The Great Apostasy - Revision history

SpencerMarsh at 16:08, 22 July 2026

2026-07-22T16:08:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:08, 22 July 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:

	However, do the lone mentions of an "ἐκκλησία" in Matthew 16 and 18 establish that Christ meant to establish a church? Lothar Coenen expresses doubt in ''The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology'' that the uses of "ἐκκλησία" in the passages from Matthew 16 and 18 can be used to support the notion that Christ established an official, institutional church. They are indeed the only times in all the Gospels that "ἐκκλησία" is used. "In all probability," Coenen writes, "Jesus himself called together the Twelve, but did not found the 'ekklesia' as such in his own lifetime, not even through the institution of the Lord's Supper." However, "This by itself would not settle the question whether he intended the church to come into being."<ref>Lothar Coenen, "Church," in ''The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology'', ed. Colin Brown (Zondervan, 1981), 298.</ref> This should not threaten Latter-day Saint belief. If Jesus at the very least came, taught His people, won them as followers, performed His Atonement, and gave His Apostles both authority to baptize and a commission to baptize His followers after His Ascension, the essential Latter-day Saint belief that Christ established a church is preserved.		However, do the lone mentions of an "ἐκκλησία" in Matthew 16 and 18 establish that Christ meant to establish a church? Lothar Coenen expresses doubt in ''The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology'' that the uses of "ἐκκλησία" in the passages from Matthew 16 and 18 can be used to support the notion that Christ established an official, institutional church. They are indeed the only times in all the Gospels that "ἐκκλησία" is used. "In all probability," Coenen writes, "Jesus himself called together the Twelve, but did not found the 'ekklesia' as such in his own lifetime, not even through the institution of the Lord's Supper." However, "This by itself would not settle the question whether he intended the church to come into being."<ref>Lothar Coenen, "Church," in ''The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology'', ed. Colin Brown (Zondervan, 1981), 298.</ref> This should not threaten Latter-day Saint belief. If Jesus at the very least came, taught His people, won them as followers, performed His Atonement, and gave His Apostles both authority to baptize and a commission to baptize His followers after His Ascension, the essential Latter-day Saint belief that Christ established a church is preserved.

			====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====

	====The Apostasy Predicted====		====The Apostasy Predicted====

SpencerMarsh at 16:02, 22 July 2026

2026-07-22T16:02:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:02, 22 July 2026
Line 254:		Line 254:
	====The Great Splintering: Patristic and Historical Evidence for the Apostasy====		====The Great Splintering: Patristic and Historical Evidence for the Apostasy====

	====~~1800 Years of Spiritual Darkness and Confusion~~?====		====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====

			====Why 1820?====
	One of the most natural questions a person can ask about the Restoration is why it took so long. If the priesthood authority and many "plain and precious" truths were lost following the deaths of the Apostles, why would God wait nearly eighteen centuries before restoring them? Why not restore the gospel in the fourth century, the eighth century, or during the Protestant Reformation? Latter-day Saint doctrine does not provide a complete answer to those questions. The Lord has never revealed every reason for His timing. Nevertheless, scripture, history, and the teachings of modern prophets together suggest a compelling cumulative explanation. While they may not demonstrate that the Restoration ''had'' to occur in 1820, they help us understand why that moment in history was uniquely fitting.		One of the most natural questions a person can ask about the Restoration is why it took so long. If the priesthood authority and many "plain and precious" truths were lost following the deaths of the Apostles, why would God wait nearly eighteen centuries before restoring them? Why not restore the gospel in the fourth century, the eighth century, or during the Protestant Reformation? Latter-day Saint doctrine does not provide a complete answer to those questions. The Lord has never revealed every reason for His timing. Nevertheless, scripture, history, and the teachings of modern prophets together suggest a compelling cumulative explanation. While they may not demonstrate that the Restoration ''had'' to occur in 1820, they help us understand why that moment in history was uniquely fitting.

