Hi everyone, I hope you enjoy this video about the Didache, one of the most important texts in early Christianity, one of the earliest outside of the New Testament, definitely worth learning about!
Thank you, I enjoyed this immensely. I am not a catholic, nor a protestant, I am just a bible believer who is always looking for ancient writings that are written and not orally passed down and after your presentation of this, I will study it next!
Discovered this book 15 years ago and it, along with the volume of the Apostolic Fathers, and the Ante-Nicean Fathers, completely changed my Christian practice and ministry. It's interesting I see the exact same books on your bookshelf behind you as is on mine.
The fact that, there are such strong emphasis on the laws concerning what you can eat, may be subtle sign that it was written quite early, or quite close the time of the apostles. Very Interesting
Yeshua (Jesus) belonged to one of the 3 Jewish sects (The Pharisees, the Sadducees, and Essenes), the Essenes were made up of 2 sects. He belonged to the most pious of them. Vegetarian, teach kindness, love thy neighbor, etc. He chastised the other sects for their sacrifices of animals and even children (the canaanites). This was the symbolism behind him sacrificing himself so no more lives would be scarified. See Dead Sea Scrolls and Gospels found at Nag Hammadi)
@ actually yes there is. He belonged to a Jewish sect called the Nazarene Essenes. You can find their laws in the didache, instructions for the apostles. Discovered in 1940 . Look for yourself.
Thanks. I find it interesting that the history of the early church represented in the didache shows no fealty between the local churches to any central governing body, and instead instructs caution with the traveling elders.
Au contraire...the authoritative tone of Didache verifies that there was a nominative governing authority, such as recorded in Acts 15. The fact that Bible was not complete by this time also emphasizes that there was a commonality of worship that was not centered around a book (Bible), but centered around a common set of beliefs.
@@chapagawa The entire Didache states its positions dogmatically, as if such matters has been settled. In other words, it does not read, “we think maybe it should be…”, but instead reads, “this is how it is”.
@@GopnikVlad Again, care to share anything that backs up your position other than your feelings about the matter? The only mentions of the church leadership as an office are in the “Supporting God’s Ministers” and “Church Leaders” with no reference to the offices being passed down or limited to some supposed hierarchy. If Rome was such an important office in the early church, one could and should expect verbiage in those sections stating that Rome needs to elect those positions, etc.
@@chapagawa Your condescension contributes greatly to meaningful conversation. If you cannot discern the difference between statements of fact and suppositions, that is something you should sort out. Who mentioned anything about Rome? Have no clue what nonsense you are on about with that...from the very beginning, there was a hierarchy of clergy. No serious human disputes that. Only later did Rome claim the top-most position of that hierarchy, which is why the church excommunicated them and came to be called "Orthodox" for their insistence on "Correct Belief".
I am of the mind that the Didache is first century canon that was unknown or unaccepted by the modern churches. The Jewish underpinnings tell me that it was around the time before the church was mainly gentiles. In the first chapter, for example, when it is speaking of loving enemies and it says "there is no reward in loving those the love you, don't even the gentiles do that?" That tells me that it had to be written at a time when the Church was still in turmoil over Saint Paul's teaching away from the Laws of Moses and Saint James and Saint Peter were trying to keep the two teachings together. During the council of Jerusalem, the canon was akin to the teachings in the Didache. Do you believe that it is likely that the Didache was written before the fall of Jerusalem, with connections to the Church of Jerusalem?
I’ll be following this discussion and further episodes on this book. It’s always struck me (when I’m feeling a bit wee contrarian) as something deserving of including in the Canon.
@@rayne6719 well if I was someone's enemy (as Satan is Jesus') and I was smart and wanted to mislead Jesus' followers (as Satan is), I couldn't think of a better way to do it than to write (or ask someone to) a book that is very similar to the Bible, but just a wee bit misleading, enough for people to think "Well it's so similar to the Gospel, it must be true", although it's just enough misleading to cause sacrilege against Jesus. Therefore, I think it is good judgement for our church fathers to study and discern which books should be included or discluded due to possible forgery.
Thanks for this pep talk. I have the Hermeneia volumes of The Odes and Shepherd of Hermas on my shelf, but I've been dragging my feet with the Didache. Your introduction is very helpful and encouraging.
Very good Michael! A very good presentation from modern a Christian perspective! Should we be surprised that the Didache is written from a Jewish perspective. The first century "church" (synagogue ?) was made up of disciples of a Jewish Messiah. Of course we can't know the ratio of Jews and Gentiles disciples when the Didache was written but it's obvious it is full of Jewish context because our faith was birthed from Judaism. The disciples were practicing Judaism and most likely had no clue our faith would separate from it's mother doctrine and gospel. We can imagine the Didache was written by Jewish believers to Gentiles who had left their pagan gods to service their maker and creator. The Jewish believers would have taught from the Scriptures and traditions of Israel. They would have taught as a normal course (and it's right in the Didache) what the Jewish Messiah had taught them through Jesus's apostles who all were Jewish. So thank you Michael for you positive take on the Didache! I would highly recommend the book "The Way of Life" by Toby Janicki for an in depth commentary from a Messianic Jewish perspective. I would claim that is the perspective the disciples of Jesus would have had when the Didache was written. Blessings to whoever took the time to read my thoughts. Shalom!
15:00 It's a reference to when Jesus was catching the Pharisees in their ignorance (Matthew 22: 41-45) by asking them about Psalms 110. "If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?"
"Assemble on the Lord’s day, and break bread and offer the Eucharist; but first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be pure. Anyone who has a difference with his fellow is not to take part until he has been reconciled, so as to avoid profaning your sacrifice [Mt 5:23-24]. For this is the offering of which the Lord said, “Everywhere and always bring me a sacrifice that is undefiled, for I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is the wonder of nations” [Mal 1:11, 14] [Didache 14 (c. A.D. 50)].
What bible are you reading? 'So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. ' Matthew 5:23-24 ESV 'Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. ' Matthew 5:23-24 KJV Even the KJV doesn't read anything like yours. So I'm very confused.
Didache is great. Polycarp Epistle is incredible too (I forget if there’s more than one). I also moved into a more Monarchic view of the Trinity in light of the early church’s writings of emphasis on the Fathers First Authority. At least, that’s how I took it overall not dogmatic about the nuances.
Yeshua the Christ IS THE FATHER, THE REDEEMER OF ISRAEL THE ONE HOLY PROTECTOR OF ISRAEL. IN THE FLESH. BOW AND WORSHIP HIM. Do you not KNOW ME by now PHILIP?
