Oral History Release Form: Fill & Download for Free

I present to you one of the most maligned modern English utterances of the millennium:“YOLO”From its unassuming origins as a clothing brand in 2004 to its explosion into a certified cliche after Drake used it in his 2011 hip-hop single “The Motto,” “YOLO” has experienced the lexical equivalent of a rags-to-riches-to-rags story in its short but fascinating history.The phrase “You Only Live Once” is not new by any stretch. In fact, there was a film of that name released way back in 1937, though I don’t think it’s fair to place blame for the word on the film’s creators. The phrase itself is not the problem; it’s the foul acronym that sprung forth from it like a disgusting linguistic Mini Me that we hate.Drake was the first person to take the perfectly reasonable adage, chew it up, and regurgitate its current abhorrent form to a worldwide audience. His track “The Motto” solidified YOLO’s celebrity status for sure, and he even went so far as to call out businesses that were using “his word” in their advertising and demand payment for what he believed was his intellectual property. But according to the internet bloodhounds at Know Your Meme, the original “YOLO” predates Drizzy’s use by almost a decade.The indie band The Strokes produced a song called “You Only Live Once” in 2006, and to promote the track, they created a promotional campaign called “Operation YOLO” - beating Drake to the punch by almost 5 years. Between The Strokes’ song and “The Motto,” the word appeared in Urban Dictionary, on YouTube, in a life coaching website address, and even on an underground weather website. [1]But still, none of these can be said to be the original. As far as we know, the first public, mainstream utterance of “YOLO” belongs to Adam Mesh. He was a reality show star on NBC’s The Average Joe, and he launched a clothing line using the acronym on March 20, 2004.[2]So if we want to blame anyone for being the originator and coiner of the word to a population that would spread its use, that distinction likely belongs to Mr. Mesh and his clothing line.But it was a wild ride for YOLO, that’s for sure. For a time, we saw it everywhere. It was even in the running to be Oxford’s “Word of the Year” for 2012, but even at that point, YOLO’s star was fading. Just a year after Drake’s song catapulted the word to the forefront of western pop culture, it was already losing favor, going from “catchy new slang to ‘dangerous’ youth motto”[3] in just a few short months.With all the energy and love and hate surrounding the word, there’s no question that YOLO has been a unique, 21st century lexical abomination. For the moment, it seems to have evaporated into the aether just as mysteriously as it materialized, its only remaining vestiges lurking in early 2010’s hiphop playlists on Spotify and eternally marring the skin of late 20-somethings who got a little too drunk on Spring Break and decided to have Drizzy’s sage wisdom indelibly etched on their necks and inner thighs.Will it ever return? What’s the next hot topic in youth life slang? Only time will tell.Until then, remember:You Only Have A Single Life Available To YouYOHASLATY, everyone.Footnotes[1] YOLO[2] Adam Mesh - Wikipedia[3] An Oral History of YOLO, the Word That Lived Too Long

Pocahontas | Biography, History, & Cultural LegacyThanks for the A2A @Sean KernanPocahontas has left an indelible impression that has endured for more than 400 years. Pocahontas might be a household name, but the true story of her short but powerful life has been buried in myths that have persisted since the 17th century. The Pocahontas we think we all know, is a melded image of false historical facts and creative first person accounts, with popular depictions from literature, theater and moving pictures. Not much is known about this memorable woman. What is known was written by others, as none of her thoughts or feelings were ever recorded. Specifically, her story has been told through written historical accounts and, most recently, through the sacred oral history of the Mattaponi.[1]To start with, Pocahontas wasn’t even her true name. Born about 1596, her real name was Amonute, and she also had the more private name Matoaka.[2] Pocahontas was her nickname, which depending on who you ask means “playful one" or “ill-behaved child.”[3] She was the favorite daughter of Wahunsenaca (Chief Powhatan), the mamanatowick (paramount chief) of the Powhatan Chiefdom.[4] At its height, the Powhatan Chiefdom had a population of about 25,000 and included more than 30 Algonquian speaking tribes - each with its own werowance (chief). The Powhatan Indians called their homeland "Tsenacomoco,” the area that the early English settlers would claim as Jamestown, Virginia.