The church before the bible?

[john_ennis]

BrianH:

The Trinity is an attempt to define the relationship between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The truth behind our attempt to define it is unchanging. As Christians institutionalized the truth of Christ, yes, “doctrine” developed.
Is there a different criteria for salvation from 33 CE to 2006 CE?

Sounds like you don’t think Christ was establishing an identifiable institution when he gave the Apostles the power of binding and loosing my sins. Surely you can understand how others my see His words differently?

Peace.
John

 

[BrianH]

john ennis:

Sounds like you don’t think Christ was establishing an identifiable institution when he gave the Apostles the power of binding and loosing my sins. Surely you can understand how others my see His words differently?

Peace.
John

I understand why you see it that way. Of course.
When I read the Bible, especially the letters of Paul and the Book of Acts, I see the overall framework that the early church developed and…it does not look like Catholicism. Orthodoxy? Much more so, but even with that, I think we would have a very long discussion.
Brian

 

[Ignatius]

godsent:

I know the church existed before the bible…but how could they practice the teachings of jesus such as the eucarist or his ways and teachings if they didnt have the bible?..im very confused on this subject.

When the serperate sacred texts were found before they were chosen and compiled into the bible we have today…who chose and decided that the texts were inspired by god?

Very appericated if helped!

The Church existed before even the New Testament writings existed. Jesus never wrote a word, nor did He tell the Apostles to either.

 

[Al_Masetti]

godsent:

I know the church existed before the bible…but how could they practice the teachings of jesus such as the eucarist or his ways and teachings if they didnt have the bible?..im very confused on this subject.

In addition to the Bible which was taught orally, there were a LOT of early Church letters from various bishops and folks we now recognize as saints.

A lot of these have been lost over the centuries.

However, the surviving writings of the early Church writers are available in book form… There is a book store in Fort Worth, Texas… Stella Maris… and their catalog has a whole page that lists volumes of the early church writings. These are not considered officially “inspired”; however, they are reflective of the kinds of “sermons” and letters that were delivered and circulated among the first century Christians, before the “Bible” as we know it was “officially” assembled. Keep in mind that all the stuff was available, although not in one “book”… [probably they didn’t have “books” in those days anyway… they probably had scrolls…bindings hadn’t been invented yet.]

St. Augustine (300’s) was a prolific writer. As a result, a LOT of his work has survived to this day. The point is that his SERMONS are available on-line he was ahead of his time! ] … and they are probably reflective of the kinds of sermons were available to the “general public” at the time.

 

[Sherlock]

BrianH:

I understand why you see it that way. Of course.
When I read the Bible, especially the letters of Paul and the Book of Acts, I see the overall framework that the early church developed and…it does not look like Catholicism. Orthodoxy? Much more so, but even with that, I think we would have a very long discussion.
Brian

Wow, I have the exact opposite reaction. It looks like Catholicism to me, and Orthodoxy seems less of a fit (because of Orthodoxy’s strongly ethnic/nationalistic bent and because of the primacy of Peter in the Scriptures). This impression is strengthened when one reads the Early Church Fathers. A very readable introduction to the Church Fathers is “Four Witnesses” by Bennett. Jurgens’ volumes are also worth having for more in-depth study.

 

[BrianH]

Sherlock:

Wow, I have the exact opposite reaction. It looks like Catholicism to me, and Orthodoxy seems less of a fit (because of Orthodoxy’s strongly ethnic/nationalistic bent and because of the primacy of Peter in the Scriptures). This impression is strengthened when one reads the Early Church Fathers. A very readable introduction to the Church Fathers is “Four Witnesses” by Bennett. Jurgens’ volumes are also worth having for more in-depth study.

I have read the church fathers, which is one of the main reasons I think the way I do. When is the first historical evidence of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome? remembering Peter had another job as Bishop of Antioch prior to being in Rome
BH

 

[DeFide]

BrianH:

… When is the first historical evidence of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome? remembering Peter had another job as Bishop of Antioch prior to being in Rome
BH

That’s an interesting question. Why don’t you look around these topics, and pick out what you think is acceptable as the earliest evidence, and tell us why you picked it?:

catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp

I ask this to see what significance you place on office, person and location.

 

[geno75]

qwe

 

[Flopfoot]

godsent:

I know the church existed before the bible…but how could they practice the teachings of jesus such as the eucarist or his ways and teachings if they didnt have the bible?..im very confused on this subject.

Hi, I just scrolled over the link of this thread and read this first part. Later on, coming in to the thread, I realised there actually was a serious question here, but anyway, I just wanna say -

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! Thank you so much - reading this (quoted part) cracked me and my brother up so much! Most hilarious thing I have ever read on CAF (-: