Supposed similarities between the early church and LDS?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DanoCleveland
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
To get a better understanding of an LDS scholarly view in the Apostacy of the early Church please read the Hugh Nibley essay The Passing of the Primitive Church: Forty Variations on an Unpopular Theme found here: maxwellinstitute.com/publications/transcripts/?id=116

I hope this help…
This is nothing more than Nibley asserting his interpretation of scripture. And quite frankly I can’t see any of his scriptural quote supporting his statements. To say that “Christ says clearly” and then quote scripture that is not any where near a clear statement supporting his claim is not scholarly in the least. I’ve only read the beginning of this but over all I’m not impressed, I see Nibley as putting his scholarship in the service of LDS apologetics, he starts with “the LDS church is true” and works diligently to support his original assumption. And this is before getting to his “parallelomania”.
 
This is nothing more than Nibley asserting his interpretation of scripture. And quite frankly I can’t see any of his scriptural quote supporting his statements. To say that “Christ says clearly” and then quote scripture that is not any where near a clear statement supporting his claim is not scholarly in the least. I’ve only read the beginning of this but over all I’m not impressed, I see Nibley as putting his scholarship in the service of LDS apologetics, he starts with “the LDS church is true” and works diligently to support his original assumption. And this is before getting to his “parallelomania”.
Agreed. I too did not get very far with the article but got the same sense that you did.

Peace
James
 
“Thou shall not put the Lord thy God to the test”…

Luke 4:12
Not that kind of test. The kind where the message delivered is considered against the known good knowledge of God, His Kingdom, and Salvation.

Deuteronomy 13:1-5, 18:19-22, 1 John 4:6

Jeremiah 17:9, Proverbs 28:26 -feelings not a sure source of good/bad
 
Not that kind of test. The kind where the message delivered is considered against the known good knowledge of God, His Kingdom, and Salvation.

Deuteronomy 13:1-5, 18:19-22, 1 John 4:6

Jeremiah 17:9, Proverbs 28:26 -feelings not a sure source of good/bad
And …

John 16:2-3 - people will be deceived and believe they are doing good/God’s work

2 Cor 11:14 - devil can disguise himself as angel of light
1 Thessalonians 5:20-21 - do not despise prophesying, but test everything; hold fast what is good,
 
Of course there may well be similarities between the early Christian church and current day Mormonism. However, as a Christian and an ex-Mormon, I would deny that there are any uniquely Mormon activities today that were performed in the early Christian church - where those activities were orthodox and not apostate.

We know of the apostate teachings of some early Christians regarding baptism for the dead - found in 1 Corinthians 15:29. Paul argued against them. If this is the early teaching that your LDS friend is talking about, then he is correct. In this instance some of the early church did perform activities that the current LDS church also performs.

Understand that the LDS church is constantly seeking for support for their belief - whether that be in early writings or in South American archaeology. Just let them search - its all in vain.

One of the earlier posters talked about the Early Church Fathers. They are so very definitely Catholic. Yes, some LDS will say that the church was apostate by then. One article that I read said this (a slight paraphrase): “in the mid first or second century, the lights went out so to speak, and when they came back on a century or so later, all the chairs had been rearranged”. This was a reference to the apostasy of the early Christian church. Mmmm… interesting logic here.

I heard Father Pacwa say that trying to understand LDS doctrine is like trying to grasp hold of mercury (the metal). i.e. impossible. LDS doctrine changes depending on the prophet in charge. Christ is the Bridegroom, the Church is His Bride. Did the Son of God abandon His Bride for 1500 or so years as the LDS believe? Did He in retribution for the death of His Son take His authority from the Church until in the 1800’s He restored it through Joseph Smith. That was some “time-out”!! Did we learn our lesson by the 1820’s? It is in this area that I feel it is most fruitful to have LDS people start to think and ponder. Plant those seeds at the very heart of their beliefs - because everything hinges on their “Great Apostasy”.

Look today at who speaks to the World for Christianity: Pope Francis or President Thomas S. Monson? Who raised their voice against the bloodshed in Syria, or the horrors of human trafficking? Even when Mormon missionaries come to your door, what are they preaching? Christ? Nope. The Restoration and Joseph Smith, thinly veiled with Christ. It is more about getting people into the LDS church than it is in getting them to Christ. Sit in a Mormon sacrament meeting or their priesthood or Sunday School. Christ is their - vaguely. But the emphasis is in keeping the members LDS.

