LDS Church puts a date on the Great Apostasy

[Cruxis117]

The **restored gospel **is in perfect harmony with the scriptures so I am happy with my belief.

The only problem with that statement is that it is completely and utterly wrong. This is because of one set of verses that particularly come to mind:

[BIBLEDRB]Galatians 1:6-9[/BIBLEDRB]

There is no “restored” gospel. There is only the Gospel found in the Scriptures, and not in the Book of Mormon. If it was so, then your message that you have in the Book of Mormon would be in the Scriptures, but it is not so.

 

[KathleenGee]

Flyonthewall,

Ok. Put away the exaltation and progression…back to beginning of the Apostasy…don’t bring up anymore with you about Smith visiting a Methodist church afterwards, etc.

So the apostles were not allowed to or did not want to or were indifferent to naming their successors. There is no Mormon explanation to this. To think the Apostles would not consider appointing anyone or making sure there was a system in place to insure the true teachings of Christ were passed on … where was the Holy Spirit…did He withdraw? Didn’t the Apostles think about future generations???

But there are those of you here stating that there were still Christians practicing their faith…

So who were these early Christians and what prevented them from your prophet from naming them apostate as well?

Why would anyone call those who faithfully accompanied the Apostles and study under them think they would then betray the confidence of the Apostles and the Holy Spirit to apostasize…and what specific were the apostate teachings?

You see, there is a tremendous and I would say very proud and self-righteous brushing off of an entires populations of peoples in the beginning 100 years of Christianity, who were Orthodox, meaning, who believed in the Last Supper and the Eucharist with the Word of God…just as we do today…and many of them were persecuted and martyred. How can you call them apostate?

What about the priests and bishops and presbyters…who said Mass…because they said the Mass, then they are apostate??? They were companions to the Apostles…do you think they would have no fear of God, after meeting with the Apostles and spending much time learning from them, that they would violate the Apostles’ trust and confidence in them…where is their fear of God?

Mormonism wipes away bishops, priests, presbyters, deacons, virgins, celibates, martyrs because they worshipped at Mass and believed in the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus? The Roman Empire greatly contradicted the interior life of the Christian who found new freedom and meaning and life in the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is a great injustice and error to consider these early Christians apostate. To judge and condemn them because so is in a way playing god.

 

[KathleenGee]

Our restoration, our regeneration, our partaking in the divine life is with Jesus Christ.

Tonight, for you, Flyonthewall, I turned to the BYU station and saw many, many lovely people…a lady artist who shared her paintings and how she painted Christ the way she saw him…the paintings were a real blessing to see…there was a quote shared about the only thing we can place on the altar is our will to God…agree…

I would think many early Christians who received the Eucharist also believed the same…

 

[Stephen168]

I didn’t say it, but you did illustrate how meanings can be changed and believed to be there from the start.

I’m not sure what you mean by ‘the start,’ but the definitions are older than Mormonism.

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.

Not sure if that is simple, but person and being are not necessarily the same thing. Just the like The Twelve Apostles and Apostles are not necessarily the same thing.

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.

False analogy, but we have shown how Mormons do not know who the Christian God is anymore and that is why they are not Christian anymore.

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.

Religions are defined by who they worship and Mormons worship another god. Joseph Smith also turned away (apostasy) from the Judeo-Christian definition of eternal of without beginning or end (Alpha and the Omega) in 1844.

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.

Earlier you acted like you understood the different between being and person. Christians know God to be one being, one, a singular God; the one true God (Exodus 3:14, John 8:58, Isaiah 41:4, Revelation 2:8, Isaiah 43:10-11, Isaiah 44:6, Isaiah 46:9, Isaiah 48:12, John 1:1-14, John 20:28) Even the writers of the Book of Mormon were Christian (Mosiah 15:1-5, 3 Nephi 9:15) but Joseph Smith led them away from Christ and Christianity.

 

[flyonthewall]

The only problem with that statement is that it is completely and utterly wrong. This is because of one set of verses that particularly come to mind:

[BIBLEDRB]Galatians 1:6-9[/BIBLEDRB]

There is no “restored” gospel. There is only the Gospel found in the Scriptures, and not in the Book of Mormon. If it was so, then your message that you have in the Book of Mormon would be in the Scriptures, but it is not so.

