Thank you for your kind words. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
Tom, thank you so much for this outstanding series. As an ex-Catholic, and as someone who has meandered in and out of various denominations, I have desired to know why and how we ended up with an organised, religious ritual, so far removed from the intimately natural and spiritual gathering of the assembly as described in the days of the apostles. Your research and presentation has saved me a lot of leg work -- what a great presentation. All glory to Christ Jesus, our Lord, for steering us away from the traditions of men, and toward his Good News.
@tomwadsworth Bless you Tom. I have listened to your talks twice now. Truly an answer to my prayers. For reasons I can only attribute to the Lord's merciful protection, I have always keenly delineated between the New Testament and the early church writings which followed. Even when preachers -- so called -- or theologians, would appeal to these extrabiblical sources, I never felt at ease, nor was there a sense of edification on behalf of the congregation. Non-inspired ancient correspondences did not make for a good argument, vis-a-vis 'why we do things this way'. Granted, these early writings are a historical curiosity, and can certainly serve a purpose, as you showed when referencing the post-apostolic writings, but what they primarily show is where and when the seeds of heresy began: works-based soteriology, clergy-laity boundaries, the sacramental system, etc. Tom, I still have a hard time speaking in ‘church’ language, or partaking in hymnal singing, even when it comes to using seemingly orthodox terms like ‘trinity’, or ‘three persons in one’. I see in scripture that Jesus is the Word, and that the Word is God, and the He and the Father are one, and that the Spirit is Lord, etc, but because I don’t see Paul and the other NT writers using such language as 'trinity' etc, and seeing that they never communicated such profundities in that manner, I wish we would also resist this tendency to truncate God into ‘convenient’ creedal formulae. Anyway Tom I won’t take up more of your time. I pray that many more will find your teaching series and seriously consider your sound, biblically-based case, because God’s people need to be freed from the shackles of regimented religiosity, and in dong so, they will better grasp the One in Whom we have our salvation, rest and assurance, They will also attain a better approach as to the true purpose of our gathering together. Your point about ‘horizontal vs vertical’ fellowship and the N’T’s appeal to ‘oneanotherism’ was outstanding. The Lord be with your spirit dear brother !
@@persiandrum9871 I agree with everything you said! If you don't mind, can you tell me: (1) your current church affiliation and (2) any formal theological education you have?
@@tomwadsworth Dear Tom, again thanks for your reply. I would love to stay in touch via your email, if you are okay with that, but in the meantime, in answer to your questions here in the comments thread, here is a summary: Until recently, I was unchurched for a decade plus, after attending various denominations, including Presbyterian and a Messianic fellowship Only this year I have begun attending a Reform Baptist assembly in the Blue Mountains of Australia (still called 'church' of course). The reason for my attendance there after such a long hiatus is to support a friend there who is new to the faith, to answer any questions she might have. I must admit, even though I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of the current form of 'worship', it is nice to be in a fellowship again. With that said, it does feel disingenuous - on my part - to carry out all the rituals of standing, sitting, ‘the Lord’s supper’, formal creeds and prayers, etc, knowing that this is alien to the NT model of ‘church’, i.e., the assembly of the saints. I sometimes roll my eyes when the ‘vicar’ refers to ‘Saint’ Paul or ‘Saint’ John. Where in scripture, I ask myself, do we address certain saints as ‘Saint’, while not others? Still, it is far more favourable than the theatre of my old Roman Catholic days. I won’t lie, there is still a sentimental nostalgia for the earthly beauty of Romanism, with its ‘bells and smells’, but I could never return to such a setting, with its Mariology, prayers to dead saints, holy water, relic worship, the Mass, etc. Tom I sat in a theological college in Sydney, many years back now, but gave up after a few short months. It was too academic, and the classes seemed to comprise of thematic analyses of the narrative of the Bible, as though it were a literary piece, like Tolkien or Joyce, rather than the truthful, historical Word of God. Most of my understanding of scripture has come from faithful men such as yourself, those who may not have millions of subscribers, but are nevertheless zealous for the gospel of Christ, and are equipped to teach biblical truths, without the filter of a denominational tradition, or historic creed. One last thing - apologies for my long-windedness Tom but I appreciate being in touch with a Christian such as yourself - after 20 odd years reading the bible through a Darby-Scofield-Dispensationalist lens, I have, since 2021, been studying the Good Book through a Preterist ‘audience relevance’ framework. If you don’t mind me asking, is the (full) Preterist paradigm something that you and your congregation hold? Or is it seen as erroneous? In the Baptist congregation where I am now situated, I may be the only Preterist there. The (mainly older) congregation members seem to advocate for the State of Israel as being the epicentre of prophecies still yet to be fulfilled, so it is a little awkward when the topic comes up. Needless to say, I no longer hold such views. God bless you Tom, looking forward to hearing from you when - and if - you have time. PD
@@persiandrum9871 Thanks for the helpful response. I agree with so much of your reply. Concerning the Preterist position ... I definitely think that Matt 24 is primarily talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. I don't know how to avoid that conclusion. I resist being pigeon-holed into any of the common modern categories of eschatology. I just try to deal honestly with the biblical text., regardless of where it leads me. I also resist "advocating for the State of Israel as being the epicenter of prophecies yet to be fulfilled." That view is common in American Evangelicalism, and it leads to a host of problems. I should add that I don't have a congregation. I've been free from being tied to any church paycheck for decades. I find that being non-affiliated lets me be free to follow the Scriptures wherever they lead. I still go to church every week, I'm often invited to speak in various churches, and I teach a weekly adult class, but I simply cannot allow myself to commit to any church's doctrine. Having said that, I do my best to foster unity and faithfulness, avoiding divisive attitudes. I resist the pressure to "start my own church" because it's precisely the way that Christianity has become so notoriously divided. I still find that millions of Christians are eager to follow the Scriptures, and they recognize that no one church has it all figured out. Our devotion must be to Christ and Him alone. The Christian Scriptures are our best resource for determining the original attitudes and practices of Jesus and the earliest church.
I’d point out that the “Christians” that began utilizing basilicas in Eusebius’ time was just one branch of Christianity. It is not accurate to assume that all Christian’s were doing so. Rather throughout Christian history, there has always been a proto Christian assembly. The ones who pushed for and benefited from their association with Constantine, inevitably suffered from gross theological drift in their ecclesiology, liturgy, and subsequently theology. Pagan Christianity by Frank Viola is a great resource to Constantine’s consecration of pagan temples into Christian temples. Overall, I’d say this is a phenomenal presentation. Great job sir.
Thank you for your kind words. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
Thank you for your kind words. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
I read my Bible... worship is part of our devotion to God, what is sung is very important. I will lift up holy hands to worship God. Singing of what he has done to set me free.. is one of the ways.. it's not because God needs it.. he Loves when we make a joyful noise ... enter his gates with praise and thanks giving🙌🏼🙌🏼✝️
@@kelliwolk275 - I had a pastor Once who taught healthy relationship skills through learning your spouses love language. He liked to say that God’s love language was obedience. ❤️ (And if you’re not familiar with the five love languages, obedience wasn’t actually one of them!) 🤣 But it’s true. Obedience generally says that we trust him implicitly. That’s the foundation of a beautiful relationship with him.
hi Tom, you are so refreshing! Finally someone who speaks truth. The churches are in trouble. we, as a family, find we cannot even go to church, instead we have a family bible study at home and watch videos like yours. This has kept us spiritually awake and close to our heavenly Father for years.
Please remember....the church had bishops from very early times.......from whom Tom has been quoting profusely....what does this mean? Please think about it
@ksmathew6494 Quoting someone who claims to be a bishop does not imply agreement with their use of that title. In fact, Jesus specifically commanded against the use of honorific titles like "rabbi" or "teacher" among His followers in Matthew 23:8-10, emphasizing humility and equality among the brethren. Titles like "bishop" can create unnecessary hierarchies, which Jesus discouraged. Therefore, while you may reference someone's statements or teachings, it does not mean you endorse their use of a title that contradicts Jesus' teachings on humility and brotherhood.
Dear Tom - you have done an incredible service to the ecclesia of the Living God by sharing these presentations online. They encapsulate what some believe to be "the great falling away" from simple NT Christianity to a syncretistic mixing of paganism, Judaism and the vain traditions of men. It was many years ago in my reading of Acts and observing how the early church met I wondered why such gatherings/fellowship/agape feast were not like that for contemporary Christianity. When one really studies it like you have done, or for those who have listened to your presentations, it is clear that evangelicals, baptists and other non-Catholics do not hold the high ground in their "worship" or "services." It really is only a matter of degrees between their "low church" liturgy vs. "high church." I realize there are deep doctrinal differences between RC and others but in terms of gatherings and how "church" is done, it is really not much different. I know as I was delivered out of Catholicism by God's grace many years ago. All of your presentations have been wonderful as well as your presentation style, but this one really stood out to me as I've studied the Constantinian shift most notably around Christian "holy days" like Christmas. I don't know if you will ever coalesce your materials into a book, but I'd be one of the first to buy it if you ever do. Many blessings to you and hope to see more content in the future.
As I read through dozens of comments from people who simply don't understand what I'm saying, it's so refreshing to read a comment that "gets it." Thanks for your kind remarks. I think we're very much "on the same page." Concerning a book ... I'm working on it!
@marriage4life893 My study was primarily around Christmas. For the first 300 or so years of the church, they did not, from what I've found keep Christmas, or the Feast of the Nativity as it was initially called. And certainly not during the winter solstice. Instead, Rome celebrated the winter solstice like most nations of the world did as a time of feasting, sun worship, etc. When Constantine "Christianized" Rome and had citizens baptized, he also "Christianized" the Saturnalia which also was the birthday of Mithra and was formalized in 274 by Aurelian as the sun god's birthday. So Constantine, said to the people you now will celebrate the Son of God's birthday instead (= syncretism which is what formed the Roman Catholic religion; mix paganism with Christianity). A key reason for this is that the people did not want to give up the Saturnalia (which was very debauched) so Constantine found a compromise. Too much more to write - and traditions were added over the years but this is a very short snippet.
@@stmcgarret- “Christianized“ pagan holidays have bothered me since childhood, starting with Santa Claus, and an Easter bunny, being mixed in with the birth and death of Jesus Christ. Studying though roots of those characters/entities was an eye-opener. Even the triad of Mary, Joseph, Jesus has a pagan counterpart, and was one of the final mental nails in the coffin of my acceptance of these holidays. (I had already been uneasy with physical representations of Jesus, in light of the 10 Commandments.) Did your new understanding of things like the origins of Christmas change your life? As a family, we went through the process of gradually letting those things all go. Oh, we might still enjoy parties with loved ones at that time of year, just because it’s a convenient time to get together with everyone that we don’t see except when they’re having those kinds of parties, but it’s not to celebrate the holiday… On the contrary, it’s usually an opportunity to share why we don’t have a tree, why we don’t exchange presents, etc. Oh, and why we don’t even have a nativity scene. A lot of people still see Christmas and Easter in particular as important ways to instill faith in their children, for example. And I completely understand their reluctance to give up following Family holiday traditions and creating holiday memories for their children. But I do wonder, sometimes, how our heavenly father views all of this. To me, scripture suggests that it’s a good thing to let them all go. It’s “avoiding even the appearance of evil.“ Among other things. But as I travel in a grace-based church world, others see the practice of celebrating these holidays as part of the freedom they have in Christ.
