The second century at one time was described as a tunnel period in the history of Christianity; the imagery is actually more apt for the last one-third of the first century. The absence of a narrative comparable to the book of Acts for this period leaves many gaps in our knowledge. Even those scholars who date a considerable part of the New Testament to the late first century or early second century still must resort to hypotheses and sociological theories to describe the developments in the church in this period.

The removal from the scene of three dominant personalities from the apostolic age, combined with the suppression of the Jewish revolt in Palestine against Roman rule (66–70/73) that resulted in the destruction of Jerusalem, brought a significant new situation to the church in the last third of the first century.

STRANDS OF JEWISH CHRISTIANITY#

The late first and early second century saw an increased alienation of believers in Jesus from the synagogues. One important result of the death of James, the destruction of the temple in 70, and the banishment of Jews from Jerusalem after the Bar Kokhba revolt in 135, was the removal of Jerusalem as a geographical center of the Christian movement. This was accompanied by an increasing marginalization of Jewish Christians in relation to the growing numbers of Gentile believers.

The mutual rejection of each other by most Gentile believers and most Jewish believers effectively removed from the history of the church the potential middle ground of a Jewish Christian viewpoint that could have preserved lines of communication between Jews who did not accept Jesus and Gentiles who did. As a consequence of these developments, little literature from Jewish Christianity survives, so its history must be sketched in broad strokes.

Some time before the end of the first century, although the details cannot now be ascertained, many synagogues took actions that effectively eliminated from their membership any Christian presence that may have continued. Jewish Christians found themselves excluded from the synagogue and not accepted by the Gentile churches, which were distinguishing themselves from Jewish practices while at the same time claiming the Jewish scriptural heritage as their own. When Rome forbade Jews from Jerusalem after 135, the Palestinian church itself became largely Gentile.

Three strands of Jewish Christianity are attested in the writings of the church fathers; all are known only fragmentarily and all eventually passed out of existence:

Ebionites#

The group of Jewish Christians most commented on by Gentile Christian writers, and treated by them as heretical, were called Ebionites. Their hero was James the Just, and they were quite antagonistic toward Paul. They took the position that Gentile converts must submit to the Law of Moses.

Along with material sacrifices, the Ebionites rejected the monarchy, some aspects of prophecy, and offensive passages in the Old Testament (described as false pericopes, which were regarded as later additions to the text of Scripture). Other characteristics were a prohibition of meat, emphasis on poverty, and concern with purity (involving ritual washings in addition to the initiatory baptism). They continued the Jewish practices of circumcision, Sabbath (but also observing the Lord’s day), and dietary laws. Their Gospel was Matthew, but they also produced other Gospels and Acts of their own.

The church fathers offered various explanations of their name, some speculating (on the analogy of other movements) that they followed a man named Ebion. Origen knew enough Hebrew to recognize that the name came from the word for “poor,” and he saw it as appropriate to the “poverty” of their theology that held such a low view of Jesus’ nature (only human).

Nazoraeans#

There were other Jewish Christians, sometimes called Nazoraeans or Nazaraeans, who, although living by the Law themselves, accepted Gentile believers without expecting them to submit to the Law. This uneasy middle ground, which failed to draw as much comment from Gentile Christian authors, proved also to be too unstable to survive.

Elkesaites#

Other Jewish Christians absorbed Gnostic tendencies. This is reflected in the so-called Elkesaites. A prophet named Elkesai is connected with a book of revelations that originated in the early years of the second century. The Cologne Mani Codex relates that Mani, the third-century founder of Manichaeism, grew up in an Elkesaite community, and so establishes a link between its ideas and the later developments in Gnostic thought associated with Mani.

Other Jewish Influences#

Jewish concepts and concerns continued to be prominent in parts of the church that contributed to its mainstream. This is especially evident in the work known as the Didache. Moreover, greater recognition is now being given to the Jewish elements in Gnostic speculations. Non-heretical Jewish Christian ideas are found in Christian additions to the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, such as 2 Esdras (4th and 5th Ezra), Testaments of the 12 Patriarchs, and Ascension of Isaiah.

Apart from fragmentary quotations of Jewish Christian works, the principal surviving source of Jewish Christian material is the Pseudo-Clementine literature.

As might be expected from its geographical proximity, Jewish Christianity and its aberrations made their strongest impact in Syria. The early development there of a priestly concept of ministry may be a direct inheritance from Judaism. The asceticism of the Syriac church, which might seem un-Jewish, was perhaps mediated from Jewish sectarian groups, such as those known from Colossians and represented by the Essenes and by Jewish Christian groups.

