Growth Early Church History

[OzSpen]

No, but that is how a certain Gentile religion years ago changed it to Sunday as the Sabbath was always on Saturday starting Friday night at sundown and ending Saturday night at sundown. BTW I am a Gentile grafted into the branch.

But it was on the morning of the first day of the week (not during the night), the Lord's Day, that Jesus' tomb was found to be empty and the day on which Christians met for worship. The fact is that the first day of the week for us, and the day of worship, is Sunday and not the Saturday Sabbath. See my articles to confirm this:

• Sunday or Saturday worship for Christians?

• No Sabbath-worship for Christians

Oz

 

[for_his_glory]

But it was on the morning of the first day of the week (not during the night), the Lord's Day, that Jesus' tomb was found to be empty and the day on which Christians met for worship. The fact is that the first day of the week for us, and the day of worship, is Sunday and not the Saturday Sabbath. See my articles to confirm this:

• Sunday or Saturday worship for Christians?

• No Sabbath-worship for Christians

Oz

Are we to only worship God once a week or everyday we draw breath from Him. Saturday Sunday makes no difference as God said the seventh day is a day of rest from all our labors as it was His and God gave no name to days, but only how long a day was.

 

[OzSpen]

Are we to only worship God once a week or everyday we draw breath from Him. Saturday Sunday makes no difference as God said the seventh day is a day of rest from all our labors as it was His and God gave no name to days, but only how long a day was.

Of course not. We are to worship God every day of the week. All of life is worship. However, that doesn't alter the fact that in the New Covenant the early Christians met for collective worship on the first day of the week, the Lord's day.

See my defense of that in:

• Sunday or Saturday worship for Christians?

• No Sabbath-worship for Christians

Oz

 

[Jim Parker]

I know there were no 1st Century Roman Catholic Churches.

And yet you stated: "There is so much wrong with your Epistle 58:4 that man wrote just like all the writings of the 1st century Roman Catholic church leaders as all their writings are not inspired by the Holy Spirit."
Why would you say that if you knew better?
Why would you state that there WERE RC churches in the 1st century and then proceed with slandering the RCC by saying that they had no deposit of the Holy Spirit.
Have you read "all the writings of the 1st century church"?
The Didache?
Have you read ANY of the writings of the early Church?

The Sabbath that Jesus was risen on was called a High Sabbath which is different from the Saturday Sabbath as I already explained that in post #21.

What you think you explained in your post #21 is nonsense.
The SCRIPTURES say that Jesus rose on the first day of the week and the first day of the week is SUNDAY.
Either you believe the scriptures or you don't.
And if you don't then your unbelief is certainly NOT "for_his_glory."
Here it is again. (Please note that there is NO reference to any Sabbath whatsoever.)
Mar 16:9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons.
And every legitimate writer of the Church, other than nut-cases and whackos, from the first century to the present, has consistently stated that Jesus rose on SUNDAY.

 

[for_his_glory]

And yet you stated: "There is so much wrong with your Epistle 58:4 that man wrote just like all the writings of the 1st century Roman Catholic church leaders as all their writings are not inspired by the Holy Spirit."
Why would you say that if you knew better?
Why would you state that there WERE RC churches in the 1st century and then proceed with slandering the RCC by saying that they had no deposit of the Holy Spirit.
Have you read "all the writings of the 1st century church"?
The Didache?
Have you read ANY of the writings of the early Church?

What you think you explained in your post #21 is nonsense.
The SCRIPTURES say that Jesus rose on the first day of the week and the first day of the week is SUNDAY.
Either you believe the scriptures or you don't.
And if you don't then your unbelief is certainly NOT "for_his_glory."
Here it is again. (Please note that there is NO reference to any Sabbath whatsoever.)
Mar 16:9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons.
And every legitimate writer of the Church, other than nut-cases and whackos, from the first century to the present, has consistently stated that Jesus rose on SUNDAY.

You are the one who mentioned the first century fathers were from the RCC when you gave us the writings of Cyprian, Justin Martyr, Ignatius to read.

As far as Sunday being the first day of the week where in scripture does God give the names of the week, but only says he rested on the seventh day from all His labors He started on the first day. It was the Hebrews who came up with the names of months, days and years as they used a Hebrew Lunar Calendar, not like the Grecian Calendar we use today.

The first Passover is described in Exodus 12 as the first month was Abib/March according to the Jewish Lunar Calendar. The Feast of Unleavened Bread always falls on the 15th day of Nisan/April 2, Exodus 12:6, which begins Thursday after sundown and ends Friday at sundown. Nisan 15 fell on April 3, A.D.33, the day after Jesus died and was laid in the tomb.

