The Apostolic Fathers
Closest in time to the New Testament texts themselves are the writings of the ‘Apostolic Fathers,’ from the late 1st and early 2nd centuries AD. These include Clement of Rome, Polycarp of Smyrna, and Ignatius of Antioch, along with individual writings such as the Didache and the Epistle of Barnabas. Since these writings were the first after the NT (perhaps, in the case of Clement and the Didache, even contemporary with the NT), they’re the best indicator of what the earliest post-apostolic Christians believed about the ultimate fate of unbelievers.
Didache
The Didache (“Teaching”) was a manual of faith for early Christians, alleged to have been written by the twelve apostles, which was written most likely some time in the first century. [1] This text has little to say about the ultimate fate of unbelievers. Its distinction between the “way of life” and “way of death” (1.1f; 5.1) may indicate a belief in conditionalism or annihilationism, but on the other hand, there’s nothing to indicate that the “way of death” is final. A better indicator is the Didache’s description of the resurrection: “...the resurrection of the dead, yet not of all, as it is said: ‘The Lord will come, and all his saints with him’” (16.14-16). This suggests that the author was a conditionalist who thought that only believers (“his saints”) would be resurrected.
Clement of Rome
Clement of Rome’s beliefs on this topic are difficult to determine, because his only surviving writing is a letter of exhortation to the Corinthian church, recently plagued by the persecution and turmoil of AD 66-70 (1 Clem. 1.1; 5.1-7.1). [1] Clement writes of the continuing sacrifices in the Jerusalem Temple (41.2), but anticipates a quickly coming judgment on the temple (23.3-5; cf. Matt. 24.32), which he wrongly associates with the resurrection of the dead (24.1-3).
Within this context, Clement often speaks of the judgment of the wicked, to exhort believers not to join them in their coming destruction (14.1-15.6; 22.1-8; 57.1-59.1). However, he also emphasizes that repentance will deliver anyone from God’s judgment (7.4-8.6). Importantly, he states that God is “free from anger... toward all his creatures... doing good to all, but especially we who have taken refuge in his mercies” (19.3-20.11). This indicates that, in his view, God’s punishments are for the ultimate good of all his creatures. Indeed, Clement says later, there is “great protection for those who are chastened by the Master... he chastens us in order to have mercy on us through his holy chastisement” (56.16), which he says specifically about the unbelievers in transgression (56.1-57.2).
A hint of Clement’s universalism may be found in the doxology at the middle of his letter, where he speaks of “the faith by which Almighty God has justified all men from the ages” (32.4). This may be limited by his statements elsewhere about the number of the elect who have been saved through Jesus Christ (58.2; 59.2). However, we must also consider that Clement is speaking on behalf of the church of Rome, the recipient of Paul’s most universalistic letter, in which he spoke of “justification... for all men” (Rom. 5.18), where “all men” refers to absolutely all people, the same number who were condemned by Adam’s sin (5.12-21).
Finally, we must take into account the testimony of the later church about Clement’s beliefs. In the 5th-century debate between Rufinus and Jerome, on the topic of universal salvation, Clement the “disciple of the apostle” (i.e., of Rome) was cited as one of the fathers whom both of them agreed was a proponent of universal salvation (Rufinus, Apology Against Jerome 1.43). This testimony, along with the above points, strongly indicates that Clement of Rome was a believer in the ultimate salvation of all. However, he de-emphasized this point in his letter for pastoral reasons, due to his anticipation of the quickly coming judgment.
Epistle of Barnabas
The Epistle of Barnabas was an early post-New Testament text, written shortly after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple (Barn. 16.1-5). [2] This text distinguishes between “the way of light” and “the way of death” (19.1f, 12). The latter is “a way of aiōnios death with punishment” (20.1). The truly eschatological nature of these remarks is confirmed later:
For he who does these things [i.e., righteousness] will be glorified in the kingdom of God, but he who chooses their opposites will perish together with his works. This is why there is resurrection and reward. (21.1)
Therefore, the author of this text believed that the resurrection of the righteous would be accompanied by the final death of the wicked. The Epistle of Barnabas should be classified as either a conditionalist or annihilationist writing (it doesn’t state whether the wicked will be resurrected or not).
