1st Century Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ginger2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
oneseeker said:
I am confused. Are you saying that the Didache does not guarantee papal infallibility? :eek:

oneseeker
Click to expand...
I don’t think the Didache addresses Papal infallibility. It isn’t just the Pope who receives the Sacrament of Holy Orders. All priests and bishops do. What the Didache, in my understanding, merely asserts is that not every priest, bishop, or deacon is automatically guaranteed to always speak the truth, just because they received the Sacrament. History, including very recent history, attests to the Didache being true on that one. That is my take, anyway.
 
[Rightlydivide;3038564]You cannot by definition have a denominaton by yourself
Click to expand...
And one man can’t be an island and pretend that he is following Christian truth. No man is an island, Christianity is made up of a family.
Your “church” whatever it is has an authority, makes decisions on doctrinal matters, even if it is you alone, you still make decisions by yourself which is FAR from the Biblical application in Acts 15 where the Apostles (the Church) made binding decisions on the faithful and did so applying Mt 18:15-18.
You cannot change the meanings of words to meet your arguments.
Click to expand...
I’m afraid you can’t escape the reality that you are a product of the reformation. Your pastor went to a Bible college which was started from someone who went to a church founded by someone who started a church founded by someone way way back to the 1500’s, starting with Luther.
 
Bishopite said:
And one man can’t be an island and pretend that he is following Christian truth. No man is an island, Christianity is made up of a family.
Your “church” whatever it is has an authority, makes decisions on doctrinal matters, even if it is you alone, you still make decisions by yourself which is FAR from the Biblical application in Acts 15 where the Apostles (the Church) made binding decisions on the faithful and did so applying Mt 18:15-18.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Bishopite said:
You are #4 in the definition of a denomination.
Is Christianity formulated so that people are alone their only authority?
Isn’t the Biblical application the “family of God?”
Click to expand...
The purpose of Christianity is to spread the gospel. We are a family. You just think I am your step-cousin twice removed because I am not a Catholic.
 
Rightlydivide said:
I have never claimed to be an island. I have not devulged much myself personally but I work cooperatively with everyone in the church. I am not a trouble maker. Sure I have areas that I disagree with, but the focus of the church is following the Bible and soul winning. Doctrinal disputes are…actually I have never really heard one of any substance! I have heard people disagree but never in an unchristian manner. Doctrine is not the focus, because the Bible is not a book about what to believe. If you read the Bible, and I know that you have, it is crucial that we believe the correct doctrine but the vast majority is not open to dispute. Treat others this way, do this and etc. It is a book about what to do with its central them that people must be reached for Christ. And that is the focus. Soulwinning. The great commision, whatever you call it.

It seems as though aren’t being forthright here. You gave the definition of a “denomination” and said you weren’t one since you were your own person. Now you are saying that you do “cooperate” in your church. As the definition you gave said, a demonination is a collective group of religious people with doctrines, leaders.

“a religious group, usually including many local churches, often larger than a sect:”
dictionary.reference.com/browse/denomination
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Rightlydivide said:
The purpose of Christianity is to spread the gospel. We are a family. You just think I am your step-cousin twice removed because I am not a Catholic.
Click to expand...
No, not at all. I used to be Protestant, I was one for thirty-eight years before converting to Catholicism. I understand your position completely.
You are my brother in Christ, however, you are also lacking certain proper beliefs and hold to some that are not within the bounds of Christian orthodoxy. We are separated in a sense; not fully in commuion with each other, yet Eph 4:4-5 says there is “one faith, one baptism, one body, one Lord, one hope.”

The Apostles creed which is dated back to the first or second century says…
There is “one holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.”
 
Ginger2 and RightlyDivide,

This post is purely set up to be divisive and circular…

First of all, catholic teaching and doctrines are all biblical [some explicit and some implicit] none are contrary to what is found in scripture… the Christian faith of the First Century is most closely found in the two historic and apostolic branches of Christianity the Catholic Church [all of its Rites of which the Latin Rite is only one] and the Orthodox Church.

Both of you claim your church [and/or your beliefs] are in the bible and are the embodiment of the first christians … but alas, you have only your personal, infallable decree on that…

You say with one breath that the “Trinity” is an okay term and yet the term is not found any where in the bible … simialrly with “Faith Alone” which is specifically denied by the scriptures…

and yet in a later post a “Discipline” is not a term you will address because it is not “in the bible”

An assertion is made that the Didache states that baptism is to be by immersion only … when clearly it states otherwise …

Infant baptisms… what is it about “Entire households” being baptized that is beyond your comprehension … ? That the jewish community initiated children [marking them in the faith] was common … Entire households means that servants, slaves, infants, children … everyone …

The New Testament [27 books, neatly compiled, and identified as scriptures] did not exist in the first century …

