I am participating in the group Read the Fathers, so in order to help me maintain this discipline I will be sharing my favorite quotes and reflections every Saturday:
Quotes
Moses’ Broken Covenant:
“Moses understood [the meaning of God], and cast the two tables out of his hands; and their covenant was broken, in order that the covenant of the beloved Jesus might be sealed upon our heart, in the hope which flows from believing in Him.” (Epistle of Barnabas IV)
Triple Meaning of Isaiah 53 (Jesus, Israel, and the Church):
“For it is written concerning Him, partly with reference to Israel, and partly to us; and [the Scripture] saith thus: ‘He was wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our iniquities: with His stripes we are healed. He was brought as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a lamb which is dumb before its shearer.'” (Epistle of Barnabas V)
The Mission of Christ:
“The prophets, having obtained grace from Him, prophesied concerning Him. And He (since it behooved Him to appear in flesh), that He might abolish death, and reveal the resurrection from the dead, endured [what and as He did], in order that He might fulfill the promise made unto the fathers, and by preparing a new people for Himself, might show, while He dwelt on earth, that He, when He has raised mankind, will also judge them. Moreover, teaching Israel, and doing so great miracles and signs, He preached [the truth] to him, and greatly loved him. But when He chose His own apostles who were to preach His Gospel, [He did so from among those] who were sinners above all sin, that He might show He came “not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”Then He manifested Himself to be the Son of God.” (Epistle of Barnabas V)
The Temple Stands:
“Let us inquire, then, if there still is a temple of God. There is—where He himself declared He would make and finish it. For it is written, “And it shall come to pass, when the week is completed, the temple of God shall be built in glory in the name of the Lord.” I find, therefore, that a temple does exist. Learn, then, how it shall be built in the name of the Lord. Before we believed in God, the habitation of our heart was corrupt and weak, as being indeed like a temple made with hands. For it was full of idolatry, and was a habitation of demons, through our doing such things as were opposed to [the will of] God. But it shall be built, observe ye, in the name of the Lord, in order that the temple of the Lord may be built in glory. How? Learn [as follows]. Having received the forgiveness of sins, and placed our trust in the name of the Lord, we have become new creatures, formed again from the beginning. Wherefore in our habitation God truly dwells in us. How? His word of faith; His calling of promise; the wisdom of the statutes; the commands of the doctrine; He himself prophesying in us; He himself dwelling in us; opening to us who were enslaved by death the doors of the temple, that is, the mouth; and by giving us repentance introduced us into the incorruptible temple. He then, who wishes to be saved, looks not to man, but to Him who dwells in him, and speaks in him, amazed at never having either heard him utter such words with his mouth, nor himself having ever desired to hear them. This is the spiritual temple built for the Lord.” (Epistle of Barnabas XVI)
“Pro-Life” Ethics:
“You shall not slay the child by procuring abortion; nor, again, shall you destroy it after it is born.” (Epistle of Barnabas XIX)
Reflections
– Ignatius of Antioch was identified as the author of the following epistle, now understood as spurious: Epistle to the Tarsians, Epistle to the Antiochians, Epistle to Hero, Epistle to the Philippians, First and Second Epistle to St. John, Epistle to the Virgin Mary (with a reply), and Epistle to Mary at Neapolis. Also, a letter from Maria the Proselyte to Ignatius is included in this collection. There is much binitarian and trinitarian thought in these works. The concerns seem closer to the Nicene age (or later) than the Apostolic Fathers. The spurious epistles appear to be packed with references to Scripture, more than the authentic letters. Does this indicate more of a familiarity with the developing canon of Scripture? Does it expose these letters as less situational that the authentic ones?
– The correspondance with Mary is interesting. It is short, brief, and supports the apostolic witness of John. I wonder about the purpose of its composition as relates to Ignatius?
– The Martyrdom of Ignatius depicts Ignatius of Antioch’s martyrdom as occurring soon after Trajan became emperor (98-117 CE). The second chapter puts the death after Trajan’s ninth year, which would be around 107 CE. Eusebius places his death around 108 CE. Ignatius is depicted as desiring martyrdom. He has a trial before Trajan, defends Jesus as Lord against Trajan’s mockery, and when Trajan sentences him to die in Rome he rejoices. Chapter III claims Ignatius and Polycarp to have been disciples of the Apostle John.
– The Epistle of Barnabas is old enough to be attributed to Barnabas, Paul’s contemporary and partner in mission. Whether or not it was written by this man is debated (unlikely?), but it does give a peak into early Christianity. The themes are similar to the Epistle to the Hebrews (canonical) in that the Old Covenant is depicted as having ended with the New Covenant reigning. Judaism’s rites and rituals are depicted as foreshadowing the present, but obsolete now. This epistle is far more positive toward the Old Covenant’s role than the Epistle to Diognetus and it is allegorical in it’s approach.
