Rejoicing in pretense?

[jubilationtcornpone]

On a couple of recent occasions, I found myself discussing the issue of false teaching within the church. To my shock, on both occasions, some believers chimed in by saying, "Hey, don't complain about false teaching! Instead, rejoice! After all, didn't Paul say that he would rejoice, even in pretense? Paul knew that the Gospel is still preached, even in false doctrine!"

I was absolutely stunned by these replies, so I decided to look up the relevant Scripture. I discovered a reference to pretense and rejoicing in Philippians 1:18, which says,

"[W]hether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice."​

I always like to consider verses in their proper context though, so here's what verses 15 to 18 have to say:

"Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains; but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel. What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice."​

Note that this passage says nothing about false teaching or false teachers. Rather, Paul is expressing thanks that the Gospel is being preached, even when it is occasionally done with ill motives (e.g. envy, strife, selfish ambition). In other words, this passage does NOT say that we should be thankful when God's Word is being twisted around and preached incorrectly. I daresay that Paul would be horrified at such a thought; after all, he's the one who said "Test all things" (1 Thess 5:21). Luke would surely be aghast as well, for he commended the Bereans as they searched the Scriptures diligently to discern the truth. (Acts 17:10-11)

This shows the importance of examining verses in their proper context, instead of just reading them individually. You can open yourself up to all manner of abominable teaching unless you examine their context carefully.

 

[5stringJeff]

This shows the importance of examining verses in their proper context, instead of just reading them individually. You can open yourself up to all manner of abominable teaching unless you examine their context carefully.

Agreed! When the Gospel is twisted around as it is taught, people are worse off for hearing it.

 

[Nereu]

I believe that passage that includes this,



18What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

19For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, 20According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death.

Was what inspired Eusebius to claim that to lie on behalf of Christianity was acceptable if it helped further the cause of Christianity. That is why the false stories of the martyrs being killed in the arena were written by Eusebius and his cronnies. In fact many of those who wer supposedly killed by lions lived full and happy lives. To think that all those persecution stories and the heroes they portray was a big lie is quite disconcerting. But I guess if those lies were necessary for Christianity to prosper, we have to accept it as a correct decision.

 

[jubilationtcornpone]

Was what inspired Eusebius to claim that to lie on behalf of Christianity was acceptable if it helped further the cause of Christianity. That is why the false stories of the martyrs being killed in the arena were written by Eusebius and his cronnies. In fact many of those who wer supposedly killed by lions lived full and happy lives. To think that all those persecution stories and the heroes they portray was a big lie is quite disconcerting. But I guess if those lies were necessary for Christianity to prosper, we have to accept it as a correct decision.

If Eusebius did indeed make that claim, then that was HIS error. I, for one, reject the notion that those lies were necessary for Christianity to prosper. Indeed, the Book of Acts shows that Christianity was spreading just fine without the use of such falsehoods.

Moreover, that ultimately has no bearing on the topic at hand. This thread is about whether we should rejoice when FALSE TEACHING is being propagated. Regardless of what some misguided individuals may say, that simply is not what Philippians 1:15-18 says.

 

[Nereu]

If Eusebius did indeed make that claim, then that was HIS error. I, for one, reject the notion that those lies were necessary for Christianity to prosper. Indeed, the Book of Acts shows that Christianity was spreading just fine without the use of such falsehoods.

Moreover, that ultimately has no bearing on the topic at hand. This thread is about whether we should rejoice when FALSE TEACHING is being propagated. Regardless of what some misguided individuals may say, that simply is not what Philippians 1:15-18 says.

I really don't see any difference whether false teaching happens today, tomorrow or yesterday. That is why I feel it is relevant to mention Eusebius. Just think of how many people have come to Christ due to their empathy for those thrown to the lions. Even though Christians being thrown to lions is a lie, if it brings people to Christ, that is fine by me. I believe this idea was at the core of Eusebius' thinking in his day. I, a Christian in 2005, fully agree with him. That is why I believe it to be relevant.

Also, we constantly use Josephus as historical evidence that Christ existed. We would not have this option if not for Eusebius.

 

[jubilationtcornpone]

I really don't see any difference whether false teaching happens today, tomorrow or yesterday. That is why I feel it is relevant to mention Eusebius. Just think of how many people have come to Christ due to their empathy for those thrown to the lions. Even though Christians being thrown to lions is a lie, if it brings people to Christ, that is fine by me. I believe this idea was at the core of Eusebius' thinking in his day. I, a Christian in 2005, fully agree with him. That is why I believe it to be relevant.

If you're talking about martyrdom, I agree that this is relevant and does promote the cause of Christ.

However, your earlier statement was about Eusebius' alleged claim "that to lie on behalf of Christianity was acceptable if it helped further the cause of Christianity." Martyrdom is by no means the same as lying on behalf of Christianity. Lying for the sake of the gospel is simply unacceptable.

 

[Nereu]

If you're talking about martyrdom, I agree that this is relevant and does promote the cause of Christ.

However, your earlier statement was about Eusebius' alleged claim "that to lie on behalf of Christianity was acceptable if it helped further the cause of Christianity." Martyrdom is by no means the same as lying on behalf of Christianity. Lying for the sake of the gospel is simply unacceptable.