As for the bishops and deacons being selected by the laity … this is actually what occurs to a certain extent even today … a man discerns a call to the priesthood [or the diaconate] and investigates that calling … he may approach a bishop, etc… but he comes forth from a community [it is the same with those who are initiated into the faith at baptism, the community welcomes and accepts the person, sends them forth to the bishop], the period of formation, instruction, discernment follows. So a person is recommended by their faith community, studies, discerns and is presented for ordination. Accepted by the bishop they begin their ministry…a priest then may become a bishop [again this person is called forth from the community], and through the various ministerial offices, even to the pope … this actually is what the Didache is intructing … though in 90 AD, they probably did not require a Masters degree in Theology from an accredited institution … but then doctors in 90 AD did not require a Bachelors in Pre-Med and Doctorate, Specialization and Intership either …
 
Church_Militant said:
Show me someone in this list of ante-Nicene ECF that teach something contrary to current catholic teaching.
Volume 1 - The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus: Clement; Mathetes; Polycarp; Ignatius; Barnabas; Papias; Justin Martyr; Irenaeus
Click to expand...
I found another one. Sorry it took me so long. Yesterday was very busy. It ended with me completely losing a file I was working on - it just vanished!

TATIAN THE ASSYRIAN [A.D. 110-172.]
TATIAN’S ADDRESS TO THE GREEKS

CHAP. XIII.–THEORY OF THE SOUL’S IMMORTALITY.

The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal.[7] Yet it is possible for it not to die. If, indeed, it knows not the truth, it dies, and is dissolved with the body, but rises again at last at the end of the world with the body, receiving death by punishment in immortality. But, again, **if it acquires the knowledge of God, it dies not, although for a time it be dissolved. **

I had never even heard of Tatian before. 🤷
 
And this is one I looked up a long time ago:

This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture-proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. **Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures **(A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church (Oxford: Parker, 1845), The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 4.17).
 
Ginger2 said:
From your list:

Iraneus 130 to 202 AD.

“We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith. For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed “perfect knowledge,” as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles.” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, book 3, 1, 1)
Click to expand...
Note that he says that he first leaned of it by oral tradition before he ever got into the scripture. I assume you are using this as a support for Sola Scriptura, but it doesn’t work my friend. 🙂
 
Ginger2 said:
I found another one. Sorry it took me so long. Yesterday was very busy. It ended with me completely losing a file I was working on - it just vanished!

TATIAN THE ASSYRIAN [A.D. 110-172.]
TATIAN’S ADDRESS TO THE GREEKS

CHAP. XIII.–THEORY
Click to expand...
OF THE SOUL’S IMMORTALITY.

The soul is not in itself immortal, O Greeks, but mortal.[7] Yet it is possible for it not to die. If, indeed, it knows not the truth, it dies, and is dissolved with the body, but rises again at last at the end of the world with the body, receiving death by punishment in immortality. But, again, **if it acquires the knowledge of God, it dies not, although for a time it be dissolved. **

I had never even heard of Tatian before. :shrug:And just as well it seems. 🤷 There are still people who hold to this error even today. However, at that time this was part of an ongoing debate that was settled by the church and has not changed since.

Did you notice the quote of St. Ignatius of Antioch concerning the Eucharistic Real Presence in my blog article? That’s one of the things that I think is far more critical since it is the “source and summit of our faith.”
 
Ginger2 said:
And this is one I looked up a long time ago:

This seal have thou ever on thy mind; which now by way of summary has been touched on in its heads, and if the Lord grant, shall hereafter be set forth according to our power, with Scripture-proofs. For concerning the divine and sacred Mysteries of the Faith, we ought not to deliver even the most casual remark without the Holy Scriptures: nor be drawn aside by mere probabilities and the artifices of argument. **Do not then believe me because I tell thee these things, unless thou receive from the Holy Scriptures the proof of what is set forth: for this salvation, which is of our faith, is not by ingenious reasonings, but by proof from the Holy Scriptures **(A Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church (Oxford: Parker, 1845), The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 4.17).
Click to expand...
Here you actually have all three legs of the divine revelation in evidence.

Magisterium, Oral Tradition, and Scripture.
 
YADA said:
Ginger2 and RightlyDivide,

This post is purely set up to be divisive and circular …
Click to expand...
Another psychic?

Only God can see into a person’s heart. IMHO, his thread will be much more productive if posters refrain from worrying about others motives and stick to discussing this issue.
 
Church_Militant said:
Note that he says that he first leaned of it by oral tradition before he ever got into the scripture. I assume you are using this as a support for Sola Scriptura, but it doesn’t work my friend. 🙂
Click to expand...
No, I am responding to your request. You provided a link.

To be honest, I don’t remember how we got into this either…🤷
 
Ginger2 said:
Another psychic?

Only God can see into a person’s heart. IMHO, his thread will be much more productive if posters refrain from worrying about others motives and stick to discussing this issue.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Church_Militant said:
And just as well it seems. 🤷 There are still people who hold to this error even today. However, at that time this was part of an ongoing debate that was settled by the church and has not changed since.

Did you notice the quote of St. Ignatius of Antioch concerning the Eucharistic Real Presence in my blog article? That’s one of the things that I think is far more critical since it is the “source and summit of our faith.”
Click to expand...
agreed!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top