Introduction

Shepherd of Hermas

Occasionally it is argued that Hermas is not an apocalyptic work (G.F. Snyder, The Shepherd of Hermas (Camden, NJ. 1968), p. 10- list also other reference which makes this statement.  Even Oseik, who argues that Hermas belongs to the apocalyptic literature states that “much of the content is devoted to paraenetic instruction, often the form of commandments, to the extent that the eschatological perspective seems frequently to get lost.” (Oseik, p. 115).  Joly’s comment may be extreme and doesn’t find a great deal of acceptance, “toute la doctrine d’Hermas est commandee par l’imminence de la Parousie.”  (R. Joly Hermas Le Pasteur (Paris: 1958), p. 236.  Humphrey (red book) p. 120- “the Shepherd exhibits far less interest in eschatology, especially imminent eschatology.”)

The great tribulation is mentioned in Vis. 2.2.7; 2.3.4; 4.1.1,5-10; 4.2.4-5; 4.3.6. Vis. 3.6.5; 3.1.9; 3.2.1; 3.5.2; Sim 8.3.6-7, and is seen as imminent (23.5).  The beast is a type of the great tribulation to come (Vis. 4.2.5-8).  There is no mention of the resurrection in Hermas but he does speak of the resurrection body of the angelic beings (102.2).  This concept seems to be consistent with Mart Poly 2.3; 2 Baruch 51.5-12; Enoch 104.7, and was probably based on the words of Jesus in Matt 22:30 and Luke 20:36.  (cf. Justin Martyr, Dial 81).  The coming tribulation can possibly cause some to deny the faith (7.4; 22.1; 23.4f.; 24.6).  There exists optimism in that there is still time or repentance and all those who repent with “their whole hearts” will be forgiven (Vis. 2.2.4).  By doing so they can bear “fruit in the world to come” (Sim 4.8).   There is still time for repentance since “the tower is still being built” (Sim 9.3 2.1).    The tower plays an important role in Hermas, especially in the Third Vision- 11.3 specifically identifies this as the Church, (III.2- it is almost finished thus the end is near)- the tower is set in the plain (9.2-4; 22.2; 90.1).  His eschatology, is not given for the purpose of spelling out a detailed chronology of the last days, but is primarily used to instill a sense of urgency, the need for repentance and holy conduct.  A good example of this mixture is seen in 23.4-6.        

The believers can rest it one of two ways; they can waiver and become double minded (23.4) and go thorough the tribulation and plagues of God (23.6).  Or, they may prepare themselves to face it through repentance (with the whole heart) ( 23.5), put their entire trust in the Lord (23.4f.), face this period with courage (22.8) and be to escape it (23.4).

His eschatology is on the focus of the completion of the building of the Church (16.9; 82.2)

Five Lines of Proof

Vocabulary

A. P. O’Hagan, “The Great Tribulation to Come in the Pastor of Hermas,” Studia Patristica 3(1959);309-310.

Argues that Hermas understood the Great Tribulation in eschatological terms: 

The term qliyis is used in an eschatological sense as Dan 12:1,10; Matt 24:21; Mk 13:24; Rev 2:22, 7:14; Sib. 3.187; 2 Bar xlviii.31.  “That the tribulation is qualified by the term ‘great’ in Dan., Mt., Apoc., and Sib., as in Hermas tends to class the expression as stereotyped.  And the use of erxomenos and, two word so strongly leaning to the eschatological, leaves little doubt that the Great Trial to come of Hermas is no intermediate persecution.” (p, 309-310- O’Hagan)    The LXX of Dan 12:1 uses the term  qliyis megela

The results:

Bauckmann points out that if this period was merely a time of persecution, the very opposite results would be expected, in that the faithful would experience the persecution while those who turn from the Lord would enjoy acceptance (Bauckman, p. 31).  Thus we must seek an understanding beyond that of a persecution from a government.  The escape of the faithful is not taken literally by many scholars (see O’Hagan, p. 307-309 article listed on page 27 of Bauckman) “Comparison with 6.7f (where the idea of the great tribulation is first introduced, in the context of the revealed call to repentance) shows that ekfeugein is equivalent to upomenein: the faithful ‘escape’ the tribulation by enduring and not denying the Lord.” (Bauckman, p. 31).  The term upomonh is often used in the New Testament as a godly characteristic in the midst of suffering (Rom 5:3, 1 Peter 2:20), and most significantly in Rev 1:9.  This word is also used in a section of the John’s Apocalypse in a section where a group of people are suffering under the hands of another beast and are called to endure (Rev 13:10; 14:12).  The escaping in 6.7 is referred to as patiently enduring (upomenete) and in 24.6 it is referred to as those who are “willing” (pqelhshte).  p