Of course actual martyrdom is very different to lying on behalf of Christianity. Nobody would deny that. However the fact remains that those stories about martyrs written in the period circa 800 to 900 AD are fictional. This means the stories of virtually all the martyrs are false. And yet these stories are kept alive even today. So in other words Christianity is constantly being taught falsely. Not only by one church, but by any church that lays claim to Christians being devoured by lions in the arena. Indeed, the Vatican on their website keeps these stories current. And yet they are a lie. We know there were some martyrs killed, but the number is very small in comparrison to what is taught.

 

[jubilationtcornpone]

On what grounds do you say that the accounrds of Christian martyrdom circa A.D. 800-900 are false? Can you be more specific?

Moreover, as I pointed out earlier, that's ultimately irrelevant to the topic at hand. We are talking about whether Philippians 1:18 teaches that we should rejoice when false teachings are propagated. It does not. Sure, one can attempt to use falsehoods to promote the kingdom, but we should not rejoice in such dishonesty.

Do you see the distinction yet?

 

[Nereu]

On what grounds do you say that the accounrds of Christian martyrdom circa A.D. 800-900 are false? Can you be more specific?

Moreover, as I pointed out earlier, that's ultimately irrelevant to the topic at hand. We are talking about whether Philippians 1:18 teaches that we should rejoice when false teachings are propagated. It does not. Sure, one can attempt to use falsehoods to promote the kingdom, but we should not rejoice in such dishonesty.

Do you see the distinction yet?

Yes, I understand your meaning. I am looking at it in a similar vein to that which I think Eusebius would have seen it. I believe that he would have found in Philippians 1:18 a justification to create those stories.

Are you unaware of the fact that many of our Christian martyr stories date from circa 800 to 900 AD? If so, please forgive me for assuming you may have already known this. Eusebius is the Bishop who is generally credited with inserting this famous passage about Jesus into the history written by Josephus. This Eusebius was the father of Tertullian.

"About that time appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it be right to speak of him as a man, for he was a performer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew after him many of the Jews, as well as of the Gentiles. This same was the Christ. And though Pilate, by the judgment of the chief rulers among us, delivered him to be crucified, those who from the first had loved him fell not from him, for to them at least he showed himself alive on the third day: this, and ten thousand other wonderful things being what the holy prophets had foretold concerning him; so that the Christian people who derive their name from him have not yet ceased to exist."

This is not his only forgery. A later Eusebius writing in the aforementioned period and his fellows spent many years writing fictional stories about Christian martyrs. Thousands of them in fact. This practice was one in which he was not alone though. A sad fact of Christian history is that much written around it has been false. People like Tertullian Clement, Polycarp, and Origen were not above telling lies on behalf of Christianity. We must remember that ever since its inception Christianity has been at war. Propaganda is a tried and proven weapon of warfare, and Christians have made great use of it through the ages. The period 800 to 900 AD saw literally hundreds of works written under the names of Christians who had lived hundreds of years before. Of course this had always gone on, not just with books but also with documents and other artifacts. You should be able to find information on the web regarding this. It is a sad part of our religion's history, but it is one we should face. After all, it was not Jesus who lied, but rather frail human beings working on His behalf.

 

[jubilationtcornpone]

Nereu, I think the subject of Eusebiu's alleged deceptions belongs in another thread. As I said earlier, it is unrelated to the topic at hand. If you wish to start a discussion on this topic, I think you should start it up elsewhere.

Second, while the stories may have appeared in circa A.D. 800-900 (which is the proper notation used by historians, BTW), that doesn't mean that the martyrdoms occurred during that time. Eusebius reported on the martyrdoms of the Apostles, for example, which date back to the first century.

Third, you've made assertions about Eusebius' alleged deceptions, but I haven't seen any authoritative, scholarly cites to that effect. A friend of mine is a History Ph.D. and a college professor. He maintains that Eusebius has an outstanding reputation among historians, and that his claims have extraordinary consistency with other sources. So pardon me, but I'm more than a bit skeptical about your claims.

Again, I'd like to request that you take your discussion elsewhere. It has nothing but a tangential connection with this particular thread, so let's stop this hijack right now.

 

[Nereu]

Nereu, I think the subject of Eusebiu's alleged deceptions belongs in another thread.

I tend to agree. Forgive me, I am writing at work and get distracted and go off on tangents. Slightly embarrassing really, but I do see a connection. Next time I will take the connection out and do something specific. Many thanks for your understanding.

 

[Akathist]

I believe that passage that includes this,



18What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

19For I know that this shall turn to my salvation through your prayer, and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ, 20According to my earnest expectation and my hope, that in nothing I shall be ashamed, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death.

Was what inspired Eusebius to claim that to lie on behalf of Christianity was acceptable if it helped further the cause of Christianity. That is why the false stories of the martyrs being killed in the arena were written by Eusebius and his cronnies. In fact many of those who wer supposedly killed by lions lived full and happy lives. To think that all those persecution stories and the heroes they portray was a big lie is quite disconcerting. But I guess if those lies were necessary for Christianity to prosper, we have to accept it as a correct decision.

Please provide some reference to back up your CLAIM that Eusebius has lied on behalf of Christianity... or tha the stories of the martyrs are lies. (For indeed, it is accepted beliefs of my faith that these events occured.)