LDS Church puts a date on the Great Apostasy

[catholic-rcia]

This is reality:
holyland-pilgrimage.org/?categoryId=37573&itemId=88769

holyland-pilgrimage.org/?gclid=CMDe8Yvm6qUCFRNSgwodqCMrow

catholicscomehome.org/not-catholic.php

 

[pablope]

In case you missed it, we don’t accept the concept of the Trinity as being accurate as described.

Sorry…i did not understand you as you originally posted:

There is no “official” statement by the church on the Trinity.
We simply don’t believe it to be accurate, and let others have it any way they want.

There is a talk that was given by Elder Holland that mentions the concept of the Trinity:
lds.org/liahona/2007/11/the-…mat=conference

When you quoted Elder Holland, I took it to mean you were agreeing with what he stated. So just to confirm, you also do not agree with Holland’s statement?

 

[Javl]

JAVL,

It wasn’t “down through the ages”. It was all in the Bible itself. Everything that changed in the Catholic church “down through the ages” is what shows how the departure from the pure teachings of the prophets, the apostles, and the Savior happened. Those changes occurred dramatically at first (such as declaring that John was not the leader of the church, but instead someone else was, when he was living as the last living apostle), then all the other changes that came and can be clearly compared–including the mistaken idea that there could be no new apostles other than the twelve original apostles less Judas Iscariot and replaced by Matthias, and the mistaken notion that the church began to be on the day of Pentecost (which I hadn’t heard was a Catholic belief until just very recently on this forum–new one to me).

Sorry Parker, but this still does not answer my question. The LDS still use the Catholic Bible, which appeared after 325 AD when the Church was in “Apostacy”. As for the Apostle John, there is nothing in scripture that says he HAD to be the last leader. All that you say is strictly conjecture and assumption with no historical or definite proof and none of it holds water.

As far as your post about the Jewish name of God, a person noted that Elohim is plural. There are sources that show that some Hebrew translations for Genesis show that there were cases where the words should have been rightly translated as “Elohim and Jehovah” (using the modern word for Jehovah, with the vowel sounds added). Jehovah was and is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the One Savior as prophetically declared by Isaiah. When He came to earth, He declared He had a Father in Heaven, separate from Him, to Whom He prayed. But the Jews generally absolutely could not accept that there could be such a concept as “God with us”–God come to earth, as the Savior and Redeemer, and certainly not as their I AM and the I AM who appeared to Moses.

I have given an explanation as to the “Elohim” and “Jehovah” is a corruption of YAWEH and it has never been used by the Jews under any circustance. Also whether you believe and/or accept it or not, your and the LDS concept of the Trinity is NOT Biblical. For if it were, it would be the same as mainline Christianity’s. You fall in the same category as the Jehovahs Witnesses, Christian Scientists, Swedenborgians, etc., all of whom follow the Arian concept. Shalom.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom haMeshiach

 

[ParkerD]

(1) Sorry Parker, but this still does not answer my question. The LDS still use the Catholic Bible, which appeared after 325 AD when the Church was in “Apostacy”. (2) As for the Apostle John, there is nothing in scripture that says he HAD to be the last leader. All that you say is strictly conjecture and assumption with no historical or definite proof and none of it holds water.

(3) I have given an explanation as to the “Elohim” and “Jehovah” is a corruption of YAWEH and it has never been used by the Jews under any circustance. Also whether you believe and/or accept it or not, your and the LDS concept of the Trinity is NOT Biblical.
…
Shalom haMeshiach

JAVL,
(1) Part of what needed to begin to be clearly and unmistakably understood was that with respect to truths from God, there is a difference between the finder and the Giver, and being a finder does not give anyone ownership rights. If anyone wanted to claim ownership rights for both the Old and the New Testaments, it would fall more accurately to the Jews than to anyone else, but that does not make it so–they were not the Giver, but a steward given stewardship from the Giver.

(2) So, in your mind only Peter was given authority and the other apostles were given no authority? So Paul and John and James wrote their epistles showing that they had authority but yet they did not? The New Testament disagrees with your premise.

