1st/2nd century church

[Programmer]

This is an interesting question but I think that one could selectively find writings of ECFs that are consistent with Islam, Buddhism, J's Witnesses and so forth.

In the end, the deeper question is whether you believe God was able or willing to preserve His Church on earth. If, as the LDS claim, the answer is 'no', then you should be prepared to explain your confidence that God has preserved LDS from apostasy. Frankly, the back and forth on issues of race and polygamy and the other changes across the last century in the LDS signify a faith that God is guiding His church, His restored church, and protecting it from error. Funny that He would do that now but not 2,000 years ago.

Good point Count Bassie.

But you also must realize that God doesn't force any decisions on anyone. When we talk about an apostacy, it is people apostacizing from God, not the other way around. In fact, if you look at all religious history, there is a cycle of apostacy, one after the other.

Personal apostacy does and will continue to happen. But hardly anyone within the last 100 years has apostacized because of adultery (for instance) and gone out and started their own church as a result.

Schisms were quite rampant in the Christian Roman world. Not today.

I fear less about an apostacy in our day because:

1. The prophet is still alive, and his picture is plastered everywhere in church buildings and seminaries.

2. The 12 apostles are still alive, and their pictures are plastered everywhere in church buildings and seminaries.

3. They can get up and speak in General Conference and theoreticly be heard by anyone anywhere within broadcasting distance of earth.

4. It would now be absolutely impossible for fakers to come along and claim to be an apostle or some other leading authority.

5. The procedural methods in the church for authority and administration have been laid down and codified BEFORE Joseph Smith was killed.

6. The doctrine (i.e. Book of Mormon) was printed up and distributed even before the church was organized.

No other dispensation ever had such advantages as this one.

Besides this dispensation will theoreticly not be here as long as the others because it is preparatory for the second coming of Jesus Christ, just as John the Baptist's commission didn't last long before Jesus came around.

It is reason and logic like the above that help me to know that the LDS church is the Lords divinely commissioned church.

[Zakuska]

Speaking of Shcisms.

1 Cor. 12: 25

25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

[johnny]

David Waltz  writes,

The EO

[Tanyan]

Pray tell, did not Augustine state that those in the Heavenly Jerusalem were "gods," "not those proud prideful gods but followers f the True GOD" ?.

[Programmer]

Speaking of Shcisms.

1 Cor. 12: 25

25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.

I find it telling that the ECF found schisms deeply abhorant and were deeply troubled by it.

Today people choose church's like grocery stores, and it hardly bothers anyone.

Yep, the more I read anything about the ECF's the more I see the last vestiges of the true church as the Apostles delivered it unto the world.

[ave maria]

I find it telling that the ECF found schisms deeply abhorant and were deeply troubled by it.

Today people choose church's like grocery stores, and it hardly bothers anyone.

I appreciate your point of view on this, Programmer, but I'm not sure it's supportable.

There are certainly people of various faiths on record as deeply troubled by the divisions within Christianity.

[Zakuska]

I must frame this post for posterities sake!

Hello again Johnny,

You asked the following:

>>Does this doctrine teach men become "a God" or that they become "God"?>>

Me: The EO

[johnny]

Zakuska  writes,

So tell me Johnny, when you get plugged into the big grape vine in the sky, does that make you any less capable of producing grapes?

I won't be able to create grapes out of nothing like my Heavenly Father can.

How is an "Adopted" son any less a son of God than a literal son? Isn't the Father powerful enough to make good his promise?

Jesus is the only natural Son. Men receive divine sonship through adoption.

[Tanyan]

Creation Ex-nihilo again ?. The 2nd comment did not answer Zakuska's statement.

[Zakuska]

Keep thinking like that and limiting almighty Gods Power and you wont.

Of Course Jesus is the only Natual Son. But, Thats not what I asked Johhny.

Isn't God powerful enough to be able to make good his promise?

[Zakuska]

Creation Ex-nihilo again ?. The 2nd comment did not answer Zakuska's statement.

Not even Peter and Paul agreed over ex-nihilio. Peter was a creation from a pre-existant watery Chaos. So I wonder why Paul, the least of the Apostles, not worthy of the Apostleship, once again trumps Peter the Rock.

[ave maria]

Creation Ex-nihilo again ?. The 2nd comment did not answer Zakuska's statement.

As none of us know for certain whether creation was ex nihilo or ex materia, any discussion of it is entirely speculative.

[ave maria]

Isn't God powerful enough to be able to make good his promise?

Excellent question, Zakuska.

[Tanyan]

Creation Ex-nihilo again ?. The 2nd comment did not answer Zakuska's statement.

As none of us know for certain whether creation was ex nihilo or ex materia, any discussion of it is entirely speculative.

See parts 1,2,3 of http://www.fairlds.org/apol/TNMC/

[juliann]

Hi Juliann

You posted:

>>The only thing that is difficult to support is a pre-existence. Baptism for the dead would be next but there is enough there to support that something was going on.>>

Me: I must disagree about the doctrine of pre-existence. Others besides Origen (who was clearly influenced by Platonism on this issue) clearly taught the doctrine. Even Augustine, prior to his writings on Pelagianism, was open to the doctrine of pre-existence.

