LDS: Apostasy

[Catholic20064]

The easiest way to invalidate Mormon claims is to read the Book of Mormon which is obviously false.

 

[KathleenGee]

To say that the real church ended with the apostles doesn’t make any sense…

The Apostles were the link between Jesus Christ and us who witnessed His life, death and resurrection, 12, the sign of perfection of the church…the administrators of the Word, the Sacraments – the visible signs of God, and its administration.

The apostles are the foundation of the Church on the cornerstone of Jesus Christ, Peter His rock.

And to say it ended at the beginning…and not give their followers–the Church Fathers, the bishops who were faithful to the oral tradition, to build the church doesn’t hold. Christ did not make a mistake.

God already knew way back then there would always be wolves among the sheep, chaff among the wheat…and His grace and forgiveness far greater than our sins combined.

 

[KathleenGee]

I read some passages from Joseph Smith…the hat…the glasses…the invalidation of Christianity going way back to its beginning, the use of language…a very different style from Sacred Scripture.

I can see there are so many differences among us.

Christ said He would always be with us.

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks for the response, Parker. I would like to clarify a couple of your points. I know we will disagree and I am not criticizing your points, I just want to be sure I am fully understanding your position.

In the Mormon mind, was God not able to (or simply decided not to) guide the choosing of the Church leaders the first time around?

In the quote above, you mention that the Bible and the BOM together bring a higher level of doctrinal clarity. In your first paragraph you mention reasons why people may drft to their own “version” of what they believe. To answer my question in the OP are you saying that the combination of 1) the Bible and the BOM, along with 2) God’s divine guidance on the choosing of apostles, provides us an implicit guarantee that the church never has nor never will fall into apostasy?

Sterryfamily,
I suppose that I would need to write perhaps a hundred pages for you to “fully understand” my position. Clearly, the apostles in the original church, including Matthias and Paul and others, were chosen by the manifestation of the will of God through the Holy Spirit. They were chosen by God, including the fact that Jesus knew exactly what He was doing when He chose Judas Iscariot to be one of the original twelve. The apostles chosen after the Savior had ascended were chosen by revelation, but it appears from what happened during the years 60-90 AD, that apostles were not replaced at some point, and it appears that John the Revelator came to understand why during the vision he had.

God allowed the drifting away from pure doctrinal truth, and could have placed different people with different strengths and no need to “please” the people around them or be drawn to some of the beliefs of the people around them and try to make their own beliefs acceptable to a wider “audience”. Such drifting away was prophesied, and it had a needful purpose in that what we have in the world today is an assortment of beliefs that allow people to choose how much truth they want to live by, and what appeals to them from that assortment of beliefs. God did not ordain that this happen, but allowed it to happen, just as He allowed Eve and Adam to partake of the forbidden fruit.

The Book of Mormon helps fulfill Ezekiel 36 and 37 and Hosea and many prophecies of Isaiah about the joining of the entire house of Israel in the latter days and during the Millenium, in that Judah and Ephraim become joined and there is a stick of Joseph in the hand of Ephraim joined with the stick of Judah.

This is all part of the plan of salvation for the entire world and for the fulfilling of the Abrahamic covenant and Abrahamic promise that all the kindreds of the earth would be blessed through his seed.

You could read Jacob 5 from the Book of Mormon if you want to read an allegory about this whole subject of the scatterings due to people drifting away from the pure gospel, and the gatherings of the descendants of God’s covenant people, written originally by a prophet whose writings were on a set of records that were brought to America by Lehi and his family.

If your final question referred to the “restored church” after 1830, then “yes” is my answer, based on so many prophecies in the Old Testament, the book of Revelation, the Book of Mormon, and elsewhere. You might look at Daniel 12:4 and 7-10. These are things hid from the world, that the “wise shall understand.” It is the same kind of wisdom written about by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2.

 

[KathleenGee]

Parker,

You say, it would take so many pages…I agree as a Catholic it would take so many pages and texts to explain to you the early history, the documents, their contexts and time…
You should visit Hebrewcatholics.org and see how they view the Catholic Church.

The Book of Dan refers to primarily Babylon, present day Iraq, and I find this war significant and how it is impacting events in Israel.

The Book of Revelation, you well know written by St. John the Evangelist, was written primarily for encouragement and perseverence in the face of persecution and martyrdom.

The book covers the trials of the 7 early churches and their bishops, conditions that you can find today in ecclesial communities.

Other chapters represent the age old battle of good vs evil. The last chapters wording reflects the New Jerusalem that is reflected in the sacrifice of the Mass…Jesus the Paschal offering as atonement for sin…Evil has already been defeated by Christ’s life, death and resurrection…and this is fulfilled in each generation.

Jesus is not coming back to this world to rule but only at the end when we will have a new heaven and a new earth.

 

[sterryfamily]

Sterryfamily,
I suppose that I would need to write perhaps a hundred pages for you to “fully understand” my position. Clearly, the apostles in the original church, including Matthias and Paul and others, were chosen by the manifestation of the will of God through the Holy Spirit. They were chosen by God, including the fact that Jesus knew exactly what He was doing when He chose Judas Iscariot to be one of the original twelve. The apostles chosen after the Savior had ascended were chosen by revelation, but it appears from what happened during the years 60-90 AD, that apostles were not replaced at some point, and it appears that John the Revelator came to understand why during the vision he had.

God allowed the drifting away from pure doctrinal truth, and could have placed different people with different strengths and no need to “please” the people around them or be drawn to some of the beliefs of the people around them and try to make their own beliefs acceptable to a wider “audience”. Such drifting away was prophesied, and it had a needful purpose in that what we have in the world today is an assortment of beliefs that allow people to choose how much truth they want to live by, and what appeals to them from that assortment of beliefs. God did not ordain that this happen, but allowed it to happen, just as He allowed Eve and Adam to partake of the forbidden fruit.

The Book of Mormon helps fulfill Ezekiel 36 and 37 and Hosea and many prophecies of Isaiah about the joining of the entire house of Israel in the latter days and during the Millenium, in that Judah and Ephraim become joined and there is a stick of Joseph in the hand of Ephraim joined with the stick of Judah.

This is all part of the plan of salvation for the entire world and for the fulfilling of the Abrahamic covenant and Abrahamic promise that all the kindreds of the earth would be blessed through his seed.

You could read Jacob 5 from the Book of Mormon if you want to read an allegory about this whole subject of the scatterings due to people drifting away from the pure gospel, and the gatherings of the descendants of God’s covenant people, written originally by a prophet whose writings were on a set of records that were brought to America by Lehi and his family.

If your final question referred to the “restored church” after 1830, then “yes” is my answer, based on so many prophecies in the Old Testament, the book of Revelation, the Book of Mormon, and elsewhere. You might look at Daniel 12:4 and 7-10. These are things hid from the world, that the “wise shall understand.” It is the same kind of wisdom written about by Paul in 1 Corinthians 2.

Thanks again, Parker.

Last question for you and I’ll leave you alone. Catholics, as you know, will point to the writings of the early Christians to corroborate our claims. The available evidence shows people who were very passionate about their devotion to Christ and EXTREMELY passionate about defending orthodoxy - that is, correct practice and understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Take, for instance, Ignatius of Antioch. He was a student of the apostle, John. He traveled some with Sts. Peter and Paul and was actually ordained as Bishop of Antioch by St Peter, himself. Ignatius was arrested and taken to Rome to be fed to the lions for practicing Christianity around the turn of the first century, while St John was still living. On the trip to Rome, he wrote several letters to the Christians of the communities he passed through exhorting them to stand firm in their faith and to be faithful to the gospel. He was adamant about Christians’ adherence to authentic teaching and their fidelity to the Church leaders. In his letters he also admonished Christians not to be sad for him, but to rejoice at his becoming food for the beasts and his impending return home to our Father in heaven.

Guys like Ignatius, as evidenced by the writings they left behind, were very vociferous defenders of right teaching. There is tons of evidence in their writings that supports the Catholic Church’s claims and her understandings of the Scriptures and Christ’s gospel message. There is not one lick of evidence anywhere which in any shape of form comes even remotely close to supporting the Mormon claims.

When I’ve asked Mormon missionaries how they account for this lack of evidence they have essentially claimed some vast right-wing conspiracy in the early Church to cover up the true gospel. A conspiracy which destroyed vast volumes of writings (presumably approximately equivalent to the BOM), and other evidence. It’s difficult to imagine men like Ignatius and others who were so devoted to their love for Jesus Christ and his gospel message allowing such a conspiracy to survive. It’s hard to imagine such a conspiratorial effort succeeding with these Christians having been scatterd to all known quarters and accross many cultures and languages, etc. It took so long just to get comuniques distibuted.

Do you have any other explanation or hypothesis?

 

[KathleenGee]

I think it very hard for others who have been taught to view the Catholic Church in a certain way to study our historical documents.

Every generation, every diocese has had very devout, most Christian Catholics in every part of the world…for 2,000 years, who have kept the faith, followed the Holy Spirit in the Gospels in total unity with their pope, bishop and pastors.

I read parts of the book of Mormon, but the references, language, imagery, the connection to the Jewish Levites, etc. was so different…it was like reading a totally new religion.

The Palestinian Catholic Christians have Jewish blood of the earliest believers going back to the time of Christ and retain practice of the breaking of bread in their homes. I have the greatest respect for them and all that they have suffered. Their numbers are now dwindling…but they would be a good source for Mormons to speak to and understand to get a sense of our history, rather than reading countless texts and documents.

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks again, Parker.

Last question for you and I’ll leave you alone. Catholics, as you know, will point to the writings of the early Christians to corroborate our claims. The available evidence shows people who were very passionate about their devotion to Christ and EXTREMELY passionate about defending orthodoxy - that is, correct practice and understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Take, for instance, Ignatius of Antioch. He was a student of the apostle, John. He traveled some with Sts. Peter and Paul and was actually ordained as Bishop of Antioch by St Peter, himself. Ignatius was arrested and taken to Rome to be fed to the lions for practicing Christianity around the turn of the first century, while St John was still living. On the trip to Rome, he wrote several letters to the Christians of the communities he passed through exhorting them to stand firm in their faith and to be faithful to the gospel. He was adamant about Christians’ adherence to authentic teaching and their fidelity to the Church leaders. In his letters he also admonished Christians not to be sad for him, but to rejoice at his becoming food for the beasts and his impending return home to our Father in heaven.

Guys like Ignatius, as evidenced by the writings they left behind, were very vociferous defenders of right teaching. There is tons of evidence in their writings that supports the Catholic Church’s claims and her understandings of the Scriptures and Christ’s gospel message. There is not one lick of evidence anywhere which in any shape of form comes even remotely close to supporting the Mormon claims.

When I’ve asked Mormon missionaries how they account for this lack of evidence they have essentially claimed some vast right-wing conspiracy in the early Church to cover up the true gospel. A conspiracy which destroyed vast volumes of writings (presumably approximately equivalent to the BOM), and other evidence. It’s difficult to imagine men like Ignatius and others who were so devoted to their love for Jesus Christ and his gospel message allowing such a conspiracy to survive. It’s hard to imagine such a conspiratorial effort succeeding with these Christians having been scatterd to all known quarters and accross many cultures and languages, etc. It took so long just to get comuniques distibuted.

Do you have any other explanation or hypothesis?

Sterryfamily,
I would certainly disagree with the idea of “some vast … conspiracy in the early Church” although there seem to have been attempts to assert authority and deal with divisions by labeling rather than by loving. I’ve read some of the writings of and about Ignatius, and have found that some of his writings teetered on the edge of wrong doctrine as compared with the New Testament, nor is it assured historically that he was ordained a bishop by Peter.

I have explained before on this website that the apostle John was by being the last living apostle, the one who held the leading keys of priesthood authority on the earth, even in 90-100 AD. He didn’t delegate those to someone else, nor did he bow out of the picture.

Of course leaders trying to assert their authority and position would refer to having been taught by or having associated with the apostles. What becomes evident is that as they emphasize that association rather than emphasizing that they understand how the Holy Spirit directs the calling of leaders and the releasing of leaders, they are defending their role which is what would be expected.

 

[Catholic20064]

Sterryfamily,

I have explained before on this website that the apostle John was by being the last living apostle, the one who held the leading keys of priesthood authority on the earth, even in 90-100 AD. He didn’t delegate those to someone else, nor did he bow out of the picture.

How do you know he didn’t do this? How do you know the Bishops weren’t given that authority? You assert things without any proof. What real evidence do you have that Joseph Smith was given this authority?

 

[KathleenGee]

Very hard…my day here is coming to a close…but I am working tonight and am praying for all…

I guess Parker what hurts us is that our Church – without the language and labels used in past to describe us – is that it became fake after the last apostle…so it has been existing for 2,000 years.

In the past, I tried to get some understanding of the Mormon faith on my own from your perspective but found it impossible to build bridges…and then today to hear that everything after the Apostles was wrong…you just can’t say there are Catholics that are good Christians in it inspite of the Catholic Church…

Joseph Smith took it on himself to judge and condemn an entire people, albeit there were those who failed in the faith and caused scandal…but to deny all the work done by our Church to ensure the Oral Tradition of Jesus was passed down…

I am praying for all tonight…because if anything, for our country…The Christians are the greatest block in our country but we are completely splintered and we are loosing.

