Ignatius of Antioch

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

Ignatius of Antioch occupies a significant yet elusive place in the history of the early Church. Despite the historical, theological, and ecclesiastical insights we gain from his writings, the details of his life remain scant and largely speculative.

In this article, I’ll explore the life of Ignatius of Antioch, sifting through historical evidence and legendary accounts to understand the man behind the writings, helping us understand the shape of early Christian thought.

Who Was Ignatius of Antioch?

The main obstacle to writing about Ignatius of Antioch is our lack of information about him. We don’t know when he was born, although it was probably in the late 1st century CE. He was likely born somewhere in Syria since he was traditionally said to be the bishop of the Syrian city of Antioch. Even the long-held assumption that he died in 107 or 108 CE has been challenged. An article by Timothy Barnes, for instance, argues that Ignatius lived until the 140s CE. All of this merely highlights the myriad uncertainties about Ignatius’ life.

The letters Ignatius wrote have long been part of a collection of writings known as the Apostolic Fathers, which included Christian authors from the 1st and 2nd centuries CE. These authors provided us with a lot of information about early Christian theology and church structures, and Ignatius’ letters are no exception.

Our sources about Ignatius consist mainly of 4th and 5th-century writings by church historian Eusebius of Caesarea, well-known bishop and author John Chrysostom, and the bishop and author Theodoret of Cyrrhus. Eusebius says that Ignatius was only the second bishop of Antioch, although Ignatius actually calls himself the “bishop of Syria” in his own letters. Theodoret claims that the Apostle Peter himself commanded that Ignatius be appointed bishop of Antioch. Additionally, John Chrysostom writes that Ignatius died a martyr’s death in the Roman Coliseum.

These are all traditional legends written centuries after Ignatius’ death that may or may not reflect the reality of his life. Other legends about him included that he was one of the children Jesus took into his arms in the Gospels (Mark 10:13-16, Matt 19:14) and that he was the disciple of the Apostle John. Unfortunately, there is no historical evidence beyond much later writings to confirm or deny the truth of these legends.

What we can know, or at least reasonably speculate about, comes from letters Ignatius wrote on the way to his execution as a martyr.

Ignatius’ Dire Situation

Ignatius was arrested in Antioch — like Paul, he calls himself “a prisoner of Jesus Christ” — and was transported to Rome for his execution. This in itself is puzzling: why would they transport him to Rome when they could have hosted a trial and/or an execution right in Antioch? Stevan Davies writes that in Roman law, there were two possibilities that might have explained this.

If Ignatius was a Roman citizen, he could have appealed his conviction to the Emperor. If he had done this, he would have had the right to be taken to Rome for the appeal. Alternatively, some have posited that Ignatius, as a condemned man, was sent to Rome by the governor of Syria as a donation to the Roman games. However, Davies says that the evidence doesn’t fit either of these explanations.

First, Ignatius writes that he is being transported in chains by Roman soldiers. Roman law, however, said that Roman citizens being transported for appeal could not be put in chains. Second, if he was not a citizen, he would not have had the right to appeal. Additionally, Davies says there are no known examples during the 2nd century of any prisoners being transported to Rome for execution except prisoners of war.

Furthermore, Ignatius mentions no other prisoners being transported with him. A lone prisoner would have made a pretty meager gift from a governor to the Emperor. Since neither of these two common explanations fit the evidence, how can we explain the elaborate effort to transport Ignatius to Rome?

Davies offers an instructive example: he mentions that several decades after Ignatius’ time, in the year 177 CE, a situation arose in the Roman province of Lyon, where Christians were imprisoned by a representative or legate of the Lyon governor in the governor’s absence. Since only the governor could order executions, the Christians remained imprisoned until he returned and ordered their deaths.

Moreover, Ignatius hints in his letters that there have been conflicts in the church at Antioch. Davies concludes, then, that the governor of Syria was absent for some reason when Ignatius was arrested. He also posits that the reason for his arrest was that he had been stirring up trouble against other Christians with whom he disagreed, threatening a disturbance of the peace. The legate may then have decided that since he couldn’t order an execution, it would preserve the peace most effectively if he shipped a rabble rouser like Ignatius off to Rome for execution.

This view agrees with Bart Ehrman’s introduction to his translation of Ignatius’ letters which notes that many scholars believe that Ignatius’ arrest and condemnation were not the result of external persecution of Christians, but rather internal church conflicts over doctrine or the authority of church offices. So, if we understand why Ignatius was sent to Rome, do we know how he was transported?

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Most scholars agree, based on his letters, on the route probably taken by the soldiers transporting Ignatius to Rome. In The Apostolic Fathers and the New Testament, Clayton Jeffords outlines the journey like this:

Ignatius first traveled from Antioch, in the province of Syria, to Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey), by sea or land. He was then taken to the city of Smyrna, on a route that avoided the cities of Magnesia, Tralles, and Ephesus, but probably went through Philadelphia.

Next he was then taken to the Greek city of Troas, where he boarded a ship for Neapolis in Macedonia. He afterwards went through the city of Philippi, subsequently taking either a land or sea route to Rome.

This itinerary is important because it determines in part the letters Ignatius wrote to the Christian churches in cities along or near his route. He wrote six letters to churches in Ephesus, Magnesia, Tralles, Philadelphia, Smyrna, and Rome. In addition, he wrote one letter to an individual named Polycarp, a friend who was bishop of Smyrna.

Let’s take a look at the content of Ignatius’ letters. I should mention, however, that while the majority of scholars accept these seven letters as authentic, Jonathan Lookadoo notes that some scholars believe that not all the letters were entirely written by Ignatius or may contain later interpolations.

What the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch Tell Us

Here, I’ll provide a summary of each letter, with commentary when necessary. Examining the  themes of the letters gives historians valuable information about Christian concerns in the 2nd century.

Epistle to the Ephesians

Ignatius starts by praising the Ephesian church and especially its bishop Onesimus. This may or may not be the same runaway slave named Onesimus whom Paul wrote about in the Epistle to Philemon. Ignatius then writes that bishops are the representatives of Christ on earth and must, therefore, be obeyed:

He then tells of a tradition not explicitly referred to elsewhere in which God’s very silence is the cause of three profound Christian mysteries:

Epistle to the Magnesians

The churches of Magnesia and Tralles sent their bishops, Polybius and Damas, along with two presbyters or priests from Magnesia, to meet Ignatius, who was being held at Smyrna at that time. Ignatius wrote this letter to thank the church of Magnesia.

Like many Christian documents of the time, the letter begins with a plea for unity among churches and against false doctrines, that is, doctrines with which he disagreed (these were not called “heresy” until the writings of Irenaeus later in the 2nd century CE). Included in this group of “false teachers” were Jewish Christians who still followed the Torah:

Accordingly, he advocates for observing Sunday as a holy day rather than the traditional Sabbath on Saturday:

We can only assume that Ignatius had heard about and/or encountered Jewish Christians continuing to observe Jewish practices. This is an indication that even at this early point, some gentile Christians were already attempting to separate Christianity from Judaism.

Epistle to the Trallians

Although Ignatius did not pass through the city of Tralles, he wrote to their church to thank them for sending their bishop Polybius to visit him in Smyrna.

As in the letter to the Magnesians, Ignatius warns the Trallians about false teachings. In the following quote, he seems concerned primarily with heretical teachings called Docetism, a Christian schism which believed that Jesus had only appeared to be human but was instead wholly divine:

Epistle to the Philadelphians

Again, Ignatius is concerned in this letter with schisms, something that he was probably dealing with in the conflicts in his own church in Antioch:

Also, while Ignatius is clearly worried about any doctrines that deviate from his own, he once again reminds those in the church at Philadelphia not to follow Jewish practices:

It should be clear by now that Christianity and Judaism were not entirely separate at this point, except in the minds of some gentile Christians. We see similar anti-Judaism rhetoric from John Chrysostom, the bishop of Antioch two centuries later, indicating that the complete separation of Judaism and Christianity took a very long time.

Finally, this letter also tells us that Ignatius’ home church at Antioch is no longer experiencing conflict, reinforcing that there was conflict before. Did this conflict end because of Ignatius’ own forced departure?

Epistle to the Smyrnaeans

In this letter, we get another clear reference to the Docetic notion of Jesus:

He then makes further accusations against the Docetists regarding the Eucharist:

Epistle to the Romans

This letter is somewhat unique because Ignatius writes it in anticipation of his arrival in Rome,  his (very) final destination. While he wants to visit with representatives of the Roman church, he doesn’t want them to advocate for his release:

This demonstrates that not only did Ignatius see martyrdom as the highest honor, but that many early Christians seem to have believed the same. Note the metaphor of Ignatius as bread, not unlike Jesus’ metaphor of himself as the bread of life in John 6:32-35.

It’s also interesting to note that Ignatius assumes that the Roman church has the power to advocate successfully for Christian prisoners, implying perhaps that it has already done so before.

Epistle to Polycarp

In addition to the letter to the church at Smyrna, Ignatius wrote a letter to its bishop Polycarp who would later become a famous martyr himself. Ignatius begins this letter by telling Polycarp that his church at Antioch is finally at peace, asking him to write a letter to the Antiochene church encouraging them:

He further asks Polycarp to send a letter to several other churches, asking that they too send letters of congratulations and encouragement to the church of Antioch.

Conclusion

Despite the lack of information we have about the life of Ignatius of Antioch, his letters have long given scholars sources for 2nd-century developments in Christian thought and church authority.

Ignatius was a bishop in Antioch, Syria, where there seems to have been some kind of conflict in the Church, either over doctrine or over authority (or both). It may very well be this division among the Antiochene church that caused Ignatius to be arrested and condemned. Whatever the reason, he was transported for his execution to Rome, possibly because the governor of Syria was not available.

On the way to Rome, accompanied by Roman soldiers, Ignatius wrote six letters to churches and one to an individual. Themes of these letters included railing against people he perceived as heretics — although he didn’t use that word — such as the Docetists and Jewish Christians, the importance of the authority of Christ as manifested through bishops, and the honor of martyrdom, something he was looking forward to for himself.

While we may not know a lot about Ignatius’ life, his letters provide us with an abundance of information about the dynamics of the early church. If you’d like to know more about early Christianity, check out Bart Ehrman’s course Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide.

Athanasius: Defender of Orthodoxy and Early Church Shaper

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

Christianity began as a small sect within Judaism. As the new movement spread, key figures emerged to defend its core beliefs and guide its growth. One of the most influential of these was bishop Athanasius of Alexandria whose leadership left an indelible mark on the early Church.

Even though the new movement didn’t exclusively draw members from society’s lower ranks, before Emperor Constantine’s conversion in 312 C.E., the wealthy and elite largely kept their distance from Christianity. 

Yet, as Peter Brown notes, by the middle of the 4th century, the wealthy and powerful were “waiting in the wings, as it were, to make their presence felt in the churches.” This era also marked the rise of influential bishops and leaders, with St. Athanasius standing out as one of the most important of them all.

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Therefore, this article will explore Athanasius’ life, from his early years to his rise as bishop of Alexandria. We’ll examine his most significant writings, including The Life of St. Anthony and his theological defenses, which remain central to Christian thought. 

Finally, we’ll consider his historical significance within the broader Christian tradition and why his influence continues to be felt today. 

However, before we step into the world of 4th century Egypt and explore Athanasius' life and lasting influence, you may want to consider diving into one of the most debated topics in early Christianity with Dr. Bart D. Ehrman’s course “Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide”.

This amazing course explores whether Paul and Jesus shared the same religious vision or if Paul's teachings marked a significant departure, shaping Christianity into what it became! 

Athanasius: Biography

Who is Athanasius? Athanasius of Alexandria, born around 295 C.E., emerged from humble beginnings in one of the most vibrant and tumultuous cities of the Roman Empire. 

Alexandria was a bustling metropolis, a hub of culture, learning, and religious diversity. As Khaled Anatolios notes, the city’s status as both a cultural and administrative center of Egypt made it the perfect backdrop for the future bishop’s influential career. 

While much of Athanasius’ early life remains shrouded in mystery, it’s generally agreed that he grew up in a non-Christian family before converting to Christianity, a move that would shape not only his life but the course of the religion’s history. 

After his conversion, Athanasius caught the attention of Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria, who became his mentor and later ordained him as a deacon. Athanasius was barely 30 years old when he was thrust into the spotlight by becoming the bishop of Alexandria in 328 C.E.

Peter Gemeinhardt notes that a synodal letter sent 10 years later from Alexandria described the decisive factor in his election as bishop: The church community had perceived Athanasius as “zealous, devout, Christian, one of the ascetics, and a true bishop.” (my translation)

His appointment followed the death of his mentor, Bishop Alexander, but, as Timothy Barnes explains in his study Athanasius and Constantius, Athanasius’ rise to power wasn’t without controversy. 

His election was challenged by factions within the Egyptian church, particularly the Melitians, who had been embroiled in schismatic tensions for years. 

Yet, despite these early challenges, Athanasius quickly made a name for himself as a staunch defender of Nicene orthodoxy, particularly against the rising tide of Arianism, which assumed the subordinate position of Jesus to God the Father. 

As it turns out, Athanasius’ unyielding stance against Arianism would define much of his career — and his many exiles. Throughout his nearly five-decade tenure as bishop, Athanasius spent at least 17 years in exile, scattered across five separate periods. 

These exiles were largely the result of his opposition to Arianism, which several Roman emperors, including Constantius II (reigned 337–361 C.E.), the middle son of Constantine the Great, supported.

In other words, Athanasius' determination to uphold Nicene's orthodoxy earned him both powerful enemies and devoted allies, particularly among Egypt’s growing monastic communities. 

One example that illustrates his unwavering battle for what Athanasius perceived as “orthodoxy” pertains to his actions in the spring of 362 C.E. He summoned a council of bishops in Alexandria, which the church historian Rufinus refers to as the “Synod of the Confessors.”

In his study Athanasius der Große. Der unbeugsame Heilige (Athanasius the Great: The Unyielding Saint), German historian Manfred Clauss explains the purpose and the outcome of this synod:

Clauss notes that, from Athanasius' perspective, the “fallen” bishops were divided into several groups. Those who had voluntarily joined the Arians were removed from the clergy, while those who had renounced the Nicene faith under state pressure but were now willing to reaffirm it were forgiven, as this affected most of the Alexandrian clergy.

But it wasn’t just his actions at the synod that showcased his influence; Athanasius also used his literary talents to further solidify his authority and theological stance.

As a master of theological rhetoric, Athanasius penned numerous works during these years, including his famous Life of St. Anthony. His writings also serve as a testament to his resilience, using his time in exile to craft arguments that would strengthen his position once he returned to Alexandria.

Despite the many political and theological storms he weathered, Athanasius eventually returned to Alexandria, where he spent his final years in relative peace. One could humorously observe that he was something of an ecclesiastical “boomerang” — just when his opponents thought they’d gotten rid of him, he kept coming back.

He died in 373 C.E., having outlasted his Arian adversaries and leaving a profound legacy on Christian doctrine.

His steadfast defense of Nicene orthodoxy solidified his place as one of the great Church Fathers, with a reputation as a tireless and, some might say, relentless defender of what he perceived as the right interpretation of Christianity.

Athanasius: Major Works and Their Importance

Athanasius’ legacy as a prolific and influential writer can’t be overstated. Perhaps, the best illustration of this comes from an unexpected witness.

