Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bob Betts

Universal Apostasy Or Not?

Recommended Posts

When they were translated. Doesn't that imply that they were killed by God and changed to be able to live on Earth until Jesus comes for the second time.

Iffy.....translation does not usually equate to physical death- in fact (IIRC) it's specifically stated that those who are translated during the Millenium will not taste of death.

Personally, I think saying "they were all killed" is acceptable in that it communicates the basic idea without bogging down the discussion in minutia. It is a sacrifice of technical accuracy in favor of brevity and clarity.

In the same vein, I am often content to say that "I live in Salt Lake City" without the slightest compunction to offer my address, zipcode, or GPS coordinates. Even when I travel, I still tell people that "I live in Salt Lake"- even though at that particular moment I might be engaged in the activity of living and breathing while someplace else entirely, nor the desire to clarify that I mean the city and not the body of water.

Then again, I'm not a pharisee looking for things to quibble over, either. :P

Share this post


Link to post

When they were translated. Doesn't that imply that they were killed by God and changed to be able to live on Earth until Jesus comes for the second time.

I don't know. Does "translation" involve dying? I seem to recall a JS statement to that effect.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know. Does "translation" involve dying? I seem to recall a JS statement to that effect.

I was under the impression Translation does involve dieing. Like a quick death that hits in a second. I might be wrong. If someone could prove or disprove this I would be very happy to know either way.

Share this post


Link to post

I was under the impression Translation does involve dieing. Like a quick death that hits in a second. I might be wrong. If someone could prove or disprove this I would be very happy to know either way.

Translated beings have not died. They will still need to be resurrected. At that time, they will be changed from a translated being to a resurrected being in the "twinkling of an eye".

T-Shirt

Share this post


Link to post

Hey thanks T-Shirt. I always appreciate people clearing things up.

While we are clearing things up, isn't The Apostle John busy preparing the remaining lost tribes of Israel for the second coming of Christ. Which could imply a wide range of people or if you believe they are in a hole in the north pole it could imply a very isolated group of people.

Share this post


Link to post

A few comments on this topic and this thread.

1. I think that some of the posts on this thread -- especially the guy with his head up...between his legs -- serves our message board and Latter Day Saints poorly. I can only imagine how the quotes and image will be featured in future commentary on his message board, website and materials.

2. I believe the contradiction that Mr. Betts is attempting to make between translated apostles on the earth today and the idea of a total apostacy fall short. Mr. Betts is setting up something of a strawman argument without complete information. The scripture does not say that John of the three Nephites will hold the keys of the priesthood or will be appointed to be the leaders of the Church.

3. A basic understanding of LDS theology makes that disctinction. If Mr. Betts examines LDS theology more deeply, he'd understand that we believe that having the priesthood...even being an apostle...is a far different thing than actually being appointed and annointed with the authorative keys to be the leader of the Church. There is no scriptural evidence that such keys (as required by the LDS understanding of priesthood authority) were conveyed to any of the immortal apostles.

4. As someone who is now a Latter Day Saint who was raised in the Protestant tradition, I can testify that the apostacy is very real. I recognized it myself without any reference or knowledge of the LDS Church and its teachings on the subject. With no disrespect to Mr. Bett's sincere beliefs, traditional Christianity has lost its ways with false teachings such as the Trinity, lack of new scripture, false notions of the priesthood, baptism, the manner of salvation, etc. etc.

Lastly, I hope that Mr. Betts will join us for many discussions.

Regards,

Six

Share this post


Link to post

A few comments on this topic and this thread.

1. I think that some of the posts on this thread -- especially the guy with his head up...between his legs -- serves our message board and Latter Day Saints poorly. I can only imagine how the quotes and image will be featured in future commentary on his message board, website and materials.

2. I believe the contradiction that Mr. Betts is attempting to make between translated apostles on the earth today and the idea of a total apostacy fall short. Mr. Betts is setting up something of a strawman argument without complete information. The scripture does not say that John of the three Nephites will hold the keys of the priesthood or will be appointed to be the leaders of the Church.

3. A basic understanding of LDS theology makes that disctinction. If Mr. Betts examines LDS theology more deeply, he'd understand that we believe that having the priesthood...even being an apostle...is a far different thing than actually being appointed and annointed with the authorative keys to be the leader of the Church. There is no scriptural evidence that such keys (as required by the LDS understanding of priesthood authority) were conveyed to any of the immortal apostles.

