Introduction to the Shepherd of Hermas

[@DEADPOETOFFICIAL]

Thanks man I love your videos I hope you'll continue to make them 🙏

[@JoshAlicea1229]

What I get from this book is a need for my own personal repentance. The video mentioned that it was not to be read out loud at a church gathering because it was after the prophets and the time of the apostles. In my opinion, it should be read personally and prayerfully.

[@krono5el]

Hermes Trismegistus/Thoth will bless you.

[@HistoryandReviews]

The gospels were written after the apostles lmao

[@JoshAlicea1229]

@@HistoryandReviews wrong, they were written by the Apostles

[@trappedcat3615]

An AD writing that does not mention or proclaim the death and resurrection of Jesus. Repentance without the gospel is just will worship mentioned in Galatians.

[@hoponpop3330]

I read this years ago . I personally was amazed that it was held in such high regard by many I don’t think the Didache was understood not so much as scripture but as a instruction pamphlet. Although the giant of the early church St Athanasius of Alexandria in discussion of the New Testament canon commented that it was held in the same regard as John’s Apocalypse ( Revelation) I know the East didn’t like Revelation.

[@PostApostolicChurch]

You might be very right about the Didache. Eusebius wasn't too favorable to it. Perhaps if the title of the document didn't claim to be from the apostles, the Didache would have been more accepted... as an instruction pamphlet instead of an inspired Scripture. You are right. The Shepherd of Hermas was in the same category as John's Revelation. In my opinion, I believe Christians made the right choice by including Revelation in their canons. God bless!

[@PostApostolicChurch]

Thank you for commenting! God bless.

[@jesusstudentbrett]

I believe that we should judge the writing based on Quality not Quantity, and in that I mean, "who" deemed it edifying and a serious read, should be what matters, not the democratic process, because we see the Bible and especially the NT illustrate that the Broad Road is full of many that leads to destruction and many enter through it, said Jesus, but the narrow road is found by only a few. Hence the fact that Irenaeus, who studied under Polycarp, a direct student of the apostle John, should be sufficient. The teaching that the Shepherd has on accepting a repentant spouse from adultery is inline with what Jesus taught that we will not be forgiven if we do not forgive.

[@PostApostolicChurch]

I fully agree with you! We should always put more weight on the Quality than the Quantity. Another evidence on the quality side is the Muratorian Fragment. It was written about one generation after Hermas and written from Rome (as also Hermas was). In it, they said, "But Hermas wrote the Shepherd very recently, in our times, in the city of Rome, while bishop Pius, his brother, was occupying the [episcopal] chair of the church of the city of Rome. And therefore it ought indeed to be read; but it cannot be read publicly to the people in church either among the Prophets, whose number is complete, or among the Apostles, for it is after [their] time." By this, I believe their view of the Shepherd puts on the level of "deuterocanon." But yes, as you said, many other persons of quality supported Hermas such as Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian (early in life), and Origen. Even the Codex Sinaiticus listed it among the New Testament. Perhaps the best we can do is to promote the Shepherd with people in our circles. We can also share this video with those on the Internet. Even if the Shepherd isn't viewed as Scripture, at least we can inspire individual Christians to read it--as the Muratorian Fragment says.

[@jesusstudentbrett]

First let me say "thank you" for your work and efforts. Very nice quality videos... keep it up. A friend of mine (Scooby Crockett) and I are planning on narrating some early Christian writings. As for this SOH, I think it unwise to take the word of an unknown author, the Muratorian Fragment, whose credibility is unknown, and therefore in question itself, as deeming the credibility of this writing. If we had a great testimony of who the author was, read some of his writings, we could judge the fruit of its contents to know if it is believable. So we have the KNOWN credibility of Irenaeus says it is scripture. We both know who Irenaeus is, and having read his "On Apostolic Preaching", I know this man is carried along by the Holy Spirit. The KNOWN undermines the UNKNOWN, don't you think? I have read lengthy parts of the Shepherd of Hermas from time to time and it carries great power to conviction. The NT is clear, as the early Christians have awoken me out of my upbringing and protestant slumber, that one must purify himself from ALL impurities of sin, and be eager to do what is right, just, loving toward mankind, in order to make it into the Kingdom of God. We are saved as adults through baptism as they wrote, and as the NT teaches, and this Shepherd of Hermas fans that into flame. Hence, how can it not be a serious edifying read?

