A Church like the early Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter ralphinal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BrianH said:
You know I have always thought when reading Paul that it sounds A LOT like Pentecostal churches or heck…Publisher…a little like your church too 😉
Click to expand...
Paul’s description of what he wanted for members of The Church resemble the monastic orders (friaries, convents, etc…).

No marriage, communal living, complete devotion to God.

From what I know (coming from a Pentecostal family), sacramentals (something Paul used) aren’t allowed.

But Catholic Monks and Nuns use them.

Also, the Primitive Church used The Septugaint as their Old Testament so no Protestant Church qualifies as resembling The Primitive Church.

Only those that study and quote from the same books that The Apostles quoted from can be seen to resemble The First Christian Church.
 
If they were “just like the early church” the would put their Bibles on the shelf and never look at them again, because they didn’t have it.
 
Well since “Catholics” aren’t “Bible Churches”,
doesn’t this make us the first church by default?

:rotfl:

So there were NO “bible churches” back then, huh?
 
SyCarl said:
They are a type of Anabaptist.

hutterites.org/
Click to expand...
I will give them credit on two fronts. They are dedicated to the cause as they see it. 100% sold on it. And, they actually altered the Apostle’s Creed to fit their church. It says “holy Christian” and “fellowship of saints.” They did not let it slip by them.

This thread is funny, and a little informative. I still would like to hear from more Protestants and non-Catholic Christians.

allischalmers, you put it out there: does your church live communally? If not, why not? If not, why do you claim to be like the early one?
 
We’re stuck with ourselves here.

Not too many Protestants come here.

Those that do come to defend their church almost always restort to getting nasty or just outrightly quit when pushed to answer questions directly instead of changing subjects.

The Protestants that “are” here are nice people and even if they don’t agree with us doctrinally, they aren’t disagreeble souls. 🙂

But we have to ask our questions here.

If we ask them on a Protestant site,
we get kicked off of their boards.
 
ralphinal said:
I will give them credit on two fronts. They are dedicated to the cause as they see it. 100% sold on it. And, they actually altered the Apostle’s Creed to fit their church. It says “holy Christian” and “fellowship of saints.” They did not let it slip by them.

This thread is funny, and a little informative. I still would like to hear from more Protestants and non-Catholic Christians.

allischalmers, you put it out there: does your church live communally? If not, why not? If not, why do you claim to be like the early one?
Click to expand...
Would the Amish and Mennonites (similar to Hutterites) also fit in that category as well?
 
2ndGen said:
Paul’s description of what he wanted for members of The Church resemble the monastic orders (friaries, convents, etc…).

No marriage, communal living, complete devotion to God.

From what I know (coming from a Pentecostal family), sacramentals (something Paul used) aren’t allowed.

But Catholic Monks and Nuns use them.

Also, the Primitive Church used The Septugaint as their Old Testament so no Protestant Church qualifies as resembling The Primitive Church.

Only those that study and quote from the same books that The Apostles quoted from can be seen to resemble The First Christian Church.
Click to expand...
Do not overstate that 2nd Generation. The Septugaint was used by early Christians but so were eclectic texts and the many quotations match the masoretic texts. Protestant AND Catholic scholars agree on that for the most part.
Then one has to ascertain what that Septugaint looked like. The oldest copies of the LXX have a huge amount of differences in readings and so forth.
Do not overstate the no marriage thing either. We know the Apostles were married and while Paul was not, the issue is far from settled
 
Since Brian H reiterated the part about which texts were quoted in the NT, it should be noted that both the Masoretic (Hebrew) and Septuagint (Greek) were both widely quoted. (for starters see Gleason Archer & C.G. Chirichigno, “Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey”)
 
BrianH
Click to expand...
Do not overstate that 2nd Generation. The Septugaint was used by early Christians but so were eclectic texts and the many quotations match the masoretic texts. Protestant AND Catholic scholars agree on that for the most part.
Click to expand...
Doesnt’ take a “scholar” to see that Jesus Himself used The Septugaint Old Testament. The Pharisees version of The Old Testament didn’t exist until 60 years “after” Jesus died (so Jesus couldn’t have used that one).

Besides, here are all the quotes that prove that Jesus and The Apostles used The Septugaint Old Testament (which contained all The Books of The Holy Bible and which both The Protestants and those whose version of The Old Testament they used, The Pharisees reject as canonical):

(The following 100 or so verses appear “only” in The Septugaint “as” written and quoted by Jesus and The Apostles)

scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html
Then one has to ascertain what that Septugaint looked like. The oldest copies of the LXX have a huge amount of differences in readings and so forth.
Click to expand...
The Dead Sea scrolls clearly show what The Septugaint looked like…they were composed in the time of The Apostolic Age. And, they had the Deuterocanonical Books.
Do not overstate the no marriage thing either.
Click to expand...
Tell Paul that.
We know the Apostles were married and while Paul was not, the issue is far from settled
Click to expand...
“were” being the key word. Peter is the only one who’s said to be married I believe and Peter left his wife when he joined Christ.

And again, Paul’s personal preference is that they not be married only applied to those that he was addressing…the “leaders” of The Church.

Anyway, Jesus said that some were called to “not” be married or to remain celibate to serve God exclusively and that some chose that of their own will (something He never challenged).