In The Penguin Dictionary of Saints, Donald Attwater and Catherine R. John remind us of the words that came from an 8th-century monk: “If you find a book by Athanasius and have no paper on which to copy it, write it on your shirts.” 

His works, ranging from theological treatises to biographical accounts and pastoral letters, became cornerstones of early Christian thought. Among these, several stand out for their lasting impact on both doctrine and Christian practice.

#1 – On the Incarnation

In this text, Athanasius lays out a clear and compelling argument for the necessity of the Word becoming flesh. He emphasizes that only through the Incarnation could humanity be redeemed from sin and corruption.

He writes:

Athanasus’ argument wasn’t merely theological but also practical, addressing the concerns of a divided Church facing the growing influence of Arianism — a theological doctrine named after the Alexandrian priest Arius, who argued that Christ, as the Son of God, was a created being and not co-eternal with the Father. 

The refutation of Arius’ teachings is perhaps most vivid in a series of works known as Four Discourses Against the Arians. 

#2 – Four Discourses Against the Arians

In these writings, Athanasius engaged with Arian claims that Christ, as the Son of God, was a created being rather than being of the same substance (Greek: homoousios) as God the Father. His orations make use of scriptural interpretation to argue in favor of the full divinity of Christ, a stance central to the Nicene Creed.

Weinandy explains that in his discourses against the Arians, Athanasius stresses a key distinction between creatures and the Son. 

Creatures are made and differ in essence (Greek: ousia) from the Father. However, the Son, as the Word and Wisdom of the Father, is not external to Him. Unlike creatures, the Son doesn’t differ in kind or essence from the Father but is “the proper offspring of the Father’s ousia.” As a result, Athanasius argues, the Son isn’t foreign to the Father’s essence but is proper to it.

Finally, this work undoubtedly reflects the intellectual exchanges happening within the Church of that time and offers a perspective that sought to counter the Arian interpretation of Christ's relationship to God.

#3 – The Life of St. Anthony

Another of Athanasius’ major works is The Life of St. Anthony, a “biographical” account of the famed Egyptian monk who became the father of Christian monasticism. 

Written around 360 C.E., this text isn’t a biography in a modern sense but, first and foremost, an idealized (highly subjective) portrait of what Athanasius saw as the monastic virtue, intended to inspire Christians to embrace the “right” or “orthodox” form of asceticism. The Church, as you can see, continued its focus on the development and protection of “orthodoxy” against all those perceived as enemies. 

To “Bible nerds”, the name of St. Athanasius is perhaps best known for his role in shaping the New Testament canon. As you probably know, the New Testament didn’t just fall out of the sky. Rather, its formation was a process that took centuries, with debates about which books should be included or excluded continuing even after the 4th century.

But here’s a fun fact: Athanasius is our earliest witness to the complete list of the 27 books that we now recognize as the New Testament. In his 39th Festal Letter (written in 367 CE), he laid out the books that should be considered authoritative Scripture, giving us the first official mention of the canon that has become so familiar today.

Athanasius clearly wasn’t thrilled with some of the reading choices floating around at the time and was determined to put an end to the debate — at least within the Egyptian Church! 

So, next time you flip through the pages of your New Testament, you can thank Athanasius for helping to cement which books made it and which didn’t. Or, if you’re not entirely satisfied with the final product, well, you know who to blame!

Athanasius depicted Anthony as a man who renounced wealth and the comforts of society to live a life devoted entirely to God in the Egyptian desert. Furthermore, the good bishop also portrayed Anthony as a fierce enemy of Arianism which shouldn’t surprise us. After all, ancient “biographies” often reveal more about their authors than their subjects. 

Additionally, this work is particularly notable for its role in the development and spread of Christian monastic traditions. 

Daniel F. Caner rightly points out that "the single most important step toward the standardization of monastic practice was its identification, early on, with physical isolation, and with the Egyptian desert in particular; and no doubt the main reason for that was the rapid dissemination of a single text, namely the Life of Antony [italics added].”

Finally, Athanasius' portrayal of Anthony as a spiritual warrior who conquered demons through prayer and fasting became an archetype for future generations of monks. The text was translated into several languages and inspired countless readers, including St. Augustine, whose conversion came, among other things, as a result of hearing stories of Anthony’s life. 

#4 – Letters and Theological Correspondence

In addition to his treatises and biographical writings, Athanasius was a prolific letter writer. His correspondence was wide-ranging, addressing both pastoral concerns and theological debates.

Perhaps the most famous examples are the Festal Letters, sent annually to mark the beginning of the Easter season. In them, Athanasius not only provided pastoral guidance but also used them as an opportunity to reinforce Nicene orthodoxy in the face of ongoing Arian challenges.

In her book Athanase d’Alexandrie et l’Église d’Égypte au IVe siècle (Athanasius of Alexandria and the Egyptian Church in the 4th century) Annick Martin notes: 

Beyond the Festal Letters, Athanasius' Letters to Serapion are critical for their defense of the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Written amid the Arian controversy, these letters helped to solidify Trinitarian doctrine by insisting that the Holy Spirit, like the Son, is fully divine and consubstantial with the Father.

St. Athanasius: Historical Significance

When bishop Gregory of Nazianzus (329-390) wrote that Athanasius “reconciled” ascetic Christians with the institutional Church, he highlighted what contemporary scholars such as David Brakke have explored in detail. 

The rise of Christian monasticism can’t be traced to a single cause or moment; rather, it was a confluence of preexisting ascetic traditions that emphasized the spiritual over the material world.

However, by the 4th century, the “orthodox” Church began to recognize the potential of this growing social and religious movement. Among the most successful figures in integrating monasticism into the broader Church structure was undoubtedly Athanasius.

Like a skillful politician, he engaged with the monks, wrote letters, offered guidance, issued strategic directives, and articulated a vision of the Church that included bishops, monks, and laypeople. 

As Brakke observes, Athanasius' ultimate goal remained consistent: To connect ascetic Christians with the emerging "orthodox" Church while distancing them from dangerous heretical movements.

By integrating monastic life into the ecclesiastical framework, Athanasius ensured that monks wouldn’t only participate in the spiritual life but also serve as leaders within the institutional Church that was in the process of shaping its major doctrines (e.g. the Council of Nicaea). 

In his essay “Bishops and Charismatics in Early Christian Egypt,” Norman Russell rightly points out that the “integration of the monastic life into the general life of the Church became for him [Athanasius] a key element of his search for doctrinal unity.”

To put it more bluntly, Athanasius understood that monasticism could be a powerful force for upholding orthodoxy, especially in the face of heterodox pressures such as Arianism.

Another area where Athanasius' influence is particularly visible is in his efforts to preserve doctrinal unity within the “orthodox” Church. While his battle against Arianism is well known and already mentioned, Athanasius also worked tirelessly to ensure that the theological and liturgical practices of the Church were consistent across regions. 

His emphasis on maintaining a unified understanding of the nature of Christ, the Trinity, and the role of the Church was instrumental in preventing further fragmentation within the early Christian community, which is not to say that intra-Church debates and controversies didn’t continue after his death. 

Finally, Athanasius' impact on Christian liturgical practices should be noted. His Festal Letters, in which he provided guidance on the observance of Easter and other key feasts, helped standardize Christian liturgical life across Egypt.

All of this wouldn’t have been possible without a serious engagement on Athanasius’ part. Annick Martin reminds us that St. Athanasius was the first bishop of Alexandria to visit every diocese during the first six years of his episcopate. Even modern politicians know that getting out there and meeting people is one of the best ways to win them over — Athanasius, it seems, was well ahead of the curve!

Conclusion

So, who is Athanasius, and what significance does he have in the history of Christianity? Athanasius of Alexandria remains a pivotal figure in Christian history, not only for his theological contributions but also for his ability to navigate the complex social and religious dynamics of his time.

His unwavering commitment to Nicene orthodoxy, his role in integrating monasticism into the life of the Church, and his influence on the establishment of liturgical practices all demonstrate Athanasius’ lasting impact on the development of Christian doctrine and ecclesiastical structure.

Through his writings, pastoral efforts, and leadership, Athanasius played a central role in shaping the contours of what would become the "orthodox" Church, bridging theological divides and consolidating key aspects of Christian belief.

Though Athanasius faced significant opposition, including multiple exiles, his legacy endures in the works he left behind and the doctrinal foundations he helped establish.

I often get asked if the wealth that, to paraphrase the great Peter Brown, was “waiting in the wings” and entered the “orthodox” Church in the 4th century ultimately corrupted it beyond recognition. To frame it that way, however, is to fall into a simplistic understanding of what was a much more complex issue.

One of the things that this influx of wealth and power also brought was the arrival of highly capable, intellectually astute individuals such as Athanasius, whose contributions not only left a remarkable imprint on the Church but also on the broader society of his time.

Jerome: Everything About the “Doctor of the Church”

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

St. Jerome is one of the most influential figures in the history of Christianity, revered as a "Doctor of the Church" for his theological insights and scholarly contributions. Yet his life was marked by controversy, theological debates, personal struggles, and a profound quest for spiritual truth.

Who is Jerome? In this article, I’ll examine the life of Jerome, tracing his early years in a small town, his education in Rome, his monastic experiences in the desert, and his pivotal role in the development of biblical translation, as well as the controversies and challenges he faced.

Jerome’s Early Life

Eusebius Sophronius Hieronymus was born sometime between the years 342 and 347 CE. In English sources, by the way, the name “Hieronymus” was later anglicized to “Jerome.” He was born in a small town called Stridon in the Roman province of Dalmatia, which included modern-day northern Albania, much of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Serbia. The original name for this region was Illyria, and it had its own language which has long been extinct.

In Jerome: His Life, Writings, and Controversies,  J.N.D. Kelly notes that Jerome’s family was quite wealthy and owned large tracts of land around Stridon. This can be confirmed, according to Kelly, by letters later sent from Jerome to his younger brother Paulinianus instructing him to sell off some of those lands. By the way, if you’re interested in Jerome’s letters, 150 of them are freely available here.

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Jerome writes in his Preface to Job, as well as one of his copious letters, that his parents were Christians. The name he shared with his father — Eusebius, meaning “devout” in Greek — was a common Christian name in the Roman Empire. Although Jerome wasn’t baptized as an infant, his parents did make sure he was enrolled as a catechumen, someone receiving instruction in the Christian faith. Kelly notes that, although infant baptism was common at the time, equally common was the practice of postponing it until the turbulence of adolescence and even young  manhood had passed (Augustine of Hippo did this, for instance).

For all intents and purposes, Jerome lived the normal childhood of the son of a wealthy family, including a basic education, until he reached adolescence.

Jerome’s Education in Rome

Wealthy children in the ancient Mediterranean world were often sent away from home for their education. Jerome was sent to Rome, along with his friend Bonosus of Sardica, to study rhetoric and philosophy. Kelly says that this normally happened in wealthy families in the 4th century when a child was around the age of 12. There, Jerome studied under a well-known grammarian and teacher of rhetoric named Aelius Donatus, learning Latin and at least some Greek.

From his many letters, we know that during the years he spent in Rome, the young Jerome had several friends and classmates in addition to Bonosus. One of these was Turranius Rufinus, with whom Jerome would maintain contact for years, although that contact would not always be friendly. Another was named Heliodorus, a man with whom he would maintain a lifelong friendship.

From those same letters, we discover that the young Jerome was interested in more than education while at Rome. In one of these, he writes of himself as the Prodigal Son, who was “befouled with the squalor of every kind of sin.” He also says that he had fallen “on the slippery path of youth.” He illuminates this further when he writes that, as an older man, he praised virginity, not because he himself was a virgin but because he admired what he had lost.

However, in Jerome’s Commentary on Ezekiel he writes that to relieve his conscience for indulging in those hedonistic pleasures, he would visit the burial places of martyrs and the apostles in the catacombs:

That last line from Vergil, the translation of which means “Horror strikes hearts everywhere, and at the same time the very silences terrify them," betrays both Jerome’s fearful state of mind at that time as he contemplated eternal damnation and the vast influence of his classical education through famous Latin authors such as Vergil and Terrence.

Solitude and Asceticism in the Desert

Jerome’s formal education probably ended when he was around 20 years old as it did for most wealthy young men. His hedonistic days over, he seems to have begun taking his spiritual life more seriously. There are, unfortunately, very few clues from this time of his life, but Kelly notes that there are a few hints from letters written much later.

He made his way first to the city of Trier in modern-day Germany, along with his friend Bonosus. In one of his letters, he says they lived in a place on the banks of the Rhine river. Our only hint about his activities in Trier is one small phrase in which he says he had copied some well-known books to keep for his library.

After a stay of undetermined length, he made his way back to Stridon, his hometown, presumably without Bonosus. We don’t know how long he stayed there, but this time of his life was characterized by a long period of travel during which he visited the city of Aquileia in northern Italy and then Antioch, Syria. While in Antioch, he was visited by his friend from student days Heliodorus, who had some notable news: their old friend Rufinus was living as a monk at a place called Nitria, a well-known monastic settlement in Egypt. He then learned that Bonosus had become a solitary monk on a tiny island in the Adriatic Sea.

The news of his former companions inspired Jerome to become a desert monk himself. He therefore traveled to the Syrian desert of Chalcis, not far from Antioch, where many solitary monks were known to live. His letters say that it was here that he first began to learn Hebrew from a local Jewish Christian. Additionally, in his book Nazarene Jewish Christianity: From the End of the New Testament Period Until Its Disappearance in the Fourth Century, Ray Pritz writes that at this time, Jerome was able to read and copy a Gospel written in Hebrew, later translating it into Greek, getting more practice in translation which would later serve him well.

Like other solitary monks in Chalcis, Jerome probably lived in a cave, according to Kelly. We know that he also fasted extensively and spent large amounts of time in solitude. However, there was sporadic contact with other monks living nearby. This contact would lead to a controversy based on an ongoing disagreement in the larger Christian world over the proper way to understand the Trinity.

One of Jerome’s letters from this time was to a local priest, complaining that other monks in the area were insulting and abusing him for his position on the Trinity. Basically, there were arguments over whether God was one in three persons, or three separate beings, much as Arius had apparently claimed decades before and for which he had been denounced at the Council of Nicaea. This would not be the last controversy in Jerome’s theological life.

Later, for example, Jerome and his former friend Rufinus would conduct a heated war of words over the writings of Origen of Alexandria. Many in the Church had already condemned some of Origen’s ideas by this time, including the pre-existence of souls and Origen’s use of Platonic philosophy. Jerome thus vehemently denounced Origen while Rufinus, whose Latin translations of some of Origen’s writings are still our only copies, staunchly defended Origen as a spiritual authority.

This highlights Jerome’s fiery personality. J.N.D. Kelly writes that while Rufinus’ letters reveal him to be “more cautious, more deliberate, more steadfast,” Jerome’s letters show that he was “much more passionate, impulsive, egotistical… and sensitive” to criticism.

Constantinople and a Return to Rome

The abuse he suffered, especially the indignity of being called a heretic, made Jerome angry enough that he finally decided to leave the desert. He went first to Constantinople, capital of the eastern Empire. While living there, he attended the Council of Constantinople, a fairly small council at which debates about the nature of the Trinity continued. In addition, he wrote a commentary on Isaiah 6 in the form of a letter to the current Pope Damasus in Rome. This would be his foray into serving the Pope.

