Kingdom With No End or General Apostasy

[MormonMason]

Can you clarify by examples how the creeds aren't in agreement with what the Bible says?

Find homoousia in the Bible.

Alternatively, find us passages in the Bible that clearly state that God is sans form, parts, or passions.

Edited October 6, 2012 by MormonMason

[altersteve]

Can you clarify by examples how the creeds aren't in agreement with what the Bible says?

First of all, I don't see Christ described in the Bible as "being of one substance with the Father," ever. Is Christ one with the Father? Yes, of course. But where does this "one in substance" stuff come from?

But again, it's not whether or not the creeds are "in agreement with what the Bible says" that God finds abominable. It's the fact that there is no way to correct these doctrines that God dislikes so much. He wants to reveal to us all the mysteries of His kingdom, but we can't do that if we make creeds that set up barriers that cannot be expanded.

[Bart Burk]

I wonder what it would take for a person to believe in a religion like Mormonism (or Catholicism for that matter)? If tens of thousands of people saw a miracle which was witnessed and reported upon favorably by the local atheistic news media, would that be enough? I don't even think that would cause most people in the world to believe that Mormonism is a restoration of the gospel. Appeals to the scriptures are always subject to interpretation as we've seen throughout this thread. I suppose we just have to make a choice the best we know how, trusting that God will honor the fact we were even willing to make the effort.

[Saints Alive]

The news media would report it as mass hysteria for sure

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

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?

And then there are the early reformers who freely admit the Church was lost and that it did fall into apostasy. You should read the history of the Church following the death of the Apostles...painful stuff.

[coolrok7]

coolrok7, on 05 October 2012 - 09:19 PM, said:

Can you clarify by examples how the creeds aren't in agreement with what the Bible says?

Find homoousia in the Bible.

Alternatively, find us passages in the Bible that clearly state that God is sans form, parts, or passions.

Edited by MormonMason, 2 weeks ago.

First of all, I don't see Christ described in the Bible as "being of one substance with the Father," ever. Is Christ one with the Father? Yes, of course. But where does this "one in substance" stuff come from?

But again, it's not whether or not the creeds are "in agreement with what the Bible says" that God finds abominable. It's the fact that there is no way to correct these doctrines that God dislikes so much. He wants to reveal to us all the mysteries of His kingdom, but we can't do that if we make creeds that set up barriers that cannot be expanded.(altersteve)

And then there are the early reformers who freely admit the Church was lost and that it did fall into apostasy. You should read the history of the Church following the death of the Apostles...painful stuff. (Pa Pa)

The point under discussion at the time of the drafting of the Nicene Creed involved dealing with the heretical view of Arius of Alexandria (which in part involved discussing the Greek terms of homoousia and homoiousia):

Arius is notable primarily because of his role in the Arian controversy, a great fourth-century theological conflict that rocked the Christian world and led to the calling of the first ecumenical councill of the Church. This controversy centered upon the nature of the Son of God, and his precise relationship to God the Father. (Arius, Wikipedia)

Homoousian (/ˌhɒmoʊˈaʊsiə/ HOM-oh-OW-see-ə; Ancient Greek: ὁμοούσιος, from the Ancient Greek: ὁμός, homós, "same" and Ancient Greek: οὐσίa, ousía, "essence, being") is a technical theological term used in discussion of the Christian understanding of God as Trinity. The Nicene Creed describes Jesus as being homooúsios with God the Father — that is, they are of the "same substance" and are equally God. This term, adopted by the First Council of Nicaea, was intended to add clarity to the relationship between Christ and God the Father within the Godhead. The term is rendered "consubstantialis" in Latin and in related terms in other Latin-derived languages. It is one of the cornerstones of theology in all Churches that adhere to the Nicene Creed. (Homoousian, Wikipedia)

The Arian controversy was a Trinitarian dispute that began in Alexandria between the followers of Arius (the Arians) and the followers of St. Alexander of Alexandria (now known as Homoousians). Alexander and his followers believed that the Son was co-eternal with the Father, and divine in just the same sense that the Father is. The Arians believed that the Son shared neither the eternity nor the true divinity of the Father, but was merely the most perfect of the creatures. . . .

