![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A brief history of Early Christianity
Oct. 2nd, 2020 10:07 pmThis is a tentative 'speculative history' of Early Christianity I've been working on, according to my current level of knowledge and research on the religious climate of Late Antiquity Rome. This theory adopts a 'Christ Mythicist' view, which is the position that there was no 'historical Jesus' that closely matched the description of the Jesus Christ character we have in the Gospel narrative of the New Testament canon that is recognized by all variants of Mainstream Christianity that have survived to this day. The basic thesis here is that:
1. There were a great number of precursor sects, charismatic religious figures, movements, doctrines, and ideologies which led up to the formation of a distinctly-Roman Christianity; including but not limited to: The polytheistic cults of the Eastern Mediterranean and Neart East and the numinous symbolism each of them employed, Mystical Jewish sects like the Essenes and Nazarenes, Judeo-Platonic syncretistic philosophical works like those of Philo Judaeus, Alexandrian Greco-Egyptian syncretism in general, Jewish Messianic rebel movements, Jewish rabbis incorporating Stoic practices into their own teachings, ect.
2. The historical inspiration behind the Gospel narrative may have involved an Essene/Nazarene sect which played some role on the Judean revolt that began in 68 CE, and was crushed by the father-son team of Vespasian and Titus, with aid from the Herodian dynasty and allied monied interests from Alexandria. Much of this movement likely perished during the war, but the surviving elements may have spread to various Jewish diaspora communities throughout the cities of Asia Minor and other areas around the Eastern Mediterranean region. It may have been these groups who became the Ebionites. We can speculate this much: that that was probably nothing we'd today recognize as Christianity that existed during the 1st Century. Any precursor groups from that time would have been wholly Jewish in character. And then of course there was in abundance at that time, many pagan mystery cults that inspired the distinct Christianity that would form in the 2nd century.
3. Roman Chirstianity started off as a Judeo-Hellenic mystery cult during the early-mid 2nd century CE; the original structure consisted of an inner order of initiates who were able to understand the metaphors and symbolism of their "Jesus the Anointed" salvific figure that the outer teachings made references to. By this we could say that the cult had an outer order of hearers who received a more rudimentary set of teachings from the inner order; in summary, the outer circle would take spiritual and moral counsel from the inner clerical order of initiates. A religious scholar existing today who is able to time-travel back to their period would most certainly identify these first churches as being essentially 'Gnostic' in character according to contemporary definitions. Most of the initial converts to the early cult were probably thoroughly-Hellenzied diaspora Jews and gentile 'proselytes' (i.e. 'god-fearers') who had partially converted to Judaism, perhaps as a means of opting out of Roman civic society.
4. The mystery cult soon fanned out into a number of local churches scattered around the Eastern half of the Roman empire. it was in one of these churches, perhaps somewhere in an Asia Minor city where the first Gospel narrative was devised and written down. This was perhaps the first written codification of the Jesus story, which had prior been an oral legend. The scribes who penned the Gospel used a number of pre-existing literary sources, symbols, legends, and cultural motifs as a template to construct their own narrative. They re-imagined their Jesus savior figure as a parody of the life of the great first century sage and holy man, Apollonius of Tyana, combined with various stories of great Jewish rabbis from the last couple centuries prior. And for the narrative structure of the Gospel story, these scribes used the place-setting from Flavius Josephus's 'Wars of the Jews,' to provide a geographic venue for Jesus's preaching mission in the story. And finally, they employed the symbolism of the many dying-and-rising vegetation gods that were so common in the Near East during that time period. This first draft of the Gospel had many of the elements we would recognize centuries later in the version the state church would approve of as doctrinally-acceptable.
5. At some point early on there must have been a great number of schismatic movements, whereby a member (or several) from the inner order of initiates who had some sort of disagreement with the sect leadership, would split off and form their own new splinter sect. And it may have even been the case that in some instances, it was uninitiated hearers (undoubtedly ambitious and eager at the prospect of accumulating a band of followers) who branched off and formed their own churches, taking a more literalistic and matter-of-fact approach to the teachings. Lacking an understanding of the mystery symbolism and genuine spiritual teachings of the founding sect, these groups would fall back on a literal and legalistic reading of the Hebrew scriptures as a source of authority for their churches. Second century figures like Polycarp of Smyrna and Justin Martyr were probably the people who headed these counter-numinious splinter churches. Their doctrine was essentially a Stoic Judaism with a savior figure as the central focus. Some of these splinter churches took a middle ground between literalism and acknowledging mystery teachings. And among these groups, there were some that refused to acknowledge the authority of the Hebrew scriptures, much less the Mosaic laws contained within. It was Marcion of Sinope and his church which serves as a known historical example of the type of early church.
6. The early Churches which did retain their initiatory structures would increasingly incorporate Greco-Egyptian syncretistic ideas into their doctrines; ideas that were quite popular in Alexandria during the first several centuries of our common era. The Valentinian church doctrine and philosophy is likely quite indicative of what these churches were teaching at the time. These 'Gnostic' churches were certainly not so sectarian, exclusivist, and intolerant, like the more literalistic sects that would later coalesce into the state orthodoxy that formed in the 4th century. The Gnostic churches peacefully co-existed with other sects and mystery cults in what was then a vast sea of new religious movements. By the we would speculate that a wide swatch of early Christianity was indeed peaceful and respectful of the pluralistic religious climate of the Roman Empire in late antiquity. It just so happened that the more intolerant and dogmatic churches were the ones that contributed the most to the aforementioned orthodoxy that came about when Roman Christianity became THE state religion of Rome.
7. In summary, there was no one single Early Christianity, Early Christian Doctrine, or Early Christian church, going by the above facts and informed speculations. Rather, there was a constellation of different Christian sects, each having different doctrines and teachings. The Roman church's assertion that there was an unbroken chain of 'apostolic succession' going all the way back to the 1st century CE is a completely unfounded assertion, when we take all of the above information into consideration. There was especially not unbroken chain of doctrines and teachings going back that far that is ideologically compatible with any of the post-Nicene dogmas, proclamations, catechisms, ect. We know quite well from examining contemporary religious movements that the assertion of spurious lineages and pedigrees is all too common. Historical religious movements shouldn't be seen as being any exception to this general rule. And to claim that post-4th-century Roman Christianity is unique from this general trend would be a very clear use of the 'special pleading' fallacy.
1. There were a great number of precursor sects, charismatic religious figures, movements, doctrines, and ideologies which led up to the formation of a distinctly-Roman Christianity; including but not limited to: The polytheistic cults of the Eastern Mediterranean and Neart East and the numinous symbolism each of them employed, Mystical Jewish sects like the Essenes and Nazarenes, Judeo-Platonic syncretistic philosophical works like those of Philo Judaeus, Alexandrian Greco-Egyptian syncretism in general, Jewish Messianic rebel movements, Jewish rabbis incorporating Stoic practices into their own teachings, ect.
2. The historical inspiration behind the Gospel narrative may have involved an Essene/Nazarene sect which played some role on the Judean revolt that began in 68 CE, and was crushed by the father-son team of Vespasian and Titus, with aid from the Herodian dynasty and allied monied interests from Alexandria. Much of this movement likely perished during the war, but the surviving elements may have spread to various Jewish diaspora communities throughout the cities of Asia Minor and other areas around the Eastern Mediterranean region. It may have been these groups who became the Ebionites. We can speculate this much: that that was probably nothing we'd today recognize as Christianity that existed during the 1st Century. Any precursor groups from that time would have been wholly Jewish in character. And then of course there was in abundance at that time, many pagan mystery cults that inspired the distinct Christianity that would form in the 2nd century.
3. Roman Chirstianity started off as a Judeo-Hellenic mystery cult during the early-mid 2nd century CE; the original structure consisted of an inner order of initiates who were able to understand the metaphors and symbolism of their "Jesus the Anointed" salvific figure that the outer teachings made references to. By this we could say that the cult had an outer order of hearers who received a more rudimentary set of teachings from the inner order; in summary, the outer circle would take spiritual and moral counsel from the inner clerical order of initiates. A religious scholar existing today who is able to time-travel back to their period would most certainly identify these first churches as being essentially 'Gnostic' in character according to contemporary definitions. Most of the initial converts to the early cult were probably thoroughly-Hellenzied diaspora Jews and gentile 'proselytes' (i.e. 'god-fearers') who had partially converted to Judaism, perhaps as a means of opting out of Roman civic society.
4. The mystery cult soon fanned out into a number of local churches scattered around the Eastern half of the Roman empire. it was in one of these churches, perhaps somewhere in an Asia Minor city where the first Gospel narrative was devised and written down. This was perhaps the first written codification of the Jesus story, which had prior been an oral legend. The scribes who penned the Gospel used a number of pre-existing literary sources, symbols, legends, and cultural motifs as a template to construct their own narrative. They re-imagined their Jesus savior figure as a parody of the life of the great first century sage and holy man, Apollonius of Tyana, combined with various stories of great Jewish rabbis from the last couple centuries prior. And for the narrative structure of the Gospel story, these scribes used the place-setting from Flavius Josephus's 'Wars of the Jews,' to provide a geographic venue for Jesus's preaching mission in the story. And finally, they employed the symbolism of the many dying-and-rising vegetation gods that were so common in the Near East during that time period. This first draft of the Gospel had many of the elements we would recognize centuries later in the version the state church would approve of as doctrinally-acceptable.
5. At some point early on there must have been a great number of schismatic movements, whereby a member (or several) from the inner order of initiates who had some sort of disagreement with the sect leadership, would split off and form their own new splinter sect. And it may have even been the case that in some instances, it was uninitiated hearers (undoubtedly ambitious and eager at the prospect of accumulating a band of followers) who branched off and formed their own churches, taking a more literalistic and matter-of-fact approach to the teachings. Lacking an understanding of the mystery symbolism and genuine spiritual teachings of the founding sect, these groups would fall back on a literal and legalistic reading of the Hebrew scriptures as a source of authority for their churches. Second century figures like Polycarp of Smyrna and Justin Martyr were probably the people who headed these counter-numinious splinter churches. Their doctrine was essentially a Stoic Judaism with a savior figure as the central focus. Some of these splinter churches took a middle ground between literalism and acknowledging mystery teachings. And among these groups, there were some that refused to acknowledge the authority of the Hebrew scriptures, much less the Mosaic laws contained within. It was Marcion of Sinope and his church which serves as a known historical example of the type of early church.
6. The early Churches which did retain their initiatory structures would increasingly incorporate Greco-Egyptian syncretistic ideas into their doctrines; ideas that were quite popular in Alexandria during the first several centuries of our common era. The Valentinian church doctrine and philosophy is likely quite indicative of what these churches were teaching at the time. These 'Gnostic' churches were certainly not so sectarian, exclusivist, and intolerant, like the more literalistic sects that would later coalesce into the state orthodoxy that formed in the 4th century. The Gnostic churches peacefully co-existed with other sects and mystery cults in what was then a vast sea of new religious movements. By the we would speculate that a wide swatch of early Christianity was indeed peaceful and respectful of the pluralistic religious climate of the Roman Empire in late antiquity. It just so happened that the more intolerant and dogmatic churches were the ones that contributed the most to the aforementioned orthodoxy that came about when Roman Christianity became THE state religion of Rome.
7. In summary, there was no one single Early Christianity, Early Christian Doctrine, or Early Christian church, going by the above facts and informed speculations. Rather, there was a constellation of different Christian sects, each having different doctrines and teachings. The Roman church's assertion that there was an unbroken chain of 'apostolic succession' going all the way back to the 1st century CE is a completely unfounded assertion, when we take all of the above information into consideration. There was especially not unbroken chain of doctrines and teachings going back that far that is ideologically compatible with any of the post-Nicene dogmas, proclamations, catechisms, ect. We know quite well from examining contemporary religious movements that the assertion of spurious lineages and pedigrees is all too common. Historical religious movements shouldn't be seen as being any exception to this general rule. And to claim that post-4th-century Roman Christianity is unique from this general trend would be a very clear use of the 'special pleading' fallacy.
