Has the division of Christianity into many apostate sects teaching different salvation messages served a useful purpose to God and Christ? According to the Scriptures, it has served a very specific and useful purpose.
Apostate Christianity has assisted in preparing the world for true Christianity to flourish. (Ro 3:7, 8 [pa|in]; 2Th 2:3 [pa|in]; 2Ti 4:1-5 [pa|in]) How so? Belief in the Christ has been spread throughout the earth while true Christianity was not even in the world and then Christ could bring back true Christianity and do away with those who teach a false salvation message at the end, just as the apostate Jewish system gave way to Christianity. (Joh 3:19-21 [pa|in]; Ro 11:7-12 [pa|in]; 2Th 2:6-8 [pa|in]) This has allowed Jehovah to save many more people than if he had founded the Christian congregation for the first time at the end of the system of things or if he tried to maintain it throughout that time. (Compare Ge 6:9-7:7 [pa|in] and Mt 24:22 [pa|in])
However, it is not that those apostate sects brought salvation for anyone, as demonstrated by the horrific acts perpetrated in the name of Christianity during that time. (Re 18:5 [pa|in]) But its spread was so that the salvation message could spread quickly in the last days because people would be able to see clearly the difference between true and false religion and could cause many to be judged for despising truth.
Apostate Christianity has assisted in preparing the world for true Christianity to flourish. (Ro 3:7, 8 [pa|in]; 2Th 2:3 [pa|in]; 2Ti 4:1-5 [pa|in]) How so? Belief in the Christ has been spread throughout the earth while true Christianity was not even in the world and then Christ could bring back true Christianity and do away with those who teach a false salvation message at the end, just as the apostate Jewish system gave way to Christianity. (Joh 3:19-21 [pa|in]; Ro 11:7-12 [pa|in]; 2Th 2:6-8 [pa|in]) This has allowed Jehovah to save many more people than if he had founded the Christian congregation for the first time at the end of the system of things or if he tried to maintain it throughout that time. (Compare Ge 6:9-7:7 [pa|in] and Mt 24:22 [pa|in])
However, it is not that those apostate sects brought salvation for anyone, as demonstrated by the horrific acts perpetrated in the name of Christianity during that time. (Re 18:5 [pa|in]) But its spread was so that the salvation message could spread quickly in the last days because people would be able to see clearly the difference between true and false religion and could cause many to be judged for despising truth.
The reason for why Jehovah allows his people to become overrun with apostasy is stated in three places. One is at Psalms 92:7 [pa|in];, where it says, “When the wicked sprout like weeds and all the wrongdoers flourish, it is THAT THEY MAY BE ANNIHILATED FOREVER.” (Note the reference to weeds in line with Jesus’ prophecy at Mt 13:24-30, 37-43 [pa|in], where the weeds are burned up.)
Jesus himself said, “Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will FALL INTO A PIT.” (Mt 15:12-14 [pa|in]) So we are to let it happen, not making any extraordinary effort to acquire or retain them. It is not up to us to force sight on someone who wishes to remain blind. (So I do not speak to you about these things for your own benefit, but for the reader’s.)
Finally, we have these words: “Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence. But the lawless one’s presence is according to the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents and with every unrighteous deception FOR THOSE WHO ARE PERISHING, AS A RETRIBUTION BECAUSE THEY DID NOT ACCEPT THE LOVE OF THE TRUTH that they might be saved.”—2Th 2:9-12 [pa|in].
That is why Jehovah's Witnesses stand out so distinctly from the pack. People see Jehovah's Witnesses as a beacon of faithfulness standing out against the darkness because they can compare us to the vast sea of false Christianity, though many seek to besmirch our name. (Mal 3:17, 18 [pa|in]; Lu 6:22, 23 [pa|in])
The various following series exhaustively address every so-called "proof" in support of false doctrines that contradict the salvation message. These have crept into nominal Christianity since the second century. (1Ti 4:1 [pa|in]) They also thoroughly prove by scripture references what Christians should be believing about our salvation. (Ac 17:2, 3 [pa|in])
This is certainly an "us vs. them" way of thinking. We do not deny that. The world has pitted itself against Jehovah God and they will one day take their stand against him and his people; not the other way around. (Lu 6:27-36 [pa|in]; Ro 1:25 [pa|in]; 8:7, 8 [pa|in]; 12:20, 21 [pa|in]; Jas 4:4 [pa|in]) Just because we identify the enemy does not mean we are making any effort to make them our enemies, but they have pitted themselves against us, (Lu 6:22, 23 [pa|in]) just as we can identify Satan as the enemy because he pitted himself against God. (Genesis 3:1-5 [par|int]; Re 12:9, 10 [pa|in]) Jehovah God's Son, Jesus Christ, foretold this. The Revelation is all about it. But this is not because we think we are better than everyone else. Far from it. (Ro 3:9-18 [pa|in]) It is because we happened to choose Jehovah, the true God, over the world, the truth over the lie. (Joh 15:21 [pa|in]) We came out of the world and therefore are no better than the world, but we obey God rather than men. (Ro 3:23 [pa|in]; Ac 5:29 [pa|in]) We have chosen a better life through faith in Jesus Christ, and on this account the world hates us. (Joh 15:17-19 [pa|in]) The life we have chosen is superior to the world, not we ourselves.
We will not sell out or compromise to any person or authority who stands against the word of God. We will not lower our standards because they dictate it in their hateful and violent schemes. We are a peaceful people, and it is because of our being peaceful that the nations despise us. It is because of our higher standards that the world feels condemned, but we do not condemn them, but they condemn themselves in their continuing in what they know to be wrong and have the power to stop, but don't. (Tit 3:9-11 [pa|in]; 1Pe 4:4 [pa|in])
Taken individually, the posts in this series will each only prove some nominal Christian sects to be false, but taken together, they prove all modern religions to be false, except one: the one that adheres to the Scriptures as the final word of truth without relying upon the fetid traditions of men.
Is it anyone's responsibility to openly oppose those false Christians? When Jesus disciples said to Jesus, "Do you know that the Pharisees were stumbled at hearing what you said?", Jesus did not respond by saying we should retaliate. He did not say we should track them down and persecute them as they do to us. He did not say that we should go where they are and have arguments with them. And he did not say that we should follow them around giving scathing public denouncements of them. Instead, he indicated that they have a judgment coming and said, "Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit." (Mt 15:12-14 [pa|in]) So they serve the purpose of misleading those who want to be misled because they keep their eyes shut and refuse to open them.
Do you believe that false Christianity has served the purpose of making way for true Christianity to flourish in the last days? If not, state your disagreement in a comment below.
