In my Age of the Fathers class, we have recently been discussing the early Christian apologists. Here follows a few notes:
Justin Martyr
Definition of apologists is rather arbitrary. Lists of who the apologists were varies. The late Richard Norris offered the following definition:
The term “Apologists”, as applied to Christian writers of the early period, denotes a series of authors who in the course of the second century composed and circulated addresses and pleas…to emperors and others in public authority on behalf of their fellow Christians. The aim of such writings was in general to persuade the authorities that the frequent local persecutions of Christians were unjust, unnecessary, and unworthy of enlightened rulers (Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, p. 36).
So when we speak of the Apologists, we are generally referring to those 2nd century Christian authors who sought to defend the faith in the face of persecution and condemnation. They are writing mostly for non-Christian readers, but their main influence is among Christians (Justin Martyr is a good example). Athenagoras’ “Plea” is not a good example of this–it disappears for centuries.
Relationship to Greek philosophy–in the past, they were seen as the era when Greek philosophy comes and takes over Christianity. While Christianity does certainly become “Hellenized”, the question is: When did Hellenization occur? As far as the early Apologists go, it is more clear now that they were influenced by Jewish theology and literature–again, Justin Martyr is a good example of this, while Athenagoras is probably least example. Doctrine of the Logos, popular with many of these writers, used to be seen as a purely Middle-Platonic idea, but now it is recognized as plainly Jewish. It used to be taken for granted that Justin made all that up (in Dialogue with Trypho)–now it is clear that Trypho’s Judaism wasn’t invented–he truly expressed what are now seen as real nuances of Jewish belief. There are many parallels between Greek thinking and Jewish belief. Some pagans called Judaism “Moses’ philosophy”, and Genesis looks very much like Plato’s Timaeus. The question is who influenced whom?
It is interesting to note that many of these early Apologists quote frequently from pseudepigraphal literature, such as the Book of Enoch, Jubilees, etc. Apologists were greatly influenced by apocalyptic literature.
There were two main groups of Apologists–centered around 155 AD and 177 AD, respectively.
Some of the recognized Apologists include:
- Melito of Sardis
- Apollinarius
- Miltiades
- Aristides
- Justin Martyr
- Theophilus
- Athenagoras
- Tatian
- Clement of Alexandria
- Origen
- Tertullian
- Cyprian
Although all are considered strong representatives for early Christianity, their theology is not always the same. Although the focus of our class discussion ended up being on Athenagoras and his importance for the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, my current personal favorite of these is Justin Martyr (I am also partial to Clement and Origen). Here are a couple of quotes from Justin. First, on his Logos theology:
I shall give you another testimony, my friends…from the Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called, by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos; and on another occasion He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave (Nun). For He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to the Father’s will, and since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will; just as we see happening among ourselves…just as we see happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], abut remains the same; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom and, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me…(Dialogue with Trypho, LXI, ANF)
Another quote, on God’s creation of the world (out of unformed matter):
And we have been taught, and are convinced, and do believe, that He (God) accepts those only who imitate the excellences which reside in Him, temperance, and justice, and philanthropy, and as many virtues as are peculiar to a God who is called by no proper name. And we have been taught that He in the beginning did of His goodness, for man’s sake, create all things out of unformed matter; and if men by their works show themselves worthy of this His design, they are deemed worthy–and so we have received–of reigning in company with Him, being delivered from corruption and suffering.
Angel Pneumatology
Of course one of the major topics addressed by these early Apologists was that of the relationship between God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. The Christians were accused of being everything from atheists to polytheists, and so much thought was put into explaining just who they worshipped. Because of the prominence of Jesus Christ in their theology, many writings dealt with His relationship to God–because of this fact, scholars have claimed that early Christianity looked very “binitarian.” This emphasis leaves out, obviously, the Third Person, the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit was always a rather enigmatic figure. The majority of his titles (Comforter, Sanctifier, Testifier, Advocate, etc.) seem to depict Him more as an activity than a person. Father and Son are much more concrete images, whereas the Spirit’s titles are not so concrete. Only the name ”Holy Spirit” gives a better idea of His nature–that is, obviously, that He is a Spirit. However, this is also quite vague, in that He could be seen as God’s own Spirit (i.e., the spiritual “part” of God), and the Father and Son were sometimes seen as holy spirit(s) (spirit=divine)–nevermind the fact that “spirit” could be conceived of in a number of ways in the ancient world. There is, however, significant evidence in Second Temple Judaism that supports the idea of a Holy Spirit as a separate, hypostatized entity. There was never really any discussion over whether there was a Holy Spirit, yet His nature and origin was always difficult to pin down.
