Some records indicate that St Clement was an apostle and not just the Bishop of Rome. Unlike some traditions however, he was not the leader of the church. The apostle John was alive and well
You understand that Paul wrote and instructed several churches but was never a Bishop, right? So it is not a Papal institution to write to several church's.
@@andrewreed4216 I don't understand your question or why you detected it at me, John outlived Clement and never needed to receive instructions from him, why would he?
Up until the 300s AD, when the church began to make things "universal" in various ways, the various churches had been at their own bishop and elder's discretion reading writings for edification. They began to develop a universal NT canon that would be for all churches. Eusebius' church history discusses the books considered and the disputed ones. One thing we often neglect is the Bishops disputing them, we don't know who or their spiritual condition. Acts 20 Paul prophesied among the Ephesians elder's wolves would arise among them. Jude speaks of false teachers among his audience etc. Some of them disputed 2 Peter, James, Hebrews, and Revelation. The fact they disputed these tells me a lot about them. They also disputed: The Didache of the 12 Apostles (elements echo throughout 2nd century writings like fasting Wed and Friday), Epistle of Barnabas (said by Clement of Alexandria to be the Barnabas that traveled with the apostle Paul), Shepherd of Hermas (called scripture by Irenaeus around 180 AD) and First Clement to the Corinthians and others. The first release of the Apostolic Constitutions in 390 AD yielded the first cut of the reduced NT canon. This had 28 books including First Clement.
The Holy Spirit allowed men to create a canon that would contain in plain sight, the knowledge that the word of God has been hidden but preserved. Know the last day is dawning and with eyes to see and ears to hear, we can see our Fathers face and hear His word to His people.
If you read the Epistle of Barnabas then you will found out that it's just alexandrian garbage and not written by the same Barnabus in the Bible. There's a bunch of bizarre doctrines contained in that epistle.
@@joelthompson90 I thought you made the joke., Paul is in the book of acts., I thought you meant it as a pun, play on words For their act together as paul is a writer of the book of Corinthians lol
A good reading from an elder brother. But it’s disheartening to see the comments be so disillusioned by power grabs and lordship. Praying that all of us will come to see the greatest of us will be the servant
I have read many times all legitimate early Christian writings from the first century AD up to Irenaeus and even some of Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian but can't find them ever call Clement the Pope...nor anyone else. That office was created under Conatantine's State church no earlier than the 4th century AD.
The title of Pope or Papa does not appear until about 400 A.D. Some scholars believe that Pope Leo (called the great) 440 to 461 A.D. was the first true Pope.
You're not going to find the word's "bible" or "Trinity" either. Doesn't mean that they didn't exist. What you can find are examples of the Bishop of Rome in a leadership position and/or as having a primacy of honour among bishops
LOL...that means your research is not enough...The Roman Church is clear VISIBLE leadership in ancient Christianity to the point that even a Pagan hostile to Christianity knew about this....The Pagan Tacitus said... "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in ROME, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their CENTER and become popular. " -----TACITUS, Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44. See that Rome was the CENTER Of Christendom...
@@pfarquharson1 The first time that it is provably recorded as used is a Bishop of Rome referring to a bishop of Alexandria as a (wise) "Father/papa/Pope" of the Church. Let no one forget, that the Church in Alexandria was/is the Second Highest Ranked SEE in "orthodox" Catholicism. Mark never met My Lord and King, he was Peter's protogé and found his way to found The Church in Alexandria because Peter sent him there on that "mission" from ROME.
@@johnnylaroux9517 Where in the Bible does it tell us when Peter first went to Rome. Where does it say Peter was the "Pope" or leader in Rome. I do accept that it looks as if Peter died in Rome, but how long did he live in Rome. Please provide proof.
You need the full context: “Let us therefore join with those to whom grace is given by God. Let us clothe ourselves in concord, being humble and self- controlled, keeping ourselves far from all backbiting and slander, BEING JUSTIFIED BY WORKS AND NOT BY WORDS….Why was our Father Abraham blessed? Was it not because of HIS DEEDS of justice and truth, wrought in faith?…So we, having been called through his will in Christ Jesus, were not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holiness of heart, but through faith, whereby the almighty God justified all men.” (Letter to the Corinthians 30:3, 31:2, 32:3-4). What are you trying to prove with your second timestamp?
Cristian, Even if one has ALL FAITH, but does not Love, it is useless, ( 1 Corinthians 13:2) " for it is by WORKS and NOT BY FAITH ALONE THAT WE ARE JUSTIFIED ", ( James 2:24, Romans 2:6-8, Matthew 25:35-42). Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
@@rody3199 “For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness 👉apart from works:” Romans 4:2-6 ESV ☝️ Faith alone. James 2 is James saying that saving faith is never alone. Both passages are true and don’t not contradict. We are saved by saving faith alone but saving faith is never alone because God made works for us to do. Ephesians 2:10
“For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness 👉apart from works:” Romans 4:2-6 ESV Faith alone saves but saving Faith is never alone.
I often wondered who he was writing to. Gentiles had no knowledge of the people and sayings of YAH and the those ppl of the old testement. They never grew up reading the torah. Maybe he was writing the tribes of isreal that had known of all for- father's. And were their fore-fathers. Even gentiles today that never have grown up rwading the torah have no idea who some of these ppl are or the sayings of the prophets. Or maybe the gentiles were having the torah read to them and now knew who clement was speaking of.
You must get past that. Even Clement had once been a gentile. He was writing to the early Christian Catholic Church which was composed of both Jews and Gentiles. The problem with ebionites and Judaizers is that they forget that the Gospel was to be preached throughtout all nations.
Victor Tellez the Jewish Temples allowed all who were earnestly seeking to hear/discuss theology with polite manners to come to the Temples. We see this in the NT during a few interactions of the apostles with others. Those day saw the temple much like a forums when not performing exclusively Jewish ceremonies. Though I am not Catholic, and Believe Jesus was promoting a purer Hebraic anti-statist teaching far flung from any modern Christianity, these were not unknown stories to the gentiles of theological leanings
You are 100% right let no man decieve you through philosophy and vain deceit. Clement was not a gentile nation but of gentile ways and thought which was Roman.
I think these are still corrupt writings from the Roman influence. Simply the word God is used in reference to the creator. For which the Hebrews never used. I question these writings for authentic. Also the name Jesus Christ was not used either. very interesting.
"Also the name Jesus Christ was not used either. very interesting." The very first words of the letter: "The church of God which sojourns at Rome, to the church of God sojourning at Corinth, to them that are called and sanctified by the will of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, from Almighty God through Jesus Christ, be multiplied." "Simply the word God is used in reference to the creator" How do you know, have you read the Old Testament or other Hebrew writings to find out? Because they do. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Also the very first words of that Book. "I think these are still corrupt writings from the Roman influence" In what do they depart from other, New Testament books?
The simple fact all miss or attempt to rationally over look is that the word "God" is a title and not a name. Through history all religions has gods whose names are known. A man doesn't introduce himself as "Man" as that would sound silly. Hi my name is Man and I am your man or in this case the scriptures would say My name is God and I am your god. I don't think so. I believe its much simpler than that yet more relevant than most people would think.
@@terrybowlibg6090 let me repeat myself...what are your sources. sorry to burst your bubble, but no one cares what you think until you can back it up with credible sources.
Victor Tellez The Torah refers to our singular holy creator as Elohim אלוהים, pluralized honorific of 1. El אל, meaning: “power(s), authority(ies), Ruler(s), prime force(s)... etc... 2. Adonai אדוני, meaning “my master”. 3.Yahava יהוה, the personal name given and known as the tetragrammaton; containing “father, love, Am, and other hebrew phrases folded in one utterance likened to a breath of nefesh, or spirit. Typically rendered Jehova, Yaweh, etc. by gentiles as the use of it became taboo. 4. hashem השם, meaning “the name”. God is a pagan word meaning nothing of import. Indeed, moreso than mere names, the entire “OT” excerpts mildly altered from the Holy Torah is null as it is retched out of the Hebrew tongue. Hebrew CANNOT linguistically be translated satisfactorily into English. The manifold of the multiple meanings for each word are use in conjunctions while translators pick and choose what they wish to use al a carte. Hebrew holds meaning on the letter level, unique apart from lesser languages. Those who have not read the Torah in Hebrew have arguably never known the “OT” at all in fact.
Please let me keep my timestamps! Ch 2 - 2:10; Ch 3 - 3:46; Ch 4 - 4:50; Ch 5 - 6:36; Ch 6 - 7:46; Ch 7 - 8:37; Ch 8 - 9:46; Ch 9 - 11:17; Ch 10 - 12:05; Ch 11 - 14:11; Ch 12 - 15:05; Ch 13 - 16:46; Ch 14 - 18:03; Ch 15 - 19:09; Ch 16 - 20:09; Ch 17 - 23:29; Ch 18 - 24:49; Ch 19- 26:58; Ch 20 - 27:53; Ch 21 - 30:17; Ch 22 - 32:13; Ch 23 - 33:07; Ch 24 - 34:24; Ch 25 - 35:23; Ch 26 - 36:38; Ch 27 - 37:16; Ch 28 - 38:24; Ch 29 - 39:15; Ch 30 - 40:02 (continued in different comment)
Give us this day our daily bread 🍞 Amen.
Thank you for this recording of this text! I’ve been longing to listen to the early Church fathers.
Thank you for the great recording, Sam.
Thank you so much for your gracious effort of having had recorded this text. Wonderful listening to this
Some things never change
I love how the Bishop of Rome is already leading by teaching the other dioceses. 🙏
Paul’s disciple. See Philippians.
Some records indicate that St Clement was an apostle and not just the Bishop of Rome. Unlike some traditions however, he was not the leader of the church. The apostle John was alive and well
You understand that Paul wrote and instructed several churches but was never a Bishop, right? So it is not a Papal institution to write to several church's.
@@BrianTerrill it's pretty clear John was the last known apostle that we know of... clement must have received instructions for him too?
@@andrewreed4216 I don't understand your question or why you detected it at me, John outlived Clement and never needed to receive instructions from him, why would he?
Thank you for making this.
Lovely clear reading
Excellent teaching
Thanks!
Thank you
Thank you!
Up until the 300s AD, when the church began to make things "universal" in various ways, the various churches had been at their own bishop and elder's discretion reading writings for edification. They began to develop a universal NT canon that would be for all churches. Eusebius' church history discusses the books considered and the disputed ones. One thing we often neglect is the Bishops disputing them, we don't know who or their spiritual condition. Acts 20 Paul prophesied among the Ephesians elder's wolves would arise among them. Jude speaks of false teachers among his audience etc. Some of them disputed 2 Peter, James, Hebrews, and Revelation. The fact they disputed these tells me a lot about them. They also disputed: The Didache of the 12 Apostles (elements echo throughout 2nd century writings like fasting Wed and Friday), Epistle of Barnabas (said by Clement of Alexandria to be the Barnabas that traveled with the apostle Paul), Shepherd of Hermas (called scripture by Irenaeus around 180 AD) and First Clement to the Corinthians and others. The first release of the Apostolic Constitutions in 390 AD yielded the first cut of the reduced NT canon. This had 28 books including First Clement.
Interesting
Well said! im happy to see more people considering and testing rather than following a tradition of human history such as the canon.
The Holy Spirit allowed men to create a canon that would contain in plain sight, the knowledge that the word of God has been hidden but preserved. Know the last day is dawning and with eyes to see and ears to hear, we can see our Fathers face and hear His word to His people.
@Jeff Payne chapter and verse please? Oh you don't have any. Sola scriptura not sola canon decided by others. Seek and you will find
If you read the Epistle of Barnabas then you will found out that it's just alexandrian garbage and not written by the same Barnabus in the Bible. There's a bunch of bizarre doctrines contained in that epistle.
It doesn't sound like the same Corinthian church Paul wrote to. They must have gotten their act together.
I see what you did there
@@MrInfoPhilly what did I do?
@@joelthompson90
I thought you made the joke.,
Paul is in the book of acts.,
I thought you meant it as a pun, play on words
For their act together as paul is a writer of the book of Corinthians lol
31:00 reading
55:08
Amen
20:59..
Wonderful counsellor
I wonder if clement was under direction of John the apostle/revelator as he was still alive.
Under Peter.
A good reading from an elder brother. But it’s disheartening to see the comments be so disillusioned by power grabs and lordship. Praying that all of us will come to see the greatest of us will be the servant
Why is corn mentioned? As far as I know it was a crop indigenous to Mexico and not spread until about 1500. Is this a mistranslation?
Corn is a generic word in British English for grains (wheat, oats, etc)
@@batyushki Thanks. I did not know that!
Epic.
I have read many times all legitimate early Christian writings from the first century AD up to Irenaeus and even some of Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian but can't find them ever call Clement the Pope...nor anyone else. That office was created under Conatantine's State church no earlier than the 4th century AD.
The title of Pope or Papa does not appear until about 400 A.D. Some scholars believe that Pope Leo (called the great) 440 to 461 A.D. was the first true Pope.
You're not going to find the word's "bible" or "Trinity" either. Doesn't mean that they didn't exist. What you can find are examples of the Bishop of Rome in a leadership position and/or as having a primacy of honour among bishops
LOL...that means your research is not enough...The Roman Church is clear VISIBLE leadership in ancient Christianity to the point that even a Pagan hostile to Christianity knew about this....The Pagan Tacitus said...
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in ROME, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their CENTER and become popular. "
-----TACITUS, Annals (written ca. AD 116), book 15, chapter 44.
See that Rome was the CENTER Of Christendom...
@@pfarquharson1 The first time that it is provably recorded as used is a Bishop of Rome referring to a bishop of Alexandria as a (wise) "Father/papa/Pope" of the Church. Let no one forget, that the Church in Alexandria was/is the Second Highest Ranked SEE in "orthodox" Catholicism. Mark never met My Lord and King, he was Peter's protogé and found his way to found The Church in Alexandria because Peter sent him there on that "mission" from ROME.
@@johnnylaroux9517 Where in the Bible does it tell us when Peter first went to Rome. Where does it say Peter was the "Pope" or leader in Rome. I do accept that it looks as if Peter died in Rome, but how long did he live in Rome. Please provide proof.
27:04
43:29 Justification through faith alone, since day one
1:01:26 presbyterS, plural, since day one
You need the full context:
“Let us therefore join with those to whom grace is given by God. Let us clothe ourselves in concord, being humble and self- controlled, keeping ourselves far from all backbiting and slander, BEING JUSTIFIED BY WORKS AND NOT BY WORDS….Why was our Father Abraham blessed? Was it not because of HIS DEEDS of justice and truth, wrought in faith?…So we, having been called through his will in Christ Jesus, were not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holiness of heart, but through faith, whereby the almighty God justified all men.” (Letter to the Corinthians 30:3, 31:2, 32:3-4).
What are you trying to prove with your second timestamp?
Cristian, Even if one has ALL FAITH, but does not Love, it is useless, ( 1 Corinthians 13:2) " for it is by WORKS and NOT BY FAITH ALONE THAT WE ARE JUSTIFIED ", ( James 2:24, Romans 2:6-8, Matthew 25:35-42). Peace always in Jesus Christ our Great and Kind God and Savior, He whose Flesh is True food and Blood True drink
@@rody3199 “For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness 👉apart from works:”
Romans 4:2-6 ESV
☝️
Faith alone.
