LETTER 109 

To Riparius

Riparius, a presbyter of Aquitaine had written to inform Jerome that Vigilantius (for whom see Letter LXI.) was preaching in southern Gaul against the worship of relics and the keeping of night vigils; and this apparently with the consent of his bishop. Jerome now replies in a letter more noteworthy for its bitterness than for its logic. Nevertheless he offers to write a full confutation of Vigilantius if Riparius will send him the book containing his heresies. This Riparius subsequently did and then Jerome wrote his treatise Against Vigilantius, the most extreme and least convincing of all his works. The date of the letter is A.D. 404.

1. Now that I have received a letter from you, if I do not answer it I shall be guilty of pride, and if I do I shall be guilty of rashness. For the matters concerning which you ask my opinion are such that they cannot either be spoken of or listened to without profanity. You tell me that Vigilantius (whose very name Wakeful is a contradiction: he ought rather to be described as Sleepy) has again opened his fetid lips and is pouring forth a torrent of filthy venom upon the relics of the holy martyrs; and that he calls us who cherish them ashmongers and idolaters who pay homage to dead men’s bones. Unhappy wretch! To be wept over by all Christian men, who sees not that in speaking thus he makes himself one with the Samaritans and the Jews who hold dead bodies unclean and regard as defiled even vessels which have been in the same house with them, following the letter that kills and not the spirit that gives life. 2 Corinthians 3:6 We, it is true, refuse to worship or adore, I say not the relics of the martyrs, but even the sun and moon, the angels and archangels, the Cherubim and Seraphim and every name that is named, not only in this world but also in that which is to come. Ephesians 1:21 For we may not serve the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Romans 1:25 Still we honour the relics of the martyrs, that we may adore Him whose martyrs they are. We honour the servants that their honour may be reflected upon their Lord who Himself says:— he that receives you receives me. Matthew 10:40 I ask Vigilantius, Are the relics of Peter and of Paul unclean? Was the body of Moses unclean, of which we are told (according to the correct Hebrew text) that it was buried by the Lord Himself? Deuteronomy 34:6 And do we, every time that we enter the basilicas of apostles and prophets and martyrs, pay homage to the shrines of idols? Are the tapers which burn before their tombs only the tokens of idolatry? I will go farther still and ask a question which will make this theory recoil upon the head of its inventor and which will either kill or cure that frenzied brain of his, so that simple souls shall be no more subverted by his sacrilegious reasonings. Let him answer me this, Was the Lord’s body unclean when it was placed in the sepulchre? And did the angels clothed in white raiment merely watch over a corpse dead and defiled, that ages afterwards this sleepy fellow might indulge in dreams and vomit forth his filthy surfeit, so as, like the persecutor Julian, either to destroy the basilicas of the saints or to convert them into heathen temples?

2. I am surprised that the reverend bishop in whose diocese he is said to be a presbyter acquiesces in this his mad preaching, and that he does not rather with apostolic rod, nay with a rod of iron, shatter this useless vessel and deliver him for the destruction of the flesh that the spirit may be saved. 1 Corinthians 5:5 He should remember the words that are said: When you saw a thief, then you consented unto him; and hast been partaker with adulterers; and in another place, I will early destroy all the wicked of the land; that I may cut off all wicked doers from the city of the Lord; and again Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate you? And am not I grieved with those that rise up against you? I hate them with perfect hatred. If the relics of the martyrs are not worthy of honour, how comes it that we read Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints? If dead men’s bones defile those that touch them, how came it that the dead Elisha raised another man also dead, and that life came to this latter from the body of the prophet which according to Vigilantius must have been unclean? In that case every encampment of the host of Israel and the people of God was unclean; for they carried the bodies of Joseph and of the patriarchs with them in the wilderness, and carried their unclean ashes even into the holy land. In that case Joseph, who was a type of our Lord and Saviour, was a wicked man; for he carried up Jacob’s bones with great pomp to Hebron merely to put his unclean father beside his unclean grandfather and great grandfather, that is, one dead body along with others. The wretch’s tongue should be cut out, or he should be put under treatment for insanity. As he does not know how to speak, he should learn to be silent. I have myself before now seen the monster, and have done my best to bind the maniac with texts of scripture, as Hippocrates binds his patients with chains; but he went away, he departed, he escaped, he broke out, and taking refuge between the Adriatic and the Alps of King Cotius declaimed in his turn against me. For all that a fool says must be regarded as mere noise and mouthing.

