Biblical Evidence for Great Apostasy and Restoration? (Mormons)

[PaulDupre]

Here are a couple observations I have as a Catholic who came out of Mormonism and lives in Utah. In Salt Lake the homeless are sent from the LDS temple away, up the hill to the Catholic Church where they have access to our Cathedral and food. In Logan Utah the homeless or those struggling who are not LDS members are sent to our Church to find help, relief.

When my parents lived in St. George, UT they observed the same thing. Transients who showed up at one of the many huge LDS wards for a handout were sent over to the one tiny Catholic parish (35 parishioners) for help. Father always had a sandwich and fresh milk for them (Father had his own cow) and did whatever else he could do to help.

 

[Nicea325]

I have said it before and I will say it again…for there to be the Apostasy that Mormons need, Jesus would have to be a weak, cruel, liar.

I cannot accept that.

If one looks at Christian History from Jesus till now, you will find plenty of evidence that God still controlled His Church.

True, you will also find plenty of evidence that man sometimes ignored God’s will and sinned…but God still controlled.

When Gos makes a promise, He keeps it. He never gave up on his chosen people. Even when they rejected him.

God did not desert us. He did not leave us.

The Apostasy that the Mormons need never happened.

I agree 100%! I have also said a billion times to Mormons who believe in a so-called Great Apostasy,where are the extensive and exhaustive historical writings from the past 2,000 years supporting such a ‘process’ happened against Christ Church?

 

[Nicea325]

True.

The Catholic Church! The Catholic Church is a respectable and honorable institution that has preserved the scriptures and many Christian values, doctrines, and traditions over the centuries; and deserves credit for doing that. But it does not prove that they had the authority and the priesthood that they claimed.

Excuse us? It does not prove they had the authority and the priesthood? Then kindly point us to the church Christ bestowed such a authority and priesthood,if it is not the Catholic Church? Sources please…

 

[Holly3278]

There is absolutely no Biblical evidence for the “Great Apostasy” or the “Restoration”. All Biblical quotes that they provide are always taken out of context and/or misinterpreted.

 

[soren1]

Isaiah by all accounts is not an easy book to understand or to interpret, and you and I could be arguing forever about the rights and wrongs of its interpretation without ever coming to an agreement; and I would rather not go down that road.

You are the one who raised Isaiah, you can’t get out of it now. If you are presenting a text as *evidence *of the Great Apostasy, it is a very modest expectation that you should provide a text that actually poses an exegetical problem for a person who says no total apostasy happened, and which does not require you to appeal to your own personal interpretation or from the interpretation of your own religious tradition. You have to say, on the basis of textual evidence, either that Isaiah 60:1-2 *must *refer to a post-messianic total apostasy, and a post-messianic restoration, or at least provide some reasonable positive warrant from the text for that claim. Otherwise, you are really just making assertions from your own religious tradition, which already presupposes the total apostasy. It is therefore circular and does not amount to actual evidence.

The mistake you are making here is that you are trying to read Isaiah as though it were a continuous narrative, which it isn’t.

I am trying to read it as a coherent narrative; it does not need to be chronologically continuous (although I think it is in this section), but it cannot be haphazard. I need not assume that everything is in a strict chronological order, but I *do *assume that everything is in a rational order, and therefore, it is legitimate to bring the immediate context of a verse to bear on how I read it.

The two “darkness”es mentioned in 59:9 and 60:2 refer to two different things. They don’t refer to the same phenomenon. In 59:9 it refers to the chastisement of Zion in her exiled condition, which the Lord allowed to come upon them because of their transgressions. In 60:2 it refers to the redemption of Zion from her exiled condition at the time when the rest of the world is in a darkened state of Apostasy.

If it is the rest of the world and not Zion that is in apostasy in v. 60:2, then why are you using this as a proof text in the first place? If the preceding verses are about the continuity of the Isaiah’s words and God’s covenants among the Jewish people, what, pray tell, could darkness among the nations possibly imply about a total apostasy within Zion? Your own observation undermines the very purpose for which you first called upon this text.

Interesting that you should mention that. From a Mormon perspective, the citation of Isaiah 60:2 in D&C 112:23 is the definitive proof that it refers to the apostasy. It describes the state of the world at the time of the Restoration, and indeed after it. “Darkness” (meaning spiritual darkness) still covers the earth as a result of the Apostasy, notwithstanding the “light” that has burst upon the world as a consequence of the Restoration.
I know that is how Mormons read D&C 112:23. My point is that it an illogical way to read it. In their zeal to find a proof text to support the Great Apostasy, Mormons have jumped to a conclusion from a text of their scriptures that gives them no real warrant, and which, clearly seen, undermines the possibility of making an evidential case from Is 60:2.

