• Announcements

    • Nemesis

      Contact Us Broken   09/27/2016

      Users, It has come to our attention that the contact us feature on the site is broken.  Please do not use this feature to contact board admins.  Please go through normal channels.  If you are ignored there then assume your request was denied. Also if you try to email us that email address is pretty much ignored.  Also don't contact us to complain, ask for favors, donations, or any other thing that you may think would annoy us.  Nemesis
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
TrueSoldier

apostasy
What Caused Each Dispensation To End?

16 posts in this topic

What happened during each dispensation to cause it to end?

Adam
Enoch
Noah
Abraham
Moses
Jesus Christ (this one more obvious)

Scripture references are greatly appreciated.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Loss of sufficient priesthood authority to perform every ordinance and build the kingdom.
Even when some priesthood remained on earth, a loss of any keys and ordinances from the earth requires them to be "dispensed" from heaven again.

0

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Loss of sufficient priesthood authority to perform every ordinance and build the kingdom.
Even when some priesthood remained on earth, a loss of any keys and ordinances from the earth requires them to be "dispensed" from heaven again.

I know I get it, we teach that people "rejected" prophets, priesthood was lost etc... but where in the bible do we learn that Abraham was rejected for example and the priesthood was lost? What ch verse?

With Noah after the water cleared out after the flood, where does it talk about rejection of truth to the point we needed it restored to Abraham?

Am I making sense? Trust me I get the while Apostasy pattern... I was a missionary myself... but would like to be able to site exact scriptures. (I can't seem to find any clear verses)

0

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, TrueSoldier said:

I know I get it, we teach that people "rejected" prophets, priesthood was lost etc... but where in the bible do we learn that Abraham was rejected for example and the priesthood was lost? What ch verse?

With Noah after the water cleared out after the flood, where does it talk about rejection of truth to the point we needed it restored to Abraham?

Am I making sense? Trust me I get the while Apostasy pattern... I was a missionary myself... but would like to be able to site exact scriptures. (I can't seem to find any clear verses)

It's not that people "rejected the prophets".

It is an issue of authority not being passed down.
If all the Apostles and Seventy die and they don't ordain anyone else to the Apostleship no rejection is needed.  There is simply nobody on earth who holds sufficient authority to administer in the ordinances.
Abraham ordained Isaac, Isaac ordained Jacob/Israel,  Israel ordained Joseph, Joseph ordained Ephraim....and then their descendants remained in Egypt.  (I know that isn't the exact ordination list but you get the point).
By the time Moses came around there was nobody left who had been given all the priesthood.  His father in law Jethro the Midianite had some degree of priesthood, but not all.

Or take Enoch.  Enoch held all the priesthood, but he and his entire city were taken from the earth.  If nobody on earth remained holding all the priesthood a new dispensation becomes needed.

You want scriptures that say these things in detail?  I don't think they exist but simple reasoning still exists. (ie, Enoch and his people were taken from the Earth, God dispensed priesthood keys to Noah.)
 

0

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

It's not that people "rejected the prophets".

It is an issue of authority not being passed down.
If all the Apostles and Seventy die and they don't ordain anyone else to the Apostleship no rejection is needed.  There is simply nobody on earth who holds sufficient authority to administer in the ordinances.
Abraham ordained Isaac, Isaac ordained Jacob/Israel,  Israel ordained Joseph, Joseph ordained Ephraim....and then their descendants remained in Egypt.  (I know that isn't the exact ordination list but you get the point).
By the time Moses came around there was nobody left who had been given all the priesthood.  His father in law Jethro the Midianite had some degree of priesthood, but not all.

Or take Enoch.  Enoch held all the priesthood, but he and his entire city were taken from the earth.  If nobody on earth remained holding all the priesthood a new dispensation becomes needed.

You want scriptures that say these things in detail?  I don't think they exist but simple reasoning still exists. (ie, Enoch and his people were taken from the Earth, God dispensed priesthood keys to Noah.)
 

That is helpful thank you. I hadn't looked at it that way before. I think as a missionary sometimes for the sake of keeping things simple with investigators you tend to oversimplify things. 

