Did Christianity Appear in an Enlightened Age?
The Apotheosis of Romulus by Gabriel de Saint-Aubin, mid-18th century.
From Augustine's City of God:
Let us here recite the passage in which Tully [Cicero] expresses his astonishment that the apotheosis of Romulus should have been credited. I shall insert his words as they stand:
“It is most worthy of remark in Romulus, that other men who are said to have become gods lived in less educated ages, when there was a greater propensity to the fabulous, and when the uninstructed were easily persuaded to believe anything. But the age of Romulus was barely six hundred years ago, and already literature and science had dispelled the errors that attach to an uncultured age.”
And a little after he says of the same Romulus words to this effect:
“From this we may perceive that Homer had flourished long before Romulus, and that there was now so much learning in individuals, and so generally diffused an enlightenment, that scarcely any room was left for fable. For antiquity admitted fables, and sometimes even very clumsy ones; but this age [of Romulus] was sufficiently enlightened to reject whatever had not the air of truth.”
Thus one of the most learned men, and certainly the most eloquent, M. Tullius Cicero, says that it is surprising that the divinity of Romulus was believed in, because the times were already so enlightened that they would not accept a fabulous fiction. But who believed that Romulus was a god except Rome, which was itself small and in its infancy? Then afterwards it was necessary that succeeding generations should preserve the tradition of their ancestors; that, drinking in this superstition with their mother’s milk, the state might grow and come to such power that it might dictate this belief, as from a point of vantage, to all the nations over whom its sway extended. - City of God 22.6
Augustine suggests that the people of Jesus' time were far more sophisticated than those who first worshiped Romulus.
Is this true? Was the apostolic era free of credulity?
The synoptic gospels report that it was widely believed that Elijah had returned to earth and that both John the Baptist and the prophet Jeremiah had risen from the dead and were seen performing miracles.
In the Acts of the Apostles, we are told that Simon Magus was worshiped in Samaria, that Paul was called a god on Malta and that both Paul and Barnabas received divine honors in Lystra, where they were thought to be Zeus and Hermes.
From first century historians and early church fathers we learn that some Romans and Parthians believed that the late Emperor Nero had either risen from the dead, or would return to reclaim his throne at a future date.
In the still more enlightened 2nd century, thousands followed the failed messiah Simon Bar-Kochba – the “Son of a Star” – in his attempt to recapture Jerusalem, though defeat meant certain death at the hands of the Romans. Meanwhile, Simon Magus and Helen of Tyre were worshiped in Rome, Apollonius in Asia Minor, Antinous in Egypt, Glycon in Greece and Apsethus in Libya. All of these individuals were mortal human beings, except for Glycon, which was a snake wearing a wig.
So one could argue that, at the time of the apotheosis of Jesus, becoming a god was easier than ever. Philosophers, magicians, slaves, reptiles...why not carpenters?
The earliest post-apostolic Christian document still extant is a letter from Clement of Rome, to the church at Corith, written at the close of the first century, in which he exhorts the Corinthians to have faith that there will be a physical resurrection on Judgment Day. In so doing, he introduces two arguments of interest for their assertions and their omissions.
Clement's first remarkably pagan proof of resurrection: agriculture.
Let us consider, beloved, how the Lord continually proves to us that there shall be a future resurrection, of which He has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the first-fruits by raising Him from the dead. Let us contemplate, beloved, the resurrection which is at all times taking place. Day and night declare to us a resurrection. The night sinks to sleep, and the day arises; the day [again] departs, and the night comes on. Let us behold the fruits [of the earth], how the sowing of grain takes place. The sower goes forth, and casts it into the ground; and the seed being thus scattered, though dry and naked when it fell upon the earth, is gradually dissolved. Then out of its dissolution the mighty power of the providence of the Lord raises it up again, and from one seed many arise and bring forth fruit. - Clement 1:24
Clement's second remarkably pagan proof of resurrection: the phoenix.
Let us consider that wonderful sign [of the resurrection] which takes place in Eastern lands, that is, in Arabia and the countries round about. There is a certain bird which is called a phoenix. This is the only one of its kind, and lives five hundred years. And when the time of its dissolution draws near that it must die, it builds itself a nest of frankincense, and myrrh, and other spices, into which, when the time is fulfilled, it enters and dies. But as the flesh decays a certain kind of worm is produced, which, being nourished by the juices of the dead bird, brings forth feathers. Then, when it has acquired strength, it takes up that nest in which are the bones of its parent, and bearing these it passes from the land of Arabia into Egypt, to the city called Heliopolis. And, in open day, flying in the sight of all men, it places them on the altar of the sun, and having done this, hastens back to its former abode. The priests then inspect the registers of the dates, and find that it has returned exactly as the five hundredth year was completed. - Clement 1:25
Note that Clement, who was supposedly a personal acquaintance of the late apostle Peter, resorts to these heathen evidences of resurrection without mentioning or even hinting at the New Testament reanimations of Lazarus, Tabitha, Eutychus, or the countless dead bodies who rose from their graves and were "seen by many" on the day Jesus was crucified. The evidence suggests that these stories - attributed to Matthew, Luke and John, were productions of a later time and that neither Jesus nor Peter nor Paul raised anyone from the dead.
As to the fable that there are Antipodes, that is to say, men on the opposite side of the earth, where the sun rises when it sets to us, men who walk with their feet opposite ours, that is on no ground credible. And, indeed, it is not affirmed that this has been learned by historical knowledge, but by scientific conjecture, on the ground that the earth is suspended within the concavity of the sky, and that it has as much room on the one side of it as on the other: hence they say that the part which is beneath must also be inhabited. But they do not remark that, although it be supposed or scientifically demonstrated that the world is of a round and spherical form, yet it does not follow that the other side of the earth is bare of water; nor even, though it be bare, does it immediately follow that it is peopled. For Scripture, which proves the truth of its historical statements by the accomplishment of its prophecies, gives no false information; and it is too absurd to say, that some men might have taken ship and traversed the whole wide ocean, and crossed from this side of the world to the other, and that thus even the inhabitants of that distant region are descended from that one first man. - City of God, 16.9
# # #