Odes of Solomon
The Odes of Solomon are a collection of hymns, dating most likely to the late first century. [3] Although the exact relationship is debated, the Odes are very closely related (directly or indirectly) to the gospel and letters of John, and may have been written in or by the same community as those texts. [4] The Odes of Solomon present a very universalistic depiction of salvation. Regarding the Water of Life (cf. GJohn 4.14; Rev. 7.17; 21.6; 22.1, 17), one of the Odes says that nobody could restrain it, and “it went over the face of the whole earth and filled everything. All the thirsty upon earth drank, and their thirst was relieved and quenched, for from the Most High it was given” (Odes 6.9-12). God, through the Son, will take hold of absolutely everything in his salvation; everything that breathes will be given knowledge of the Lord, to sing his praises, at his coming (Odes 7.17-27).
The scope of the atonement in the Odes of Solomon is universal, just as in John’s gospel and letters (see my previous post). According to the Odes, the Messiah descended to Death and Sheol in order to set everyone free. He says, “I went on to all my prisoners, to liberate them, in order to leave no one bound or binding others... They were gathered to me and were saved, because they became my limbs and I was their head” (17.8-14). Because Death and Sheol could not hold him, they cast him out along with “those who had died,” who were thereby redeemed by him (42.14-26). [5] Throughout the Odes, death is only mentioned in order to describe its defeat via the Messiah’s crucifixion (e.g., 6.14ff; 15.9-11).
In summary, the Odes of Solomon should be classified as a universalist writing. It represents the scope of the atonement from Jesus’ crucifixion as universal, involving everyone who has died, and says that all people will be given knowledge of the Lord at his coming. However, we must also keep in mind that because it is a hymnal, the Odes may be using hyperbolic language.
Shepherd of Hermas
The Shepherd of Hermas was an early Christian text, written in the late first or early second century, which was held in very high esteem by the 2nd-century church. [2] Shep. Herm. takes an extreme view of repentance, claiming that believers have only one chance to repent and won’t be saved if they continue to sin. This book frequently mentions the destruction of the wicked. However, it holds that unbelievers will be allowed to repent “on the last day” when they see God (vis. 2.2.5). Some may be punished for a time, but if they repent, they will be saved; the rest will be utterly destroyed (vis. 3.5.5-7.6; simil. 6.2.1-4). Thus, this work takes a middle position between annihilationism and universalism, as it holds that there will be a second chance at repentance for unbelievers.
Polycarp of Smyrna
Polycarp was a bishop of Smyrna in the early second century AD. His single surviving letter, written to the Philippian church, displays a conditionalist view of the ultimate fate of unbelievers. According to him, we will only be resurrected by God “if we do his will, and walk in his commandments, and love what he loved, keeping ourselves from all unrighteousness” (Phil. 2.2f). The Martyrdom of Polycarp, written after his death, says about the martyrs,
...they despised worldly tortures, purchasing aiōnios life by a single hour. The fire of their torturers was cold to them, for they set before their eyes an escape from the [fire] which is aiōnios and not quenched. (Mart. Pol. 2.3)
This could be an indication of nascent infernalism (the view that unbelievers will be tortured forever). It may also simply be echoing Matthean language about Gehenna, which for Matthew would be a place of destruction, not everlasting torture (Matt. 3.12; 10.28; 18.8f). Furthermore, Mart. Pol. may not reflect Polycarp’s actual views about this issue. Therefore, Polycarp would best be categorized as a conditionalist.
Ignatius of Antioch
Ignatius was a bishop of Antioch who was martyred some time in the early-to-mid second century. I’ll be treating the middle recension of his seven-letter corpus as original, in line with the current consensus. It’s debated whether these letters were actually written by Ignatius in the early-to-mid 2nd century, or if they were written pseudonymously in the mid-to-late 2nd century. [6] This doesn’t particularly matter for our purposes, because whether or not they are authentically Ignatian, they still reflect the beliefs of one strand of 2nd-century Christianity.
In some places, the Ignatian corpus seems to support universalism, as Ramelli notes. [7] For example, “when [Christ’s] flesh was lifted up... he attracted all human beings to himself, for their eternal salvation” (Smyrn. 2). [7] Furthermore, he speaks of the destruction of all wickedness and ignorance, so that “all things have been set in motion for the realization of the destruction of death” (Eph. 19). Ignatius urges all people, even rebellious angels, to be saved (Smyrn. 6.1; Polycarp 1.1), showing that he didn’t believe in a limited number of elect individuals (as in modern-day Calvinism).
On the other hand, Ignatius distinguishes between the teloi of life and death (Magn. 5), and says that the prize of believers is immortality (Polycarp 2). Believers “escape from death by believing in [Christ’s] death” (Tral. 2). This may indicate that the author of the Ignatian corpus was a conditionalist. Therefore, due to the ambiguities in his letters, we can’t be sure whether Ignatius was a universalist or conditionalist.
