LDS Church puts a date on the Great Apostasy

  • Thread starter Thread starter soren1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bishops are not successors of the Apostles. They were congregationall leaders appointed by the Apostles. They were not appointed to lead the whole church, just the congregation they were put in charge of.
I can understand why they were promoted from congretational leaders to successors to the Apostles…the need was there.
So now the Apostles were ignorant and short-sighted men ? Because anyone realizes the need for successors in leadership : what you are asserting is that the Apostles either ignorantly or purposely left a gaping hole in the Church in order to compromise the Church and effectively insure its destruction (which never happened). I can see how a Mormon would necessarily need to believe that, however utterly unbelievable and absurd such a belief is.

Tim
 
My pastor has recommended reading a solid history of the Catholic Church, and gleaning it the last day as well as reading the beginning parts of early church history, a person must objectively study what roles meant by those who used them, not by sources that adversarily invalidate. We have to be honest and objective in studying early church history.

The issue of orthodoxy was always there with the Apostles you can read their reactions to those others in public who gathered around Christ, and made witness of their own reception or rejection of Christ. Orthodoxy–the correct meaning and intent, had been with the Apostles since the beginning with Christ’s rebukes and clarification.

The bishops were indeed appointed by the Apostles to carry on, and as another posted stated here, to maintain the authentic Oral Tradition of Jesus Christ.
 
But you did say it. You just made person and being the same; therefore you are saying your cat is a person.
I didn’t say it, but you did illustrate how meanings can be changed and believed to be there from the start.
Let me see if I can put it simpler…Every person is a being, but not every being is a person. Every cat is a being, but not every being is a cat. This is not saying that every cat is a person or every person is a cat. A person is not a cat, and a cat is not a person…yet they are both beings.
It is THE issue. It is knowing the God of the Old and New Testament. It is knowing the difference between the God of Christianity and the God of Joseph Smith.
They are one in the same. I supposed you also think the Democrats refer to a different Barak Obama than the Republicans because they use different terms to describe him.
No, if I understand the current desire for Mormons to claim the belief in one God, I would think you would call yourself the Parent-head; two separating persons, two separate beings with the same mission. It is for this reason that Mormons are polytheists; they believe in more than one being as God; more than one God. Christians are not polytheist; therefore Mormons are not Christian.
We are not trinitarian Christians, but we are Christians. We believe in God the Eternal Father, and in His Son Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
These are the same 3 that you believe in, yet you call us polytheists. The only way 3 can possibly be numerically one is if they are parts of a whole. We believe they are whole in themselves.
 
So now the Apostles were ignorant and short-sighted men ? Because anyone realizes the need for successors in leadership : what you are asserting is that the Apostles either ignorantly or purposely left a gaping hole in the Church in order to compromise the Church and effectively insure its destruction (which never happened). I can see how a Mormon would necessarily need to believe that, however utterly unbelievable and absurd such a belief is.
Tim
I said they were neither ignorant nor short-sighted. For whatever reason it was, there were no more Apostles, which is a fact.
 
Bishops are not successors of the Apostles. They were congregationall leaders appointed by the Apostles. They were not appointed to lead the whole church, just the congregation they were put in charge of.
I can understand why they were promoted from congretational leaders to successors to the Apostles…the need was there.
I think you had better re-read the history of the early church. The Bishops are the successors of the Apostles since they are consecrated with the laying on of hands. Apostolic power is bestowed this way through the Holy Spirit. This is how Barnabas was consecrated. Since there were only twelve apostles and more than twelve communities ( Churches ) who was going to teach with Apostolic authority in these Churches? Catholic and Orthodox Bishops today are still the successors of the Apostles and have the full power given originally to the twelve Apostles by Jesus Christ.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
Originall posted by flyonthewall:
We are not trinitarian Christians, but we are Christians. We believe in God the Eternal Father, and in His Son Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.
These are the same 3 that you believe in, yet you call us polytheists. The only way 3 can possibly be numerically one is if they are parts of a whole. We believe they are whole in themselves.
Another thing that I don’t understand about the LDS that has never been answered is how the LDS claim that there are tenets and doctrines that are to be accepted on/by faith alone. Yet, the Christian Trinitarian doctrine of three person, or beings, in One God which description is evident in the Judeo-Christian scriptures is misunderstood and rejected. Why can’t this be accepted on faith.

I also have never received an answer to my question as to how the LDS keep the first commandment if they accept and believe in three separate Gods?

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
I think you had better re-read the history of the early church. The Bishops are the successors of the Apostles since they are consecrated with the laying on of hands. Apostolic power is bestowed this way through the Holy Spirit. This is how Barnabas was consecrated. Since there were only twelve apostles and more than twelve communities ( Churches ) who was going to teach with Apostolic authority in these Churches? Catholic and Orthodox Bishops today are still the successors of the Apostles and have the full power given originally to the twelve Apostles by Jesus Christ.

