Oldest Christian Denomination

[Root of Jesse]

Protestants would insist that there still isn't more than one church, however.

This is all a question of how the word is to be used.

Some denominations like to claim that it applies to them alone (half a dozen or so good examples come to mind, including yours); some balance different uses of the word (local assembly vs. the sum of all adherents); and yet others will insist that it ultimately, and most accurately, refers to the sum of all true believers of all times and places who are known only to God.

Catholics believe there's only one Church, too...

 

[Marvin Knox]

If we are talking Christian communities, then the earliest and first is Jerusalem. Antioch is where Christians were first called "Christians", but it's not the earliest community of Christians or "church" in the local assembly or community sense. Jerusalem had the distinction and honor as "Mother of all Churches" for this very reason. -CryptoLutheran

That goes without saying.
That's why I put "Christian" in quotes.

I assumed that doing so would state the obvious for most of us who know the scriptures just as well as a bunch of words.

 

[Kit Sigmon]

hello all
I was wondering what the oldest Christian church is. From my research on the internet it seems to be the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria. Is that true?

The oldest church/meaning body of believers on the earth...their beginnings is mentioned in Genesis 4:25; and those that still call up the name of the Lord from then and onward.

the Lord himself says: John 10:16
"But I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will listen to My voice. Then there will be one flock, one shepherd."

 

[Albion]

Those were statements about something that was yet to happen, right? So that wouldn't really answer the question.

 

[buzuxi02]

You want to know which Body is the most ancient? Pick out 10 or so places mentioned in the NT where there was an established Church. For example Smyrna, Crete, Damascus, Rome, Corinth, Cyprus, Jerusalem, and visit them. Or visit the remaining ruins (as I said most of these anatolian christian communities existed until the treaty of Lausanne evicted them in the 1920's) and make up your own mind.

 

[Rubiks]

I'm surprised at the lack of [insert my denomination here] answers. Although I identify as Protestant in that I accept 'solo scriptura' I accept that the early church was much different and varied in theology as fundamentalist Baptists would like you to believe.

 

[buzuxi02]

I'm surprised at the lack of [insert my denomination here] answers. Although I identify as Protestant in that I accept 'solo scriptura' I accept that the early church was much different and varied in theology as fundamentalist Baptists would like you to believe.

I kind of am doing that when I telling the original poster to buy a plane ticket and go to Asia Minor, to to Pontos, to Cappadocia (1 Pet 1:1), to Damascus on the Street called straight (the road still exists and its where one of the oldest church's in the world still stands). Depending on what the poster is asking for its really not a mystery.

 

[Albion]

You want to know which Body is the most ancient? Pick out 10 or so places mentioned in the NT where there was an established Church. For example Smyrna, Crete, Damascus, Rome, Corinth, Cyprus, Jerusalem, and visit them. Or visit the remaining ruins (as I said most of these anatolian christian communities existed until the treaty of Lausanne evicted them in the 1920's) and make up your own mind.

Isn't it beyond doubt that the church in Jerusalem is older than ones in Rome or Greece? That list seems too large.

However, the OP speculated on the Coptic Orthodox Church, so any reference to "oldest church" wouldn't mean oldest congregation but oldest denomination/communion instead (just as the thread's title indicates.)

 

[Light of the East]

We are each members of the “Body”... or little bricks that are founded on the “Corner Stone”.

We are the Body.

Labels and Theologies that divide are hogwash.

The Question... in regards to it all... whatever it is... has only one answer. The truth isn’t any theological doctrine or building founded by humanity... there’s only one Human founder of the Body... and He is God... too.

The answer... “Jesus”.

Nope. The Bible doesn't speak about "churches" in the plural. There is one Church - ONE - and not thousands. The idea of an "invisible Church" composed of true believers is just ridiculous (and unscriptural) on the face of it.

Your post is pretty typical of the means by which Protestants try to avoid the obvious - they are not part of the Church. The earmarks of the true Church are found in the Scriptures that you guys like to "sola scriptura" so much -

they are:

1. Covenantal in structure. The Church is the congregation of God's faithful. It began with Moses in the desert when God established the following covenant principles:

A. Hierarchy or leadership. Protestantism, especially the Anabaptist and Fundamentalist brands, has no such thing. This hierarchical leadership of the Old Covenant was transferred to the Apostles in John 20:23 when Jesus gave them His authority to forgive sins. St. Paul speaks of presbyters (priests) and bishops, both of which Protestantism does not have.

