How do protestants explain the 1500 year gap.

[guanophore]

The question probably should be, Who are the remnant?
Rev.12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

rags

Yes, I think that is a valid question, but it is equally valid to ask what the Church founded by Christ looked like…How can it be recognized? Why did Jesus appear to abandon His One Church, leaving only a scattered remnant of believers?

 

[beckie_clark]

not much of the protestant doctrine makes sence to me anyway (born raised protestant. leaving all that behind me for the truth that is in the cathlic church)

 

[andrewstx]

I don’t think Guanophore is claiming that Christians are only in the CC.
The reason there is no gap is because the word has been preached and the sacraments administered since Pentecost in the Catholic Church, in Orthodoxy, and in other traditions of Christ’s Church.

Who were the remnant ?

Jon

Ragsbin is obviously Seventh Day Adventist or at least something extremely similar. SDAs are convinced that they are the ‘remnant’.

They have a book ‘written’ by their ‘prophetess’ Ellen White that claims they existed from the very beginning of Christianity. The book has many mistruths about history. It is commonly thought that “The Great Controversy” was actually plagarised from the work of others.

This volume is a lot like the work used by just a few Baptists to link to every heretical sects doctrine to prove the Baptists are the original church with Apostolic Succesion.

This sort of thing was popular in the 19th century when the SDAs were invented.

 

[ragsbinwashed]

I don’t think I assumed or purported anything of the kind.

The question, though is not about individual Christians, it is about the Church. Jesus established a visible, authorative church that He promised to lead into “all Truth”. This Church was founded upon the apostles and prophets. The Apostles passed the authority given them by Christ to their successors, the Bishops.

So if Christians claim that the Church somehow got “lost” between the NT and the Reformation, one has to wonder where, how, and why? Were all those people who believed they were “church” just deceiving themselves?

Well, here is your post.

Originally Posted by guanophore View Post
This is quite true, but the thread is really not directed at Lutherans, since that communion is only 500 some years old. It is directed toward those evangelical/fundamentalists who believe that the CC went “off the rails” about the time of Constantine. In fact, there are many of them who believe that Constantine founded the CC.

**So if Christians “lost” the true gospel **from that time until this, how is this “gap” explained? Did the visage of the powerful Jesus shepherding His Church we seen in the book of Revleation get tired, or sick? Was the Holy Spirit unable to communicate with the faithful until the modern birth of fundamentalism?

Notice the emboldened parts. You say that some believe that the CC went “off the rails” about the time of Constantine. Then you equate the CC with “Christians” who may have “lost” the true gospel. You don’t appear to leave any room for any other Christians than the CC that went “off the rails”

rags

 

[ragsbinwashed]

Yes, I think that is a valid question, but it is equally valid to ask what the Church founded by Christ looked like…How can it be recognized?

I keep telling you Rev,12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
This is what Go’s church looks like.

Why did Jesus appear to abandon His One Church, leaving only a scattered remnant of believers?

Well here’s some more of Rev.12
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

rags

 

[Tomyris]

I keep telling you Rev,12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
This is what Go’s church looks like.

Well here’s some more of Rev.12
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

rags

Are you really using the Book of Revelations as a doctrinal base?

Use clear Scripture to explain the unclear. This book is one of the most obscure and there is great debate about what it means.

 

[andrewstx]

Are you really using the Book of Revelations as a doctrinal base?

Use clear Scripture to explain the unclear. This book is one of the most obscure and there is great debate about what it means.

If it were not for the books of Revelation, and Daniel the Seventh Day Adventists could not exist.

They also put the ‘writtings’ of Ellen White on the same level as the bible. Since of course Ellen White was an ‘inspired prophetess’.

 

[guanophore]

You say that some believe that the CC went "off the rails" about the time of Constantine. Then you equate the CC with "Christians" who may have "lost" the true gospel. You don't appear to leave any room for any other Christians than the CC that went "off the rails"

rags

This is true. All Christians were Catholics for the first 1000 years, then all Christians were Catholic and Orthodox for the next 500 years. Those who were outside of these visbile and authoriative communions who had “different doctrine” were not considered Christians, but heretics.

Christians are all part of the One Body of Christ, the Church. The Church is in unity, holy, universal, and holds the doctrine and aurhority committed to it by Christ. Through the Church, the paradosis is handed down, inaffiliby preserved by the Holy Spirit.

