• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Why should we believe in the results of the Council of Nicea?

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,129
17,440
Florida panhandle, USA
✟930,345.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I don't know why that document claims that a Trinitarian formula wasn't common for centuries, but the Didache (Teaching of the 12 Apostles) is a very early document that instructs baptizing into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (not only mentioning all three but triple immersion or pouring as well). That was the common formula of the early Church pretty much immediately.

Constantine did not lead the council.

And the Council was not Roman Catholic - there was no such thing at that time. Only the Church - of which some bishops were Roman but they were following Apostolic teaching at that point.

Translations can indeed lead to errors - most of the Church relied upon (and those others besides Rome still do to this day) the Greek of the original writings. Best not to try to filter it through Latin if there's no need - Latin is a comparably imprecise language and each time a document is translated it will lose a bit of the original or include imposed interpretation of the translators.

Read real history - not the reactionist revisions.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Where in the Didache does it say what you charge?

Chapter 9 concerns Communion, and Ch 10 Thanksgiving after communion.

And Scripture itself commands baptism in the name of the Trinity so I'm not sure why the argument.

Welcome to CF by the way. :)
The Didache, what I understand of it are lessons taught to early disciples. Not all the xhurches would have all the scrolls or might have none. It comes as no real surprise that baptism isn't mentioned since these teahings were for the already converted, you wouldn't be regarded as Christian until baptized.
 
Upvote 0

Joy

John 3:16
Site Supporter
May 21, 2004
45,184
3,375
West Midlands
✟1,457,567.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single

Mod Hat On


Thread has been
262239_23a007d3befce9f3bced4ce6221f5e4e.png


Some Posts have been Removed

Re: CF Statement of Faith
Discussions in all "Christians Only" forums must be in alignment with Trinitarian beliefs.


Mod Hat Off
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Seeing that the council of Nicea happened ~300 years after the ressurection of Jesus, why should we believe the conclusion they came to? Additionally did they have a collection of what we might call the New Testaments at the Council that they poured over to come to the conclusion they did, or was it just a bunch of scholars and theologians who came together to discuss trying to pinpoint who Jesus was? (I really dont know some of these answers so I come here looking for a history lesson and an answer to this question).
They actually did not have a collection of what the NT Canon was. Some places had some books, some had others. All had the gospels and Acts of the Apostles. A few didn't have Revelation. The Council of Nicea actually sent Jerome to collect all the books, and to translate them. Then, in 390 or thereabouts, the Council of Rome (synod, really) defined the NT Canon, and it was agreed upon again about 10 years later at Hippo. The OT Canon came from Jerome as well.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I see we have several good answers so far but why is it that no one has mentioned the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in making the decisions that were made.
I think the Holy Spirit is the only source of inspiration to those men at the council. People seem to forget that the Church was illegal until just a few years before. It would have been their death had they met sooner. We believe the Bishops and Apostles are completely Spirt-led in matters of faith and morals.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The council consisted of as many bishops as Constantine could manage to gather. It was almost unanimous in its conclusions - I think there were three bishops who disagreed after the deliberations, but affirmed it anyway out of Church unity, out of between 270-381 bishops all told (the sources differ a bit on the numbers). The conclusion wasn't forced by Constantine either, as he perhaps had Arian leanings himself, and it is clear a robust debate occured there. I think it quite clear that Nicaea represents the overwhelming consensus view of the fourth century Church, so is the best yardstick to measure the beliefs of the Church prior to this as well.
You're probably right about Constantine. He was actually baptized by an Arian. Folks seem to think he founded the Church or something. He merely legalized it.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,865
✟344,561.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
They actually did not have a collection of what the NT Canon was.

They agreed on most of it long before Nicaea. Everybody agreed on the 4 gospels, Acts, the Pauline epistles, and 1 John from very early on. Some of the other books were still being discussed at the time of Nicaea. The first list of the NT canon 100% identical to ours was in 367, in a letter by Athanasius.

The Council of Nicea actually sent Jerome to collect all the books, and to translate them.

The Council of Nicaea was more than 20 years before Jerome was born, so no.

In fact, the Council of Nicaea was not involved with the canon at all.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BBAS 64
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,865
✟344,561.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The Didache, what I understand of it are lessons taught to early disciples. Not all the xhurches would have all the scrolls or might have none. It comes as no real surprise that baptism isn't mentioned since these teahings were for the already converted, you wouldn't be regarded as Christian until baptized.

