Blatant Scriptural reference to the Great Apostasy

[Kaptain_Won]

You might be thinking I’m talking about Thessalonians, but I’m not. I’m talking about a parable of Jesus in Luke.

Luke 8:13

 "Those on **the rock** are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root.  They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they **fall away**."

If Peter is the rock upon which the first church was built, then those who came after the first generation church “are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it but have no root.” since they are “those on the rock.” “They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.”

Yes, Jesus promised Peter that the gates of Hades would not overcome his church. I am not contesting that. “Peter’s” church was correct. The next generation cannot be called Peter’s because they fell away in the Great Apostasy.

 

[GelasianumVetus]

Just one problem here, you’re mixing metaphors.

When Jesus re-named Simon, “Rock” or Peter, he was speaking about rock in the context of the foundation of a building, where rock is necessary.

In this parable, the rock is in the context of farming, where rocky soil is a bad thing.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Just one problem here, you’re mixing metaphors.

When Jesus re-named Simon, “Rock” or Peter, he was speaking about rock in the context of the foundation of a building, where rock is necessary.

In this parable, the rock is in the context of farming, where rocky soil is a bad thing.

Also He was using a play on words…Petros means rock. Dead on on the rest

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

The next generation cannot be called Peter’s because they fell away in the Great Apostasy.

Really? And yet none olf the early Church Fathers, many of whom knew the Apostles personaly, mention this apostasy. Not one. Surely at least one would have mentioned it, no? They certainly had no problem mentioning the real apostacies (gnosticism, etc).

And I would like to see even one secular mention of this apostasy.

 

[SonCatcher]

You might be thinking I’m talking about Thessalonians, but I’m not. I’m talking about a parable of Jesus in Luke.

Luke 8:13

 "Those on **the rock** are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root.  They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they **fall away**."

If Peter is the rock upon which the first church was built, then those who came after the first generation church “are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it but have no root.” since they are “those on the rock.” “They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.”

Yes, Jesus promised Peter that the gates of Hades would not overcome his church. I am not contesting that. “Peter’s” church was correct. The next generation cannot be called Peter’s because they fell away in the Great Apostasy.

Kaptain Won, you seem to be alleging that Jesus himself knowingly and intentionally established a church to fail. That doesn’t sound like anyone I’d want to follow, even if somehow there was a restoration after “apostasy.”

[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 16:18[/BIBLEDRB]
Seems like Jesus was referring more to:
[BIBLEDRB]Matthew 7:24-25[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[Joe_Kelley]

…
Yes, Jesus promised Peter that the gates of Hades would not overcome his church. I am not contesting that. “Peter’s” church was correct. The next generation cannot be called Peter’s because they fell away in the Great Apostasy.

So you maintain that the gates of Hades did prevail against it?

 

[Kaptain_Won]

Really? And yet none olf the early Church Fathers, many of whom knew the Apostles personaly, mention this apostasy. Not one. Surely at least one would have mentioned it, no? They certainly had no problem mentioning the real apostacies (gnosticism, etc).

And I would like to see even one secular mention of this apostasy.

That’s because the apostasy was gradual. It was not a single, tangible event, otherwise nobody would’ve been deceived by it. The evidence of the apostasy comes with the countless splits in the church and with so many corrupt popes down the line. I believe one pope even had a Vatican sanctioned orgy in the papal palace (Alexander, I think). Also, one pope toasted Satan on occasion. Talk about apostasy.

 

[Catherine_S]

So you maintain that the gates of Hades did prevail against it?

Worse still, it means that our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ could* not*** keep His word!!

 

[Jim_Dandy]

This is a blatant scriptural misinterpretation, like all the “proof-texts” offered for the imaginary Great Apostasy.

 

[_L]

If this scriptural passage is a blatant reference to the Great apostasy, then what about this one that refutes the premise of the OP?

Matthew 7:24-27

[24] Every one therefore that heareth these my words, and doth them, shall be likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock, [25] And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was founded on a rock.
[26] And every one that heareth these my words, and doth them not, shall be like a foolish man that built his house upon the sand, [27] And the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and they beat upon that house, and it fell, and great was the fall thereof.

 

[_L]

That’s because the apostasy was gradual. It was not a single, tangible event, otherwise nobody would’ve been deceived by it. The evidence of the apostasy comes with the countless splits in the church and with so many corrupt popes down the line. I believe one pope even had a Vatican sanctioned orgy in the papal palace (Alexander, I think). Also, one pope toasted Satan on occasion. Talk about apostasy.

