Did the church cease to Exist?

[Guest]

THE CHURCH HAS NEVER CEASED TO EXIST

To suppose that God could allow His Gospel to vanish and His church to fail is to think Him so weak that He isn't God at all.

To think that He could have prevented such a thing, but didn't, is to think that He doesn't care either for His Word or His people. It is to eviscerate the nature of God, to make Him a mere fallible being, like Zeus or Apollo.

It is, also, to contradict the Bible, and therefore to call God Himself a

liar, for He promised that His church would stand until the end of time.

These things are the truth about Christianity. To claim that Christianity is otherwise is ridiculous. You can know about Mormonism, but you then don't know about Christianity.

The question is not whether you are member of the right denomination but are you trusting Christ's atonement to make you right with God?

If grace only applies after all you can do, how do you know when you have done enough? Have you truly done ALL you could do? If not, then it would seem that grace would not apply. That is why a Christian rejoices in grace (unmerited favor) as presented in the Bible.

Good works are a result of grace, not a way to achieve it (Gal. 5:22-23 and Eph. 2). One doesn't earn or pay for a gift. Grace is not a license to sin, those who truly love God will want to please Him.

[WillowTheWhisp]

T

If grace only applies after all you can do, how do you know when you have done enough? Have you truly done ALL you could do? If not, then it would seem that grace would not apply. That is why a Christian rejoices in grace (unmerited favor) as presented in the Bible.

Good works are a result of grace, not a way to achieve it (Gal. 5:22-23 and Eph. 2). One doesn't earn or pay for a gift. Grace is not a license to sin, those who truly love God will want to please Him.

Indeed good works do follow - as a result. We are offered the gift more in spite of ourselves than because of. I don't believe that we must do good works in order to obtain grace - despite that concept having been taught throughout the middle ages even including the sale of 'indulgences' to buy your way out of purgatory. Can you really believe the true Gospel has never ceased to exist when the only church which existed at the time had drifted so far away from the true concept of the free gift of grace? Surely you must agree, after all you have just said that one doesn't earn or pay for a gift. We may try - but after all that trying Paul tells us we are saved by grace after/despite all our efforts because we can't earn something which could only be paid for by the atoning sacrifice of one worthy.

[NeuroTypical]

Hi there,

Please be aware that this forum really isn't the place to preach your version of Christianity. This forum is for asking questions about our church, and interacting with members. But based on the things you emphasise in your post, you seem to have to a few misconceptions about what we believe.

THE CHURCH HAS NEVER CEASED TO EXIST

No mormon ever claimed it did. We claim the church fell into apostacy, just like 2 Thessalonians 2:3 said it would.

We do not claim the church ended, but that it's authority ended. They martyred the apostles, new ones were not named. Bishops fought over correct doctrine. Sects were killing each other when Constantine seized power and forced unity. Various councils got together and voted on what God's words meant. The schisms and reformations broke away from each other. And now we have the modern evangelical movement claiming that authority was never important to begin with. You have to ignore quite a few scriptures to reach that conclusion.

You can know about Mormonism, but you then don't know about Christianity.

Quite to the contrary - the more you actually know about Christ's restored church, the more you end up learning about the original church.

If grace only applies after all you can do, how do you know when you have done enough?

Grace vs. works arguments are as old as the hills. Tell me - have you ever budged an inch when arguing the issue? Have you ever seen anyone else budge? I don't think we'll be convincing the other in this thread. About all we can hope for is a charitable understanding of the other's position. I've got one of yours already, let us know if you want to understand where we're coming from.

Welcome to the board - if you wish to, you will learn a thing or two about us here.

LM

[Canuck Mormon]

Welcome to the board - if you wish to, you will learn a thing or two about us here.

LM

With 10 posts is 5 years, I'm not so sure what his intentions are.

[Dale]

If Martin Luther left the church in apostasy where is the faithful remnant? I am not becoming a Catholic.

I can find all sort's of quote's by the church father's saying obedience is essential to salvation? Outside of maybe the Gnostic heretic's and wasn't it Augustine i know of proof grace alone ever considered orthodoxy. That is but for grace alone proof texts in the New Testament grace alone orthodoxy vanished. Certainly for the Evangelical church to survive you have to find a group holding to that orthodoxy that never apostasized.

