Incarnation and Salvation

Irenaeus stresses strongly in chapter 18 the reality of the incarnation, and is particularly critical of adoptionist and docetic christologies. Some reasons for this concern are:

(1) For Irenaeus salvation requires a genuine incarnation. "For unless man had overcome the enemy of man, the enemy would not have been legitimately vanquished. And again: unless it had been God who had freely given salvation, we could never have possessed it securely."

(2) The suffering of Christians makes sense if Christ genuinely suffered. If not, it becomes a mockery and Christ can be seen to mislead them.

Irenaeus sees salvation as communion with God involving a process in which "God recapitulated in Himself the ancient formation of man, that He might kill sin, deprive death of its power, and vivify man; and thereforeHis works are true."

There are also links between Irenaeus Christology and Trinitarian theology in this chapter, as when he says:

"For in the name of Christ is implied, He that anoints, He that is anointed, and the unction
itself with which He is anointed. And it is the Father who anoints, but the Son who is anointed by
the Spirit, who is the unction, as the Word declares by Isaiah, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because He hath anointed me,”pointing out both the anointing Father, the anointed Son, and the unction, which is the Spirit."

Apostolic tradition

Irenaeus sees the church as the true guardian of not only the writings but also the teaching and the tradition of the apostles. He illustrates this by indicating the existence of "barbarian" Christians who unable to read the Scriptures, nonetheless hold on to orthodox Christianity. (ch 4) Irenaeus then draws on the tradition to deny heretic speculation regarding the demiurge. (ch 5-6)

Amidst his refutation of the heretics we get a glimpse of Irenaeus' trinitarian theology:

"For the Spirit designates both [of them] by the name, of God—both Him who is anointed as Son, and Him who does anoint, that is, the Father."

And as he refutes the heretics we have the following prayer:

Wherefore I do also call upon thee, Lord God of Abraham, and God of Isaac, and God of
Jacob and Israel, who art the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the God who, through the abundance of Thy mercy, hast had a favour towards us, that we should know Thee, who hast made heaven and earth, who rulest over all, who art the only and the true God, above whom there is none other God; grant, by our Lord Jesus Christ, the governing power of the Holy Spirit; give to every reader of this book to know Thee, that Thou art God alone, to be strengthened in Thee, and to avoid every heretical, and godless, and impious doctrine.

Christology

In chapters 126-129 Justin rehashes familiar ground, claiming that appearances of God in the OT refer to the Son rather than the Father who is ineffable.

Clues of his christology lie in his insistence that whilst Father and Son are numerically distinct, they share in the same essence such as two flames coming from the same fire [in this case the Father being the original fire/flame]

Discussing Old Testament Monotheism

In chapters 55-66 Justin continues to engage the remarkable patient Trypho, seeking to defend from the OT the divinity of Christ.

Justin builds upon certain Old Testament passages which point to a dynamic monotheism, especially those where the Angel of the Lord is referred to as God/Lord, and the passages in Proverbs where the Wisdom of God is hypostasised. He sees these as references to Christ, although he is not prepared to admit that one needs the New Testament to make such a conclusion.

However, the Christology that Justin develops is not without its own problems. His christology is subordinationist, and is worryingly concerned with insisting that the Son is "numerically distinct" from the Father. One can see how this could be pushed in an Arian direction to affirm that the Son does not share in the divine essence.

Names of God and Christ

Chapter 6 has many theological points:

(1) God, the Father, has no name, only apellations as there is no one superior to him to name him.
(2) The Word/Son named as Christ to refer to his anointing, named as Jesus to refer to his status as saviour and man.
(3) Christ came for the sake of believing men and for the destruction of demons. Christus Victor!
(4) John Wimber you have a friend! Justin points to the significance of Christian exorcists healing numberless demoniacs, even in Rome itself.

Justin's Christology

Chapters 62-63 although us to see a bit more of Justin's Christology. For Justin it was Christ who spoke to Moses from the burning bush, and he also takes OT references to the Angel of the Lord to be references to Christ. The logic for this seems to come from Justin's close identification of Christ with the "Word of God".

Also, some questions I was having previously are being clarified as Christ is clearly referred to as "being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God." Nonetheless, the status of nameless/ineffable God is reserved by Justin for the Father.

Justin on the Bible

Chapters 36-39 provide us with more insight on Justin's perspective regarding scripture. He sees the Spirit inspiring different prophetic utterances, some through the Son/Word, some through the Father and some through direct predictions from the Spirit.

The prophesised Christ

Justin continues his apology in chapters 30-35 by quoting Old Testament prophecies concerning Christ. On the whole he covers the same ground that the NT covers, whilst providing 1-2 examples of his own.

Still much to unpack regarding Justin's Christology. Jesus is described as being the "first power" after God the Father and whilst taking human flesh the blood was not of human seed but of divine power. In narrating the virgin birth Justin takes great care to point out there is no link with pagan myths of intercourse between gods and humans, although his statement that the Spirit and the power of God in the OT are the Word, the first-born of God made me raise my eyebrows.

Justin Christian worship and mini creed

Chapter 13 is another theological gem. Here Justin sets Christian worship and the rejection of sacrifices and other forms of religious ritual in the context of God desiring prayers and the good use of the creation that he has established.

Here we also have a proto-trinitarian mini-creed where Christ is worshipped as the son of God and the prophetic Spirit is referred to. The nature of Justin's belief is still unclear here as he refers to Christ as "second to the eternal and unchangeable God".

Justin on government, salvation and Trinity

Chapter 12 is full of interesting theological themes.

(1) Justin emphasises that the authorities should be content with Christians as they are allies in promoting peace. But this is no free cheque for politicians, for Justin also claims that the power of rulers who esteem opinion over truth is that of robbers in a desert.

(2) The emphasis in this chapter is strongly on the link between good works and salvation. Eternal punishment comes to those who do evil, eternal salvation to those who do good.

(3) Here we have language of the son being begotten of the Father.

Responding to the charge of atheism

Christians are being condemned for "atheism", as evildoers, which Justin considers injust as they are being condemned on account of the name "Christian" as opposed to any evidence against them.

Justin accepts that Christians are atheists concerning the pagan gods, which he links to demons. Nonetheless, they believe in "the most true God, the Father of righteousness..." and in trinitarian language he refers also to the Son who proceeds from the Father and the "prophetic Spirit."

Justin justifies Christian rejection of the pagan gods by claiming that the same rejection of these demons can be seen in the great philosopher Socrates. In fact, the "logos" at work in Socrates is the same that "took shape, and became a man and was called Jesus Christ;". No wonder that Justin is such a mine (field?) for christology and the debate concerning Christianity and other religions.

Ignatius takes on heresy

In chapters 7 to 11 we see Ignatius express his concern with heresy. Not that he believes that his readers are engaging in heresy, but as a forewarning to hold on to the birth, the passion and the resurrection of Christ.

The heresy Ignatius is concerned with is Judaizing. Not that he is anti-Jewish [at least not in the shorter version] but he simply believes that Christianity fulfils the OT hope so that true Judaism embraces Christianity [a concept missing from the longer version which is definitely anti-Jewish]

The final chapters repeat the appeal for unity of the rest of the letter but it is interesting to notice a proto-trinitarian formula of Father, Son, Spirit appearing, as up to now Ignatius has seemed to concentrate mainly on the Father and the Son.

Clement and the Resurrection

Having mentioned the return of Christ in chapter 23, Clement wishes to guide his readers into a greater trust in the future resurrection in Chapter 24.

Clement's first argument is quite sound, that one can trust in the future resurrection based on Christ's resurrection, "the first-fruits" of what is to come. However, he does seek to back this up with natural examples, which end up being much more metaphors for the resurrection, rather than evidence.

Clement's second argument rings strange in modern ears, as he provides the example of the phoenix as an analogy for the resurrection. It seems to be that he really believed that the phoenix existed, possibly influenced by sources such as Herodutus and Pliny.

In Chapter 26 Clement moves unto firmer ground using OT passages to back up his belief in the resurrection. His argument may not pass the author-centred canons of the historical critical method, but a more reader sensitive approach will appreciate the thrust of his argument.

Finally in chapter 27 he emphasises that our hope in the resurrection should be strengthened focusing on the omnipotence and omniscience of God. For those who are interested in philosophical hair-splitting, Clement, whilst referring to God as omnipotent, is still able to say that it is impossible for God to lie.