Uncomfortable Doctrine

[HiJolly]

Originally Posted by ceeboo

CONTEXT AND DEFINITIONS ARE CRITICAL FOR THIS DISCUSSION:
Apostasy- a falling away from the Church Jesus built
COMPLETE OR TOTAL APOSTASY- JESUS' Church gone, lights out, no more authority

I notice here an institutional emphasis. In the LDS view, the Church still could exist in the midst of a complete or total apostacy. When we speak of apostacy, it is not so much just the Church in name that goes away, but rather two important elements: (1) the organization of the Church (2) the Priesthood of the individual members of the Church.

As I understand it there was no central or unified Church for at least 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. There were local Bishops and no single Bishop was in charge of the collective, until after the Nicene Council. Not only this, but the council was convened by Imperial decree. Regardless, the Church no longer had apostles, though we read in scripture the apparent need to replace deceased apostles with new replacements. Unfortunately, this biblical practice did not continue, and the Church was no longer organized in the way the Savior set it up, the way Peter tried to keep it going. This is not a minor detail.

Donatism strikes at the heart of #2 above. We as LDS understand that the priesthood authority departs from a priesthood holder if that man does not walk the path of righteousness. We either excommunicate the wicked priesthood holder, or release them from positions of authority, since we know by revelation that God has ALREADY removed their authority. We do agree with the Catholic Church that ordinances performed by men WITH exoteric authority but without the Godly (esoteric) authority are honored by the institution of the Church, but we also remove the offender post haste as soon as their ungodly deeds are known.

So we have here 2 cases for an apostate church that still exists (at least after Constantine pulled it together again) that has lost its divinely appointed organization and lost its leader's godly (esoteric) authority. And all this with no Pope in sight. I want to make it clear, though, that this apostacy applies to an existing Church, and not to individuals who are sincere and honest in their spiritual pursuits. For example, I am completely convinced that St. John of the Cross (Juan de la Cruz) did in fact see God. I love his books!

I do not think this is incompatible with St. John belonging to an apostate Church. God is who He is, and speaks to whomever He will.

Originally Posted by ceeboo

I do understand the commitment that LDS MUST have in a " total " or " Great " apostasy
but I must reply that it IMHO the complete apostasy claim does not exist.

Total does not mean the institution of the Catholic Church would have to disappear, in the LDS view.

Originally Posted by ceeboo

First, regarding my interpretation of these scriptures. Many of them do indeed speak of apostasy ( people falling away from the Church ) NOT ONE of them speak of a complete apostasy, total darkness of the Church, lights out etc. In addition, when the scriptures do speak of apostasy they tell us that it will be in the end times ( IMHO the end times do not mean the year 200 or 300 or whatever " shortly after the original 12 apostles passed" implies.

I think we can agree to differ on this. Amicably, I'm sure!

Originally Posted by ceeboo

I am not a Biblical scholar ( just a 40 year old sinner like the rest of us ) but since I was asked about my interpretation of scripture, I think I will suggest a few of my own that I feel is directly related to this " total apostasy thread " thus " restoration".
Matthew 16:18, ( Jesus' promise of his Church ) " on this rock ( Peter ) I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Matthew 28:20 ( Jesus' words to all of us ) " Behold I will be with you always " ( there are many many more )

Joseph taught that the 'rock' meant revelation from God. Peter had just told Jesus that he knew He was the Christ, then Jesus said it was because of revelation that Peter knew it. I know about the play on words in the Greek 'Cephas' and so forth. I think there are more levels of meaning here than some may acknowledge. Again, I'm sure you disagree and I don't claim that our view is the only justifiable one. Especially if you don't believe Joseph had a clue. So its OK.

Originally Posted by ceeboo

If JS was right about a total apostasy then Jesus was a failure in regard to HIS CHURCH.
Jesus would also be not telling the truth and misleading us with his promises.

Of course Jesus would not mislead anyone, unless someone through lack of the spirit could not understand what He was saying. I hope you agree that if we don't have the Spirit with us, we run the risk of not understanding the things of God?

The LDS view is that Christ set up the perfect Church and it was the failings of individual Church leaders after His departure that caused the failure (apostacy). We all know that Christ would not mislead anyone, but we also know that He allows us to misunderstand Him when our lives or situations prevent our correct understanding. That's what continuing revelation (the 'rock') is there for.

Originally Posted by ceeboo

" What happened to the Church after Peter " IT IS STILL THE SAME CHURCH THAT JESUS PROMISED US ALL WOULD NOT EVER FALL".

And you see our point that it was not the Church or the Pope that was promised to not fall, but revelation, right? I know you don't need to agree, but that is the LDS position.

