• 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.

How did the earliest Christians differ from us.

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,514
8,177
50
The Wild West
✟757,534.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
To a very limited extent, sure. The only pre-schism ones I can think of are Sts. Dionysius the Areopagite, Firmilian, Augustine, and Photius. The authenticity of Dionysius is disputed by the non-Orthodox, Firmilian isn't venerated in Catholicism (to my knowledge) due to his having written against the bishop of Rome, some Orthodox have a problem with Augustine's writings (although he is still venerated as a saint), and Photius is only venerated by the Orthodox and Eastern Catholics. Catholics and Protestants generally consider St. John Damascene to have been the last Church Father.

On the other hand everyone venerates St. Isaac the Syrian, St John of Damascus, St. Romanos the Melodist and St. Theodora, despite them being of the Church of the East, the Eastern Orthodox and the Syriac Orthodox, respectively, although some Eastern Orthodox have tried to argue that there were two monks named Isaac and that Sebastian Brock is confusing them, but these arguments are not convincing due to a cointinuity in the style between them, and the arguments St. Isaac makes in favor of Apokatastasis follow both what had been previously advocated by Origen and St. Gregory of Nyssa, and what was taught by the Church of the East at that time (see the Book of the Bee by Mar Solomon of Basra).
 
  • Like
Reactions: jas3
Upvote 0

Canuckster

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2022
498
194
Calgary
✟61,172.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Not true: see Acts 11:19-26 - the Church absolutely called itself Christian and in this way differentiated itself from the various counterfeit cults such as the Marcionites, whose founder blasphemously taught that God in the Old Testament was not the Father of Jesus Christ but an evil entity, the Valentinians, who believed in that, and also Docetism, the idea that Jesus Christ did not have a physical human body but was a purely divine spirit, and Arianism, following Arius, who taught the opposite heresy, that Jesus Christ was not God but was an exalted creature, of a different essence than the Father, or the Pneumatomachs, whose founder Macedonius denied that the Holy Spirit was God or a person of the Holy Trinity (it is unclear if he was an Arian or some sort of “Binitarian”) or the Sabellians, who believed that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are modes of a unipersonal God - this heresy has been revived by the Oneness Pentecostals.
"...the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch."

They were called Christians by non-believers as a reproch. The disciples didn't call themselves Christians.
 
Upvote 0

DragonFox91

Well-Known Member
Dec 20, 2020
6,211
3,797
33
Grand Rapids MI
✟277,296.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
The NT letters & letters after the NT frequently use the words ‘saints’, ‘brothers’, ‘those called’, etc. They don’t say ‘fellow Christians’.

We know we eventually accepted the title Christian but I’m disappointed how little other & earlier NT language is used to describe us. It makes me feel like the real language we should be using lost out. Acts isn’t saying we s/ be calling us ourselves that, only describing where the term came from.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Canuckster
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,514
8,177
50
The Wild West
✟757,534.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
"...the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch."

They were called Christians by non-believers as a reproch. The disciples didn't call themselves Christians.

That is supposition, and supposition which is problematic, since it risks a loss of continuity in our community.
 
Upvote 0

Canuckster

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2022
498
194
Calgary
✟61,172.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
That is supposition, and supposition which is problematic, since it risks a loss of continuity in our community.
In our community, the first disciples who met Christ face-to-face, witnessed His brutal death and resurrection and became known as apostles, could not even imagine to take it onto themselves to invent a new label to place on God's children (themselves and others redeemed by the blood and sacrifice of Christ and transformed by the Holy Spirit) nor would they place on God's children a new label invented by unbelievers.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: DragonFox91
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
15,514
8,177
50
The Wild West
✟757,534.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
The Patristics, that is to say, the successors to the Apostles, were martyred and put to death as Christians, identifying as Christians, for example St. Justin Martyr, and St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St. Polycarp of Smyrna, and St. Peter of Alexandria. And what the choir of martyrs died for calling themselves, or suffered in countless more cases of confessors, that is what I identify with. For this reason I declare myself a Christian. One Syriac Orthodox church, the Jacobites, were also given that name by the Byzantine Empire as a smear, but among the Syriac Orthodox of India, they are happy to call themselves Jacobites, for the same reason.
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
23,679
14,115
59
Sydney, Straya
✟1,415,526.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
In our community, the first disciples who met Christ face-to-face, witnessed His brutal death and resurrection and became known as apostles, could not even imagine to take it onto themselves to invent a new label to place on God's children (themselves and others redeemed by the blood and sacrifice of Christ and transformed by the Holy Spirit) nor would they place on God's children a new label invented by unbelievers.
What follower of Christ would shun being identified with Christ? To those within the Church, they would be identified as brothers and sisters in Christ, but to be identified with Christ by those without the Church would have been seen as a great honour.
 
