Mormonism: Restoration of Ancient Christian Church?

[Stephen168]

Again, the reason I pointed to creation ex nihilo here is that Irenaeus is building on the perfection that is God because He is uncreated. I think section of Irenaeus I see him coming close to saying that we become uncreated.

Reason would tell us the once something is created it can not become uncreated.

We “receive a faculty of the Uncreated” through “eternal existence” “For we cast blame upon Him, because we have not been made gods from the beginning, but at first merely men, then at length gods.” I see powerful deification language here and I have quoted it in the past. I do see a lot of “creation ex nihilo.” But, I do not see a limit on our final state.

Joseph Smith:

He was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as JesusChrist Himself did; and I will show it from the Bible.

Besides the fact Smith never does shows it from the Bible, he clearly is not teaching what Irenaeus is teaching. Smith teaches a created god, while the ancient Christian Church teaches an uncreated God; a God who was never a man, but was always God. The ancient Christian Church taught that through Christ man might see God and live forever; like God lives forever. God always was, is, and shall be.

If anybody can find a place where and ECF before Athanasius limits the final state of deified man, I will be surprised and I will read. NOBODY EVER DOES.

The teachings of Irenaeus give us the final state of man. Now find an ECF that states that God the Father was once a man.

Joseph Smith’s teaching is a creation not a restoration.

 

[Stephen168]

Joseph’s Smith teachings on exaltation, polygamy, baptism of the dead, and melchizedek priesthood are inventions not restoration.
Brigham Young’s claim that apostles are required to lead the Church, Adam was god the father, and blood atonement are inventions not a restoration.

Christ’s presence in the Eucharist was taught by Christ, the Apostles and the Catholic Church for 2000 years. It is the the consistent sign of the Christ’s Church which is not a Mormon teaching.

Mormonism is an invention not a restoration.

 

[Stephen168]

Tom will never address the difficult issues and challenges presented. He ignores, deflects, and acts like he can’t understand your points

I think he knows that the Brighamite branch of Mormonism lacks reason, so he has invented his own Tomite branch which he brings out as a diversion to the teachings of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and Lorenzo Snow.

 

[Aramis]

Perry as an EO embraces a view of deification unavailable to the Catholic IMO (and generally in his opinion as I read him), but that is not the point of discussion.

Tom, you’re wrong about the explanation of Theosis being unavailable to Catholics. Probably out of ignorance about the existance of the Eastern Catholic Churches in Union with Rome. Theosis is one of several explanations of the deification process, and is fully embraced by Rome as valid.

I didn’t get a chance to respond to the comment that I think is most relevant to this thread (and I guess the one that is supposed “blow TOm’s position out of the water.”)

cont…

You look much the fool for your limp and desperate looking attempts, man. If all LDS apologists were as bad at it as you seem to be, there would be no LDS left.

 

[andrewstx]

Yes, but Theosis is very different from LDS deification which involves humans becoming godS.

Many Mormons try to say they are exactly the same. To give them the benefit of the doubt perhaps they are unfamiliar with the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox beleifs on Theosis?

 

[KathleenGee]

Hi Marie,

Thanks for info…>I knew they got together but no time to read the details. I just read something about the new archbishop to Portland, OR. Archbishop Sample says we should sing the Liturgy and not just sing songs.

This insight is most reflective of what is needed to reform our liturgies.

The Church must work again to make the reality apparent who all visit our worship, that Jesus Christ truly physically present on our altars and the reason behind our adoration and contemplation.

 

[gazelam]

While mowing the lawn one day two Mormons approached me and wanted to discuss with me about their church. I said sure, invited them over the week later and we sat outside.

1 - I said let’s get some ground rules agreed upon

My questions:
1 - do you agree the Bible is the word of God? The inspired word of God?
They agreed
2 - As a collolory to that question, do you agree the books within the Bible are also the word of God?
They agreed.

Ok then. I asked then when did this Great Apostasy of theirs take place?

They said the Great Apostasy took place as early as the death of Jesus to as late as the death of the last Apostle (John). So no later than say 100-150AD they said.

