Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs

By David W. Bercot and editor

Interest in the ways of the early church has never been more intense. What did early Christians believe about the divinity of Christ? What were the beliefs of those who sat at the feet of Jesus’ disciples? Now, for the first time, a unique dictionary has been developed to allow easy access to the ancient material and furnish ready answers to these questions and others like them. David W. Bercot has painstakingly combed the writings of these early church leaders and categorized the heart of their thinking into more than 700 theological, moral, and historical topics to create A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs. Wonderfully suited for devotional or thematic study as well as sermon illustration, this resource offers a window into the world of the early church and affords a special opportunity to examine topically the thoughts of students of the original apostles, as well as other great lights in the life of the early church.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Hendrickson Publishers
• Release date: Oct 1, 1997
• ISBN: 9781619701687

Book preview

A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs (eBook edition)

Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, LLC

P. O. Box 3473

Peabody, Massachusetts 01961-3473

eBook ISBN 978-1-61970-168-7

© 1998, 2013 by David Bercot

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Due to technical issues, this eBook may not contain all of the images or diagrams in the original print edition of the work. In addition, adapting the print edition to the eBook format may require some other layout and feature changes to be made.

First eBook edition — June 2014.

How to use this Dictionary

A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs allows the user to quickly ascertain what the early Christians[1] believed on over 700 different theological, moral, and historical topics, and it functions as an index to the writings of the ante-Nicene writers, specifically as collected in the ten-volume work, the Ante-Nicene Fathers.[2]

Why are the beliefs of these early Christian authors important? Because early Christian testimony holds that many, such as Clement of Rome and Polycarp, personally knew the apostles of Jesus. They were approved by the apostles and appointed by the apostles to positions of church leadership. Modern students of church history must largely depend on these and other early Christian writers for information on topics of major import, such as who wrote the New Testament documents and how the Christian canon of Scripture came into being. Furthermore, these early Christians’ interpretation of the Scriptures is among the most valuable commentary on Scripture anywhere. To be sure, none of these writers claimed divine inspiration; nor did they equate their own writings with Scripture. They did, however, claim that they were faithfully passing along the faith that the apostles had delivered to the church.

THE ESSENCE OF EARLY CHRISTIANITY

Users of this dictionary should first grasp the ethos of early Christianity. That ethos can be summarized in two basic principles: (1) the earliest Christians focused on living in the light of the Christian message and explaining that message to nonbelievers rather than on sharpening their theological prowess; and (2) early Christian doctrine is less elaborate and less defined than later formulations.

To say that the early Christians focused on living the gospel rather than on theological hair-splitting does not mean that individuals taught whatever they wanted. There were recognized boundaries that prevented such a laissez-faire attitude. Nonetheless, to the early Christians, the heart of their faith consisted of an obedient love relationship with Christ, not the ability to articulate dogma. None of the testimony of the writers in this volume arose from some professional theologians; rather, like the apostle Paul, many lived in the trenches, on the cutting edge of Christian life, and in fact, a substantial number of these early Christian writers died as martyrs.

The early church concentrated chiefly on the nature of Christian living because the essential core of Christian belief (i.e., the rule of faith) can be expressed quite briefly. The church believed that the Christian faith is a fairly simple one. Cyprian wrote,

When the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, came unto all, he gathered alike the learned and unlearned. He published the teachings of salvation to each sex and every age. He made a concise summary of His teachings, so that the memory of the scholars might not be burdened with the heavenly learning. Instead, we could quickly learn what was necessary to a simple faith. (ANF 5.455).

Echoing those sentiments, Lactantius remarked,

The secrets of the Most High God, who created all things, cannot be attained by our own ability and perceptions. Otherwise, there would be no difference between God and man, if human thought could reach to the counsels and arrangements of that eternal majesty. (ANF 7.9)

Irenaeus criticized the heretics for going beyond the simple teachings of the faith, saying, They form opinions on what is beyond the limits of understanding. For this cause also the apostle says, ‘Be not wise beyond what it is fitting to be wise, but be wise prudently’ (ANF 1.548).

WORKING THROUGH A SAMPLE TOPIC

Suppose a reader wants to know what the early Christians believed about the fall of man. Under the entry Fall of Man, a number of early Christian texts are cited. Note, though, that selected Scriptures precede the early Christian quotations. The intent is not to include every biblical passage concerning the fall of man. Rather, these are some of the key texts used by the early church.

Following the Scripture passages are quotations from early Christians, listed in approximately chronological order:

The human race . . . from Adam had fallen under the power of death and the guile of the serpent. Each one had committed personal transgression. Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.243.

The citation identifies the source as Justin Martyr. His name is followed by (c. 160, E). The parenthetical information indicates that Justin wrote around the year A.D. 160; the E verifies that he was an Eastern writer.[3] This affords brief information about the writer, but more information is required to place his statement in a proper perspective. A section entitled Who’s Who in the Early Church following this introductory chapter furnishes the added information.

Justin Martyr (JәS-tәn MÄRT-әr) c. 100–165. Philosopher who converted to Christianity and became a tireless evangelist and apologist. Justin wrote more concerning Christianity than any other person prior to his time. He is classified herein as eastern, since he was a native of Samaria and his thought patterns were eastern. However, he spent the last years of his life in Rome, where he was executed as a martyr (c. 165). See JUSTIN MARTYR herein.

The closing statement, See JUSTIN MARTYR herein, indicates that the main section contains an entry under Justin Martyr. That entry contains quotations from other early Christians concerning Justin Martyr.

For a fuller understanding of Justin Martyr’s remarks concerning the topic the fall of man, the quotation can be consulted in its full context in the Ante-Nicene Fathers. (In fact, one of the primary purposes of this dictionary is to serve as an index to the Ante-Nicene Fathers.) The citation ends with the reference, 1.243, which refers to volume one, page 243 in the Ante-Nicene Fathers.[4] In Ante-Nicene Fathers 1.243, the source of the quotation is identified as Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew. The preface to Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew explains that it is an apologetic work written to the Jews. This procedure can be followed with each citation within a given entry.

