Historian of Early Christianity waiting for school to start . . . ask me anything!

[mbmulkern]

I have a question. Where was the first Christian church built? I mean the apostles all scattered but was there an actual building structure built somewhere?

 

[BoomerangToo]

1. When Marco Polo went to China, he found Christians there. How did they get there? Who evangelized them?
2. Are there any Jewish writings from the first few centuries AD that speak of Christians or Jesus?
3. Was there any connection or overlap between Christians and Mithraists in the first two centuries?
4. Why was the Book of Enoch excluded from the Bible?
5. What was the Christian community in Rome like before Peter and Paul arrived?

 

[NotThatHarvey]

What do you think of the theory that the Jewish High Priesthood had a role in persuading Nero to go after the Christians? According to Josephus, apparently, a former High Priest Ismael was part of the inner circle of Poppea, Nero’s wife, at that time.

 

[Myronthecatholic]

It is Salome’s fault. Endless over-thinking is what she intended. Any of us could have helped her, but she would not listen.
Titles, rank, and pecking order were o.k. in small doses,
All glory and honor were at least available for a higher power. . . .

 

[Wannano]

I’ve seen a few posts by Atheists looking to answer questions, so I thought it might be fun for me to try the same thing with my interest - Early Christian history.

A few pieces of background: I’m a professor of Early Christian history (including the Historical Jesus) at a US university. I am a historian, NOT a theologian. If you have any questions about Christology or things of that nature, I am not the best resource.

Also, I am not interested in debating faith. That is something best left to vehicles other than the internet.

So, if anyone has any questions, I will do my best.

I am interested in Baptism. There are no direct statements in the NT involving the baptism of infants. From what I gather it may not have been a practice at all for many years. Do you have anything to contribute about the origin and practice of infant baptism?

 

[billsherman]

Where do you teach, Bill?

I teach at a decent sized US private university. I would prefer to leave it there, if you don’t mind. I appreciate the interest, however.

 

[billsherman]

Understanding the context of writings of hundreds of years ago is important, imho, and helps us see the difficulty of finding solutions to the entirety of today’s ethical issues.

I fully agree. JFK was onto something when he said “we chose to do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard.” Ancient history, of all kinds, is difficult, but so rewarding.

I’m curious about the secular issues caused by King Phillip of France, the 19-year old monarch that needed more money, so changed something concerning taxation of churches. What were the turmoils and changes caused in the world of his day? Did they have permanent effects?

I wish I could give you a good answer here. The best I can do is point you toward Joseph Bergin. He has written extensively on Christianity in France. You should be able to find his books on Amazon, or in a local library via interlibrary loan.

 

[TheButler]

So, if anyone has any questions, I will do my best.

Given there appears to be a lot of cross-over in terms of phrases, concepts and specific words as well as the time-frame, is there any evidence to suggest that the four Gospels and Revelation were written by just one person?

On the same topic, do you subscribe to the author of John and Revelation (written post 100AD) to be one and the same as well as the apostle John who personally knew Christ 70 years earlier?

 

[billsherman]

(1) Do you agree with the division into seven “authentic” amd seven “deutero-Pauline” epistles?

Yes, I agree with your breakdown.

If so, what are your views about the authorship of the “deutero-pauline” epistles? Ben Witherington, I think, favors Luke as the author of the Pastoral epistles (visiting Paul in prison in Rome and acting as his secretary), and someone else has mentioned Apollos of Alexandria as the likely author of Hebrews.

I don’t like to ascribe any particular author to them. I’m just not convinced there is enough evidence to link them to any specific person. Luke, however, would be as good a guess as anyone. If they in fact weren’t written by Paul, they were certainly written by a close associate or follower.

(2) Authorship and date of the Epistle of James. Do you attach any weight to the argument that it can’t be James “the brother of the Lord”, the James of Acts 15, because of the late date at which the epistle was admitted to the canon? There would have been no such delay—the argument goes—if it was known that the author was such a prominent and highly regarded leader of the early Jewish Church.

James is a fascinating letter. It gives us one of our few glimpses into what scholars call “Jewish-Christianity.” Which is a rapidly growing area of scholarship. Few historians believe it was written by James, and like Paul believe it was written by a close associate or follower. Even though James was clearly one of the most important leaders of the early Church, his legacy was very quickly overshadowed by Paul. Hence, I suspect, the reason why this letter gets generally less attention.

 

[steido01]

Secret Gospel of Mark

Do you consider it to predate canonical Mark?

I think the stylistic evidence clearly makes it the work of a later writer (perhaps even much later). I can’t help but think it’s a little convenient to proffer a free-love Jesus during the Summer of Love. And the refusal to give the evidence to police or share the images? I’m inclined to think Morton Smith was peddling some popular snake oil.

 

[Gorgias]

Of course. But as I said, I am a historian, not a theologian.

OK… so then, your answer boils down to “when did folks begin to call the people who acted in a priestly role at Liturgy ‘priests’?”

That’s fair. However, I think the question isn’t one of convention or naming, but of exercise of priestly ministry. The Mass – whether called by that name or another; whether celebrated with a particular rubric – existed at the very beginning of the Church.

I would’ve hoped your answer would have addressed the notion of hierus and how that title (albeit not that function) was reserved to Jewish priests at least until (Jewish) Christians were forcibly denied access to Jewish liturgical worship.

