The Great Apostasy

[Purity]

It is well known that even Roman Catholics cannot dispute the applicability of this Apocalyptic term Babylon to Rome; but the usual interpretation is that it applied to Rome pagan, before the days of Constantine. But this is inconsistent with the seven-headed and ten-horned phase of the scarlet-coloured beast which obtained long after Constantine’s day and extends to the war of the “ten horns” with “the Lamb,” which war is still future.

Purity

 

[aspen]

It is well known that even Roman Catholics cannot dispute the applicability of this Apocalyptic term Babylon to Rome; but the usual interpretation is that it applied to Rome pagan, before the days of Constantine. But this is inconsistent with the seven-headed and ten-horned phase of the scarlet-coloured beast which obtained long after Constantine’s day and extends to the war of the “ten horns” with “the Lamb,” which war is still future.

Purity

Absurd.

All worldly governments are Babylon.

It is simply convenient for the Reformers to reframe the converted Roman Empire as Babylon for their own purposes.

The fact is, Revelation is speaking about Pagan Rome as Babylon and the eventual defeat of Babylon by Christ and the conversion of Pagan Rome, or 'the entire world'.

 

[Dodo_David]

I see nothing in Revelation to suggest that "Babylon" is anything other than Rome.

Anyway, the book of Revelation is of a genre that is difficult for even trained clergy to understand, which is why there is such a variety of opinions as to how to properly interpret what is written in Revelation.

I cringe whenever someone suggests that Revelation speaks about any particular branch of the universal Church.

After all, the universal Church consists of Messianic Jews, Anglicans, Protestants, Oriental Orthodox Christians and Eastern Orthodox Christians, as well as Roman Catholics. No one branch has authority over the other branches, and no one person is the final earthly authority over all living followers of the Messiah.

 

[aspen]

Well Dodo, there is a lot to cringe about when exegesis is involved. I agree with you that reference to Babylon in the Book of Revelation is speaking of Pagan Rome and no other civilization, but the term 'Babylon' is used throughout the Bible in reference to all sorts of worldly civilizations that opposed Israel and later, Christianity.

As far as excluding parts of the Christian Body based on doctrinal differences, I think it is wrong. Christ came for all who follow Him by loving God and neighbor. He also told us to give up ownership of everything if it impedes our love of others - this includes our divisive opinions about doctrine.

 

[Purity]

Hi Rach,

Your warning was issued prematurely in my opinion.

The rules as stated in the warning are such "We believe the above to attest to the very nature of Christianity. However, we do recognize that our brothers and sisters of other decidedly Christian faiths may have variations in their denominations and traditions. We affirm that the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church are Christian, although there may be differences of opinion, doctrine, and tradition."

Nowhere in my post did suggest the Roman Catholic Church was not Christian. In fact it was the initial Roman aspect of Catholicism which caused the true Gospel to flourish in the first century ecclesia...you only need to read Pauls epistle to the Philippines to see how the Brothers and Sisters grew substantially amidst the Roman praetorian.

I have placed an exert dealing with this subject below for your reference.

Praetorians. From the time of Sejanus’s gathering of the praetorian guard in one area in a.d. 23, the praetorians became a political force in Roman life. In a.d. 41, after the murder of Gaius, it was the praetorians who saluted Claudius as emperor while the Senate was considering reinstatement of the republic. By this action they ensured that the Principate would continue and that Claudius would be the next emperor. Elite soldiers who were paid very well, the praetorians served for terms of sixteen years. The praetorians guarded the Emperor and his family members in Rome and abroad. Paul’s statement that the cause of his imprisonment was well known throughout the whole praetorian guard ( Phil 1:13) is strong but not by itself sufficient evidence for the Roman provenance of Philippines. The leader of the praetorian guard, the praetorian prefect, had a great deal of political power. Since Nero had announced at the beginning of his reign that he would not judge cases personally (Tacitus. Ann 13.4.2), it is thought that the praetorian prefect took this responsibility. If Paul appeared in Caesar’s court for trial soon after the time period covered in Acts, it is very likely that the praetorian prefect was his actual judge.

Now eventually Church and State come together and Pauls advice unheeded.

Pauls advice:

Phil 1:27; Eph 2:19

πολιτεύομαι politeuomai

Middle voice of a derivative of G4177; to behave as a citizen (figuratively): - let conversation be, live.

Its where we get the English word for Politics.

The Philippine ecclesia were under great pressure to conform to Roman rule and while the warnings were numerous Christianity eventfully conceded.

