Posted on 07/08/2006 6:41:47 AM PDT by DouglasKC
Jesus Christ told His apostles to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in His name. Most people who are familiar with the Bible realize those apostles zealously embarked on that mission. Their converts were first called Christians in the city of Antioch (Acts 11:26). Since then, so many people have been born or converted into the hundreds of denominations known collectively as "Christianity" that it is one of the world's most popular and dominant religions.
People assume that all, or at least almost all, who bear the name Christian follow the beliefs, teachings and practices of Jesus Christ. But the Bible tells us that not everyone who accepts the name of Christ is really a Christian.
Jesus predicted that some would claim His name but deny Him by their actions. He said they would "call Me 'Lord, Lord,'" but "not do the things which I say" (Luke 6:46). Christ and His apostles spoke of false prophets, false apostles and false brethren. They revealed that two opposing ostensibly Christian religions would emerge. Onethe Church Jesus foundedwould be led by God's Spirit and remain faithful to His teachings. The otherguided and influenced by a different spiritwould accept the name of Christ but twist His teachings to create a convincing counterfeit of the true Church of God.
Both would use Christ's name and claim His authority. Both would perform works that would outwardly appear good and right. Both would claim to be following Christ's true teachings. But only one would faithfully represent its founder, Jesus Christ. The other would capture the minds and hearts of humanity by attaching the name of Christ to biblically insupportable religious customs and doctrines that Jesus and His apostles neither practiced nor approved.
The apostles repeatedly warned Jesus' followers to beware of false teachers who would introduce counterfeit-Christian beliefs. Jesus Himself warned: "Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name . . . and will deceive many" (Matthew 24:4-5).
The New Testament presents a concise historical sketch of the roots of these two religions that profess to be Christianone real, one counterfeit. Christ's apostles described the origin of each and their fundamental characteristics.
We have already examined the apostles' description of the Church Jesus founded. Now let's look at the record they left us of another supposedly Christian religionone that distorted and corrupted the truth and grew to become far more powerful and influential than the small Church Jesus promised would never die out.
Teaching the traditions of men
Where do most churches get their teachings and practices? Most of their members assume they come from the Bible or from Jesus Christ Himself. But do they? Jesus commanded His apostles to teach others exactly what He had taught"teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you" (Matthew 28:20, NIV). He condemned the replacing of God's commandments with traditions and human reason. Speaking to the Pharisees, He said, "For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men . . . All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition" (Mark 7:8-9).
Jesus taught that His Church should keep the commandments of God: "If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:17). He warned: "Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied [preached] in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'" (Matthew 7:22-23). He knew that false teachers would arise who would reject the commandments of God for a distorted gospel of no lawlawlessness!
Like Jesus, the apostles consistently taught obedience to God. Peter and the other apostles risked their lives to make it clear that "we ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). Paul expressed the same commitment he shared with the other apostlesof a life of obedience. "Through him [Christ] and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith" (Romans 1:5, NIV).
Paul later cautioned members of the congregation in Colosse to hold fast to what he had taught them. "As you have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, rooted and built up in Him and established in the faith, as you have been taught . . ." (Colossians 2:6-7).
Following Christ's example, Paul warned the Colossians not to accept traditions as replacements for the commandments of God: "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ" (Colossians 2:8; compare Mark 7:8-9, 13).
Why did Jesus Christ and the apostles sound such urgent warnings to avoid the traditions of men?
Subversion from within the Church
As the apostles strove to establish still more congregations of believers among the nations, a phenomenon arose that eventually produced an alternate and outwardly Christian religionbut one quite different from the Church Jesus and His apostles established.
New and different doctrines were subtly introduced. Some began subverting the Church by challenging and contradicting the teachings of Christ's apostles. Paul warned, "For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain" (Titus 1:10-11).
To counter this trend, Paul instructed fellow elder Titus to carefully consider the background, knowledge and character of anyone being considered for ordination: "Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless . . . He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it" (verses 7, 9, NIV).
Increasingly, "false apostles" began contradicting and undermining the teachings of the true apostles of Christ. Paul cautioned the church in Rome: "I urge you, brothers and sisters, to keep an eye on those who cause dissensions and offenses, in opposition to the teaching that you have learned; avoid them. For such people do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded. For while your obedience is known to all, so that I rejoice over you, I want you to be wise in what is good and guileless in what is evil" (Romans 16:17-19, NRSV).
Competing religious leaders, masquerading as ministers of Christ, began teaching their own false doctrines "in opposition to" Christ's apostles and other of his faithful servants. At first they came predominantly from a Jewish background. But then false teachers emerged from people of other backgrounds within the Church. The subversive doctrines that eventually grew to be the most influential were a blend of pagan and misguided Jewish philosophies synthesized with the mysticism popular at that time.
Simon the Sorcerer was one such false teacher mentioned early in the Scriptures. After his baptism by Philip, Simon attempted to buy the office of apostle from Peter, hoping to obtain the power to grant others the Holy Spirit. Motivated by his greed for power and influence, he faked conversion to appear Christian (Acts 8:9-23). Later historical sources indicate that he blended various elements of paganism and mysticism into a counterfeit-Christian philosophy.
A dangerous trend was established. Soon "false apostles," "false teachers" and "false brethren" abounded.
A counterfeit Christianity was born.
A different gospel gains ground
The impact of distorted teachings devastated the early Church. For example, Christians in the Roman province of Galatia turned en masse from the teachings of the apostle Paul and to a corrupted, cunningly devised but counterfeit gospel promoted by these false apostles.
Paul described the approach they used and the effect the false teachers had on Christians in Galatia: "I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ" (Galatians 1:6-7). The brethren in that area were being swept into one of the many sects making up the emerging false Christianity. Paul had to contend with religious strife generated by Jewish and gentile elements in the Galatian congregations.
These cunning pretenders did not reject outright the gospel Paul taught. They simply perverted aspects of it. Then they seduced the Galatian Christians into accepting their gospela deadly mixture of truth and error. It contained enough truth to appear righteous and Christian, but it contained sufficient error to prevent any who would accept it from receiving salvation.
Notice Paul's blistering condemnation of that "different" gospel: "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" (verses 8-9).
A gospel of no law
Jesus warned His apostles this would happen: "Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many. And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold" (Matthew 24:11-12). Jesus explained that lawlessness, the key element in the message of the false teachers, would make their ideas appealing and popular. Disregard for God's law would finally become the foundation of a popular and successful counterfeit Christianity.
The false prophets devised their message and doctrines by verbally acknowledging Jesus as "Lord" while refusing to obey Him (Luke 6:46). Jesus Himself warned of their deceitful, cunning approach: "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves" (Matthew 7:15).
Jesus made it clear that teachers of lawlessness, who outwardly appear as innocent sheep performing devoutly religious acts, are not His apostles or servants: "Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'" (verses 22-23).
God's law: the religious battleground
Controversy over God's law erupted within the Church as soon as the first gentiles (non-Israelites) were converted. Certain Jewish believers wanted to force circumcision and other physical requirements on the gentiles. They demanded that gentile converts be physically circumcised to receive salvation (Acts 15:1).
The apostles refused. They pointed out that even Moses had taught that the circumcision that made one acceptable to God was a matter of the heart (Deuteronomy 30:6; compare with Romans 2:29 and Colossians 2:11-12). Also, God had declared Abraham to be righteous in His sight before he was circumcised (Romans 4:9-12). Therefore, they explained, physical circumcision should not be regarded as a requirement for the gentiles' salvation (Acts 15:2, 5-10). For further proof, Peter noted that God had recently given the Holy Spirit to several gentiles without their being circumcised, demonstrating His will in the matter (verse 8; Acts 11:1-4, 15-18).
The same Jews also demanded that gentiles observe the temple ceremonies and rituals that pointed to the sacrifice of Christ. The apostles insisted that Christ's sacrifice was sufficient for the forgiveness of sins through the grace of God (Hebrews 7:26-27).
The temple sacrifices and rituals were only temporary institutions until the sacrifice of the real "Lamb of God" (John 1:29). The apostles taught that they were no longer required (Acts 15:11; Hebrews 9:1-15) because they were "concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation" (Hebrews 9:10).