One idea that's false is the idea that just because obedience is essential to salvation it's no longer a gift. If the best of us are guilty by the mere 1% of disobedience they did not merit salvation. We are truly saved by grace after all we can do. (Jame's 2:10)

I am already saved from hell. Any reward's, position's glories i get in the afterlife are conditional on me meeting the requirement's. My original debt with God has been satisfied, or i would not be saved from hell to any kingdom of glory. I would go to outer darkness, the lake of fire, hell as it's variously termed. I am right with God. If i am not right with God to get everything else as a freebee that does not effect my salvation from hell. Jesus paid my debt with God. If he feel's i owe him anything it's more like a purgatory situation not one that get's me unsaved.

I do not see good work's as act's of human effort, but yielding ourselve's to God allowing him to work in us by his grace. (1 Cor. 15:10)

I look at Ephesian's 2:8-9 and Titus 3:5 and interpret it differently than do Evangelical's. I see some of those work's as unbeliever's must do must do upon pain of damnation if they don't do them.

I can't help you if you run off without satisfying me you have the true gospel. I looked up John 14:6 a part of your posting name. To me if you do not have the real gospel you offer me a different Jesus. Only one Jesus has the power to get me into seeing the Father and i won't ask your Jesus. Your Jesus tell's me i am going to hell, but my Jesus say's i am already saved. I like my Jesus which is Paul's Jesus much better. (2 Cor. 11:4) You posting to witness and then running off only satisfies me that i have the better gospel. I like what Isaiah say's ""Come now, and let us reason together,..." Let my Jesus have a place in your mind, and heart where you will listen to him.

---------

I am a member of the Community of Christ (formerly the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints).

[a-train]

'And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.' - Rev. 12:5-6

[prisonchaplain]

ICan you really believe the true Gospel has never ceased to exist when the only church which existed at the time had drifted so far away from the true concept of the free gift of grace? Surely you must agree, after all you have just said that one doesn't earn or pay for a gift. We may try - but after all that trying Paul tells us we are saved by grace after/despite all our efforts because we can't earn something which could only be paid for by the atoning sacrifice of one worthy.

Aye, there's the rub. Protestants do not believe there is a singular, perfected human institutional church. Rather, the "true church," is comprised of all sincere, believing followers of Christ. We do not believe the Catholic Church has perfected doctrine or practice. Likewise, our various denominations--likewise any independent or nondeminational church. Rather, it is Christ, the Truth, that sets us free--and sets us apart. So, YES--I do believe that the gospel never ceased to exist.

[prisonchaplain]

Grace vs. works arguments are as old as the hills. Tell me - have you ever budged an inch when arguing the issue? Have you ever seen anyone else budge? I don't think we'll be convincing the other in this thread. About all we can hope for is a charitable understanding of the other's position. I've got one of yours already, let us know if you want to understand where we're coming from.

Welcome to the board - if you wish to, you will learn a thing or two about us here.

LM

I've probably budged an inch or two towards urging those who listen to me that good works are a necessary outgrowth of living Christianity.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Aye, there's the rub. Protestants do not believe there is a singular, perfected human institutional church. Rather, the "true church," is comprised of all sincere, believing followers of Christ. We do not believe the Catholic Church has perfected doctrine or practice. Likewise, our various denominations--likewise any independent or nondeminational church. Rather, it is Christ, the Truth, that sets us free--and sets us apart. So, YES--I do believe that the gospel never ceased to exist.

Well, we've got something in common there because I too do not believe that any man made church has the whole truth. Some have some parts and some have others. Where we differ is that I believe that because of this Jesus has restored the full Gospel to the earth in the church which bears his name.

[Guest Malcolm]

Aye, there's the rub. Protestants do not believe there is a singular, perfected human institutional church. Rather, the "true church," is comprised of all sincere, believing followers of Christ. We do not believe the Catholic Church has perfected doctrine or practice. Likewise, our various denominations--likewise any independent or nondeminational church. Rather, it is Christ, the Truth, that sets us free--and sets us apart. So, YES--I do believe that the gospel never ceased to exist.

Well, that is a man-made concept. It is quite evidently circular logic in order to justify the establishment of the "church X". The fact that there was no clear ecclesiastic authority after the Reformation did not eclipsed the fact they knew they had no authority to act in the name of God.

If I own a piece of land it does not matter if you had built a hospital or housing or whatever. I am the legitimate owner and whatever you have built, be it well intended, I have the right to seize, demolish and plant a vegetable garden. It was always my property and I did not authorize its use for any purpose. Matthew points to it quite clearly.

[Dale]

The need for Catholic priesthood is rejected by the reformation. The only kind of priesthood a believer can hold to them would be a priesthood of believer's. I had this Anti-Restored Priesthood lecture on tape that used a blank piece of paper for illustrative purposes. It said this is what priesthood was in the early church. It just wasn't there in the early church, so the person i was listening to felt no need for it.

