Mormons, when did the Apostacy occur?

[zerinus]

What you mean “we” kimosabe?

I just told you that many, if not most, if not ALL other Mormons DO put the 6 April date as the Lord’s birthday.

Now, if by “we” you mean Zerinus and his missionary partner in the next cube, then fine. But if you are making a claim for a Mormon-wide opinion, then it is obvious that you’re whistling in the dark. Again.

Yes, that date has been popularized in the Church, and when you talk to Church members they will speak of it as certian doctine. But when you are talking in precise theological terms, you want to be as acurate as possible. The truth of the mtter is that as far as I know, the First Presidency have not made an official statement to the effect that that it the correct interpretation of that verse; and whethere we like it or not, there is some ambiguity in the wording of it, therefore that popular interoretation is not absolutely certain.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Just a reminder, Zerinus. I don’t want you to get all flustered by this birthday of Jesus talk. I will repeat my question: Are there ANY OTHER MORMONS who would be able to answer the question as to the approximate date, within, say, a decade, of John’s ministry being withdrawn?

I accept what you say that you are in guesswork mode on this. But it seems to me that there might be a more authoritative source for this information than you. Maybe you could direct us over to it.

I don’t know of any. You can take out an ad in a Utah newspaper to see if any Mormons will come up with a closer date than the one I have given.

zerinus

 

[PaulDupre]

So we have an approximate DECADE when John died. But you Mormons think he’s still walking around out there somewhere.

They think Cain is still walking around, too. One popular LDS notion is that Bigfoot is Cain wandering the earth.

In The Miracle of Forgiveness by Mormon prophet Spencer W. Kimball**, he relates the story (from the journal of an early Mormon) about how this man and a friend were riding on a horse, and an 8 ft tall hairy naked man ran up beside them, running as fast as the horse. Later, Joseph Smith told them they had seen Cain, who still wanders the earth.

Once, in a Fast-and Testimony meeting in my ward in Massachusetts, a man stood up and testified that, while on a camping trip, he had seen Bigfoot/Cain and “could feel his murderous evil”. No one else stood up to bear testimony after that.

I would like to see a movie about Cain and the apostle John meeting and having to fight to the death (there can be only one!).

Google “Bigfoot Cain Mormon” and you’ll find out a lot about it.

God bless 'em,
Paul

** Everybody liked President Kimball, because he was really nice and looked like Yoda from Star Wars.

 

[Allweather]

I will give you an example. It would be difficult to find two historians who would agree to a precise date—month, year, day, hour, and second—when the Roman Empire fell. But all will agree that it fell, and will put the date of the fall somewhere in the fourth and fifth centuries.

476 a.d. in the west, and I think 1492 in the east. Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s what I remember from school.

The same is true of the Apostasy. I have given you a mush narrower range for the date of the Apostasy than the historians give for the fall of the Roman Empire.

See above.

I was being facetious. However, if it will help you to remember that, and not embarrass yourself in the future by asking that silly question again, you can ask them to pin it up. I have no objection.

Still waiting for that decade i.d. As soon as we get it, why, then we can go forward.

From where I am looking at it, the “crankiness” is coming from you. zerinus

Hmmm. Interesting.

 

[kellie]

The apostasy was complete when the divine authority was lost; and the authority was lost when the last Apostle died; or as in the case of John, when his ministry was withdrawn form the church, without instigating the perpetuation of that institution in the world.

I have repeated that many many times; but you always ask it again. Why? Are you deaf? Are you suffering from memory loss/dementia/Alzheimer’s disease? Would you like the admin to pin this post at the top, so that you won’t forget it again? Well, I don’t know if the admin would agree to it or not; but if you like you can ask them to pin this post at the top of the board, and title it in block capitals: “THE MORMON DATE OF APOSTASY” so that it will be the visible reminder to you and all concerned, and in the future you and others won’t need to ask that question again.

zrinus

That is like saying I was born when my mum popped me out.

It doesn’t give a date, it’s more like a reason or definition for “my birth”.

So if people ask me when I was born I should just say “when my mum popped me out”, rather than saying “june 16,1970”

So what is the rough time of the Apostasy?
We realise a definitive day of the week cannot be given but surely a century isn’t too hard to ascertain??

 

[zerinus]

Still waiting for that decade i.d. As soon as we get it, why, then we can go forward.