A careful reader will discover that the Dictionary’s translation does not exactly match that in the Ante-Nicene Fathers. That is because I rendered the citations into contemporary English. I endeavored, however, not to alter the meaning. My basic procedures in making these adaptations were as follows: (1) I have replaced archaic and academic words with contemporary, common words. (2) I have broken down long sentences into two or more smaller sentences. In doing so, I sometimes reused certain nouns and verbs to make complete sentences. (3) When appropriate, I have rearranged sentence structures to follow a contemporary English pattern. (4) Where the antecedent of a pronoun lies outside the passage being quoted, I have supplied it. For example, in the course of discussing the heretical teachings of Marcion, a writer may begin a sentence: He also teaches. . . . In such an instance, I would render the quotation, Marcion also teaches. . . . (5) Some early Christian writers used the editorial we when speaking about themselves. When it is clear that the writer is speaking only for himself, I have rendered his plural pronouns in the singular.

These steps should render these passages from the early Christians more accessible for the modern reader. No attempt, however, was made to retranslate the pre-Nicene writings from the available Latin and Greek texts.

Even though I collected several quotations, these are obviously only representative, not comprehensive. At the end of the last quotation is a further directive: See also 2.102, 103. This indicates that additional relevant material appears in volume 2, pages 102 and 103. The full text has not been given since they are similar in nature and are from one of the same authors as those already cited. For a more thorough study, look up those texts as well. A final instruction occurs at the end of the article.

SEE ALSO ADAM; ATONEMENT; DEATH; EVE; EVIL, PROBLEM OF; FLESH; FREEWILL AND PRE-DESTINATION; MAN, DOCTRINE OF; SALVATION; TREE OF KNOWLEDGE.

These additional subjects are related concepts that should be examined in any full treatment of the topic, fall of man. Thus to better grasp the early church’s view of the fall of man, understanding early Christian teachings about death, the atonement, salvation, and the nature of man becomes critical.

I offer one caveat: Please remember that what the early Christian writers do not say can often be just as important as what they do say. In some cases, the early Christian writers knew nothing at all about some of the doctrines that certain Christians today regard as fundamental tenets of the faith. So do not be alarmed if a cross-reference does not lead to a fuller discussion. That should not happen very often, but when it does, it is not a mistake; rather, in this manner I attempted to index what the early Christians did not say. For example, at the end of the list of quotations under Mary, you will find a cross-reference to Woman Clothed with the Sun and Moon. However, when you check the various quotations under Woman Clothed with the Sun and Moon, you will find that all of the writers understood this woman in Revelation to be the church, not Mary. In short, I have indexed what the early Christian writers did not say.

ACQUIRING A FOUNDATIONAL UNDERSTANDING

To accurately grasp what the early Christians said about a given topic it becomes important to have a basic understanding of three concepts: (1) Marcion and the Gnostics, (2) the early Christian concept of the Logos, and (3) the Scriptures of the early church.

Marcion and the Gnostics

Many early Christian writings were polemical works directed against the heretic Marcion or against various Gnostics.[5] Both Marcion and the Gnostics taught that the earth and everything in it (including people) were created by a God they called the Demiurge.

They regarded the Demiurge not as the God of the New Testament; rather, the Demiurge was thought to be more of a demigod, with certain imperfect traits. Gnostics sometimes portrayed him as an unmerciful, unloving, and vengeful God. On occasion they referred to him as the just God of the Old Testament in contrast with the good God of the New Testament.

Marcion and the Gnostics also taught an exaggerated view of the fall of man. They believed that all physical creation—including the physical body—was inherently flawed and incapable of salvation. Accordingly, they denied the resurrection of the body, as well as the efficacy of baptism and communion. Many taught that the Son of God did not really become man and that he did not really die on the cross. In their teaching, the Son only appeared to do so. These Gnostics (including a group called Docetists, from the Greek word dokeo, seem, appear) are the persons whom John spoke of as the antichrists, for they denied that Jesus had come in the flesh (2 John 7).

Logos

It would be quite difficult to understand most of the early Christian writings without some appreciation of the meanings and significance of the Greek word logos, particularly as a title of Christ. Since our English translations usually translate logos as Word when this title is applied to the Son, English-speaking Christians usually fail to appreciate the term logos and its significance. The Moffatt version of the New Testament, however, often leaves logos untranslated when it is used as a title for the Son. For example, it renders John 1:1: The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine. It translates Revelation 19:13 as follows: He is clad in a robe dipped in blood (his name is called THE LOGOS OF GOD.)

Moffatt left the term logos untranslated because in Greek that term means far more than simply word. Its range of meaning could include reason, rational principle, and even mind. Early Christians use the term logos extensively when speaking about the Son of God. When John refers to the Son as being the Logos of God, the early Christians understood him to mean that the Son is the eternal Rational Principle of the Father, the Father’s Counselor before all ages.[6]

The Early Christian Scriptures

To comprehend and appreciate what the early Christians have to say, a thorough knowledge and grasp of Scripture are indispensable. That is because the early Christians grounded all of their fundamental beliefs on Scripture. Nonetheless, a first reading of early Christian quotations from Scripture can be perplexing. Not infrequently, their citations do not read the same as do our modern Bibles. There are several reasons for this. First, when quoting from the Old Testament, the early Christians nearly always quoted from the Septuagint (i.e., the Greek Old Testament, including the Apocrypha)—as did the apostles. [See SEPTUAGINT herein.] In contrast, modern Old Testament translations are usually based on the Masoretic Text. Secondly, we must remember that the early Christians had no concordances, topical Bibles, study aids, computer Bibles, or even handy personal Bibles. As a result, the early Christians often had to quote Scriptures from memory, which meant they sometimes misquoted a verse or two. Furthermore, particularly in the case of the Latin writers, citations seem to have come from a version or text that differed slightly from later versions or editions.

THE ANTE-NICENE FATHERS AS A SOURCE FOR EARLY CHRISTIAN WRITINGS

Of course, the Ante-Nicene Fathers are not the only available translations of the preNicene writings. Still, I chose the present edition of the Ante-Nicene Fathers as the basis for this work for several reasons. First, the translations in the Ante-Nicene Fathers are usually more literal than more recent translations. Secondly, other sets of translations contain only a small portion of the pre-Nicene writings. Finally, as a practical matter, the Ante-Nicene Fathers is the only set of the pre-Nicene writings affordable to the average person.

Theological Bias

I have made every effort to make this volume as theologically neutral as I can. I have indexed and cross-referenced most topics under terms familiar to both Catholics and Protestants. Although the Dictionary does not purport to be exhaustive, I have attempted to include every significant quotation under each of the indexed topics. No essential quotation has been purposefully omitted.

Scope of this Work

The Dictionary does not include all of the works contained in the Ante-Nicene Fathers because a number of those works are either spurious, post-Nicene, or Gnostic in origin.