Then I asked them, how could they then preach to me from Satan’s Bible, the Apostate Bible?

what? That said.
well, I asked, the Bible as we know it today, the one you have on the table there, was collated together by the Catholic Church in the Council of Hippo Regus in 393AD and again confirmed in the Council of Carthage in 397AD etc…

Sooooo, according to you Mormons the Church was Apostate by this time and the Canon of Scripture must be of Satan.

They both looked at each other and were silent.

I think the debate is over you can leave now I said looooool.

Puh-lease…

By this logic the books of the New Testament were not divinely inspired from the time they were written until collated. They were clearly divinely inspired when originally authored.

By this logic any apostate religion only does the work of Old Scratch. (LDS regularly teach that other religions contain a subset of divine/revealed truths, and therefore some good works come from then. Collating the books of the New Testament would be an excellent example of these good works.) Total Apostasy would not be an LDS characterization of what happened to the early Church. Total Apostasy would mean teaching the complete opposite of each and every teach of Christ and the Apostles. The LDS position would be better characterized at a loss of priesthood authority and a loss of some original teachings. An example of a teaching never lost is “Thou shalt not steal.”

 

[TexanKnight]

Puh-lease…

By this logic the books of the New Testament were not divinely inspired from the time they were written until collated. They were clearly divinely inspired when originally authored.

By this logic any apostate religion only does the work of Old Scratch. (LDS regularly teach that other religions contain a subset of divine/revealed truths, and therefore some good works come from then. Collating the books of the New Testament would be an excellent example of these good works.) Total Apostasy would not be an LDS characterization of what happened to the early Church. Total Apostasy would mean teaching the complete opposite of each and every teach of Christ and the Apostles. The LDS position would be better characterized at a loss of priesthood authority and a loss of some original teachings. An example of a teaching never lost is “Thou shalt not steal.”

lol…so, you accepted a Bible edited by Martin Luther…an apostate from a Church that had no authority…

and you have the nerve to say “puh-lease”?

LOLOLOL…you amuse me.

 

[twopekinguys]

Puh-lease…

By this logic the books of the New Testament were not divinely inspired from the time they were written until collated. They were clearly divinely inspired when originally authored.

By this logic any apostate religion only does the work of Old Scratch. (LDS regularly teach that other religions contain a subset of divine/revealed truths, and therefore some good works come from then. Collating the books of the New Testament would be an excellent example of these good works.) Total Apostasy would not be an LDS characterization of what happened to the early Church. Total Apostasy would mean teaching the complete opposite of each and every teach of Christ and the Apostles. The LDS position would be better characterized at a loss of priesthood authority and a loss of some original teachings. An example of a teaching never lost is “Thou shalt not steal.”

The mormon church claimed for years that there was a “total apostasy”.

Since “total” could not be proven, they have gone with only a taking away, or a partial apostasy.

Unless Jesus lied to his people, there has not been, cannot been, will not be a “Total apostasy”.

Tom tried to offer a different definition of the word “total”, but unfortunately that was as flat as a balloon that spun around the room.

Total means complete. There has been no total apostasy. Mormonism stands or fails on that definition. Without a “total” apostasy, there was no reason for a restoration. Even with a partial restoration. Unfortunately for mormons that hasn’t happened either.

Care to take a shot at when this great apostasy supposedly took place? Your own leadership hasn’t been able to do it.

Just sayin…

ETA: Tom’s definition for the word “total” was very illogical. God took away the “authority”, but let the Catholic Church keep everything else. Yep, makes sense to me.

Even if you go with that, it would mean Jesus lied by leaving his church, and taking the “authority” with him. Let’s read Matthew 28:20 shall we?

"Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

How about Psalm 55:22

“Cast your burden on the Lord, and he will sustain you; he will never permit the righteous to be moved.”

Want me to keep going?

I can’t stop myself. Look at Deuteronomy 12:32 where we are commanded not to add or take away from the Bible. Another “testament” would be adding to scripture, and in and of itself would therefore be blasphemous.

Ok, I’m done. (for now )

 

[kimg901]

lol…so, you accepted a Bible edited by Martin Luther…an apostate from a Church that had no authority…

and you have the nerve to say “puh-lease”?

