aqwsed12345

Joined

• started 11 topics
• posted 723 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by aqwsed12345

• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  Is the Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon?

  The Babylon connection?
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  The claim that Peter was in Rome is not based solely on Acts 12:17, but rather on a combination of scriptural, historical, and archaeological evidence. The early Church Fathers, such as Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch, who were much closer to the time of the apostles, also attested to Peter’s presence and martyrdom in Rome. The Acts of the Apostles was written as a historical account, not fiction, and was written by Luke, a companion of Paul, not a proto-Orthodox church in the 2nd century.

  The innterpretation of Matthew 24:9-28 and related passages appears to be influenced by a modern eschatological perspective rather than a historical one. The "great tribulation" in 66-70 CE is not the definitive fulfillment of the eschatological prophecies; rather, these are understood by many Christians to have a dual fulfillment, addressing both the immediate context of the early Church and the ultimate end times. Jesus' "parousia" is not limited to that generation but refers to His final return, which Christians have awaited ever since.

  Catholic doctrine is indeed apostolic, as it traces its teachings back to the apostles through an unbroken line of succession. The concept of the Trinity, the veneration of Mary, and other doctrines are rooted in early Christian tradition, not in "paganism". The charge of "pagan worship" is a common, but unfounded, critique that has been refuted many times over by both Catholic and non-Catholic scholars. Read this:

  • Is Catholicism Pagan?
  • Is Catholicism Half-Pagan?

  It’s important to differentiate between the sins of individuals within the Church and the Church’s teachings. The Catholic Church does not condone the actions of those who have committed atrocities, and it has sought to address these issues. The Church is made up of human beings who, like everyone else, are capable of sin. However, this does not invalidate the truth of the Church’s teachings. The Church itself has acknowledged its failings and has taken steps to seek forgiveness and reconciliation.

  You bring up various historical incidents, some of which are distorted or taken out of context, to argue against the Catholic Church’s legitimacy. While the Church has certainly faced dark periods in its history, it has also been a force for immense good in the world, from establishing hospitals and schools to advocating for the poor and oppressed. To paint the entire history of the Church with a broad brush of negativity is to ignore the vast contributions it has made to global civilization and the spread of Christianity.

  In conclusion, your arguments seem to be based on a selective reading of history and scripture, as well as a misunderstanding of Catholic teaching. The Catholic Church, despite the failings of some of its members, continues to uphold the teachings of Christ and the apostles. The criticisms you’ve raised have been addressed by the Church over centuries, and they do not diminish its role as the Church founded by Christ.
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  Your critique seems driven by a deep misunderstanding of what the Catholic Church teaches and what the Bible actually says. It’s important to address both the misconceptions about the Church and the logic behind your reasoning.

  First, the idea that the Catholic Church somehow aligns with "ancient Babylon" (?) is a misinterpretation often based on a selective reading of scripture and a misunderstanding of history. The Church has always professed faith in Christ, the same Christ who established His Church on Peter (Matthew 16:18). The Catholic Church is not a man-made institution but a continuation of the Church Christ founded.

  Second, regarding the horrific sins committed by individuals within the Church, it’s essential to differentiate between the failings of individuals and the teachings of the Church itself. The Church is made up of human beings who, like all people, are susceptible to sin. However, the sins of individuals do not invalidate the truth of the Church’s teachings. The Bible is replete with examples of God using flawed people to accomplish His will—King David, who committed adultery and murder, yet was still called a man after God’s own heart (Acts 13:22), is a prime example.

  The Catholic Church does not "whitewash" the sins of its members. On the contrary, the Church teaches repentance, accountability, and justice, echoing the Bible’s call for the same (1 John 1:9). The Church’s doctrine remains unblemished by the personal sins of its members, just as God’s covenant with David wasn’t nullified by David’s sins. The Church’s teachings stand on the truth of Christ, not the personal holiness of its leaders.

  Finally, accountability is indeed a fundamental tenet of the Bible, but it applies to individuals rather than institutions. The Church holds its members to account, but it does not claim that its truth depends on the sinlessness of its leaders. The truth of the Gospel is independent of human weakness.

  To conclude, the Catholic Church upholds the Bible’s teachings, including the recognition of sin, the need for repentance, and the call for holiness. The sins of individuals do not erase the truth that the Church proclaims, just as the sins of David did not negate his anointing by God. The Church’s role is to lead people to Christ, not to be an idol in itself. Rejecting the Church because of the sins of some of its members is akin to rejecting Christ because Judas was one of the apostles.
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  @vienne

  The Church has continuously taught the Gospel of Christ for over two millennia, preserving and spreading the teachings of Jesus as handed down through the Apostles. The Catholic Church, through its teachings, sacraments, and tradition, has always centered its mission on Christ. The Church proclaims His truth in every Mass, in its doctrines, and through the lives of countless saints who have lived according to His teachings. The Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Church's doctrinal teachings are rooted in Scripture and Apostolic Tradition, both of which convey Christ's truth to the faithful.

  Matthew 7 does indeed emphasize that Christian identity is demonstrated through one’s actions, urging individuals to live in accordance with Christ’s commands. However, this passage speaks to personal accountability and does not invalidate the Church as an institution. It is crucial to understand that the Church's truth is not contingent on the moral failings of its members or leaders. Instead, it is founded on Christ Himself, who is the cornerstone of the Church (Ephesians 2:19-20). While individuals within the Church may fall into sin, this does not negate the Church's role as the bearer of Christ’s teachings.
  

  The term "workers of lawlessness" applies to individuals who reject God's commandments and live contrary to His will. While some members of the Church have indeed acted sinfully, the Church as a whole is not defined by these failures. The Church is founded on Christ, who is the source of all holiness. Throughout history, the Church has also been a source of immense good, promoting justice, mercy, and the Gospel across the world.
  

  Acknowledging the sins of individuals within the Church is not escapism, but facing the reality that the Church, made up of humans, is imperfect. However, this does not negate the truth that the Church teaches or its mission to bring Christ's salvation to the world. The Church openly recognizes and addresses the sins of its members, and it continually strives for reform and holiness. It is crucial to distinguish between the actions of individuals and the Church’s divine mission.

  If the Pope falls into heresy, then he ceases to be Catholic and thus loses his papacy, but that does not mean that the Church loses its legitimacy—only that a particular Pope loses his papacy. However, if the Pope merely commits a mortal sin, it is his individual fault, and that's it. The faithful do not need to concern themselves with that; God will hold him accountable. This is the same situation that Jesus outlined in Matthew 23:1-3:

  "Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 'The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.'"

  What was "Moses’ seat" in the Old Testament is now "Peter’s seat," and the same logic applies.

  The quote "You will know them by their fruits" could be a classic example of how a statement from the Bible can be taken out of context and falsely applied to a completely different situation. This is what the Watchtower Society does with the statement "God is not a God of confusion" (1 Corinthians 14:33) when they use it against the Trinity, interpreting it roughly as "a doctrine that is difficult to understand cannot possibly be true." However, this verse— as has already been pointed out—does not speak about the nature of God, but about the need for order in the congregation (i.e., He is the God of peace). The phrase "You will know them by their fruits" also falls into this category: it is not about identifying which denomination will have secularized Christians in the 21st century, especially since the Bible gives other criteria for recognizing the true Church, and this is not one of them. One only needs to read the full context:

  "Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit, you will recognize them."

  From here, it is entirely clear; there is no need for any magisterium—just read it with understanding: this statement is simply about recognizing false prophets (and false messiahs), not about some foolish denominational validation based on prison statistics, as you have presented here. Jesus teaches here that false prophets can be recognized by their fruits, and the fruit of a person who calls themselves a prophet is whether their prophecy comes true or not. In plain terms, Jesus was teaching that false prophets can be recognized when their predictions do not come true—so this statement does not validate the JWs; it even refutes it!

  Even if you wanted to use this—by twisting the context of Jesus' words—to evaluate denominations, you still could not gain complete certainty. No human can fully understand another person's situation to know why they are the way they are. God examines hearts and minds; you have no right to pry into the hearts of others. God is our judge!

  The analogy that applies much more to denominations: Even the most valuable soil can produce weeds and thorns. It would still be foolish not to appreciate good soil and blame it for the problems. Distorted and perverted growths can emerge from the soil of religion, but no wise person judges the value of things based on occasional distortions; rather, they judge based on what is the natural and normal development of those things. And that is not hypocrisy but a pure heart, honest character, and elevated spirit.

  You could not gather a representative sample that thoroughly considers all circumstances. For example, you could probably show that there are more people baptized as Catholics in prison than Jehovah’s Witnesses—but this would be as meaningless as saying that there are more incarcerated people in China than in Luxembourg, ignoring the fact that China's population is "a bit" higher than ours: likewise, there are barely more than twenty thousand Jehovah's Witnesses in the country, whereas there are millions baptized as Catholics. Then there’s the matter of defining who belongs to a given denomination, so if you wanted a fair comparison, you would have to consider that different denominations define who they count among their members differently. On paper, formally, a person baptized as a Catholic is still considered Catholic even if they were baptized only out of tradition and have never set foot in a church; practically, they should not be considered in a study of "the state of Catholics" but only the practicing faithful. In that case, we would certainly find that a practicing believer here is no worse than one there.