This volume covers only recognized pre-Nicene works whose authors are considered orthodox by the pre-Nicene church. Therefore, I have excluded the following works:

The spurious letters of Ignatius (vol. 1).

The Martyrdom of Ignatius, which is post-Nicene (vol. 1).

The apocryphal and Gnostic Gospels (vol. 8).

The pseudo-Clementine literature (vol. 8).

The false papal decretals (vol. 8).

The post-Nicene works incorrectly attributed to Hippolytus, such as Against Beron and Helix (vol. 5).

The post-Nicene works incorrectly attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus (vol. 6).

The quotations from the ninth-century bishop, Photius (vol. 6).

The various liturgies, all of which are in a post-Nicene form (vol. 7).

The various Syriac works, except for a few scattered references (vol. 8). Although these works are worth reading, nearly all of them are from the fourth or fifth centuries.

After considerable deliberation, I have included the Apostolic Constitutions (vol. 7) in this index, even though strong arguments exist to exclude this work. By way of objection, these Constitutions were not compiled until nearly the end of the fourth century—a half century or more after Nicea. Furthermore, the documents betray a spurious facade, pretending to have been written directly by the apostles themselves. The editor of the Apostolic Constitutions even makes the ludicrous attempt to include the Constitutions in the New Testament canon (ANF 7.505). Despite these objectionable elements, the bulk of the Constitutions is pre-Nicene in origin, and is thus included. I did exclude material in the Constitutions that is almost certainly post-Nicene in nature (or else I have included such passages in this digest with the caveat post-Nicene[7]).

Three Mistakes to Avoid

Perhaps the most common mistake would be to employ this resource as a database for proof-texts. It would be tempting to sift through it, noting quotations that bolster our personal beliefs and discarding those that do not fit. Such an approach, however, inevitably misuses the early Christian writings. By selectively choosing quotations, we make it appear that the early Christians believed exactly as we do (which is sometimes not the case). In short, instead of learning from those close to the apostles in time and spirit, we simply use them for our own designs.

Another common mistake is to read the early Christian writers as though these writers were making dogmatic theological pronouncements every time they spoke. Generally, the pre-Nicene Christian writers were not attempting to define precise points of dogma for the rest of the church. Most of their theological discussions come up in the context of either (1) explaining to outsiders what Christians believed or (2) contrasting the tenets of particular heretics with what the general body of Christians believed. They were not normally trying to convince other orthodox Christians what to believe.

We also must be careful not to read technical or post-Nicene meanings into theological terms used by the pre-Nicene Christians. Very rarely did orthodoxy (itself a fifthcentury term) in the early church turn on the issue of using this word instead of that word. The early Christians understood orthodoxy in terms of general concepts, not meticulous theological definitions. As Clement of Alexandria put it, Those who are particular about words, and devote their time to them, miss the point of the whole picture (ANF 2.347). Although theology was important to the early church, it took a back seat to living the Christian life.

Notes

[1]. When I use the term early Christians or early church, I am referring to the pre-Nicene Christians and the pre-Nicene Church.

[2]. The Ante-Nicene Fathers (ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson; 1885–1887; repr. 10 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1994).

[3]. The stated dates of writing are not intended to be precise. For persons whose writings span a period of only a few years, I have usually attributed all of that person’s writing to one median date. For example, all of Cyprian’s works are dated herein as c. 250; however, the writings of authors who wrote over an extended period of time (such as Origen) are assigned an approximate date for each work.

[4]. Note that the Hendrickson Publishers’ edition reorders the sequence of the volumes to make the index volume, volume 10 (not 9 as in past editions), the last volume. Volume 10 now includes an expanded index (Annotated Index of Authors and Works) and two appendixes (A. Patristic Exegetical Works and B. The Liturgical Year).

[5]. Treatment of the Gnostics as a defined and understood group is problematic. Modern scholars use the expression Gnosticism to describe a wide variety of groups and beliefs among those groups. The origins and nature of Gnosticism remains a point of scholarly debate.

[6]. For examples of how the early Christians understood the word logos, see CHRIST, DIVINITY OF; LOGOS; and WORD OF GOD (CHRIST) in this digest.

[7]. Since chapters 1 through 32 of Book 7 of the Constitutions simply reiterate the Didache, I have not indexed those chapters. All of that material is included under the citations for the Didache.

Who’s Who in the Ante-Nicene Fathers

Alexander of Alexandria (AL-ig-ZAN-dәr) d. 328. Bishop of the church at Alexandria, Egypt, at the outbreak of the Arian controversy. He strongly opposed the heresy of Arius.

Apollonarius (ә-PÄL-ә-NAR-è-әs) 2d century. Bishop of Hierapolis and Christian apologist. He also wrote a short work against the Montanists.

Archelaus (ÄR-kә-LÀ-әs) 3d century. A Christian bishop who publicly debated Manes, the founder of Manichaeism. A purported record of this debate is chronicled in the Disputation of Archelaus and Manes.

Aristides (AR-ә-STÌD-èz) early 2d century. A converted Greek philosopher of Athens who wrote one of the earliest Christian apologies.

Aristo of Pella (AR-ә-STÒ) 2d century. Early Christian apologist about whom little is known. Only brief excerpts remain of his apology.

Arius (AR-è-әs) c. 250–336. Presbyter in the church at Alexandria who disputed with his bishop over the nature of Christ. Arius taught that Jesus was of a different nature than the Father and that Jesus was created out of nothing. His views were condemned at the Council of Nicea. See ARIUS herein.

Arnobius (är-NÒ-bè-әs) d. c. 330. Noted pagan teacher of rhetoric at Sicca, North Africa, who converted to Christianity. According to Jerome, the local bishop demanded proof of Arnobius’s sincerity before admitting him into the church. That was because Arnobius had previously been an outspoken opponent of Christianity. So Arnobius wrote a lengthy apologetic work entitled Against the Pagan, which is included in the Ante-Nicene Fathers. Although orthodox in intent, this work reflects the fact that its author did not have a thorough grasp of the totality of Christian doctrine.

Athenagoras (ATH-ә-NAG-ә-rәs) 2d century. Christian apologist who had been a Greek philosopher before his conversion. His apology was presented to Emperors Marcus Aurelius and Commodus about A.D. 177.

