Why 1600 Years For A Restoration?

[inactivetx]

Hi, first time poster, inactive LDS. I think I could better accept the unique teachings of the Church if it's history was longer than 200 years or so. As I understand it, the 'true' gospel died with the apostles at around 100 AD. 1) Why did God allow the truth to be lost and 2) why did he wait several centuries to restore it? I understand that an apostacy was fortold in the Bible and the BoM, but again, my question is why did the apostacy happen so fast after Christs ressurection and why wait so long to restore it? Any thoughts would be appreciated, and thanks for reading my post!

[Snow]

Originally posted by inactivetx@Feb 26 2004, 02:14 PM

1) Why did God allow the truth to be lost and

2) why did he wait several centuries to restore it?

1. The heat, and

2. The humidity.

Fortunately a cooler, drier climate is predicted for the millenium.

[Guest curvette]

I don't think it was the climate. I'm sure it had something to do with the Whore of Babylon.

[Snow]

Originally posted by curvette@Feb 26 2004, 03:47 PM

I'm sure it had something to do with the Whore of Babylon.

I prefer to think of her, fondly, as the liberated women of Babylon, not afraid to assert herself and use her sexuality as an asset.

[Ray]

Q: Why did God allow the truth to be lost?

A: How could God have kept the truth from being lost? By constantly providing revelation to people after some other people chose not to acknowledge the truth? Do you understand how someone comes to know the truth in the first place?

I believe God reveals the truth to anyone who sincerely wants to know it and apply it in their lives, but He won’t force anyone to accept anything He has to say and He won’t keep assuring people of the truth when people show by their attitude and actions that they really don’t want it. Revealing the truth to people like that just doesn’t do any good.

Q: Why did God wait several centuries to restore the truth?

A: Who says He did? Who says that He wasn’t always willing to assure someone of the truth? Who says that people can’t know the truth without being citizens of His kingdom?

There are lots of people in the world today who know the truth about some things, and they aren’t citizens of His kingdom. Just because God waited a while before restoring His kingdom to the Earth that doesn’t mean that He hasn’t always been willing to assure someone of the truth.

Btw, I believe the reason that God chose to reorganize His kingdom from scratch was the same reason that He didn’t try to straighten out the Jews during His mortal ministry. Putting new wine in old wine skins doesn’t seem to be a good idea.

[Snow]

Atta way to answer a question by asking more questions Ray. What this world needs is more questions.

Don't ya think?

[Ray]

Originally posted by Snow@Feb 26 2004, 04:19 PM

Atta way to answer a question by asking more questions Ray. What this world needs is more questions.

Don't ya think?

Yes, I do, and questions usually help other people think for themselves. :)

[Guest Starsky]

I think we have to go back to the plan of salvation, and the purpose of our earthly existence.

It isn't all about 'everyone' having the exact opportunities in the 'exact' same way.

During the 'dark ages' interestingly enough, darkness reigned supreme...and not because God chose it to be so....but men chose....

It took many centuries and millenia for the people to finally get prepared for the gospel to be restored...and even then evil had tripled it's efforts to destroy the work.

Just imagine trying to do what Joseph Smith did when there was no such thing as a printing press, or explorations and expansion and space to build your own society. Imagine all of the work and things brought about through JS coming in a time of dark ages in Europe.

[porterrockwell]

God has a process for everything. Once people rejected Christ, they rejected the Gospel, they rejected the higher law. So once the 12 were killed off, the priesthood keys were lost as was the gift of the Holy Ghost. by which we discern between all good and evil. Men must play a part in their own salvation, while you will only be saved by grace and faith, work is still needed. Thus, a reformation from the dark ages was needed to allow for religious freedom to come to fruition, this unfortunately took a great deal of time because of the corrupt nature that was envoked by tireless kingdoms of evil. God knew when the world was ready, and by his will the Kingdom of God was set forth unto it's Restoration. However, that we still do not have the Full Restoration of the Gospel. That will not come until that great day when the Lord Jesus Christ ascends from the Heavens like a thief in the night, and Satan is bound to outer darkness.

