Your Notre Dame Mormon on The Apostasy

[zerinus]

So the LDS must have seen these “plain and precious parts” to know they exist and aren’t included in the Bible.

Not necessarily. That does not logically follow. We know that they existed because the Lord has made it know to us in the Book of Mormon that they did; but it does not logically follow that we must have seen them. Actually, the answer to your question is partly yes and partly no. All of them have not yet been restored to us; but some of those lost truths, or the essence of them, have been restored to us in various ways and means—through the modern revelations and scriptures of the LDS Church:

And it came to pass that the angel of the Lord spake unto me, saying: Behold, saith the Lamb of God, after I have visited the remnant of the house of Israel—and this remnant of whom I speak is the seed of thy father—wherefore, after I have visited them in judgment, and smitten them by the hand of the Gentiles, and after the Gentiles do stumble exceedingly, because of the most plain and precious parts of the gospel of the Lamb which have been kept back by that abominable church, which is the mother of harlots, saith the Lamb—I will be merciful unto the Gentiles in that day, insomuch that I will bring forth unto them, in mine own power, much of my gospel, which shall be plain and precious, saith the Lamb. (Book of Mormon | 1 Nephi 13:34)

So they have been restored to us in part, but not necessarily always in their original form.

Where are they and what do they say?

These include the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Perl of Great Price, and JST. You have to go and read them for yourself to find out what they say. I couldn’t summarise them all for you here.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

Catholics… watch out, to them we really are the “abominable church” AND their prime target.

Not true! Believe it not! False propaganda against the LDS Church!

zerinus

 

[christianley]

Oh one more thing…

AND I must say to all ex-mormons… You all are beyond inspiring to have had the strength to break away. I honestly dont even know how you get out of it when you are never allowed to question anything. These threads are a blessing for those us, well my case in particular, who were led astray and almost joined such a false church.

Be assured the number of people who are getting out of the Mormon Church is increasing. The truth about Mormonism is widely available on the Internet and more and more Mormons are waking up to the truth about Joseph Smith’s fraud. Unfortunately, Mormonism has poisoned the water for many of them, and they often reject Christianity altogether once they make the break. I am so grateful God led me to other Christian churches and finally to the Catholic Church where I learned the truth about Jesus.

 

[NotreDameMormon]

I think the main question is “where do you get these ideas?” I see your quotes as typical LDS unfounded assertions…I mean why go from three down to two and not even have the same “calling”? Joseph and Oliver were “first and second Elder”. When was Joseph Smith ordained an Apostle? cuz according to the D&C that’s not what happened with Peter, James and John.

Majick,

There is more than enough of the “biblical justification” you asked for to support the claims of the LDS faith. I understand if you personally do not accept the scriptural interpretation, but you asked for the LDS “justification” in scripture. You have it.

Joseph was called as a prophet and given the keys of the priesthood from Peter, James, and John to reestablish the Church. The process naturally requires time, preaching of the restored Gospel, gathering the saints, and creating the offices and calling apostles, seventy, bishops, priests, etc. from among the people.

Reading the D&C, as you obviously have, clearly demonstrates the Lord was directing Joseph in the restoration, one step at a time. It follows the same process the Savior used with Peter, James, and John. The calling, ordaining, and passing of keys from the prophets of previous dispensations:

"We now have in the restored Church apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, and evangelists, as spoken of by Paul to the Ephesians. These priesthood offices were established by the Savior when He organized His Church in the meridian of time. We recognize the two orders of the priesthood and the offices contained within them: the lesser priesthood is the Aaronic Priesthood, named after Aaron; and the greater priesthood is the Melchizedek Priesthood, named after Melchizedek, to whom Abraham paid tithes. The Aaronic Priesthood was restored on May 15, 1829, under the hands of John the Baptist, and the Melchizedek Priesthood within a month under the hands of the ancient Apostles Peter, James, and John to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Thus those possessing the priesthood today claim the power to act in the name of God through the priesthood, “which power commands respect both on earth and in heaven.”

