One week ago, I celebrated the twenty-eighth anniversary of my baptism into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. One reason for my baptism was the fact that I saw the various hallmarks of the ancient Church I gleaned from studying ancient Roman history that were absent from the other Churches I attended.
In my early days as a member of the Church, I had thought, like James Talmage in his book, The Great Apostasy, that the Roman Catholic Church had fallen away from the true Christian Church, and that other non-LDS Christian Churches were corruptions of a corruptions. I have found that my opinions have, …, um, …, evolved. Rather than being the Great Apostasy, I now regard the Roman Catholic and other non-LDS Christian Churches as pious humans’ valiant attempts to salvage true Christianity from the Great Apostasy; attempts that were, for the most part, successful–significantly more successful than I had previously thought.
Don’t get me wrong. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is still the only one with God’s unmitigated authority, and there is still the Great Apostasy. The hallmarks that I found still mark the Church as true, and I have found nothing that shakes my faith about God’s relationship with His Church. I have found, though, that I must assimilate new data.
Remember the nursery rhyme, “Humpty Dumpty”? Some people posit that it was a simile for the collapse of the Roman Empire. Now that I think about it, I realise that the rhyme could also apply to the Great Apostasy of the Christian Church shortly after the deaths of the original twelve Apostles. Just as, after the fall of the original Roman Empire in AD 476, nobody has reestablished it in the 1,532 years since, since the Great Apostasy, nobody (without God’s help) can restore the fallen Church.
To continue the Humpty Dumpty analogy, when the Church fell and was broken into several pieces, several of those pieces were irretrievable, many of those lost pieces were significant. Thus, we need God to restore those parts. Moreover, when attempts to gather in as much of the egg (Read: Church) as possible, it was quite easy for the gatherers to include impurities that were not part of the egg in the first place. Of course, only God has the ability to purge the impurities without purging parts of the true Church. While man cannot help “throwing the baby out with the bath water,” God can easily get rid of dirty water while keeping the baby.
Still, it is remarkable how much of the true Church was salvaged. For one thing, they salvaged the Books of the Holy Bible–with only about 10% corruption [Don Stewart and Josh McDowell, in their book, Answers, give a 10% difference in the earliest texts (p. 45).]. God says in D&C 91:1 that even the Apocrypha is most correct. And, of course, God refers to non-LDS Christians as being in a “saved condition” [D&C 132:17]. It is only the creeds that God found abominable–insofar as they spread incorrect doctrines [JS-H 1:19]. No wonder that Joseph Smith said that non-LDS Christians had much truth [HC 5:517]–and Brigham Young confirms it [JD 7:283]!
To those who accuse me of apostasy, I must, like John Maynard Keynes, say, “When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
UPDATE:
I received a comment from NOYDMB that, in effect, asked why I allowed some people to go off topic. I must state here that I was seriously considering deleting all the highjacking posts, but I had thought that the illustrative value of the comments–as written–carried a greater value. The sheer hate that the “orthodox” have for those they consider “heretical non-Christians,” I thought, was much too good a lesson for Latter-day Saints (and FAIR-minded others!) to miss–at least until the haters violated all bounds of civil conduct.
However, those people did remain within those bounds (though not perfectly), and I thank them for that. Nevertheless, because of space constraints, the time has come to separate that illustration from my original post. The early part of that exchange follows:
Marcus Brody Says:
August 10th, 2008 at 6:49 am
I find it entirely appropriate that you compare mormonism to a fairy tale.
Steven Danderson Says:
August 11th, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Hello “Marcus”!
You said, “I find it entirely appropriate that you compare mormonism to a fairy tale.”
You are wrong, Sir, on two counts:
1. I was not comparing Mormonism, but ancient Christianity’s decline from its New Testament state, and,
2. It was a nursery rhyme I was comparing it to. The nursery rhyme is an entirely different genre from the fairy tale.
Sincerely,
“Indiana Jones”
(I am a native Hoosier!)
Marcus Brody Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Indy,
Points of correction taken.
Let me then say, “It would be entirely appropriate to compare the Book of Mormon to a fairy tale”.
I believe that is more to the point anyway.
