Protestant opinion on where Roman Catholic Church went into apostasy?

[RaisedCatholic]

I’m afraid your scholarship and is a bit liberal in regards to the dating of the canonical New Testament books. All of them were written in the first century, and with the exception of John‘s writings, all of them were written before 70 A.D. Regarding my comments between Luke’s and Matthew’s genealogies of Jesus, that is not example of a contradiction. That is an example of a disagreement as to interpretation of who’s genealogy Luke is talking about, Joseph’s or Mary’s. Either way, it’s not a contradiction, because it can easily be reconciled by using previous scripture, particularly Levirite marriage. But in regards to the non-canonical writings, such as 1Clement, and the Didache, the errors in those writings cannot be reconciled because they are blatantly in error and contradict previous scripture.

 

[adf417]

I’m afraid your scholarship and is a bit liberal in regards to the dating of the canonical New Testament books. All of them were written in the first century, and with the exception of John‘s writings, all of them were written before 70 A.D.

Yes, i understand you have your opinion. Many people do. Some think some of the books in the NT should have not been included. Some think others should have been. Some change the wording to fit their own understanding. :man_shrugging:t3:

But in regards to the non-canonical writings, such as 1Clement, and the Didache, the errors in those writings cannot be reconciled because they are blatantly in error and contradict previous scripture.

No different than the “blatant errors” in:

1. The two different creation stories in Genesis
2. Seeing the face of God - Genesis 32:30 vs. John 1:18
3. God’s power - Matthew 19:26 vs Judges 1:19

Peace!!!

 

[JonNC]

I thought it was a reprobate priest

Reprobate: a person rejected by God and beyond hope of salvation.

Of whom are you speaking, and how would you know this?

went into apostasy and started the great rebellion. Protestantism is the apostasy.

The Catholic Church disagrees with you.

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272

 

[nearlycatholic]

I’m sorry. Wrong word; I thought he was an “apostate” priest. Kind of like Judas being a disciple. Same vein. Apostasy comes first. The great falling away.

 

[JonNC]

I’m sorry. Wrong word; I thought he was an “apostate” priest. Kind of like Judas being a disciple. Same vein. Apostasy comes first. The great falling away.

Apostasy , the total rejection of Christianity by a baptized person who, having at one time professed the Christian faith, publicly rejects it.

Once more, of whom are you speaking?

If you are speaking of Luther, again, the Catholic Church disagrees with you.

 

[GLam1761]

This thread is all about an Apostate Church, which’
is an oxymoron to start with, if it is apostate, it is
no longer the Church(capital C) b/c SHe is being
built by Christ and continues until the end of the
Age, ie until Christ comes to take us Back to be
w/ him forever (John 14:1ff)
If it is a question of doctrinal errors, the word
of God or the Scriptures and the words spoken
by the Pope ex-cathedra in other words as the
Vicar of Christ and in the office or Chair of
St. Peter is inerrant!
I believe firmly in the Apostalic Succession of
the Popes from Peter, that is why I am ROMAN
Catholic!!

 

[Johnofendore]

Any unbiased look at history and scripture will demonstrate that the Church founded on the rock, Peter, is the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (Mt 16:18). The vast majority of protestant scholars admit that Peter is the Rock, its the only thing that makes sense in the passage. Our Lord stated that “the gates of Hell will not prevail of it”. If the RC Church fell into apostasy then our Lord is a liar, because the gates of hell did prevail. We know our Lord is not a liar, and therefore, the RC Church has never fallen into apostasy. Of course, the Church is visible, because our Lord said He would build it. I just had a house built, and the builder called my wife and I over for a final inspection. If we had got there and the block was still vacant, and I turned to the builder and said, “Ah, where is the house?” and he replied with a wink and nod, “Its invisible”, I would have thought he was crazy. Our Lord established a visible Church for His children, and bestowed upon that Church Sacraments in order to be with and guide and assist in this life of exile back to the Father’s Kingdom.

 

[GLam1761]

First, welcome to CAForums!! Yes, the Church IS
b/c of it’s members, we NEED everyone to come
on board!! This is esp. true of the Roman Catholic
Church, which has been ROCKED by scandal and
desertion by it’s members, BUT we have to remember
we are a “work in progress”. That doesn’t mean that
the Teachings of the Church, keeping the Spirit of the
Apostolic Teaching are not valid… on the Contrary, we
can BOAST about the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
which HELPS us as a Guide to Right Living!!

 

[Mishakel]

I’m not sure how to answer this question without offending Catholics. There are a vast number of writings that attribute the system of Catholicism to the mystery of iniquity. Let’s look at what exactly Paul says.

2 Thessalonians 2: 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. 8 And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 9 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

Whether you are a Protestant or Catholic, both sides agree Paul’s writings are inspired. Paul physically wrote the epistle but it’s God who is giving the revelation.

Paul is given insight by God which matches exactly with Daniel in chapter 2

45 Inasmuch as you saw that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it broke in pieces the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold—the great God has made known to the king what will come to pass after this. The dream is certain, and its interpretation is sure.”

In Daniel there is no doubt who the 4 beasts, and the 4 distinct parts of the statue are because 3 are told to us. The head of gold or 1st beast was Babylon. Daniel foretold who the next two beasts would be. Babylon was conquered by Medo-Persia. The 3rd beast was Greece who conquered Medo-Persia. Daniel doesn’t name the 4th beast but again we all know Rome conquered Greece.

Both Daniel and Paul tell us this 4th beast would last until Christ comes back to destroy it.

John in Revelation 19 sees this even in greater detail

20 Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.