3. You may perhaps in your secret thoughts find fault with me for thus assailing a man behind his back. I will frankly admit that my indignation overpowers me; I cannot listen with patience to such sacrilegious opinions. I have read of the javelin of Phinehas, Numbers 25:7-8 of the harshness of Elijah, 1 Kings 18:40 of the jealous anger of Simon the zealot, of the severity of Peter in putting to death Ananias and Sapphira, Acts 5:1-10 and of the firmness of Paul who, when Elymas the sorcerer withstood the ways of the Lord, doomed him to lifelong blindness. Acts 13:8-11 There is no cruelty in regard for God’s honour. Wherefore also in the Law it is said: If your brother or your friend or the wife of your bosom entice you from the truth, your hand shall be upon them and you shall shed their blood, Deuteronomy 13:6-9 and so shall you put the evil away from the midst of Israel. Once more I ask, Are the relics of the martyrs unclean? If so, why did the apostles allow themselves to walk in that funeral procession before the body — the unclean body — of Stephen? Why did they make great lamentation over him, Acts 8:2 that their grief might be turned into our joy?

You tell me farther that Vigilantius execrates vigils. In this surely he goes contrary to his name. The Wakeful one wishes to sleep and will not hearken to the Saviour’s words, What, could ye not watch with me one hour? Watch and pray that you enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing but the flesh is weak. Matthew 26:40-41 And in another place a prophet sings: At midnight I will rise to give thanks unto you because of your righteous judgments. We read also in the gospel how the Lord spent whole nights in prayer Luke 6:12 and how the apostles when they were shut up in prison kept vigil all night long, singing their psalms until the earth quaked, and the keeper of the prison believed, and the magistrates and citizens were filled with terror. Acts 16:25-38 Paul says: continue in prayer and watch in the same, Colossians 4:2 and in another place he speaks of himself as in watchings often. 2 Corinthians 11:27 Vigilantius may sleep if he pleases and may choke in his sleep, destroyed by the destroyer of Egypt and of the Egyptians. But let us say with David: Behold, he that keeps Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep. So will the Holy One and the Watcher come to us. And if ever by reason of our sins He fall asleep, let us say to Him: Awake, why do you sleep, O Lord; and when our ship is tossed by the waves let us rouse Him and say, Master, save us: we perish.

4. I would dictate more were it not that the limits of a letter impose upon me a modest silence. I might have gone on, had you sent me the books which contain this man’s rhapsodies, for in that case I should have known what points I had to refute. As it is I am only beating the air 1 Corinthians 9:26 and revealing not so much his infidelity — for this is patent to all — as my own faith. But if you wish me to write against him at greater length, send me those wretched dronings of his and in my answer he shall hear an echo of John the Baptist’s words Now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees; therefore every tree which brings not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire. Matthew 3:10

Moreover, this is what this blessed saint writes in regards to the intercession of those who have passed on into glory. All emphasis mine:

5. Madman, who in the world ever adored the martyrs? Who ever thought man was God? Did not Acts 14:11 Paul and Barnabas, when the people of Lycaonia thought them to be Jupiter and Mercury, and would have offered sacrifices to them, rend their clothes and declare they were men? Not that they were not better than Jupiter and Mercury, who were but men long ago dead, but because, under the mistaken ideas of the Gentiles, the honour due to God was being paid to them. And we read the same respecting Peter, who, when Cornelius wished to adore him, raised him by the hand, and said, Acts 10:26 Stand up, for I also am a man. And have you the audacity to speak of the mysterious something or other which you carry about in a little vessel and worship? I want to know what it is that you call something or other. Tell us more clearly (that there may be no restraint on your blasphemy) what you mean by the phrase a bit of powder wrapped up in a costly cloth in a tiny vessel. It is nothing less than the relics of the martyrs which he is vexed to see covered with a costly veil, and not bound up with rags or hair-cloth, or thrown on the midden, so that Vigilantius alone in his drunken slumber may be worshipped. Are we, therefore guilty of sacrilege when we enter the basilicas of the Apostles? Was the Emperor Constantius I. guilty of sacrilege when he transferred the sacred relics of Andrew, Luke, and Timothy to Constantinople? In their presence the demons cry out, and the devils who dwell in Vigilantius confess that they feel the influence of the saints. And at the present day is the Emperor Arcadius guilty of sacrilege, who after so long a time has conveyed the bones of the blessed Samuel from Judea to Thrace? Are all the bishops to be considered not only sacrilegious, but silly into the bargain, because they carried that most worthless thing, dust and ashes, wrapped in silk in golden vessel? Are the people of all the Churches fools, because they went to meet the sacred relics, and welcomed them with as much joy as if they beheld a living prophet in the midst of them, so that there was one great swarm of people from Palestine to Chalcedon with one voice re-echoing the praises of Christ? They were forsooth, adoring Samuel and not Christ, whose Levite and prophet Samuel was. You show mistrust because you think only of the dead body, and therefore blaspheme. Read the Gospel— Matthew 22:32 The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob: He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. If then they are alive, they are not, to use your expression, kept in honourable confinement.