I believe the Holy Spirit works through all people of Good Will and treat others accordingly…but the full deposit of faith is found in the Catholic Church…that doesn’t mean anybody is better in it. We are all equal before God and He plays no favorites.

 

[sterryfamily]

Sterryfamily,
I would certainly disagree with the idea of “some vast … conspiracy in the early Church” although there seem to have been attempts to assert authority and deal with divisions by labeling rather than by loving. I’ve read some of the writings of and about Ignatius, and have found that some of his writings teetered on the edge of wrong doctrine as compared with the New Testament, nor is it assured historically that he was ordained a bishop by Peter.

I have explained before on this website that the apostle John was by being the last living apostle, the one who held the leading keys of priesthood authority on the earth, even in 90-100 AD. He didn’t delegate those to someone else, nor did he bow out of the picture.

Of course leaders trying to assert their authority and position would refer to having been taught by or having associated with the apostles. What becomes evident is that as they emphasize that association rather than emphasizing that they understand how the Holy Spirit directs the calling of leaders and the releasing of leaders, they are defending their role which is what would be expected.

Thanks again, Parker. I sincerely appreciate your patience.

What about the lack of evidence supporting the Mormon version of the gospel from early Christian days? How do you attribute this?

P.S. I wouldn’t be able to stand up to the heat on a Mormon site the way you are here so, thanks.

 

[TheosisM]

Thanks again, Parker. I sincerely appreciate your patience.

What about the lack of evidence supporting the Mormon version of the gospel from early Christian days? How do you attribute this?

P.S. I wouldn’t be able to stand up to the heat on a Mormon site the way you are here so, thanks.

I think you have to define what you believe the “Mormon version of the gospel” is . Most will say that it’s the same gospel as the one found in the Bible and in “early Christian days”.

 

[ParkerD]

How do you know he didn’t do this? How do you know the Bishops weren’t given that authority? You assert things without any proof. What real evidence do you have that Joseph Smith was given this authority?

Catholic20064,
John wrote the book of Revelation and the gospel of John fairly late in his life as a mortal person. He knew the importance of his apostolic witness and of the keys of authority on the earth. Of course he would have written it down if he had been instructed by the Holy Spirit to tell that he was no longer in a direct leadership role as the last living apostle, or that the bishops had been given the keys, or that there was a bishop of Rome who was the “in charge” bishop because Peter died in Rome. How trustworthy is the “proof” you think you have that Peter was the “first bishop of Rome” and that the supposed “popes” in succession from him were recognized by everyone including John as the leading bishop and therefore the earthly leader of the church?

Besides the Holy Ghost confirming the truth of restoration of priesthood to Joseph Smith that I understand by personal revelation, I also have had many experiences using the priesthood such that I know I was not acting “on my own” and the outcome was not “on its own.” There is also the confirming guidance of the New Testament as to the order of the church Christ established–a purposeful order including the cornerstone foundation of Himself, then and throughout the ages after His ascension.

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks again, Parker. I sincerely appreciate your patience.

What about the lack of evidence supporting the Mormon version of the gospel from early Christian days? How do you attribute this?

P.S. I wouldn’t be able to stand up to the heat on a Mormon site the way you are here so, thanks.

Sterryfamily,

If by the words “Mormon version of the gospel” you are referring to temple marriage for eternity (not the kinds of time-only marriages such as those among the Sadducees) or the work done in temples, then I will explain that there are enough references in the Old Testament to temples and their purpose and that there would be a temple or temples in the latter days (see Malachi), that these sacred parts of God’s work on the earth can be understood to be necessary within the divinely established church.

Other aspects of the gospel as taught within the LDS faith can be supported by Biblical references or teachings, but can also be explained away by others who bring different meanings to the texts. It illustrates why having the personal sure guide of the Holy Spirit is so important and why having living apostles to preserve the pure doctrines all over the world as the gospel is embraced by many people from many cultures, is a wonderful gift from God.

Thanks for your postscript note here. I appreciate your kindness in saying that. You have been thoughtful and considerate–thanks!

 

[Xavierlives]

I don’t think that you understand that scripture correctly. Since this is a question that is asked of LDS all the time, I have already answered it in my Blog which you can read here. Stroll down the post to my answers to Objections 6 and 7.

The prophecy of Daniel is one.

From you blog:

By that we do not mean that the entire church became wicked, or that there were no more true Christians left in the world who had a saving faith in the Christ.

