Summary

The greatest mystery within early Christianity concerns the lack of controversy over the high Christology of Jesus in Paul's letters, despite the strict monotheism of Second Temple Judaism.

Abstract

The article delves into a perplexing enigma of early Christian history: the absence of any documented disputes regarding Jesus' divine status within the Pauline epistles. Despite the fact that Second Temple Judaism was known for its stringent monotheism, Paul's letters contain pre-Pauline traditions and creeds that ascribe a remarkably high Christology to Jesus without any indication of debate or dissent. This is particularly striking when contrasted with the numerous other controversies Paul addresses, such as marriage, dietary laws, and circumcision. The article ponders why there is no evidence of the early church grappling with the concept of Jesus' divinity, which later became a central point of contention in the 3rd to 5th centuries. The author presents various hypotheses from scholars and amateurs alike, attempting to explain this silence, ranging from Greco-Roman influence diminishing the novelty of Jesus' exalted status to the possibility that the issue was so settled there was no need for discussion.

Opinions

Some suggest that early Christian converts, influenced by Greco-Roman culture, were indifferent to elevating humans to divine status, which may have allowed for a smooth acceptance of Jesus' high Christology.
Others, like the late scholar Larry Hurtado, argue there was a remarkable consensus on Jesus' identity from the Jerusalem Church, which rendered any debate unnecessary.
Another view posits that the resurrection experience was so profound for the earliest Christians that it revealed Jesus' divine nature to them, solidifying their beliefs without need for further debate.
There is a theory that Paul's churches belonged to a faction that already held a high view of Jesus, thus explaining the lack of controversy in his letters.
It is also proposed that the existing letters from Paul might not represent the full spectrum of debates at the time, and that discussions about Jesus' identity could have been present in now-lost correspondence.

The Greatest Mystery within Early Christianity

The Riddle That Will Likely Never Be Solved

Have you ever had a mystery or riddle that became an obsession for you? For the last few weeks, I have been obsessed with this mystery within the earliest decades of Christianity. I apologize for the semi-baiting title, as this is simply what I consider to be the greatest mystery…. Others may not find it all that mysterious or interesting!

Before I state the mystery, let’s give a little context. New Testament scholars and historians agree that within Paul’s letters are traditions that pre-date Paul. These creeds (1 Cor. 15:1–6) and poems (Phillipians 2:5–11) were passed down to Paul from earlier followers of Christ. I wrote about this in an earlier article. Read that article and it will give you a greater sense of the mystery that has been on my mind.

What Did the Earliest Christians Believe?

And What They Tell Us About Christian Origins?

medium.com

The pre-Pauline passages show remarkable statements about Jesus. Especially the Philippians poem which proclaims wild language about Jesus’ identity.

Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage. — Philippians 2:6

Wait, what?!

Scholars of all stripes debate how high the early church’s Christology was, but in my opinion the question should be… Was it high? Higher than high? The highest possible (Jesus was equal in nature and status to Yahweh)? Wherever you fall on the spectrum, I have a tough time believing the early church did not give a uniquely high status to Jesus.

Let’s take a step back. 2nd Temple Judaism was perhaps one of the strictest periods up to that point in Jewish history about exclusive worship of the Jewish God alone. They were particular that God is one and no other God should be worshipped. Was there diversity and splinter beliefs? I’m sure there was, yet we don’t have any reason to believe that claims of divinity or worship were not seen as blasphemous by devout Jews. We see this type of reaction in the gospels where Jesus is making claims to forgive sins and heal on the Sabbath, and the religious leaders are understandably perturbed at these claims. That would be the expected reaction within Judaism at this time. Now here is the mystery…

Why do Paul’s letters have zero evidence of controversy over who Jesus is?

Think about it for a second…

We find debates and controversies within Paul’s letters over marriage, food sacrificed to idols, resurrection of the dead, gentile conversion, circumcision, the law and faith, the law and works and more. How are there no signs of controversy or questions over Jesus’ identity?!

Paul makes statements about Jesus and quotes statements from earlier Christians that are incredibly high and he doesn’t defend them or qualify them in any way. He assumes agreement. If he felt he was saying something controversial, he would give reasoning like he does with other issues.

In the 3–5th centuries of Christianity, there were countless Christological debates about how Jesus can be God and God can still be one. There was rigorous defense of Jesus’ high Christology based on passages like the one in Philippians. This is understandable because it’s a big idea that Jesus is equal to God! It provokes reactions, questions, and confusion. Then how come the earliest church was not debating this very same thing? No questions for Paul? No misunderstandings? No hesitancy to worship Jesus and invoke his name in prayer? How should we understand this deafening silence?

In my view, this is a mystery for both skeptics and believers.

— If Jesus was not resurrected, we should still find some controversy in Paul’s letters.

— If Jesus was resurrected, we should still find some controversy in Paul’s letters.

Everything we know about the climate of Judaism in the 1st Century would lead us to believe there should be some evidence of uneasiness about these high claims about and apparent worship of Jesus.

I have corresponded with professional New Testament scholars and amateurs alike in the past few weeks trying piece together possible answers. These responses come from a wide spectrum of beliefs about Jesus, from skeptics to believers. None of them are wholly fulfilling for me, but maybe they will help gain more clarity about the question. Here are some of the responses and ideas I was given…

The earliest Christians simply didn’t care. We may think it was a big deal, but early Christian converts were fine with turning humans into deities due to Greco-Roman influence. Much like the god-emperors of other nations, this period of Judaism was laxed with giving high status to Messiah figures. In my opinion, there is certainly evidence of Greco-Roman influence on early Christians, but to me this position would have to disregard any sense of Jewish loyalty.
There is universal confidence in Jesus’ identity from the Jerusalem Church and early Christianity. This is the position of the late scholar Larry Hurtado in his book Lord Jesus Christ. There was such remarkable agreement that Paul doesn’t even need to address it at all. In my opinion, even if there was a sense of agreement from the Jerusalem Church, did none of Paul’s churches need clarity or have questions? Even with agreement, I would sense some Jewish converts would wonder why it is fine to worship Jesus! What does it mean that Jesus is equal to God?
The earliest Christians believe they were revealed this truth by the resurrected Lord. This is similar to #2. However, it goes one step further to state a reason why there was such universal agreement among the earliest Christians. It gives a nuance that the earliest church was trying to put into words what they could not explain. This truth about Jesus’ identity was revealed to them and it became a pillar of the earliest church. This presents some of the same questions of #2. Was it then revealed to every Christian convert? Even if this was revealed and the early apostles gave proof of this belief, I still would expect later converts to try to make sense of it.
There were competing groups with different beliefs about exactly who Jesus was, and the churches Paul is writing to fall into the group with this high view of Jesus. My problem with this is that we should find more evidence of this in Paul’s letters if it was in fact true. A lot of scholars believe Paul is following the traditions of the Jerusalem church, and if we saw competition with their teachings, this scenario would perhaps bring out the most debate in the letters.
We simply don’t have the letters from Paul where this controversy would be most evident. This is a possibility… If we didn’t have a question about the resurrection of the dead from the church in Corinth, we would not have Paul’s thoughts or the pre-Pauline creed on the resurrection. However, we do have high Christological statements in the existing Pauline letters and it is precisely there we would likely see some qualification or defense of the beliefs about Jesus’ identity.

I don’t have a lot of answers, but I do have a lot of questions. If you have any thoughts or speculation, please share! Any proposals whether skeptic or faith-based or somewhere in between are fine.