I have trouble discussing things when I have to have my dictionary handy.
Some of us are just to simple to understand.
Just don't be too lazy to learn. I use a dictionary and find Google quite handy.
The Didache: Doctrines That Build on the Creed
- Thread starter GWH
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Just don't be too lazy to learn. I use a dictionary and find Google quite handy.
If you say so! I won't argue with you. Retired people should get to do whatever they want that's fun for them!
(Within reason of course and as long as it's legal!
You obviously posted in order to argue rather than learn my sources.
(Disappointing.)
Amen! Thanks SOTW for posting something serious on the topic of this thread.
Are we ready now to discuss those Scriptures that build upon the foundation?
If so, please read OP's #1-3 and let's see if we can get back on the rails.
Hopefully others will join us who are not pejorative, because so far
this has not been what I envisioned when I felt led to begin this thread.
Right you are, sotw, and the right Faith is the topic on The Kerygma thread.
Per my OP, this thread will build on the foundation of Ephesians 2:8-9
by exploring the meaning of v.10. Here is the three part OP again (abbreviated):
Teachings that are secondary or subsequent to learning the Gospel/Creed or kerygma (GRFS) may be indicated by another Greek word, didache, which means teaching. The didache may be very important and requisite for becoming spiritually mature, but it is not most important or necessary to know/believe in order to be saved. The distinction between kerygma/saving faith and didache/working faith was made by Jesus when He commissioned His original twelve disciples minus Judas (Matt. 28:19-20). This “Great Commission” speaks of both types of information. The kerygma is indicated by verse 19, in which Jesus says, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations”, and the didache is implicit in verse 20, in which Jesus continues by saying “teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” This speaks of information a disciple needs to know and believe after conversion in order to grow in Christlikeness regarding how to live the law of love. It is the “all truth” that is taught by the Spirit referred to in John 16:13. Again, it is very important following salvation for attaining complete sanctification. The distinction between kerygma and didache can be seen also in 2 Timothy 3:15-17 and in 1 Corinthians 3:10-15.
The need for persevering in saving faith in Christ Jesus as Lord is part of the essential Gospel kerygma/creed, but NT teachings regarding what Christians should be doing while persevering are details that build upon that foundation, which Paul indicated is seeking moral perfection, saying in Philippians 3:12-14, “Not that I have already... been made perfect, but I press on… toward the goal… for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus”, and Paul condemned those who “live as enemies of the cross of Christ… whose destiny is destruction” (v.18b-19a). Thus, he connected saving faith (cited in Eph. 2:8-9) with sanctifying good works (in Eph. 2:10), saying “In the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed… that is by faith from first to last” (Rom. 1:17, cf. Hab. 2:4).
If we truly believe in Jesus as Lord, we will want to please Him by cooperating with His will (Matt. 7:21, Eph. 5:8-10), but remaining faithful is as easy as an act of our will, even though Jesus referred to His yoke as a cross (Matt. 11:29-30, 16:24), and Peter acknowledged that a believer’s joy may sometimes be despite suffering (1Pet. 1:6-9). Paul explained that the reason Christ called some to be pastor-teachers is “to prepare God’s people for works of service… until we all reach unity in the faith… and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:11b-13), which fullness is indicated by having the power to love (Eph. 3:16-19), which is why Paul said “In Christ Jesus… the only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love” (Gal. 5:6, cf. v. 22-23).
Paul urged believers to renew their minds by learning God’s perfect will (Rom. 12:2), which is conveyed via inspired Scripture and “is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2Tim. 2:17). This is why Jesus said, “Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4). Learning the manifold teachings regarding God’s moral will takes a lifetime, so let us continue to persevere from “what we have already attained” or learned (Phil. 3:16, 2Tim. 3:14), “making every effort to add to our faith goodness… godliness… and love” (2Pet. 1:5-7).
As we begin this discussion, I would like to remind everyone that learning didachaic doctrine is very important but not necessary for initial salvation, which hinges or is conditional upon believing only the essential Gospel indicated by Paul in Acts 16:31, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved.” The didache teaches God’s will regarding how saints or those who have been saved should live in order to be a good witness for Christ, which involves learning more of God’s Word throughout one’s lifetime (Col. 2:6-7).
Building on the kerygma is important, but because we are fallible, we may disagree about how to interpret secondary doctrines regarding relatively minor issues. May we receive God’s blessing as peacemakers, who draw inclusive circles around fellow Christians based on the kerygma rather than denominational lines between them due to didachaic differences. Jesus prayed for spiritual unity (cf. John 17:20-23, “May they be one…”), because unity regarding the Gospel is more important than accuracy regarding doctrinal details, so may we feel free to speak honestly and disagree friendly without becoming unduly upset.