[5]Spotlight: TsenacomocoAs the daughter of the paramount chief Powhatan, custom dictated that Pocahontas would have accompanied her mother, who would have gone to live in another village, after her birth (Powhatan still cared for them).[6] However, nothing is written by the English about Pocahontas' mother. Some historians have theorized that she died during childbirth, so it is possible that Pocahontas did not leave like most of her half-siblings.[7] Either way, Pocahontas would have eventually returned to live with her father Powhatan and her half-siblings once she was weaned. [8] Her mother, if still living, would then have been free to remarry.Pocahontas was an extremely talented and lively 10-year-old girl when Jamestown was founded in 1607. Years later—after no one was able to dispute the facts—John Smith wrote about how she, the beautiful daughter of a powerful native leader, rescued him, an English adventurer, from being executed by her father. Her “wit, and spirit” made her stand out.[9] Smith's version, in his 1624 Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles, describes his first meeting with Pocahontas when he was captured a few weeks after the first colonists’ arrival in the area.[10] He was brought before the Great Powhatan, where he encountered men with clubs ready, he thought, to beat out his brains. Suddenly Pocahontas intervened and put her head on his. Smith wrote that she risked her own life to save his. Eventually after questioning him, they released him. But while he was a prisoner among the tribe, Smith spent time with Pocahontas and that they were teaching each other some basic aspects of their languages. There are surviving notes written in Smith's handwriting like:"Tell Pocahontas to bring me three baskets." Or "Pocahontas has many white beads."[11]Mattaponi sacred oral tradition provides an alternative scenario, one that is corroborated by modern historians. When the English arrived with weaponry equivalent to that of the Spanish, Wahunsenaca desired to have them as an allied tribe within the Powhatan nation. [12] According to oral history, Wahunsenaca truly liked Smith. He offered Smith a position to be a werowance of the English colonists, to be the leader of the English within the Powhatan nation.[13] In addition, Wahunsenaca told Smith that the English could live and settle in a more habitable place in the Powhatan nation than on Jamestown Island.[14]Captain John Smith - Historic Jamestowne Part of Colonial National Historical Park (U.S. National Park Service)Although Smith alleged years later that Pocahontas saved his life during a four-day ceremony in the process of his being made a Powhatan werowance, his life was never in danger.[15] His life did not need saving. Why would the Powhatan want to kill a person they were initiating to be a werowance. By Smith's own admission, Wahunsenaca gave Smith his word that Smith would be released in four days.[16] Smith's fears was either a figment of his own imagination or an embellishment to dramatize his narrativeModern scholars think Pocahontas was probably playing a scripted role in some kind of adoption ceremony. The quiakros played an integral part in such a ceremony. [17] Children, male or female, were not allowed to attend. Pocahontas would not have been in the ceremony to throw herself on top of Smith to save him because the quiakros would not have allowed Pocahontas to be there.[18] After being initiated as a werowance over the English colony, not only was Smith now considered a member of Powhatan society, but the entire English colony were considered members.[19] True to his word, released Smith after the four days transpired. Afterward, Powhatan called Smith his son.In January 1609, Smith made a detour during his rounds of attempting to secure provisions for the Jamestown fort by going to Werowocomoco, without giving prior notice.[20] Virginia was deep in the worst drought in 770 years, and food was scarce.[21] Powhatan carriers were sent out to notify Chief Powhatan Wahunsenaca. Wahunsenaca put aside what he was doing and returned to Werowocomoco. (Mattaponi oral history does not say precisely where he was at that time).[22] There are numerous places where he could have been; away for business, meeting with other chiefs in another village, hunting, or he could have been away for spiritual renewal, such as going to the Uttamussac Temple.[23]House of Chief Powhatan 1607 (Powhatan – Wikipedija)Once again there is ambiguity concerning Smith's story of the second time Pocahontas intervened and saved his life. Smith wrote that:In the middle of the night, as the English slept, Pocahontas, Powhatan’s “dearest jewel and daughter, in that dark night came through the irksome woods” to warn Smith of a plot to kill them.