April 2 Nisan 14 Wednesday (Tuesday nightfall to Wednesday nightfall) Day of Crucifixion
April 3 Nisan 15 Thursday (Wednesday nightfall to Thursday nightfall) Feast of Unleavened Bread known as the High Sabbath. High Sabbath is different than the weekly Sabbath that started Friday at sundown to Saturday sundown.
April 4 Nisan 16 Friday (Thursday nightfall to Friday nightfall) Weekly Sabbath begins
April 5 Nisan 17 Saturday (Friday nightfall to Saturday nightfall) Weekly Sabbath

Hebrew weekly Sabbath started Friday night sundown to Saturday night sundown. This was a different Sabbath called a high Sabbath not like the weekly Sabbath. This high Sabbath began the first day through the last day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread from Nisan 15 to Nisan 21. This was the Sabbath where Jesus had to be removed from the cross before the Feast of Unleavened Bread began on Nisan 15. Passover is annual and not a weekly Sabbath as it was the day of preparation for the High Sabbath that is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and no one was to do any labor on that day as it was a day of holy assembling. Luke 23:52-54; John 19:31, 42; Leviticus 23:6, 7

Seeing that this was a High Sabbath that started on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread it would have been Tuesday Nisan 13 that Jesus ate supper with His disciples being the last supper, not the Passover Seder that many teach it to be then went to pray in Gethsemane and was arrested and brought before the Sanhedrin. Wednesday morning, Nisan 14, Jesus was brought before Pilate who passed sentence on Jesus according to Roman law was scourged and nailed to the cross about the third hour and died at the ninth hour about the same time after noon when the Passover lambs were killed, Exodus 12:1-6.

Jesus was laid in the borrowed tomb on Wednesday evening, Nisan 14, before High Sabbath began at sundown making it Nisan 15. Jesus laid in the tomb from Nisan 14 until sometime before sunrise on Saturday Nisan 17 being the weekly Sabbath that started at sundown on Nisan 16 as this would have been three days and three nights fulfilling what he spoke in Matthew 12:40 and Mark 14:58. This did not violate the Torah that says no one is to work on the Sabbath, but Jesus being risen from the grave was not work, but Jesus being the Lord of the Sabbath, Mark 2:23-28.

 

[brewmama]

Where do I find that liturgy in the New Testament revelation?

It has always been in the Church. It is in the NT, maybe not as specifically as you would like, because it wasn't needed. It was in the Church, and did not need to be elaborated on.

"The key to comprehending liturgy in the New Testament is to understand the work of the High Priest, our Lord Jesus Christ, who inaugurates the New Covenant. Christ is “a priest forever” (Heb. 7:17, 21). It is unthinkable that Christ would be a priest but not serve liturgically: “forever” suggests He serves continually, without ceasing, in the heavenly tabernacle. Further, He is called not only a priest but a liturgist: “a Minister(Gr. leitourgos, “liturgist”) of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected” (Heb. 8:2). Christian worship on earth, to be fully Christian, must mirror the worship of Christ in heaven.

Moreover, Christ is “Mediator of a better covenant” (Heb. 8:6). What is that covenant? In the words of the Lord, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood” (1 Cor. 11:25). Just as the blood of bulls and goats in the Old Covenant prefigured Christ’s sacrifice to come, so the Eucharistic Feast brings to us the fullness of His New Covenant offering, completed at the Cross and fulfilled in His Resurrection. This once-for-all offering of Himself (Heb. 7:27) which He as High Priest presents at the heavenly altar, is an offering in which we participate through the Divine Liturgy in the Church. This is the worship of the New Testament Church!

Given this biblical background, a number of New Testament passages take on new meaning.

(1) Acts 13:2: “As they ministered the Lord [literally, “as they were in the liturgy of the Lord”] and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul . ..’” We learn that (a) these two apostles were called by God during worship, and (b) the Holy Spirit speaks in a liturgical setting.

(2) Acts 20:7: “Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them.” Communion was held each Sunday.

(3) Rom. 16:16: “Greet one another with a holy kiss.” A kiss of greeting was common in this ancient culture. The “holy kiss,” however, was an element of the Christian liturgy which signified that the people of God were reconciled to one another, so that they might receive the Body and Blood of Christ in peace.

(4) Eph. 5:14: “Awake, you who sleep, arise from the dead, and Christ will give you light.” Biblical scholars tell us this is an ancient baptismal hymn already in use by the time Ephesians was written. (Note other preexisting New Testament creeds and hymns such as 1 Tim. 3:16 and 2 Tim. 2:11-13).