B. A specific form of worship which was liturgical in nature. Again, this is something that Evangelicals of all flavors run from. Moses was warned not to tamper with that worship which God expressly showed to him. Protestantism ignores the warnings of God not to tamper with the Liturgy and instead engages in a free-for-all in which you never know what you are going to get when you go into various Protestant, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist conclaves. With the Orthodox Church, you know what you will get - the same Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom that has been observed for over 1,000 years. We don't mess with that which God has given us through His bishops.

C. A sacramental Church. The Sacraments were established with the the first Church - the nation of Israel - as Ordinances. They in turn became the Sacraments. The Passover Meal became the Eucharist. Circumcision was changed to baptism. Sacraments are part of the New Covenant and you cannot have a covenant without them.

2. The second earmark of the Church, from Moses onward, is that it is visible. That is, you knew exactly where the worship took place and you knew who was a visible member of the congregation. This same principle was transferred to the New Covenant Church as they met in house assemblies under the hierarchical leadership of the Apostles. The individualist nature of Evangelical assemblies, where the leader of that assembly answers to no higher authority, would be unknown to St. Paul and the Apostles.

Furthermore, an invisible Church cannot exercise discipline of erring and sinning members. To whom do they answer. Where is the authority to discipline in an invisible church? It doesn't exist, and if the members are caught in sin and don't like the response, they simply move to another "Independent Bible-based, Fundamental KJV-only" assembly. An invisible "church" has no way to maintain discipline.

3. Most importantly, the Church that was established by Jesus on the Apostles passes down from generation to generation by the laying on of hands and the conferring of authority. One does not simply say "I think I should be a pastor, then go start a "church" and claim that God is in that. It defies the covenant principle of succession. I think there are going to be a large number of men on the Judgment Day who will be shocked to find out that they were not called of God, but by their own desire for pre-eminence and fame, kind of like the way that Joel Osteen, Creflo Dollar, and that ilk of guys love to show off in front of people. A true call from God should come from God's established authority and make a man humble, not haughty. In Orthodoxy we have a word which describes those kinds of men - "prelest" and it means "deception," as in, "He is in a state of prelest." It is a fearful thing to be caught by it.

No, you are not "little bricks founded upon the Cornerstone" unless you are in the building which Christ Himself raised upon the Apostles - the Orthodox Church. Only that Church has a direct, visible, continuous link to the Apostles and all that they taught to the Early Church. Even Rome has wandered away into "strange fire" such as the ideas of "papal infallibility" and "The Immaculate Conception," which the first Church would not recognize.

I long for the day and am looking for it, when Christ shall open the door to Orthodoxy for me. THAT is the Church, and none other.

 

[buzuxi02]

Isn't it beyond doubt that the church in Jerusalem is older than ones in Rome or Greece? That list seems too large.

However, the OP speculated on the Coptic Orthodox Church, so any reference to "oldest church" wouldn't mean oldest congregation but oldest denomination/communion instead (just as the thread's title indicates.)

Yes this is why in a more previous post i urged him to go to Jerusalem and meet with the oldest christian communities there and visit places like the Mar Saba Monastery or go to those christian villages that still exist there from time imemorable such as Bethlehem (and no nothing was canceled due to Pence, Christmas is not celebrated on Dec 25th by the natives thats just for the tourists).
But all in all the poster's decision on antiquity comes down to whether he accepts Chalcedon (EO) or does not (OO). He seems to already have an idea on the antiquity question and his only decision left is who seemed to have schismed from whom.
Thus its a matter of doctrine. Is it this guy named Theodoros II from Alexandria:
-- [ Greek Orthodox ] --

Or is it this guy named Theodoros II from Alexandria:
H.H. Pope Tawadros II, 118th Pope and Patriarch of the See of St. Mark

 

[Grip Docility]

Nope. The Bible doesn't speak about "churches" in the plural. There is one Church - ONE - and not thousands. The idea of an "invisible Church" composed of true believers is just ridiculous (and unscriptural) on the face of it.

Your post is pretty typical of the means by which Protestants try to avoid the obvious - they are not part of the Church. The earmarks of the true Church are found in the Scriptures that you guys like to "sola scriptura" so much -

they are:

1. Covenantal in structure. The Church is the congregation of God's faithful. It began with Moses in the desert when God established the following covenant principles:

A. Hierarchy or leadership. Protestantism, especially the Anabaptist and Fundamentalist brands, has no such thing. This hierarchical leadership of the Old Covenant was transferred to the Apostles in John 20:23 when Jesus gave them His authority to forgive sins. St. Paul speaks of presbyters (priests) and bishops, both of which Protestantism does not have.

B. A specific form of worship which was liturgical in nature. Again, this is something that Evangelicals of all flavors run from. Moses was warned not to tamper with that worship which God expressly showed to him. Protestantism ignores the warnings of God not to tamper with the Liturgy and instead engages in a free-for-all in which you never know what you are going to get when you go into various Protestant, Evangelical, and Fundamentalist conclaves. With the Orthodox Church, you know what you will get - the same Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom that has been observed for over 1,000 years. We don't mess with that which God has given us through His bishops.

C. A sacramental Church. The Sacraments were established with the the first Church - the nation of Israel - as Ordinances. They in turn became the Sacraments. The Passover Meal became the Eucharist. Circumcision was changed to baptism. Sacraments are part of the New Covenant and you cannot have a covenant without them.

2. The second earmark of the Church, from Moses onward, is that it is visible. That is, you knew exactly where the worship took place and you knew who was a visible member of the congregation. This same principle was transferred to the New Covenant Church as they met in house assemblies under the hierarchical leadership of the Apostles. The individualist nature of Evangelical assemblies, where the leader of that assembly answers to no higher authority, would be unknown to St. Paul and the Apostles.

Furthermore, an invisible Church cannot exercise discipline of erring and sinning members. To whom do they answer. Where is the authority to discipline in an invisible church? It doesn't exist, and if the members are caught in sin and don't like the response, they simply move to another "Independent Bible-based, Fundamental KJV-only" assembly. An invisible "church" has no way to maintain discipline.

3. Most importantly, the Church that was established by Jesus on the Apostles passes down from generation to generation by the laying on of hands and the conferring of authority. One does not simply say "I think I should be a pastor, then go start a "church" and claim that God is in that. It defies the covenant principle of succession. I think there are going to be a large number of men on the Judgment Day who will be shocked to find out that they were not called of God, but by their own desire for pre-eminence and fame, kind of like the way that Joel Osteen, Creflo Dollar, and that ilk of guys love to show off in front of people. A true call from God should come from God's established authority and make a man humble, not haughty. In Orthodoxy we have a word which describes those kinds of men - "prelest" and it means "deception," as in, "He is in a state of prelest." It is a fearful thing to be caught by it.

No, you are not "little bricks founded upon the Cornerstone" unless you are in the building which Christ Himself raised upon the Apostles - the Orthodox Church. Only that Church has a direct, visible, continuous link to the Apostles and all that they taught to the Early Church. Even Rome has wandered away into "strange fire" such as the ideas of "papal infallibility" and "The Immaculate Conception," which the first Church would not recognize.

I long for the day and am looking for it, when Christ shall open the door to Orthodoxy for me. THAT is the Church, and none other.

Um... ever wonder why “Nope” doesn’t do anything but assert opinion that is relitive to a human mind?

Ever notice that when someone says...

“is Christ Divided”... or Jesus is the Head and we are the Body...

People get upset?

Every wonder why? Ever wonder why Man likes to trade the Creator for the Creation?

Things that make you go... “Hmmmmmm”

 

[Albion]

Nope. The Bible doesn't speak about "churches" in the plural.

Sure it does. It speaks of the churches to which Paul ministered, for example--in the plural.

And consider Revelation: "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches..." (2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22).

 

[Light of the East]

Um... ever wonder why “Nope” doesn’t do anything but assert opinion that is relitive to a human mind?

Ever notice that when someone says...

“is Christ Divided”... or Jesus is the Head and we are the Body...

People get upset?

Every wonder why? Ever wonder why Man likes to trade the Creator for the Creation?

Things that make you go... “Hmmmmmm”

Nice non-answer.