If anyone has the time/knowledge (it's ok if you don't have a scripture verse) I would be curious if someone could briefly help me understand what happened to end the dispensations with:

 

● Adam to Enoch

(I read that Adam in D&C 107:48 called Enoch and others to be high priests 3 years before he died, but not sure why that was a new dispensation)

 

● Noah to Abraham (After the flood cleared why did the dispensation end)

 

I think if I was more clear on those 2 dispensations I can pretty much piece the rest of it together.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, TrueSoldier said:

With Noah after the water cleared out after the flood, where does it talk about rejection of truth to the point we needed it restored to Abraham?

1. Shem, Noah's son, was contemporary with Abraham.

2. (And in some LDS & Jewish circles, Shem=Melchizedek, who knew Abraham.)

 

Make of that what you wish.

 

"Dispensation" has meanings above and beyond the one-size-fits-all LDS paradigm. (English is a bit more rich in meaning than the pauper we sometimes assume it to be.) Your results may vary...contents may settle during shipping...

Thoughts?

Edited by probablyHagoth7
2

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

49 minutes ago, TrueSoldier said:

● Adam to Enoch   (I read that Adam in D&C 107:48 called Enoch and others to be high priests 3 years before he died, but not sure why that was a new dispensation)

The calling was new to Enoch, if that counts. And it produced a new result (for that generation), if that also counts. 

Effective ministry requires ongoing inspiration. And inspiration is dispensed (i.e. *any* inspiration/revelation *is* a dispensation).... 

"...and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distil upon thy soul as the dews from heaven..." https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/121.45?lang=eng#p44

Thoughts?

Edited by probablyHagoth7
0

Share this post


Link to post

Posted (edited)

19 hours ago, TrueSoldier said:

What happened during each dispensation to cause it to end?

Adam
Enoch
Noah
Abraham
Moses
Jesus Christ (this one more obvious)

Scripture references are greatly appreciated.

I am not sure it is just an ending, but instead evolving into another. 

Edited by Bill "Papa" Lee
2

Share this post


Link to post

A new dispensation is a renewal of the gospel. Each dispensation receives revelation sufficient to establish the gospel largely independent from the revelations of previous dispensations. There is no requirement to lose Priesthood keys or the Priesthood.

0

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, The Nehor said:

A new dispensation is a renewal of the gospel. Each dispensation receives revelation sufficient to establish the gospel largely independent from the revelations of previous dispensations. There is no requirement to lose Priesthood keys or the Priesthood.

Are you suggesting that men holding all the keys of priesthood and the ability to perform ordinances don't have the knowledge to use what they have and need revelation to reinstitute the gospel plan?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you all for your comments so far.

I've been internalizing what I've been reading and realising that the word "dispensation" may not be as cut and dry as I once previously understood it to be. I think this former thinking was from sources like "Preach my Gospel" where terms may be broadly simplified, for example:

Lesson 1- "Whenever people choose to disregard, disobey, or distort any gospel principle or ordinance, whenever they reject the Lord’s prophets, or whenever they fail to endure in faith, they distance themselves from God and begin to live in spiritual darkness. Eventually this leads to a condition called apostasy. When widespread apostasy occurs, God withdraws His priesthood authority to teach and administer the ordinances of the gospel.

Biblical history has recorded many instances of God speaking to prophets, and it also tells of many instances of apostasy. To end each period of general apostasy, God has shown His love for His children by calling another prophet and giving him priesthood authority to restore and teach the gospel of Jesus Christ anew. In essence, the prophet acts as a steward to oversee the household of God here on earth. Such periods of time headed by prophetic responsibility are called dispensations. Such periods of time headed by prophetic responsibility are called dispensations."

So this line of thinking caused me to conclude that each new "dispensation" had to have been the result of a loss of priesthood, rejection of prophets, or distortion of the gospel. As a result God withdrawing his priesthood and therefore the people needing one to restore it again much like Joseph Smith did in this last and current dispensation.

