Trent Horn Continued, the Didache, and Confession

Continued our response to Trent Horn’s “Protestant Distortions of Church History” lecture from 2019 by delving into the Didache.
This was the confessional practice of the ancient church:
"If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican." Matt 18:15-17
All Dividing Line Highlights' video productions and credit belong to Alpha and Omega Ministries®. If this video interested you, please visit aomin.org/ or www.sermonaudio... for more of A&O ministry's content.
For James White's political content, click here:
www.bitchute.c...

[@BornAgainRN]

Trent Horn mentioned me and my book, “Why Protestant Bibles are smaller,” at the same 2019 conference where he brought up Dr. James White in his presentation. It was quite the honor to be mentioned along side of Dr. White.

[@bobbyrice2858]

Lol igh, i do t see anything honored from the curly haired trolls mouth.

[@ScottPalmer-mp1we]

I thought the Didache would have a lot of Catholic doctrine and practices in it, given that they seem to think it is so great. I was surprised that it has almost nothing close to anything distinctly Catholic (or Orthodox for that matter). Men like Mr. Horn come into reading the Didache. with their suppositions about the mass, confession, eucharist at least and assume that it is describing those things as the Catholic church does them. There is no logical basis for this. I think the Didache is a good summation of principles of Christian life and practice, though it is nonbinding. At times its hard to tell if it is making commandments or suggestions. On a lighter note, that section about the apostle being false if he asks for money made me chuckle; its almost as if the writer(s) anticipated these present day televangelists begging for money.

[@franceshaypenny8481]

Scummy televangelists scamming money by corrupting Scripture is merely copying the money scamming formula perfected by Rome for hundreds of years before - the RCC is the mother of them all. And Christ was calling out these hypocrisies and corruptions all throughout His ministry, and warned that corruption would be more the rule than the exception. (The wide way versus the narrow path).

[@Soli_Deo_Gloria_.]

Trent Horn vs. Matt Dilahaunty... "Is the resurrection reasonable" "Atheists go to Heaven" - The Popery *Good grief... SMH*

[@juanisaac5172]

Geez dood why do you worry so much about it? I mean you will be raptured out any.minute.

[@swim96ful]

Thank you James for your presentation. Really enjoyed your talk. Just wanted to write down some of my thoughts below. 1. Personally, i don't look through Didache as a manual to tell me how breaking of the bread should be done, even though ironically that's the intention of the Didache. They are not inspired instructions and as such they are not authoritative for me to follow or not to follow them. 2. When reading the Didache on breaking of the bread, what i want to see is what it *meant* to early Christians, now *how* they did it. And clearly, it meant a lot, and it was connected to the concept of sacrfice. 3. Knowing what it meant to them, doesnt prove anything of course, and i acknowledge that early Christians might have taken breaking of the bread to the wrong extent. 4. Knowing what it meant to them, together with other sources, can make you reflect, though. The same way we reflect when listening to a pastor nowadays. It doesn't mean that everything that is preached on a Sunday by a pastor is infallilble. 5. Of course, the Didache has this unprecendented feature of being a very early Christian source that goes back to the apostolic age. 6. Simply put, imagine that i ask you "Do you want to hear a sermon compiled from a Christian community that personally knew some of the disciples and was crucial to passing down the deposit of faith in early Church?" Yes, please! Reading the Didache, would i believe i need to pray "Our Father" three times a day just because it is in the Didache? No, i would understand that this was just their custom approach to prayer. I would, though, acknowledge that the prayer "Our Father" was important to early Christians, and i might feel encouraged to pray this prayer more often, knowing that what Jesus told us to do, was in fact, passed down and practiced eagerly by early Christians. And following it, it's not just me and my interpretation of the Scriptures, but it connects me with the whole Church, knowing that we share the same prayer from the foundation of Christianity. 7. Every document that you read, do not read it to try and prove yourself right or someone wrong. Try reflect on what they *mean* and what message they are conveying. If we read something with pre-assumptions: I believe in the real presence then all you will find is the reasons confirming your beliefs. If we read something with pre-assumptions: I do not believe in the real presence then all you will find is the reasons confirming your beliefs. Keep wanting to know the truth, even if it goes against your beliefs, because in the truth we can be sure to find Jesus as He is the truth himself.

[@niklash8242]

Rome is the farhest away from me as a Swedish Evangelical Catholic. I.E Lutheran.

[@charlesm7735]

Section 9 about prayers during during eucharist whereas section 14 is about the day christian should gather and activities to be performed which are breaking bread and thanksgiving. Your arguments don't make no sense if you approach those texts with honesty.

[@BrandonCorley109]

4:11 This is the definition of anachronism, kids

[@patdainel9037]

Protestantism: Christ dies, raises, then waits 1500 Years to start his church. * his 30,000 conflicting churches.

[@juanisaac5172]

Do not forget the fake church of Constantine.