The idea of the Holy Spirit being identified with fire is significant. Anciently, spiritual beings/angels were seen as being of fire. Cyprian identified the Presence in the burning bush as the Holy Spirit. The fact that the Holy Spirit was seen as composed of fire (we would probably say light) is not incompatible with His being a distinct entity.
There is an interesting and early tradition which described the Holy Spirit as an angel (hence “angel pneumatology”). Dr. Barnes is something of an expert on this topic. I quote from his “Lecture Notes” for our class:
A number of scholars have documented a Jewish angel pneumatology in writings stretching from First Temple works like Exodus (23:20-23) and 1 Samuel to Second Temple works like Haggai, Nehemiah and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). “Angel pneumatology” is thus a wholly Jewish phenomenon, that is to say, it predates Christianity and, in the Common Era, sometimes parallels Christian theology of the Holy Spirit (p. 47).
Another good example of the Holy Spirit being described as an angel is in Isaiah, especially Isa 63:9–10 (in one rendering):
In all their affliction he [God] was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them: he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit.
Barnes sees an equivalency here between the “angel of his presence” and “his Holy Spirit,” suggesting that the Holy Spirit was an angel who stood in the presence of God. Barnes goes on to trace this angel pneumatology in the New Testament:
As one might expect, the first Christian articulation extant of an angel pneumatolgoy is in the writings of Luke. Leaving aside for the present the thorny question of whether the annunciation narrative is -or once was- the first Christian statement of angel pneumatology, traces of a primitive angel pneumatology can be found in Acts 8:26–40, where the language for who or what is whisking the deacon Philip from place to place shifts back and forth between “angel” and “spirit”. We should note, first, that the eunuch is reading Isaiah, and second, that this portrait of the Holy Spirit as the one who carries people to and fro’ occurs again in the very Jewish Gospel of the Hebrews, where Jesus is carried through the air by his mother, the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit as Jesus’ mother is another can of worms altogether, so I won’t go into that–suffice it to say that there were certain Christian groups that believed that–I would say by connecting the Holy Spirit to the Wisdom tradition, which often depicted Wisdom as female.
Barnes continues by noting that in the Ascension of Isaiah, Isaiah encounters the Son and Holy Spirit, both as angelic beings. As he arrives in the highest heaven, Isaiah is presented by his angelic guide in the presence of God:
And I saw the Lord and the second angel, and they were standing, and the second one whom I saw (was) on the left of my Lord. And I asked the angel who led me and I said to him, “Who is this one?” And he said to me, “Worship him, for this is the angel of the Holy Spirit who has spoken in you and in the other righteous.” (9:36)
Here, it is interesting to note that the Lord (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit are angels that, unlike other angels, are worthy of worship.
One of the best examples of this belief, according to Barnes, is from Origen, in his Peri Archon, which Origen says involves teachings he received from his “Hebrew master” (which some have identified as Philo):
…that the two six-winged seraphim in Isaiah who cry one to another “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord,” were the only-begotten Son of God and the Holy Spirit [Isa 6:2 f.]… And we ourselves think that the expression in the song of Habbakkuk, “in the midst of the two living creatures thou shalt be known” is spoken of Christ and the Holy Spirit.”
We know that the Book of Isaiah was very important to the early Christians, and seems to have been the source of much of their understanding for who the Holy Spirit was–one of the most prominent angels who stood beside the heavenly throne along with the Son. Barnes notes, however, that this angelic conception (no pun intended) begins to lessen, however, because of the story of the presence of an angel at the fertilization of Mary. This angel who “overshadowed” Mary was often seen as the Holy Spirit. However, because of the strong influence of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch) on early Christianity, over time the doctrine of the Holy Spirit as an angel was weakened, so as to not present anything inappropriate (i.e., the angel of the Holy Spirit being a danger to Mary’s virginity). Christians eventually reached the point of insisting that they did not believe that angels (unlike the Watchers story) could possibly have any interest in earth women because angels “neither marry nor are given in marriage” (Luke 20:35–37).
For more scholarly work on “angel pneumatology,” check out:
- Charles Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology (Leiden: Brill, 1998), pp. 114-119.
