For Nick's benefit, I have detailed precisely (where possible) the errors contained within Livergood's assertions regarding Christianity.
Point 1:
The fact that the Church was liturgical, and sacramental, and eucharistic, is in itself sufficient proof that, from the very first day, the message was that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and co-equal in all things with the Father:
"And he is before all, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he may hold the primacy: Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father, that all fullness should dwell; And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven."
It is inconceivable that the first Christians, drawn from the Jews, would pray to anyone but God. The fact therefore, that their liturgical celebrations focussed on Christ, clearly signifies their belief that Son and the Father are One.
(I am willing to accept that Livergood in his ignorance does not understand the usage of the term 'Kurios' (Lord) with respect to Jesus Christ, but even so the claims and assertion's of Jesus' divinity is evident. Such ignorance would seem to be in accord with his general ignorance of Christian doctrine generally)
So this assertion is factually wrong. I leave it to the reader to determine whether it's an error or a lie.
+++
Point 2:
"Now, O you, my children, our Instructor (Jesus Christ) is like His Father God, whose son He is, sinless, blameless, and with a soul devoid of passion; God in the form of man, stainless, the minister of His Father's will, the Word who is God, who is in the Father, who is at the Father's right hand, and with the form of God is God."
Clement of Alexandria, Pedagogus, I, 2, 1.
italics my emphasis
"The Lord ministers all good and all help, both as man and as God: as God, forgiving our sins; and as man, training us not to sin."
Ibid. I, 3, 1.
So this assertion is factually wrong. I leave it to the reader to determine whether it's an error or a lie.
+++
Point 3:
"Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets."
Matthew 22:36; Mark 12:29 ...
"But he answering, said to them: Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and precepts of men. For leaving the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, the washing of pots and of cups: and many other things you do like to these. And he said to them: Well do you make void the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition. "
Mark 7:6-9.
So this assertion is factually wrong. I leave it to the reader to determine whether it's an error or a lie.
+++
Here's three points to be going on with. Pick any one you like, but please address the issue at hand, by responding to the point, not by evasive and sentimental statements/appeals to so-called esoterica, or ad hominems.
I suggest you tackle just one point to begin with.
Thomas
Point 1:
The implication here being there was no teaching of Jesus as God before the fourth century ... not in the Gospels, nor the letters of Paul, nor the non-canonical documents, nor the writings of the fathers: Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, Papius, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen ...Within a short time, there came into being a new sacerdotal state-supported Church which misrepresented Jesus as a god.
The fact that the Church was liturgical, and sacramental, and eucharistic, is in itself sufficient proof that, from the very first day, the message was that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and co-equal in all things with the Father:
"And he is before all, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he may hold the primacy: Because in him, it hath well pleased the Father, that all fullness should dwell; And through him to reconcile all things unto himself, making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth, and the things that are in heaven."
It is inconceivable that the first Christians, drawn from the Jews, would pray to anyone but God. The fact therefore, that their liturgical celebrations focussed on Christ, clearly signifies their belief that Son and the Father are One.
(I am willing to accept that Livergood in his ignorance does not understand the usage of the term 'Kurios' (Lord) with respect to Jesus Christ, but even so the claims and assertion's of Jesus' divinity is evident. Such ignorance would seem to be in accord with his general ignorance of Christian doctrine generally)
So this assertion is factually wrong. I leave it to the reader to determine whether it's an error or a lie.
+++
Point 2:
I shall not address Paul, as being too easy, I shall not address Marcion, as he was wrong on many points, so to refer just to Clement and Origen, 'favourites' of these pseudo-esoterists:... Paul, Clement of Alexandria, Marcion and Origen understood Jesus' true teachings and did not view him as a deity but as a mystical teacher.
"Now, O you, my children, our Instructor (Jesus Christ) is like His Father God, whose son He is, sinless, blameless, and with a soul devoid of passion; God in the form of man, stainless, the minister of His Father's will, the Word who is God, who is in the Father, who is at the Father's right hand, and with the form of God is God."
Clement of Alexandria, Pedagogus, I, 2, 1.
italics my emphasis
"The Lord ministers all good and all help, both as man and as God: as God, forgiving our sins; and as man, training us not to sin."
Ibid. I, 3, 1.
So this assertion is factually wrong. I leave it to the reader to determine whether it's an error or a lie.
+++
Point 3:
"Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For amen I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law, till all be fulfilled." Matthew 5:17-18Both Jesus and Paul made it clear that Christianity was decidedly not an extension of Judaism.
"Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first commandment. And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets."
Matthew 22:36; Mark 12:29 ...
"But he answering, said to them: Well did Isaias prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. And in vain do they worship me, teaching doctrines and precepts of men. For leaving the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, the washing of pots and of cups: and many other things you do like to these. And he said to them: Well do you make void the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition. "
Mark 7:6-9.
So this assertion is factually wrong. I leave it to the reader to determine whether it's an error or a lie.
+++
Here's three points to be going on with. Pick any one you like, but please address the issue at hand, by responding to the point, not by evasive and sentimental statements/appeals to so-called esoterica, or ad hominems.
I suggest you tackle just one point to begin with.
Thomas