FAIR - User contributions [en]

Authorship of New Testament books

2026-08-12T19:27:59Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Church leaders have been relatively unconcerned about the actual authorship of the New Testament */

{{Main Page}}
{{Navigation:Bible}}{{blankline}}

=Who wrote the books of the New Testament=

In evaluating authorship of New Testament books, it is important to remember that the source or authority of a book is usually not the same as the actual scribe of the book.

=Who wrote Romans?=
Said one author, "For example, one might ask who really wrote the epistle to the Romans in the New Testament. Most people would probably say that Paul wrote it. But Paul was not the person who actually took a writing instrument to a sheet of papyrus and wrote the epistle from beginning to end. Rather, Paul used the services of a scribe, to whom he dictated the contents of the letter: 'I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord' ({{s||Romans|16|22}})."<ref name="judd">Frank F. Judd Jr., "[https://rsc.byu.edu/how-new-testament-came-be/who-really-wrote-gospels-study-traditional-authorship Who Really Wrote the Gospels? A Study of Traditional Authorship]," in ''How the New Testament Came to Be'', ed. Kent P. Jackson and Frank F. Judd Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2006).</ref>{{Rp|131}}

=Who wrote the Gospel of Mark?=
As another example, consider the question, "Who is the author of the Gospel of Mark? Recall that according to early Christian tradition, Mark was a missionary companion of the Apostle Peter and wrote down those things that Peter taught him about the life of the Savior. In this particular case, the scribe rather than the source of the information received credit for the Gospel. Thus, this Gospel might have been called the Gospel of Peter, but it is traditionally called the Gospel of Mark."<ref name="judd"></ref>{{Rp|132}}

=What exactly are the Gospels?=
Especially regarding authorship of the Gospels, it is helpful to remember that "the four Gospels are, by no means, the unchanged and unadulterated words of biographers or stenographers who followed Jesus around and recorded His utterances verbatim. They probably began, in common with other ancient scriptures, as oral traditions—collections of reminiscences, stories, proverbs, and anecdotes."<ref>Alexander B. Morrison, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/how-new-testament-came-be/plain-precious-things "'Plain and Precious Things': The Writing of the New Testament]," in ''How the New Testament Came to Be'', 3.</ref>

=The apostle John in modern revelation=
For example, based on modern-day revelation, Latter-day Saints affirm that the Apostle John is the authority or source of the Gospel of John (see {{s||Doctrine and Covenants|7|}}) as well as the Book of Revelation (see {{s|1|Nephi|14|27}}). However, this does not mean he is the actual scribe of the words that we have now. For example, the end of the Gospel of John includes these words: "This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and ''we'' know that his testimony is true" ({{s||John|21|24}}), implying that one or more people helped assemble the Gospel of John in its current form.

=Epistle to the Hebrews=
There are no other New Testament books whose source is given by revelation. The authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews has been murky throughout Christian history. One historian wrote about Joseph Smith's statements about Hebrews, but the same ideas are applicable to all New Testament books:

<blockquote>
The Prophet Joseph Smith never made any direct statement regarding the complex issue of the authorship of Hebrews. He did, however, quote passages of scripture from the epistle to the Hebrews and attribute them to Paul. For example, he attributed a passage from {{s||Hebrews|6|17}}: "Paul said to his Hebrew brethren that God b[e]ing more abundantly willing to show unto the heirs of his promises the immutability of his council [‘]confirmed it by an oath.’" I feel that this type of statement, however, is not by itself sufficiently strong to definitively answer the question. In my view, Joseph was simply following the view of Pauline authorship as he read it in the title, "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews," rather than making an overt statement about the authorship of Hebrews. On one occasion, Willard Richards recorded the Prophet saying, "St Paul exhorts us to make our Calling & Election shure." We know, however, that these teachings appear in {{s|2|Peter|1|10}} and not in any of Paul’s writings. Certainly no one should use this statement as evidence that Joseph Smith considered Paul the author of 2 Peter. Thus the phrase "Paul said," followed by a quote from Hebrews, does not necessarily mean that the Prophet was weighing in on the question of the authorship of Hebrews.<ref>Terrence L. Szink, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/how-new-testament-came-be/authorship-epistle-hebrews Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews]," in ''How the New Testament Came to Be'', 251.</ref>
</blockquote>

<onlyinclude>
=Church leaders have been relatively unconcerned about the actual authorship of the New Testament=
President J. Reuben Clark, as First Counselor in the First Presidency, stated, "I am not really concerned, and no man of faith should be, about the exact authorship of the books of the Bible. More than one Prophet may well have written parts of books now collected under one heading. I do not know. There may have been ‘ghost writers’ in those days, as now."<ref> J. Reuben Clark, ''On the Way to Immortality and Eternal Life'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1950), 210; as cited in Szink, "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews," 254.</ref>

And Elder Bruce R. McConkie, speaking specifically of the Epistle to the Hebrews but applicable to all New Testament books, noted, "The principles set forth in the Epistle are more important than the personage who recorded them; an understanding of the doctrines taught is of greater worth than a knowledge of their earthly authorship."<ref>Bruce R. McConkie, ''Doctrinal New Testament Commentary'' (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1973), 3:133; as cited in Szink, "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews," 255.</ref>
</onlyinclude>
{{Endnotes sources}}

Latter-day Saint scripture and the closed canon

2026-08-12T19:27:17Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Does the fact that the Bible states that nothing should be "added to" or "taken away" from the book mean that the Book of Mormon is false? */

{{Main Page}}
{{Navigation:Scripture}}{{blankline}}

=Is the Church's "open canon" evidence of error because Christianity requires a "closed canon"?=
==The doctrine of a closed canon and the end of authoritative revelation is not found in the Bible==

Other churches sometimes claim that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is in error because Christianity requires a "closed canon" (no more authoritative revelation) instead of the Church's "open canon" (potential for more binding revelation).

The doctrine of a closed canon and the end of authoritative revelation is not found in the Bible. To insist upon this doctrine is to place a non-Biblical doctrine in a place of pre-eminence, and insist that God must be bound by it. Such a doctrine would require the very revelation it denies to be authoritative. Even the proper interpretation of Biblical teachings requires authoritative revelation, which are necessarily extra-Biblical.

Critics are free to hold these beliefs if they wish, but they ought not to criticize the LDS for believing extra-Biblical doctrines when they themselves insist upon the non-Biblical closed canon.

==God is superior even to His Word==

The Bible is an important record of God's message to humanity. However, the Bible—or any other written text—cannot be the focus of the Christian's life or faith. Only one deserves that place: God.

One non-LDS Christian author cautioned believers from placing the Bible 'ahead' of God:

<blockquote>
It is possible, however, to stress the Bible so much and give it so central a place that the sensitive Christian conscience must rebel. We may illustrate such overstress on the Bible by the often-used (and perhaps misused) quotation from Chillingworth: "The Bible alone is the religion of Protestantism." Or we may recall how often it has been said that the Bible is the final authority for the Christian. If it will not seem too facetious, I would like to put in a good word for God. It is God and not the Bible who is the central fact for the Christian. When we speak of "the Word of God" we use a phrase which, properly used, may apply to the Bible, but it has a deeper primary meaning. It is God who speaks to man. But he does not do so only through the Bible. He speaks through prophets and apostles. He speaks through specific events. And while his unique message to the Church finds its central record and written expression in the Bible, this very reference to the Bible reminds us that Christ is the Word of God in a living, personal way which surpasses what we have even in this unique book. Even the Bible proves to be the Word of God only when the Holy Spirit working within us attests the truth and divine authority of what the Scripture says. Faith must not give to the aids that God provides the reverence and attention that Belong only to God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Our hope is in God; our life is in Christ; our power is in the Spirit. The Bible speaks to us of the divine center of all life and help and power, but it is not the center. The Christian teaching about the canon must not deify the Scripture.<ref>Floyd V. Filson, ''Which Books Belong in the Bible?'' (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1957), 20–21.</ref>
</blockquote>

To argue that the canon is closed effectively seeks to place God's written word (the Bible) above God Himself. Some have even called this practice "bibolatry" or "bibliolatry." Critics are effectively ordering God not to reveal anything further, or refusing to even consider that He might choose to speak again.

==Closed canon is not a Biblical doctrine==

The idea of a closed canon is not a Biblical doctrine. The Bible bears record that God called prophets in the past. Why could He not—indeed, why ''would'' He not—continue to do so?

Ironically, it would seem that the only way to know that there can be no extra-Biblical revelation is via revelation: otherwise, decisions about God's Word are being made by human intellect alone. Yet, since the Bible does not claim that it is the sole source of revealed truth, the only potential source of a revelation to close the canon would be extra-Biblical. Thus, those who insist on a closed canon are in the uncomfortable position of requiring extra-Biblical revelation to rule out extra-Biblical revelation!<ref>Joseph Smith made this observation in {{TPJS1|start=61}}</ref>

As one non-LDS scholar observed: "For ''evidence'' about what was within the canon, one had to go outside the canon itself." After all, there was "no ''scriptural'' evidence to decide what were the exact limits of the canon."<ref>James Barr, ''Holy Scripture: Canon, Authority, Criticism'' (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983), 24–25. Emphases in original.</ref>

Throughout Biblical history, the canon was clearly ''not'' closed. New prophets were called, and new authoritative writing was made. It would seem strange for this to cease without revelatory notice being given that God's practices were about to change.

Some authors are even now asking if the decision to close the canon was a mistake:

<blockquote>
The first question, and the most important one, is whether the church was right in perceiving the need for a closed canon of scriptures....did such a move toward a closed canon of scriptures ultimately (and unconsciously) limit the presence and power of the Holy Spirit in the church?...Does God act in the church today and by the same Spirit? On what biblical or historical grounds has the inspiration of God been limited to the written documents that the Church now calls its Bible?...one must surely ask about the appropriateness of tying the church of the twentieth century to a canon that emerged out of the historical circumstances in the second to the fifth centuries CE. How are we supposed to make the experience of that church absolute for all time?...Was the church in the Nicene and post-Nicene eras infallible in its decisions or not? Finally, if the Spirit inspired only the written documents of the first century, does that mean that the same Spirit does not speak today in the church about matters that are of significant concern, for example, the use of contraceptives, abortion, liberation, ecological irresponsibility, equal rights, euthanasia, nuclear proliferation, global genocide, economic and social justice, and so on?...<ref>Lee Martin McDonald, ''Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon'' (Hendrickson Publishers; Rev Sub edition, 1995), 254–255.</ref>
</blockquote>

These are striking questions, and those who insist upon a closed canon may have difficulty resolving the issues which they raise. Joseph Smith's insistence that God did not cease to speak, and that the canon was not closed, resolved these issues many decades before modern Christians began to grapple with them.

==Early Christians did not have a closed canon==

The early Christian Church did not have a fixed canon, nor did it restrict itself to the canon used by most modern Christian churches:

<blockquote>
If the term "Christian" is defined by the examples and beliefs passed on by earliest followers of Jesus, then we must at least ponder the question of whether the notion of a biblical canon is necessarily "Christian." They did not have such canons as the church possesses today, nor did they indicate that their successors should draw them up....

Even in regard to the OT canon, it has been shown that the early church’s collections of scriptures were considerably broader in scope than those presently found in either the Catholic or Protestant canons and that they demonstrated much more flexibility than our present collections allow....in regard to the OT, should the church be limited to an OT canon to which Jesus and his first disciples were clearly not limited?<ref>Ibid.</ref>
</blockquote>

==Scriptural interpretation requires revelation==

Even if one were to grant that the Bible contains all ''necessary'' teachings, it is clear from Christian history that the Bible can be interpreted in many different ways by sincere readers. What else but additional, on-going revelation can settle legitimate questions of interpretation and application of God's word? Are we to rely on human reason alone to do so? Does this not in essence turn to an extra-Biblical source for information about divine matters?

{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Open canon vs. closed canon/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}

= What does the Book of Mormon mean when it says that "plain and precious" things have been taken out of the bible? =
== So called "lost scripture" is in reference to writings mentioned or cited within the present Biblical record, but which are not in the Bible itself ==

I've heard about "lost scripture" mentioned in the Bible. What is this about, and what implications does it have for the doctrine of Biblical [[Mormonism and the Bible/Inerrancy|inerrancy]] and [[Mormonism and the Bible/Completeness|sufficiency]]?

1. Biblical writers considered writings not in the present canon to be scriptural writings. 
2. Christian groups do not agree on what constitutes the Biblical canon—any claim that the canon is closed, complete, and sufficient must answer:
: a) ''which'' canon?
: b) what establishes this canon as authoritative and not some other?
3. Differences in canon between Christian groups ''and'' Biblical authors' clear belief in the scriptural status of other non-Biblical texts argue against a coherent doctrine of Biblical sufficiency and inerrancy drawn from the Bible itself. Such a claim must come from outside the Bible.

Stephen E. Robinson said of this subject:

<blockquote>
The Book of Mormon teaches that "plain and precious" things have been taken out of the Bible ({{s|1|Nephi|13|24-29}}). Both Latter-day Saints and Evangelicals often assume this means that the present biblical books went through a cut-and-paste process to remove these things...However, I see no reason to understand things this way, and in fact I it is largely erroneous. The pertinent passages from the Book of Mormon give no reason to assume that the process of removing plain and precious things from Scripture was one exclusively or even primarily of editing the books of the present canon. The bulk of the text-critical evidence is against a process of wholesale cutting and pasting...

It is clear to me, therefore, that "the plain and precious truths" were not necessarily in the originals of the ''present'' biblical books, and I suspect that the editing process that excised them did not consist solely or even primarily of cutting and pasting the present books, but rather largely in keeping ''other'' apostolic or prophetic writings from being included in the canon. In other words, "the plain and precious truths" were primarily excised not by means of controlling the ''text'', but by means of controlling the ''canon''."<ref> {{HowWide1|start=63}}</ref>
</blockquote>

So called "lost scripture" is in reference to writings mentioned or cited within the present Biblical record, but which are not in the Bible itself. Some of these writings are known from other sources, and some are not.

== Examples of "lost scripture" ==

{| valign="top" border="1"
!Lost writing!!Biblical citation to the lost writing
|-
| style="width:50%" valign="top"| Book of the Wars of the Lord ||{{b||Numbers|21|14}}
|-
|Book of Jasher||{{b||Joshua|10|13}}, {{b|2|Samuel|1|18}}
|-
|Book of the Acts of Solomon||{{b|1|Kings|11|41}}
|-
|Book of Samuel the Seer||{{b|1|Chronicles|29|29}}
|-
|Book of Gad the Seer||{{b|1|Chronicles|29|29}}
|-
|Book of Nathan the Prophet||{{b|1|Chronicles|29|29}}, {{b|2|Chronicles|9|29}}
|-
|Prophecy of Ahijah||{{b|2|Chronicles|9|29}}
|-
|Visions of Iddo the Seer||{{b|2|Chronicles|9|29}}, {{b|2|Chronicles|12|15}}, {{b|2|Chronicles|13|22}}
|-
|Book of Shemaiah||{{b|2|Chronicles|12|15}}
|-
|Book of Jehu||{{b|2|Chronicles|20|34}}
|-
|Sayings of the Seers||{{b|2|Chronicles|33|19}}
|-
|Lament for Josiah||{{b|2|Chronicles|35|25}}
|-
|Paul's epistle to Corinthians before our "1 Corinthians"||{{b|1|Corinthians|5|9}}
|-
|Paul's possible earlier Ephesians epistle||{{b||Ephesians|3|3}}
|-
|Paul's epistle to Church at Laodicea||{{b||Colossians|4|16}}
|-
|1 Enoch 1:19 and The Assumption of Moses||{{b||Jude|1|14-15}}
|-
|1 Enoch||"It influenced Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, Hebrews, 1 John, Jude (which quotes it directly) and Revelation (with numerous points of contact)…in molding New Testament doctrines concerning the nature of the Messiah, the Son of Man, the messianic kingdom, demonology, the future, resurrection, the final judgment, the whole eschatological theater, and symbolism."<ref>E. Isaac, "1 (Ethiopic Apocalypse of) Enoch," in ''The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha'', ed. J. H. Charlesworth, 2 vols, (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 1:10; cited in {{ComparingLDSBeliefs}}</ref>
|}

== Examples of canonical differences among Bibles ==

The picture is further complicated by the fact that Christians have not always agreed on the "canon"—that is, they have not always agreed upon which writings were "scripture" and which were not.

Some examples of these variations:

{| valign="top" border="1"
!Christian Person or Group!!Difference in canon from Protestant Bible (e.g., the KJV)
|-
|Catholics||Apocrypha is canonical
|-
|Orthodox||Apocrypha is canonical
|-
|Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 200)|| Included in canon:
* Epistle of Barnabas
* Epistle of Clement
* The Preaching of Peter<ref>{{ComparingLDSBeliefs}}</ref>
|-
|Roman Christians (circa A.D. 200)||Included in canon:
*Revelation of Peter
*Wisdom of Solomon
Excluded from canon:
*Hebrews
*1 Peter
*2 Peter
*3 John<ref>Mike Ash, "[http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Brochures/Is_the_Bible_Complete.pdf Is the Bible Complete?]" (FAIR Brochure): 1.</ref>
|-
|Origen (''date'')||Included in canon:
* Epistle of Barnabas
* Shepherd of Hermas<ref>{{ComparingLDSBeliefs}}; citing Clyde L. Manschreck, ''A History of Christianity in the World'', 2d. ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1985), 52.</ref>
Excluded from canon: 
*James
*Jude
*2 John
*Those disputed by Rome (see above)<ref>Mike Ash, "[http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Brochures/Is_the_Bible_Complete.pdf Is the Bible Complete?]" (FAIR Brochure): 1.</ref>
|-
|Syriac Peshitta||Excluded from the canon:
* 2 Peter
* 2 John
* 3 John
* Jude
* Revelation of St. John<ref>{{FR-11-2-4}}; citing Kurt Aland, ''Nestle-Aland Greek-English New Testament'', 5th ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1990), 769–75; see also Craig A. Evans, ''Noncanonical Writings and New Testament Interpretation'' (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1992), 190–219, who provides al{{s||most|1|}},500 quotations, allusions, and parallels between noncanonical sources and the New Testament.</ref>
|-
|Armenian Church||Included in canon:
* 3 Corinthians
Excluded from canon: 
* Revelation of St. John prior to 12th century<ref>{{FR-11-2-4}}</ref>
|-
|Ethiopian Church||Included in canon:
*Sinodos
* Clement
* Book of the Covenant
* Didascalia<ref>{{FR-11-2-4}}</ref>
|-
|Martin Luther||Considered Epistle of James "a right strawy epistle."<ref>Timothy George, "[http://www.sbts.edu/pdf/sbjt_2000Fall3.pdf 'A Right Strawy Epistle': Reformation Perspectives on James]," ''The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology'' (Fall 2000), 20–31.</ref> Also didn't agree with Sermon on the Mount because didn't match his "grace only" theology.
|-
|}

== Implications for inerrancy and sufficiency doctrine of the Bible ==

All these canons cannot be correct. Why must we accept that the critic's Bible is complete and inerrant? By what authority is this declared? Such an authority would have to be ''outside'' the Bible, thus demonstrating that there is some other source for the Word of God besides the Bible.

Furthermore, one should remember that Biblical writers were not aware of the Bible canon, because the Bible was not compiled until centuries later. Thus, Biblical writers cannot have referred to completeness and sufficiency of the canon, because the canon did not exist.

The clear evidence of "lost scripture" from the Bible was a common early LDS argument.<ref>See, for example: {{MA1|author=J. Goodson|article=[http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/BOMP&CISOPTR=1315&REC=19 Dear Sir]|vol=3|num=1|date=October 1836|start=397–99}} </ref>

{{blankline}}
{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Lost scripture/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}

= Does the Bible alone contain all necessary or essential knowledge to assure salvation, thus making the Book of Mormon and modern prophets unnecessary? =
== The Bible nowhere makes the claim for sufficiency or completeness ==

Other churches claim the [[Bible_basics |Bible]] contains all necessary or essential knowledge to assure salvation. Therefore, things like modern prophets or additional scripture (such as the [[Book_of_Mormon_basics |Book of Mormon]]) are unnecessary or even blasphemous.

Claiming inerrancy and completeness:
* is not a Biblical doctrine
* has not been sufficient to prevent a vast range of Biblical interpretations and Christian practices, all of which cannot be correct
* ignores that the Biblical canon is not unanimous among Christians, and ignores non-canonical books which the Bible itself cites as being authoritative
* ignores that the Bible contains some errors and internal inconsistencies

However, Mormons cherish the Bible. Those who claim otherwise are mistaken. As Elder Neal A. Maxwell said:

<blockquote>
Occasionally, a few in the Church let the justified caveat about the Bible—"as far as it is translated correctly"—diminish their exultation over the New Testament. Inaccuracy of some translating must not, however, diminish our appreciation for the powerful ''testimony'' and ample ''historicity'' of the New Testament...

So when we read and turn the pages of the precious New Testament, there is a barely audible rustling like the quiet stirrings of the Spirit, something to be 'spiritually discerned.' ({{b|1|Corinthians|2|14}}). The witnessing words came to us—not slowly, laboriously, or equivocally through the corridors of the centuries, but rather, swiftly, deftly, and clearly. Upon the wings of the Spirit these words proclaim, again and anew, "JESUS LIVED. JESUS LIVES!"<ref>{{Ensign1|author=Neal Maxwell|article=[https://www.lds.org/ensign/1986/12/the-new-testament-a-matchless-portrait-of-the-savior?lang=eng The New Testament—A Matchless Portrait of the Savior]|date=December 1986|start=20}} {{io}}</ref>
</blockquote>

The Bible nowhere makes the claim for sufficiency or completeness.

Furthermore, the thousands of Christian sects and groups provide ample testimony that the Bible has not been sufficient to encourage unanimity among Christians about proper authority, doctrine, or practice. Critics would like us to accept that ''their'' reading is the correct one, but this means we must appeal to some other standard—one cannot use their reading of the Bible to prove their reading of the Bible!

There is also no unanimity among Christians concerning what constitutes the "true" Bible canon—once again, some other standard is needed to determine which Bible is the "true" or "inerrant" version.

There are also other writings which the Bible itself refers to as authoritative, and yet these books are not in the present Bible canon. Either the Bible is wrong in referring to these writings as authoritative, or some modern Christians are wrong for arguing that the Bible is a complete record of all God's word to His children.

== Mormons consider the Bible an inspired volume of scripture of great value, but they also recognize that there are some errors and contradictions ==

While the LDS do not like to denigrate the Bible or call attention to its errors, since they consider it an inspired volume of scripture of great value, they also recognize that there are some errors and contradictions in the Bible which are the result of human error or tampering. This does not reduce the Bible's value in their estimation, but it does call into question any claims for the Bible's "inerrancy."

Said early LDS leader George Q. Cannon:

<blockquote>
This book [the Bible] is of priceless worth; its value cannot estimated by anything that is known among men upon which value is fixed. ... But in the Latter-day Saints it should always be a precious treasure. Beyond any people now upon the face of the earth, they should value it, for the reason that from its pages, from the doctrines set forth by its writers, the epitome of the plan of salvation which is there given unto us, we derive the highest consolation, we obtain the greatest strength. It is, as it were, a constant fountain sending forth streams of living life to satisfy the souls of all who peruse its pages.<ref>{{JDfairwiki|vol=22|disc=34|start=261|end=262|date=8 May 1881|author=George Q. Cannon|title=The Blessings Enjoyed Through Possessing The Ancient Records, etc.}}</ref>

{{parabreak}}

We are not called to teach the errors of translators but the truth of God's word. It is our mission to develop faith in the revelations from God in the hearts of the children, and "How can that best be done?" is the question that confronts us. Certainly not by emphasizing doubts, creating difficulties or teaching negations.... The [http://scriptures.lds.org/a_of_f/1/8#8 clause in the Articles of Faith] regarding mistakes in the translation of the Bible was never intended to encourage us to spend our time in searching out and studying those errors, but to emphasize the idea that it is the truth and the truth only that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints accepts, no matter where it is found.<ref>{{JInstructor1|author=George Q. Cannon|article=?|date=1 April 1901|vol=36|num=?|start=208}}</ref>
</blockquote>

{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Insufficient/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}
{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Completeness/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}

<onlyinclude>
=Does the fact that the Bible states that nothing should be "added to" or "taken away" from the book mean that the Book of Mormon is false?=
==Misuse of the Book of Revelation==

Some Christians claim that the Book of Mormon cannot be true because nothing should be "added to" or "taken away from" the Holy Bible. However, those who claim this misuse Revelation, misunderstand the process by which the Bible canon was formed, and must ignore other, earlier scriptures to maintain their position. Their use of this argument is a form of [[Logical_fallacies#Begging_the_question |begging the question]] whereby they presume at the outset that the Book of Mormon and other scriptures are not the Word of God, which is precisely the point under debate.

The verse often cited (as by Martin, above) is {{b||Revelation|22|18-19}}:

<blockquote>
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
</blockquote>

==The book of Revelation was written prior to some of the other biblical books==

Some claim that this verse states that the Bible is complete, and no other scripture exists or will be forthcoming.

However, the critics ignore that:
* The book of Revelation was written prior to some of the other biblical books, and prior the Bible being assembled into a collection of texts. Therefore, this verse can only apply to the Book of Revelation, and not the Bible as a whole (some of which was unwritten and none of which was yet assembled together into 'the Bible'). While the traditional date of the book of Revelation is A.D. 95 or 96 (primarily based on a statement by Irenaeus), many scholars now date it as early as A.D. 68 or 69. The Gospel of John is generally dated A.D. 95-100.<ref>For more information on the dating of Revelation, see Thomas B. Slater's [http://www.bsw.org/?l=71841&a=Ani04.html ''Biblica''] article.</ref>
* The New Testament was organized by placing the gospels first, and then the letters of apostles and other leaders in order of decreasing length.

:Since the book of Revelation is neither a gospel nor an epistle, it was placed at the end of the canon in its own category. Therefore, John cannot have intended the last few sentences of Revelation to apply to the entire Bible, since he was not writing a 'final chapter' for the New Testament and since the Bible would not be completed and canonized for some centuries later.
* Other scriptures (such as {{s||Deuteronomy|4|2}}, {{s_short||Deuteronomy|12|32}}, and {{s||Proverbs|30|6}}) likewise forbid additions. If the critics' arguments were self-consistent, they would have to then discard everything in the New Testament and much of the Old, since these verses predate "other scripture" added by God through later prophets.
* Further evidence that {{s||Rev.|22|19}} is not referring to the entire bible when it reads "words of the book of this prophecy" is found if one reads {{b||Revelation|1|3,11}}:

<blockquote>
Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of '''this prophecy''', and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand...Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, '''write in a book''', and send [it] unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
</blockquote>

It is clear that the book referred to at the beginning of Revelation is the same book being referred to at the end.

Everything that John saw and heard in between these two statements are the contents of that book.

==Many biblical authors warned against editing their work==

Biblical scholar Bart Ehrman wrote:

<blockquote>
The very real danger that [New Testament] texts could be modified at will, by scribes who did not approve of their wording, is evident in other ways as well. We need always to remember that the copyists of the early Christian writings were reproducing their texts in a world in which there were not only no printing presses or publishing houses but also no such thing as copyright law. How could authors guarantee that their texts were not modified once put into circulation? The short answer is that they could not. That explains why authors would sometimes call curses down on any copyists who modified their texts without permission. We find this kind of imprecation already in one early Christian writing that made it into the New Testament, the book of Revelation, whose author, near the end of his text, utters a dire warning [quotes {{s||Revelation|22|18-19}}].

This is not a threat that the reader has to accept or believe everything written in this book of prophecy, as it is sometimes interpreted; rather, it is a typical threat to copyists of the book, that they are not to add to or remove any of its words. Similar imprecations can be found scattered throughout the range of early Christian writings.<ref>{{MisquotingJesus|start=54|end=55}}</ref></blockquote>

==God may add to God's word==

Even if the passage in Revelation meant that no '''man''' could add to scripture; it does not forbid that '''God''' may, through a prophet, add to the Word of God. If this were not possible, then the Bible could never have come into existence—the Old Testament, for example, would have precluded having the New Testament.

{{To learn more box:"adding to" or "taking away from" the Bible}}{{blankline}}

{{Critical sources box:The Bible/"Adding to" or "taking away from"/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}
</onlyinclude>
{{endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Questions]]
[[de:Bibel/Hinzufügen oder Wegnehmen]]
[[es:Pregunta: ¿El Mormonismo está en error porque el cristianismo requiere un "canon cerrado" en lugar del "canon abierto"?]]
[[es:Pregunta: ¿El hecho de que la Biblia declare que nada debe ser "agregado a" o "quitado" del libro significa que el Libro de Mormón es falso?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: O Mormonismo está em erro porque o Cristianismo requer um "cânone fechado" em vez do "cânone aberto" da Igreja?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: O fato de que a Bíblia diz que nada deve ser "adicionar a" ou "retirar" do livro significa que o Livro de Mórmon é falso?]]

Biblical inerrancy

2026-08-12T19:26:26Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Do Latter-day Saints consider the Bible to be untrustworthy? */

{{Main Page}}
{{Navigation:Bible}}{{blankline}}

=Does the Bible itself claim to be inerrant?=
==The Bible nowhere makes the claim that it is inerrant==

As Blake Ostler observed of the "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy":<ref>On the Chicago Statement, see Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, ''A General Introduction to the Bible'', rev. and exp. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986), 181–185.</ref>

<blockquote>
''The doctrine of inerrancy is internally incoherent''. In my opinion, numerous insuperable problems dictate the rejection of inerrancy in general and inerrancy as promulgated in the Chicago Statement in particular. First, the Chicago Statement is self-referentially incoherent. One cannot consistently assert that the Bible is the basis of his or her beliefs and then assert that one must nevertheless accept biblical inerrancy as asserted in the Chicago Statement...This statement contains a number of assertions, propositions if you will, that are not biblical. Inerrancy, at least as recently asserted by evangelicals, is not spelled out in the Bible. Nowhere do the words ''inerrant'' or ''infallible'' appear in the Bible. Such theoretical views are quite alien to the biblical writers. Further, inerrancy is not included in any of the major creeds. Such a notion is of rather recent vintage and rather peculiar to American evangelicalism. Throughout the history of Christian thought, the Bible has been a source rather than an object of beliefs. The assertion that the Bible is inerrant goes well beyond the scriptural statements that all scripture is inspired or "God-breathed." Thus inerrancy, as a faith commitment, is inconsistent with the assertion that one's beliefs are based on what the Bible says. The doctrine of inerrancy is an extrabiblical doctrine about the Bible based on nonscriptural considerations. It should be accepted only if it is reasonable and if it squares with what we know from scripture itself, and not as an article of faith... However, it is not and it does not. 

The Chicago Statement can function only as a statement of belief and not as a reasonable observation of what we find in the Bible. The Chicago Statement itself acknowledges that we do not find inerrant statements in the Bible, for it is only "when all facts are known" that we will see that inerrancy is true. It is very convenient to propose a theory that cannot be assessed unless and until we are in fact omniscient. That is why the Chicago Statement is a useless proposition. It cannot be a statement of faith derived from the Bible because it is not in the Bible. It cannot be a statement about what the evidence shows because the evidence cannot be assessed until we are omniscient.<ref>{{FR-11-2-3}} {{io}}</ref>
</blockquote>

=Is any book of scripture perfect?=
==No book of scripture is "perfect"==
Latter-day Saints do not subscribe to the conservative Protestant belief in [[Biblical inerrancy|scriptural inerrancy]]. We do not believe that ''any'' book of scripture is perfect or infallible. Brigham Young explained:

<blockquote>
When God speaks to the people, he does it in a manner to suit their circumstances and capacities.... Should the Lord Almighty send an angel to re-write the Bible, it would in many places be very different from what it now is. And I will even venture to say that if the Book of Mormon were now to be re-written, in many instances it would materially differ from the present translation. According as people are willing to receive the things of God, so the heavens send forth their blessings.<ref>{{JDfairwiki|author=Brigham Young|vol=9|start=311|disc=64}} [13 July 1862]</ref>
</blockquote>

So while the Book of Mormon has come down to us with fewer doctrinal errors and corruptions than the Bible, even it could be improved if we were ready to receive further light and knowledge.

Infelicities of language are also to be expected when produced by revelators with little education, said George A. Smith:

<blockquote>
The Book of Mormon was denounced as ungrammatical. An argument was raised that if it had been translated by the gift and power of God it would have been strictly grammatical.... When the Lord reveals anything to men, he reveals it in a language that corresponds with their own. If you were to converse with an angel, and you used strictly grammatical language he would do the same. But if you used two negatives in a sentence the heavenly messenger would use language to correspond with your understanding.<ref>{{JDfairwiki|author=George A. Smith|vol=12|start=335|disc=63}} [15 November 1863]</ref>
</blockquote>

<onlyinclude>
=Do Latter-day Saints consider the Bible to be untrustworthy?=
==Early LDS leaders' views on the problems with biblical inerrancy and biblical translation would seem mainstream to most today==

It is claimed that Latter-day Saint leaders diminish the Bible as untrustworthy.

Do the Latter-day Saints detract from the Bible? Do they criticize it? No more so than the majority of Biblical scholars.

Early LDS leaders' views on the problems with biblical inerrancy and biblical translation would seem mainstream to most today. Only those who completely reject modern biblical textual criticism would find LDS leaders' views radical or evil. In fact, LDS beliefs on the matter accord well with many other Christian denominations. Those who vilify LDS belief on this point tend to be at the extreme end of the debate about scriptural inerrancy, and would also reject a modern creedal, orthodox scholar's views.

The Latter-day Saints believe that the Bible is true. It is inspired and inspiring, having been inspired by God and written by prophets, apostles, and disciples of Jesus Christ.

==In 1979, the Church produced its own King James Bible, complete with a set of footnotes and cross references, as well as translational notes and study helps==

Prior to this publication, the Church purchased most of its King James Bibles from Cambridge University Press. Does this sound like an organization that is using the Bible merely as a public relations gimmick? If so, millions of members were never told. The Church and its members have a deep love and appreciation for the Word of God as found in the Bible.

The bold assertion that the LDS do not value the Bible is amusing. There is no presentation of statistics, only anecdotal claims that first, LDS members do not read the Bible and are not familiar with it, and second, that they constantly hear from their leaders that the Bible is less than trustworthy.

In a survey published in July 2001, Barna Research Group, Ltd. (BRG) made the following observations:

<blockquote>
The study also revealed that barely half of all Protestant adults (54%) read the Bible during a typical week. Barna pointed out that Mormons are more likely to read the Bible during a week than are Protestants-even though most Mormons do not believe that the Bible is the authoritative Word of God.<ref>The full survey, entitled "Protestants, Catholics and Mormons Reflect Diverse Levels of Religious Activity," can be found at the Barna Web site at www.barna.org.</ref>
</blockquote>

BRG is not affiliated with the LDS Church, nor was the LDS Church involved in the survey. Members of the LDS Church likewise would not categorize their faith in this fashion—they ''do'', in fact, regard the Bible as authoritative and the Word of God. Yet the survey indicated that they certainly do read the Bible consistently. Also, over the course of two years out of every four years, every member of the Church is asked to read and study the entire text of the Bible as part of the Church's Sunday School curriculum. Asked by whom? By the leaders of the LDS Church.

==Early LDS study of biblical languages==

One of the often-neglected events in LDS history happened in 1836. Joseph Smith arranged for a Hebrew scholar to come and teach Hebrew to the members of the LDS Church in Kirtland Ohio. The members of the Church had already been studying the Hebrew language, having purchased some grammars, a Hebrew Bible, and a lexicon, and had previously attempted to hire a teacher. The Hebrew scholar who came was Joshua Seixas. He spent several weeks instructing many of the members of the Church in Hebrew.<ref>Perhaps as many as 120 members of the LDS Church studied under Seixas while he was in Kirtland.</ref> Why the interest in the Hebrew we might ask? Clearly it was to be able to (in the words of Pope Pius XII) 'explain the original text which, having been written by the inspired author himself, has more authority and greater weight than any even the very best translation, whether ancient or modern.'

What this shows is that not only were the early LDS aware of the challenges associated with the Bible, but that they were just as interested in going back to the original language and to the original texts (if possible) as was the rest of Christendom who were aware of these discrepancies. Despite the critics' unfounded assertions to the contrary, there has never been a leader of the LDS Church who has ever suggested that the Bible was not suitable for study and for learning the Gospel due to any shortcomings it may have.

==The Book of Mormon on the Bible==

Critics often discuss two of Nephi's statements regarding the Bible as found in the Book of Mormon. Nephi's perspective is that of modern Latter-day Saints: The Bible contains truth from God. However, it is still the work of men, and is only as reliable as the men who wrote, translated and copied it.

It is interesting that the Book of Mormon itself has begun to be seen as a witness to the textual criticism of the Bible. Source critical theory of the Old Testament splits the story of David and Goliath into two separate accounts that were later merged into the common story that we have today.<ref>See, for example, Emmanuel Tov, "The Composition of 1 Samuel 16-18 in the Light of the Septuagint Version," in Jeffrey H. Tigay, ''Empirical Models for Biblical Criticism'' (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985), 97-130.</ref> Scholars believe these two traditions represent an earlier source and a later source. One of the primary evidences for this argument is the fact that some of the added material is missing from the Septuagint (LXX). In a paper presented at the 2001 FAIR Conference, Benjamin McGuire presented evidence that Nephi, in borrowing from the story of David and Goliath, relied on a text that did not have the added or late material.<ref>Benjamin McGuire, "[http://www.fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2001_Nephi_and_Goliath.html Nephi and Goliath: A Reappraisal of the Use of the Old Testament in First Nephi]" (text), or [[Topical_Guide/Multimedia_presentations/Videos/YouTube/FAIR_Conference/2001#Benjamin_McGuire_-_.22Nephi_and_Goliath:_A_Reappraisal_of_the_Use_of_the_Old_Testament_in_First_Nephi.22|video]].</ref> This would be in harmony with current scholarship of the Old Testament, which indicates that this material was added at the time of the captivity in Babylon, and certainly after Nephi had left Jerusalem with his Brass Plates.

{{Critical sources box:The Bible/Trustworthy/CriticalSources}}{{blankline}}
</onlyinclude>
{{Endnotes sources}}


[[Category:Questions]]

Textual variants in the Bible

2026-08-12T19:24:33Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Are the Biblical textual variants theologically significant? */

{{Main Page}}
{{Navigation:Bible}}{{blankline}}

=What evidence demonstrates that the Bible has been altered?=
==The current evidence of Biblical manuscripts demonstrates unequivocally that variation, corruption, or tampering with Biblical texts is the rule, not the exception==

===Old Testament===

Emmanuel Tov<ref>These examples are taken from {{FR-11-2-4}}. References to Tov's original work may be found in footnotes 26–49.</ref>, J. L. Magnes Professor of Bible at Jerusalem's Hebrew University, and editor-in-chief of the Dead Sea Scrolls publication project wrote:

:* "All of [the] textual witnesses [of the OT] differ from each other to a greater or lesser extent."
:* "There does not exist any one edition [of the OT] which agrees in all of its details with another."
:*"Most of the texts—ancient and modern—which have been transmitted from one generation to the next have been ''corrupted'' in one way or another." (emphasis in original)
:* "A second phenomenon pertains to corrections and changes inserted in the biblical text. . . . Such tampering with the text is evidenced in all textual witnesses."
:*"Therefore, paradoxically, the soferim [scribes] and Masoretes carefully preserved a text that was already corrupted."
:* "One of the postulates of biblical research is that the text preserved in the various representatives (manuscripts, editions) of what is commonly called the Masoretic Text, does not reflect the 'original text' of the biblical books in many details."
:* "These parallel sources [from Kings, Isaiah, Psalms, Samuel, etc.] are based on ancient texts which already differed from each other before they were incorporated into the biblical books, and which underwent changes after they were transmitted from one generation to the next as part of the biblical books."
:* "S[eptuagint] is a Jewish translation which was made mainly in Alexandria. Its Hebrew source differed greatly from the other textual witnesses (M[asoretic], T[argums], S[amaritan], V[ulgate, and many of the Qumran texts]). . . . Moreover, S[eptuagint] is important as a source for early exegesis, and this translation also forms the basis for many elements in the NT."
:* "The importance of S[eptuagint] is based on the fact that it reflects a greater variety of important variants than all the other translations put together."
:* "Textual recensions bear recognizable textual characteristics, such as an expansionistic, abbreviating, harmonizing, Judaizing, or Christianizing tendency."
:* "The theory of the division of the biblical witnesses into three recensions [Masoretic, Septuagint, and Samaritan] cannot be maintained . . . to such an extent that one can almost speak in terms of an unlimited number of texts."
:* "The question of the original text of the biblical books cannot be resolved unequivocally, since there is no solid evidence to help us to decide in either direction."
:* "We still have no knowledge of copies of biblical books that were written in the first stage of their textual transmission, nor even of texts which are close to that time. . . . Since the centuries preceding the extant evidence presumably were marked by great textual fluidity, everything that is said about the pristine state of the biblical text must necessarily remain hypothetical."
:* "M[asoretic] is but one witness of the biblical text, and its original form was far from identical with the original text of the Bible as a whole."
:* "As a rule they [concepts of the nature of the original biblical text] are formulated as 'beliefs,' that is, a scholar, as it were, believes, or does not believe, in a single original text, and such views are almost always dogmatic."
:* "During the textual transmission many complicated changes occurred, making it now almost impossible for us to reconstruct the original form of the text."
:*"many of the pervasive changes in the biblical text, pertaining to whole sentences, sections and books, should not . . . be ascribed to copyists, but to earlier generations of editors who allowed themselves such massive changes in the formative stage of the biblical literature."
:*"It is not that M[asoretic text] triumphed over the other texts, but rather, that those who fostered it probably constituted the only organized group which survived the destruction of the Second Temple [i.e., the rabbinic schools derived from the Pharisees]."

The Dead Sea Scrolls also indicate that the text differed, and this was not unique to Qumran, where they were discovered:

:There is nothing in the biblical texts [found at Qumran] to suggest that they are specific to Qumran or to any particular group within Judaism. In fact, everything we know about the biblical text prior to the end of the first century C.E--for example, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, Philo, Josephus, the New Testament, Rabbinic quotations--indicates that the text was '''pluriform'''. The Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, and Josephus demonstrate bountifully that there were variant literary editions of the books of Scripture in the late Second Temple period {{ea}}.<ref>Eugene Ulrich, ''The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of the Bible'' (Eerdmans, and Leiden 1999) 9–10</ref>

===New Testament===

A similar situations confronts us with the New Testament. Leon Vaganay and Christian-Bernard Amphoux<ref>These examples are taken from {{FR-11-2-4}}. References to Vaganay and Amphoux's original work may be found in footnotes 52–58.</ref> wrote in ''An Introduction to New Testament Criticism'':

:*"They [ancient methods of rhetorical interpretation] are used to reveal a secret code, only accessible to the learned or initiated. If the 'Western' text is seen from this perspective, it becomes less of a product of a certain theology than of a certain system of meaning. . . . But this sophisticated kind of coded writing is not suitable for general circulation. For wider distribution, the text had to be adapted to the mentality of the people who were going to receive it, it had to be revised and changed so as to make it acceptable to an audience who were not expecting to have to look for hidden meaning."
:*"The wide stylistic gap between the two main New Testament text types, the 'Western' on the one hand and all the other types on the other hand, cannot have arisen by chance."
:*"In AD 178 the secular writer Celsus stated in polemic against the Christians: some of the believers . . . have changed the original text of the Gospels three or four times or even more, with the intention of thus being able to destroy the arguments of their critics.' (quoted in Origen, Contra Celsum, SC 132, 2, 27). Origen does not deny the existence of such changes." Indeed, Origen wrote, "It is an obvious fact today [third century A.D.] that there is much diversity among the manuscripts, due either to the carelessness of the scribes, or to the perverse audacity of some people in correcting the text, or again to the fact that there are those who add or delete as they please, setting themselves up as correctors."
:*"It is therefore not possible to reconstitute with certainty the earliest text, even though there is no doubt about its having existed in written form from a very early date, without a preparatory oral stage."
:*"In the period following AD 135, the recensions proliferated with a resultant textual diversity which reached a peak before the year 200."
:*"Thus between the years 150 and 250, the text of the first recensions acquired a host of new readings. They were a mixture of accidental carelessness, deliberate scribal corrections, involuntary mistakes, a translator's conscious departure from literalness, a reviser's more systematic alterations, and, not least, contamination caused by harmonizing to an extent which varied in strength from place to place. All these things contributed to diversification of the text, to giving it, if one may so put it, a little of the local colour of each country."

===Who made the changes?===

Christian writers often accused heretics (such as Marcion of the second century AD) of altering the Bible text. However, there is another more disturbing finding for those who insist on an inerrant Bible text:

:...recent studies have shown that the evidence of our surviving manuscripts points the finger in the opposite direction. Scribes who were associated with the ''orthodox'' tradition not infrequently changed their texts, sometimes in order to eliminate the possibility of their "misuse" by Christians affirming heretical beliefs and sometimes to make them more amenable to the doctrines being espoused by Christians of their own persuasion.<ref>{{MisquotingJesus1|start=53}}</ref>

Thus, the present-day "orthodox" Christian tradition sometimes required the original texts to be reworked to support their views or oppose the views of those with whom they disagreed. It seems strange, then, to now accuse those who do not wholly accept the "orthodox" view of "violating scripture," since that very scripture was originally tampered with by those we now label 'orthodox,' which is merely another way of saying that they won the battle to define their view as the 'proper' one.

As Bruce Metzger observed:

<blockquote>
Odd though it may seem, scribes who thought [for themselves] were more dangerous than those who wished merely to be faithful in copying what lay before them. Many of the alterations which may be classified as intentional were no doubt introduced in good faith by copyists who believed that they were correcting an error or infelicity of language which had previously crept into the sacred text and needed to be rectified. A later scribe might even reintroduce an erroneous reading that had been previously corrected. …The manuscripts of the New Testament preserve traces of two kinds of dogmatic alterations: those which involve the elimination or alteration of what was regarded as doctrinally unacceptable or inconvenient; and those which introduce into the Scriptures ‘proof’ for a favorite theological tenet or practice....<ref>Bruce Metzger, ''The Text of the New Testament. Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration ''(second edition 1979; first edition 1964), 195, 201.</ref>
</blockquote>

<onlyinclude>
=Are the Biblical textual variants theologically significant?=
==Non-LDS scholar Kenneth Clark addressed this notion==

Non-LDS scholar Kenneth Clark addressed this notion.<ref>Kenneth W. Clark, "The Theological Relevance of Textual Variation in current criticism of the Greek New Testament," ''Journal of Biblical Literature'' 85 (1966): 1-16.</ref> Each citation has the specific page number in brackets following it.

*"It is important to know what the original text and the original meaning were, but it is also important to recognize the subsequent revision of text and thought in the course of the church’s history. In the current edition of the Nestle NT, for example, we have more than a single text, for in the apparatus criticus we are confronted with thousands of textual variants that involve a difference of form and interpretation" (2).
* "Although a variant which is a departure from the original text may be described as spurious, yet every intentional and sensible variant has a claim to authenticity in the history of Christian thought. It will be valuable to form a judgment, in the light of all modern textual discoveries and researches, of the extent to which the Greek text of our NT has been subject to revision and made to carry differences of thought" (2).
*"About 250 years ago, John Mill of Oxford… [in which it was] reported that his manuscript sources revealed 30,000 variants" (2, citing Mill, Novum Testamentum… (Oxford 1707). "A hundred years ago F. H. A. Scrivener [A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, I.3] estimated that the text of the Greek NT showed variance ‘at least fourfold that quantity,’ i.e., 120,000" (2).
* "In 1886 Benjamin Warfield estimated between 180,000 and 200,000 ‘variant readings’ [Warfield, An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament, 13]" (2-3).
* "And in 1937 Vaganay acknowledged a range of 150,000 to 250,000" (3).
* "Now in our time, the International Greek New Testament Project can report on 300 manuscript collations of Luke, and the estimate for the entire NT perhaps 300,000 variants" (3). He quotes several scholars from 1700 to his own day, that not one variant affected the fundamentals of Christian faith: Richard Bentley, Daniel Whitby, Benjamin Warfield, FHA Scrivener, Vaganay, Frederic Kenyon, FC Grant, Harold Greenlee, Kee-Young-Froelich NT introduction (3-4).
* "There has been, of course, a contrary opinion. Hort himself admitted that ‘it is true that dogmatic preferences to a great extent determined theologians, and probably scribes, in their choice between rival readings….’ [Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek., 2.283]" (4).
* "Recently CSC Williams has expressed the judgment that textual alteration derives ‘no less frequently from dogmatic than from other motivation’ [Williams, Alterations to the Text of the Synoptic Gospels and Acts (1951): 7]" (4).
*"In reality, the amount of textual variation is a considerable portion. Of course it is true that the great bulk of text shows little or no record of variation…. So in the NT text it is the doubtful portion that stands in need of refinement. Its importance far exceeds its fractional size" (4).
* "How shall we measure the theological clarification derived from textual emendation where a single word altered affects the major concept in a passage? …. By calculating words it is impossible to appreciate the spiritual insights that depend upon the words. We would not contend that even the most theological of variants create a doctrine or cancel out a doctrine, but it is defensible to maintain that variants do ‘affect’ or ‘alter’ or ‘modify’ doctrine" (4-5).
* "The only objective and justification of textual criticism is that its emended text should give access to a clearer insight and a deeper faith. Textual variation does not imperil belief in God but it can and does contribute to elucidation of the character of God and of his relation to man…. There is far more in Christian doctrine than a brief creedal summation, and the exegesis of variant texts contributes to the enrichment of doctrine" (5).
* "We can agree with Hort that ‘perceptible fraud’ is not evident in textual alteration, that ‘accusations of willful tampering…prove to be groundless,’ and that dogma has not motivated ‘deliberate falsification’ [Hort, 282f]…. Willful and deliberate, yes. But not tampering, falsification, and fraud. Alteration, yes; but not corruption. Emendation, yes; but not in bad faith. These denials of evil or unethical intention can well be sustained, but such intention is not a proper allegation by the textual critic. He must analyze the text constructively to understand the theological value of any variation, and its place in historical theology" (5).
* "It is also a false assurance, offered by many, that textual criticism can have no effect upon Christian doctrine" (5). "Let us no longer implant the belief that Christian doctrine is unaffected by textual emendation, whether for better or worse. The earliest intentional changes in the text of the Gospel of Mark are still to be seen recorded in the Gospel of Matthew and Luke, revising the sense" (6).
* Marcion made revision of the text of Luke at many points, for the sake of reinterpretation…. At Luke 18.19 he adds pater…. Although Origen also adds this word, Epiphanius makes clear the deliberate motivation on the part of Marcion. It is Jerome who explains Marcion’s omission in Gal 1.1 of the phrase ‘and God the Father,’ so as to read: ‘…through Jesus Christ who raised himself from the dead.’ In Rom 1.16 Marcion excinded proton, thus repealing the priority of the Jews: ‘the gospel is the power of God for salvation…to Jew and Greek’—a reading followed even by Tertullian and later preserved in Vaticanus and in the Sahidic version" (6).
* "So also Origen revised the primitive text at points, although with greater caution and restraint…. In John 11.25 Jesus speaks: ‘I am the resurrection and the life;’ but Origen dropped the latter term, recording rather: ‘I am the resurrection,’ and his revision is retained by Cyprian and in P45 and also in the Sinaitic Syriac codex" (6). "Tatian also made revision in the NT text…. Mark 1.41…. ‘Jesus was moved with pity [splagchnistheis]’ Tatian reports however that ‘Jesus was moved with anger [orgistheis],’…. Tatian introduced a different interpretation at Matt 17.26" (6-7).
* "In the recently acquired gnostic Christian documents of the second century there are instances of textual alteration which revises the meaning in highly important aspects" [Gospel of Thomas 55 & Luke 14.26; GosTho 109 & Matt 13.44]…. It does illustrate the freedom with which the account in Matthew was treated from the beginning" (7).
* "Thus far we have recalled only a few of the many examples of textual revision within a century after the recording of the gospel—revision made by fellow evangelists, in patristic interpretations of second-century fathers, and in a pseudonymous gospel of gnostic color. These revisions clearly were made with deliberate intent and, furthermore, they do alter the sense of the text and affect the interpretation" (7).

The paper then discusses the differences between the RSV and the comparable Catholic edition, both agreed upon by the Catholic Church and the National Council of Churches:

* "This English translation as originally produced by Protestant American scholarship is basically acceptable to Catholic scholarship as well. The extent of revision in the CE is minimal, amounting to only forty-five changes in the entire NT: thirty-three occurring in the gospels and twelve in the Pauline epistles. Eighteen instances are accounted for by the single change to ‘brethren’ instead of ‘brothers,’ all instances intended in the original RSV to refer to blood brothers of Jesus [CE changes occur in Matt 13.55; Mark 12.31 ff., par; J 2.12; 7.3f; Acts 1.14; I Cor 9.5]" (8).
* "Besides the alterations in the English text, the CE introduces nineteen new footnotes. Eleven of these refer to the value of money…. Another footnote is found six times in I Corinthians, to the effect that parthenos means ‘virgin.’" (9).
* "It is of greater importance, however, to comment on those alterations in the CE which involve change in the critical Greek text itself. There are only sixteen such places, all of them in the gospels. Eight of these readings are in Luke, of which six are found in the account of the resurrection. All sixteen variants represent the same textual attitude; that is, they are restorations of passages which were present in the King James and Rheims-Douai versions but have been omitted from the RSV. They are all present in the Textus Receptus but rejected by Westcott-Hort and Nestle…. The formula used in both the RSV and the CE is similar, but the textual judgment is reversed. The RSV omits the passage from the text and in the footnote reports its presence in ‘some ancient authorities;’ whereas the CE returns each passage to the text (as does Knox), and a footnote reports that ‘other ancient authorities omit. Notably these sixteen restorations include the traditional ending of Mark and the Johannine pericope adulterae; and both these textual phenomena are fully and accurately explained in footnotes. To restore the pericope adulterae to its traditional position within the Gospel of John would appear to be erroneous, especially against the fresh testimony for omission by both P66 and P75. The CE note on p. 239 acknowledges that the passage ‘is not by St. John’ but is held to be inspired and canonical" (9).

