The Didache: Doctrines That Build on the Creed

[GWH]

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?

 

[GWH]

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).

What didachaic doctrines shall we learn first/next?

 

[GWH]

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—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 you like to begin this construction?


_________________________

 

[Eli1]

Hello sailor.
Here’s some feedback for you which is something I have mentioned to you before in regards to your style of communication.

You said that the word “ditache” means “teaching” in English.
So why not just say “teaching” instead of “ditache”?
You’re speaking to an English audience , right?

You know who does this kinda talk?
Harvard professors. So they can sound important and give themselves a sense of self-importance.

You’re in America, so speak English. Don’t speak Greek or Latin.

Try to reduce complex ideas into simple concepts. Don’t do the opposite !

 

[GWH]

Hello sailor.
Here’s some feedback for you which is something I have mentioned to you before in regards to your style of communication.

You said that the word “ditache” means “teaching” in English.
So why not just say “teaching” instead of “ditache”?
You’re speaking to an English audience , right?

You know who does this kinda talk?
Harvard professors. So they can sound important and give themselves a sense of self-importance.

You’re in America, so speak English. Don’t speak Greek or Latin.

Try to reduce complex ideas into simple concepts. Don’t do the opposite !

Ahoy there ortho! Do you know what happened to Blain?

I wish you would discuss substance more than style, but I use didache in the sense of "teaching
whose substance or content is different from teaching directly related to what I call kerygma", referring to GRFS.

Hope that answers your question and wish it were obvious from what I already posted,
but I am aware you find my communication or teaching confusing, so there y'are.

Regarding "professors", my reason for sharing here and on our website is in order to help boost y'all's understanding
with what I have learned during my 75 years, including study for two BA's and three Masters degrees (didn't have a
good enough memory to pass the oral exam) so y'all will know more than me.

Now that you understand that, do you have any suggestions regarding how to begin
or which didachaic doctrines to learn first as we build on the foundation of the Gospel?

 

[Eli1]

Ahoy there ortho! Do you know what happened to Blain?

I wish you would discuss substance more than style, but I use didache in the sense of "teaching
whose substance or content is different from teaching directly related to what I call kerygma", referring to GRFS.

Hope that answers your question and wish it were obvious from what I already posted,
but I am aware you find my communication or teaching confusing, so there y'are.

Regarding "professors", my reason for sharing here and on our website is in order to help boost y'all's understanding
with what I have learned during my 75 years, including study for two BA's and three Masters degrees (didn't have a
good enough memory to pass the oral exam) so y'all will know more than me.

Now that you understand that, do you have any suggestions regarding how to begin
or which didachaic doctrines to learn first as we build on the foundation of the Gospel?

I don't know what happened to Blain. Maybe he's busy?

I enjoy when i talk to you about the topic "do as i say, not as i do".

So, how can you discuss substance when you can't even "style"? Meaning, how do you expect to communicate when you use non-English speaking words, acronyms and most importantly, how can you respond to questions that people ask you when they disagree with you or don't understand you?

And the fact that you throw degrees here is confirmation that you think that will help your case.
The people who have taught me, had degrees in engineering and they never mentioned it. I learned it from others.
And the people who taught me, in Albanian, who were Greek-speaking people, did not use confusing words to teach a concept to me. They used simple words.

As far as "suggestions" go this goes back to what i said earlier. I may have agreement with you on a lot of things, and for things i don't, you can't comprehend the disagreement and therefore you're unable to respond.
This tells me that you're looking to make an idol out of yourself when you think that you, a man with poor communication skills is looking to teach. This is not your gift. You don't have humility or communication.
You're looking for people to kiss your feet and you're looking for people to fall in-line with your army mentality.

 

[GWH]

I don't know what happened to Blain. Maybe he's busy?

I enjoy when i talk to you about the topic "do as i say, not as i do".

So, how can you discuss substance when you can't even "style"? Meaning, how do you expect to communicate when you use non-English speaking words, acronyms and most importantly, how can you respond to questions that people ask you when they disagree with you or don't understand you?

And the fact that you throw degrees here is confirmation that you think that will help your case.
The people who have taught me, had degrees in engineering and they never mentioned it. I learned it from others.
And the people who taught me, in Albanian, who were Greek-speaking people, did not use confusing words to teach a concept to me. They used simple words.

As far as "suggestions" go this goes back to what i said earlier. I may have agreement with you on a lot of things, and for things i don't, you can't comprehend the disagreement and therefore you're unable to respond.
This tells me that you're looking to make an idol out of yourself when you think that you, a man with poor communication skills is looking to teach. This is not your gift. You don't have humility or communication.
You're looking for people to kiss your feet and you're looking for people to fall in-line with your army mentality.

Thanks for sharing, so now I understand you much better. Sorry you feel that way. Happy trails!

 

[GWH]

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?

 

[Eli1]

Thanks for sharing, so now I understand you much better. Sorry you feel that way. Happy trails!

