LDS Church puts a date on the Great Apostasy

[KathleenGee]

In regards to the Greek philosophers, there were various schools of philosophical inquiry.

The work of Aristotle was studied and reflected on, especially cause and effect. St. Thomas, much time later, studied Aristotle, and decided to write his Summa Theologicae…Summa Contra Gentiles: Book One: God…that in the discipline of metaphysics, one could prove the existence of God, the cause, and His effects.

If there was one characteristic of the Lord, it is God, the Unmoved Mover…It is the constancy of God that never changes. “I Am Who Am”…the state of being…

One description of metaphysics is the study of reality. It develops and perfects the use of reason, and helps people to look at things critically. I don’t mean lacking in charity, but through philosophy, developing the use of reason and the ability to discern true from false.

 

[catholic-rcia]

I commend you in your faith, and I encourage you to stay true to your faith. Continue to seek truth and follow it where ever it may lead. In the end, it is our faith in Christ and our actions in accordance to our faith that we will be judged by.

I feel I have to remind you that you do not worship the same Jesus as we do. You know this right? You have accepted this correct? Just to make sure we are all on the same page. I don’;t want others who view this to be mislead. We need to make this clear in order to have an honest diologe.

 

[flyonthewall]

I did not say this. You did…to justify your belief.

I did not state that you said it, but tell me are their written records of their religion true or myth? They have archeological evidence of the places named in their stories…does that make their religion true?

I did not say it is the only proof. It contributes to the proof, to the truth, to the veracity, which sadly, you cannot prove the claimed apostasy with anything except conjecture. And you continue to ignore historical facts, records and what not.

And what historical document will verify the priesthood did not continue? There would only be church records that would address this…and of course they would not admit an apostasy.

The absence of the acheological evidence just means these have not been found yet. But there are lots of acheological proof that has been found that authenticates the Bible. Actually, archeologists believe they have located the two missing rivers from the Garden of Eden…Pishon and Gishon.

Funny how that works in your favor…
There are a lot of archeological sites that authenticate sites from the Illiad and the Odysey. There are cities that are known that are mentioned in the Bourne Identity and its sequels.
The archeological sites we know of today, that are mentioned in the Bible only verify the names of places mentioned, not the events that happened there.
The Bible is authenticated by ones faith, not by any historical record or archeological evidence. They are evidence…not proof.

Yet, you are diverting the attention from the Book of Mormon. Has anything been found, archeological, to prove the book of Mormon? Show it and display it for all to see.

I am no scholar on BoM evidence but one that comes to mind is the plates themselves. Critics used to use the concept of writing on metal plates as proof that Joseph Smith lied as every scholar would tell you that ancient people of that time period did not write on metal plates. It subsequently was found that ancient people did indeed write on metal plates.
I do not submit this as proof, but as evidence.

And what about the Book of Abraham? You seem to have ignored the proof of its unreal.

I have not ignored this. The assumption critics make is that the papyri that was used to translate the Book of Abraham is still in existence, and this has not been proven. Yes, the existing fragments may have been with the source of the BoA, but are not THE source. Of course when trying to disprove the work of Joseph, details like that are overlooked, and then conclusions are drawn.
I know that anything I say will be dismissed out of hand so does it really matter if I address it or not?

 

[flyonthewall]

I feel I have to remind you that you do not worship the same Jesus as we do. You know this right? You have accepted this correct?

I reject it outright. This is a juvenile tactic used by those that cannot conceive of a single person being viewed in different lights by different people.
Christians view Jesus as the Son of God and Savior. Jews view Him simply as another Rabbi. Two different people view the same person in two different lights…but somehow that boggles your mind…you simply cannot comprehend it. So be it, but it changes nothing.

Just to make sure we are all on the same page. I don’;t want others who view this to be mislead. We need to make this clear in order to have an honest diologe.

The second you make that assertion, you are being ignorant at best.
Honest dialogue goes out the window when you seek to “poison the well”.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Exactly who is doing the poisoning could be debated.

 

[Stephen168]

The absence of the acheological evidence just means these have not been found yet. But there are lots of acheological proof that has been found that authenticates the Bible. Actually, archeologists believe they have located the two missing rivers from the Garden of Eden…Pishon and Gishon.

DNA evidence has been found and it proves the Book of Mormon is not what Joseph Smith claimed it to be, Joseph Smith lied and the Book of Mormon is a 19th century American work of fiction. It seems the Mormon Church is trying to change what the Book of Mormon is about but that still means Joseph Smith lied.

 

[ParkerD]

DNA evidence has been found …

Stephen,
So please do tell what the DNA evidence has said about every single particular individual tribal group that was in existence in the ancient Americas? Where did they all come from, specifically and individually–the hundreds of them? The evidence must evidently be conclusive from your perspective, so you evidently know something that no one else has said that they know.

You can start with listing all of the individual tribal groups, and list their origins…that will be a remarkable list! It will be groundbreaking!

Anyone who compiles such a list with their conclusive and irrefutable DNA evidence that shows the origins of each tribal group who ended up in ancient America, and can trace their descent such that they really can say they are dealing with that unique tribal group, will have done one of the most remarkable compilations ever to have been completed–since so many have failed when they tried doing that even using linguistics rather than DNA, and since there are so many tribal groups to account for.

 

[Stephen168]

I cited my evidence found in the scriptures, there is more but you would not consider them authoritive so I do not cite them.

Mormons believe the ‘Great Apostasy’ can be found in the Bible.
Mormons believe the ‘Great Apostasy’ happened at the death of the last Apostle.
The Apostles wrote the Bible.
Therefore, __________________________.

Yes, there is no biblical (why would there be) or historical evidence of a ‘Great Apostasy.’ What it boils down to is:

1. Joseph Smith invented a new religion;
2. that religion is contrary to Christianity;
3. Therefore, there was an Apostasy.
   Mormon claims are based on ‘faith only’ because their claims cannot be supported by history, science, or reason.

 

[benidict]

I agree that they were holding to what they believed was the truth. Unfortunately, as described by the Apostles and the Church Fathers, there were strifes, disagreements, and people seeking their own followers. Once the truth has been altered, and accepted as truth, it doesn’t matter the length of time it has been accepted as truth. It does not matter how many people write about it being the truth, it still has been altered from the truth.
I am not saying they were not sincere in their faith, but that their faith was based on altered truths.
We have always maintained that all religions have truth in them so the Catholic church was not without truths.
The main thing with the apostasy is it was about the proper authority being absent. Which led to other philosophies creeping in, or being injected.
I believe the Catholic church did indeed have a mission to fulfill…to keep faith in Christ alive, which it did…but that did not negate the need for the restoration of the proper authority, and the correction of altered truths.

Thanks for the Christmas wish, and I too, wish you, and all, a very merry Christmas season.

again my friend. i really dont think history bears this out. i believe it can be found in the didache, that the apostles themselves left a means of succession. that the authority was not lost, but continued on after their deaths. this coupled with what Christ himself said, that he would build his Church, and the Gates of hell would not prevail against it. also, what alterations crept in? i would be very interested to find out what these were. what was injected. which philosophies? Catholicism is the closest thing that can be found to temple Judaism. what beliefs were introduced to change that? look forward to your answers. peace and prayers for you.

 

[flyonthewall]

Mormons believe the ‘Great Apostasy’ can be found in the Bible.
Mormons believe the ‘Great Apostasy’ happened at the death of the last Apostle.
The Apostles wrote the Bible.
Therefore, __________________________.

Yes, there is no biblical (why would there be) or historical evidence of a ‘Great Apostasy.’ What it boils down to is:

1. Joseph Smith invented a new religion;
2. that religion is contrary to Christianity;
3. Therefore, there was an Apostasy.
   Mormon claims are based on ‘faith only’ because their claims cannot be supported by history, science, or reason.

Tell me, by what history, science or reason can the ressurrection be proved, or even supported?
There are no historical documents that include that, and no, the Bible is not a historical document. It is a religious one. The Bible is only authoritive to those who have faith in it. Outside of the Bible, Jesus does not exist in history.

Tell me, what science will prove that someone can be dead for 3 days and rise again? And I mean dead, not in a coma, or just thought of as dead, as that would refute the ressurection because He wasn’t really dead.

Tell me the “reason” you use to prove supernatural events, that would be any different than the Greeks or Romans?

Bottom line is, you can’t. It’s all faith.

 

[benidict]

Tell me, by what history, science or reason can the ressurrection be proved, or even supported?
There are no historical documents that include that, and no, the Bible is not a historical document. It is a religious one. The Bible is only authoritive to those who have faith in it. Outside of the Bible, Jesus does not exist in history.