(3) The following link shows a difference than what you have explained:

ancient-hebrew.org/17_xlit.html

How is Jesus being YAWEH and Alpha and Omega, God with us Who was the Creator, Arianism?

The LDS concept is of the Godhead, clearly explained and exemplified in the New Testament–but yes, different than the explained “Trinity” doctrine which is not found in the New Testament.

But what the differences give each of us is the free will and choice opportunity to choose our beliefs based on how we experience the living Christ and the Holy Spirit in our personal lives. Those beliefs are not forced onto us, in any way, because the Giver does not force belief. Peace to you, also, and blessed health.

 

[Stephen168]

Those changes occurred dramatically at first (such as declaring that John was not the leader of the church, but instead someone else was, when he was living as the last living apostle),

Declaring that John should have been the last leader is a Mormon invention, after the Mormon succession crisis.

then all the other changes that came and can be clearly compared–including the mistaken idea that there could be no new apostles other than the twelve original apostles less Judas Iscariot and replaced by Matthias, and the mistaken notion that the church began to be on the day of Pentecost

These are Biblical ideas. Joseph Smith reinvented modern Apostles five years after he started his new religion and almost four years after he started the practice of polygamy.Some insight on how important Apostles were to him.

 

[Stephen168]

(2) So, in your mind only Peter was given authority and the other apostles were given no authority? So Paul and John and James wrote their epistles showing that they had authority but yet they did not?

All the Apostles had authority and they passed it to the Bishops; very Biblical.

 

[ParkerD]

These are Biblical ideas. Joseph Smith reinvented modern Apostles five years after he started his new religion…

Stephen,
No, he received a specific direction from the Savior in June, 1829, as recorded in D & C 18:

Revelation to Joseph Smith the Prophet, Oliver Cowdery, and David Whitmer, given at Fayette, New York, June 1829.

26 And now, behold, there are others who are called to declare my gospel, both unto Gentile and unto Jew;
27 Yea, even twelve; and the Twelve shall be my disciples, and they shall take upon them my name; and the Twelve are they who shall desire to take upon them my name with full purpose of heart.

37 And now, behold, I give unto you, Oliver Cowdery, and also unto David Whitmer, that you shall search out the Twelve, who shall have the desires of which I have spoken;
38 And by their desires and their works you shall know them.

So they had that direction in mind during the years ahead, and searched out the Twelve just as they had been asked to do by the Savior. The apostleship calling was important enough that they would be patient in doing so, and not do it on “their own timetable” but on “His timetable”. (In other words, all of this was directed by Him and by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and the timing was guided.)

 

[Timothy17]

I reject it [Catholics and Mormons believe in a different Jesus] outright. This is a juvenile tactic used by those that cannot conceive of a single person being viewed in different lights by different people.

Congratulations, you just called St Paul a deceiver, because he himself warned his churches to beware of anyone coming to them preaching another gospel or another Christ than the one he, himself, taught us about.

So we Catholics are doing exactly what St Paul instructs us to do : test all things, and hold fast to what is good. We test your religion and discover with ease that you preach a different gospel than the one the Apostles taught, and worship a different Jesus (for if you worshipped the Tue Christ, you would not seperate yourselves from His Church, nor would you preach a different gospel, which manifestly you do, as is evident from what follows).

Christians view Jesus as the Son of God and Savior.

False. Christians have always worshipped Jesus as GOD, the Second Divine Person of the Most Holy Trinity. They have always sung hymns to Him as God, offered Him sacrifice as to a God, and this is the testimony of all those who investigated Christianity in its primitive antiquity. The peculiar thing about the Christians from all times by the obervation of outsiders was their particular and special praise and worship of Christ. This is exactly why they called us Christians.

Jews view Him simply as another [r]abbi.

Not surprising you follow one error with another. Jews view Him as a blasphemer or a sorceror (at worst), or a “sage” or wonder-worker (at best) : not a rabbi, for if Jesus was considered by them to be a rabbi His teachings would fill or at least be found in the Talmud, which is the collective accumulative work and teaching of generations of rabbis, and was not completed until Medieval times - well after the time of Christ’s Ministry on earth. For this reason the Jewish rabbis officially and formally excommunicated all Christians - even if they were Israelities by blood and birth - from their synagogues circa A.D 90.