Love and Charity always. Reason and faith.

Peace be with you.

Prince Hal.
 
there are no similarities.

mormons worship a different god.

There were no wards, stakes, presidents, relief societies, or anything like them

early Christians used unleavened bread and wine for the Eucharist…lds uses bread and water

the Early Church frowned on adultery, js reveled in it.

The Early Christians believed Jesus did not lie, was not weak and was not cruel

Mormons need to have a dishonest, weak, cruel Jesus in order to justify its existence…

no similarities…
 
early Christians used unleavened bread and wine for the Eucharist…lds uses bread and water

QUOTE]

Hello TexanKnight,
Code:
 Unleavened bread is used by the Jews during their Passover celebration.  Is there any basis for your above claim that Christians used unleavened bread for the rest of the year.  I at one time attended synagogue services.  Instead of giving everyone a scrap of bread and sip of juice we actually sat down and ate a meal together.  I would think that the early Christians would have followed that same tradition.
 
TexanKnight;11364202:
early Christians used unleavened bread and wine for the Eucharist…lds uses bread and water

QUOTE]

Hello TexanKnight,
Code:
 Unleavened bread is used by the Jews during their Passover celebration.  Is there any basis for your above claim that Christians used unleavened bread for the rest of the year.  I at one time attended synagogue services.  Instead of giving everyone a scrap of bread and sip of juice we actually sat down and ate a meal together.  I would think that the early Christians would have followed that same tradition.
Read the Gospels…
 
It should also be noted that Eastern Catholics and Eastern Orthodox validly celebrate the Eucharist with leavened bread.
 
For Biblical proof the apostles baptized people and you also see the second generation appearing in scripture. For example Timothy, Titus, Stephen
 
Of course there may well be similarities between the early Christian church and current day Mormonism. However, as a Christian and an ex-Mormon, I would deny that there are any uniquely Mormon activities today that were performed in the early Christian church - where those activities were orthodox and not apostate.

We know of the apostate teachings of some early Christians regarding baptism for the dead - found in 1 Corinthians 15:29. Paul argued against them. If this is the early teaching that your LDS friend is talking about, then he is correct. In this instance some of the early church did perform activities that the current LDS church also performs.

Understand that the LDS church is constantly seeking for support for their belief - whether that be in early writings or in South American archaeology. Just let them search - its all in vain.

One of the earlier posters talked about the Early Church Fathers. They are so very definitely Catholic. Yes, some LDS will say that the church was apostate by then. One article that I read said this (a slight paraphrase): “in the mid first or second century, the lights went out so to speak, and when they came back on a century or so later, all the chairs had been rearranged”. This was a reference to the apostasy of the early Christian church. Mmmm… interesting logic here.

I heard Father Pacwa say that trying to understand LDS doctrine is like trying to grasp hold of mercury (the metal). i.e. impossible. LDS doctrine changes depending on the prophet in charge. Christ is the Bridegroom, the Church is His Bride. Did the Son of God abandon His Bride for 1500 or so years as the LDS believe? Did He in retribution for the death of His Son take His authority from the Church until in the 1800’s He restored it through Joseph Smith. That was some “time-out”!! Did we learn our lesson by the 1820’s? It is in this area that I feel it is most fruitful to have LDS people start to think and ponder. Plant those seeds at the very heart of their beliefs - because everything hinges on their “Great Apostasy”.

Look today at who speaks to the World for Christianity: Pope Francis or President Thomas S. Monson? Who raised their voice against the bloodshed in Syria, or the horrors of human trafficking? Even when Mormon missionaries come to your door, what are they preaching? Christ? Nope. The Restoration and Joseph Smith, thinly veiled with Christ. It is more about getting people into the LDS church than it is in getting them to Christ. Sit in a Mormon sacrament meeting or their priesthood or Sunday School. Christ is their - vaguely. But the emphasis is in keeping the members LDS.

Love and Charity always. Reason and faith.

Peace be with you.

Prince Hal.
Great post! Welcome to CAF.