In the Kirtland Temple on April 3, 1836, Moses appeared and gave the Prophet Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery the keys of the gathering of Israel. After this, Elias appeared and committed the gospel of Abraham, that in “our seed all generations after us should be blessed.” After this, Elijah the prophet appeared and gave to them the keys of this dispensation, including the sealing power, to bind in heaven that which is bound on earth within the temples. Thus, prophets of previous gospel dispensations presented their keys to the Prophet Joseph Smith in this, the “dispensation of the fulness of times” spoken of by the Apostle Paul to the Ephesians…

Many of the revelations that came to the Prophet Joseph Smith were written down in a book that came to be known as the Doctrine and Covenants. This contains further insights about principles and ordinances and is a valuable source concerning the structure of the priesthood. James E. Faust, “The Restoration of All Things,” Ensign, May 2006, 61

 

[majick275]

Not true! Believe it not! False propaganda against the LDS Church!

zerinus

how funny:
from the LDS “pearl of great price”
Moses 5:
13 *And Satan came among them, saying: I am also a son of God; and he commanded them, saying: Believe it not; and they believed it not, and they loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish. *

now who here thinks they are “also a god”? (LDS teach man is a god in embryo)

Who just told us to “believe it not?”

Was there anyone more carnal and sensual than Joseph Smith with his harem that included other mens wives?

Read the rest of that “scripture” and think about the pre-1990 mormon temple endowment. Who was doing all the “swear by thy throat?”

 

[NotreDameMormon]

"In 1958, LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie published Mormon Doctrine, a dictionary of theological concepts. The definition of "church of the devil’’ was the Roman Catholic Church. And under "transubstantiation’’ - the Catholic belief that communion bread and wine actually became Christ’s body and blood - McConkie wrote in part: The doctrine is a sort of religious cannibalism which partakes measurably of the same spirit, and is enshrouded by the same blanket of satanic darkness, as the murderous blood drinking orgies of the most degenerate pagan peoples.’’

I appreciate your fervor, but you are a day late and a dollar short on this topic. This was the last thread and your argument is moot.

Mormon Doctrine was not published by the Church, the Church has never taught those things and Elder McConkie’s personal views are not doctrine. The leaders of the Church objected to many assertions in Mormon Doctrine. They directly conflict with clear LDS doctrine.

President David O. McKay noted: “We decided that Bruce R. McConkie’s book, ‘Mormon Doctrine’ recently published by Bookcraft Company, must not be re-published, as it is full of errors and misstatements, and it is most unfortunate that it has received such wide circulation. It is reported to us that Brother McConkie has made corrections to his book, and is now preparing another edition. We decided this morning that we do not want him to publish another edition.”

It was later agreed that publication would be approved of if changes were made and guided under direction of the Twelve.

In his biography of his father, Joseph Fielding McConkie wrote:

“On July 5, 1966, President McKay invited Elder McConkie into his office and gave approval for the book to be reprinted if appropriate changes were made and approved. Elder Spencer W. Kimball was assigned to be Elder McConkie’s mentor in making those changes.”

 

[majick275]

Majick,

There is more than enough of the “biblical justification” you asked for to support the claims of the LDS faith. I understand if you personally do not accept the scriptural interpretation, but you asked for the LDS “justification” in scripture. You have it.

then I must have misspoke. let me rephrase the question. Where is the BIBLICAL justification?

Joseph was called as a prophet and given the keys of the priesthood from Peter, James, and John to reestablish the Church. The process naturally requires time, preaching of the restored Gospel, gathering the saints, and creating the offices and calling apostles, seventy, bishops, priests, etc. from among the people.

yet Joseph and Oliver led as first and second elder. JS-H verse 72. (Which appears contradictory to D&C 27:12 but history shows us the timeline so we know that JS-H was the only thing in effect for quite some time.)

Reading the D&C, as you obviously have, clearly demonstrates the Lord was directing Joseph in the restoration, one step at a time. It follows the same process the Savior used with Peter, James, and John. The calling, ordaining, and passing of keys from the prophets of previous dispensations: (/snip)

In the Kirtland Temple on April 3, 1836, Moses appeared and gave the Prophet Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery the keys of the gathering of Israel. After this, Elias appeared and committed the gospel of Abraham, that in “our seed all generations after us should be blessed.” After this, Elijah the prophet appeared and gave to them the keys of this dispensation, including the sealing power, to bind in heaven that which is bound on earth within the temples. Thus, prophets of previous gospel dispensations presented their keys to the Prophet Joseph Smith in this, the “dispensation of the fulness of times” spoken of by the Apostle Paul to the Ephesians…

Many of the revelations that came to the Prophet Joseph Smith were written down in a book that came to be known as the Doctrine and Covenants. This contains further insights about principles and ordinances and is a valuable source concerning the structure of the priesthood. James E. Faust, “The Restoration of All Things,” Ensign, May 2006, 61

no it doesn’t. Christ called his apostles first. Why didn’t joseph have a full first presidency if that’s what is really required?

the two orders of priesthood was sidney rigdons idea. Jesus never taught that. Once again I would refer you the the entire letter tot he hebrews. These are not restorations of anytihng that existed before and they are not what the bible directs us to today.