Two different people view the same person in two different lights…but somehow that boggles your mind

Beg your pardon ? There is only One Light : “I Am the Light of the World.” If Christ Himself is the Light, then what other Light are we to follow ?

…you simply cannot comprehend it.

Clearly it is not us who cannot comprehend the Truth, Who is Christ, the Light of the World.

So be it, but it changes nothing.

It changes everything when you replace the One True Light for another, false light ; afterall, St Paul taught that “even the devil masquerades as an angel of light.” Now if the devil would himself cast a false light in order to deceive, then how can you dare to criticize us for being critical of any other “different light,” (as you put it), that you yourself assert to behold Jesus in ? The Apostles themselves commanded us to be critical of this, to beware of wolves and devils masquerading as angels, and you have the brazen audacity to charge us with being jeuvenile for following their warnings, teachings and recommendations ?

The second you make that assertion, you are being ignorant at best.

Point in case.

Honest dialogue goes out the window when you seek to “poison the well”.

Which is exactly what Joseph Smith did, namely, poison the well, and the results of this poisoning are brazenly evident in the heterodox opinions and shameless sophistry of the Mormon religion and its apologists.

Pax,
Tim

 

[catholic-rcia]

Congratulations, you just called St Paul a deceiver, because he himself warned his churches to beware of anyone coming to them preaching another gospel or another Christ than the one he, himself, taught us about.

So we Catholics are doing exactly what St Paul instructs us to do : test all things, and hold fast to what is good. We test your religion and discover with ease that you preach a different gospel than the one the Apostles taught, and worship a different Jesus (for if you worshipped the Tue Christ, you would not seperate yourselves from His Church, nor would you preach a different gospel, which manifestly you do, as is evident from what follows).

False. Christians have always worshipped Jesus as GOD, the Second Divine Person of the Most Holy Trinity. They have always sung hymns to Him as God, offered Him sacrifice as to a God, and this is the testimony of all those who investigated Christianity in its primitive antiquity. The peculiar thing about the Christians from all times by the obervation of outsiders was their particular and special praise and worship of Christ. This is exactly why they called us Christians.

Not surprising you follow one error with another. Jews view Him as a blasphemer or a sorceror (at worst), or a “sage” or wonder-worker (at best) : not a rabbi, for if Jesus was considered by them to be a rabbi His teachings would fill or at least be found in the Talmud, which is the collective accumulative work and teaching of generations of rabbis, and was not completed until Medieval times - well after the time of Christ’s Ministry on earth. For this reason the Jewish rabbis officially and formally excommunicated all Christians - even if they were Israelities by blood and birth - from their synagogues circa A.D 90.

Beg your pardon ? There is only One Light : “I Am the Light of the World.” If Christ Himself is the Light, then what other Light are we to follow ?

Clearly it is not us who cannot comprehend the Truth, Who is Christ, the Light of the World.

It changes everything when you replace the One True Light for another, false light ; afterall, St Paul taught that “even the devil masquerades as an angel of light.” Now if the devil would himself cast a false light in order to deceive, then how can you dare to criticize us for being critical of any other “different light,” (as you put it), that you yourself assert to behold Jesus in ? The Apostles themselves commanded us to be critical of this, to beware of wolves and devils masquerading as angels, and you have the brazen audacity to charge us with being jeuvenile for following their warnings, teachings and recommendations ?

Point in case.

Which is exactly what Joseph Smith did, namely, poison the well, and the results of this poisoning are brazenly evident in the heterodox opinions and shameless sophistry of the Mormon religion and its apologists.

Pax,
Tim

I did not know you all were talking about this. When I got up a few minutes ago while lying in bed this struck me. So I came to my office and wrote this to pots here, and a few other treads that are now running. If this is not the Holy Spirit what is? Here it is.

Disclaimer:

Keep in mind when we are speaking to Mormons we are speaking to a group who has for its savior a completely different Jesus, as only the name Jesus is the same. That’s why when they make the claim that they are Christians because the name of their church is the Church of Jesus Christ it’s an invalid claim at least to Christians who understand their faith and have made a good honest study of the Mormon Church.

Say we were friends in high school and just met after 10 years and began to speak about our common friend Mark. “Yes I new Mark too, great quarterback, and he married Jill do you remember her? Wait, the Mark I knew was into soccer, he is married to Gail who died of Cancer three years ago.

I tell you this, how could we both continue to speak about Mark even after we find out he is not the same Mark? We could ignore this fact, but the conversation would be insane right?

So here we are speaking about when and if the Apostasy happened that Mormons bring forth as if we were speaking about the same Jesus that they are speaking about.

We just have to keep this is the back of our mind when conversing with this certain church. We also need to remind them, Catholics as well, (me included) when this gets buried under the conversation we may be having with them.
Just some food for thought

If someone wants to make a true comparison between the Mormon Jesus and the Christian Jesus that would be great. I have to go to work.

 

[Stephen168]

Stephen,
No, he received a specific direction from the Savior in June, 1829, as recorded in D & C 18:

There were no Mormon Apostles for five years. Smith’s man made Apostles were selected almost four years after he started the practice of polygamy; priorities. Christ’s celibate ministry lasted three years total and almost the first thing he did was select the Twelve Apostles. The Twelve who can never be replaced (Act 1:21-22, Rev 21:14).

 

[KathleenGee]

Yes, Rich…acknowledged…

Stephen168…acknowledged about the 4 year gap of Joseph Smith before he had his ‘apostles’…

Joseph Smith decided to join a Methodist church after he had his revelations.

It is no wonder a number of ex Mormons cannot turn to any God…

For the Mormons here, it is better you go to RCIA in a local parish, or go to a priest who set up for you a legitimate instruction in learning our beliefs.

Again, repeating here, Jesus Christ had apostles who were not allowed to have successors…but 1800 years later, Joseph Smith could …later on…with no witnesses to his ‘prophetic’ event.

Joseph Smith is not a prophet, an illuminator on Christ…He contradicts Christ.

Joseph Smith is part of the Great Apostasy.

I pray for any Mormon lurkers here to turn to God, completely to God in His providence, and pray for discernment and freedom to find out what is really true. I pray for all Mormons to stop declaring everyone else apostate. I pray for all Mormons for God’s blessings that they come to Jesus Christ as we know Him, the Alpha and the Omega.

 

[RebeccaJ]

RebeccaJ and Zaffiroborant:

Please, use Christian Charity in your communications with the LDS. Use some politeness too. Isn’t it better to capture flies with honey rather than vinegar? We should understand that their belief is almost diametrically opposite ours and we should all strive to prove this to them with Christian Charity. God Bless. Shalom.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom haMeshiach.

I’m a plain speaking person, here, and in real life. I can’t say I’ve been know to coddle anyone. I am not speaking out of hate. I speak out of love for the truth. Pretending along with what is not true, is something I can’t do. If I could, I’d still be Mormon.

I’ve admired, worked with, am in a family of Mormons. I admire some of their leaders. Their late Elder Ashton was someone I admired as a man who spoke the truth. This Holland, on the other hand, says a lot of things in speeches that are meant only to deceive. That particular link flyonthewall gave, is one of the most spectacular anti-Christian nonsense ever to come from Mormonism since Brigham Young.

I’m not going to pretend it isn’t.

 

[KathleenGee]

Rebecca,

Jesus said to Pilate…“I am the Truth”…and I see such Mormon beliefs as betrayal to the truth of Jesus.

 

[KathleenGee]

Flyonthewall,

Have you ever read the Nicene Creed? It followed the Apostles Creed because Christians were loosing their faith in Christ as God. It is recited every Resurrection Sunday Mass…every week.

Here is part of the Nicene Creed, 381 AD:

“We believe in One God, the Father, the Almighty…”

“We believe in One Lord, Jesus Christ,
Eternally begotten of the Father
God from God, Light from Light,
True God from True God.
Begotten, not made
Of One being with the Father…
Through Him (Jesus Christ) all things were made…”

If Mormons want to study Catholicism for what it really teaches…it is best to go to a Catholic teaching source rather than learning about it through the prism of Mormonism that calls us apostate.

 

[onenow1]

For All,

The Mother of GOD is in the first book of the Bible, Genesis 3:15, and she is in the last book of the Bible, Revelation 12:1-2, and she is in the middle of the Bible, Isaiah 7:14?


God Bless

 

[Javl]

JAVL,
(1) Part of what needed to begin to be clearly and unmistakably understood was that with respect to truths from God, there is a difference between the finder and the Giver, and being a finder does not give anyone ownership rights. If anyone wanted to claim ownership rights for both the Old and the New Testaments, it would fall more accurately to the Jews than to anyone else, but that does not make it so–they were not the Giver, but a steward given stewardship from the Giver.

Once again, my friend, you do not pay attention to what I say which is as plain as the nose on your face. I have stated plainly, as I tell others, that if it was not for the Catholic Church no one, denomination, religion, or otherwise, would be in possesion of the Bible as it is today. It was the Catholic Church that, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit ( GOD ), that separated inspired Sacred Scriptures ( New Testament ) from the uninspired, spurious, and false ones in circulation and use at that time.

(2) So, in your mind only Peter was given authority and the other apostles were given no authority? So Paul and John and James wrote their epistles showing that they had authority but yet they did not? The New Testament disagrees with your premise.

(3) The following link shows a difference than what you have explained:

ancient-hebrew.org/17_xlit.html

How is Jesus being YAWEH and Alpha and Omega, God with us Who was the Creator, Arianism?

And once again you put your own spin on what I say. Please pay attention and try to understand what I say as I do with you.

The LDS concept is of the Godhead, clearly explained and exemplified in the New Testament–but yes, different than the explained “Trinity” doctrine which is not found in the New Testament.

Although the word “trinity” is a word that is not found in the Bible, the doctrine and revelation of the Holy Trinity is most definitely found in the Bible. It is most evident and described from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation. It is, as you say, clearly explained and exemplified in the whole of Sacred Scripture ( the Bible ). Only those whom I have previously mention do not see it since they arenot guided by the Holy Spirit.

But what the differences give each of us is the free will and choice opportunity to choose our beliefs based on how we experience the living Christ and the Holy Spirit in our personal lives. Those beliefs are not forced onto us, in any way, because the Giver does not force belief. Peace to you, also, and blessed health.

With this I agree totally and wholeheartedly. Shalom.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom haMeshiach

 

[KathleenGee]

You know there are all kinds of pills, transplants out there…

Transplants for the heart, the kidneys, liver – these are tricky ones, eye balls, limbs…there are pills to help asthma and auto immune disorders, psychosomatic drugs to help people with their moods and personality reactions other people get tired of dealing with – I mean the ones being given risperdol never really complained about their behavior to anybody…

There are anti-seizure pills and pills to help an upset stomach…there are those for the thyroid high or low; you got pills for all kinds of stuff.

But you never have a transplant for the tongue…it keeps going and going …no matter what you do to try to curb it, it just doesnt’ stop. The disputes by Mormons keeps going and going and going.

So it is with Mormons, and fundamentalists, and restorationists people who reject history of the Catholic Church and anything resembling Catholic.

No matter what you say or do, no matter the facts, the consistency, the good order of worship that standardized in a short amount of time, it goes nowhere with Mormons. Our priests are no good, our sacraments are nothing, the saints are worthless, our Bible studies and reflection are pointing a wrong way…

So…do we ask them to take a shot of truth serum before coming on here???

Would pills or praying together…yes that is, how about we Mormons and Catholics take a time out and just pray for common unity…

Can we do it?

 

[ParkerD]

… It was the Catholic Church that, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit ( GOD ), that separated inspired Sacred Scriptures ( New Testament ) from the uninspired, spurious, and false ones in circulation and use at that time…

With this I agree totally and wholeheartedly. Shalom.

Shalom haMeshiach

JAVL,
Thanks for agreeing with something I have written.

As far as the putting together of the Bible from “uninspired, spurious, and false ones in circulation”, I don’t think that would have been all that hard, but I do think the Holy Spirit helped to the extent that those involved in that effort sought the guidance of the Spirit.

From my perspective, that is how the Holy Spirit works–if sought for prayerfully, with real intent and no ulterior motives, then the Holy Spirit will enliven the mind and quicken the understanding.

I wish you well in your language studies–sounds like a great way to spend time in a worthwhile way.

No need for any response–it has been a pleasure communicating to the extent we were able to. Peace and joy of the Christ child with you and yours, JAVL.

 

[flyonthewall]

Sorry…i did not understand you as you originally posted:

When you quoted Elder Holland, I took it to mean you were agreeing with what he stated. So just to confirm, you also do not agree with Holland’s statement?

Which statement are referring to? That we find all the different descriptions of the Trinity in the different creeds to be unknowable? That I agree with.

 

[flyonthewall]

Congratulations, you just called St Paul a deceiver, because he himself warned his churches to beware of anyone coming to them preaching another gospel or another Christ than the one he, himself, taught us about.

Paul had already found one of the churches to be preaching another gospel, but not another gospel just a altered or perverted version of the Gospel. It was underway already.

So we Catholics are doing exactly what St Paul instructs us to do : test all things, and hold fast to what is good. We test your religion and discover with ease that you preach a different gospel than the one the Apostles taught, and worship a different Jesus (for if you worshipped the Tue Christ, you would not seperate yourselves from His Church, nor would you preach a different gospel, which manifestly you do, as is evident from what follows).

I am not surprised that you think we have a different gospel.
Yawn…about the “different Jesus” bit.

False. Christians have always worshipped Jesus as GOD, the Second Divine Person of the Most Holy Trinity. They have always sung hymns to Him as God, offered Him sacrifice as to a God, and this is the testimony of all those who investigated Christianity in its primitive antiquity. The peculiar thing about the Christians from all times by the obervation of outsiders was their particular and special praise and worship of Christ. This is exactly why they called us Christians.

15He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God
I make the same statementn as Peter and you call it false. Perhaps Peter worshiped a ‘different’ Jesus than you, too. It appears I am in good company with Peter.

Not surprising you follow one error with another. Jews view Him as a blasphemer or a sorceror (at worst), or a “sage” or wonder-worker (at best) : not a rabbi, for if Jesus was considered by them to be a rabbi His teachings would fill or at least be found in the Talmud, which is the collective accumulative work and teaching of generations of rabbis, and was not completed until Medieval times - well after the time of Christ’s Ministry on earth. For this reason the Jewish rabbis officially and formally excommunicated all Christians - even if they were Israelities by blood and birth - from their synagogues circa A.D 90.

Would you say that the Jews refer to a different Jesus? Or would you say they don’t hold the same beliefs about Him?

Be

g your pardon ? There is only One Light : “I Am the Light of the World.” If Christ Himself is the Light, then what other Light are we to follow ?

That is good…but you know that is not what I meant. Let me re-phrase: our view of Jesus is different from yours. Same Jesus, different view.

Clearly it is not us who cannot comprehend the Truth, Who is Christ, the Light of the World.

The truth is, we worship the same Jesus, we just have differing beliefs about Him. Simple. But somehow un-grasped by a few.

It changes everything when you replace the One True Light for another, false light ; afterall, St Paul taught that “even the devil masquerades as an angel of light.” Now if the devil would himself cast a false light in order to deceive, then how can you dare to criticize us for being critical of any other “different light,” (as you put it), that you yourself assert to behold Jesus in ? The Apostles themselves commanded us to be critical of this, to beware of wolves and devils masquerading as angels, and you have the brazen audacity to charge us with being jeuvenile for following their warnings, teachings and recommendations ?

I speak true. It is definately juvenile to try and state we worship a different Jesus. It is such a simple concept to understand that different people can see a single individual differently. But perhaps it is above your ability to understand. Again, so be it.
The wolves have already been and not spared the flock. If you disagree, then take it up with Paul. Perhaps he too, worshiped a “different” Jesus than you.

Point in case.

Which is exactly what Joseph Smith did, namely, poison the well, and the results of this poisoning are brazenly evident in the heterodox opinions and shameless sophistry of the Mormon religion and its apologists.

I understand you disagree with what we believe. That’s okay, the prevailing religious leaders of the day had worse to say about Jesus.