“Hermas has given it the ‘purgatorial’ quality which his own theology of repentance requires.” (Bauck, p. 36).  He applies the metaphor of fire both the destruction of the world as well as to the purification of the Church.  (Note at bottom- Sib. 2.252 refers to a river of fire which only the righteous will be able to pass through while the ungodly will suffer death. cf. Zech 13:9; Mal 3:1-3; 4 Esd 16.68-73 “...Then it will be seen that my chosen people have stood the test like gold in the assayer’s fire.”)  The emphasis in Hermas is definitely on a time of testing the faith of the individual which prepares them for membership in the Church (24.4 “useful for the building of the tower”).  Since the time period is for both the unbelievers (24.3 “this world must be destroyed”) and believers (23.4 “will be purified”) it indicates that it does not represent a time of persecution upon the Church.  Dan 12:10 mentions those who go through the tribulation as coming out white and refined, where Hermas refers to the age to come as being represented by the color white (24.5) and being refined through the fire (24.4).   

“The concept of the great tribulation is further explained by the devices of the four colors of the monster’s head.  The first and last colors represent the two aeons: ‘this world in which you live’ and ‘the age to come, in which the elect of God will live’ (xxiv. 2,5).  Black is the appropriate for this color because (xcii. 1-4) it characterizes the vices which are attributes of the evil spirit.....the use of the color white represents the eschatological purity of the church.  The great tribulation is therefore the means of transition from this age to the next.  The function of the two intermediate colors is o explain how this transition is effected.  Red symbolizes the effect of the great tribulation upon ‘this world’: ‘The color of fire and blood means it is necessary for this world to be destroyed by blood and fire’ (xxiv. 3).  Gold represents its effect upon the Church, a purifying effect by which Christians are made ‘useful in the construction of the tower’, i.e., fit to be part of the eschatological Church of the next world (xxiv. 4).” (Bauck, p. 32-33).                  

and “The significant words are ‘sorrow and tribulation.’  Parallel to the dross which gold casts off are not our sins and evil tendencies, as we might have expected, but sorrow and troubles!  With these words Hermas introduces the eschatological; his purifying fire stands at the doorway to anther world, and through it, as the text says, we are to gain entrance to the tower, the eschatological world to come, the transfigured Church.” (O’Hagan- The GT in...p, 310.)     

3. There is no opportunity or repentance during the Tribulation:

Vis 2.2.7-8 appears to make this point which would suggest a finality of God’s dealing with the Church and the world.  To strengthen this point, Hermas offers no indication of the possibility of repentance after the tribulation period. 

Boyd offers three lines of reasoning to reject the idea that the tribulation is eschatological (mention note below).  He suggestions are: 1) The warning of a tribulation was given to forestall wealthy Christians from apostatizing due to their business interests (Vis. 1.1.8; 3.6.5-6).  2) The apostasy is not a warning about a future time period but a description of one which had already taken place. (Vis 5 and Similitude 10 are taken as a persecution in the past where apostasy did deny the Lord- 8.6.4; 9.19.1.)  3) Maximus had already apostatized (2.3.4) and was capable of doing so again (palin)  (Bauckman offers a solid suggestion in that “Hermas’ eschatology leads him to proclaim a final, but not a first opportunity of repentance.” (B, p. 29).  It is also apparent that Hermas’ message is that every possibility of repentance will soon vanish. (Note- Snyder, p. 37 mentions that 23.5-6 offers the possibility that life continues after the tribulation-Grant vol 6- He suggests that the coming persecution threatened by Trajan which never materialized in Rome (Pliny Ep, X, 96, 97) (Snyder, p. 37).   

(Boyd- p. 110-111. The first two he himself agrees are not very convincing and are based on “presuppositions which are unverifiable” and admits that the arguments for it being eschatological are “more valid.”    

R. J. Bauckham, The Great Tribulation in the Shepherd of Hermas,” Journal of Theological Studies 25 (1974):35-40.

Passing through- 1) the meaning of upomenei above, 2) the purpose of purification see above 3) The typology of Hermas as a type of the Church and of the Beast being a type of the tribulation and the fact he passed through it (4.4.8-9).  4) 4.3.4 The church is present during the time the world is being judged by fire. 

Difference- The Beast in Hermas represents the great tribulation and not a political power as in the book of Revelation.

Barnabas

15.1-9 crucial text

-Israel lost the covenant at its inception due to their sinfulness (4.6-8), thus the Church is the new people of God (2.6; 3.6; 5.7; 6.19; 13.1). 

The Apoc & Pseud of the OT, p. 427- “The writer of the epistle does not develop logically the thought of the seventh day.”

Point 1

the days of creation adumbrate world history

(list at bottom the acceptance of this view)

Point 2 World history will last 6,000 years- 15.4

(Three factors led the author to this conclusion: 1) the allegorical method of interpretation, which is nothing new to the epistle, 2) the transposing of the Aorist to the future tense, which is based on the Hebrew text rather than on the LXX  (suntelesei, katapausetai), and 3) a faulty exegesis of Ps 90:4. Cf. William Shea, 169-170)

Point 3 Rest will take place at the Parousia when Jesus with judge the wicked, destroy the Devil and cause changes in the heavens 15.5

-4 Ezra 7.39 “For thus shall the Day of Judgment be, whereon is neither sun, nor moon, nor stars.”

Point 4 The Sanctification of the seventh day will happen in the future when the believers are justified, receive the promise (note- 5.7 ties the promise to the resurrection and 6.17 relates it to ruling on the earth), when the lawless one no longer exists, all things are mad new, the believers are themselves sanctified and God sets everything at rest (15.6-8).  At this point the beginning of the eighth day will be inaugurated which is the beginning of a new world (15.8).  “When this is done, the new Sabbath, which is acceptable to God, will have been instituted.  In 15.9, the writer applies this teaching—Christians presently observe the Eighth Day, which foreshadows the new Sabbath, because this is when Christ rose and ascended.” (Boyd, p. 104)  The main point is that the Christians observe the Sabbath which is acceptable by God and the Jews do not. 

Boyd -Probably not (p. 104): Boyd offers six solid objections though he says probably not-p. 104-106))

the fact the author believes the days of creation adumbrate world history into six millennia, does not demand one to posit a seventh millennium, 2) the ‘rest from creation’ takes place at the Second Advent (15.7) and at the beginning of the Eighth Day (15.8), i.e., there is no interval between the seventh and eighth day, 3) the chronological unity of 15.5-8 is affirmed by two parallel ideas: the removal of sin (15.5) and the new creation (15.8), 4) If there is a distinction between the seventh and eighth day then God would have to intervene twice, 5) the lack of a millennium does not detract from the main point of the author’s attack upon the Jewish Sabbath, 6) the eighth day is the beginning of the new world, which is best understood to be eternity. 

inherent ambiguities

“it is not certain whether there are two distinct eschatological Sabbath (the seventh and eight day, separately). or whether the kingdom that will be inaugurated is temporal or terrestrial or not.” (Jews and Christians, p. 274). 

also p. 275 The introduction of the eighth day “complicates the picture, since logically it would suggest a further stage and a second set of final events (and re-creation).”  He favors no millennium but is willing to leave the “questions open” (p. 275). 

O’Hagan applies the term promise (15.7) to apply to the Abrahamic promise of a land for Israel (p. 50-60).  Problem- 6.8-19 he interprets the Promised Land to belonging to the Church (6.9-17). 