I think the point that must be made concerning any similarities between the LDS and the early Christian Church is that even these similarities are not really similarities. Baptism is a great example. If one witnessed a Mormon baptism they would hear the words “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”. In addition, even the correct matter is used (water). How can one doubt that this was not an early Church practice? Yet when one discovers the meaning behind the words we find that they do not mean the same thing intended by Christian baptism.

We could speak about the simple fact that they profess to follow Christ and believe that his death atoned for their sins. Very early Church. But they mean something entirely different. Even the basic requirement of monotheism is not present in their theology once the truth is known, though they profess it. So I would say that about the only thing Mormonism has in common with the early Church is that they are not atheists. Other than that they have re-written the entire story of salvation history and created gods in their own image.

God bless.

Steve
 
Great post! Welcome to CAF.

I think the point that must be made concerning any similarities between the LDS and the early Christian Church is that even these similarities are not really similarities. Baptism is a great example. If one witnessed a Mormon baptism they would hear the words “I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”. In addition, even the correct matter is used (water). How can one doubt that this was not an early Church practice? Yet when one discovers the meaning behind the words we find that they do not mean the same thing intended by Christian baptism.

We could speak about the simple fact that they profess to follow Christ and believe that his death atoned for their sins. Very early Church. But they mean something entirely different. Even the basic requirement of monotheism is not present in their theology once the truth is known, though they profess it. So I would say that about the only thing Mormonism has in common with the early Church is that they are not atheists. Other than that they have re-written the entire story of salvation history and created gods in their own image.

God bless.

Steve
Thank you for your post. I believed wholly in the LDS church for over 20 years of my life, accepting their interpretation as being the truth. We were always taught to simple “believe” an to “follow the Prophet”. This greatly excluded thinking and reason, except to “conjure” up ways to make facts support the LDS viewpoint. To disbelieve- such as in my case - is obviously due to a heinous sin. How else could I not be hearing the Holy Spirit tell me that my current thinking was wrong and that the LDS teachings were true. That is quite a powerful argument - as odd as that may sound. You are new in the gospel, seeking to be faithful,to, have faith. Here is a perfect scenario to show faith, by believing the prophet and the church leaders.

It takes Grace to overcome and to realize that the Holy Spirit does not just come through the emotions, but through reason and the scriptures and faith.

Thank you for you post.

I pray that we can help others like me to see the errors of the LDS teachings.

God bless you,

Hal.
 
Thank you for your post. I believed wholly in the LDS church for over 20 years of my life, accepting their interpretation as being the truth. We were always taught to simple “believe” an to “follow the Prophet”. This greatly excluded thinking and reason, except to “conjure” up ways to make facts support the LDS viewpoint. To disbelieve- such as in my case - is obviously due to a heinous sin. How else could I not be hearing the Holy Spirit tell me that my current thinking was wrong and that the LDS teachings were true. That is quite a powerful argument - as odd as that may sound. You are new in the gospel, seeking to be faithful,to, have faith. Here is a perfect scenario to show faith, by believing the prophet and the church leaders.

It takes Grace to overcome and to realize that the Holy Spirit does not just come through the emotions, but through reason and the scriptures and faith.

Thank you for you post.

I pray that we can help others like me to see the errors of the LDS teachings.

God bless you,

Hal.
I admire anyone who has broken free from the LDS. After reading posts from many ex-Mormons it is evident that this is not an easy thing to do and more times than not many loose their faith in God completely.

God bless you for your “Yes” to Christ!

Steve
 
mormons teach that the Church Jesus started became apostate very early on, the latest i have heard is in the third century AD. it is true that the mormons cannot determine when the Great Apostasy actually occurred.

accepting, for the sake of argument, that the Church did fail to maintaine Jesus’ true teachings, we are confronted with this dilemma.

why would God want to restart a church which had proven itself to be a failure?

aside from the fact that the mormon assertion that Jesus started a Church He knew was destined to fail, an absurdity to those who believe Jesus is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity because it reduces Jesus to a fool; there remains the question of why restart an organization that had with in its very foundation the inability to accomplish its stated goals?

what kind or moron embraces necessary failure as an essential doctrine and then asks others to join in celebrating this failure?
 
