What is An Apostate Christian?

apostasy pic2Apostasy is a grievous sin. It means “to fall away” from the faith. In the same way that Lucifer and one third of the angels fell away from God, Christians can fall away from God. I won’t argue whether they were ever with God or not, but at some point they made a public declaration of their rebellion.

For Lucifer, the moment of rebellion came when he proudly declared he wanted to be

Fall of Lucifer
Michael casts out rebel angels. Illustration by Gustave Doré for John Milton‘s Paradise Lost. (From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Heaven)

like the Most High” (Isa. 14:14b, KJV). Adam and Eve fell in the same way. The serpent told Eve she wouldn’t die, but would have her eyes opened and would “be as gods” (Gen. 3:5, KJV), “knowing good and evil” (Gen. 3: 4, KJV).

 

Apostate Christians believe the same lies as Eve and the fallen angels. They believe in extra-biblical (something added to the Word of God) teachings or revelations that claim to make them wise–even if it conflicts with the Word of God.

The beginning of all evil can be found in this inclination to add to the Word of God. The Old Testament prophets, and even Jesus, called this a form of spiritual adultery. Is it any coincidence that Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Hosea, and all the other Old Testament prophets framed their arguments against apostate Israel in terms of a marriage relationship?

Jeremiah revealed the heart of God when he said Israel “played the harlot with many lovers” (Jer. 3:1, KJV) when she added Baal worship to the worship of Yahweh. Because the Israelites of Jeremiah’s time never stopped worshiping God, and just added Baal (the god of prosperity and fertility) to their worship, they never even considered that they had fallen from God.

Hosea was even commanded to marry an unfaithful woman as an allegorical picture of Israel’s adultery. God lamented the situation, asking how long his people would be incapable of purity (Hosea 8:5). To Him, Israel was like an unfaithful wife who kept other lovers on the side.

Jesus carried on this line of thought when he pointed to the Pharisees and Sadducees and called them “a wicked and adulterous generation” (Matt. 16:4). Why were they evil? Because they needed the addition of a “sign” (the Word wasn’t enough) to prove Jesus was the Messiah, and they had added their own traditions to the Word of God, “teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mark 7:7).

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word na’aph means both “apostasy” and “adultery.” (1)  The Greek word for “adultery” is moicheuo. (2) Its root word is moichos, (3) which, like the Old Testament word for adultery (na’aph), also refers to an apostate. In fact, the Greek word for “falling away” is apostasia. It means “defection from truth, apostasy, falling away, forsake.”(4)

Spiritual adultery (adding something to the worship of God, or adding to his Word) is the same thing as apostasy! It’s also the same thing as falling away from God. When Satan added his lies to the Word, and Eve believed them and ate of the forbidden tree, or when one third of the angels believed they could worship God AND Satan, they fell away from God.

When the Christian church adds to the Word, or worships something alongside of the Word, they are fallen away from God. As I hope I’ve documented on this website, spiritual adultery, or apostasy, has happened over and over in Christian history, and when it occurs, it’s always accompanied by war, torture, slavery, abuse, genocide, tyranny, and all other forms of human suffering.

While progressives and atheists point to fundamentalist Christians as purveyors of evil, nothing could be further from the truth. History reveals that it was apostates who betrayed God, and consequently, betrayed humanity.

forbidden fruit
Depiction of the original sin by Peter Paul Rubens

When Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, the whole world fell from a state of perfect provision–and human suffering began. When Israel began worshiping Baal or Molech alongside of Yahweh, they no longer treated each other with kindness and love (read Isaiah 1!).

And when the church began to blend Greek philosophy and Roman ritualism with the Word, darkness began to descend upon all of western civilization. It remained in that state of darkness for a millennium–until the call went out during the Reformation to return to the Word alone (sola scriptura) as our source of truth.

There have always been two entities in the world claiming to be the CHURCH, but only one of them is the true church. The other is an apostate. She is a harlot with other lovers on the side. Using the name of “Jesus,” she goes around seducing people away from the truth of the Word, convincing them that they will be wiser for it. No need to get rid of God–just add the current wisdom of the world to the teachings of Christ and create a jumbled up blend that is no longer the truth. And by the way, the destruction that follows can be blamed on God!

For God’s sake, can’t we keep the Word of God pure?

