Mormonism: Restoration of Ancient Christian Church?

[zaffiroborant]

Rebecca, curious here. Do you know how the word “diocese” came into being ? Does it come from some Latin word?

From the Wiktionary:

Etymology

From Old French diocese, from Latin dioecēsis (“district under a governor”), from Ancient Greek διοίκησις (dioikēsis, “internal administration”)

 

[Marie5890]

Thanks both of you.

 

[pablope]

Jeff Lindsay says this about this issue

-“Modern prophets and apostles are like the prophets and apostles of ancient times: they were called by God, ordained and authorized by God, given the power to teach inspired messages from Christ, and appointed to lead the Church of Christ.” But were ancient prophets ordained prophets?

)!

I think prophets were to teach and call the Israelites to repentance, to go back to the way of the Lord…and basically did as instructed by God.

John the Baptist is considered the last prophet…not more prophets after him as Jesus revealed all of God to the Apostles.

Leaders were either ordained/annointed.

Example is Joshua…in Numbers 27:

18 So the Lord said to Moses, “Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit of leadership,[a] and lay your hand on him. 19 Have him stand before Eleazar the priest and the entire assembly and commission him in their presence…22 Moses did as the Lord commanded him. He took Joshua and had him stand before Eleazar the priest and the whole assembly. 23 Then he laid his hands on him and commissioned him, as the Lord instructed through Moses.

1Sam 10:
1 Samuel took a vial of oil and poured it on his head, and kissed him; he said, “The Lord has anointed you ruler over his people Israel. You shall reign over the people of the Lord and you will save them from the hand of their enemies all around. Now this shall be the sign to you that the Lord has anointed you ruler[a] over his heritage:

1sam 16:

12 He sent and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and had beautiful eyes, and was handsome. The Lord said, “Rise and anoint him; for this is the one.” 13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the presence of his brothers; and the spirit of the Lord came mightily upon David from that day forward. Samuel then set out and went to Ramah.

 

[RebeccaJ]

This Jewish Encyclopedia article on prophets and prophecy explains the historical development of prophecy.

jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12389-prophets-and-prophecy

New Advent has a good article on prophecy in a Catholic context.

 

[Marie5890]

This Jewish Encyclopedia article on prophets and prophecy explains the historical development of prophecy.

jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/12389-prophets-and-prophecy

New Advent has a good article on prophecy in a Catholic context.

Very interesting article from the Jewish Encyclopedia. Thanks.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Very interesting article from the Jewish Encyclopedia. Thanks.

I thought so too. In the development of prophecy, we see it culminated and is perfected in Jesus Christ. While the Jewish Encyclopedia sites the written word (scripture) as the final and decisive stage of prophecy, we understand Jesus Christ to be this stage. He is the Word of God perfectly revealed.

I think it is important to underline we don’t mean in only what Jesus said, but in everything he did, taught, instituted, founded, commissioned and prophesied. So I still ask LDS members: What do you think Jesus left out? But my impression is that this question isn’t taken seriously enough to even think on it for more than 5 seconds.

 

[Marie5890]

I thought so too. In the development of prophecy, we see it culminated and is perfected in Jesus Christ. While the Jewish Encyclopedia sites the written word (scripture) as the final and decisive stage of prophecy, we understand Jesus Christ to be this stage. He is the Word of God perfectly revealed.

I think it is important to underline we don’t mean in only what Jesus said, but in everything he did, taught, instituted, founded, commissioned and prophesied. So I still ask LDS members: What do you think Jesus left out? But my impression is that this question isn’t taken seriously enough to even think on it for more than 5 seconds.

Very important,indeed.

I remember when I was going thru RCIA and the pastoral associate and I would talk about my LDS background and how that prism was impacting the view I taking to what I was learning about Catholicism.
She was still working on her doctorate and took the time to explore what I have been taught and exposed to.
The one comment that I remember even to this day about those discussions was how underdeveloped LDS doctrine was. She understood that, in part, it was such a new religion, but she would point out all kind of holes and ask me all kinds of questions that I simply couldn’t answer or have never crossed my mind. Things that never occurred to me, other than the weakness of the idea of a having to be “sealed” to be a family, and that temples were needed for those sealing.

She helped me take that sort of thought process of reasoning about “sealings” and apply it to other ideas as well.

She was a great help.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Very important,indeed.

I remember when I was going thru RCIA and the pastoral associate and I would talk about my LDS background and how that prism was impacting the view I taking to what I was learning about Catholicism.
She was still working on her doctorate and took the time to explore what I have been taught and exposed to.
The one comment that I remember even to this day about those discussions was how underdeveloped LDS doctrine was. She understood that, in part, it was such a new religion, but she would point out all kind of holes and ask me all kinds of questions that I simply couldn’t answer or have never crossed my mind. Things that never occurred to me, other than the weakness of the idea of a having to be “sealed” to be a family, and that temples were needed for those sealing.

She helped me take that sort of thought process of reasoning about “sealings” and apply it to other ideas as well.

She was a great help.

Yeah, it is where I see Mormon leaders and apologists as just throwing stuff out there to see what sticks.

 

[aspirant]

LDS believe that latter day revelation has been given that the Church would never again apostatize… If only such a promise was given the first time! Wait…

Clearly you see my problem.

John the Baptist is considered the last prophet…not more prophets after him as Jesus revealed all of God to the Apostles.

There is no more public revelation, you are right about that, but there are prophets. A whole Church full of them!
Acts:

Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them: “Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel: ‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy…’”

The Catholic Church teaches that all of us, laity included, have a share in Christ’s prophetic office:
Catechism of the Catholic Church:

the faithful, who by Baptism are incorporated into Christ and integrated into the People of God, are made sharers in their particular way in the priestly, prophetic, and kingly office of Christ, and have their own part to play in the mission of the whole Christian people in the Church and in the World.

(See especially #904-907)

The New Testament mentions particular prophets as well, as some members of the Church have been given a special charism:
Acts:

Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul, and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch… Now in these days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. And one of them named Agabus stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine over all the world (this took place in the days of Claudius). So the disciples determined, every one according to his ability, to send relief to the brothers living in Judea. And they did so, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul.

Acts:

Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brothers, with the following letter… they went down to Antioch, and having gathered the congregation together, they delivered the letter. And when they had read it, they rejoiced because of its encouragement. And Judas and Silas, who were themselves prophets, encouraged and strengthened the brothers with many words.

Romans:

as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads, with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.

When Mormon missionaries ask Catholics about prophets, our response should be that we’ve always had them.

 

[LivingWaters7]

I’ll be back in the thread tomorrow, I’m working a double today so don’t have as much time to provide thoughtful responses.

Also, I hope Tom comes back to respond!

 

[lynnettejane]

And even if there was such a thing; no human would qualify for the Melchizedek priesthood.

Genesis 14:18-20 A King-Priest Melchizedek appears and gives Abram bread and wine; then blesses Abram. A King-Priest who suddenly appears with no genealogy; no parents or children.

Psalm 110:4 King David speaks of a priest that will come in the same way that Melchizedek was a priest. A King-Priest bringing bread and wine. A priest directly from God and not from Aaron; the tribe of Levi.

Jeremiah 31:31-34 God will make a new covenant. It will be different from the old one: It will last forever, it will be written on the hearts of men not just stone tablets, and all people will know him.

Hebrews 7:1-3 Melchizedek appears without father, mother, or children, and was a priest always. Compared to the divine Christ, the Son of Man; who was born without father, mother, or children, and was a priest always.* There is no actual Melchizedek priesthood. Melchizedek is a High Priest and King who is the example of the Messiah. What Melchizedek is in portrayal, Christ is in fact: the unique priest of all mankind.*

Hebrews 7:4-10 Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek. The priests of Aaron were also sons of Abraham, so Melchizedek was a superior priesthood than the Levitical priesthood.