[@andys3035]

@@juanisaac5172 Constantine didn't start a church

[@KnightFel]

Catholics: *gets their history from Wikipedia, thinks they are superior.*

[@franceshaypenny8481]

Christ founded Christianity, not Roman Catholicism, not Lutheranism, not etc. etc. etc.

[@rosehammer9482]

Wasn’t there a communion meal when believers gathered together each week. They probably gathered in homes at that time. I wonder if they completed the meal like Jesus did when He took the bread and the cup and told them as often as you do this do in remembrance of me.Throughout Scriptures, giving thanks is often described as a sacrifice. I thought that’s what the word Eucharist meant. Thanksgiving. As a body of believers do we not gather together as a new family in Christ to Worship and give Thanks. We have been redeemed…we have much to be Thankful for. I was exposed to how the Brethren gathered. The breaking of bread service was separate from the Teaching/preaching hour. I have attended churches that model a Baptist type church. I have to admit I got a pretty good understanding of a non mass Breaking of Bread and offering up a sacrifice of thanksgiving and praise.

[@LightOfAllMankind]

James White: I don’t know much about Orthodoxy. Also James White: Orthodoxy in America is different from Orthodoxy in Europe.

[@LightOfAllMankind]

@Pedro Lourenço just in general, if I asked someone for directions to get to New York City, and they told me they don’t like New York, have never been there and don’t plan to, I’d be wise to avoid that person for any further information regarding the subject. So what are these differences in your view?

[@LightOfAllMankind]

@Pedro Lourenço there are liberals in every country. Some have more than others. Do liberal parishes and priests exist? Absolutely. But this is the same genetic fallacy I could level against Protestants in general or Calvinists specifically. White is a Reformed Baptist. I am sure Calvin would scoff at him if he were alive today.

[@LightOfAllMankind]

@Pedro Lourenço I suppose I need clarification on what people like James White mean by ‘different’. Orthodox teaching on asceticism, liturgy, the Canon, Sacraments, etc have been maintained in America as Europe. We do not differ on essential doctrines. If you think we do, I welcome a challenge on this stance. Now, do some people live in defiance and ignore what Orthodox Tradition teaches? Yes, but that’s basically the story of the human race, not just America, and an entire religion in a region is not justified or debunked based on these conditions. There are good and bad parishes all over America and the world. As with every sect.

[@ibelieveitcauseiseentit9630]

What a dumb comment, you don't have to know much about orthodoxy to know that it's not the same in Europe as it is in America.

[@LightOfAllMankind]

@@ibelieveitcauseiseentit9630 lol. Protestants say the darndest things. 😆

[@ta3p-theannex3project84]

Twisting and turning.

[@maurdib]

I'm a bit confused, Did I first hear them say, Baptized in the Name of the Father , Son , and Holy Spirit. Then when it came to the Eucharist, it says you needed to be Baptized in the Name of the Lord? Which is it? Father , Son , and Holy Spirit or Jesus should you be baptized?

[@TheChunkyCrusader]

To be baptized in the name of Jesus is being baptized by the command of Jesus. The formula is still I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

[@ChandraAnandInChrist]

To be baptised into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is same as being baptised into the name of the Lord Jesus.

[@TheChunkyCrusader]

@@ChandraAnandInChrist The trinitarian formula is the form of Baptism. Baptizing in the name of Jesus means by the command of Jesus.

[@maurdib]

@Timbo Slice the law is represented by the government you are in. IE law of Israel. That's why we don't say "in the name of the Son ", we say in Jesus name, for no other name would work or has authority. Ask those guys whom got stripped naked

[@maurdib]

@Timbo Slice That makes no sense at all. What did Paul ask them in Acts? 9:5 On hearing this, they were baptized in[b] the name of the Lord Jesus.. What is the name of Lord Jesus , Wait, it's Jesus LOL

[@kentfink9509]

What's with all this Catholicism? We left all this silliness 100s of years ago

[@amichiganblackman3200]

The reformation is not over.

[@flippintobyland7257]

Look at all the ecumenical stuff going on with 80% of evangelicals these days .

[@kentfink9509]

@@amichiganblackman3200 idk about you but I believe nothing that is certifiably Catholic.

[@electronicMI]

@@amichiganblackman3200: Semper reformanda...

[@kentfink9509]

@@flippintobyland7257 its appalling. We are in the Laodecean Age.

[@theservantsresource3565]

The Didache is essentially a list of rules, many of which go against the teaching of the Apostles. There are many reasons why it wasn’t included in the New Testament. 1. It seems to present Jesus as secondary to the Father. 2. The rules are dogmatic to the extreme. We’re talking detail upon detail, much like Leviticus. 3. Baptism is best with cold runnung water, as opposed to warm still water. Seriously! 4. The teaching about Prophets is nonsensical. Many other problems, but likely useful for Apologetics.

