I don't believe that there was ever an apostasy as the Mormons claim.

[Arandur]

This is fantasy. Ever heard of Nero et al?

Yes, the Romans persecuted Christians, but we were about the only ones. How do you think they held together so well as an empire? They figured, “the more gods, the better!” and welcomed all of them. What they didn’t like was one group having the gall to tell them and everyone else that their gods were not gods at all. The Jews were not nearly so evangelistic about it, being content to live within their cultural communities, but the Christians potentially threatened the integrity of the empire by not playing nicely with anyone else’s theology.

Read up on your history before you go making claims. I’ve read mine, and I can point you to the modern scholarship where I get it, if you wish.

Freedom to be apostate. Read up on the Samaritans

Yes the Samaritans had broken off from Judah. But there was still Judah. Remember that Cyrus restored the Jews to Israel. Point is, there was religious tolerance in multiple kingdoms of ancient times. Alexander the Great left a legacy of it as well.

Sorry, this is so far off the wall that it’s not belivable. I guess freedom of relgion doesn’t count if you are the follower of the most politically powerful single person of the middle ages and hundreds of years later- the pope. But if you were one he was persecuting, I think freedom of religion was a little more important to you. Remember the pilgrims and all the others that left the old world for religious freedom?

You really need to read some history. The pilgrims and “all the others” were typically fleeing PROTESTANT religious persecution! The kind that had Catholics hunted down and killed for being Catholic in England! Yes, there is blame on both sides, but I can’t think of any Church-sponsored decrees criminalizing not being a Catholic. Even during the Inquisitions, even the worst of the Spanish Inquisition, the focus was on Catholics who had turned heretic, not on non-Catholics. In fact, one of the reasons the Spanish Inquisition got out of hand was that the Spanish Jews were turning in the ethnic Jews who had converted because of internal cultural rivalries. The practicing Jews were immune to the Inquisition.

All this ignorant propagandist mythology you have built up about some sort of systemic, active Catholic persecution of non-Catholics has little basis in reality.

The promise applies to all who want to have revelation from God. Read James-- “If any lack wisdom…”

Oh, so anyone who asks God for wisdom has a guarantee that the gates of hell will not prevail against them? Boy is that easy to disprove. Unless, that is, you don’t think anyone but your own brand of Christian is sincere. If you’ll admit the sincerity and faith and love many Christians have for God, and yet you see the contradictions in their beliefs, you should easily be able to see that the promise does not apply to that mode of devotion.

Well I can accuse you of blaphemy and being part of the great and abominable church of satan, and where will that get us? It’s just stupid. This is how those stupid religious European wars got started and why the restoration had to happen where there was religous freedom.

What is so blasphemous about Catholic beliefs? What is blasphemous about believing in a God so powerful and loving and wise that He has preserved His Word, His family, His Bride, His flock?
Compare that to believing in a God so weak and uncaring and foolish that He is the weak man, the fool, the oathbreaker, the laughingstock by the standard of His own parables.

Can you see now where at least the greater appearance of blasphemy lies? And if just an appearance, how so? How is it not actually blasphemy?

I’ve always wondered just what is so “Abominable” and “Satanic” about the non-Smithian churches in Smith’s eyes, anyway. When he and his followers say that Smith’s apparitions could only have been from God because Satan would not lead to Christ, I wonder how that is reconciled to the very Christ-centered faith, theology, and worship of so many other Christian groups.

There is no “mass” in the NT, there is no Mariology, no confession, no purgatory, saints, indulgences, sprinkling baptism, popes, original sin, immaculate conception or anything else. I know, its tradition. I call it invention.

Plenty more evidence of these in Scripture than of distinctly Mormon beliefs. Incredibly easy to prove that.

 

[rmcmullan]

Well of course Catholics don’t think there was an apostacy. If they thought that, they’d leave the church. However they are alone in that opinion. There’s been a lot of fragmentation over the ages into different rights and so on until it got so bad that there was a Reformation. I know you all have heard Martin Luther and there’s much to add from those who came after him. Once the layity could read and had access to the Bible, they could see that the Catholic church and the Biblical teachings…needed some reconciliation.