[prisonchaplain]

Well, that is a man-made concept. It is quite evidently circular logic in order to justify the establishment of the "church X". The fact that there was no clear ecclesiastic authority after the Reformation did not eclipsed the fact they knew they had no authority to act in the name of God.

It is or it isn't. Did Jesus really establish a heavily organized church with 12 apostles, 72 leaders, etc. etc. Or, did Jesus grant the authority of his name to all his followers? Was the Great Commission just for the apostles, or is every member a missionary?

I do not deny that church needs leadership, and that they are ordained of God. On the other hand, I remain doubtful that leadership was meant to do much more than instruct and coach "the royal priesthood, the holy nation."

If I own a piece of land it does not matter if you had built a hospital or housing or whatever. I am the legitimate owner and whatever you have built, be it well intended, I have the right to seize, demolish and plant a vegetable garden. It was always my property and I did not authorize its use for any purpose. Matthew points to it quite clearly.

That's true. And, if Jesus assigned everyone in his church stewardship, it does matter how often leadership claims sole authority, it ultimately belongs to all of us. Mind you--I speak as one of those leaders.

[Guest Malcolm]

So in you mind the chaos within the evangelical community is not disturbing? The multiple schisms within denominations and congregations over property, dogma and doctrine, the aberrations, absurd "re-translations" and myriad of interpretation of the scriptures does not point to the fact that there is something fundamentally wrong in this approach?

I believe you to be a man of faith, a true believer and someone that lives with purpose and integrity attempting to do the absolute best based on your own understanding of the scriptures. I would never question that. I do think however that your argument points to self justification. I say this in the must strict meaning of the word rather that an attempt to qualify. You engage on a task that touches your soul deeply and for you that is sufficient to proceed forward. You have not stopped to question the the process itself. The "how" is in this case of much greater importance than the "what."

For the sake of the argument; I happen to believe that most of the my son's 7th grade teachers are total morons. Since I hold advanced degrees in several academic disciplines I feel more than confident I can actually teach my son in a more effective, efficient and with a quality higher in an order of magnitud. I could do just that. In fact, after 2 years I could prove that my son is better prepared for the SAT's than most HS kids in the district. Incompetent as the bureocracy may be, they hold ALL the authority to grant the HS degree. I don't. All my well intended effort will be worthless for all practical purposes.

My intent is not to deny or belittle the value of your work in the Gospel, Chaplain. I thought about this many years ago before joining the church after reading 3 John. Here is the last of the Apostles, one who knew the Savior like no other and he is being rejected by a certain congregation and its leaders. This congregation even refuses to received the emissaries of John. He (the leader) thought he had a grip on the doctrine, the position, the "calling" and the self appointed authority thus no need for the Apostle. They rejected a living witness of the Christ in favor of what? That you reject the testimony of the prophet of this dispensation does not surprise me. But you would have to acknowledge that arguments to the contrary only point to the same.

[Elgama]

I have always seen it that the church needed to go into apostasy it was part of God;s plan because the apostasy happened the Word was carried around the world. Without God removing the Head, the Roman Church could not have taken it up.

I see everything in the scriptures as a shadow of things to come, everything is a pattern of what is to come Christ was crucified by the Romans, went through a period when he descended into hell and was then resurrected - this represented the apostasy very well. And there other examples throughout scripture. Like the organisation being restored allowed great things to happen the Resurrection of Christ was greater than his death. Removing the organisation prevented it from becoming corrupted during the time it was carried round the world. I believe removing the organisation for a time is what prevented the Gates of Hell Prevailing against it, whilst at the same time spreading the Word - if this hadn't happened it would still be restricted to the Middle East look at what happened with Islam etc

- have much more to say need go my daugher has urgent Drs appointment

-Charley

[WillowTheWhisp]

That's a very interesting thought Charley. There must needs be an opposition in all things.

[Elgama]

I agree Willow God always knows there will be opposition and his plan allows for us to have agency at all levels of service. I don't believe the body of Christ was entirely removed just the brain or head. When I look at my own life the greatest things in it come out of opposition, and trials, they are when we move forward most - that happens in the world too most of the worlds greatest advances came about because of wars, during time of war is when you see people at their very best as well as their very worst. Without the apostasy I don't think Christ's church could have ever become so great -

We see it happen again and again in the scriptures (Bible and Book of Mormon) people become wicked, they go through a period of darkness and great trial and then we get the great men of scripture come forward and for a time people are at their best. How many times were Gods People taken into captivity by the dominant nation at the time? Out of that we get men like Daniel and Moses. The church is always at some point in the pride cycle - difference today is I think the church goes through that pride cycle in individual units rather than as a whole church like when small branches get closed because members are at war (the oldest branch in Scotland was closed recently because of it - it had been there since the 1800s), ours was nearly a casualty but I think we are now getting passed that stage and because of the period our branch went through an almost apostasy it is now amazing because only the strongest members remained everyone else fell away. I know I am still struggling with my faith because of it.