Funny you should use this scripture…it is referring to the Galatians, a church that was set up either by the Apostles or Jesus Himself, and they had already fallen into apostasy because the Gospel had become perverted…right under the noses of the Apostles.
This strengthens the case for an apostasy rather than refutes it.

 

[flyonthewall]

Flyonthewall,
So the apostles were not allowed to or did not want to or were indifferent to naming their successors. There is no Mormon explanation to this. To think the Apostles would not consider appointing anyone or making sure there was a system in place to insure the true teachings of Christ were passed on … where was the Holy Spirit…did He withdraw? Didn’t the Apostles think about future generations???

There was a system in place to select successors, and it was used several times. Like I have stated, for what ever the reason was, there were no more Apostles - whether it be because the didn’t have the opportunity to gather together to select successors or just didn’t believe then needed to because the 2nd coming would be in their lifetimes(which is a very likely possibility since the Savior informed them that this generation shall not pass away before it occured)

But there are those of you here stating that there were still Christians practicing their faith…

So who were these early Christians and what prevented them from your prophet from naming them apostate as well?

Why would anyone call those who faithfully accompanied the Apostles and study under them think they would then betray the confidence of the Apostles and the Holy Spirit to apostasize…and what specific were the apostate teachings?

Well, Paul identified the Galatians, and prophecied another church would also once he left.

You see, there is a tremendous and I would say very proud and self-righteous brushing off of an entires populations of peoples in the beginning 100 years of Christianity, who were Orthodox, meaning, who believed in the Last Supper and the Eucharist with the Word of God…just as we do today…and many of them were persecuted and martyred. How can you call them apostate?

What about the priests and bishops and presbyters…who said Mass…because they said the Mass, then they are apostate??? They were companions to the Apostles…do you think they would have no fear of God, after meeting with the Apostles and spending much time learning from them, that they would violate the Apostles’ trust and confidence in them…where is their fear of God?

I believe many feared and sincerely followed what they understood and were taught. The Galatians started out on the right track, but somewhere along the line they went astray in their teachings. If Paul had not have written a letter and told them they were removed from the gospel as preached to them by Jesus and the Apostles, then no one would have kown the difference. They would have continued in their incorrect version of the gospel and believed it to be the truth. That doesn’t mean there was not any sincere faith by the members.

Mormonism wipes away bishops, priests, presbyters, deacons, virgins, celibates, martyrs because they worshipped at Mass and believed in the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus? The Roman Empire greatly contradicted the interior life of the Christian who found new freedom and meaning and life in the Lord Jesus Christ.

It is a great injustice and error to consider these early Christians apostate. To judge and condemn them because so is in a way playing god.

We don’t wipe away anyone because they worshipped at Mass, we simply identify that the gospel teachings were modified and corrupted, just like the Galatians, and errors were perpetuated.
We have never stated there were none faithful.

 

[CalifCatholic]

On the new mormon.org, there is a timeline indicating the major dates in Church history, which puts the Great Apostasy right at the death of the Apostles around 70 a.d. …

So, in essence, they are saying the Bible was canonized by an apostate Church, since the NT was formally canonized in the late 4th century. Yet they use this apostate Bible.

LOL. Sweeeeet irony

 

[Stephen168]

I said they were neither ignorant nor short-sighted. For whatever reason it was, there were no more Apostles, which is a fact.

Apostles were sent by Christ and the Twelve. Because of Judas’ apostasy (Acts 1:25), the Twelve needed to be restored. The eleven chose Matthias.
According to Peter there are two requirements to be a member of the Twelve (Acts 1:21-22). The two requirements are:
a) Witness the resurrected Lord
b) Been in the company of the twelve while the Lord walked on earth.
These requirements limit the Twelve membership to the first century. That is the reason there are no more Apostles. There were never meant to be any more (Revelation 21:14).

Having man made Apostles (1835), practicing polygamy (1831) and inventing a Melchisedech Priesthood are reasons we know Mormonism is no restoration of Christ’s Church.

