In a rather
desperate attempt to show the earliest Christian writings support Sola Fide,
Matthew Paulson wrote the following about Ignatius of Antioch and his
soteriology:
Ignatius writes during a time of heavy persecution
of Christianity about 80 years after the resurrection of Christ. He encourages
Christians to strive with the tools for Christian service, “Let your baptism
endure as your arms; your faith as your helmet; your love as your spear; your
patience as a complete panoply [i.e. something that covers and protects]. Let
your works be the charge assigned to you, that ye may receive a worthy
recompense” (Peterson and Ricks, Offenders
for a Word, p. 144). Peterson and Ricks quotes Ignatius explaining works
and rewards but neglect to mention the tools which are baptism, faith, love,
and patience. These are not works, per se, but they are essential attitudes of
Christian while works are performed. Does Ignatius believe salvation is a “pay-back”
or reward from the efforts of Christians? Not at all.
While writing to Polycarp, Ignatius advocates
that fellow Christians need to be “at leisure” ready for the service of God
which he calls “both God’s and yours” (Ignatius
to Polycarp, Chapter 7). This is strange advice if works are essential to
salvation. Of course, Ignatius believes that God will reward Christians for
their efforts. He recommends, “Labour together with one another, strive in
company together, run together; suffer together; sleep together; and awake
together, as the stewards, and associates, and servants of God. Please ye Him
under whom ye fight, and from whom ye receive your wages” (Ibid.) However,
Ignatius never explicitly posits that his works produce salvation. His
statements are about rewards in eternity for Christian service, not works for
salvation. In contrast Ignatius rebuked those who were Judaizers saying, “For
if, until now, we live after the rule of Judaism, we confess that we have not
received grace” (Epistle to the
Magnesians, Chapter 8).
Also, Ignatius does relate his salvation to
athletics and receiving a prize of a resurrected body and eternal life. He
advises, “Be temperate, as God’s athlete. The prize is incorruption and life
eternal, concerning which also you have been persuaded” (Epistle to Polycarp, chapter 2). This prize would be the same as
the Apostle Pau’s prize, being that it is “for the prize of the high calling of
God in Christ Jesus,” (Phil. 3:14). Because of the prize, they are called unto
consists of things above, where Jesus is, and is the hope laid up in heaven,
(Col. 1:5), and the inheritance reserved there, (1 Pet. 1:4). Moreover, the
rewards or “back-pays” would be the result of storing up treasures in heaven,
(Matt. 19:21). Rewards for service are not the removal of sins nor salvation.
These rewards are essentially unexplained benefits distributed in eternity. (Matthew
A. Paulson, Breaking the Mormon Code: A
Critique of Mormon Scholarship Regarding Classic Christian Theology and the
Book of Mormon [Livermore, Calif.: WingSpan Press, 2006, 2009], 164-65)
This is only
representative of the shoddy patristic scholarship and exegesis in Paulson’s
book. When one reads Ignatius’ authentic letters in their entirety, one will
see that, while Ignatius did not believe works outside of God’s grace can save,
those done by a saved person were efficacious and meritorious. The “all works
are bad” approach, common in Protestantism, blinds Paulson and his eisegesis.
Consider the following from the authentic epistles of Ignatius:
Let no man deceive himself; if any one be not
within the altar, he is deprived of the bread of God.... Do ye beloved, be
careful to be subject to the bishop, and the presbyters and the deacons. For he
that is subject to these is obedient to Christ, who has appointed them; but he
that he is disobedient to these is disobedient to Christ Jesus. And "he
that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on
him." (Letter to the Ephesians, 5)
Stand fast, brethren, in the faith of Jesus
Christ, and in his love, in his passion, and in his resurrection. Do ye all
come together in common, and individually, through grace, in one faith of God
the Father, and of Jesus Christ, his only-begotten Son, and "the
first-born of every creature, but of the seed of David according to the flesh,
being under the guidance of the Comforter, in obedience to the bishop and the
presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is
the medicine of immortality, and the antidote which prevents us from dying, but
a cleansing remedy driving away evil, (which causes) that we should live in God
through Jesus Christ. (Letter to the Ephesians, 20)
Seeing then, all things have an end, there is
set before us life upon our observance
of God's precepts, but death as the result of disobedience, and every one,
according to the choice he makes, shall go to his own place, let us flee from
death, and make choice of life. The truly devout man is the right kind of coin,
stamped by God himself. The ungodly man, again, is false coin, unlawful,
spurious, counterfeit, wrought not by God, but by the devil. I do not mean to
say that there are two different human natures, but that there is one humanity,
sometimes belonging to God, and sometimes to the devil. If any one is truly
religious, he is a man of God; but if he is irreligious, he is a man of the
devil, made such, not by nature, but by his own choice. The unbelieving bear
the image of the prince of wickedness. The believing possess the image of their
Prince, God the Father, and Jesus Christ, through whom, if we are not in
readiness to die for the truth into his passion, his life is not in us. (Letter
to the Magnesians, 5, emphasis added)
Be pleasing to him whose soldiers you are,
and whose pay you receive. May none of you be found to be a deserter. Let your
baptism be your armament, your faith your helmet, your love your spear, your
endurance your full suit of armor. Let your works be as your deposited
withholdings, so that you may receive the back-pay which has accrued to you.
(Letter to Polycarp 6.2)
The term
translated as "your deposited withholdings" is δεποσιτα (whence
"deposit"), with such works being said to be "worthy"
(αξιος) of an ακκεπτα (the back pay; alt. "recompense"), which, per
BDAG, refers to "military finance: a sum credited to a Roman soldier and
paid upon his discharge." Contra Paulson, Ignatius is teaching gracious
merit, not simply that good works are merely
the outward evidence/fruit of one being in a saved state.
As for
chapter 7 of Ignatius’ letter to Polycarp, Ignatius is not teaching sola fide. What Ignatius is saying is that, as a
result of God, he s without earth cares (rather important as
he was on his way to martyrdom), but even then, did not believe he was
eternally secure:
Seeing that the
Church which is at Antioch in Syria is, as report has informed me, at peace,
through your prayers, I also am the more encouraged, resting without anxiety in
God, if indeed by means of suffering I may attain to God, so that, through your
prayers, I may be found a disciple [of Christ]. It is fitting, O Polycarp, most
blessed in God, to assemble a very solemn council, and to elect one whom you
greatly love, and know to be a man of activity, who may be designated the
messenger of God; and to bestow on him this honour that he may go into Syria,
and glorify your ever active love to the praise of Christ. A Christian has not
power over himself, but must always be ready for the service of God. Now, this
work is both God's and yours, when ye shall have completed it to His glory. For
I trust that, through grace, ye are prepared for every good work pertaining to
God. Knowing, therefore, your energetic love of the truth, I have exhorted you
by this brief Epistle.
Seeing that the
Church which is at Antioch in Syria is, as report has informed me, at peace,
through your prayers, I also am the more encouraged, resting without anxiety in
God, if indeed by means of suffering I may attain to God, so that, through your
prayers, I may be found a disciple [of Christ]. It is fitting, O Polycarp, most
blessed in God, to assemble a very solemn council, and to elect one whom you
greatly love, and know to be a man of activity, who may be designated the
messenger of God; and to bestow on him the honour of going into Syria, so that,
going into Syria, he may glorify your ever active love to the praise of God. A
Christian has not power over himself, but must always be ready for the service
of God. Now, this work is both God's and yours, when ye shall have completed
it. For I trust that, through grace, ye are prepared for every good work
pertaining to God. Knowing your energetic love of the truth, I have exhorted
you by this brief Epistle. (Epistle to Polycarp, VII [ANF 1:96])
Note how
Ignatius says that "if indeed by means of suffering I may attain to God,
so that, through your prayers, I may be found a disciple of Christ" (ἐάνπερ
διὰ τοῦ παθεῖν θεοῦ ἐπιτύχω, εἰς τὸ εὑρεθῆναί με ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει ὑμῶν μαθητήν
[alt. have become more eager to be found your disciple in the resurrection, if
indeed I attain to God through suffering [Ehrman]).
It should
also be noted that Ignatius taught baptismal regeneration:
For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to
the appointment of God, conceived in the womb of Mary, of the seed of David,
but by the Holy Ghost. He was born and baptized, that by His passion He might
purify the water. (To the Ephesians 18:2)
. . . He was truly born of a virgin, was
baptized by John, in order that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him;
(To the Smyrnaeans 1:1)
Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let
the multitude |of the people¦ also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there
is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize
or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also
pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid. (To
the Smyrnaeans 8:2)
Ignatius lived from approximately 30 to 107
AD and was the Bishop of Antioch in his later life. According to tradition he
was a disciple of the Apostle John, along with Polycarp. In the last year of
his life, he presented himself before the Emperor Trajan as a professing
Christian and was sentenced to death by exposure to wild beasts. On the way to
Rome for his execution he wrote the seven letters which are today considered
authentically Ignatian (CCEL Intro. Ignatius Ephesians).
In Ignatius' epistles to the Ephesians and
Smyrnaeans, there are concepts of baptismal regeneration in relation to Jesus'
own baptism. Ignatius writes in the former that Christ "was born and
baptized, that by His passion He might purify the water." (CCEL Ignatius,
Ephesians:XVIII) According to William Schoedel's commentary on Ignatius, this
somewhat magical idea as well as the connection between Christ's baptism and
passion were well known and traditional concepts in the early church (W. Schoedel.
Ignatius of Antioch. Philadelphia: Fortress. 1985:85). To the Smyrnaeans
Ignatius writes, quoting Mat 3:15, that Christ "was baptized by John, in
order that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him…" (CCEL Ignatius,
Smyrnaeans:I) This does not speak directly of purifying the water, but still
connects Christ's baptism with his fulfillment of God's plan for righteousness
- a salvific plan. In both contexts, Ignatius is not directly addressing
baptism, but states these ideas in relation to Christ in a creedal fashion.
This implies they were assumed as common Christian knowledge.
Elsewhere in Ignatius' letters he makes a
strong case for the authority of the bishop. In relation to this authority, he
dictates that neither baptism nor the celebration of the Lord's Supper were to
be done without the administration of a bishop or his agent (CCEL Ignatius,
Smyrnaeans:VIII; CCEL Ignatius, Trallians:II3). Schoedel notes a plausible
suggestion by Elze that Ignatius is "applying a recognized rule … taken
for granted in the case of baptism." (Schoedel 1985:244) While these texts
do not directly reveal the nature of baptism in the early church, they do
exhibit its traditional nature (Schoedel 1985:276) and great importance as one
of the two main rites of the early church.
With respect
to Jesus being baptised to fulfil all righteousness in the Gospels (and
Ignatius), we read the following from NathanEubank which affirms the salvific efficacy of water
baptism:
I would like to propose another interpretation of πληροω, one that has rarely been considered: that of filling up something. The phrase would then be translated “to fill up all righteousness.” Matthew himself uses the word this way in 13:48 to refer to a fish-net becoming full, and 23:32 when Jesus tells the scribes and Pharisees to “fill up” (πληρωσατε) the measure of [their] fathers.” According to this proposal, “filling up all righteousness” would be the exact inverse of the filling up of the scribes and Pharisees; they fill up the measure of sin, but Jesus and John the Baptist fill up the measure of righteousness. I shall provide three main arguments for this rendering:
First main argument: for Matthew, righteousness is something that can be “filled up” because righteousness deeds earn wages that are stored up in heavenly treasuries. In 6:1, or instance, Jesus says, “take care not to do your righteousness before people in order to be seen by them. Otherwise you have no wage with your Father who is in the heaven (μισθὸν οὐκ ἔχετε παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν τῷ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς).” . . . . the words μισθὸν οὐκ ἔχετε παρὰ τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν τῷ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς are commonly translated “you will have no reward from your Father in heaven,” thereby obscuring the fact that Matthew describes divine wages as (1) existing already in the present time rather than only in the future, and (2) with God in heave, stored up to be repaid at the return of the Son of Man. The description of heavenly treasures that follows reinforces the point:
Do not treasure up for yourselves treasures on earth (Μὴ θησαυρίζετε ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς), where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal. Rather, treasure up for yourselves treasures in heaven (θησαυρίζετε δὲ ὑμῖν θησαυροὺς ἐν οὐρανῷ), where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in nor steal. For where your treasures is, there also will be your heart (ὅπου γάρ ἐστιν ὁ θησαυρός σου, ἐκεῖ ἔσται καὶ ἡ καρδία σου). (6:19-21).