6. For you say that the souls of Apostles and martyrs have their abode either in the bosom of Abraham, or in the place of refreshment, or under the altar of God, and that they cannot leave their own tombs, and be present where they will. They are, it seems, of senatorial rank, and are not subjected to the worst kind of prison and the society of murderers, but are kept apart in liberal and honourable custody in the isles of the blessed and the Elysian fields. Will you lay down the law for God? Will you put the Apostles into chains? So that to the day of judgment they are to be kept in confinement, and are not with their Lord, although it is written concerning them, Revelation 14:4 They follow the Lamb, wherever he goes. If the Lamb is present everywhere, the same must be believed respecting those who are with the Lamb. And while the devil and the demons wander through the whole world, and with only too great speed present themselves everywhere; are martyrs, after the shedding of their blood, to be kept out of sight shut up in a coffin, from whence they cannot escape? You say, in your pamphlet, that so long as we are alive we can pray for one another; but once we die, the prayer of no person for another can be heard, and all the more because the martyrs, though they Revelation 6:10 cry for the avenging of their blood, have never been able to obtain their request. If Apostles and martyrs while still in the body can pray for others, when they ought still to be anxious for themselves, how much more must they do so when once they have won their crowns, overcome, and triumphed? A single man, Moses, oft wins pardon from God for six hundred thousand armed men; and Acts 7:59-60 Stephen, the follower of his Lord and the first Christian martyr, entreats pardon for his persecutors; and when once they have entered on their life with Christ, shall they have less power than before? The Apostle Paul Acts 27:37 says that two hundred and seventy-six souls were given to him in the ship; and when, after his dissolution, he has begun to be with Christ, must he shut his mouth, and be unable to say a word for those who throughout the whole world have believed in his Gospel? Shall Vigilantius the live dog be better than Paul the dead lion? I should be right in saying so after Ecclesiastes, if I admitted that Paul is dead in spirit. The truth is that the saints are not called dead, but are said to be asleep. Wherefore John 11:11 Lazarus, who was about to rise again, is said to have slept. And the Apostle 1 Thessalonians 4:13 forbids the Thessalonians to be sorry for those who were asleep. As for you, when wide awake you are asleep, and asleep when you write, and you bring before me an apocryphal book which, under the name of Esdras, is read by you and those of your feather, and in this book it is written that after death no one dares pray for others. I have never read the book: for what need is there to take up what the Church does not receive? It can hardly be your intention to confront me with Balsamus, and Barbelus, and the Thesaurus of Manichæus, and the ludicrous name of Leusiboras; though possibly because you live at the foot of the Pyrenees, and border on Iberia, you follow the incredible marvels of the ancient heretic Basilides and his so-called knowledge, which is mere ignorance, and set forth what is condemned by the authority of the whole world. I say this because in your short treatise you quote Solomon as if he were on your side, though Solomon never wrote the words in question at all; so that, as you have a second Esdras you may have a second Solomon. And, if you like, you may read the imaginary revelations of all the patriarchs and prophets, and, when you have learned them, you may sing them among the women in their weaving-shops, or rather order them to be read in your taverns, the more easily by these melancholy ditties to stimulate the ignorant mob to replenish their cups. (Against Vigilantius)

FURTHER READING

Veneration of Icons: An Unbiblical Tradition or Biblical Truth?

VENERATION OF THE SAINTS: A BIBLICAL OUTLINE PT. 1, PT. 2

DID THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH REMOVE THE “SECOND COMMANDMENT”?

I begin with Irenaeus’ views on the fourth figure in the fiery whom Nebuchadnezzar saw and the one like a Son of Man that Daniel beheld.

11. If, then, neither Moses, nor Elias, nor Ezekiel, who had all many celestial visions, saw God; but if what they did see were similitudes of the splendour of the Lord, and prophecies of things to come; it is manifest that the Father is indeed invisible, of whom also the Lord said, No man has seen God at any time. John 1:18 But His Word, as He Himself willed it, and for the benefit of those who beheld, did show the Father’s brightness, and explained His purposes (as also the Lord said: The only-begotten God, which is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared [Him]; and He does Himself also interpret the Word of the Father as being rich and great); not in one figure, nor in one character, did He appear to those seeing Him, but according to the reasons and effects aimed at in His dispensations, as it is written in Daniel. For at one time He was seen with those who were around Ananias, Azarias, Misaël, as present with them in the furnace of fire, in the burning, and preserving them from [the effects of] fire: And the appearance of the fourth, it is said, was like to the Son of God. Daniel 3:26 

