Posted on 02/28/2015 12:17:20 PM PST by RnMomof7
History Ping...
“How much is your church like the ancient church?”
Well, if we are talking about Protestantism, then very little.
http://www.oodegr.co/english/biblia/episkopos1/perieh.htm
**Well, if we are talking about Protestantism, then very little.**
If your church is not following Acts 2:38 for converting souls, then yours is seriously lacking in some of the basic foundation, that is thoroughly detailed in Acts (more than once), and that was set up by the Lord and his apostles.
If your church is using the Lord’s supper as a means of salvation, then yours is teaching a practice that’s not thoroughly detailed in the early church history, as recorded in Acts.
“for a new generation of non-conformers”
Says a lot about the posts from this site.
“How much is your church like the ancient church?”
“Well, if we are talking about Protestantism, then very little.”
Our church is very Protestant, yet fits this perfectly. Please, try not to judge.
Excellent article.
LOL. The Roman Church looks absolutely NOTHING like the church of the Apostles. Any attempt to say otherwise is just a demonstration of ignorance at a supreme level. The first century church would not even recognize the Catholic Church of today and all its practices. Whether that’s ok or not is open for discussion but the fact it’s a different church than the early church is not.
Amen and Amen! And those who are truly called out by God (the ekklesia) will do just that as the "churches" we have today all drift farther and farther from the truth of scripture.
Notice the church Justin describes has no "priests" no "sacrifice "
I agree with you on the simplicity of the early church. Acts 2 tells the whole story. If the lost people in Acts 2 could be saved after what they did to Jesus, could I be saved if I believed and did the same thing they did? Yes I can.
“Justin was born toward the end of the first century. He died in 165 as a martyr for his faith in Jesus Christ.
Around 150, he wrote a defense of the faith to the Roman emperor—called his First Apology—arguing that Christianity should not be illegal. In the course of his defense, he describes what a typical church service was like in his day.”
If I wanted to find out what the meaning of the Constitution as written was, and to find out how those who debated and ratified it would conduct government business, who would be better to ask, one of those founders or a Supreme Court Justice who served some 50 or 60 years later?
There are plenty of direct statements in the NT and plenty of strong hints in canonized Epistles to know a lot about the “faith once delivered to the saints”. That is the faith that I seek, and there are tens of thousands in the US who practice that faith, not some paganized or Gnostic substitute.
In technical language such people are called “primitive Christians”. The first hallmark of this group is simple: do they accept what the Bible plainly says or do they accept what some later authority claims it says.
A good first few questions would be to ask:
1) did the Church that met on the first Pentecost keep the other Holy Days too such as the Sabbath?
2) did the Church that met on the first Pentecost also observe Xmas and Ishtar, or would they reject Xmas and Ishtar as being pagan, syncretic, abominations?
3) did the Church that met on the first Pentecost believe that man had in innate immortal soul, so that without a savior humans would still have eternal life, just not in heaven?
4) did the Church that met on the first Pentecost know that Jesus had conveyed a body of beliefs that was not to be altered and they only had His permission to elaborate and explain, not to abrogate and nullify.
5) did the Church that met on the first Pentecost know that Jesus was indeed going to return to earth to sit on the throne of His father David? That this means the royal lineage of David must continue to the day He returns? (Luke 1:32, Acts 2:29-30!, Acts 15:16, Amos 9:11)
Not a single mainline Church can answer these questions in the affirmative. People who are committed to practicing the exact faith of the Church that met on the first Pentecost will.
And they already had the memoirs of the apostles and the writings of the prophets!
Who said anything about the Roman Church? Read the linked book and get back to me.
Next to it would be the independent fundamental "baptist" assemblies that feature a local pastor as the schooled elder/teacher, with deacons assisting the orderly conduct of the organization. Except for the distinctive characteristic of one sole ruling pastor, they also would fit the description of a New Testament church, as contrasted to any denominational church arising out of trying to mend the misbehaviors of the Romanists four hundred years ago. None of these Protestant denominations can meet the Justin Martyr test, IMHO.
Well, if we are talking about Protestantism, then very little.
What are you, nuts??? Every Protestant church I've been in follows Justin's take on it...
What is telling in Justin's remarks is that there is no one waving incense smoke around...No one is participating in a Catholic Eucharist celebration...Mary isn't mentioned at all...Nothing going on with altar boys...Nothing at all is Catholic in Justin Martyr's church service...
And interesting quote from the link you posted...
It is to Saint Ignatius the God-bearer that we owe most of the information that we have, regarding the significance of the Bishop in the early Church.
Since Ignatius' information is known to be forged, your religion has nothing in the way of the significance of any bishops, anywhere or at any time...
And in many, many cases, it's pure deception...
What??? It would another couple hundreds of years before the Constantine religion would pass those out to the Church...
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.