Origen's teachings on the sin being heavy and falling from heaven based on a platonic universe...followed by his universalism that I never saw much there to hang on to. I have spent little time on Augustine...if you have sources I would appreciate them. One interesting find was a 5th or 6th century African council in which an edict was put out that the speculation on this topic was to cease. So it was obviously still a hot issue. There just is not much written directly about it and there are only oblique biblical references that have to be interpreted.

Good to see you again!! I always like hearing your analysis of deification from the Catholic perspective.

[Tanyan]

David, How is that book of yours ?, please share. Grace To you. In His Debt, Tanyan.

[juliann]

As none of us know for certain whether creation was ex nihilo or ex materia, any discussion of it is entirely speculative.

You are off-topic again. The discussion is what the ECFs thought...not what you know for certain. It would be greatly appreciated if you would provide something topical and use the names of the early Christians.

[ave maria]

You are off-topic again. The discussion is what the ECFs thought

juliann, if you'd like to be topical, let's go back to the initial post on this thread and examine the following words from Brent:

I've heard there are 1st and 2nd century writings by Church leaders which suggest doctrines exclusive nowadays to the LDS Church are supported. (emphasis mine)

I'd be very interested to know exactly what you believe those "doctrines exclusive nowadays to the LDS Church" are that are supported in your exploration of patristics.

[Tanyan]

http://www.kevingraham.org/wilken.htm

[ave maria]

Since this was deemed off-topic for Brent's other thread on 1st and 2nd century Christianity, I thought I'd restate the question here. (Edit: Moderator apparently decided it was on-topic, instead of off-, and moved it back here.)

I've noticed that some Latter-day Saints claim that the LDS Church has unique doctrines and practices that existed in the early Christian church (pointing to writings of the Church fathers as evidence), but that they disappeared and no longer exist in other faiths currently.

Barry Bickmore gives an example of this on his Early Christianity and Mormonism webpage, when he asserts the following:

Little of these rites now remain in the liturgies of the Christian churches of today, so one might wonder what became of them. C.W. Heckethorne asserts that the secret tradition of early Christianity was lost after the Church essentially became the only game in town and there really weren't very many people around to keep secrets from:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/2671/ECOrTpl.html

I continue to be interested in knowing exactly what doctrines and practices LDS members believe are exclusive to them, and not found in any other faith tradition currently, that was "lost" from early Christianity.

My reading of Barry Bickmore's article is that essentially every item he listed can be found outside of LDS tradition today, but I'm interested in the thoughts and observations of others, LDS and non-.

[juliann]

I'd be very interested to know exactly what you believe those "doctrines exclusive nowadays to the LDS Church" are that are supported in your exploration of patristics.

We have already had a discussion on salvation for the dead. Is that exclusive enough for you? If you want to join in...join in. If you want to continue trolling with nonresponsive "questions" go elsewhere.

[ave maria]

I'd be very interested to know exactly what you believe those "doctrines exclusive nowadays to the LDS Church" are that are supported in your exploration of patristics.

We have already had a discussion on salvation for the dead. Is that exclusive enough for you? If you want to join in...join in. If you want to continue trolling with nonresponsive "questions" go elsewhere.

Are you stating that it's your view that the LDS Church is exclusive in its practice of participating in or concerning itself with the redemption of the dead?

Feel free to comprehensively discuss.

Moderator: Respond to the posts that talk about this. Discuss differences or agreement you have with what has already been posted before demanding more. Your posts have been and will be deleted if you goad posters without adding anything to the discussion yourself.

I have been doing this, all through the thread. If I respond, I'm deemed off-topic or not in a position to make a statement. If I ask a question, I'm told it's inappropriate to question. I've tried to participate appropriately in the thread and to contribute, and I believe I've done so. I even went to a new thread when the questions I was posing were said to be off-topic for this one.

I have no problem with you bringing them back to this thread, but some guidelines for appropriate participation in the thread that applies to all parties would be appreciated.

While you're at it, are you planning to put back my Barry Bickmore post, since you moved the Michael Hickenbotham one here without it? Thanks. (Edited: noted it's been placed above in this thread--thanks.)

[ave maria]

In another article, this one in Mormonism 201 on "Communion and Baptism" by Michael Hickenbotham on this site, the author appears to imply that another practice existed in the early Church, but does not continue today:

It is noteworthy that some early Christians used both water and wine in the sacrament.

http://www.fairlds.org/apol/morm201/m20113.html

He then goes on to cite Justin Martyr and Pope Julius I as evidentiary support of the practice in early Christianity, again implying that the practice does not continue today.

So add that:

*water mingled with wine in the sacrament/Eucharist

to some of the items mentioned by Barry Bickmore:

*prayers for the dead

*prayer circle

*anointing with chrism before and after baptism

*instruction before the mysteries

*wearing of a white garment

*exchanging a holy kiss

And we have a number of practices that seem to be implied as part of rituals of early Christianity that seem not to be in evidence outside the LDS faith currently to the authors in question.

[Dunamis]

Oops. I merged a copy-cat thread and ended up with the wrong thread title. I have restored the original thread title to the best of my memory. My apologies.

[Proverbs]

Ave,

What are the other Christian Faiths that currently practice Baptism for the dead?