In Part 3 of this series we want to continue the examination of the early church teaching in what later became known as the Trinity. It is paramount that Christians trace their theology and doctrine coming from the Bible as was written by the apostles and prophets. Our foundation is built upon them (Eph 2:20); Christians stand on very large, strong shoulders when we look at historical theology.
Mormonism claims that Christianity went into apostasy after the death of the apostles, thus the church ceased to exist. This is an absurd charge that is hard to take seriously in light of the historical lineage of Christianity following the death of John the Apostle. Due to the conspiracy theory put forth by Mormons we need to examine the legacy of John the Apostle in the lives of several men, and the teachings that were passed down to them. Surprisingly, the LDS Church makes this declaration pertaining to this discussion:
…While we do not believe the Bible to be inerrant, complete or the final word of God, we accept the essential details of the Gospels and more particularly the divine witness of those men who walked and talked with Him or were mentored by His chosen apostles. (Emphasis mine. Mormon Newsroom, What Mormons Believe About Jesus Christ)
Does the LDS Church really accept the witness of those that “were mentored by His [Jesus] chosen apostles”? Their rejection of the triune God says otherwise. Let’s look at John the Apostle as our starting point. John lived to be a very old man and died in the city of Ephesus (A.D. 100-101). John was very active in proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ along with teaching doctrine to several men – men who would end up becoming bishops of churches mainly because of their credentials of having been taught by John or one of John’s disciples. These men along with several others became the earliest of the Christian church fathers.
Ignatius (death: A.D. 98-117?) was the bishop of Antioch and a disciple of John. Did John teach Ignatius that Jesus Christ was fully God in deity/essence? And was there mention of Persons in a triadic pattern? Let’s find out:
There is the one God and Father, and not two or three; One who is; and there is no other besides Him, the only true [God]…There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to “baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” not unto one [person] having three names, nor into three [persons] who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honor. (Epistle to the Philippians, Chapter 2)
What did Ignatius do with the instruction he received from John? Eusebius tells us:
He [Ignatius] exhorted them [different churches] to adhere firmly to the tradition of the apostles, which, for the sake of greater security, he deemed it necessary to attest by committing it to writing. (Ecclesiastical History; Book 3, Chapter 36)
The most well-known of John’s disciples was Polycarp (A.D 69/70-155) who was the bishop of Smyrna. His link to John is clear according to Eusebius:
Polycarp flourished in Asia, an intimate disciple of the apostles who received the episcopate of the church at Smyrna, at the hands of the eyewitnesses and servants of the Lord. (Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Chapter 36).
Notice Polycarp’s prayer that is very triune:
O Lord God almighty…I bless you and glorify you through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, your beloved Son, through whom be glory to you, with Him and the Holy Spirit, both now and forever (n. 14, ed. Funk; PG 5.1040).
Let’s now get acquainted with Polycarp’s disciple, Irenaeus (A.D. 130-202), who was the bishop of Lyons. Eusebius introduces us to Irenaeus:
Let us proceed to the order of history. Pothinus, having died with the other martyrs of Gaul [France] in the ninetieth year of his age, was succeeded by Irenaeus in the episcopate of the church at Lyons. We have understood that he was a hearer of Polycarp in his youth. (Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, Chapter 5)
Eusebius quotes Irenaeus’ words to Florinus regarding the instruction he received from Polycarp:
For I saw thee when I was yet a boy in the lower Asia with Polycarp…I remember the events of those times much better than those of more recent occurrence. As the studies of our youth growing with our minds, unite with it so firmly that I can tell also the very place where the blessed Polycarp was accustomed to sit and discourse; and also his entrances, his walks, the complexion of his life and the form of his body, and his conversations with the people, and his familiar intercourse with John, as he was accustomed to tell, as also his familiarity with those that had seen the Lord. How also he used to relate their discourses, and what things he had heard from them concerning the Lord. Also concerning his miracles, his doctrine, all these were told by Polycarp, in consistency with the Holy Scriptures, as he had received them from the eyewitnesses of the doctrine of salvation. These things, by the mercy of God, and the opportunity then afforded me, I attentively heard, noting them down, not on paper, but in my heart; and these same facts I am always in the habit, by the grace of God, to recall faithfully to mind. (Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, Chapter 20)
Irenaeus speaks more of Polycarp and the link to the apostles:
But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true. To these things all the Asiatic Churches testify, as do also these men who have succeeded Polycarp down to the present time…He it was who, coming to Rome in the time of Anicetus caused many to turn away from the aforesaid heretics to the Church of God, proclaiming that he had received this one and sole truth from the apostles, – that, namely, which is handed down by the Church (Against Heresies 3:3:4).
What was Irenaeus taught by Polycarp about Jesus Christ?
…the Word of God…that He is all in all…the Man among men; Son in the Father; God in God; King to all eternity…and the bridegroom of the Church; the Chief also of the cherubim, the Prince of the angelic powers; God of God; Son of the Father; Jesus Christ; King forever and ever. Amen (Fragment 53).
Therefore, the Father is Lord and the Son is Lord, and the Father is God and the Son is God, since he who is born of God is God, and in this way, according to His being and power and essence, one God is demonstrated: but according to the economy of our salvation, there is both Father and Son (On the Apostolic Preaching 2:1:47).
Did Irenaeus see the one God as triune?
I have also largely demonstrated, that the Word, namely the Son, was always with the Father, and that Wisdom also, which is the Spirit, was present with Him, anterior to all creation…There is therefore one God, who by the Word and Wisdom created and arranged all things (Against Heresies 4:20:3-4).
The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord…and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father (Against Heresies 1:10:1).
In conclusion, Ignatius, Polycarp, and Irenaeus weren’t creating new doctrines that were contrary to what they had received from John. Other church fathers at this same time received the same teachings and passed them on through their writings. The LDS Church has diverted from these teachings and accepted heretical teachings that were denounced very early on by some of these same church fathers. We will examine one of these heretical teachings in the next article.
Here’s the problem for Mormons. If there was no falling away, an apostasy, then there is no need for a restoration. Quite frankly, the apostasy/restoration scenario, is a Joseph Smith concocted myth useful in that he could project himself as a religious leader, even a prophet.
I have yet to have a Mormon provide for me information that the Utah brand of Mormonism, or any Mormonism for that matter, existed in the early Church. This is a pure fantasy. Given the Mormon approach, we could make-up just about any type of religion and say that it was the real first century Christian Church. No evidence required.
“I’m a prophet. God appeared to me. He told me every religion is wrong. Here is the REAL truth. Now the truth will unfold and might contradict what I told you before, but believe me because God told me.”
Lastly, and again, what is the Mormon source for their information on the nature of god? It’s whatever a Mormon prophet wants to say it is at any particular time. I’ve never quite figured out the logic of someone getting a bosom burning over the BoM and then accepting “whatever” in Mormonism as to apply the bosom burning to.
Follow my line of thinking? A person claims a BoM bosom burning experience and then accepts the notion that everything else in Mormonism is true, even when it changes. Very strange logic indeed.
I would think that reading the Church Fathers and accepting their experience in learning about the nature of God from the apostles would carry a little more weight than trusting in the word of a man with a magic rock.
The myth of a complete/universal apostasy from the Christian religion , that Christianity
sickened and died , that the gospel of Jesus as well as vital truths about God were not available
until 1830 is a convenient tool for false prophets to use to try and convince people they need
their “restored ” doctrines and submit to their authority—or else God’s judgement await ! These
type of prophets Jesus warned us of in advance —Mk 13:23
Mormon leaders are such prophets. As such they come claiming that they alone have been
given the truth about our Creator and have been faithful in relaying that truth from Him to
mankind. Therefore caution is well advised in considering the teachings of these men because
false prophets are skilled in detouring those people who don’t go far enough in evaluating the
“restored” truth they offer , in this case about the Trinity . 1Jn 4 : 1
I was watching ‘Word Pictures’ the other night (http://www.crosstv.com/contact-crosstv.html) and the subject was letteralism, or super literalism. He spoke about how the LDS Church, the Catholic Church and many Evangelical Protestant Churches take things that should be taken as symbolic are taken as being very literal. Anybody he did not agree with was wrong.
Funny thing, he, like you, is not willing to even look at the idea that the verses used to prove the manmade definition Trinity should be taken as the symbolic verses and not as the literal teachings.
Andy, if you remove your preconceived prejudices about the definition Trinity, every one of the references can and do speak of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit being one in purpose, but not one in substance. Together they are the body of the Godhead, not the body of one being.
“Here’s the problem for Mormons. If there was no falling away, an apostasy, then there is no need for a restoration. Quite frankly, the apostasy/restoration scenario, is a Joseph Smith concocted myth…”
If you do not follow the Catholic Church, like the Protestants do not, then you are saying that there has at least been a minor falling away. After all, Protestants started by protesting the teachings of the Catholic Church.
” Anybody he did’nt agree with was wrong ” ” …your preconceived prejudices about the
definition of the Trinity…”
This sounds like you could be talking about the Mormon prophet .
Minor falling away ? Re- read what I said in the post above , its how Mormon authorities have
described the alleged great apostasy .
“Minor falling away ? Re- read what I said in the post above , its how Mormon authorities have
described the alleged great apostasy .”
And I stated that you believe that there was/is at least some apostasy because you are part of a Protest group.
Parkman, I now see the point you attempted to make . But it did’nt address what Falcon
mentioned about the myth of apostasy / restoration Mormons subscribe to . Concerning the
topic at hand , how can I trust Mormon apostles to have revealed the true identity of our
Creator —Father , Son , and Holy Ghost ? Does Jesus personally guide the teaching ministry
of Mormon authorities and have they accurately relayed His truths about Himself , the Father,
and the Holy Ghost to everyone ?
Mike,
It’s simple. Mormons can trust what they are told because their founder had a most excellent magic rock. When put in a hat, the thing really came to life, sort of like Frosty the Snowman. The founder was even able to “translate” a language that never existed. Now how awesome is that?
It has to be true, the Mormon view of God. They’ve had several tries at it and even today there are a variety of views of who God is depending on what sect of Mormonism a person belongs to. So you’d think one of them might accidentally swerve into it. And here’s the thing. They don’t have to depend on that musty, dusty corrupted tome known as the Bible. Who needs the Bible when you have such a wonderful array of super prophets?
It’s a truly marvelous thing, really. Then to top it off, you know what these high-flyers tell you is true because when you read the BoM you got a feeling that indicated that it was true. So then everything in Mormonism is true even if it changes and contradicts what was said before. That’s so cool how it works.
Who’d want to mess around with what the Church Fathers who were taught by the apostles when you can have these smoking hot Mormon prophets?
I have found something very scary. The edict said they will suffer the 1st place the chastisement of the divine condemnation and in the 2nd the punishment of our authority which in accordance with the will of heaven we shall decide to inflict. When you say the edict didn’t stop people from being heretics you were right. But those people who lived later and were heretics were killed.
Several questions arise from this, one is how did the church keep the Kings in line. You yourself in a comment said that Theodosius was not allowed communion. The 2nd question is what of the Crusades that were not against the holy land what about them and what about Torquemada.
clyde,
Do you want to talk about the politics of the first four hundred years of Church history or do you want to talk about the theology of the doctrine of the Trinity?
The Emperor didn’t articulate the doctrine. The Church Fathers, as Andy has pointed out, articulated this doctrine very early on in Church history. The Emperor et al were interested in political peace. They didn’t want disruptions within the realm.
God’s people have always existed within a political context going back to the OT times. The OT is really a study of the history of the Jewish people. There is the relationship with God and His revelation to the people within the political context. But there is a political context, always.
So what I’m cautioning the Mormon reader about is not to take on the idea that the doctrine of the Trinity was a political document developed at the behest of the Emperor. That’s not the way it worked.
Mormons dumped polygamy because of the threats to the Mormon church by the U.S. government. They didn’t tube it because the leaders thought polygamy was wrong. That’s why the FLDS thinks the Utah Mormon sect is in apostasy. Polygamy was suspended for a time because of politics not revelation. It’s still on the books. Mormons fully expect to be practicing it again at some future time.
