Are Mormons (and Protestants) Right About the "Great Apostasy?"

[@Isaac_Hess]

As a former Mormon (now Catholic), well done! This was a very good episode, and I think you did a very good job charitably, and accurately, stating the LDS position. Many current Latter-day Saints recognize these issues, and there is a new theological movement in the faith to strongly downplay the Great Apostasy narrative in favor of a sort of pluralism, where the restoration wasn't so much a response to total apostasy, but was God's desire to bring "new light and truth" to the earth through Joseph Smith. (Needless to say, this is utter revisionist history, and as you point out the Great Apostasy was intimately tied to the earliest moments of Mormonism.) I'd also like to point out a subtle nuance with how Mormons use the word "Priesthood." Catholics (and most people) use it as you did - the "state of being or acting as priest." Mormons use it in a much more intangible way - it is the _authority_ to act in God's name. Sort of like how a properly deputized police officer has authority to act in the name of the state, whereas someone pretending to be a police officer does not - even if they are both "acting as a police officer." So when you claim that the priesthood was never lost because "we have an unbroken line of priests," that will not resonate much with a Latter-day Saint. Because for them, what was lost was this intangible _authority_, which can be withdrawn by God even if people are continuing to _act_ in the priestly office. (Imagine a police officer is fired by the department, but he retains his uniform, badge, and gun; he isn't _really_ a police officer anymore, but externally he could sure look like one.)

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

If you’re interested in the Latter-day Saint side of things, here are some videos on the topic: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4uWgmhnftZ6fck m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gajbgGOKgLVjqtk m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ7dqGSXncihqLM m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/oKeVYaGqopd6iM0 m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/baO5Z5qLntV1q5I If after watching both sides you’re more convinced than ever that the Catholics are right, let me know why. 🙃

[@Compulsive-Elk7103]

Welcome to full communion with Christ' real church, what made you join?

[@jackjackson7343]

Your episode on Pints was really great! Thank you for your witness

[@KaiserSoze-us9ji]

I love you Isaac. Brilliant, yet so self effacing. How can one not only leave the Restored Church, to leave into, the Great and Abominable Church ? When LDS go into Angelical Protestants chards, maybe I am biased as a former Mennonite/Lutheran/Baptists, seems more innocuous, even if regressive. But the Catholics ? The Reformation led to the Restoration. And yes, unequivocally, there was a Great Apostasy. Not to be pejorative, look at all the Molestations and Sale of Indulgences.

[@HaleStorm49]

Which way did the Apostles use the word priesthood? Was it the intangible way or the "Anyone can act like an Apostle way"

[@JohnBoyX570]

So good. Matt Fradd is looking for someone to debate a Mormon apologist on his channel. I elect you.

[@rosiegirl2485]

I think the problem Matt Fradd was having and I believe he is still having is finding a responsible Mormon who is willing to defend Mormonism.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@rosiegirl2485 No, that isn't the problem. The problem is they want to set it up like a CNN debate where they get to decide what is discussed and for how long. You have to be anti or exmormon to have a normal conversation. They can't risk platforming someone who makes a more compelling case for than against.

[@rosiegirl2485]

@HaleStorm49 I don't believe that to be true at all! Having the truth is what is important, and showing the era's in the Mormon religion is not so difficult.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@rosiegirl2485 hundreds of scholars and millions of return missionaries walking around and the only people Pints can to talk to happen to be exmormons? Hmmkay. Has Joel interviewed an active Mormon? Has Trent Horn? Can you point me to an episode of any Catholic host doing so? If it's as easy as you think... they would be speaking to Mormons instead of about them. Believe what you like.

[@rosiegirl2485]

@HaleStorm49 Have them contact Matt Fradd. You might not agree, but I truly believe that he is looking for someone who can truly defend their beliefs!

[@orbeuniversity]

Introduction 1:36 Step-1: Establish the stakes. 1:54 The Catholic Church Claim, in a Nutshell 2:41 The LDS Claim, in a nutshell 13:55 The Stakes 15:15 Step-2: Distinguish between personal from universal apostasy. 25:45 Step-3: Establish that the early Church was the Catholic Church. 32:03 Four points of agreement. 33:18 Step-4: Did the apostles fail? 36:35 The Kingdom Parables. 41:56 Step-5: What happened to prophecy, then? 57:05 Step-6: Be ready for the standard LDS proof-text: Amos 8 : 11-12 1:08:34 Step-7: Does Daniel 2 foretell Jesus Christ or Joseph Smith? 1:16:31 Step-8 (Final): Did Jesus Preserve His Church From Apostasy?

[@clearstonewindows]

And the conclusion?

[@IlleMagister]

You sir, are my hero. I wish your comment had more upvotes so that others could find it easier.

[@codenametemplar]

Just about to watch it, but I'm gonna assume the quick answer is no 🤣

[@johnnyosprey6056]

Spoilers…geez….😂

[@codenametemplar]

@@johnnyosprey6056 I said I ain't watched it yet, it's just personal speculation 🤣....... I might be wrong👀🤣

[@Anthony-fk2zu]

😂

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

If you’re interested in the Latter-day Saint side of things, here are some videos on the topic: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4uWgmhnftZ6fck m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gajbgGOKgLVjqtk m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ7dqGSXncihqLM m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/oKeVYaGqopd6iM0 m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/baO5Z5qLntV1q5I If after watching both sides you’re more convinced than ever that the Catholics are right, let me know why.

[@RealSeanithan]

The short answer is no. The long answer is noooooooooooooooooooooooo.

[@sanoroo]

Great episode. Thank you. I was received into the Roman Catholic Church in 2014. I was raised in the churches of Christ, which grew out of the Restoration (Stone-Campbell) Movement. I was taught by the churches of Christ that an apostasy occurred quite quickly following the death of the Apostles. I believe Stone and Campbell were contemporaries of Joseph Smith. Perhaps you can consider a Shameless Popery Podcast on churches of Christ history and theology.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

Stone and Campbell were a good bit before Smith, and Smith wasn’t influenced by their ideas. Mormon restorationism is distinct and independent from Protestant restorationism.

[@sanoroo]

@@KnuttyEntertainment The Restoration Movement in the US was 1790-1840. Joseph Smirh founded the LDS church in 1830. I cannot say if Smith was or was not influenced by that movement.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@@sanoroo That period is called the 2nd great awakening, the ideas of Stone and Campbell began to be popularized during the early portions. Joseph Smith was 14 during the revival’s hay day in 1820, when his famous first vision took place. The only thing that influenced Joseph about the religious revival was that it created in him a great distaste for all the divisions and disputes between all the different Protestant sects, which is partly why Latter-day Saints put so much emphasis on Apostolic succession.

[@Compulsive-Elk7103]

​​@@KnuttyEntertainmentthe problem is that the LDS can't prove their so called claim of "apostolic succession" It all comes down to if you believe in what Joseph Smith said happened, which in fact never happened

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@robertstephenson6806 Poorly written fiction eh? Look whether or not you believe you believe the Book of Mormon is true is a matter between you and God, but poorly written? That’s objectively wrong. You’re talking about one of the most intricate, influential, and compositionally impressive books in history: m.kzbin.info/aero/PLify9A8x-4Qq_d_dpN4falUFCha2sKP0j m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/r6KrnaRne56GbKM

[@JoshN91]

Really looking forward to this one! I had a conversation with some LDS missionaries this Monday and followed up the brief conversation with a text outlining why I have doubts about the Great Apostasy. I can’t wait to see if my response lines up at all with Joe’s! They said they will look into my concerns and we will get together in person to discuss them. :)

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

If you’re interested in the Latter-day Saint side of things, here are some videos on the topic: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4uWgmhnftZ6fck m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gajbgGOKgLVjqtk m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ7dqGSXncihqLM m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/oKeVYaGqopd6iM0 m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/baO5Z5qLntV1q5I If after watching both sides you’re more convinced than ever that the Catholics are right, let me know why.

[@JazzyJacksJokeShack]

God bless you for spreading the Gospel I'm doing the same with my local LDS too

[@clearstonewindows]

Have you read the great apostacy?

[@JoshN91]

@@clearstonewindows I have read a chapter sent to me by some missionaries. :) I would love to read the whole thing though. Once money is a little less tight I’d like to buy a physical copy. I don’t do well with digital books. Haha

[@clearstonewindows]

@@JoshN91 sorry didn't see this response... Have a good trip. Ask the missionaries if someone in the ward has a copy they'll give you. If not i can ship you one. I love Mexico

[@SUPERHEAVYBOOSTER]

Joe this was a really fantastic episode. Thank you so much. A friend of mine has gone from listening to one of your podcasts to now going to weekly RCIA sessions and he even now sends me your new episodes.

[@ArchangelIcon]

Thanks for those excellent two talks on Mormons. Wonderfully researched and presented. As an Eastern Orthodox Christian this is very helpful. Where I am in a small town in the UK, Mormons don't (yet) exist, but there's a large presence and evangelism from Jehovah's Whitnesses. Maybe you could present a similar video on them?

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

I might have to try! I'll probably do Seventh-Day Adventism first, though.

[@tonyl3762]

When you realize that Mormonism makes Joseph Smith out to be a better Church builder/founder than Jesus Christ, it makes sense that Mormonism had to downgrade Jesus and elevate man in their theology.

[@t.d6379]

They also believe for a while that Adam was God and above Jesus.

[@femaleKCRoyalsFan]

Jesus warned about false prophets. Joseph Smith was one of them

[@catholic3dod790]

Why does Mormon church have the beds on the upper levels?

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

​@catholic3dod790 The Mormon church headquartered in Salt Lake city, which is the mainstream Mormon church that most people are familiar with, does not have beds in any of their buildings of worship. It's possible you are thinking of the FLDS church (the fundamental Mormons) who practice polygamy. I know their leader had beds installed in their temples so he could have sex with women.

[@Klee99zeno]

and when you see that a man like Smith was clearly motivated by a desire for power and a lust for multiple wives then it becomes clear that no true prophet of God would act like that.

