LDS Church puts a date on the Great Apostasy

[Javl]

Sorry Javl, I don’t see how your conclusion follows from the given premises.

If you read and understand the scriptural verses honestly, without putting an LDS spin on them, you will come to the same conclusion.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[onenow1]

Hi All, and Happy Belated Birthday Jesus.

I’d like to lay side by side the ancient Catholic Church and the present day catholic eccliasial communities, that by and large are not following True Catholic Principles of doctrine.
The CC has from its ancient beginning had detractors. St.Paul talks about this in Galatians, admonishing them gently, not unlike every Pope has done since Christ instituted the Church, shepherding the sheep…

Below is what happens and continues even today when the authority of the CC is ignored.

1. The foundation of the Lutherans, the beginning of Protestantism, was laid down by Martin Luther.
2. The foundation of the Anabaptists was laid down by Conrad Grebel, Menno Simons, Thomas Munzer and others.
3. The foundation of the Mennonites was laid down by Menno Simons in a split from Anabaptists.
4. The foundation of the Anglican Church of England, was laid down by King Henry VIII.
5. The foundation of the Calvinists was laid down by John Calvin, as he taught predestination.
6. The foundation of the Presbyterians was laid down by John Knox, who studied under Luther.
7. The foundation of the Congregationalists was laid down by Robert Brown, a branch from Puritanism.
8. The foundation of the Baptists in Holland was laid down by John Smyth.
9. The foundation of the Baptists in America was laid down by Roger Williams.
10. The foundation of the Quakers was laid down by George Fox in England.

“Obey your superiors and be subject to them, for they keep watch as having to render an account of your souls; so that they may do this with joy, and not with grief, for that would not be expedient for you.”
Hebrews 13:17
How many of the above “foundation layers” obeyed the clear command of Hebrews 13:17?
How many simply ignored yet another Bible verse?

1. The foundation of the Amish was laid down by men in a split from the Mennonites.
2. The foundation of the Church of the Brethren was laid down by five men and three women.
3. The foundation of the Methodists was laid down by John and Charles Wesley.
4. The foundation of the Universalists was laid down by John Murray in New Jersey.
5. The foundation of the Unitarians was laid down by Theophilus Lindley.
6. The foundation of the Episcopalians was laid down by Samuel Seabury. It is the American branch of Anglicans.
7. The foundation of the Reformed Church in America was laid down by many who broke from the Dutch Reformed Church.
8. The foundation of the Seventh Day Baptist General Conference was laid down by Stephen and Ann Mumford.
9. The foundation of the Evangelicals was laid down by Jacob Albright.
10. The foundation of the Fundamentalist-Bible was laid down by John Darby, Cyrus Scofield, and others.

“For the time has come for the judgment to begin with the household of GOD;
but if it begin first with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the Gospel of GOD?”
1Peter 4:17

1. The foundation of the Christian Church (Stone-Campbell) was laid down by Alexander Campbell.
2. The foundation of the Primitive Baptist was laid down by men. It is considered the strictest of all Baptists.
3. The foundation of the Mormons was laid down by Joseph Smith in Palmyra New York. (Galatians 1:6-10)
4. The foundation of the Disciples of Christ was laid down by a presbyterian schism called “The Stone-Campbell Movement”.
5. The foundation of the Primitive Methodist Church was laid down by Hugh Borne and William Clowes.
6. The foundation of the Wesleyan Church was laid down by Orange Scott.
7. The foundation of the Christadelphians was laid down by John Thomas from Stone-Campbell movement.
8. The foundation of the American Baptist Churches was laid down by several men.
9. The foundation of the Religious Society of Friends was laid down by Joseph Gurney, and John Wilbur.
10. The foundation of the Southern Baptist Convention, the largest non-Catholic denomination, was laid down by several men.

Peace

 

[rainman10]

The trick is to listen and follow, which of course the Galatians did not do.

So the church that was established by an Apostle, whose presence was there at the set up, then turned from that which was preached to them by the mouth of the Apostle, would stand corrected by a letter and not have any further need for guidance? I know you will bring up the Holy Spirit was given to guide them, but it didn’t seem to do that much good before.
I disagree with you. This is proof positive that that particular church/congregation went astray. Paul also wrote about another church going astray soon after he leaves.