Much later, Muhammad seems to have had contact with and gained some of his knowledge of Christianity from Jewish Christian groups. This later history of Jewish Christianity in the Middle East is even more poorly known than in its early stages, but, largely cut off from the mainstream of the church, it failed to exert a significant or constructive influence on the history of Christianity.

LITERATURE AND PROBLEMS IN GENTILE CHRISTIANITY#

In contrast to the little literature preserved from Jewish Christianity, the considerable writings of Gentile Christians from the late first century to the mid-second century enable us to see the organizational and doctrinal developments in the church as it adapted to its new circumstances. This literature, especially the so-called Apostolic Fathers, also reflects perennial Christian concerns and problems, and so prepares for the further unfolding of the church’s story in subsequent centuries.

The non-canonical literature of the period may be classified as:

1. The Apostolic Fathers

2. The apocryphal New Testament (extending through the second century and later)

3. Other miscellaneous works.

The Apostolic Fathers#

“Apostolic Fathers” is the name given to the earliest orthodox writings not included in the New Testament. The name was given because it was assumed that disciples of the apostles wrote the works, a false assumption in nearly all, if not all, cases. The category is an artificial grouping, encompassing many different literary forms and overlapping other classifications.

The Didache and 1 Clement overlap in time the later New Testament writings. There is a further overlap in date of the Apostolic Fathers with some of the New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha—Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Peter, and perhaps Odes of Solomon; moreover, The Epistle of Barnabas is perhaps pseudonymous.

The earliest apologists—Quadratus and Aristides—are as early as some of the Apostolic Fathers, and the apology known as the Epistle to Diognetus is sometimes included in the Apostolic Fathers. There is also an overlap with the accounts of martyrdom, for one of these, the Martyrdom of Polycarp, concerns an apostolic father.

APOSTOLIC FATHERS

The Didache#

The Didache is a manual of church life in three parts: “The Two Ways” of life and death, on the moral teachings given to new converts; instructions on baptism, fasting, prayer, eucharist, treatment of itinerant prophets and teachers, the Sunday assembly, and election of local leaders; and an eschatological conclusion.

The Didache has been variously dated from around 70 or earlier to as late as 180. The question of date is complicated by the compiler’s use of earlier materials. Another characteristic of the church order literature is that as practices in the church changed, material was brought up to date, so we cannot rule out later interpolations in the basic document available to us.

Although an argument can be made for an Egyptian origin, rural Syria remains the most likely place of composition. The Jewish setting of early Christianity is quite in evidence throughout the document—in its moral teachings and their framework in the “Two Ways,” the language of its prayers, the instructions concerning support of ministers, and the language of eschatology employed.

The Didache reflects the continuing concern in Christian history with how properly to conduct church affairs—how to regulate moral life, worship, and polity.

Sharing with the Didache a section of moral instruction according to the “Two Ways” is the Epistle of Barnabas, with the difference that the “Two Ways” comes at the end instead of the beginning and uses the terminology of “way of light” and “way of darkness” (also, “the way of the Black One”). It is a treatise sent as a letter.

The Epistle of Barnabas#

Barnabas is usually dated around 135, which may be about right, although the arguments in behalf of this date (or any other) have problems about them. The author is unknown; both date and content seem to preclude the companion of Paul as the author.

The name Barnabas that appears in the manuscripts but not in the treatise itself can be accounted for in various ways:

1. the author was really named Barnabas, later confused with the apostolic Barnabas

2. the ascription to Barnabas was a later inaccurate guess

3. the author issued his work pseudonymously. The likely but not certain place of origin is the vicinity of Alexandria. The author professes not to write as a teacher, but his protests seem to indicate that such was in fact his position.

The principal concern of Barnabas was the debate with the Jews over the Old Testament: “Whose is the covenant?” The author answers that it belongs to the later people (Christians) and no longer to the Jews.

“There are two ways, one of life and one of death, and there is a great difference between the two ways. The way of life is this: First, you shall love the God who made you, secondly, your neighbor as yourself” (Didache 1.1–2).

Barnabas further argues that the institutions and practices of Judaism were never intended to be kept literally and are kept spiritually by Christians: sacrifice (Jesus Christ’s atonement), circumcision (hearing the Word of the Lord with the heart and ears), washings (baptism), dietary laws (avoiding sinners), Sabbath (eighth day, i.e., “first day” as a type of the world to come), temple (the heart and people).

The writer seems especially proud of the allegorical interpretation he gives to the circumcision of the 318 servants of Abraham (Genesis 14:14). Since 318 in Greek was represented by the letters iota (i), eta (e), and tau (t), and the former two letters were the first two letters of the name Jesus, and the latter letter was in the shape of a cross, he interpreted the circumcision of these men as referring to the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.

The writer’s extreme position of spiritualizing the Old Testament, and denying it to the Jewish people, was not followed by anyone else known to us. Still, Barnabas represented one way of addressing the continuing problem posed by the Old Testament, whose authority was accepted by the church, which conversely saw no ongoing need for its religious institutions.

First Clement#

First Clement is the name given to the letter from “the church of God that sojourns in Rome to the church of God that sojourns in Corinth.” The letter is attributed to Clement in the manuscripts and also by Dionysius of Corinth about 170 (Eusebius, Church History 4.23.11). Hermas mentions a Clement in Rome whose task was to correspond with other churches (Visions 2.4.3). However, Clement does not write in his own name. Instead, as a presbyter-bishop, he wrote as a spokesman of the Roman church. The letter therefore carried communal (rather than apostolic or episcopal) authority.

The date is usually assigned to the reign of Domitian, about 96, but this is not absolutely certain, and some have argued for an earlier date of about 70. Acording to Irenaeus, Clement was the third successor of Peter as bishop of Rome, following Linus and Anacletus (Against Heresies 3.3.3; Eusebius, Church History 3.15.34). A rival tradition made him the successor to Peter (Pseudo Clement, Epistle to James 2; Tertullian, Prescription against Heretics 32). Epiphanius later tried to harmonize the reports by saying Peter consecrated Clement, but he stepped aside until later (Panarion 27.6).

The author may have been a freedman of the Roman senatorial Clemens family, either a Gentile convert to Judaism before accepting Christianity or a Jew with some Hellenistic education. The occasion for the letter was division in the church at Corinth (the Corinthians were taking sides yet again). Some of the presbyters in the church had been unseated. Was this a rebellion of the younger against the older members, or a charismatic uprising against institutional authority? Such interpretations have been advanced, but the letter itself speaks primarily about personal rivalry and envy.

The letter of 1 Clement may be divided into two major parts: general moral considerations applicable to the situation at Corinth (1–38) and practical suggestions to solve the problem (39–65). We can perhaps overhear the author’s typical methods of preaching and teaching in the way he collects scriptural passages and examples on such topics as jealousy, repentance, obedience, and humility. Although relying primarily on Jewish sources, the author draws on pagan sources as well in order to make his points.

Among the notable contents of the document are:

1. The affirmation of God as creator, with the use of Stoic imagery about the laws of nature, in order to encourage obedience as the human response.

2. The picture of Jesus as “servant of God” and high priest.

3. The affirmation of Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith and the quotation of his teaching on love in 1 Corinthians.

4. The description of the organization of the church with bishops and deacons as having been instituted by the apostles with provision for this arrangement to continue (“presbyters” and “bishops” are used interchangeably).

5. The first use of a clergy-laity distinction and of priestly terminology for the ministry of the church (in reference to Old Testament institutions but as analogous to the need for good order in the church).

6. The appeal to the myth of the phoenix bird in support of the resurrection.

7. The implication that Peter and Paul died at Rome under Nero after Paul had preached in the “limits of the west” (Spain?).

8. A long prayer at the end with its positive petitions on behalf of the Roman government.

First Clement reflects the ongoing problem throughout Christian history of division in the church and therefore the need to promote unity and harmony.

Second Clement#

Second Clement is a homily of moral exhortation. Although associated with 1 Clement in the manuscript tradition, it is by a different, otherwise unknown, author. There are few clues to a date, likely early to mid-second century, and the place of composition may have been Rome, Alexandria, or (with slight preference) Corinth. The sermon was delivered by a teacher or reader in the church on the subject of repentance.

Hermas#

The longest work in the Apostolic Fathers is the Shepherd (Pastor), a collection of Visions, Parables (Similitudes), and Commandments (Man-dates) by Hermas. The unity of the work has been questioned, but perhaps the best explanation for the sometimes conflicting data is that the work is from a single author active in Rome over three to four decades in the first half of the second century (and so reflecting different situations in its different parts).