 

[CalifCatholic]

On the new mormon.org, there is a timeline indicating the major dates in Church history, which puts the Great Apostasy right at the death of the Apostles around 70 a.d. …

So, in essence, they are saying the Bible was canonized by an apostate Church, since the NT was formally canonized in the late 4th century. Yet they use this apostate Bible.

LOL. Sweeeeet irony

 

[Jerusha]

Sidney Rigdon was originally a disciple of Alexander Campbell. Campbell was one of the originators of the doctrine of “apostasy” of the Catholic Church. He believed that since Paul was a devout scholar of Judaism before his conversion, that his conversion was bogus. Therefore, Paul began the “apostasy.”

LDS, what do you think of that?

 

[KathleenGee]

Flyonthewall…is that what they are teaching you? I have the impression that you are young and formed in the new, more standardized version we see of Mormonism today.

So in some ways, I think I am being heavy handed with you because you seem unaware of ideas or concepts or behaviors that we are aware of in the development of Mormonism.

I would also like to know what parts of the Bible were corrupted, since the Mass is now OK. It took the Church many years and many people to discern which books that were inspired, such as the Gospel of St. Thomas were for public revelation as the Church was to preach the Good News and nurture Christian faith in all peoples, cultures, and time vs those books that were divinely inspired but for private revelation, not upholding the universal faith vs books that were simply not inspired.

Tjere were heresies and apostasies present in Christ’s time…

When I have shared about ancient forms of Mass to Mormons, they reject it. So I am getting one take from you and another take from other Mormons…

 

[Timothy17]

Funny you should use this scripture [Galatians 1:6-9]…it is referring to the Galatians, a church that was set up either by the Apostles or Jesus Himself, and they had already fallen into apostasy because the Gospel had become perverted…right under the noses of the Apostles.

People constantly, whether willfully or unintentionally, pervert the Gospel. It is for this reason that Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to His Church to remind them of all things He taught and to guide them into all the Truth.

This strengthens the case for an apostasy rather than refutes it.

Negative. One cannot believe that claim without doing serious violence to the obvious : the error is being refuted and corrected by the Apostle, just as any competent manager fixes a problem as soon as it is reported to him. We do not have an example of apostasy here ; we have an example of a living Church regulating itself.

We have already demonstrated that it is also unjust to claim bishops (overseers) were not both authorities (over) and leaders (seers) of and over the Church, and furthermore trained by the very Apostles themselves (as Scripture attests) to continue their work, especially in governing the Churches and maintaining orthodoxy. So in Galatians we have an Apostle, who likely trained at least a few Bishops, correcting his flock, which work his apprentices, as it were, would naturally continue and were even speficially instructed and disciplined (discipled) for. This is the teaching and doctrine of Apostolic Succession, which Scripture confirms.

**In conclusion : **
The letter to the Galatians (especially 1:6-9) does not give any evidence of apostasy ; in fact, it demonstrates a functioning Church : The sheep were beginning to go astray, the shepherds quickly brought them back in ; error was detected, then refuted, and finally the Truth was admonished to prevent future errors, especially of the same sort or cause. In this case, it was apprently persons assuming or pretending authority over the gospels, and inculcating false teachings, doctrines, etc., that were foreign to the doctrines of the Apostles who were disturbing the Galatian Church.

Pax,
Tim

 

[catholic-rcia]

Funny you should use this scripture…it is referring to the Galatians, a church that was set up either by the Apostles or Jesus Himself, and they had already fallen into apostasy because the Gospel had become perverted…right under the noses of the Apostles.
This strengthens the case for an apostasy rather than refutes it.

Do you know who is even writing this? Look beyond your keyboard, pray about it.
You are mocking Jesus and you do not even know it. Pray

Flyonwall
Go here and read about 10 to 20 Saints today.
These are some that you are walking over
catholic.org/saints/martyr.php

 

[SteveVH]

Originally Posted by SteveVH
I meant what I said. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit do not operate independently of each other. They cannot, because they are the same “being”. Where one is, there the others are also. But, they are very definitely three persons. What you fail to understand is that God has a different nature than us. I know this is difficult for you because you have been told that God is like us, He has just progressed further. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are separate persons in relationship. The nature of God is that He is a family. That is one way in which we have been made in His image and likeness. The Father is called the Father because of His relationship with the Son. The Son is called the Son because of His relationship with the Father. This has been so from eternity. The Father does not depend upon us for His Fatherhood. He invites us to become His adopted sons and daughters but we will never be sons in the way that Christ is the Son because we will never be God. To think otherwise is a violation of the first commandment.

