Sermon Tone Analysis

! Introduction

* *

L. E. Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers (Washington: Review and Herald, 1950).

1. 205-206.

“The situation in the Christian Church, immediately following the apostles, did not require an extensive literature of its own.

Men were expecting important changes in the world.

The authoritative teaching of the apostles was, of course, still fresh in the memory…..It was the twilight period, before the literature of the early church philosophers had developed.

Their first writings were not so much history, exposition, or apologies, as simply letters.”

In these writing, we do not find a refined systematic theology of the second-century, or even theological definitions of particular doctrines germane to the readers.

What we do find are occasional references to doctrinal ideas set in the framework of a personal letter.

J.N.D. Kelley, Early Christian Doctrines, p. 462 “Four chief moments dominate the eschatological expectation of early Christian theology-- the return of Christ, known as the Parousia, the resurrection, the judgment, and the catastrophic ending of the present world-order.

Manson, p. 17 “it can hardly be discussed in isolation from the doctrines of creation, redemption, the work of the Holy Spirit and grace.”

interwoven       Thus I will weave in and out the related doctrines without making a separate listing for each one.

Manson, P. 17 “it is even more difficult to deal with the patristic writings as though they formed a homogeneous body of divinity....It is scarcely possible to trace in the early fathers a regular and logical pattern of consistent eschatology.

Consistency is not one of the characteristics of the fathers.”

No Clear Systematic Theology

J.N.D. Kelley, Early Christian Doctrines, p. 462: “In the primitive period they were held together in a naive, unreflective fashion, with little or no attempt to work out their implications or solve the problems they raise.”

Approach of Study

Robert Grant suggests that the approach to studying the Apostolic Fathers could be one o two ways, to treat them as a group and focus on their common teachings or to treat them as individuals.

The latter will be the approach of this paper and will focus on the four main concepts.

!

The Resurrection

I Clement

     The emphasis which each work places upon the doctrine of the resurrection primarily relates to the context of each letter.

“For some the resurrection was brought to the service of exhortation of virtue (1 Clement, 2 Clement, Didache), for others to that of Christology (Ignatius’ letters), and there are those for whom it seems to have been a necessary component of a general material re-creation (the Letter of Barnabas, the Fragments of Papias).”[1]

I Clement mentions the resurrection often (19.2-3;

23.1-5; 24.1; 26.1; 36.1-2;

42.1-3;) but his focus is often Christological.

The future resurrection of the believer is tied to Christ of which he is the “firstfruits” (24.1).

“The focus of the letter is less on Christ’s death and resurrection than on his salvonic revelatory function.”[2]

It is absolutely clear that there is a resurrection is for the just (34.3,7; 35.1-4), as well as punishment for the wicked (11.1).

“Because discussion of resurrection is so subordinate to the letters’ general thrust it is difficult to determine the author’s understanding of the character of the resurrection body.”[3]

In general, there is a lack of clarity as to meaning each writer held in relation to the term body, especially when one attempts to determine the nature of the resurrection body.

I Clement definitely makes use of the analogies from nature in relation to the resurrection of the body (the vine in 23.1-5, the legend of the Phoenix 26.1-2, the seasonal cycles 24.1-5) which may suggest the concept of a material resurrection of the body or are simply used since they are great analogies.

After the Legend of the Phoenix, Clement then quotes Job 19:26 from the LXX as a prediction of the resurrection.

I Clement 50.3-4 may be used to prove that the soul can exist apart from the body, or it is simply affirming the salvation of the OT saints.

It appears that Polycarp to Phil.

9.2 may mention this as well when he states that faithful men of the past are “now in the place due them with the Lord.”

The martyrs already enjoy a place of glory (5.4,7; 6.2; 44.5), while the faithful saints will have to wait for Christ’s Kingdom to come

when they will be raised from their graves (50.3-4).

Ignatius

     Ignatius’ writings primarily use the resurrection and judgment as an incentive to proper ethical behavior in the present time.

The gospel of Jesus’ death and resurrection is the “realization of incorruptibility” (Philad 9.2).

The believers resurrection is to tied to that of Christ’s (Trall 9.2) and it is a prominent part of the writer’s hope (Eph 11.2; Trall Intro; Rom 2.2; 4.3).

One must believe in the fact Jesus has a body made of real flesh if they are to be raised (Magn 9.2; Smyrn 5.2f.), and those who deny such a doctrine are headed for “unquenchable fire” (Eph 16.2) or possibly as “disembodied and demonic” (Smyrn 2.1).

“Ignatius sees the resurrection of the dead simply as part- although undeniably a very important part, for embodied beings- of the ‘prize of incorruptibility and eternal life’ which lies ahead for ‘God’s athlete’ (Poly 2.3).”[4]

Martyrdom is the only way for the writer to become a “true disciple” (Eph 1.2; Rom 4.2; 5.1,3), and his path to get to God and Christ  (Rom 1.2; 2.2; 5.3; 6.1).

The connection between martyrdom and the resurrection is obvious in Ignatius due to his historical situation.

In Eph 11.1, the believer has already received, in part, ‘true life’ which will not be fully experienced until after the resurrection.

The following can also be seen in Ignatius’ writings:

1.