(Note- Hermans argues that the verbs judged and reigned in verse 5 refer to God and not the Son, and then argues that God is the subject of 5b.  This in effect allows him to understand the eighth day to follow the sixth day without any intervening millennial reign of Christ.  See Albert Hermans, “Le Pseudo-Barnabe Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 35(1959) 853-69.    

agree with Boyd- “the most modern scholarship can do is to assume that the Seventh Day, in the writer’s thought, is a millennium since there is no prima facie evidence for it.” (p. 104)

Hvalvik, p. 197 where he compares the events of the two days and sees them as synonymous: “According to v. 4

The Lord ‘will bring all things to an end’ in six days; that means that everything will be completed at the Sabbath.  According to v. 8 the beginning of the eighth day will come when the Lord has ‘brought everything to rest’.  According to v. 7 the Sabbath implies that ‘all things have been made new’, according to v. 8 it is the eighth day which marks ‘the beginning of another world’.  The Sabbath and the eighth day thus have the same function within Barnabas’ chronological scheme.”  (For a detailed description of this issue see Albert Hermans “Le Pseudo-Barnabe, est-il Millenariste?”  ETL 35 (1959) 861-875.

A. P. O’Hagan “the state of the world during the seventh thousand years cannot be solved with complete certainty.” (P. 55)- He does say that this period will last for 1,000 years, but it is hedged in on the one side by the six thousand years of the world existence and the ogdoad on the other, so what would it be but another millennium? ( note- O’Hagan, p. 55).    He sees the seventh and eighth day as synonymous (p. 59)

8th Day  2 Enoch 33.1-2 “And I appointed the eighth day also, that the eighth day should be the first created after my work, and that the first seven revolve in the form of the seventh thousand, and that at the beginning of the eighth thousand there should be a time of not-counting, endless, with neither years nor months nor weeks nor days nor hours.” 

Chapter 4

The teleion skandalon is the “ultimate trap, the last in a series, and the most difficult to avoid...the climax of deceit.” (Antichrist, p. 188)    This time period is also seen in Matt 24:12; 2 Thess 2:3-12 and Did 16.4.  

Unfortunately Kraft doesn’t offer much help in that he avoids the issue by We may not be able to state the precise situation with accuracy but the text reads as if he is discussing a concrete situation which his readers were presently facing.  (Note- Hvalvik follows this same line of reasoning, p. 26 “He is eager to show that the end is at hand, but he is not concerned about the actual point if time….Maybe he himself was not sure about the meaning.”) G.  R. Beasely-Murray “When apocalyptic traditions are applied to history, precision is not to be looked for.”- The Book of Revelation NCB Rev. ed. London: Oliphants 1978, p. 257-) The fact the final stumbling is at hand (present tense?) causes this to be a concrete situation rather than a hypothetical one. (Kraft, p. 88- vol3 “There is no reason to think that he has a clear sequence of contemporary events in view.  He is using a living apocalyptic tradition based on Dan 7:7-8, 19-24….it has provided the imagery, and thus we cannot press the imagery for exact evidence.”   Tugwell, p. 46 the “doesn’t explain why Barnabas cites the prophecy.  One would hardly seek to instill a sense of urgency by quoting in 1989 a prophecy of the imminent end of the world in 1969.”    “The most plausible interpretation is still that of Lightfoot: the ten kingdoms refer to Roman Emperors.” (p. J. B. Lightfoot (ed.) The Apostolic Fathers (London: 1893), pp. 240-1.  If Julius Caesar is considered to be the first king, the tenth king would be Vespian (69-70).  The three kings who will be removed would be Vespian and his two sons (Titus and Domitian), both of whom carried the title ‘Caesar’ during the reign of their father.  If this is the case, Barnabas must have written this work before the death of Vespian, and since there was no little king who came along and removed all three of them at one time, this prophecy went unfulfilled.  Lightfoot suggests that the little king was assumed to be some type of Nero redivivus.

Dark One- (ACBook, p. 191 associates this with the way of light (19.1) and the way of darkness (18.1), p. 191- see 20.1 refers to the way of darkness as the way of the dark one, 2.10 speaks o the evil one and 4.10 speaks of the evil way.). 

(AC book, p 191- “What rally creates the necessity to behave properly is the coming Judgment” and not the coming ruler. He leaves it vague and unimportant as well)

Two quotes from Dan 7:24 and 7:7-8.

The widespread view of the early Church appears to be that fourth beast was the Roman Empire, the horns were the Emperors, and the ‘little horn’ was a reference to the Antichrist. (Note- Lightfoot, p. 506-507).   