Bardesanes (BÄRD-i-SÀ-NÈZ) c. 154–222. A Syriac convert to Christianity who later lapsed into heresy, espousing many Gnostic tenets. The work, The Book of the Laws of Divers Countries, may have actually been written by his student, Philip. However, it is credited to Bardesanes in the Ante-Nicene Fathers (under the name Bardesan). This work has been included in this dictionary only sparingly and only where it contains historical information or else theological teachings that are wholly consistent with pre-Nicene orthodoxy.

Barnabas, Epistle of (BÄR-nә-bәs) c. 70–100. An anonymous work widely circulated among the early Christians. Many early Christians believed this work to have been written by Barnabas, the well-known companion of the apostle Paul. Some writers, such as Clement of Alexandria, even considered it to be Scripture. It is included in the early manuscript, Codex Sinaiticus, which contains much of the modern New Testament. Most modern scholars doubt it was actually written by the historic Barnabas. See BARNABAS, EPISTLE OF herein.

Caius (KÀ-(y)әs) early 3d century. Presbyter in the church at Rome who wrote several works against major heresies of his day. Also known as Gaius.

Celsus (SEL-sәs) 2d century. Pagan Roman philosopher who wrote a blistering attack on Christianity (c. 178). Over a half century later, his attack was brilliantly answered by Origen. In the quotations found herein under Origen, I have noted where the speaker is Celsus rather than Origen. In such instances, it should be understood that the view being presented is that of a pagan critic.

Clement of Rome (KLEM-әnt) 1st century. Bishop of the church at Rome; he may well have been a companion of both Peter and Paul (Phil. 4:3). On behalf of the church in Rome, he wrote a letter to the Corinthian church (c. 95) in aid to the church leaders who had been ousted by a minority faction. The work designated as Second Clement was at one time erroneously attributed to Clement of Rome. However, it is actually an early sermon or homily, the authorship of which is unknown. See CLEMENT OF ROME herein.

Clement of Alexandria (KLEM-әnt) c. 150–215. Learned Christian teacher at Alexandria, Egypt, who was in charge of the catechetical school there. Origen was one of his pupils. In his largest extant work, Miscellanies, Clement attempted unsuccessfuly to wrest the term gnostic (one who knows) away from the heretics and give it a Christian meaning. To avoid confusion, I have rendered his Christian gnostic as spiritual man herein. A few of the quotations herein from Clement have been translated from the Latin passages appearing in the Ante-Nicene Fathers. See CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA herein.

Cyprian (SIP-rè-әn) d. 258. Bishop of the church in Carthage, North Africa, during a period of fierce persecution. He often had to work underground. However, he was eventually captured and executed by the Romans. An extensive collection of letters written by and to Cyprian still remains, along with various treatises written by him. These works give tremendous insight into the structure of the church in the middle of the third century. See CYPRIAN herein.

Dionysius of Alexandria (DÌ-ә-NIS(H)-è-әs) d. c. 264. Pupil of Origen, later head of the catechetical school in Alexandria, and eventually bishop of Alexandria (from 247). He wrote against Sabellianism, and he opposed Paul of Samosata.

Dionysius of Corinth (DÌ-ә-NIS(H)-è-әs) 2d century. Bishop of Corinth, some of whose letters are extant.

Dionysius of Rome (DÌ-ә-NIS(H)-è-әs) d. 268. Bishop of Rome who entered into a controversy with Dionysius, bishop of Alexandria, concerning the divine nature of Christ.

Edict of Milan (mi-LÄN) 313. Decree issued jointly by Constantine and Licinius, rulers of the Western and Eastern portions of the Roman Empire, giving legal recognition to Christianity for the first time.

Eusebius (yü-SÈ-bè-әs) 270–340. Bishop of the church in Caesarea during the time of Constantine’s reign. His Ecclesiastical History is a principal source for the history of the church from the first century down through the time of Emperor Constantine.

Firmilian (fәr-MIL-yәn) c. 200–268. Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia. He was a friend of Origen, and he sided with Cyprian against Stephen, bishop of Rome, in the controversy concerning baptism by heretics.

Hegesippus (HEJ-ә-SIP-әs) c. 110–180. Early church historian. Only fragments of his works are still extant, preserved in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History. Hegesippus drew up one of the earliest lists of the succession of bishops in the church in Rome.

Hermas (HER-mәs) 1st or 2d century. Author of an allegorical work entitled The Shepherd, which was widely read and held in great esteem by many early Christian churches. Origen believed the author to be the same person referred to by Paul in Romans 16:14. The Muratorian Fragment asserts that he was the brother of Pius, second century bishop of Rome. See HERMAS, SHEPHERD OF herein.

Hippolytus (hip-ÄL-әt-әs) c. 170–236. A leading presbyter in the church in Rome near the beginning of the third century. He attacked the theology and discipline of two Roman bishops, Zephyrinus and Callistus, and apparently led a schism in the Roman church for awhile. His principal work was the Refutation of All Heresies. Among other works, he also wrote commentaries on Daniel and the Song of Songs. He died as a martyr.

Ignatius (ig-NÀ-sh(è-)әs) c. 35–107. Bishop of the church at Antioch and a personal disciple of one or more apostles. He was executed in Rome c. 107. On his way to Rome as a prisoner, Ignatius wrote letters to several churches; these letters give considerable insight into the structure and beliefs of the churches in Asia Minor at the close of the apostolic age. See IGNATIUS herein.

Irenaeus (Ì-rè-NÈ-әs) c. 130–200. Bishop of the church at Lyons (in modern-day France). When he was a boy, Irenaeus had heard Polycarp teach. From this, it is generally supposed that Irenaeus was a native of Smyrna. In 190, Irenaeus wrote to Victor, bishop of Rome, pleading tolerance for the Christians of Asia Minor who celebrated Easter on a different day than did Rome. He is classified herein as both Eastern and Western, since he was from an Eastern background but ministered in the West.

Julius Africanus ( JÜL-yәs AF-ri-KÀ-nәs) c. 160–240. Roman military officer, friend of kings and emperors, and convert to Christianity. Only a few letters from his writings remain.

Justin Martyr ( JәS-tәn MÄRT-әr) c. 100–165. Philosopher who converted to Christianity and became a tireless evangelist and apologist. Justin wrote more concerning Christianity than any other person prior to his time. He is classified herein as Eastern, since he was a native of Samaria and his thought patterns were Eastern. However, he spent the last years of his life in Rome, where he was executed as a martyr (c. 165). See JUSTIN MARTYR herein.

