The very first church..where the apostles assembled..

[ironglowz]

  Uncovered in the 1960s..the under ground church used by the apostles.  As Jesus instructed them, they waited in Jerusalem after the His resurrection.

  If this is genuine ..and it appears so, this is the very first Christian church, with the Lord's half brother James as overseer.

   The above ground structure is of course of a recent construction, built to preserve the original.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoEvDkzRRj8

    Between the 5:30 to 6:00 minute mark, artifacts and the early Christian symbol is described, which shows the lineage of Christianity..
     From the menorah, to the Star of David..with the early Christian symbol of the fish (fishers of men), descending from the star.

      All the apostles were of course, Jewish, even though some had Greek names, so it  shows in their early pictograph..
 
   

[Dee]

Sounds like a catholic myth to me.

[ironglowz]

Sounds like a catholic myth to me.

  The Greek Orthodox church holds the keys to the above ground protective cage.

[Dee]

Sounds like a catholic myth to me.

  The Greek Orthodox church holds the keys to the above ground protective cage.

But there's ZERO PROOF its the first church, or where the apostles assembled. 100% speculation.

[ironglowz]

Sounds like a catholic myth to me.

  The Greek Orthodox church holds the keys to the above ground protective cage.

But there's ZERO PROOF its the first church, or where the apostles assembled. 100% speculation.

  Not  rock solid proof...in archaeology, rarely is solid PROOF found.  One can only  go by the evidence, and in this case the evidence is apparently quite strong.

  Just as the death and resurrection of Jesus, if it were tried in a court, we have no proof to offer, but mountains of evidence.

  Same as the Viking settlement at L'Anse Au Meadows, Newfoundland, the evidence is very strong, iron working on the spot rules out the natives, building dimensions and construction closely match the Viking building practices of that era., and  a stone whorl found there, points to women in the settlement.

  These, plus other discoveries, is enough evidence to convince archaeologists and historians that it is the remnant of a Viking settlement !t.

  Let Cliff explain;   https://www.youtube.com/shorts/aZE9va2nTJM            https://www.youtube.com/shorts/nH9C7vLIRL8

[ironglowz]

   Archaeology is simply basic detective work;

       
AI Summary

To understand why archaeology is not always an exact science, consider the following points:

Interpretations of artifacts can vary based on cultural context.
Limited evidence can lead to multiple plausible explanations.
Preservation conditions affect the availability of materials for study.
Excavation methods can introduce biases in findings.
New technologies can change previous understandings of sites.
The subjective nature of analysis can influence conclusions.

[Dixie-Dude]

Didn't they carbon 14 date the location?  I do know early Christians used the fish symbol.  Also, it makes sense, all of them being Jewish to use a symbol of the Minorah and the Star of David, then add the fish symbol to the progression from Judaism to Christianity.  None of these symbols are either Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.  One thing about the Eastern Orthodox that many here probably do not know is they allow their priests to marry, baptize by immersion and do not baptize children until they are 12 to make their commitment to Christ.  The Catholic Church in the early 1,000's AD started requiring Priests not to marry, and they stopped baptizing by immersion and started sprinkling babies as well as adults. 

Haven't studied much about the other stuff, because I am Bapticostal in my beliefs.     

[ironglowz]

Didn't they carbon 14 date the location?  I do know early Christians used the fish symbol.  Also, it makes sense, all of them being Jewish to use a symbol of the Minorah and the Star of David, then add the fish symbol to the progression from Judaism to Christianity.  None of these symbols are either Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.  One thing about the Eastern Orthodox that many here probably do not know is they allow their priests to marry, baptize by immersion and do not baptize children until they are 12 to make their commitment to Christ.  The Catholic Church in the early 1,000's AD started requiring Priests not to marry, and they stopped baptizing by immersion and started sprinkling babies as well as adults. 

Haven't studied much about the other stuff, because I am Bapticostal in my beliefs.   

   Yes; both rhe RC and Greek church wandered a bit after becoming more or less political, under Constantine. I don't endorse all they believe, any more than they endorse what I believe.

  The very Greek word "bapt'o" means to immerse..

  I don't know if they retrieved anything that was carbon datable. Normally it takes once living remains to carbon date.  T

  his ancient, "first" church is located nearby in the "upper room", where the apostles celebrated the Last Supper.  Some authorities claim that as true..  Although the upper room has been destroyed a couple times over the centuries, it has been rebuilt.

  This tour guide gal will explain.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDdktsDJTiM&t=943s

  I only post this for Christian interest...

[Dixie-Dude]

Yes, it seems the Catholic church wandered more than the Eastern Orthodox church thus leading to the Protestant reformation.  You know, it is also interesting that the printing press was invented about the same time.  People could read the Bible for themselves and could see the wandering away from the simple Gospel. 

Another interesting thing is in Colonial America, reading was taught to all kids from the Bible, and most of the Ivy league schools were started by Christians.  And, early America actually had a higher standard of living for most people than in England or France, more educated people also because of the Christian influence. 

[Dee]

Man has always tried to supersede God by dictate to followers how to properly worship God. Catholicism gets the most criticism, because it is the prominent, and the most obvious, with all its sainthoods and ceremonies. Methodist, and Baptist churches however, are fast catching up.

Take this thread for instance. Its very title claims something that is not only erroneous, but impossible to validate. Man is willing to fabricate information in order appear more holy. The "Shroud of Turin" is yet another example. Its been promoted even here that its the shroud Christ was buried in, when in fact, nobody has a clue where it even came from. There isn't any proof that its even the image of a man on it, when it could have been an old piece or cloth thrown into a corner somewhere. Crap, people are seeing the image of what they claim is Christ on pieces of toast, and the image of the Virgin Mary on water damaged walls. "MAN" is never satisfied with scripture, they want something they can see. If folks studied what God actually gave him, the Bible/Scripture,  they'd be a lot further down the road to Christianity. This thread topic church is just another of mans distraction from Gods TRUTH.

[Bob Riebe]

      Other ancient Christian churches, besides Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, include the Church of the East and the Oriental Orthodox Churches. The Oriental Orthodox Churches are a communion of churches that includes

 the Armenian Apostolic Church,
the Coptic Orthodox Church,
the Syriac Orthodox Church,
 the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church,
and the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church.

The Church of the East includes
 the Assyrian Church of the East
 and the Ancient Church of the East, which share a distinct theological tradition

[ironglowz]

 I expected that without saying so, most would understand that I presented the "first church" as an intellectual exercise and suggestion for those interested.

  I made no claim of absolute surety, but just a possibility, and a good possibility at that !  I never claimed it to be the ONLY possibility.
,
  If we were to run our lives expending energy, trying to crush every new thought or exploration, we would never get anywhere.

   Something else to contemplate;   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZDfGiXJjjI         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkJtgZWyy90


   Don't be afraid...it won't bite !

[Dee]

I expected that without saying so, most would understand that I presented the "first church" as an intellectual exercise and suggestion for those interested.

  I made no claim of absolute surety, but just a possibility, and a good possibility at that !  I never claimed it to be the ONLY possibility.
,
  If we were to run our lives expending energy, trying to crush every new thought or exploration, we would never get anywhere.

   Something else to contemplate;   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZDfGiXJjjI         https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkJtgZWyy90


   Don't be afraid...it won't bite !

How does an intellectual exercise  take place with a fictitious claim?

Your thread title says: The very first church..where the apostles assembled..
Thats how you promoted the thread, now your abandoning it.

Expending energy chasing fictional cats while pretending their spiritual rabbits isn't an exploration of God's word, or works it's strictly a man thing.
All of Gods answers to mans questions are in the Book, but man is never satisfied, he's too busy surmising and wants to do it on his own.

There should be a forum here for folks that enjoy "biblical surmising" where scriptural truth doesn't matter, where scripture  doesn't  even  matter, but false doctrine, and non scriptural fantasy like this can be "explored".

[Dixie-Dude]

Well, archeology is pretty accurate.  If the uncovered the church and the buildings or homes around it there is usually some coinage, or something written to tell what the approximate date is.  Then you can narrow it down to just a few years.  The tile used for the floors and walls can tell the time period they were in manufacture in that area.  Also any manuscripts found, or stone carvings with words, etc.  If it is the first church or oldest church found, it will be interesting to find what their actual teachings and preachings were. 

[Dee]

Well, archeology is pretty accurate.  If the uncovered the church and the buildings or homes around it there is usually some coinage, or something written to tell what the approximate date is.  Then you can narrow it down to just a few years.  The tile used for the floors and walls can tell the time period they were in manufacture in that area.  Also any manuscripts found, or stone carvings with words, etc.  If it is the first church or oldest church found, it will be interesting to find what their actual teachings and preachings were.

I agree with most of what your saying, but there are many assumptions that folks make that have no basis for their claims.
Take the Bible for an example. There are archeological facts, and non biblical truths, that document the Bibles factual correctness already found, and constantly being found.

I look at an arrowhead, or a flint scraper, and try to imagine the effort taken in making of those in such a primitive environment, but although I live within 4 miles of Adobe Walls, I don't say this  likely was used by Commanche Chief Quanna Parker. All I know is it was likely made by a commanche.

[ironglowz]

  From Dee;

  "How does an intellectual exercise  take place with a fictitious claim?

Your thread title says: The very first church..where the apostles assembled..
Thats how you promoted the thread, now your abandoning it."

  If you watched the video, you would find that I lifted that information from the moderator of the video. I did provoke interest and i suspect such a claim would be of interest to any serious Christian.

  I guess I didn't realize that in order to post some info on GBO, I had to adhere to court room discipline, and bring a lawyer along for verification.

  Perhaps you have a better, more authentic "first church" site to offer...if so bring it on !  In the meantime I expect others to enjoy the intellectual exercise, and perhaps offer suggestions of their own.

  The location in good, since the site is about where Jesus told the apostles to wait for a time after his resurrection.

  As Dixie dude said, today's archaeology can narrow things quite closely to date and circumstance..shards of pottery, scraps of fabric or leather, or discarded pieces of tools.

  Still, we should be careful not to conflate evidence with proof !  After all, many a criminal is convicted on evidence alone.

  I really thought when I posted the interesting video, that perhaps most were well aware of that age old conundrum.

[Dee]

I never thought for a minute that we'd agree. You look for additions to  biblical truth, and I call out what I consider heresy.
I don't do it to antagonize you, but I understand that there are MANY SILENT READERS that go to the religious forums searching for truth.
Your message to them most of the time is that it is, when it isn't. Mine is based on biblical facts, not what ifs.
You very seldom post your own thoughts on any specific scriptures, you always use someone else's. In fact, the only time you use scripture is to try to prophecy a a current event.

This thread was started as a here's the original very first church. Your thread title promotes that. I rebutted it. Now your crawfishing. Back your stance.
As to your latest claim I would contend that God Himself told serious Christians to stay away from such surmising, and speculation. 1st Timothy Chapter 6 verse 4.

[ironglowz]

  I think we have belabored the subject and beaten this dead horse quite enough !

  Like many, I get no joy with prolonged arguing and doubt many other do either.    So that being said, and to keep peace on GBO, I will simply bow out here to save the strain on the forum..

  If you want to argue, complain, accuse or pontificate more..just take the liberty of speaking clearly and succinctly, into my hand !

 

[Dee]

  I think we have belabored the subject and beaten this dead horse quite enough !

  Like many, I get no joy with prolonged arguing and doubt many other do either.    So that being said, and to keep peace on GBO, I will simply bow out here to save the strain on the forum..

  If you want to argue, complain, accuse or pontificate more..just take the liberty of speaking clearly and succinctly, into my hand !

 

Cute, but as I said it is was rebuttal. This thread in the religious forums has already been read 195 times, and only 1 scripture has been posted.

[ironglowz]

  I think we have belabored the subject and beaten this dead horse quite enough !

  Like many, I get no joy with prolonged arguing and doubt many other do either.    So that being said, and to keep peace on GBO, I will simply bow out here to save the strain on the forum..

  If you want to argue, complain, accuse or pontificate more..just take the liberty of speaking clearly and succinctly, into my hand !

 

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spPeRpAegF0

Cute, but as I said it is was rebuttal. This thread in the religious forums has already been read 195 times, and only 1 scripture has been posted.

[Dee]

Once again ironglowz. You post someone else's thoughts, and opinions. Don't you have any of your own, other than your aggravation when I give my thoughts,  and my opinions?

Years ago when I tried to lead a Bible study  here with only the Bible as an information source, you fought it tooth and nail, constantly postin commentary from other people. I gave up and shut it down with the help of Bill. You raised hell over it being shut down, but were one of the constant violators of forum rules, which were Bible only

I'm thinking you get all your information from sources other than straight scripture.

[Graybeard]

I did provoke interest and i suspect such a claim would be of interest to any serious Christian

Not to argue but rather to try to understand the thought process going into that statement.

Why would I care? I can't see how the location of the first or any other early church would be of interest to me. I see a possible veneration of a place, a building or meeting place perhaps happening from that and I think all such to be wrong, very wrong.

[ironglowz]

I did provoke interest and i suspect such a claim would be of interest to any serious Christian

Not to argue but rather to try to understand the thought process going into that statement.

Why would I care? I can't see how the location of the first or any other early church would be of interest to me. I see a possible veneration of a place, a building or meeting place perhaps happening from that and I think all such to be wrong, very wrong.

 

  For Bill;  Perhaps I am too myopic, but I am a history buff and almost anything history interests me.  I suppose i should keep in mind, that not all are as taken with histoiry as i am.

  I have visited old Roman gladiatorial arenas...and for me it was a thrill to stand where gladiators shed one another's blood.  I have visited the various battlefields where WW1 and WW2 were fought and contemplated the actions and effects of infantry, armor and air power. on each battle.

  I visited some of the great cathedrals of Europe, and was amazed at how the peasants in 1200 to 1400 AD, were virtually enslaved to build them...despite being ravaged  by periodic visits by the black plague.

  I visit the battle sites of the revolutionary and Civil wars here in the USA, and can find admiration for those on both sides.

  I even visited the Frankenstein castle, knowing the novel by Mary Shelley, was pure fiction. Nevertheless it is an excellent example of 10th century fortifications.

   ..Sorry, but I just "eat that stuff up"..    Below; enjoy some views of Frankenstein, Pfalz..

[Dee]

I did provoke interest and i suspect such a claim would be of interest to any serious Christian

Not to argue but rather to try to understand the thought process going into that statement.

Why would I care? I can't see how the location of the first or any other early church would be of interest to me. I see a possible veneration of a place, a building or meeting place perhaps happening from that and I think all such to be wrong, very wrong.

Agreed,