For in the first place, I hear that when you gather as a church there are divisions among you, and I partly believe it. Of course, there must be factions among you to show which of you are genuine!
— 1 Corinthians 11:18-19, ISV​

First of all, much (most?) of what follows is speculation and supposition on my part, so please keep that in mind. Nevertheless, I will strive to provide references which are behind my thoughts to avoid the appearance that I’m pulling any or all of what follows out of thin air.

In his first letter to the new believers at Corinth, the apostle Paul writes:

For first of all, when YOU come together in a congregation, I hear divisions exist among YOU; and in some measure I believe it. For there must also be sects among YOU, that the persons approved may also become manifest among YOU. — 1 Corinthians 11:18-19, NWT

Two words are of particular interest here: “divisions,” which in the original Greek is schisma, from which we today have the word schisms. The second word is “sects,” as translated in the New World Translation, which in the original Greek is hairesis, from which we today have the word heresy or heresies.

While I won’t try to guess why the editors of the New World Translation chose to say that heresies are the equivalent of sects, for the sake of argument I would suggest that since a sect is usually formed around a heresy or body of heresies, they are part and partial with one another to the point where it won’t impact the discussion.

I’m confident that we all understand what a schism is:

1. division or disunion, especially into mutually opposed parties.

2. a formal division within, or separation from, a church or religious body over some doctrinal difference.

Likewise, I think we all know what a heresy is:

1. opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system.

2. Roman Catholic Church. the willful and persistent rejection of any article of faith by a baptized member of the church.


Based on this, I take Paul to be saying here: “I have been informed (cf 1 Cor 1:11) that there are doctrinal differences among you that are causing a division among you. I partly believe it, by reason that there are also opinions or doctrines among you at variance from what Christians should believe, to manifest who is acceptable among you.”

To get a sense of the Corinthian setting, it should be noted that Corinth was “one of the largest and most important cities of Greece.” The city “had a large mixed population of Romans, Greeks, and Jews” and was “an important locus for activities of the imperial cult.” Further, “Acts 18:6 suggests that Jewish refusal to accept his preaching here led Paul to resolve no longer speak in the synagogues where he travelled: ‘From now on I will go to the Gentiles.’” (Cf Acts 13:46)

This last would seem to indicate that the biggest cause behind Paul’s words at 1 Corinthians 11:18-19 was the Jewish Christians, which is supported by the account of a schism in Paul’s letter to the believers at Galatia:

However, when Ce'phas came to Antioch, I resisted him face to face, because he stood condemned. For before the arrival of certain men from James, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he went withdrawing and separating himself, in fear of those of the circumcised class. The rest of the Jews also joined him in putting on this pretense, so that even Bar'na·bas was led along with them in their pretense. But when I saw they were not walking straight according to the truth of the good news, I said to Ce'phas before them all: "If you, though you are a Jew, live as the nations do, and not as Jews do, how is it that you are compelling people of the nations to live according to Jewish practice?" We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners from the nations, knowing as we do that a man is declared righteous, not due to works of law, but only through faith toward Christ Jesus, even we have put our faith in Christ Jesus, that we may be declared righteous due to faith toward Christ, and not due to works of law, because due to works of law no flesh will be declared righteous. — Galatians 2:11-16, NWT

There are a number of points I’d love to go into from Paul’s description of what happened among the followers of Jesus at Antioch, but for the sake of brevity I will try to focus on the pertinent ones.

First, the source of the schism was evidently James, the brother of Jesus, who scholars have established, was the head of the Christian movement sometime following Pentecost, after the apostle Peter left Jerusalem. This is contrary to the perception of most Christians today, who are under the impression that it was the apostles who were in charge of the Christian movement.

I believe James was the source based on Paul stating that the Judaizers had come from James, at Jerusalem. This, to me, means that they came with the approval of James, now leader of the Christian movement.

The schism was caused by a persistent view among Jewish Christians that Gentile believers were required to abide by Judaic observances including circumcision and the eating of meat. That the apostle Peter went along with the Jewish Christians who arrived at Antioch tells me this was a very influential view. It carried significant enough weight among the Jewish followers of Jesus to trip up Peter, too— and this in spite of Peter’s vision of clean and unclean animals! That’s how powerful the Judaizing movement was in the first century!

