The Didache: Doctrines That Build on the Creed

[GWH]

In Phil. 1:21-26 Paul remarks that "to live is Christ and to die is gain", but he looks forward to remaining and seeing the saints make progress in the faith, which must refer to them learning more of GW and increasing in love (building on the Gospel kerygma with didachaic doctrines) as he wrote the Ephesians (Eph. 3:16-19, 4:11-16).

In Phil. 2:12-13 Paul describes this process as continuing "to work out your salvation... for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to His good purpose", which indicates cooperation of a sinner's MFW with GW (cf. Eph. 2:8-10). The goal is expressed as becoming "blameless and pure children of God without fault" (cf. Phil. 1:10-11 & 3:12-14).

In this epistle Paul associates sanctification with joy (Phil. 1:4&25-26, 2:2&18, 3:1, 4:1,4&10).

 

[GWH]

In Phil. 3:2-9 Paul warned Christians against those who believe physical circumcision is necessary for salvation
instead of spiritual circumcision or faith in the righteousness from God through faith in Christ. This warning might
also apply to those who believe physical baptism is necessary instead of receiving the Spirit of God.

Then (in Phil. 3:17) Paul urged the Philippians to follow his example and live in accordance with the teaching he had given them.
Finally, he encouraged them (in Phil. 4:4-8) to rejoice in the Lord, to pray to God, and to meditate on praiseworthy things.

 

[kinda]

Well, this thread went off the rails right quick!

Is there anyone out there on my wavelength who wants to suggest how to begin a study of didachaic doctrines
that build on the foundation of the Gospel?

Always have to watch those rails. lol

To to be honest, I was quite happy to see someone mention the Didache in a thread. I have read it a few times and I honestly believe it would be a great manual for every believer in Christ. In literally tells you how to be a Christian, or at least how early followers thought what it means to be a believer in Jesus.

As far as your studies, hmm. I will leave you to that, but found this website, that could help you.


http://apocryphile.org/jrm/articles/didache2.html

 

[kinda]

The Didache

http://apocryphile.org/jrm/articles/didache.html

 

[GWH]

Always have to watch those rails. lol

To to be honest, I was quite happy to see someone mention the Didache in a thread. I have read it a few times and I honestly believe it would be a great manual for every believer in Christ. In literally tells you how to be a Christian, or at least how early followers thought what it means to be a believer in Jesus.

As far as your studies, hmm. I will leave you to that, but found this website, that could help you.

http://apocryphile.org/jrm/articles/didache2.html

To be honest, I hoped you would share what you learned from GW or "The Didache" for the benefit of others,
so I find it kinda disappointing for you to leave. However, I will monologue re GW until I have nothing more
to share on this topic, and I may compare it with what the website says, so thanks for the link.

 

[kinda]

To be honest, I hoped you would share what you learned from GW or "The Didache" for the benefit of others,
so I find it kinda disappointing for you to leave. However, I will monologue re GW until I have nothing more
to share on this topic, and I may compare it with what the website says, so thanks for the link.

Yeah, I think the Didache is hidden gem, that I wish was more popular. I think the writing is pretty straightforward. What do you think? That link that I posted is worth a read. Although, I didn't confirm what it writes, it did mention that the writing had influences in Mathew and possibly some writings in Luke.

There are also other Apostle writings that aren't very popular. I wrote a thread many moons back discussing this, it didn't get much traction, but I don't see the harm in at least reading these works. I can't remember which writings I read in the past.

The Didache was found in codex hierosolymitanus and learning about the first Christian Bibles is a very interesting journey in discovering the past. I believe one early Christian Bible is found in the London. I would encourage you to look into these, early writings, if interested. I found it fascinating and it opened up my mind. My intent is not to encourage people to disregard the Holy Bible, but to discover other historical writings, that are probably credible for believers in the faith.

