LDS Church puts a date on the Great Apostasy

[KathleenGee]

Hi Parker,

The Church developed prayers drawn from the practices of Jewish faith and that from our Apostles. St. John the Evangelist has his prayer used for the Eucharistic liturgy at the Maronite church.

Again, when you explain, it can be compared in my Catholic mind as an interpretation of looking at Scriptures in a private way…private revelation…but the authority of the Church must decide if it is divinely inspired or not. You can have public revelation which is the teaching from the Apostles, private but divinely inspired writings but not for public proclamation because they do not support the perspective and faith of all people in the universal church, or you have private revelations drawn from private interpretations…they can be divinely inspired or not.

When you share your insights, always gracious, how they can be compared to is private spiritual studies…we have feminist private Bible studies that are allowed where they interpret their readings through the eyes of a feminist…but it is not considered orthodox and for the church. We have Bible studies of different ‘flavors’ allowed to suit private studies. It is allowed in the Catholic Church.

 

[ParkerD]

Thank you Parker. I shall never think ill of you nor forget you and I will always pray for you and your family.

What does disturb me though is our ( you and me ) dependence on the Holy Spirit for direction and guidance. From your experience and mine, it seems that He places you in one direction and me in the diametrically opposite direction. Can this be? One of is incorrect for He will NOT do that. Truthfully, I know that it’s not me. Shalom haMeshiach.

Shalom Aleichem

JAVL,

He doesn’t force choice onto people. He doesn’t “place me” in a direction. I choose the direction using the scriptures and prayerful consideration and actual life experience that confirms through peace, joy and heavensent family blessings that the direction is “His way not my way”–then through prayer and answered prayers, my soul is uplifted and renewed and also at times I am given specific guidance–but not if I don’t ask, not if I don’t seek the specific guidance.

So, the answer to “can this be?” is “yes, it can”. A person can live by the truths they themselves ask and want to live by, and can know that those specific truths are true, but it is not a blanket situation–it is specific to the particular truths being lived.

 

[BYUChemAlum]

I actually got this idea from a doubting Mormon. I just put it into an outline form because I think outlines make for clear thinking. His thinking was:
In order for Christ’s Church to require restoration there had to be a total and complete apostasy of the one he started 2000 years ago. The apostasy means a total loss of priesthood authority. The other reasons Mormons give for proof of an apostasy are really the result of the loss of priesthood authority, so authority is the key. Now what would it take, step by step, in detail, for my church (Mormon Church) to lose priesthood authority? The answer: Every Priesthood holder would have to not pass on their authority and at almost the same time non-Priesthood holders take over leadership of the Church. In other words it could not happen. So if it could not happen in the Mormon Church now, it could not happen 2000 years ago. No Apostasy, no need for the Mormon Church.

Actually, this “doubting Mormon” does not understand LDS ecclesiology, specifically the underlined portion. Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ ultimately comes from Christ Himself, who delegated authority to apostles. The apostles hold the keys of the kingdom of God. If there were no new apostles called (as we all agree happened), then there wouldn’t be anyone that held the keys, to delegate authority, to authorize exercising of keys, etc. So, the doubting Mormon shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the LDS Church actually functions, which would not necessitate “every priesthood holder would have to not pass on their authority…”.

 

[Stephen168]

Actually, this “doubting Mormon” does not understand LDS ecclesiology, specifically the underlined portion. Authority in the Church of Jesus Christ ultimately comes from Christ Himself, who delegated authority to apostles. The apostles hold the keys of the kingdom of God. If there were no new apostles called (as we all agree happened), then there wouldn’t be anyone that held the keys, to delegate authority, to authorize exercising of keys, etc. So, the doubting Mormon shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the LDS Church actually functions, which would not necessitate “every priesthood holder would have to not pass on their authority…”.

I think the ‘doubting Mormon’ knew Mormon ecclesiology does not match Mormon history.

Mormons believe they have the keys and priesthood authority (C) to make changes (B). They have made changes as extreme as change ‘who God is’ and ‘what is required for salvation.’ It took Joseph Smith five years to get around inventing Mormon Apostles (A), yet he had claimed for those years he had the keys and authority. So reason would tell us that the Mormon claim that doctrine changing in the early church is an indication of apostasy is not true; Mormons have changed doctrine. Mormons claiming that only an Apostle can have authority is not true; they claimed authority without apostles. All you really need is ‘authority’ and you can do whatever you want. So out of nowhere Joseph Smith took the restorationist idea of a great apostasy and claimed he had authority.
The problem with this claim of an apostasy is Mormons don’t think about what it would really take for their own church to lose priesthood authority. Except the one Mormon I talked about.