(5) Heb. 13:10: “We have an altar” reveals the continuation of the altar in New Testament worship."

http://www.stspyridons.org/liturgy-in-the-new-testament-church/

Another good article

http://preachersinstitute.com/2012/09/14/the-eternal-liturgy-vs-contemporary-worship/

 

[Deborah13]

No, but that is how a certain Gentile religion years ago changed it to Sunday as the Sabbath was always on Saturday starting Friday night at sundown and ending Saturday night at sundown. BTW I am a Gentile grafted into the branch.

The Catholic Church did not change the 7th day "Sabbath" to Sunday "Sabbath". The 7th day Sabbath is still the "Sabbath".
The 8th day, worship is "the Lord's Day" not the "Sabbath" and they don't claim that it is.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/did-the-early-church-move-the-sabbath-from-saturday-to-sunday

I know there were no 1st Century Roman Catholic Churches. None of the 1st Century Churches even had denominational or non-denominational Churches like we have today. The seven Churches of Revelations need to be our example that all Gods true Church needs to be that of the Church of Philadelphia. The Sabbath that Jesus was risen on was called a High Sabbath which is different from the Saturday Sabbath as I already explained that in post #21. You might want to look up the difference between Sabbath and High Sabbath as they are not the same.

Many of the church fathers, that have been quoted ie. Justin Martyr 100-165 AD, died long before the RCC existed.

The SCRIPTURES say that Jesus rose on the first day of the week and the first day of the week is SUNDAY.
Either you believe the scriptures or you don't.
And if you don't then your unbelief is certainly NOT "for_his_glory."
Here it is again. (Please note that there is NO reference to any Sabbath whatsoever.)
Mar 16:9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons.
And every legitimate writer of the Church, other than nut-cases and whackos, from the first century to the present, has consistently stated that Jesus rose on SUNDAY.

I think, to be fair, there is confusion about what some of the scriptures mean, such as this one. If you look at the KJV you will see that the word 'day' does not appear in this verse, in the Greek. The issue is what does/can the word sabbaths mean in the Greek. Can it be translated as 'week, in the singular form'. Well, Greek scholars say it can, Strong's says it can and from reading a couple other scriptures where "sabbaths" appears, I am convinced (not that, that means anything, just clarifying my position) is that it can.
Young's Literal Translation
Mar 16:9 And he, having risen in the morning of the first of the sabbaths, did appear first to Mary the Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven demons;
The only other meaning I can possibly see would be it was the first of the sabbaths/weeks, of the counting of the weeks of omer, to Pentecost.

 

[OzSpen]

It has always been in the Church. It is in the NT, maybe not as specifically as you would like, because it wasn't needed. It was in the Church, and did not need to be elaborated on.

"The key to comprehending liturgy in the New Testament is to understand the work of the High Priest, our Lord Jesus Christ, who inaugurates the New Covenant. Christ is “a priest forever” (Heb. 7:17, 21). It is unthinkable that Christ would be a priest but not serve liturgically: “forever” suggests He serves continually, without ceasing, in the heavenly tabernacle. Further, He is called not only a priest but a liturgist: “a Minister(Gr. leitourgos, “liturgist”) of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected” (Heb. 8:2). Christian worship on earth, to be fully Christian, must mirror the worship of Christ in heaven.

Moreover, Christ is “Mediator of a better covenant” (Heb. 8:6). What is that covenant? In the words of the Lord, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood” (1 Cor. 11:25). Just as the blood of bulls and goats in the Old Covenant prefigured Christ’s sacrifice to come, so the Eucharistic Feast brings to us the fullness of His New Covenant offering, completed at the Cross and fulfilled in His Resurrection. This once-for-all offering of Himself (Heb. 7:27) which He as High Priest presents at the heavenly altar, is an offering in which we participate through the Divine Liturgy in the Church. This is the worship of the New Testament Church!

Given this biblical background, a number of New Testament passages take on new meaning.

(1) Acts 13:2: “As they ministered the Lord [literally, “as they were in the liturgy of the Lord”] and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul . ..’” We learn that (a) these two apostles were called by God during worship, and (b) the Holy Spirit speaks in a liturgical setting.

(2) Acts 20:7: “Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them.” Communion was held each Sunday.

(3) Rom. 16:16: “Greet one another with a holy kiss.” A kiss of greeting was common in this ancient culture. The “holy kiss,” however, was an element of the Christian liturgy which signified that the people of God were reconciled to one another, so that they might receive the Body and Blood of Christ in peace.