- Arthur Evertt Sekki, The Meaning of Ruah at Qumran (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989), Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation No 110.
- John Levison, “The Angelic Spirit in Early Judaism,” SBL 1995 Seminar Papers, pp. 464-492.
Also, please see one of my earliest posts, entitled: Angelomorphic Holy Spirit
On the Apologists and Angel Pneumatology
In my Age of the Fathers class, we have recently been discussing the early Christian apologists. Here follows a few notes:
Justin Martyr
Definition of apologists is rather arbitrary. Lists of who the apologists were varies. The late Richard Norris offered the following definition:
So when we speak of the Apologists, we are generally referring to those 2nd century Christian authors who sought to defend the faith in the face of persecution and condemnation. They are writing mostly for non-Christian readers, but their main influence is among Christians (Justin Martyr is a good example). Athenagoras’ “Plea” is not a good example of this–it disappears for centuries.
Relationship to Greek philosophy–in the past, they were seen as the era when Greek philosophy comes and takes over Christianity. While Christianity does certainly become “Hellenized”, the question is: When did Hellenization occur? As far as the early Apologists go, it is more clear now that they were influenced by Jewish theology and literature–again, Justin Martyr is a good example of this, while Athenagoras is probably least example. Doctrine of the Logos, popular with many of these writers, used to be seen as a purely Middle-Platonic idea, but now it is recognized as plainly Jewish. It used to be taken for granted that Justin made all that up (in Dialogue with Trypho)–now it is clear that Trypho’s Judaism wasn’t invented–he truly expressed what are now seen as real nuances of Jewish belief. There are many parallels between Greek thinking and Jewish belief. Some pagans called Judaism “Moses’ philosophy”, and Genesis looks very much like Plato’s Timaeus. The question is who influenced whom?
It is interesting to note that many of these early Apologists quote frequently from pseudepigraphal literature, such as the Book of Enoch, Jubilees, etc. Apologists were greatly influenced by apocalyptic literature.
There were two main groups of Apologists–centered around 155 AD and 177 AD, respectively.
Some of the recognized Apologists include:
Although all are considered strong representatives for early Christianity, their theology is not always the same. Although the focus of our class discussion ended up being on Athenagoras and his importance for the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, my current personal favorite of these is Justin Martyr (I am also partial to Clement and Origen). Here are a couple of quotes from Justin. First, on his Logos theology:
I shall give you another testimony, my friends…from the Scriptures, that God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called, by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos; and on another occasion He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave (Nun). For He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to the Father’s will, and since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will; just as we see happening among ourselves…just as we see happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], abut remains the same; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was kindled. The Word of Wisdom, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom and, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me…(Dialogue with Trypho, LXI, ANF)
Another quote, on God’s creation of the world (out of unformed matter):
And we have been taught, and are convinced, and do believe, that He (God) accepts those only who imitate the excellences which reside in Him, temperance, and justice, and philanthropy, and as many virtues as are peculiar to a God who is called by no proper name. And we have been taught that He in the beginning did of His goodness, for man’s sake, create all things out of unformed matter; and if men by their works show themselves worthy of this His design, they are deemed worthy–and so we have received–of reigning in company with Him, being delivered from corruption and suffering.
Angel Pneumatology
Of course one of the major topics addressed by these early Apologists was that of the relationship between God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit. The Christians were accused of being everything from atheists to polytheists, and so much thought was put into explaining just who they worshipped. Because of the prominence of Jesus Christ in their theology, many writings dealt with His relationship to God–because of this fact, scholars have claimed that early Christianity looked very “binitarian.” This emphasis leaves out, obviously, the Third Person, the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit was always a rather enigmatic figure. The majority of his titles (Comforter, Sanctifier, Testifier, Advocate, etc.) seem to depict Him more as an activity than a person. Father and Son are much more concrete images, whereas the Spirit’s titles are not so concrete. Only the name ”Holy Spirit” gives a better idea of His nature–that is, obviously, that He is a Spirit. However, this is also quite vague, in that He could be seen as God’s own Spirit (i.e., the spiritual “part” of God), and the Father and Son were sometimes seen as holy spirit(s) (spirit=divine)–nevermind the fact that “spirit” could be conceived of in a number of ways in the ancient world. There is, however, significant evidence in Second Temple Judaism that supports the idea of a Holy Spirit as a separate, hypostatized entity. There was never really any discussion over whether there was a Holy Spirit, yet His nature and origin was always difficult to pin down.