@@bitrudder3792 Yes, my understanding did change things for me; some for the better, maybe some for the worse in pulling away from family activities and the like. Hard to know how hard to draw the line at times. The good is that I learned that so much of what is part of modern Christianity has no basis in the Scriptures and comes out of the syncretism of Rome that tried to "Christianize" paganism. This, in my view, is mystery Babylon. Yes, others do see it as their freedom in Christ which in part I agree with. I don't worry bout others as God will judge them; I only need to be concerned about my walk which is hard enough. Peace to you.
Very informative Tom. I knew of these things to a degree but you went into the history of them and tied them all together. Just amazing how fast the truth can be lost and a lie take its place. Everyone professing Christ should do everything they can to reverse these trends/traditions/evils and return to what Jesus Himself has made possible for us.
@@tomwadsworth Hello Tom, I live in Wales in the UK. The Lord led me out of an 'institutional' Pentecostal church last year, and I am seeking a house fellowship to join. Had a strong impression from God to return to New Testament patterns as we are in the End Times, and the institutional churches will have difficulty surviving the 'bumpy ride' we are heading into over the next few years. Thank you so much for your series, truly the Lord brought it up on my feed and I shall recommend it to others. You are speaking with a prophetic voice to our generation. God bless you.
Thanks for your comment. For me, the research involved in this video helped me understand how, why, and when the church shifted its focus to a "worship" model and away from an edification model. It all started with viewing the Lord's Supper as an actual sacrifice.
Tom, I followed your recommendation and watched this video. I cannot object to anything and I found it very informative. Thank you. I needed to add this: I am not surprised that the body of believers started to revolve around certain men and certain rituals. I have seen these sort of things happen throughout my life. It is what men do.
I really love this series! I've been very interested in what's going on in the church from the time of the apostles to the 300s. It's amazing how the so-called early church fathers were so confused!
What a God we have, that He would allow His church to go astray virtually from the beginning. Really? Then you better discard the doctrine of the Trinity, because that is only implicit - not explicit - in Scripture.
@@marksmale827 he allowed the Israelites to astray. He allowed Adam, King David, king Solomon, Moses to go astray. But he has preserved his word for us to study and rightly divide.
@@marksmale827 both. When Israel went to Egypt they came back an unbelieving mixed altitude. The Lord did daily miracles for them for 40 years and they refused to turn their hearts over to him, so he let them die in the wilderness in unbelief. He let his chosen people go astray. Those who seek the Lord find him. Those that are caught up in their traditions and religion he let’s go astray.
@@christopherlees1134 I love traditions and religion. We are so blessed to have them. They provide us with amazing channels of grace. Without wanting to boast, sometimes I am overwhelmed by an ocean of divine love. Enjoy your spiritual wilderness of scripture alone.
Thank you for your support. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
I became a follower of Jesus in 1974. .. On attending a local assembly of the church. I was confronted with a church service. It entailed singing from hymn and chorus books. Accompanied by a piano and organ. Also, on occasions guitars etc were used. These were also used in youth meetings, youth clubs, open air meetings, in schools, universities and other church assemblies. So, being aware of other members attitudes to such changes, has always been a concern. (Mainly the volume of the drums). We were not aware of the “worship wars”, as you call them. We transitioned over time. Because attendance was developing, growing, plus sadly over time older member died. It was a decreasing issue in regards to, “change”being an issue. Plus, the older folks at that time, were thrilled to see the assembly growing. Change for many is a difficult process. Yet, anything living goes through constant change. In the 70s I was 17. Now I’m 67. You talk of horizontal encouragement, when the body assembles. How can you love God if you don’t love your neighbour? They go hand in glove. Both are needed. This is part of what it is to live a “life” of worship. All the terms you used as “temple terms.” Sacrifice, bowing, prostrate, bend to kiss, kneel. They all denote an attitude. In the presence of God. As Christian’s we are always in Gods presence. Taking every thought captive, not being conformed to this world, dying to self, blessing others, being hospitable. Cutting your neighbours grass, taking others to hospital, loving your enemy, praying for those who use you. Freely giving. Working hard. Is all part of reasonable worship/service. In whatever you do, be it as unto God. In 1974 I was 17. Now I am 67. …. Praise God, I have been able to faithfully attending one church all my life. We did and do still sing old hymns, as well as ones written today. God still inhabits the praise of His people. I am still actively involved in worshiping and praising my God. .. There are times in the assembly when you’ll see people, kneeling, lying prostrate, bowing, raising hands. All of which can be totally irrelevant if your motivation is wrong. Worship, is a response to the awareness of His presence. Wherever that may be. Behold, the manner of love, the Father has bestowed upon us. That we can be called, children of God. There is an amazing Spiritual side to what you’ve discussed. Perhaps your unaware of. To be lost in His presence, (in a trance) is a place of holiness. It is personal. To trivialise this, is dangerous. …. We all approach the throne of Grace individually. I was glad, very glad, when they said unto me, let us go into the house of the Lord today. .. One thing I have asked of the LORD, that which I will seek after: that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, and gaze upon the beauty of the LORD. Amen.
Constantine mother accepted christainty early on and greatly influenced her son.She was instrumental in Constantine building this one church building because it was over the site of artifacts of the cross.Her influence helped lead to bringing artifacts of worship into the church.(nails from Christ's crucifiction,splinters from the cross,bones of apostles,etc.)THE details you provide about the early church strengthens our foundation greatly Tom.
A new connection just occurred to me with your comment. The word “ekklesia” Is the word we translate as “Church“ - but “ekklesia” means “called OUT” whereas “church” comes from a word that means “dedicated to.“ The followers of Jesus were “called out.” Out of what? Out of the old system, out of buildings, out of rituals? I think so. Or maybe it was simply called out to a new purpose. While it is nice to think that they were “dedicated to” being the “ekklesia” perhaps failing to translate that well made it easier to slip into error, And being “called out” was forgotten. The idea of dedicated people turned into the idea of dedicated places and objects and Sacred rituals. I wonder if that’s how that happened.
@@bitrudder3792 What you think is inrelevant. this silly ide that protestants have that individuals can come up with their own interpretations of scripture is ridiculous and dangerous for you soul.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 - Silly? irrelevant? God commands us to read his word, meditate on it night and day. Scripture is fairly straightforward in many ways. It is that way for a reason. People aren’t so stupid as you think. If reading scripture unsupervised was as dangerous as that, I think we would’ve had warnings throughout, both the old and new testament that we should NOT read it without an “expert“ nearby. But that’s not what we find. We find warnings to pay attention to teachers, and to figure out whether they are teaching scripturally, or if they are teaching something that is false. And the only way you can know the difference is if you are reading the scriptures yourself. And nothing about what I am saying here is in protest of anything in God‘s word. I could easily argue that you are protesting against God’s word. You are also implying that we should NOT be doing what we are told to do, which is to examine and question what we are taught.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 - oh wow, this video popped up on my feed, and it has nothing to do with Catholic versus protestant, but rather about the power of God‘s word in the life of a young woman. It’s one of the shorts it won’t take you long, but it cuts right to my point. th-cam.com/users/shortsWfNXbpFx-Co?si=mcus8CNgrwfxoerZ
@@bitrudder3792 That was a load of nonsense. Christ gave us a Church. The Church interprets the scripture not just any random guy. If you reject the authority of the Church you reject the authority of Christ. Also it seems the protestants don't even know what the real church is. Not the Roman Catholic church but rather the Orthodox Church.
Tom's point is: how does this edify the body? Paul says: If it is just for you, then do it at home (1 Cor 14:2, about tongues yes, but is equivalent) If I raised my hands during Assembly singing, I'd be the only one doing so... and how does that affect my brother? It isn't about me, it is about us.
@@geoffreygrounds5870. Seeing others worship can have a profound impact on others, encouraging them to give heart praise to the Lord. If we talk with our hands generally, why would we not do that when “talking” to the Lord?
Wow, wow, wow!!! Thank you, for confirming what I believed from reading the Bible. Your research is soooooo good. No one in the NT was called Pastor. Jesus commanded against such titles among the brethren. Matthew 23 8:12. The Church cannot go to church. Only churchgoers go to church.
Around the 3rd century the attitude of the leadership of the Christians was turning to an attitude of not questioning the local leaders, they know what's best so don't question them.
@@tomwadsworth I started to see it in Ignatius letter to the Magnesians. Meic Pierce talks about it in the "A Foggy Day in Olympus" podcast episode 13 "Women, Charismata, and the Rise of the Hierarchy in the Early Church" I struggle to read the letters of the Church Fathers but Meic Taught early church history at a local Weslyan College and has a good handle on them. Before listening to Meic I was of the opinion that the right doctrine for the use of Charismata was being lost And a more legalistic approach was being taken. That podcast validated that.
@@twistedlimb4053 Ignatius, writing ca. AD 105, said: “Let no one do anything that has to do with the church without the bishop. Only that Eucharist which is under the authority of the bishop (or whomever he himself designates) is to be considered valid.” (Smyrnaeans 8.1-2, Holmes translation). The "clergy" is definitely beginning to wield more power, even at that early stage ...
@@Benjamin-jo4rf You need to go to a real Church and partake in the sacraments such as Confession, Communion, Marriage, Baptism and others. You need a Priest and a spiritual father to guide you and not be guided by your delusions that are from the prince of the power of the air.
Tom, I just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed this video, and plan to share it with the mens Wednesday night Bible study class that I’ve been part of for about a decade. We’re about to start going through Frank Viola and George Barna’s Pagan Christianity, and I thought your set of videos about the misuse of the word worship would be a great resource for those wanting to go deeper. As to my state and denomination: I’m a life long resident of the Lone Star state of Texas. My Christian background began in Confessional Lutheranism (LCMS), but I’ve been active in several other traditions as well. I’ve fellowshipped with Baptists, Pentecostals, Methodists and folks within the Restoration Movement. I currently self-identify as post-denominational, although I’ve facilitate an adult SS class at a local now, Global Methodist Church, attend a men’s Wednesday night Bible study at a local church of Christ, facilitate a Wednesday morning Bible study at a local nursing home and Sunday morning gathering there as well. And on Sunday afternoons, my wife and I host a gathering at our place consisting of both current members of institutional churches and some who are currently non affiliated. I believe that, like one of your other commentators stated, the current institutional church is ill prepared to face what’s coming our way in the near future, unless there’s a dramatic change in the trajectory of our culture.
I think what we truly learned here is Constantine is the true first pope of the Catholic Church. He brought all the paganism to Christianity that the Catholic church has refused to get rid of
This is so good! Exactly what I have felt reading the early church fathers. There is a few brothers in the northeast that follow this such as Followers of the Way. I live in Florida and only know a handful of people that believe the same way. Looking for a congregation that believes the same and if anyone knows please let me know
Hi Tom. This is my fourth time listening thru your 7 part series and it really resonates with me. Too many thoughts to fit on a comment thread but I think we have copied the OT temple model rather than the NT ekklesia model. Sunday service becomes an end to itself rather than a preparation for going forth.
A truly excellent video! I found it so sad that it took so few years for the real meaning of ekklesia to be distorted. We really need to get back to the simplicity of gathering together and its purpose - "one anothering" - and "come out of her, my people", out of the corrupt entity that the ekklesia has become.