(4) Eph. 5:14: “Awake, you who sleep, arise from the dead, and Christ will give you light.” Biblical scholars tell us this is an ancient baptismal hymn already in use by the time Ephesians was written. (Note other preexisting New Testament creeds and hymns such as 1 Tim. 3:16 and 2 Tim. 2:11-13).

(5) Heb. 13:10: “We have an altar” reveals the continuation of the altar in New Testament worship."

http://www.stspyridons.org/liturgy-in-the-new-testament-church/

Another good article

http://preachersinstitute.com/2012/09/14/the-eternal-liturgy-vs-contemporary-worship/

I find you are straining at a gnat to try to find a strong emphasis on liturgical worship in the NT. I'll deal with only one of the verses you cited from your outside Orthodox source.

You copied this information, 'Acts 13:2: “As they ministered the Lord [literally, “as they were in the liturgy of the Lord”] and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul . . .’” We learn that (a) these two apostles were called by God during worship, and (b) the Holy Spirit speaks in a liturgical setting'.

Let's look at Acts 13:2 (ESV). The verse begins with a genitive absolute, λειτουργούντων (leitourgountwn), which is based on the old Greek verb leitourgew which referred to Attic Greek orators 'who served the state at their own cost' and was a word commonly used 'in the LXX of the priests who served in the temple' (Robertson 1930:177). However, by NT times it had a broader use than meaning liturgy.

F F Bruce in his Greek commentary on Acts 13:2 (Greek) does not agree with your narrowly defined use of 'ministered' meaning that they 'were in the liturgy'. He wrote that 'this verb was used in Attic Gk. of performing an unpaid public service, e.g., helping to equip naval units for training choruses (dancing choirs) for the state festivals. In NT it is used of service in the Christian community, in a much wider sense than that represented by the later ecclesiastical use of "liturgy"' (Bruce 1951:253).

We know when the church of the first century met, the emphasis in the Corinthian church indicated that it was not a liturgical gathering. I'm thinking of a verse such as 1 Cor 14:26 (NIV), 'What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up'

That is a long way from a liturgical emphasis. Instead, every brother and sister in Christ was encouraged to manifest a gift of the Spirit for the edification of the church.

Oz

Works consulted
Bruce, F F 1951. The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Robertson, A T 1930. Word Pictures in the New Testament: The Acts of the Apostles, vol 3. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press.

 

[for_his_glory]

The Catholic Church did not change the 7th day "Sabbath" to Sunday "Sabbath". The 7th day Sabbath is still the "Sabbath".
The 8th day, worship is "the Lord's Day" not the "Sabbath" and they don't claim that it is.
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/did-the-early-church-move-the-sabbath-from-saturday-to-sunday

Many of the church fathers, that have been quoted ie. Justin Martyr 100-165 AD, died long before the RCC existed.

I think, to be fair, there is confusion about what some of the scriptures mean, such as this one. If you look at the KJV you will see that the word 'day' does not appear in this verse, in the Greek. The issue is what does/can the word sabbaths mean in the Greek. Can it be translated as 'week, in the singular form'. Well, Greek scholars say it can, Strong's says it can and from reading a couple other scriptures where "sabbaths" appears, I am convinced (not that, that means anything, just clarifying my position) is that it can.
Young's Literal Translation
Mar 16:9 And he, having risen in the morning of the first of the sabbaths, did appear first to Mary the Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven demons;
The only other meaning I can possibly see would be it was the first of the sabbaths/weeks, of the counting of the weeks of omer, to Pentecost.

I'm not going to get into a RCC discussion per the ToS, but the Sabbath at the time of Christ started Friday at sundown to Saturday sundown so either God changed the day to Sunday or man did as God would have not changed it as God never gave days a name, but only rested on the seventh day and is never told what day that would have been according to either the Hebrew Lunar Calendar or the Grecian Calendar we use today.

Mark 16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

Risen early could be anytime from sundown to the break of daylight as this is how the Jews defined the length of days so no one actually knows the hour He arose other than it was early, but that sometime after He did arise he appeared to Mary Magdalene when she went to the tomb.

 

[Jim Parker]

I find you are straining at a gnat to try to find a strong emphasis on liturgical worship in the NT. I'll deal with only one of the verses you cited from your outside Orthodox source.

You copied this information, 'Acts 13:2: “As they ministered the Lord [literally, “as they were in the liturgy of the Lord”] and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul . . .’” We learn that (a) these two apostles were called by God during worship, and (b) the Holy Spirit speaks in a liturgical setting'.

Let's look at Acts 13:2 (ESV). The verse begins with a genitive absolute, λειτουργούντων (leitourgountwn), which is based on the old Greek verb leitourgew which referred to Attic Greek orators 'who served the state at their own cost' and was a word commonly used 'in the LXX of the priests who served in the temple' (Robertson 1930:177). However, by NT times it had a broader use than meaning liturgy.