You are right, the Father is called the Father for a reason, and it is His relationship with the Son. The Son is called the Son for a reason too. The Father IS the Father of the Son. Jesus tells us that the Father is His Father and our Father. I believe Him.

Each time I get an answer like this I’m a little baffled as to how to respond. You seem to choose words which appear to place us in agreement, yet the underlying truth is that we are not even talking about the same thing. You made the remark that I must believe that Jesus is some sort of puppet, which I ignored. You then asked me to address it so I did. I tried to give an explanation of the relationship between the Father and the Son; why the Son only does what the Father asks. After doing so, you respond with “Jesus tells us that the Father is His Father and our Father. I believe Him.” Does this mean that you are in agreement with everything I said in the quote above?

This is fine. You can continue to be a creature if you would like. I know I am a child of God. I hope one day you will realize that too.

The fact that I am a creature (as you are) does not mean that I am not a child of God. He has invited us to be His adopted son’s and daughters. You believe that you are somehow eternal, like God. You are not. You were created whether or not you wish to believe it. That is the wonder of our God; that He would stoop to become one of us, and, furthermore, to suffer and die for us, His creatures, so that we may spend the rest of eternity with Him, to share in the life of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is LOVE incarnate. It is the revelation of the true nature of our magnificent God.

I told you that the laws of nature on this earth may not apply elsewhere. You may be referring to gravity, I am not. I am referring to any law, rule, principal etc that God adheres to. You have mentioned gravity, so I will use that. We have been able to figure out how to suspend gravity. If we can do that, then God certainly knows how to do that…without breaking any laws of gravity or nature or anything else.

This part of the conversation is becoming a pointless exercise.

It is my belief per the words of a prophet. Scriptures do not address it.

Thank you.

Your God is bigger than my God…is that the angle you are going for? ooookay.

It is the logical conclusion when comparing our beliefs. We believe in an eternal God, infinitely beyond our understanding; a God who’s glory cannot be increased or decreased; a God who is Perfection itself; Love itself; Truth itself, all powerful, all knowing. He did not progress from anywhere; but has existed in His current state (Holy Trinity) for eternity. He is the source of everything that exists and nothing (matter and intelligences included) exists without Him. Now, you describe your god and make the call.

Or, it is not a literary device, but a literal description. I know you cannot accept it as you are limited to the esoteric philisophical description as put forth in the creed you follow.
Tell me, if you were to see God the Father as He truly is, if the Father were right in front of you right now, what would you see?

Yet the scriptures describe God as having a face, a hand, back parts, feet, AND, Jesus states that if we have seen Him, we have seen the Father.

No disrespect intended here, but this is just silly and is a great example of what happens when one moves further and further away from the truth handed down to us from the Apostles; from the Church that Christ Himself began. The LDS have exchanged the truth for a lie and the revelation of God in Jesus Christ has been lost. You believe the only difference between you and Jesus is that He has already progressed and you have not. You are in great error. Eternal life with God is a gift from the Creator to the created, not a process.

 

[RebeccaJ]

LDS teaching:

1-Jesus is a “spirit child” of their father, the same as you and me

also a teaching

2-Jesus has always been a god

Q: If Jesus is the same as you and me, when did we become a god, the same as Jesus?

Q: If we are not the same as Jesus, that is a god before birth, when did Jesus become a god?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Each time I get an answer like this I’m a little baffled as to how to respond.

Compartmentalized belief/understanding, that can be spoken about as though the one compartment is not aware of the other.

Compartment A: Jesus has always been a god.

Compartment B: Jesus progressed to godhood.

You get to figure out which compartment is speaking.

 

[SteveVH]

Compartmentalized belief/understanding, that can be spoken about as though the one compartment is not aware of the other.