  And there are many other factors we haven't considered. By the way, we should also address this "sectarians are better people than members of established churches" "argument". Not to mention that among Jehovah’s Witnesses, there aren't "better people," since according to them, it's merely about human effort, "educated conscience," and obedience to the organization, whereas only God can make or change a person for the better through a transformation of grace, which, by their own admission, does not exist among Jehovah’s Witnesses. It's simply a matter of authority and church discipline restraining them, but that always leads to hypocrisy, as it will always result in escape into substitute actions. That's why it often happens that when someone leaves the Jehovah’s Witnesses, they start living an immoral life, because they weren't transformed by grace but just had a band around them. It's like when someone uses tight clothing to compress a big belly—it doesn’t make them any less fat, and as soon as they take it off, their belly pops out :-) Of course, they deceitfully and demagogically communicate this internally as proof that this is what happens to everyone who leaves, claiming that God abandoned them, etc.

  But you can compare it, specifically with any denomination where justification is emphasized and where the Holy Spirit is believed to transform us. There is indeed experience with ex-Catholics: it is not common for someone who leaves the Catholic Church to immediately fall apart, as if church discipline was the only thing holding them together, whereas in the case of Jehovah's Witnesses, that is the only motivating force, since there the "holy spirit" is primarily reserved for the inner party, and at most, it helps the rest with "preaching."

  Oh, and one more thing: living a Christian life is not the same as being "good" in a civil sense, especially since "no one is good except God alone" (Luke 18:19) in a Christian sense. You cannot equate justification/righteousness with what is considered "honest living" in human terms.

  The JW attitude towards this reveals two things: JWs love to boast about this, as it has been mentioned here on the forum more than once, and they often quote in their publications that "even X.Y. said what good people they are." This kind of self-congratulation is what the Pharisees did, and it shows that it is not the love of God that motivates this, but rather a desire to impress people, so they can say, "Oh, how good these JWs are." This conceited attitude loves to hear how special they are.

  However, pride is one of the greatest sins: in God's eyes, the sin of a thief who feels shame and stirs up sincere repentance in their heart is lesser than that of someone who has never stolen a penny in their life but whose heart is ruled by pride and self-satisfaction.

  True Christian spirit, however, is characterized by humility (a word that the Watchtower also misinterprets), which does not mean some false modesty or feminine nonsense, but rather treating oneself appropriately. If we keep God's commandments, we do so out of love for God, not to earn the praise of pagans. If we are praised, we should accept it modestly within ourselves, not boast about it to others, saying, "Look, even this person praised me, see how good I am?"—and certainly not create self-praising, triumphalist collections of quotes like the Watchtower does.

  JWs are not primarily "good people" because they love God and therefore keep His commandments (especially not in the true New Testament sense of justification!), but rather because their church discipline forces them to be (leaving out the mind control aspect for now), and because they seek to earn the approval of the outside world, so that others will say, "What good people these JWs are, unlike those filthy Sunday Christians!"—which they then note with great satisfaction and reference. This is not about God, but about showing how much better and different they are than others.

  Hate, when it takes root, gives birth to the feeling that the group member is inherently moral and good, because if the enemy is as disgusting as they daily tell themselves, then obviously they are on the good side, and anyone who has any objection to them as a monolithic block can't be right about anything. The members of cults are made to feel that they belong to the elite of humanity. There is a very strong sense that we are special and that we are carrying out the most important actions in human history as part of a committed vanguard of believers, and as a result, we are capable of working hard for a long time and making great sacrifices.

  We do not teach that just because someone is Catholic, they are automatically better than everyone else and can then look down on others.

  Unfortunately, there are people who live in a religious community without having a living friendship with God. They see God only as the inventor of rules to be obeyed. Some can continue to 'serve God' under these circumstances, hoping to earn salvation.

  The fact that you keep God's commandments is not something you can boast about in front of others. This is not a virtue; it is a duty. It's like boasting to your employer that you are doing your job properly. This is not a virtue of yours but a basic obligation, and it cannot be a matter of boasting, even if all your colleagues are slacking off. Renouncing evil is a duty, not a virtue! And we cannot boast about fulfilling our duties, as that is the minimum required.

  Especially since, according to the Bible, "no one may boast before God" (1 Corinthians 1:29), and "Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord." The Apostle Paul also said, "If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness," and "I will not boast about myself, except about my weaknesses." How far removed is this from the Watchtower mentality, which sees itself as a "triumphant organization" and, with the fervor of Stalinist propaganda, triumphantly lists its achievements: operating in so many hundred countries, distributing so many million copies, achieving so many billion hours of work, meeting such-and-such a percentage in the Stakhanovite work competition. Or like some global capitalist corporation, listing its achievements in its reports.

  The sectarians' main sin is pride, the first of the cardinal sins, the root of all sin. From this stems their stubbornness, arrogance, which convinces them that they know better than the priest appointed by God to teach them. They alone understand and keep the Bible. The priest, and even the Church, do not understand it, but the priest is much worse than that, even if he did understand it, he would not respect the Bible. This self-confidence makes sectarians fanatical. They are by no means humble or obedient. They are capable of anything but that. They cannot, for example, exist without eccentricity, a craving for attention, and drawing public attention to themselves. They could have served God as Catholics and could have reformed themselves this way as well, and of course, they could have stopped swearing, lying, and smoking in this way. But if they had done this as simple Catholics, only their family members would have noticed their conversion, maybe the neighbors. But as sectarians, their cessation of smoking and swearing draws the attention of his entire community. This is how they satisfy their ambition.

  It is certain that, even unconsciously, they are satisfying their pride, desire to stand out, and craving for attention when they do not want to serve God under the Church's wings, not as the majority and average do, not in the community, not under the guidance of their pastor, not obeying him like other ordinary church members, not quietly, modestly, and in anonymity, but in an extraordinary way, drawing everyone's attention to themselves, in an exceptional manner. They cannot and do not want to serve God like other people. They need to stand out from the rest so that they are noticed and admired as the model followers of Christ. With their limited intellectual capacity, they do not realize that they are not good people, but Pharisees, making an elephant out of a gnat, clinging to the letter rather than the essence. In sects and among their followers, despite all their piety, and often even praiseworthy zeal, the traces of satanism are clearly noticeable.

  "The knowledgeable can immediately detect the false piety even in the better sectarians, or at least the lack of that true humility that makes virtue a virtue and which is such an attractive quality of Christ's true followers. Defiance, eccentricity, self-congratulation, and satisfaction with oneself, the weakness of thinking oneself better than others, and the fact that their actions are guided more by hatred than love, are all found in every sectarian. Even the most pious sectarian has the flaw of not being sufficiently intelligent or humble. They strive for good, their intentions are generally noble at their core, but they cannot rise to the heights of true Christian perfection. We do not find in them the pure love of neighbor, free from all base undertones, which is so characteristic of the saints, and especially not the attractive humility. They cannot exist without self-congratulation, and they cannot do good in quiet, modest obscurity, expecting a reward only from God. It is peculiar that although they constantly study the Bible, they do not notice the important advice in it: 'Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing' (Matthew 6:3).

  Indeed, Jesus taught this:

  "Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others." (Matthew 6:1-2)

  So the fact that there have been scandals within the Church, and your generalization based on that, is rather crude and unfounded, as if there have been no scandals in every human community. The Donatist argument is heresy, and in a debate, it is a sign of unethical behavior and an inability to argue properly. Moreover:

  "It is impossible that no offenses should come, but woe to him through whom they do come." (Luke 17:1)

  You see, woe only "to him", so that specific individual, not to the whole Church!
  

  'What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means!" (Romans 3:3-4)

  "If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself." (2 Timothy 2:13 )

  So, even the legitimate Church could not lose its legitimacy if all its superiors bathed in the blood of babies, at most that would follow would be that those individuals would go to hell. It doesn't matter at all whether a member of the clergy, or even the Pope himself, is a good person, an intelligent person, whether they have done something good or bad at the moment. There’s no need to tear your clothes over what some clergyman has done or said again, and how outrageous it is, blah blah blah. So what?
  

  Recognizing this truth is what it means not to be a Donatist. In fact, this is the ultimate guarantee that Catholics see God, not the clergy, in the clergy. Because let’s assume that a priest, or even the Pope, is a terrible theologian, or even let’s say a murderer or a pimp—how does that matter in terms of the Church's legitimacy and the validity of the sacraments? It doesn’t matter at all.

  Now, one might be shocked and say, ‘What kind of people are these, for heaven's sake?’, but for a Catholic, it’s completely clear that when you look at the institutional structure of the Church, you shouldn't focus on the individual. Don’t even concern yourself with who they are, whether they are good people or hypocrites—it’s irrelevant to your faith. God can use even sinners to achieve His purposes and communicate His grace.

  Therefore, in this media-driven world, when the press asks about the scandals of 'pedophile priests,' the answer (with a bit of a provocative tone) should be that 'pedophile priests belong in prison, and Donatists belong in hell.' (The 'pedophile priests' is a sensationalized meme created to attack conservative values, and it has been quite successful in Ireland, turning one of the most conservative societies into one of the most liberal within a few decades.) See:

  • Atrocity propaganda
  • Poisoning the well

  The same thing applies to the BLM and George Floyd case. There is an event that needs to be slightly embellished and magnified, and then framed in the media to fit a politically convenient narrative.
  

  What actually happened there? A repeatedly convicted violent criminal, under the influence of drugs, resisted arrest, leading to his death due to a chokehold performed incorrectly by the officer (applying pressure to the carotid artery instead of the trapezius muscle). That's the reality.

  How did the media portray it? That an evil cop deliberately killed him just because he was Black, even though the indictment didn’t claim this.

  How was it communicated? That the entire police force is collectively racist and that officers are deliberately killing people of color solely because of their skin color.

  What was the goal? To stir up ethnic hostility, violently overthrow the establishment, and push and spread the extreme woke ideology.

  The same goes for the "pedophile priests" as a trope. There’s a situation: pedophile sexual predators—unsurprisingly—seek positions where they have access to children. Statistically, the highest rate of sexual offenders is among gym teachers who coach children, yet no one says ‘the pedophile gym teachers, this and that.’ So these incidents happen in church-run boarding schools (and surprise, not in nursing homes or factory warehouses). How was this communicated? That practically every priest is a pedophile (‘this is just how they are’). What is the story about? It’s not about the victims or justice (that’s what the police, prosecutors, and criminal courts are for), but about a well-organized media smear campaign designed to hammer into the heads of even the to the most average and least experienced people that priests are collectively pedophiles. This required a few lies, like saying ‘in the Catholic Church, everything is resolved with a confession,’ when in fact, Catholic teaching states that confession is about reconciliation with God, not an exemption from earthly legal consequences, and the idea that the confessor would have a duty to report is absurd.

  Why was this necessary? Because the Catholic Church is the largest Christian denomination, and as such, it has enough influence and authority to resist the woke transformation of society. Therefore, it had to be discredited in such a vile manner so that from now on, any Church statement would be met with inarticulate and childish mockery, like 'oh, and these people preach about morals.'

  Pope Benedict XVI also noted, ‘it was impossible not to notice that the media was not just driven by a desire for truth in their coverage, but also took pleasure in stripping the Church bare and discrediting it as much as possible.’

  The goal wasn't to give anti-Catholic sects like the Adventists or Jehovah's Witnesses such a cheap, Donatist trump card—that was just a collateral benefit—but to deliver a low blow in the political arena. The subsequent ripple effect of this story is that anti-Catholic shallow debaters can avoid substantive theological argumentation by merely blurting out that priests are all debauched.

  Let me paint the archetype of a typical anti-Catholic church opponent. The church opponent is the rationalist rebel who shakes off "millennia-old shackles" and makes eternal dogmas the subject of ridicule. Naturally, by "Church," we mean only the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican—his atheism and rejection of religion might extend somewhat (though to a lesser extent) to some other Christian denominations, mostly historical ones, but he is less bothered by other faiths. After all, we should still show some respect for our fellow humans!

  No one cheers more for the scandals involving pedophile priests than he does. If only he had been a victim of such vile abuses in his childhood, or at least knew someone who was... but no. Even so, it’s disgusting what could have happened... and the Crusades, when they killed in the name of Christ, blessing the murderous swords and armies?! Conquests, the Inquisition? Should he follow these?

  One group of church opponents is the universal liberal. He is a believer—mostly superstitious—who naturally prays regularly, believes in God—but looks down on other believers. He looks down on those who regularly attend church (those "bigoted" Catholics) and also on those who only occasionally attend mass (sunday Christians, fashionable believers... just midnight mass, baptism, wedding, and funeral...).

  He has moved beyond all that: he doesn’t need a mediator, a church, ridiculous rules, or restrictions. He has built a personal, direct relationship with God, communicates with Him, and is in harmony. He doesn’t consider any religion as a standard: beyond the Holy Trinity, his faith can incorporate elements of Kabbalah, Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism—whatever he finds appealing. He is superstitious, believes in the supernatural, spirits, reincarnation, dream interpretation, extraterrestrials, numerology, tantra, conspiracies, and destiny. Just not in the Vatican and the "hypocritical false" priests.

  Then there is the die-hard materialist, the learned person: the atheist—since everything in the world is matter and interaction. Physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics—these are the explanations for everything; everything can and must be mapped out. You just have to understand it. But our education system is terrible—it’s no wonder that after this, charlatans and false prophets can even exist and have a platform. In any case, he consistently writes "god" with a lowercase "g" (since there isn’t just one—there would be more, but in reality, there is none), even in occasional biblical quotes or references.

  His main enemy is, of course, Christianity, specifically the plague of Roman Catholicism, the cause of all evil. He rebels against it, because the world and society are still solely "controlled, deceived, blinded, and exploited" by the Vatican. They are responsible for famines, wars, and they still maintain feudal society and its "outdated" conventions. They collect tithes, lord over the nobles and rulers—and of course, they are pedophiles and hypocrites. They drink wine and preach water.

  Fortunately, there are still enlightened, progressive artists and public figures who have realized all this—and they are not afraid to share their revelations with us! They expose the truth, but ruthlessly: The Da Vinci Code, Stigmata. See, see? They fear for their power, their money, their influence... that's why they kept everything hidden from us for 1000 years! Because they knew that it would destroy their earthly kingdom. Though, of course, they themselves wouldn’t follow a faith without externalities and "material," but still.
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  Yes, yes, there are a bunch of anti-Catholic legends, and somehow, interestingly, the anti-Catholic debaters can NEVER stick to the specific theological issues at hand; they always have to throw in the following red herrings: Unpleasant Catholics, the Inquisition, the death of John Paul I, Pius XII and the Holocaust, witch burnings, and don't forget the most cited BS: the blood libel of the PEDOPHILE PRIESTS.

  It's so annoying that you can't have a meaningful discourse, because within minutes one of the stupid trump cards comes up: "BUT THE INQUISITION AND THE PEDOPHILIC PRIESTS!!"

  Let me teach you some keywords, which you should google up:

  • leyenda negra
  • corpus permixtum
  • donatism
  • catharism
  • red herring

  Against the Donatist View of the Church

  Donatism was a heretical movement in the 4th and 5th centuries that spread across North Africa. The Donatists claimed that the validity and sanctity of the Church depended on the sinlessness of its members and leaders. According to them, if a bishop or priest committed a sin, especially if they became an apostate, then the sacraments they administered (such as baptism) were invalid. However, this position contradicts the teachings of the Catholic Church, which holds that the sanctity of the Church does not depend on the moral state of its members.

  According to Catholic teaching, the sanctity of the Church derives from Christ’s holiness, not from the moral purity of its members. St. Augustine, one of the primary opponents of the Donatists, emphasized that the Church is the Body of Christ, and as such, even sinners are part of this body. Therefore, the sanctity of the Church does not depend on whether some of its members are sinful or not, but rather on the presence of Christ within it and His leadership.

  One fundamental error in the Donatist view of the Church is that it conflates the sanctity of the Church with the moral state of its members. If the Church’s sanctity depended on the sinlessness of its members, the Church would constantly be in jeopardy, as every sinful member could undermine its sanctity. This logic, however, is contrary to the teachings of the Bible, which asserts that the Church is holy by God’s grace, regardless of the sins committed by its members.

  The Donatist approach ultimately fosters division and discord within the Church. If the Church’s sanctity truly depended on the sinlessness of its members, then every sinful or weak believer would need to be excluded from the Church. However, this contradicts the teachings of Christ, who said that He came not for the righteous, but for sinners (Luke 5:32). The Church provides refuge precisely for sinners, so that through repentance they might find grace.

  Arguments Against the Use of Red Herring Fallacies

  The essence of the red herring fallacy is that one party introduces an irrelevant topic to distract from the real subject of the debate. This is a logical error that often confuses the interlocutor and leads the discussion away from the original issue.

  The red herring argument is unethical because it undermines the clarity and purpose of the debate. In a theological debate, the goal is to seek the truth and discuss different viewpoints. When someone introduces an irrelevant topic, it prevents substantive dialogue and diverts the debate toward personal attacks or secondary issues.

  In theological debates, it is especially important to stay focused on the subject at hand and not to deviate toward questions that are not directly related to the topic. For example, in a debate about the teachings of the Catholic Church, it would be irrelevant and unfair to bring up the personal sins of any of its members. Such an argument does not address the disputed issue but rather distracts from it and prevents meaningful discourse.

  When the red herring fallacy is employed, it often creates confusion in the debate and hinders a constructive outcome. The participants may become frustrated and lose sight of the debate’s purpose. Additionally, this type of argument diminishes the credibility of those involved, as it shows that they are either unable or unwilling to address the substantive issues.

  Both the Donatist view of the Church and the red herring fallacy contain serious flaws that obstruct the search for truth and constructive debate. The Donatist misinterpretation of the Church’s nature ties its sanctity to the sinlessness of its members, which contradicts Christian teaching. The red herring fallacy, on the other hand, diverts the debate from the core issues in an unethical manner, preventing meaningful discourse. In theological debates, it is crucial to avoid both errors and focus on the Bible and the fundamental teachings of the Christian faith.

  Analyzing your argument and approach, it seems that you often return to mentioning the sins of the Catholic Church to discredit the entire Church and its teachings. However, it’s worth considering how thorough and logically sound this approach is.

  When discussing the sins of a community or institution, we must remember that no church is free from the sins committed by its members, regardless of denomination. The quote "by their fruits you will recognize them" is often used to condemn a community or leader, but in Jesus’ context, this quote refers to recognizing false prophets, not to criticizing a denomination or its members.

  The sanctity of the Church is not based on the flawlessness of its members but on the fact that it was founded by Jesus Christ and is led by the Holy Spirit. Even if there are members of the Church who commit serious sins, this does not mean that the Church’s teachings or the Church itself are flawed. The sanctity of the Church lies in Christ giving Himself for it and in the Holy Spirit’s work within it, not in the sinlessness of its members.

  Furthermore, rejecting Donatism is not merely about respecting leadership, but also about understanding that the Church’s legitimacy does not depend on the moral purity of its leaders but on whether it proclaims Christ’s true teachings. St. Augustine also pointed out that the sanctity of the Church is not affected by the sins of its members but by the fact that the Church itself is part of the Body of Christ, which He leads and sustains.

  In theological argumentation, it is important to examine claims and arguments based on the Bible and theological traditions, rather than through personal attacks and generalizations. If you genuinely wish to debate based on the Bible and Christian faith, it is better to focus on the actual theological issues rather than on personal sins or the faults of specific Church members.

  In conclusion, your argument, which cites the sins of Church members, is not a valid basis for discrediting the entire Church. The sanctity and teachings of the Church do not depend on the sins of individual members but on whether they proclaim and follow Christ’s truth. Therefore, in theological debates, it is more fruitful to focus on the Bible and the core teachings of the faith rather than on personal attacks and generalizations.

  Your argument, which seeks to discredit the entire Catholic Church and its teachings by pointing to the sins committed within the Church, is flawed for several reasons.

  Firstly, you are using the biblical quote "by their fruits you will recognize them" out of context. Jesus made this statement in reference to recognizing false prophets, not to judging an entire denomination or its membership based on the actions of individuals. Therefore, this statement cannot be applied to collectively condemn the Catholic Church or any other denomination based on the sins of its members. The essence of the Christian Church does not lie in the perfection of its members but in the fact that it proclaims and follows the truth of Christ.

  Similar questions were raised in the context of the Donatist debates regarding the legitimacy of the Church. Donatism claimed that the legitimacy of the Church depended on the moral purity of its leaders, but St. Augustine and other Church leaders refuted this argument. The legitimacy of the Church does not depend on the moral failings of individual members or leaders but on whether it can be considered the Church of Christ and whether it proclaims the true faith. If the legitimacy of the Church were based on the sins of its members, any Church could easily lose its legitimacy, as there are sinners in every community. The foundation of the Christian faith is that the Church is God’s instrument for proclaiming Christ’s truth, regardless of the sins of its members.

  The sins committed within the Church, including cases of pedophilia, are indeed serious issues that the Catholic Church acknowledges and seeks to address. However, these sins do not justify the broad generalization that every priest or the entire Church is guilty. The media often exaggerates these cases to demonize the Church in the eyes of the public, whereas in reality, the vast majority of the Church's members are honest, faithful Christians who serve God. Church leaders and members are not immune to human sin, but this does not invalidate the Church's faith and teachings.

  A fundamental teaching of the Christian faith is humility, which means that one should not place oneself above others or highlight the sins of others above one’s own. In Christianity, no one can boast of their goodness or morality, as all humans are sinful and in need of God’s grace. Therefore, your argument that the Church should be judged based on the sins of its members does not align with Christian teaching.

  Jesus Himself taught that there would always be sinners in the Church, and that God would judge them in the end. Therefore, the Church cannot be held accountable for the sins of individual members, and it is not appropriate to condemn the Church based on these sins. The Christian faith is not based on human perfection but on God’s grace and mercy.

  Your argument, which seeks to discredit the teachings of the Catholic Church by pointing to its sins, is misguided and misleading. The legitimacy of the Church does not depend on the moral purity of individual members or leaders but on whether it proclaims Christ’s truth. The sins committed within the Church do not justify rejecting the Church as a whole or its teachings. The Church's mission is to proclaim God’s truth and call sinners to repentance, regardless of the sins of its members.

  Thus, your argument is based on fundamentally flawed logic that relies on personal attacks and historical grievances rather than addressing the substance of the debate. I do not deny that there have been abuses and serious sins in the history of the Church, but these cannot serve as arguments in the current theological debate. As I have pointed out before, it is important to remain true to the subject of the debate and not to diverge into personal attacks or the recollection of historical grievances, which only distracts from the real issues.

  The fact that sins have occurred within the Church does not change the truth that the Church represents. Jesus Himself said that there would be scandals and sins within the Church, but these reflect human weakness, not the sanctity of the Church. The sanctity of the Church is not based on the sinlessness of its members but on the presence of Christ within it.

  The quote "by their fruits you will recognize them" (Matthew 7:16) is often misunderstood and misapplied. In this passage, Jesus was speaking about false prophets and how their falsity can be recognized by their deeds. However, this does not mean that an entire denomination or community should be condemned because of the sins of some of its members. Such reasoning is based on Donatist logic, which the Church has long rejected.

  Finally, by engaging in personal attacks and bringing up past sins as an argument, you avoid discussing the real theological issues. This tactic is an example of the red herring fallacy, which distracts from the real problem and hinders constructive dialogue.

  Therefore, I ask that we return to the subject of the debate and argue about theological issues based on the Bible and Christian tradition, without resorting to personal attacks to support our positions.
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  @Anony Mous

  The assertion that papal succession can't be historically proven beyond the 9th or 10th century isn't entirely accurate. While it is true that the records from the early church are not as comprehensive as modern documentation, significant historical evidence supports the continuity of papal succession from the early church. The writings of the early Church Fathers, councils, and even non-Christian sources provide a substantial record of the papacy's existence and succession.

  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_popes
    

  While the exact early chronology is debated by some, the tradition of an unbroken line of succession from St. Peter is a core belief of the Catholic Church, supported by early Christian writings and the consistent teaching of the Church Fathers. The recognition of early popes as saints and martyrs, despite uncertainties about precise dates, underscores the early Church’s acknowledgment of their spiritual authority and leadership. Although some earlier sources might have legendary elements as well, much of it is based on historical data. Additionally, letters, decrees, and church synods from various periods corroborate the continuous leadership of the bishops of Rome. Even if the records from the earliest centuries are fragmentary, the church's self-understanding and external recognition as a hierarchical institution centered on the papacy is well-documented and traceable much beyond the 9th or 10th century.

  The Scriptures and early Church writings clearly indicate that St. Peter spent his final years in Rome, where he carried out his apostolic mission. This claim is supported by passages in the New Testament, such as in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 12:17), which attest to Peter’s presence in Rome. The writings of the early Church Fathers also support the apostolic succession of the bishops of Rome. St. Ignatius and St. Irenaeus, among others, highlight the authority and primacy of the Roman Church over other Christian communities, which is seen as strong evidence of apostolic succession. From the earliest times, the Bishops of Rome exercised primacy within the Church as the vicars of Christ. For instance, Pope Clement’s intervention in the disputes of the Corinthian Church and Pope Victor’s role in the debate over the date of Easter show that the Bishop of Rome was regarded as the final arbiter. The apostolic succession and papal authority developed over time as the Church faced new challenges. This development, however, does not undermine the essence of papal primacy; rather, it shows the unfolding of what Christ instituted in Peter.

  It's true that Russell's early teachings diverged significantly from what later became orthodox JW doctrine, particularly after Rutherford's leadership. However, some core elements that have persisted include:

  • Rejection of Traditional Christian Doctrines: Even though Russell initially accepted the Trinity and the cross, he and his followers soon began to reject traditional Christian doctrines, a trend that continued and solidified under Rutherford.
    
  • Expectation of an Imminent End Times: Russell's teachings were heavily focused on eschatology and the belief that Christ's invisible presence began in 1874 and that the end of the world was imminent. This focus on the end times, while the dates and interpretations have shifted, remains a key feature of JW theology.

  That said, it's important to recognize that while certain doctrinal shifts occurred, especially under Rutherford, the movement's identity and direction were very much shaped by Russell's initial ideas and teachings. The process of doctrinal evolution does not negate the continuity of certain core themes, even if specifics have changed.

  Russell initially did believe in honoring Jesus, which was consistent with some mainstream Protestant views of the time. However, over time, Russell and his followers moved away from orthodox Trinitarianism, eventually leading to a complete rejection of the worship of Jesus as God under Rutherford.
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  @TTWSYF

  I do, but the issue is simply a question of historical continuity.
• 
  6

  Mormon's go door to door

  by truthseeker in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2006/12/20/news/features/908features.txtmormon missionaries proselytize despite hurdlesby mary garrigan, journal staff writerat 5 p.m., the thermometer reads 103 degrees in the shade, and elder jeff pyper, a burly young mormon missionary with the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints, has been knocking on doors in a rapid city neighborhood all afternoon.. .

  angie friedt and her daughter, landry, 6, answer a knock at the door of their rapid valley home from three missionaries of the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints.

  (steve mcenroe/journal staff).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints emerged in early 19th-century America. It fulfilled a dual need. On the one hand, it catered to the need for an "American myth," as this was the era of nation-building and the search for national roots. On the other hand, it addressed the desire for the "restoration" of the primitive church, in contrast to denominationalism, as this was also the period of the so-called Restoration Movement. Today’s Mormon religion is thus a combination of biblical elements, alleged ancient and modern American revelations, a rationalist theology, a new priestly hierarchy, Masonic rites, and Puritan morality.

  The church was founded in 1830 by Joseph Smith Jr. (1805-1844). As a teenager, he was searching for the true church when the Father and the Son appeared to him, declaring that the churches "were all wrong and abominable in His sight" (1820). Later, an angel named Moroni also appeared to him, through whom he obtained the records of a once-flourishing Christian culture in America (1823). Smith dug up the gold plates, translated them, published them under the title The Book of Mormon, and founded his church (1830). Although he showed the plates to 11 witnesses, the angel took them to the afterlife. Smith and his followers were initially persecuted, and he himself was eventually lynched in a prison. Under the leadership of the second church president, Brigham Young, they succeeded in establishing a state in what is now Utah. Their center has since been Salt Lake City, with a global spread of 13 million members. Several similar churches have split from the Utah church, the largest of which (about 250,000 members) is the Reorganized Church (Missouri), which also conducts missionary work and considers itself Smith's true heir.

  Distinctive Doctrines and Their Criticism

  a) The American Prophet

  LDS Claim: Joseph Smith Jr. was the first President, Seer, and Revelator of the restored Church of the Last Days, without whom there would be no (complete) salvation. Despite his church-founding and city-organizing talents, he was poorly educated. This also proves that the great works he produced could not be his own writings but were inspired by God. According to Smith, Acts 3:21 speaks of him and the restoration of the church. He claimed about himself that "I am prouder of this than any other man. Since the days of Adam, I am the only man who has been able to keep a whole church together. The majority of the entire thing is on my side. Neither Paul, nor John, nor Peter, nor Jesus did this. I boast that no man ever did a greater work than I. The followers of Jesus ran away from him, but the Latter-day Saints never have run away from me." As a prophet, he predicted his persecution and died as a martyr.

  Criticism: Smith was undoubtedly one of the most charismatic figures of his time, but contemporary sources do not confirm the later idealized image. He grew up as a farm boy involved in treasure hunting and occultism. He was subject to civil proceedings for fraud, and the Methodist church – which he joined after God explicitly forbade him in the First Vision – expelled him. His works faithfully reflect his historical and biblical ignorance. After founding the church, at the height of his career, he was mayor of Nauvoo, a bank director, militia commander, and a candidate for U.S. president. He had the printing press of an opposition newspaper destroyed. When his bank went bankrupt, he fled without compensating his creditors. He falsely prophesied multiple times. He was not a martyr; he killed two of his attackers with a smuggled pistol before he was shot. Smith introduced polygamy, citing divine revelation. In addition to his legal wife, he had 47 other living wives, married only in church ceremonies, including teenagers and already married women, and 149 deceased women were also sealed to him in temple ceremonies.

  b) Continuous Revelation

  LDS Claim: The Bible is considered scripture "as far as it is translated correctly," but according to Smith, the text of the Bible is corrupted. The Inspired Version revealed to Smith corrects the errors and restores the removed parts (its full text is only published by the Missouri church). Jesus also gave revelations in America: the ancient-origin Book of Mormon, and the modern-day Doctrine and Covenants, as well as the Pearl of Great Price. In addition, the teachings of the current Prophet and the 12 apostles are also considered revelations. God's judgment is upon those who reject continuous revelation and the Mormon scriptures. God would not allow the leaders of His church to teach false doctrine.

  Criticism: The Book of Mormon contains many biblical passages, which is why it has a "biblical" text and exerts a positive influence on its readers. However, Mormons interpret almost every biblical term differently from Christians. The teachings in the Book of Mormon contradict the Bible on important issues and even later Mormon revelations. The Inspired Version is completely arbitrary, a true Bible falsification; for example, Smith added a long prophecy about Joseph (that is, himself) to the end of Genesis 50, supposedly spoken by the ancient Joseph. The text of the Bible has indeed been preserved and is sufficient for salvation and holy living (Acts 11:14, Rom 1:16, 15:4, 1 Cor 1:18, 21, 2:2-5, 2 Cor 4:3, 2 Tim 3:14-17, Heb 1:1-2, etc.).

  c) The Book of Mormon

  LDS Claim: The Book of Mormon is an ancient American revelation from God, equivalent to the Bible (Palestinian scriptures). It was written on gold plates in "reformed Egyptian" script. Its content centers on the history of Jews (Nephites, Lamanites) who sailed across the Indian and Pacific Oceans to the American continent, the promised land, from 621 BC to 421 AD. The descendants of a portion of these American Jewish tribes (the Lamanites, who were cursed and had dark skin due to their sins) are the Native Americans and the peoples of Oceania. The Book of Mormon was translated from the gold plates by Smith "by the gift and power of God." Its authenticity is confirmed by the fact that those who sincerely ask God whether the Book of Mormon is true will receive a revelation from God (e.g., a warm feeling in their hearts). The Book of Mormon is "the most perfect book in the world, the cornerstone of our religion, and whoever lives by its teachings will come closer to God than by any other book" (JS). The stories described in the Book of Mormon can be placed in the regions of ancient Aztec, Inca, and Mayan cultures. The Bible also prophesied the appearance of the Book of Mormon (Ezekiel 37:16-20). The Book of Mormon contains so many biblical passages because the Jews who sailed to America brought with them the Old Testament that had been written until 621 BC, and the New Testament elements were spoken by Jesus Himself in America.

  Criticism: The style and much of the text of the Book of Mormon derive from the English translation of the King James Bible (1611). Unlike the Bible, the existence of the American culture described in the Book of Mormon (peoples, cities, countries, battles, writings, etc.) has not been confirmed by archaeology. Contrary to the data in the Book of Mormon, pre-Columbian America did not have wheat, barley, horses, donkeys, sheep, cattle, pigs, elephants, iron and steel, coins, synagogues, or leprosy. Native Americans are not Semitic (like Jews and Arabs) but belong to the Mongoloid race and originate from Northeast Asia. The history and characteristics of Central and South American cultures are not compatible in any way with the cultures described in the Book of Mormon (e.g., the Mayan culture was later and Stone Age in nature). The real author of the Book of Mormon projected the conditions of 19th-century North America back into the past. Ezekiel 37:16-20: The joining of the two inscribed sticks is a prophetic illustration of the post-captivity reunification of Israel and Judah, where God will again gather His people from everywhere (verses 20-22), not a unity of Palestinian and American revelations. The Book of Mormon also quotes from Old Testament Jewish prophets who lived after 621 BC (from Jeremiah to Malachi), whose writings addressed the situation of the Jewish people in Palestine and who could not have had contact with the supposed American Jews. Smith even adopted the translation errors from the King James Bible.

  d) The Book of Abraham

  LDS Claim: The Book of Abraham, which is part of the Pearl of Great Price and is theologically important, was translated by Smith from an Egyptian papyrus purchased from an antiquities dealer named Chandler, using his God-given ability. The facsimiles of three segments of the papyri are included in the text of the Book of Abraham, along with Smith's detailed, numbered explanations.

  Criticism: According to modern Egyptology, the papyri considered the original source of the Book of Abraham actually contain the text of a pagan funerary document from the Egyptian Book of the Dead. The Egyptian script was deciphered by Champollion in 1822, and its grammar and dictionary were published in 1836 and 1841, but even long after Smith, no one in the United States could read Egyptian. The "Egyptian Grammar" written by Smith is also a product of fantasy. The authenticity of his "revelations" is not determined by feelings or mutual affirmations (cf. Jeremiah 17:9) but by facts. Nothing confirms the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham; on the contrary, everything we know refutes them.

  e) The Restored Church

  LDS Claim: The church founded by Jesus in Jerusalem fell into error, disbanded, and ceased to be the true church in the early centuries due to the foretold Great Apostasy (2 Thessalonians 2:3). After His resurrection, Jesus appeared in America and founded His church there, but by the early 5th century, the Nephite church in America was also destroyed. The final restoration of the church on earth (Acts 3:20-21, Revelation 14:6) occurred in 1830 through Joseph Smith, thus making the Mormon church "the kingdom of the Lord, once again, reestablished on the earth, which prepares for the second coming of the Messiah," and which "is the only true, living church upon the face of the whole earth." According to God's promise (Daniel 2:44), the church will never be overthrown again. Moreover, God revealed to Smith that the New Jerusalem would be built in the United States, in the state of Missouri. Since the Mormon church has taken the place of unfaithful Israel, every new member is assigned to one of the Jewish tribes (even those of non-Jewish origin). Although the Mormon community has been unjustly persecuted from the beginning, Mormons do not criticize other churches.

  Criticism: According to Joseph Smith's account, the Father and the Son who appeared to him declared that the contemporary Baptist, Methodist, Reformed, Lutheran, etc., churches "were all wrong" and that "all their creeds were an abomination." The denominations of that time are the same as those today, so the very existence, legitimacy, and mission of the Mormon church is a judgment against all Christian churches. However, the universal Christian church, despite all its problems, could not have ceased to exist for almost a millennium and a half, because according to Christ, the gates of hell shall not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18, Jude 24-25 cf. Ephesians 5:25-32). So who lied: Jesus or Smith? The New Testament also writes about the need for continuous faith defense (Jude 3), not about disintegration after the 1st century. The original text of 2 Thessalonians 2:3: does not say "great apostasy" but "rebellion" (without details), and at this time, the Antichrist will also appear, who will sit in God's temple, deify himself, etc. None of this has happened yet. Daniel 2 speaks of an eternal kingdom after the destruction of great political powers, but these political powers still exist. Therefore, the Mormon Church is not a "restoration" of the early church, because it overstepped the biblical boundaries from the beginning, which could have ensured that it remained within Christianity.

  f) The Godhead

  LDS Claim: According to the fundamental doctrine, the Godhead consists of three persons: the Father (Elohim), the Son (Jehovah), and the Holy Ghost. However, the deeper teachings, which are revealed later, suggest that there are actually many gods who possess perfect souls and perfect bodies, have genders, and reproduce. God Himself was once a man but was exalted to become God, meaning He was not always God. Humans are essentially gods in an embryonic state. After the final judgment, if they meet all the conditions, they too can become gods and goddesses, with their own worlds. "As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be..." (JS) The Bible also teaches the existence of many gods (1 Corinthians 8:5) and the exaltation of humans to godhood (Psalms 82:1,6, John 10:34-36).

