Which Church would be the most recognizable to Early Christians?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’d go with Oriental Orthodox in a house church setting.
 
i am pretty sure that a first century christian exposed to the authentic teachings of each christian cult would easily recognize the Church that recognizes the authority of Peter to be the true Church.

now it you are only talking about decorations, i suspect a first century chrisitian would not easily ascertain any of today’s christian church buildings as being a place of worship for the true Church.
 
CathBoy1 said:
Hello,
I agree completely with your above quote.
Although I would like to hear your thoughts on the OP?🙂
Click to expand...
One of the Syriac/Chaldean/Assyrian/Malankara Churches or the Ethiopian Church.
 
The following is just my musing:

I think our early christian friends would also recognize aspects of life in the Amish community - in that they live a Christian life in some ways closer to what you see in the Didache.

Some modern Christians (I’m one of them) live a secular life and visit a church - my two lifes are separate.

My impression of early Christian is that church life was bound with everyday life.
 
benjohnson said:
The following is just my musing:

I think our early christian friends would also recognize aspects of life in the Amish community - in that they live a Christian life in some ways closer to what you see in the Didache.

Some modern Christians (I’m one of them) live a secular life and visit a church - my two lifes are separate.

My impression of early Christian is that church life was bound with everyday life.
Click to expand...
I think you are quite right!
 
benjohnson said:
The following is just my musing:

I think our early christian friends would also recognize aspects of life in the Amish community - in that they live a Christian life in some ways closer to what you see in the Didache.

Some modern Christians (I’m one of them) live a secular life and visit a church - my two lifes are separate.

My impression of early Christian is that church life was bound with everyday life.
Click to expand...
Amish, yes, in their aspect of community, if you are comparing it to first century Christians. Perhaps modern Jewish communities would be recognizable. But worship? I think a mix between synagogues and some contemporary house churches that do meals and communion.
 
eddie_too said:
i am pretty sure that a first century christian exposed to the authentic teachings of each christian cult would easily recognize the Church that recognizes the authority of Peter to be the true Church.

now it you are only talking about decorations, i suspect a first century chrisitian would not easily ascertain any of today’s christian church buildings as being a place of worship for the true Church.[/QUOTE]

Remembering the caves and the catacombs, like the caves here in Ireland and the Mass rocks during Penal Times…**
Click to expand...
 
Rosebud77 said:
eddie too;14155491:
i am pretty sure that a first century christian exposed to the authentic teachings of each christian cult would easily recognize the Church that recognizes the authority of Peter to be the true Church.

now it you are only talking about decorations, i suspect a first century chrisitian would not easily ascertain any of today’s christian church buildings as being a place of worship for the true Church.[/QUOTE]

Remembering the caves and the catacombs, like the caves here in Ireland and the Mass rocks during Penal Times…**
Click to expand...
c8.alamy.com/comp/ARBK0P/dayro-d-mor-hananyo-saffron-monastery-deyrulzafaran-5th-cent-ad-important-ARBK0P.jpg

c8.alamy.com/comp/ARC0YR/dayro-d-mor-hananyo-saffron-monastery-deyrulzafaran-5th-cent-ad-important-ARC0YR.jpg

users.stlcc.edu/mfuller/tnr/HahChurchHiakalOpen.jpg

arabicare.org.au/images/ac-pages/religion/320px-east-churches-worship-2015.jpg
Click to expand...
 
 
SalamKhan said:
Why Oriental Orthodox?
Click to expand...
The Copts and Ethiopians still have loads of pratices they retained from Judaism. We in the West and East have drifted farther in looks. At that time the major growth of the Way, seemed to be in the East / Middle East. But as it turns out it was more in Europe. People back then would recognise the Egyptian christian better than the European Catholics and Ortodox.

I said Oriental Orthodox, but Coptic Orthodox and Coptic Catholic don’t make any difference. I’d also could’ve said that some segments of eastern catholicism and Oriental Orthodoxy would be the most recognizable.
 
benjohnson said:
The following is just my musing:

I think our early christian friends would also recognize aspects of life in the Amish community - in that they live a Christian life in some ways closer to what you see in the Didache.