But the apostles never regarded God's spiritual laws, summarized by the Ten Commandments, as being in the same category with "fleshly ordinances." They always supported obedience to God's commandments. Paul made this clear: "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters" (1 Corinthians 7:19). He concluded: "Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law" (Romans 3:31).
Distorted view of God's grace
Just as Jesus had foretold, unscrupulous teachers pounced on the teachings of Paul and the other apostles and twisted their meaning (2 Peter 3:15-16). By distorting the apostles' words, first about grace and then about those "fleshly ordinances" that are no longer necessary, they discovered a way to excuse their unlawful behavior. "For certain men have crept in unnoticed, who long ago were marked out for this condemnation, ungodly men, who turn the grace of our God into lewdness [shameful behavior] and deny the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ" (Jude 4).
To them, grace excused sinthe breaking of God's lawby allowing them to disregard scriptural teachings they did not like. They twisted Paul's explanation that we cannot earn salvation with our own "works" into an excuse for making no effort to obey God.
Peter pinpointed their real problem. They "despise authority": "They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries . . ." (2 Peter 2:10). A dominant characteristic of these deceivers was their eagerness to verbally attack and undermine the apostles and elders who were the true shepherds of God's flock.
As a consequence, said Peter, "they have forsaken the right way and gone astray . . ." (verse 15). "For when they speak great swelling words of emptiness, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through lewdness, the ones who have actually escaped from those who live in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption . . ." (verses 18-19).
Now a problem even more sinister developed among the scattered congregations of God's people. False teachers, instead of trying to impose more law on gentiles, began exploiting God's mercythe grace of Godto advocate the idea that Christians have been liberated from the law and no longer need to obey it. However, God says transgressing His law is sin (1 John 3:4).
These teachers misrepresented God's law as an unnecessary burden. John responded: "For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome" (1 John 5:3).
Contrary to the idea of being liberated from law, James calls God's commandments a "royal law" and the "law of liberty" (James 2:8-12). God designed His law to guarantee freedom from the consequences of such evils as adultery, murder, theft, fraud and covetousness.
It is sin, not God's law, that enslaves us (Romans 6:6). We become free from the enslavement to sin by obeying God (verse 17). Paul explains that obedience and righteousness are inseparable. "For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous" (Romans 2:13, NIV).
Satan the devil: master deceiver
Those who promoted these lawless principles were influenced by Satan. Paul said: "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works" (2 Corinthians 11:13-15).
Satan hates God's law. He is a master deceiver. Naturally, he will spare no effort to infiltrate the Church Christ founded.
To accomplish his purpose, Satan uses people to mislead other people. It is easy for him to influence human beings who desire to teach others when they are motivated by personal ambition. This is especially true if they lack a proper understanding of the Scriptures. Satan simply takes advantage of their desire to be spiritual teachers. He seduces susceptible individuals to pay lip service to Christ while creating their own new sets of doctrines and ignoring or disobeying portions of God's laws.
Paul told Timothy to "charge some that they teach no other doctrine" and have a "pure heart," "good conscience" and "sincere faith, . . . from which some, having strayed, have turned aside to idle talk, desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm" (1 Timothy 1:3, 6-7). Sincere but misguided religious leaders can and do accept doctrines that permit them to break some of God's commandments. Then they persuade others to believe as they do. Sadly, through the devil's influence, they convince themselves that their misguided concepts are righteousthat God is pleased with them. They believe the false doctrines they teach. Although sincere, they are sincerely mistaken.
Paul says, "The coming of the lawless one [a future teacher who will advocate doctrines contrary to God's laws] is according to the working of Satan . . . with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie" (2 Thessalonians 2:9-11). Probably none of the misguided teachers perceives he is in reality advocating Satan's point of view.
However, by creating a counterfeit-Christian religionone that is not entirely different from the true Church but rejects some of the essential biblical teachings that lead to eternal lifeSatan is attempting to thwart God's plan for the salvation of mankind. Remember, Jesus says, "if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:17). That is exactly what the devil wants to prevent.
He promotes a lawless Christianity that teaches we can selectively obeyor even ignoreGod's commandments.
Lawlessness in varying degrees is the centerpiece of Satan's counterfeit doctrines. His purpose is to convince people that they are serving Christ while cutting them off from salvation by clouding their understanding of what sin is so they will continue in sinso they will practice at least some degree of lawlessness.
To accomplish his purpose, Satan exploits human nature. He sways people to believe his deceptions (1 John 5:19; Revelation 12:9). Satan retains just enough truth in his doctrines to persuade people they are following Christ. But he introduces sufficient error to prevent them from living the way that would ultimately lead to eternal life.
Why disobedience appeals to human nature
Satan is successful in deceiving humanity for good reason. The apostle Paul explains that the natural mind of manthe mind that is not guided by God's Spiritcannot always see the purpose behind God's laws. "But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Corinthians 2:14).
Most people are not overtly hostile toward many of God's laws. They usually recognize that deeds such as murder and theft are wrong. However, they are hostileperhaps without recognizing their innate hostilitytoward laws that challenge their own personal, natural way of thinking. In that sense lawlessness appeals to people. Paul explains why disobedience can appeal to our baser instincts: ". . . The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be" (Romans 8:7). The carnal, or fleshly, mind not only lacks spiritual discernment, it resents God's authority as expressed in His laws. The New International Version translates this verse: ". . . The sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so."
We call this sinful tendency human naturea combination of human weakness and acquired attitudes resulting from Satan's influence on people. Satan exploits human nature. He uses his false teachers to convince other people that they are "liberated" from the laws of God, thus excusing their tendency to be hostile toward God's laws. So, rather than abandoning a life of lawlessness, those led astray by this deception continue in sin. Thinking their disobedient actions are permissible to God, they fail to recognize, at least in some of their beliefs and behavior, the gravity of their sinful actions.
But the apostle James makes it clear that this approach and attitude to God's royal law are entirely wrong. "For whoever shall keep the whole law and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10). The context shows James is speaking of the Ten Commandments (verses 8-9, 11). God's fundamental law is made up of 10 points, and He requires us to observe them allin letter and spirit.
A falling away from truth begins
Christ praised the church in Ephesus for refusing to follow false apostles who tried to take advantage of their human nature and seduce them. "I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars" (Revelation 2:2).
But not everyone in every congregation followed the example of the church in Ephesus. Many accepted the teachings of the false apostles and reverted to sinning. That is why Peter wrote: "For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them" (2 Peter 2:20-21).
People began turning away from the teachings of Christ's true apostles. They accepted the philosophies of false teachers. Peter had explicitly warned that this would occur. He said false teachers would arise "among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed" (2 Peter 2:1-2).
Peter anticipated that not just a fewbut manyChristians would turn aside from the truth to follow doctrines that were more appealing to the carnal mind. Later John confirms this happened. "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us" (1 John 2:19).
Barnabas and Saul (later renamed Paul) encountered a false prophet determined to turn people away from the truth. "Now when they had gone through the island to Paphos, they found a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a Jew whose name was Bar-Jesus, who was with the proconsul, Sergius Paulus . . . But Elymas the sorcerer (for so his name is translated) withstood them, seeking to turn the proconsul away from the faith" (Acts 13:6-8).
On other occasions the problem lay with false brethren (Galatians 2:4). Paul referred to his trials "in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils of my own countrymen, in perils of the Gentiles, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren" (2 Corinthians 11:26).
These false Christians had not become a genuine threat just to Paul's safety and effectiveness, but they had also become a significant part of the visible Christian community. Some may have finally gone out from God's special people but continued calling themselves Christian. Others became members of new and supposedly liberated sects that retained the name Christian. Still others probably remained in the fellowship of true believers and over time subverted congregations to their own heretical teachings.
A false Christianity was beginning to take a firm hold.
True Christians forced out of congregations
As the teachings of false ministers gained in popularity, their followers gradually grew to be the majority in some congregations. The apostle John records one such tragic example: "I wrote to the church, but Diotrephes, who loves to have the preeminence among them, does not receive us. Therefore, if I come, I will call to mind his deeds which he does, prating against us with malicious words. And not content with that, he himself does not receive the brethren, and forbids those who wish to, putting them out of the church" (3 John 9-10).
Incredible as it sounds, those who were faithful to the teaching of the apostles were expelled from this congregation. They had become the minority. The majority had chosen to follow Diotrephes, who, in his own lust for power and influence, falsely accused the apostle John. Satan had succeeded in placing his minister over this congregation, expelling the faithful servants of Jesus Christ.
Remember, Jesus had already warned His true servants that this would happen: "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it. Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves" (Matthew 7:13-15).
He also said: "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: 'These people honour me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.' You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men" (Mark 7:6-8, NIV). Now we can understand why Paul explained to Christians in Rome the appropriate response to those who were stirring up division within the Church. "Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them" (Romans 16:17).
Counterfeit Christianity dominates
By the end of the third century the true servants of God had become a distinct minority among those who called themselves Christians. The counterfeit Christianity had become the majority.
False teachers had successfully gained a far larger following than the faithful ministers of God. However, history shows the counterfeit sects were not united in their beliefs. Many factions existed among them.
Nevertheless, divided and unconverted as it was, this new brand of Christianity rapidly expanded its membership and became the visible Christian church. Purporting to offer salvation, but without the necessity of real repentance, it held just enough truth to appeal to the masses.
In spite of its faults, it appeared to offer a hope unequaled by any pagan religion at that time. None of the pagan religions offered a believable way for people to receive forgiveness of sins and obtain eternal life. This new religion seemed to offer just that. Little did its followers realize that its promises, without real repentance, were made in vain.
By the end of the third century this counterfeit Christianity was a squabbling, bitterly divided religion. But at the beginning of the fourth century two things happened that abruptly altered the course of Christian history. First, the Roman emperor Diocletian intensified the policy of many previous Roman emperors of persecuting Christians and ordered that all Christian manuscripts be burned. This dramatically renewed a climate of fear throughout the Christian community.
Ten years later another emperor, Constantine, came to power. He had defeated another powerful contender for the right to replace Diocletian as emperor, but he still had many enemies, and his political position remained insecure. In all the empire, only Christians were unaligned politically. Constantine immediately saw an opportunity to use this formerly persecuted and politically alienated religious body to strengthen his hold on the empire.
First he legalized Christianity. Then, only two years later, he called all the divided professing-Christian groups together to hammer out a unified system of belief. He wanted a united religious body that was politically committed to him.
To achieve this, Constantine presided over doctrinal deliberations and dictated statements of belief whenever disagreements could not be resolved amicably. He soon successfully molded the bickering groups of counterfeit Christians who were willing to accept state control into a strong and unified vassal of the Roman Empire. Williston Walker, former professor of ecclesiastical history at Yale University, tells us that, in 323, "Constantine was at last the sole ruler of the Roman world. The church was everywhere free from persecution . . . But, in winning its freedom from its enemies, it had come largely under the control of the occupant of the Roman imperial throne. A fateful union with the state had begun" (A History of the Christian Church, 1946, p. 111).
A religion transformed through syncretism
As this new religionnow supported by the Roman emperorsgrew in power and influence, it sought to become a truly universal church. In its ambition to add more members, many new convertsand many new practiceswere welcomed into its fold.
Charles Guignebert, professor of the history of Christianity at the University of Paris, described the process: "Now at the beginning of the fifth century, the ignorant and the semi-Christians thronged into the Church in numbers . . . They had forgotten none of their pagan customs . . . The bishops of that period had to content themselves with redressing, as best they could, and in experimental fashion, the shocking malformations of the Christian faith which they perceived around them . . .
"[Properly instructing converts] was out of the question; they had to be content with teaching them no more than the symbol of baptism and then baptizing them en masse, postponing until a later date the task of eradicating their superstitions, which they preserved intact . . . This 'later date' never arrived, and the Church adapted to herself, as well as she could, them and their customs and beliefs. On their side, they were content to dress up their paganism in a Christian cloak" (The Early History of Christianity, 1927, p. 208-210, emphasis added throughout).
What was the result? This state-dominated Christianity became a bizarre synthesis of beliefs, practices and customs from many sources.
As Guignebert explained: "It is sometimes very difficult to tell exactly from which pagan rite a particular Christian rite is derived, but it remains certain that the spirit of pagan ritualism became impressed upon Christianity, to such an extent that at last the whole of it might be found distributed through its ceremonies" (p. 121).
In those early centuries the counterfeit Christianity that the apostles of Jesus Christ had fought so hard to contain grew in size and popularity. In later centuries this religion would fragment repeatedly into competing denominations. Tragically, however, none completely returned to the original practices and teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles. This fact is recognized by many modern biblical scholars. (See "Changes in Christian Scholars' Perspective on God's Law," p. 44.)
Meanwhile, those who, through these many centuries, have faithfully continued to yield their lives to God in sincere obedience to His laws are still, comparatively speaking, only a "little flock" in a confused world.
Is the fact that the image of the Crucifixion actually pre-dates the event proof for you?
And your evidence for this is what exactly? Find me one single quote from an ancient historian that derives the Roman office of Pontifex Maximus from Babylon. Just one.
You make it sound as if the Easter date at Nicaea was *changed* from what it had always been. Not so. From Eusebius's History of the Church:
Chapter XXIII. The Question Then Agitated Concerning the Passover. 1 A Question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour's passover.343 It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Saviour.The Quartodeciman custom was followed by the disciples of St. John in Asia....but it was not followed anywhere else. The majority of the churches around 150 or so followed the Sunday Easter. Irenaeus traces that custom in Rome at least back to Pope Sixtus I around 115-125 A.D.; and the fact that it was already very widespread a few years after suggests that it was probably itself an old tradition.
Nicaea *standardized* the date, it did not change the date.
Now let us add in those unique items posited by Freke and Gandy. We should first note the most obvious, for it graces the cover of their work: Based on "a small picture tucked away in the appendices of an old academic book" (though what the cite is for this book, we are not told), they feature a drawing of "a third-century CE amulet" with a depiction of a crucified figure which names "Orpheus Bacchus" as the figure, another name for D. According to Freke and Gandy, this shows that "To the initiated, these were both names for essentially the same figure." [12-13] To which we reply: That's the initiated's problem. The uncritical syncretism of a single person (the maker/wearer of the amulet) provides no evidence for the copycat thesis; least of all when the evidence dates several hundred years after the time of Christ (as does indeed all their evidence of D being crucified [52]). They also state incorrectly that there are no representations of the crucified Jesus before the fifth century; as Raymond Brown noted in Death of the Messiah, there are about a half-dozen depictions of the crucified Jesus dated between the second and fifth century, and even if this were not so, the literary depiction in the Gospels amounts to the same thing. Freke and Gandy chose rather a poor examplar to feature on their cover.It may well be a forgery; but even if it's not, the authors of the book it came from seem to think it is of the 3rd century. Oh, and someone ought to let Stormfront in on the news...they have it up on their website.Update: Poorer than we realized, in fact. Our old pal Venerable Bede has uncovered some new information on this picture used by F and G that really blows them out of the water. Bede has given me permission to use this from one of his online logs; we'll just report it here.
Freke and Gandy do not supply a reference for the picture in their book but kindly let me know by email. The first they supplied was R Eisler, Orpheus the Fisher (Kessinger Publishing reprints), first published in 1920 and where the fourth century date for the amulet is given and it is illustrated. Interestingly it is dated to the fourth century simply by virtue of its representation of a crucifixion so could, in theory be older or more recent.
The second reference was WKC Guthrie, Orpheus and Greek Religion Princeton University Press, 1952. This is the second edition and discusses the amulet at some length on page 265. He mentions the views of Eisler and Otto Kern who was a very distinguished German expert on Orpheus. At the time, both considered the gem to be an ancient Orphic artifact and Eisler suggested their was a tradition of a crucified Orpheus. Pointing to the evidence of Justin Martyr, who denies there ever was a crucified pagan, Guthrie rightly rejects this interpretation.
...But there is a final kicker to this story that Freke failed to mention. I found an endnote to the 1952 edition of Guthrie's work (page 278) states:
"In his review of this book [Orpheus and Greek Religion] in Gnomon (1935, p 476), [Otto] Kern [unfeasibly esteemed German expert on Orpheus] recants and expresses himself convinced by the expert opinion of Reil and Zahn [more distinguished Germans] that the gem is a forgery."
I looked up the review in Gnomon but it is in German so I can't make anything of it. Still, the gem has been branded a forgery by noted experts. Luckily for Freke and Gandy that they don't think the gem important to their thesis, but you still have to ask what it was doing on the front cover of their book. And one can also have suspicions as to why they didn't give a reference to where the picture came from.
No. The image of a cross is ancient and pre-dates Christianity. Christ was crucified. That's why Christians use the symbol. The former has nothing to do with the latter. Also, the image you posted was not sourced was it? I went to the website you linked. Where is the source of the image?
Excellent work Claud!
Looks like our local anti-Catholics have been suckered by yet another forgery! No surprise there.
It *looks* kinda suspicious to me, but I'm no archaeologist. I would imagine if it is not a forgery, it almost certainly dates to the Christian era--perhaps some pagan/Christian conflation cooked up by some wacky gnostics.
This is too easy! Acts 8:9-13. Simon the Sorcerer entered the Church from a Samaritan (Babylonian) background and immediately set out to pervert the teachings of the Apostles. Justin Martyr See Chapter XXVI.
The Samaritans were descended from The Babylonians who had brought their "Mystery Religion" with them when they arrived from Babylon. Notice in verse 34....they are still practicing their Mystery Religion and this was the same religion of Simon Magus. This is one of the reasons Christ warned his disciples to stay out of Samaria [Matthew 10:5] as they were still practicing this same type of religion in the first century.
Of course you will now say that Simon had no influence on the early Church.....and I will chuckle.
The Samaritans were descended from The Babylonians who had brought their "Mystery Religion" with them when they arrived from Babylon. Notice in verse 34....they are still practicing their Mystery Religion and this was the same religion of Simon Magus. This is one of the reasons Christ warned his disciples to stay out of Samaria [Matthew 10:5] as they were still practicing this same type of religion in the first century.
Did not Jesus Himself travel through Samaria and, personally, convert many of the Samaritians ?John 4:5 Then cometh he to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.Did not Jesus, ultimately, send His Apostles to Samaria ?
6 Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the well: and it was about the sixth hour.
...
John 4:39 And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did.
40 So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he would tarry with them: and he abode there two days.
41 And many more believed because of his own word;
42 And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.Did not Phillip, a NT evangelist, enjoy much evangelistic success among the Samaritans ?Acts 8:5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.And the following describes Simon the Magus, does it not ... ?
6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did.
7 For unclean spirits, crying with loud voice, came out of many that were possessed with them: and many taken with palsies, and that were lame, were healed.
8 And there was great joy in that city.Acts 8:9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:Looks for all the world like a struggling new believer to me.
10 To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God.
11 And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries.
12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
...
Acts 8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
20 But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.
21 Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God.
22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.
23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
24 Then answered Simon, and said, Pray ye to the Lord for me, that none of these things which ye have spoken come upon me.
25 And they, when they had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans.
Not thinking about who wrote it, what denomination they are etc, I think it is right on. False teachers abound in the world of Christianity. I have been to Churches and seen preachers on TV saying we are under grace, not under law, for example. (Or, "that is legalism".) I joined one Church and then left when the Pastor said the Ten Commandments were just a good example to follow, but were OLD Testament, therefore not for us today. The doctrines of men are alive and well all over the place! Excellent article IMHO.
He would have Avoided it if possible but it was on his way. Yes, he converted some Samaritans, but at the time of his visit they were still pagans and his disciples were surprised he was even talking to them [4:27]. He had instructed the twelve to not go there [Matthew 10:5] because these folks were a gentile people and the twelve were to go only to the "Lost Sheep of the House of Israel."
Acts 8:18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money
Evidently you did not read my link to Justin Martyr so I will give you another one to Ireneus Book I, Chapter XXIII and Eusebius Book II, Chapter XIII....a later writer.
Now, if Simon was a genuine convert, he obviously fell away later.....probably right after Peter rebuked him. The statement was made earlier, "Show me any pagan convert that ended up changing anything in the early church." If you don't think that "Simon Magus" influenced early Christian theology in Rome, spreading it eastward to Greece, then I guess we'll just leave it like that!
You make it sound as if the Easter date at Nicaea was *changed* from what it had always been. Not so. From Eusebius's History of the Church:
Chapter XXIII. The Question Then Agitated Concerning the Passover.Nicaea *standardized* the date, it did not change the date.
1 A Question of no small importance arose at that time.
For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition,
held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews
were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the
feast of the Saviour's passover.343 It was therefore necessary to
end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen
to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world
to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which,
from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time,
of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Saviour.The Quartodeciman custom was followed by the disciples of St. John in Asia....
but it was not followed anywhere else. The majority of the churches around 150
or so followed the Sunday Easter. Irenaeus traces that custom in Rome at
least back to Pope Sixtus I around 115-125 A.D.; and the fact that it was already
very widespread a few years after suggests that it was probably itself an old tradition.
83 posted on 07/10/2006 10:43:10 AM MDT by Claud
What I can glean from the the last paragraph Thank you.
b'shem Y'shua
is that when John, the last Disciple died, Paganism
ran rampant in the church, particularly the Roman church.
Anti-semitism entered the church; hence the movement
away from the Holy Word of G-d and
towards the Traditions of man.
For sure. You only have to read the headlines to see just how deep into apostasty today's organized churches are. And it's prophesized to get even worse.
Excellent post Diego. This will be a good subject to study for me. Thank you.
That isn't what he wrote, though. I think any objective analysis of the Greek will tell you that "pillar and ground of the truth" is appositive to "church of the living God".
We can all go around assuming that Paul wrote what we want him to have written. That does quite a bit of violence to the idea that Scripture is our authority, however, because it makes what we want Scripture to say into our real authority.
BTTT
Now, if Simon was a genuine convert, he obviously fell away later.....probably right after Peter rebuked him. The statement was made earlier, "Show me any pagan convert that ended up changing anything in the early church." If you don't think that "Simon Magus" influenced early Christian theology in Rome, spreading it eastward to Greece, then I guess we'll just leave it like that!
This makes Simon a contemporary of Peter and the other Apostles.
Do you think that his (Simon's) influence overwhelmed that of the Apostles ?
Do you have any evidence that this one infiltrator had a lasting effect on the development of Christianity ?
As I said later, it can go either way and doesn't make much of a difference. God's church and God are both the pillar and ground of the truth.
There is evidence in the bible of rebellion within one of the early churches, a revolt against John and apparently the authority he had:
3Jo 1:9 I wrote something to the church; but Diotrephes, who loves to be first among them, does not accept what we say. 3Jo 1:10 For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does, unjustly accusing us with wicked words; and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brethren, either, and he forbids those who desire to do so and puts them out of the church.
It's not a stretch to imagine that the church Diotrephes belonged to became corrupt because they rejected the authority of John. Whether Simon Magus had direct influence is unknown, but the problem of corruption began to occur early.
Do you have any evidence that this one infiltrator had a lasting effect on the development of Christianity ?
There is evidence in the bible of rebellion within one of the early churches, a revolt against John and apparently the authority he had: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.It's not a stretch to imagine that the church Diotrephes belonged to became corrupt because they rejected the authority of John. Whether Simon Magus had direct influence is unknown, but the problem of corruption began to occur early.
10 For this reason, if I come, I will call attention to his deeds which he does, unjustly accusing us with wicked words; and not satisfied with this, he himself does not receive the brethren, either, and he forbids those who desire to do so and puts them out of the church.
Yes ... individual churches had issues from the very beginning ... Corinth, Galatia, Thessalonica, Ephesus, etc ... even as they do today.
Church leadership has had to consistently deal with these issues.
Note Jesus' letters to the churches cited in Revelation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.