No Unhallowed Hand Can Stop The Work From Progressing

[Libs]

The Standard of Truth has been erected; no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done (Joseph Smith - History of the Church, 4:540).

Nathair posted this quote, on another thread, and it raised a question, for me, about the Restoration.

Most Orthodox Christians believe that God did not allow any "unhallowed hand" to stop the progression of Christianity, from the 1st Century on. Assuming God has this ability, why would he not have just saved his church from the very beginning? Why allow it to fall and then restore it, if he could have just saved it to begin with?

Also, I have a question about exactly how much power God has, according to LDS theology. (I was active LDS for almost seven years, but I sure didn't know everything....or much of anything, I'm beginning to think!...lol)..

Where does agency fit in, as far as the Restored Church is concerned? Could man's agency destroy this church, as it (supposedly) did the original church? Or would God not allow that to happen (as Joseph Smith seemed to have believed)?

Thanks in advance.

Edited July 1, 2011 by Libs

[TAO]

Nathair posted this quote, on another thread, and it raised a question, for me, about the Restoration.

Most Orthodox Christians believe that God did not allow any "unhallowed hand" to stop the progression of Christianity, from the 1st Century on. Assuming God has this ability, why would he not have just saved his church from the very beginning? Why allow it to fall and then restore it, if he could have just saved it to begin with?

The scriptures say this must happen... I forget where. But it says a fall must happen before Christ comes again... so either way, they are looking at a fall, of some sort. (Found it: 2 Thesselonians 2:3)

Why must it happen? I think so Joseph Smith and the Saints could recieve the challenges necessary to make them do what they did. No challenges, no... God expects us to be challenged. I'm not super-challenged... but I think... maybe hope... nah... I know, that God will at sometimes, test me to my ability.

Also, I have a question about exactly how much power God has, according to LDS theology. (I was active LDS for almost seven years, but I sure didn't know everything....or much of anything, I'm beginning to think!...lol)..

Power over everything except the eternal laws, whatever those be =D.

Where does agency fit in, as far as the Restored Church is concerned? Could man's agency destroy this church, as it (supposedly) did the original church? Or would God not allow that to happen (as Joseph Smith seemed to have believed)?

Not sure, that's in the eyes of God. We have recieved a promise though that the prophet would be removed if they went astray. I think God will keep this promise =D.

Thanks in advance.

No prob =D.

Best Wishes

-TAO

EDIT: Again, this is all my opinion though =P.

Edited July 1, 2011 by TAO

[shalamabobbi]

Nathair posted this quote, on another thread, and it raised a question, for me, about the Restoration.

Most Orthodox Christians believe that God did not allow any "unhallowed hand" to stop the progression of Christianity, from the 1st Century on. Assuming God has this ability, why would he not have just saved his church from the very beginning? Why allow it to fall and then restore it, if he could have just saved it to begin with?

Also, I have a question about exactly how much power God has, according to LDS theology. (I was active LDS for almost seven years, but I sure didn't know everything....or much of anything, I'm beginning to think!...lol)..

Where does agency fit in, as far as the Restored Church is concerned? Could man's agency destroy this church, as it (supposedly) did the original church? Or would God not allow that to happen (as Joseph Smith seemed to have believed)?

Thanks in advance.

I think of this statement more along the lines of "God knows that the church will not fail this time" rather than "God will preserve it".

There is God's influence and power and there is the free will of man. Man's ill use of agency overcame the original church. But the conditions were right this 2nd time around that that didn't happen and will not happen. The raising up of a free country with freedom of religion had/has a lot to do with the difference.

[CV75]

Most Orthodox Christians believe that God did not allow any "unhallowed hand" to stop the progression of Christianity, from the 1st Century on. Assuming God has this ability, why would he not have just saved his church from the very beginning? Why allow it to fall and then restore it, if he could have just saved it to begin with?

Also, I have a question about exactly how much power God has, according to LDS theology. (I was active LDS for almost seven years, but I sure didn't know everything....or much of anything, I'm beginning to think!...lol)..

Where does agency fit in, as far as the Restored Church is concerned? Could man's agency destroy this church, as it (supposedly) did the original church? Or would God not allow that to happen (as Joseph Smith seemed to have believed)?

First, nothing really stopped Christianity from spreading and enduring since the days that Christ walked the earth. The way it was practiced without the priesthood didn't look very pretty by 1820, but nothing could eradicate the memory of Christ and Christianity continued to be a powerful force.