(See also Leslie Barnard, “The Date of the Epistle of Barnabas- A Document of Early Christianity.”  JEA 44

(1958) 101-107.

Problem- we must identify the tenth emperor and the three subdued in order to find the little horn: Should Julius Caesar be included or the three rival Emperor Galba, Otho and Vitellius?    See Hvalvik, p. 29-32 for an excellent treatment of the strength and weakness of each position.  (REPRODUCE THE CHART ON PAGE 29) 

4.3 Kraft, p. 89 the quote probably refers back to the final stumbling block which is at hand- If the author had an exact text then it has not been preserved but other possibilities are 1 Enoch 89.61-64; 90.17f.; 2 Enoch 34.1-3. 

Two relevant passages are used when attempting to be more precise in dating this work (4.3-5; 16.1-4). The first reference is a quote from Daniel 7 which mentions the ten kings, a little king and the three kings.  The second reference relates to the rebuilding of the Temple which apparently was taking place as the epistle was being written since 16.4 reads, “This is happening now.”[1]  The following are the possible dates based on different interpretations of these two texts: 

The Time of Vespasian (AD 70-79): J. A. T. Robinson holds this position based on taking 4.3-5 at face value and then applies it to this time period.[2]  Lightfoot also held this position[3] and understood Julius Caesar to be the first king, Vespasian would be the 10th, with the three kings being a reference to Vespasian and his two sons, Titus and Domitian.  The little horn was a reference to the Antichrist, which was an expectation of Nero’s resurrection or return. 

The Time of Nerva or Trajan (AD 96 to early 100’s):  Hilgenfeld adopts this position based on the idea that Domitian is the 10th king and that the little horn is Nerva.[4]  This viewpoint has gained acceptance based on the ideas that the theological perspectives and historical data relate closer to this time period or the beginning of 2nd century.  During the reign of Nerva (96-98) and Trajan is also suggested due to the fact their views towards the spread of Christianity were more open and less hostile than that of their successors.

Hadrian’s Reign (AD 117-38):  Harnack[5] and L. W. Banard hold this position.[6]

AD 130-132:

K. Wengst adopts this position.[7]

AD 132-135: This date is primarily based on the status of the Temple, specifically the allusions to the rebuilding in 16.1-4.  “Though the text depends upon the imagery of the prophet Isaiah, the allusion may have been employed as a reference to any of the various limited attempts to reconstruct the temple occurring between AD 70-131.”[8]  The “latter part of the period becomes more probable.”[9]  Goodspeed suggests “about 130.”[10]  Jefford prefers the close of the 2nd century.[11]  Kleist prefers to be more general and suggests between 117-132.[12]

Overview:  The last days are present (4.9; 6.13) and a time of evil which the believer must withstand (2.1; 4.9).  It will include suffering before the final future judgment (4.12).  The believers will share in the reign to come (4.13; 8.13).  

Didache

AC

-Ascension if Isaiah 4

1) In Did 16.4 he appears (faghsetai) but in Asc of Is he descends from the firmament (4.2)

2) world-deceiver (a hapax legomenon)  (kosmos plaghs) Asc Is 4:7-8 “And all the people in the world will believe in him.  And they will sacrifice to him, and they will serve him saying: This is God and beside him there is no other.”  See 2 Th 2:11?   (AC, p. 181 “It is best to regard the title ‘deceiver of the world’ as a description of Satan...The deceiver is definitely not described as an envoy of Satan.”  see also Niederwimmer Didache, p. 262- He bases this on the concept that Satan tries to hide his identity in Adam and Eve 9; 2 Cor 11:14; T. Job 6.4)   and AC p. 181). 

3) He will appear as the ‘Son of God’ (ws uios  qeou)  See also Asc Is 4.6-8 “He will do and speak like the Beloved and he will say: I am God and before me there has been none.” 

He will also set up a image of himself in very city to further promotes this blaspheme (Asc Is 4.11)

4) He will do signs and wonders 16.4- see also 2 Th 2:9, Asc Is 4:5-6,10 where he is even able to by his word cause the sun to rise and give light a night and is able to give this power to his servants) to promote his deception. 

5) The world will be given over to his hands- (Hermas Sim 9.20.4; 9.23.5, Asc Is 4.4, 7).