Much of the debate hinged on the difference between being "born" or "created" and being "begotten". Arians saw these as essentially the same; followers of Alexander did not. The exact meaning of many of the words used in the debates at Nicea were still unclear to speakers of other languages. Greek words like "essence" (ousia), "substance" (hypostasis), "nature" (physis), "person" (prosopon) bore a variety of meanings drawn from pre-Christian philosophers, which could not but entail misunderstandings until they were cleared up. The word homoousia, in particular, was initially disliked by many bishops because of its associations with Gnostic heretics (who used it in their theology), and because it had been condemned at the 264–268 Synods of Antioch.

Position of Arius (Arianism)

Arius maintained that the Son of God was a Creature, made from nothing; and that he was God's First Production, before all ages. And he argued that everything else was created through the Son. Thus, said the Arians, only the Son was directly created and begotten of God; and therefore there was a time that He had no existence. Arius believed the Son Jesus was capable of His own free will of right and wrong, and that "were He in the truest sense a son, He must have come after the Father, therefore the time obviously was when He was not, and hence He was a finite being,"^] and was under God the Father. The Arians appealed to Scripture, quoting verses such as John 14:28: "the Father is greater than I", and also Colossians 1:15: "Firstborn of all creation." (Wikipedia)

The immediate above is also the heretical view of Jehovah’s Witnesses (Jesus as, a god, is a created being and is therefore not God of the same nature as the Father is):

In (the) beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in (the) beginning with God. (New World Translation)

Our Lord Jesus Christ is a God. . .still the united voice of the scriptures must emphatically assert that there is but one Almighty God, the Father of all. (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol.V, p.55)

This one was not Jehovah God, but was existing in the form of God. . .he was a spirit person...he was a mighty one although not Almighty as Jehovah God is; . . .He was a God, but not the Almighty God, who is Jehovah. (Let God Be True, pp.34, 35)

At the time of his beginning of life he was created by the everlasting God, Jehovah, without the aid or instrumentality of any mother. In other words, he was the first and direct creation of Jehovah God. . .He was the start of God’s creative work. He was not an incarnation in flesh but was flesh, a human Son of God, a perfect man, no longer a spirit, although having a spiritual or heavenly past and background. (The Kingdom Is At Hand, pp.46, 47, 49)

Now, at the present time, the true Christian congregation has been recovered from the apostasy that enshrouded the Middle Ages in spiritual darkness. Just as Israel was returned to its land in 537 B.C.E. by King Cyrus of Persia, so Jehovah has used his reigning King Jesus Christ to bring the modern-day Christian congregation into a spiritually prosperous condition. (Isa. 1:25-27) The true doctrines have been restored concerning God’s name, the position of his Son Jesus Christ, the kingdom of God, the ransom, resurrection, and others. The false doctrines of Trinity, hellfire, immortality of the human soul and others have been exposed as unscriptural. The preaching of the good news of the Kingdom is being done world wide. . . .As to knowledge, God has provided his entire Word, which today can be possessed in printed form by the most humble person. Its use can make the man of God fully competent, completely equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16, 17) (The Watchtower, Aug. 15, 1971, p.503)

Apostasy yes, as there will be apostasy until the end of those who fall away from the faith (Mormonism along with Jehovah’s Witnesses included), delivered to the first century saints, but you can’t get “complete” “total” from “some”. The Mormon message of Joseph Smith, since 1830, is not the Gospel message of first century Christianity but “another gospel” warned about by the apostle Paul:

But the Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons by means of the hypocrisy of liars seared in their own conscience as with a branding iron, . . .In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following. (1 Timothy 4:1 2, 6)

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:6-eight)

3. There was a complete apostasy affecting both Catholic and Protestant churches. . . .2. There was a total apostasy affecting the Catholic and Protestant churches. . . . (A UNIFORM SYSTEM FOR TEACHING INVESTIGATORS, Aug. 1961, pp.32, 58)

Salvation comes only through Jesus Christ. In him and in him alone is there redemption. But he works in his own way. God’s way is not man’s way. The Lord provided that salvation should come through his gospel functioning through his church, wherein are prophets and apostles “for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ.” (Ephesians 4:12). . .Is there such a church upon the earth? Until 1830 there was not. It had been lost through the falling away we have described in this pamphlet. (Which Church is Right pamphlet, p.17)

Nothing less than a complete apostasy from the Christian religion would warrant the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Documentary History of the Church, Introduction, xl)

What we do find in the Bible is the following.