Actually, the Didache contains very detailed instructions on how baptisms are to be performed.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Actually, the Didache contains very detailed instructions on how baptisms are to be performed.
You know your right, went back and took another look. It reads like a disciples hand book, some really good Pastoral stuff in there. I liked the one that says, have nothing to do with omens because it leads to idolatry. I have known so many people who think something is a sign, some random little coincidental event. Anyway, the instructions on baptism are kind of interesting, insisting on running water or if you have to you could sprinkle three times. It's a window into how the early church looked at things. While I don't see it as anything approaching a canonical work it is a truly wonderful window into how our spiritual ancestors taught disciples to conduct themselves.

Grace and peace,
Mark
 
  • Like
Reactions: Radagast
Upvote 0

servantofiam

Active Member
Dec 9, 2018
220
23
56
Colorado
✟26,311.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Divorced
Actually, the Didache contains very detailed instructions on how baptisms are to be performed.




Do you find it odd that nowhere n the Holy Bible (KJV) or in the Hebrew Torah the word Eucharist exists, but it does in the Didache?

The Didache is supposed to be from the Disciples of Christ.

So, how did Eucharist get into the Didache around 50 A.D. when the Disciples never used such a term?

I thought the Didache was an example of the first church, but the term Eucharist wasn't used until...

Where did the word Eucharist come from?
It is a mid 14th Century word from Greek 'Eukharista' meaning thanksgiving or gratitude and later the Lord's Supper.


So, how does the portion of the Didache called the Eucharist (when the word did not exist until the 14th century) become a part of the 1st church example of the Disciples?


This might be why some think the Didache is gnostic. Clearly the portion about Eucharist is an add-on. I wonder what else is also an add-on to the Didache since it does not match the first church example in the Book of Acts or from anything that Paul wrote about?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,865
✟344,561.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Do you find it odd that nowhere n the Holy Bible (KJV) or in the Hebrew Torah the word Eucharist exists, but it does in the Didache?

The New Testament was written in Greek, not Hebrew. The word "Eucharist" is a Greek word. The word "Eucharist" can be found in the original Greek New Testament. It means "thanksgiving."

The Didache is supposed to be from the Disciples of Christ.

The Didache seems to have been written in the 1st Century. But because it's not clear who wrote it, it was not included in the New Testament.

when the word did not exist until the 14th century

This is simply false.

This might be why some think the Didache is gnostic

AFAIK, no sensible person thinks that. What would be the rationale for that?
 
Upvote 0

servantofiam

Active Member
Dec 9, 2018
220
23
56
Colorado
✟26,311.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Divorced
I looked up the origin of the word Eucharist and it did not exist when referring to communion until the 14th Century. So no, it is not FALSE!!

The reason I began looking at the different things is because the Didache has many Catholic terms. There was no Catholic church when Peter and Paul were alive. So, due to the gift God gave me of discernment, I asked what could have happened then?

So I searched for why this Book never made the official cannon?
Then I learned the Book supposedly existed, but was lost for almost 400 years.

And how ironic, when it is found it has Catholic terms and words not in use until the 14th century.

Clearly this Book is a fraud, and it definitely has add-ons because the terminology is Catholic, which did not exist around the time of the original church.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,865
✟344,561.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I looked up the origin of the word Eucharist and it did not exist when referring to communion until the 14th Century.

I believe that's the first use in English. It was used in French before that, and in Latin before that, and in Greek before that.

I believe that the oldest manuscripts of the Didache are from the 4th century, and Christians from earlier centuries also referred to it.

it definitely has add-ons because the terminology is Catholic, which did not exist around the time of the original church.

I don't think you know all that much about the original church.
 
