Rivalries in the Early Christian Church History
Rivalries within the early Christian church emerged from various sources, including theological disagreements, administrative disputes, and personal ambitions. Even in its earliest days, the Christian community, initially known as "disciples," "believers," or "saints" before being called "Christians" around A.D. 43 in Antioch [2], experienced internal tensions.
One of the earliest recorded rivalries stemmed from administrative issues. As the number of disciples in Jerusalem multiplied, a "murmuring" arose among the Hellenists against the Hebrews. The Hellenists complained that their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food [5]. This dispute, though seemingly logistical, highlighted potential ethnic or cultural divisions within the nascent church. The apostles addressed this by appointing seven men, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, to oversee this daily service, allowing the apostles to focus on prayer and the ministry of the word [5].
Theological differences also quickly led to significant rivalries. The question of whether Gentile converts needed to be circumcised and observe the Mosaic Law became a major point of contention. This issue prompted the Jerusalem Council, where apostles and elders, including Peter and James, deliberated on the matter [8]. The council ultimately decided that Gentile believers were not required to be circumcised, a decision communicated through letters carried by figures like Judas and Silas [8]. This resolution helped to prevent a schism between Jewish and Gentile Christians, but the underlying tension regarding the relationship between the old covenant and the new persisted in various forms.
The New Testament itself provides evidence of rivalries and contentions. The Apostle John, for instance, mentions Diotrephes, "who loveth to have the preeminence" (3 John 9) [9]. This desire for leadership and authority was present even among the twelve apostles, who sometimes contended over "who should be the greatest" [9]. Charles Hodge notes that the assumption of priestly functions by the Christian ministry was an early corruption, contributing significantly to the power of the papacy [9].
As the church grew, so did the diversity of opinions, leading to further divisions. Tertullian observed that while Christians were initially few and held similar opinions, "when they grew to be a great multitude, they were divided and separated, each wishing to have his own individual party" [4]. This fragmentation was seen by some as a fulfillment of their original intent [4]. The early church's doctrine regarding sin, for example, was initially stated in general terms, with more explicit and discrete theological doctrines developing later [3].
Heresies and heterodox teachings also fueled rivalries. The term "Antichrist," meaning an adversary to Christ [1], points to figures or movements that opposed core Christian beliefs. While not explicitly a rivalry within the church, the struggle against such external or internal opposition shaped the church's identity and doctrine. For example, the deification of Mary, which became a significant point of contention in later centuries, was not an idea present in the early church, though an "undercurrent of opposition" to it became more apparent during controversies like that over the immaculate conception [7].
The apostle Paul's ministry, particularly his focus on the Gentiles, also created a dynamic that could be perceived as a rivalry with those who emphasized Peter's apostleship to the Jews. John Calvin argues that to firmly establish the Spirit among believers, "we ought to pay more regard to the apostleship of Paul than to that of Peter, since the Holy Spirit, in allotting them different provinces, destined Peter for the Jews and Paul for us" [6]. This highlights how different emphases in apostolic ministry could become points of discussion or even contention.
The early church, therefore, was not a monolithic entity but a dynamic community grappling with internal disagreements and external pressures, which often manifested as rivalries over doctrine, practice, and leadership.
Sources
- Hitchcock's Bible Names “Hitchcock's Bible Names: Antichrist — an adversary to Christ”
- Smith's Bible Dictionary “Smith's Bible Dictionary: Christian — The disciples, we are told, (Acts 11:26) were first called Christians at Antioch on the Orontes, somewhere about A.D. 43. They were known to each other as, and were among themselves called, brethren, (Acts 15:1,23; 1 Corinthians 7:12) disciples, (Acts 9:26; 11:29) believers, (Acts 5:14) saints, (Romans 8:27; 15:25) The name "Christian," which, in the only other cases where it appears in the New Testament, (Acts 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16) is used contemptuously, could not have been applied by the early disciples to themselves, but was imposed upon them by the Gen”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 40: § 3. The Doctrine of the Early Church . The theories already considered are called philosophical, either because they concern the metaphysical nature of sin, or because 150 they are founded on some philosophical principle. The moral at theological doctrines on the subject are so designated because they are founded on what are assumed to be the teachings of our moral nature or of the word of God. So far as the early Church is concerned, the doctrine respecting sin was stated only in general terms. In almost all cases the explicit and discr”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — CHAP. X.: But observe what he alleges as a proof of his statement: "Christians at first were few in number, and held the same opinions; but when they grew to be a great multitude, they were divided and separated, each wishing to have his own individual party:[4] for this was their object from the beginning." That Christians at first were few in number, in comparison with the multitudes who subsequently became Christian, is undoubted; and yet, all things considered, they were not so very few.[5] For what stirred up the envy of the Je”
- Acts (Nonconformist/Puritan) “Matthew Henry on Acts 6:1: Having seen the church's struggles with her enemies, and triumphed with her in her victories, we now come to take a view of the administration of her affairs at home; and here we have, I. An unhappy disagreement among some of the church-members, which might have been of ill consequence, but was prudently accommodated and taken up in time (Act 6:1): When the number of the disciples (for so Christians were at first called, learners of Christ) was multiplied to many thousands in Jerusalem, there arose a murmuring. 1. It does our hearts good to find that the number of th”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 88: Spirit may be firmly established among us, we ought to pay more regard to the apostleship of Paul than to that of Peter, since the Holy Spirit, in allotting them different provinces, destined Peter for the Jews and Paul for us. Let the Romanists, therefore, seek their primacy somewhere else than in the word of God, which gives not the least foundation for it. 16. Let us now come to the Primitive Church, that it may also appear that our opponents plume themselves on its support, not less falsely and unadvisedly than on the testimony”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 43: Christ. The Virgin Mary is to her worshippers what Christ is to us. She is the object of all religious affections; the ground of confidence; and the source whence all the blessings of salvation are expected and sought. There was, however, always an undercurrent of opposition to this deification of the mother of our Lord. This became more apparent in the controversy on the question of her immaculate conception. This idea was never broached in the early Church. The first form in which the doctrine appeared was, that from the fact that God s”
- Acts (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Acts 15:23: And wrote letters by them after this manner,.... Not that they made use of them as their amanuenses, to write their letters for them; but being written they put them into their hands, and sent them by them, and they were written in the following form: the apostles, and elders, and brethren; which belonged to, or were members of the church at Jerusalem; they are severally set in their proper place and order: the apostles, Peter, and James, and John, and it may be some others first; for these God had set in the first place in the church; then the elders, or preachers o”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 89: fact than that the assumption of a priestly character and functions by the Christian ministry, was one of the earliest corruptions of the Church. And nothing is plainer than that to this assumption the power of the papacy is in a large measure to be attributed. And as to the desire of preeminence, we know that there was, even among the twelve, a contention who should be the greatest. The Apostle John ( 3 Epistle 9 ) speaks of Diotrephes, “who loveth to have the preeminence;” and in all the Epistles there is evidence of the struggle for as”