Posted on 06/16/2006 6:58:18 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
If I were to tell you about an ancient document that sheds fresh light on Christianity, your first reaction might be to run for the hills. Most of us have had just about all we can handle of the spurious “Gospel of Judas” and The Da Vinci Code, right?
Well, I’m not talking about The Da Vinci Code. Unlike the Gnostic gospels that inspired the novel, the ancient document I’m talking about sheds some real light on Christianity. It’s called the Didache, and it’s one of the earliest non-scriptural Christian writings, written toward the end of the first century. As Christianity Today explains in an excellent article last month, “While no one believes that any of the twelve apostles wrote it, scholars agree that the work is a faithful transmission of the apostles’ teaching, intended primarily for the training of Gentile believers.”
So this is no mysterious subject of an ancient conspiracy, just a practical guide to discipleship and obedience—maybe not as thrilling to many readers and moviegoers, but a lot more important.
The Didache came to my attention at the last meeting of the group Evangelicals and Catholics Together. As some of you know, I am one of the founders of the group, which is dedicated to finding common ground in our Christian faith and mission, and standing together in the culture war. Specifically, I came across the following passage:
“There are two ways, a way of life and a way of death; there is a great difference between them . . . in accordance with the precept of the teaching ‘You shall not kill,’ you shall not put a child to death by abortion nor kill it once it is born. . . . The way of death is this; they show no compassion for the poor. They do not suffer with the suffering. They do not acknowledge their Creator, they kill their children and by abortion cause God’s creatures to perish; they drive away the needy, oppress the suffering; they are advocates of the rich and unjust judges of the poor; they are filled with every sin. May you be ever guiltless of all these sins!”
That’s pretty powerful language, condemning the brutal practices of the Romans and of the pagan societies. But what really caught my attention is that this demonstrates so clearly that the sanctity of all human life is an issue that goes back to the very beginnings of the Church. That ought to be news to those who slam the so-called “religious right” as if abortion were some issue we just recently latched onto for political power. To the contrary, this struggle against the culture of death is an ancient one, going back two thousand years. The Didache wisely identifies the unborn with the poor, and condemns the rich and unjust judges who oppress them.
Fascinating, isn’t it? All the hoopla over the “Gospel of Judas,” which was discredited in the second century. The world, you see, wants to believe all kinds of deep dark secrets that might shake the foundations of the faith. But here comes a genuine document—no attention paid to it—but what it proves is the validity of the biblical account.
The Didache, the Church’s first written guide for discipleship, may not contain ear-tingling, earth-shattering revelations like all the other recent sensational disclosures, but it contains something much more important: a reminder of the Church’s great heritage and a call to our generation to be as faithful as our ancestors were in protecting life and the weak and the defenseless.
Priests For Life has an excellent compilation of quotes from the Church Fathers against abortion.
These can be found at
http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/earlychurchfathers/fatherscover.html
It should also be of interest that birth control was known and condemned. This condemntion remained a teaching of both Catholic and Protestant churches until the Anglican church in 1930 allowed it for married couples.
Careful passing that Didache on... It makes plain that what St. Paul was describing as a "prayer meeting" is pretty similar to Catholicism. In fact, if anything, the Catholic Church has gone all soft and mushy in the last 2,000 years. Confession, abstaining on Fridays (AND Wednesdays), fasting before Eucharist: all those Catholic "inventions" are all there.
>> So the Didache was a way to instruct the new Christians (who were generally not always Jewish by background) in the faith - a teaching tool... <<
Actually, it seems to be more written to gentile pastors, instructing them how to lead a flock. That is the best guess for why it was rejected for the bible: the bible is universal and timeless; the Didache was for pastors in a particular age.
Frankly, it also might be useful for how to properly do a charismatic mass...
And to be fair, a partial score for the Protestants: The earliest bible to include the verse, "For thine is the kingdom, and the power and the glory, now and forever," is from the ninth century. While the Didache does not contain this in the entirety, it does include a substantial portion, "For thine is the power and the glory" after the Our Father.
(The Catholic church does not include this at the end of every recitation of the "Our Father," (Lord's Prayer); it is considered a pious addition, but nonetheless an addition to sacred scripture.)
What I heard as the reason for the Didache not being incorporated into the Bible was not this not TOTALLY inspired by the Holy Spirit.
I believe that Jesus does refer to the The Two Ways in the Gospel of Matthew, but I would have to research that. Basically, the Didache uses that theme from the Gospel but points out SPECIFIC policies to follow - much like some of the Old Testament books on laws given to Moses (the eating of pork, etc).
The average Christian may not have had access to the teachings.
Some of the Web Links in this article would give much more detail.