  Criticism: In the Bible, Jehovah and Elohim are the same God, under the name Yahweh Elohim (Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 40:3 cf. John 1:23). The Hebrew word "elohim" means "gods" only when the verb following it is in the plural (with a few exceptions for pagan gods), but when the verb is singular, it means "the Godhead" (as Hebrew uses the plural form of a noun to form an abstract noun). God is a spiritual being (Psalms 139, John 4:24, Acts 17:28-29), and the "body parts" attributed to Him in the Bible are only metaphors. There is only one God (Isaiah 43:10, 45:5, 20-21, 44:6, 1 Timothy 2:5, 1 Corinthians 8:6, James 2:19, etc.). God has always been God (Isaiah 40:28, John 5:26, Hebrews 13:8, 9:14, 1 Timothy 1:17, 6:16) and does not change (Malachi 3:6, James 1:17). God is not a man (Hosea 11:9, Numbers 23:19), and the deification of man is a satanic doctrine (Genesis 3:5, 2 Thessalonians 2:4). Psalms 82:1,6: God is mocking the judges who were "gods" (mighty ones) but, because of their unfaithfulness, will die like mere mortals. John 10:34-36: Jesus refers back to Psalms 82: If God mockingly called the judges "gods," how much more true is it for Him, if He calls Himself the Son of God! 1 Corinthians 8:5: There are so-called (believed to be, considered to be) gods in pagan religions; cf. 8:6 "...yet for us there is only one God."

  g) The Children of Heavenly Father and Mother

  LDS Claim: In addition to Heavenly Father, there is also a Heavenly Mother, whose name is unknown, and prayers should not be directed to her. Together, they have given birth to many billions of spirit children, who existed even before earthly, mortal life (pre-existence, Jeremiah 1:5, John 1:2, 14, 8:58, 17:5). In order for these spirit children to progress and prove their obedience, they must experience the joys and sorrows of earthly life. Satan (Lucifer) and a portion of the spirits rebelled against this plan of earthly life and redemption, as Satan wanted everyone to be saved, but without free will. Jesus, on the other hand, desired to follow the Father’s will, allowing people to make their own choices. Therefore, the Father entrusted Him with the redemption. Jesus, under the Father's direction, created this world with the help of the archangel Michael and the chosen spirits from the pre-existing chaotic matter. The fall of Adam (the archangel Michael) and Eve was a necessary evil, part of the divine plan: only this way could they become mortal humans capable of biological reproduction, only this way could the spirit children be born on earth, and only this way could they begin their path of eternal progression and exaltation.

  Criticism: In the Bible, God's "fatherhood" is meant to make His relationship with us (paternal love) understandable; biological gender is only attributed to pagan gods. "Jehovah" (Jesus) and Satan (a fallen angel) are not brothers, nor are they our brothers! The Bible makes a clear distinction between the Creator and His creations; they are not of the same kind. Humans do not come from pre-existence but from the earth (Genesis 2:7, John 3:13, 33, 8:23, 1 Corinthians 15:47). Jeremiah 1:5 does not speak of everyone's pre-existence but specifically of Jeremiah's calling. John 1:2, etc., speaks only of Jesus, not of everyone (cf. Colossians 1:15-19). God created the world out of nothing (Romans 4:17), entirely by Himself (Isaiah 44:24, Isaiah 45:12, etc.) with His mere word (Genesis 1:3, John 1:1-3). The fall brought not a blessing but a curse (Romans 6:23, 5:14, 1 Corinthians 15:21-22). Since then, no one is inherently a child of God, but one can become so, receiving the authority, by coming to faith in Christ (John 1:12-13, 1 John 5:1, Romans 8:15, Galatians 3:26).

  h) Perfection and Eternal Progression

  LDS Claim: God is perfect and commanded His children to be perfect as well (Matthew 5:48), to become completely holy (1 Peter 1:15-16), and to ultimately be exalted to godhood (2 Peter 1:4). God would not have commanded perfection if humans were not capable of achieving it. A believer must become worthy of everything, fulfilling the conditions of the bilateral covenant with God: Christ has done His part, so the believer must do their part as well. The process of conversion and the condition of sanctification include faith, repentance, baptism, receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, honesty, faithfulness, regular testimony, paying tithing, keeping the word of wisdom, and performing temple ordinances. A person is not inherently sinful but becomes so only when and if they commit sin. Repentance has seven steps: acknowledgment, remorse, confession, restitution, forgiveness of others, keeping the commandments, and not committing the same sin again. Grace comes into effect only after the believer has done everything within their power to keep the commandments. By the grace thus received, one becomes eligible for the blessings of mortal and eternal life.

  Criticism: 2 Peter 1:4: According to the text and its context (verses 3 and 5), Christ's divine power has given the believer everything needed for a godly life (here on earth), by making Himself known through His own glory and moral excellence [Greek "aretē"], and indeed, He called them to Himself through these, and on this basis, He promised them that through these, they would become partakers of the divine nature and escape the corruption caused by evil desires. It does not mean that one "becomes a god," but rather that one partakes in something that is a natural attribute, a gift of God alone (Greek "physis"), namely moral excellence. Matthew 5:48 does not say, "slowly become perfect," but be perfect here and now, because God is. 1 Peter 1:16 does not say, "become as holy as I am," but be holy here and now, because God is. Only God is holy (Revelation 15:4), and no one is as holy as God (2 Samuel 2:2, 6:20), but Christ's holiness and righteousness are attributed to the believer (Romans 3:24-26, 4:3-5, 1 Corinthians 1:30), making every sanctified (set apart for God) person once and for all perfect (Hebrews 10:14). Sanctification as a process only refers to living out this perfection more fully. Humans are not sinful only when they sin, but they sin because they are inherently inclined to sin (Luke 5:8, Colossians 2:13, Ephesians 2:1-3, Romans 3:23, 5:10-21, 8:3). Everyone sins frequently (James 2:10, 3:2), and everyone repeatedly commits the same sins, yet still receives forgiveness (Luke 17:3-4). A believer's life is, until the end, one of unmerited, unearned grace; this is not cheap, not expensive, but priceless, and therefore a free gift (Ephesians 2:1-10, Titus 3:5). A holy life and service are not tools for achieving goals but a sign of grateful reciprocal love (1 Peter 1:5-9, Ephesians 5:1) for the blessings already received as a gift (Ephesians 1:3-14). In the Bible, the sinful believer receives grace, i.e., release from judgment, and does not become favored based on merit, as in the Mormon religion.

  i) The Restored Priesthood

  LDS Claim: God has restored the authority of the church's priesthood in the last days, meaning the authority to act in God's stead and in His name (Matthew 16:19). There are two types of priesthood with different responsibilities and rights. The Aaronic Priesthood (for those over 12 years old) mainly performs physical services: baptisms and administering the sacrament. The Melchizedek Priesthood (for "elders" over 18 years old) conducts salvific ordinances: conferring the Holy Ghost, teaching, and leading the church. The Aaronic Priesthood was conferred on Jesus by John the Baptist, and the Melchizedek Priesthood was conferred on Jesus' apostles by Him. John the Baptist, who appeared to Smith and his close associates, conferred the Aaronic Priesthood upon them, and the apostles Peter, James, and John, who also appeared, conferred the Melchizedek Priesthood. The ordination into the priesthood continues today through the laying on of hands (this is the so-called priesthood line).

  Criticism: Only Levites, descendants of Levi by blood, could belong to the Aaronic Priesthood, making it non-transferable (Exodus 29:9, Numbers 3:10, 2 Chronicles 31:19). The figures in the Book of Mormon were not Levites, so they could not be priests, nor could they have a temple. Jesus was born into the tribe of Judah, so He could not have been a Levite (Hebrews 7:13-14). However, because of Jesus' one and only sacrifice, the Aaronic Priesthood lost its function, and the priesthood changed (Hebrews 7:12, 27). The privilege of priestly service, once exclusive to male members of one tribe, became universal (1 Peter 2:9, Revelation 1:4-6), including women (Acts 2:16-18), since it became a spiritual sacrifice (1 Peter 2:5, Hebrews 13:15, Romans 12:1, 15:16, Philippians 4:18). The eternal priesthood after the "order" of Melchizedek is also exclusively, and non-transferably, Christ's (Hebrews 7:24) because only He is immortal (Hebrews 7:2-3,15-16,24).

  j) The Holy Temple

  LDS Claim: Educational work and community practice take place worldwide in meetinghouses (chapels). However, there are only about 150 temples worldwide. Certain ordinances necessary for salvation and specific covenants can only be performed in the temple, and it is also where one can learn about pre-earthly and post-mortal life. The most important ordinances are endowment, eternal marriage, sealing of children to their parents, and ordinances for the dead. After a public opening, only worthy church members with a temple recommend (entry permit) may enter the temple. The ordinances can only be performed by those authorized to do so, and the ordinances are sacred and practically secret, as members are sworn not to disclose them to outsiders (this would be a grave sin).

  Criticism: Mormon "temple work" has nothing to do with the rituals of biblical times, the early church, or today's Christian denominations. Israel could have only one temple, and its priesthood was limited to male members of one tribe. Everyone approached it with a sense of guilt, fully aware of their unworthiness, as the temple's function was the offering of sacrifices and worship (obtaining forgiveness of sins and thanksgiving). However, because of Christ's sacrifice, the temple lost its function, and in AD 70, it was destroyed. God must be worshiped in spirit (John 4:24). Not a building, but the Christian community and the individual have become God's temple (1 Corinthians 3:16-17, 6:19, 2 Corinthians 6:16, Ephesians 2:19-22 cf. Revelation 21:22). Smith received a "revelation" about secret temple rituals shortly after becoming a member of a Masonic lodge in 1838, after which they considered him a traitor. He adopted many rituals but reinterpreted almost all of them. However, significant changes have been made to the theoretically sacred and unchangeable Mormon temple ceremonies over time: most recently in April 1990 in the text and rituals, and in January 2005 in the ritual clothing.

  k) Work for the Dead

  LDS Claim: The church exists and operates in the spirit world as well. The spirits of the dead are sent either to paradise or to a prison for spirits, which has several levels. Spirits are classified according to their deeds, but if they learn and live by the gospel rules, they can ascend to higher levels. And if a relative performs ordinances for them in a temple on earth (1 Corinthians 15:29), they can pass into paradise (1 Peter 3:18-20, 4:6). If they do not repent of their sins, they must suffer for them, similar to Christ's suffering, and after the resurrection, they may reach the lowest (telestial) level of glory. For this reason, every Mormon traces their ancestors so that they can provide their dead relatives with an opportunity for salvation through proxy ordinances. The church's International Genealogical Department assists them in family history research. In the temples, living and dead family members are linked together through various ordinances. According to Smith, "Our ancestors cannot be made perfect without us, nor we without them." Journal keeping also serves to more fully bind families together, as the journals of today’s Saints are like those of the prophets: descendants can later learn much from their testimonies.