Galatians 1:8
TrevorM Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
Marcus I will see your “Book of Mormon fairytale” and raise you: Universal Flood, Noah’s ark, Giants, 7000 year old earth, Samson, Job, Elijah, Daniel, Ananias and Saphira, and biblical inerrency “fairy tales”.
I would go “all in” but I don’t have time to type it all.
Those who live in glass houses ought not to pretend that they don’t use windex…. or throw stones.
P. K. Andersen Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Marcus Brody wrote,
Let me then say, “It would be entirely appropriate to compare the Book of Mormon to a fairy tale”.
However, it would be far more appropriate to compare the Book of Mormon to the Bible.
But perhaps you have read some fairy tales that I have missed. Which fairy tales do you find most resemble the tone, style, or message of the Book of Mormon?
Steven Danderson Says:
August 12th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Marcus Brody” says:
**Indy,
Points of correction taken.
Let me then say, “It would be entirely appropriate to compare the Book of Mormon to a fairy tale”.
I believe that is more to the point anyway.
Galatians 1:8**
Indy replies:
In what way would it be appropriate? Are you arguing that the Book of Mormon is an “other gospel” [implied by your cite of Galatians 1:8, and, presumably, verse 9], and thus, is untrue?
Is it another gospel to say, as the title page of the Book of Mormon, that “JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD”?
Is it another Gospel to say that “there is no other way nor means whereby man can be saved, only through the atoning blood of Jesus Christ” (Book of Mormon, Helaman 5:9)?
Inquiring minds want to know! 
Thanks Trevor and PK, for your comments.
“Your prophets have made it clear that the Jesus of Mormonism is not the Jesus of the New Testament. And, “when the prophet speaks, the debate is over”, right?”
Kent,
August 13th, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Marcus Brody wrote:
It’s not like any fairy tale I’ve read, but the creative process is the same.
In other words, comparing the Book of Mormon to a fairy tale is not “entirely appropriate.” The Book of Mormon does not resemble a fairy tale in tone, style, or content.
To be clear here, I’m calling it a work of fiction. Where are all ruins of all the Lamanite cities in the Americas? Why are wheat and barley listed among the plants found in America when they were brought here by Europeans? (These are serious questions you need to ask yourself)
I am sure that those are very interesting questions (especially to a botanist or archeologist), but they miss the point entirely. My belief in the Book of Mormon has nothing to do with ruins, wheat or barley. I believe in the Book of Mormon for the same reason I believe in the Bible: I have studied both, made up my mind, and asked God for confirmation.
If you REALLY want to compare the BoM to the Bible we can, but I suspect you won’t be happy with what we find. We really don’t need to do it, for here is a very nicely done video that does it for us.
I have been comparing the Bible and the Book of Mormon for years, not by watching some video, but by actually studying the books themselves. I recommend the same approach to you.
Marcus Brody Says:
August 13th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Indy,
Your “Book” calls itself “another testament of Jesus Christ”. Right? Testament means covenant. A covenant is an agreement or contract between two or more entities. If the BoM is another testament/covenant/contract/agreement of Jesus Christ, it would certainly follow suit that it meets the criteria of being another gospel…from an angel.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.) [Galatians 1:8-9 LDS website edition]
Your prophets have made it clear that the Jesus of Mormonism is not the Jesus of the New Testament. And, “when the prophet speaks, the debate is over”, right?
If the Prophet did not “make up” his story and and angel from heaven indeed gave it to him, then there’s a problem somewhere either in his story or the one that the angel gave him, for it is a different gospel than the one presented in the Bible.
So, it would be entirely appropriate to compare the BoM to a fairy tale, because somewhere, somebody made up the story; it didn’t come from God.
PK,
It’s not like any fairy tale I’ve read, but the creative process is the same. To be clear here, I’m calling it a work of fiction. Where are all ruins of all the Lamanite cities in the Americas? Why are wheat and barley listed among the plants found in America when they were brought here by Europeans? (These are serious questions you need to ask yourself) If you REALLY want to compare the BoM to the Bible we can, but I suspect you won’t be happy with what we find. We really don’t need to do it, for here is a very nicely done video that does it for us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1mFdO1wB08
Continue reading at the original source →
August 13th, 2008 at 3:51 pm