James Talmage gives an evidence of the Great Apostasy:
> “Disregard for truth. As early as the fourth century, certain pernicious doctrines embodying a disregard for truth gained currency in the Church. Thus, it was taught ‘that it was an act of virtue to deceive and lie, when by that means the interests of the church might be promoted.’—(Mosheim, ‘Eccl. Hist.,’ Cent. IV, Part II, ch. 3:16.) Needless to say, sins other than those of falsehood and deceit were justified when committed in the supposed interests of church advancement, and crime was condoned under the specious excuse that the end justifies the means. Many of the fables and fictitious stories relating to the lives of Christ and the apostles, as also the spurious accounts of supernatural visitations and wonderful miracles, in which the literature of the early centuries abound, are traceable to this infamous doctrine that lies are acceptable unto God if perpetrated in a cause that man calls good.” (James Talmage, The Great Apostasy, ch. 7)
It’s a good thing Mormonism doesn’t do that kind of thing, right? Otherwise, that’d be an evidence of apostasy.
PS It might sound like Talmage is quoting an early church father, but he’s not. He is quoting the historian Johann Lorenz von Mosheim.
At first I really thought this topic was about js and his church he built. I guess it could still fit them since we know they do that.
What would qualify as “apostasy”.
Paul warned about wolves coming in and ravenging the flock. Before him, Our Lord talked about false prophets.
Jude writes about it extensively. I’ve posted the essential Christian doctrines on this blog many times over the years. When people get these basic doctrines wrong I’d qualify them as apostates.
Mormons, for example, want to call themselves the true church and Christians. Yet they reject God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, God’s plan of Salvation, the Word of God and embrace an occult based religion founded by a practitioner of magic arts.
I wouldn’t even consider them “apostates” because they don’t have enough Christianity in the religion to be characterized as fallen away.
They do however lie and deceive.
The Mormon Hierarchy has always blatantly broken the law under the auspices of “the end justifies the means.” Here is a great example of that:
Joseph F. Smith was concerned about their lying getting out and gave this directive after he was forced to testify before Congress (and got caught lying) in the Reed Smoot Hearings:
This is just what happened with Wilford Woodruff’s Journals, Abraham Cannon’s, and many others that “made a pretty full account of everything that transpired in the councils of the brethren”. If there is any document that damns the Mormons more than this one, I don’t know what it is. You see, if they have one set of minutes, they can doctor them, or order the person to be judicious in what they write down. Notice that these men were not concerned with anyone altering or taking them out of context, only that there was too much information in the private journals. To lie though, in any way, goes against what these men affirm as binding scripture:
Here, one Mormon “apostle” says that Wars are necessary for the spread of the gospel:
And then Canon writes that the brethren did engage in political bribery and influence, though they have outright denied this for years. Think about what Lyman said, that wars are NECESSARY for the spread of the gospel, and that he objected to the truth being revealed about the involvement of the “brethren” in politics.
This is unthinkable and deplorable in someone who who claims to be an apostle or prophet of Jesus. These journals and diaries give us the truth about who these men were, and what they taught, believed and did. This is why F. Smith was so terrified that these documents would get out to the public.
Joseph F. Smith was a notorious liar. Here is some of his testimony under oath at the Reed Smoot Hearings,
These outright lies offended many people, including Abraham’s brother Frank J. Cannon, who painfully recalled these instances of Smith’s perjury:
This was not the only instance of the Smiths going to Lannan. In his diary entry for Friday, September 23, 1898, John Henry Smith writes,
Frank Cannon’s recollection along with John Henry Smith’s diary entry, show how Joseph F. Smith further perjured himself at the Smoot Hearings:
Not only is Smith lying here about this specific instance, he is lying about Church interest in the Tribune. The “charges” that the Tribune were making WERE TRUE! They were not “vicious”. Smith absolutely knew this, and knew that the First Presidency and the “apostles” had been discussing the Tribune for YEARS, and that they had even prayed to God to stop the Tribune from printing the TRUTH! The following diary entries show that the Tribune was of ongoing concern to the Church Hierarchy, and was read and discussed often in Smith’s presence:
They were angry at the Tribune for reporting the continuance of plural marriages, which the Church was publicaly denying, but that Grant just admitted in his diary!
Treating the Salt Lake Tribune “with silent contempt” by way of the Deseret News, did not stop them from reading and discussing it:
This was a year before Smith testified at the Smoot hearings that “we pay no attention to them, even if they do tell the truth.” The charge by the Tribune about the Senate election involving Thomas J. Kearns was also true. As Frank J. Cannon writes,
Heber J. Grants diary confirms his and the church’s involvement in the campaign:
This is just one example of some of Smith’s lying to Congress. When the actual facts concerning what went on in the Church are revealed, it paints a wholly different picture than what the Church does. That is why Smith ordered the “brethren” to no longer write down any of the doings in their councils. That is also why D. Michael Quinn’s two books on The Mormon Hierarchy are so important to read to gain a total understanding of how much they have lied over the years.
Jesus said that the Devil was a liar from the beginning and said to some religious leaders, You of your father the devil and you speak his language. Seems like the Mormon church is following in there fathers foot steps. Fits like a glove.
It would appear that Talmage was not aware, or maybe he was able to excuse, that JS lied to nonmembers and members about polygamy all his life even unto allowing a section of the DnC to state that monogamy was the truth of God and the policy of the LDS church. Oh and that section was notnremoved until decades after JS’s death and even after the church was openly teaching it in Utah.
Apostasy. It’s what happens when lies are made scripture.