You can say the Catholic Church has the authority to run its affairs as it sees it best since it is the church of Christ with His authority. And there’s no way to either prove or disapprove such a statement. It’s just that it had gotten to the point where people had a hard time reconciling their church with Christ’s church as described in the New Testament. So what to do? Reasonable people began break away churches in a sincere effort to do right before God.

Since we’ve discussed this many times before let me also mention that the LDS view is that the church lost its authority before the Council of Nicea with the martyrdom of the church leadership as well as many saints. So while the Holy Ghost would still call people to Jesus Christ, the church they formed was mostly fragmented and susceptible to foregin influences. Let’s be realistic–it’s hard avoid some degree of apostacy. The church would need to stay true to the original teachings of Christ for nearly two thousand years of history, calamities and political empires.

I know you’re very fond of the Peter the Rock scripture but–well again, this has been discussed so many times. Let me just suggest that there is a possibility that you’re misinterpreting the scripture. As for examples of an Apostacy, just read the Old testament.

 

[mjf001]

I don’t know where you get this stuff, honestly. God gives us what he can when we are ready to learn. I believe that the US constitution is an inspired document. I don’t want to argue with you , it’s silly and pointless. What is plain to you is absurd to me and there is no basis for communication.

This is fantasy. Ever heard of Nero et al?
Freedom to be apostate. Read up on the Samaritans

Sorry, this is so far off the wall that it’s not belivable. I guess freedom of relgion doesn’t count if you are the follower of the most politically powerful single person of the middle ages and hundreds of years later- the pope. But if you were one he was persecuting, I think freedom of religion was a little more important to you. Remember the pilgrims and all the others that left the old world for religious freedom?
Well I have never maintained I was very bright. Ask my wife. I am not going to bother restating anything, there’s no point. Either you get it or you don’t. I don’t really care. The promise applies to all who want to have revelation from God. Read James-- “If any lack wisdom…”
Well I can accuse you of blaphemy and being part of the great and abominable church of satan, and where will that get us? It’s just stupid. This is how those stupid religious European wars got started and why the restoration had to happen where there was religous freedom.

It seems Catholics cannot discuss this rationally, I guess it is just too close to a nerve or something. I think you all know deep inside that I am right. There is no “mass” in the NT, there is no Mariology, no confession, no purgatory, saints, indulgences, sprinkling baptism, popes, original sin, immaculate conception or anything else. I know, its tradition. I call it invention. Stick with it, I hope it’s workin for ya.

Boy we are much closer now aren’t we?
I’m outa here. No point in this.

God gave us his Word. Jesus Christ, God the Son second person of the Trinity, who took human form, to redeem mankind. If Jesus Christ promised that he will be with us always, then how can you possibly believe he left us alone for 1800 years?

 

[ricko]

Sorry, this is so far off the wall that it’s not belivable. I guess freedom of relgion doesn’t count if you are the follower of the most politically powerful single person of the middle ages and hundreds of years later- the pope. But if you were one he was persecuting, I think freedom of religion was a little more important to you. Remember the pilgrims and all the others that left the old world for religious freedom?

Dear Ski, I read your post several times and it does appear that you are saying the pilgrims and others left the old world because of the Pope persecuting them?? If that IS what you are saying then you better recheck your history books. They left not because of the Catholic Church but because of the state controlling religions. Remember Henry VIII? That’s one example.

 

[Arandur]

Well of course Catholics don’t think there was an apostacy. If they thought that, they’d leave the church. However they are alone in that opinion. There’s been a lot of fragmentation over the ages into different rights and so on until it got so bad that there was a Reformation. I know you all have heard Martin Luther and there’s much to add from those who came after him. Once the layity could read and had access to the Bible, they could see that the Catholic church and the Biblical teachings…needed some reconciliation.

Take an honest look at history and you can easily discover that there were many among the laity who could read (scholars, nobles, merchants) and the Bible was available in literally hundreds of different translations into the vernacular languages. It was as available as people could expect it to be given the technology and economic conditions. And the laity were pretty faithfully Catholic, didn’t see problems.

