Prove to me that there was a great apostasy

[drstevej]

JOHN 3:3
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Dead and blind until born again.



"He's dead, Jim."

 

[A New Dawn]

Your prayers are very much treasured. I know it comes from the heart, how could I ask for better!

Do you believe that the " ...HS guides and directs, and yes, even reveals, to those outside "the faith", ..." even when the results have been divisions, which is contrary to God's Word? Do you believe the HS gives different and conflicting directions and revelations to those outside the faith? If you see this as possible, I sure don't and would appreciate your prayers to help me see what you see.

Yes there are divisions, but I do not believe that the divisions are over the "essentials" of the gospel. It is only when men come along claiming to have an "in" to God that excludes everyone who doesn't agree, even if that "in" speaks against everything else that God has revealed, that divisions over the essentials happen. And, IMO, that is what happened with the restoration, specifically the LDS church.

 

[MormonFriend]

Dead and blind until born again.



"He's dead, Jim."

Get your facts straight! That quote is Dr. McCoy.

Scotty would say, "I can't hold it together any longer, Captain! She's going to blow!"

 

[gort]

#1 http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/angels.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/vulcan.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/braingon.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/doctor1a.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/whatami.wav

 

[MormonFriend]

JOHN 3:3
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.


Dead and blind until born again.

So then who was Jesus referring to when He said this to His disciples? Does "any man" pertain to a dead and blind person, or to a born agian person?


Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
(Matthew 16:24)

 

[MormonFriend]

Yes there are divisions, but I do not believe that the divisions are over the "essentials" of the gospel. It is only when men come along claiming to have an "in" to God that excludes everyone who doesn't agree, even if that "in" speaks against everything else that God has revealed, that divisions over the essentials happen. And, IMO, that is what happened with the restoration, specifically the LDS church.

So to you, the scripture reads:
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you (unless it is over non-essentials); but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment (excepting of course those non-essential issues. Ye may enter into disputes and contentions over anything you deem non-essential, for scripture teacheth exactly what is, and what is not essential. Therefore, grow in perfect love and harmony.)

(1 Corinthians 1:10 /embellishment added for illustration)

So tell me, please. Who did come up with the term "essential," and who had the wisdom to teach the world that there are things pertaining to God that are not essential?

 

[MormonFriend]

#1 http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/angels.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/vulcan.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/braingon.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/doctor1a.wav

http://www.sherylfranklin.com/sounds/trek/mccoy/whatami.wav

Care to make a bet that I can quote the line Scotty is saying in Steve's photo?

 

[Ran77]

Care to make a bet that I can quote the line Scotty is saying in Steve's photo?

No bets here, but I am interested in hearing the line. I feel like the answer is on the tip of my tongue, but I can't quite remember.

Is this the episode where they found a planet that is run by 1920's style gangsters and one of them has ordered Kirk to ship him down a 100 "heaters"?

 

[MormonFriend]

No bets here, but I am interested in hearing the line. I feel like the answer is on the tip of my tongue, but I can't quite remember.

Is this the episode where they found a planet that is run by 1920's style gangsters and one of them has ordered Kirk to ship him down a 100 "heaters"?

That episode you referred to was called "A Piece of the Action."

I really can't be sure, but I see Scotty saying: "There's an old Scottish saying, 'Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me'." It was in response to a false distress signal, trying to divert the Enterprise from going where they needed to go.

 

[Onesiphorus]

Generally, an apostacy is moving either individuals, the organisation or the leadership away from the truth. Eventually, the authourity from God is also lost.

Thank you for your reply.

What was the "truth" they moved from? I, of course, understand what you're saying but feel the "truth" is the crux of the matter. Before we can establish they moved away from something, we need to establish what the something is. There are "truths" that are not relevant to an apostasy scenario. For example: Jesus really had black hair and blue eyes. Moving away from this truth toward a Jesus with red hair and green eyes would not be considered apostasy. (unless we're biologically driven instead of theologically)

Authority from God has never been lost. Humans would cease if His authority to us ever stopped. He has given us dominion and free agency. We were told to be fruitful and multiply. I see all these elements present in humans today.

More or less. Prophets and punishments were sent to bring them back into the fold. In ancient times, apostacy was dealt with physically, by destroying them or removing them from their Land.