Tell me, what science will prove that someone can be dead for 3 days and rise again? And I mean dead, not in a coma, or just thought of as dead, as that would refute the ressurection because He wasn’t really dead.

Tell me the “reason” you use to prove supernatural events, that would be any different than the Greeks or Romans?

Bottom line is, you can’t. It’s all faith.

ah my friend. but there is at least one historical document that can be looked at. Josephus. also you may want to look at titanius. these are two historians that were not Christian, who wrote about Jesus historically, and how his movement flourished after he was here. Peace

 

[Stephen168]

Stephen,
So please do tell what the DNA evidence has said about every single particular individual tribal group that was in existence in the ancient Americas? Where did they all come from, specifically and individually–the hundreds of them? The evidence must evidently be conclusive from your perspective, so you evidently know something that no one else has said that they know.

You can start with listing all of the individual tribal groups, and list their origins…that will be a remarkable list! It will be groundbreaking!

Anyone who compiles such a list with their conclusive and irrefutable DNA evidence that shows the origins of each tribal group who ended up in ancient America, and can trace their descent such that they really can say they are dealing with that unique tribal group, will have done one of the most remarkable compilations ever to have been completed–since so many have failed when they tried doing that even using linguistics rather than DNA, and since there are so many tribal groups to account for.

Joseph Smith’s claim was the equivalent of claiming all sheep are white. Scientists don’t have to locate and determine the color of every sheep on the planet to show Smith to be a liar. To show Smith to be a liar, they have to find one non-white sheep. They have. In fact is this analogy, they have not found any white ones; not one, zip, zero.

Now the Mormon Church is claiming that Joseph Smith and over 150 years of Mormon teaching did not claim that ALL sheep are white. In the 1980’s, it was downgraded to MOST sheep are white. In the meantime, Mormons are holding out hoping that someone will find that one white sheep.

Keep looking you say, we don’t have to; to show Smith to be a liar.

 

[ParkerD]

Joseph Smith’s claim was the equivalent of claiming all sheep are white. Scientists don’t have to locate and determine the color of every sheep on the planet …

Stephen,

You wrote that DNA evidence proves… This means you have proof of what it proves. Go ahead and state what it proves…about all the tribal groups who ever came to the ancient Americas.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Interesting as all this might be, it is a diversion tactic. Smith claimed boldly and without exception that all the native peoples of the Americas were descendants of Jews who had traveled from the middle east. Therefore, all native peoples should have this DNA marker.

When science proved that this is a lie, the Mormons changed their story. In other words, they covered up Smith’s lie with just another lie.

This happens over and over again in Mormonism. The layers of lies become so thick that the only way to stay above them is to go with the top layer and not delve to deeply underneath.

 

[Stephen168]

Tell me, by what history, science or reason can the ressurrection be proved, or even supported?
There are no historical documents that include that, and no, the Bible is not a historical document. It is a religious one. The Bible is only authoritive to those who have faith in it. Outside of the Bible, Jesus does not exist in history.

Tell me, what science will prove that someone can be dead for 3 days and rise again? And I mean dead, not in a coma, or just thought of as dead, as that would refute the ressurection because He wasn’t really dead.

Tell me the “reason” you use to prove supernatural events, that would be any different than the Greeks or Romans?

Bottom line is, you can’t. It’s all faith.

This has nothing to do with the Mormon claim of the ‘Great Apostasy.’

 

[Stephen168]

Interesting as all this might be, it is a diversion tactic. Smith claimed boldly and without exception that all the native peoples of the Americas were descendants of Jews who had traveled from the middle east. Therefore, all native peoples should have this DNA marker.

When science proved that this is a lie, the Mormons changed their story. In other words, they covered up Smith’s lie with just another lie.

This happens over and over again in Mormonism. The layers of lies become so thick that the only way to stay above them is to go with the top layer and not delve to deeply underneath.

Exactly

 

[flyonthewall]

again my friend. i really dont think history bears this out. i believe it can be found in the didache, that the apostles themselves left a means of succession. that the authority was not lost, but continued on after their deaths. this coupled with what Christ himself said, that he would build his Church, and the Gates of hell would not prevail against it.