 

[KathleenGee]

I was sharing my remarks about the Last Apostle in his final words in Revelation identifying and naming those who are false…who will be put in the pool of fire and sulpher…He made no allusion to a forthcoming apostasy after his death.

And how he saw a mystical image we identify as the Mass.

I came across tonight part of an address by John Paul II, February 21, 2001. In welcoming people from every part of the world he said, “You come from 27 countries on 4 continents and speak various languages. Is this not a sign of the Church’s ability, now that she has spread to every corner of the globe, to understand with different traditions, peoples, languages, in order to bring to all the message of Christ?”

We have 2000 years of Christ remaining with us, nurturing us, restoring us.

 

[ParkerD]

I was sharing my remarks about the Last Apostle in his final words in Revelation identifying and naming those who are false…who will be put in the pool of fire and sulpher…He made no allusion to a forthcoming apostasy after his death.

KathleenGee,

'Hoping you have enjoyed a good day.

It would be important for you to understand that the word apostasy does not equate with the words describing what John saw about those “who have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” (Revelation 20:8) That condition is for those who chose to be “unbelieving, abominable, murderers, …idolaters, liars” who didn’t repent because of their continuing unbelief.

The apostasy would be referring to what John saw in Revelation 12:14 and 13:7, where the church flies “into the wilderness” and where the beast is allowed to “make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” But that is a temporary situation–that power “over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” So Christ is ultimately victorious but yet temporarily the beast had power “given him”.

And how he saw a mystical image we identify as the Mass.

Although I don’t know what part of the vision you are referring to, it would seem to not be a good idea to talk about a “mystical image” since the word “mystery” does not have a favorable connotation in Revelation 17:5.

I came across tonight part of an address by John Paul II, February 21, 2001. In welcoming people from every part of the world he said, “You come from 27 countries on 4 continents and speak various languages. Is this not a sign of the Church’s ability, now that she has spread to every corner of the globe, to understand with different traditions, peoples, languages, in order to bring to all the message of Christ?”

We have 2000 years of Christ remaining with us, nurturing us, restoring us.

But yet the prophecy of an apostasy was included in John’s vision, so there was prophesied to be a break during the 2000 years during a period of time when power was given to the beast “to overcome them”–“over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.” It was right there in his vision.

Still and all, what eventually matters is what people individually do with the message of the gospel, and it is certainly a good thing to know personally that Christ, the personal Redeemer and Savior of each and every soul who comes unto Him in sincerity of heart, does indeed “nurture us and restore us”, and that He lives as the resurrected, loving Son of God.

 

[KathleenGee]

Thanks for your response.

The image of the woman fleeing into the desert is what happens when faithful people are under persecution. The world around them is as a desert. The woman symbolizes the Church and the wings of the eagle represent contemplation of the Word of God for sustenance – no Eucharist.

The woman also represents Mary, the Mother of God. Those who entrust their faith in Christ to His mother know her protection of our faith, and healing of our souls in times of persecution and despair.

The devil vomits a river to block the woman…that is Satan fighting Mary, the woman who has the seed of Christ, and crushes the head of Satan through her heel – the little ones, powerless and unseen in this world, who pray with her, and live purity of faith in Christ with her companionship.

There is the symbol of how many days, that also equal up to 3.5 years, that is also stated during the time of persecution.

When I refer to the Mass, it is the altar with angels and peoples of all sorts of tongues, and nations and races praising God. The Book of Revelations also refer to the ceasing of the Daily Sacrifice which we know is the Daily Sacrifice of the Mass prophesized by Melchizedek.

Those who die in this life to Christ, live. And our Church has many countless martyrs who have died for their faith. The 20th century has known more deaths than any other. The cup of the Lord overfills with the blood of martyrs.

Have you heard of those Tutus who survived the massacres in Rhwanda? Incredible. There are more details now coming out. Mary appeared there and forewarned them of this disaster. And those who survived said the same evil could come to other countries. And how we need to pray with Mary and be pure, and to fortify our faith.

Again, I hope you are not pointing to the Catholic Church as the anti-Christ…The Catholic Church gives us Christ’s Eucharist…His Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity that does not lead to evil but to the partaking of divine life now. But the fruits are of Christ and not for show.

Virtue hides itself.

 

[Javl]

JAVL,

He doesn’t force choice onto people. He doesn’t “place me” in a direction. I choose the direction using the scriptures and prayerful consideration and actual life experience that confirms through peace, joy and heavensent family blessings that the direction is “His way not my way”–then through prayer and answered prayers, my soul is uplifted and renewed and also at times I am given specific guidance–but not if I don’t ask, not if I don’t seek the specific guidance.

So, the answer to “can this be?” is “yes, it can”. A person can live by the truths they themselves ask and want to live by, and can know that those specific truths are true, but it is not a blanket situation–it is specific to the particular truths being lived.

Parker:

I did not say that He forces choice onto people. What I am saying is that He shows or provides one direction for you and a diametrically opposite direction for me. Therefore He does not head us in the same direction. This is the confusion. Therefore it seems that the Holy Spirit is not whom He seems to be since God in not the author of confusion. There is only one truth, not multiple ones. From this, one of us ***is not really guided ***by the Holy Spirit. The promptings of the Spirit are being ignored. Shalom haMeshiach.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[ParkerD]

Parker:

I did not say that He forces choice onto people. What I am saying is that He shows or provides one direction for you and a diametrically opposite direction for me. Therefore He does not head us in the same direction. This is the confusion. Therefore it seems that the Holy Spirit is not whom He seems to be since God in not the author of confusion. There is only one truth, not multiple ones. From this, one of us ***is not really guided ***by the Holy Spirit. The promptings of the Spirit are being ignored. Shalom haMeshiach.

Shalom Aleichem

Hi, JAVL, and good day to you,

I noticed on another post you mentioned your age–tremendous that you are involved in so many things at such an age when others would be merely “rocking away” or such. Congratulations!

What I had posted is to say that the Holy Spirit doesn’t prompt if a person doesn’t ask, specifically, because that would be detracting from personal free will choice. So I think I have understood where you were coming from, but I hope you can also understand where I am coming from with this comment and the other one that you responded to.

Have a great day!

 

[catholic-rcia]

Hi, JAVL, and good day to you,

What I had posted is to say that the Holy Spirit doesn’t prompt if a person doesn’t ask,

Have a great day!

Dear Parker, did you know that when you decide to pray, that this is put in place by the promptings of the Holy Spirit first? Or do you think you begin this process on your own?

It’s not so much about asking, although you can and you should when your faith is weak and mine is weak 24 hours a day so I do ask a lot.

For a Saint it would be more about letting go, allowing the asking to become less while acting on the promptings of the Spirit without much thought. An alignment to the will of God, not seeking anything other than doing His will. The closer one becomes to God, the less this one becomes. Christ becomes the captain of our souls.

  Being in the Grace of God when one is so blessed to be there is a place like no other. It is a place of surrender, a place for Saints. I can only talk this is my current journey, only have a sense of it.  In other words I can see this light but it remains at a distance. Calling me closer at each meal. Less and less do I bring to each meal.  Here is another little treasure that I found on my Catholic journey that I have been asked to pass on, to share: 

  “The proud cannot bring themselves to hold out empty hands to God, they insist on offering virtues, good works, self denials, anything in order not to have nothing. They want to be beautiful for him from their own resources, whereas we are beautiful only because God looks on us and makes us beautiful. God cannot give himself to us unless our hands are empty to receive him. The deepest reason why so few of us are saints is because we will not let God love us. To be loved means a naked, defenceless surrender to all God is. It means a glad acceptance of our nothingness, a look fixed only on the God who gives, taking no account of the nothing to whom the gift is made. To lose ourselves like this is the most radical of despoliations because the last shred of self-importance is discarded. The very words and acts of humility can be a barricade of well-nigh infinite subtlety. Jesus came to us precisely to break down the bars, something we could never have done of ourselves. Yet we cannot live the life of Jesus unless we consent to leave our own pitiful lives, and this is what pride finds unendurable. Striving for ‘perfection’ is the most disastrous of the mistakes good people fall into. It feeds the very vice it intends to destroy. Most fervent souls are prepared to give God any mortal thing, work themselves to death, anything except the one thing he wants, total trust: anything but surrender into his loving hands. ‘You must become as little children’, whose one virtue is that they know they are unimportant.”

Used with permission
(above taken from Guidelines for Mystical Prayer pages 83-84 by Ruth Burrows, published and copyright 1976 by Sheed and Ward and used by permission of the publishers.)

 

[Javl]

Hi, JAVL, and good day to you,

I noticed on another post you mentioned your age–tremendous that you are involved in so many things at such an age when others would be merely “rocking away” or such. Congratulations!

What I had posted is to say that the Holy Spirit doesn’t prompt if a person doesn’t ask, specifically, because that would be detracting from personal free will choice. So I think I have understood where you were coming from, but I hope you can also understand where I am coming from with this comment and the other one that you responded to.

Have a great day!