Upvote 0

Canuckster

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2022
498
194
Calgary
✟61,172.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
What follower of Christ would shun being identified with Christ? To those within the Church, they would be identified as brothers and sisters in Christ, but to be identified with Christ by those without the Church would have been seen as a great honour.
That's a different subject. Christ's apostles would not call themselves or those they taught Christians. They certainly didn't need a term invented by unbelievers to make them feel identified with Christ. That doesn't mean they didn't grow to consider it a great honour to suffer and be persecuted as Christians.
 
Upvote 0

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2024
3,254
1,764
76
Paignton
✟73,936.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
That's a different subject. Christ's apostles would not call themselves or those they taught Christians. They certainly didn't need a term invented by unbelievers to make them feel identified with Christ. That doesn't mean they didn't grow to consider it a great honour to suffer and be persecuted as Christians.
Didn't they? What about Peter:

“Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter.” (1Pe 4:16 NKJV)

Certainly, other terms, such as saints, those in Christ, followers of the way, were used more often.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Active Member
Feb 3, 2024
236
62
64
Campobello
✟22,856.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
chap. xxv.—the phœnix an emblem of our resurrection.

Let us consider that wonderful sign [of the resurrection] which takes place in Eastern lands, that is, in Arabia and the countries round about. There is a certain bird which is called a phœnix. This is the only one of its kind, and lives five hundred years. And when the time of its dissolution draws near that it must die, it builds itself a nest of frankincense, and myrrh, and other spices, into which, when the time is fulfilled, it enters and dies. But as the flesh decays a certain kind of worm is produced, which, being nourished by the juices of the dead bird, brings forth feathers. Then, when it has acquired strength, it takes up that nest in which are the bones of its parent, and bearing these it passes from the land of Arabia into Egypt, to the city called Heliopolis. And, in open day, flying in the sight of all men, it places them on the altar of the sun, and having done this, hastens back to its former abode. The priests then inspect the registers of the dates, and find that it has returned exactly as the five hundredth year was completed.

chap. xxvi.—we shall rise again, then, as the scripture also testifies.

Do we then deem it any great and wonderful thing for the Maker of all things to raise up again those that have piously served Him in the assurance of a good faith, when even by a bird He shows us the mightiness of His power to fulfil His promise? For [the Scripture] saith in a certain place, “Thou shalt raise me up, and I shall confess unto Thee;” 4 and again, “I laid me down, and slept; I awaked, because Thou art with me;” and again, Job says, “Thou shalt raise up this flesh of mine, which has suffered all these things.”6

Clement of Rome, “The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 12.

The above quote is one of the reasons I consider the writings of the “Church Fathers” to be inferior to holy scripture. This early on, Clement is already introducing pagan mythology into the mix, to be considered regarding the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and his faithful followers.

Phoenix | Egyptian, Greek & Roman | Britannica

Quoted article below from link above.

phoenix, in ancient Egypt and in Classical antiquity, a fabulous bird associated with the worship of the sun. The Egyptian phoenix was said to be as large as an eagle, with brilliant scarlet and gold plumage and a melodious cry. Only one phoenix existed at any time, and it was very long-lived—no ancient authority gave it a life span of less than 500 years. As its end approached, the phoenix fashioned a nest of aromatic boughs and spices, set it on fire, and was consumed in the flames. From the pyre miraculously sprang a new phoenix, which, after embalming its father’s ashes in an egg of myrrh, flew with the ashes to Heliopolis (“City of the Sun”) in Egypt, where it deposited them on the altar in the temple of the Egyptian god of the sun, Re. A variant of the story made the dying phoenix fly to Heliopolis and immolate itself in the altar fire, from which the young phoenix then rose.

