Where is that pesky priesthood??? (part 2 redefinitions)
When reading the New Testament and looking for a prediction of a general or “great” apostasy, Mormons are confronted with the promises of Jesus Christ to be with the Church until the “end of the world”, (Matt 28:20) as it is rendered in the AV, or “end of the age” as it is rendered in other translations. Mr. Tvedtnes rejects Christ’ promise in a footnote, claiming that the word “aion” refers to “… a specific time period. In this case, it would refer to the dispensation of the gospel in the meridian of time.” The evangelist Matthew used “aion” 9 times in the following passages, Matt 6:13; 12:32; 13:22, 39, 40, 49; 21:19; 24:3; 28:20. A cursory reading of any or all of these passage shows that Matthew never referred to an “aion” as a dispensation of the high point of the “gospel”. When precisely does the meridian of the gospel take place? If you look at a very relevant passage where “anion” is used in much the same context Matt 24:3 you will see that the word “anion” has eschatological implications referring to the second coming.
Mormon inability to deal correctly with eschatological passages often has implications on their apostasy theology. We have seen how Mr. Tvedtnes must redefine Matt 28:20 part of the great commission to somehow limit or reduce the promise of our Lord to just the “dispensation of the gospel”. One is forced to ask when did the Gospel end and why Jesus would promise to be with us until he takes his apostles away? This redefinition of the clear intent of the passage is necessary only because a prediction of a general apostasy is missing from the works of the New Testament.
Mormon eschatology is a broad subject that I am not going to go into, they are dispensational millennialists (owing to their creation out of the Christian Second Great awakening and founding in the Burnt over District) and believe that Christ will come at the “end of this age” to rule for a literal 1,000 years. The problem for Mormons with their dispensational and apostasy theology is the need to interpret the same scripture verses through different lenses depending on the subject at hand. For instance Mr. Tvedtnes claims that Matt 24:5 shows a general apostasy predicted, while the heading of the LDS Scriptures they recognize that Matthew chapter 24 as a Chapter is referring to the “Last Days”, as does the Mormon owned BYU LDS Encyclopedia. From the Mormon eschatological view, if the prophesies of Matthew 24 occurred in the first century as is necessary for their apostasy theology, the 1,000 year millennial reign of Christ would be long over conflicting with their millennial theology. Inconsistency and direct conflict is never a good sign if a well developed theology. Unfortunately for Mormons they are forced by all of their heterodox teachings to continue with apostasy theology.
While Mr. Tvedtnes dismisses Matthew 28:20 in a footnote he fails to address the gift of the Holy Spirit in John 7:38-39 and John 14:15-19 at all. These passages connecting with the Old Testament prophesies the prophet Joel for instance in Joel 2:28-32 prophesies and promises the Gift of the Holy Spirit and interpreted by Peter as accomplished (1Pe 2:6).
Matt 28:16 ¶ Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them (the eleven disciples).
17 And when they (the eleven disciples) saw him, they (the eleven disciples) worshipped him: but some doubted.
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them (the eleven disciples), saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 ¶ Go ye (the eleven disciples) therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you (the eleven disciples): and, lo, I am with you (the eleven disciples) alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Jesus was talking to the 11 disciples, NOT to the church. :-)
GB,
Is this your argument that the Great Commission (Matt 28:16-20) was only given and only binding to the 11 apostles? This conflicts with your own Churches practices. Your Church gives the authority to baptize to teenagers at 16, it sends teenagers out as missionaries at 19.
Not at all!
Jesus’ commission and His blessing was given to INDIVIDUALS not the the Church as a body. However, Jesus also authorized His apostles (called and ordained/authorized) to commission other individuals to preach the word.
Jesus’ blessing may have also passed on to individuals.
GB,
That is an incredibly low view of the Church in Gods plan.
GD: . . . “while the heading of the LDS Scriptures they recognize that Matthew chapter 24 as a Chapter is referring to the “Last Days” . . .
GB: What the heading actually says is “Jesus foretells the doom of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple—Great calamities shall precede his Second Coming—He gives the parable of the fig tree.”
I don’t see “Last Days” there. Nice Strawman!!
Was “the doom of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple” in the “Last Days”?
GB,
I have not misrepresented your churches teaching, I suggest that you look at the links I provided. “Great calamities shall precede his Second Coming” is the heading I referred to. Note that this does not say, “Great calamities shall precede the restoration…” And from the BYU site “Some early Christians appear to have anticipated the second coming of Jesus Christ and the onset of the Millennium as imminent, despite the Savior’s caution that none but the Father knew the time of his coming, and despite both angelic and apostolic pronouncements concerning events that must precede the Millennium” referencing Matthew 24.
You asked “Was “the doom of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple” in the “Last Days”?” From an amillennial view of eschatology, yes.
So, what you are saying is if you use an eschatology other than the one used in writing that heading you get a different meaning than the one intended,
Isn’t that just another way of describing a strawman?
:-)
What I am saying is that if all predictions of an apostasy point to a general apostasy that occurred in the first century AD then they cannot be connected with eschatology. Simple as that.
I don’t see where anyone makes a claim as to WHEN the general apostasy was complete. Even though there are numerous indications that it started while the apostles were spreading the word. Most of the epistles were written to combat apostasy.
It is true that a general apostasy would necessitate a restoration such as the one described it Dan 2.
GB,
Read the the introduction to Mr. Tvedtnes’ peice. He says “the apostasy had already run its course before the introduction of philosophical ideas and the prostitution of Christianity.” Now when the exact date of the prostitution of Christianity began he does not say but he connects it with the passing of divine revelation and the absence of the apostles. He goes on in the next section on the New Testament to argue quite unconvincingly that the apostasy was well on its way during the time of inscripturation.
I do not argue that much of the apostle’s writings serve the purpose of fighting apostasy in fact that has been my argument all alog. There is no evidence to the contrary either in scripture or in the writing of the early Church.
There are two eschatological problems that you have not answered. The first is that while Scripture does speak of an apostasy, it does not claim it to be a complete and total apostasy, and the great apostasy is spoken of in connection with the tribulation (Matt 24:9-12, 21-24; Mark 12:9-22; Luke 21:22-24). Do you claim that the tribulation has occurred as well? The second problem is that the next chronological step in Scripture after the apostasy/tribulation is the Parousia, there is no predicted restoration after the apostasy. Your position that an apostasy requires a restoration is not totally incorrect but the restoration will come when Christ returns and restores all things at the end of this age.
gd: . . . the great apostasy is spoken of in connection with the tribulation . . .
GB: Connected by the word “and” which doesn’t necessitate a real connection at all. The events could be 1800 years apart and we could still find the word “and” between them in a single paragraph.
I think you need to read this statement more closely and actually address it rather than something else.
“It is true that a general apostasy would necessitate a restoration such as the one described it Dan 2.”
Now lest you miss it. The restoration described in Dan 2:
1) “shall be in the latter days” vs. 28
2) “in the days of these kings” vs. 44 (the ten kingdoms described in vs. 41-43)
3) “shall not be left to other people” As opposed to the kingdom described in Matt 21:43.
GB,
It is 4 Kingdoms not 10, Babylon, Medo-Persia (named 8:20), Greece (named in 8:21), and Rome it might be Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece or 5 Kingdoms… But the important part is the Kingdom of God set up at the Parousia.
That “the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed” is beyond doubt. What is your point? I support the claim that there will be a restoration after the great apostasy and the tribulation, this is completely biblical.
gd,
I didn’t know that you only had 4 toes. Your problem is that you can’t use your special defect to interpret these verses.
Dan 2:41 And whereas thou sawest the feet and TOES, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay.
42 And as the TOES of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken.
43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
This is a clear description of post Roman empire Europe. :-)
gd: But the important part is the Kingdom of God set up at the Parousia.
GB: Are you saying that there will be no Kingdom of God on the earth to welcome the returning Messiah?
Isn’t that an implicit admission that there will be a Great Apostasy (which has already occurred) before the “parousia”?
gd: That “the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that shall never be destroyed” is beyond doubt.
GB: True!! It happened in 1830 :-) Yipee!!!
First the Great Apostasy,
Then the Restoration,
Then the Tribulation.
Then the “parousia”.
And that is completely Biblical!!!
The Great Apostasy started at the time of the ancient Apostles.
Matt. 13: 25 his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat.
Matt. 24: 5 saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many.
Matt. 24: 24 shall arise false Christs, and false prophets.
John 6: 66 his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Acts 20: 29 shall grievous wolves enter in among you.
1 Cor. 11: 18 there be divisions among you.
Gal. 1: 6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him.
Gal. 3: 1 who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey.