[Rodney]

Funny how when you're doing it, it just doesn't sound like pure rationalization, does it? (I'm using "you're" in the collective sense, i.e., myself included.)

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Rodney@Feb 27 2004, 06:06 AM

Funny how when you're doing it, it just doesn't sound like pure rationalization, does it? (I'm using "you're" in the collective sense, i.e., myself included.)

It does if you have the presence of the Holy Ghost. But if you are all alone, left to yourself, it probably doesn't.

[Ray]

I think it’s worth mentioning that the Bible does contain the fullness of the gospel, so it isn’t the “gospel” that was restored. The gospel is simply the message that Jesus is the Christ, the only one who can redeem Man from sin and bring Man back into the presence of God with a clear conscience. The Book of Mormon is another witness that the gospel and Bible are true.

What was restored was the kingdom of God to the Earth, comprised of people who help Man to know and do the things God requires from citizens in God’s kingdom. Many plain and precious truths were also restored, pertaining to both the gospel and kingdom of God, but Man was already in possession of all the information about the gospel that was necessary.

Once someone knows that Jesus is the Christ, and that they must go through Him to enter the kingdom of God, they know that they need to do whatever He requires of them before they can enter God’s kingdom and presence with a clear conscience. That involves doing things. If someone can’t do something during their mortal life on this Earth, because an authorized servant of God isn't available to help them do something, or because someone isn't aware that they need to do something, they will learn about all those things later, after their mortal life here on this Earth. People who are already in the kingdom of God, who already know about those things and do them, help other people know and do those things both during this mortal life and afterwards.

Someday, everyone will know that Jesus is the Christ, and they will either do what they know they should be doing or they won't. Advancement in the kingdom of God is dependent on how well people do what they know they should be doing.

[inactivetx]

Originally posted by Ray@Feb 27 2004, 10:56 AM

Many plain and precious truths were also restored, pertaining to both the gospel and kingdom of God, but Man was already in possession of all the information about the gospel that was necessary.

Thanks everyone for responding to my question. Ray, I found your answer thought provoking. The missionaries who are now meeting with me in an attempt to 'reactivate' me gave a similiar answer as a previous poster that the world wasn't ready for the restoration until the dark ages, reformation and the concept of religious freedom was in place in American.

Ray, I have a question about your comment above. What is necessary about the Gospel that man already had? During these 1600 the priesthood was gone so all baptisms performed during this period are null and void, there was no gift of the HG, and no temples to perform rites in. How did these people have the gospel?

[Jason]

inactivetx,

You're asking very good questions. But perhaps you should ask yourself something even greater: Was there a "great apostasy"? Is there anything in history to suggest that the Church that Jesus Christ established was thwarted by the Devil? Perhaps you're familiar with this passage of scripture:

"And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee: That thou are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church. And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (St. Matt. 16:17-18)

What I want to draw your attention to is the last sentence. "And the gates of hell (hades) shall not prevail against it." What is "it"? "It" could be the "rock" (Peter or Revelation as you will) or it could be the "Church". We know that "it" is not Peter, because he was murdered in Rome. That leaves us with Revelation or the Church that hell would not prevail against. If it's Revelation, then a man like Joseph Smith was unnecessary. If "it" is the Church that Christ established, then we still had no need of Joseph Smith in the capacity of a restorer.

Think about it.......Can Jesus Lie?

Jason

[Ray]

Originally posted by inactivetx+ Feb 27 2004, 11:56 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (inactivetx @ Feb 27 2004, 11:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>What is necessary about the Gospel that man already had?

I’m not sure about what you are asking here. Are you asking what I meant by saying that Man was already in possession of all the information about the gospel that was necessary? By that I meant that Man was already in possession of the knowledge that Jesus is the Christ. The knowledge that Jesus is the Christ is all the information that is necessary for salvation. When you know that, you know that you need to look to Him for guidance, and you know that you must do what He requires of you. You know that You aren’t the one who makes the rules regarding what is necessary for salvation, and nobody else is either. Christ is the only one who can guide you, and Jesus is the Christ.

The understanding of that knowledge is both simple and complex at the same time. For instance, must Christ do everything Himself? No, He can send someone as a messenger, to declare His will to us on His behalf. He can appoint prophets, and apostles, and teachers, and other people to help Him with His work. But whether the message comes from Him personally, or through one of His appointed servants, it is the same. It all comes from Him.

And how can you know whether or not a message truly comes from Him or the mind of some other person? Through a testimony from the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost will personally witness to you whether or not a message is from Christ, and you can trust a message from the Holy Ghost because Christ and the Holy Ghost are in agreement, and God will never lie to you.

Once you acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ, and you try to learn all you can about Him, you will begin to know more and more about what He requires from you, and whatever He requires, you will know that you must follow Him. To think that you can simply acknowledge that He is the Christ but not do anything He requires from you doesn’t make any sense, does it?

<!--QuoteBegin--inactivetx@ Feb 27 2004, 11:56 AM

During these 1600 the priesthood was gone so all baptisms performed during this period are null and void, there was no gift of the HG, and no temples to perform rites in. How did these people have the gospel?

I suggest that you think about the difference between the actual gospel message and actually doing what Christ requires from you. The gospel is simply the message that Jesus is the Christ, but before you can acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ, you must first think about what the word “Christ” signifies. It doesn’t help a whole lot to acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ if you don’t first understand the significance of Christ, or Messiah.

Put simply, Christ signifies the person with the power to redeem you from your sins, cleansing your conscience from everything you have ever done “wrong” and helping you become the best type of person you can possibly imagine. We have all done things that we knew were “wrong”, and without being able to put those faults behind us, and receiving the power to overcome our weaknesses, we would always feel bad about the mistakes we have made and never be able to move forward to reach our full potential. The destiny of Man is glorious, if we will simply rely upon the mercy and power of Christ. But without a Christ, Man would be limited to only what He can accomplish by himself, with no assistance from a higher power.

You also mentioned some specific things we must do in obedience to Christ, probably because you have heard that Christ requires us to do those things, namely being baptized and receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, but if we don’t have the opportunity to do those things, we are not at fault.

Understanding that we need to be baptized doesn’t do us any good if we don’t have anyone around who can baptize us. The ordinance of baptism must be fulfilled through someone with the authority to act for Christ, if we are to expect Christ to honor our baptism. Christ will not accept a baptism that was done by someone only “claiming” to have authority to act for God because God must authorize and approve every act done in His name. He will not honor the work of unauthorized servants.

Christ is also the one who must give us the opportunity to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, because the gift of the Holy Ghost comes from Him, and not from us. But we can only receive it when it is available to us.

In summary, Man has always had the gospel, because the gospel has been taught since the days of Adam. But God doesn’t force Man to listen to Him, or remember what He has taught, or share the gospel with other people. When Man chooses to ignore the gospel or rebel against God after being taught, Man is showing that he doesn’t want the kingdom of God on this Earth. In the past God has allowed this to happen because God wants Man to choose Him, but someday this Earth will be inhabited only by people who want God as their Lord and King. Everyone else will have to live somewhere else. The work of God will not be frustrated, because every Man will have the opportunity to know what God requires and do it. It’s only a matter of time and testing, to see if Man will do everything that God requires of Him.

[Ray]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Feb 27 2004, 02:32 PM

inactivetx,

You're asking very good questions.  But perhaps you should ask yourself something even greater:  Was there a "great apostasy"?  Is there anything in history to suggest that the Church that Jesus Christ established was thwarted by the Devil?  Perhaps you're familiar with this passage of scripture:

"And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven.  And I say to thee: That thou are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.  And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."  (St. Matt. 16:17-18)

What I want to draw your attention to is the last sentence.  "And the gates of hell (hades) shall not prevail against it."  What is "it"?  "It" could be the "rock" (Peter or Revelation as you will) or it could be the "Church".  We know that "it" is not Peter, because he was murdered in Rome.  That leaves us with Revelation or the Church that hell would not prevail against.  If it's Revelation, then a man like Joseph Smith was unnecessary.  If "it" is the Church that Christ established, then we still had no need of Joseph Smith in the capacity of a restorer.   

