Didache text origin 1056 AD first pub. 1883.

[JonC]

Post #. Identity of Didache's oldest manuscript.

Post an argument - from a legitimate source on the subject - that believes the Didache was written after the 5th Century AD and we'll go from there.

 

[37818]

There is no reason. He is what this board would consider a heretic.

Fine. Then I am not interested in his heresy except where he uses it against explicit orthodoxy taught in the Didache. My arguments against Didache is solely where the Didache it is not Biblical.

 

[37818]

Frank W. Nelte

@JonC is correct. Nelte makes huge issue against Didache over its Biblical reference to the Trinity. "There is a huge question about the validity of the text of Matthew 28:19 with its obviously Trinitarian baptismal formula. . . . . . . One of the arguments presented repeatedly in support of the triune baptism formula in Matthew 28:19 consists of appeals to the Didache, to claim that the Matthew 28:19 formula was already used by the apostles during the first century A.D., because this triune statement also appears in the Didache."

Jesus' teachings found in Matthew are cited in the epistle James making Matthew along with James two of the oldest New Testament book. Older than 70 AD.

 

[JonC]

Fine. Then I am not interested in his heresy except where he uses it against explicit orthodoxy taught in the Didache. My arguments against Didache is solely where the Didache it is not Biblical.

The Didache is not biblical. I never said it was. Even those who referenced it in the early 4th Century didn't accept it as Scripture.

You chose to make a false argument (another's false argument) about the Didache because it isn't biblical. That is not right.

The point isn't whether it is biblical but what was practiced.

You thought "thrice baptized" was humorous, but this was actually practiced. It was practiced by immersion in the 6th Century and even today by immersion (with infants)....which is kinda funny if you've ever seen it.

 

[JonC]

Nelte makes huge issue against [I]Didache[/I] over its Biblical reference to the Trinity. "There is a huge question about [B]the validity of the text of Matthew 28:19[/B] with its obviously Trinitarian baptismal formula. . . . . . . One of the arguments presented repeatedly in support of the triune baptism formula in Matthew 28:19 consists of [B]appeals to the Didache[/B], to claim that the Matthew 28:19 formula was already used by the apostles during the first century A.D., because this triune statement also appears in the Didache."

Jesus' teachings found in Matthew are cited in the epistle James making Matthew along with James two of the oldest New Testament book. Older than 70 AD.

I agree. I've seen his arguments before- often with trinitarian doctrine. I think sometimes people approach Scripture in order to defend their beliefs rather than to learn what to believe. So when they find something that doesn't connect they have to find a way to get rid of it.

 

[JonC]

I agree. I've seen his arguments before- often with trinitarian doctrine. I think sometimes people approach Scripture in order to defend their beliefs rather than to learn what to believe. So when they find something that doesn't connect they have to find a way to get rid of it.

Ps.....don't know why that is blue.

Edit - or this. Confused

 

[rsr]

You thought "thrice baptized" was humorous, but this was actually practiced. It was practiced by immersion in the 6th Century and even today by immersion (with infants)....which is kinda funny if you've ever seen it.

The infant baptism you mention is in the Orthodox tradition.

Triple immersion for adults is still practiced by some Anabaptist groups. The Church of the Brethren, for example, practices triple immersion in a forward position while the Mennonite Brethren are baptized three time backwards.

 

[37818]

A side note: What was the Worldwide Church of God ceased in 2009.
Grace Communion International. Formerly: Worldwide Church of God

 

[37818]

A pyprus fragment identified to be of the Didache.
Text History of the Didache

 

[rsr]

Grace Communion is more or less orthodox now, but many splinters from Armstrongism remain and hold to most if not all his teachings about ceremonial law, the divine Family of God (no, not Three, but many), British Israelism, etc. Netle seems to be in the splinter camp.

 

[JonC]

A side note: What was the Worldwide Church of God ceased in 2009.
Grace Communion International. Formerly: Worldwide Church of God

Yes. It moved away from the doctrines Netle teaches. In his website he speaks the of Armstrong's doctrine (Armstrong founded the church) and attributed his being fired as a pastor to the churches moving away from this doctrine and into what he believes to be the satanic doctrine of the Trinity invented by the Catholic Church in the 11th Century.