So it's been very eye opening to see for example that Adam to Enoch, yes there was some apostasy going on in some circles, but the Priesthood was still on the earth. God hadn't withdrawn it completely like Preach My Gospel kind of generally would have me believe would have been the case. Instead it and was passed from Adam directly to Enoch. (D&C 107:48).  So looking at it more as "Bill "Papa" Lee mentioned, not as an "ending, but instead an evolving into another" is actually very helpful.

For me this also gives more meaning to what has been referred to as "The Great Apostasy" (the time prior to Joseph Smith where there was zero priesthood power and saving ordinances on the earth). It becomes more "great" when you compare it to some former dispensations where the priesthood was either smoothly passed on (Adam to Enoch) or there was still part of the priesthood intact (Abraham to Moses).

So again thank you all for opening my mind up more on the the meaning of dispensations.

0

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, TrueSoldier said:

What happened during each dispensation to cause it to end?

Adam
Enoch
Noah
Abraham
Moses
Jesus Christ (this one more obvious)

Scripture references are greatly appreciated.

Could it be that each dispensation is predestined to end on schedule so that a new dispensation may begin?  For educational and experiential purposes?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone here know of records where a gospel dispensation has been delivered to China or India, or for that matter most of Africa? I am speaking of before this current dispensation. Arguably , the majority of earth's inhabitants have lived in those areas for most of recorded history. If they have been left out, I wonder why. I am aware of tiny pockets of Jewish traditions and Christian ones scattered in Asia.

0

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, strappinglad said:

Does anyone here know of records where a gospel dispensation has been delivered to China...I am speaking of before this current dispensation. 

Roughly a year ago, I came across an ancient account that strongly suggests such a thing for Asia.

I have moved since then, and most of my research is boxed up. (Some of it is gone.) Will see what the unpacking process unfolds.

0

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Are you suggesting that men holding all the keys of priesthood and the ability to perform ordinances don't have the knowledge to use what they have and need revelation to reinstitute the gospel plan?

No.

I am saying that God renews the gospel without apostasy by choosing a prophet and giving him visions and revelations that reveal everything all over again AND are commanded to reveal it. Enoch got the visions of Eternity. So did Moses. They got them despite their being Priesthood on the Earth for reasons best known to God.

0

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, probablyHagoth7 said:

Roughly a year ago, I came across an ancient account that strongly suggests such a thing for Asia.

I have moved since then, and most of my research is boxed up. (Some of it is gone.) Will see what the unpacking process unfolds.

Perhaps you are thinking of the Hindu system of yuga-years, which begins Feb 18, 3102 B.C. (Julian), which then proceeds to move through four dispensations of 4,320,000 human years, which = 1 mahayuga “great-year; aeon.” Just to give an idea of scale, one day in the life of the god Brahma (1 kalpa) is 2,000 mahayugas.  Brahmā lives 100 years, is now 50 years old, so that he is now 432,000,000,000 x 360 = 155,520,000,000,000 human years old.  Each life of Brahmā is followed by an equally long period of pralaya “abeyance” – sleep of the universe – before another creator-god begins it all anew.  1 pralaya = 864,000,000,000 x 360 = 311,040,000,000,0000 human years.  Each kalpa contains 14 manvantaras, or secondary cycles with long intervals between, in each of which the world is recreated and a new Manu (king) appears as the progenitor of the human race.  We are currently in the seventh manvantara (that of Manu Vaivasvata).

You may have noticed that the Hindu system is based on the 360-day year, as is the Mesoamerican Long Count, which also begins at the same time.  See David H. Kelley, “The World Ages in India and Mesoamerica,” SEHA Newsletter, 137 (Mar 1975):1-18.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Spencer 88
      Hi, anybody willing to read and share some input.
      I am in a tough situation and will try to give a brief overview of all. My wife and I are from dysfunctional part member or so so active hypocritical homes. I was inactive, read the BOM repented and gained a testimony, went on a mission, got back and made some mistakes etc. Met my wife, who I thought was an amazing person, but she was inactive. We dated, slipped with sexual transgression, got pregnant and decided to get married. Both had desire to marry each other, but had some apprehensions due to slipping and failing on those goals.
      I fell into a deep depression and was disfellowshipped as I expected. I felt like I failed God and myself and the witnesses I had received. I felt hopeless and wrote some terrible things about my wife and secretly began to loathe her as I despised myself. Had our son, I sought help and went on antidepressants and went to counseling. I pulled up out of that hole, and had a new hope for us. My wife found my journal and read all the things I said, that I no longer felt about her and our future. It destroyed her. 
      She has since been with me, but not emotionally there, won't do things to progress with me. I quit both my jobs and moved for her masters program, after she had left me earlier and came back and decided to work through things and have a fresh start. Now she is disconnected again, has expressed she has no faith in God because  of her life and the terrible things that happen in the world, and because of the church's decision to exclude children of gay couples...
      I am tired of trying to prove I didn't mean those things and being constantly pushed away. I am scared and now she wants a divorce as I said I need her to commit and she says she can't trust or love me. She is going to speak with a counselor from school. She doesn't want to be with me especially if I desire a temple sealing. I fear the worst for us and our son, and have been trying as much as I can give without being burnt from her rejection. I do love her, but don't know how much more I can take. 
      Anybody have similar experiences? The consequences of the divorce will make life nearly impossible, will have to shuffle our child, pay for two rents, lose half of everything, work around child care and child payments, and the devastating loneliness that comes with divorce and the stigma of trying to find another spouse when you have a child and are divorced. I am 28.
       
    • By The Nehor
      So sad. Seems to want to stay in the faith but abandon the organization as he believes it has become corrupted.
       
      Will this trend continue?
       

       
       
    • By mormonnewb
      I've just heard for the umpteenth time on a podcast about how a committed saint lost his/her faith in the Church upon learning about JS' polyandry.  And, as is almost always the case, the person's loss of faith in the Church resulted in a complete loss of faith in Christ.  And I just don't get it.
       
      And let's be clear.  I TOTALLY understand how somehow could lose faith in the Church.  I just don't get throwing out the baby (Jesus) with the polyandry.  In my studies of Mormon history, I've come to believe that there are many parts of our founding narrative that are either misunderstood, exaggerated, whitewashed or just plain not true.  But there is NOTHING that you could tell me about JS, BY, President Monson, my beloved bishop (or even my very own mother) that would cause me to abandon my belief in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.
       
      And don't get me wrong.  I'm not claiming that my faith in Christ is bullet-proof.  I could imagine losing faith in Christ if I suffered some horrendous personal tragedy that caused me to doubt the existence of a god or, at least, that a loving god could allow me to experience such pain.  I just can't imagine losing faith in my Savior because I felt lied to by a MAN.
       
      Yet, I hear that time and again from Mormons.  They come to the conclusion that JS was not truthful or mistaken and pretty soon, there is no Jesus.  How do these two things become conflated?  After all, JS didn't "discover" Jesus Christ.  Nor did he "invent" the figure of a Savior out of whole cloth.  So even if JS was completely wrong about the Restoration, it wouldn't affect Christ's earthly ministry or any of the marvelous acts attributed to him in the Gospels.  So why is that when someone rejects Mormonism, they so often reject Christ too?
       
      To me, it would be like going to the Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter movie and later discovering that it wasn't a "true life story," and then concluding that there must have never been an Abraham Lincoln at all.
       
      To my knowledge, this doesn't happen with, say, Lutherans or Calvinists.  I've certainly never heard of anyone learning about Luther's horrifying anti-semitism or his allowing Philip's bigamy and then swearing off the Savior as a "fiction."  Most often, these people don't even consider leaving Lutheranism.  But even if they do decide that they must find a new church, it isn't the Church of Secular Humanism.  They simply move to another sect of Christianity or hope that their new church is slightly less flawed than their old church.
       
      But what is it about Mormonism that creates such brittle Christians?  And is there a way to allow saints to come through the furnace of disaffection with their Christianity still largely intact?
    • By Pahoran
      Gina Colvin, also known (for reasons that are entirely unclear) as "Kiwimormon," is at it again. See here.

      I particularly like this ringing declaration:
       

      Now I don't expect Ms Colvin to know this, because she's a journalist, not a historian. Deep thinking and careful analysis of past events is not what she does; glib quips and flippant headlines are her oeuvre. But the fact remains that Plural marriage, throughout Mormon history, was at all times a deeply religious principle, and no less for Joseph than anyone else. The fact that he worried about it constantly, it gave him no end of trouble, and still he persisted with it, really ought to tell her something.

