Harvard Theological Review 2009-02

146 Pages·0.735 MB·English

by  Harvard Theological Review

T
H R
Harvard
Theological
Review
102:2
APRIL 2009
ISSN 0017-8160
T Harvard Theological Review
H R
102:2
ISSUED QUARTERLY BY THE FACULTYOF DIVINITY IN HARVARD UNIVERSITY
The Harvard Theological Review is partially funded by the foundation established under the will of Mildred Everett,
daughter of Charles Carroll Everett, Bussey Professor of Theology in Harvard University (1869–1900) and Dean of the
Faculty of Divinity (1878–1900). The scope of the Review embraces history and philosophy of religious thought in all
traditions and periods—including the areas of Hebrew Bible, New Testament, Christianity, Jewish studies, theology, ethics,
archaeology, and comparative religious studies. It seeks to publish compelling original research that contributes to the
development of scholarly understanding and interpretation.
EDITOR
François Bovon
EDITORIAL BOARD
David D. Hall, Jon D. Levenson, Kevin Madigan, and Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza
ASSOCIATE EDITORS
Members of the Faculty of Divinity
MANAGING EDITOR
Margaret Studier
EDITORIAL ASSISTANTS
Cavan Concannon, Brian Doak, Aryay Bennett Finkelstein, Jonathan Kaplan, Piotr Malsyz,
John Robichaux, Bryan L. Wagoner
PRODUCTION STAFF
Anne Browder, Eve Feinstein, Rebecca Hancock, Christine Thomas
Manuscripts and communications on editorial matters should be addressed to the Managing Editor, Harvard Theological
Review, Harvard Divinity School, 45 Francis Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02138. “Instructions to Contributors” may be found
in HTR 80:2 (April 1987) 243–60; an updated style sheet is available upon request ([email protected]).
For subscriptions (US): Subscription Coordinator, Cambridge University Press, 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York,
NY 10013-2473; tel: [phone] or 845-353-7500; fax: [phone]. Email: [email protected].
Annual subscription rates for Volume 102, 2009: Individuals, print only: US $55 in the U.S.A., Canada, and
Mexico; £36 in UK, elsewhere. Institutions, print only: US $160 in the U.S.A., Canada, and Mexico; £95 in
UK, elsewhere. Institutions, electronic only: US $146 in the U.S.A., Canada, and Mexico; £87 + VAT UK, else-
where. Institutions, print and electronic: US $175 in the U.S.A., Canada, and Mexico; £105 in UK, elsewhere.
Prices include surface postage and are payable in advance or on receipt of invoice; only personal check or
credit card accepted for individual subscriptions (corporate check also accepted for institutional subscriptions).
Website: journals.cambridge.org. For subscriptions outside the US: Journals Marketing Department, Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 1BR, UK. Tel: [phone]; fax: [phone].
Email: [email protected]. VAT registration no: GB 214 1416 14. Payment in pounds sterling.
Back issues of vols. 1 (1908) through 93 (2000) are available from the Periodicals Service Company, 11 Main St.,
Germantown, NY 12526; tel: [phone], fax: [phone]. For more recent issues, contact the journal’s customer
services at Cambridge University Press, 100 Brook Hill Drive, W. Nyack, NY 10994-2113; tel: [phone].
The foreign language and transliteration fonts used in this journal are available from Linguist’s Software Inc., PO Box 580,
Edmonds, WA 98020-0580 USA; tel: [phone]. Website: www.linguistsoftware.com.
Typeset in the Harvard Theological Review Offices, Harvard Divinity School, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Published by Cambridge University Press, New York, New York
© Copyright 2009 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College
Origen, Bardai(cid:138)an, and the Origin of
Universal Salvation*
Ilaria L. E. Ramelli
Catholic University of the Sacred Heart
Milan, Italy
■ The Question at Stake
Is Origen of Alexandria the inventor of the eschatological doctrine of apokatastasis—
of the eventual return of all creatures to the Good, that is, God, and thus universal
salvation? Certainly, he is one of its chief supporters in all of history, and he is,
as far as we know, the first to have maintained it in a complete and coherent way,
so that all of his philosophy of history, protology, and anthropology is oriented
toward this telos.1 There are, however, significant antecedents to his mature and
articulate theorization, at least some of which he surely knew very well, and there
is even a possible parallel. For this conception did not appear ex nihilo, but in a
cultural context rich in suggestions and premises, and in a philosophical framework
of lively discussions concerning fate, free will, theodicy, and the eternal destiny
of rational creatures.
* This article is a significantly revised and expanded version of a paper I delivered at the SBL
International Meeting, Vienna; 22–26 July, 2007. I am very grateful to all colleagues and friends
who discussed it with me at various stages and to the anonymous readers of HTR, who offered
helpful suggestions.
1 See most recently Panayiotis Tzamalikos, Origen: Philosophy of History and Eschatology
(Leiden: Brill, 2007); Ilaria L. E. Ramelli, Apocatastasi (Milan: Vita e Pensiero, 2009); eadem,
“Christian Soteriology and Christian Platonism: Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, and the Biblical and
Philosophical Basis of the Doctrine of Apokatastasis,” VChr 61 (2007) 313–56; eadem, “Origene
ed il lessico dell’eternità,” Adamantius14 (2008) 100–29.
HTR 102:2 (2009) 135–68
136 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
■ Premises in Early Christian Apocrypha: Intercession,
Postmortem Conversion, and Christ’s Role
I shall argue that a few early Christian apocrypha2 are extremely significant for
understanding the background to Origen’s concept of apokatastasis. The most
important of these are above all the Apocalypse of Peter and the Sibylline Oracles,
in addition to the Apocalypse of Elijah, the Epistula Apostolorum, and the Life of
Adam and Eve. Some of these works were well known to both Origen and Clement
of Alexandria3 and were considered by them to be inspired writings. Thus, even
though these texts do not present a full-blown theory of universal salvation, they
are likely to have constituted a common ground and source of inspiration for the
development of the doctrine of apokatastasis.
TheApocalypse of Peter (Apoc. Pet.),4 which was probably read in a liturgical
context, attests to the doctrine of the intercession of the blessed for the damned in
the eschatological scene, a conception that returns, in almost identical terms, in the
2 On this category and the debate about it I limit myself to referring to recent assessments
such as Jean-Claude Picard, “L’apocryphe à l’étroit,” Apocrypha 1 (1990) 69–117; Éric Junod,
“ ‘Apocryphes du Nouveau Testament’. Une appellation erronée et une collection artificielle,”
Apocrypha 3 (1992) 17–46; Angelo Di Berardino, “Gli apocrifi cristiani e il loro significato,” in
Storia della teologia (ed. Angelo Di Beradino and Basil Studer; Casale Monferrato: Marietti, 1993)
1:273–303; Tobias Nicklas, “Écrits apocryphes chrétiens. Ein Sammelband als Spiegel eines
weitreichenden Paradigmenwechsels in der Apokryphenforschung,” VChr 61 (2007) 70–95, with
ample documentation.
3 Many studies have been devoted to the relationship between Clement and Origen in the context of
the school of Alexandria, some of which question the very notion of a Christian “school of Alexandria”;
see, e.g., Annewies van den Hoek, “The ‘Catechetical’ School of Early Christian Alexandria,” HTR
90 (1997) 59–87; Jutta Tloka, Griechische Christen, Christliche Griechen (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck,
2006)112–24 with wide-ranging documentation (she notes that Eusebius himself employed different
expressions to denote the so-called School of Alexandria in the days of Pantaenus and Clement);
Anthony Grafton and Megan Williams, Christianity and the Transformation of the Book (Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006) 78, who accept Eusebius’s information about Origen as
a disciple of Clement but think, as the majority of scholars do nowadays, that the (cid:72)(cid:77)(cid:72)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:83)(cid:82)(cid:4)
should be interpreted in a much less institutional way; it was not an institution depending on the
bishop of Alexandria from the very beginning. Origen obtained support for his study rather from
private patronage (that of Ambrose). According to Emanuela Prinzivalli, “La metamorfosi della
scuola alessandrina da Eracla a Didimo,” in Origeniana Octava (ed. Lorenzo Perrone; Leuven:
Peeters, 2003) 911–37, it is possible to speak of private schools of Pantaenus and Clement and a
public school from Origen onward. The difference between the situation before Origen and that
of his day is due to the influence of the episcopal institution, which then associated itself with a
didactic activity already existing in Alexandria in more independent forms.
4 See Dennis D. Buchholz, Your Eyes will be Opened: A Study of the Greek (Ethiopic) Apocalypse
of Peter (Atlanta: SBL, 1988); The Apocalypse of Peter (ed. Jan N. Bremmer and István Czachesz;
Leuven: Peeters, 2003), esp. Kristi Barrett Copeland, “Sinners and Post-mortem ‘Baptism’ in
the Acherusian Lake,” 92–107; Das Petrusevangelium und die Petrusapokalypse (ed. Thomas J.
Kraus and Tobias Nicklas; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004) with an edition of the Akhmîm and Rainer
fragments. Additional studies of Apoc. Pet. include: Richard John Bauckham, “The Apocalypse of
Peter,” Apocrypha 5 (1994) 7–111; idem, The Fate of the Dead: Studies on the Jewish and Christian
Apocalypses (Leiden: Brill, 1998); idem, “Jews and Jewish Christians in the Land of Israel at the
Time of the Bar Kochba War, with Special Reference to the Apocalypse of Peter,” in Tolerance
ILARIAL.E.RAMELLI 137
Apocalypse of Elijah and in the Epistula Apostolorum. The Apoc. Pet. seems to be
particularly ancient, as its Christology is extremely archaic5: It can be placed in an
Alexandrian or Egyptian milieu, ca. 100–135 C.E., according to Müller.6 According
to Norelli,7 it may represent an important oral tradition independent of those of
the canonical Gospels. As Heinrich Weinel observed, the Jewish Antichrist who
persecutes Christians mentioned in chapter 2 may be an allusion to Bar Kochba.8 The
dating of the Apocalypse to the Bar Kochba war is upheld by a number of scholars,9
although not by all.10 James supposed that the Apoc. Pet. might be as ancient as that
of John.11 In any case, the Apoc. Pet. is the earliest Christian document to describe
the kingdoms of the other world with its attendant rewards and punishments.12 Its
terminology is specifically Judaic, and so is the use of “just” in reference to the
good and the blessed, which comes as no surprise given the connection of this
and Intolerance in Early Judaism and Christianity (ed. Graham N. Stanton and Guy G. Stroumsa;
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998) 228–38.
5 See Buchholz, Your Eyes, 388–98: It is a “low” Christology, “perhaps the most ancient of
all.” It is Jewish-Christian, strongly focused on eschatology, so that Jesus’ messiahship does not
appear during his own life, but at his return in glory, a conception whose archaic traits are well
shown, for example, also by Giorgio Jossa, Gesù Messia? (Roma: Carocci, 2006). On Christology
in apocalyptic texts, see Richard Bauckham, “The Worship of Jesus in Apocalyptic Christianity,”
NTS 27 (1981) 322–41.
6 It is included in the Muratorian Canon of the secondcentury and in the Codex Claromontanus
catalogue of the fourth to sixth centuries.
7 See Enrico Norelli, s.v.“Apocrifi cristiani antichi,”in Dizionario di omiletica (ed. Manlio Sodi
and Achille M. Triacca; Torino: LDC/Leumann, 1998) 102–11.
8 The terminus post quem should be established on the basis of 4 Esdra dating to ca. 100 C.E.,
since it seems to be employed in the Apoc. Pet., ch. 3; also 2 Pet seems to be earlier than the
Apoc. Pet. For the dating of this apocalyptic text and bibliography on it, see Ilaria Ramelli, “La
colpa antecedente come ermeneutica del male in sede storico-religiosa e nei testi biblici,” RSB19
(2007) 11–64.
9 Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 160–61; Paolo Marrassini, “L’Apocalisse di Pietro,” in
Etiopia e oltre, Studi in onore di L. Ricci (ed. Yaqob Beyene; Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale,
1994) 171–232; Enrico Norelli, “Pertinence théologique et canonicité. Les premières apocalypses
chrétiennes,” Apocrypha 8 (1997) 147–64, at 157; Attila Jakab, “The Reception of the Apocalypse
of Peter in Ancient Christianity,” in The Apocalypse of Peter (ed. Bremmer and Czachesz), 174–86,
at 174; János Bolyki, “False Prophets in the Apocalypse of Peter,” in The Apocalypse of Peter,
52–62.
10 Eibert Tigchelaar argues against the supposed allusions to Bar Kochba in this Apocalypse (“Is
the Liar Bar Kochba?” in The Apocalypse of Peter [ed. Bremmer and Czachesz] 63–77), mainly on
the basis of the fact that they are not in the Greek fragments but in the Ethiopic translation, which
is often inaccurate and full of textual problems.
11 Montague Rhodes James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
1924) introduction.
12 Enrico Norelli has pointed out some typically Petrine themes in the three apocryphal texts
that are related to the Petrine tradition: the Kerygmata Petri, the Apoc. Pet.,and the Gospel of Peter
(“Situation des apocryphes pétriniens,” Apocrypha 2 [1991] 31–38). There emerges an ancient Petrine
tradition historically connected with Antioch. From the doctrinal point of view, see Michel Tardieu,
“Hérésiographie de l’Apocalypse de Pierre,” in Histoire et conscience historique dans les civilisations
du Proche-Orient ancien (Actes du colloque de Cartigny 1986; Leuven: Peeters, 1989) 33–39.
138 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
document to the tradition attached to Peter, who in Rome introduced Christianity
ritu Iudaico according to Ambrosiaster.13 The presence of this Petrine tradition in
Egypt in an early period is also related to the Egyptian tradition of Mark, Peter’s
disciple and “interpreter” ((cid:73)(cid:46)(cid:86)(cid:81)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:73)(cid:89)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:90)(cid:98)).14 An Egyptian origin of the Apoc. Pet.
would explain: 1) the reference in it to Egyptian elements, above all the Egyptian
cult of animals (e.g., cat and reptile idols); 2) the synthesis of Jewish and Orphic
traditions (and, I would add, Platonic traditions, given the allusions to the Phaedo
that I shall mention shortly), which, as Jan Bremmer posits, most likely took
place in Alexandria;15 3) the mention of the angel Tartaroukhos, unattested in
classical literature but occurring in a Cypriote and an Egyptian tablet;16 4) Clement
of Alexandria’s knowledge of the text shortly after its composition, and echoes of
it in the Passio Perpetuae;17 and 5) the presence of both Jewish and Hellenistic
motifs, such as the use of the term “just” and allusions to Plato18 respectively, which
seems to me to point to Hellenistic Judaism (compare Philo) and to Alexandria in
particular. Not only did Clement know the Apoc. Pet., but he also considered it an
inspired writing, like those of the New Testament. For this reason he commented on
it in his Hypotyposeis, as attested by Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 6.14.1), who states that
in this workClement commented on all the books of the New Testament, “without
13 See Ilaria Ramelli in collaboration with Marta Sordi, “Commodiano era di Roma?” RIL 138
(2004) 3–23.
14 According to Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness
Testimony (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2006), the term should be understood as “interpreter,
translator” of Peter’s words into Latin or Greek. For Papias, see The Apostolic Fathers (ed. Bart D.
Ehrman; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003) 2:85–118. For the early tradition on the
gospel of Mark, see Ilaria Ramelli, “Fonti note e meno note sulle origini dei Vangeli: osservazioni
per una valutazione dei dati della tradizione,” Aevum 81 (2007) 171–85. On the “secret gospel of
Mark,” attested by Clement of Alexandria and first studied by Morton Smith in 1973, see Scott G.
Brown, Mark’s Other Gospel (Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfrid Laurier University, 2005); Hugh M. Humphrey,
From Q to “Secret” Mark (London: T&T Clark, 2006); Henny F. Hägg, Clement of Alexandria and
the Beginning of Christian Apophaticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 135–40; Peter
Jeffery, The Secret Gospel of Mark Unveiled (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007); Pierluigi
Piovanelli, “L’Évangile secret de Marc trente-trois ans après,” RB114 (2007) 52–72, 237–54; Allan
Pantuck and Scott G. Brown, “Morton Smith as M. Madiotes,” Journal for the Study of the Historical
Jesus 6 (2008) 106–25. Within the Petrine tradition the Apoc. Pet. played a remarkable role; Peter
is there the principal witness to Jesus’ resurrection and the recipient of further revelations, which
he authoritatively transmits, first of all to his disciple Clement (2 Clem. 5).
15 Jan Bremmer, “The Apocalypse of Peter: Greek or Jewish?” in The Apocalypse of Peter (ed.
Bremmer and Czachesz), 1–14. The same mixture is found in the Testament of Orpheus, stemming
from the same environment.
16 Respectively SEG 44.1279 and 38.1837. This connection is noted by Bremmer, “The
Apocalypse,” 8.
17 On postmortem salvation in this document, for Dinocrates, Perpetua’s brother, see Jeffrey A.
Trumbower, Rescue for the Dead (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) 76–90; Ilaria Ramelli,
“Alle origini della figura dell’intercessore,” in Mediadores con lo divino en el Mediterráneo antiguo,
Actas del Congreso Internacional de Historia de las Religiones, Palma 13–15.X.2005 (Palma
de Mallorca: Universitat de les Illes Balears, 2009).
18 Regarding these motifs, see below.
ILARIAL.E.RAMELLI 139
omitting ... the so-called Apocalypse of Peter.”19 It is probable that Origen too
considered this document to be very authoritative.
Several elements in the Apoc. Pet. are relevant to our question and can be seen
as premises of the doctrine of apokatastasis. One such element is Christ’s descensus
ad inferos,20 which is well attested in “Petrine” texts such as 1 Pet 3:19–21—where
Christ is said to have announced salvation even to the wicked who had perished
in the flood and are a type ((cid:88)(cid:89)(cid:90)(cid:84)(cid:83)(cid:98)) of the non-baptized—and the Gospel of Peter,
datable to the second century like the Apoc. Pet. Another element is the emptying
of Hades, related to the descensus; a third is the idea that spiritual development is
always possible, even in the other world.21 Most important, however, is the notion
of the final salvation of sinners together with the blessed, so that, after a longer
or shorter period of suffering in the afterlife, sinners too will be able to enjoy
communion with God and the saints, thanks to their own conversion after death
or to the intercession of the blessed on their behalf. Moreover, in Ecl.48 Clement
quotes a passage from the Apoc. Pet., ascribing it to Peter himself (“Peter in his
Apocalypse says that ...”) and at41 he even quotes a section from this Apocalypse
assigning it to “Scripture” (“Scripture says that ...”), just as Methodius, an author
deeply influenced by Clement and Origen, did a century later in Symp. 2.6 (“It
has been handed down to us in divinely inspired Scriptures that ...”). Since the
passages corresponding to Clement’s and Methodius’s quotations are also found in
the Ethiopic translation of the Apoc. Pet., which constitutes its widest recension,22
we can conclude with certainty that they actually belong to the Apoc. Pet.23
19 See James Brooks, “Clement of Alexandria as a Witness to the Development of the New
Testament Canon,” SCent 9 (1992) 41–55; Annewies van den Hoek, “Clement and Origen as Sources
on ‘Noncanonical’ Scriptural Traditions,” in Origeniana Sexta (ed. Gilles Dorival and Alain Le
Boulluec; Leuven: Peeters, 1995) 93–113.
20 Trumbower, Rescue, 91–107; Henryk Pietras, L’escatologia della Chiesa (Rome: Augustinianum,
2006) 37–46; for later developments (fourth to sixth cent.), see Rémi Gounelle, La descente du
Christ aux enfers (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000).
21 The specific reference is to little children who have died and to their opportunity of receiving
baptism and conversion even in the next life, according to a dynamic conception of deep continuity
between the present and the future life. This will be expressed by Gregory of Nyssa in his De
infantibus praemature abreptis (PG 46.161–192; ed. Hadwiga Hörner, GNO 3.2.65–97). Gregory
also takes over the notion of the angels’ role in this, already present in the Apoc. Pet. and in Origen.
On this role in Origen and some Gnostics, see Riemer Roukema, “Les anges attendant les âmes des
défunts,” in Origeniana Octava (ed. Lorenzo Perrone; Leuven: Peeters, 2003) 367–75.
22 It presents Peter’s revelation to Clement concerning the world from creation to judgment.
See Buchholz, Your Eyes,with status quaestionis, particularly 139–52 and 413–23 on the Akhmîm
fragment, found in a Giza manuscript, preserved at Cairo. Two other short Greek fragments,
concerning suffering in hell, are in a folio of a fifth-century manuscript in the Oxford Bodleian
Library (Madan’s Summary Catalogue, no. 31810). The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter in NHC VII
3 is different; see The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter (ed. Henrietta Wilhelmina Havelaar; Berlin:
Akademie, 1999) edition with English translation and commentary.
23 Apart from a fragment preserved by Macarius of Magnesia, Apocr. 4.16, all the fragments
transmitted by ancient authors have corresponding passages in the Ethiopic translation.