QUOTE][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.And as the scriptures plainly state, even with the training from the Apostles, that Bishop had either let the flock go astray or led them astray to the point where the training Apostle had to write a letter and accuse him of leaving the gospel that was taught to him.

No evidence of the Apostasy? only if one hides their head in the sand…The sheep were not beginning to go astray, they were already removed from the gospel, in fact he marveled at how quickly it happened. In chapter 3 he chides them: “O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?”
Where does it say that the Galatians came back into the fold? It doesn’t. There is only a letter…not a visit, a letter written to them, exhorting, nay, pleading with them to come back into the fold. There is no follow up that we know of.
Do you think the Galatians knew they were in apostasy before Paul’s letter?

Where in Galatians chapter 3 does it say ALL Galatians apostasized?

 

[SteveVH]

God’s promise is not some “trick” that humans perform. God’s promise stands independent of human action. When God promised the Spirit to His Church he did not add any caveats such as, “so long as you do this and that,” or “until your do this or that.” It was issued as self-enacting.

No. I will bring up the Bishops who were instructed in the things and way of God by the Apostles who were also assured of the Holy Spirit by God’s promise. Galatians shows a single Church going astray but being corrected by the authorities set over it to do that very thing (maintain them in the True Faith).

You don’t actually disagree with me. I did not say the Church was not going astray : you are putting words into my mouth. I said the Church was going astray but the duly appointed leader and authority of that Church corrected it. What you assert, “that [this] church went astray,” is not supported by the text. You assert it as if it was lost and hopeless, which would make the very letter sent to them pointless and redundant. Galatians proves a living, functioning Church under Apostolic authority being corrected and maintained in the Faith.

If they were utterly lost, why would he bother writing a letter to them ?

It is necessary for you to make it appear that the New Testament Churches collapsed almost instantly ; however, the fact remains that this letter was nonetheless sent, and you have no proof or evidence that the letter did not succeed in its purpose of correcting the flock. I prefer to believe that the Apostles were good at what they did ; you must believe they were vain (such as writing letters to utterly lost souls) and incompetent (unwilling to bother to appoint proper leadership and successors in the Churches they, by God’s grace, built).

Where does it say they didn’t ? Do you honestly believe the Apostle would write a letter that’s intention was not to bring them back into the fold ? Are you really going to claim that the letter to the Galatians was simply hate-mail sent by an Apostle to a Church he himself laboured to convert and establish ?

I don’t know, to be frank : but I know the Galatians knew,*** thanks to the letter***, that those who hold the keys to the kingdom were warning them that if they did not correct themselves, they would jeopardize their belonging to that kingdom. Personally, seeing as how the Churches continued to spread and prosper in general concord from this time until the present time, I happen to think it much more likely and realistic that the Apostle’s letter was more succesful than not, and that the flock addressed heeded the Apostle’s warnings and obeyed the Truth. My theory is supported with evidence (the purpose of the letter itself, followed by and with the growth and spread of Christianity throughout the world) ; the theory you are made to hold by your church, however, is devoid of any substantial evidence whatsoever.

Laslty, Apostasy is a complete repudiation of the Faith : an utter exiting and withdrawal from it. This simply never happened : the Church persisted from then and is still here with us today, along with the Christian Faith.

This is impossible to believe for obvious reasons : the Christian religion survived trial and tribulation, persecution and martyrdoms for hundreds of years and nonetheless persisted and ultimately triumphed. Catholicism still has martyrs today. No one in their right mind would suffer and die for a religion they simply did not believe in, and people have suffered and died for the sake of the Faith continuously for 2,000 years. This should be enough proof for anyone that the Apostles did not labour in vain.

Pax,
Tim

:bowdown:

 

[Stephen168]

I think the word “being” has been used differently than it’s common usage. I am a being. My dog is a being. My cat is a being. A being is simply a life form. ** Each person or living entity is a separate being. **

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.

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

but younger than Catholicism.