2 Thes. 2: 3 shall not come, except there come a falling away first.
1 Tim. 1: 6 some having swerved have turned aside.
1 Tim. 4: 1 giving heed to seducing spirits.
2 Tim. 1: 15 all they which are in Asia be turned away from me.
2 Tim. 2: 18 Who concerning the truth have erred.
2 Tim. 3: 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power.
2 Tim. 4: 4 turn away their ears from the truth . . . unto fables.
Titus 1: 16 profess that they know God, but in works they deny him.
James 4: 1 From whence came wars and fightings among you.
2 Pet. 2: 1 false prophets also among the people.
2 Pet. 3: 17 being led away with the error of the wicked.
1 Jn. 2: 18 now are there many antichrists.
1 Jn. 4: 1 many false prophets are gone out into the world.
Jude 1: 4 certain men crept in . . . denying the only Lord God.
Rev. 2: 2 which say they are apostles, and are not.
Rev. 3: 16 thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot.
Rev. 13: 7 to make war with the saints.
It was even predicted in the Old Testament.
Isa. 24: 5 changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.
Isa. 29: 13 this people draw near me with their mouth.
Isa. 60: 2 darkness shall cover the earth. (They don’t call it the dark ages for nothing :-) )
Amos 8: 11 a famine . . . of hearing the words of the Lord.
I was just wondering what your take on Acts 20:28-30?
Clearly “flock” is a metaphor for “church”.
So what is your take on “not sparing the flock”?
GB,
Acts 20:28-30 is a clear warning of the danger of false teachers and prophets in Paul’s day and ours. Read a little further down the page and in Acts 20:31-35 Paul gives the flock a defense against the wolves, “And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified.” Only by ignoring Paul’s admonition to the Ephesian Elders can you regard this as a predictive prophesy of a general apostasy.
That is all nice, warm, and fuzzy, but it doesn’t negate the prophesy that the flock would NOT BE SPARED now does it!
You have a clear and plain prophesy on one hand and an “admonition” on the other.
It is interesting that would you bring up Ephesians again. It was apparently written by Paul while he was in Rome (later than the events described in Act 20).
Eph 1:10 mentions the “dispensation of the fulness of times” which will “gather together in one all things in Christ”.
This is a reference to the latter-day restoration of more than just the gospel that Jesus taught. (You know like temples and stuff.) :-)
GB,
You should read the entire passages you present, Acts 20:17-38 is to the Ephesian Elders. I was not quoting or referring to the letter to the Ephesians, though it is one of my favorites.
Eph 1:10 is part of a single sentence in the original Greek. This sentence stats with Eph 1:3 an goes to Eph 1:14, and is talking about the our reconciliation with God through the redemptive work of Christ. You know the cross.
We need to be clear where the LDS bar of argument is here.
We don’t have to prove anything from the Bible – even if Joseph Smith once boldly vocalized such sentiments. All we have to do really is muddy the waters, and then modern revelation and appeal to human judgment can take up the slack.
So really, all we have to do is show that the theme of an eventual apostasy is there in the New Testament. We don’t have to prove that it’s demanded by the body of the New Testament scripture. Just that the theme is there.
Then we can declare our modern revelations, and let people judge for themselves.
To be frank, I’ve actually got a firmer conviction of an actual Great Apostasy than I do of the authority claims of the modern LDS Church. The more I read about the utter mess early Christianity found itself in for the first two centuries of its existence (I hold that the Apostasy largely occurred and had come to full bloom in the first two hundred years), the more clear it becomes that the apostasy was simply a stark fact by that point.
Seth R,
Let me first say that I do not totally disagree with you, in fact I think for a great many Mormon doctrines you are better off never referencing the Bible and relying only on modern revelation as a justification for your particular beliefs. Ignoring, for the moment, my belief in a cessation of dogmatic and binding canonical revelation there are 3 problems with this position of disconnecting Mormon apostasy theology from the New Testament:
1 For whatever reason Joseph Smith accepted Christianities acknowledgement of the NT as canonical, claims to translation issues notwithstanding. Joseph Smith claimed to be restoring the original Church this means that any new revelation should not deviate or contradict what is revealed in the Bible. We have an example of how this works in the New Testament where past revelation was added to. New Testament writers took great care to show that the revelation given by Christ and his apostles did not conflict with the Old Testament, showing how their revelation was tied to and in fulfillment of the Old Testament law and prophets. While other Mormon doctrines could be said to be additional to existing New Testament prophesy a general apostasy should be evident in the New Testament so as not to conflict with past prophesies regarding Christ and his work and union with the Church.