James 2 is James saying that saving faith is never alone. Both passages are true and don’t not contradict. We are saved by saving faith alone but saving faith is never alone because God made works for us to do. Ephesians 2:10
“For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness 👉apart from works:”
Romans 4:2-6 ESV
Faith alone saves but saving Faith is never alone.
Is faith without works not dead?
Ch. 15
I often wondered who he was writing to. Gentiles had no knowledge of the people and sayings of YAH and the those ppl of the old testement. They never grew up reading the torah. Maybe he was writing the tribes of isreal that had known of all for- father's. And were their fore-fathers. Even gentiles today that never have grown up rwading the torah have no idea who some of these ppl are or the sayings of the prophets. Or maybe the gentiles were having the torah read to them and now knew who clement was speaking of.
You must get past that. Even Clement had once been a gentile. He was writing to the early Christian Catholic Church which was composed of both Jews and Gentiles. The problem with ebionites and Judaizers is that they forget that the Gospel was to be preached throughtout all nations.
Victor Tellez the Jewish Temples allowed all who were earnestly seeking to hear/discuss theology with polite manners to come to the Temples. We see this in the NT during a few interactions of the apostles with others. Those day saw the temple much like a forums when not performing exclusively Jewish ceremonies.
Though I am not Catholic, and Believe Jesus was promoting a purer Hebraic anti-statist teaching far flung from any modern Christianity, these were not unknown stories to the gentiles of theological leanings
You are 100% right let no man decieve you through philosophy and vain deceit. Clement was not a gentile nation but of gentile ways and thought which was Roman.
@@Jobyfresh Yeah he was a Roman, but in Jesus Christ he was taken into Israel born again.
You know if it wern't for the stupid bird, this could have been in the Bible, maybe.
Ch. 7 repent
I think these are still corrupt writings from the Roman influence. Simply the word God is used in reference to the creator. For which the Hebrews never used. I question these writings for authentic. Also the name Jesus Christ was not used either. very interesting.
"Also the name Jesus Christ was not used either. very interesting."
The very first words of the letter:
"The church of God which sojourns at Rome, to the church of God sojourning at Corinth, to them that are called and sanctified by the will of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, from Almighty God through Jesus Christ, be multiplied."
"Simply the word God is used in reference to the creator"
How do you know, have you read the Old Testament or other Hebrew writings to find out? Because they do. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Also the very first words of that Book.
"I think these are still corrupt writings from the Roman influence"
In what do they depart from other, New Testament books?
sources?
The simple fact all miss or attempt to rationally over look is that the word "God" is a title and not a name. Through history all religions has gods whose names are known. A man doesn't introduce himself as "Man" as that would sound silly. Hi my name is Man and I am your man or in this case the scriptures would say My name is God and I am your god. I don't think so. I believe its much simpler than that yet more relevant than most people would think.
@@terrybowlibg6090 let me repeat myself...what are your sources. sorry to burst your bubble, but no one cares what you think until you can back it up with credible sources.
Victor Tellez The Torah refers to our singular holy creator as Elohim אלוהים, pluralized honorific of 1. El אל, meaning: “power(s), authority(ies), Ruler(s), prime force(s)... etc... 2. Adonai אדוני, meaning “my master”. 3.Yahava יהוה, the personal name given and known as the tetragrammaton; containing “father, love, Am, and other hebrew phrases folded in one utterance likened to a breath of nefesh, or spirit. Typically rendered Jehova, Yaweh, etc. by gentiles as the use of it became taboo. 4. hashem השם, meaning “the name”.
God is a pagan word meaning nothing of import.
Indeed, moreso than mere names, the entire “OT” excerpts mildly altered from the Holy Torah is null as it is retched out of the Hebrew tongue. Hebrew CANNOT linguistically be translated satisfactorily into English. The manifold of the multiple meanings for each word are use in conjunctions while translators pick and choose what they wish to use al a carte.
Hebrew holds meaning on the letter level, unique apart from lesser languages.
Those who have not read the Torah in Hebrew have arguably never known the “OT” at all in fact.