So you didn’t mean ‘the start’ of this thread or conversation; you meant ‘the start’ of when the words were first defined. “Being” was defined 2500 years ago; 500 years before Christ and the Catholic Church. The first Christians were taught and understood God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit to be one being.
“Person” was defined 1500 years ago and it is still the same definition most of us accept and it is the one we have used since ‘the start’ of this conversation. Now there are some folks who want to redefine person so that your cat would be a person and a human less than 12 months old would not. They want to change the definition, so it would be OK to kill unborn babies and but not kill cats. I understand the Mormon Church allows for the killing of unborn babies, so maybe you are part of this new definition and not aware of the 1500 year old definition used by the Catholic Church.

I can repeat back to you what I have been told about “being” and “person”, but I do not adhere to it.

So you understand ‘being’ and ‘person’ but can’t understand them. Posts #593 and #594, and why no Mormon has responded to them makes sense to me know.

One person = one being. Two persons = two beings. To have 3 persons = 1 being, is man’s attempt to reconcile the unity of the Godhead with artificial limitations.

The limitation are in Mormonism; one being per person, now move along. 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.

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.

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.

To repair your analogy; Republicans and Democrats know Barak Obama is the current President of the United States, just as Catholics and Protestants know who Jesus is. We may understand his teachings differently but we know who he is. Mormons don’t know who Jesus is. (Matthew 16:15, Mark 8:29). And to finish your analogy; Mormons don’t know that Barak Obama is the current President of the United States.

Try as you might, you will not wrestle God the Father or Jesus Christ from us.

The Latter Day Saint Movement started as an Protestant denomination in 1830 but Joseph Smith lead his followers away from Jesus Christ in 1844. Mormonism has nothing to wrestle away.

 

[Stephen168]

“For by her activity the machinations of her foes were promptly shown up and extinguished, though one after another heresies were invented, the earlier ones constantly passing away and disappearing, in different ways at different times, into forms of every shape and character. But the splendor of the Catholic and one true Church, always remaining the same and unchanged, grew steadily in greatness and strength,” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History Book IV, Chapter 7.

 

[Timothy17]

QUOTE=Stephen168;7404286
“For by her activity the machinations of her foes were promptly shown up and extinguished, though one after another heresies were invented, the earlier ones constantly passing away and disappearing, in different ways at different times, into forms of every shape and character. But the splendor of the Catholic and one true Church, always remaining the same and unchanged, grew steadily in greatness and strength,” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History Book IV, Chapter 7.

That says it all.

Pax,
Tim

 

[KathleenGee]

The misuse of a farewell by St. Paul, – who most likely had premonitions of his forthcoming martyrdom–,

during the time when more and more beginning Christians were coming together to pray… a beginning Church, to use as the basis of the Apostasy does not bear weight to the consequences of Christianity being labelled apostate.

Mormonism can and Catholicism/Christianity can’t.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

Robert in SD,

I see that it’s either just not something you want to really consider by looking at the Old Testament passages and looking at the exact words of the Intercessory prayer without any embellishment, or that you don’t want to “go there”.

You’re seeing only what you want to see. Apparently, it’s easier for you to take pot shots at me than to respond to any of the substance that’s been raised.

ParkerD:

That’s fine–I assure you I certainly am not “looking for my own private Kolob”–nor was Abraham when he saw the vision including the plan presented by the Father and endorsed by the Son and brought about by Him through His loving atonement for all of us–even those who follow the Jewish traditions about there being “One Being” and only “One Being” as the Godhead.

So, then you’re agreeing to set aside the confusion of the LDS position and acknowledge a God that is Three Persons and One Being? Again, your comment is hard to follow, perhaps because the LDS theological grasp of the distinction between person and being is somewhat absent from the picture.

ParkerD:

It is not idolatry to say that the Intercessory prayer was literal, and that Christ is truly the Son of God, Jehovah come to earth as God with us, and that He taught that the Holy Ghost would be sent to be the Comforter with us also.

I don’t think I accused anyone of idolatry. Again, not sure of your point here?

ParkerD:

By the way, Abraham was indeed looking for “a better country, that is, an heavenly: …for he hath prepared for them a city.” Even the “city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.” (Hebrews 11:16, 10)

He prepared one city; not one City for each person. Do you think that Abraham and Isaac have their own separate “heaven” to rule and guide? Is that what you think the OT portends for Abraham and his descendants? Again, I’ve looked at this issue and I don’t think the LDS theological construct is supported here.

