Reddit mentions of Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity

• For dogma: On The Incarnation by Athanasius of Alexandria (c.318 AD). The single most influential thing I've ever read.
  
• For insight into the early beliefs on the role and Person of Christ: Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity by Larry Hurtado.
  
• For understanding of Christian worship across twenty centuries: The Study of Liturgy edited by Cheslynn Jones
  
• For both theory and practical application of Orthodox understanding of salvation: Bread & Water, Wine & Oil by Meletios Webber
  
• For practical pastoral perspective: The Other Side of Pastoral Ministry by Daniel Brown (no, not that Dan Brown :-) The book's premise can be summarized in a trite sentence or two but its content was a significant game-changer in my ministry.
  
  

> Acts of Pilate

> Apocryphal report of Pilate on Christ's trial, crucifixion, and resurrection, composed in Greek. Although there was a keen interest in Pilate in early Christianity and the existence of the Acts of Pilate was known to second-century writers (Justin, 1 Apol. 35.9; 48.3; c£ Tertullian, Apol. 21.24), the present Acts of Pilate dates from the fourth century or later; however, the use of earlier materials in its composition is likely. The Acts of Pilate proper may well have been intended as a response to forged Acts of Pilate spread by the Roman authorities in support of paganism under the emperor Maximinus Daia (311-312; cf. Eusebius, HE. 1.9.3; 1.11.9; 9.5.1; 9.7.1). The work makes considerable use of the Gospel accounts and offers as well a report of debates in the Sanhedrin over the resurrection. Added to it in the early fifth century was a description of the harrowing of hell supposedly composed by two sons of the aged Simeon (cf. Luke 2:25-35), who served as witnesses (the narrative is suggested by 1 Peter 3: 19). The two works together have been known as the Gospel of Nicodemus since the thirteenth century.

> The popularity of the Acts of Pilate is attested by Latin, Syriac, Armenian, Coptic, and Arabic translations, alongside the original Greek. Pilate received veneration as a saint and martyr in Syria and Egypt and among the Copts. In the Middle Ages, the Gospel of Nicodemus was influential in the development of the legends of Joseph of Arimathea and of the Holy Grail besides being reflected in drama in the theme of the harrowing of hell.

• Encyclopedia of Early Christianity
  
  
  
  > Jesus' Descent to Hades
  
  > The idea that Jesus descended to the realm of the dead (Gk. hades) and there proclaimed his redemptive work, became perhaps the most widely affirmed and influential development in belief that is first explicitly attested in
  extracanonical Christian texts of the period under review in this chapter. Indeed, Malcolm Peel judged that in the second century and thereafter, "there was no more well-known and popular belief among early Christians." Strangely, however, it does not often figure prominently in scholarly accounts of early beliefs about Jesus. Although there are various versions of the idea in Christian writings of the first several centuries, both orthodox and heterodox, it most likely originated in proto-orthodox circles. The belief in Jesus' descent to the dead came to be included in the classical and well-known confession of orthodox faith, the Apostles' Creed, and has been accepted in all major branches of Christian tradition. Indeed, Jesus' "harrowing of hell" became a major subject in Christian art and medieval plays. It is unlikely the idea would have become so accepted had it originated in heterodox circles, and had it originally served suspect beliefs.
  
  > Of course, the New Testament writings affirm that Jesus really died and was buried (e.g., 1 Cor. 15:1-4). Moreover, in Acts 2:24-32 the author draws upon Psalm 16:8-11 to assert that Jesus "was not abandoned to Hades" (Acts 2:31, citing Ps. 16:10), but had been raised by God from death. This obviously implies the idea that at death Jesus "went" to the realm of death/the dead, "hades," which is probably what earliest Christians imagined. But in the plan of God "it was impossible for [Jesus] to be held in its power" (Acts 2:24). Moreover, Christian tradition, and some modern scholars as well, have interpreted a few New Testament texts as alluding to the specific idea that Jesus descended to hades. But it is now more commonly accepted by scholars that references to Jesus' descent in Romans 10:7 and Ephesians 4:9 refer to Jesus descending from heaven to earth.
  