This isn’t to suggest that Gentiles didn’t form their own schisms, but it was Paul’s opinion (inferred from his words) that the Gentiles didn’t necessarily know any better. But the Jewish followers of Jesus knew better, as the above-cited passage from Galatians attests:

We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners from the nations, knowing as we do that a man is declared righteous, not due to works of law, but only through faith toward Christ Jesus, even we have put our faith in Christ Jesus, that we may be declared righteous due to faith toward Christ, and not due to works of law, because due to works of law no flesh will be declared righteous. — Galatians 2:16, NWT (Emphasis added)

This placed a much greater accountability upon the follower of Jesus who was also a Jew before Jesus, their Messiah-King and Exemplar. (cf Luke 12:47-48)

Paul points out how the Judaizing followers of Jesus chose to eat separately from the other diaspora Jewish followers of Jesus and the Greeks of Antioch who were learning to follow Jesus. This, of course, played into the Judaizers’ thinking that they had the “Truth” to a greater extent than those who would mix company with “worldlings,” so to speak, whether those “heathens” believed that Jesus was the Messiah or the Christ, or not. If the Greeks really believed that, then why weren’t they getting circumcised to come into the covenant which the true Jews enjoyed? Why weren’t they abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols? And how could those Jews associate with the non-Jews who didn’t abide by the orthodoxy appointed over every Jew?

With these things in mind, it would appear that the situation at Corinth wasn’t all that different. The cultural clash between Greeks and Jews was unmistakable, and wasn’t going to go away any time soon, in spite of the apostle Paul’s tireless efforts to meld the two disparate groups of believers.

Paul’s reference to there being schisms and heresies among the Corinthian followers of Jesus is followed by his concern that this is preventing them from eating “the Lord’s evening meal” with the due respect it should instill in the follower of Jesus as a solemn reminder that Jesus gave his life for all, and not only the Jew.

Paul concludes his viewpoint on the inappropriate sectarianism taking place by warning the believers at Corinth that if they persist in this divisiveness between Jew and Gentile and subsequently participate in “the Lord’s evening meal” eat and drink condemnation to themselves, and that each and every one of the followers of Jesus at Corinth needs to perform a serious examination of their heart before committing such an offense to Jesus who gave his life and Jehovah, who provided the Lamb in the first place.

That's why you must examine the way you eat and drink. If you fail to understand that you are the body of the Lord, you will condemn yourselves by the way you eat and drink. — 1 Corinthians 11:28, CEV

[Yes, I know the Watchtower holds the opinion that this scripture is supportive of their “only partake if you are one of the ‘anointed’ who will rule with Jesus or face everlasting cutting-off,” but when taken in full context of the passage it is my opinion that the Watchtower’s doctrine on this scripture is errant and misapplied.]

In modern marriages, we will usually hear the person presiding over the wedding say something to the effect of “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder,” and I believe this is an excellent reference point to Paul’s point here in trying to get the believers at Corinth (especially those who insisted on remaining separate from Greeks except in the evening meal when they apparently tolerated the mingling of Jew and non-Jew before resuming the status quo once the observance was completed) to appreciate that it was God who removed the barrier between Jew and non-Jew, opening the Way to anyone of any nation who wished to repent of their sin before our Father and repent, henceforth following the Way laid down by our Great Teacher and Exemplar, Jesus.

Paul, across three of his epistles to believers, reiterates the extinction of distinctions as far as Jehovah is concerned:

For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for there is the same Lord over all, who is rich to all those calling upon him. For "everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved." — Romans 10:12-13, NWT

[In this relationship] there is to be no [distinction between] Jews or Greeks [i.e., Gentiles], slaves or free persons, men or women; for all of you are united into one [body] because of your relationship with Christ Jesus. — Galatians 3:28, An Understandable Version of the New Testament (AUV-NT)

[In this new creation all distinctions vanish] There is no room for and there can be neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor uncircumcised, [nor difference between nations whether alien] barbarians or Scythians [who are the most savage of all], nor slave or free man; but Christ is all and in all [everything and everywhere, to all men, without distinction of person]. — Colossians 3:11, Amplified Bible

[Continued in next post due to length limitation of post]

 

[Continued from previous post]
_______________________________________


Of course, this hasn’t stopped mere humans from making their distinctions down through Christianity’s history.

What began as Judaizing among the Jewish followers of Jesus then became the institution of an “orthodoxy” driven by Gentile followers by the first part of the 100s C.E. This, in turn, became Catholicism (the universal church). For centuries, one’s standing before Jehovah God was determined by the might and authority of the leaders of Christianity while the Roman Catholic Church dealt severely with “heretics.”

