Early Church History

John Dominic Crossan is at it again. The author of The Historical Jesus and founder of the Jesus Seminar has authored a new book which purports to tell the "unknown" story of the twenty-odd years between the death of Jesus and the apostle Paul's early letters to churches, thought to be the earliest of Christian writings. The book is called The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately After the Execution of Jesus, and it is the premise, that we cannot know from scripture what happened in the thirties and forties (A.D.) to form what we now know as Christianity, that is precisely what is flawed about the book.

You must know that much of the world recognizes Crossan as one of the leading scholars of New Testament studies, particularly concerning the discovery of the "real" Jesus. Crossan himself is a former Jesuit priest, and he still considers himself a practicing Roman Catholic, despite denying much of what could be considered their major doctrinal positions, and much of his work has been denounced as heretical. As head of the Jesus Seminar, he was responsible for a group which decided which of the statements attributed to Jesus in scripture were actually spoken by Him. This resulted in a purging of more than half of the words of Jesus, and a reliance on such dubious documents as the Gospel of Thomas(a work generally accepted as 3rd century or later until the Jesus Seminar arbitrarily assigned it a date earlier than any of the gospels) and the mythical Gospel of Q(from the German quelle, or source, meaning it is the source of all the other gospels). No one has ever seen the Gospel of Q(although there has been a recent work with that title, collecting the sayings of Jesus as attributed by the Jesus Seminar).

The flaw in both of Crossan's books lies in his presumptions going in. He does not believe, for instance, that the Historical Jesus (their term) was concerned at all with the afterlife or the end of the world, thus, anything in the gospels discussing these things are automatically tossed out. In addition, apocalyptic passages, such as Matthew 24, are dismissed as having been written much later, after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, because, in Crossan's mind, Jesus could not have known anything about the destruction forty years before it happened. Miracles are also explained away or simply dismissed as being untrue.

Although this passes for scholarship in much of the academic world, certainly the committed Bible student can recognize it for what it is: circular reasoningand shaky, even shoddy, acceptance of previously discounted texts. It also rejects long established dates for the four gospels (despite the discovery a fragment of Matthew's gospel dating prior to A.D. 90). Rather than real scholarship, what we have is a group of men with an agenda that denies the simple truth of scripture, particularly New Testament scripture. By doing so, they are able to shape the Historical Jesus into just the type of man and teacher they want Him to be.

One of the major problems with Crossan's work is found in the timetable. Imagine if a small band of men began to circulate stories of miracles performed by Franklin D. Roosevelt, and they began to attribute sayings to him which were completely made up. Imagine the derision with which they would be met. Everyone knows these things just didn't happen. And FDR has been dead for over 50 years. Now, imagine a group of men in Judea beginning to spread tales of the miracles and words of Jesus, a man known to many of Jews (and in fact, opposed by the most prominent). This teaching is widely known and accepted just 20 years following His death. It is laughable unless the stories of Jesus are true.

In fact, Crossan himself unknowingly lends particular credibility to the work of Luke. On a radio talk show, Crossan was asked if anything in his research of the new book surprised him. He replied, "Two things. The first is the growth of Christianity from the country to the large cities, and the second is the seeming inclusion of the Gentiles without them having to be circumcised."

On the first point, Luke, beginning in his gospel and continuing in the Acts, details the growth of Jesus teaching from small town Galilee to Jerusalem, Antioch, Corinth and Rome. Certainly, the dispersion of Acts 8:1-4, and the journeys of Paul fit this pattern which was such a surprise to Crossan.

On the second point, huge sections of the New Testament are devoted to the discussion of the Gentiles inclusion in the faith, and distinctly, their inclusion without having to be circumcised (Acts 15, for instance). Crossan is so blinded by his own prejudices that he fails to give Luke credit for knowing what was such a surprise for him.

"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Rom. 1:22).