mormons teach that the Church Jesus started became apostate very early on, the latest i have heard is in the third century AD. it is true that the mormons cannot determine when the Great Apostasy actually occurred.

accepting, for the sake of argument, that the Church did fail to maintaine Jesus’ true teachings, we are confronted with this dilemma.

why would God want to restart a church which had proven itself to be a failure?

aside from the fact that the mormon assertion that Jesus started a Church He knew was destined to fail, an absurdity to those who believe Jesus is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity because it reduces Jesus to a fool; there remains the question of why restart an organization that had with in its very foundation the inability to accomplish its stated goals?

what kind or moron embraces necessary failure as an essential doctrine and then asks others to join in celebrating this failure?
it is easier to defend something that never happened if you remain as vague as possible about the incident.
 
mormons teach that the Church Jesus started became apostate very early on, the latest i have heard is in the third century AD. it is true that the mormons cannot determine when the Great Apostasy actually occurred.
Indeed. Some say it was with the death of all of the Apostles (excluding John). Some say that the apostasy was in full effect at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. Others say 570 AD. Some claim that the Catholic Church was formed by Constantine at the Nicaean Council (which simply isn’t historical). Others claim that the Catholic Church evolved from the true Church.

Either way, yes, it would have had to have started to become apostate very early on, because from very early on, we see distinctly Catholic/Orthodox teachings, most especially the Real Presence in the Eucharist.
 
mormons teach that the Church Jesus started became apostate very early on, the latest i have heard is in the third century AD. it is true that the mormons cannot determine when the Great Apostasy actually occurred.

accepting, for the sake of argument, that the Church did fail to maintaine Jesus’ true teachings, we are confronted with this dilemma.

why would God want to restart a church which had proven itself to be a failure?

aside from the fact that the mormon assertion that Jesus started a Church He knew was destined to fail, an absurdity to those who believe Jesus is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity because it reduces Jesus to a fool; there remains the question of why restart an organization that had with in its very foundation the inability to accomplish its stated goals?

what kind or moron embraces necessary failure as an essential doctrine and then asks others to join in celebrating this failure?
If I may play devil’s advocate here for a moment…
One might point to the great flood as a case where a great apostasy occurred (the great wickedness of the world) and God decided to wipe everything out and start again…
After all - God Started the world - created everything itn it - and it still fell into apostasy…

One could make the case that in a similar manner, the Church fell into a great apostasy and - like the great flood - God chose to restart with a new Noah…in this case, Joseph Smith.

Not saying I buy this…as I say, I’m just playing devils advocate.

Peace
James
 
If I may play devil’s advocate here for a moment…
One might point to the great flood as a case where a great apostasy occurred (the great wickedness of the world) and God decided to wipe everything out and start again…
After all - God Started the world - created everything itn it - and it still fell into apostasy…

One could make the case that in a similar manner, the Church fell into a great apostasy and - like the great flood - God chose to restart with a new Noah…in this case, Joseph Smith.

Not saying I buy this…as I say, I’m just playing devils advocate.

Peace
James
ah…but God did not wipe His Church and wait 1800 years to restart it. He wiped out the world but SAVED His “Church” with a man who was their before the flood…not a great analogy…
 
ah…but God did not wipe His Church and wait 1800 years to restart it. He wiped out the world but SAVED His “Church” with a man who was their before the flood…not a great analogy…
Fair enough - What I was trying to address was the idea of God wanting to restart something that had proven a failure…After all, God started the world with Adam and Eve…that was “The church” - that is - the community (ekklesia) but later found that He need to “restart” it…

Eddie too had said that:
aside from the fact that the mormon assertion that Jesus started a Church He knew was destined to fail, an absurdity to those who believe Jesus is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity because it reduces Jesus to a fool; there remains the question of why restart an organization that had with in its very foundation the inability to accomplish its stated goals?
The Flood reference places before the reader a place where the first person of the trinity started a community (ekklesia) that was destined to fail…so Why restart an organization that seems doomed to failure?
Certainly we would not say that God was a fool for starting over with Noah…

I’ve never heard this argument presented by a Mormon…But when I read Eddie’s post - this is what I thought of…

Peace
James
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top