A Historiography of the Great/Total/Universal Apostasy

[Navidad]

I have been increasingly interested in studying the LDS concept of an apostasy - sometimes in the LDS literature it is called the Total Apostasy, the Great Apostasy, and/or the Universal Apostasy. I have read more and more articles, etc. from the evangelical and Catholic perspective that identify it as the most important issue between Mormons and members of other faith groups. Reading Talmage's book on the subject, I know it was important to him. That makes it pretty important. So, I started buying books and reading articles to better understand the LDS concept.  So, I have read and read books, articles and the scriptures, trying my best to gain an understanding. 

Separately from this , I received an invitation to submit a presentation for next years MHS conference in Boise. I presented this year and had a great time.  So I began casting around in the empty caverns of my mind on what I might offer up to the committee as a topic for a presentation. I assumed it would be something about the Mexican Colonies. That is an area of LDS history that I know best. Then as I kept reading about the apostasy I began to think - might there be a need for a presentation on the historiography of the Great Apostasy? In other words, what is the LDS (I don't care about non-LDS sources) chronological sequence of writings, beliefs, etc. about the apostasy? It seems to have changed, modified, been refined, matured - you pick a word, over time. Then I hesitated, could I as a non-Mormon write a historiography of the Great Apostasy and present it? I decided yes I could. There have been any number of non-LDS speakers at MHA, some with great regularity. Some of them have won the highest prizes. 

Ok.  so now I am thinking about it seriously, so I begin to look around to see if there indeed already exists a historiography of the apostasy? If so, i need to move back to the colonies. No value in doing something that has already been done. So I begin searching and lo and behold I find a fairly new book published by Oxford Press entitled Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy, a series of articles edited by Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young.  The article titles sound very interesting. I don't know any of the authors. Reading the descriptors it seems to be something done by "faithful" Mormons. The reviews were five stars with a solo one star. Sometimes reviews say more about the reviewer than the book! 

Ok...After all that introduction do any of you know this book? Do you recommend it and the authors? Have any of you read it? I have limited funds and it is a bit expensive. I trust your collective judgment and would value your opinions on the book. Does it represent the historiography of the apostasy for which I have been looking?  Is there something else you think is better? I have Morrison's and Richard's books already. Thanks so much. 

[RevTestament]

From the Introduction:
"Instead of defending the tradition of the Great Apostasy [as understood by a number of LDS leaders and apologists], we critically examine its development in church discourse and imagination over the last two centuries, and we suggest ideas for renewing the narrative tradition with greater inclusivity and generosity both to the past and to those of other religious traditions.:

I will echo Blair Hodges and post most his review from the Maxwell Institute:

"... the most important Mormon studies book since Bushman’s Rough Stone Rolling... challenging aspects of the Church’s “Apostasy” narrative the authors recognize they are in essence challenging important aspects of Mormon identity. In other words, this book is made up of historical work that also performs theological work. A different understanding of Apostasy necessitates a different understanding of Restoration. The most proactively theological piece in the collection is the Epilogue wherein Terryl Givens suggests that today’s widely accepted Apostasy-to-Restoration narrative has diverged from Joseph Smith’s understanding of the historical scene in crucial ways.

The collection’s editors justify their bold move in a thoroughly LDS way. They affirm that treating the history of Christianity with greater respect than we have thus far is an important part of fulfilling Malachi’s prophecy that the hearts of the children will be turned to the hearts of the fathers in the last days: 'Turning our hearts to the past with love is a sacred responsibility for Latter-day Saints...'

... It remains to be seen how seriously such a work will be taken by the institutional Church, but its being published by Oxford University Press suggests that it is more than a haphazard collection of speculations. It deserves to be engaged by Mormons but will also be of interest to scholars of religion more broadly who value sensitive but critical interreligious engagement."

 

Haven't read it. You probably saw this comment from the intro. However, I will say that Teryl Givens is well-regarded in Church circles, and the work seemed to received positively by the BYU Studies and the Mormon Studies Review. I have to say there really is not a uniform view or set of studies about when or how the apostasy occurred. Most of the talks I have heard speak about the beginnings of the restoration - the invention of the printing press, and translations of the Bible into German and English which made it accessible to the masses and precipitated a flow of membership away from the Roman Catholic Church to Protestant Churches. 

A number of different types of interpretation of the Bible have emerged over the centuries. One of the first major types is known as the "Historicist" view. A hallmark of Historicism interpreted the Church as going apostate, and that the Roman Catholic Church was the great abominable whore of Revelation 17:5. Most early Protestantism adopted this basic view. There is also the "Futurist" view which holds that the prophecies of the New Testament have not happened yet, but will happen in the future. Another major view which has taken hold is known as the "Preterist" view. It takes a literal view of Yeshua's words that He would return in "this generation" as being one human generation, and therefore they believe He returned by the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, and that the prophecies of Revelation occurred before that time. Preterists point out that Revelation 1:3 says of the things of this book "for the time is at hand." The preterist eschatology seemed to come about as a Catholic answer to the historicist view which railed against the Catholic Church. It began at the pen of a Catholic priest. Its main fault is that it attempts to fit all the prophecies of Revelation into a forty year period instead of merely beginning during that time period with the prophesied downfall of Jerusalem and the spread of the gospel to the other Gentile nations. Further, it fails to recognize that when Yeshua said "this generation" He was apparently referring to this generation of the earth rather than in the regeneration when those who follow Him are made judges of the twelve tribes of Israel. Thus, Yeshua is using the term "this generation" to refer to the last generation of this earth, and therefore only a promise to return in person before this earth ends, since at the time He did not know the day He was to return as the Father had not yet told Him. 
 

For what it's worth I personally place the apostasy as starting with the institution of the state church of the Roman empire, and the associated required creeds. The modern Church has separated itself from a direct association of the Catholic Church with the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, and thereby I believe disassociated itself from the Historicist view. I came about the Historicist view after returning home from a trip in which I prayed to know who the false prophet of Revelation is. I found a booklet on my porch which was produced by the Seventh Day Adventist Church or an associated organization. Upon perusing it, I immediately realized that it got some basic things about Daniel 7 and Revelation 12 correct, and therefore the preterist view of Revelation could not be correct.  Some of the basics I refer to are attributed by history to Joachim of Fiore who lived from 1135 - 1202 AD, and identified the 1,260 days and the 42 months of Revelation 11 and 12 as referring to a period of 1260 years in Western history. He believed at least two Old Testament scriptures showed that prophetically, God sometimes applied years to days such as when the forty days given to Israel to search the land became forty years in the wilderness. In Ezekiel the Lord told a son of man that He had given him a year for a day. I recognized this principle of defining terminology from modern law. 
Joachim identified the beast of Revelation and the whore as referring to pagan Rome and the papacy with which I largely agree. Some Franciscans followed Joachim and his interpretation.

