Ancient Apologetic Exegesis

Introducing and Recovering Theophilus’s World

Stuart Parsons

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN:
  9781625648099
  9781498227490
• eBook ISBN:
  9781498227506
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Christian Theology

New Testament scholarship uncovers much about first-century Christianity. Early Christian masters such as Origen and Augustine draw great attention to the third and following centuries. Yet oddly, despite this flood of attention to both the first century and to the third and later centuries, the second century often escapes notice, this despite its almost living memory of Jesus and his apostles from only a generation or two prior. A distinctive biblical exegesis was used by those second-century apologists who challenged Greco-Roman pagan religionists. Along with introducing the general shape of this ancient apologetic exegesis, Ancient Apologetic Exegesis aims at its recovery as well. Current literature often misunderstands or dismisses second-century exegetical approaches. But by looking behind anachronistic views of ancient genre, literacy, and rhetoric, we can rediscover a forgotten form of early Christian exegesis.

1

Theophilus and His Life with Scripture

The great body of New Testament scholarship uncovers much about first-century Christian thinking and experience. Brilliant Christian writers such as Origen, the Cappadocians, and Augustine draw scholarly attention to the third, fourth, and fifth centuries. But oddly, despite this flood of attention to both the first century and to the third to fifth centuries, the second century often escapes notice, despite its almost living memory of Jesus and his apostles from only a generation or two prior. Yet we bypass the second century only to our own loss.

Theophilus was one of the foremost second-century Christian leaders, bishop of the church at Antioch, capital city of the eastern province of the Roman Empire. We know little of his life. In what little of his writings that survive, he mentioned that at one time he did not believe in the possibility of resurrection, but he later changed his mind and that by encountering the Jewish Scriptures, he came to believe in the God of whom they spoke.1 Eusebius, the ancient church historian, mentions Theophilus’s service as the sixth bishop of Antioch. He and Jerome thought well of Theophilus’s writings against various heresies. Jerome mentions various writings by the bishop which he considered quite suitable for building up the church. Sadly, virtually all of Theophilus’s writings named by Eusebius and Jerome are now lost.2

The second century was a dangerous time to be a Christian. Local persecutions sometimes arose unexpectedly and with little warning. One infamous local persecution was in the year 177 C. E., close to when Theophilus wrote his third letter to Autolycus, when the Romans executed the elderly overseer of the church in Lyons and some of his flock.

Martyrdom was not sought, and Christians were to flee persecution if they could. But if they were taken, they were frequently given a choice of renouncing Christianity and worshipping the emperor in exchange for freedom, or else suffering public torture and death. Christians encouraged one another to remain steadfast, since they regarded it better to suffer the brief tortures of the Romans and receive the reward of eternal life, than to escape Roman torture only to face an eternity of suffering.

The most renowned of the martyrs of Lyons was not a member of the clergy or a prominent citizen, but a humble slave girl named Blandina. She was not expected to remain very steadfast because she was small and weak. The crowd in the amphitheater was therefore astounded to observe that Blandina lasted so long under successive tortures. Her endurance encouraged her companions, and ultimately encouraged Christians throughout Asia Minor who read of her sufferings when an eyewitness account came to them.3

When she would not recant her faith, Blandina was hung from a stake, in a rather fitting way given her religious identity, as if she were hanging from a cross. Dangerous beasts were released around her, but they did not attack. At the end of the day, she was taken back to prison. Again she was brought into the arena. There, before the crowds, she was successively whipped, exposed before dangerous animals, and baked on a large skillet (τήγανον) over a fire.4 Rather than renounce her faith, she confessed her allegiance to Christ and her own innocence of wrong-doing. Finally, she was enclosed inside a net so that she could be repeatedly tossed and gored to death by a bull.

Not too long after the torture and execution of Blandina, Theophilus complained to his pagan Roman friend Autolycus that Christians were being persecuted unto death daily.5 In light of the severity and recurrence of Roman persecution, it would not have been surprising if Theophilus had adopted a bitter or fearful tone toward Roman non-Christians, or if he had refused to correspond with any of them.

It is therefore surprising to find Theophilus a decade or two before the end of the second century sending three treatise-length letters to his pagan friend Autolycus.6 With these letters, he endeavored to persuade Autolycus to forsake worship of Greco-Roman gods and to embrace Christianity. These three letters are collectively entitled Ad Autolycum, or in English, “To Autolycus.” As for Autolycus, none of his letters or other writings survive.

It is not unreasonable to think that this correspondence between Theophilus and Autolycus was genuine and more than a mere literary invention, although such invention was not impossible. At any rate, it is likely that the content of Ad Autolycum accurately reflects actual Christian/pagan dialogues. Neymeyr shows that Christian teachers in the second century were in fairly harmonious contact with churches, but also had frequent interaction with non-Christians as they answered questions during their public lectures. Therefore, Theophilus would likely have been well aware of specific challenges to Christian teaching from Greco-Roman religionists, not only those which he learned directly via friendships with non-Christians such as Autolycus, but also those he learned second-hand from Christian teachers and others in his community who also dialogued with non-Christians.7

In Theophilus’s three letters to Autolycus, he exhibited neither anger, bitterness, nor fear towards Autolycus on account of Roman persecution against Christians.8 While he sharply critiqued Greco-Roman religious ideas in the letters, he nonetheless maintained a friendly tone towards Autolycus.9

This is not the only surprise that we find in Ad Autolycum. In his entire defense of Christianity, he did not once mention Jesus by name in reference to the historical Christ.10 Nor did he discourse on the earthly ministry of the historical Christ, the Incarnation, or the Cross. Neither did he emphasize the theme of divine grace. Not only so, the organization of Ad Autolycum sometimes appears curious, haphazard, and somehow less than adequate to the modern reader. For these reasons, Theophilus has been regarded by various scholars as being a disorganized writer who did not understand very much of Christian teaching.

However, this stereotypical picture of him is deceptive. Actually, he contended for his faith in a sophisticated and sure way according to the conventions of his age. If we truly grasp the protreptic form of his letters, we would be better able to comprehend his actual thought. And even if modern readers are sometimes unimpressed with...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: Theophilus and His Life with Scripture
• Chapter 2: Scripture and a Forgotten Genre
• Chapter 3: Scripture and a Forgotten Orality
• Chapter 4: Scripture and a Forgotten Coherence
• Chapter 5: Scriptural Anthologies and Testimonia (Excursus)
• Epilogue
• Appendix 1: Methodological Notes
• Appendix 2: Scripture Usage Tables
• Bibliography