The Egyptians associated the phoenix with immortality, and that symbolism had a widespread appeal in late antiquity. The phoenix was compared to undying Rome, and it appears on the coinage of the late Roman Empire as a symbol of the Eternal City. It was also widely interpreted as an allegory of resurrection and life after death—ideas that also appealed to emergent Christianity.

In Islamic mythology the phoenix was identified with the ʿanqāʾ (Persian: sīmorgh), a huge mysterious bird (probably a heron) that was originally created by God with all perfections but thereafter became a plague and was killed.


So, here we have in the writings of Clement, the introduction of pagan sun worshiping mythology. A trend that would only increase over time unto the formation of the first mandated form of “Christianity” for the Roman Empire. One heavily influenced and established by professed converted sun worshipping Emperors, and a mass of pagan sun worshippers brought into the “Church” via imperial mandate over and above gospel believing conversion.
 
Upvote 0

Canuckster

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2022
498
194
Calgary
✟61,172.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Didn't they? What about Peter:

“Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in this matter.” (1Pe 4:16 NKJV)

Certainly, other terms, such as saints, those in Christ, followers of the way, were used more often.
Yes.... When Peter said this, being persecuted as a "Christian" (to suffer as a "Christian") was well on the way and was nothing to be ashamed of. This shows the term "Christian" was invented by their persecutors as a reproach and not by Peter or any of the other early believers. Whereas terms such as "saints, those in Christ, followers of the way, bondservants of Christ" were invented by believers to give honour to Christ.
 
Upvote 0

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2024
3,254
1,764
76
Paignton
✟73,936.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Yes.... When Peter said this, being persecuted as a "Christian" (to suffer as a "Christian") was well on the way and was nothing to be ashamed of. This shows the term "Christian" was invented by their persecutors as a reproach and not by Peter or any of the other early believers. Whereas terms such as "saints, those in Christ, followers of the way, bondservants of Christ" were invented by believers to give honour to Christ.
I don't think we are told who "invented" the label "Christian". The verse that tells us when the name was first used simply says:

“And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for a whole year they assembled with the church and taught a great many people. And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” (Ac 11:26 NKJV)

No mention of who called them that.

As "Christian" means "Follower of Christ" I don't see it as not giving honour to Christ, or as being necessarily a term of reproach.
 
Upvote 0

Canuckster

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2022
498
194
Calgary
✟61,172.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I don't think we are told who "invented" the label "Christian". The verse that tells us when the name was first used simply says:

“And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. So it was that for a whole year they assembled with the church and taught a great many people. And the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” (Ac 11:26 NKJV)

No mention of who called them that.

As "Christian" means "Follower of Christ" I don't see it as not giving honour to Christ, or as being necessarily a term of reproach.
"the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” not "the disciples first called themselves Christians in Antioch".

And as I mentioned, being called a Christian and suffering as a Christian from your persecutors who invented the term, which to the persecutors meant those who follow what they claim to be the "Christ", is giving honour to Christ.

One thing is for certain: God the Father does not call His children, "Christians", and Christ does not call His brethren, "Christians".
 
Upvote 0

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2024
3,254
1,764
76
Paignton
✟73,936.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
"the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.” not "the disciples first called themselves Christians in Antioch".

And as I mentioned, being called a Christian and suffering as a Christian from your persecutors who invented the term, which to the persecutors meant those who follow what they claim to be the "Christ", is giving honour to Christ.

One thing is for certain: God the Father does not call His children, "Christians", and Christ does not call His brethren, "Christians".
I agree that Acts doesn't say that the disciples called themselves Christians, but neither does it say that their persecutors called them Christians. I see nothing dishonouring (either to God or to Christians) in using the name "Christian", which means "follower of Christ."
 