140 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
In the Ethiopic text, Christ affirms that he personally baptizes and saves and
endows with eternal life those for whom he is supplicated, even after their death, and
he says that he will be happy to do so: “Then I shall give to those who belong to me,
the elect and justified, the bath and the salvation for which they have implored me,
in the Acherusian valley, called Elysian Fields, and I shall go and rejoice together
with them.24 I shall have the peoples enter my eternal Kingdom, and I shall do for
them that which I and my heavenly Father had promised them.”25 The parallel Greek
Rainer fragment, which is far more ancient than the Ethiopic versionand dates to
the third century,26 runs as follows: “I shall grant to my summoned and elect all
those whom they ask me to remove from punishment [(cid:84)(cid:69)(cid:86)(cid:76)(cid:90)(cid:87)(cid:83)(cid:81)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:4)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:79)(cid:80)(cid:76)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:98)(cid:4)
(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:4)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:79)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:79)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:4)(cid:83)(cid:97)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:69)(cid:31)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:90)(cid:87)(cid:91)(cid:82)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:79)(cid:4)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:68)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:79)(cid:83)(cid:80)(cid:69)(cid:90)(cid:87)(cid:73)(cid:91)(cid:98)]. And I shall
grant them a beautiful baptism in salvation [(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:80)(cid:83)(cid:31)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:70)(cid:69)(cid:90)(cid:84)(cid:88)(cid:77)(cid:87)(cid:81)(cid:69)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:87)(cid:91)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:69)(cid:19)] in the
Acherusian Lake, which is said to be in the Elysian valley, a sharing of justice and
justification with my saints[(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:90)(cid:86)(cid:83)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:72)(cid:77)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:83)(cid:87)(cid:89)(cid:90)(cid:82)(cid:76)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:88)(cid:91)(cid:68)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:46)(cid:75)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:91)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:89)]. And I and
my elect will go and rejoice together with the Patriarchs in my eternal Kingdom
[(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:78)(cid:84)(cid:73)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:89)(cid:90)(cid:87)(cid:83)(cid:81)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:75)(cid:91)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:46)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:79)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:79)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:78)(cid:75)(cid:69)(cid:80)(cid:80)(cid:77)(cid:91)(cid:68)(cid:82)(cid:88)(cid:73)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:88)(cid:91)(cid:68)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:84)(cid:69)(cid:88)(cid:86)(cid:77)(cid:69)(cid:90)(cid:86)(cid:71)(cid:91)(cid:82)(cid:4)
(cid:73)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:31)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:91)(cid:82)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:4)(cid:70)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:77)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:69)(cid:82)],and with them I shall keep my promises, made
by me and by my Father who is in heaven [(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:84)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:76)(cid:90)(cid:87)(cid:91)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:88)(cid:169)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:89)(cid:78)(cid:88)(cid:91)(cid:68)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:31)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:84)(cid:69)(cid:75)(cid:75)(cid:73)(cid:80)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:69)(cid:98)(cid:4)
(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:97)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:84)(cid:69)(cid:75)(cid:75)(cid:73)(cid:77)(cid:80)(cid:69)(cid:90)(cid:81)(cid:76)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:75)(cid:91)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:79)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:84)(cid:69)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:90)(cid:86)(cid:4)(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:4)(cid:83)(cid:46)(cid:4)(cid:73)(cid:78)(cid:82)(cid:4)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:78)(cid:86)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:83)(cid:77)(cid:68)(cid:98)].”27 The Ethiopic
text is secondary, and it is significant that precisely in the passage corresponding
24 The reference to the Acherusian Valley and the Elysian Fields led, e.g., James to accept the
suppositions of Norden and Dieterich that the sources of the eschatological vision of the Apoc.
Pet. were pagan more than Jewish, and especially Orphic. See Bremmer, “The Apocalypse,” 1–8;
Buchholz, Your Eyes, 98–118, who shows how subsequently the Jewish heritage in this writing and
its relationship to Jewish texts, the Apostolic Fathers, etc., has been investigated with success.
25 I cite Buchholz’s translation of the Ethiopic text in Your Eyes, 224–30.
26 See Montague Rhodes James, “The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter,” JTS 32
(1931) 270–79; Buchholz, Your Eyes, 152–55; James Keith Elliott, “The Apocalypse of Peter,” in
The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993) 593–613; Caspar Detlef Gustav Müller,
“Offenbarung des Petrus,” in Neutestamentliche Apokryphen (ed. Edgar Hennecke and Wilhelm
Schneemelcher; 2 vols.; 5th ed.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1989) 2:562–78; Richard Bauckham,
“The Apocalypse of Peter: An Account of Research,” ANRW 2.25.6 (1988) 4713–50; idem, “The
Conflict of Justice and Mercy,” in idem, The Fate of the Dead, 132–48. The text was published by
Wesseley as a part of the Acts of Peter, in Patrologia Orientalis18 (1924) 482–83, and again by
Karl Prümm, “De genuino Apocalypsis Petri textu,” Biblica10 (1929) 62–80, as a part of the Apoc.
Pet., and by James, who has given the best edition of it. More recently, Kraus and Nicklas published
Das Petrusevangelium und die Petrusapokalypse, which is not a complete critical edition, as Bart
D. Ehrman remarks in his review in VC 61 (2007) 96–117, but includes all the Greek manuscripts
of the Apoc. Pet. The editors question whether the second part of the Akhmîm fragment belongs not
to the Apoc. Pet. but to the Gospel of Peter (on these texts, see also Enrico Norelli, “Situation des
apocryphes pétriniens,” Apocrypha 2 [1991] 31–83). In any case, the editors offer the entire Akhmîm
fragment of the Apoc. Pet., with detailed notes, together with the other two Greek fragments.
27 See Buchholz, Your Eyes, 228 and 345; Elliott, “The Apocalypse of Peter,” 609; James, “The
Rainer Fragment,” 271 for the Greek text. This section corresponds to ch. 14 in the Ethiopic text,
whereas the section is completely lacking in the Akhmîm fragment, which suggests that it belongs to
a different recension. A detailed comparison between the Rainer fragment and the Ethiopic translation
is provided by Buchholz, Your Eyes, 344–62. According to James, “The Rainer Fragment,” 278,
ILARIAL.E.RAMELLI 141
to the Rainer fragment it plainly underwent modifications, in all probability due to
the fact that the reviser tried to eliminate the patent reference to the salvation of the
damned (and, according to some scholars, even universal salvation).28 However,
these are all limited modifications, which did not prevent scholars from recognizing
the original version even before the discovery of the Rainer fragment.29 The mention
of the Acherusian Lake as a place passing through which the sinners will obtain
salvation in the afterworld is remarkable because, even in such an early text, it is a
clear reference to Plato’s Phaedo. In Phaedo113D—which is, notably, included in
Eusebius’s lengthy quotation—the sinners are said to be purified in the Acherusian
Lake, which frees them ((cid:69)(cid:78)(cid:84)(cid:83)(cid:80)(cid:89)(cid:90)(cid:91)) through expiation; in the Rainer fragment, this
very lake is present and functions in the very same way.30
The Ethiopic translation of the Apoc. Pet., being complete, helps us to place the
valuable Rainer fragment in context. In chapter 12 the description of the sinners’
torments ends with the river of fire creating a wheel which will “turn numberless
times.” Chapter 13 states that the just watch the punishment of the damned, which
is described as “eternal,” but the Greek Vorlage surely had the scriptural expression
(cid:79)(cid:83)(cid:90)(cid:80)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:77)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:91)(cid:90)(cid:82)(cid:77)(cid:83)(cid:98), indicating not an “eternal” punishment, but rather, one that lasts
for an indefinite period in the world to come.31 The conclusion of chapter 13, in fact,
runs as follows: “The aiōnios punishment is for each one according to his or her
deeds. ... The angel Tartaroukhos will come and instruct them with punishment,
telling them: ‘You repent now that there is no time left for repentance, and you
the Rainer and the Bodleian fragments of this Apocalypse originally belonged not only to the same
recension, but even to the same manuscript.
28 Buchholz, Your Eyes, 348; Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta, “Does Punishment Reward the Righteous?
The Justice Pattern Underlying the Apocalypse of Peter,” in The Apocalypse of Peter (ed. Bremmer
and Czachesz) 127–57, at 151–52.