2 Joseph Smith, as you pointed out claimed to be able to prove his beliefs from the Bible; I do not see how you can so easily distance yourself from your prophet. I am not going to attack Smith’s character but his first vision account in JS-H 1 makes bold claims. Muddying the water does not support those types of claims you need to prove that Christianity prior to 1830 was poison. Prophesy of individual or partial apostasy is not sufficient because that is not what Joseph Smith claimed. A total, absolute, complete, general, or great apostasy is what Smith claimed. Proof the God removed his grace and Holy Spirit is what is would be required.
3 Finally, if we all acknowledge that God guides His Church by the power of the Holy Spirit, there must be a reasonable explanation for the removal of God’s grace and the Holy Spirit from the Church in order to support Mormon apostasy theology. While early apostasy writers were not at all troubled to point to the early Church as unrighteous and not deserving of God’s gifts, I find this a wholly unsatisfactory explanation because it conflicts with Mormon soteriology and the need for the Holy Spirit in the process of sanctification.
As I see it Mormon thinking on apostasy theology has not gone much further than
“The Great Apostasy: Considered in the Light of Scriptural and Secular History”. While I cannot claim to have read everything on the subject I am unaware of any writings that systematically connect apostasy theology with other Mormon beliefs, ecclesiology excepted of course. Eschatology is only the most obliviously pertinent, soteriology and pneumatology both need to be dealt with.
Gundeck, this editorial from Michael Ash in the Deseret News online religion section seems relevant to the topic:
http://www.mormontimes.com/mormon_voices/guest_blog/?id=9645
Seth R, Interesting series it will take some time for me to review it all. Thank you.
Matt 24:14 Is consistent with a restoration occurring.
GB,
When you read Matt 24:9-14 you see a couple of things, persecution of the Church will be present (v. 9), many, not all, will fall away (v.10), false prophets will arise and lead many, not all, astray (v. 11), lawlessness will increase leading to the love of many, not all, to grow cold (v. 12), the one who endures all of this will be saved (v. 13), and the gospel will be proclaimed to all nations prior to the second advent (v. 14).
All will not fall away, all will not follow false prophets, all will not grow cold, some will endure. This is not consistent with apostasy theology and not consistent with a restoration because some will endure (v. 13).
I don’t know why the apostasy would have to be total on the individual level for Mormon assertions to hold.
Seth,
D&C 1:16 specifies “every man”. I don’t see how that leaves you room for a not so great partial apostasy.
In context “every man” of verse 16 is referring to “they who will not hear the voice of the Lord, neither the voice of his servants, neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles” of verse 14.
In context D&C 1:16 doesn’t provide any refutation to Seth’s statement.
GB and Seth,
If you say so. The D&C are your books, I am not going to tell you what you beleive.
The problem you then have from a Reformed view, is that salvation is not only accomplished on an individual level. The Individual aspects of salvation is important but cooperate salvation as the body of Christ is equally important. There is a direct connection between union with Christ and His Church. It is only in the Church by the ordained means of grace, preaching the word that Faith is promised.
I am a little more conservative than many in the broader evangelical movement. The Reformed have a high view of the necessity of the Church and sacraments in salvation, we do not claim that God cannot save outside of them but that he has promised to save inside of them.
Seth,
Are you having any problems posting over at Markcares place?
This it the second day that I have had posts disappear over there.
No, not in particular.
But honestly, I’m about to give it a rest on that conversation.
You have to have a debate partner capable of carrying on a discussion with. “Jesuslover” and “Echo” don’t really fit the bill.
And the whole blog is really stuck on a feedback loop or something. I’m essentially done with the grace vs. works debate. It no longer interests me in the slightest (the debate – not the actual doctrine, of course).
“4 toes”, I liked that, but no, I am not counting toes.
From Dan 2:32, 33 We see that Daniel is going to interpret the following parts of the image “head of this image was of fine gold”, “chest and arms of silver”, “middle and thighs of bronze”, and “its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay”
I love the list of verses you present, shall I show you each time Joseph Smith complained about apostasy in the Mormon Church? Brigham Young was well known for doing the same and reading about Lorenzo Snow I am sure I can find some apostasy quotes against the Saints. This list is well known and does not show either the call for a total apostasy or the restoration of a Church prior to the Second Advent.
You need a verse here and a verse there. Pick this passage exclude that passage. Where as I can show in a single chapter Matt 24 a consistent eschatological chronology, there is no restoration in Matt 24. You can also look at Luke 21 a single coherent eschatological chronology, no restoration is predicted after the apostasy. I can read the words of Christ as he said them and find meaning. You are using them like a jigsaw puzzle.