Go back to: Part 2: Salvation vs, Salvation
Go to Part 4: Deep Research Takes Effort
The various following series exhaustively address every so-called "proof" in support of false doctrines that contradict the salvation message. These have crept into nominal Christianity since the second century. (1Ti 4:1 [pa|in]) They also thoroughly prove by scripture references what Christians should be believing about our salvation. (Ac 17:2, 3 [pa|in])
This is certainly an "us vs. them" way of thinking. We do not deny that. The world has pitted itself against Jehovah God and they will one day take their stand against him and his people; not the other way around. (Lu 6:27-36 [pa|in]; Ro 1:25 [pa|in]; 8:7, 8 [pa|in]; 12:20, 21 [pa|in]; Jas 4:4 [pa|in]) Just because we identify the enemy does not mean we are making any effort to make them our enemies, but they have pitted themselves against us, (Lu 6:22, 23 [pa|in]) just as we can identify Satan as the enemy because he pitted himself against God. (Genesis 3:1-5 [par|int]; Re 12:9, 10 [pa|in]) Jehovah God's Son, Jesus Christ, foretold this. The Revelation is all about it. But this is not because we think we are better than everyone else. Far from it. (Ro 3:9-18 [pa|in]) It is because we happened to choose Jehovah, the true God, over the world, the truth over the lie. (Joh 15:21 [pa|in]) We came out of the world and therefore are no better than the world, but we obey God rather than men. (Ro 3:23 [pa|in]; Ac 5:29 [pa|in]) We have chosen a better life through faith in Jesus Christ, and on this account the world hates us. (Joh 15:17-19 [pa|in]) The life we have chosen is superior to the world, not we ourselves.
We will not sell out or compromise to any person or authority who stands against the word of God. We will not lower our standards because they dictate it in their hateful and violent schemes. We are a peaceful people, and it is because of our being peaceful that the nations despise us. It is because of our higher standards that the world feels condemned, but we do not condemn them, but they condemn themselves in their continuing in what they know to be wrong and have the power to stop, but don't. (Tit 3:9-11 [pa|in]; 1Pe 4:4 [pa|in])
Taken individually, the posts in this series will each only prove some nominal Christian sects to be false, but taken together, they prove all modern religions to be false, except one: the one that adheres to the Scriptures as the final word of truth without relying upon the fetid traditions of men.
Is it anyone's responsibility to openly oppose those false Christians? When Jesus disciples said to Jesus, "Do you know that the Pharisees were stumbled at hearing what you said?", Jesus did not respond by saying we should retaliate. He did not say we should track them down and persecute them as they do to us. He did not say that we should go where they are and have arguments with them. And he did not say that we should follow them around giving scathing public denouncements of them. Instead, he indicated that they have a judgment coming and said, "Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit." (Mt 15:12-14 [pa|in]) So they serve the purpose of misleading those who want to be misled because they keep their eyes shut and refuse to open them.
Do you believe that false Christianity has served the purpose of making way for true Christianity to flourish in the last days? If not, state your disagreement in a comment below.
Go back to: Part 2: Salvation vs, Salvation
Go to Part 4: Deep Research Takes Effort
Comments
Jesus himself said, “Let them be. Blind guides is what they are. If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will FALL INTO A PIT.” (Mt 15:14) So we are to let it happen, not making any extraordinary effort to acquire or retain them. It is not up to us to force sight on someone who wishes to remain blind. (So I do not speak to you about these things for your own benefit, but for the reader’s.)
Finally, we have these words in one of the very scriptures we are discussing here: “Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence. But the lawless one’s presence is according to the operation of Satan with every powerful work and lying signs and portents and with every unrighteous deception FOR THOSE WHO ARE PERISHING, AS A RETRIBUTION BECAUSE THEY DID NOT ACCEPT THE LOVE OF THE TRUTH that they might be saved.”—2Th 2:8-10.
So there is a reason Jehovah let’s it happen: to judge the faithless. Thus, that period of apostasy has been by Jehovah’s will and very much Scriptural. It is Satan who leads into apostasy, Jehovah who allows it, but Jesus who will judge. (Joh 5:22) These things cannot be denied.
Nincsnevem, I will not be posting the link you shared, nor will I address it on that blog as I do not go chasing down Trinitarians, but I will address its points without addressing the repetitive, unnecessary, off-topic or opinionated stuff.
Also, topics we have already covered on other pages will be covered on those pages instead of here.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “The true Church must be continuous from the apostolic age. There is no room in Christianity for a "gap" or interruption of thousands of years during which true Christianity ceased to exist and then was revived in the form of another movement. …”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: I think 1924 years is plenty of room. Let’s say, for argument’s sake, that succession could be proved beyond question. It would not affect the salvation message and would not magically prove that they did not apostatize after the first century, treating the flock abusively, so it would be a waste of time to address. We have historical evidence of such systemic abuses for the past 1700 years. Abuses that did not exist in the first century, nor exist among Jehovah’s Witnesses.
There is only one movement: Christianity. Then there are false claimants to Christianity. The Bible records Christianity in minute details. We do not need to bring in speculative philosophers to tell us about it. We only need to stick to its counsel and apply it. Anything in excess of this is from Satan.
So most of your arguments about succession will be ignored, except where you make a claim that it is directly connected to a promise in the Scriptures.
“Numerous biblical texts and early Christian writings support the existence of apostolic succession, such as in Acts 1:15-26, where Matthias is chosen to replace Judas.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: I will address this because not even the Catholic Church uses this. Matthias replaced Judas to fulfill Psalm 69:25 that said the office of the traitor, and the traitor alone, was to be given to another. (Ac 1:20) If this applies, as you say, then where are the Church’s twelve apostles of today? Clearly, the Church does not subscribe to this verse as proof of apostolic succession or there would be 12 Popes along with the Pontifex Maximus. Neither Judas nor Matthias are in the line of succession. I suggest you dredge up your last vestige of humility to let this one go.
Don’t waste your breath providing any more “proof” of succession. It does not affect the salvation message (the subject of this blog) as Jehovah can raise worshippers for himself from the stones, and succession does not prevent apostasy (the subject of this post.)
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “... 4. Did the True Church Disappear?
“The argument that the "great apostasy" did not mean the complete disappearance of the Church but rather the emergence of false teachers touches on several important points. The New Testament indeed contains warnings about false teachers, but these texts do not state that the entire Church will turn away from the faith or that the Church will cease to exist altogether. For example, in the Acts of the Apostles, Paul warns the Ephesian elders that "savage wolves will come in among you," who will "not spare the flock" (Acts 20:29-30). However, Paul does not say that the faith will completely disappear but that they must watch over it and stand firm in true teaching.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Jesus was the first to speak of this period of time when he spoke of the wheat and the weeds at Mt 13:24-30, 37-43, which you already know, as will be addressed below. Since it is associated with a conclusion of a system of things, then we can see that the apostasy lasts all the way until the last days, so it is not an isolated apostasy in place or time.
At Acts 20:29, 30, Paul warns, “I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.” At 2 Thessalonians 2:3, he referred to it as “the apostasy,” and associated it with “the man of lawlessness,” whom John called “the antichrist”, defining it as those who deny, not that Jesus is God, but that Jesus is truly God’s Son.—1Jo 2:18-23.
Then, at 1 Timothy 4:1-3 he says, “The inspired word clearly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired statements and teachings of demons, by means of the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, whose conscience is seared as with a branding iron. They forbid marriage and command people to abstain from foods that God created to be partaken of with thanksgiving by those who have faith and accurately know the truth.”
At 2 Timothy 4:3, 4, he said, “There will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled. They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories”
Can it really be denied that these verses clearly speak of a gap with the words “a period of time?” It does not state how long this gap is (long or short), but it is clear that there was to be a gap filled with false teachers of Christianity. However, what makes it clear that this is more than the mere presence of apostates?
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Please cite the publication. I could not find the words “Disappeared from the pages of history” in our publications. So who are you quoting? But even if it is somewhere, it would only mean that there was no large organization whose teachings could be clearly associated with first century Christianity. It would not mean truth-seeking Christians themselves disappeared.
Being a truth-seeker is an attitude, not any one teaching. (1Ch 28:9) It does not mean there were no individuals who sought to worship the one and only true God in truth or who failed to put faith in the correct salvation message. Regardless, the resurrection will give all the chance to learn the truth who were not previously exposed to it, so it is not like all those people are condemned without hearing the actual good news. The world could have been entirely bereft of truth at the time, but it would not thwart God’s will in the end when it is time for it to be fulfilled.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “In contrast, Jesus referred to the Church in Matthew 5:14 as follows: “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.” This image suggests a visible, continuously present community that bears witness to Jesus’ teachings in the world. … If the Church had truly disappeared, as the JW[s] claim, this would contradict Jesus’ promise that the Church would always be visible and bear witness to God’s sovereignty. The historical continuity and constant presence of the Catholic Church in the world are much more in line with this promise.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: The Bible does not use the word “Catholic”, nor does it ever claim that the church would “always be visible.” There is no mention in Mt 5:14 of a time frame, nor any mention of continuity, nor any mention of a community. It is an instruction to individual Christians to bear witness to the truth to others. That is all. It in no way says they themselves were to be highly visible to governments and historians.
The Catholic Church was so visible because they sought political control and forced people to convert, not because they were preaching. But this in turn led to their suppressing any dissenting opinion through violent oppression and bloodguilty acts by Popes who fashioned themselves as tyrannical emperors. This cannot be denied. That is not the behavior of true Christianity. First century Christians avoided such things like a contageon.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “Actually there is no extrabiblical historical evidence or source at all indicating that, before the Constantinian shift, there existed any form of Christianity that even remotely resembled the beliefs and practices of modern Jehovah's Witnesses, let alone that this was once the originally dominant view.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: It’s called the Bible; the most widely available book in the world. Even you criticize our effort to stick as closeky to it as possible. So which is it? We stick to it without the later traditions or we don’t? I think the contradiction reveals what you know to be true. But there is nothing to be ashamed of in admitting it. A great many Catholics have admitted it about us in print. Just stick to the truth and you won’t have to deal with your own words thrown back at you. If sticking only to the Bible is bad, then it is bad, if it is good, it is good. You can’t have it both ways.
“… Moreover, if the Watchtower Society claims that there has always been a faithful group, why is there no historical evidence or written material to support this?”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: You really seem to have an affinity for weakening your own claims by attributing false claims to us. Where have we ever claimed that our teachings have persisted uninterrupted? I won’t hold my breath waiting for you to present evidence. Only a few of the Catholic teachings have been proved to go back to the second century. Most of the rest were developed over the next 1500 years and directly contradict the Scriptures in order to convert enslaved or conquered populations. An unbroken chain of succession means nothing in the face of the Church’s consistant abuses and Luke 3:8.
You weaken your own stand when you use imaginary claims. First, we have never said any one group believed everything we do. Nor are we under any obligation to. We only need to prove the histories of individual doctrines.
You want to talk about historical doctrine, YOU name one historical document inside or outside the Bible that talks about the Trinity before the second century CE or Jews believing in hellfire or an immortal soul before the second century BCE. I predict that you won’t even bother to try finding them because you already know you won’t find them.
But now you have given me the chance to prove how far back our doctrines go. As to the same doctrines by historical groups, do you mean these? These groups worshiped only a singular God named Jehovah, and after the Christian era believed that Jesus was NOT God himself:
• Abrimites (Ge 15:8; 24:12)
• Jacobim (Ge 28:16; 30:24)
• Kenites of Midian (Ex 18:5, 10; Ju 1:16)
• Egypt knew about Jehovah in the 13th century BCE (Merneptah Stele)
• Israelites (Ex 3:15; 20:3; De 5:7; curse talisman at Joshua’s altar; Lachish letters; Khirbet Beit Lei inscription)
• The Moabites knew about Jehovah in the 9th century BCE (Mesha Stele, a.k.a. the Moabite Stone)
• Aradites knew of Jehovah in c 600 BCE. (Ostracon #18)
• Jews before, during and after the deportation (Ho 13:5; Da 9:2-4; Malachi 3:6; Na 1-7; 9th century BCE receipt, Babylonian receipts during the captivity, Various inscriptions dating to the repatriation)
• Apostles and followers of Christ (Mt 6:9; Joh 17:26; 1Co 8:6)
• Essenes
• Gnostics
• Arians
• Goths
• Vandals
• Visigoths
• Lombards
• John Assheton
• Anabaptists
• Polish Brethren
• Latitudinarians (Including Isaac Newton)
• Unitarian Church
• Early Seventh Day Adventists
• Some modern Baptists
• Eve (Ge 3:2, 3)
• Job (Job 14:13-15)
• Samuel (1Sa 2:6)
• David (Ps 30:9)
• The Congregator (Solomon? Ecc 9:5, 6, 10)
• Ezekiel (Eze 32:21-32)
• Hosea (13:14)
• Paul (1Co 15:12-21; 54, 55)
• the apostle John (Re 20:13)
• Arians
• Anabaptists
• Some Latitudinarians
• Some Early Seventh Day Adventists
These people preached publicly to those on hand and some house to house (not just in places of worship):
• All the prophets from Enoch on (Amos 3:7; Eze 3:17-21; Mic 2:6)
• Noah (2Pe 2:5)
• Israelites (Ex 11:2, 3; 12:35, 36; De 6:6, 7)
• King David (Ps 9:1; 71:14-18)
• Jesus (Mt 11:1, 7-15)
• The apostles and disciples (Mt 10:5-; Mr 3:14; Ac 17:17; 20:20)
• All Christians are supposed to preach publicly (Mt 28:19, 20; Ro 10:13-15; Eph 6:14, 15)
• Arians
• Anabaptists
• Cathars (Albigenses)
• Lollards
• Waldenses
• Other groups were known to have preached publicly in the last two millennia, but we do not have names for them.
• The Church of Latterday Saints
• Various modern groups that come and go or preach for a little bit and then back off when they see how difficult it is to organize and maintain.
