C
christianley
Guest
Coming back to the truth? The Catholic Church never espoused one of the doctrines you listed as apostasy. There is ample evidence it fought those doctrines. To claim otherwise is simply dishonest.
- Status
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
So Jesus sets up a Church in the East and it apostacizes I’ve heard anywhere between immediately and ~ the Council of Nicea. Then Jesus sets up a Church in the West and it too apostacizes within ~200 years. All this AFTER Jesus promises that the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church he is leaving in Peter’s charge, and that he will be with us always until the end of time. Sorry to believe that I would have to think Jesus a liar and a two time loser. And that Joseph Smith’s boasting that “I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it.”. Now I don’t believe that at all, I believe what Jesus told Peter and the Apostles. Therefore I am not insulting Jesus, I think you’re missing that point.
Z
zerinus
Guest
The process was complete when the Apostles died. From that point of view, the Apostasy was an event, not a process. As I have previously explained, by the Apostasy we mean the loss of priesthood and divine authority of the church. That event took place, and was complete, when the last Apostle died, or ceased to be in charge of the governance of the church.
Strictly speaking, the Apostasy did not begin, but was complete with the death of the last Apostle. How do we know that? Because by the Apostasy we mean the loss of the priesthood and divine authority of the church, and that divine authority was lost when the last Apostle died.
zerinus
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
Z
zerinus
Guest
The evidence for the Apostasy of the church (not just of some individuals) lies in the fact that the institution of the Twelve Apostled did not survive. It did not survive because it could not have survived. The Apostasy of the church was such as to make the continuation of that institution in the church untenable. Therefore that institution was taken from the earth, and the keys of authority and the priesthood was taken with it.
zerinus
C
christianley
Guest
Give me your proof text that shows we needed to continue to have Twelve Apostles. I’m sure you’ve got one. Then we can tear it apart.
Z
zerinus
Guest
N
NotreDameMormon
Guest
Your attacks, coupled with a blatant disregard for the LDS doctrines clearly cited in this thread, reveal your determined ignorance. You have now repeatedly tried to attribute false sentiment as LDS theology and intentionally blasphemed Christ in the process. Your depravity in this matter astounds me.
And, as characteristic of this type of slander, you take a road already revealed to be vain and foolish. The remarks you attribute to Joseph Smith come from an illustrative sermon on the writings of the Apostle Paul, 2 Corinthians, Chapter 11.
For your pleasure, a few excerpts:
"Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ…For I suppose I was not a whit behind the very chiefest apostles. But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been throughly made manifest among you in all things. Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely?..As the truth of Christ is in me, **no man shall stop me of this boasting **in the regions of Achaia… I say again, Let no man think me a fool; if otherwise, yet as a fool receive me, that **I may boast **myself a little…That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting. Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I will glory also. For ye suffer fools gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise. For ye suffer, if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face. I speak as concerning reproach, as though we had been weak. Howbeit whereinsoever any is bold, (I speak foolishly,) I am bold also. Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I. Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.
And now, the “boasting foolishly” quote in context:
"I, like Paul, have been in perils, and oftener than anyone in this generation. As Paul boasted, I have suffered more than Paul did. I should be like a fish out of water, if I were out of persecutions. Perhaps my brethren think it requires all this to keep me humble. The Lord has constituted me so curiously that I glory in persecution. I am not nearly so humble as if I were not persecuted. If oppression will make a wise man mad, much more a fool. If they want a beardless boy to whip all the world, I will get on the top of a mountain and crow like a rooster: I shall always beat them. When facts are proved, truth and innocence will prevail at last. My enemies are no philosophers: they think that when they have my spoke under, they will keep me down; but for the fools, I will hold on and fly over them.
God is in the still small voice. In all these affidavits, indictments, it is all of the devil-all corruption. Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on the top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet. You know my daily walk and conversation. I am in the bosom of a virtuous and good people." History of the Church, vol. 6, pg. 408-409
Anyone familiar with LDS faith and practice would know the Prophet did not hold himself above Christ. The boasting as Paul is certainly no reliable source for doctrines related to the apostasy. The prophet and Church have taught clearly and specifically on that subject, and in all cases, the LDS doctrine is: the people rejected Christ, the Apostles, and the Gospel, and thus, Christ pulled the keys and priesthood from the Earth. There was no failure of Christ in LDS doctrine.
