MORMONS (LDS) what is this "great apostasy" that you claim to have happened?

[ParkerD]

No, Jesus’ birth near Jerusalem was prophesied in the Americas before Christ’s birth, but He visited the Americas after His resurrection.

Scriptural proof of this please?

JeanneH,
If your question meant scriptural proof from the Bible, then what I would say is that there were twelve tribes of Israel who were God’s covenant people as described throughout most of the Old Testament. There occurred a “scattering of Israel” or the dispersion of the tribes of Israel into most every part of the world. This was all part of God’s plan, and was prophesied many places in the Old Testament. Christ is the Savior for the whole world, of course, and would have had an interest in people throughout the world even though He lived in only one place and was resurrected there. He certainly had the ability to travel to other places on earth and visit other peoples, which would have made prefect sense since He would want to teach others of the covenant people who had been scattered. It seems to me to be almost a given that He would do that while on earth.

The LDS know that He did, and it is written about in the Book of Mormon, 3 Nephi 1 and chapters 11-26.

 

[dianaiad]

Why do Mormons need to prove their denomination is correct by proving another’s to be wrong?

Actually, we don’t. That’s what YOU guys do TO Mormons. The responses on this thread are direct answers to a direct question. We teach that there was an apostasy…but we don’t go on to start listing all the wrong stuff other religions believe and then go 'prove them wrong." We simply present what we believe to be correct; you know your beliefs better than we do, and you can do your own comparing.

don’t understand this way of thinking. If you believe you are right, why does what anyone else do or not do to your liking matter at all? Can’t you just stand on your position alone?

I like reading about the family aspects about Mormons, and they sound like really nice people. I just have a hard time with believers stating they are right because someone else is wrong. It shouldn’t be a basis for being correct IMHO.

No, we claim we are correct because we are correct; you aren’t going to find any pamphlets from us comparing Mormonism to the Baptists, for instance, or “cult” sections in Deseret bookstores talking about how awful and wrongheaded everybody else is.

In fact, your question is an odd one; it’s one I have reason to ask the anti’s all the time, but it’s simply not something that Mormons do.

But please, feel free to find any LDS publication entitled “Maze of Methodism” (the way “Maze of Mormonism” is published by the Baptists) or something akin to 'The Godmakers" addressing Catholicism, or an LDS website that is even remotely like CARM or Mormon Research or…

The thing is, reading your post made me go 'huh?" It’s certainly the first time I’ve ever seen such an accusation, I can tell you that one. You sure you have the right group?

 

[ParkerD]

I’m sorry if I sounded critical of Mormons, I assure you I am not trying to disparage your faith or beliefs and respect yours and the good things people of belief do and I stand with on many issues.

Thanks for replying, and perhaps I don’t fully understand this claim about the keys and the authority with them the way you do or for that matter the way catholics do.

But, I will share this with you from a skeptic’s view as I guess I did already:blush:

I’d be much more interested in reasons you believe what you do and why you do without having to do it by saying that basically the entire Jesus project if you forgive me for calling it that, failed utterly for any period of time. Because if for any period of time at all there was an utter and complete gap of believers then I can tell you right now, I would say that reflects on Jesus in a big big way. Especially that soon in the ball game.

I hope that is not blaspheme to say that, and I ask all believers to please know I am not of the mind that an utter and complete void of believers ever occured in the timeline. If I could find that out, I would not even waste my time being here at all. One reason chrisitan claims have strength is in its unbroken nature of belief in Jesus. Differing ideas are not the same thing as an utter denial for any time period in the person Jesus, if that makes sense?

I don’t see a lot of great claims about christian beliefs so far, but I am opening myself up to them.

One of the 4 things I see as excellent evidence on behalf of christians is belief in constancy from the time of christ to now.

I hope I was not offensive in expressing that, or disparaged either Mormons or Catholics or any other believer in God.

Please let me know if I was out of line, I wish not to be that way.

Strawberry Jam,
I can tell that you have thought very deeply about these things, and I tend to agree with the premise on the face of it that Christ would have wanted His church to stay on the earth to help as many people as possible and your belief in constancy and the need for constancy.

I guess I’ll just say that Christ can bring about the purposes He had in mind when He created the earth and placed people on it by many different means, including allowing many many different religions each of which satisfy certain segments of believers. The truths of the gospel of Christ are powerful in and of themselves, even if taught within different frameworks of beliefs or traditions.