  > Two passages in 1 Peter have continued to attract the most attention (3:18-20; 4:6) as possible allusions to the idea that Jesus descended to the dead to proclaim his advent and victory. Both passages present interpretative difficulties, especially 3:18-20, which has been judged "the most difficult passage in the entire letter." But it is much more likely that this passage refers to the crucified and risen Jesus announcing to the demonic powers ("the disobedient spirits") his victory and exaltation over them (v. 22). That is, 1 Peter 3:18-20 probably reflects something similar to the idea expressed in Colossians 2:14-15, where Jesus triumphs over demonic powers in his death and resurrection. As for 1 Peter 4:6, the dead here are almost certainly Christians, the point being that their death does not cut them off from God's life-giving Spirit and the prospect of future vindication.
  
  
• Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity
  
  

> Yeah, that he had raised people from the dead, calmed storms with a word, fed 5000 people with 5 loaves of bread, and came back from the dead after a public execution, appearing to 500 people, some of whom were still around if you wanted to ask. That seems like more than the exaggerations and distortions we see in Herodotus, Tacitus, or Thucydides. And, again, this was all written with access to eyewitnesses. I think it's more than just typical ancient historiography, it's either true or it's nuttery.

Again, claims of miracles were common. I suggest you read Miracles in Greco-Roman Antiquity. And Herodotus provided very unusual exaggerations of history. And ancient history used exaggerations like that a lot. I suggest you ask /r/AcademicBiblical about these concerns, because it is to my knowledge that they are unfounded.


>his apostle John certainly believed Jesus taught he was God

What are you talking about? When did John the Apostle say this?

>He does, however, acknowledge that he is the Son of God, the messiah

The idea that Jesus claimed messiahship or divinity is "naive and ahistorical." (Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity)

Thanks for that long, detailed, and thoughtful reply. I agree that Joseph was self-contradictory throughout his life, and this seemed to not bother him very much. He wasn't particularly concerned whether his current teaching contradicted previous teaching. Whether that's a sign of divine calling or an ambitious (maybe reckless) thinker is open to interpretation.

> But how do we miss, "I Become What I Am" and "I Am What I Become"

I'm not an expert on Hebrew. I rely on the expertise of others. It made me think of this blog post which renders the name as, "He who causes to be." I think you'll enjoy that entire post quite a bit. (And probably that entire blog. His backlog is incredible.)

I personally disagree strongly with Joseph's later theology concerning God, especially the idea that "the glory of God is intelligence," and that the seeking of intelligence and knowledge is precisely what prevents us from being God ourselves. I actually think it is a dangerous theology that leads to Pharisaical behavior, overconfidence in our own righteousness, and a lazy spiritual life. It turns growing in the Godly life into a pursuit of a few secret rituals and discrete tasks which, if fulfilled, automatically confer Godliness.

A perfect example of this is from Nelson's recent BYU devotional where he said, "Let me say it as succinctly as I can: As you abide by God’s laws, you are progressing toward exaltation."

> the concept of God and Christology evolved over time in the early Christian world as well. Bart Ehrman, etc.

I am familiar with Ehrman's work. I think it's oversimplifying things to say "he has the historical evidence to support his claims." His claims are based on one reading of the historical evidence, but it's hardly the only supportable conclusion. Ehrman makes some great points, but sometimes he stretches the evidence too far, imo. (Way too far, in some cases.)

If you're interested in a counter view, I suggest the short volume Honoring the Son by Larry Hurtado, or his more expansive work, Lord Jesus Christ. He makes a convincing case, imo, that Ehrman's thesis of developing Christology is far too simplistic.

Personally, I think it is clear even from the gospels that the disciples were only dimly aware of Jesus's nature during his ministry. The synoptics are clear on this: the disciples didn't grasp Jesus's mission until after his resurrection. The resurrection changed everything. Immediately afterward the conception of God (especially as reflected in their worship) shifted and began to incorporate worship of Christ as God. It's true that the language used to describe Trinitarian theology shifted over time, but it's not at all clear to me that the early Christians held a low Christology. I think that reads too much into the text.

I don't know if you'd consider yourself a Unitarian, but there's an argument to be made that the earliest followers of Jesus did see him on par with God (the Father). Larry Hurtado has written a few books on this topic.