[@jesusstudentbrett]

After Constantine embraced the church, we see doctrines that had been protected by the church throughout the first and second centuries against the heretics started to be picked apart, renegotiated like Nonresistance since Rome wanted to maintain its military power, so that was quickly lost, then by the time of Augustine, soon after the Apostolic Constitutions was released and the NT canon universalized, which the early church didn't see the need to do that, what had been taken seriously was starting to be treated like a step child. In particular, POWERFUL writings leading people unto a true salvation like 2nd Clement, Epistle of Barnabas, and others were being diminished. Until the Internet, they were pretty much lying dormant, but I BELEIVE God is reviving them, and awakening the world to their power to instill the fear that can save, the knowledge that can save, and help rectify many false doctrines that have become convoluted through ages, that can save.

[@postapostolicchurch8876]

jesusstudentbrett Thank you for the encouragement! I would love to stay in touch and support you in your narrating early Christian writings. Feel free to email me at [e-mail]. Perhaps you can help me with this channel! You are right. We know who Irenaeus is and who taught him. His testimony should carry lots of weight. About the Muratorian Fragment, we know it was written by the church in Rome. We may not know the person who wrote it, but this might only be because we only have a fragment from the whole work. We shouldn’t lower its value because we don’t know who the author is. After all, the Didache’s author is unknown to us yet it was a first century writing. Based on the time of writing, the Didache should carry lots of weight-even though the author is unknown. What you said about the awakening of these ancient Christian writings is spot on. Most of these writings were literally lying dormant until the 1800s when new discoveries such as the Didache, Codex Sinaiticus, and Codex Vaticanus reignited interest in these ancient writings. As you said, I also have seen a new interest in these writings over the last decade like nothing before. I believe the Holy Spirit is bringing them out and using them to prepare today’s church for tomorrow. God bless! I look forward to keeping in touch with you!

[@jesusstudentbrett]

I will email you, but keep in mind the church in Rome was not of any significance greater than any other assembly until after Constantine, when the efforts of the Constantine evolved Rome into the central hub so to speak. So we don't start from a position of credibility, everyone is suspect until the show fruit and prove their worthiness, for the NT says everyone who has been given a trust, must prove worthy. So Irenaeus, Justin Martyr and others that point to the Shepherd's value, carries weight, the Muratorian Frament is unknown, and so should be kept at a lower credibility level until it proves worthy. This may happen in the future, but how can it outweight Irenaeus who is Pseudo-direct connected to the teaching of John via Polycarp? Anyway, there's some food for thought. Yes, I will be in touch. You can catch me at [e-mail]. God bless you my brother.

[@jonathanwain7949]

I was amazed to listen to the audio book of the shepherd yesterday , wow , i need to look into it more , do you know if it was lost? I know it was in the codex sinaiticus 4th century.

[@PostApostolicChurch]

+jon wain I don't know about the manuscript history of Hermas. I know that Hermas was one of the debated books through the first few centuries. As you know now, it definitely worth the read.

[@globalimpactministries766]

+jon wain Many early Christian writers actually cited the Shepherd of Hermas as inspired scripture. Both the internal and external evidence support the inspiration of this book and that it was written during the first century. See my recent comments above. More info on our new KZbin Channel and on our web site at ApostolicChristianFaith .com

[@jonathanwain7949]

Global Impact Ministries Yes it was removed at the council of laodicea 364ad , I'd guess a date between 50 to 60 ad as it's written origin

[@globalimpactministries766]

jon wain The Shepherd of Hermas impressed me the first time I read it. The Lord confirmed to me that the book is inspired scripture that was rejected by the RCC. Hermas wrote that Clement was a leader in the church of Rome at the time. Scholars and historians that believe Hermas was written within the first century, usually attribute it to a time before Clement became the senior Bishop of the Roman Church. Based upon the extensive research I read from church historians George Edmondson and John Robinson, the Shepherd of Hermas had to have been written before 85. That is all I know. Our video editor is almost finished editing my recent 3 hour and 16 minute debate. I have four new church history videos that will be posted shortly. The Lord has been leading me to document my extensive research in church history so that I can post everything for free on our new KZbin Channel and on our web site. I just completed reading the Apology of Aristides and found it to be very accurate and informative about the beliefs and practices of the early second century Christian Church. Therefore I plan on making a video on this short apology as well. If the Lord wills, I will continue my research on all of the early Christian writers and post videos, articles, and booklets on line. The Lord miraculously healed me from a deadly form of bone cancer that is supposed to be incurable. I'm living proof that Jesus Christ still does miracles and I have dedicated my life to serve Him. May the Lord bless you in Jesus!

