When do you think the Church got corrupted?

[DaDad]

I used to think only Muslims and Mormons thought that but I realized some Christians have this idea. Even I used to think the reason for the Reformation was that the Church became corrupted. So I want to know the date and reason that damaged the Church.

Hey David,
LOVE the Topic. I quit going to several different churches because the N.T. church is structured to have "hirelings", -- which Jesus warned us of. But of course, the O.T. church killed the prophets, so maybe everything man touches is corrupted.

None the less, it's a sad fate when the result is the "great falling away", whether due to the individual's own seeking GOD:

Matt: 11:12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and men of violence take it by force. ​

... better rendered:

... the kingdom of heaven is obtained by pursuit, and the pursuers take it by ardent action.​

... or by the present church structure which contradicts Scripture:

1 Cor. 14:26 What then, brethren? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation.​

Either way, if a person pays a gym membership to watch the Trainer use the equipment, -- they leave weaker than when they walked in.


Thanks for a TIMELY Topic,
DaDad

 

[redleghunter]

The reason for the Protestant Rebellion was one proud man's opinion that he could do a better job of interpreting the Bible than the one Church Jesus Christ founded, to which He had promised the fullness of truth. He defected from God's Church and set up an unauthorized manmade church, teaching his own personal interpretations of the Bible. Before he died there were 8 other denominations that had broken away from his church because they didn't agree with his biblical interpretations. The doctrinal chaos of Protestantism had begun. Today, a few hundred years later, there are over 6,000 registered Protestant denominations, plus more than 20,000 so-called "non-denominational" Protestant churches, each one claiming to be teaching the truth because they get their teaching "right out of the Bible", yet the teaching of each one conflicting with the teaching of the others. Truth cannot conflict with truth, so it is obvious that a great deal of untruth is being taught. In the meantime, the Church Jesus founded remains one in belief, one in teaching, one in worship, one in biblical understanding, throughout the world after 2,000 years. You just can't beat God's plan.

Well let’s shed some Roman Catholic scholarship on the above.

From the Roman Catholic scholar then Cardinal Ratzinger now Benedict XVI:

For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution.“

"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,” trans. by Sister Mary Frances McCarthy, S.N.D. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1989) p.196). Who’s in Charge Here? The Illusions of Church Infallibility – White Horse Inn)

 

[redleghunter]

The Church itself never became corrupted. I accept on faith that "the gates of hell will never prevail against it".

There have always been false teachers in the Church, but the Church has always had a way of dealing with them. The Ecumenical Councils were convened to combat heresy in the Church, thereby exposing and excommunicating them.

The protestant reformation was at first ostensibly to combat abuses in the Western Church, but rather than ending the abuses, rapidly set out to redefine the Christian faith, something the reformers never had the authority to do.

That has led to countless heresies, and seemingly spawns a new one on a daily basis. So much so that it is difficult for most laymen to even recognize the Church.

Then why did your Eastern bishops break away from the supreme pontiff of the West? Does that not make the East the first Protestants?

 

[redleghunter]

You mean the NT which a lot of denominations takes different doctrines from? The Bible is considered Sacred Scriptures being part of Sacred Tradition in the Church I go.

How many Holy orders does your church have?

 

[HTacianas]

Then why did your Eastern bishops break away from the supreme pontiff of the West? Does that not make the East the first Protestants?

It had nothing to do with belief or doctrine. The Roman Church claimed for itself authority it was denied by Ecumenical Councils.

The Roman bishop has always held a position of primacy. The Eastern Churches have always acknowledged that. But the Roman bishop claimed supremacy over the Church the Eastern Churches do not recognize. Rome went so far as to claim the authority to set aside the determinations of Ecumenical Councils.

The East/West schism could be resolved tomorrow by simply continuing on as the Church always has.

 

[dcalling]

I used to think only Muslims and Mormons thought that but I realized some Christians have this idea. Even I used to think the reason for the Reformation was that the Church became corrupted. So I want to know the date and reason that damaged the Church.

If you are talking about church as an organization of people, it is always corrupted, as we are all sinners and none of us can follow God's commandments correctly.

However the teaching of God from Bible is never corrupted, even at the time when Catholic church banned reading of the Bible, as we can see the Bible are always read by people and there are always true followers of Christ that are willing to sacrifices themselves to right the wrong for the word of God.

I don't think Mormons thought Church is corrupted, as I read one of their papers online (not sure where) that claim all scriptures are from God, so Quran/Buddha's teachings are also from God.
Mustlims are in a different position, the Bahais don't think Bible is corrupted, but most Muslims do, even though Quran specificly said Christians should be judged by Injel (Gospel) and Jews should be judged by Torah.

 

[redleghunter]

The East/West schism could be resolved tomorrow by simply continuing on as the Church always has.