LOLOLOL…you amuse me.

TK got to it before I could say something. But his statement is just. So gargamel, your church is apostate too? Thats why your church is false. There is contradiction in all your teachings. the right hand doesnt know what the left is doing.You need to think before you type.

 

[kimg901]

The mormon church claimed for years that there was a “total apostasy”.

Since “total” could not be proven, they have gone with only a taking away, or a partial apostasy.

Unless Jesus lied to his people, there has not been, cannot been, will not be a “Total apostasy”.

Tom tried to offer a different definition of the word “total”, but unfortunately that was as flat as a balloon that spun around the room.

Total means complete. There has been no total apostasy. Mormonism stands or fails on that definition. Without a “total” apostasy, there was no reason for a restoration. Even with a partial restoration. Unfortunately for mormons that hasn’t happened either.

Care to take a shot at when this great apostasy supposedly took place? Your own leadership hasn’t been able to do it.

Just sayin…

ETA: Tom’s definition for the word “total” was very illogical. God took away the “authority”, but let the Catholic Church keep everything else. Yep, makes sense to me.

Even if you go with that, it would mean Jesus lied by leaving his church, and taking the “authority” with him. Let’s read Matthew 28:20 shall we?

"Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

How about Psalm 55:22

“Cast your burden on the Lord, and he will sustain you; he will never permit the righteous to be moved.”

Want me to keep going?

I can’t stop myself. Look at Deuteronomy 12:32 where we are commanded not to add or take away from the Bible. Another “testament” would be adding to scripture, and in and of itself would therefore be blasphemous.

Ok, I’m done. (for now )

Oh, oh, my turn. Revelation Chp.22 Verses 18-19.

 

[gazelam]

The mormon church claimed for years that there was a “total apostasy”.

Since “total” could not be proven, they have gone with only a taking away, or a partial apostasy.

I just googled and found a couple of “total” and “universal” apostasy quotes of LDS leaders. My contention would be that those adjectives are used to mean that the condition of the loss of authority and some teachings happened everywhere. Again as I stated before the commandment to not steal was never lost. I’m an LDS lifer and have always heard taught that all religions have some truth.

Unless Jesus lied to his people, there has not been, cannot been, will not be a “Total apostasy”.

ETA: Tom’s definition for the word “total” was very illogical. God took away the “authority”, but let the Catholic Church keep everything else. Yep, makes sense to me.

Even if you go with that, it would mean Jesus lied by leaving his church, and taking the “authority” with him. Let’s read Matthew 28:20 shall we?

"Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

This FAIR LDS web site fairlds.org/authors/tvedtnes-john/rejection-of-priesthood-leaders-as-a-cause-of-the-great-apostasy at footnote 4 makes the point that the greek for the word “age” that you use (or the word “world” in KJV) refers to a specific time period so Christ’s words could mean the current time period (whatever that is) while still allowing for apostasy later (per many references in Acts and the epistles).

Tom tried to offer a different definition of the word “total”, but unfortunately that was as flat as a balloon that spun around the room.

Total means complete. There has been no total apostasy. Mormonism stands or fails on that definition. Without a “total” apostasy, there was no reason for a restoration. Even with a partial restoration. Unfortunately for mormons that hasn’t happened either.

Care to take a shot at when this great apostasy supposedly took place? Your own leadership hasn’t been able to do it.

Being the simple man that I am, any understanding I have of the Apostasy probably won’t sway you. But I did run across a tidbit that was insightful to me anyways that’s found here maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/insights/?vol=21&num=10&id=220. Apparently Clement of Alexandria played a role in adopting Greek Philosophy into Christianity. Clement of Alexandria said “the prophets and apostles knew not the arts by which the exercises of philosophy are exhibited”, and explained that the prophets and disciples were of the Spirit and knew these things infallibly by faith, but this is not possible for others. So, here’s an ECF explaining that at his time it was not possible to learn the way the Apostles did and so Greek Philosophy is necessary to fill the void. Not being able to learn as the Apostles did smells of apostasy to me.