Then came the time of the Great Schisms, starting with the Western Greek Christians and Eastern Orthodox believers, followed by the additional schisms of Lutheranism and Protestantism. Out of Protestantism we can see the development of still more schisms among the followers of Jesus as Calvinism, Adventism, and Russellism and countless other sects appeared on the world scene— each determined to establish their own distinctions, and each asserting its qualification and authority to determine a believer’s standing before Jesus (and subsequently Jehovah God) in accordance with the believer’s compliance and adherence to the orthodoxy of the respective schism or sect.

Even among Jehovah’s Witnesses I have witnessed over the last 15 years or so a growing schism associated with what some refer to as the “Future Judgment View,” with its adoptees holding the view that the Watchtower organization is the modern-day Jerusalem which will be destroyed, even though the ones holding this view will “mingle” with mainstream Witnesses in worship while privately holding to their distinction between those around them who don’t see things their way. I’ve even seen some go so far as to saying that the Witnesses unaware of the “FJV” interpretation deserve to be destroyed when the Watchtower goes down, because these Witnesses stayed and didn’t adopt the “heresy,” as the Watchtower would call the Future Judgment View.

In all these cases I see a commonality: believers are united by orthodoxy more than they are united through Christlike love, and in spite of the insistence on divisions and distinctions from all other followers of Jesus. And it seems to universally come into play over a doctrine.

So, what does any of this have to do with my proposition that all of this causes me to believe that this is the “scattering” which Jesus spoke about?

Jesus, toward the end of his human ministry, told his disciples:

On the way, Jesus told them, "Tonight all of you will desert me. For the Scriptures say, 'God will strike the Shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.' — Matthew 26:31, New Living Translation

This likely calls to mind the words recorded in Zechariah’s prophecy:

"Awake, sword, against my shepherd, and against the man who is close to me," says Yahweh of Armies. "Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered; and I will turn my hand against the little ones. — Zechariah 13:7, World English Bible

I suspect there is far more to Jesus’ words than Zechariah’s account provides.

For one thing, my own examination of the original language here at Zechariah— specifically “I will turn my hand against the little ones”— centers on the choice of “against” in the majority of Bible translations. My initial impression is that this is meant in a negative sense, regarding the “little ones.”

In fact, the New Century Version Bible chose to translation the original language of Zechariah in this way:

"Sword, hit the shepherd. Attack the man who is my friend," says the Lord All-Powerful. "Kill the shepherd, and the sheep will scatter, and I will punish the little ones." — Zechariah 13:7, NCV

Why, I ask myself, would Jehovah punish the “little ones” if the prophecy is referring to the disciples who scattered following Jesus’ arrest and trial?

In the Greek Christian scriptures, the “little ones” were children. (Cf Matthew 18:6)

At the same time, the Lukan gospel has Jesus referring to his disciples as a “little flock.”

Going back to the original language and Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Definitions, it appears that the expression is a reference to the “insignificant ones.” This would certainly fit the status of a child in the first century!

But, again, it makes no sense to me that Jehovah would punish children or Jesus’ disciples.

I finally came to a prophecy in Ezekiel which records:

“‘This is what the Lord God says: I, myself, will search for my sheep and take care of them. As a shepherd takes care of his scattered flock when it is found, I will take care of my sheep. I will save them from all the places where they were scattered on a cloudy and dark day. I will bring them out from the nations and gather them from the countries. I will bring them to their own land and pasture them on the mountains of Israel, in the ravines, and in all the places where people live in the land. I will feed them in a good pasture, and they will eat grass on the high mountains of Israel. They will lie down on good ground where they eat grass, and they will eat in rich grassland on the mountains of Israel. I will feed my flock and lead them to rest, says the Lord God. I will search for the lost, bring back those that strayed away, put bandages on those that were hurt, and make the weak strong. But I will destroy those sheep that are fat and strong. I will tend the sheep with fairness.

