1 Clement: An Introduction to an Early Christian Letter

[@bdpage2023]

The big baller of the subapostolic era. Many faithful today have no idea the suffering of early Christians. I think many of us would accept "the mark" to maintain comfortable materialistic lifestyle. We're fortunate.

[@OscarRodriguez-xp4qy]

Thank you very much brother for this short but very informative video... a Pentecostal here trying to learn more about the history of the Church.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

Thanks Oscar. Trying to do my party to help people like you out!

[@godswordisastory8448]

Well done. I've alway loved his humility: "we are struggling on the same arena, and the same conflict is assigned to both of us. Wherefore let us give up vain and fruitless cares, and approach to the glorious and venerable rule of our holy calling. Let us attend to what is good, pleasing, and acceptable in the sight of Him who formed us. Let us look steadfastly to the blood of Christ, and see how precious that blood is to God, shed for our salvation"

[@davidlafleche1142]

1 Clement was merely a letter. It was not Scripture.

[@godswordisastory8448]

@@davidlafleche1142 right.

[@theologisch]

I think I'll be reading 1 Clement soon. Thanks for the summary, Dr. Bird!

[@davidhaynes9234]

This is good. It seems that this later leader of the church still had the spirit of Peter and Paul as he led this growing world church of believers.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

David, yes, a fair assessment, he carries the torch from Peter and Paul.

[@revddf]

Thank you, Mike. 1 Clement is not a text I studied in six years of theological study, so I have greatly appreciated this summary.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

Thanks!

[@robynvanhoutte6074]

Really enjoyed this summary. Bit sized synopsis that is encouraging me get started in this area of study.

[@theologytaco]

Excellent overview! I will be sharing.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

Thanks!

[@jesseclement1225]

You touch my heart

[@Miroslaw-rs8ip]

Good video, thanks 👍

[@qijiy]

This was great, thanks

[@alexandresavardo]

Do we know why first clement didn't make the final cut in the NT ?

[@WilliamDusing]

Interesting!

[@RenjuPhilip]

Thank you for this summary, how to read this in detail. Can you point to any books.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

Scott Harrower and I edited a book on the apostolic fathers, I'd start there.

[@RenjuPhilip]

@@earlychristianhistorywithm8684 Thank you very much

[@jordandthornburg]

How can we find more info on P6? I wasnt familiar with that.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

Jordan, start here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_6

[@CJFCarlsson]

@@earlychristianhistorywithm8684 Isn't there a project to scan and make the manuscripts and fragments publically available in a one stop shop, because they are expiring. Papyri especially but pergament too? David B Wallace mentioned something like that.

[@earlychristianhistorywithm8684]

@@CJFCarlsson There are places you can find transcriptions and other places where you can find photographs.

[@kylebaird4642]

😊

[@theguyver4934]

Just like biblical and historical evidence proves that jesus and his apostles were vegatarians biblical and historical evidence also proves that the trinity, atonement, original sin and hell are very late misinterpretations and are not supported by the early creed hence its not a part of Christianity I pray that Allah swt revives Christianity both inside and out preserves and protects it and makes its massage be witnessed by all people but at the right moment, place and time The secred text of the Bible says ye shall know them by their fruits So too that I say to my christian brothers and sisters be fruitful and multiply Best regards from a Muslim ( line of ismail )

[@johnaidoo2744]

What is the link between the original apostle Peter, and the bishops of Rome , since the gap between apostles and nicene council was 250 years or 10 generations?? Also , what is the proof that , apostle Peter had his missionary work in Rome??

[@youngrevival9715]

The 500 year old pheonix is what gets me

[@missionsbibleministry]

Pls. dont use "C.E.", keep using B.C./A.D.

[@josephang9927]

I read it as Christian Era just for fun.

[@sandracoombs2255]

Absolutely - I don’t know why Christians ever use “C.E”. 😊

[@ElmerMcconnal-m6d]

Claudie Throughway

[@davidkuder4356]

Michael: "Why Corinth... ?" 🤔 😍. On my first examination of the Ruins in 1975, our tour guide explained the remains of the public toilet as "the birthplace of Philosophy..."💖 🐝 😍 So. Might have been in the Water, &/or the pipes that carried it. Might have been the electromag geology of the place. A unique ingredient in the local wine... ? In any case, a bunch of hyper-thinking competitors lived there. It was "in the Air..." Affected their brainworkings. I live in such a place in southwestern Ohio. Feels familiar... So. Take comfort, as many of them likely did, in "First Corinthians 13..." And, as olde John from the back pew spoke boldly forth, "Little Children (beloved of G_D), Love One Another..!" Pachem, agni...