So there were Christians, only there was no one there to baptize them? There was no one there to give them the Eucharist? But they were still Christians?

 

[sterryfamily]

Sorry…By Mormon version of the gospel, I meant the conglomeration of all Mormon doctrine. What makes Mormonism differ from Catholicism.

And the question is why is there no evidence from the early Church supporting this Mormon version? - the teachings that are unique to the LDS?

 

[Catholic20064]

Catholic20064,
John wrote the book of Revelation and the gospel of John fairly late in his life as a mortal person. He knew the importance of his apostolic witness and of the keys of authority on the earth. Of course he would have written it down if he had been instructed by the Holy Spirit to tell that he was no longer in a direct leadership role as the last living apostle, or that the bishops had been given the keys, or that there was a bishop of Rome who was the “in charge” bishop because Peter died in Rome. How trustworthy is the “proof” you think you have that Peter was the “first bishop of Rome” and that the supposed “popes” in succession from him were recognized by everyone including John as the leading bishop and therefore the earthly leader of the church?

Besides the Holy Ghost confirming the truth of restoration of priesthood to Joseph Smith that I understand by personal revelation, I also have had many experiences using the priesthood such that I know I was not acting “on my own” and the outcome was not “on its own.” There is also the confirming guidance of the New Testament as to the order of the church Christ established–a purposeful order including the cornerstone foundation of Himself, then and throughout the ages after His ascension.

A friend of mine just joined the New Apostolic Church. They are based in Germany. They also claim to have the apostolic ministry. Quoting their website:

Apostle Ministry necessary for salvation

The statement that the apostle ministry is necessary for salvation means that the apostle ministry is indispensable for attaining salvation in Christ. The question of indispensability only applies to that period in the salvation history in which the apostle ministry is active for preparing the bridal congregation.

First of all, the indispensability of the apostle ministry emanates from the fact that Jesus established just this one ministry and vested it with respective powers. Moreover, this is based on biblical testimonials of acts by apostles, such as for example the bestowal of the Holy Spirit in Samaria and Ephesus (cf. Acts 8:14 ff. and 19:1 ff.).

It is our conviction of faith that the apostle ministry was not historically unique but that it was re-established by God in the 19th century for the preparation of the bridal congregation for the Return of Christ. The question as to who will be accepted on the Day of the Lord and whether there will be any exceptions is left to God’s sovereign decision.

Why you and not them?

Once you wander off the reservation and found your own church like Joseph Smith did you can make any claim you want just like the New Apostolic Church does. God is a God of order. This entire claim of a complete apostasy and a restoration flies in the face of history and common sense. Either God preserved his priesthood authority in the Catholic Church or as the Protestants claim there is no need for priesthood authority. The idea of a restoration seems to be a uniquely 19th century idea which was not limited to Joseph Smith. But you need some proof. What’s the proof that God restored the church through Joseph Smith? Don’t tell me again that it was the Holy Ghost. The New Apostolic Church would make the same claim. What objective evidence is there for Joseph Smith’s claims?

 

[Catholic20064]

In all of these discussions no Mormon has provided any proof that the office of apostle was meant to be an ongoing office after the death of the last apostle. They just assume it was supposed to continue. I’d love to see how they justify that in scripture. The only scripture I can imagine is this one:

Ephesians 4:11: And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12: For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ:
14: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

I don’t see how they stretch this to mean there would need to be more apostles. The apostles achieved the unity of the faith through the Catholic Church before they died by establishing the apostolic authority through the Bishops. Apostasy from the Catholic Church does not destroy the unity of the faith found in the one Holy Catholic Church. Movements like Mormonism don’t disrupt the unity of the Catholic Church because that unity is found wherever a Catholic Bishop in union with Rome is found.

 

[Bataar]

Where do mormons get the idea that the “keys” were to pass from apostle to apostle as a sign of authority? No where in the Bible does it say that’s how Jesus designed it. He made Peter the head and that was it. Once St. Ignatius was made a bishop he was of equal authority of St. John or any other living apostle.

 

[zerinus]

From you blog:

By that we do not mean that the entire church became wicked, or that there were no more true Christians left in the world who had a saving faith in the Christ.

So there were Christians, only there was no one there to baptize them? There was no one there to give them the Eucharist? But they were still Christians?

Yes, they were Christians in the sense that they had genuine faith in Christ, and believed in His teachings. That was sufficient to identify them as Christians, and qualify them to possess a measure of the Holy Spirit, even though they did not have the priesthood and therefore could not administer valid sacraments. That is not, after all, unlike how the Catholic Church views the Protestants.