Hermas refers to the idea of the church as eternal and gives information on its contemporary organization. The sometimes tiresome document is valuable for the picture it gives of a Christian community in the third generation. The members were involved in the daily affairs of life, and the world threatened to overwhelm their Christian way of life.

The special interest of the work concerns what to do about sins after baptism. Although the ideal is to preserve baptismal grace untarnished, Hermas gives assurance that there is one “repentance” after conversion for those who have fallen away but warns against presuming that this is always available, for the end of the world is imminent.

Ignatius#

Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in Syria, wrote seven genuine letters that survive, one of which was to the church at Rome pleading with the Christians there not to try to intervene to save him from martyrdom. Ignatius was arrested under the emperor Trajan (98–117), and probably toward the end of his reign was taken under guard to Rome for execution, probably as one of the prisoners to serve as victims in the wild animal games put on to entertain the populace.

On his way across Asia Minor, Ignatius wrote four letters from Smyrna (to the churches at Ephesus, Magnesia, and Tralles in Asia and to the church at Rome) and then three from Troas (to the churches at Philadelphia and Smyrna, and to Smyrna’s bishop, Polycarp). These letters were interpolated and six additional ones were added in the fourth century, and this expanded version was the form in which Ignatius was known until modern scholars recovered the original edition.

Ignatius calls himself Theophorus (“God bearer”). According to tradition he was the third bishop of Antioch, after Peter and an otherwise unknown Evodius. That only one name could be remembered between him and Peter’s presence in Antioch suggests that it was late in the first century before a single bishop emerged to lead the church at Antioch.

In understanding Ignatius’s letters it is important to remember that he was on his way to martyrdom and hardly traveling in comfort. His own imaginative personality was heightened by the situation to produce flowery figures of speech and mixed metaphors sometimes piled on top of each other. Still, Ignatius had practical concerns with the immediate problems he learned about in churches on his route.

Ignatius was especially concerned about division in the churches, occasioned by the false teachings both of the Docetists, who said that Jesus Christ only “seemed” or “appeared” to be truly human, and of the Judaizers, who promoted Jewish practices. The two kinds of false teaching may come from the same group—a Docetic view of Christ could have solved some problems for Jewish believers in overcoming the paradox of a crucified Messiah.

Ignatius’s response to divisiveness was to insist on obedience of Christians to their leaders—the bishop (who took the place of God), the presbyters (who symbolized the apostles), and the deacons (who represented the servant Christ). Ignatius is the first writer to attest this three-fold ministry in each local church.

In view of Ignatius’s strong claims for the one bishop and the later development of church organization, it is worth noting that for Ignatius the bishop was still a congregational and not a diocesan bishop, worked with the presbyters as their leader (a first among equals), and did not have his position by reason of apostolic succession. The absence of an emphasis on the bishop in the letter to Rome has led some to see this silence as an argument against the presence at this time of a monarchical bishop at Rome.

Also to be considered is the subject matter of Ignatius’s letter to the Romans, where his interest is martyrdom, making this letter an important early source for the developing theology of martyrdom.

The letters of Ignatius deal with a continuing problem in Christian history—variant interpretations of the Christian faith by those who withdraw from the life of the local congregation. His response—which was to strengthen the institutional structures of the church—has been the course most often followed in the history of the church, but with mixed results as to its effectiveness in achieving spiritual unity.

Polycarp#

Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, received one of Ignatius’s letters and wrote his own letter to the Philippians in part in response to their request for copies of the letters of Ignatius. He wrote to them also in order to give instruction in “righteousness,” dealing with the qualities of the Christian life. Polycarp further refers to an internal problem at Philippi concerning a presbyter by the name of Valens, who had fallen to the temptation of avarice.

The surviving letter to the Philippians is now commonly thought to be a conflation of two letters, the first (chapters 13–14) written shortly after Ignatius passed through the region on his way to Rome and the second (chapters 1–12) written some twenty or twenty-five years later; but there seems no compelling need for this to be the case.

Polycarp was so saturated with the language of the New Testament that whatever he had to say was expressed in its wording. He wove phrases from the letters of Paul, Peter, and John into new contexts to express his own message. Polycarp remains a representative of the pious Christian leader, filled with the apostolic teaching, who was concerned for righteous living.