Upvote 0

Canuckster

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2022
498
194
Calgary
✟61,172.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I agree that Acts doesn't say that the disciples called themselves Christians, but neither does it say that their persecutors called them Christians. I see nothing dishonouring (either to God or to Christians) in using the name "Christian", which means "follower of Christ."
The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch. That in itself is all the proof I need to know that they didn't call themselves Christians but were first called Christians by non-disciples/unbelievers in Antioch. Thus it was first invented and used by unbelievers in Antioch not by the disciples. And because the disciples suffered as Christians, that term was used by their persecutors (non-disciples/unbelievers) as a reproach. The bottom line is this: none of the early followers of Christ, who witnessed his death and became His apostles, invented the term "Christians" and called themselves "Christians". And if you're honouring God you shouldn't make stuff up I never said. Reread my posts and tell me where I said using the name "Christian" is dishonouring God.
 
Upvote 0

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2024
3,254
1,764
76
Paignton
✟73,936.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch. That in itself is all the proof I need to know that they didn't call themselves Christians but were first called Christians by non-disciples/unbelievers in Antioch. Thus it was first invented and used by unbelievers in Antioch not by the disciples. And because the disciples suffered as Christians, that term was used by their persecutors (non-disciples/unbelievers) as a reproach. The bottom line is this: none of the early followers of Christ, who witnessed his death and became His apostles, invented the term "Christians" and called themselves "Christians". And if you're honouring God you shouldn't make stuff up I never said. Reread my posts and tell me where I said using the name "Christian" is dishonouring God.
If I misunderstood you to say something which you didn't, I apologise. I certainly didn't set out to "make stuff up." I think I read more into your sentence: "Whereas terms such as "saints, those in Christ, followers of the way, bondservants of Christ" were invented by believers to give honour to Christ." than you intended. Sorry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canuckster
Upvote 0

Canuckster

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2022
498
194
Calgary
✟61,172.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
If I misunderstood you to say something which you didn't, I apologise. I certainly didn't set out to "make stuff up." I think I read more into your sentence: "Whereas terms such as "saints, those in Christ, followers of the way, bondservants of Christ" were invented by believers to give honour to Christ." than you intended. Sorry.
Thanks for your clarification and apology... a most honourable thing to do on a public forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David Lamb
Upvote 0

Amo2

Active Member
Feb 3, 2024
236
62
64
Campobello
✟22,856.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Having just finished reading Clement of Rome, apart from his reference to the Phoenix, the work seems to be very biblically based. Somewhat generic though, in that it did not address any of the specifics of the contentions it was addressing. Focussed upon salvation in Christ alone, our High Priest. The importance of faith, right living, the commandments of God and Jesus, and unity of course. As the holy scriptures admonish us to keep the commandments of God, without any reference to the changing of the fourth commandment, so also does this address by Clement. Unless of course a contention regarding such a change was one of the issues he was addressing, which we do not know. Seems like there would have been some debate about such a change, if it were occurring at the time. So probably not. I suppose I will move on to the Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus next.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Active Member
Feb 3, 2024
236
62
64
Campobello
✟22,856.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
THE EPISTLE OF MATHETES TO DIOGNETUS

CHAP. I.—OCCASION OF THE EPISTLE.

SINCE I see thee, most excellent Diognetus, exceedingly desirous to learn the mode of worshipping God prevalent among the Christians, and inquiring very carefully and earnestly concerning them, what God they trust in, and what form of religion they observe, so as all to look down upon the world itself, and despise death, while they neither esteem those to be gods that are reckoned such by the Greeks, nor hold to the superstition of the Jews; and what is the affection which they cherish among themselves; and why, in fine, this new kind or practice [of piety] has only now entered into the world, and not long ago; I cordially welcome this thy desire, and I implore God, who enables us both to speak and to hear, to grant to me so to speak, that, above all, I may hear you have been edified, and to you so to hear, that I who speak may have no cause of regret for having done so.

CHAP. II.—THE VANITY OF IDOLS.

Come, then, after you have freed yourself from all prejudices possessing your mind, and laid aside what you have been accustomed to, as something apt to deceive you, and being made, as if from the beginning, a new man, inasmuch as, according to your own confession, you are to be the hearer of a new [system of] doctrine; come and contemplate, not with your eyes only, but with your understanding, the substance and the form of those whom ye declare and deem to be gods. Is not one of them a stone similar to that on which we tread? Is not a second brass, in no way superior to those vessels which are constructed for our ordinary use? Is not a third wood, and that already rotten? Is not a fourth silver, which needs a man to watch it, lest it be stolen? Is not a fifth iron, consumed by rust? Is not a sixth earthenware, in no degree more valuable than that which is formed for the humblest purposes? Are not all these of corruptible matter? Are they not fabricated by means of iron and fire? Did not the sculptor fashion one of them, the brazier a second, the silversmith a third, and the potter a fourth? Was not every one of them, before they were formed by the arts of these [workmen] into the shape of these [gods], each in its own way subject to change? Would not those things which are now vessels, formed of the same materials, become like to such, if they met with the same artificers? Might not these, which are now worshipped by you, again be made by men vessels similar to others? Are they not all deaf? Are they not blind? Are they not without life? Are they not destitute of feeling? Are they not incapable of motion? Are they not all liable to rot? Are they not all corruptible? These things ye call gods; these ye serve; these ye worship; and ye become altogether like to them. For this reason ye hate the Christians, because they do not deem these to be gods. But do not ye yourselves, who now think and suppose [such to be gods], much more cast contempt upon them than they [the Christians do]? Do ye not much more mock and insult them, when ye worship those that are made of stone and earthenware, without appointing any persons to guard them; but those made of silver and gold ye shut up by night, and appoint watchers to look after them by day, lest they be stolen? And by those gifts which ye mean to present to them, do ye not, if they are possessed of sense, rather punish [than honour] them? But if, on the other hand, they are destitute of sense, ye convict them of this fact, while ye worship them with blood and the smoke of sacrifices. Let any one of you suffer such indignities! Let any one of you endure to have such things done to himself! But not a single human being will, unless compelled to it, endure such treatment, since he is endowed with sense and reason. A stone, however, readily bears it, seeing it is insensible. Certainly you do not show [by your conduct] that he [your God] is possessed of sense. And as to the fact that Christians are not accustomed to serve such gods, I might easily find many other things to say; but if even what has been said does not seem to any one sufficient, I deem it idle to say anything further.

CHAP. III.—SUPERSTITIONS OF THE JEWS.

And next, I imagine that you are most desirous of hearing something on this point, that the Christians do not observe the same forms of divine worship as do the Jews. The Jews, then, if they abstain from the kind of service above described, and deem it proper to worship one God as being Lord of all, [are right]; but if they offer Him worship in the way which we have described, they greatly err. For while the Gentiles, by offering such things to those that are destitute of sense and hearing, furnish an example of madness; they, on the other hand by thinking to offer these things to God as if He needed them, might justly reckon it rather an act of folly than of divine worship. For He that made heaven and earth, and all that is therein, and gives to us all the things of which we stand in need, certainly requires none of those things which He Himself bestows on such as think of furnishing them to Him. But those who imagine that, by means of blood, and the smoke of sacrifices and burnt-offerings, they offer sacrifices [acceptable] to Him, and that by such honours they show Him respect,—these, by supposing that they can give anything to Him who stands in need of nothing, appear to me in no respect to differ from those who studiously confer the same honour on things destitute of sense, and which therefore are unable to enjoy such honours.

CHAP. IV.—THE OTHER OBSERVANCES OF THE JEWS.

But as to their scrupulosity concerning meats, and their superstition as respects the Sabbaths, and their boasting about circumcision, and their fancies about fasting and the new moons, which are utterly ridiculous and unworthy of notice,—I do not think that you require to learn anything from me. For, to accept some of those things which have been formed by God for the use of men as properly formed, and to reject others as useless and redundant,—how can this be lawful? And to speak falsely of God, as if He forbade us to do what is good on the Sabbath-days,—how is not this impious? And to glory in the circumcision of the flesh as a proof of election, and as if, on account of it, they were specially beloved by God,—how is it not a subject of ridicule? And as to their observing months and days, as if waiting upon the stars and the moon, and their distributing, according to their own tendencies, the appointments of God, and the vicissitudes of the seasons, some for festivities, and others for mourning,—who would deem this a part of divine worship, and not much rather a manifestation of folly? I suppose, then, you are sufficiently convinced that the Christians properly abstain from the vanity and error common [to both Jews and Gentiles], and from the busy-body spirit and vain boasting of the Jews; but you must not hope to learn the mystery of their peculiar mode of worshipping God from any mortal.

Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, eds., “The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 25–26.

In the above quoted portions of THE EPISTLE OF MATHETES TO DIOGNETUS, we begin to see greater departure, or shall we say deviation from the testimony of holy scripture. In an attempt it appears, to distance “Christianity” from the Jews and apparently the teachings of the Old Testament. In the very first chapter referring to “the superstitions of the Jews”, and alluding to “Christianity” as a new religion, rather than the New Covenant era of the most ancient and true religion or message on earth. The everlasting gospel of Jesus Christ.

In the second chapter we see that Mathetes does not consider all Jewish or Old Testament teaching as superstition, since his stance upon idols is most obviously identical to that of the Jews and Old Testament teaching. Particularly in line with that of the first and second commandments of God. These commandments in any case, he has not ditched into the category of superstition. Nevertheless, declaring anything the Jews believed by commandment and or teaching of God within holy scripture to have become superstition during the New covenant era, is gross error. Our God is not, has never been, and will not ever be the creator or propagator of superstitions.

Chapter three misses and excellent opportunity to address the changes from Old Covenant to New Covenant teaching and practice regarding the sacrificial system. That of the Old Covenant being fulfilled by the once and for all sacrifice of the New Covenant in Christ Jesus our Lord. And the spiritual sacrifice of the saved themselves, in response to the gospel, during this New Covenant era.

Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Nothing about the Israelites sacrificial system had anything to do with superstition, but rather the revelation of the everlasting gospel in type and symbol until the antitype appeared. The Lamb of God, Christ Jesus our Lord. The fulfillment of biblical prophecy which each and every sacrifice was intended to represent and foretell. These teachings and practices of the Old Covenant did not turn into superstition by the establishment of the New Covenant. Rather it became fulfilled prophecy which still had great depth of meaning and revelation concerning the gospel. Providing excellent opportunity for instruction concerning the continuity of the everlasting gospel throughout our earth’s history. God’s people of the Old Covenant having exercised prophetic faith in the forgiveness of their sins by the sacrifice of the LAMB OF GOD, the Messiah of the Jews. And those of the New Covenant accepting the reality of that sacrifice for them, in the life, crucifixion, and resurrection of Christ Jesus our Lord.

Chapter four becomes more specific in addressing what Mathetes deems to be superstition. Which includes teaching and practices concerning meats, Sabbaths, circumcision, new moons, observation of months and days, some for festivities and others for mourning. Referring to these Old covenant teachings and observances as not just superstition, but actual folly concerning authentic worship. All of these which were commanded to be observed by the very God Mathetes claimed to worship. As though God Himself instituted worthless, superstitious, folly to be observed by the people He Himself chose for a nation to be a witness among all the other nations of this earth. Perhaps Mathetes will expound upon the subject later in more depth, to the proper effect of the real folly concerning all such. In that they were never meant to be the means of salvation which so many of Israel often made them. Nor of course in many cases, meant to be observed by the multitudes of the saved from other nations during the New Covenant dispensation.

Nevertheless, these commanded teachings and observances established by God Himself for Israel never were and or will be mere worthless superstitions or folly. They had exact purpose, intent, value, and lessons of importance for those of the Old Covenant era, none of which has disappeared in this New Covenant era. The lessons and purposes are still there to be studied unto increased knowledge of God’s guidance and providence for His people throughout history. As the New Testament writers themsleves expounded upon, rightly dividing the word of God under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God. As the Old Covenant prophets did as well. There is no folly at all in the teachings and observances of the Old Covenant, but by sinful humanity itself in attributing such to the cause of their salvation. Instead of observing that which God commanded and or commands because of their salvation in Him alone. Which very problems exists to this very day, among professed Christianity. Being a natural inclination of our fallen natures, which must always be guarded against.