Joachim's teachings were somewhat convincing, and started a school of thought in which many great minds have contributed since his day. Nicolas of Lyra(1270-1349) followed the historicist view somewhat but attempted to restore a "literal" reading of the scriptural texts. He believed the literal sense of scripture was foundational for all interpretation and must precede any allegorical, mystical or other expositions. He made it clear that he made his insights subject to Church teaching: "I protest that I do not intend to assert or determine anything that has not been manifestly determined by Sacred Scripture or by the authority of the Church.... Wherefore I submit all I have said or shall say to the correction of Holy Mother Church and of all learned men....(Postillae) One of the great contributions of Nicolas was to write a commentary of the entire Bible.
Another early disciple of the views of Joachim was a man known as Peter Waldo (1140-1202), who ended up being the head of the Waldensian movement by founding the Poor Men of Lyons. Waldo was a wealthy merchant who gave away all his property. With Waldo we see the first glimmer of the Reformation as he was the first to call the Roman pontiff "antichrist." The Church first reacted  to Waldo's teaching by excommunicating them in 1184 at the Synod of Verona, under the auspices of Pope Lucius III. Three decades later in 1211 more than 80 Waldensians were burned as heretics at Strasbourg, which launched several centuries of persecution that nearly destroyed the movement.[Ellwood, R.S.; Alles, G.D. (2007). "Waldensians". The Encyclopedia of World Religions. New York, NY: Facts on File. p. 471] At the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 Pontiff Innocent III went even further, and denounced the Waldensians as heretics.[Catholic Encyclopedia: 'Waldenses'". Newadvent.org. 1 October 1912]. In 1487 Innocent VIII issued a bull for the extermination of the Vaudois or Waldensians. The archdeacon of Cremona, Alberto de' Capitanei, responded to the bull by organizing a crusade to fulfill the extermination order and launched an offensive in the provinces of Dauphinי and Piedmont. After the crusade had devastated the area and many of the Vaudois had fled, Charles I, Duke of Savoy, stepped in to save his territories from further turmoil and promised the Vaudois peace.[CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Bl. Angelo Carletti di Chivasso]

In a parallel some several hundred years later governor Boggs of Missouri issued an extermination order against "the Mormons," which in turn resulted in the Haun's Mill Massacre in which most of the men in that small community and a young boy were shot to death. Tellingly, Joseph Smith, Jr indicated in the Joseph Smith Translation that the 1260 years of Revelation 12 referred to 1260 years.
The Waldensians essentially joined up with the early Protestants, and suffered two more major massacres. On January 1, 1545 the French king, Francis I, issued the "Arrךt de Mיrindol", and assembled an army against the Waldensians of Provence which led to the 1545 massacres of hundreds to thousands, depending on the estimates, and several villages were devastated.[Knecht, R. J. (1984). Francis I. Cambridge University Press. p. 405] Although French King Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes in 1598, which granted the Waldensian church some rights and freedoms, persecution rose again in the 17th century when the Duke of Savoy in 1655 tried to exterminate the Waldensians by giving them twenty days to return to the upper valleys of their homeland, or to attend Mass. When most chose to leave to their upper valleys, the Duke later sent troops with commands that the local people house them. This however was a ruse and on 24 April 1655, at 4 a.m, began what became known as the Piedmont Easter in which the Duke's forces are reported to have unleashed an unprovoked campaign of looting, rape, torture, and murder.
 
Dr. Henry Grattan Guinness, D.D., F.R.A.S. (1835-1910), “The seventy weeks of Daniel, or 490 days to the Messiah, were fulfilled as 490 years; that is, they were fulfilled on the year-day scale. On this scale the forty-two months, or 1,260 days, are 1,260 years. We ask then, Has the Papacy endured this period? An examination of the facts of history will show that it has.”..: “the notable decree of the emperor Justinian [525-565 A.D.] constituting the Bishop of Rome as the head of all Churches [in Western Europe].” (H. Grattan Guinness, Romanism and the Reformation, 84. Dr. Henry Grattan Guinness has often been called “England’s Greatest Teacher of Prophecy.” Founder of the East London Institute for Home and Foreign Missions (1872), Dr. Guinness was considered to be one of the three greatest preachers of his day, right along with Dwight L. Moody and Charles Haddon Spurgeon) 
 

I do not share the view of many early Protestants which called the papacy anti-Christ, however I seem to depart from expressed views of my Church about the fulfillment of these prophecies, and offer the above as my own little "historiography" concerning the period of the apostasy. 

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

From the Introduction:
"Instead of defending the tradition of the Great Apostasy [as understood by a number of LDS leaders and apologists], we critically examine its development in church discourse and imagination over the last two centuries, and we suggest ideas for renewing the narrative tradition with greater inclusivity and generosity both to the past and to those of other religious traditions.:

I will echo Blair Hodges and post most his review from the Maxwell Institute:

"... the most important Mormon studies book since Bushman’s Rough Stone Rolling... challenging aspects of the Church’s “Apostasy” narrative the authors recognize they are in essence challenging important aspects of Mormon identity. In other words, this book is made up of historical work that also performs theological work. A different understanding of Apostasy necessitates a different understanding of Restoration. The most proactively theological piece in the collection is the Epilogue wherein Terryl Givens suggests that today’s widely accepted Apostasy-to-Restoration narrative has diverged from Joseph Smith’s understanding of the historical scene in crucial ways.

The collection’s editors justify their bold move in a thoroughly LDS way. They affirm that treating the history of Christianity with greater respect than we have thus far is an important part of fulfilling Malachi’s prophecy that the hearts of the children will be turned to the hearts of the fathers in the last days: 'Turning our hearts to the past with love is a sacred responsibility for Latter-day Saints...'

... It remains to be seen how seriously such a work will be taken by the institutional Church, but its being published by Oxford University Press suggests that it is more than a haphazard collection of speculations. It deserves to be engaged by Mormons but will also be of interest to scholars of religion more broadly who value sensitive but critical interreligious engagement."

 

Haven't read it. You probably saw this comment from the intro. However, I will say that Teryl Givens is well-regarded in Church circles, and the work seemed to received positively by the BYU Studies and the Mormon Studies Review. I have to say there really is not a uniform view or set of studies about when or how the apostasy occurred. Most of the talks I have heard speak about the beginnings of the restoration - the invention of the printing press, and translations of the Bible into German and English which made it accessible to the masses and precipitated a flow of membership away from the Roman Catholic Church to Protestant Churches. 

A number of different types of interpretation of the Bible have emerged over the centuries. One of the first major types is known as the "Historicist" view. A hallmark of Historicism interpreted the Church as going apostate, and that the Roman Catholic Church was the great abominable whore of Revelation 17:5. Most early Protestantism adopted this basic view. There is also the "Futurist" view which holds that the prophecies of the New Testament have not happened yet, but will happen in the future. Another major view which has taken hold is known as the "Preterist" view. It takes a literal view of Yeshua's words that He would return in "this generation" as being one human generation, and therefore they believe He returned by the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, and that the prophecies of Revelation occurred before that time. Preterists point out that Revelation 1:3 says of the things of this book "for the time is at hand." The preterist eschatology seemed to come about as a Catholic answer to the historicist view which railed against the Catholic Church. It began at the pen of a Catholic priest. Its main fault is that it attempts to fit all the prophecies of Revelation into a forty year period instead of merely beginning during that time period with the prophesied downfall of Jerusalem and the spread of the gospel to the other Gentile nations. Further, it fails to recognize that when Yeshua said "this generation" He was apparently referring to this generation of the earth rather than in the regeneration when those who follow Him are made judges of the twelve tribes of Israel. Thus, Yeshua is using the term "this generation" to refer to the last generation of this earth, and therefore only a promise to return in person before this earth ends, since at the time He did not know the day He was to return as the Father had not yet told Him. 
 

For what it's worth I personally place the apostasy as starting with the institution of the state church of the Roman empire, and the associated required creeds. The modern Church has separated itself from a direct association of the Catholic Church with the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, and thereby I believe disassociated itself from the Historicist view. I came about the Historicist view after returning home from a trip in which I prayed to know who the false prophet of Revelation is. I found a booklet on my porch which was produced by the Seventh Day Adventist Church or an associated organization. Upon perusing it, I immediately realized that it got some basic things about Daniel 7 and Revelation 12 correct, and therefore the preterist view of Revelation could not be correct.  Some of the basics I refer to are attributed by history to Joachim of Fiore who lived from 1135 - 1202 AD, and identified the 1,260 days and the 42 months of Revelation 11 and 12 as referring to a period of 1260 years in Western history. He believed at least two Old Testament scriptures showed that prophetically, God sometimes applied years to days such as when the forty days given to Israel to search the land became forty years in the wilderness. In Ezekiel the Lord told a son of man that He had given him a year for a day. I recognized this principle of defining terminology from modern law. 
Joachim identified the beast of Revelation and the whore as referring to pagan Rome and the papacy with which I largely agree. Some Franciscans followed Joachim and his interpretation.