F F Bruce in his Greek commentary on Acts 13:2 (Greek) does not agree with your narrowly defined use of 'ministered' meaning that they 'were in the liturgy'. He wrote that 'this verb was used in Attic Gk. of performing an unpaid public service, e.g., helping to equip naval units for training choruses (dancing choirs) for the state festivals. In NT it is used of service in the Christian community, in a much wider sense than that represented by the later ecclesiastical use of "liturgy"' (Bruce 1951:253).

We know when the church of the first century met, the emphasis in the Corinthian church indicated that it was not a liturgical gathering. I'm thinking of a verse such as 1 Cor 14:26 (NIV), 'What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up'

That is a long way from a liturgical emphasis. Instead, every brother and sister in Christ was encouraged to manifest a gift of the Spirit for the edification of the church.

Oz

Works consulted
Bruce, F F 1951. The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Robertson, A T 1930. Word Pictures in the New Testament: The Acts of the Apostles, vol 3. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press.

That the early church had a developed liturgy by the second century is attested to by the statements of Justin Martyr.
Justin Martyr: (AD 100-165) The First Apology of Justin Chapter LXVII.—Weekly Worship of the Christians.
…… (1) And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and
(2) the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits;
(3) then, when the reader has ceased, the president** verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.
(4) Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended,
(5) bread and wine and water are brought, and the president1 in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and
(6) the people assent, saying Amen;
(7) and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, (the Eucharist) and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons…………. Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples,
(8) He (Jesus) taught them (the apostles & disciples) these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Justin described a gathering
(a) of the entire local church,
(b) at a place which would accommodate them,
(c) on Sunday.

He then described the process of the meeting which are easily identified as:
A. the Liturgy of the word
(1) The reading of the Gospels or Prophets
(2) The sermon
(3) The prayers of the people

B. The Liturgy of the Eucharist
(4) The consecration of the bread and wine (by the presider, AKA: "priest")
(5) The “great Amen”
(6) The people receive the Eucharist

The source of this form of liturgy: Justin stated that it was Jesus who taught this form of worship. Thus, Justin refuted the notion that the Mass was a later development.

What Justin describes is the basic format of the liturgy which is followed to this day in all Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Coptic and Assyrian Churches.

** The “president” refers to the presiding presbyter or the overseer. The word “presbyter” or “elder” (presbuteros) has come down to us in modern English as “priest” and the word overseer (episcopos) has come down to us in English as “bishop.”

 

[brewmama]

I find you are straining at a gnat to try to find a strong emphasis on liturgical worship in the NT. I'll deal with only one of the verses you cited from your outside Orthodox source.

You copied this information, 'Acts 13:2: “As they ministered the Lord [literally, “as they were in the liturgy of the Lord”] and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul . . .’” We learn that (a) these two apostles were called by God during worship, and (b) the Holy Spirit speaks in a liturgical setting'.

Let's look at Acts 13:2 (ESV). The verse begins with a genitive absolute, λειτουργούντων (leitourgountwn), which is based on the old Greek verb leitourgew which referred to Attic Greek orators 'who served the state at their own cost' and was a word commonly used 'in the LXX of the priests who served in the temple' (Robertson 1930:177). However, by NT times it had a broader use than meaning liturgy.

F F Bruce in his Greek commentary on Acts 13:2 (Greek) does not agree with your narrowly defined use of 'ministered' meaning that they 'were in the liturgy'. He wrote that 'this verb was used in Attic Gk. of performing an unpaid public service, e.g., helping to equip naval units for training choruses (dancing choirs) for the state festivals. In NT it is used of service in the Christian community, in a much wider sense than that represented by the later ecclesiastical use of "liturgy"' (Bruce 1951:253).

We know when the church of the first century met, the emphasis in the Corinthian church indicated that it was not a liturgical gathering. I'm thinking of a verse such as 1 Cor 14:26 (NIV), 'What then shall we say, brothers and sisters? When you come together, each of you has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. Everything must be done so that the church may be built up'

That is a long way from a liturgical emphasis. Instead, every brother and sister in Christ was encouraged to manifest a gift of the Spirit for the edification of the church.

Oz

Works consulted
Bruce, F F 1951. The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Robertson, A T 1930. Word Pictures in the New Testament: The Acts of the Apostles, vol 3. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press.

Hey, if you want to present a different meaning of Greek words than what the Greek Church, started by the Apostle Paul, says and has always said, that's your prerogative, though I'm at a loss of why you would want to do that. It fits right in with the Protestant habit of throwing out all of Church practice and history.