Hebrews 7:11-14 If the Levitical priesthood was good enough, there would be no need for another priest as prophesied by King David. A new priest means a change in the law.

Hebrews 7:15-19 Christ is the new High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek. He abolishes the Levitical priesthood and the law. They were abolished because the law did not bring man into close communication with God.

Hebrews 7:20-25 Through Christ there is a better covenant because he is the eternal high priest like Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7:26-28 There is no need to offer sacrifices daily like the Levitical priesthood. Christ offered himself one time for all people sins forever.

John 6:31-69 Jesus tells his disciples, he is the bread of life. The Jews doubt him and he repeats his claim. They doubt him again and he tells them that he is the bread of life and you must eat his flesh and drink his blood. Many of his disciples leave him. The Jews gave Jesus three chances to tell them he was talking in a figurative manor but did not.

Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinth 11:23-25 Jesus tells his Apostles to eat his body and drink his blood in remembrance and for the forgiveness of sin. The blood of the new and everlasting covenant that he will shed for us.

Hebrews 8:1-5 We have Jesus our high priest sitting in heaven. If he was on earth he would not be a priest of the order of Melchizedek; just Aaron. In heaven, he is still offering gifts and sacrifices according to the order of Melchizedek. The gifts of Levi are just a shadow of the heavenly gifts offered by Christ.

Hebrews 9:11-15 Christ is in heaven by the perfect sacrifice of his blood. And he is the mediator of the new covenant.

John 1:26 Jesus Christ is the Lamb of God. His sacrifice will take away the sin of the world.

Revelations 7:17 Christ is the High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek. He had no beginning and no end. Just as Melchizedek brought bread and wine, Christ is feeding his flock through his flesh and blood in the new covenant.*** This food we call Eucharist.***

Fantastic! Well put, succinct and clear as a bell:thumbsup:

 

[lynnettejane]

Look to be honest I haven’t read all the thread, I don’t reall know why there is a need to go into this great debate.
Mormonism stands or falls with JS. The BoM has NO evidence to back it up and it does not teach those doctrines that are specifically mormon.
The Book of Abraham, has been shown to be by many scholars, funerary texts papyri which is why they were buried with the mummies. They are the Book of the Dead and the Book of Breathings which were common funerary texts. They have NOTHING to do with Abraham. They cannot have been translated into the BoA , because they say nothing about him.
The BoM supposed to have been translated by JS from reformed Egyptian, but no plates to study…convenient. And the rediscovery of the papyri have proved to be an embarrassment ever since because they have shown JS to be a fraud.
If the quorum of the First Presidency hold the office or keys of a Seer, why don’t they translate the papyri that have been identified as the Book of Joseph, and why did they engage experts in Egyptology to study the papyri rather than using this restored gift of God to do it.
The whole thing is a sham, so it doesn’t matter how their church is arranged, it is founded on the falsehood of a false prophet, it is that simple.

 

[KathleenGee]

Catholic women are also priests, through Jesus Christ, by bringing His sanctity and life, through the reception of the Eucharist into daily life.

We are prophets, Christ, the fulfillment of all revelation and prophecy, when we extend His values and morality into the world around us.

We are His adopted daughters and friends, when we truly understand His teachings and His purpose to Him, and follow Him, subsequently, making us daughters of royal blood, Jesus King of Heaven and Earth.

So we as women share in Christ’s priesthood, His role as Prophet, and King.

What this further reflects about Christ is that He is so humble as God that He shares His divine life and roles with us, especially with the women faithful of the Church.

The Church consecrated priesthood’s function is to serve separate, as intercessors between us and God, and to maintain the altar, the sanctuary of God, and to teach His Word and intercede with us administrating the Sacraments.

 

[LivingWaters7]

They’ve certainly restored a part of the ancient playing field - the Arian heresy.
And incorporated some parts of other heresies pruned from the church in the 4th and 5th centuries.