Joachim's teachings were somewhat convincing, and started a school of thought in which many great minds have contributed since his day. Nicolas of Lyra(1270-1349) followed the historicist view somewhat but attempted to restore a "literal" reading of the scriptural texts. He believed the literal sense of scripture was foundational for all interpretation and must precede any allegorical, mystical or other expositions. He made it clear that he made his insights subject to Church teaching: "I protest that I do not intend to assert or determine anything that has not been manifestly determined by Sacred Scripture or by the authority of the Church.... Wherefore I submit all I have said or shall say to the correction of Holy Mother Church and of all learned men....(Postillae) One of the great contributions of Nicolas was to write a commentary of the entire Bible.
Another early disciple of the views of Joachim was a man known as Peter Waldo (1140-1202), who ended up being the head of the Waldensian movement by founding the Poor Men of Lyons. Waldo was a wealthy merchant who gave away all his property. With Waldo we see the first glimmer of the Reformation as he was the first to call the Roman pontiff "antichrist." The Church first reacted  to Waldo's teaching by excommunicating them in 1184 at the Synod of Verona, under the auspices of Pope Lucius III. Three decades later in 1211 more than 80 Waldensians were burned as heretics at Strasbourg, which launched several centuries of persecution that nearly destroyed the movement.[Ellwood, R.S.; Alles, G.D. (2007). "Waldensians". The Encyclopedia of World Religions. New York, NY: Facts on File. p. 471] At the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 Pontiff Innocent III went even further, and denounced the Waldensians as heretics.[Catholic Encyclopedia: 'Waldenses'". Newadvent.org. 1 October 1912]. In 1487 Innocent VIII issued a bull for the extermination of the Vaudois or Waldensians. The archdeacon of Cremona, Alberto de' Capitanei, responded to the bull by organizing a crusade to fulfill the extermination order and launched an offensive in the provinces of Dauphinי and Piedmont. After the crusade had devastated the area and many of the Vaudois had fled, Charles I, Duke of Savoy, stepped in to save his territories from further turmoil and promised the Vaudois peace.[CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Bl. Angelo Carletti di Chivasso]

In a parallel some several hundred years later governor Boggs of Missouri issued an extermination order against "the Mormons," which in turn resulted in the Haun's Mill Massacre in which most of the men in that small community and a young boy were shot to death. Tellingly, Joseph Smith, Jr indicated in the Joseph Smith Translation that the 1260 years of Revelation 12 referred to 1260 years.
The Waldensians essentially joined up with the early Protestants, and suffered two more major massacres. On January 1, 1545 the French king, Francis I, issued the "Arrךt de Mיrindol", and assembled an army against the Waldensians of Provence which led to the 1545 massacres of hundreds to thousands, depending on the estimates, and several villages were devastated.[Knecht, R. J. (1984). Francis I. Cambridge University Press. p. 405] Although French King Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes in 1598, which granted the Waldensian church some rights and freedoms, persecution rose again in the 17th century when the Duke of Savoy in 1655 tried to exterminate the Waldensians by giving them twenty days to return to the upper valleys of their homeland, or to attend Mass. When most chose to leave to their upper valleys, the Duke later sent troops with commands that the local people house them. This however was a ruse and on 24 April 1655, at 4 a.m, began what became known as the Piedmont Easter in which the Duke's forces are reported to have unleashed an unprovoked campaign of looting, rape, torture, and murder.
 
Dr. Henry Grattan Guinness, D.D., F.R.A.S. (1835-1910), “The seventy weeks of Daniel, or 490 days to the Messiah, were fulfilled as 490 years; that is, they were fulfilled on the year-day scale. On this scale the forty-two months, or 1,260 days, are 1,260 years. We ask then, Has the Papacy endured this period? An examination of the facts of history will show that it has.”..: “the notable decree of the emperor Justinian [525-565 A.D.] constituting the Bishop of Rome as the head of all Churches [in Western Europe].” (H. Grattan Guinness, Romanism and the Reformation, 84. Dr. Henry Grattan Guinness has often been called “England’s Greatest Teacher of Prophecy.” Founder of the East London Institute for Home and Foreign Missions (1872), Dr. Guinness was considered to be one of the three greatest preachers of his day, right along with Dwight L. Moody and Charles Haddon Spurgeon) 
 

I do not share the view of many early Protestants which called the papacy anti-Christ, however I seem to depart from expressed views of my Church about the fulfillment of these prophecies, and offer the above as my own little "historiography" concerning the period of the apostasy. 

Wow, that was very impressive. More importantly I am glad you didn't mention the Anabaptists because they were never part of the apostasy because they never apostatized!  Actually Anna Baptist was the sister of John the Baptist - she began our faith and from her forward to this very day Anabaptists have been faithful - he says TIC - Tongue in Cheek. Seriously that was a great response. The historiography I was talking about was that of the Mormon writings, speeches, sermons, about the Great Apostasy. What is the record of the Mormon teachings about this very important doctrine? I hope this book I mentioned tells us the whole chronology of LDS teachings.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, Navidad said:

I have been increasingly interested in studying the LDS concept of an apostasy - sometimes in the LDS literature it is called the Total Apostasy, the Great Apostasy, and/or the Universal Apostasy. I have read more and more articles, etc. from the evangelical and Catholic perspective that identify it as the most important issue between Mormons and members of other faith groups. Reading Talmage's book on the subject, I know it was important to him. That makes it pretty important. So, I started buying books and reading articles to better understand the LDS concept.  So, I have read and read books, articles and the scriptures, trying my best to gain an understanding. 

Separately from this , I received an invitation to submit a presentation for next years MHS conference in Boise. I presented this year and had a great time.  So I began casting around in the empty caverns of my mind on what I might offer up to the committee as a topic for a presentation. I assumed it would be something about the Mexican Colonies. That is an area of LDS history that I know best. Then as I kept reading about the apostasy I began to think - might there be a need for a presentation on the historiography of the Great Apostasy? ........................

The most important article on the apostasy by a Mormon scholar was by Hugh Nibley, "The Passing of the Primitive Church: Forty Variations on an Unpopular Theme," Church History, 30/2 (June 1961):131-154 = Collected Works of Hugh Nibley IV:168-208 (FARMS/Deseret, 1987), online at http://twochurchesonly.com/volume-1/supmat/02/nibley/nibley_the_passing_of_the_primitive_church_-_forty_variations_on_an_unpopular_theme.pdf .