• It was the false church who burned people at the stake by blending in Greek philosophy, Roman ritualism, and false teaching with the doctrines of Christ.

• It was the false church who squelched science by blending Aristotelian natural philosophy into the doctrines of Christ.

• It was the false church who supported slavery by blending scientific racism (polygenism) in with the doctrines of Christ.

• It was the false church that supported abusive colonialism by blending Darwinism into the doctrines of Christ.

• It was the false church who supported Nazism by blending in the latest philosophy (Hegelianism) and science (Darwinism) in with the teachings of Christ.

The burning, torture, and tyranny of the Inquisition, slavery, the Holocaust, ignorance, and abuse of the helpless has never been caused by a faithful Christian who loves the Bible and keep its doctrines pure, but it has always been caused by an apostate Christian who tosses aside the Word of God for another source of wisdom.

the shack
Author
William P Young
Cover artist
Dave Aldrich
Country
United States
Language
English
Genre
Fiction
Publisher
Windblown Media, FaithWordsHodder & Stoughton
Publication date
May 2007
Media type
Print, e-book, audiobook
Pages
256 pp
ISBN
0-9647292-3-7
OCLC
166263178

We can see this same challenge in our own generation. How many Christians have gone astray by adding Darwinism, psychology, quantum physics, prophetic revelations, political ideologies, business principles, mammon (through the prosperity gospel), angelic visitations (such as those that began Islam or Mormonism), ecumenism, contemplative spirituality, dreams, visions, or even fictional narratives (such as the book The Shack)?

Whether or not a person is faithful to the scriptures is a sure way to discern whether a person has become apostate. If a Christian places other sources of knowledge or wisdom above, or beside, the sure teachings of the scriptures, they may be going astray in much the same way as an unfaithful spouse–and someone will suffer for their unfaithfulness to God.  Satan and Adam and Eve are examples of the consequences that come from falling away.

Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.” (1 Cor. 4:1-2, KJV)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(1) James Strong, na’aph (#5003), “Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary Accompanying the Exhaustive Concordance.” The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1980), 75.

(2) James Strong, moicheuo (#3431). “A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament; With Their Renderings in the Authorized English Version.” The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1980), 49.

(3) Ibid., moichos (#3432), 49.

(4) Ibid., apostosia (#646), 15.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19 Comments

  1. They believe in extra-biblical (something added to the Word of God) teachings or revelations that claim to make them wise–even if it conflicts with the Word of God Not really. I/we just don’t believe the story. I’ve not added nor subtracted to claim any special wisdom at all. The story is so full of holes any rational person that actually read it would see it’s fiction. Made up. That’s all. 2000 years of non results. No blind see, no lame are healed. No signs follow any of you. With the kind of domination Christianity has had, the world should be pure bliss by now. You have a monopoly and have failed to produce results. That’s it. Pretty simple.

    Like

    1. If it’s in the Bible it’s the truth, but some people who believed in God have added their philosophical, scientific, or other types of views to Christianity and created a monstrous mix. For example, science was stunted when the medieval Catholic church blended Aristotle’s “natural philosophy” in with church teachings. In order for science to thrive scientists had to break the stranglehold that Greek philosophy had on the church. Galileo wasn’t fighting against the teachings in the Bible; he was fighting against Aristotelian views set up as truth in the church. If church doctrine would have remained pure, this conflict would not have happened. Aristotle believed that the earth was at the center of the solar system. The Bible doesn’t teach that. Aristotle believed that the earth was made up of four elements (earth, water, air, and fire). The Bible doesn’t teach that. Aristotle believed in spontaneous generation. The Bible certainly doesn’t teach that. Francis Bacon, the founder of the scientific method, wrote “The New Organon” to counter Aristotle’s “Organon.” Aristotle’s teachings were fables while the Bible teachings are the truth. Perhaps you could read more about this in my post, “God and the Scientific Revolution.”

      Liked by 1 person

      1. So the people that believed in god, added to the Bible on their own, took out what they wanted, included traditional stories that never happened, somehow make the Bible true? You don’t really believe that do you? Noah, the ark, the exodus with Moses, not even the Jews believe those any more. Geopolitical fiction, is what they’re calling it. This isn’t even new. What’s up?