Regarding the Long ending to Mark:

* "Before the middle of the second century, Justin in his ‘first’ Apology [1.45] writes a short passage notably verbatim with Mark 16.20 which looks like a direct quotation. Similarly, Irenaeus quotes from Mark 16.19 [AH 3.10.6]. Tatian’s text had the long ending. The earliest translations—Latin, Syriac, and Coptic—all possess it" (9-10).
* "What theological relevance is to be recognized in the textual alteration of the CE? First, it may be said that few Catholic-vs.-Protestant issues are apparent. Rather, the difference is one of scholarly judgment. Further, there is no consistent theological tendency in the textual revision" (10-11).
* "There are two other restorations in the CE which, on the other hand, probably were interpolations into the original text [Mark 10.24: ‘for those who trust in riches.’ And Luke 8.43: woman who spent her money on physicians]" (10-11).
* "The most impressive alteration in the CE which involves the Greek critical text is the series of six readings in the account of the resurrection in Luke 24.6, 12, 36, 40, 51, 52. These are all valid scholarly alterations, in which no theological tendency is to be found" (11). Another major undertaking currently in progress is the International Greek New Testament Project, whose objective is the publication of a new apparatus criticus…. In the preparation of the initial volume, on the Gospel of Luke, the texts of approximately 300 MSS have been collated completely, and this is the most massive attack ever made upon the problem of textual variation…. The master file for the Gospel of Luke contains, it is estimated, about 25,000 variants of all sorts…. Variants of substantial alteration [yields] about 2 per cent, much higher than the earlier estimates of Hort, Ezra Abbot, and others" (11-12). "But the effect upon exegesis is hardly to be measured by such statistics, when we consider the theological implication of a single letter as in eudokias of Luke 2.14; or the addition of theon in 2.12, where Gregory Thaumaturgus speaks of the ‘swaddled God;’ or the omission of a full verse at Luke 23.34, thus losing the prayer of Jesus: ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do’" (12).
* "…about 500 variants of more substantial character…. It would seem to be more meaningful to consider longer passages which contain clusters of textual alterations" (12).
* Luke 1.26-35. "…city of Galilee" although Sinaiticus et al state that this city was in Judea, and Bezae e al omit to name Nazareth in particular" (12) others mentioned.
* "Such freedom of treatment is quite incongruous with a traditional conception of Scripture. With many of the variant forms, it is easy to recognize primary and secondary text, and yet all the variant forms become part of the narrative in the history of the church" (12). Luke 2.1-7: ‘in those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus. "An Old Latin MS of the fifth century omits the explanation ‘that all the world should be enrolled.’ The Protevangelion reports instead that the residents of Bethlehem must register, whereas Bezae reports the residents of Jerusalem, and Codex Boreel the residents of Judea" some mss say they went to enroll, each to his own polis; some to a man’s patris; others to his chora; an Old Latin ms of his regionem. The manger becomes a cave (13).
* Luke 2.16-22: the shepherds ‘went hurrying,’ becomes in one ‘went believing.’ (13).
* Luke 2.33-35: his father and his mother marveled at what was said.’ "Origen protests that Joseph is not properly called father, and accordingly a second-century variant would remove the earthly father and refers instead to ‘Joseph and his mother.’ On the other hand, some Byzantine scribes simply wrote ‘his parents.’…. Some manuscripts omit the prediction: ‘this child is set for the fall and rising of many in Israel" (13).
* Luke 9.18-23: ‘it happened that as he was praying alone the disciples were with him.’ Bezae says nothing of praying, Vaticanus reports that the disciples rather came up to join him. ‘Who do the people identify as the Son of man?’, at least, that is the record in Justin’s Dialogue. …Peter’s response is variously reported: ‘the messiah’; ‘God’s Messiah;’ ‘Messiah God;’ ‘Messiah, Son of God’; ‘Messiah, Son of man;’ ‘Son of the living God; or simply ‘Son of God’. A patristic omission is the clause’ ‘rejected by elders, chief priests, and scribes."" (133-4).
* "So our inquiry could be greatly extended, passage by passage, to demonstrate the freedom of alteration and interpretation, the substantial portion of the text involved in variation, and the theological quality of many textual alterations…. Extended analysis could demonstrate the theological quality of each individual witness and distinguish the threads woven into the larger pattern" (14).
* "If we should now concentrate upon one Ms, Papyrus 75, we find further evidence that variation in the text and alteration in the sense appeared early…More than a thousand differences between the two manuscript copies [P75 and P66], and about a hundred of these are of greater importance" (14). John 4.14; 6.5; 6.69; 8.57 "the Jews do not query, ‘Have you seen Abraham?’ but rather, ‘Has Abraham seen you?’; 9.17; 12.8;. Such alterations are early, and many, and are neither errors nor heresy. Many of them are mild changes, but they all form a cumulative exegetical mood" (14-5).
* "The Gospel of Luke in P75 we have selected about 125 substantial variants out of about 1500 differences from the TR" (15). "In Luke 11.11 there appears a unique reading heretofore unreported: ‘if a son should ask his father for bodily strength, the father will not give him a serpent in place of a fish.’ 15.24: "’my son was dead and has come alive, he was lost and then was found; and the father became joyous’" (15).
* 17.14; 22.62-23.23: ‘Judas went out and wept bitterly,’ and also that his captors ‘beat Jesus.’" (15). 24.26: ‘Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his kingdom?’ The last word is the unique term, and it was later altered by a corrector to the term now usual to us: his ‘glory.’" (15). "The papyrus vividly portrays a fluid state of the text at about AD 200. Such scribal freedom suggests that the gospel text was little more stable than an oral tradition, and that we may be pursuing the retreating mirage of the ‘original text.’" (15).
* "The amount of textual change that involves theological alteration is a small proportion but it is a nugget of essential importance for interpretation…. In the course of transmission thousands of textual alterations have appeared in the legitimate lineage of theological interpretation, and all of these must be taken into account in exegesis and doctrinal exposition" (15).
* "'''We may well begin to ask if there really was a stable text at the beginning. We talk of recovering the original text, and of course every document had such a text. But the earliest witnesses to NT text even from the first century already show such variety and freedom that we may well wonder if the text remained stable long enough to hold a priority.'''" (16, {{ea}}).
* "The NT text and the theology of each church father, of each regional text such as fam. 13, or of each major recension such as the Caesarean text—especially where departures from the common text are notable" (16).
</onlyinclude>
{{Endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T22:15:19Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church? */

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Combs says, "Moreover, the Lord could also say very positive things about ministers from other Christian churches (see Doctrine and Covenants 35:3–4; 39:7–8), and the Lord could speak of his [sic] 'church' already existing at the time that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was being established (see Doctrine and Covenants 5:14; 10:52–56, 67–69)."<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 11.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim. Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that their claims cannot be sustained. In a famous canonized statement, God the Father told Joseph Smith that all the creeds of the denominations that existed at that time were an "abomination" (Joseph Smith-History 1:18–19).<ref>John W. Welch, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination ‘All Their Creeds Were an Abomination’: A Brief Look at Creeds as Part of the Apostasy],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2004), 228–49.</ref> Joseph Smith restored priesthood keys. He revealed that people who were baptized in another church could not count those baptisms as valid, and had to be rebaptized into the Lord's Church (Doctrine and Covenants 22). The Book of Mormon calls any other system that does not subscribe to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Book of Mormon, part of the church of the devil or the great and abominable church.

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T22:14:41Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church? */

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Combs says, "Moreover, the Lord could also say very positive things about ministers from other Christian churches (see Doctrine and Covenants 35:3–4; 39:7–8), and the Lord could speak of his [sic] 'church' already existing at the time that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was being established (see Doctrine and Covenants 5:14; 10:52–56, 67–69)."<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 11.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim. Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that their claims cannot be sustained. In a famous canonized statement, God the Father told Joseph Smith that all the creeds of the denominations that existed at that time were an "abomination" (Joseph Smith-History 1:18–19).<ref>John W. Welch, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination ‘All Their Creeds Were an Abomination’: A Brief Look at Creeds as Part of the Apostasy],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2004), 228–249.</ref> Joseph Smith restored priesthood keys. He revealed that people who were baptized in another church could not count those baptisms as valid, and had to be rebaptized into the Lord's Church (Doctrine and Covenants 22). The Book of Mormon calls any other system that does not subscribe to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Book of Mormon, part of the church of the devil or the great and abominable church.

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T22:13:43Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church? */

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Combs says, "Moreover, the Lord could also say very positive things about ministers from other Christian churches (see Doctrine and Covenants 35:3–4; 39:7–8), and the Lord could speak of his [sic] 'church' already existing at the time that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was being established (see Doctrine and Covenants 5:14; 10:52–56, 67–69)."<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 11.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim. Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that their claims cannot be sustained. In a famous canonized statement, God the Father told Joseph Smith that all the creeds of the denominations that existed at that time were an "abomination" (Joseph Smith-History 1:18–19).<ref>John W. Welch, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination ‘All Their Creeds Were an Abomination’: A Brief Look at Creeds as Part of the Apostasy],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2004), 228–249.</ref> Joseph Smith restored priesthood keys. He revealed that people that were baptized to another church could not count The Book of Mormon calls any other system that does not subscribe to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Book of Mormon, part of the church of the devil or the great and abominable church. He has commanded that all people be rebaptized if they have not been united to the Lord's church (Doctrine and Covenants 22).

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T22:13:21Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church? */

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Combs says, "Moreover, the Lord could also say very positive things about ministers from other Christian churches (see Doctrine and Covenants 35:3–4; 39:7–8), and the Lord could speak of his "church" already existing at the time that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was being established (see Doctrine and Covenants 5:14; 10:52–56, 67–69)."<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 11.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim. Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that their claims cannot be sustained. In a famous canonized statement, God the Father told Joseph Smith that all the creeds of the denominations that existed at that time were an "abomination" (Joseph Smith-History 1:18–19).<ref>John W. Welch, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination ‘All Their Creeds Were an Abomination’: A Brief Look at Creeds as Part of the Apostasy],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2004), 228–249.</ref> Joseph Smith restored priesthood keys. He revealed that people that were baptized to another church could not count The Book of Mormon calls any other system that does not subscribe to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Book of Mormon, part of the church of the devil or the great and abominable church. He has commanded that all people be rebaptized if they have not been united to the Lord's church (Doctrine and Covenants 22).

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T21:57:19Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church? */

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim. Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that their claims cannot be sustained. In a famous canonized statement, God the Father told Joseph Smith that all the creeds of the denominations that existed at that time were an "abomination" (Joseph Smith-History 1:18–19).<ref>John W. Welch, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination ‘All Their Creeds Were an Abomination’: A Brief Look at Creeds as Part of the Apostasy],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2004), 228–249.</ref> Joseph Smith restored priesthood keys. He revealed that people that were baptized to another church could not count The Book of Mormon calls any other system that does not subscribe to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Book of Mormon, part of the church of the devil or the great and abominable church. He has commanded that all people be rebaptized if they have not been united to the Lord's church (Doctrine and Covenants 22).

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T21:16:55Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church? */

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim. Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that their claims cannot be sustained. In a famous canonized statement, God the Father told Joseph Smith that all the creeds of the denominations that existed at that time were an "abomination" (Joseph Smith-History 1:18–19).<ref>John W. Welch, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/all-their-creeds-were-abomination ‘All Their Creeds Were an Abomination’: A Brief Look at Creeds as Part of the Apostasy],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University and Deseret Book, 2004), 228–249.</ref> Joseph Smith restored priesthood keys. The Book of Mormon calls any other system that does not subscribe to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as revealed in the Book of Mormon, part of the church of the devil or the great and abominable church.

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T21:01:01Z

SpencerMarsh: /* Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church? */

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim.

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

The Great Apostasy

2026-08-11T20:59:30Z

SpencerMarsh:

{{UnderConstructionSuggestions}}
<h1>The Great Apostasy</h1>
{{Summary1}} The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints claims to be the restored Church of Jesus Christ. Fundamental to that belief is that the Church was lost for a time. The period in which the Church was lost is known to Latter-day Saints as either the "Great Apostasy" or the "Falling Away."<ref>For a reference to the "Great Apostasy," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Missionary Service'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2004), 35–36. For "Falling Away," see ''Preach My Gospel: A Guide to Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ'' (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 2023), 37–38.</ref> Without such a loss, there could have been no "restitution of all things" (Acts 3:21). 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.

Regardless of the criticism, it is a valuable exercise for Latter-day Saints to consider the historical, scriptural, and theological grounding for their belief in the Great Apostasy. While some aspects of this belief lie beyond the ken of academics, Latter-day Saint belief is not contradicted by existing historical or scriptural evidence.
----
====New Approaches to the Apostasy====
In recent years, there has been a growing strain of Latter-day Saint scholars who have called for new approaches to the Apostasy. Some are concerned that traditional approaches—which have emphasized a dark pall of intellectual and spiritual rot that essentially covered all people from the death of the last Apostles to Joseph Smith's First Vision—are neither "pastorally productive," nor "intellectually defensible."<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 Possible Apostasy Narrative],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 1 (2021): 106 For more on these scholars' views, see the summary in John Gee, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/ten-views-on-the-falling-away Ten Views on the Falling Away]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 63, no. 2 (2024): 157–60.</ref> This Apostasy narrative has been productively deconstructed.<ref>See generally Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young, eds., ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'' (Oxford University Press, 2014).</ref> Another concern is the portrayal of the Middle Ages as a time of spiritual darkness and imbecility.<ref>Eric R. Dursteler, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/inheriting-great-apostasy-evolution-latter-day-saint-views-middle-ages-and-renaissance Inheriting the 'Great Apostasy': The Evolution of Latter-day Saint Views on the Middle Ages and Renaissance]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 29–65; Miranda Wilcox, “[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/narrating-religious-heritage Narrating Religious Heritage: Apostasy and Restoration],” ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 60, no. 3 (2021): 213–28.</ref>

The article will aim to provide a narrative that is both intellectually defensible and pastorally productive. Without diminishing the seriousness of the loss of authority and precious truths that came with the Falling Away, this article will also show that there is much room for a full and loving embrace of "our kindred Christian saints;" "our believing mothers and fathers;" "our ancient Christian sisters and brothers."<ref>Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal, ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' (BYU Maxwell Institute, 2022), viii.</ref>

====Defining the Apostasy====
Defining ''what'' the Apostasy actually was is a matter of great importance. Without this definition, we cannot help answer concerns regarding this topic. It is important to define the Apostasy using scripture.

The word ''apostasy'' comes from the Greek word ''ἀποστασία'' (ah-poh-stah-SEE-ah). The prefix ''ἀπο'' means "away," and ''στασίs'' means "standing." Thus, etymologically, we get "standing away" or "standing apart" as the word's meaning. "The word means ‘rebellion,’ ‘mutiny,’ ‘revolt,’ or ‘revolution,’ and it is used in ancient contexts with reference to uprisings against established authority."<ref>Kent P. Jackson, ''From Apostasy to Restoration'' (Deseret Book, 1996), 6.</ref>

In 2 Thessalonians, the apostle Paul said, "Let no man deceive you by any means: for [the Second Coming of Jesus Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away ["''ἀποστασία''"] first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition" (2 Thessalonians 2:3).

Thus, in contrast to some who believe that external persecution was a primary cause of the Great Apostasy, the New Testament and other passages of scripture identify ''internal rebellion'' as its primary cause. As we shall see, however, external persecution still played a role.

''Mass internal rebellion'' is the primary cause and central, defining feature of the Great Apostasy, but rebellion against what? Ultimately, it was a rebellion against key, essential doctrines taught by Christ and His Apostles. When we talk about someone who is an "apostate" or "apostatizes" from the Church today, we are usually referring to someone who is openly rebelling against the Church and its authority.<ref>General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, “32.6.3.2 Apostasy,” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, accessed July 17, 2026, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/32-repentance-and-membership-councils#sec17.</ref> ''This'' is the best way to make sense of the Great Apostasy.

This mass internal rebellion was brought about by those who belong to the "great and abominable church": any person or organization that fights against the progress of the Church of God. This church's founder is the Devil (1 Nephi 13:6). The desires of the great and abominable church are as follows:

# Slay the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Torture the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bind the Saints (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Yoke the Saints with iron (1 Nephi 13:5)
# Bring the Saints into captivity for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:5, 9)
# Destroy the Saints for the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Obtain gold, silver, silks, scarlets, fine-twined linens, all manner of precious clothing, and harlots (1 Nephi 13:7–8)
# Have the praise of the world (1 Nephi 13:9)
# Pervert the right ways of the Lord (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Blind the eyes of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Harden the hearts of the children of men (1 Nephi 13:27)
# Lead souls to hell (1 Nephi 14:3)
# Have dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people (1 Nephi 14:11)
The internal rebellion against Christ's Church must have been made for one or more of those reasons.

Some have conceptualized the loss of priesthood authority, the changing of ordinances, and the corruption of scripture as part of the definition of the Great Apostasy. However, these are merely ''symptoms'' of the internal rebellion against key, essential doctrines of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by His Apostles. The rebellion against these doctrines led to the creation of many different Christian groups, none of which fully aligned with New Testament teachings on how Christ's Church should be run and what its members should believe. The creators of these sects thus become the ''perpetrators'' of the Great Apostasy, and other Christians who belonged to these churches became the unfortunate and unwitting ''inheritors'' or ''victims'' of it. Nephi says that these people "stumble" (1 Nephi 13:29, 34). He says that the great and abominable church blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts (1 Nephi 13:27). Clearly, there is room to accept the sincere beliefs and profound moral, intellectual, and devotional accomplishments of our spiritual forebearers.

The Apostasy occurred because there was widespread internal rebellion against important doctrines, external persecution removed the Apostles (the only means to correct the errors that were creeping in), and corruption of scripture stood like a dragon guarding the way back to the house of God and ensured that believers wouldn't correct their beliefs through prior apostolic and prophetic statements.

====The Establishment of Christ's Church====
If Christ's official, institutional Church was lost, then it must have been established. However, many today doubt that Christ ever established such a church.

The word that Greek uses to describe such a church is "ἐκκλησία" (eh-clay-SEE-ah). In the Gospel of Matthew, after Christ praises Peter for receiving his testimony of Christ from heaven, Christ says, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my ''church'' [''ἐκκλησίαν'']; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18, emphasis added). This is one of the most explicit pieces of evidence in the New Testament that Christ meant to establish a church. In the next verse, Christ says, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew 16:19). What does the language of "binding" and "loosing" refer to? Protestant scholars assure us that this refers to the power of the Apostles to permit and ban various forms of behavior among the covenant people.<ref>W.D. Davis and Dale C. Allison, ''Matthew: A Shorter Commentary'' (T&T Clark International, 2004), 270–71, emphasis in original; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, ''After the Order of the Son of God: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Latter-day Saint Theology of the Priesthood'' (CreateSpace, 2018), 121–22. See also Oscar Cullmann, ''Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr'' (SCM Press, 1953), 204–5; quoted in Boylan, ''After the Order'', 122. Finally, see Craig S. Keener, ''IVP Bible Background Commentary New Testament'' (Intervarsity Press, 1993), 90; quoted in Boylan, After the Order, 122.</ref> Matthew 18:18 confirms that all of the Twelve had this authority. This was the authority to establish doctrine for the Church (Acts 2:42). This authority is evident from the fact that one of the criteria for including a book in the New Testament canon was ''apostolicity''—that is, the characteristic of having been written by an apostle.<ref>Daniel Becerra, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/new-testament-history-culture-society/canonization-new-testament The Canonization of the New Testament]," in ''New Testament History, Culture, and Society: A Background to the Texts of the New Testament'', ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2019), 780.</ref> The Apostles were also given power ("''δύναμις''" [DOO-nah-mees]) and authority ("''ἐξουσία''" [ex-oo-SEE-ah]) to cast out all devils (Matthew 10:1) and to cure diseases (Luke 9:1).

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.

New Testament data outside the Gospels clearly support the idea that an institutional church was organized. Acts 2:37–47 describes believers (a) being ''baptized into'' the church, and (b) united by their common belief in apostolic teaching. In both [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Disputed_epistles disputed] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorship_of_the_Pauline_epistles#Undisputed_epistles undisputed] Pauline writings, we get the same pattern of officers with authority and followers united by common belief in practice. Ernest Best notes how "[m]inistry in the church is described both in general terms (1 Thess. 5:12; Heb 13:7) and with a variety of more specific titles (e.g. deacons, 1 Tim. 3:8-13; bishops, 3:1-7; elders, 4:17-20...pastors, Eph. 4:11; and prophets, 1 Cor. 12:4-11) and their ministry was a gift from God (Rom. 12:4-8; Eph. 4:7-11)."<ref>Ernest Best, "Church," in ''Harper Collins Bible Dictionary'', ed. Mark Allan Powell (HarperCollins, 1989), 135.</ref> Paul's letters obviously describe real geographic locations where the Church had been established and where Paul had performed ministry.

In short, "Christ had followers, leaders, and rules. That certainly constitutes an organization."<ref>Gilbert W. Scharffs, ''Missionary's Little Book of Answers'' (Covenant Communications, 2002), 185.</ref>

====Was There a Unified Platform to Apostatize From?====
Another question raised is whether there was a unified church to apostatize from. Did the Church have any authoritative beliefs that all believers were bound to uphold? This question has been raised even by defenders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Former BYU professors and Latter-day Saint apologists Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks wrote:

<blockquote>Terms like "orthodoxy" and "heresy" seem increasingly—to modern objective scholarship—to be mere self-congratulatory epithets worked up by the victors in the dogmatic skirmishes of Christian history. In the earliest Christianity, the two are often impossible to distinguish, at least without the benefit of hindsight. In many areas, the "heretics" were the established church, while the "orthodox" were the damnable minority. And this is not the case in later, "apostate" centuries. The New Testament itself contains conflicting perspectives and positions that, many scholars would contend, resist even the most determined harmonizer.<ref>Daniel C. Peterson and Stephen D. Ricks, ''Offenders for a Word: How Anti-Mormons Play Word Games to Attack the Latter-day Saints'' (FARMS, 1992), 40–41. This argument is put forth forcefully in Taylor G. Petrey, "Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity," in ''Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy'', ed. Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young (Oxford University Press, 2014), 174–95.</ref></blockquote>

This raises the obvious question: From what, then, did the earliest Christians apostatize from?

Clearly, the New Testament authors believed that there was ''an'' authoritative standard against which they could measure other believers and the world around them. Otherwise, it would make no sense for Paul, for example, to have written all his epistles correcting local congregations' beliefs and behaviors.

Below, we will lay out the doctrines we believe the earliest Christians apostatized from. On these points, we believe that the documents contained in the New Testament and other authoritative scripture ''are'' univocal and binding on all believers. Yet, as we will see, various early Christian groups rebelled against these doctrines for various reasons.

Otherwise, it is important to keep a few principles in mind.

First, it is important to distinguish among eternal principles, their application, and the historical narratives in scripture that teach them. Latter-day Saint leaders have at least distinguished the first two.<ref>Ronald E. Pohlman, "[https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1984/10/the-gospel-and-the-church?lang=eng The Gospel and the Church]," ''Ensign'' 14, no. 11 (November 1984): 64.</ref> Eternal principles—such as faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, covenant faithfulness, charity, and holiness—do not change. However, the application of those principles may vary according to a people's circumstances, culture, spiritual maturity, or divine direction, just as God gave different commandments to Israel, the early Church, and the Saints in the latter days. Likewise, the historical accounts preserved in scripture—while teaching eternal principles and their application—are historical accounts. They can teach inspired narratives even if the different accounts contained within scripture differ on particulars.

Second, it is important to keep the doctrine of continuing revelation in mind. Continuing revelation provides an authoritative means of distinguishing between eternal doctrine and temporary applications, clarifying scriptural passages that may appear to be in tension, and resolving questions that sincere readers may answer differently. Rather than expecting every biblical author to express every doctrine identically, the Restoration teaches that God reveals truth "line upon line, precept upon precept" (2 Nephi 28:30; Doctrine and Covenants 98:12), adapting His instructions to the needs of His children across different dispensations while preserving the unchanging principles of the gospel (Doctrine and Covenants 46:15).

Third, differences among biblical authors often reflect ''complementary emphases'' rather than ''mutually exclusive claims''. One writer may stress faith while another emphasizes faithful obedience; one may focus on God's mercy while another highlights His justice; one may describe a practice in one historical setting while another addresses a different audience facing different challenges. Such variations do not necessarily indicate that the underlying doctrine has changed, but that inspired authors selected and emphasized material according to their purposes and audiences.

With these three principles in mind, virtually all of the contradictions in scripture can be reconciled. From this perspective, the multivocality of scripture is not a threat to divine revelation but an illustration of how God has consistently worked through inspired servants, diverse witnesses, and unfolding revelation to testify of Jesus Christ.

====The Apostasy Predicted====
Biblical scriptures predicted the Apostasy long before it happened, and provide evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in it.

One of the earliest scriptures that predicts the Apostasy is Amos 8:11–12. It says, "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord. And they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it." No longer would the Lord send a drought or famine, but rather, He would remove prophets who gave vision and wisdom to the people (Proverbs 29:18).<ref>Gregory Mobley, "Amos," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (Oxford, 2018), 1312n11–12.</ref>

The New Testament both ''predicts'' the Apostasy's occurrence and ''documents its beginnings''. Latter-day Saints have appealed to a variety of scriptures to support their belief in the Great Apostasy. The New Testament provides the most extensive evidence for Latter-day Saint belief in the Great Apostasy.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/appendix-c-new-testament-evidences-and-prophecies-apostasy-first-century-church Appendix C: New Testament Evidences and Prophecies of Apostasy in the First-Century Church]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 355–69; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/learn-me/new-testament-prophecies-apostasy New Testament Prophecies of Apostasy]," in ''Learn of Me: History and Teachings of the New Testament'', ed. John Hilton III and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2022), 375–90; Kent P. Jackson, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/watch-and-remember-new-testament-and-great-apostasy 'Watch and Remember': The New Testament and the Great Apostasy]," in ''By Study and Also By Faith, Volume 1'', ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (FARMS; Deseret Book, 1990), 81–117.</ref>

Below, one can find all New Testament scriptures that predict the Great Apostasy.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''New Testament Prophecies of the Demise of Christ’s Church'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 13:24–30
||In the parable of the wheat and tares, Jesus describes the kingdom of God being filled with tares sown by his enemy, which are then allowed to grow until the harvest.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew 24:5, 24
||Jesus prophesies to his disciples that before his time comes, many false prophets and false Christs or messiahs will arise, deceiving many.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Acts 20:29-30
||Luke records that Paul had called together the elders of the church in Ephesus to hear his farewell. He pleaded with them to take heed, for he knew that “grievous wolves” should come among them “not sparing the flock” (v. 29), and that even some of the elders themselves would “arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (v. 30).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 11:19–21
||Paul warns the Roman saints that just as apostate Israel had been cut off, so would the Christians should they fail to “continue in goodness” (v. 22).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:3–4
||Paul prophesies that Christ would not return before the “falling away” (v. 3)—the apostasy—and the son of perdition be exposed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 4:1–3
||Paul prophesies of future times when Christians will leave the faith and give “heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy;... forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 3:1–9, 12; 4:3–4
||Paul speaks of a coming “perilous” (3:1) time when men, apparently affiliated with the church, will be wicked in so many ways, loving pleasures more than God. These “traitors” (3:4) will have “a form of godliness” (3:5), but they will deny the power that makes godliness possible in men. All that will live godly lives in Christ will suffer persecution (3:12). Apparently speaking again of these same traitors, Paul prophesies that in that future time, “they will not endure sound doctrine” (4:3), but will “turn away” (4:4) from the truth unto fables. And they will find teachers who will justify the indulgence of their lusts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–3
||Peter prophesies not only that false teachers will come among the Christians, but also that many will follow “their pernicious ways" (v. 2).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelation 13:7
||John is shown in his vision that the beast will “make war with the saints, and ... overcome them.”
|}

In the next table, one can find all the scriptures documenting the widespread rebellion that was beginning to unfold.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="25%"| '''Scripture'''
!width="75.0%"|'''Reynolds's Description'''
|+'''Evidences of First-Century Apostasy from the New Testament'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John 6:66
||Many of Jesus’s disciples left him because of his teachings.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 1:8–32
||Paul congratulates the Roman faithful and contrasts their case with that of those Christians “who hold the truth in unrighteousness” (v. 18), but who by their sins of idolatry, murder, homosexuality, and fornication have changed the truth of God into a lie and will receive severe judgment.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 2:17–24
||Paul confutes the Judaizers in the church who exalt themselves as circumcised Jews and defenders of the law, while they hypocritically commit all kinds of grievous sin and blaspheme the name of God among the Gentiles by their bad examples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Romans 16:17–18
||Paul recognizes that there are already some Roman Christians who “cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine” (v. 17). These appear to be smooth speakers who deceive the simple believers with their “good words and fair speeches” (v. 18), but not in the service of Christ, but rather to make a living for themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 1:11–12; 3:4
||Paul describes the splintering of churches as church members begin to proclaim allegiance to different leaders, such as Apollos and Paul, rather than Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 4:18
||Pride in the church at Corinth causes some to reject the words of the apostle Paul.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 5:1, 6
||Fornication and incest are named as sins committed by, or perhaps between, church members.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 10:14
||Some Corinthian saints begin to engage in idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 11:18–11, 29–30, 34
||There are divisions and heresies among the Christians at Corinth. The Corinthians desecrate the sacrament by substituting for it pagan feasts. Because they take the sacrament unworthily, they eat and drink damnation to themselves, and many have been made weak and sickly or have even died for it. There are also other offenses which Paul hopes to straighten out when he comes.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Corinthians 14:1–37
||There is confusion in the Corinthian church. Many are claiming to prophesy and to speak in tongues by inspiration. And the women, who should be silent, have joined in the fray. Paul pleads for good order and peace, which would be an indication that they were guided by God’s inspiration.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 3:1; 72
||Members begin to reject legitimate authority, and Paul’s credentials appear to be questioned.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 6:14–17
||Paul pleads with the Corinthians to separate themselves from the heathens with whom they seem to be joined in their lives. Specifically, they appear to be participating in idol worship at heathen temples.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Corinthians 11:3–4, 12–15
||Paul argues to the Corinthian church that they should follow him rather than those who come preaching another Jesus, or another spirit or gospel. Paul recognizes his own weaknesses, but these others “are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ” (v. 13). But if Satan himself can be “transformed into an angel of light” (v. 14), it is not to be unexpected that his ministers should “ be transformed as the ministers of righteousness” (v. 15).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 1:6–9; 3:1
||Local leaders and false teachers are changing the gospel of Christ and are preaching “another gospel” (v. 6) as the truth. Paul marvels that the Christians there are “so soon removed from him” (v. 6) to these teachers of other gospels, and he curses all who are preaching their own gospels.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Galatians 4:8–11; 5:7, 15–22
||Paul bemoans the retrogression of the church membership for their disobedience, their backbiting among church members, and their observation of pagan and Jewish holidays. He calls on them to stand fast in their Christian liberty gained through the atonement of Christ and not to let themselves get entangled again with the works of the flesh—“adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like” (5:21)—of which he has warned them before. The sense is clearly that some significant part of the Galatian members have returned to their sinful ways.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Ephesians 4:1–5:21
||Paul describes for the Christians in Ephesus the kinds of lives, the unity, and spiritual consistency that they can enjoy, if they would live according to “the vocation wherewith [they] are called” (4:1). If they will heed his call, they can come to a “unity of the faith... unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ... [and] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive” (4:13-14). In the process, he names a long list of sinful acts that are preventing them from leaving the world of the Gentiles and establishing a community of perfected saints. Paul calls them to stop walking “as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind” (4:17), with their “understanding darkened being alienated from God . . . because of the blindness of their heart” (4:18). As converts to Christ, they are taught to put off works of greediness and lasciviousness. They must put away lying, anger, stealing, bitterness, and evil speaking. He pleads with them to become “followers of God ... walking] in love” (5:1-2). If they would do this and be proper saints, such sins as fornication, uncleanness, covetousness, filthiness, foolish talk and jesting would never need to be named among
them. But whatever the vain men among them might say, “no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ” (5:5-6). But all things which are shameful even to speak of, that are being done in secret, shall be “made manifest by the light” (5:13). Again, he pleads with them that they be “not unwise . . . [and] drunk with wine” (5:17-18), but that they be filled with the Spirit.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Colossians 2:8–9, 18
||Paul writes to the faithful brethren at Colosse and encourages them to stand fast in the gospel of Christ that he taught them and not to heed the beguiling men who seek to spoil them through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 2:7–9
||Paul calls upon the Christians of Thessaly to withstand the strong delusions and lying wonders of their times. If they can stand fast, they will obtain the love and glory of Christ.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Thessalonians 3:6
||Paul further notes that the Thessalonians are supporting disorderly busybodies who do not accept Paul’s epistles. He calls on local believers to separate themselves from such and not to support their leadership.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 1:3–4, 6–7, 19–20
||Paul explains why he left Timothy at Ephesus to call upon those Christians who were teaching false doctrines, “fables and endless genealogies” (v. 4), which only raise questions without edifying. These teachings have caused some to swerve and turn aside “unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law” (vv.6-7) but without understanding. While among his own disciples, Timothy has been faithful, Hymenaeus and Alexander have blasphemed and “made shipwreck” (v. 19) of their faith, and Paul has delivered them to the buffetings of Satan.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 5:15
||Paul advises Timothy about how to address growing domestic apostasies in the Church and acknowledges that through these problems, members have “already turned aside after Satan.”
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:1–10
||Paul instructs Timothy on how to distinguish in the church between faithful teachers of godliness and those who are seeking the praise and riches of this world. The teaching of the latter group is marked by envy, strife, and “perverse disputings” (v. 5) that are destitute of truth. Those who love money rather than godliness “fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts” (v. 9).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 Timothy 6:20–21
||Timothy is further warned to beware those Christians who profess the faith, but who are engaged in “profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science, falsely so called” (v. 20).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Timothy 1:8–18; 2:16–18; 4:14–17
||Paul writes Timothy to encourage him not to be ashamed of his testimony of Jesus or of his affiliation with Paul. He cites two prominent Christians by name as examples and complains “that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me” (1:15). He excepts “the house of Onesiphorus” of Ephesus who “refreshed” Paul and was “not ashamed of [Paul’s] chain” (1:16). Timothy is warned specifically to avoid “profane and vain babblings” (2:16); for they will increase unto more ungodliness, as in the cases of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who are teaching a false understanding of the resurrection. Further, Paul recites the specific case of a coppersmith who did Paul “much evil,”for he “greatly withstood our words” (4:14-15). And no one in the congregation would stand with Paul against him.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 1:10–14
||Paul left Titus in Crete specifically “to set in order the things that are wanting” (v. 5). He is warned to be careful who he selects to be elders or bishops because “there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers . . . who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake” (vv. 10-11). Paul hopes that sharp rebukes may return them to soundness of faith, so that they will no longer give “heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 2:1–15
||Paul exhorts Titus to set the church in order, as all age groups from both sexes need to be raised from inappropriate behavior, that Christ might “redeem [them] from all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works” (v. 14).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Titus 3:9–11
||Paul goes on to enumerate other failings of the members, which he seems to think can be corrected by Titus’s teaching. But he also recognizes the serious dangers of those who are focused on “foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law” (v. 9). If a man maintains his heretical position after being admonished a second time, Titus is to reject him as a sinner and subverter of others.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 1–2
||James recognizes that all are tempted and that the members of the church must not only speak the truth, but their lives must reflect comparable good works. Otherwise their religion is vain. In addition to other sins, he emphasizes the practice of despising the poor and ignoring the teaching of Christ to love their neighbor. For until their works meet these expectations of Christ, their faith is dead.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James 4:1–8
||James describes “wars and fightings” (v. 1) among the Christians which arise from their own lusts. Calling them adulterers and enemies to God, he urges them to be humble and resist the devil, that God may cleanse their hands and purify their double-minded hearts.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2 Peter 2:1–22; 3:16–18
||Peter warns the members against those of their own number who engage in all kinds of sins, including “damnable heresies” (2:1), covetousness, walking “after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness” (2:10), evil speaking, “having eyes full of adultery” (2:14). These have all gone astray. For having once escaped the world “through the knowledge of the Lord” (2:20), and becoming again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. They exemplify the proverbs of the dog that is turned to his own vomit and the washed sow that returns to wallowing in the mire (2:22). After discussing false teachings by scoffers in the church, he warns the members again not to wrest the scriptures or to be led away by the errors of the wicked, but to remain steadfast and grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord (3:16-18).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1 John 2:9–27; 4:1
||John warns the members that any who hate their brothers are in darkness. He warns them not to love the world, the lusts of the flesh or the pride of the eyes, as these things are “not of the Father” (2:16). For “even now are there many antichrists” (2:18), that arose from within the church. But now they deny the Father and the Son. But the anointing which the members have received can protect them from these seducers. Further, because there are many false prophets, James teaches those who would be faithful how to distinguish the true from the false.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3 John 1:9–10
||A prideful and apostate local leader, presumably an elder or a bishop, rejects apostolic authority and even excommunicates those who stand up for the apostles.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude 1:3–19
||Jude writes to the faithful, whom he fears have been taken in by ungodly men who have crept in unawares, denying Christ and turning his grace into lasciviousness. Jude invokes the Old Testament and other writings as examples and prophecies of this kind of thing and calls the ungodly among them “murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (v. 16).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Revelations 2–3
||John sees the Son of Man, who commands him to write to the seven churches. Ephesus has done many good things, is now fallen and must repent, having left the Lord (2:5-6). The church in Pergamos has held fast against Satan, but harbors proponents of the doctrine of Balaam who eat meat sacrificed to idols and commit fornication. There are also Christians there who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which the Lord hates (2:12-16). In spite of many good works, the church at Thyatira permits Jezebel to pass herself off as a prophetess while seducing the Lord’s servants to fornicate and to eat things sacrificed unto idols (2:18-20). There appear to be only a few members in Sardis who “have not defiled their garments” and who are worthy to walk with the Lord (3:1-6). Laodiceans focused on wealth, are comfortable, and do not recognize their need for the Lord’s aid. They are neither cold nor hot, and the Lord will spew them out (3:16-17).
|}

====Teeing the Ball Up: The Loss of Apostolic Authority====
1 Nephi 11 portrays the great and abominable church fighting against the Apostles (1 Nephi 11:34–36). 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 (vv. 1–3). The scriptures never say ''explicitly'' that the Apostles' priesthood authority was lost. However, they do record the restoration of that authority by heavenly messengers, which would imply its loss. John the Baptist appeared as an angel to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to restore the "Priesthood of Aaron" (Doctrine and Covenants 13:1; Joseph Smith-History 1:68–72). Later, Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to ordain them "to be apostles, and especial witnesses of [the Lord's] name, and bear the keys of [their] ministry and of the same things which [the Lord] revealed unto [Peter, James, and John]" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:12). Those keys—"the keys of [the Lord's] kingdom" (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13) and "the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:20)—had been "committed" unto Peter, James, and John to be given to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

=====The Fate of the Apostles=====
The best historical scholarship available places the death of the last Apostle only as late as 134 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>

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="11%"|'''Apostle'''
!width="11%"|'''Location'''
!width="11%"|'''Killed By'''
!width="11%"|'''Reason'''
!width="11%"|'''Manner'''
!width="11%"|'''Source'''
!width="11%"|'''Date'''
!width="11%"|'''Historical Likelihood'''
|+'''The Fate of the Apostles'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Peter
||Rome, Italy
||Roman authorities under Emperor Nero
||Preaching Christ during the Roman persecution of Christians after the Great Fire of Rome in (c. AD 64–67).
||Crucified
||Tradition
||64–68 AD
||Moderate-High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Andrew
||Patras, Greece
||Roman governor of Achaia
||Refused to stop preaching Christianity.
||Crucified
||Tradition
||60 AD
||Low-Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James G
||Jerusalem
||Herod Agrippa
||To please certain Jewish leaders who opposed the Christian movement (Acts 12:1–2).
||Beheaded
||Acts 12
||44 AD
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|John
||Ephesus
||None
||Exiled to Patmos under Roman authority for preaching the Gospel (Revelation 1:9), then made a translated being (3 Nephi 28:6–8; Doctrine and Covenants 7:2–3).
||Natural
||Tradition
||100 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Philip
||Hierapolis
||Local authorities in Phrygia
||Converted prominent individuals and challenged paganism.
||Crucified
||Apocrypha
||80 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Bartholomew
||Armenia
||Armenian or local pagan rulers
||Converted members of the royal family to Christianity.
||Flayed
||Tradition
||69–71 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Thomas
||Chennai, India
||Local rulers in India
||Converted many people, including members of the nobility.
||Speared
||Tradition
||72 AD
||Moderate
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthew
||Ethiopia
||Local rulers
||Refused to stop teaching and converting people.
||Natural or Stabbed
||Legend
||68 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|James L
||Jerusalem
||Jewish religious leaders
||Preached that Jesus was the Messiah
||Stoned
||Josephus
||62 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Jude
||Persia/Beirut
||Local authorities in Persia
||Missionary activities and conversions
||Beaten/Axed
||Apocrypha
||65 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Simon
||Persia
||Persian or Roman authorities
||Preaching Christianity
||Sawn
||Tradition
||65–107 AD
||Low
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Judas
||Jerusalem
||Himself
||After betraying Jesus, he died in remorse (Matthew 27:3–5; Acts 1:18–19 describes the aftermath differently).
||Suicide
||Math. 27 / Acts 1
||AD 30–33
||High
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|Matthias
||Jerusalem or Colchis
||Jewish religious authorities
||For preaching Christ as the Messiah
||Stoned or Crucified
||Tradition
||80 AD
||Moderate
|-
|Three Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked Jesus to become translated beings
||Translated
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–34
||High
|-
|Nine Other Nephite Apostles
||New World
||None
||Asked to finish their ministry and then “speedily come unto [Christ],” and Jesus promised that after they were 72 years old, they would come to Him (3 Nephi 28:2–3). Mormon later summarizes: after about 100 years, “the disciples of Jesus . . . had all gone to the paradise of God, save it were the three who should tarry” (4 Nephi 1:14).
||Natural
||The Book of Mormon
||AD 33–AD 134
||High
|}

=====Scripture Outside the Model=====

=====The Apostle John and the Three Nephites=====
Some have argued that Latter-day Saints do not truly believe that Apostolic authority ceased on the earth since Latter-day Saints also affirm that John the Beloved and the Three Nephites (who were ordained as members of the Twelve during Jesus's New World ministry) held such apostolic authority.

However, these men are now ''translated beings''. According to Mark L. McConkie, "Latter-day Saint scriptures speak of a unique class of beings, persons whom the Lord has 'translated' or changed from a mortal state to one in which they are temporarily not subject to death, and in which they experience neither pain nor sorrow except for the sins of the world. Such beings appear to have much greater power than mortals. All translated beings will eventually experience physical death and resurrection (MD, p. 807-808). Translation is a necessary condition in special instances to further the work of the Lord."<ref>Mark L. McConkie, "[https://eom.byu.edu/index.php?title=Translated_Beings Translated Beings]," in ''Encyclopedia of Mormonism'', ed. Daniel H. Ludlow, 6 vols. (MacMillan Publishing, 1992), 4:1485.</ref>

John the Apostle "desired [of Christ] that he might bring souls unto [him]," or "that he might do more, or a greater work yet among men than what he has before done" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:4-5). He was made "as a flaming fire and a ministering angel" to "minister for those who shall be heirs of salvation who dwell on the earth" (Doctrine & Covenants 7:6).

The Three Nephites were made to do a work similar to that of John the Apostle. Before the Great Apostasy, Mormon records that they ministered unto "all the people," uniting and baptizing as many as would believe into the Church (3 Nephi 28:18). They apparently ministered unto Mormon and Moroni (3 Nephi 28:26; Mormon 8:11). The Lord took them away from the Nephites, though, because of the Nephites' prevailing wickedness (Mormon 1:13). Mormon tells us that there would be a moment in the Lord's timetable in which the Three Nephites would again "minister unto all the scattered tribes of Israel, and unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, and shall bring out of them unto Jesus many souls, that their desire may be fulfilled, and also because of the convincing power of God which is in them" (3 Nephi 28:29). By praying to God they can show themselves unto whomever seems good to them (3 Nephi 28:30).

Neither John nor the Three Nephites were authorized to lead the Church during the Great Apostasy. Neither were given the authority to perform saving and exalting ordinances during the Great Apostasy. Both functioned as ministering angels. A ministering angel is not necessarily one who has to convert you to the religion. They can comfort you in times of affliction, annoyance, or discomfort. They can guide you gently toward the light in moments of confusion. They don't have to baptize and convert you. John and the Three Nephites will remain in this state until they are resurrected.

John then appeared with Peter and James, with apostolic keys "committed" to them, to give those keys to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery (Doctrine and Covenants 27:13).

John's and the Three Nephites' existence as ministering angels does not negate the Latter-day Saint belief in the loss of Apostolic authority or in the Great Apostasy. Still, it does show that one conception of Latter-day Saint belief is inaccurate: Latter-day Saints cannot affirm that apostolic authority was simply ''extinguished'' by killing the Apostles. Latter-day Saints must affirm something else. One possibility is that the translated Apostles' authority to lead was taken away upon their translation. Another is that whatever valid priesthood authority was left after the non-translated Apostles were killed, God removed it from the translated Apostles. Yet another possibility is that they retained priesthood keys but lacked ''divine permission'' to exercise them.

=====Did bishops hold apostolic authority?=====

====The Rebellion: Doctrines Rejected, Scripture Corrupted, and Groups Formed====
=====The Key Doctrines=====
As mentioned before, the Apostasy resulted from the rejection of key doctrines. Below, we explore some of the possibilities. It is important that we do not overclaim regarding what needs to be a part of the ancient Church. Joseph Smith explained that the dispensation of the fullness of times was "a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories," that this dispensation included all dispensations, keys, powers, and glories "from the days of Adam even to the present time. '''And not only this, but those things which never have been revealed from the foundation of the world, but have been kept hid from the wise and prudent''', shall be revealed unto babes and sucklings in this, the dispensation of the fulness of times" (Doctrine and Covenants 128:18, emphasis added). The Restoration does not need to be a one-for-one match to the primitive church to be an authentic restoration.

The cumulative effect of these changes is to (1) change God's nature (which has far-reaching ramifications), (2) shut His mouth so that He cannot speak and correct error, and (3) separate us from important tools that teach us about and allow us to participate in the Atonement of Jesus Christ. While other changes could be cited—such as baptism for the dead, multiple heavens, and the meaning of grace—the changes that follow have greater, more fundamental impacts.

======An Embodied God======
By the 2nd century, Christians were teaching that God created the universe out of nothing. As observed by James Hubler,

<blockquote>Creatio ex nihilo appeared suddenly in the latter half of the second century c.e. Not only did creatio ex nihilo lack precedent, it stood in firm opposition to all the philosophical schools of the Greco-Roman world. As we have seen, the doctrine was not forced upon the Christian community by their revealed tradition, either in Biblical texts or the Early Jewish interpretation of them. As we will also see it was not a position attested in the New Testament doctrine or even sub-apostolic writings. It was a position taken by the apologists of the late second century, Tatian and Theophilus, and developed by various ecclesiastical writers thereafter, by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. Creatio ex nihilo represents an innovation in the interpretive traditions of revelation and cannot be explained merely as a continuation of tradition.<ref>James N. Hubler, ''Creatio ex Nihilo: Matter, Creation, and the Body in Classical and Christian Philosophy through Aquinas'' (University of Pennsylvania, 1995), 102.</ref></blockquote>

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatian Tatian] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophilus_of_Antioch Theophilus] died by AD 185. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus] (191 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen] (253 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (220 AD) all died by the third century AD. This doctrine they taught contravened the Bible. John 17:3 teaches, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” By not knowing the true God, the Christians certainly fell into apostasy.

It has been well-documented that, according to the earliest Christian conception of God, God is corporeal.<ref>David L. Paulsen, "
[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/divine-embodiment-earliest-christian-understanding-god Divine Embodiment: The Earliest Christian Understanding of God]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 239–93; David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/1509938?seq=1 Early Christian Belief in a Corporeal Deity: Origen and Augustine as Reluctant Witnesses]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 83, no. 2 (April 1990): 105–16; Carl W. Griffin and David L. Paulsen, "[https://www.jstor.org/stable/4150740?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchKey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3Ac6ac1ac8d9fbe24b5ad2d5342f4778d2&initiator=recommender&seq=1 Augustine and the Corporeality of God]," ''The Harvard Theological Review'' 95, no. 1 (January 2002): 97-118.</ref> The most current scholarly consensus is that the biblical data support the corporeality of God.<ref>See generally S. Tamar Kamionkowski and Wonil Kim, eds., ''Bodies, Embodiment, and Theology of the Hebrew Bible'' (T&T Clark International, 2010); Charles Halton, ''A Human-Shaped God: Theology of an Embodied God'' (Westminster John Knox Press, 2021); Brittany E. Wilson, ''The Embodied God: Seeing the Divine in Luke-Acts and the Early Church'' (Oxford University Press, 2021); Andreas Wagner, ''God's Body: The Anthropomorphic God in the Old Testament'', trans. Marion Salzmann (T&T Clark, 2019); Christoph Markschies, ''God's Body: Jewish, Christian, and Pagan Images of God'' (Baylor University Press, 2019); Benjamin D. Sommer, ''The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel'' (Cambridge University Press, 2011); Francesca Stavarakopolou, ''God: An Anatomy'' (Alfred A. Knopf, 2021).</ref>

======The Mode of Baptism======
Changes to the mode of baptism may also be viewed as evidence of the Great Apostasy because they altered the ordinance's symbolic connection to the atoning death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament consistently portrays baptism by immersion as a reenactment of the Savior's burial and resurrection. Paul taught, "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Romans 6:4; see also Romans 6:3–5). Going down into the water symbolizes Christ's death and burial, while rising from the water symbolizes His resurrection and the believer's new life in Christ.

This symbolism is more than an illustrative ritual—it teaches fundamental truths about the Atonement. Baptism unites the believer with Christ's redemptive work, signifying the death of the "old man" of sin and rebirth through the power of the Resurrection. Because the ordinance itself preaches the gospel, preserving its divinely revealed form is significant.

The earliest Christians generally practiced baptism by immersion where circumstances permitted, a practice reflected in the New Testament and supported by many early Christian writings. Over time, however, affusion (pouring) and eventually sprinkling became increasingly common, particularly in cases involving the sick, infants, or practical necessity, and later gained broader ecclesiastical acceptance. While many Christians viewed these developments as legitimate adaptations, Latter-day Saints see them as evidence that the original ordinance had been modified after the loss of apostolic authority.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the issue is not merely one of ritual preference but of preserving the doctrine embodied in the ordinance itself. If baptism is intended to represent participation in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, then changing its mode necessarily weakens or obscures that symbolism. The Restoration's return to baptism by immersion under proper priesthood authority is therefore understood as a restoration of both the ordinance and the profound doctrine of the Atonement that the ordinance was designed to proclaim.

======Closing the Canon======
The widespread belief that the canon of scripture had permanently closed may itself be evidence of the Great Apostasy. Although the process of recognizing the books of the New Testament unfolded gradually over several centuries, by the fourth and fifth centuries, many Christians had come to regard the biblical canon as complete and closed, with no expectation of additional scripture or authoritative revelation.

Throughout the Bible, God consistently speaks to His children through living prophets, adding new revelation as circumstances require. The New Testament supplemented the Old Testament, and neither Jesus nor His apostles taught that God would forever cease revealing His word after the apostolic age. Instead, the New Testament encourages believers to "despise not prophesyings" (1 Thessalonians 5:20), to "covet to prophesy" (1 Corinthians 14:39), and teaches that Christ gave apostles and prophets "for the perfecting of the saints...till we all come in the unity of the faith" (Ephesians 4:11–13).

If God truly intends to guide His Church through continuing revelation, then the loss of that expectation represents a profound spiritual change. The conviction that God had finished speaking effectively removed the expectation of new prophets, new scripture, and divine direction for new circumstances. Latter-day Saints, therefore, see the doctrine of a closed canon not merely as a theological conclusion, but as a symptom of a Church that no longer expected or received the revelatory voice of God.

This perspective does not imply that God abandoned humanity or ceased inspiring individuals. Rather, it suggests that the institutional Church gradually lost the prophetic authority through which binding revelation for the whole Church was received. The Restoration's claim of continuing revelation and an open canon is therefore not an innovation but a return to the biblical pattern, in which God repeatedly declares, "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7). The Restoration's addition of the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and ongoing prophetic revelation reflects the conviction that a living God continues to speak to His children today.