[@Bob_Oxnard-sp1gr]

Great job, Joe. The charitable approach you take is almost as good as your logic. There are millions of kind, well-intentioned, and moral Mormons and Protestants, so it’s good to address these issues in a constructive way. That said, the notion that Christ founded a church that failed isn’t logical. He can make the universe but can’t make a non-failing church? And the Bible is the unfailing word of God, but it was put together by a church that failed? (This point will resonate with people who study when, how, and by whom the Bible was put together - and who determined what books go in the Bible, what books don’t.) If the apostles and the people who knew them couldn’t get Christianity right despite being direct witnesses of Christ or direct recipients of the apostles teaching, what’s the chance that Martin Luther or Calvin got it right 16 centuries later? Or the chances that the latest mega church founded 5 years ago is getting it right? People sin. Institutions have corruption. That has always been the case going back to Adam and Eve, and always will be the way it is. Human nature. That doesn’t mean the church Christ founded failed. In fact, look around today and look for that impeccable, unblemished church on the hill, among the thousands of post-reformation churches. Any luck? Thanks again.

[@crusaderACR]

​@robertstephenson6806How do you know that? Under what authority?

[@jayguevara6153]

@@crusaderACR the authority of his own rugged individualism and private interpretation.

[@hyeminkwun9523]

My people perish for lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6). God wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the Truth (1 Tim 2:4). Our Lord is the Truth (John 14:6) and the Light (John 1:4,6,9). Our Lord instituted His Church as the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim 3:15), and set it on a mountain as the Light of the world (Matt 5:14) so that all souls may see and come to it to obtain knowledge of the Truth and eternal salvation. Our Lord founded it on the Apostles (Rev 21:14) with St. Peter as their leader and His Vicar (Pope) on earth, vesting him with His Authority by giving him the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt 16:18-19), and sent them to baptize and teach to OBSERVE ALL He commanded (Matt 28:20), and said, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned (Mark 16:16)." Our Lord provided in His Church means (Sacraments) to communicate His Infinite Graces and Merits to those who believe through the Apostles words (John 17:20), and become members of His Church, His Body and Bride (Eph 5:23), so that they may be transformed into true children of God, True Image and Likeness of Christ (Rom 8:29, 2 Cor 3:18), worthy for the Heavenly Kingdom. Our Lord said, "Amen, Amen, I say to you, whoever receives the one I send, receives Me and whoever receives Me receives the One who sent Me (John 13:20; Matt 10:40)" and "Whoever listens to you listens to Me. Whoever rejects you rejects Me and rejects the One who sent Me (Luke 10:16)." Brothers and sisters, why do you not come to Our Lord's One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church, but seek Him on your own way or by following man-made protestant churches? They did not even exist before Luther founded his in AD 1524, after rebelling against the Catholic Church whose Head is Our Lord (Eph 5:23) and with whom He and Holy Sprit always remain until the end of the world (Matt 28:20, John 14:16-17). Do you want to be like those who look but do not see and hear but do not listen or understand (Matt 13:13-15)? Do you truly believe and trust in All His words? Protestant churches teach a partial truth (from Bible to deceive and lure unsuspecting souls) mixed with heresies and lies (to lead them to their master, father of lies), and work against the Catholic Church and Our Lord, even though they say 'Lord, Lord (Matt 7:21-23).' Do you think people lived before Luther were deceived by the Catholic Church, the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim 3:15), and lost their salvation? Nonsense! Can the only Divine Institution fail to fulfill the mission given Her, that is Redemption of souls until the end of the world? Never (Matt 16:18)! Unless repent and convert, pastors of protestant churches as well as those who follow them will hear, "I Never Knew you. Depart from Me, you evil doers (Matt 7:21-23)."

[@IJS92]

I was raised Methodist (Protestant) and the Mormons are just as crazy to me as to you Catholics. Please don't sum everyone up

[@Anthony-fk2zu]

Joe please get your books, especially The Early Church was the Catholic Church, on Audible

[@tonyl3762]

Very nice tie-in to the recent Sunday gospels about the parables of the Kingdom!

[@user-hj8vd2od9h]

Like the new setup, although I'd prefer if the mic was positioned so we could see your mouth talk!

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

You are not alone! The guys in video scolded me for this.

[@modernsaints7881]

Favorite podcast in the world!!! Great decision Joe❤

[@JohnHenry-w5m]

Thank you! Good work and explanations. Good man 👍📿🥰

[@Hamann9631]

44:00. God's definition of 'priesthood" is not the specific office/job/calling of "priest". It is power and authority from God. Every true prophet has power and authority from God. That manual does not treat priest and prophet as the same thing. My son is a priest, not a prophet. That manual uses the definition I gave already in this post for priesthood.

[@JoshN91]

Great episode! My only critique is that it is too short. 😂

[@marenlatham4349]

As a former Mormon who converted to Catholicism, I cannot tell you how on the money you are with this line of reasoning. It's the most important claim of Mormonism and THE reason we always felt justified over Protestants. I always understood that it had to either be us or the Catholics, since a break off group can't have any authority. It either has to be the original church Christ founded, or a church restored by God. If you can show a Mormon that there never was a great apostasy...and that actually it's totally incoherent to think that Christ's bride would die, leaving Christ a widower, as you said, that would really stop an honest Mormon in their tracks. I can tell you that not a lot of detail was ever given to me about the early church. It just seemed like a murky time, covered in the mists of antiquity. It was absolutely shocking to me to discover how completely ignorant I was about the early church, and yet that is what the religion I was born into was based on. Bringing this into the light is incredibly powerful! Wonderful job and God bless you!

[@atalibouck8780]

Former Mormon turned Catholic here too! The problem is that most of the Mormons I have discussions with about the Great Apostasy, even if they concede that it probably didn't happen after a few discussions, they are still convinced that Joseph Smith revealed "the fullness of the gospel". There's been a huge shift within the Mormon church away from "a great Apostasy" and into a pluralism mindset. The idea being that maybe Christ's church never apostasized, but they still have the fullness of the gospel. It's a problem.

[@marenlatham4349]

@@atalibouck8780 You are so right. Really, there is no silver bullet for Mormonism. It's like your mind is booby trapped and there is an answer for everything. In the end, a Mormon has to get themselves out with the help of the Holy Spirit. No one on the outside can get passed all of the traps. But I do think that these arguments and logic, do weaken the defences....especially over time. I am sure that what you are doing is making a difference, even if you can't see it. I know it did for me.

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

@@atalibouck8780 There's a similar shift in Protestant thought -- the Reformers were pretty explicit on an Apostasy, and later Protestants have typically had a muddier claim about there being "some error" sometime, and a restoration to "fullness," rather than a restoration of an apostate Church to truth. It's definitely a hard claim to defend, because it's a lot vaguer about what it's claiming!

[@jamess7576]

I was discussing this with two missionaries and their bishop. I got them to agree that biblically the Eucharist is and must be the Body of Christ. So when I asked which Church follows that teaching the Catholic or LDS. They admitted it was the Catholic Church. However their response to this was that God changed His mind and the Church didn't follow and that is how the apostasy happened. I was shocked they so readily accused God of being apostate.

[@smartismarti4049]

I've had the same experience with learning early Christian history, but have had a hard time putting it into words. I like how you described it.

[@Hamann9631]

3:00 Accurate summary of our beliefs. Thank you

[@MaryMBray-ki9sy]

God bless you and God bless the Catholic Church.🤗🌞🙏✌🙌😇

[@RealSeanithan]

Conspiracy theory: Kahan shows under the pronunciation "kaw-han". Kaw han. Scott Hahn. Coincidence? Yes.

[@johnhoelzeman6683]

That's a good way of framing the question in the title 😂

[@conovan5081]

Title is missing a "?" I found myself waiting for thursday so I could watch your new episode, it is really my new favorite (:

[@mattduffy4952]

I came here as a prot and wow I dont know what to think now

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

You can start by asking "would an apostle that sees my congregation today be pleased or not?" Then read how the christian witnessrs to how a local church looks like, and be ready to conclude "no". There is no prirest offering a sacrifice, and no bishop ordained in a line of successiom to the Apostles. Nobody is really bound to obey the leader, and that goes against hebrews 13:17

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

God bless your openness, Matt! I'm happy to help in any way that I can, but obviously, I'm not substitute for prayer and study. (I'm also happy to recommend books if you're looking for something in particular).

[@clearstonewindows]

I know a good book@@JosephHeschmeyer . It's the book of Mormon. Or how about "the great apostasy"

[@StringofPearls55]

@@clearstonewindows I prefer The Apostasy That Wasn't by Rod Bennett.

[@clearstonewindows]

@@StringofPearls55 I'm sorry I don't understand is this sarcasm?

[@tracebeard9249]

I realize that this is an older video but, I just found it and, as a "cradle Mormon" who now believes in the Catholic Church, this is a fantastic presentation to refute their entire "great apostasy" argument. Without this, there is no reason for a "restoration " of Christ's gospel wothout even getting into polygamy, polyandry, and the lies of Joseph Smith and his successors. Thank you!

[@mitchelljimeno3564]

Praise the Lord! thank you

[@ShowaGojira92]

Great video as always! I haven't talked to many folks about the idea of a great apostasy but now I'll know how to refute such a false notion!

[@cactoidjim1477]

They have been insisting on not using the term "Mormon" any longer, but "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" which is way more of a mouthful than "mormon". It also shortens to CoJCoLDS....and Coj-colds sounds like something you don't want to catch.

[@alannahmay3823]

The word "Mormon" dies as the Mormon church is dying...or it will whittle down to a tiny denomination that once had its day.

[@HaleStorm49]

​@@alannahmay3823They are Emphasizing the proper name for the exact opposite reason. It's all the other churches that are sputtering and shuttering.

[@tabandken8562]

Too bad. Their own book calls them Mormons. I'm for sure not calling them "Church of Jesus Christ", because Jesus didn't start their Church and I'm not calling them "latter day saints" cause they're not later day saints.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@tabandken8562 What page does it call them Mormons? Chapter and verse please.

[@codenametemplar]

That was an amazing video!