[@globalimpactministries766]

james67707 Later apostate Trinitarians falsely claimed Apostolic succession from the early Christians who were Oneness Modalists. That is why both Tertullian in the West (see Against Praxeus chapter 3) and Origen in the East (See Origen's Commenter on the Gospel of John chapter 23) affirmed that the Oneness Modalists "always comprise the majority of believers" as "the general run of Christians." Even Catholic and Eastern Orthodox historians admit that Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Origen were "Semi-Arians." The historical evidence proves that only the Modalistic Monarchians (Oneness) believed in the full deity of Christ before the Trinitarian doctrine fully developed. I documented these facts in my KZbin videos "The Theology of Tertullian" and "The Theology of Origen." I previously replied to you in another thread that Ignatius first used the word Catholic which simply means "universal" for the universal church. We are the true Universal Church that was set up by Jesus Christ's first century apostles, but the so called orthodox Catholic Church that sits on the ancient 7 hilled city of Rome is the pretending bride of Christ who is the harlot of the book of Revelation. Your mother of harlots murdered millions of Christians. Your Eastern Orthodox branch is a daughter of that harlot who mixed pagan ideas with Christian scripture. Like Islam, the Roman Catholic Church fornicated with the rulers of this world to conquer, torture, and murder its adversaries. That is how you now falsely claim apostolic succession and that is why the Vatican still holds political power and controls the Vatican where Peter and Paul were buried.

[@vicachcoup]

I'm not a christian but these videos are well done and give a lovely overview.

[@postapostolicchurch8876]

Thanks so much. :) Please stay tuned. It may be quite a few months, but I will begin posting videos on what the earliest Christians believed. It will be worth it!

[@vicachcoup]

PostApostolic Church Excellent. I think I will subscribe to you to get the updates. May God bless you. PS - I am a Muslim looking into Christianity due to the many references to the Injeel [gospel] and Torah in the Qur'an and due to the main issue we tend to disagree on i.e the unity vs trinity of God. It seems fascinating to study early Christianity to see exactly how it formed/evolved and to see whether the current dogmas are right simply because they triumphed at the council of Nicea etc or whether there are views closer to what Jesus many have taught that have been lost or suppressed. Do you have any views on these issues? God bless.

[@postapostolicchurch8876]

vicachcoup That is fantastic. It sounds like you know more about Christianity than I know about Islam. Thanks for sticking with this channel. I look forward to what other comments you have to share! Yes, I do know one of the big differences is the trinity/unity of God. Once I post videos on the rest of the major Pre-Nicene writers, one of the next series I will do is the Christian belief about the nature of God. I know one of the other major differences is that Christianity teaches that Jesus the Messiah really did die on the cross while Islam teaches that he did not. You are right: it's good to study this history to see if the current dogmas are right. Studying the Pre-Nicene period also helps to see the differences between the different groups of Christians. Some Christian groups have some really crazy beliefs/teachings. Do I have any views on these issues? There is a whole lot to share. Is there a more specific issue/question that you would like to discuss?

[@jonhenning]

I just started to read it. Strange that he helps a beautiful woman who was bathing out of the water. Then he comments that he didn’t have any bad thoughts. But he said he would like to marry such a woman. 🤔

[@PostApostolicChurch]

Thank you for commenting. Yes, it does seem a little odd. To me, Hermas is taking his sexual desire and placing it where it belongs: in marriage. God bless you!

[@CMZIEBARTH]

Maybe there's a way for men and women to have righteous desires for each other.

[@jonhenning]

@@CMZIEBARTH Maybe a rat will not gnaw his own arm off when stuck in a trap.

[@timothy6828]

00:53 what does it exactly mean, the comment on the prophets and the apostles, I don’t get it...sorry English isn’t my first language...