 This was controversial, and the following comments are apropos:

Professor Hans J. Hillerbrand wrote a letter protesting Nibley’s thesis because, among other reasons, of the possibility that, if widely accepted, it would logically preclude his continuing to teach what he understood to be “Church history.” See Hillerbrand, “The Passing of the Church: Two Comments on a Strange Theme,” Church History 30/3 (December 1961):481-482; and a response to Hillerbrand by Robert M. Grant, “The Passing of the Church: Comments on Two Comments on a Strange Theme,” Church History 30/3 (December 1961):482-483. William A. Clebsch, in his “History and Salvation: An Essay in Distinctions,” published in a collection of essays entitled The Study of Religion in Colleges and Universities, edited by Paul Ramsey and John F. Wilson (Princeton University Press, 1970):40-72, commented on Nibley’s arguments for the apostasy in “The Passing of the Church” as follows: During the early 1960’s there arose in the pages of Church History a brief but in retrospect fascinating argument, which I will trace briefly. The argument not only revolved around the question of the continuity of the Christian church but also involved a more fundamental question about the very survival of the church through its early history. On the basis of his study of patristic writings, Hugh Nibley scored all church historians since Eusebius for describing rather than questioning the survival of the church through the early centuries. That Nibley took a Mormon’s viewpoint on the nascent Christian movement does not make any easier the defense of its identity and continuity against his attack.

I'll look forward to your MHA presentation next year in Boise.

[clarkgoble]

Fundamentally I think Nibley's perspective was that the key aspect of the apostasy was the church fleeing to the wilderness. To him this was key things not being passed along including priesthood keys. I'm pretty convinced by Nibley on this point. I think there's pretty abundant evidence that there was something akin to what we'd call the endowment early on. You look at gnostic or semi-gnostic texts like the Gospel of Philip or 1 & 2 Jeu and it's hard not to be struck by how close they are. 

I think Mormons tend to emphasize the Church falling away through things like the Trinity but I tend to favor Nibley's interpretation much more. This also lines up with how I read Rev 12 which was a prophecy of the apostasy as I read it. (Although I'll fully confess I'm not quite sure what to make of the JST of those verses)

Edited September 5, 2017 by clarkgoble

[hagoth7]

16 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

...Although I'll fully confess I'm not quite sure what to make of the JST of those verses)

Since prophetic timelines were mentioned earlier in this thread. In response to the reference to Joseph and what to make of it:

1260 days/years = 1844 (per Muslim calendar - ask Bahai's)

2300 days/years of Daniel 8 (which also end in 1844 - ask Seventh Day Adventists)

 

1844 = Joseph & Hyrum's martyrdom. Two witnesses.

 

Their murder (by contemporaries) and rejection (by Christianity) is very relevant to the message of widespread apostasy.

[Robert F. Smith]

43 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Fundamentally I think Nibley's perspective was that the key aspect of the apostasy was the church fleeing to the wilderness. To him this was key things not being passed along including priesthood keys. I'm pretty convinced by Nibley on this point. I think there's pretty abundant evidence that there was something akin to what we'd call the endowment early on. You look at gnostic or semi-gnostic texts like the Gospel of Philip or 1 & 2 Jeu and it's hard not to be struck by how close they are. 

I think Mormons tend to emphasize the Church falling away through things like the Trinity but I tend to favor Nibley's interpretation much more. This also lines up with how I read Rev 12 which was a prophecy of the apostasy as I read it. (Although I'll fully confess I'm not quite sure what to make of the JST of those verses)

An excellent resource (the best resource) on the Forty-Day literature is to be found at BYU, http://fortydayministry.com/ , covering themes such as:

1.  Disciples Worried

2.  Apostolic Authority and Duties over the Church

3.  Infallible Proofs of the Resurrection

4.  Missionary Commission, Service, and Rejection

5.  Future Suffering and Death/Martyrdom of Apostles

6.  Prophecies about Terrible Things to Happen to those who Killed Jesus

7.  Apostasy, Cosmoplanes Usurps Authority, Sheep Turn to Wolves

8.  Alterations in Ritual Foreseen

9.  Second Coming in the Distance

10. Secrecy of Sacred Knowledge

11. Purification, Washing, and Anointing

12. Sacred Vestments

13. True Nature of God revealed

14. Pre-mortal Existence and War in Heaven Explained

15. Role of Adam and Eve Discussed

16. Creation of Man

17. Investiture or Endowment with Power

18. Prayer, including Prayer Circle

19. Marriage

20. Descent to Underworld to Overcome Death and Hell and Proclaim the Gospel to the  Dead

21. Heavenly Ascent

22. Apotheosis/Exaltation

23. Mimesis

24. Final Apostasy or Dissolution of the Church

[Robert F. Smith]

54 minutes ago, hagoth7 said:

Since prophetic timelines were mentioned earlier in this thread. In response to the reference to Joseph and what to make of it:

1260 days/years = 1844 (per Muslim calendar - ask Bahai's)

2300 days/years of Daniel 8 (which also end in 1844 - ask Seventh Day Adventists)

1844 = Joseph & Hyrum's martyrdom. Two witnesses.

Their murder (by contemporaries) and rejection (by Christianity) is very relevant to the message of widespread apostasy.

Yes, there appear to be some amazing synchronisms in Mormon and Jewish history.  Lenet Read pointed to one in her “The Golden Plates and the Feast of Trumpets,” Ensign Jan 2000, online at https://www.lds.org/ensign/2000/01/the-golden-plates-and-the-feast-of-trumpets?lang=eng .

Just last Sunday the Sunday School lesson was on D&C 136.  What most people don't know is that the first two companies (the main bodies, not the vanguard company) in the Mormon Exodus arrived in Oct 1847 and Autumn 1848, both during the Jewish Jubilee year from Sept 11, 1847 to Sept 28, 1848.  In addition, Pres Young became President of the Church, and the Miracle of the Crickets and Seagulls took place in that same Jubilee year.  This is typical of Mormon history.  God seems to consult his calendar.

[Nevo]

8 hours ago, Navidad said:

Then as I kept reading about the apostasy I began to think - might there be a need for a presentation on the historiography of the Great Apostasy? In other words, what is the LDS (I don't care about non-LDS sources) chronological sequence of writings, beliefs, etc. about the apostasy? It seems to have changed, modified, been refined, matured - you pick a word, over time. Then I hesitated, could I as a non-Mormon write a historiography of the Great Apostasy and present it? I decided yes I could. There have been any number of non-LDS speakers at MHA, some with great regularity. Some of them have won the highest prizes. 

Ok.  so now I am thinking about it seriously, so I begin to look around to see if there indeed already exists a historiography of the apostasy? If so, i need to move back to the colonies. No value in doing something that has already been done. So I begin searching and lo and behold I find a fairly new book published by Oxford Press entitled Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy, a series of articles edited by Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young.  The article titles sound very interesting. I don't know any of the authors. Reading the descriptors it seems to be something done by "faithful" Mormons. The reviews were five stars with a solo one star. Sometimes reviews say more about the reviewer than the book! 

Ok...After all that introduction do any of you know this book? Do you recommend it and the authors? Have any of you read it? I have limited funds and it is a bit expensive. I trust your collective judgment and would value your opinions on the book. Does it represent the historiography of the apostasy for which I have been looking?  Is there something else you think is better? I have Morrison's and Richard's books already. Thanks so much.

It seems to me that if you want to present a historiography of the Great Apostasy narrative in Mormonism that you are going to need to read the Standing Apart anthology, and many more books, articles, pamphlets, and talks besides. That you're asking members of an Internet message board for advice on whether or not to read Standing Apart—an obvious starting point for such a study—makes me wonder how serious you are about this. Standing Apart is readily available in academic libraries and through inter-library loan and the full text is included in Oxford Scholarship Online, which many (most?) post-secondary institutions have access to. That will be one of the easier sources to track down.

Here's an excerpt from Eric Dursteler's chapter:

Quote

Given the importance of the “Great Apostasy” in Mormonism, the somewhat sparse attention it has received at the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first from the pulpit and in official publications is striking.⁵ During Mormonism’s first century, discussions of apostasy were a much greater part of the faith’s dialogue. Apostasy, of course, figured centrally in the mission and teachings of Joseph Smith, particularly in his accounts of the First Vision, in which he was told that Christ’s church had been lost from the earth and that the existing sects “were all wrong;…[and] all their creeds were an abomination” (JS-History 1:19).⁶ These early narratives present the new faith as a light bursting through the spiritual darkness that had reigned for almost two thousand years, a metaphor to which subsequent LDS writers repeatedly returned.⁷ This theme resonated strongly among the first generation of converts and gradually evolved in the writings and discourses of many leaders. Brigham Young, for example, reflected on apostasy, as did Parley and Orson Pratt in several important treatises.⁸ The most extensive early treatment was Benjamin Winchester’s A History of the Priesthood from the Beginning of the World to the Present Time (1843), Mormonism’s first attempt at a systematic historical theology.⁹

Building upon these earlier works, the last years of the nineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth saw the publication of a number of more systematic treatments of the apostasy.¹⁰ The most consequential were those of Roberts, Talmage, and Joseph Fielding Smith, three of Mormonism’s most (p.25) influential doctrinal and theological thinkers. These writers all attempted to historicize the nature and progress of the “Great Apostasy” in specific detail. In turn, they influenced a flurry of works in the mid–twentieth century on the historical apostasy, which were developed for use as manuals in church instruction. In 1944, the apostasy was the subject of an Institute of Religion manual used for instructing college-age youth, in 1950 a Sunday School manual used for teaching weekly adult scripture classes focused on the topic, and in 1952–55 and 1960 Melchizedek priesthood manuals used for the instruction of adult men revisited it yet again.¹¹ The 1950s thus saw the institutional validation and recognition of a historical view in which the apostasy directed the whole of Western history toward the culminating event of Joseph Smith’s 1830 restoration of Christ’s original church.

The quantity and scope of the works produced from 1900 to 1960, however, were followed by a decline in attention to the apostasy among Mormon thinkers. The causes are not entirely clear, but they may have been linked in part to the expanding LDS missionary effort and ongoing efforts to fit more squarely within mainstream American culture and society, which led to attempts to find common ground with former religious antagonists.¹² As part of this trend, the missionary lessons, which were recast in the early 1970s, shifted the apostasy from its privileged position immediately following the recounting of the Joseph Smith story to a less conspicuous place in one of the later lessons. The general trend toward emphasizing the teaching of commandments over doctrinal exegesis certainly played a role in this declining focus as well.¹³ As part of this process, the strident anti-Catholic undercurrent that informed many early Mormon views on apostasy was tempered and even disavowed.¹⁴ This shift is most evident in the controversy over the identification of “the church of the devil” and “the great and abominable church” of 1 Nephi 13–14 with Roman Catholicism in the first edition (1958) of Bruce R. McConkie’s Mormon Doctrine, which was subsequently expurgated from the second edition (1966).¹⁵ Exceptions to this general pattern of ignoring the apostasy occasionally appeared, such as Milton V. Backman’s American Religions and the Rise of Mormonism and McConkie’s A New Witness for the Articles of Faith.¹⁶

While it is often rich and suggestive, a perusal of the Mormon literature of apostasy reveals a marked homogeneity, despite spanning almost 150 years. A comparison of the reflections of Orson Pratt in 1857, of James Talmage in 1909, and of Bruce R. McConkie in 1985, for example, shows striking similarities among these generations of LDS thinkers. Some of these resemblances stem from their dependence on the same sources and their tendency to self-reference. These characteristics are especially true of the foundational doctrinal works of Roberts, Talmage, and Smith, in which LDS theories of apostasy were codified in the first decades of the twentieth century as part of an extremely fertile theological era of definition and reconciliation with secular learning, described by Leonard Arrington as “the stage of creative adaptation.”¹⁷

(p.26) These three scholarly leaders of the second generation of Mormonism were most responsible for systematizing LDS theology. All wrote widely and perceptively on many of the doctrinal issues of the day.¹⁸ While Smith and Roberts disagreed fiercely about evolution and other issues, Talmage often staked out a middle ground between them. In marked contrast, their historical theologies were virtually identical, particularly in how each understood the place of the Middle Ages and Renaissance in the apostasy and their relationship to the LDS Restoration.¹⁹ Church leadership and membership alike generally embraced the “priestly narratives” of Roberts, Talmage, and Smith as authoritative in their day,²⁰ and they have provided the foundation for all subsequent discussions of the apostasy. In many ways, their views continue to inform Mormon thinking on the apostasy even to this day.

The first comprehensive treatment of the apostasy was that of B. H. Roberts, whom Sterling McMurrin called “the intellectual leader of the Mormon people in the era of Mormonism’s finest intellectual attainment.”²¹ In his Outlines of Ecclesiastical History, first published in 1893 as a Seventies quorum manual, with five subsequent editions over the next thirty years, Roberts developed a wide-ranging and all-encompassing view of the apostasy. He restated and amplified these views—without substantially altering them—in a 1929 series of radio lectures published as The Falling Away.²² At its core, Roberts’s position centered on the view of the apostasy, common since Joseph Smith’s time, as primarily the loss of priesthood authority—that is, the loss of divine sanction to act in the name of God in conducting such saving ordinances as the sacrament, baptism, and temple sealing—and the end of continuing revelation. In these foundational works, however, Roberts also attempted to historicize the process of apostasy. He focused particularly on historical and doctrinal developments in late antiquity, changes in ordinances, the infiltration of pagan philosophies, the rise of the Mass, and variations from the original organization of Christ’s church. For Roberts, the first three Christian centuries were the key period in the “Great Apostasy.” By the time of Constantine, the church that Christ had organized had ceased to exist. More than any other Mormon scholar’s, Roberts’s ideas and approach effectively set the parameters and pattern for all subsequent discussions of apostasy; indeed his oeuvre provided the basic outlines of “a Mormon theology of history, nearly Augustinian in its vision.”²³

While Roberts’s chief emphasis was on the first Christian centuries, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance were important transitional moments in the lockstep (p.27) evolution from apostasy to Reformation to Restoration. He concentrates on what he considered evidence of both the omnipotence and the depravity of the papacy and the “state of morals” within the church.²⁴ Roberts also identifies a number of medieval events that he sees as preparing the ground for the all-important Reformation. He traces “the progress of popular liberty” to the rise of a “commercial class” around 1200, which financed the crusading movement in return for grants of “political privileges” from cash-strapped monarchs. This development, according to Roberts, led to the breakdown of the “Feudal Land Tenure System” and the ultimate weakening of the ecclesiastical stranglehold on European society. Despite these seemingly positive developments, however, Roberts’s Middle Ages are painted overwhelmingly in monochromatic tones. These are the Dark Ages, a backward bookmark between New Testament Christianity and the beginnings of its revival with Martin Luther. This was, in his words, an “Age of Darkness, ” the “midnight period of our world.” He exclaims: “A period of fifteen hundred years! In which a famine for the word of God existed; a period when men wandered from sea to sea, and ran to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and found it not. How pitiful the picture of it!”²⁵

(p.28) In Roberts’s theological chronology, this fifteen-hundred-year “Age of Darkness” was not only spiritual but also intellectual, blighting all aspects of European life: “The intellectual stupor of Europe had been as profound as spiritual darkness had been dense.” Into this spiritual and intellectual obscurity, however, a ray of light began to break through with the “Revival of Learning” in the latter part of the fifteenth century, which set the stage for Luther’s theses and eventually Joseph Smith’s vision. Roberts points to significant innovations in this awakening: the invention of gunpowder, the compass, paper, and printing; the discovery of the Cape of Good Hope route to India; Columbus’s discovery of the Americas; innovations in art; and “a greater knowledge of antiquity” spread by Greek refugees fleeing the fall of Constantinople after 1453.²⁶ These are the key elements in Roberts’s binary view of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