Originally Posted by ceeboo

Yes indeed it is a FACT that there have been immoral members in the Church and still are there today. Jesus promised the Church would stand to the end and he also taught that there would indeed be good and evil members sitting side by side in HIS CHURCH until that end.

Yes, tares and the wheat.

Originally Posted by ceeboo

I think I will stop at this point to be fair to others who may want to contribute or rebute my crazy Catholic perspective.

Not crazy at all. Thanks for your posts, and I really respect your ability to discuss without rancor. You rock!

HiJolly

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

I didn't really feel like reading through all this...so I'll just testify of my belief in the divine doctrine of deification, and what it is to me.

I believe that the Lord God, our Father in Heaven has promised man all things. As it says in the Bible I believe that I am a son of God and a joint-heir with Christ. I believe that if I am worthy and faithful that I will be perfected through the atonement of Yeshua bar Abba (Joshua son of the Father in Hebrew, Jesus being the Greek form of Joshua). I believe in the God of the New Testament and all scriptures, who promises that we shall inherit all the things he has. The literal Father of our spirits who seeks to help us become like him and his Only Begotten Son, the one who extends his hand and says "Come, your sins are washed clean in the blood of the lamb. Now let me teach you all that I know and give you all that I have."

All that he has to give is the perfection of love kindness or charity, that being eternal unconditional love. It involves the perfection of my priesthood, and the power to spread happiness, and righteousness through out all of God's creations. He will teach me other divine attributes if I am worthy, but the attributes of love, righteousness, and charity are his most important I believe. God is nothing without love, and the atonement of his son. All his creations, his powers, his acts and accomplishments are for naught if he had not charity. This is what to become a god is to me. The Christ came down and became like us, so we can go back up and become like him. Though I am not perfect right now I believe that if I am faithful, if I strive to follow God's will and if I endure to the end I will one day be cleansed by the fire of the Holy Spirit and the blood of the Messiah. Even now I, and all faithful and good of any religion are on the path to what I call godhood. As the three servants described in the bible we are to increase our talents, whether they be spiritual, mental, or physical in preperation for that blessed day when we can kneel at the feet of Christ and hear the words "Well done my good and faithful servant."

This I testify in God's name.

[OneEternalSonata]

I really feel for you and understand your struggle, if even in a small way. I hope and pray that this doctrine will become clearer to you and that the discomfort will pass. I too had a difficult time with this doctrine as a convert, as it made sense in my head, but my heart just didn't accept it at first. I understand how it feels blasphemous, and it would be, if man made the theory all up. If it is of God, as I believe it to be, then it is a precious gift that unites us with Him and doesn't exalt us above Him.

[pam]

Originally Posted by HiJolly

I notice here an institutional emphasis. In the LDS view, the Church still could exist in the midst of a complete or total apostacy. When we speak of apostacy, it is not so much just the Church in name that goes away, but rather two important elements: (1) the organization of the Church (2) the Priesthood of the individual members of the Church.

As I understand it there was no central or unified Church for at least 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. There were local Bishops and no single Bishop was in charge of the collective, until after the Nicene Council. Not only this, but the council was convened by Imperial decree. Regardless, the Church no longer had apostles, though we read in scripture the apparent need to replace deceased apostles with new replacements. Unfortunately, this biblical practice did not continue, and the Church was no longer organized in the way the Savior set it up, the way Peter tried to keep it going. This is not a minor detail.

Donatism strikes at the heart of #2 above. We as LDS understand that the priesthood authority departs from a priesthood holder if that man does not walk the path of righteousness. We either excommunicate the wicked priesthood holder, or release them from positions of authority, since we know by revelation that God has ALREADY removed their authority. We do agree with the Catholic Church that ordinances performed by men WITH exoteric authority but without the Godly (esoteric) authority are honored by the institution of the Church, but we also remove the offender post haste as soon as their ungodly deeds are known.

So we have here 2 cases for an apostate church that still exists (at least after Constantine pulled it together again) that has lost its divinely appointed organization and lost its leader's godly (esoteric) authority. And all this with no Pope in sight. I want to make it clear, though, that this apostacy applies to an existing Church, and not to individuals who are sincere and honest in their spiritual pursuits. For example, I am completely convinced that St. John of the Cross (Juan de la Cruz) did in fact see God. I love his books!

I do not think this is incompatible with St. John belonging to an apostate Church. God is who He is, and speaks to whomever He will.


Total does not mean the institution of the Catholic Church would have to disappear, in the LDS view.


I think we can agree to differ on this. Amicably, I'm sure!