"GOD that made the world and ALL things therein, Seeing that ‘HE IS’ LORD of Heaven and Earth, Dwelleth 'N-O-T' in temples Made with hands; Neither is 'Worshipped' with men's hands, As though HE 'Needed' Anything, Seeing HE Giveth to All Life, and Breath, and All Things." (Acts 17:24-25) ~~~ :)
I was shocked by how early the idea of the Lord's supper was considered a sacrifice. I didn't see that you showed the development of that idea though. Were there any 2nd century writings before or even after Justin Martyr where church fathers didn't view the Lord's supper at sacrifice, but one can start the see the beginnings of this development? Also, even more shocking is how early ministers (elders? bishops?) are thought of as being "priests." I guess I have the same question regarding this development. Were there previous or even subsequent writings where it is clear that elders/bishops/presbyters were not thought of as priests. Thank you for sharing this important research.
Send me an email, and I can send you a paper with quotations and footnotes on both of these issues. You can find my email at my website at www.tomwadsworth.com.
I get the impression when Paul wrote to the church in Corinth and the church in Rome, that he wasn’t writing to a small group of people in a house. Paul also talked about the qualifications for deacons and elders and bishops, all of which indicate a large church body. There’s no room for deacons elders and bishops in a house gathering. How should we make sense of this?
It's likely that these larger cities had multiple house groups that were aware of each other. Note Acts 12:17. After Peter speaks to the assembly at Mary's house, he says to them, "'Tell James and the other brothers and sisters about this,' he said, and then he left for another place." But when Paul is writing to, say, Corinth, he is writing to the larger group of Christians in an entire city. Remember the Corinthian church had already divided into the Paul group, the Cephas group, the Apollos group, and the Jesus group (1 Cor 1:10ff). But when he writes, he addresses them all, assuming that the letter will be individually delivered to each cell group.
The basic assumption was based on the synagogue model. You needed 10 men and you would have a leader or elder directing them. This goes back to the way Moses was told to break the community down with leaders increasingly having more responsibility over the group. They carried that tradition on and was influential on the way they arranged the leadership of the ekklesia.
@@LordsSupperSociety Everything you said has been the common assumption for decades, but the evidence is lacking. My doctoral work included about three months of research into "the origins of the Christian assembly." While many have postulated that the synagogue is the origin, others have said it's based on the temple, and in the last 30 years, a new theory is that the Christian assembly is based on Greco-Roman associations and its banquet/symposium model. But all these theories have noteworthy drawbacks. When all is said and done, one must admit that these theories are only theories. After all, since Christianity was known for its new wine that needed fresh wineskins (Mk 2:22), its new covenant (Heb 9:15; 12:24), its new and living way (Heb 10:20), its new teaching (Acts 17:19), and its new song (Rev 5:9; 14:3), it is not a far-fetched idea that Christian gatherings might also be “new.” After all, the God who “makes all things new” (Rev 21:5) does not need to recycle and revamp some existing meeting tradition, whether from Jews or Greeks. The “newness” of Christianity does not negate the possibility that its meetings are patterned after some other meeting. But the “fresh wineskins” of the gospel should prompt-at least-the possibility that Christianity required no model.
I think this is a big reason so many people become so disallusioned with christianity. They try church after church, denomination after denomination, all because each time they understand something aint quite right about how its all going. Both in contrast to things described in the NT, as well as just the internal conscious moral compass god has given us. Not that all post 1st century church acrretions are neccesarily evil, or bad. (Many are, but not all) some may even be a great idea. But its the problem of every church, and majesterium, and what have you laying a strict claim either explicitly verbally, or at minumum with their behaviour, or refusal to do anything in any different way. It says to the people "you have to do it this way or you are doing it wrong" . Some like the catholics, and many of the "older" sects of Christianity go so far as to say that if you are outside their bounds of how they describe things need to be done in accordance to christianity, then you are anathema!. And all doing this while being damn near completly removed from how the first century christians practiced.
I love your effort in research! It brings a question to mind😅 concerning Acts 15, Councils!! These Saints whose words you quote, gave time and effort into the Canon of Scripture...assembly and preservation of!! They were at least of equal standing as ourselves😅 So in essence, we must somehow determine a point in time...to be an agreed upon point...when we can all agree on a "model" of what is involved in Assembly!? We look back at very basic (divisions of church timeline), big changes in 4th, 7th, 14th-16th, and 20th, give or take. Which do we judge legitimate, and based on what? Records and letters from eye-witnesses of The Lord? Or maybe 1st-hearers of those men? (Thinking of whispering in another's ear, and so on around the room...)
14:14 from Justin's letter, "when the reader ceases reading, the president in a discourse admonishes and urges the imitation of these good things" ..... similar to what Paul did in Acts 20v7 .... instances which sounds like, gasp, A SERMON like today. Oh my ...... Don't get me wrong. I fully agree with Tom in this 7 part series that 'the one another partcipation, exhortation and edification of the body of Christ' is severely absent and atrophied in the body of Chrust (the church) today. And that is a shame.
1:00 My definition of Teaching is "instruction on what to do or how to do it" whereas my definition for Preaching is "instruction on what NOT to do or how NOT to do it." 1:07:00 I would add to that, "allowing idolatries to grow within the church and also ostracizing the Christian Jews of the time." I would love to see a study on when and how the Christian Jews were erased from the Christian Religion in the early church. Did anyone in 2000 years ever wonder about the Jews or ask why the Jews didn't follow us in this religion? 1:12:00 I love what you say here. I tell people "I have a new message from God, but don't worry. It is only new to us. Christians in the 1st century already knew it." I think we need to do more studies about what we are doing wrong today in the church. It is obvious we are doing things wrong based upon discipleship patterns and also all the Pagans infiltrating the church (which are no longer secretive).
When someone is concerned about their afterlife it seems to me we should ask questions not in judgement of others but when it is that serious I would hope everyone ask questions.
For the purposes of my research and investigation, Ezekiel's vision of the temple (in chapters 40-48) provided several eye-opening details about how Ezekiel's contemporary Jews used the temple. In particular, Ezek 46:1-10 helped me see the standard procedure of the massive crowds of Jews who came to the temple during a feast. After entering the gate, they prostrated one by one, which fulfilled the requirement of presenting themselves to the Lord (Deut 16:16). They then proceeded--probably in a line--out the opposite gate of the temple. This process allowed everyone to fulfill their duties, and it served as excellent crowd control. Our typical anachronistic view of "temple worship" sees Jews gathering like modern Christians into a holy church structure and then singing, praying, etc. But Ezekiel uses the term proskuneo--they performed their obligatory prostration. Proskuneo, in its 265 occurrences in the LXX and NT, never refers to singing or praying or congregational ceremonies. It refers to prostration. Ezekiel's vision helped me understand that.
@@tomwadsworthTom, thank you for taking the trouble to present more detail on this important subject. I should have been more direct with my question. Earthy temples get done away with because the body of Christ has become the temple as i understand it. So why is there to be another earthy temple that I believe is being referred to in Ezekiel that will be established in the millennial reign? I realise this is a huge subject, but appreciate your understanding of these things. Thanks.
@@globalwarninguk You ask a good question. Since Ezekiel is not my field, I will defer to others who specialize in that study. As a New Testament guy, I can say that it's hard to arrive at firm conclusions when you're dealing with highly figurative apocalyptic language, such as is found in Ezekiel (the temple vision) and Revelation (the millennial reign). However, from clear and direct (non-apocalyptic) statements in the NT, we know that the Christian's body has now become the temple (Matt 1:23; 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; Eph 2:21; cf. Jer 31:31; Heb 8:8-12; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Rev 21:3). And the reason is clear: God now dwells within, and not in a man-made building. (See Video #3: The Temple that Changed Everything th-cam.com/video/jD00uwVXCQY/w-d-xo.html)
Malachi 1:11 doesn’t have the word sacrifice, but it does talk about an offering. I think it has a similar meaning. In my view, the meaning of the eucharist is indeed a sacrificial offering. We represent the sacrifice of Christ, but additionally we also join ourselves to him as we offer our lives as living sacrifices. So I think the sacrifice idea is not far from the truth, at least as I see it, even though this is not explicit in the New Testament. But I’m no authority, this is just how I discern it as a believer.
John 4:19-24, Jesus stated that the ceremonial, sacrificial aspects of Jewish Temple worship or the practices of the Samaritans on their mountain top would not be valid in the coming Christianity. The believers themselves are the priests who answer directly to Christ and God Himself.
I have a question. At about 23:38 you start referencing the "Epistle of Barnabas" which is not part of the Bible. What merit does quoting such a passage give us? Are you just using it as some form of historical reference?
Problem: You refuted yourself on the first early quotes. Central to your whole argument is the lack of verticality in the church's early gatherings. But now you've narrowed down to semantics -- looking for the actual term, 'worship.' The Didache quote clearly includes worship language even though it doesn't mention worship. They gathered together for the breaking of bread and to give thanks. The Ignatius quote talks about thanksgiving and glory to God and even (Charismatics would love this!) includes an aspect of spiritual warfare. Pliny talks about singing hymns to Christ. I mean, what's enough for you? If they didn't start out worshiping in any traditional sense, they seem to have gotten busy doing it quite quickly.
I admit to watching (so far) only one of your videos, ie, How we got worship wrong. Is it not true that after the Passover meal and before they left the Upper Room they first "sang a hymn"? Solomon installed 24-hr sessions of singers in the temple. After the destruction of that temple cantors led members in singing in their synagogues while in captivity and still do so to this day. My question to Dr Wadsworth is this, why the glee in his "discovery"? Yes, there is error in some parts of the church, but this does not mean Jesus is anti-singing in a gathering of believers. Even Paul said, "sing to one another...". Are you saying this happens only in private, as in a one-on-one greeting, instead of saying, "Hello, how are you?" If the person says, "I have the flu," is the friend to start singing a verse from scripture to encourage the friend? I believe this singing is done in a corporate setting, and not to be denounced. Dr Wadsworth, please enlighten us - do you gather with believers? If so, do you think it is wrong to sing praises to God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ? Or is it that you simply have an issue with a particular group of Christians, perhaps Pentecostals and Charismatics? I realise you have correctly translated the word worship. But this does not mean singing praises to the Lord is not worship. Jesus loves His Church / Ekklessia. After listening to your initial video on this matter of singing/worship, I wondered if you follow your own theses, and that every time you go to church you fall prostrate before the Lord? The Lord certainly deserves this kind of worship. However, the buildings in which we meet do not allow for much room to do this. Another question... do you ever sing to the Lord to praise Him? If so, why? What are you exactly doing when you sing to Him?
I highly suspect that you have not watched or understood the video. Yes, I gather weekly with believers and have done so for 50+ years. No, I do not think it's wrong to sing praises to God or Jesus. No, I'm not attacking any particular group.
Old Testament Israel was supposed to be a kingdom of priests, the whole nation had a priestly calling, yet that didn’t preclude the existence of a ministerial priesthood.
1:12:10 Constantine was not influential in the theological decisions of Nicea. Constantine was an Arian in his understanding of Jesus. But Arianism was rejected by the assembled bishops.
In the Garden of Eden there were no trappings. Religion is a result of the fall. In the Garden we lost the Holy Spirit. Sin had to be dealt with by a human so God sent his Son fully God and truly man. He put an end to sacrafice and when we become Believers we are cleansed from Sin and the Holy Spirit can fill our bodies the true temple.
I'm not sure what the thing about Polycarp at 26:00 has to do with what we are to do. This quote is clearly pagans saying that he teaches them not to sacrifice or worship their gods. It says nothing about what it means in regards to what we can do as Christians. It neither confirms of denies anything about Christian practices. It only talks about Christian attitude towards pagan gods.