But it hasn’t and the Eastern churches won’t administer the Eucharist to Roman Catholics. Why?

 

[redleghunter]

Christ our God said that the gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church, and I for one do not believe for a second that He was lying or wasting His words.

What do you think Jesus meant by the gates of hell not prevailing against the church?

 

[HTacianas]

But it hasn’t and the Eastern churches won’t administer the Eucharist to Roman Catholics. Why?

In certain cases a Catholic can receive the Eucharist from an Orthodox priest, and vice versa. The reason it is not routinely done is that "it represents a unity that does not currently exist".

 

[redleghunter]

It had nothing to do with belief or doctrine. The Roman Church claimed for itself authority it was denied by Ecumenical Councils.

I must have missed this previously.

Filioque?

 

[Not David]

Hey David,
LOVE the Topic. I quit going to several different churches because the N.T. church is structured to have "hirelings", -- which Jesus warned us of. But of course, the O.T. church killed the prophets, so maybe everything man touches is corrupted.

None the less, it's a sad fate when the result is the "great falling away", whether due to the individual's own seeking GOD:

Matt: 11:12 From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and men of violence take it by force. ​

... better rendered:

... the kingdom of heaven is obtained by pursuit, and the pursuers take it by ardent action.​

... or by the present church structure which contradicts Scripture:

1 Cor. 14:26 What then, brethren? When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation.​

Either way, if a person pays a gym membership to watch the Trainer use the equipment, -- they leave weaker than when they walked in.


Thanks for a TIMELY Topic,
DaDad

Hey! Can you please tell me what you think of what Paul said about having "One Lord, one faith and one baptism"?

 

[redleghunter]

In certain cases a Catholic can receive the Eucharist from an Orthodox priest, and vice versa. The reason it is not routinely done is that "it represents a unity that does not currently exist".

What are those certain cases?

 

[redleghunter]

Hey! Can you please tell me what you think of what Paul said about having "One Lord, one faith and one baptism"?

Well according to this thread there are at least two faiths which claim to be the One who rules them all. And who says Paul was speaking of either one.

 

[Not David]

Well according to this thread there are at least two faiths which claim to be the One who rules them all. And who says Paul was speaking of either one.

Yeah, and that leads to the conclusion that one faith is the true one, not multiple ones that make Christianity sound like relative truth.

 

[redleghunter]

Yeah, and that leads to the conclusion that one faith is the true one, not multiple ones that make Christianity sound like relative truth.

Correct. Therefore we must examine who Paul is speaking to (Ephesians) and the fact that Paul was an apostle delivering said truth.

So we examine his and the apostles teachings. Not some medieval forgery claiming the words of Paul made in the first century.

 

[HTacianas]

I must have missed this previously.

Filioque?

The filoque is its own separate issue. The filoque may be perfectly valid, but only an Ecumenical Council can change the Creed. A Council could be held today and determine that the filoque should be in the Creed and change it. But the Creed cannot be changed by a single Bishop.

 

[HTacianas]

What are those certain cases?

A person could be near death and not have his own priest nearby. In other cases one only needs permission from a bishop.

 

[DaDad]

Hey! Can you please tell me what you think of what Paul said about having "One Lord, one faith and one baptism"?

Uhhhhh, no. My expertise is in Bible Prophecy. I merely saw your topic in the Forum front page and immediately liked your Topic, having not only seen the lies and corruption in the "Pastor" category (yep, I've been out-and-out LIED to by THREE "Pastors"), but also the consequence of a weak an ineffective church which will not be able to endure the Tribulation 42 months which we entered on May 14, 2018.

Rev. 13:10 ... Here is a call for the endurance and faith of the saints.
Rev. 14:12 Here is a call for the endurance of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.
​

... and don't be deceived by a pre/mid/post tribulation "rapture". The DEAD don't rise until the end of the Millennial Kingdom:

Rev. 20:7 And when the thousand years are ended ...
13 And the sea gave up the dead in it, Death and Hades gave up the dead in them, ...​

So we're going through the tribulation. And I hope every Christian has the resources necessary for when we can't "buy or sell":

Luke 22:35 And he said to them, “When I sent you out with no purse or bag or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “Nothing.” 36 He said to them, “But now, let him who has a purse take it, and likewise a bag. And let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one.​

Crossing your fingers also works -- or so I've heard ...

Thanks,
DaDad

 

[redleghunter]

The filoque is its own separate issue. The filoque may be perfectly valid, but only an Ecumenical Council can change the Creed. A Council could be held today and determine that the filoque should be in the Creed and change it. But the Creed cannot be changed by a single Bishop.

Ok so the East is separated from the West based on doctrine. Thought so.

 

[Not David]

Ok so the East is separated from the West based on doctrine. Thought so.

Wouldn't the West be the one who separated from the East?