The idea of the Holy Spirit being identified with fire is significant. Anciently, spiritual beings/angels were seen as being of fire. Cyprian identified the Presence in the burning bush as the Holy Spirit. The fact that the Holy Spirit was seen as composed of fire (we would probably say light) is not incompatible with His being a distinct entity.
There is an interesting and early tradition which described the Holy Spirit as an angel (hence “angel pneumatology”). Dr. Barnes is something of an expert on this topic. I quote from his “Lecture Notes” for our class:
A number of scholars have documented a Jewish angel pneumatology in writings stretching from First Temple works like Exodus (23:20-23) and 1 Samuel to Second Temple works like Haggai, Nehemiah and the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). “Angel pneumatology” is thus a wholly Jewish phenomenon, that is to say, it predates Christianity and, in the Common Era, sometimes parallels Christian theology of the Holy Spirit (p. 47).
Another good example of the Holy Spirit being described as an angel is in Isaiah, especially Isa 63:9–10 (in one rendering):
In all their affliction he [God] was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them; in his love and in his pity he redeemed them: he lifted them up and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit.
Barnes sees an equivalency here between the “angel of his presence” and “his Holy Spirit,” suggesting that the Holy Spirit was an angel who stood in the presence of God. Barnes goes on to trace this angel pneumatology in the New Testament:
As one might expect, the first Christian articulation extant of an angel pneumatolgoy is in the writings of Luke. Leaving aside for the present the thorny question of whether the annunciation narrative is -or once was- the first Christian statement of angel pneumatology, traces of a primitive angel pneumatology can be found in Acts 8:26–40, where the language for who or what is whisking the deacon Philip from place to place shifts back and forth between “angel” and “spirit”. We should note, first, that the eunuch is reading Isaiah, and second, that this portrait of the Holy Spirit as the one who carries people to and fro’ occurs again in the very Jewish Gospel of the Hebrews, where Jesus is carried through the air by his mother, the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit as Jesus’ mother is another can of worms altogether, so I won’t go into that–suffice it to say that there were certain Christian groups that believed that–I would say by connecting the Holy Spirit to the Wisdom tradition, which often depicted Wisdom as female.
Barnes continues by noting that in the Ascension of Isaiah, Isaiah encounters the Son and Holy Spirit, both as angelic beings. As he arrives in the highest heaven, Isaiah is presented by his angelic guide in the presence of God:
And I saw the Lord and the second angel, and they were standing, and the second one whom I saw (was) on the left of my Lord. And I asked the angel who led me and I said to him, “Who is this one?” And he said to me, “Worship him, for this is the angel of the Holy Spirit who has spoken in you and in the other righteous.” (9:36)
Here, it is interesting to note that the Lord (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit are angels that, unlike other angels, are worthy of worship.
One of the best examples of this belief, according to Barnes, is from Origen, in his Peri Archon, which Origen says involves teachings he received from his “Hebrew master” (which some have identified as Philo):
…that the two six-winged seraphim in Isaiah who cry one to another “Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord,” were the only-begotten Son of God and the Holy Spirit [Isa 6:2 f.]… And we ourselves think that the expression in the song of Habbakkuk, “in the midst of the two living creatures thou shalt be known” is spoken of Christ and the Holy Spirit.”
We know that the Book of Isaiah was very important to the early Christians, and seems to have been the source of much of their understanding for who the Holy Spirit was–one of the most prominent angels who stood beside the heavenly throne along with the Son. Barnes notes, however, that this angelic conception (no pun intended) begins to lessen, however, because of the story of the presence of an angel at the fertilization of Mary. This angel who “overshadowed” Mary was often seen as the Holy Spirit. However, because of the strong influence of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch) on early Christianity, over time the doctrine of the Holy Spirit as an angel was weakened, so as to not present anything inappropriate (i.e., the angel of the Holy Spirit being a danger to Mary’s virginity). Christians eventually reached the point of insisting that they did not believe that angels (unlike the Watchers story) could possibly have any interest in earth women because angels “neither marry nor are given in marriage” (Luke 20:35–37).
For more scholarly work on “angel pneumatology,” check out:
Also, please see one of my earliest posts, entitled: Angelomorphic Holy Spirit