St. Paul also actively persecuted and sent Christians to their deaths, St. Peter denied Jesus three times, if you want to prove that everyone including the Popes are sinners, you have done so with no argument from anyone here. You are tearing down straw men by referencing the sinfulness of certain Popes, no one is going to argue with you because there is nothing to argue about, Popes are sinners too but not even the Pope can strip the bride of Christ away from Jesus the bridegroom who guaranteed that the gates of hell would NEVER (not even for one second let alone hundreds and hundreds of years) prevail against His Church.

 

[pablope]

You might be thinking I’m talking about Thessalonians, but I’m not. I’m talking about a parable of Jesus in Luke.

Luke 8:13

 "Those on **the rock** are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root.  They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they **fall away**."

If Peter is the rock upon which the first church was built, then those who came after the first generation church “are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it but have no root.” since they are “those on the rock.” “They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.”

Yes, Jesus promised Peter that the gates of Hades would not overcome his church. I am not contesting that. “Peter’s” church was correct. The next generation cannot be called Peter’s because they fell away in the Great Apostasy.

You are confusing the Luke passage for something else. Please read the other verses related to the quote…this is about a parable. This is talking about a seed…the word of God…being planted in different soils…meaning it will received differently by different receivers.

Anyway, the apostasy is fiction. It never happened. Otherwise, it would have been well documented. Besides, if there was an apostasy, it means Jesus was asleep at the wheel…why did He not act sooner? Why did He had to wait for 1800 years or so before acting?

The apostasy could only be true if Jesus was a liar, was an unreliable founder of a Church. If you want to examine an apostasy, examine the LDS itself. It broke into several branches right after the death of Joseph Smith.

Here is an ongoing thread discussing this…hope you can contribute whatever you can…

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=591212

 

[patrick457]

Oh-kayyy…so, the Parable of the Sower.

The OP has cited Luke’s version, but I once encountered an idea (popularized by Mary Ann Tolbert) that proposes that the Parable in the gospel of Mark acts as a sort of ‘character introduction’ for that Gospel; I also opened a thread about this once. I quote from a post of mine there:

In Tolbert’s reading, the key focus in Mark is not on the seed, but on the kind of ground onto which it falls. Thus, the parable (which for her functions as an introduction to the first half of Mark’s gospel, which in her interpretation runs from 1:14 to 10:52) introduces the typology for each of the major groups in the story. In addition, the parable also functions as a synopsis of the next section.

Seed on the footpath=scribes, Pharisees, Jewish leaders
Seed on rocky ground=the disciples, especially Peter, James and John
Seed among thorns=Herod (6:14-29), rich young man (10:17-22), possibly also Pilate
Seed on good soil=those healed by their faith

Now I do agree with the OP that there might be a connection between Peter and the ‘rocky ground’, but I think applying it to ideas of the Great Apostasy is going too far. More strong I believe is to see the pre-Easter disciples as symbolizing the seed that fell on rocky ground and withered, especially considering the running ‘blindness of the disciples’ theme that underlies Mark, and to a lesser extent Matthew and Luke. They were privileged to be chosen and to have the ‘mystery of the kingdom of God’ revealed to them, but they increasingly stumble along the way, reaching its climax of course in Holy Week, when Jesus is betrayed, denied and generally abandoned by them. In fact, the word for “fall away” (skandalizo) used in the parable is the same word used by Jesus when He predicts His abandonment by the disciples!

“And these are the ones sown on rocky ground: the ones who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with joy. And they have no root in themselves, but endure for a while; then, when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately they fall away (skandalizontai).”

• Mark 4:17

From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, “Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you.” But he turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance (skandalon) to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man.”

• Matthew 16:21-23

And Jesus said to them, “You will all fall away (skandalisthesesthe), for it is written, ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered.’ But after I am raised up, I will go before you to Galilee.” Peter said to him, “Even though they all fall away (skandalisthesontai), I will not.” And Jesus said to him, “Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times.”

• Mark 14:27-29

So if we go by the OP’s reasoning, the Great Apostasy has already begun with the Apostles.

 

[pablope]

That’s because the apostasy was gradual. It was not a single, tangible event, otherwise nobody would’ve been deceived by it. The evidence of the apostasy comes with the countless splits in the church and with so many corrupt popes down the line. I believe one pope even had a Vatican sanctioned orgy in the papal palace (Alexander, I think). Also, one pope toasted Satan on occasion. Talk about apostasy.

Better to cite and provide your sources…otherwise, this is all fiction, which you probably picked up from anti-Catholic sources.

And can you absolutely say the leaders of your church are sinless? And how about the founder of your denomination…Joseph Smith…care to share the skeletons in his closet…like why was he jailed for?

 

[SonCatcher]

That’s because the apostasy was gradual. It was not a single, tangible event, otherwise nobody would’ve been deceived by it. The evidence of the apostasy comes with the countless splits in the church and with so many corrupt popes down the line. I believe one pope even had a Vatican sanctioned orgy in the papal palace (Alexander, I think). Also, one pope toasted Satan on occasion. Talk about apostasy.

Countless splits? Kinda hypocritical, hmm?

As for the rest, do you have credible sources?

 

[didymus]

That’s because the apostasy was gradual. It was not a single, tangible event, otherwise nobody would’ve been deceived by it. The evidence of the apostasy comes with the countless splits

If by splits, you mean schisms and heresies, there were plenty. But the true Church endured after every crisis. From the Arians & Nestorians to the so-called “Reformation” the Church goes on because Christ founded it.

in the church and with so many corrupt popes down the line. I believe one pope even had a Vatican sanctioned orgy in the papal palace (Alexander, I think). Also, one pope toasted Satan on occasion. Talk about apostasy.

Again, corruption =/= apostasy.
And I would really like to see a credible source for that story, it sounds like Chick tract material.

You state that the Great Apostasy was not a single event but happened gradually sometime between Peter and . . . ?
That means Christianity was still intact at some point well after the death of the apostles. Maybe after the Council of Chalcedon . . . Nicea? The Council of Hippo where the canon of Scriptures were finalised?

Now IF Christianity went off the rails and God were sending a new revelation to set things right why shouldn’t I believe it is Koran (soon after the supposed apostasy) rather than Book of Mormon which wasn’t found/revealed/whatever until 1820s?

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

St. Paul also actively persecuted and sent Christians to their deaths, St. Peter denied Jesus three times, if you want to prove that everyone including the Popes are sinners, you have done so with no argument from anyone here.

Clearly you know your Bible and history. I respect that. But from my personal experience here, I think you overestimate your fellow Catholics on this forum.

Regards,

Peter

 

[po18guy]

You might be thinking I’m talking about Thessalonians, but I’m not. I’m talking about a parable of Jesus in Luke.

Luke 8:13

 "Those on **the rock** are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root.  They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they **fall away**."

If Peter is the rock upon which the first church was built, then those who came after the first generation church “are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it but have no root.” since they are “those on the rock.” “They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away.”

Yes, Jesus promised Peter that the gates of Hades would not overcome his church. I am not contesting that. “Peter’s” church was correct. The next generation cannot be called Peter’s because they fell away in the Great Apostasy.

2 Peter 1:20. You have violated the first precept of biblical interpretation by interpreting it privately, as well as with an agenda. So, just whom has apostatized?

 

[po18guy]

That’s because the apostasy was gradual. It was not a single, tangible event, otherwise nobody would’ve been deceived by it. The evidence of the apostasy comes with the countless splits in the church and with so many corrupt popes down the line. I believe one pope even had a Vatican sanctioned orgy in the papal palace (Alexander, I think). Also, one pope toasted Satan on occasion. Talk about apostasy.

If you are speaking of the reformation, you just might, possibly, have a point there. However, let us look at the English definition of Apostasy “the abandonment or renunciation of a religious or political belief”. Even in the reformation, how do you stretch this to fit your agenda? Not one split-away sect denies Jesus Christ as One of the three Persons of the Holy Trinity. Well, “Oneness” pentecostals are exceptions, as are JWs and, yes, the LDS.

Seems more like those “single prophet” faiths that deny Jesus’ well-establsihed divinity are the true apostates:

2 Peter 2:1
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
“But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction.”

Jude 1:4
Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)
“For certain men are secretly entered in, (who were written of long ago unto this judgment,) ungodly men, turning the grace of our Lord God into riotousness, and denying the only sovereign Ruler, and our Lord Jesus Christ.”

 

[Cowboy_Pete]

Countless splits? Kinda hypocritical, hmm?

We’ve never gone to war with each other. You have to admit that the fourth crusade turned into the greatest betrayal that Christianity had seen since Judas; left Constantinople swept and varnished for the Turks.