Apostasy has never derailed Gods Plan its just a part of it, it always has been and humans haven't changed that much.

-Charley

[WillowTheWhisp]

Our Ward in Accrington was closed but not due to Apostacy. The neighbouring Blackburn Ward had shrunk and we were amalgamated with them. We are now in Blackburn Ward as that's where the chapel is. We didn't have a chapel in our Accrington Ward.

[prisonchaplain]

So in you mind the chaos within the evangelical community is not disturbing?

No. "Chaos," is obviously a loaded term. Our various denominations and congregations agree on most matters of doctrine, and we enjoy tremendous fellowship across denominations.

The multiple schisms within denominations and congregations over property, dogma and doctrine, the aberrations, absurd "re-translations" and myriad of interpretation of the scriptures does not point to the fact that there is something fundamentally wrong in this approach?

No. Again, the differences are exagerrated, and we enjoy sincere Christian fellowship amongst ourselves. There is genuine love within the universal Christian church, despite our occasional differences of opinion.

For the sake of the argument; I happen to believe that most of the my son's 7th grade teachers are total morons. Since I hold advanced degrees in several academic disciplines I feel more than confident I can actually teach my son in a more effective, efficient and with a quality higher in an order of magnitud. I could do just that. In fact, after 2 years I could prove that my son is better prepared for the SAT's than most HS kids in the district. Incompetent as the bureocracy may be, they hold ALL the authority to grant the HS degree. I don't. All my well intended effort will be worthless for all practical purposes.

Ever hear of home schooling? Your child's superior scores on the SAT, and perhaps, if necessary, a GED, would be testimony to the validity of his educational training.

I thought about this many years ago before joining the church after reading 3 John. Here is the last of the Apostles, one who knew the Savior like no other and he is being rejected by a certain congregation and its leaders. This congregation even refuses to received the emissaries of John. He (the leader) thought he had a grip on the doctrine, the position, the "calling" and the self appointed authority thus no need for the Apostle. They rejected a living witness of the Christ in favor of what? That you reject the testimony of the prophet of this dispensation does not surprise me. But you would have to acknowledge that arguments to the contrary only point to the same.

The example of the 3rd letter of John is interesting, but perhaps inappropriate. The letter writer makes it clear that the leader's rejection of John and his representatives has to do with his own desire for power, not with a sincere effort to protect "the truths once taught" against new interpretations.

Joseph Smith openly said that other churches were in apostasy, and that his teachings were in contrast to them. You're not calling me to welcome your missionaries into my church. Rather, you are calling me to leave the "synagogue" and join your Church.

[Guest Malcolm]

Chaplain, my friend:

I think you are oversimplifying just a little. Courtesy and fellowship does not mean "cordial or congenial" From Constantine to the Reformation Christianity experienced several fractures that led to several very distinct and independent denominations. The last and most profound being the emergence of the Protestant Church which remains to this day. Do not forget all the martyrs.

Keep in mind that the authors of the Reformation were ALL Roman Catholic theologians. They saw how far away the Roman Church has moved from what they believed was the true intent of the word of God in scriptures. And they split.

I do not desire to contend since I unequivocally believe you to be sincere and true believer. I also know that you are an intelligent seeker of truth. So I appeal to the same spirit and I would like to pose a question: Assume you live in the first century AD in a city in Asia Minor. You are an expert in the Law and faithful observant of the Torah. A fellow countryman also an expert of the Law visits your town and declare with all solemnity that God has sent His Son, that as pertaining to the Law all has been fulfilled and the new covenant requires of you a host of things foreign and on the surface contrary to what you have done and believed your whole life and your forefathers for two thousand years!! Will you search and ponder about this new doctrine with the full intent of knowing if this is in deed God's new commandment, or will you dismiss it on the claim that you already have the Law or Moses and above the Torah there is no Law, not could it be changed because God changes not?

Again, assuming you dismiss the Restoration all together at face value, if God would send two witnesses to preach and testify into your town about the second coming; how would you discern whether they are true messengers of God or a couple of lunatics?

Tricky...?

[Traveler]

THE CHURCH HAS NEVER CEASED TO EXIST

To suppose that God could allow His Gospel to vanish and His church to fail is to think Him so weak that He isn't God at all.

To think that He could have prevented such a thing, but didn't, is to think that He doesn't care either for His Word or His people. It is to eviscerate the nature of God, to make Him a mere fallible being, like Zeus or Apollo.

It is, also, to contradict the Bible, and therefore to call God Himself a

liar, for He promised that His church would stand until the end of time.

These things are the truth about Christianity. To claim that Christianity is otherwise is ridiculous. You can know about Mormonism, but you then don't know about Christianity.

The question is not whether you are member of the right denomination but are you trusting Christ's atonement to make you right with God?

If grace only applies after all you can do, how do you know when you have done enough? Have you truly done ALL you could do? If not, then it would seem that grace would not apply. That is why a Christian rejoices in grace (unmerited favor) as presented in the Bible.

Good works are a result of grace, not a way to achieve it (Gal. 5:22-23 and Eph. 2). One doesn't earn or pay for a gift. Grace is not a license to sin, those who truly love God will want to please Him.

One would think there was no fall of man or that the possibility of a fall was not Biblical.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

It is or it isn't. Did Jesus really establish a heavily organized church with 12 apostles, 72 leaders, etc. etc. Or, did Jesus grant the authority of his name to all his followers? Was the Great Commission just for the apostles, or is every member a missionary?

I do not deny that church needs leadership, and that they are ordained of God. On the other hand, I remain doubtful that leadership was meant to do much more than instruct and coach "the royal priesthood, the holy nation."

That's true. And, if Jesus assigned everyone in his church stewardship, it does matter how often leadership claims sole authority, it ultimately belongs to all of us. Mind you--I speak as one of those leaders.

I cannot speak for others - only myself. I believe that leadership belongs to only the L-rd. It is his kingdom. I find it interesting that you and I differ on this point of leadership, especially because of past discussions you and I have had concerning the doctrine of man becoming like unto G-d.

I see leadership in the Kingdom of G-d on earth as taking upon one's self as proxy the role of G-d. It is not in my mind that such a thing cannot happen; only when it does that G-d must approve such an appointment. As I view history and the treatment of those that questioned the Trinity; I am not about to witness that G-d approved.

The Traveler

[Doctor Steuss]

Good works are a result of grace, not a way to achieve it (Gal. 5:22-23 and Eph. 2). One doesn't earn or pay for a gift. Grace is not a license to sin, those who truly love God will want to please Him.

So tell me, who receives this "gift"? Is there nothing one must do to obtain it?

[Hemidakota]

THE CHURCH HAS NEVER CEASED TO EXIST

To suppose that God could allow His Gospel to vanish and His church to fail is to think Him so weak that He isn't God at all.

To think that He could have prevented such a thing, but didn't, is to think that He doesn't care either for His Word or His people. It is to eviscerate the nature of God, to make Him a mere fallible being, like Zeus or Apollo.

It is, also, to contradict the Bible, and therefore to call God Himself a

liar, for He promised that His church would stand until the end of time.

These things are the truth about Christianity. To claim that Christianity is otherwise is ridiculous. You can know about Mormonism, but you then don't know about Christianity.

The question is not whether you are member of the right denomination but are you trusting Christ's atonement to make you right with God?

If grace only applies after all you can do, how do you know when you have done enough? Have you truly done ALL you could do? If not, then it would seem that grace would not apply. That is why a Christian rejoices in grace (unmerited favor) as presented in the Bible.

Good works are a result of grace, not a way to achieve it (Gal. 5:22-23 and Eph. 2). One doesn't earn or pay for a gift. Grace is not a license to sin, those who truly love God will want to please Him.

My question is do you really understand the Atonement or the term Christian?

[Misshalfway]

We don't believe that the gospel of Christ completely vanished from the earth. We do believe that Christ did set up an organized church. He called Peter to be at the head and twelve apostles to lead and preach. He gave commandments like baptism and missionary work. The people at that time were wicked enough to kill all the prophets. The purity of the church organization was lost. The pure gospel of Jesus Christ was reinterpreted so very many times. Plain and precious truths, as we say, were lost, as was the priesthood authority to act in the name of Christ -- authority that was given to Peter by the laying on of hands. I do believe that there is a lot of truth in the world. I do believe that God reveals truth to whoever seeks it. And think that Christianity itself has been preserved by faithful groups and individuals that loved the Savior. Thank goodness for them.

[WillowTheWhisp]

God can protect the Gospel but he cannot force us to believe it. He cannot prevent people from putting their own interpretation on things. If he did so he would be taking away our agency.