When do you think the Church got corrupted?

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,876
USA
✟580,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Chapter and verse??

Did Andronicus? Did Junia?

The 11 wanted someone who fit that bill to replace Judas; but there is no indication that those 12 were the only apostles nor that the requirements they put forth were actually from God.
“Greet Andronicus and Junia, my compatriots and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me.” (Romans 16:7)
 
Upvote 0

Loren T.

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
1,003
396
56
Hadley
✟24,186.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
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.
Selling indulgences surely qualifies as corruption.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,524
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
They are well known to the apostles,
Not a good translation.

NASB: who are outstanding among the apostles,

Meaning they are both part of the group of apostles.
 
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,876
USA
✟580,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Not a good translation.

NASB: who are outstanding among the apostles,

Meaning they are both part of the group of apostles.
“Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me.” (Romans 16:7) ESV
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,251
✟48,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
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.

Since the church is made up of sinners it has always been corrupt and in need of reform. A motto which came from the Reformation was Semper Reformanda (always reforming). The church ought always to be reforming herself and returning to the pure doctrines of Scripture and cleansing herself from sins and weight which cling so closely.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,251
✟48,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
An interesting thing you learn when you study church history is that the same debates and divisions which plague the church today have been around since the earliest times. For example, the church does not agree about baptism today in part because the church has never agreed about baptism.
 
Upvote 0
Dec 16, 2011
5,208
2,548
57
Home
Visit site
✟234,967.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
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.
The Church did not become corrupted. Such a thing is not possible, because the Church is the Body of Christ, with Christ as it's head and the Holy Spirit breathing the very Life of God in it. No, that is not what has happened. The following will not be easily understood, so you'll need to pay very close attention to the wording.

What has happened, is that from the beginning, in a nearly perfectly imperceptive manner, a force that is naturally at work within this "unnatural", fallen world that resulted from the sin of mankind, has been slowly eroding away at the outer fabric of the Church, which eventually caused some holes in the fabric which allowed the for the penetration and appearance of certain ideas within the body, which do not coincide with the Truth of the nature of God, the nature of the Church, and the nature of Salvation. As more and more of these deceptively attractive ideas gained a stronghold among Church members, dogmas eventually developed and gained wide acceptance within particular regions and time periods. These dogmas effectively gave rise to solid platforms from which that particular "natural force that has always been a working influence in our fallen, unnatural world" could begin to inflict heavy damage upon the overall health of the entire Church, but most especially in those areas where the errant ideas had taken hold and become the common beliefs.

The natural force that has always been at work in our fallen, unnatural world, is called "Logos bias".
 
Upvote 0

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
It actually started with Paul.

The Christ warned His disciples not to listen to a person who claims to have seen Him in the desert (wilderness).

Paul did meet Jesus on the way to Damascus while still in the desert. Many of the teachings of Paul are contradictory to the teachings of Christ and St. John.
No, there are no real contradictions, and instead they are complimentary, but which would be another thread.
And the chronology of the New Testament books are mixed up. St. John had the last word on the New Testament in the timeline of the books written. Yet, his books are placed on the 4th slot so everyone thinks Paul has the last word on the teachings / theology of Christ and so everyone followed Paul.
Which is another product of propaganda. If anything, since Catholicism esteems the gospels above the rest and often makes them interpretive of the epistles (as with the Eucharist ), then it would be in their interest to place John and the gospels after Acts-Revelation. And many hold that John was not the last book penned. https://www.bible-history.com/new-testament/timeline.html
The Christ said only FEW will find salvation. And yet, there are about 3 billion Christians on the planet. Not few. It's easy to see if you open your eyes to this that something is definitely wrong even with Christianity.
There is no contradiction. It has always been a relative remnant, and stats are not based on actual active Christians with a testimony of conversion, but on what churches report as membership. Which can be based on who they ever baptized.
Jesus did not even teach about getting martyred for our faiths. The Christ rather gave explicit instructions to leave any place that will not receive the Word - don't get killed trying to stay! Matthew 10:14. Earlier prophets lived far away from the people who hates them!
But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come. (Matthew 10:23)