There is no doubt as to which person of the Godhead is being talked about here: not the Father or Holy Spirit but—“the Word” that “was with God,” (“In the beginning”) is “the Word” that “was God” and is “the Word” that “was made flesh”):

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. . . .And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:1-2, 14)

I have finished the work which You have given Me to do. And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. (John 17:4-5)

For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:9)

And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. (Luke 24:36-39)

What matters here is the actual Biblical teaching in its totality and in context. Jesus, as part of the Godhead became a man in the first century:

Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. (Galatians 4:1-5)

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. (Genesis 1:1-2)

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. (Genesis 1:26)

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Genesis 2:7)

The assumption that Mormonism comes with and what that is based on:

Following the death of the apostles, revelation ceased. The authority of God was no longer among men. Christianity sickened and died. In time, a new religion grew up in its place—a religion that professed to be Jesus Christ’s Church, but which in reality was a conglomerate of pagan worship and Greek philosophy, “having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.”. . .that eventually led to the complete apostasy of the true church and the eventual creation of an apostate religion that has been responsible for the extermination of the Messiah’s true followers and the persecution of his chosen people, the Jews. . . .(APOSTASY AND RESTORATION pamphlet, p.9)

. . .this is the pivotal thing of our story. Every claim we make concerning divine authority, every truth that we offer concerning the validity of this work, all finds its roots in the First Vision of the boy prophet. Without it we would not have anything much to say. . .This becomes the hinge pin on which the whole cause turns. If the First Vision was true, if it actually happened, then the Book of Mormon is true. Then we have the priesthood. Then we have the Church organizations and all of the other keys and blessings of authority which we say we have. If the First Vision did not occur, then we are involved in a great sham. It is that simple. (Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley, p.237)

Third, how important is the Book of Mormon? Joseph Smith called it “the keystone of our religion.” (History of the Church, 4:461.) “Take away the Book of Mormon and the revelations,” he said, “and where is our religion? We have none.” (History of the Church, 2:52.). . .(The Ensign, President Ezra Taft Benson, Nov. 1984, p.6)

The challenge offered by an earlier church General Authority:

THE DIVINE MISSION OF JOSEPH SMITH

CHURCH STANDS OR FALLS WITH JOSEPH SMITH.

Mormonism, as it is called, must stand or fall on the story of Joseph Smith. He was either a prophet of God, divinely called, properly appointed and commissioned, or he was one of the biggest frauds this world has ever seen. There is no middle ground. If Joseph Smith was a deceiver, who willfully attempted to mislead the people, then he should be exposed; his claims should be refuted, and his doctrines shown to be false, for the doctrines of an imposter cannot be made to harmonize in all particulars with divine truth. If his claims and declarations were built upon fraud and deceit, there would appear many errors and contradictions, which would be easy to detect. The doctrines of false teachers will not stand the test when tried by the accepted standards of measurement, the scriptures. (Doctrines of Salvation, Joseph Fielding Smith, p.188, 1954 edition)

Jesus warned (the fruit of a prophet is the teaching that comes):

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. (Matthew 7:15-20)

Edited November 2, 2012 by coolrok7

[bcuzbcuz]

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?

I think your question provokes considerable reflection. First I would ask, "who is saying what?" Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not written by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John. Paul certainly did not write all the letters attributed to him. And Jesus' words were never recorded at the time he said them but only written many, many years later and in another language.

The writings of Bart D. Ehrman, "Misquoting Jesus" and "Jesus Interrupted" are well worth the time.