M
majick275
Guest
no I’m not. Notice I said you could use the BoM or the JST to do this with. are they pieced together? show me from those sources (no blending in D&C or PoGP) that prior to the apostasy the church taught the doctrines and practicess and had the organizational structure that maps to the current unique elements of the LDS church. That would appear to be what was “restored” wouild it not? Those things that are only found in the LDS church but that existed prior to the apostasy?
So show me…
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
Excuse me?
All I did was quote Joseph Smith directly, which is very relavent to the discussion we are having, I have not confused anything at all, nor attacked you personally even once, or the LDS faith even once, which you can not say the same. Nor have I blasphemed Jesus at all since I don’t believe in the assertion he failed twice in setting up his Church. Your charity level is miles away from what is acceptable.Joseph Smith clearly says that he (Joseph Smith) was more successful in starting a Church than Jesus. One would think if Joseph Smith really received the keys from Jesus Christ, he would give Him a little credit for the “restoration”.
N
NotreDameMormon
Guest
Brother. I appreciate you restating the challenge. Unfortunately, you are still asking me to show, in the Bible, how the restored knowledge of the initial Church and its teachings, that were lost, are evidenced in scripture (the Bible) that was pieced together after they were lost!
C
christianley
Guest
So the Catholic Church rejected Christ? It has defended the divinity of Christ from its beginnings against heresy, against atheism, yet, it has rejected Christ. So now we know all your words of reconciliation are simply sophistry designed to try to disarm us. At least we are upfront about rejecting Mormonism completely as a valid philosophy. There can really be no reconciliation between Catholics and Mormons because they don’t overlap in any significant way. You believe Catholics rejected Christ and we believe Joseph Smith’s teachings are fully and completely fraudulant and heretical. At least the Protestants accept the unique divinity of Christ unlike Mormons who say he is a created being. At least now we understand each other.
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
Yes there was, the Church Christ originally set up failed on two seperate continents and “dwindled in unbelief” for millenia. That clearly flies in the face of what Christ promised when he set the Church up, with Peter as the rock. If that doesn’t make Christ a two time failure perhaps we just have completely different views on what failure is. The LDS view is clearly the Church dissapeared for over 1,800 years. Sounds to me like Christ reniged on His promise to Peter.
N
NotreDameMormon
Guest
What a response! Don’t get so carried away! Temperance, brother, temperance!
I said “the people,” not the Church. The people of the world, speaking generally, rejected Christ, His Apostles, and His Gospel. The Church spun into general apostasy and Christ pulled the keys and priesthood. The pieces the Catholic Church correctly kept or put back together are not held by the LDS to have saved the world from loss of the keys and the priesthood.
N
NotreDameMormon
Guest
Post 14, brother. You missed it again! You are starting to look ridiculous.
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
More personal attacks? I read it, I think it’s obvious I disagree with your interpretation. If you’re going to repeat the same things, so will I. In fact to believe post 14, we have to believe that the entire Christian Church lost the powers of the Holy Spirit for over 1,800 years, and Christ still failed since apparently by your assertion Christians rejected the Holy Spirit, rejected Christ, and rejected the Gospel, to the point where the Gospel and the Church completely dissappeared. All of these Christ promised would not happen. When Christ sends the Holy Spirit He promises it will remain with us always. You contradict yourself over and over.
Now please try to up the level of discussion and lose the personal attacks, I have not said one ill thing about you or your faith.
J
Jaypeeto3
Guest
I looked into this whole early church great apostasy thing myself back in 1990/1991. Having been raised a JW, then briefly a Morrmon, then baptized a Presbyterian in 1990, I heard the early apostasy theory from three angles, JW, LDS, and Protestant (though the protestants generally date the apostasy later than do the LDS and JWs).
What I found in my study was that there was no existing evidence of any such great apostasy occuring. What there was, in the late first and early 2nd century, was a Christian church which spanned the Roman Empire encompassing many languages and cultures, and which basically taught the exact same thing in every country. In a non-technological age, that is nothing short of a miracle I think. Yes, there were groups who were breaking away from that Church, the Catholic Church, and even hypocrites and bad folks among the members of that Church, but there was no great apostasy early on. If what the JWs and the Mormons believe happened had really happened, there would have been widespread intra-church infighting and rioting all over the ancient Roman Empire and Mediterranean world, not the calm unity that was visible up until the awful Arian heresy broke out in the Church in the early 4th century.