Though we don’t know the details of how he was taken on, the next we see of Jerome is when he serves as the Pope’s protégé in Rome. Among his other clerical and ecclesiastical duties, he started a revision of the already-translated Latin versions of the Gospels.

At that time in Rome, Jerome was often surrounded by wealthy women who would be his benefactors and patrons. These included the widows Marcella, Lea, and Paula, as well as Paula's daughters, Blaesilla and Eustochium. His influence and commitment to asceticism caused these women to reject the hedonism of Roman life. In his preface to Cartas de S. Jerónimo (Letters of St. Jerome), Ruiz Bueno writes that approximately 40% of Jerome’s letters were addressed to them and that he was criticized by the Roman clergy for spending so much time with women.

When Pope Damasus died in 384 CE, Jerome was removed from his position, partly because of lascivious allegations about his relationship with the widow Paula. In addition, Jerome's condemnation of Blaesilla's decadent lifestyle led her to take on severe ascetic practices, so severe, in fact, that she died just four months after beginning to follow his instructions. Many Roman elites were outraged. It was time for Jerome to leave Rome.

The Monastery at Bethlehem

The widow Paula paid for Jerome to travel to and live in a monastery in Bethlehem. It was here that he would finally work intensively on his Latin translation of the Bible, which came to be known as the Vulgate and which he had begun in Rome in 382 CE. He first revised older Latin versions of the Gospels, and then began an extensive translation of the entire Hebrew Bible. His translation differed from previous versions, however, since he translated directly from the Hebrew rather than the Greek version, known as the Septuagint.

He completed the entire Bible by 405 CE. Augustine of Hippo thought Jerome’s translation from the Hebrew was a mistake, believing that the Septuagint was itself an inspired translation. In addition, modern scholars have often disparaged Jerome’s grasp of the Hebrew and, thus, the accuracy of his translation. However, in Jerome's Hebrew Philology: A Study Based on His Commentary on Jeremiah, Michael Graves concludes that Jerome was an adequate, if not proficient, translator of Hebrew.

Jerome lived the next 15 years in the monastery at Bethlehem, producing vast quantities of writings, including commentaries, letters, histories, and hagiographies (biographies of saints), despite failing eyesight. He died in Bethlehem in 420 CE.

Conclusion

Coming from a highly-privileged Christian family in Stridon, Jerome was sent to Rome, like other scions of Roman wealth, to further his education. The years he spent in Rome and his studies in Latin rhetoric and grammar, would stand him in good stead later as an author and scholar.

In addition to enjoying the pleasures of youth, the young Jerome found himself fearing eternal punishment. Nevertheless, his time spent repenting in the catacombs among the bodies of saints seems to have convinced him to take his Christian life more earnestly.

Drawn to the asceticism of desert monks, Jerome then spent time in the Syrian desert, living a mostly solitary life of prayer and austerity and only leaving when theological controversy erupted around him, exposing him to accusations of heresy. As a result, he returned to Rome.

In Rome, working for Pope Damasus, he began what would become his masterpiece: the Vulgate, a Latin translation of the entire Bible, rendered from the original languages. However, accused by the Roman elite of scandal and being responsible for the death of a young woman under his tutelage, Jerome fled to a monastery in Bethlehem where he lived out his final years.

In the Catholic Church, he is the patron saint of translators, librarians, and encyclopedists, for obvious reasons.

Justin Martyr: Everything About the Christian Apologist

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

It feels like a lifetime has passed since I first chose to dedicate my professional journey to the study of early Christian history. I still vividly remember the moment I informed my professor of my decision. Young, eager, and full of ambition, I naively believed I could grasp the entirety of this vast field in just a few short years. 

My professor, with a knowing smile, simply said, "You are stepping into a well of endless knowledge, filled with thinkers and writers who will change your perspective at every turn. It’s not a sprint —  it’s a lifelong journey." And, as you can guess, he was right.

Among the many towering figures who have shaped the course of early Christian thought, one stands out as especially transformative: Justin Martyr.

Justin’s legacy as a philosopher turned Christian apologist offers us a glimpse into a time when Christianity was still struggling to find its place in the Greco-Roman world. His works, especially Apologies and Dialogue with Trypho, reveal the intellectual rigor and spiritual depth that defined his life’s mission.

In this article, we’ll explore the life of Justin Martyr — what we can know of his education, his conversion, and his eventual martyrdom. We’ll then turn our attention to his major writings, delving into the ideas that shaped his Apologies and Dialogue.

Finally, we’ll examine his lasting impact on Christian thought and why, centuries later, Justin remains one of the most influential figures in the history of Christianity. Join us as we enter into the time machine and work our way back to the 2nd century C.E.

Justin Martyr: Biography

Justin Martyr, born in the early second century in Flavia Neapolis (modern-day Nablus in the West Bank), probably grew up in a Greek-speaking, non-Jewish family within the Roman province of Samaria. 

In Greek Apologists of the Second Century, Robert M. Grant notes that his background suggests strong ties to Hellenistic culture, as his family bore names such as Priscus and Baccheius, evoking Roman and Dionysian connections. 

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Justin's early life was marked by a deep philosophical curiosity, driven by his quest for truth and meaning in a world that, at the time, offered him several competing systems of thought.

Initially, Justin explored various philosophical schools, starting with Stoicism. However, he quickly became disillusioned with Stoic teachers, finding them unwilling to engage in discussions about theology — the very subject that intrigued him the most.

His intellectual journey next led him to Peripatetic and Pythagorean teachers, but he found their approach either too focused on wealth or reliant on prerequisites he didn’t have. It wasn’t until he encountered Platonism that Justin felt he had found a system capable of addressing the deeper questions of reality and existence.

In his writings, Justin recalls how the Platonist ideas of incorporeals and the vision of God excited his mind and seemed to offer a glimpse of the ultimate truth.

The turning point in Justin’s life came during an encounter with an elderly Christian near the seashore, likely in Ephesus. The old man challenged the very foundations of Platonism, pointing out its contradictions and leading Justin to consider a higher religious authority.

This interaction ignited a new passion in Justin for the prophets of the Old Testament, whose wisdom, he realized, predated and surpassed the Greek philosophers. From that moment, Justin became a Christian, and his conversion led him to dedicate his life to teaching and defending the faith.

However, unlike some of his contemporaries, Justin didn’t become a cleric but remained a philosopher. Jörg Ulrich explains: 

To avoid anachronistic projections, we must remember that Justin likely operated as a “freelance philosopher” in Rome. As Joseph H. Lynch notes in his book Early Christianity: A Brief History:

This serves as a reminder of the loosely connected Christian communities — Christianities, in the plural — that existed in the capital city of the Empire during the 2nd century, a social phenomenon that scholars such as Peter Lampe have analyzed in detail.

Justin's death was as significant as his intellectual journey. Around 165 C.E., during the reign of the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius, Justin was arrested and tried in Rome for his Christian beliefs. 

The account of his martyrdom has been preserved in three different editions. Ulrich notes that the central elements (the gist of the story) are essentially historically credible, as the process outlined corresponds to the otherwise known procedure. 

The urban prefect Rusticus, who led the trial, demanded that Justin and the other arrested Christians sacrifice to the Roman gods to demonstrate loyalty to the empire.

Justin’s response was characteristically bold. When threatened by death, Justin responded with a firm belief in the afterlife: “I hope that I shall have His gifts if I endure these things. For I know that, to all who have thus lived, there abides the divine favor until the completion of the whole world.”

Rusticus, unfazed by Justin’s defiance, pressed him further, instructing him to obey the imperial decree and perform the sacrifices. Justin, however, refused, stating that no one in their right mind would trade the truth of Christianity for pagan falsehoods.

Despite the prefect’s repeated demands, Justin and his companions held firm in their convictions. They were unflinching in their refusal to sacrifice to the gods, a stand that sealed their fate. Rusticus, after having exhausted his questions, sentenced them to death by beheading.

The execution was carried out swiftly, and Justin’s calm acceptance of his death became a powerful testimony of his courage, sealing his place in the history of Christianity. Soon after his death, Justin was recognized and revered as one of the Christian martyrs and his writings continued to inspire future generations of Christian leaders and authors.

It’s precisely to his writings that we’ll turn our attention now. After all, Justin was, as Bart D. Ehrman notes in Lost Christianities, “one of the most productive proto-orthodox authors of the second century.”

Justin Martyr: Major Works

Justin Martyr's most important surviving works, First and Second Apology and Dialogue with Trypho stand as key texts of early Christian apologetics. Written in the mid-second century, these works reflect Justin’s defense of Christianity within the context of Greco-Roman culture.

First Apology

Justin’s First Apology, addressed to Emperor Antoninus Pius and his adopted sons, argues for the rationality and ethical superiority of Christianity. Central to this defense is Justin’s attempt to refute the accusation that Christians were atheists — a common charge, as they rejected the Roman pantheon of gods. 

Moreover, Justin boldly proclaims that Christians worship the one true God and that, far from being dangerous, they contribute to the moral and social good of the empire by upholding virtues such as justice, chastity, and charity.

In what kind of a God does Justin believe and defend? Eric Osborn explains Justin’s views:

Furthermore, Justin constructs his argument for the superiority of Christianity through a comparison with the philosophical traditions of the Greco-Roman world. He aligns certain Christian teachings with Platonic ideals, especially regarding the nature of the soul and the afterlife, while highlighting the uniqueness of Christian doctrine, such as the resurrection of the body.

For Justin, Jesus embodies the Logos, the rational principle of the universe, which was partially revealed to pre-Christian philosophers such as Socrates and Plato. However, he insists that Christianity reveals the Logos in its fullness through the incarnation of Christ.

The First Apology also includes a detailed description of Christian rituals,  such as baptism and the Eucharist, emphasizing the transparency and moral integrity of Christian worship. Those values contrasted with what he viewed as the secretive and immoral practices of Roman paganism. 

Second Apology

Justin’s Second Apology is often considered an extension of his First Apology, and many scholars believe the two works were originally intended to form a single document.

While the First Apology primarily addresses the Roman authorities, defending Christians against accusations of atheism, the Second Apology delves deeper into the spiritual and philosophical dimensions of Christianity, with a particular focus on the experience of Christian martyrs.

A key theme in the Second Apology is the role of demons in opposing Christianity. Justin explains that these demons, who once masqueraded as the gods of the Roman pantheon, are behind the persecution of Christians and the false accusations levied against them.

This emphasis on demonic activity reflects Justin’s broader theological framework, in which the conflict between good (embodied in Jesus) and evil (embodied in the demons) plays a central role in human history. 

Moreover, by relating pagan gods with demons, Justin attacks the core of Greco-Roman religious tradition, arguing that the whole pagan mythology serves the needs of the evil forces.

Charles Munier offers an excellent conclusion regarding Justin's attitude toward Greco-Roman mythology:

Dialogue with Trypho

Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho takes a different approach, engaging in a theological debate with a Jewish interlocutor. The dialogue is framed as a philosophical discussion, but scriptural interpretation is its main focus. Justin’s goal is to convince Trypho, a learned Jew, that Jesus is the Messiah prophesied in the Hebrew Scriptures. 

Throughout the text, Justin offers a Christian reading of the Old Testament, arguing that many of its prophecies — particularly those concerning the Messiah — find their fulfillment in Jesus.

The debate touches on issues such as the continued relevance of the Mosaic Law and the nature of salvation, with Justin asserting that Jesus’ coming heralds a new covenant, rendering the old law obsolete. 

Although the dialogue ends without Trypho’s conversion, it is clear that Justin sees this exchange as part of a broader attempt to position Christianity as the fulfillment of Judaism — a feature that Tessa Rajak has labeled as the fundamental principle in the development of the proto-orthodoxy. 

In addition to these, Justin Martyr is known to have written several other works, though most have been lost. These include Treatise Against All Heresies and a now fragmentary work against Marcion, both referenced by later writers such as Irenaeus and Tertullian.

While we lack the full texts, these writings likely expanded on Justin’s defense of Christian orthodoxy and his opposition to other forms of Christianity he labeled as heresies.

St. Justin Martyr: Historical and Theological Significance

Justin’s writings stand as monumental contributions to Christian apologetics. Sara Parvis, for instance, argued that Justin’s apologetic works served as a basic model for subsequent Christians who offered defenses to Roman authorities. 

Furthermore, he provides the earliest account of Christian worship outside the New Testament, describing how Christians gather on Sundays to read the Scriptures (especially the “memoirs of the apostles”), pray, and partake in the Eucharist. 

The service includes a sermon by the leader, communal prayers, and the sharing of bread, wine, and water. Collected offerings support the needy, such as orphans, widows, and those in distress, and Sunday is chosen for worship because it commemorates both the creation of the world and Christ’s resurrection.

Justin’s contributions go beyond his role as an apologist; he also played a pivotal part in shaping the intellectual identity of Christianity in its formative years. One of Justin’s most enduring legacies is his embodiment of the Christian philosopher-apologist model.

By presenting himself as a philosopher who found the ultimate truth in Christianity, Justin Martyr bridged the gap between Greco-Roman intellectual traditions and the emerging religion which was, as Michael J. Kruger noted, at the crossroads in so many of its aspects. 

Additionally, Justin’s integration of Greek philosophical concepts, particularly those from Platonism, into Christian theology, allowed him to engage with educated pagans and present Christianity as the "true philosophy.”

Moreover, Justin Martyr wasn’t only a Christian apologist and intellectual; he also addressed the challenges posed by other Christian groups, such as the followers of Marcion, whom he deemed heretical. As Robert M. Royalty observes, Justin employed a rhetoric of delegitimation by linking these groups' teachings to demonic influence, thereby stripping them of the title “Christian.”

In his book La Notion d'Hérésie dans la Littérature Grecque, French scholar Alain Le Boulluec explored Justin Martyr's substantial influence in redefining the concept of “heresy.” Le Boulluec argued that it was primarily Justin who employed the notion of heresy to delineate the boundaries of what would later be called “orthodoxy,” thus imbuing the term with clear negative connotations.

But to delve deeper into Justin Martyr’s “heresiologist career” would lead us far beyond the scope of this article. 

Finally, Justin Martyr and the Catholic Church share a profound connection. Within the Catholic tradition, Justin is venerated as a saint and martyr who exemplified an unwavering commitment to his belief in one God.

His opposition to Roman authorities during his trial, and his refusal to renounce his belief in Jesus even in the face of execution, have cemented St. Justin Martyr’s legacy as a powerful witness to Christian perseverance.

Conclusion

Justin Martyr’s life and works stand as a testament to the intellectual and theological development of early Christianity. As both a philosopher and a Christian apologist, he navigated the complex intersection of Greco-Roman thought and Christian doctrine, offering compelling defenses of the faith to both Roman authorities and Jewish interlocutors.

His Apologies and Dialogue with Trypho not only laid the foundation for Christian apologetics but also illustrated how deeply early Christian thinkers engaged with the broader cultural and philosophical currents of their time. 

In reflecting on Justin’s legacy, it becomes clear that my professor was absolutely right – early Christian history is indeed a well of endless knowledge.

Figures like Justin demonstrate the profound intellectual richness of the period, offering perspectives that continue to influence scholarly discussions on the development of Christian thought within the broader context of ancient philosophy and culture.

Gospel of Mary Magdalene: Summary, Dating, and Little-Known Facts

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

"Sir Leigh Teabing was still talking. 'I shan't bore you with the countless references to Jesus and Magdalene's union. That has been explored ad nauseam by modern historians. I would, however, like to point out the following.' He motioned to another passage. 'This is from the Gospel of Mary Magdalene.' 

Sophie had not known a gospel existed in Magdalene's words. She read the text: 'And Peter said, “Did the Saviour really speak with a woman without our knowledge? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did he prefer her to us?” The woman they are speaking of,' Teabing explained, 'is Mary Magdalene. Peter is jealous of her.'”

For many, including myself, this passage in Dan Brown’s infamous novel served as an eye-opening introduction to the lesser-known narratives of early Christianity. 

I remember being a sophomore in college, flipping through the pages of the book late at night, when I first encountered the idea that there were other gospels — those not included in the Bible. 

This moment was more than just an exciting literary experience; it was a turning point in my academic journey. The tantalizing prospect that there were other gospels, other stories, out there waiting to be uncovered sparked a passion within me to explore the world of early Christianity.

But what exactly is the Gospel of Mary Magdalene? Why has it remained outside the canon of the New Testament, and what does it reveal about Mary and Jesus? 

This article will explore the history, content, and significance of this remarkable text, thus shedding light on its enduring mystery and importance.

But before we begin, if you’re intrigued by the complexities of early Christian history and want to dive deeper into the relationship between Paul and Jesus, check out Dr. Bart D. Ehrman’s online course, "Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide."

In this course, Dr. Ehrman critically examines whether Paul and Jesus shared the same religion, revealing surprising insights into two of Christianity’s most pivotal figures. It's a must-watch for anyone interested in understanding the historical foundations of Christianity!

The Book of Mary: Basic Overview

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene is an ancient text discovered in 1896 as part of the Berlin Codex, a collection of early Christian writings. However, it wasn't fully recognized until much later, with significant portions of the text remaining missing. 

This manuscript, written in Coptic, isn’t included in the New Testament and offers a unique glimpse into early Christian thought, particularly a thought that probably shares some Gnostic elements (we’ll come back to that later). 

Furthermore, the content of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene primarily revolves around teachings attributed to Mary Magdalene, focusing on spiritual revelations and conflicts within the early Christian community.

Scholars generally date the Gospel of Mary Magdalene to the 2nd century CE, placing it within the early formative period of Christian doctrine.  As Wilhelm Schneemelcher firmly asserts in his work New Testament Apocrypha: “We may date it [the Book of Mary] fairly certainly in the 2nd century.” (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

The content of the Book of Mary and its possible connection to Gnostic thought sets this gospel apart from the canonical texts and contributes to its exclusion from the New Testament. We’ll delve deeper into these issues of dating, content, and the reasons behind its non-canonical status later in the article.

However, before we do that, let’s take a step back and look at Mary Magdalene as depicted in the Bible. Who was she and what can we know about her life? 

Who Was Mary Magdalene in the Bible? Revealing a Mysterious Figure

Near the capital city of Zagreb, Croatia, stands the Church of St. Mary Magdalene, a monument steeped in both religious and cultural significance. Dating back to the 13th century, it’s the oldest religious structure in the northern part of my country — a testament to the enduring reverence for Mary Magdalene in this region.

But who exactly is the figure behind this veneration, shrouded in layers of myth and tradition? Who was Mary Magdalene in the Bible, and what can we reliably know about her life and role within the first generation of Jesus worshippers??

The name “Mary” (also rendered as Mariamme, Mariamne, Mariam, Maria, among others) was incredibly popular in the ancient world, reflecting the legacy of Miriam, the sister of Moses and Aaron, a leader in Israel’s Exodus (see Exodus 15 for her “Song of the Sea”).

In his book Jesus and the Eyewitnesses, Richard Bauckham highlights the frequency of this name. He aptly notes: 

So, if you were playing “Guess the Name” in ancient Israel, betting on “Mary” was a pretty good choice! 

But while the name may have been common, Mary Magdalene's story is anything but. The title “Magdalene” isn’t a surname, as last names weren’t a thing back then in the way we think of them today. Instead, “Magdalene” could be a reference to the town of Magdala, a bustling fishing town on the western shore of the Sea of Galilee, known for its fish-salting industry. This may mean that this was where Mary was from.

Mary Magdalene is indentified as an early follower of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke, where she is introduced as a woman from whom Jesus cast out seven demons (8:1-3). 

Whether “seven” is meant to be taken literally or as a symbolic number representing complete affliction, it's clear that Mary was seen as someone profoundly affected by some kind of spiritual disorder before joining Jesus’ band of followers.

Interestingly, these women, including Mary, Joanna, and Susanna, supported Jesus “out of their means.” The Greek term used here, “διακονεῖν” (diakonein), might suggest that their role may have gone beyond financial support to include formal ministerial duties.

Bart D. Ehrman notes in his book Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene: “We don’t have any indication where they received an income. Possibly these women just happened to be wealthy, that is, they came from wealthy families and/or married into money.” 

Indeed, Mary may have been part of a broader network of women who were important to Jesus' ministry, even if the Gospels don’t always shine a spotlight on them.

Despite her significant presence in the Crucifixion and Resurrection accounts across all four Gospels (Mark 15:40; Matthew 27:56; Luke 23:49; John 19:25), Mary Magdalene remains somewhat elusive. 

In each of these scenes, her name appears first among the women present, signaling her prominence. In other words, she is the first to witness the risen Jesus in several accounts – an extraordinary honor that early Christian tradition preserved despite the patriarchal context of the time.

Based on the Gospel accounts, here’s what we can know about Mary Magdalene: 

These points, drawn from the New Testament Gospels, provide a glimpse into Mary Magdalene's importance in early Christianity.

While the canonical Gospels offer a fragmented portrayal of Mary, other non-canonical texts give her a more prominent role. One such text is the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, where she emerges not just as a follower of Jesus but as a spiritual leader in her own right.

As we move forward, we’ll present a summary of the gospel of Mary Magdalene and explore how it portrays her as a key figure in early Christian thought – one whose voice, although somewhat marginalized in the canonical texts, continued to resonate in Christian communities beyond the bounds of the proto-orthodox movement.

Gospel of Mary Magdalene: Authorship, Summary, Dating, and Critical Reflection

As we explore the Gospel of Mary Magdalene — a text that offers a unique perspective on early Christian thought — we’ll not only examine its origins, content, and significant themes but also provide a critical (historical) reflection! Let’s begin.

The Book of Mary: Authorship and Dating

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, the only early Christian gospel attributed to a woman, presents a fascinating yet complex puzzle for scholars. The surviving text is composed of two short Greek fragments and a longer Coptic translation, all of which point to a much larger original work.

Dating this gospel is challenging, but contemporary scholars generally agree it was likely written in the 2nd century CE.

Christopher Tuckett, in his book The Gospel of Mary, suggests that the nature of the debate between Peter, Andrew, Mary, and Levi at the end of the gospel might indicate an earlier date within the century. He notes: 

In other words, while a 2nd-century date seems most likely, it’s plausible that the text emerged in the first half of the century, during a time of fluid theological boundaries. However, this remains speculative, as we lack definitive evidence to pinpoint an exact date.

As for authorship, the surviving fragments of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene don’t bear any attribution. This makes the text, strictly speaking, anonymous. It’s possible that the lost beginning of the narrative may have contained an attribution to Mary, similar to how the Gospel of Thomas claims Thomas as its author.

However, even if such a claim existed, no scholar would argue that the historical Mary Magdalene was the actual author. The gospel was written decades after her time, within a different social and historical context, and contains themes and ideas that would have been foreign to a 1st-century Jewish woman like Mary.

Is the Book of Mary a Gnostic Text?

Although the Gospel of Mary Magdalene shares certain themes with Gnostic thought, contemporary scholars have challenged the notion that it can be easily categorized as a Gnostic text. 

Karen King, for instance, has questioned whether “Gnosticism” is even a coherent or useful category, arguing that the wide diversity of beliefs and practices traditionally grouped under this label makes it difficult to apply to any specific text, including the Book of Mary.

Moreover, the Book of Mary lacks some of the core teachings that define Gnostic systems —  most notably, the myth of a malevolent demiurge, a figure central to many Gnostic narratives. 

Antti Marjanen, who once considered the gospel Gnostic (check out his book The Woman Jesus Loved), later revised his view, suggesting in an essay published in 2002 that, without this key element, the Gospel of Mary Magdalene can’t be fully classified as Gnostic.

He notes:

Additionally, David Brakke points out that the text shows stronger connections with the Gospel of Thomas and Valentinian ideas, further complicating its categorization. 

I opt for Tuckett’s suggestion that the Gospel of Mary Magdalene could still be considered Gnostic in the broader sense, or at least connected in some way to Gnostic thought.

However, the exact classification remains uncertain, and I believe we should favor a more nuanced approach that recognizes both the common and unique features of the text.

A Summary of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene

The narrative of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene begins with Jesus teaching his disciples after his death and resurrection. When he finishes his discourse, he instructs them to go forth and preach the gospel, then departs. However, instead of following his command, the disciples are overcome with fear and sorrow, worried that they’ll meet the same fate as Jesus.

At this critical moment, Mary Magdalene rises to reassure them, reminding them of God's grace and urging them to be resolute in their mission.

Peter then asks Mary to share any teachings that Jesus may have revealed to her privately, teachings that the other apostles might not know. In response, Mary recounts a vision in which Jesus appeared to her and spoke of the soul’s journey to its heavenly home, a path fraught with challenges from hostile powers.

But when Mary finishes her revelation, Andrew and Peter immediately challenge her. Andrew dismisses her teachings as strange, while Peter questions whether Jesus would have given such profound revelations to a woman in private.

Levi, however, defends Mary, accusing Peter of being prone to anger and reminding him that Jesus loved Mary more than the other disciples because of her deep understanding. Levi then urges the group to stop quarreling and go forth to preach the good news, as Jesus instructed.

Gospel of Mary Magdalene: Critical Reflection

The Book of Mary is more than just a story; it reflects deeper theological and social conflicts in early Christianity. The two main issues that lead to tensions between Mary and the male disciples are the content of her teachings, which seems unfamiliar to Andrew, and the fact that Mary, a woman, is teaching them.

This text presents a significant departure from the New Testament gospels, as it includes teachings from Jesus that sound similar to Valentinian theology — a stream of thought within early Christianity.

In the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Jesus shares several key ideas:

Furthermore, the gospel delves into a vision where Mary explains that the human soul must ascend past hostile powers such as Darkness, Desire, and Ignorance. These powers attempt to block the soul’s ascent, but when the soul reveals its true nature, it can move beyond them.

This journey of the soul echoes themes found in both Gnostic and Valentinian thought, placing the Gospel of Mary Magdalene somewhere between these two theological systems.

The Role of Women and Authority in Early Christianity

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene also highlights the struggle over the role of women in the early Church and the nature of religious authority. Peter’s objections to Mary’s revelation are twofold: she is a woman, and she received these teachings in private, without the other disciples' knowledge.

Peter’s stance likely represents a faction of early Christians who were resistant to female leadership and skeptical of private revelations that didn’t conform to established traditions.

This gospel suggests that certain Christian communities had developed rules and regulations that strayed from the original message of Jesus. These regulations, likely including restrictions on female leadership and strict adherence to an official canon, are implicitly criticized in the text.

So, the Book of Mary, much like the Gnostic Gospel of Judas, challenges emerging power structures within the Church, which sought to concentrate authority in the hands of male priests. 

In this struggle, Mary Magdalene, the first witness to the empty tomb, became a symbol of resistance against these developments, just as Peter became a symbol for the institutional (male-dominated) Church.

In the end, the contest between Mary Magdalene and Peter wasn’t just about theological differences — it was about the future direction of Christianity itself. Unfortunately for Mary, history shows that Peter and his side won this battle.

The emerging Church structure, with its hierarchy of male bishops and priests, became the dominant force, while texts like the Gospel of Mary Magdalene were, due to their Gnostic-like content and teachings, relegated to the margins. 

One can’t help but wonder how different Christian history might have been if Mary’s version of events had taken root. Perhaps, in a parallel universe, we’d all be learning about the seven stages of soul ascension instead of debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

But as it stands, Peter got the last word — though “Mary’s voice,” through this gospel and others, continues to resonate across the centuries.

Conclusion

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene offers a fascinating glimpse into the early Christian world and the conflicts that shaped the nascent Church. It challenges the dominant narratives of the New Testament and brings to light alternative perspectives, particularly regarding the role of women and the nature of spiritual authority.

As we look closely at the Book of Mary, we see a portrait of a woman not just as a follower of Jesus but as a leader and teacher whose contributions were significant, even if they were later downplayed or excluded from the official canon.

And to think, it all started with “The Da Vinci Code.” Who would have guessed that a novel filled with historical inaccuracies would be the spark that ignited my passion for early Christianity?

It’s ironic, really — what began as a fictional tale of secret gospels and hidden truths led me to uncover the real stories behind those ancient texts. So, perhaps Dan Brown got something right after all: Sometimes, fiction has a funny way of leading us to the truth.

Origen of Alexandria: Life, Writings, and Importance in Christianity

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

Many of my Christian friends are intrigued and attracted by the concept of reincarnation, even though it doesn't align with the core beliefs of most contemporary Christian denominations. Despite this, they often ask me if early Christians entertained such ideas. 

While there isn’t a straightforward example of the belief in reincarnation in early Christianity, one prominent figure came remarkably close. His name was Origen.

Origen of Alexandria (c. 185-254) was a towering intellectual in early Christianity, a theologian and philosopher whose ideas profoundly impacted Christian thought. Living in the 3rd century, he was a pioneering scholar, philosopher, and theologian who sought to reconcile Greek philosophy with Christian doctrine.

His works, though sometimes controversial, contributed significantly to the development of Christian theology and biblical exegesis (the interpretation of texts).

In this article, we’ll delve into Origen's life, explore his major works, and discuss his significance and lasting impact on Christianity. By examining his biography and contributions, we can better understand the complex and often contentious role he played in shaping early Christian thought. 

The Christian tradition is filled with great and important figures. So, before we begin our exploration of Origen's life and legacy, I want to invite you to check out the online course “Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide” by Dr. Bart D. Ehrman.

In this course, Dr. Ehrman analyzes two pivotal figures of Christianity, highlighting their similarities but more often their surprising differences! Dive deeper into the fascinating contrasts between Paul and Jesus and enhance your understanding of early Christian thought.

Origen of Alexandria: Biography

Origen was born around 185 C.E. into a Christian family in Alexandria, Egypt, one of the largest and most culturally diverse cities of the ancient world. 

Alexandria was a melting pot of philosophical streams and cultural influences, and the Christian Church itself was far from homogeneous. Notable Gnostic teachers like Basilides and Valentinus also hailed from this vibrant city.

Origen's father, Leonides, was martyred during the Severan Persecution of 202-203 C.E., a tragic event that profoundly affected the young Origen. 

Eusebius recounts that Origen was determined to join his father in martyrdom, but his mother, in a desperate attempt to save him, hid his clothes to keep him at home. After Leonides' death, the imperial authorities confiscated the family’s property, leaving Origen, at seventeen, responsible for his mother and six younger siblings.

