|[ Previous Lecture / Essay ]|[ Ancient Christianity Index ]|[ Next Lecture / Essay]|
The first organization of the followers of Christ came into existence in cosmopolitan Jerusalem and the Christian congregation displayed the same kinds of differences the Jewish population did out of which it was called. The early Christians did not cease being Jews just because they accepted Christ. A squabble developed in the church over the alleged inequality in the distribution of donated supplies. The widows of Hellenistic, urban, and Greek-speaking Jewish Christians complained and the Apostles (who represented Jewish Christians from rural, Aramaic-speaking Galilee and Judea) recommended that some ministers be selected from among the disaffected part of the congregation. The seven ministers of Acts 6 all have Hellenistic names. While the Apostles continued to focus their ministry among the Aramaic-speaking worshippers in the Temple courtyard, the seven took their ministry into the Greek-speaking synagogues in Jerusalem. The martyrdom of Stephen and the persecution of Saul of Tarsus were events that primarily disturbed and dispersed the Hellenistic Jewish believers rather than the Aramaic Jewish believers who seem to have continued to enjoy growth in their numbers under the ministry of the Apostles.
When did this first congregation appear in Jerusalem? The surviving evidence from all sources points to a time during the reign of the Roman Emperor Tiberius (AD 14-37). Further discussion of these historical sources is found in Appendix V.
Up
It was at this juncture that the Emperor Gaius, 37-41, demonstrated his lack of concern for Roman treaties and his own megalomania. He ordered a statue of himself dressed as a divus imperatoris to be erected in the Temple at Jerusalem. He intended to transform the Temple into a center for the worship of the reigning emperor. Gaius was assassinated in 41 before this plan could be carried out, but enormous popular protests had already been dispatched to beg the Emperor's agents in Syria not to proceed, and to threaten a massive set-down strike if they did. A fuller treatment of Gaius is found in Appendix V.
Meanwhile the Hellenistic Jewish believers had been dispersed from Jerusalem by Saul's persecution, and they spread north through the Jewish communities in Phoenicia to the Jewish community in Antioch, Syria. There it appears that the first gentile converts after Cornelius were made. It may have been about the same time during the reign of Emperor Claudius (41-54) when a noisy controversy in the Jewish community in Rome took place. This controversy was mentioned in an off-hand, rather naive manner in the second century account of the Roman historian Suetonius (Life of Claudius, XXV.4) as taking place "at the instigation of Chrestus [sic.]".
Up
When the 9 day fire of 64 AD gutted a large section of Rome and left many thousands homeless, the bitterness of the masses and their long-smoldering contempt of Nero overflowed in the belief that Nero had deliberately started the fire for his own purposes. Nero, who never gave much attention to public relations, seems in this case to have felt a compulsion to somehow divert the hostility of the masses from himself. His scheme was to convict somebody else for starting the fire and then to punish them in public, spectacular, attention-grabbing ways that would assuage the rage and anger of the masses. There is no indication he would have ever paid any attention to the Christians in Rome had he not needed someone vulnerable and expendable to be his scape-goats--people not likely to have strong connections or friends in high places who could or would protest.
How did his attention turn to the Christians? One place he might have heard about these Jewish Christians was from the zealous non-Christian Jews in Rome who already knew how to be politicians. In order to make themselves look clean as a whistle and smell like a rose they found some vulnerable opponent and plastered him with stinky mud. For the zealous Jews of the early 60's in Rome the Christian Jews would have been a natural target. A small group, increasingly alienated from their own race, followers of a convicted and executed political criminal under Rome's appointed governor in Judea not yet forty years ago. Nero is not likely to find anybody more vulnerable and expendable than that.