It should be granted as self-evident that if it is possible in principle for Is 60:2 to refer to a time when there is not a total apostasy, then it cannot, for that very reason, be taken as a proof of a total apostasy. But unless you grant that D&C misuses Is 60:2, then you must admit that such is indeed possible. Because D&C 112:23 applies Is 60:2 to non-total-apostasy times, it follows that nothing in Is 60:2 can necessitate a total apostasy. There is no consistency in saying it does not refer to a total apostasy which Smith says it, but must refer to a total apostasy when Isaiah says it.

That “darkness” unfortunately still “covers the earth,” notwithstanding the Restoration, because they “receive not the light”.

 

[twopekinguys]

You are the one who raised Isaiah, you can’t get out of it now. If you are presenting a text as *evidence *of the Great Apostasy, it is a very modest expectation that you should provide a text that actually poses an exegetical problem for a person who says no total apostasy happened, and which does not require you to appeal to your own personal interpretation or from the interpretation of your own religious tradition. You have to say, on the basis of textual evidence, either that Isaiah 60:1-2 *must *refer to a post-messianic total apostasy, and a post-messianic restoration, or at least provide some reasonable positive warrant from the text for that claim. Otherwise, you are really just making assertions from your own religious tradition, which already presupposes the total apostasy. It is therefore circular and does not amount to actual evidence.

I am trying to read it as a coherent narrative; it does not need to be chronologically continuous (although I think it is in this section), but it cannot be haphazard. I need not assume that everything is in a strict chronological order, but I *do *assume that everything is in a rational order, and therefore, it is legitimate to bring the immediate context of a verse to bear on how I read it.

If it is the rest of the world and not Zion that is in apostasy in v. 60:2, then why are you using this as a proof text in the first place? If the preceding verses are about the continuity of the Isaiah’s words and God’s covenants among the Jewish people, what, pray tell, could darkness among the nations possibly imply about a total apostasy within Zion? Your own observation undermines the very purpose for which you first called upon this text.

I know that is how Mormons read D&C 112:23. My point is that it an illogical way to read it. In their zeal to find a proof text to support the Great Apostasy, Mormons have jumped to a conclusion from a text of their scriptures that gives them no real warrant, and which, clearly seen, undermines the possibility of making an evidential case from Is 60:2.

It should be granted as self-evident that if it is possible in principle for Is 60:2 to refer to a time when there is not a total apostasy, then it cannot, for that very reason, be taken as a proof of a total apostasy. But unless you grant that D&C misuses Is 60:2, then you must admit that such is indeed possible. Because D&C 112:23 applies Is 60:2 to non-total-apostasy times, it follows that nothing in Is 60:2 can necessitate a total apostasy. There is no consistency in saying it does not refer to a total apostasy which Smith says it, but must refer to a total apostasy when Isaiah says it.

Which again demonstrates, from your own principles, that darkness covering the earth does not inherently imply the presence of a total apostasy.

But that is what we are pointing to Heb 1:1-2 to show. What we say when we teach a closed canon is not that God fell silent after inspiring the Bible, but that his normative way of speaking changed. Because the Church is the body of Christ, it speaks as Christ, and is thereby guided by the Holy Spirit. That constitutes continual divine communication with man, but in a different mode from former times.

Can I put you on my Christmas Card list?

I’m loving this, and I’m just going to sit back and

 

[Erich]

If I had to put a date on the Apostasy, I would say that it occurred when the last Apostle died, or when his ministry in the church was terminated. That is when the priesthood authority was lost.

I thought Mormons believe – or are supposed to believe (D&C 7) – that the John the Apostle never died and is still here on earth, continually fulfilling his extended life-long mission of evangelism.

Is this another dogma that has changed over the years? If not, what does that do to your dating of the Apostasy?

 

[SirThomasMore]

I thought Mormons believe – or are supposed to believe (D&C 7) – that the John the Apostle never died and is still here on earth, continually fulfilling his extended life-long mission of evangelism.

Is this another dogma that has changed over the years? If not, what does that do to your dating of the Apostasy?

yeah…that was another issue the LDS apologetics had to twist and turn thru…John never died. In addition, neither did the “3 Nephites”. So, 4 guys with the priesthood allegedly walking around, yet there was an Apostasy…

if it were not so sad, it would be hysterical

 

[soren1]

yeah…that was another issue the LDS apologetics had to twist and turn thru…John never died. In addition, neither did the “3 Nephites”. So, 4 guys with the priesthood allegedly walking around, yet there was an Apostasy…

if it were not so sad, it would be hysterical

Zerinus can speak for himself, but I know of a few Mormon answers to this: some say that the removal of the priesthood from the earth does not mean the removal of all priests, but that the power of the priesthood was not actively exercised in any way that would result in the constitution of the Church. Others think the Apostles, when they were translated, were removed from the earth. The first theory seems to me the most defensible, but what all such explanations have in common is that they posit an end or a suspension of the Apostles’ ministry during the time of the Apostasy.

