Thread by @Akemi180

SEVEN REASONS TO REJECT THE EPISTLES OF "IGNATIUS" AS SPURIOUS

(1) They are not mentioned in the Epistle of Polycarp as: (a) the Ignatius of Polycarp was part of a group of martyrs, not a solo travelling procession to Rome, “concerning Ignatius himself, and those who are with

him, if, ye have any sure tidings, certify us.”. (b) The Ignatius of Polycarp was not from Syria, but was from Philippi, “I exhort you all, therefore, to be obedient unto the word of righteousness, and to practise all endurance, which also ye saw with your own eyes in the blessed

Ignatius, and Zosimus, and Rufus, and IN OTHERS ALSO AMONG YOURSELVES.” These words surely mean that the individuals here named were men of Philippi. It is admitted that two of them, viz. Zosimus and Rufus, answered to this description; and in the Latin Martyrologies,

as Dr. Lightfoot himself acknowledges, they are said to have been natives of the town. Thus, he Ignatius of Polycarp is not the phantom "Ignatius".

(2) Irenaeus does not once mention the "Ignatian" epistles (purportedly written long before his time) despite quoting Polycarp,

Clement, Papias, and Justin Martyr, all of whom give evidences against the Gnostics far less potent than "Ignatius"' such that Irenaeus would have been sure to have used his works if he had known of them. Why omit a disciple of the Apostle, glorious martyr, fierce anti-docetist,

and prominent early churchman in your work against Gnosticism? It makes no sense... unless Irenaeus knew of no such Epistles.

(3) The Epistles, despite purportedly being written by a disciple of John in the early 2nd century, never saw the light of day until the early 3rd, and

as shown above are absent from all the places on would expect them to be. Such forgeries were common at the time, see II Clement.

(4) The narrative of "Ignatius" being taken from Syria to Rome by 10 armed guards while surrounded by an entourage of co-coreligionists freely

shipping his letters all over the empire reads more like poor fiction than sober history.

(5) The ecclesiology is different from all other works of the same period, Ignatius is made to address Polycarp as if he were a full-blown prelate, and tells the people under his care,

"He that honoureth the bishop is honoured of God; he that doth aught against the knowledge of the bishop, rendereth service to the devil" [58:6] Polycarp, on the other hand, describes himself as one of the elders, and exhorts the Philippians to "submit to the presbyters and

"He that honoureth the bishop is honoured of God; he that doth aught against the knowledge of the bishop, rendereth service to the devil" [58:6] Polycarp, on the other hand, describes himself as one of the elders, and exhorts the Philippians to "submit to the presbyters and

deacons, " and to be "all subject one to another."

This is admitted even by "Ignatius"' defenders Lightfoot and Brent, with Lightfoot saying "of all the Fathers of the Church, early or later, no one is more incisive or more persistent in advocating the claims of the threefold

ministry to allegiance than Ignatius." [57:3] Polycarp, on the other hand, has written a letter "which has proved a stronghold of Presbyterianism." [57:4] And yet Dr. Lightfoot would have us to believe that these various letters were written by two ministers living at the same

time, taught by the same instructors, holding the closest intercourse with each other, professing the same doctrines, and adhering to the same ecclesiastical arrangements!

Fr. Allen Brent even goes so far as to say, "Undoubtedly Polycarp and Ignatius represent the meeting of two

quite different earlier Christian worlds." And, "Polycarp's reaction [to "Ignatius"' Epistle], on my view, would have been: He calls me "bishop', and I suppose I am because presbyters are also bishops, though I am not the only bishop ... or am I? Other presbyters defer to me

generally although there is nothing that I do that they cannot... Perhaps then I am, as Ignatius says, the bishop."

(6) The theology of Polycarp and Ignatius directly contradict on martyrdom, Ignatius is described as offering himself voluntarily that he may suffer as a martyr, and as telling those to whom he writes that his supreme desire is to be devoured by the lions at Rome.

"I desire," says he, "to fight with wild beasts." [57:5] "May I have joy of the beasts that have been prepared for me ... I will entice them that they may devour me promptly." [58:1] "Though I desire to suffer, yet I know not whether I am worthy." [58:2] "I delivered myself over

to death." [58:3] "I bid all men know that of my own free will I die for God." [58:4] The Church, instructed by Polycarp, condemns this insane ambition for martyrdom. "We praise not those," say the Smyrnaeans, "who deliver themselves up, since the gospel does not so teach us."

What is more likely, that these two disciples of John differed radicly on theology and ecclesiology... or that "Ignatius" wrote no such Epistles?

I thought I had a 7th reason but I guess I didn't, whoops lmfao