[@Forester-]

It's interesting that Mormons don't believe in sola scriptura but also don't look to early Christian witness to better understand the New Testament. You have to be presupposing the apostasy and Smith's revelation to come to that conclusion.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

Actually, Latter-day Saints do put heavy importance on the ante-Nicene church. If you’re interested in the Latter-day Saint side of things, here are some videos on the topic: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4uWgmhnftZ6fck m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gajbgGOKgLVjqtk m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ7dqGSXncihqLM m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/oKeVYaGqopd6iM0 m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/baO5Z5qLntV1q5I If after watching both sides you’re more convinced than ever that the Catholics are right, let me know why. 🙃

[@tgphlaicke]

You either don't believe in solo scriptura, or you don't believe in the Bible. Three quick things to consider: 1) Paul baptized gentiles, the leadership of the church had to discuss and Peter had to receive revelation that this was acceptable. 2) Then the leadership was faced with the choice of whether these new converts had to be circumcised, Peter again goes to the Lord to receive revelation on behalf of the whole church. 3) The Book of Revelation prophesies of two prophets preaching in Jerusalem who are killed by the anti-Christ, it is undeniable that these are prophets of the Lord...but solo scriptura. The Bible makes no claim to solo-scriptura. Bonus thought: Which Bible, The one with one tree in the Garden of Eden or Two? The Catholic version? The Protestant version? The KJV or something with more "approachable" language? Who decides? The Bible as Holy writ, is indispensable in drawing closer to Heavenly Father, but it is not perfect it is not all there is, it doesn't even claim to be all there is on its own behalf. That is a much later claim made by men, men who had control of a Latin version and no one else could read it. Once that problem was solved, it became clear that while indispensable, the Bible is not perfect, nor inerrant.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@@tgphlaicke Latter-day Saints don’t believe in Sola scriptura. We have both additional books, and modern prophets.

[@tgphlaicke]

@@KnuttyEntertainment yes, I know, I was making. The point that neither do Protestants, thought they claim to. Trinity not in the Bible, saved by grace alone, not in the Bible. Etc. Etc.

[@KnuttyEntertainment]

@@tgphlaicke You speak the truth.

[@llla_german_ewoklll6413]

Hey Joe, can you please please please do a series on Seventh-day adventism and messianicism?

[@raeldc]

Yes please. Although I think much of what Joe said here apply to SDAs and any other Protestant. SDAs believe that the early Church apostatized very early on. Mervym Maxwell, an Adventist scholar said: "The speed with which the early Christians tobogganed into apostasy takes one’s breath away." They can't square the fact that the early Church kept the Lord's Day centuries before Constantine. So the only conclusion they can come up with is that the Church apostatized. BTW, I'm a former Adventist, became Catholic in 2020.

[@Hamann9631]

1:20:00. The Great Apostacy makes more sense than the church continuing without Apostles, the same baptism, allowance of eating meat, and without marriage for all.

[@tabandken8562]

The Apostles were witnesses of Jesus Christ. Your "Great Apostasy" book even says that. The Apostles weren't meant to continue on, their Successors did. The Apostles were also the first Bishops and their Successors were Bishops.

[@Hamann9631]

@@tabandken8562 If they were not meant to continue, why were 2 apostles called after the resurrection? They would have stopped at the first 12 if they were not meant to continue.

[@cameronreed1411]

​@@tabandken8562 LDS would argue you're reading "successor" into the history as an actual priesthood office that was legitimate and recognized as such, but that isn't the case.

[@Theosis_and_prayer]

To be an honest Protestant you will have to believe there was some great apostasy

[@huntsman528]

Or that the 'true church' isn't an organization or denomination. But a 'universal' concept of the collective churches of true believers. I don't see the Eastern Orthodox church as any more true than the Catholic church or Protestant churches. The RCC is the one who broke from Orthodoxy with Augustine's doctrines. I don't see why anybody need a great apostacy unless you want to start a new religion like Mormons. The RCC just has so much baggage added on top of scriptures. The church in Acts didn't need an 'organization ' to be part of the true church and neither do churches today.

[@gregorybarrett4998]

@@huntsman528 Hi, huntsman. We're back to the mosquito in the nudist colony analogy, scarcely knowing where to begin for plenitude of options in addressing deficiencies in your comment. As to visibility, a city set on a hill cannot be hidden; rather, everyone can see clearly that it is, where it is, what it is, what it has, and how it is organised. God intends and effects that His Church have such characteristics. As to organisation, God had Moses organise even the foreigners who attached themselves to Israel at the exodus into membership according to the twelve tribes of Israel, with progressively subordinate tribal structure, as well as the tribes themselves marching in specific position relative to each other and to the tabernacle. They received territorial allotment according to tribe, with their progressively subordinate leaders maintaining order in their jurisdictions. The Temple had its organisation, with the holy of holies, the holy place, the priestly territory with its altar of sacrifice, the territory of the Levites, the court of the men of Israel, the court of the women of Israel, the court of the gentiles. Jesus identified outsiders, believers, followers, disciples, seventy appointed to ministry, twelve apostles, three chief attendants, one chief steward. These appointed both successors and subordinate collaborators. The Church ruled, imposing teachings and practices for the maintenance of order in the Church as a whole and in progressively subordinate jurisdictions. While it is certainly true that there is a body of ideas which informs Christianity, this body of ideas is held, maintained, plumbed, protected, proclaimed, transmitted, and entrusted to successors by those established by Christ to teach, rule, sanctify, and judge. As for relations between East and West, there is a long and storied history which does not justly lend itself to such simplistic characterisations as the whole of the East being in peace and harmony with the whole of the West until, suddenly scandalised by Augustine's teaching (or the West's reception thereof), breaking off as a body from the whole of the West. The reason Protestantism, or non-Catholicism (or those who reject the authority and teaching of successors in the episcopal rank of the Apostles more generally) needs a great apostasy to validate its position is that the Church is, has always been, and has always insisted itself to be the visible organisation of the successors of the Apostles. Anyone who claims that the Church is anything different from that has to account for the incompatibility between his claim and what the Church has always claimed. If their claim is true, then the Church's claim is false, and the fact that the Church makes such false claim can only be explained by the Church itself teaching falsehood with respect to essential doctrines of Christianity, which necessarily implies a great apostasy.

[@crusaderACR]

​@@huntsman528"isnt an organization or denomination" The Bible gives the Church authority to bind and loose, and to discipline. How can that be possible without organization?

[@huntsman528]

@alonso19989 it isn't limited to one disciple and it isn't limited to one church. Churches can be formal organizations or they can be groups of fellowshiping believers. Does a small home church need a big organization to bind, loose, disciple, have elders, or exercise authority? I don't think so. So if there are lots of church organizations, does one have to be the 'true organizations'? With the disciples there were a lot. They didn't all agree. They formed their own churches through their work. All of them had authority to bind, loose, disciple. And all of them were part of the true church, yet none of them individually were the true church. The jailer became part of the true church when he believed, yet he wasn't Catholic or part of an organization.

[@crusaderACR]

@@huntsman528 This interpretation raises up too many questions. I can't just say I'm in Peter's church, or Paul's church, or my hairdresser's church, the Bible tells me that there's just one I have to concern myself with: The Church of Jesus Christ. To follow any other is to follow a fallible man. That's what I take from holy scripture. Do you have any argument or proof passage for your position? Also I understand the Church must have the power to excommunicate, or so says Scripture. After someone gets confronted in private, then if persisting confronted with witnesses, we are to tell the Church if still persisting we treat those in error as _pagans._ How would you exercise that if there are independent churches every two blocks? Would there really be a way to outcast if there's no organized structure? Also, how would something be bound and loosed in heaven, yet that not cover not even your neighborhood? How would a single parish organize such a thing? While what you say feels right in some perspective, it also seems that what you argue is hard to reconcile with Scripture.

[@Isaac_Hess]

One more important distinction: when Latter-day Saints speak of "ongoing revelation" from God through a modern prophet, they mean two distinct things, and as Catholics we only deny one of them, but absolutely believe in the other. Latter-day Saints use "revelation" to refer _both_ to (1) public revelation, and (2) the divine, ongoing guidance God gives to His church as it moves through history. As Catholics we deny (1), and affirm that all public revelation found its fulfillment in Christ, as Joe mentioned in the video. But we, as Catholics, absolutely affirm (2), that God continues to guide His church on earth through a number of means, _including_ by continuing to call prophets. While we do not look for new public revelation announcing unknown doctrines, we do see men and women called by God to proclaim his message in various ways throughout history. We also see God guiding the Catholic Church by the Holy Spirit as it encounters heresy, deals with moral questions, etc. So be careful about claiming that "all revelation is fulfilled in Christ, there is no more to give" when speaking with a Latter-day Saint, because they will understand you to mean something even stronger than what you are trying to say.

[@brotherbruno1783]

As someone who did at one time inquire with LDS missionaries I can say this: they NEVER answered the question of *when* this apostasy supposedly occurred. Their theology necessitates the priesthood no longer existing on the earth after a certain point until Joseph Smith reestablished it, but they would never answer when the last of these priesthood-holders would have been alive. At first they said at the death of the last apostle, but when I asked what about the people who picked the canon of scripture in the fourth century they had no answer. That was enough to get me to come to my senses and stay within the fold of the Church Christ founded and sustains until the end of the age.

[@anthonyterry2896]

The reason they didn’t give a definitive answer as to when it happened is because the “great apostasy” wasn’t an event- it was a process. The loss of authority and shifting of ideas over the course of decades. Apostasy in general means a turning away from or rejection of a certain religion or religious belief. More broadly, it is the drifting away from the truth. I and many Latter Day Saints would say that by the end of the 2nd century or early into the 3rd that priesthood authority was all but gone. HOWEVER: that does NOT mean that people were not inspired by or acted upon by God. Those who chose scriptural cannon? They certainly made an inspired choice. The reformers who sought for religious freedom? They were also inspired men. And those many saintly catholic popes, bishops, etc were also acted upon and inspired by God. Apostasy doesn’t mean that God ceased to interact with our guide His children. Heck, as Latter Day Saints we even believe people from other religions such as Buddhists and even atheists can be guided by God and inspired by Him. Honestly, this is a mistake that a lot of people make (even those less studious members of the LDS church). But this issue comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of what our idea of the Great Apostasy really was

[@brotherbruno1783]

@@anthonyterry2896 If you hold that the Priesthood was “all but gone” at around the time of the third century, then who was the last to hold the Priesthood? What group were they a part of? We have recorded heresies that took place through that era, some of which we still have today. Was it one of those groups, like Marcionism or Donatism? Or was it one of these “hidden faithful” groups Protestants always speak of but can never prove? It would seem that, if your view was correct, the apostate church would have formally denounced the priesthood holders at some point prior to the second or third century. They made a big deal of addressing heresies all through that era, and there were many examples of this. But where exactly can you find examples of Christian sects who were denounced by the Catholic (or as you say “apostate”) Church that believes any of the doctrines the LDS church supports (besides those that are obviously specific to Joseph Smith and later revelation)?

[@anthonyterry2896]

@@brotherbruno1783 Honestly I couldn’t point you to the last man to ever by ordained by someone with proper authority. I have no idea and I would posit that while some people may have a better opinions than I others, it doesn’t matter. In my opinion, this line of thinking demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how the apostasy worked. I would first and foremost that you and anyone looking at the apostasy needs to understand the difference between loss of AUTHORITY and loss of DOCTRINE. Those are both two different things and while related they are not dependent one on another. Authority is merely received when one authorized to pass it along passes it. Generally this happens today from someone who has been designated by our apostles to act in this function. So, as far as authority goes, at the very earliest the authority for it to continue one would have been lost with the death of the last apostle or leader designated to pass it on-aside from John who was recorded as alive as late as 98 AD (though exiled to Patmos) the others were all recorded by the catholic tradition to be dead by 70 AD at the latest. Perhaps other apostles were called and killed, perhaps not. We don’t really have a lot of records regarding that and the scriptures are silent on that point. So at the earliest person (be it a bishop or someone else) could have been ordained to the priesthood by someone authorized around 70 AD. Being unable to pass on authority he would have died and the line of the priesthood would have stopped. Perhaps it was later than this, perhaps not. Honestly I do not know. BUT… there is no indication that one properly ordained would have been shunned or seen as a heretic. There is also no reason to assume that because they were authorized to use the priesthood that they would believe everything according to the truth. Even the apostles were shown to be mistaken in some of their beliefs after being ordained by God (like John and James thinking it right to burn a city down for them being rejected there). Authority does NOT equate to knowledge. Many “authorized” people in the church today have their own preconceived ideas that are untrue or inaccurate. That is part of life. And with the apostles dead and gone, a drift from true teaching would be normal among the believers. And we DO see conflict within the early church after the death of the apostles and even BEFORE. There are 1st and 2nd century church leaders that teach about the physicality of God the father. There are others that teach a more Trinitarian view. There are many who spoke of the idea of becoming like deity, such as can be found in some of the writings of Irenaeus in the 2nd century. Others were strongly against this idea. That’s why the Catholic Church organized councils and created groups of men to discuss doctrine, and attempt to unify the church in their beliefs. I could go on and and on but I think it better for me to stop here since the message is already so long. To sum it up though, pinpointing exactly when the church “became apostate is at least for the general person, not possible. It’s like putting a frog in cold water and slowly increasing the heat. The frog doesn’t know when the water gets to hot until it’s cooked. It doesn’t feel the heat or even perceive when it starts boiling. Similarly, we can’t see when the church truly lost all authority, but we can certainly see the results of it and we can certainly see the schisms that the apostles themselves spoke of. Hopefully that answers your question but I’m always open to other opinions and beliefs. Honestly, talking about religious beliefs and other points of view fascinate me, so I apologize for the length of this text. I just love discussing these things

[@clearstonewindows]

It's because we don't know the year the last apostle died. But that was it, like 85AD. I'm not sure why the exact date matters. Go research the witnesses of the restoration.

[@anthonyterry2896]

@@clearstonewindows very concise and to the point. I agree with you. Too much focus is placed on this idea of “who was the last apostle” or “the precise date”. Look at the Bible and most things in both the old and New Testament are rough estimates at best and many other things have almost no date past opinions and speculation. What is important is that it DID happen and that there WAS a restoration, one prophesied about in the New Testament itself

[@AmberDalton-jg7eu]

Thank you for doing this! As an x Mormon this is so helpful.

[@Hamann9631]

1:02:00 If Amos 8 was a self-induced famine caused by knowing where food was and not going there; then, they would find food. The people prophesied by Amos are seeking and not finding. They are not fake seeking and avoiding a known source.

[@Hamann9631]

21:20. There have ways been individuals from large groups leaving. A prophecy that individuals would leave a large group is as useful as a prophecy that the sun will continue to burn and humans will need breathable air. Of course, the rebellion, apostacy, falling away was the whole church (organization and priesthood) being gone.

[@orbeuniversity]

Thank you for making this video. You should eventually do a video series on responding to Jehovah's Witnesses.

[@joseph2941]

Very well argued. It does indeed come down to the Catholic, the Orthodox or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I do have a couple of questions that seem to be relevant to a podcast titled Shameless Popery. Does the Pope have the same authority as the Apostles? If he does, is what he teaches scripture? If the bishop of Rome truly succeeded to Peter's office, doesn't that make the Orthodox bishops apostate for being in rebellion against his authority? If it is not in what way is his authority equal to that of the Apostles?

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

The pope doesn't have the same authority as the Apostles. He shares some of their authority of governance, but aspects of their office are unique to the first century, and their role as direct eyewitnesses of Jesus. When St. Peter calls for the Apostles to replace Judas, the conditions are that it be "one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us-one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection" (Acts 1:21-22). St. Paul will later share in Apostleship in some sense, by virtue of his direct eyewitness vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus. But later popes don't claim a similar authority. Similarly, we believe that revelation is completed in the first century, since Jesus is the fullness of revelation (see Heb. 1:1-2; Jude 1:3), so even when the pope is speaking infallibly, that's a negative (protection from error) not a positive (divine inspiration to know stuff he wouldn't otherwise know). Finally, the Church has always observed a distinction between heresy (false teaching), apostasy (abandonment of the faith), and schism (division within the Church). The Catholic-Orthodox controversy mostly involves schism, not heresy or apostasy.

[@PInk77W1]

Jesus said I will be with you for all times Mt 28 Mormons skipped 1800yrs

[@cameronreed1411]

​​@@JosephHeschmeyerFascinating. So Catholics are saying: - Pope is not an Apostle or Eyewitness. - Apostles were eyewitnesses. - Revelation is complete. LDS are saying: - Pope is an unauthorized Bishop - Apostles should have continued to be called when one died - Revelation should have continued through the Apostles that should have continued being called since they held all the priesthood keys of church government. There is a similar pattern in the Bible where Moses and Elijah are saved physically from death so as to be able to pass their authority and priesthood keys on to Jesus in the New Testament at the Mount of Transfiguration. The keys have to be passed on physically by the laying on of hands in an unbroken chain. If we're using Catholic terminology, We would also say that the Church fell into a state of Heresy through the loss of Apostolic Priesthood Keys which resulted in Apostasy through loss of authority to make authorized changes to the Church.

[@Hamann9631]

1:05:00 Acts 20:28-30 does not make your case. It does not say "all"; however, it also does not say, "There will be enough of you for God to continue to call replacement Apostles until and beyond 1820.".

[@daniallemmon5453]

Mormon to Orthodox here. Great video

[@emmanuelsimon8607]

Still working my way through the video, and am really enjoying it thus far. Its especially helpful because I work with many Latter Day Saints. In regards to 23:28, how would a Catholic respond to the argument by analogy that just as Christ died and rose again, so it was fitting for the Church to die and rise again, so that it can be said without absurdity that the gates of Hell did not prevail against Christ Church, which is resurrected as the Latter Day Saint Church.

[@clearstonewindows]

Have you looked at it from our perspective? The only way you're going to be able to "work" with us and persuade us to your point of view is to know what we know. Have you read the great apostasy or the book of Mormon?

[@emmanuelsimon8607]

@@clearstonewindows I try to understand from the LDS perspective. I've read the book of Mormon and try to interpret it in a manner in which it's as coherent as possible. But Im not sure what your referring to when you say 'read the great apostasy '. I'm aware of the arguments in attempt to support the great apostasy from LDS works, but not a book titled "the great apostasy"

[@clearstonewindows]

@@emmanuelsimon8607 "the great apostacy" is a book, hence the quotes. I'm a little confused, have you read the new testament, the book of Mormon is in the same language as the KJV of the NT. What parts didn't you understand? Here's an exercises make a list for and against the points and get the strongest points you have for both sides. Then weight it out. Only then can you understand as we do.

[@emmanuelsimon8607]

@@clearstonewindows Thanks for the response!I have read the New Testament. My difficulties with LDS teachings are more on a logical and philosophical level. Respectfully, some of the arguments against Catholicism from the LDS perspective, if true, also undermine the LDS view. For example: According to some missionaries who approached me, one (out of many) reasons LDS think the great apostasy happened is because early Christian thinking is meshed with Hellenistic thought. Let's assume that is a sufficient reason. If that's sufficient, then one can make the same claim against LDS doctrines like the pre-existence or the view that God created using eternal matter. Views like the pre-existence can be traced back to Plato's Phaedrus and Phaedo. (Albeit not exactly in the same sense) Views like God creating out of eternal matter can be found in Plato's Timaeus and (according to some ancient Greeks) Book 1 of Aristotle's physics. So the view that Hellenistic thought and its influence on Christianity is one (of many) factors causing the great apostasy is either true, and therefore Catholicism and LDS Teaching is false, or the argument is not good. Again, I'm aware there are other reasons for claiming a Great Apostasy occured, such as the alleged lost of priesthood. But I'm just giving an example of what I mean :)

[@clearstonewindows]

@@emmanuelsimon8607 Let me awser in line so it's clear: "For example: According to some missionaries who approached me, one (out of many) reasons LDS think the great apostasy happened is because early Christian thinking is meshed with Hellenistic thought. Let's assume that is a sufficient reason. If that's sufficient, then one can make the same claim against LDS doctrines like the pre-existence or the view that God created using eternal matter." ------the Meshing isn't a sufficient, it's the authority to act in God's name that was taken.... The Doctrine of pre-existence is not unique to us and can be found in early Christiaan lititure. It's actually key to understanding why we're here. We don't think God created ex-nelo, and this life is not for God's entertainment but for our Growth because God loves his children. "Views like the pre-existence can be traced back to Plato's Phaedrus and Phaedo. (Albeit not exactly in the same sense)".... Yes and views like the Son of God to the Greeks. May have parts of the truth. We're now living in the fullness of times and prophesied. "Views like God creating out of eternal matter can be found in Plato's Timaeus and (according to some ancient Greeks) Book 1 of Aristotle's physics.".... Same as above. And I love this doctrine, it gives God real purpose. "So the view that Hellenistic thought and its influence on Christianity is one (of many) factors causing the great apostasy is either true, and therefore Catholicism and LDS Teaching is false, or the argument is not good."...Yeah so this is a false premise. "Again, I'm aware there are other reasons for claiming a Great Apostasy occurred, such as the alleged lost of priesthood. But I'm just giving an example of what I mean :)".... Thanks for clarifying. Have you read the book "the Great apostacy" It's in depth and very convincing, historically.