Papias#

Papias of Hierapolis wrote five books of Explanations of the Oracles of the Lord (ca. 130), now lost and known only through a few quotations from later writers. Special attention has been given to his testimony that Matthew wrote his Gospel originally in Hebrew and that Mark faithfully set down the preaching of Peter (but not in good order). He likely attested the Gospel of John (and implicitly Luke) as well.

Also notable is Papias’s expressed preference for the “living voice” of those who heard the disciples of the apostles over what was written in books. Although this is often taken as a disparagement of Scripture, the frequent use of the word “oracles” for the Scriptures may mean that his very work is a commentary on written texts. In that case, his contrast may be the value of the oral testimony of older disciples over the written books of heretics in interpreting the Christian message.

Papias is also our first non-canonical writer to give a specifically millennial interpretation to the Christian eschatological hope. He advocated, in the manner of some Jewish writings, a materialist understanding of the millennium. Papias thus shows the perennial Christian interest in matters of eschatology.

Apocryphal Literature#

If one wants to appreciate the genuine article, read the imitations. If one feels a decline in spiritual power from the New Testament to the Apostolic Fathers, there is a plunge into another world in much of the second-century New Testament Apocrypha. The recent scholarly interest in this literature is an appropriate reaction against its neglect for historical purposes, but is not likely to change the common Christian judgment of its spiritual inferiority. Nevertheless, the Apocrypha remains an important source for assessing the variety of expressions of popular piety in the early church.

Some Apocryphal works seem to have been written for entertainment and to satisfy curiosity. Others are more serious works for edification, advocating asceticism and certain doctrinal ideas. These divergent features, however, sometimes are combined in one work.

All of the Apocryphal writings are valuable for reflecting ideas prevalent at the time of composition, itself often difficult to determine. The following discussion is limited to works generally agreed to have the best claim to a second-century date. The boundaries between orthodoxy and heresy were not clearly perceived in the circles from which some of these works emanated. They are a reminder that departures from apostolic faith as often occurred in popular piety as in theological speculations.

The categories used in the accompanying chart are somewhat artificial, but it is not misleading to group the New Testament Apocryphal writings according to the literary forms of the New Testament itself.

The apocryphal gospels reflect types of material found in the canonical Gospels: birth narratives, sayings (but not deeds) of Jesus, and the passion narrative.

SOME NEW TESTAMENT APOCRYPHA OF THE SECOND CENTURY

Gospels

Gospel of Thomas Gospel of Peter Protevangelium of James

Acts

Acts of Peter Acts of Paul Acts of John

Epistles

Epistle of the Apostles

Apocalypses

Apocalypse of Peter

The Gospel of Thomas#

Much of the content of the sayings Gospel of Thomas had been known, but without a title, in three Greek papyri. The Coptic text contained in the collection of codices found at Nag Hammadi in upper Egypt supplied the missing text and title. Because of its company in the Nag Hammadi codices, the gospel has been described as Gnostic, and it was susceptible to a Gnostic interpretation, but the work may better be described as Encratite (chapter 5) or more broadly as ascetic.

The Gospel of Thomas offers, without narrative context, an early collection of sayings of Jesus, often similar to sayings found in the canonical Gospels. Many scholars see the wording as reflecting a quite early stage in the transmission of the sayings of Jesus. New Testament scholars have long conjectured an early collection of the sayings of Jesus called Q as explaining the common material in Matthew and Luke. Thomas is not Q, but it does demonstrate that there was such a thing as collections of sayings of Jesus that circulated independently.

The Gospel of Peter#

The Gospel of Peter is a passion narrative. It was early rejected by church leaders because of its suspected Docetic leanings, that is, presenting a Christ who was not fully human but only “seemed” to be (at his crucifixion he was “as if he felt no pain”). It may not have been specifically written to promote such views, but it could be read as favoring such an understanding of Jesus.

The Protevangelium of James#

The Protevangelium of James concerns the birth of Jesus but especially centers on Mary, promoting her perpetual virginity and presenting Joseph as a widower with children by an earlier marriage. The work was very popular and provided the information for the later elaboration of Marian doctrine.

The Acts of Peter, Paul, John, and Thomas#

The Acts of Peter and Acts of Paul, both certainly from the second century, reflect basically orthodox viewpoints. The Acts of John is more Gnostic in flavor (chapter 5). Like the Acts of John, the Acts of Andrew reflects Gnostic dualism (with even fewer Christian concerns than the Acts of John) and is less certainly dated, either to the second or third century. The Acts of Thomas, preserved in Syriac and a revised Greek version, is third century.

