So there are some in the Messianic movement who cite to the Didache as evidence that the Apostles taught a different way of life for the Gentiles, a way of life distinct from Judaism. James Pyles', a blogger promoted by the UMJC, says this:
"I’m convinced that the Didache was a guide for Jewish disciples to make Gentile novices into disciples of Yeshua, but obviously, it fell into disuse when Gentiles exited the ancient Messianic Jewish community," from the comments section of his post found here: http://mymorningmeditations.com/2015/06/01/what-am-i-chopped-liver/But what do the actual scholars say? Here's the reality about the reliability of the Didache:
"There is only one complete text of the Didache, that manuscript which was discovered by Archbishop Philotheos Bryennios in 1875 in the Patriarchal Library in Constantinople (Hierosolymitanus 54). This eleventh-century manuscript is the standard text upon which most scholarship on the Didache is based. In their reliance upon a single manuscript, and such a late one at that, scholars understand themselves to tread upon very thin ice....how certain can we be that the Didache manuscript of Bryennios represents the text as it was known in the first century?" Jefford, The Didache in Context: Essays on Its Text, History, and TransmissionDoes that sound reliable to any of you?
Here's the real question: why would FFOZ and James Pyles promote such an unreliable text?