Rach, what you are suggesting within your warning is this rich history cannot be spoken in this forum? If I am correct it maybe the censorship here has stifled the truth and I must move on.

Thanks
Purity

 

[Dodo_David]

Purity, Rach is merely enforcing this website's rules, which you agreed to abide by when you joined this website.

In Post #17 of this discussion thread, you imply that all Roman Catholics are participating in apostasy.
Such an attack on our Roman Catholic brethren isn't tolerated here, just as attacks on our Protestant brethren aren't tolerated.

 

[Purity]

Purity, Rach is merely enforcing this website's rules, which you agreed to abide by when you joined this website.

In Post #17 of this discussion thread, you imply that all Roman Catholics are participating in apostasy.
Such an attack on our Roman Catholic brethren isn't tolerated here, just as attacks on our Protestant brethren aren't tolerated.

Dodo, its was not an "attack" but stating a fact - you were right in suggesting that Babylon is speaking to Rome and history reveals church and state (Rome) coming together through Constantine.

These truths have been taught in History all over the English speaking world.

Are you suggesting this history cannot be spoken of in this forum? Should this not be spelt out more clearly in the forum rules?

The early church was a free church—at times accepted by the Roman state, and at other times persecuted by the empire on the grounds that Christians refused to participate in the official state cult. Christians typically were loyal Roman citizens as long as their faith was not compromised by the empire. During the reign of Emperor Constantine (306–37) Christianity was granted full freedom by the Edict of Milan (313), which held the state to be neutral with regard to religion. The process of the recognition of the Christian religion in the Roman Empire was crowned by an edict on February 28, 380, by the three emperors who between them ruled East and West: Gratian (375–83), Valentinian II (375–92), and Theodosius I (379–95). The ruling proscribed heresy and established Christianity as the state religion.

Do you disagree with this well documented history?

If not what is your conclusion? if so please provide an alternative history which is to your liking?

Do you believe caesaropapism is accepted in Pauls writings?

Thanks
Purity

 

[Dodo_David]

Purity, when you stated that the Roman Catholic Church is the Mother of all Apostasies, you were not quoting from the Bible.
You were giving opinion, not fact. Your statement does come across as an attack on Roman Catholics.

This website affirms that our Roman Catholic brethren are Heaven-bound Christians.

 

[Purity]

Purity, when you stated that the Roman Catholic Church is the Mother of all Apostasies, you were not quoting from the Bible.
You were giving opinion, not fact. Your statement does come across as an attack on Roman Catholics.

This website affirms that our Roman Catholic brethren are Heaven-bound Christians.

You avoided the question Dodo.

Do you believe caesaropapism is accepted in Pauls writings?

Purity, when you stated that the Roman Catholic Church is the Mother of all Apostasies, you were not quoting from the Bible.

I have already shown you from the Bible how the Roman occupation caused Paul to write (a warning) concerning its governance over the brothers and sisters at Philippi. I don't need to expose the revelation to prove Babylon the Great is RCC.

I am more disturbed at your resistance to speak about a state religion and its history...troubling signs of denial for you Dodo.

Can I recommend a sound work for your learning: The ENCYCLOPEDIA of CHRISTIANITY Volume 5 Editros: Erwin Fahlbusch Jan Milič Lochman

Some very sound historical reading on caesaropapism.

 

[Dodo_David]

You avoided the question Dodo.

Do you believe caesaropapism is accepted in Pauls writings?

The New Testament is silent about the Roman Catholic Church, because the RCC didn't come into existence until the Schism of 1054 CE.

Prior to that date, the universal Church was led by a group of Patriarchs who lived in the cities of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, with the Patriarchs being equals.

It was the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I who first imposed caesaropapism on the Christians living in eastern Europe.

 

[Purity]

The New Testament is silent about the Roman Catholic Church, because the RCC didn't come into existence until the Schism of 1054 CE.

Prior to that date, the universal Church was led by a group of Patriarchs who lived in the cities of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, with the Patriarchs being equals.

It was the Byzantine Emperor Justinian I who first imposed caesaropapism on the Christians living in eastern Europe.

The New Testament is full of quotes and references to Romanism --> Apostasies which would lead to caesaropapism.