We have very different interpretations on what it means for the gates of hell would not prevail…
As I have stated before, “hell” as used in this context was the place of the dead. The only way “gates” could prevail is if they could not be opened. Christ broke the bands of death and swung open the gates of hell, or death. All will be resurrected.
And what Jesus was talking about is revelation, not only Peter. Peter received revelation of the divinity of Jesus Christ, and Jesus was both stating that Peter would lead the church, and it would be upon revelatoin that it would be lead.
Now correct me if I am wrong, but doesn’t the Catholic church beleive that (public)revelation stopped with the Apostles?
I certainly believe that the gates of hell will never prevail, in fact, they have already been prevailed over.

also, what alterations crept in? i would be very interested to find out what these were. what was injected. which philosophies? Catholicism is the closest thing that can be found to temple Judaism. what beliefs were introduced to change that? look forward to your answers. peace and prayers for you.

This is what gets a lot of people hot under the collar around here. I am asked to provide evidence for my beleif, and specifically evidence that supports my belief and does not support yours. When I do, it is dismissed with a wave of a hand, and then others proceed to tell me why my church is wrong…or worse.
I know I am not going to convince anyone about my belief, so I am not sure why it is asked about…I get the feeling it is more of a “I dare you to prove it” type thing.
I keep hoping it is asked more in a “I want to understand why you believe that way, so we can have a better understanding of where each of us are coming from” type thing. Not that my words will sway anyone.

 

[flyonthewall]

This has nothing to do with the Mormon claim of the ‘Great Apostasy.’

Oh but it is in answer to your statements. You claim history, science and reason support your stand, and that we have none of that…only faith.

I merely pointed out that your claims to history, science and reason are based soley upon your faith, and do not stand on their own…to which you now state it has nothing to do with the Great Apostasy.

This is a double standard that is used quite often. I hear double standards are frowned upon.

 

[TEPO]

Tell me, by what history, science or reason can the ressurrection be proved, or even supported?
There are no historical documents that include that, and no, the Bible is not a historical document. It is a religious one. The Bible is only authoritive to those who have faith in it. Outside of the Bible, Jesus does not exist in history.

Tell me, what science will prove that someone can be dead for 3 days and rise again? And I mean dead, not in a coma, or just thought of as dead, as that would refute the ressurection because He wasn’t really dead.

Tell me the “reason” you use to prove supernatural events, that would be any different than the Greeks or Romans?

Bottom line is, you can’t. It’s all faith.

Great points, I also deny the use of scientific or historical “facts” or “statistics” into my faith… Still, justifying the claims of non-Catholic “prophets” only goes further into dividing up Christianity. If Joseph Smith was a true Prophet, bearing the weight of the Holy Spirit, He would’nt have led people apart from all the good sacraments of the Holy Church, he would have infused them.

God is not a divider, he is a multiplier.

 

[KathleenGee]

Flyonthewall and Parker,

It is quite illuminating to find out that the Mormons cannot p(name removed by moderator)oint anything proving the Great Apostasy happened at the death of the Last Apostle…except St. Paul’s farewell address and the denial of the use of Greek Philosophy.

Greek Philosophy can be of great help to any human being to help them think and discern what is true witness from false witness because if anything, it is the study of objective reality.

Every teaching of the Catholic Church is concrete, absolute, no mirrors, rationalizations.

The other thing I find interesting is the denial of the description of the Mass provided by St. Justin the Martyr in 155 AD, as I shared with both of you…and it was an endearing document representing the universality of worship in the Christian world at that time and describing the good order, peace and sustenance the worshippers encountered…

Which contradicts your other ‘proof’ of the disorder and heresies of the early churches…showing that the Apostles were now dealing with the Great Apostasy…

What people were experiencing was the earliest and primitive church…and it is through the Apostles and their successors, doing their job as church authority and administrators to bring about divinely inspired order to worship and assembly.

So they did their job, and the Mass was developed through the Holy Spirit to bring about good order and worship…

So if you don’t follow reason and the seeking of truth…the Greek philosophers can help in that…then you will be closed minded in seeking documents of the early church and avoid sensationalists like Joseph Smith and his scrolls that actually were about how to prepare mummies…

So you are reflecting instead on believing in documents on how to wrap up the dead…think of the symbolism here and how in it prepares your remains for the next life…

vs the Christians who suffered persecution and how to worship in the catechumes of the dead in Rome, where the light of Christ was coming forth....in the center of the evil empire....

Christ decided to start His church in the very center of the world representing power, slavery, excess, affluence…among the dead and bringing the dead new life.