Mormons: When did the Great Apostasy occur?

[meemsdeherrera]

Defense of God’s truth, as revealed through the many prophets He has sent, is not “bashing”.

AMEN

A lot of my family is still LDS and any time we get into a discussion about Truth “bashing” is always the response. I want so badly for my family to see the Truth and understand how false the Mormon doctorine is. I am so worried about them all! I pray for them, light candles for them, and try to approach the subject with love.

As far as the “Great Apostasy” goes, it doesn’t even make sound sense, and goes against the teachings of the Bible (as several examples have already shown) I just can’t understand how so many people are buying this new religion as true. I just hope the Holy Spirit touches their hearts and brings them back to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Brothers and Sisters of the LDS Church, we will continue to pray for you.

God Bless

 

[SteveVH]

I thank you for your comment I’m LDS and in all actuality, I love reading and understanding how other religions perceive our own. It saddens me when I come onto forums like this and see how a church, that claims to follow Christ can so easily bash on another. In the end, aren’t we all just trying to be good people? So, I thank you for this comment

Marr, I’m sorry that you feel you are being bashed. Some of us can get a little carried away but I want you to know that you are welcome here. As po18guy pointed out, however, speaking truth that may conflict with one’s beliefs is not bashing and you are free to refute anything said here.

In the end, it is not about us being good people, it is about the goodness of God. I know people with very little or no faith that are good people. It is about discovering truth, submitting to that truth, and defending that truth. Hopefully that is why we are all here.

Anyway, Welcome to this forum. I’m glad you are here.

 

[Josh316]

Inquiring person,

A loss of authority (God’s authority to use the priesthood keys including the authority of the apostles since they were no longer around when this happened) and a loss of the purity of some of the doctrines of the everlasting gospel taught by Christ and the apostles, occurred as a gradual thing during the AD 80’s, 90’s, and so on when John became the last living apostle and then was taken into the wilderness. It was gradual, not a single event.

There was a fairly recent thread about this subject.

Wishing you peace and good will, for you and your friend and any other readers here.

Here is what I find “funny.” Without the protestant reformation, (for want of a better phrase) Lds faithful would have no leg to stand on. I’m pretty sure that all Lds members believe that the Catholic Church is the original “apostate” church right? Well let’s say that the reformation never took place. Then the only historical christian church that could be proven from history would be the Catholic Church. So then there would be no debate because the only Chuch you could argue with would be the only one in existance. But let us get back to reality which is just as cloudy IMO from an Lds stand-point. Not until some sixteen centuries later did a protestant church come into play, so from an Lds POV that would have to mean that the apostasy was EXTREMELY gradual for sixteen hundred plus years (since the Catholic Church has not changed her teachings in over 2,000yrs) and then, after Luther, the “apostasy” flipped on the nitro switch like Eleanor from “Gone in Sixty Seconds” and exploded into many more church’s until God said ENOUGH and decided it was time to reveal the “truth” to Joseph Smith to “save” us from a church that taught the same things for 2,000 plus years! Either that or “the gates of hell will not prevail against my true church” means what it says and the Catholic Church is the only one fitting that description. Unless, like my friend and Lds co-worker you believe that verse to mean that EVENTUALLY the true church will prevail and therefore, in the end, the gates of hell did not prevail.

 

[Bibliomomiac]

If the Mormons believe in an apostasy… and assume their church to be the only ‘real’ christian church… why do they sing songs write by faux christians from (dead) churches?

 

[ParkerD]

If the Mormons believe in an apostasy… and assume their church to be the only ‘real’ christian church… why do they sing songs write by faux christians from (dead) churches?

Hi, Bibiomomiac,

(I hope that you are a lover of the Bible, as am I.)

It’s a good question you’ve asked. (First, simply, Latter-day Saints don’t think or “assume their church to be the only ‘real’ Christian church”. “Authorized church with continuing revelation to guide its leaders in leading people to the ordinances and covenants centered in Jesus Christ that lead to exaltation through His grace and His shepherding influence” would be a way you could put it that would express the thinking.)