Taken from wiki...

he following writings are generally grouped together as having been written by the Apostolic Fathers (in italics are writings whose authors are unknown):[5]

• Letters attributed to Clement of Rome
  • The First Epistle of Clement
  • The Second Epistle of Clement (contested authorship; see § Clement of Rome)
• Seven epistles of Ignatius of Antioch
• The Martyrium Ignatii
• The Epistle of Polycarp
• The Martyrdom of Polycarp
• Fragments of the writings of Papias of Hierapolis, which have survived as quotations in later writers
• One short fragment of the Apology of Quadratus of Athens
• The Didache
• The Epistle of Barnabas
• The Epistle to Diognetus[note 1]
• The Shepherd of Hermas

 

[Ouch]

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. The scriptures “which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” refers to the Gospel or kerygma. The scriptural teaching that is useful for “training in righteousness, so that the man [or woman per Gal. 3:28] of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” refers to the didache. The apostle Paul also employs the difference between kerygma and didache in 1 Corinthians 3:10-15. The “foundation… which is Jesus Christ” is the kerygmatic teaching regarding salvation. Paul alludes to the didache when he says that one should be careful how he/she builds upon this foundation. The purpose of this thread is to do just that.

Any suggestions regarding how to begin?

I have a suggestion, don't put it over HIS word.

I read what you said, and spotted right there.

"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."

Wonder why GOD left it out of HIS RULE BOOK?

Your IMPLYING we need it to be saved? YEP!!!

Did you ever see these scriputres?

Revelation 22:18-19
King James Version
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Why are you using it?


Why isn't the didache in the bible?

AI Overview
The Didache is not in the Bible because it did not meet the criteria for inclusion in the New Testament canon, primarily due to its anonymous authorship and limited circulation, though some early Christians did consider it scripture. While it was an early and influential Christian document, other works were more widely circulated and attributed to apostles, leading to their acceptance as canonical while the Didache was eventually excluded.

Anonymous and disputed authorship: The Didache does not have a clear author. While it circulated under the title "The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles," it was widely understood to be a summary of apostolic teaching rather than a work written directly by an apostle.

Limited circulation: While some communities used the Didache for worship, it was not universally circulated and accepted as scripture across the early church. Other books that were considered more authoritative or widely circulated eventually became part of the canon.

Conflicting theological viewpoints: Some scholars note that the Didache's theological emphasis on its Jewish-Christian roots, as well as specific teachings on practices like baptism, were sometimes in conflict with later, more Pauline, orthodox Christian teachings.

Not considered sacred scripture: The early church set criteria for inclusion, and the Didache was never consistently considered to be sacred scripture by the majority of bishops and churches.

 

[GWH]

Yeah, I think the Didache is hidden gem, that I wish was more popular. I think the writing is pretty straightforward. What do you think? That link that I posted is worth a read. Although, I didn't confirm what it writes, it did mention that the writing had influences in Mathew and possibly some writings in Luke.

There are also other Apostle writings that aren't very popular. I wrote a thread many moons back discussing this, it didn't get much traction, but I don't see the harm in at least reading these works. I can't remember which writings I read in the past.

The Didache was found in codex hierosolymitanus and learning about the first Christian Bibles is a very interesting journey in discovering the past. I believe one early Christian Bible is found in the London. I would encourage you to look into these, early writings, if interested. I found it fascinating and it opened up my mind. My intent is not to encourage people to disregard the Holy Bible, but to discover other historical writings, that are probably credible for believers in the faith.

Taken from wiki...

he following writings are generally grouped together as having been written by the Apostolic Fathers (in italics are writings whose authors are unknown):[5]

• Letters attributed to Clement of Rome
  • The First Epistle of Clement
  • The Second Epistle of Clement (contested authorship; see § Clement of Rome)
• Seven epistles of Ignatius of Antioch
• The Martyrium Ignatii
• The Epistle of Polycarp
• The Martyrdom of Polycarp
• Fragments of the writings of Papias of Hierapolis, which have survived as quotations in later writers
• One short fragment of the Apology of Quadratus of Athens
• The Didache
• The Epistle of Barnabas
• The Epistle to Diognetus[note 1]
• The Shepherd of Hermas

I remember reading the writings by the Apostolic Fathers that you listed when I attended seminary in circa 1980 & 1990,
but not the content. Heck, I barely remember being alive back then!

The link briefly described The Didache but contained no content. Do you have any content to share and compare with GW?

BTW, do you understand the difference between the historical writing called "The Didache" and the NT teaching
that builds on the Gospel that I refer to as the didache? If so, I wish you would explain it to Ouch, because I see that
he is confused again/still.

 

[kinda]

I remember reading the writings by the Apostolic Fathers that you listed when I attended seminary in circa 1980 & 1990,
but not the content. Heck, I barely remember being alive back then!

The link briefly described The Didache but contained no content. Do you have any content to share and compare with GW?

BTW, do you understand the difference between the historical writing called "The Didache" and the NT teaching
that builds on the Gospel that I refer to as the didache? If so, I wish you would explain it to Ouch, because I see that
he is confused again/still.

Not sure I have what your looking for.

How do you see it?

If your trying to satisfy everyone that posts here, your in for a rude awakening. lol. I seriously think some people just question, for entertainment. It's your thread, I will let you answer ouch, or not.

I'm not currently reading the Didache, but will read it again eventually. It's a good writing, I don't really see how any believer would have a problem with it, but people see things differently.

 

[Dino246]

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).

You present two ideas here that don’t appear in Scripture:

- that sign gifts were superseded by teaching gifts; and
- that prophecy morphed into preaching.

To the former: they have different purposes, simple as that. The Holy Spirit manifests in many ways, specifically in the “sign” gifts as described in 1 Corinthians 12-14, for the edification (“building up”) of both the individual and the body (14:4). Teaching gifts are for the maturing of the individual and the body towards ministry (Eph. 4:12).

To the latter: many people misinterpret 2 Peter 1:20-21 to mean that prophecies in Scripture should not be interpreted by “regular” Christians. It actually means that genuine prophecies originate in the Spirit, not in human speculation. Nowhere does Scripture suggest that preaching is prophesying. Indeed, many who hold that aberrant belief also hold the cessationist interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13:8, claiming that prophecy has ceased. Note the blatant contradiction.

 

[lrs68]

Personally, I don't believe the Apostles had anything to do with the Didache. I believe the Scholars interpretation that someone took many teachings that were assigned coming from the Apostles and wrote them down.

I am willing to bet if each Apostle were to read the Didache many would not agree to several choice words used and expressions.

 

[GWH]

Not sure I have what your looking for.

How do you see it?

If your trying to satisfy everyone that posts here, your in for a rude awakening. lol. I seriously think some people just question, for entertainment. It's your thread, I will let you answer ouch, or not.

I'm not currently reading the Didache, but will read it again eventually. It's a good writing, I don't really see how any believer would have a problem with it, but people see things differently.

I see "it" as the OP explains it:

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. The scriptures “which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus” refers to the Gospel or kerygma. The scriptural teaching that is useful for “training in righteousness, so that the man [or woman per Gal. 3:28] of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” refers to the didache. The apostle Paul also employs the difference between kerygma and didache in 1 Corinthians 3:10-15. The “foundation… which is Jesus Christ” is the kerygmatic teaching regarding salvation. Paul alludes to the didache when he says that one should be careful how he/she builds upon this foundation. The purpose of this thread is to do just that.

I have no idea why "it" is not plain and simple.

 

[GWH]

You present two ideas here that don’t appear in Scripture:

- that sign gifts were superseded by teaching gifts; and
- that prophecy morphed into preaching.

To the former: they have different purposes, simple as that. The Holy Spirit manifests in many ways, specifically in the “sign” gifts as described in 1 Corinthians 12-14, for the edification (“building up”) of both the individual and the body (14:4). Teaching gifts are for the maturing of the individual and the body towards ministry (Eph. 4:12).

To the latter: many people misinterpret 2 Peter 1:20-21 to mean that prophecies in Scripture should not be interpreted by “regular” Christians. It actually means that genuine prophecies originate in the Spirit, not in human speculation. Nowhere does Scripture suggest that preaching is prophesying. Indeed, many who hold that aberrant belief also hold the cessationist interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13:8, claiming that prophecy has ceased. Note the blatant contradiction.

I note that you identify with 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), whereas I identify with those who believe such gifts were superseded by teaching gifts (cited in Eph. 4:11-14). Regarding prophesying, 1Cor. 14:3 indicates that it refers to preaching rather than to predicting.

Regarding speaking in tongues (SIT), the original occurrence of SIT at Pentecost (in Acts 2:4-11) and for awhile longer was earthly languages given as a sign that fulfilled Joel 2:28-32 (cf. Isa. 28:11-12 cited in 1Cor.14:21), which reversed Babel and evangelized 3,000 people, thereby ensuring the planting of the first Christian church. However, by the time of its occurrence in the church at Corinth apparently it had morphed into mere pagan-like babbling (cf. Matt. 6:9), which Paul neither quashed completely nor commanded, writing that the gift would cease (1Cor. 13:8-13) as love continued forever but also that he exercised it more than anyone (1Cor. 14:18), thereby causing confusion.