 

[brewmama]

Many of the church fathers, that have been quoted ie. Justin Martyr 100-165 AD, died long before the RCC existed.

Why would you say that? The RCC traces their bishops back to Peter.

 

[OzSpen]

That the early church had a developed liturgy by the second century is attested to by the statements of Justin Martyr.
Justin Martyr: (AD 100-165) The First Apology of Justin Chapter LXVII.—Weekly Worship of the Christians.
…… (1) And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and
(2) the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits;
(3) then, when the reader has ceased, the president** verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.
(4) Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended,
(5) bread and wine and water are brought, and the president1 in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and
(6) the people assent, saying Amen;
(7) and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, (the Eucharist) and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons…………. Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples,
(8) He (Jesus) taught them (the apostles & disciples) these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Justin described a gathering
(a) of the entire local church,
(b) at a place which would accommodate them,
(c) on Sunday.

He then described the process of the meeting which are easily identified as:
A. the Liturgy of the word
(1) The reading of the Gospels or Prophets
(2) The sermon
(3) The prayers of the people

B. The Liturgy of the Eucharist
(4) The consecration of the bread and wine (by the presider, AKA: "priest")
(5) The “great Amen”
(6) The people receive the Eucharist

The source of this form of liturgy: Justin stated that it was Jesus who taught this form of worship. Thus, Justin refuted the notion that the Mass was a later development.

What Justin describes is the basic format of the liturgy which is followed to this day in all Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Coptic and Assyrian Churches.

** The “president” refers to the presiding presbyter or the overseer. The word “presbyter” or “elder” (presbuteros) has come down to us in modern English as “priest” and the word overseer (episcopos) has come down to us in English as “bishop.”

Jim,

I don't deny that it developed after the NT, but it is not a liturgical environment (as we know it today) in the NT. The lexicons and cultural details of the NT do not support a liturgy like that of Justin Martyr etc.

We know from 1 Cor 14:26 (ESV), as but one example, that there was not a priest led dominant liturgy in the NT church that expunged the people of God and the gifts they brought to the (house) church gathering.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Hey, if you want to present a different meaning of Greek words than what the Greek Church, started by the Apostle Paul, says and has always said, that's your prerogative, though I'm at a loss of why you would want to do that. It fits right in with the Protestant habit of throwing out all of Church practice and history.

Brewmama,

I happen to read and teach NT Greek, so I'm not a Greek ignoramus. I'm exegeting what the Greek of the NT states, the Greek of the apostle Paul, etc and it does not teach what I hear you propounding.

I don't throw out 'all of Church practice and history'. I want to be faithful to the NT Scriptures in determining what IS church practice. Even many Protestant churches today have moved to a pastor-led evangelical liturgy (they don't call it that) that is a long way from the expression of the church gathering of 1 Cor 14:26 (ESV).

I don't expect you and me to agree on this topic.

Oz

 

[brewmama]

Brewmama,

I happen to read and teach NT Greek, so I'm not a Greek ignoramus. I'm exegeting what the Greek of the NT states, the Greek of the apostle Paul, etc and it does not teach what I hear you propounding.

I don't throw out 'all of Church practice and history'. I want to be faithful to the NT Scriptures in determining what IS church practice. Even many Protestant churches today have moved to a pastor-led evangelical liturgy (they don't call it that) that is a long way from the expression of the church gathering of 1 Cor 14:26 (ESV).

I don't expect you and me to agree on this topic.

Oz

I guess we won't. I take it you didn't read my second article linked?

Here's another one.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/justandsinner/the-biblical-foundations-for-liturgical-worship/

 

[Deborah13]

Why would you say that? The RCC traces their bishops back to Peter.

Fine.
If you read post #21 that is the original post I was addressing.

 

[Jim Parker]

I don't deny that it developed after the NT, but it is not a liturgical environment (as we know it today) in the NT. The lexicons and cultural details of the NT do not support a liturgy like that of Justin Martyr etc.

No, it's not as we know it today. The primitive church would have patterned their worship after the synagogues (liturgy of the word; psalms, reading, sermon) and the Temple. (The Eucharist replacing the sacrifices.) So it would have had a very distinctive "Jewish feel" to it. Today, there is 2000 years of cultural and ecclesiastic adornment added. But, still, the basic pattern of psalms, readings, sermon and Eucharist form the basic structure of current liturgical Christian worship as it was in the primitive church.