4. As someone who is now a Latter Day Saint who was raised in the Protestant tradition, I can testify that the apostacy is very real. I recognized it myself without any reference or knowledge of the LDS Church and its teachings on the subject. With no disrespect to Mr. Bett's sincere beliefs, traditional Christianity has lost its ways with false teachings such as the Trinity, lack of new scripture, false notions of the priesthood, baptism, the manner of salvation, etc. etc.

Lastly, I hope that Mr. Betts will join us for many discussions.

Regards,

Six

:P<_<:unsure:

Eloquently stated on all points.

Share this post


Link to post

It's true, because John and the three nephites, once they were no longer mortal, were also no longer presiding over the church that Christ set up on the earth.

To preside means, among other things, to act as the president or chairperson of an organization-and there is no mention of them any of these men being called to do that once they were immortal.

This was not what they were called to do and was not one of their responsibilities.

The statement is also true because it accurately describes the reason the apostasy came about-that it was the loss of the presiding leaders of the Christ's church and worthy priesthood holders that lead to that the priesthood vanishing from the earth and the apostasy of Christ's church.

:P

Bluebell, it appears that the fact that they were administering the LDS rite of baptism shows they had authority of calling and LDS priesthood.

How could they not have genuine LDS authority and still baptize?

Share this post


Link to post

Bluebell, it appears that the fact that they were administering the LDS rite of baptism shows they had authority of calling and LDS priesthood.

How could they not have genuine LDS authority and still baptize?

I can baptize too, but that doesn't mean it's my job to steady the ark of an anticipated world wide phenomenon.

Share this post


Link to post

If there was no universal apostasy, there was no need for a restoration. There has to be a universal apostasy, for there to be a need for a restoration.

I can quickly agree that there was no universal apostasy as many believe. A quick look at American History shows how ministers like David Brainard, Jonathan Edwards, Issac Watts, and other ministers operated in a realm of spiritual authority by the manifestations of the spirit in what they did. Add to ministers like these (and many others like them) we also have the account of John and the three Nephites. So no, I do not believe history shows a universal apostasy as many think actually happened. BUT a form of apostasy DID happen and is still prevelant today!

When Joseph went to God in asking what "church" to join, his testimony was that God told him to join none of them. And then he tells us why. He said that the Presbyterians were against the Baptist and Methodist and how the others were equally as zealous in proving the others just as wrong. Priest was contending against Priest and member against member. This is a form of apostasy.

The Lord also told Joseph that these "professors" were corrupt because while their lips were close to him, their hearts were far away. This too is a form of apostasy. The Lord said that their creeds were an abomination. That they taught for doctrine the commandments of men, having a "form of godliness", yet denied the power thereof. This too is a form of apostasy and if we do these things in ANY day and time we are in apostasy.

But I do not believe the Lord intended for the Restoration Movement to be merely another church that would everntually fall into apostasy like the rest, rather a movement of God to fulfill the scriptures in gathering together his House of Israel. In the Book of Mormon, Jesus himself tells how his covenant people would fall into iniquity due to unbelief (a form of apostasy) and how he would use the Gentiles to remind us of who we really are and what we are called to accomplish.

The Restoration Movement (in my opinion) was not to establish another church institution, rather as a movement of God upon the world for the benefit of all mankind. Anyway, just my thoughts.

In Christ I Serve

Thunderfire

Share this post


Link to post

Bob,

You’re getting, neigh, ridiculous.

But the four were exercising their priesthood authority and keys. If it was taken FROM the earth, how could the four exercise it?

This is quite simple, but I’ll play your game. What do you mean exercise it? I don’t know if you’re doing it, but you’re confounding terms. If you mean influence for good, blessing, etc., yes then…of course they exercised their priesthood. If you mean that they authorized their keys of presidency, then you’re just flat wrong.

That being said, I don’t understand in the least what your question has anything with anything, nor what you think it’s supposed to prove.

That being said…I must have missed what board you run. Are you an EV?

Oh wait…another one.

So, when Christ PROMISED the four that they would live on and bring souls to Christ until His return, what happened to that promise?