6) Perform iniquities (aqemeta) unparalleled in evil The word places an emphasis on that which is contrary to “law.”

which have never been done before (2 Th 2 in general character of the AC and Asc Is 4.2-13)

Asc of Isaiah goes beyond that of the Didache and Paul.

Strange that Did 16 says nothing about the destruction of the Antichrist- (Ladd suggests this due to the idea that he is following the outline of Matt 24- Ladd, p. 89 He has noting to say ‘about the fat of the Antichrist because his source is silent on the subject.”  see also AC p. 174 “The author if Didache 16 adapted the Mattean material and fitted it into his own scheme.” O’Hagan, p. 25 “A striking resemblance between chapter 16 and Mt. 24 is apparent even from a cursory reading of the two.”)   

4 stages: AC- p. 176-79

1. In the last days false prophets will arise (16.3) “AC, p. 177 “the fact that the false prophets are expected to increase in number shows that these last day still lie in the future....for the Didachist the parousia of Christ is certainly no an imminent reality.”  The false prophets were already mentioned in 11.4-12 as being active already during the time of the Didachist. 

2. Then the deceiver of the world will appear (16.4)- then lists the activities

3. Testing by fire- (16.6)

4. The three signs of truth (AC, p. 178 a substitute for the sign of the son of Man in heaven of Matt 24:? Two possibilities- heaven itself opening up or the cross See AC pages 178-79 for discussion- based on Apocalypse of Peter “With my cross going before my face I will come in my majesty.”)

After these four events, Christ will come on the clouds of heaven (16.8). 

Fiery Trial

no wrath of God mentioned as in Rev,

only those who endure the test will be saved and many will fall away 16.5

Accursed one

Bryennios applies the term to Christ (1883, p. 54- listed by Ladd on 102)-

Others have followed a variant reading apo rather than upo- from the accursed one. 

Ladd “consensus of modern scholarship is that the curse is Jesus, who became a curse to effect salvation for men (Gal 3:13) or who is cursed by unbelievers.” (-no reason to change opinion today-Ladd, p. 103)

(See J. Rendel Harris The Teaching of the Apostles London: C. J. Clay, 1887), pp. 62-69 for an old defense of this position but a convincing one). 

AC, p. 178 Christ and ref 3:13 and 1 Cor 12:3!

4 Possibilities

Christ, the fiery trial, the world-deceiver and faith itself.  (See Jefford, the Didache in Context, p. 135-139 for an explanation of each position.)

Kraft, vol 3, p. 176 by the curse itself or by that which is accursed and then mentions the earth Gen 3:17.  Audet take it to mean from the grave itself (Rev 21:4; 22:3).

Res

In the Did, it only mentions it in relation to the believers (Ladd, p. 145-46 “Nowhere in the New Testament or in Jewish literature are the unrighteous so clearly excluded from the resurrection as here.”  For a defense of the possibility that the Didachist help to a millennium see Ladd pages 145-165)  (Jews and Christians- p. 278 “no hint of millenarian concept.”) 

(O’Hagan, p. 28 finds support in the fact the believers’ resurrection itself: “A material reward was precisely the reason why the just would need their bodies back at all!”  H also finds support for this by associating the Jewish apocalyptic elements of the Messiah coming t rescue the righteous form an increasing evil age through the establishing of the kingdom and cites 4 Es 5.1; 12.20-33; Sib III 63-92; Asc Is 4.1-14; Apoc Pet Frag.) as support.  relies upon the Jewish apocalyptic scene)  (Jew and Chn p. 278-279 brings up a good questions- His argument “begs the question of whether the use of ‘kingdom’ here implies the whole Jewish tradition, in material form, or whether it has been qualified and redefined in terms of church, to give it a different sense.”

Problem is that text is broken off her- See Ladd p. ? for the best treatment of possibilities.)

Papias

(Ire- used Papias AH 5.3f.

only doctrine:

Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian Tradition, 5vols. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1971), vol. 1 The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600), p. 12 “The only doctrinal position definitely attributed to him was the teaching, which he claimed to have derived from ‘unwritten tradition,’ that ‘there will be a millennium following the resurrection of the dead, when the kingdom of Christ is to be established physically on the earth.”  