[@Hamann9631]

43:20. Reading the Bible shows the pattern of Apostacy and Restoration followed by God in ~150AD and 1820AD. The prophets lead a minority of the people when Israel was not in complete apostacy like now.

[@TruLuan]

This applies to the Jehovah's Witnesses as well, who make the same claim about the "Great Apostasy".

[@jeroenvankooten]

I am a former JW. That is almost right, but there is a small difference. JW's also believe in a great Apostasy. But they do claim that there always has been a remnant of true believers. Some Arians and others who randomly believe some similar things. It's the same level of cult thinking, but there is a minor difference.

[@TruLuan]

@@jeroenvankooten Yes, this is true! I was never baptized as a JW but I studied with them for over 7 years. JW's claim they had true believers that hid in the catacombs, but those catacombs are in the Vatican lol. Catholics have the evidence, JW's just have a claim. They do that a lot though and are very much intellectually dishonest with a lot of things.

[@Garry_Combine]

​@@jeroenvankootenstill kinda funny that JWs identify with Heretics and actually ignore Nicaea and Athanasius' arguments. They also ignore earlier church father's and the Didache that are clearly trinitarian despite not calling themselves such. The most interesting one was someone I debated recently who said Tertullian wasn't Trinitarian. You know, the first guy to really write in depth on the Trinity. There is a reason, I have a horse in the race as my step-grandfather is a former Catholic Christian turned JW, so I'm trying to help him come back to Christ.

[@Garry_Combine]

​@@jeroenvankootenany advice, if you're open to giving advice?

[@tabandken8562]

​@@Garry_CombineDo you read early Church Fathers to him?

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

Thank you for your explanation of Daniel 2:44. That was one verse I had not been able to make sense of but after watching your video I realized I was also adding a 5th kingdom to the prophecy.

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

Great! Glad I could help.

[@clearstonewindows]

The feet of Clay are the fragmented nations of the world and the weakest. You're missing something on you interpterion.

[@tafazzi-on-discord]

@@clearstonewindows what?

[@rhwinner]

I think a good general rule is, don't go all-in on a church whose prophet and founder is named Joe Smith. 😮

[@erikb3041]

Any episodes planned for similar analyses of Islam and jehovah witness?

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

Not presently - I know more about LDS than I do about Islam, and more about Islam than I do about JW. But I am always up for learning!

[@TheMobius011]

Supposing that the "great apostasy" actually happened, wouldn't that necessarily mean that Christ was a lair, having promised that "the gates of hell will not prevail against it?" Which, to me, at least, would then invalidate any claims that Christianity would have to being a true religion. Because if He lied about the church never failing, then couldn't He lie about being the Son of God?

[@crusaderACR]

Yes. If anyone claims the Catholic Church, the Orthodox, and the Copts are all heretics... Christianity is all a lie. If there was no succession, there's no Christianity.

[@hyeminkwun9523]

How insolent you are to speak such a blasphemous word! Unless repent and convert, you will surely lose your eternal salvation. In His foreknowledge, Our Lord knew what will happen to His Church and, thus, revealed them to the Apostles including apostacy in Her and Her struggles and triumph during the end times as written in the Bible. Catechism #675 and 677 state that, before the second coming of Christ, the Church MUST follow Her Lord to Calvary, Death, and Resurrection for purification and renewal of the Church and world. The fulfillment of this Dogma is here, as we are now living through the prophesied events in 2 Thes 2:1-12 and the mystery of the iniquity (2 Thes 2:7) -- that's why we have had two popes (one True -- Benedict XVI; and the other false, as seen in the vision of Blessed Anne Catherine Emmerich) and great apostasy (2 Thes 2:3) in the Church. With the passing of Benedict XVI, the restrainer, Katechon, has been removed and, therefore, the antichrist will soon appear in public (2 Thes 2:7-8), who will be the head of the 1 world religion, followed by schism after the denial of real presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist by a false pope, banning of the daily Sacrifice of the Mass (Daniel 12:11), abomination of desolation (Matt 24:15), and fiercest persecutions of the Church (Rev 12:17, 13:10) for 3.5 years (Daniel 12:11-12, Rev 12:14). But God will protect His Church as promised in Matt 16:18, "the gates of Hell shall not prevail against Her" and His faithful remnant (Ps 91). All prophecies of the end times will be fulfilled as written in our generation.

[@TheMobius011]

@@hyeminkwun9523 I'm not actually calling Christ a liar here. What I'm saying is that for a great apostasy to persist in the way of "the Church immediately apostatized after the death of the apostles, and now 1500 years later WE have the true gospel etc," makes no logical sense to me because I don't believe that God would wait for 1500 years to correct His Church, if that were to be the case, which I don't believe.

[@hyeminkwun9523]

@@TheMobius011 Thank you for your clarification. I misunderstood your intention. May God bless you and keep you. Amen!

[@trencher7]

@@TheMobius011 Didn't we need a savior after the fall of Adam? How long did God wait?

[@sunnyjohnson992]

The great apostasy went back to pagan religion for it’s teachings and ceremonies that’s confirmed by Cardinal John Henry Newman in his book The Development of Christian Doctrine, he writes: “Constantine, in order to recommend the new [Roman Catholic] religion to the heathen, transferred into the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own.” The phenomenon, admitted on all hands is this: That great portion of what is generally received as Christian truth is, in its rudiments or in its separate parts to be found in heathen philosophies and religions. For instance, the doctrine of a Trinity is found both in the East and in the West; so is the ceremony of washing; so is the rite of sacrifice. The doctrine of the Divine Word is Platonic; the doctrine of the Incarnation is Indian.” He goes on to say: “We, on the contrary, prefer to say, ‘these things are in Christianity, therefore they are not heathen. But their source is the Babylonian and Greek teachings that existed centuries before the birth of Roman Catholicism. Moreover, they are not to be found in God’s Word, the Bible.”

[@richardkasper5822]

As a former atheist that was getting involved with paganism until God intervened on my life, I have to tell you your waaaay off on your accusations. Pagan religion is all about the self, and nothing but the self. Catholocism is totally opposite..its about assuming the life of Christ in one's self. But has everything to do with compassion and putting your -self last.

[@Maranatha99]

The great apostasy started probably in pre-Babilon Babel, when pple were making a name for themselves.

[@Hamann9631]

39:50. The seed could be our lives. The seed could be the church which Jesus Christ started in 1830. That parable in Mark 4 is not denying The Great Apostacy. The seed was 6 followers in April 6, 1830.

[@tabandken8562]

The seed is the Church Jesus started in 33A.D.

[@Hamann9631]

@@tabandken8562 Thanks for sharing your opinion. The possibilities I proposed are not disproven by your opinion. Jesus did not start off the parable with, "...This is starting right now. There will be no break in the authority I give you. The Kingdom of Heaven is likened unto a mustard seed."

[@Hamann9631]

Malachi 1 proves the earlier apostacy broken by John the Baptist and Jesus Christ. Israel was being scolded for their apostacy. How does a group being scolded disprove others doing the same thing? That would be like saying Mikey couldn't have broken a window because Johny was scolded for breaking a window.

[@HaleStorm49]

Joe I'm not trolling Im.taking notes. We spend way too much time talking about what happened 2000 years ago...but if you want to look at evidence for the Apostasy one of the best ways is to follow: Trent Horn Pints Eric Sammons Steve Skojek The infiltration guy (Marshall?) The guy with the fedora... and look at 70% of the content they produce about apostasy in the church....while still claiming that there is no evidence of the Apostasy. Restoration and Apostasy are both on a spectrum. @6:29 I've never seen someone cast aspersions on Smiths first vision AND mention that Paul does the same thing in the new testament and there are. Multiple versions of what happened in various events in the Gospels...one example is who went to the tomb the morning of the resurrection. I've heard atheists use this argument against Christians claiming that they don't read their Bibles...so it's always interesting when sectarians use the same argument against Smith. The Atheists have a point. Belief is not binary, it's a spectrum. @8:29 That's not true. The early Christians were members of Christs actual church. They were treated similarly to early Saints I'm NY, Ohio, and Missouri...where the extermination order was passed and it was legal to kill Mormons in the good ole US of A. If you are going to say they "backed off" this belief then provide some context for why that might have occurred. Look what happens today when you publicly declare there are only two genders...we shouldn't assume people are any more prepared to be spiritually red pilled than politically red pilled. @36:10 No mention of Galatians - who were having major apostasy issues, or 1st Corinthians, or Ephesians...ignoring the myriad examples in Pauls epistles where he was laying down harsh doctrinal correction. Apostasy is the default. @37:20 Ive never heard someone claim these parables were about the Catholic Church. That's quite a reach. @43:38 except there is biblical precedent for it. Moses gave Israel the law of carnal commandments and, accordong to Christ, the ability to divorce because they had lost much of their priesthood power. This is why Moses and Elijah were taken from the Earth without dying... so that they could restore this authority to P/J/ and John during the transfiguration. They would also appear to Joseph Smith to restore this power again in the last dispensation. Never again to be taken from the Earth. @48:06 really? Who got it all? Did Paul tell us everything he knew? No, he says he wasn't able to. He called the Hebrews dull of hearing and told them they were not ready for meet. He did not record any of the dialogue from his heavenly visitations for the 14 years he was re educated or when angels ministered to him in prison...or when he said the things he saw in the third heaven were unspeakable... But yet we can claim that we already got it all? It doesn't make sense. We hardly got anything. We don't even have all of the Epistles according to Paul's own writings. @1:04:48 This section is all over the place but its always odd to me when the argument against rrading apostasy into Old Testament verses is to study the Jewish commentary. Trent Horn sis the same thing when talking aboit Theosis amd Psalms 82. He basically said leta examine what what the Jews wouldnhave understood this to mean...(before they had him murdered for blasphemy) @1:06:46 If he had the same authority he would have been an Apostle.. They wouldn't have given him a new ambigous title like successor. There is no office on the church account or modern called a successor. It's also worth noting what would have happened if the Apostles came out and told the leaders that the entire church would apostasize and collapse - and that like John, the priesthood wouls be taken from the believers...as if that would have been a better solution. @1:15:50 Its interesting to hear the Catholic interpretation of Daniel 2 but it must, be necessity, ignore the importance and description of the toes. The kingdoms are being compared in terms of their strength and glory. They become increasingly inferior as we approach the legs of iron, and then we get to small pieces of iron and clay. Iron was the Roman empire and mixed with clay at the toes. Not strong, not united, and there are many divided kingdoms. The last of those divided kingdoms arguably being the British empire. In the days of _those kings_ shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms. Post British empire this could not be the Roman Church... But it could absolutely be a kingdom of God which necessitated a free land (with no king)established by His hand for his righteous purposes.

