Did the church cease to Exist?

[Hemidakota]

Intelligence - Free Agency - Honor = Power of God

[Guest tomk]

I read somewhere that while the Church, itself, was not on the earth, the priesthood was never gone because of the translated beings, John the Beloved and the 3 Nephites, who were still on the earth.

[Holly3278]

No, the church on earth never ceased to exist. It has always existed.

[a-train]

No, the church on earth never ceased to exist. It has always existed.

This is true, and the LDS Church does not claim otherwise.

-a-train

[rameumptom]

As with Prison Chaplain, I do not believe that the gospel ceased from the Earth. I do believe that many plain and precious things were lost, needing to be restored prior to the 2nd Coming in order to prepare us for that day.

The atonement of Christ was and is available to all those who have or will live on earth. However, key points needed restoring to ensure not only salvation in a heaven of glory, but exaltation, as well.

This restoration included priesthood authority, continuing revelation, prophets and apostles, temple ordinances, etc.

D&C 1 tells us that the LDS Church is the only true and living Church with which the Lord is truly pleased. This does not mean there are no other true and living churches, but that there is one which fully pleases God - IOW, it contains a fullness of His gospel offerings.

The apostasy was not a complete falling away. Otherwise, we would not have had the Bible or a knowledge of Christ continue through the ages. But there was a loss of precious things needing to be restored. Even Martin Luther and the other Reformers would have agreed with the concept that the Catholic Church had lost its way on several key issues.

[rameumptom]

BTW, the Catholic Church recently came out with a statement saying that the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox are the only "true" Churches out there. Protestant churches are all heretical apostates and are not recognized, unless they convert over to the RCC.

If they are, indeed, the actual descended church of God, then the Protestants really do not have a leg to stand on, being heretics. If the RCC isn't completely descended from the original Church in its fullness, then there must have been key truths lost: an apostasy. If that is the case, then the issue is whether a Reformation or Restoration is required to bring the Church and gospel back to its fullness. Given that the Reformers made a compelling case for breaking off of the Roman Catholic Church, due to its falling away from the original intent of the gospel, I'd say they would have to agree there was a loss of truth and authority.

So, this discussion about whether there was an apostasy is a silly one for Protestants to deny. Otherwise, they need to all march on up to the local cathedral and ask the priest for communion and baptism.

[Vanhin]

Our knowledge of the Great Apostasy, is directly tied to Joseph Smith and the First Vision. There is, of course, ample historical evidence to support our claim that there was a general falling away from the truth. At the same time, it's quite understandable that those not of our faith would doubt this occurance, since it is very much at odds with the validity of the authority of their own religious organizations.

One of the first things Jesus Christ himself taught the young Joseph Smith, in that great vision, was that an apostasy had occurred. Joseph's object was not to form a new religion, but to obtain from God direction on which church to join. However, according to Joseph Smith, the Lord instead introduced the fact that an apostasy had occurred:

"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof."(JS-H 1: 19)

Like other things that we claim, the Apostasy, and by association, the Restoration, depends on the truthfulness of the account of the First Vision. "Was Joseph Smith really a prophet of God, and did he, in fact, converse with the Lord, as he claimed?", is the question that must be answered.

Vanhin

[AnthonyB]

rameumptom,

The questions is whose restoration? If you look up "restoration movement" you'll see that it can mean a range of things. The LDS borrowed the concept, phrase and a number of doctrines via Sidney Rigdon and the influence of the Pratt's etc.

I have no problems saying the church needed a restoration back to New Testament practices and beliefs. What the church didn't need was more wrong doctrines being introduced, but of course who is doing the true restoring and who is introducing more false doctrine is something you and I very likely to disagree on.

[Elgama]

rameumptom,

The questions is whose restoration? If you look up "restoration movement" you'll see that it can mean a range of things. The LDS borrowed the concept, phrase and a number of doctrines via Sidney Rigdon and the influence of the Pratt's etc.

I have no problems saying the church needed a restoration back to New Testament practices and beliefs. What the church didn't need was more wrong doctrines being introduced, but of course who is doing the true restoring and who is introducing more false doctrine is something you and I very likely to disagree on.

can the Saviour introduce a false or wrong doctrine;)?

-Charley

[AnthonyB]

Elgama,

No but men clearly can or there wouldn't have been the need for a restoration!

[AnthonyB]

A quote from a FAIR article.

The Corruption of Scripture in the Second Century

It seems likely that we actually borrowed the term "restoration" from Alexander and his reformers.

[prisonchaplain]

BTW, the Catholic Church recently came out with a statement saying that the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox are the only "true" Churches out there. Protestant churches are all heretical apostates and are not recognized, unless they convert over to the RCC.

If they are, indeed, the actual descended church of God, then the Protestants really do not have a leg to stand on, being heretics. If the RCC isn't completely descended from the original Church in its fullness, then there must have been key truths lost: an apostasy. If that is the case, then the issue is whether a Reformation or Restoration is required to bring the Church and gospel back to its fullness. Given that the Reformers made a compelling case for breaking off of the Roman Catholic Church, due to its falling away from the original intent of the gospel, I'd say they would have to agree there was a loss of truth and authority.

So, this discussion about whether there was an apostasy is a silly one for Protestants to deny. Otherwise, they need to all march on up to the local cathedral and ask the priest for communion and baptism.

This argument does not hold. Luther had no interest in starting a new church, or separating from Rome. His desire was for reform from corruption, and a few wrong practices. Yet the hierarchy said, "Recant or be branded a heretic." So, the Lutheran church started, not out of a declaration that Roman Catholicism was victim of a Great Apostasy, but rather that a measure of corruption to great to ignore had entered the church.

The Protestant churches that came afterwards mostly developed due to different understandings about particular doctrines--not because they believed Catholics and Lutherans were part of a Great Apostasy.

So, yes, Protestants have legs to stand on when we question whether God was so displeased with the Church that he withdrew spiritual authority from it.

[CatholicGirl]

Well, my opinion is that the Catholic church was going through a hard time at Martin Luther's time. But to say that because of this, the church Christ started was now untrue is hard for me to believe. All churches have rough patches - and this was one of the Catholic church's. I'm not denying that some bad things happened - but hey, the Mormon church used to believe in Polygamy. My point here is not to point blame at anyone, but that everyone has ups and downs, and that doesn't mean that all of a sudden the church is untrue. Remember the story of the Prodigal Son? He saw the error of his ways and fixed them. That's the important part here.

[Andrew777]

Well, my opinion is that the Catholic church was going through a hard time at Martin Luther's time. But to say that because of this, the church Christ started was now untrue is hard for me to believe. All churches have rough patches - and this was one of the Catholic church's. I'm not denying that some bad things happened - but hey, the Mormon church used to believe in Polygamy.

People in Old Testament times used to practice polygamy too, they worshiped the same God as we do. Nonetheless, polygamy isn't comparable to the types of atrocities Roman Catholics have committed throughout history, not just in Martin Luther's time. The Roman Catholic church was created by a council of men not Christ.

[rameumptom]

rameumptom,

The questions is whose restoration? If you look up "restoration movement" you'll see that it can mean a range of things. The LDS borrowed the concept, phrase and a number of doctrines via Sidney Rigdon and the influence of the Pratt's etc.

I have no problems saying the church needed a restoration back to New Testament practices and beliefs. What the church didn't need was more wrong doctrines being introduced, but of course who is doing the true restoring and who is introducing more false doctrine is something you and I very likely to disagree on.

And that is why I stated that we need to determine such things. Is a Reformation sufficient to restore the Church? Who, then is to reform it? I'd say several thousands of ministers have felt the need to reform the Christian church, so as we now have several thousand varieties of Christianity.

As for Restorationist movements, I agree there are several. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young stated they accepted truth wherever it was found. The truths that Sidney Rigdon and others had were embraced. But the Rigdons and Pratts, et al., had to reject several concepts, as well. You'll note that Joseph Smith did not throw out the Bible, but used it as his key scripture throughout his life. The Bible, in fact, was often a catalyst for the revelations of Joseph Smith. Ideas and concepts from the Bible or other individuals often led to the revelations that established doctrines. The Word of Wisdom came about because Emma complained about tobacco stains and smoke damaging rooms in the house.

The key idea on the term "restore" is it means something that is brought back to its original condition. Joseph brought back apostles and prophets, modern revelation and scripture, ancient concepts like: the divine council, the premortal existence, levels of heaven, and an anthropomorphic God. All of these concepts were ancient and preceded the creeds of Christianity.

So, while we can disagree on whether Joseph actually restored the true Church, one must realize that he did bring back/restore ancient teachings.

[a-train]

It seems likely that we actually borrowed the term "restoration" from Alexander and his reformers.

The term 'restore' in reference to the reinstallment of Israel in the end times is a KJV term. Isaiah 1:26, 49:6; Jeremiah 30:17; Matt. 17:11; Acts 1:6 are some examples.

The 10th Article of Faith is: 'We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.'

Although the use of the term was popular long before Joseph Smith, the notion is true. We are living in the time of the restoration of Israel.

-a-train

[rameumptom]

This argument does not hold. Luther had no interest in starting a new church, or separating from Rome. His desire was for reform from corruption, and a few wrong practices. Yet the hierarchy said, "Recant or be branded a heretic." So, the Lutheran church started, not out of a declaration that Roman Catholicism was victim of a Great Apostasy, but rather that a measure of corruption to great to ignore had entered the church.

The Protestant churches that came afterwards mostly developed due to different understandings about particular doctrines--not because they believed Catholics and Lutherans were part of a Great Apostasy.

So, yes, Protestants have legs to stand on when we question whether God was so displeased with the Church that he withdrew spiritual authority from it.

I agree that Luther didn't want to leave the RCC. However, it happened. He was, at the time, excommunicated. The Lutheran and later Reformation Churches were not recognized by the RCC, except as heretics that were often burned at the stake. So, my argument does hold.

If the RCC claims sacerdotal power and authority, which it does, and others dispute that authority, then there is a clean break. I agree with you that God withdrew spiritual authority from the RCC. The question then comes, how does one regain that spiritual authority of God? Is a Reformation sufficient? Or must God restore the authority again?

The point I'm making is that Protestants cannot claim a 2000 year tradition, because they have broken off of the RCC - removing themselves from that tradition. Another way to possibly look at it is that the tree is dead or dying, and so the branches are also dead or dying. I know you will not agree with such an assessment, but that is how a Catholic priest discussed it with me once on "IF" there had been an apostasy. He agreed there would have to be a restoration. Now, he did not believe an apostasy had occurred, and so no restoration or reformation was required.

[CatholicGirl]

People in Old Testament times used to practice polygamy too, they worshiped the same God as we do. Nonetheless, polygamy isn't comparable to the types of atrocities Roman Catholics have committed throughout history, not just in Martin Luther's time. The Roman Catholic church was created by a council of men not Christ.

I'm sorry you feel that way. And yes, men are fallible. But it was started by Christ. The LDS church was started by a man - Joseph Smith.

[Elgama]

I'm sorry you feel that way. And yes, men are fallible. But it was started by Christ. The LDS church was started by a man - Joseph Smith.

Thats not what God said when I asked Him - I know many who believe Jesus was just a man, the Bible contains many stories of people who believed just that whilst He was alive. Ask my Jewish friends and they will say Christianity was started by a fraud.

-Charley

[CatholicGirl]

Just out of curiosity - do you personally believe that? So all those miracles... those were the works of a magician? There are so many parts in the bible that claim Jesus to be God. Here are a mere two examples: John 20:28-29, Thomas says "My Lord and my God" to which Jesus replies "Happy are those who do not see yet believe". In Isaiah 9:6 "For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace." Well all believe in the bible, right?

[CatholicGirl]

Thats not what God said when I asked Him - I know many who believe Jesus was just a man, the Bible contains many stories of people who believed just that whilst He was alive. Ask my Jewish friends and they will say Christianity was started by a fraud.

Wait... when you asked God, are you saying that he told you that Jesus was just a man or that Joseph Smith is more then a man? Forgive me - I'm confused with the statement.

And all my LDS friends say that they are Christian, allthough I've heard otherwise. Is that what you are saying by "Christianity was started by a fraud", because that's not a good argument because I thought that the LDS consider THEMSELVES Christian.

[Elgama]

Wait... when you asked God, are you saying that he told you that Jesus was just a man or that Joseph Smith is more then a man? Forgive me - I'm confused with the statement.

And all my LDS friends say that they are Christian, allthough I've heard otherwise. Is that what you are saying by "Christianity was started by a fraud", because that's not a good argument because I thought that the LDS consider THEMSELVES Christian.

this LDS doesn't consider herself Christian I know I should but I feel divorced from the religion, more so than I do any other, I find Christians difficult to understand in general. I started calling myself Non-Trinitarian Christian at 8, dropped the Christian and just said I believed in God at 12, at 15 I was baptised a Latter Day Saint and that is how I see myself. I personally do not believe its for me or anyone else to say who is Christian its between them and Christ

Through answers to prayer I know the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is where Heavenly Father wants me and Joseph Smith was a prophet. After this weeks conference I finally believe it is the True and Living Church that testimony has taken me awhile.

What I meant by my post was that Jews believe Christianity is a fraud - does that make it false? I do not believe Jesus was a fraud I believe He is my Saviour, why because I have prayed and have my answer. Through prayer I know that the Saviour is at the Head of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - and my reaction to you saying it was started by a man will be similar to how you will feel if a Jew were to tell you Jesus was a fraud? What would you feel, maybe they were wrong and deluded? Then there is the Hindu/Pagan/Buddhist/Muslim view that he is a prophet again I don't believe that because of prayer. Or the Hindu and Pagan beliefs that the Jesus story is a retelling of Mithras or Krishna - is that true is Jesus a fraud because there are older similar tales I don't believe that because of faith neither do you.

-Charley

[CatholicGirl]

Oh, okay. I understand now. It's interesting that you say that you have your answers (from God) - obviously he doesn't verbally tell you. Is this the thing that I hear the LDS talking about all the time - their testimonies?

[rameumptom]

I'm sorry you feel that way. And yes, men are fallible. But it was started by Christ. The LDS church was started by a man - Joseph Smith.

Well, that IS one version. I believe that God started the LDS Church. After all, if the claim is true, then God and Jesus DID appear to Joseph Smith and restore their Church. I personally believe the First Vision and subsequent miracles and revelations occurred, just as I believe that Jesus healed the sick and was resurrected on the third day.

Now, history shows us that the Trinity was established as traditional church belief by way of a council that did not receive that by revelation. It was a rather rambunctious crowd that varied in their belief on the Godhead at Nicea. But those that did not follow the Trinity were expelled and/or excommunicated. Even the historian Eusebius was exiled for his belief in Origenism (very similar to the LDS Godhead belief). So, the establishment of the Trinity belief was by man.

[Elgama]

Oh, okay. I understand now. It's interesting that you say that you have your answers (from God) - obviously he doesn't verbally tell you. Is this the thing that I hear the LDS talking about all the time - their testimonies?

No its not the testimony the testimony is what comes as a result of the answer to the prayer at least for me. A testimony is usually described as the heart telling or confirming what is in the head. (I think lol) - it is personal revelation

it comes in many forms everyone receives answers to prayers in different ways, I am not sure of my own origins of faith, I did not have a single moment of conversion I have always prayed and had them answered sometimes it is words, sometimes a dream,sometimes a feeling, sometimes something dramatic, sometimes something small. The Pagan in me can even receive answers just looking at the world around me after all Heavenly Father created it for me:) (sorry LDS primary song) I actually wanted to be a Nun, but couldn't reconcile myself to becoming Roman Catholic, Hindu or Buddhist the idea of a contemplative lifestyle still attracts me greatly I get my fix by attending a retreat at a local monastery every so often. Also our Temples are a similar idea and I love living so far away so I can stay for a week.

-Charley