======The Change of Covenants======
Nephi mentions "many covenants of the Lord" that were "taken away" from the Bible by the great and abominable church (1 Nephi 13:26). What does "many 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>Frederick and Spencer, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/remnant-or-replacement-outlining-a-possible-apostasy-narrative Remnant or Replacement]," 105–27.</ref> In a future article, they will give evidence to support the narrative they have constructed, and it will be added here. As examples of this type of loss of knowledge of the covenantal status of Jews, Dr. Spencer has hinted that the article will appeal to people like [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr] (c. 90 AD – c. 165 AD) in his ''Dialogue with Trypho'' (published c. 155–160 AD), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian] (c. 155 AD – c. 220 AD) in his ''Against the Jews'' (published c. 197 AD), and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion_of_Sinope Marcion of Sinope] (c. 85 – c. 160) and his attempts to decouple the god of the Old Testament from the god of the New.<ref>Joseph M. Spencer, ''The Vision of All: Twenty-five Lectures on Isaiah in Nephi's Record'' (Greg Kofford Books, 2016), 8.</ref>

One aspect of the Great Apostasy identified by Latter-day Saint scholars is the gradual separation of Christian ordinances from their original covenantal context. As Bachman and Reynolds explain, early Christians inherited a rich biblical tradition in which covenants represented binding relationships between God and His people, yet over time, much of historic Christianity increasingly came to understand sacraments primarily as channels through which divine grace was transmitted rather than as covenant-making acts involving both divine promises and human commitments. Although some Reformers, particularly Heinrich Bullinger, sought to recover a covenant-centered understanding of baptism and other sacred rites, the broader Christian tradition often maintained a distinction between sacrament and covenant that differed from the Restoration emphasis that ordinances are essential covenant encounters with God. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the restoration of the connection between ordinances and covenants represents a recovery of an important biblical pattern in which baptism, the sacrament, and temple ordinances are not merely symbolic practices but sacred acts through which individuals enter into binding relationships with Christ and receive His promised blessings.<ref>Bryson L. Bachman and Noel B. Reynolds, “[https://rsc.byu.edu/prelude-restoration/traditional-christian-sacraments-covenants Traditional Christian Sacraments and Covenants],” in ''Prelude to the Restoration: From Apostasy to the Restored Church'' (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Deseret Book, 2004), 24–39.</ref>

A significant feature of the post-apostolic transformation of Christianity was the decline of covenant as a central organizing concept in Christian thought. As Reynolds argues, the earliest Christians understood their relationship with God through the biblical framework of covenant, viewing Christ’s Atonement as the establishment of a “new covenant” that fulfilled and continued God’s covenant dealings with humanity. However, as Christianity expanded into the Greco-Roman world, covenant language gradually became less prominent and was increasingly replaced by theological categories drawn from Greek philosophy, Roman legal concepts, and ecclesiastical structures. Rather than emphasizing a reciprocal relationship in which believers entered into binding commitments with God, later Christian theology often placed greater emphasis on doctrines of divine essence, sacramental administration, and institutional authority. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, this shift represents one dimension of the Great Apostasy: not the complete disappearance of the Christian faith, but a gradual departure from the covenant-centered pattern found in scripture, in which God establishes relationships with His people through revealed promises, ordinances, and priesthood authority.<ref>Noel B. Reynolds, "[https://scripturecentral.org/archive/books/book-chapter/decline-covenant-early-christian-thought The Decline of Covenant in Early Christian Thought]," in ''Early Christians in Disarray: Contemporary LDS Perspectives on the Christian Apostasy'', ed. Noel B. Reynolds (FARMS, 2005), 295–324.</ref>

=====The Corruption of Scripture Guards the Way Back=====
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.

Nephi's vision varies in claiming that many plain and precious things are taken out of the Bible (1 Nephi 13:29) or taken out of the ''gospel'' (1 Nephi 13:26). Nephi also mentions "covenants" that have been taken away (1 Nephi 13:26). These plain and precious parts were taken away by "the great and abominable church" so "that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men (vv. 26–27). Here, we have a clear distinction between the ''perpetrators'' and their ''unfortunate victims'' whom they have blinded and whose hearts they have hardened against the true church.

The great and abominable church sought to "pervert the right ways of the Lord" (v. 27). The angel tells Nephi, "Behold the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church" (1 Nephi 13:8).

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> According to Dr. Gee, "We neither need to nor should look later than the second century for [changes to the scriptures]. By the early second century, Christianity had fragmented into dozens of splinter groups, with each group charging that the other possessed both forged and corrupted texts."<ref>Gee, "Corruption of Scripture," 163–64.</ref>

Dr. Gee explains that various kinds of corruption can occur in the scriptures. These include:
# Omission
# Deletion
# Addition
# Alteration

But they can also include reinterpretation of scriptures, including the following:
# Presuppositional
# Grammatical
# Lexical

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | Who Accused Whom of Altering Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged alteration or corruption
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Source
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Martyr Justin Martyr]
| Jewish rulers / Jewish authorities
| Removed words from the Psalms, including the phrase “from the wood” from Psalm 96 (95 LXX).
| ''Dialogue with Trypho'' 73
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates] and the Carpocratians
| Corrupted a secret version of the Gospel of Mark by adding material and mixing false teachings into the text.
| ''Letter to Theodore''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Valentinians
| Transferred passages, rearranged them, and adapted scriptural passages to support their theological system.
| ''Against Heresies'' 1.8.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Removed portions of Scripture, particularly from Luke, to make the text conform to his teachings.
| ''Against Marcion'' 4.2; ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| Valentinians
| Altered the meaning of Scripture by removing and adding material and imposing a different interpretation upon individual words.
| ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 38
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| A presbyter in Asia
| Forged writings that were falsely attributed to Paul.
| ''On Baptism'' 17
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| Various Christian sects / “heretics”
| Accused them of corrupting Scripture; Irenaeus also acknowledged that these groups accused the emerging orthodox church of corrupting Scripture.
| ''Against Heresies'' 3.2.1
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epiphanius_of_Salamis Epiphanius of Salamis]†
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebion Ebion], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus Cerinthus], [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpocrates Carpocrates], and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| Corrupted the Gospel of Matthew.
| ''Panarion'' 30.13.1; 42.9.1–2
|-
| Opposing Christian sects
| The emerging orthodox / Catholic Christian group
| Altered Scripture and introduced false interpretations.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rufinus_of_Aquileia Rufinus of Aquileia]
| Earlier copyists / translators of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origen Origen]
| Omitted or edited passages considered doctrinally corrupt and added material to clarify passages.
| Preface to Origen, ''On First Principles''
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| By implication, rejected or altered portions of the Christian scriptural tradition that he regarded as incompatible with his theology.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]'s reports concerning Marcion
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism Valentinianism]
| The orthodox Christian tradition
| Accused the orthodox of adulterating Scripture and giving false interpretations, while maintaining that their own interpretation represented the truth.
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian], ''Prescription Against Heretics'' 18
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. He therefore treats the accusation as evidence of an ancient claim, not as an independently verified historical fact. † Gee likewise cautions that Epiphanius is not necessarily a reliable source for these second-century figures.
|}

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|+ style="color:#7BB375; font-weight:bold;" | What Motives Were Attributed to Those Who Altered Scripture?
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accused
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Accuser / source
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | Alleged motive
! style="background:white; color:#0E98BA; font-weight:bold;" | How the alteration served that motive
|-
| Individuals at Corinth
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Rome Clement of Rome]
| Pride, sedition, and desire for authority
| They set themselves up as leaders and attempted to usurp authority that did not belong to them.
|-
| Carpocratians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria Clement of Alexandria]*
| To justify their own immoral practices
| They allegedly altered the Gospel of Mark and incorporated false material from which they derived their doctrine.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To give scriptural support to their preexisting theological system
| They adapted the sayings of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles so that their teachings would appear to have scriptural support.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus Irenaeus]
| To obtain intellectual respectability
| They attempted to harmonize Christian teachings with philosophical traditions and ideas current in the wider Greco-Roman intellectual world.
|-
| Author of ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Gee's discussion of the text
| To give philosophical teachings the authority of Jesus
| Philosophical material from ''Eugnostos'' was placed, largely word for word, into the mouth of the risen Jesus.
|-
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcion Marcion]
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to Marcion's theological system
| Marcion removed portions of Scripture that did not fit his teachings, particularly from Luke.
|-
| Valentinians
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To make Scripture conform to their theological system
| Rather than simply deleting passages, they allegedly changed the meaning of words and added interpretations that supported their doctrine.
|-
| Presbytery / presbyter in Asia
| [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertullian Tertullian]
| To legitimize women's teaching and baptizing
| The presbyter allegedly forged writings under Paul's name so that they would authorize practices Tertullian opposed.
|-
| Individuals seeking authority
| Gee's discussion of early accusations
| To obtain or consolidate religious authority
| Alteration or manipulation of texts could be used to give one's own teachings or leadership scriptural legitimacy.
|-
! colspan="4" | * Gee notes that the authenticity of the ''Letter to Theodore'' is uncertain. The table therefore reports the motive attributed in the source rather than presenting the allegation as established fact.
|}

=====The Great Splintering: The Groups that Formed in the Wake of the Great Apostasy=====
Further evidence for the Great Apostasy can be found in the writings of early Christian fathers (the study of which is known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patristics] or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patristics patrology]) and Christian apocryphal writings.

When approaching these writings, it is important to keep their chronological context in mind. This helps in determining when the Great Apostasy might have been complete. Below is a series of tables that organize these writings chronologically and that can be viewed when desired.

====== Chronology of Early Christian Writings (A.D. 30–300) ======
This chronology includes the major surviving writings of early Christianity, including the New Testament, Apostolic Fathers, Church Fathers, apologetic works, church orders, martyr literature, biblical commentaries, Christian apocrypha, Christian pseudepigrapha, Gnostic literature, and important lost works.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="6.3%"| '''Approx. Date'''
!width="6.0%"|'''Author'''
!width="8.6%"|'''Work'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Genre'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Category'''
!width="9.3%"|'''Place of Composition'''
!width="7.3%"|'''Survival Status'''
!width="10.0%"|'''Principal Manuscript(s)'''
!width="8.3%"|'''Standard English Edition(s)'''
!width="14.6%"|'''Notes'''
|+'''Chronology of Early Christian Writings (AD 0–AD 300)'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 48–50
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Galatians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Galatia or Antioch (disputed)
| Complete
| Codices Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| Nestle-Aland 28; Holmes; Loeb
| Earliest surviving Christian document, according to most scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 50–51
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus
| NA28; Holmes
| Earliest extant letter to a Christian congregation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 51–52
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Thessalonians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Some scholars debate Pauline authorship

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 53–55
| Paul
| ''First Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Ephesus
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Addresses divisions, worship, resurrection, and ethics.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 55–56
| Paul
| ''Second Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Collection of multiple Pauline letters according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 56–57
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Corinth
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Paul's longest and most systematic theological letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Prison epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul
| ''Epistle to Philemon''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest Pauline letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Colossians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Many scholars dispute Pauline authorship.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 60–62
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Circular letter, according to many scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''First Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| One of the Pastoral Epistles.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 62–64
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Epistle to Titus''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Macedonia or Nicopolis
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Pastoral Epistle.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 64–67
| Paul (traditional)
| ''Second Epistle to Timothy''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome
| Complete
| Sinaiticus
| NA28
| Traditionally regarded as Paul's final letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 65–70
| John Mark (traditional)
| ''Gospel according to Mark''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Rome (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Earliest Canonical Gospel, according to the majority of scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Didache''
| Church Order
| Apostolic Fathers
| Syria (probably)
| Complete
| Codex Hierosolymitanus (1056)
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Earliest surviving Christian church manual.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 70–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Matthew''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Antioch? (traditional scholarly proposal)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Probably dependent upon Mark and other traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle to the Hebrews''
| Homily / Epistle
| New Testament
| Unknown
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Anonymous in the earliest manuscripts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to Luke''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| First volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–90
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles''
| History
| New Testament
| Greece or Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Second volume of Luke–Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of James''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Palestine? (disputed)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Traditionally attributed to James, the brother of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of Peter''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Rome ("Babylon")
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Petrine authorship debated.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 80–100
| Clement of Rome
| ''First Epistle of Clement''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Alexandrinus; Codex Hierosolymitanus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Earliest surviving post-apostolic Christian letter.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 85–95
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel according to John''
| Gospel
| New Testament
| Ephesus (traditional)
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Distinctive theological portrait of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''First Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Closely related to the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Second Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Shortest New Testament epistle by verse count.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–95
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle of John''
| Epistle
| New Testament
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Sinaiticus, Vaticanus
| NA28
| Personal letter concerning church leadership.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–96
| John of Patmos
| ''Revelation''
| Apocalypse
| New Testament
| Patmos
| Complete
| Sinaiticus; Alexandrinus
| NA28
| Earliest surviving Christian apocalypse in the canon.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 90–100
| Anonymous
| ''Odes of Solomon''
| Hymns
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts; Papyrus Bodmer XI (fragments)
| Charlesworth; Lattke
| Earliest substantial Christian hymn collection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 95–120
| Anonymous
| ''Ascension of Isaiah'' (Christian recension)
| Apocalypse
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria or Palestine
| Complete
| Ethiopic manuscripts; Latin & Slavonic fragments
| Charlesworth; Knibb
| Composite work containing an early Christian vision of Christ's descent and ascent.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Ephesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| One of the seven authentic letters written while en route to martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Magnesians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Emphasizes unity under the bishop.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Trallians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Warns against false teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Romans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Famous for Ignatius's desire for martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Philadelphians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Encourages ecclesiastical unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to the Smyrnaeans''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Strong affirmation of Christ's true humanity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–110
| Ignatius of Antioch
| ''Epistle to Polycarp''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Troas
| Complete
| Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Personal letter to Polycarp of Smyrna.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–120
| Polycarp of Smyrna
| ''Epistle to the Philippians''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Codex Vaticanus Graecus 859; later manuscripts
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Frequently quotes New Testament writings.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Papias of Hierapolis
| ''Exposition of the Sayings of the Lord''
| Commentary
| Apostolic Fathers
| Hierapolis
| Fragmentary
| Preserved principally in Eusebius
| Holmes (fragments); Ehrman
| Earliest extant discussion of the origins of Matthew and Mark.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Shepherd of Hermas''
| Apocalypse / Parable
| Apostolic Fathers
| Rome
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus; Codex Athous
| Holmes; Ehrman
| Highly regarded by many second-century Christians.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Hebrews''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome and others
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Used by some Jewish-Christian communities.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Nazarenes''
| Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Jerome
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Closely related to Matthew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 100–130
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of the Ebionites''
| Gospel Harmony
| Christian Apocrypha
| Transjordan or Syria
| Fragmentary
| Quotations in Epiphanius
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Omits the infancy narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–135
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Peter''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial (Greek); Complete (Ethiopic recension)
| Akhmim Codex; Ethiopic manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Widely read in the second century and included in some early canon lists.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 110–140
| Anonymous
| ''Preaching of Peter'' (''Kerygma Petrou'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Christian Apocrypha
| Alexandria (possibly)
| Fragmentary
| Clement of Alexandria and others
| Schneemelcher
| Survives only in quotations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 120–135
| Anonymous
| ''Epistle of Barnabas''
| Epistle
| Apostolic Fathers
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Codex Sinaiticus
| Holmes; Lightfoot
| Presents an allegorical interpretation of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–140
| Quadratus of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Ehrman
| Earliest known Christian apology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 125–145
| Aristides of Athens
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens
| Complete
| Syriac manuscript; Armenian version
| ANF; Ehrman
| Addressed to Emperor Hadrian or Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 130–150
| Hegesippus
| ''Memoirs'' (''Hypomnemata'')
| Church History
| Patristic
| Probably Rome
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| One of the earliest Christian historical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 135–150
| Anonymous
| ''Protoevangelium of James''
| Infancy Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Bodmer Papyrus V; numerous later manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Principal source for later traditions concerning Mary's childhood.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Antitheses''
| Theological Treatise
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Lost
| Reconstructed from patristic quotations
| Harnack
| Contrasted the God of the Old Testament with the Father of Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 140
| Marcion
| ''Evangelion'' (Marcion's Gospel)
| Gospel
| Heterodox
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Patristic quotations
| Harnack; Roth
| Edited form of the Gospel of Luke according to the majority view.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–170
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Mary''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Partial
| Berlin Codex; Rylands Papyrus 463
| Meyer; Elliott
| Centers on post-resurrection revelations to Mary Magdalene.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Thomas''
| Sayings Gospel
| Christian Apocrypha
| Syria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II; Oxyrhynchus papyri
| Meyer; Patterson & Robinson
| Collection of 114 sayings attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Truth''
| Homily / Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Rome or Alexandria
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Meyer; Robinson
| Often attributed to Valentinus or one of his followers.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 140–180
| Valentinian school
| ''Gospel of Philip''
| Sacramental Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Meyer; Robinson
| Collection of mystical sayings concerning sacraments and union with Christ.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''First Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Defense of Christianity addressed to Antoninus Pius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 150
| Justin Martyr
| ''Second Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Supplement to the ''First Apology''.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Justin Martyr
| ''Dialogue with Trypho''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Ephesus or Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Falls
| Lengthy defense of Christianity against Jewish objections.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 145–170
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of John''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Earliest of the major apocryphal Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 150–160
| Tatian
| ''Address to the Greeks''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Critique of Greek philosophy and culture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 160–172
| Tatian
| ''Diatessaron''
| Gospel Harmony
| Gospel Harmony
| Syria
| Lost (reconstructed)
| Ephrem's Commentary; Arabic and Latin witnesses
| Petersen; Hill
| Earliest known harmony of the four canonical Gospels.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 165
| Melito of Sardis
| ''On Pascha''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Sardis
| Complete
| Papyrus Chester Beatty-Michigan
| Hall; ANF (partial)
| Earliest surviving Christian Paschal homily.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| Hall
| Addressed to Emperor Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–180
| Melito of Sardis
| ''Extracts'' (''Eklogai'')
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Sardis
| Fragmentary
| Catenae and patristic citations
| Hall
| Collection of scriptural interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 165–177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''Plea for the Christians''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Athens (probably)
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of Christians addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Athenagoras of Athens
| ''On the Resurrection of the Dead''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Athens
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest full-length defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 169–183
| Theophilus of Antioch
| ''To Autolycus''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Antioch
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| First known Christian author to use the word "Trinity" (Trias).

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 170
| Anonymous
| ''Muratorian Fragment''
| Canon List
| Canonical Literature
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Codex Ambrosianus
| Metzger
| Earliest surviving list of New Testament books.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 170–180
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Gaul
| Complete
| Preserved in Eusebius
| Musurillo
| Documents the persecution under Marcus Aurelius.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 177
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Traditional date disputed by some scholars.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–185
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Partial
| Coptic, Greek, and Latin witnesses
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Includes the ''Acts of Paul and Thecla.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Paul and Thecla''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Numerous Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Most popular section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Third Epistle to the Corinthians''
| Epistle
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Armenian and Latin traditions
| Schneemelcher
| Incorporated into the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Paul''
| Martyr Account
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Final section of the ''Acts of Paul.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 175–190
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Rome
| Partial
| Vercelli Acts; Greek fragments
| Schneemelcher
| Contains the ''Quo Vadis'' episode.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 178
| Celsus
| ''The True Doctrine''
| Polemic
| Pagan Critique
| Alexandria (probably)
| Lost (quoted extensively)
| Preserved by Origen
| Chadwick
| Most influential pagan critique of Christianity before Porphyry.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Against Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Proto-orthodox
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts; Armenian fragments
| ANF; Rousseau & Doutreleau
| Principal refutation of second-century Gnosticism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 180
| Irenaeus of Lyons
| ''Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching''
| Catechetical Treatise
| Patristic
| Lyons
| Complete
| Armenian manuscript
| Behr
| Summary of Christian doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 180–190
| Rhodo
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF (fragments)
| Disciple of Tatian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Exhortation to the Greeks'' (''Protrepticus'')
| Apologetic Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Invitation for pagans to embrace Christianity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''The Instructor'' (''Paedagogus'')
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian ethics and daily conduct.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 190–202
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Miscellanies'' (''Stromata'')
| Theological Miscellany
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the most learned Christian works of the second century.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 190
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary on Mark 10:17–31.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''Apology''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Greatest Latin apology of the early Church.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''To the Nations''
| Apology
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earlier companion to the ''Apology.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 197
| Tertullian
| ''On the Testimony of the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Appeals to natural knowledge of God.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 197–208
| Tertullian
| ''Against Marcion''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Five-book refutation of Marcionism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Baptism''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving treatise devoted entirely to baptism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 198
| Tertullian
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest substantial Christian commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 199
| Tertullian
| ''On Repentance''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Important witness to early penitential practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Thomas''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Edessa
| Complete
| Syriac and Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| Famous for the "Hymn of the Pearl."

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hymn of the Pearl''
| Hymn
| Christian Poetry
| Edessa
| Complete
| Embedded in the ''Acts of Thomas''
| Schneemelcher
| One of the masterpieces of early Syriac Christian literature.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Judas''
| Dialogue Gospel
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Codex Tchacos
| Meyer; Kasser
| Presents Judas as the recipient of a secret revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Apocryphon of John''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codices II, III, IV; Berlin Codex
| Robinson; Meyer
| Foundational Gnostic text.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Hypostasis of the Archons''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex II
| Robinson
| Interpretation of Genesis from a Gnostic perspective.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''The Thought of Norea''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex IX
| Robinson
| Short revelation centered on Norea.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Thunder, Perfect Mind''
| Poetic Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Famous poetic monologue spoken by a divine female figure.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Trimorphic Protennoia''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XIII
| Robinson
| Closely related to the ''Apocryphon of John.''

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Sophia of Jesus Christ''
| Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex III; Berlin Codex
| Robinson
| Dialogue between the risen Christ and his disciples.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Tripartite Tractate''
| Theological Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex I
| Robinson
| One of the longest Valentinian theological works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Interpretation of Knowledge''
| Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Reflects mature Valentinian ecclesiology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Letter of Peter to Philip''
| Epistle
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Expanded apostolic revelation dialogue.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles''
| Acts
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VI
| Robinson
| Symbolic missionary narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Excerpts from Theodotus''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Commentary preserving Valentinian traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Eclogae Propheticae''
| Commentary
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Notes on biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–203
| Clement of Alexandria
| ''Quis Dives Salvetur?''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Interpretation of the Rich Young Ruler.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 200
| Minucius Felix
| ''Octavius''
| Dialogue
| Apologetic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Christian dialogue in Latin.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 200–206
| Tertullian
| ''On the Prescription of Heretics''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues apostolic succession determines authentic doctrine.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 202
| Tertullian
| ''Against Praxeas''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest extensive Latin defense of Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Perpetua and Felicitas''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Numerous Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Includes Perpetua's own prison diary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''To the Martyrs''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Encouragement for imprisoned confessors.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 203
| Tertullian
| ''On the Crown''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses military service and Christian conscience.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Commentary on Daniel''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek and Slavonic witnesses
| ANF
| Earliest surviving complete Christian biblical commentary.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 205
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''On Christ and Antichrist''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early work of Christian eschatology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 205–215
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Apostolic Tradition''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Rome
| Reconstructed
| Ethiopic, Latin, Arabic, Sahidic witnesses
| Stewart; Bradshaw
| Influential source for early liturgy and ordination rites.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 210–220
| Hippolytus of Rome
| ''Refutation of All Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Rome
| Complete
| Mount Athos manuscript
| ANF
| Valuable source for many otherwise-lost heresies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 212
| Tertullian
| ''On the Resurrection of the Flesh''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 213
| Tertullian
| ''On the Soul''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Christian anthropology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''Exhortation to Martyrdom''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Greer
| Written during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 215
| Origen
| ''On Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Caesarea
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| Greer
| One of the finest early Christian works on prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Origen
| ''On First Principles'' (''De Principiis'')
| Systematic Theology
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Latin translation of Rufinus
| Butterworth
| First systematic theology in Christian history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on John''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; Latin translation by Rufinus
| ANF; Heine
| One of the earliest extensive Christian commentaries on the Fourth Gospel.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Matthew''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments
| ANF; Scheck
| Important witness to early Gospel interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Romans''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Earliest surviving major commentary on Romans.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| Heine
| Demonstrates Origen's allegorical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Genesis''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Early example of Christian preaching on Scripture.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Exodus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Develops typological readings of Exodus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Homilies on Leviticus''
| Homily
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Partial
| Rufinus translation
| ANF
| Influential on later sacramental theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Origen of Alexandria
| ''Hexapla''
| Biblical Textual Criticism
| Biblical Scholarship
| Caesarea
| Fragmentary
| Fragments preserved in later writers
| Field; Nautin
| Monumental six-column edition of the Old Testament.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Chronographiai''
| Chronology / History
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius and later writers
| Wallraff
| One of the earliest Christian chronological histories.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 220
| Julius Africanus
| ''Letter to Aristides''
| Letter / Gospel Harmonization
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Fragmentary
| Preserved in Eusebius
| ANF
| Discusses apparent differences between Matthew and Luke.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–230
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek fragments; later recensions
| Schneemelcher; Elliott
| One of the major apocryphal apostolic Acts.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 220–240
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Andrew''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt or Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Part of the broader Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Gospel of Bartholomew''
| Gospel / Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Contains dialogues between Christ and Bartholomew.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Questions of Bartholomew''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek and Coptic manuscripts
| Elliott
| Explores post-resurrection revelations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Adam''
| Apocalypse
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex V
| Robinson
| reinterpretation of salvation history.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Zostrianos''
| Revelation
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex VIII
| Robinson
| Long cosmological revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Allogenes''
| Revelation Dialogue
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex XI
| Robinson
| Describes ascent through heavenly realms.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 230
| Anonymous
| ''Marsanes''
| Revelation Treatise
| Gnostic Literature
| Egypt
| Complete
| Nag Hammadi Codex X
| Robinson
| Mystical cosmological work.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–240
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin treatise devoted to the Trinity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''On Jewish Foods''
| Treatise
| Biblical Interpretation
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Jewish dietary laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 235–250
| Novatian of Rome
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Rome
| Fragmentary
| Cyprian and later writers
| ANF
| Important evidence for Roman church disputes.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 240–250
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Donatus''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Cyprian's conversion narrative.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 246
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Dress of Virgins''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses Christian ascetic ideals.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 248
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''The Unity of the Church''
| Ecclesiology Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Major early statement on episcopal unity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lapsed''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Addresses Christians who sacrificed during persecution.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 249
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Lord's Prayer''
| Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Early Latin commentary on the Lord's Prayer.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Didascalia Apostolorum''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Syria
| Complete
| Syriac manuscripts
| Connolly; Funk
| Important source for third-century church practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving Latin martyr act.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Martyrdom of Pionius''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Smyrna
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes persecution under Decius or earlier.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Testament of Jesus Christ''
| Church Order / Revelation
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Tübingen editions
| Presents apostolic instructions attributed to Jesus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Xanthippe and Polyxena''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Spain (traditional)
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apocryphal Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 250
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Contains extensive miracle narratives.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| One of the most important collections of third-century Christian correspondence.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 250–251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''To Demetrian''
| Apologetic Treatise
| Apologetic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Responds to pagan accusations that Christians caused disasters.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On the Mortality''
| Pastoral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Reflection on Christian responses to plague and death.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''On Works and Almsgiving''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Discusses charity and repentance.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–258
| Cyprian of Carthage
| ''Letters concerning the Novatian Schism''
| Ecclesiastical Letters
| Patristic
| Carthage
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF; Diercks
| Major evidence for early debates over church unity and restoration of the lapsed.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Jewish Foods''
| Biblical Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Allegorical interpretation of Mosaic food laws.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Trinity''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin works defending Trinitarian theology.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 251
| Novatian
| ''On the Spectacles''
| Moral Treatise
| Patristic
| Rome
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Argues Christians should avoid pagan entertainment.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 251–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Letters''
| Letters
| Patristic
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius and later writers
| ANF
| Important witness to third-century theological controversies.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 252
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Cyprian''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Carthage
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Earliest surviving account of an African bishop's martyrdom.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 252–260
| Dionysius of Alexandria
| ''Against Nepos''
| Anti-millennialist Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Alexandria
| Fragmentary
| Eusebius
| ANF fragments
| Refutes excessive literal millennial interpretations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Marianus and James''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Important witness to persecution under Valerian.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Passion of Montanus, Lucius, and Others''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| North Africa
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Describes Montanist-associated martyrs.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 255
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Euplus''
| Martyr Account
| Martyr Literature
| Sicily
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Musurillo
| Valerian persecution martyrdom account.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–270
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Address of Thanks to Origen''
| Oration
| Patristic
| Palestine
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Important account of Origen's teaching.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 260
| Gregory Thaumaturgus
| ''Canonical Letter''
| Ecclesiastical Letter
| Patristic
| Neocaesarea
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Early evidence of church disciplinary practice.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 260–280
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Peter and Paul''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor or Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Combines traditions concerning Peter and Paul.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Revelation''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Complete
| Medieval manuscripts
| ANF
| Earliest surviving Latin commentary on Revelation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Commentary on Genesis''
| Biblical Commentary
| Biblical Commentary
| Pannonia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Early Latin biblical interpretation.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270
| Victorinus of Pettau
| ''Against the Heresies''
| Anti-heretical Treatise
| Anti-heretical
| Pannonia
| Lost
| Fragments only
| ANF
| One of the earliest Latin anti-heretical works.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''Symposium''
| Dialogue
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| ANF
| Christian adaptation of Plato's ''Symposium'' focusing on virginity.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On Free Will''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Response to determinism.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 270–280
| Methodius of Olympus
| ''On the Resurrection''
| Theological Treatise
| Patristic
| Lycia
| Fragmentary
| Patristic quotations
| ANF
| Defense of bodily resurrection.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Apostolic Church Order''
| Church Order
| Church Order
| Egypt or Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Funk
| Early compilation of apostolic regulations.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Homilies''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Rehm; Jones
| Presents Peter as defender of true Christianity against Simon Magus.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280
| Anonymous
| ''Pseudo-Clementine Recognitions''
| Religious Romance / Dialogue
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Syria
| Complete
| Rufinus Latin translation
| Rehm; Jones
| Related to the ''Homilies'' but preserves different traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Paul''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Numerous medieval manuscripts
| Elliott
| Influential vision of heaven and hell.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 280–300
| Anonymous
| ''Apocalypse of Thomas''
| Apocalypse
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Latin manuscripts
| Elliott
| Eschatological revelations attributed to Thomas.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Philip'' (later sections)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Asia Minor
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Schneemelcher
| Includes extensive miracle traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 290
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of Andrew and Matthias''
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Fragmentary
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Late apostolic Acts tradition.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| 290–300
| Anonymous
| ''Life of Adam and Eve'' (Christian expansion)
| Adamic Literature
| Christian Pseudepigrapha
| Mediterranean
| Complete
| Numerous manuscripts
| Johnson
| Christian adaptation of Jewish Adam traditions.

|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| c. 300
| Anonymous
| ''Acts of the Apostles Peter and Paul'' (expanded form)
| Acts
| Christian Apocrypha
| Egypt
| Complete
| Greek manuscripts
| Elliott
| Expands traditions surrounding apostolic martyrdom.
|}

======The Movements Away from Apostolic Christiantiy======
Following the ministry of Jesus Christ and His Apostles, Christianity entered a period of increasing theological diversity. The New Testament itself anticipates this development, warning that false teachers, divisions, and apostasy would arise after the Apostles' ministry (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Thessalonians 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Peter 2:1–3). By the second century, Christians held a wide variety of views concerning the nature of Christ, the Godhead, salvation, Church authority, revelation, and the proper interpretation of scripture.

Although historians debate the precise boundaries of these movements, many can be understood as belonging to one of three broad trajectories.<ref>Barry Robert Bickmore, ''Restoring the Ancient Church: Joseph Smith and Early Christianity'', expanded and revised ed. (FairMormon, 2014), 29–35.</ref>

#'''Jewish Christianity''' sought to preserve Christianity's continuity with Judaism by maintaining observance of the Mosaic Law and emphasizing Israel's covenantal identity.
#'''Gnostic Christianity''' interpreted Christianity through various philosophical and mystical systems that emphasized secret knowledge (''gnosis''), dualism between spirit and matter, and esoteric readings of scripture.
#'''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''' increasingly emphasized episcopal leadership, apostolic succession, and ecclesiastical unity as the means of preserving the apostolic faith. This latter tradition eventually developed into what became the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.

Not every movement fits neatly into one of these categories. Some, such as ''Montanism'', were reform movements that arose within proto-orthodox Christianity and emphasized continuing prophecy and revelation. Others, including ''Monarchianism'', ''Adoptionism'', ''Sabellianism'', and later ''Arianism'', were theological movements that developed within the broader Church as Christians debated the relationship between the Father and the Son. Still others, such as ''Manichaeism'', developed into distinct religions while borrowing elements from Christianity.

From a Latter-day Saint perspective, the proliferation of these movements is significant because it illustrates that, following the deaths of the Apostles, Christians increasingly disagreed over fundamental questions of doctrine and authority. Latter-day Saints generally understand these movements as sincere but competing attempts to preserve or explain Christianity after the loss of living apostolic leadership. This raises what Restoration theology regards as the central historical question: by what authority could disputes concerning doctrine and practice be definitively resolved once the Apostles were gone?

{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" style="width:100%; font-size:85%; vertical-align:top;" border="3"
|+ '''Emergence and Decline of Major Christian Movements After the Apostolic Era'''
! width="15%" | '''Approx. Emergence'''
! width="17%" | '''Movement'''
! width="22%" | '''Broader Trajectory'''
! width="18%" | '''Approx. Decline/Disappearance'''
! width="28%" | '''Summary'''

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 30–50'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_1st_century '''Apostolic Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#eeeeee;" | '''Apostolic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st–early 2nd century''' Continued through successor churches
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Ministry of Jesus Christ and the Apostles established the New Testament Church.
* Apostles and prophets provided priesthood authority, revelation, and doctrinal guidance.
* Represents the period before the emergence of later competing Christian traditions.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 40s–60s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judaizers '''Judaizing Movement''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 1st century''' Related Jewish-Christian groups continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Mentioned throughout Acts and Paul's epistles.
* Taught that Gentile converts should observe circumcision and aspects of the Law of Moses.
* Reflected ongoing debates concerning Christianity's relationship to Judaism.
* The early Apostles decided that converts did ''not'' need to be circumcised in order to be Christians (Acts 15:19–29; 1 Corinthians 7:18–19)

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 50s–90s'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus '''Cerinthian Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish-Christian / Early Gnostic Transition'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd century''' Little evidence after this period
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Associated with Cerinthus, a late first-century Christian teacher.
* Combined Jewish-Christian traditions with emerging speculative teachings about Christ.
* Believed that the material, visible world was not created by God, but by a being separate from Him.
* Denied the virgin birth of Jesus
* Taught that Jesus and Christ were separate beings, and that Christ descended upon Jesus at Jesus's Baptism in the form of a dove. After Jesus died, Christ ascended into heaven.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–100'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docetism '''Docetism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''2nd–3rd centuries''' Continued in later Gnostic movements
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Christ only appeared to have a physical body.
* Denied or minimized the reality of Christ's suffering and mortal experience.
* Opposed by early Christian writers emphasizing Christ's true incarnation.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect) '''Nazarenes''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Maintained Jewish practices while accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
* Generally held a higher view of Christ than later Ebionite groups.
* Represented one continuation of Jewish-Christian identity after the first century.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 70–135'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebionites '''Ebionites''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#FFFFCC;" | '''Jewish Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Continued observance of the Mosaic Law.
* Viewed Jesus as the Messiah but often rejected His premortal divine status.
* Became increasingly distinct from Gentile Christianity after the destruction of Jerusalem.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 90–120'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-orthodox_Christianity '''Proto-Orthodox Christianity''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox (Catholic) Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Did not disappear''' Became dominant Christian tradition
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed stronger episcopal leadership following the deaths of the Apostles.
* Emphasized bishops, apostolic succession, and the rule of faith.
* Became the tradition from which Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity developed.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 110–150'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilideans '''Basilidean Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Basilides in Alexandria.
* Developed elaborate cosmological systems involving divine emanations and spiritual realities.
* Emphasized salvation through higher knowledge.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 140'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcionism '''Marcionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic-Influenced Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''4th–5th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Marcion after arriving in Rome.
* Rejected the Old Testament and distinguished the God of Israel from the Father of Jesus Christ.
* Produced one of the earliest attempts at a Christian canon.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 140–180'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentinianism '''Valentinian Gnosticism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFCC;" | '''Gnostic Christianity'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 3rd–4th centuries'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Valentinus.
* Became one of the most influential Gnostic movements.
* Combined Christian teachings with complex philosophical and mystical interpretations.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''AD 150–200'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchianism '''Monarchianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After 3rd-century Christological controversies'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Attempted to preserve strict monotheism while explaining Christ's relationship to the Father.
* Included Dynamic Monarchianism and Modalistic forms.
* Contributed to later debates concerning the nature of the Godhead.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 170'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montanism '''Montanism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Proto-Orthodox Renewal Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''5th–6th centuries in some regions'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began under Montanus in Phrygia.
* Emphasized continuing prophecy, revelation, and spiritual gifts.
* Reflected continued expectations of divine communication among early Christians.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late 2nd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoptionism '''Adoptionism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''3rd century''' Related ideas periodically reappeared
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Taught that Jesus became God's Son through adoption at a particular point in His mortal life.
* Challenged emerging teachings concerning Christ's eternal divine identity.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Early 3rd century'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabellianism '''Sabellianism (Modalism)''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''After the 3rd century''' Related ideas continued
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Developed a systematic form of Modalistic Monarchianism.
* Taught that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost were different manifestations of one divine person.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 240'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism '''Manichaeism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#E6CCFF;" | '''Independent Syncretic Movement'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''Late Middle Ages'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Founded by Mani.
* Combined Christian, Persian, and other religious traditions.
* Emphasized cosmic dualism between light and darkness.

|-
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''c. AD 318'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism '''Arianism''']
| style="vertical-align:top; background:#CCFFFF;" | '''Internal Proto-Orthodox Debate'''
| style="vertical-align:top;" | '''7th century''' Survived among some Germanic peoples
| style="vertical-align:top;" |
* Began with Arius in Alexandria.
* Taught that the Son was created by the Father and was not co-eternal with Him.
* Became the central controversy addressed at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325).

|}

====The Totality of the Apostasy's Scope====
Some Christians admit that there was an apostasy. Nevertheless, they claim that the Apostasy was not a "complete" or "total" apostasy. Rather, they claim that a faithful band of believers kept the faith and that, eventually, truth and unity overcame heresy and division.

=====The Catholic View=====
Catholicism does not accept the Latter-day Saint claim that there was a complete loss of Christ’s Church after the deaths of the apostles. Instead, the Catholic position is that the Church established by Christ has continued through apostolic succession—an unbroken transmission of authority from the Apostles through bishops to the present day.

Catholics generally do not argue that other Christian groups experienced a historical apostasy requiring restoration. Rather, they claim that the Catholic Church itself has preserved the essential authority, teachings, sacraments, and institutional structure of the original Church. Because of this, Catholic theology views later Christian communities that separated from Rome as lacking certain elements of apostolic continuity, particularly sacramental priesthood and apostolic succession.

A major distinction is therefore how Catholics and Latter-day Saints define apostasy:

*'''Latter-day Saint View:''' The Great Apostasy involved a loss of divine authority, priesthood keys, prophetic leadership, and certain truths from Christ’s original Church. The Restoration was necessary because the institutional Church no longer possessed the fullness of Christ’s authority.
*'''Catholic View:''' There was no universal apostasy of the Church because Christ promised that the Church would endure. Instead, there have been periods of sin, corruption, doctrinal disputes, and individual apostasy, but the Church’s essential authority and teachings remained intact through apostolic succession.

Catholic teaching does not claim that everything outside Catholicism is false. Catholic documents acknowledge that other religions and Christian communities may contain elements of truth and holiness. However, Catholic doctrine maintains that the fullness of the Church founded by Christ exists within the Catholic Church because it retains apostolic succession and the sacramental priesthood.

In short: The Catholic response to the Great Apostasy claim is not that Christianity never experienced corruption or decline, but that the Church itself never disappeared. Catholics believe Christ preserved His Church through the bishops and apostolic succession, whereas Latter-day Saints believe the loss of apostolic authority necessitated a Restoration through Joseph Smith.

=====The Reformed View=====
Protestant Reformers generally did not believe in a complete apostasy of Christianity, but they did believe that the visible Christian Church had undergone a serious corruption that required reform. Unlike the Latter-day Saint view, which teaches a loss of priesthood authority and the need for a Restoration, most Reformers argued that the true Church had continued to exist despite doctrinal and institutional errors.

Reformers such as Martin Luther and John Calvin viewed the medieval Catholic Church as having departed from biblical Christianity in important ways. They criticized practices and teachings they believed were later developments, including issues involving papal authority, indulgences, church traditions, and certain doctrines. However, they generally did not conclude that God’s Church had vanished from the earth. Instead, they believed that the true Church had been preserved through Scripture and faithful believers, even if it was obscured by error.

A central distinction between the Reformation and Restoration perspectives is the question of continuity:

{| class="wikitable" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
|-
! width="20%"|'''View'''
! width="40%"|'''What happened after the apostles?'''
! width="40%"color:#0E98BA;" | '''Solution'''
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Catholic view'''
| The Church continued through apostolic succession. Although individual Christians and leaders experienced sin, corruption, and doctrinal disputes, Christ preserved the Church’s essential authority, priesthood, sacraments, and teachings.
| Remain within and preserve the apostolic Church through its bishops, traditions, and sacramental structure.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Protestant Reformation view'''
| The Church did not disappear, but many Reformers believed that significant doctrinal and institutional corruptions developed over time, especially within medieval Catholicism. The true faith was preserved among faithful believers and through Scripture.
| Reform the existing Church by returning to biblical teachings and correcting later traditions and practices.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
| '''Latter-day Saint view'''
| A widespread apostasy occurred in which Christ’s Church lost priesthood authority, prophetic leadership, and the fullness of revealed truth, although individual believers and fragments of truth remained.
| Restore Christ’s original Church through the reestablishment of priesthood authority, revelation, ordinances, and the fullness of the gospel.
|}
Protestant reliance on Scripture contrasts with the Catholic emphasis on institutional continuity and apostolic succession. Reformers argued that the ultimate authority for correcting the Church was the Bible rather than the traditions or structures that had developed within medieval Christianity. They believed the Church could be restored to greater purity by returning to biblical teachings.

The Reformation view holds that Christianity experienced a significant falling away from original teachings and practices, particularly within medieval Catholicism, but not a complete apostasy in which Christ’s Church ceased to exist. Reformers believed God preserved the true faith through Scripture and faithful Christians, while Latter-day Saints argue that the loss of priesthood authority required a divine Restoration rather than merely a reform movement.

One Protestant attempted to support her view of the limited Apostasy as follows:

<blockquote>While the Mormon Church goes on to try to justify their reasons for rejecting the historic Christian faith by claiming that Christianity apostasized (fell away from the truth) after the death of the apostles, the Bible is clear that during the apostasy, only a few people would fall away from the faith. In 1 Timothy 4:1, the Bible says, “Not the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, '''some shall depart''' from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”<ref>Christina R. Darlington, ''Misguided by Mormonism But Redeemed by God’s Grace: Leaving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for Biblical Christianity'', 2nd ed. (n.p., 2019), 5. Emphasis in original.</ref></blockquote>

There are two problems with this analysis.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "Refuting Christina Darlington on 1 Timothy 4:1 and LDS Belief in the Great Apostasy," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', August 17, 2019, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2019/08/refuting-christina-darlington-on-1.html?m=1.</ref>

# Biblical scholars agree that this verse is more aptly applied to the ''end times'' rather than the near future, i.e., the Apostasy.<ref>I Howard Marshall and Philip H. Towner, ''A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles'' (International Critical Commentary; T&T Clark International, 2004), 537.</ref>
# The Greek word translated as "some," ''τινες'' (TEE-nehs), does not have the force of ''selecting a specific group''. Rather, it is an indefinite: "anyone."

====Why Did God Allow the Great Apostasy to Happen?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if God knew His Church would fall into apostasy, why would He allow it to happen? Why would God permit centuries of confusion and the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and ordinances? Latter-day Saint theology answers that God does not force humanity to accept truth. Because agency is essential to God’s plan, He allows individuals and communities to choose whether they will accept or reject the light He offers.

The scriptures repeatedly show that God permits His children to exercise agency, even when those choices lead to spiritual consequences. The Lord declared, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light” (Doctrine and Covenants 93:31).

Likewise, the Book of Mormon teaches that God “gave unto them that they should be agents unto themselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 101:78; see also 2 Nephi 2:16). Without the possibility of rejecting truth, there could be no meaningful exercise of faith, obedience, or repentance.

The Bible itself describes periods in which God’s people fell away from revealed truth. Ancient Israel repeatedly experienced cycles of revelation, apostasy, judgment, and restoration. The book of Judges describes how “every man did that which was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:25) after turning away from God’s covenant. The prophets repeatedly warned Israel that rejecting God’s word would lead to the loss of greater light: “Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge” (Isaiah 5:13).

These patterns demonstrate that God allowing apostasy is not unique to Christianity’s history. Rather, it reflects a recurring pattern in which God honors human agency while continuing to prepare a way for restoration.

The New Testament anticipated that a falling away would occur after the time of Christ and His apostles. Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29).

These passages suggest that God did not allow the Apostasy because He was surprised by it. Rather, the scriptures indicate that God knew such a falling away would occur and prepared for its eventual restoration.

The Doctrine and Covenants uses the parable of the wheat and the tares to describe this process. The Lord explained that after the apostles died, the adversary would sow corruption among the followers of Christ: “After they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon… soweth the tares” (Doctrine and Covenants 86:3).

However, this revelation also teaches that God preserved a faithful remnant and that the loss of the fulness of the gospel would not be permanent. The Lord declared that the wheat and the tares would grow together until the time of the harvest (Doctrine and Covenants 86:7–10). The purpose of the Restoration was therefore not to recover a completely extinguished faith, but to restore the fullness of the gospel and gather God’s covenant people in preparation for the final harvest.

The Great Apostasy also demonstrated the need for the Restoration. The loss of priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances showed that Christ’s Church could not be maintained solely through human effort. The Restoration was therefore not merely a reform movement but a divine renewal of authority and covenant. As the Lord declared, “The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1).

God’s purposes continued even during the Apostasy. Just as the Lord preserved a faithful remnant of Israel despite periods of rebellion, He preserved truth and prepared the way for the Restoration. The Book of Mormon teaches that the Lord’s work continues despite opposition: “He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world” (2 Nephi 26:24).

Thus, the Great Apostasy was not a failure of God’s plan. It was a consequence of human agency, a fulfillment of scriptural prophecy, and part of the larger pattern of apostasy and restoration found throughout God’s dealings with His children. God allowed the loss of the fullness of the gospel because He permits His children to choose. Still, He also prepared from the beginning to restore the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary for the salvation of all humanity.

====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.

The Restoration was not simply a correction of a few theological errors. It inaugurated what Latter-day Saints call the "dispensation of the fulness of times" (Ephesians 1:10; Doctrine and Covenants 128:18), the final dispensation before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. God was not merely restoring doctrines. He was restoring priesthood authority, bringing forth new scripture, revealing temple ordinances, gathering Israel on both sides of the veil, and establishing a Church intended to endure until Christ's return. Such a work required more than a willing prophet. It required a world prepared to receive, preserve, and spread the Restoration. Throughout scripture, God often accomplishes His purposes by patiently preparing both people and circumstances over generations rather than by overriding history altogether. The Restoration appears to follow that same pattern.

History itself points toward the nineteenth century as an unusually favorable moment. For much of Christian history, governments treated religious dissent as both a theological and civil offense. New religious movements were often suppressed before they could take root. By Joseph Smith's day, however, the United States offered something unprecedented: constitutional protections for religious liberty, a population with high literacy rates, inexpensive printing, and a culture that encouraged religious inquiry. The Book of Mormon could be printed and distributed on a scale that would have been impossible centuries earlier. Missionaries could travel with increasing ease, and advances in communication and transportation would soon allow the restored gospel to spread throughout the world. The political, technological, and social conditions necessary for a permanent restoration had begun to converge.

Those developments did not emerge in isolation. From a Latter-day Saint perspective, centuries of Christian reform also helped prepare the way. Men and women such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and John Wesley challenged religious corruption, translated the scriptures into the language of ordinary people, emphasized personal engagement with the Bible, and encouraged believers to seek a purer form of Christianity. Although Latter-day Saints believe these reformers did not restore priesthood authority or the fullness of the gospel, they nevertheless helped create a world increasingly receptive to the idea that God might yet do more. In that sense, the Reformation was not the Restoration itself, but an important step toward it.

The Book of Mormon adds another dimension to this picture. In 1 Nephi 13, Nephi foresaw that many "plain and precious" truths would be removed from the gospel as it passed through history. Whether through deliberate corruption, sincere misunderstanding, or simply the accumulation of centuries of tradition, religious institutions naturally develop a powerful inertia. Once a particular way of reading scripture becomes deeply established, even faithful believers often find it difficult to imagine that foundational assumptions could be mistaken. The Restoration, therefore, required more than correcting isolated doctrines. It required someone willing to ask whether prevailing religious narratives themselves were incomplete. Joseph Smith's First Vision began with precisely that kind of question. Rather than asking which denomination was the best expression of Christianity, he sought to know which church God Himself recognized. His willingness to seek revelation rather than rely solely upon inherited tradition distinguished him from many of his contemporaries.

Latter-day Saints also believe that Joseph Smith was prepared for this work long before his birth. Scripture teaches that certain individuals were foreordained in the premortal life for sacred missions (Abraham 3:22–23), and Lehi identified Joseph Smith as the "choice seer" prophesied centuries earlier by Joseph of Egypt (2 Nephi 3). Although the reasons for Joseph's foreordination have not been fully revealed, it is reasonable within Latter-day Saint theology to conclude that he had demonstrated exceptional faithfulness before mortality and had been divinely prepared for this calling. His mortal life likewise displayed qualities the Restoration demanded: humility before God, openness to continuing revelation, remarkable resilience under persecution, and an extraordinary capacity to receive, organize, and teach new revelation. If God had spent centuries preparing the world for the Restoration, it is fitting that He would also prepare the prophet through whom that Restoration would come.

Taken together, these considerations form a persuasive cumulative case. God prepared nations through political and legal developments that protected religious liberty. He prepared societies through centuries of reform that rekindled a desire for scriptural truth. He prepared the world through advances in literacy, printing, communication, and transportation, enabling the restored gospel to endure and spread. He prepared a prophet who was foreordained, spiritually receptive, and willing to ask questions that others would not. Each consideration, standing alone, explains only part of the picture. Together, however, they paint a coherent portrait of divine providence unfolding over many centuries.

Even so, it is important not to claim more than the evidence allows. This cumulative case does not prove that 1820 was the ''only'' possible time for the Restoration or that Joseph Smith was the ''only'' person whom God could have called. Latter-day Saint scripture does not reveal every reason for God's choices, and finite beings should be cautious about claiming insight into every aspect of divine providence. The purpose of these arguments is not to demonstrate necessity but to show fittingness. They explain why the timing of the Restoration makes sense within the broader sweep of sacred history.

Ultimately, Christians already accept this kind of reasoning in many other contexts. Scripture says that Christ came "in the fulness of time" (Galatians 4:4), yet it does not explain why the Incarnation occurred in the first century rather than earlier or later. God waited centuries before delivering Israel from Egypt, generations before sending the Flood, and days before raising Lazarus. In each case, believers can identify reasons that illuminate God's timing without claiming to exhaust His purposes. The Restoration invites the same posture. Latter-day Saints can reasonably conclude that God inaugurated the Restoration when the world had been sufficiently prepared and through the prophet He had long prepared for that work. Beyond that, faith does not require complete knowledge of every divine reason. It requires confidence that the God who patiently guided history toward the Restoration knew precisely when its fullness of times had arrived.

====Did God Abandon the World During the Great Apostasy?====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared from the earth, then God must have left humanity without divine guidance for centuries. Latter-day Saint theology rejects this conclusion. The Apostasy describes the loss of the authorized Church and its fullness of ordinances, not the absence of God’s influence, inspiration, or concern for His children.

The scriptures teach that God’s light continues to reach all people. The Doctrine and Covenants teaches that “the Spirit giveth light to every man that cometh into the world” (Doctrine and Covenants 84:46), and the Gospel of John similarly states that Christ is “the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (John 1:9). Even without the fulness of revealed truth, individuals could still receive inspiration, seek righteousness, and act according to the knowledge they possessed.

The Book of Mormon teaches that God remembers and works with His children even when they lack complete knowledge. Alma taught that God “imparteth his words unto the children of men, yea, over all the face of the earth” (Alma 29:8). Likewise, Nephi taught that God “loveth his children” and provides opportunities for them to receive truth according to His wisdom (1 Nephi 10:17).

The Great Apostasy was therefore not a period in which God withdrew His love or ceased His work among humanity. Rather, it was a period in which the authorized means for receiving the fullness of the gospel—such as priesthood authority, prophetic revelation, and saving ordinances—were no longer fully available on the earth. God continued to guide individuals through conscience, inspiration, scripture, and the light of Christ as He prepared the way for the Restoration.

The Restoration of the gospel through Joseph Smith was not a correction to a period of divine abandonment, but the continuation of God’s ongoing work to bless His children. Through the Restoration, God restored the authority, covenants, and ordinances necessary to bring the fullness of the gospel back to the earth and extend its blessings to all people.

====The Fate of Those Living During the Great Apostasy====
A common objection to the doctrine of the Great Apostasy is that if the fulness of the gospel and priesthood authority were lost from the earth, many people must have lived and died without access to essential truths and ordinances. Latter-day Saint doctrine teaches that God’s plan accounts for this circumstance through the preaching of the gospel to the dead and the performance of ordinances on their behalf.

The Book of Mormon teaches that individuals are not condemned for lacking a law or knowledge they never received: “Where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Similarly, Doctrine and Covenants 137:7 teaches that “all who have died without a knowledge of this gospel, who would have received it if they had been permitted to tarry, shall be heirs of the celestial kingdom of God.”

The New Testament teaches that the gospel is preached to those who have died: “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Modern revelation further explains that those who did not receive the gospel during mortality have the opportunity to accept it in the spirit world and receive its blessings through obedience to the ordinances of God’s house (Doctrine and Covenants 138:58).

The Great Apostasy refers to the loss of priesthood authority, revelation, and the fullness of gospel ordinances from the earth; it does not mean that God abandoned His children or that God personally rejected every person who lived during that period. Individuals could still receive light, follow Christ according to the understanding available to them, and be judged according to their faithfulness.

The Restoration restored the ordinances and authority necessary for the salvation of all God’s children, including those who lived during periods when the fullness of the gospel was unavailable. Through Christ’s Atonement, missionary work in the spirit world, and temple ordinances performed on behalf of the dead, God provides every person with a fair opportunity to accept or reject the gospel.

====Did Joseph Smith intend to restore a church?====
Some Latter-day Saint scholars today doubt that Joseph Smith intended to restore the Church of Jesus Christ. The reasons for their doubt are not entirely clear, but they have encouraged Church members to rethink their use of the term.

Latter-day Saint scholar Patrick Q. Mason, in his book ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World'' (2020), notes that the term ''restored church'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon of scripture.<ref>Patrick Q. Mason, ''Restoration: God's Call to the 21st-Century World (Faith Matters, 2020), 11–37.</ref> Latter-day Saint scholar Jason R. Combs explains, "When Latter-day Saints use that unscriptural phrase, ''restored church'', it should be understood as shorthand for the ''restorations'' the Doctrine and Covennats does address—namely, the bestowal of priesthood power, authority, and keys associated with making sacred covenants, establishing Zion (Moses 7:18), gathering scattered Israel on both sides of the veil (that is, in this life and beyond), and binding up all dispensations in preparation for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."<ref>Jason R. Combs, "Introduction: Understanding Ancient Christians, Apostasy, and Restoration," in ''Ancient Christians: An Introduction for Latter-day Saints'' ed. Jason R. Combs, Mark D. Ellison, Catherine Gines Taylor, and Kristian S. Heal (Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship, 2022), 10.</ref> Combs also takes time to emphasize that the term ''great apostasy'' does not appear in the Latter-day Saint canon.<ref>Combs, "Introduction," 10.</ref>

Again, it is not entirely clear what motivation these scholars have for making this claim.

====How Would We Know Whether the Church is in Apostasy Today?====
Latter-day Saints believe that the Church will never fall into generalized apostasy like the early Church. This is based on several scriptures.

Some might ask how we might know whether the Church is in apostasy. What is more, these critics might ask how we can believe the Church is not in apostasy when it has strayed from some teachings that are clearly scriptural.

The answer to this question is that the Church has not strayed from essential teachings like the early Christians did.
{{endnotes sources}}

KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon

2026-08-11T19:54:40Z

SpencerMarsh:

{{Main Page}}
{{Navigation:Bible}}{{blankline}}
{{Navigation:Book of Mormon}}{{blankline}}
<h1>KJV Translation Errors in the Book of Mormon</h1>
'''Summary:''' The Book of Mormon contains quotations from biblical authors with language mirroring much of that of the King James translation. The Book of Mormon also contains word and phrase borrowings from the King James Bible that are not part of quotations from biblical authors. These quotations, word borrowings, and phrase borrowings contain what are now considered by some scholars and critics to be translation errors.

Some critics believe that the errors are evidence of Joseph Smith's plagiarism in creating the Book of Mormon, specifically from a 1769 edition of the King James Bible. The author of the ''CES Letter'' asks, "What are 1769 King James Version edition errors doing in the Book of Mormon? A purported ancient text? Errors which are unique to the 1769 edition that Joseph Smith owned?"<ref>Jeremy T. Runnells, ''CES Letter: My Search for Answers to My Mormon Doubts'' (n.p.: CES Letter Foundation, 2017), 14 {{ea}}.</ref>

Other critics focus on a statement from Joseph Smith declaring that the Book of Mormon is "the most correct book" and ask, "If the Book of Mormon is ‘the most correct book of any on earth,’ why would it contain translational errors that exist in the King James Bible?"<ref>{{CriticalWork:Palmer:Insider|pages=10, 83}}; {{CriticalWork:Martin:Kingdom of the Cults|pages=205}}; La Roy Sunderland, "Mormonism," ''Zion’s Watchman'' (New York) 3, no. 7 (17 February 1838) {{link|url=http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/BOMP&CISOPTR=1730&REC=19}}</ref>

Four questions must be confronted regarding supposed KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon:

#[[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #2 and #3: Are there really translation errors in the Book of Mormon? If so, do they lead us into believing erroneous theological ideas?|Is the claimed "translation error" actually an error?]]
#[[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #1: Do the translation errors prove that Joseph Smith plagiarized from his contemporary King James Version to create the Book of Mormon?|Is the error evidence that Joseph Smith was plagiarizing from the KJV?]] We need to know whether Joseph was plagiarizing from a 1769 edition of the KJV, because that is the edition that Joseph reputedly owned.
#[[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #2 and #3: Are there really translation errors in the Book of Mormon? If so, do they lead us into believing erroneous theological ideas?|Do the translation errors change the meaning of the text so drastically as to mislead the reader in theologically significant ways?]] Joseph Smith declared the Book of Mormon "the most correct book on earth" not because it contained no translation errors, but because by following what the Book of Mormon teaches [[The_Book_of_Mormon_as_the_most_correct_book#Why_did_Joseph_Smith_say_that_the_Book_of_Mormon_was_the_.22most_correct_book.22.3F|a person would get closer to God and His nature than by reading any other book]].
# [[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #4: Why did God allow the KJV errors to exist in the Book of Mormon?|If these are errors, why would God allow such an error in the text of the Book of Mormon?]]

Our answers, in brief, are as follows:

# The Book of Mormon indeed does contain some King James Bible translation errors.
# There are 12 different reasons to believe that Joseph Smith did not plagiarize from the King James Bible to create the Book of Mormon. ''None'' of the errors is unique to the 1769 edition of the King James Bible.
# In no case do any of the errors teach incorrect doctrine or compel someone to believe something false.
# God allowed the errors to persist in the Book of Mormon because He speaks to His "servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding" ([https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/1.24?lang=eng Doctrine & Covenants 1:24]). God can achieve all of His divine goals without a perfect translation.
----
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Question #1: Do the translation errors prove that Joseph Smith plagiarized from his contemporary King James Version to create the Book of Mormon?===
| state = closed
| content =
{{BMCentral|title=What Vision Guides Nephi's Choice of Isaiah Chapters?|url=https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/what-vision-guides-nephis-choice-of-isaiah-chapters|number=38}}

First, we deal with the accusation of plagiarism. There are many reasons to reject the notion that Joseph Smith either used a Bible during the translation of the Book of Mormon or had one nearby that he was memorizing before or during the translation.

====Plagiarism is implausible #1—Errors not unique to 1769====

As a corrective to the ''CES Letter'', the "errors" reported in the King James Bible are not unique to the 1769 version. Five major editions of the KJV were published in 1611, 1629, 1638, 1762, and 1769. Many minor editions/revisions have been made since the 1769 edition.

The 1769 text is the standard text of most King James Bibles today, including that published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Only the 1611 and 1769 editions are available online. The "errors" are contained in both editions. Readers can [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611-Bible/ read the 1611 edition online] and see for themselves.

The more modern 1769 KJV used in Latter-day Saint scriptures is also available online for review. Given that the 1611 and 1769 editions contain the same "translation errors," it is likely that the other major editions published between the 1611 and 1769 editions contain the same "errors," which, in turn, makes it more difficult for us to claim with certainty which edition of the KJV, if any, Joseph Smith plagiarized from.

<h5>A Slow Drift in the Argument</h5>
Anti-Mormon critics' arguments often undergo a slow evolution as they copy from each other, sometimes distorting the original argument along the way. So it proves in this case. The authors on whom the ''CES Letter'' seems to rely did ''not'' claim that the translation errors are unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV. Rather, one of them merely noted translation errors and suggested that the King James Bible was a source for the Book of Mormon’s composition. The other also noted translation errors, but he did not claim that the errors were what singled out the 1769 edition. Rather, he noted the use of ''italics'' in the KJV to indicate a word that was not present in the original Greek text of the Bible and that "[t]he Book of Mormon sometimes revises the KJV italics that are only found in the 1769 and later printings."<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|p.130}} This, it was argued, proved the Book of Mormon wasn't ancient. That's an absurd claim since the revision of italics does not necessarily prove a modern origin for the Book of Mormon. At most, it can mean that a 1769 King James Bible or later printing is being used in some way as a base text for the Book of Mormon translation.<ref>Runnells originally relied on sources that are not cited nor linked to in the first few editions of the ''CES Letter''. In editions past 2013, he links to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Book_of_Mormon_and_the_King_James_Bible&oldid=582211861#Perpetuation_of_translation_errors an old version of a Wikipedia page] (accessed 2 December 2022) to make his argument. The editor of the Wikipedia page arguing that the errors are unique to the 1769 edition may have relied on either Runnells or Runnells' unknown sources and very likely misunderstood and thus misrepresented the argument originally made by Wright and Larson. A similar argument to Runnells' is made in {{CriticalWork:Palmer:Insider|pages=10}}. Palmer relies on David P. Wright, "Joseph Smith's Interpretation of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon," 181–206, and Larson, "The Historicity of the Matthean Sermon," 115–63. Those two, and more especially Larson, seem to be the source of this criticism. Palmer doesn't seem to make the argument that the translation errors in the Book of Mormon are unique to the 1769 version, but rather that scholars (Larson and Wright) have dated the Book of Mormon's composition to the 1830s because of the Book of Mormon's seeming use of the 1769 KJV, including its errors. That is a correct reading of the argument that Larson and Wright make. They argued that the Book of Mormon includes KJV translation errors and, ''separately'', that the Book of Mormon's use of KJV '''italics''' is what pinned the Book of Mormon to the 1769 edition. Runnells, however, including his sources, has certainly misunderstood the argument that Palmer, Larson, and Wright were making because he relied on the mistaken Wikipedia page. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon_and_the_King_James_Bible#Perpetuation_of_KJV_translation_variations As of this writing, the newest iteration of the Wikipedia page] (accessed December 2, 2022) seems to correct this error. Still, it also partially retains the argument that the errors are unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV. Significantly, it says there are translation ''variations'' (rather than errors) in the 1769 edition of the KJV and in the Book of Mormon. But it seems to suggest that the variations are unique to the 1769 edition, as it opens by saying that "The KJV of 1769 contains translation variations which also occur in the Book of Mormon." That's technically a correct statement, but why specify that the variations come from the 1769 edition unless wanting to hold on at least partially to the original argument of the 1769 version's unique errors? Moving along in that section and reading the table of that section, it gives examples of how the ''1611'' (and not the 1769) edition of the KJV and the Book of Mormon share translation variants. It's an odd page to be sure, but it makes important points that hint at the errors in Runnells' claims. Runnells now relies on the Larson and Wright articles that Palmer used, the new Wikipedia page, an old anti-Mormon webpage called 2Think.org, [https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/7 the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon], as well as [https://www.stepbible.org/version.jsp?version=KJVA an online edition of the 1769 KJV with apocrypha] to make his case. Though he has neglected correcting for the fact that the translation errors he identifies exist in other editions of the KJV. This is either evidence of ignorance, laziness, or duplicity. Runnells is known for moving the goalposts and claiming that opponents straw-man his arguments to make it appear as though his ''CES Letter'' hasn't made any significant, lazy mistakes in research. Why take pains to state "1769" and "unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV that Joseph Smith owned" in the quote from the ''CES Letter'' at the top of this article? Elsewhere, Runnells pointedly underscores as fact that "[t]here are 1769 KJV Bible edition errors '''unique to only that edition''' present in the Book of Mormon." See Jeremy Runnells, "What are 1769 King James Version edition errors doing in the Book of Mormon?" ''CES Letter'', accessed 22 December 2022, {{antilink|https://cesletter.org/debunking-fairmormon/book-of-mormon.html#2}}</ref>

<h5>KJV as a Base Text</h5>

Stan Spencer writes:

<blockquote>
Although the Bible that was used as a base text for the Book of Mormon was certainly the KJV, it was probably not the 1769 Oxford edition, which most King James Bibles today are based on. The text of that edition was not uniformly used in King James Bibles until after the Book of Mormon was translated. Many distinctive American editions of the KJV were printed in the latter part of the eighteenth and the early part of the nineteenth centuries, and these, along with the contemporary King James Bibles out of Cambridge, had many minor differences from the Oxford 1769 edition, some of which served to modernize the language. Some of these editions more closely match the Book of Mormon than does the 1769 edition — the 1828 Phinney Cooperstown Bible and the 1819 American Bible Society octavo edition being among the closest.<ref name="spencer">{{Interpreter:Spencer:Missing Words King James Bible Italics The Translation:2020}}</ref>{{Rp|49}}
</blockquote>

The King James Bible itself is a very conservative revision of the 1602 edition of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishops%27_Bible Bishop's Bible].<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|47n5}} The original, 1568 edition of the Bishop's Bible [https://textusreceptusbibles.com/Bishops is available online] and may be checked if one is curious as to whether an 'error' in the KJV is a holdover from this earlier translation. The key point is that the King James translators may not have been the translators who originated many of these errors. Instead, they were likely reproducing prior errors. (If this happened in the case of the Book of Mormon, it would no more prove that Joseph was not translating the Book of Mormon than the presence of such errors in the KJV proves that the KJV translators were not translating.)

Spencer explains why the KJV is used as the Book of Mormon's base text:

<blockquote>
The use of the KJV as a base text for biblical passages in the Book of Mormon makes sense since it allows for any important differences to be easily seen. A completely independent retranslation of the Isaiah chapters would have differed more in wording than in meaning. The differences in wording would have invited fruitless criticism of the suitability of word choice in the Book of Mormon. The use of wording from the KJV precludes such a diversion of attention from the intended messages of the Book of Mormon. Even for short biblical interactions, the use of KJV wording makes it more clear that the Bible is indeed being quoted or alluded to. An independent translation of these shorter passages would have differed enough in wording from the KJV that some of these interactions would have been less clear.<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|47–48}}
</blockquote>

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=Question: Do academic translators copy translations of other documents to use as a "base text"?
|subject1=Academic use of base texts for new translation
|summary1=See here for discussion of translators using earlier translations as a base text to showcase only the ''important'' differences between their text and well-known versions.
}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #2—Announcing a quotation is not plagiarism====

Nephi and the Savior generally make it clear when they are quoting from Isaiah. Regardless of whether a modern or ancient author is responsible for the Book of Mormon text, citing sources directly is ''not'' plagiarism. ''At most'', all we can say is that Joseph Smith (or his supposed co-conspirators) is haphazardly using Isaiah to create the Book of Mormon, not ''plagiarizing'' it.

As far as material from Micah is concerned, this is a word-for-word quotation/reproduction of God's message in {{s||Micah|4|12-13}} and {{s_short|Micah|5|8-14}}. ({{s|3|Nephi|16|14-15}}; {{s_short|3|Nephi|20|16-20}}; {{s_short|3|Nephi|21|12|18, 21}}<ref>For the most thorough coverage of the Micah material in the Book of Mormon, see Dana M. Pike, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/they-shall-grow-together/passages-book-micah-book-mormon Passages from the Book of Micah in the Book of Mormon]," in ''They Shall Grow Together: The Bible in the Book of Mormon'', ed. Charles Swift and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2022), 393–443.</ref> Mormon uses {{s||Micah|5|8}} similarly in {{s||Mormon|5|24}}.

As for the Sermon on the Mount, it is not difficult to believe that Christ's message would be the same to all people. For Him to repeat himself is not plagiarism. If Joseph is trying to fool us, putting the most well-known sermon in all of Christendom into the mouth of the resurrected Jesus is a foolish way to do it.

John W. Welch has documented important differences between the Sermon on the Mount recorded in the New Testament and what he calls the Sermon at the Temple in 3rd Nephi. Welsh demonstrates that Joseph Smith is not just mindlessly copying the Sermon on the Mount.<ref name="welchilluminate">John W. Welch, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/sermon-temple-and-sermon-mount-differences ''Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple & the Sermon on the Mount''] (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1999), 125–50.</ref>

====Plagiarism is implausible #3—The Book of Mormon author clearly does not need to plagiarize to produce large amounts of text====

Regarding Exodus, Mark, 1 Corinthians, and 1 John, why would Joseph or his supposed co-conspirators plagiarize the one source most familiar to their audience? Why copy whole chapters haphazardly when that audience was so familiar with the source material? Whoever produced the Book of Mormon is clearly able to write text that has nothing to do with the KJV. Joseph does not need it as filler—he can produce immense amounts of text very quickly.

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=Question:_What_do_we_know_about_the_chronology_of_the_Book_of_Mormon_translation_and_publication%3F
|subject1=Timeline of the Book of Mormon translation and publications
|summary1=Our current Book of Mormon was translated from 7 April to the end of June 1829.
}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #4—Some 'errors' find confirmation in texts unknown to Joseph Smith====

A closer look at these duplicate texts actually provides us with an additional witness of the Book of Mormon's authenticity.<ref>See Michael Hickenbotham, ''Answering Challenging Mormon Questions: Replies to 130 Queries by Friends and Critics of the LDS Church'' (Springville, UT: Cedar Fort Publisher, 2004),193-196.{{NB}}</ref> One verse ({{s|2|Nephi|12|16}}) is not only different but adds a completely new phrase: "And upon all the ships of the sea." This non-King James addition agrees with the Greek (Septuagint) version of the Bible, which was first translated into English in 1808 by Charles Thomson. It is also contained in the Coverdale 1535 translation of the Bible.<ref>The implications of this change represent a more complicated textual history than previously thought. See discussion in {{Seely:Upon All The Ships Of The Sea And:JBMS:2005}}. For earlier discussions, see {{TruthGodmakers1 | start=172}}; see also {{AncientAmericaBoM|start=100|end=102}}; {{Nibley7|start=129|end=143}}; Royal Skousen, "[https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/textual-variants-isaiah-quotations-book-mormon Textual Variants in the Isaiah Quotations of the Book of Mormon]," in ''Isaiah in the Book of Mormon'', ed. Donald W. Parry and John W. Welch (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998), 376.</ref> John Tvedtnes has also shown that many of the Book of Mormon's translation variants of Isaiah have ancient support.<ref>John A. Tvedtnes, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/isaiah-prophets/isaiah-variants-book-mormon Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon]," in ''Isaiah and the Prophets: Inspired Voices from the Old Testament'', ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1984), 165-78. David Wright responded to John Tvedtnes' chapter therein. Tvedtnes responds to Wright in John A. Tvedtnes, "[https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/isaiah-bible-and-book-mormon Isaiah in the Bible and the Book of Mormon]," ''The FARMS Review'' 16, no. 2 (2004): 161–72.{{Tvedtnes:Isaiah In The Bible And The Book Of:FARMS Review:2004}}</ref> BYU Professor Paul Y. Hoskisson has shown that "[t]he brass plates version of {{s||Isaiah|2|2}}, as contained in {{s|2|Nephi|12|2}}, contains a small difference, not attested in any other pre-1830 Isaiah witness, that not only helps clarify the meaning but also ties the verse to events of the Restoration. The change does so by introducing a Hebraism that would have been impossible for Joseph Smith, the Prophet, to have produced on his own."<ref>{{Interpreter:Hoskisson:Was Joseph Smith Smarter Than The Average Fourth:2015}}</ref>

These factors throw a huge wrench into any critic's theories that Joseph Smith merely cribbed from the KJV Isaiah. Why would Joseph Smith crib the KJV, including all of its translation errors, but then somehow find the ''one phrase'', "upon all the ships of the sea," from the Greek Septuagint and 1535 Coverdale Bible? How could he make sure that his translation of Isaiah had support from ancient renderings of Isaiah, and make sure that his version of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon had authentic Hebraisms made to be part of the text as well? It's obviously ''possible'' that he did, but ''highly unlikely''.

====Plagiarism is implausible #5—Witnesses all insist no papers or bible was ever consulted====

The witnesses to the translation are unanimous that a Bible was not consulted during the translation of the Book of Mormon.<ref>John W. Welch, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/online-chapters/documents-of-the-translation-of-the-book-of-mormon/ Documents of the Translation of the Book of Mormon]," in ''Opening the Heavens: Accounts of Divine Manifestations'', ed. John W. Welch, 2nd ed. (Provo, UT: BYU Press; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2017), 126–227.</ref>

{{Related articles
|link1=Joseph_Smith_and_the_translation_process#A compilation of published statements on the Book of Mormon translation method in both Church and non-Church publications
|subject1=All descriptions of the Book of Mormon translation process
|summary1=This page collects all first- and second-hand descriptions of the translation of the Book of Mormon, and groups them by theme (e.g., weight of the plates, use of seer stone, etc.)}}

Stan Spencer observed,

<blockquote>[I]f Joseph Smith used a physical bible, he would have had to do so frequently, since biblical interactions are scattered throughout the Book of Mormon. Continuously removing his face from the hat to make use of a physical Bible would not have gone unnoticed by those who watched him translate.<ref name="spencer"></ref>{{Rp|59}}
</blockquote>

Indeed, given the all the different quotations of whole chapters, phrasal interactions between the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon, as well as [[The_New_Testament_and_the_Book_of_Mormon#The_Book_of_Mormon_claims_to_be_a_.22translation.2C.22_and_the_language_used_is_that_of_Joseph_Smith|the phrasal interactions/similarities between the New Testament and the Book of Mormon]], to conceive of Joseph either memorizing these passages and phrases (a process for which there is no evidence) or consulting a Bible during the translation (likewise) is ludicrous. Someone would have noticed that. Yet no one reports a Bible, and [[Book_of_Mormon/Translation/Method/1846-1900#Emma Smith Bidamon (eyewitness)|some are specifically clear]] that he did ''not'' have any book or manuscript to which he referred.<ref>Joseph Smith III, "Last Testimony of Sister Emma;' ''Saints' Herald'' 26 (October 1, 1879): 289-90; and Joseph Smith III, "Last Testimony of Sister Emma;' ''Saints' Advocate'' 2 (October 1879): 50-52.</ref>

====Plagiarism is implausible #6—The original manuscript shows no signs of visual copying of the KJV====

Latter-day Saint scholar Royal Skousen, using the [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/printing-and-publishing-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng Original and Printer's Manuscripts] of the Book of Mormon, has provided a persuasive argument that none of the King James language contained in the Book of Mormon could have been copied directly from the Bible. He deduces this from the fact that when the Book of Mormon quotes, echoes, or alludes to passages in the King James Bible, Oliver (Joseph's amanuensis for the dictation of the Book of Mormon) consistently misspells certain words from the text that he wouldn't have misspelled if he was looking at the then-current edition of the KJV.<ref>"[https://interpreterfoundation.org/the-history-of-the-text-of-the-book-of-mormon/ The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon]," Interpreter Foundation, accessed August 15, 2022, .</ref>

Of course, it's possible that Joseph Smith dictated every portion of the Book of Mormon that quotes Isaiah to Oliver while looking at the Bible and Oliver isn't; but that's less likely given the consistency with which Oliver misspells the words (wouldn't there be at least one time, throughout all the time that Joseph and Oliver were translating, where Joseph Smith hands Oliver the Bible to more efficiently copy the passages and where Oliver then spells the words correctly?)

When considering the data, Skousen proposes that, instead of Joseph or Oliver looking at a Bible, God provided the page of text from the King James Bible to Joseph's mind, and then Joseph was free to alter the text as he pleased. In cases where the Book of Mormon alludes to or echoes KJV language, perhaps the Lord allowed these portions of the text to be revealed in a way that would be more comprehensible/comfortable to the 19th-century audience. Even if Joseph Smith were using the King James Bible out in the open and on the translating table as a base text, [[Question: Do academic translators copy translations of other documents to use as a "base text"?|that would hardly be out of line with best practices for translators and hardly considered plagiarism]]. The available eyewitness and manuscript data are more consistent with the theory that the KJV was used as a base text, but ''through divine revelation from God'', rather than openly on the table.<ref>Earlier LDS scholarship sometimes did argue that Joseph Smith used a Bible during the Book of Mormon translation process. They did not, however, have the benefit of the subsequent half-century of investigation. See {{Ensign|author=Richard Lloyd Anderson|url=https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1977/09/by-the-gift-and-power-of-god?lang=eng|article=By the Gift and Power of God=|vol=7|num=9|date=September 1977}}.</ref>

====Plagiarism is implausible #7—Archaic vocabulary====

{{EvidenceCentral|title=Book of Mormon Evidence: Archaic Vocabulary|url=https://evidencecentral.org/recency/evidence/archaic-vocabulary|number=361}} Skousen and Latter-day Saint linguist Stanford Carmack are ''adamant'' that Joseph Smith merely read the words off the seer stone/Urim and Thummim and did not consult a bible during translation of the Book of Mormon. A reason they believe this is that the Book of Mormon contains [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Modern_English Early Modern English] in its translation. They provide many examples that they believe predate Joseph’s English, the English of the 1769 edition of the King James Bible, and even the 1600s edition. Skousen and Carmack have produced a massive amount of literature arguing for this stance. Readers are encouraged to read that work and decide for themselves.<ref>{{Interpreter:Skousen:The Original Text Of The Book Of Mormon:2013}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:A Look At Some Nonstandard Book Of Mormon:2014}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:What Command Syntax Tells Us About Book Of:2014}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The Implications Of Past-tense Syntax In The Book:2015}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Why The Oxford English Dictionary And Not Websters:2015}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The More Part Of The Book Of Mormon:2016}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Joseph Smith Read The Words:2016}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The Case Of The -th Plural In The:2016}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:How Joseph Smiths Grammar Differed From Book Of:2017}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Barlow On Book Of Mormon Language An Examination:2017}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Is The Book Of Mormon A Pseudo-archaic Text:2018}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Bad Grammar In The Book Of Mormon Found:2020}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Personal Relative Pronoun Usage In The Book Of:2021}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The Book Of Mormons Complex Finite Cause Syntax:2021}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:A Comparison Of The Book Of Mormons Subordinate:2022}}; "[https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/language-original-text-book-mormon The Language of the Original Text of the Book of Mormon]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 57, no. 3 (2018): 81-110; Royal Skousen with the collaboration of Stanford Carmack, ''The Nature of the Original Language'', Parts 3-4 of ''The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon'', Volume 3 of ''The Critical Text of the Book of Mormon'' (Provo, UT: FARMS and BYU Studies, 2018).</ref> This information is summarized by Evidence Central at the hotlink to the right.

====Plagiarism is implausible #8—A bible was purchased only ''after'' the translation was finished====

We know that Oliver Cowdery purchased a Bible on 8 October 1829. However, the Book of Mormon was already at press by this time, with the copyright being registered on 11 June 1829.<ref name="tandr">{{Roper:Joseph Smiths Use Of The Apocrypha Shadow Or:FARMS Review:1996}}</ref>

Before that time, the only Bible Joseph is known to have had access to was the Smith family Bible, which he did not have after he married and moved out of the Smith home. Joseph was poor and even poorer after moving away from home.<ref>{{BeginningsofMormonism |start=95 | end=100}}</ref> Yet Oliver purchased the Bible for Joseph in October 1829 from the print shop that did the type-setting for the Book of Mormon. This Bible was later used to produce the [[The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible|Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible]] (JST).<ref>Robert J. Matthews, ''A Plainer Translation": Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible: A History and Commentary'' (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 1985), 26; cited in footnote 165 of {{FR-6-1-4}}</ref> Given the family's poverty, why purchase a bible if they already had access to one for the Book of Mormon?

====Plagiarism is implausible #9—Over half the Isaiah verses have alterations====

As the Church has made clear in the 1981 and the 2013 editions of the Book of Mormon in [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/12?lang=eng#note2a footnote "a"] for {{s|2|Nephi|12|2}}: "Comparison with the King James Bible in English shows that there are differences in more than half of the 433 verses of Isaiah quoted in the Book of Mormon, while about 200 verses have the same wording as the KJV."<ref>See [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/12?lang=eng#note2a page 81] of either edition of the Book of Mormon</ref> This provides excellent evidence that Joseph Smith is not mindlessly cribbing off the KJV version of Isaiah. A lot of these changes ''are indeed'' (around 30% of the Isaiah variants) merely changes to the italicized words of the King James passages.<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|50n11}} But many others aren't. [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|We can actually show]] that Nephi is engaging with the text and making changes to Isaiah that "liken" Isaiah’s messages to Nephi’s then-current situation and theological understanding ({{s|1|Nephi|19|23}}). We can also demonstrate that Nephi is selecting passages of Isaiah with an overriding, coherent theological agenda. Book of Mormon Central's description at the link above is an excellent summary. Thus, rather than mindless copy-paste, there is meaningful engagement with the text of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon.

Royal Skousen, with extensive analysis of the Original and Printer's Manuscript of the Book of Mormon,<ref>{{Skousen:How Joseph Smith Translated The Book Of Mormon:JBMS:1998}}</ref> has concluded that the original manuscript, including the quoted Bible chapters, was written from dictation rather than copying of another document. One of the reasons he believes this is that Joseph Smith’s dictation consistently includes precise and sometimes unusual spellings of some words not contained in the King James Bible nor any document in his immediate environment, suggesting that exact words, including their exact spelling, were revealed to him and that he wasn't taking inspiration from other sources. An example of this is the name ''Coriantumr'' spelled with ''mr'' rather than ''mer'', as might be expected if Joseph were getting ideas in his head about what to say and dictating them to Oliver or another of his scribes. This suggests that Joseph could ''see words on the stone/Urim and Thummim'' and that he could ''spell them out exactly'' to his scribes in cases (such as names) where precision was important for meaning.

====Plagiarism is implausible #10—The manuscript shows signs of dictation from a text, not improvisation====

Skousen also believes the Original Manuscript was dictated because "[t]he manuscripts include consistent phraseology that suggests Joseph Smith was reading from a carefully prepared text rather than composing the English translation based on thoughts or impressions as he dictated."<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|88}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #11—There's no evidence Joseph knew what the italics meant====

[[Question: Did Joseph know what the italics in the Bible meant?|Emma Smith reported that, during the Book of Mormon translation, Joseph didn't know that walls surrounded Jerusalem]], a far more basic fact than the meaning of italics. If Joseph didn't know this basic fact, how likely is it that he knew the Bible well enough to plagiarize it, much less repeat that plagiarism from memory?

Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph's mother, stated that

<blockquote>
I presume our family presented an aspect as singular as any that ever lived upon the face of the earth-all seated in a circle, father, mother, sons and daughters, and giving the most profound attention to a boy, eighteen years of age, who had never read the Bible through in his life; he seemed much less inclined to the perusal of books than any of the rest of our children, but far more given to meditation and deep study.<ref>{{Book:Smith:History of Joseph Smith by His Mother:1954|pages=82-83}}</ref>
</blockquote>

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=KJV italicized text in the Book of Mormon#What did Joseph know about the italics?
|subject1=What did Joseph know about the italics in the KJV?
|summary1=How aware was Joseph about what the italics in the Book of Mormon meant?
}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #12—No evidence Joseph's memory would allow the feat critics require====
{{EvidenceCentral|title=Book of Mormon Evidence: Joseph Smith’s Limited Education|url=https://evidencecentral.org/recency/evidence/joseph-smiths-education|number=1}}
#There is no evidence that Joseph Smith had an [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/eidetic eidetic] (or "photographic") memory.
#There is no evidence that Joseph Smith was ever seen trying to memorize long passages from the King James Bible at, near, or leading up to the time of translation. Joseph's level of education may suggest that he was not even capable of memorizing such lengthy passages.

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=Book of Mormon/Plagiarism accusations/King James Bible
|subject1=Plagiarism from the King James Bible?
|summary1=This further discusses the problems with plagiarism theories for the Book of Mormon text.
}}
}}
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Question #2 and #3: Are there really translation errors in the Book of Mormon? If so, do they lead us into believing erroneous theological ideas?===
| state = closed
| content =
<wt>
====The Lexicons of Today May Not Be the Lexicons of Tomorrow ====
What ''is'' a translation error?<ref>The ''CES Letter'', for example, wants to broaden the meaning of "translation error" to include "an error that can occur during translation" and/or "something that looks like an error to me after someone has translated a text."</ref> A translation error occurs when someone misrepresents in a target language what something in a source language refers to. For example, it is an error to translate the Spanish word "rey" as ''queen'' when it means ''king''. The word for ''queen'' in Spanish is "reina."

We use lots of words in different ways. Words do not have inherent meaning (a given sound or word does not ''need'' to mean anything in particular). But, words are not completely idiosyncratic—they cannot mean just whatever an individual decides they mean. A language community understands them in roughly similar ways—similar enough to allow reliable communication. That is, after all, the whole point of words. If they can mean anything at all, then they mean nothing.

For instance, the object we now call a "fork" may not have been called a fork a long time ago. At some point in the past, people began to apply the name "fork" to a fork and popularized that label within the English-speaking linguistic community. We could have called a fork a "spoon" a long time ago, popularized it, and that label ("spoon") would be what we call a fork today. In essence, words refer to what we've used them to refer to. Spelling and pronunciation are products of the same set of arbitrary decisions and subsequent popularization.

Lexicons (translators' dictionaries) that translators use today—and especially those dealing with ancient languages—are constantly evolving as new evidence about how words were used becomes available. The lexicons of today may not be the lexicons of tomorrow. Today's lexicons may find that a word has a meaning we didn't understand a decade ago.

This would mean that perceived translation errors today may not actually be translation errors, and we need to wait for more evidence. Now, lexicons of tomorrow will probably not change drastically since language evolution tends to be conservative. Different societies want to use unique words to distinguish between objects and concepts to enhance cooperation and efficiency in problem-solving.

====We don't have the original manuscripts of the biblical text====
We should also note that we do not have any of the ''original manuscripts'' of the Bible. Modern translations of the biblical text we have today come from the ''earliest known copies'' of the original manuscripts available to translators at the time of their respective translations. Any claim that the Book of Mormon makes use of an "erroneous" translation from the King James Bible is going to be at least ''mildly'' suspect for that simple fact. Wouldn't we want the original manuscripts, as composed by the author, before making a definitive claim that any particular translation is "in error"? We do have ''copies'' of the manuscripts, and they ''may'' reproduce the text of the originals reliably, but there's no reason to be certain. [[Accuracy of the bible|There's good reason to doubt it]], including the fact that the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith teach that the extant biblical manuscripts ''don't'' accurately reproduce the original text.<ref>"History of Joseph Smith by his Mother Lucy," 592; {{s|1|Nephi|13|28}}; see {{s_short|1|Nephi13|23-29}}. Cited in Kent P. Jackson, ''Understanding Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible'' (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2022), 34–35.</ref>

On the other hand, we do not intend to claim definitively that the Book of Mormon preserves the original, pristine version of the biblical texts it quotes or alludes to. In some cases, we [[Question: Why does Isaiah in the Book of Mormon not match the Dead Sea Scrolls?|can't know whether it does]]. If "translate" is being defined as merely "reproducing the text produced in one language in a different language," then perhaps we would declare a given rendering 'in error'. However, translation has the potential to be more broadly and inclusively conceived—and Joseph Smith seems to have understood it [[Joseph Smith: "I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands"|in this broader sense]].

This broader view of translation includes activities such as expounding on the text and making amendments to clarify the author's intent or to make the translation more readable and comprehensible to the translator's audience. For instance, modern individuals in various highly technical professions have to "translate" the specialized English of their profession into "layman's terms" or simpler English for those who don't understand the intricacies of the profession. The Joseph Smith-era 1828 edition of ''Webster's Dictionary'' has no less than 7 different definitions of the word 'translate' that include such things as 'conveying' or 'transporting' an object or person from one place to another, 'changing', and 'explaining'.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=translate}}</ref>

We often forget that there are typically ''three'' layers we must identify to understand a written text:

# what's in the author's mind and what he or she intended to write,
# what is actually written, and
# our own definitions of words, which impact how we interpret what an author writes.

Word meaning can sometimes be culturally separated from the original author, leading us to misinterpret what the author wrote. Sometimes the author doesn't write what he or she intended to communicate.

With a translated text, there is a ''fourth'' layer to identify and untangle from the other three:

:4. The translation itself and its relation to its source text—here again, we must determine what the ''translator'' thought and intended to write, what he or she actually wrote, and the definition of the words they used and how we understand them.

Sometimes, a translator has his or her own objectives, quirks, and other philosophies about translation that can either clarify or obscure the meaning and content of the source text. There's a sense in which we can never uncover the author's intentions because the mind is by its nature a private, subjective experience. We have to rely on the text authors produce to convey what is in their minds accurately, but sometimes it doesn't do so because the translator wasn't careful enough. We know that people of any culture will have culturally conditioned definitions of words, and sometimes we aren't able to learn enough about that culture to uncover the definitions as the original author intended.

Thus, there may be errors, and we wouldn't know it—and supposed errors may not be errors at all, and we wouldn't know it either. All these factors demand some humility on our part.

The ''most'' that we can say is that, ''based on current manuscript evidence and scholarship'', ''some'' of the King James translation of the Bible paralleled in the Book of Mormon is considered erroneous by some scholars and critics, based on several questionable and unverifiable assumptions. We can go no further.

With these cautions in mind, we will now proceed to specifics. For the sake of argument, we will assume that the biblical manuscripts that we translate from today accurately reproduce the text of the Bible as written by its original authors, and that these texts actually reflect the authors' intent. We will also assume that today's lexicons accurately reflect how words were used in antiquity to refer to different objects. But remember—these are assumptions, not proven facts.

====The "Translation Errors"====
Royal Skousen has given us a representative list of what constitutes translation errors. Skousen did "not intend to list every possible error. Rather, [he] simply recognize[d] that the Book of Mormon translation will reflect errors because of its dependence on the King James Bible."<ref name="Skousen King James">Royal Skousen, ''The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon, Part Five: King James Quotations in the Book of Mormon'' (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2019).</ref>{{Rp|220}}

Skousen also has given us a list of cultural translations "where the original meaning is obscured by providing a translation that speakers from the Early Modern English period would have readily understood."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} Some of these might be considered "errors" by our critics, and so we will discuss specifics below.

Along with these cultural translations and alleged translation errors, emerging scholarship demonstrates that the Book of Mormon also has significant intertextual relationships with the New Testament. That is, the Book of Mormon echoes, alludes to, and sometimes quotes New Testament language at length as a means of communicating the Book of Mormon’s message.

Critics have alleged that this demonstrates Joseph Smith was plagiarizing the King James Version of the New Testament to create the Book of Mormon.

{{Related articles
|title=main
|link1=The New Testament and the Book of Mormon
|subject1=The New Testament and the Book of Mormon
}}

In written correspondence with those who study New Testament intertextuality with the Book of Mormon, the author has found that three items may currently be considered "translation errors" by scholars. There may be more. However, none of these that immediately came to mind for them seem to threaten the Book of Mormon's authenticity in any significant way. Those are also discussed below.

Skousen says that "[n]one of these scholarly objections matter much since the Book of Mormon is a creative, cultural translation. In other words, the use of the King James text, warts and all, is not only unsurprising, but it is in fact expected."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} The table below, along with the "errors" identified by Skousen and other Book of Mormon scholars, will also include close to 50 other claims of translation errors by nine critics of the Book of Mormon.<ref name="larson">Stan Larson, "The Historicity of the Matthean Sermon on the Mount in 3 Nephi," in {{CriticalWork:Metcalfe:New Approaches|pages=15-63}}</ref><ref name="wrightjosephint">David P. Wright, “[https://www.dialoguejournal.com/articles/joseph-smiths-interpretation-of-isaiah-in-the-book-of-mormon/ Joseph Smith’s Interpretation of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon],” ‘’Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought’’ 31, no. 4 (Winter 1998): 187.</ref><ref name="wrightjosephisaiah">David P. Wright, "Isaiah in the Book of Mormon: Or Joseph Smith in Isaiah," in {{CriticalWork:Vogel Metcalfe:American Apocrypha|pages=157-234}}.</ref><ref name="runnells1769">Jeremy Runnells, "1769 KJV Errors in Book of Mormon Sources and notes on presence of 1769 King James Version edition errors in the Book of Mormon - a supposed ancient text," CES Letter Foundation, accessed 2 December 2022, {{antilink|https://cesletter.org/1769-kjv-errors/}}</ref><ref name="wikiold">This [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.phptitle=The_Book_of_Mormon_and_the_King_James_Bible&oldid=582211861#Perpetuation_of_translation_errors old Wikipedia article that contained claims of errors].</ref><ref>"Topics," 2Think.org, accessed 11 December 2022, {{antilink|https://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/annotated/topics.shtml#KJV%20Translation%20Errors}}.</ref><ref name="ankerberg">John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonism (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1992).</ref><ref name="alcase">Al Case, "Questions related to the Book of Mormon and other items on Mormonism and Joseph Smith," About The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon): Perspective on all things LDS/Mormon/Latter-day Saint, accessed May 5, 2023, {{antilink|https://www.lds-mormon.com/bookofmormonquestions.shtml/#BOM8.}}</ref><ref name="brown">M. D. Brown, ''One Hundred Similarities Between the Book of Mormon and the Spaulding Manuscript'' (M. D. Brown, 1937), 24.</ref><ref name="snowden">James H. Snowden, ''The Truth About Mormonism'' (George H. Doran Company, 1926), 105, 106–7</ref>

This table catalogs, as far as we can ascertain, every potential error that has been pointed to by critics and other scholars of the Book of Mormon to date.<ref>This line was written 11 December 2022.</ref> This table includes 91 items.<ref>Depending on how one divides the translation errors, one may be able to divide these into more items. The author chose to keep them as follows for convenience or clarity. Thus, this claim shouldn't be taken to mean that there are exactly 88 translation errors made by the King James Bible translators (or perhaps their translating predecessors) perpetuated in the Book of Mormon.</ref>

As a reminder, this table contains links to passages from both the 1611 and 1769 editions of the King James Bible, as well as to lists of translations at biblehub.com, to refute the contention in the ''CES Letter'' that the translation errors are unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV.

We start with the basic translation "errors,” then catalog the cultural translations, and finish off with the New Testament "errors." The table below lists the locations of the errors in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, the supposed erroneous translation, the passage in question, and commentary on the alleged error. They are organized in the order they appear in the Book of Mormon. Those troubled by other "errors" they may find in the Book of Mormon might seriously consider adopting a similar approach to the one taken by the author of this article to resolve their concerns. If someone finds an "error" that they'd like FAIR to comment on, or that person has already done that work and would like to submit it to FAIR to be included in this article, they are strongly encouraged to send that work/ask those questions to FAIR volunteers at [https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/contact this link].

====Summary of conclusions====

For those who do not wish to examine each case in detail, we provide our conclusions:

*Some cases aren't errors.
*Some aren't translation errors but rather correct translations of younger biblical manuscripts. Biblical scholars typically prefer older manuscripts, as they often contain versions of the text that are closer to what the original author intended. Sometimes, this intuition is incorrect.
*In four cases pointed to as an "error," the "error" wasn't an error at all but a good example of the [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/diachronic diachronic] nature of language—that is, language changes and evolves over time. What the King James translators (or perhaps their translating predecessors) meant by "virtue," for instance, is not the same thing we mean by "virtue." They meant to refer to something like ''power,'' and we mean to refer to something like ''strength in doing moral good,'' or sometimes ''chastity.''
*In two cases below, the "errors" weren't errors, but instead a case of modern translators using the conventions of their language. This is the case with {{s||Isaiah|6|2}} and {{s_short||Isaiah|6|6}} (and corresponding passages in {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}} and {{s_short|2|Nephi|16|6}} in the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon) with their use of the word "seraphims" to refer to multiple [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seraph seraph(s)]. The problem is that the Hebrew suffix ''-im'' already pluralizes the word ''seraph''. But the King James translators (or perhaps their translating predecessors) are also referring to multiple seraph(s) but just using the conventions of English by adding an "s" to the end of the word. This is the sort of error an academic translator would avoid, but it means little in this context.
*In some cases, the errors are merely translation ''variants'' (rather than ''errors'') where one variant is not necessarily superior to another. This is because the meaning of the underlying Hebrew or Greek is uncertain.
*In some cases, the meaning of the verses has been changed from the original text, but it hasn't changed so drastically as not to include the more specific meaning of the passage captured in other translations. In these cases, the translation can only be said to be ''too broad or general'' rather than necessarily ''erroneous''. It’s like saying that "king" refers to ''royalty''. Technically correct, but it could be more specific ("a particular male royal") for more clarity.
*In some cases, the translation errors ''are'' legitimate. These errors thus change the ''meaning'' of one or more words in the respective passages, but they don't always lead us away from the original and overall ''intent'' of the passages.
*In some cases, the errors actually ''do'' lead us away from the original and overall intent, but this isn’t a bad thing since the changed intent does not necessarily reflect an inaccurate doctrinal understanding.
*In some cases, the "errors" are not errors and are better explained as a translator's gloss where the translation is not necessarily accurate as to what a word from the target language referred to, but do help make explicit what ancient readers would have understood implicitly from use of a particular word.
*In many cases, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to determine with a reliable degree of certainty in which of the above 9 categories the translation falls. We can make a reasonable case for fitting them into multiple categories.

In no case, however, is there a translation variant, broadening of meaning, change in meaning, change in intent, etc. that teaches incorrect doctrine or otherwise ''compels'' a reader into believing something false.

The following chart documents how many claims of "errors" fit into the respective categories (as well as what percentage of the total claims that number represents):

[[File:PieChartKJVErrors6.png|750px|thumb|center]]

For those who want commentary on the individual claims, click "expand" below to view our table of analysis.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="12%"|'''Location in Canon'''
!width="12%"|'''Erroneous Translation'''
!width="30%"|'''Passage'''
!width="46%"|'''Commentary'''
|+<big>'''Commentary on Alleged KJV Translation Errors in the Book of Mormon'''</big>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1. {{s||Exodus|15|4}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|2|5}}
||Red Sea
||This one isn't a quotation of a biblical passage per se, but the use of a particular biblical name. The Book of Mormon and King James Bible consistently call the sea that Moses and the children of Israel crossed when fleeing from the Egyptians the "Red Sea." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Exodus-Chapter-15/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Exodus-Chapter-15/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/exodus/15-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Critics contend that this is based on a mistranslation of the Hebrew ''yam sûp''. Instead of "Red Sea," critics contend that it should read "Reed sea." We have responded to this theory [[Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/The Red Sea|elsewhere on the wiki]].
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2. {{s||Isaiah|49|4}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|4}}
||Work
||"Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the Lord, and my '''work''' with my God." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critic David P. Wright asserts that the better translation would be "reward" instead of "work."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} The verses concern either Israel's, the Messiah's,<ref>Donald W. Parry, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/isaiah-49-0 ''The Book of Isaiah: A New Translation (Preliminary Edition)''] (Springville, UT: Book of Mormon Central, 2022), 117.</ref> or Isaiah's response to God who in verse 3 calls one of them His servant in whom He will be glorified. One of them responds that, in their own judgment, they are weak and frail as a servant, but that, nonetheless, God will judge and reward them. The intent of the passage can be argued as correct, no matter the translation, however.

If the passage is translated as "reward," the Book of Mormon already teaches that God rewards us despite our moral and vocational frailties. The Book of Mormon already teaches that God is our reward. Nephi teaches us that beautifully in his psalm recorded in {{s|2|Nephi|4|}}.<ref>{{s|2|Nephi|4|30}}</ref>

If the passage is translated as "work," one could interpret it in a few ways. One could say that God ''works through'' his servants to do good despite their frailties. In that case, Paul tells the Philippians that "it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."<ref>Phillipians 2:13</ref> In the previous chapter, {{s||Isaiah|8|}}, God tells Israel, "I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction."<ref>{{s||Isaiah|48|10}}</ref>

One could alternatively interpret it as saying that the work of Isaiah, the Messiah, or Israel is ''chosen'' or ''ordained'' by God to do a work ''on their own'': ''without'' God's intervening power. Isaiah recounts how God called him in {{s||Isaiah|6|}}. God indicates that Israel is his chosen, covenant people throughout the Old Testament text. The Messiah is the anointed one and is prophesied of throughout Isaiah's record and in other Old Testament prophecies.

No matter the translation and interpretation, there is nothing that isn't clearly taught elsewhere in the Book of Mormon.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3. {{s||Isaiah|49|5}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|5}}
||Though Israel be not gathered
||"And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, '''Though Israel be not gathered''', yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Critics assert that the better translation would be "to restore Jacob to him, and that Israel be gathered to him."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}}<ref name="runnells1769" /> Neither the Book of Mormon rendering nor the critics' change the meaning significantly.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|4. {{s||Isaiah|49|8}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|8}}
||Have I heard thee
||"Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time '''have I heard thee''', and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#8 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#8 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-8.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation would be "I answer/have answered you."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} Interestingly, in the ancient Near East, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KQLOuIKaRA hearing and doing something or responding to them were functionally the same thing]. You didn't hear someone if you didn't respond to them. Something similar may be going on here. The passage means that the Lord heard the cries of Israel and helped them, which is already affirmed with "in a day of salvation have I helped thee."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|5. {{s||Isaiah|49|24}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|24}}
||Or the lawful captive delivered
||"Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, '''or the lawful captive delivered'''?" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#24 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#24 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-24.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation would be "Can...captives (be) retrieved from a victor?"<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/49-24.htm Popular English biblical translations vary] between saying captives of the "mighty," "tyrant," "righteous," "victor," or "conqueror." The verse can only be considered a translation variant rather than an error. "The rhetorical questions function here as assertions of divine power insofar as the LORD can make these things happen."<ref name="Sweeney">Marvin A. Sweeney, "Isaiah," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018).</ref>{{Rp|1047n24–26}} God is asserting that he can free the Israelites taken captive by those who oppress them. Thus, regardless of the translation options, the intent of the verse is not changed substantively.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|6. {{s||Isaiah|50|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|7|4}}
||Know how to speak a word in season
||"The Lord God hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should '''know how to speak a word in season''' to him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-50/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-50/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/50-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Critic David P. Wright laughably asserts that "the underlying Hebrew is unintelligible" and then, in the next clause of the sentence, that "the KJV is likely wrong." This passage, according to Wright, "is apparently taking the word läcût to mean 'to speak/do in season.'" Yet again, Wright tells us that "[h]ow it is to be understood is not clear." Then he tells us that "[s]ome modern scholars, with hesitation, take the verb to mean 'to aid/help/succor.'"<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172–73.}} Even this is part of Wright's essay discussing KJV translation ''errors'' ''perpetuated'' in the Book of Mormon. As such, it can only be considered a translation variant. Even with the wording as is, it clearly teaches that Isaiah's gift is to speak to the weary. That can only mean a form of succoring/aiding.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|7. {{s||Isaiah|51|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|8|4}}
||Rest
||"Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to '''rest''' for a light of the people." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-51/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-51/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/51-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Critics think that the metaphor "make my judgment to rest/repose for a light" is merely "odd." "Many modern versions take the verb (which the KJV translates 'make rest') with the beginning of the next verse (sometimes with emendation)."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|173}} The sentence construction is a bit odd, but it doesn't substantively change the meaning of the verse, which is that God's judgment (sometimes translated "justice") will be a light for the people. Where exactly would the judgment "rest"? This is not certain. Perhaps on the wicked? Regardless, the rhetorical goals of the verse are accomplished. Some might think that the verse communicates that God will cease to judge and that this will be a light to the people, which would indeed be incorrect teaching; however, that interpretation is inconsistent with the first clause ("for a law shall proceed from me").
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|8. {{s||Isaiah|2|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|4}}
||Rebuke
||"And he shall judge among the nations and shall '''rebuke''' many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' "The Hebrew verb here lacks the negative sense of ''rebuke''—that is, it means 'to judge' rather than 'to reprove'; note the preceding parallel line: 'and he shall judge among the nations'."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} The act of judging or arbitrating disputes between people may mean that God actually will rebuke people who come down on the negative side of God's judgments. In any dispute, there will be rebukes that God sends forth—implicitly or otherwise—for the wrongdoer. The Lord tells us that he chastens us and scourges us because he loves us in {{s||Proverbs|3|11-12}}, {{s||Hebrews|12|5-6}}, and {{s||Helaman|15|3}}.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|9. {{s||Isaiah|2|6}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|6}}
||Please themselves in the children of strangers
||"Therefore thou hast forsaken thy people the house of Jacob, because they be replenished from the east, and are soothsayers like the Philistines, and they '''please themselves in the children of strangers'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#6 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#6 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-6.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is closer to things like "they strike hands with foreigners," "make bargain/covenant with foreigners," or "are crowded with foreigners."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|169}} The verse concerns the idolatry of Israel. "Pleasing themselves" is ambiguous because it could certainly be used (though, admittedly, awkwardly) to refer to making deals with the people of idolatrous nations. It could refer to any positive activity with foreigners/strangers. Regardless of the positive activity, it is clear that doing it with foreigners symbolizes the kind of idolatry and apostasy the Lord/Isaiah means to refer to in this verse. Thus, it's unclear that there's a substantive change in meaning, and even if there were, the passage would still accomplish what it sets out to do.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|10. {{s||Isaiah|2|9}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|9}}
||Boweth down
||"And the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself not: therefore forgive them not" (Book of Mormon, 1830 Edition) ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#9 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#9 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-9.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Runnells asserts that the correct translation is "and the mean man boweth down '''not''', and the great man humbleth himself [not]: therefore forgive them not."<ref name="runnells1769" /> Interestingly, the current edition of the Book of Mormon contains just this translation. "And the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore, forgive him not." The only difference between Runnells' proposal and the current edition of the Book of Mormon is that the Book of Mormon replaces ''them'' in "forgive them not" with ''him'' and omits the second ''not'' that the critic has in brackets. The essential message of the evils of idolatry is not affected.

But both the critic and Latter-day Saints still have errors to account for here. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/2-9.htm nearly every single popular, English biblical translation of these verses] rejects using "not" after "boweth down." The correct translation is actually how it is rendered in the King James Bible! The critic claims to have been working from the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon and making comparisons to the [https://www.stepbible.org/version.jsp?version=KJVA an online version of the 1769 KJV with apocrypha]. The 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon (the first edition) [https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/93 has this verse rendered as] "and the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself not: therefore forgive him not." Skousen, in his earliest reconstruction of the Book of Mormon text, renders it as "and the mean man boweth down and the great man humbleth himself; therefore forgive them not."<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|108}} This is the correct translation of the text. Skousen notes a rather complex textual history of this verse in his ''Analysis of Textual Variants''.<ref name="skousenvariants">Royal Skousen, [https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/atv/p2/ ''Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon Part Two: 2 Nephi 1 – Mosiah 6''] (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2014).</ref>{{Rp|656–60}} Thus, the Book of Mormon actually originally had the correct translation of this passage, and it was changed, likely by the first printer and typesetter of the Book of Mormon, John Gilbert. This is at most an error perpetuated by modern editors.

