LDS View of the Great Apostasy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fatboys
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How do you know that it is correct? Are you saying that history is what makes a belief true?

How did Peter know it was true?
Peter knew it was true, cause he was with Christ. irrelevant to the point. My point, is that there is nothing documented in early church history that lays any claims by the Mormon “church”. There are no recorded temples built to do what you do in them. There are no “Other testaments” floating around. The primitive christian church (or the ECFs for that matter) make no reference to giving 12 year old boys the priesthood of Aaron, or 18 year olds the priesthood of Melchizedek. There are no records of “eternal marriages” performed, oddly, no records of baptisms for the dead, even though your “church” tries so hard to make a verse in the New Testament back your claim. There is nothing written that talks about a Pantheon of gods, there is no record of “eternal progression”. The list could go on Ad nauseam. Before you sluff off what I’ve written here with your “Yeah Buts” consider: Mormons claim that God’s house is a house of Order. If yours is a true restoration, then said records would exist, because who ever the “prophet” leading the primitive church would have commanded the church to keep records.
 
People I am spending way to much time trying to answer your posts. It is going to be hard to not respond to all I can but I have tried to be as pleasant as possible in answering each and everyone, I do not seem to have the words to explain it well enough because I get the same questions over and over again. Im sorry. I will answer on a limited basis. I have learned much here, and I hope you have from me.
 
Here’s what I found out about my last post;

Christians believe that Jesus is the Messiah spoken of as “a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek” (Ps. 110:4), and so Jesus plays the role of High Priest once and for all. Jesus is considered a priest in the order of Melchizedek because, like Melchizedek, Jesus was not a Kohen, and thus would not qualify for the Kohanic priesthood under Torah Laws[2]).

Melchizedek is referred to again in Hebrews 5:6-10; Hebrews 6:20; Hebrews 7:1-21: “Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek”; and Hebrews 8:1.

And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people according to the law, that is, of their brethren, though they come out of the loins of Abraham: But he whose descent is not counted from them received tithes of Abraham, and blessed him that had the promises" (Hebrews 7:5-6).

If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron? For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law" (Hebrews 7:11-12).

The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the New Testament discussed this subject considerably, listing the following reasons for why the priesthood of Melchizedek is superior to the Aaronic priesthood:
1.Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek; later, the Levites would receive tithes from their countrymen. Since Aaron was in Abraham’s loins then, it was as if the Aaronic priesthood were paying tithes to Melchizedek. (Heb. 7:4-10)
2.The one who blesses is always greater than the one being blessed. Thus, Melchizedek was greater than Abraham. As Levi was yet in the loins of Abraham, it follows that Melchizedek is greater than Levi. (Heb. 7:7-10)
3.If the priesthood of Aaron were effective, God would not have called a new priest in a different order in Psalm 110. (Heb. 7:11)
4.The basis of the Aaronic priesthood was ancestry; the basis of the priesthood of Melchizedek is everlasting life. That is, there is no interruption due to a priest’s death. (Heb. 7:8,15-16,23-25)
5.Christ, being sinless, does not need a sacrifice for his own sins. (Heb. 7:26-27)
6.The priesthood of Melchizedek is more effective because it required a single sacrifice once and for all (Jesus), while the Levitical priesthood made endless sacrifices. (Heb. 7:27)
7.The Aaronic priests serve (or, rather, served) in an earthly copy and shadow of the heavenly Temple, which Jesus serves in. (Heb. 8:5)

The epistle goes on to say that the covenant of Jesus is superior to the covenant the Levitical priesthood is under. Some Christians hold that Melchizedek was a type of Christ, and some other Christians hold that Melchizedek indeed was Christ. Reasons provided include that Melchizedek’s name means “king of righteousness” according to the author of Hebrews, and that being king of Salem makes Melchizedek the “king of peace.” Heb. 7:3 states, “Without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life, like the Son of God he (Melchizedek) remains a priest forever.” Melchizedek gave Abraham bread and wine, which Christians consider symbols of the body and blood of Jesus Christ, the sacrifice to confirm a covenant.
 