  Criticism: According to the Bible, our fate is determined here on earth (Hebrews 9:27, Luke 16:19-31, Romans 2:14-16), and the soul's final destiny is either eternal life or eternal death, heaven or hell (Daniel 12:2, Revelation 20-21). Those who could not know the law of Moses or the gospel of Christ are excused by God for their ignorance (Acts 14:16, 17:30) and are judged based on their conscience (Romans 2:14-16). Those who could make a decision regarding the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-11) are judged based on their faith or unbelief (John 3:18,36). If they do not believe, the words of Moses and Christ condemn them (Deuteronomy 18:19, John 5:45-47, 12:48). The interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15:29 is difficult, but it is certain that there is no trace of any need or possibility for ordinances to be performed on behalf of the dead elsewhere in the Bible or in Christian church history before the 19th century, so it cannot be a restoration, but only a new doctrine. 1 Peter 3:18-20, 4:6: Christ preached not to all the dead but only to the spirits of the people who lived in Noah's time, before the law of Moses and the gospel of Christ. Moreover, it speaks only of Christ, not that the souls of deceased believers would preach to other souls. Mormons are not "co-redeemers"; their ordinances for the dead are simply futile.

  l) Resurrection and Final Judgment

  LDS Claim: Resurrection is the final reunification of the soul and the physical body in a perfect and immortal form. Everyone will be resurrected, but there are two resurrections: the first for the righteous and the second for sinners who do not repent. After the resurrection comes the final judgment, where everyone will receive what they deserve. Judgment is given to the Son (John 5:22), but He will call upon others to assist: for example, the New Testament apostles will judge the 12 tribes of Israel, the American apostles will judge the Lamanites and Nephites, and the Presidency and the Twelve Apostles who served during their lives will judge the Mormons.

  Criticism: According to the Bible, resurrection is not the reunification of the soul (Greek pneuma/psyche) and the physical body (Greek sarx), but the complete transformation and glorification of the "body," meaning the form of existence (Greek soma) (Mark 12:24-25, Philippians 3:20-21, 1 Corinthians 15:35-56, 1 John 3:2). John 5:22: The Father has given all judgment to the Son (Acts 17:31, 2 Corinthians 5:10, 2 Timothy 4:1), who will judge everyone's life (Genesis 18:25, Job 21:22, Romans 2:6, Revelation 20:11-12). One believer cannot judge another, that is, no one can judge God's servant (Matthew 7:1-2, Romans 14:4,10,12-13).

  m) Degrees of Glory

  LDS Claim: The righteous will be placed in one of the three heavenly degrees of glory (2 Corinthians 12:2, 1 Corinthians 15:40-42). In the highest, celestial glory, everyone can live with their family in the constant presence of the Father and the Son, but even within this, there are three degrees: to reach exaltation, or godhood, four ordinances (including celestial marriage) and the observance of 18 laws are necessary. The second, terrestrial glory is for those honorable people who did not accept the gospel on earth due to others but accepted it in the spirit world, or who accepted it on earth but later fell away; they cannot be with their families, but Christ will visit them. The telestial glory is for those who did not accept the gospel on earth or in the spirit world and led sinful lives; they are the majority and will be visited only by the Holy Ghost. The fourth is outer darkness (Matthew 8:12), for those who knew the truth but allowed Satan to rule them; they will suffer in eternal darkness with Satan and his angels, forever stuck in their progression.

  Criticism: The last day, the final judgment in the Bible, is entirely different (cf. Revelation 20:5-6,11-15, 21:8), as is the fate of Satan and his demons (cf. Revelation 20:10). 2 Corinthians 12:2 does not refer to post-resurrection degrees of glory. Paul's experience happened in his lifetime, in the present, though he did not know exactly how (verses 2-3), so he described it according to the rabbinic ideas of his time. According to these, the first heaven is for the birds, the second for the angels, and the third heaven or paradise is the presence of God. 1 Corinthians 15:40-42 does not speak of heavenly degrees but of the earthly and heavenly bodies of people, that is, their forms of existence (Greek soma). Matthew 8:12: Jesus spoke of the Kingdom of Heaven, that is, God's earthly kingdom, the Millennium, not of an otherworldly place. In His illustration, believing Gentiles (verses 10-11) and truly believing Jews will rejoice together, but the self-righteous but actually unbelieving contemporary Jews (verse 12) will be cast out.

  n) Eternal Marriage

  LDS Claim: Mormons enter into so-called celestial marriage in the Temple, not only for earthly life but for eternity. Through this, they will be exalted in the highest degree of celestial glory and, as gods and goddesses, will create, populate, and rule new worlds. Procreative power is, in fact, a holy creative power. Polygamy (plural marriage) was introduced by Smith and Young, claiming revelation from God. Although Mormons have not practiced it since 1890 due to pressure from American public opinion, and even face excommunication for it, it will be reinstated in the coming Millennium (Christ's thousand-year Kingdom) so that all of God's spirit children can become human. Today, only so-called "fundamentalist Mormon" churches practice polygamy (about 30-40,000 members).

  Criticism: According to Jesus, there will be no marriage after the resurrection (Mark 12:24-25). The Bible makes a sharp distinction between divine creation and biological reproduction. God created with His word, from nothing, and created new things (e.g., humans). Humans, with their already created physicality, only reproduce. The biblical examples of polygamy—before the Mosaic law (Lamech, Abraham, Jacob) and during the time of some kings (David, Solomon, Rehoboam)—were not recorded as models to follow (cf. 1 Kings 11:1-4), and the institution of levirate marriage (Deuteronomy 25:5-10) was given only for exceptional situations. God's plan has always been for the marriage of one man and one woman, that they two should become one flesh (Genesis 2:24 cf. Ephesians 5:25).

  Positive Aspects

  The Christian background of the Mormon religion is evident in its recognition of the Bible as scripture, the use of biblical vocabulary, and the central role of Christ. The lifestyle of its members is exemplary in many respects, as Mormon ethics draw heavily from biblical principles. There is a strong emphasis on individual responsibility, the development of talents, and honesty. The "Word of Wisdom"—though in the Bible it simply means "wise words"—promotes a healthy, active lifestyle (prohibiting coffee, black tea, smoking, and drug use), resulting in the average Mormon living 10 years longer than the average American. The church's focus on family and love for children is reflected in the exemplary family lives of Mormons: marriage is considered eternal, and Monday's "family evening" is dedicated to shared learning, playing, praying, and singing together. The church offers genealogical research as a free service to non-members as well and has compiled the civil registration databases of more developed countries at its own expense. The social safety net provided to members (through relief societies) demonstrates exemplary solidarity: there are no unemployed Mormons, and the Perpetual Education Fund (PEF) fully finances the education of young church members. Members also engage in much charitable work outside the church, with many regularly contributing to those in need through the so-called fast offering (donating the cost of two meals). The dedication of young missionaries is unquestionable, with many saving from a young age to cover mission expenses. The church's choir, the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, is also world-renowned.

  Negative Aspects

  The Mormon religion denies or misunderstands almost every important doctrine of biblical Christianity. At the same time, the Mormon Church—misleadingly—attempts to present itself as one of the Christian denominations, while internally it continues to regard itself as the only true church. This "interest-driven ecumenism" helps the church gain acceptance but is morally questionable. The biblical vocabulary used by Mormons also strengthens the impression of Christianity, although almost every word means something entirely different than in the Bible. Therefore, meaningful conversations with them require understanding "Mormon language."

  The perfectionism of the church is striking. Since they misunderstand the biblical command for perfection, water down the concept of sin, and do not understand the true, biblical meaning of grace, many members find themselves in conflict between the church's expectations (becoming perfect and worthy) and their own abilities (their sinful nature). Even the Mormon press now acknowledges that the Utah population, which is 70% Mormon (especially women), needs stress-relieving medication at a rate higher than the national average, and that more than half of the missionaries, who usually bear testimony almost like robots for two years, become inactive after returning home.

  Behind the appealing image of the Mormon family ideal, with many children, lies the teaching that spirit children waiting in the pre-mortal existence are eager to be born into earthly life through the sexual union of their earthly siblings as soon and in as great numbers as possible. The love of family and the appreciation of children are, of course, also present in the Christian church, but without this background teaching, which is bizarre from a biblical perspective.

  The Mormon religion has an esoteric-gnostic structure. Regarding their proselytizing method, according to the iceberg principle, the prospective convert is not given, and indeed cannot be given, a full picture of the Mormon belief system. What is visible on the surface appears biblical and Christian, and partly it is. However, beneath the surface, strange, unbiblical doctrines are hidden. Investigators are given only the Book of Mormon; the other scriptures (Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price) can be read only after baptism, once they have become members of the church. The deeper teachings are received in the Temple, and those involved in temple work can also learn the content of the so-called temple records. This multi-layered system only becomes apparent over the years.

