First Century Christian Church records doctrinal error springing up from within repeatedly.

[concretecamper]

Really? That seems unusual. Gluttony is a mortal sin but there have always been scenarios where the Lenten fast does not apply. At least in Orthodoxy, it does not apply to persons who are sick, traveling or receiving a meal as someone’s guest.

Agreed, I think the poster simply used an issue as an excuse to bash His Church.

Lenten fasting and abstaining is pretty clear cut in the Catholic Church.

 

[WilliamC]

xrs

The New Testament writers - tell of a first century church lead by the Apostles and holding the Bible , scripture as the infallible standard of truth AND YET also having a great struggle with the fact that the Church itself was the source of many doctrinal errors arising repeatedly. With the warning that after the Apostle's departure even more error would be springing up from within the church.

============================================================

Acts 20:29 I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; 30 and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after them. 31 Therefore, be on the alert,

>>apostasy was to arise from WITHIN the church according to Acts 20

1 Tim 1:3 Just as I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, to remain on at Ephesus so that you would instruct certain people not to teach strange doctrines, 4 nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to useless speculation rather than advance the plan of God, which is by faith, so I urge you now. 5 But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart, from a good conscience, and from a sincere faith. 6 Some people have strayed from these things and have turned aside to fruitless discussion, 7 wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.

18 This command I entrust to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you fight the good fight, 19 keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to their faith. 20 Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme.

>>Blasphemers arise from within the church - and are handed over to satan - but not "exterminated" like Lateran IV commanded.

3 John 1
9 I wrote something to the church; but Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not accept what we say. 10 For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does, unjustly accusing us (Apostles) with malicious words; and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brothers either, and he forbids those who want to do so and puts them out of the church.

>>> "The church" casting out those who believe the Apostles's teaching --

The church predicted as going into apostasy 2 Thess 2 -

2 Thess 2: Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, regarding the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, 2 that you not be quickly shaken from your composure or be disturbed either by a spirit, or a message, or a letter as if from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 No one is to deceive you in any way! For it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, a
"deduced" by "some" via "Extreme inference" is not the same as "taught by the writer"

So then Paul himself subject to "sola scriptura testing"

"They studied the scriptures daily TO SEE IF those things taught by the apostle Paul - WERE SO" Acts 17:11

Gal 1:6-9 "Though WE (Apostles) or an ANGEL from HEAVEN should teach a different doctrine a different gospel other than has been taught - let him be accursed!" - Gal 1:6-9

>>-- rank means nothing - it is the pure truth , pure doctrine that matters according to the Apostle Paul in Gal 1.

History shows that even Popes accuse fellow popes of being "antichrist" as history show.

IN the NT we see the many errors that they were facing - as coming from within the church of the first century -

Jude 1:
3 Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith that was once for all time handed down to the saints. 4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed, those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into indecent behavior and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.


8 Yet in the same way these people also, dreaming, defile the flesh, reject authority, and speak abusively of angelic majesties. 9 But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him an abusive judgment, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” 10 But these people disparage all the things that they do not understand; and all the things that they know by instinct, like unreasoning animals, by these things they are destroyed. 11 Woe to them! For they have gone the way of Cain, and for pay they have given themselves up to the error of Balaam, and perished in the rebellion of Korah. 12 These are the ones who are hidden reefs in your love feasts when they feast with you without fear, like shepherds caring only for themselves; clouds without water, carried along by winds; autumn trees without fruit, doubly dead, uprooted; 13 wild waves of the sea, churning up their own shameful deeds like dirty foam; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of darkness has been reserved forever.

>> shepherds in the church teaching false doctrine vs 12

... 16 These are grumblers, finding fault, following after their own lusts; they speak arrogantly, flattering people for the sake of gaining an advantage.


Titus 1:
7 For the overseer (Elder) must be beyond reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not overindulging in wine, not a bully, not greedy for money, 8 but hospitable, loving what is good, self-controlled, righteous, holy, disciplined, 9 holding firmly the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict it.

10 For there are many rebellious people, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, 11 who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of dishonest gain.