[@clearstonewindows]

Great notes!

[@tabandken8562]

As he said, Apostasy happens in the Church. The Church itself never apostasized and God never took His Authority away from His Church. To claim He did, you need to prove He did in the early centuries. You can't prove it because He didn't.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@tabandken8562 You can't prove to an atheist that god exists because they dismiss any evidence as proof. Same pattern here.

[@clearstonewindows]

@14:19 as a member of the church of Jesus Christ. It thank you for being so clear about the claim here.

[@clearstonewindows]

Is the catholic church False isn't the question. Is it lead by Jesus Christ himself, no. Do I think most Catholics are the salt of the earth, yes, but we still stand by the creeds not being good. Does Jesus Christ himself lead the living church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints, You decide by reading the book of mormon, praying about Joseph smith and the current propthet Presedent Neslon.

[@clearstonewindows]

"it disproves" I don't think that's true, as the claims of following Jesus Christ's life will not go in vain for anyone. (even if they've never heard of Jesus )

[@tabandken8562]

​@@clearstonewindowsYes, the Catholic Church is lead by Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is not leading the man-made fraud of Joseph Smith.

[@andrewreed4216]

Luke 9:49-50 "Those who aren't against me are for me," jesus tells off his apostles for not being tolerant of other people who were doing similar things to them. A lesson many haven't understood.

[@Hamann9631]

2 Thessalonians 2 is not clearly an end times prophecy. It would be if it said the falling away was immediately before the falling away. It does not. It is a prophecy about the falling away (The Great Apostacy, "falling away" in KJV) happening at an untold, thus possibly long time (now that it has happened, approximately 2000 year), time period before The Second Coming.

[@NordenilewelyaAtkinsonTanner]

Hi how could the church fall down.if Jesus had said to Peter your are Peter on this rock shall but my church and the doors of hell.never prevel over it

[@paularnold3745]

The big problem with any Great Apostacy claim is that if such an apostacy occurred, then Jesus is a false prophet. If Jesus is God (or at least Divinely authorized), then His promise that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church must be fulfilled. If there was a Great Apostacy then Jesus' promise was false and therefore he is also false.

[@Hamann9631]

@paularnold3745, wow. Jesus Christ never said He was going to force everybody to follow Himself. People are free to choose. The Gates of Hell overcoming would mean people followed Jesus and ended up in Hell. Which did not happen.

[@tabandken8562]

​@@Hamann9631No, when Jesus said the Gates of hell would not prevail, He was saying His Church would not fail and it didn't and Joseph Smith is a lying plaigerist.

[@Kalenwilliams1393]

Who witnessed Peter giving the keys to pope Linus? Any witnesses to that claim?

[@Gospel-Living-Truth]

0:33 LATTER DAY SAINT Claim is the priesthood authority left the eatrth, not the church.

[@mitchellpope]

What about the Book of Revelation as an example of prophecy after it had been "fulfilled" by Jesus? 48:55

[@Hamann9631]

23:40. That claim only makes sense if we do have freedom to choose and you take the wedding metaphor too far. The church is composed of those who make covenants with and follow Jesus Christ, if no people are doing that, then there is no church (apostacy).

[@tabandken8562]

Yet there has been people doing that for 2000 years.

[@Hamann9631]

@@tabandken8562 No. Since there were not apostles starting at about 100 BC until 1830, people have not been making covenants with Jesus Christ (in His way).

[@tabandken8562]

@@Hamann9631 Apostles were witnesses of Christ during His life, death, and Resurrection. The Apostles weren't meant to carry on, yet the priesthood of the Apostles did carry on through there Successors. The Church He started has been following Him from the beginning. You don't follow Jesus Christ. You follow Joseph Smith, a lying con man who never received Revelations from Jesus and never directed by God to start a Church and write a book of mormon. All lies by an evil liar. He was even sued before writing that book for conning people by claiming to be a treasure digger. He would tell people that he could find treasure with his "magic seer stone", charge people, and of course not find anything. He's a dirty, filthy, evil con. His creation of this Mormon false Church probably led him to eternal suffering.

[@RealSeanithan]

Very interesting. I was never part of any of the circles that believed the great apostasy (or great falling away, since we always read the KJV) was referencing a movement within the church, where the church itself would apostatize as a whole, but my groups always taught that it meant so many individuals and groups would apostatize that apostates and heretics would potentially outnumber the Church, though the Church itself would never fall into apostasy or damnable heresy. That is, it didn't refer to a falling away so great that it would sweep away the church, but that a great many would fall away.

[@crusaderACR]

That still cannot be right, because Protestant interpretations are completely absent in all the first millenium. There was no controversy on the Eucharist, priesthood, hierarchy or infant baptism. There was controversy about the divinity of Christ, the validity of some books of the Bible, the divinity of the Holy Spirit, about gnosticism, yet none of these apply to Protestants. There's nothing. Nada.

[@Hamann9631]

1:10:30. Except, if there was The Great Apostacy, then Matthew 16 was not the founding of The Roman Catholic Church. The many debates and councils which used the wisdom of men to decide things show that The Roman Catholic Church was founded by the hands of men. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was founded by God choosing a prophet and sending many angels to him. It is the rock cut without hands. The Holy Ghost says so.

[@tabandken8562]

The Councils use the Wisdom of God just as it did in the book of Acts. The Mormon Church was founded by Joseph Smith, an evil con man who duped his followers. The Mormon Church was not founded by God.

[@VAATAUSILI4139]

Some, lack knowledge of, THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER DAY SAINTS, that's the problem.

[@rivereuphrates8103]

I really don't understand the significance and efficacy of the Crucifixion in Mormonism. What was it for in that cosmology or worldview? It doesn't seem to line up at all with the rest of their belief system. It seems tacked on, probably because it has to be.

[@TheThreatenedSwan]

Israel also didn't fall but the Church became Israel, but this has been denigrated to not offend contemporary Jews for some bizarre reason

[@soteriology400]

The apostasy occurred during the Jewish revolt. As Paul stated this was to happen first before their gathering. The lawless one was revealed shortly after, on August 14, AD66. The next day was the beginning of their 1335 day prophecy of Daniel 12:12. The last day of the 1335 days is the day they fled the temple, the day after that, was the start of their 1260 days of revelation 12:6. This brings us to the last day of the house of Israel, September 22, AD73. This was their last Yom Teruah. It was the half a time (day 5 out of 10, Tishri 5 of the Hebraic calendar).

[@GMMXX80]

So, what we have to establish here is that an apostacy actually took place. Did Jesus himself make a prophecy himself of it, and if he did, and there are claims against it, then Jesus would be a liar. God, cannot lie or he would cease to be God, and we'd then be looking at Jewish faith. So, did Jesus himself prophecy of an apostacy. The next point is, what is an apostacy? He went ahead and picked the definition to help support his claim, but I think a Mormon could take that and do well with it. For an apostacy to tale place, the core doctrines of the faith would have to, themselves, be corrupted and changed. There would be a LOT of issues with that. If it were the Church of Jesus Christ, everything he taught would fall into place. Another subject that is a real issue, when it comes to this subject is the issue of Constantine, himself. What was his intent? And the topic of the day that loves to be discussed of the council of Nicea, which is its own thing. Thats a fun topic. Finally, Latter-day Saints have been jumping ahead and finding some, not a whole lot, of archeological evidence, which is really neat stuff. One COULD argue that God doesnt want you to know the actual evidence because that defeats his purposes of faith and free will. I would argue, as far as evidence and archeological things that Latter-day Saints have what the rest of Christianity has so thats already there and shared by all of Christianity, but some they most certainly reject. BUT, the Book of Mormon and the goings on with the Book of Mormon hasnt had anywhere near as long to have had archeological digs conducted to turn up evidence with several reasons. 1) As I understand it the United States government is incredibly picky about digs, as Ive heard. 2) When the Spaniards came across and landed in areas, they of course brought Holy Men with them. Probably Friars. As Friars intermingled with the Natives, a couple of things happened. They all thought of Natives as savages so that was universal but, anything of gold that wouldve held any significant historical value was immediately taken and who knows what happened to it. As well, with different cultures can come different ways of expressing that, but is still identifiable, for example, a Catholic does things differently in Spain or Rome, than a Catholic in the United States or Canada, and then Mexico. So, Friars identified objects that were clearly identified as what one might call Christian, and the Friars ordered them "blaspnemy" and had them either completely destroyed, or parts broken. You can destroy the marker, but the legends and cultural beliefs and symbols remain. That explains also the apostacy that was foretold and prophecied on the Book of Mormon side of things. In many conversations with Native Americans, many who practice, now, and many who dont subscribe to Latter-day Saint faith will affirm that there were former teachings that now have a link to Christianity, those aspects wouldve been changed or abandoned altogether by the tribe. (Were not talking Pagan and Egyptian type practices, yet, but they all wouldve been apostate adoptions that stemmed originally by Adamic and Abrahamic teachings of that era), so did it become in Native American culture. There just hasnt been as much time to really dig in it as much as older Christianity has the old country who also has a greater work force. Its not like Christians are saying: "Hey, ya know what Mormons, lets say you are right, what can we do to help you out here?" There are some, but theyre very few. Everyone else is busy fighting against it and trying to stall it up because it threatens their traditions, so what if it is right? People, regardless of faith, even Latter-day Saints have a hard time letting go of long time traditions. So, theres that too, but more and more is surfacing. Finally, Latter-day Saints have actually when VERY innovative in discovering more about the Latter-day Saint faith to support their cause. How? By looking into the postive idea of being open to other faiths and their beliefs, pracrices, and traditions. Joseph Smith DIDNT have access to information we have today, by any means. Ill even give an example. "Jospeh Smith coppied the Masons for the Temple." Until you actually study it out. Joseph Smith was being told about the temple before he was even a Mason, but he didnt understand it until he was a Mason, but there were a lot of things that still werent known then. The point is, Latter-day Saints are leadning more about the credibility of Joseph Smith studying other faiths and its astounding whats learned when you choose to accept that God works with all people because we're all Gods children. There are absolutely times when everyone absolutely doesnt want to follow Gods will, and thats incredibly frustrating for Him, but he finds a way to make it happen. But, what a long discussion. Those who have a sincere desire to want to know Gods will and follow Him and be humble, will find it. By talking to missionaries, they'll be amazed at what is learned rather than having an argument and trying to prove each other wrong. As Isaiah wrote: Come now and let us reason together, sayeth the Lord, though your sins be as crimson, theyll be as white as snow. I currently live in the Bible belt and Im spending a lot of time talking with Evangelicals and Baptists. I wven talk with Catholics and we have awesome conversations and you can learn things. But, have the intent to prove them wrong and turn around and make a KZbin video, I promise you, Gods not gonna tell you a thing. How did Jesus respond to the Scribes and Scholars of his time? Have an open heart and an open mind, and the windows of heaven open. Have a closed mind, and this is what you get, and the rest of the world passing you buy, you just live an un-Christlike life being angry and miserable and contentous with the whole world. God gave you 73 years to live, and it goes fast

[@resvero8342]

Catholicism is true

[@GMMXX80]

Parts of it are, but if you say so, man

[@Spiritof76Catholic]

The Bible and early church fathers confirm that Jesus Christ is mystically the head of his body the church of the living God the pillar and bull work of truth even to our own day. First referred to as universal in Greek translated as Catholic because it is the only true Christian church.