        Liked by 1 person

      2. I believe the Bible is true because it’s message is miraculous, it has always been on the right side of history, and because there is evidence everywhere that points to its truthfulness. The fact that people weren’t faithful to its message doesn’t make me reject the Bible.

        Like

      1. I’ve been reading about these discoveries in creationist material, but I thought I should provide links to secular news sources.

        https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/

        https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-soft-tissue-recovered-eight-cretaceous-era-fossils-180955538/

        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5214798.stm

        The discovery of soft tissue in dinosaur bones is challenging the notion that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago.

        Even the way that dinosaurs have been preserved, through the rapid covering of sediment brought about by an “extinction-level” event which scientists claim was a large meteor hitting the oceans and causing a flood (not the flood of Noah, mind you) fits the biblical narrative. It’s curious that a massive flood threw dinosaurs and other animals (that aren’t extinct and are still alive right now) together in a mass of jumbled up bones as found in places like the Morrison Formation in the western U.S. and the Karoo Formation in Africa.

        The reason that soft tissue was never found before was because scientists DIDN’T LOOK. They assumed the evolutionary narrative of millions of years was true and never attempted to find soft tissue. Now, slowly (because the scientific community cannot bear the possible ramifications), more and more scientists are discovering the age of the actual dinosaur and not the composition of the surrounding rock they’re found in.

        I realize that this news has been tossed aside by many in the scientific community (at this point), but my knowledge of history tells me that God’s Word will stand, and that “science” that isn’t tethered to the truth of the Bible will be discredited AGAIN. (i.e. polygenism, eugenics, spontaneous generation, Darwinism [as a contributor to abusive colonialism and Nazism], etc…) On the other hand, scientific advances based on creationism (pasteurization, germ theory, canned food, wound protection, OT cleanliness laws, anesthesia, etc…) have greatly blessed the world!

        Like

      2. The soft tissue argument for an early date in dinos has been explained and debunked ages ago, even by the scientist who discovered it and she was furious when idiot creationists co-opted her discovery for their own ridiculous ends. Yet even when the tissue was fully explained Creationists have refused to acknowledge the scientific explanation and still drone on about it.
        Such gross anti-scientific behavior is not only flat out disingenuous but those who persist in spewing out this nonsense are in all probability lying.

        There is little point in launching into a detailed explanation as you are apparently impervious to science and reason.

        The bone graveyards feature no modern mammals and certainly no human bones.

        Furthermore, there is no evidence whatsoever of humans and dinosaurs co existing.

        However, if you can point to a rabbit fossil in pre Cambrian rock I may reconsider my position.

        In the meantime, you have , unfortunately allowed yourself to be duped.

        As the Doobie Brothers once sang:
        ”Only a fool believes”

        Liked by 1 person

      3. The reason that there is still controversy about the work of Mary Schweitzer is that there isn’t enough evidence to support her claim. It hasn’t been debunked, it just hasn’t been replicated enough. In fact, more and more scientists are now discovering soft tissue in dinosaur fossils. And why would it be that there wasn’t more evidence of the existence of soft tissue? Because scientists just assumed that the fossils would be millions of years old since that was the accepted evolutionary narrative.

        The jury is still out on this one, Arkenaten. It will be interesting to observe the outcome.

        Blessings,

        Diana

        Like

      4. I don’t think Mary Schweizer has debunked her conclusions on soft tissue found in dinosaur bones. Here is a video she just did in September 2017 where she explains her research, and wonders how to convince the scientific community to accept her results. She said they rejected her work, even though most critics never tried to replicate it for themselves.

        She was also interviewed in a recent Science magazine news article where they describe her quest for dinosaur fossils to test: “Now, on her Hell Creek expedition, she hopes to find new, well-preserved fossils that might harbor ancient proteins—and new evidence to convince the doubters.” Then she says this: “I don’t care what they say about me,” she says. “I know my work is good.”

        https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/09/i-don-t-care-what-they-say-about-me-paleontologist-stares-down-critics-her-hunt

        Where did you hear that she agreed her research had been debunked?

        Like

      5. I apologise. I should have expressed myself clearer.
        She was correct regarding the soft tissue.
        Or certainly seems to have been, notwithstanding the controversy about replicating her experiments.
        Be that as it may, I am not a paleontologist.