What did stop was His Church and the priesthood. The reason He permitted this was the same reason He allowed His death (John 12:24).

God has more power than we can imagine, and His thoughts are not our thoughts; neither are His ways our ways (Isaiah 55:7-9).

The “corn of wheat” is in the “bringeth forth much fruit” stage and so is past death, just as Christ’s resurrection is well beyond death (“as the heavens are higher than the earth…”). So His Church will not die again--too late for that!

[Deborah]

The raising up of a free country with freedom of religion had/has a lot to do with the difference.

I think this is an important factor. Look at the turmoil going on in the world at the time of the early church. Slavery was prevalent, peoples were constantly battling and being conquered. Under such circumstances could the church expected to remain united and flourish? Even the saints of the restored church were driven from place to place and it was only when they settled in the Utah territory and were left alone for awhile they were able to be more firmly grounded to grow. Furthermore as means of transportation and communication expanded the church could start to expand and still maintain the unity of teachings that is so important in preventing apostasy.

[Questing Beast]

I peer through "[my] glass, darkly", and see the early Christian religion progressing in experience. This causes knowledge, wisdom and change. Though the medieval churches seem almost fixed in place it was not so. And when the RCC tightened her grip in the maximum effort to exert control, most of humanity escaped to believe and practice whatever they chose. Out of that fragmented world arose Mormonism and countless other belief "systems". And today, more and more people look upon dogmatic exclusivity claims as a thing from the past; they look instead upon all religions as equals: equally valid or invalid, equally good or bad depending on what is done "in the name of" said-religions and their gods, etc.

It is for the individual to find his or her own way, looking to "God" alone for guidance - for no oracles or priests or priestesses have authority to stand between us and "God". And just as we are seven billion egocentric "universes", no two overlapping or exactly the same, we are each individually connected to "God" inseparably, forever; we always were and always will be....

[alter idem]

Nathair posted this quote, on another thread, and it raised a question, for me, about the Restoration.

Most Orthodox Christians believe that God did not allow any "unhallowed hand" to stop the progression of Christianity, from the 1st Century on. Assuming God has this ability, why would he not have just saved his church from the very beginning? Why allow it to fall and then restore it, if he could have just saved it to begin with?

That quote refers to the restoration of the Gospel. LDS recognize that Satan has great power in this world and can use his influence to disrupt the work of God, but we also know that he will be defeated--no unhallowed hand will be able to stop the work of god. God has granted us agency to choose--he won't intervene, he won't force us to follow him.

Also, I have a question about exactly how much power God has, according to LDS theology. (I was active LDS for almost seven years, but I sure didn't know everything....or much of anything, I'm beginning to think!...lol)..

LDS believe that God is omnipotent, all powerful. However, he has granted us agency, the ability to choose for ourselves. He honors our agency and will not use his power in a way which would interfere with our agency.

Where does agency fit in, as far as the Restored Church is concerned? Could man's agency destroy this church, as it (supposedly) did the original church? Or would God not allow that to happen (as Joseph Smith seemed to have believed)?

Thanks in advance.

Agency is what allows us to actually learn and choose. It makes us free. It allows us to show our Heavenly Father who we are--whether we cleave to the light or the dark.

Yes, man's agency could destroy the church, however, since God exists outside of our realm of time, he is all-knowing. He knows the outcome of events and has promised us that the restored gospel will continue and spread to fill the whole earth and there will be no major apostasy again(though we know there will be problems--ie, the separating of the wheat and the chaff, the very elect being deceived, for example). Also, the scriptures contain promises concerning the restoration of the gospel.

There are also warnings to us in the Book of Mormon and we should take them seriously--hence the warning of saying 'all's well in Zion'. A while ago, President Benson admonished the members that we needed to read/study/use the Book of Mormon and like the earlier saints, we were under condemnation for taking it lightly. I think the membership listened and we're doing much better--and I think we are reaping the blessings. But from this, it is clear that the church is not immune from problems that if not addressed, could harm us or at least, hold us back. But, this is the value of having a modern Prophet and ongoing revelation and we believe they strive to guide the church to follow the Savior.

[Libs]

Thank you for all of the responses. Much appreciated.

It seems like the consensus is that God is not using his power to save the church from corruption (because that would interfere with free will), but knows, through his omniscient powers, that it will not fall this time?

Also, it was the priesthood that was taken, not really the ability to spread the Gospel or Christianity, in general.

