Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanhin
That's fine. I'm just letting you know why we claim there was an apostasy. Any serious study of this belief of ours has to ultimately include a discussion about the First Vision, because that, above all other reasons, is why we believe it.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you saying you don't wish to have a conversation about the First Vision because it has the word "abomination" in it? Why not?
Exactly. That is why it all comes down to whether the First Vision really occurred or not. That's the question that must be answered. If you knew for sure that it did happen, wouldn't that change your opinion about whether you would subscribe to it or not?
Well no, that doesn't answer the question. I'll explain. The fact that I (LDS) believe it, does not make it true; and so the fact that you (Catholic) do not believe does not make it false. It either actually happened or it did not. The reality of that event is true or false, regardless of whether you or I choose to believe it or not. So, the actual answer to the question, "Did the First Vision really occur?" is paramount to all questions regarding the validity of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
I'm not asking if you know the answer, I'm suggesting that the answer to that question is the most important to the authenticity of our religion. Do you agree?
Sincerely,
Vanhin
|
Hi again Vanhin,
I greatly appreciate your efforts
and perspective
Why you claim there was an apostasy- Yes, I fully realize the importance of the apostasy claim by LDS leading to " restore " ( thank you for that )
I was simply offering a different view that there was not a Great Apostasy " nor is there any evidence in NT for it.
I will try " abomination " ( short answer as to not get caught up in nor divert from the topic at hand ) Nicene Creed, year 520 or so, adopted by the only Christian Church that was available on the planet. JS implies in 1820ish that the Creed is an abomination.
Try, if you would, understand how some may find that enormously insulting especially when you consider that many do not adhere to the " first vision " or the next several things that followed. Not sure I did a very good job with that but I did try.
I would absolutly agree that the " first vision " is indeed paramount to what the LDS faith is built on. I would further suggest that all following visions by all prophets, from first ( JS )
to current ( Monson sp?? sorry ) should be completly accepted without contradiction or " speculation " as to the evaluation of the authenticity of all it's total claims.
I would agree that the evaluation of the authenticty of the first vision claim is a large part of your religion, but all the following prophetic claims and doctrine are certainly a part of that " restoration ".
Thanks for your ear,
God bless,
Carl