Lactantius (lak-TAN-sh(è-)әs) c. 250–325. Prominent Roman teacher of rhetoric who later converted to Christianity. In his old age, he was summoned by Emperor Constantine to Gaul (France) to tutor Constantine’s son, Crispus.

Manes (MÀ-nèz) c. 216–276. Also known as Mani and Manichaeus. He founded a religious sect in Persia that incorporated many gnostic elements, particularly dualism. It spread throughout the East as a distinct religion, but it emerged in the West primarily as a Christian heresy. See MANES, MANICHAEANS herein.

Marcion (MÄR-s(h)è-әn) d. c. 160. Heretical second-century teacher who eventually founded his own church. His teachings incorporated many gnostic elements, including the belief that the God of the Old Testament was a different God than the Father of Jesus. Marcion accepted only the Gospel of Luke and the writings of Paul for his New Testament canon, and he was forced to alter even these to fit his teachings. See MARCION herein.

Mark Minucius Felix (mә-N(Y)Ü-sh(è-)әs FÈ-liks) 2d or 3d century. Roman lawyer who converted to Christianity. He wrote one of the finest apologies of early Christianity in the form of a dialogue between a Christian and a pagan. When reading quotations attributed to Mark Minucius Felix, the reader should take note whether the speaker is the pagan antagonist or the Christian apologist.

Melito (MEL-ә-tò) d. c. 190. Bishop of Sardis in Asia and a prolific writer. Unfortunately, only fragments of his works remain.

Methodius (mi-THÒ-dè-әs) d. c. 311. Apparently bishop of Lycia, the author of several theological and moral works.

Montanus (MÄN-tә-nәs, män-TÀ-nәs) 2d century. Founder of a spiritual movement that began in Phrygia in the latter part of the second century. After the death of Montanus, the movement was led by two self-proclaimed prophetesses, Priscilla and Maximilla. The Montantists referred to their movement as the New Prophecy. The church, however, usually called them Phrygians, Cataphrygians, or Montanists. The Montanists referred to the catholic Christians as the psychics, or unspiritual. See MONTANISTS herein.

Novatian (nә-VÀ-shәn) d. 257. Roman presbyter and author of several theological works in Latin. He later led a schism when Cornelius was ordained as bishop of Rome (c. 251). The Novatianists held to the same theological doctrines as the church, but were stricter in matters of discipline. The Novatianists lingered through the fifth century. The quotations herein that are credited to Novatian, but marked with an asterisk, are works that the AnteNicene Fathers attribute to Cyprian but which most scholars now attribute to Novatian. See NOVATIAN, NOVATIANISTS herein.

Origen (ÄR-ә-jәn) c. 185–255. A pupil of Clement of Alexandria who took over the famous catechetical school in Alexandria after the departure of Clement. He has been called the father of Christian theology. Origen was also the most prolific writer of the pre-Nicene church, dictating around two thousand works. He wrote not only doctrinal and apologetic works, but also commentaries on most of the books of the Bible. Many of his teachings reflect brilliant spiritual insights. On the other hand, some of his teachings exhibit strained or unsound theological speculation.

Origen traveled widely and defended the church against heretics. During Origen’s travels through Palestine on church interests (c. 233), he was ordained as a presbyter by the bishop of Caesarea. This led to a great controversy with his bishop in Alexandria and to Origen’s dismissal from the church in Alexandria. Origen spent the remainder of his life at Caesarea in Palestine as a presbyter, where he publicly preached and taught. He eventually died as a confessor, having endured excruciating tortures for Christ during the Decian persecution. Many of Origen’s works exist only in the Latin translations made by the fourthcentury monk, Rufinus. At one time, it was generally thought that Rufinus’s translations were seriously tainted and that he tried to make Origen appear more orthodox than he really was. Modern scholarship, however, has tended to vindicate Rufinus’s translations as being much more theologically honest and sound than was once thought. See ORIGEN herein.

Papias (PÀ-pè-әs) c. 60–130. Bishop of Hierapolis in Asia Minor and a disciple of John and a friend of Polycarp. His testimony concerning the Gospels of Matthew and Mark has been invaluable to the church. See PAPIAS herein.

Polycarp (PÄL-è-KÄRP) c. 69–156. Faithful bishop of the church at Smyrna, friend of Ignatius, and a disciple of the apostle John. He was arrested in his very old age and was burned to death (c. 156). See POLYCARP herein.

Polycrates (pә-LIK-rә-TÈZ) 2d century. Bishop of Ephesus who opposed Victor, bishop of Rome, when the latter attempted to coerce all Christians to conform to Rome’s date for celebrating Easter.

Tatian (TÀ-shәn) 2d century. A disciple of Justin Martyr and Christian apologist. His most famous work is the Diatessaron, a harmony of the Gospels. It was originally written in Greek, but Tatian translated it himself into Syriac. Sadly, after the death of Justin, Tatian deviated into heresy, becoming a leader of the Encratite sect. All of the quotations herein are from Tatian’s orthodox period. See TATIAN herein.

Tertullian (tәr-TәL-yәn) c. 160–230. Fiery Christian writer in Carthage, North Africa. He may have been an ordained presbyter. He wrote numerous apologies, works against heretics, and exhortations to other Christians—nearly all of which are in Latin. Near the beginning of the third century, he came under the influence of the Montanist sect. Around 211, he seems to have left the church to join a Montanist congregation, although this is not certain. Since the Montanist sect differed from the church primarily on matters of discipline, not theological doctrines, Tertullian’s writings during his Montanist phase have been included herein. When the view he expresses appears to be unique to the Montanists, this is noted. See TERTULLIAN herein.

Theonas (thè-ÄN-әs) d. 300. Bishop of Alexandria who succeeded Dionysius.

Theophilus (thè-ÄF-ә-lәs) 2d century. Bishop of Antioch and Christian apologist. He was the first person to use the word Triad in speaking of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Trypho (TRÌ-fò) A Jewish literary character (and possibly an historical person) in Justin Martyr’s Dialogue with Trypho the Jew. In quotations from this work herein, I have noted the quotations where Trypho is the speaker. Such quotations reflect Jewish beliefs and attitudes, not those of the Christians.

Victorinus (VIK-tә-RÌ-nәs) d. c. 304. Bishop of Poetovio in Syria and a martyr. He wrote commentaries on a number of the books of the Bible; however, only his commentary on Revelation has survived.

