Ignatius of Antioch: Who Reads Him in Context? (#4)

Ignatius on False Teachers and the Blood of Christ

Let no one be dismissed. Miss misled this man. Let. No he misled. Even the heavenly beings in the glory of angels in the rulers both visible invisible are also subject to judgment if they do not believe in the blood of Christ.

Now if you stop right there what's he talking about. Is he talking about sacraments. Is he talking about transubstantiation. Up to this point what is the consistent interpretation. The Jesus Christ truly was flesh and bone.

That he shed blood upon the cross of Calvary. That he was truly man. Right. I mean if if we if this is if this is the end the letter is we thought that let's say that some that the the the epistle was lost and it and it the the last page fell off for something like that and it ended here.

Would anyone reading what came before come to this section and understand anything other than what has been said all the way up this point. I don't think so. So that is very important to recognize. They don't leave the blood of Christ the one who accepts this.

I have accepted. Do not let a high position make anyone proud for faith and love everything. Nothing is preferable to them. Now note. Well those who hold heretical opinions about the grace of Jesus Christ who came which.

Came to us.

Note how contrary they are. The mind of God. Who's he talking about. Is this. Is this a. Is this a shifting over to someone new. Is this some new a context some new false teachers. No of course not. We talks about the grace of Jesus Christ has come to us.

He's still talking about the incarnate Lord the connection between the fact that if he's not truly human there is no gospel there is no salvation you can't have a suffering Messiah who only seems to suffer doesn't really suffer etc etc.

They have no concern for love none for the widow none for the orphan none for the press number the prisoner or the one released none for the hungry or thirsty. Now he's saying these false teachers they're just like the ones described in scripture.

Look at second to the chapter.

Three.

The description of those people they're very similar to this false teachers a sneak into homes that take they take a captive women who are laden down with sins and they're always teaching. And they never come to knowledge the truth.

Ignatius, the Eucharist, and the Flesh of Christ

And and so on and so forth. And then all the sudden no introduction. Nothing whatsoever to say. Okay I'm I'm shifting subjects now anything like that. Here comes the quote they abstain from the Eucharist in prayer because they refuse to acknowledge the Eucharist the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ which suffered for our sins in which the father by his goodness raised up.

Now if we if there had never been a doctrine of transubstantiation if there had never been a fourth ladder in counsel and think about it did these words have a particular meaning in the year 200. It's a 100 years after written.

Of course they did. Can we know that meaning without reference to something happened a thousand years later. Well we should be able to. If words in language communicates anything this had a meeting when it was written should we interpret these words in light of what happened a thousand years later.

No not. If we want to be fair to Ignatius. And so if that had never happened what would these words mean. Well remember Ignatius is warning against false teachers. He's saying don't bring them in don't greet them don't meet them.

He's describing them. And now he gives us another description of them. And it's one thing to say they don't care for widows. They don't care for the poor. You know you can always see that part. But there's a way of detecting these false teachers.

There's something they won't do. They abstain. They will not participate in the Eucharist and prayer. Now Eucharist is a wonderful biblical term. It's a wonderful biblical term. It really is. It's been stolen from us because of its its misuse of the Roman Catholicism in the attachments of the neighbor.

But it just simply means the giving of Thanksgiving and became attached to the the supper and to the giving of thanks to God for the the sufferings of Jesus Christ the wonderful work. And so the early church had the Eucharist and prayer.

This is this was part and parcel of their service of their of their worship. But the Dos Etix will not partake in that why. Why would a Dos Etix refuse to partake in the life of the church where you have the remembrance and proclamation of the true body and blood and suffering of Christ.

Well it's obvious when Jesus would say this is my body this is my blood. When he institute institutes the supper and he gives the bread and the wine. And this is the same words that that Paul uses in first Corinthians chapter 11.

And you have the the the entire establishment of the supper and the anamnesis the remembrance of Christ therein. If you don't believe he had flesh and blood. You're not gonna participate in something that is based upon the reality.

Of those things.

Resurrection, Augustine, and the Rejection of Docetism

And so here is a means Smyrnians of recognizing these false teachers they abstain from the Eucharist and prayer. Why. Because they refuse to acknowledge that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ.

Why would they do.

That.

Because they don't believe in transubstantiation. No because Jesus Christ didn't have flesh which suffered for our sins and which the father by his goodness raised up. Remember the Gnostics the Docetics.

What was it that in Act 17 caused the people. They listened to Paul up to a certain point. And then Paul said one word. And that one word made them go. Oh come on Paul. Who is this babbler. What nuttiness is that.

What one word was it. Anastasis. And what's that resurrection. See to them. That was absolutely positively silly. Silly. Why would it be silly. Because Anastasis means that which died coming to life again.

And for the Greeks for a dualist and for the Docetics salvation was being freed from the evil physical body. And so the idea of resurrection the idea of Jesus' flesh being raised again not to be made present through some magical ceremony but raised to the right hand of the Father.

That's what Augustine taught. That's why Augustine said that the church on earth is deprived of the physical presence of Christ. Because his physical body is in heaven. And so that's why they would not participate in this.

Not because they were denying transubstantiation in the mass a concept completely foreign to Ignatius. Nowhere to be found within this letter. Nowhere to be found within the worldview. The reason of the rejection goes back to their rejection of the physicality of the incarnation the resurrection.

And that is the only thing that you can honestly and with integrity derive from reading Ignatius. In any fair manner at.

All.