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
The laying on of hands is not only to appoint Apostles. It is used to ordain someone to the office of the priest, to bestow the Holy Ghost, to administer to the sick, and give fatherly blessings.
The laying on of hands on the Bishops was to transfer the authority to administer in the position they were appointed to, which was a Bishop, not an Apostle.
 
One other question I ask of my Mormon friends concerning the “Great Apostacy”. If all we Christians still abide by and keep the Ten Commandments ( The Decalogue ), how then can we still be “Apostates”?

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
 
I said they were neither ignorant nor short-sighted. For whatever reason it was, there were no more Apostles, which is a fact.
Please listen to yourself. You can’t even imagine a reason why leaders would not appoint successors.

Again, this belief is absurd. We differentiate between those who were hand-picked by Christ to be His Apostles and those the Apostles themselves picked and likewise trained (overseers ; that is, Bishops).

Now, you imaginatively and ficticiously claim that the bishops were somehow simply “leaders of their congregations,” and not successors to the Apostles ; however, Holy Scripture denounces you when it calls these men overseers (bishops), which is not only a position of leadership (seer) but also authority (over).

You agree that they were appointed by the Apostles to the undoing of your own argument. It is so utterly inimical to the purpose and mission of the Apostles to at once labour so hard and train scrupulously chosen men to be overseers, and then to miserably and utterly fail to insure that the next generation would not be utterly deprived of any real leadership or authority. You essentially charge the Apostles with gross negligence, even to the point of willfully attempting to effect the destitution and destruction of Christ’s Church on earth.

Of course they made it a matter of important priority to ensure that the gospel would continue to be taught and spread by worthy, elect men, and that those souls won to Christ would have good shepherds that would look to their souls. This defamation of the Apostles - and by proxy Christ Himself - is unsufferable to Christian ears.

In sum, Christ did not appoint incompetent imbiciles to establish His Church on earth ; he selected and trained certain men who would continue His work on earth and ensure His Church would spread over the earth, thus ushering in His Messianic Kingdom. The results of Christ’s Apostles can be shown throughout the world in the countless Churches and Cathedrals scattered yet united over the entire superfices of the earth. The Apostles laboured, and their labour bore much fruit, as reality attests to and only the most willfully blind of men cannot clearly perceive.

Pax,
Tim
 
This controversy, the alleged Great Apostasy, really needs to more focus and elucidation.

Apostasy is the total rejection of Christianity.

How in the world did the Early Church Fathers reject Christianity?

How did St. Justin the Martyr demonstrate his apostasy when writing in response to the Emperor, how the Mass was celebrated in the early Christian world???

Apostasy is the rejection of a belief system after previously believing. The mainline Christians did not apostate, and lay down their lives for Jesus, and also were receivers of the Eucharist.

There was no apostasy by the Early Church Fathers…the use of the word apostasy happening after the death of the last apostle…is ludicrous. Mormonism cannot back up with any proof. The point of Mormonism is the exaltation of the male gender to become gods some day and to rule over…this is part of the inheritance of original sin in the changed relationship between Adam and Eve…‘he will rule over her…’ Adam will rule over Eve after original sin, not in the shared partnership they had before.
 
One other question I ask of my Mormon friends concerning the “Great Apostacy”. If all we Christians still abide by and keep the Ten Commandments ( The Decalogue ), how then can we still be “Apostates”?

PAX DOMINI :signofcross:

Shalom Aleichem
When we speak of the “Great Apostacy”, we do not believe it means that Christianity disappeared, and nobody believed in the 10 Commandments or Jesus Christ.
It simiply means that the priesthood authority was lost and errors crept in, whether by design or accident. There were still people that had sincere faith and followed what they were taught as best they could. Faith in Christ continued, even though errors crept in.
Catholics speak of the many heresies that were fought early on. What is to say that some of those heresies were not incorporated into Catholic belief? If they were incorporated, they would no longer be looked upon as heresies, but part of the Cathlolic belief.
History is written by the victor, and of course the victor is always right.
 
What mask are you referring to? I have always come from the point of view that the restoration was required due to the apostasy.
 
Mormonism is sophistry par excellence…no intention to offend you, Flyonthewall…but then compare your charge of our heresies to Mormonism’s, and 1830’s discovery by Joseph Smith of golden secret plates by putting on glasses to find truth – (opposite of Christ’s healing of the blind), to Joseph Smith’s Egyptian scrolls that were later decodified by experts whose script was merely explaining how to mummify a body…well…who is alleging apostasy?

You are replacing authentic Salvation history with charlatanism…you can’t even claim such behaviors like Smith’s are recorded in the Bible. There is no mention of any angel Moroni in the Bible.

After his discoveries, he then attempted to join a Methodist church.
 