 

[Light of the East]

Sure it does. It speaks of the churches to which Paul ministered, for example--in the plural.

And consider Revelation: "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches..." (2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22).

Wrong again. You really make a habit of being wrong.

The "churches" that you speak of were house churches which are the equivalent of our parishes today, that is, they are under ONE AUTHORITY.

Your Protestant Rebellion, on the other hand, has NO AUTHORITY other that the word of the particular pastor of the particular rebellious little assembly he is leading.

Try see this in your mind. Picture a large circle. Now put a multitude of dots in that circle. Those were the house churches of the first century. But they were all within the circle, which represents the authority of the bishops of the united Church under the headship or leadership of St. Peter as the "first among the Apostles." It is united ..... get it?????

Now take away the circle and leave all the little dots. That is Protestantism. No authority, no headship, no unity. All bickering and arguing over doctrines. No united Church under on authority.

GET IT??????

(I doubt it)

 

[Albion]

Wrong again. You really make a habit of being wrong.

The "churches" that you speak of were house churches which are the equivalent of our parishes today, that is, they are under ONE AUTHORITY.

I was merely responding to what you wrote. Had you said then what you said here, the reply would have been different.

What you wrote was:

The Bible doesn't speak about "churches" in the plural.

...which is dead wrong, as I showed by quoting from the Bible.

You might say that it doesn't matter...or you could say what you did here (a combination of insults and claiming to have meant something other than you wrote), but you did certainly imply, by the wording chosen, something about early Christianity that isn't true.

By the way, historians point out that there were at least 80 (!) different varieties of Christianity during the first century alone.

 

[Light of the East]

I was merely responding to what you wrote. Had you said then what you said here, the reply would have been different.

What you wrote was:



...which is dead wrong, as I showed by quoting from the Bible.

You might say that it doesn't matter...or you could say what you did here (a combination of insults and claiming to have meant something other than you wrote), but you did certainly imply, by the wording chosen, something about early Christianity that isn't true.

By the way, historians point out that there were at least 80 (!) different varieties of Christianity during the first century alone.

Historians????

You mean like Jack Chick, Lorraine Boettner, or Alexander Hislop? All of them virulently anti-Catholic bigots who wouldn't know the truth if it walked up to them and slapped them in the face!

Or perhaps you are confusing ETHNIC variations with idea that there were actually DENOMINATIONS in the first century. Or perhaps HERETICS are also part of that "80 Varieties."

The FACTS are this: to be part of the ONE CHURCH, which was called "katholicos" in the beginning of the second century, you believed one set of teachings as set forth by the Church. Now you may have different ethnic expressions for this, but it is the same dogma.

For instance, the Melkite Church has slightly different variations in their Liturgy from my Ukrainian Catholic Church and we are both different from the Coptics, but that does not make us different "churches." We are still under ONE HEAD, ONE AUTHORITY, and practice ONE SET OF DOGMATIC beliefs.

There are 24 for different churches under the single authority of Rome. That does not make them independent and separate with their own authority, which is what Protestantism is and is what you are trying to sell.

 

[Albion]

Historians????

You mean like Jack Chick, Lorraine Boettner, or Alexander Hislop?

No. I mean respected historians of the ancient era and/or early Christianity.

 

[Root of Jesse]

No. I mean respected historians of the ancient era and/or early Christianity.

Names?

 

[Albion]

Roland Bainton, Paul Maier, Williston Walker, Adolph Harnack

Here's what Professor Mary Jo Weaver has to say: "The church in its first three centuries...grew from a group of dedicated believers with no uniform structure....As we have seen, early believers differed, somewhat radically, about practice and doctrine." (Introduction to Christianity, p. 44.)

 

[Root of Jesse]

Roland Bainton, Paul Maier, Williston Walker, Adolph Harnack

Here's what Professor Mary Jo Weaver has to say: "The church in its first three centuries...grew from a group of dedicated believers with no uniform structure....As we have seen, early believers differed, somewhat radically, about practice and doctrine." (Introduction to Christianity, p. 44.)

So an expert in American Protestant history, someone who mixes scholarly and fiction works, another expert in American Protestant history, a German Lutheran and a feminist Catholic. I'll believe the works of those who were there.