At another time [He is represented as] a stone cut out of the mountain without hands, Daniel 7:13-14 and as smiting all temporal kingdoms, and as blowing them away (ventilans ea), and as Himself filling all the earth. Then, too, is this same individual beheld as the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, and drawing near to the Ancient of Days, and receiving from Him all power and glory, and a kingdom. His dominion, it is said, is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom shall not perish. Daniel 7:4 John also, the Lord’s disciple, when beholding the sacerdotal and glorious advent of His kingdom, says in the Apocalypse: I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And, being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; and in the midst of the candlesticks One like the Son of man, clothed with a garment reaching to the feet, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle; and His head and His hairs were white, as white as wool, and as snow; and His eyes were as a flame of fire; and His feet like fine brass, as if He burned in a furnace. And His voice [was] as the voice of waters; and He had in His right hand seven stars; and out of His mouth went a sharp two-edged sword; and His countenance was as the sun shining in his strength. Revelation 1:12 For in these words He sets forth something of the glory [which He has received] from His Father, as [where He makes mention of] the head; something in reference to the priestly office also, as in the case of the long garment reaching to the feet. And this was the reason why Moses vested the high priest after this fashion. Something also alludes to the end [of all things], as [where He speaks of] the fine brass burning in the fire, which denotes the power of faith, and the continuing instant in prayer, because of the consuming fire which is to come at the end of time. But when John could not endure the sight (for he says, I fell at his feet as dead; Revelation 1:17 that what was written might come to pass: No man sees God, and shall live Exodus 33:20), and the Word reviving him, and reminding him that it was He upon whose bosom he had leaned at supper, when he put the question as to who should betray Him, declared: I am the first and the last, and He who lives, and was dead, and behold I am alive for evermore, and have the keys of death and of hell. 

And after these things, seeing the same Lord in a second vision, he says: For I saw in the midst of the throne, and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, a Lamb standing as it had been slain, having seven horns, and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God, sent forth into all the earth. Revelation 5:6 And again, he says, speaking of this very same Lamb: And behold a white horse; and He that sat upon him was called Faithful and True; and in righteousness does He judge and make war. And His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns; having a name written, that no man knows but Himself: and He was girded around with a vesture sprinkled with blood: and His name is called The Word of God. And the armies of heaven followed Him upon white horses, clothed in pure white linen. And out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He may smite the nations; and He shall rule (pascet) them with a rod of iron: and He treads the wine-press of the fierceness of the wrath of God Almighty. And He has upon His vesture and upon His thigh a name written, King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Revelation 19:11-17 Thus does the Word of God always preserve the outlines, as it were, of things to come, and points out to men the various forms (species), as it were, of the dispensations of the Father, teaching us the things pertaining to God. (Against Heresies Book IV, Chapter 20 That one God formed all things in the world, by means of the Word and the Holy Spirit: and that although he is to us in this life invisible and incomprehensible, nevertheless he is not unknown; inasmuch as his works do declare him, and his Word has shown that in many modes he may be seen and known.)

I next quote Hippolytus’ interpretation on the divine figure seen by Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel not just in Daniel 3 and 7, but also in chapter 10. He also deals with the Messianic timetable outlined in Daniel 9. Also, this great saint of the Church likened Mary’s body to the Ark of the covenant.  

3. As these things, then, are destined to come to pass, and as the toes of the image turn out to be democracies, and the ten horns of the beast are distributed among ten kings, let us look at what is before us more carefully, and scan it, as it were, with open eye. The golden head of the image is identical with the lioness, by which the Babylonians were represented. The golden shoulders and the arms of silver are the same with the bear, by which the Persians and Medes are meant. The belly and thighs of brass are the leopard, by which the Greeks who ruled from Alexander onwards are intended. The legs of iron are the dreadful and terrible beast, by which the Romans who hold the empire now are meant. The toes of clay and iron are the ten horns which are to be. The one other little horn springing up in their midst is the antichrist. The stone that smites the image and breaks it in pieces, and that filled the whole earth, is Christ, who comes from heaven and brings judgment on the world.

4. But that we may not leave our subject at this point undemonstrated, we are obliged to discuss the matter of the times, of which a man should not speak hastily, because they are a light to him. For as the times are noted from the foundation of the world, and reckoned from Adam, they set clearly before us the matter with which our inquiry deals. For the first appearance of our Lord in the flesh took place in Bethlehem, under Augustus, in the year 5500; and He suffered in the thirty-third year. And 6, 000 years must needs be accomplished, in order that the Sabbath may come, the rest, the holy day on which God rested from all His works. For the Sabbath is the type and emblem of the future kingdom of the saints, when they shall reign with Christ, when He comes from heaven, as John says in his Apocalypse: for a day with the Lord is as a thousand years. Since, then, in six days God made all things, it follows that 6, 000 years must be fulfilled. And they are not yet fulfilled, as John says: five are fallen; one is, that is, the sixth; the other is not yet come.