[@PostApostolicChurch]

Thank you for asking. By Prophets, he means the Old Testament prophets. I also believe he is referring to all of the Old Testament. By Apostles, he means that this book was written long after the apostles lived. In short... he means that the Shepherd of Hermas is not an inspired book, but it is recommended that people read it anyway. God bless!

[@timothy6828]

@@PostApostolicChurch Thanks that cleared it up for me!

[@SheltonDCruz]

Matt 16:18

[@alfonsodonna8565]

I listen to the audio but I have to listen to it again, but I believe in Jesus Christ he is the saviour of the body

[@RaphialLee]

There was multiple men named hermas. That could have been anyone

[@PostApostolicChurch]

Thank you for sharing that. In Romans 16:14, Paul includes both: Hermes and Hermas. God bless!

[@KyleInOklahoma]

Many did not accept this as inspired, just like the other thousand or so letters at the time plus it was not authored by an apostle or by any1 associated with an apostle..If anything should have made it in2 the canon it was the Didache, authored about 50AD or Clements letters but the process shows that the very fact the Pope actually was the one who had the final word & is accepted by all serious Christians today is proof enough that the spirit of truth did in fact pass on from the seat of Moses to the seat of Peter & Authority Jesus spoke of in Matt passed on from the hundreds of Davidic kings stewards like Shebna & Eliakim mentioned in Is 22:15, to the new keeper of the keys, Peter & his successors. I know some1 who doesn believe the church got the NT correct & therefore his faith is now so twisted but i guess any1 who believes Luther was correct to remove books in 16th century must be consistent & agree he was correct to remove James, Revelation, Jude & 2 other NT books that he was later forced to put back in plus the words he added to the NT...If a person dis-agrees with Luthers removal then they must admit he was also mistaken to remove the OT books which include prophecy that came to pass with the coming of Christ..There is hundreds of letters from the period & the church only chose the letters that bore fruit in the Church for centuries while the church taught by word of mouth as it was not even imagined that there would be a NT PLUS THE COUNCILS THAT HAMMERED OUT THE UNDERSTANDING OF CHRISTS DIVINITY & HUMANITY, THE HOLY SPIRIT AS A PERSON & THE TRINITY & if we dnt believe the spirit of truth was with the church as Christ said it would be, then we have no ground to stand on if you or me added a book, or the Jehovah witnesses or mormans..I trust the churches authority as it was also her who tld us who authored the letters that aint signed plus table of contents..AUGUSTINE SAID HE WOULD NEVER HAVE TRUSTED WHAT BOOKS WERE IN THE NT CANON IF THE BISHOP OF ROME HAD NOT RATIFIED FROM THE CHAIR OF PETER..HE UNDERSTOOD THE PAPACY FROM THE TRADITION HANDED DOWN FROM CHRIST WHO AS KING GAVE SHEBNA'S POSITION TO PETER--READ ISAIAH 22:15

[@PostApostolicChurch]

Thanks for commenting. Yes, the Didache and the Clement letters are the most closely associated with the actual apostles. There is another work from that time that also claims to be directly from the apostles: the Letter to Diognetus. Unfortunately, portions of this letter are missing and we do not know who the author actually was. God bless!

[@jantz01]

I am very skeptical of anyone who claims visions and dreams as direct revelation from God that are not already in our Bible. Because to me, for one, they are indirectly saying our Bible is not the finished word of God. And this is very dangerous. Just look at religions like Islam and the Mormons who both claim their profits were visited by an angel who gave them revelation from God. There are bad Angels or demons in the world. Remember Paul said in Galatians 1-8 "But even if we or an angel from heaven, should preach a gospel contrary to what we have preached, he is to be accursed!" I could be wrong but it sounds like the angel in this vision who is preaching on the importance of repentance is cleverly preaching a works based salvation. Which would not be from God since it's contrary to the gospel Paul preached. I will admit I have not read the entire vision so I could be wrong. But I have no faith in visions like this my faith is in the Bible. And It is very disappointing to me to hear that Arenas ( who I think I heard from one of these video's was a student of John?) wanted this in our Bible. Anyways I love these videos I'm learning alot I never knew before.

