A critical examination of the New Testament in the light of known and verifiable history leads me to the theory that most, if not all of the writings known as the New Testament were written in the 2nd Century CE, as opposed to the common view that such are 1st Century CE historical accounts. My theory is based upon:
A lack of evidence that the material written in the New Testament reflects actual 1st Century CE history.
And yet several traces of evidence that the material written in the New Testament do reflect actual 2nd Century CE history.
Some such history is cloaked in the form of rewritten material, but regardless the New Testament writings reveal traces of foreknowledge of verifiable historical realities which include the complete diaspora of Jews from Jerusalem; 132-135CE (cf Acts 8.1-3; 1 Thessalonians 2.14-16; Romans 9-11); the persecution of Christians and the subsequent Church doctrine of Martyrdom which occurred and developed during the reign of Marcus Aurelius in the 160’s through 170’s (Acts 14:21-22; Rom 8:35; 12:14; 1 Cor 4:12; 2 Cor 4:9; 12:10; Gal 6:12; 1 Thess 2:14); the development of an organized and recognized Church hierarchy of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons; unknown of until the mid 2nd Century CE (Philippians 1.1); doctrinal discussions such as whether justification is by faith or by works of the law (Rom 4.1-5; James 2.14-24; cf Tertullian's Against Marcion (Ad Marc) 5.2); the relationship of the Old and New Testaments (Luke 16.16; Hebrews 9.15, cf Ad Marc; 5.2); whether one should be circumcised or merely baptized (Justin’s dialogue with Trypho Ch 39; Ad Marc 5.3; cf Galatians 2.3-4, 5.1-6); and the dual nature Paul (Gnostic Paul of Galatians as contrasted with Catholicized Paul of Acts of the Apostles) which reflects the transformation of Paul from Marcion’s personal false Apostle (Tertullian Ad Marc 5.1) to patron Saint Paul of Catholic Church fame.
Indeed, when the New Testament is read in the light of verifiable Church and World History, it is as though the history of 2nd Century Christianity is rewritten into the New Testament as alleged 1st Century history.
A common objection to the theory of the origins of Christianity dating to the 2nd Century CE, is to cite 1 Clement as a proof text of 1st Century origins. The theory being that 1 Clement was written in 95 CE. Yet, a critical analysis of the text of 1 Clement in the light of known and verifiable history yields the same results as a similar such approach to New Testament writings. The text reveals traces of 2nd Century authorship which simply outweigh any notions that 1 Clement may have been written in the latter 1st Century, as is commonly believed.
Consider the overall theme of obligatory submission to rulers, presbyters, and bishops. There are several such passages throughout 1 Clement, which beg the question as to exactly what point in history the Orthodox Church might have actually developed a recognizable hierarchy and formal structure. It is difficult to pinpoint, but there is little evidence of any clerical hierarchy within Christianity prior to the mid 2nd Century CE.
1 Clement was of course a treatise which clearly promoted Orthodoxy by both confirming the authority of the Church hierarchy, all the while reminding laymen to know their place. A variety of topics are emphasized including unity, peace, harmony, and obedience, but such was merely laying the groundwork for putting “headstrong and selfwilled persons” (1.1) in their rightful place. Their rightful place of course being in submission to the Church hierarchy.
The apex of this argument is recorded in Chapters 40-42, in which the notion that all things must be done in order is asserted, even to the extent that the only acceptable worship is done at appointed times, places, and only by the administration of certain people. This was Clergy over laymen, Priests over people, authority over self will. The case for the ultimate authority of the Clergy was seemingly sealed tight by an appeal to Apostolic order, and the focal point of the case was a sober reminder to the rubble of the Orthodox Church that “the layman is bound by the layman’s ordinances” (40.5)
However; the struggle so described in 1 Clement between those who maintained a respect for order and hierarchy, in direct contrast to those “head strong and self willed persons” is strikingly reminiscent of Tertullian’s similar rebuke of the “heretics” who “are puffed up” and who “all offer you knowledge (gnosis)” as recorded in his “Prescription Against Heretics” (Ch. 41). Tertullian was aghast at the fact that Gnostic Christians (“heretics” per his terminology) allowed women to teach, and made no distinction between who served as deacon, presbyter, or bishop at any particular time in their assemblies. To Tertullian, the ultimate disrespect for the order of the hierarchy was that the “heretics” actually allowed laymen to function as priests!
Frankly, the general message of 1 Clement fits the setting of the latter 2nd Century CE struggle between the Orthodox and Gnostic Christianity so well, that there is no reason to assume that such was written any earlier.
Furthermore, the utility of Peter and Paul as mutual examples of martyrs of the faith (Ch. 5) is a clear indicator of latter 2nd Century CE authorship. Firstly, the era of Christian martyrdom as a means of salvation seems to have developed during the persecution of Christians during the reign of Marcus Aurelius, from 161 CE to the latter 170’s,thus this chapter appears suited to that chronological time frame. Secondly, the presentation of Peter and Paul as seemingly equals was the latter 2nd Century CE Orthodox approach to its struggles against the Gnostic Christian movement. In fact, the Acts of the Apostles seems to have been a literary tool utilized to help incorporate “the Apostle of the heretics” (“Against Marcion”; 3.5) into the fold of Orthodoxy by uniting the Pauline and Petrine legends into early Catholic Church compatriots. Thus, the content of Chapter 5 is indicative of latter 2nd Century CE authorship.
The internal evidence of 1 Clement when examined in the light of known and verifiable history thus reveals clear traces of 2nd Century authorship. Hence, we maintain our theory that the origins of Christianity and the writing and composition of the New Testament date to the 2nd Century CE, and not the 1st Century as is commonly believed.
No comments:
Post a Comment