– The fragments that remain from Papias‘ writings from The Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord have gained a lot of attention recently. I plan on dedicating a post to Papias next week, so I won’t be sharing anything about him here.
– Technically, our reading of Justin Martyr began this week, but I am going to move my thoughts and quotes from Justin to next week’s post.
__________
the archives near Emmaus 
The replacement theology espoused by church fathers, such as the very first Epistle of Barnabas IV quote you cite here, has contributed much to the blindness of Christians in the reading of scriptures.
Because of replacement theology (heresy?) the intention behind the text is lost. When that happens, error is introduced and the text can be applied (incorrectly) to anything. It would be like if your brother-in-law wrote his bride (your sister) a letter full of advice and instruction. That advice, though valid in the context it was given, is not intended for you and not necessarily good advice in circumstances other than what it was intended for.
For example the quote above ” …and cast the two tables out of his hands; and their covenant was broken” makes it seem one covenant replaced another completely (this was the church fathers effort to show that the ekklesia replaced Israel) yet look what [Jer 31:35-36] says about that. It says this would only happen when the stars cease to shine, or the ocean roar etc.
Furthermore, the prophecies surrounding Jesus birth further attest his claims in [Matt 15:24]:
[Luke 1:32-33] “He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.” (Gabriel’s prophecy)
[Luke 1:54-55] “He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his offspring forever.” (Magnificat)
[Luke 2:29-32] “Lord, now you are letting your servant depart in peace, according to your word; for my eyes have seen your salvation that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a light for revelation to the nations, and glory to your people Israel.’ (Referencing the prophecies of [Isa 12:1;49:13]” (Simeon’s prophecy)
Clearly, the relationship the new covenant (mentioned in [Jer 31:31]) has with the old is that it ‘perfects it’ rather than discards it as implied by many church fathers including the quote above.
This shows the danger of simply accepting the expertise of church fathers uncritically.
Andrew
May the Spirit continue to lead you in your search
Andrew
The Church’s willingness to depart from the Jewishness of its roots has proven problematic, at times. Of course, non-Jews being Christians as non-Jews is expected. I think the Epistle of Barnabas is similar in many ways to the canonical Epistle to the Hebrews and far more kind toward the Old Covenant that the aforementioned Epistle to Diognetus. Does the Epistle to the Hebrews bother you or do you think it avoids something problematic that can be found in the Epistle of Barnabas?
Robert, thank you.
Brian, I have no problem rejecting ‘Jewishness’, Jewish meaning post-Babalonian citizen of Judea, of whatever ethnicity and lineage [Rev 2:9; 3:9]. Being unbiblical, I do have a problem with the (theological) rejection of Israel however; Israel being vastly different from ‘Jewish’. Apart from Revelation (and the Gospels), the Canonical book of Hebrews is likely the new covevant book I esteem the most.
Speaking of Hebrews, what does [Hebrews 8:13] say, this being a great chance to see more Hebrew idioms in the Greek? The word ‘obsolete’ in the English translation from the word παλαιόω (palaioō G3822), means to become worn, figuratively. There is no doubt that the Mosaic covenant had become worn. Isaiah, Jeremiah et al, show that God felt the covenant had become worn ([Isa 1:3-5][Jer 4:22] etc.) except that the Greek here impedes meaning. The word in [Hebrews 8:13] that causes this confusion is ἀφανισμός (aphanismos G854 ) which means to vanish away or disappear figuratively. However, the book Hebrews was not written in Greek, it was written in Hebrew, translated to Greek. This is the only instance of ἀφανισμός in our Bible, yet the word appears in the LXX also translated from Hebrew, and can be traced back to its Hebrew origin using the Dead Sea Scrolls since they contain proto-Septuagint Hebrew copies.
The Hebrew word translated ἀφανισμός in [Heb 8:13] was related to מלח (malach : H04414 ) which means to fade from view. The exact same expression in [Hebrew 8:13] is found in [Isaiah 51:6]. What is interesting about the Hebrew word מלח is that it is the same word that means “to salt”. A better Greek word to reflect the Hebrew meaning might have been ἀφανίζω (aphanizō G853) which was the root of the word ἀφανισμός that was actually used. Thus [Heb 8:13] would have read:
“In speaking of a new covenant, he has worn out the first. And what is becoming worn is nigh faded from view.” [Heb 8:13] {modified ESV}
Why is it fading from view? The old covenant, though imperfect, was a shadow of heavenly things [Heb 8:5], an incomplete image. Jesus gave substance to the shadow. This is the change spoken of in [Hebrews 7:12]. When a shadow is eclipsed by the thing itself, where do we look? We no longer cling to a promise (and look to the shadow), but to its fulfilment (the thing itself) which is exactly what I was alluding to above. Thus [Hew 8:13] shows the new covenant to be the perfection of the old.
The second marriage with the bride was more perfect than the first, because in the second instance the bride was no longer unfaithful, her sins had been removed through the death of her husband [Rom 7:2-3][1Cor 7:39].