Early Christianity

[ena]

The problem with COC doctrine is the attitude which is condescending towards other faiths. You may find some untruth there. The hardest to detect lies are mixed with truth and defended viciously. If you detect a vicious defense check for lies. For instance you might hear that Baptists don't study their Bible right. I have been in Baptist Churches for many years and have met many lay people that know their Bible well. This includes the Old Testament because the basis of future things is there as well as the Messiah. They do not have the fear that if you get killed in a car accident on the way to getting Baptized you go to Hell. The church that professes to be founded in 33 AD does not know much about early Christianity. Early Christians were in a state of trauma. Their leader had been murdered. The church as it was; was very divided. As time went on various groups had various writings that they considered scripture.

2 Peter 3:15 (KJV) ......even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

I note that Peter if it is him calls Paul a brother. Not an Apostle. Paul calls himself an Apostle. He was not present with Jesus before the crucifixion. This probably was a bit of a sore spot for him to overcome but that is my guess. This is a subject that needs to be covered because of the large amount of second guessing and mythology. Some people believe even that Jesus was a myth. I am not of that ilk. Recommend Bart Ehrman's "Lost Christianities." Bart is very involved in Bible archeology. Should be required reading so you can see clearly.

[Struggler]

One of the dumbest things I ever heard was that "the early church was just like ours, only the clothes were different." In other words, an ancient "service" was identical to what we'd see now. All about getting the service right. Geez.

[lvmaus]

One of the dumbest things I ever heard was that "the early church was just like ours, only the clothes were different." In other words, an ancient "service" was identical to what we'd see now. All about getting the service right. Geez.

Legalistic churches think they have discovered the perfect pattern for the "church service" that follows exactly the practices of the early church. Elements of this perfect pattern they profess to have discovered are selected willy-nilly and forced into a "worship service" that suits their desires.

I'm shocked that dressing in first century sandals and robes are not demanded as being the only appropriate garb for their traditional assemblies.

[zeek]

.

[bnot]

The problem with COC doctrine is the attitude which is condescending towards other faiths. You may find some untruth there. The hardest to detect lies are mixed with truth and defended viciously. If you detect a vicious defense check for lies. For instance you might hear that Baptists don't study their Bible right. I have been in Baptist Churches for many years and have met many lay people that know their Bible well. This includes the Old Testament because the basis of future things is there as well as the Messiah. They do not have the fear that if you get killed in a car accident on the way to getting Baptized you go to Hell. The church that professes to be founded in 33 AD does not know much about early Christianity. Early Christians were in a state of trauma. Their leader had been murdered. The church as it was; was very divided. As time went on various groups had various writings that they considered scripture.

The Coc is not the one you read of in the Bible as they say. That is arrogance in and of itself. Actually I'll take that back; when I read about the Pharisees I see characteristics of the Coc. The first century church did not have the Coc "plan of salvation" which is nothing more than ripping verses out of context. If the "plan of salvation" is valid those verses would follow one after another in the same chapter and book. The plan of salvation of the first century church is simply the gospel. The first century church were not looked down upon because they didn't bring their Bible to service (of course they didn't have any, but they had the gospel).

[ena]

bnot The Coc is not the one you read of in the Bible as they say. That is arrogance in and of itself. Actually I'll take that back; when I read about the Pharisees I see characteristics of the Coc. The first century church did not have the Coc "plan of salvation" which is nothing more than ripping verses out of context. If the "plan of salvation" is valid those verses would follow one after another in the same chapter and book. The plan of salvation of the first century church is simply the gospel. The first century church were not looked down upon because they didn't bring their Bible to service (of course they didn't have any, but they had the gospel).

You cited several things of consequence. I do like the word arrogance as that embodies much. Perhaps we should meet in an upper room or take communion on a Wednesday night. It is not possible these days to recreate the sociopolitical climate of the first century. I do believe wine means exactly that. They did not have phones, computers, refrigerators. A former boss of mine had served time in Korea in the military. He mentioned that Koreans buried kimchi underground. It actually makes sense. Germans do their sauerkraut in a root celler. Both are femented. Both are good when done right. For kraut I like Klausen or Bubbies. These are refrigerated. You can sometimes get some for your polish dog at Costco. Goes great on a Reuben.

[Lev]

1950-60s-esque "middle-class american" attire is more to their liking.

My wife (who was not raised COC) and I once met a woman on a Sunday afternoon who was dressed in a rather 'anachronistic' way. My wife whispered to me, 'Think she's COC?" Turns out she was.

Lev

[lvmaus]

Where's the church that even vaguely resembles the first century church!

One CoC practice that really baffles me is their strange understanding of the communion service. Rather than being an uplifting love feast celebrating the risen Lord, they have created a dark funeral rite that never gets past the cross, death, or the grave. Nothing even resembling joy is expressed, just long sad faces during this commemoration ... He's alive and partaking with us in this love feast, why all the sadness? Be HAPPY for goodness sake!

[ena]

One CoC practice that really baffles me is their strange understanding of the communion service. Rather than being an uplifting love feast celebrating the risen Lord, they have created a dark funeral rite that never gets past the cross, death, or the grave. Nothing even resembling joy is expressed, just long sad faces during this commemoration ... He's alive and partaking with us in this love feast, why all the sadness? Be HAPPY for goodness sake!

Communion as I see it is a memorial service for Jesus. There are sad aspects to this but joy in his resurrection and our salvation. The problem comes from a misunderstanding of what Paul meant. The problem was better off people were debauching communion and not sharing with others such that some were not able to even able to partake. It is in 1 Cor 11. In short they were disrespecting Jesus and other people as well. This church was so fractious that Paul stated he was glad he did not baptize many so they could not claim I'm of Paul. He is royally pissed off. It is not that you cannot eat in church. Just don't mix communion with meals. If you could look into CoC history I believe you would find a church split over this. The CoC is quite fractious like the Corinthian church.

[B.H.]

They say there were gnostic texts circulating in the first century. For the sake of argument how do they know that some of those texts do not record some of Jesus's teachings?