1st century Christians who lived beyond AD 70?
Around AD 70, Jerusalem was destroyed as a consequence of the First Jewish-Roman War. Christians were reported after that to still be living and even to live in Jerusalem afterward.
Christians fled the destruction of Jerusalem to live in Pella and later came back to Jerusalem
Around the start of the First Jewish-Roman War around AD 66, Christians were reported to have fled to a city called Pella to live there in safety.
Around the 4th century, the Christian historian Eusebius wrote in "Ecclesiastical History":
3:5: "But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. And when those that believed in Christ had come thither from Jerusalem, then, as if the royal city of the Jews and the whole land of Judea were entirely destitute of holy men, the judgment of God at length overtook those who had committed such outrages against Christ and his apostles, and totally destroyed that generation of impious men."
Disciples were also reported to have later been living back in Jerusalem.
In the 4th century, a Christian author named Epiphanius wrote in "On Weights and Measures":
15: "So Aquila, while he was in Jerusalem, also saw the disciples of the disciples of the apostles flourishing in the faith and working great signs, healings, and other miracles. For they were such as had come back from the city of Pella to Jerusalem and were living there and teaching. For when the city was about to be taken and destroyed by the Romans, it was revealed in advance to all the disciples by an angel of God that they should remove from the city, as it was going to be completely destroyed. They sojourned as emigrants in Pella, the city above mentioned in Transjordania. And this city is said to be of the Decapolis."
For more information on this flight to Pella:
Matthew 24:16 - Flee to the mountains (1st century historical fulfillment?):
Click here
Symeon deemed worthy to succeed James after the destruction of Jerusalem around AD 70?
James was a leader in the early church, especially in Jerusalem, as for example when "the apostles and elders in Jerusalem" (Acts 15:2) took issue with a doctrine, "James" (Acts 15:13) addressed the issue and "it-seemed (good to) the apostles and the elders, (along) with the whole church" (Acts 15:22).
James was then killed between AD 60 and AD 66 according to the historian Josephus.
In the 1st century, the historian Josephus wrote in "Antiquities of the Jews":
20:9:1: "Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned"
After this martyrdom of James and the conquest of Jerusalem which happened around AD 70, Christians who were still alive were reported to have taken counsel as to who was worthy to succeed James, and they pronounced Symeon, the son of Clopas to be worthy of the episcopal throne.
Around the 4th century, the Christian historian Eusebius wrote in "Ecclesiastical History":
3:11: "After the martyrdom of James and the conquest of Jerusalem which immediately followed, it is said that those of the apostles and disciples of the Lord that were still living came together from all directions with those that were related to the Lord according to the flesh (for the majority of them also were still alive) to take counsel as to who was worthy to succeed James. They all with one consent pronounced Symeon, the son of Clopas, of whom the Gospel also makes mention; to be worthy of the episcopal throne of that parish. He was a cousin, as they say, of the Saviour. For Hegesippus records that Clopas was a brother of Joseph"
Eusebius mentioned about "Symeon, the son of Clopas, of whom the Gospel also makes mention". In the Gospel of Mark it was written about Jesus that some said: "Is this (One) not the carpenter, the son (of) Mary, and kinsman (of) James and Joses and Jude and Symeon?" (Mark 6:3).
The Greek word used for "kinsman" used in Mark 6:3 can be translated as "kinsman", and can describe a "brother" or also a "cousin", which is what Eusebius is interpreting here, saying that Symeon "was a cousin, as they say, of the Saviour. For Hegesippus records that Clopas was a brother of Joseph". Eusebius mentioned as a reason for Symeon being the "cousin" of Jesus that "Symeon [was] the son of Clopas" and "Clopas was a brother of Joseph" (Joseph being the man who married Mary, the mother of Jesus).
All in all, Eusebius was reporting that Symeon would have been chosen to succeed James because also of his connection to both James and Jesus.
Successors in Jerusalem after Symeon died around the time of the reign of Trajan?
Eusebius reported that Symeon died while Trajan was emperor (from around AD 98 to around AD 117) and Atticus governor.
Around the 4th century, the Christian historian Eusebius wrote in "Ecclesiastical History":
3:32: "Certain of these heretics brought accusation against Symeon, the son of Clopas, on the ground that he was a descendant of David and a Christian; and thus he suffered martyrdom, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, while Trajan was emperor and Atticus governor"
Eusebius then reported that other bishops in Jerusalem were present after Symeon in succession.
Around the 4th century, the Christian historian Eusebius wrote in "Ecclesiastical History":
4:5: "The chronology of the bishops of Jerusalem I have nowhere found preserved in writing; for tradition says that they were all short lived. But I have learned this much from the writings, that until the siege of the Jews, which took place under Adrian [135AD] there were fifteen bishops in succession there, all of whom are said to have been of Hebrew descent, and to have received the knowledge of Christ in purity, so that they were approved by those who were able to judge such matters and were deemed worthy of the episcopate"
John alive until the reign of Trajan?
Eusebius reported that "John" (Revelation 1:1) who "came-to-be on the island being-called Patmos" (Revelation 1:9), who would have been "the disciple [...] whom Jesus was-loving" (John 21:20), would have remained alive until the time of Trajan. Trajan was emperor from around AD 98 to around AD 117.
Around the 4th century, the Christian historian Eusebius wrote in "Ecclesiastical History":
3:23.1-4: "At that time the apostle and evangelist John, the one whom Jesus loved, was still living in Asia, and governing the churches of that region, having returned [...] from his exile on the island. And that he was still alive at that time may be established by the testimony of two witnesses. They should be trustworthy who have maintained the orthodoxy of the Church; and such indeed were Irenæus and Clement of Alexandria. The former in the second book of his work Against Heresies, writes as follows: 'And all the elders that associated with John the disciple of the Lord in Asia bear witness that John delivered it to them. For he remained among them until the time of Trajan'. And in the third book of the same work he attests the same thing in the following words: 'But the church in Ephesus also, which was founded by Paul, and where John remained until the time of Trajan, is a faithful witness of the apostolic tradition'."
Comments
Post a Comment