A

ABANDONMENT OF INFANTS

SEE ABORTION, INFANTICIDE.

ABEL

And the Lord respected Abel and his offering. Gen. 4:4.

By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. Heb. 11:4.

On you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah. Matt. 23:35.

We show that both earthly oblations and spiritual sacrifices were foreshadowed. . . . Cain foreshadowed those of the elder son, that is, of Israel. And the opposite sacrifices are demonstrated to be those of the younger son, Abel. He represents our [Christian] people. Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.156.

Beloved brethren, let us imitate righteous Abel, who initiated martyrdoms. For he was the first to be slain for righteousness’ sake. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.348.

In the sacrifices that Abel and Cain first offered, God looked not at their gifts, but at their hearts. Abel was acceptable in his gift because he was acceptable in his heart. Abel was peaceable and righteous; he sacrificed in innocence to God. He thereby taught others that when they, too, bring their gift to the altar, they should come with the fear of God and with a simple heart. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.454; see also 2.105.

ABGAR, KING

Abgar was the customary name given to various kings of Edessa. The passages below apparently refer to two different Abgars. The first one refers to Abgar the Black, c. A.D. 13–50.

King Abgar was renowned for his valor among the nations that were east of the Euphrates. However, his body was wasting away with a grievous disease, one for which there was no cure among men. But when Abgar heard and was informed of the name of Jesus and about the mighty works that He did, . . . he sent a letter of request [to Jesus] through one of his slaves. Abgar begged Him to come and heal him of his disease. However, our Savior did not comply with his request at the time that he asked. Still, He sent Abgar a letter in reply. Eusebius (c. 315, E), 8.651.

This Abgar was called Avak-air (great man) because of his gentleness, wisdom, and size. Not being able to pronounce well, the Greeks and the Syrians called him Abgar. In the second year of his reign, all the districts of Armenia became vassals to the Romans. Moses of Chorene (date uncertain, E), 8.702; extended discussion: 8.651–8.653.

SEE ALSO ARMENIA; EDESSA; SEVENTY, THE (DISCIPLES).

ABLUTION

Ablution refers to ceremonial washing before prayer or other religious observance.

It is said that we should go to the sacrifices and prayers washed, clean, and bright. It is said that this external adornment and purification are practiced as a symbol. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.435.

[DESCRIBING A LOVE FEAST:] After washing the hands and the bringing in of lights, each person is asked to stand forth and sing a hymn to God, as best he can. This can be either a hymn from the Holy Scriptures or one of his own composing. Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.47.

What reason is there to go to prayer with hands indeed washed, but the spirit foul? It is spiritual purities that are necessary for our hands, so that they can be lifted up pure from falsehood, and from murder. . . . These are the true purities. The true ones are not those which most persons are superstitiously careful about—such as using water at every prayer, even when they are coming from a bath of the whole body. When I was carefully making a thorough investigation of this practice, . . . I ascertained that it was a commemorative act, relating to the surrender of the Lord [when Pilate washed his hands]. However, we pray to the Lord; we do not surrender him. Tertullian (c. 198, W), 3.685.

In this manner, the Essenes perform ablutions in cold water. And after being cleansed in this manner, they retire together into one room. Hippolytus (c. 225, W), 5.134.

SEE ALSO PRAYER (II. PRAYER POSTURES AND CUSTOMS).

ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION

SEE DANIEL, BOOK OF.

ABORTION, INFANTICIDE

The term exposing infants refers to the practice of abandoning infant children along roadsides, leaving them either to die of exposure or to be taken by someone, usually to be raised as a slave or a prostitute.

If men fight and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely . . . [and] if any lasting harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. Exod. 21:22, 23.

You shall not kill the child by obtaining an abortion. Nor, again, shall you destroy him after he is born. Barnabas (c. 70–130, E), 1.148.

You shall not murder a child by abortion nor kill one who has been born. Didache (c. 80–140, E), 1.377.

They bear children, but they do not destroy their offspring. Letter to Diognetus (c. 125–200), 1.27.

We say that those women who use drugs to bring on abortion commit murder. And we also say they will have to give an account to God for the abortion. So on what basis could we commit murder? For it does not belong to the same person to regard the very fetus in the womb as a created being (and therefore an object of God’s care)—yet, when he has passed into life, to kill him. We also teach that it is wrong to expose an infant. For those who expose them are guilty of child murder. Athenagoras (c. 175, E), 2.147.

Fathers, forgetting about their children who have been exposed, often unknowingly have intercourse with a son that has debauched himself and with daughters who are prostitutes. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.276.

Although keeping parrots and curlews, the [pagans] do not adopt the orphan child. Rather, they expose children who are born at home. Yet, they take up the young of birds. So they prefer irrational creatures to rational ones! Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.279.

What cause is there for the exposure of a child? The man who did not desire to beget children had no right to marry at all. He certainly does not have the right to become the murderer of his children, because of licentious indulgence. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.368.

In our case, murder is once for all forbidden. Therefore, we may not destroy even the fetus in the womb, while as yet the human being derives blood from other parts of the body for its sustenance. To hinder a birth is merely a speedier way to kill a human. It does not matter whether you take away a life that has been born, or destroy one that is not yet born. Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.25.

First of all, you [pagans] expose your children, so that they may be taken up by any compassionate passer-by, to whom they are quite unknown! Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.26.

Although you are forbidden by the laws to kill newborn infants, it so happens that no laws are evaded with more impunity or greater safety. And this is done with the deliberate knowledge of the public. Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.123.

Among surgeons’ tools there is a certain instrument that is formed with a nicelyadjusted flexible frame for first of all opening the uterus and then keeping it open. It also has a circular blade, by means of which the limbs within the womb are dissected with careful, but unflinching care. Its last appendage is a blunted or covered hook, by which the entire fetus is extracted by a violent delivery. There is also a copper needle or spike, by which the actual death is brought about in this treacherous robbery of life. From its infanticide function, they give it the name, killer of the infant—which infant, of course, had once been alive. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.206.

Indeed, the Law of Moses punishes with appropriate penalties the person who causes abortion. For there already exists the beginning stages of a human being. And even at this stage, [the fetus] is already acknowledged with having the condition of life and death, since he is already susceptible to both. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.218.

Are you to dissolve the conception by aid of drugs? I believe it is no more lawful to hurt a child in process of birth, than to hurt one who is already born. Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.57.