Instead of NO false doctrine being taught - what we see is tons of false doctrine being taught in the first century church and a great struggle to try and keep it from getting out of hand. How much more so when the apostles themselves had died off.


=============================

The NT writers present the NT age as one of strife and contention and false doctrine arising from WITHIN the church

Interesting. I understood there was some apostasy withing the early church, but my further study of this shows maybe there is something more. Acts 20:29,30 reveals that because of contrary doctrine being introduced, disciples were being pulled away from the real church to follow a false faction.
John also testified late in IJohn 2:18,19 that they were an antichrist, that they went out from the church that they might be revealed. Paul also testified early back in 54C.E. in II Thess. 2:3 that there was an obvious falling away on the way, and it would be a false religious system who would obviously be claiming prerogatives that only God has. (Vs.4) Sounds like the little horn in Dan. 8:11 and Rev. 13:6... Huh?
I never saw this before in this light, but it appears to me that there was possibly another false church, beginning its rise during the first century. a long term system that crept in, came out of the real church, rises to power before the second coming.
I found this very insightful Dan. Blessings!

 

[The Liturgist]

xrs

Interesting. I understood there was some apostasy withing the early church, but my further study of this shows maybe there is something more. Acts 20:29,30 reveals that because of contrary doctrine being introduced, disciples were being pulled away from the real church to follow a false faction.
John also testified late in IJohn 2:18,19 that they were an antichrist, that they went out from the church that they might be revealed. Paul also testified early back in 54C.E. in II Thess. 2:3 that there was an obvious falling away on the way, and it would be a false religious system who would obviously be claiming prerogatives that only God has. (Vs.4) Sounds like the little horn in Dan. 8:11 and Rev. 13:6... Huh?
I never saw this before in this light, but it appears to me that there was possibly another false church, beginning its rise during the first century. a long term system that crept in, came out of the real church, rises to power before the second coming.
I found this very insightful Dan. Blessings!

There were several actually, the Gnostic sects, including that of Simon Magus and the Nicolaitan sects, and later Valentinians, Tatianists, Ophites, Manichees, Paulicians, Bogomils and Albigensians, and then the related Docetics, Marcionites, Ebionites and later on groups like the Montanists, Novatians, Arians, Semi-Arians, Pneumatomacchians, Apollonarians, Antidicomarians, Collyridians, Donatists, Pelagians, Nestorians, Eutychians, Monothelites and Iconoclasts, among others,

We have a complete record of these sects and what they believed in, and we even have some of their scriptures (since many of the aformentioned, especially of the Gnostic variety, but also the Ebionites, used apocryphal texts such as the Gospel od Truth, the Tripartite Tractate, the Pistis Sophia, and the relatively recent Book of Keys; indeed some Bedouins inadvertantly hit a jackpot of heretical scriptures at Nag Hammadi, which Carl Jung paid to have translated.

 

[BobRyan]

xrs

Interesting. I understood there was some apostasy withing the early church, but my further study of this shows maybe there is something more. Acts 20:29,30 reveals that because of contrary doctrine being introduced, disciples were being pulled away from the real church to follow a false faction.
John also testified late in IJohn 2:18,19 that they were an antichrist, that they went out from the church that they might be revealed. Paul also testified early back in 54C.E. in II Thess. 2:3 that there was an obvious falling away on the way, and it would be a false religious system who would obviously be claiming prerogatives that only God has. (Vs.4) Sounds like the little horn in Dan. 8:11 and Rev. 13:6... Huh?
I never saw this before in this light, but it appears to me that there was possibly another false church, beginning its rise during the first century. a long term system that crept in, came out of the real church, rises to power before the second coming.
I found this very insightful Dan. Blessings!

Good point.

The principle of error is clearly seen and as you point out 2 Thess 2:3 even addresses the problem of "fake source documents" where "fake letters" were an issue.

Ignatius is a good example of well known fake letters being promoted as legit - so Paul's first century concern over that problem is in an interesting historic perspective were we can see just how real the problem was for the first century church.