I give this reminder because I am aware that sometimes discussion gets dangerously close to quarrelling, which Paul strictly forbids in 2 Timothy 2:23-25 and Titus 3:9-11, saying that those who are divisive are “warped and sinful; self-condemned”. In Paul’s day a major divisive debate was between those who advocated salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9) and those who taught that circumcision was necessary (Phil. 3:2-3, Gal. 5:2-12), but in our time I am aware of two topics that can be divisive, so I would like to share a peaceable word about them and then move on to other doctrines.
The first problematic issue is the debate between those who believe in what is known as TULIP and those who believe in what is called MFW. May we agree that it is important to affirm the sovereignty of God and that salvation cannot be earned on the one hand, and on the other hand the love and righteousness of God should not be impugned (Rom. 2:5-11, 3:21-26, 5:8 & 17-21).
The second potential divide is the debate between those who believe that the Holy Spirit is manifested by miracle gifts (such as the glossolalia that occurred in Acts 2:4, cf. 1Cor. 12:9-10) and those who believe such gifts were superseded by teaching gifts (cited in Eph. 4:11-14), just as the meaning of “prophecy” in the sense of predicting the future (1Pet. 1:10-12) morphed into preaching true doctrine (2Pet. 1:20-2:3). May we agree that it is right to test what is preached (per 1Thes. 5:19-21) and that love manifests the filling of the Holy Spirit. (“Love” in Scripture is comparable to “fractal” in science.)
Now—God permitting (no more derailments)—let us leave the elementary although essential teaching about the Gospel of Christ
and go on to other doctrines that will build on that foundation and lead to becoming blameless in practice as well as because of forgiveness in Christ (Heb. 6:1-3, Eph. 1:4-7). Being careful how we build (1Cor. 3:10-11), how would y'all like to begin this construction?
Over...
I would suggest that prophecy per se never meant predicting the future. That would be divination based on a belief that the future is already determined and settled and can therefore be known in advance. Prophecy was often about warning where things are heading, if the bad actors continue in their present attitudes and intentions; and encouragement about where things will end up, if the good actors continue in their present attitudes and intentions. Occasionally prophecy was alerting people to how God was going to unilaterally intervene in the world to reset societies that had gone too far off the righteous track, or to alert people of some blessing He was going to unilaterally bestow on societies. Such predictions and their fulfilment were to demonstrate His omnipotence and power to keep His promises and so inspire faith in Him and His word.
I agree, although 1Pet. 1:10-12 indicates belief that telling the future was part of prophecy.
I also agree that Paul's prison epistles typically begin rather theologically before turning to moral principles.
In Ephesians, chapter four seems to begin explaining the meaning of 2:10. Shall we begin making a list?
Maybe try verifying what people post from comparing scripture with scripture. Giving credence to something because the person saying or writing it has the backing of someone with a degree or someone with a following is the appeal to authority fallacy. Experts can also be wrong.*schrug* You don't cite your work. I can't verify what you post.
So I can't give what you write much weight.
I don't care if I disappoint you. You're not my God.
I'm not talking about when he writes about something from a bible verse or passage that everyone can easily look up.
He also writes about the history of Christianity and other things related to Christianity - and he doesn't cite sources for those too.
Citing sources gives the reader the ability to assess the source directly. A good reader isn't automatically impressed with the degrees of the source. But without the source citation, a reader can't trace and verify it to see if that expert was right or wrong.
I don't know why he just doesn't automatically attach source citation to his writings. It isn't hard to do. It's just one or a few lines of information so that readers can see where his info or inspiration are coming from.
I'm not talking about when he writes about something from a bible verse or passage that everyone can easily look up.
He also writes about the history of Christianity and other things related to Christianity - and he doesn't cite sources for those too.
Citing sources gives the reader the ability to assess the source directly. A good reader isn't automatically impressed with the degrees of the source. But without the source citation, a reader can't trace and verify it to see if that expert was right or wrong.
I don't know why he just doesn't automatically attach source citation to his writings. It isn't hard to do. It's just one or a few lines of information so that readers can see where his info or inspiration are coming from.
I see. I haven't noticed GWH writing about the history of Christianity as such. But I don't read everything in all the threads I participate in.
What you see is 2ndTime not so charming, but at least she finally alluded to "the history of Christianity", which probably means Lessons 7 & 8 in our website on the History of Beliefs, and I seem to remember telling her before that my main sources are Bernard Grun's "The Timetables of History" and the Smithsonian "Timelines of History", although today I imagine everything is available or verifiable (not that I care about being verified by snide snipers) via Google or even Wikipedia.
If anyone seriously (and preferably nicely) wants to ask about my sources for other parts of our website, please feel free after googling first.
Now regarding the topic of this thread, shall we begin making a list of didachaic doctrines?
All righty then! (So far this thread has been like herding cats.)
Again I will post the gist of the OP and hope we will make progress.