True, Luther would have been nothing without the printing press, but do you really consider it a service to truth for anyone and their dog to get some information and declare their interpretation of it truth? Science only works to find truth when the scientific community is reasonably objective, rigorous, and well-educated. Scientific truth is not discovered very easily by the ignorant masses of the world. Charlatanism and superstition and mythology is the result of such endeavors. How could it be the reverse in terms of divine truth, particularly when God granted particular ordained teaching authority to a priesthood for just the purpose of teaching truth?

Since we’ve discussed this many times before let me also mention that the LDS view is that the church lost its authority before the Council of Nicea with the martyrdom of the church leadership as well as many saints. So while the Holy Ghost would still call people to Jesus Christ, the church they formed was mostly fragmented and susceptible to foregin influences. Let’s be realistic–it’s hard avoid some degree of apostacy. The church would need to stay true to the original teachings of Christ for nearly two thousand years of history, calamities and political empires.

You seem to think that the Church is left to human devices. It is NOT. Jesus Christ is the Head of the Church which is His Body, and He sent us the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth. A distinct improvement in many ways upon the pre-Christian church (the Jewish people, whom God had kept His covenant with and kept alive through so many trials that should have destroyed them). So now the Divine Institution of the Church would be for all people (Gentiles now included) for all time. It would not fail worse than any previous line of God’s faithful, for certain. You claim that it has.

I know you’re very fond of the Peter the Rock scripture but–well again, this has been discussed so many times. Let me just suggest that there is a possibility that you’re misinterpreting the scripture. As for examples of an Apostacy, just read the Old testament.

I think YOU ought to read the Old Testament. It is there that you learn that however much God’s people messed up, He always maintained His Covenant with them. He always maintained an authoritative line of His faithful. From Adam through Noah to Abraham (where we see by the example of Melchizedek that God has maintained a line of authoritative faithful even outside of Abraham) to Moses to David on through to Jesus. Now we have Jesus eternally. UNBROKEN line. For you to claim that it has broken is just nonsense that defies a large point of the OT and indicates that you believe that God is a God of contracts, not Covenants; a God who loves conditionally, not unconditionally.

That is what I find so offensive about the concept of the Great Apostasy, and so blasphemous about your belief.

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

God gave us his Word. Jesus Christ, God the Son second person of the Trinity, who took human form, to redeem mankind. If Jesus Christ promised that he will be with us always, then how can you possibly believe he left us alone for 1800 years?

I want to know that exact thing! We will never get an answer from a Mormon on that one. Believe me, look at all my posts, I have asked so many this question, and I have never received an answer. the reason why is, there is no answer for it. It can not be answered by them.
God Bless, Alisha

 

[mfbukowski]

Dear Ski, I read your post several times and it does appear that you are saying the pilgrims and others left the old world because of the Pope persecuting them?? If that IS what you are saying then you better recheck your history books. They left not because of the Catholic Church but because of the state controlling religions. Remember Henry VIII? That’s one example.

Of course I didn’t say that. All I said was that there had to be religous freedom for the restoration to occurr

 

[mfbukowski]

I want to know that exact thing! We will never get an answer from a Mormon on that one. Believe me, look at all my posts, I have asked so many this question, and I have never received an answer. the reason why is, there is no answer for it. It can not be answered by them.
God Bless, Alisha

He didn’t leave you alone for 1800 years – already answered. You still could learn that Jesus was the Christ. You still could pray and receive inspiration. No one who lived during that period will be “penalized” due to the doctrine of the redemption of the dead. All will have the right to receive the true gospel on the other side should they accept it. But the priesthood was not on the earth and the ordinances of salvation were not available on the earth. That’s what you don’t understand at all. The restoration made that all “whole” so that any true soul who lived during those times will in no way be harmed for what others did.