The early great apostasy of the Church is a laughable myth, and a blasphemous lie.
Yes, the Great Apostasy spoken of by Paul WILL come, just before the rise of the Antichrist, as scripture predicts. It did NOT come in the first and second centuries A.D.
Jaypeeto3 (aka Jaypeeto4)
What I found in my study was that there was no existing evidence of any such great apostasy occuring. What there was, in the late first and early 2nd century, was a Christian church which spanned the Roman Empire encompassing many languages and cultures, and which basically taught the exact same thing in every country. In a non-technological age, that is nothing short of a miracle I think. Yes, there were groups who were breaking away from that Church, the Catholic Church, and even hypocrites and bad folks among the members of that Church, but there was no great apostasy early on. If what the JWs and the Mormons believe happened had really happened, there would have been widespread intra-church infighting and rioting all over the ancient Roman Empire and Mediterranean world, not the calm unity that was visible up until the awful Arian heresy broke out in the Church in the early 4th century.
The early great apostasy of the Church is a laughable myth, and a blasphemous lie.
Yes, the Great Apostasy spoken of by Paul WILL come, just before the rise of the Antichrist, as scripture predicts. It did NOT come in the first and second centuries A.D.
Jaypeeto3 (aka Jaypeeto4)
N
NotreDameMormon
Guest
Brother, that’s all you have to say. This is the first time you’ve said so. Up until now you have directly asserted that the LDS view leads to calling Christ a failure and a liar. That is one of the most offensive things I have encountered here, particularly since you intentionally have ignored the LDS premise (at post 14) that would not allow you to make that assertion.
I am happy to maintain and prefer a charitable exchange. I have deleted the post you took offense from. I hope that is an acceptable olive branch.
S
Saint_Michael
Guest
My interpretation is obviously that yes in LDS theology Christ is a liar and miserable failure, since His promises were not kept and He allowed billions of Christians to worship Him falsely to damnation by trusting in a Church by His own words would never fail us, for nearly two millenia. If you’re offended by that, I don’t know what to say, that’s my only take as a Catholic, that’s any Catholic’s only take. You stating that the Catholic Church rejected Christ and the Gospel and corrupted Christians is offensive to me (and yes the only Christians in the Early Church were “catholics” so saying “people” instead of the “Catholic Church” is no different), but I do not attack you.
Z
zerinus
Guest
The institution of the Twelve Apostles was meant to last forever. The individual Apostles would have died, and others would have been appointed to succeed them.
With the death of the Apostles, the keys of the authority of the whole church were taken away. This requires some theological explanation. In the LDS Church, we make a distinction between the priesthood, and the keys of the priesthood. The priesthood itself is something that when it is conferred on someone (assuming it is done by proper authority), it cannot be taken away. He remains a priest forever (unless he commits some very serious transgressions). But the keys of the priesthood is something else that can be taken away. An office in the priesthood is something that confers certain keys on the individual, which he can exercise as long as he holds that office in the Church; and when he is released, those keys are taken away. For example, a bishop has to be a high priest in the Melchizedek priesthood to be ordained a bishop. When he is ordained, he is given the keys to function in that capacity in his own ward (and not in any other). That gives him the right and authority to do certain things pertaining to his calling in his ward. When he is released, those keys are taken away form him; but his priesthood remains. That is not taken away. Those keys always have clearly defined limits and boundaries, and are always delegated and function under the authority of a higher officer. The bishop holds the keys of his office under the authority of the stake president, and he in turn holds the keys of his office under the authority of the President of the Church. The President of the Church is the only one who holds all the keys of all the offices in the Church, and he delegates those keys to other to exercise in their respective callings as he sees fit. He holds those keys in conjunction with his two counsellors who form the First Presidency of the Church. In the absence of the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles exercise those keys over the Church. Now suppose that through some catastrophic event, all the general leadership of the Church were wiped off the face of the whole earth. What would happen to all the keys of priesthood offices delegated to the rest of the Church? The answer is that they would become dysfunctional. Nobody would hold any keys, until the authority was restored again by divine intervention and angelic ministration to the Church. That is how the priesthood works in the Church. In the early church, with the death of the Twelve Apostles, the keys of authority of the whole church was taken away, and the “laying on of hands” of the ministers of the church no longer conferred any keys, priesthood, or indelible authority to another.
zerinus
- Status