The LDS belief is that there are several kingdoms of glory after this life, and each person who has lived will inherit the kind of glory they prepare themselves for by the kind of life they live, regardless of which religion they follow. It is not a make or break situation, and it is fluid rather than static. It has to do with making progress through making changes in life, feeling inner peace through letting go of the baggage of hurts and misunderstandings during the course of our lives, and giving our inner self to a power outside of ourselves (Christ and the Holy Spirit) to help us do that. The LDS are certainly not unique in that.

I guess I would hope that someone such as yourself can grab onto a faith tradition that does satisfy you and feel right, and then join that community of believers because there is strength in community. The New Testament is clear about that aspect of Christianity.

Thanks for having shared your insights and the kind way you expressed them.

 

[StrawberryJam]

]Actually, we don’t. That’s what YOU guys do TO Mormons.

What did I ever do to Mormons? I am agnostic, and I object to your caps, and your comments here.

The responses on this thread are direct answers to a direct question. We teach that there was an apostasy…but we don’t go on to start listing all the wrong stuff other religions believe and then go 'prove them wrong." We simply present what we believe to be correct; you know your beliefs better than we do, and you can do your own comparing.

I have no belief in God. I lack belief and faith in God. I wish I could believe and have faith.
I am here to learn about christian claims. So, yeah I am comparing what I think is a valid claim and a not so valid claim.
I also can’t stand someone stating they are correct about things with no reason for me to accept it other than their word.

No, we claim we are correct because we are correct;

you aren’t going to find any pamphlets from us comparing Mormonism to the Baptists, for instance, or “cult” sections in Deseret bookstores talking about how awful and wrongheaded everybody else is.

So, It would only be the catholics you disparage then? Sounds like I was right to chose catholics to learn from then.

In fact, your question is an odd one; it’s one I have reason to ask the anti’s all the time, but it’s simply not something that Mormons do.

I am not an anti-God, I am a trying to understand if there is a basis to the christian believer’s claims about the Christian God type. So what am I anti?

But please, feel free to find any LDS publication entitled “Maze of Methodism” (the way “Maze of Mormonism” is published by the Baptists) or something akin to 'The Godmakers" addressing Catholicism, or an LDS website that is even remotely like CARM or Mormon Research or…

What are these things you are talking about here?:hypno::blackeye:

I’m not aware of the code languge you are using with any of this stuff you mention!

The thing is, reading your post made me go 'huh?" It’s certainly the first time I’ve ever seen such an accusation, I can tell you that one. You sure you have the right group?

Um, so far yes I think I am just fine where I am now thanks!

 

[RebeccaJ]

Actually, we don’t. That’s what YOU guys do TO Mormons. The responses on this thread are direct answers to a direct question. We teach that there was an apostasy…but we don’t go on to start listing all the wrong stuff other religions believe and then go 'prove them wrong." We simply present what we believe to be correct; you know your beliefs better than we do, and you can do your own comparing.

I suppose you don’t read your own church material? Your elder Holland did exactly this at one of your general conferences, not all that long ago, with his preaching against the Trinity (GOD).

You can google lds.org for “false doctrine” and find an endless amount of comparison, that is in fact, working at “proving them wrong”.

It is the basis of your entire religion.

eNo, we claim we are correct because we are correct; you aren’t going to find any pamphlets from us comparing Mormonism to the Baptists, for instance, or “cult” sections in Deseret bookstores talking about how awful and wrongheaded everybody else is.

@Deseret Book

Or maybe, you would prefer to read your own scriptures?

“I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: ‘they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.’

 

[ParkerD]

What did I ever do to Mormons?
Um, so far yes I think I am just fine where I am now thanks!

Strawberry Jam,
I think your reply was what needed to be said. Sometimes comments made on these threads assume everyone has read every previous comment including those on other threads, and it becomes pretty tangled trying to communicate especially when feelings have been hurt in the past.

I hope you’ll still go back and read what I had to say, although I wouldn’t blame you if you walked away. All the best to you. Your kindness came across loud and clear to me.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Thanks for having shared your insights and the kind way you expressed them.

You as well Paul D, it was a pleasure discussing these things with you, and I will say you exhibit a great deal of things to think about and present another viewpoint worth considering.

Thank you

 

[zaffiroborant]

Skinny Jay,
The doctrinal changes that occurred are various and are evident. Mode of baptism, age of baptism, celibacy, being joint heirs with Christ, understanding the process of revelation and revealed knowledge, to name a few.

I don’t see these things being changed by anyone other than LDS.