Let’s think about this…Christ has yet to return, so if they started working tomorrow…then the promise is still fulfilled, right? Again, you’re grasping at logically incoherent straws that don’t exist.

Thunderfire,

I can quickly agree that there was no universal apostasy as many believe. A quick look at American History shows how ministers like David Brainard, Jonathan Edwards, Issac Watts, and other ministers operated in a realm of spiritual authority by the manifestations of the spirit in what they did.

To bad it’s contra-biblical. Check out Hebs 5 about this “authority,” and then we’ll chat.

PacMan

Share this post


Link to post

Bob,

FYI, your site is junk. It wouldn't even let me register.

Did you preemptively ban me already?

PacMan

Share this post


Link to post

:P

Bob, i know you really seem to beleive yer on to something hear? But you are not listening or making any kind of rational desicions whatsoever, either that or you refuse to let your mind understand the obvious?

<_<

Or, the other way around. Maybe it's you all.

A universal apostasy was supposed to have taken place after the deaths of the Apostles. Yet, one Apostle never died, and three others, granted the same permission, and at least acting as Apostles, are doing the very thing that was supposed to have ceased. THAT'S what's obvious to ME. Telling me I don't understand and that I'm not being rational makes NO sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
So, how can Preach My Gospel claim that, "With the death of the Apostles, priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth"? That's not the story I'm getting from the LDS scriptures.

If Bob were able to find evidence that John or the three Nephites kept the Church going, he might have a point. Lazy research; all antiMormons are guilty of it.

The universal apostasy is already foretold in the Bible. For example....

And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. Revelation 13:7

Tracing the wholesale changes in early orthodox Christian doctrine from something very LDS-like to the heresies extant today among all nonLDS Christians also bears this out.

Share this post


Link to post

Or, the other way around. Maybe it's you all.

A universal apostasy was supposed to have taken place after the deaths of the Apostles. Yet, one Apostle never died, and three others, granted the same permission, and at least acting as Apostles, are doing the very thing that was supposed to have ceased. THAT'S what's obvious to ME. Telling me I don't understand and that I'm not being rational makes NO sense to me.

Lets see if you will answer this arguement. There was a universal apostacy just as Preach my Gospel indicates. As for John and the three nephites I refer to this statement:
(Mormon 1:13-14) "But wickedness did prevail upon the face of the whole land, insomuch that the Lord did take away his beloved disciples, and the work of miracles and of healing did cease because of the iniquity of the people. And there were no gifts from the Lord, and the Holy Ghost did not come upon any, because of their wickedness and unbelief."
This state of affairs was worldwide, so in addition to the loss of priesthood authority the apostacy was caused by something much worse: WICKEDNESS and UNBELIEF. That is why the Church became corrupt and that is why the priesthood authority was withdrawn. It had to await a day when religious freedom was protected by a government that would become a world power, and had to await a faithful generation to uphold the pure teachings of the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Share this post


Link to post

Bob knows the LDS posiiton on this. So he tries to lawyer it by finding some technical problem with it. Though John and the 3 Nephites have held the priesthood, how they have used it is not known. What is known is that there is no indication in any LDS sources, official or not, that during the apostasy period, these 4 ordained anyone to the priesthood or administered the ordiances like baptism and confirmation.

Then you didn't read my OP and the D&C and 3 Nephi 28 passages I posted, because it says precisely what they did, including baptisms in water and the HG. Verse 18 and 23.

Perhaps these 4 gave people priesthood blessings
Why guess, when the details of their callings are spelled out for you in the passages I posted.
but even that does not change the LDS stance on the apostasy.
No, of course not. And, page 36 of Preach My Gospel tells me exactly why it would never change the LDS stance on the Apostasy:
Investigators must understand that a universal apostasy occured following the death of Jesus Christ and His Apostles. If there had been no apostasy, there would have been no need for a restoration.
And the logical conclusion is, if there was no need for a restoration, there would have been no need for Joseph Smith. So, it stands to reason that I can't make sense, or it would spell the end of Mormonism as we know it. Therefore, no matter WHAT the LDS scriptures I presented say, there HAS to be an explanation. Or, your other alternative, shoot the messenger, which leads to your next paragraph:
Bob claims is found in a lot of anti places and might work with complete idiots who know nothing about LDS doctrine but can not work here where people do have more than a few brain cells working.

Add On: If there is any proof that one needs that Bob would have been a Pharisee if he lived in Jesus day, this is it. He is trying to look for some technical problem and not really address what the the issue is really about.

Share this post


Link to post

Then you didn't read my OP and the D&C and 3 Nephi 28 passages I posted, because it says precisely what they did, including baptisms in water and the HG. Verse 18 and 23.

Why guess, when the details of their callings are spelled out for you in the passages I posted.

No, of course not. And, page 36 of Preach My Gospel tells me exactly why it would never change the LDS stance on the Apostasy: And the logical conclusion is, if there was no need for a restoration, there would have been no need for Joseph Smith. So, it stands to reason that I can't make sense, or it would spell the end of Mormonism as we know it. Therefore, no matter WHAT the LDS scriptures I presented say, there HAS to be an explanation. Or, your other alternative, shoot the messenger, which leads to your next paragraph:

Is it just me, or is the inability to quash dissent, control what's posted, and the isolation from his groupies/cheering squad bringing out Bob's petulant side?

It's certainly affecting his hearing/ability to perceive what is written on the screen in front of him.

Share this post


Link to post
A universal apostasy was supposed to have taken place after the deaths of the Apostles. Yet, one Apostle never died, and three others, granted the same permission, and at least acting as Apostles, are doing the very thing that was supposed to have ceased. THAT'S what's obvious to ME. Telling me I don't understand and that I'm not being rational makes NO sense to me.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Cor 2:14)

Share this post


Link to post

Or, the other way around. Maybe it's you all.

A universal apostasy was supposed to have taken place after the deaths of the Apostles. Yet, one Apostle never died, and three others, granted the same permission, and at least acting as Apostles, are doing the very thing that was supposed to have ceased. THAT'S what's obvious to ME. Telling me I don't understand and that I'm not being rational makes NO sense to me.

Of course it is Bob, Its all of us, were to stoopid to understand. We are like sheep. Just mindless brainless pond scum merman type. Bob, do you not think that we the member of the LDS are more the authority on the topic of our faith than "YOU". Did that thought ever cross your mind. We are telling you how it works and you are not listening to it.

Share this post


Link to post

The Christian Apostasy David Stewart, Jr. (Part 1)

Introduction

During His ministry, the Savior Jesus Christ established His church according to divine pattern and taught the way of salvation. He established His church and commissioned apostles to lead it. A century later, there were no more apostles, and the gifts of the Holy Spirit had vanished from among professing Christians. Doctrines were changed and a non-biblical church hierarchy was established. Many find it difficult to reconcile the teachings, practices, leadership, and history of the so-called â??orthodoxâ? Christian churches of today with the standards of the New Testament church. What happened to the early church? Did God continue to guide it until the present, or was there a general Christian apostasy?

Evidence of Apostasy in the New Testament

The apostolic leaders of the early Church forsaw the impending apostasy. The Apostle Paul warns Timothy: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables" (2 Timothy 2:3-4). He charges Timothy: "guard what has been entrusted to you. Avoid the godless chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge [gnosis], for by professing it some have missed the mark as regards the faith " (1 Timothy 6:20-21, RSV). The Greek text uses the word gn

Share this post


Link to post

Lets see if you will answer this arguement. There was a universal apostacy just as Preach my Gospel indicates. As for John and the three nephites I refer to this statement:This state of affairs was worldwide, so in addition to the loss of priesthood authority the apostacy was caused by something much worse: WICKEDNESS and UNBELIEF. That is why the Church became corrupt and that is why the priesthood authority was withdrawn. It had to await a day when religious freedom was protected by a government that would become a world power, and had to await a faithful generation to uphold the pure teachings of the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Lightbearer, has come to the rescue. I think this sums it up. Bob, you have no argument any more. Case closed.