Peace,
Robert

 

[flyonthewall]

God’s promise is not some “trick” that humans perform. God’s promise stands independent of human action. When God promised the Spirit to His Church he did not add any caveats such as, “so long as you do this and that,” or “until your do this or that.” It was issued as self-enacting.

Okay, you object to the word “trick”. I did not mean it the way you describe, so I will change it for another word…The KEY is to listen and follow.
Now you say that God’s promise stands independent of human action…God does not work that way. God leads, and invites, He does not drive or force.

No. I will bring up the Bishops who were instructed in the things and way of God by the Apostles who were also assured of the Holy Spirit by God’s promise. Galatians shows a single Church going astray but being corrected by the authorities set over it to do that very thing (maintain them in the True Faith).

It does illustrate that churches set up by the Apostles, without constant tending, can and will go astray. This was not an isolated incident as Paul prophecied that Ephesus would have similar touble.

You don’t actually disagree with me. I did not say the Church was not going astray : you are putting words into my mouth. I said the Church was going astray but the duly appointed leader and authority of that Church corrected it. What you assert, “that [this] church went astray,” is not supported by the text. You assert it as if it was lost and hopeless, which would make the very letter sent to them pointless and redundant. Galatians proves a living, functioning Church under Apostolic authority being corrected and maintained in the Faith.

No, I do not assert that the church was lost and hopeless, but simply off the tracks. They had wandered away from the truth, not completely away, but enough to have altered the gospel, to something I suspect as a combination of the Law of Moses, Christianity and man made philosophies.

If they were utterly lost, why would he bother writing a letter to them ?

He wrote a letter to them because they were not lost but in need of direction, the same as the House of Israel when prophets were called to cry repentance…well not child sacrifice bad but they were not where they should have been.

It is necessary for you to make it appear that the New Testament Churches collapsed almost instantly ; however, the fact remains that this letter was nonetheless sent, and you have no proof or evidence that the letter did not succeed in its purpose of correcting the flock. I prefer to believe that the Apostles were good at what they did ; you must believe they were vain (such as writing letters to utterly lost souls) and incompetent (unwilling to bother to appoint proper leadership and successors in the Churches they, by God’s grace, built).

I do not envision the NT churches collapsing instantaneously, this was simply one that was identified that was quick to do so.
I know you prefer to believe that all the church needed was one letter to get them back to where they should be.
I do not believe the Apostles were vain or incompetent, but people are what they are. Christianity was something new and radically different. People tend to gravitate to the old and well known when things are hard to understand. This was a case of the Bishop that was put in place to tend the flocks was either part of the problem or failed to recognize there was a problem…easy to do in a new religion.

Where does it say they didn’t ? Do you honestly believe the Apostle would write a letter that’s intention was not to bring them back into the fold ? Are you really going to claim that the letter to the Galatians was simply hate-mail sent by an Apostle to a Church he himself laboured to convert and establish ?

Oh, I believe the intent of the letter was to bring them back to the fold, but then the intent of appointing a Bishop was to keep the flock in the fold in the first place. How many times did the House of Israel heed the prophets when they came in to bring them back to the fold?

(cont.d)

 

[flyonthewall]

(part 2)

I don’t know, to be frank : but I know the Galatians knew,*** thanks to the letter***, that those who hold the keys to the kingdom were warning them that if they did not correct themselves, they would jeopardize their belonging to that kingdom. Personally, seeing as how the Churches continued to spread and prosper in general concord from this time until the present time, I happen to think it much more likely and realistic that the Apostle’s letter was more succesful than not, and that the flock addressed heeded the Apostle’s warnings and obeyed the Truth. My theory is supported with evidence (the purpose of the letter itself, followed by and with the growth and spread of Christianity throughout the world) ; the theory you are made to hold by your church, however, is devoid of any substantial evidence whatsoever.

The point is, they most likely did not set out to wander away, but they did anyway. Lucky for them an Apostle was there to write the letter. What if the Apostles weren’t there? Who would be there to write the next letter? and the letter after that?