Answered here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1955249&postcount=271

Deaf, Dumb, and Blind!

zerinus

 

[JonathanKinsman]

We didn’t go and ask the Lord to tell us what His birthday is.

Why not, Zerinus?

You claim the Holy Spirit personally talks to you all the time about how evil we Christians are and how ‘restored’ the Mormon church and ‘scripture’ is: so why not ask Him when Jesus’ birthday occurred?

Do you think the date is the same as “The Great Apostacy”?

 

[kellie]

Answered here:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1955249&postcount=271

Deaf, Dumb, and Blind!

zerinus

zerinus:

I have no idea; but I would say the end of the first century is a good guess.

I don’t think we are after guesses about something so important.

 

[Harland]

1 The rise of the Church of Christ in these last days, being one thousand eight hundred and thirty years since the coming of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in the flesh, it being regularly organized and established agreeable to the laws of our country, by the will and commandments of God, in the fourth month, and on the sixth day of the month which is called April.[/INDENT]

As you can see, the language is ambiguous, and it is not clear that it is stating that that is the date of His birth. But it is generally interpreted in the Church that way.

The apostasy was complete when the divine authority was lost; and the authority was lost when the last Apostle died; or as in the case of John, when his ministry was withdrawn form the church, without instigating the perpetuation of that institution in the world.

I have repeated that many many times; but you always ask it again. Why? Are you deaf? Are you suffering from memory loss/dementia/Alzheimer’s disease? Would you like the admin to pin this post at the top, so that you won’t forget it again? Well, I don’t know if the admin would agree to it or not; but if you like you can ask them to pin this post at the top of the board, and title it in block capitals: “THE MORMON DATE OF APOSTASY” so that it will be the visible reminder to you and all concerned, and in the future you and others won’t need to ask that question again.

zrinus

Well, sense the Apostle John is still alive why don’t you just ask him when Jesus was born or when the apostasy happened? Or did I miss read the posts that claimed the Apostle John is still alive and has been seen? I would think over the last 2000 years he would have made some concerted effort to set things right, or is that the job of the CoJCoLDS? I would think something as important as the apostasy, if there was such a thing, would need to be corrected as soon as possible. Why would GOD wait some 1500 years before sending Luther, et al. to corrected the Church? Then when they couldn’t get it right why did He wait another 300 years or so before sending Joseph Smith and his golden pltes? And how do we know he got it right? My conclusion is, the CoJCoLDS can make claims of an apostasy all they want but without listing a decade, century or under which Pope they are just grasping at straws to justify their existence.

I hate it when people make claims, the world is round and floats in space when the Bible makes it clear the earth is flat. But that is another topic.

 

[zerinus]

476 a.d. in the west, and I think 1492 in the east. Someone correct me if I’m wrong,

According to the Wikipedia article:

The traditional date of the fall of the Roman Empire is September 4, 476 when Romulus Augustus, the de jure Emperor of the Western Roman Empire was deposed by Odoacer. Many historians question this date, noting that the Eastern Roman Empire continued until the Fall of Constantinople in 29 May 1453. Some other notable dates are the death of Theodosius I in 395, that last time the Roman Empire was unified, the crossing of the Rhine in 406 by Germanic tribes, after the withdrawal of the legions in order to defend Italy against Alaric I, and the death of Stilicho in 408, followed by the disintegration of the western legions. Many scholars maintain that rather than a simplistic “fall”, the changes can more accurately be described as a complex transformation. Over time many theories have been proposed on why the Empire fell, or whether indeed it fell at all.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

I don’t think we are after guesses about something so important.

By a “guess” I meant a good approximation. There are many historical events that one cannot give a precise date for, but we know they happened, like the fall of the Roman Empire; an approximation is the best that one can aim for.

zerinus

 

[kellie]

By a “guess” I meant a good approximation. There are many historical events that one cannot give a precise date for, but we know they happened, like the fall of the Roman Empire; an approximation is the best that one can aim for.

zerinus

You know the Apsotasy happened because God told Joseph Smith it happened?

 

[zerinus]

You know the Apsotasy happened because God told Joseph Smith it happened?

No; we know it happened in the same way that we know the fall of the Roman Empire happened. How do we know that the Roman Empire fell? Because it doesn’t exist any more (even though we may argue over the exact date when it happened). How do we know that the Christian church apostatized? Because it doesn’t exist any more. How do we know it doesn’t exist any more? Because the divine authority isn’t there any more. How do we know that? Because it has lost the direct communion with the heavens that ancient church used to have, when the Apostles were alive. It is not led by revelation any more, like it used to be. It cannot add to the canon of scripture any more. Its leaders have a “form of godliness,” but “deny the power thereof,” as Paul taught to Timothy:

2 Timothy 3:

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, . . .