I thought that priesthood was for Jesus Christ only, and only Him. That He never passed that on to anyone. Anyone know anything about this?
Oh, I agree. Hebrews 7 makes that distinction, as you pointed out.
 
Again, this is like the teapot calling the kettle black. Your own religion is full of mysteries and unanswered questions. You can not place the same value we have today and try to force it onto what they believed then. Catholic missionaries forced those to accept their teachings during exploration of the world and islands of the sea. This would be unacceptable in our day.
Fat,

God is a mystery, Paul says that there are mysteries, the Catechism is online right here for your review and it talks about mysteries…

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

most Church documents and Papal encyclicals can be read online as well…

papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/index.htm

I don’t recall seeing many questions that you have asked that remain unanswered. Were you there when Catholic missionaries forced anyone to do anything? Remmember, you yourself cannot trust history, so how is it you came to believe this?
 
Then why were so many factions of Christianity that existed during the third century?
It doesn’t matter how many factions there were (and are)–only one has survived the rise and fall of the rest, and it isn’t the LDS. (Spoiler: look at your address bar.)
 
What do Mormons hope to accomplish on this board? When I first joined, it was because I wanted to become a Catholic. But, since I found that it’s not for me, I have stayed, because the good Catholics here challenge what I believe, so that I’m not taking my faith for granted. I’m not saying that Mormons aren’t welcome, they most certainly are, but, methinks there may be some kind of quiet proselytizing.
 
So Encyclopedia Britannica and every history teacher from 1492 to the present is wrong on the point that Columbus was Catholic?

Good grief.

I don’t know what to say.
Cat,

It would seem so, since there is no evidence of the Apostasy, someone is controlling the history of that event so that there is no trace of it. Sounds like a conspiracy.
 
Cat - LDS even believe the apostles were LDS…in all their teachings.
Pork,

So that means they believe that the Apostles wore the underwear, did the secret handshakes, and rode bicycles too???
 
Again, this is like the teapot calling the kettle black. Your own religion is full of mysteries and unanswered questions. You can not place the same value we have today and try to force it onto what they believed then. Catholic missionaries forced those to accept their teachings during exploration of the world and islands of the sea. This would be unacceptable in our day.
Look Fatboys, it has nothing to do with belief it has everything to do with Young claiming to speak for God, and Mormons like you following Young, all the while apologizing for him. Mormons like you accept institutional racism because you think your God wants you to. It ain’t no mystery pal. Mormon priesthood is a sham and so are your "prophets’.
 
So Encyclopedia Britannica and every history teacher from 1492 to the present is wrong on the point that Columbus was Catholic?

Good grief.

I don’t know what to say.
I think that Fatboys’ point is that since Columbus was Catholic, he was a missionary who forced the Catholic faith on the Caribbean natives.

*Force *is the word that he is emphasizing.
 
Yes…Mormons here are actively prosletyzing, or may I say, passively prosletyzing to the point of being unreasonable and undocumented in their references as well as their spins.

There was no factions in Christianity per se in the first 300 years. There were cultural and geographic jurisdictions, but the faith centered on the Eucharist and the Apostles Creed and the approved books of Scripture, as well as the episcopacy.

Parallel to Christianity were Gnostics, which Mormonism is as well, based on secret knowledge and made up fables because they could not accept the apostles and their witness, and the reality that life is difficult and full of sorrows.

And that the planet does not revolve around us and our way of looking at things.

Melchizedek had no parents and no beginning and end…vs the Levitical priesthood whose priesthood had to prove one’s genealogy as well as only being able to serve within a given age, between the ages of 30’s up to the 50’s.

Jesus Christ fulfilled not only the sacrificial meal of the Passover, the Levitical priesthood, but also that of the ancient High Priest who was allowed once a year to enter into the inner sanctuary of the Temple and bless it with sacrificial blood of animals.

