“I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt” (Joseph Smith – History 1:19).
SZonian: That means “complete”, there is not one shred of truth left, “complete apostasy”.
I don't think the usage of "all" means "complete", at least not how you quoted it above. It would seem that some partial level of apostasy could be the case. Such as anything less than the whole truth is a lie. God's standard is perfection, no?
“I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong [that is that not one of them had it right - truth being 100% and not anything less]; and the Personage who addressed me said that all [everyone of] their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that [everyone of] those professors were (all is omitted) corrupt” (Joseph Smith – History 1:19).
You can see that the meaning doesn't change. Smith is quoting the Personage (God) and the Personage is answering. If the Personage meant "completely" he could have used it instead of all. So "all" is being used to modify that there isn't one of them that is correct, as opposed to there isn't one of them that has any truth at all.
You really got me thinking and I spent a little time on the LDS site I'd found previously: the LDS definition of Apostasy
Latter-day Saints believe that apostasy occurs whenever an individual or community rejects the revelations and ordinances of God, changes the gospel of Jesus Christ, or rebels against the commandments of God, thereby losing the blessings of the Holy Ghost and of divine authority.
So you have four conditions that satisfy apostasy:
1. Rejection of revelations of God
2. Rejection of the ordinances of God
3. Changes to the gospel of Jesus Christ
4. Rebellion against the commandments of God
Apostasy like this has happened throughout the Bible.
What you “think” it means and what I was taught it means by mormon missionaries, the mormon lessons and my 6 years as an active, temple attending mormon are two different things.
I don’t entertain the parsing of words. I’m fully aware of what the mormons teach in this regard and stand by my assertion that is supported by their founders’ own words and by their teachings.
By definition and context SZ's citation of smith's statement does mean complete.
I find it incredable the parsing of your words 10. It is stamped in every missionaries mind that the apostasy was complete and total. In the updated "Gospel Principles" it states “More and more error crept into Church doctrine, and soon the dissolution of the Church was complete. The period of time when the true Church no longer existed on earth is called the Great Apostasy”.
smith stated it even more clearly - “Nothing less than a complete apostasy from the Christian religion would warrant the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.”
- Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., History of the Church, v. 1, p. xl
Notice the word complete - there can be no waffling on its definition - complete is complete. Now if we follow your line of reasoning 10 that the apostasy was not 100% - then the 'apostasy' was NOT complete and there would be no need for the lds church.
Your tack may work for milk to the masses, but the fundamental doctrine of mormonism teaches otherwise.