 

[BobRyan]

There were several actually, the Gnostic sects, including that of Simon Magus and the Nicolaitan sects, and later Valentinians, Tatianists, Ophites, Manichees, Paulicians, Bogomils and Albigensians, and then the related Docetics, Marcionites, Ebionites and later on groups like the Montanists, Novatians, Arians, Semi-Arians, Pneumatomacchians, Apollonarians, Antidicomarians, Collyridians, Donatists, Pelagians, Nestorians, Eutychians, Monothelites and Iconoclasts, among others,

We have a complete record of these sects and what they believed in, and we even have some of their scriptures (since many of the aformentioned, especially of the Gnostic variety, but also the Ebionites, used apocryphal texts such as the Gospel od Truth, the Tripartite Tractate, the Pistis Sophia, and the relatively recent Book of Keys; indeed some Bedouins inadvertantly hit a jackpot of heretical scriptures at Nag Hammadi, which Carl Jung paid to have translated.

It leads us to have serious doubts about the idea that traditions that arise centuries later could not possibly be in error since they are so close to first century sources.

 

[The Liturgist]

It leads us to have serious doubts about the idea that traditions that arise centuries later could not possibly be in error since they are so close to first century sources.

Indeed, such traditions should be regarded with suspicion. We know in the case of the Orthodox, from the writings of St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Justin Martyr, St. Polycarp of Smyrna and St. Irenaeus of Lyons, among others, that our Holy Tradition, including the details of our hierarchy and the essential features of our liturgy originated in the first century, with St. James the Just and St. Mark the Evangelist being responsible for the two oldest liturgies, and the traditions of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Oriental Orthodox Church are unchanged from the time of the Apostles, as my fellow Orthodox friends will agree ( such as @FenderTL5 @prodromos @HTacianas @dzheremi and @Tigran1245 ).

And we also know from St. Irenaeus, St. Epiphanius of Salamis, and others, the nature of the various heretical sects, and their beliefs and practices. Some were only slightly different from the Christian church, usually schismatic groups that took a rigorist position regarding reconciliation with those who caved in to the demands of the pagan persecutors to make sacrifices to idols, in the case of the Novatianists, and a related error among the Donatists, that being a belief that only a righteous man could preside over worship (the problem being that finding someone who is truly righteous of their own accord is difficult, and additionally only God knows who is righteous and who isn’t, and thus making sacramental validity conditional on the virtue of the presbyter puts the laity in an impossible situation, since an outwardly decent presbyter might be committing grave sins internally, or otherwise be a total hypocrite). Others were spectacularly different, such as the Bogomils, Manichaeans, Ophites, Hydroparastae, Ebionites, Montanists, and other such groups.

Unfortunately, after nearly five centuries of pure Orthodoxy, a variance began in the Roman Catholic Church, starting with certain actions of Archbishop Leo which could be said to have exceeded his mandate, for example, taking the title Pontifex Maximus, and shortly thereafter, in Spain, the beginnings of the Filioque controversy, which came to a head in the 9th century, and then continuing with the adoption of Scholastic theology, which in many respects was a radical and unnecessary departure from Patristic theology, and Papal Supremacy, which lead to the Great Schism of 1054 with the Eastern Orthodox, and Papal Infallibility, and Purgatory, and other issues, which ultimately reached a point where the Protestant reformation blossomed in Prague in the 15th century, although it was not until Martin Luther that the Protestants were able to hold their ground. But unfortunately this caused a number of schisms, much to the dismay of Luther, with groups such as the Anabaptists and other Radical Reformation churches, and later on the Restorationist churches such as the Quakers, Shakers, Plymouth Brethren and the Stone/Campbell movement (which among Restorationists was the one movement largely successful at restoring some aspects of the early church with its Eucharistic focus, which also created a point of commonality with Lutherans and with most contemporary Anglicans.

