Much has happened since the death of the apostles that has led people astray in the religious world. Digression didn't happen all at once because people would see through it quickly. However, little by little the apostles teachings were twisted and watered down until we have what is going on today.

Paul told the elders that after his death digression would occure even among themselves. That did happen. Soon one man was called the *president* of the gatherings as they became formal. Then one man was call THE Bishop. One of the Church Fathers wrote, "Don't do anything without the permission of your Bishop." paraphrased.

The introduction of the Church building was what furthered formality. It took away from the people the interaction that had taken place in the simple gathers of the N.T. Then buildings got more elaborate as society became more affluent and each *Church* tried to outdo the others in the cities.

Benjamin Franklin, a preacher in the 1800s, had this to say about the fancy buildings that were going up most everywhere.

"..to make the church a fashionable place of resort and entertainment." He continues, "We would blush to talk of the "ancient order," the "gospel restored," returning to the "primitive order," The "Man of Sorrows," who "had not where to lay his head"...and teaching, "Be not conformed to this world, but be you transformed," "Love not the world nor the things of the world," in this temple of folly and pride. From the book, "Distant Voices."

We have nowhere in scripture where a group is told to *worship God*. Nor to meet to do the other things done today in all denominations. The early groups did not come together for formality but for interaction. They met any and everywhere they could and NEVER on a certain day to do Church stuff.

Nelta http://members.xoom.com/atlen/ 1stCen-Christianity-subscribe@egroups.com

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Answers

Different words....same neo-orthodox tune!!

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

They met any and everywhere they could and NEVER on a certain day to do Church stuff.

As has been pointed out to you before, the writings of the day say differently. the church fathers' writings show very clearly the church emeting on a certain day, in a certain place, for a certain purpose (corporate worship, including singing of hymns, prayers, and scriptural teaching), and even include the participation of an Apostle (John). you're just wrong, and it doesn't matter how many tmies you tell the same tale -- history and the clear writings of the earlt days of the church show you to be wrong.

-- Anonymous, July 09, 2000

Gaius Plinius Secundus, Imperial Legate of Bithynia, to the Emperor Trajan:

My Lord: It is my custom to consult you whenever I am in doubt on any matter; who is better able to direct my hesitation or instruct my ignorance?

I have never been present at Christian trials; consequently I do not know the precedents regarding the question of punishment or the nature of the inquisition. I have been in no little doubt whether the young are treated no differently from the older; whether renunciation wins indulgence, or it is of no avail to have abandoned Christianity if one has once been a Christian; whether the very profession of the name is to be punished, or only the disgraceful practices which go along with the name.

So far this has been my procedure when people were charged before me with being Christians. I have asked the accused themselves if they were Christians; if they said 'Yes', I asked them a second and third time, warning them of the penalty; if they persisted I ordered them to be led off to execution. For I had no doubt that, whatever kind of thing it was that they pleaded guilty to, their stubbornness and unyielding obstinacy at any rate deserved to be punished. There were others afflicted with the like madness whom I marked down to be referred to Rome, because they were Roman citizens.

Later, as usually happens, the trouble spread by the very fact that it was being dealt with, and further varieties came to my notice. An anonymous document was laid before me containing many people's names. Some of these denied that they were Christians or had ever been so; at my dictation they invoked the gods and did reverence with incence and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose along with the statues of the gods; they also cursed Christ; and as I am informed that people who are really Christians cannot possibly be made to do any of those things, I considered that the people who did them should be discharged. Others against whom I received information said that they were Christians and then denied it; they meant (they said) that they had once been Christians but had given it up: some three years previously, some a longer time, one or two as many as twenty years before. All these likewise did reverence to your image and the statues of the gods and cursed Christ. But they maintained that their fault or error amounted to nothing more than this: they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before sunrise and reciting an antiphonal hymn to Christ as God, and binding themselves with an oath - not to commit any crime, but to obstain from all acts of theft, robbery and adultery, from breaches of faith, from repudiating a trust when called upon to honor it. After this, they went on, it was their custom to separate, and then to meet again to partake of food, but food of an ordinary and innocent kind. And even this, they said, they had given up doing since the publication of my edict in which, according to your instructions, I had placed a ban on private associations. So I thought it the more necessary to inquire into the real truth of the matter by subjecting to torture two female slaves, who were called 'deacons'; but I found nothing more than a perverse superstition which went beyond all bounds.

Therefore I deferred further inquiry in order to apply to you for a ruling. The case seemed to me to be a proper one for consultation, particularly because of the number of those who were accused. For many of every age, every class, and of both sexes are being accused and wil continue to be accused. Nor has this contagious superstition spread through the cities only, but also through the villages and the countryside. But I think it can be checked and put right. At any rate the temples, which had been well nigh abandoned, are beginning to be frequented again; and the customary services, which had been neglected for a long time, are beginning to be resumed; fodder for the sacrificial animals, too, is beginning to find a sale again, for hitherto it was difficult to find anyone to buy it. From all this it is easy to judge what a multitude of people can be reclaimed, if an opportunity is granted to renounce Christianity.

(Pliny the Younger, circa 111 A.D.)

-- Anonymous, July 10, 2000

From above:

So I thought it the more necessary to inquire into the real truth of the matter by subjecting to torture two female slaves, who were called 'deacons'; but I found nothing more than a perverse superstition which went beyond all bounds.

Therefore I deferred further inquiry in order to apply to you for a ruling. The case seemed to me to be a proper one for consultation, particularly because of the number of those who were accused. For many of every age, every class, and of both sexes are being accused and will continue to be accused. Nor has this contagious superstition spread through the cities only, but also through the villages and the countryside.

-- Anonymous, July 10, 2000

The above quote shows four very obvious things:

1. There are indeed records dating back to the first and second centuries that tell exactly how the early Christians worshipped (steeeeeeeeeerike one!),
2. The early Christians did indeed come together formally (steeeeeeeeeerike two!),
3. They did indeed meet on a certain day (steeeeeeeeeerike three, Nelta), and
4. There were female deacons in the early church. (Not related to this thread but to another ...)

Incidentally, Trajan wrote a reply to Pliny which has also survived, but I didn't print it because it was basically a pat-on-the-back.

-- Anonymous, July 11, 2000

1.There are indeed records dating back to the first and second centuries that tell exactly how the early Christians worshipped (steeeeeeeeeerike one!), 2.The early Christians did indeed come together formally (steeeeeeeeeerike two!), 3.They did indeed meet on a certain day (steeeeeeeeeerike three, Nelta), and 4.There were female deacons in the early church. (Not related to this thread but to another ...) >>

This is all well and good to make statements such as this. But where is the scriptural proof? And I repeat: anything after the death of the apostles that gives information not given by them is from mere men and not to be depended on.

Nelta

-- Anonymous, July 11, 2000

And anything that Nelta Brock says certainly should never be depended upon either...

-- Anonymous, July 11, 2000

Now you want scriptural proof of a historical document? Oh come now.

-- Anonymous, July 11, 2000