The Didache

User avatar
_Evangelion
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Black Country, UK (ex-Australia)

Post by _Evangelion » Sun Jun 11, 2006 10:17 am

You're welcome; my pleasure. 8)
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Søren Kierkegaard

User avatar
_Rae
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: Texas!

Post by _Rae » Sun Jun 11, 2006 12:08 pm

These are the things that I thought were interesting and/or bothered me about the Didache:
Woe to him who receives; for if one receives who has need, he is guiltless; but he who receives not having need shall pay the penalty, why he received and for what.
I think I have received without having true need (I'm not saying that makes it ok, just that I'm not quite sure what to do with this.)
But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week. Rather, fast on the fourth day and the Preparation (Friday).
???
Do not pray like the hypocrites, but rather as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, like this:

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily (needful) bread, and forgive us our debt as we also forgive our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (or, evil); for Thine is the power and the glory for ever..

Pray this three times each day.
Pray this three times?
Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord. But he shall not remain more than one day; or two days, if there's a need. But if he remains three days, he is a false prophet
I'm not quite sure how to apply this. I would generally consider missionaries a type of apostle and we would certainly let them stay at our house for longer than three days.
give to the prophets, for they are your high priests.
I thought Jesus was our high priest. Isn't this one of the main arguments against Roman Catholicism? This quote seems to be affirming some aspects of Roman Catholicism.
Appoint, therefore, for yourselves, bishops and deacons...
In Scripture I see the apostles and men they had appointed appointing elders and deacons. Is this something that the church as a whole can do? That's what this seems to be saying.

-Rachel
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
"How is it that Christians today will pay $20 to hear the latest Christian concert, but Jesus can't draw a crowd?"

- Jim Cymbala (Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire) on prayer meetings

User avatar
_Steve
Posts: 1564
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Santa Cruz, CA

Post by _Steve » Sun Jun 11, 2006 12:15 pm

Though the Didache is very early, and an authentic document of the orthodox Christian community, I do not believe it represents the pure teaching of the apostles, but illustrates how quickly traditions can be adopted as normative.

The Didache also teaches that a person should be required to fast for a couple of days before being baptized. In the New Testament, the converts were baptized immediately.

Also, the Didache teaches that one should not test or judge a prophet who is speaking by the Spirit. However, every Christian who prophesies claims to be speaking by the Spirit, and John and Paul both instruct their readers to test the prophetic utterances (1 John 4:1/ 1 Thess.5:21).

Like all other early noncanonical church documents, the Didache is an interesting specimen of the beliefs and practices of the churches at a particular time in the post-apostolic era. There is a reason, however, that it is not in the canon of the New Testament.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve

User avatar
_Rae
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: Texas!

Post by _Rae » Sun Jun 11, 2006 1:33 pm

Thanks! Most of the reading of the Didache was encouraging, but I didn't really know what to do with those parts. It really is amazing how quick tradition can be treated as Scripture.

Here are a few other questions that I had...
"And every prophet who orders a meal in the Spirit does not eat it, unless he is indeed a false prophet."
What in the world does that mean?
"And every prophet who speaks in the Spirit you shall neither try nor judge; for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven."
So is this what these early Christians believed blaspemy of the Spirit was? This seems to me to border on the lines of heresy, not just tradition creeping in. Or maybe they aren't talking about those who judge not being forgiven, but the prophet, if he is false.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
"How is it that Christians today will pay $20 to hear the latest Christian concert, but Jesus can't draw a crowd?"

- Jim Cymbala (Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire) on prayer meetings

User avatar
_Evangelion
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Black Country, UK (ex-Australia)

Post by _Evangelion » Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:02 pm

Rae wrote:These are the things that I thought were interesting and/or bothered me about the Didache:
Woe to him who receives; for if one receives who has need, he is guiltless; but he who receives not having need shall pay the penalty, why he received and for what.
I think I have received without having true need (I'm not saying that makes it ok, just that I'm not quite sure what to do with this.)
It means that people who receive charity under false pretences will be judged for their deception.
But let not your fasts be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and fifth day of the week. Rather, fast on the fourth day and the Preparation (Friday).
???