 

[mjf001]

Skinny Jay,
I think I understand your position, and I guess if you believe that and also have the guidance of the Holy Spirit in your own life to the extent that you want, then the Catholic church has made exactly the doctrinal changes that you would have made if you had been on those councils, and it therefore satisfies your criteria for the truths you want to live by. For you and others, that means there was no apostasy, no falling away from the pure doctrine Christ taught, and I would say you’re well enough off with that. Catholicism is satisfactory for many, many wonderful people who have exactly what they want within those beliefs.

I will offer you the challenge I’ve offered other LDS here who’ve argued the apostasy angle. Surely, if there was an apostasy, there should be some objective data to back it up. So, show me a date, show me the unique LDS doctrines practiced in the Synagogues or early Christian churches, show me the apologists’ writings, arguing against the changes being made. Or show me some other object proof. If you can’t, all you’re doing is making the same assertion that all the other LDS who’ve commented on this subject have made.

 

[SkinnyJay]

Skinny Jay,
I think I understand your position, and I guess if you believe that and also have the guidance of the Holy Spirit in your own life to the extent that you want, then the Catholic church has made exactly the doctrinal changes that you would have made if you had been on those councils, and it therefore satisfies your criteria for the truths you want to live by. For you and others, that means there was no apostasy, no falling away from the pure doctrine Christ taught, and I would say you’re well enough off with that. Catholicism is satisfactory for many, many wonderful people who have exactly what they want within those beliefs.

This just proves something in my mind. It is about what feels right, what I want.

As long as I feel like I following the Holy Spirit then I am “well enough off”.

Do you understand how dangerous this is?

 

[Finrock]

Good evening StrawberryJam! I hope you are doing well today.

I know that your post quoted below was addressed to ParkerD, but I hope you don’t mind if I comment on some things you posted as well.

I’d be much more interested in reasons you believe what you do and why you do without having to do it by saying that basically the entire Jesus project if you forgive me for calling it that, failed utterly for any period of time. Because if for any period of time at all there was an utter and complete gap of believers then I can tell you right now, I would say that reflects on Jesus in a big big way. Especially that soon in the ball game.

Now, I can’t speak for every Mormon individual (obviously), but I can present to you what the Mormon Church teaches it’s members. Sometimes individual Mormons may present the message of the restoration as one of dichotomies (i.e., I’m right, you are wrong). If anyone were to present the Great Apostasy in a way where it means that “there was an utter and complete gap of believers”, then they would not be teaching the LDS point-of-view. Mormons believe that the apostasy resulted primarily from the loss of priesthood authority.

I hope to be able to express in a correct way how the Mormon church understands the apostasy. Let me quote from our former President of the Church, the late Gordon Hinckley:

“We say to the people, in effect, you bring with you all the good that you have, and then let us see if we can add to it.”

I wanted to quote this often repeated sentiment of President Hinckley because I think it entails the true spirit of how Mormons view (or should view) the Great Apostasy. “We speak of the Apostasy not as an attack on any church. We have no interest in tearing down or belittling any religious organization” (Wirthlin). Mormons believe that even during the apostasy, there were many good Christians who were valiant in their testimony to Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon illustrates several different instances where during the time of the apostasy, many people were led and inspired by God. A current Mormon apostle stated in a talk that, “…the [Ancient Christian] Church struggled for survival in the face of horrifying oppression. To their everlasting credit, Christianity did survive and was truly a prominent force by the end of the second century a.d. Many valiant Saints were instrumental in helping Christianity to endure” (Elder Ballard).

The Mormon idea of the apostasy is not one in which there was a complete loss of all truth or that there were no true believers or followers of Christ. However, even though we do not believe all truth was lost during the apostasy, Mormons do believe that as a result of the apostasy many “plain and precious truths” were lost.

So, in short when Mormons speak of the Apostasy, we are saying that after the death of the Apostles (who had the priesthood authority to direct God’s church) and due to the widespread nature of this falling away from the truth, God withdrew his priesthood authority from the earth. Without the direction of prophets and apostles, many doctrines underwent unauthorized changes or were lost. The message of the restoration then, is that this lost priesthood authority has now been restored along with a restoration of all truth. Although we do not claim to have a monopoly on truth, we do claim to have the fulness of the truth and also we claim to have the proper priesthood authority by which necessisary ordinances and sacraments can be performed.

Quite obviously, this Mormon understanding is vehemently rejected by Catholics and really most other mainstream Christian churches.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[Finrock]

Good evening dianaiad! I hope you are doing well.

Actually, we don’t. That’s what YOU guys do TO Mormons. The responses on this thread are direct answers to a direct question. We teach that there was an apostasy…but we don’t go on to start listing all the wrong stuff other religions believe and then go 'prove them wrong." We simply present what we believe to be correct; you know your beliefs better than we do, and you can do your own comparing.

No, we claim we are correct because we are correct; you aren’t going to find any pamphlets from us comparing Mormonism to the Baptists, for instance, or “cult” sections in Deseret bookstores talking about how awful and wrongheaded everybody else is.

In fact, your question is an odd one; it’s one I have reason to ask the anti’s all the time, but it’s simply not something that Mormons do.

But please, feel free to find any LDS publication entitled “Maze of Methodism” (the way “Maze of Mormonism” is published by the Baptists) or something akin to 'The Godmakers" addressing Catholicism, or an LDS website that is even remotely like CARM or Mormon Research or…

The thing is, reading your post made me go 'huh?" It’s certainly the first time I’ve ever seen such an accusation, I can tell you that one. You sure you have the right group?

I just wanted to point out that I think you’ve misunderstood StrawberryJams affiliation and intention. He/She is an agnostic.

Kind Regards,
Finrock

 

[MatthewCrossman]

Matthew,

No, Jesus’ birth near Jerusalem was prophesied in the Americas before Christ’s birth, but He visited the Americas after His resurrection.

It does take faith enough to read, ponder, and ask about the message of the Book of Mormon. These acts of faith are available to everyone, but even so you are OK with the religion you have.

Sorry Parker, my mistake as to the timing of Jesus’ arrival to the Americas in particular. uch: Please believe I did not seek to distort your beliefs.

However, my main point was though, the Mormon church clearly believes in ‘‘another gospel’’ that is unproven by both scripture and history. DNA analysis disproves the notion that native Americans were descendants of these lost Jewish tribes and there is no archaelogical evidence of any kind for Joseph Smith’s golden plates…nor for some of the animals, plants and technologies of pre-Columbus America as detailed in the BoM (elephants…steel…brass plates…iron…swords…chariots…cows and so on).

Further, the Bible’s ‘‘sons of God’’ and mention of us becoming heirs is hardly teaching you might get your own planet one day…or that God was a man who lived on another planet before becoming God.

 

[MatthewCrossman]

I will offer you the challenge I’ve offered other LDS here who’ve argued the apostasy angle. Surely, if there was an apostasy, there should be some objective data to back it up. So, show me a date, show me the unique LDS doctrines practiced in the Synagogues or early Christian churches, show me the apologists’ writings, arguing against the changes being made. Or show me some other object proof. If you can’t, all you’re doing is making the same assertion that all the other LDS who’ve commented on this subject have made.

 

[JeanneH]

.

The LDS know that He did, and it is written about in the Book of Mormon, 3 Nephi 1 and chapters 11-26.

The Book Of Mormon means nothing to me. As far as I am concerned it is a work of fiction by Mr. Smith. Do you have any other knowledge of this event other then the “wisdom” of the LDS congregation.?
I am not saying that Jesus didn’t do these things. He certainly could have but there is no “proof” that He did as there is proof in the gospels that He appeared in the midst apostles… I doubt that when the gospels were written the writers knew anything about the America’s.

 

[ParkerD]

.

The Book Of Mormon means nothing to me. As far as I am concerned it is a work of fiction by Mr. Smith. Do you have any other knowledge of this event other then the “wisdom” of the LDS congregation.?
I am not saying that Jesus didn’t do these things. He certainly could have but there is no “proof” that He did as there is proof in the gospels that He appeared in the midst apostles… I doubt that when the gospels were written the writers knew anything about the America’s.

Jeanne H,
It is the kind of knowledge Jesus spoke of to Peter in Matthew 15:16 and Paul wrote about in 1 Corinthians 2:10, 11 and 14. It also makes sense from Biblical sources and Biblical “wisdom” of the Old Testament and understanding what Christ’s mission was. There are oral traditions that corroborate Jesus’ visit to the Americas.

But I doubt that you would find the kind of “proof” that you seem to want.

 

[ParkerD]

Sorry Parker, my mistake as to the timing of Jesus’ arrival to the Americas in particular. uch: Please believe I did not seek to distort your beliefs.