This idea of keys gets way out of whack with Joseph Smith. How/Why would john the baptist be needed as teh melchisadec hold all the keys of the aaronic? Why peter, james and john? they were not (according the othe BoM) the last ones to hold them. Wher are the three nephites in all of this and it was Moroni that “called” joseph originally why wouldn’t he have baptized or ordained them? They were ordained by the laying on of hands but weren’t validly baptized since they didn’t have authority…it’s not making any sense.

Moses the gathering of Israel? please…read the old testament. if there was such a person with THE keys to this it would have been someone much later in the story. Doesn’t the “president” of the church hold ALL of the keys? so it should have been Peter? or whatever nephite prophet was last standing. Moroni? Elijah came after Christ how we would he have keys to our “dispensation?”

There was no “Elias”. That’s a translation error/misunderstanding of the bible by joseph.

why would all of these “prophets” have to give their keys to Joseph? wouldn’t peter have them all? what about Christ? he appeared to Joseph, he is the “great high priest”, shouldn’t he have been involved? This story is a very jumbled rewritng of biblical history with interpretations based solely on extra-biblical accounts that aren’t even supported by the JST. (or the BoM)

I believe that the actual doctrines and practices of the current LDS church are based primarily on the D&C…which not only contradicts itself but isn’t comletely adhered to by the LDS today.

If you are looking for an apostasy there it is. The Catholic church on the other hand traces a direct apostolic succession “in the flesh” with no breaks. Our tradition matches up with our scripture and we have the help of historical documentation to make it plain that from the didache the current catechism the teachings and practices demonstrate an unchanging doctrine. How could that possibly apostate?

 

[majick275]

I appreciate your fervor, but you are a day late and a dollar short on this topic. This was the last thread and your argument is moot.

Mormon Doctrine was not published by the Church, the Church has never taught those things and Elder McConkie’s personal views are not doctrine. The leaders of the Church objected to many assertions in Mormon Doctrine. They directly conflict with clear LDS doctrine.

which calls into question then the value of mormon apostles as prophets, seers and revelators who lead the church through revelation.

President David O. McKay noted: “We decided that Bruce R. McConkie’s book, ‘Mormon Doctrine’ recently published by Bookcraft Company, must not be re-published, as it is full of errors and misstatements, and it is most unfortunate that it has received such wide circulation. It is reported to us that Brother McConkie has made corrections to his book, and is now preparing another edition. We decided this morning that we do not want him to publish another edition.”

but he did and it is still one of the best sellers in any LDS bookstore.

It was later agreed that publication would be approved of if changes were made and guided under direction of the Twelve.

but he WAS one of the twelve.

In his biography of his father, Joseph Fielding McConkie wrote:

“On July 5, 1966, President McKay invited Elder McConkie into his office and gave approval for the book to be reprinted if appropriate changes were made and approved. Elder Spencer W. Kimball was assigned to be Elder McConkie’s mentor in making those changes.”

and all they did was make it less “confrontational”. We have seen other writngs of LDS leaders on this subject that demonstrate where Mconkie got his ideas on this. He learned this at church.

 

[NotreDameMormon]

which calls into question then the value of mormon apostles as prophets, seers and revelators who lead the church through revelation.

Nice try.

The authority of the Twelve is in the body, not the individual.

"Now, brethren, I think there is one thing which we should have exceedingly clear in our minds. Neither the President of the Church, nor the First Presidency, nor the united voice of the First Presidency and the Twelve will ever lead the Saints astray or send forth counsel to the world that is contrary to the mind and will of the Lord.

An individual may fall by the wayside, or have views, or give counsel which falls short of what the Lord intends. But the voice of the First Presidency and the united voice of those others who hold with them the keys of the kingdom shall always guide the Saints and the world in those paths where the Lord wants them to be." Joseph Fielding Smith, “Eternal Keys and the Right to Preside,” Ensign, July 1972, 87

 

[majick275]

so now we are back to the question of how valid were Joseph Smiths actions prior to the establishment of a Quorum of twelve apostles?

 

[Kay_Cee]

Hello.

I’ve been following this thread for a while but now feel compelled to jump in.

If, as NDM claims, a Great Apostasy took place, we absolutely need to know the date of it. If such a thing occurred, then the teachings of the Church *before *the Apostasy were orthodox and worthy of belief, and the teachings of the Church *after *the Apostasy were heretical and should be rejected. It is therefore essential that we know the date of it if we want to be true believers and follow God’s word.