However, aside from the recent disaster of Fiducia Supplicans, the Roman Catholic Church is still closer to the ancient Orthodox Church than most Restorationist or Radical Reformation churches; the closest matches at present, since the various problematic changes made by Pope Francis, are the Continuing Anglicans, Confessional Lutherans and certain other traditional liturgical Protestant churches, along with the Eastern Catholic Churches and traditionalist Catholic groups like the SSPX. But the Orthodox Church does represent the church with direct continuity to the Apostolic kerygma.

 

[Markie Boy]

Really? That seems unusual. Gluttony is a mortal sin but there have always been scenarios where the Lenten fast does not apply. At least in Orthodoxy, it does not apply to persons who are sick, traveling or receiving a meal as someone’s guest.

That's how it was - ask any Baby Boomer that was Catholic. But it's been changed since. Sounds not right, because it's not, but it's how it was.

 

[The Liturgist]

That's how it was - ask any Baby Boomer that was Catholic. But it's been changed since. Sounds not right, because it's not, but it's how it was.

There were occasional popular miscommunications of Catholic doctrine; I wonder if my friend @chevyontheriver is familiar with this.

 

[Markie Boy]

Good point.

The principle of error is clearly seen and as you point out 2 Thess 2:3 even addresses the problem of "fake source documents" where "fake letters" were an issue.

Ignatius is a good example of well known fake letters being promoted as legit - so Paul's first century concern over that problem is in an interesting historic perspective were we can see just how real the problem was for the first century church.

I am very interested in Ignatius letters being not authentic, or un-tampered. I heard this elsewhere recently. Any insight into which ones or what topics? It's why Church Fathers to me are interesting, but not authoritative.

 

[dzheremi]

There are several spurious letters attributed to St. Ignatius, yes, but also several that are considered by basically everyone to be authentic. If you know which one you're reading from, there's really no danger in relying on his corpus (and I would say a great deal is lost by not doing so). It is important to remember here that the practice of attributing to saints the writings of others was probably less of a bid to 'fool' people with inauthentic writings, but more of a way to say that, at least in the mind of the writer, their own writings are meant to follow in the mold of such-and-such (whoever's name they are putting on the work). That's how the RCC and wider Latin Christianity ended up with the Creed of Ps.-Athanasius (which does not appear in either Greek or Coptic, but in Latin, and only starting about a century after the departure of HH), and in the East there are entire collections of writings by Ps.-Dionysius the Aeropagite, or Ps. Dionysius of Tell-Mahre (to whom was long credited the very important Chronicle of Zuqnin, but that attribution has since been abandoned), or whoever else. There is still value to these writings to the extent that they are useful to those who accept them; it's just that they're not attributed to their actual authors.

 

[chevyontheriver]

There were occasional popular miscommunications of Catholic doctrine; I wonder if my friend @chevyontheriver is familiar with this.

Going back through my almost 70 years there was always the possibility of a dispensation from Lenten regulations for health and for travel.

The regulations since Vatican II have been very relaxed. But the intent of Vatican II has been ignored, which was that lay people should pick mortifications that made sense to them instead of having a one size fits all regulation. For example, I LOVE fish. And I'm not much of a meat eater. So I look forward to Lent and going to a fish fry. It is NOT a mortification for me at all. I need something else. Vatican II expected that we would all find something else as needed, relevant to ourselves. But instead most people decided they didn't need any of that any more. Just another way that Vatican II has been misapplied. Good content. Poor execution. And then people snipe about what was a sin before is not a sin now. They miss the mark.

 

[The Liturgist]

Going back through my almost 70 years there was always the possibility of a dispensation from Lenten regulations for health and for travel.

The regulations since Vatican II have been very relaxed. But the intent of Vatican II has been ignored, which was that lay people should pick mortifications that made sense to them instead of having a one size fits all regulation. For example, I LOVE fish. And I'm not much of a meat eater. So I look forward to Lent and going to a fish fry. It is NOT a mortification for me at all. I need something else. Vatican II expected that we would all find something else as needed, relevant to ourselves. But instead most people decided they didn't need any of that any more. Just another way that Vatican II has been misapplied. Good content. Poor execution. And then people snipe about what was a sin before is not a sin now. They miss the mark.

Orthodoxy regards Lent as a joyous fast, even though the dietary regulations are stricter (but shellfish and caviar are generally permitted except on days when xerophagy is specified, or prior to attending the Presanctified Liturgy at the ninth hour (the afternoon) on Wednesdays and Fridays. The mortification of the flesh can be taken to an excess; the main point is to gain control over the sinful passions.

We don’t have the idea of an individualized “giving something up for Lent” but what we do stress is longer, more frequent and in many cases, more beautiful services, with very high frequency communion. In contrast, Armenians do not partake of the Eucharist during Lent except for the presbyter, and the curtain is drawn over the bema thus concealing the altar until Palm Sunday. However at one time it is believed they had a presanctified liturgy and their Lenten services were more like those of the other Eastern churches.

 

[The Liturgist]

Ignatius is a good example of well known fake letters being promoted as legit - so Paul's first century concern over that problem is in an interesting historic perspective were we can see just how real the problem was for the first century church.

Seven of the Ignatian Epistles are believed by all major contemporary scholars to be authentic, and these seven authentic epistles contain the most important details.

It’s a bit like the spurious Pauline epistle to the Laodiceans or the spurious II Clement, in that nothing important or interesting was in the spurious epistles of St. Ignatius of Antioch.

And it should also be known that within Orthodoxy there was always doubt over the veracity of those letters later proven to be spurious.

As for the idea that the entire Ignatian canon is spurious, this has been rejected by academia.

+

A much more valid instance of St. Paul’s concern over people preaching another Gospel can be found in the case of Marcion, or the various false Gospels of Gnostic origin, along with other pseudepigrapha, books like the Gospel of Mary, the blasphemous Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Pistis Sophia, the Acts of Andrew and the Tripartite Tractate, to name a few.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Orthodoxy regards Lent as a joyous fast, even though the dietary regulations are stricter (but shellfish and caviar are generally permitted except on days when xerophagy is specified, or prior to attending the Presanctified Liturgy at the ninth hour (the afternoon) on Wednesdays and Fridays. The mortification of the flesh can be taken to an excess; the main point is to gain control over the sinful passions.

There can be excesses, but the pre-Vatican II regulations were not what a normal person could call excesses. The excesses were in those people who went not just a bit beyond but way over the top beyond where they were even harming themselves.

We don’t have the idea of an individualized “giving something up for Lent”

I think that was a 'nice try' but in the end a mistake. More traditionally minded Catholics often voice a desire to return to the old regulations that could be done 'together'.

... but what we do stress is longer, more frequent and in many cases, more beautiful services, with very high frequency communion.

We get Stations of the Cross and things connected with Lenten parish missions. It can be a busy time, so giving up busy things for Lent can make attending all of that easier. Point was that a sense of penitence was and was supposed to continue to be a year round thing. But with optionalizing it the result was far far less of a sense of penitence. Woops. Not what is needed in the 21st century. Now we look and act just like the world.

 

[RileyG]

There were all sorts of heresies floating around in the first century. If you know what they were it makes it easy to see the polemics against them written in the new testament. Thankfully the Church was able to weed them out and preserve the teachings of the apostles.

Amen!

 

[RileyG]

Having been in the Catholic Church - and now entering the season of Lent, is a great example.

Not long ago meatless Fridays were mandatory all year - and to eat a burger on Friday was mortal sin, sending one to Hell if not confessed to the priest. But - now meatless Fridays are only mandatory Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, and Fridays during Lent. So salvation is a moving target, when not going by Scripture.

On top of that, I have seen when St. Patrick's day fell on a Friday in Lent - and the bishop in one diocese gave a dispensation so his people could eat corned beef, but the next diocese over did not get that - so what was OK for one guy, was mortal sin for the other guy across the road.

Try to teach that to kids that are young and free thinkers, that have not been programmed "how" to think yet - and they look at you like you are nuts.

Fasting is a discipline that has changed.

 

[Markie Boy]

Fasting is a discipline that has changed.

It's more than that. To no fast was mortal sin - that has to do with salvation.