7/28/2019 Crossan1

1/6

AN INVENTORY OF THE JESUS TRADITION BY CHRONOLOGICAL

STRATIFICATION

John Dominic Crossan

Used by permission

A. CHRONOLGICAL STRATIFICATION

FIRST STRATUM[30-60 CE]

1. First Letter of Paul to the Thessalonians [I Thess]. Written from Corinth in late 50 CE

(Koester, 1982:2.112).

2. Letter of Paul to the Galatians [Gal]. Written from Ephesus possibly in the winter of 52-53

CE (Koester, 1982:2.116).

3. First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians [1 Cor]. Written from Ephesus in the winter of 53-54

CE (Koester, 1982:2.121).

4. Letter of Paul to the Romans [Rom]. Written from Corinth in the winter of 55-56 CE

(Koester, 1982:2.138).

5. Gospel of Thomas I [Gos. Thom. I]. A serial collection of Jesus' sayings with limited

individual linkage by means of theme, word, or expression. Although is has several dialogues, it

has no miracles, no narrative connections, and no passion-resurrection account. It is known in

three fragmentary Greek copies from Oxyrhynchus (P. Oxy. 1, 654, 655; van Haelst ##593-595)

and in a Coptic translation (CG II,2 ) among the Nag Hammadi codices (Koester et al., 1989).

There may be at least two separate layers in it. One was composed by the 50s CE, possibly inJerusalem, under the aegis of James' authority (see Gos. Thom. 12). After his martyrdom in 62

CE, the collection and maybe also its community, migrated to Syrian Edessa. There a second

layer was added, possibly as early as the sixties or seventies, under the aegis of the Thomas

authority (see Gos. Thom. 13). The collection is independent of the intracanonical gospels

(Davies, 1983; Crossan, 1985, 1988; but especially Patterson, 1988). Those twin layers are

identified, but tentatively and experimentally, as follows: the earlier James-layer is now

discernible primarily in those units with independent attestation elsewhere and is placed in the

first stratum (Gos. Thom. I], the Thomas-layer is now discernible primarily in that which is

unique to this collection or at least to the general Thomas tradition, and is placed in the second

stratum (Gos. Thom. II]. That rather crude stratification underlines the need for a better one but it

also emphasizes how much of this collection is very, very early.

6. Egerton Gospel [Eger. Gos.]. The Egerton Gospel is known from a single codex now

separated over two locations: (a) Papyrus Egerton 2 (P. Lond. Christ 1; van Haelst #586) contains

87 damaged lines on two large fragments, one much smaller one, and a scrap; (b) Papyrus Kln

255 (Inv. 608) adds 12 lines of completion or addition to the bottom of fragment 1. The Egerton

Gospel must now be taken as presented and numbered not by Bell & Skeat (1935a;8-12; 1935b:

29-32;NTA 1.96-97; Cameron, 1982:74-75) but by Gronewald (138-142 & Plate V). He, however,

7/28/2019 Crossan1

2/6

presuming theEgerton Gospel's intracanonical dependence, changed the order of the fragments

to 1,3,2. The standard order of 1,2,3 is probably more neutral and preferable, hence the best

available edition is now that of Daniels (12-16). The codex has been dated from the early second

to the early third century but the original composition, which is independent of all the

intracanonical gospels, could be as early as the 50s CE.

7. Papyrus Vindobonensis Greek 2325 [P. Vienna G. 2325]. A tiny 7-line textfrom a 3rd century papyrus (scroll?) is commonly known as the Fayum

Fragment because it was discovered among provincial archives from the

Egyptian Fayum acquired by the Archduke Rainer for the library of the

Austro-Hungarian Empire in Vienna (van Haelst #589). The editio princeps is

either Bickell (1887) or Wessely (1946, from 1907). It is, as argued by Bickell,

Wessely, and Harnack (1889), independent of the intracanonical gospels, a fact

more evident in the Greek original than in English translations (Hennecke-

Schneemelcher-Wilson: 1.115-116; James: 25)

8. Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 1224 [P. Oxy. 1224]. Two fragments from a Greek papyrus book of

the early fourth or maybe even the late third century were discovered by B. P. Grenfell and A. S.

Hunt in 1903-4 and published by them in 1914. The pages are numbered and the thirty pages

between fragment 1 and 2 make it possible that they might not even be from the same document

(Grenfell & Hunt, 1914:1-10 & Plate I; van Haelst #587). Fragment 1 is very small but fragment 2

is large enough to indicate that it is independent of the intracanonical gospels.

9. Gospel of the Hebrews [Gos. Heb]. There are no extant fragments, it is known only from

seven patristic citations, and is independent of the intracanonical gospels (Koester, 1982:2.223-

224). Composed by the 50s CE, in Egypt, it depicted the preexistence, advent, sayings, and

resurrectional appearance of Jesus as the incarnation of divine Wisdom.

10. Sayings Gospel Q now imbedded within the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. A serial

collection of Jesus' sayings but with more compositional organization than the Gospel of

Thomas. Composed by the 50s, and possibly at Tiberias in Galilee, it contains no passion or

resurrection account but presumes the same myth of divine Wisdom as do the Gospel of Thomas

and the Gospel of the Hebrews. There may be three successive layers in its development: a

sapiential layer (1Q), an apocalyptic layer (2Q), and an introductory layer (3Q) and it is

inventoried within those three rubrics (Kloppenborg, 1987, 1988).

11. Miracles Collection now imbedded within the Gospels of Mark and John. Of the seven

miracles in John 2-9, the five in John 5,6 (two),9,11 which have Markan parallels, appear in the

same order in Mark 2,6 (two),8 and Secret Mark. Collections of Jesus' deeds, like collections of

Jesus' words, were already being composed by the 50s CE.12. Apocalyptic Scenario now imbedded in Didache 16 and Matthew 24. There is a common

apocalyptic source behind bothDid. 16:3-8 and Matt 24:10-12,30a which was not known or used

by Mark 13 (Kloppenborg, 1979).

13. Cross Gospelnow imbedded in the Gospel of Peter[Gos. Pet.]. It contained, at least, a linked

narrative of Crucifixion and Deposition in 1:1-2 & 2:5b-6:22, of Tomb and Guards in 7:25 &

8:28-9:34, and of Resurrection and Confession in 9:35-10:42 & 11:45-49. Composed by the 50s,

and possibly at Sepphoris in Galilee, it is the single source of the intracanonical passion accounts

7/28/2019 Crossan1

3/6

(Crossan, 1985, 1988). A major alternative proposal is that a single Passion Source was used

independently by Mark, John, and the Gospel of Peter(Koester, 1990:220).

SECOND STRATUM [60-80 CE]

14. Gospel of the Egyptians [Gos. Eg.]. There are no extant fragments, it is known only from six

patristic citations, and is independent of the intracanonical gospels. Its dialogue format is more

developed than that in the Gospel of Thomas (Koester, 1980b:255-256) but both contain the

same theology of celibate asceticism as necessary to restore the pre-Adamic split into male and

female (MacDonald). It was composed in Egypt, possibly by the sixties.

15. Secret Gospel of Mark [Secret Mark]. The first version of the Gospel of Mark and contained

the accounts of the Dead Man Raised in 1v20-2r11a after Mark 10:32-34 and of the Raised

Man's Family in 2r14b-216 after Mark 10:35-46a (Smith, 1973ab). This version was composed in

the early 70s but those units were immediately interpreted by libertine gnostics, proleptic

Carpocratian as it were, similar to those Paul encountered at Corinth (Crossan, 1985).

16. Gospel of Mark [Mark]. The second version of Mark expurgated those passages but left

their textual debris strewn across its text. That may well have been done, with the minimal

rewriting necessary, by the end of the 70s CE (Crossan, 1985; but see Koester, 1983).

17. Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 840 [P. Oxy. 840]. This fragmented account of a debate between

Jesus and a Pharisaic chief priest is formally more developed than the debates in the Egerton

Gospel or Mark 7, so it may be dated tentatively around the 80s (Cameron, 1982:53).

18. Gospel of Thomas II [Gos. Thom. II]. See comments earlier under Gospel of Thomas I

[Gos. Thom. I].

19. Dialogue Collection now imbedded within the Dialogue of the Savior (CG III,5 ). The

dialogues between Jesus, Judas, Matthew, and Mariam, which constitute more than half this

document, are created by expanding a collection of Jesus' sayings which is independent of theintracanonical gospels. This source is still clearly distinguishable in Dial. Sav. 124,23-127,18;

131,19-132,15; 137,3-147,22 (Pagels & Koester, 1978; Emmel, Koester, & Pagels, 1984) and

shows a more developed dialogue format than in the Gospel of Thomas or the Sayings Gospel Q

(Koester, 1980b:255-256).

20. Signs Gospelor Book of Signs now imbedded within the Gospel of John. In John 2-14 the

distinctive theology involves a combination of miracle and discourse wherein the earlier Miracles

Collection is integrated with an independent collection of the sayings of Jesus so that physical

miracles become signs pointing, through their attendant discourses, to spiritual realities. It is

independent of the three Synoptic Gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke. A more difficult

question is whether it had anything about John the Baptist and an even more difficult one iswhether it had any passion and resurrection account. If it had neither, their later presence might

be due to and dependent on the Synoptic accounts.

21. Letter to the Colossians [Col]. Written most likely not by Paul himself but posthumously by

one of his students in his name (Koester, 1982:2.261-267).

THIRD STRATUM [80-120 CE]

7/28/2019 Crossan1

4/6

22. Gospel of Matthew [Matt]. Written around 90 CE and possibly at Syrian Antioch, it used,

apart from other data, the Gospel of Mark and the Sayings Gospel Q for its pre-passion narrative,

and the Gospel of Mark and the Cross Gospel for its passion and resurrection ac-count (Crossan,

1988).

23. Gospel of Luke [Luke]. Written possibly as early as the 90s but before John 1-20 which used

its passion and resurrection account. Like the Gospel of Matthew, it used, apart from much otherdata, the Gospel of Mark and the Sayings Gospel Q for its pre-passion narrative, and the Gospel

of Mark and the Cross Gospel for its passion and resurrection ac-count (Crossan, 1988).

24. Revelation/Apocalypse of John [Rev]. Written in Asia Minor towards the end of the first

century CE by a church leader named John exiled to the island of Patmos presumably under

Domitian (Koester, 1982:2.250).

25. First Letter of Clement [1 Clem.]. Written on behalf of the Church at Rome by Clement, its

secretary, to the church at Corinth, soon after the Domitian persecution in 96-97 CE. It is

independent of the intracanonical gospels (Koester, 1957:4-23; 1982:2.287-292).

26.Epistle of Barnabas [Barn.]. Written towards the end of the first century CE, it probes the

Hebrew Scriptures not only for a deeper understanding of ritual law but especially for biblicalbases concerning the suffering and death of Jesus. It is independent of the intracanonical gospels

and indicates the prophetic interpretation from which the narrative tradition of the Cross Gospel

was created (Koester, 1957:124-158; 1982:2.276-279; Crossan, 1988).

27.Didache 1:1-3a & 2:2-16:2 [Did.]. The earliest church order was written in Syria towards the

end of the first century CE. It explains virtues and vices, rituals and prayers, offices and

functions, and is, apart from the later insertion of 1:3b-2:1 (Layton, 1968), independent of the

intracanonical gospels. Indeed, to the converse, the apocalyptic source behind Did.16:3-5 may

have been known by Mark 13 (Koester, 1957:159-241; 1982:2.158-160), or, more likely, by

Matthew 24 (Kloppenborg, 1979).

28. Shepherd of Hermas [Herm. Vis.; Herm. Man.; Herm Sim.]. Written at Rome around 100

CE, and divided into Visions, Mandates, and Similitudes, it proposes an apocalyptic ordering of

moral life. It is independent of the intracanonical gospels (Koester, 1957:242-256; 1982:2.257-

261).

29. Letter of James [Jas]. Written in Syria possibly around 100 CE, it indicates the continuing

importance of James of Jerusalem in terms of ethics and offices. It criticizes misinterpretations

of Paul's teachings (Koester 1982:2.156-157).

30. Gospel of John I [John]. The first edition of the Gospel of John was composed, very early in

the second century CE and under the pressure of Synoptic ascendancy, as a combination of the

Johannine Signs Gospel and the Synoptic traditions about the passion and resurrection. It is

dependent, but very creatively so, on the Cross Gospel and the Synoptic gospels for its passion

and resurrection account (Crossan, 1988). The earliest extant fragment of John is dated to about125 CE.

31-37.Letters of Ignatius, To the Ephesians [Ign. Eph.]; To the Magnesians [Ign. Mag.]; To the

Trallians [Ign. Trall ]; To the Romans [Ign. Rom.]; To the Philadelphians [Ign. Phil.]; To the

Smyrnaeans [Ign. Smyrn.]; To Polycarp [Ign. Pol ]. Written by Ignatius, bishop of Syrian

Antioch, from Smyrna and Troas around 110 CE, as he was being taken under guard across Asia

Minor to martyrdom at Rome. They are independent of the intracanonical gospels. (Koester,

1957:24-61; 1982.2.279-287).

7/28/2019 Crossan1

5/6

38. First Letter of Peter [1 Pet]. Written from Rome and pseudepigraphically attributed to Peter,

it was sent to encourage persecuted Christians around 112 CE in the situation known from the

letters of Pliny the Younger to Trajan (Koester, 1982:2.292-297).

39. Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians 13-14 [Pol.Phil.]. Polycarp, already bishop of Smyrna

in Ignatius' time, was martyred around 160 CE. Pol. 13-14 is an earlier letter than Pol. 1-12 and

was sent, soon after Ignatius' martyrdom, to accompany a copy of the Ignatian letters requestedby the church at Philippi (Harrison, 1936; Koester, 1957:112-123; 1982:2.306-308).

40. First Letter of John [1 John]. Interpretations, catholic against gnostic, of the Gospel of John

caused a split within the Johannine community and this letter was written to underline the

catholic reading of that text (Brown, 1979, 1982). The opposite reading may be seen in the Acts

of John 87-105 (Koester, 1982:2.192-198; Cameron, 1982:87-96).

FOURTH STRATUM [120-150 CE]

41. Gospel of John II [John]. A second edition of the Gospel of John is indicated most clearly

by the appended John 21 which underlines not only Synoptic but Petrine ascendancy. Many otheradditions such as 1:1-18: 6:51b-58; 15-17; and the Beloved Disciple passages, may also have been

added at this late stage.

42. Acts of the Apostles [Acts]. Although probably conceived, along with the Gospel of Luke, as

the second part of a two-volume writing, this part was probably written some time after its

predecessor.

43.Apocryphon of James [Ap. Jas.]. There is an intracanonically independent tradition of Jesus'

sayings, going back to the 50s CE, behind this document, but it is no longer possible to separate

them as a unified first century source. The final composition of this Nag Hammadi writing (CG

1,2 ) dates from the first half of the second century (Cameron, 1982:55-57; 1984; Williams,

1985).

44. First Letter to Timothy [1 Tim]. The three Pastoral Epistles of 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and

Titus were composed by the same author in the general Aegean area during the peaceful years

after 120 CE and were pseudepigraphically attributed to Paul. 1 Timothy is concerned with ethics

and offices as a defense against gnostic inroads (Koester, 1982.2:297-305).

45. Second Letter to Timothy [2 Tim]. Written in the format of a last will and testament, 2

Timothy was originally the last of the three Pastoral Epistles but with the same emphasis on

ethics and offices found in all three (Koester, 1982:2.297-305).

46. Second Letter of Peter [2 Pet]. Pseudepigraphically attributed to Peter, this letter, which

uses 1 Peter and Jude, was written in the second quarter of the second century CE (Koester,

1082:2.295-297).

47. Letter of Polycarp to the Philippians 1-12 [Pol.]. This section of the document was originallywritten a few decades after Pol. Phil. 13-14, around 140 CE, on the occasion of a crisis in the

church at Philippi. It is dependent on the intracanonical gospels of Matthew and Luke (Harrison,

1936; Koester, 1957:112-123; 1982:2.306-308).

48. Second Letter of Clement [2 Clem.]. A treatise, attributed to the author of1 Clement by its

manuscripts, but written around 150 CE. Dependent on the intracanonical Gospels of Matthew

and Luke but in harmonized excerpts, it may well be the earliest anti-gnostic writing known from

Egypt (Koester, 1957:62-111; 1982:2.233-236).

7/28/2019 Crossan1

6/6

49. Gospel of the Nazoreans [Gos. Naz.]. About twenty-three excerpts from an expansive

translation of the Greek Gospel of Matthew into either Aramaic or Syriac are known from

patristic citations and marginal notations in a family of thirty-six manuscripts stemming from a

"Zion Gospel" edition of about 500 CE. The translation dates from around the middle of the

second century CE (Koester, 1982:2.201-202; Cameron, 1982:97-98).

50.Gospel of the Ebionites [Gos. Eb.]. All seven excerpts from this gospel are cited byEpiphanius at the end of the fourth century CE. The text, written around the middle of the second

century CE, was dependent on a harmonized version of the Gospels of Matthew, Luke, and

possibly Mark as well (Koester, 1982:202-203; Cameron, 1982:103-104).

51.Didache 1:3b-2:1 [Did.]. An inserted section, from the middle of the second century, which

depends on the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke and which carefully and rhetorically

harmonizes their versions of specific Jesus' sayings (Layton, 1968).

52. Gospel of Peter [Gos. Pet.]. Extant middle-second-century CE text is redacted from the

Cross Gospel and intracanonical units such as Joseph and Burial in 6:23-24, Women and Youth

in 12:50-13:57, and Disciples and Apparition in14:60. Those new units are redactionally prepared

for by, respectively, Request for Burial in 2:3-5a, Arrival of Youth in 11:43-44, and Action ofDisciples in 7:26-27 & 14:58-59. It indicates, as do the two editions of the Gospel of John, the

Synoptic and Petrine ascendancy within the western Syrian traditions (Crossan, 1988).