I attend a Russian Orthodox church and have been to Romanian, Greek, Antiochan, and other churches. We all do the same late 4th century St. John Chrysostom liturgy as was used at the Hagia Sophia Church in Constantinople which, over time, became the standard for the Byzantine churches. The Coptic and Syrian churches developed similar liturgies but all include the same basic format of psalms, word, sermon and Eucharist as was described by Justin Martyr.

We know from 1 Cor 14:26 (ESV), as but one example, that there was not a priest led dominant liturgy in the NT church that expunged the people of God and the gifts they brought to the (house) church gathering.

You may need to have a mouse in your pocket for that "we." I don't see 1 Cor 14 talking about how the liturgy was conducted. It's about the proper exercise of the gift of tongues.
On the other hand, you wouldn't find any appropriate moment in most modern liturgical churches for speaking in tongues. It got lost somewhere back there, unfortunately. But I have been in liturgies where tongues, interpretations, prophesy, etc. were accommodated in an orderly fashion under the oversight of the presiding priest of bishop. So it can be done. (But I wouldn't try it at my Russian church. I'd be off to the Gulags in an instant!)

jim

 

[OzSpen]

I guess we won't. I take it you didn't read my second article linked?

Here's another one.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/justandsinner/the-biblical-foundations-for-liturgical-worship/

brewmama,

There was a practical reason why I didn't read the second link you provided. I disciple a new Christian in his 40s and I was preparing for that discipleship meeting this morning and did not have the time to read the 2nd article.

I have now read it: http://preachersinstitute.com/2012/09/14/the-eternal-liturgy-vs-contemporary-worship/

It is exceptionally well written and has some superb exposition in it from the OT, but it is somewhat myopic when it comes to OT worship. This is the short-sightedness to which I refer in: http://preachersinstitute.com/2012/09/14/the-eternal-liturgy-vs-contemporary-worship/

This kind of emphasis is missing:

Psalm 68:25 (ESV), 'The singers in front, the musicians last, between them virgins playing tambourines'.

Psalm 149:1-3 (ESV),
Praise the Lord!
Sing to the Lord a new song,
his praise in the assembly of the godly!
2 Let Israel be glad in his Maker;
let the children of Zion rejoice in their King!
3 Let them praise his name with dancing,
making melody to him with tambourine and lyre!

Psalm 150:1-6 (ESV),
Praise the Lord!
Praise God in his sanctuary;
praise him in his mighty heavens!
2 Praise him for his mighty deeds;
praise him according to his excellent greatness!
3 Praise him with trumpet sound;
praise him with lute and harp!
4 Praise him with tambourine and dance;
praise him with strings and pipe!
5 Praise him with sounding cymbals;
praise him with loud clashing cymbals!
6 Let everything that has breath praise the Lord!
Praise the Lord!

John 4:21-24 (ESV),
21 Jesus said to her, “Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. 22 You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. 24 God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”

Heb 13:15 (ESV), 'Through him then let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge his name'.

The emphasis for NT believers is to worship 'in spirit and truth'. Of course there will be OT emphases in worship, but in the NT I don't see anything expounded like that in the OT. However, the exuberance of worship and the loudness of music was missing from the writer's article to which you referred.

I have written brief articles exposing some of the false elements in contemporary evangelical Protestant worship:

• What’s wrong with these Jesus Culture songs?

• Do words matter in worship songs in church?

• What’s happening to music in evangelical churches?

I did read the Patheos article from the link you provided.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

No, it's not as we know it today. The primitive church would have patterned their worship after the synagogues (liturgy of the word; psalms, reading, sermon) and the Temple. (The Eucharist replacing the sacrifices.) So it would have had a very distinctive "Jewish feel" to it. Today, there is 2000 years of cultural and ecclesiastic adornment added. But, still, the basic pattern of psalms, readings, sermon and Eucharist form the basic structure of current liturgical Christian worship as it was in the primitive church.

I attend a Russian Orthodox church and have been to Romanian, Greek, Antiochan, and other churches. We all do the same late 4th century St. John Chrysostom liturgy as was used at the Hagia Sophia Church in Constantinople which, over time, became the standard for the Byzantine churches. The Coptic and Syrian churches developed similar liturgies but all include the same basic format of psalms, word, sermon and Eucharist as was described by Justin Martyr.

You may need to have a mouse in your pocket for that "we." I don't see 1 Cor 14 talking about how the liturgy was conducted. It's about the proper exercise of the gift of tongues.
On the other hand, you wouldn't find any appropriate moment in most modern liturgical churches for speaking in tongues. It got lost somewhere back there, unfortunately. But I have been in liturgies where tongues, interpretations, prophesy, etc. were accommodated in an orderly fashion under the oversight of the presiding priest of bishop. So it can be done. (But I wouldn't try it at my Russian church. I'd be off to the Gulags in an instant!)

jim

Jim,

You have a few too many assumptions about Jewish-style worship here for me. Can you imagine Gentile churches being subjugated to Jewish worship at the beginning, with the full knowledge it was Jewish? I can't.