[24]. Smith tried to reward her with “such things as she delighted in,” but with “tears running down her cheeks,” she said if she were seen with English presents, “she were but dead.”[25]According to Mattaponi sacred oral history, Smith's claim of Pocahontas having saved – or, in this case, warned – him do not seem possible within the cultural standards of seventeenth-century Powhatan society. Pocahontas warning Smith in the night implies that Pocahontas, a young girl, was capable of slipping out in the cold night past all adult supervision.[26] According to Mattaponi sacred oral history, this is unlikely. Powhatan children were watched closely and learned discipline early in life.[27] Pocahontas, being the favorite daughter of Wahunsenaca, was watched even more closely than other children.Smith wrote that Wahunsenaca had put a death warrant on him.[28] If this was so, why did Smith then travel deeper into Powhatan territory to the Pamunkey villages the next morning instead of returning to Jamestown? Either Smith was so confident in his ability to defend himself from the Powhatan or there was no reasonable threat to his life, which is the position of Mattaponi sacred oral history. The Powhatan were not trying to kill Smith.In hindsight, knowing Mattaponi oral history, the other English colonists may have been jealous of Smith's close and powerful relationship with the Powhatan paramount chief.[29] Wahunsenaca was unaware of tensions among the English colonists and their disdain for Smith. Instead, Wahunsenaca and the quiakros had perceived Smith as the leader of the English. [30] As such, making him the werowance (chief) of the English should not have been a problem; however, the offer may have escalated political tensions between Smith and his countrymen.“Starving Time”: Cannibalism in Jamestown ColonyAfter this incident, Pocahontas began visiting Jamestown with a group of Powhatan’s envoys, and her presence signaled that they came in peace.[31] The English learned, many years later, that Pocahontas was only a nickname. Her real name, Matoaka, had been concealed for fear the English could do her harm if they knew it.[32] During this early period, when Powhatan was getting tools and weapons from the colony in exchange for badly needed food, colonial leaders presented Powhatan with a newly-arrived boy, 13-year-old Thomas Savage, and Powhatan gave a young man named Namontack in return.[33] Such exchanges were common in relationships in the region; the boys could learn the other side’s language and customs and serve as go-betweens in the future. Pocahontas was there to help Thomas adjust to his new life.Powhatan moved his capital farther west to Orapax, a location much harder for the English to reach, and Pocahontas quit visiting the fort.[34] Thomas Savage moved with the Powhatans, and was soon joined by another boy, 14-year-old Henry Spelman.[35] Everything changed while they were at Orapax, Powhatan’s new capital. Henry absconded to join a friendlier chief on the Potomac and Pocahontas intervened to save his life when her father sent men to bring him back.[36] Thomas was sent back to Jamestown, severing his last ties with the colony.A 1630 map of Virginia; written across the middle is the name “Powhatan.” (Powhatan: The Powerful Native American Chief and His Kingdom)Pocahontas had her coming of age ceremony, (called a huskanasquaw for girls), which symbolized that she was eligible for courtship and marriage.[37] This ceremony took place annually and boys and girls aged twelve to fourteen took part. Since her mother was dead, her older sister Mattachanna oversaw the huskanasquaw, during which Wahunsenaca's daughter officially changed her name to Pocahontas.[38] Powhatan decided it was time for Pocahontas to enter adult life, so she married a warrior named Kocoum.[39] This first marriage produced her first son, whose ancestors survive today.Little was heard from Orapax for a while. Then, toward the end of 1612, Capt. Samuel Argall was, as usual, looking for food. As he entered the Potomac, he heard rumors that Pocahontas was visiting there and he made up his mind, “to possess myself of her by any stratagem that I could use.”[40] His plan was to exchange her for English men held by Powhatan. He forced the Patawomekes, the people who had sheltered Henry Spelman after he left Orapax, to trick her into going on to his ship and sailed away with her, so 14-year-old Pocahontas returned to Jamestown as a prisoner. [41] Jamestown’s leaders soon discarded the plan of using her in a prisoner exchange and instead now saw her as their key to success.John RolfeAt Jamestown, a young puritan minister named Alexander Whitaker instructed her about Christianity,[42] and a man named John Rolfe began to fall in love with her. Sometime in the spring of 1614 Pocahontas “renounced publicly her country Idolatry, openly confessed her Christian faith, [and] was, as she desired, baptized.” [43] Colonist Ralph Hamor announced this in his 1615 book, A True Discourse of the Present State of Virginia; this publication included a letter from Gov. Sir Thomas Dale with exactly the same wording, stressing that her conversion was voluntary.