Thanks to the generosity of a wealthy Christian woman, Origen briefly continued his studies. Despite the challenges, Origen's intellectual prowess blossomed. Of Greek ancestry, he was fluent in Greek and one of the few early church fathers to master Hebrew.

Joseph W. Trigg, in his Biography of Origen, highlights Origen's comprehensive education: “Origen clearly mastered the standard Hellenistic curriculum: the study of Greek literature along with mathematics and astronomy. His command of Scripture, likewise remarkable, also bespeaks a familiarity nourished from childhood.” (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

One episode from his life shows how profound Origen’s commitment to Christianity was. Eusebius informs us that he took the evangelical instructions so seriously that he acted on a verse from Matthew 19:12: 

“For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others – and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

Believe it or not, Origen of Alexandria, in his youthful zeal, took this verse literally and underwent the described operation, an act that French scholar Henri Crouzel finds intriguing given Origen's reputation as “the prince of allegory.” Perhaps, it was precisely a youthful zeal to blame since Origen did, indeed, in his later years, become known as a great allegorist. 

Origen left Alexandria in the early 230s during a dispute with his bishop, Demetrius. He then took up permanent residence in Palestinian Caesarea among bishops who highly valued his biblical interpretation. This wasn’t Origen's first visit to Caesarea Maritima; he had been there on previous occasions.

One of the causes of the conflict emerged when Bishop Demetrius criticized Origen for being allowed to preach during his earlier visit without being ordained as a priest.

To make it easier to understand Origen's life and contributions, here are some key dates highlighting significant moments. The table below is mostly based on information from Eusebius.

In his book “Griechische Kirchenväter” (“Greek Church Fathers”), Hans von Campenhausen notes: 

“Despite all his peacefulness and personal humility, Origen ultimately couldn’t give the office of the bishop the importance it claimed for itself.” (my translation)

In any case, Origen found his new residence in Caesarea Maritima — a city founded by King Herod as his Greek capital, which housed a major library of Greek and Hebrew texts. It was in Caesarea that Origen produced most of his extensive body of work.

In his later years, Origen's influence continued to grow, but so did the controversies surrounding his teachings. He traveled widely, engaging in theological debates and spreading his ideas. Unfortunately, persecution marked his later life.

During the Decian persecution around 250 C.E., Origen was imprisoned and tortured. He survived these ordeals, but his health was irreparably damaged, leading to his death a few years later, around 253-254 C.E. 

Origen: Major Works

Were he to teach on a modern theological faculty, Fred Norris observed, Origen would probably be a professor of the Old Testament, but one with so many interests in all the theological disciplines that, in essence, he would be a faculty in himself, yet more missionary, holistic, and helpful than many.

Undoubtedly, Origen was a prolific writer and an even greater intellectual. What follows is a list of his major works and short descriptions. 

Hexapla

Christopher Markschies, in his book “Origenes und sein Erbe” (“Origen and His Legacy”), situates this work in the second decade of the 3rd century, when Origen began an extensive amount of preparatory work to place Old Testament commentary on a solid philological foundation.

The Hexapla, or “Six Books,” contains the Hebrew text, the Hebrew text transliterated into Greek letters, and the four most important Greek translations of the Hebrew Bible — including the Septuagint — as well as commentaries on how these texts relate to the New Testament.

Here, Origen of Alexandria created the official biblical typology and identified passages in the Old Testament that prefigure the New Testament, which is used to this day. This work is evidence of his great influence on biblical scholarship.

On First Principles 

Origen’s greatest contribution to Christian theology was a work he wrote early in his career, On First Principles. This work was controversial not only because of its views but because it exists only in fragmentary form. The first three books have been reconstructed fairly accurately, while the later books are more questionable. 

In this book, Origen refined the language of analysis, which became the hallmark of Christian exegesis. He emphasized the importance of understanding the inner (allegorical) meaning, not just the literal meaning, of the text.

Furthermore, this work contains the first clear explanation of the creation of the Godhead, as well as discussions of the nature of evil that borrow heavily from Plato concluding that evil is, first and foremost, the absence of good.

Additionally, Origen stressed the importance of free will in achieving salvation, describing it as the process of moving the soul back toward God. This idea would bring him close to a modern concept of reincarnation, as we’ll explore later in the article.

Against Celsus

In Against Celsus, Origen offers a robust defense of Christianity against the criticisms of the pagan philosopher Celsus. To put it more bluntly, this work represents the culmination of early Christian apologetics.

In his translation of Against Celsus, Henry Chadwick points out: “Origen does not merely vindicate the character of Jesus and the credibility of the Christian tradition; he also shows that Christians can be so far from being irrational and credulous illiterates such as Celsus thinks them to be that they may know more about Greek philosophy than the pagan Celsus himself, and can make intelligent use of it to interpret the doctrines of the Church.”

Commentary on John’s Gospel

In this work, Origen produced what Ronald E. Heine describes as “the greatest exegetical work of the early Church.” This commentary showcases Origen's profound understanding of scripture and ability to draw deep theological insights from the text, thus significantly shaping subsequent Christian thought and exegesis.

Origen of Alexandria approached John's Gospel with a meticulous and innovative method, combining literal, moral, and allegorical interpretations to uncover the multi-layered meanings within the text. His work on John's Gospel not only illuminated the theological depths of the scripture but set a high standard for future biblical commentaries.

One of the saddest aspects of Origen's career is that so little of his remarkable work has reached us. In his second volume of Patrology, German scholar Johannes Quasten noted that of 574 homilies known to us, only 20 in Greek and others in Latin are extant. Fully 388 are lost.

The decision not to copy them because of the Origenist Controversy (theological disputes and condemnations surrounding Origen's teachings that emerged after his death) leaves us without many insights into Christian spirituality and philosophy. What was the controversy all about? To learn that, we need to delve deeper into Origen's theology and influence. To this, we turn our attention now.

Origen’s Theology and Influence

When observing Origen in his work as a philosopher, it becomes clear that the starting and ending point of his theology is the interpretation of biblical texts. His “system,” which lies behind all texts and is partially developed in his main work On First Principles, is the result of a vigorous attempt to interpret biblical texts so they can provide educated contemporaries with a convincing account of God, humanity, sin, and salvation.

Origen accepted the identification of Christ with the Logos (1:1) in John's Gospel — "the Word," but, more precisely, the rational Word of creation. According to Origen, the Christ-Logos was eternally created by the Father. 

He believed that God the Father, the Christ-Logos, and the Holy Spirit represented three aspects of the Godhead and stood in a hierarchical relationship to one another. The image he used is that of an eternal torch, one of which illuminates the other.

In the 4th century, serious debates arose over Origen’s view of the Trinity. Did he mean a hierarchy of emanations — that is, the Father generated the Son, who in turn generated the Holy Spirit — or are they coequal and coeternal?

So, Origen of Alexandria set up the intellectual framework for debates that would unfold at the Council of Nicaea and the Council of Constantinople, influencing theological discussions for the next century. 

Moreover, despite his dependence on Platonic thought, Origen was, first and foremost, a Christian who knew Hebrew texts very well. Consequently, he had a strong sense of the transcendence of God. For him, the Christ-Logos was the bridge between divinity and the material world or, in Platonic terms, from the world of being to the world of becoming.

Furthermore, Origen believed souls are eternal and inherently good, yet they possess free will. The first three books of On First Principles spend a great deal of time explaining how souls fell away from God.

They are divine, but because they have free will, they become inattentive and fall away from God like a charioteer who falls asleep at the reins — an image taken from Plato’s work Phaedrus. However, Origen posited that all souls, through knowledge and faith, can return to God. 

Origen’s theology, therefore, borders on the concept of reincarnation, suggesting a cyclical view of souls falling away and returning to God. He thought that if souls could fall away from God and re-attain perfection once, perhaps they could fall away again.

This notion implies a cyclical pattern of existence, deviating from the linear progressive time of the Hebrew tradition and moving toward a Greek philosophical (circular) sense of time.

In this scheme, no soul is condemned to hell for eternity; punishment is the soul contemplating and remembering its evil acts with remorse, thereby perceiving God and attaining divinization. Through these assumptions, Origen could argue for the universalism of salvation.

In his universalist view, while sinners would go to hell, hell was envisioned only as a temporary stage for purification before entrance into heaven.

As Brian E. Daley explains in his book The Hope of the Early Church:

“Behind this conviction that all punishment is ultimately medicinal and educational stands the equally strong conviction that all human souls will ultimately be saved and will be united to God forever in loving contemplation. For Origen, universal salvation is an indispensable part of the 'end' promised by Paul in I Cor 15.24-28, when Christ will destroy all his enemies, even death, and hand over all things in 'subjection' to his Father, who will be 'all in all’.”

Undoubtedly, Origen’s theological contributions significantly influenced early Christian thought, setting the stage for future doctrinal developments and debates. 

Origen of Alexandria: His Everlasting Impact

Christoph Markschies rightly notes:

“Origen is a theologian of revelation, insofar as divine revelation represents the highest norm for him and is accessible to humans through the methodically secured understanding of biblical texts... He is also a hermeneutical theologian, as he methodically attempts to overcome the temporal distance between his present and the biblical texts through a theory of multiple senses of Scripture.” (my translation)

In Origen, early Christian thought gained an intellectual and philosophical giant whose contributions significantly shaped the development of Christian theology and philosophy. 

One of Origen's notable achievements was his meticulous work with the Hebrew Bible. He determined the most accurate Greek version of the Old Testament, a crucial task for later Christian thinkers who did not know Hebrew and relied heavily on his scholarship. 

This foundational work ensured that Christian biblical interpretation had a solid, reliable basis, which was essential for theological consistency and development.

Perhaps Origen's most important contribution was his synthesis of Platonic reasoning and philosophy with Christian doctrine. By integrating Platonic ideas into Christian theology, Origen helped bridge the gap between pagan and Christian intellectual traditions.

Christians were no longer as divided as they had been and could present themselves as the legitimate heirs of Plato. This alignment with classical tradition was vital in the ancient world, where respect for tradition was paramount, and new ideas often faced skepticism.

Origen's efforts provided Christian thinkers with a coherent religious vision and robust intellectual arguments to support their beliefs. His work allowed Christianity to be seen as a serious and intellectually credible tradition, capable of standing alongside the philosophical systems of the time.

Through Origen, early Christianity gained not only theological depth but a respected place in the ancient world’s broader intellectual landscape.

Conclusion

Origen of Alexandria stands as a monumental figure in early Christian thought, whose intellectual legacy continues to influence theological discourse. His rigorous approach to biblical exegesis and his efforts to integrate Greek philosophy with Christian doctrine provided a robust foundation for future theological developments.

Despite the controversies surrounding his teachings, particularly the Origenist Controversy that spanned the 4th to 6th centuries, Origen's influence is undeniable. His belief in the eventual return of all souls to God, a notion that borders on reincarnation challenged the Judeo-Christian linear view of time and salvation.

This universalist perspective, where punishment serves as a temporary stage for purification rather than eternal damnation, offers a more compassionate and hopeful vision of salvation.

Finally, Origen's dedication to understanding and interpreting the divine through scripture and prayer highlights his profound commitment to faith and reason, thus underscoring his lasting impact on the Christian tradition.

Clement of Alexandria: Bio and Significant Christian Writings

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

Clement of Alexandria is a key figure in early Christian theology and a major influence on later Christian thinkers. What scholars know about him begins with his conversion to Christianity, an event that shaped his journey from Greek thought to the philosophical aspects of the religion.

Who was Clement of Alexandria? In this article, I’ll look at what we know about his background, how his thought was shaped by Greek philosophy, and how it, in turn, shaped Christian thought for centuries.

Clement of Alexandria’s Background

In his book Clement of Alexandria, John Ferguson writes that we know almost nothing of the early life of Titus Flavius Clement, known to us as Clement of Alexandria. (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!) His place of birth, first of all, is a matter of some debate. Since he wrote in classical, educated Greek and was well-versed in Greek philosophy, some ancient Christian writers, such as Epiphanius of Salamis, believed he was born in Athens. Others claimed he had been born in the city of Alexandria, with which he was later associated.

His date of birth is equally undetermined. Most scholars, however, estimate his birth year to be around 150 CE, although Clement himself gives no explicit information about the place or time of his birth.

We do know, however, that his parents were not Christians because he writes of his conversion in his book Paedagogos (English title: Tutor). But as Ferguson writes, Clement’s obvious knowledge of Greek philosophy makes it clear that he was educated in that discipline well before becoming a Christian. Clement even includes a detailed description of Greek mystery religions in his book Protrepticus (English title: Exhortation to the Greeks). This is one reason many think he was born in Athens.

Because Clement writes little about his conversion, however, Ferguson believes it to have been a gradual process rather than a dramatic transformation such as that of Paul or Augustine. The impetus for his conversion, according to his own writings, was the simple realization that the gods of the Greek pantheon were morally corrupt, unlike the Christian God.

As a young man in search of knowledge about Christianity, Clement traveled widely in Greece, Asia Minor (modern-day Türkiye), Palestine, and Egypt. On his travels in Greece, he says that he met and learned from an unnamed theologian whom scholars have since identified as an early Church Father named Athenagoras of Athens (133-190 CE).

The Catechetical School of Alexandria and Beyond

Clement’s travels came to an end when he arrived in Alexandria, Egypt, one of the intellectual centers of the Roman Empire. There, he met a Christian teacher named Pantaenus who was associated in some way with the Catechetical School of Alexandria (he may have been the head of the school). This would prove to be a momentous meeting for Clement, spurring him on to theological insights.

The Catechetical School of Alexandria was a school of Christian theologians and bishops which had a huge influence on the theological controversies of the day. This school was less like a Sunday School, though, and more like the philosophical schools of Plato, Aristotle, and other Greek philosophers. After studying under Pantaenus, Clement himself became a teacher at the school, as well as an ordained priest. Eventually, he took over as head of the school.

By the way, Clement never says whether he was married, but his positive view of marriage and childbearing, in opposition to the asceticism advocated by many Christian teachers of his time, may indicate that he was.

Around 202 or 203 CE, Clement left Alexandria, probably because of the persecutions going on at the time, spurred by the reign of the emperor Lucius Septimius Severus. When he left, his prominent and equally influential student Origen took over his post at the school.

We have no information about where Clement went at this point. Ferguson writes that he may have gone to Cappadocia, a region in Asia Minor. We have a letter written around 211 CE from Alexander —a former student of Clement’s and a future bishop — written to the church at Antioch, Syria, commending Clement to them. This implies that right up to the end of his life, he was traveling. Clement died around 215, although whether he died in Cappadocia, Antioch, or Jerusalem is unknown.

Major Works and Theology

While Clement was known as a teacher, he was also a theologian with a strong philosophical streak. As such, he wrote three major works that survive: The Protrepticus (Exhortation to the Greeks), written around 195 CE, the Paedagogus (Tutor) written around 198 CE, and the Stromata (Miscellanies) written between 198-203 CE. Here, I’ll summarize these works and analyze their theological positions.

The Protrepticus (Exhortation to the Greeks)

This work’s entire purpose  is to convince non-Christian Greeks to embrace Christianity. As such, it demonstrates Clement’s extensive knowledge of Greek philosophy and myths. In  Homer or Moses?: Early Christian Interpretations of the History of Culture, Arthur Droge writes that Clement attempts to explain Greek religion as anthropological, explaining it in historical stages (Needless to say, he bases all this on pure speculation).

For instance, Clement suggests humans initially believed that the Sun, the Moon, and other heavenly bodies were deities, then worshiped the products of agriculture, from which he surmises the veneration of Demeter and  Dionysus originated. He lumps all this worship of material creation together as idolatry and, therefore, sinful.

He then goes on to criticize Greek gods as morally corrupt and thus unworthy of being worshiped. At the same time, however, Clement praises the philosopher Plato, whose view that God could not be adequately known by humans foreshadowed some forms of Christianity.

The Paedagogus (Tutor)

The title of this book refers to the underlying theme of Christ as the ultimate teacher of humanity. As such, it uses an extensive metaphor of Christians as children needing to be taught.

In his book Clement of Alexandria, Eric Osborn writes that, in The Paedagogus, Clement goes beyond simple instruction, attempting to demonstrate how Christians must respond faithfully to God’s love. He divides life into three sections: character, actions, and passions. The focus of the Paedagogus is on how a Christian should act morally and subdue the passions. Clement develops this theme by drawing on such sources as Stoic philosophy and Greek literature, especially Homer.

Clement goes on to note that since Christ was sinless and without passions, Christians should try to imitate him. He writes that sin is an instinctive reaction in humans and is, thus, irrational. It can only be removed, he says, by the wisdom of Christ, which teaches humans.

One very interesting point in The Paedagogus, is that Clement seems to believe in the equality of the sexes since God’s salvation is offered to all. He writes that “both men and women practice the same sort of virtue; surely, if there is but one God for both, then there is but one Educator for both." In The Spirit and Spirituality, Deborah Gill writes that Clement also indicates God has both male and female aspects; for instance, he describes the Eucharist as milk from the Father’s breast.

Clement then addresses food and drink, warning against overindulgence in either. While he criticizes ostentatious living that includes expensive furniture or clothing, he does not advocate for the complete rejection of worldly pleasures and says Christians should be able to express joy through celebration.

Unlike many theologians of his day, Clement says that while promiscuity is unnatural, total abstinence is equally so and argues that the goal of sex must always be procreation. For this reason, he condemns adultery and prostitution since those would not lead to legitimate offspring by Roman standards. As Peter Brown put it in The Body and Society, while “sexual activity, in itself, carried with it no stigma that might debar the Christian from achieving perfection in Christ,“ sex “beyond the periods strictly necessary for the conception of a child” was “vulgar and plebian.”

The Stromata (Miscellanies)

This work’s title signifies that it, indeed, consists of miscellaneous pieces of writing on miscellaneous topics. Eric Osborn believes it was intended for a limited audience interested in the more philosophical and esoteric aspects of theology. It originally included eight separate works, of which only seven survive.

Book One focuses on Greek philosophy, which Clement says can actually be a good introductory set of principles to Christian thought, not unlike the Torah for Jews. In his discussion, Clement claims Jewish thought had a big influence on the most important Greek philosophers, specifically on Plato (there is no historical evidence for this argument).

Book Two concerns the roles of philosophy and faith in Christianity. While he believes both are important, the fear of God is paramount for him since it brings wisdom (See Proverbs 9:10), which is the goal of philosophy. Faith is a choice, the most important one for drawing nearer to God.

In Book Three, Clement discusses the importance of marriage. As mentioned in the Paedagogus, Clement believes sex within marriage for the purpose of bearing children is good and does not hinder the Christian in his or her quest for perfection. While he acknowledges that some asceticism, motivated by Christian concerns, can be good, marriage and family life are just as good if done for the right reasons.

The focus of the fourth book is martyrdom. While he says that Christians have no reason to fear death, he condemns those who seek out martyrdom for themselves. Clement says that people like this have no respect for the gift of life bestowed by God. Heretics such as Marcionites, believing incorrect principles as they do, would not benefit from martyrdom anyway. In the final part of the book, Clement notes there is no way of proving God’s existence and, therefore, it must be taken on faith.

Speaking of faith, the fifth book argues that awareness of God can only be attained through faith if one’s actions are moral. He argues that only those who show their faith through good deeds are living correctly. Those who merely talk about their faith don’t have enough of it for their own salvation.

In the sixth book, Clement argues that the Greek poets were influenced mainly by the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible. He then pivots to the topics of sin and hell, saying Adam was not perfect when God created him but was granted the latent possibility to attain perfection. He then goes on to show that he is a universalist, believing that everyone, even those now in hell, will ultimately be saved: "God's punishments are saving and disciplinary, leading to conversion; choosing rather the repentance than the death of a sinner."

Finally, in Book Seven, Clement says that a true Gnostic (“one who knows”) would not include the Gnostics who are well-known, such as Valentinus, but rather the true Christians like himself who have true knowledge of God. In other words, in this book, Clement attempts to reclaim the word “gnosis” for orthodox Christianity. In order to achieve this gnosis, he argues, it is necessary to become as much as possible like Christ. His final argument in this book says immorality emerges not from intention but from ignorance. Therefore, the more one becomes aware of God and the true nature of Christ, the more one moves away from sinful activity.

Other Works and Fragments

Most of the rest of Clement’s writings are in fragments except for the shorter work called Salvation for the Rich but also known as Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved?, written around 203 CE. In this treatise, Clement argues that, contrary to the usual understanding of Mark 10:25 (“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”), material wealth need not be an impediment to spiritual perfection as long as one is generous with it.

Other fragments include eschatological works in which Clement writes about the heavenly hierarchy including angels, archangels, and humans, and a letter attributed to Clement which may or may not be authentic.

Clement of Alexandria’s Intellectual Influence

Clement’s theological legacy extended far into the future. His student Origen of Alexandria, an extremely influential Christian thinker and writer himself, based much of his theology on Clement’s thought. Later Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea included a summary of Clement’s life and works in his massive 4th-century Church History, as well as extended quotes from Clement’s writings. Christian scholar and translator Jerome wrote that Clement’s writings were “full of eloquence and learning, both in sacred Scripture and in secular literature.” In addition, medieval theologian Maximos the Confessor, living centuries later, referred to him as “the Great Clement,” a level of reverence he gave only to those whose ideas had long been part of the Christian intellectual tradition.

In addition, modern scholars have long recognized Clement’s significance. In God Has Spoken: A History of Christian Theology, Gerald Bray writes that Clement was “the founder of Christian philosophical theology” and “the first major commentator on the Bible.” Likewise, in The Influence of Greek ideas on Christianity, Edwin Hatch calls Clement “the first great teacher of philosophical Christianity.”

Conclusion

Who was Clement of Alexandria? First and foremost, he was one of the first Christian writers to make extensive use of Greek philosophy within Christian theology. He was a convert to Christianity who came to reside in Alexandria, Egypt, an intellectual hub of the ancient Mediterranean world. He was a teacher who then became the head of the great Catechetical School of Alexandria, in which philosophical theologians like himself taught and theorized about the theological issues of the day.

Clement’s theology included some uncommon positions in his day, such as the notion of universal salvation and the equality of men and women. He has been called the first Christian philosopher and had an enormous influence, especially through the later works of his pupil, Origen. As such, he would influence many later Christian writers, including Augustine of Hippo, who believed that Greek philosophical ideas had a place in Christian thought.

Tertullian - Bio & Writings (Including the Trinity)

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

As an early theologian and Church Father, Tertullian provides us with an important historical view of early Christianity in North Africa. Moreover, his voluminous writings offer profound glimpses into the development of Christian thought during the 2nd and 3rd centuries.

A polemical and prolific writer, Tertullian’s forceful rhetoric and unyielding stance on theological matters left a lasting mark on the trajectory of early Christian thought. In this article, I’ll explore the life, writings, and theological contributions of Tertullian, examining his influence as the first Latin Christian author and his enduring impact on subsequent Christian thinkers.

Where and When Was Tertullian Born?

Like most ancient Christian writers, Tertullian didn’t give us many details about his life. Those we know come from veiled references in his own writings as well as two biographical sketches of him made two centuries later, one by Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea and the other by priest and ascetic author Jerome.

Quintus Septimius Florens Tertullianus was born around 155 CE in the city of Carthage in Roman North Africa (modern-day Tunisia), where he would spend his entire life. Carthage was originally founded in the first millennium BCE by the Phoenicians and then developed into a large city-state like Athens or Rome. However, in 146 BCE, the Roman Empire conquered and destroyed the original city.

According to Caroline Winterer, by the time Tertullian was born, Carthage had been developed by Rome into a massive metropolitan trading hub for the Roman Empire with a peak population of about 500,000 people. This meant, by the way, that while the original language of Carthage was Punic, a Semitic language, Tertullian and most citizens of Roman Carthage spoke Latin as their first language.

What Was Tertullian’s Background and Education?

Tertullian spent his entire life in the city of Carthage. However, this afforded him amazing educational resources, as Carthage was the second-largest city in Roman North Africa (only Alexandria, Egypt was larger). By the mid-2nd century and time of Tertullian’s birth, Christianity had spread to Carthage. It appears, though, that he was not born into a Christian family.

Church tradition, based largely on the biographies written by Eusebius and Jerome, says Tertullian was the son of a Roman centurion. Many have also claimed he trained as a lawyer, based partly on the many legal analogies used in his writings. However, in Tertullian: A Historical and Literary Study, Timothy Barnes says that although Tertullian demonstrated general knowledge of Roman law in his writings, it would have been common to any educated citizen of Roman Carthage. Once again, we just don’t know for sure. (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Both Jerome and Eusebius, again writing two centuries after Tertullian’s death, also write that he was an ordained priest. However, Tertullian never states this, making the claim questionable at best. Moreover, in one of his writings, “On the Exhortation to Chastity,” he seems to place himself among the laity rather than the clergy.

His first work, “Apology,” was written in 197 CE and seems to hint about his conversion to Christianity (“apology,” in this case, means a defense). Based on this date, early scholars of Christianity surmised he had converted not long before this year, but it’s impossible to say for sure. He did convert, however, and in “Apology,” he writes that a real Christian life requires a drastic act of conversion which changes everything. He therefore writes, "Christians are made, not born." He also says that he was married to a Christian wife and even addressed two of his books to her.

As reflected in his writings, Tertullian was not an easygoing person. He wrote vehemently against heretics and other perceived enemies of the Christian life. As William Benham wrote of Tertullian in his 1887 Dictionary of Religion, “His style is harsh, but vigorous and powerful.” This seems to have described Tertullian’s character, as well.

In the approximate year of 207 CE, when Tertullian was 52, he was attracted to a Christian movement known as the “New Prophecy,” but also called Montanism after its founder Montanus. Without going into too much detail, Montanus, a recent convert to Christianity, had declared himself and two women named Prisca and Maximilla as prophets through whom the Holy Spirit spoke. Montanism would be officially condemned as a heresy in 381 CE, but it was highly controversial even in Tertullian’s time.

While it was believed for years that Tertullian left the wider Christian church (or was excommunicated) to become a Montanist, most modern scholars find this assertion dubious. In Tertullian and Paul, for instance, David Wilhite writes that it is far more likely that Tertullian merely believed much of what the Montanists said, much of which agreed with broader Christian theology but remained a part of the wider Carthaginian church. In addition, a later Christian Bishop of Carthage named Cyprian claimed that his entire theology came from Tertullian’s writings. This would be highly unlikely if Tertullian had been condemned as a heretic.

Jerome writes that Tertullian lived a long life, probably dying in the year 220 CE. As the first prolific Latin Christian author, he was the predecessor to such important Latin theologians as the abovementioned Cyprian and Augustine of Hippo. With that, let’s turn to his writings and theology.

Tertullian’s Writings and Significance

Tertullian was an extremely prolific author. It’s beyond the scope of this article to write in detail about every single one of his writings. Instead, I’ll outline some broad themes in those writings, some of which he seems to have innovated.

Tertullian’s writings can be divided into four main groups (see the table below). First, there are apologetic writings, that is, various defenses of Christianity against heretics or non-Christian naysayers. Then we have polemical writings, which either attack certain people or groups or express controversial opinions. Next, there are the dogmatic writings, which argue for the irrefutable truth of certain Christian principles. Finally, we have his writings on correct Christian morality.

Note also that Tertullian used most of his opinions to argue in some way against those he defined as heretics. This is a bit ironic, of course, since he himself was accused of heresy for his Montanist leanings.

God

Tertullian is the first Latin writer to use the word “trinity” (Latin: trinitas). However, Dale Tuggy writes that Tertullian used the word God (Latin: Deus) solely to refer to the Father, the ultimate creator of the universe through the agency of his Son. In “Against Praxeas,” he defines his Trinitarian doctrine, writing that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

are one substance, not one person; and it is said, 'I and my Father are one' in respect not of the singularity of number but the unity of the substance. The very names "Father" and "Son" indicate the distinction of personality. The Father is one, the Son is another, and the Spirit is another.

In this sense, Tertullian anticipated the Council of Nicaea, which would define the trinity as three persons but one substance. However, he also defined the Son as subordinate to the Father, something the Council would have abhorred since this was a principal tenet of a heresy called Arianism.

Baptism

Although he acknowledged that infant baptism was the norm in his church, Tertullian urged people to postpone baptism for everyone until they were not only grown but married. This, he argued, would prevent the danger of a baptized infant falling away from the church and thus corrupting his baptism forever. Likewise, unmarried young people, he argued, were susceptible to sexual temptation and should wait until marriage so that they wouldn’t corrupt their baptism (people were only supposed to be baptized once in ancient Christianity).

In addition, he thought that the benefit of baptism derived not from the clergy member who administered it but from the actual ritual itself. Accordingly, he said it was acceptable for a layperson to baptize another if no clergy were available. The Church did not adopt this doctrine.

Scripture

While Tertullian did not make a canon list of his own, we can see from references in his writings which books he considered Scripture. Among canonical books of the New Testament, he quotes liberally from 1 John, 1 Peter, Jude, Revelation, the Pauline epistles, and the four Gospels. He also quotes from the Shepherd of Hermas, a very popular early Christian book which was later excluded from the canon.

In terms of the Old Testament, Tertullian quoted from most of our canonical books and included two books of the Apocrypha, the book of Judith and 2 Maccabees. He also defended the scriptural status of the book of Enoch.

When interpreting Scripture, he thought that some passages, especially OT passages thought to refer to Christ, should be interpreted allegorically. Most others he interpreted literally. Furthermore, he thought the simplicity of Scripture spoke for itself and needed no complicated explanations.

The Church

Tertullian believed in apostolic succession — the belief that the original authority of the apostles was passed down through bishops. For this reason, when writing to or about Christians he considered heretical, he challenged them to demonstrate evidence of apostolic succession in their communities.

In addition, Tertullian believed the Church should not pardon some sins.  His stance was, for example, that people who committed sorcery, fornication, or murder should be permanently excommunicated.

Other Themes/Beliefs

Although later Christian theologians, most prominently Origen of Alexandria and Augustine of Hippo, would make use of Greek philosophy in their writings, Tertullian thought this was deplorable. He wrote that such dependence on philosophy would turn Christians into heretics, prompting one of his most famous quotes: "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?"

Unlike later Catholic teachings, Tertullian did not believe in the perpetual virginity or the perpetual sinlessness of the Virgin Mary. Also contrary to later Catholic doctrine, Tertullian was an iconoclast. This meant he thought holy images should not be used by Christians and even destroyed whenever encountered.

Conclusion

Who was Tertullian? He was the first Latin Church Father, or at least the first whose writings survive today. While we don’t know a lot about his biography, we know he was born into a non-Christian family in the bustling city of Roman Carthage and was clearly well-educated. After his conversion to Christianity, he used his forceful personality to define Christian doctrine and orthodoxy.

Despite the fact that some of his opinions are no longer held by the Catholic Church, he was undoubtedly a major influence on some of the most famous Christian thinkers, including Cyprian and Augustine.

Tertullian’s writings give historians a fascinating view of 2nd and 3rd century Christian thought in Roman North Africa, including the different sects that existed and how some Christians perceived themselves and their relation to the wider Roman world. For these reasons, he is considered a noteworthy Church Father.

Marcion (and Marcionism): The Untold Story of an Early Christian Heresy

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

A couple of years ago, I had a fascinating conversation with a friend about the existence of God. She was a graduate student majoring in psychology, and as we tackled the age-old debate, she argued against the existence of the Biblical God. Her main point?

The stark and often inconceivable differences between the Old and New Testament deities. She noted that these two couldn’t possibly be the same God, thus concluding that belief in a Biblical God was too vague to uphold on rational grounds. 

Her argument made me chuckle because I knew that nearly 2,000 years ago, a Christian theologian named Marcion made the very same argument. He, too, pointed out the existence of two separate deities in the Judeo-Christian tradition. 

In this article, we’ll explore the life and teachings of Marcion, a significant yet often overlooked figure in early Christian history. We’ll learn about his radical views and how the controversy they sparked played a crucial role in shaping what we now consider “orthodox” or “mainstream” Christianity.

Understanding Marcion’s perspective not only provides insight into the diverse landscape of early Christian thought but also highlights the ongoing debates about the nature of God that continue to this day.

So, who was Marcion, and why did his teachings provoke such a strong reaction from the early Church? In the following sections, we’ll delve into his life, his views on the Old and New Testament gods, and the canon he proposed. We’ll also examine the fierce opposition he faced from prominent Church figures like Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, and Tertullian.

Stay with us as we journey back in time to meet the man who dared to challenge the very foundations of Christian belief. And who knows? You might just find that ancient theological debates are more relevant — and more entertaining — than you ever imagined.

Christianity’s Varied Landscape: A Look at the 2nd and 3rd Centuries

Recently, I discovered that Jehovah's Witnesses also identify as Christians. This places them among more than 45,000 Christian denominations worldwide. But this diversity isn't a modern phenomenon.

Christianity has always encompassed a wide variety of beliefs. From differing views on God to contrasting understandings of Jesus and his resurrection, Christians have never been a monolithic group.

Some Christians think of God as a personal being, almost like a superhuman residing in the sky. Others find it blasphemous to make God in our image and instead view God as an impersonal force behind all life in the universe. 

Even the resurrection sparks diverse interpretations: some see it as a literal, physical reanimation of Jesus’ corpse, while others consider it a symbolic claim. So, despite common perceptions, Christianity has always been varied in its beliefs and practices.

This diversity was particularly pronounced in the first few centuries of Christianity. As Bart D. Ehrman notes in his bestseller Lost Christianities:

“In the second and third centuries, there were Christians who believed that God had created the world. But others believed that this world had been created by a subordinate, ignorant divinity... Yet other Christians thought it was worse than that, that this world was a cosmic mistake created by a malevolent divinity... In the second and third centuries, there were Christians who believed that Jesus was both divine and human, God and man. There were other Christians who argued that he was completely divine and not human at all.”

(Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

Additionally, during this period, the “proto-orthodox” Church began to emerge, slowly but steadily. This (scholarly) term refers to the group of Christians whose views would later be recognized as the "right" beliefs, especially during the 4th and 5th centuries. As this stream of Christianity gained dominance, it marginalized other groups by labeling them heretical.

In his excellent study Found Christianities, M. David Litwa explains: “Anti-heresy writers made their attacks to avoid being grouped with those whom they considered being politically dangerous subalterns. By the second century CE, Greek and Roman authors tended to use the general descriptor 'Christian' for Christ-believers, whereas Christian insiders used a wide variety of differentiating labels to distinguish their movements from putatively false forms of the faith.”

Today, scholars recognize the polemical attitude of early heresiologists such as Irenaeus. Consequently, they view the Christian world as including all the figures and movements that claimed the name “Christian” for themselves. This broader understanding helps us appreciate the rich tapestry of early Christian thought and the intense debates that shaped it.

It’s within this diverse and dynamic context that Marcion emerged. Understanding it allows us to fully grasp his revolutionary ideas and the profound impact they had on Christianity’s development.

And who knows? Maybe, next time you hear a modern debate about the nature of Biblical God you’ll also smile, knowing that such discussions have been around for nearly two millennia. So, who was Marcion? What did he teach? Let’s take a closer look! 

Who Was Marcion?: A Brief Look at an Amazing Life

Marcion was raised in a Christian church in Sinope, in northern Asia Minor (modern-day Turkey). His father was allegedly the bishop of the church, a role that imbued Marcion with early exposure to Christian teachings. 

However, this upbringing also led to conflict. His father eventually deemed Marcion’s views too heretical to tolerate — a foreshadowing of the larger controversies to come.

As a (probable) shipowner (Greek: “naukleros”), Marcion was independently wealthy, which afforded him significant influence. He moved to Rome around 139 C.E. and made a substantial donation to the church — reportedly 200,000 sesterces.

In his book From Paul to Valentinus, Peter Lampe highlights the significance of Marcion's occupation: “A 'naukleros' is a shipowner or a captain of his own or a rented ship with which he conducts business in his name. The extreme risk of overseas trade not only presupposes capital but also yields profit. Numerous bequests and donations of considerable size made by 'naukleroi' testify that their occupation is lucrative.”

Undoubtedly, Marcion’s wealth and status provided him with the means and platform to propagate his beliefs. 

In Rome, Marcion devoted himself to studying and writing, producing two significant literary works that would later define Marcionism. In 144 A.D., he called a council of the church leaders in Rome, marking the first known church council meeting. He hoped the leaders would ratify his views, but instead, the Roman church elders found his ideas repugnant.

They excommunicated him from the church and returned his generous donation. Undeterred, Marcion left Rome and traveled through Asia Minor, establishing Marcionite churches and gaining a substantial following.

Marcion's teachings proved remarkably successful, despite the strong opposition from the proto-orthodox Church. He continued to spread his doctrine until his death around 160 C.E., just before the reign of Marcus Aurelius (161-180). His impact on early Christianity was profound, and Marcionite Christian church establishments persisted for several centuries.

But the history of Marcionism is only the beginning. What characterized Marcion were his radical teachings that shook the foundations of the early “proto-orthodox” Church. Let’s delve into the Marcion beliefs that made him one of the most controversial figures in Christian history.

Marcion’s Teachings: A Challenge to the Proto-Orthodox Church

Marcion's admiration for Paul stood in stark contrast to the views of other early Christian groups such as the Ebionites, who saw Paul as their mortal enemy. Marcion believed Paul was the only apostle who truly understood the nature of Jesus' message. 

In his letters, Paul emphasized that Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection brought salvation to the world. Paul also made a clear distinction between his gospel message and the Jewish law, asserting that people are made right with God through faith in the resurrected Christ, not by following the Mosaic Law. Marcion took this differentiation to its logical extreme.

For Marcion, there was a radical disjunction between the Old Testament law and the "good news" that Jesus brought. He argued that the God who gave the gospel couldn’t be the same God who gave the law. 

According to Marcion, the law was given to the Jews by their own God, whereas the gospel was given by Jesus, who came from a different, higher God. This led Marcion to conclude that the God of Jesus wasn’t the God of the Jews. 

He saw the Jewish God as the creator of this world, who called Israel to be his people and gave them his law. Since they couldn’t keep this law, they were condemned by the wrathful justice of their God.

In contrast, Marcion believed that the God of Jesus was a God of mercy and love. Jeffrey S. Siker summarizes Marcion's main teachings:

“Marcion was convinced that the good and loving God revealed in Jesus Christ was different from the vindictive God of the Jews who created and ruled this world. The inferior God of the Jews, to whom Jewish scriptures testify, is a jealous and vengeful God who requires sacrifices, commands the slaughter of entire peoples, and is inconsistent. Marcion argued that the loving God of Jesus is essentially antithetical to the God of the Jewish scriptures.”

Moreover, Marcion asserted that Jesus came to save people from the just wrath of the Old Testament God who created this world. Consequently, Marcion concluded that Jesus wasn’t born into this world or part of it. Instead, he viewed Jesus as a phantasm, an apparition who appeared in the world but wasn’t of the world. 

This belief further underscored Marcion's radical departure from the emerging orthodoxy that emphasized both the human and divine nature of Jesus.

Marcion's views presented a profound challenge to the early “proto-orthodox” Church. By distinguishing between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament, he introduced a form of dualism that starkly contrasted with emerging orthodox beliefs.

But that wasn't the whole story. Marcion even went so far as to create his version of the Christian canon, which would become a cornerstone of his teachings and further ignite debates within the early Church. 

Marcion’s Canon

Marcion developed his views through two major literary productions: one he wrote himself and another that he edited. His original work, the “Antitheses”, presented a series of contradictory statements highlighting the differences between the Old Testament God of wrath and the God of love and mercy revealed by Jesus.

For instance, the Old Testament God commanded the Israelites to annihilate their enemies in Jericho (Joshua 6), whereas Jesus' God instructed his followers to love their enemies (Matthew 5:44). The Old Testament God permitted the prophet Elisha to summon bears to attack children who taunted him (2 Kings 2:23-24), but Jesus welcomed children, saying, “Let the little children come to me” (Matthew 19:14). 

In his “Antitheses”, Marcion aimed to demonstrate that “above all was the Supreme God, the Father of Jesus Christ and the Lord of the Gospel; infinitely below him in degree and attributes was the Creator of this world whose law was death and whose justice blinded men to the truth of the gospel”, as Joseph Hoffman notes in his book Marcion: On the Restitution of Christianity. 

Marcion’s other major contribution was his edited work, which was the first known canon of Scripture devised by an early Christian. 

This canon contained eleven books: ten of Paul’s letters (all that are now found in the New Testament, except 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus) and a gospel very much like our Gospel of Luke. The Old Testament wasn’t excluded from his canon.

Reflecting on the historical significance of Marcion's decision, Jean Daniélou remarks in L'Eglise des premiers temps: 

“He was the first, with the apologist Tatian, to pose the problem of writing and finalizing the New Testament. What were the authentic texts attesting to the preaching of Jesus? Was it necessary to take the novelty of the Gospel to its limits by eliminating its roots?... He completely de-Judaized the historical character of Jesus.” (my translation)

However, even the books Marcion included in his canon made references to the God of the Old Testament and contained positive comments about creation. Marcion argued that these texts had been corrupted by Judaizers, who inserted such references.

Consequently, Marcion removed any passages he believed contradicted the gospel he thought he inherited from Paul. This included, for example, the first two chapters of Luke, which narrate Jesus’ birth in fulfillment of the Jewish Scriptures.

By setting forth a distinct set of scriptures, Marcion not only challenged the emerging orthodoxy but forced the early Church to grapple with which texts genuinely represented the Christian faith. This act of defining a canon was a critical step in the development of the New Testament as we know it today.

The Proto-Orthodox Church Strikes Back: Response to Marcion

Writing in the middle of the 2nd century, Justin Martyr observed:

“Then a certain Marcion of Pontus, who is even now teaching those who are persuaded to acknowledge another God greater than the creator. In every race of humanity through the agency of demons, he has caused many to utter blasphemies and to deny the maker of all as God and to confess some other as being greater to have made greater things than him.”

This early polemical attack on Marcion highlights the intense opposition he faced from the proto-orthodox Church.

Judith Lieu, in her book Marcion and the Making of a Heretic, comments on Justin's depiction: “Already in this, the earliest reference to Marcion, he is being ‘mythologised’ — reconstructed to serve the interests of his portrayer, on whose description any subsequent account must rely.”

There is no doubt: Early proto-orthodox authors and bishops heavily criticized Marcion, labeling his teachings as heretical. Eric Osborn notes that “no one stirred up more trouble in the early Church than Marcion when he divided the just inferior Jewish creator from the good Christian God of love.” 

In the early 3rd century, Tertullian dedicated a five-volume work, Against Marcion, to discredit Marcion's teachings and diminish his influence within early Christianity. Tertullian systematically refuted Marcion's arguments, demonstrating that even the New Testament texts Marcion retained (Luke’s Gospel and the Pauline epistles) are incomprehensible without considering their Jewish background. 

Furthermore, Tertullian argued that Christ is the creator, whose incarnation was predicted by the Old Testament prophets. He did all of that while basing his refutation solely on the texts Marcion accepted as canonical.

Ultimately, the proto-orthodox Church triumphed, and Marcion, along with other groups labeled as heretical, was marginalized. The reasons for the proto-orthodox Church's success are numerous. In Lost Christianities, Bart Ehrman outlines some key factors:

From my standpoint, this hierarchical structure was the main reason for the triumph of proto-orthodoxy. Paul Veyne, in Quand notre monde est devenu chrétien?, describes the Church's hierarchy and organization as "formidable machinery which, little by little, supervised and Christianized the mass of the population and even sent missionaries among foreign peoples.” (my translation)

These strategic advantages allowed the proto-orthodox Church to consolidate its position and eventually dominate the diverse landscape of early Christianity. In the end, Marcionites were delegated to the fringes of Christian history. Is history written by the winners? In this case, it’s not far-fetched to answer affirmingly.

Conclusion

Marcion's beliefs and his daring theological innovations left a significant mark on early Christian history. By presenting a radical distinction between the Old Testament God of justice and wrath and the New Testament God of mercy and love, Marcion forced the early Church to confront and clarify its doctrines.

His establishment of the first known Christian canon, though eventually deemed heretical, prompted the early Church to define and solidify the New Testament canon that is recognized today.

Despite the fierce opposition he faced from early Church figures such as Polycarp, Justin Martyr, and Tertullian, and the eventual marginalization of his followers, Marcion's legacy endures. His controversial views sparked crucial debates about the nature of God, the interpretation of Scripture, and the essence of Christian religion.

Marcion’s influence, while ultimately subdued by the proto-orthodox Church's strategic organizational strength and doctrinal consolidation, played a pivotal role in shaping the theological and structural foundations of mainstream Christianity.

For a deeper exploration of early Christian figures and their theological divergences, check out Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's online course, “Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide”. In it, Dr. Ehrman discovered fascinating differences between these two figures, thus enabling us to understand more deeply the complexities that lie behind the origins of Christianity. 

Irenaeus: Life, Writings, and Significance in Early Christianity

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

"So unbridled is their madness that they declare they have in their power all things which are irreligious and impious and are at liberty to practice them." Such strong words were directed against a small group of Gnostic Christians (Carpocratians) by an influential bishop named Irenaeus in the late 2nd century.

He didn't back down in his fierce polemics, often accusing ideological enemies of countless moral crimes and theological inefficiencies. This article delves into the life and works of this pivotal figure in early Christianity, examining his role as a defender of “orthodoxy” and a determined opponent of “heretical” sects.

