“The way of life is this: First, you shalt love the God who made thee, secondly, thy neighbor as thyself; and whatsoever thou wouldst not have done to thyself, do not thou to another.” – Didache 1:2
“That which is hateful to you do not do to another; that is the entire Torah, and the rest is its interpretation.” – Shabbat 31a
The Didache, it reflects the concerns of an early Jewish-Christian community regarding matters like the Two Ways teaching, baptism (mikvah), and the communal meal (Eucharist). The Two Way teachings appear in various ancient Jewish and Christian texts, including the Didache, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Epistle of Peter to James. These texts share a common concept of the Two Ways.
“There are two Ways, one of Life and one of Death, and there is a great difference between the two Ways.” – Didache 1:1
“And now I tell you, my sons, and show you The paths of righteousness and the paths of violence.” – 1 Enoch 91:19
The Two Ways section of the Didache likely draws from an earlier Jewish source. The community that produced the Didache may have been based in Syria, addressing gentiles from a Judaic perspective. It shows no evidence of Pauline influence. Alan Garrow suggests that its earliest layer may have originated in the decree issued by the Apostolic council 49–50 CE, that this was issued by the Jerusalem Assembly under James the Just.
“The way of life is this: First, you shalt love the God who made thee, secondly, thy neighbor as thyself; and whatsoever thou wouldst not have done to thyself, do not thou to another.” – Didache 1:2
“And what you hate, do not do to anyone.” – Tobit 4:15
Willy Rordorf suggests that the initial five chapters of the Didache have their foundation in Jewish traditions, but they were later adapted and incorporated by the Christian community through the addition of an “evangelical section.” This indicates a process of redaction within the Didache. Within the text, the term ‘Lord’ is typically reserved for “Lord God,” while Jesus is identified as “the servant” of the Father (9:2; 10:2). Scholars generally agree that verse 9:5, which mentions baptism “in the name of the Lord,” represents an earlier tradition before it was eventually later turned into the concept of the Trinity. Notably, this concept is not explicitly present in the Didache. Aaron Milavec highlights a resemblance between the Didache and Acts 3, as both portray Jesus as “the servant of God.” This perspective aligns with the view held by the Ebionites, who did not consider Jesus to be divine. The community described in the Didache is depicted as eagerly anticipating the future arrival of the kingdom from the Father.
The concept of the Two Ways doctrine, as found in the Didache, exhibits remarkable similarities to the teachings of the Essene or the Dead Sea Scrolls community, as well as the apocryphal books used by Enochian Judaism which shows it’s connection to the diversity of First Century Judaism. One significant parallel can be observed in the Qumran community’s founding Charter, known as The Community Rule, which also includes a teaching on the Two Ways. The presence of the Two Ways doctrine in both the Didache and the Qumran community’s teachings suggests a shared ideological framework between these Jewish groups which may connect this to the Ebionites or the Nazarenes, both considered branch of the Essenes by later Church fathers. This doctrine delineates two contrasting paths—one leading to life and the other to destruction—and provides ethical and practical instructions for adherents to follow. Interestingly, as one examines the content of the Two Ways in the Didache, it becomes evident that numerous Torah quotes, which are also found in the Gospels, are employed. This usage of shared biblical passages highlights a theological affinity and points to a common scriptural foundation between the Didache and the Gospel traditions.
It is important to highlight that although the Didache incorporates theological elements and draws from the Torah, it does not specifically mention Jesus by name, leaving room for interpretation. The teachings within the Didache can pertain to the historical Jesus or even the Teacher of Righteousness, as they both embody ethical teachings and values.It is important to highlight that although the Didache incorporates theological elements and draws from the Torah, it does not specifically mention Jesus by name, leaving room for interpretation though it’s commonly accepted that it would be referring to Jesus. Like the Qumran community it makes references to the branch or vine of David. The teachings within the Didache can pertain to the historical Jesus or the Teacher of Righteousness, as they both embody ethical teachings and values and come from the same cultural milieu.
The initial chapter of the Didache establishes its ethical framework by incorporating significant passages such as the Ten Commandments (“you shall love God”), and the Commandment, including the Golden Rule (“love your neighbor as yourself”), presented in the negative form “do not do unto others what is hateful to you to do” similar to other Jewish writings. These foundational principles emphasize the importance of love for both God and one’s neighbor, echoing central teachings within Jewish and Christian traditions. The Two Ways doctrine found in the Didache exhibits striking similarities to the teachings of the Essene Community of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The inclusion of shared Torah quotes and theological parallels with the Gospels suggests a common scriptural foundation. While the Didache does not explicitly mention Jesus, its ethical teachings align with the values associated with him. The incorporation of elements of key Torah teachings rooted in the Ten Commandments, and the Golden Rule establishes a strong moral framework rooted in the Jewish tradition of the time.