Although Roberts effectively set the parameters of what came to be the standard view of apostasy within the Mormon community, the most noted work on the topic is James Talmage’s slender volume, The Great Apostasy, written in 1909 before his call as an apostle, for use in LDS youth Mutual Improvement Associations.²⁷ Though in many ways quite derivative of Roberts, Talmage’s is the book still in circulation and still regularly referenced today. Indeed, it often still appears on approved reading lists for Mormon missionaries.²⁸ Like Roberts, Talmage emphasizes the nexus of apostasy and loss of priesthood authority; he devotes the bulk of his historical exegesis to the initial stages of apostasy in the early Christian church, emphasizing both external and internal causes. In his final chapter, “Results of the Apostasy.—Its Sequel, ” however, he briefly surveys medieval resistance to the church in Rome as a bridge to a discussion of the Reformation. When Talmage describes revolts against the “tyranny…[of] the thoroughly apostate and utterly corrupt…Church of Rome, ” he uses language reminiscent of Roberts’s in describing the Middle Ages: “The awakening of intellectual activity…began in the latter part of the fourteenth century. The period from the tenth century onward to the time of the awakening has come to be known as the dark ages—characterized by stagnation in the progress of the useful arts and sciences as well as of fine arts and letters, and by a general condition of illiteracy and ignorance among the masses.” This era of darkness was enlightened by “the revival of learning, ” which opened “the struggle for freedom from church tyranny.”²⁹

In his widely respected Jesus the Christ (1915), Talmage makes even more explicit the relationship of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance:

Under the tyrannous repression…[of] the Roman church, civilization was retarded and for centuries was practically halted in its course. The period of retrogression is known in history as the Dark Ages. The fifteenth century witnessed the movement known as the Renaissance or Revival of Learning; there was a general and significantly rapid awakening among men, and a (p.29) determined effort to shake off the stupor of indolence and ignorance was manifest throughout the civilized world….it was a development predetermined in the Mind of God to illumine the benighted minds of men in preparation for the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ.³⁰

The lockstep linkage of the three R’s—Renaissance, Reformation, and Restoration—at the center of Roberts’s depiction of the “Great Apostasy” is abundantly evident in Talmage’s writings.

The influential writings of Roberts and Talmage culminated in the work of Joseph Fielding Smith, the third prominent Mormon theologian of the apostasy in the early twentieth century. Son of President Joseph F. Smith, grandson of Hyrum Smith, he was called by his father as an apostle in 1910 at age thirty-three and in 1970 was ordained the tenth president of the LDS church. Called a “soldier of truth” by his biographer-grandson, Smith was also one of the most important doctrinal thinkers and probably the most influential conservative force of Mormonism’s second century. He published more books and articles than any other Mormon president, and President Heber J. Grant considered him “the best posted man on the scriptures of the general authorities.”³¹ In addition, Smith significantly shaped the historical consciousness of the church through his work at the church (p.30) historian’s office. He was hired in 1901 when he returned from his mission and called as assistant church historian in 1906 and then church historian in 1921, a position he held until 1970, when he became the president of the church.

Smith’s views on the apostasy first appeared in his 1922 Essentials in Church History. His introduction includes a general overview of the “Falling Away, ” which serves simply to set the stage for the real focus of his treatise, the restoration of all things by Joseph Smith and the subsequent history of the church he founded.³² A decade later, Smith returned to the apostasy and published a much more extensive study, The Progress of Man (1936). This rich work was commissioned by the board of the Genealogical Society of Utah, which because of the “grave conditions” of the day “thought it would be timely to have a course of study giving a brief outline of man’s history on the earth.” Smith’s text was no ordinary universal history, however; it was “an outline history of man interpreted in the light of revelation. It tells of…[the] everlasting conflict between good and evil, light and darkness, freedom and oppression, [and]…the final and destined triumph of truth.”³³ Smith’s striking litany of binary oppositions foreshadows his treatment of the medieval apostasy.

Smith devotes more attention than Roberts or Talmage to the Middle Ages and the Renaissance as they relate to the Mormon understanding of the apostasy. He links the Renaissance’s revival of learning to Europe’s increasing encounters (p.31) with Islam and the rest of the world through the Crusades, Mediterranean trade, and the travels of Marco Polo. Despite Smith’s greater detail, however, he does not depart significantly from the path outlined by Roberts and Talmage. Like both of them, he finds divine technological intervention in the invention of the compass, paper, gunpowder, and printing, though he develops each example in greater detail. The Middle Ages for Smith, as for Roberts and Talmage, are the “Dark Ages[, which]…commenced with the fall of Rome and continued during the greater part of the next thousand years.” It was an era characterized by a “condition of mental and spiritual stupor and stupidity.”³⁴

As you can see, there's quite a bit of historiographical content in Dursteler's article, but it's not exhaustive. He focuses mostly on Roberts, Talmage, and Smith.

If you want to survey the history of the idea of the Great Apostasy in LDS thought, you will need to start with Joseph Smith's sermons and writings, then review the statements of subsequent leaders in the Journal of Discourses, Conference Report, The Improvement Era, and the Ensign, then work your way through B.H. Roberts, James E. Talmage, Joseph Fielding Smith, LeGrand Richards, Hugh Nibley, T. Edgar Lyon, Bruce R. McConkie, and into the present day with such writers as Stephen E. Robinson, Kent P. Jackson, Alexander Morrison, Tad R. Callister, and Terryl Givens. You will also want to look at nineteenth-century pamphlet literature and church manuals over the years (e.g., Daryl Chase, Christianity through the Centuries [Salt Lake City: Department of Education of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1944]; James L. Barker, The Divine Church: Down through Change, Apostasy Therefrom and Restoration, 3 vols. [Salt Lake City: Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1952–54]; Roy A. Welker, The Divine Church Restored [Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1955], Gospel Principles [1978, 2009], etc.). So, it's a significant undertaking that will likely require research trips to Utah.

Good luck!

Edited September 5, 2017 by Nevo

[Darren10]

6 hours ago, Navidad said:

Wow, that was very impressive. More importantly I am glad you didn't mention the Anabaptists because they were never part of the apostasy because they never apostatized!  Actually Anna Baptist was the sister of John the Baptist - she began our faith and from her forward to this very day Anabaptists have been faithful - he says TIC - Tongue in Cheek. Seriously that was a great response. The historiography I was talking about was that of the Mormon writings, speeches, sermons, about the Great Apostasy. What is the record of the Mormon teachings about this very important doctrine? I hope this book I mentioned tells us the whole chronology of LDS teachings.

"I am glad you didn't mention the Anabaptists because they were never part of the apostasy because they never apostatized!"

LOL!

[Darren10]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, there appear to be some amazing synchronisms in Mormon and Jewish history.  Lenet Read pointed to one in her “The Golden Plates and the Feast of Trumpets,” Ensign Jan 2000, online at https://www.lds.org/ensign/2000/01/the-golden-plates-and-the-feast-of-trumpets?lang=eng .

Just last Sunday the Sunday School lesson was on D&C 136.  What most people don't know is that the first two companies (the main bodies, not the vanguard company) in the Mormon Exodus arrived in Oct 1847 and Autumn 1848, both during the Jewish Jubilee year from Sept 11, 1847 to Sept 28, 1848.  In addition, Pres Young became President of the Church, and the Miracle of the Crickets and Seagulls took place in that same Jubilee year.  This is typical of Mormon history.  God seems to consult his calendar.

I knew the Franklin Planner was divine!