The prophets and punishments were always very specific to a people and place. They never dealt with humanity on a whole. Towns, cities and people were destroyed, but apostasy never occurred on a "global" scale. (Perhaps the flood story could be the only example. However, God clearly promises to never destroy all of mankind again.)

After Christ, they were cut off spiritually.

I would say this comment does not align with biblical or theological truth. It would appear to be the exact opposite. Jesus established the Kingdom in man's heart. He promised the comforter would come and never leave. The Spirit was not present before Jesus' ministry, hence the need for the temple and priesthood.

The apostacy of Judaism was almost complete when Jesus began his ministry and was complete at the cross. If the Jews were not apostate, why was Jesus not welcomed?

How was Judaism (almost) apostate? They had the Law and were keeping it to the best of man's ability. Who could keep 613 laws? Jesus came to fulfill that Law which man could not keep. However, this was not something new. No man had ever kept the law. Jesus was not welcomed because the Jews were looking for a warrior to free them from the worries of this world. Jesus came to offer them entrance into the next world. Once again, I'd say we have to identify what exactly the Jews were apostate from. If it is not keeping some laws, then count me as apostate too!

The Apsotacy was predicted by Paul in Thessalonians:

Actually, that verse deals with apocalyptic events. The other verses listed all deal with specific members in specific communities. None deal with an apostasy of the Church. They speak to the human condition. Warnings to not go down the wrong path. Not that those who Paul wrote to had actually gone down that path. He would not be writings letters to apostate groups.

However, by far the best evidence of a general apostacy is the history of Christianity.

However, history shows that God has always been present and brings His sheep back to the fold. You have even stated such about OT prophets/people. Why have things changed after Jesus came? Why has God changed His MO between the time of Christ and JS? Now that the restoration has taken place, God is back to continued revelations and guidance... ? His MO has kicked in again?

Jesus died so that we may be with God. That is an event. One that has already taken place. I don't see how mankind can be apostate from an event.

 

[gort]

Care to make a bet that I can quote the line Scotty is saying in Steve's photo?

I'm quite sure that YOU could quote the line, but 50 quatloos says you can't find where Scotty said, in DrSteves post, "He's dead, Jim"



<><

 

[A New Dawn]

So to you, the scripture reads:
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you (unless it is over non-essentials); but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment (excepting of course those non-essential issues. Ye may enter into disputes and contentions over anything you deem non-essential, for scripture teacheth exactly what is, and what is not essential. Therefore, grow in perfect love and harmony.)

(1 Corinthians 1:10 /embellishment added for illustration)

So tell me, please. Who did come up with the term "essential," and who had the wisdom to teach the world that there are things pertaining to God that are not essential?

I am sure you know exactly what I am talking about.

You cannot be saved unless you are baptized in my church. You cannot understand the gospel unless you listen to my version of it. You cannot receive the Holy Ghost unless you have laying on of hands done by members of my priesthood.

That's what I am talking about. That's what I mean by an organization set up by man. Forget that people, for years, have had relationships with God, and God has moved them to do powerful deeds (Mother Teresa comes to mind). If they aren't part of your organization and done things that benefit no one but themselves, they cannot hope to live with God.

 

[Theway]

You cannot be saved unless you are baptized in my church. You cannot understand the gospel unless you listen to my version of it. You cannot receive the Holy Ghost unless you have laying on of hands done by members of my priesthood.

If you substitute “the Lord’s” in place of “my” in this sentence, it would be correct.

 

[Fit4Christ]

I thought I made myself clear. Scripture states many things we must do, to receive knowledge. You state that we cannot do anything, not based from a direct scriptural precept, but from a man made conclusion that if we are dead in our sins, then we are some sort of walking zombies without any source of direction until God chooses them. If a person believes that we cannot do anything, then Satan has them in the perfect trap, for they will not do the things that bring understanding.



John is specifically referring to the apostleship.

Ephesians is indicating that many things happened before our birth, and the creation of this world. If you wish to believe that we were not there, and that God made up some plan to create some for the purpose of saving, and some for the purpose of damning, and if you feel peace about this, I wish you well, but I cannot fathom such a being and call him a God of Love.




But, according to your system, the scriptures will not inspire, or teach doctrine to those that God has not chosen. Who are you going to reprove or correct? Even those 'who you suppose that God has already chosen' didn't understand a thing about scripture before they were chosen, because they were dead! How can you even expect me to understand what you are talking to me about? Why waste your time? I am dead! Why did Jesus teach the beattitudes to a bunch of dead people, when nothing would be within their intellectual grip until they were chosen?

To me, your doctrine makes about as much sense as our Senators voting themselves a raise, and I guess that is pretty good on my part for being dead.

Interesting. I read this post this morning. Then, as I was looking for other information, I "happened" upon this from one of the early church fathers, Justin Martyr. The lds claim restoration to the beliefs of the early church. Here's what Martyr had to say about where "understanding" comes from:

"By Him are the eyes of our hearts opened. By Him our foolish and darkened understanding blossoms154 up anew towards His marvellous light. By Him the Lord has willed that we should taste of immortal knowledge,155 “who, being the brightness of His majesty, is by so much greater than the angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.” (Martyr, Chapter XXXVI)

NOTE: Not sure how to reference ECF writings so here's the link:

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.ii.ii.xxxvi.html

It appears that at least one ECF believes it is Christ who gives us understanding.

My concern would be for those who don't "get it". Have they "got It"?

 

[A New Dawn]

If you substitute “the Lord’s” in place of “my” in this sentence, it would be correct.

No, even then it wouldn't be, because God is not exclusive the way man is.

God gave the same "rules" to everyone. He didn't give anyone special dispensations. It's not a club.

 

[Theway]

No, even then it wouldn't be, because God is not exclusive the way man is.

God gave the same "rules" to everyone. He didn't give anyone special dispensations. It's not a club.

No, God's way is very narrow and yes, your right, not open to man's interpretation.
Matthew 7:13-14
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
It is not God that makes it exclusive all are welcome. Yet what is required is very exact. It is man who keeps trying to widen the path in order to be more inclusive that waters down Gods commandments.
I see OCs on this board as being like a social club where one needs to be named an orthdox Christian by thier rules in order to join, yet doctrine as basic as whether baptism is neccessary or not is unimportant. In the real world outside this forum (yes there is one) things are still different, whether one is called a Christian is not as important as what you believe.

 

[Fit4Christ]

No, God's way is very narrow and yes, your right, not open to man's interpretation.
Matthew 7:13-14
"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
It is not God that makes it exclusive all are welcome. Yet what is required is very exact. It is man who keeps trying to widen the path in order to be more inclusive that waters down Gods commandments.
I see OCs on this board as being like a social club where one needs to be named an orthdox Christian by thier rules in order to join, yet doctrine as basic as whether baptism is neccessary or not is unimportant. In the real world outside this forum (yes there is one) things are still different, whether one is called a Christian is not as important as what you believe.

True, but when one has the wrong beliefs, outside of what the Bible teaches, they are on the path to destruction.

The "few" means salvation, not exaltation to some multi-level kingdom.

 

[A New Dawn]

It is not God that makes it exclusive all are welcome. Yet what is required is very exact. It is man who keeps trying to widen the path in order to be more inclusive that waters down Gods commandments.
I see OCs on this board as being like a social club where one needs to be named an orthdox Christian by thier rules in order to join, yet doctrine as basic as whether baptism is neccessary or not is unimportant. In the real world outside this forum (yes there is one) things are still different, whether one is called a Christian is not as important as what you believe.

You are very wrong. The OC's on this board are very up front in saying that they cannot judge another's salvation and that they believe that there can be Christians in religions that are not orthodox.

The LDS, on the other had, are very up front in believing (and stating) that no one but other LDS can be saved (terrestrial glory being the highest we could obtain (and not even heaven, in my book.)) So, who has the exclusive club with all the nifty rules? Not the OC's.

 

[Swart]

What was the "truth" they moved from? I, of course, understand what you're saying but feel the "truth" is the crux of the matter. Before we can establish they moved away from something, we need to establish what the something is. There are "truths" that are not relevant to an apostasy scenario. For example: Jesus really had black hair and blue eyes. Moving away from this truth toward a Jesus with red hair and green eyes would not be considered apostasy. (unless we're biologically driven instead of theologically)

There are many truths that have been lost. Without truth, we are lead into error. One I will cite is infant baptism. Little children are alive in Christ and are not sinful from birth. This one practice, however, has lead to an array of erroneous teachings including the Calvinistic doctrine of Total Depravity.