[44]Pocahontas did in fact make the crucial contribution to Virginia’s success, but in a way that completely surprised everyone. Colonists had been trying to grow tobacco for years, but without success.[45] Now suddenly, with Pocahontas present, John Rolfe succeeded in growing a crop Europeans would buy. Tobacco culture required very different techniques from European crops, and women were the agriculturalists in Chesapeake Algonquian society, so she was the one who understood both the crop and the environment.[46] Tobacco transformed Virginia from a money drain to an economic success as smoking went from a pastime for the elite few in Europe to something everyone could afford.In 1616, Pocahontas, baptized as "Rebecca," married John Rolfe. Shortly thereafter, Thomas Rolfe was born and the Virginia Company decided to bring Pocahontas and her son to London to show off their success.[47] They arrived in late spring 1616, and she was presented as visiting royalty. Pocahontas was received at the Royal Court and in an elaborate ceremony by the Bishop of London, Sir John King.[48] But the rapidly growing city of London was badly polluted — both its air and water. While on the ship on its return to Virginia, Pocahontas and her husband dined with Captain Argall. Shortly after, Pocahontas became very ill, began convulsing and died as the ship pulled into Gravesend.[49] She died possibly of pneumonia or tuberculosis (or poison as believed by fellow tribesmen) and was buried at St. George's Church on March 21, 1617.[50] Baby Thomas was also sickly and John left him to be brought up by his brother in Norfolk, for fear he would not survive the long ocean voyage.[51] Pocahontas’ son would be her greatest legacy.Thomas Rolfe - WikipediaDespite her short life, Pocahontas was a key figure in the beginnings of English America. And it was her intelligence and willingness to take risks that made her so. The narrative of Pocahontas turning her back on her own people and allying with the English, thereby finding common ground between the two cultures, has endured for centuries.[52] But in actuality, Pocahontas’ life was much different than how Smith or mainstream culture depicts it. It’s even disputed whether or not Pocahontas, age 11 or 12, even rescued the mercantile soldier and explorer at all, as Smith might have misinterpreted what was actually a ritual ceremony or even just lifted the tale from a popular Scottish ballad, “Young Beichan" or Lord Bateman and the Turkish king's daughter.[53]That story that Pocahontas was head-over-heels in love with John Smith has lasted for generations. It began with Smith's own narrative then it died, but was born again in the early 1800s when Americans sought nationalist stories.[54] It has continued in one form or another until today. It has been so popular—not among Native Americans, but among people of the dominant culture—because it’s very flattering to Caucasian populations. The idea is she is a ‘good Indian.’ [55] She admires the white man, admires Christianity, admires the culture, wants to have peace, is willing to live among these people rather than her own people and marry him rather than one of her own. That whole idea makes white American culture feel good about their history—they haven't wronged Native Americans, they were helping and the ‘good’ ones appreciated it.[56]That is very, very far from a reflection of the real historical experience. The actual history of what these tribes experienced is sobering, forcing one to reckon with the pain and loss Native Americans experienced over the last five generations or so.Pocahontas adapted to so many difficult situations, in a world so different from the one in which she’d grown up, and always found a way to succeed. Representatives from the Pamunkey tribe of Virginia[57] , the descendants of Pocahontas, paint a picture of a spunky, cartwheeling Pocahontas who grew up to be a clever and brave young woman, serving as a translator, ambassador and leader in her own right in the face of European power.Footnotes[1] https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.389.4379%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ved=2ahUKEwjs1LH7gr7qAhVCB50JHSS2Ap8QFjASegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw2AltCK5EQ5pzuYl4M3VCtZ&cshid=1594223958196[2] Amonute Matoaka (Powhatan) Rolfe (abt.1596-1617)[3] Pocahontas: Her Life and Legend - Historic Jamestowne Part of Colonial National