Another text the deals with the Didache and Jewish Two’ Ways teaching is “Peter and the ‘Two Ways’ by Robert E. Aldridge” which is a scholarly work that examines the connection between the Epistle of Peter and the concept of the “Two Ways,” which is also found in the Didache. The author explores the potential influence of the Didache on Peter’s teachings and argues that Peter may have incorporated elements of the “Two Ways” into his epistle. The “Two Ways” refers to a common motif in ancient Jewish and Christian literature that presents a contrast between the path of righteousness and the path of wickedness. It involves ethical teachings and instructions on how to lead a righteous life.
Aldridge suggests that Peter’s epistle reflects familiarity with the concept of the “Two Ways” and incorporates it into his ethical exhortations. The author examines various passages in Peter’s epistle that exhibit similarities to the “Two Ways” teachings, such as the emphasis on moral conduct, avoiding evil deeds, and pursuing righteousness. The book argues that Peter’s utilization of the “Two Ways” concept in his epistle aligns with his purpose of providing ethical guidance and exhortation to his audience. Aldridge suggests that the influence of the Didache’s “Two Ways” on Peter’s epistle demonstrates the interconnectedness of early Christian writings and the shared ethical concerns of the time. Aldridge explores the potential influence of the Didache’s “Two Ways” on Peter’s teachings in his epistle. It highlights the similarities between the two texts and suggests that the incorporation of the “Two Ways” concept in Peter’s epistle demonstrates the interconnectedness of early Jewish Christian writings and their shared ethical concerns.
“See that no one causes you to err from this way of the teaching, since apart from God it teaches you. For if you are able to bear the entire yoke of the Lord, you will be perfect; but if you are not able to do this, do what you are able. And concerning food, bear what you are able; but against that which is sacrificed to idols be exceedingly careful; for it is the service of dead gods.” – Didache Chapter 6
In Chapter 6 of the Didache, there is an exhortation emphasizing the importance of following the teachings provided. It cautions against being led astray from this path, as it is a teaching that comes from God. The passage suggests that if one is capable of fully embracing the responsibilities and obligations of the yoke of the Lord, they will achieve perfection. However, if one is unable to do so entirely, they should do whatever they can manage. Regarding dietary practices, individuals are advised to adhere to what they are capable of handling. They are also urged to be extremely cautious when it comes to consuming food that has been offered to idols, as it is associated with the worship of false deities.
This passage from the Didache appears to encompass a notion of keeping kosher, where individuals are encouraged to consume what they can handle in terms of dietary restrictions but seek to bear the full Yoke of the Lord. It also emphasizes the avoidance of food that has been involved in idolatrous rituals. Additionally, the reference to “bearing the Yoke of the Lord” echoes Jewish traditions found in the Talmud, which emphasize the observance of all 613 commandments and adherence to God’s teachings.
This passage in the Didache reflects a sense of incorporating Jewish ethical and dietary practices within its teachings, while also emphasizing the importance of adhering to the commandments and avoiding idolatrous practices. It highlights the potential influence of Jewish traditions and ethical principles on early Christian communities.
“Concerning baptism, baptize… in running water.” – Didache 7:1
“Superior to them are “living waters” for in them there is immersion… and they are valid for the preparation of the… waters.” – Mishnah Mikvaot 1:8
The Didache provides instructions regarding the practice of baptism, stating that it should be performed in “living water.” This particular phrase bears resemblance to the Jewish tradition of immersion in a ritual bath called a Mikveh. In Judaism, the Mikveh is a pool of naturally flowing water or a collection of rainwater that is used for spiritual purification.
The mention of baptism in “living water” in the Didache suggests a parallel with the concept of immersion in the Mikveh. This connection indicates a potential influence of Jewish traditions, particularly the Essene Jewish community, on the early Christian practice of baptism. The Essenes were a Jewish sect known for their strict observance of purity rituals, including immersion in flowing water for ritual purification.
Furthermore, the mention of baptism in “living water” also aligns with the beliefs and practices of Ebionite or Jewish-Christians. The Ebionites were a sect of Jewish-Christians who maintained a strong connection to Jewish traditions and observances. They regarded Jesus as a Prophet while adhering to Jewish laws and practices. The emphasis on baptism in “living water” in the Didache resonates with the immersion practices associated with the Essenes and reflects the continuity of these practices among certain Jewish Christian groups like the Ebionites.
By highlighting the use of “living water” for baptism, the Didache indicates a potential link between early Christian baptismal practices and Jewish traditions, particularly those influenced by the Essenes, John the Baptist (Mikvahist) and the Ebionites. This connection underscores the diverse influences and interactions between Jewish and early Christian communities during the formative stages of Christianity.
The Didache contains a passage in Chapter 9 that seems to parallel the Jewish tradition of Kiddush, a ritual performed before partaking in the ha’Motzi (blessing over bread). The Didache instructs its readers on how to offer thanks, beginning with a prayer specifically regarding the cup: “We thank thee, our Father, for the holy vine of David Thy servant, which Thou madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory forever.”
This passage exhibits similarities to the Jewish practice of Kiddush, which involves sanctifying and giving thanks for the wine before a meal with modifications declaring Jesus as a servant of “god.” Kiddush traditionally begins with a blessing over the cup of wine, expressing gratitude to God for the vineyard and the covenantal relationship with the Jewish people.
The term “Eucharist,” commonly used in Christian traditions to refer to the act of partaking in the bread and wine during Communion, has its origins in a Greek word that likely served as a translation of the Hebrew term for “giving thanks” or “making a blessing” (bracha). The term Eucharist may have come from a tradition associated with Birkat ha’mazon. This further reinforces the influence of Jewish customs and traditions on the early Jesus movement as it developed.
The inclusion of a Thanksgiving prayer in the Didache, resembling the Jewish practice of Kiddush, underscores the ongoing influence of Judaism on early Christian rituals. It reflects a continuity between Jewish blessings and the emerging Christian liturgical practices. The appropriation of the concept of giving thanks, as expressed in the Eucharistic prayers, demonstrates the interplay and borrowing of ideas between Jewish and Christian traditions during the formative period of the Jesus movement.
The Didache’s incorporation of a thanksgiving prayer and its connection to Jewish customs, such as Kiddush, highlights the deep intertwining of Jewish and Christian influences in the early stages of Christianity. It underscores the significance of Jewish roots and the ongoing dialogue and interaction between Jewish and Christian communities as the Jesus movement took shape.
In Chapter 9 of the Didache, there is a passage that appears to parallel the Jewish tradition of Ha’Motzi, the blessing recited over bread. The Didache provides instructions on how to give thanks for the broken bread, stating:
“And concerning the broken bread: We thank you, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through Jesus your servant; to you be the glory forever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills and was gathered together and became one, so let the Assembly be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom; for yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever. But let no one eat or drink of your Thanksgiving who is not first baptized.”
This passage reflects a sentiment to the Ha’Motzi blessing in Jewish tradition, which acknowledges God’s provision of sustenance and expresses gratitude for the bread. The Didache’s prayer expresses thankfulness to God the Father, while also emphasizing the unity of the Assembly (community of believers) and the hope for the gathering of all believers into God’s kingdom.
By incorporating elements reminiscent of Ha’Motzi, the Didache showcases another instance of Jewish influence on the early Jewish-Christian movement. The prayer demonstrates the integration of Jewish liturgical patterns and blessings into the emerging Christian practices. It highlights the continuity between Jewish traditions and the evolving customs and prayers of the early followers of Jesus.
The inclusion of this prayer in the Didache underscores the ongoing dialogue and borrowing of traditions between Judaism and early Christianity. It reveals the mutual exchange of ideas, symbols, and rituals that characterized the interplay between the two religious traditions during the formative period of the Jesus movement. This fusion of Jewish and Christian elements in the Didache further attests to the deep Jewish roots of early Christianity and the complex dynamics at play as the movement developed.
In Chapter 9 of the Didache, it states that certain individuals should not partake in the Thanksgiving meal unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord. The passage makes reference to a statement by the Lord, “Give not that which is holy to the dogs.” This echoes a similar statement attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew (7:6), where he advises against giving what is holy to dogs or casting pearls before pigs.
The connection between these teachings suggests a shared understanding among early Christian communities regarding the significance of baptism and the requirement for initiation into the faith before partaking in sacred rituals. The Didache emphasizes the importance of being baptized in the name of the Lord, aligning with Jesus’ teaching on the value of holy things being reserved for those who are properly initiated and prepared.
Additionally, there is a parallel reference to the initiation of Moses in the Epistle of Peter to James (Chapter 4, verse 1), which speaks of bringing someone to a river or a fountain of living water for their initiation. This further reinforces the concept of immersion in water, specifically living water, as a symbolic act of conversion and purification.
The mention of living water in both the Didache and the Epistle of Peter to James bears similarities to the Jewish tradition of Mikveh, which involves immersion in a ritual bath as a means of spiritual purification and entry into the community. The requirement for baptism in the Didache aligns with the Jewish process of conversion that incorporates Mikveh as an essential ritual for joining the Jewish community.
The convergence of these teachings reflects the influence of Jewish practices and traditions on early Christianity, particularly in relation to the significance of water immersion for purification and initiation. The inclusion of such teachings in the Didache indicates the continuity between Jewish rites and the emerging rituals of the Christian movement, highlighting the interconnectedness and mutual borrowing of concepts and symbols.
These passages emphasize the necessity of proper initiation, including baptism or immersion in water, as a prerequisite for participating in the sacred rituals of the early Jewish-Christian communities. They draw upon Jewish traditions and teachings to establish the significance of these practices and affirm the importance of spiritual purification and commitment to the faith.
The Didache provides further insight into the practice of the sacred meal, also known as the Thanksgiving meal or called the Eucharist, within the early Jewish-Christian communities. It presents a unique perspective by portraying the Lord’s supper as a literal meal rather than a symbolic or ritualistic act alone. This understanding aligns with historical evidence and sheds light on the communal nature of these gatherings.
The Didache implies that the sacred meal took place in the context of a “house assembly” gathered around prominent figures probably the likes of Ya’akov ha’Tzadik (James the Just), Shimon Kepha (Peter), and others. This suggests that these early gatherings were intimate and likely took place in the homes of community members rather than in designated religious spaces after the destruction of the Temple and the believers were scattered. This house assembly setting reflects the close-knit nature of the early Jewish-Christian communities and the familial atmosphere in which the sacred meal was celebrated.
The communal aspect of the meal is significant in understanding the early Christian practice. It highlights the idea of fellowship and shared participation among the believers, as they gathered together to partake in a common meal in the presence of the community leaders. This communal gathering fostered a sense of unity, mutual support, and shared spiritual experiences among the believers.
The inclusion of a meal as part of the Lord’s supper also reflects the Jewish tradition of gathering for meals in the context of various religious observances. In Judaism, meals play a central role in celebrations such as Shabbat and festivals, serving as occasions for communal worship, reflection, and fellowship. The incorporation of an actual meal into the Lord’s supper (meal) in the early Jewish-Christian context demonstrates the continuity and adaptation of Jewish practices within the emerging Christian movement.
The portrayal of the Lord’s supper as a communal meal in the Didache underscores the social, relational, and communal dimensions of early Jewish-Christian gatherings. It emphasizes the significance of fellowship and shared participation, as believers came together in house assemblies to share a meal and commemorate the teachings and actions of Jesus.
In Chapter 10 of the Didache, we encounter a modified version of the traditional Jewish practice of offering a thanksgiving or grace after meals (Birkat ha’Mazon). This section, starting at 10.1, reflects a reworking of the Jewish birkat ha-mazon, a three-strophe prayer recited at the conclusion of a meal. While the content of the prayer has been adapted to suit the Christian context, the overall structure and form still maintain their Jewish roots.
The prayer in the Didache follows a similar pattern to the birkat ha-mazon. It begins by offering gratitude to God for sustaining the universe, acknowledging His role as the provider of food, earth, and covenant. This demonstrates the recognition of God’s continuous care and provision, echoing the Jewish understanding of God’s involvement in sustaining all aspects of life.
Furthermore, the Didache includes a prayer for the restoration of Jerusalem, which aligns with a prominent theme in Jewish liturgy and aspirations for the rebuilding of the holy city. This inclusion indicates the ongoing connection to Jewish traditions and the recognition of Jerusalem’s significance within the early Jewish-Christian communities.
While the content of the prayer has been adapted to reflect the emerging Christian beliefs and teachings, the underlying structure and framework remain rooted in Jewish practice. This further demonstrates the influence of Jewish forms of worship and liturgy on the early Christian community and their efforts to integrate and adapt these practices to their evolving faith.
The modified grace after meals (Birkat ha’Mazon) in the Didache serves as a testament to the continuity and interplay between Jewish and Christian traditions in the early stages of the Jesus movement. It shows the intentional incorporation of Jewish elements into the developing Christian practices, allowing believers to maintain a sense of connection to their Jewish heritage.
By preserving the Jewish form of the thanksgiving prayer while adapting its content, the Didache demonstrates a delicate balance between the continuity of Jewish traditions and the emergence of new Christian expressions of faith. This reflects the dynamic nature of the early Jewish-Christian movement and its ongoing engagement with both Jewish and Gentile cultural and religious contexts.
“Thou shalt not be of two minds whether it shall be or not.” – Didache 4:4
“Since he is a double-minded individual, unstable in all his ways.” – James 1:8
In James 1:8, however, the author is more specific, saying that a double-minded person is “unstable in all their ways.” This suggests that being double-minded can have a negative impact on all aspects of one’s life. Both passages are warning against the dangers of being “double-minded.” In Didache 4:4, the author is simply stating that one should not be indecisive or uncertain about their faith. In Didache 4:4, the author uses the image of being “of two minds” to describe someone who is indecisive or uncertain about the future. This person is unable to make a decision because they are constantly second-guessing themselves. In Didache 4:4, the author says that if we ask God for wisdom, we will be given it if we believe and do not doubt. In James 1:8, the author says that if we doubt, we will be like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. Both passages use the word “mind” (Greek: nous) to describe the state of being double-minded.
“Of whatsoever thou hast gained by thy hands thou shalt give a ransom for thy sins.” – Didache 4:6
“And death is stronger than them all, but charity saves a person from death, as it is written: “And charity delivers from death” (Proverbs 10:2, 11:4).” – Bava Batra 10a
Didache 4:6 instructs individuals to give a ransom for their sins from the gains of their own labor. Bava Batra 10a states that charity can save a person from death, emphasizing the power of giving. Both passages highlight the significance of acts of chairity in mitigating the consequences of wrongdoing and bringing about spiritual well-being.
The Didache passage suggests that individuals should offer a form of reparation for their sins by giving from their own earnings. This concept aligns with the idea of atonement and personal responsibility. It encourages individuals to acknowledge their wrongdoings and take tangible steps to make amends. In contrast, Bava Batra 10a conveys the notion that charity has the power to save a person from death. It emphasizes the transformative nature of acts of giving and their potential to counterbalance negative outcomes. The passage cites Proverbs 10:2 and 11:4, which highlight the deliverance from death that can be achieved through charitable acts.
These two passages share a common theme of the salvific power of acts of giving. While the Didache focuses on making amends for personal sins through material offerings, Bava Batra emphasizes the broader impact of charity in preserving life and warding off negative consequences. We can observe that both passages reflect a moral understanding that acts of giving and charity have significant spiritual implications. They convey the idea that engaging in acts of generosity not only benefits others but also has the potential to positively impact the giver, providing a means of atonement, redemption, and protection.
The concept of giving a ransom for sins in Didache 4:6 aligns with the principle of teshuvah in Jewish thought, which emphasizes repentance and seeking forgiveness for transgressions. By offering a portion of one’s earnings, individuals are actively taking responsibility for their actions and seeking to rectify their relationship with God and others. This act of giving serves as a tangible expression of remorse and a commitment to change.
Bava Batra 10a broadens the scope of the salvific power of charity. It recognizes the inherent vulnerability of human existence, symbolized by the inevitability of death. However, it suggests that acts of charity can counteract the harshness of mortality, serving as a means of salvation. This idea resonates with the Jewish concept of tzedakah, which refers to the obligation to perform righteous acts of giving and charity to uplift both the giver and the recipient.
In summary, Didache 4:6 and Bava Batra 10a both emphasize the transformative power of acts of giving. While the former focuses on personal atonement and making amends for sins through material offerings, the latter highlights the broader salvific potential of charity in preserving life and mitigating negative consequences. These passages underscore the significance of generosity as a means of spiritual transformation, redemption, and protection.
“Thou shalt not turn away the needy, but shalt share everything with thy brother, and shalt not say it is thine own, for if you are sharers in the imperishable, how much more in the things which perish?” – Didache 4:8
“Rabbi Elazar of Bartotha said: give to Him of that which is His, for you and that which is yours is His; and thus it says with regards to David: ‘for everything comes from You, and from Your own hand have we given you’” – Pirkei Avot 3:7
Both Didache 4:8 and Pirkei Avot 3:7 emphasize the importance of generosity and sharing with those in need. Didache 4:8 states that one should not turn away the needy but should share everything with their brother. It encourages a selfless attitude, discouraging individuals from claiming possessions as their own, highlighting that if they are sharers in the imperishable (presumably referring to spiritual blessings or the Kingdom of God), they should be even more willing to share in temporal or material things that are perishable.
Pirkei Avot 3:7, on the other hand, conveys a similar message in a slightly different way. Rabbi Elazar of Bartotha advises giving to God what belongs to Him, acknowledging that everything ultimately comes from God. By recognizing that one’s possessions and wealth are ultimately in God’s hands, individuals should be willing to share with others, as they and their possessions are ultimately God’s.
These teachings convey a common theme of recognizing the transient nature of worldly possessions and emphasizing the importance of generosity. They encourage individuals to go beyond self-interest and recognize the interconnectedness of humanity, emphasizing the need to share resources and support those in need.
Expanding on these teachings, we can see that they promote a holistic perspective on material wealth and possessions. They urge individuals to move away from possessiveness and the belief that what they have is exclusively theirs. Instead, they encourage a mindset of stewardship, where individuals recognize that their resources are ultimately gifts from a higher power or part of a larger interconnected system.
Furthermore, these teachings emphasize the idea that true wealth and abundance are found in sharing and giving. They suggest that when individuals act with generosity, they align themselves with higher, spiritual principles that transcend material possessions. By recognizing the impermanence of material wealth, they encourage a focus on cultivating qualities like compassion, empathy, and selflessness.
Ultimately, these teachings call for a shift in perspective, encouraging individuals to view themselves as part of a larger whole and to act accordingly. By embracing a mindset of sharing and recognizing the interconnectedness of all beings, individuals can contribute to the well-being of their communities and foster a sense of unity and harmony.
“Therefore thou shalt take the firstfruit of the produce of the winepress and of the threshingfloor and of oxen and sheep, and shalt give them as the firstfruits to the prophets, for they are your high priests.” – Didache 13:3
“And thou shalt give to him the first-fruits of the fleeces of thy sheep.” – LXX Deuteronomy 18:4
Didache 13:3 instructs believers to offer the firstfruits of their produce, such as from the winepress, threshing floor, oxen, and sheep, to the prophets, who are regarded as their high priests. It emphasizes the importance of honoring the prophets and recognizing their spiritual leadership. LXX Deuteronomy 18:4, part of the Septuagint version of the Book of Deuteronomy, states that individuals should give the first-fruits of the fleeces of their sheep to a designated recipient.
Both passages highlight the practice of offering the firstfruits as a form of religious offering or tribute. They demonstrate the significance of recognizing the primacy and sanctity of certain portions of one’s produce or possessions and dedicating them to a higher spiritual purpose. We can see that the act of offering the firstfruits serves multiple purposes. Firstly, it symbolizes gratitude and acknowledgment of God’s provision. By presenting the first and best portion of one’s harvest or possessions, individuals express their appreciation for the abundance they have received.
Secondly, offering the firstfruits demonstrates an understanding of the interconnectedness between God, humanity, and the natural world. It signifies the recognition that all things ultimately belong to God and that humans are stewards entrusted with these resources. By giving the firstfruits, individuals demonstrate their fidelity to this stewardship role and their willingness to share with others.
In the case of Didache 13:3, the focus is on offering the firstfruits to the prophets as high priests. This highlights the respect and honor bestowed upon those who serve as spiritual leaders and intermediaries between God and the community. By giving the firstfruits to the prophets, individuals show their recognition of the prophets’ important role and their support for their ministry. In LXX Deuteronomy 18:4, the instruction is to offer the first-fruits of the sheep’s fleeces. This specific focus on sheep symbolizes the significance of livestock and animal husbandry in the agricultural practices of the time. By dedicating the firstfruits of the sheep’s fleeces, individuals demonstrate their commitment to sharing even the products of their livestock with a designated recipient, potentially a priest or Levite.
These teachings emphasize the spiritual significance of the firstfruits offering, highlighting themes of gratitude, stewardship, and community support. They encourage believers to be mindful of the sacredness of their resources and to allocate them with reverence and generosity. Ultimately, the act of giving the firstfruits serves as a reminder of the interconnectedness of humanity, the divine, and the natural world, fostering a sense of unity, gratitude, and shared responsibility.
“But let none who has a quarrel with his fellow join in your meeting until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice be not defiled.” – Didache 14:2
“For from the east to the west my name will be great among the nations. Incense and pure offerings will be offered in my name everywhere, for my name will be great /among the nations,” says the Lord of Heaven’s Armies.” – Malachi 1:11
Didache 14:2 advises that individuals who have a dispute with one another should not participate in the community gathering until they are reconciled. This instruction aims to ensure that the act of worship or sacrifice remains pure and untainted by unresolved conflicts. Malachi 1:11, a verse from the Book of Malachi, prophesies that God’s name will be honored and praised among the nations, with incense and pure offerings being presented in His name everywhere. It emphasizes the universal recognition and reverence for God’s name and worship that will transcend geographical boundaries.
Both passages emphasize the importance of maintaining a pure and reverent worship environment. Didache 14:2 highlights the need for reconciliation and harmony among believers before engaging in communal worship. It stresses that unresolved conflicts can defile the act of sacrifice or worship, underscoring the significance of interpersonal relationships and unity within the community.
“Then shall the creation of mankind come to the fiery trial and many shall be offended and be lost, but they who endure in their faith shall be saved by the curse itself.” – Didache 16:5
“‘Whoever is left after all that I have foretold, he shall be preserved, and shall see the deliverance that I bring and the end of this world of mine.” – Ezra 6:25
Both passages share a common theme of perseverance and salvation amidst trials and the end times. They suggest that while many may be lost or offended during difficult periods, those who remain faithful will ultimately experience deliverance and preservation.
The comparisons between the Didache and Jewish texts reveal common themes such as acts of giving, sharing with others, recognizing the divine ownership, offering firstfruits, seeking reconciliation, and persevering in faith. These parallels demonstrate shared moral and spiritual principles between the Didache and Jewish traditions, reflecting the influence of Jewish teachings on early Christian thought.
The Didache is a text that shares a common concept of the Two Ways with the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Epistle of Peter to James. The Didache likely draws from an earlier Jewish source and shows little evidence of Pauline influence. It incorporates ethical teachings and values associated with Jesus, although it does not explicitly mention him by name.
The Two Ways doctrine in the Didache parallels teachings found in the Essene or Dead Sea Scrolls community, indicating shared ideological frameworks. The Didache also incorporates elements of Jewish traditions, such as immersion in living water and the practice of offering thanks similar to Kiddush and Ha’Motzi blessings. The inclusion of Torah quotes and theological parallels with the Gospels and Jewish traditions suggests a common foundation. The Didache’s teachings on baptism (mikveh), the Thanksgiving meal (Birkat ha’Mazon), and initiation align with Jewish practices and highlight the ongoing interaction and borrowing of traditions between Jewish and early Christian communities.
The original followers of Jesus were Jewish and converted Gentiles to Judaism and continued to do so into the 8th century they remained in Synagogues. They didn’t become apart of Christianity and they didn’t become “Christians.” They remained in Synagogues they didn’t join Christianity the religion of Paul. The New Testament is not reliable and can’t be relied upon.
Despite similarities in terminology, the Didache, echoing the past, is a product of later additions. The Didache includes Catechal elements added later. It only has echoes of the past. The same way the copies of the Didache we have are unreliable, it isn’t the original, it has echoes of the original but it can’t be accepted as a whole.
The same skepticism extends to the New Testament, with any reconstruction considered a guess rather than a reliable representation of the original. Any reconstruction of the Didache or any part of the New Testament isn’t going to be the original. It’s a guess. The original followers of Jesus remained Jewish and converted people to Judaism. There are echoes of the Jewish followers of Jesus.
The Ebionites did not believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, didn’t believe he was resurrected, didn’t believe he was a savior, didn’t believe he was “god the son,” they rejected Paul as a heretic.
Crucially, the original followers of Jesus remained Jewish, converting people to Judaism, not to Christianity. Echoes of their beliefs can be found, but the Ebionites, rejected concepts such as the virgin birth, resurrection, and the divinity of Jesus.
For a more accurate understanding, we look to valuable insights into the historical context, emphasizing the importance of independent thinking free from theological constraints. Independent thinking is researching history without a theological filter of it’s looking for historical truth that isn’t bound by theological statements which tend to be eisegetical not exegetical
The Pulling the Thread Podcast 
Leave a comment