Think about it.......Can Jesus Lie? 

Jason

Hi Jason,

I started a thread a little while ago about this very same question. Look here. It was very enlightening, but maybe you can add something to what has already been discussed. :)

[Snow]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Feb 27 2004, 02:32 PM

What I want to draw your attention to is the last sentence. "And the gates of hell (hades) shall not prevail against it." What is "it"? "It" could be the "rock" (Peter or Revelation as you will) or it could be the "Church". We know that "it" is not Peter, because he was murdered in Rome. That leaves us with Revelation or the Church that hell would not prevail against. If it's Revelation, then a man like Joseph Smith was unnecessary. If "it" is the Church that Christ established, then we still had no need of Joseph Smith in the capacity of a restorer.

Think about it.......Can Jesus Lie?

Jason

Jason,

How you been?

You are interpreting the clause about the gates of hell not prevailing as meaning that there would be no apostacy and/or no need for a restoration. By "hell" you want us to infer the devil - that he won't conquer the Church.

I don't read it that way. Personally I can think of lots of ways that your argument fails. Here's one.

Gates of hell refers, not to satan, but to Hades which is the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. We needn't picture Hell attacking the church. Christ's church will prevail and survive because He will burst the gates of Hades, (meaning his mortal death is not the end), and come forth conqueror. He will ever live and be the guarantor of the perpetuity of His people or church. (RWP)

When viewed that way, along with the many verses that predict an inevitable apostacy ( ex: 2 Thessalonians 2:3), this particular argument makes more sense than your. Besides, that just one of several ways of rebutting your argument.

[Guest Starsky]

What I want to draw your attention to is the last sentence. "And the gates of hell (hades) shall not prevail against it." What is "it"? "It" could be the "rock" (Peter or Revelation as you will) or it could be the "Church". We know that "it" is not Peter, because he was murdered in Rome. That leaves us with Revelation or the Church that hell would not prevail against. If it's Revelation, then a man like Joseph Smith was unnecessary. If "it" is the Church that Christ established, then we still had no need of Joseph Smith in the capacity of a restorer.

Think about it.......Can Jesus Lie?

Jason

Prevailing against it, just means it would win in the end....what you are talking about is two complete different events. The church wasn't completely destroyed because the Bible survived in pretty good condition despite all the stuff it went through.

The large picture helps you see things on a less personal level..which one must do if he wants to see the plan in action and the true meaning of the scriptures.

There will seem injustice and blantant neglect by God...in the world's perspective...but God is not allowing injustice in the 'end' nor is He ever neglectful...we just don't always know His purpose in some of the things that happen and when they happen.

All is well that ends well and it is the END we are always pointed to through out the scriptures.

Look to the end...and you will see it is all as it should be and will be in the end.

Christ is the beginning...and the END....don't forget the end.

[Jason]

Ray,

I'll check out the other thread as soon as I can. It looks interesting. Thanks.

Snow,

Hey, Im doing very well thanks. And you?

Of course you're correct in the hell/hades interpretation (that's why I put Hades in parentheses). And while I generallly agree with your statement, I think that your verse (along with every other apostasy verse) states nothing that would indicate a worldwide apostasy. Certainly there were many local problems with apostasy (and I dare say personal apostasy was and still is common today). Yet the apostasy scriptures of the NT never even hint at a general or worldwide apostasy.

Peace,

Win in the end? So you're saying that the Church established by God was losing for a couple of millenia, only to start winning again? How do you interpret this verse:

"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." (Matt 28:20. DRV)

When Christ promised to be with his people even to the end of the world, was he lying? Do you think that he just took off for a few thousand years?

Or this one:

"And I will ask the Father: and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever:" (John 14:16. DRV)

If the Holy Ghost ceased to abide with Christians, doesn't this make God a liar?

Jason

[Snow]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Feb 27 2004, 06:04 PM

Snow,

Hey, Im doing very well thanks. And you?

Of course you're correct in the hell/hades interpretation (that's why I put Hades in parentheses). And while I generallly agree with your statement, I think that your verse (along with every other apostasy verse) states nothing that would indicate a worldwide apostasy. Certainly there were many local problems with apostasy (and I dare say personal apostasy was and still is common today). Yet the apostasy scriptures of the NT never even hint at a general or worldwide apostasy.

Well thanks. Miss your post but I know this stuff doesn't interest you as much anymore.

A general apostasy may not be explicit in the NT but there certainly are enough relevant verses that a logical inference could be made, more than just the hint you say is missing. Of course, from your perspective, I'm not sure what relevance any of that would hold. Is it your position that the NT is the final word on all that is true, correct and complete?

Thank goodness Mormons don't have to rely just on the NT for our doctrine. Besides, there's alway Isaiah.

[Guest Starsky]

"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." (Matt 28:20. DRV)

When Christ promised to be with his people even to the end of the world, was he lying? Do you think that he just took off for a few thousand years?

Or this one:

"And I will ask the Father: and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever:" (John 14:16. DRV)

If the Holy Ghost ceased to abide with Christians, doesn't this make God a liar?

Jason

Like I have said before....you see it too small. And there is the situation that God/Christ is with individuals who allow the Holy Ghost to be with them....but in general during the dark ages, the hearts of men were not open to spiritual things they delved into the supertitions and witch crafts etc....

What good is a gift if it is not accepted?

This is stated in a couple of places in the scriptures.

What is this question trying to tell us?

[Jason]

Snow,

I love Isaiah. He really put it too the wicked prophets and priests of his day. Could use a few more like him nowadays.

As for the apostasy stuff, you can certainly infer that more apostasy is on the way, (which is what I believe they were trying to warn everyone about) but still nothing that would suggest a complete apostasy. Even LDS Church leaders have preached against growing apostasy. But if you were able to move ahead a few thousand years and read the conference talks, would you infer that they were talking about a complete apostasy of the church? Anyway, just my take on it....

Peace,

What exactly am I seeing "too small"? As for you knowledge of the so-called "dark ages" I suggest you read up on your history. Superstition and "witch craft" was no more prevelant at that time than it is now. In fact, it is probably more prevelant today than it was then! You should try reading some of the Christian literature from the "dark ages" and then try and tell me that men (and women) were not open to spiritual things!

Jason

[Lindy]

Originally posted by ExMormon-Jason@Feb 27 2004, 06:04 PM

When Christ promised to be with his people even to the end of the world, was he lying? Do you think that he just took off for a few thousand years?

Welcome Back Jason!

My 2 cents.....I don't think that Christ broke His promise, I think that all things had to come about to justify the end. I am pretty sure that He was there shaking His head thru the struggles and the saddness of mankind. HIS people? His people turned away from Him (an ongoing thing throughout the Bible). How could we say that He wasn't there? Don't you allow others to stumble during their quest to "find themselves", their learning process, or their "re-learning" process? Even when you see them fall to the ground, you have to watch to see them pick themselves back up to try again.

And you know that Heavenly time is not Earthly time....

[Guest Starsky]

Peace,

What exactly am I seeing "too small"? As for you knowledge of the so-called "dark ages" I suggest you read up on your history. Superstition and "witch craft" was no more prevelant at that time than it is now. In fact, it is probably more prevelant today than it was then! You should try reading some of the Christian literature from the "dark ages" and then try and tell me that men (and women) were not open to spiritual things!

Jason

I don't see how comparing our 'today' prevelancy of superstitions and followings of witch craft have anything to do with the time that JS was given to open a new dispensation.

The time had been carefully prepared with the ability to print enmass, the scriptures...most people had a bible in their homes at that time. That was one of the main things necessary....for the restoration.

Also, the lack of education during the dark ages for the masses was also a factor. When JS was given to restore the gospel in it's fullness, education was available to most...at least enough to learn to read.

Literacy and a knowledge of God was essential for the restoration. These were not available during the dark ages.

Again...the small tunnel vision keeps you from getting the bigger picture.

[Jason]

Peace,

Have you even read any history on the middle ages before??? Your ignorance is embarrasing to the other members of this board. Snow, please help her.

J