We know for certain the 4th beast was Rome. There are no other beasts after Rome, so this power that was already working to gain a foothold in Paul’s time, (around 50AD when he wrote Thessalonians) would have to last until the return of Jesus. There’s no way around those facts. There’s no 5th beast, or 6th beast, or 7th beast etc… The 4th beast has to survive until the 2nd coming.

So the answer to the OP from a biblical point of view is the entire system of Catholicism was invented by Satan from the very beginnings of Christianity. The Son of Perdition is used only twice in all of scripture. Once to describe Judas and once to describe the ultimate AntiChrist. Wouldn’t this ultimate AntiChrist then share attributes of Judas? Did Judas lead a rebellion against Jesus and his followers? No he acted like one and betrayed Jesus with a kiss. Paul says the AntiChrist will come with all deceivableness of unrighteousness. Isn’t that what Judas tried to do?

 

[gohjedrek]

That’s the issue of sola scriptura, reading the bible out of context and having a biased view on history

 

[ButNowIsee]

I am asking myself the same question every week after Mass. I can’t find any reason not to join the Catholic church.

 

[JonNC]

That’s the issue of sola scriptura, reading the bible out of context and having a biased view on history

Neither of these is anything similar to sola scriptura

 

[RaisedCatholic]

The two different creation stories in Genesis

Genesis 1 describes the six day creation. Genesis 2 expands & gives more detail of day 6 of creation. There is no contradiction. Similar arguments can be used to easily reconcile the apparent errors in the NT. However, 1 Clement, the Didache, and other early non-NT writings have errors that cannot be reconciled.

 

[adf417]

However, 1 Clement, the Didache, and other early non-NT writings have errors that cannot be reconciled.

You are quite welcome to provide evidence of these “errors” but in the end it may or may not be opinion and is completely irrelevant to my original assertion in post #140 you have been trying to debunk.

That point being - Writings such as 1 Clement, Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas were considered God-breathed by the church in the 1st century.

Peace!!!

 

[RaisedCatholic]

You are quite welcome to provide evidence of these “errors” but in the end it may or may not be opinion

The writer of 1 Clement believed the phoenix was a real live bird that resurrected from its ashes from a worm. Even though it was meant as an analogy to the Resurrection of Jesus, nonetheless, he believed the bird was real. The Didache also has errors, which I don’t have access to right now (I am at work) but I will list them later.

is completely irrelevant to my original assertion in post #140 you have been trying to debunk. That point being - Writings such as 1 Clement, Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas were considered God-breathed by the church in the 1st century

The Shepherd of Hermas & the epistle of Barnabas were written in the second century. So, how could the church consider them God-breathed in the first century? 1 Clement was written around 96 AD. So, the first century church couldn’t have considered it God-breathed either, since it wasn’t written yet until the very end of the first century.

 

[AlNg]

The message of Jesus is centered around love, peace and non-violence, turning the other cheek…

True. But this could be why we see people disagreeing with the policy of burning people alive at the stake in public as was done during the Inquisition.

 

[adf417]

Even though it was meant as an analogy

This point stands and not only in 1 Clement, we find it throughout the bible.

The Shepherd of Hermas & the epistle of Barnabas were written in the second century

This is possible, it is also possibly not. You really don’t know no more than the you know the many others such as The Didache and The Gospel of Thomas could have been written as early as 50. Equally problematic for your argument is the possibility of 1&2 Timothy and 2 Peter could have been written well into the 2nd century as late as 150.

Peace!!!

 

[RaisedCatholic]

The point is that while there are analogies throughout the Bible, none of the writers of the Old or the New Testaments make blatant errors like in 1 Clement which falsely claims that the phoenix was a real live animal.

We know from the Muratorian Fragmnent that was dated in the late second century that the Shepherd of Hermas was written around this time because the Fragment says it was written. At the earliest the Didache could have been written was in the late first century, and that is only because it relies so heavily on Paul’s later pastoral epistles written just before the destruction of the temple and AD 70, but more likely it was written in the early second century as late as 120.

But the Didache has problems of its own regardless of when it was written. For example it states that the baptismal candidates and the one performing the baptism must fast for a few days before baptizing someone. But we see in scripture especially in Acts that people were baptized the same day they came to faith. It also commands baptism to be performed three times to a baptismal candidate, while the New Testament infers only a single immersion in the NAME of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. It also commands that Christians should fast on different days than the hypocrites do referring to nonbelieving religious elite. Yet we see in the Bible that John the Baptist’s followers fasted on the same days as the Pharisees.

The reason liberal scholarship believe some of the new testament books were written in the second century, like second Peter, is because we don’t find citations from it until at least that time. However Jude sites second Peter extensively. And the way we know Jude was written after second Peter is because second Peter states that false teachers were coming in and Jude says they’re already there.

Same goes for first and second Timothy. The earliest attestation for these writings were they took place in the first century. Some liberal scholars have tried to push the false gospel of Thomas into the first century, however their arguments are weak and the earliest you can get Thomas is in the second century. Plus the false gospel Thomas isn’t even close to what you find in the four canonical gospels in the New Testament in terms of literary format, doctrine, historical validity.

And the same cannot be said about the 27 New Testament book canon as these non-biblical writings from the late first and second centuries The former is God breathed and inspired iinerrant,while the latter is not
.

 

[Wannano]

Wannano:

The message of Jesus is centered around love, peace and non-violence, turning the other cheek…

True. But this could be why we see people disagreeing with the policy of burning people alive at the stake in public as was done during the Inquisition.

Not sure I am completely understanding what you are saying…care to elaborate?

 

[adf417]

The point is that while there are analogies throughout the Bible, none of the writers of the Old or the New Testaments make blatant errors like in 1 Clement which falsely claims that the phoenix was a real live animal.

And yet it was considered inspired for more than 300 years. :man_shrugging:t3: