The Year Zero in Christianity
Joe-Kodzo Homezo, 5th march 2009
Christianity celebrates Jesus-Christ as the revelator of God in the human history. However, that belief’s core principle remained a constantly divisive source of misunderstanding among bishoprics, theologians and, the Roman emperors. The first century has recorded divergent dogmas and diverse interpretations about the real nature of God and the identity of Jesus-Christ. The variety of the approach to the question of God and the way one has addressed such a problematic has scatted on believers, churchgoers, as well as their leaders, so that both sides of the Empire has seemed to be like a theater of huge confusion and ceaseless quarrels. Aryanism, Gnosticism and Anabaptists were challenging the supremacy. There was in front of them were some proto communities which were claiming Jesus-Christ’s disciples heritage. There was a scramble for the God News and the legitimacy to its administration. Anywhere the Alive God’s worship became debatable subjects. Most approaches to such a problematic were articulated to formal quo analysis of the faith, the relationship between Christianity and Judaism and, how to sort inside the ambient proliferation of Holy Scriptures. In fine, the question of the salvation in God was aimed at determining the specificity of the Universalist message of Christianity as “a mysterium salutis”.
In the second century, Marcion (ca 85 - ca 160) ── an Early Christian theologian who was excommunicated by the Christian church at Rome as a heretic ─ has estimated that the God of Jesus-Christ is different from God in the Judaism (called God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). To highlight his distinctive reading, Marcion has created the expression “New Testament” which he has opposed to the “Old Testament”. According to this theologian, Christianity is founded on the God of Love (Dieu d’Amour), whereas God in the Hebrews perspective would have been only a creative God (Dieu créateur). Thus, the separation between the old and the new hagiographical texts has marked the preference Marcion expressed for the Gospels he savagely opposes to the Torah. Marcion taught that God in the Old Testament was not the true God, but rather that the true and higher God had been revealed only by Jesus Christ.
The dissociation between these deities meant, in doctrinal terms, that the Hebraic scriptural revelation, from the beginning of the salvation story till now, is achieved by the arrival of Jesus-Christ – Verb of God and the Theoulogos. In the Marconi’s theology the Jewish faith would be a simple preparation of the achievement of times and anything in Jesus-Christ. Jews should have converted themselves to Christianity in whom the faith of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and thee of Joseph would have meaningful direction. Moreover, Marcion has accused Jews for killing God by crucifying Jesus-Christ.
However, the New Testament (NT) is like a tree which hides forest. In fact, the New Testament is a scriptural corpus whose appreciation is really difficult to establish: several hagiographic scriptures were proliferating in the Roman Empire. Believing communities that could be seen at that period did not have the same textual sources. In the former African bishoprics, in Cartagena (Tunisia), Kamet (Egypt) and, in Abyssinia (Ethiopia), one was used at the reading of the Gospel of Maria, that of Philippe, as well as the Gospel of Judas. In other Roman provinces, like Antiochus (Syria), in Lebanon and in the Minor Asia (Ephesus), one has the habit in listening to other holly scriptures. Each community had its preferences. There were so much sacred writings in circulation, that nobody knew precisely their number. But, later, some of these sacred literatures were qualified as apocryphal books.
In this sociological and religious context of holly scripture profusion, Bishop Irene of Lyon (Gaulle) has decided to prohibit some Writings which did not seem to him in conformity with a certain vision of Christianity. But, neither Bishop Irene, nor many other prominent church doctrinarians and theologians, at that era, like Libyan Berber Christian priest and theologian Arius (AD. 250 or 256 - 336) , were unaware of the contents of the scriptures in circulation. To make short, Irene has recommended his criteria and has imposed how to identify and select only what he has considered being authentic texts. In his process, Irene said that number “four” is the perfect arithmetic and cosmic number, because there would be four winds: North, South, East, and Western. Thus, one needed four Gospels (Mateo, Marco, Luca, John). By retaining four Gospels, as orthodox, despite their doctrines and contradictions, Irene has intended to make the unity of Christians and to standardize the access to the Scriptures. By doing so, Bishop Irene has solemnly condemned the Gospel of Judas, however a corpus of holly literature which was very appreciated by the Gnosis movements.
The criteria initiated to select canonical books are very debatable: seniority, apostolicity, catholicity and orthodoxy. The four Gospels selected have posed therefore some problems of authenticity. Nobody knew the author of the Gospels entitled of the name of Matthew, Marco, Luca and John. These texts are marked “Gospel according to… (Matthew)”, which meant that Matthew is hardly the author! One is right to point out such an observation concerning the Gospel namely identified as a book of Marco, Luca and John. In fact, a Gospel is a kind of literature, whose the style is a manner of telling as effective, stories oneself has heard. But the story presented in the Gospel as factual were, seriously thinking, simple narrative speeches that were less sure than evoked. The Gospel of Marco was written more than 30 years after the death of Jesus. And everyone knew that the disciples of Jesus have escaped when their Master was arrested, jugged, sentenced and crucified. A woman has identified Peter who was walking neutrally behind and said: “this man also is the membership, he is Galilean”. But, Peter has denied categorically: “Woman, don’t get me into problems; I don’t know this Man (Jesus)”.
Moreover, the writings are selected under authoritarian process, arbitrarily, and rather for utility reasons. How one could determine the authenticity of scriptures that were circulating in different provinces of the Empire, while, at the same time, there were few transport commodities (weakness roads, rare contact with people, language problem of communication, etc.). How could one justify the seniority of a document, whereas nobody had operated dating? The apostolicity meant that apostles or their disciples were informed of the existence of a text. However, nobody has exhaustively listed these sacred texts and there was none administration which hold the register of all these people who said they were disciples. Saint Paul who had never met concretely Jesus alive used to call himself disciple! Finally orthodoxy means right opinion. But compared to which meanings? Who could claim to be well informed and to possess the best dogma, in a context where several Christianities abounded and where were mixed Pagan-Christians, Pagans, Gnostics and many bishoprics leaders firmly attached to their territories?
To avoid bishoprics quarrels, constant argumentation controversy and, the theologian disputes, the Roman Emperor Konstantin, who was not yet baptized, had convened the council of Nicene (Turkey), in 325, and had imposed the Creed, whose the doctrine clamed that Jesus is Son of God and God himself, "God born of God, true God born of true God": « Deo de Deo... Deo vero, de Deo vero » . However, people were much divided on the question. Church and followers did not profess their faith in the same way.
Some affirmed that Jesus has the same nature as God (homo-oussios). That means the same substance, property and quality (the Greek name "Oùσία », read ousia - oo-see'-ah , [read oussiyâ ] whose the present participle " εìναι " is said " being ").
The book of the Proverbs (8, 22), which speaks about the Wisdom, has justified that Wisdom is the principle of God and the mediator between created and uncreated things. In the New Testament, Wisdom is Christ who has preexisted to the historical Jesus: "At the beginning was the Verb, the Verb was near God and the Verb was God (Jn.1, 1); the Verb is made flesh and, he lived among us (Jn.1, 14) ". In the epistle of Colossians, "Jesus does not retain jealously the equalized rank with God " (Col.1, 15).
But other Christian communities recommended that Jesus would be rather similar to God (homoios - hom-oy'-oce [read homoyôs]). Jesus is a man with a divine appearance. He is divine, but with human appearance. The homoiousianism maintained that He was in substance "like God. The similarity or the similar is analogical. Thus, one cannot identify the similar (ontical) and the same (ontological). The difference that requires attention resides in the smallest iota in the Greek alphabet.
Finally, some communities affirmed that Jesus did not have the same identity as God. Since, he was alive, Jesus used to call God his father. He cannot call or pray himself. Short, Jesus and God would be different by nature. They would not be consubstantial. The one and the other would be dissimilar. In Aristotle terms, Jesus would be "Sumbebekos", an accident. Here is the anhomoeanism [anomeanism] thesis or the hetero-oussianism principle. Vis-à-vis the multiple confessions in Christology, the council of Nicene, under the presidency of a pagan, Emperor Konstantin, retains a formula to be recited, in order to close any debate on that subject.
Indeed, the faith taught by the participants of the Council is that people should believe that Jesus is God. But the discourse is not yet over. And there will be other councils. Half century later, in 381, the council of Constantinople has consolidated the thesis of the Trinity of God. The following were the Ephesus (431) and the Chalcedon (451) Council.
Consequently, the question one must address is the following: when Christianity makes date? When starts Christianity’s year zero? In the Middle-Age, monk Denis the Small (le Petit) has computed Jesus of Nazarene as officially born on December 25 th of the year 753 of Roma. But this calculation which was based on the 753 anniversary of the Roman Empire foundation was false. Roman prosecutor Herod, who has ordered a general population census at the time Jesus born, was dead in year (-5) before the birth of Christ. Consequently, Jesus would have been born four years before Anno Domini (Year zero), i.e. latest four years before Jesus-Christ.
Usually, one counts the beginning of a new era by starting from a great event. Some analysts have recommended to aggregate Christianity’s year zero with Emperor Konstantin’s crown inauguration, in 306. But many other thinkers have considered more judicious year 312 which has marked the Konstantin’s conversion to Christianity. Some other scholars rather support to appoint September 18 th, 324, when Licinius was defeat. However, various people admitted that February 28th, in 380, would be the good date, since it was the moment Emperor Theodosius has declared Church as official religion of the Empire. Finally, most believers were focused on year 392, when Theodosius has prohibited the paganism. But some scholars seemed more favorable to the year 395, when Theodosius died. Moreover, "Jesus has announced the kingdom of God and church has come". Church has been proclaimed as the normative institution, whereas it is only an institution between diverse institutions in the society.