If you would like to understand the Latter-day Saints perspective about how it could be possible that God would inspire the writing of beautiful, wonderful hymns of praise by those who were no doubt experiencing His love and blessing in their lives, then perhaps it would help to think of a “truth source” with pure truth beaming across the universe and available to all. (God is no respecter of persons, right?)

As humble, prayerful people have sought truth and guidance in their lives from that “truth source”, then they have certainly been able to receive truths and guidance and blessings which are always promised through obeying those truths. That would include the inspiration to write beautiful hymns of praise and adoration. Those were “real Christians”, with real love for Christ and the real inspiration of Christ and the Holy Spirit.

I haven’t heard the term “dead churches” used in my church, nor do I believe that terminology for a second. An individual person can be “dead to Christ” by having experienced “spiritual death” through having rejected their conscience and rejected the influence of the Holy Spirit in their personal life, but that doesn’t mean they have belonged to a church that led them to that point. It means they weren’t paying attention, if their church used the truths from the Bible as the basis for teaching about living the gospel of Jesus Christ.

They can be spiritually alive and spiritually awakened as they read the Bible and live by its teachings, including seeking inspiration from God through humble prayer and their desires to have the love of God in their heart and to act on that love in how they serve the people around them.

Sorry for the long answer to a short question. Wishing you peace and a wonderful day.

 

[Chris-WA]

Hi, Bibiomomiac,

(I hope that you are a lover of the Bible, as am I.)

It’s a good question you’ve asked. (First, simply, Latter-day Saints don’t think or “assume their church to be the only ‘real’ Christian church”. “Authorized church with continuing revelation to guide its leaders in leading people to the ordinances and covenants centered in Jesus Christ that lead to exaltation through His grace and His shepherding influence” would be a way you could put it that would express the thinking.)

ParkerD,

What a politically correct way of putting things. I don’t buy it. Let’s hear what Joseph Smith himself, the founder of the LDS church, had to say on the subject. From the official website of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on Joseph Smith’s First Vision (emphasis added):
…When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other–“This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!”

My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)–and which I should join.

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."

He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home.
I think calling all the other Christian churches an abomination in God’s sight is a fairly strong indicator of how the LDS church regards other Christian churches, don’t you?

 

[Nicea325]

There is not a shred of evidence to support a “sudden” apostasy either, such as upon the death of the last Apostle (or at lease who ever died right before John). The Church has been dealing with apostates and heretics since its inception, so there were definitely “apostasies” occurring, but it was not the Catholic Church that was in apostasy, it was the Catholic Church that defended against apostasy. There are apostasies taking place as we speak, and if the Catholic Church is the one, true Church then Mormonism is in apostasy along with a number of others.

As far as documenting the so-called “Great Apostasy”, you are correct. The Early Church Fathers speak volumes about the various heretics and heresies plaguing the Church during their time. No mention of what would have been an incredible event within the Church, much more so than anything found in their writings. Maybe the belief is that the Church did not know it was in apostasy, therefore no reporting on it. The consistency of Church doctrine, from the beginning, is enough evidence that the Church has not lost any truth, but rather that it possesses the fullness of truth.

I have heard the argument that it was not that all truth was lost, but that “priesthood authority” is what was lost because only the Apostles could confer priesthood authority. Forget the fact that if true, this would make Jesus more than a little short sighted. He would have to have known that His Church was only going to be around for 50-60 years after He was gone. I’m not sure what the Apostles thought they were passing on when they annointed bishops if it was not the office of priest, first and foremost. But they will argue that the bishops had no authority to ordain priests. They believe that the office of Apostle should have been passed and that bishops were not their successors. If true, if they had to name successor “Apostles” in order for the Church to continue then why didn’t they? Did they forget? Just didn’t get around to it? They ordained all of these bishops but not any “Apostles”, the most important thing of all if the Church was going to survive. One has to really do some mental gymnastics to rationalize this one.

Exactly! The Great Apostasy is nothing but a lie fabricated up and as with many lies,the ignorant take it as truth and relay it on for years. The Great Apostasy is nothing more than a Great Lie!