This confusion and apparent contradiction can be resolved by noting that if SIT were important it would be mentioned and even commanded in other epistles, so the absence of affirming SIT in other Pauline epistles speaks volumes. Thus, whenever SIT is claimed,
it is right to test whether it is genuine or pagan (1Thes. 5:21).

Certainly, if someone suddenly is enabled to speak an unlearned earthly language, that can be verified and considered miraculous, but interpretation of babbling is impossible to verify. Thus, disagreement can continue regarding the occurrence of SIT in private prayer, although there is no Scriptural warrant for viewing it as signifying Spirit filling rather than love (John 13:35, 1John 4:7-21, Eph. 3:16-19).

 

[GWH]

In Phil. 3:2-9 Paul warned Christians against those who believe physical circumcision is necessary for salvation
instead of spiritual circumcision or faith in the righteousness from God through faith in Christ. This warning might
also apply to those who believe physical baptism is necessary instead of receiving the Spirit of God.

Then (in Phil. 3:17) Paul urged the Philippians to follow his example and live in accordance with the teaching he had given them.
Finally, he encouraged them (in Phil. 4:4-8) to rejoice in the Lord, to pray to God, and to meditate on praiseworthy things.

In Col. 1:3-8 Paul referred to the kerygmatic faith of the brethren at Colosse that was producing new believers as its fruit,
and in Col. 1:9-12 he spoke of praying they would become growing full of spiritual understanding so that they would produce
the fruit of good works, endurance, joy and thanksgiving. Paul concluded the passage by returning to the opening reference
to saving faith and having redemption because of being IN the Son (cf. Eph. 1:3-15).

In Col. 1:21-23 Paul stated God's condition for remaining reconciled: IF the believer continues having saving faith. In Col. 1:28-29
and 2:1-7 he indicated that God's purpose for persevering faith was so believers would become perfect IN Christ and united in love.
In Col. 2:9-11 Paul spoke of Christ as having the fullness of God, which is also given to those IN Christ and circumcised by Christ, apparently meaning the Holy Spirit and spiritual circumcision.

Finally, in Col. 2:16-23 Paul taught those IN Christ not to believe or value religious regulations or traditions and false humility,
but instead to shed sins such as sexual immorality, greed, rage, vulgarity and lying and be clothed with compassion, kindness,
humility, gentleness, forgiveness and other manifestations of love, so they would have perfect peace/unity (Col. 3:1-17). Paul
concluded his didachaic urgings in Col. 3:18-4:1 with instructions for wives, children, parents, slaves and masters.

 

[GWH]

Before continuing the mining of Paul's epistles for the purpose of finding didachaic teachings, perhaps we should be reminded what we are looking for by reviewing the OP regarding how they differ from kerygmatic teachings. The following elaboration of the succinct way of stating the kerygma/GRFS in the NT, “Accept Christ Jesus as Lord” (as in Acts 16:31, 2Cor. 4:5 & Col. 2:6), summarizes beliefs it implies as a foundational/kerygmatic Christian creed:

1. There is a/one all-loving and just Lord or Creator God (Deut. 6:4, John 3:16, 2Thes. 1:6), who is both able (2Tim. 1:12) and willing (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11) to provide all morally accountable human beings salvation or heaven—a wonderful life full of love, joy and peace forever.
2. Human beings are selfish or sinful (Rom. 3:23, 2Tim. 3:2-4, Col. 3:5), miserable (Gal. 5:19-21), and hopeless (Eph. 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (Matt. 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (John 3:18, Rom. 2:5-11).
3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (John 3:16, Acts 16:30-31, Phil. 2:9-11) of providing salvation by means of his atoning death on the cross for the payment of the penalty for the sins of humanity (Rom. 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1Cor. 15:14-28).
4. Thus, every person who hears the NT Gospel needs to repent and accept God’s grace or justification in Jesus as Christ/Messiah the Lord or Supreme Commander (Luke 2:11, John 14:6, Acts 16:31), at which moment God’s loving Holy Spirit of Christ indwells/baptizes the believer into the church (Rev. 3:20, Rom. 5:5, 1Cor. 12:13).
5. Loving Christ Jesus as Lord (Luke 2:11), God the Son (Matt. 16:16) or God in the human dimension (Col. 2:9) means reflecting divine love as empowered by the Holy Spirit, thereby obeying His command to love one another (Matt. 7:21, 22:37-40, John 13:35, Rom. 13:9)—forever (Matt. 10:22, Psa. 113:2), which will eventually achieve spiritual maturity on earth and heaven after Christ returns at God’s resurrection (John 14:6, 17&26, Rom. 8:6-17, Gal. 6:7-9, Eph. 1:13-14, Phil. 3:12-16, Heb. 10:36, 12:1, Jam. 1:2-4).

NT teachings that build on this kerygmatic foundation may be viewed as part of the didachaic teachings (cf. 1 Cor. 3:1-13, Heb. 6:1-3). The didache may be very important and requisite for becoming spiritually mature, but it is not most important or necessary to believe
in order to be saved.

The distinction between kerygma and didache was made in the Great Commission (MT 28:19-20), which speaks of making disciples and of teaching them information a disciple needs to learn after conversion in order to grow in Christ-likeness. It is the “all truth” that is taught by the Spirit referred to in John 16:13. The distinction between kerygma and didache can be seen also Paul's epistles, such as 2 Timothy 3:15-17, in which the Scriptures that "are able to make you wise for salvation" refers to the kerygma and the Scriptures that are useful for “training in righteousness" and equipping "for every good work” refers to the didache.

We have seen that the didache consists mainly of teachings about morality, but it also includes information about various subjects such as spiritual gifts (1Cor. 12-14) and the resurrection (1Cor. 15). We should note that some biblical statements are neither kerygmatic nor didachaic but merely administrative or relevant only for the situation being mentioned, such as the closing parts of Paul's epistles (e.g., Col. 4:7-18).

 

[DJT_47]

These so called doctrines in the did ache are not scripture however and in fact go against/alter scripture such as in case of baptismal principles which are clearly contrary to God's word.

 

[Ouch]

These so called doctrines in the did ache are not scripture however and in fact go against/alter scripture such as in case of baptismal principles which are clearly contrary to God's word.

Yea, so why not read the quran and follow it also? Fiction is fiction.

GOD gave us HIS rule book for a reason.

We have a choice follow JESUS or satan.

 

[Ouch]

These so called doctrines in the did ache are not scripture however and in fact go against/alter scripture such as in case of baptismal principles which are clearly contrary to God's word.

FYI, after dealing with ghw guy and his beleivfes system is evidence that he follow other sorces other than GODS word.

He believes the earth is millions of years old.

I asked him a couple of times if we came from monkeys, no reply.

He believes being baptized in the spirit replaced being baptized in JESUS name to remove our sins.

After challenging him to prove it, he never did so ending in me calling him a liar which didn't seem to bother him other then him not liking me.

He believes speaking in tongues is babble.

I feel bad for him, he is like the pope his word trumps GODS.

I started a thread, GOD'S word verse's men's opinion like ghw.

 

[GWH]

These so called doctrines in the did ache are not scripture however and in fact go against/alter scripture such as in case of baptismal principles which are clearly contrary to God's word.

How can NT didachaic teachings that build on the kerygma not be part of Scripture?!
Please quote one as an example.

 

[GWH]

FYI, after dealing with ghw guy and his beleivfes system is evidence that he follow other sorces other than GODS word.
He believes the earth is millions of years old.
I asked him a couple of times if we came from monkeys, no reply.
He believes being baptized in the spirit replaced being baptized in JESUS name to remove our sins.
After challenging him to prove it, he never did so ending in me calling him a liar which didn't seem to bother him other then him not liking me.
He believes speaking in tongues is babble.
I feel bad for him, he is like the pope his word trumps GODS.
I started a thread, GOD'S word verse's men's opinion like ghw.

Just to clarify: I believe God is revealed in creation and that God created matter and the laws by which they operate,
which seem to indicate per current scientific study that the universe is billions of years old.

Current scientific theory is that humanity evolved from pre-human Mammalia. I believe the purpose of Genesis is not
to teach astrophysics or how humanity was made but rather it is an OT parable teaching who created everything, why and
how humans differ from animals.

I do believe NT SB replaced PC and was symbolized by WB.
I do believe post-NT glossolalia is babbling that is indistinguishable from what pagans practice.

I believe what I share on CC and our website is the most correct understanding of GW, but I invite congenial critique
(unlike Ouch's accusations), because as a truthseeker my goal is to amend my beliefs as soon as I learn they need fine-tuning
(cf. Phil. 3:12-14--I am good at "forgetting what is behind" :^).