Kingdom With No End or General Apostasy

[Saints Alive]

Over and over in the NT, Jesus commands people not to doubt but be believing. Have you thought, at this point in your life where you are having trouble believing, about reading books that will help strengthen your faith rather than your doubt?

It seems likely that doubt has a lot of power to shape a person's perspective for the worse, if Christ specifically and repeatedly commands against it.

Additional I personally like the Fair WIKI site http://en.fairmormon.org/Main_Page It covers just about every critics argument in a digestible form.

[zerinus]

Just seeking answers. I'm in a search, do I leave or do I stay? Everything in my world at the time, is staying LDS. It will shatter my world if I leave. When I'm around believing saints everything seems like it'll be okay. But when I listen to shows or sermons on the internet about the Savior and His church never falling away, I'm afraid again and think I have to make a choice. Choose Joseph's version or Jesus' version. I'm not as stemmed in the Gospel as some of you on here. I've never had a powerful witness. My witness has always been in the members and the spirit they exude. On occasion I'll be disappointed though. I just thought some on here would have some thoughts about these scriptures and have a scripture or two about Christ's church needing to be restored and maybe it'll keep me going in the LDS faith a little while longer. BTW some of the OP on here have the anti look also....check it out.

For me, the greatest evidence of the Apostasy is the Restoration. The fact that God has taken the trouble to restore His Church anew in our time means that it did not already exist on earth. I think that your real difficulty is not so much whether the Apostasy occurred or not, but whether the Restored gospel is true or not. Your problem is one of testimony. And testimony cannot be gained without being earnestly sought. If your testimony is based on just how good you feel whey you are around Church members, then it is not likely to be strong enough to withstand the buffetings of Satan.

My advice to you would be to try to obtain that witness of the Restoration for yourself, rather than try to prove the Apostasy. There are answers to the scriptural verses you had quoted (picked up from anti-Mormon sites); but without obtaining that spiritual witness of the Restoration, I don't think it would do you any good to discuss them. Nobody ever becomes a Mormon because they suddenly become convinced of the Apostasy. They join the Church because they obtain a witness of its truth---then they start thinking that there must have been an Apostasy. You are putting the cart before the horse. You want someone to prove to you that the Apostasy is true before you believe in the Restoration. It never works that way. The way it works is that you read the Book of Mormon and gain a spiritual witness of its truth; then you come to the realization that there was an Apostasy.

You also appear to be susceptible of being deceived by the devil's counterfeit. To avoid being deceived we need spiritual gifts, which we cannot obtain without first obtaining a testimony of the Restoration.

[Calm]

Additional I personally like the Fair WIKI site http://en.fairmormon.org/Main_Page It covers just about every critics argument in a digestible form.

And we are always on the lookout for new ones...rare though they be.

[ERayR]

Just seeking answers. I'm in a search, do I leave or do I stay? Everything in my world at the time, is staying LDS. It will shatter my world if I leave. When I'm around believing saints everything seems like it'll be okay. But when I listen to shows or sermons on the internet about the Savior and His church never falling away, I'm afraid again and think I have to make a choice. Choose Joseph's version or Jesus' version. I'm not as stemmed in the Gospel as some of you on here. I've never had a powerful witness. My witness has always been in the members and the spirit they exude. On occasion I'll be disappointed though. I just thought some on here would have some thoughts about these scriptures and have a scripture or two about Christ's church needing to be restored and maybe it'll keep me going in the LDS faith a little while longer. BTW some of the OP on here have the anti look also....check it out.

Joshua's advice works very well. "Choose ye this day whom ye will serve..." Make that choice and he rest will fall into place. Whether you serve the critics and anti-Mormons or serve Christ. The choice is yours but once you make it you can quit vacillating.

[volgadon]

Only one book, Unveiling Mormonism written by a now non member, Grant Palmer, who resigned this year. I really trust this book though. It tells the truth, though the truth can hurt.

If it is anything like Palmer's earlier book, I wouldn't trust it further than I could cross reference every source.

[MormonMason]

Matt 16:18 And I also say unto thee, That thou Peter, and upon this rock I will build this church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Matt 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Ephesians 3:21 To Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen.

Luke 1:32-33 "He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom would have no end."

1 Kings 19:13-18 God has always been capable of keeping His followers from being wiped out and He promised to do so.

Are any of these scriptures false or in need of further explanations? Thoughts?

Not false; just misinterpreted. Key things to remember:

1. "gates of hell" = gates of Hades. The gates of Hades pertain to the realm of the dead. One only encounters the gates in death. So, the implication is that the Church will die but will not be kept dead. If the gates of Hades prevail against you, you stay dead. That matches pretty well with the Mormon idea of the apostasy and restoration.

