The Great Apostasy

[creekster]

"Great Apostasy" is born of the Euroconceit that used to be commonly called "Dark Ages" and has been universally rejected by scholars. Since recorded history there has always been enlightenment somewhere. The one unfortunate thing that happened for about 1800 years is that represenative government vanished from the earth and civil liberties were greatly reduced.

Does LDS theology take credit for restoring representative government and reinvigorating civil liberties? That would be funny and ironic if it did. For these developments we can mostly thank our British and early American forebears (who were inspired by Greek democractic institutions and civil liberties principles) as well as (according Nietzsche) Christianity (which in turn has strong ancient Greek roots). By the time of the birth of the American republic Great Britain had been developing and experimenting with representative institutions, and had developed a strong civil libertarian ethos. Indeed, GB abolished slavery long before we did.

Oh, man, here we go.

You insist on making the notion of an apostasy from the truth of the gospel equivalent wiht the notion of a loss of all 'enlightenment', whatever that means. They do not mean the same thing. You are so eager to slam what you percevie as the churhc's improper ciriticsm of the hellenizationd of crisitianity that you try to make the concept of an apostasy somehting it is not and never was meant to be. I am not defedning, by the way, all statements of past LDS leafes on this topic, but I am asserting that to suggest that islam, for example, had great thinkers during what has been called the dark ages really has no bearing on whether or not the truth and authroity espoused by Christ was maintained in accurate form during the same period.

[SeattleUte]

Oh, man, here we go.

You insist on making the notion of an apostasy from the truth of the gospel equivalent wiht the notion of a loss of all 'enlightenment', whatever that means. They do not mean the same thing. You are so eager to slam what you percevie as the churhc's improper ciriticsm of the hellenizationd of crisitianity that you try to make the concept of an apostasy somehting it is not and never was meant to be. I am not defedning, by the way, all statements of past LDS leafes on this topic, but I am asserting that to suggest that islam, for example, had great thinkers during what has been called the dark ages really has no bearing on whether or not the truth and authroity espoused by Christ was maintained in accurate form during the same period.

Islam, Byzantium, pockets of Europe, China, progress and learning and technology advancement was going on all over the place. It's just simply not true that all of humanity stopped progressinng and slid into regession after 410 A.D. It kept moving forward, though not as much in Europe.

[Indy Coug]

Islam, Byzantium, pockets of Europe, China, progress and learning and technology advancement was going on all over the place. It's just simply not true that all of humanity stopped progressinng and slid into regession after 410 A.D. It kept moving forward, though not as much in Europe.

Progress, learning, technology advancement have no bearing on whether or not the doctrinal integrity and priesthood keys of the church established by Christ were preserved.

[TripletDaddy]

Islam, Byzantium, pockets of Europe, China, progress and learning and technology advancement was going on all over the place. It's just simply not true that all of humanity stopped progressinng and slid into regession after 410 A.D. It kept moving forward, though not as much in Europe.

in the spirit of Halloween, I will call what you are currently weaving a "scarecrow."

[creekster]

Islam, Byzantium, pockets of Europe, China, progress and learning and technology advancement was going on all over the place. It's just simply not true that all of humanity stopped progressinng and slid into regession after 410 A.D. It kept moving forward, though not as much in Europe.

ok. But you are disputing arguments no one here is making. SO you read a book and you dont like it. I dont think talmadge is on this forum. My point is that your arguments have nothing to do wiht the principles of religious authority and doctrine (or speific beliefs, as a bone to you) that LDS contend were lost between the genreation after christ and 1820. You just can't do it, and you aren't even trying. Instead you might as well take all your posts and put them in a thread titled "THERE WERE NO DARK AGES!!" and see if anyone here argues with you.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Progress, learning, technology advancement have no bearing on whether or not the doctrinal integrity and priesthood keys of the church established by Christ were preserved.

Which is the real question(that I am poorly expressing). What is the purpose of the broken chain? Why would the existing apostles continue to call replacements to maintain that integrity?

[creekster]

Which is the real question(that I am poorly expressing). What is the purpose of the broken chain? Why would the existing apostles continue to call replacements to maintain that integrity?

Death and geography had a nasty habit of getting in the way.

[Jeff Lebowski]

in the spirit of Halloween, I will call what you are currently weaving a "scarecrow."

