Influence on Early Christian Worship

Author(s):  
Paul F. Bradshaw

This chapter traces the various ways in which the cultic language and imagery of the Hebrew Scriptures influenced and shaped the liturgical thought and ritual practices of early Christianity, from the first to the fourth century ce. At first, this was primarily through the metaphorical or spiritual application of such concepts as priesthood and sacrifice, but eventually there are indications of the beginnings of the adoption of a more literal correspondence between some elements of the Temple cult and aspects of Christian worship. Both corporate and individual practices of prayer are covered, including the use of the canonical psalms, as well as the appropriation of traditional ritual gestures and the emergence of Christian holy days out of biblical festivals.

1981 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Osiek

The admonition to ransom captives has a long paraenetic and social tradition that is documented in a variety of genres in early Christian literature. It is a tradition which, like many of its companion pieces in paraenetic literature, springs from roots in the Hebrew Scriptures which were consciously adopted by Christians as an important base upon which to build their own theology. The development of this particular tradition in early Christianity is an interesting example and test case of how a theological and moral conviction was not limited to verbal expression but was effectively translated into practice and creatively adapted to changing situations.


Author(s):  
John Peter Kenney

Early Christian writers used terminology and ideas drawn from Graeco-Roman philosophical literature in their theological writings, and some early Christians also engaged in more formal philosophical reflection. The term ‘patristic philosophy’ covers all of these activities by the ‘fathers’ (patres) of the Church. The literature of nascent Christianity thus contains many concepts drawn from Graeco-Roman philosophy, and this early use of classical ideas by prominent Christians provided an authoritative sanction for subsequent philosophical discussion and elaboration. Early Christians were drawn to philosophy for many reasons. Philosophy held a pre-eminent place in the culture of the late Hellenistic and Roman world. Its schools provided training in logical rigour, systematic accounts of the cosmos and directions on how to lead a good and happy life. While philosophical movements of the period, such as Neoplatonism or Stoicism, varied widely in their doctrines, most presented accounts of reality that included some representation of the divine. These rationally articulated accounts established the theological and ethical discourse of Graeco-Roman culture. As such, philosophy had a natural appeal to Hellenistic Jewish and early Christian thinkers. It provided a ready language in which to refine ideas about the God of the ancient Hebrew scriptures, and to elaborate the trinitarian God of Christianity. It also helped to bring conceptual coherence to the ideas found in the scriptures of both religions. Finally, it provided the common intellectual discourse that those communities required in order to present their central tenets to the majority culture of the Roman empire. To a considerable extent, the notion of ‘philosophy’ suggested to the ancients a way of life as much as an intellectual discipline. This too drew Christians to the teachings of the philosophers. While there were doctrines and prescriptions of behaviour specific to the major schools, philosophers in general tended to advocate an ethically reflective and usually rather ascetic life, one which conjoined intellectual with moral discipline. This ethical austerity was prized by early Christians as an allied phenomenon within Graeco-Roman culture to which they could appeal in debates about the character of their new movement. The tacit validation that philosophy offered to the Christian movement was thus multifaceted, and, while it was sometimes thought to be associated with unacceptable aspects of pagan religious culture, philosophy provided some educated Christians with a subtle social warrant for their new life and beliefs. It should be noted that ancient Christianity was itself a complex movement. Like Graeco-Roman philosophy, Christianity included a broad spectrum of beliefs and practices. Thus those early Christians who developed their beliefs with reference to philosophy endorsed a wide range of metaphysical and ethical doctrines, ranging from materialism to extreme transcendentalism, from asceticism to spiritual libertinism. Yet, while diversity is evident, it is also true that the Christian movement came to develop a rough set of central beliefs and some early forms of community organization associated with those beliefs. This incipient ‘orthodoxy’ came to value some sorts of philosophy, especially Platonism, which seemed best suited to its theological agenda. This tacit alliance with Platonism was fraught with ambiguity and uncertainty, and it was never a reciprocal relationship. Nonetheless, in the second and third centuries a type of Christian philosophical theology emerged which owed much to the Platonic school and became increasingly dominant among orthodox Christian authors. It was this trajectory that defined the character of patristic philosophy. Early Christian thought had its origins in Hellenistic Judaism, and its initial character was defined by the dominant patterns of that tradition. This early phase extended through the first half of the second century ad, as Christianity began to define its distinctive themes associated with the nature and historical mission of Jesus Christ. Throughout the second century, Christianity became increasingly a movement made up of gentile converts; some of these new members had educations that had included philosophy and a few were even trained as philosophers. Thus Christian thought began to show increased contact with the Graeco-Roman philosophical schools, a trend no doubt reinforced by the critical need for Christians – as a proscribed religious minority – to defend their theology, ritual practices and ethics in the face of cultural and legal hostility. This so-called ‘age of the apologists’ lasted throughout the second and third centuries, until Christianity began to enjoy toleration early in the fourth century. However, it would be a mistake to consider Christian philosophical thought in that period as primarily directed towards the surrounding pagan society. In many respects philosophy, as the intellectual discourse of Graeco-Roman culture, offered gentile Christians a means to clarify, articulate and assimilate the tenets of their new faith. This process of intellectual appropriation appears to have been of considerable personal importance to many Graeco-Roman converts. Christian philosophical theology helped them to recover ideas familiar from their school training and to find unfamiliar concepts defended with the rigour much prized within Graeco-Roman culture. After Christianity became a licit religion in the fourth century, philosophical activity among Christians expanded. The task of theological self-articulation became increasingly significant as Christianity grew in the fourth and fifth centuries towards majority status within the Empire, with imperial support. In this later period the range and sophistication of Christian thought increased significantly, due in part to the influence of pagan Neoplatonism, a movement that included a number of the finest philosophers active since the classical period of Plato and Aristotle. Later patristic philosophy had a defining influence upon medieval Christian thought through such figures as Augustine and Dionysius the pseudo-Areopagite, establishing both the conceptual foundations and the authoritative warrant for the scholasticism of the Latin West and Greek East.