OK, my friend. I understand your position. Although we have divergent views on religion(s) I know that we both have siminlar basic beliefs. This should be sufficient to cement a friendship ( I hope and pray ). Enough of the slaps and punches…on with the hair and beard pulling. Have a great day. Shalom haMeshiac.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem.

 

[SteveVH]

Hi, JAVL, and good day to you,

I noticed on another post you mentioned your age–tremendous that you are involved in so many things at such an age when others would be merely “rocking away” or such. Congratulations!

What I had posted is to say that the Holy Spirit doesn’t prompt if a person doesn’t ask, specifically, because that would be detracting from personal free will choice. So I think I have understood where you were coming from, but I hope you can also understand where I am coming from with this comment and the other one that you responded to.

Have a great day!

The point, however, is that truth cannot conflict with truth. To believe that you have received truth from the Holy Spirit necessarily means that one who believes differently than you has not received truth from the Holy Spirit. Your contention that the Holy Spirit does not prompt if a person doesn’t ask, specifically, assumes then that we are not asking. As Javl has intimated, the Holy Spirit does not give conflicting truths to those that ask. Asking is one thing, listening is another. Discernment is absolutely required when determining whether or not one is hearing the Holy Spirit, or rather hearing one’s own desires or imagination.

This is the danger in assuming, through interior feelings, that one has received the truth because they asked. Who’s voice are you really hearing; God’s, yours or another spirit? We do this through prayer, but also knowing that the Holy Spirit will not give us one truth one day, and another truth another day. In other words, if the truth we believe we have received conflicts with truth already given, we know that it is not the Holy Spirit guiding us. This is the problem we have with polygamy being ok one day and not the next; or blacks being restricted from the priesthood one day, and not the next. God is not subject to human laws. His truth remains the same always.

 

[ParkerD]

…(1) Asking is one thing, listening is another. (2) Discernment is absolutely required when determining whether or not one is hearing the Holy Spirit, or rather hearing one’s own desires or imagination. …(3) God is not subject to human laws. (4) His truth remains the same always.

SteveVH,

I have certainly always agreed with the sentences I brought forward from your quote that I labeled, for convenience, (1), (2), and (3). But I don’t agree with (4) if you mean the administration of particular rules and practices revealed by God at particular points in time, as for example I don’t think you are making the kind of comparison Jesus made about non-Jews today:

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.

26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.

27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH,

I have certainly always agreed with the sentences I brought forward from your quote that I labeled, for convenience, (1), (2), and (3). But I don’t agree with (4) if you mean the administration of particular rules and practices revealed by God at particular points in time, as for example I don’t think you are making the kind of comparison Jesus made about non-Jews today:

Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.

26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs.

27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.

And then, what did Jesus do? He healed her. This is indeed a strange passage and easily and understandably misinterpreted. Jesus came as Israel’s Messiah, yet He showed here that salvation was not just limited to the Jews only. He tested her faith and found that she had great faith, and healed her.

I don’t mean “administration of particular rules and practices revealed by God at particular points in time”. I am speaking of truth, not methods of administration. Truth never conflicts with truth, regardless of how it is carried out. Issues such as polygamy and racism are not a matter of administration of particular rules and practices. They are either wrong or they are not.

 

[ParkerD]

And then, what did Jesus do? He healed her. This is indeed a strange passage and easily and understandably misinterpreted. Jesus came as Israel’s Messiah, yet He showed here that salvation was not just limited to the Jews only. He tested her faith and found that she had great faith, and healed her.

I don’t mean “administration of particular rules and practices revealed by God at particular points in time”. I am speaking of truth, not methods of administration. Truth never conflicts with truth, regardless of how it is carried out. Issues such as polygamy and racism are not a matter of administration of particular rules and practices. They are either wrong or they are not.

SteveVH,

Three observations:

1. Paul admired Abraham and Sarah and used them as an example of faith and faithfulness, so it appears you disagree with Paul–but I don’t.

It also appears that if you had been around to advise Jacob (Israel), you would have advised him that he had better not do what he was about to do, and accept that Leah had been given to him as his only wife.

1. It appears that you disagree that there should have been any “mark” placed upon anyone which could possibly lead to a situation of prejudice, thus you would be disagreeing with the following action:

Genesis 4:15 And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

1. For the record, as far as the woman of Canaan, it was her daughter whom she wanted the Savior to heal, and He said “be it unto thee even as thou wilt” which means that her faith led to the healing of her daughter. So yes, the Savior did acknowledge her great faith, and He acknowledged that her faith led to the healing of her daughter.

We all ought to seek to have that kind of faith.

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH,

Three observations:

1. Paul admired Abraham and Sarah and used them as an example of faith and faithfulness, so it appears you disagree with Paul–but I don’t.