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

What is the “power thereof”? It is the ability to receive revelation, and to communicate directly with God. It is the ability to lead and guide the church by revelation from God, instead of by the judgement and decisions and whims and fancies of man. That is the “power thereof” which is now lost to the Christian church(es), but has been restored in the LDS Church.

zerinus

 

[kellie]

No; we know it happened in the same way that we know the fall of the Roman Empire happened. How do we know that the Roman Empire fell? Because it doesn’t exist any more (even though we may argue over the exact date when it happened). How do we know that the Christian church apostatized? Because it doesn’t exist any more. How do we know it doesn’t exist any more? Because the divine authority isn’t there any more. How do we know that? Because it has lost the direct communion with the heavens that ancient church used to have, when the Apostles were alive. It is not led by revelation any more, like it used to be. It cannot add to the canon of scripture any more. Its leaders have a “form of godliness,” but “deny the power thereof,” as Paul taught to Timothy:

2 Timothy 3:

1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, . . .

5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
What is the “power thereof”? It is the ability to receive revelation, and to communicate directly with God. It is the ability to lead and guide the church by revelation from God, instead of by the judgement and decisions and whims and fancies of man. That is the “power thereof” which is now lost to the Christian church(es), but has been restored in the LDS Church.

zerinus

Ok, I am understanding it more now, thanks zerinus.

However, the Holy Spirit came upon the Apostles at Pentecost. Do you believe that?

Jesus gave the Apostles to baptise people in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and to make disciples of them.

Jesus did not say make Apostles of them.

So why is it Mormons believe that the true church should be run by Apostles and continual revelation?

 

[wussup]

See Dupre, there you go again. The question to be answered here is ‘when did the Apostasy occur’, and clearly has nothing to do with the LDS, so attacking the LDS belief (or non-beliefs) does not answer the argument as an ad hominem. Every church has legends developed and spread about like a cancer. The LDS DO NOT believe Bigfoot is Cain, and as a past LDS with your atested to background, you know this. Furthermore, there is not a past leader who has not been held to account for ‘developing’ their own theology. I am not a sweet person, though I think the statement was tongue and cheek. I am a cranky ex-sailor with little tolerance for fools.

I served in South Africa, 1986-1988.

Allweather-
I am aware of Matthew Henry’s commentary on this. It makes for a great read due to his zeal, but his actual criticism of the the Biblem, is in my humble opinion, not very good. As a presbyterian he has a vested interest in explaining away at every opportunity God’s appearances to man (which are numerous in the scripture). I say this by way of why I think he teaches certain principles the way he does rather than as an ad hominem against his arguements per se.

 

[MrS]

.[1] Every church has legends developed and spread about like a cancer. The LDS DO NOT believe Bigfoot is Cain, and as a past LDS with your atested to background, you know this.

[2] Furthermore, there is not a past leader who has not been held to account for ‘developing’ their own theology. I am not a sweet person, though I think the statement was tongue and cheek. [3] I am a cranky ex-sailor with little tolerance for fools.

I served in South Africa, 1986-1988.

Allweather-
I am aware of Matthew Henry’s commentary on this. It makes for a great read due to his zeal, [4] but his actual criticism of the the Biblem, is in my humble opinion, not very good. As a presbyterian [5] he has a vested interest in explaining away at every opportunity God’s appearances to man (which are numerous in the scripture). I say this by way of why I think he teaches certain principles the way he does rather than as an ad hominem against his arguements per se.

You make some rather interesting points, unlike Z who seems to be stuck on stubborn.

[1] Yes most “faiths” have legends… don’t know about the cancer discription though. With Catholicism we see the distinction… legends are not the basis of the faith… only the extra baggage. But with some, JWs for instance, there are some fanciful stories surrounding the “founder”. I think the same is true of the Mormon founder too.

[2] With the exception of Jesus Christ you are right. Jesus is the Truth Himself… hardly something He developed. Thus all forms of theology that are not fully in sinc with Jesus are doomed to fail. Perhaps you see that from the Catholic posters here who know that Catholicism and Mormonism are quite “different”

[3] I am a no-longer-cranky VietNam vet, 69-71… with lots of tolerance for those who are still outside the only way to salvation… Jesus Christ … through the only Church He founded… The Catholic Church.