No. No one group taught everything we do, but our teachings are neither new nor original to us, but go all the way back to when they were first instituted as described in the Bible.
Of course, not every doctrine we have existed all the way back to Adam. Did Adam know the need for salvation before he sinned? Did Noah preach that a future destruction would come after the flood? Did Moses preach a heavenly reward to become kings and priests in heaven? Did David declare the name of Jesus? So obviously more doctrines are delivered by the prophets over time, but everything we teach not involving prophecy was practiced by others before us. We do not have original doctrines except as we might misundrstand something until our understanding is improved.
But yours is a trick to make it seem like only Jehovah’s Witnesses’ doctrines count as changed, yet we only change to get closer to the Bible. (I also already provided an account of our major doctrines acquired from the Bible), whereas Catholic dogma changes to get further away from the Bible. Catholicism turns Bible doctrines on their head by their traditions. Jesus being God’s Son becomes representational instead of literal. God’s oneness becomes situational instead of actual. The emblems become literal instead of representational. The mortal being becomes an immortal “soul”. Death becomes a passage instead of a punishment. Resurrection is downgraded from reward to figure of speech. Their priesthood is earthly instead of becoming heavenly. God’s fire is weakened from completely destructive to simply painful. God is transformed from peaceful and loving to base and cruel. Truth becomes “too complex for human comprehension“ over being easily understood by children. Instead of rejecting the philosophies and traditions of men, they celebrate them above the word of God. Instead of viewing His word as the source of truth, they view it as a source of confusion.
But our interpretation of prophecies is doctrine only in so much that we do not allow ones to teach anything different. But this does not mean we believe our understanding of prophecy, or even Bible doctrines, is infallible because we have no prophets among us sent directly by God (The Catholics cannot claim that either), thus we must be content with being guided into its understanding through holy spirit rather than it being handed to us in a vision or new revelation.—Pr 4:18; 2Pe 1:19.
“The historical groups mentioned by the Watchtower Society, such as the Waldenses, Cathars, Albigenses, Paulicians, and Lollards, all showed significant deviations from Jehovah's Witnesses' teachings and cannot be identified as equivalent to today's Jehovah's Witnesses.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Yet another example of claiming we said things we never said. We never once implied Wycliffe or Tyndale believed as we do, nor called them “Jehovah’s Witnesses”, nor anyone before or after them (except maybe any who attempted to defend Jehovah’s name and preached about it. I simply will not be dogmatic in that particular vain).
We only speak of their preaching the necessity of God’s word to be made available to all people. A position for which YOUR church burned them at the stake. This is something that Catholics have consistently done all the way into the nineteenth century. Should we go into your church immolating by fire? Is that how we should identify true religion? By its horrendous tortures and body count? (Re 18:5) Is it not by love that Jesus’ disciples are identified?—Joh 13:35.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “2. The Jerusalem "Governing Body" and Apostolic Succession
“The JW teaching asserts that the first-century Christian congregation was under the direction of a central "governing body" operating in Jerusalem. However, biblical and historical sources indicate that such a permanent "body" did not exist and that the Jerusalem council was more of an occasional assembly rather than a continuously functioning governing body.
“The historic churches, especially the Catholic Church, ensure continuity and unity of the Church through apostolic succession. The apostles chose successors who continued to carry on the Church's teachings and governance. This continuity and hierarchical structure are what is missing in the JW argument.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: There is nothing that suggests the gathering of a group to decide on matters was only occasional. In fact, the account uses the phrase, “go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem.” (Acts 15:2) This means they were already there and did not have to collect together from other parts. That they thought they needed to go to them indicates that the body already existed and was known and their word respected, which also indicates that this was not their first issue, nor was their meeting irregular.
Verse 4 says, “On arriving in Jerusalem, they were kindly received by the congregation and the apostles and the elders.” The account does not indicate any of the trouble of calling a gathering together.
You see, instead of making conjectures about the Bible, I actually read it, study the text and draw conclusions as I have been taught to do. I looked for your claim in the text, but found no support, but found ample evidence to the contrary. You are obviously mistaken because you rely on assumptions instead of evidence.
“According to the JW[s], the Christian congregation disappeared due to apostasy and was only restored in the "last days" (around 1914). They interpret the parable of the "wheat" and the "weeds" in Matthew 13:24-30 to mean that the "wheat" ("true" Christians) disappeared for a time because of the "weeds" ("false" Christians).”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: When we talk about it, we make it clear that there were small groups and individuals earnestly endeavoring to serve God, even Jehovah, throughout this time. But there was no de facto organization that taught the true salvation message after the fourth century.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “However, in the parable, Jesus does not say that the "wheat" disappears but that it grows together with the "weeds" until the harvest. This means that the true Church was always present, though mixed with false Christianity. This interpretation is much more in line with the Catholic Church's view that the Church has been continuously present and active throughout history.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Incorrect. It only requires that SOME would seek true Christianity, while they would be choked out by (hidden by, overshadowed by, dominated by, killed by, afflicted by) the weeds. At what point have Catholics ever been hidden by other groups? Catholics have remained the dominant religion in the world continuously since the fourth century, when it was declared the state religion by Constantine. As you yourself said, they have been quite visible. Does Jesus’s parable indicate that the wheat would remain so highly visible? Does it not, in fact, indicate that they would be difficult to distinguish and intermingled?
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “While there have always been false teachers in the Church, they never completely took over. The interpretation of the "great apostasy" does not mean that the entire Church turned away from the true faith but that some people did, while the true faith remained within the Church.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: There is no “church” as an organization mentioned in Christ’s parable except towards the end, when the wheat is collected. There is no distinction between the wheat and the weeds. They are mixed together. According to Jesus, the field is the entire earth, not just one organization. (Mt 13:38) Just like the parable, we do not distinguish between Catholic and Protestant, Baptist or Calvinist when discussing this parable. This parable indicates, instead, that no one was teaching the truth as an organization at that time, because, if they had, they would stand out and not need to be separated into two separate groups.
“Jesus' promise that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Mt 16:18) proclaims the Church's invincibility. This promise ensures that whatever happens in the world, the Church as Christ's earthly community will survive. Throughout its history, the Church has faced many challenges but has never been broken and has never lost its sacraments or teaching authority. This continuity is due to Christ's promises and the presence of the Holy Spirit. The idea that the Church fell into apostasy in the early centuries is fundamentally contradictory to the basic teachings of the Christian faith. If this were true, it would mean that Christ and the apostles' work was not successful and that the Church could not fulfill its mission. …
“This notion conflicts with the biblical teaching of a Church that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against" (Matthew 16:18). The New Testament presents the Church as a lasting institution founded by Christ, not one that would become apostate and need replacement.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: That verse is your ONLY supposed “proof”, and so, by my showing your understanding of that verse to be wrong, you will be back to no evidence for your claim. Mt 16:18 has nothing to do with an organization. It is about the gates of the Grave (or Hell, if you prefer) not being able to resist the salvation of the congregation through Jesus Christ. Jesus was not talking about the entire lifespan of an organization, but the beginning of the Christian congregation through Peter and the inability of anyone to prevent it from happening by attempts to kill him. This was fulfilled. Once fulfilled, that prophecy no longer required fulfillment. The congregation was successfully built and founded. That verse and its context nowhere mentions the prevention of apostasy from taking over the Christian congregation, nor of the congregation or its faithfulness continuing forever. It talks only of how the congregation would be founded
Again, we never said that true Christians would go extinct. There just was not a worldwide organization of true Christians preaching the true salvation message. (I speak only in regard to your claim about our own words.)
The creeds do not “show that the Church continued its work after the apostles and faithfully preserved the faith.” The creeds are not Scripture. They were not sritten by prophets. They were never entered into the Bible canon and each creed was established for the weakness of the previous. All the creeds prove is that a doctrine about God was introduced by a body of men who thought that God’s word was not enough. There is no testimony of God’s spirit among them, especially since they rejected Christ being the ACTUAL Son of God, the teaching of the resurrection (making it only symbolic), the ministry of the laity (until recently) and the substitutionary value of Christ’s sacrifice for Adam’s sin, as well as teaching that God is cruel, burning people alive forever, as well as being so steeped in the world that they engage in the world’s politics and wars. There was never anything even remotely resembling the Christianity of the Bible in those councils or the creeds.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: A “mass defection” is not a requirement of the prophecy. Only mass apostasy is required. Your view about historicity is therefore moot because your subjective viewpoint blinds you to any history but your own well-edited rosy-colored version of your churche’s history. It blinds you to the Catholic Church’s unbroken chain of crimes from the second century to today that disqualify it as the true Christian congregation.
“Cannot be supported by credible historical evidence”? Would you like me to enumerate the wars, slaughters, tortures, beheadings, immolations by fire, poisonings, briberies, slaughter of orphans and widows, thieveries, orgies, adulteries, rapes and child choirs to supply pederasty? I’m only talking about the Popes. The bishops and cardinals have been just as bad. All the apostate churches in the world cannot match up to the sins of the Catholic Church. Where have you been to claim that there is no evidence? You can’t even prove the Trinity with the Scriptures. The church relied on philosophy to explain it. Philosophy is literally speculation, not truth, and certainly not the wisdom it professes to love. The Church’s apostasy and hypocrisy is plainly evident by this besides the antichristian doctrines and the lack of love among them. Putting on blinders doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “The assumption that the true Christian faith would have been completely lost for 1800 years is also problematic since it contradicts the promises of Jesus and the apostles. If the Church had disappeared, why would we trust the canon of the New Testament, which was compiled by those early Church Fathers and councils who supposedly would have departed from the faith?”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Again, not everyone was corrupted. The Only the congregation as a whole was corrupted. But even when a whole loaf is corrupted, parts of it may still be uncorrupted.
Most of the people who presented canons were not Catholic, because that organization did not arise until later. Its origins are documented by the Church’s own priests (Their works are available). The Catholic Church originally included apocryphal books in its canon that were not in majority canons, and only corrected it after Protestants brought it to light, and even then, they still persisted in Catholic Bibles until the 20th century when they just couldn’t hide it from their parishioners anymore because of religious periodicals, Bible salesmen and house to house preachers.
Jehovah will make HIS canon known regardless. He has the power to influence things any way He likes. Neither mankind nor the Devil can hide God’s word if He wants it to be clearly identified. God’s will cannot be thwarted. Those we have canons for, themselves relied on earlier canons. There were many canons and the canon we have today is called “the majority canon” because of the commonly accepted books in the majority of the canons. Even later, careful observations of the text by many both Catholic and Protestant came to agreement as to which books were in agreement and which books directly contradicted them, meaning non-canon.
I have even investigated the apocryphal books myself, every last one, including the books of the Hassadim, the Ethiopian Danielite texts, the Essene works, the Nag Hammadi library and the Book of Jasher, and must concur that the current canon is accurate as it is highly cooperative, has historical backing, in agreement with science (though not a valid criteria) and supports Jehovah’s timeline, as well as being complementary in every way. A few of the books from the supposed secondary canon not included are in agreement, but superfluous and do not appear until later.
1 & 2 Maccabees share the same source document and so agree strongly with each other and have substantial historical support, but seem to have a few places that are in disagreement with the established canon, if the popular interpretations are to be believed, but I suspect those few places are misunderstood. However, I do not believe the books of the Maccabees are immediately essential at this time. If Jehovah wanted them in His canon, He would make it happen and may still one day.—Re 20:12.
Most of the others, including the popular version of 1 Enoch, are so far removed from agreement with the canon that I find them downright sacreligious, if not demonic. My point is that the agreement and disagreement seem obvious with the exception of just a handful of documents (though I am in full agreement with their not being included).
As to those who failed to learn the truth in the time since the first century, it is in the resurrection to the earth in the thousand years, which Catholics deny, that all those throughout history will get a chance to learn the truth who were deceived or in no position to learn the truth. That is why Jehovah did not need the truth to be known in all places in all ages. He only needed the seed in the earth and He would make it sprout in His own time.
The holy ones stated the principle: A seed must first dry out before it can germinate on fine soil. (1Co 13:36; Mt 13:8, 18-23) In fact, some seeds do not germinate until first they are burned in the fire and the ash has prepared the soil and the rain has washed it all away. There they may lie in the dirt until the conditions are right and be made anew from the soil. That is why it is said, “Neither is the one who plants anything nor is the one who waters, but God who makes it grow.” (1Co 3:7)
“... Bible verses used to support the idea of a "great apostasy" in the Church. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12: The Apostle Paul clearly states that a "falling away" will occur before the appearance of the Antichrist, which many interpret as apostasy.”
“... The "great apostasy" in Christian eschatology (the study of the end times) is therefore interpreted as an event expected just before the appearance of the Antichrist. The Antichrist is the one who will perform miracles and try to deceive people by claiming to be God and sitting in God's temple.”
“... The text does not indicate at all that this will happen in the near future, for example in 2-4[] centur[ies], and there is no biblical evidence [at] all that the true faith will only be "restored" and the "true church" re-established in about 1800-1900 years.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Wrong on all counts. Denial of the evidence does not mean the evidence does not exist.
The prophecy at 2 Thessalonians 2:6-8 says that the “lawless one” (the antichrist), will be REVEALED when Jesus comes to do away with him “by the spirit of his mouth.” That does not mean the antichrist would not already be here long before. In fact, verse 7 of that same prophecy speaks of the certain one who “right now is acting as a restraint gets to be out of the way.” Thus, it was a single mortal person living AT THAT TIME, fending off lawlessness. Eventually he would die, thereby getting “out of the way.” This does not indicate that an organization of apostasy would spring up overnight. It took time for the false church to impose its will and false doctrines. But this does not mean the Great Apostasy was not already growing unrestrained. It only means that what was preventing the total apostasy would no longer prevent it.
This is why John grouped all of the antichrists into a single antichrist at 2 John 7. But the Catholic church thinks every person of prophecy represents a single person, so its members will remain blind until they discover at Christ’s coming that THEY (and all “churches”) are the antichrist because they are part of those who oppose Christ through antichristian orthodoxy or other teachings that reject the value of Christ’s sinless human sacrifice, the meaning of resurrection, the Son’s relationship to the Father and/or his command concerning love. (1Co 15:12; 2Ti 2:18; 1Jo 2:22-25, 28, 29; 3:4, 10-12, 15; 4:9, 10; 5:1-12; 2Jo 6, 8, 9) Christ will gather all those who are part of lawless churches into bundles to be burned with fire. (Mt 13:30) You see, the antichrist and the weeds are one and the same.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: “... Until the end of time.” There is no such promise in the Scriptures. I already debunked your claim about Mt 16:18 above.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “... However, this falling away does not mean the complete dissolution of the Church or its descent into heresy but rather a significant trial that the Church must endure.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Other than the Church’s attempt to forcefully misinterpret Mt 16:18, which I soundly debunked above, there is no necessity to believe that the Christian congregation did not devolve into apostasy. The Scriptures do not indicate any “trial”, nor suggest that it would be at all brief. On the contrary. The first century congregation dealt with antichrists all the way from Paul in c 51 CE up to John in 99 CE. So clearly, the dominance of the antichrist afterward would not be some brief “trial”, but one that lasts all the way until Christ’s coming.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “1 Timothy 4:1: the Apostle Paul warns that "in later times, some will apostatize from the Faith, paying attention to spirits of deception and to demonic teachings." However, this verse does not suggest that the entire Church would fall into apostasy, as it clearly states that "some will apostatize," not the whole Church.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: What indicates that the congregation would apostatize is indicated by two things I already highlighted:
1. The apostasy had already begun, so much that it could be said, “already many antichrists.”
2. There was someone in the firstcentury “actimg as a restraint, preventing the apostasy from exploding.
These two things indicate how total the apostasy would be.
You have fallen into the same trap the apostate church did. You are relying on a translation for interpretation. If you go into the Koiné Greek that the letter was written in, you will find the word “ti'nes” (τινες), an indefinite pronoun, thus not indicating any particular size of group (as you assume with “some”). Basically, it means “an [uncertain] number of …“. So you cannot take it as a small group. Also, John, the one acting as a restraint said, “it is the last hour, and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now MANY antichrists have appeared, from which fact we know that it is the last hour.” (1Jo ) Here he uses the Greek word “polloi”, which DOES mean “many” or “much”. So if there were many BEFORE his death, then there would be that much more AFTER his death.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: The words, “the faith that was once for all time delivered to the holy ones,” is referring to the message. The message was delivered by Jesus Christ and indelibly recorded in God’s word. This means that it does not need to be “delivered” a second time. It is not a promise that the congregation would never apostatize. After all, Jesus himself both gave prophecies about “good and faithful” and “faithful and discreet” slaves and also about “wicked and sluggish“ and “wicked and evil” slaves, and foretold that there would be a time when the two groups would be confused so that they could not be distinguished. (Mt 25:14-30; 13:37-43; Mt 24:25-51) Paul said there would be “a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching.” (2Ti 4:3) I already covered this above.
The church’s continuity, as I showed, has never been prophesied. That is the same argument the Jews claim, yet their dissolution was prophesied, just like the prophecies I highlighted show the congregation’s effectively total apostasy.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “Acts 20:28-30 warns of false teachers, but does not indicate that the entire Church will be led astray.
“... Other verses, such as 1 Timothy 1:19 and 1 Timothy 6:21, also mention certain individuals who stray from the faith, but do not imply a complete apostasy of the Church.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Isolating a single scripture makes it easy to say that the scriptures do not say something, which is dishonest when another scripture about the same event actually does say it. Analyzing all the prophecies concerning the same period is what reveals all the details. It is like looking at an event from different angles, highlighting different facets as with a gem. 1 Timothy 1:19 and 6:21 are neither the prophecy nor about the fulfillment of the prophecy.
Acts 20:29, 30 reveals that it will be after Paul goes away, all the way back after he would die, that those in authority (clergy) will mistreat the flock and will indeed lead them into apostasy. Mt 13:24-30, 37-43 reveals that the entire congregation would become overrun worldwide and that it would only be resolved in the last days. He reiterates this fact at Mt: 24:10-13, where he says it will be followed by a worldwide preaching campaign in line with Da 12:4. At 2Th 2:3-12, Paul refers to “the lawless one” who would come after the first century restraint gets “out of the way”, but will be revealed when Jesus comes, giving us a clear timeframe of at least 1800 years. He also gives us the reason why in verses 11 and 12: in order to judge them at the last day.
Finally, at 1Jo 2:18-26; 4:2, 3 and 2Jo 5-11, John identifies the lawless one as the “antichrist”, saying that the antichrist is many people, and what it means to be one, including any one of these: 1) rejecting that Jesus came from heaven or came to earth (The way “Black Israel” does), 2) denying that he is the actual Son of God (like claiming that God dishonestly declares himself to be His own Son), 3) teaching ones to disobey Christ’s command to love (such as persecution or going to war), 4) rejecting any of Christ’s teachings or 5) disobedience to God or Christ (Such as hating people by persecuting them or not carrying out the ministy). These things cannot be denied about this shared prophecy without making oneself a liar, and thereby a son of the Devil.—Joh 8:44; 1Jo 3:10.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: This is true. It is only the ultraorthodox churches, without any proof, that claim to be the uninterrupted continuation of the Christian congregation. That you want to believe this is fine, but you cannot say you have proof. Pointing to a list of Popes the Catholic Church itself made does not prove anything. We have the clear record of the history of the Catholic church that demonstrates that it was formed nearly two centuries after the apostle John passed away. There have been many Catholic priests (not reformers or Protestants) who have admitted this history and are, in fact, the means by which we have that history preserved in the first place along with the existence of the Vatican archives.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “6. The Historical Continuity of the Church and the Problem of "Re-establishment"
“If the Church had indeed lost its true faith and then had to be re-established in the 19th century, this would imply a kind of "second founding."
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: This is not terrible reasoning, but it is not Jehovah’s reasoning. Jesus said, “Therefore, produce fruits that befit repentance. Do not start saying to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones. Indeed, the ax is already lying at the root of the trees. Every tree, then, that does not produce fine fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.” (Lu 3:8, 9) EVERY TREE.
You are also ignoring the very idea of this page, which is to show that the first century congregation was established so that later the truth could re-emerge. There is no need to “re-establish” or perform a “second founding” of what is already recorded for us in the Scriptures. But, of course, the Catholic Church puts the words of men above the word of God, so I can’t expect you to understand it from that angle.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “The question of who entrusted Russell with the re-establishment of the Church further complicates the Watchtower Society's position. If the true Church had ceased to exist, how could Russell's mandate be legitimate? …”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Because Russell demonstrated things the Catholic Church never has: Obedience to God and Jesus, Rejection of the Trinity, immortality of the soul and hellfire by adherence to the Scriptures as the sole authority of doctrine, and the humility to reject the claim of being God’s mouthpiece or prophet and not abuse the flock.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “The argument that 1914 could have been a turning point after which the Church was "lost" suggests that the previous Church was indeed true. However, the Watchtower's own literature suggests that God had already rejected the Church before then. This is contradictory because if the Church was true until 1914, why did it not remain so afterward?
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Huh? There is nothing in our literature that says that the Church was true until 1914, nor that ir was “lost” after 1914. Careful relying upon the Church’s propaganda. They have a documented history of spreading lies about us.—Mt 5:11, 12.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “... Jesus' promise, … also implies … there will always be valid sacraments ...”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: The prophecy of the Great Apostasy has nothing to do with the sacrament. It never mentions them, nor implies toward them, good or bad. You need to put a tighter rein on your claims. You just seem to be spouting anything that sounds good to you.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: There is no scripture that says the Christian congregation is infallible. If you ever read your Bible, you would know this. The word of God is infallible, not the men whose responsibility is to keep the flock clean. Christ would not have needed to give them reminders to look out for apostasy if the congregation was infallible.—Re 2:5; 14-16, 20-26.
Now it may be that the agreed upon teachings of the apostles and older men were infallible in the first century, while they still had the gifts of prophecy and of lnowledge, but the scriptures never say this. But what did Paul say under inspiration? “Even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond the good news we declared to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, I now say again, Whoever is declaring to you as good news something beyond what you accepted, let him be accursed.” (Gal 1:8, 9) So even an apostle was not guaranteed to be infallible.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST:
“9. Ockham's Razor and Theological Interpretation
“The preference for simple and reasonable explanations is important in theological interpretation as well, and it is not necessary to create complex conspiracy theories that suggest the devil has blinded everyone.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Says the Trinitarian who espouses a doctrine so complex no one can explain it, as well as denies the scripture that clearly states that even children would understand, or were you lying? Okham’s razor is a generalized principle in science, not a stated Biblical truth.
In what way is this so-called “conspiracy theory” complex? Please, I would really like to know. I mean, even children understand it, you know, because the message in the scriptures is so easy to understand. Let’s review it:
• Apostasy breaks out in the congregation.
• After a certain person gets to be “out of the way,”
• the apostasy spreads unchecked until
• the apostasy is collectively known as “the man of lawlessbness” and the “antichrist”
• that Christ will do away with when he comes to judge the world.
Well would you look at that? No contradictions. No mysteries. No dancing around facts. No denials. Just a simple four-point progression. You seem to be dumping the word “complex” fully on its head to suit your needs.
“Heresies and new denominations often present themselves as defenders of "truth" while in reality opposing the historical and theological continuity of the Catholic Church.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Simply by virtue of telling a truth, one is in opposition to Catholicism. That’s just a given.
1 Corinthians 1:10 is probably my favorite verse in the Bible, so I believe doctrinal unity, speaking in agreement, is essential to a true Christian’s faith. However, there can be no unity where it is obvious that the individual or group has abandoned the salvation message through the only-begotton Son of the Father, the only true God, Jehovah. In this case, it is the founders of the Catholic Church that left.
Therefore, we cannot fellowship with them at all, for the Scripture says, “Do not become unevenly yoked with unbelievers. For what fellowship do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what sharing does light have with darkness? Further, what harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer share in common with an unbeliever? And what agreement does God’s temple have with idols? For we are a temple of a living God; just as God said: ‘I will reside among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.’” (2Co 6:14-16) This is why we do not participate in interfaith organizations or activities.
It is not about creating a new religion. It is about avoiding ones who created a new religion. That is, those ones did not stay faithful to the message in the Bible, but heaped lies upon it and upon God, Jesus and the holy spirit. Most Protestant groups started out that way, but it did not take long for each of them to deviate from their initial search for truth. It is as when Elisha had Jehoash of Israel strike the ground with the arrows and Jehoash stopped at three. (2Ki 13:14-19) None of them had the determination to carry it through to the finish. Instead, they became part of the problem.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “Heresies have always challenged the teachings of the Church, but the continuity of the Church and the consistency of its teachings prove its credibility. The Church has never ceased to proclaim the truth received from Christ, and through apostolic succession, it has preserved this tradition. The legitimacy of the Church is based on apostolic foundation and the consistently preserved teaching continuity over the centuries, which cannot be questioned by those trying to create new theologies.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Yet you admit that the Trinity is not explicitly found in their teachings. Neither is hellfire or the inherent immortality of the soul. You cannot profess such a claim that is disproved by your own words. It’s dishonest. There is no paper trail anywhere that shows such consistency, but there is a long paper trail proving the development of those doctrines and other false doctrines by the Catholic Church and others. You yourself use the words “continuous line of doctrinal development” in this very discourse. Doctrinal consistency: no paper trail. Doctrinal deviation: clear paper trail with a practical play-by-play. The Scriptures teach us to follow the evidence.—Ex 22:13; Isa 41:22; Jo 16:8.
Continuity and consistency that existed only after they abandoned everything that the congregation was founded on counts for nothing. For example, if a group broke away from Judaism and followed after other gods and burned their children in the fire to Molech, but they remained consistent in this for centuries, does this prove they are the true religion? Obedience to Jehovah, the only true God and faithfulness to his teachings through Jesus Christ are what define true religion, not longevity.
“Regarding the Second Vatican Council, while some directions may seem theologically harmful, this does not mean that the Church as a whole has fallen into heresy. The Church has never lost its apostolicity and continuity, even when internal problems and corruption occasionally arose. The challenges of modern times, such as the LGBTQ+ issue, require new approaches. Although I am critical of how Pope Francis handles this issue, he has not formally deviated from Catholic teachings and has not fallen into heresy. The Church can be described as a living organism that is constantly struggling with internal and external challenges. Despite the errors and corruption, the Church continues to exist because, according to God's promise, the "gates of hell" will not prevail against it.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: The dissonance is palpable.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “12. Is a political power's favor evidence of apostasy?
“Many Protestants, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and others believe that the Church fell into apostasy when Constantine the Great ended the persecutions and brought the favor of the Roman Empire towards Christians. But does the Bible support this view?”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Yes.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “Let's consider the example of the Persian Emperor Cyrus. The Bible says that God moved the heart of Cyrus—a pagan king—to rebuild the destroyed temple of God in Jerusalem and to return the sacred vessels that Nebuchadnezzar had taken from it (Ezra 1). Does the favor shown by this pagan king toward the Jews, particularly his initiative to rebuild the Temple, indicate that Israel had fallen into apostasy at that time? The Bible clearly answers no. God Himself says of the pagan king Cyrus, "He is my shepherd, and he shall fulfill all my purpose; saying of Jerusalem, 'She shall be built,' and of the temple, 'Your foundation shall be laid'" (Isaiah 44:28). This demonstrates that God can use even secular rulers to accomplish His will (Proverbs 21:1). The same principle applies to Constantine the Great: God used the favor of the Emperor to benefit the Christians, ending the state's persecutions of the Church and allowing the Gospel to spread throughout the Empire.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: I have no objection to claiming that God used Cyrus or even Nebuchadnezzar or Tiglath Pileser III or Sinnacharib or Necho II or Apries (Hophra) or Alexander. However, they were all prophesied; Constantine was not. But how God uses world rulers is not at issue here. How the Catholic Church prostitutes itself to world rulers and for hundreds of years called itself “the Holy Roman Empire,” is. This is just like when Judah turned to Moab or Egypt or Syria or Assyria or Babylon for help. In each case, they were punished because they did not turn to God. Jesus, however, on many occasions, said that Christians must be “no part of the world.” (Joh 17:16) In that particular verse, Jesus also said, “Just as I am no part of the world.” This gives us the clue of what he meant.
When Satan offered Jesus the world, he rejected it because it comes along with worshiping Satan, but the Catholic Church grabbed hold of it with both hands. (Mt 4:8-10) When the people of Tiberius came to make Jesus king, he withdrew, instead, (Joh 6:15) but the Catholic Pope said, “Hold my beer.” They’ve been jumping from national bed to national bed ever since. By the time the Nazi’s came along, they played with Hitler’s riding crop while flirtatiously complementing his mustache and comb-over. Jesus said, the world is “fond of what is its own.” (Joh 15:19) There’s no religion or denomination more loved by the world than the Roman Catholic Church.
True Christians, on the other hand, are hated by the world, just as Jesus said in that verse, but not more than the Catholic Church and its orthodox offshoots hate us, for no other reason than we make them look bad by our adherence to the Scriptures and true obedience to God and Christ. While the Catholic Church only casts out obvious “heretics” from their ranks and wink at sin, we cast out anyone who continues to practice sin or unrepentantly teach differently, even among those taking the lead among us.
Why did Jesus say we are no part of the world? Because his kingdom is no part of this world. (Joh 18:36) So true Christian make no attempt to ride the wild beasts of this world. Our wine is the blood of Christ. (1Co 10:16) The Catholic Church’s wine is mixed with the blood of his anointed ones because they do not care who they kill to retain power.—Re 17:6.
NINCSNEVEM’S LINKED POST: “If their claim were true, then the New Testament canon, which they accept, would lose its validity. As Protestant apologist Hank Hanegraaf noted in response to the Mormons (though the same applies to any group making this argument): "In response to the teaching of the church's apostasy, we should ask how the Church could praise God 'in every generation, forever and ever,' as the Apostle Paul clearly wrote in Ephesians 3:21, if it had indeed fallen into complete apostasy?"”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Still no. If you look at other verses using the same expression, you see that “forever and ever” applies, not to the longevity of the Christian congregation, but to the glory that belongs to God, saying, “to Him be the glory … to all generations forever and ever. Amen.” This is the same expression as at Gal 1:5; Php 4:20; 1Ti 1:17; 2Ti 4:18; He 13:21; and Re 7:12. He receives the glory THROUGH the congregation and Jesus Christ.
It does not say the congregation would never be overrun by apostasy, as there is always someone to worship him in every generation; that does not require them to be many. After all, when Elijah was on the run and it seemed like he was all alone, Jehovah assured him that there were still 7,000 who had not bent the knee to Baal. (1Ki 19:1-18) Now what kind of visibility did those faithful Jews have if Elijah thought he was the last faithful Jew? Yet there were many faithful ones who were not obvious to him or the world.
Swing and a miss—again.
Now to the comments you wrote unique to this blog.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: “Doctrinal development” is the key phrase here. Bible doctrine doesn’t need development. It doesn’t need workshopping, rephrasing or expansion by men enamored with their falsely called “wisdom”. Deeper understanding is needed at times, but by research alone; the answers are defined in the Scriptures themselves, not by speculative human philosophy.
Our view doesn’t undermine the early Christian work at all. It doesn’t even undermine the Catholic Church’s role in spreading a FORM of apostate Christianity. Doctrine does not continue to develop in the absence of prophets to present it. If doctrines develop without prophets, then it is false doctrine as per Deuteronomy 13 and 18 and Numbers 12:6. We can uncover the meaning of doctrine with the help of Jehovah’s holy spirit, but according to those scriptures, we cannot present new doctrine until he sends a prophet who has had a vision and speaks in his name and his words are revealed to be true.
NINCSNEVEM WROTE: “The argument selectively uses scripture to support the idea that mainstream Christianity is "apostate" while ignoring the broader context of these passages. For instance, 2 Thessalonians 2:3 refers to a "falling away" or apostasy, but this has been interpreted in various ways throughout Christian history, often relating to specific heresies or movements, not as a blanket condemnation of all Christian denominations outside of Jehovah's Witnesses. Additionally, Romans 11 speaks to the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s plan, not a wholesale rejection of the established Christian Church.”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: Says the person who never even checks the context of the scriptures he chucks out. But we’re not talking about the interpretations of other organizations. We’re talking about the one and only one thing that has ever been taught by Jehovah’s Witnesses about the Great Apostasy and based upon what the Scriptures ACTUALLY SAY, as I already amply highlighted. Bringing in other ideas to tear us down does nothing to tear us down and it demonstrates the weakness of your claim that you have to resort to such tactics.
Our view points to only one Great Apostasy, the timing of which is given at 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 6, 7. That chapter lays out a clear operation of God’s plan. Not one of us ever stated that God rejected the Christian congregation. It simply got overrun by false Christianity, not because they were powerful, but because God planned it that way to accomplish his purposes to maximum effect.
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: What would be inconsistent is for the Scriptures to claim that apostasy would never take hold and then say that apostasy would take hold. (Mt 13:24-30; 1T 4:1-3; 2Th 2:3-12) It is not a flaw in Christianity that apostasy took hold, and we have never claimed such. The flaw is in the people. It does not matter that the interpretations were flawed. What mattered was that God’s written word was spread so that in these last days, we could highlight the true salvation message that is written in it, exposing the pretense that bad actors have heaped upon it for the past 1900 years.
NINCSNEVEM WROTE: “Finally, the "us vs. them" mentality fostered by this argument can lead to a divisive and judgmental attitude towards other Christians. While the argument claims not to view Jehovah's Witnesses as superior, the underlying message is that all other Christian denominations are fundamentally flawed or apostate. This approach not only alienates other believers but also contradicts the biblical call for unity and love among all followers of Christ (John 13:34-35).”
DISMYTHED’S REPLY: I’ve decided not to take this bait. The reputation of Jehovah’s Witnesses speaks for itself and the main post above already addresses those claims. I’m not a fan of meaningless round robins.
[End of reply]