“‘This is what the Lord God says: As for you, my flock, I will judge between one sheep and another, between the male sheep and the male goats.’” — Ezekiel 34:11-17, NCV [Emphasis added]

Factoring this passage in with the previous ones, I’m led to conclude that the “little ones,” those “insignificant ones” are the shepherds of Jehovah’s people who didn’t care for the sheep— a sentiment which seems to run in tandem with that of Jesus, who made a similar observation:

Jesus saw the huge crowd as he stepped from the boat, and he had compassion on them because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So he began teaching them many things. — Mark 6:34, NLT

Compare this with the stern judgment of the aforementioned Ezekiel:

“Human, prophesy against the leaders of Israel, who are like shepherds. Prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Lord God says: How terrible it will be for the shepherds of Israel who feed only themselves! Why don’t the shepherds feed the flock? You eat the milk curds, and you clothe yourselves with the wool. You kill the fat sheep, but you do not feed the flock. You have not made the weak strong. You have not healed the sick or put bandages on those that were hurt. You have not brought back those who strayed away or searched for the lost. But you have ruled the sheep with cruel force. The sheep were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they became food for every wild animal. My flock wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. They were scattered all over the face of the earth, and no one searched or looked for them.

“‘So, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord. This is what the Lord God says: As surely as I live, my flock has been caught and eaten by all the wild animals, because the flock has no shepherd. The shepherds did not search for my flock. No, they fed themselves instead of my flock. So, you shepherds, hear the word of the Lord. This is what the Lord God says: I am against the shepherds. I will blame them for what has happened to my sheep and will not let them tend the flock anymore. Then the shepherds will stop feeding themselves, and I will take my flock from their mouths so they will no longer be their food.” — Ezekiel 34:2-10, NCV [Emphasis added]

As I said, I’m inclined to believe that the “little ones” of Zechariah 13:7 is speaking of the leaders of Jehovah’s people who failed to appreciate their responsibilities before Jehovah. Contrary to their own opinion of themselves as being the ones Jehovah was working through, in Jehovah’s estimation they had made themselves insignificant. As a result, the sheep would be taken away from them, although they had been caused to scatter under the watch of those leading Jehovah’s people who seemed more intent on upholding their own standing and station.

Jehovah would turn His hand against these insignificant “shepherds.”

While Jesus was explaining to his disciples that their abandonment of him in his hour of trial bore relevance to Zechariah’s prophecy, I cannot find reason to limit his application strictly to the disciples in light of (1) Ezekiel’s prophecy that Jehovah’s people “were scattered all over the face of the earth and (2) Jesus himself explaining that he had “other sheep” which needed to be brought in— which subsequently developed into the Christianity we see today as countless former “heathens” (Gentiles) have come to believe that Jesus was the prophesied Messiah and the Son of Man and the Christ, and as a result of their hope toward the Promise, been motivated to change their lives to one more in line with what a follower of Jesus would exemplify to the rest of the world as an emissary to all men of all nations who would return to our Father.

This hasn’t, of course, prevented “goatlike” men from rising up among believers to establish themselves as masters over the faith of the brothers and sisters down through the centuries as we await in anticipation the Day when such ones will be removed with more finality than those of the first century Jerusalem.

Yet the schisms caused by such men who would “put asunder” what Jehovah has joined together with their own distinctions and “right” views serves the unique purpose of allowing us to manifest what is in our heart. We see Christians who become followers of men, for example, rather than staying faithful to our Repurchaser and the one whom He appointed as Shepherd and King. We see Christians whose attitudes change toward other Christians who don’t think like they do, and don’t necessarily see certain things the same way as them. Some Christians even go so far as to dismiss other believers in Jesus as false Christians in much the same way the first-century Judaizers did.

But not all. There continue to be those followers of Jesus who act in the same capacity of love and acceptance as Jesus, looking for the good first in a scattered sheep, and trying to establish a common ground from which they can be a blessing to said ones, even as Jesus did for those who never became his followers. These ones aren’t caught up in schisms and opinions, but rather focus on feeding their fellow believers and otherwise providing what is needed for the person to grow and mature in their faith, and stand all the more firm in their hope.

So, while not a direct and one-to-one parallel, I do believe that the scriptures and history both provide sound enough reasons to believe that all these schisms which constitute Christianity today are part-and-parcel to the “field” which is the world, in which grow wheat and weeds, maturing alongside one another until the Harvest.

Not sure if I covered everything, but I hope this helps answer your question, JoshuaStone.

Submitted for your perusal and consideration,

~~Earthbound

 

"Even among Jehovah’s Witnesses I have witnessed over the last 15 years or so a growing schism associated with what some refer to as the “Future Judgment View,” with its adoptees holding the view that the Watchtower organization is the modern-day Jerusalem which will be destroyed, even though the ones holding this view will “mingle” with mainstream Witnesses in worship while privately holding to their distinction between those around them who don’t see things their way. I’ve even seen some go so far as to saying that the Witnesses unaware of the “FJV” interpretation deserve to be destroyed when the Watchtower goes down, because these Witnesses stayed and didn’t adopt the “heresy,” as the Watchtower would call the Future Judgment View."