Additional apocryphal writings
Finally, there are several apocryphal Christian writings from the second century which demonstrate an early belief in universalism. The Apocalypse of Peter was a writing which, according to the Muratorian Canon, was believed to be canonical by some 2nd-century Christians. This text graphically describes the punishments of the damned, and says that repentance is no longer available to them (chap. 13). However, according to the most ancient fragment of Apoc. Pet. (the Rainer Fragment), this punishment isn’t hopeless because the elect will intercede for them and stop their suffering. The same idea is found in contemporary apocryphal texts like the Sibylline Oracles (2.330-338) and the Epistle of the Apostles. [8]
Peter wishes mercy on the damned, and although Jesus doesn’t grant this request, he replies that God has even more compassion than him (chap. 3). The Ethiopic version of Apoc. Pet. concludes that God will have mercy on all sinners, but this truth must not be revealed to unbelievers, lest they sin more. [9] This concern was shared by later universalists like Origen (Contra Celsum 6.26). Although it’s contrary to the earlier universalism of the Pauline corpus, which exhorts to “instruct and teach” that God is the savior of all (1 Tim. 4.10f), this elitist attitude is significant for our purposes, as it shows that later writers may not teach (or even contradict) universalism in their pastoral writings, while still privately believing it.
The view of Apoc. Pet. is echoed in other apocryphal writings. For example, the Acts of Paul (Thecla 28-29) assume that intercession for the damned is possible, and Jesus “saved all flesh” (3 Cor. 16-18). The Apocalypse of Paul 22-24 declares that the wicked may repent, be baptized, and enter New Jerusalem if the righteous intercede for them. Ramelli argues that universal salvation is at least hinted in the Testimony of the Twelve Patriarchs, and is taught explicitly in the Acts of Thomas and Acts of Philip. [10] Finally, the Gospel of Nicodemus from the 4th century proclaims that absolutely everyone who died and was held captive by Satan via Adam’s sin was freed by Jesus’ crucifixion (chaps. 20-24). It appears that universalism was very popular in the early Christian circles that produced apocryphal literature.
Conclusion
The writings of the ‘Apostolic Fathers’ exhibit an inconsistency in their belief about the ultimate fate of unbelievers. Some texts appear to be clearly universalist (Clement of Rome, Odes of Solomon, some apocryphal writings), while others are clearly conditionalist (Didache, Epistle of Barnabas, Polycarp of Smyrna), and some waver between the two or take a middle position (Shepherd of Hermas, Ignatius of Antioch). This inconsistency among the Apostolic Fathers likely reflects the ambiguity within the New Testament itself, in which some authors seem to be conditionalists and others (especially Paul) are universalists. The two other schools of thought, annihilationism and infernalism, are not clearly represented in the writings of any of the ‘Apostolic Fathers’. [11]
______________________________
[1] Jonathan Bernier, Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2022), 239-260.
[2] Jonathan Bernier, Rethinking the Dates of the New Testament, 261-276.
[3] Michael Lattke, “Dating the Odes of Solomon,” Antichthon 27 (1993), 45-59.
[4] J. H. Charlesworth and R. A. Culpepper, “The Odes of Solomon and the Gospel of John,” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 35, no. 3 (1973), 298-322; J. H. Charlesworth, Critical Reflections on the Odes of Solomon (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1998), 232-259; Jacob J. Prahlow, “Odes and John: Perspectives on Relationship,” Pursuing Veritas (blog), 17 December 2019, https://pursuingveritas.com/2019/12/17/odes-and-john-perspectives-on-relationship/.
[5] Ramelli uses these texts to argue that early Christians believed in the salvation of the damned via Christ’s descensus ad inferos (“descent into hell”): Ilaria L. E. Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis: A Critical Assessment from the New Testament to Eriugena (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 74-75.
[6] Jonathan Lookadoo, “The Date and Authenticity of the Ignatian Letters: An Outline of Recent Discussions,” Currents in Biblical Research 19, no. 1 (2020): 88-114.
[7] Ilaria L. E. Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis, 62-63.
[8] Richard Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead: Studies on the Jewish & Christian Apocalypses (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 144-148, 232-235.
[9] M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924), 520.
[10] Ilaria L. E. Ramelli, The Christian Doctrine of Apokatastasis, 77-87.
[11] However, annihilationism (destruction after torture) appears in the pseudonymous 2 Clement, which says that the damned will be tortured without possibility of repentance (6.7f; 7.4-8.3; 17.5-7) and they will not receive immortality (14.4f).
No comments:
Post a Comment