I realize that this could be said about most of TD's posts, but that was very funny.

[TripletDaddy]

One question I have always had re: The Apostasy......in our classes, conference talks, and curricula (to the extent that it exists), the focus of the Apostasy always seems to center around the death of the Apostles after the Crucifixion. There generally seems to be a lack of emphasis on the American continent and the existence of a Priesthood chain...even through the time of Moroni, which was long after the death of the Apostles in the Old World.

Has anyone else noticed this or do I need to be paying more attention? Or both?

[creekster]

One question I have always had re: The Apostasy......in our classes, conference talks, and curricula (to the extent that it exists), the focus of the Apostasy always seems to center around the death of the Apostles after the Crucifixion. There generally seems to be a lack of emphasis on the American continent and the existence of a Priesthood chain...even through the time of Moroni, which was long after the death of the Apostles in the Old World.

Has anyone else noticed this or do I need to be paying more attention? Or both?

I always assumed, but admit i have not really investigated, that the difference was between 12 apostles in the old world and 12 disciples in the new world. Plus all the nephites die in the end. (yes that wording is euro-centric)

[TripletDaddy]

I always assumed, but admit i have not really investigated, that the difference was between 12 apostles in the old world and 12 disciples in the new world. Plus all the nephites die in the end. (yes that wording is euro-centric)

I have considered this before, as well. In fact, probably since my mission.

However, it seems to presuppose that our LDS definition of "apostasy" focuses on the existence of a structured hierarchy within the Church, as opposed to the presence or lack of priesthood. While we definitely believe in the same organization that existed in the primitive Church (apostles), isn't the "apostasy" a lack of priesthood, not necessarily a lack of Apostles? I guess this is now a separate question from the one I just posed minutes ago.

feel free to answer both, folks.

[SeattleUte]

ok. But you are disputing arguments no one here is making. SO you read a book and you dont like it. I dont think talmadge is on this forum. My point is that your arguments have nothing to do wiht the principles of religious authority and doctrine (or speific beliefs, as a bone to you) that LDS contend were lost between the genreation after christ and 1820. You just can't do it, and you aren't even trying. Instead you might as well take all your posts and put them in a thread titled "THERE WERE NO DARK AGES!!" and see if anyone here argues with you.

I disagree. It's as if you said that JS's endorsement of separaton of church and state in the articles of faith were an original thought. The creators of "Great Apostasy" and the correlary "Restored Gospel" were products of their time, e.g., the beliefs about Dark Ages, Manifest Destiny, etc. Mormons' myopia and pathological self-focus is not unlike these qualities in larger American culture, though perhaps amplified a bit. There's nary an original idea in Mormonism, and Mormonism reflects the ethos and prejudices of the place of its birth and maturity.

[RC Vikings]

There's nary an original idea in Mormonism.

Sharing time.

[Indy Coug]

There's nary an original idea in Mormonism...

Hardly surprising since it is a self-descibed "restored" church. Since there have been multiple dispensations and those kernels of gospel truths have had millennia to disperse and become part of the bedrock of most belief systems, I wouldn't expect there to be a lot of what some might deem to be orginality.

[creekster]

I disagree. It's as if you said that JS's endorsement of separaton of church and state in the articles of faith were an original thought. The creators of "Great Apostasy" and the correlary "Restored Gospel" were products of their time, e.g., the beliefs about Dark Ages, Manifest Destiny, etc. Mormons' myopia and pathological self-focus is not unlike these qualities in larger American culture, though perhaps amplified a bit. There's nary an original idea in Mormonism, and Mormonism reflects the ethos and prejudices of the place of its birth and maturity.

What?!?!? You disagree? Did anyone here see THAT coming?

This is like saying you cant help but hate the churhc becasue you dislike what some of the leaders have done. Sure the founders were products of their time. We are all products of our time. But over time those to whom the gospel speaks truth enucleate teh truth therein and separate it from the foibles of the leaders.

In this instance, the foible is really not a foible at all, but just an over zealous exclamation of a fundamentally sound idea. The church organization, as set up by Jesus (and you have to assume he did set one up; the counter is for another thread), did not exist in Joseph Smith's day. God resoterd the truth and the authority through JS. Because you don't believe the restoration you refuse to even allow the apostasy but, as a fact, and in the limited way we are talkign abotu here, it is really undeniable.