One could say from your perspective that the “gates of hell did not prevail” against the MEMBERS of the church because the work for the dead continues now. That is the key here. Those faithful members of the Catholic church got transfered to the other side where the work continues/ continued. The gates of hell did not prevail against a single faithful soul because those gates were broken open to work for the dead by Jesus Christ. That is what that scripture means! The gates of hell didn’t prevail because Jesus opened them up through the doctrine of the redemption of the dead, so not one soul was disadvantaged by the priesthood not being available during that time.

The gospel is preached in the spirit world as it is here, and the saving ordinances like baptism are now performed for those who have passed on as they were in the primitive church. Do you get it now? So from our perspective NO ONE was “left alone” for 1800 years. OK? Get it? That is our perspective on the issue.

So in a way, the “gates of hell” prophecy was what you think it means and in a way was not what you think it means.

It literally means that the “gates of hell” would not prevail against MEMBERS of the church even though the church was in apostasy, because Jesus would smash those gates of hell by preaching the true gospel to the dead. Get it? Gates don’t get up and assault the church- so it doesn’t mean what you think it means. There are multiple scriptures talking about Jesus having the keys of death-- That is why the gates of hell don’t prevail because he has the keys to preaching to the dead.

So no one was abandoned.

I said it about 5 times now in different ways hopefully so everyone now understands it.

 

[RebeccaJ]

He didn’t leave you alone for 1800 years – already answered. You still could learn that Jesus was the Christ. You still could pray and receive inspiration. No one who lived during that period will be “penalized” due to the doctrine of the redemption of the dead. All will have the right to receive the true gospel on the other side should they accept it. But the priesthood was not on the earth and the ordinances of salvation were not available on the earth.

The priesthood most certainly was and still is on this earth.

All baptized Christians for those 1800 years remain baptized Christians. We are judged for this life, not the next. No one is baptized in the hereafter. Or married. Or having children.

 

[rmcmullan]

…True, Luther would have been nothing without the printing press, but do you really consider it a service to truth for anyone and their dog to get some information and declare their interpretation of it truth?

Their dogs weren’t reading the Bible. It was intelligent and sincere men. Luther was really bothered by the sale of indulgences and that seems a fairly reasonable objection. The Baptists had an honest problem with the way baptisms were, well not just being performed, but also being understood. And it goes on and on.

The alternative to people thinking about what they read in the Bible can only be accepting authority without questioning. Well okay, but that can be dangerous. If the authority they accept is the Roman Catholic rite, then you’re okay with it because you accept it as well but you would object to any other authority. So it boils down to you wanting people to accepting the RC rite without question.

…So now the Divine Institution of the Church would be for all people (Gentiles now included) for all time. It would not fail worse than any previous line of God’s faithful, for certain. You claim that it has.

Let’s talk about the Divine Institution of the Church–I feel like we should go back to basics on this one. What does it provide for the people that belong to it? Teaching and instruction? Administration of sacraments? I think this is an important question if we want to discuss its role and history.

I think YOU ought to read the Old Testament. It is there that you learn that however much God’s people messed up, He always maintained His Covenant with them. He always maintained an authoritative line of His faithful.
That is what I find so offensive about the concept of the Great Apostasy, and so blasphemous about your belief.

Not just my belief but everybody who is not Catholic. We’re all blasphemers! I feel like you’re mixing up concepts. Sure, God hasn’t given up on His covenant people, I don’t expect Him to ever give up on trying to reclaim us. But that doesn’t mean the church will always flourish or even exist. It just means that when it falls apart, there’ll be a Restoration.

 

[rmcmullan]

Here are some passages from the New Testament which predict the Apostasy.

2 Tim. 4: 3-4
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Matt. 24: 24
24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Acts 20: 29
29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.

Gal. 1: 6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

2 Thes. 2: 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

2 Tim. 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

2 Tim. 3: 5
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

2 Pet. 2: 1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Jude 1: 4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

Rev. 2: 2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars

When Israel began to worship the golden calf, they were, uh, “corrected” by their leaders. Likewise, the labours of the early Apostles are evident in the New Testament and they spent a lot of time cirrecting the people.