You're right. It's possible that the Polycarp reference doesn't apply. But in this video, I didn't mention a couple of other references to prostration from the Fathers. Around 250 AD, Cyprian, the bishop of Carthage, ridiculed prostration because it requires you to gaze downward toward the underworld of demons and Satan and not upward to God in the heavens (Cyprian, An Address to Demetrianus 16). Then, around 300 AD, the Christian writer Lactantius made the same point about the depravity of the act of prostration (Lactantius, The Divine Institutes 2.2; cf. The Epitome of the Divine Institutes 57). In other words, there is reason to think that early Christianity was not only opposed to sacrifice (which Polycarp mentions), it may have also been opposed to prostration (which Polycarp also mentions). Remember: In the world of Jews, prostration essentially stopped when the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. Prostration was the central focus of their requirement to "present themselves before the Lord" in the Temple (Dt. 16:16). But when the Temple is gone, ritual prostration (by Jews) also went away. Besides all that, where is there evidence that Christians routinely prostrated in their meetings? To my knowledge, such evidence does not exist. I'm actually surprised that some comments are clamoring for the right to be prostrating in their meetings. Is this really a thing? I have more on this in my dissertation. If you'd like a free copy, send me an email. You can find me at my website at tomwadsworth.com.
Define worship services. The mass was formalized between the years 30-50 AD. It was never called a worship service. It was and still is called the Celebration of the Eucharist and remains to this day much unchanged. It is a beautiful blending of the Troha reading, and the words of Jesus with songs, music, art and gestors such as the sign of the cross. Sometimes using bells and incense as symbolic representation of our prayers lifting to heaven. Stain glass windows, paintings and sculpture with stories visualized as another way to understand and contemplate the spoken and written words of Jesus and the prophets.
Mass Formalized in 30 - 50 AD ? My man what are you getting that from? Cause it certiantly isn't the NT which are the only Christian documents, and teachings that could possibly exist that early.
Hi, this is very interesting, but I have a question. Romans 8:1 says that we offer our bodies as a living sacrifice to God, which I would interpret as worshipping God by our lifestyle etc. Why would it be wrong then to incorporate music and other things there if it causes our bodies to serve God as a living sacrifice by our works? Thanks for the video though, God bless you.
The question I'd have to ask first is what gives you the idea that the church was always going to be prevented from accretions? All throughout thr new testimate the apostles are constantly having to go to churches they already established to correct them on teachings they have disobeyed, forget, or new rules, a d tea him they have implemented that the apostles didn't tell them to do. What reason would this kind of thing stop after the apostles were gone if it was constantly happening while they were still around?
The parable of the mustard seed and the letter to the church in Pergamum describe the church being infiltrated by servants of Satan and the greed of men. The theme continued and expanded with the parable of the hidden leaven and the letter to the church in Thyatira. The Roman emperor Theodosius I (his name means "gift of god") made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire on Feb 27, 380 CE with the Edict of Thessalonica which recognized Nicene Christianity as the official religion. The Church and State were blended and the State began to appoint the elders. Theodosius solidified what Constantine began.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 Only that the state, the Roman Empire, recognized Christianity as outlined by the counsel of Nicaea. Considering Constantine financially supported the meeting and paid for many of the attendees travel and accommodations.
According to What Patterns and Dignity Every Order of the Clergy is Appointed by God. XXVI. The bishop, he is the minister of the word, the keeper of knowledge, the mediator between God and you in the several parts of your divine worship. He is the teacher of piety; and, next after God, he is your father, who has begotten you again to the adoption of sons by water and the Spirit. He is your ruler and governor; he is your king and potentate; he is, next after God, your earthly god, who has a right to be honoured by you. For concerning him, and such as he, it is that God pronounces, I have said, You are gods; and you are all children of the Most High. And, You shall not speak evil of the gods. Exodus 22:28 For let the bishop preside over you as one honoured with the authority of God, which he is to exercise over the clergy, and by which he is to govern all the people. But let the deacon minister to him, as Christ does to His Father; and let him serve him unblameably in all things, as Christ does nothing of Himself, but does always those things that please His Father. Let also the deaconess be honoured by you in the place of the Holy Ghost, and not do or say anything without the deacon; as neither does the Comforter say or do anything of Himself, but gives glory to Christ by waiting for His pleasure. And as we cannot believe in Christ without the teaching of the Spirit, so let not any woman address herself to the deacon or bishop without the deaconess. Let the presbyters be esteemed by you to represent us the apostles, and let them be the teachers of divine knowledge; since our Lord, when He sent us, said, Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. Matthew 28:19 Let the widows and orphans be esteemed as representing the altar of burnt-offering; and let the virgins be honoured as representing the altar of incense, and the incense itself.
Around 35min in you talk about offering the sacrifice of communion as bizarre. My understanding of what the church fathers are saying here is different to yours. What I understand is that the only sacrifice that is acceptable to God is the sacrifice that he has given to us in the body and blood of Jesus for the forgiveness of sin.
At time 1h 3 minutes "there is nothing in the NT to imply the Eucharist is an offering" see 1 Cor 10:14-22. The Eucharist and its table is contrasted with the altar of demons. Through the blood and bread we commune with Christ. Those that eat the meat sacrificed to idols commune with the god of that altar. If you partake of the Lord's Table you commune with Christ, if you partake of the altar of demons you commune with demons. The Greek word for Table is trapezēs which is the same word used in the Septuagint (Exodus 25:20) for the Table the show bread is offered on. There is a strong argument for Paul, through this contrasting of the Eucharist with the offerings to demons, viewing the Eucharist as an offering. In 1 Cor 11 Paul points out that those partaking of the body and blood unworthily are sick and dead, intoning that these gifts offered to God are now holy in the same sense as OT offerings became holy and could only be consumed by undefiled priests. The Showbread is a holy offering pre-figuring Christ.
The pre 3rd century Catholic form of worship could be closest to how the apostles worshipped. It was God who gave the dimensions of the first worship site and the rules and regulations fo follow. However it was akways about the heart and worshipping God in spirit and truth.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 See what delusion does to one's mind. I see what I want to see, I hear what I want to hear. Why? Because I can. What about facts? Oh I make my own facts.
Pleasant good day to all didn't they pray and fasted durimg these gathering and collected offerings and minister those who had the knowledge to do so to edify the new converts. What is prayer if it's not worship. When they fasted and prayed the Paul will be loosed out of prison what exactly do you call that? The early Church (first century) worshipped in Jewish synagogues on Saturday, and then met in their own private homes on Sunday morning. Near the end of the first century, the Christians were expelled from the synagogues, so most of them met in private homes for the next 150 years or so. The earliest known Christian building set aside exclusively for worship was built around 240 AD. You should ask the question why have christians abandoned the Sabbath commandment when the early church obviously kept the sabbath. He that breaketh the lease of the commandments are guilty of all. We are to be most of all walking in obedience to God. Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
Actually it looks as though when Constantine came into this picture. Paganism mixed with Christianity creating the Roman Catholic church of which I grew up in. Leading to the exalting of priests and pagan idolatry with statues and blasphemy of what they call communion.
My research indicates that Christianity began regarding its ministers as "priests" long before Constantine was even born. Lots of changes to Christianity happened after Constantine became the sole emperor. I know that he is commonly blamed for "mixing paganism with Christianity," but my research indicates that Constantine had little to do with any encroaching paganism in the church. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'm all ears!
@@tomwadsworth Lineage Journey has an article on Constantine and Compromise. Although the formal start of Roman Catholicism did not come until around 590 it does seem to have it's roots back to Constantine.
@@doncc6080 I think it's highly problematic to say that "the formal start of Roman Catholicism did not come until around 590." I suspect that no scholars of early church history, whether Catholic or Protestant, would agree with that statement.
Thank you for your kind words. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
Tom, thank you so much for this outstanding series. As an ex-Catholic, and as someone who has meandered in and out of various denominations, I have desired to know why and how we ended up with an organised, religious ritual, so far removed from the intimately natural and spiritual gathering of the assembly as described in the days of the apostles. Your research and presentation has saved me a lot of leg work -- what a great presentation. All glory to Christ Jesus, our Lord, for steering us away from the traditions of men, and toward his Good News.
These videos have stirred up a variety of reactions. Yours is the reaction I hoped for.
@tomwadsworth Bless you Tom. I have listened to your talks twice now. Truly an answer to my prayers. For reasons I can only attribute to the Lord's merciful protection, I have always keenly delineated between the New Testament and the early church writings which followed. Even when preachers -- so called -- or theologians, would appeal to these extrabiblical sources, I never felt at ease, nor was there a sense of edification on behalf of the congregation. Non-inspired ancient correspondences did not make for a good argument, vis-a-vis 'why we do things this way'.
Granted, these early writings are a historical curiosity, and can certainly serve a purpose, as you showed when referencing the post-apostolic writings, but what they primarily show is where and when the seeds of heresy began: works-based soteriology, clergy-laity boundaries, the sacramental system, etc.
Tom, I still have a hard time speaking in ‘church’ language, or partaking in hymnal singing, even when it comes to using seemingly orthodox terms like ‘trinity’, or ‘three persons in one’. I see in scripture that Jesus is the Word, and that the Word is God, and the He and the Father are one, and that the Spirit is Lord, etc, but because I don’t see Paul and the other NT writers using such language as 'trinity' etc, and seeing that they never communicated such profundities in that manner, I wish we would also resist this tendency to truncate God into ‘convenient’ creedal formulae.
Anyway Tom I won’t take up more of your time. I pray that many more will find your teaching series and seriously consider your sound, biblically-based case, because God’s people need to be freed from the shackles of regimented religiosity, and in dong so, they will better grasp the One in Whom we have our salvation, rest and assurance, They will also attain a better approach as to the true purpose of our gathering together. Your point about ‘horizontal vs vertical’ fellowship and the N’T’s appeal to ‘oneanotherism’ was outstanding.
The Lord be with your spirit dear brother !
@@persiandrum9871 I agree with everything you said! If you don't mind, can you tell me: (1) your current church affiliation and (2) any formal theological education you have?
@@tomwadsworth Dear Tom, again thanks for your reply. I would love to stay in touch via your email, if you are okay with that, but in the meantime, in answer to your questions here in the comments thread, here is a summary:
Until recently, I was unchurched for a decade plus, after attending various denominations, including Presbyterian and a Messianic fellowship Only this year I have begun attending a Reform Baptist assembly in the Blue Mountains of Australia (still called 'church' of course). The reason for my attendance there after such a long hiatus is to support a friend there who is new to the faith, to answer any questions she might have.
I must admit, even though I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment of the current form of 'worship', it is nice to be in a fellowship again. With that said, it does feel disingenuous - on my part - to carry out all the rituals of standing, sitting, ‘the Lord’s supper’, formal creeds and prayers, etc, knowing that this is alien to the NT model of ‘church’, i.e., the assembly of the saints. I sometimes roll my eyes when the ‘vicar’ refers to ‘Saint’ Paul or ‘Saint’ John. Where in scripture, I ask myself, do we address certain saints as ‘Saint’, while not others?
Still, it is far more favourable than the theatre of my old Roman Catholic days. I won’t lie, there is still a sentimental nostalgia for the earthly beauty of Romanism, with its ‘bells and smells’, but I could never return to such a setting, with its Mariology, prayers to dead saints, holy water, relic worship, the Mass, etc.
Tom I sat in a theological college in Sydney, many years back now, but gave up after a few short months. It was too academic, and the classes seemed to comprise of thematic analyses of the narrative of the Bible, as though it were a literary piece, like Tolkien or Joyce, rather than the truthful, historical Word of God.
Most of my understanding of scripture has come from faithful men such as yourself, those who may not have millions of subscribers, but are nevertheless zealous for the gospel of Christ, and are equipped to teach biblical truths, without the filter of a denominational tradition, or historic creed.
One last thing - apologies for my long-windedness Tom but I appreciate being in touch with a Christian such as yourself - after 20 odd years reading the bible through a Darby-Scofield-Dispensationalist lens, I have, since 2021, been studying the Good Book through a Preterist ‘audience relevance’ framework.
If you don’t mind me asking, is the (full) Preterist paradigm something that you and your congregation hold? Or is it seen as erroneous? In the Baptist congregation where I am now situated, I may be the only Preterist there. The (mainly older) congregation members seem to advocate for the State of Israel as being the epicentre of prophecies still yet to be fulfilled, so it is a little awkward when the topic comes up. Needless to say, I no longer hold such views.
God bless you Tom, looking forward to hearing from you when - and if - you have time.
PD
@@persiandrum9871 Thanks for the helpful response. I agree with so much of your reply.
Concerning the Preterist position ... I definitely think that Matt 24 is primarily talking about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. I don't know how to avoid that conclusion. I resist being pigeon-holed into any of the common modern categories of eschatology. I just try to deal honestly with the biblical text., regardless of where it leads me.
I also resist "advocating for the State of Israel as being the epicenter of prophecies yet to be fulfilled." That view is common in American Evangelicalism, and it leads to a host of problems.
I should add that I don't have a congregation. I've been free from being tied to any church paycheck for decades. I find that being non-affiliated lets me be free to follow the Scriptures wherever they lead. I still go to church every week, I'm often invited to speak in various churches, and I teach a weekly adult class, but I simply cannot allow myself to commit to any church's doctrine.
Having said that, I do my best to foster unity and faithfulness, avoiding divisive attitudes. I resist the pressure to "start my own church" because it's precisely the way that Christianity has become so notoriously divided. I still find that millions of Christians are eager to follow the Scriptures, and they recognize that no one church has it all figured out. Our devotion must be to Christ and Him alone. The Christian Scriptures are our best resource for determining the original attitudes and practices of Jesus and the earliest church.
I’d point out that the “Christians” that began utilizing basilicas in Eusebius’ time was just one branch of Christianity. It is not accurate to assume that all Christian’s were doing so. Rather throughout Christian history, there has always been a proto Christian assembly. The ones who pushed for and benefited from their association with Constantine, inevitably suffered from gross theological drift in their ecclesiology, liturgy, and subsequently theology.
Pagan Christianity by Frank Viola is a great resource to Constantine’s consecration of pagan temples into Christian temples.
Overall, I’d say this is a phenomenal presentation. Great job sir.
I agree Viola book is awesome
Great job! speaking the truth in love
Thank you for your kind words. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
Thank you for your kind words. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
I read my Bible... worship is part of our devotion to God, what is sung is very important. I will lift up holy hands to worship God. Singing of what he has done to set me free.. is one of the ways..
it's not because God needs it.. he Loves when we make a joyful noise ... enter his gates with praise and thanks giving🙌🏼🙌🏼✝️
It’s just that nowadays, the gates are metaphorical.😊
Actually obedience is how we worship God.
@@kelliwolk275 - I had a pastor Once who taught healthy relationship skills through learning your spouses love language. He liked to say that God’s love language was obedience. ❤️ (And if you’re not familiar with the five love languages, obedience wasn’t actually one of them!) 🤣 But it’s true. Obedience generally says that we trust him implicitly. That’s the foundation of a beautiful relationship with him.
@@kelliwolk275There are many ways to worship…by investing God, by loving our neighbor & by ascribing to God the praises due His name.
Heb. 13:15 By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.
Hi all viewers. Can't thank you enough Tom.Thanks for this presentation. Best wishes to all, AJ225
hi Tom, you are so refreshing! Finally someone who speaks truth. The churches are in trouble. we, as a family, find we cannot even go to church, instead we have a family bible study at home and watch videos like yours. This has kept us spiritually awake and close to our heavenly Father for years.
The Church doesn't go to church, church goers go to church.
Please remember....the church had bishops from very early times.......from whom Tom has been quoting profusely....what does this mean? Please think about it
@ksmathew6494 Quoting someone who claims to be a bishop does not imply agreement with their use of that title. In fact, Jesus specifically commanded against the use of honorific titles like "rabbi" or "teacher" among His followers in Matthew 23:8-10, emphasizing humility and equality among the brethren. Titles like "bishop" can create unnecessary hierarchies, which Jesus discouraged. Therefore, while you may reference someone's statements or teachings, it does not mean you endorse their use of a title that contradicts Jesus' teachings on humility and brotherhood.
10:53
@@ksmathew6494
..,.
Dear Tom - you have done an incredible service to the ecclesia of the Living God by sharing these presentations online. They encapsulate what some believe to be "the great falling away" from simple NT Christianity to a syncretistic mixing of paganism, Judaism and the vain traditions of men. It was many years ago in my reading of Acts and observing how the early church met I wondered why such gatherings/fellowship/agape feast were not like that for contemporary Christianity. When one really studies it like you have done, or for those who have listened to your presentations, it is clear that evangelicals, baptists and other non-Catholics do not hold the high ground in their "worship" or "services." It really is only a matter of degrees between their "low church" liturgy vs. "high church." I realize there are deep doctrinal differences between RC and others but in terms of gatherings and how "church" is done, it is really not much different. I know as I was delivered out of Catholicism by God's grace many years ago.
All of your presentations have been wonderful as well as your presentation style, but this one really stood out to me as I've studied the Constantinian shift most notably around Christian "holy days" like Christmas. I don't know if you will ever coalesce your materials into a book, but I'd be one of the first to buy it if you ever do.
Many blessings to you and hope to see more content in the future.
As I read through dozens of comments from people who simply don't understand what I'm saying, it's so refreshing to read a comment that "gets it." Thanks for your kind remarks. I think we're very much "on the same page."
Concerning a book ... I'm working on it!
@marriage4life893 My study was primarily around Christmas. For the first 300 or so years of the church, they did not, from what I've found keep Christmas, or the Feast of the Nativity as it was initially called. And certainly not during the winter solstice. Instead, Rome celebrated the winter solstice like most nations of the world did as a time of feasting, sun worship, etc. When Constantine "Christianized" Rome and had citizens baptized, he also "Christianized" the Saturnalia which also was the birthday of Mithra and was formalized in 274 by Aurelian as the sun god's birthday. So Constantine, said to the people you now will celebrate the Son of God's birthday instead (= syncretism which is what formed the Roman Catholic religion; mix paganism with Christianity). A key reason for this is that the people did not want to give up the Saturnalia (which was very debauched) so Constantine found a compromise. Too much more to write - and traditions were added over the years but this is a very short snippet.
I’m next in line for that book! 🙋🏻♀️
@@stmcgarret- “Christianized“ pagan holidays have bothered me since childhood, starting with Santa Claus, and an Easter bunny, being mixed in with the birth and death of Jesus Christ. Studying though roots of those characters/entities was an eye-opener. Even the triad of Mary, Joseph, Jesus has a pagan counterpart, and was one of the final mental nails in the coffin of my acceptance of these holidays. (I had already been uneasy with physical representations of Jesus, in light of the 10 Commandments.)
Did your new understanding of things like the origins of Christmas change your life? As a family, we went through the process of gradually letting those things all go. Oh, we might still enjoy parties with loved ones at that time of year, just because it’s a convenient time to get together with everyone that we don’t see except when they’re having those kinds of parties, but it’s not to celebrate the holiday… On the contrary, it’s usually an opportunity to share why we don’t have a tree, why we don’t exchange presents, etc. Oh, and why we don’t even have a nativity scene. A lot of people still see Christmas and Easter in particular as important ways to instill faith in their children, for example. And I completely understand their reluctance to give up following Family holiday traditions and creating holiday memories for their children. But I do wonder, sometimes, how our heavenly father views all of this. To me, scripture suggests that it’s a good thing to let them all go. It’s “avoiding even the appearance of evil.“ Among other things. But as I travel in a grace-based church world, others see the practice of celebrating these holidays as part of the freedom they have in Christ.
@@bitrudder3792 Yes, my understanding did change things for me; some for the better, maybe some for the worse in pulling away from family activities and the like. Hard to know how hard to draw the line at times. The good is that I learned that so much of what is part of modern Christianity has no basis in the Scriptures and comes out of the syncretism of Rome that tried to "Christianize" paganism. This, in my view, is mystery Babylon.
Yes, others do see it as their freedom in Christ which in part I agree with. I don't worry bout others as God will judge them; I only need to be concerned about my walk which is hard enough. Peace to you.
Very informative Tom. I knew of these things to a degree but you went into the history of them and tied them all together. Just amazing how fast the truth can be lost and a lie take its place. Everyone professing Christ should do everything they can to reverse these trends/traditions/evils and return to what Jesus Himself has made possible for us.
The Holy Spirit is doing such a great work. The Lord's sheep will always know His voice. Glory to Jesus
One would hope that they also recognise wolves in sheep’s clothing….
Extremely helpful and eye opening ❤
Thank you so much for all the work you put into this, very easy to understand and well presented.
Thanks for your kind remarks. Can I ask, What state are you from, and To what denomination are you most accustomed?
@@tomwadsworth Hello Tom, I live in Wales in the UK. The Lord led me out of an 'institutional' Pentecostal church last year, and I am seeking a house fellowship to join. Had a strong impression from God to return to New Testament patterns as we are in the End Times, and the institutional churches will have difficulty surviving the 'bumpy ride' we are heading into over the next few years. Thank you so much for your series, truly the Lord brought it up on my feed and I shall recommend it to others. You are speaking with a prophetic voice to our generation. God bless you.
Fascinating. Thanks for your diligence in looking through all that stuff.
Thanks for your comment. For me, the research involved in this video helped me understand how, why, and when the church shifted its focus to a "worship" model and away from an edification model. It all started with viewing the Lord's Supper as an actual sacrifice.
Thank you so much for this content. I am overwhelmed by all of this. What's more you have edified the body of Christ with this content. God bless you.
Tom, I followed your recommendation and watched this video. I cannot object to anything and I found it very informative. Thank you.
I needed to add this: I am not surprised that the body of believers started to revolve around certain men and certain rituals. I have seen these sort of things happen throughout my life. It is what men do.
This is priceless teaching thank you
I really love this series! I've been very interested in what's going on in the church from the time of the apostles to the 300s. It's amazing how the so-called early church fathers were so confused!
What a God we have, that He would allow His church to go astray virtually from the beginning. Really? Then you better discard the doctrine of the Trinity, because that is only implicit - not explicit - in Scripture.
@@marksmale827 he allowed the Israelites to astray. He allowed Adam, King David, king Solomon, Moses to go astray. But he has preserved his word for us to study and rightly divide.
@@christopherlees1134 Are you talking about beliefs or behaviour? They are two very different things.
@@marksmale827 both. When Israel went to Egypt they came back an unbelieving mixed altitude. The Lord did daily miracles for them for 40 years and they refused to turn their hearts over to him, so he let them die in the wilderness in unbelief. He let his chosen people go astray.
Those who seek the Lord find him. Those that are caught up in their traditions and religion he let’s go astray.
@@christopherlees1134 I love traditions and religion. We are so blessed to have them. They provide us with amazing channels of grace. Without wanting to boast, sometimes I am overwhelmed by an ocean of divine love.
Enjoy your spiritual wilderness of scripture alone.
I have totally loved this deep dive into history. I knew some of it but the Ante-Nicene Fathers part really did it for me. Thank you Tom.
Awesome Awesome Awesome Awesome Awesome Awesome Awesome Awesome
Thank you for your support. I'm working on a book on this topic. If you'd like to be updated on its publication, you can join the email list at tomwadsworth.com/contact.
Great! Backs up many of my instincts based on bits of info here n there. Thank you!
I became a follower of Jesus in 1974. .. On attending a local assembly of the church. I was confronted with a church service. It entailed singing from hymn and chorus books. Accompanied by a piano and organ. Also, on occasions guitars etc were used. These were also used in youth meetings, youth clubs, open air meetings, in schools, universities and other church assemblies.
So, being aware of other members attitudes to such changes, has always been a concern. (Mainly the volume of the drums). We were not aware of the “worship wars”, as you call them. We transitioned over time. Because attendance was developing, growing, plus sadly over time older member died. It was a decreasing issue in regards to, “change”being an issue. Plus, the older folks at that time, were thrilled to see the assembly growing. Change for many is a difficult process. Yet, anything living goes through constant change. In the 70s I was 17. Now I’m 67.
You talk of horizontal encouragement, when the body assembles. How can you love God if you don’t love your neighbour? They go hand in glove. Both are needed. This is part of what it is to live a “life” of worship.
All the terms you used as “temple terms.” Sacrifice, bowing, prostrate, bend to kiss, kneel. They all denote an attitude.
In the presence of God. As Christian’s we are always in Gods presence. Taking every thought captive, not being conformed to this world, dying to self, blessing others, being hospitable. Cutting your neighbours grass, taking others to hospital, loving your enemy, praying for those who use you. Freely giving. Working hard. Is all part of reasonable worship/service. In whatever you do, be it as unto God.
In 1974 I was 17. Now I am 67. …. Praise God, I have been able to faithfully attending one church all my life. We did and do still sing old hymns, as well as ones written today. God still inhabits the praise of His people. I am still actively involved in worshiping and praising my God. ..
There are times in the assembly when you’ll see people, kneeling, lying prostrate, bowing, raising hands. All of which can be totally irrelevant if your motivation is wrong. Worship, is a response to the awareness of His presence. Wherever that may be.
Behold, the manner of love, the Father has bestowed upon us. That we can be called, children of God. There is an amazing Spiritual side to what you’ve discussed. Perhaps your unaware of.
To be lost in His presence, (in a trance) is a place of holiness. It is personal. To trivialise this, is dangerous. …. We all approach the throne of Grace individually.
I was glad, very glad, when they said unto me, let us go into the house of the Lord today. .. One thing I have asked of the LORD, that which I will seek after: that I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, and gaze upon the beauty of the LORD. Amen.
Beautiful
Constantine mother accepted christainty early on and greatly influenced her son.She was instrumental in Constantine building this one church building because it was over the site of artifacts of the cross.Her influence helped lead to bringing artifacts of worship into the church.(nails from Christ's crucifiction,splinters from the cross,bones of apostles,etc.)THE details you provide about the early church strengthens our foundation greatly Tom.
Maybe this is why change is in the atmosphere. The idea of vertical and horizontal is power. 😊😊😊❤❤❤❤
I'm enjoying this a lot. It's mind-blowing. And doc puts a smile on my faces. This brother is really funny.
Tom, thank you for this very informative series!!!
Thank you for all the work you put into these videos! Wonderful information...
I’m so relieved to see this kind of content coming out. The “church” walls are cracking.
A new connection just occurred to me with your comment. The word “ekklesia” Is the word we translate as “Church“ - but “ekklesia” means “called OUT” whereas “church” comes from a word that means “dedicated to.“ The followers of Jesus were “called out.” Out of what? Out of the old system, out of buildings, out of rituals? I think so. Or maybe it was simply called out to a new purpose. While it is nice to think that they were “dedicated to” being the “ekklesia” perhaps failing to translate that well made it easier to slip into error, And being “called out” was forgotten. The idea of dedicated people turned into the idea of dedicated places and objects and Sacred rituals. I wonder if that’s how that happened.
@@bitrudder3792 What you think is inrelevant. this silly ide that protestants have that individuals can come up with their own interpretations of scripture is ridiculous and dangerous for you soul.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 - Silly? irrelevant? God commands us to read his word, meditate on it night and day. Scripture is fairly straightforward in many ways. It is that way for a reason. People aren’t so stupid as you think. If reading scripture unsupervised was as dangerous as that, I think we would’ve had warnings throughout, both the old and new testament that we should NOT read it without an “expert“ nearby. But that’s not what we find. We find warnings to pay attention to teachers, and to figure out whether they are teaching scripturally, or if they are teaching something that is false. And the only way you can know the difference is if you are reading the scriptures yourself. And nothing about what I am saying here is in protest of anything in God‘s word. I could easily argue that you are protesting against God’s word. You are also implying that we should NOT be doing what we are told to do, which is to examine and question what we are taught.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 - oh wow, this video popped up on my feed, and it has nothing to do with Catholic versus protestant, but rather about the power of God‘s word in the life of a young woman. It’s one of the shorts it won’t take you long, but it cuts right to my point. th-cam.com/users/shortsWfNXbpFx-Co?si=mcus8CNgrwfxoerZ
@@bitrudder3792 That was a load of nonsense. Christ gave us a Church. The Church interprets the scripture not just any random guy. If you reject the authority of the Church you reject the authority of Christ. Also it seems the protestants don't even know what the real church is. Not the Roman Catholic church but rather the Orthodox Church.
I'm not embarrassed to lift up holy hands to the Lord. I do it as surrender of my flesh..
Tom's point is: how does this edify the body? Paul says: If it is just for you, then do it at home (1 Cor 14:2, about tongues yes, but is equivalent)
If I raised my hands during Assembly singing, I'd be the only one doing so... and how does that affect my brother? It isn't about me, it is about us.
@@geoffreygrounds5870. Seeing others worship can have a profound impact on others, encouraging them to give heart praise to the Lord.
If we talk with our hands generally, why would we not do that when “talking” to the Lord?
This is so good!
Thanks for your kind remarks. Can I ask, What state are you from, and To what denomination are you most accustomed?
Wow, wow, wow!!! Thank you, for confirming what I believed from reading the Bible. Your research is soooooo good. No one in the NT was called Pastor. Jesus commanded against such titles among the brethren. Matthew 23 8:12.
The Church cannot go to church. Only churchgoers go to church.
This series started of by looking at "worship", but has now become about pretty much everything. Thank you Tom.
Around the 3rd century the attitude of the leadership of the Christians was turning to an attitude of not questioning the local leaders, they know what's best so don't question them.
That makes sense, but do you have evidence of that?
@@tomwadsworth I started to see it in Ignatius letter to the Magnesians. Meic Pierce talks about it in the "A Foggy Day in Olympus" podcast episode 13 "Women, Charismata, and the Rise of the Hierarchy in the Early Church" I struggle to read the letters of the Church Fathers but Meic Taught early church history at a local Weslyan College and has a good handle on them. Before listening to Meic I was of the opinion that the right doctrine for the use of Charismata was being lost And a more legalistic approach was being taken. That podcast validated that.
@@twistedlimb4053 Ignatius, writing ca. AD 105, said: “Let no one do anything that has to do with the church without the bishop. Only that Eucharist which is under the authority of the bishop (or whomever he himself designates) is to be considered valid.” (Smyrnaeans 8.1-2, Holmes translation). The "clergy" is definitely beginning to wield more power, even at that early stage ...
I set up my home church to build up my neighbours exactly as your video mention. Praise the Lord for this con firmation.
That is not how that works.
@@arnoldvezbon6131please tell me then “how it works “?
@@Benjamin-jo4rf You need to go to a real Church and partake in the sacraments such as Confession, Communion, Marriage, Baptism and others. You need a Priest and a spiritual father to guide you and not be guided by your delusions that are from the prince of the power of the air.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 what constitutes a real church? Does it have to have orthodox in its name?
@@Benjamin-jo4rf Absolutely.
Fascinating. You have made this subject simple and interesting. Very helpful. Thanks
Tom, I just wanted to let you know how much I enjoyed this video, and plan to share it with the mens Wednesday night Bible study class that I’ve been part of for about a decade. We’re about to start going through Frank Viola and George Barna’s Pagan Christianity, and I thought your set of videos about the misuse of the word worship would be a great resource for those wanting to go deeper. As to my state and denomination: I’m a life long resident of the Lone Star state of Texas. My Christian background began in Confessional Lutheranism (LCMS), but I’ve been active in several other traditions as well. I’ve fellowshipped with Baptists, Pentecostals, Methodists and folks within the Restoration Movement. I currently self-identify as post-denominational, although I’ve facilitate an adult SS class at a local now, Global Methodist Church, attend a men’s Wednesday night Bible study at a local church of Christ, facilitate a Wednesday morning Bible study at a local nursing home and Sunday morning gathering there as well. And on Sunday afternoons, my wife and I host a gathering at our place consisting of both current members of institutional churches and some who are currently non affiliated. I believe that, like one of your other commentators stated, the current institutional church is ill prepared to face what’s coming our way in the near future, unless there’s a dramatic change in the trajectory of our culture.
I think what we truly learned here is Constantine is the true first pope of the Catholic Church. He brought all the paganism to Christianity that the Catholic church has refused to get rid of
There was no Roman Catholic Church during Constantine's reign. So you learned nothing. In fact you were mislead.
This is so good! Exactly what I have felt reading the early church fathers. There is a few brothers in the northeast that follow this such as Followers of the Way. I live in Florida and only know a handful of people that believe the same way. Looking for a congregation that believes the same and if anyone knows please let me know
The early church fathers all participate in the Devine Liturgy and partook of the Holy sacraments.
Wow good stuff. ❤
Do you mind telling me ...What state are you from, and To what denomination are you most accustomed?
The main objective of worshipping God is to trust God and create peace on earth!!!
The phrase, "Sad but true" fits so well here.
Hi Tom. This is my fourth time listening thru your 7 part series and it really resonates with me. Too many thoughts to fit on a comment thread but I think we have copied the OT temple model rather than the NT ekklesia model. Sunday service becomes an end to itself rather than a preparation for going forth.
Exactly!!
A truly excellent video! I found it so sad that it took so few years for the real meaning of ekklesia to be distorted. We really need to get back to the simplicity of gathering together and its purpose - "one anothering" - and "come out of her, my people", out of the corrupt entity that the ekklesia has become.
Where everyone can speak and share and not just sit and listen to one person every week
Nobody cares what you have to say lady. You better read up on Timothy 2.
So that they could become spectators and not participants of a meeting
"GOD that made the world and ALL things therein,
Seeing that ‘HE IS’ LORD of Heaven and Earth,
Dwelleth 'N-O-T' in temples Made with hands;
Neither is 'Worshipped' with men's hands,
As though HE 'Needed' Anything,
Seeing HE Giveth to All Life, and Breath, and All Things."
(Acts 17:24-25)
~~~
:)
I think that verse (Acts 17:24-25) speaks to the modern church in ways that the church has not considered.
It doesn’t take long for man to get it wrong
The church is a divine institution. It is not the local bowling club or camera club.
Yes like as soon as Paul came around and started telling Jesus brother James and Jude and the actual followers of Jesus how they did everything wrong.