SpencerMarsh: /* The Great Splitering: Patristic and Historical Evidence for the Apostasy */

2026-07-22T15:59:32Z

The Great Splitering: Patristic and Historical Evidence for the Apostasy

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 22 July 2026
Line 252:		Line 252:
	The most thorough treatment of this topic was done by Latter-day Saint scholar and Egyptologist John Gee in a book chapter he authored in 2005.<ref>John Gee, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/corruption-scripture-early-christianity The Corruption of Scripture in Early Christianity]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 163–204.</ref>		The most thorough treatment of this topic was done by Latter-day Saint scholar and Egyptologist John Gee in a book chapter he authored in 2005.<ref>John Gee, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/corruption-scripture-early-christianity The Corruption of Scripture in Early Christianity]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 163–204.</ref>

	====The Great ~~Splitering~~: Patristic and Historical Evidence for the Apostasy====		====The Great Splintering: Patristic and Historical Evidence for the Apostasy====

	====1800 Years of Spiritual Darkness and Confusion?====		====1800 Years of Spiritual Darkness and Confusion?====

SpencerMarsh: /* The Introduction of Greek Philosophy and Redefining the Christian Concept of God */

2026-07-22T15:59:08Z

The Introduction of Greek Philosophy and Redefining the Christian Concept of God

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:59, 22 July 2026
Line 222:		Line 222:
	As mentioned before, the Apostasy was the result of key doctrines being rebelled against. Below, we explore some of the possibilities.		As mentioned before, the Apostasy was the result of key doctrines being rebelled against. Below, we explore some of the possibilities.

	=====~~The Introduction of Greek Philosophy and Redefining the Christian Concept of~~ God=====		=====An Embodied God=====
	By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,		By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

SpencerMarsh: /* Patristic Evidence for the Apostasy */

2026-07-22T14:49:57Z

Patristic Evidence for the Apostasy

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:49, 22 July 2026
Line 252:		Line 252:
	The most thorough treatment of this topic was done by Latter-day Saint scholar and Egyptologist John Gee in a book chapter he authored in 2005.<ref>John Gee, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/corruption-scripture-early-christianity The Corruption of Scripture in Early Christianity]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 163–204.</ref>		The most thorough treatment of this topic was done by Latter-day Saint scholar and Egyptologist John Gee in a book chapter he authored in 2005.<ref>John Gee, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/corruption-scripture-early-christianity The Corruption of Scripture in Early Christianity]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 163–204.</ref>

	====Patristic Evidence for the Apostasy====		====The Great Splitering: Patristic and Historical Evidence for the Apostasy====

	====1800 Years of Spiritual Darkness and Confusion?====		====1800 Years of Spiritual Darkness and Confusion?====

SpencerMarsh at 14:48, 22 July 2026

2026-07-22T14:48:18Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:48, 22 July 2026
Line 216:		Line 216:
	\|}		\|}
	=====Scripture Outside the Model=====		=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

			=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====

	====The Key Doctrines====		====The Key Doctrines====
Line 236:		Line 238:
	* Faith and works		* Faith and works

	=====The Corruption of Scripture=====		=====The Change of Covenants=====
			Nephi mentions "covenants" that were taken out of the Bible. What could these covenants refer to?

			BYU professors Nicolas J. Frederick and Joseph M. Spencer argue that the Book of Mormon presents the Great Apostasy primarily as the rise of ''replacement theology''—the belief that the Christian Church permanently replaced Israel as God's covenant people. They contend that the Book of Mormon emphasizes a ''remnant theology'', teaching that God's covenants with Israel remain in force and that Gentiles are invited to be grafted into those covenants rather than supplant Israel. They build this case primarily from 1 Nephi 13, arguing that the "plain and precious things" removed from the Bible largely concerned God's enduring covenant with Israel and its future gathering. They reinforce this interpretation with 2 Nephi 25–30, Jacob 5, 3 Nephi 16, 20, and 21, and Mormon 5, all of which emphasize Israel's eventual restoration and the centrality of the gathering of Israel in the last days. They also appeal to Romans 9–11, particularly Paul's olive tree analogy, along with the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 12 and Isaiah's prophecies of Israel's restoration, to argue that both the Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that Gentile Christians become part of Israel's covenant family rather than replacing it. In their view, the Restoration restores this covenant-centered understanding of God's work, making the gathering of Israel—not merely the reestablishment of ecclesiastical authority—the defining answer to the Great Apostasy.<ref>Nicholas J. Frederick and Joseph M. Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement: Outlining a Potential Apostasy Narrative]," ''BYU Studies'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 105–27.</ref>