[@jantz01]

My bad. I spelled Areanas but I meant Irenaeus. Who i just learned was Polycarps student. And Polycarp was Johns student

[@thomasmcewen5493]

@@jantz01 "Our Bible ?" If Jesus was born in 4BC then there was no Bible for 400 years, by which time the entire Roman empire was Christian. Every Bishopric was mandated from 325AD to have a new thing under heaven, a hospital for the poor and common people, no longer were children left outside the city wall to be eaten by wild animals nor dropped in the rivers to die, but rescued as St Ignatius taught, no longer were slaves who died dragged out of the city and their bodies burned on the rubbish pile, there was societies to bury the dead with honor. We had the Nazis then the communists and when the jew passed under your window in 1942 you quoted Romans 13 to obey Hitler, the Catholics obeyed God and that is why 96% of the religious prisoners in Dachau were Catholics not Biblical Christians. The Communist secret police knew the enemy and it was Catholic religious sisters who spent 25 years in the labor camps not you one verse (Our Bible) Christians. "Bibličtí křesťané jsou jako pytel prdů, mohou smrdět nám a komunistické straně, ale vždy najdou verš, který nás nikdy nezpochybní." The communists were right when the gun comes up you shut your month and sit down. When evil calls quoting the Bible is not an answer. There are seven tenses of the Greek verb. They are: the Aorist, Present, Imperfect, Future, Pluperfect, and Future Perfect. Let us exemplify the Perfect and Present tenses. In the words of the Greek grammarian J. Gresham Machen, 'The Greek perfect tense denotes the present state resultant upon a past action'. The perfect is used in Matthew 4:4,7,10 ('it is written'). Literally translated, 'It has been written in the past and is still in force. For by grace are you saved through faith...' The word 'saved' is translated from the Greek word sesosmenoi, which is a perfect passive participle. It means that this salvation took place at some point in the past and is continuing on in the present. John 3 16 is Obey perfect tense not believe it is obedience over a lifetime in action not words.

[@gent.27]

Does that mean though that because you now have faith, you do not need to repent? Look for this verse. It was sent to believers, not unbelievers. James 4:8 Draw close to God, and he will draw close to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you indecisive ones. Of course, faith is needed to be pardoned of sins, but repentance is also required to continue to walk to that faith.(See 1 Corinthians 6:9,10) We know that repentance is grieving on the things you did on the past, things that God hate and you are moved or resolved yourself to not repeat it again. Our faith requires action, obedience to God’s righteous way.

[@thomasmcewen5493]

I thank you for this work, Catholic as a word is labeled as a touch of Hell, but History is welcomed for knowledge. Maybe Christianity will survive in Europe, black fairy tales and ignorance coupled with cowardice has not worked.

[@coloradonative5793]

you should make a video about what the early church taught about believers security.

[@PostApostolicChurch]

Thanks for commenting and letting me know you would like to learn about believers' security. Please stay tuned, because I hope to deliver on that over the next few years. I have other videos in the work at the moment. Thanks for your patience. God bless!

[@coloradonative5793]

Post-Apostolic Church Amen thank you Godbless

[@globalimpactministries766]