When Christ rose from the dead and was glorified to enter into through the gate of heaven and into the inner sanctuary of the throne of heaven, He fulfilled the role of the high priest, to become the only High Priest because as St. Michael said, ‘Who is like unto God?’

However what the universal Christian presbyter/priest does as well as the bishops and pope stand in the place of Christ, just as Peter and the apostles were chosen by Christ to be the human foundation of the Church.

There are no documents of Mormonism or its beliefs surviving, just as there are no artifacts of some ancient civilization here among American Indians.

I truly believe from what I have gleaned over the years, in consideration of Joseph Smith and Crowley, and their mindset, is that they drew on the gnostic writings written about 400 AD to fabricate a new story to create their new religion, which focuses essentially on Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit. They are just like Adam and Eve because they also likewise refused to be drawn to the fruit of the Tree of Life that God pointed out to them that they could eat.

Jesus Christ is the one High Priest and the Church ministers are His representatives, and fulfilling the prophecy of Melchizedek as well as the ancient daily blood sacrifices of the ancient temple in Israel, the Mass is the summation of these sacrifices, and Jesus Christ is the one, holy Sacrifice that alone can atone for the sin of mankind.

And this is what we Catholics have believed and practiced since the beginning of the Church at Pentecost.

There was no apostasy. Apostasy means turning one’s back on God. To say there was no authentic Christianity in ancient times is simply a gross and deprecating insult, considering those people and the threats and persecutions given them.

How many Mormons have died for Christ?..or for Joseph Smith the prophet???

There is no other story.
 
To clarify on gnostic writings, I am having the impression that Joseph Smith and Crowley, et al, were aware of ancient Egyptian gnosticism around 400 AD, that created heresies among the teeming Christian population in Egypt. Joseph Smith talks about the Golden Plates, the secret papyrus roll that was later interpreted by scholars that was simply instructions in how to bury the dead…ironic, as well as Jesus being married, and gnosticism’s take on the nature of God and Christ’s parallel life to what we have understood Christ to be through the Apostles.

I can see why Christ chose 12 apostles and not one.

When Islam conquered the Christians, it was due to the weakening of Christian faith, due to losses by the bubonic plague as well as heresies infecting the Christian beliefs. So many gave up in face of the sword to become Muslim.
 
What do Mormons hope to accomplish on this board? When I first joined, it was because I wanted to become a Catholic. But, since I found that it’s not for me, I have stayed, because the good Catholics here challenge what I believe, so that I’m not taking my faith for granted. I’m not saying that Mormons aren’t welcome, they most certainly are, but, methinks there may be some kind of quiet proselytizing.
Bat,

You are correct…look here…Fatboy started this thread with this…
This is from my perspective and studies. I have not only studied from LDS sources but from Non LDS sources.
The gospel message was so good, and so strong that even though I believe that it had started to be distorted and truths had been lost or replace that it still brought people together
That means that the gospel was so good, the LDS gospel, that Fatboy believes he now has and that gospel is bringing people together and changing lives.

When Fatboy is asked for references…here…
Also, how do you know the apostles were killed off faster than they could be replaced? Please provide a reference.
Fatboy responds with this…
It does not differ at all really. Apostacy is when one strays from truth. Paul could see they were straying and wrote letters of correction. Even though he corrected many things, he could not correct all of them.
First off we know that when Judas killed himself, they replaced him. I will finish this later got go chase cows
Then note this…

Post 29 Janderich enters with, continues Post 38
Let me try and provide a few sources on Constantine. However, I give this from what I have reacently read as anyone may do.
Fatboy comes back at post 44 with no references…

Janderich then goes on to defend the Apostasy in post 78 with nonsense

We then see tandem post 87/88 Fatboy/Janderich….

Fatboy seems to be the instigator by experience… and Janderich the Apologist…

There was no Apostasy. LDS is a cult. Fatboy and Janderich are deluded and their proof is lacking of anything but delusion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top