Laslty, Apostasy is a complete repudiation of the Faith : an utter exiting and withdrawal from it. This simply never happened : the Church persisted from then and is still here with us today, along with the Christian Faith.

Not the only definition…turning away and falling away are also definitions. If they were removed from the gospel as Paul describes then they either turned away or fell away.

This is impossible to believe for obvious reasons : the Christian religion survived trial and tribulation, persecution and martyrdoms for hundreds of years and nonetheless persisted and ultimately triumphed. Catholicism still has martyrs today. No one in their right mind would suffer and die for a religion they simply did not believe in, and people have suffered and died for the sake of the Faith continuously for 2,000 years. This should be enough proof for anyone that the Apostles did not labour in vain.

Remember, I never said there weren’t those that believed, but people have died for causes through out history, right, wrong or indifferent, all they had to do was believe in it. I am sure that before Paul wrote the letter to the Galatians, there were some within that group that believed strongly enough to put their lives on the line for what they believed to be true.

 

[KathleenGee]

Flyonthewall,

Mormonism has not gone through all the trials and tribulations Christianity has. Yes, there are people out there, and you probably think I am one of them in my disputes here regarding the construct of Mormonism, who will be very harsh and unkind to Mormon people. This is wrong.

But I am beginning to study the history of Christianity from the one recommended by my pastor. And gleaning through the book at the beginning, I essentially see the wheat with the chaff, and how every generation had its great trials, whether it be from the outside or within. It is not real positive because every generation had its issues as well as shining lights of faith. If anything the book shows we are a human institution. But we are in a divinely inspired and sustained institution, Christ is always with us. His teachings continue the same. The mandate to proclaim the Good News is always with the Church.

I just think that you, as well as many of us, need to study objective church history. I know my pastor or any cleric does not want us to have a pollyanna perspective on our church.

But I do know that I am receiving the sacraments, that I am going to Mass, I am hearing the Word of God in the context of today as well as those readings and the context of their times…connected today. I could not be in any other church.

The problem is that your religion’s belief system denies Christianity was nurtured for 2,000 years in the truth of the Word of God Made Flesh, it does not know of the fruits or miracles of the Eucharist, the lives and works of the saints in the power of good over evil. I read of so many who died. The Dark Ages…how no longer did Christianity allow to be legal than it was overrun and attacked by barbarians. My St. Patrick was kidnapped and enslaved in those days. I read his ‘Confession of St. Patrick’ in 1996 and his words and faith were so alive and fresh and spoke to the faith today.

Our Church did not denigrate classes of faith of people. You go into a Catholic church. You never hear a priest denounce other Christians. I have never in my entire life hear of a priest denounce Mormonism, see a parish having classes denouncing Mormonism, or speaking in ill faith towards other Christians.

It is our daily life and our encounters that bring us into contact with the Mormons or Jehovah Witnesses, the Seventh Day Adventists…As I told you before, I finally entered an LDS bookstore…in a very affluent and well educated part of the state and was greatly affected by the readings about the ‘Roman Church’.

I think Mormonism is essentially anti-Catholic priesthood and celibacy. It knows Protestantism drew from it and is separated. What the Mormons do use of Christianity is the Protestant perspective on Bible readings which are again, anti-clerical,

There is a Mormon here on this site who has developed his own blog and uses our sharings to invalidate the Sacred Liturgy and the Eucharist. There is this ongoing perspective by Mormons towards our apostolic church that reveals how little it actually understands the faith.

There is a book out that is in use by dioceses…‘What Happens at Mass’, by Fr Jeremy Driscoll, OSB. The priest at Mass represents the one priesthood of Jesus Christ. At every Eucharistic celebration, we exclaim, “Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again!” This exclamation is the foundation of our faith.

We question the understanding of God in Mormonism because it challenges the ancient belief that Christ is the Alpha and the Omega…the beginning and end. Without understanding the Sacred Liturgy, knowing the history, the embellishment of faith into culture and the unification of all believers into the mystical body of Christ…there is so much you don’t know.