Joseph taught that the 'rock' meant revelation from God. Peter had just told Jesus that he knew He was the Christ, then Jesus said it was because of revelation that Peter knew it. I know about the play on words in the Greek 'Cephas' and so forth. I think there are more levels of meaning here than some may acknowledge. Again, I'm sure you disagree and I don't claim that our view is the only justifiable one. Especially if you don't believe Joseph had a clue. So its OK.


Of course Jesus would not mislead anyone, unless someone through lack of the spirit could not understand what He was saying. I hope you agree that if we don't have the Spirit with us, we run the risk of not understanding the things of God?

The LDS view is that Christ set up the perfect Church and it was the failings of individual Church leaders after His departure that caused the failure (apostacy). We all know that Christ would not mislead anyone, but we also know that He allows us to misunderstand Him when our lives or situations prevent our correct understanding. That's what continuing revelation (the 'rock') is there for.


And you see our point that it was not the Church or the Pope that was promised to not fall, but revelation, right? I know you don't need to agree, but that is the LDS position.


Yes, tares and the wheat.


Not crazy at all. Thanks for your posts, and I really respect your ability to discuss without rancor. You rock!

HiJolly

Yes ceeboo does Rock!!!!

[Misshalfway]

Whenever I think or discuss the great apostasy, I always think in my mind that of all the Christian groups it is the Catholic that is the strongest. Who else would have had the authority if not them?

I think I see that there is some acknowledgement in this conversation that some form of apostasy did occur. My understanding from my limited study is that the 12 apostles were killed...torturously I might add. And that the church was in a state of confusion for many years as HiJolly stated. I can't look at the Christian world today without seeing such variety in interpretation and doctrine. One builds a church on baptism. Another on tongues. And the list goes on. In my very limited missionary service to one state in the US, I spoke with many who had such differing views of the same biblical text. I was astonished by the variety of interpretations on the Nature of God question alone. And the last piece of this that still surprises me (and I don't know for sure if this is the Catholic position or not) is the decision that God no longer talks to man. That God somehow decided that he would let us interpret on our own. These ideas confuse me.

If God is the same yesterday, today, and forever then he must continue revealing his will. He literally led the Israelites every step of the way from Moses and Pharaoh and what Moses was to do with his staff, to telling the people to put lambs blood on their doorways, to giving the 10 commandments and to leading them to the promised land! And this is just one example.

It is clear that revelation was part of Jesus's mission after his resurrection for he met the twelve on the road and spent days and days with them. What was he saying if not setting the direction for the church to go forward with that very group of twelve that he so carefully chose and instructed before his death and resurrection. And also showing them his resurrected body so they would very literally be able to testify of the "good news"! How can one be a special witness of Christ without such literal and visual experience?

I ask myself now.....if I weren't going to be a LDS, where would I go? Well, the Catholic church would be my first stop. Precisely because of the Peter/Rock/thing. But I stop in my tracks and ask where are the 12?

At the end of the day, I must conclude that either the Catholics got it right and the rest of the Christian world rebelled and went their own way OR a restoration was necessary. Not a new idea to my LDS friends here.......but something that I keep coming back to in my own searchings and questioning.

And such a question could be debated long into the night! I am grateful, in this case, for the institution of prayer. I can go and sit alone before my maker and ask the question. Who of all these groups is right? And He will answer. I figure if anyone knows the answer, He does.

[bytor2112]

As a Father.....I want my children to learn and grow and become better than I am......because I love them. One day, they will inherit all that I have......sound familiar? Heavenly Father loves us so incomprehensively much, that he wants us to have the kind of life that he has....eternal life....exaltation. We can all claim to be heirs of royalty, yet seem to struggle that one day when we are ready, when we have progressed, we will rise to that station in the eternal worlds. Not to be above the Father, but to become like him.

[ceeboo]

Originally Posted by HiJolly

I

As I understand it there was no central or unified Church for at least 300 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. There were local Bishops and no single Bishop was in charge of the collective, until after the Nicene Council. Not only this, but the council was convened by Imperial decree. Regardless, the Church no longer had apostles, though we read in scripture the apparent need to replace deceased apostles with new replacements. Unfortunately, this biblical practice did not continue, and the Church was no longer organized in the way the Savior set it up, the way Peter tried to keep it going. This is not a minor detail


Total does not mean the institution of the Catholic Church would have to disappear, in the LDS view.


And you see our point that it was not the Church or the Pope that was promised to not fall, but revelation, right? I know you don't need to agree, but that is the LDS position.


HiJolly

Hello HiJolly,

Thanks so much for the wealth of perspective you have shared.