Say what? Sorry, you lost me. I don’t disagree with anything Paul said. Abraham was punished for his extramarital affair if that is the situation to which you are referring.

It also appears that if you had been around to advise Jacob (Israel), you would have advised him that he had better not do what he was about to do, and accept that Leah had been given to him as his only wife.

Jacob was tricked by Leah’s father, just as he had tricked his own father into receiving his brother’s birth rite.

1. It appears that you disagree that there should have been any “mark” placed upon anyone which could possibly lead to a situation of prejudice, thus you would be disagreeing with the following action:

Genesis 4:15 And the Lord said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the Lord set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

1. For the record, as far as the woman of Canaan, it was her daughter whom she wanted the Savior to heal, and He said “be it unto thee even as thou wilt” which means that her faith led to the healing of her daughter. So yes, the Savior did acknowledge her great faith, and He acknowledged that her faith led to the healing of her daughter.

You are correct. My wording was less than clear, however my point remains.

 

[ParkerD]

Say what? Sorry, you lost me. I don’t disagree with anything Paul said. Abraham was punished for his extramarital affair if that is the situation to which you are referring.

Jacob was tricked by Leah’s father, just as he had tricked his own father into receiving his brother’s birth rite.



You are correct. My wording was less than clear, however my point remains.

SteveVH,

I have no desire to help clarify the Bible for you in these matters, but I’m going to give the benefit of the doubt in that I assume you were expressing your own private opinions.

Be that as it may, I wish you peace and good health, and good bye. I disagree with your points of view on practically every subject we have conversed about, let alone the Biblical accounts in Genesis that are plainly translated–perhaps not so clear for some. Bye.

 

[SteveVH]

SteveVH,

I have no desire to help clarify the Bible for you in these matters, but I’m going to give the benefit of the doubt in that I assume you were expressing your own private opinions.

Be that as it may, I wish you peace and good health, and good bye. I disagree with your points of view on practically every subject we have conversed about, let alone the Biblical accounts in Genesis that are plainly translated–perhaps not so clear for some. Bye.

Well I have not asked for your clarification of the Bible, Parker, nor do I want or need it. We began wih a very simple premise; that truth cannot conflict with truth; that the Holy Spirit does not give one truth to one person and a conflicting truth to another. You will not deal with that logic head on. But I agree, enough is enough.

 

[ParkerD]

Thanks for your response.

The image of the woman fleeing into the desert is what happens when faithful people are under persecution. The world around them is as a desert. The woman symbolizes the Church and the wings of the eagle represent contemplation of the Word of God for sustenance – no Eucharist.

KathleenGee,
At least we agree that the woman symbolizes the church. It’s interesting that you think the wings of the eagle represent contemplation of the Word of God–that helps her “fly into the wilderness”? I disagree with your meaning.

The devil vomits a river to block the woman…that is Satan fighting Mary, the woman who has the seed of Christ, and crushes the head of Satan through her heel – the little ones, powerless and unseen in this world, who pray with her, and live purity of faith in Christ with her companionship.

I liked the first symbolism you came up with for the woman much better, in that it was true, whereas this is completely “catholic” and has no scriptural basis.

There is the symbol of how many days, that also equal up to 3.5 years, that is also stated during the time of persecution.

It seems pretty clear that Revelation 12:6 and Revelation 12:14 relate to each other, but I think the word “days” should have been rendered “years” in translation, and that 12:14 makes that clear in that “a time, and times, and half a time” is greater than 3.5 years–especially since the rest of the vision of John is about a much greater period of time and about the end times.

Again, I hope you are not pointing to the Catholic Church as the anti-Christ…

.

No, I’m not. Anyone who teaches against repentance, forgiveness, brotherly love, personal free will and choice, and coming unto Christ and being sanctified through His grace and through repentance, is anti-Christ as far as I’m concerned, but that would be individuals–not institutions.

'Wishing you peace and happiness.

 

[ParkerD]

…Your observation that the Holy Spirit does not prompt if a person doesn’t ask, specifically, assumes then that we are not asking. …

SteveVH,

(You have stated as much in other threads–that you weren’t asking.)

A person doing that kind of asking would need to have prepared themselves through sincerity of heart, sincerity of keeping all the commandments in their personal life, and through sincere study of the Bible without all the preconceived teachings that are non-Biblical and come from traditions, such as the often-expressed belief that to even pray about such a work as the Book of Mormon is to have gone out on a limb. (That means such a prayer “on a dare” would be completely without faith, and would of course not be answered by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit does not “force” faith onto people, period.)

So this was in response to your latest comment. Bye again.