The Didache is my very favorite document left to us by the early Church Fathers. Sometimes I wish the Didache made it into the New Testament! Excellent short video.
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time The secret text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply Best regards from a Muslim [ line of ismail ]
You clearly haven't read either the Bible or early Christian writing ✍️. Jesus was Jewish and therefore did eat meat. He specifically rebuked foolish worry about what people eat. Warning it was that which goes into the heart that corrupts and not that which goes into the belly. Matthew 15:17
That's a great point that the Didache is a quick read. Every Christian should take the 20 minutes needed to read it. It is certainly the most interesting of the Patristic writings...
Always wary of teachers to start but settled in quickly - had never heard of The Didache until tonight; Tom's talk was excellent. Heading to Amazon now to buy his book - Thanks
A couple of things he didn't mention...Abortion is listed as a sin in it. I also think the fasting for 2 or 3 days before Baptism is interesting. Great summary.
Genuine faith in Christ alone, which is sufficient for salvation (having one name appear in the Book of Life, is the driver of living in Godliness. We must always come back to The Cross and what happened on Calvery.
It was in Greek. Fragments of the Didache have been found Coptic and Georgian; and part of it survives in an early Latin translation. Much of it can also be found in Greek in the document known as the 'Apostolic Constitutions'. Also part of the Didache in an Ethiopic version can be found in a document known as the 'Apostolic Church Ordinances'.
+Dust Driver 'There are so many translations - each with some good points and each with some drawbacks - that I cannot answer your question with a simple 'go to this one!' However, if you are looking for a translation of the Didache, there is one in my book The Didache: A Window on the Earliest Christians and there is another good translation by Aaron Milavec in his The Didache: Text, Translation, Analysis and Commentary. Each has its strong points and each its weaknesses!' - Prof. Thomas O'Loughlin
It mentions fasting “on the preparation day”…. They obviously kept the Sabbath. This lines up with how the Messiah said “pray your flight not take part on a Sabbath day”.
In a way I sort of like it (example: on new believers prayerfully waiting and fasting before being baptized b/c some denominations teach you have to get baptized asap OR ELSE you will go to hell if you died before getting baptized). In another way, it feels rather restricting and binding to compulsive instruction AS OPPOSED TO being led by the Spirit. By that I mean, being drawn into prayer by the drawing of the Holy Spirit. I’m divided in my feelings and thoughts. While I like being certain schedules for the purpose of self discipline, but I want to be more spontaneous in my relationship with spending time communing in fellowship with Him.
So wonderful to hear a Minister give the Thumbs up to this Original Copy in Hebrew in the Great Cathedral in Turkey. Last year , When it reverted back to the islamics, They found in the last of the Sacred Scroll books, and Original Hebrew New Testament in Hebrew. Dated approx 37 - 68 ad. Amazingly, these Islamics returned this Sacred Scroll to our people's in Yashra'al. Messianic Believers are so excited, and desiring to study this Most Important of Documents , before the Return of our Risen Jewish Saviour. Hallaluyah. This Bomb shell of A Bible , destroys the lies about the first Bibles being in Greek,? That all the Sacred Scrolls were originally written in either Otiot/ Enochian/ Aramaic,/ Paleo/ Languages. You must get a copy of Gad the Seer . It's Mind booking in Such a richness of Biblical Truths. Praise Yah
Ignatius of Antioch "For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of penance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ" (Letter to the Philadelphians 3 [A.D. 110]). "For where there is division and wrath, God does not dwell. To all them that repent, the Lord grants forgiveness, if they turn in penitence to the unity of God, and to communion with the bishop" (ibid., 8).
"Bishop" is an anglicanization..the Greek word means overseer whether bishop or pastor or minister is meant. Just means to submit to spiritual leadership. And "penance " is probably a mistranslation of "metanonia " which in New Testament is translated "repent" (I haven't checked the Greek text of Ignatius but that's a huntch)
A. You’re 3 years late dude B. When you read the writings of Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome (both in the first century when John the apostle was still alive) they clearly refer to the bishop as an office created by the apostles. Protestants try to deny this to justify their own false doctrine of breaking away from the apostolic church C. Even Protestants themselves are inconsistent about this, since they use the Greek term “deacon” but reject the Greek term “episcopis.”
@@mosesking2923I'm an Anglican protestant. We have Bishops too. We don't have Popes but we definitely have Bishops. I understand we get defensive about our different denominations and so not a criticism. Just nice to let people reading know the facts.
The is considered part of the group of second-generation Christian writings known as the Apostolic Fathers. The work was considered by some Church Fathers to be a part of the New Testament, while being rejected by others as spurious or non-canonical, In the end, it was not accepted into the New Testament canon.
It was a copy made during the Byzantine empire, so it was written in koine Greek. They can date it to the first century because of the style of writing and the first hand accounts as well as traditions practiced then and only known about then
The community that produced the Didache could have been based in Syria, as it addressed the Gentiles but from a Judaic perspective, at some remove from Jerusalem, and shows no evidence of Pauline influence.
gman3215 All documents should be studied especially those from the apostles they walked and lived with the Lord Jesus Man had no rights to edit God's word
I would say who ever says that is a very mad protestant and trying to rewrite history for their own belief. Didache proves how early church was done which was very liturgical. Communion was always celebrated no just special occasions. So the question now is why are 99 percent of protestants not celebrating the eucharist every Sunday?
It mentions putting water over the head 3 times which is the origin of Roman Catholic baptism. Yes internally it claims to be written pre 70 AD as it contains prophecies right at the end that are the same as in the NT_ second coming, rapture, man of sin which were all around 70 AD. Revelation 1-12 happened 70 AD but Revelation 13-22 is future.
Based off what I know, the dates range from AD 50-110. I think because he puts Matthew (written tradition...unsure of his thoughts on an oral tradition. I'll admit that I'm only halfway through the video) after the Didache, he is forced to an earlier date. A lot of people believe that it was originally two or more documents formed together. Likely the Two Ways section was early and the church manual came a bit later. Then, they were paired together even after that. Of course, with the first manuscript (discovered in 1873) being from the 11th century (if the dating was accurate), knowing any of this for sure is impossible. There are a lot of assumption that have to be made about what the "Gospel" in the Didache is, if it was written in Antioch, who were considered apostles, when traveling prophets ceased, etc. All of that balanced within a largely oral culture balancing their relationship as a Jewish sect in an increasingly hostile culture! Kind of nuts. It is fun and fascinating, though!
The manuscript is from around 1000 CE. From comparisons, we can say text is very close to gospel of Matthew, dated to about 70 CE. The text has no trace of destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE in it, so it might be a bit earlier. But such comparison couldn't give us 33 CE, because there's no scripture so early to compare.
The Didache is a useful tool, but the reader should know that it has blemishes: it instructs the reader that the ritual of baptism has to be done 3 times.
Eusebius wrote that the Didache was "spurious (Eusebius History 3:25)." John S. Kloppenborg Verbin comments on the Didache (Excavating Q, pp. 134-135):“The Didache, an early second-century Christian composition, is also clearly composite, consisting of a "Two Ways" section (chaps. 1-6), a liturgical manual (7-10), instructions on the reception of traveling prophets (11-15), and a brief apocalypse (16). Marked divergences in style and content as well as the presence of doubtless and obvious interpolations, make plain the fact that the Didache was not cut from whole cloth. The dominant view today is that the document was composed on the basis of several independent, preredactional units which were assembled by either one or two redactors (Neiderwimmer 1989:64-70, ET 1998:42-52). Comparison of the "Two Ways" section with several other "Two Ways" documents suggests that Didache 1-6 is itself the result of multistage editing. The document began with rather haphazard organization (cf. Barnabas 18-20), but was reorganized in a source common to the Didache, the Doctrina apostolorum, and the Apostolic Church Order …” Church historians such as Johannes Quasten wrote that the Didache was not written during the lifetime of the original apostles and that “the document was tampered with by later insertions.” Patrology Vol. 1, Page 36Johannes Quasten wrote, “… the document does not go back to the apostolic times … Furthermore, such a collection of ecclesiastical ordinances presupposes a period of stabilization of some duration. Scattered details indicate that the apostolic age is no longer contemporary, but has passed into history.” Patrology Vol. 1, Page 36, Johannes QuastenThere is much controversy over the authenticity of the Didache that I had to expend an enormous amount of time researching the historical data to uncover the truth. After thorough research, I have concluded that the Didache contains the beliefs and practices of some early Christians during the early second century. It was known as a “spurious” document by the time of Eusebius because it was not recognized as being the “teaching” of the original apostles. The historical evidence proves that the Didache was not written by the original apostles. It was a collection of early second century Christian writings combined together by an unknown scribe sometime in the early second century. Scholars have identified so many later interpolations and editions to the Didache that we can no longer trust the veracity of its contents. We will be posting a video on the Didache here on UA-cam in about two weeks. We have allot of videos on church history which can also be accessed from our web site at ApostolicChristianFaith .com
A justified question, but maybe better placed to experts of old texts. From what I know: Older fragments of it have been found in other languages. Many church fathers refer to its content before 400 CE. Other older documents seem to derive from it. Material it's written on is old and difficult to find for fraud.
Why do we not study the Didache? For the simple reason we don't study or take serious, any of the Apocrypha books. The Didache was rejected from being included into the canonized books of the bible. It is a forgery that started out as the "teaching of the twelve." Like all forged books, it was not written by the apostles. The document has some identifying points with the group that held it in high esteem. It tells its readers, not to have homosexual sex with boys. They are told to pray the "Our Father" three times a day. It prescribes water baptism to be done with sprinkling where there is no running water. It calls other groups "hypocrites" for fasting on different days, other than theirs. There is more.
It wasn't included in the Bible because it wasn't written by Apostles or about Christ. "Teaching of the 12" doesn't necessarily claim apostolic authorship but rather apostolic content. To say it was "rejected" is just silly. Onecquestion: are you reading nothing more in your life than the books of the Bible? If yes, you are very narrow minded anfd will probably nor indetstand much of whst you are reading. If no, your whole complaint is hypocritical.
Ur trying to rewrite history it was never rejected from the bible . Lol and even when some books were rejected doesn't mean they were not used or beneficial. The apocrypha was not rejected either actually Martin Luther the first reformer just moved it to the end of the bible and eventually other reformers removed it themselves. Pesky reformers who themselves became popes. What they ran away from in Catholicism they became themselves mini popes the sole authority of scripture. This 30 thousand different denominations.
The Didache is my very favorite document left to us by the early Church Fathers. Sometimes I wish the Didache made it into the New Testament!
Excellent short video.
Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time
The secret text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits
So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply
Best regards from a Muslim [ line of ismail ]
You clearly haven't read either the Bible or early Christian writing ✍️. Jesus was Jewish and therefore did eat meat. He specifically rebuked foolish worry about what people eat. Warning it was that which goes into the heart that corrupts and not that which goes into the belly. Matthew 15:17
That's a great point that the Didache is a quick read. Every Christian should take the 20 minutes needed to read it. It is certainly the most interesting of the Patristic writings...
Sad that most Christians will never read it. In fact most Christians will never hear of it. What a precious work.
Always wary of teachers to start but settled in quickly - had never heard of The Didache until tonight; Tom's talk was excellent. Heading to Amazon now to buy his book - Thanks
A couple of things he didn't mention...Abortion is listed as a sin in it. I also think the fasting for 2 or 3 days before Baptism is interesting. Great summary.
Also fasting Wednesday and Friday.
Peter says the exact same thing about fasting before baptism in the recognitions of Clement.
Brings back some really good memories of being taught this at Lampeter.
Beautiful! Thank you Professor Thomas!
It is very interesting. Such a providential treasure. The community of the covenant.
To be a follower of Jesus is to learn a way of life that goes far beyond just 'faith alone'. Good idea.
Genuine faith in Christ alone, which is sufficient for salvation (having one name appear in the Book of Life, is the driver of living in Godliness. We must always come back to The Cross and what happened on Calvery.
Goods Blessings thank you lovely spoken words of Jesus from across the pondxxxxx
This is incredibly insightful and helpful. Thank you
Read his book years ago. Great insight into the Didache.
Well presented, Tom. You got me hooked. Your book best be on Amazon!
Wonderful and concise overview. More volume would be helpful.
5:07 - The Didache and saying the Lord’s Prayer three times a day
6:54 - Didache and Baptism
7:32 - Didache and Eucharist
thanks for your answer.
Thank you so much for sharing! Could you make a video about *Didascalia* and its content . What's the oldest manuscript for it ?
The didache doesn’t dispute the New Testament it just expands on it and reasserts it
It was in Greek.
Fragments of the Didache have been found Coptic and Georgian; and part of it survives in an early Latin translation.
Much of it can also be found in Greek in the document known as the 'Apostolic Constitutions'.
Also part of the Didache in an Ethiopic version can be found in a document known as the 'Apostolic Church Ordinances'.
Isn't that something?? Wish I had a time machine...
Its unbelievable to me that I jut recently discovered it! But I am so happy I did!
Love this video ❤️
could you please kindly tell me which translation on the early church fathers is best in modern day English? thank you
+Dust Driver 'There are so many translations - each with some good points and each with some drawbacks - that I cannot answer your question with a simple 'go to this one!' However, if you are looking for a translation of the Didache, there is one in my book The Didache: A Window on the Earliest Christians and there is another good translation by Aaron Milavec in his The Didache: Text, Translation, Analysis and Commentary. Each has its strong points and each its weaknesses!' - Prof. Thomas O'Loughlin
It mentions fasting “on the preparation day”…. They obviously kept the Sabbath. This lines up with how the Messiah said “pray your flight not take part on a Sabbath day”.
In a way I sort of like it (example: on new believers prayerfully waiting and fasting before being baptized b/c some denominations teach you have to get baptized asap OR ELSE you will go to hell if you died before getting baptized). In another way, it feels rather restricting and binding to compulsive instruction AS OPPOSED TO being led by the Spirit. By that I mean, being drawn into prayer by the drawing of the Holy Spirit. I’m divided in my feelings and thoughts. While I like being certain schedules for the purpose of self discipline, but I want to be more spontaneous in my relationship with spending time communing in fellowship with Him.
So wonderful to hear a Minister give the Thumbs up to this Original Copy in Hebrew in the Great Cathedral in Turkey.
Last year , When it reverted back to the islamics,
They found in the last of the Sacred Scroll books, and Original Hebrew New Testament in Hebrew.
Dated approx 37 - 68 ad.
Amazingly, these Islamics returned this Sacred Scroll to our people's in Yashra'al.
Messianic Believers are so excited, and desiring to study this Most Important of Documents , before the Return of our Risen Jewish Saviour.
Hallaluyah.
This Bomb shell of A Bible , destroys the lies about the first Bibles being in Greek,?
That all the Sacred Scrolls were originally written in either Otiot/ Enochian/ Aramaic,/ Paleo/ Languages.
You must get a copy of Gad the Seer
.
It's Mind booking in Such a richness of Biblical Truths.
Praise Yah
...and for some reason God saw fit to keep it out of our hands for 19 centuries....
There just wasn't a complete copy until more recently. Fragments were found much earlier on.
Ignatius of Antioch
"For as many as are of God and of Jesus Christ are also with the bishop. And as many as shall, in the exercise of penance, return into the unity of the Church, these, too, shall belong to God, that they may live according to Jesus Christ" (Letter to the Philadelphians 3 [A.D. 110]).
"For where there is division and wrath, God does not dwell. To all them that repent, the Lord grants forgiveness, if they turn in penitence to the unity of God, and to communion with the bishop" (ibid., 8).
"Bishop" is an anglicanization..the Greek word means overseer whether bishop or pastor or minister is meant. Just means to submit to spiritual leadership. And "penance " is probably a mistranslation of "metanonia " which in New Testament is translated "repent" (I haven't checked the Greek text of Ignatius but that's a huntch)
A. You’re 3 years late dude
B. When you read the writings of Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome (both in the first century when John the apostle was still alive) they clearly refer to the bishop as an office created by the apostles. Protestants try to deny this to justify their own false doctrine of breaking away from the apostolic church
C. Even Protestants themselves are inconsistent about this, since they use the Greek term “deacon” but reject the Greek term “episcopis.”
@@mosesking2923 They also ignore "presbyter" (priest).
@@mosesking2923I'm an Anglican protestant. We have Bishops too. We don't have Popes but we definitely have Bishops. I understand we get defensive about our different denominations and so not a criticism. Just nice to let people reading know the facts.
The is considered part of the group of second-generation Christian writings known as the Apostolic Fathers. The work was considered by some Church Fathers to be a part of the New Testament, while being rejected by others as spurious or non-canonical, In the end, it was not accepted into the New Testament canon.
The manuscript is in Greek and was written by 'Leo the Scribe' in the eleventh century; it is not housed in Jerusalem.
Huh??
thanks
What was the original language of the Didache text found in Instanbul/Constantinople in 1873?
It was a copy made during the Byzantine empire, so it was written in koine Greek. They can date it to the first century because of the style of writing and the first hand accounts as well as traditions practiced then and only known about then
The community that produced the Didache could have been based in Syria, as it addressed the Gentiles but from a Judaic perspective, at some remove from Jerusalem, and shows no evidence of Pauline influence.
1:27, in A.D.1873 the Didache was discovered in Constantinople.
This is some good stuff. Some say the Didache was originally a jewish document then later edited by Gentile Christians. What do you think?
gman3215
A theorie that could not be prouved.
gman3215
All documents should be studied especially those from the apostles they walked and lived with the Lord Jesus
Man had no rights to edit God's word
I would say who ever says that is a very mad protestant and trying to rewrite history for their own belief. Didache proves how early church was done which was very liturgical. Communion was always celebrated no just special occasions. So the question now is why are 99 percent of protestants not celebrating the eucharist every Sunday?
It mentions putting water over the head 3 times which is the origin of Roman Catholic baptism. Yes internally it claims to be written pre 70 AD as it contains prophecies right at the end that are the same as in the NT_ second coming, rapture, man of sin which were all around 70 AD. Revelation 1-12 happened 70 AD but Revelation 13-22 is future.
👍👍👍
The Didache was c. 100 AD.
He makes the Didiche a very early date. I thought it was 80s
Based off what I know, the dates range from AD 50-110. I think because he puts Matthew (written tradition...unsure of his thoughts on an oral tradition. I'll admit that I'm only halfway through the video) after the Didache, he is forced to an earlier date. A lot of people believe that it was originally two or more documents formed together. Likely the Two Ways section was early and the church manual came a bit later. Then, they were paired together even after that. Of course, with the first manuscript (discovered in 1873) being from the 11th century (if the dating was accurate), knowing any of this for sure is impossible. There are a lot of assumption that have to be made about what the "Gospel" in the Didache is, if it was written in Antioch, who were considered apostles, when traveling prophets ceased, etc. All of that balanced within a largely oral culture balancing their relationship as a Jewish sect in an increasingly hostile culture! Kind of nuts. It is fun and fascinating, though!
you say it is prior to 70 CE how far prior?. Can it be dated to say 33 CE when Jesus was crucified?
The manuscript is from around 1000 CE.
From comparisons, we can say text is very close to gospel of Matthew, dated to about 70 CE.
The text has no trace of destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE in it, so it might be a bit earlier.
But such comparison couldn't give us 33 CE, because there's no scripture so early to compare.
The Didache is a useful tool, but the reader should know that it has blemishes: it instructs the reader that the ritual of baptism has to be done 3 times.
if it done not in running water
That's normal practice
Generally baptism is submerged three times in the name of the father son and holy spirit this has always been done in the church.
How do we know that this is the actual Didache? And not modern ideas added to this name...Didache?????
Didache tells the guide of the Catholic Church.