Thank you for the video. I've heard of the Didache and its content, and your video refreshed and clarified it. Do you know of any text-critical studies of it, if it might depend on aramaic urtext or that could give better limits of earliest and latest creation?
Praise God , its a blessing to hear this. I wonder why it was not used in the book of common worship . We have creeds and apocrypha portions like song of three young men. Could you shed some light on that? Also Rev Michael can you please share this writeup?
The didache text was rediscovered only in 1873, in one copy. First, its existence had to become known more widely and its authenticity confirmed, with fragments from other places. And even afterwards, I expect some resitance against its inclusion in services.
It was used in the early church. It’s referenced in other texts. Also, the creator of the New Testament (meaning he suggested it’s current make up) St Athanasius suggested to use the Didache in the same letter he suggested the NT books. He says “here are the 27 books to use in liturgy, and for those new to the church, here are 10 other books to read to get context” and the Didache was one of those 10. This was paraphrased obviously
It is interesting you say that, it actually feels more protestant to me. Baptism is not infant and should be submersion in natural running water. There is comment on communion with no commentary on transubstantiation. Confessing to one another (not a priest)is fairly common within protestantism although not necessarily called confession. Simple church structure Bishop and Deacons no comment on pope or priest. I find it all quite interesting and agree with the initial comment it is good for us all. I am new to the topic and plan to learn more.
Learn theology which forcefully implies to read tradition because tradition was written by the early first Christian. Read “Agains Heresies” of Ireneo of Lione, this is the primitive church: he named the Catholic church exactly with these two terms the Catholic Church, in his book against heresies
Since the word Lord has replaced the name of the Father Yahweh wouldnt it be safe to say that the references to "the Lord" should be Yahweh? Also, Yeshua referred back to his father when it came to his actions and words.
Women were also bringing the good news too and serving the church… women inside the Catholic Church read at the altar the Word of God. It’s not just the priest who reads. To serve inside a Church means you encourage others and/or you read the word at the altar. That’s what deacon also means: to serve. When it’s a woman she can serve the church and read the word and encourage other Christians. When it’s a man he can give baptism and so on. A woman it’s not consecrated like a priest is. It is a common woman the one who reads the word at the altar of the Catholic Church just like the priest does but she doesn’t explain the word, like a priest must do. She can nonetheless encourage the church
@@chrisregas5045 what is a deacon? Meaning of deacon= The deacon's ministry has three dimensions: liturgy, word and service. At the liturgy, he assists the bishop and priests. At the Mass, the deacon proclaims the Gospel, may be invited to preach the homily, and assists at the altar. Romans 16:1 16 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon[a][b] of the church in Cenchreae.
It seems that the Didache attests to the Catholic faith. We see that the early Church was liturgical; The form of baptism is the same as Catholics and with the Eucharist being the center of Christian worship.
Noooo its closer to orthodox. You dont find bread and wine becoming literal flesh and blood, you dont find saint or Mary “veneration” (worship), you don’t find the papacy, you don’t find purgatory. If anything its closer to orthodoxy
The false "apostle Paul" was brought before apostle James and their council where they questioned him about his teachings. He lied to them, saying he supported the law of Moses and took the Essene vow, according to some texts found in Nag Hammadi. Paul was referenced in other texts and warning others to be careful of false prophets.
Yes, it has no traces of Catholicism, so it doesn't go into transubstantiation doctrines. The very title "the teachings of the 12 Apostles to the Nations" also show it doesn't have a later innovation of papal authority and Peter being put above all the apostles. This document was likely 2nd Century, before the teaching of the RCC became evolved and entrenched.
Lie. It says that whoever does not recognize the Eucharist is the body of Christ is heretic. This is not written there but is written in Against the Heresies of Ireneo of Lione, another book of the early first Christian where the author named the Catholic Church, Catholic Church even at his times @@saintejeannedarc9460
The Catholic Church is the first Christian Church. Saint Ignatius who was taught by the apostle John said this in 107AD: See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude of the people also be; even as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. -Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 8
@@ateam388 the other Orthodox churches can equally claim to be the first Church. There is no definitive proof that the RCC is the same church that was started by Peter.
@@CrannDarachThere is definitive proof. Because the Roman Church was seen as indefectible/Infallible from the earliest times. Because it was the See of Peter who held the Primacy.
I had to listen to this part twice, but you said the Eucharist is an act of cultic worship? The Lord's words are on par with Holy Scripture? Wait, He is the Word of God. Why did this need to be said, as though He was equivalent to an early bishop?
@ri3m4nn - the prayers for the Eucharist are clearly different between the Didache and Paul. There's much less emphasis on Jesus and on his sacrifice in the Didache. . . . To fasting: I don't think Paul ever recommended Wednesdays and Fridays, did he? There was more diversity in Second Temple Judaism than in later Rabbinical Judaism that recommended Mondays and Thursdays: fasting at two different days points more to faction building within Judaism than to Gentiles.
@@wilsontexas sorry San Ireneo of Lione has written a historical document “Against Heresies “, where he writes the terms: Catholic Church. if you deny history it’s not my fault
When it say question none trust in scholars educated guesser deceiving self void in know unknown exactly like gues is know in life is Deceiving self exactly why you don't know self unknown to even self
How do we know it's a first century work? we don't. That's just a guess. Where was it found and who found it? Nobody knows. It just appeared in the 11th century.
@@lisaburnside2101 How can Jesus be the head of a Church he never founded or intended to found.He was an observant Jew and remained so his whole life.Never did anyone write that he wanted a religion to be created in his name.Now Paul ,there is you founder.That pretentious bastard never even met Jesus, and yet he knew better than all of the Apostles combined.You had better read up on your Christianity history my friend.The Christian Church was founded by Paul not poor Jesus.
While some of the contents of the Didache are quite old, we know the whole of this writing is NOT contemporaneous with the apostles as the itinerant preacher advice would definitely be post-apostolic and likely more than a century after the time of the apostles. It's general advice on how to identify a traveling scam artist. These are undoubtedly post-Judaizers, as 1) Judaizers are not mentioned and 2) they have made a living of leeching off of Christian charity. In the first century, the Judaizers were Jewish "believers" who insisted on forcing Gentiles to become fully Jewish. The fact that they are not even referenced helps us to date this document into the 2nd century. This is the first reference to "pouring water on the forehead" of the bed-ridden who are unable to be baptized in any other way. Because the date of the full "existing" document is so late, we do not know how many "revisions" occurred in this writing over the centuries as there are no comparative documents in their entirety.