Author(s):  
Eyal Regev

This chapter examines how early Christian attitude toward the Temple changed and why. First-century early Christianity was a religious and social movement at the beginning of the process of identity formation. Its members had yet to determine who they were: what part of their identity was contiguous with Judaism and what part comprised all-new elements. During this process they undoubtedly looked to other non-Christian Jews as a point of reference. Literary engagement with the Temple granted the New Testament writers and their contemporary readers the opportunity to express their debt to Jewish tradition, while at the same time their distinctiveness from it. Moreover, this engagement enhanced their sense of being powerful, genuine, and sacred—that is, close to God. For them, the Temple is a means of experiencing the sacred in both old and new fashion, somewhere on the spectrum between what would later be termed “Judaism” and “Christianity.”


2003 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adela Yarbro Collins

AbstractStudents of early Christianity recognized long ago that the canonical psalms of the Jewish Bible provided a framework of meaning in which the followers of Jesus could make sense of his crucifixion. This novel hermeneutic is evident in the allusions to the Psalms in the passion narrative of the Gospel according to Mark. It appears also in the Markan Jesus's explanation of the need for the Son of Man to suffer. Most students of the New Testament today understand Philippians 2:6-11 as a pre-Pauline hymn that was composed for early Christian worship. More recent studies suggest that it is exalted prose rather than poetry. The hypothesis of this article is that Paul composed it, either for worship or for the purposes of the argument of his letter to the Philippians. In doing so, he adapted a common social practice of the local culture. The "theologos" was an official in the organized worship of an ancient deity whose duty it was to compose brief speeches, sometimes in prose, sometimes in poetry, in honor of the deity. The organized worship of the emperor included such officials. Paul acted as a "theologos" in writing a brief speech in exalted prose honoring Jesus Christ, whom he had taught the Philippians to honor instead of the emperor.


Author(s):  
Ildar Garipzanov

The first section provides a synopsis of early Christian discourse on the symbolism of the cross, and emphasizes the importance of the emergence and the dissemination of the cult of the Holy Cross for the increasing public profile of the cross sign in late Roman culture from the mid-fourth century onwards. The second section overviews the appropriation of this sign by Theodosian empresses and emperors as a major imperial symbol of authority, and its rise to paramount importance for imperial culture in the course of the fifth and sixth centuries. The final section underscores beliefs in the apotropaic power of the sign of the cross as an important factor contributing to its growing popularity in late antiquity. It also points out that in this function the sign of the cross was similar to other apotropaic devices, alongside which this sign was often employed in textual amulets and ritual practices.


1973 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis C. Duling

The fundamental outlook in what follows is that there is a fairly consistent, compact, yet expanding and developing promise tradition which is founded on the promises to David (and his descendants) in the Hebrew Scriptures; that this tradition in certain ways has been rejuvenated and strengthened in the early Christian period; and that it enters Christianity in connection with the application of these promises to Jesus' resurrection apart from the title Son of David itself, a title whose acceptance and adaptation in early Christianity appears on both historical and redaction critical grounds to be relatively late. The hypothesis is not totally new. My intention will be to put some older information into what will hopefully be an illuminating perspective, to draw out some implications from the perspective itself, and to nail down the hypothesis of the use of Old Testament texts in connection with the resurrection of Jesus a little tighter. I have not undertaken here to trace out a history of tradition in the New Testament such as can now be found in C. Burger's excellent study,Jesus als Davidssohn, though the direction of the paper will support the legitimacy of his starting point in early Christian formulae.


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-376
Author(s):  
Mike Duncan

Current histories of rhetoric neglect the early Christian period (ca. 30–430 CE) in several crucial ways–Augustine is overemphasized and made to serve as a summary of Christian thought rather than an endpoint, the texts of church fathers before 300 CE are neglected or lumped together, and the texts of the New Testament are left unexamined. An alternative outline of early Christian rhetoric is offered, explored through the angles of political self-invention, doctrinal ghostwriting, apologetics, and fractured sermonization. Early Christianity was not a monolithic religion that eventually made peace with classical rhetoric, but as a rhetorical force in its own right, and comprised of more factions early on than just the apostolic church.


Author(s):  
Jennifer Otto

As an allegorical interpreter who perceived some of the spiritual teachings embedded in the Hebrew scriptures, Philo did not match the image of the stereotypical Jew constructed by Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Eusebius. Neither, however, did he fulfill their criteria to be considered a legitimate Christian. This chapter argues that Philo functions in early Christian writings as neither a Christian nor a Jew but is situated in between these two increasingly differentiated identities. Acting as a third term in the equation, Philo the “Pythagorean,” the “predecessor,” and the “Hebrew,” mediates between the categories of Christian and Jew while ensuring that the two identities remain rhetorically and conceptually distinct. An epilogue briefly traces the varying depictions of Philo in later Christian literature, including accounts of his baptism by the apostle John and his transformation into Philo Judaeus, Philo the Jew.


Author(s):  
Jennifer Otto

Between the second and the sixteenth centuries CE, references to the Jewish exegete Philo of Alexandria occur exclusively in texts written by Christians. David T. Runia has described this phenomenon as the adoption of Philo by Christians as an “honorary Church Father.” Drawing on the work of Jonathan Z. Smith and recent investigations of the “Parting of the Ways” of early Christianity and Judaism, this study argues that early Christian invocations of Philo reveal ongoing efforts to define the relationship between Jewishness and Christianness, their areas of overlap and points of divergence. The introduction situates invocations of Philo within the wider context of early Christian writing about Jews and Jewishness. It considers how Philo and his early Christian readers participated in the larger world of Greco-Roman philosophical schools, text production, and the ethical and intellectual formation (paideia) of elite young men in the Roman Empire.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document