Awake!, May 22, 1960
Download: PDF — Awake!, May 22, 1960
. Bdhjion
APRIL 22, 1962
THE MISSION OF THIS JOURNAL
New* sources that are able to keep you awake to the vital issues of our times must be unfettered by censorship and selfish interests, "Awake!" has no fetters. If recognizes facts, faces facts, is free to publish facts. It is not bound by political ambitions or obligations; it is unhampered by advertisers whose toes must not be trodden on; It is unprejudiced by traditional creeds. This journal keeps itself free that it may speak freely to you. But It does not abuse Its freedom. It maintains integrity to truth.
“Awake!” uses the regular news channels, but is not dependent on them. Its own correspondents are on all continents, In scores of nations. From the four corners of the earth their uncensored, on-ihe-scenes reports come to yw through these columns. This journal’s viewpoint is not narrow, but is international. It is read in many nations, in many languages, by persons of all ages. Through its pages many fields of knowledge pass in review—government, commerce, religion, history, geography, science, social conditions, natural wonders—why, its coverage is as broad as the earth ond as high as the heavens.
"Awake!” pledges itself to righteous principles,. to exposing hidden foes and subtle dangers, to championing freedom for all, to comforting mourners and strengthening those disheartened by the failures of a delinquent world, reflecting sure hope for the establishment of a righteous New World.
Get acquainted with "Awake!" Keep awake by reading "Awake!"
PUBLISH »D SlMULTAWIOUSLT IN THS UNHID StaTW BY THE WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, INC, 117 Atoms Street Brooklyn 1, N.Y., U.S.A.
and in England bj
WATCH TOWER BIBLE Watch Tower House, The Ridgeway N. H. Knobs, President
Printing this Issue: 8,550,000 4d
"Awake!” U puhllihid !■ the fallowing 25 Unp»i«i: Semimonthly—Afrikaans. CJoyanja, Danish, Dutch, English, Flntitah French, German, Gr«fc, Italian, Norwegian, PoHUF^se, Spanish, Swedish, Tagalog, Sulu. Monthly—Cebu-VkayAn, Chinese, Ilocano, Korean, Malt-yalam, Polish, Tamil, Ukrainian.
Yearly subscription rates
Office* fot Himi monthly editions
America, U.S., 117 Adama St., Brooklyn 1, N.Y, fl Australia, 11 Bereefrrd Rd., Rtrathtald, N.8.W, 8/-
Canada, 150 Bridgeland Ave., Toronto 1&. Ont. *1 Enol and, Watch Tower House,
The Ridgeway, London N.W. 7 7/-
firaw Ziafaitf, New North Ref., Aodflutf, 1 7/-&Mfft Afrta, Private Hag, EJandrfonttfn, Tri. 70c Monthly editions coat half the above rales.
AND TRACT SOCIETY
London N*W, 7, England Grant Suites, Secretary
a copy (Australia, 5d; South Africa, 3>/ae) Remittance* for subscriptioni thould be sent to the rf)ce la ytmr country. Otherwise send your remittance la LodAd, Nufta of upCnt/dn i? sent at two Issj® before aubscrlpUon Expires.
CHANCES Of ADDRESS ihoild reach n thirty day* before yoir moving date, oive a* your »ld and new address (If passible, yoir old ftddrc&i label). Watch Tower, Watch Tower Hmm, The Ftldoeway, Lon-hn N.W. 7t Efifllaad.
Entered sj wtond-eEuv mettur at BrocUyn, N.Y, Printed in England
Th* Bible translation ued In ‘(Awak«!” 1* the New World Tranelatlon rf tb* Holy Seri pt ire*, 1551 edition, When other translations are seed th* following eyMbol* will appear behind the ctistroBs;
40 - American fiundart Veraion J.T - An Ameriean TMiulaUcn AV - AiElhorlMd Verehn (1811) _ j. X, Darby's rerakn
Dv •- Calbolic. Efouw vetbJdCl
- The Emphatic Dlagtatt JP - Jewlah Publication 800. Is6 ■- Lilt Liefer's version
AfO — James Moffatt's version J?O - J. B. Rotherham'* vefrion Bfi — Revised Standard Version Ifg - Robert Young's version
CONTENTS
Important to You
Early Christian Beliefs
Religious Celebrations
Manner of Worship
Preachers of the Kingdom of God
Known by Their Way of Life
No Part of the World
Persecuted for Their Faith
Christendom and Early Christianity
Jehovah’s Witnesses
and the Early Christians
Watching the World
THE very best place to learn the
IMPORTANT
Christianity that f Jesus taught is in k your Bible. “But,”'' you say, “look at all the
YOU
one
sects that claim to practice true Christianity. They all interpret it differently!” Yes, they certainly do, but it was not so with the early Christians. They held to “one Lord, faith, one baptism; one God and Father.” (Eph. 4:5, 6) The fact is, even today, by careful study of the Bible, taking into consideration all that it says, you can discover which doctrines and practices are really Christian and which are not. Nor is that the only way to make this important discovery. There is another Way.
That other way is to examine secular history. History written in the days of the apostles and the centuries immediately following, as well as historical compilations based on the records available from that time, give an amazingly clear picture of what Christianity was meant to be. Any who have doubts as to how the first Christians understood the teachings of Jesus and how they applied the counsel of the Scriptures to everyday problems need only let history speak.
You may be shocked when you leam the extent to which modern-day religion has lost sight of the Christianity taught by Christ. History makes plain that an important apostolic warning has been
X ignored: “Look ) out: perhaps there may be someone who
will carry you off as his prey through the philosophy and empty deception according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary things of the world and not according to Christ.” (Col. 2:8) Each of us must check to make sure that no one has carried us off from the original pattern of Christianity delivered by Jesus and his apostles. Only by knowing what they believed and practiced can we obey the apostle Paul’s inspired counsel: “Become imitators of me, even as I am of Christ." —ICor. 11:1,
Yes, we should be anxious to make our actions and beliefs conform to those of Jesus, recognizing that he is the one whom God sent into the world to do His will and point out the narrow gate to life.—Matt. 7:13,14.