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD,

What a politically correct way of putting things. I don’t buy it. Let’s hear what Joseph Smith himself, the founder of the LDS church, had to say on the subject. From the official website of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints on Joseph Smith’s First Vision (emphasis added):
…When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other–“This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!”

My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)–and which I should join.

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."

He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home.
I think calling all the other Christian churches an abomination in God’s sight is a fairly strong indicator of how the LDS church regards other Christian churches, don’t you?

Hi, Chris-WA,

I hope you and your family are well, as I assume that you all are.

Christ is a very careful chooser of words, and also of course has perfect knowledge of the scriptures so He uses them in a perfect way. He quoted from Isaiah (29:13) and from Matthew (15:8-9) in some of the words you cited that were in quotation marks. So that should come as no surprise to one familiar with how many times He had quoted Isaiah and the Psalms during His ministry–but its application could be surprising, yes.

He didn’t call “all other Christian churches an abomination”. He said “all their creeds were an abomination in His sight”, so the tight focus was on “their creeds” and on whether doctrines were “denying the power thereof” and included “commandments of men” and where the “hearts” of those “professors of religion” whom Joseph Smith had become personally acquainted with were–whether their hearts were “far from Him”. The Savior looks at the hearts of men, as we all know. He is the perfect Judge of where one’s heart is, so He could make the kind of statement He made.

The Bible draws people to the Savior as they allow their hearts to be drawn to Him, but that’s never a guarantee, neither in 1820 in Palmyra, New York, nor today wherever one goes in the world. He inspired the words to be written for all, “If with all your hearts ye truly seek me, ye shall ever surely find me.”

 

[zaffiroborant]

Hi, Chris-WA,

He didn’t call “all other Christian churches an abomination”. He said “all their creeds were an abomination in His sight”, so the tight focus was on “their creeds” and on whether doctrines were “denying the power thereof” and included “commandments of men” and where the “hearts” of those “professors of religion” whom Joseph Smith had become personally acquainted with were–whether their hearts were “far from Him”. The Savior looks at the hearts of men, as we all know. He is the perfect Judge of where one’s heart is, so He could make the kind of statement He made.

This is a meaningless distinction, the creeds are what Christian churches teach, believe and profess. If a church, believes, professes and teaches an abomination it is by default an abomination. Joseph Smith did, and your missionaries continue, to teach that all Christian churches are an abomination.

And it seems to me to be rather contradictory, Isaiah says they draw close to me with their mouth and yet what is coming out of the mouth? It’s those abominable creeds that they are drawing near with, well how 'bout that! Amazing, the abominable creeds draw them near to God, looks to me like the abomination is not the creeds or the churches who believe, teach and profess them, but those who profess them without belief.

 

[ParkerD]

If one wants to broaden the picture about the use of the word “abomination” in the scriptures, then that can be a good idea. For example, whenever I have followed false spirits in my own life, which certainly has happened, then that is following after an “abomination” because only through following the Holy Spirit and the light of Christ and being led by Them can one escape from being led by such false spirits, who are out to deceive the whole world and bring everyone into the bondage of sin and the bondage of their seduction.

Christ wants all of our hearts, all of our faith, all of our trust, all of our yielding to His guidance in our lives. Anything less becomes following after either our own hearts or following false spirits, and either position is an abomination to Him who would have us be holy, without spot. And it must be done in His way, not our way.

A wish of peace to all readers.

 

[KathleenGee]

I am sharing this link with Pinay as well…

hancaquam.blogspot.com/2011/04/vatican-two-true-and-false-reform.html

What makes a true reform in the Catholic Church vs false reform…I put this out as well to the claims of certain vague references to St. Paul as defining the apostasy already at work. St. Paul was also of the opinion that Christ would come back soon within their generation…but in time, they realized they misunderstood.

Subsequently, the apostles and their successors made it their great aim to insure that the true faith was passed down…there were beginning modes of administrating…the Gentiles were collective, the Jewish Christians had one leader with a council, and in time the Holy Spirit revealed that the practice of the Jewish Christian way was chosen as the form to govern the Church with bishop, deacons, presbyters, priests.

The Church did not fall out of the sky. It was ready made, though, – Jesus Christ Himself the life of the Church. However, its human outward form took time to develop because Church is a human institution.

Drawing from the writings of French Dominican Yves Congar, his writings now pretty much considered orthodox regarding true and false reform of the Church, the Catholic Church must consider if the reform increases or decreases her own calling.

Any true reform in the Catholic spirit respects our style of worship and pastoral life. Sects, divisions in the Church are caused by ‘reformers’ who 'fanatically insist on sheer light of an intellectual system. The Catholic Tradition ‘considers concrete possibilities and works within a framework…’

In other words, we work with the world as it is…concrete. Our sacraments are concrete. The Eucharist has been the center of liturgical worship for 2,000 years. As we deal with the concrete with the deposit of faith, the Word of God is always reflected upon to relate to the times we live in. It is about context within the concrete.

Another important point is that "a reform that is Catholic in spirit will seek to maintain communion with the whole body of the Church, and will avoid anything savoring of schism or factionalism.

St. Paul speaks of anger, dissension, and party spirit as contrary to the spirit of God. (Galatians 5:20). To be Catholic is precisely to see one’s self as part of a larger whole, to be inserted into the universal Catholic Church."

These values have been held dear by the Church, itself akin to a living breathing sacrament as the Bride of Christ since its beginning.

The answer to the Mormons’ claim of apostasy only reflects on a different concept of God. The Holy Spirit never turned around, Jesus never turned around and left us…a failed mission…

Such an idea of believing in an apostasy would even happen at the beginning of Christianity, and assuming a strange and contradictory indifference by the apostles-- themselves turning their back on Christ and not insuring the faith would be passed down to subsequent generations-- is unbelievable.

We do not believe in a failed Christ, a balloon Holy Spirit that blows in and then blows out after the death of the last apostle.

The Church began at Pentecost. There were many attending at Pentecost…over a 100 people received the tongues of the Holy Spirit over them besides the Apostles and Mary, the Mother of Christ. The apostles recognized those who had true faith integrated within their being…Afterall, the Jews put great weight into who would be administrators of their religion…and the Apostles, living witnesses to Christ, in the same Substance as the Father and Holy Spirit…were in no way going to let this great mission of salvation be thrown away by their deaths.

If their deaths then caused the apostasy to happen, then death still holds power over the Mormons and not the true life of Jesus Christ.

 

[CougaNova]

The Great Apostasy occured at 450 AD. Just one day, the church flopped. On January 1st of that year actually. Then there wasn’t really true Christianity until the 1800’s when Joseph Smith met God AND Jesus in the forest in the USA. Props to God for founding his religion in such a great country. So basically Jesus only saved people for about 400 years then took a break for 1400 years or so.

Atheists make this same argument against Christianity. Why did Jesus wait around for a million years while the Pagan idolatry was going on, before he revealed himself?

So really, for example, the Protestant reformation wasn’t really reforming anything as the Apostasy occured years before.

That’s incorrect. Mormons recognize the reformation was a step in the right direction.

 

[CougaNova]

The above is the most precise answer I have ever seen. It is not praise, however. I have never received a believable LDS response as to when God’s very substance changed **(from being One God, into being simply one of many), **and why the early, pure and “non-apostatized” Church did not teach it - or why Jesus Himself did not teach it. I also wonder why God did not “reveal” this until 1,800 years after His Son ascended.

Do you have a copy of the Essential Catholic Survival Guide ? It is very good in teching you to refute the various heresies.