The Didache says that when Christians fast, they should do so on Wednesdays and Fridays, so as to distinguish themselves from the hypocrites. (Pharisees.)

The Didache has clearly taken its instruction from Jesus’ commandments: “Do not give alms as the hypocrites do… do not pray as the hypocrites do… do not fast as the hypocrites do…” (Matthew 6:1-2, 5, 16.) By fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays, the Christians ensured that their actions would not be confused with a religious observance of the Law, which was no longer required.

Note also that Jesus never prohibits fasting, but merely instructs his followers – when and if they fast – to fast with sincerity.

Fasting was definitely practiced by the early Christians themselves. Cornelius (an aspiring Christian) was fasting when he received his vision. (Acts 10:30.) The apostles fasted and prayed before making significant decisions on behalf of the Christian community (Acts 13:3; Acts 14:23.)

It appears that Jews and Christians still fasted in preparation for the Day of Atonement (Acts 27:9; see the footnote in the margin of the NIV.)

Finally, Paul instructs married couples to pray and fast while they abstain from conjugal relations (I Corinthians 7:5.)
Do not pray like the hypocrites, but rather as the Lord commanded in His Gospel, like this:

Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily (needful) bread, and forgive us our debt as we also forgive our debtors. And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (or, evil); for Thine is the power and the glory for ever..

Pray this three times each day.
Pray this three times?
It must be remembered that the Jews were in the custom of praying thrice daily. In this regard, the Didache does not introduce anything new, but merely conforms to the practice of the day.

We know from the record of Scripture that the early Christians continued to observe this Jewish ritual. Peter and John entered the temple for the purpose of ritual prayer at the ninth hour (Acts 3:1); Peter prayed upon the housetop at the sixth hour (Acts 10:9), and Cornelius prayed in accordance with the Jewish ritual, receiving his vision during a prayer in the ninth hour (Acts 10:30.)

Finally, Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-215) and Origen (AD 185-254) both refer to prayer three times a day, demonstrating that the practice had been accepted by the general Christian community.

[quote#]
Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord. But he shall not remain more than one day; or two days, if there's a need. But if he remains three days, he is a false prophet
I'm not quite sure how to apply this. I would generally consider missionaries a type of apostle and we would certainly let them stay at our house for longer than three days.[/quote]

The implication here is that someone who lives off the church for three days without giving anything back, is most likely defrauding the church and should not be trusted. It is a test to discern false teachers from the true.
give to the prophets, for they are your high priests.
I thought Jesus was our high priest. Isn't this one of the main arguments against Roman Catholicism? This quote seems to be affirming some aspects of Roman Catholicism.
Sounds like a dodgy translation to me; I couldn't find it in my copy of the Didache. Do you have a chapter/verse reference for it?
Appoint, therefore, for yourselves, bishops and deacons...
In Scripture I see the apostles and men they had appointed appointing elders and deacons. Is this something that the church as a whole can do? That's what this seems to be saying.

-Rachel
Paul's instructions to Timothy seem to suggest that this was something the church could do as a whole, on occasion.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Søren Kierkegaard

User avatar
_Evangelion
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Black Country, UK (ex-Australia)

Post by _Evangelion » Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:11 pm

Steve wrote:Though the Didache is very early, and an authentic document of the orthodox Christian community, I do not believe it represents the pure teaching of the apostles, but illustrates how quickly traditions can be adopted as normative.

The Didache also teaches that a person should be required to fast for a couple of days before being baptized. In the New Testament, the converts were baptized immediately.
True, but this seems more like a localised recommendation to me. We know from Scripture that was customary for prayer and fasting to be performed as a twofold ritual, in preparation for a significant decision or religious rite.