But now, what about modern editions of the Book of Mormon that don't have the correct translation? Are they in true error? In context, Isaiah is condemning the house of Jacob for idolatry and for bowing down to idols, as mentioned in verse 8. Thus, the correct translation refers to people being humbled and bowing to the ''idols''. The modern editions of the Book of Mormon would be in error if whoever composes the text today meant to refer to the idols. But the modern editions could be referring to God. If the mean man and great man don't bow to God, then they're committing idolatry, and God shouldn't forgive them. In the 1830s edition, it says that the mean man bows down, while the great man doesn't. This could be read to mean that the mean man bows down to the idols, and the great man doesn't bow down to God.

No matter which edition we're consulting here, we are not compelled to read the essential intent of the verse wrongly, and, indeed, with careful reading, it seems that the essential intent of the verse will be captured by careful, studious readers, no matter which translation/edition is consulted. It seems implausible to believe the author (ancient or modern) meant to endorse or encourage idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|11. {{s||Isaiah|2|16}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|16}}
||Pictures
||"and upon all the ships of Tarshish and upon all the pleasant '''pictures'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#16 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#16 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-16.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' The better translation, according to Skousen, is "and upon all the pleasant '''ships'''."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Critic Jeremy Runnells thinks it should be either "image," "ships," or "crafts."<ref name="runnells1769" /> Yes, he includes "image" as somehow a potentially more correct translation than "pictures." Critic David P. Wright thinks it should be either "grand ships" or "precious things."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|169}} Though [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/2-16.htm there are at least four modern, popular, English biblical translations] that render this verse similar to how it is rendered in the Book of Mormon. Popular English translations vary between referring to ships/crafts or pleasant imagery/pictures. It's not entirely certain, but the more likely correct translation is ships. Isaiah intends to use the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be brought down and taken away to eliminate pride. Either ships, crafts, or pleasant imagery/pictures can do/be a part of that. Thus, the intent hasn't changed at all, and no doctrinal error occurs.<ref>Recall that the textual history of this verse is seen as quite complex. For detailed discussion, see {{Seely:Upon All The Ships Of The Sea And:JBMS:2005}}.</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|12. {{s||Isaiah|3|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|2}}
||Prudent
||"The mighty man, and the man of war, the judge, and the prophet, and the '''prudent''', and the ancient" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "In the phrase 'the prudent and the ancient', the adjectival noun ''prudent'' is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word for divining. This phrase is translated, for instance, as 'the diviner and the elder' in the English Standard Version."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Critic David P. Wright agrees.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} The verse concerns the Assyrians' coming invasion of Israel and carrying them away into captivity. ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'' notes that "[t]he Assyrians were well known for deporting the leading figures and skilled craftspeople of a conquered society to exploit their talents elsewhere in the empire and to destabilize the conquered society to prevent further revolt."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|984n3.1–12.}} Thus, the verse intends to use [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that the most talented and wisest of Israelite society were going to be taken away captive by the Assyrians. That can include the prudent. Also, diviners may be described as prudent.

In any case, this does not alter the verses' meaning—men of importance or value are being subject to capture and deportation.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|13. {{s||Isaiah|3|3}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|3}}
||Orator
||"The captain of fifty, and the honourable man, and the counsellor, and the cunning artificer, and the eloquent '''orator'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#3 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#3 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-3.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "Here in the Hebrew the sense of ''orator'' is 'enchanter.' The English word derives from the Latin verb meaning 'to pray' (see definition 1 under ''orator'' in the [''Oxford English Dictionary''])."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Critic David P. Wright derives the same analysis as Skousen.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Same commentary here as made for the preceding entry for {{s|2|Nephi|13|2}}.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|14. {{s||Isaiah|3|8}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|3}}
||Provoke the eyes of his glory
||"For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their tongue and their doings are against the Lord, to '''provoke the eyes of his glory'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#8 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#8 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-8.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' Critic David Wright asserts that the better translation is "Rebel against/defy/insult his glorious presence/glance/gaze."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} The Book of Mormon actually changes this verse from the KJV. In the Book of Mormon it is rendered "For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their tongue'''s''' and their doings '''have been''' against the Lord, to provoke the eyes of his glory." [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/3-8.htm 4-5 other modern, popular, English biblical translations] render it with "provoke." This is a good example of the diachronic nature of language, since [https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/provoke one of the definitions] of the word ''provoke'' is "to challenge," which is clearly in agreement with modern translations of the Bible.<ref name="tvedtnes">{{Tvedtnes:Isaiah In The Bible And The Book Of:FARMS Review:2004}}</ref>{{rp|170}} The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' similarly provides examples of writers near the time of the King James translation using "provoke" to mean "[t]o call out or summon to a fight; to challenge, to defy" and "[t]o incite (a person or animal) to anger; to annoy, vex, irritate, or exasperate, esp. deliberately."<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Provoke."</ref> This fits in with Wright's suggestions of insult and defiance.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|15. {{s||Isaiah|3|18}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|18}}
||Cauls
||"the Lord will take away the bravery of tinkling ornaments and '''cauls'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-18.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' defines caul as 'a netted cap or head-dress, often richly ornamented'. The Hebrew word today is usually translated as a headband."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} Isaiah intends to communicate that the Lord will take away the most prized possessions of the women of Jerusalem because those possessions cause arrogance. Whether headbands or cauls are being taken away, it doesn't change the essential message of Isaiah—and both are worn on the head.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|16. {{s||Isaiah|3|18}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|18}}
||Tires like the moon
||"and cauls and round '''tires like the moon'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-18.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' "In the Hebrew, the word ''tire'' refers to something round, either a crescent or perhaps a round pendant for the neck. The use of ''tire'' here in {{s||Isaiah|3|18}} originated in the 1560 Geneva Bible: 'in that day shall the Lord take away the ornament of the slipper and the cauls and the round tires', where ''tire'' is a shortening from ''attire'' and refers to an ornament for a woman's head. The 1568 Bishop's Bible expanded on this by placing an internal note in square brackets after ''round tires'': 'and the cauls and the round tires [after the fashion of the moon]'. This interpretative remark was apparently derived from the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate, where the term for 'crescent ornament' or 'little crescent' was a diminutive of the word for ''moon''. The 1611 King James translators decided to embed this remark within the text itself by omitting the brackets, thus 'and round tires like the moon'. Since this interpretative prepositional phrase was not in the original Hebrew, it should have been placed in italics in the King James text."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} This doesn't appear to be a translation error, but just a variant.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|17. {{s||Isaiah|3|20}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|20}}
||Tablets
||"The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the '''tablets''', and the earrings," ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-20.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' The ''Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament'' states that the best translation would be something like the Latin Vulgate's "scent-bottles." It states that the translation rendered literally is "'little houses [containers] of vital energy [life],' made use of by breathing."<ref>Horst Seebass, "נֶפֶשׁ," in ''Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament'', ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. David E. Green, 15 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), 9:505.</ref> The ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament'' states that the translation is better rendered as something like "tomb" or "grave."<ref name="boylanproblematic">Robert S. Boylan, "Some of the More Problematic Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon Suggesting Joseph Smith was Influenced by KJV Isaiah, not the Brass Plates," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', November 13, 2021, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2021/11/some-of-more-problematic-isaiah.html?q=translation+errors.</ref> This is most likely a translation variant, given the disagreement among scholars. It may not be an error at all. The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether a scent-bottle, a tomb, or a grave, it doesn't change the intent of the verse. (Given the poetic nature of Isaiah, all of these resonances may be intended--their scent bottles of life are ironically death, which they pack around with them.)
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|18. {{s||Isaiah|3|20}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|20}}
||Earrings
||"The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the '''earrings'''," ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-20.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' The ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament'' states that the translation is best rendered as "amulets."<ref name="boylanproblematic" /> The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether amulets or earrings, it doesn't change the intent of the verse.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|19. {{s||Isaiah|3|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|22}}
||Wimples
||"The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles and the '''wimples''', and the crisping pins" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Hebrew word refers to a wide or flowing cloak. The English word used by the King James translators, ''wimple'', is quite different: 'a garment of linen or silk formerly worn by women, so folded as to envelop the head, chin, sides of the face, and neck; now retained in the dress of nuns' (the first definition under the noun wimple in the ''Oxford English Dictionary'')."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|219}} The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether a cloak or a wimple (both items of clothing to cover and protect), it doesn't change the intent of the verse, which implies that the soon-to-be captive will be stripped naked literally by the Assyrians, and spiritually by their vulnerability to the pagan invaders.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|20. {{s||Isaiah|3|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|22}}
||Crisping pins
||"The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the '''crisping pins'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The modern-day equivalent of ''crisping pin'' would be ''curling iron''. The Hebrew is generally interpreted here as referring to purses or handbags."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Similar considerations apply as for "wimples" above. Whether they are seen as losing their fancy, well-coiffed hair or their purses containing cosmetics or riches, the ironic fall of the daughters of Zion is graphically illustrated.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|21. {{s||Isaiah|3|23}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|23}}
||Glasses
||"The '''glasses''', and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#23 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#23 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-23.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' The ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament'' states that the translation is best rendered as "papyrus garments" or "mirrors."<ref name="boylanproblematic" /> The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether glasses, papyrus garments, or mirrors, it doesn't change the intent of the verse. The irony is again thick in either case--if mirrors, then those who cannot see their spiritual state clearly will lose the mirrors in which they admire themselves in pride. If papyrus garments, these are delicate and easily stripped away by the Assyrians, who will lead them into slavery--again, a dramatic type of shameful exposure to those so concerned about externals.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|22. {{s||Isaiah|3|24}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|24}}
||Rent
||"And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle, a '''rent'''; and instead of well set hair baldness; and instead of a stomacher a girding of sackcloth; and burning instead of beauty." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-24.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "There are two Hebrew verbs, both with identical consonants, but with different meanings: one means 'to tear' and the other means 'to go around or to surround'. The noun ''rent'' derives from the first verb, but the noun ''rope'' or ''cord'' (meaning to go around the body) derives from the second. Here, the word ''girdle'' takes the archaic meaning 'belt'. Modern translators have typically rendered this line in {{s||Isaiah|3|24}} as 'and instead of a belt, a rope.'"<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Isaiah intends to contrast the former dignity and pride of the daughters of Zion with their current shame. Interestingly, in the ancient Near East, uncovering someone's nakedness was a way to make them feel shame (see, for example, {{s||Isaiah|47|3}} which reflects this attitude) so keeping "rent" (i.e. cut/gap) where perhaps a person's belt line was would uncover someone's buttocks and genitals and is an appropriate way to contrast current dignity and subsequent shame or lower social status. The intent of the passage is unaltered and correct.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|23. {{s||Isaiah|3|24}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|24}}
||Stomacher
||"and instead of a '''stomacher''', a girding of sackcloth" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-24.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' "The Hebrew word here, ''patigil'', is otherwise unattested. The Greek Septuagint translated it as 'a tunic of mixed purple', which has led to the general translation of this article of clothing as 'a fine garment' or 'a rich robe'. Miles Coverdale, in his Bible, translated it more specifically as ''stomacher'', 'an ornamental covering for the chest (often covered with jewels) worn by women under the lacing of the bodice'."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} As the Hebrew remains uncertain, this can only be seen as a translation variant rather than an error. The essential message of Isaiah, contrasting fine, luxurious things with those of lower social status and shame that await the future Assyrian captives, remains unaffected.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|24. {{s||Isaiah|4|5}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|14|5}}
||Defence
||"And the Lord will create upon every dwelling-place of Mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day and the shining of a flaming fire by night; for upon all the glory of Zion shall be a '''defence'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/4-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator's Gloss.''' Critics allege that the word translated here as "defence" is better rendered as "canopy."<ref name="ankerberg" />{{Rp| 322.}} True, "canopy" [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/4-5.htm is in most popular English biblical translations]. However, nearly all of these popular English biblical translations depict a canopy as a defensive structure, and the King James translation, as well as the Book of Mormon, see it precisely that way. Robert S. Boylan stated that "[t]he offending word here is חֻפָּה. The term means a 'chamber' (as a covering or enclosing), per ''BDB'', or a 'shelter' (per Holladay's ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament''). As the word 'defense' in KJV English refers to any kind of shelter, including a canopy and other terms that this Hebrew word can be translated as, there is no issue."<ref name="boylankjv">Robert S. Boylan, "KJV Errors in the Book of Mormon?" ''Scriptural Mormonism'', October 8, 2015, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2015/10/kjv-errors-in-book-of-mormon.html?q=translation+errors.</ref>

Similarly, Daniel C. Peterson responded to this claim as follows in a 1993 review of an anti-Mormon book:

:In {{s|2|Nephi|14|5}}, the Book of Mormon follows KJV {{s||Isaiah|4|5}} in rendering the Hebrew ''chuppah'' as "defence": "For upon all the glory of Zion shall be a defence." But the proper reading, say Ankerberg and Weldon, should have been not "defence," but "canopy" (p. 322). Therefore, they contend, the Book of Mormon is fraudulent.

:Their reading of ''chuppah'' is, it must be admitted, correct. It has the support of the majority of modern translations. But does the Book of Mormon's "defence" represent so serious a distortion of Isaiah's meaning, so serious an error, as to call into question its own antiquity? I think not. The ancient Latin translation of the Bible known as the Vulgate seems to have interpreted {{s||Isaiah|4|5}} in the same way as did the King James translators, rendering the last phrase of the verse as ''super omnem enim gloriam protectio''. The ancient Greek Septuagint, on the other hand, has ''pase te doxe skepaslllcsetai'', in which the final verb is clearly related to the nouns ''skepas'' and ''skepc'', both of which mean "covering" or "shelter." The Jewish Publication Society's translation, Tanakh, says that the "canopy ... shall serve as a pavilion for shade from heat by day and as a shelter for protection against drenching rain." ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' says that it will give "refuge and shelter from the storm and the rain," using much the same language as does the ''New English Bible''. The Evangelical Protestant ''New International Version'' says that the "canopy ... will be a shelter and shade from the heat of the day, and a refuge and hiding place from the storm and rain." Is "defence" really so very out of place in such a context?<ref>{{Peterson:Chattanooga Cheapshot Or The Gall Of Bitterness Review:FARMS Review:1993|pages=50-51}}</ref>

This is best understood as a translator's gloss. A translator's gloss serves more as an explanation of the underlying text than as a literal translation. It makes explicit what ancient readers would have understood implicitly by the ancient term.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|25. {{s||Isaiah|5|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|2}}
||Fenced
||"And he '''fenced''' it and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' "The Hebrew verb for ''fenced'' in {{s||Isaiah|5|2}} is now translated as 'to dig about' or 'to hoe or weed'; in other words, "he dug about it and cleared it of its stones."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Critic David P. Wright derives basically the same analysis as Skousen.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} This is a good example of the diachronic nature of language. The verse here is a part of verses 1–7 that describe Isaiah's Song of the Vineyard. ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'' notes that it "allegorically portrays the Lord as Isaiah's friend ... who worked so hard to ensure a productive vineyard only to be disappointed when it yielded sour grapes. The allegory, which is explained only at the end, draws in the audience in, as many in ancient Judah would have had extensive experience in vineyards. Its conclusion makes puns to make its point, viz., the Lord expects ''justice'' (Heb "mishpat") but sees only ''bloodshed'' (Heb "mispah") and hopes for ''righteousness'' (Heb "tsedaqah") only to hear a ''cry'' (Heb "tse'aqah)."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|986n1–7}} "The 1828 Webster<ref>See {{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=fence}}</ref> notes that the word ''fence means'' 'a wall, hedge, ditch,' the third example fitting well with the modern renderings."<ref name="tvedtnes" />

The KJV translators may have meant to say that the Lord allegorically protected the vineyard by fencing it with a ditch. (Or earth/stones dug from the ditch are then piled as a barrier on the edge of the ditch, combining the images.) The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' notes that, at its broadest, "to fence" meant to put up a type of barrier at the time of the King James Version's translation. Thus, there are examples of writers from the 17th century saying, for instance, "The lands of [private] men . . . were '''fenced with ditches'''." This usage fits into the Book of Mormon's and the KJV's usage. Other examples of writings from the 17th century say that you can fence with a battlement, walls, iron armor, shells, and so forth. To fence was to put up a barrier.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|26. {{s||Isaiah|5|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|12}}
||Viol
||"And the harp, and the '''viol''', the tabret, and pipe, and wine, are in their feasts: but they regard not the work of the Lord, neither consider the operation of his hands." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Against the Book of Mormon, critic M.D. Brown claims that the word translated as "'viol' is the Hebrew 'nebel', a type of lyre. True viols were unknown until the 15th century."<ref name="brown"></ref> This claim is correct. The mistranslation, however, does not lead a reader away from the passage’s overall intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|27. {{s||Isaiah|5|17}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|17}}
||Then shall the lambs feed after their manner
||"'''Then shall the lambs feed after their manner''', and the waste places of the fat ones shall strangers eat." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#17 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#17 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-17.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "then lambs shall feed as at their pasture/meadow" or "in their old pastures."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} The passage contrasts the type of success one can have with the Lord and the grave misfortune one can have when one does not follow the Lord. The previous verse to this (v.16) begins that contrast. The passage intends to say that lambs shall return to their normal feeding. Thus, saying they return to their old pasture to feed and saying they'll feed "after their manner" is not a substantive change in meaning. The author judges this as a translation variant rather than an error. Even if the image shifts slightly, it is inconsequential.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|28. {{s||Isaiah|5|25}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|25}}
||Carcases
||"Therefore is the anger of the Lord kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their '''carcases''' were torn in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-25.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "their '''corpses''' were as refuse in the midst of the streets."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} This is a good example of the diachronic nature of language. The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' notes that the word "carcass" could refer to either animal or human remains at the time that the King James Bible was translated. After about the year 1750, it came to be used as a form of contempt for human remains.<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Carcass."</ref> These usages fit perfectly within the context of Isaiah. This appears to be an attempt to find fault where there is none—a carcass and a corpse are the same thing.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|29. {{s||Isaiah|5|25}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|25}}
||Were torn
||"Therefore is the anger of the Lord kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their carcases '''were torn''' in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-25.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "their corpses were '''as refuse''' in the midst of the streets."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} To say that the corpses "were torn" in the midst of the streets ''does'' leave ambiguity since "were torn" could refer to people or perhaps animals ''actively tearing up'' dead human remains in the streets or it could refer to the dead bodies ''already being torn up'' in the streets. "Refuse" refers to trash. To say that their corpses were torn in the streets is functionally the same thing as saying that they're refuse. Regarding "torn," Robert S. Boylan stated that "[t]he Hebrew term in question here is כַּסּוּחָה. Again, this is not a KJV error that made its way into the Book of Mormon...if the Hebrew is read as a verb, as in the KJV, it means 'cut of' or 'torn off'; only by reading it as a noun prefixed preposition it would mean 'as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offal offal].'"<ref name="boylankjv" /> In either case, the sense of horror to an Israelite audience would be profound, who would be troubled both by the desecration of a body if it were torn by scavengers ''and'' by the fact that the dead lay in the street, unburied. A proper burial was vital in the ancient world, and failing to receive it was regarded as a terrible fate.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|30. {{s||Isaiah|5|30}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|30}}
||And the light is darkened in the heavens thereof
||"And in that day they shall roar against them like the roaring of the sea: and if one look unto the land, behold darkness and sorrow, '''and the light is darkened in the heavens thereof'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#30 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#30 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-30.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "the light is darkened by/in its clouds."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Whether the light is darkened in the sky or by clouds, the intent of the verse isn't changed. (And what in the sky, one wonders, would darken light if not clouds?)
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|31. {{s||Isaiah|6|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}}
||It
||"Above '''it''' stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "above '''him'''" (referring to the Lord in v. 1) instead of "above it" (which would be referring to the train of his garment in v. 1).<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Though it's uncertain if saying that the angel standing above the garment train is a denial that the angel stood above God.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|32. {{s||Isaiah|6|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}}
||Seraphims
||"Above it stood the '''seraphims''': each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly" (Book of Mormon, 1830 edition) ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator’s Convention.''' The current edition of the Book of Mormon just has ''seraphim'' without the ''s''. Skousen's earliest reconstruction of the verses, as well as [https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/97 the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon], have "seraphim'''s'''."<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|114}} Under a certain perspective, a more correct translation of these verses would indeed render it as only "seraphim" and not "seraphim'''s'''" with an s. That is because the suffix ''-im'' in Hebrew already indicates that the object is pluralized. Though one could argue that there really is no error in translation, given that the KJV translators were using English conventions to assure readers that the object was pluralized. Consider the ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'', for instance, that said that the plural of seraph could be seraph'''s'''.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=seraph}}</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|33. {{s||Isaiah|6|6}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|6}}
||Seraphims
||"Then flew one of the '''seraphims''' unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar" (Book of Mormon, 1830 edition) ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#6 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#6 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-6.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator’s Convention.''' The same analysis applies to the "error" in {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}} in the previous entry. One anti-Latter-day Saint used a similar argument in claiming that the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon was in error by using the word "cherubims" from the KJV.<ref>Dave Miller, "Is the Book of Mormon from God?" ''Apologetics Press'', 31 December 2002, {{antilink|https://apologeticspress.org/is-the-book-of-mormon-from-god-1187/}}</ref> The same reasoning applies against his claim. Consider the ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'', for instance, that said that the plural of cherub could be cherub'''s'''.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=cherub}} </ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|34. {{s||Isaiah|6|13}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|13}}
||Whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves, so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.
||"But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, '''whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "whose stock/stump remains when they are felled (or: their leaves fall): its stock/stump is the holy seed."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} Though the verse retains the substance of meaning proposed by the critic. The verse means to communicate that "[a] part of Israel would return, and like the oak and terebinth, which though they are eaten or consumed right to their substance or stumps, yet they possess a seed in them that can regenerate."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|367}} "Despite the horrific imagery of a mere ten-percent survival rate (''tenth part''), the account concludes with a hopeful image of new growth from the ravaged stump that will constitute the holy seed of restoration (see {{s||Ezra|9|2}})."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|989n11–13}} Is saying that the "substance" of the tree remains really a denial of the stump/stock being that substance? Are the rhetorical goals of the verse not accomplished by changing "stock/stump" to "substance"? It could be seen as the tree's "vital force" or "substance" hidden within as well as life (apparently gone) awaiting the chance to burst forth anew.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|35. {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|14}}
||Virgin
||"Therefore, the Lord himself shall give you a sign—Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and shall bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#14 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#14 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-14.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – Change in Intent.''' This passage in {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} and its proper translation is [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_7:14 one of the most contested in all of scripture].

The verses have been crucial for Christians who want to support Matthew's use of the passage in his Gospel to argue that the Savior would be born of a virgin, Mary. Jews and the majority of biblical scholars contend, and not without merit, that the proper translation of the verse is to have merely "young woman" instead of "virgin." What's more, Christians have needed to contend that prophecies can have more than one fulfillment since the verses could be referring to a son of Ahaz that would be named Immanuel in context.

Some of our critics contend, based on this mistranslation, that the idea of the virgin birth is anachronistic to the time of Nephi, but [[Virgin birth of Jesus Christ in the Book of Mormon|we have responded to that in depth elsewhere on the Wiki]].

The issue of translation has been explored elsewhere by both non-Latter-day Saint Christian scholars and Latter-day Saint scholars.<ref>Jason R. Combs, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/prophets-prophecies-old-testament/king-ahazs-sign-christ-jesus From King Ahaz’s Sign to Christ Jesus: The ‘Fulfillment’ of Isaiah 7:14]," in ''Prophets & Prophecies of the Old Testament'' (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book Company, 2017), 95-122; {{Interpreter:Parry:An Approach To Isaiah Studies:2020}}; Garrett Kell, "[https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/jesus-virgin-child-isaiah/ Is Jesus Really the Virgin–Born Child] in {{s||Isaiah|7|}}?" ''The Gospel Coalition'', May 9, 2020, .</ref>

Perhaps the best commentary was offered by the editors of netbible.org who observed that the Hebrew term translated as "virgin" (''ʿalmah''), in the vast majority of cases, refers to just a young woman who has reached sexual maturity, but that it can be and has been used in select instances to refer to a virgin (e.g. {{s||Gen|24|43}}). Thus, one's view of the doctrine of virgin birth may be entirely unaffected by disputes over translation.<ref>''NET Bible'', [https://netbible.org/bible/Isaiah+7 Isaiah 7, footnote 25].</ref> There are other issues to deal with if wanting the verse to work as a reference to Christ, but as far as a translation of the verse, we've explicated all the most relevant issues.

It should be remembered that one of the reasons that {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} and {{s|2|Nephi|7|14}} retain the "virgin" translation may very well be because Nephi had already seen a vision of the virgin Mary ({{s|1|Nephi|11|13}}, 15) and, like Matthew, may have wanted {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} to say "virgin" as part of a theological commentary on Isaiah [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|that we know that he was engaged in given the substantive differences between the KJV and Book of Mormon versions of Isaiah]].
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|36. {{s||Isaiah|7|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|15}}
||That
||"Butter and honey shall he eat''', that''' he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the logical relation of the second clause to the first is not clear. It is as if eating butter and honey leads to moral knowledge. Clarification is needed. Compare the ''New Jerusalem Bible'': "On curds and honey will he feed until he knows how to refuse the bad and choose the good."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Certainly, clarification of the logic is preferable here. However, the rhetorical goals of the verse are still accomplished given this translation, and there are no grave errors as constructed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|37. {{s||Isaiah|7|23}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|23}}
||Silverlings
||"where there were a thousand vines at a thousand '''silverlings'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#23 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#23 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-23.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Hebrew here literally reads 'a thousand of silver', where the presumed measure of weight is the shekel. The Greek Septuagint translated this phrase as 'a thousand shekels'. The use of ''silverlings'' in the English translation originated with Miles Coverdale's 1535 Bible. The English word ''silvering'' was chosen because it was morphologically analyzed as a ''silver + ling'', but its value was not the same as a shekel's."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The intent of the scripture appears to remain unharmed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|38. {{s||Isaiah|7|25}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|25}}
||Mattock
||"and all the hills that shall be digged with the '''mattock'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#25 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#25 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-25.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "This is a tool that in the Hebrew is based on the verb meaning 'to pick' or 'to hoe'. The English mattock refers to a tool that is more specific than simply a pick or a hoe."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The intent of the passage seems to remain unchanged.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|39. {{s||Isaiah|8|1}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|1}}
||Man's pen
||"Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with '''a man’s pen''' concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts the better translation is "common/ordinary letters" or "common/ordinary stylus."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} The concern here is over "man" and what the significance of saying "a man's pen" is. It's certainly not clear enough to communicate that Isaiah means that the pen is common or average. But it's also not erroneous.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|40. {{s||Isaiah|8|6}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|6}}
||Rejoice
||"Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and '''rejoice''' in Rezin and Remaliah’s son;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#6 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#6 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-6.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation "may be" "'''but melt''' (with fear) before Rezin and Remaliah's son."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Experts affirm that the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|991nC}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/8-6.htm Most modern, popular, English biblical translations] have "rejoice" instead of "melt in fear." Either translation works and makes enough sense in the historical context. The Lord merely means to express his "dissatisfaction with Ahaz's refusal to accept the divine offer of protection."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|991n5-8}} The Lord does not want Judah to associate with Rezin and Pekah. Those who associate themselves reject the offer and "rejoice" in Rezin and Pekah by gladly joining them in their quest to defend against the incoming invasion of the Assyrians. The ''Contemporary English Version'' (2000) translates this verse as "These people have refused the gentle waters of Shiloah and have gladly gone over to the side of King Rezin and King Pekah." This captures the spirit of what is meant to be "rejoicing" in Rezin and Pekah. Though one could also translate it as "melt in fear" and say that the people join Rezin and Pekah because of fear of them. At worst, "rejoice" is merely a translation variant, and at best, it's an entirely correct translation, and "melt in fear" is in error.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|41. {{s||Isaiah|8|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|12}}
||All them
||"Say ye not, A confederacy, to '''all them''' to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts the better translation is "...to all that this people calls a confederacy/conspiracy."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The Book of Mormon omits the "them" from {{s||Isaiah|8|12}} and has "say ye not a confederacy to all to whom this people shall say a confederacy." The Book of Mormon's sentence construction doesn't change substantively from Wright's proposal.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|42. {{s||Isaiah|8|19-20}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|19-20}}
||To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them
||"And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony: if they shall speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#19 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#19 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-19.htm Bible Hub v. 18] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-20.htm Bible Hub v. 20])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the Hebrew is obscure and that the KJV/ Book of Mormon translation is also obscure. He asks us to compare the following modern translation: "And should people say to you, 'Go and consult ghosts and wizards that whisper and mutter'–a people should certainly consult its gods and the dead on behalf of the living! As regards instruction and testimony, without doubt this is how they will talk, and hence there will be no dawn for them" (''New Jerusalem Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The current edition of the Book of Mormon reads as follows (differences from KJV bolded): "And when they shall say unto you''':''' Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards '''that peep and''' mutter'''—'''should not a people seek unto their God for the living to '''hear from''' the dead? To the law and to the testimony''';''' '''and''' if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." So the only real difference to which Wright draws our eye is the KJV/BoM's bad (?) translation of "to the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." If the Hebrew is indeed obscure, this can only be a translation variant. However, the Book of Mormon and the KJV likely capture the better sense of the verse.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|43. {{s||Isaiah|8|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|22}}
||And; and they shall be driven
||"And they shall look unto the earth; '''and''' behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; '''and they shall be driven''' to darkness." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Critic David P. Wright curiously asserts that "[t]he Hebrew here is ... obscure" and then, in the same sentence, states that "the KJV offers an unlikely translation, especially of the last phrase." This is part of an essay dedicated to KJV ''errors'' in the Book of Mormon. He asks us to compare the KJV to the following translations: "or he may look below, but behold, distress and darkness, with no daybreak, straitness and gloom, with no dawn" (''Tanakh of the Jewish Publication Society'') and "then (he will look) down to the earth, there will be only anguish, gloom, the confusion of night, swirling darkness" (''New Jerusalem Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/8-22.htm Most modern, popular, English biblical translations] render this verse as "driven" or "thrust" into thick darkness. The meaning of the underlying Hebrew is uncertain, according to scholar Marvin Sweeney.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|991nC}} Thus, this can only be considered a translation variant. The intent and overall meaning of the passage are not affected. The passage concerns Isaiah warning people not to practice necromancy as was often practiced (and condemned) in ancient Israel ({{s||Isaiah|19|3}}; {{s||Leviticus|19|31}}; {{s||Deuteronomy|18|10-11}}). With the practice of necromancy, Israel will only see greater and greater darkness and distress as they call upon the dead thought to inhabit the shadow lands of the underworld. Whether they are "thrust" into darkness, "driven" into darkness, or look and see utter darkness with no break of day, makes little difference. This again looks like straining to find fault.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|44. {{s||Isaiah|9|1}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|1}}
||Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation
||"'''Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation''', when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "For if there were to be any break of day for that [land] which is in straits" (''Tanakh of the Jewish Publication Society''); "But there will be no gloom for her that was in anguish" (''Revised Standard Version''); and "For is not everything dark as night for a country in distress" (''New Jerusalem Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} It seems that the substantive meaning of the verse is not changed from Wright's proposals. The verse means that the dimness or gloom will not be like it was when these nations mentioned were distressed or vexed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|45. {{s||Isaiah|9|1}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|1}}
||Grievously afflict
||"Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more '''grievously afflict''' by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – Change in Intent.''' The better translation is "but in the future '''he will honor''' Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the Jordan."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}}

The Book of Mormon actually changes this verse quite a bit from the original one in {{s||Isaiah|9|1}}. It reads: "Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations." {{s|2|Nephi|19|1}} reads: "Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more grievously afflict <s>her</s> by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations." Thus, the Book of Mormon makes the verse refer to the Red Sea. Critics have made fun of the Book of Mormon for this and leveled other criticisms. See [[Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/The Red Sea|here]] and [[Question: Why does 2 Nephi 19:1 change the word "sea" in Isaiah 9 to "Red Sea"?|here]] for commentary on the criticisms that have arisen.

We now must ask—could the translation of "grievously afflicting" actually be some modification by Nephi that provides commentary on his own situation or experience? [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|We know that Nephi did modifications]] to affect the meaning and intent of Isaiah's scripture as a sort of commentary on his own situation that Nephi calls "likening" ({{s|1|Nephi|19|23}}). Could there be something similar going on here? This may have something to do with the difficult journey that Lehi, Nephi, and their family faced by the borders of the Red Sea as they traveled down the Arabian Peninsula.

Skousen actually tells us that he believes that "Red Sea" was not an accident by scribes of the Book of Mormon translation. He believes that "Red Sea" was actually on the plates that Joseph Smith translated from. He deduces this from the fact that there is no manuscript evidence that scribes of the Book of Mormon translation text inserted "Red" next to "sea" even in the original manuscript of the translation of the Book of Mormon. Also, there are four uses in the Bible of the phrase "by the way of the Red Sea" ({{s||Numbers|14|25}}; {{s||Numbers|21|4}}; {{s||Deuteronomy|1|40}}; {{s_short||Deuteronomy|2|1}}). Familiarity with the phrase, Skousen argues, perhaps led Nephi to add the word "Red" to “sea” when copying Isaiah. Either that, or "Red" was actually a part of the text and Nephi didn't add anything to it. Furthermore, out of 82 occurrences of the word "sea" in the Book of Mormon, there is no manuscript evidence that scribes added "Red" to the word "sea," even as a mistake that was then corrected.<ref name="skousenvariants" />{{Rp|732–33}} Skousen retained "Red Sea" in his reconstruction of the earliest text of the Book of Mormon: the text as it came from the mouth of Joseph Smith (or at least his best reconstruction of it).<ref name="skousenearliest">{{Book:Skousen:The Earliest Text}}</ref>{{Rp|119}}

Again, [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|Nephi was "likening" Isaiah to his current situation and understanding throughout the Book of Mormon quotations of Isaiah]] by changing text ({{s|1|Nephi|19|23}}). Something similar is likely going on here.

This may thus be an intentional emendation by Nephi to creatively liken the scriptures Isaiah wrote to his present situation, which Joseph Smith then correctly translated from the plates into English. The intent of the verse ‘'is changed'', and leads us to an incorrect understanding of what Isaiah's original text meant. But it ''isn’t'' an error regarding what ''Nephi'' meant to communicate about God. If Nephi is likening this passage to himself and his then-current situation and understanding, then there is no error.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|46. {{s||Isaiah|9|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|2}}
||Shadow of death
||"The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the '''shadow of death''', upon them hath the light shined." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the Hebrew term ''almäwet'' which this verse translates should be "darkness." It is not connected with the term ''mäwet'' "death."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/9-2.htm More than a few modern, popular, English biblical translations] render this verse with "the land of the shadow of death." The verse merely "symbolizes the mortal world where there is darkness, and death."<ref name="bookofmormonref">{{Book:Largey:Book of Mormon Reference Companion}} </ref>{{Rp|374}} Whether saying "the land of darkness," "the land of the shadow of death," or something close to it, the meaning or referent is still the same: the mortal, fallen world/earth.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|47. {{s||Isaiah|9|5}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|5}}
||For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise
||"'''For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise''', and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "For every boot that tramps with noise/in battle."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} Skousen's reconstruction of the earliest text of the Book of Mormon changes this verse to read "For every battle of the warrior with confused noise and garments rolled in blood—but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire."<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|119}} The verse concerns imminent military oppression. "Military oppression is symbolized by the ''yoke'' (10.27; 14.25), the ''bar'' (10.24), the ''rod'' (10.24; 14.4; {{s||Gen|49|10}}), and trampling ''boots''."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|993n4–5}} The "confused noise" of the battle could be correctly interpreted as the trampling boots. Regardless, Isaiah means to say that the military oppressors will be overthrown and that the oppression will be fuel for fire. The reader can still come to the accurate conclusion that all of it—the battles with confused noise and the garments rolled in blood—will be burned. The details are different; the message is the same.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|48. {{s||Isaiah|10|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|4}}
||Without me
||"'''Without me''' they shall bow down under the prisoners, and they shall fall under the slain. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the KJV's translation is "doubtful." The better translation is supposedly "so that they do not cower among the prisoners" (''Revised English Bible''); "Nothing remains but to crouch among the prisoners" (''Revised Standard Version'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The verse is meant to merge with the rhetorical question of the previous verse which reads (''New Revised Standard Version'') "To whom will you flee for help and where will you leave your wealth, so as not to crouch among the prisoners or fall among the slain?" The verse can still make sense as constructed in the KJV and the Book of Mormon, since it simply means that "[d]uring the day of visitation the wicked will fall in the destruction or become prisoners with other captives."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|376–37}} The ''without me'' can then function as the Lord saying "without my intervention and aid, these people will have to crouch among prisoners or die." Meaning has changed, but not significantly.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|49. {{s||Isaiah|10|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|15}}
||As if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood
||"Shall the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith? or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? '''as if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the Hebrew should be translated "as if a rod raised the one who lifted it, as if a staff lifted the one who is not wood."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The verses concern the Lord declaring his superior power against the Assyrians. The Lord uses the imagery of an axe and a saw to say that they can't declare their superiority over the one who wields them. The verses still accomplish their rhetorical goals. The detail has changed, the intent has not.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|50. {{s||Isaiah|10|18}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|18}}
||As when a standardbearer fainteth
||"And shall consume the glory of his forest, and of his fruitful field, both soul and body: and they shall be '''as when a standardbearer fainteth'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#18 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#18 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-18.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critics assert that the better translation is something like "and it will be as when '''a sick man''' wastes away," "and it will be as when '''a weak person''' despairs," or "and it will be as '''when someone''' falls in a fit."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}}<ref name="runnells1769" /> Most translations have something like the first suggestion. Though [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-18.htm at least three modern, popular, English biblical translations] carry something like "as when a standard-bearer faints." The superior translation clearly seems to be "when a sick man wastes away" since the verse is trying to describe how the Lord "destroys both soul and body as well as that man's 'forest and fruitful field'." The verse may still work with "standard-bearer faints," however. ''Ellicot's Commentary for English Readers'' [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-18.htm#commentary notes] that "[t]he 'standard-bearer' was chosen for his heroic strength and stature. When he 'fainted' and gave way, what hope was there that others would survive? A more correct rendering, however, gives ‘As a sick man pineth away.’" Similarly, ''Pulpit Commentary'' [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-18.htm#commentary notes] that "[u]tter prostration and exhaustion is indicated, whichever way the passage is translated."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|51. {{s||Isaiah|10|27}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|27}}
||The anointing
||And it shall come to pass in that day, that his burden shall be taken away from off thy shoulder, and his yoke from off thy neck, and the yoke shall be destroyed because of '''the anointing''' ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#27 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#27 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-27.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is something like "the yoke shall be destroyed because of fatness." He asserts that some emend the text of the Masoretic text of Isaiah (the earliest manuscript of Isaiah we have) since it doesn't make clear sense.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-27.htm Most modern, popular, English biblical translations] agree with the critic. However, some retain a reference to an anointing with oil. The literal meaning of the Hebrew is "because of oil."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|378}} The best way to translate that Hebrew and expand it into a more coherent idea is still uncertain. Thus, this can only be considered a translation variant.

The essential message of this passage is that the yoke of Assyria's oppression against Israel will be taken off. Different translations use imagery compatible with that essential message. With fatness, the yoke will be taken off or fall off Israel because they have become fat and the yoke is too small. The ''Douay-Rheims'' translation of this verse makes the imagery mean that the oil will rot off the yoke. Anointing is typically associated with ordaining someone to success. Thus, with the translation as it stands in the KJV and the Book of Mormon, perhaps the imagery is that God has ordained or anointed Israel to be successful before her enemies. Thus, the yoke will be destroyed because God protected Israel. Thus, given different translations, the detail certainly changes, but the essential meaning does not.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|52. {{s||Isaiah|11|3}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|21|3}}
||Make him of quick understanding
||"And shall '''make him of quick understanding''' in the fear of the Lord: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-11/#3 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-11/#3 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/11-3.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critics assert that the underlying Hebrew translated as "make him of quick understanding" is "unclear," but "probably" doesn't mean "make him of quick understanding." The better translation is "probably" something like, "He shall sense the truth by his reverence for the Lord" (''Tanakh of the Jewish Publication Society''); "And his delight shall be the fear of the Lord" (''New American Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}}<ref name="runnells1769" /> The chapter speaks about a coming Messiah. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/11-3.htm The majority of popular, English biblical translations] render this passage as the second suggestion from the critic. The gist of the verse, as constructed in the KJV and the Book of Mormon, is that the Messiah will be filled with great knowledge; though, arguably, in context, one would only be said to be ''genuinely'' of quick understanding if one feared God and obeyed him. Thus, "reverence for the Lord" is the best evidence of "quick understanding." The true wisdom and genius, we might say, is in knowing how to obey God, and not simply because one quickly masters man's learning or priorities.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|53. {{s||Isaiah|11|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|21|15}}
||Dry-shod
||"he shall. . .make men go over '''dry-shod'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-11/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-11/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/11-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator’s Gloss.''' "The past participial phrase ''dry-shod'' is equivalent to the adverbial phrase 'with dry shoes'. Here, the Hebrew as well as the Greek and the Latin translations use the phrase 'in sandals', without any reference to getting one's sandals wet."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The adverbial phrase still makes sense in context, however. The whole verse in {{s||Isaiah|11|15}} reads as follows: "And the Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make men go over dry-shod." Scholars recognize that this is an allusion to the Exodus, when the Israelites crossed the Red Sea on dry ground.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|997n15}} This is best understood as a translator’s gloss: the translation may make explicit what the ancient readers would have understood implicitly.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|54. {{s||Isaiah|13|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|12}}
||Wedge
||"I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden '''wedge''' of Ophir" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' The better translation is "more precious. . .than '''the gold''' of Ophir."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} Regardless of the translation, the essence is that a man is being made more precious than a piece of gold from Ophir. No significant alteration in meaning.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|55. {{s||Isaiah|13|14}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|14}}
||Roe
||"and it shall be as the chased '''roe'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#14 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#14 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-14.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "In English, a roe is a species of small deer. The word in the Hebrew word refers to a gazelle. The word ''gazelle'' entered English in the late 1500s and early 1600s and would not have been readily available to the King James translators. All the earlier English translations, dating back to Miles Coverdale's 1535 Bible, had the phrase ''chased doe'' rather than ''chased roe''."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} Both the gazelle and roe—speedy hooved herbivores often hunted—work as illustrations of the imagery of fleeing to one's own people and lands. Thus, the intent of the passage is unchanged.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|56. {{s||Isaiah|13|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|15}}
||That is joined
||"Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one '''that is joined''' unto them shall fall by the sword." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – Change in Intent.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "who are caught/captured."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} The verse intends to create a type of parallelism between the first and second clauses. It doesn't seem to be a substantive shift in meaning to say that all who are caught will be killed and all who are joined to the people who are caught will be killed. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon changes "found" in {{s||Isaiah|13|15}} to read "proud" and substitutes "the wicked" for "them" such that the verse reads "[e]very one that is proud shall be thrust through; yea, and every one that is joined to the wicked shall fall by the sword."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|57. {{s||Isaiah|13|21}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|21}}
||Satyrs
||"But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and '''satyrs''' shall dance there." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#21 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#21 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-21.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Hebrew word here in the singular is sa'ir, which in the Hebrew refers to hairy demons or monsters that inhabit the deserts. This word has been incorrectly translated into its phonetically similar Greek word ''satyr'', which refers to a woodland god that is half-human and half-beast."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} No significant change in meaning. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/13-21.htm The vast majority of popular English biblical translations] render this as wild goats, goat-demons, or [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyr satyrs] (mythical half-human, half-goat creatures). The verse intends to convey that Babylon will be made desolate and no man shall live there. Instead, animals will infest and inhabit their lands. There is no significant change in intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|58. {{s||Isaiah|13|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|22}}
||Wild beasts
||"And the '''wild beasts''' of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged. For I will destroy her speedily; yea, for I will be merciful unto my people, but the wicked shall perish." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Jeremy Runnells asserts that the better translation would be something like either "howling beast," "jackal," or "hyena."<ref name="runnells1769" /> The word איים (aym) refers to a howling desert animal, and most translators seem to take that as a reference to either jackals or hyenas.<ref>Though [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm there are translations (mostly much older ones)] that take it as a reference to either sirens, cats, owls, dogs, or wolves.</ref> There is no evidence that jackals or hyenas were domesticated in ancient Israel. They have remained wild in most cultures. Thus, "wild" isn't truly an inaccurate translation here either. Even critic David Wright thinks that the passage is translated accurately as either "wild beasts" or "desert beasts."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} The passage in the KJV already says that the wild beasts "shall cry" in desolate houses, so why "howling beast" needs to be added on top of "cry" is at least mildly uncertain. This is a case where the translation is, at best, not erroneous, and, at worst, just too broad. Certainly, there is no shift away from the intent of the passage. This also looks like straining to find fault.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|59. {{s||Isaiah|13|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|22}}
||Of the islands
||"And the wild beasts '''of the islands''' shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged. For I will destroy her speedily; yea, for I will be merciful unto my people, but the wicked shall perish." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation would be to omit "of the islands" and render it simply "wild/desert beasts" or specifically "jackals" or "hyenas."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} The verse concerns the Lord's/Isaiah's prediction that Babylon will revert to its primitive condition when it is overthrown. Whether "hyenas" or "wild beasts of the islands" crying in the towers of Babylon does not matter or change the intent of the verse.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|60. {{s||Isaiah|13|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|22}}
||Dragons
||"And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and '''dragons''' in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged. For I will destroy her speedily; yea, for I will be merciful unto my people, but the wicked shall perish." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Runnells asserts that the better translation would be to replace "dragons" with "jackals."<ref name="runnells1769" /> [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/13-22.htm The majority of popular English biblical translations] render this verse with "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackal jackals]" instead of dragons, though at least one modern, popular translation keeps dragons. "Dragon" could refer to merely a snake at the time of the King James translation, according to the ''Oxford English Dictionary''.<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Dragon."</ref> One places "hedgehogs" here and another "wild dogs." We can make similar commentary here as we did for the "of the islands" error. The verses concern Babylon's reversion to a primitive, uncivilized, even dangerous condition when the Lord desolates it. Whether jackals or dragons in the palaces, it doesn't really matter. The verses are meant to depict Babylon's desolate, grim condition after the Lord ravages it. The details have changed, but the underlying imagery and intent have not.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|61. {{s||Isaiah|14|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|2}}
||Handmaids
||"And the people shall take them and bring them to their place; yea, from far unto the ends of the earth; and they shall return to their lands of promise. And the house of Israel shall possess them, and the land of the Lord shall be for servants and '''handmaids'''; and they shall take them captives unto whom they were captives; and they shall rule over their oppressors." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Skousen says that "[i]n this verse the sense of handmaid is 'a female slave', especially since the paired noun ''servant'' means 'a male slave'. In biblical contexts, ''handmaid'' usually means 'a female personal servant', but not here."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} But a handmaid in the [https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/handmaid ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'' understands] a handmaid to be a "maid that waits at hand; '''a female servant''' or attendant." Similarly, the ''Oxford English Dictionary'' notes that the main usage of handmaid is to refer to "[a] '''female''' personal attendant or '''servant'''."<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Handmaid."</ref> Thus, it's not certain why Skousen considers this to be an error. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-2.htm Popular biblical translations more contemporary to the 1800s, as well as two more modern translations, render it as "handmaids."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|62. {{s||Isaiah|14|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|4}}
||Golden city
||"And it shall come to pass in that day, that thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say: How hath the oppressor ceased, the '''golden city''' ceased!" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Skousen claims that the better translation is "how hath the oppressor ceased, the '''assaulting''' ceased."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Critic David P. Wright asserts that the KJV translation is "doubtful" and that the translation should "probably" be "boisterous behavior, frenzy, [or] arrogance."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}}

This is Isaiah's taunt song against Babylon. Calling Babylon "the golden city" that is laid down and humbled is a great way to taunt Babylon, as Isaiah contrasts their former glory with their current misery. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-4.htm Five other biblical translations (two of which are modern and three much older)] render it as "golden city." Scholar Seth Erlandson makes a compelling case for translating this passage as "golden city."<ref>Seth Erlandsson, ''The Burden of Babylon: A Study of Isaiah 13:2–Isaiah 14:23'' (Berlingska Boktryckeriet, 1970), 29–32; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, "Seth Erlandsson on מדהבה meaning 'golden city' in {{s||Isaiah|14|4}}," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', 11 November 2022, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2022/11/seth-erlandsson-on-meaning-golden-city.html?q=golden+city.</ref> Given that "golden city," "assaulting," and "boisterous behavior, frenzy, or arrogance" would all be referring to Babylon ceasing or Babylon's action ceasing, this isn't a translation error at all. The meaning or referent does not change, no matter which way the verse is translated! At best, we have no error. At worst, we have a translation variant.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|63. {{s||Isaiah|14|5}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|5}}
||Scepter
||"The Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, the '''scepter''' of the rulers." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Skousen proposes that the better translation is "the Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the '''rod''' of the rulers."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} But [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-5.htm the vast majority of popular, English biblical translations] render this verse with "scepter" or "sceptre" instead of rod. Either way, it does not seem that either the essential object being referred to or the ethical message changes. In Skousen's reconstruction of the earliest text of the Book of Mormon (the best reconstruction of the original words dictated by Joseph Smith), the text reads "scepter'''s'''" in the plural.<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|127}} This also doesn't seem to significantly change the essential meaning of the text—a sceptre represents the rod of force or correction used by a sovereign to rule. This is a distinction without a difference, though KJV translators would have been more familiar with the more fancy and elaborate sceptre compared to the simple rod.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|64. {{s||Isaiah|14|11}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|11}}
||Viols
||"Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy '''viols''': the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#11 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#11 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-11.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Critic M.D. Brown claims that the word translated as "'viol' is the Hebrew 'nebel', a type of lyre. True viols were unknown until the 15th century."<ref name="brown"></ref> This claim is correct. The mistranslation, however, does not lead a reader away from the passage's overall intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|65. {{s||Isaiah|14|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|12}}
||Weaken
||"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! Art thou cut down to the ground which did '''weaken''' the nations!" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "There are two meanings for this verb in the Hebrew: one means 'to weaken', the other 'to defeat or to lay prostrate'. In this context, the second of these works better. It is the one adopted in modern translations, such as the English Standard Version: 'How you are cut down to the ground, '''you who laid the nations low'''!'"<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} The essential message of bringing the nations down and humbling them is not altered, given this variation. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-12.htm Eight other popular English biblical translations (six of which are modern)] render this verse as "weaken."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|66. {{s||Isaiah|14|29}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|29}}
||[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockatrice Cockatrice]
||"for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a '''cockatrice'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-29.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The cockatrice is a mythical serpent with a deadly glance that is hatched by a reptile from a cock's egg. However, the Hebrew word here is based on a verb meaning 'to hiss' and simply refers to a viper or adder."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} This verse provides "imagery explaining that while an oppressor of the Philistines may perish, another, more severe will follow." It's "a metaphor suggesting that Philistia's next oppressor (the cockatrice or deadly viper) will somehow be related to its first (the serpent or snake), perhaps a descendant."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|388}} Either a cockatrice or viper/adder can accomplish the rhetorical goals of the verse. Some might think that a cockatrice is somehow more powerful than a fiery flying serpent. That may be the case. Who exactly knows the power differentials that Philistia's next oppressors would have? The prophecy may refer to Babylon since they were part of the Assyrian empire and yet overcame the Assyrian empire and destroyed Jerusalem, which the Assyrians never managed to do. around 587 BC. "Philistia attempted to revolt against Assyria" in 715 BCE, and "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_II Sargon] put down the Philistine revolt in 713 BCE" just two years later.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|p.1001n14.28–32}} Or the Philistines may have considered themselves oppressed by the Assyrians, and so revolted. But, whatever they thought of the oppression that led to their revolt, it was nothing compared to the brutal treatment they would receive from Sargon II when he arrived to besiege their land to reassert his control.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|67. {{s||Isaiah|14|29}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|29}}
||Fiery flying serpent
||"Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken; for out of the serpent’s root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a '''fiery flying serpent'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-29.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' "The correct rendition of the Hebrew for {{s||Isaiah|14|29}} should be 'a flying fiery serpent'. The compound ''fiery serpent'' is represented in the Hebrew by a single word ''saraf'', which comes from the verb ''saraf'' 'to burn'; here we have a flying serpent whose sting burns (in other words, 'a flying poisonous serpent')."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Regardless, we have a mythical serpent creature on the attack. No significant alteration in meaning. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-29.htm Five other popular, English biblical translations (two of which are modern)] render it as the Book of Mormon does here.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|68. {{s||Isaiah|29|16}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|27|27}}
||Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay
||"And wo unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord! And their works are in the dark; and they say: Who seeth us, and who knoweth us? And they also say: '''Surely, your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay'''. But behold, I will show unto them, saith the Lord of Hosts, that I know all their works. For shall the work say of him that made it, he made me not? Or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, he had no understanding?" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-29/#16 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-29/#16 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/29-16.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Erorr – Change in Intent.''' Critic David P. Wright claims that a better translation would be: "How perverse of you! Can the potter be considered as the clay? Can a work say of its maker, 'He did not make me,' and can what is formed say to the one that formed it, 'He has no creative intelligence?'"<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} Wright is correct that this verse's translation changes the meaning of the original text significantly. Isaiah means to use a metaphor that "shows the foolishness of mortals who pretend to be mightier than their Creator (cf. {{s||D&C|10|5-34}})."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|391}}

As currently rendered in the Book of Mormon, the verse means that the wicked who hide their works in darkness are telling God that His "turning of things upside down" will be esteemed as the potter's clay. The "turning of things upside down" might refer to God threatening to humble the mighty and powerful by sending them into slavery. (Compare the daughters of Zion verses, which are full of ironic contrasts between the glamorous, worldly daughters before and after their captivity.) Here, the wicked are so arrogant that they dismiss God's ability to cause a revolution in their comfortable lives. But this is as foolish, says the Book of Mormon's rendition, as a clay pot thinking that the potter cannot throw it back into the clay for destruction and remixing into something new if he decides to.

