Appendix D: Bibliographical Note on Latter-day Saint Writings on the Apostasy

Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship ^ | Ryan Christensen

[Colofornian]

See, I at least have respect for more of the newer "open-aired" scholars like Matthew Brown (see Classic Mormonism and in this case, Ryan Christensen).

There's an obvious commitment they have to being forthright -- a trait I've found to be quite lacking on the part of Lds apologists & Lds general authorities...a great exception -- a BYU history prof who actually proved to be "overly" forthright was D. Michael Quinn.

Now obviously, the source of this link is filled to the brim with historical and theological distortions from many contributors.

At least, with Christensen, he doesn't beat around the bush -- as he starts right off with Lds "scriptures" of Mormonism's "first vision" -- a vision that...well...here, let's quote Christensen:

The idea that Christ's church no longer existed was central to Joseph Smith's prophetic claims, and as such was among the earliest of the doctrines established in this dispensation...the first vision that he "must join none of [the sects], for they were all wrong; . . . that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: 'they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness but deny the power thereof'" (Joseph Smith—History 1:19).

IOW, the Lds commitment to Christians being "ALL...corrupt" and embracing "creeds [that] were an abomination" to these Mormon spirit-creature entities wasn't some obscure "sideline" teaching of Mormonism...No great apostasy...no need for a restoration.

More from Christensen on this aspect: ...following the greatest apostasy the world has ever seen comes the greatest dispensation the world has ever seen, the one in which all things would be restored, the one which would not end in apostasy, the one which would truly spread to all the world to prepare it for the great and dreadful day of the Lord. In a sense, this became the central teaching of Mormonism, what some scholars refer to as a "myth"; like the story of the fall and the atonement, for the followers of Joseph Smith the story of the apostasy and restoration came to define the world and their place in it.

Exactly. The very identity and definition of Christians as "apostates" became inseparably linked to the very identity and definition of Mormons. This is their central "myth" -- as Christensen says! Their central narrative.

If Christians are not "apostates," then Mormons aren't Mormons! Mormonism rises a very religious people group on the very ashes and graveyard of Christianity!

Mormons have needed to spiritually slay 100% of all Christians (except the apostle John, who supposedly has never died per Mormonism) in order to justify its very existence!

Another thing Christensen outlines is exactly how hard at work Mormon writers & leaders were in the 20th century to try to "prove" the Christian church ENTIRELY crumbled for 1500-1700 years...with Lds general authority B.H. Roberts writing a book entitled The "Falling Away": Or the Loss of the Christian Religion and Church (see Bibliography).

[Colofornian]

From Christensen: Nibley's lush assortment of proof texts has attracted criticism. Many of the passages he cites do not seem to prove his points; many of them seem to be taken out of context or even to be irrelevant to his thesis. For example, Nibley says, "As soon as the Lord departs there comes 'the lord of this world, and hath nothing in me'; in the very act of casting out the Lord of the vineyard the usurpers seize it for themselves, to remain in possession until his return;"10 as support for this claim he lists four scriptures: John 14:30; Matthew 21:38; Mark 12:7; and Luke 20:14.11 These scriptures are prophecies of Christ's coming death; if Nibley really intends for them to support his thesis that the church did not survive, he would have to date the apostasy at the death of Christ, something he probably does not want to do. In short, the criticism is that the New Testament does not provide evidence for the apostasy.

Ah, typical sloppy Mormon “scholarship” – and Nibley is touted by Lds apologists & Deseret News journalists as “tops.” Here, Nibley was citing four Gospel passages that fail to support his claims! (Reaganaut, a trained historian, has said this actually was rather typical of Nibley)

[Colofornian]

From Christensen: Most recently, Alexander B. Morrison, an emeritus General Authority, has written a volume on the apostasy that is directed at the general membership of the church.23 It draws on current scholarship, including a number of the papers now published in this volume, and early Christian writings to produce an updated and deeper LDS understanding of the great apostasy. It corrects many common misperceptions while promoting greater appreciation for the contributions of faithful Christians across the centuries.

What? Could it be? ”Faithful Christians across the centuries” actually (for once) receiving “appreciative” reviews from Mormon scholars?

You mean...we're just not only "apostates..."? "Corrupt?" Abominable creed embracers? Heart drifters? The whore of Babylon? The Church of the Devil? A dead and false church?

[ejonesie22]

I am glad I follow the real, competent Christ, not the made up one who could not even keep a Church together more than a century of two...

[aMorePerfectUnion]

IB4PDSPAMLINKS!

[ejonesie22]

Ditto...

[CommerceComet]

In spite of the recurring criticisms, Nibley's work provided a cosmic scope that has proved to be a watershed in Mormon studies.

The author misspelled comic.

Perhaps the greatest apologist since B. H. Roberts is Hugh W. Nibley, who has brought a stunning array of findings from many fields to his work of understanding the Book of Mormon, the Book of Abraham...