Upvote 0

Root of Jesse

Admiral of the Fleet/First Sea Lord
Site Supporter
Jun 23, 2011
18,909
3,645
Bay Area, California
Visit site
✟399,065.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
They agreed on most of it long before Nicaea. Everybody agreed on the 4 gospels, Acts, the Pauline epistles, and 1 John from very early on. Some of the other books were still being discussed at the time of Nicaea. The first list of the NT canon 100% identical to ours was in 367, in a letter by Athanasius.
The fact is they agreed on 22 books. 5 were in discussion.
The Council of Nicaea was more than 20 years before Jerome was born, so no.
True. What I meant was that Damasus, who was at the Council, sent Jerome out. Important detail I failed to insert.
In fact, the Council of Nicaea was not involved with the canon at all.
Because of the above, right. It is still true that Jerome was sent out to collect all the books, and to translate them. The 5 were included in 390 or thereabouts at the Council of Rome.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,896
9,865
✟344,561.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The fact is they agreed on 22 books. 5 were in discussion.

I would say 19 books accepted across the early Church, 3 more very widely accepted (1 Peter, Jude, Revelation), 2 not so widely (Hebrews, 2 John), and 3 not well accepted (2 Peter, 3 John, James).

IIRC, Eusebius put question marks on Jude, Revelation, Hebrews, 2 John, 2 Peter, 3 John, and James. He gave a tick to the 19 I mentioned plus 1 Peter.
 
Upvote 0

servantofiam

Active Member
Dec 9, 2018
220
23
56
Colorado
✟26,311.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Divorced
I believe that's the first use in English. It was used in French before that, and in Latin before that, and in Greek before that.

I believe that the oldest manuscripts of the Didache are from the 4th century, and Christians from earlier centuries also referred to it.

It is a mid 14th Century word from Greek 'Eukharista' meaning thanksgiving or gratitude and later the Lord's Supper.
Where did the word Eucharist come from - Answers.com
www.answers.com/Q/Where_did_the_word_Eucharist_come_from

You can dance all around this to make your Didache be accurate, but the absolute truth is it is a fraud and the Greek word applied to communion began in the mid-14th century. That is a historical fact. So, there is no way the original Didache in 50 A.D. could have used the term Eucharist.

It clearly was added into the Didache around the 14th century when the Didache was thought to be lost. And clearly it was not lost, it was being written then.




I don't think you know all that much about the original church.

You obviously do not!!

I can provide the Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, and Mid-Western Biblical colleges where both my Grandfather and Father (evangelists/pastors - biblical teachers and scholars - my Grandfather was Presbyter over the entire Mid-west for the Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ) taught at. I have all of the manuscripts for every topic discussed within scripture. I know the history of the first church better than I know the history of the country I was born in (United States).

Since my Grandfather and Father were biblical teachers/evangelists/pastors, I was being groomed to follow their footsteps from the moment I could talk and hold a reasonable conversation.

I have dissected the Book of Acts and Paul's letters since I was in kindergarten.

And every example of water baptism found within the New Testament (except for Yeshua) conducted by Peter, Phillip, and Paul were full body immersion. And NOWHERE did these men require people to first fast like the Didache specifies, nor did they sprinkle water three times like the Didache mentions, they dunked them full body.

In fact, as Peter was teaching/preaching to his fellow Jews in the Book of Acts chapter 10, they were astonished that a group of Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit and was speaking in tongues. And immediately (NO FASTING FOR ONE DAY), Peter baptized them in water in Jesus Name:

44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.




In Acts chapter 8, Phillip runs and jumps into a chariot owned by a Eunuch. As they pass water, the Eunuch mentions water and suggest being baptized. Immediately, Phillip stops the chariot, takes the Eunuch into the water and baptizes him (NO WAITING ONE DAY TO FAST BEFORE BAPTIZING LIKE DIDACHE SPECIFIES).

36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?

38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.



In Acts chapter 19, Paul meets a group of men and asked how they were baptized. After learning by John the Baptist, Paul instructed them they needed to be baptized in Jesus. And immediately all of them were baptized (NO WAITING 1 DAY TO FAST LIKE THE DIDACHE SUGGESTS).

Acts 19:3
And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.


Acts 19:4
Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.


Acts 19:5
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.




Example after Example of people being baptized by Peter, Phillip, Paul, and others AND NEVER ONCE DID THEY REQUIRE A 1 DAY FAST FIRST, no, they immediately baptized them right on the spot!!

Obviously, the Didache is full of Catholic dogma that does not represent the actual first church. You can tear the Didache apart section by section comparing it to actual events within the New Testament and NONE OF IT LINES UP.

The Didache is obviously a FRAUD!!
 
Upvote 0