[@paynedv]

You're fake news protestant

[@oracleoftroy]

@Timbo Slice Not sure how literally I should take "anything at all". Avoiding vague terms like "protestant": Reformed Christians tend to affirm the Apostles' Creed (AD 650), Nicene Creed (AD 381), Chalcedonian Creed (AD 451), and Athanasian Creed (AD 800). If those are too general for you, I've always found the Canons of Orange (AD 529) to be quite in line with Reformed doctrine; affirming 4 of the so called "5 points of Calvinism." Or you could read Calvin and Luther. Both were quite concerned with demonstrating how their doctrines weren't new inventions, but found throughout the church fathers and referenced them often. Or maybe you are being ultra picky and expecting to see a 21st century Protestant exactly though for thought described in the fathers. If that is your standard, show me the father that is exactly equal to the 21st century Romanist. It can't be done. They lived in different times with different cultures and different concerns, and there's been 1500 years of development since then that won't just disappear if we want an honest assessment of these issues.

[@mwright_boomer]

@Timbo Slice You’re committing the fallacy of equivocation. The word “catholic” means universal. In that sense, Protestants affirm membership in the catholic church. We hold the catholic faith, that is, the faith that makes someone a Christian. You’d be hard pressed to demonstrate that the word “catholic” in the creed means what we today would call the Roman Catholic Church. What we can agree on however, according to your profile pic, is which baseball team to root for 👍🏼

[@mwright_boomer]

@Timbo Slice We believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as the one true God too, because we’re part of the universal church. But to read the word catholic in this context and import into it everything we now call Roman Catholicism is anachronistic to the extreme

[@mitromney]

1. It doesn't. Nothing in it clearly states Jesus is in any way inferior. Even Scripture itself has far more challenging quotes putting Jesus's authority into question. Didache says NOTHING like that. If you can prove it, do it. 2. There is nothing in there more "dogmatic to extreme" than Jesus's direct teachings ex. his sermon on the mountain. Hell most teachings are quotes from Scripture. If you find that too extreme howdo you find Jesus's teachings otherwise? Didache teaches in detail and is strict, because it's an instruction on the ministry service. There is no reason why it would be vague or general, than it would not provide it's function. 3. That's exactly how John the baptist and later apostles did it. They baptised in Jordan river. That's cold running water. Also Didache never says baptising in other water is forbidden, it just suggests the preferable, original tradition and than adds other water is also fine. 4. No it's not. Show me where and how? It's directly in line with Scripture, especially what Jesus said about false prophets and what Paul said about Prophecy being a very important gift for ministry. "Many other problems"? Nah.

[@willb5507]

On the section on the Eucharist. Your argument is one from silence. So you know and I know that is a terrible argument.

[@partoftheway4235]

I was raised Catholic. When I was 16 I left the Catholic religion and started attending non Catholic churches. And I started investigating the history of the doctrines of the Catholic Church. And a large percentage of them come from peganisim. It happened when empower Constantine got involved with the church during his rule. Do I don't even pay attention to what people who are Catholic practice. "Most" peopld I know who are catholic don't even know the scriptures anyway. So if the are hungry to know the truth of the "scriptures"? Then I discuss with them? If they are closed minded and not open for discussion of the scriptures. Then I just move to topics other than religion.

[@juanisaac5172]

I challenge you. Throw me a pagan practice in the Catholic Church and I will debunk it. December 25, the hats of the Assyrian Fish god Dagon, the Babylonian so called sunburst, the Assyrian Queen of Heaven, the Egyptian Obelisks in the Vatican, the snake shape in the Vatican, whatever. The half moon Our Lady of Guadalupe sits on...whatever.

[@juanisaac5172]

Oh I forgot about Tamuz and the Aristotelianism Some baptist lady told me Augustine used. Even though he Platonism. Easter, transubstantiation, greek gods in the vatican, easter, the bent crucifix, the upside down crucifix on they papal chair, t he cult of Isis, Mithradism? I am trying to be thorough here. Help me out if I missed some.

[@Sosarchives]

@@juanisaac5172 i can easily say that the incarnation is blasphemy, trinitarianism is polytheism, etc. protestantism literally came out of scholasticism. your comments hold no value in theology and historicity.

[@juanisaac5172]

@@Sosarchives I do not care what you think of my comments. Just by the very fact you deny the Trinity makes you a non Christian. One God in three distinct people. God can and will do whatever he pleases not withstanding you saying that he can't. You are joining the Arian heretics, the Muslims, the Jews, and the Jehovah's Witnesses in denying the Trinity. If you do not believe in the Nicene Creed you are lost man.

[@Sosarchives]

@@juanisaac5172 im not denying anything, it’s a rhetorical statement genius. if you’re a protestant you have no weight in mentioning nicene creed since you deny “traditions of men” and adhere to sola scriptura.