Many scholars have proved that the Muratorian fragment is filled with errors. Church historian George Edmondson proved that the Shepherd of Hermas was written in the first century. The following quotes are taken from "The Church of Rome In The First Century" by George Edmondson. The charismatic ministry of apostles, prophets, and teachers are working side by side with the hierarchical officials-bishops, presbyters, and deacons. In Vision III. 5, the white stones used for the building of the tower, which is the Church, are described as being ‘The apostles, bishops, teachers, and deacons, who have walked in godly gravity, and who have discharged their duties as bishops, teachers, and deacons for the good of God's elect. Some of these have fallen asleep, some still are with us.'Vis. iii. 5: Now this passage, which recalls the language of 1 Cor. 12:28 and Eph. 4:11, clearly implies that of the original apostles, bishops, teachers, and deacons there were some still living when Hermas wrote. It will be noticed that Hermas omits from this list ‘The prophets,' and elsewhere throughout this work, but in Similitude XI he treats at length of the difference between true and false prophets. He was himself a prophet and he is at pains to claim for himself inspiration and a position of authority. He does not classify ‘The prophets' with the apostles and teachers, because he regards the prophets apparently as possessing gifts which place them in a category apart. From a number of passages it may be seen that Hermas, as a prophet, both claimed and exercised the right of delivering charges and admonitions to the rulers of the Church, and of speaking publicly in the assemblies. The Church of Rome In The First Century Page 208-218Hermas is listed by Paul in Romans 16:14 so it appears that Hermas personally knew the apostle Paul himself. Hermas also listed Clement as a Bishop in Rome who sent copies of his book entitled “The Shepherd of Hermas” throughout the known world. Catholic scholars have tried to claim that The Shepherd of Hermas was written in the late second century because they do not want to admit that the earliest first century Roman Church that the apostles themselves founded baptized in Jesus Name (Romans 6:1-7) and believed that the Spirit of the Son of God is the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:9). Since the Shepherd of Hermas was quoted as scripture by many of the earliest church fathers and was accepted as scripture by the majority of the second century Christians, the Shepherd of Hermas must have originated during the first century A.D. For why would the second century Christians accept it as scripture if it was not written during the first century? The Shepherd of Hermas was bound with the New Testament in the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Claromontanus but was rejected by the fourth century Catholic Church. Trinitarian translator Jack N. Sparks wrote in his preface to his translation of The Shepherd of Hermas: “You wouldn’t call Hermas a precise theologian. His terminology in speaking of the Son and the Holy Spirit is so confusing that he seems to IDENTIFY THE TWO AS THE SAME PERSON.” Hermas wrote concerning the deity of Jesus, “The pre-existent Holy Spirit which created all things did God make to dwell in a body of flesh chosen by Himself.” The Shepherd of Hermas Parable 5:6 If Hermas and the first century Roman Church believed in a trinity, Hermas 5:6 should have stated that the “pre-existent Son did God make to dwell in a body of flesh.” Yet Hermas declares that the Holy Spirit of God incarnated Himself “in a body of flesh chosen by Himself.” Hermas clearly believed that the deity of Jesus is the Holy Spirit! “The angel of repentance, he came to me and said to me, I want to show you what THE HOLY SPIRIT which spoke with you in the form of the church, showed you; for THAT SPIRIT IS THE SON OF GOD.”(See Romans 8:9 / 2 Corinthians 3:17 / Ephesians 4:6) Since the annals of church history prove that the Shepherd [Angel] of Hermas was widely received and accepted by the earliest Roman Christians, it is clear that these Roman Christians also believed that the Holy Spirit of God is the Spirit that became the Son of God by incarnating Himself in baby Jesus. Hence, the earliest Christian writers (who lived while some of the apostles were still alive) believed that Jesus is the Holy Spirit of God incarnated in a body rather than an alleged second divine person called “God the Son.” Since the apostles themselves founded the first century Roman Church, it is hard to believe that the theology of the first century Roman Church differed from the theology of the original apostles. The teachings of the Shepherd of Hermas are identical with the Bible. Luke 1:35 states: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you. So the baby to be born will be holy, and he will be called the Son of God.” NIV Luke 1:35 proves that the Holy Spirit came upon Mary to supernaturally conceive baby Jesus but if the trinity were true then it should read that an eternal divine person called God the Son came over Mary to sire the Christ child. Therefore the theology of the earliest Roman Christian Church is identical with the Bibles' teaching. Trinitarians hate to admit that Hermas taught Oneness Theology and water baptism in Jesus Name in Rome while some of the apostles were still alive. In The Shepherd of Hermas 11:5 we read that Hermas asks the angel, “Why is the tower (symbolic of the church) built on water?” The angel replied, “Here then why the tower [Church] is built on water: because your life has been and will be saved through water.” See 1 Peter 3:20-21 / Mark 16:16 Hermas 89:3-8 “Did you see the stones which were entered through the portico [doorway] were placed in the structure of the tower (the Church) but the ones that did not so enter were returned to their own place? No one will enter the Kingdom of God unless HE TAKES HIS HOLY NAME. For if you want to enter a city and that particular city has been walled around and has one entrance, could you possibly enter that city except by the gateway, so, a man cannot enter the Kingdom of God other than by the name of the Son … The portico [doorway] is the Son of God; this is the only entrance to the Lord … Whoever does not receive his name cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.” See John 3:3-5 / John 10:1-9 The Shepherd [Angel] of Hermas clearly teaches that no one can enter into the Kingdom of God unless he or she received the name of the Son of God in water baptism. The angel further explains why the stones of the tower which symbolize the members of Christ’s Church need to be baptized into water: Hermas 93:2-4 “They needed to come up through the water [baptized by immersion] in order to be made alive, for otherwise they could not enter the Kingdom of God unless they set aside the deadness of their former life. So even those who had fallen asleep received the seal of the Son of God (through baptism) and entered into the Kingdom of God. For before he bears the name of the Son of God (baptized into the Name of the Son); the man is dead, and whenever he receives the seal he sets aside the deadness and receives life. So the water is the seal. Therefore THEY GO DOWN INTO THE WATER dead and THEY COME UP alive [baptism by immersion].” See Romans 6:1-7/Colossians 2:8-12 / 1 Peter 3:20-21 / John 3:3-5 Here we have plain evidence proving that the earliest Christian Church in Rome believed that the Spirit of the Son of God is the Holy Spirit and that water baptism must be conducted by full body immersion into the name of the Son of God [Jesus]. This is exactly what modern Apostolic Faith Christians believe even though they are condemned as heretics for doing so. The teaching of Hermas that was accepted by the majority of believers in the first and second centuries clearly harmonizes with the commands of New Testament Scripture. New believers are commanded to repent and be baptized into the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins (Acts 2:38). Since the Shepherd of Hermas was received by the late first century Roman Church along with the majority of churches throughout the Roman Empire, the majority of the earliest Christians must have embraced Oneness Theology and the essentiality of water baptism into the Name of the Son of God. For much more info SUBSCRIBE to our new KZbin Channel or visit ApostolicChristianFaith .com