[Alan]

I understand the MHS covers the whole of the Mormon movement, not just the Utah version.

It might be worth looking into the understanding of the apostasy held by the Community of Christ, the Restoration Branches, The Remnant Church (RLDS), the Church of Christ (Temple Lot), the Strangites etc. They all have a different take on the issue.

For me, the scriptures describe the church as "being in the wilderness" prior to the restoration. Maybe it's just the way we use and understand words, but the church being in the wilderness does not mean the same thing and non-existent.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Alan
Grammar

[hagoth7]

2 hours ago, Darren10 said:

"I am glad you didn't mention the Anabaptists because they were never part of the apostasy because they never apostatized!"

LOL!

Nothing funny about it.

The Anabaptists were the genuine epicenter of the reformation.

Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and most of the rest were wannabes.

Seriously. Tragic even.

[hagoth7]

10 minutes ago, Alan said:

It might be worth looking into the understanding of the apostasy held by the Community of Christ, the Restoration Branches, The Remnant Church (RLDS), the Church of Christ (Temple Lot), the Strangites etc. They all have a different take on the issue.

Again, if the Adventist view isn't included, you may be missing the epicenter of the message of Revelation. They unintentionally tie in the martyrdom with the apostasy, and were close contemporaries with the Restoration movement.

10 minutes ago, Alan said:

For me, the scriptures describe the church as "being in the wilderness" prior to the restoration. Maybe it's just the way we use and understand words, but the church being in the wilderness does not mean the same thing and non-existent.

The timeline for the two witnesses in the previous chapter is more relevant...the two who are slain after 1260 days/years. I can explain elsewhere how that chapter aligns with the martyrs under the altar from Revelation 6 (compare D&C 135).

 

The question relevant to the earlier apostasy question then becomes, did the church enter the wilderness *for* the duration of 1260 days/years, or merely *because of* the events at the end of 1260 days/years. (Not a Greek master here.) If it was *because of* (for) the 1260 days/years, it would align with the church being driven into the wilderness (literally) after and because of 1844.

 

Thoughts?

 

[Alan]

7 hours ago, hagoth7 said:

Since prophetic timelines were mentioned earlier in this thread. In response to the reference to Joseph and what to make of it:

1260 days/years = 1844 (per Muslim calendar - ask Bahai's)

2300 days/years of Daniel 8 (which also end in 1844 - ask Seventh Day Adventists)

 

1844 = Joseph & Hyrum's martyrdom. Two witnesses.

 

Their murder (by contemporaries) and rejection (by Christianity) is very relevant to the message of widespread apostasy.

Also, Daniel's 1260 "day" prophecy places the apostasy as being completed in 570AD (rise of Gregory the Great, birth of Muhammad). 570 plus 1260 years brings us to 1830.

[hagoth7]

24 minutes ago, Alan said:

Also, Daniel's 1260 "day" prophecy places the apostasy as being completed in 570AD (rise of Gregory the Great, birth of Muhammad). 570 plus 1260 years brings us to 1830.

And another reckoning uses it to suggest the timeline terminates in 1776.

And another reckoning uses it to suggest it terminates with the ousting of the papacy from its power a wee bit later.

That makes 4 competing termination (or beginning) points (1776, 17**, 1830, 1844), without even having to look hard.

(There are several such timelines in scripture...and I'm not insisting that they all point to the same terminus.)

So the real questions are, where is Waldo, and what did God intend/appoint as the epicenter/indicator/(end or beginning) of apostasy?

 

 

Edited September 5, 2017 by hagoth7

[hagoth7]

14 hours ago, Navidad said:

I have been increasingly interested in studying the LDS concept of an apostasy - sometimes .... 

Why?

What's the draw/objective?

[clarkgoble]

10 hours ago, hagoth7 said:

Since prophetic timelines were mentioned earlier in this thread. In response to the reference to Joseph and what to make of it:

1260 days/years = 1844 (per Muslim calendar - ask Bahai's)

2300 days/years of Daniel 8 (which also end in 1844 - ask Seventh Day Adventists)

1844 = Joseph & Hyrum's martyrdom. Two witnesses.

Their murder (by contemporaries) and rejection (by Christianity) is very relevant to the message of widespread apostasy.

I'll confess I'm pretty skeptical of most prophet dating schemes.  Most seem pretty ad hoc and largely working backwards. Here the issues are even more pronounced. First though the JST changes the 1260 days to years. That's what I meant by not being sure how to take the JST since 1260 years doesn't seem to point to anything.

For your numbers though, why on earth would the martyrdom be significant rather than dates like the starting the Church in 1830 or the restoration of the priesthood in 1829? Even if you point to the higher ordinances things get a bit blurry since we have partial endowments in 1831 and 1836. The main endowment is 1842. From a prophetic standpoint of apostasy, there's really nothing significant about 1844 IMO. (Plus I don't quite get the 1260 days/year as reaching 1844 just from a math perspective) 

Even if you tie the martyrdom to the two prophets of Revelation (which I don't think works for various reasons) I don't see how that ties to this date. Most significantly D&C 77 says they "prophesy to the Jews after they are gathered and have built the city of Jerusalem." So it couldn't be Joseph.

Also Joseph's beliefs were that Daniel and Revelation were quite different and referred to very different things.

Edited September 5, 2017 by clarkgoble

[stemelbow]

7 hours ago, Nevo said:

It seems to me that if you want to present a historiography of the Great Apostasy narrative in Mormonism that you are going to need to read the Standing Apart anthology, and many more books, articles, pamphlets, and talks besides. That you're asking members of an Internet message board for advice on whether or not to read Standing Apart—an obvious starting point for such a study—makes me wonder how serious you are about this. Standing Apart is readily available in academic libraries and through inter-library loan and the full text is included in Oxford Scholarship Online, which many (most?) post-secondary institutions have access to. That will be one of the easier sources to track down.

Here's an excerpt from Eric Dursteler's chapter:

As you can see, there's quite a bit of historiographical content in Dursteler's article, but it's not exhaustive. He focuses mostly on Roberts, Talmage, and Smith.

If you want to survey the history of the idea of the Great Apostasy in LDS thought, you will need to start with Joseph Smith's sermons and writings, then review the statements of subsequent leaders in the Journal of Discourses, Conference Report, The Improvement Era, and the Ensign, then work your way through B.H. Roberts, James E. Talmage, Joseph Fielding Smith, LeGrand Richards, Hugh Nibley, T. Edgar Lyon, Bruce R. McConkie, and into the present day with such writers as Stephen E. Robinson, Kent P. Jackson, Alexander Morrison, Tad R. Callister, and Terryl Givens. You will also want to look at nineteenth-century pamphlet literature and church manuals over the years (e.g., Daryl Chase, Christianity through the Centuries [Salt Lake City: Department of Education of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1944]; James L. Barker, The Divine Church: Down through Change, Apostasy Therefrom and Restoration, 3 vols. [Salt Lake City: Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1952–54]; Roy A. Welker, The Divine Church Restored [Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1955], Gospel Principles [1978, 2009], etc.). So, it's a significant undertaking that will likely require research trips to Utah.

Good luck!

I'd say, have fun. Sounds exhausting. 

[Navidad]

8 hours ago, Nevo said:

It seems to me that if you want to present a historiography of the Great Apostasy narrative in Mormonism that you are going to need to read the Standing Apart anthology, and many more books, articles, pamphlets, and talks besides. That you're asking members of an Internet message board for advice on whether or not to read Standing Apart—an obvious starting point for such a study—makes me wonder how serious you are about this. Standing Apart is readily available in academic libraries and through inter-library loan and the full text is included in Oxford Scholarship Online, which many (most?) post-secondary institutions have access to. That will be one of the easier sources to track down.

Here's an excerpt from Eric Dursteler's chapter:

As you can see, there's quite a bit of historiographical content in Dursteler's article, but it's not exhaustive. He focuses mostly on Roberts, Talmage, and Smith.

If you want to survey the history of the idea of the Great Apostasy in LDS thought, you will need to start with Joseph Smith's sermons and writings, then review the statements of subsequent leaders in the Journal of Discourses, Conference Report, The Improvement Era, and the Ensign, then work your way through B.H. Roberts, James E. Talmage, Joseph Fielding Smith, LeGrand Richards, Hugh Nibley, T. Edgar Lyon, Bruce R. McConkie, and into the present day with such writers as Stephen E. Robinson, Kent P. Jackson, Alexander Morrison, Tad R. Callister, and Terryl Givens. You will also want to look at nineteenth-century pamphlet literature and church manuals over the years (e.g., Daryl Chase, Christianity through the Centuries [Salt Lake City: Department of Education of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1944]; James L. Barker, The Divine Church: Down through Change, Apostasy Therefrom and Restoration, 3 vols. [Salt Lake City: Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1952–54]; Roy A. Welker, The Divine Church Restored [Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1955], Gospel Principles [1978, 2009], etc.). So, it's a significant undertaking that will likely require research trips to Utah.

Good luck!

Good morning: Thanks for your excellent thoughts. I have only been thinking about this (a presentation) the last two days. So, it is not that I am not serious, it is that it is a completely new idea in my mind. I realize the breadth and scope of such an idea. I also know I have only 15-20 minutes for a presentation at MHA, so I most likely cannot even begin to put together a cogent presentation on such a broad topic. I also live in Chihuahua so I don't have access to archives. I would have to make trips north which I must do anyway for other of my projects. With a Mexican ISP I am also not allowed access to a number of online sites. I also have limited funds, so all in all, yes I did seek the advice of trusted people I have come to respect about one particular book with which I was not familiar. It is also difficult to access some information without a university affiliation. Thanks again for your great reply. I appreciate very much the time it took. 

[Navidad]

1 hour ago, hagoth7 said:

Why?

What's the draw/objective?

The draw/objective is my thirst for knowledge. Nothing more. I studied a lot of church history. It is one of my "first loves" in academia. I had never heard of a "great apostasy" until I began studying LDS literature. It fits in perfectly with any study of restorationist thought. I know the history of the Anabaptists includes a self-concept since the very late 15th century as a restorationist (restorational?) group. Since reading Brook's book I am also interested in Anabaptist antecedents in Mormon thought. So tie it all together and it is a subject of great interest. 

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, Alan said:

I understand the MHS covers the whole of the Mormon movement, not just the Utah version.

It might be worth looking into the understanding of the apostasy held by the Community of Christ, the Restoration Branches, The Remnant Church (RLDS), the Church of Christ (Temple Lot), the Strangites etc. They all have a different take on the issue.

For me, the scriptures describe the church as "being in the wilderness" prior to the restoration. Maybe it's just the way we use and understand words, but the church being in the wilderness does not mean the same thing and non-existent.

Great idea. Thanks. The Church to me is made up of human beings. Human beings sin, make mistakes (overtly or covertly), and generally can be self-interested or self-motivated. Hence, the concept that the primitive church or the restored church (including Anabaptist and LDS) has had some apostasy is not surprising at all to me.  Weren't at least a statistically significant number of apostles in the first 100 years of the LDS church declared apostate, disfellowshipped, or excommunicated? I find it all very interesting. The same is true across the broad spectrum of Christianity or perhaps more broadly, any human organization.

[hagoth7]

48 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

I'll confess I'm pretty skeptical of most prophet dating schemes.  Most seem pretty ad hoc and largely working backwards. Here the issues are even more pronounced. First though the JST changes the 1260 days to years. That's what I meant by not being sure how to take the JST since 1260 years doesn't seem to point to anything.

I'll beg to differ.

1776 definitely is something.

As is 1844: the martyrdom of two messengers of God.

And the day/year principle is well founded/demonstrated by a close examination of the 70 sevens in Daniel 9. Also explicitly stated to be so in two other passages, (plus the Rev 12 JST that you cited).

48 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

For your numbers though, why on earth would the martyrdom be significant rather than dates like the starting the Church....From a prophetic standpoint of apostasy, there's really nothing significant about 1844 IMO. (Plus I don't quite get the 1260 days/year as reaching 1844 just from a math perspective)

First the math perspective. year 1260 of the Muslim calendar (AH) ends precisely in 1844 AD of our Gregorian calendar.

Second, as to why martyrdom is a more telling point of restoration and apostasy....I've addressed that point sufficiently elsewhere in this forum and in print...published ca. two decades ago. Won't impose on others to rehash it much here. It is essentially the true mark of a true disciple...love. (By this shall men know that ye are my disciples...) And no greater love...than to lay down one's life for one's friends.

And as to a high-water mark of apostasy, rejecting and killing Christ's servants/troubadours is what is repeatedly foretold as the epicenter of ripened apostasy.

48 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Even if you tie the martyrdom to the two prophets of Revelation (which I don't think works for various reasons) I don't see how that ties to this date. Most significantly D&C 77 says they "prophesy to the Jews after they are gathered and have built the city of Jerusalem." So it couldn't be Joseph.

Not with a mortal myopic view. They will prophesy to the Jews (and **are** prophesying to the Jews today).  Ezekiel continues prophesying to you...and likely to your forefathers.

Note that Joseph knew years in advance that he wouldn't live to see age 40.

And he cited a book that claimed years in advance that one 1844 timeline would terminate in June of 1844. (Joseph and Hyrum were killed that June).

And Joseph told Hyrum they would be killed if they surrendered to the bogus charges being raised against them.

Joseph knew.

48 minutes ago, clarkgoble said:

Also Joseph's beliefs were that Daniel and Revelation were quite different and referred to very different things.

Not really.

Both Daniel and Revelation foretold the restoration (Daniel 2...stone rolling forth) (and Rev 14...angel flying through the midst of heaven...). Parallel messages, simply with different imagery.

And they both foretold persecution/martyrdom as part of that.

So not surprising that both would echo the same year.

The key difference is one's imagery was depicted from earth's perspective, and the other from heaven's perspective. Same message, however. The two accounts go hand in hand.

The one illuminates the other.

 

Edited September 5, 2017 by hagoth7

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, hagoth7 said:

Nothing funny about it.

The Anabaptists were the genuine epicenter of the reformation.

Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and most of the rest were wannabes.

Seriously. Tragic even.

Well, I made an attempt at telling you all a Mennonite joke. If that was offensive I am sorry. I simply enjoy humor. I even heard Mormon jokes at MHA. I found some are identical to Mennonite jokes with just the name of the faith group changed. I do agree with your conclusion, Anabaptists were there at the forefront suffering terribly. Nothing funny about that. 

[Navidad]

3 hours ago, hagoth7 said:

And another reckoning uses it to suggest the timeline terminates in 1776.

And another reckoning uses it to suggest it terminates with the ousting of the papacy from its power a wee bit later.

That makes 4 competing termination (or beginning) points (1776, 17**, 1830, 1844), without even having to look hard.

(There are several such timelines in scripture...and I'm not insisting that they all point to the same terminus.)

So the real questions are, where is Waldo, and what did God intend/appoint as the epicenter/indicator/(end or beginning) of apostasy?

 

 

Trying to tie in numerology with hermeneutics is an age old endeavor that has rarely, if ever produced fruit. Just my humble opinion.