A common claim among critics of Christianity is that early Christian doctrine was a bit of a mess. What we believe now—about the incarnation, divinity of Jesus, etc.—was a late development within the early Christian movement. And, so the implication goes, the earliest Christians did not necessarily believe the same things as later Christians.
Now, it must be said that such a criticism is partly true. The early Christian movement was not monolithic, to be sure. There was quite a bit of theological diversity, and it took a few generations to work out some of the kinks. I cover this doctrinal diversity in my book Christianity at the Crossroads: How the Second Century Shaped the Future of the Church (IVP Academic, 2018).
Even so, I think we can see the seeds of many of our core doctrines at a remarkably early point. Yes, it took time to develop these ideas. But it doesn’t seem like they were late impositions on the church as is so often claimed.
A good example of this phenomenon is an amazing paragraph in one of our earliest Christian apologies. Aristides, a converted Athenian philosopher, wrote an apology to emperor Hadrian around 125 A.D. As such, it is one of the earliest patristic writings we possess. It is a lengthy treatise which compares the God of Christianity with the gods of the barbarians, the Egyptians, and the Greeks.
But, at one point, he summarizes what Christians believe in a manner that would rival even the Apostle’s Creed:
The Christians, then, trace the beginning of their religion from Jesus the Messiah; and he is named the Son of God Most High. And it is said that God came down from heaven, and from a Hebrew virgin assumed and clothed himself with flesh; and the Son of God lived in a daughter of man. This is taught in the gospel, as it is called, which a short time was preached among them; and you also if you will read therein, may perceive the power which belongs to it. This Jesus, then, was born of the race of the Hebrews; and he had twelve disciples in order that the purpose of his incarnation might in time be accomplished. But he himself was pierced by the Jews, and he died and was buried; and they say that after three days he rose and ascended to heaven (Apol. 2, Syriac).
Aristides makes it clear that Christians affirm a number of key truths:
1. The divinity of Jesus: “God came down from heaven…” In the mind of Aristides, Jesus is not an angel, or a semi-divine being, but the very God of heaven itself.
2. The incarnation: “clothed himself with flesh.” In very vivid language, the author affirms that Jesus is God enfleshed; he took upon himself a real human body (contra the Docetists).
3. The virgin birth: “from a Hebrew virgin.” This doctrine flows naturally from the prior two. If Jesus is God, and he took on human flesh, then his conception would be distinctive from other human beings.
4. The authority of the Gospels: “taught in the gospel…and you also if you read therein, may perceive the power which belongs to it.” Notice for Aristides, there are books called a “gospel” which you can “read” to learn more about the person of Jesus. Moreover, these gospels contain a certain “power” which the reader can discern.
5. The authority of the apostles: “and he had twelve disciples.” Aristides recognizes that Jesus had an authority structure through the twelve that was necessary “so that the purpose of his incarnation might in time be accomplished.”
6. His death on the cross: “pierced by the Jews.” This is a clear reference to Jesus’ crucifixion under Pontius Pilate at the request of the Jewish leadership.
7. His resurrection: “after three days he rose.” Jesus did not stay in the grave but was raised from the dead.
8. His ascension: “ascended into heaven.” Jesus returned to his former heavenly home, in a position of power and glory.
This is a surprisingly thorough and wide-ranging summary of core Christian doctrines at a very early point in the life of the church. And it was this form of Christianity that was publicly presented to the Emperor. Once again, we can see that core Christian beliefs were not latecomers that were invented in the fourth century (or later), but appear to have been in place from the very beginning.
Ryan Pope says
But there was also universal agreement on doctrines most Protestants would consider heretical today.
tpm says
Partly true and there and the controversial will rages on
Chad says
This is amazing, thank you for sharing it with us.
Trevor R Allin says
Thank you. Could you indicate to us the source of the image of Christ with Jn 14:6 at the top of the page?
Thank you.
Trevor
Van Rhodes says
Such as? Please provide evidence, don’t merely make bald assertions. Also, don’t cut and paste, don’t point me to a web site, articulate these yourself.
Nemo says
Ryan Pope wrote, “But there was also universal agreement on doctrines most Protestants would consider heretical today.”
Could you list those doctrines and their earliest statements in Christian writings?
Reading the Ante-Nicene Fathers series has immensely deepened and enriched my understanding of Christian doctrines. I haven’t found any universally held doctrines that I would consider heretical. But then, I can’t speak for “most Protestants”.
MiR says
Such as?
Rolf Östlund Sweden says
Thank you, a book in the “heavyweight class” that pushes liberal pettiness, lukewarmness and worldliness aside …
Van Rhodes says
Such as?
Van Rhodes says
Examples, please, not just a bare assertion.
Lee says
Very good thank you. WE also should consider the epistles of Paul, Peter and John with more strength than that of Aristides because of when they were written.
Bryant J. Williams III says
Dr. Kruger,
Excellent post. I liked the reference to Aristides. Of course, your Doktor Vater had some things to say about early Christianity as well that I’ll just give the links to.
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2019/11/06/chronology-matters/
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2017/07/27/kruger-christianity-as-the-crossroads/
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2017/07/19/our-knowledge-of-early-christianity/.
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2017/05/03/kloppenborgs-review-of-destroyer/
I would highly recommend his List of Selected Publications: Larry W. Hurtado and Selected Published Essays etc. for more reading on the various topics that he discusses.
Bryant J. Williams III says
Ryan Pope,
Dr. Kruger wrote,
“A common claim among critics of Christianity is that early Christian doctrine was a bit of a mess. What we believe now—about the incarnation, divinity of Jesus, etc.—was a late development within the early Christian movement. And, so the implication goes, the earliest Christians did not necessarily believe the same things as later Christians.
Now, it must be said that such a criticism is partly true. The early Christian movement was not monolithic, to be sure. There was quite a bit of theological diversity, and it took a few generations to work out some of the kinks.”
Dr. Kruger wrote a clearly summarized statement as to the theological diversity within Christianity. What he did not do was go into detail about it since that was not the “main” focus of the post. He has done so elsewhere even on this blog.
Chevy says
I am a layman. I feel that my comment is amongst scholars. However, I thank you for this post. Just the other day I had a plumber in my home, and he was telling me that Emperor Constantine “invented” the Holy Spirit in 325 AD (council of Nicea – I knew that much), and that no one understands why Jesus had to be an “eastern” Rabbi (not a western one). (He learned this through a vision while fixing someone’s pipes) Through your posts, I am learning. Let it be known that your efforts are furthering the Kingdom of God, even through wannabe “theologians” like me. After he fixed my sink, I left him with something to think about. Thank you Dr. Kurger!
Robert says
Subscribe
Lucille Gaither says
Good article!
Which Roman emperor made Christianity official? Just would like to know…
Ryan Pope says
Apostolic succession required for a church to be valid?
The Eucharist required as a sacrifice, presented by a validly ordained bishop?
Forgiveness of sins through baptism?
Bryant J. Williams III says
Lucille,
Contrary to popular opinion, it was NOT Constantine. The Edict of Milan changed the status of Christianity from a “religio illicitas” (illicit religion) to “religio licitas” (licit religion).
The Roman Emperor Theodotion I made Christianity into the “state” religion. Theodosius made the Nicene Creed the official belief system of the Roman Empire. Prior to that, many different creeds were believed. The Nicene Creed states that Jesus, the Son, is equal to God the Father. Other people, such as Arius, said that Jesus was inferior to the Father. Theodosius affirmed the faith that the Council of Nicea agreed on. In February, 380, he and Gratian published the famous edict that all their subjects should profess the faith of the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria (Cod. Theod., XVI, I, 2; Sozomen, VII, 4). The conventicles of the heretics were not to be called churches.
Thus, wherein Constantine I changed the status of Christianity from an illegal to legal religion, Theodosius I change the status of paganism from legal religion to illegal religion.
Nemo says
Ryan Pope wrote, “Apostolic succession required for a church to be valid?”
Could you provide the original (and clear) statements of “apostolic succession” in earliest Christian writings? I’m no at all convinced what the early Church Fathers had in mind is the same as what Roman Catholics would make it out to be. As one NT scholar told me, “Precision in language is important”.
As far as I can tell (speaking as a layperson), most discussions relating to “apostolic succession” in the earliest Christian writings happen in the context of doctrinal disputes, i.e., the dispute is about the validity of certain doctrine, not the validity of the church. For example, in “The Prescription Against Heretics”, Tertullian writes as follows:
The churches in Africa, to which Tertullian belonged, were not founded by the apostles in person, and so were not considered “apostolic churches”, but they held “communion with the apostolic churches” because they held the same doctrine. Tertullian listed the “apostolic churches in Chapter XXXVI of the same book:
There were many apostolic churches, and Rome was one of them. Rome held a prominent place among the apostolic churches, but it would be presumptuous to claim that it alone is “the Church”. The Apostles would be grieved if they knew that their “successors” have divided the Church in their names, instead of following their examples and striving for unity and charity in Christ.
Michael Farley Jr says
Hello sir,
Can you recommend a particular book collection that contains the Apology of Aristides? A search shows there are several low quality print-on-demand versions, but my hope is that there’s a good strong collection of early documents like this put out by a good, reputable Christian publisher – preferably with annotations.
Thank you, sir.
Nemo says
Trevor R Allin wrote, “Could you indicate to us the source of the image of Christ with Jn 14:6 at the top of the page?”
It is a painting in Maria Laach Abbe in Germany. (Your question piqued my interest, so I googled it)
https://www.maria-laach.de/unser-kloster/kirche-und-kloster/abteikirche/
Trevor R Allin says
Well done! Thank you!
Nemo says
Michael Farley Jr wrote, “Can you recommend a particular book collection that contains the Apology of Aristides?”
I would highly recommend the Ante-Nicene (ANF), Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers (NPNF) 38-volume set. It is freely available for online reading or download at Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL)
and New Advent (a Catholic site).
The Apology of Aristides is included in Vol. 9 of the ANF series, and Tertullian’s “Prescription Against Heretics” (quoted in my previous comment) Vol. 3. Both works include a summary of Christian beliefs, and they are consistent with one another, which is another evidence of the unity among early Christians across time and space.