Historical Park (U.S. National Park Service)[4] The Pocahontas Archive - Controversy[5] A People and a Nation: A History of the United States, Volume 1: To 1877, Brief[6] Pocahontas and the Powhatan Dilemma[7] Pocahontas[8] What roles did men, women, and children have in Powhatan society? - History Is Fun[9] Pocahontas[10] John Smith, 1580-1631. The Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles: With the Names of the Adventurers, Planters, and Governours From Their First Beginning Ano: 1584. To This Present 1624. With the Procedings of Those Severall Colonies and the Accidents That Befell Them in All Their Journyes and Discoveries. Also the Maps and Descriptions of All Those Countryes, Their Commodities, People, Government, Customes, and Religion Yet Knowne. Divided Into Sixe Bookes. By Captaine Iohn Smith, Sometymes Governour in Those Countryes & Admirall of New England[11] John Smith, 1580-1631. The Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles: With the Names of the Adventurers, Planters, and Governours From Their First Beginning Ano: 1584. To This Present 1624. With the Procedings of Those Severall Colonies and the Accidents That Befell Them in All Their Journyes and Discoveries. Also the Maps and Descriptions of All Those Countryes, Their Commodities, People, Government, Customes, and Religion Yet Knowne. Divided Into Sixe Bookes. By Captaine Iohn Smith, Sometymes Governour in Those Countryes & Admirall of New England[12] The Mattaponi Oral Tradition[13] Pocahontas: Separating Fact From Fiction About the Native American[14] The Mattaponi Oral Tradition[15] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/1998/03/11/the-adventures-of-john-smith/6f6515e3-935b-4c0d-8f8c-7c2b2743cb74/[16] The Mattaponi Oral Tradition[17] The Pocahontas Archive - Controversy[18] What roles did men, women, and children have in Powhatan society? - History Is Fun[19] True Story of Pocahontas[20] The Atlantic Monthly[21] Extreme Droughts Played Major Role In Tragedies At Jamestown, "Lost Colony"[22] The Mattaponi Oral Tradition[23] The Atlantic Monthly[24] True Story of Pocahontas[25] John Smith, 1580-1631. The Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles: With the Names of the Adventurers, Planters, and Governours From Their First Beginning Ano: 1584. To This Present 1624. With the Procedings of Those Severall Colonies and the Accidents That Befell Them in All Their Journyes and Discoveries. Also the Maps and Descriptions of All Those Countryes, Their Commodities, People, Government, Customes, and Religion Yet Knowne. Divided Into Sixe Bookes. By Captaine Iohn Smith, Sometymes Governour in Those Countryes & Admirall of New England[26] What roles did men, women, and children have in Powhatan society? - History Is Fun[27] https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/08/03/powhatan-his-people-american-indians-that-jamestowns-settlers-shoved-aside/[28] John Smith, 1580-1631. The Generall Historie of Virginia, New-England, and the Summer Isles: With the Names of the Adventurers, Planters, and Governours From Their First Beginning Ano: 1584. To This Present 1624. With the Procedings of Those Severall Colonies and the Accidents That Befell Them in All Their Journyes and Discoveries. Also the Maps and Descriptions of All Those Countryes, Their Commodities, People, Government, Customes, and Religion Yet Knowne. Divided Into Sixe Bookes. By Captaine Iohn Smith, Sometymes Governour in Those Countryes & Admirall of New England[29] King Philip's War: The History and Legacy of America's Forgotten Conflict (Revised Edition)[30] True Story of Pocahontas[31] Pocahontas: Separating Fact From Fiction About the Native American[32] The True Story of Pocahontas[33] JOURNEYS: The British Teenager Left Behind to Live with the Indians in 1608 | Secrets of the Eastern Shore[34] Lost City of Powhatan[35] Henry Spelman. Relation of Virginia Travels and Works of John Smith President of Virginia, and Admiral of New England, 1580-1631 President of Virginia, and Admiral of New England, 1580-1631[36] ‘Pocahontas and the English Boys’ and ‘Relation of Virginia’ Review: The Go-Betweens[37] True Story of Pocahontas[38] The True Story of Pocahontas - Wikipedia[39] Pocahontas' First Marriage: The Powhatan Side of the Story[40] British Captain Samuel Argall kidnapped Native American princess Pocahontas at Passapatanzy, Virginia today in 1613 to ransom her for English prisoners held by her father, the Powhatan Chief Wahunsonacock. Now WE know em[41] British Captain Samuel Argall kidnapped Native American princess Pocahontas at Passapatanzy, Virginia today in 1613 to ransom her for English prisoners held by her father, the Powhatan Chief Wahunsonacock. Now WE know em[42] Pocahontas' Pastor[43] A True Discourse of the Present Estate of Virginia A True Discourse of the Present State of Virginia[44] https://blogs.loc.gov/law/2011/06/the-devil-and-thomas-dale/[45] The Chesapeake Bay and Our Native American Heritage[46] Pocahontas and the English Boys[47] The Enduring Legacy of the Pocahontas Myth[48] The Full Story of Pocahontas Is Rarely Told. Here's What We're Missing[49] Pocahontas: Her Life and Legend - Historic Jamestowne Part of Colonial National Historical Park (U.S. National Park Service)[50] Pocahontas in England[51] Thomas Rolfe - Wikipedia[52] The true story of Pocahontas: the woman who betrayed her people out of love?[53] Native Women's History in Eastern North America Before 1900[54] The True Story of Pocahontas: Historical Myths Versus Sad Reality[55] True Story of Pocahontas[56] Pocahontas as a Traitor: For one child, the story of Pocahontas inspired pride — and anger[57] Pamunkey Indian Tribe

Pre-Constantinian or early Roman Christianity was an interesting time and place. Shortly after Jesus spent forty days proving to everyone who had followed him that he was alive and not a ghost or a dream or a pretender, talking to them, walking with them, eating with them and showing them his healed wounds, he moved on into the next dimension we call Heaven. The disciples didn't go along for that ride. They were still here for various lengths of time—doing the work Jesus gave them to do: preaching and teaching about him, traveling and spreading the word. And they took the time to record their experiences.From what we know, Matthew probably wrote his gospel first. Bishop Papias was one of the early church fathers and he testifies to this. Papias lived at the end of the first century and beginning of the second, wrote a four volume history of everything he could find from everyone he could talk to about Jesus. We only have a few scraps quoted in other works, but what he says is significant. There is no legitimate reason not to accept it.Papias says Matthew was the designated note taker while Jesus was alive and teaching. As a former Levite, Matthew probably knew Hebrew—the sacred language—as well as the Aramaic they all spoke everyday, so the task was given to him to record the words of Jesus as they traveled around. As an itinerant preacher, Jesus probably used a lot of the same material over and over as they went from place to place. The Apostles may have heard slightly varied versions of the same parables and instructions many times. And oral history was still being practiced in Israel of the first century. Oral history is not at all like the game of telephone; oral history is repeated and memorized and as orality studies of the last decades have shown, gets set into a form that doesn’t vary much very early in the process.Matthew’s notes and memories were recorded early—perhaps as early as the 40’s A.D.— into a gospel in Hebrew originally. Papias says he wrote it before leaving Palestine to spread the gospel, and that was probably ten to twelve years after Jesus died. Matthew’s gospel contains interior evidence that it was written when the church was still fully Jewish. He includes references to Jewish holidays and laws and customs and gives no explanation of them, but assumes his audience understands. That Jewish exclusivity didn’t last long.Mark on the other hand, records the memories of Peter, and he must have used Matthew as a reference as well, abstracting the parts Peter remembered, because they duplicate each other somewhat. Mark is described as Peter’s translator who accompanied him to Rome when he went to spread the gospel there. Mark’s gospel is probably written for those Roman Gentile Christians; he does explain Jewish practices as though assuming his readers would not understand.Papias says John wrote his gospel when he was an old man, and since we believe John lived till about 100 A.D., the late dates that are common for that gospel are probably correct. The “John Rylands fragment” containing six verses from the book of John probably dates to about 110 A.D. - 130 A.D. so the gospel had to be written before then and that fits with what we know about John’s life and death.Paul showed up early in the life of the church. He had contact with the other apostles, met with them at least twice that we know, and Paul himself says he went to check that they were all on the same page preaching the same gospel and teaching the same Jesus. The book of acts tells us he spoke with Peter and with James, Jesus’ brother.James is an interesting story on his own. Jesus’ family did not believe in him when he was alive, but in 1 Corinthians 15, which is a spoken creed that dates as far back as 1–4 years after Jesus’ death and is passed on to Paul who then records it later in his letter to the troublesome Corinthians, says the risen Christ showed himself to his