• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Oldest form of Christianity? or church

Jeremy Mason

Well-Known Member
I believe that if any of the other early Christian Churches ( Antioch; Jerusalem; Constantinople, Corinth, etc) of the post-apostolic era had "won out" in the political battle for pre-eminence over the Roman Church, the Church now called "the Catholic Church" would have been far different than the modern version of the early Roman Christian church.

We are on a roll! :clap2: I find the first century church to be remarkably different than any Christian church after Constantine until today. I'm not saying that there aren't groups of people who practice first century Christian worship and mannerisms. I'm just saying they are hard to find and when I find one, I'll have a church to go to.
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
"I find the first century church to be remarkably different than any Christian church after Constantine until today. I'm not saying that there aren't groups of people who practice first century Christian worship and mannerisms. I'm just saying they are hard to find and when I find one, I'll have a church to go to." - Jeremy Mason

1) Regarding the Christians loss of the original Gospel and Church authority (and the revelations that attend the presence of apostles and prophets)

I have to wonder if there isn’t a lesson for Christians in the Observation of how the Jews had earlier lost the important essence of their religion.

In the "Lost Books" thread, I attempted to point out that "The Jews had already gone through a similar process (as the christians have). The Jews hade already undergone the demoralizing process of demotion from being actively and consistently let by God through on-going revelation through prophets to having to be led by sanhedrin's and man-made administrations. They went from Active Temple worship through destruction of the temple to a simple faith that the "someday temple" will be built. They lost active and sacred ordinances administered by true and living priests to the expedient of simply meeting in synagogues for worship.

The synagogues were NOT the temple they once had; the rabbis were NOT the priests they once had; the scriptures were NOT ongoing revelation through prophets; the councils were not direction by revelation they once had." - Clear


With the death of the apostles, the early Christians were placed in a similar situation of expediency and simply tried to "make do" with what they then had.
If we are to have apostles and their authority and on-going revelation that attends such an organization, I do not think it will not come from a church that has lost it (such as the Roman Church), nor from men trying to "reform" a church that has already lost such gifts (such as the protestants). I believe God will have to bring apostles and revelation back himself. Then, we might enjoy the gifts of "original" Christianity.



2) If the first observation regarding the Jews has application to us, perhaps another observation of the Jews might apply to us as well : Just as the Jewish leaders knew the scriptures as well as the Christians (but interpreted them differently), and thus were unprepared to recognize Jesus as the Christ, I wonder if we also, as Christians interpret things so differently than the early christians, that we run the risk of missing the truth when it is just under our own noses because it will not fit our current notions and traditions.

Clear
 
Last edited:

astarath

Well-Known Member
Also it depends if your speaking solely of the modern definition of Christianity. The gnostic still are present as a faith and trace themselves to the apostle Thomas Didymos
 

Clear

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Astarath

I would certainly accept your addition without argument. MANY churches saw making a connection to an apostle (no matter how tenuous the connection) as an important principle in their claims to legitimacy and pre-eminence.

I did not intentially mean to overlook another of the many claims, but simply wanted to discuss such claims as a principle. thank you for the addition.

clear

(t- e e)
 
Last edited:

astarath

Well-Known Member
the gnostic connection is not one of tenuous strain but rather the placement was to the disadvantage. Thomas did not remain in Rome to spread the gospel to the gentiles their but rather was concerned with the gentiles of india and asia. Many gnostic churches and communities still exist in these areas and contain equally legitimate claims to their apostolic origins.
 

Jeremy Mason

Well-Known Member
2) If the first observation regarding the Jews has application to us, perhaps another observation of the Jews might apply to us as well : Just as the Jewish leaders knew the scriptures as well as the Christians (but interpreted them differently), and thus were unprepared to recognize Jesus as the Christ, I wonder if we also, as Christians interpret things so differently than the early christians, that we run the risk of missing the truth when it is just under our own noses because it will not fit our current notions and traditions.

I completely understand what you are saying and have contemplated the similarities of the Jewish and Christian situations after 2000 years from their beginnings, although the Jewish starting point is more unclear. Which makes me wonder if there is going to be another ending/beginning sometime soon.
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
Sometimes I wonder if I should become a Jew (I have Jewish ancestry and was even once told by a Rabbi that I am considered Jewish because my maternal grandmother was but I know nothing of the faith-- my mother raised me atheist/agnostic in my early childhood) in order to be a better Christian. After all, the Apostles never stopped being Jews, from what I can tell.
 

Jeremy Mason

Well-Known Member
Sometimes I wonder if I should become a Jew (I have Jewish ancestry and was even once told by a Rabbi that I am considered Jewish because my maternal grandmother was but I know nothing of the faith-- my mother raised me atheist/agnostic in my early childhood) in order to be a better Christian. After all, the Apostles never stopped being Jews, from what I can tell.

You might find this interesting.
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...bates/69903-first-christians-were-jews-5.html

Posts 42-47
 

ChristineES

Tiggerism
Premium Member
I know of some Jews who also believe in Jesus, they are Jews for Jesus, Messianic Jews, and so on. I even belong to a forum that is for Messianic Jews and Jews for Jesus (I haven't posted in it, just read it). Those Jews seem to believe that Jesus filled the requirements for the Messiah. I also have read the works of the late Zola Levitt, another Messianic Jew. Mr. Levitt compared Jesus to the Passover Lamb. I have attended a few meetings of these Messianic Jews, too. They were very much Jewish, yet they accepted Jesus.
 

Orontes

Master of the Horse
After all, the Apostles never stopped being Jews, from what I can tell.

Quite so. The Jesus Movement was a following within Jewry. It isn't until after the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem (70 C.E.) and the Council of Jamnia (circa 90 C.E.) that a diaspora Judaism began to define itself as a distinct religion from the followers of Jesus.
 

Delamere

Member
I think Jeremy and Scott1 both have it right. The true Church of Jesus Christ is not an organisation (like a denomination) but an organism, a fellowship of living, loving people. Everyone belongs to the true Church who loves the Lord Jesus Christ. The true Church is that body of people who try to live in acordance with the doctrine of the apostles as recorded in the canonical books of the New Testament.

I feel able to have Christian fellowship with anyone who truly loves the Lord Jesus regardless of which Christian denomination they belong to.

It is possible to belong to a church institution or an organisation and not really belong to Christ at all. Please read 1 John 5:11-12 - it is not rocket science!
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
The Anglican church traces its past from the first century, through the early English Celtic church which was Monastic Coptic in origin.
The early English church was later absorbed under the rule of the Roman Church.
The church of England broke again from the Roman Church during the reign of Henry V111
The rest is history.
 

ayani

member
one of the very earliest Christian traditions to be established is the little-known St. Thomas Christian group, founded by the Apostle Thomas on a missionary trip to India.

Syrian Malabar Nasrani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

they may indeed be the oldest surviving, continuous Christian comunity in the world. they retained, until recent contact with the Roman Catholic Church, many Judaic traditions and practices. they still do, but to a less copious degree.
 
Last edited:

ayani

member
Mar Thoma Church - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the earliest converts in India were actually Cochin Jews. Jews have been in India for a very, very long time, too.

not many people know about these Indian Orthodox Christians. they pre-datethe split between Roman Catholicism and everything else, and they also seem to pre-date the Nestorian and Arian controversies, being introduced to the Gospel by an apostle, who was later martyred in India itself.
 
Last edited:
Top