			====Cherubim and a Flaming Sword: The Corruption of Scripture Guarding the Way Back from the Apostasy====
	In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi sees that the Bible originally went forth from the Jews in purity, containing the "fulness of the gospel" and many "plain and precious" truths. However, after it passed through the hands of a "great and abominable church," many of these plain and precious parts were removed before the Bible reached the Gentiles. As a result, many people stumbled spiritually, became confused about essential doctrines, and fell under the influence of false traditions. Nevertheless, Nephi also sees that God would not abandon humanity: He would bring forth additional scripture—most notably the Book of Mormon—to restore many of the lost truths, establish the truth of the Bible as far as it had been preserved, and help gather Israel and bring people to a knowledge of Jesus Christ and His gospel.		In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi sees that the Bible originally went forth from the Jews in purity, containing the "fulness of the gospel" and many "plain and precious" truths. However, after it passed through the hands of a "great and abominable church," many of these plain and precious parts were removed before the Bible reached the Gentiles. As a result, many people stumbled spiritually, became confused about essential doctrines, and fell under the influence of false traditions. Nevertheless, Nephi also sees that God would not abandon humanity: He would bring forth additional scripture—most notably the Book of Mormon—to restore many of the lost truths, establish the truth of the Bible as far as it had been preserved, and help gather Israel and bring people to a knowledge of Jesus Christ and His gospel.

Line 244:		Line 251:

	The most thorough treatment of this topic was done by Latter-day Saint scholar and Egyptologist John Gee in a book chapter he authored in 2005.<ref>John Gee, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/corruption-scripture-early-christianity The Corruption of Scripture in Early Christianity]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 163–204.</ref>		The most thorough treatment of this topic was done by Latter-day Saint scholar and Egyptologist John Gee in a book chapter he authored in 2005.<ref>John Gee, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/corruption-scripture-early-christianity The Corruption of Scripture in Early Christianity]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 163–204.</ref>

	~~=====The Change of Covenants=====~~
	~~Nephi mentions "covenants" that were taken out of the Bible. What could these covenants refer to?~~

	BYU professors Nicolas J. Frederick and Joseph M. Spencer argue that the Book of Mormon presents the Great Apostasy primarily as the rise of ''replacement theology''—the belief that the Christian Church permanently replaced Israel as God's covenant people. They contend that the Book of Mormon emphasizes a ''remnant theology'', teaching that God's covenants with Israel remain in force and that Gentiles are invited to be grafted into those covenants rather than supplant Israel. They build this case primarily from 1 Nephi 13, arguing that the "plain and precious things" removed from the Bible largely concerned God's enduring covenant with Israel and its future gathering. They reinforce this interpretation with 2 Nephi 25–30, Jacob 5, 3 Nephi 16, 20, and 21, and Mormon 5, all of which emphasize Israel's eventual restoration and the centrality of the gathering of Israel in the last days. They also appeal to Romans 9–11, particularly Paul's olive tree analogy, along with the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 12 and Isaiah's prophecies of Israel's restoration, to argue that both the Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that Gentile Christians become part of Israel's covenant family rather than replacing it. In their view, the Restoration restores this covenant-centered understanding of God's work, making the gathering of Israel—not merely the reestablishment of ecclesiastical authority—the defining answer to the Great Apostasy.<ref>Nicholas J. Frederick and Joseph M. Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement: Outlining a Potential Apostasy Narrative]," ''BYU Studies'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 105–27.</ref>

	~~====Historical Evidence for the Great Apostasy====~~

	====Patristic Evidence for the Apostasy====		====Patristic Evidence for the Apostasy====

SpencerMarsh: /* =Scripture Outside the Model */

2026-07-22T14:36:02Z

=Scripture Outside the Model

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:36, 22 July 2026
Line 215:		Line 215:
	\|\|Moderate		\|\|Moderate
	\|}		\|}
	=====Scripture Outside the Model====		=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

	====The Key Doctrines====		====The Key Doctrines====

SpencerMarsh: /* Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority= */

2026-07-22T14:33:09Z

Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority=

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:33, 22 July 2026
Line 81:		Line 81:
	*Revelations 2–3		*Revelations 2–3

	===Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority~~====~~		====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====