If the leaders do not correct the church when they stray from the Will of God, how far will He let them stray until he no longer respects them and withdraws His authority? When that happens, how is the Church to know?

 

[ricko]

It literally means that the “gates of hell” would not prevail against MEMBERS of the church even though the church was in apostasy

,

Ski, you will have a lot to answer for, twisting scripture like that. I can get my 9th grade English teacher to explain English to you.

“and on this rock I will build my church and the jaws of death shall not prevail against it”.

I will build my church. Understand that? Jesus is talking about a CHURCH. Now look at “prevail against IT” What is IT? Why IT is the CHURCH Jesus is talking about. Got it? Not the people but the church itself. In case you are going to say that the people are the church, they are not. They are part of the body of the church but not the church itself.

“Furthermore, God has set up in the church first apostles, second prophets, thid teachers, then miracle workers, healers, assistants, administrators, and those who speak in tongues” 1Co 12:28.

And Ski, once you die, its too late to be baptised, its too late to repent.

 

[PaulDupre]

Here are some passages from the New Testament which predict the Apostasy.

Those passages predict an apostasy of individuals from the Church, not an apostasy of the Church. The Church is the body of Christ. The Mormons claim that the Mormon Jesus could not sustain His own body. How small and impotent your god is!

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

He didn’t leave you alone for 1800 years – already answered. You still could learn that Jesus was the Christ. You still could pray and receive inspiration. No one who lived during that period will be “penalized” due to the doctrine of the redemption of the dead. All will have the right to receive the true gospel on the other side should they accept it. But the priesthood was not on the earth and the ordinances of salvation were not available on the earth. That’s what you don’t understand at all. The restoration made that all “whole” so that any true soul who lived during those times will in no way be harmed for what others did.

One could say from your perspective that the “gates of hell did not prevail” against the MEMBERS of the church because the work for the dead continues now. That is the key here. Those faithful members of the Catholic church got transfered to the other side where the work continues/ continued. The gates of hell did not prevail against a single faithful soul because those gates were broken open to work for the dead by Jesus Christ. That is what that scripture means! The gates of hell didn’t prevail because Jesus opened them up through the doctrine of the redemption of the dead, so not one soul was disadvantaged by the priesthood not being available during that time.

The gospel is preached in the spirit world as it is here, and the saving ordinances like baptism are now performed for those who have passed on as they were in the primitive church. Do you get it now? So from our perspective NO ONE was “left alone” for 1800 years. OK? Get it? That is our perspective on the issue.

So in a way, the “gates of hell” prophecy was what you think it means and in a way was not what you think it means.

It literally means that the “gates of hell” would not prevail against MEMBERS of the church even though the church was in apostasy, because Jesus would smash those gates of hell by preaching the true gospel to the dead. Get it? Gates don’t get up and assault the church- so it doesn’t mean what you think it means. There are multiple scriptures talking about Jesus having the keys of death-- That is why the gates of hell don’t prevail because he has the keys to preaching to the dead.

So no one was abandoned.

I said it about 5 times now in different ways hopefully so everyone now understands it.

Ski, I’m so sorry, but I don’t get it. There has never been one word about the church having had an apostacy! Who wrote about. You think I would believe that just because a man named joseph smith said it! No, I’m very sorry, but it didn’t happen! There have been 265 popes since saint peter, and there was never a gap in between any of them! Everything we do as Catholics can be backed up in the bible, everything!!! Everything Jesus taught, we do! Y’all on the other hand have to refer to the book of Mormon for most of your practices! We don’t. We go straight to the bible! Unless you don’t believe the bible to be the true word of Jesus! So, I’m sorry, but it sits very uncomfortable with me everytime I think if there apostasy! I know that Jesus doesn’t want me to believe that! What do you think when you hear about Saint Theresa and how she has had so many vision, do you think she was lying her whole life? She gave her entire life on earth to God! She was catholic also! There have been so many miracles in the catholic faith, there is no denying it! These people who lived such holy lives were not lying! if they were lyingthen that would mean they were bad people, and they would have a lot of other bad things they would do also because if you could lie about having visions, then other aspects of your life would also not be good. Another words, someone couldn’t be as holy as her and live completly for God if she was lying! I’m on my phone typing this so I’m sorry if I’m not being very clear!
God Bless,
Alisha

 

[LAMBOFGODGIRLY]

Their dogs weren’t reading the Bible. It was intelligent and sincere men. Luther was really bothered by the sale of indulgences and that seems a fairly reasonable objection. The Baptists had an honest problem with the way baptisms were, well not just being performed, but also being understood. And it goes on and on.