[@catherinebradberry877]

Lockman Bridge

[@charleslaird706]

CE? Nonsense. Anno Domini is still an accepted term. Common era was established to mock our current calendar and to minimize Jesus.

[@kiwihans100]

two points are significant to me. 1. Clement says nothing about the 'trinity' Only "There is one Almighty God the Creator of everthing." ( Letter to the Cortinthians) and 2. Though he mentions both Paul & Peter in his epistle, though he was IN Rome he said nothing about Peter being either in Rome or even the 'leader' of the church! ( He spent more words on Paul!

[@iain5615]

The creed that was taught within months of the crucifixion and written down within 2-3 years of the crucifixion states that Jesus was the Son of God and there are early writings of the Holy Spirit. The trinity was in place early on.

[@kiwihans100]

@@iain5615 Sorry but the 'trinity' is NOT the existance or even the naming of 'Father. Son & Holy Spirit. Jesus said"To baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son & the Holy Spirit". I believe that, of course! But the 'trinity' is specifically that; 'There are three persons on One God' and that God is; "God the Father, God the Son & God the Holy Spirit' THATS the 'trinity'! And thats what is NOT in the bible or even in the earliest writings of the church fathers! The Bible is Clear; "There is One God, the FATHER' ( 1 Cor 8:6) "One God and FATHER of all persons" ( Eph 4:6 ) As for the closeness to the crucifixion, what about Peter's inspired speech at Pentecost on 50 DAYS afterwards! No mention of a 'trinity' Only reference to the Father raising his Son. Then a fews day later the disciples praised the FATHER with thr words; "Sovereign Lord, you are the ONE who made the heavan and the earth and the sea and the things in them. And through Holy Spirit said by the mouth of our forfather Daavid you servant....your Holy SERVANT Jesus" Acts 4|:24,27) Thus Jesus disciples viewed Jesus, not as the 'Sovereign Lord, God, but his SERVANT! Thus No trinity for centuries. Please realise this is a manmade doctrine! Not a bible teaching "

[@kiwihans100]

@@iain5615 Wrong! Thre were no 'creeds' in writing till at least the middle of the first century! We do have Paul's clear 'creed' at 1 Cor 8:6; "Actually to us there is ONE God the FATHER out of whom all things are and we for him. And one Lord Jesus Christ through whom all things are and we for him". In Fact Paul stated on more than one occasion that There is 'One God and Father. ( Eph 4:6. Just mentioning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is NOT a definition of thre 'trinity' is it? I believe in the 'Father', I believe in the 'Son' I believe in the Holy Spirit' BUT I do NOT believe they are 'three persons in One God'. Thats the tinity! The word and the definition is not in ANY bible verse and you have to admit it! implication and suggestion are not valid! It is entirely a manmade 'creed' or dagma. This can be easily shown in 'google' articles. I just stick to the Holy bible! Hope you do to my friend! God's blessings

[@iain5615]

@@kiwihans100 study what scholars state. The experts concur that Cor 1:15 was written down within 3 years of the crucifixion. This is clearly a citation by Paul of an oral tradition that scholars agree was given to Paul when he went to Jerusalem after Damascus.

[@iain5615]

@@kiwihans100 the Trinity is just a term coined for what was taught in the first century - the father, the son and the holy spirit.

[@wilsontexas]

HE doesnt mention our holy Mother of God, the Queen of heaven. Not even once.

[@TimothyTitusDaugett]

That is because Mary is not exalted to that title or honor by God. God has no mother, He is the creator of all, including Mary. She is not a Queen of heaven. There is no Queen of Heaven. There is only King Jesus.

[@mavisemberson8737]

The title Theotokos God bearer was given much later . It was to guard against a heresy which claimed Jesus was not born human in flesh

[@jesseclement1225]

I am clement

[@charleslaird706]

I'm sorry. This is a culmination of Lightfoots perspective. Not 96-97AD. Much earlier. Not talking of the primacy of the Roman church, not even pointing to it. Some info was interesting, but this does not give a good rounding of the actual evidence from the text itself. Too biased based on bad research and old ideas. Shame.

[@thedon978]

“C.E.” ??? What’s wrong with you?

[@PiedFifer]

Define “Jewish Christian”

[@jimo-tx6385]

CE? It is AD! Are you a Christian? It is AD!