The focus here is on the location of one’s treasure, whether earth or heaven. It is better to stockpile treasures “in heaven” because heavenly treasuries are safe from corruption and theft. Similarly, in chapter 19 Jesus tells the rich young man: “If you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.” The young man refuses to acquire this heavenly treasure because he cannot bear to lose all that he has stockpiled on earth . . . Second main argument: . . . Matthew uses πληροω in the way suggested here, but in reference to sin rather than righteousness. In 23:32 Jesus ironically tells his opponents to “fill up (πληρωσατε) the measure of [their] fathers” and so receive the punishment for all the righteous blood that has been shred since Abel . . . the measure in 23:32 is, like the measure in 7:2, a measure that records the amount that is owed. When Jesus tells the scribes and Pharisees to “fill up the measure of your fathers,” he ironically tells them to bring the debt of their fathers to its limit, the point at which the creditor can tolerate it no more and steps in to collect that is due. Both 3;15 and 23:32 employ the spatial image of “filling up,” but in 23:32, it is the “measure” (μετρον) for recording the debt of sin . . . A narrative link has often been observed between 23:32 and the preaching of John the Baptist. In 3:7-12 John (A) calls the Pharisees and Sadducees “a brood of vipers” (γεννηματα εχιδνων), (B) asks them rhetorically “Who told you to flee from the coming wrath?”, and (C) warns them that they will not escape the coming wrath simply by relying on the fact that Abraham is their father. They must “bear fruit worthy of repentance” because God is able to raise up children of Abraham from stones (3:8-9). In other words, it is not biology that determines paternity but deeds. The question of paternity and the coming judgment is also at stake in 23:31-33, where Jesus (A) calls the scribes and Pharisees a brood of vipers (γεννηματα εχιδνων), (B) asks rhetorically, “How will you escape the judgment of Gehenna?”, and (C) warns them that their actions show that they are the children (not of Abraham but) of those who murdered the prophets, as their coming complicity in Jesus’ own death shows. In short, 23:31-33 harks back to John the Baptist standing in the wilderness of Judea, thereby strengthening the connection between these two “filling-up” sayings . . . Third main argument: Matthew describes Jesus’ saving activity as a payment on behalf of others in the so-called “ransom saying” in 20:28 . . . it must be noted that, regardless of the pre-Matthean history of the saying, the description of Jesus’ gift of his life as a ransom-price (λυτρον) fits hand in glove with Matthew’s grammar of sin and righteousness. For Matthew sin is thought of as debt, and Jesus was born to save his people from their sins. I propose that it is not a coincidence that this saving activity is described as a payment; Jesus gives his life as a ransom-price to pay the debt of “the many.” (Nathan Eubank, Wages of Cross-Bearing and Debt of Sin: The Economy of Heaven in Matthew’s Gospel [Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2013], 124-26, 127-28, 129)
If Eubank’s thesis holds up, it will be significant, as it shows that Jesus’ baptism was not merely symbolic, but had great soteriological value, as his water baptism “filled up” righteousness, a righteousness that it is not a merely imputed righteousness, but an intrinsic one, not just in the Gospels but also Ignatius who is quoting from Matt 3:15 (cf. Maximus of Turin [early 5th century], who stated that Christ was baptised to make the water [of baptism] holy, echoing the earlier words of Ignatius of Antioch quoted above),
Finally, on
the apostle Paul’s use of athletic terminology and imagery, such refutes
Paulson’s claims, not supports them. How so? Note the following from 1 Cor
9:27, in the context of Paul using such concepts:
No, I strike a blow
to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I
myself will not be disqualified for the prize. (NIV)
The term translated
as “disqualified” is αδοκιμος and means “reprobate.” As one Lutheran
scholar wrote about this term and the context it is used in:
This term implies
that a test is made, and that whatever stands the test is accepted as δόκιμος,
whatever fails to stand the test is rejected as ἀδόκιμος and is thrown out,
cast away. The two adjectives and the cognate verb and the noun are frequently
used with reference to ancient coins which were always weighed and otherwise
carefully tested; the genuine and the full-weight coins were accepted as
“proven,” the others were rejected as “disproven.” C.-K. 357.
What a calamity when
a professing Christian finds himself “rejected” in the end! How much worse when
one of the Lord’s own heralds has this experience! Paul regards his work and
even the way in which he does his work with extreme seriousness. The fact that
he is an apostle is not yet proof to him that he will be saved. He knows the
test that he must face. He applies that test to himself in this chapter and so
attains both the subjective and the objective certainty that he will indeed not
be a castaway. (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s First and
Second Epistle to the Corinthians [Minneapolis:: Augsburg Publishing
House, 1963], 388)
As we see,
Ignatius did not teach Sola Fide and
Latter-day Saints are on sound patristic footing in rejecting this man-made
doctrine. It is Paulson’s theology, not LDS theology, that is at odds with
Ignatius of Antioch’s soteriology.
For previous refutations of Paulson's
Breaking the Mormon Code, see:
Listing of articles responding to "Breaking the Mormon Code"