I was shocked by how early the idea of the Lord's supper was considered a sacrifice. I didn't see that you showed the development of that idea though. Were there any 2nd century writings before or even after Justin Martyr where church fathers didn't view the Lord's supper at sacrifice, but one can start the see the beginnings of this development? Also, even more shocking is how early ministers (elders? bishops?) are thought of as being "priests." I guess I have the same question regarding this development. Were there previous or even subsequent writings where it is clear that elders/bishops/presbyters were not thought of as priests. Thank you for sharing this important research.
Send me an email, and I can send you a paper with quotations and footnotes on both of these issues. You can find my email at my website at www.tomwadsworth.com.
We have become mere spectators in formal services.
I get the impression when Paul wrote to the church in Corinth and the church in Rome, that he wasn’t writing to a small group of people in a house.
Paul also talked about the qualifications for deacons and elders and bishops, all of which indicate a large church body. There’s no room for deacons elders and bishops in a house gathering.
How should we make sense of this?
It's likely that these larger cities had multiple house groups that were aware of each other. Note Acts 12:17. After Peter speaks to the assembly at Mary's house, he says to them, "'Tell James and the other brothers and sisters about this,' he said, and then he left for another place."
But when Paul is writing to, say, Corinth, he is writing to the larger group of Christians in an entire city. Remember the Corinthian church had already divided into the Paul group, the Cephas group, the Apollos group, and the Jesus group (1 Cor 1:10ff). But when he writes, he addresses them all, assuming that the letter will be individually delivered to each cell group.
The basic assumption was based on the synagogue model. You needed 10 men and you would have a leader or elder directing them. This goes back to the way Moses was told to break the community down with leaders increasingly having more responsibility over the group. They carried that tradition on and was influential on the way they arranged the leadership of the ekklesia.
@@LordsSupperSociety Everything you said has been the common assumption for decades, but the evidence is lacking. My doctoral work included about three months of research into "the origins of the Christian assembly." While many have postulated that the synagogue is the origin, others have said it's based on the temple, and in the last 30 years, a new theory is that the Christian assembly is based on Greco-Roman associations and its banquet/symposium model. But all these theories have noteworthy drawbacks.
When all is said and done, one must admit that these theories are only theories. After all, since Christianity was known for its new wine that needed fresh wineskins (Mk 2:22), its new covenant (Heb 9:15; 12:24), its new and living way (Heb 10:20), its new teaching (Acts 17:19), and its new song (Rev 5:9; 14:3), it is not a far-fetched idea that Christian gatherings might also be “new.” After all, the God who “makes all things new” (Rev 21:5) does not need to recycle and revamp some existing meeting tradition, whether from Jews or Greeks. The “newness” of Christianity does not negate the possibility that its meetings are patterned after some other meeting. But the “fresh wineskins” of the gospel should prompt-at least-the possibility that Christianity required no model.
@@tomwadsworth So where do you transform the whine and bread in to the Body and Blood? At the coffee table?
@@arnoldvezbon6131. I would just say that “we” don’t transform anything.
I think this is a big reason so many people become so disallusioned with christianity. They try church after church, denomination after denomination, all because each time they understand something aint quite right about how its all going. Both in contrast to things described in the NT, as well as just the internal conscious moral compass god has given us.
Not that all post 1st century church acrretions are neccesarily evil, or bad. (Many are, but not all) some may even be a great idea. But its the problem of every church, and majesterium, and what have you laying a strict claim either explicitly verbally, or at minumum with their behaviour, or refusal to do anything in any different way. It says to the people "you have to do it this way or you are doing it wrong" . Some like the catholics, and many of the "older" sects of Christianity go so far as to say that if you are outside their bounds of how they describe things need to be done in accordance to christianity, then you are anathema!.
And all doing this while being damn near completly removed from how the first century christians practiced.
I love your effort in research! It brings a question to mind😅 concerning Acts 15, Councils!!
These Saints whose words you quote, gave time and effort into the Canon of Scripture...assembly and preservation of!! They were at least of equal standing as ourselves😅
So in essence, we must somehow determine a point in time...to be an agreed upon point...when we can all agree on a "model" of what is involved in Assembly!?
We look back at very basic (divisions of church timeline), big changes in 4th, 7th, 14th-16th, and 20th, give or take. Which do we judge legitimate, and based on what? Records and letters from eye-witnesses of The Lord? Or maybe 1st-hearers of those men?
(Thinking of whispering in another's ear, and so on around the room...)
A reason why Constantine built cathedrals. Politics always has it’s finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing
Rome had a stronghold on religion as a result of it’s earthly power
I read the opening of your PhD thesis. I would love to read the whole thing. Any plans to make it public?
14:14 from Justin's letter, "when the reader ceases reading, the president in a discourse admonishes and urges the imitation of these good things" ..... similar to what Paul did in Acts 20v7 .... instances which sounds like, gasp, A SERMON like today. Oh my ......
Don't get me wrong. I fully agree with Tom in this 7 part series that 'the one another partcipation, exhortation and edification of the body of Christ' is severely absent and atrophied in the body of Chrust (the church) today. And that is a shame.
1:00 My definition of Teaching is "instruction on what to do or how to do it" whereas my definition for Preaching is "instruction on what NOT to do or how NOT to do it."
1:07:00 I would add to that, "allowing idolatries to grow within the church and also ostracizing the Christian Jews of the time." I would love to see a study on when and how the Christian Jews were erased from the Christian Religion in the early church.
Did anyone in 2000 years ever wonder about the Jews or ask why the Jews didn't follow us in this religion?
1:12:00 I love what you say here. I tell people "I have a new message from God, but don't worry. It is only new to us. Christians in the 1st century already knew it." I think we need to do more studies about what we are doing wrong today in the church. It is obvious we are doing things wrong based upon discipleship patterns and also all the Pagans infiltrating the church (which are no longer secretive).
Tom, do you discuss bringing mine Christians to church. No so we can dumb down the church, but to help expose them to what family looks like?
Can you rephrase the question? I'm a little confused about what you're asking.
My guess is that the above comment should read, ‘non-Christians’ instead of ‘mine Christians,’ and ‘not so we,’ instead of ‘no so we.’
When someone is concerned about their afterlife it seems to me we should ask questions not in judgement of others but when it is that serious I would hope everyone ask questions.
Is it okay to share this wonderful teaching with my friends on Facebook?
Certainly. Share away!
Do you mind telling me ...What state are you from, and To what denomination are you most accustomed?
A serious outcome of wrong worship sermons etc is that Christ's body cannot function as it should.
With all this in mind about the temple etc how are we to understand Ezekiel chs 40 to 48? (Some light reading)
For the purposes of my research and investigation, Ezekiel's vision of the temple (in chapters 40-48) provided several eye-opening details about how Ezekiel's contemporary Jews used the temple. In particular, Ezek 46:1-10 helped me see the standard procedure of the massive crowds of Jews who came to the temple during a feast. After entering the gate, they prostrated one by one, which fulfilled the requirement of presenting themselves to the Lord (Deut 16:16). They then proceeded--probably in a line--out the opposite gate of the temple. This process allowed everyone to fulfill their duties, and it served as excellent crowd control.
Our typical anachronistic view of "temple worship" sees Jews gathering like modern Christians into a holy church structure and then singing, praying, etc. But Ezekiel uses the term proskuneo--they performed their obligatory prostration. Proskuneo, in its 265 occurrences in the LXX and NT, never refers to singing or praying or congregational ceremonies. It refers to prostration. Ezekiel's vision helped me understand that.
@@tomwadsworthTom, thank you for taking the trouble to present more detail on this important subject. I should have been more direct with my question. Earthy temples get done away with because the body of Christ has become the temple as i understand it. So why is there to be another earthy temple that I believe is being referred to in Ezekiel that will be established in the millennial reign? I realise this is a huge subject, but appreciate your understanding of these things. Thanks.
@@globalwarninguk You ask a good question. Since Ezekiel is not my field, I will defer to others who specialize in that study. As a New Testament guy, I can say that it's hard to arrive at firm conclusions when you're dealing with highly figurative apocalyptic language, such as is found in Ezekiel (the temple vision) and Revelation (the millennial reign).
However, from clear and direct (non-apocalyptic) statements in the NT, we know that the Christian's body has now become the temple (Matt 1:23; 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; Eph 2:21; cf. Jer 31:31; Heb 8:8-12; 2 Cor 6:16-18; Rev 21:3). And the reason is clear: God now dwells within, and not in a man-made building. (See Video #3: The Temple that Changed Everything th-cam.com/video/jD00uwVXCQY/w-d-xo.html)
I'm going to listen again, but have you discussed the Upper Room? What was that exactly and how does it fit in to history?
Gods first bible was creation
It's where I prefer to commune with God.
"Me me me" Christianity is not about what "you" prefer.
Malachi 1:11 doesn’t have the word sacrifice, but it does talk about an offering. I think it has a similar meaning.
In my view, the meaning of the eucharist is indeed a sacrificial offering. We represent the sacrifice of Christ, but additionally we also join ourselves to him as we offer our lives as living sacrifices. So I think the sacrifice idea is not far from the truth, at least as I see it, even though this is not explicit in the New Testament. But I’m no authority, this is just how I discern it as a believer.
Can you provide the slide for this video? Better yet, all slides you used for this presentation.
John 4:19-24, Jesus stated that the ceremonial, sacrificial aspects of Jewish Temple worship or the practices of the Samaritans on their mountain top would not be valid in the coming Christianity. The believers themselves are the priests who answer directly to Christ and God Himself.
Just like the proclamation is heralded
I have a question. At about 23:38 you start referencing the "Epistle of Barnabas" which is not part of the Bible. What merit does quoting such a passage give us? Are you just using it as some form of historical reference?
Problem: You refuted yourself on the first early quotes. Central to your whole argument is the lack of verticality in the church's early gatherings. But now you've narrowed down to semantics -- looking for the actual term, 'worship.' The Didache quote clearly includes worship language even though it doesn't mention worship. They gathered together for the breaking of bread and to give thanks. The Ignatius quote talks about thanksgiving and glory to God and even (Charismatics would love this!) includes an aspect of spiritual warfare. Pliny talks about singing hymns to Christ. I mean, what's enough for you? If they didn't start out worshiping in any traditional sense, they seem to have gotten busy doing it quite quickly.
I admit to watching (so far) only one of your videos, ie, How we got worship wrong.
Is it not true that after the Passover meal and before they left the Upper Room they first "sang a hymn"?
Solomon installed 24-hr sessions of singers in the temple.
After the destruction of that temple cantors led members in singing in their synagogues while in captivity and still do so to this day.
My question to Dr Wadsworth is this, why the glee in his "discovery"?
Yes, there is error in some parts of the church, but this does not mean Jesus is anti-singing in a gathering of believers. Even Paul said, "sing to one another...". Are you saying this happens only in private, as in a one-on-one greeting, instead of saying, "Hello, how are you?" If the person says, "I have the flu," is the friend to start singing a verse from scripture to encourage the friend? I believe this singing is done in a corporate setting, and not to be denounced.
Dr Wadsworth, please enlighten us - do you gather with believers? If so, do you think it is wrong to sing praises to God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ? Or is it that you simply have an issue with a particular group of Christians, perhaps Pentecostals and Charismatics? I realise you have correctly translated the word worship. But this does not mean singing praises to the Lord is not worship.
Jesus loves His Church / Ekklessia. After listening to your initial video on this matter of singing/worship, I wondered if you follow your own theses, and that every time you go to church you fall prostrate before the Lord? The Lord certainly deserves this kind of worship. However, the buildings in which we meet do not allow for much room to do this.