The Book of Mormon, in line with Wright's translation, already teaches us that God is all-searching and all-wise.<ref>{{s|2|Nephi|9|44}}; {{s||Mosiah|27|41}}; {{s_short||Mosiah|29|19}}</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|69. {{s||Isaiah|29|21}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|27|32}}
||Reproveth
||"And they that make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that '''reproveth''' in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of naught." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-29/#21 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-29/#21 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/29-21.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The verb ''reprove'' is used four times in the Book of Mormon, all in biblical quotes. The King James Version’s use of ''reprove'' adds a negative sense not found in the Hebrew original. In all cases, the neutral verb 'judge' would be a more appropriate translation."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/29-21.htm Twelve other popular, English biblical translations (only two of which are modern)] render this verse similar to how the Book of Mormon and King James Version do. The act of judging or arbitrating disputes between people may mean that the judge at the city gates will actually reprove those who receive the negative side of his judgments. Being found guilty or liable in court is always an implicit reproof of behavior. The passage intends to point to the judge at the gate, who can both arbitrate and reprove—indeed, one cannot do one without the other. One arbitrates by finding who is in the right and who is in the wrong, and arranging a settlement of disparate interests. If one side gets everything they want, the other is reproved. If neither side gets everything they want, there is an implicit reproof of some aspect of both sides' conduct and of their inability to resolve the matter themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|70. {{s|1|John|5|7}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|31|21}}
||The potential presence of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma Johannine Comma] in {{s|2|Nephi|31|21}}
||"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_1-John-Chapter-5/#7 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-John-Chapter-5/#7 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/1_john/5-7.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' This one is considered a stretch even by the scholar with whom the author corresponded. The passages from {{s|1|John|5|7}} and {{s|2|Nephi|31|21}} don't line up like the critics might want them to.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|71. {{s||Exodus|20|13}} ~ {{s||Mosiah|13|21}}
||Kill
||"Thou shalt not '''kill'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Exodus-Chapter-20/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Exodus-Chapter-20/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/exodus/20-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Some have said that the Book of Mormon's inclusion of the word "kill" here is incorrect and that one should have "murder" instead. There's a complex discussion to be had regarding proper translation that can be found, in part, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_not_kill here]. Nevertheless, these debates would have been of little moment to the Book of Mormon's audience, who understood that the command against killing referred to murder, and not to some other forms of death dealing (e.g., self-defense, judicial punishment, or lawful warfare).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|72. {{s||Isaiah|53|8}} ~ {{s||Mosiah|14|8}}
||He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation?
||"'''He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation?''' for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-53/#8 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-53/#8 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/53-8.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright thinks that the first phrase might be rendered as the KJV has it, though many moderns translate it as "by oppression and judgment he was taken away" (New International Version).<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} The second phrase, Wright tells us, is obscure in the Hebrew. It has been rendered variously: "who could consider his stock/descendants," "who could consider his fate," "who could describe his abode," or "who could plead his cause." This can only be considered a translation variant. It is not ideal, since "declaring a generation" isn't very clear in meaning, though it can plausibly be interpreted to include Wright's suggestions, especially the last one.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|73. {{s||Matthew|23|37}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|10|5}}
||Chickens
||"And again, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her '''chickens''' under her wings, yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, who have fallen; yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, ye that dwell at Jerusalem, as ye that have fallen; yea, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens, and ye would not." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-23/#37 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-23/#37 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/23-37.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' The ''CES Letter'' asserts that this is a translation error.<ref name="runnells1769" /> The author believes that it should be rendered "chicks." This isn't an error, but a good example of the diachronic nature of language. The ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'' defines "chicken" as "[t]he young of fowls, particularly of the domestic hen, or gallinaceous fowls."<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=chicken}} </ref> The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' has examples from the 10th to the 16th centuries of "chicken" being used to designate "[t]he young of the domestic fowl [and] its flesh" as well as "the young of any bird."<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Chicken."</ref> This looks like seeking to find fault.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|74. {{s||Matthew|5|15}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|15}}
||Candle
||"do men light a '''candle''' and put it under bushel?" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The corresponding Greek means simply 'a lamp', in fact, 'a small oil lamp."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} the passage intends to use the metaphor of hiding a light when needed to guide towards goodness and truth. Both a candle and a lamp can do that; the source of light is simply a question of culture. Even a translation as far from the original as "no one turns on their flashlight and then hides it under the bedclothes" would convey the same message.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|75. {{s||Matthew|5|15}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|15}}
||Candlestick
||"nay, but on a '''candlestick'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The corresponding Greek word means 'a lamp stand' (that is, a specific stand for placing a lamp)."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} The passage intends to say that a person shouldn't hide their spiritual light but show it to others. Both a lamp/lampstand and a candle/candlestick are effective imagery for communicating that message. See the above discussion.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|76. {{s||Matthew|5|27}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|27}}
||By them of old time
||"Ye have heard that it was said '''by them of old time''', Thou shalt not commit adultery:" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#27 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#27 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-27.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Correct Translation of Younger Biblical Manuscripts.''' Newer translations of the Bible, based on the earliest extant manuscripts, omit the phrase "by them of old time." But there is no significant change of meaning nor intent in the verse, and Jesus is quoting {{s||Exodus|20|14}} and {{s||Deuteronomy|5|18}}. Those are certainly references to prophets "of old time" relevant to Jesus. Further, as Robert S. Boylan has observed, "While the earliest Greek texts do lack the phrase [translated as "by them of old time"] τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, the meaning of the phrase is implicit in the Greek whether or not the phrase is original. This is because the parallel sayings in {{s||Matt|5|21}} and 5:33 contain the phrase τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, so these words are understood in v.27 (via subtext), just as they are understood in vv. 38 and 43, where no Greek manuscript evidenced a need to repeat the obvious, either."<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "KJV Mistranslations in the Sermon at the Temple?" ''Scriptural Mormonism'', May 5, 2016, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2016/05/kjv-mistranslations-in-sermon-at-temple.html?q=translation+errors. Citing Welch, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/sermon-temple-and-greek-new-testament-manuscripts ''Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple''], 202.</ref> This cannot be considered an error—only an evidence that [[Question: Do academic translators copy translations of other documents to use as a "base text"?|the Book of Mormon has the King James Bible as its "base text" for translation]].

One critic takes this further and says that "by them of old time" is a ''mistranslation'' of the Greek ''tois archaiois''. It is more properly rendered as "to them of old time," suggesting that God is the one who told the prophets, "thou shalt not commit adultery."<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|121}} This is correct,<ref>Eric D. Huntsman, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/sermon-mount-latter-day-scripture/six-antitheses The Six Antitheses: Attaining the Purpose of the Law through the Teachings of Jesus]," in ''The Sermon on the Mount in Latter-day Scripture'', ed. Gaye Strathearn, Thomas A. Wayment, and Daniel L. Belnap (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2010), 96, 107n14.</ref> but that doesn't negate the Book of Mormon's historicity, nor does it mean that the Book of Mormon can't retain its status as the "most correct book." The ethical message is the same: don't commit adultery and don't look on someone to lust after them. Whether it was said ''by'' the prophets of old (which is still correct) or ''to'' the prophets of old doesn't matter at all! If prophets speak the word of the Lord, anything they ''say to the people'' has already been ''said to them'' by God.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|77. {{s||Matthew|5|30}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|30}}
||Should be cast into hell
||"And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body '''should be cast into hell'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#30 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#30 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-30.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Stan Larson asserts that this should read "that thy whole body should go into hell" instead of "be cast into hell." Larson asserts that the earliest manuscripts of Matthew support this reading.<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|122}} The differences, however, seem to be trivial, and "cast into hell" can be the translated phrase from the earliest manuscripts. [https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-30.htm Many popular English biblical translations (including a few modern translations)] render this verse as "cast into hell.” However, the rest vary between saying "go into hell," "thrown into hell," "depart into hell," and "fall into hell," so again, the essential intent of the verse is retained no matter the translation.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|78. {{s||Matthew|5|40}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|40}}
||Coat
||"if any man will sue thee at the law and take away thy '''coat''', let him have thy cloak also" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#40 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#40 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-40.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Greek word for ''coat'' is ''chiton'': 'tunic', which actually refers to an inner garment worn under the coat, next to the skin, whereas the Greek word for ''cloak'' is ''himation'', a more general word used to refer to an outer garment (such as a coat or a cloak)."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} "Jesus is saying that, if we are sued even for a trifling amount, rather than countersuing and ratcheting up the hostility, we should be willing to give up what is rightfully ours to defuse the situation."<ref>"What the Bible says about Outer Cloak (From Forerunner Commentary)," ''Bible Tools'', accessed 22 September 2022, https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/11587/Outer-Cloak.htm.</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|79. {{s||Matthew|5|44}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|44}}
||Bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and ... which despitefully use you
||"But behold I say unto you, love your enemies, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you and persecute you;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#44 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#44 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-44.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Newer translations based on earlier manuscripts do render things differently. The newer translations are simpler. They usually say, "But I say to you that you shall love those who hate you and pray for those who persecute you."<ref>Thomas A. Wayment, ''The New Testament, A Translation for Latter-day Saints: A Study Bible'' (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2019), 14.</ref> Neither the verse’s meaning nor intent seems to change in any significant ways. Obviously, there's no doctrinal error.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|80. {{s||Matthew|6|4}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|4}}
||Openly
||"That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret, himself shall reward thee '''openly'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' The word "openly" in this verse [https://biblehub.com/matthew/6-4.htm is omitted in most modern, popular, English biblical translations]. That the Lord will reward us openly is repeated in verses 6 and 18 of {{s||Matthew|6|}} and verses 6 and 18 of {{s|3|Nephi|3|}}. "Openly" is omitted in most biblical translations of those verses as well. Some believe that "openly" is implied in the original Greek word αποδιδωμι (ah-poh-dih-doh-mee) while others don't.<ref>For a case in favor of "openly" being implied in the Greek, see Welch, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/sermon-temple-and-greek-new-testament-manuscripts ''Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple''], 205.</ref> Regardless of the correct translation of the Matthean verses, it remains correct doctrine. {{s||Proverbs|10|22}} says that "The blessing of the LORD, it maketh rich, and he addeth no sorrow with it." {{s|2|Corinthians|9|8}} says that "God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work." In other words, God can bless us abundantly with riches and provisions so that we can continue to do good to others at home and abroad. Is that not blessing us "openly"? Thus, this is either a case where there is no translation error at all, or an intelligible change in intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|81. {{s||Matthew|6|13}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}}
||Temptation
||"And lead us not into '''temptation''', but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' One critic claims that "temptation" should be rendered as "the time of trial."<ref name="alcase" /> [https://biblehub.com/matthew/6-13.htm The majority of popular, academic, modern, English biblical translations], however, disagree with the author. Further, "the time of trial" ''is'' "temptation." To "tempt" someone is "to put them to the test," or to have a "trial" of their strength or character.

Webster's 1828 dictionary defines "tempt" as "'''''In Scripture'''', to try; to prove; to put to trial for proof."<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=tempt}} {{ea}}</ref> Webster also regards "temptation" as meaning "trial," and even includes this precise phrase ("Lead us not into ''temptation''") as an illustration.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=tempt}} {{io}}</ref>

The critic is simply ignorant of the meaning of the word and sees fault where there is none.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|82. {{s||Matthew|6|13}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}}
||Evil
||"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from '''evil''': For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' One critic claims that "evil" should be rendered as "the evil one."<ref name="alcase" /> Evil is personified in "the evil one." Satan was seen as the ultimate source of all evil; to be delivered from him was to be delivered from evil, and vice versa. At most, this is a variant.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|83. {{s||Matthew|6|13}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}}
||For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever, Amen
||"For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Correct Translation of Younger Biblical Manuscript.''' Critics believe that this verse, known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxology#Lord's_Prayer_doxology the doxology], was not original to Jesus; that Jesus didn't actually say this. The earliest manuscripts of the Bible do not contain these phrases. The inclusion of the doxology in {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}} is not a problem for the Book of Mormon. See: [[Question: Did Joseph Smith ignorantly include an error from the Bible into the Book of Mormon when including the Lord's Prayer in 3 Nephi 13:13?|here]]. The doxology is obviously not a doctrinal error about God. The doxology is probably based on a reading of {{s|1|Chronicles|29|10-11}} which reads "Wherefore David blessed the Lord before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, Lord God of Israel our father, for ever and ever. Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted as head above all." Robert S. Boylan, citing John W. Welch, offered other important considerations that provide plausibility for the utterance of the doxology by Jesus.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "[https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-sermon-on-mount-sermon-at-temple.html?q=translation+errors The Sermon on the Mount, the Sermon at the Temple, and the Doxology]," ''Scriptural Mormonism'',26 August 2014.</ref> Swiss theologian [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulrich_Luz Ulrich Luz] observed that "[t]he three-member doxology, which is usual in our services, is missing in the best manuscripts." He then argued that {{s|2|Timothy|4|18}} and Didache 8:2 "show that the Lord’s Prayer was prayed in the Greek church from the beginning with a doxology."<ref>Ulrich Luz, ''{{s||Matthew|1|7}}: A Continental Commentary'', trans. William C. Linss (Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 1985), 385; as cited in Patrick D. Miller, ''They Cried to the Lord: The Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer'' (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 438n118.</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|84. {{s||Matthew|6|28}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|28}}
||Lillies
||"consider the '''lilies''' of the field" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#28 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#28 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-28.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "Here the Greek word ''krinon'', modified as being 'in the field', most likely refers to a colorful wild flower."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The verses are meant to suggest that the birds of the air, flowers of the field, and other things do not worry about the span of their lives nor worry about what they're going to eat to survive, and yet the Lord provides for them. The intent of the verse is unchanged.{{Rp|215}}
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|85. {{s||Matthew|7|2}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}}
||Again
||"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you '''again'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-7/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-7/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/7-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Stan Larson asserts that the "again" at the end of {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}} is erroneous.<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|123}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Welch John W. Welch] responded as follows in the ''FARMS Review'': "Example 3 concerns the difference between 'measured to you' (which appears in older Matthean texts) and "measured to you again" (which appears in KJV {{s||Matthew|7|2}} and {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}}). Larson says that I 'downplay the difference among the variants at {{s||Matthew|7|2}}' (p. 123). He does not say, however, why I find the difference to be negligible. The difference is over the presence or absence of the Greek prefix anti- (English again). I believe that 'with or without this prefix on the verb, the sentence means exactly the same thing.'<ref name="welchsermon">John W. Welch, ''The Sermon at the Temple and the Sermon on the Mount'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1990), 155.</ref> Indeed, the similarity is such that 'this variant was not considered significant enough to be noted in the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament.'<ref name="welchsermon" /> Larson tries to salvage his point by arguing that 'it can usually (but not always) be shown what Greek text the Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions were based upon' and 'it is often such fine distinctions that are clues in textual criticism' (p. 123). But if one were to imagine a world in which no Greek manuscripts of the New Testament existed, scholars would not stake their reputations on claiming to know for sure (given the clear sense of the passage) whether ''antimetrethesetai'' or ''metrethesetai'' stood behind an English translation that renders {{s||Matthew|7|2}} as 'measured again.' Similarly, one cannot be sure which Aramaic verb was originally used here or which version of a Nephite verb stood on the plates of Mormon behind the translation 'measured again.' Because {{s||Luke|6|38}} contains the word ''antimetrethesetai'' ('measured again'), is there any reason not to believe that early Christians used the words ''antimetrethesetai'' and ''metrethesetai'' interchangeably? Larson has not shown that this is one of those cases where one can determine from the translation what the underlying text was, or that this is one of those 'fine distinctions' of textual analysis (because there is virtually no distinction in meaning here). If no difference exists, Larson has not proved that {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}} is in error."<ref>{{Welch:Approaching New Approaches Review Of New Approaches To:FARMS Review:1994|pages=159-160}}</ref> John Gee and Royal Skousen also address these issues for those who want to learn more.<ref>{{Gee:La Trahison Des Clercs On The Language And:FARMS Review:1994|pages=67–71, 99–101.}}, {{Skousen:Critical Methodology And The Text Of The Book:FARMS Review:1994|pages=121–29}}</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|86. {{s||Isaiah|52|15}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|20|45}}
||Sprinkle
||"So he shall '''sprinkle''' many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-52/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-52/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/52-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' The Hebrew verb for ''sprinkle'' doesn't make much sense in context here. Other translations have made this verse something like "the nations '''shall marvel''' upon him." Joseph Smith, in his "New Translation" of the Bible, replaced ''sprinkle'' with '''''gather''''', showing the difficulty of rendering this verse.<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} Some translations render it as nations gathering to God, standing in wonder of him, or being startled by him. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/52-15.htm The majority of popular, English biblical translations] render it as "sprinkle." Scholars today are still not certain about the meaning of the Hebrew.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|1051nB}} If that's the case, then this can't be considered a translation ''error''. At worst, it can only be a translation ''variant''. The question really becomes, if the verse is translated as "sprinkle," sprinkle with what? And how will that sprinkling be part of what causes kings to shut their mouths in the Lord's presence?
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|87. {{s||Micah|5|14}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|21|18}}
||Groves
||"And I will pluck up thy '''groves''' out of the midst of thee; so will I destroy thy cities." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Micah-Chapter-5/#14 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Micah-Chapter-5/#14 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/micah/5-14.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' "Here the noun ''grove'' is used to refer to a sacred grove used for cultic rites. However, the original Hebrew in these passages refers to ''Asherim'', that is, wooden images of the Canaanite goddess Asherah."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Given that "groves" refers to areas where cultic, idolatrous rites were practiced, the Book of Mormon does not alter the essential message of Isaiah: that idolatry is wrong ({{s||Mosiah|13|12-13}}) and that God was going to take action to remove idolatrous practices from the Israelites. [https://biblehub.com/micah/5-14.htm Four other popular, English biblical translations (only one modern)] render this verse as "groves."

It's difficult to see this even as a mistranslation, since the wooden images were conceptually trees or groves anyway. Some scholars believe that they actually ''were'' trees sometimes:

<blockquote>
These poles represent living trees, with which the goddess is associated. Some scholars believe that ''asherim'' [the wooden images] were not poles, but living trees (like the one depicted on the Tanaach Cult Stand). The poles were either carved to resemble trees or the goddess (this could also be reflected in the numerous pillar figurines found throughout Israel).<ref> Ellen White, "[https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-israel/asherah-and-the-asherim-goddess-or-cult-symbol/ Asherah and the Asherim: Goddess or Cult Symbol?]," ''Biblical Archaeology Society'' (3 August 2023).</ref>
</blockquote>

"Grove" may, in fact, give more nuance and depth to the ideas being conveyed. It is certainly not a mistranslation or misleading rendering.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|88. {{s||Isaiah|54|11-12}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|22|11-12}}
||Stones and architectural details mentioned
||"O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not comforted, behold, I will lay thy stones with fair colours, and lay thy foundations with sapphires. And I will make thy windows of agates, and thy gates of carbuncles, and all thy borders of pleasant stones." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-54/#11 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-54/#11 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/54-11.htm Bible Hub v. 11] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/54-12.htm Bible Hub v. 12])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critic David P. Wright curiously claims that "the meaning of several of the terms in this passage is unclear" and then, in the next clause of the sentence, that "the KJV cannot be considered accurate." He asks us to compare the Revised English Bible: "Storm-battered city, distressed and desolate, now I shall set your stones in the finest mortar and lay your foundations with sapphires; I shall make your battlements of red jasper and your gates of garnet; all your boundary stones will be precious jewels."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|173}} So the main differences are to substitute "finest mortar" for "fair colours," "battlements" for "windows," "red jasper" for "agates," and "garnet" for "carbuncle." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbuncle Carbuncle] ''is'' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garnet garnet] so that complaint doesn't make much sense. A [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlement battlement] is a type of window, so it likewise doesn't make much sense to fuss over it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agate Agate] is similar to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper jasper]. The overall intent of the passage is to state that "[t]he new Jerusalem is adorned with precious stones and gems by builders supernaturally instructed; cf. {{s||Ezekiel|28|13-19}}. Christian apocalyptic literature draws on this imagery to describe the new Jerusalem ({{s||Rev|21|18-21}})."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|1053n11–17}}
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|89. {{s||Mark|16|15-18}} ~ {{s||Mormon|9|22-24}}; {{s||Ether|4|18}}
||Longer ending of Mark in the books of Mormon and Ether
||"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; And he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned; And these signs shall follow them that believe—in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Mark-Chapter-16/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Mark-Chapter-16/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-15.htm Bible Hub v. 15] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-16.htm Bible Hub v. 16] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-17.htm Bible Hub v. 17] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-15.htm Bible Hub v. 18])
||'''Not An Error.''' See our commentary on this issue [[Question: Why does part of the longer ending of Mark show up in the Book of Mormon?|here]].
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|90. {{s|1|Corinthians|13|5}} ~ {{s||Moroni|7|45}}
||Easily
||"Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not ''easily'' provoked, thinketh no evil;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#5 1611] |[https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/1_corinthians/13-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Critic James H. Snowden claims that "in incorporating 1 Cor. 13:5, in the 'Book of Moroni,' the phrase 'is not easily provoked,' reads as in the Authorized Version, but the word 'easily' is not found in the Greek and is dropped in the Revised Version. Joe's 'Urim and Thummim,' however, did not detect the absence of this word and he put it in."<ref name="snowden"></ref> The Greek word translated as "easily" is ''παροξύνεται'' (pah-roh-HOO-neh-tai). That word refers to ''irritability'' and irritability certainly entails being "easily" angered or provoked. While the word "easily" is not present in the Greek, its presence in the Book of Mormon does not constitute a mistranslation of the Greek.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|91. {{s|1|Corinthians|13|1}} ~ {{s||Moroni|7|47}}
||The use of "charity" in {{s||Moroni|7|}}, relying upon the KJV rendering of "agape." Apparently, it should just be rendered "love."
||"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/1_corinthians/13-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' It's difficult to know exactly how passages like {{s||Moroni|7|47}} would be translated. There, we learn that "charity is the pure love of Christ." Should we translate that passage as "love is the pure love of Christ"? Or "agape is the pure love of Christ"? Maybe the latter, but it doesn't seem to be a substantive improvement over just retaining "charity" in the verse, especially for a Christianized 19th-century audience.
|-
|}
</wt>
}}
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Question #4: Why did God allow the KJV errors to exist in the Book of Mormon?===
| state = closed
| content =
====The Lord Speaks "After the Manner of their Language"====
All the tabulated data above support the conclusion that the Book of Mormon, if indeed a translation of an ancient text, is a cultural and creative translation of that text. But why did God allow the translation errors?

The only description of the translation process that Joseph Smith ever gave was that it was performed by the "gift and power of God" and used the "Urim and Thummim."<ref>{{EJfairwiki|author=Joseph Smith|date=July 1838|vol=1|num=3|start=42|end=43}}</ref>

We have [[Question: Was every word of the Book of Mormon translation provided directly from God?|some of the Lord's own words about the nature of revelation to Joseph Smith]]. The Lord speaks to His servants "after the manner of their language that they may come to understanding" according to the Doctrine & Covenants ({{s||Doctrine & Covenants|1|24}}). That same idea is confirmed in {{s|2|Nephi|31|3}}. He can even use error for His own holy, higher purposes. The formal theological term for this idea is "accommodation." [[Question: How do Mormons understand prophetic revelation?|The wiki page on the nature of prophetic revelation]] discusses this idea from a Latter-day Saint point of view. God can accommodate erroneous translations and even perspectives for higher, holier objectives. That should be comforting to us—the Lord accommodates His perfection to our weakness and uses our imperfect language and nature for the building up of Zion on the earth.

Joseph Smith quoted from {{s||Malachi|4|5-6}} in {{s||Doctrine and Covenants|128|17-18}}. At the top of verse 18: "I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands."<ref>Complete article and citation can be read [[Joseph Smith: "I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands"|here]]</ref> Joseph here is content with a functionally sufficient translation. It doesn’t need to be 100% exact to be divine and achieve divine purposes.

The Lord can start with the plates, use Joseph's culturally-saturated mind as a springboard and filter for further modification of the text as well as decide which changes absolutely need to be made to the text to communicate the right message (the one that leads to salvation and exaltation), and then provide that "accommodated," functionally-sufficient translation, word-for-word, on the seer stone and Urim and Thummim. (Part of this discussion depends upon whether one understands the Book of Mormon to have been a [[Question: Was every word of the Book of Mormon translation provided directly from God?|loose translation versus tight translation]].)

The data above confirms what scripture and other revelations teach about the nature of revelation.

Brigham Young taught:

<blockquote>
Should the Lord Almighty send an angel to rewrite the Bible, it would in many places be very different from what it now is. And I will even venture to say that if the Book of Mormon were now to be re-written, in many instances it would materially differ from the present translation. According as people are willing to receive the things of God, so the heavens send forth their blessings.<ref>{{JDmini|author=Brigham Young|vol=9|pages=311}}.</ref>
</blockquote>

Brigham recognized that the Book of Mormon's translation could take different shapes. For Latter-day Saints, it is the message—and not the precise words—that matter when determining whether divinity lies behind a claim to revelation.
}}
{{endnotes sources}}



[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]
[[Category:An Insider's View of Mormon Origins]]
[[Category:Difficult Questions for Mormons]]

[[es:Pregunta: Si el Libro de Mormón es una traducción exacta, ¿por qué habría que contiene errores de traslación que existen en la Biblia King James?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Se o Livro de Mórmon é uma tradução exata, por isso que conteria erros translacionais que existem na Bíblia King James?]]

KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon

2026-08-11T19:48:11Z

SpencerMarsh:

{{Main Page}}
{{Navigation:Bible}}{{blankline}}
{{Navigation:Book of Mormon}}{{blankline}}
<h1>KJV Translation Errors in the Book of Mormon</h1>
'''Summary:''' The Book of Mormon contains quotations from biblical authors with language mirroring much of that of the King James translation. The Book of Mormon also contains word and phrase borrowings from the King James Bible that are not part of quotations from biblical authors. These quotations, word borrowings, and phrase borrowings contain what are now considered by some scholars and critics to be translation errors.

Some critics believe that the errors are evidence of Joseph Smith's plagiarism in creating the Book of Mormon, specifically from a 1769 edition of the King James Bible. The author of the ''CES Letter'' asks, "What are 1769 King James Version edition errors doing in the Book of Mormon? A purported ancient text? Errors which are unique to the 1769 edition that Joseph Smith owned?"<ref>Jeremy T. Runnells, ''CES Letter: My Search for Answers to My Mormon Doubts'' (n.p.: CES Letter Foundation, 2017), 14 {{ea}}.</ref>

Other critics focus on a statement from Joseph Smith declaring that the Book of Mormon is "the most correct book" and ask, "If the Book of Mormon is ‘the most correct book of any on earth,’ why would it contain translational errors that exist in the King James Bible?"<ref>{{CriticalWork:Palmer:Insider|pages=10, 83}}; {{CriticalWork:Martin:Kingdom of the Cults|pages=205}}; La Roy Sunderland, "Mormonism," ''Zion’s Watchman'' (New York) 3, no. 7 (17 February 1838) {{link|url=http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/BOMP&CISOPTR=1730&REC=19}}</ref>

Four questions must be confronted regarding supposed KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon:

#[[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #2 and #3: Are there really translation errors in the Book of Mormon? If so, do they lead us into believing erroneous theological ideas?|Is the claimed "translation error" actually an error?]]
#[[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #1: Do the translation errors prove that Joseph Smith plagiarized from his contemporary King James Version to create the Book of Mormon?|Is the error evidence that Joseph Smith was plagiarizing from the KJV?]] We need to know whether Joseph was plagiarizing from a 1769 edition of the KJV, because that is the edition that Joseph reputedly owned.
#[[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #2 and #3: Are there really translation errors in the Book of Mormon? If so, do they lead us into believing erroneous theological ideas?|Do the translation errors change the meaning of the text so drastically as to mislead the reader in theologically significant ways?]] Joseph Smith declared the Book of Mormon "the most correct book on earth" not because it contained no translation errors, but because by following what the Book of Mormon teaches [[The_Book_of_Mormon_as_the_most_correct_book#Why_did_Joseph_Smith_say_that_the_Book_of_Mormon_was_the_.22most_correct_book.22.3F|a person would get closer to God and His nature than by reading any other book]].
# [[KJV translation errors in the Book of Mormon#Question #4: Why did God allow the KJV errors to exist in the Book of Mormon?|If these are errors, why would God allow such an error in the text of the Book of Mormon?]]

Our answers, in brief, are as follows:

# The Book of Mormon indeed does contain some King James Bible translation errors.
# There are 12 different reasons to believe that Joseph Smith did not plagiarize from the King James Bible to create the Book of Mormon. ''None'' of the errors is unique to the 1769 edition of the King James Bible.
# In no case do any of the errors teach incorrect doctrine or compel someone to believe something false.
# God allowed the errors to persist in the Book of Mormon because He speaks to His "servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding" ([https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/1.24?lang=eng Doctrine & Covenants 1:24]). God can achieve all of His divine goals without a perfect translation.
----
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Question #1: Do the translation errors prove that Joseph Smith plagiarized from his contemporary King James Version to create the Book of Mormon?===
| state = closed
| content =
{{BMCentral|title=What Vision Guides Nephi's Choice of Isaiah Chapters?|url=https://knowhy.bookofmormoncentral.org/knowhy/what-vision-guides-nephis-choice-of-isaiah-chapters|number=38}}

First, we deal with the accusation of plagiarism. There are many reasons to reject the notion that Joseph Smith either used a Bible during the translation of the Book of Mormon or had one nearby that he was memorizing before or during the translation.

====Plagiarism is implausible #1—Errors not unique to 1769====

As a corrective to the ''CES Letter'', the "errors" reported in the King James Bible are not unique to the 1769 version. Five major editions of the KJV were published in 1611, 1629, 1638, 1762, and 1769. Many minor editions/revisions have been made since the 1769 edition.

The 1769 text is the standard text of most King James Bibles today, including that published by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Only the 1611 and 1769 editions are available online. The "errors" are contained in both editions. Readers can [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611-Bible/ read the 1611 edition online] and see for themselves.

The more modern 1769 KJV used in Latter-day Saint scriptures is also available online for review. Given that the 1611 and 1769 editions contain the same "translation errors," it is likely that the other major editions published between the 1611 and 1769 editions contain the same "errors," which, in turn, makes it more difficult for us to claim with certainty which edition of the KJV, if any, Joseph Smith plagiarized from.

<h5>A Slow Drift in the Argument</h5>
Anti-Mormon critics' arguments often undergo a slow evolution as they copy from each other, sometimes distorting the original argument along the way. So it proves in this case. The authors on whom the ''CES Letter'' seems to rely did ''not'' claim that the translation errors are unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV. Rather, one of them merely noted translation errors and suggested that the King James Bible was a source for the Book of Mormon’s composition. The other also noted translation errors, but he did not claim that the errors were what singled out the 1769 edition. Rather, he noted the use of ''italics'' in the KJV to indicate a word that was not present in the original Greek text of the Bible and that "[t]he Book of Mormon sometimes revises the KJV italics that are only found in the 1769 and later printings."<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|p.130}} This, it was argued, proved the Book of Mormon wasn't ancient. That's an absurd claim since the revision of italics does not necessarily prove a modern origin for the Book of Mormon. At most, it can mean that a 1769 King James Bible or later printing is being used in some way as a base text for the Book of Mormon translation.<ref>Runnells originally relied on sources that are not cited nor linked to in the first few editions of the ''CES Letter''. In editions past 2013, he links to [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Book_of_Mormon_and_the_King_James_Bible&oldid=582211861#Perpetuation_of_translation_errors an old version of a Wikipedia page] (accessed 2 December 2022) to make his argument. The editor of the Wikipedia page arguing that the errors are unique to the 1769 edition may have relied on either Runnells or Runnells' unknown sources and very likely misunderstood and thus misrepresented the argument originally made by Wright and Larson. A similar argument to Runnells' is made in {{CriticalWork:Palmer:Insider|pages=10}}. Palmer relies on David P. Wright, "Joseph Smith's Interpretation of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon," 181–206, and Larson, "The Historicity of the Matthean Sermon," 115–63. Those two, and more especially Larson, seem to be the source of this criticism. Palmer doesn't seem to make the argument that the translation errors in the Book of Mormon are unique to the 1769 version, but rather that scholars (Larson and Wright) have dated the Book of Mormon's composition to the 1830s because of the Book of Mormon's seeming use of the 1769 KJV, including its errors. That is a correct reading of the argument that Larson and Wright make. They argued that the Book of Mormon includes KJV translation errors and, ''separately'', that the Book of Mormon's use of KJV '''italics''' is what pinned the Book of Mormon to the 1769 edition. Runnells, however, including his sources, has certainly misunderstood the argument that Palmer, Larson, and Wright were making because he relied on the mistaken Wikipedia page. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon_and_the_King_James_Bible#Perpetuation_of_KJV_translation_variations As of this writing, the newest iteration of the Wikipedia page] (accessed December 2, 2022) seems to correct this error. Still, it also partially retains the argument that the errors are unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV. Significantly, it says there are translation ''variations'' (rather than errors) in the 1769 edition of the KJV and in the Book of Mormon. But it seems to suggest that the variations are unique to the 1769 edition, as it opens by saying that "The KJV of 1769 contains translation variations which also occur in the Book of Mormon." That's technically a correct statement, but why specify that the variations come from the 1769 edition unless wanting to hold on at least partially to the original argument of the 1769 version's unique errors? Moving along in that section and reading the table of that section, it gives examples of how the ''1611'' (and not the 1769) edition of the KJV and the Book of Mormon share translation variants. It's an odd page to be sure, but it makes important points that hint at the errors in Runnells' claims. Runnells now relies on the Larson and Wright articles that Palmer used, the new Wikipedia page, an old anti-Mormon webpage called 2Think.org, [https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/7 the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon], as well as [https://www.stepbible.org/version.jsp?version=KJVA an online edition of the 1769 KJV with apocrypha] to make his case. Though he has neglected correcting for the fact that the translation errors he identifies exist in other editions of the KJV. This is either evidence of ignorance, laziness, or duplicity. Runnells is known for moving the goalposts and claiming that opponents straw-man his arguments to make it appear as though his ''CES Letter'' hasn't made any significant, lazy mistakes in research. Why take pains to state "1769" and "unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV that Joseph Smith owned" in the quote from the ''CES Letter'' at the top of this article? Elsewhere, Runnells pointedly underscores as fact that "[t]here are 1769 KJV Bible edition errors '''unique to only that edition''' present in the Book of Mormon." See Jeremy Runnells, "What are 1769 King James Version edition errors doing in the Book of Mormon?" ''CES Letter'', accessed 22 December 2022, {{antilink|https://cesletter.org/debunking-fairmormon/book-of-mormon.html#2}}</ref>

<h5>KJV as a Base Text</h5>

Stan Spencer writes:

<blockquote>
Although the Bible that was used as a base text for the Book of Mormon was certainly the KJV, it was probably not the 1769 Oxford edition, which most King James Bibles today are based on. The text of that edition was not uniformly used in King James Bibles until after the Book of Mormon was translated. Many distinctive American editions of the KJV were printed in the latter part of the eighteenth and the early part of the nineteenth centuries, and these, along with the contemporary King James Bibles out of Cambridge, had many minor differences from the Oxford 1769 edition, some of which served to modernize the language. Some of these editions more closely match the Book of Mormon than does the 1769 edition — the 1828 Phinney Cooperstown Bible and the 1819 American Bible Society octavo edition being among the closest.<ref name="spencer">{{Interpreter:Spencer:Missing Words King James Bible Italics The Translation:2020}}</ref>{{Rp|49}}
</blockquote>

The King James Bible itself is a very conservative revision of the 1602 edition of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishops%27_Bible Bishop's Bible].<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|47n5}} The original, 1568 edition of the Bishop's Bible [https://textusreceptusbibles.com/Bishops is available online] and may be checked if one is curious as to whether an 'error' in the KJV is a holdover from this earlier translation. The key point is that the King James translators may not have been the translators who originated many of these errors. Instead, they were likely reproducing prior errors. (If this happened in the case of the Book of Mormon, it would no more prove that Joseph was not translating the Book of Mormon than the presence of such errors in the KJV proves that the KJV translators were not translating.)

Spencer explains why the KJV is used as the Book of Mormon's base text:

<blockquote>
The use of the KJV as a base text for biblical passages in the Book of Mormon makes sense since it allows for any important differences to be easily seen. A completely independent retranslation of the Isaiah chapters would have differed more in wording than in meaning. The differences in wording would have invited fruitless criticism of the suitability of word choice in the Book of Mormon. The use of wording from the KJV precludes such a diversion of attention from the intended messages of the Book of Mormon. Even for short biblical interactions, the use of KJV wording makes it more clear that the Bible is indeed being quoted or alluded to. An independent translation of these shorter passages would have differed enough in wording from the KJV that some of these interactions would have been less clear.<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|47–48}}
</blockquote>

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=Question: Do academic translators copy translations of other documents to use as a "base text"?
|subject1=Academic use of base texts for new translation
|summary1=See here for discussion of translators using earlier translations as a base text to showcase only the ''important'' differences between their text and well-known versions.
}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #2—Announcing a quotation is not plagiarism====

Nephi and the Savior generally make it clear when they are quoting from Isaiah. Regardless of whether a modern or ancient author is responsible for the Book of Mormon text, citing sources directly is ''not'' plagiarism. ''At most'', all we can say is that Joseph Smith (or his supposed co-conspirators) is haphazardly using Isaiah to create the Book of Mormon, not ''plagiarizing'' it.

As far as material from Micah is concerned, this is a word-for-word quotation/reproduction of God's message in {{s||Micah|4|12-13}} and {{s_short|Micah|5|8-14}}. ({{s|3|Nephi|16|14-15}}; {{s_short|3|Nephi|20|16-20}}; {{s_short|3|Nephi|21|12|18, 21}}<ref>For the most thorough coverage of the Micah material in the Book of Mormon, see Dana M. Pike, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/they-shall-grow-together/passages-book-micah-book-mormon Passages from the Book of Micah in the Book of Mormon]," in ''They Shall Grow Together: The Bible in the Book of Mormon'', ed. Charles Swift and Nicholas J. Frederick (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2022), 393–443.</ref> Mormon uses {{s||Micah|5|8}} similarly in {{s||Mormon|5|24}}.

As for the Sermon on the Mount, it is not difficult to believe that Christ's message would be the same to all people. For Him to repeat himself is not plagiarism. If Joseph is trying to fool us, putting the most well-known sermon in all of Christendom into the mouth of the resurrected Jesus is a foolish way to do it.

John W. Welch has documented important differences between the Sermon on the Mount recorded in the New Testament and what he calls the Sermon at the Temple in 3rd Nephi. Welsh demonstrates that Joseph Smith is not just mindlessly copying the Sermon on the Mount.<ref name="welchilluminate">John W. Welch, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/sermon-temple-and-sermon-mount-differences ''Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple & the Sermon on the Mount''] (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1999), 125–50.</ref>

====Plagiarism is implausible #3—The Book of Mormon author clearly does not need to plagiarize to produce large amounts of text====

Regarding Exodus, Mark, 1 Corinthians, and 1 John, why would Joseph or his supposed co-conspirators plagiarize the one source most familiar to their audience? Why copy whole chapters haphazardly when that audience was so familiar with the source material? Whoever produced the Book of Mormon is clearly able to write text that has nothing to do with the KJV. Joseph does not need it as filler—he can produce immense amounts of text very quickly.

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=Question:_What_do_we_know_about_the_chronology_of_the_Book_of_Mormon_translation_and_publication%3F
|subject1=Timeline of the Book of Mormon translation and publications
|summary1=Our current Book of Mormon was translated from 7 April to the end of June 1829.
}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #4—Some 'errors' find confirmation in texts unknown to Joseph Smith====

A closer look at these duplicate texts actually provides us with an additional witness of the Book of Mormon's authenticity.<ref>See Michael Hickenbotham, ''Answering Challenging Mormon Questions: Replies to 130 Queries by Friends and Critics of the LDS Church'' (Springville, UT: Cedar Fort Publisher, 2004),193-196.{{NB}}</ref> One verse ({{s|2|Nephi|12|16}}) is not only different but adds a completely new phrase: "And upon all the ships of the sea." This non-King James addition agrees with the Greek (Septuagint) version of the Bible, which was first translated into English in 1808 by Charles Thomson. It is also contained in the Coverdale 1535 translation of the Bible.<ref>The implications of this change represent a more complicated textual history than previously thought. See discussion in {{Seely:Upon All The Ships Of The Sea And:JBMS:2005}}. For earlier discussions, see {{TruthGodmakers1 | start=172}}; see also {{AncientAmericaBoM|start=100|end=102}}; {{Nibley7|start=129|end=143}}; Royal Skousen, "[https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/textual-variants-isaiah-quotations-book-mormon Textual Variants in the Isaiah Quotations of the Book of Mormon]," in ''Isaiah in the Book of Mormon'', ed. Donald W. Parry and John W. Welch (Provo, UT: FARMS, 1998), 376.</ref> John Tvedtnes has also shown that many of the Book of Mormon's translation variants of Isaiah have ancient support.<ref>John A. Tvedtnes, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/isaiah-prophets/isaiah-variants-book-mormon Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon]," in ''Isaiah and the Prophets: Inspired Voices from the Old Testament'', ed. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1984), 165-78. David Wright responded to John Tvedtnes' chapter therein. Tvedtnes responds to Wright in John A. Tvedtnes, "[https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/isaiah-bible-and-book-mormon Isaiah in the Bible and the Book of Mormon]," ''The FARMS Review'' 16, no. 2 (2004): 161–72.{{Tvedtnes:Isaiah In The Bible And The Book Of:FARMS Review:2004}}</ref> BYU Professor Paul Y. Hoskisson has shown that "[t]he brass plates version of {{s||Isaiah|2|2}}, as contained in {{s|2|Nephi|12|2}}, contains a small difference, not attested in any other pre-1830 Isaiah witness, that not only helps clarify the meaning but also ties the verse to events of the Restoration. The change does so by introducing a Hebraism that would have been impossible for Joseph Smith, the Prophet, to have produced on his own."<ref>{{Interpreter:Hoskisson:Was Joseph Smith Smarter Than The Average Fourth:2015}}</ref>

These factors throw a huge wrench into any critic's theories that Joseph Smith merely cribbed from the KJV Isaiah. Why would Joseph Smith crib the KJV, including all of its translation errors, but then somehow find the ''one phrase'', "upon all the ships of the sea," from the Greek Septuagint and 1535 Coverdale Bible? How could he make sure that his translation of Isaiah had support from ancient renderings of Isaiah, and make sure that his version of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon had authentic Hebraisms made to be part of the text as well? It's obviously ''possible'' that he did, but ''highly unlikely''.

====Plagiarism is implausible #5—Witnesses all insist no papers or bible was ever consulted====

The witnesses to the translation are unanimous that a Bible was not consulted during the translation of the Book of Mormon.<ref>John W. Welch, "[https://byustudies.byu.edu/online-chapters/documents-of-the-translation-of-the-book-of-mormon/ Documents of the Translation of the Book of Mormon]," in ''Opening the Heavens: Accounts of Divine Manifestations'', ed. John W. Welch, 2nd ed. (Provo, UT: BYU Press; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2017), 126–227.</ref>

{{Related articles
|link1=Joseph_Smith_and_the_translation_process#A compilation of published statements on the Book of Mormon translation method in both Church and non-Church publications
|subject1=All descriptions of the Book of Mormon translation process
|summary1=This page collects all first- and second-hand descriptions of the translation of the Book of Mormon, and groups them by theme (e.g., weight of the plates, use of seer stone, etc.)}}

Stan Spencer observed,

<blockquote>[I]f Joseph Smith used a physical bible, he would have had to do so frequently, since biblical interactions are scattered throughout the Book of Mormon. Continuously removing his face from the hat to make use of a physical Bible would not have gone unnoticed by those who watched him translate.<ref name="spencer"></ref>{{Rp|59}}
</blockquote>

Indeed, given the all the different quotations of whole chapters, phrasal interactions between the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon, as well as [[The_New_Testament_and_the_Book_of_Mormon#The_Book_of_Mormon_claims_to_be_a_.22translation.2C.22_and_the_language_used_is_that_of_Joseph_Smith|the phrasal interactions/similarities between the New Testament and the Book of Mormon]], to conceive of Joseph either memorizing these passages and phrases (a process for which there is no evidence) or consulting a Bible during the translation (likewise) is ludicrous. Someone would have noticed that. Yet no one reports a Bible, and [[Book_of_Mormon/Translation/Method/1846-1900#Emma Smith Bidamon (eyewitness)|some are specifically clear]] that he did ''not'' have any book or manuscript to which he referred.<ref>Joseph Smith III, "Last Testimony of Sister Emma;' ''Saints' Herald'' 26 (October 1, 1879): 289-90; and Joseph Smith III, "Last Testimony of Sister Emma;' ''Saints' Advocate'' 2 (October 1879): 50-52.</ref>

====Plagiarism is implausible #6—The original manuscript shows no signs of visual copying of the KJV====

Latter-day Saint scholar Royal Skousen, using the [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/printing-and-publishing-the-book-of-mormon?lang=eng Original and Printer's Manuscripts] of the Book of Mormon, has provided a persuasive argument that none of the King James language contained in the Book of Mormon could have been copied directly from the Bible. He deduces this from the fact that when the Book of Mormon quotes, echoes, or alludes to passages in the King James Bible, Oliver (Joseph's amanuensis for the dictation of the Book of Mormon) consistently misspells certain words from the text that he wouldn't have misspelled if he was looking at the then-current edition of the KJV.<ref>"[https://interpreterfoundation.org/the-history-of-the-text-of-the-book-of-mormon/ The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon]," Interpreter Foundation, accessed August 15, 2022, .</ref>

Of course, it's possible that Joseph Smith dictated every portion of the Book of Mormon that quotes Isaiah to Oliver while looking at the Bible and Oliver isn't; but that's less likely given the consistency with which Oliver misspells the words (wouldn't there be at least one time, throughout all the time that Joseph and Oliver were translating, where Joseph Smith hands Oliver the Bible to more efficiently copy the passages and where Oliver then spells the words correctly?)

When considering the data, Skousen proposes that, instead of Joseph or Oliver looking at a Bible, God provided the page of text from the King James Bible to Joseph's mind, and then Joseph was free to alter the text as he pleased. In cases where the Book of Mormon alludes to or echoes KJV language, perhaps the Lord allowed these portions of the text to be revealed in a way that would be more comprehensible/comfortable to the 19th-century audience. Even if Joseph Smith were using the King James Bible out in the open and on the translating table as a base text, [[Question: Do academic translators copy translations of other documents to use as a "base text"?|that would hardly be out of line with best practices for translators and hardly considered plagiarism]]. The available eyewitness and manuscript data are more consistent with the theory that the KJV was used as a base text, but ''through divine revelation from God'', rather than openly on the table.<ref>Earlier LDS scholarship sometimes did argue that Joseph Smith used a Bible during the Book of Mormon translation process. They did not, however, have the benefit of the subsequent half-century of investigation. See {{Ensign|author=Richard Lloyd Anderson|url=https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1977/09/by-the-gift-and-power-of-god?lang=eng|article=By the Gift and Power of God=|vol=7|num=9|date=September 1977}}.</ref>

====Plagiarism is implausible #7—Archaic vocabulary====

{{EvidenceCentral|title=Book of Mormon Evidence: Archaic Vocabulary|url=https://evidencecentral.org/recency/evidence/archaic-vocabulary|number=361}} Skousen and Latter-day Saint linguist Stanford Carmack are ''adamant'' that Joseph Smith merely read the words off the seer stone/Urim and Thummim and did not consult a bible during translation of the Book of Mormon. A reason they believe this is that the Book of Mormon contains [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Modern_English Early Modern English] in its translation. They provide many examples that they believe predate Joseph’s English, the English of the 1769 edition of the King James Bible, and even the 1600s edition. Skousen and Carmack have produced a massive amount of literature arguing for this stance. Readers are encouraged to read that work and decide for themselves.<ref>{{Interpreter:Skousen:The Original Text Of The Book Of Mormon:2013}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:A Look At Some Nonstandard Book Of Mormon:2014}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:What Command Syntax Tells Us About Book Of:2014}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The Implications Of Past-tense Syntax In The Book:2015}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Why The Oxford English Dictionary And Not Websters:2015}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The More Part Of The Book Of Mormon:2016}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Joseph Smith Read The Words:2016}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The Case Of The -th Plural In The:2016}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:How Joseph Smiths Grammar Differed From Book Of:2017}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Barlow On Book Of Mormon Language An Examination:2017}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Is The Book Of Mormon A Pseudo-archaic Text:2018}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Bad Grammar In The Book Of Mormon Found:2020}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:Personal Relative Pronoun Usage In The Book Of:2021}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:The Book Of Mormons Complex Finite Cause Syntax:2021}}; {{Interpreter:Carmack:A Comparison Of The Book Of Mormons Subordinate:2022}}; "[https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/language-original-text-book-mormon The Language of the Original Text of the Book of Mormon]," ''BYU Studies Quarterly'' 57, no. 3 (2018): 81-110; Royal Skousen with the collaboration of Stanford Carmack, ''The Nature of the Original Language'', Parts 3-4 of ''The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon'', Volume 3 of ''The Critical Text of the Book of Mormon'' (Provo, UT: FARMS and BYU Studies, 2018).</ref> This information is summarized by Evidence Central at the hotlink to the right.

====Plagiarism is implausible #8—A bible was purchased only ''after'' the translation was finished====

We know that Oliver Cowdery purchased a Bible on 8 October 1829. However, the Book of Mormon was already at press by this time, with the copyright being registered on 11 June 1829.<ref name="tandr">{{Roper:Joseph Smiths Use Of The Apocrypha Shadow Or:FARMS Review:1996}}</ref>

Before that time, the only Bible Joseph is known to have had access to was the Smith family Bible, which he did not have after he married and moved out of the Smith home. Joseph was poor and even poorer after moving away from home.<ref>{{BeginningsofMormonism |start=95 | end=100}}</ref> Yet Oliver purchased the Bible for Joseph in October 1829 from the print shop that did the type-setting for the Book of Mormon. This Bible was later used to produce the [[The Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible|Joseph Smith Translation of the Bible]] (JST).<ref>Robert J. Matthews, ''A Plainer Translation": Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible: A History and Commentary'' (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University Press, 1985), 26; cited in footnote 165 of {{FR-6-1-4}}</ref> Given the family's poverty, why purchase a bible if they already had access to one for the Book of Mormon?

====Plagiarism is implausible #9—Over half the Isaiah verses have alterations====

As the Church has made clear in the 1981 and the 2013 editions of the Book of Mormon in [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/12?lang=eng#note2a footnote "a"] for {{s|2|Nephi|12|2}}: "Comparison with the King James Bible in English shows that there are differences in more than half of the 433 verses of Isaiah quoted in the Book of Mormon, while about 200 verses have the same wording as the KJV."<ref>See [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/2-ne/12?lang=eng#note2a page 81] of either edition of the Book of Mormon</ref> This provides excellent evidence that Joseph Smith is not mindlessly cribbing off the KJV version of Isaiah. A lot of these changes ''are indeed'' (around 30% of the Isaiah variants) merely changes to the italicized words of the King James passages.<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|50n11}} But many others aren't. [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|We can actually show]] that Nephi is engaging with the text and making changes to Isaiah that "liken" Isaiah’s messages to Nephi’s then-current situation and theological understanding ({{s|1|Nephi|19|23}}). We can also demonstrate that Nephi is selecting passages of Isaiah with an overriding, coherent theological agenda. Book of Mormon Central's description at the link above is an excellent summary. Thus, rather than mindless copy-paste, there is meaningful engagement with the text of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon.

Royal Skousen, with extensive analysis of the Original and Printer's Manuscript of the Book of Mormon,<ref>{{Skousen:How Joseph Smith Translated The Book Of Mormon:JBMS:1998}}</ref> has concluded that the original manuscript, including the quoted Bible chapters, was written from dictation rather than copying of another document. One of the reasons he believes this is that Joseph Smith’s dictation consistently includes precise and sometimes unusual spellings of some words not contained in the King James Bible nor any document in his immediate environment, suggesting that exact words, including their exact spelling, were revealed to him and that he wasn't taking inspiration from other sources. An example of this is the name ''Coriantumr'' spelled with ''mr'' rather than ''mer'', as might be expected if Joseph were getting ideas in his head about what to say and dictating them to Oliver or another of his scribes. This suggests that Joseph could ''see words on the stone/Urim and Thummim'' and that he could ''spell them out exactly'' to his scribes in cases (such as names) where precision was important for meaning.

====Plagiarism is implausible #10—The manuscript shows signs of dictation from a text, not improvisation====

Skousen also believes the Original Manuscript was dictated because "[t]he manuscripts include consistent phraseology that suggests Joseph Smith was reading from a carefully prepared text rather than composing the English translation based on thoughts or impressions as he dictated."<ref name="spencer" />{{Rp|88}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #11—There's no evidence Joseph knew what the italics meant====

[[Question: Did Joseph know what the italics in the Bible meant?|Emma Smith reported that, during the Book of Mormon translation, Joseph didn't know that walls surrounded Jerusalem]], a far more basic fact than the meaning of italics. If Joseph didn't know this basic fact, how likely is it that he knew the Bible well enough to plagiarize it, much less repeat that plagiarism from memory?