Yes, the LDS beliefs on the relationship between the Father and the Son are a type of Arianism. I say “type” because if I remember correctly, Arians stated that the Son was created by the Father, and therefore did not exist at a certain time, until brought into existence by the Father. Mormons believe that we are all, including the Son, co-eternal with God the Father in some sense, as our core “intelligence” is uncreated. The Father “organized” us from pre-existing, eternal, matter.

The more I read about Gnosticism, the more I do find similarities with the LDS faith.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Yes, the LDS beliefs on the relationship between the Father and the Son are a type of Arianism. I say “type” because if I remember correctly, Arians stated that the Son was created by the Father, and therefore did not exist at a certain time, until brought into existence by the Father. Mormons believe that we are all, including the Son, co-eternal with God the Father in some sense, as our core “intelligence” is uncreated. The Father “organized” us from pre-existing, eternal, matter.

The more I read about Gnosticism, the more I do find similarities with the LDS faith.

Such as? Secret knowledge and adherents to the religion not answering a direct question?

 

[LivingWaters7]

Such as? Secret knowledge and adherents to the religion not answering a direct question?

For example:

-secret/esoteric knowledge
-plurality of deities/divine figures
-divine Feminine/God as Father and Mother
-absolute necessity of certain knowledge/experience to achieve salvation
-pre-existence

There are of course real differences between the two, however I do find many real similarities. It is also no wonder that LDS scholars and apologists frequently reference Gnostic texts and theologians in attempting to place various unique LDS beliefs and practices in the ancient world, which again points to the OP, that they aren’t able to point to a singular, cohesive ancient Church that they are restoring.

More info:

Joseph Smith: America’s Hermetic Prophet

Gnosticism Reformed

 

[KathleenGee]

The teachings of St. Irenaeus answers in truth to Gnosticism around 200 AD.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Clearly you see my problem.

There is no more public revelation, you are right about that, but there are prophets. A whole Church full of them!

The Catholic Church teaches that all of us, laity included, have a share in Christ’s prophetic office:
(See especially #904-907)

The New Testament mentions particular prophets as well, as some members of the Church have been given a special charism:

When Mormon missionaries ask Catholics about prophets, our response should be that we’ve always had them.

Thanks for your post.

I think that LDS would agree with the Catholic view that all, including the laity, have a share in Christ’s prophetic office, though they don’t really believe that it is resulting from baptism per se, but that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy (Rev 19:10), so all that have a testimony of Christ are in a sense “prophets”. What I think LDS see and claim about traditional Christianity is that traditional Christians believe that the “Heavens are closed”, that God no longer speaks (they cite the closing of the scriptural canon as evidence of this), and revelation ended anciently. It is clear that Catholics do not believe that the Heavens are closed or that God no longer speaks, and certainly believes that a specific subset of revelation, private revelation, continues to this day, and never ended. What did end was “public revelation”, or all that is needed to receive eternal life (correct me if I’m wrong). So yes, Catholics certainly believe that prophets have been in the Church since it was established anciently, and many profound revelations and visions have occurred throughout the history of the post-Apostolic Church.

 

[LivingWaters7]

Here are some quotes, starting in the 2nd century, that may help you discern that a very organized Church was present very early on:

*“The church of God that sojourns at Smyrna, to the church of God sojourning in Philomelium - and to all of the congregations of the holy and Catholic Church in every place.” (The Martyrdom of St. Polycarp)

“When at last he had finished his prayer, in which he remembered all who had met with him ant any time, both small and great, both those with and those without renown, and the whole Catholic Church throughout the world.” (The Martyrdom of Polycarp, 8:1, [A.D. 156]).

“And certainly the most admirable Polycarp was one of these [elect], in whose times among us he showed himself an apostolic and prophetic teacher and bishop of the Catholic Church in Smyrna.” (The Martyrdom of Polycarp, 16:2, [A.D. 156]).

“Our Lord Jesus Christ is the Savior of our souls, the Governor of our bodies, and the Shepherd of the Catholic Church throughout the world.” (The Martyrdom of Polycarp, [A.D. 156]).*

Clement of Alexandria:

“From what has been said, then, it seems clear to me that the true Church, that which is really ancient, is one; and in it are enrolled those who, in accord with a design, are just. . . . We say, therefore, that in substance, in concept, in origin and in eminence, the ancient and Catholic Church is alone, gathering as it does into the unity of the one faith which results from the familiar covenants, - or rather, from the one covenant in different times, by the will of the one God and through the one Lord, - those already chosen, those predestined by God who knew before the foundation of the world that they would be just.” (Stromaties 7:17:107:3 [A.D. 202]).

There are many more. Does this sound like a Church that was just started as these men wrote, or are they speaking of what they considered an already “ancient” Church?

Thanks for the quotes. I think you misunderstood me though. When I said, as quoted by you “There are books and articles with references to things like “the Ancient Church”, the “Early Christian Church”, etc., yet I don’t see such an organization existing.”, I was referring to LDS apologetic works that reference restoring “the Ancient Church” or “the Early Christian Church”, yet, I don’t see such an organization, a unified, cohesive Church, that has those unique LDS beliefs and practices that are being claimed to be restored. Instead, I see LDS authors pulling here a little, there a little, sometimes out of context from the understanding of the individual being quoted. I do agree with you that it is clear that Christ established a Church, and that ancient history does point to an organized Church.

For an example of what I’m talking about, see this article:

Mormonism in the Early Jewish Christian Milieu by Barry Bickmore. The intro to the article touches on the exact issue that I have with LDS apologetics, and to which I have yet to receive a coherent LDS response to (hoping Tom or any other LDS poster would respond):

"Roman Catholic apologist Patrick Madrid recently posed a challenging question for Latter-day Saints. That is, if Mormonism is essentially a “restoration” of primitive Christianity, where can we find historical evidence for some ancient Christian group that “was identical to the Mormon Church of today”? He goes on, “We have records of many controversies that raged in the early days of the ChurchÖ, and there just is no evidence-none at all-that Mormonism existed prior to the 1830s.”1 Whether Mr. Madrid is adequately informed about LDS claims and the state of the evidence concerning them, is beside the point. If Latter-day Saints want to make a rigorous historical case for our faith, we need to demonstrate at least some probability that a group of “Former-day Saints” really existed. What evidence for such a group should we expect to find, and what evidence is there? In this paper I attempt to answer these questions, at least in part, and show a high probability for the proposition that a group of “Former-day Saints” existed within the early Jewish Christian milieu."

The funny thing is, his paper doesn’t show a “group of ‘Former-day Saints’” at all, And I think he realizes that there is no actual evidence for this, as he can only show "a high probability.

Anyway, I’m definitely curious to see how LDS that employ these apologetics view this. I know that I used to reference material like this to show that Joseph Smith didn’t just make stuff up, but that unique LDS beliefs are found anciently.

 

[RebeccaJ]

For example:

-secret/esoteric knowledge
-plurality of deities/divine figures
-divine Feminine/God as Father and Mother
-absolute necessity of certain knowledge/experience to achieve salvation
-pre-existence

There are of course real differences between the two, however I do find many real similarities. It is also no wonder that LDS scholars and apologists frequently reference Gnostic texts and theologians in attempting to place various unique LDS beliefs and practices in the ancient world, which again points to the OP, that they aren’t able to point to a singular, cohesive ancient Church that they are restoring.

More info:

Joseph Smith: America’s Hermetic Prophet

Gnosticism Reformed

LW7, LDS apologists can take any ancient belief and tell you how Mormonism restored something from it. I don’t see that as evidence for anything.

Christian, Gnostic, Egyptian, Coptic, Mayan, Aztec, Jewish, etc.