        When I mentioned debunked, I was referring to nonsensical claims by Young Earth Creationists that her research had ”proved” that dinosaurs were only thousands, rather than millions, of years old.
        She was once a YEC but realised that she had been duped.
        You will note, I hope, that she accepts evolution.
        Perhaps it’s time you did also?

        I will try to ensure my wording is on the money in future.

        Liked by 1 person

      6. Ark and Mrs. Lesperance,

        To Ark first: As you know, I don’t usually give much attention or credance to any faith-based opinions and bias such as this blog’s content here. I especially do not when organizations or individuals like this and hundreds of others around the globe pretend to be professionals or experts in a field of science they have no business in attempting to critique, much less legitimately challenge the real and reputable experts in the various fields of science. But I’ll make a quick exception on this instance. 😉

        However, having my former many years in undefineable “Christianity” (even the recent rhetoric of True Christians ™ ) via under-grad, post-grad, seminary, missions, and church staff and leadership, I can most definitely speak to Fundamental Christians who hold/claim their Scriptures are literally God-breathed and inerrant, equalling in their minds that ultimate truth can only be found in their 4th-century CE canonized New Testament and Old Testament. This short, oversimplified background, of course, skips over the complex theology and nature of their Holy Spirit too. That’s a whole other different thesis/debate/assessment beyond the scope of this blog-post. But please note, it can’t and shouldn’t be forgotten when dissecting the very HUMAN ability or mistake to turn good feelings into self-perceived truth that applies to (and is projected onto) all people on the planet. You already know all of this Ark, but it needs stating here.

        To Mrs. Lesperance: Your reply to Ark’s question and also to the state and operation of modern scientific research and publication was quite limited and skewed toward one lens. It lacked a rounder understanding of how it is impossible to misinterpret the dating of these species. I’d like to offer some additional lenses and sources for the sake of a more equitable examination of species evolution and the dating of such evidence and fossils. Thanks.

        ———————————

        I hope all of these links appear in my next comment/reply. I do this because many blog-owners set limits on comments with more than 1 or 2 hyper-links embedded. If it doesn’t show up below Mrs. Lesperance, please Approve it in your Spam folder. Thank you.

        Like

      7. Hi Professor Taboo,

        “It lacked a rounder understanding of how it is impossible to misinterpret the dating of these species.”

        It’s impossible to misinterpret the dating of dinosaurs?

        Like

      8. Yes, according to the consensus of relevant scientists in all the relevant fields or disciplines, not just one or two. The sheer number of scientific experts in a variety of interconnected fields/disciplines is quite large. And when one is speaking in terms of date-ranges of or margins of error about fossilized remains that are simply 300-years to 1,000 years give or take, that range doesn’t detract from the overall accuracy. It’s splitting hairs so to speak. Furthermore, when one utilizes a LARGE and wide vista of interrelated (yet independent) fields of science, which willingly collaborate with other disciplines, to support or reject various hypotheses based upon the cumulative data/evidence… you hedge against error and bias.

        Furthermore still, supposing for the sake of argument (which is good to do by the way) that Homo sapiens did live and walk with dinosaurs of say the later Mesozoic Era in the Cretaceous Period (145 – 65 million years ago) or to assume there are sufficient remains of dinosaurs from 60,000 – 40,000 years ago — when Homo sapiens first appeared in eastern Africa — are discovered for the first time ever and a carnivorous dinosaur with the remains of Homo sapien bones or particles in its/their stomachs, intestines, or bowels… THEN there is reason for reexamining many time-tables. Yes, even science will allow for a 0.01 – 0.2% chance of error. “Absolutes” or hair-splitting just doesn’t work when discussing pre-Historic fossils and time-periods. It often doesn’t work today either.

        That said, science already have many pre-Historic animal remains where their very last meal was found intact in their stomachs. Paleontologists can deduce the same findings with the current records of dinosaurs. To date, no Homo sapien remains have been found in carnivorous dinosaurs. And that’s just one implication that humans probably (certainly?) were not around.

        P.S. I also submitted a second comment above with 4-5 links to science articles about this subject. They are likely in your Spam folder, if you would please approve them. Thank you.

        Like

Leave a Reply to Diana Lesperance Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s