[elguanteloko]

The Apostasy is such a strange doctrine.

It is said that people turned from the truth of Christ... while Christianity exploded throughout the world.

[KevinG]

The Apostasy is such a strange doctrine.

It is said that people turned from the truth of Christ... while Christianity exploded throughout the world.

Apostacy is about the loss of the authorized government of the Lord's Church, not the loss of belief in Christ. The bulk of the Latter-day Saints have a great appreciation for the early church fathers, martyrs, reformers and faithful throughout the centruries between the mortal ministry of Christ and the resotration of the fullness of the Gospel.

There is a mural in the Manti Temple that celebrates the long history of Christianity and those who preserved its beliefs to the best of their ability - it is a very powerful sight.

[elguanteloko]

Apostacy is about the loss of the authorized government of the Lord's Church, not the loss of belief in Christ.

I said "turned from the TRUTH of Christ", not "from Christ".

The bulk of the Latter-day Saints have a great appreciation for the early church fathers, martyrs, reformers and faithful throughout the centruries between the mortal ministry of Christ and the resotration of the fullness of the Gospel.

Still, people (they) turned from the truth and God chose to withhold his priesthood and truth from them while Christianity exploded.

There is a mural in the Manti Temple that celebrates the long history of Christianity and those who preserved its beliefs to the best of their ability - it is a very powerful sight.

irrelevant.

Edited July 1, 2011 by elguanteloko

[KevinG]

irrelevant.

[TAO]

Also, it was the priesthood that was taken, not really the ability to spread the Gospel or Christianity, in general.

Yeah, I think this pretty much sums it us. Some 'Pure and Precious things' were taken away too, I suppose, out of the scriptures.

But yah, the ability too spread the gospel or Christianity still existed, I hope, for a long while, to a degree =).

[Mark Beesley]

The Apostasy is such a strange doctrine.

It is said that people turned from the truth of Christ... while Christianity exploded throughout the world.

It is a rather facinating phenomenon, one which I think perhaps occured in order to imprees on the minds of people the difference between institutional apostacy and individual apostasy. What we see from the early 1st Century following the death of Christ is that the power of Christ to draw men to him persisted even in an environment of dissent and division. Throughout the ages, individuals have succumbed to the Spirit of Chirst and found peace in worshiping him. However, institutional churches were not always on the same wavelength and their goals seemed to deviate from the needs of the worshipers. So, I don't really see a problem in recognizing the apostasy on an institutional level while appreciating the ability of the individual to remain true to a faith in Christ.

The answer to Libs questioning why the Lord would allow the early institution to fall into apostasy and yet promise that the latter-day Church would not be subject to the same risk may lie in the grand plan of salvation for the world, what was important to have when, and where does it all lead. Unfortunately, I don't have those answers. It may be helpful to think in terms of discrete episodes in the history of the world, and reduce each to the essential events in each era that significantly impacted the work of the Father, which is to bring to pass the immorality and eternal life of man.

For example, the Gospels provide a wonderful account of the life of the Savior. We learn of his miraculous birth, the wondrous miracles he performed, and the ageless teachings he preached. However, when distilled down to its essentials, the lfie of the Savior was not essential because of any of those things. The work of the Father was accomplished through the atoning suffering, death, and resurrection of the Savior. Founding a Church was not the reason the Savior came.

On the other hand, the work of making ordinances available for all, preaching the Gospel throughout the World, there are factors that are significant to the work of the Father, and the primary period for these things to occur were delayed until technology advanced to where we are to day. So, we have a realistic opportunity with modern innovations in transporations and communication to preach the gospel to all the world and bring all men to Christ, something that was really inconceivable in 90 C.E.

It kind of all makes sense to me if the general run of the world's history is considered in light of the declaration of the Lord that He will give us line upon line, precept upon precept.

[KevinG]

I said "turned from the TRUTH of Christ", not "from Christ".

Still, people (they) turned from the truth and God chose to withhold his priesthood and truth from them while Christianity exploded.

irrelevant.

Perhaps you should explain yourself further and take some responsibility for understanding instead of jumping on other peoples comments like a dog on a bone.

Which truths of Christ do you think the LDS were referring too if not the authority of the church or the fullness of the Gospel?

Why would the mural illustrating LDS appreciation for the truths that were preserved be irrelevant to a discussion on the apostacy?

As you do so please avoid attempting to define LDS beliefs for the LDS and creating a false premise.