The alternative to people thinking about what they read in the Bible can only be accepting authority without questioning. Well okay, but that can be dangerous. If the authority they accept is the Roman Catholic rite, then you’re okay with it because you accept it as well but you would object to any other authority. So it boils down to you wanting people to accepting the RC rite without question.

Let’s talk about the Divine Institution of the Church–I feel like we should go back to basics on this one. What does it provide for the people that belong to it? Teaching and instruction? Administration of sacraments? I think this is an important question if we want to discuss its role and history.

Not just my belief but everybody who is not Catholic. We’re all blasphemers! I feel like you’re mixing up concepts. Sure, God hasn’t given up on His covenant people, I don’t expect Him to ever give up on trying to reclaim us. But that doesn’t mean the church will always flourish or even exist. It just means that when it falls apart, there’ll be a Restoration.

Here are some passages from the New Testament which predict the Apostasy.

When Israel began to worship the golden calf, they were, uh, “corrected” by their leaders. Likewise, the labours of the early Apostles are evident in the New Testament and they spent a lot of time cirrecting the people.

If the leaders do not correct the church when they stray from the Will of God, how far will He let them stray until he no longer respects them and withdraws His authority? When that happens, how is the Church to know?

All I get when I read those passages, is Jesus warning me from religions to come, that teach of false prophets, like Joseph smith

 

[Arandur]

Their dogs weren’t reading the Bible. It was intelligent and sincere men. Luther was really bothered by the sale of indulgences and that seems a fairly reasonable objection. The Baptists had an honest problem with the way baptisms were, well not just being performed, but also being understood. And it goes on and on.

The sale of indulgences was improper and was corrected. Note that the sale was not dogmatically approved. As for the Baptists’ objections, this is no argument. Just because some people take exception and have a different interpretation does not make them right.

The alternative to people thinking about what they read in the Bible can only be accepting authority without questioning. Well okay, but that can be dangerous. If the authority they accept is the Roman Catholic rite, then you’re okay with it because you accept it as well but you would object to any other authority. So it boils down to you wanting people to accepting the RC rite without question.

This is nonsense. You really know nothing about Catholics if you think it’s about unquestioning acceptance of human authorities. What does your church say about following what your “prophets” have said, and what has been approved by the general assembly and so forth?

Let’s talk about the Divine Institution of the Church–I feel like we should go back to basics on this one. What does it provide for the people that belong to it? Teaching and instruction? Administration of sacraments? I think this is an important question if we want to discuss its role and history.

What does Christ provide for the people who belong to Him? Salvation (unto eternal life) and guidance for how to follow His way (He is the Good Shepherd). He provides Salvation through the Sacraments that He performs as our High Priest. He provides guidance through the apostolic office that He ordained and through the Spirit’s work among the faithful (which includes Scripture and Tradition).

How could these things be truly provided if the Church was not, in fact, Divine, Christ Himself?

Not just my belief but everybody who is not Catholic. We’re all blasphemers!

To the extent that we are all sinners and hypocrites, we in a sense blaspheme, but in the more extreme sense of blasphemy that I refer, only those who call God a faithless fool of an oathbreaker commit such a terrible blasphemy.

And that is where Smithians differ from most other non-Catholics. You see, the Great Apostasy is NOT the belief of everybody who is not Catholic. You ought to get to know your other Christian denominations. The primary difference on this point that Protestants and Evangelicals have with us is that they believe the Church is differently defined. They believe Matt 16:18 applies to the Church just like we do; they just believe that the Church is some other form, often some form of priesthood of all believers, apart from the ordained priesthood and apostolic office. So they don’t share in your blasphemy, just in a misunderstanding of what the Church is.

