[Springfield Reformer]

How was it off base from the start? Didn’t Jesus personally instruct the Apostles? Was His teaching somehow flawed?

Straw man.  No Protestant teaches that Jesus' teachings were flawed.  

There is a difference between people being people (vain, greedy, etc.) and beliefs. While the whole “I belong to Apollo” thing was vanity, the Truth of Jesus Christ wasn’t at issue.

Really? Did you miss that whole mess in the book of Galatians? "Another Gospel."  Or "Another Jesus" at Corinth? Pretty serious charges, and right there during the apostolic era, even before the period addressed in Revelation.

BTW, the various dust-ups in the Revelation 2-3 churches were no small thing either.  Let's take a look:

1. Ephesus, the orthodox but out of focus church.  They had great consistency of doctrine.  They even hated an early heretical sect called the Nickolaitans.  That sect was not a vanity issue.  They aparently actively tried to justify sexual misconduct, probably as an attmept to harmonize the Dianna cult of Ephesus with Christian belief, so clearly an attack on doctirne as it applied to Christian morality. But despite this favorable report on their orthodoxy, Jesus still finds fault, because they had left their first love.  Somehow a shift was occurring, where the focus of their love was moving away from where it belonged, and so despite their orthodoxy, they were still at risk of losing their candlestick. Orthodox but fallen.  Orthodox but about to die. Not trivial.

2. Smyrna, church of the martyrs. No fault was found here. Only an admonition to be faithful unto death.  Presumably there could be some who needed to hear that, or else they might fail at the moment of truth. May we all endure unto the end as well as these.

3. Pergamos, church of martyrs and Nickolaitans. What a mess.  Here is a church under extreme duress, just like Smyrna, and credited for their faithfuness, yet they tolerated the Nickolaitan heresy, and were caught up in various ongoing, uncorrected sins in the church, dancing with the enemy.  And here the Nickolaitan heresy is identified expressly as doctrine.  This should remove all doubt that the early church, right out of the box, was in a pitched fight to retain it's identity in Christ, as a matter of being required to fend off doctrinal deviation.

4. Thyatira vs Jezebel.  Again, they had a faction where the doctrinal deviation profoundly affected Christian morals.  This is the sort of church that no doubt might have tolerated any of the modern deviancy movements you complain about.  And this "Jezebel" was more that just a faction leader.  She was apparently a true prototype of the classic cullt leader, not satisfied with merely teaching false doctrine, but imposing herself as a wanna-be prophetess, using the false claim of direct revelation from God to speak against plain apostolic teaching.  Given a clear choice between the record of apostolic teaching (which we have in Scripture) versus a self-affirming and contrary prophetess, the assembly at Thyatira tried to keep both.  It didn't work.  Jesus would not permit it.

5. Sardis, the zombie church. They had works. They had a name for being alive.  But they were nearly dead.  This is not mere vanity.  This is a departure from the heart of Christian teaching, that our life is our connection with our Savior, His working in us to bring forth His life, rivers of living water. Lose that, and you lose everything.  You resemble a church, but you have become one of the living dead.  Is this a doctrinal problem?  Yes, if spiritual life constitutes doctrine.  What is the greatest doctrine? Love God with everything you have, and love your neighbor as yourself. Fail that, and miss the meaning of everything.

6. Philadelphia? Apparently no error to correct here, only an admonition to endure the difficulties, because there will be a time of relief at the end.

7. Laodicea, the materialist church.  Apparently that whole area of doctrine that had to do with not getting attached to or reliant upon worldly goods had been ignored by them.  And there is actual theology to that.  If we have faith in God to take care of our material needs, such that we do not rely on them but on Him, He will care for us.  But if we shift the focus of our faith from God to things, we have become idolaters, for the coveting of stuff, even while making a show of being Christian, is idolatry, and contrary to the most basic doctrines taught by Jesus and the apostles.

So, going back to the original question, if the Church has been corrupted “since the beginning,” how do you know what to trust, and what not to trust? Since the Canon of Scripture was closed in 397 AD, what corruptions took place after that? Were they corrected? If so, by whom?

This is the epistemological question. It's not easy for anybody. At some point you have to choose whether you will believe the voice of man or the voice of God. As Jesus said, man shall live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.  Scripture was present and active among the sons and daughters of men well before the Roman denomination decided to rubber sttamp what the whole Christian world had already recognized as the voice of God in Scripture. (a status, BTW, never accorded the deuterocanon so popular with Rome).

