Generally speaking early Christianity refers to Christianity up to and including the canonization of the written Word of God. Early Christianity refers to the time when the authority of the Church was solely dependent on the oral teaching authority of the apostles and their successors before there was the teaching authority of the NT. therefore early Church history ended around the first of the fifth century.
In Christ
Fr. Joseph
2007-07-20 12:57:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by cristoiglesia 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
coffee pot - your answer has me baffled, to say the least. I mean, it just doesn't make any sense.
You said that the church had existed in secret for a couple hundred years before the Catholic Church even got its start. And, you stated that the Romans later appointed a pope to deal with religious problems.
Well, we know historically that the Catholic Church started around 32 A.D. According to my Bible, Jesus himself gave Peter authority over the church, not the Romans.
The reigning dates of the first few popes are as follows: Peter (32-67) --- Linus (67-76) --- Anacletus (76-88).
Now, according to what you said, the church had existed a couple hundred years before this. So...that means that the church existed way before Jesus was even born. How is that possible? There was no Christianity at that time.
And why would Jesus have established a new church if one had already existed?
You see, your answer is wrong on so many levels...and it would behoove you much more to do the research, rather than to make assumptions.
2007-07-20 18:37:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Raven † 5
·
7⤊
0⤋
The term Early Christianity here refers to Christianity of the period after the Death of Jesus in the early 30s and before the First Council of Nicaea in 325.
By the way, im Not "Protestant".
We are given only one name to wear: "Christian"
(1 Peter 4:16).
2007-07-20 16:26:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by RR 4
·
3⤊
3⤋
The "early church" is widely accepted as the Roman church. So the cut off date would be the fall of the Roman Empire.
The traditional date of the fall of the Roman Empire is September 4, 476 when Romulus Augustus, the last Emperor of the Western Roman Empire was deposed by Odoacer.
So I guess that's the cut-off.
2007-07-20 16:24:19
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Well I would mean prior to Constantine. Basically 33-150 AD is an early period. Anytime after that becomes less and less historical.
2007-07-20 16:29:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
good question. Protestants and fundamentalist Christians want to have us believe that there were these secret, mysterious christian communities that floated around over 1500 years, and then magically appeared as the rightful church.
2007-07-20 17:19:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
different dates from different motives: for some ends with deathof last Apostle,for others the beginning of hellenisation of Church,others end of Roman Persecutions and others believe that their particular church(and it alone) is Early Christianity.
2007-07-20 22:45:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by James O 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Not a Prot...but the best working definition is usually the death (or martyrdom) of the last of the Apostolic Fathers.
The list of Apostolic Fathers included under this title has varied, literary criticism having removed some who were formerly considered as second-century writers, while the publication (Constantinople, 1883) of the Didache has added one to the list. Chief in importance are the three first-century Bishops: St. Clement of Rome, St. Ignatius of Antioch, and St. Polycarp of Smyrna, of whose intimate personal relations with the Apostles there is no doubt. Clement, Bishop of Rome and third successor of St. Peter in the Papacy, "had seen the blessed Apostles [Peter and Paul] and had been conversant with them" (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer., III, iii, 3). Ignatius was the second successor of St. Peter in the See of Antioch (Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., III, 36) and during his life in that centre of Christian activity may have met with others of the Apostolic band. An accepted tradition, substantiated by the similarity of Ignatius's thought with the ideas of the Johannine writings, declares him a disciple of St. John. Polycarp was "instructed by Apostles" (Irenaeus, op. cit., III, iii, 4) and had been a disciple of St. John (Eusebius, op. cit., III, 36; V, 20) whose contemporary he was for nearly twenty years.
2007-07-20 16:28:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
We'll never know. The parts of the story that didn't please Emper Constantine never made it into the cannonized Bible. For those who don't do their homework, that's not the King James. The Bible was still in Greek and Hebrew at that time, and King James wouldn't be born for another 11 hundred years.
2007-07-20 16:27:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jahosaphat 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
I most agreed with Chez_DeVille and The Raven!
2007-07-20 19:22:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sniper 5
·
2⤊
0⤋