I Cor 14 (ESV) has more to do with the variety of gifts and appropriate function of those gifts and the superiority of prophecy over tongues (unless there was interpretation). Evidence is provided for how the house churches functioned when they gathered (according to 1 Cor 14:26 ESV). The varieties of gifts for function in the assembly are mentioned in 1 Cor 12:4-11) and 'to each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good" (1 Cor 12 7 ESV).

You'll have a hard time convincing me that the Corinthian church was liturgical like the OT Tabernacle experiences with the 1 Cor 12-14 emphases of, 'Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church....' (1 Cor 12:27 ESV).

Oz

 

[Jim Parker]

You have a few too many assumptions about Jewish-style worship here for me. Can you imagine Gentile churches being subjugated to Jewish worship at the beginning, with the full knowledge it was Jewish? I can't.

The original church was 100% Jewish.
There were many Gentiles who were attracted to the Jewish religion. (The centurion with the dying servant built them a Synagogue.)
So, yes, I can, without reservation, imagine Gentiles having no problem embracing Jewish worship. In fact, Paul had to constantly combat the gentile willingness to submit to circumcision and keep the Law of Moses.
What I can't imagine is that they would suddenly change their habitual manner of worship to resemble a, northern European, Protestant, evangelical service of 1600 years in the future.
That Christian worship in the early church (and up until today among liturgical sects) came from the temple worship and the synagogue practices is well established.
See: The Jewish Roots of Christian Liturgy, Eugene J. Fisher, Ed.

You'll have a hard time convincing me that the Corinthian church was liturgical like the OT Tabernacle experiences with the 1 Cor 12-14 emphases of, 'Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church....' (1 Cor 12:27 ESV).

I suspect that is because you have unconsciously imposed your personal experience into the scripture.
I remember talking with a Jewish convert to Roman Catholicism. She stated that, when she attended the mass, everything she had been taught as a Jew fell into place and she was completely at home with the liturgy because it was so similar to what she was already familiar.
Remember that the entire church was liturgical, using the format described by Justin, until some time after Luther, Calvin, et. al. who continued the form of the ancient liturgy.
That the Christian liturgy has its source in Jewish, pre-Christian liturgical practices of the temple and synagogue is not even debatable. But, you'll have to go to historical records as the scriptures do not clearly address the topic.
The Corinthian passages do not preclude what Justin described as having been received from the apostles who were taught them by Jesus.

Again: That the early church had a developed liturgy by the second century is attested to by the statements of Justin Martyr.
Justin Martyr: (AD 100-165) The First Apology of Justin Chapter LXVII.—Weekly Worship of the Christians.
…… (1) And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and
(2) the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits;
(3) then, when the reader has ceased, the president1 verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.
(4) Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended,
(5) bread and wine and water are brought, and the president1 in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and
(6) the people assent, saying Amen;
(7) and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, (the Eucharist) and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons………….
Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples,
(8) He (Jesus) taught them (the apostles & disciples) these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Justin described a gathering
(a) of the entire local church,
(b) at a place which would accommodate them,
(c) on Sunday.

He then described the process of the meeting which are easily identified by anyone familiar with liturgical worship as:
A. the Liturgy of the word
(1) The reading of the Gospels or Prophets
(2) The sermon
(3) The prayers of the people

B. The Liturgy of the Eucharist
(4) The consecration of the bread and wine (by the presider, AKA: "priest")
(5) The “great Amen”
(6) The people receive the Eucharist

The source of this form of liturgy:
Justin stated that it was Jesus who taught this form of worship. Thus, Justin refuted the notion that the Mass was a later development.

What Justin describes is the basic format of the liturgy that is followed to this day in all Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Coptic and Assyrian Churches.

Of note: The apostle Thomas established churches in India beginning in AD 52. When the Portuguese arrived in the 1400's, they were astounded to find a Christian church that celebrated the "Mass". The Mar Toma Church had been isolated from the west for almost 1000 years yet their liturgical worship was essentially the same as what was practiced in Rome and Constantinople.

1. The “president” refers to the presiding presbyter or the overseer. The word “presbyter” or “elder” (presbuteros) has come down to us in modern English as “priest” (From Middle English "prestor") and the word overseer (episcopos) has come down to us in English as “bishop.”

Blessings on you and your tribe

jim †