“The fact that it reflects “Romanism,” as you put it (rather rudely, I might add), is an indication that the early Church was Catholic, which is why I brought it up in the first place.”
My comment was factual and any rudeness is simply your perception. Romanism is the amalgamation of Christianity and the pagan customs, practices and beliefs it incorporated.
In regards to the didache, we do not know how many times it was changed nor do we know what centuries the changes were made. All we know is we have a copy from the 400s ad - more than 300 years after Christ.
As such, it does not represent the early church nor is there any certainty it represents the teaching of an Apostle.
Best.
And if I characterized the Protestants in such a manner, would you think I was being rude?
Whom do you follow? Luther, who continually changed his mind, recommending massacre of the peasants, everything Hitler did against the Jews short of the concentration camp, and assuring Phillip of Hesse that bigamy was a-ok?
So he starts a church of sorts, based on *his* interpretation of the Bible, and when someone disagrees with Luther’s interpretation, he starts his own church, all the while burning witches, destroying property that doesn’t belong to them, fomenting war and rebellion, and starting new churches each time someone disagrees with his minister’s interpretation, until there are dozens of “Christian” churches unified only in their hatred of the original Church founded not by Wesley or Smyth or Darby or Eddy, but by Jesus Christ Himself.
I think you think I would be very rude if I spoke like that about Protestantism, but you go ahead and feel free to insult those whom you are presumably trying to persuade. Good luck with that tactic. I myself am outta here.