Monday, May 30, 2022

Early Christian Texts (1 Clement; Ignatius, Epistle to the Philadelphians) Claiming to be Divinely Inspired Works

  

The author of 2 Clement believed that 1 Clement was an inspired document and cites 1 Clement 23.3-4 with the words “for the prophetic word also says” (λεγει γαρ και ο προφητικος λογος) (2 Clem. 11.2). These are the usual words that designate writings as inspired. Clement of Rome (ca. 90-95) told his readers that Paul’s letter, 1 Corinthians, was written “with true inspiration” (επαληθειας πνευματικως) (1 Clem. 47.3), but later claimed inspiration for himself, saying that his own letter was “written through the Holy Spirit” (γεγραμμενοις δια του αγιου πνευματος) (1 Clem. 63.2). Ignatius also emphasized his own inspiration: “I spoke with a great voice—with God’s own voice . . . But some suspected me of saying this because I had previous knowledge of the division among you. But the one in whom I am bound is my witness that I had no knowledge of this from any human being, but the Spirit was preaching and saying this [το δε πνευμα εκηρυσσεν, λεγον ταδε]” (Ign. Phld. 7.1b-2, LCL, emphasis added). (Lee Martin McDonald, “Recognizing Christian Religious Texts as Scriptures,” in Ancient Jewish and Christian Scriptures: New Developments in Canon Controversy, ed. John J. Collins, Craig A. Evans, and Lee Martin McDonald [Louisville, Ky.: Westminster John Knox Press, 2020], 108; McDonald places 2 Clement from 140-160 [“Forming Christian Scriptures as a Biblical Canon,” ibid., 123)

 

Commenting on Ignatius’ words in his epistle to the Philadelphians, Schodel noted that:

  

Ignatius traces his outbursts to God's Spirit. He shared with many others in the Graeco-Roman world the belief that a sudden loud utterance marked the inrush of the divine. The bishop clothes this perception in traditional Christian language when he denies that "human flesh" made the situation known to him (cf. Matt 16: 17; Gal 1: 16; 1 Cor 2: 13) and in specifically Johannine terms when he describes the Spirit as knowing whence it comes and whither it goes (cf. John 3:8). Here we have the strongest possibility in Ignatius of a dependence directly on the Fourth Gospel. Yet in the absence of other positive evidence of such dependence the question must be left open. Moreover, the Johannine writings speak of knowing the whence and whither of figures other than the Spirit, and this suggests that we are dealing with a formula that could have been known to Ignatius apart from the gospel.  In any event, Ignatius appears before us here as one moved by the Spirit (cf. Rom. 7 .2), yet as one who also takes it for granted that the Spirit speaks through and on behalf of established authority (cf. Phd. inscr). (William R. Schoedel, Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch [Hermeneia-A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985], 205-6)