Lucy Mack Smith, Joseph's mother, stated that

<blockquote>
I presume our family presented an aspect as singular as any that ever lived upon the face of the earth-all seated in a circle, father, mother, sons and daughters, and giving the most profound attention to a boy, eighteen years of age, who had never read the Bible through in his life; he seemed much less inclined to the perusal of books than any of the rest of our children, but far more given to meditation and deep study.<ref>{{Book:Smith:History of Joseph Smith by His Mother:1954|pages=82-83}}</ref>
</blockquote>

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=KJV italicized text in the Book of Mormon#What did Joseph know about the italics?
|subject1=What did Joseph know about the italics in the KJV?
|summary1=How aware was Joseph about what the italics in the Book of Mormon meant?
}}

====Plagiarism is implausible #12—No evidence Joseph's memory would allow the feat critics require====
{{EvidenceCentral|title=Book of Mormon Evidence: Joseph Smith’s Limited Education|url=https://evidencecentral.org/recency/evidence/joseph-smiths-education|number=1}}
#There is no evidence that Joseph Smith had an [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/eidetic eidetic] (or "photographic") memory.
#There is no evidence that Joseph Smith was ever seen trying to memorize long passages from the King James Bible at, near, or leading up to the time of translation. Joseph's level of education may suggest that he was not even capable of memorizing such lengthy passages.

{{Related articles
|title=
|link1=Book of Mormon/Plagiarism accusations/King James Bible
|subject1=Plagiarism from the King James Bible?
|summary1=This further discusses the problems with plagiarism theories for the Book of Mormon text.
}}
}}
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Question #2 and #3: Are there really translation errors in the Book of Mormon? If so, do they lead us into believing erroneous theological ideas?===
| state = closed
| content =
<wt>
====The Lexicons of Today May Not Be the Lexicons of Tomorrow ====
What ''is'' a translation error?<ref>The ''CES Letter'', for example, wants to broaden the meaning of "translation error" to include "an error that can occur during translation" and/or "something that looks like an error to me after someone has translated a text."</ref> For example, it is an error to translate the Spanish word "rey" as ''queen'' when it means ''king''. The word for ''queen'' in Spanish is "reina." A translation error occurs when someone misrepresents in a target language what something in a source language refers to.

We use lots of words in different ways. Words do not have inherent meaning (a given sound or word does not ''need'' to mean anything in particular). But, words are not completely idiosyncratic—they cannot mean just whatever an individual decides they mean. A language community understands them in roughly similar ways—similar enough to allow reliable communication. That is, after all, the whole point of words. If they can mean anything at all, then they mean nothing.

For instance, the object we now call a "fork" may not have been called a fork a long time ago. At some point in the past, people began to apply the name "fork" to a fork and popularized that label within the English-speaking linguistic community. We could have called a fork a "spoon" a long time ago, popularized it, and that label ("spoon") would be what we call a fork today. In essence, words refer to what we've used them to refer to. Spelling and pronunciation are products of the same set of arbitrary decisions and subsequent popularization.

Lexicons (translators' dictionaries) that translators use today—and especially those dealing with ancient languages—are constantly evolving as new evidence about how words were used becomes available. The lexicons of today may not be the lexicons of tomorrow. Today's lexicons may find that a word has a meaning we didn't understand a decade ago.

This would mean that perceived translation errors today may not actually be translation errors, and we need to wait for more evidence. Now, lexicons of tomorrow will probably not change drastically since language evolution tends to be conservative. Different societies want to use unique words to distinguish between objects and concepts to enhance cooperation and efficiency in problem-solving.

====We don't have the original manuscripts of the biblical text====
We should also note that we do not have any of the ''original manuscripts'' of the Bible. Modern translations of the biblical text we have today come from the ''earliest known copies'' of the original manuscripts available to translators at the time of their respective translations. Any claim that the Book of Mormon makes use of an "erroneous" translation from the King James Bible is going to be at least ''mildly'' suspect for that simple fact. Wouldn't we want the original manuscripts, as composed by the author, before making a definitive claim that any particular translation is "in error"? We do have ''copies'' of the manuscripts, and they ''may'' reproduce the text of the originals reliably, but there's no reason to be certain. [[Accuracy of the bible|There's good reason to doubt it]], including the fact that the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith teach that the extant biblical manuscripts ''don't'' accurately reproduce the original text.<ref>"History of Joseph Smith by his Mother Lucy," 592; {{s|1|Nephi|13|28}}; see {{s_short|1|Nephi13|23-29}}. Cited in Kent P. Jackson, ''Understanding Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible'' (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2022), 34–35.</ref>

On the other hand, we do not intend to claim definitively that the Book of Mormon preserves the original, pristine version of the biblical texts it quotes or alludes to. In some cases, we [[Question: Why does Isaiah in the Book of Mormon not match the Dead Sea Scrolls?|can't know whether it does]]. If "translate" is being defined as merely "reproducing the text produced in one language in a different language," then perhaps we would declare a given rendering 'in error'. However, translation has the potential to be more broadly and inclusively conceived—and Joseph Smith seems to have understood it [[Joseph Smith: "I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands"|in this broader sense]].

This broader view of translation includes activities such as expounding on the text and making amendments to clarify the author's intent or to make the translation more readable and comprehensible to the translator's audience. For instance, modern individuals in various highly technical professions have to "translate" the specialized English of their profession into "layman's terms" or simpler English for those who don't understand the intricacies of the profession. The Joseph Smith-era 1828 edition of ''Webster's Dictionary'' has no less than 7 different definitions of the word 'translate' that include such things as 'conveying' or 'transporting' an object or person from one place to another, 'changing', and 'explaining'.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=translate}}</ref>

We often forget that there are typically ''three'' layers we must identify to understand a written text:

# what's in the author's mind and what he or she intended to write,
# what is actually written, and
# our own definitions of words, which impact how we interpret what an author writes.

Word meaning can sometimes be culturally separated from the original author, leading us to misinterpret what the author wrote. Sometimes the author doesn't write what he or she intended to communicate.

With a translated text, there is a ''fourth'' layer to identify and untangle from the other three:

:4. The translation itself and its relation to its source text—here again, we must determine what the ''translator'' thought and intended to write, what he or she actually wrote, and the definition of the words they used and how we understand them.

Sometimes, a translator has his or her own objectives, quirks, and other philosophies about translation that can either clarify or obscure the meaning and content of the source text. There's a sense in which we can never uncover the author's intentions because the mind is by its nature a private, subjective experience. We have to rely on the text authors produce to convey what is in their minds accurately, but sometimes it doesn't do so because the translator wasn't careful enough. We know that people of any culture will have culturally conditioned definitions of words, and sometimes we aren't able to learn enough about that culture to uncover the definitions as the original author intended.

Thus, there may be errors, and we wouldn't know it—and supposed errors may not be errors at all, and we wouldn't know it either. All these factors demand some humility on our part.

The ''most'' that we can say is that, ''based on current manuscript evidence and scholarship'', ''some'' of the King James translation of the Bible paralleled in the Book of Mormon is considered erroneous by some scholars and critics, based on several questionable and unverifiable assumptions. We can go no further.

With these cautions in mind, we will now proceed to specifics. For the sake of argument, we will assume that the biblical manuscripts that we translate from today accurately reproduce the text of the Bible as written by its original authors, and that these texts actually reflect the authors' intent. We will also assume that today's lexicons accurately reflect how words were used in antiquity to refer to different objects. But remember—these are assumptions, not proven facts.

====The "Translation Errors"====
Royal Skousen has given us a representative list of what constitutes translation errors. Skousen did "not intend to list every possible error. Rather, [he] simply recognize[d] that the Book of Mormon translation will reflect errors because of its dependence on the King James Bible."<ref name="Skousen King James">Royal Skousen, ''The History of the Text of the Book of Mormon, Part Five: King James Quotations in the Book of Mormon'' (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2019).</ref>{{Rp|220}}

Skousen also has given us a list of cultural translations "where the original meaning is obscured by providing a translation that speakers from the Early Modern English period would have readily understood."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} Some of these might be considered "errors" by our critics, and so we will discuss specifics below.

Along with these cultural translations and alleged translation errors, emerging scholarship demonstrates that the Book of Mormon also has significant intertextual relationships with the New Testament. That is, the Book of Mormon echoes, alludes to, and sometimes quotes New Testament language at length as a means of communicating the Book of Mormon’s message.

Critics have alleged that this demonstrates Joseph Smith was plagiarizing the King James Version of the New Testament to create the Book of Mormon.

{{Related articles
|title=main
|link1=The New Testament and the Book of Mormon
|subject1=The New Testament and the Book of Mormon
}}

In written correspondence with those who study New Testament intertextuality with the Book of Mormon, the author has found that three items may currently be considered "translation errors" by scholars. There may be more. However, none of these that immediately came to mind for them seem to threaten the Book of Mormon's authenticity in any significant way. Those are also discussed below.

Skousen says that "[n]one of these scholarly objections matter much since the Book of Mormon is a creative, cultural translation. In other words, the use of the King James text, warts and all, is not only unsurprising, but it is in fact expected."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} The table below, along with the "errors" identified by Skousen and other Book of Mormon scholars, will also include close to 50 other claims of translation errors by nine critics of the Book of Mormon.<ref name="larson">Stan Larson, "The Historicity of the Matthean Sermon on the Mount in 3 Nephi," in {{CriticalWork:Metcalfe:New Approaches|pages=15-63}}</ref><ref name="wrightjosephint">David P. Wright, “[https://www.dialoguejournal.com/articles/joseph-smiths-interpretation-of-isaiah-in-the-book-of-mormon/ Joseph Smith’s Interpretation of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon],” ‘’Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought’’ 31, no. 4 (Winter 1998): 187.</ref><ref name="wrightjosephisaiah">David P. Wright, "Isaiah in the Book of Mormon: Or Joseph Smith in Isaiah," in {{CriticalWork:Vogel Metcalfe:American Apocrypha|pages=157-234}}.</ref><ref name="runnells1769">Jeremy Runnells, "1769 KJV Errors in Book of Mormon Sources and notes on presence of 1769 King James Version edition errors in the Book of Mormon - a supposed ancient text," CES Letter Foundation, accessed 2 December 2022, {{antilink|https://cesletter.org/1769-kjv-errors/}}</ref><ref name="wikiold">This [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.phptitle=The_Book_of_Mormon_and_the_King_James_Bible&oldid=582211861#Perpetuation_of_translation_errors old Wikipedia article that contained claims of errors].</ref><ref>"Topics," 2Think.org, accessed 11 December 2022, {{antilink|https://www.2think.org/hundredsheep/annotated/topics.shtml#KJV%20Translation%20Errors}}.</ref><ref name="ankerberg">John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonism (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1992).</ref><ref name="alcase">Al Case, "Questions related to the Book of Mormon and other items on Mormonism and Joseph Smith," About The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon): Perspective on all things LDS/Mormon/Latter-day Saint, accessed May 5, 2023, {{antilink|https://www.lds-mormon.com/bookofmormonquestions.shtml/#BOM8.}}</ref><ref name="brown">M. D. Brown, ''One Hundred Similarities Between the Book of Mormon and the Spaulding Manuscript'' (M. D. Brown, 1937), 24.</ref><ref name="snowden">James H. Snowden, ''The Truth About Mormonism'' (George H. Doran Company, 1926), 105, 106–7</ref>

This table catalogs, as far as we can ascertain, every potential error that has been pointed to by critics and other scholars of the Book of Mormon to date.<ref>This line was written 11 December 2022.</ref> This table includes 91 items.<ref>Depending on how one divides the translation errors, one may be able to divide these into more items. The author chose to keep them as follows for convenience or clarity. Thus, this claim shouldn't be taken to mean that there are exactly 88 translation errors made by the King James Bible translators (or perhaps their translating predecessors) perpetuated in the Book of Mormon.</ref>

As a reminder, this table contains links to passages from both the 1611 and 1769 editions of the King James Bible, as well as to lists of translations at biblehub.com, to refute the contention in the ''CES Letter'' that the translation errors are unique to the 1769 edition of the KJV.

We start with the basic translation "errors,” then catalog the cultural translations, and finish off with the New Testament "errors." The table below lists the locations of the errors in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, the supposed erroneous translation, the passage in question, and commentary on the alleged error. They are organized in the order they appear in the Book of Mormon. Those troubled by other "errors" they may find in the Book of Mormon might seriously consider adopting a similar approach to the one taken by the author of this article to resolve their concerns. If someone finds an "error" that they'd like FAIR to comment on, or that person has already done that work and would like to submit it to FAIR to be included in this article, they are strongly encouraged to send that work/ask those questions to FAIR volunteers at [https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/contact this link].

====Summary of conclusions====

For those who do not wish to examine each case in detail, we provide our conclusions:

*Some cases aren't errors.
*Some aren't translation errors but rather correct translations of younger biblical manuscripts. Biblical scholars typically prefer older manuscripts, as they often contain versions of the text that are closer to what the original author intended. Sometimes, this intuition is incorrect.
*In four cases pointed to as an "error," the "error" wasn't an error at all but a good example of the [https://www.dictionary.com/browse/diachronic diachronic] nature of language—that is, language changes and evolves over time. What the King James translators (or perhaps their translating predecessors) meant by "virtue," for instance, is not the same thing we mean by "virtue." They meant to refer to something like ''power,'' and we mean to refer to something like ''strength in doing moral good,'' or sometimes ''chastity.''
*In two cases below, the "errors" weren't errors, but instead a case of modern translators using the conventions of their language. This is the case with {{s||Isaiah|6|2}} and {{s_short||Isaiah|6|6}} (and corresponding passages in {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}} and {{s_short|2|Nephi|16|6}} in the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon) with their use of the word "seraphims" to refer to multiple [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seraph seraph(s)]. The problem is that the Hebrew suffix ''-im'' already pluralizes the word ''seraph''. But the King James translators (or perhaps their translating predecessors) are also referring to multiple seraph(s) but just using the conventions of English by adding an "s" to the end of the word. This is the sort of error an academic translator would avoid, but it means little in this context.
*In some cases, the errors are merely translation ''variants'' (rather than ''errors'') where one variant is not necessarily superior to another. This is because the meaning of the underlying Hebrew or Greek is uncertain.
*In some cases, the meaning of the verses has been changed from the original text, but it hasn't changed so drastically as not to include the more specific meaning of the passage captured in other translations. In these cases, the translation can only be said to be ''too broad or general'' rather than necessarily ''erroneous''. It’s like saying that "king" refers to ''royalty''. Technically correct, but it could be more specific ("a particular male royal") for more clarity.
*In some cases, the translation errors ''are'' legitimate. These errors thus change the ''meaning'' of one or more words in the respective passages, but they don't always lead us away from the original and overall ''intent'' of the passages.
*In some cases, the errors actually ''do'' lead us away from the original and overall intent, but this isn’t a bad thing since the changed intent does not necessarily reflect an inaccurate doctrinal understanding.
*In some cases, the "errors" are not errors and are better explained as a translator's gloss where the translation is not necessarily accurate as to what a word from the target language referred to, but do help make explicit what ancient readers would have understood implicitly from use of a particular word.
*In many cases, it is very difficult (if not impossible) to determine with a reliable degree of certainty in which of the above 9 categories the translation falls. We can make a reasonable case for fitting them into multiple categories.

In no case, however, is there a translation variant, broadening of meaning, change in meaning, change in intent, etc. that teaches incorrect doctrine or otherwise ''compels'' a reader into believing something false.

The following chart documents how many claims of "errors" fit into the respective categories (as well as what percentage of the total claims that number represents):

[[File:PieChartKJVErrors6.png|750px|thumb|center]]

For those who want commentary on the individual claims, click "expand" below to view our table of analysis.

{|class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" vertical-align:top border="3" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="12%"|'''Location in Canon'''
!width="12%"|'''Erroneous Translation'''
!width="30%"|'''Passage'''
!width="46%"|'''Commentary'''
|+<big>'''Commentary on Alleged KJV Translation Errors in the Book of Mormon'''</big>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|1. {{s||Exodus|15|4}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|2|5}}
||Red Sea
||This one isn't a quotation of a biblical passage per se, but the use of a particular biblical name. The Book of Mormon and King James Bible consistently call the sea that Moses and the children of Israel crossed when fleeing from the Egyptians the "Red Sea." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Exodus-Chapter-15/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Exodus-Chapter-15/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/exodus/15-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Critics contend that this is based on a mistranslation of the Hebrew ''yam sûp''. Instead of "Red Sea," critics contend that it should read "Reed sea." We have responded to this theory [[Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/The Red Sea|elsewhere on the wiki]].
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|2. {{s||Isaiah|49|4}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|4}}
||Work
||"Then I said, I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for nought, and in vain: yet surely my judgment is with the Lord, and my '''work''' with my God." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critic David P. Wright asserts that the better translation would be "reward" instead of "work."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} The verses concern either Israel's, the Messiah's,<ref>Donald W. Parry, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/isaiah-49-0 ''The Book of Isaiah: A New Translation (Preliminary Edition)''] (Springville, UT: Book of Mormon Central, 2022), 117.</ref> or Isaiah's response to God who in verse 3 calls one of them His servant in whom He will be glorified. One of them responds that, in their own judgment, they are weak and frail as a servant, but that, nonetheless, God will judge and reward them. The intent of the passage can be argued as correct, no matter the translation, however.

If the passage is translated as "reward," the Book of Mormon already teaches that God rewards us despite our moral and vocational frailties. The Book of Mormon already teaches that God is our reward. Nephi teaches us that beautifully in his psalm recorded in {{s|2|Nephi|4|}}.<ref>{{s|2|Nephi|4|30}}</ref>

If the passage is translated as "work," one could interpret it in a few ways. One could say that God ''works through'' his servants to do good despite their frailties. In that case, Paul tells the Philippians that "it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."<ref>Phillipians 2:13</ref> In the previous chapter, {{s||Isaiah|8|}}, God tells Israel, "I have refined thee, but not with silver; I have chosen thee in the furnace of affliction."<ref>{{s||Isaiah|48|10}}</ref>

One could alternatively interpret it as saying that the work of Isaiah, the Messiah, or Israel is ''chosen'' or ''ordained'' by God to do a work ''on their own'': ''without'' God's intervening power. Isaiah recounts how God called him in {{s||Isaiah|6|}}. God indicates that Israel is his chosen, covenant people throughout the Old Testament text. The Messiah is the anointed one and is prophesied of throughout Isaiah's record and in other Old Testament prophecies.

No matter the translation and interpretation, there is nothing that isn't clearly taught elsewhere in the Book of Mormon.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|3. {{s||Isaiah|49|5}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|5}}
||Though Israel be not gathered
||"And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, '''Though Israel be not gathered''', yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Critics assert that the better translation would be "to restore Jacob to him, and that Israel be gathered to him."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}}<ref name="runnells1769" /> Neither the Book of Mormon rendering nor the critics' change the meaning significantly.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|4. {{s||Isaiah|49|8}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|8}}
||Have I heard thee
||"Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time '''have I heard thee''', and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#8 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#8 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-8.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation would be "I answer/have answered you."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} Interestingly, in the ancient Near East, [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KQLOuIKaRA hearing and doing something or responding to them were functionally the same thing]. You didn't hear someone if you didn't respond to them. Something similar may be going on here. The passage means that the Lord heard the cries of Israel and helped them, which is already affirmed with "in a day of salvation have I helped thee."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|5. {{s||Isaiah|49|24}} ~ {{s|1|Nephi|21|24}}
||Or the lawful captive delivered
||"Shall the prey be taken from the mighty, '''or the lawful captive delivered'''?" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-49/#24 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-49/#24 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/49-24.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation would be "Can...captives (be) retrieved from a victor?"<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/49-24.htm Popular English biblical translations vary] between saying captives of the "mighty," "tyrant," "righteous," "victor," or "conqueror." The verse can only be considered a translation variant rather than an error. "The rhetorical questions function here as assertions of divine power insofar as the LORD can make these things happen."<ref name="Sweeney">Marvin A. Sweeney, "Isaiah," in ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'', ed. Michael D. Coogan, 5th ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2018).</ref>{{Rp|1047n24–26}} God is asserting that he can free the Israelites taken captive by those who oppress them. Thus, regardless of the translation options, the intent of the verse is not changed substantively.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|6. {{s||Isaiah|50|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|7|4}}
||Know how to speak a word in season
||"The Lord God hath given me the tongue of the learned, that I should '''know how to speak a word in season''' to him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-50/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-50/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/50-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Critic David P. Wright laughably asserts that "the underlying Hebrew is unintelligible" and then, in the next clause of the sentence, that "the KJV is likely wrong." This passage, according to Wright, "is apparently taking the word läcût to mean 'to speak/do in season.'" Yet again, Wright tells us that "[h]ow it is to be understood is not clear." Then he tells us that "[s]ome modern scholars, with hesitation, take the verb to mean 'to aid/help/succor.'"<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172–73.}} Even this is part of Wright's essay discussing KJV translation ''errors'' ''perpetuated'' in the Book of Mormon. As such, it can only be considered a translation variant. Even with the wording as is, it clearly teaches that Isaiah's gift is to speak to the weary. That can only mean a form of succoring/aiding.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|7. {{s||Isaiah|51|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|8|4}}
||Rest
||"Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to '''rest''' for a light of the people." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-51/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-51/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/51-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Critics think that the metaphor "make my judgment to rest/repose for a light" is merely "odd." "Many modern versions take the verb (which the KJV translates 'make rest') with the beginning of the next verse (sometimes with emendation)."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|173}} The sentence construction is a bit odd, but it doesn't substantively change the meaning of the verse, which is that God's judgment (sometimes translated "justice") will be a light for the people. Where exactly would the judgment "rest"? This is not certain. Perhaps on the wicked? Regardless, the rhetorical goals of the verse are accomplished. Some might think that the verse communicates that God will cease to judge and that this will be a light to the people, which would indeed be incorrect teaching; however, that interpretation is inconsistent with the first clause ("for a law shall proceed from me").
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|8. {{s||Isaiah|2|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|4}}
||Rebuke
||"And he shall judge among the nations and shall '''rebuke''' many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' "The Hebrew verb here lacks the negative sense of ''rebuke''—that is, it means 'to judge' rather than 'to reprove'; note the preceding parallel line: 'and he shall judge among the nations'."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} The act of judging or arbitrating disputes between people may mean that God actually will rebuke people who come down on the negative side of God's judgments. In any dispute, there will be rebukes that God sends forth—implicitly or otherwise—for the wrongdoer. The Lord tells us that he chastens us and scourges us because he loves us in {{s||Proverbs|3|11-12}}, {{s||Hebrews|12|5-6}}, and {{s||Helaman|15|3}}.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|9. {{s||Isaiah|2|6}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|6}}
||Please themselves in the children of strangers
||"Therefore thou hast forsaken thy people the house of Jacob, because they be replenished from the east, and are soothsayers like the Philistines, and they '''please themselves in the children of strangers'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#6 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#6 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-6.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is closer to things like "they strike hands with foreigners," "make bargain/covenant with foreigners," or "are crowded with foreigners."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|169}} The verse concerns the idolatry of Israel. "Pleasing themselves" is ambiguous because it could certainly be used (though, admittedly, awkwardly) to refer to making deals with the people of idolatrous nations. It could refer to any positive activity with foreigners/strangers. Regardless of the positive activity, it is clear that doing it with foreigners symbolizes the kind of idolatry and apostasy the Lord/Isaiah means to refer to in this verse. Thus, it's unclear that there's a substantive change in meaning, and even if there were, the passage would still accomplish what it sets out to do.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|10. {{s||Isaiah|2|9}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|9}}
||Boweth down
||"And the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself not: therefore forgive them not" (Book of Mormon, 1830 Edition) ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#9 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#9 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-9.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not an Error.''' Runnells asserts that the correct translation is "and the mean man boweth down '''not''', and the great man humbleth himself [not]: therefore forgive them not."<ref name="runnells1769" /> Interestingly, the current edition of the Book of Mormon contains just this translation. "And the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore, forgive him not." The only difference between Runnells' proposal and the current edition of the Book of Mormon is that the Book of Mormon replaces ''them'' in "forgive them not" with ''him'' and omits the second ''not'' that the critic has in brackets. The essential message of the evils of idolatry is not affected.

But both the critic and Latter-day Saints still have errors to account for here. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/2-9.htm nearly every single popular, English biblical translation of these verses] rejects using "not" after "boweth down." The correct translation is actually how it is rendered in the King James Bible! The critic claims to have been working from the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon and making comparisons to the [https://www.stepbible.org/version.jsp?version=KJVA an online version of the 1769 KJV with apocrypha]. The 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon (the first edition) [https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/93 has this verse rendered as] "and the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself not: therefore forgive him not." Skousen, in his earliest reconstruction of the Book of Mormon text, renders it as "and the mean man boweth down and the great man humbleth himself; therefore forgive them not."<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|108}} This is the correct translation of the text. Skousen notes a rather complex textual history of this verse in his ''Analysis of Textual Variants''.<ref name="skousenvariants">Royal Skousen, [https://interpreterfoundation.org/books/atv/p2/ ''Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon Part Two: 2 Nephi 1 – Mosiah 6''] (Provo, UT: FARMS, 2014).</ref>{{Rp|656–60}} Thus, the Book of Mormon actually originally had the correct translation of this passage, and it was changed, likely by the first printer and typesetter of the Book of Mormon, John Gilbert. This is at most an error perpetuated by modern editors.

But now, what about modern editions of the Book of Mormon that don't have the correct translation? Are they in true error? In context, Isaiah is condemning the house of Jacob for idolatry and for bowing down to idols, as mentioned in verse 8. Thus, the correct translation refers to people being humbled and bowing to the ''idols''. The modern editions of the Book of Mormon would be in error if whoever composes the text today meant to refer to the idols. But the modern editions could be referring to God. If the mean man and great man don't bow to God, then they're committing idolatry, and God shouldn't forgive them. In the 1830s edition, it says that the mean man bows down, while the great man doesn't. This could be read to mean that the mean man bows down to the idols, and the great man doesn't bow down to God.

No matter which edition we're consulting here, we are not compelled to read the essential intent of the verse wrongly, and, indeed, with careful reading, it seems that the essential intent of the verse will be captured by careful, studious readers, no matter which translation/edition is consulted. It seems implausible to believe the author (ancient or modern) meant to endorse or encourage idolatry.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|11. {{s||Isaiah|2|16}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|12|16}}
||Pictures
||"and upon all the ships of Tarshish and upon all the pleasant '''pictures'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-2/#16 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-2/#16 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/2-16.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' The better translation, according to Skousen, is "and upon all the pleasant '''ships'''."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Critic Jeremy Runnells thinks it should be either "image," "ships," or "crafts."<ref name="runnells1769" /> Yes, he includes "image" as somehow a potentially more correct translation than "pictures." Critic David P. Wright thinks it should be either "grand ships" or "precious things."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|169}} Though [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/2-16.htm there are at least four modern, popular, English biblical translations] that render this verse similar to how it is rendered in the Book of Mormon. Popular English translations vary between referring to ships/crafts or pleasant imagery/pictures. It's not entirely certain, but the more likely correct translation is ships. Isaiah intends to use the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be brought down and taken away to eliminate pride. Either ships, crafts, or pleasant imagery/pictures can do/be a part of that. Thus, the intent hasn't changed at all, and no doctrinal error occurs.<ref>Recall that the textual history of this verse is seen as quite complex. For detailed discussion, see {{Seely:Upon All The Ships Of The Sea And:JBMS:2005}}.</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|12. {{s||Isaiah|3|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|2}}
||Prudent
||"The mighty man, and the man of war, the judge, and the prophet, and the '''prudent''', and the ancient" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "In the phrase 'the prudent and the ancient', the adjectival noun ''prudent'' is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word for divining. This phrase is translated, for instance, as 'the diviner and the elder' in the English Standard Version."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Critic David P. Wright agrees.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} The verse concerns the Assyrians' coming invasion of Israel and carrying them away into captivity. ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'' notes that "[t]he Assyrians were well known for deporting the leading figures and skilled craftspeople of a conquered society to exploit their talents elsewhere in the empire and to destabilize the conquered society to prevent further revolt."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|984n3.1–12.}} Thus, the verse intends to use [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that the most talented and wisest of Israelite society were going to be taken away captive by the Assyrians. That can include the prudent. Also, diviners may be described as prudent.

In any case, this does not alter the verses' meaning—men of importance or value are being subject to capture and deportation.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|13. {{s||Isaiah|3|3}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|3}}
||Orator
||"The captain of fifty, and the honourable man, and the counsellor, and the cunning artificer, and the eloquent '''orator'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#3 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#3 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-3.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "Here in the Hebrew the sense of ''orator'' is 'enchanter.' The English word derives from the Latin verb meaning 'to pray' (see definition 1 under ''orator'' in the [''Oxford English Dictionary''])."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Critic David P. Wright derives the same analysis as Skousen.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Same commentary here as made for the preceding entry for {{s|2|Nephi|13|2}}.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|14. {{s||Isaiah|3|8}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|3}}
||Provoke the eyes of his glory
||"For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their tongue and their doings are against the Lord, to '''provoke the eyes of his glory'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#8 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#8 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-8.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' Critic David Wright asserts that the better translation is "Rebel against/defy/insult his glorious presence/glance/gaze."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} The Book of Mormon actually changes this verse from the KJV. In the Book of Mormon it is rendered "For Jerusalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen: because their tongue'''s''' and their doings '''have been''' against the Lord, to provoke the eyes of his glory." [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/3-8.htm 4-5 other modern, popular, English biblical translations] render it with "provoke." This is a good example of the diachronic nature of language, since [https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/provoke one of the definitions] of the word ''provoke'' is "to challenge," which is clearly in agreement with modern translations of the Bible.<ref name="tvedtnes">{{Tvedtnes:Isaiah In The Bible And The Book Of:FARMS Review:2004}}</ref>{{rp|170}} The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' similarly provides examples of writers near the time of the King James translation using "provoke" to mean "[t]o call out or summon to a fight; to challenge, to defy" and "[t]o incite (a person or animal) to anger; to annoy, vex, irritate, or exasperate, esp. deliberately."<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Provoke."</ref> This fits in with Wright's suggestions of insult and defiance.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|15. {{s||Isaiah|3|18}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|18}}
||Cauls
||"the Lord will take away the bravery of tinkling ornaments and '''cauls'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-18.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' defines caul as 'a netted cap or head-dress, often richly ornamented'. The Hebrew word today is usually translated as a headband."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} Isaiah intends to communicate that the Lord will take away the most prized possessions of the women of Jerusalem because those possessions cause arrogance. Whether headbands or cauls are being taken away, it doesn't change the essential message of Isaiah—and both are worn on the head.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|16. {{s||Isaiah|3|18}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|18}}
||Tires like the moon
||"and cauls and round '''tires like the moon'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#18 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-18.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' "In the Hebrew, the word ''tire'' refers to something round, either a crescent or perhaps a round pendant for the neck. The use of ''tire'' here in {{s||Isaiah|3|18}} originated in the 1560 Geneva Bible: 'in that day shall the Lord take away the ornament of the slipper and the cauls and the round tires', where ''tire'' is a shortening from ''attire'' and refers to an ornament for a woman's head. The 1568 Bishop's Bible expanded on this by placing an internal note in square brackets after ''round tires'': 'and the cauls and the round tires [after the fashion of the moon]'. This interpretative remark was apparently derived from the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate, where the term for 'crescent ornament' or 'little crescent' was a diminutive of the word for ''moon''. The 1611 King James translators decided to embed this remark within the text itself by omitting the brackets, thus 'and round tires like the moon'. Since this interpretative prepositional phrase was not in the original Hebrew, it should have been placed in italics in the King James text."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} This doesn't appear to be a translation error, but just a variant.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|17. {{s||Isaiah|3|20}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|20}}
||Tablets
||"The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the '''tablets''', and the earrings," ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-20.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' The ''Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament'' states that the best translation would be something like the Latin Vulgate's "scent-bottles." It states that the translation rendered literally is "'little houses [containers] of vital energy [life],' made use of by breathing."<ref>Horst Seebass, "נֶפֶשׁ," in ''Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament'', ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, trans. David E. Green, 15 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1998), 9:505.</ref> The ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament'' states that the translation is better rendered as something like "tomb" or "grave."<ref name="boylanproblematic">Robert S. Boylan, "Some of the More Problematic Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon Suggesting Joseph Smith was Influenced by KJV Isaiah, not the Brass Plates," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', November 13, 2021, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2021/11/some-of-more-problematic-isaiah.html?q=translation+errors.</ref> This is most likely a translation variant, given the disagreement among scholars. It may not be an error at all. The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether a scent-bottle, a tomb, or a grave, it doesn't change the intent of the verse. (Given the poetic nature of Isaiah, all of these resonances may be intended--their scent bottles of life are ironically death, which they pack around with them.)
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|18. {{s||Isaiah|3|20}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|20}}
||Earrings
||"The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the '''earrings'''," ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#20 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-20.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' The ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament'' states that the translation is best rendered as "amulets."<ref name="boylanproblematic" /> The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether amulets or earrings, it doesn't change the intent of the verse.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|19. {{s||Isaiah|3|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|22}}
||Wimples
||"The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles and the '''wimples''', and the crisping pins" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Hebrew word refers to a wide or flowing cloak. The English word used by the King James translators, ''wimple'', is quite different: 'a garment of linen or silk formerly worn by women, so folded as to envelop the head, chin, sides of the face, and neck; now retained in the dress of nuns' (the first definition under the noun wimple in the ''Oxford English Dictionary'')."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|219}} The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether a cloak or a wimple (both items of clothing to cover and protect), it doesn't change the intent of the verse, which implies that the soon-to-be captive will be stripped naked literally by the Assyrians, and spiritually by their vulnerability to the pagan invaders.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|20. {{s||Isaiah|3|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|22}}
||Crisping pins
||"The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the '''crisping pins'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The modern-day equivalent of ''crisping pin'' would be ''curling iron''. The Hebrew is generally interpreted here as referring to purses or handbags."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Similar considerations apply as for "wimples" above. Whether they are seen as losing their fancy, well-coiffed hair or their purses containing cosmetics or riches, the ironic fall of the daughters of Zion is graphically illustrated.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|21. {{s||Isaiah|3|23}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|23}}
||Glasses
||"The '''glasses''', and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#23 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#23 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-23.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' The ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament'' states that the translation is best rendered as "papyrus garments" or "mirrors."<ref name="boylanproblematic" /> The verse is using the rhetorical device of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accumulatio accumulatio] to communicate and emphasize that everything will be taken from the "daughters of Zion" (v. 17) so that they will be humbled. Whether glasses, papyrus garments, or mirrors, it doesn't change the intent of the verse. The irony is again thick in either case--if mirrors, then those who cannot see their spiritual state clearly will lose the mirrors in which they admire themselves in pride. If papyrus garments, these are delicate and easily stripped away by the Assyrians, who will lead them into slavery--again, a dramatic type of shameful exposure to those so concerned about externals.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|22. {{s||Isaiah|3|24}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|24}}
||Rent
||"And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle, a '''rent'''; and instead of well set hair baldness; and instead of a stomacher a girding of sackcloth; and burning instead of beauty." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-24.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "There are two Hebrew verbs, both with identical consonants, but with different meanings: one means 'to tear' and the other means 'to go around or to surround'. The noun ''rent'' derives from the first verb, but the noun ''rope'' or ''cord'' (meaning to go around the body) derives from the second. Here, the word ''girdle'' takes the archaic meaning 'belt'. Modern translators have typically rendered this line in {{s||Isaiah|3|24}} as 'and instead of a belt, a rope.'"<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Isaiah intends to contrast the former dignity and pride of the daughters of Zion with their current shame. Interestingly, in the ancient Near East, uncovering someone's nakedness was a way to make them feel shame (see, for example, {{s||Isaiah|47|3}} which reflects this attitude) so keeping "rent" (i.e. cut/gap) where perhaps a person's belt line was would uncover someone's buttocks and genitals and is an appropriate way to contrast current dignity and subsequent shame or lower social status. The intent of the passage is unaltered and correct.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|23. {{s||Isaiah|3|24}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|13|24}}
||Stomacher
||"and instead of a '''stomacher''', a girding of sackcloth" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-3/#24 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/3-24.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' "The Hebrew word here, ''patigil'', is otherwise unattested. The Greek Septuagint translated it as 'a tunic of mixed purple', which has led to the general translation of this article of clothing as 'a fine garment' or 'a rich robe'. Miles Coverdale, in his Bible, translated it more specifically as ''stomacher'', 'an ornamental covering for the chest (often covered with jewels) worn by women under the lacing of the bodice'."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} As the Hebrew remains uncertain, this can only be seen as a translation variant rather than an error. The essential message of Isaiah, contrasting fine, luxurious things with those of lower social status and shame that await the future Assyrian captives, remains unaffected.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|24. {{s||Isaiah|4|5}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|14|5}}
||Defence
||"And the Lord will create upon every dwelling-place of Mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day and the shining of a flaming fire by night; for upon all the glory of Zion shall be a '''defence'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/4-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator's Gloss.''' Critics allege that the word translated here as "defence" is better rendered as "canopy."<ref name="ankerberg" />{{Rp| 322.}} True, "canopy" [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/4-5.htm is in most popular English biblical translations]. However, nearly all of these popular English biblical translations depict a canopy as a defensive structure, and the King James translation, as well as the Book of Mormon, see it precisely that way. Robert S. Boylan stated that "[t]he offending word here is חֻפָּה. The term means a 'chamber' (as a covering or enclosing), per ''BDB'', or a 'shelter' (per Holladay's ''Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament''). As the word 'defense' in KJV English refers to any kind of shelter, including a canopy and other terms that this Hebrew word can be translated as, there is no issue."<ref name="boylankjv">Robert S. Boylan, "KJV Errors in the Book of Mormon?" ''Scriptural Mormonism'', October 8, 2015, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2015/10/kjv-errors-in-book-of-mormon.html?q=translation+errors.</ref>

Similarly, Daniel C. Peterson responded to this claim as follows in a 1993 review of an anti-Mormon book:

:In {{s|2|Nephi|14|5}}, the Book of Mormon follows KJV {{s||Isaiah|4|5}} in rendering the Hebrew ''chuppah'' as "defence": "For upon all the glory of Zion shall be a defence." But the proper reading, say Ankerberg and Weldon, should have been not "defence," but "canopy" (p. 322). Therefore, they contend, the Book of Mormon is fraudulent.

:Their reading of ''chuppah'' is, it must be admitted, correct. It has the support of the majority of modern translations. But does the Book of Mormon's "defence" represent so serious a distortion of Isaiah's meaning, so serious an error, as to call into question its own antiquity? I think not. The ancient Latin translation of the Bible known as the Vulgate seems to have interpreted {{s||Isaiah|4|5}} in the same way as did the King James translators, rendering the last phrase of the verse as ''super omnem enim gloriam protectio''. The ancient Greek Septuagint, on the other hand, has ''pase te doxe skepaslllcsetai'', in which the final verb is clearly related to the nouns ''skepas'' and ''skepc'', both of which mean "covering" or "shelter." The Jewish Publication Society's translation, Tanakh, says that the "canopy ... shall serve as a pavilion for shade from heat by day and as a shelter for protection against drenching rain." ''The New Jerusalem Bible'' says that it will give "refuge and shelter from the storm and the rain," using much the same language as does the ''New English Bible''. The Evangelical Protestant ''New International Version'' says that the "canopy ... will be a shelter and shade from the heat of the day, and a refuge and hiding place from the storm and rain." Is "defence" really so very out of place in such a context?<ref>{{Peterson:Chattanooga Cheapshot Or The Gall Of Bitterness Review:FARMS Review:1993|pages=50-51}}</ref>

This is best understood as a translator's gloss. A translator's gloss serves more as an explanation of the underlying text than as a literal translation. It makes explicit what ancient readers would have understood implicitly by the ancient term.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|25. {{s||Isaiah|5|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|2}}
||Fenced
||"And he '''fenced''' it and gathered out the stones thereof, and planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of it, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should bring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' "The Hebrew verb for ''fenced'' in {{s||Isaiah|5|2}} is now translated as 'to dig about' or 'to hoe or weed'; in other words, "he dug about it and cleared it of its stones."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Critic David P. Wright derives basically the same analysis as Skousen.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} This is a good example of the diachronic nature of language. The verse here is a part of verses 1–7 that describe Isaiah's Song of the Vineyard. ''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'' notes that it "allegorically portrays the Lord as Isaiah's friend ... who worked so hard to ensure a productive vineyard only to be disappointed when it yielded sour grapes. The allegory, which is explained only at the end, draws in the audience in, as many in ancient Judah would have had extensive experience in vineyards. Its conclusion makes puns to make its point, viz., the Lord expects ''justice'' (Heb "mishpat") but sees only ''bloodshed'' (Heb "mispah") and hopes for ''righteousness'' (Heb "tsedaqah") only to hear a ''cry'' (Heb "tse'aqah)."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|986n1–7}} "The 1828 Webster<ref>See {{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=fence}}</ref> notes that the word ''fence means'' 'a wall, hedge, ditch,' the third example fitting well with the modern renderings."<ref name="tvedtnes" />

The KJV translators may have meant to say that the Lord allegorically protected the vineyard by fencing it with a ditch. (Or earth/stones dug from the ditch are then piled as a barrier on the edge of the ditch, combining the images.) The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' notes that, at its broadest, "to fence" meant to put up a type of barrier at the time of the King James Version's translation. Thus, there are examples of writers from the 17th century saying, for instance, "The lands of [private] men . . . were '''fenced with ditches'''." This usage fits into the Book of Mormon's and the KJV's usage. Other examples of writings from the 17th century say that you can fence with a battlement, walls, iron armor, shells, and so forth. To fence was to put up a barrier.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|26. {{s||Isaiah|5|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|12}}
||Viol
||"And the harp, and the '''viol''', the tabret, and pipe, and wine, are in their feasts: but they regard not the work of the Lord, neither consider the operation of his hands." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Against the Book of Mormon, critic M.D. Brown claims that the word translated as "'viol' is the Hebrew 'nebel', a type of lyre. True viols were unknown until the 15th century."<ref name="brown"></ref> This claim is correct. The mistranslation, however, does not lead a reader away from the passage’s overall intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|27. {{s||Isaiah|5|17}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|17}}
||Then shall the lambs feed after their manner
||"'''Then shall the lambs feed after their manner''', and the waste places of the fat ones shall strangers eat." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#17 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#17 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-17.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "then lambs shall feed as at their pasture/meadow" or "in their old pastures."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} The passage contrasts the type of success one can have with the Lord and the grave misfortune one can have when one does not follow the Lord. The previous verse to this (v.16) begins that contrast. The passage intends to say that lambs shall return to their normal feeding. Thus, saying they return to their old pasture to feed and saying they'll feed "after their manner" is not a substantive change in meaning. The author judges this as a translation variant rather than an error. Even if the image shifts slightly, it is inconsequential.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|28. {{s||Isaiah|5|25}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|25}}
||Carcases
||"Therefore is the anger of the Lord kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their '''carcases''' were torn in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-25.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "their '''corpses''' were as refuse in the midst of the streets."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} This is a good example of the diachronic nature of language. The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' notes that the word "carcass" could refer to either animal or human remains at the time that the King James Bible was translated. After about the year 1750, it came to be used as a form of contempt for human remains.<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Carcass."</ref> These usages fit perfectly within the context of Isaiah. This appears to be an attempt to find fault where there is none—a carcass and a corpse are the same thing.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|29. {{s||Isaiah|5|25}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|25}}
||Were torn
||"Therefore is the anger of the Lord kindled against his people, and he hath stretched forth his hand against them, and hath smitten them: and the hills did tremble, and their carcases '''were torn''' in the midst of the streets. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#25 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-25.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "their corpses were '''as refuse''' in the midst of the streets."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} To say that the corpses "were torn" in the midst of the streets ''does'' leave ambiguity since "were torn" could refer to people or perhaps animals ''actively tearing up'' dead human remains in the streets or it could refer to the dead bodies ''already being torn up'' in the streets. "Refuse" refers to trash. To say that their corpses were torn in the streets is functionally the same thing as saying that they're refuse. Regarding "torn," Robert S. Boylan stated that "[t]he Hebrew term in question here is כַּסּוּחָה. Again, this is not a KJV error that made its way into the Book of Mormon...if the Hebrew is read as a verb, as in the KJV, it means 'cut of' or 'torn off'; only by reading it as a noun prefixed preposition it would mean 'as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offal offal].'"<ref name="boylankjv" /> In either case, the sense of horror to an Israelite audience would be profound, who would be troubled both by the desecration of a body if it were torn by scavengers ''and'' by the fact that the dead lay in the street, unburied. A proper burial was vital in the ancient world, and failing to receive it was regarded as a terrible fate.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|30. {{s||Isaiah|5|30}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|15|30}}
||And the light is darkened in the heavens thereof
||"And in that day they shall roar against them like the roaring of the sea: and if one look unto the land, behold darkness and sorrow, '''and the light is darkened in the heavens thereof'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-5/#30 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-5/#30 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/5-30.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "the light is darkened by/in its clouds."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Whether the light is darkened in the sky or by clouds, the intent of the verse isn't changed. (And what in the sky, one wonders, would darken light if not clouds?)
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|31. {{s||Isaiah|6|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}}
||It
||"Above '''it''' stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "above '''him'''" (referring to the Lord in v. 1) instead of "above it" (which would be referring to the train of his garment in v. 1).<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Though it's uncertain if saying that the angel standing above the garment train is a denial that the angel stood above God.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|32. {{s||Isaiah|6|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}}
||Seraphims
||"Above it stood the '''seraphims''': each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly" (Book of Mormon, 1830 edition) ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator’s Convention.''' The current edition of the Book of Mormon just has ''seraphim'' without the ''s''. Skousen's earliest reconstruction of the verses, as well as [https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/book-of-mormon-1830/97 the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon], have "seraphim'''s'''."<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|114}} Under a certain perspective, a more correct translation of these verses would indeed render it as only "seraphim" and not "seraphim'''s'''" with an s. That is because the suffix ''-im'' in Hebrew already indicates that the object is pluralized. Though one could argue that there really is no error in translation, given that the KJV translators were using English conventions to assure readers that the object was pluralized. Consider the ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'', for instance, that said that the plural of seraph could be seraph'''s'''.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=seraph}}</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|33. {{s||Isaiah|6|6}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|6}}
||Seraphims
||"Then flew one of the '''seraphims''' unto me, having a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with the tongs from off the altar" (Book of Mormon, 1830 edition) ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#6 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#6 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-6.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator’s Convention.''' The same analysis applies to the "error" in {{s|2|Nephi|16|2}} in the previous entry. One anti-Latter-day Saint used a similar argument in claiming that the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon was in error by using the word "cherubims" from the KJV.<ref>Dave Miller, "Is the Book of Mormon from God?" ''Apologetics Press'', 31 December 2002, {{antilink|https://apologeticspress.org/is-the-book-of-mormon-from-god-1187/}}</ref> The same reasoning applies against his claim. Consider the ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'', for instance, that said that the plural of cherub could be cherub'''s'''.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=cherub}} </ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|34. {{s||Isaiah|6|13}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|16|13}}
||Whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves, so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof.
||"But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return, and shall be eaten: as a teil tree, and as an oak, '''whose substance is in them, when they cast their leaves: so the holy seed shall be the substance thereof'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "whose stock/stump remains when they are felled (or: their leaves fall): its stock/stump is the holy seed."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} Though the verse retains the substance of meaning proposed by the critic. The verse means to communicate that "[a] part of Israel would return, and like the oak and terebinth, which though they are eaten or consumed right to their substance or stumps, yet they possess a seed in them that can regenerate."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|367}} "Despite the horrific imagery of a mere ten-percent survival rate (''tenth part''), the account concludes with a hopeful image of new growth from the ravaged stump that will constitute the holy seed of restoration (see {{s||Ezra|9|2}})."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|989n11–13}} Is saying that the "substance" of the tree remains really a denial of the stump/stock being that substance? Are the rhetorical goals of the verse not accomplished by changing "stock/stump" to "substance"? It could be seen as the tree's "vital force" or "substance" hidden within as well as life (apparently gone) awaiting the chance to burst forth anew.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|35. {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|14}}
||Virgin
||"Therefore, the Lord himself shall give you a sign—Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and shall bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#14 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#14 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-14.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – Change in Intent.''' This passage in {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} and its proper translation is [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaiah_7:14 one of the most contested in all of scripture].

The verses have been crucial for Christians who want to support Matthew's use of the passage in his Gospel to argue that the Savior would be born of a virgin, Mary. Jews and the majority of biblical scholars contend, and not without merit, that the proper translation of the verse is to have merely "young woman" instead of "virgin." What's more, Christians have needed to contend that prophecies can have more than one fulfillment since the verses could be referring to a son of Ahaz that would be named Immanuel in context.

Some of our critics contend, based on this mistranslation, that the idea of the virgin birth is anachronistic to the time of Nephi, but [[Virgin birth of Jesus Christ in the Book of Mormon|we have responded to that in depth elsewhere on the Wiki]].

The issue of translation has been explored elsewhere by both non-Latter-day Saint Christian scholars and Latter-day Saint scholars.<ref>Jason R. Combs, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/prophets-prophecies-old-testament/king-ahazs-sign-christ-jesus From King Ahaz’s Sign to Christ Jesus: The ‘Fulfillment’ of Isaiah 7:14]," in ''Prophets & Prophecies of the Old Testament'' (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book Company, 2017), 95-122; {{Interpreter:Parry:An Approach To Isaiah Studies:2020}}; Garrett Kell, "[https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/jesus-virgin-child-isaiah/ Is Jesus Really the Virgin–Born Child] in {{s||Isaiah|7|}}?" ''The Gospel Coalition'', May 9, 2020, .</ref>

Perhaps the best commentary was offered by the editors of netbible.org who observed that the Hebrew term translated as "virgin" (''ʿalmah''), in the vast majority of cases, refers to just a young woman who has reached sexual maturity, but that it can be and has been used in select instances to refer to a virgin (e.g. {{s||Gen|24|43}}). Thus, one's view of the doctrine of virgin birth may be entirely unaffected by disputes over translation.<ref>''NET Bible'', [https://netbible.org/bible/Isaiah+7 Isaiah 7, footnote 25].</ref> There are other issues to deal with if wanting the verse to work as a reference to Christ, but as far as a translation of the verse, we've explicated all the most relevant issues.

It should be remembered that one of the reasons that {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} and {{s|2|Nephi|7|14}} retain the "virgin" translation may very well be because Nephi had already seen a vision of the virgin Mary ({{s|1|Nephi|11|13}}, 15) and, like Matthew, may have wanted {{s||Isaiah|7|14}} to say "virgin" as part of a theological commentary on Isaiah [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|that we know that he was engaged in given the substantive differences between the KJV and Book of Mormon versions of Isaiah]].
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|36. {{s||Isaiah|7|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|15}}
||That
||"Butter and honey shall he eat''', that''' he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the logical relation of the second clause to the first is not clear. It is as if eating butter and honey leads to moral knowledge. Clarification is needed. Compare the ''New Jerusalem Bible'': "On curds and honey will he feed until he knows how to refuse the bad and choose the good."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Certainly, clarification of the logic is preferable here. However, the rhetorical goals of the verse are still accomplished given this translation, and there are no grave errors as constructed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|37. {{s||Isaiah|7|23}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|23}}
||Silverlings
||"where there were a thousand vines at a thousand '''silverlings'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#23 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#23 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-23.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Hebrew here literally reads 'a thousand of silver', where the presumed measure of weight is the shekel. The Greek Septuagint translated this phrase as 'a thousand shekels'. The use of ''silverlings'' in the English translation originated with Miles Coverdale's 1535 Bible. The English word ''silvering'' was chosen because it was morphologically analyzed as a ''silver + ling'', but its value was not the same as a shekel's."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The intent of the scripture appears to remain unharmed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|38. {{s||Isaiah|7|25}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|17|25}}
||Mattock
||"and all the hills that shall be digged with the '''mattock'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-7/#25 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-7/#25 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/7-25.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "This is a tool that in the Hebrew is based on the verb meaning 'to pick' or 'to hoe'. The English mattock refers to a tool that is more specific than simply a pick or a hoe."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The intent of the passage seems to remain unchanged.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|39. {{s||Isaiah|8|1}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|1}}
||Man's pen
||"Moreover the Lord said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with '''a man’s pen''' concerning Maher-shalal-hash-baz." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts the better translation is "common/ordinary letters" or "common/ordinary stylus."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} The concern here is over "man" and what the significance of saying "a man's pen" is. It's certainly not clear enough to communicate that Isaiah means that the pen is common or average. But it's also not erroneous.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|40. {{s||Isaiah|8|6}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|6}}
||Rejoice
||"Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and '''rejoice''' in Rezin and Remaliah’s son;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#6 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#6 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-6.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation "may be" "'''but melt''' (with fear) before Rezin and Remaliah's son."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|170}} Experts affirm that the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|991nC}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/8-6.htm Most modern, popular, English biblical translations] have "rejoice" instead of "melt in fear." Either translation works and makes enough sense in the historical context. The Lord merely means to express his "dissatisfaction with Ahaz's refusal to accept the divine offer of protection."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|991n5-8}} The Lord does not want Judah to associate with Rezin and Pekah. Those who associate themselves reject the offer and "rejoice" in Rezin and Pekah by gladly joining them in their quest to defend against the incoming invasion of the Assyrians. The ''Contemporary English Version'' (2000) translates this verse as "These people have refused the gentle waters of Shiloah and have gladly gone over to the side of King Rezin and King Pekah." This captures the spirit of what is meant to be "rejoicing" in Rezin and Pekah. Though one could also translate it as "melt in fear" and say that the people join Rezin and Pekah because of fear of them. At worst, "rejoice" is merely a translation variant, and at best, it's an entirely correct translation, and "melt in fear" is in error.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|41. {{s||Isaiah|8|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|12}}
||All them
||"Say ye not, A confederacy, to '''all them''' to whom this people shall say, A confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts the better translation is "...to all that this people calls a confederacy/conspiracy."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The Book of Mormon omits the "them" from {{s||Isaiah|8|12}} and has "say ye not a confederacy to all to whom this people shall say a confederacy." The Book of Mormon's sentence construction doesn't change substantively from Wright's proposal.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|42. {{s||Isaiah|8|19-20}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|19-20}}
||To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them
||"And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony: if they shall speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#19 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#19 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-19.htm Bible Hub v. 18] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-20.htm Bible Hub v. 20])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the Hebrew is obscure and that the KJV/ Book of Mormon translation is also obscure. He asks us to compare the following modern translation: "And should people say to you, 'Go and consult ghosts and wizards that whisper and mutter'–a people should certainly consult its gods and the dead on behalf of the living! As regards instruction and testimony, without doubt this is how they will talk, and hence there will be no dawn for them" (''New Jerusalem Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The current edition of the Book of Mormon reads as follows (differences from KJV bolded): "And when they shall say unto you''':''' Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards '''that peep and''' mutter'''—'''should not a people seek unto their God for the living to '''hear from''' the dead? To the law and to the testimony''';''' '''and''' if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." So the only real difference to which Wright draws our eye is the KJV/BoM's bad (?) translation of "to the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." If the Hebrew is indeed obscure, this can only be a translation variant. However, the Book of Mormon and the KJV likely capture the better sense of the verse.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|43. {{s||Isaiah|8|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|18|22}}
||And; and they shall be driven
||"And they shall look unto the earth; '''and''' behold trouble and darkness, dimness of anguish; '''and they shall be driven''' to darkness." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-8/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-8/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/8-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Critic David P. Wright curiously asserts that "[t]he Hebrew here is ... obscure" and then, in the same sentence, states that "the KJV offers an unlikely translation, especially of the last phrase." This is part of an essay dedicated to KJV ''errors'' in the Book of Mormon. He asks us to compare the KJV to the following translations: "or he may look below, but behold, distress and darkness, with no daybreak, straitness and gloom, with no dawn" (''Tanakh of the Jewish Publication Society'') and "then (he will look) down to the earth, there will be only anguish, gloom, the confusion of night, swirling darkness" (''New Jerusalem Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/8-22.htm Most modern, popular, English biblical translations] render this verse as "driven" or "thrust" into thick darkness. The meaning of the underlying Hebrew is uncertain, according to scholar Marvin Sweeney.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|991nC}} Thus, this can only be considered a translation variant. The intent and overall meaning of the passage are not affected. The passage concerns Isaiah warning people not to practice necromancy as was often practiced (and condemned) in ancient Israel ({{s||Isaiah|19|3}}; {{s||Leviticus|19|31}}; {{s||Deuteronomy|18|10-11}}). With the practice of necromancy, Israel will only see greater and greater darkness and distress as they call upon the dead thought to inhabit the shadow lands of the underworld. Whether they are "thrust" into darkness, "driven" into darkness, or look and see utter darkness with no break of day, makes little difference. This again looks like straining to find fault.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|44. {{s||Isaiah|9|1}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|1}}
||Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation
||"'''Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation''', when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "For if there were to be any break of day for that [land] which is in straits" (''Tanakh of the Jewish Publication Society''); "But there will be no gloom for her that was in anguish" (''Revised Standard Version''); and "For is not everything dark as night for a country in distress" (''New Jerusalem Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} It seems that the substantive meaning of the verse is not changed from Wright's proposals. The verse means that the dimness or gloom will not be like it was when these nations mentioned were distressed or vexed.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|45. {{s||Isaiah|9|1}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|1}}
||Grievously afflict
||"Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more '''grievously afflict''' by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – Change in Intent.''' The better translation is "but in the future '''he will honor''' Galilee of the Gentiles, by the way of the sea, along the Jordan."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}}

The Book of Mormon actually changes this verse quite a bit from the original one in {{s||Isaiah|9|1}}. It reads: "Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations." {{s|2|Nephi|19|1}} reads: "Nevertheless, the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun, and the land of Naphtali, and afterwards did more grievously afflict <s>her</s> by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations." Thus, the Book of Mormon makes the verse refer to the Red Sea. Critics have made fun of the Book of Mormon for this and leveled other criticisms. See [[Book of Mormon/Anachronisms/The Red Sea|here]] and [[Question: Why does 2 Nephi 19:1 change the word "sea" in Isaiah 9 to "Red Sea"?|here]] for commentary on the criticisms that have arisen.

We now must ask—could the translation of "grievously afflicting" actually be some modification by Nephi that provides commentary on his own situation or experience? [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|We know that Nephi did modifications]] to affect the meaning and intent of Isaiah's scripture as a sort of commentary on his own situation that Nephi calls "likening" ({{s|1|Nephi|19|23}}). Could there be something similar going on here? This may have something to do with the difficult journey that Lehi, Nephi, and their family faced by the borders of the Red Sea as they traveled down the Arabian Peninsula.

Skousen actually tells us that he believes that "Red Sea" was not an accident by scribes of the Book of Mormon translation. He believes that "Red Sea" was actually on the plates that Joseph Smith translated from. He deduces this from the fact that there is no manuscript evidence that scribes of the Book of Mormon translation text inserted "Red" next to "sea" even in the original manuscript of the translation of the Book of Mormon. Also, there are four uses in the Bible of the phrase "by the way of the Red Sea" ({{s||Numbers|14|25}}; {{s||Numbers|21|4}}; {{s||Deuteronomy|1|40}}; {{s_short||Deuteronomy|2|1}}). Familiarity with the phrase, Skousen argues, perhaps led Nephi to add the word "Red" to “sea” when copying Isaiah. Either that, or "Red" was actually a part of the text and Nephi didn't add anything to it. Furthermore, out of 82 occurrences of the word "sea" in the Book of Mormon, there is no manuscript evidence that scribes added "Red" to the word "sea," even as a mistake that was then corrected.<ref name="skousenvariants" />{{Rp|732–33}} Skousen retained "Red Sea" in his reconstruction of the earliest text of the Book of Mormon: the text as it came from the mouth of Joseph Smith (or at least his best reconstruction of it).<ref name="skousenearliest">{{Book:Skousen:The Earliest Text}}</ref>{{Rp|119}}

Again, [[Question: Do the changes in the Book of Mormon Isaiah passages reflect a better translation of the underlying Hebrew?|Nephi was "likening" Isaiah to his current situation and understanding throughout the Book of Mormon quotations of Isaiah]] by changing text ({{s|1|Nephi|19|23}}). Something similar is likely going on here.

This may thus be an intentional emendation by Nephi to creatively liken the scriptures Isaiah wrote to his present situation, which Joseph Smith then correctly translated from the plates into English. The intent of the verse ‘'is changed'', and leads us to an incorrect understanding of what Isaiah's original text meant. But it ''isn’t'' an error regarding what ''Nephi'' meant to communicate about God. If Nephi is likening this passage to himself and his then-current situation and understanding, then there is no error.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|46. {{s||Isaiah|9|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|2}}
||Shadow of death
||"The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the '''shadow of death''', upon them hath the light shined." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the Hebrew term ''almäwet'' which this verse translates should be "darkness." It is not connected with the term ''mäwet'' "death."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/9-2.htm More than a few modern, popular, English biblical translations] render this verse with "the land of the shadow of death." The verse merely "symbolizes the mortal world where there is darkness, and death."<ref name="bookofmormonref">{{Book:Largey:Book of Mormon Reference Companion}} </ref>{{Rp|374}} Whether saying "the land of darkness," "the land of the shadow of death," or something close to it, the meaning or referent is still the same: the mortal, fallen world/earth.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|47. {{s||Isaiah|9|5}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|19|5}}
||For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise
||"'''For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise''', and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-9/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-9/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/9-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "For every boot that tramps with noise/in battle."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} Skousen's reconstruction of the earliest text of the Book of Mormon changes this verse to read "For every battle of the warrior with confused noise and garments rolled in blood—but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire."<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|119}} The verse concerns imminent military oppression. "Military oppression is symbolized by the ''yoke'' (10.27; 14.25), the ''bar'' (10.24), the ''rod'' (10.24; 14.4; {{s||Gen|49|10}}), and trampling ''boots''."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|993n4–5}} The "confused noise" of the battle could be correctly interpreted as the trampling boots. Regardless, Isaiah means to say that the military oppressors will be overthrown and that the oppression will be fuel for fire. The reader can still come to the accurate conclusion that all of it—the battles with confused noise and the garments rolled in blood—will be burned. The details are different; the message is the same.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|48. {{s||Isaiah|10|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|4}}
||Without me
||"'''Without me''' they shall bow down under the prisoners, and they shall fall under the slain. For all this his anger is not turned away, but his hand is stretched out still." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the KJV's translation is "doubtful." The better translation is supposedly "so that they do not cower among the prisoners" (''Revised English Bible''); "Nothing remains but to crouch among the prisoners" (''Revised Standard Version'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The verse is meant to merge with the rhetorical question of the previous verse which reads (''New Revised Standard Version'') "To whom will you flee for help and where will you leave your wealth, so as not to crouch among the prisoners or fall among the slain?" The verse can still make sense as constructed in the KJV and the Book of Mormon, since it simply means that "[d]uring the day of visitation the wicked will fall in the destruction or become prisoners with other captives."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|376–37}} The ''without me'' can then function as the Lord saying "without my intervention and aid, these people will have to crouch among prisoners or die." Meaning has changed, but not significantly.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|49. {{s||Isaiah|10|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|15}}
||As if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood
||"Shall the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith? or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? '''as if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the Hebrew should be translated "as if a rod raised the one who lifted it, as if a staff lifted the one who is not wood."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|171}} The verses concern the Lord declaring his superior power against the Assyrians. The Lord uses the imagery of an axe and a saw to say that they can't declare their superiority over the one who wields them. The verses still accomplish their rhetorical goals. The detail has changed, the intent has not.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|50. {{s||Isaiah|10|18}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|18}}
||As when a standardbearer fainteth
||"And shall consume the glory of his forest, and of his fruitful field, both soul and body: and they shall be '''as when a standardbearer fainteth'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#18 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#18 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-18.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critics assert that the better translation is something like "and it will be as when '''a sick man''' wastes away," "and it will be as when '''a weak person''' despairs," or "and it will be as '''when someone''' falls in a fit."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}}<ref name="runnells1769" /> Most translations have something like the first suggestion. Though [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-18.htm at least three modern, popular, English biblical translations] carry something like "as when a standard-bearer faints." The superior translation clearly seems to be "when a sick man wastes away" since the verse is trying to describe how the Lord "destroys both soul and body as well as that man's 'forest and fruitful field'." The verse may still work with "standard-bearer faints," however. ''Ellicot's Commentary for English Readers'' [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-18.htm#commentary notes] that "[t]he 'standard-bearer' was chosen for his heroic strength and stature. When he 'fainted' and gave way, what hope was there that others would survive? A more correct rendering, however, gives ‘As a sick man pineth away.’" Similarly, ''Pulpit Commentary'' [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-18.htm#commentary notes] that "[u]tter prostration and exhaustion is indicated, whichever way the passage is translated."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|51. {{s||Isaiah|10|27}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|20|27}}
||The anointing
||And it shall come to pass in that day, that his burden shall be taken away from off thy shoulder, and his yoke from off thy neck, and the yoke shall be destroyed because of '''the anointing''' ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-10/#27 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-10/#27 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/10-27.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is something like "the yoke shall be destroyed because of fatness." He asserts that some emend the text of the Masoretic text of Isaiah (the earliest manuscript of Isaiah we have) since it doesn't make clear sense.<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/10-27.htm Most modern, popular, English biblical translations] agree with the critic. However, some retain a reference to an anointing with oil. The literal meaning of the Hebrew is "because of oil."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|378}} The best way to translate that Hebrew and expand it into a more coherent idea is still uncertain. Thus, this can only be considered a translation variant.

The essential message of this passage is that the yoke of Assyria's oppression against Israel will be taken off. Different translations use imagery compatible with that essential message. With fatness, the yoke will be taken off or fall off Israel because they have become fat and the yoke is too small. The ''Douay-Rheims'' translation of this verse makes the imagery mean that the oil will rot off the yoke. Anointing is typically associated with ordaining someone to success. Thus, with the translation as it stands in the KJV and the Book of Mormon, perhaps the imagery is that God has ordained or anointed Israel to be successful before her enemies. Thus, the yoke will be destroyed because God protected Israel. Thus, given different translations, the detail certainly changes, but the essential meaning does not.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|52. {{s||Isaiah|11|3}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|21|3}}
||Make him of quick understanding
||"And shall '''make him of quick understanding''' in the fear of the Lord: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-11/#3 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-11/#3 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/11-3.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critics assert that the underlying Hebrew translated as "make him of quick understanding" is "unclear," but "probably" doesn't mean "make him of quick understanding." The better translation is "probably" something like, "He shall sense the truth by his reverence for the Lord" (''Tanakh of the Jewish Publication Society''); "And his delight shall be the fear of the Lord" (''New American Bible'').<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}}<ref name="runnells1769" /> The chapter speaks about a coming Messiah. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/11-3.htm The majority of popular, English biblical translations] render this passage as the second suggestion from the critic. The gist of the verse, as constructed in the KJV and the Book of Mormon, is that the Messiah will be filled with great knowledge; though, arguably, in context, one would only be said to be ''genuinely'' of quick understanding if one feared God and obeyed him. Thus, "reverence for the Lord" is the best evidence of "quick understanding." The true wisdom and genius, we might say, is in knowing how to obey God, and not simply because one quickly masters man's learning or priorities.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|53. {{s||Isaiah|11|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|21|15}}
||Dry-shod
||"he shall. . .make men go over '''dry-shod'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-11/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-11/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/11-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translator’s Gloss.''' "The past participial phrase ''dry-shod'' is equivalent to the adverbial phrase 'with dry shoes'. Here, the Hebrew as well as the Greek and the Latin translations use the phrase 'in sandals', without any reference to getting one's sandals wet."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The adverbial phrase still makes sense in context, however. The whole verse in {{s||Isaiah|11|15}} reads as follows: "And the Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make men go over dry-shod." Scholars recognize that this is an allusion to the Exodus, when the Israelites crossed the Red Sea on dry ground.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|997n15}} This is best understood as a translator’s gloss: the translation may make explicit what the ancient readers would have understood implicitly.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|54. {{s||Isaiah|13|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|12}}
||Wedge
||"I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden '''wedge''' of Ophir" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' The better translation is "more precious. . .than '''the gold''' of Ophir."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} Regardless of the translation, the essence is that a man is being made more precious than a piece of gold from Ophir. No significant alteration in meaning.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|55. {{s||Isaiah|13|14}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|14}}
||Roe
||"and it shall be as the chased '''roe'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#14 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#14 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-14.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "In English, a roe is a species of small deer. The word in the Hebrew word refers to a gazelle. The word ''gazelle'' entered English in the late 1500s and early 1600s and would not have been readily available to the King James translators. All the earlier English translations, dating back to Miles Coverdale's 1535 Bible, had the phrase ''chased doe'' rather than ''chased roe''."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} Both the gazelle and roe—speedy hooved herbivores often hunted—work as illustrations of the imagery of fleeing to one's own people and lands. Thus, the intent of the passage is unchanged.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|56. {{s||Isaiah|13|15}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|15}}
||That is joined
||"Every one that is found shall be thrust through; and every one '''that is joined''' unto them shall fall by the sword." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – Change in Intent.''' Wright asserts that the better translation is "who are caught/captured."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} The verse intends to create a type of parallelism between the first and second clauses. It doesn't seem to be a substantive shift in meaning to say that all who are caught will be killed and all who are joined to the people who are caught will be killed. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon changes "found" in {{s||Isaiah|13|15}} to read "proud" and substitutes "the wicked" for "them" such that the verse reads "[e]very one that is proud shall be thrust through; yea, and every one that is joined to the wicked shall fall by the sword."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|57. {{s||Isaiah|13|21}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|21}}
||Satyrs
||"But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures; and owls shall dwell there, and '''satyrs''' shall dance there." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#21 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#21 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-21.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Hebrew word here in the singular is sa'ir, which in the Hebrew refers to hairy demons or monsters that inhabit the deserts. This word has been incorrectly translated into its phonetically similar Greek word ''satyr'', which refers to a woodland god that is half-human and half-beast."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} No significant change in meaning. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/13-21.htm The vast majority of popular English biblical translations] render this as wild goats, goat-demons, or [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyr satyrs] (mythical half-human, half-goat creatures). The verse intends to convey that Babylon will be made desolate and no man shall live there. Instead, animals will infest and inhabit their lands. There is no significant change in intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|58. {{s||Isaiah|13|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|22}}
||Wild beasts
||"And the '''wild beasts''' of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged. For I will destroy her speedily; yea, for I will be merciful unto my people, but the wicked shall perish." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Jeremy Runnells asserts that the better translation would be something like either "howling beast," "jackal," or "hyena."<ref name="runnells1769" /> The word איים (aym) refers to a howling desert animal, and most translators seem to take that as a reference to either jackals or hyenas.<ref>Though [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm there are translations (mostly much older ones)] that take it as a reference to either sirens, cats, owls, dogs, or wolves.</ref> There is no evidence that jackals or hyenas were domesticated in ancient Israel. They have remained wild in most cultures. Thus, "wild" isn't truly an inaccurate translation here either. Even critic David Wright thinks that the passage is translated accurately as either "wild beasts" or "desert beasts."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} The passage in the KJV already says that the wild beasts "shall cry" in desolate houses, so why "howling beast" needs to be added on top of "cry" is at least mildly uncertain. This is a case where the translation is, at best, not erroneous, and, at worst, just too broad. Certainly, there is no shift away from the intent of the passage. This also looks like straining to find fault.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|59. {{s||Isaiah|13|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|22}}
||Of the islands
||"And the wild beasts '''of the islands''' shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged. For I will destroy her speedily; yea, for I will be merciful unto my people, but the wicked shall perish." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Wright asserts that the better translation would be to omit "of the islands" and render it simply "wild/desert beasts" or specifically "jackals" or "hyenas."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} The verse concerns the Lord's/Isaiah's prediction that Babylon will revert to its primitive condition when it is overthrown. Whether "hyenas" or "wild beasts of the islands" crying in the towers of Babylon does not matter or change the intent of the verse.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|60. {{s||Isaiah|13|22}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|23|22}}
||Dragons
||"And the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and '''dragons''' in their pleasant palaces: and her time is near to come, and her days shall not be prolonged. For I will destroy her speedily; yea, for I will be merciful unto my people, but the wicked shall perish." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-13/#22 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/13-22.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Runnells asserts that the better translation would be to replace "dragons" with "jackals."<ref name="runnells1769" /> [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/13-22.htm The majority of popular English biblical translations] render this verse with "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackal jackals]" instead of dragons, though at least one modern, popular translation keeps dragons. "Dragon" could refer to merely a snake at the time of the King James translation, according to the ''Oxford English Dictionary''.<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Dragon."</ref> One places "hedgehogs" here and another "wild dogs." We can make similar commentary here as we did for the "of the islands" error. The verses concern Babylon's reversion to a primitive, uncivilized, even dangerous condition when the Lord desolates it. Whether jackals or dragons in the palaces, it doesn't really matter. The verses are meant to depict Babylon's desolate, grim condition after the Lord ravages it. The details have changed, but the underlying imagery and intent have not.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|61. {{s||Isaiah|14|2}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|2}}
||Handmaids
||"And the people shall take them and bring them to their place; yea, from far unto the ends of the earth; and they shall return to their lands of promise. And the house of Israel shall possess them, and the land of the Lord shall be for servants and '''handmaids'''; and they shall take them captives unto whom they were captives; and they shall rule over their oppressors." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Skousen says that "[i]n this verse the sense of handmaid is 'a female slave', especially since the paired noun ''servant'' means 'a male slave'. In biblical contexts, ''handmaid'' usually means 'a female personal servant', but not here."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} But a handmaid in the [https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/handmaid ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'' understands] a handmaid to be a "maid that waits at hand; '''a female servant''' or attendant." Similarly, the ''Oxford English Dictionary'' notes that the main usage of handmaid is to refer to "[a] '''female''' personal attendant or '''servant'''."<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Handmaid."</ref> Thus, it's not certain why Skousen considers this to be an error. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-2.htm Popular biblical translations more contemporary to the 1800s, as well as two more modern translations, render it as "handmaids."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|62. {{s||Isaiah|14|4}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|4}}
||Golden city
||"And it shall come to pass in that day, that thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say: How hath the oppressor ceased, the '''golden city''' ceased!" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Skousen claims that the better translation is "how hath the oppressor ceased, the '''assaulting''' ceased."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Critic David P. Wright asserts that the KJV translation is "doubtful" and that the translation should "probably" be "boisterous behavior, frenzy, [or] arrogance."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}}

This is Isaiah's taunt song against Babylon. Calling Babylon "the golden city" that is laid down and humbled is a great way to taunt Babylon, as Isaiah contrasts their former glory with their current misery. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-4.htm Five other biblical translations (two of which are modern and three much older)] render it as "golden city." Scholar Seth Erlandson makes a compelling case for translating this passage as "golden city."<ref>Seth Erlandsson, ''The Burden of Babylon: A Study of Isaiah 13:2–Isaiah 14:23'' (Berlingska Boktryckeriet, 1970), 29–32; quoted in Robert S. Boylan, "Seth Erlandsson on מדהבה meaning 'golden city' in {{s||Isaiah|14|4}}," ''Scriptural Mormonism'', 11 November 2022, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2022/11/seth-erlandsson-on-meaning-golden-city.html?q=golden+city.</ref> Given that "golden city," "assaulting," and "boisterous behavior, frenzy, or arrogance" would all be referring to Babylon ceasing or Babylon's action ceasing, this isn't a translation error at all. The meaning or referent does not change, no matter which way the verse is translated! At best, we have no error. At worst, we have a translation variant.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|63. {{s||Isaiah|14|5}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|5}}
||Scepter
||"The Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, the '''scepter''' of the rulers." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#5 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Skousen proposes that the better translation is "the Lord hath broken the staff of the wicked, and the '''rod''' of the rulers."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} But [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-5.htm the vast majority of popular, English biblical translations] render this verse with "scepter" or "sceptre" instead of rod. Either way, it does not seem that either the essential object being referred to or the ethical message changes. In Skousen's reconstruction of the earliest text of the Book of Mormon (the best reconstruction of the original words dictated by Joseph Smith), the text reads "scepter'''s'''" in the plural.<ref name="skousenearliest" />{{Rp|127}} This also doesn't seem to significantly change the essential meaning of the text—a sceptre represents the rod of force or correction used by a sovereign to rule. This is a distinction without a difference, though KJV translators would have been more familiar with the more fancy and elaborate sceptre compared to the simple rod.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|64. {{s||Isaiah|14|11}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|11}}
||Viols
||"Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy '''viols''': the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#11 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#11 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-11.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' Critic M.D. Brown claims that the word translated as "'viol' is the Hebrew 'nebel', a type of lyre. True viols were unknown until the 15th century."<ref name="brown"></ref> This claim is correct. The mistranslation, however, does not lead a reader away from the passage's overall intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|65. {{s||Isaiah|14|12}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|12}}
||Weaken
||"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! Art thou cut down to the ground which did '''weaken''' the nations!" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#12 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#12 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-12.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "There are two meanings for this verb in the Hebrew: one means 'to weaken', the other 'to defeat or to lay prostrate'. In this context, the second of these works better. It is the one adopted in modern translations, such as the English Standard Version: 'How you are cut down to the ground, '''you who laid the nations low'''!'"<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} The essential message of bringing the nations down and humbling them is not altered, given this variation. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-12.htm Eight other popular English biblical translations (six of which are modern)] render this verse as "weaken."
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|66. {{s||Isaiah|14|29}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|29}}
||[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockatrice Cockatrice]
||"for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a '''cockatrice'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-29.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The cockatrice is a mythical serpent with a deadly glance that is hatched by a reptile from a cock's egg. However, the Hebrew word here is based on a verb meaning 'to hiss' and simply refers to a viper or adder."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} This verse provides "imagery explaining that while an oppressor of the Philistines may perish, another, more severe will follow." It's "a metaphor suggesting that Philistia's next oppressor (the cockatrice or deadly viper) will somehow be related to its first (the serpent or snake), perhaps a descendant."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|388}} Either a cockatrice or viper/adder can accomplish the rhetorical goals of the verse. Some might think that a cockatrice is somehow more powerful than a fiery flying serpent. That may be the case. Who exactly knows the power differentials that Philistia's next oppressors would have? The prophecy may refer to Babylon since they were part of the Assyrian empire and yet overcame the Assyrian empire and destroyed Jerusalem, which the Assyrians never managed to do. around 587 BC. "Philistia attempted to revolt against Assyria" in 715 BCE, and "[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_II Sargon] put down the Philistine revolt in 713 BCE" just two years later.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|p.1001n14.28–32}} Or the Philistines may have considered themselves oppressed by the Assyrians, and so revolted. But, whatever they thought of the oppression that led to their revolt, it was nothing compared to the brutal treatment they would receive from Sargon II when he arrived to besiege their land to reassert his control.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|67. {{s||Isaiah|14|29}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|24|29}}
||Fiery flying serpent
||"Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken; for out of the serpent’s root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit shall be a '''fiery flying serpent'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-14/#29 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/14-29.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' "The correct rendition of the Hebrew for {{s||Isaiah|14|29}} should be 'a flying fiery serpent'. The compound ''fiery serpent'' is represented in the Hebrew by a single word ''saraf'', which comes from the verb ''saraf'' 'to burn'; here we have a flying serpent whose sting burns (in other words, 'a flying poisonous serpent')."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|216}} Regardless, we have a mythical serpent creature on the attack. No significant alteration in meaning. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/14-29.htm Five other popular, English biblical translations (two of which are modern)] render it as the Book of Mormon does here.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|68. {{s||Isaiah|29|16}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|27|27}}
||Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay
||"And wo unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the Lord! And their works are in the dark; and they say: Who seeth us, and who knoweth us? And they also say: '''Surely, your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay'''. But behold, I will show unto them, saith the Lord of Hosts, that I know all their works. For shall the work say of him that made it, he made me not? Or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, he had no understanding?" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-29/#16 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-29/#16 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/29-16.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Erorr – Change in Intent.''' Critic David P. Wright claims that a better translation would be: "How perverse of you! Can the potter be considered as the clay? Can a work say of its maker, 'He did not make me,' and can what is formed say to the one that formed it, 'He has no creative intelligence?'"<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|172}} Wright is correct that this verse's translation changes the meaning of the original text significantly. Isaiah means to use a metaphor that "shows the foolishness of mortals who pretend to be mightier than their Creator (cf. {{s||D&C|10|5-34}})."<ref name="bookofmormonref" />{{Rp|391}}

As currently rendered in the Book of Mormon, the verse means that the wicked who hide their works in darkness are telling God that His "turning of things upside down" will be esteemed as the potter's clay. The "turning of things upside down" might refer to God threatening to humble the mighty and powerful by sending them into slavery. (Compare the daughters of Zion verses, which are full of ironic contrasts between the glamorous, worldly daughters before and after their captivity.) Here, the wicked are so arrogant that they dismiss God's ability to cause a revolution in their comfortable lives. But this is as foolish, says the Book of Mormon's rendition, as a clay pot thinking that the potter cannot throw it back into the clay for destruction and remixing into something new if he decides to.

The Book of Mormon, in line with Wright's translation, already teaches us that God is all-searching and all-wise.<ref>{{s|2|Nephi|9|44}}; {{s||Mosiah|27|41}}; {{s_short||Mosiah|29|19}}</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|69. {{s||Isaiah|29|21}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|27|32}}
||Reproveth
||"And they that make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that '''reproveth''' in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of naught." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-29/#21 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-29/#21 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/29-21.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The verb ''reprove'' is used four times in the Book of Mormon, all in biblical quotes. The King James Version’s use of ''reprove'' adds a negative sense not found in the Hebrew original. In all cases, the neutral verb 'judge' would be a more appropriate translation."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/29-21.htm Twelve other popular, English biblical translations (only two of which are modern)] render this verse similar to how the Book of Mormon and King James Version do. The act of judging or arbitrating disputes between people may mean that the judge at the city gates will actually reprove those who receive the negative side of his judgments. Being found guilty or liable in court is always an implicit reproof of behavior. The passage intends to point to the judge at the gate, who can both arbitrate and reprove—indeed, one cannot do one without the other. One arbitrates by finding who is in the right and who is in the wrong, and arranging a settlement of disparate interests. If one side gets everything they want, the other is reproved. If neither side gets everything they want, there is an implicit reproof of some aspect of both sides' conduct and of their inability to resolve the matter themselves.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|70. {{s|1|John|5|7}} ~ {{s|2|Nephi|31|21}}
||The potential presence of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma Johannine Comma] in {{s|2|Nephi|31|21}}
||"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_1-John-Chapter-5/#7 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-John-Chapter-5/#7 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/1_john/5-7.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' This one is considered a stretch even by the scholar with whom the author corresponded. The passages from {{s|1|John|5|7}} and {{s|2|Nephi|31|21}} don't line up like the critics might want them to.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|71. {{s||Exodus|20|13}} ~ {{s||Mosiah|13|21}}
||Kill
||"Thou shalt not '''kill'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Exodus-Chapter-20/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Exodus-Chapter-20/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/exodus/20-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Some have said that the Book of Mormon's inclusion of the word "kill" here is incorrect and that one should have "murder" instead. There's a complex discussion to be had regarding proper translation that can be found, in part, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_not_kill here]. Nevertheless, these debates would have been of little moment to the Book of Mormon's audience, who understood that the command against killing referred to murder, and not to some other forms of death dealing (e.g., self-defense, judicial punishment, or lawful warfare).
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|72. {{s||Isaiah|53|8}} ~ {{s||Mosiah|14|8}}
||He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation?
||"'''He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation?''' for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-53/#8 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-53/#8 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/53-8.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' Wright thinks that the first phrase might be rendered as the KJV has it, though many moderns translate it as "by oppression and judgment he was taken away" (New International Version).<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|219n48.}} The second phrase, Wright tells us, is obscure in the Hebrew. It has been rendered variously: "who could consider his stock/descendants," "who could consider his fate," "who could describe his abode," or "who could plead his cause." This can only be considered a translation variant. It is not ideal, since "declaring a generation" isn't very clear in meaning, though it can plausibly be interpreted to include Wright's suggestions, especially the last one.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|73. {{s||Matthew|23|37}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|10|5}}
||Chickens
||"And again, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her '''chickens''' under her wings, yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, who have fallen; yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, ye that dwell at Jerusalem, as ye that have fallen; yea, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens, and ye would not." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-23/#37 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-23/#37 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/23-37.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Diachronic Shift.''' The ''CES Letter'' asserts that this is a translation error.<ref name="runnells1769" /> The author believes that it should be rendered "chicks." This isn't an error, but a good example of the diachronic nature of language. The ''1828 Webster's Dictionary'' defines "chicken" as "[t]he young of fowls, particularly of the domestic hen, or gallinaceous fowls."<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=chicken}} </ref> The ''Oxford English Dictionary'' has examples from the 10th to the 16th centuries of "chicken" being used to designate "[t]he young of the domestic fowl [and] its flesh" as well as "the young of any bird."<ref>''Oxford English Dictionary'', s.v. "Chicken."</ref> This looks like seeking to find fault.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|74. {{s||Matthew|5|15}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|15}}
||Candle
||"do men light a '''candle''' and put it under bushel?" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The corresponding Greek means simply 'a lamp', in fact, 'a small oil lamp."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} the passage intends to use the metaphor of hiding a light when needed to guide towards goodness and truth. Both a candle and a lamp can do that; the source of light is simply a question of culture. Even a translation as far from the original as "no one turns on their flashlight and then hides it under the bedclothes" would convey the same message.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|75. {{s||Matthew|5|15}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|15}}
||Candlestick
||"nay, but on a '''candlestick'''" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The corresponding Greek word means 'a lamp stand' (that is, a specific stand for placing a lamp)."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} The passage intends to say that a person shouldn't hide their spiritual light but show it to others. Both a lamp/lampstand and a candle/candlestick are effective imagery for communicating that message. See the above discussion.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|76. {{s||Matthew|5|27}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|27}}
||By them of old time
||"Ye have heard that it was said '''by them of old time''', Thou shalt not commit adultery:" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#27 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#27 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-27.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Correct Translation of Younger Biblical Manuscripts.''' Newer translations of the Bible, based on the earliest extant manuscripts, omit the phrase "by them of old time." But there is no significant change of meaning nor intent in the verse, and Jesus is quoting {{s||Exodus|20|14}} and {{s||Deuteronomy|5|18}}. Those are certainly references to prophets "of old time" relevant to Jesus. Further, as Robert S. Boylan has observed, "While the earliest Greek texts do lack the phrase [translated as "by them of old time"] τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, the meaning of the phrase is implicit in the Greek whether or not the phrase is original. This is because the parallel sayings in {{s||Matt|5|21}} and 5:33 contain the phrase τοῖς ἀρχαίοις, so these words are understood in v.27 (via subtext), just as they are understood in vv. 38 and 43, where no Greek manuscript evidenced a need to repeat the obvious, either."<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "KJV Mistranslations in the Sermon at the Temple?" ''Scriptural Mormonism'', May 5, 2016, https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2016/05/kjv-mistranslations-in-sermon-at-temple.html?q=translation+errors. Citing Welch, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/sermon-temple-and-greek-new-testament-manuscripts ''Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple''], 202.</ref> This cannot be considered an error—only an evidence that [[Question: Do academic translators copy translations of other documents to use as a "base text"?|the Book of Mormon has the King James Bible as its "base text" for translation]].

One critic takes this further and says that "by them of old time" is a ''mistranslation'' of the Greek ''tois archaiois''. It is more properly rendered as "to them of old time," suggesting that God is the one who told the prophets, "thou shalt not commit adultery."<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|121}} This is correct,<ref>Eric D. Huntsman, "[https://rsc.byu.edu/sermon-mount-latter-day-scripture/six-antitheses The Six Antitheses: Attaining the Purpose of the Law through the Teachings of Jesus]," in ''The Sermon on the Mount in Latter-day Scripture'', ed. Gaye Strathearn, Thomas A. Wayment, and Daniel L. Belnap (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2010), 96, 107n14.</ref> but that doesn't negate the Book of Mormon's historicity, nor does it mean that the Book of Mormon can't retain its status as the "most correct book." The ethical message is the same: don't commit adultery and don't look on someone to lust after them. Whether it was said ''by'' the prophets of old (which is still correct) or ''to'' the prophets of old doesn't matter at all! If prophets speak the word of the Lord, anything they ''say to the people'' has already been ''said to them'' by God.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|77. {{s||Matthew|5|30}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|30}}
||Should be cast into hell
||"And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body '''should be cast into hell'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#30 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#30 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-30.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Stan Larson asserts that this should read "that thy whole body should go into hell" instead of "be cast into hell." Larson asserts that the earliest manuscripts of Matthew support this reading.<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|122}} The differences, however, seem to be trivial, and "cast into hell" can be the translated phrase from the earliest manuscripts. [https://biblehub.com/matthew/5-30.htm Many popular English biblical translations (including a few modern translations)] render this verse as "cast into hell.” However, the rest vary between saying "go into hell," "thrown into hell," "depart into hell," and "fall into hell," so again, the essential intent of the verse is retained no matter the translation.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|78. {{s||Matthew|5|40}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|40}}
||Coat
||"if any man will sue thee at the law and take away thy '''coat''', let him have thy cloak also" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#40 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#40 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-40.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "The Greek word for ''coat'' is ''chiton'': 'tunic', which actually refers to an inner garment worn under the coat, next to the skin, whereas the Greek word for ''cloak'' is ''himation'', a more general word used to refer to an outer garment (such as a coat or a cloak)."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|214}} "Jesus is saying that, if we are sued even for a trifling amount, rather than countersuing and ratcheting up the hostility, we should be willing to give up what is rightfully ours to defuse the situation."<ref>"What the Bible says about Outer Cloak (From Forerunner Commentary)," ''Bible Tools'', accessed 22 September 2022, https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/11587/Outer-Cloak.htm.</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|79. {{s||Matthew|5|44}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|12|44}}
||Bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and ... which despitefully use you
||"But behold I say unto you, love your enemies, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you and persecute you;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-5/#44 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#44 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/5-44.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Newer translations based on earlier manuscripts do render things differently. The newer translations are simpler. They usually say, "But I say to you that you shall love those who hate you and pray for those who persecute you."<ref>Thomas A. Wayment, ''The New Testament, A Translation for Latter-day Saints: A Study Bible'' (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2019), 14.</ref> Neither the verse’s meaning nor intent seems to change in any significant ways. Obviously, there's no doctrinal error.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|80. {{s||Matthew|6|4}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|4}}
||Openly
||"That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret, himself shall reward thee '''openly'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#4 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#4 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-4.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' The word "openly" in this verse [https://biblehub.com/matthew/6-4.htm is omitted in most modern, popular, English biblical translations]. That the Lord will reward us openly is repeated in verses 6 and 18 of {{s||Matthew|6|}} and verses 6 and 18 of {{s|3|Nephi|3|}}. "Openly" is omitted in most biblical translations of those verses as well. Some believe that "openly" is implied in the original Greek word αποδιδωμι (ah-poh-dih-doh-mee) while others don't.<ref>For a case in favor of "openly" being implied in the Greek, see Welch, [https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org/content/sermon-temple-and-greek-new-testament-manuscripts ''Illuminating the Sermon at the Temple''], 205.</ref> Regardless of the correct translation of the Matthean verses, it remains correct doctrine. {{s||Proverbs|10|22}} says that "The blessing of the LORD, it maketh rich, and he addeth no sorrow with it." {{s|2|Corinthians|9|8}} says that "God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work." In other words, God can bless us abundantly with riches and provisions so that we can continue to do good to others at home and abroad. Is that not blessing us "openly"? Thus, this is either a case where there is no translation error at all, or an intelligible change in intent.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|81. {{s||Matthew|6|13}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}}
||Temptation
||"And lead us not into '''temptation''', but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' One critic claims that "temptation" should be rendered as "the time of trial."<ref name="alcase" /> [https://biblehub.com/matthew/6-13.htm The majority of popular, academic, modern, English biblical translations], however, disagree with the author. Further, "the time of trial" ''is'' "temptation." To "tempt" someone is "to put them to the test," or to have a "trial" of their strength or character.

Webster's 1828 dictionary defines "tempt" as "'''''In Scripture'''', to try; to prove; to put to trial for proof."<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=tempt}} {{ea}}</ref> Webster also regards "temptation" as meaning "trial," and even includes this precise phrase ("Lead us not into ''temptation''") as an illustration.<ref>{{Book:Webster:Dictionary:1828|word=tempt}} {{io}}</ref>

The critic is simply ignorant of the meaning of the word and sees fault where there is none.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|82. {{s||Matthew|6|13}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}}
||Evil
||"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from '''evil''': For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' One critic claims that "evil" should be rendered as "the evil one."<ref name="alcase" /> Evil is personified in "the evil one." Satan was seen as the ultimate source of all evil; to be delivered from him was to be delivered from evil, and vice versa. At most, this is a variant.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|83. {{s||Matthew|6|13}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}}
||For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever, Amen
||"For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#13 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-13.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Correct Translation of Younger Biblical Manuscript.''' Critics believe that this verse, known as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxology#Lord's_Prayer_doxology the doxology], was not original to Jesus; that Jesus didn't actually say this. The earliest manuscripts of the Bible do not contain these phrases. The inclusion of the doxology in {{s|3|Nephi|13|13}} is not a problem for the Book of Mormon. See: [[Question: Did Joseph Smith ignorantly include an error from the Bible into the Book of Mormon when including the Lord's Prayer in 3 Nephi 13:13?|here]]. The doxology is obviously not a doctrinal error about God. The doxology is probably based on a reading of {{s|1|Chronicles|29|10-11}} which reads "Wherefore David blessed the Lord before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, Lord God of Israel our father, for ever and ever. Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted as head above all." Robert S. Boylan, citing John W. Welch, offered other important considerations that provide plausibility for the utterance of the doxology by Jesus.<ref>Robert S. Boylan, "[https://scripturalmormonism.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-sermon-on-mount-sermon-at-temple.html?q=translation+errors The Sermon on the Mount, the Sermon at the Temple, and the Doxology]," ''Scriptural Mormonism'',26 August 2014.</ref> Swiss theologian [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulrich_Luz Ulrich Luz] observed that "[t]he three-member doxology, which is usual in our services, is missing in the best manuscripts." He then argued that {{s|2|Timothy|4|18}} and Didache 8:2 "show that the Lord’s Prayer was prayed in the Greek church from the beginning with a doxology."<ref>Ulrich Luz, ''{{s||Matthew|1|7}}: A Continental Commentary'', trans. William C. Linss (Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 1985), 385; as cited in Patrick D. Miller, ''They Cried to the Lord: The Form and Theology of Biblical Prayer'' (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994), 438n118.</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|84. {{s||Matthew|6|28}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|13|28}}
||Lillies
||"consider the '''lilies''' of the field" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-6/#28 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-6/#28 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/6-28.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Legit Error – No Change in Intent.''' "Here the Greek word ''krinon'', modified as being 'in the field', most likely refers to a colorful wild flower."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|215}} The verses are meant to suggest that the birds of the air, flowers of the field, and other things do not worry about the span of their lives nor worry about what they're going to eat to survive, and yet the Lord provides for them. The intent of the verse is unchanged.{{Rp|215}}
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|85. {{s||Matthew|7|2}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}}
||Again
||"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you '''again'''." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Matthew-Chapter-7/#2 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-7/#2 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/matthew/7-2.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Uncertain.''' Stan Larson asserts that the "again" at the end of {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}} is erroneous.<ref name="larson" />{{Rp|123}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Welch John W. Welch] responded as follows in the ''FARMS Review'': "Example 3 concerns the difference between 'measured to you' (which appears in older Matthean texts) and "measured to you again" (which appears in KJV {{s||Matthew|7|2}} and {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}}). Larson says that I 'downplay the difference among the variants at {{s||Matthew|7|2}}' (p. 123). He does not say, however, why I find the difference to be negligible. The difference is over the presence or absence of the Greek prefix anti- (English again). I believe that 'with or without this prefix on the verb, the sentence means exactly the same thing.'<ref name="welchsermon">John W. Welch, ''The Sermon at the Temple and the Sermon on the Mount'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1990), 155.</ref> Indeed, the similarity is such that 'this variant was not considered significant enough to be noted in the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament.'<ref name="welchsermon" /> Larson tries to salvage his point by arguing that 'it can usually (but not always) be shown what Greek text the Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions were based upon' and 'it is often such fine distinctions that are clues in textual criticism' (p. 123). But if one were to imagine a world in which no Greek manuscripts of the New Testament existed, scholars would not stake their reputations on claiming to know for sure (given the clear sense of the passage) whether ''antimetrethesetai'' or ''metrethesetai'' stood behind an English translation that renders {{s||Matthew|7|2}} as 'measured again.' Similarly, one cannot be sure which Aramaic verb was originally used here or which version of a Nephite verb stood on the plates of Mormon behind the translation 'measured again.' Because {{s||Luke|6|38}} contains the word ''antimetrethesetai'' ('measured again'), is there any reason not to believe that early Christians used the words ''antimetrethesetai'' and ''metrethesetai'' interchangeably? Larson has not shown that this is one of those cases where one can determine from the translation what the underlying text was, or that this is one of those 'fine distinctions' of textual analysis (because there is virtually no distinction in meaning here). If no difference exists, Larson has not proved that {{s|3|Nephi|14|2}} is in error."<ref>{{Welch:Approaching New Approaches Review Of New Approaches To:FARMS Review:1994|pages=159-160}}</ref> John Gee and Royal Skousen also address these issues for those who want to learn more.<ref>{{Gee:La Trahison Des Clercs On The Language And:FARMS Review:1994|pages=67–71, 99–101.}}, {{Skousen:Critical Methodology And The Text Of The Book:FARMS Review:1994|pages=121–29}}</ref>
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|86. {{s||Isaiah|52|15}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|20|45}}
||Sprinkle
||"So he shall '''sprinkle''' many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-52/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-52/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/52-15.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Translation Variant.''' The Hebrew verb for ''sprinkle'' doesn't make much sense in context here. Other translations have made this verse something like "the nations '''shall marvel''' upon him." Joseph Smith, in his "New Translation" of the Bible, replaced ''sprinkle'' with '''''gather''''', showing the difficulty of rendering this verse.<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|218}} Some translations render it as nations gathering to God, standing in wonder of him, or being startled by him. [https://biblehub.com/isaiah/52-15.htm The majority of popular, English biblical translations] render it as "sprinkle." Scholars today are still not certain about the meaning of the Hebrew.<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|1051nB}} If that's the case, then this can't be considered a translation ''error''. At worst, it can only be a translation ''variant''. The question really becomes, if the verse is translated as "sprinkle," sprinkle with what? And how will that sprinkling be part of what causes kings to shut their mouths in the Lord's presence?
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|87. {{s||Micah|5|14}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|21|18}}
||Groves
||"And I will pluck up thy '''groves''' out of the midst of thee; so will I destroy thy cities." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Micah-Chapter-5/#14 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Micah-Chapter-5/#14 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/micah/5-14.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' "Here the noun ''grove'' is used to refer to a sacred grove used for cultic rites. However, the original Hebrew in these passages refers to ''Asherim'', that is, wooden images of the Canaanite goddess Asherah."<ref name="Skousen King James" />{{Rp|217}} Given that "groves" refers to areas where cultic, idolatrous rites were practiced, the Book of Mormon does not alter the essential message of Isaiah: that idolatry is wrong ({{s||Mosiah|13|12-13}}) and that God was going to take action to remove idolatrous practices from the Israelites. [https://biblehub.com/micah/5-14.htm Four other popular, English biblical translations (only one modern)] render this verse as "groves."

It's difficult to see this even as a mistranslation, since the wooden images were conceptually trees or groves anyway. Some scholars believe that they actually ''were'' trees sometimes:

<blockquote>
These poles represent living trees, with which the goddess is associated. Some scholars believe that ''asherim'' [the wooden images] were not poles, but living trees (like the one depicted on the Tanaach Cult Stand). The poles were either carved to resemble trees or the goddess (this could also be reflected in the numerous pillar figurines found throughout Israel).<ref> Ellen White, "[https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-israel/asherah-and-the-asherim-goddess-or-cult-symbol/ Asherah and the Asherim: Goddess or Cult Symbol?]," ''Biblical Archaeology Society'' (3 August 2023).</ref>
</blockquote>

"Grove" may, in fact, give more nuance and depth to the ideas being conveyed. It is certainly not a mistranslation or misleading rendering.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|88. {{s||Isaiah|54|11-12}} ~ {{s|3|Nephi|22|11-12}}
||Stones and architectural details mentioned
||"O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not comforted, behold, I will lay thy stones with fair colours, and lay thy foundations with sapphires. And I will make thy windows of agates, and thy gates of carbuncles, and all thy borders of pleasant stones." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Isaiah-Chapter-54/#11 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Isaiah-Chapter-54/#11 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/54-11.htm Bible Hub v. 11] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/isaiah/54-12.htm Bible Hub v. 12])
||'''Uncertain.''' Critic David P. Wright curiously claims that "the meaning of several of the terms in this passage is unclear" and then, in the next clause of the sentence, that "the KJV cannot be considered accurate." He asks us to compare the Revised English Bible: "Storm-battered city, distressed and desolate, now I shall set your stones in the finest mortar and lay your foundations with sapphires; I shall make your battlements of red jasper and your gates of garnet; all your boundary stones will be precious jewels."<ref name="wrightjosephisaiah" />{{Rp|173}} So the main differences are to substitute "finest mortar" for "fair colours," "battlements" for "windows," "red jasper" for "agates," and "garnet" for "carbuncle." [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbuncle Carbuncle] ''is'' [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garnet garnet] so that complaint doesn't make much sense. A [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlement battlement] is a type of window, so it likewise doesn't make much sense to fuss over it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agate Agate] is similar to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jasper jasper]. The overall intent of the passage is to state that "[t]he new Jerusalem is adorned with precious stones and gems by builders supernaturally instructed; cf. {{s||Ezekiel|28|13-19}}. Christian apocalyptic literature draws on this imagery to describe the new Jerusalem ({{s||Rev|21|18-21}})."<ref name="Sweeney" />{{Rp|1053n11–17}}
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|89. {{s||Mark|16|15-18}} ~ {{s||Mormon|9|22-24}}; {{s||Ether|4|18}}
||Longer ending of Mark in the books of Mormon and Ether
||"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; And he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned; And these signs shall follow them that believe—in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_Mark-Chapter-16/#15 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Mark-Chapter-16/#15 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-15.htm Bible Hub v. 15] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-16.htm Bible Hub v. 16] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-17.htm Bible Hub v. 17] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/mark/16-15.htm Bible Hub v. 18])
||'''Not An Error.''' See our commentary on this issue [[Question: Why does part of the longer ending of Mark show up in the Book of Mormon?|here]].
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|90. {{s|1|Corinthians|13|5}} ~ {{s||Moroni|7|45}}
||Easily
||"Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not ''easily'' provoked, thinketh no evil;" ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#5 1611] |[https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#5 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/1_corinthians/13-5.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' Critic James H. Snowden claims that "in incorporating 1 Cor. 13:5, in the 'Book of Moroni,' the phrase 'is not easily provoked,' reads as in the Authorized Version, but the word 'easily' is not found in the Greek and is dropped in the Revised Version. Joe's 'Urim and Thummim,' however, did not detect the absence of this word and he put it in."<ref name="snowden"></ref> The Greek word translated as "easily" is ''παροξύνεται'' (pah-roh-HOO-neh-tai). That word refers to ''irritability'' and irritability certainly entails being "easily" angered or provoked. While the word "easily" is not present in the Greek, its presence in the Book of Mormon does not constitute a mistranslation of the Greek.
|-style="vertical-align:top;"
|91. {{s|1|Corinthians|13|1}} ~ {{s||Moroni|7|47}}
||The use of "charity" in {{s||Moroni|7|}}, relying upon the KJV rendering of "agape." Apparently, it should just be rendered "love."
||"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal." ([https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611_1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#1 1611] | [https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1-Corinthians-Chapter-13/#1 1769] | [https://biblehub.com/parallel/1_corinthians/13-1.htm Bible Hub])
||'''Not An Error.''' It's difficult to know exactly how passages like {{s||Moroni|7|47}} would be translated. There, we learn that "charity is the pure love of Christ." Should we translate that passage as "love is the pure love of Christ"? Or "agape is the pure love of Christ"? Maybe the latter, but it doesn't seem to be a substantive improvement over just retaining "charity" in the verse, especially for a Christianized 19th-century audience.
|-
|}
</wt>
}}
{{CollapseHeaders
| title = ===Question #4: Why did God allow the KJV errors to exist in the Book of Mormon?===
| state = closed
| content =
====The Lord Speaks "After the Manner of their Language"====
All the tabulated data above support the conclusion that the Book of Mormon, if indeed a translation of an ancient text, is a cultural and creative translation of that text. But why did God allow the translation errors?

The only description of the translation process that Joseph Smith ever gave was that it was performed by the "gift and power of God" and used the "Urim and Thummim."<ref>{{EJfairwiki|author=Joseph Smith|date=July 1838|vol=1|num=3|start=42|end=43}}</ref>

We have [[Question: Was every word of the Book of Mormon translation provided directly from God?|some of the Lord's own words about the nature of revelation to Joseph Smith]]. The Lord speaks to His servants "after the manner of their language that they may come to understanding" according to the Doctrine & Covenants ({{s||Doctrine & Covenants|1|24}}). That same idea is confirmed in {{s|2|Nephi|31|3}}. He can even use error for His own holy, higher purposes. The formal theological term for this idea is "accommodation." [[Question: How do Mormons understand prophetic revelation?|The wiki page on the nature of prophetic revelation]] discusses this idea from a Latter-day Saint point of view. God can accommodate erroneous translations and even perspectives for higher, holier objectives. That should be comforting to us—the Lord accommodates His perfection to our weakness and uses our imperfect language and nature for the building up of Zion on the earth.

Joseph Smith quoted from {{s||Malachi|4|5-6}} in {{s||Doctrine and Covenants|128|17-18}}. At the top of verse 18: "I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands."<ref>Complete article and citation can be read [[Joseph Smith: "I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands"|here]]</ref> Joseph here is content with a functionally sufficient translation. It doesn’t need to be 100% exact to be divine and achieve divine purposes.

The Lord can start with the plates, use Joseph's culturally-saturated mind as a springboard and filter for further modification of the text as well as decide which changes absolutely need to be made to the text to communicate the right message (the one that leads to salvation and exaltation), and then provide that "accommodated," functionally-sufficient translation, word-for-word, on the seer stone and Urim and Thummim. (Part of this discussion depends upon whether one understands the Book of Mormon to have been a [[Question: Was every word of the Book of Mormon translation provided directly from God?|loose translation versus tight translation]].)

The data above confirms what scripture and other revelations teach about the nature of revelation.

Brigham Young taught:

<blockquote>
Should the Lord Almighty send an angel to rewrite the Bible, it would in many places be very different from what it now is. And I will even venture to say that if the Book of Mormon were now to be re-written, in many instances it would materially differ from the present translation. According as people are willing to receive the things of God, so the heavens send forth their blessings.<ref>{{JDmini|author=Brigham Young|vol=9|pages=311}}.</ref>
</blockquote>

Brigham recognized that the Book of Mormon's translation could take different shapes. For Latter-day Saints, it is the message—and not the precise words—that matter when determining whether divinity lies behind a claim to revelation.
}}
{{endnotes sources}}



[[Category:Letter to a CES Director]]
[[Category:MormonThink]]
[[Category:An Insider's View of Mormon Origins]]
[[Category:Difficult Questions for Mormons]]

[[es:Pregunta: Si el Libro de Mormón es una traducción exacta, ¿por qué habría que contiene errores de traslación que existen en la Biblia King James?]]
[[pt:Pergunta: Se o Livro de Mórmon é uma tradução exata, por isso que conteria erros translacionais que existem na Bíblia King James?]]