 

[billsherman]

Roughly when do you believe that the “Church in the modern sense” came into being? Thanks in advance!

Great question! Assuming that we are talking about the Catholic Church here - and I think that is a safe assumption - my own view is rather unorthodox. I actually date the beginning of the modern Church to 1870. That is because 1870 marks the end of the Papal States. From that point on, the Pope became almost entirely a religious leader, as opposed to the political and religious leader he was previously. As you probably know, at many different times the Papacy was directly controlled by various monarchs and powerful noble families. I know this view is unpopular, but you asked for my opinion!

 

[billsherman]

I have a question. Where was the first Christian church built? I mean the apostles all scattered but was there an actual building structure built somewhere?

There obviously was a first Christian Church built somewhere, but sadly that information has been lost to us. Jerusalem or one of the surrounding towns seems like a good guess, but it is just a guess.

 

[billsherman]

When Marco Polo went to China, he found Christians there. How did they get there? Who evangelized them?

I honestly don’t know. Christianity did have almost 1300 years to get there though.

Are there any Jewish writings from the first few centuries AD that speak of Christians or Jesus?

Yes! The most famous, and most useful historically, are the writings of the Jewish-Roman historian Josephus. He only briefly mentions Jesus, James, and the Jerusalem Church, but the references are there. There are also some alleged references in the Talmud, but those are not necessarily to Jesus of Nazareth (Jesus was a common name at the time), and even if they are, give no historical information about Christianity in the first century.

Why was the Book of Enoch excluded from the Bible?

As far as I know, it was not well regarded in Second Temple Era Judaism, and the earliest Christians were originally Jewish. So it makes sense to me that it would continue to be out of favor.

What was the Christian community in Rome like before Peter and Paul arrived?

Sadly, other than Paul’s Letter to the Romans, we have basically no information on Christianity in Rome in the First Century. Believe it or not, there isn’t even any historical evidence Peter ever traveled to Rome. Seriously, there is tradition, but no actual written record of him ever being there (please note: that doesn’t mean he wasn’t there, just that no record of it survives).

 

[billsherman]

What do you think of the theory that the Jewish High Priesthood had a role in persuading Nero to go after the Christians? According to Josephus, apparently, a former High Priest Ismael was part of the inner circle of Poppea, Nero’s wife, at that time.

I try to stay away from theories for which there is no evidence.

 

[RedFan]

Can you weigh in on a topic that was left hanging on another post? The issue is whether we have any historical evidence that Peter handed the Keys of the Kingdom to Linus.

It seems that Peter had two hats. He was Leader of the Church as a whole, despite there being leaders or episcopoi in various cities. (I know, I know, James was leader of the Jerusalem Church even while Peter was active there – let’s leave that aside.) For a short while at the end of his life, tradition has it that he was leader of the Church in Rome. To be clear, I am not asking about evidence that Linus succeeded Peter as Bishop of Rome (let’s presume that much), but rather as Leader of the Church. as a whole. Any historical insight would be appreciated.

 

[billsherman]

I am interested in Baptism. There are no direct statements in the NT involving the baptism of infants. From what I gather it may not have been a practice at all for many years. Do you have anything to contribute about the origin and practice of infant baptism?

In Early Christianity infant baptism does not appear to have been the norm. John the Baptist also apparently only baptized adults. Beyond that, I’m sorry I have not done any research on the origins of infant baptism.

 

[billsherman]

Given there appears to be a lot of cross-over in terms of phrases, concepts and specific words as well as the time-frame, is there any evidence to suggest that the four Gospels and Revelation were written by just one person?

No. The styles are just way too different. Currently the most widely accepted theory of Gospel authorship is what is called the Two Source Hypothesis. Essentially this means that Mark was written first. Matthew and Luke were written roughly contemporaneously and used Mark as a source, along with a source common to both of them (called the “Q” source), and material know to only themselves. John was written later, possibly with knowledge of Mark, but no knowledge of Matthew and Luke. Revelation was written last, likely with knowledge of all four Gospels.

On the same topic, do you subscribe to the author of John and Revelation (written post 100AD) to be one and the same as well as the apostle John who personally knew Christ 70 years earlier?

No. In fact I agree with the hypothesis of John P. Meier, and many others, that the Beloved Disciple was an otherwise unknown disciple of Jesus. The line claiming the Beloved Disciple was the author of the Gospel, is viewed as a later addition by nearly every scholar.

 

[billsherman]

Do you consider it to predate canonical Mark?

No. I suspect at best, it was just another Gnostic gospel. There were many of them, and while they are interesting for the historical development of Gnosticism, they rarely tell us much about Christianity in the First Century. And they never tell us anything about the historical Jesus.

I think the stylistic evidence clearly makes it the work of a later writer (perhaps even much later). I can’t help but think it’s a little convenient to proffer a free-love Jesus during the Summer of Love. And the refusal to give the evidence to police or share the images? I’m inclined to think Morton Smith was peddling some popular snake oil.

For what it’s worth, I knew Morton Smith, and believe he legitimately found the letter. With that said, I also reject his view of Jesus as a magician.

 

[NotThatHarvey]

But Ismael was probably in Rome during the Christian persecutions in Poppea’s salon- will you admit to that? Or at least the high probability of that being the case?