Authority from God has never been lost.

This is the crux of the matter and can't simply be stated as an axiom. As I mentioned before, I believe it can be reasonably proven through inductive methods, however it appears no one is willing to spin the wheel on that one.

The prophets and punishments were always very specific to a people and place. They never dealt with humanity on a whole. Towns, cities and people were destroyed, but apostasy never occurred on a "global" scale.

That's why it was the "great apostacy". Since it was the first time the Gospel was preached to the whole world, it was the first occurrence of a global apostacy.

I would say this comment does not align with biblical or theological truth.

Perhaps in your interpretation of these things. I would argue the scriptures teach something quite different. I would also argue that my interpretation is harmonious with historical fact and I can point to specific instances of this.

The Spirit was not present before Jesus' ministry, hence the need for the temple and priesthood.

I think the Bible disagrees with you on this. You need to read your OT some more:
[BIBLE]Genesis 6:3[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Exodus 31:3[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Numbers 11:25[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]1 Samuel 10:6[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]1 Samuel 16:14[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Nehemiah 9:20[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Nehemiah 9:30[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Joel 2:28[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Psalm 51:11[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Isaiah 63:10[/BIBLE]
[BIBLE]Micah 3:8[/BIBLE]

How was Judaism (almost) apostate? They had the Law and were keeping it to the best of man's ability.

They had perverted the Law and were using it to their own ends. The Scribes and Pharisees were definitely apostate. The Sadducees denied the resurrection. They accused the Lord of the Sabbath of breaking the Sabbath. What better example of apostacy do you want? If they weren't, why didn't Jesus reform Judaism? Why did he make the following statement?
[BIBLE]Luke 5:36-39[/BIBLE]

Once again, I'd say we have to identify what exactly the Jews were apostate from. If it is not keeping some laws, then count me as apostate too!

They were apostate from the spirit of the Law. They should have known that the Law was the schoolmaster, but they did not. If they had been following the Law correctly, they would have understood. However, they had sown generations of unwritten tradition into the Law and the Prophets. After the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70, this unwritten Law was codified as the Talmud and is considered as binding as the Torah. It was these traditions that lead them into apostacy and error.

Actually, that verse deals with apocalyptic events.

True. Paul uses the proir teaching of the apostacy to convince the Thessalonians that the second coming cannot happen yet, because the apostacy hasn't yet occurred.

The other verses listed all deal with specific members in specific communities.

They do, against the backdrop of the prophesied general apostacy. "I marvel that ye are so soon removed". He doesn't marvel that they are removed, but rather the pace that it is happening.

None deal with an apostasy of the Church.

The quote in 2 Thessalonians deals directly with the apostacy of the church, as does Timothy.

He would not be writings letters to apostate groups.

He doesn't. He does make it clear they are engaged in apostate acts. The become apostate when they no longer heed his counsel. The later epistles mention congregations that are in this category.

However, history shows that God has always been present and brings His sheep back to the fold. You have even stated such about OT prophets/people. Why have things changed after Jesus came? Why has God changed His MO between the time of Christ and JS? Now that the restoration has taken place, God is back to continued revelations and guidance... ? His MO has kicked in again?

All things according to the fulfilment of prophecy. Reading the scriptures we tend to forget the centuries of gaps in what we read.

Lots of things changed after Jesus, after all, this is the new covenant. His MO has not changed. Like I say, it is an inductive proof, not a reductive one.

 

[Swart]

You are very wrong. The OC's on this board are very up front in saying that they cannot judge another's salvation and that they believe that there can be Christians in religions that are not orthodox.

There are certainly more than a handful that don't say this, and from the style of their posts, they push the rules very close by saying "no-one who believes ... can be saved".

The LDS, on the other had, are very up front in believing (and stating) that no one but other LDS can be saved (terrestrial glory being the highest we could obtain (and not even heaven, in my book.)) So, who has the exclusive club with all the nifty rules? Not the OC's.

I think your being selective in your reading here. I would say only one or two LDS posters ever say anything like this. If you did an empirical sount over the last month on UT over statements over who can and can't be saved, I think you will be surprised.