How about Psalm 55:22

“Cast your burden on the Lord, and he will sustain you; he will never permit the righteous to be moved.”

Want me to keep going?

I can’t stop myself. Look at Deuteronomy 12:32 where we are commanded not to add or take away from the Bible. Another “testament” would be adding to scripture, and in and of itself would therefore be blasphemous.

Ok, I’m done. (for now )

Here are a few apostasy verses of my own. Take care and have a great CAF day!!

Isaiah 24:5 (KJV) The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

How about changing baptism to not be by immersion and adding chrysm to Confirmation? Chrysm is not mentioned in the New Testament.

Isaiah 60:2 (KJV) For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.

When was this darkness? At the time a Christ He told the Samaritan woman at the well that Salvation was of the Jews. So even then the Jews in their corrupt state still had authority from God.

Amos 8:11, 12 (KJV) Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:
And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.

When was the famine of the word of God Amos referred to?

 

[twopekinguys]

I just googled and found a couple of “total” and “universal” apostasy quotes of LDS leaders. My contention would be that those adjectives are used to mean that the condition of the loss of authority and some teachings happened everywhere. Again as I stated before the commandment to not steal was never lost. I’m an LDS lifer and have always heard taught that all religions have some truth.

This FAIR LDS web site fairlds.org/authors/tvedtnes-john/rejection-of-priesthood-leaders-as-a-cause-of-the-great-apostasy at footnote 4 makes the point that the greek for the word “age” that you use (or the word “world” in KJV) refers to a specific time period so Christ’s words could mean the current time period (whatever that is) while still allowing for apostasy later (per many references in Acts and the epistles).

Being the simple man that I am, any understanding I have of the Apostasy probably won’t sway you. But I did run across a tidbit that was insightful to me anyways that’s found here maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/insights/?vol=21&num=10&id=220. Apparently Clement of Alexandria played a role in adopting Greek Philosophy into Christianity. Clement of Alexandria said “the prophets and apostles knew not the arts by which the exercises of philosophy are exhibited”, and explained that the prophets and disciples were of the Spirit and knew these things infallibly by faith, but this is not possible for others. So, here’s an ECF explaining that at his time it was not possible to learn the way the Apostles did and so Greek Philosophy is necessary to fill the void. Not being able to learn as the Apostles did smells of apostasy to me.

Here are a few apostasy verses of my own. Take care and have a great CAF day!!

Isaiah 24:5 (KJV) The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

How about changing baptism to not be by immersion and adding chrysm to Confirmation? Chrysm is not mentioned in the New Testament.

Isaiah 60:2 (KJV) For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.

When was this darkness? At the time a Christ He told the Samaritan woman at the well that Salvation was of the Jews. So even then the Jews in their corrupt state still had authority from God.

Amos 8:11, 12 (KJV) Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:
And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.

When was the famine of the word of God Amos referred to?

Sorry , but your maxwell institute link,and fair link are somewhat a biased source don’t you think? Not even worth considering in this conversation now is it. Even those from your leaders. Rather biased don’t you think? Primarily because they are using non standard definitions for common words. It is all over in mormonism. Like the definition of “total”.

Sorry, you’re not making any ground on that, but good try!!

Prove to me where baptism was by immersion. Also, chrism may not be mentioned, but anointing and perfumed oils are. So what’s your point.

I would like to point you to a portion of the Gospel reading at Mass today.

John 20:19-31, although, the pertinent verse can be found at #30.

“30 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.”

You will notice that the word Bible is only on the main page. It isn’t found anywhere else in the Bible.

Just because something is not mentioned explicitly in the Bible doesn’t mean it is wrong. If that were the case, computers and discussion forums aren’t mentioned in the Bible, so you might want to turn yours off.

Your Isaiah verse supports the Catholic position quite well. Good job.

I would say your Amos quote describes mormon missionaries more than anything. Running around the world seeking, but not finding. If I remember correctly the largest number of those leaving mormonism is returned missionaries.

It would also explain the lack of retention of converts. Especially in Latin and South America. Remember, your leadership overstated the membership numbers in Brazil by over 1 million.

 

[Stephen168]

How about changing baptism to not be by immersion and adding chrysm to Confirmation? Chrysm is not mentioned in the New Testament.

yes, Joseph Smith changed the teaching on baptism from what the ancient Christian Church taught also. Also see post #202.

Mormonism is an invention not a restoration.

 

[JHow]

Isaiah 60:2 (KJV) For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee.

When was this darkness?

The darkness was at noon.

“And when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land[a] until the ninth hour.”

 

[LivingWaters7]

Being the simple man that I am, any understanding I have of the Apostasy probably won’t sway you. But I did run across a tidbit that was insightful to me anyways that’s found here maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/insights/?vol=21&num=10&id=220. Apparently Clement of Alexandria played a role in adopting Greek Philosophy into Christianity. Clement of Alexandria said “the prophets and apostles knew not the arts by which the exercises of philosophy are exhibited”, and explained that the prophets and disciples were of the Spirit and knew these things infallibly by faith, but this is not possible for others. So, here’s an ECF explaining that at his time it was not possible to learn the way the Apostles did and so Greek Philosophy is necessary to fill the void. Not being able to learn as the Apostles did smells of apostasy to me.

Where did Clement of Alexandria teach that knowing things of the Spirit, infallibly by faith, was possible for the prophets and apostles, but not possible for others? Do you have a reference in his writings? The quote you gave above, in context, doesn’t say that. The relevant context can be found here, in Chapter 9.

In fact, what Clement is saying sounds somewhat similar to what many LDS say: although the fulness of the Truth can only be found in the true Church of Jesus Christ, pieces of the truth can be found elsewhere. You can bring those truths that you have with you when you convert. Etc etc. Indeed, as one striking example, there is a clear relationship between Freemasonry and the Endowment, with some LDS apologists and scholars saying that Joseph could have borrowed truths or used “tools” from Freemasonry as a vehicle to explain the Divinely revealed truths of the Endowment. I find Clement’s discussions on Greek philosophy to be quite similar (also similar to the belief that the Reformation fathers were inspired in the sense of paving the way for the Restoration, and other similar thoughts). Indeed, Clement says as much in Chapter 13, which has the following title given to it: " All Sects of Philosophy Contain a Germ of Truth’!

It is also a gross misuse of Clement, who repeatedly talked about the “mysteries”, about knowing God through faith. etc. Clement, in his Exhortation to the Heathen, essentially asked the Greeks to give up the mystery religions that they followed, and to participate in the true mysteries of God. Knowing by the Spirit, participating in the life of God through sacramental mysteries, etc., were very important to Clement, and he wasn’t claiming that the inspiration of the Spirit that the apostles and prophets had was lost and unavailable to others, so there was no void for Greek philosophy to fill. That wasn’t how he was using Greek philosophy.

Here are a few apostasy verses of my own. Take care and have a great CAF day!!

Isaiah 24:5 (KJV) The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

How about changing baptism to not be by immersion and adding chrysm to Confirmation? Chrysm is not mentioned in the New Testament.

Please remember that neither Catholics nor LDS are sola scriptura. Just because something isn’t mentioned in the New Testament doesn’t mean that it wasn’t done or it isn’t true. Nowhere in the Bible does it claim that everything must be written in the Bible, or to only rely on the Bible, or any other variation of sola scriptura. This is a false dilemma.

Further, it is obvious that the LDS faith has also had “changed the ordinance”. The Endowment has gone through various iterations and changes in form. The Initiatory, the Washing and Anointing, is not done as it used to be done (a change that clearly parallels that of baptism that you are referring to). Also, Catholics practice both immersion and pouring for baptism. They didn’t change it to “not be by immersion”. The Didache, an early Christian document dating from anywhere from 60AD-100AD, shows that both were methods employed by that time.

Anyway, I think what you would say, and what any LDS would say for that matter, is that the changes in the form of various ordinances, such as in the Endowment or the Washing and Anointing, were inspired changes, and they don’t change the core of the ordinances. So, I fail to see why Catholics wouldn’t be able to use the same argument in their case as well.

Amos 8:11, 12 (KJV) Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord:
And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.