Share this post


Link to post

Contemporary Witnesses of the Apostasy (Part 2)

Through their apostolic priesthood and divine spiritual gifts, Peter, Paul, John, and the Apostles could speak Godâ??s word with power and authority and regulate the integrity of the Church. Without such men in the church, no one could appeal to the voice of God that comes through His appointed servants. The letters of the bishops Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, and Polycarp of Smyrna, dating from the time of Johnâ??s Revelation and slightly after, provide insight into the Christan apostasy from these contemporary witnesses. These are critical years â??when nonapostolic church government was first fashioned and, oddly, the most poorly documented years in Christian history.â?[2] Their writings illuminate the front of â??a very ill-lit tunnel [that] extends from the later apostolic age to the great apologists of the middle and later 2nd century.â?[3] The writings of the â??pre-Nicene church visibly shows the shock of losing apostolic leadership; the earlier the writing, the deeper that shock.â?[4] While bishops and other church officers are mentioned during the apostolic era, it is interesting that the only two offices which we can directly document from New Testament record as being commissioned by directly by Christ during his earthly ministry, that of the apostles and the seventy (Luke 10:1-4), were completely absent from the apostate Church only a century later. The divine leadership of the Church chosen by God was subverted and replaced by a hierarchy of man-made offices found nowhere in scripture â?? popes, archbishops, cardinals, and so forth â?? filled with unauthorized men. The prophet Isaiah had prophesied centuries earlier of a future time: â??The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenantâ? (D&C 24:5). In examining the Christian apostasy, we find numerous changes in the ordinances and organization of the Church that are nowhere authorized by scripture.

Clement of Rome, identified by Eusebius as being the same Clement praised by Paul as having his name written "in the Book of Life" (Philippians 4:3), wrote to the Corinthian church to express his shock that they had deposed local church leaders appointed by the apostles â??with the consent of the whole church.â? The jealousy of â??a few rash and self-willed personsâ? (1 Clement 1) brought rejection of the authorized priesthood leaders. Clement states: â??Your schism has turned aside many, has cast many into discouragement, many to doubt, all of us to grief, and your sedition continues.â? (1 Clement 46:9.) On his way to execution in Rome, Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, stood in the Christian meeting at Philadelphia (as he says in their letter) and â??with a great voiceâ? cried out to â??give heed to the bishop, and to the elders and the deacons.â? He continued: â??Keep your flesh as the temple of God, love unity, flee from divisions, be imitators of Jesus Christ, as was he also of his Fatherâ? (Philadelphians 7:1-2.) In every letter, Ignatius repeats the cry to â??do nothing without the bishop,â? as obedience to proper priesthood authority is the only antidote to the spreading â??poison of heretics.â? Polycarp of Smyrna, called a â??godly bishopâ? by Ignatius (Smyrnaeans 12:2), testified of his youthful contact "with John and with the others who had seen the Lordâ? (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History, 5.20.6). Polycarp's only surviving writing is his letter to the Philippians, who had asked for copies of Ignatius' letters shortly after Ignatius had been sent to Rome for execution. Polycarp used the opportunity to â??warn the Philippians against certain disorders in the Church at Philippi, and especially against apostasy.â?[5]

Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp all recognized that they lacked apostolic authority to direct the church. When correcting doctrinal errors and false practices that had arisen in local churches, the Apostle Paul began his New Testament letters by invoking his apostolic powers. Bishop Clement writes as an equal to an equal, but without authoritative direction, from â??the church of God which sojourns in Rome to the Church of God which sojourns in Corinth.â? The New Testament does not contain a single case of a bishop writing to someone elseâ??s church or of a church writing to another church.2 During the second century, many other letters of advice were written from Christians to other Christians expressing concern in the absence of apostolic authority. Similarly, Ignatius emphasizes that he is only giving advice and lacks the authority to direct the church of God like the apostles. He tells the Trallians: â??I did not think myself competent, as a convict, to give you orders like an apostle.â? (Trallians 3:3). To the Romans, he writes: â??I do not order you as did Peter and Paul; they were apostles, I am a convict.â? (Romans 4:3.) Polycarp also claims no apostolic authority and recognizes that he cannot exercise jurisdiction beyond his local bishopric, telling the Philippians: â??I write to you concerning righteousness, not at my own instance, but because you first invited meâ?¦For neither am I, nor is any other like me, able to follow the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul.â? (Philippians 3:1-2) In Polycarpâ??s era, bishops were independent. In his old age, Polycarp visited Rome and disagreed with the bishop of Rome about several things, including the proper date to celebrate Easter. The two peacefully agreed to disagree. (Eusebius 5.24.16-17).