It is to the person’s advantage to live a godly life so that they “might rise up” (Smyrn 7.1).

2.      The resurrection is guaranteed to the believer based on Christ’s resurrection and the fact that there is life only in Christ (Trallians 9.2).[5]

And Jesus Christ is our true life (Smyrnaeans 4.1).

3.      Unbelievers need to change their mind in regard to the “Passion, which is our resurrection” (Smyrn 5.3).

4.      Ignatius was hoping to “rise up free in him” (Rom 4.3)

Ignatius refers to it as the “wrath of God” (Eph 11.1).

Polycarp

      “The eschatological references of Polycarp...do not go beyond the common themes of resurrection and judgment, and most of them are either spiritual allusions or snatches of confessional formulae.”[6]

According to Polycarp (Poly to the Phil 7.1) one must affirm the doctrine of the resurrection or they are outside of salvation.

“He who denies the resurrection and the judgment is the first-born of Satan.”

(7.1).

“He speaks out in forthright manner against anything that smacks of over-realized eschatology or of Gnostic spiritualizing of the last things, putting it on par with Docetic misinterpretations of Christ’s incarnation and passion.”[7]

It is clear that the just shall be raised (Phil 2.2).[8]  Polycarp emphasizes the need to live a godly life now, if one expect to be raised to the next one.

He states that we need to “please Him” (5.2) and “do his commandments and love the things he loved” (2.2) in order to be part of the resurrection.

Those who desire to “reign with him” must be “worthy of him” (5.2).

In the Martyrdom of Polycarp, it is the martyrs who are immediately raised and “crowned with the crown of immortality and had won a prize which no one could challenge” (17.1).

Polycarp himself had already experienced this blessing and was now “crowned with the crown of immortality” (17.1).

The judgment upon the wicked is referred to as an “eternal fire” and the fire of the coming judgment and eternal punishment, which is reserved for the ungodly” (11.2).

The future rewards for the believers are also used as truth which is to motivate obedience even unto death (2.3).

The resurrection to eternal life involved both the soul and the body (14.2). 

 

2 Clement

     It is clear that 2 Clement affirmed both the resurrection of the just and the unjust.

In 19:4, the godly person will “live again (anabiwsas) with the fathers.”  2 Clem 19:3 mentions “the immortal fruit of the resurrection,” i.e., immortality is the fruit or result of the resurrection.

As for the ungodly, they will be raised and suffer “torments in unquenchable fire” (17.7; 6.7; 7.6).

For more details see the overview of 2 Clement.

The reward of the just takes on an interesting twist in that it is referred to a sharing in the Spirit in a peculiar way.

The logic of 2 Clement is as follows:

a) Christ pre-existed in the Spirit before the incarnation (14.1-3).

b) This existence was shared by “the first church, the spiritual one, which was created before the sun and the moon” (14.1-3).

c) Since the Church is the body of Christ, and in some sense pre-existed with Christ, it now has the ability to return to that capacity (14.3).

d) The flesh is simply a “copy” of the Spirit, it can be saved (14.3, 5).

e) It also holds true that if one “does violence” to the Church, he will not share in the Spirit (14.4).

In order to prove that the rewards of the believers will take place in the flesh he uses the following logic in chapter 9.1-5:

His logic is based on two points: 1) The believer received salvation in the flesh and 2) Christ was enfleshed as the means of salvation.

The logical deduction is that the rewards of the righteous will of necessity be in the flesh.

He states that “as you were called in the flesh, so you will come in the flesh” (9.4).

! / /

!

/The Following points can also be seen:/

1.

The Lord Himself will bring about the resurrection and then “execute judgment” (Barnabas 5.7).

2.      One of the three signs which will precede the Lord’s coming will be the third sign of “the resurrection from the dead” (Did 16:6).

3.      The flesh will have a part in the resurrection (Hermas Sim 5.6.7 and 2 Cl 9.1-5).

!! Blessedness

     The future is often described by the term “blessedness.”

I Clement 34.3-35.2

lists some of this blessedness and states that it “belongs to our comprehension.”

The blessedness, in its fullness, only belongs to God the Father, yet it does belong to those in the future who endure.

This blessedness belongs to us now but will not be ours in fullness until the resurrection to life.

He quotes 1 Cor 2:9 is quoted in support of this point.

The present blessing are merely a “foretaste” of more things to come (Barn 1.7).

!!  

!! Emphasis on the Flesh

     Ignatius emphasizes the flesh probably due to his struggle against the Docetists or to limit the radical dichotomy between the flesh and the spirit.[9]

In I Clement 26:3 he quotes Job as saying, “You will raise this flesh of mine.”

It is significant that the text in 26.3 reads thn sarka mou.

He used the word sarx (sarx) here,  in contrast to the LXX which has derma (derma).  2 Clement 9 and 14 have already been mentioned where there is an obvious point made about the flesh.

Donfried argues that in order for the writer to refute the Hellenistic concept of the immortality of the soul and the general gnosticizing of Paul’s teachings on the resurrection, the writer “adopted “a rather simplistic, crude and one-dimensional view which equates the future resurrection of the flesh with that that possessed by the individual during his present life.”[10]

Trallians 9.2 support this idea in where it affirms that the believers will be raised in the same way Christ was raised up.