2. Which Greek text do we regard as authentic? Consider Ephesians 3:21. In that text, there is a word for "and" that is omitted from one text family but included in an older one. That extra "and" can make quite a difference in meaning. For example, one could take the last part of the phrase "all generations forever and ever" and refer that to the glory to the Father being by or through Jesus Christ rather than referring to the Church for that length of time. Alternatively, even if we accept the proposition that it refers to both the Church and by Christ Jesus for that length of time, recall Christ's promise that some were there that would not die until Jesus returned again. If that premise be accepted, members of the Church of Jesus' day never died and could do exactly that without precluding an apostasy from happening.

3. The Bible speaks of the Church and refers to a visible and invisible Church. It does not directly state that but it is hinted at. The invisible Church was called the Church of the firstborn. One can liken the idea of the Church being symbolically represented by a human woman. There is the body and the soul, the former being visible and the latter being invisible. They are both parts of the same person but one part dies and the other survives death. Refer again to point 1 above.

4. Since we have only a fraction of the words of Jesus, those recorded on materials that have perished also have in effect passed away. In addition, those which were never written also have perished from the perspective of mortal man. Yet, they are all recorded in heaven. So, in that sense they have never perished. That Matthew passage does not apply to apostasy or lack thereof and doesn't address it like some think. It also does not address or prevent the corruption of the texts. Whether or not the originals were lost and formats changed, the original words would be recorded somewhere, even if not any longer on earth, and never pass away from that perspective.

5. Christ's kingdom won't have an end. Refer again to point 1 above. The Lord ensured the Church's survival by restoration via those from the original Church ordaining Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery as apostles. Since these men who ordained them survived via resurrection and/or translation, the Church never would have an end and never really would stay dead. Even if the visible Church would die the invisible Church would not, and the restoration ensured that the visible Church was not prevailed over by the gates of Hades in the realm of the dead.

6. That 1 Kings passage does not constitute a promise of any kind. It was a mere statement of fact at the time. Nowhere does the passage say or imply that this would always be the case.

Keeping these in mind, the passages do not present the problems that some might think.

Edited September 23, 2012 by MormonMason

[CV75]

Thoughts?

His kingdom has no end wherever it exists that is not of this world. This world will reject it, since this world and all things in it have, do and will fail and come to an end. This is the whole point of His having to save it.

His kingdom, by design, must fail in this world, just as He was crucified. This is so that He could overcome all things. He overcame death and hell, and oveame the apostasy with the restoration. Yet His full kingdom is yet to come. Jesus had an end in this world but was exalted in His Father's world. Even His Church, though now restored, will also give way to His Kingdom, the Church of the Firstborn, in the next world (by way of progress, not by way of apostasy).

So the Great Apostasy represents only the end of His kingdom in this world, and the Restoration represents His overcoming that. But there is still more of His kingdom to come; or perhaps more correctly, more of His kingdom for us to go to.

[volgadon]

especially after reading the JOD. Journal of Discoures,

I'm curious, have you read it through, or just the sensational bits? If the former, you definitely have my respect for trudging through it.

[Tacenda]

I'm curious, have you read it through, or just the sensational bits? If the former, you definitely have my respect for trudging through it.

No, I would just check out volumes from the library and look up things critics say to see if they were true.

[volgadon]

No, I would just check out volumes from the library and look up things critics say to see if they were true.

Trying to get a feel for your methodology. Do you look much into the surrounding context, or do you focus more on the immediate quote? The reason I ask is that context has to come from somewhere. All too often it is provided less from the sources than from those who asked the question and framed it in a certain way.

[Tacenda]

Trying to get a feel for your methodology. Do you look much into the surrounding context, or do you focus more on the immediate quote? The reason I ask is that context has to come from somewhere. All too often it is provided less from the sources than from those who asked the question and framed it in a certain way.

There isn't much context to some of BY's quotes. In fact it felt like I was reading a non fiction story of some current off shoot mormons that practice polygamy.

[urroner]

There isn't much context to some of BY's quotes. In fact it felt like I was reading a non fiction story of some current off shoot mormons that practice polygamy.

For example?

[coolrok7]

Matt 16:18 And I also say unto thee, That thou Peter, and upon this rock I will build this church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Matt 24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Ephesians 3:21 To Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations forever and ever. Amen.

Luke 1:32-33 "He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom would have no end."

1 Kings 19:13-18 God has always been capable of keeping His followers from being wiped out and He promised to do so.

Are any of these scriptures false or in need of further explanations? Thoughts?

Tacenda, you’ve heard the Mormon side of the discussion. Without the Mormon input and just the Scripture itself what do you think it is saying?

[Tacenda]

Tacenda, you’ve heard the Mormon side of the discussion. Without the Mormon input and just the Scripture itself what do you think it is saying?

I think it says exactly what it means and means exactly what it says until I get the Mormon view.

[coolrok7]

So where does that put you if I might ask?

[Saints Alive]

So where does that put you if I might ask?

that's quite irrelevant, without context and cultural understanding you can read a lot of things into the bible that aren't there

[MormonMason]

I think it says exactly what it means and means exactly what it says until I get the Mormon view.