The edict from 380 confirmed the Constantinian alliance established at Milan in 313 and the practice both of state control over orthodoxy of doctrine and state involvement in the internal affairs of the church. In the East the relationship between state and church developed into caesaropapism, the idea of a harmonious “symphony” between the two entities. According to this view, the state and the church have one and the same head, Jesus Christ; the emperor governs the state and defends the orthodox faith in the name of Christ, and the church is loyal to the emperor and makes decisions solely in the ecclesiastical domain. This system came close to being theocratic. But after the reign of Emperor Julian (“the Apostate,” 360–63), who tried to restore → paganism as the imperial religion and abolished the privileges that Constantine had granted to the Christian religion, → persecutions, backed by the power of the empire, of non-Christian citizens and persons labeled heretics became endemic.

So how did it begin?

In Armenia in about the year 301, King Tiridates III (259–314), who had been converted by Gregory the Illuminator (ca 240–332), made Christianity the state religion, the first nation in the world to take this step. The process of indigenization and institutionalization of Christianity in Armenia followed in the fourth and fifth centuries. In 365 the Armenian church declared its complete independence from Constantinople.

The system of caesaropapism was by and large the fundamental principle and system in the Orthodox churches until the 20th century. In Russia the system collapsed with the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917–18, and in countries like Romania, Bulgaria, and Serbia the same collapse took place after World War II. The persecution of Christians was rampant in the Communist countries because of the Marxist atheistic ideology, with very many being imprisoned and killed, and churches were closed and church property confiscated. After World War II a certain degree of cooperation was established between the → ROC and the Communist regime in the USSR because the church had been able to serve as a national symbol of unity and resistance during the war. In Albania all religions were prohibited in 1967, when the dictator Enver Hoxha (1944–85) declared Albania the first atheistic state in the world. Since the collapse of Communism in 1989 (→ Marxism), churches in eastern Europe have tried to establish new relationships with the states that respect the principle of the religious neutrality of the state and the independence of the churches.

One cannot argue with the History; the question is whether you can learn from it?

I am looking for the Russian Orthodox Church and the RCC to culminate with Europe / Arabs to become the power behind the King of the North who will eventually conquer the middle-east including Israel.

Roman Catholicism will play an essential role in persecuting the people of God...as it did in World War 2, but on a much larger scale.

Purity

 

[Rach1370]

Hi Rach,

Your warning was issued prematurely in my opinion.

The rules as stated in the warning are such "We believe the above to attest to the very nature of Christianity. However, we do recognize that our brothers and sisters of other decidedly Christian faiths may have variations in their denominations and traditions. We affirm that the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church are Christian, although there may be differences of opinion, doctrine, and tradition."

Nowhere in my post did suggest the Roman Catholic Church was not Christian. In fact it was the initial Roman aspect of Catholicism which caused the true Gospel to flourish in the first century ecclesia...you only need to read Pauls epistle to the Philippines to see how the Brothers and Sisters grew substantially amidst the Roman praetorian.

I have placed an exert dealing with this subject below for your reference.

Praetorians. From the time of Sejanus’s gathering of the praetorian guard in one area in a.d. 23, the praetorians became a political force in Roman life. In a.d. 41, after the murder of Gaius, it was the praetorians who saluted Claudius as emperor while the Senate was considering reinstatement of the republic. By this action they ensured that the Principate would continue and that Claudius would be the next emperor. Elite soldiers who were paid very well, the praetorians served for terms of sixteen years. The praetorians guarded the Emperor and his family members in Rome and abroad. Paul’s statement that the cause of his imprisonment was well known throughout the whole praetorian guard ( Phil 1:13) is strong but not by itself sufficient evidence for the Roman provenance of Philippines. The leader of the praetorian guard, the praetorian prefect, had a great deal of political power. Since Nero had announced at the beginning of his reign that he would not judge cases personally (Tacitus. Ann 13.4.2), it is thought that the praetorian prefect took this responsibility. If Paul appeared in Caesar’s court for trial soon after the time period covered in Acts, it is very likely that the praetorian prefect was his actual judge.

Now eventually Church and State come together and Pauls advice unheeded.

Pauls advice:

Phil 1:27; Eph 2:19

πολιτεύομαι politeuomai

Middle voice of a derivative of G4177; to behave as a citizen (figuratively): - let conversation be, live.

Its where we get the English word for Politics.

The Philippine ecclesia were under great pressure to conform to Roman rule and while the warnings were numerous Christianity eventfully conceded.

Rach, what you are suggesting within your warning is this rich history cannot be spoken in this forum? If I am correct it maybe the censorship here has stifled the truth and I must move on.

Thanks
Purity

Ok....firstly....if you have an issue with the warning you recieved, then you PM me or Hammerstone...as per the boards rules.