I behold a certain ceremony and circumstance of adultery. On the one hand, idolatry precedes it and leads the way. On the other hand, murder follows in company. . . . Witness the midwives, too! How many adulterous conceptions are slaughtered! Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.78.

There are some women who, by drinking medical preparations, extinguish the source of the future man in their very bowels. So they commit murder before they bring forth. And these things assuredly come down from the teaching of your gods. Mark Minucius Felix (c. 200, W), 4.192.

Women who were reputed believers began to resort to drugs for producing sterility. They also girded themselves around, so as to expel what was being conceived. For they did not wish to have a child by either a slave or by any common fellow—out of concern for their family and their excessive wealth. See what a great impiety the lawless one has advanced! He teaches adultery and murder at the same time! Hippolytus (c. 225, W), 5.131.

The womb of his wife was hit by a blow of his heel. And, in the miscarriage that soon followed, the offspring was brought forth, the fruit of a father’s murder. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.326.

I cannot find language to even speak of the infants who were burned to the same Saturn! Lactantius (c. 304–313, W), 7.35.

[SPEAKING OF PAGANS:] They either strangle the sons born from themselves, or if they are too pious, they expose them. Lactantius (c. 304–313, W), 7.144, 145.

Let no one imagine that to strangle newborn children is allowable. For this is the greatest impiety! God breathes into their souls for life, not for death. Men . . . deprive souls that are still innocent and simple, of the light that they themselves have not given. . . . Or can those persons be considered innocent who expose their own offspring as prey for dogs? As far as their participation is concerned, they have killed them in a more cruel manner than if they had strangled them! . . . Therefore, if anyone is unable to bring up children because of poverty, it is better to abstain from marriage than to mar the work of God with wicked hands. Lactantius (c. 304–313, W), 7.187.

You shall not slay your child by causing abortion, nor kill the baby that is born. For everything that is shaped and has received a soul from God, if it is slain, shall be avenged, as being unjustly destroyed [Ezek. 21:23, LXX]. Apostolic Constitutions (compiled c. 390, E), 7.466.

SEE ALSO CONCEPTION; PROCREATION.

ABRAHAM

Now it came to pass after these things that God tested Abraham, and said to him . . . , Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering. Gen. 22:1, 2.

I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones. Matt. 3:9.

If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise. Gal. 3:29.

Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. Gal. 4:28.

This man was not only the prophet of faith, but also the father of those who from among the Gentiles believe in Jesus Christ. That is because his faith and ours are one and the same. Irenaeus (c. 180, E/W), 1.492.

The promise of God that He gave to Abraham remains steadfast. . . . For his seed is the church, which receives the adoption of God through the Lord, as John the Baptist said: For God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham. Thus also the apostle says in the Epistle to the Galatians: But you, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of the promise. Irenaeus (c. 180, E/W), 1.561.

God had commanded even Abraham to make a sacrifice of his son. He did not do this to tempt [Abraham], but to prove his faith. Tertullian (c. 198, W), 3.684.

SEE ALSO ISRAEL OF GOD.

ABRAHAM’S BOSOM

SEE DEAD, INTERMEDIATE STATE OF; PARADISE.

ABSOLUTION

In the early church, absolution was the formal act of a bishop or presbyter in pronouncing forgiveness of sin to a repentant Christian.

Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Matt. 18:15.

If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained. John 20:23.

Some, not able to find this peace [i.e., ecclesiastical forgiveness] in the church, have been seeking it from the imprisoned martyrs. Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.693.

Is it better to be damned in secret than absolved in public? Tertullian (c. 203, W), 3.664.

The next four quotations from Tertullian reflect the Montanist view that the church cannot extend forgiveness for serious postbaptismal sins, such as adultery.

I am not speaking of the type of repentance after believing that receives pardon from the bishop for lighter sins. For greater and irremissible ones, [pardon comes] from God alone. Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.95.

Apostolic sir, therefore, demonstrate to me even now prophetic evidence, so that I may recognize your divine virtue and so that you can vindicate to yourself the power of remitting such sins! If, however, you have only had the function of discipline allotted you, . . . who are you, how great are you, to grant indulgence? Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.99.

You say, But the church has the power of forgiving sins. This I acknowledge and adjudge. . . . But now I ask you, "From what source do you usurp this right of the church? Is it because the Lord has said to Peter, Upon this rock I will build My church and to you I have given the keys of the heavenly kingdom? Or Whatever you shall have bound or loosed in earth shall be bound or loosed in the heavens"? From these [Scriptures], do you presume that the power of binding and loosing has derived to you—that is, to every church of Peter? If so, what sort of man are you, subverting and wholly changing the manifest intention of the Lord, conferring this [authority] on Peter personally? Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.99.

You go so far as to lavish this power [of forgiveness of sins] on martyrs as well! No sooner has anyone . . . put on the chains, . . . than adulterers beset him and fornicators gain access to him. Prayers immediately echo around him. Instantly, there are pools of tears. Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.100.

The impostor [i.e., Callistus, bishop of Rome], having ventured on such opinions, established a school in antagonism to the church. And he adopted the foregoing system of instruction: He first invented the device of conniving with men in regard to their indulgence in pleasures, saying that everyone has their sins forgiven by him. For if anyone who commits any transgression, if he is called a Christian (even though he normally attended the congregation of someone else), they say the sin is not counted against him—provided he hurries off to the school of Callistus. And many persons are gratified with his regulation. . . . Now, some of those persons had been by us forcibly ejected from the church in accord with our judicial sentence. However, they simply went over to him and helped to crowd his school. Hippolytus (c. 225, W), 5.131.

In smaller sins, sinners may do penance for a set time and come to public confession according to the rules of discipline. They then receive the right of communion through the imposition of the hand of the bishop and clergy. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.290.

Let no one say, He who accepts martyrdom is baptized in his own blood. Therefore, he does not need peace [i.e., absolution for serious sins] from the bishop. For he is about to have the peace of his own glory. He is about to receive a greater reward from the mercy of the Lord. First of all, no one can be fitted for martyrdom if he is not armed for the contest by the church. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.337.

They do violence to His body and blood [i.e., the Eucharist]—before their sin is expiated, before confession of their crime has been made! They do this before their consciences have been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest! Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.441.

I entreat you, beloved brethren, that each one should confess his own sins while he is still in this world—while his confession can still be received and while the satisfaction and remission made by the priests are still pleasing to the Lord. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.445.