As Fr Jeremy repeats, ‘the altar we face at Mass is nothing less than the throne of God and of the Lamb. Here the Daily Mass atones through Christ all the sins committed every hour of every day. The Eucharistic Prayer is followed by the Angels’ Prayer that was cited in the ancient temple of Jerusalem…Holy, Holy, Holy…‘After this I saw before me a huge crowd which no one could count from every nation and race, people and tongue. They stood before the throne of the Lamb, dressed in long white robes and holding palm branches in their hands. They cried out in a loud voice, “Salvation is from our God, who is seated on the throne, and from the Lamb!” All the angels who were standing around the throne and the elders and the four living creatures fell down before the throne to worship God. They said: “Amen! Praise and glory, wisdom and thanksgiving and honor, power and might to our God forever and ever. Amen!”’ Rev. 7:9-12

So from this sentiment shared, Christ Himself choses those who are called separate and set aside for the altar. We do not have men or boys assume to become priests. The work and duties of a Catholic priest as Minister to the sacraments and the altar and his relationship to his peoples is very different than that of a Mormon priest.

I could do an intro to the Mass and its parts here as a thread, using Fr Driscoll’s text but I am not computer savvy.

But I think just explaining the parts to you, Flybywall, would hopefully inspire you to get a taste of the vision, of the perspective we Catholics have. I remember attending Mass at the Madeleine in SLC, and really, the movements and participation there reminded me very much of the piece here from Revelations.

May be if you could see or taste a little of what the Mass is or what it means, then you would see how and why we react the way we do when Mormonism or others consider our faith apostate.

We await a New Jerusalem.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Our Church did not denigrate classes of faith of people. You go into a Catholic church. You never hear a priest denounce other Christians. I have never in my entire life hear of a priest denounce Mormonism, see a parish having classes denouncing Mormonism, or speaking in ill faith towards other Christians.

.

I’ll second this, not only have I never heard a priest denounce other Christians, I have never had one bring them up, not in a homily, not in prayer groups, retreats, rosaries, not in catechism (as student or teacher). Even among lay members, who lead so many ministries (contrary to what LDS believe about our members participation) I have only once heard someone mention another religion and this was in passing with no discussion of their beliefs what so ever. All of the focus has always been on the rich Catholic history we have, the Popes, Saints, church Fathers and so forth.

 

[KathleenGee]

Yes, and for me it is the sign that Jesus is truly at heart in our teachings. He never came to condemn a class of people who believe in Him.

He never condemned our apostolic, universal faith and He doesn’t condemn the Mormons either.

It is truly Jesus teaching and preaching through our Church.

Jesus is calling all of us to Salvation, to Redemption, to enter into His kingdom among us, and to grow ever closer to Him in the Eucharist.

 

[onenow1]

Yes, and for me it is the sign that Jesus is truly at heart in our teachings. He never came to condemn a class of people who believe in Him.

He never condemned our apostolic, universal faith and He doesn’t condemn the Mormons either.

It is truly Jesus teaching and preaching through our Church.

Jesus is calling all of us to Salvation, to Redemption, to enter into His kingdom among us, and to grow ever closer to Him in the Eucharist.

Kathleen.Now, Jesus always explained things when he was misunderstood.

Examples:Look at Holy Scripture: When Jesus said to his disciples, “Lazarus our friend sleeps; but I go that I may awake him out of sleep.” His disciples then said, “Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.” Jesus then said plainly, “Lazarus is dead.” Christ did not leave them with the misunderstanding that they expressed.

In another incident Jesus told Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, that "unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.Jesus then answered him precisely by telling him that a man must be "born again of water and the Holy Ghost. Another correction !

At still another time, Jesus said to His disciples, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” The disciples then thought that Jesus was talking about their taking no bread with them. Jesus, knowing what they were thinking; Says do you not understand that it was not concerning bread.The disciples then understood that Jesus was talking about their doctrines.

The stumbling block then and now !

“Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, drink indeed.”
This was a command, and a divine precept. Many of his disciples murmured at this saying, “This saying is hard, and who can hear it?”
Jesus, knowing this, said to them, “Doth this scandalize you?” And, rather than give a figurative meaning still, “many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.” Jesus, knowing that they had taken Him literally, was then prepared to allow even the twelve apostles to leave Him; Jesus asked His twelve, “Will you also go away?” It is obvious that Jesus meant his words to be taken literally. The way Catholics have always believed them. Jesus promised: “The bread that I will give is my flesh…”.

On the eve of His death Jesus fulfilled His promise saying, “Take ye and eat. This is my body.” Those who have the true Faith accept this. Before the “Revolt” of the 16th century, when being Christian was synonymous with being Catholic, all Christians believed this and obeyed,our Lord’s command by receiving Him in the Eucharist so that they
would “have life”.

Note : John 6: 62 Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before?
63 It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life

WOW ! Jesus compares His ascension to the bread of life ! The spirit gives life to His flesh and will to ours on the last day !

Peace

 

[SteveVH]

I’ll second this, not only have I never heard a priest denounce other Christians, I have never had one bring them up, not in a homily, not in prayer groups, retreats, rosaries, not in catechism (as student or teacher). Even among lay members, who lead so many ministries (contrary to what LDS believe about our members participation) I have only once heard someone mention another religion and this was in passing with no discussion of their beliefs what so ever. All of the focus has always been on the rich Catholic history we have, the Popes, Saints, church Fathers and so forth.

I have heard our priest, and others speak of non-Catholic Christians, but always as our brothers and sisters in Christ. As for other religions, it is always with respect. For the most part though, it is just not brought up at all. Our focus is on the truth of our faith, not the shortfalls or errors in other’s faiths. They leave that up to us on CAF.

 

[KathleenGee]

OneNow1,

What you are describing is Christ Who never left us in confusion and error.

And the great number of followers who left him represented the Great Heresy of all – denying the Eucharist!

This Great Heresy has been in existence even while Christ was still alive. And there are a number of documents that verify the great belief of Christians in the Eucharist as well as the uniformity of worship – within one person’s lifetime already in effect.

The misuse of the Sacred Scriptures to be used to polarize and condemn and invalidate…this is why I do not use it too much…just relate the events instead because the Word of God is so holy…

So the death of the last apostle then was a time of great rejoicing found in Revelations–that we must persevere in Jesus…those who followed the Great Heresy and left Jesus did not persevere. And that in the end Good will triumph over Evil.

This is the final message of the St. John the Evangelist, Last Apostle:

Perseverance and triumph of Good over evil…through our sustenance of the Daily Sacrifice…the altar…the perpetual sacrifice that Melchizedek prophesized.

To say his death signified the beginning of the Apostasy is a terrible, terrible lie and complete inversion of John’s final message.

Some day the Mormons will finally cast off the Great Lie.

 

[KathleenGee]

OneNow1…thanks for your post showing all the fractures…the farther out they break, the farther out they are from the Sacraments and Church and it is very hard for them to relate to us, and that much more difficult for them to return to the Church…have to deal with alot of baggage.

 

[zaffiroborant]

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.

 

[Cruxis117]

Sorry Cruxis, your post is too complicated for me to reply to. If you could lay out your arguments in a simpler way I will do my best to answer it for you.

Okay, I’ll try to segment this down in to at least two posts in order to make it more clear.

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

As it has been previously noted in a post before mine, Galatians clearly speaks of the fact that there is no other Gospel, therefore the ‘restored gospel’ or this Book of Mormon, is false.

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

It is simple, if we are a part of creation, and we have both flesh and souls (matter and spirit), then He created both matter and spirit.

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.

*John 1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.*

Christ Jesus is the Living Word, who was always with God, as God.They are both eternal, without beginning or end.

*John:58-59
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.*

Now, in Judaistic culture, the name “I Am” was only used by one other, and to use it would be blasphemy and would deserve death. Christ was God before, during, and after, his life and resurrection. This was not due to a process, but was before creation and will endure forever.

*(Deuteronomy 33:27)
"27 The eternal God is your refuge,
and underneath are the everlasting arms.
He will drive out your enemies before you,
saying, ‘Destroy them!’

(Isaiah 43:10)
10Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.*

There is only One God. And there is no other God before him, and no other God after him. And likewise, God is eternal, without beginning or end. Jesus is of the same eternal God, because he is the only “begotten son”. There will never be any Gods or Goddesses, as the LDS Church proclaims.