Mormon leaders have gotten quite creative in trying to convince people that a universal
apostasy from the doctrine taught by Jesus and His apostles happened soon after all His
apostles were gone . This alleged apostasy , departure , from the true gospel of Jesus and His
church caused spiritual darkness to cover the earth and 1700 years later God restored this very
same gospel of salvation taught by Jesus’ apostles through Mormon prophet Joseph Smith .
To add further to this ridiculous theory is that it’s also taught by Mormon authorities
that because of this apostasy , ” Christianity sickened and died ” , that those members
of Jesus’ church body that were around after the original apostles all were killed or
had died off , those members were all hunted down and ” exterminated ” by evil men who had
succumbed to the apostasy . Thus the only “church ” that was left was an apostate one etc.
This type of rhetoric is what has come from the pen of Mormon authorities to prove their
erroneous doctrine of a complete/universal apostasy of the Christian religion .
We should expect this type of reasoning from those who seek to introduce the need for people
to accept them as God’s sole mouthpiece for these latter days . Jesus said to Beware of such
men —-Matt. 24 :11 .
Wow, the guy in the 1700s came up with this disregard for truth as early as the 4th century certain pernicious doctrines embodying a disregard for truth gain currency in the church. The us, it was taught that it was an act of virtue deceive and lie, when by that means the interest of church might be promoted.
It is interesting he drew this conclusion. The fourth century was an interesting time in church history, a time in which trinitarianism became dominant. Emperors kicked Arian bishops out of the towns, wouldn’t let them build churches, wouldn’t allow pagans to offer sacrifices, and when Christians destroy a jewish synagogue and did not pay the damages when the Emperor had ordered them to made for very interesting times. Who was in charge?
could you explain your timeline I am trying to understand your superblog.
We’ve answered your basic question at length previously. I really don’t want to go all through the early history of the Church again with you. You need to get yourself a couple of good books by reputed Church historians and study them.
Let me add, I don’t know what your point is but if it’s to do the Mormon conclusion, “therefore the (Mormon) church is true” routine, you’re not going to get that out of a study of the history of the Christian Church.
Joseph F. Smith committed multiple instances of Perjury. Mormon “apostles” and “prophets” engaged in bribery and used their influence to rig elections. They were terrified that individual journal/diary accounts would bring this out.
What do you think? Is grindael making all of this up? Is it “out of context”. Is it all very innocent and he’s drawing the wrong conclusions?
Really, you need to begin to see this organization and its leaders, past and present, for what they are.
Why do you think grindael along with Ironman and Kate walked away from the Mormon church specifically and Mormonism generally? The point is that there isn’t a testimony of the Mormon church that will hold up to the evidence that’s available that it’s all a sham. That is, of course, unless someone is totally delusional. I can understand why some Mormons would hang around for other reasons, but not because they believe it’s true.
Is he making it all up? No Is it out of context? Yes because they are from personal journals and the background for the statements are not quit clear. The history is not clear either. Were senators directly elected or by the state house back then? If it could be written better –organized,collated,whatever- it would make a better story. Very good research but a better explaination of the back ground is needed. Is it innocent and is he drawing the wrong conclusion? I don’t know.but I don’t think so. Now grindael don’t feel sad because I like Thomas B. Costain’s series Last Of The Plantagenents and that was I believe faction ( fiction mixed with a lot of Fact.) Remember this someone else can draw different conclusion or see something different in the information you put out.
I need to get a couple of good books by reputed church historians. I am sure that is going to be unbiased. They paint a glorious picture of Constantines’ triumph , the victory of Trinitarian thought over the other heresies, dominance of the church at Rome, and all of this being divinely inspiring. Well maybe your right Falcon I probably do.
Given your mind set, anything can be true, it’s just a matter of selecting the thing that has the most appeal.
There are scholars who write factually about the history of the Christian Church and the formulation of the theology that explains what the Bible reveals. I’ve got a book here called “Early Christian Doctrines” by J.N.D. Kelly that gives a good historical account of these matters. Here’s what is said about the book.
“This revised edition of the standard history of the first great period in Christian thought has been thoroughly updated in the light of the latest historical findings. Dr. Kelly organizes an ocean of material by outlining the development of each doctrine in its historical context. He lucidly summarizes the genesis of Christian thought from the close of the apostolic age to the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth century-a time teeming with fresh and competing ideas. The doctrines of the Trinity, the authority of the Bible and tradition, the nature of Christ, salvation, original sin and grace, and the sacraments are all extensively treated in these pages.”
Now I know this isn’t as good as some Mormon prophet saying that he got a revelation about this or that. A scholarly treatment actually takes some work, some thought and a systematic approach to presenting information.
As long as you are locked into your current mind set, you will not be free to make logical deductions and come to meaningful conclusions. People get sucked into cults because, to a certain extent, they are lazy. They out source their thinking to a bunch of men who they suppose are getting direct revelation from God.
You’ve been here long enough clyde and have had the testimony of former Mormons who actually did the work of ferreting out the information and facts and in doing so have come to new life in Jesus Christ. You need to follow their example.
Actually Clyde, I did do a better job, the story is here, on my blog. I simply forgot to put a link to my quotes.
Your problem is your trying to prove that Mormonism is the real deal by trying to prove Christianity isn’t. That’s a backwards way of thinking but that’s how cults work. The “prophet” proclaims that the established sect has lost its way but now he/she has the correct revelation and will set all things straight.
You may as well jump on board any one of several sects that have emerged since the time of Joseph Smith forward. It’s all pretty much the same story. You just happened to latch on to Mormonism. BTW, the FLDS say that your particular sect of Mormonism has lost its way and you’re a bunch of apostates.
Funny how that works!