      At least, it might, if only she had the intellectual horsepower to manage it.

      But instead, she goes with the utterly discredited "Old Joe's libido" explanation. Which actually explains very little, and leaves far too many unanswered questions.

      But what else should we expect of someone who's not only a journalist, but a toxic feminist?

      Note that remark about "spiritual abuse." It's a regular theme of hers. Read it again. Is she saying that Joseph was guilty of "spiritual abuse?" Actually no although if you asked her, she'd probably say that he was. No, the "spiritual abuse" to which she objects consists in "maintain[ing] a discourse of high transcendent religious motivation around the character of Joseph Smith" instead of surrendering to her preferred "Lothario" narrative of Mormon polygamy. Did you get that? It's "spiritual abuse" to disagree with her, so shut up.

      Read her description of her discussion with her Priests/Laurels Sunday School class. Hands up who really believes that a class of teenagers came up with those expressions of cynicism and disgust without any prompting from their teacher?

      I don't.

      The comments are also instructive. She smiles benignly upon the most outrageous anti-Mormon propaganda. "Cult mind control?" Really? But a number of other comments have been deleted; clearly there was a commenter who disagreed with Ms Colvin's position, so she silenced him, as she habitually does. But the most damning comment comes, not from anyone who disagrees with her, but from "Rev_Lowery," someone who supports her wholeheartedly:
       

      You sure got that right, Rev.

      Regards,
      Pahoran
    • By watermelongirl
      The loss of sisters in the gospel has been on my mind a lot of late. Being a science-minded sort of woman, I started looking for meaningful statistics to analyze our losses and their reasons, which we know are virtually nonexistent.
       
      But by examining the general membership numbers (and doing some simple math) in the General Conference Statistics Reports, for 2012 and 2013 we can see the following:
       
      The church's actual growth was 299,555 people in 2013.
      282,945 of those were converts.
      Presumably the rest of the growth is composed of children of record, which is listed at 115,486.
       
      The discrepancy between the totals *should* be the number of records that were removed from the church.
       
      So New Converts + Children of Record = Gross additions
       
      Gross Additions in 2013 - Actual Growth = People Lost
       
      According to my math, People lost from the record = 98,876.
       
      Edited to add: as someone rightly pointed out, this includes deaths.
       
      We don't have any good studies of why people are so upset as to have their names removed from the record, but it is different than simply going inactive. This would also include excommunications, which I'm assuming would comprise a very small percentage of that number.
       
      The online survey from a couple of years ago (sponsored by John Dehlin?) cited women's issues as one of the reasons for leaving among 47% of 3000 survey respondents. For women specifically, the number was 63%. Who knows how reflective those percentages are of the 98,876, but it stands to reason that we can extrapolate that at least thousands, if not tens of thousands, of women are leaving the church because of women's issues.
       
      As I've read through social media responses over the last week and many of the comments here, it seems like there is among many a readiness to dismiss those hurt by the church and ignore any possible need for self-examination on behalf of the church. I support church leadership in their callings and in their efforts to improve things that can be improved.  I would hate for recent events to give the LDS an excuse to vilify those who "ask questions" (We love that term by now, don't we?) or those who see injustices within the church.
       
      If there is anything that I had hoped to hear from the First Presidency when they made their statement Saturday, it was a statement of love and "we hear you" for women that are hurting. It *felt* symbolic of a greater dismissal of the issues at hand. Otterson has said that the GAs care and are aware, but it was absent from that particular statement.
       
      How seriously do we take the losses of the church? Do we just label them tares and we let them go?
       
      Would it be possible to make the church's introspection a more transparent process? Do we have to keep up the appearance that all is well in Zion?
       
      Does anyone know about "The Rescue" effort made by President Monson? I have only heard it vaguely referenced.
       
      These things weigh heavy on my heart today.
       
       
       
       
       
       
      https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/statistical-report-2012?lang=eng
      https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2014/04/statistical-report-2013?lang=eng