Eusebius, a fourth-century Christian author, makes scores of references to apostasies and heresies within the church.[6] Eusebius quotes Hegesippus (AD 100-180) that until the times of Trajan (AD 98-117) the church â??continued a virgin pure and incorrupt; but after the sacred company of the apostles ended their lives by various kinds of death, then the conspiracy of impious error began to take place, through the deceit of false teachers" (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 1.3.32). Eusebius wrote that after the apostles, â??with our greater freedom a change came over us. We yielded to pride and sloth. We yielded to mutual envy and abuse. We warred upon ourselves as occasion offered, and we used the weapons and the spears of words. Leaders fought with leaders and laity formed factions against laity. Unspeakable hypocrisy and dissimulation traveled to the farthest limits of evil.â?[7] Eusebius referred to heresies held by leaders of the Church: â??Beryllusâ?¦ Bishop of Bostra in Arabia, perverted the true doctrine of the Church and tried to bring in ideas alien to the Faith, actually asserting that our Savior and Lord did not pre-exist in His own form of being before He made His home among men, and had no divinity of His own but only the Fatherâ??s dwelling in Him.â?[8] He noted the continued spread of apostasy at high levels under Constantine: â??There was also the unspeakable hypocrisy of men who crept into the Church and who took on the name and the character of Christiansâ?¦ [Constantine] put his trust in those who said they were Christians and who feigned the utmost affection for him.â? Challenging the heresy of celibacy that was to become officially accepted by the apostate church, Eusebius quoted Clement of Alexandria (about A.D. 150-215): â??Clementâ?¦ gives a list of those of the apostles who were married. This he does on account of those who condemn marriage. He says, â??Will they also condemn the apostles? For Peter and Philip had children, and Philip gave his daughters to husbands.â?? â?

Share this post


Link to post

Lightbearer, has come to the rescue. I think this sums it up. Bob, you have no argument any more. Case closed.

Thanks for the compliment Mola, yes I suppose you are right- case closed. But that seems to be Bob's M.O. once someone answers his arguement he slinks off...He did the same to me on another thread.

Share this post


Link to post

Bob,

I think you have been adequately answered but I will give it a crack as well.

Your misunderstanding what we mean by apostasy. The world was in a state where the church of Jesus Christ with the Priesthood authority could not thrive. It didn't matter that some men remained on the earth that Christ gave authority too.

It matters if the statement in Preach My Gospel is true. I'm just going by what it says: "With the death of the Apostles, priesthood keys and presiding priesthood authority were taken from the earth."Apparently no men remained on the earth with the authority, since it was taken from the earth with the Apostle's death.
We read in the BOM that when wickedness came they withdrew.
They withdrew from Zarahemla, but their callings were to "all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people" (3 Nephi 28:29 and D&C 7:3).
This is about as much as we know.
No, it's not. We know, according to the BoM and the D&C, where they went ("all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people") and what they did ("they did go forth upon the face of the land, and did minister unto all the people, uniting as many to the church as would believe in their preaching; baptizing them, and as many as were baptized did receive the Holy Ghost.")
When Christ took the authority from the earth mankind's access to them was taken.
Since your scripture says that four guys stayed and exercised authority, I can't see how "mankind's access to them was taken" when all four of them were called to go to "all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues and people."
The church as a functional unit built on the foundation of apostles and prophets no longer existed.
That may be what your church tells you, but that doesn't square with Christ calling on all four of them in D&C 7:2 and 3 Nephi 28:9: bring the souls of men unto me, while the world shall stand."
It's the same reason why the church was restored in a land and time and in the precise moment it could be. The reformation paved way for the restoration as you've probable heard. The church may not have survived in the climate before 1830.
This doesn't address my OP question. I don't see that a universal apostasy can be claimed base on your scriptures about the four priesthood authorities.
Also, I would think someone choosing to dwell on earth until the second coming of Christ has a little different calling then a mere mortal man would. We do not have enough information to know exactly what this is.
I think my presentation of what their specific callings were, where they were to go, and that they would do so until the return of Christ, from your scriptures, completely contradicts your assessment.

I'm sorry you aren't making sense to me. I'm simply going by what I'm reading in your scriptures, which contradicts the universal apostasy claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...