Eusebius wrote that the Didache was "spurious (Eusebius History 3:25)." John S. Kloppenborg Verbin comments on the Didache (Excavating Q, pp. 134-135):“The Didache, an early second-century Christian composition, is also clearly composite, consisting of a "Two Ways" section (chaps. 1-6), a liturgical manual (7-10), instructions on the reception of traveling prophets (11-15), and a brief apocalypse (16). Marked divergences in style and content as well as the presence of doubtless and obvious interpolations, make plain the fact that the Didache was not cut from whole cloth. The dominant view today is that the document was composed on the basis of several
independent, preredactional units which were assembled by either one or two redactors
(Neiderwimmer 1989:64-70, ET 1998:42-52). Comparison
of the "Two Ways" section with several other "Two Ways"
documents suggests that Didache 1-6 is itself the result of multistage editing. The document began with rather haphazard organization (cf. Barnabas 18-20), but was reorganized in a source common to the Didache, the Doctrina apostolorum, and the Apostolic Church Order …”
Church historians such as Johannes Quasten wrote that the
Didache was not written during the lifetime of the original apostles and that “the document was tampered with by later insertions.” Patrology Vol. 1, Page 36Johannes Quasten wrote, “… the document does not go back
to the apostolic times … Furthermore, such a collection of ecclesiastical ordinances presupposes a period of stabilization of some duration. Scattered details indicate that the apostolic age is no longer contemporary, but has passed into history.” Patrology Vol.
1, Page 36, Johannes QuastenThere is much controversy over the authenticity of the Didache that I had to expend an enormous amount of time researching the
historical data to uncover the truth. After thorough research, I have concluded that the Didache contains the beliefs and practices of some early Christians during the early second century. It was known as a “spurious” document by the time of Eusebius because it was not recognized as being the “teaching” of the
original apostles. The historical evidence proves that the Didache was not written by the original apostles. It was a collection of early second century Christian writings combined together by an unknown scribe sometime in the early second century. Scholars have identified so many later interpolations and editions to the Didache that we can no longer trust the veracity of its contents.
We will be posting a video on the Didache here on UA-cam in about two weeks. We have allot of videos on church history which can also be accessed from our web site at ApostolicChristianFaith .com
Mmmmm... Hijacking another upload to punt your own counterpoint. Shabby.
How do we know it wasn't fabricated in the 1800s?
A justified question, but maybe better placed to experts of old texts.
From what I know:
Older fragments of it have been found in other languages.
Many church fathers refer to its content before 400 CE.
Other older documents seem to derive from it.
Material it's written on is old and difficult to find for fraud.
Its called carbon-dating
Love thy neighbor is in Leviticus, just saying.
6:30
The Didache is certainly not Protestant. The sacrifice is the Eucharist.
Wikipedia says otherwise...It is not a canonical book. There is no Pauline in it. I beg to disagree.
Disagree with what exactly?
Jesus never mentioned Paul which seems odd considering his writings make up a huge chunk of the NT.
Why do we not study the Didache? For the simple reason we don't study or take serious, any of the Apocrypha books. The Didache was rejected from being included into the canonized books of the bible. It is a forgery that started out as the "teaching of the twelve." Like all forged books, it was not written by the apostles. The document has some identifying points with the group that held it in high esteem. It tells its readers, not to have homosexual sex with boys. They are told to pray the "Our Father" three times a day. It prescribes water baptism to be done with sprinkling where there is no running water. It calls other groups "hypocrites" for fasting on different days, other than theirs. There is more.
approvedofGod
THE hypocrites mention in the didache are the jews. Wendesday and friday are the traditionnals fasting days in orthodoxy.
It wasn't included in the Bible because it wasn't written by Apostles or about Christ. "Teaching of the 12" doesn't necessarily claim apostolic authorship but rather apostolic content. To say it was "rejected" is just silly. Onecquestion: are you reading nothing more in your life than the books of the Bible? If yes, you are very narrow minded anfd will probably nor indetstand much of whst you are reading. If no, your whole complaint is hypocritical.
Ur trying to rewrite history it was never rejected from the bible . Lol and even when some books were rejected doesn't mean they were not used or beneficial. The apocrypha was not rejected either actually Martin Luther the first reformer just moved it to the end of the bible and eventually other reformers removed it themselves. Pesky reformers who themselves became popes. What they ran away from in Catholicism they became themselves mini popes the sole authority of scripture. This 30 thousand different denominations.
7:27