Do not circumvent forum policies or publicly discuss staff actions. This means that if you are disciplined for violating forum rules, do not circumvent bans or other limitations placed on your account. If you have an issue with action(s) taken by the staff here at Christianity Board, please use the appropriate private channels to conduct your appeal or dissatisfaction. And remember, simply because someone has “Account Disabled” as a tag does not mean that they were banned.

Secondly....."Rich history"? You called the entire Roman Catholic Church "apostate". You do know what that means, yes?

"Apostate".....a person who forsakes his religion, cause, party, etc.
"Apostacy"....a total desertion of or departure from one's religion, principles, party, cause, etc.

This means that the person, or persons, you are calling 'apostate', have willingly 'forsaken' or 'deserted' their faith or religion. You were not speaking of a 'rich history', you were accusing every person who consider themselves Catholic, to have turned their back on Christ and are in the process of living and teaching a lie. That, without doubt, constitutes as attacking the RCC....hence the warning...it is against this sites rules.

It's not my job here to get into the history or doctrine of the RCC...it's my job to uphold the sites rules, and to hold true to what the bible teaches. While I may personally disagree with some of the RCC's doctrines, I recognise that a lot of their doctrines actually harmonize with what Protestants believe also. Therefore I acknowledge that many RCC members are brothers and sisters in Christ. Saved, redeemed people. This site recognises this as well. Which brings me back to the rules. I'm sorry if you disagree with the rules, but you did agree to abide by them when you joined this site.

So once again I am forced to reiterate this site's rules....

Denominational Posts – Excessive posts either attempting to either push a single denomination (or group) or attacking another denomination are included in this rule.

Please heed the rules, or I will be forced to lock this thread.

 

[Purity]

Ok....firstly....if you have an issue with the warning you recieved, then you PM me or Hammerstone...as per the boards rules.


Secondly....."Rich history"? You called the entire Roman Catholic Church "apostate". You do know what that means, yes?

"Apostate".....a person who forsakes his religion, cause, party, etc.
"Apostacy"....a total desertion of or departure from one's religion, principles, party, cause, etc.

This means that the person, or persons, you are calling 'apostate', have willingly 'forsaken' or 'deserted' their faith or religion. You were not speaking of a 'rich history', you were accusing every person who consider themselves Catholic, to have turned their back on Christ and are in the process of living and teaching a lie. That, without doubt, constitutes as attacking the RCC....hence the warning...it is against this sites rules.

It's not my job here to get into the history or doctrine of the RCC...it's my job to uphold the sites rules, and to hold true to what the bible teaches. While I may personally disagree with some of the RCC's doctrines, I recognise that a lot of their doctrines actually harmonize with what Protestants believe also. Therefore I acknowledge that many RCC members are brothers and sisters in Christ. Saved, redeemed people. This site recognises this as well. Which brings me back to the rules. I'm sorry if you disagree with the rules, but you did agree to abide by them when you joined this site.

Thankyou Rach,

This is a passionate response from one you has admirably upheld the forums rules - well done! (said sincerely)

Certainly in your response you perceived a great deal into what is meant by apostasy. Israel has been plagued with apostasy from the very moment it ventured into the promised land (if not before!) when Achan took the forbidden things (Josh 7:1), the Babylonian garments. Now if I were to discuss God's treatment of that man and his family because he craved and coveted foreign things would we both agree His judgement was right ? Of course we would. However, under the OP title "The Great Apostasy" we cannot discuss those here today who also crave and covet the Babylonian garments? We cannot warn of their danger? Can we discuss openly and freely those things which you say..."I may personally disagree with some of the RCC's doctrines", well, why can we not hear them without being so easily offended?

Would it be beneficial to moderate the tone and behaviour, rather the censor the content?

The apostasy upon Jesus' first coming was Judaism gone mad; are we so naïve to think Christianity has not also suffered from an apostasy? And is God not able to redeem those of His out of such a state? I believe so.

I agree the language I used could sound harsh at times, but none so strong as Paul in Titus - I certainly haven't called any one an evil beast or lazy glutton, or have I said RCC's are all liars. My statement and belief under this OP is that RCC is the apostasy of Rev 17:5. If I am wrong those RCC members are free to show otherwise and I will respect their beliefs under the forum rules.

I was comfortable in discussing this publicly as I feel its important we can openly address aspects of our precious faith without need for constraint.

In the Masters service

Purity

 

[Dodo_David]

From this site's rules:

Denominational Posts – Excessive posts either attempting to either push a single denomination (or group) or attacking another denomination are included in this rule.

I am locking this thread because of the continued violation of the above-quoted rule.