[@kerry8506]

Question: What about God promising that David would never lack a man to sit on his throne, but then David did lack someone to sit on his throne for a span of time before Christ came and took the throne? Could that be used to argue for a great apostasy as a sort of parallel? That is to say, Jesus said the church could not die, but maybe it could temporarily be gone from the earth, just as David’s throne was temporarily vacant despite the promise? I’m Catholic, btw.

[@contraheresy]

There is a MASSIVE contradiction when it comes to Mormon belief in the great apostasy. The claim is that with the death of the apostles there was no one to lead the church. There’s only one problem. Mormons cannot accept that the apostle John ever died. Because it says in the BofM and D&C that he was blessed to live until the second coming. Not only that, he was told he would preach to all the nations the whole time he was to tarry. So according to Mormon definition of universal apostasy and the Mormon scriptures regarding the fate of the apostle John, the Great Apostasy could not have occurred.

[@clearstonewindows]

Um? John is the one who did visit Joseph and Oliver and pass the priesthood to them. I'm not sure this is the smoking gun you think it is.

[@contraheresy]

@clearstonewondows you did not follow the argument. read it again.

[@clearstonewindows]

The greater policy doesn't require that John die. It only requires that his church and the authority His act and his name is not on the Earth. The fact that John is going back and forth between heaven and Earth doesn't really mean much because he's not directing the church. Unless you have examples of John visiting the Catholic Church and telling them what to do.

[@contraheresy]

@clearstonewondows go read D&C section 7 and then read it again and then get back to me.

[@clearstonewindows]

@@contraheresy John is and has done all the things talked about there. Not sure why you think that has anything to do with the church being lead by Jesus Christ himself existing or not.

[@Hamann9631]

1:15:19. Here is a response to, why have 4 kingdoms if it will not happen during those 4 kingdoms. It did happen during the last of those 4 kingdoms. Any prophecy is valid if it happens during any time God chooses. Since, the stone cutting started in 1820, things happening in 1820 are a valid part of any prophecy. Does not know the beginning from the end? Does not God not know thousands of years into the future? If God knows His plans for 2400 years later, He can make prophecies which are not clear until it happens how far seeing those prophecies were.

[@njerimatenjwa5467]

I wonder where God the Holy Spirit was during these 1,800 years or so while the Church established by Jesus was destroyed by the great apostasy??? It is so sad to see people seduced by lies and getting lost in religions like Mormonisim. God our Father save Your children.

[@tgphlaicke]

Strange, the jews of Jesus day asked the same thing between the death of the last prophet of the old testament and the coming of Christ. God works on his own timeline, which is often hundreds or thousands of years, this isn't hard.

[@Hamann9631]

@njerimatenjwa5467, God our Father has saved me. He put me in a situation where I would hear the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Viola, I am on the strait and narrow way to heaven.

[@whitebeans7292]

@@tgphlaicke The time between the prophet Malachai and John the Baptist was about 400 years, and the time between the Jewish Maccabees and John was even shorter (150 years). Simeon was also an elderly prophet who saw Jesus before he died, meaning there was only a gap of 70 years. To state that God abandoned His people for 1800 years belittles our God who says "Behold, I am with you until the end of the age."

[@tgphlaicke]

@@whitebeans7292 Im not sure why you addressed your comments to me, but sure. Your comments bring up some interesting questions: 1) How long between Solomon and Hezekiah? 2) How long was the Babylonian exile? 3) The Macabees were great military leaders but weren't prophets so 400 years since a prophet. The point stands God works on his own timeline and your point is weak demonstrably from Adam to Jesus there were several periods where God left his people withou priesthood authority or prophets.

[@whitebeans7292]

@@tgphlaicke 1) Solomon to Hezekiah is kind of random, there were many prophets in between including Ahijah, Jehu, Micaiah, and Elijah. 2) The Babylonian exile was 70 years (Which is the lifetime of a single person and had the prophet Daniel). 3) Being military leaders, they functioned as Judges. They even had a miracle of burning oil, which was cause for the festival of Hannukah. Even if we only count prophets, it's *still* not 400 years between Malachai and the next prophet we know of since Simeon the prophet was at Jesus's presentation in the temple, so it's more like 300 years. P.S. Not every prophet was recorded in the Bible, the book of Jonah is incredibly short and we know practically nothing of Ahijah. Paul mentions prophets in a general sense but doesn't name them. There is literally no period since Abraham where God left his people without guidance.

[@PainlessRockinb]

10:24 so bam, looks into a hat, has a translator writing...

[@Hamann9631]

1:17:40. Actually, that quote you put up is what Jesus meant.

[@modernsaints7881]

Can you do a video on orthodox Christianity?

[@theonewhomjesusloves7360]

And what about the fact that they've always said that the chair of Peter would be the anti-Christ...then we hear this in prophecy???😩🤷

[@rexomusprime]

I have a question. You mention that the reason we do not have prophets anymore is because we do not need any further revelations, testaments, or warnings because God fully revealed himself in Christ; in Christ we got it all. Wonderfully put. My question is, why does Mary still appear and bare prophecy?

[@twoody9760]

With the death of the last apostle public revelation ceased. The full Gospel has been fully revealed. There is no revelation that can contradict what has already been revealed. We have received private revelation from Mary and some holy people. We are not required to believe any private revelation. The Church will go no further than saying a private revelation may be worthy of belief, but we are not obligated to believe it. The private revelations are conditional. Meaning if we turn back to God the revelation will be minimized or voided.

[@rexomusprime]

Thank you. I greatly appreciate you taking the time to reply. @@twoody9760

[@HaleStorm49]

It's weird to claim that we know everything God already wants us to know. Who got to decide this? This is the religious equivalent of "the science is settled" Fauci approach.

[@HaleStorm49]

@@twoody9760 According to Jesus, prophets are not without honor except in their own country. The Bible makes it pretty clear that believers are bad at identifying prophets. No reason to think that will change any time soon. If Christ returned and tried to teach people anything new he would get crucified all over again precisely because of how hostile people are to anything they don't already believe...like you.

[@twoody9760]

@@HaleStorm49 You are a case in point as you believe the lying, immoral, false prophet Joseph Smith.

[@normmcinnis4102]

Apostasy has been going on since Paul's day. Apostasy is thought of as a departure from the faith. 2 Thessalonians 2:3 mentions "falling away" which Is a departure . Some see this as the literal departure of the Bride of Christ while many do not. But what follows is the man of sin being revealed. Logically, congregations falling into false beliefs will not bring out the man of sin, but a literal rapture will.

[@cameronreed1411]

From a "Mormon" perspective, our view is that the Keys of Apostleship and the spiritual rights thereof were not passed on to more Apostles who continued governing the Church. The Apostles were killed and though Bishops were ordained they were not to take the place of Apostles which were to continue as a quorum (like Matthias being called to be an Apostle when Judas died). Essentially, the Church went from being led by revelation through Apostles who held the Keys of the Kingdom (or at least a chief apostle) to being led by philosophizing men who mixed hellenism with the gospel. This combined with the unauthorized changing of doctrines and leadership of the Church led eventually to the complete withdrawal of authorization for the Church to effect salvific ordinances. The Protestants were wrong to break off, but they were right that the Church had fallen into a state of apostasy. And we "Mormons" would say that apostasy came from the keys that Peter held as an Apostle not being passed down to Bishops who were not of the same priesthood authority as the Bishops but a higher authority.

[@ItsSnagret]

Where does God tell Joseph that Christian’s are evil? Joseph said that God told him that the creeds were an abomination and the professors of those creed were corrupt. People are not evil, but the doctrine they espouse is incorrect or incomplete.

[@129jasper1]

Gentlemen, gentlemen, we are currently living through the great falling away, or Apostacy. Whether you come from a Catholic or Protestant or just man on the street perspective, surely you can see the signs. Truth is illegal in many ways in many places, and evil is insisted to be good.

[@tabandken8562]

Yet, it'll never happen with the Church itself. Jesus said He's with the Church till the end and that He won't leave us orphaned.

[@zacharyboudreau9127]

It sounds more like they’re not saying Christ is a widower but that he’s gotten a divorce and has now remarried.

[@TheIndependenceThinker]

Or that his spouse committed adultery.

[@tabandken8562]

​@@TheIndependenceThinkerProve that His spouse committed adultery and He left her.

[@TheIndependenceThinker]

@@tabandken8562 Why?