Falling sick, he [a lapsed believer] continued three successive days dumb and senseless. Recovering a little on the fourth day, he called his grandchild to him and said, . . . Hurry, I entreat you, and absolve me quickly. Summon one of the presbyters to me. . . . The boy ran for the presbyter. But it was night and the presbyter was sick and was, as a result, unable to come. However, I had issued an injunction that persons at the point of death, if they requested it, . . . should be absolved in order that they might depart this life in cheerful hope. So the presbyter gave the boy a small portion of the Eucharist, telling him to steep it in water and drop it into the old man’s mouth. Dionysius of Alexandria (c. 262, E), 6.101.

O bishop, just as you receive a pagan after you have instructed and baptized him, likewise let everyone join in prayers for this [penitent] man and restore him to his former place among the flock, through the imposition of hands. For he has been purified by repentance. And the imposition of hands shall be similar to baptism for him. For, by the laying on of hands, the Holy Spirit was given to believers. Apostolic Constitutions (compiled c. 390, E), 7.415.

SEE ALSO BINDING AND LOOSING; CONFESSION OF SINS; DISCIPLINE, CHURCH; REPENTANCE.

ACOLYTE

In the early church, an acolyte was a man who assisted the bishop, presbyters, or deacons in administering the Eucharist and in other duties.

I have sent another share to the same person by Naricus the acolyte. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.314.

I have read your letter, dearest brother, which you sent by Saturus our brother, the acolyte. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.338, 339.

The letter that you sent to us by . . . Lucian, Maximus, and Amantius, the acolytes. Lucius to Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.405.

SEE ALSO MINOR ORDERS.

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES

SEE CANON, NEW TESTAMENT.

ADAM

As in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 1 Cor. 15:22.

Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 1 Tim. 2:13, 14.

Because he was still an infant in age, Adam was not yet able to receive knowledge worthily. For even nowadays, too, when a child is born, he is not at once able to eat bread. Rather, he is first nourished with milk. . . . It would have been the same with Adam. The reason God commanded him not to eat of knowledge was not because God begrudged him, as some suppose. Rather, He wished to test Adam, to see whether he would obey His commandment. At the same time, He wished man, infant as he was, to remain simple and sincere for a while longer. Theophilus (c. 180, E), 2.104.

The Lord came to the lost sheep. He made a recapitulation of a very comprehensive dispensation, and He sought after His own handiwork. Therefore, it was necessary for Him to save that very man who had been created after His image and likeness—that is, Adam. . . . Man had been created by God to live. However, he was injured by the serpent who had corrupted him. Now, if after losing life, man would never again return to life (but would be utterly abandoned to death), then God would have been conquered. The wickedness of the serpent would have prevailed over the will of God. Irenaeus (c. 180, E/W), 1.455.

Inasmuch as man is saved, it is fitting that he who was created as the original man should be saved, too. . . . It was for this reason that, immediately after Adam had transgressed (as the Scripture relates), God pronounced no curse against Adam personally, but only against the ground. Irenaeus (c. 180, E/W), 1.456.

Adam showed his repentance by his conduct. He did this by means of the girdle of fig-leaves by which he covered himself. For there were many other leaves that would have been less irritating to his body. However, he adopted a garment fitting for his disobedience. For he was awed by the fear of God. . . . Adam had been conquered, and all life was taken away from him. Therefore, when the enemy was conquered in its turn, Adam received new life. So the last enemy, death, is destroyed. For it had taken possession of man at the first. . . . Therefore, everyone who disallows Adam’s salvation, speaks falsely. Irenaeus (c. 180, E/W), 1.457.

It was possible for God to have made man perfect from the beginning. However, man could not receive such perfection, being as yet an infant. Irenaeus (c. 180, E/W), 1.521.

Disobedience to God brings death. For that reason, Adam and Eve came under the penalty of death. From that very moment, they were handed over to it. Therefore, they did die in the same day that they ate, for they became death’s debtors. Furthermore, it was one day of the creation. . . . And there are some, again, who relegate the death of Adam to the thousandth year. For since a day of the Lord is as a thousand years, he did not go beyond the thousand years, but died within that period, thereby fulfilling the sentence of his sin. Irenaeus (c. 180, E/ W), 1.551.

Before the Law, Adam spoke prophetically concerning the woman and the naming of the creatures. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.331.

Adam readily chose what was wrong, following his wife. So he neglected what is true and good. On which account he exchanged his immortal life for a mortal life—but not forever. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.369.

Adam was perfect as far as his formation. . . . So the cause [of his sin] lay in his choosing—his choosing what was forbidden. God was not the cause. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.437.

The question propounded to us by the heretics is: Was Adam created perfect or imperfect? If imperfect, how could the work of a perfect God . . . be imperfect? And if Adam was created perfect, how did he transgress the commandment? They shall hear from us in reply that he was not perfect [or complete] at his creation. Rather, he was adapted to the reception of virtue. . . . For God created man for immortality and made him an image of His own nature. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.502.

I cannot easily be silent about that thing concerning which also the very head and fountain of the human race, and of human offense, is not silent. I mean Adam, who was restored by penitential discipline [Gr. exomologesis] to his own Paradise. Tertullian (c. 203, W), 3.666.

God did not actually curse Adam and Eve, because they were candidates for restoration. That is because they had been relieved by confession. Tertullian (c. 207, W), 3.317.

Since Adam was a figure of Christ, Adam’s sleep foreshadowed the death of Christ (who was to sleep a mortal slumber). Similarly, the church, the true mother of the living, was pictured by the wound inflicted on His side. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.222.

Adam gave the various names to the animals before he picked the fruit of the tree. So, before he ate, he prophesied. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.592.

Jesus delivered from the lowest Hades the first man of earth, when that man was lost and bound by the chains of death. Hippolytus (c. 205, W), 5.170.

We could not have received such a benefit . . . had He not taken up man, the first man of all—the man more precious than all others, purer than all others and capable of receiving Him. But after that man, we, too, will be able to receive Him. Origen (c. 228, E), 9.384.

God, having made man, . . . placed him in Paradise—that is, in a most fruitful and pleasant garden. He planted the garden in the regions of the east with every kind of wood

Reviews for Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs

[fschipani_3 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

This is a wonderful book to have around. It lists subjects alphabetically and under each subject heading it contains quotes from early Christian writers on the subject. A valuable resource in understanding the beliefs of the early church.

[rybeewoods · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

A killer resource. It's an encyclopedia style book filled with topics that run the gamut of the Christian walk.