The first writings of the first Christians, like Saint Ireneo of Lione wrote about the Catholic Roman Church. Read: “Against the Heresies” by Saint Ireneo of Lione. He named the Catholic Church in his writings
@@nadiadiiorio1850 It is even stated many times in this video how the book leans heavily into the Jewish roots and the Old testamentestaments . They followed the feast days and observed the Sabath Friday night to Saturday night. It was not till Constantine was the Sabath moved to Sunday. Do not judge my words based on your ignorance.
@@infantryblack you are talking nonsense. A good lot of the world population is ignorant on religious topics, but mind you.. to assume everyone is ignorant on this topic, is called syllogism: something that God didn’t like when Job’s friends did this to Job. Job’s friends were guilty of syllogism
Instead of giving money to pastors, give money whats called alms to the handicapped people of faith. Where the apostles orked with their hands, where tge faith is free. Where teaching the true faith is hard to find.
Making too much of the word Lord. Ravv (Lord) is the title of a Shaliah (Apostle) or senior-law-giving rabbi. Note Roman Catholic, Anglicans and Orthodox use this title routinely for their Bishops. Not that special. Jesus is the Lord. Other Bishops/Apostles are Lords as well but not with the definite article
Not that Micheal is following the Church fathers (I just wanted his take on the Didache), but there are those that follow and study Church father’s teachings rather than the Word. Traditions tend to lead away from the Scriptures, and place emphasis on the Church fathers, so the whole counsel of God trumps Church fathers every time. Of course this is a rudimentary informational video on a document that is worth careful study and research, while letting the Spirit lead, of course. Careful study of some of the Greek usage (see Lee Brainard) and tenses can be viewed as pre-tribulational, even putting Imminency aside. I know, I had to do a second take too. I try to stay Berean (Acts 17:11) as much as I can. Good work on the video. As I stated, the Didache can be a years long study. Blessings!
Tell me please what was the original practices early Christians? Like all Europeans you digress into ethnic paradigms when the truth is that Christianity came out of and is of the "Old Testament". Abraham, Isaac, Jacobs , Moses none of then were Jewish. None of the writings of the "New Testament" were available until about 40 to 50 years after the resurrection. So Christianity is the same religion Jesus gave Moses is the Sinai.
@@Achill101 Wrong question to a simple inquiry. I pick up the Bible and read three times from Genesis 1 to Revelations 22 and could not find and difference between the Old and New Testament and all the so call Christian doctrines were absent, and no where around. So I began to ask myself certain questions.One of which is my opening statement. Do I know it all...I Do Not! But this I do know if Jesus Christ where to come today He would not recognize what we call Christianity. Truly searching for the truth is very difficult if not impossible. But it is note worthy that all have answered me in the same manner as you.
You claim "None of the writings of the New Testament were available until about 40 to 50 years after the resurrection", but that is NOT what most biblical scholars think today. They assume that the Pauline letters were written 10-30 years after the resurrection, were stored and reread in the addressed parishes. What is the evidence for your claim?
@@Achill101 None of the Apostles would heard of or think of, their letters and writings as the "New Testament" and at best the earliest correlation of their writings is about AD 66 to AD110. I know it may have angered some because I use "European" but the fact remains that modern Christian is a European construct and NOT A BIBLICAL one. None of the present day practices and doctrines of modern Christianity have anything to do with God's word but is based on Greek, Roman and Germanic ( European) Satanic traditions and philosophies deceptively portrayed and packaged as Christianity. And the Pauline letters were written much much later than your fatuous Biblical scholarship thinks. There are 11 years between Paul’s conversion (Acts 9:1-9) approximately 33-36 AD and when his the first apostolic journey (Acts 13:2-3), so approximately 44-47 AD, Paul started his ministry. EVIDENCE!!!
Paul wrote "Do not beyond what is written" ( 1Cor 4:6 ) This was Pauls's 'rule'! Also Jude ( Jesus's half brother) wrote about "The faith that was delivered once for all to the holy ones" ( Jude 3). Thus a Christian needs NOTHING MORE than the Holy bible. No manmade rules and regulations and requirement to please God & jesus Christ! The mistakes of the pharasees were now duplicated by the church leaders from the latter half of the first & into the second century! We dont need the 'Didache' or any other 'handbook' to prove we are serving Christ!
The didache doesn’t invalidate sola scriptura. Scripture is the only infallible rule for faith and doctrine and it’s authority is supreme but that doesn’t mean there are other authorities we abide by. For instance, if a laymen or a pastor doesn’t hold to there church’s articles of faith then discipline is warranted. Don’t throw out all Christian writings because it isn’t the Bible, rather judge them based on scripture and they are helpful in understanding what early Christianity was like.
@@CCiPencil Sorry to say that appart from a few examples like Clement of Rome and even some of Origen's writings the majority of the 'church fathers' indulged in an effort to explain thr unexpalinable with strong references not just to the bible but to greek phi;osophy & even mythology!
@@CCiPencil I agree, some were sincere Christians first then writers who stuck closely to the inspired word. Others were clever men, well educated & who studied greek philosophy which was very popular amoung the intellegensia at the time, who later were converted and quickly made 'bishops' e.t.c, not because of their faith but their wisdom and cleverness ( 1 Cor 1 tells us that 'God chose the foolish things of the worl;d to put the wise men to shame").
@@CCiPencil Having studied the lives and teachings of most of the 'church fathers' a very few like Polycarp & Clement of Rome were sincere christians. Mainly they were clever, well educated men of learning, strongly influenced by greek philosophy. Tertullian for example was actually made a 'bishop' after only TWO YEARS of conversion following a long term as a greek philosopher. It caused much consternation as to his rapid appointment. The favour or not of the current emporer was also a factor in the popularity of these men. As I read 1 Cor chapter 1 it is very relevent to this question as Paul states in part "No many wise men were chosen for God put the wise men to shame and chose the foolish things of the world"
In examining the lordnin didache you dont mention how in hebrew LORD YAHOVAH ADONAI is distinguished from LORD MESSIAH ADONEE. hence sit at my right hand until i put all your enemies under your feet. So no indication that jesus is God but is divine.
What the Didache shows is the simplicity of the early church. These followers held a simple faith in Jesus as Messiah and Savior. They assembled in local churches without hierarchy above the local church, on Sunday to remember the sacrifice of Christ in the communion service, and receive instruction in the scriptural texts by reading the scrolls. Each local church had its own selection of bishops (overseers) and deacons. Traveling preachers would go from church to church in teaching the doctrine of these churches, which helped in keeping uniformity. Believers baptism was the initiatory rite into these church communities. These churches looked forward to Christ's second coming and resurrection of the dead, with judgement following. The chiliast approach to eschatology is definitely not evident here, which indeed demonstrates a break with the Jewish view. Clearly in the Didache the Jewish roots are present, but a separate Christian vision is definitely in play at this time, probably very late first century or very early second century. This document, though edited does closely follow the Christianity as expressed in the New Testament.