However, my main point was though, the Mormon church clearly believes in ‘‘another gospel’’ that is unproven by both scripture and history. DNA analysis disproves the notion that native Americans were descendants of these lost Jewish tribes and there is no archaelogical evidence of any kind for Joseph Smith’s golden plates…nor for some of the animals, plants and technologies of pre-Columbus America as detailed in the BoM (elephants…steel…brass plates…iron…swords…chariots…cows and so on).

Further, the Bible’s ‘‘sons of God’’ and mention of us becoming heirs is hardly teaching you might get your own planet one day…or that God was a man who lived on another planet before becoming God.

Matthew,
I disagree about the meaning of the words “another gospel” if you think it means “another text of scripture”. I disagree about DNA analysis disproving anything related to the Book of Mormon.

As to creating or helping create worlds and helping to further the progress of spirits by bearing rule on a throne as Christ does, then even though that sounds more complicated than I can possibly imagine, I have to defer to what Christ and John taught and wrote, and admit that being a “ruler” and “sitting on a throne” gives a clear image of inheriting what Christ had already done by creating a world and by sitting on a throne bearing rule iwthout any coorcive rule ever but with perfect love and perfect understanding.

 

[ParkerD]

This just proves something in my mind. It is about what feels right, what I want.

As long as I feel like I following the Holy Spirit then I am “well enough off”.

Do you understand how dangerous this is?

Skinny Jay,
I understand how one could think it is dangerous, if one does not have common everyday experiences that corroborate what the witness and guidance of the Holy Ghost is and how those impact everyday life.

I am comfortable with the knowledge that twelve apostles were intended as safeguards of the doctrinal purity of the gospel Christ taught, and that the Holy Ghost was intended as the revealer of truth and confirmer of revealed knowledge.

 

[ParkerD]

I will offer you the challenge I’ve offered other LDS here who’ve argued the apostasy angle. Surely, if there was an apostasy, there should be some objective data to back it up. So, show me a date, show me the unique LDS doctrines practiced in the Synagogues or early Christian churches, show me the apologists’ writings, arguing against the changes being made. Or show me some other objective proof. If you can’t, all you’re doing is making the same assertion that all the other LDS who’ve commented on this subject have made.

MFJ,
I have read writings that show there were disagreements among the early “apologists.” Paul certainly writes in a way that shows there were disagreements when he was alive.

The biggest distinction of a practice within early Christianity versus practices today, is the strength of the witness from the Holy Ghost that enlivens the dialogue and the writings in a way that shows the same kind of assurance that Peter had when Christ told him his knowedge was revealed by His Father in Heaven, and when Paul wrote that his knowledge was brought to him by being “spiritually discerned”. (1 Corithians 2:14)

 

[MatthewCrossman]

Matthew,
I disagree about the meaning of the words “another gospel” if you think it means “another text of scripture”. I disagree about DNA analysis disproving anything related to the Book of Mormon.

As to creating or helping create worlds and helping to further the progress of spirits by bearing rule on a throne as Christ does, then even though that sounds more complicated than I can possibly imagine, I have to defer to what Christ and John taught and wrote, and admit that being a “ruler” and “sitting on a throne” gives a clear image of inheriting what Christ had already done by creating a world and by sitting on a throne bearing rule iwthout any coorcive rule ever but with perfect love and perfect understanding.

Hey Parker,

No, I don’t think it means ‘‘another text of scripture’’. I mean in the broader sense of the word, as I believe the Bible does also.

Whilst Mormonism uses Christian words and concepts there are some fundamental differences. Starting with the undeniable fact that the Jews have always believed in only one God, Jesus believed in only one God and all of mainstream Christianity, starting from the very time of the apostles, has believed in only one God.

As mentioned, the other major concern I have is that Mormonism has from the outset claimed that every other branch of Christianity was in apostasy (according to the Macquarie dictionary: in ‘‘total desertion of or departure from one’s religion, principles, party, cause’’). Mormonism in turn has lent on a new scripture, if you will, by way of proving this. This new scripture, as I also mentioned earlier, has no known historical basis or proof. The peoples and events described therein also have no known historical basis.

The Bible, on the other hand, and even sacred tradition have been supported time and time again by archaeological discoveries and their consistency has been proven.

Given Mormonism makes such a claim, that the church made a total desertion from its roots shortly after the time of the apostles, then the burden is on it to prove where this ‘apostasy’ occurred.

Why is it that the unique practices and beliefs of the Mormon church are found nowhere else in history, while those of mainstream Christianity indeed are…even in secular tomes?