Epistle of the Apostles#

Epistles are poorly represented in the Apocrypha. The required pseudonymity either was little attempted or proved unsuccessful. The so-called Epistle of the Apostles (c. 150) is an “epistle” only in the broad sense of being sent out supposedly by the apostles. In literary form it is a post-resurrection “revelation” by the Lord to his apostles, a type of writing common in Gnostic documents in order to give authority for teaching not found in the traditions of the ministry of Jesus. The author seems to have adopted this common Gnostic literary device in order to affirm orthodox doctrine against the Gnostics.

Another second-century letter is Third Corinthians, included in the Acts of Paul but circulated independently and perhaps having been written prior to the Acts of Paul. It too is anti-Gnostic in its contents.

Apocalypse of Peter#

An apocalypse from the second century is the Apocalypse of Peter. Its revelation concerns the punishments of various kinds of sinners in the afterlife. The prominence of the name of Peter in early Christian apocrypha is to be noted: there is also an apologetic work known as the Preaching of Peter, and one Jewish-Christian component of the Pseudo-Clementines is the Preachings of Peter.

Other Writings#

Various Jewish writings prompted Christians to enlarge them, interpolate them, or imitate them. The preserved form of the Ascension of Isaiah contains—in addition to a Jewish account of the martyrdom of Isaiah—two Christian additions revealing the miraculous birth, life, death, resurrection, ascension, and second coming of Jesus Christ. There is also a description of the condition of the church at the end of the first or beginning of the second century.

The present form of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs is a Christian work dating to the second century. The debate continues whether it was a Jewish work that Christian scribes interpolated or was a Christian composition employing earlier Jewish materials. The ethical content is quite close to Christian teaching, but not necessarily of Christian origin. The clearest sign of a Christian hand is found in doctrinal statements about Jesus Christ.

The Jews produced oracles in the style of the pagan Sibylline for propaganda and apologetic purposes. Christians preserved these Oracles and wrote many more of their own, so that the existing Sibylline are primarily a Christian composition. Although some of these are fourth century, some are second century, for they are quoted by second-century Christian apologists.

Also remembered as a hymn writer was Bardaisan (Latin: Bardesanes) of Edessa (c. 154–222), one of the first Christian writers in Syriac. His only work to survive is the Book of the Laws of the Lands, or On Fate, a dialogue transcribed by his disciple Philip. Bardaisan’s orthodoxy was found deficient by later Syrian Christian leaders.

Limitations and Value of This Literature#

Even the writings most acceptable to orthodox Christians—e.g., those from Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp—have been criticized as representing a severe falling away from apostolic Christianity. These authors are indeed inferior to their masters, but they were not as simple-minded as sometimes they are made out to be.

The usual charge is that the Apostolic Fathers retreated from the robust doctrines of grace and faith enunciated by Paul and took refuge in moralism and legalism. Some of this criticism comes from a one-sided understanding of Paul; some from a failure to take into account the specific contexts in which both Paul and the Apostolic Fathers were writing.

A contemporary reader indeed would not confuse the Apostolic Fathers with Paul (or with John or James for that matter), but the contrasts in theology may easily be exaggerated. One would not expect the same theological inspiration and spiritual depth in the second and third generation as in the original leaders, but the later followers did have their own contributions to make.

In their defense, it may further be said that the Apostolic Fathers were sincere, pious persons, striving to preserve the fundamentals of the faith in the face of new circumstances and new challenges. By the testimony of these quite diverse men, the reader can detect what earnest Christians regarded as spurious and what they identified as real.

Certainly some of the enthusiasm of the apostolic age was gone, and the church was beginning to settle down to life in an alien world. In such circumstances more needed to be said about ethical living. This was a situation that called not so much for keen or original thought as scrupulous fidelity in preserving intact Christian doctrine and practice. Christians of the time did not always respond wisely, but they still proclaimed the same basic message, the same faith, the same Savior, and the same God as their predecessors.

The New Testament Apocryphal writings may have less to commend them, but they too show religious earnestness and give insights into certain strands of early Christianity, in addition to being valuable historical sources (not necessarily for New Testament times but for their own). Some scholars consider the Gospel of Thomas and Gospel of Peter to preserve early and valuable material about the teachings of Jesus and the understanding of his death and resurrection. Among the other works the Odes of Solomon reflects a deep spirituality still appreciated by modern readers.