@lindamorgan2678 Most scholars agree it was edited through the years, although the major parts have remained in tact. Just view online sources for the details.
Questioner: Can you tell me the origin of the Ten Commandments? Ra: I am Ra. The origin of these commandments follows the law of negative entities impressing information upon positively oriented mind/body/spirit complexes. The information attempted to copy or ape positivity while retaining negative characteristics. Questioner: Was this done by the Orion group? Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. Questioner: What was their purpose in doing this? Ra: I am Ra. The purpose of the Orion group, as mentioned before, is conquest and enslavement. This is done by finding and establishing an elite and causing others to serve the elite through various devices such as the laws you mention and others given by this entity. Questioner: Was the recipient of the laws… of the Ten Commandments positively or negatively oriented? Ra: The recipient was one of extreme positivity, thus accounting for some of the pseudo-positive characteristics of the information received. As with contacts which are not successful, this entity, vibratory complex, Moishe, did not remain a credible influence among those who had first heard the philosophy of One and this entity was removed from this third-density vibratory level in a lessened or saddened state, having lost what you may call the honor and faith with which he had begun the conceptualization of the Law of One and the freeing of those who were of his tribes, as they were called at that time/space. Questioner: If this entity was positively oriented, how was the Orion group able to contact him? Ra: I am Ra. This was an intensive, shall we say, battleground between positively oriented forces of Confederation origin and negatively oriented sources. The one called Moishe was open to impression and received the Law of One in its most simple form. However, the information became negatively oriented due to his people’s pressure to do specific physical things in the third-density planes. This left the entity open for the type of information and philosophy of a self-service nature. Questioner: It would be unlike an entity fully aware of the knowledge of the Law of One to ever say “Thou shalt not.” Is this correct? Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. Ra Material (1981)
Sounds a lot like the many "Egyptian Books of the Dead", if the questioner is Osiris, and Ra is not the Egyptian creator god. In that case, it could be masonic., which also elevates both Isis and Osiris (who is the keeper of the land of the dead.). Anyway, is has little or nothing to do with Christianity and its infancy. It seems more occult whichever way the wind blows.
Ŵe have forsaken the Prince of peace. The selfbegotten freedom and Joy of The Lord. Trade your shares in the kingdom. Keep your silence. I am conserving myself about these matters.
Hi everyone, I hope you enjoy this video about the Didache, one of the most important texts in early Christianity, one of the earliest outside of the New Testament, definitely worth learning about!
The Didache is a Chrsitian - and it is wholly a CATHOLIC text.
Thank you, I enjoyed this immensely. I am not a catholic, nor a protestant, I am just a bible believer who is always looking for ancient writings that are written and not orally passed down and after your presentation of this, I will study it next!
Discovered this book 15 years ago and it, along with the volume of the Apostolic Fathers, and the Ante-Nicean Fathers, completely changed my Christian practice and ministry. It's interesting I see the exact same books on your bookshelf behind you as is on mine.
Thank you for sharing this very interesting piece of information as well as for your comments!
Kind regards,
A.
The fact that, there are such strong emphasis on the laws concerning what you can eat, may be subtle sign that it was written quite early, or quite close the time of the apostles. Very Interesting
I noticed the same thing when I read it a few years back. I imagined it being read in my church today and the discussion it would kick off.
The missing link is called messianic : Judean and Greek Jews for Jesus if you will. Also the first popes. ‘High Priest’. New Temple.
Yeshua (Jesus) belonged to one of the 3 Jewish sects (The Pharisees, the Sadducees, and Essenes), the Essenes were made up of 2 sects. He belonged to the most pious of them. Vegetarian, teach kindness, love thy neighbor, etc. He chastised the other sects for their sacrifices of animals and even children (the canaanites). This was the symbolism behind him sacrificing himself so no more lives would be scarified. See Dead Sea Scrolls and Gospels found at Nag Hammadi)
@@Tarotreadingmystic false. There is no proof Jesus was a vegetarian.
@ actually yes there is. He belonged to a Jewish sect called the Nazarene Essenes. You can find their laws in the didache, instructions for the apostles. Discovered in 1940 . Look for yourself.
So helpful! Thank you!
Thank you for this work. Most enlightening.
Thank you, I will stay tuned! "This is a great get'em hooked" overview!
Thanks. I find it interesting that the history of the early church represented in the didache shows no fealty between the local churches to any central governing body, and instead instructs caution with the traveling elders.
Au contraire...the authoritative tone of Didache verifies that there was a nominative governing authority, such as recorded in Acts 15. The fact that Bible was not complete by this time also emphasizes that there was a commonality of worship that was not centered around a book (Bible), but centered around a common set of beliefs.
@ Care to provide some quotes for the “authoritative tone?”
@@chapagawa The entire Didache states its positions dogmatically, as if such matters has been settled. In other words, it does not read, “we think maybe it should be…”, but instead reads, “this is how it is”.
@@GopnikVlad Again, care to share anything that backs up your position other than your feelings about the matter? The only mentions of the church leadership as an office are in the “Supporting God’s Ministers” and “Church Leaders” with no reference to the offices being passed down or limited to some supposed hierarchy. If Rome was such an important office in the early church, one could and should expect verbiage in those sections stating that Rome needs to elect those positions, etc.
@@chapagawa Your condescension contributes greatly to meaningful conversation. If you cannot discern the difference between statements of fact and suppositions, that is something you should sort out. Who mentioned anything about Rome? Have no clue what nonsense you are on about with that...from the very beginning, there was a hierarchy of clergy. No serious human disputes that. Only later did Rome claim the top-most position of that hierarchy, which is why the church excommunicated them and came to be called "Orthodox" for their insistence on "Correct Belief".
Thanks!
This was very helpful ty😮😇😇😇
Excellent introduction.
Glad you liked it!
❤❤❤ Love to all, its great to understand how early believers were taught.
I am of the mind that the Didache is first century canon that was unknown or unaccepted by the modern churches. The Jewish underpinnings tell me that it was around the time before the church was mainly gentiles. In the first chapter, for example, when it is speaking of loving enemies and it says "there is no reward in loving those the love you, don't even the gentiles do that?" That tells me that it had to be written at a time when the Church was still in turmoil over Saint Paul's teaching away from the Laws of Moses and Saint James and Saint Peter were trying to keep the two teachings together. During the council of Jerusalem, the canon was akin to the teachings in the Didache. Do you believe that it is likely that the Didache was written before the fall of Jerusalem, with connections to the Church of Jerusalem?