[@KingOfComedyXD]

Modalism is heresy. " "My Father! If it is possible, let this cup of suffering be taken away from me. Yet I want your will to be done, not mine." (Matthew 26:39)"

[@alfredvickers4054]

The Shepherd of Hermas does equate the Son and Holy Spirit. This erroneous theology is probably why the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, didn't put it into the canon in the end. You shouldn't base your theology on a non-canonical work which goes against Scripture and the Church Fathers. And if you deny that method of determining the divinely inspired Scriptures (guidance by the Spirit), you have no other way to determine what books to follow, except personal whim. If you say the men who represented the Church were wrong about the canon just because they disagree with you, that's begging the question. And you still have nothing else to base a canon off of. There were a lot of heretical views in the early centuries of the Church, so this Shepherd of Hermas doesn't even prove anything on its own, certainly not your implied anti-trinitarian conspiracy theory that trinitarians came in, imposed their views, and covered up the truth. Your view would mean that not only was Christ's Church not preserved, it was destroyed by heretics almost immediately! You also dismiss clues that the book could be a fraud written in the 2nd century, apparently forgetting the fact that people can deliberately pretend that a story takes place earlier than when it's actually written. The heretical theology of the Shepherd is allegedly revealed to Hermas by an angel, reminding me of the warning in Galatians to beware angels preaching strange Gospels. (Compare with the origins of Mormonism and Islam.) The titular Hermas even admits to having a tendency to lie, and you blindly believe his claims anyway!? The Church has always taught the Trinity. The Gospels point to it. Jesus Himself told the Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Didache, a first century work which discusses how the Church did things, describes baptizing people in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. You can't take a single verse from Acts (urging people to get baptized in Jesus' name) out of context and ignore the rest of the canonical Scriptures and the historical teachings and practices of the Church. In John Chapter 14, Jesus says he'll ask the Father to send an advocate to the Apostles after He leaves: the Holy Spirit. In your view, that would be Jesus asking Jesus to send Jesus in His absence. That makes no sense. And in Luke 22, how can Jesus ask Jesus to take this cup away from Him? Is your God suffering from Dissociative Identity Disorder? To be honest, I'm not sure why non-heretical Church Fathers who were later canonized as Saints considered this book to be Scripture. I imagine they liked the rest of the teachings of the book and were willing to show leniency for the error due the writer allegedly being a former slave who wouldn't have been educated on the ins and outs of theology. Regardless of the reason, the book isn't canon and never really was (individual opinions don't decide Scripture, and neither does popularity), and it doesn't make Modalism true.

[@egwpisteuw]

I still can't understand why anyone would have considered Hermas to be canonical--I find it to be a brutal read and get very little of value out of it.

[@kickpublishing]

I've read it, it's absolutely mental, clearly not inspired - very legalistic and not in line with the core biblical message.

[@HistoryandReviews]

Its a stupid book