For those who dissent from the Catholic Church, it is an easy charge to make that it is “corrupted.” However, when one goes back to the beginning, and examines the teachings, one finds that aside from defeated heresies, “corruption” began with the Reformation, and the removal of books from the Bible. From there, any number of novel teachings and beliefs have followed.

Sorry, as demonstrated above, your assessment of the history of corrumption is well off the mark.  Clear problems were raising their ugly head during the apostolic era. For example, the early gnosticism addressed in the epistles of John was not "defeated" in the absolute sense.  That error is still with us today, and certain aspects of it have permeated the theology of major religions, not the least of which is Islam.

So it is not at all surprising that the purveyors of such error should rise to great temporal power, able to hound and persecute those who struggled to remain faithful. Like the commercial, "It's what they do."  

But the Ekklesia of Jesus Christ was never intended to operate like any carnal organization of man, fueled by the power of human perstige and eventiually even the power of the sword. To the contrary, Jesus taught that His kingdom was not of this world.  Why are we constantly reminded that the Lord knows those who are His, the whole wheats and tares dilemma? Because we don't control this organization. It is a spiritual reality, and God has no problem tracing the history of it, or who are the true members of it.  That true accounting, which I know would be great if we could do it ourselves, has not been left to us to do. We walk by faith, not by sight. Our job is to be faithful to what we have been given, the word of God, the working of the Spirit of God, the faithful teaching of the Gospel, and fellowship with the people of God.  God will sort out later who got it right and who didn't.  

The novelties continue, such as “gay” clergy, support for abortion, acceptance of divorce, and a number of other moral issues. Since there is no recognized authority among non-Catholics (excluding the Orthodox), any belief can be supported by one’s own interpretation of Scripture. That is also why there are so many non-Catholic denominations.

As noted above, even the early churches wrestled with false teachers who sought to corrupt Christian teaching and morals. The Lord will preserve those who belong to Him. Proof of corruption at any stage of Christian history is only proof that the word of God is true, that man is bent to doing evil from the moment he is born, and only a divine miracle of grace can save him from it.  Else he will suppress the truth in unrighteousness, even as Paul says, and will seek to dispace the glory of the Creator with the worship of created things, descending into the depths of idolatry and it's close cousin perversion.  Any "denomination" constituted of sinful men and women will have that problem.  

But for those who have become new creations in Christ, we see that the old ways of the flesh have passed away; all things have become new. Just as with the churches of Revelation, it's the relationship with Jesus that matters.

Peace,

SR

[redleghunter]

Thank you for the Biblical exegesis of the 7 churches.

[af_vet_1981]

1. Ephesus, the orthodox but out of focus church. They had great consistency of doctrine. They even hated an early heretical sect called the Nickolaitans. That sect was not a vanity issue. They apparently actively tried to justify sexual misconduct, probably as an attmept to harmonize the Dianna cult of Ephesus with Christian belief, so clearly an attack on doctirne as it applied to Christian morality. But despite this favorable report on their orthodoxy, Jesus still finds fault, because they had left their first love. Somehow a shift was occurring, where the focus of their love was moving away from where it belonged, and so despite their orthodoxy, they were still at risk of losing their candlestick. Orthodox but fallen. Orthodox but about to die. Not trivial.

It seems to me there is something obvious in this scripture staring at us.
1. What is not even mentioned as relevant ? Faith or belief. So much for Sola Fide.
2. What is fundamental to the relationship with the Messiah ? Works, which are really, faith which worketh by love.
3. What happens to one who does not repent and overcome ? Was that one justified from all sins, past, present, and future ? No OSAS evident in this passage.

Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted. Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches;,To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

Revelation, Catholic chapter two, Protestant verses one to seven,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James
boldness and underlining mine

[af_vet_1981]

Smyrna, church of the martyrs. No fault was found here. Only an admonition to be faithful unto death. Presumably there could be some who needed to hear that, or else they might fail at the moment of truth. May we all endure unto the end as well as these.

I agree; I would add two points
1. Again, the preemince of works is obvious, albeit works is faith working by love.
2. A famous verse, championed by those who hate the Jewish people first by denying they are Jews, occurs first to the angel of the church of Smyrna.

   And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive; I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are even Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; He that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death.
   
   Revelation, Catholic chapter two, Protestant verses eight to eleven,
   as authorized, but not authored,
   by King James
   boldness mine