Another question... do you ever sing to the Lord to praise Him? If so, why? What are you exactly doing when you sing to Him?
I highly suspect that you have not watched or understood the video.
Yes, I gather weekly with believers and have done so for 50+ years.
No, I do not think it's wrong to sing praises to God or Jesus.
No, I'm not attacking any particular group.
Old Testament Israel was supposed to be a kingdom of priests, the whole nation had a priestly calling, yet that didn’t preclude the existence of a ministerial priesthood.
Didn’t they also have Emperor Worship going on all along as well?
1:12:10 Constantine was not influential in the theological decisions of Nicea. Constantine was an Arian in his understanding of Jesus. But Arianism was rejected by the assembled bishops.
In the Garden of Eden there were no trappings. Religion is a result of the fall.
In the Garden we lost the Holy Spirit.
Sin had to be dealt with by a human so God sent his Son fully God and truly man.
He put an end to sacrafice and when we become Believers we are cleansed from Sin and the Holy Spirit can fill our bodies the true temple.
I agree that the Didache was more like 2nd century and many scholars agree
2nd century he would of know the direct students of the apostles...
I'm not sure what the thing about Polycarp at 26:00 has to do with what we are to do. This quote is clearly pagans saying that he teaches them not to sacrifice or worship their gods. It says nothing about what it means in regards to what we can do as Christians. It neither confirms of denies anything about Christian practices. It only talks about Christian attitude towards pagan gods.
You're right. It's possible that the Polycarp reference doesn't apply. But in this video, I didn't mention a couple of other references to prostration from the Fathers.
Around 250 AD, Cyprian, the bishop of Carthage, ridiculed prostration because it requires you to gaze downward toward the underworld of demons and Satan and not upward to God in the heavens (Cyprian, An Address to Demetrianus 16). Then, around 300 AD, the Christian writer Lactantius made the same point about the depravity of the act of prostration (Lactantius, The Divine Institutes 2.2; cf. The Epitome of the Divine Institutes 57).
In other words, there is reason to think that early Christianity was not only opposed to sacrifice (which Polycarp mentions), it may have also been opposed to prostration (which Polycarp also mentions).
Remember: In the world of Jews, prostration essentially stopped when the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. Prostration was the central focus of their requirement to "present themselves before the Lord" in the Temple (Dt. 16:16). But when the Temple is gone, ritual prostration (by Jews) also went away.
Besides all that, where is there evidence that Christians routinely prostrated in their meetings? To my knowledge, such evidence does not exist.
I'm actually surprised that some comments are clamoring for the right to be prostrating in their meetings. Is this really a thing?
I have more on this in my dissertation. If you'd like a free copy, send me an email. You can find me at my website at tomwadsworth.com.
Of course he was. Always follow the $ trail as far as man goes
Define worship services. The mass was formalized between the years 30-50 AD. It was never called a worship service. It was and still is called the Celebration of the Eucharist and remains to this day much unchanged. It is a beautiful blending of the Troha reading, and the words of Jesus with songs, music, art and gestors such as the sign of the cross. Sometimes using bells and incense as symbolic representation of our prayers lifting to heaven. Stain glass windows, paintings and sculpture with stories visualized as another way to understand and contemplate the spoken and written words of Jesus and the prophets.
Mass Formalized in 30 - 50 AD ?
My man what are you getting that from? Cause it certiantly isn't the NT which are the only Christian documents, and teachings that could possibly exist that early.
@@anthonypolonkay2681exactly
Hi, this is very interesting, but I have a question. Romans 8:1 says that we offer our bodies as a living sacrifice to God, which I would interpret as worshipping God by our lifestyle etc. Why would it be wrong then to incorporate music and other things there if it causes our bodies to serve God as a living sacrifice by our works? Thanks for the video though, God bless you.
There is, of course, nothing wrong with incorporating music in our daily service of God. You may have misunderstood the point of the video.
@@tomwadsworth I see, thanks for clarifying, I am not coming against you or anything of course. God bless you
Why so many commercials?
Why say that the early fathers wrote about what they did in their gatherings, but not let us know what they said?
This video contains 38 direct quotes from the early fathers, placing the quotes verbatim on the screen. How did I not let you know what they said??
@@tomwadsworth 38 quote mines you mean...
So what caused the errors you highlight in these videos if God is sovereign and can manage His Church?
The question I'd have to ask first is what gives you the idea that the church was always going to be prevented from accretions?
All throughout thr new testimate the apostles are constantly having to go to churches they already established to correct them on teachings they have disobeyed, forget, or new rules, a d tea him they have implemented that the apostles didn't tell them to do.
What reason would this kind of thing stop after the apostles were gone if it was constantly happening while they were still around?
The parable of the mustard seed and the letter to the church in Pergamum describe the church being infiltrated by servants of Satan and the greed of men. The theme continued and expanded with the parable of the hidden leaven and the letter to the church in Thyatira.
The Roman emperor Theodosius I (his name means "gift of god") made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire on Feb 27, 380 CE with the Edict of Thessalonica which recognized Nicene Christianity as the official religion. The Church and State were blended and the State began to appoint the elders. Theodosius solidified what Constantine began.
"Nicene Christianity" what does that mean? There is only one Christianity and then there is a whole bunch of heresies.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 Only that the state, the Roman Empire, recognized Christianity as outlined by the counsel of Nicaea. Considering Constantine financially supported the meeting and paid for many of the attendees travel and accommodations.
@@MrGMcAulay Yes St. Constantine the great was amazin'!
Syriac Christians have the oldest Christian liturgy.
Christians use temple terminology because of the Jewish temple.
Sounds like most of them were just nominal christans and were ignorant of The Truth that God Alone teaches His children.
Wow, how can one person get so many things wrong!
43:20 This! Coming from a leader of the Christian church! I think I'm going to be heresick!!
You mean that quote mine that was quoted out of context?
According to What Patterns and Dignity Every Order of the Clergy is Appointed by God.
XXVI. The bishop, he is the minister of the word, the keeper of knowledge, the mediator between God and you in the several parts of your divine worship. He is the teacher of piety; and, next after God, he is your father, who has begotten you again to the adoption of sons by water and the Spirit. He is your ruler and governor; he is your king and potentate; he is, next after God, your earthly god, who has a right to be honoured by you. For concerning him, and such as he, it is that God pronounces, I have said, You are gods; and you are all children of the Most High. And, You shall not speak evil of the gods. Exodus 22:28 For let the bishop preside over you as one honoured with the authority of God, which he is to exercise over the clergy, and by which he is to govern all the people. But let the deacon minister to him, as Christ does to His Father; and let him serve him unblameably in all things, as Christ does nothing of Himself, but does always those things that please His Father. Let also the deaconess be honoured by you in the place of the Holy Ghost, and not do or say anything without the deacon; as neither does the Comforter say or do anything of Himself, but gives glory to Christ by waiting for His pleasure. And as we cannot believe in Christ without the teaching of the Spirit, so let not any woman address herself to the deacon or bishop without the deaconess. Let the presbyters be esteemed by you to represent us the apostles, and let them be the teachers of divine knowledge; since our Lord, when He sent us, said, Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. Matthew 28:19 Let the widows and orphans be esteemed as representing the altar of burnt-offering; and let the virgins be honoured as representing the altar of incense, and the incense itself.
Around 35min in you talk about offering the sacrifice of communion as bizarre. My understanding of what the church fathers are saying here is different to yours. What I understand is that the only sacrifice that is acceptable to God is the sacrifice that he has given to us in the body and blood of Jesus for the forgiveness of sin.
Constatine was messed up!! Wasn’t led by the Lord for sure!!!
According to who? Some random lady on the internet lol.
At time 1h 3 minutes "there is nothing in the NT to imply the Eucharist is an offering" see 1 Cor 10:14-22. The Eucharist and its table is contrasted with the altar of demons. Through the blood and bread we commune with Christ. Those that eat the meat sacrificed to idols commune with the god of that altar. If you partake of the Lord's Table you commune with Christ, if you partake of the altar of demons you commune with demons. The Greek word for Table is trapezēs which is the same word used in the Septuagint (Exodus 25:20) for the Table the show bread is offered on. There is a strong argument for Paul, through this contrasting of the Eucharist with the offerings to demons, viewing the Eucharist as an offering. In 1 Cor 11 Paul points out that those partaking of the body and blood unworthily are sick and dead, intoning that these gifts offered to God are now holy in the same sense as OT offerings became holy and could only be consumed by undefiled priests. The Showbread is a holy offering pre-figuring Christ.
The pre 3rd century Catholic form of worship could be closest to how the apostles worshipped.
It was God who gave the dimensions of the first worship site and the rules and regulations fo follow. However it was akways about the heart and worshipping God in spirit and truth.
There was no 3rd century Catholic worship. The Roman Catholic church started in 1024 as the first protestant church.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 See what delusion does to one's mind. I see what I want to see, I hear what I want to hear. Why? Because I can.
What about facts? Oh I make my own facts.
@@therighteousrighthand Yep that is exactly what protestants do.
Pleasant good day to all didn't they pray and fasted durimg these gathering and collected offerings and minister those who had the knowledge to do so to edify the new converts. What is prayer if it's not worship. When they fasted and prayed the Paul will be loosed out of prison what exactly do you call that? The early Church (first century) worshipped in Jewish synagogues on Saturday, and then met in their own private homes on Sunday morning. Near the end of the first century, the Christians were expelled from the synagogues, so most of them met in private homes for the next 150 years or so. The earliest known Christian building set aside exclusively for worship was built around 240 AD.
You should ask the question why have christians abandoned the Sabbath commandment when the early church obviously kept the sabbath. He that breaketh the lease of the commandments are guilty of all. We are to be most of all walking in obedience to God. Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
EVERY time religion & politics combine there's trouble
Actually as evidenced by the state of affairs in the secular west it would stand to reason that the complete opposite is true.
They allowed the Catholic Church influence them,.. and gotten away from the Sabbath
The Catholic Church started in 1024
This is sophistry. There are 2nd-3rd c. writers talking about Eucharist and sacrifice, etc.
Actually it looks as though when Constantine came into this picture. Paganism mixed with Christianity
creating the Roman Catholic church of which I grew up in. Leading to the exalting of priests and pagan
idolatry with statues and blasphemy of what they call communion.
My research indicates that Christianity began regarding its ministers as "priests" long before Constantine was even born. Lots of changes to Christianity happened after Constantine became the sole emperor. I know that he is commonly blamed for "mixing paganism with Christianity," but my research indicates that Constantine had little to do with any encroaching paganism in the church. If you have evidence to the contrary, I'm all ears!
@@tomwadsworth Lineage Journey has an article on Constantine and Compromise. Although the formal start of Roman Catholicism did not come until around 590 it does seem to have it's roots back to Constantine.
@@doncc6080 I think it's highly problematic to say that "the formal start of Roman Catholicism did not come until around 590." I suspect that no scholars of early church history, whether Catholic or Protestant, would agree with that statement.
1:12:19
Rome’s 1st Crusade
It's either faith alone in Jesus alone, or it's legalism.
Are you aware that the words “faith alone” appear together only once in the Bible?
@@alittlepeace9562 Yet the Concept is woven throughout entire Scripture. The implication is obvious to me.
@@Bluettes-cm7wo No it's not.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 Yes it is....ya legalist. You have not received the truth and I am sorry for you.
@@arnoldvezbon6131 Habakkuk 2:4, Hebrews 10:38. The Just shall by Faith! And all the rest of scripture which supports that exact precept.