You seem to think that the “remnant” referred to in Revelation were individual souls scattered and on the run. This is not the case. They were all part of the One Church founded by Christ, which was given the Keys to the Kingdom.

 

[Theo520]

This was the real question I had in a previous thread that got derailed. Personally leaving my non denominational church and coming home to the Catholic Church if both had a solid answer from the bible I had to go with the catholic one because it was rooted in history such as the writings from the first three centuries after Christ.

When ever I show protestants of any kind writings such as the Didiache, polycarp, and ignatius of Antioch. They say “well false teachers were there from the beginning and I have the truth from the bible”. This had come from Lutherans to baptists

While I haven’t read the 40 page thread, I’m surprised anyone thinks there was a 1,500 year gap. Strong differences were surfacing from the beginning. There was the Novatian schism, the Donatist schism, plus all those Councils were to resolve conflicts as well.

Only the ignorant would claim there was a lack of doctrinal conflict for the first 15 centuries of the Christian Church.

 

[Tomyris]

If it were not for the books of Revelation, and Daniel the Seventh Day Adventists could not exist.

They also put the ‘writtings’ of Ellen White on the same level as the bible. Since of course Ellen White was an ‘inspired prophetess’.

He has not said whether he is SDA, so I think you are presuming.

His argument does not stand or fall on whether he is SDA. It should be evaluated on its own merits, or lack thereof.

I have not been able to make out exactly what he is saying.

 

[guanophore]

I keep telling you Rev,12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

This is what Go’s church looks like.

This scripture, though the focus is on the dragon and the Blessed Mother (which I doubt you accept either) does give us some information about those who are the remnant. They keep the commandments of God, and they have the testimony of Jesus Christ. But you give a good example of why it is dangerous to try to make a doctrine from one verse. There are also many other verses that help us understand “what God’s Church looks like”, and none of them are contradictory with this verse.

This verse refernces nothing about authority and discipine, which are also part of God’s Church.

You did not answer my question. What happened to the powerful Jesus depicted in the letters of Revelation? Did He become sick or disinterested in preserving His One Body, the Church? Why didn’t He keep His promises to lead her into “all truth”?

 

[guanophore]

While I haven’t read the 40 page thread, I’m surprised anyone thinks there was a 1,500 year gap. Strong differences were surfacing from the beginning. There was the Novatian schism, the Donatist schism, plus all those Councils were to resolve conflicts as well.

Only the ignorant would claim there was a lack of doctrinal conflict for the first 15 centuries of the Christian Church.

I don’t think anyone is claiming there was no conflict over doctrine. The issue really is one of authority. Christians who are recipients of the Apostolic teaching believe that the Church is visible and authorized by Christ to resolve such disputes, and did so. We believe that the Holy Spirit has infallibly guided the Church into “all truth” just as Jesus promised He would. This did happen trhough Councils, and in other ways.

There are some moderns who call themselves christians that believe there was/is no visible, aurthorative Church (basically that Jesus abandoned the Church He founded leaving a “remnant” astray in the world.)

 

[ragsbinwashed]

Are you really using the Book of Revelations as a doctrinal base?

Doctrinal base? Have you been reading the posts? We are talking about some fictional “gap” and what God’s church looks like I don’t think anyone has even touched on doctrine.

Use clear Scripture to explain the unclear. This book is one of the most obscure and there is great debate about what it means.

Rev.12
14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

So you don’t think that these verses are talking about how God’s church will be persecuted? The time times and half a time actually refers to prophetic years of 360 days each. Which translates to 1260 literal years. So, no gap.

rags

 

[andrewstx]

He has not said whether he is SDA, so I think you are presuming.

His argument does not stand or fall on whether he is SDA. It should be evaluated on its own merits, or lack thereof.

I have not been able to make out exactly what he is saying.

No he has not stated outright that he is SDA. But I have read a LOT of SDA writings and forums for many years and his style of posting and emphasis on Revelation and the so called “remnant” makes it abundantly clear that is what he is. Or something extremely similar.

Give him the benefit of the doubt. If you were “in on” Adventism and it’s rhetoric you and all would be able to make out his posts.

SDAs almost never identify them selves as SDA, just generic Protestants. But their teachings are far removed from Protestant Christianity.