  Ordinary members know only the heroic side of the church's history (the pioneer journey, persecutions, the building of Salt Lake City, etc.). The average Mormon is either unaware of or does not recognize the significance of the internal contradictions in Smith's story, the completely different versions of his visions, his false prophecies, the significant textual changes made to the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants, and the scientific refutations of the claims in the Book of Mormon and the content of the Book of Abraham papyri. The church leadership keeps these contradictions silent and suppresses internal criticism: a number of Mormon scholars (anthropologists, Egyptologists, geneticists, etc.) who have voiced professional criticism have already been excommunicated. As incredible as it may seem, this is a religion that—beyond the biblical and Masonic elements—is largely a product of 19th-century American religious imagination.
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  The Church NEVER apostatized

  Faith of Our Fathers (Part 1): Were the Early Christians Jehovah’s Witnesses?

  Faith of Our Fathers (Part 2): Were the Early Christians Jehovah’s Witnesses?
• 
  60

  The Question of the "Great Apostasy" and the Historical Continuity of Christianity

  by aqwsed12345 in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  1. the continuity and visibility of the church.

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  aqwsed12345

  1. The Continuity and Visibility of the Church

  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. The continuity of the Catholic Church and Orthodoxy, as communities traceable back to the apostles, cannot be emphasized enough.

  Jehovah's Witnesses claim that Christ’s true congregation "disappeared from the pages of history" for a time while "false Christians" dominated religious life. 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 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.

  At the same time, somewhat paradoxically, Jehovah's Witnesses assert that their beliefs have always been present throughout history, from Abel to the present day, without interruption. However, when this claim is examined from a historical perspective, significant problems arise. The Watchtower Society teaches that there have always been people who adhered to Watchtower teachings since Jesus, particularly in regards to the main doctrines. Yet, when they attempted to find specific historical groups that held similar beliefs, they could not find a single group that accepted all the important teachings.

  In the book “Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God's Kingdom,” John Wycliffe and William Tyndale are cited, but they believed in the Trinity and therefore could not be considered Jehovah's Witnesses. Furthermore, no group can be identified before the 1300s because at that time, except for a few exotic (and severely heretical by both Protestant and JW standards) sects, everyone’s belief system was necessarily Catholic. 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.

  Based on historical data, it cannot be claimed that Jehovah's Witnesses' beliefs have persisted uninterrupted over the centuries. While the Watchtower Society often tries to find similarities with earlier religious groups, these groups exhibited significant differences from the teachings of today’s Jehovah's Witnesses. Accordingly, proving historical continuity is not possible, and it appears that Jehovah's Witnesses are rather a relatively new religious movement with no direct connection to apostolic Christianity.

  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.

  3. Apostasy and the "Wheat" Parable

  According to the JW, 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).

  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.

  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.

  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.

  The Bible speaks in several places about the Church not disappearing entirely, and indeed, Christ promises that the gates of hell will not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). The Apostles’ Creed and the Nicene Creed, which are based on the teachings of the early Church Fathers from the first few centuries, also show that the Church continued its work after the apostles and faithfully preserved the faith.

  The "great apostasy" theory, as promoted by groups like Jehovah's Witnesses, cannot be supported by credible historical evidence. The writings of the Church Fathers, who were in direct contact with the apostles, do not indicate a mass defection that would have led to the complete cessation of the Church. These writings and historical ecclesiastical traditions all show that the Church was continuously present and preserved the core truths of the Christian faith.

  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?

  In summary, the argument that the "great apostasy" did not mean the complete disappearance of the Church appears well-founded in light of both biblical texts and historical facts. The continuity of the Church and the preservation of the apostolic tradition demonstrate that the Christian faith was not lost but continuously present and influential in the world.

  5. Apostolic Succession and the Historical Credibility of the Church

  Jehovah's Witnesses claim that the Catholic Church's doctrine of apostolic succession cannot be authenticated on either historical or biblical grounds. However, 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.

  Apostolic succession is a historical fact, supported by the writings of the Church Fathers. This succession ensures the continuity of the Church's teachings and sacraments, which trace back to the apostolic age. The Catholic Church's credibility is based on this continuity, which the JW cannot refute.

  The "great apostasy" in Christian theology is interpreted as an event expected before the appearance of the Antichrist. The idea that the Church fell into apostasy in the early centuries is untenable because Jesus promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church. The claim that the Church would have fallen into apostasy and ceased to exist for centuries contradicts Jesus' promise that the Church would endure until the end of time. The Church has continuously survived and is built on apostolic traditions. Movements that claim to have re-established the Church because it supposedly ceased to exist are fundamentally based on flawed assumptions. Apostolic teachings have been preserved in the Church, providing the foundation for its continuity. While there have been instances of corruption and errors in the Church's history, these never led to the Church's complete collapse. The Church, as a living organism, has continually fought against internal and external challenges, and this is what has kept it alive. The criticisms from Protestant and other religious groups that the Church fell into apostasy earlier are often based on justifying their existence. However, such claims do not consider the Church's historical continuity and Jesus' promises.

  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.

  • 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. 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.
  • Jude 3: The New Testament urges believers to continually contend for the faith and defend it against false teachings. This does not proclaim the disintegration of the faith but rather its protection and reinforcement. Overall, the continuity of the Church and its adherence to the true faith are fundamental to Christianity, and no new movement or teaching can stand that denies this continuity. The Church, as a community founded by Jesus, will endure until the end of time, even as it faces various challenges in different eras.

  Therefore, the Church not only has survived throughout the centuries, but Jesus promised that it will never disappear and that there will always be valid sacraments and saints within it. The "great apostasy" will only occur at the end of times, not immediately after the death of the apostles, as some religious groups claim. There has never been an event in the Church that could be called a "great apostasy," as some modern religious movements claim. The Church has always preserved the apostolic teaching, and although there have been internal conflicts and heresies, they never completely took over.

  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." This, however, would contradict Jesus' promise that the Church would not be overcome by the "gates of hell" (Matthew 16:18). If the Church had completely disappeared, then Jesus' promise would not be true, which is theologically unacceptable in a Christian belief system. The theology of the Watchtower Society, which claims that the true Church disappeared and then reappeared through Russell, leads to logical inconsistencies, as it would imply that the Church had two foundings, which is incompatible with the "eternal covenant" proclaimed by Jesus.

  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.

  Protestants often hold that the Church is not necessarily a visible institution but the invisible community of believers. In contrast, Mormons argue that the true faith was distorted and needed to be re-established. Jehovah's Witnesses combine these two concepts, but in doing so, they weaken their own position. On the one hand, they emphasize the importance of a visible organization, while on the other hand, they cannot credibly prove that their organization is in continuous connection with the first-century Christian Church.

  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? 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?

  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?

  7. Extremes in Biblical Interpretation

  Biblical interpretation moves between two extremes: one extreme is that the Bible is so simple that no explanation is needed (Protestantism), while the other extreme over-mystifies the text, seeing hidden messages in every little motif (Gnosticism, Watchtower).

  However, the Bible is not just a text but a profound theological work that can be interpreted on different levels. While some parts are simple and direct, others are more complex and require appropriate theological knowledge and consideration of context. Finding the balance is crucial, and both excessive simplification and over-complication can be misleading. The tradition of the Catholic Church, for example, emphasizes apostolic succession and Sacred Tradition, which help in proper interpretation.

  8. The Legitimacy and Continuity of the Church

  The legitimacy of the Roman Catholic Church was not lost due to the sins of some of its members, and apostolic succession ensures its credibility. Arguments suggesting the loss of the Church's legitimacy are more often tools of sectarian rhetoric used by various religious movements.

  The Church's legitimacy does not depend on the moral failings of certain members but on apostolic succession and God's promise. The Church was founded by Jesus Christ, who promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18). Despite the many difficulties and challenges in church history, the Church has maintained this continuity and fidelity to Christ's teachings.

  The "gates of hell" refer to the power of evil, the strength of the devil, and according to Jesus' promise, this power will never overcome the Church. The Church has faced various challenges over time, but according to Jesus' promise, it will always survive and never lose its strength. The phrase also implies that the Church will never be destroyed, there will always be valid sacraments, and there will always be saints within it. False teachings can never take over the Church. The Church is infallible, meaning that false teachings cannot gain dominion within it. According to the apostles' prophecies, there will always be false teachers, but they will never completely take over the Church. The Church is indefectible, meaning it will never completely disappear or cease to exist.

  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.

  Theological interpretation indeed requires reasonableness and simplicity, but simplicity should not equate to superficiality. The deep understanding of theological issues is often complex and requires a thorough knowledge of Scripture and tradition. The interpretation of the Catholic Church, for example, is based on the continuity of apostolic teachings and the traditions of the Church Fathers, providing a reliable and consistent framework for interpretation.

  10. The Church's Historical Role and the Issue of Heresy

  Heresies and new denominations often present themselves as defenders of "truth" while in reality opposing the historical and theological continuity of the Catholic Church.

  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.

  11. The Second Vatican Council and the current State of the Church

  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.

  12. Conclusion

  The JW view that the true Church "disappeared" and was only "restored in the last days" (around 1914) contradicts Jesus' promise of the Church's continuous presence. The historical and theological continuity of the Church, especially in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, is a strong argument that Christ's Church has been continuously present throughout history, even amidst difficulties and apostasy. Apostolic succession and hierarchical structure have ensured that the Church has always followed Christ's teachings and remained faithful to apostolic tradition. The claim that Christianity already experienced the great apostasy is theologically and historically unfounded. The Church has always preserved the faith handed down by the apostles and protected by Christ's promises. Views that consider the "great apostasy" to have already occurred do not take into account the continuity of the Church and the clear teachings of Scripture.