Hello everyone :)
I am currently studying the earliest church fathers (as found in volume 1 of the ten volume set of ECF's). In my study I am listing passages on various issues, such as their Christology (what they say about the person of Christ) and other issues which perk my interests.
Anyway, after finishing my study of Ignatius seven epistles, I am curious as why he places so much emphasis on the Bishop of the church. This emphasis isn't just in the big interpolated epistles, but is just as apparent in the shorter more authentic versions of his epistles. It kind of strikes me as odd that this emphasis on the Bishop is not found in any of the other earliest church fathers. Any thoughts on this?
Another interesting thing that struck me, is that not too long ago, I was looking into the issue of the title of "Son of God" as applied to Jesus and what it means. Tim gave me some thought provoking replies dealing with that it is a title referring exclusively to the incarnation (as per Luke 1:35 I think) and not some title referring to an eternal begetting of the Son (as the Council of Nicea uses it).
In my study of the short and long versions of Ignatius, I have found that the short versions never speaks of an eternal begetting of the Son, and it is only in the longer versions where this usage is seen. For example...
From the short version of Ignatius epistle to the Ephesians...
"For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by 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. "
From the long version of the same epistle...
"For the Son of God, who was begotten before time began, and established all things according to the will of the Father, He was conceived in the womb of Mary, according to the appointment of God, of the seed of David, and by the Holy Ghost. For says the Scripture, "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and He shall be called Immanuel." He was born and was baptized by John, that He might ratify the institution committed to that prophet."
Another aspect I have been studying is the New Testament quotations by Ignatius in the short and long versions, and comparing them to the Byzantine and Alexandrian manuscripts. Although this area hasn't proven that fruitful because there were only a couple times when the quotations did not agree with both the Byzantine and Alexandrian texts. (Both times the quotations is only found in the longer version of the epistle)
In his epistle to the Ephesians, Ignatius says, And you are, as Paul wrote to you, "one body and one spirit, because ye have also been called in one hope of the faith. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all."
This is a quotation of Pauls letter to the Ephesians 4:5-6, which in the Byzantine says, "… and through all, and in us all." Whereas in the Alexandrian it says, "…and through all, and in all."
In his epistle to the Magnesians, Ignatius says, "Old things are passed away: behold, all things have become new."
This is a quotation of Pauls second letter to the Corinthians 5:17, which in the Byzantine says, "...the old things passed away; behold, all things have become new." Whereas in the Alexandrian it says, "...the old has gone, the new has come!"
I am currently studying the earliest church fathers (as found in volume 1 of the ten volume set of ECF's). In my study I am listing passages on various issues, such as their Christology (what they say about the person of Christ) and other issues which perk my interests.
Anyway, after finishing my study of Ignatius seven epistles, I am curious as why he places so much emphasis on the Bishop of the church. This emphasis isn't just in the big interpolated epistles, but is just as apparent in the shorter more authentic versions of his epistles. It kind of strikes me as odd that this emphasis on the Bishop is not found in any of the other earliest church fathers. Any thoughts on this?
Another interesting thing that struck me, is that not too long ago, I was looking into the issue of the title of "Son of God" as applied to Jesus and what it means. Tim gave me some thought provoking replies dealing with that it is a title referring exclusively to the incarnation (as per Luke 1:35 I think) and not some title referring to an eternal begetting of the Son (as the Council of Nicea uses it).
In my study of the short and long versions of Ignatius, I have found that the short versions never speaks of an eternal begetting of the Son, and it is only in the longer versions where this usage is seen. For example...
From the short version of Ignatius epistle to the Ephesians...
"For our God, Jesus Christ, was, according to the appointment of God, conceived in the womb by 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. "
From the long version of the same epistle...
"For the Son of God, who was begotten before time began, and established all things according to the will of the Father, He was conceived in the womb of Mary, according to the appointment of God, of the seed of David, and by the Holy Ghost. For says the Scripture, "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and He shall be called Immanuel." He was born and was baptized by John, that He might ratify the institution committed to that prophet."
From the short version of Ignatius epistle to the Magnesians...
"Entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed."
From the long version of the same epistle...
"With the ministry of Jesus Christ. He, being begotten by the Father before the beginning of time, was God the Word, the only-begotten Son, and remains the same for ever."Another aspect I have been studying is the New Testament quotations by Ignatius in the short and long versions, and comparing them to the Byzantine and Alexandrian manuscripts. Although this area hasn't proven that fruitful because there were only a couple times when the quotations did not agree with both the Byzantine and Alexandrian texts. (Both times the quotations is only found in the longer version of the epistle)
In his epistle to the Ephesians, Ignatius says, And you are, as Paul wrote to you, "one body and one spirit, because ye have also been called in one hope of the faith. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all."
This is a quotation of Pauls letter to the Ephesians 4:5-6, which in the Byzantine says, "… and through all, and in us all." Whereas in the Alexandrian it says, "…and through all, and in all."
In his epistle to the Magnesians, Ignatius says, "Old things are passed away: behold, all things have become new."
This is a quotation of Pauls second letter to the Corinthians 5:17, which in the Byzantine says, "...the old things passed away; behold, all things have become new." Whereas in the Alexandrian it says, "...the old has gone, the new has come!"