Which is written in the context of being hated "of all men for my name’s sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved," (Matthew 10:22) and is a general admonition, yet the Lord said "Follow Me," and while He Himself could strategically escape and otherwise remove Himself near to the wilderness, (Jn. 5:13; 10:39,40; 11:54; 5:13; 10:39,40; 11:54) yet He also preached where He was not welcome, and purposely went into the lion's den as it were to be martyred:

Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles: (Mark 10:33)
Getting martyred, die trying to get the highest praises from God, is not God's will. That's probably the will of a wicked and corrupt king for his soldiers.... It's a political idealogy!
Which is kind of a false dilemma fallacy. Purposely trying to gt oneself martyred is indeed not right, versus faithfully preaching the word where God leads you, even if not welcome (like biker bars). Peter did not agree that the latter could be God;'s will, trying to dissuade Christ from getting martyred and getting the highest praises from God, to which the Lord replied,

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. (Matthew 16:23)

For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. (Matthew 16:25)

And let me ask you if you believe that all the epistles in the 27 book NT are all Scripture/the word of God?
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Read the Bible. It's always been a ship of fools. Peter and Paul fighting over Judaizing. .
The honest description of its characters does not render the Bible a ship of fools, while Peter and Paul are hardly described as fighting with each other (if that is what you meant) over Judaizing.
 
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,876
USA
✟580,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
An interesting thing you learn when you study church history is that the same debates and divisions which plague the church today have been around since the earliest times. For example, the church does not agree about baptism today in part because the church has never agreed about baptism.
In Acts they all agreed that baptism was for believers by immersion in water in the name of Jesus Christ. No mention of infant baptism, or baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as today. (I'm trinitarian baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as in Acts).
 
  • Agree
Reactions: PeaceByJesus
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,809
18,627
Orlando, Florida
✟1,270,198.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Politics
US-Democrat
The honest description of its characters does not render the Bible a ship of fools, while Peter and Paul are hardly described as fighting with each other (if that is what you meant) over Judaizing.

I meant the Church has always been a ship of fools.

Peter and Paul had sharp disagreements, that is agreed by scholars.
 
Upvote 0

Tree of Life

Hide The Pain
Feb 15, 2013
8,824
6,251
✟48,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
In Acts they all agreed that baptism was for believers by immersion in water in the name of Jesus Christ. No mention of infant baptism, or baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as today. (I'm trinitarian baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as in Acts).

LOL! It's actually not quite so clear in Scripture itself. That's why people have never agreed about it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: FireDragon76
Upvote 0

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Ok so the East is separated from the West based on doctrine. Thought so.

The Orthodox Church opposes the Roman doctrines of universal papal jurisdiction, papal infallibility, purgatory, and the Immaculate Conception precisely because they are untraditional." - Orthodox apologist and author Clark Carlton: THE WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, 1997, p 135.

The Church preserves unity in diversity. In the Orthodox Church there is no hierarch with universal jurisdiction since its One True Shepherd, our Lord Jesus, has never left His Church (Matthew 28:20). The Apostle Peter does not replace or substitute for Him. The Scriptures do indeed indicate that Peter exercises an important role as leader among the Apostles but his primacy is exercised in equality or collegiality ("primus inter pares") as the Book of Acts clearly shows. The Rock upon which the Church is built is our Lord Himself as we proclaim during Matins: "The Stone which the builders rejected has become the Cornerstone; this is the Lord's doing and it is marvelous in our eyes" (from Psalm 118:2 - also the most often repeated phrase from the Old in the New Testament: Matthew 21:42, Mark 12:10, Luke 20:17, Acts 4:11 and 1 Peter 2:7). Peter, a leader among the Apostles, was first to proclaim the Church's faith in our Lord upon Whom it is built: "You are the the Christ (i.e. the Messiah, God's Chosen and Annointed One - igk), the Son of the Living God" (Matthew 16:15). He did not see himself as that Rock. Such, at any rate, is the conviction of the Orthodox Church. — http://www.ukrainian-orthodoxy.org/questions/2007/appostolic.html

Roman Catholicism, unable to show a continuity of faith and in order to justify new doctrine, erected in the last century, a theory of "doctrinal development." Following the philosophical spirit of the time (and the lead of Cardinal Henry Newman), Roman Catholic theologians began to define and teach the idea that Christ only gave us an "original deposit" of faith, a "seed," which grew and matured through the centuries. The Holy Spirit, they said, amplified the Christian Faith as the Church moved into new circumstances and acquired other needs...

