The Great Apostacy!

[wonbyone]

The mormon religion claims that God used joseph smith to restore His Church due to the Church being apostate for 1800 years but trying to find out from mormons when this great apostacy happened is like trying to find a needle in a hay stack. Hopefully the lds members on this forum can enlighten us as to when this great apostacy happened?

[RCNicholas]

The mormon religion claims that God used joseph smith to restore His Church due to the Church being apostate for 1800 years but trying to find out from mormons when this great apostacy happened is like trying to find a needle in a hay stack. Hopefully the lds members on this forum can enlighten us as to when this great apostacy happened?

I'm not Mormon, but from what I understand from conversations with Mormons on a forum I used to participate in, Mormons generally believe that, while the Apostasy was gradual (the Church got farther and farther away from the fullness of the truth with time), it began immediately after the death of the Apostles. They do not believe that the bishops ordained by the Apostles were ever given apostolic authority to lead the Church. Thus an Apostle, or Prophet, was needed to restore the Church...enter Joseph Smith. Moreover, this prophetic/apostolic authority is continually needed to prevent the Church from erring, thus the Mormon church continually has a Prophet leading it.

The Mormons around these parts can correct me or add things if they wish to, but hopefully that will be a good introduction to the Mormon position.

[Kelp]

If the bishops the Apostles ordained did not have proper authority (no one get on my back about Apostolic Succession or church government, I'm arguing based on Mormon logic as RCN presents it), then isn't this a serious lapse on the Apostles' part that implies that they too were apostate?

[Sparko]

at least a serious lapse of responsibility of the apostle John, who they claim never died but is still hanging around out there somewhere.

[RCNicholas]

If the bishops the Apostles ordained did not have proper authority (no one get on my back about Apostolic Succession or church government, I'm arguing based on Mormon logic as RCN presents it), then isn't this a serious lapse on the Apostles' part that implies that they too were apostate?

If I may play devil's advocate (since I asked a similar question), if I recall correctly the answer came back to the effect that the Church was being heavily persecuted and thus it was disunified, through no fault of the Apostles themselves. That's probably an oversimplification of the way a Mormon would say it, but that's the gist of it from what I recall.

[Cow Poke]

Thus an Apostle, or Prophet, was needed to restore the Church...enter Joseph Smith. Moreover, this prophetic/apostolic authority is continually needed to prevent the Church from erring, thus the Mormon church continually has a Prophet leading it.

Thanks, RCN.

As to preventing the Church from erring - that worked out really well with the "negro" issue and the "polygamy" issue.

[Kelp]

If I may play devil's advocate (since I asked a similar question), if I recall correctly the answer came back to the effect that the Church was being heavily persecuted and thus it was disunified, through no fault of the Apostles themselves. That's probably an oversimplification of the way a Mormon would say it, but that's the gist of it from what I recall.

Why didn't God then send a bunch of visions to raise up more Apostles, Paul-style, among the various disunified populations?

[RCNicholas]

Why didn't God then send a bunch of visions to raise up more Apostles, Paul-style, among the various disunified populations?

I'm going to let a Mormon answer that. It's just going to turn into a discussion on why God lets bad things happen, which I've hashed out quite enough outside the Mormon paradigm. Hopefully a Mormon joins us soon!

[Sparko]

Why didn't God then send a bunch of visions to raise up more Apostles, Paul-style, among the various disunified populations?

excellent question since that is what they claim happened with Joseph Smith. Why wait 2000 years??

Still since they claim one man fixed the church, why couldn't the immortal John do that?

[One Bad Pig]

The mormon religion claims that God used joseph smith to restore His Church due to the Church being apostate for 1800 years but trying to find out from mormons when this great apostacy happened is like trying to find a needle in a hay stack. Hopefully the lds members on this forum can enlighten us as to when this great apostacy happened?

The least you could've done when starting the thread was link to the argument jo provided.

The argument is made there that the first apostles failed - that the church became completely apostate at the time they were killed. IOW, the ones who actually learned from Jesus couldn't build the Church, but the LDS today have managed to stay faithful for over 175 years. You can't say they lack chutzpah.

[Sparko]

The least you could've done when starting the thread was link to the argument jo provided.

The argument is made there that the first apostles failed - that the church became completely apostate at the time they were killed. IOW, the ones who actually learned from Jesus couldn't build the Church, but the LDS today have managed to stay faithful for over 175 years. You can't say they lack chutzpah.

Gee if they couldn't hold the church together after the apostles died (still wondering about the immortal John though) then it's amazing the LDS church could do it when Smith died.

maybe they are apostate now too and Jesus will wait 2000 more years to send another prophet to fix the church.

[Jin-Roh]

This is very strange thread.

An LDS is going to comment eventually, right?

[Cow Poke]

This is very strange thread.

An LDS is going to comment eventually, right?

Red Rover, Red Rover
Let JO come over!

(let's see if that works)

[LDSTrue]

If the bishops the Apostles ordained did not have proper authority, then isn't this a serious lapse on the Apostles' part that implies that they too were apostate?

The Bishops the Apostles ordained had the proper authority… to be Bishops.

Bishops were to care for the flock within their respective areas as the Apostles traveled throughout the land establishing the Church. The Apostles and Seventy subsequently ordained Bishops to remain and care for the converts within their respective areas.

Neither the Seventy nor the Bishops possessed the Authority to appoint and ordain Apostles. Only Jesus has that authority and He has proven He does it personally or by the inspiration and voice of the Holy Ghost.

[LDSTrue]

at least a serious lapse of responsibility of the apostle John, who they claim never died but is still hanging around out there somewhere.

Exactly what are you attempting to fault the Apostle John for? It was never his responsibility to call and ordain Apostles.

He could not call and ordain another Apostle. If the Church was without Apostles to travel and establish the Church and ordain Bishops you should be faulting Jesus and not the Apostle John.

Jesus is the only one with that authority and He has proven He does it personally or by the inspiration and voice of the Holy Ghost. John could have participated in the calling and ordaining other Apostles once Jesus chose them as did Ananias however, John could not have initiated the call as that was Jesus' prerogative as evidenced in scripture.