Elaborate

 

I'm not sure what I can add here. Have you not encountered Witnesses who hold that there is a coming (future) judgment of the Watchtower organization in direct contrast with the Watchtower's position that said judgment will be against "Christendom" (everyone except the Watchtower's Jehovah's Witnesses) since by the Watchtower's reasoning they have already been judged (1919) and deemed worthy to be Jehovah's exclusive organization of believers?

~~Earthbound

 

Have you not read 2 Thessalonians 2? It says it right there.

It isn't like Jesus is going to come without giving them a chance first (Revelation 11).

Do not be mistaken, The Watchtower will pit itself against these two Witnesses, given the Chance. And since they will deny them in favor of their false parousia, they deny Christ. And I turn Christ will deny them, because they did not take pleasure in righteousness in order that they might be saved.

 

It sounds like a very different topic from this one. Am I missing your connection?

~~Earthbound

 

Where did you get this future judgement view, e-watchman, perimeno?

 

Earthbound,
Thank you for this forum. Very good and well written. One thing that most modern day Christians don’t understand is the background of the peoples who made up the congregation (church) of Corinth. They were a mix of gentiles and Israelites. Paul opening address was to the Israelites. He mentions the “traditions” at the beginning of chapter 11. “Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you.” ( 1 Co 11:2 NASB ) The traditions of the gentiles/Greeks, was quite different.

The word “traditions”, used by Paul is paradidomi (par-ad-id’-o-mee), literally to hand over, give to another the authority or power, to deliver up one to custody, to be judged, condemned, punished, scourged, tormented, put to death. The Israelites were quite familiar with this thought in the laws given to Moses.

The Greek gentiles were more familiar with the philosophy of the Greek teachers and their ideas of the Gods. Paul reminded the congregation of the position of each member, especially between men and women in the congregation. It is a teaching which still causes divisions/schisms today. Humans have a hard time giving up their power. It goes all the way back to Eve wanting the power to be like God, making decisions for herself to chose between right and wrong.

At that time. there were certain Israelites, (I prefer this term because there were still specific tribes existing at that time), who still carried their tribal customs. The “law” forbidding eating certain foods, and teachings about celebration of the passover. They were trying to influence some gentiles to continue these traditions. Those descendants of Abraham, Israelites, also known as Jews, felt more blessed by God then the gentiles. This was also a cause for divisions. Paul called out Peter for causing this problem in Galatia. (Ga 2:14-16) So, it is not much different today. Sad, but true.

 

I'm acquainted with their views, yes. I've also read what Greg Stafford has published through the years, as well as numerous others closely associated with being a member of the Watchtower organization— all of them recognizing the same thing: it's not the people, it's the system which has some significant problems. I've read the arguments of those Witnesses who argue that blood transfusions should be a matter of personal conscience and not an imposed doctrine with consequences for disobedience. I've read the blogs and boards of those outraged at the mishandling of child sexual abuse by the Watchtower organization.

If anything, all of the above serves as examples of schisms among Jehovah's Witnesses today.

But I still see no connection here with 2 Thessalonians 2.

~~Earthbound

 

So you don't see the Watchtower as the man of Lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians 2? Who in the world's history has taught Jesus presence has begun other than the Watchtower? Who makes themselves a god in God's Temple? You can't even use the bathroom without the Watchtower approving it. Who/what is God's Temple (1 Corinthians 3 16)?

The Watchtower has taught the gathering of ourselves to Jesus started in 1914, they teach the Lord's day began in 1914, they teach that Christ's presence began in 1914. And it says this happens in God's Temple, and Jehovah allows them to believe the lie.

Do you see the connection now?

Doesn't their new light and Spiritual Paradise resemble the whitewash of Ezekiel 13, 14?

This isn't a schism, 1914 is utterly false. The schism is on the Watchtower's part, they are the ones enforcing a Satanic doctrine (1914) and are now lying to keep it alive with their laughable overlapping generations.

These men have deviated from the truth saying the resurrection has already begun, they want to be teachers of law when they don't even understand what they teach, they spend their time talking about genealogies, which isn't in anyway related to God.