Informative ….
I could listen you for hours
I’ll be following this discussion and further episodes on this book. It’s always struck me (when I’m feeling a bit wee contrarian) as something deserving of including in the Canon.
We have, at least, the gospel of Matthew, to which the didache seems related. But I agree that the didache would make some good readings on Sunday.
How dare you read books not approved of by your church daddies
@@rayne6719 well if I was someone's enemy (as Satan is Jesus') and I was smart and wanted to mislead Jesus' followers (as Satan is), I couldn't think of a better way to do it than to write (or ask someone to) a book that is very similar to the Bible, but just a wee bit misleading, enough for people to think "Well it's so similar to the Gospel, it must be true", although it's just enough misleading to cause sacrilege against Jesus. Therefore, I think it is good judgement for our church fathers to study and discern which books should be included or discluded due to possible forgery.
@@nichmon3221 good point. Presupposing that Satan exists and has power to bewitch people into writing things.
the content of didache is actually similar to catholic canon law books.
Thanks for this pep talk. I have the Hermeneia volumes of The Odes and Shepherd of Hermas on my shelf, but I've been dragging my feet with the Didache. Your introduction is very helpful and encouraging.
Very helpful synopsis. Thanks Dr Bird. Particularly the issue of baptism.
If you listen the the Didache on audible it's about 20 mind, this video is longer then the actual Didache. Just thought I would share.
Be blessed brother. Very usefull. Greatings from Romania.
Thanks
A wonderful analysis of one of my top 5 favorite ante-Nicene Christian Documents.
What are your other 4 favorites?
Yes, tell us of your other four, please.
are there more? please, share!
@@Achill101you 77😅t you😅😅uu😅😅😅
What are your other four favorites?
My copy of the Didache allows pouring but prefers immersion. It doesn't mention sprinkling like this man says. Is he trying to deceive us?
Very good Michael! A very good presentation from modern a Christian perspective!
Should we be surprised that the Didache is written from a Jewish perspective. The first century "church" (synagogue ?) was made up of disciples of a Jewish Messiah. Of course we can't know the ratio of Jews and Gentiles disciples when the Didache was written but it's obvious it is full of Jewish context because our faith was birthed from Judaism. The disciples were practicing Judaism and most likely had no clue our faith would separate from it's mother doctrine and gospel. We can imagine the Didache was written by Jewish believers to Gentiles who had left their pagan gods to service their maker and creator. The Jewish believers would have taught from the Scriptures and traditions of Israel. They would have taught as a normal course (and it's right in the Didache) what the Jewish Messiah had taught them through Jesus's apostles who all were Jewish.
So thank you Michael for you positive take on the Didache!
I would highly recommend the book "The Way of Life" by Toby Janicki for an in depth commentary from a Messianic Jewish perspective. I would claim that is the perspective the disciples of Jesus would have had when the Didache was written.
Blessings to whoever took the time to read my thoughts. Shalom!
Super helpful. Thanks for this overview
15:00 It's a reference to when Jesus was catching the Pharisees in their ignorance (Matthew 22: 41-45) by asking them about Psalms 110. "If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?"
So is this document like a mix of leviticus and the synoptic gospels
"Assemble on the Lord’s day, and break bread and offer the Eucharist; but first make confession of your faults, so that your sacrifice may be pure. Anyone who has a difference with his fellow is not to take part until he has been reconciled, so as to avoid profaning your sacrifice [Mt 5:23-24]. For this is the offering of which the Lord said, “Everywhere and always bring me a sacrifice that is undefiled, for I am a great king, says the Lord, and my name is the wonder of nations” [Mal 1:11, 14] [Didache 14 (c. A.D. 50)].
The "Lord's Day" is not in the Greek. "Day" was added.
What bible are you reading?
'So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. '
Matthew 5:23-24 ESV
'Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. '
Matthew 5:23-24 KJV
Even the KJV doesn't read anything like yours. So I'm very confused.
@@loveonbumpercars check out Catholic
Didache is great. Polycarp Epistle is incredible too (I forget if there’s more than one). I also moved into a more Monarchic view of the Trinity in light of the early church’s writings of emphasis on the Fathers First Authority. At least, that’s how I took it overall not dogmatic about the nuances.
Ryan, if you check the channel, I also have a video about Polycarp!
@@earlychristianhistorywithm8684 I will thanks a lot! Your channel is absolutely fantastic, and Polycarp is one of the greatest men to ever live.
Yeshua the Christ IS THE FATHER, THE REDEEMER OF ISRAEL THE ONE HOLY PROTECTOR OF ISRAEL. IN THE FLESH.
BOW AND WORSHIP HIM.
Do you not KNOW ME by now PHILIP?
@@pede8889 At His baptism. Who was talking to Jesus?
@@ryanparris1021 there is only one. I'll let you choose
Where can one buy a copy of the Didache?
Thank you for the video.
I've heard of the Didache and its content, and your video refreshed and clarified it. Do you know of any text-critical studies of it, if it might depend on aramaic urtext or that could give better limits of earliest and latest creation?
The way if life by toby janicki
@@bec5gtr - thanks. I'll check it out.
It feels like we are living in a time of great lawlessness right now.
We are
#JesusIsComingSoon
“Really?” (Dripping with sarcasm.)
We are!!! It doesn't just feel like it. These are increasingly evil times.
I would like to know the church rubrics during the liturgy thanks
Praise God , its a blessing to hear this. I wonder why it was not used in the book of common worship . We have creeds and apocrypha portions like song of three young men. Could you shed some light on that? Also Rev Michael can you please share this writeup?
The didache text was rediscovered only in 1873, in one copy. First, its existence had to become known more widely and its authenticity confirmed, with fragments from other places. And even afterwards, I expect some resitance against its inclusion in services.
@@Achill101 okay thank you for the reply
You mentioned praying to the Lord - I agree with that.
In my opinion, Prayers to dead folks is the equivalent of eating food sacrificed to dead gods…
It was used in the early church. It’s referenced in other texts.
Also, the creator of the New Testament (meaning he suggested it’s current make up) St Athanasius suggested to use the Didache in the same letter he suggested the NT books.
He says “here are the 27 books to use in liturgy, and for those new to the church, here are 10 other books to read to get context” and the Didache was one of those 10. This was paraphrased obviously
@@Achill101They knew it existed before the copy was discovered because early texts referenced it
Was it more like a Catechism?
I do have a question ❓ is the Didache the teaching of the Apostles, is it apostolic teaching???
It's not written by THE apostles, even if it attempts to imagine what their collective instruction would be.
It proves Catholics practice these all.
Not all. Orthodoxy is it 👍🏻
And then developed more …😂
@@ntlearning amen.. this is more Jewish than Papist
@@qijiy yes indeed
Everything proves Catholicism in the circular reasoning of Catholicism
This document belongs to the Church not Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant but to all of us.
Not Protestant
It is interesting you say that, it actually feels more protestant to me. Baptism is not infant and should be submersion in natural running water. There is comment on communion with no commentary on transubstantiation. Confessing to one another (not a priest)is fairly common within protestantism although not necessarily called confession. Simple church structure Bishop and Deacons no comment on pope or priest. I find it all quite interesting and agree with the initial comment it is good for us all. I am new to the topic and plan to learn more.
Learn theology which forcefully implies to read tradition because tradition was written by the early first Christian. Read “Agains Heresies” of Ireneo of Lione, this is the primitive church: he named the Catholic church exactly with these two terms the Catholic Church, in his book against heresies
Most protestants will ignore it if they are even aware of it. Remember Sola Scriptura! tradition and history are nothing and to be ignored.
You forgot an important warning. It says to confess your sins in the Church…
Doesn't it say pour, not sprinkle?
Can a copy be put here?
You can buy online.
Since the word Lord has replaced the name of the Father Yahweh wouldnt it be safe to say that the references to "the Lord" should be Yahweh? Also, Yeshua referred back to his father when it came to his actions and words.
I missed the section in the Didache on women elders. Hmmmm.
Nice argument from slience
Romans 16:1
New International Version
Personal Greetings
16 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon[a][b] of the church in Cenchreae.
Women were also bringing the good news too and serving the church… women inside the Catholic Church read at the altar the Word of God. It’s not just the priest who reads. To serve inside a Church means you encourage others and/or you read the word at the altar. That’s what deacon also means: to serve. When it’s a woman she can serve the church and read the word and encourage other Christians. When it’s a man he can give baptism and so on. A woman it’s not consecrated like a priest is. It is a common woman the one who reads the word at the altar of the Catholic Church just like the priest does but she doesn’t explain the word, like a priest must do. She can nonetheless encourage the church
No mention of female elders/overseers/pastors in the NT.
@@chrisregas5045 what is a deacon?
Meaning of deacon= The deacon's ministry has three dimensions: liturgy, word and service. At the liturgy, he assists the bishop and priests. At the Mass, the deacon proclaims the Gospel, may be invited to preach the homily, and assists at the altar.
Romans 16:1 16 I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon[a][b] of the church in Cenchreae.
Why is there any doubt that it wasn't the Apostles?
It seems that the Didache attests to the Catholic faith. We see that the early Church was liturgical; The form of baptism is the same as Catholics and with the Eucharist being the center of Christian worship.
There's clear continuity with later Catholic tradition.
*orthodox
@@newchillynoble2412Catholic
Noooo its closer to orthodox. You dont find bread and wine becoming literal flesh and blood, you dont find saint or Mary “veneration” (worship), you don’t find the papacy, you don’t find purgatory. If anything its closer to orthodoxy
@@earlychristianhistorywithm8684wrong
The false "apostle Paul" was brought before apostle James and their council where they questioned him about his teachings. He lied to them, saying he supported the law of Moses and took the Essene vow, according to some texts found in Nag Hammadi. Paul was referenced in other texts and warning others to be careful of false prophets.
Is the Eucharisti in Didache without eat my flesh and drink my blood??....
Yes, it has no traces of Catholicism, so it doesn't go into transubstantiation doctrines. The very title "the teachings of the 12 Apostles to the Nations" also show it doesn't have a later innovation of papal authority and Peter being put above all the apostles. This document was likely 2nd Century, before the teaching of the RCC became evolved and entrenched.
@@saintejeannedarc9460bingo
Lie. It says that whoever does not recognize the Eucharist is the body of Christ is heretic. This is not written there but is written in Against the Heresies of Ireneo of Lione, another book of the early first Christian where the author named the Catholic Church, Catholic Church even at his times @@saintejeannedarc9460
Fact #4 relationship is misspelled
Why didn't you just read it. It takes twenty minutes to read it
There are videos where it is read.
I thought he gave a good overview.
This letter was given to the first church not the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church is the first Christian Church.
Saint Ignatius who was taught by the apostle John said this in 107AD: See that you all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is administered either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude of the people also be; even as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. -Letter to the Smyrnaeans, Ch 8
@ateam388 obviously not. Acts 15 shows the split between the Gentile and Jewish Christians.
@@ri3m4nn All so called Christians outside of the Catholic church at that time were heretics.
@@ateam388 the other Orthodox churches can equally claim to be the first Church. There is no definitive proof that the RCC is the same church that was started by Peter.
@@CrannDarachThere is definitive proof. Because the Roman Church was seen as indefectible/Infallible from the earliest times. Because it was the See of Peter who held the Primacy.
Why does everyone pronounce it wrong?
Because these are the teachings the 12 apostles conveyed to the other Apostles who wrote the letter you can find in the Didachè
A headache?
what are you talking about
Proves the early church was not Catholic but more like a Baptist Church.
I had to listen to this part twice, but you said the Eucharist is an act of cultic worship? The Lord's words are on par with Holy Scripture? Wait, He is the Word of God. Why did this need to be said, as though He was equivalent to an early bishop?
I think it's late 2nd century AD
Why do you think so?
I thought it was earlier, because of the absence of Pauline theology.
@@Achill101.... without Pauline theology? Hilarious
@@ri3m4nn - do you think there's Pauline theology in the Didache? Which one specifically?
@@Achill101 the part where it calls the Eucharist Spiritual, or how about the fact it's clearly not Hewbrew-Christians by fasting on different days.
@ri3m4nn - the prayers for the Eucharist are clearly different between the Didache and Paul. There's much less emphasis on Jesus and on his sacrifice in the Didache.
. . . To fasting: I don't think Paul ever recommended Wednesdays and Fridays, did he? There was more diversity in Second Temple Judaism than in later Rabbinical Judaism that recommended Mondays and Thursdays: fasting at two different days points more to faction building within Judaism than to Gentiles.
Why do Catholics and Orthodox adherents in every comment section praise their denomination more than Christ? I do not understand this tendency.
Because it’s the body of Christ and points to him.
Salvation comes through the church men.
Because the doctrine of the First early Church (the Roman Catholic Church) is part of the doctrine written in the Bible
@@nadiadiiorio1850 Sorry the first early church was not roman....