 

[zerinus]

You are the one who raised Isaiah, you can’t get out of it now. If you are presenting a text as evidence of the Great Apostasy, it is a very modest expectation that you should provide a text that actually poses an exegetical problem for a person who says no total apostasy happened, and which does not require you to appeal to your own personal interpretation or from the interpretation of your own religious tradition. You have to say, on the basis of textual evidence, either that Isaiah 60:1-2 must refer to a post-messianic total apostasy, and a post-messianic restoration, or at least provide some reasonable positive warrant from the text for that claim. Otherwise, you are really just making assertions from your own religious tradition, which already presupposes the total apostasy. It is therefore circular and does not amount to actual evidence.

I agree with that; and I am willing to discuss it if I am assured of an attentive interlocutor; otherwise it can quickly become a futile exercise.

I am trying to read it as a coherent narrative; it does not need to be chronologically continuous (although I think it is in this section), but it cannot be haphazard. I need not assume that everything is in a strict chronological order, but I do assume that everything is in a rational order, and therefore, it is legitimate to bring the immediate context of a verse to bear on how I read it.

I agree with that too; and probably the best way that I can answer your questions in this regard is to give a brief running commentary of Isaiah 59–60, so that you can see exactly how I come to the conclusions regarding it that I do. Perhaps that is what will do in the next few posts, and you can take it from there.

If it is the rest of the world and not Zion that is in apostasy in v. 60:2, then why are you using this as a proof text in the first place? If the preceding verses are about the continuity of the Isaiah’s words and God’s covenants among the Jewish people, what, pray tell, could darkness among the nations possibly imply about a total apostasy within Zion? Your own observation undermines the very purpose for which you first called upon this text.

See my running commentary of Isaiah 59–60 below.

I know that is how Mormons read D&C 112:23. My point is that it an illogical way to read it. In their zeal to find a proof text to support the Great Apostasy, Mormons have jumped to a conclusion from a text of their scriptures that gives them no real warrant, and which, clearly seen, undermines the possibility of making an evidential case from Is 60:2.

I simply do not understand what you are talking about here. This is the verse you are referring to:

D&C 112:

23 Verily, verily, I say unto you, darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face.

That clearly states that the world lies in a spiritually darkened and corrupt condition. This obviously does not include those whom it is addressing—i.e. the Latter-day Saints. They are not in the darkened state, because they have been rescued from it by the Restoration, which has enlightened their minds and provided them with the truth. But the rest of the world who are in the spiritually darkened state can legitimately be described as being in a state of Apostasy. That is the logical deduction. If you fail to see that logic, then I fail to see how I can help you.

It should be granted as self-evident that if it is possible in principle for Is 60:2 to refer to a time when there is not a total apostasy, then it cannot, for that very reason, be taken as a proof of a total apostasy. But unless you grant that D&C misuses Is 60:2, then you must admit that such is indeed possible. Because D&C 112:23 applies Is 60:2 to non-total-apostasy times, . . .

I simply do not understand this. D&C 112:23 does apply Isaiah 60:2 to a total apostasy times. It refers to the world which had been and still was in a state of total apostasy, even though the Latter-day Saints are excluded from that apostasy because they had been rescued from it.

. . . it follows that nothing in Is 60:2 can necessitate a total apostasy. There is no consistency in saying it does not refer to a total apostasy which Smith says it, but must refer to a total apostasy when Isaiah says it.

It refers to total apostasy in both cases. It refers to the total apostasy of all ancient orders of religion. It does not, nor does it logically need to, refer to the Restoration which reverses that Apostasy among Latter-day Saints.

Which again demonstrates, from your own principles, that darkness covering the earth does not inherently imply the presence of a total apostasy.

Sorry, don’t agree and don’t understand.

But that is what we are pointing to Heb 1:1-2 to show. What we say when we teach a closed canon is not that God fell silent after inspiring the Bible, but that his normative way of speaking changed. Because the Church is the body of Christ, it speaks as Christ, and is thereby guided by the Holy Spirit. That constitutes continual divine communication with man, but in a different mode from former times.

I don’t agree that God’s “normative way of speaking” changed or needed to be changed; neither have provided any evidence that it did or needed to.

 

[zerinus]

Isaiah 59–60: A Running Commentary

Isaiah 59:

1 Behold, the Lord’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear:
2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.

In these verses the prophet addresses Zion, or the house of Israel, in their exiled condition among the Gentiles which the Lord allowed to happen to them because of their sins, as had been prophesied by all their former prophets.

3 For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.
4 None calleth for justice, nor any pleadeth for truth: they trust in vanity, and speak lies; they conceive mischief, and bring forth iniquity.
5 They hatch cockatrice’ eggs, and weave the spider’s web: he that eateth of their eggs dieth, and that which is crushed breaketh out into a viper.
6 Their webs shall not become garments, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are works of iniquity, and the act of violence is in their hands.
7 Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths.
8 The way of peace they know not; and there is no judgment in their goings: they have made them crooked paths: whosoever goeth therein shall not know peace.

These verses recount the sins that Israel had committed that had caused the Lord to become angry with them, and allow their enemies who were the Gentile nations to destroy their kingdom and remove them from their land of promise to captivity and exile among the Gentiles.

9 Therefore is judgment far from us, neither doth justice overtake us: we wait for light, but behold obscurity; for brightness, but we walk in darkness.
10 We grope for the wall like the blind, and we grope as if we had no eyes: we stumble at noonday as in the night; we are in desolate places as dead men.
11 We roar all like bears, and mourn sore like doves: we look for judgment, but there is none; for salvation, but it is far off from us.

These verses describe the unhappy and wrenched state of Zion, or Israel, in their exiled condition among the Gentiles. That is what verse 9 is referring to. It describes how wrenched and miserable Zion is after her deportation and exile among the Gentiles, where the light of God is taken from them.

12 For our transgressions are multiplied before thee, and our sins testify against us: for our transgressions are with us; and as for our iniquities, we know them;
13 In transgressing and lying against the Lord, and departing away from our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood.
14 And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter.

These verses revert back to recounting all the sins of Israel that caused all of these terrible chastisements to come upon them.

15 Yea, truth faileth; and he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey: and the Lord saw it, and it displeased him that there was no judgment.
16 And he saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor: therefore his arm brought salvation unto him; and his righteousness, it sustained him.
17 For he put on righteousness as a breastplate, and an helmet of salvation upon his head; and he put on the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloke.
18 According to their deeds, accordingly he will repay, fury to his adversaries, recompence to his enemies; to the islands he will repay recompence.
19 So shall they fear the name of the Lord from the west, and his glory from the rising of the sun. When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against him.
20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord.
21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever.

This passage begins to describe the redemption of Zion, or true Israel, from her exiled and scattered condition in the last days, after the period of their chastisement has ended. It is a complicated passage that contains a lot. It includes a prophecy of the coming of Christ, who is the ultimate Savior and Redeemer of Israel both spiritually, from sin and spiritual death; as well as temporally, from captivity among the Gentiles (in due course). Verse 21 refers to Israel, or Zion, after her redemption, when she is now righteous, and keeps God’s commandments, unlike the generation which had been taken captive because they had sinned, and had consequently been chastened by Lord. Compare verse 21 with the following passage from Jeremiah:

Continued … /

 

[zerinus]

/… Continued

Jeremiah 31:

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Moving on to the next chapter, the whole of this chapter now describes Zion, or Israel, after her redemption from bondage, which process began in the last few verses of the previous chapter:

Isaiah 60:

1 Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.
2 For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.
3 And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.

This describes how the redemption or restoration of Israel, which is Zion, will take place at a time when “darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people”. LDS identify this restoration with the Restoration of the gospel in the latter days, which is the LDS Church. It says that this Restoration will take place at a time when the rest of the world is in a darkened state spiritually, which we identify with the Apostasy. The reason why the world is in a darkened state is because they have lost the priesthood and the divine authority that they once possessed. There is no true church. False doctrines abound and cannot be corrected because no one has the priesthood authority and revelation needed to correct them.

The remainder of Isaiah 60 is an allegorical reference to Zion in her redeemed and saved condition, and need not be quoted or commented on for the purpose of this discussion; but they are worth reading in your Bible so as to get the complete picture. If you have further questions feel free to ask.

 

[zerinus]

I thought Mormons believe – or are supposed to believe (D&C 7) – that the John the Apostle never died and is still here on earth, continually fulfilling his extended life-long mission of evangelism.

Is this another dogma that has changed over the years? If not, what does that do to your dating of the Apostasy?

The quote you had given from my Blog actually explains it. Here was the quote:

If I had to put a date on the Apostasy, I would say that it occurred when the last Apostle died, or when his ministry in the church was terminated. That is when the priesthood authority was lost.