[4] Most who have critique/criticism of the Bible, and who are outside the Church to which the Bible belongs (Catholic!!) will have flaws in their work. But the flaws are found in the person, not the work.
In charity/honesty, I must add that the problems with the Book of Mormon are found in both - the book and the person who tries to explain it. It cannot be of God, and is thus subject to changes and eventually will come to an end… much as the Koran will.

[5] the above is true because of the LDS “vested” interest in trying to explain away much of Christianity.

.

 

[Allweather]

Allweather-
I am aware of Matthew Henry’s commentary on this. It makes for a great read due to his zeal, but his actual criticism of the the Biblem, is in my humble opinion, not very good. As a presbyterian he has a vested interest in explaining away at every opportunity God’s appearances to man (which are numerous in the scripture). I say this by way of why I think he teaches certain principles the way he does rather than as an ad hominem against his arguements per se.

No, I’m not a big fan of Matthew Henry anymore either, since I stopped Protesting against God’s Church, LOL. I just threw it in there as an example of orthodox Protestant thinking. The commentary is old enough to have withstood the test of time, and is VERY popular among Protestants.

 

[Allweather]

According to the Wikipedia article:

The traditional date of the fall of the Roman Empire is September 4, 476 when Romulus Augustus, the de jure Emperor of the Western Roman Empire was deposed by Odoacer. Many historians question this date, noting that the Eastern Roman Empire continued until the Fall of Constantinople in 29 May 1453. Some other notable dates are the death of Theodosius I in 395, that last time the Roman Empire was unified, the crossing of the Rhine in 406 by Germanic tribes, after the withdrawal of the legions in order to defend Italy against Alaric I, and the death of Stilicho in 408, followed by the disintegration of the western legions. Many scholars maintain that rather than a simplistic “fall”, the changes can more accurately be described as a complex transformation. Over time many theories have been proposed on why the Empire fell, or whether indeed it fell at all.

zerinus

I’m going to brag that I got the western date exactly right, and was on off the date of the fall of Constantiople by only a few years. Not bad considering my age and the fact that I was working without references. Now, Zerinus, it may be that there is some disagreement about precise dates, but MOST historians are agreed. A blurb in Wiki doesn’t alter that fact. Whether the ultimate fall of the Empire was in this year or that, there is at least a general time period attached to it.

You, OTOH, in spite of your direct line of commo to the holy ghost, are not able to provide even within a decade of the withdrawal of divine ministry to the Apostle John, who you claim is still walking the earth somewhere. That is fishy. Just like the whole charge of Apostasy… fishy.

 

[Allweather]

By a “guess” I meant a good approximation. There are many historical events that one cannot give a precise date for, but we know they happened, like the fall of the Roman Empire; an approximation is the best that one can aim for.

zerinus

If you meant “good approximation” then you should’ve said “good approximation” rather than what you did say, which was:

““I have no idea; but I would say the end of the first century is a good guess. zerinus””

If you had anything better than “no idea” then you might could give a “approximation,” whether a good one, or a bad one. A “guess” is something else entirely, and is more in-line with your statement, quoted above, in which you admit to having “no idea.”

My understanding, and correct me if I’m wrong, is that you’ve stated that the Great Apostasy was complete EITHER upon the death of the last Apostle around 90-100 a.d., OR at the moment that Apostle John’s earthly ministry was terminated by God. Therefore, what we are looking for is THE DATE, within, say, a decade or so, when that ministry was withdrawn from the supposedly-still-walking-the-Earth Apostle John.

Good grief, man!

 

[Allweather]

Every church has legends developed and spread about like a cancer. The LDS DO NOT believe Bigfoot is Cain, and as a past LDS with your atested to background, you know this. Furthermore, there is not a past leader who has not been held to account for ‘developing’ their own theology. I am not a sweet person, though I think the statement was tongue and cheek. I am a cranky ex-sailor with little tolerance for fools.

One way the Catholic Church deals with stuff like this is to have a Catechism, where all the Church’s official teachings are laid out, in one volume. The Mormon church evidently does not have a catechism. When I asked about this, it was speculated by another that the reason for this is because the absence of having things down in writing allows the LDS leadership to deny things that become inconvenient for it.

wussup, why is it do YOU think the Mormon church doesn’t have a catechism?