Replies

It is probably the 2nd oldest after the Didache based upon this analysis —

See the following paragraphs at this study of the Didache: http://www.bswett.com/1998-01Didache.html

In his epistle to the Galatians, Paul wrote:

Then after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. I went up by revelation; and I laid before them (but privately before those who were of repute) the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, lest somehow I should be running or had run in vain. (Galatians 2:1-2)
Fourteen years after Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem probably equates to AD 47. The Didache may be what Paul laid before the leaders in Jerusalem — a summary document prepared in advance for just that purpose — or more likely from the way it sounds, a set of lecture notes taken while Barnabas and Paul and Titus were speaking. In either case it is worth noting that in the Didache and in Acts 15:12 Barnabas speaks first. He was the leader at Antioch. Paul was his assistant.
when they perceived the grace that was given to me, James and Peter and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. (Galatians 2:9)
This was when Barnabas and Paul received their charter as “The Apostles to the Gentiles.” They returned from Jerusalem to Antioch, bringing Mark with them. (Acts 12:25) Shortly thereafter, all three of them set out on Paul’s first missionary journey, which scholars date in AD 47. (Acts 13:1-4)

Certainly Barnabas and Paul were “The Apostles to the Gentiles.” If the Didache is a sample of their teaching, as it certainly seems to be, then it must be dated no later than AD 49 because that was when they went their separate ways. The most probable date is either AD 44 or AD 47. In either case, those dates are earlier than anything in the New Testament. Therefore, I believe the Didache is the earliest Christian document we have. Although rightly regarded as a church handbook and not a Gospel or absolutely based on the teachings of Jesus, it provides valuable insights concerning the moral doctrines, theology, rituals, esoteric operations and congregational testing of apostles and prophets, and the basic organization of First Century Christianity

Your link is good so far, but I come across this:

"The Trinity formula "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" appears only once in the New Testament (Matthew 28:19). It is probably a later insert (redaction) in both the Didache and Matthew's Gospel, because the Trinity was not defined until AD 362. The original reading was probably "In the name of the Lord" (see the Didache 9:5). Fasting before baptism dropped out of our tradition somewhere along the line."

None of the Greek manuscripts that possess Matt 28:19 are different from what we have today; furthermore, the verse is quoted by many church fathers prior to AD 362. There is absolutely no evidence that the verse is not original to Matthew, but there is every evidence in the world that the verse is original to the Gospel of Matthew.

I'm just reading through the link and was enjoying it, still haven't finished it, but then he does it again!:

"Direct comparison of "your son David" and "your son Jesus" must be a very early doctrine, predating the doctrine that Jesus is the only son of God and the doctrine set forth by Athanasius in AD 318 that Jesus was God Incarnate. This is probably one reason why Athanasius excluded the Didache when he finalized the list of New Testament books in AD 367. Paul compared David and Jesus (Acts 13:16-41, Romans 5:15-17, I Timothy 2:5)."

Christ is called both the son of David according to the flesh and God incarnate in the scripture. Why is he trying to claim that Athanasius invented this? Furthermore, Ignatius calls Christ God as well as early as the end of the first century or early into the second.

This guy makes weird comments in an otherwise good article.