Mormonism redefines Christianity and indirectly Judaism. According to Mormonism, Judaism should also be in the Great Apostasy…but it doesn’t because its construct is anti-Christian.

The Koran and Islam claims to be the one to define Christianity…Mormonism does the same.
 
Mormonism is sophistry par excellence…no intention to offend you, Flyonthewall…but then compare your charge of our heresies to Mormonism’s, and 1830’s discovery by Joseph Smith of golden secret plates by putting on glasses to find truth – (opposite of Christ’s healing of the blind), to Joseph Smith’s Egyptian scrolls that were later decodified by experts whose script was merely explaining how to mummify a body…well…who is alleging apostasy?
You can’t even keep the facts straight when criticising my faith, and throw in a few of your own facts.
You are replacing authentic Salvation history with charlatanism…you can’t even claim such behaviors like Smith’s are recorded in the Bible. There is no mention of any angel Moroni in the Bible.
After his discoveries, he then attempted to join a Methodist church.
Are all the angles listed in the Bible?
As far as the false report that Joseph attempted to join a Methodist church after his discoveries, well, that is just a baseless accusation made by those that would discredit Joseph - it has been refuted beyond any doubt.
 
Then Flyonthewall…

Why do you believe those actions of Joseph Smith over mainline Judeo Christian History??? And rationalize his practices to subsidize his claims…

You are setting this man, Joseph Smith up as truth par excellence vs the history of countless Jews and Christians all down through time…for exaltation…to become a god some day???

Isn’t that the Forbidden Fruit offered Eve from the Tree of Knowledge to be like gods?

When Jesus Christ shares His divinity with us in the Kingdom already here in the Eucharist…but instead of we seeking godship…we are to extend His presence into the world by serving others as a humble servant…not a future god.

I think Salvation History going back 5,600 years from the Jewish calendar including those faithful within Judaism and Christianityl are the true witness to faith, not Joseph Smith.
 
Then Flyonthewall…

Why do you believe those actions of Joseph Smith over mainline Judeo Christian History??? And rationalize his practices to subsidize his claims…

You are setting this man, Joseph Smith up as truth par excellence vs the history of countless Jews and Christians all down through time…for exaltation…to become a god some day???

Isn’t that the Forbidden Fruit offered Eve from the Tree of Knowledge to be like gods?

When Jesus Christ shares His divinity with us in the Kingdom already here in the Eucharist…but instead of we seeking godship…we are to extend His presence into the world by serving others as a humble servant…not a future god.

I think Salvation History going back 5,600 years from the Jewish calendar including those faithful within Judaism and Christianityl are the true witness to faith, not Joseph Smith.
It is difficult to respond to such a post without some thinking I am prosyletizing.
I believe the actions of Joseph Smith over mainline Judeo Christan History because I believe him to be a prophet of God. Would ask Peter, or Paul, or any of the other Apostles why they believe Jesus over the Jewish leaders of the day and the history of their religion?

You are the one that focuses on exaltation and becoming a god, I do not. My focus is getting through each day as best I can

The forbidden fruit that was offered was not to be like gods, because simply knowing the difference between good and evil is only the first step in being like God. It is the choices we make with that knowledge, and our actions in conjunction with it.

The restored gospel is in perfect harmony with the scriptures so I am happy with my belief.
 
When we believe that “we are good and you are evil;” when we judge others, aren’t we usurping God? People tend to play god in many areas. This is pride, and the essence of original sin.

When we think that we know the difference between good and evil, we begin thinking that we are gods. All we can really come to know is a system of natural moral law, always choosing to love our neighbor as ourselves, and God above all. My behavior is more important than trying to change my neighbor’s behavior. I am just as sinful as anyone else.

It is really difficult for me to hold to that personal philosophy when I live among people who don’t understand these basic concepts.
 
When we believe that “we are good and you are evil;” when we judge others, aren’t we usurping God? People tend to play god in many areas. This is pride, and the essence of original sin.
I am not sure if you are stating that I have called anyone evil and myself good, or not, but I have not.
When we think that we know the difference between good and evil, we begin thinking that we are gods. All we can really come to know is a system of natural moral law, always choosing to love our neighbor as ourselves, and God above all. My behavior is more important than trying to change my neighbor’s behavior. I am just as sinful as anyone else.
It is given to each of us to know the difference between good and evil, that is one of the results of the fall. We have that capability and we need to use that understanding wisely. All the commandments and teachings of the Lord hinge on that understanding. If we cannot understand or come to know the difference between good and evil, then we really don’t have free agency.
It was God himself that stated Adam and Eve had become as “one of us” with that knowledge of Good and Evil.
It is really difficult for me to hold to that personal philosophy when I live among people who don’t understand these basic concepts.
Your core beliefs really should not depend on what those around you understand. Stay true to yourself and your faith in God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top