It is interesting to note that Mathetes makes a distinction between the Sabbaths of the “Jews” which he refers to as superstitions, and the weekly Sabbath day or days of the fourth commandment, which he apparently did not consider to be part of such superstitions. The Lightfoot & Harmer translation translates Mathetes reference to the Sabbaths which it is lawful to do good upon, as sabbath day, not days.

(from: _Apostolic Fathers_ Lightfoot & Harmer, 1891 translation)
4:3 And again to lie against God, as if He forbad us to do any good thing on the sabbath day, is not this profane?

Which testimony is itself a direct reference to the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ concerning God’s weekly seventh day sabbath established at creation by His word , spoken by the mouth of God and written with His own finger for his chosen people twice among His Ten Commandments. Not the other sabbaths specific to the ceremony, holidays, and or agriculture of the nation of Israel. Those of the law written for them by the hand of Moses.

Mat 12:9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue: 10 And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath days? that they might accuse him. 11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? 12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days. 13 Then saith he to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it forth; and it was restored whole, like as the other. 14 Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him.

Luk 6:6 And it came to pass also on another sabbath, that he entered into the synagogue and taught: and there was a man whose right hand was withered. 7 And the scribes and Pharisees watched him, whether he would heal on the sabbath day; that they might find an accusation against him. 8 But he knew their thoughts, and said to the man which had the withered hand,
Rise up, and stand forth in the midst. And he arose and stood forth. 9 Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it ? 10 And looking round about upon them all, he said unto the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he did so: and his hand was restored whole as the other.

Luk 14:1 And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the sabbath day, that they watched him. 2 And, behold, there was a certain man before him which had the dropsy. 3 And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees, saying,
Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? 4 And they held their peace. And he took him, and healed him, and let him go; 5 And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day? 6 And they could not answer him again to these things.

If in fact God’s seventh day Sabbath had been done away with by the early church, and replaced with a Sunday observance based upon the resurrection, these first two “Church Fathers” under examination address no such thing. Though many might choose to associate Mathetes reference to sabbaths of the Jews being among supposed superstitions which God Himself apparently instituted. His later reference to God’s weekly seventh day Sabbath is problematic to such an idea though. In that he references our Lord’s teaching regarding it, and the mistake which many Jews made in relation to it, without taking any opportunity to address any major changes concerning it. Even though changes and differences between the Jews and Christians was the exact context being discussed. In this Epistle exactly addressing the teachings of the early church, and its differences from the teachings and observances of the Jews.

If indeed Mathetes had already discontinued his observance of God’s seventh day Sabbath, and firmly believed its observance to have been replaced by Sunday observance as the “Lord’s day” in honor of the resurrection, it makes no sense for him to not address such. Neither in this Epistle at all, or even when the Sabbath itself was the exact topic being discussed, regarding the “mode of worshipping God prevalent among the Christians” in his day. Mathetes stated entire reason for this Epistle.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Active Member
Feb 3, 2024
236
62
64
Campobello
✟22,856.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
CHAP. V.—THE MANNERS OF THE CHRISTIANS.

For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed. They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. They are poor, yet make many rich; they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.

Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, eds., “The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus,” in The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, vol. 1, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 26–27.

The only observation I’ll make concerning Mathetes chapter 5, is to point out his comment concerning Christinas not having any particular singularity. After which he continues on to list more than just a few. Nevertheless apparently, he still feels no need to point out the new establishment of the observance of the “Lord’s Day”, in honor of Christ’s resurrection. Which would certainly qualify as a singularity among Christians of the time, had it been doctrinally established already. This may have helped clear up certain accused connections between sun worshipers and Christians which developed. At least as Trypho accused and or contended in the Dialogue with Trypho, of Justin Martyr I do believe.

Apart from this, there is the scriptural teaching of course -

2Co 6:14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? 15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? 16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

Tit 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:


While it is not the object of authentic Christianity to seek worldly recognition, neither is its purpose to blend into and disappear within societies or nations. But to the contrary, be different enough from the norms of this world, to be unavoidably noticed. Not unto self recognition or praise, but rather direction toward the exaltation of the One we worship, and the salvation of those who would look upon Him.
 
Upvote 0