brother James. That must have been a shock! The second time Paul comes to Jerusalem—James has become the head of the church there—so Paul meets and greets with both of them.Paul makes four missionary journeys, and on at least one of them Dr.Luke travels along with him. Luke played the role of the good scientific skeptic—he and Thomas! Luke investigated. He went everywhere Jesus was supposed to have gone, he gathered information, he interviewed people. Then he too wrote. We are unsure whether Luke was a Hellenist Jew or an actual Greek, but there’s a chance he had the language skill to be the Greek writer of his own material.The books of Luke and Acts both use a larger vocabulary than other New Testament writers, and those words are used in literary styles that reflect whatever event he happens to be recording. Sometimes he employs good quality classical Greek, at other times, first century Aramaic shows through in his expressions. Aramaicisms are used when he is describing events in Palestine, but when he leaves for the more Greek lands, they stop. He quotes actual speeches and fragments of sermons in Acts and has the most accurate historical detail of any NT writer.In the early church, there were a great many people who could not read and write, so much church doctrine and history of Jesus was put into oral form that could be easily memorized. These are the early oral creeds and we find about four dozen of them contained in the books of the New Testament. There are also many sermons and parts of sermons recorded in the book of acts. So Matthew’s Hebrew gospel, his many notes that he took while Jesus was alive, Mark’s memoirs of Peter, the early oral creeds and other oral records, their various individual memories, Luke’s wanderings, and eventually John’s theology, all these things went into what became the four gospels.Chances are they were all copied down by a professional scribe. Scribes took dictation, and wrote letters, and administrative documents, and formal literary pieces and all kinds of things. It is highly probable these men took all their material and dictated it to someone who could write in Greek, the common tongue of the day. It’s possible Mark and Luke could speak and maybe even write in Greek, but the gospels are well written and constructed in a Greek literary form that indicates they probably had help putting their memories into final form. These were the words of Jesus they had been speaking of and preaching about time and again. There is every indication they were completely aware of how important this was.The texts that were written down, that contained the words of Christ, were passed from hand to hand as the church grew. Christians copied them and passed them on. They multiplied. There must have been a Christian scribal community who communicated with each other because far and wide, they had a few things in common. They always abbreviated Jesus, Christ, Lord and God in the same way; they wrote fewer lines—and letters to the line—than was normal for the day in order to make it easier to read the text in public; and they developed a type of handwriting called “reformed documentary” that used fewer ligatures—which are connected letters like fl or fi— and more precise letters than regular documentary handwriting.Far and wide across the empire, wherever Christians went, they took these practices along. There were so many Christians making copies that even after millennia we have over five thousand of those copies and fragments in the Greek; 8,000 more in Latin, and upwards of ten thousand in other languages.Much ado is made about the differences between these thousands of texts making them undependable, but that is misleading. Most of the differences—perhaps 80%—are simple errors like misspellings and copy errors. One text was clearly copied from an original that was written in two columns—except the copyist copied them across the columns instead of down! Only one to two percent of the differences between these texts can be seen as real differences, and none of them have any impact on doctrine. They are all in the footnotes of every Bible. And since the early church fathers referenced the texts they had and made notes in the margins of their work that quote those texts, it is possible to see what those texts said as far back as the early second century. It’s the same thing those texts say now. It has not varied in any substantive way in 2000 years.These people recognized the significance of what they were recording. While the New Testament is still being written, they are already beginning to equate the New with the Old in stature. Peter refers to the writings of Paul as scripture and Paul equates a passage in Luke’s gospel with one from Deuteronomy. By 180 A.D. the Muratorian Canon has compiled 22 