Some modern Christians (I’m one of them) live a secular life and visit a church - my two lifes are separate.

My impression of early Christian is that church life was bound with everyday life.
Click to expand...
I think you’re right. I daresay that the early Christians would have our liturgy and early creeds( " our" being Lutherans, Catholics, Anglicans, any kind of liturgical Western Christian), while living separately and worshiping in home settings, as the Old Order Mennonites and the Amish do.
 
LutheranScholar said:
I think you’re right. I daresay that the early Christians would have our liturgy and early creeds( " our" being Lutherans, Catholics, Anglicans, any kind of liturgical Western Christian), while living separately and worshiping in home settings, as the Old Order Mennonites and the Amish do.
Click to expand...
Which creeds and liturgies were being used in the 1st and 2nd centuries?
 
CathBoy1 said:
Which Church would be the most recognizable to Early Christians?
What I mean to ask is, if somehow a Christian from between the years 100 & 300 ended up in our time, which church could he (or she) walk into and instantly recognize it as his (or her) church?
I understand that language might be a barrier to the above mentioned Early Christian, so let’s leave that issue out.
I’m just looking for your opinion & why.
I would imagine that it would be a Church of Eastern Tradition, either Catholic or Orthodox, but am I right in that assumption?
What’s your opinion?
Click to expand...
You can read Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, the Didache, or Irenaeus of Lyon to find out.
 
susanlo said:
Which creeds and liturgies were being used in the 1st and 2nd centuries?
Click to expand...
Which Scriptures were being read?

I think that Paul’s Scripture to the Corinthians was an early one in some communities:

For, in the first place, when you assemble as a church,… it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal, and one is hungry and another is drunk.*What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing?

So then, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another—**if any one is hungry, let him eat at home—lest you come together to be condemned. About the other things I will give directions when I come.

Here, Paul is removing people from a “house Church” mentality. Eat at home, but when you come together, in the House of God, it is not your house any longer but the Lord’s.

Just because homes were necessary in the early formation of Church gathering for Mass, does not mean a “house Church” today would resemble the early worship of the Church.

The first liturgy was as it still is, the Liturgy of the Word (the reading of Scripture) and the Liturgy of the Lord’s Supper (the proclamation of the Last Supper, His crucifixion and distribution of the Blessed Bread and Cup of Jesus, the Lamb of God.)

Homilies of the one(s) presiding over the Bread and Wine were offered as well. And the corporal prayers were lifted as well.

And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts,praising God and having favor with all the people.
In the beginning, they came together in the Temple and “broke bread” in their homes. But Paul addresses the abuses that occurred as a result of this (and their unChristian behavior, not that the home was the problem). So by this time, Paul addresses the outgrowth of house worship and the need for designated houses of worship to come together. It was inevitable for the Temples of the Old Covenant to fall away, and the Temples of the New Covenant to manifest.

An early 1st or 2nd century Christian removed from the environment of that period would be a drastic change to his or her understanding of things (especially those under the real danger of persecution!). What would be the same, is the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of His Eucharist, the Prayers (including the Lord’s prayer) and singing hyms and Psalms. Right?

Furthermore, can we really say that the 1st century Christians, then, “came together” identically as those in the 2nd century? Because there was no longer temple meeting worship, right? And Liturgies were already developing and growing.
 
rcwitness said:
Furthermore, can we really say that the 1st century Christians, then, “came together” identically as those in the 2nd century? Because there was no longer temple meeting worship, right? And Liturgies were already developing and growing.
Click to expand...
The Temple rituals were not primary in Jewish prayer in the late days. I mean that most Jews and early Christians did not go to the Temple on a regular basis. It was the synagogue where people said their daily and Shabbat prayers. That was the style that the early Church took its worship from - Scripture readings, exposition on the text, and liturgical prayers.

Also, the OP asked about creeds. That did not happen for centuries.
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top