5. In mentioning the other, moreover, he specifies the seventh, in which there is rest. But some one may be ready to say, How will you prove to me that the Saviour was born in the year 5500? Learn that easily, O man; for the things that took place of old in the wilderness, under Moses, in the case of the tabernacle, were constituted types and emblems of spiritual mysteries, in order that, when the truth came in Christ in these last days, you might be able to perceive that these things were fulfilled. For He says to him, And you shall make the ark of imperishable wood, and shall overlay it with pure gold within and without; and you shall make the length of it two cubits and a half, and the breadth thereof one cubit and a half, and a cubit and a half the height;  which measures, when summed up together, make five cubits and a half, so that the 5500 years might be signified thereby.

6. At that time, then, the Saviour appeared and showed His own body to the world, (born) of the Virgin, who was the ark overlaid with pure gold, with the Word within and the Holy Spirit without; so that the truth is demonstrated, and the ark made manifest. From the birth of Christ, then, we must reckon the 500 years that remain to make up the 6000, and thus the end shall be. And that the Saviour appeared in the world, bearing the imperishable ark, His own body, at a time which was the fifth and half, John declares: Now it was the sixth hour, he says, intimating by that, one-half of the day. But a day with the Lord is 10000 years; and the half of that, therefore, is 500 years. For it was not meet that He should appear earlier, for the burden of the law still endured, nor yet when the sixth day was fulfilled (for the baptism is changed), but on the fifth and half, in order that in the remaining half time the gospel might be preached to the whole world, and that when the sixth day was completed He might end the present life…

12. After his confession and supplication, the angel says to him, You are a man greatly beloved: for you desire to see things of which you shall be informed by me; and in their own time these things will be fulfilled; and he touched me, saying, Seventy weeks are determined upon your people, and upon the holy city, to seal up sins and to blot out transgressions, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the Most Holy; and you shall know and understand, that from the going forth of words for the answer, and for the building of Jerusalem, unto Christ the Prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks.

13. Having mentioned therefore seventy weeks, and having divided them into two parts, in order that what was spoken by him to the prophet might be better understood, he proceeds thus, Unto Christ the Prince shall be seven weeks, which make forty-nine years. It was in the twenty-first year that Daniel saw these things in Babylon. Hence, the forty-nine years added to the twenty-one, make up the seventy years, of which the blessed Jeremiah spoke: The sanctuary shall be desolate seventy years from the captivity that befell them under Nebuchadnezzar; and after these things the people will return, and sacrifice and offering will be presented, when Christ is their Prince.

14. Now of what Christ does he speak, but of Jesus the son of Josedech, who returned at that time along with the people, and offered sacrifice according to the law, in the seventieth year, when the sanctuary was built? For all the kings and priests were styled Christs, because they were anointed with the holy oil, which Moses of old prepared. These, then, bore the name of the Lord in their own persons, showing aforetime the type, and presenting the image until the perfect King and Priest appeared from heaven, who alone did the will of the Father; as also it is written in Kings: And I will raise me up a faithful priest, that shall do all things according to my heart.

15. In order, then, to show the time when He is to come whom the blessed Daniel desired to see, he says, And after seven weeks there are other threescore and two weeks, which period embraces the space of 434 years. For after the return of the people from Babylon under the leadership of Jesus the son of Josedech, and Ezra the scribe, and Zerubbabel the son of Salathiel, of the tribe of David, there were 434 years unto the coming of Christ, in order that the Priest of priests might be manifested in the world, and that He who takes away the sins of the world might be evidently set forth, as John speaks concerning Him: Behold the Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world! And in like manner Gabriel says: To blot out transgressions, and make reconciliation for sins. But who has blotted out our transgressions? Paul the apostle teaches us, saying, He is our peace who made both one; and then, Blotting out the handwriting of sins that was against us.

16. That transgressions, therefore, are blotted out, and that reconciliation is made for sins, is shown by this. But who are they who have reconciliation made for their sins, but they who believe in His name, and propitiate His countenance by good works? And that after the return of the people from Babylon there was a space of 434 years, until the time of the birth of Christ, may be easily understood. For, since the first covenant was given to the children of Israel after a period of 434 years, it follows that the second covenant also should be defined by the same space of time, in order that it might be expected by the people and easily recognised by the faithful.

17. And for this reason Gabriel says: And to anoint the Most Holy. And the Most Holy is none else but the Son of God alone, who, when He came and manifested Himself, said to them, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He has anointed me;  and so forth. Whosoever, therefore, believed on the heavenly Priest, were cleansed by that same Priest, and their sins were blotted out. And whosoever believe it not on Him, despising Him as a man, had their sins sealed, as those which could not be taken away; whence the angel, foreseeing that not all should believe in Him, said, To finish sins, and to seal up sins. For as many as continued to disbelieve Him, even to the end, had their sins not finished, but sealed to be kept for judgment. But as many as will believe in Him as One able to remit sins, have their sins blotted out. Wherefore he says: And to seal up vision and prophet.

22. For when the threescore and two weeks are fulfilled, and Christ has come, and the Gospel is preached in every place, the times being then accomplished, there will remain only one week, the last, in which Elias will appear, and Enoch, and in the midst of it the abomination of desolation will be manifested, viz., Antichrist, announcing desolation to the world. And when he comes, the sacrifice and oblation will be removed, which now are offered to God in every place by the nations. These things being thus recounted, the prophet again describes another vision to us. For he had no other care save to be accurately instructed in all things that are to be, and to prove himself an instructor in such.

23. He says then: In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia, a word was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was Belshazzar; and the word was true, and great power and understanding were given him in the vision. In those days I Daniel was mourning three weeks of days. I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine into my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three weeks of days were fulfilled. On the fourth day of the first month I humbled myself, says he, one and twenty days, praying to the living God, and asking of Him the revelation of the mystery. And the Father in truth heard me, and sent His own Word, to show what should happen by Him. And that took place, indeed, by the great river. For it was meet that the Son should be manifested there, where also He was to remove sins.

24. And I lifted up my eyes, he says, and, behold, a man clothed in linen. In the first vision he says, Behold, the angel Gabriel (was) sent. Here, however, it is not so; but he sees the Lord, not yet indeed as perfect man, but with the appearance and form of man, as he says: And, behold, a man clothed in linen. For in being clothed in a various-colored coat, he indicated mystically the variety of the graces of our calling. For the priestly coat was made up of different colors, as various nations waited for Christ’s coming, in order that we might be made up (as one body) of many colors. And his loins were girded with the gold of Ophaz.

25. Now the word Ophaz, which is a word transferred from Hebrew to Greek, denotes pure gold. With a pure girdle, therefore, he was girded round the loins. For the Word was to bear us all, binding us like a girdle round His body, in His own love. The complete body was His, but we are members in His body, united together, and sustained by the Word Himself. And his body was like Tharses. Now Tharses, by interpretation, is Ethiopians. For that it would be difficult to recognise Him, the prophet had thus already announced beforehand, intimating that He would be manifested in the flesh in the world, but that many would find it difficult to recognise Him. And his face as lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire; for it was meet that the fiery and judicial power of the Word should be signified aforetime, in the exercise of which He will cause the fire (of His judgment) to light with justice upon the impious, and consume them.

26. He added also these words: And his arms and his feet like polished brass; to denote the first calling of men, and the second calling like it, viz. of the Gentiles. For the last shall be as the first; for I will set your rulers as at the beginning, and your leaders as before. And His voice was as the voice of a great multitude. For all we who believe in Him in these days utter things oracular, as speaking by His mouth the things appointed by Him. (Hippolytus, Some Exegetical Fragments of Hippolytus, Second fragment (Of the visions))

And:

47. And the flame streamed forth. The fire, he means, was driven from within by the angel, and burst forth outwardly. See how even the fire appears intelligent, as if it recognised and punished the guilty. For it did not touch the servants of God, but it consumed the unbelieving and impious Chaldeans. Those who were within were besprinkled with a (cooling) dew by the angel, while those who thought they stood in safety outside the furnace were destroyed by the fire. The men who cast in the youths were burned by the flame, which caught them on all sides, as I suppose, when they went to bind the youths.

92 (i.e., 25). And the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Tell me, Nebuchadnezzar, when did you see the Son of God, that you should confess that this is the Son of God? And who pricked your heart, that you should utter such a word? And with what eyes were you able to look into this light? And why was this manifested to you alone, and to none of the satraps about you? But, as it is written, The heart of a king is in the hand of God: the hand of God is here, whereby the Word pricked his heart, so that he might recognise Him in the furnace, and glorify Him. And this idea of ours is not without good ground. For as the children of Israel were destined to see God in the world, and yet not to believe in Him, the Scripture showed beforehand that the Gentiles would recognise Him incarnate, whom, while not incarnate, Nebuchadnezzar saw and recognised of old in the furnace, and acknowledged to be the Son of God.

93 (i.e., 26). And he said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. The three youths he thus called by name. But he found no name by which to call the fourth. For He was not yet that Jesus born of the Virgin.

97 (i.e., 30). Then the king promoted, etc. For as they honoured God by giving themselves up to death, so, too, they were themselves honoured not only by God, but also by the king. And they taught strange and foreign nations also to worship God…

13 And came to the Ancient of days. By the Ancient of days he means none other than the Lord and God and Ruler of all, and even of Christ Himself, who makes the days old, and yet becomes not old Himself by times and days.

14. His dominion is an everlasting dominion. The Father, having put all things in subjection to His own Son, both things in heaven and things on earth, showed Him forth by all as the first-begotten of God, in order that, along with the Father, He might be approved the Son of God before angels, and be manifested as the Lord also of angels: (He showed Him forth also as) the first-begotten of a virgin, that He might be seen to be in Himself the Creator anew of the first-formed Adam, (and) as the first-begotten from the dead, that He might become Himself the first-fruits of our resurrection.

Which shall not pass away. He exhibited all the dominion given by the Father to His own Son, who is manifested as King of all in heaven and on earth, and under the earth, and as Judge of all: of all in heaven, because He was born the Word, of the heart of the Father before all; and of all in earth, because He was made man, and created Adam anew of Himself; and of all under the earth, because He was also numbered among the dead, and preached to the souls of the saints, (and) by death overcame death.

17. Which shall arise. For when the three beasts have finished their course, and been removed, and the one still stands in vigour — if this one, too, is removed, then finally earthly things (shall) end, and heavenly things begin; that the indissoluble and everlasting kingdom of the saints may be brought to view, and the heavenly King manifested to all, no longer in figure, like one seen in vision, or revealed in a pillar of cloud upon the top of a mountain, but amid the powers and armies of angels, as God incarnate and man, Son of God and Son of man— coming from heaven as the world’s Judge…

22. Until the Ancient of days come. That is, when at length the Judge of judges and the King of kings comes from heaven, who shall subvert the whole dominion and power of the adversary, and shall consume all with the eternal fire of punishment. But to His servants, and prophets, and martyrs, and to all who fear Him, He will give an everlasting kingdom; that is, they shall possess the endless enjoyment of good.

Daniel 10:6 And the voice of His words. For all we who now believe in Him declare the words of Christ, as if we spoke by His mouth the things enjoined by Him.

7. And I saw, etc. For it is to His saints that fear Him, and to them alone, that He reveals Himself. For if any one seems to be living now in the Church, and yet has not the fear of God, his companionship with the saints will avail him nothing. (Ibid., Third fragment (Scholia on Daniel))

FURTHER READING

Appearances of Christ in Daniel

Daniel’s Son of Man as the Messiah

The Son of Man Rides the Clouds Pt. 1a, Pt. 1b, Pt. 2a, Pt. 2b

MESSIANIC TIMELINE OF DANIEL REVISITED AGAIN

A Justification of the Translation of Dan. 9:24-27 in the KJV

The Time of Messiah’s Advent Pt. 1, Pt. 2

A Divine Messiah That Suffers and Reigns! Pt. 2

MORE ON DANIEL’S MESSIANIC TIMELINE

All scriptural references taken from the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB).

FURTHER READING

An Articulation of the Incarnation

JESUS CHRIST: THE GOD-MAN

The Blood of God

Acts 20:28: The Blood of God

The following is an excerpt from Dr. Thomas Holland’s Crowned With Glory, ©2000, used with permission.

John 1:18 – “only begotten Son”

“No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

There are really two problems here, although only one appears on the surface. Should the proper translation be “only begotten Son” or should it be as the New American Standard Version renders it, “only begotten God”? This particular problem is not translational but textual because there is a difference in the Greek texts underlining these two translations. However, there is another problem that has to do with the Greek word monogenes. Both the King James and the New American Standard correctly translate it as only begotten. There is a growing movement to understand this word as unique, one of a kind, or simply only. We will deal with this difference first.

Many of the current handbooks on Greek syntax state that monogenes should not be translated as only begotten. [1] Instead, they take the word to mean only or unique. If this were true, the translation of the KJV would not be alone in its “error” for this is the translation of the New American Standard Version, the New King James Version, and several other translations of the twentieth century.

The problem here is a misunderstanding of the Greek language (both Koine and Modern). The word monogenes does means one or unique in the sense that an only child is the only one of his parents. It does not mean unique, as in special, such as in the phrase, “his work is very unique.” Here the Greek would be monadikos, not monogenes. As we examine the New Testament we find the word monogenes used eight times (not counting its usage here in John 1:18). In every case it is used to describe a relationship between a parent and child (Luke 7:12; 8:42; 9:38; John 1:14; 3:16, 18; Hebrews 11:17; 1 John 4:9). Since this is how the Holy Spirit uses the word in the New Testament, we must accept this definition when reading John 1:18. [2]

The evidence establishes that Jesus Christ, although God (John 1:1), is also the only begotten Son of God. None other can claim hold to this title. Those who accept Christ as their personal Savior are spiritually born of God and are called His sons (John 1:12). But no human can lay claim to the title of only begotten Son. This phrase has not only to do with Christ’s virgin birth, but also His eternal place within the Trinity.

Having established this point, we are now faced with the question of the word following monogenes.  Should it be heios (Son) or theos (God)? The oldest known Greek manuscripts, P66 and P75, read only begotten God. However, these manuscripts all come from the Alexandrian line and smack of ancient Gnosticism. The Gnostics taught that Christ was a begotten god, created by God the Father, whom they called the Unbegotten God.

When those who had been tainted with Gnosticism cite John 1:18, they cite it as only begotten God. Such is true of Tatian (second century), Valentinus (second century), Clement of Alexandria (215 AD), and Arius (336 AD). On the other hand, we find many of the orthodox fathers who opposed Gnosticism quoting John 1:18 as only begotten Son (Irenaeus, Tertullian, Basil, Gregory Nazianzus, and Chrysostom). [3]

Even some that served on the textual committee for the UBS-4 recognized that the proper reading of John 1:18 is only begotten Son. Dr. Allen Wilkgren, who served on the committee, writes, “It is doubtful that the author (i.e., John) would have written monogenes theos, which may be a primitive, transcriptional error in the Alexandrian tradition.” [4] Additionally, Professor Bart Ehrman of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has noted that he believes the original reading is monogenes heios and not monogenes theos. [5] Although Professor Ehrman did not serve on the UBS-4 committee, he is a recognized scholar in the field of Biblical textual criticism. [6] Thus, not all scholars agree as to the original reading in this regard.

The majority of orthodox church fathers support the reading monogenes heios, as do the majority of existing Greek cursive manuscripts. The reading contained in the majority of uncials (such as A, C3, K, W, Q, Y, D, P, X, and 063), Old Latin, Latin Vulgate, and the Old Syrian also support the reading monogenes heios.

Since we know the Greek word monogenes concerns the parent/child relationship, and that God is never called monogenes (accept for Christ in His relationship to the Father), it is clear that monogenes heios is the correct reading.

[1] See, Newman and Nida, A Translator’s Handbook on the Gospel of John (New York: United Bible Societies, 1980), 24. Also, Moulton and Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdman’s, 1930), 416-417. However, others recognize that monogenes means only begotten. See, Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Milford, MI: Mott Media, 1977 ed.), 417-418. Moulton, The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978 ed.), 272. And, Prestige, God in Patristic Thought (London: SPCK, 1952) 37-51, 135-141, 151-156.

[2] It has further been established that the word monogenes has as its root word genos. Again, some have suggested that this root word means kind or type. This is true, but again in the sense that those who are born of a given parentage are a certain type or kind. The Greek word genos appears twenty-one times in the New Testament. It is translated as kind, nation, stock (of Abraham), nation, offspring, kindred, generation, and country in the KJV, demonstrating the word has to do with descendents. The New International Version translates it as born in Mark 7:26, and the New American Standard Version translates it as birth in Acts 4:36.

[3] It is also interesting to note that the New World Translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses also uses the phrase only begotten god. This is, of course, in line with their teaching that Christ is a created god. Once we accept the reading only begotten god, we have opened the door to reinterpret all other verses concerning the deity of Jesus Christ.

[4] Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament (New York: United Bible Societies, 2^nd ed.), 170.

[5] Bart D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption Of Scripture (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 78-82.

[6] In fairness to Professor Ehrman’s position he does not support the Traditional Text, and his support for the traditional reading here should not be taken as an endorsement of that text. Ehrman believes that many of the textual variants are a result of scribes seeking to establish orthodox Christianity by altering the text in favor of orthodoxy. It is his hypothesis that John 1:18 in the Critical Text is an orthodox corruption, stating that Christ was the unique God. Thereby supporting the orthodox view regarding the Deity of Jesus Christ.

My hypothesis is that many of the textual variants were caused by scribal corruption. However, not by orthodox scribes seeking to establish orthodoxy, but by heretical scribes seeking to corrupt Scripture to support their false doctrines. Once we understand that monogenes theos does not mean that Christ is uniquely God, but instead would be understood as a begotten god, we have a reading that would support the Gnostic teaching which proclaimed this very heresy. When we consider those in the second, third, and fourth centuries who support this false reading and the doctrine they held in this regard, it is not far fetched to draw such conclusions. If one accepts Ehrman’s position as feasible than they should also be willing to accept the possibility of the opposite being true. Namely, that the corruption of the text may be afforded to various heretical groups who sought to move the text of Scripture away from Biblical orthodoxy and toward their heretical position.

FURTHER READING

JOHN 1:18 REVISITED… AGAIN!

John 1:18 – What Does Μονογενὴς Mean?

John 1:18 – Some Patristic Evidence

The Only Begotten Son: A Defense of the King James’ Rendering of John 1:18

Monogenes Theos: A Gnostic Corruption?

The Gnostic & Arian Corruption of John 1:18

James White and the NA/UBS Compilation

John 1:18 – Sinaiticus: The Devil in the Details