T
tkdnick
Guest
I will be having a discussion with some LDS friends of mine regarding the Great Apostasy and wanted get the evidences and proofs for and against this apostasy. Contributions are much appreciated.
- Status
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
Proof # 1, if the Great Apostacy DIDN’T happen, then the entire basis for the LDS, JW, and most other non-Catholic demoninations is undermined.
T
Tmaque
Guest
As I stated on another thread. There was never a total apostacy. There was a Great Apostasy, it’s called the protestant Reformation.
S
Scott_Lafrance
Guest
T
tkdnick
Guest
:tiphat: Point well taken…however, this won’t help me with my LDS friends.
T
tkdnick
Guest
That’s a cool little emoticon!
C
Church_Militant
Guest
tkdnick said:
tkdnick, Make 'em give you historical evidence of it from a neutral source. They can’t because it doesn’t exist.
Get yourself a copy of Beginning Apologetics # 2 How to Answer Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons from San Juan Catholic Seminars catholicapologetics.com/
or right here on the CA ma(name removed by moderator)age bookstore and you’ll be armed to the teeth so to speak…
Holler if I can help.
Pax vobiscum,
T
Tmaque
Guest
tkdnick said:
Ok. For me, as an ex-Mormon it’s pretty simple. LDS folks claim that their’s is God’s true church restored to it’s original form. Anything that is restored to it’s original should be quite similar to, if not exactly like the way it was in the first place…right? Well, what uniquely Mormon beliefs and practices can be found in the early mainstream Christian Church? You can always find exceptions to the rule but how would Mormons of today like us judging them by the radical beliefs of todays LDS Fundamentalists? Here we go…
Belief in a pre-existence?-No
Belief in baptism for the dead?-only by heretical groups
Belief that God has a physical body?-No
Belief in a Word of Wisdom?-No
Belief in baptism by immersion only?-No
Belief that there is no original sin?-No
Belief that not everyone should be baptized?-No
Temples?-No
Temple ordinances?-No
Special garments?-No
Belief that abortion is acceptable?-No
Belief that contraception is acceptable?-No
Belief that there is no Real Presence?-No
Belief in marriage in heaven?-No
Belief that man can become a God and rule his own world?-No
Well, those are a few that quickly came to mind.
Hope it helps.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Wow! Thanks Todd! YOU ROCK!
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Wow! Thanks Todd! YOU ROCK!
T
TOmNossor
Guest
Can I come and help your friends ?
I hope neither you nor your friends will focus on ugly aspects of each other’s church, but I am afraid this is likely.
I hope you will not initiate discussions of the sins of past LDS, but it might improve upon the communication if you know a few of these.
When your friends say such and such Pope did such and such horrible thing (which they very well might because this is a more common thing than I would like), I think you should respond like this.
I would like to suggest that we follow these three rules. The rules come from a Lutheran Bishop Stendahl, but Truman Madsen (LDS scholar) has recently quoted them in the BYU documentary Between Heaven and Earth.
The second rule is most applicable here:
Three rules of Lutheran Bishop Krister Stendahl:
- Compare best to best. We (Stendahl says, speaking in general) are often too guilty of comparing our bests to their worsts.
- If you want to learn about a religion, you should use their sources, and talk to their adherents. After all, you wouldn’t ask a Nazi to explain Judaism to you (a question of bias). You also wouldn’t question a Bible-thumping southerner about Islam, for the same reason you wouldn’t ask an art historian about mechanical engineering (a question of expertise). Go to the source and its native interpretations. (Of course, the average John Doe, Eliezer Cohen, or Mohammed Abdullah may not be the most knowledgeable, literate spokesperson for his religious tradition.
- Allow room for “holy envy.” This is the respect/envy of aspects of the beliefs we do not (and perhaps cannot) embrace.
I think I could give you a lot more ideas on how to defend Catholicism from these well meaning folks, but I am afraid that the above may mute some of their main points. I am happy that they will not be able to use the sins of past popes because I think this is not necessary. I am not happy that these LDS folks may be at a disadvantage because you have Catholic Answers as a resource. I encourage you to recognize that we should not convert people through the force of our greater study. Greater truth, yes, but there will always be folks who have studied more than we have. Would you want to hear that RC Sproul was going to have some one on one session with your mother and try to convert her to Protestantism?
Charity, TOm
T
TOmNossor
Guest
Christian Church? You can always find exceptions to the rule but how would Mormons of today like us judging them by the radical beliefs of todays LDS Fundamentalists? Here we go…
Belief in a pre-existence?-No
Belief in baptism for the dead?-only by heretical groups
Belief that God has a physical body?-No
Belief in a Word of Wisdom?-No
Belief in baptism by immersion only?-No
Belief that there is no original sin?-No
Belief that not everyone should be baptized?-No
Temples?-No
Temple ordinances?-No
Special garments?-No
Belief that abortion is acceptable?-No
Belief that contraception is acceptable?-No
Belief that there is no Real Presence?-No
Belief in marriage in heaven?-No
Belief that man can become a God and rule his own world?-No
Well, those are a few that quickly came to mind.