We believe that John the Revelator never died, but his mission in the early Church was terminated when it apostatized. John is still alive, and will minister to all nations of the earth in due course as God had promised him; but he did not continue his ministry as an officer in the early Church following its apostasy. Mormon doctrine has not changed in this regard.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Zerinus can speak for himself, but I know of a few Mormon answers to this: some say that the removal of the priesthood from the earth does not mean the removal of all priests, but that the power of the priesthood was not actively exercised in any way that would result in the constitution of the Church. Others think the Apostles, when they were translated, were removed from the earth. The first theory seems to me the most defensible, but what all such explanations have in common is that they posit an end or a suspension of the Apostles’ ministry during the time of the Apostasy.

yep…I have heard that one…like I said, an issue LDS apologists have had to twist and turn thru

 

[zerinus]

Zerinus can speak for himself, but I know of a few Mormon answers to this: some say that the removal of the priesthood from the earth does not mean the removal of all priests, but that the power of the priesthood was not actively exercised in any way that would result in the constitution of the Church. Others think the Apostles, when they were translated, were removed from the earth. The first theory seems to me the most defensible, but what all such explanations have in common is that they posit an end or a suspension of the Apostles’ ministry during the time of the Apostasy.

Clearly during the period of Apostasy there were individuals on earth who had the priesthood, John and the three Nephite disciples among them. But they were not legally officiating as officers of the Christian Church that emerged at the end of the Apostasy. The Christian Church had lost the priesthood.

 

[Cashue]

CAF Mormons, is there biblical evidence for a Great Apostasy of the Church established by Jesus Christ anciently, as well as a restoration of that Church? Also, how do Mormons deal with the oft-quoted Matt 16:18, which states that the gates of hell will not prevail?

Please lets keep this thread charitable and on topic so that it won’t be closed.

There is no evidence at all - Jesus spoke the illustration of the wheat being corrupted by the weeds but this was about the human heart and had nothing to do with the time of the harvest meaning our time.

This is just a misinterpretation of scripture - the catholic church as established in the first century and just when from strength to strength always clean and incorruptable always in the form Jesus had established there is absolutely NOTHING in scripture to support an idea of christians falling “asleep” spiritually until the master returns.

 

[SirThomasMore]

Clearly during the period of Apostasy there were individuals on earth who had the priesthood, John and the three Nephite disciples among them. But they were not legally officiating as officers of the Christian Church that emerged at the end of the Apostasy. The Christian Church had lost the priesthood.

see? another day, another tap dance

 

[catholic-rcia]

Catholic Answers does a great job here on this subject.
catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9203fea.asp

Its truth, very scriptural

“If Mormons want their claim of a complete apostasy to be taken seriously, they must evince biblical and historical evidence supporting it. So far they’ve come up empty-handed. Honest investigators will see the unavoidable truth: The Mormon “great apostasy” doctrine is a myth. There never has been–nor will there ever be–a complete apostasy. Jesus Christ promised that his Church, established on the solid rock of Peter, will remain forever. We have his Word on it.” Patrick Madrid

www.utahmission.com

 

[RebeccaJ]

From the Catholic view, Christ’s Church is His. His Priesthood is His own. As the living stones of the Church, we share in the Priesthood of our One High Priest.

It is impossible to explain away the Priesthood of Jesus Christ, or His Church. There is only the option of turning away from what is His. This is the temptation of Protestantism, of which Mormonism is a diluted version.

 

[catholic-rcia]

Zerinus wrote: , “This passage begins to describe the redemption of Zion, or true Israel, from her exiled and scattered condition in the last days, after the period of their chastisement has ended. It is a complicated passage that contains a lot. It includes a prophecy of the coming of Christ, who is the ultimate Savior and Redeemer of Israel both spiritually, from sin and spiritual death; as well as temporally, from captivity among the Gentiles (in due course). Verse 21 refers to Israel, or Zion, after her redemption, when she is now righteous, and keeps God’s commandments, unlike the generation which had been taken captive because they had sinned, and had consequently been chastened by Lord. Compare verse 21 with the following passage from Jeremiah:”
Continued … /

Zerinus, I dfo know Jesus. Jesus came as the scriptures you use describe, Jesus taught, Jesus was crucified because of our sins in order to save us. He formed a Church so that we can be engrafted in Him, with the Sacrament of Confession at its center. This Church is Catholic, a fallen people following our God home. You cannot steal this as if it were yours. It’s for all people. Let me define the Great Apostasy in a nutshell, in one word.
“Pride” It would be good for you to study this word.

In all sincerity and love
Rich
: ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.’
‘You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.’