His attempt to convict the Christians of arson fissiled for lack of valid accusers, so he simply charged them with general subversion--"hatred of the human race," a charge often employed by Roman judges against defenseless subject peoples who angered their neighbors by practicing magic or demonology. The penalty for this charge is left entirely to the discretion of the judge. Some of Nero's convicts were tied between draft-animals and literally pulled apart; others had their hair and their clothing soaked in oil, hoisted bodily high up on a pole and ignited to serve as human torches in the park where evening meals were being served to the homeless. The Roman historian Tacitus (Annals, XV:44.2-8) ventures that the masses saw through what Nero was attempting to do, but instead of venting their hatred and frustration against the Christians, they felt sorry for them and hated Nero more than ever. Another more detailed treatment of Nero is found in Appendix VI
Up
It is very easy to fall into the trap of making unhistorical assumptions about what the New Testament text says, especially when discussing "offices" in the early Christian movement. It is true that the everyday descriptive terms found in the New Testament vocabulary do at some undocumented point in time become the official titles we are
familiar with and those official titles do gradually assume elaborate and precise meaning. Hence, the reader tends to see in those familiar terms the elaborate, nuanced meaning supplied by his or her cultural conditioning. Such an understanding almost never matches the simple meaning operative in an ancient culture foreign to ours. The most egregious examples of this type often occur when someone is more interested in proving the correctness of his particular cultural tradition than knowing what the scripture says. Realizing these pitfalls this section discusses some of the familiar nomenclature found in the New Testament.
Up
The New Testament makes it clear that the Apostles constituted the highest-ranking officials of the early Christian movement. The Eleven Disciples and Matthias constitute these first Apostles. It appears that these Apostles reflected the cultural background of Galilee, largely Aramaic with minor effects of Hellenism. Acts 1:25 characterizes
the Apostles' task as "deaconship and apostleship"; while Acts 6:4 clarifies their work as "prayer and deaconship of the word." I'm translating the Greek word diakonia as "deaconship" rather than "ministry" to emphasize how this New Testament word associated with deacons is utilized in describing the Apostles. The term "apostle" (apostolon) is used too in the secular world to designate a particular ship dedicated to a particular destination overseas, a ship with a
designated mission. The activity most often attributed to the New Testament Apostles is teaching or preaching.
Up
It is often assumed that the passage in Acts 6:1-6 refers to the selection of deacons; however, a close study of the account in Acts raises interesting questions. The problem was with the inequity in the distribution of the Christian community's collective resources to widows and dependents of the Hellenistic Jewish Christians. These "seven men of good report" all had Hellenistic names: for example, Stephen and Philip. Stephen witnessed in the Hellenistic Jewish congregations at Jerusalem where he encountered Saul. Philip witnessed to the Hellenistic Samaritans in the "city of Samaria", certainly the city Herod rebuilt and renamed Sebaste. One of the seven was further identified as a Hellenistic gentile proselyte (a convert to Judaism) from Syrian Antioch. These individuals were to "deacon (the verb here is diakonein) the daily deaconship" (the noun here is diakonia), a task involving the distribution of common resources to widows and their dependents. The "tables" they were to deacon (the verb here is diakonein) may have been those of the common meal, but it is just as likely to have been the "counters" of financial administration--literally, tables where financial calculations were carried out with tokens and coins. There is no doubt that later on they did serve at the "table of the Lord" in the memorial meal.
There is, however, no other reference in Acts or any of the other New Testament books to deacons serving in the Jerusalem church. However, in Acts 11:30 the Christian community's leaders who received the funds brought to Jerusalem by Barnabas and Paul, are referred to as elders. By that time Stephen has been martyred and many other Hellenistic Jewish Christians have decided to visit only occasionally in Jerusalem. In Acts 15 elders (presbyteroi [plural]) are mentioned several times among those who exercise authority in the Jerusalem congregation. If the elders referred to in Acts 11:30 and Acts 15:2, et al., are not the successors of the seven of Acts 6, then these elders were evidently selected later, perhaps after Peter left Jerusalem, c. AD 42. Acts 12:17 strongly implies that James, the Lord's brother, was a central figure in the Jerusalem congregation after the death of James the Apostle (Acts 12:2) and the departure of Peter. While elders are not specifically identified at the church at Antioch-in-Syria, they were reportedly established in the congregations founded by Paul and Barnabas (Acts 14:23, cf. Titus 1:5).
At this point we should remember that every Jewish synagogue (see Appendix IV) was typically governed by a small committee of three elders, collectively called "rulers". They were generally supported by a larger committee of elders. For more information on Jewish elders see Appendix IV. Paul reports in Galatians 2:9 that at the time of his visit in Jerusalem, c. AD 48, three men (undoubtedly elders) were recognized as "pillars" in the Jerusalem congregation. Do these three pillars reflect the three "rulers" in the synagogue organization?
Two of these pillars are usually recognized as having been among the Twelve Apostles: Cephas (Peter) and John. Paul compared the way Peter's apostleship to the circumcision had been confirmed by the work of the Holy Spirit in the same way his own apostleship to the gentiles had been confirmed by the Spirit (Galatians 2:7-8). The way Galatians 2:11 is usually handled, Peter was in Syrian Antioch before he, Paul and Barnabas all appeared at the so-called Jerusalem Council. At the council Peter came to the defense of the gentile converts and "salvation by grace" against the zealous Pharisee Christians (and those from Judea, Acts 15:1; Galatians 2:12) who were in favor of demanding that all believers must keep the whole law of Moses to be saved (Acts 15:5-11). Peter was considered a pillar at Jerusalem even though he was for a time residing and ministering in Antioch.
In the case of the pillar John some doubt that this John was one of the Twelve. On the basis of II John 1:1 and III John 1:1 some identify this as the "Elder John", a different person, while it is not at all unlikely that the Apostle John merely choose to call himself the Elder. John is not named or quoted in Acts 15. While Luke's text in Acts 15:2 implies that apostles and elders are the authorities at Jerusalem, only two of the twelve are mentioned.
The third pillar, James, must have been Jesus' brother, not the Apostle James; for, he had been executed in the early 40's (Acts 12:2). Nevertheless, James is referred to (Galatians 2:12) by Paul as the leader representing the origin of those zealous representatives "of the circumcision". Luke identifies the origin of the troublemakers as "from Judea" (Acts 15:1). Certainly James was identified and quoted as one of the spokesmen for the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15:13-21, and later tradition as reported by Eusebius, (Ecclesiastical History, II.I.2-3) tells how Peter, James and John "chose him", James the Just, as "overseer" (i.e. bishop) of the Jerusalem Christian community.
The unclear relationship between elders and deacons will eventually come into sharper focus in relation to the position of the bishop, which was beginning to emerge at the end of the New Testament period just before AD 70. In his letter to Titus (1:5,7) Paul used "bishop" (episkopos, i.e. overseer) as a synonym of "elder" (presbyteron). Also, he addressed the elders of the Ephesian congregation (Acts 20:17) pointing out that they have responsibility as "overseers" (episkopoi --Acts 20:28). Later about AD 60 in addressing the Philippian congregation Paul makes no mention of elders, but salutes "the saints ... in Philippi with overseers and ministers", i.e. bishops and deacons (Philippians 1:1). These several usages do not support the conclusion too often drawn, that a fully developed episcopal autocracy is already present in the first century church.
In the vocabulary of the Jewish heritage elders were culturally defined as "bearded" men (Hebrew: zeqen). However in the New Testament no gender is regularly associated with the deacon vocabulary. Forms of the word translated "deacon" are found throughout the New Testament conveying the simple sense of service or ministry. Jesus speaks of himself in the role of the "deacon" in Luke 22:27. In John 12:26 Jesus invited his deacons to follow him. And we noted above the Apostles exercised a type of responsibility as "deacons" as did the Seven of Acts 6. But we also find women ministering, that is, being deacons in this simple sense of the word, in a number of domestic settings. Peter's mother-in-law was a "deacon" in Matthew 8:14. Martha was the "deacon" in John 12:2. Aside from these common instances, among several others where the word is used in its basic sense of serving and attending the needs of others, there is also the famous instance of Phoebe. Paul introduces her as (Romans 6:1-2) a "deaconess (diakonon) of the Church at Cenchrea" and recommends her to the Church at Rome as a capable administrator (prostatis is the feminine form of prostatés which is used in some instances to mean presiding leader, facilitator, appointed or designated leader). What this tells us for sure is that Phoebe was once a member of the Church at Cenchrea. It does not tell us whether she filled an office or whether her lifestyle of efficiently tending to others' needs was simply being described with the appropriate word! Similarly, it is impossible to know whether the reference to women found in Paul's admonitions to deacons in I Timothy 3:11 refers to women who serve as deacons or the deacon's wives. We should be alert to the possibility that the word "deacon" in I Timothy 3 may well by that time refer to an authoritative well-defined "office", as the King James translation suggests, or simply be characterizing these believers as servant-attendants.
Up
Itinerant church planting teams are reported in Acts and in references found in later Christian writers. The composition of such a team generally seems to include a teacher, an evangelist, and a prophet. A second century author, Clement of Alexandria, indicates that a fourth team member was sometimes included, specifically a woman to work with the local women. He makes special note of the fact that the female team member was not one of the team members' wives.
Up
The teacher's activity was to teach and interpret the Old Testament from the Christian point of view. While the Apostles originally exercised the teaching responsibility it became a special task evident in the itinerant missionary outreach teams. At Syrian Antioch there were two teachers (Manaen and Paul) counted among the leaders (Acts 13:1). The missionary teams recorded in Acts seem to include a designated teacher. Once the local churches were established the responsibility was then delegated to the elders in local churches (Cf. I Timothy 5:17). The Holy Scriptures in this period consisted exclusively of what we recognize today as the Old Testament and it was selectively quoted when it was understood to support the orally transmitted teachings of the personal witnesses. Most of the Old Testament quotations in the New Testament Books appear to be drawn from the Septuagint, the Greek text used by the Hellenistic Jews.
Up
Acts 13:1 also identifies the three prophets in the faculty gathered at Antioch by Barnabas (Acts 13:1). The prophet's role was the consolation and encouragement of new believers, exhorting, counseling, directing them in meeting the problems and day-to-day challenges of the Christian life and witness. Sometimes they did foretell problems about to be encountered collectively (Acts 11:27-28) or individually (Acts 21:10-11). Both men (Acts 11:27) and women (Acts 21:9) are numbered among the prophets. In the missionary teams recorded in Acts or in Paul's letters the prophet is typically included.
Up
The evangelist's role was recounting, explaining and perhaps defending the teachings and events of Jesus' life--as is obvious in the "evangels" or gospels composed in this period. The evangelist had an especially important role on the itinerant missionary team in the period before and for a considerable time after the written Gospel texts began to be available.
Philip is described as an evangelist in Acts 21:8. While no authentic Gospel text survived with Philip's name attached, Luke may well have used Philip as a resource (Acts 21:8-10a) for his account. Luke had joined Paul's company during Paul's second journey, and eventually left us writings describing both the life and teachings of Jesus and the history of the early Christian movement. Luke had not been an eye-witness participant before about 50 AD, but collected and compiled available testimony. The evangelist John Mark was associated with Barnabas, Paul and finally Peter on missionary tours. Mark was likewise not an eye-witness, but a reporter of the reports of eye-witnesses, especially, we suspect, of Peter. Of the canonical Gospel writers, Matthew and John are typically, but not universally, recognized as participating eye-witnesses of Jesus' public ministry. In addition to the canonical gospels there were a number of other texts that begin to be cited by name as gospels later in the second century making it difficult, if not impossible, to verify original authorship or date.
Up
The Christians in the New Testament period continued to participate in most of the traditional Jewish observances; however, they were increasingly forced out of existing local Jewish congregations from the time of Saul's persecution onward. They simply organized parallel Christian congregations, that is, synagogues of believing Jews, when that happened. Building on a solid foundation of Jewish religious custom they included the new and unique Christian elements.
The customary worship activities of the Jewish synagogues were duplicated in the Christian congregations: Scripture reading, prayer, teaching, Psalms, hymns, and exhortation. Based on the circumstances at Jerusalem additional activities became customary; Acts 2:42-47 emphasizes the koinonia (Cf. Latin, communio), fellowship, community or society of the believers. After Pentecost daily assemblages were held in the Temple area at the customary Jewish prayer hours (mid-morning and mid-afternoon) when the Apostles taught and preached. Also they daily divided into house-sized groups for meals, further instruction, prayer and worship. These house-sized fellowship/worship groups are probably indicated even before Pentecost (Acts 1: 12-13) where it is reported that the apostles and others who had returned to Jerusalem continued to meet for fellowship and worship in "the upper room", evidently the location of Jesus' last fellowship meal with them. After Pentecost their numbers increased to the point they were meeting in multiple group locations.
Up
In his very last meal with the twelve they celebrated together the annual Jewish Passover Supper. During that meal Jesus had identified the loaf of unleavened bread they would all partaken of as "my body" (Matt 26:26). According to the fourth gospel this was not the first time Jesus had identified himself with bread (John 6:32-59), but its significance here was identifying the bread "which cometh down out of heaven" (vs. 50) with the Passover meal. Then he identified the common cup from which they all drank as "my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Matt 26:28, but compare Luke 22:17-18, 20). This reference to the symbolic meaning of the wine in the Passover meal, symbolizing the "blood of the covenant" sprinkled on the door posts of the Israelite houses in Egypt, later helped his disciples identify Jesus' death with the lamb sacrificed by each homeowner on that first Passover. It was a poignant prophecy that gave meaning to the events of the following day when Jesus was crucified and his body buried. Henceforth, the disciples doubtless remembered Jesus' introduction of this other covenant, the "new covenant in my blood" (Luke 22:20), every time the group came together for a meal. That understanding had given coherence and meaning to all the unbelievable things that had happened since that Last Supper with Jesus, including Jesus' crucifixion, resurrection and ascension.
At the house-sized fellowship meals (Acts 2:46) these Jewish believers followed Jewish custom, even as Jesus had at that last meal with his disciples, of offering thanks and blessing each major course as it was served. However, for the Christians there now was additional meaning. These believers "gave thanks" (Greek verb; eucharistein) not only for the refreshing drink they were about to enjoy, but also at the same time, they remembered to be thankful for Christ's shed blood symbolized by the drink. Again they gave thanks for the food (bread) on the table to nourish their physical bodies and, at the same time, remembered to be thankful for the "bread which came down out of heaven", i.e., the provision made by God for the salvation of mankind through the death of Jesus. This was perhaps the most meaningful and worshipful and unifying moment in their "fellowship" experience. Moreover, this new covenant was not restricted to a once a year memorial as the Exodus covenant had been, hence they "remembered" each time they gathered as disciples to break and share their bread.
The owners of the houses where the groups met may have supplied food for these common meals; for, the believers surrendered all their resources to meet the common needs of the fellowship. One consequence of such a policy was the increasing impoverishment of believers in Jerusalem, including those like Barnabas who were not natives. This was perhaps justification for sometimes calling themselves "the poor" (Galatians 2:10)
At an unknown time and place this practice of the early disciples was transferred from the intimate house-sized meal groups to occasions when the total congregation assembled in one place. In those early years at Jerusalem the impracticality of the entire congregation gathering in one place for a fellowship meal probably first suggested to the believers that the very meaningful moment of "the Thanksgiving" could be separated from the fellowship meal. Consequently, it eventually became customary to employ a streamlined or symbolic meal, consisting of only the bread and wine, as a focus for their corporate worship service. In its new position at the very center of their corporate worship this cherished memorial served as a potent reminder of Jesus' teaching regarding his death, its role in, and the result of, the new covenant. Moreover in the first century believer's understanding this covenant teaching as well as Jesus' other teachings were confirmed as truth by the resurrection. Participating in the memorial celebration confirmed the individual believers' identification with and participation in the body, the church.
Today we call this symbolic meal "the Lord's Supper." Greek speaking believers in the first century called it "the Thanksgiving"; hence, many Christian groups today still call it "the Eucharist". It was not until the sixth century AD that the Lord's Supper began to be called "communion" in Latin--from which that term came into English.
In the polytheistic world of the first century AD such a group ritual symbolizing individual commitment to a group and its purpose frequently involved the pronouncement of a vow or an oath (Latin: sacramentum) often of dreadful consequence--calling down a curse (Greek: anathama)--upon themselves if they failed in their purpose. This was a common practice among secretive conspirators like those forty-some men who conspired to murder Paul as recorded in Acts 23:12ff. While this was not the motivation of the early Christian practice it did appear to non-Christian outsiders that Christians participating in the Lord's Supper were invoking a sacred oath or curse. Here then you have the basis for the later Latin Christian usage of the term "sacrament" in a positive sense of a commitment of allegiance or solemn binding agreement in reference to both the Lord's Supper and Baptism.
The practice of the fellowship meal complete with its "Thanksgiving" long survived in some local churches independently of, and in parallel to the development of corporate worship experience. Although not mentioned by name in the New Testament the common fellowship meal very early came to be called the agapé, "love", meal. Some like to call it the "love feast". "Love" was the primary characteristic of the way of life Jesus taught his followers and was certainly a primary ingredient of Christian fellowship in the local church. As the believers spread into other parts of the Roman world and beyond, different customs impacted these fellowship meals. Problems sometimes arose (I Corinthians 11:23-26; 2 Peter 2:13; and Jude 12). Nevertheless, the references to the continuation of this practice would seem to indicate that Christian fellowship did not in every setting find expression in common meals. Remember that agapé is often translated in English as "charity". In one later situation an offering of food, clothing, or other supplies was brought by each believer in accordance with his ability to share. The food was shared in the fellowship meal and the remainder distributed to the needy of the congregation and to others.
Up
Various Jewish groups employed forms of ritual immersion with varied significance. The Jews commonly practiced ritual cleansing from ceremonial (external and circumstantial) uncleanness by immersion. Priests immersed themselves ceremonially before serving in the Temple and ceremonial immersion was one of the several prerequisites for proselytes entering the Jewish religion. The Qumran community interpreted the immersion ritual as a cleansing from both ceremonial and spiritual (internal and dispositional) uncleanness, i.e., sin. So, in John the Baptist's baptism of repentance (Luke 3:7-14) he demanded an overt change in behavior toward others as evidence of actual obedience to the Law and resulting righteousness. The motivational factor in his message was the matter of God's immanent judgment of those who disregarded His Law. Repentance was an internal, spiritual cleansing replacing the disposition to ignore and disregard God's will as expressed in the Law of Moses with a disposition to obedience.
The inaugural event in Jesus public ministry was his baptism by John the Baptist. In the light of the character and disposition of those John was addressing John hesitated to honor Jesus' request for baptism. One may suspect that John knew something of Jesus' character, disposition and behavior through family connections, as he was inspired to speak of his successor in prophetic eloquence (Matthew 2:11; Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16-17; John 1:29-37). Jesus prevailed upon John to baptize him by arguing that it was the righteous thing to do. Thus, identifying himself with those who had intentions of internalizing and living out the Law, Jesus ministry was not a call to repentance out of fear, but rather out of faith, hope and love. He did not stress the bad news of God's immanent wrath; it was the good news of God's immanent sovereign rule, "the gospel of the Kingdom" (Matt 4:23; compare Mark 1:1).