of the eventual 27 books and recognized them as accepted throughout the church, read in the churches as scripture, and that includes the four gospels we have, and all 13 of Paul’s letters. Once apostolic writing ended, the canon closed as far as the church was concerned.For the next seventy years after Jesus died, these men traveled and spoke, offering their testimony to anyone who would listen—and sometimes to those who would rather not. They were sometimes beaten and imprisoned, and some were killed. James was killed early, we know, and Peter was killed in Rome, probably in Nero’s persecutions. About two years later, Paul was in prison in Rome for the second time, but this time they did not release him, and he also was killed in Rome. As a citizen, he would have been beheaded. There are to this day in Rome churches founded by these men, and a cathedral that stands where Paul was supposed to have died, and a Christian chapel dedicated to them in the catacombs beneath the city.The apostles were still in active circulation during the church’s founding years. They functioned as trusted authoritative sources and guardians of the tradition. Even as advancing age took them—or prison or death—the wide range of years in which the early church was populated means it would have included many first hand observers of Christ including the 12 apostles, elders that sat personally at their feet and learned directly from them, and the disciples of those who had heard these accounts from original sources, and this would have been on into the early second century.It is not simply the reverence these men were held in, nor the church’s vested interest in keeping the words of Jesus pure and unblemished, that explains why it is so absurd to even imply any of these texts could have been forged. It would simply be impossible to do under the circumstances. Say, for example, some rogue monk decided to forge a text and wants to substitute his own work instead. If he tried it while the apostles were still alive, the transgression would be obvious to all. So let’s say forgery is attempted some time later—say the second century. By then the new testament writings have been circulating among the churches for nearly a century. How would anyone go about substituting a forgery and even begin to find all the texts he is trying to replace and thereby leave no evidence of it for us to find?The evidence we have indicates the early church was aggressive in making sure no “funny business” was happening with their sacred texts. They rejected much more than they accepted. The document we recognize as the New Testament was completed by 100 A.D.; those texts were either written by an apostle or by someone who received it from an apostle and could be verified through eye-witness testimony. That was the standard for historians in the day. The canon was closed in practice in the 200’s. The Council of Nicea merely recognized what had been established for over 100 years.Christianity spread because it made life better—when they weren’t being killed or tortured for it. The Roman Empire was not tolerant in the modern sense of allowing something one disapproves of. What Rome did was absorb the Gods of the people they conquered and add them to the Roman pantheon. That’s why there are Roman names for all the Greek gods. If the practices of your religion were compatible with Roman practices, you could continue worshipping your god—they would just now have a good Roman name.But Christianity would not get with the program! Romans didn’t even recognize it as an actual religion—they saw it as a superstition. There were wild rumors about Christians eating the flesh and drinking the blood of their god in their gatherings, and everyone knew they refused to make any sacrifices to the Roman gods. That was like a “homeland security” issue for the Romans since everyone “knew” that it was the favor of the gods that kept Rome safe, and if they weren’t sacrificed to, they might withdraw their favor. That’s why it seemed perfectly reasonable to the Romans to lay at the feet of Christians the responsibility for any and every disaster, calamity, or misfortune of any kind.There are normally counted ten official persecutions of Christians during the Pre-Constantine era, but this does not take into consideration the gangs that would occasionally arise against them. They kept to themselves—they were separate—and that was a very non-Roman practice. They were against killing—and didn’t join the army—at least we think that’s largely true. It’s much debated.But there were times of peace too and Christianity grew and prospered and spread. It practiced an equality and dignity and self-worth that no one had ever conceived of before. It was a revolution in every sense. The world was never the same again.