I identify teachings about God's requirement for salvation (GRFS) or the Gospel creed by use of the Greek word for preaching, "kerygma", and doctrines that are subsequent to learning the Gospel and build on that foundation by another Greek word for teaching, "didache". This distinction was made by Jesus in "The Great Commission” (Matt. 28:19-20). The kerygma is indicated by Jesus saying to make disciples of all nations, and the didache is implicit when Jesus adds, teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you, which must be the “all truth” taught by the Spirit that He referred to in John 16:13. (The distinction between kerygma and didache can be seen also in 2Tim. 3:15-17 and 1Cor. 3:10-15.)
The purpose of this thread is to identify and discuss the didachaic doctrines, which Paul indicated (in Philippians 3:12-19a) are those relevant for seeking the goal of moral perfection and no longer living as enemies of Christ, whose destiny is destruction. In this way he connected saving faith (Eph. 2:8-9) with sanctifying good works (Eph. 2:10), saying that the Gospel reveals a righteousness from God that is by faith from first to last (Rom. 1:17). IOW, those who believe the kerygma and accept Jesus as Lord at conversion want to please Him by learning the didache and cooperating with His will until the end of their life-long sanctification (Matt 7:21, Eph. 5:8-10). Paul explained that the reason Christ called some to be pastor-teachers is “to prepare God’s people for works of service… until we all reach unity in the faith… and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:11b-13).
As we leave the elementary teaching about the Gospel of Christ (kerygma) and go on to consider other doctrines (didache) that will build on that foundation (Heb. 6:1-3), being careful how we build (1Cor. 3:10-11), would someone like to lay the first brick?
Again I will post the gist of the OP and hope we will make progress.
I identify teachings about God's requirement for salvation (GRFS) or the Gospel creed by use of the Greek word for preaching, "kerygma", and doctrines that are subsequent to learning the Gospel and build on that foundation by another Greek word for teaching, "didache". This distinction was made by Jesus in "The Great Commission” (Matt. 28:19-20). The kerygma is indicated by Jesus saying to make disciples of all nations, and the didache is implicit when Jesus adds, teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you, which must be the “all truth” taught by the Spirit that He referred to in John 16:13. (The distinction between kerygma and didache can be seen also in 2Tim. 3:15-17 and 1Cor. 3:10-15.)
The purpose of this thread is to identify and discuss the didachaic doctrines, which Paul indicated (in Philippians 3:12-19a) are those relevant for seeking the goal of moral perfection and no longer living as enemies of Christ, whose destiny is destruction. In this way he connected saving faith (Eph. 2:8-9) with sanctifying good works (Eph. 2:10), saying that the Gospel reveals a righteousness from God that is by faith from first to last (Rom. 1:17). IOW, those who believe the kerygma and accept Jesus as Lord at conversion want to please Him by learning the didache and cooperating with His will until the end of their life-long sanctification (Matt 7:21, Eph. 5:8-10). Paul explained that the reason Christ called some to be pastor-teachers is “to prepare God’s people for works of service… until we all reach unity in the faith… and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:11b-13).
As we leave the elementary teaching about the Gospel of Christ (kerygma) and go on to consider other doctrines (didache) that will build on that foundation (Heb. 6:1-3), being careful how we build (1Cor. 3:10-11), would someone like to lay the first brick?
If not, I will continue with a plan germinated in post #28, where it was noticed that Ephesians chapter four seems to begin explaining the meaning of Ephesians 2:10, so perhaps it would be edifying to collect a list of didachaic doctrines based on what Paul says there.
Ephesians 4:1 instructs believers to live a life worthy of the calling they have received, which Paul describes as including the following:
1. Live worthy of the calling to be a Christian (Eph. 4:1)
2. Be humble (EPH 4:2)
3. Be gentle (EPH 4:2)
4. Be patient (Eph. 4:2)
5. Maintain the unity of the Spirit (Eph. 4:3)
6. Speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15 & 25)
Any thoughts or comments before we continue?
Ephesians 4:1 instructs believers to live a life worthy of the calling they have received, which Paul describes as including the following:
1. Live worthy of the calling to be a Christian (Eph. 4:1)
2. Be humble (EPH 4:2)
3. Be gentle (EPH 4:2)
4. Be patient (Eph. 4:2)
5. Maintain the unity of the Spirit (Eph. 4:3)
6. Speak the truth in love (Eph. 4:15 & 25)
Any thoughts or comments before we continue?
Here is what you said.
I will run your test on Luke's Gospel and see if Luke's Gospel passes the test?
Luke 1:1-4
Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us,
just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants
of the word, it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning,
to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth
about the things you have been taught.
The date of composition ranges from the sixties to the eighties, no one really knows.
Luke's Gospel is a compilation of various accounts (many) handed down to that second generation.
Not a choice of only four gospels.
Luke of course is reading directly from accounts handed down, gospels, eye witness testimony, etc.
Will there be theological tension in Luke's Gospel?
Obviously, the resurrection account will differ from the other gospel accounts.
I don't think Luke's Gospel passes the AI test.