You might want to take a look at this thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=84832

• The Ancient of Days in Dan. 7.10-13 seems to owe a lot to El, the supreme god in Ugarit
• El dwells at twin water-sources - rather as the four rivers in Gen. 2 all flow out of the Garden of Eden.
• The story about Dagon in 2 Sam. 5, from the same set of gods, looks as if it is making the point that he is falling on his face in worship; & so, acknowledging the superiority of Israel’s god
• Asherah in 1 & 2 Kings (for instance) is Atirat, the wife of El.
• The gods of Ugarit assembled on a holy mountain. Zaphon, “North” seems to be its Hebrew name - as for mentions of a mountain used for this purpose, it is behind OT references to JHWH’s [holy] hill/mountain", and to “the hill/mountain of the Lord”; as in Psalms 2, 15, etc.
• **the “sons of El/god/the gods” are this assembly *** **The title JHWH Sabaoth/“of Hosts” reflects the position of JHWH as the leader of this assembly in war: sometimes the hosts are stars, sometimes “angels”; sometimes the stars are a flock of sheep *** The promise in Isaiah 7.14 is word for word the same as a line in a Ugaritic myth.
• Psalm 29 ascribes to JHWH functions exercised by Baal (AKA Hadad, Ramman)

Ancient Israel was not a strict monotheism.

 

[KathleenGee]

Couga…

In contrast to the practice of documentation by both Jews and Christians, there is an 1800 year old gap in Mormonism.

When Mormonism arrives, there are contradictions between it and Judeo/Christianity.

Mormonism puts itself in the position to essentially condemn and invalidate Christianity.

Mormonism refuses to deal with factual history, documents, and common practices of Judaism and Christianity.

On the other hand, Mormonism then makes claims about the lost tribe of Israelites in America by referring to mound dwellings of ancient native Indian tribes that show complete detachment from any artifacts of ancient Judaism in Israel, the controversy over the practices of Joseph Smith that appear more aligned with divination and clairvoyancy–which are condemned by both Judaism and Christianity.

Mormonism gives the impression that its doctrines are constantly evolving and changing its positions. It is moving towards standardization.

Mormonism taught anti-Catholicism up to the 1990’s. Now on the Mormon TV channel, they aired a program recently with news about the building of temples around the world. The program stated that the Mormon Church in Rome would hopefully receive its share of awe for its temple as the world does for both the Roman Catholic Church and the rest of the Eternal City.

Essentially Mormonism does not recognize the continuity of faith that is based on a gathering of people with its need to record and document its belief and practices, its peoples and worship practiced by both Judaism and Catholicism.

We center on a faith given us by the Apostles. We are non-sectarian, we have no mortal and individual founder like you see in Protestant and Mormon beliefs. Our beliers are based on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ based on His life and words and witness, in the context of salvation history.

 

[Bran_Stark]

I also wonder why God did not “reveal” this until 1,800 years after His Son ascended.

Well for my part I’m not sure why God didn’t reveal the New Covenant until (about) 1,800 years after the old one, and why Christ hasn’t returned in glory like He promised, after (at least) 2,000 years. So I don’t know how valid a criticism this is.

If the Mormons believe in an apostasy… and assume their church to be the only ‘real’ christian church… why do they sing songs write by faux christians from (dead) churches?

I imagine for the very same reason that Catholics sing protestant hymns themselves! In either case, you call yourself the One True Church and yet (most charitably) accept that there are outsiders sincerely trying to follow Christ as best they are able.

 

[CougaNova]

Couga…

In contrast to the practice of documentation by both Jews and Christians, there is an 1800 year old gap in Mormonism.

When Mormonism arrives, there are contradictions between it and Judeo/Christianity.

Mormonism puts itself in the position to essentially condemn and invalidate Christianity.

Not really. Every faith has condemned others, but Mormons don’t run a “countercult” industry dedicated to bashing others. I now Catholics don’t either.

Mormonism refuses to deal with factual history, documents, and common practices of Judaism and Christianity.

Mormonism taught anti-Catholicism up to the 1990’s.

Link?

 

[Chris-WA]

He didn’t call “all other Christian churches an abomination”. He said “all their creeds were an abomination in His sight”, so the tight focus was on “their creeds” and on whether doctrines were “denying the power thereof”

ParkerD, you sound like a lawyer or politician trying to squirm their way around an issue. There is no difference between calling a church an abomination and calling that church’s system of beliefs an abomination. It’s the same thing. Let’s not make something more complicated just so you can soften the blow.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD, you sound like a lawyer or politician trying to squirm their way around an issue. There is no difference between calling a church an abomination and calling that church’s system of beliefs an abomination. It’s the same thing. Let’s not make something more complicated just so you can soften the blow.