🙂
 
There seems to be a misconception on what “holding things in common” meant back then. I don’t believe it meant they lived a communal existence. More that they open up themselves to giving of what they had to meet certain needs. If someone needed something (food), and you had extra food, you gave it. Or if you had extra money/property, you were willing to buy/sell whatever of your own to make certain that a brother did not starve. Widows and orphans were taken care of.

And I agree with the PP that stated we should be careful about thinking of the early church through rose coloured lenses. They had their imperfections and struggles as well…and heresies going around. Much the same as today. Not much new under the sun, eh?
 
paidion said:
Since Brian H reiterated the part about which texts were quoted in the NT, it should be noted that both the Masoretic (Hebrew) and Septuagint (Greek) were both widely quoted. (for starters see Gleason Archer & C.G. Chirichigno, “Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey”)
Click to expand...
But Jesus’ words are clear as to which version He used.

🙂
 
ScottishColleen said:
There seems to be a misconception on what “holding things in common” meant back then. I don’t believe it meant they lived a communal existence. More that they open up themselves to giving of what they had to meet certain needs. If someone needed something (food), and you had extra food, you gave it. Or if you had extra money/property, you were willing to buy/sell whatever of your own to make certain that a brother did not starve. Widows and orphans were taken care of.

And I agree with the PP that stated we should be careful about thinking of the early church through rose coloured lenses. They had their imperfections and struggles as well…and heresies going around. Much the same as today. Not much new under the sun, eh?
Click to expand...
Not only that, 8% of The Apostles (Judas) was corrupt and The Apostles argued and had differences in how to work in His name while they were with Jesus and after Jesus all through the New Testament.

There was never any Christian institution that was in complete 101% agreement with anything that didn’t come from debate and exchange of ideas and by the sharing of personal beliefs and revelations.
 
ScottishColleen said:
Curious, serious question here…did He ever quote or make any implications from these?
Click to expand...
Ever heard of The Lord’s Prayer?

More than 1/2 of it comes from The Book of Sirach (aka The Wisdom of Jesus).

🙂

“Jesus quotes the Septuagint in 80% of his Old Testament references.”

davidmacd.com/catholic/bible_catholics_apocrypha.htm

Just “some” of the 300 quotes:

*DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Sirach 16:12
Great as his mercy is his punishment; he judges men, each according to his deeds.
1 Peter 1:17
Since you call on a Father who judges each man’s work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear.

1 Macc. 2:52
Was not Abraham found faithful in trial, and it was reputed to him as uprightness?
James 2:23
And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend.

Wisdom 15:7
For truly the potter, laboriously working the soft earth, molds for our service each several article: Both the vessels that serve for clean purposes and their opposites, all alike; As to what shall be the use of each vessel of either class the worker in clay is the judge.
Rom. 9:21
Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

Hebrews 11:35
Women received back their dead, raised to life again. Others were tortured and refused to be released, so that they might gain a better resurrection.
2 Maccabees 7
It also happened that seven brothers with their mother were arrested and tortured with whips and scourges by the king, to force them to eat pork in violation of God’s law… When he was completely maimed but still breathing, the king ordered them to carry him to the fire and fry him. As a cloud of smoke spread from the pan, the brothers and their mother encouraged one another to die bravely, saying such words as these: “The Lord God is looking on, and he truly has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his canticle, when he protested openly with the words, ‘And he will have pity on his servants…’” Do not be afraid of this executioner, but be worthy of your brothers and accept death, so that in the time of mercy I may receive you again with them." Thus he too died undefiled, putting all his trust in the Lord. The mother was last to die, after her sons.

Sirach 44:19
ABRAHAM, father of many peoples, kept his glory without stain:
Rom. 4:17
As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.”*

freerepublic.com/focus/religion/767812/posts
 
2ndGen said:
“were” being the key word. Peter is the only one who’s said to be married I believe and Peter left his wife when he joined Christ.
Click to expand...
Obviously you are blinded by “Tradition”, Read the following and please note your two mistakes in the above statement.

1 Corinthians 9:4-6 (New International Version)

4Don’t we have the right to food and drink? 5Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas[a]? 6Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?

Footnotes:
a Corinthians 9:5 That is, Peter

Note: Apostles is plural i.e. more than one and Peter (Cephas) is described as currently bringing along his wife which contradicts the idea he left his wife.

Looks like the the 2nd Gen Knight forgot to handle the Sword (His Word) of the Lord correctly. Remember it’s 2 edged and it’s SHARP !
 
Hebrews_4_12 said:
Obviously you are blinded by “Tradition”, Read the following and please note your two mistakes in the above statement.

1 Corinthians 9:4-6 (New International Version)

4Don’t we have the right to food and drink? 5Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas[a]? 6Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?

Footnotes:
a Corinthians 9:5 That is, Peter

Note: Apostles is plural i.e. more than one and Peter (Cephas) is described as currently bringing along his wife which contradicts the idea he left his wife.

Looks like the the 2nd Gen Knight forgot to handle the Sword (His Word) of the Lord correctly. Remember it’s 2 edged and it’s SHARP !
Click to expand...
That’s why I said “I believe”. In America, when one is not “sure” about something, they state that they believe something just in case they aren’t 100% accurate.

I knew that verse you chose to quote, but I wasn’t sure as to how many of the Apostles were married.

But anyway, Peter and The Apostles left their wives (those that had wives) to serve Jesus.

What Peter said to Jesus…
Matthew 19:27
Then Peter said to Him,
“Behold, we have left everything and followed You; what then will there be for us?”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top