 

I think those who are seeking blood reformation are not ready to die if need be. Acts is very clear on the matter, "abstain from blood".

Greg Stafford started his own religion, I spoke with him and he doesn't care about 2 Thessalonians 2 and the Watchtower. That guy is more lost than Frank Conger.

And the outrage is justified. Can't remember the specific verse, but in Numbers or Deuteronomy, Jehovah said a woman raped in a field who can't be helped because no one could hear, is not guilty of sin, but her rapist should die. It is obvious from this scripture that for alleged rape, you don't need a second pair of eyes. And since the two Witness rule is one of the few things that carried over from the Jews, this scripture is relevant for handling sex abusers. The Watchtower has happily accepted a $4k per day penalty by the gov for refusal to turn in these predators. So why shouldn't people be mad when their donations are being burned and kingdom Halls are closing and the Governing body is asking for more money even though they just made a billion dollar real estate deal with Trump's kid?

 

While it's an interesting application of the apostle Paul's words, no, I don't see the Watchtower as the man of Lawlessness. And since the Man of Lawlessness is a whole other topic, I'll leave it at that to avoid taking this topic off-track.

~~Earthbound

 

Again, off-topic in my estimation. However, I will say that if you ask those seeking what they believe to be a more rational policy regarding blood transfusions and the Pharisaic nit-picky blood component (policies) that tries to strain the gnat blood, they'll very likely tell you that they are not ready to die needlessly. Jehovah nor Jesus are looking for martyrs.

Isn't this unnecessarily judgmental? When were you appointed judge over others, might I ask?

Is it your position, then, that Christians are to take up causes?

~~Earthbound

 

It's not off topic though, you mentioned this fkj in your original post, and I replied to it.

You just seem content with the way things are ran (Jeremiah 5:31)

Unnecessarily judgemental? You just wrote a sermon about schisms and are now defending the person who is trying to take disciples after himself. Yes he is lost, anyone who thinks they can just start their own religion and teach a new doctrine is delusional. He is an advocate for politics too. The Bible has a few things to say about those who want to start their own sects.

So do you believe 1914?

Isn't the Bible a cause? Jesus said himself he came to cause division in the Earth not peace. So is Paul wrong for standing up against the Christians who were for circumcision? The fantasy of ignorance and apathy for the sake of peace must end. When there are people teaching what is against the Bible, they must be silenced.

 

Where the discussion would go off-topic is in venturing on over to the debate over identifying the "man of lawlessness."

Huh?!

Again, huh?! What I wrote were my reflections on the apostle Paul's discussion about there being divisions, sects, and factions among the followers of Jesus. The primary culprits were the Judaizing Jewish followers, but in due course Peter and others began to be idolized by some believers. (Cf 1 Corinthians 1:12; 3:4)

First, I'm not sure what you want me to do about your feelings and opinion. But I would hope you have discussed this with the individual you are referring to.

Do I believe "1914" what?

Based on this, I'd like to hear your thoughts about why early Christians didn't silence the superapostles which the apostle Paul mentioned as griefing him (Cf 2 Corinthians 11:5) ? Why did early Christians stand by and allow catholicism to take control of the followers of Jesus for centuries?

~~Earthbound

 

Who says they didn't try? Paul had a few things to write about them. Seems, just like today, Satan has overcome the truth. I could ask you the same, why have Christians allowed the Governing Body to enforce 1914? We have a battle against wicked spirit forces.

FYI, I don't think you know, but Greg Stafford has started his own religion, "Christian Witnesses of Jah". This is what I was referring to.

 

How did they try? What did they do? History makes it pretty clear that the catholicization of Christianity didn't happen overnight, so how did astute believers "try" to stop these men from placing themselves in full authority over the followers of Jesus? Just ask them nicely to stop? Kindly remind them that they had steered off-course?

In your opinion, to what extent should a Christian oppose leaders who place the body of Christ at-risk of apostasy?

~~Earthbound

 

You are asking questions that are impossible to answer. Yet we know it happened because Paul wrote about it. Shunning unrepentant sinners was practiced in the 1st Century CE, obviously the true Christians shunned them, so it has been written about in the Bible.

To what extent? Preaching to those who are placed at risk. You cannot just idly stand by and do nothing while the rest are misled, and if it comes to the point of being disfellowshipped, then so be it.

e-watchman and Perimeno have set fine examples for resisting the Apostate teachings of bethel.