Hope it helps.
Tmaque,
The problem with what you suggest is that while you recognize LDS can find exceptions, it is unlikely that you, TDNick, TDNick’s friends, or me are well versed enough or have enough resources to demonstrate what are exceptions and what are not conclusively.
A few things on your list are generally correct: Real Presence and Marriage in Heaven
A few things on your list are very wrong: Original Sin.
A few things on your list evidence a flaw in the way you look at this: Marriage in Heaven, Word of Wisdom, abortion, contraception.
And nothing on your list is unable to be responded too.
I do not think this is intended as a debate thread so I will leave my assertions next to your assertions.
Charity, TOm
T
tkdnick
Guest
TOm, I must say I have never had someone from another religion help me to defend my religion. That is quite admirable.
I think if you come help my friends the discussion would be quite lopsided toward you end. I don’t have the historical background to keep up with ya. In all of the discussions I have had with my friend we have never brought up the “ugly” aspects of the other’s religion. On my part because I don’t think it’s all that useful and on their part because I don’t think they really know anything about the Catholic Church.
The whole conversation started by me asking if it was proven that there was no Great Apostasy, what would it mean for them? From there we have gotten into a discussion about each religion’s specific beliefs regarding a Great Apostasy and they have asked if I would come up and discuss in person. I made the stipulation that I would only discuss if it didn’t turn into one of those “we can’t be friends because you’re a blasphemous heathen” kind of debates. I have no doubts that we will be able to keep it cordial.
Thanks for the info.
C
Church_Militant
Guest
Hello TomNosser,
I doubt that that is his purpose at all. And no one should EVER be afraid to go looking for the answers just because it might put someone else at a disadvantage debate-wise. What I do suspect is that some of his LDS friends have challenged him with an alllegation that the Catholic Church (and in the case of the LDS, ALL of Christianity.) departed from true faith long long ago just after the death of St. John. They are, (unfortunately) not the only ones that attempt to make this unhistorical claim, so it behooves us to make a good defense of the faith in this and every case where questions, or allegations are made concerning what we believe.
There is no historical evidence among the writings of the early church fathers that such an event ever occurred because their writings are there to answer every heresy that came down the pike.
Pax vobiscum,
I doubt that that is his purpose at all. And no one should EVER be afraid to go looking for the answers just because it might put someone else at a disadvantage debate-wise. What I do suspect is that some of his LDS friends have challenged him with an alllegation that the Catholic Church (and in the case of the LDS, ALL of Christianity.) departed from true faith long long ago just after the death of St. John. They are, (unfortunately) not the only ones that attempt to make this unhistorical claim, so it behooves us to make a good defense of the faith in this and every case where questions, or allegations are made concerning what we believe.
There is no historical evidence among the writings of the early church fathers that such an event ever occurred because their writings are there to answer every heresy that came down the pike.
Pax vobiscum,
T
tkdnick
Guest
Thanks! That’s quite a list. The only one of those I am really qualified to put my two cents in on is the Real Presence.
T
tkdnick
Guest
Church Militant:
I’ve got that book and I must say it’s pretty well done. I also have about an 8 page essay from Patrick Madrid that I haven’t had a chance to go through, but looks pretty good.
Historical evidence is one thing I’ve found lacking in these types of discussions, as you found out in your other thread. The one lead I have to go on from my friends is that a total apostasy was predicted in Amos, Acts, and 2 Thessalonians. I’ve found the 2 Thessalonians verses, but haven’t found anything in Amos or Acts. Do you know what those are? I think I remember also being told that there are “apostasy prophesies” in Timothy.tkdnick, Make 'em give you historical evidence of it from a neutral source. They can’t because it doesn’t exist.
Get yourself a copy of Beginning Apologetics # 2 How to Answer Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons from San Juan Catholic Seminars catholicapologetics.com/
or right here on the CA ma(name removed by moderator)age bookstore and you’ll be armed to the teeth so to speak…
Holler if I can help.
Pax vobiscum,
I’ve got that book and I must say it’s pretty well done. I also have about an 8 page essay from Patrick Madrid that I haven’t had a chance to go through, but looks pretty good.
T
tkdnick
Guest
Church Militant:
**1 Peter 3:15 (New International Version) But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, **
T
Tmaque
Guest
The 2nd LDS Article of Faith:
2. We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.
Sounds like a repudiation of original sin to me.