So Utah based LDS practice has been dictated by the government not based on revelation.
Just away of comparing and contrasting here.
Going back a bit, Parkman said:
“Funny thing, he, like you, is not willing to even look at the idea that the verses used to prove the manmade definition Trinity should be taken as the symbolic verses and not as the literal teachings.”
One has to be very literal, not allowing for any symbolic meaning at all, to make God the Father into a being with a physical body, when Jesus, himself, said he was spirit.
It’s tough to have it both ways.
TOM
Not if that passage was mistranslated.
FALCON
Everyone knows that there is a political world in which the church exists. I don’t think that Clyde or anyone else is trying to say that it was the Emperor that wrote out the definition of the doctrine. But his role in enforcing it cannot be over looked. The political world in many ways shaped the religious world.
As you mention, the Old Testament is full of political intrigue, and it tells of the fall and corruption of many men because of their involvement in politics. Solomon married many women as political alliances and was chastised by God for doing so. Many kings introduced Idol worship into Israel for political reasons.
To say that the politics of the day did not influence the religion is naive at best. That is all that we are saying. Look at all the context of the events; not just the religious ones.
Speaking of the Article
“Does the LDS Church really accept the witness of those that “were mentored by His [Jesus] chosen apostles”?”
This statement was said in regards to the Bible, not in regards to extra-biblical records. Those mentored by the Apostles include Luke, Paul, Stephen, Apollos, and many others that the Bible records as being called to the ministry. The witness of these people we accept.
Another note on the the Article, I found this rather amusing. Honestly, none of the quotes given by these three men make any reference to a Triune God. They use the same kind of wording as the Bible, which clearly teaching the Godhead.
Personally, I think these passages have only given further proof that the gospel that God restored in these last days was the exact same Gospel taught by the Apostles. Of course there are sections taken from some of the quotes, and I do not have the resources to look up the original document at this time. However, when these men state that Christ is the Son of God, and that “since he who is born of God is God, and in this way, according to His being and power and essence, one God is demonstrated: but according to the economy of our salvation, there is both Father and Son” it sounds so much like the doctrine of the Godhead that I am astounded.
All the other quotes also sound so much like the Godhead that I think Andy has proven very nicely that the LDS church is the only one that has the truth in the modern day, and that by the time of the Counsel of Nicaea that truth had been lost and perverted into what we know as the Trinity.
” …. the gospel that God restored in these last days was the exact same Gospel taught by the
Apostles .”
Fact of the matter is that the gospel that Jesus’ apostles preached was not restored in these last
days because there was no complete /universal apostasy . So no restoration happened in 1830 .
What Joseph Smith did was actually introduce a imitation gospel in place of the true one , not
restore the same one Jesus’ apostles preached 1700 years earlier . To be accurate the Mormon
church( and it’s gospel ) is not the restored church , but rather the substituted church .
” All the other quotes also sound so much like the Godhead that I think Andy has proven very
nicely that the LDS church is the only one that has the truth in the modern day , and that by the
time of the Council of Nicea that truth had been lost and perverted into what we know as the
Trinity . ”
Actually , what Andy has shared was enough to allow people to see that the Trinity is based on
more solid ground than the false caricatures of it that those like Mormon leaders have told
their followers for well over a century now .
Mormon leaders have introduced an array of teachings about the Trinity /Godhead to their
flock ever since their arrival on the American landscape , and given their teaching track record they can offer no guarantee to their flock that the current doctrine will be around very long .
Brigham Young even introduced into the Mormon sacred temple ceremony the teaching that
the three Gods who created this earth were : Elohim, Jehovah , and Michael .
What Mormon leaders have taught about members of the their Trinity runs way past what
Jesus’ true apostles preached in His church . These latter days prophets succumbed to the very
thing Paul said would happen to those who just would’nt stay within the safety of the apostles
teachings —- 2 Tim 4: 3, 4 .
LDS have the Bible , they don’t need latter days prophets who have consistently ” taught for
doctrine the commandments of men ” .