Compartment A: Jesus has always been a god.

Compartment B: Jesus progressed to godhood.

You get to figure out which compartment is speaking.

Rebecca, you have a nack for placing seemingly complicated issues in a nut shell. Thanks for this. I couldn’t agree more.

 

[zerinus]

My Jesus is eternal, without beginning or end. Yours?

Mine too. See 2 Nephi 26:12; Mosiah 3:5; Alma 34:14; D&C 20:28; 38:1-3.

My Jesus created everything that exists, including all matter and spirit. Yours?

Well, He created everything that was created; but scripture says nothing about “matter and spirit”. Not sure where you got that from.

My Jesus is eternally the Son of the Father. Yours?

The Jesus of the Bible is a bit different. See Psalms 2:7; Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; Colossians 1:15; Revelation 3:14.

My Jesus is not the brother of Satan. Yours?

Again, my Jesus is the biblical one. Not sure about you. See Job 1:6; Job 2:1.

My Jesus is the second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Yours?

So is mine. I am glad your Jesus is the same as the biblical one at least some of the time, if not all of the time!

My Jesus is the fulfillment of all Revelation. Yours?

He certainly came to fulfill the Law: Luke 24:44; John 15:25; 2 Nephi 25:24, 30; 3 Nephi 9:17; 12:18, 19; 15:4, 5, 8. Not sure what you mean by “all Revelation”. You need to explain.

In any event, their true beliefs seem to be hidden and there appears to be no one who will just jump out there and state it plainly. It makes it very difficult to converse when the words we use are the same, but the meaning is completely different.

At this point, I’m also unsure of Mormon belief in just about every aspect.

Have no fear, Zman is here, to answer your questions and make all things clear!

You didn’t know I was a poet as well, did you.

 

[onenow1]

So is mine. I am glad your Jesus is the same as the biblical one at least some of the time, if not all of the time!

Indeed! your Jesus is different accrding to the early writings.

Ignatius

“Jesus Christ . . . was with the Father before the beginning of time and in the end was revealed” (Letter to the Magnesians 6 [A.D. 110]

Justin Martyr

“Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being his Word and first-begotten and power; and, becoming man according to his will, he taught us these things for the conversion and restoration of the human race” (First Apology 23 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus
“[The Gnostics] transfer the generation of the uttered word of men to the eternal Word of God, attributing to him a beginning of utterance and a coming into being. . . . In what manner, then, would the word of God—indeed, the great God himself, since he is the Word—differ from the word of men?” (Against Heresies 2:13:8 [A.D. 189]).

Tertullian

[W]hen God says, ‘Let there be light’ [Gen. 1:3], this is the perfect nativity of the Word, while he is proceeding from God. . . . Thus, the Father makes him equal to himself, and the Son, by proceeding from him, was made the first-begotten, since he was begotten before all things, and the only-begotten, because he alone was begotten of God, in a manner peculiar to himself, from the womb of his own heart, to which even the Father himself gives witness: ‘My heart has poured forth my finest Word’ [Ps. 45:1-2]" (Against Praxeas 7:1 [A.D. 216]).

Hippolytus

“Therefore, this sole and universal God, by reflecting, first brought forth the Word—not a word as in speech, but as a mental word, the reason for everything. . . . The Word was the cause of those things which came into existence, carrying out in himself the will of him by whom he was begotten. . . . Only [God’s] Word is from himself and is therefore also God, becoming the substance of God” (Refutation of All Heresies 10:33 [A.D. 228]).

Gregory the Wonderworker
“There is one God, the Father of the living Word, who is his subsistent Wisdom and Power and Eternal Image: perfect Begetter of the perfect Begotten, Father of the only-begotten Son. There is one Lord, Only of the Only, God of God, Image and Likeness of Deity, Efficient Word, Wisdom comprehensive of the constitution of all things, and Power formative of the whole creation, true Son of true Father” (Declaration of Faith [A.D. 265]).

From Catholic Answers

Peace

 

[zerinus]

Indeed! your Jesus is different accrding to the early writings.

Thank you, but I like the biblical quotes even better!