So, consider the evidence. Consider what it means to you personally. Compare it with your way of worship. If your religion agrees with the divinely provided pattern, you will be delighted to know it. If it does not agree, you should also know that—and do something about it. In either event, the information in this special issue of Awake! is important to you.
looked upon it as the standard of ultimate appeal in matters of belief and practice. It was their measuring rod of true worship. Neither decisions of living men nor ancient human traditions were regarded as equal to it. As Titus Flavius Clemens of the second and third centuries said:
in the second and third centuries, told Christian parents: “Teach then your children the word of the Lord. . . . Teach them to write, and to read the holy Scriptures.”* The deep respect early Christians had for the Scriptures is also revealed by their diligent efforts to make many handwritten copies in the language of the common people.
“They who are laboring after excellency will not stop in their search after truth, until they have obtained proof of that which they believe from the Scriptures themselves.”1 This view is echoed by Cyprian, a third-century writer: “What obstinacy is that, or what presumption to prefer human tradition to Divine ordinances, and not to perceive that God is displeased and angered, as often as human tradition relaxes and sets aside the Divine command.”2 Irenaeus of the second century observed: “If a man reads the Scriptures ... he will be even a perfect disciple, and like unto a householder, who bringeth out of his treasure things new and old.”2
Even in private homes the Bible held an important position. The husband and wife of each Chrisfiaff household talked about the Scriptures as they sat in their home, and they instructed their children in the Scriptures, On this point Origen, who lived
God and Christ
Despite heathen pressure to worship many gods, the early Christians stoutly refused to worship more than the one true God, Jehovah. They followed the example of Jesus, who said: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matt. 4:10) Irenaeus argued in support of their view when he said: “It is proper, then, that I should begin with the first and most important head, that is, God the Creator, who made the heaven and the earth, and all things that are therein .. . and to demonstrate that there is nothing either above him or after him; nor that, influenced by any one, but of his own free will, he created all things, since he is the only God, the only Lord, the only Creator, the only Father, alone containing all things, and himself commanding all things."®
Although the corrupting of the early Christian organization eventually caused to be adopted the erroneous belief that Christ is actually God and part of a triune godhead, early Christians dung to the Scriptural fact that Christ is not equal with the Father and coetema] with him. How could they think otherwise, since Jesus said: “The Father is greater than I am”? (John 14:28) Regarding the early Christian writers, the book Christianity and the Roman Empire by W. E. Addis states: “The Apologists were impelled to believe in the distinct personality of the Word, just
because he was not God coequal with the Father, but a secondary God subordinate to him.... Not one of them, however, had even dreamt that there was a trinity of equal persons in the Godhead.”—Pages 115,116.
Baptism
Although different views developed on how baptism should be performed, the early Christians generally followed the apostolic practice of immersion. Indicating that the apostles regarded baptism as requiring that one be immersed or covered over, the apostle Paul uses the word in connection with being buried, when he says: “For you were buried with him in his baptism.” (Col. 2:12) In the book The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, Augustus Neander draws attention to this and says: “Baptism was originally administered by immersion, and many of the comparisons of St. Paul allude to this form of its administration: the immersion is a symbol of death, of being buried with Christ.”® A writer of the fourth century, Gregory Nyssa, also compared baptism in water with burial, saying of the water; “We hide ourselves in it, like the Savior was hidden in the earth.”1
Those who were baptized were adults or persons old enough to receive instruction in Christianity and to make a free choice from their own convictions. On this point The Encyclopaedia Britannica states; "The whole early period knows baptism only for adults, who join themselves of their own resolve to the Christian community. Infant baptism appears sporadically towards the end of the second century and was indeed practiced also during the following centuries, yet only as exception.”8
Blood
The early Christians obeyed the apostolic decree: “Keep yourselves free from things sacrificed to idols and from blood.” (Acts 15:29) Addressing the heathen, who did eat blood, Tertullian said: “Let your error blush before the Christians, for we do not include even animals’ blood in our natural diet. We abstain on that account from things strangled or that die of themselves, that we may not in any way be polluted by blood, even if it is buried in the meat. Finally, when you are testing Christians, you offer them sausages full of blood; you are thoroughly well aware, of course, that among them it is forbidden; but you want to make them transgress.”’
Another writer, Minucius Felix of the third century, mentioned that blood of animals was never eaten at the meals of ear [y Christians. For them to have done so , as the heathen did, would have VTOBite d the law of God. He wrote: "For US.. 11 js not permissible either to see or to hear of human slaughter; we have such a shrinking from human blood that at our meals we avoid the blood of animals used for food.”10
Resurrection
As the pagan Athenians ridiculed the apostle Paul about the resui erection, so did the heathens ridicule Chrigtiang after his day. They accused Christltans of thinking themselves Immortal becatjse they believed in the resurrection. The heathen writer Lucian said, in the second century: “The wretched people have ^persuaded themselves that they are altogether immortal, and will live forever; therefore they despise death, and many ol them meet it on their own accord.”*
The early Christian belief about the soul was different from the pagan belief in the Inherent immortality of the soul, which apostate Christians later adopted. Instead of thinking of the soul as being something in man that is immortal, they recognized that the human soul is subject to death. Thus James says: “Know that he who turns a sinner back from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.” (Jas. 5:20) Since they believed in the death of the soul, Paul could argue that, if there were no resurrection, the dead have perished. “If Christ has not been raised up, your faith is useless; you are yet in your sins. In fact, also, those who fell asleep in death in union with Christ, perished.”—1 Cor. 15:17,18.
Arguing with the heathen who believed fin the immortality of the soul and in pre-ex&ftence, Tertuhian wrote: “Reflect what you V.'-'cre, before you were you. Nothing at all, wt3sn’f it? For you would remember, if you ihad existed. You were nothing before you, came into being; you become nothing w-’hen you have ceased to be.”11 Speaking ai,bout the resurrection, he goes on to say: “ Why could you not again come out of nothing into being, by the will of the very samC Author whose will brought you Into toeing out of nothing? . . . You were not; you ‘,were made; and once again when you are fiot, you will be made.” In harmony with /-his view Minucius Felix wrote: “Who is stupid or senseless as to venture to maintain that man, originally formed by God, rannot be remade by him anew?”10 The early Christians had hope and courage in tihe face of death because they knew that God would bring them back to life by resurrection. For them immortality was not inherited but was regarded as a rewat’d for faithfulness. That is why the apostle ;Paul stated: “This mortal must put on immortality.”—1 Cor. 15:53, AS.