@@wilsontexas sorry San Ireneo of Lione has written a historical document “Against Heresies “, where he writes the terms: Catholic Church. if you deny history it’s not my fault
😊
When it say question none trust in scholars educated guesser deceiving self void in know unknown exactly like gues is know in life is Deceiving self exactly why you don't know self unknown to even self
How do we know it's a first century work? we don't. That's just a guess. Where was it found and who found it? Nobody knows. It just appeared in the 11th century.
Long live the Catholic Church ❤
Amen.
It's already lived too long!🎉
Jesus Christ is the head of the Church not man - the invisible church He will separate the wheat from the terrors.
@@lisaburnside2101 How can Jesus be the head of a Church he never founded or intended to found.He was an observant Jew and remained so his whole life.Never did anyone write that he wanted a religion to be created in his name.Now Paul ,there is you founder.That pretentious bastard never even met Jesus, and yet he knew better than all of the Apostles combined.You had better read up on your Christianity history my friend.The Christian Church was founded by Paul not poor Jesus.
@@rondecambio7375.... and continue on living....
🎶Who can take Christian doctrine?🎶sun it up ‘n’ a paragraph or two? 🎶the didache can🎵the didache🎶
Hehehehe
It confirms the Catholic faith. Whoever doesn't eat my flesh and drink my blood does not have part in me.
Not to be that guy, but the Orthodox Christians do that too.
@Nasser FireLord Arts Because they are Catholic as well.
Did the thief at the cross eat flesh snd blood or just believed and repented?
@@chosen4Jexactly
@@chosen4Jlikewise,
Was he baptized in water?
While some of the contents of the Didache are quite old, we know the whole of this writing is NOT contemporaneous with the apostles as the itinerant preacher advice would definitely be post-apostolic and likely more than a century after the time of the apostles. It's general advice on how to identify a traveling scam artist. These are undoubtedly post-Judaizers, as 1) Judaizers are not mentioned and 2) they have made a living of leeching off of Christian charity. In the first century, the Judaizers were Jewish "believers" who insisted on forcing Gentiles to become fully Jewish. The fact that they are not even referenced helps us to date this document into the 2nd century. This is the first reference to "pouring water on the forehead" of the bed-ridden who are unable to be baptized in any other way. Because the date of the full "existing" document is so late, we do not know how many "revisions" occurred in this writing over the centuries as there are no comparative documents in their entirety.
ORTHODOXY IS WHAT CHRIST TAUGHT AND THE APPOSTELS PREACHED☦️☦️☦️☦️
The first writings of the first Christians, like Saint Ireneo of Lione wrote about the Catholic Roman Church. Read: “Against the Heresies” by Saint Ireneo of Lione. He named the Catholic Church in his writings
Christian Tora observers are close to what was practiced.
@@infantryblack you are talking nonsense
@@nadiadiiorio1850 It is even stated many times in this video how the book leans heavily into the Jewish roots and the Old testamentestaments . They followed the feast days and observed the Sabath Friday night to Saturday night. It was not till Constantine was the Sabath moved to Sunday. Do not judge my words based on your ignorance.
@@infantryblack you are talking nonsense. A good lot of the world population is ignorant on religious topics, but mind you.. to assume everyone is ignorant on this topic, is called syllogism: something that God didn’t like when Job’s friends did this to Job. Job’s friends were guilty of syllogism
Instead of giving money to pastors, give money whats called alms to the handicapped people of faith. Where the apostles orked with their hands, where tge faith is free. Where teaching the true faith is hard to find.
Making too much of the word Lord. Ravv (Lord) is the title of a Shaliah (Apostle) or senior-law-giving rabbi. Note Roman Catholic, Anglicans and Orthodox use this title routinely for their Bishops. Not that special. Jesus is the Lord. Other Bishops/Apostles are Lords as well but not with the definite article
Not that Micheal is following the Church fathers (I just wanted his take on the Didache), but there are those that follow and study Church father’s teachings rather than the Word.
Traditions tend to lead away from the Scriptures, and place emphasis on the Church fathers, so the whole counsel of God trumps Church fathers every time.
Of course this is a rudimentary informational video on a document that is worth careful study and research, while letting the Spirit lead, of course.
Careful study of some of the Greek usage (see Lee Brainard) and tenses can be viewed as pre-tribulational, even putting Imminency aside. I know, I had to do a second take too. I try to stay Berean (Acts 17:11) as much as I can.
Good work on the video. As I stated, the Didache can be a years long study.
Blessings!
Tell me please what was the original practices early Christians? Like all Europeans you digress into ethnic paradigms when the truth is that Christianity came out of and is of the "Old Testament". Abraham, Isaac, Jacobs , Moses none of then were Jewish. None of the writings of the "New Testament" were available until about 40 to 50 years after the resurrection. So Christianity is the same religion Jesus gave Moses is the Sinai.
If you know it all, why don't you make a video about it (you could leave a link here).
@@Achill101 Wrong question to a simple inquiry. I pick up the Bible and read three times from Genesis 1 to Revelations 22 and could not find and difference between the Old and New Testament and all the so call Christian doctrines were absent, and no where around. So I began to ask myself certain questions.One of which is my opening statement. Do I know it all...I Do Not! But this I do know if Jesus Christ where to come today He would not recognize what we call Christianity. Truly searching for the truth is very difficult if not impossible. But it is note worthy that all have answered me in the same manner as you.
You claim "None of the writings of the New Testament were available until about 40 to 50 years after the resurrection", but that is NOT what most biblical scholars think today. They assume that the Pauline letters were written 10-30 years after the resurrection, were stored and reread in the addressed parishes. What is the evidence for your claim?
@@Achill101 None of the Apostles would heard of or think of, their letters and writings as the "New Testament" and at best the earliest correlation of their writings is about AD 66 to AD110. I know it may have angered some because I use "European" but the fact remains that modern Christian is a European construct and NOT A BIBLICAL one. None of the present day practices and doctrines of modern Christianity have anything to do with God's word but is based on Greek, Roman and Germanic ( European) Satanic traditions and philosophies deceptively portrayed and packaged as Christianity. And the Pauline letters were written much much later than your fatuous Biblical scholarship thinks. There are 11 years between Paul’s conversion (Acts 9:1-9) approximately 33-36 AD and when his the first apostolic journey (Acts 13:2-3), so approximately 44-47 AD, Paul started his ministry. EVIDENCE!!!
@@arthurnunez5019 - Satanic 🤣
That deplorable word
Epiosious
Excellent.
By doing so you choose your own religion, you cannot separate the two and when you do you create your own religion, the Lord heal your mind
Paul wrote "Do not beyond what is written" ( 1Cor 4:6 ) This was Pauls's 'rule'! Also Jude ( Jesus's half brother) wrote about "The faith that was delivered once for all to the holy ones" ( Jude 3). Thus a Christian needs NOTHING MORE than the Holy bible. No manmade rules and regulations and requirement to please God & jesus Christ! The mistakes of the pharasees were now duplicated by the church leaders from the latter half of the first & into the second century! We dont need the 'Didache' or any other 'handbook' to prove we are serving Christ!
The didache doesn’t invalidate sola scriptura. Scripture is the only infallible rule for faith and doctrine and it’s authority is supreme but that doesn’t mean there are other authorities we abide by. For instance, if a laymen or a pastor doesn’t hold to there church’s articles of faith then discipline is warranted. Don’t throw out all Christian writings because it isn’t the Bible, rather judge them based on scripture and they are helpful in understanding what early Christianity was like.
@@CCiPencil Sorry to say that appart from a few examples like Clement of Rome and even some of Origen's writings the majority of the 'church fathers' indulged in an effort to explain thr unexpalinable with strong references not just to the bible but to greek phi;osophy & even mythology!
@@kiwihans100 I think it’s problematic to make blanket statements of church fathers. Some bad, some good, some great
@@CCiPencil I agree, some were sincere Christians first then writers who stuck closely to the inspired word. Others were clever men, well educated & who studied greek philosophy which was very popular amoung the intellegensia at the time, who later were converted and quickly made 'bishops' e.t.c, not because of their faith but their wisdom and cleverness ( 1 Cor 1 tells us that 'God chose the foolish things of the worl;d to put the wise men to shame").
@@CCiPencil Having studied the lives and teachings of most of the 'church fathers' a very few like Polycarp & Clement of Rome were sincere christians. Mainly they were clever, well educated men of learning, strongly influenced by greek philosophy. Tertullian for example was actually made a 'bishop' after only TWO YEARS of conversion following a long term as a greek philosopher. It caused much consternation as to his rapid appointment. The favour or not of the current emporer was also a factor in the popularity of these men. As I read 1 Cor chapter 1 it is very relevent to this question as Paul states in part "No many wise men were chosen for God put the wise men to shame and chose the foolish things of the world"
When the Didache says "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it contradicts Jesus, Paul, and Peter.
Nuff said! Moving on...
😂
In examining the lordnin didache you dont mention how in hebrew
LORD YAHOVAH ADONAI is distinguished from LORD MESSIAH ADONEE.
hence sit at my right hand until i put all your enemies under your feet.
So no indication that jesus is God but is divine.
Die • dack
It is pronounced (DID-uh-kee) from my understanding.
The didache is an early church document where they teach us to devote ourselves to Mary and pray to her.
Baptism should be done in the name of the Father, son and spirt. Yea Catholic foolishness.
So basically the Didache does not say Jesus is God. That’s a major problem for the Trinity doctrine.
Baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
What the Didache shows is the simplicity of the early church. These followers held a simple faith in Jesus as Messiah and Savior. They assembled in local churches without hierarchy above the local church, on Sunday to remember the sacrifice of Christ in the communion service, and receive instruction in the scriptural texts by reading the scrolls. Each local church had its own selection of bishops (overseers) and deacons. Traveling preachers would go from church to church in teaching the doctrine of these churches, which helped in keeping uniformity. Believers baptism was the initiatory rite into these church communities. These churches looked forward to Christ's second coming and resurrection of the dead, with judgement following. The chiliast approach to eschatology is definitely not evident here, which indeed demonstrates a break with the Jewish view. Clearly in the Didache the Jewish roots are present, but a separate Christian vision is definitely in play at this time, probably very late first century or very early second century. This document, though edited does closely follow the Christianity as expressed in the New Testament.
This document, "though edited" ?What do you mean by edited ? Thanks
@lindamorgan2678 Most scholars agree it was edited through the years, although the major parts have remained in tact. Just view online sources for the details.
So just read the scriptures. Very simples. Also as the Catholic Church us corrupted by idolatry.
Dont spread false news
@@bernard9349pray to Mary yet today?
Questioner: Can you tell me the origin of the Ten Commandments?
Ra: I am Ra. The origin of these commandments follows the law of negative entities impressing information upon positively oriented mind/body/spirit complexes. The information attempted to copy or ape positivity while retaining negative characteristics.
Questioner: Was this done by the Orion group?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.
Questioner: What was their purpose in doing this?
Ra: I am Ra. The purpose of the Orion group, as mentioned before, is conquest and enslavement. This is done by finding and establishing an elite and causing others to serve the elite through various devices such as the laws you mention and others given by this entity.
Questioner: Was the recipient of the laws… of the Ten Commandments positively or negatively oriented?
Ra: The recipient was one of extreme positivity, thus accounting for some of the pseudo-positive characteristics of the information received. As with contacts which are not successful, this entity, vibratory complex, Moishe, did not remain a credible influence among those who had first heard the philosophy of One and this entity was removed from this third-density vibratory level in a lessened or saddened state, having lost what you may call the honor and faith with which he had begun the conceptualization of the Law of One and the freeing of those who were of his tribes, as they were called at that time/space.
Questioner: If this entity was positively oriented, how was the Orion group able to contact him?
Ra: I am Ra. This was an intensive, shall we say, battleground between positively oriented forces of Confederation origin and negatively oriented sources. The one called Moishe was open to impression and received the Law of One in its most simple form. However, the information became negatively oriented due to his people’s pressure to do specific physical things in the third-density planes. This left the entity open for the type of information and philosophy of a self-service nature.
Questioner: It would be unlike an entity fully aware of the knowledge of the Law of One to ever say “Thou shalt not.” Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.
Ra Material (1981)
Lolwat?
Sounds a lot like the many "Egyptian Books of the Dead", if the questioner is Osiris, and Ra is not the Egyptian creator god. In that case, it could be masonic., which also elevates both Isis and Osiris (who is the keeper of the land of the dead.). Anyway, is has little or nothing to do with Christianity and its infancy. It seems more occult whichever way the wind blows.
This guy is reading the whole time that he is speaking. Notice his eyes. Does he really know what he is speaking about? 😂
It's called a script, so I provide clear and well-thought descriptions, rather than off the cuff ramblings.
Ŵe have forsaken the Prince of peace.
The selfbegotten freedom and Joy of The Lord.
Trade your shares in the kingdom.
Keep your silence.
I am conserving myself about these matters.