And the bottom line is that if Christians go back to the early Church, we can find common ground between Evangelicals, Baptists, Methodists, Orthodox and Roman Catholic. Something we can all agree on but in different ways... I think that was the original point of this web article on the Didache...
God bless!
"So this is no mysterious subject of an ancient conspiracy, just a practical guide to discipleship and obedience—maybe not as thrilling to many readers and moviegoers, but a lot more important."
Well I'm sure glad they found this "practical guide to discipleship and obedience". That has been so lacking in the Holy Bible.
Thanks Colson, for now creating more doubt in the body of Christ about what else might be lacking in the Bible. Just like the gospel of Judas and the Da Vinci Code did. Where would Christianity be without you?
Isn't that exactly how Satan works - create a little doubt, then let it fester.
Chuck Colson does not fear God. He mocks Him.
Didache ping.
There is no endorsement of the didache as a substitute or supplement to the Bible in this article. I defy you to find it.
You have completely missed the point of this article.
You have completely missed the point of Colson's entire life for the last three decades.
Advise you keep that accusing finger in its holster next time.
Thanks, I've been pronouncing it wrong in my head and in conversation with my wife.
It must have been when I was reading about the point of Jesus' life in the Holy Bible. I expect to be reading it the rest of my left, and not really ever having finished it.
"You have completely missed the point of this article."
The point of the article is obvious. There is now something else that Christians should be reading about God. When Christians aren't even reading their Bibles. If Christians were reading their Bibles, they would know their complete lack of need for any other book but the Holy Bible - the preserved, inerrant, infallible and complete word of God. This Didache just gives them another convenient excuse for not reading their Bibles. Satan loves when that happens. Christians who don't spend time with the word of God are weak. And are easy pickings for Satan and the seductions of the world.
I know plenty about Chuck Colson. But not to worry. I will leave you in peace with your Chuck Colson thread. He really doesn't interest me. He is just a man. Think I'll go read some Scripture.
I bid you a good night.
Wht do you think that all works by early Christians not in the canon are evil? No one thinks that the Didache was actually written by the Apostles, but it contains enough doctrine consistent with the canonical works that it was highly thought of.
Is that what you say every time you denigrate a fellow Christian's life with no real evidence, "Sorry, I was too busy being into Jesus to actually act like a Christian?"
Colson has spent over thirty years proclaiming the Gospel and promoting orthodoxy. Your accusations against him are as ludicrous as someone calling Madalyn Murray O'Hair a Bible thumper.
The point of the article is obvious. There is now something else that Christians should be reading about God.
WRONG! The point of the article is that many of the political positions the conservative church has taken are in fact positions that the church fathers considered Christian doctrine. The positions match the doctrine because the doctrine is Bible-based, and there is no endorsement of extra-biblical teaching.
I challenge you to show me any place in this article where Colson implies that the Bible is not complete or that we need a supplement to it.
If Christians were reading their Bibles, they would know their complete lack of need for any other book but the Holy Bible - the preserved, inerrant, infallible and complete word of God.
Fine, put your Scripture where your mouth is. Give me a Biblical reference that says we are only supposed to read the Bible, and we are not to read any other document even if it is an expression of proper Christian doctrine.
Think I'll go read some Scripture.
Please do. You haven't been reading it nearly enough if you think your behavior in this thread is remotely Christlike. Back your bile up with Scripture or go home.
I'm a Protestant, and I've experienced the pain of being the only person still standing and talking in a church when the Catholics came to a screeching halt at "deliver us from evil" and I kept going. And the worst part was, I had (for reasons too involved to go into here) worn jeans and a Detroit Lions jersey. Four hundred people in suits and dresses looking at the dipstick Protestant who's standing up with Barry Sanders number on his back. Not a stellar moment in church history.
Excellent points.
I'm sure there was a lesson in it, on both sides. It would certainly have been a temptation to pride for the four hundred, and they might have profitably reflected on their (understandable) reaction.From my POV it's not a disgrace to go to church in informal attire when circumstances cause you not to have a suit. Even if you had the suit and instead wore golf clothes but repented and went to church instead of to the course . . .
But I wouldn't recommend it every week. IMHO.
Take a walk or something.
I wont be wasting my time reading the Didache. As a matter for fact, I've already wasted too much time on this thread, and on Free Republic as of late. It is time for me to get back to some meaningful reading of my KJV Bible - the Bible of my forefathers.
Here is a link for those who do not want to remain egregiously ignorant about Chuck Colson and New Evangelicalism.
Request noted, appreciated, and denied.
I'm not "piling on." I have asked this person to back up their bizarre accusations. In deference to you and your commendable attittude of peacemaking, I will not ask him to back up his bile again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.