Irenaeus, who served as the bishop of Lyon, remains one of the most significant theologians of early Christianity. His writings and actions helped to define Christian orthodoxy when the young religion was fraught with internal division and doctrinal disputes. 

This introduction sets the stage for a historical and scholarly examination of his life and influence, eschewing theological bias to focus instead on the historical facts and contributions of Irenaeus to the Christian tradition.

Our exploration is structured to provide a biography of Irenaeus and an analysis of his major works, including the famous Against Heresies. This treatise not only combats the Gnostic sects that proliferated during his time but offers insights into the theological and philosophical battlegrounds of early Christian communities.

By understanding Irenaeus in his historical context, we can appreciate his profound impact on Christian doctrine and the establishment of a unified church identity.

Who Was Irenaeus?

Regrettably, details about Irenaeus’ early life are sparse. He has shared that in his youth he heard Polycarp preach — a memory that left a lasting impression on him. 

Considering Polycarp's role as the bishop of Smyrna (modern-day Izmir, Turkey) and his mid-2nd century martyrdom, it’s widely speculated that Irenaeus originated from Asia Minor, possibly Smyrna itself. Yet, these deductions remain conjectural as they rely on the scant information available from the later, second-hand sources such as Eusebius. 

Irenaeus seldom discussed his educational background, but his writings, predominantly in Greek, suggest he was well-versed in the Greek language and rhetoric. French scholar Pierre Nautin proposes Irenaeus might have traveled from Asia Minor to Rome to further his rhetoric studies before eventually settling in Lyon, France. 

By the late 170s, Irenaeus emerged as a leader among Lyon's small Christian community, which was primarily composed of Greek-speaking immigrants facing mistrust from the local majority.

His leadership commenced in the aftermath of severe yet localized persecution, a traumatic episode for the community that had claimed the life of his predecessor, Pothinus. Based on the letters Eusebius preserved, Dennis Mins describes in his book Irenaeus: An Biography, a “remarkable Christian community, proud of those members who endured appalling torments but prepared to acknowledge that some had weakened.” (Affiliate Disclaimer: We may earn commissions on products you purchase through this page at no additional cost to you. Thank you for supporting our site!)

As bishop, Irenaeus was tasked with the dual challenges of restoring the community's morale and broadening its appeal to potential converts. This transition from a potential rhetorician to a religious leader underscores a crucial phase in Irenaeus' life and illustrates the fluidity and connectivity of early Christian leaders across the Roman Empire. 

His ability to communicate effectively across different cultures was key to his success as a leader and defender of the religion, which was slowly emerging as a trans-local phenomenon with a strong emphasis on the idea of the “universal” Church. 

According to this, the Church was one body of communities scattered around the Roman Empire but united by several key beliefs and practices under the authority of bishops and presbyters. 

Upon assuming the bishopric, Irenaeus took on multiple roles: He was a shepherd to his flock, a theology educator, and a defender of the doctrines he held. Irenaeus was particularly focused on countering the threats posed by Gnostic teachings, which he viewed as divisive and corruptive.

In reviewing the scant but significant details of Irenaeus’ early years and his rise as bishop, it’s evident that his influence was both deep and enduring. His leadership stabilized a community in turmoil and set it on a path of growth. 

Understanding Irenaeus' World: Early Christian Diversity

In today’s world, the term “Christianity” often suggests a unified belief system. However, the reality is far more complex, encompassing a broad spectrum of beliefs and practices. This diversity includes varying doctrines on core tenets such as the nature of God, the identity of Jesus, and the significance of his resurrection.

Contrary to the notion of a monolithic faith, Christianity has always been characterized by a mosaic of beliefs and practices. This was even more pronounced in its early days, as highlighted by Bart D. Ehrman in his best-seller Lost Christianities. 

He notes: “In the second and third centuries, there were Christians who believed that God had created the world. But others believed that this world had been created by a subordinate, ignorant divinity. Yet other Christians thought it was worse than that — That this world was a cosmic mistake created by a malevolent divinity as a place of imprisonment, to trap humans and subject them to pain and suffering."

The early Christian world, teeming with diverse beliefs and practices, was the milieu in which St. Irenaeus found himself. He was part of what scholars now refer to as "Proto-orthodoxy," a precursor to what would later become mainstream Christian orthodoxy.

In the influential study, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity, Larry W. Hurtado notes that this term encompasses the early forms and stages of beliefs and practices that, over the following centuries, evolved into the classical, "orthodox" Christianity widely accepted among Christian communities.

This diversity wasn’t merely academic but was a practical reality of the era, as described by Denis Minns, who notes that Irenaeus saw himself as part of a "world-wide Christian (“proto-orthodox”) community." This community, although unified in some respects, was a conglomerate of smaller local groups scattered across the Roman Empire, each maintaining its unique traditions, yet subscribing to a collective identity.

The theological landscape of Irenaeus' time was marked by vibrant debates and intense disagreements among these groups, each asserting its understanding of the supreme truth about divine matters and the essence of Jesus.

This period was crucial for the development of what Irenaeus and like-minded leaders considered "proto-orthodox" Christianity. Within this contentious atmosphere, Irenaeus penned his significant works thus aiming to delineate and defend the core doctrines of this emerging “orthodoxy” against the backdrop of competing interpretations.

The “Chain of Custody” Argument: From the Apostle John to Irenaeus?

The world of Christian apologetics is diverse, featuring scholars and non-scholars alike. Some employ truly unique methods to investigate the historical Jesus and the origins of Christianity. One intriguing figure is John Warner Wallace — a retired police detective who turned his skills toward religious history. 

Wallace asserts the Gospels are reliable historical sources and claims Jesus’ resurrection can be proven from a historical perspective. While his conclusions are far from what critical scholars think, one of his arguments is particularly relevant to St. Irenaeus. 

Wallace calls this the "chain of custody" argument, positing that authentic stories of Jesus were transmitted through a reliable chain of transmission. He illustrates this argument using the Gospel of John as an example. 

He states: “We have an 'officer' at the scene of the crime (the Apostle John) who took a 'Polaroid' of Jesus (the Gospel of John). How do we know that the gospel we possess today is the same gospel John allegedly wrote in the 1st century? We can follow the 'chain of custody.' John handed the evidence over to two additional 'officers' in the chain, the Church Fathers we know as Ignatius and Polycarp... They then handed the evidence related to Jesus over to another 'officer' in the chain of custody, their student, the well-known second-century church apologist, Irenaeus.”

While persuasive on the surface, this theory is founded on several erroneous assumptions. Firstly, the assertion that the Apostle John authored the Gospel of John is highly questionable. The New Testament itself describes John as illiterate (Acts 4:13), making it improbable he could have written a sophisticated text in Greek.

The real author likely possessed a classical education far beyond the reach of a Galilean fisherman who belonged to the lower class of society. This casts doubt on the initial link in Wallace’s “chain of custody”. 

Secondly, the notion of a seamless transmission of Jesus' teachings through this chain is flawed. The significant discrepancies and differences between the Gospels suggest that stories about Jesus were not transmitted without alteration.

As Bart D. Ehrman notes in Jesus Before the Gospels: "The striking differences in the words and deeds of Jesus as reported in the Gospels is compelling evidence precisely that they were not memorized and passed along without significant change."

Furthermore, Wallace's argument overlooks the reality that traditions about Jesus were transmitted orally for several decades across various regions before the Gospel of Mark, the earliest written account, was composed.

Moreover, the purported "John-Papias-Polycarp-Irenaeus" connection is problematic. The only independent evidence for a link between Papias and Polycarp comes from Irenaeus' Against Heresies, where he describes Papias as “a hearer of John, and colleague of Polycarp.” However, this statement is difficult to corroborate.

There is no evidence in Polycarp’s writings or the fragments of Papias to support this relationship. Additionally, Irenaeus’ identification of John as both the evangelist and the seer of Revelation is confusing, given that later scholarship has questioned whether these were indeed the same person.

Finally, Wallace fails to account for the complexities and inconsistencies in early Christian tradition. He neglects that Irenaeus lived in a time of intense doctrinal conflict where various Christian groups claimed to represent the true message of Jesus. Valentinian Gnostics, for instance, asserted that their teachings derive from a certain Theudas, who was a disciple of Paul! 

In this context, Irenaeus’ emphasis on apostolic succession was likely a strategy to legitimize the theological stance against competing interpretations. This historical reality underscores the challenges of tracing an unbroken “chain of custody” that Wallace presents. 

Understanding this backdrop is essential for grasping the significance of Irenaeus' contributions to Christian theology. His efforts weren’t merely about promoting a particular theological viewpoint, but forging a consensus in a time of theological diversity and uncertainty. 

His writings, therefore, can be seen as both a defense and a clarification of the emerging orthodox beliefs to unify a fragmented faith under a shared doctrinal umbrella — a utopian goal that was never fully achieved.

As we delve deeper into his works, we'll explore how Irenaeus addressed these challenges, seeking to shape a cohesive and enduring Christian identity.

St. Irenaeus: Major Works and Theology

Most of what we know about Irenaeus’ literary contributions comes from Eusebius, who discusses the bishop of Lyon extensively in his Ecclesiastical History. According to Eusebius, Irenaeus authored eight works. Unfortunately, only two have survived into modern times. 

Nevertheless, these surviving works continue to provide invaluable insights into the theological debates and ecclesiastical matters of the late 2nd century. As it turns out, for most of Christianity’s history, Irenaeus’ works were the main source of our knowledge about the various early Christian groups labeled heretical. 

The most significant of Irenaeus’ works is undoubtedly Against Heresies. In his book Found Christianities, David M. Litwa explains the contextual background of this masterpiece: “As Irenaeus tried to rebuild his Christian sect, he also began writing against a certain Christian group integrated into Roman and local ecclesiastical networks — the Valentinians.” 

For Irenaeus’, they were wolves “covered with sheep's clothing,” on course to destroy the only true interpretation of Jesus’ message that (surprise, surprise) the community that Irenaeus belonged to preached.

Moreover, the bishop of Lyon saw them as a particularly dangerous Gnostic sect that was proliferating at the time. In any case, Against Heresies is structured into five books — each addressing different aspects of Gnostic theology. 

Denis Minns notes in his Biography of Irenaeus: “Book I uncovers and exposes the heresies by describing them in some detail and showing their ultimate dependence on the errors of Simon the Magician… At the end of Book I, Irenaeus was confident, now that the opinions of the heretics had been exposed to public view, that there would not be much need of further discourse to overturn them.”

He particularly focuses on the Valentinian Gnostic School and the Marcionites. These two groups of Christians challenge some of the most basic ideas of the “proto-orthodox” Church. Valentinians, for instance, rejected the emerging hierarchy of bishops and presbyters while arguing for a more complex cosmogony and different understanding of Jesus’ nature and role in salvation history. 

Starting from the apostles, Irenaeus traces the alleged succession of the bishops to argue for the authenticity and authority of the Church’s (“proto-orthodox”) teachings. He contends that the true knowledge of God has been transmitted through this unbroken line (Jesus - Apostles - Bishops) and is preserved in the Church. In contrast, Gnostics, according to Irenaeus, derive their teachings from a “heretic” Simon the Magician known from the Acts of the Apostles. 

Irenaeus asserts (3.3.1.): “It’s within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our times.”

Moreover, Irenaeus employs scriptural exegesis to challenge Gnostic interpretations, thus reinforcing the “proto-orthodox” view of the Old and New Testaments as coherent and unified texts.

Denis Minns observes: “One of the most important elements of the self-definition of Irenaeus and his church was a deep sense of continuity with the scriptures of the Old Testament, and with the people of God to whom that revelation had been addressed. As Irenaeus sees it, this isn’t a Christian usurpation. Christians are the legitimate inheritors of the promises made to Abraham.”

He emphasizes that the incarnation was essential for humanity’s redemption (a theme that would evolve into a serious debate during the subsequent centuries of the Church), as it allowed Jesus to be an example for humans to imitate. Only by becoming truly man, Irenaeus asserts, could Jesus bridge the divine and human, thus making salvation of all humanity accessible.

A famous German scholar Johannes Quasten explains in Volume 1 of his Patrology: “Book Five treats almost exclusively of the resurrection of the flesh, which all the Gnostics denied. In conclusion, he speaks of the millennium, and it’s here that Irenaeus proves himself to be a chiliast (the doctrine of Jesus’ expected return to reign on earth for 1000 years).” 

The other extant work The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching is less known but no less important. In it, Irenaeus provides a concise exposition of the proto-orthodox doctrine intended to be a manual for instructing new converts. 

After opening with a series of reflections on the motivations behind his authorship (chapters 1-3), Irenaeus delves into the core tenets of proto-orthodox doctrine in its initial segments (chapters 4-42). 

These chapters explore foundational elements of the emergent religion, such as the conceptual development of the Trinity, encapsulating the intricate relationship and roles of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Moreover, the work further addresses the creation of the world, the fall of humanity, and the profound doctrines of the incarnation and redemption through Christ, underscoring the salvific mission integral to Christian theology.

The subsequent portion of the treatise (chapters 42-97) offers a robust defense of Christian revelation, grounding its truth in the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. Irenaeus tries hard to illustrate how the prophecies not only anticipate but are conclusively realized in Jesus who is, according to Irenaeus, the rightful Son of David and the promised Messiah.

Summing It Up: The Influence of St. Irenaeus

Referring to Irenaeus' historical and cultural importance, Johannes Quasten notes: "Despite his suspicious attitude toward speculative theology, Irenaeus deserves great credit for being the first to formulate in dogmatic terms the entire Christian doctrine." Similarly, Denis Minns emphasizes that "Irenaeus deserves his reputation as the first theologian to try to pull Christian teaching together into a cohesive whole."

Indeed, Irenaeus' contributions to early Christianity are profound and multifaceted. By establishing a structured “orthodoxy” through his writings, he not only combated prevailing heretical views but laid a foundational framework for the future theological discourse of the emerging Church. 

His efforts to delineate a clear, systematic theology helped stabilize Christian doctrine during a period marked by intense doctrinal diversity and conflict. He was among the first authors to argue emphatically for the elevated (canonical) status of the four New Testament Gospels against other similar writings that the bishop of Lyon regarded as heretical and dangerous.

Furthermore, Irenaeus' role as a conceptual bridge between the apostolic tradition and the emerging structured Church (bishops and presbyters) can’t be overstated. His emphasis on apostolic succession was important in legitimizing the authority of the “proto-orthodox” bishops against the claims of other (“heretical”) Christians. 

This underpinning of ecclesiastical authority was crucial for the unity, identity, and spread of the Church — a notion Dimitris J. Kyrtatas explored in his captivating article. He noted that “what made (“proto-orthodox”) Christianity so effective was primarily its very organization, or its 'republic', as Edward Gibbon would call it.” Undoubtedly, Irenaeus had a paramount role in that process. 

In summary, St. Irenaeus stands as a cornerstone in the history of Christianity, not merely as a defender against “heresy,” but as a proactive architect of the early Church's theological and ecclesiastical structure. Through his comprehensive approach to Christian doctrine, Irenaeus helped shape the contours of a religion that was, and remains, a dynamic and diverse tradition.

Intrigued by the theological debates of early Christianity? They are present from the start of a new religion! Are you interested in knowing more about it? Dive deeper with Dr. Bart D. Ehrman's online course, “Paul and Jesus: The Great Divide”, and explore the historical perspectives on these two influential figures and their theological worlds.