The only flaw in the way I look at things is that I’m pretty straightforward. A thing is right or wrong, it is true or false. Either the Catholic church is true or it isn’t.
Either contraception is wrong or it isn’t…No exceptions
Either abortion is wrong or it isn’t.
Either Christ said there is no marriage in Heaven or he didn’t
it’s obvious that you’re very intelligent, and really like to get into the details of the subject you’re interested in. But, sometimes, you can get a sense of a thing by just looking at it in a general way. If you examine it too closely you can get lost in the details and miss the sense of the larger truth of it entirely. Is the LDS Church exactly like, or even quite similar to, the early Christian church? In my mind there is only one answer. No, it is not. Not even close.
Sometimes you need to back away from a thing to get perspective on it.
T
tkdnick
Guest
Feel free to debate! Debating on specific topics that Tmaque supplied will allow me to see possible things that might come up in my personal discussion, and will most likely be beneficial for all.
I hereby open the debated-ness of this thread! :bigyikes:
T
TOmNossor
Guest
Ok, here goes.
Tmaque:
LDS do not believe in original sin. LDS beliefs are much closer to Eastern Orthodox beliefs than they are to western Christianity.
Your very clear error is in suggesting that original sin has early witness. The concept of original sin was developed by Augustine in the 5th century. LDS beliefs are closer to Early Christianity than are Catholic beliefs.
Tmaque:
It is fairly silly to suggest that anti-contraception views have early witness. That would be impossible. In PRACTICE it seems LDS are as anti-contraception as are Catholic if not more so. In doctrine, we have little to say but that the command to multiply and replenish the earth is in full effect. In recent years we have very much softened our speak on contraception, but I believe the best read of our scriptures and the statements of our leaders is that LDS may only practice contraception during the circumstances which Catholics can practice contraception. The chief difference being that LDS can practice “non-natural” contraception in the circumstances whereas Catholic may only use LAM or rhythm or other natural methods. Catholics have developed an unusual IMO position on the prevention of fertilized eggs and how this relates to murder. LDS have not done this.
The fact that LDS typically do not view contraception as wrong (when it is done at times that LDS leaders seem to have suggested are not appropriate) is unfortunate, but it can be placed next to the plethora of Catholics who practice contraception and even do other more evil birth prevention things.
Tmaque:
In addition to this the Catholic position on abortion has absolutely developed. See this thread and specifically post #33 (although much of the thread discusses this). I think the old Catholic position was a lot closer to the LDS position than is the current Catholic position. I am not saying they are identical, I am just saying that abortion was once wrong in the Catholic Church for the same reason it is currently wrong in the LDS church. The abortion=murder always and forever is a new development.
Cont…
- We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.
LDS do not believe in original sin. LDS beliefs are much closer to Eastern Orthodox beliefs than they are to western Christianity.
Your very clear error is in suggesting that original sin has early witness. The concept of original sin was developed by Augustine in the 5th century. LDS beliefs are closer to Early Christianity than are Catholic beliefs.
Either contraception is wrong or it isn’t…No exceptions
It is fairly silly to suggest that anti-contraception views have early witness. That would be impossible. In PRACTICE it seems LDS are as anti-contraception as are Catholic if not more so. In doctrine, we have little to say but that the command to multiply and replenish the earth is in full effect. In recent years we have very much softened our speak on contraception, but I believe the best read of our scriptures and the statements of our leaders is that LDS may only practice contraception during the circumstances which Catholics can practice contraception. The chief difference being that LDS can practice “non-natural” contraception in the circumstances whereas Catholic may only use LAM or rhythm or other natural methods. Catholics have developed an unusual IMO position on the prevention of fertilized eggs and how this relates to murder. LDS have not done this.
The fact that LDS typically do not view contraception as wrong (when it is done at times that LDS leaders seem to have suggested are not appropriate) is unfortunate, but it can be placed next to the plethora of Catholics who practice contraception and even do other more evil birth prevention things.
Would it surprise you to find out that in today’s Catholic Church it is acceptable to terminate some pregnancies to save the mother’s life? Would you find it as peculiar as I do when this pregnancy termination is only theologically acceptable when done in a very dangerous manner rather than done in a very safe and simple manner (when the results are the same)? Absolutes are not quite as absolute as most Catholics think.
In addition to this the Catholic position on abortion has absolutely developed. See this thread and specifically post #33 (although much of the thread discusses this). I think the old Catholic position was a lot closer to the LDS position than is the current Catholic position. I am not saying they are identical, I am just saying that abortion was once wrong in the Catholic Church for the same reason it is currently wrong in the LDS church. The abortion=murder always and forever is a new development.
Cont…
- Status