With the passing of time the clean truths enjoyed during the, days of the apostles became clouded with falsehoods. Gems of doctrinal truth gradually sank into the mud of vain philosophies and empty imaginations until they disappeared from sight. The apostle Paul foretold this when he said: “I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves.” (Acts 20:29, 30) By the time one hundred years had passed after the apostle John’s death spiritual darkness was settling fast on the Christian community. Disputes over doctrines were increasing, sects were multiplying and the influence of pagan philosophy was becoming more and more evident as it was being woven into Christian belief by converts to Christianity and by others who admired it. The Christian organization eventually became so apostate that its resemblance was closer to that of Roman paganism than to apostolic Christianity. It had survived the hungry beasts of Rome, but it did not survive the corrupting wolves within itself.
(Turn to pages 22, 23 and 26 and note the modem-day parallels on these points.)
REFERENCES
1 The Ancient Church, W. D. Killen, pp. 448, 450, 447.
2 The Epistles of E, Cyprian, Ixxlv.
3 Five Books of S. Irenaeus Aguvnxt Heresies, translated by John Keble, p. 385.
4 Ethiopia Didascalia, translated bv Platt (28.341. p. 130.
s The WritfMpg of Irenaeus, translated by Alexander Roberts and W. Rambaut, Vol. 1, p. 117.
6 The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, Augustus Neander, translated by Henry John Rose (1848), pp. 197, 94.
t Htstoire Dogmatittue, Liturgique el ArehAologique du Sacrement de Bapt&ne, Jules Corblet.
B 1946 edition. Vol. 3, p. 84.
s TertuIIIan’s Apoiogeticus, translated by T. R Glover, pp. 51, 215.
io Minuet us Felix’s Octavius, translated by G. H. Rendall, PP. 409, 421.
as though by more ancient tradition, to observe for the feast of the Savior’s passover the fourteenth
IELEBRATIONS in the Roman Empire were numerous, but Christians of the first three | centuries refused to participate in them. The anger of their heathen neighbors over this refusal did not change their resolve. Tertullian, of the second century, wrote: "We Christians are charged with a second sacrilege because we do not celebrate the holidays of the Caesars with you in a way which neither modesty, decency, nor chastity permits,”1 Their refusal to celebrate Roman holidays does not mean they had no observance of their own.
What the early Christians celebrated was very different from the many religious holidays that are now kept in Christendom. Christmas, for example, was unknown to them. On this point The Encyclopedia Americana states: "The celebration was not observed in the first centuries of the Christian church,"2 And the religious historian Augustus Neander wrote about birthdays: “The notion of a birthday festival was far from the ideas of the Christians of this period in general,”3
After the first century the organization bearing the name “Christian" began instituting celebrations of its own, adding more and more the farther away it got in time from the days of the apostles. In his book, jin Epitome of General Ecclesiastical History, John Marsh states: "Christ had instituted the Supper as a memorial of his death; but, not content with this, his followers soon began to commemorate, annually, almost every remarkable event which occurred in the first establishment of Christianity.”1 This was done despite the fact that the Scriptures did not authorize them. As Professor W. D. Killen says: "The Founder of the Christian religion instituted only two symbolic ordinances—baptism and the Lord’s Supper.”5
The Lord’s Supper, also called the Memorial, was instituted on the same night that the Passover was annually celebrated—Nisan 14. The Christians in Asia known as the Quartodecimans (Fourteen th er s) observed this yearly celebration, which some persons call the Christian passover, on Nisan 14. Eusebius states: “At that time no small controversy arose because all the dioceses of Asia thought it right,
day of the moon, on which the Jews had been commanded to kill the lamb. Thus it was necessary to finish the fast on that day, whatever day of the week it might be.”s
When Jesus instituted this celebration of his death, he took a loaf of unleavened bread, gave thanks, broke it and gave it to his apostles, saying: "This means my body which is to be given in your behalf. Keep doing this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19) The commemoration of his death is properly kept by having this observance each year on the day Jesus instituted it—Nisan 14. For Christians this was the only Scripturally established observance.
Any other observance, including the resurrection festival, which was observed later on and became known as Easter, is without any Scriptural authorization. Note what The Encyclopaedia. Britannica says: “The ecclesiastical historian [of the fifth century] Socrates (Hist. Eccl., V. 22) states, with perfect truth, that neither the Lord nor his apostles enjoined the keeping of this or any other festival. He says: ‘The apostles had no thought of appointing festival days, but of promoting a life of blamelessness and piety.' This is doubtless the true statement of the case.”7
The many celebrations that developed with the passing of the years were the product of Christian apostasy rather than what Christ or his apostles commanded. The one and only celebration that the early Christians of apostolic times regularly observed was what they were Scripturally instructed to observe—the memorial of Christ’s death.
I Turn to pages 24 and 26 and note the modern-day parallel! on these points.)
REFERENCES
1 Tertullian’s Apologeticus, translated by T. R-Glover. p. 181.
. 2 1956 edition. Vol. 6, p. 622.
s The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, Augustus Neander, translated by Henry John Rose (1848), p. 190
4 Seventh edition, p. 183.
s The Ancient Church, W, D. Killen, p. 218.
b The Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius. Vol. 23, translated by Kirsopp Lake. Vol. 1, p. 503.
r Eleventh edition, Vol. 8, p. 828.
MEETING TOGETHER: A distinctive i feature of early Christian worship was | their meeting together for the study of i God’s Word. Justin Martyr, of the second | century, wrote: “On the day which is ! called Sunday there is a meeting together i in one place of all who dwell either in « towns or in the country; and the memoirs t of the apostles, or the writings of the | prophets are read, as long as the time t permits. When the reading ceases, the » president delivers a discourse, in which | he makes an application and exhorts to t the imitation of these good things. We [ then rise all together and pray.’’1 «
Telling more about the early Christian i meetings, Ter-tullian, who became a convert to Christianity about 190 (A.D.), wrote: “We are a society with a common religious feeling, unity of discipline, a common bond of hope. We meet in gath- | erings and congregation to approach God j in prayer. . . . We meet to read the books j of God. ... In any case, with those holy * words we feed our faith, we lift up our { hope, we confirm our confidence; and no j less we reinforce our teaching by inculca- « tion of God’s precepts.”2 |
Why did the early Christians meet to- | gather to study the Bible, to pray and to * exhort one another? Because it was God’s } will that they do so, and the apostle Paul J stated the divine will clearly: “Let us con- * sider one another to incite to love and { fine works, not forsaking the gathering of, { ourselves together, as some have the cus- ♦ tom, but encouraging oneanother.”—Heb. | 10:24,25. {
t
MEETING PLACES: The oldest doc- { qments referring to Christian worship । show that they assembled in such places }
MANNER OF
WORSHI
as private houses that had rooms large enough to accommodate their meetings. In answer to the question, “Where do you assemble?" Justin Martyr said: “Where each can and will.’’3 The early Christian writers admitted they did not have temples as did the pagans. “It was a common accusation brought against Christians by their enemies,” reports The Encyclopaedia Britannica, “that they had ‘no altars, no temples.’ Clement of Alexandria, of the second and third centuries, not satisfied with citing Paul’s statement that ‘God does not dwell in handmade temples’ (Acts 17:24), appeals in support of the same truth to the ancient poets: “Most excellently, therefore, Euripides accords with these, when he writes:— ‘What house constructed by the workmen’s hands, with folds of walls, can clothe the shape divine?’ ” Elsewhere Clement adds: “It is not now the place, but the assemblage of the elect, that I call the Church.”® Setting a pattern of simplicity in places of worship, Jesus Christ arranged with the landlord of a house to use a guest room, a large upper room, in which to meet with his apostles. He also had meetings in the open. An ornate structure was not needed.—Luke 22:10-12; Matt. 5:1, 2.
PRAYER: When the early Christians met together, they had public prayer, but they also prayed privately. Wrote Clement of Alexandria: “While engaged in walking, in conversation, while in silence, while engaged in reading and in works according to reason, he in every mood prays.’’5 Prayer was also offered before meals. Ter-tullian wrote: “We do not take our places at table until we have first tasted prayer to God.”2 These prayers were offered to Jehovah God through his Son, Jesus Christ, not to or through any saints, “The Catacombs in no wise disagree with the evidence supplied by patristic literature that the custom of addressing prayers to the saints was not in vogue before the fourth century.”8
Why were early Christians diligent in prayer? Why did they pray only to God through Christ? Because the Bible counsel is: “Persevere in prayer.” (Rom. 12:12) And Jesus stated: “No one comes to the Father except through me. If you ask anything in my name, I will do it,”—John 14:6,14.
FINANCING THE CONGREGATION: This was done, not by tithing nor by passing around collection plates, but by voluntary contributions; as Tertullian wrote: “Every man once a month brings some modest coin—or whenever he wishes, and only if he does wish, and if he can; for nobody is compelled; it is a voluntary offering.”2 This voluntary method of financing the Christian congregation was in harmony with the apostolic command: “Let each one do just as he has resolved in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”—2 Cor. 9:7.
NO IMAGES: On this matter Tertullian said: “We do not adore statues and images,”2 In his Octavius, Minucius Felix, third-century writer, has a heathen interlocutor complain that Christians do not use images. The Christian’s answer is: “Do you suppose we conceal our object of worship because we have no shrines and altars? What image can I make of God when, rightly considered, man himself is an image of God?”7 In his defense of Christian belief, Lactantius wrote, at the beginning of the fourth century. “We admit that we use no idols.”8 Another early writer, Amo-bius (fl. A.D. 300), wrote: “You worship only stone and wooden images. But these are shaped after human models.”8
Summing up the view of early Christians regarding images, the volume History of the Christian Church says: “There is no better evidence of the change which came over the Church in this regard than the comparison between the earlier and the later apologists. Justin, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and Minucius Felix rejoice in the Church’s rejection of images, but Leontius of Cyprus, in 600, and John of Damascus, in 725, are anxious to defend the practices of the Church against the objections of Jews and Saracens. Chrysostom reviews the whole ecclesiastical life of his time—354 to 407—and yet nowhere in his works is there mention of images. ., . Gregory the Great, pope from 590 to 604, was the first to publish a formal defense and exposition of image worship.”—Hurst, Vol, I, p. 508.
Who, then, made the first images of Christ? Says a noted religious historian: “Heathens, who, like [Emperor] Alexander Severus, saw something Divine in Christ, and sects, which mixed heathenism and Christianity together, were the first who made use of images of Christ; as, for instance, the Gnostic sect of the followers of Carpocratian, who put his image beside those of Plato and Aristotle.”3
What of crosses in worship? Concerning the first-centuiy Christians the evidence is: “There was no use of the crucifix and no material representation of the cross.”8 In the third century Minucius Felix brought the cross up for discussion in Octavius, and the writer charges the Romans with cross worship: “Crosses again we neither worship nor set our hopes on. You, who consecrate gods of wood, very possibly adore wooden crosses as being por-tfons of your gods. For what are your standards, and banners, and ensigns but gilded and decorated crosses? Your trophies of victory show not only the figure of a simple cross, but also of one crucified.’”
These early Christians shunned images and crosses because they knew God’s command, as stated at Exodus 20:4: “You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or that is on the earth underneath.’’ They knew that image worship proved fatal to the nation of Israel, and they also knew that Christians are commanded: “Guard yourselves from idols,'' —1 John 5:21.
NO TITLES, UNUSUAL DRESS: Mi-nucius Felix shows that early Christians also rejected titles; “We do not take our place among the dregs of the people, because we reject your official titles and purples; we are not sectarian in spirit.’” And in the volume The Contents and Teachings of the Catacombs at Rome, B. Scott says: “Here the primitive simplicity of the early Church is observable; no prefix of Saint had then been added to any of Christ’s followers exclusively . . . neither do we find any ‘nimbus’ or ‘glory’ or ‘aureole’ surrounding the head of the Apostle, nor indeed the heads of any Christians represented in the Catacombs.”—P. 122.
No peculiar attire was used by early Christians, not even by their overseers. “It need hardly be said,” states the book Early Church History, “that in early times the officers or ministers were not distinguished by their attire from the rest of the Church. . . . Until the fourth century the Church was, so far as evidence can tell us, free from the use of sacerdotal garments.”6
Why did they shun peculiar garb and honorary titles? Because Jesus Christ had said: “But you, do not you be called Rabbi, for one is your teacher, whereas all you are brothers. Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father.”—Matt. 23:8. 9.
SIMPLICITY OF WORSHIP: “If any thingYnafked Ahg primitive church,” says historiaw'J'phn Lord in The Old Roman World (page 558), “it was the simplicity of worship, and the absence of ceremonies and festivals and gorgeous rites.” Their Christianity was not outward show; their whole way of life was affected by what Jesus taught. They stuffieS the Bible together; they encouraged one another by their meetings. “By all who sought merely the gratification of the eye or of the ear,” says W. D. Killen in The Ancient Church (page 463), “the simple service in which they engaged must have been considered very bald and uninteresting. But they rejoiced exceedingly in its spiritual character/ No gorgeous rites and physical trappings were needed, because the early Christians kept clearly in mind the words of the Lord Jesus: “The true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him. God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth.1’—John 4: 23,24.
(Turn to pages 23, 24, 26 and 27 and note the modern-day parallels on these points.)
REFERENCES
1 The Ancient Church, W. D. Killen, pp. 465. 466.
2 Apology, xxxlx, 3, 4, IT. 5; x!i, 7, translated by T. R, Glover.
s The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, Dr. Augustus Meander. pp. 182, 183. from the German, translated by Henry John Rose (1848).
4 Vol. 12, p. 750, 1907 ed.
a Ante-Nic ene Christian Library, Vol. 12. "Miscellanies, " b. v, c. xl; b. vil, c. v; t>. vil, c. vii.
e History of the Christian Church, J. f. Hurst. Vol. I, pp. 314, 366, 201, 204.
r Octavi'ue, xxxll. 1; xxlx, 6, 7; xxxl, 6, translated by Gerald H. Rendall.
a Early Church History, Backhouse and Tylor, p. 269.
f KIVGDOMGOI)
vagrants, or herdsmen living In tents, among whom prayers and giving of thanks are not offered through the name of the crucified Jesus.”4
Though there may be an element of hyperbole in these passages, they supply a clear indication of the remarkable rapidity and energy of Christian preaching in the first two centuries.
Every Christian a Minister
What accounts for the remarkable preaching done by the early Christians? Vitally important is the fact that every Christian considered himself a minister, a preacher of the kingdom of God.
Tertullian declares in very plain and emphatic terms that all Christians are priests or ministers. He asks: “Are not even we laics [lay
MODERN historians tell us that among the early Christians “even the most simple members of their communities were messengers, spreading the truth entrusted to them.”1 Do the early Christian writers of the first, second and third centuries support this view? And is it true that “the zeal” of the early Christians “was never satisfied except in winning new peoples to the Christian faith’ ’ ?2
Tertullian, who wrote in the second century, testifies to the success of the Christians in winning new peoples to the Christian faith: “Men proclaim aloud that the state is beset with us; in countryside, in villages, in islands, Christians; every sex, age, condition, yes! and rank going over to his name. . . . We are but of yesterday, and we have filled everything you have—cities, islands, forts, towns, exchanges.”’
Justin Martyr, of the second century, wrote: “There is not one single race of men, whether barbarians, or Greeks, or whatever they may be called, nomads, or men] priests?” “Where three are,” he says, “a church is, albeit they be laics. For each individual lives by his own faith, nor is there exception of persons with God.”B About 180 (A.D.) Irenaeus wrote: “All the righteous possess the sacerdotal rank.”* Origen, Christian writer of the third century, testifies to the same fact: “All Christians," he says, “are priests, not merely or pre-eminently the office-bearers, but all according to the measure of their knowledge and their services in the kingdom of the Lord.’”
As preachers all, the early Christians called on people in their own towns and even visited other towns to preach the message of God’s kingdom. In his defense of Christianity against the attack of the pagan philosopher Celsus, Origen declares “that many [Christians] had made it their business to go through not only their towns, but also the villages and farms.’” Thus the early Christians even visited farms, covering rural territory to preach the Kingdom message.
Some Christians were able to leave their home city and even their country to spread the good news of the kingdom of the heavens. One early writer, Eusebius Pamphilus, tells us of Christian preaching in the opening years of the second century: “They augmented the means of promulgating the gospel more and more, and spread the seeds of salvation and of the heavenly kingdom throughout the world far and wide. , . . Leaving their country, they performed the office of evangelists to those who had not yet heard the faith, whilst with a noble ambition to proclaim Christ, they also delivered to them the books of the holy Gospels. After laying the foundation of the faith in foreign parts as the particular object of their mission . .. they went again to other regions and nations.”8
Enemies Testify to Preaching Zeal
So great was the zeal of the early Christians to preach the Kingdom good news and win people to the true religion that even opposers of Christianity admitted their success. Pliny, the Roman governor in Asia Minor during the reign of Emperor Trajan, wrote a letter to the emperor in which he said of Christianity: “But this crime spreading . . , while it was actually under prosecution. . . . This contagious superstition is not confined to the cities only, but has spread its infection among the neighbouring villages and country.”8
Celsus, the pagan philosopher of the second century, attacked the Christians because they were all zealous preachers, as the church historian Meander reports: “Celsus, the first writer against Christianity, makes it a matter of mockery, that labourers, shoemakers, farmers, the most uninformed and clownish of men, should be zealous preachers of the Gospel.”7
In more recent times historian Edward Gibbon, no friend of Christianity, admitted in his work The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: “We have already seen that the active and successful zeal of the Christians had insensibly diffused them through every province in almost every city of the empire.”10
Archaeology Testifies to Preaching Zeal
So great was the zeal of the early Christians to preach the good news of the kingdom of heaven that they used every method possible to communicate their message. As a result, the early Christians pioneered the modem form of book. Says Sir Frederic Kenyon in The Bible and Archaeology: “Discoveries . . . made within the present century . . , have shown that the Christian community at a very early date realized the advantage of making up papyrus in what is known as the ‘codex’ form, which is simply the modern form of book, with leaves made up in quires, any number of which may be fastened together to form a volume of the required size.... That the codex form of papyrus book, if not actually invented by the Christians, was first exploited by them is clear from the evidence from Egypt.”
Likewise Edgar J. Goodspeed wrote in Christianity Goes to Press: “For there were men in the early church keenly alive to the part publication was playing in the Graeco-Roman world, who, in their zeal to spread the Christian message over that world, seized upon all the techniques of publication, not just the old traditional threadbare ones, but the newest and most progressive ones, and made use of them to the full in their Christian propaganda. In doing this they began the use on any large scale of the leaf-book, now in nni-versal use. . . . Christians were beginning to lay hold of the techniques of publication to spread over the world the great message that they felt they had for mankind. That was the great dynamic that drove them on, to take every known means and even find new ones for their work. . , . They were not only abreast of their times in such matters, they were in advance of them, and the publishers of the subsequent centuries have followed them. This is I submit a different picture of the early Christian laity from the traditional one.’’—Pp. 75-78.
Why the Tremendous Zeal to Preach?
The view of the early Christians was, as Tertullian said: “The word of the Lord ought not to be hidden by any.”11 Indeed, it was the Lord Jesus Christ himself who commanded his true followers to be zealous in letting their light shine: “You are the light of the world. . . . People light a lamp and set it, not under the measuring basket, but upon the lampstand, and it shines upon all those in the house. Likewise let your light shine before men.”—Matt, 5:14-16.
So the early Christians copied the example of their Master, who himself said: "I am the light of the world.” They preached the same message Jesus did, and Jesus featured “the kingdom of the heavens.” The apostle Paul, who said that he imitated Jesus, taught "publicly and from house to house,” and he urged his Christian brothers: “Become imitators of me, even as I am of Christ.”—1 Cor. 11:1; John 8:12; Matt. 10:7; Acts 20:20.
After his resurrection, Jesus Christ gave specific commands to his followers to spread the good news and to make disciples of people of all the nations: “Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations.” (Matt. 28:19) And what were the last recorded words of Jesus Christ, just before he ascended into heaven? “He said to them . . . ‘You will be witnesses of me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria and to the most distant part of the earth.’ ”—Acts 1:7,8.
So the early Christians took their commission to preach seriously. They could not hide their message. They believed that their own hope for salvation depended upofi their speaking God’s words to others, for they knew what the apostle Paul had written to the Christians in Rome: “With the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation.”—Rom. 10:10.
Zealous preaching of the kingdom of God therefore marked the early Christians. That this would also be a distinctive mark of true Christians at the “end of the world” or “time of the end” is clear, for, concerning this time, the Lord Jesus, looking forward nineteen hundred years to our day, pointed to this as the work for modem Christians: “This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.”—Matt. 24:14.
(Turn to pages 24, 28 and 29 and note the modern-day parallels on these points.)
REFERENCES
1 The Early Christians, E. Arnold, p. 29.
2 HiBtorsi 0} the Christian Church, J. F. Hurst, Vol. I, p. 163.
s Apology, 1. 7; xxxvil. 4, translated by T. R, Glover (1931), pp. 5, 169.
i "Dialogue with Try pho," c. cxvii, translated In Vol. 2, Ante-Nicene Christian Library.
5 History of the Christian Church, Henry C. Sheldon, Vol. I, pp. 240, 241,
B Ante-Nicene Christian Library, "Against the Heresies," Iv. 8. 3.
t The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, Dr. Augustus Ne-ander, pp. 46, 41, from the German, translated by Henry John Rose (1848).
s Sccleaiastica! History, b. Hj, c. xxxvil, translated by C. F. Cruse (1894), pp. 111, 112.
B Harvard Classics, Vol. 9, pp. 420. 427.
10 Modern Library Edition, Vol. 1, c. 16, p. 451.
11 Ante-Nicene Christian Library, "On Baptism." xvlt. stantly haled before the courts, it is a matter of historical record that they were law-abiding, persons of the highest moral integrity, and outstandingly known for the love they had for one another.
D^o 0^0 D^o o^a
Their obedience to the laws was not of the same caliber as that of other men who obeyed only when they could not do otherwise or when they did not happen to be otherwise inclined. It was so consistent that mention of it has been preserved by the historians. For example, Dr. Augustus Neander records a letter concerning the Christians that was written to one Diog-netus in the early part of the second century, and which states: “They obey the existing laws, nay, they triumph over the laws by their own conduct.”1 And Tertul-lian later argued: The land is filled with assassins and thieves and criminals of other kinds. But “when Christians, charged as Christians, are brought into court, who among them is of the same sort as till those criminals? It is with your own kind the jail is always steaming ... Not a Christian on that list, unless it be simply as a 'Christian.”2 In recognition of the example set by Christians in this regard, the book Readings in Ethics, in its chapter on “Early Christianity,” says: “They were willing to render to Caesar what was Caesar's. Obedience to all laws which did not conflict with Christian principles, they insisted upon. But their main attention was directed to rendering unto God what was
God’s.”3 In this they followed the admonition of their Model, Jesus Christ.—Matt. 22:17-21.
HOUGH the early
Christians were often
misrepresented and con-
live,
■ m'-. m However, the
$ conduct of these
& Christians that set
them apart from
world involved much more than obedience to the laws of the State. Their embracing the teachings of Jesus Christ brought about a thorough change in their viewpoint toward life, their personal conduct and their attitude toward other men. (Eph. 4:22-24) That this is actually what happened is testified to in the following account: “The astounding thing is that while the Greek schools in general appealed only to a select class .., and while the comparatively wide appeal of the Stoics neither affected the masses nor stayed the corruption of the Emperor’s court, Christianity, within twenty-five years of its inception gave a totally new life to thousands and thousands. This new life most noticeably expressed itself in a virtue which the Stoics condemned and which certainly was absent from the practice of the public.”3
So it was that in a letter from the Roman governor of Pontus and Bithynia, Pliny the Younger, to Emperor Trajan, he reports about the Christians.: “They affirmed the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they met on a stated day before it was light, . . . binding themselves by a solemn oath, not for the purposes of any wicked design, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up.”4 Likewise, Athenagoras, who had been an accomplished Athenian philosopher, but who accepted Christianity when he read the Scriptures in an endeavor to refute them, in the year 177 presented to Emperor Marcus Aurelius and his son Commo-dus a plea in which he said: "But among us you will find uneducated persons, and artisans, and old women, who, if they are unable in words to prove the benefit of our doctrine, yet by their deeds exhibit the benefit arising from their persuasion of its truth: they do not rehearse speeches, but exhibit good works; when struck, they do not strike again; when robbed, they do not go to. law; they give to those that ask of them, and love their neighbours as themselves.”1
Rather than trying to change the world around them, the reforming they did was in their own lives. As the noted historian John Lord says, in The Old Roman World: “The church, in those days, was not a philanthropical institution, or an educational enterprise, or a network of agencies and ‘instrumentalities’ to bring to bear on society at large certain ameliorating influences or benignant reforms. . . . The true triumphs of Christianity were seen in making good men of those who professed her doctrines, rather than changing outwardly popular institutions, or government, or laws, or even elevating the great mass of unbelievers. . . . And for three centuries there is reason to believe that the Christians, if feeble in influence and few in numbers when compared with the whole population, were remarkable for their graces and virtues . . . [They] were patient under injuries, were charitable and unobtrusive, were full of faith and love, practicing the severest virtues, devout and spiritual when all were worldly and frivolous around them . . . We have testimony to their blameless lives, to their irreproachable morals, to their good citizenship, and to their Christian graces.”6 Any who tried to carry on immoral practices, after due encouragement to repentance and reformation, were ousted from the Christian congregation, They heeded the apostolic advice to keep the congregation clean. —1 Cor. 5:1-5, 9-13.
Love for One Another
Yet along with their reputation for being law-abiding and virtuous, they were known by the world for another trait. They had deep love for one another. Ne-ander draws attention to “the inward brotherly love of the Christian—contrasted with the universal selfishness which di-I vides all men from one another, and makes them distrustful of each other, which prevented men from understanding the nature of the Christian community, and rendered it a source of never-ending wonder to them!”1 And historian John Lord declares that this bond of love was so strong that even Christians from other countries, ranks and positions in life were welcomed into the homes of their fellow believers. “There were no strangers among the Christians,” he says; “they were all brothers.”6 Truly, these people were Christians, for Jesus Christ himself had said: “By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves.” (John 13: 35) Yes, Christians are easily identified, not only by what they believe and how they worship, but by their way of life. That is true even in this modern day.
(Turn to pages 25 and 27 and note the modern-day parallels on these points.)
REFERENCES
1 The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, Dr. Augustus Ne-ander, translated from German by H. J. Rose (1848), pp, 40, 44.
2 Ayologeticus, translated by T. R. Glover (1931), p. 195.
s Readings in Ethics, edited by Gordon H. Clark and T. V. Smith, Second Edition (1940), pp. 120, 121.
« "Letters of Pliny,” Harvard Classics, Vol. 9, p, 427 s Ante-Hicene Christian Library, Vol. 2, "Apology ” or "Plea for the Early Christians,” c. xl.
e The Old Roman World, John Lord, Second Edition (1868), pp. 551, 552, 578. 584.
TertuIHan asks, 'What heathen will let hi? wife attend the nightly meetings of the Church and the slandered Supper of the Lord, take care of the sick even in the poorest hovels, kiss the chains of the martyrs tn prison, rise in the night for prayer, and show hospitality to strange brethren?' It 15 easy to Imagine the constant and manifold dangers, as well as difficulties, spring* ing from such marriages in times of persecution. But marriages between heathens were still valid after either party became n Christian."'—1 Cor. 7:39.
Although a Christian husband or wife would not leave a non-Christian mate, it would sometimes occur that a pagan husband whose wife was converted to Christianity discovered that her strict Christian morals and zealous worship stood in his way. (1 Cor. 7:12, 13) He might leave her, but, of course, he hlamod her religion. So we arc told that the Romans considered the Christians '‘immoral because families sometimes broke up when some became Christianized."’
Upon becoming a follower of Jesus Christ, the early Christian had little In common with former associates. That he would not seek fellowship with them oven under the guise of ‘'brotherhood" or ’‘inter-faith” is apparent from the observations of John Fletcher Hurst: “No one could be a Christian and sacrifice at a heathen altar or worship with the multitude in a heathen temple. From the moment that he adopted the religion of Christ, every bond that held him to the pagan mythology was sundered. His attitude was one of pronounced hostility, if not by word, at least by absence from all pagan rites, and by meeting with Christians in their, services. He was at once a marked man. There was not a single point of sympathy between his old faith and the new one. The pagan associates could no longer be intimate friends.”*
APRTL a.
Not World Reformers
In the Roman world there was every room for improvement. While excelling in law, the Empire also reveled in moral law* lessness and cruel injustice. Yet, as E. Arnold relates of the Christians living in those days of slavery and poverty, “they were entirely convinced, as regards the totality of this present condition of affairs, that they, of themselves, could not change it, and that no essential improvement could bo made in. the structure of society by means of soefa/ reform. Again, the eariy Christians let slavery and social oppression continue to exist, as, in part at least, a phenomenon of universal political corruption directed against freedom and eQuali-ty."' They believed that God's kingdom Is the one solution to all evils and, accordingly, their time and energies were devoted to serving as itij ambassadors. Toward other kingdoms the Christians were neutral.
Consistently, what they would not reform by social measures they would not attempt to reform by political measures, such as running for public office. Concerning their stand in this matter, one historical report tells us the “Christians refused to share certain duties of Roman citizens. . . . They would not hold po/ttfeaf office."'* Of course, this refusal did not make them or their religion popular. Nevertheless, it was a logical conscquerice of their belief, as E. G. Hardy observed; “The Christian were strangers and pilgrims in the world around them; their citizenship was in heaven; the kingdom to which they looked was not of this world. The consequent want of interest Ln public affairs came thus from the outset to be a noticeable feature In Christianity.”11
In those days the Christians did not suppose that God’s kingdom would find some form of expression in the political state, Rather, as Dr. Neandet* observed: "Christians, under the then existing ■ dreum-
stances, were generally accustomed to consider the state as a power hostile to the Church, and it was far from their imagination to conceive it possible that Christianity should appropriate to itself also the relations and offices of the state. The Christians stood aloof and distinct from the state, as a priestly and spiritual race.”1 Their almost exclusive concern with spiritual matters caused another historian to state: “The prince, their country, the public good, civilisation, Roman splendour, are to them merely resounding names or vain idols. The church is their
country, their city, and their camp. This doubtless is the meaning of the accusation, ‘enemies of the public,’ which is applied to the Christians.”12
God and Caesar .
Of course, the Christians were not trying to become enemies of- the Roman people or the state. On the contrary, the faithful spent much time and effort telling their neighbors of whatever race or color exactly what they should do to come into the Christian fold as fellow heirs of the Christian hope. In this ministry to people of all nations there was no room for a nationalistic spirit. (Col. 3:11) But, as E. W. Barnes observed, the Christian point of view was not appreciated: “Because Christianity thus declined to recognize national boundaries, because it was not nationalistic, but intemationalistic, it was regarded as unpatriotic. . . . The normal expression of loyalty, alike to the emperor and to the imperial City, was to bum incense to his genius and to the genius of Rome. The Christian held that such action was to offer worship to Gods or divinities that he did not recognize. He was thus not only unpatriotic, rebellious in spirit, but he was also an ‘atheist.’ His offence was1 both political and religious.”13
COM1NG IN THE NEXT ISSUE
• Does Popularity Make It Right? Christ I* Present! Where?
• They Found a Way.
• Why Visit the Dead?
The conflict between Caesar and the Christians was understandable. Caesar demanded what belonged to God; in fact, Caesar was proclaimed to be a god. However, the “god" Caesar was not concerned with the conscience of the Christian; Caesar’s concern was the unity of the empire.
This we learn from historians Brinton, Christopher and Wolff; “To hold this motley collection of peoples in a common allegiance, to give them something like a national flag as a symbol of this unity, the Emperor was deified. Simple rites of sacrifice to him were added to local religions and local rites. . . . The Christians, however, were as rigorous monotheists as the Jews; they could not sacrifice to the Emperor any more than the Jews of old could sacrifice to Baal. . . . But sacrifice was a thing of God’s. The true Christian, then, could not bring himself to make what to an outsider was merely a decent gesture, like raising one's hat today when the flag goes by in a parade.’’’1
The concern that such an attitude caused the emperor in time of peace was bound to worsen in time of war, when barbarian hordes threatened the borders of the empire. Yet, even a national emergency could not alter the Christian’s neutrality toward conflicts of this world. In his first Apology, written A.D. 153, Justin Martyr states the Christian position; “And we who were formerly used to murder one another do not only now refrain from making war upon our enemies, but also, that we may not lie nor deceive our examiners, willingly die confessing Christ.”15 Again, in his Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew (A.D. 155-160), Justin declares: "We who were filled with war, and mutual slaughter, and every wickedness, have each through the whole earth changed our warlike weapons,—our swords into ploughshares, and our spears into implements of tillage,—and we cultivate piety, righteousness, philanthropy, faith, and hope, which we have from the Father Himself through Him who was crucified.”16
Historians commonly note the refusal of early Christians to serve in Caesar’s legions, Typical is this observation in A Short History of Rome: “But the army suffered even more than the civil services. Even in the second century, Christianity had affirmed that ‘it is not right to be a man of the sword, . . . ’ and that ‘a son of peace, whom it becometh not even to engage in a litigation, should still less take part in a battle,’ had affirmed the incompatibility of military service with Christianity.”17 According to Barnes, “A careful review of all the information available goes to show that, until the time of Marcus Aurelius, no Christian became a soldier; and no soldier, after becoming a Christian, remained in military service.”1’ Historians find that “there were two grounds on which service in the Imperial armies was irreconcilable with the Christian profession; the one that it required the military oath, and the countenancing, if not the actual performance, of idolatrous acts; the other that it contravened the express commands of Christ and the whole spirit of the Gospel.”18
The adamant refusal of the Christians to violate their neutrality, however, did not mean that they were subversive. In their defense Hurst states: “There is no proof that the Christians were disloyal to the empire. They were obedient citizens, avoiding all share in conspiracies against the existing authorities and paying taxes without murmUring. But, so great was the contrast between their civil life and that of their fellow-citizens, that they presented all the characteristics of a distinct social organization.”8
From all this testimony there can be no doubt that the early Christians, while in the Roman world, were not of it. Secular history proves that they were true to their Master, who said: “I have given your word to them, but the world has hated them, because they are no part of the world, just as I am no part of the world.”—John 17:14. (Turn to pogos 24, 27 and 28 and note the modern-day parallels on these points.)
i The Old Roman World, John Lord, Second Edition (1868), p. 544,
2 Apologeticus, Tertulllan, translated by T. R. Glover, p. 173.
3 De Spectaoulis, Tertulllan, translated by T. R. Glover, pp. 277, 287, 293.
4 The History of the Christian Religion and Church, During the Three First Centuries, Dr. Augustus Ne-ander (1848), translated from the German by Henry John Rose, pp. 162, 168.
s A History of Rome, George Willis Botsford, p. 263.
e The History of the Christian Church, Philip Smith, Vol. 1. p. 207.
T Religions of the World, Gerald L. Berry, p. 72.
a History of the Christian Church, John Fletcher Hurst (1897), Vol. I. p. 162,
9 The Early Christians, E. Arnold, p. 56.
io On the Road to Civilization, a World History, Heckel and Sigman (1937), pp. 237, 238.
ii Christianity and the Roman Government, E. G. Hardy (1925), p. 39,
iz The Historians’ History of the World, Henry Smith Williams (1904), Vol. VI, p. 327.
is The Ries of Christianity, Ernest William Barnea, pp. 300, 333.
14 A History of Civilization, Brinton. Christopher and Wolff. Vol. I, p. 137.
is “The First Apology of Justin," xxxix, p. 40, translated by M, Dods, Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Vol. II, Writings of Justin Martyr and Athenagoras.
is "Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew," Justin, ex. p. 237, translated by G. Reith, Ante-Nicene Christian Library, Vol. II, Writings of Justin Martyr and Athenagoras.
it A Short History of Rome, Ferrero and Barbagallo, p. 382.
13 Early Church History, Backhouse and Tylor, P. 128.
THE late chancellor of the University of Gottingen and writer o f ecclesiastical history, John L. von Mosheim, in his Historical Commentaries on the State of Christianity, refers to the first-century Christians as “a set of men of the most harmless inoffensive character, who never harboured in their minds a wish or thought inimical to the welfare of the state.”1 Yet these very Christians suffered indescribably at the hands of the pagan peoples and the Roman state. Why? The simple and only answer is, Because of their faith. That this is so, historians unite to testify.
Not all persecutions proceeded from the State. The Christians were often victims of mob violence and the popular fury. Dr. Mosheim states that the thing that “irritated the Romans against the Christians, was the simplicity of their worship, which resembled in nothing the sacred rites of any other people. They had no sacrifices, temples, images, oracles, or sacerdotal orders; and this was sufficient to bring upon them the reproaches of an ignorant multitude, who imagined that there could be no religion without these. Thus they were looked upon as a sort of atheists; and, by the Roman laws, those who were chargeable with atheism were declared the pests of human society.”* Dr. Mosheim further says that “the sordid interests of a multitude of lazy and selfish priests were immediately connected with the ruin and oppression of the Christian cause. , , . Nothing can be imagined, in point of virulence and fury, that they did not employ for the ruin of the Christians.”2
…