Chris-WA,

I personally see a difference. The word “church” originates from a word that means “congregation of believers.” Christ wasn’t calling the people who believe the “creeds” an abomination. He was calling the creeds that had been taught to them “an abomination” because of “commandments of men” and “denying the power thereof”.

The question I had earlier responded to was about the writing of hymns by people, with the underlying issue of whether they were inspired in the writing of particular hymns. The hymns drawn from that heritage which are used by Latter-day Saints show an adoration of Christ and the Father and do not reiterate “creeds” or the words of creeds, but reflect personal, heartfelt love and devotion expressed by individual people in their relationship with Christ.

Since Latter-day Saints believe in “salvation for the dead” including exaltation through the ordinances relating to exaltation offered vicariously as no doubt you are aware, then the issue of “what was in the heart of the person” is deeply important, and as far as I’m concerned, I love many of the hymns of those whose sincere adoration expressed their heart’s desires which showed their love for God and their gratitude for the creation of this world and for the saving grace of the Lord, Jesus Christ.

So I guess we look at words and their meaning differently. Christ the Lord suffered the atonement for the salvation and redemption of humankind including the resurrection of all who have ever lived and the opportunity for all to become like Him. To “deny the power thereof” means that the goal and the ultimate purpose was being diverted and short-changed and “commandments of men” became interspersed into doctrines that needed to remain pure as they were originally given, including the knowledge that the Good Shepherd leads the believing sheep toward becoming like Him through His ongoing, living guidance and His redeeming grace.

 

[po18guy]

You might want to take a look at this thread:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=84832

• The Ancient of Days in Dan. 7.10-13 seems to owe a lot to El, the supreme god in Ugarit
• El dwells at twin water-sources - rather as the four rivers in Gen. 2 all flow out of the Garden of Eden.
• The story about Dagon in 2 Sam. 5, from the same set of gods, looks as if it is making the point that he is falling on his face in worship; & so, acknowledging the superiority of Israel’s god
• Asherah in 1 & 2 Kings (for instance) is Atirat, the wife of El.
• The gods of Ugarit assembled on a holy mountain. Zaphon, “North” seems to be its Hebrew name - as for mentions of a mountain used for this purpose, it is behind OT references to JHWH’s [holy] hill/mountain", and to “the hill/mountain of the Lord”; as in Psalms 2, 15, etc.
• **the “sons of El/god/the gods” are this assembly *** **The title JHWH Sabaoth/“of Hosts” reflects the position of JHWH as the leader of this assembly in war: sometimes the hosts are stars, sometimes “angels”; sometimes the stars are a flock of sheep *** The promise in Isaiah 7.14 is word for word the same as a line in a Ugaritic myth.
• Psalm 29 ascribes to JHWH functions exercised by Baal (AKA Hadad, Ramman)

Ancient Israel was not a strict monotheism.

Virtually no human society has ever been monotheistic. My point was that the One True God sent many prophets, not just one. As well, man’s first sin was the desire to “be like gods”.

 

[KathleenGee]

Couga…

The link you want is in your own books…and writers up to the 1990’s.

With the Mormon Temple now going up in Rome, in hopes it will gain the same awe from the world as the world shows the Eternal City and the Vatican, non-Mormons who use Mormon links with such teachings are systematically being removed now from the internet.

But the writings of Joseph Smith and labelling all Christianity as corrupt, the doctrines, etc…who else is the inference to…as well as your teachings…but the Roman church. Mormons only use Protestant Bibles. Why won’t they use Catholic Bibles?

There is a campaign now in Mormonism to make people like me look like we are making things up. Another indication that Mormonism is not committed to objective truth.

Catholicism does not look at Scripture in isolated phrases to point out an opinion.