[@timrichardson4018]

On the Daniel 2 prophecy, your argument hinges on seeing the Mormon view as including a 5th kingdom, which is what your argument suggests as a contradiction of Daniel 2. I can see Mormons simply claiming the "European powers" after Rome and into the modern era as being the continuation of the fourth kingdom. This move alone makes the prophecy consistent with the LDS claim. My assessment, however, is that it is a very weak interpretation in the face of a much clearer and stronger alternative claim (the Catholic claim). The study of history, over the centuries, has recognized that Rome ended long ago. The Byzantines saw themselves as Rome, and the later Holy Roman Empire saw themselves as the successors of Rome. Napoleon saw himself as the successor of the Caesars. However, Rome itself dissolved long ago. And all these other claimants to the succession of Rome have fallen away in the modern era leaving us with clearly separate and no longer Roman nations by the time of Joseph Smith. The Daniel prophecy clearly stated the "rock" will come in the time of the fourth kingdom. My point is, you can make the mormon claim work, but you have to stretch the time line beyond what virtually any historian would recognize as the Roman empire, claiming all sorts uprisings of later political figures and systems as "still the Roman empire" way beyond the fall of the actual Roman empire. Combine this with the fact there is no clear prophecy about a universal apostasy and the fact that Jesus (the Son of God that any remotely orthodox Christian would have to recognize as greater than anyone else on earth ever, and thus greater than Joseph Smith) is a much better fit as the fulfillment of Daniel 2, both in terms of timeline and the greatness of the person/kingdom the prophecy suggests.

[@JosephHeschmeyer]

Yes, I think that's fair - you could squeeze the fifth (and sixth, and seventh, etc.) kingdoms into four as long as you claim every major European power in the last two thousand years is really just "the Roman Empire." After all, even the Holy Roman Empire had dissolved by the time Joseph Smith claims to restore the Church. Even if you accomplish this exegetical squeeze (which I would argue makes Daniel 2 a basically meaningless prophecy: reducing it from a specific prediction of what would happen during the Roman conquest of Judea, and turning into a vague "someday, a kingdom will come"), two problems remain: (1) the dream, and Daniel's interpretation, are focused [quite reasonably] on Israel, whereas the LDS interpretation shifts the focus towards Europe; and (2) Joseph Smith isn't from Europe or living in Europe during the supposed Restoration. I don't know how one would fit America into the four kingdoms.

[@timrichardson4018]

@@JosephHeschmeyer Good points! Thanks for the reply. I'm a new convert to the Catholic Church as of this passed Easter and your book, Pope Peter, helped me resolve my appreciation about the papacy, which was the last hurdle for me before entering the Church. Thanks for writing that book!

[@clearstonewindows]

@@JosephHeschmeyer America isn't in the four kingdoms. And how is the catholic church "cut out of the mountains"

[@GarthDomokos]

apostasy means to renounce religion. If that ideedily is the definition of apostasy, then not only did a lot of so called followers reject the Church and faith that Christ established, they established a different church, and are themselves the great apostates. I really hope that I have these apostates come to my door in order for me to share this absolute truth.

[@christianstephens7213]

I feel like if the early church lost their authority feel apart as early as LDS says we did , the Church would have been destroyed without the help of the Spirit with what early Christians went through .

[@stevenhazel4445]

Forcing KZbin to Evangelize....

[@Kalenwilliams1393]

With the Catholic Church, the tops of the tree outgrew the roots and the tree produced bitter fruit. This time around, the last time, with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the tops of the tree will grow equally with the roots and produce good fruit. Jacob 5. Book of Mormon. The Tree is the body of the Church. The roots are the covenants we make with God. The water is Christ. The tops are new converts. The Gospel of Jesus Christ in the LDS Church is the same no matter what ward you attend. Is that the same with the Catholic Church? Is the body of the Church one in the Catholic Church? Or are there differences in Doctrine and practice of that Doctrine?

[@tabandken8562]

The BoM is a plaigerized fraud. The whole book is based on a stolen manuscript by Soloman Spaulding and plaigerized text from the KJV.

[@cruznature7545]

The Church has always been here if anything the reformation would be a better candidate as the great apostasy.

[@Hamann9631]

43:40. Your claim that our claim makes no sense, only makes sense if those evil Israelites, to whom God sent prophets, had the priesthood.

[@Shevock]

Is there an argument in this again reform theology as well? Once saved always saved. Christian folk cannot fall away if they had faith. They cannot lose faith. The early church fathers had faith. They cannot fall into apostasy generally because they cannot individually.

[@Hamann9631]

1:14:38 People have 10 toes. You called Rome and Constantinople the toes. Your math is bad there.

[@Hamann9631]

53:50. Clement is an example of the Great Apostacy. He was not a leader of the whole church (maybe he was true bishop gone rogue). He claimed that authority without legitimately receiving it. Him claiming Apostolic authority and prerogative is proof of The Great Apostacy.

[@PalermoTrapani]

Did God create ex nihilo? Yes or No. If No, who created the Matter that who you call Father God and Spirit Mother used to create? And Saint Clement of the Bishop of Rome and was a disciple of Saint Paul (Phil 4:3), which was an Apostolic Church founded during the time of the Apostles. Saint Clement of Rome was the 4th Bishop of Rome following Peter, Linus and Anacletus. Joseph Smith was of English ancestry and American in the 19th. There was no Church in the British Isles in the 1st century. You belong to a polytheistic sect that has nothing to do with orthodox Christianity.

[@Hamann9631]

@@PalermoTrapani The Bible says the opposite of "ex nihilo". Matter is eternal. The universe always existed. That verse does show Paul worked with a Clement. If it is the same Clement called Pope, it does not prove he had been ordained an apostle. I have been in the same room as a true prophet and multiple apostles, I am not an apostle or prophet. The same can be said of Clement. Presence does not transfer priesthood authority. Did you really consider your last sentence? You typed, "You belong to a [religion with multiple heavenly Beings to whom they pray and in whom they trust]..." You belong to a religion (it looks like you are a Roman Catholic) which has multiple heavenly Beings to whom they pray and in whom they trust. If polytheism is so bad, are you going to leave the religion teaching you to pray to multiple gods?

[@PalermoTrapani]

@@Hamann9631 Ok the Universe always existed and thus it created God? Is that what u are suggesting? No I don't pray to saints as God, ask them to pray for me. They are clearly Holy Men and Women by God's "Grace" not nature. You are confused

[@Hamann9631]

@@PalermoTrapani You typed, "Ok the Universe always existed and thus it created God? Is that what u are suggesting?". The Hebrew word translated as "create" and variations of it, means to create from existing material, not out of nothing. Father in Heaven has not given us any details about that in revelations. He has clearly told us many other things. You typed, "No I don't pray to saints as God,...". You do pray to them as gods. You believe they are hearing you via supernatural powers, not presence or technology. That is a god. Prayer is worship. Your are committing the logical fallacy where you deny doing a thing because you do not use the word. If you do the definition of a word, you do the word, even if you do not use the word. When in the scriptures has God ever told us to talk to former righteous people via supernatural powers (if only English would create a small word to save us breathe) for help? Nowhere. We (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) only pray to Father in Heaven. That is us having one God, not many! Hence, we are not polytheists. Henotheist is the most accurate word to describe us. Are you going to apologize for calling us a thing which we are not?

[@PalermoTrapani]

@@Hamann9631 Buddy stop. Your group is full of nonsense. Saint are Holy by God's Grace, not by Nature. They are human beings like everyone else God created. Saints are in Heaven thus what they hear is only by God's allowing them to hear what is going on here on earth. Hebrews 12 speaks of a cloud of Witnesses and Revelation is clear of signs of incense rising up from the earth representing the prayers of the saints. You don't know what you are talking about. So once again, was the God you pray to always eternally God? or was He once a Man who progressed to God. And again, this existing Matter that the God you prayed to, "Who created it"? There is a reason that is a Mormon becomes Catholic, they are baptized without condition because Mormon's do not baptize in the Holy Trinity because u don't hold to the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.

[@carolzappa1804]

🤯👏👏👏👏🥰🙏✝️👑⛪🙏 Jeremiah 33 Isaiah 66 Clement Circa 96 Malachi 1:11 Daniel 2:44-45 Matthew 16 Joseph Smith = Arrogant, Presumption and Pride!

[@Hamann9631]

The title has reasons it makes sense and reasons it does not make sense. Any sect which is not Roman Catholic or Orthodox (which one of you old sects is the true one?) is claiming by their action a Great Apostacy occurred. However, Protestants, evangelicals, and non-denominational sects do not believe Jesus founded an organized group with a chain of command. So the 2 groups in the title have very different starting points.

[@Hamann9631]

38:00. The field had all tares around 100 something AD. We are now living in the time of the world being a mixed field. The net parable says nothing about timing. You are forcing your belief onto that parable. 39:20. Thou shalt not bear false witness. We do not claim Joseph Smith is going to sort the fish or physically destroy the wicked in the end. Why did you speak as if we do believe that?

[@tabandken8562]

That's the Mormon claim. That Jesus commission's Joseph Smith to restore His Church. It's like claiming that Joseph Smith is gathering wheat for the new Church. Jesus acknowledges that there will be tares (people who Apostosized the faith) and He will deal with it at the end of time. Was 1830 the end of time? No, it was not.

[@Hamann9631]

52:10. Actually, Jeremiah 33 is a last days prophecy. It supports the LDS position that there will be no great apostacy after this restoration.

[@tabandken8562]

It supports the Catholic Church that Jesus started in 33A.D., the original restoration of things.

[@Jonathan_214]

I think it would look better if you were centered on the right half of the screen. You're head is right next to the presentation, making it very crowded in the center.

[@vonitaesse4307]

Why is it that intelligent and kind people fall for the lies of the Mormon fake gods? Why is it that in respect to some people, Truth and Reason have no power over them? 😩😭😰

[@atalibouck8780]

I was born and raised in the faith and recently found my way to Catholicism. I literally was a 4th gen Mormon through all of my grandparents... It's deeply deeply ingrained. Because the lack of using reason and the centralization of feelings and emotions, plus the cultural weaponization against any person or fact "against" the Mormon faith, they are stuck. I thank God every day for the grace I was given to answer His call to conversion. I pray for my Mormon family and friends to find their way out. But it's very difficult.

[@rhamsesmartinez5007]

​@@atalibouck8780Me too. I was raised in Utah county in a devout LDS family. I joined the Catholic Church this year (2023).

[@atalibouck8780]

@@rhamsesmartinez5007 I'm in Davis County. Good for you for finding the truth!

[@vonitaesse4307]

@@atalibouck8780 Thank you for the encouragement. One of my nieces is starting to come around thanks to a Baptist she met at her work. I am confident she is in the right path out, but I pray that she will listen to Reason and see also the faults of the Baptist church and not fall for their allures.

[@vonitaesse4307]

@@rhamsesmartinez5007 Congratulations!

[@PainlessRockinb]

23:38 Isnt LDS exactly that?

[@tabandken8562]

No, that's the Catholic Church.