"Luke": A Gospel for Credulous Pagans
In the cities of the eastern Mediterrean, the scattered Jewish population was more than ever exposed to diverse influences. Survivors had been traumatised by the terrible carnage of the wars and the temple no longer existed to hold sway over their loyalty. The vast influx of thousands of Jewish refugees and slaves, into the eastern cities, was vulnerable to the pot-pourri of creeds.
It is not difficult to imagine emigre Jews, bereft of their temple and immersed in the rich religions of the city, adapting and adopting aspects of the numerous popular cults to a format more to their taste. They would also be aware that Egyptian and Greek cults were regarded favouably in Rome.
The widespread hope among the Jews for an earthly ‘Kingdom of Israel’ – as it had traditionally been understood – was gone. Now the word from the pagan converts to Christianity was of a ‘New (or ‘True’) Israel,’ one having nothing much to do with the Jews.
\
By the late 130s C.E., the Jewish variants of the ‘dying/reborn godman’ cult had been in circulation for some time and had already gained impressive ‘biographical detail.’ For example, Jesus had now acquired a filial connection to John the Baptist – they are ‘cousins’ (Luke 1.36) – and John himself is given rather greater treatment. The awkward ‘theology’ of John baptising Jesus is now dropped; 'Luke' avoids saying who baptised Jesus! (Luke 3.19-22) Various ‘biographies’ of the godman existed, and contradicted each other in many respects, but they provided a rich source for sacred pageants and ‘passion’ plays. ‘Good’ and ‘bad’ kings had been introduced, shepherds, soldiers and angels. Here was entertainment, moral tale, solace and the promise of eternal existence.
To add colour and conviction to the developing story, traditions about a ‘miraculous birth’ (heralded by angels, greeted by shepherds and wisemen, etc) were added to the central death/rebirth story. Borrowing freely from a copy of Mark, traditions of Mithras and Adonis, a Greek follower of Paul, writing in the city of Antioch, gave the godman a version of the ancient lore of ‘celestial origin, miraculous birth, astounding deeds’ so characteristic of pagan saviour gods.
In this, the prototype for a future ‘Luke’s gospel’, the resurrection was also embellished with telling extra detail - not bad, a lifetime after the supposed event and two devastating wars! In more energetic terms than ever the author absolved Rome from any responsibility for their godman’s death and blamed the perfidious Jews. Indeed, what makes it clear that the author is a non-Jew are the ‘glaring errors in “things Jewish.”’ (Meier, A Marginal Jew, p210) This is especially so, where the writer of Luke confuses two distinct rituals – the purification of the mother and the redemption of the firstborn male.
Post-war, in the revised doctrines of the gentile Christians and apostate Jews, it was the ‘hard heartedness’ of the Jews, in rejecting Christ’s message, which had cost them god’s patronage. This, then, was the explanation for the terrible wars and their outcome. Both Philo and Josephus – Jewish historians – had said that the god of the Jews was now acting through the hand of Rome. Zealous Christians took the idea further. They postulated that ‘the mission’ had passed on to a new generation of evangelists - gentiles, like themselves. The Jews, far from being a chosen people, were now pariahs; they had had their chance and had blown it.
A draft of the early proto-Luke reached the hands of a bishop, himself the son of a bishop who claimed to have known Paul, and in consequence enjoyed immense prestige. This was Marcion, one of the earliest ‘Catholics’ to address the issue of a ‘defined gospel.’ A wealthy shipowner from Sinope (modern Sinop, on the Turkish Black Sea coast), Marcion had helped fund the bishopric of Rome. While residing in the imperial capital he revised ‘proto-Luke’ and published (about 140C.E.) the first ‘new testament’, though the term itself was not used until the early third century. This was called simply the ‘Evangelicon’ (or ‘Gospel of the Lord’ ), a slim, single volume, to which he appended ten of Paul’s epistles (the ‘Apostolicon’’). Marcion rejected all other scripture, including Jewish scripture in its entirety, arguing that Yahweh was a cruel god, completely separate from the loving god spoken of by Paul. Thus for Marcion there were two gods, the lesser of which was Yahweh, the creator god. The flesh had to be overcome by the spirit, or loving god, revealed in Christ. The body must die, said Marcion. Only the soul would be resurrected. The loving god’s Grace would replace The Law of the harsh god.
In this gospel (which Marcion attributed to Paul himself), there is no nativity, no baptism. Marcion’s Christ descends fully grown from heaven (as had a number of Greek gods), and appears suddenly in a synagogue in Capernaum. In other respects his text follows closely the wording which would eventually be found in Luke. Marcion preached and evangelised for more than twenty years. But he fell out with his acolytes in Rome and returned to Asia Minor to established his own church hierarchy. Marcionites were soon to be found throughout the Roman Empire. This particular Christianity thrived for centuries in the east and survived into the early middle ages.
In practical terms, the Christians retrenched, a minority still filled with hope for an imminent ‘Day of the Lord’, but others feeling their way towards an established Church. What the Christians lacked in original doctrine they made up for in astute organisation. Borrowing freely from Jewish precedents, the Christians set up ‘prayer houses’ to rival synagogues, appointed priests to read approved texts, and collected money and property to serve the faith. Their cult had survived the wars by embracing, not opposing, authority and now it demanded of its converts discipline and compliance. Judaism had been rent and fatally weakened by its divisions; in their plans for a ‘Universal Church’ the Christians would have no place for dissent. Ironically, this striving for monolithic organisation would ensure endless factionalism and ‘heresy’ for centuries.
As the largest city in the region, and the home of the largest community of displaced Jews,
Alexandria, became the leading centre for an organised Christian church. The city that, in the work of Philo, had already contributed the notion of ‘Logos’, now gave the world the first recognisable ‘Christianity.’ It was in Alexandria that some of the most notable church ‘fathers’ would pontificate. It was from Alexandria that some of the most important Christian heresies would originate. And it was in Alexandria that some of the worse excesses of Christian terrorism were perpetrated.
Corresponance of Emperor Hadrian refers to Alexandrian worshippers of the sun-god Serapis calling themselves ‘Bishops of Christ.’ The reference is intriguing. In the cult of Serapis, Graeco-Roman and Pharaonic religion had already mingled. That the syncretic process should have continued with the additional fusion of aspects of a Jewish godman is no more than we would expect. Serapis had been a late Egyptian god, identified with Osirus, and forming part of an Egyptian trinity shared with Isis (the Mother!) and Horus (the Divine Child!).
The cult of Lord Serapis had been established by the former general of Alexander, Ptolemy I Soter (304 - 284B.C.E.). His new god (a transliteration, via Zaparrus, of Asar-Hapi) had replaced the linked Egyptian gods Osirus and Apis. Ptolemy’s idea was to have a unifying, national god, worshipped by all his subjects. Accordingly, Serapis had been given characteristics drawn from both Egyptian and Greek deities. The child Horus, it should be noted, was held to have been born in a stable on December 25th and the mother, Isis, to have been a virgin! For the Egyptians, Horus was a god of the underworld and judge of the dead. One of the many titles that would be given to Christ was Judge...that celestial arbiter on the day of judgement!
Rome stood aloof, for the most part contemptuous of ‘oriental cults’ and moving against them only when they appeared to threaten public order.
Kenneth Humphreys