In a way, I feel sorry for scholars like Nibley and Quinn when their academic training proves to them the falsity of Mormonism but still cling to the corpse for whatever reason. Despite his apologetics work, Nibley must have known that the Book of Abraham was a fraud. The cognitive dissonance that he went through must have been immense.

[Colofornian]

In a way, I feel sorry for scholars like Nibley and Quinn when their academic training proves to them the falsity of Mormonism but still cling to the corpse for whatever reason

Well, the Mormons booted Quinn out.

(Quinn also later revealed himself to be of another "orientation"...but he became consistent on one thing: Getting true Mormon history and himself out of the closet!)

[Tennessee Nana]

The idea that Christ’s church no longer existed was central to Joseph Smith’s prophetic claims,
________________________________________________

Yes to be a mormon first you would have to believe that the mormon god is not able..

that the mormon jesus was just a man who could lose his bride...

However the LORD Jesus Christ of the Christian Bible is well able to save to the uttermost...

His Blood that was shed on the Cross for us has the power to protect His Bride the church from ever being lost, stolen, kidnappped, mislaid, dropped, left behind...

Now there have been many of those priests under the old system, since death prevented them from continuing in office; But because Jesus lives forever, His priesthood lasts forever. Therefore He is able to save completely those who come to God through Him, because He always lives to intercede for them. He is the kind of high priest we need because He is holy and blameless, unstained by sin. He has been set apart from sinners and has been given the highest place of honor in Heaven. Unlike those other high priests, He does not need to offer sacrifices every day. They did this for their own sins first and then for the sins of the people. But Jesus did this once for all when He offered Himself as the sacrifice for the people’s sins. The law appointed high priests who were limited by human weakness. But after the law was given, God appointed his Son with an oath, and his Son has been made the perfect High Priest forever. Hebrews 7:23

When Christ came as High Priest of the good things that are already here, He went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that is to say, not a part of this creation. He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but He entered the Most Holy Place once for all by His own blood, secured our redemption FOREVER. Hebrews 9:11, 12

[Zakeet]

Well, the Mormons booted Quinn out.

The Saints don't like to talk about Hugh Nibley very much either, especially after he authenticated Joseph's translation of the Egyptian Papyrus (re. Book of Abraham), and then spent the rest of his long life backing down (i.e. "I never really actually did say that") after being dismantled by some real Egyptologists.

He also denied he developed "Nibley's Challenge" concerning Joseph's authorship of the BoM after the Tanners demolished his arguments -- even though evidence of Nibley's involvement is, in my opinion, conclusive.

[reaganaut]

IB4PD

[MHGinTN]

IB4PDS₂

[MHGinTN]

By the way, Colo, while reading that demonically inspired sludge I felt like I needed a lightening rod, just in case! It is embarrassing to read such blasphemous swill knowing I have friends who believe that dreck!

[Alex Murphy]

Ping to read & respond later

[ejonesie22]

Being a Mormon “Scholar’ ain’t all it’s cracked up to be.

[reaganaut]

As I found out at BYU a “Mormon Scholar” is an oxymoron, especially in the areas of history, archeology and Biblical studies. They just don’t exist, or if they do they are censored and disciplined by ‘the church’ (google ‘the September six’ for an example).

[Elsie]

 

 Joseph quotes Christ as telling him during the first vision that he "must join none of [the sects], for they were all wrong; . . . that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: 'they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness but deny the power thereof'"

(Joseph Smith—History 1:19).

 

 

No; he does NOT!!  Read it for yourself!

---

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/17#17

  17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
  18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
  19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.” 
 

There is NO ONE called CHRIST in this bit of MORMON scripture; but two vague PERSONAGES, who are NEVER identified.

 

The only ID is a RELATIONAL one (if it were true).

 

Only ONE of the PERSONAGES spoke; and it WASN'T the so called 'christ' figure.

 

---

---

 

If they can't get the second line right in the article; it doesn't bode well for any OTHER accuracy ahead!

[Elsie]

By the way, Colo, while reading that demonically inspired sludge I felt like I needed a lightening rod, just in case! 

 

Tired of NOT being white and delightsome??

 

Then try some Golden Peacock to lighten your rod!

 

Guaranteed to work within a week  or your money back!

 

 

 

[Colofornian]

Good pick-up...Ryan Christensen...if you ever read this...please stop embellishing!

I mean here I was complimenting your forthrightness in an earlier post...and here Elsie pinpoints your inaccurate exaggeration.

But it does go to show how Mormons tend to "assume."

They assume that the supposed entities they've been told about -- the Father and Jesus -- appeared to Smith. But Smith doesn't name them at all in that portion of Joseph Smith - History.

Well, now y'all have a good glimpse of how Mormon "scholars" do "scholarly" things...they embellish...they exaggerate...even among the best of the forthright ones!

[reaganaut]

BTTT