O’Hagan, . 36 “the somatikos of Eusebius and his charge of literalism made against Papias in precisely this matter make any substantially allegorical interpretation of Papias’ doctrine unthinkable.”

Frag 14- mill text = AH 5.33.3-4- “These things are believable to those who believe.”   Irenaeus may have been 

Attracted to Papias due to his recapitulation theory where he writes creatura renovata et liberata. There will be both a renovatio naturae and a liberatio naturae, which will undo the curse of Gen 3 when the Messiah establishes his kingdom. 

Source twice Eusebius refers to John as the source (Frag 2,6; 1,4) and Irenaeus once (F 1,4)

Where there is a partial picture, one must be careful- Rev 20 says nothing of an abundance as Papias says nothing of a resurrection at the end. 

He himself appeal to the living voice rather than book knowledge (Frag 2,4)      

The Kingdom

1) It will last 1,000years

2) The dead will be raised first before the kingdom is inaugurated

3) The kingdom will be swmatikws (physical) in its nature

4) The kingdom will be on this earth

5) The earth will experience tremendous fruitfulness and produce in abundance

(See Baruch 29.5 “The earth shall also yield its fruit ten thousandfold  and on vine there shall be a thousand branches, and each branch shall produce a thousand clusters, and each cluster shall produce a thousand grapes, and each grape produced a cor of wine and 1 Enoch 10.18-19 “And then shall the whole earth be tilled in righteousness, and shall all be planted with trees and full of blessings.  And all the desirable trees shall be planted on it, and they shall plant vines on it: and the vine which they plant thereon shall yield wine in abundance, and as for all the seed which is sown thereon each measure shall bear a thousand, and each measure of olives shall yield its fruit ten presses of oil.” 

also:

1- creation liberated, renewed and abundance

2. Animal kingdom at peace within itself

3. Animal kingdom subject to man

4. Not every person will see these events

Res- precede the kingdom (Eusebius EH 3.39.12) it will not include all of humanity (Irenaeus AH 5.33.4)

Immediacy

Held to a view of history similar to Barnabas (15.1-9)

Appears that he expected the Second Advent and the establishing of the kingdom (cf. Eusebius EH 3.9.12).

not a climax with God’s dealing with Israel

not a literal interp- Frag 13 (pneumatikws) interpreted the sayings spiritually

Frag 12 “the whole six days refers to Christ and the Church” (haxaemeron)

no rapture

a res immediately before the kingdom

(Note since Papias’ writings are only fragmentary we can only base this on that which we have available.

Frag 7 the Lord will reign in the flesh with the saints

----

[1]Both Lightfoot and Ferguson suggests that this reference does not fit with a literal physical Temple but more of a spiritual meaning (LF, p. 135, Ferg p. 139 in EEC).

[2]J. A. T. Robinson Redating the New Testament. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976), pp. 313-19.  See also Karl Weizsacker, Zur Kritik des Barnabasbriefs aus den Codex Sinaiticus, Tubinger Universitatsschriften aus dem Jahre (Tubingen: LudwigFriedrich Feus, 1863), p. 30.

[3]Lightfoot, (AF 1.2.505-12).

[4]Adolf  Hilgenfeld, Die Apostolischen Vater. (Halle: C.E.M. Pfeffer 1853), pp. 34-35. 

[5]Harnack, “Chronologie der altchristichen Literatur,” i. 427.   See also Mackinnon, p. 277 and Pfleiderer “Das Urchristentum, seine Schriften und Lehren in geschichtlichem Zusammenhand” 2. ed. (Berlin: George Reimer, 1902), p. 553f. for further details on this position.

[6] See Studies in the Apostolic Fathers and Their Background. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1967), p. 46.

[7]Klaus Wengst, Tradition und Theologie de Barnabasbriefs, (AKG 42 Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1971), pp. 105-13.

[8]Jefford, p. 17.

[9]Robert Kraft, Barnabas and the Didache. The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 3. New York: Nelson, 1965), p.  43.

[10]Edgar Goodspeed,  The Apostolic Fathers. An American Translation. (London: Independent Press, 1950), p. 19.

[11]Jefford, p. 17.

[12]Kleist, p. 31.