The Orthodox (the second largest Christian church) differ only slightly from us on their understanding of what the Church is. They recognize that Christ intended and ordained and maintained unbroken a line of authoritative apostolic successors. In fact, they even agree that the Petrine office has primacy. They just disagree on what that primacy means, and that unity with it is not strictly necessary in the way that we believe it is. Together with the Orthodox (who maintain valid authority, btw), we make up some 1.5 billion of the 2+ billion Christians; the majority of Christians belong to authoritative churches. Almost all the rest are Protestants or Evangelical/Pentecostals. This places you in a distinct minority for your belief, so don’t go claiming that every non-Catholic Christian believes as you Smithians do.

I feel like you’re mixing up concepts. Sure, God hasn’t given up on His covenant people, I don’t expect Him to ever give up on trying to reclaim us. But that doesn’t mean the church will always flourish or even exist. It just means that when it falls apart, there’ll be a Restoration.

Where am I mixing concepts? On “covenant?” What do you think is the “New Covenant” if not Christ’s marriage Covenant with His Church? It doesn’t get more covenantal than Him taking the Church as Bride. He will not break that Covenant; He will not let the Church die out only to start over and try again. To do that is like letting His Bride die and going to find another. Do you see how sickening your concept of God’s relationship with man is?

 

[Arandur]

He didn’t leave you alone for 1800 years …

Mski, what’s the point of life on this earth if we all get second chances later? Why does God bother to have a church on earth at all if He intends to do all this much more perfect preaching in the “spirit world?”

 

[Arandur]

Here are some passages from the New Testament which predict the Apostasy.

When Israel began to worship the golden calf, they were, uh, “corrected” by their leaders. Likewise, the labours of the early Apostles are evident in the New Testament and they spent a lot of time cirrecting the people.

Corrected by their leaders, yes, and they still had authoritative leaders now didn’t they? So still through all the ages. No loss.

If the leaders do not correct the church when they stray from the Will of God, how far will He let them stray until he no longer respects them and withdraws His authority? When that happens, how is the Church to know?

Um, check the Scriptures. God declared when He was taking the priesthood away from people. Where is His contemporary declaration for when He did this during the “Great Apostasy?” He also still maintained an authoritative line, an identifiable covenant people throughout history, even when He was revoking priesthood from individuals and families and tribes. So why would He let that identifiable covenant people die out for the very first time after His Son gave the ultimate sacrifice? You conceive of a god weaker after its greatest deed, whose greatest deed made things worse and less successful than ever before.

 

[MelanieAnne]

Those passages predict an apostasy of individuals from the Church, not an apostasy of the Church. The Church is the body of Christ. The Mormons claim that the Mormon Jesus could not sustain His own body. How small and impotent your god is!

Indeed.

When I look at other faiths, this is a common thread among them ~ a God that isn’t truly God. One faith that I attended with a family member (Calvinist in their persuasion) preached that if you didn’t believe exactly as they did, you were going to Hell. If you never had a chance to even hear the Gospel, too bad for you, you’re still going to hell.

Then there’s the the example Paul just gave of a God that is, at the very least, ineffective, and at worst, either unable or unwilling to keep His word. The reaction I come away with when confronted with such characteristics attributed to God is that “if God is like that, then I don’t want any part of it.”

Luckily for us, all of us, God isn’t like that.

 

[rmcmullan]

What does Christ provide for the people who belong to Him? Salvation (unto eternal life) and guidance for how to follow His way (He is the Good Shepherd). He provides Salvation through the Sacraments that He performs as our High Priest. He provides guidance through the apostolic office that He ordained and through the Spirit’s work among the faithful (which includes Scripture and Tradition).

Arandur, I think maybe this is where we’re both looking in different direction and wondering where each other is going. Wherever there’s a believing people, a church is established. But what is that church and what does it do for its members? It’s more than a fan club or a special interest group, right? What then?