 

[guanophore]

He has not said whether he is SDA, so I think you are presuming.

His argument does not stand or fall on whether he is SDA. It should be evaluated on its own merits, or lack thereof.

I have not been able to make out exactly what he is saying.

The “remnant” and the use of the book of Revelations as the main basis for doctrine are very strong indicators. This website might clarify what is scantily referred to in this thread.

 

[ragsbinwashed]

This scripture, though the focus is on the dragon and the Blessed Mother (which I doubt you accept either)

You’re right. A woman is used to symbolize a church.

does give us some information about those who are the remnant. They keep the commandments of God, and they have the testimony of Jesus Christ. But you give a good example of why it is dangerous to try to make a doctrine from one verse. There are also many other verses that help us understand “what God’s Church looks like”, and none of them are contradictory with this verse.

If none of them are contradictory to this verse then why is it dangerous?

This verse refernces nothing about authority and discipine, which are also part of God’s Church.

What do you mean?

You did not answer my question. What happened to the powerful Jesus depicted in the letters of Revelation? Did He become sick or disinterested in preserving His One Body, the Church? Why didn’t He keep His promises to lead her into “all truth”?

Didn’t you read the passage from Rev. God lead His church into the wilderness where He nourished her for 1260 years. No ineffectual Shepherd. He was the one feeding her in the wilderness.

rags

 

[Theo520]

I don’t think anyone is claiming there was no conflict over doctrine. The issue really is one of authority. Christians who are recipients of the Apostolic teaching believe that the Church is visible and authorized by Christ to resolve such disputes, and did so. We believe that the Holy Spirit has infallibly guided the Church into “all truth” just as Jesus promised He would. This did happen trhough Councils, and in other ways.

There are some moderns who call themselves christians that believe there was/is no visible, aurthorative Church (basically that Jesus abandoned the Church He founded leaving a “remnant” astray in the world.)

The various Schisms resulted in branches, most of with did not survive. The OP seemed to deny there were such schisms and branching of authority during the first 1500 years. In reality, church history is much more colorful.

 

[JonNC]

Ragsbin is obviously Seventh Day Adventist or at least something extremely similar. SDAs are convinced that they are the ‘remnant’.

They have a book ‘written’ by their ‘prophetess’ Ellen White that claims they existed from the very beginning of Christianity. The book has many mistruths about history. It is commonly thought that “The Great Controversy” was actually plagarised from the work of others.

This volume is a lot like the work used by just a few Baptists to link to every heretical sects doctrine to prove the Baptists are the original church with Apostolic Succesion.

This sort of thing was popular in the 19th century when the SDAs were invented.

Thanks. I don’t know a great deal about the SDA’s, but I did have a feeling.

Jon

 

[guanophore]

While I haven’t read the 40 page thread, I’m surprised anyone thinks there was a 1,500 year gap. Strong differences were surfacing from the beginning. There was the Novatian schism, the Donatist schism, plus all those Councils were to resolve conflicts as well.

Only the ignorant would claim there was a lack of doctrinal conflict for the first 15 centuries of the Christian Church.

Sadly there are many ignorant Christians who know nothing of the history of your faith. But those who have retained the Apostolic faith have been taught that the faith was whole and entire before any of the NT was written, and that it is preserved infallibly in the Church by the Holy Spirit. The “strong differences” were considered heresies (not to be tolerated) by those who were entrusted to preserve the faith. The faith was ONE, so such heterodoxy was strictly forbidden. Any who embraced a “gap” in apostolic succession or embraced different doctrine than what came down through the paradosis would have been considered a heretic or a schismatic. This is how the beliefs of the Protestant ecclesial communititeies adn the SDA would have been viewed.

For us, the SDA claim that Christ allowed His One Church to fall into apostasy is the same as saying He did not keep the promises he made.

The Orthodox.

This makes sense, and is accurate, but one is still leftwith the question of why, if the Orthodox assembled the Bible, then how is it that they did so and continued to have all these marks of the Church ascribed to “Rome”, such as liturgy, apostolic succession, sacramental life? It seems that they would be equally included in the “great apostasy” described in the link above. I wonder if Ellenn White even knew about the Orthodox?

Your point being?

What prevents you from being in unity with the Bishop of Rome?

 

[Tomyris]

You’re right.

So are you SDA?