The disciples of John the Baptist fasted, as did the 1st Century Jews and Christians. The Didache's instruction, therefore, was not an addition by the authors of the Didache, but merely an endorsement of the original practice.
Also, the Didache teaches that one should not test or judge a prophet who is speaking by the Spirit. However, every Christian who prophesies claims to be speaking by the Spirit, and John and Paul both instruct their readers to test the prophetic utterances (1 John 4:1/ 1 Thess.5:21).
Actually, the Didache instructs believers to first determine the legitimacy of a man who claims to be a prophet, and then hearken to his words. If - and only if - a man can be shown to speak with the authority of God, it would be blasphemous to ignore his teaching, as Ananias and Sapphira learned to their detriment.

For this reason, the Didache says that once you are sure that a man is a prophet, you should not ignore or judge his Spirit-guided utterances. Elsewhere, it tells you how to discern false prophets from true ones:
  • 11:3
    But concerning the apostles and prophets, so do ye according to the ordinance of the Gospel.

    11:4
    Let every apostle, when he cometh to you, be received as the Lord;

    11:5
    but he shall not abide more than a single day, or if there be need, a second likewise; but if he abide three days, he is a false prophet.

    11:6
    And when he departeth let the apostle receive nothing save bread, until he findeth shelter; but if he ask money, he is a false prophet.

    [...]

    11:8
    Yet not every one that speaketh in the Spirit is a prophet, but only if he have the ways of the Lord. From his ways therefore the false prophet and the prophet shall be recognized.

    11:9
    And no prophet when he ordereth a table in the Spirit shall eat of it; otherwise he is a false prophet.

    11:10
    And every prophet teaching the truth, if he doeth not what he teacheth, is a false prophet.

    [...]

    11:12
    And whosoever shall say in the Spirit, Give me silver or anything else, ye shall not listen to him; but if he tell you to give on behalf of others that are in want, let no man judge him.
These principles are all supported by the book of Acts and the apostolic epistles.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Søren Kierkegaard

User avatar
_Evangelion
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Black Country, UK (ex-Australia)

Post by _Evangelion » Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:14 pm

Rae wrote:Thanks! Most of the reading of the Didache was encouraging, but I didn't really know what to do with those parts. It really is amazing how quick tradition can be treated as Scripture.

Here are a few other questions that I had...
"And every prophet who orders a meal in the Spirit does not eat it, unless he is indeed a false prophet."
What in the world does that mean?
A man who is truly a prophet will put others before himself; a man pretending to be a prophet will seek to exploit the hospitality of Christians.
"And every prophet who speaks in the Spirit you shall neither try nor judge; for every sin shall be forgiven, but this sin shall not be forgiven."
So is this what these early Christians believed blaspemy of the Spirit was? This seems to me to border on the lines of heresy, not just tradition creeping in. Or maybe they aren't talking about those who judge not being forgiven, but the prophet, if he is false.
I refer you to my previous post. The instruction here is that when - and only when - you have proved that a man is a true prophet, you must obey his instructions and hearken to his Spirit-guided utterances.

In other places (as I have already shown) it explains how to tell a false prophet from a true prophet. This statement about not judging a prophet is only to be followed if the man has already proved himself to be true; it is not to be applied to any man whose status is still in doubt.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Søren Kierkegaard

User avatar
_Steve
Posts: 1564
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Santa Cruz, CA

Post by _Steve » Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:10 pm

I have always found the Didache to be fascinating, because of my interest in the development of convictions and practices in the early church. Much of what it teaches is insightful and instructional, though, as I said earlier, I do not count it as having apostolic authority.

It is true that the early Jewish Christians continued to observe certain hours of prayer and days of fasting. It is clear that these practices, though modified to differ from the practice of the Pharisees, were a hold-over from Jewish traditions that were themselves extrabiblical.

The Old Testament does not command anyone to fast other than on Yom Kippur (see the discussion of fasting at this thread: http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.ph ... ht=fasting ). Fasting twice a week was a tradition of the elders, which the Pharisees chose to observe. Jesus said that such a practice would be altogether out of place among the guests at a wedding--to which He likened His disciples during the time of His presence with them.