When was the famine of the word of God Amos referred to?

Please read the entire context of Amos chapter 8. Amos isn’t talking about post-New Testament at all! I find this article to be an excellent explanation of the surrounding context of the verse, as well as quoting LDS authors that detail why using this as a proof-text for the Great Apostasy is incorrect.

 

[KathleenGee]

Our restoration is in Jesus Christ alone, through His Word and Sacrament. Each of us is given free will and those who endure to the end will be saved.

 

[gazelam]

lol…so, you accepted a Bible edited by Martin Luther…an apostate from a Church that had no authority…

and you have the nerve to say “puh-lease”?

LOLOLOL…you amuse me.

Being a simple man, I’m utterly clueless to the point you’re making. I have zero understanding of Martin Luther’s contribution to the KJV. Please explain. Thanks in advance.

 

[TexanKnight]

Being a simple man, I’m utterly clueless to the point you’re making. I have zero understanding of Martin Luther’s contribution to the KJV. Please explain. Thanks in advance.

The original Bible had more books in it than the current KJV. Martin Luther did not like 7 of the books of the OT and took them out. He also tried to take NT books out that he did not like. He edited the Bible with no authority.

Joe did not know that and just accepted the Bible most people used. A true prophet would have known that.

Additionally, the Textus Receptus is further proof Joe had no clue what he doing.

Anyway, my point is that you claim there was NO authority on the Earth, yet you accept the Bible organized by folks with no authority. Worse, you do not even use that Bible, but a Bible edited by a man who had even less authority.

He was a conman…nothing more.

 

[KathleenGee]

Gazelam, don’t you think, considering Mormonism’s basic tenant that the Catholic Church is an abomination because of its creed…we are the only ones who have a creed, not Islam or Buddhism - that you will get very comprised information as to what IS the Catholic Church and what it actually professes???

Martin Luther took it on himself, alone, to decide for himself a new form of Christianity, and wanted to get back to the Jewish texts…but he ended up in the Mizorant tradition that does not have the same belief in the forthcoming Messiah as did the apostles and those who became Jewish Christians at the beginning of Christianity.

Mormonism has its own sense of beginnings and history. Judeo Christianity has ours. There are two basic interpretations of Sacred Scripture – the Mizorant and the Septuagint.

The Apostles and St. Paul used the Septuagint interpretation, that foresaw the coming Messiah. The Mizorant is used by Jews who foresee a different form of Messiah. The Apocrypha was used by the Jewish people before Christ. In Wisdom and Proverbs, there are passages that show the universe was created by the Natural Law, that includes the use of reason with faith.

Early on, the Christian Fathers both drew on Greek philosophy for the standard of international employ of reason, particularly Aristotle. But likewise, the Church heavily criticized Greek philosophy for its flaws in reason. The fruit of this contention came to a head with St. Thomas Aquinas and his use of logic to prove the existence of God and His works.

The Catholic Church is the foundation of Western Civilization for its application of natural law, its work in science, the foundation of education for public schools and universities to serve its populations, the framework for modern law that is practiced today, the arts and music…all drawn from inspirations of the Books of Apocrypha. The Dark Ages were anything but that, the monasteries providing agricultural methods developed by them to serve the surrounding populations.

Germany and England both had nationalistic movements to fracture the union of faith in the Christian world, and Martin Luther took it on his own to remove the Apocrypha and the letter of St. James.

The work of compiling of Sacred Scripture was done by St. Jerome who knew Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and put Scripture into the books of the Bible, copying the words literally. This was done several hundred years after the death and resurrection of Christ, but the books were chosen and in use already by 100 AD.

Early Church Fathers worked in conjunction with the Church, and submitted their writings to the Church for approval, which was the work in communion of spirit of one heart and one mind in Christ through the Holy Spirit.

I would never leave the communion of Catholicism to follow an American who grew up in post colonial America 1800 years after the fact.

It is good you are here, and I personally welcome you in your dialogue, but yes, you really have to take a double look at the ideas Mormonism is teaching you about Catholicism because it is essentially and deliberately compromised. See it here all the time.

Thanks for your attention and God bless!