As an interpreter of the law Jesus pointed toward a way of living that accorded with the divine intentions behind the Mosaic letter of the law and rejected many of the traditional interpretations (Many examples in the Sermon on the Mount, Matt 5-7). Jesus and his disciples had been baptized and continued to baptize others, even as John the Baptist continued his ministry.(John 3:22).
Hence, it was not an innovation when 3000 were baptized at Pentecost, but there was a difference! The righteous Jesus had been crucified, even as John the Baptist had prophesied (John 1:29). The resurrection now confirmed and validated Jesus' teachings and the prophesies regarding him. The further manifestation of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost was an additional seal of divine approval and authenticity. The believers now had no hesitation in proclaiming him "the Son of God", the "Anointed One" (in Greek that is "ho Christos"), "the Lord", and the "Savior" who will erase the sin record of every individual who commits unconditionally to Him and His way in faith (see Peter's sermon at Pentecost; Acts 2:14-40). The new emphasis on identifying with Jesus in the baptism (Acts 2:38; 10:48) signaled the difference in baptism following Jesus' death, burial and resurrection.
This new understanding of baptism continued to be elaborated as signifying the following:
Unfortunately, the New Testament authors did not provide a full physical description of the particulars of the act of baptism. This has allowed Christians at various times in history to practice baptism in a variety of ways. Even its general association with water was lost on occasion.
Up
Jewish synagogue communities also had provisions to take care of widows and indigent members. Such ministry was especially significant during and following Sabbatical years when no crops were planted or harvested. Individuals normally well supplied might experience real deprivation at the end of the Sabbatical. Christian congregations followed this pattern. The Jerusalem Christian fellowship like the Jewish synagogues did address special needs of indigent groups within their midst. Luke mentions their common sharing of individual resources (Acts 2:44-45), and the creative response to the complaint of the Hellenistic widows (Acts 6:1-6). The Jerusalem leaders admonished Paul to "remember the poor" (Galatians 2:10) in Jerusalem even though they had just approved his missionary work to the Gentiles.
Up
Christian literature in the first century, particularly those books we call the New Testament, played a decidedly secondary role in the spread and development of Christianity. The personal witness of individuals who had known Jesus and/or the Apostles was far more authoritative and influential, even if it were transmitted by word of mouth through a number of intermediary persons. This was not because the greater majority of believers were illiterate, but because of the perceived superiority and immediacy of the oral tradition--the good news!
While the relatively late Christian tradition ( 3d century) dating the New Testament writings between c. AD 48-9 and 105, has prevailed widely to the present day. Nineteenth and twentieth century critical scholarship opted to date the New Testament books between c. AD 60 and 160. However, my personal conclusion rejects both traditions. In general, the arguments for late dating are, in my estimation, not sufficiently persuasive when compared to the evidence and arguments for early dating. Both internal and external textual evidence coupled with much early Christian tradition (second century) supports dates between c. AD 42 and 69 for all the New Testament books.
The most powerful argument for the early dating of the New Testament books is the total absence from the New Testament books of any direct reference to the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the Temple as an established fact. It is very hard to believe that the existing books could have been written subsequent to that event without that fact having inspired some comment or reference to its impact.
Remember that these texts were all hand written. Hence, distribution of multiple copies in this earliest period was very, very limited. While no fragment of an original autograph of any New Testament passage has so far been discovered, extremely few fragments of any text penned between AD 30 and 70 have survived. This is why the Dead Sea Scrolls and fragments of a few papyrus documents found in Egypt from this approximate time frame are so important!
Up
The purposes of Christian literature in general were not only to inform, instruct and remind, but to defend and correct as well. The errors combated in the period before the destruction of Jerusalem included:
Return to the Lecture/Essay Table of Contents for Part I
ht3463le04.html
Most recently edited 26 December 2005