You got more than two Mormon's views concerning the passages above. Here is the one I gave above:

Mine is a position which I share with others, however, so it is the view of more than one and more than two. Look it up in the Greek. That is very important to the question.

Ask yourself, "What is Hades"? What is the Jewish position of Sheol (Hebrew equivalent of Greek Hades) having gates? What do you have to do when you die and pass through the gates? (Remember, when Jesus said this, everybody with a few exceptions went to Hades and stayed there).

What difference in the meaning of a reading could there be with an extra "and" in the passage separating one portion of the phrase from the other, the latter being the portion referred to with the period of time and the former expressing more a wish?

Where does the passage in 1 Kings say that God applies that passage to the question of the passages in the New Testament and where is the promise that this situation would obtain forever without change?

What do you do about that very fact that many of Jesus' words have perished from the face of the earth and that we only have a fraction of everything that Jesus taught and spoke?

You aren't asking the right questions of the texts but are taking them at face value through an English translation. You say that you think they say what they don't imply in the original languages.

Edited September 26, 2012 by MormonMason

[Vance]

that's quite irrelevant, without context and cultural understanding you can read a lot of things into the bible that aren't there

coolrok7 should know all about reading things into the Bible that aren't there, after all, he does it all the time.

[coolrok7]

that's quite irrelevant, without context and cultural understanding you can read a lot of things into the bible that aren't there

Relevant to the question I asked Tacenda, not you although you're free to comment as you did. It does boil down to interpretation and people can read into it what is not there (eisegesis). I prefer to try and read out of what is there both historically what the church (Christian) has interpreted since the first century. As always there are dissenting opinions.

Christians regardless of what denomination have reached a consensus on a lot of the issues raised here by Mormons. I have more to say concerning these past responses. But I was waiting for Tacendas' respose to my question.

Edited September 26, 2012 by coolrok7

[bluebell]

I think it says exactly what it means and means exactly what it says until I get the Mormon view.

The scriptures teach that death would have no power over Christ, yet He did die. I have read some atheists thoughts on those verses, where they declare that His death on the cross proves how wrong He was.

Believers know that HIs resurrection proves the truth of His statements though. His momentary death had no lasting impact and that (the fact that it was momentary) is why the scriptures are true when they say that He conquored it.

Likewise, the apostasy was also only momentary. The gates of hell did not prevail against the church just because the devil was ahead for a few minutes in the game. The restoration proves he lost The restoration proves that the gates of hell did not prevail against the church.

Only someone who doesn't understand what the restoration is (like cookrok), would think that the apostasy has to mean that satan won (which is what 'prevail' means-to win).

[volgadon]

The scriptures teach that death would have no power over Christ, yet He did die. I have read some atheists thoughts on those verses, where they declare that His death on the cross proves how wrong He was.

Believers know that HIs resurrection proves the truth of His statements though. His momentary death had no lasting impact and that (the fact that it was momentary) is why the scriptures are true when they say that He conquored it.

Likewise, the apostasy was also only momentary. The gates of hell did not prevail against the church just because the devil was ahead for a few minutes in the game. The restoration proves he lost The restoration proves that the gates of hell did not prevail against the church.

Only someone who doesn't understand what the restoration is (like cookrok), would think that the apostasy has to mean that satan won (which is what 'prevail' means-to win).

Brilliant post.

[coolrok7]

No bluebell, the resurrection proves that Jesus had power over the death that He came to die and defeat the lies of Satan, not the so-called "restoration"!

Edited September 26, 2012 by coolrok7

[Saints Alive]

The scriptures teach that death would have no power over Christ, yet He did die. I have read some atheists thoughts on those verses, where they declare that His death on the cross proves how wrong He was.

Believers know that HIs resurrection proves the truth of His statements though. His momentary death had no lasting impact and that (the fact that it was momentary) is why the scriptures are true when they say that He conquored it.

Likewise, the apostasy was also only momentary. The gates of hell did not prevail against the church just because the devil was ahead for a few minutes in the game. The restoration proves he lost The restoration proves that the gates of hell did not prevail against the church.

Only someone who doesn't understand what the restoration is (like cookrok), would think that the apostasy has to mean that satan won (which is what 'prevail' means-to win).

Tacenda:

Bluebell made an excellent post. I have never thought of the similarities between the resurrection and the restoration. Truly amazing.

[Saints Alive]

No bluebell, the resurrection proves that Jesus had power over the death that He came to die and defeat the lies of Satan, not the so-called "restoration"!

Did you even read what bluebell said? If you did I suggest you reread it as I think you completely missed her point. Edited September 26, 2012 by Saints Alive

[volgadon]

Tacenda, you’ve heard the Mormon side of the discussion. Without the Mormon input and just the Scripture itself what do you think it is saying?

Coolrok's game is fun to play from a Jewish perspective, using only the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament).