54Bruce, ibid.
55For scholarly views on this question of authorship, see Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (Boston: Beacon, 1963), p. 40; Robert M. Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity, pp. 5, 128-134; George W. MacRae, “Introduction,” The Gospel of Truth in James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library, p. 37.
56The Gospel of Truth 26:4-8. The edition used here is Robinson. Ibid.
57Ibid., 30:27-33; 31:4-6.
58Ibid., 20:11-14, 25-34.
59Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity, p. 109.
60Ibid., pp. 109-112; Jonas, Gnostic Religion 40, 199-205; Frederick Wisse, “Introduction” in James Robinson, The Nag Hammadi Library, p. 98; Walter Baur, Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity, p. 49.
61The Apocryphon of John 1:5-17.
62The Gospel of Thomas 32:10-11.
63See Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianity, pp. 183-184.
64Helmut Koester, “Introduction” in James Robinson, The Nag Hammadi Library, p. 117; Baur, p. 310; Pagels, Gnostic Gospels, XV-XVI.
65See Mark 8:27-30; Matt. 16:13-17; Luke 9:18-21.
66The Gospel of Thomas 34:30–35:4.
67Ibid., 43:28-30.
68Ibid., 44:34-35; 45:11-15; 49:21-26.
69Ibid., 46:23-28.
70Ibid., 32:10-11; 43:9-12; cf. 42:13-36.
71See chapter 5, where such Gnostic tendencies are evaluated in comparison to the canonical Gospels.
72Malcolm L. Peel, “Introduction” in James Robinson, The Nag Hammadi Library, p. 50.
73The Treatise on Resurrection 44:13-36.
74Ibid., 46:14-21; cf. 44:27-29.
75Ibid., 45:14-23.
76Ibid., 48:10-19.
77For instance, see The Second Treatise of the Great Seth 55:9–56:19.
78The Treatise on Resurrection 49:15-27.
79Daniel-Rops, “Silence of Jesus’ Contemporaries,” p. 14.
80Justin Martyr, First Apology, XXXV. Quotations from Justin Martyr and Tertullian are from the Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973), vol. III.
81Justin Martyr, First Apology, XLVIII.
82Tertullian, Apology, V.
83See Bruce, New Testament Documents, p. 116, for an analysis of Tertullian’s statement.
84Daniel-Rops, “Silence of Jesus’ Contemporaries,” p. 14.
85See Anderson, Witness of History, p. 19.
86Origen, Contra Celsum XIV in the Ante–Nicene Fathers.
87Ibid., XXXIII.
88Julius Africanus, XVIII.
89Origen, LIX.
90Sources that have raised various kinds of doubt are the Toledoth Jesu, the four Gnostic works and the Acts of Pilate, which make up approximately one-third of the total number of documents studied in this chapter.
91Cf. Grant, Jesus: An Historian’s Review, pp. 199-200.
92Paul L. Maier, “The Empty Tomb as History” in Christianity Today, 29/13, March 28, 1975, p. 5.
93Ibid., p. 6.
94Grant, Jesus: An Historian’s Review, p. 176.
95See chapter 7 for a further treatment of these two theories and the critically attested historical facts that refute them.
96See Eusebius, I:IX; II:XXIII; II:XXV for accounts of the martyrdoms of several of the disciples.
97For example, see Schweitzer’s The Quest of the Historical Jesus, who lists no proponent of this theory since 1778.
98On the contemporary rejection of these fraud theories, see Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, vol. IV, p. 340; Raymond Brown, “The Resurrection and Biblical Criticism,” p. 233.
10Ancient Christian Sources (Non-New Testament)
In addition to the New Testament, early Christian writers produced volumes of important works that give valuable insight into early Christian beliefs, doctrines, and customs, as well as various types of exhortation. Many of these writings also contain brief statements concerning the historicity of Jesus.
Our purpose in this chapter is not to investigate all these statements, but to study only those passages that exhibit an explicitly historical interest. Because of this emphasis on the historically-oriented claims, our treatment of these ancient Christian sources will be comparatively brief despite the large number of works that fit into this category.1 We begin with the earlier writers, usually referred to as the “apostolic fathers” (about AD 90-125),2 and then present some historical statements in a few writings that immediately followed this earlier period.
AD 90–125
Clement of Rome
One of the most important apostolic documents, Clement of Rome’s letter to the Corinthian church is generally considered to be the earliest extra-New Testament Christian writing. Clement was the leading elder in the church at Rome and wrote Corinthians about AD 95 to help end a dispute between the church members and elders at Corinth.
Although Corinthians is largely doctrinal and moral in nature, it contains at least one important historical reference to Jesus and earliest Christianity:
The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having therefore received a charge, and having been fully assured through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and confirmed in the word of God with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should come. So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their first-fruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto them that should believe.3
In this passage, Clement of Rome claims several facts. (1) The gospel or good news of the Kingdom of God was the major Christian message. (2) This gospel had been given to the apostles by Jesus himself even as it came from God. (3) Jesus’ resurrection provided the assurance of the truthfulness of these teachings. (4) With the additional certainty of Scripture, the apostles spread the gospel. (5) Wherever the gospel was preached and local congregations were started, leaders were chosen to minister to the believers.
This certification of a chain of authority from God to Jesus to the apostles to the early Christian elders is interesting not only in that it was the basis for early doctrinal proclamation and church organization. Additionally, Clement of Rome anchors this authority in the belief that Jesus was raised from the dead and in the Scripture. A miraculous event in history was thus taken as the basic sign of authority behind the preaching of the earliest Christian message.