On this basis, theories such as the dogmas of "papal infallibility" and "the immaculate conception" of the Virgin Mary (about which we will say more) are justifiably presented to the Faithful as necessary to their salvation. - ORTHODOXY AND ROMAN CATHOLICISM

Orthodoxy is not simply an alternative ecclesiastical structure to the Roman Catholic Church. The Orthodox Church presents a fundamentally different approach to theology, because She possesses a fundamentally different experience of Christ and life in Him. To put it bluntly, she knows a different Christ from that of the Roman Catholic Church.” — Clark Carlton, THE WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, 1997; Paths & Polemics.

“because it has all the proper attributes, the Orthodox Church is the living realization of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.” An Orthodox Response to the Recent Roman Catholic Declaration on the Nature of the Church | Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese

Then there are those who attempt to join together all Christian religions into one faith. They would be horrified at the idea of a service with Hindus and Christians celebrating together, yet they do not bat an eyelash at the idea of Orthodox celebrating with Roman Catholics, who with no authority broke off from the Church close to a thousand years ago. — Against Ecumenism

The feeling is mutual:

Few Catholics realize that Eastern Orthodoxy, especially as represented by Palamite theology, represents a systematic and comprehensive attack upon Catholic doctrine. Catholic and Orthodox theology are not only in opposition to one another in their understanding of God (theology), but also in the various disciplines of philosophy – in Cosmology, Psychology, Epistemology, Metaphysics, Theodicy, and Ethics. They posit radically different views of God, of man, and of the relationship between God and His creation... Over the past 2,000 years there have been many heresies, schisms, and systems of thought comprehensively opposed to Catholicism. But none has carried the potential threat for corruption of all of Catholic dogma which Eastern Orthodoxy represents. Part III: Eastern Orthodoxy: Never The Twain Should Meet – The War Against Being
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

PeaceByJesus

Unworthy servant for the Worthy Lord + Savior
Feb 20, 2013
2,779
2,095
USA
Visit site
✟83,561.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
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.


Lying Joe Smith was told by his demon and did indeed teach that all the other churches were corrupted:

I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt.. (first vision) More

When they claim the Bible is the word of God insofar as it is correctly translated, they mean, as with Catholicism, correctly interpreted, by them under the premise of ensured ecclesiastical veracity, not the weight of Scriptural substantiation.

As for Islam, answering that would be a further diversion from the question of the OP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcalling
Upvote 0

AlexDTX

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 13, 2015
4,191
2,818
✟328,934.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
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.
Frank Viola and George Barna wrote a book called, Pagan Christianity, which chronicles this corruption. If you are serious, this is a valuable book to read.

One salient point (and person) they point out is Greek orators who were professional speakers that earned their living talking that became believers in Christ and saw a way to make money preaching the Gospel to the saints. The most notable was Chrysotom whose name means "golden tongue". This occurred between the second and third centuries.

Preaching of the Gospel is not to be done for the saints, but the lost. There is teaching for the saints, but not by one person. Corinthians is very clear about the purpose of the body edifying one another. Not all can be the mouth, where is the eye? Or ears? And so on.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Dec 16, 2011
5,208
2,548
57
Home
Visit site
✟234,967.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
In Acts they all agreed that baptism was for believers by immersion in water in the name of Jesus Christ. No mention of infant baptism, or baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as today. (I'm trinitarian baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as in Acts).
Well, just a quick note here: Scripture does say that entire households were received into the Church by baptism, and it's reasonable to guess their were children in those households. Infants, for centuries before, had been circumcised to be received into Israels holy Covenant with God, and God's own law did not give them the option of waiting to decide if they would be Jews or not. Jesus said to let the little children come to Him, and do not hinder them, so we really ought to think about whether we are doing as Christ wants by keeping them little children of ours from fully participating in the Life the Church when they are small. The Gospel records that Jesus had instructed his disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, so this practice was being done somewhere in the Church at the time that Scripture was penned, without at doubt.

Not suggesting anything here, other than that these things be given a tad bit of consideration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Not David
Upvote 0