However, when pressed about the date, this is NDM’s response:

I was sure you were joking. You have to be.

Now I don’t think anybody wanted NDM to be as accurate as “2 p.m. on August 2.” I don’t think we’re asking even for an exact year. But surely if such an event took place, it was one of the most significant events in Christainity, so pinning it down to within a few years, even to a certain century, shouldn’t be that difficult.

So what I would like from NDM is one of the following:

1. A date when the Great Apostasy took place
2. The number of the response when he already told us (I read this thread very carefully, but I might have missed it)
3. An explanation as to why he can’t give us the date, or
4. An admittance he doesn’t know the date

 

[NotreDameMormon]

so now we are back to the question of how valid were Joseph Smiths actions prior to the establishment of a Quorum of twelve apostles?

He was given the keys. He the authority (and commandment) to establish the Church. The office he and Oliver ordained themselves to is irrelevant. When the Twelve were created he passed the keys to them.

“This great and good man was led, before his death, to call the Twelve together, from time to time, and to instruct them in all things pertaining to the kingdom, ordinances, and government of God. He often observed that he was laying the foundation, but it would remain for the Twelve to complete the building. Said he, ‘I know not why; but for some reason I am constrained to hasten my preparations, and to confer upon the Twelve all the ordinances, keys, covenants, endowments, and sealing ordinances of the priesthood … for, said he, the Lord is about to lay the burden on your shoulders and let me rest awhile; and if they kill me … the kingdom of God will roll on, as I have now finished the work which was laid upon me, by committing to you all things for the building up of the kingdom according to the heavenly vision, and the pattern shown me from heaven.’ ” Parley P. Pratt, “Proclamation,” Millennial Star, 5 [March 1845]: 151.

“As all students of our history know, we have maintained and followed the position that the keys and the authority of the priesthood, that authority without which there can be no true Church of Jesus Christ, were given to the Council of the Twelve Apostles in the very early days of the Church so that in the event of the death of the president the authority would remain and be passed on legally and properly for so long as the Church should continue.” *Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Joseph Smith III Document and the Keys of the Kingdom,” Ensign, May 1981, 20 *

 

[JoyFull]

so now we are back to the question of how valid were Joseph Smiths actions prior to the establishment of a Quorum of twelve apostles?

I realize I’m jumping in rather late, but…this pertains to my question yesterday as well.

Was Jospeh Smith the “buck stops here guy”, or does the current Prophet supercede him? Did Joseph Smith have the fullness of truth * (according to the Mormon faith) in his teachings?*

 

[NotreDameMormon]

Now I don’t think anybody wanted NDM to be as accurate as “2 p.m. on August 2.” I don’t think we’re asking even for an exact year. But surely if such an event took place, it was one of the most significant events in Christainity, so pinning it down to within a few years, even to a certain century, shouldn’t be that difficult.

So what I would like from NDM is one of the following:

1. A date when the Great Apostasy took place
2. The number of the response when he already told us (I read this thread very carefully, but I might have missed it)
3. An explanation as to why he can’t give us the date, or
4. An admittance he doesn’t know the date

Now this is an intelligent request. I’ll try to give you all four.

(1) As certainly as there was apostasy occurring within the Church (as cited in scripture above), there is no one date that can be attributed the “general” apostasy of the church membership. Such apostasy began during the lives of the Apostles and continued through (if not hastened by) their deaths.

(2) I cite posts 1, 15, and 18.

(3) For obvious reason, I cannot tell you from the Bible when the Lord withdrew the keys, revelation, and priesthood (the authors) from the apostatizing church, if that is what you are asking, but I can give you these suggested dates of letters chronicling the apostasy:

1 and 2 Thessalonians (ca. A.D. 50–51)
James (ca. mid-50s A.D.)
1 Corinthians (ca. A.D. 56)
2 Corinthians (ca. A.D. 57)
Galatians (ca. A.D. 58)
Colossians (ca. A.D. 61)
1 Timothy, Titus (ca. A.D. 63)
2 Timothy (ca. A.D. 67)
Jude (ca. A.D. 80)
Revelation (ca. A.D. 96)
1–3 John (ca. A.D. 98)

(4) Again, there is no “date” of the apostasy, so in that respect, I cannot give you one. It was not a council held at a certain time to decide to abandon the Apostles and their teachings. It was a process of deviation and a struggle of men seeking power to usurp the leadership of the Church of Christ, and a general falling away from the Apostles and the doctrines of the Gospel. It began early and continues, in many respects, today.

 

[NotreDameMormon]

Was Jospeh Smith the “buck stops here guy”, or does the current Prophet supercede him? Did Joseph Smith have the fullness of truth * (according to the Mormon faith) in his teachings?*

I’m not ignoring you, JoyFull. I think this is a great question, one deserving of an in-depth discussion. I’ve had similar questions so I’ll use yours for a new thread discussion this next Sunday, if that’s alright.

 

[majick275]

He was given the keys. He the authority (and commandment) to establish the Church. The office he and Oliver ordained themselves to is irrelevant. When the Twelve were created he passed the keys to them.

irelevant? how so? this is supposed to be a restoration of the original church based on the assumption that it “ceased to ahve authority” when it no longer had a quorum of apostles. YOU claimed the need to be led by the group in order to have proper authority. Joseph giving keys to subsequent “apostles” (which WAS in dispute during the Brigham Young Sidney Rigdon succession struggle)seems to be where Mormonism STARTS the concept of a quorum of Apostles being necessary for ecclesiastical authority. Please show where Joseph Smith had the authority as you have presented here to do this. (I am looking for consistency in structure)

 

[majick275]

I realize I’m jumping in rather late, but…this pertains to my question yesterday as well.

Was Jospeh Smith the “buck stops here guy”, or does the current Prophet supercede him? Did Joseph Smith have the fullness of truth * (according to the Mormon faith) in his teachings?*

he was but he does and qualified yes. (mormons believe that Joseph had all of the truth but not all of his teachings were doctrinally binding as he wasn’t always acting in the role of prophet)

 

[Kay_Cee]

Now this is an intelligent request. I’ll try to give you all four.

(1) As certainly as there was apostasy occurring within the Church (as cited in scripture above), there is no one date that can be attributed the “general” apostasy of the church membership. Such apostasy began during the lives of the Apostles and continued through (if not hastened by) their deaths.

(2) I cite posts 1, 15, and 18.

(3) For obvious reason, I cannot tell you from the Bible when the Lord withdrew the keys, revelation, and priesthood (the authors) from the apostatizing church, if that is what you are asking, but I can give you these suggested dates of letters chronicling the apostasy:

1 and 2 Thessalonians (ca. A.D. 50–51)
James (ca. mid-50s A.D.)
1 Corinthians (ca. A.D. 56)
2 Corinthians (ca. A.D. 57)
Galatians (ca. A.D. 58)
Colossians (ca. A.D. 61)
1 Timothy, Titus (ca. A.D. 63)
2 Timothy (ca. A.D. 67)
Jude (ca. A.D. 80)
Revelation (ca. A.D. 96)
1–3 John (ca. A.D. 98)

(4) Again, there is no “date” of the apostasy, so in that respect, I cannot give you one. It was not a council held at a certain time to decide to abandon the Apostles and their teachings. It was a process of deviation and a struggle of men seeking power to usurp the leadership of the Church of Christ, and a general falling away from the Apostles and the doctrines of the Gospel. It began early and continues, in many respects, today.

I take it by this you claim the apostasy was a process.

If that is so, it must have a beginning and an end. You’ve stated when you think this process began. What I would like now is a date when it was completed, that is, at what point the entire early church was in apostasy. I’m not asking you to tell me from the Bible. I’m asking you to tell me from history.

 

[perez639]

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary the meaning of apostasy is the renunciation of a religious faith or abandonment of a previous loyalty. NDM’s use of the word alone is wishywashy. Based on what apostasy means there should be a definite answer as to when it occurred… Saying its a process is a round about way of telling us there really is no answer.

Peace,

Regis UNiversity Student

 

[Saint_Michael]

I would say 75% of the Christian world today is in apostasy, it has happened, and will always happen. The LDS assertion of a TOTAL apostasy is unfounded, and completely unverifiable. Add to the fact that it makes Christ a liar, and two time loser and it’s easy to say with confidence that Christ left His Church to the Apostles and promised the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Christ promised to be with us always until the end of the age. Not be with us for ~30 years, then abandon all of Christianity until Joseph Smith came around some 1800 years later.

Fact is Mromons can NOT provide a shred of evidence for a total apostasy, either Biblically or historically (much like the Book of Mormon). Catholics can provide both that there was never a total apostasy.

No evidence of a TOTAL apostasy and Mormonism falls on its face, that’s the facts, everything else DNA evidence, historicity of the BofM, changing doctrine in complete 180 degrees, contradictions with the truths fo the Bible (One God primarily), endowment ceremonies taken from Freemasonry etc… is just icing on the cake.