Perhaps, since Jesus said that our righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, the early Christians felt compelled at least to match this practice (fasting twice weekly) in their own religious lives. Or it may be that they interpreted His prediction, "When the bridegroom is taken away, then they will fast," to be a sanction of their matching the practice of the Pharisees and the disciples of John (whose challenge He was answering) after His departure. I do not see that a prediction that they will sometimes fast (as we know they did) necessarily translates into a sanction of their adopting the Pharisaic custom.

As for keeping hours of prayer, this seems like a good discipline for Christians, especially in an age where most Christians feel somewhat convicted about their neglect of prayer. However, we should keep in mind that neither the Old Testament or the New Testament give any instructions about such established hours of prayer. The Jewish practice was another extrabiblical tradition, and it was just as extrabiblical when the church picked it up.

Having said all that, I think it would benefit many people spiritually to adopt such regular patterns, if the Holy Spirit leads them to do so.

However, when such things are institutionalized, there is a very great tendency for them to become a deadening legalism. Therefore, those who adopt such habits must always (or periodically) be discerning whether the practice has become mere religion, or whether it is producing true humility, faith and love for God and others. When it is not, it may sometimes be more helpful to modify or scrap the discipline. Such things can become old wineskins retained after all the wine is gone.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve

User avatar
_Evangelion
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 3:58 pm
Location: Black Country, UK (ex-Australia)

Post by _Evangelion » Mon Jun 12, 2006 12:52 pm

Steve wrote:It is true that the early Jewish Christians continued to observe certain hours of prayer and days of fasting. It is clear that these practices, though modified to differ from the practice of the Pharisees, were a hold-over from Jewish traditions that were themselves extrabiblical.
Agreed.
The Old Testament does not command anyone to fast other than on Yom Kippur (see the discussion of fasting at this thread: http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.ph ... ht=fasting ). Fasting twice a week was a tradition of the elders, which the Pharisees chose to observe. Jesus said that such a practice would be altogether out of place among the guests at a wedding--to which He likened His disciples during the time of His presence with them.
Agreed. Hence the early Christian preference for praying and fasting on alternate days to the Jews.
Perhaps, since Jesus said that our righteousness must exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, the early Christians felt compelled at least to match this practice (fasting twice weekly) in their own religious lives. Or it may be that they interpreted His prediction, "When the bridegroom is taken away, then they will fast," to be a sanction of their matching the practice of the Pharisees and the disciples of John (whose challenge He was answering) after His departure. I do not see that a prediction that they will sometimes fast (as we know they did) necessarily translates into a sanction of their adopting the Pharisaic custom.
Agreed.
As for keeping hours of prayer, this seems like a good discipline for Christians, especially in an age where most Christians feel somewhat convicted about their neglect of prayer. However, we should keep in mind that neither the Old Testament or the New Testament give any instructions about such established hours of prayer. The Jewish practice was another extrabiblical tradition, and it was just as extrabiblical when the church picked it up.
Agreed.
Having said all that, I think it would benefit many people spiritually to adopt such regular patterns, if the Holy Spirit leads them to do so.

However, when such things are institutionalized, there is a very great tendency for them to become a deadening legalism. Therefore, those who adopt such habits must always (or periodically) be discerning whether the practice has become mere religion, or whether it is producing true humility, faith and love for God and others. When it is not, it may sometimes be more helpful to modify or scrap the discipline. Such things can become old wineskins retained after all the wine is gone.
[/quote]

Agreed. :D
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Søren Kierkegaard

_kaufmannphillips
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 2:25 pm
Location: SW Washington

General Comment

Post by _kaufmannphillips » Sun Jul 02, 2006 6:17 am

Hello, everyone,

I am pleased to see interest here in the Didache. I have been trying to rustle up folks who would be interested in a quasi-weekly study of the Didache and the early church. So far, I've had several responses, and if some folks here would be interested, I'd love to hear from you too.

I've posted some intro material at http://didache.us .

Thanks for your time,
Emmet
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

Post Reply

Return to “Teachers, Authors, and Movements”