Yes indeed we do not agree on some of your offerings but it is my stance that God above is pleased by the manner his children are extending their hands and hearts with eachother.
I ( for one ) am truly humbled and encouraged to read the last several posts, I am also honored to be a part of them.. In addition, The thing that trumps all of our seeming disagreement ( some may certainly disagree with this and that's ok by me ) is the Christ-like tone that IMHO is alive and well. At the end of the day, we all try our very best to walk as Jesus did and for me, I certainly do my best to not "call out the sawdust in others eye when I know I have a plank in my own".

A very short offering as not to overshadow my above contribution:

" No central or organized Church for first 300 years or so" " Church no longer had apostles"

My offering, For the first 300 years or so it was illegal to be Christian and many were put to death for this, much was done " under the radar ".
IMHO, ( I realize you feel differently and offered a contribution regarding this ) It has nothing to do with " no longer set up or organized by mere men, it also has nothing to do with the building " church, small c ". It has everything to do with the Church " Capital C "
that Christ left us and the promise that indeed it would never fall.

Lastly, " the promise not to fall was revelation " I respectfuly disagree and further see no scriptural support for this. The promise was from Jesus himself ( God as Catholics believe )
that His Church, teachings,promise to all, would stand to the end.

I really do appreciate your input HiJolly.
For what i's worth, I look forward ( hope not real soon though ) that we all can smile and talk about this in HIS KINGDOM some day.

You and many others here also rock!! ( I wonder if that means Peter LOL )

God bless,
Carl

[Vanhin]

Originally Posted by ceeboo

Hello again Vanhin,

I must admit, you were probably a great missionary ( To be clear that was truly a compliment )

I realize concerning " abomination " JS claimed to be only the mouthpiece but I promise you, my new friend Vanhin, because of my opinion on the matter, it would not add anything of use to all who are involved in this thread to beat on that horse.

Your 4 options that you offer me, ok I will play ( because you have been more than fair and generous with me ) I will choose # 3 with no hesitation.

God bless,
Carl

Thanks Carl. I think #3 is the the wise choice. Because if it is true, ignoring or rejecting the message could be as consequential as it was for the people at the time of Noah, who rejected his message.

For his own purposes, God has opted to bring about the restoration in this manner. He prepared and called a prophet, and revealed his will to him. Then, He commanded his prophet to share the message with others. From that stand point, Joseph Smith's experience is not unique. The Bible is full of the same pattern. Moses, for example, was called as a prophet, and given a message to share with the Israelites, and ultimately the world at large. So, if the Bible is used as a guide, then we must at least admit that an event like the First Vision is not only possible, but probable considering how long it had been since God had called a prophet.

It is evident from the scriptures that God reveals his will through righteous men called prophets. Indeed, the Bible plainly teaches us this fact:

Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets. (Amos 3:7)

Even the early Church, established by Jesus Christ, would be built upon a foundation of apostles and prophets, Christ himself, being the chief corner stone.

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; (Eph. 2:19-20)

God, of course, has not left us without a way to know for ourselves that what the prophets teach us is from him. Whenever we read or hear something that is claimed to be from God, we can receive a witness directly from God that the message is true. Obviously there are many things having to do with faith and religion, that have no physical proof, yet they are true. Paul taught that faith "is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Heb. 11:1).

How do you suppose God reveals truth to us?

Sincerely,
Vanhin

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

Here's an interesting little tid bit for you all. In the original greek the new testament was written in the word hell used in Matthew 16: 18 is translated from Hades, meaning death. So the actual words should be "And death shall not prevail against it."

In fact, in some coptic scripture used by the Ethiopian Christians and other Orthodox religions the words "But it shall be renewed, resurrected as I was" are added to the verse.

[candyprpl]

Originally Posted by YoungMormonRoyalist

Here's an interesting little tid bit for you all. In the original greek the new testament was written in the word hell used in Matthew 16: 18 is translated from Hades, meaning death. So the actual words should be "And death shall not prevail against it."

In fact, in some coptic scripture used by the Ethiopian Christians and other Orthodox religions the words "But it shall be renewed, resurrected as I was" are added to the verse.

hmmmm -- that's very interesting. That's why I'm always wondering if God's word as found in the Bible have been translated correctly.

You know Vanhin,
When I prayed to know that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was the restored Church of Christ, I did get that comfirmation in a miraculous way. Since joining this forum I have had a lot of questions. I've taken all of this to the Lord in prayer. I'm not sure about this, but I don't think I'm getting any definite answers. I'm not bold enough to say what I'm really thinking. But, I do know they are my thoughts right now and not answers to my prayers. Sorry, just rambling. Sometimes it helps me sort out my thoughts.