I'll see you at the other cafe.
I doubt you'll ever understand the irony of your position making comments about "style" when you use non-English speaking words and acronyms.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

I'll see you at the other cafe.
I doubt you'll ever understand the irony of your position making comments about "style" when you use non-English speaking words and acronyms.

He also doesn't cite his sources either. Real professors cite all their sources so that anyone can verify the facts being used. If he wants to play pretend professor, then he should, at least, do what the big boys do and cite them, but he refuses. As a result, no one can verify anything he writes.

But I play along because he's retired and he's having fun with playing professor.

 

[GWH]

He also doesn't cite his sources either. Real professors cite all their sources so that anyone can verify the facts being used. If he wants to play pretend professor, then he should, at least, do what the big boys do and cite them, but he refuses. As a result, no one can verify anything he writes.

But I play along because he's retired and he's having fun with playing professor.

I don't play, but I cite sources when requested, so, ignoring your insults for the moment,
which part of what I share would you like to know my source for, just out of curiosity?

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

I don't play, but I cite sources when requested, so, ignoring your insults for the moment,
which part of what I share would you like to know my source for, just out of curiosity?

They should ALL be cited. Footnotes or bibliography at the end of posts should be a normal part of your writings, not upon request. If you submitted any paper or dissertation in university without sources cited, your work will not pass muster.

You ARE playing though. You have no affiliation or credentials with any Christian seminary or educational institution that any of your work would be considered "scholarly".

You're are here, on the forums, were no one can vet your work.

 

[GWH]

They should ALL be cited. Footnotes or bibliography at the end of posts should be a normal part of your writings, not upon request. If you submitted any paper or dissertation in university without sources cited, your work will not pass muster.

You ARE playing though. You have no affiliation or credentials with any Christian seminary or educational institution that any of your work would be considered "scholarly".

You're are here, on the forums, were no one can vet your work.

My two main sources are Scripture, which I cite more than you, and my website. //truthseekersfellowship.com//. Anything else you will need to ask about specifically.

 

[Howdy]

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?

I have trouble discussing things when I have to have my dictionary handy.
Some of us are just to simple to understand.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

My two main sources are Scripture, which I cite more than you, and my website. //truthseekersfellowship.com//. Anything else you will need to ask about specifically.

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! )

 

[studentoftheword]

Is there anyone out there on my wavelength who wants to suggest how to begin a study of didachaic doctrines

AI Overview

The Didache, while valuable as a window into early Christian practice, presents several problems for scholars. These include its uncertain date, its composite nature, and its reliance on the Synoptic Gospels, leading to questions about its authority and theological consistency.

Here's a breakdown of the issues:
1. Uncertain Date and Provenance:

• The Didache's exact date of composition is debated, with estimates ranging from the late 1st century to the mid-2nd century CE.
• Its exact location of origin is also unclear, though Syria is often suggested.
• These uncertainties make it difficult to place the Didache within the broader historical and theological context of early Christianity.

2. Composite Nature:

• Scholars generally agree that the Didache is not a single, unified document but rather a compilation of different texts and traditions.
  
  
• This composite nature makes it challenging to interpret the text as a coherent whole and to determine the author's original intent.
  
  
• Theories about the sources and redaction of the Didache vary widely, further complicating the issue.

3. Reliance on the Synoptic Gospels:

• The Didache shares numerous parallels with the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, leading to questions about its relationship to these texts.
• Some scholars believe the Didache borrowed from the Synoptics, while others suggest a common source or independent development.
• If the Didache relies on the Synoptics, it would be considered later and potentially derivative, which could affect its perceived authority.

4. Theological Tensions and Omissions:

• Some scholars find the Didache's theology to be somewhat "one-sided," focusing heavily on ethical behavior and obedience while giving less attention to grace and the person of Christ.
  
  
• There are also notable omissions, such as the lack of explicit mention of Jesus' death, resurrection, or ascension.
  
  
• These theological inconsistencies and omissions have led some to question the Didache's place within orthodox Christian belief.

5. Failure to Meet Criteria for Canonization:

• The Didache was ultimately excluded from the New Testament canon, partly due to its uncertain authorship and its perceived lack of apostolic authority.
• The fact that it was written by someone outside the immediate circle of the apostles, and that it relies on traditions rather than direct eyewitness accounts, likely contributed to its rejection.

In summary, while the Didache offers valuable insights into early Christian practice, its uncertain date, composite nature, reliance on the Synoptics, and theological tensions make it a challenging text to interpret and integrate into the broader narrative of early Christianity

 

[studentoftheword]

From Google

The Didache is considered part of the group of second-generation Christian writings known as the Apostolic Fathers. The work was considered by some Church Fathers to be a part of the New Testament, while being rejected by others as spurious or non-canonical. In the end, it was not accepted into the New Testament canon


From Google
People also ask

Can we trust the Didache?


In summary, the Didache is not a word inspired by God in an infallible way nor more important than the Bible, but it is a reflection of what the twelve apostles and their personal students taught to their catechumens and therefore essential for professional theologians.

From Google

People also ask

Why did the church reject the Didache?

It didn't adhere to 4th-century orthodoxy as outlined by the Council of Nicaea. This may be one reason why the Didache was left out of the New Testament canon. In addition, the material it shares with Matthew may have made it redundant, and it may have seemed more Jewish than some 4th-century Christians wanted.

 

[GWH]

AI Overview

The Didache, while valuable as a window into early Christian practice, presents several problems for scholars. These include its uncertain date, its composite nature, and its reliance on the Synoptic Gospels, leading to questions about its authority and theological consistency.

Here's a breakdown of the issues:
1. Uncertain Date and Provenance:

• The Didache's exact date of composition is debated, with estimates ranging from the late 1st century to the mid-2nd century CE.
• Its exact location of origin is also unclear, though Syria is often suggested.
• These uncertainties make it difficult to place the Didache within the broader historical and theological context of early Christianity.

2. Composite Nature:

• Scholars generally agree that the Didache is not a single, unified document but rather a compilation of different texts and traditions.
  
  
• This composite nature makes it challenging to interpret the text as a coherent whole and to determine the author's original intent.
  
  
• Theories about the sources and redaction of the Didache vary widely, further complicating the issue.

3. Reliance on the Synoptic Gospels:

• The Didache shares numerous parallels with the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, leading to questions about its relationship to these texts.
• Some scholars believe the Didache borrowed from the Synoptics, while others suggest a common source or independent development.
• If the Didache relies on the Synoptics, it would be considered later and potentially derivative, which could affect its perceived authority.

4. Theological Tensions and Omissions:

• Some scholars find the Didache's theology to be somewhat "one-sided," focusing heavily on ethical behavior and obedience while giving less attention to grace and the person of Christ.
  
  
• There are also notable omissions, such as the lack of explicit mention of Jesus' death, resurrection, or ascension.
  
  
• These theological inconsistencies and omissions have led some to question the Didache's place within orthodox Christian belief.

5. Failure to Meet Criteria for Canonization:

• The Didache was ultimately excluded from the New Testament canon, partly due to its uncertain authorship and its perceived lack of apostolic authority.
• The fact that it was written by someone outside the immediate circle of the apostles, and that it relies on traditions rather than direct eyewitness accounts, likely contributed to its rejection.

In summary, while the Didache offers valuable insights into early Christian practice, its uncertain date, composite nature, reliance on the Synoptics, and theological tensions make it a challenging text to interpret and integrate into the broader narrative of early Christianity

Okay, but I hope you understand that this thread is not about discussing that document but rather Scripture teaching that builds on the essential and fundamental Gospel aka the kerygma.

 

[studentoftheword]

teaching that builds on the essential and fundamental Gospel aka the kerygma.

As the aka proclamation------

 

[studentoftheword]

like this

AI Overview

Teaching that builds on the essential and fundamental Gospel focuses on the core doctrines of faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism, and the Holy Ghost, emphasizing their interconnectedness and practical application in daily life. It involves grounding individuals in the scriptures, teaching by the Spirit, and inviting them to act on the truths learned, fostering spiritual growth and discipleship.

Here's a more detailed explanation:
1. Core Principles:

• Faith in Jesus Christ:
  Faith is the foundation, requiring belief in Jesus as the Son of God, trust in His teachings, and a commitment to follow Him.
  
  
• Repentance:
  Acknowledging and turning away from sin, seeking forgiveness, and striving to live according to God's will.
  
  
• Baptism:
  A sacred ordinance symbolizing commitment to Christ and entering into a covenant relationship with God.
  
  
• Gift of the Holy Ghost:
  A divine gift that guides, comforts, and empowers individuals to live righteously.
  

2. Building on the Foundation:

• Scriptural Foundation:
  The scriptures are the primary source for teaching the Gospel, providing divine truth and guidance.
  
  
• Teaching by the Spirit:
  Learning and teaching spiritual truths through the power of the Holy Ghost.
  
  
• Inviting Action:
  Encouraging individuals to act on the truths they learn, fostering personal growth and discipleship.
  
  
• Living the Gospel:
  Applying the principles of the Gospel in daily life, through service, love, and righteous living.
  

3. Key Aspects of Teaching:

• Gospel-Centered Teaching:
  Focusing on the core doctrines of the Gospel and their relevance to individuals' lives.
  
  
• Discipleship:
  Helping individuals become followers of Jesus Christ, developing Christlike attributes, and serving others.
  
  
• Love and Compassion:
  Teaching with love, empathy, and a genuine desire to help others.
  
  
• Individualized Approach:
  Recognizing that individuals are at different stages of spiritual development and tailoring the teaching to their needs.
  
  
• Teacher Development:
  Continually striving to improve teaching skills and understanding of the Gospel.
  

By focusing on these principles, teaching can be a powerful force in helping individuals build a strong foundation in the Gospel and live a life of faith, purpose, and meaning.