[elguanteloko]

...because what they have in the Manti Temple doesn't matter. You could have figured that one out, DG.

[KevinG]

...because what they have in the Manti Temple doesn't matter. You could have figured that one out, DG.

Study the significance of architectural symbolism and art in LDS temples and get back to me on why it is irrelevant.

[elguanteloko]

It is a rather facinating phenomenon, one which I think perhaps occured in order to imprees on the minds of people the difference between institutional apostacy and individual apostasy.

If an institution turned from the truth of Christ purposefully but individuals didn't (or were mislead).... then the more reason to institute your Church with the truth!

Edited July 1, 2011 by elguanteloko

[elguanteloko]

Study the significance of architectural symbolism and art in LDS temples and get back to me on why it is irrelevant.

argh! I'm saying it is irrelevant when discussing why the Apostasy happened or if the ideas proposed make sense. "The X temple has a picture of so and so doing this and that".. so what?

[KevinG]

If an institution turned from the truth of Christ purposefully but individuals didn't (or were mislead).... then the more reason to institute your Church with the truth!

Characterizing the apostacy as purposeful as a stretch. Institutional apostacy was a combination of mistakes mixed with a bit of purposeful manipulation on the part of those who sought to get gain.

[KevinG]

argh! I'm saying it is irrelevant when discussing why the Apostasy happened or if the ideas proposed make sense. "The X temple has a picture of so and so doing this and that".. so what?

Argh yourself. Be more clear about your premise then. Your comments gave the distinct impression you had issue with the idea of the apostacy. The tradition of art as an expression of faith and belief is not foreign to the discussion of the apostacy. Particularly when that art in an LDS holy place is a demonstration of belief that critical components of Christianity and faith in Christ was preserved through the centuries before the restoration.

If you want to have an intelligent conversation the burden is now upon you to discuss why you feel this would be irrelevant to the discussion and not just parrot "irrelevant" over and over again.

Edited July 1, 2011 by DaddyG

[CV75]

Thank you for all of the responses. Much appreciated.

It seems like the consensus is that God is not using his power to save the church from corruption (because that would interfere with free will), but knows, through his omniscient powers, that it will not fall this time?

Also, it was the priesthood that was taken, not really the ability to spread the Gospel or Christianity, in general.

I may not be part of the consensus because I believe He would certainly intervene in some fashion before the Restored Church ever were to become corrupted. He would not interfere with the agency of those who would corrupt it (whether intentionally or not), but He would interfere with those who would so interfere so that the corruption would not take place. Because of or in addition to this power, He also has the foreknowledge that it won't be corrupted.

I would say that what was spread was some remnants of the Gospel, such as the Bible and some basic beliefs and teachings, an even corruptions of the Gospel, or whatever else was promulgated in various interpretations under the title or even under the guise of “Christianity.” It was preached in many forms, but most would recognize it as originating or being attributed to Christ.

[elguanteloko]

Characterizing the apostacy as purposeful as a stretch. Institutional apostacy was a combination of mistakes mixed with a bit of purposeful manipulation on the part of those who sought to get gain.

Well, I was giving you guys the benefit of the doubt by saying it was purposeful. If it wasn't intentional or a mixture of non-intentional and intentional... the more reason to provide the necessary tools to correct this. It wasn't like there was a shortage of believers in Christ, that's what I meant to point out when I said "while Christianity exploded throughout the world."

[KevinG]

Well, I was giving you guys the benefit of the doubt by saying it was purposeful. If it wasn't intentional or a mixture of non-intentional and intentional... the more reason to provide the necessary tools to correct this. It wasn't like there was a shortage of believers in Christ, that's what I meant to point out when I said "while Christianity exploded throughout the world."

That is the heart of the disagreement between the Catholics, Reformers and Restorationists. Either Christianity with full institutional authority was preserved by the Catholics or it was reformed and brought back to alignment with God's plan by the reformers or it needed to be restored by God's prophet.

Which position do you take if you feel the LDS are in error with the idea of the restoration. In short why you you feel Apostacy (as taught by the LDS) is "strange"?

[Mark Beesley]

If an institution turned from the truth of Christ purposefully but individuals didn't (or were mislead).... then the more reason to institute your Church with the truth!

That might have worked if the Lord's Church were organized that way, i.e. a bottom to top type of hierarchy. However, that is not how the Lord works. Change in the Lord's Church comes from the top, not the bottom.