	~~=====The Loss of Apostolic Authority=~~====
	Doctrine and Covenants 86 presents the Apostles as the original sowers of the gospel in the Savior's Parable of the Wheat and the Tares. According to the revelation, they planted the "good seed," but after they "fell asleep" (that is, after their deaths), the adversary sowed tares among the wheat, symbolizing the introduction of corruption and false teachings into the Church (Doctrine & Covenants 86:1–3). Unlike some earlier Latter-day Saint interpretations that suggested the wheat disappeared entirely, this revelation teaches that the wheat continued to exist alongside the tares until the last days, when the Lord would begin the work of gathering and separating them. Thus, Doctrine and Covenants 86 portrays the Apostles as faithfully establishing Christ's Church and attributes the subsequent Apostasy to the enemy's efforts after their ministry ended, while emphasizing that God preserved faithful believers ("the wheat") until the Restoration and the final gathering.		Doctrine and Covenants 86 presents the Apostles as the original sowers of the gospel in the Savior's Parable of the Wheat and the Tares. According to the revelation, they planted the "good seed," but after they "fell asleep" (that is, after their deaths), the adversary sowed tares among the wheat, symbolizing the introduction of corruption and false teachings into the Church (Doctrine & Covenants 86:1–3). Unlike some earlier Latter-day Saint interpretations that suggested the wheat disappeared entirely, this revelation teaches that the wheat continued to exist alongside the tares until the last days, when the Lord would begin the work of gathering and separating them. Thus, Doctrine and Covenants 86 portrays the Apostles as faithfully establishing Christ's Church and attributes the subsequent Apostasy to the enemy's efforts after their ministry ended, while emphasizing that God preserved faithful believers ("the wheat") until the Restoration and the final gathering.

			=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
	The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle as early 100 AD and as late as 107 AD.<ref>Kurt Manwaring, "Fact vs. Fiction: How Did All the Apostles Die?" ''From the Desk'', July 4, 2026, https://fromthedesk.org/how-did-all-the-apostles-die/.</ref>		The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle as early 100 AD and as late as 107 AD.<ref>Kurt Manwaring, "Fact vs. Fiction: How Did All the Apostles Die?" ''From the Desk'', July 4, 2026, https://fromthedesk.org/how-did-all-the-apostles-die/.</ref>

SpencerMarsh at 14:32, 22 July 2026

2026-07-22T14:32:03Z

@@ Line 81: / Line 81: @@
 *Revelations 2–3
-====The Symptoms of the Great Apostasy====
+===Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
 =====The Loss of Apostolic Authority=====
@@ Line 220: / Line 216: @@
 ||Moderate
 |}
 =====The Corruption of Scripture=====
@@ Line 234: / Line 250: @@
 BYU professors Nicolas J. Frederick and Joseph M. Spencer argue that the Book of Mormon presents the Great Apostasy primarily as the rise of ''replacement theology''—the belief that the Christian Church permanently replaced Israel as God's covenant people. They contend that the Book of Mormon emphasizes a ''remnant theology'', teaching that God's covenants with Israel remain in force and that Gentiles are invited to be grafted into those covenants rather than supplant Israel. They build this case primarily from 1 Nephi 13, arguing that the "plain and precious things" removed from the Bible largely concerned God's enduring covenant with Israel and its future gathering. They reinforce this interpretation with 2 Nephi 25–30, Jacob 5, 3 Nephi 16, 20, and 21, and Mormon 5, all of which emphasize Israel's eventual restoration and the centrality of the gathering of Israel in the last days. They also appeal to Romans 9–11, particularly Paul's olive tree analogy, along with the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 12 and Isaiah's prophecies of Israel's restoration, to argue that both the Bible and the Book of Mormon teach that Gentile Christians become part of Israel's covenant family rather than replacing it. In their view, the Restoration restores this covenant-centered understanding of God's work, making the gathering of Israel—not merely the reestablishment of ecclesiastical authority—the defining answer to the Great Apostasy.<ref>Nicholas J. Frederick and Joseph M. Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement: Outlining a Potential Apostasy Narrative]," ''BYU Studies'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 105&ndash;27.</ref>
 ====Historical Evidence for the Great Apostasy====
 ====Patristic Evidence for the Apostasy====
 ====1800 Years of Spiritual Darkness and Confusion?====

SpencerMarsh at 14:15, 22 July 2026

2026-07-22T14:15:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:15, 22 July 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}		{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
	<h1><b>The Great Apostasy</b></h1>		<h1><b>The Great Apostasy</b></h1>
	~~__NOTOC__~~
	{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims that it is the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. Without such a loss, there could have been no Restoration. Critics, and especially those who are of Protestant, Orthodox, or Catholic Christian background, have argued that the Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy is erroneous on many grounds. Some have argued that Christ never established an official institution during His mortal life. Others have argued that He did found a church, but that the church was never lost.		{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims that it is the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. Without such a loss, there could have been no Restoration. Critics, and especially those who are of Protestant, Orthodox, or Catholic Christian background, have argued that the Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy is erroneous on many grounds. Some have argued that Christ never established an official institution during His mortal life. Others have argued that He did found a church, but that the church was never lost.