29 See Buchholz, Your Eyes, 342–62; 425–26. The Ethiopic text is much longer than the Greek
of the Akhmîm fragment, and includes a lengthy section on Christ’s second coming and the final
judgment (chs. 1–6) and a shorter one on the Ascension (ch. 17) which are absent from the Akhmîm
fragment, as are the Ethiopic chs. 13–14. Furthermore, in the Ethiopic translation the description
of the damned comes before that of the blessed, whereas in the Akhmîm fragment the opposite is
the case. Moreover, in the Akhmîm fragment both descriptions are narrated as a vision, in the past
tense, whereas in the Ethiopic only that of the blessed is such, while that concerning the damned is
a prophecy. The Ethiopic expands much more on the description of the damned, the Greek on that
of the blessed. The Ethiopic seems to translate the Greek from the Bodleian recension rather than
from the Akhmîm recension. See ibid., 417–18.
30 This is rightly noted by Copeland, “Sinners,” 98.
31 See Ilaria Ramelli and David Konstan, Terms for Eternity (Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias, 2007);
Heleen Maria Keizer, Life, Time, Entirety: A Study of (cid:37)(cid:45)(cid:59)(cid:50) in Greek Literature and Philosophy
and Philo (Ph.D. diss., Universiteit van Amsterdam, 1999). This is why the supposed disagreement
between the Rainer fragment and the rest of the Greek Apocalypse of Peter in regard to the eternity
of punishment noted by Peter van Minnen, “The Greek Apocalypse of Peter,” in The Apocalypse
of Peter (ed. Bremmer and Czachesz), 15–39, at 32 seems to be misguided: (cid:79)(cid:83)(cid:90)(cid:80)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:77)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:91)(cid:90)(cid:82)(cid:77)(cid:83)(cid:98) does
not mean “eternal punishment.” (According to van Minnen, the Rainer fragment, with its notion of
the cessation of the punishment of the damned, “is completely out of tune with the rest of the text,
even with what little remains of the Greek, because the punishments are clearly eternal.”)
142 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
have no life left.’ And they all will say: ‘God’s judgment is right. We have heard
and known that his judgment is good, because we have paid each one according to
his/her actions.’” The “aiōniospunishment” is the ultra-mundane punishment, not
the eternal punishment, and its aim is therapeutic and pedagogical, a conception that
is stressed in Clement, Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa.32 Although some passages
in the Apoc. Pet. speak of “eternal” punishment for the damned, in chapter 14
Jesus unequivocally announces their final salvation. There is no contradiction here,
however, since behind the Ethiopic “eternal” stands the Greek (cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:91)(cid:90)(cid:82)(cid:77)(cid:83)(cid:98),33 which
in the biblical lexicon signifies “eternal” only when it refers to God; otherwise it
means “ancient,” “remote,” “enduring,” “divine, heavenly” or “pertaining to the
future world.”34 The adjective (cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:91)(cid:90)(cid:82)(cid:77)(cid:83)(cid:98) for punishment and fire and future death,
both in the Bible and in the Apoc. Pet., does not imply their absolute eternity and
does not contradict the salvation of the damned expressed in chapter 14. Already at
the beginning of Jesus’ revelation to Peter (chs. 3–4), when Peter, worrying about
the sinners’ fate, says to Jesus: “O my Lord, please permit me to quote your own
words concerning these sinners, namely, ‘Better if they had never been created,’”
Jesus immediately reminds him of God’s mercy: “O Peter, why do you say that not
having been created would have been better for them? It is you who oppose God
in this way! But you certainly do not have more mercy than God has, who created
them.” If Peter pities the damned, but God is said to have even more mercy than
Peter has, it is already possible to foresee an outcome of salvation. Immediately
after this, Jesus, who is about to speak of the eschatological perspective, tells
Peter, who is worrying about the damned, that “there is nothing that perishes for
God, nothing that is impossible for him” (4.5).35 In 5.8–9, infernal punishment is
described through traditional images employed in the Gospels, such as the “fire that
cannot be put out” ((cid:84)(cid:89)(cid:86)(cid:68) (cid:4)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:63) (cid:70)(cid:73)(cid:87)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:82)) and the “gnashing of teeth.” These punishments
are evidently not deemed to be opposed to the eventual salvation of the damned
anticipated in chapters 3–4 and proclaimed in chapter 14, where it is asserted that
Jesus will pull the damned out of the torments. This is all the more remarkable in
that the Apoc. Pet. is a coherent text, endowed with a strong unity;36 already at the
beginning we find hints of the notion of the salvation of the damned.
32 Documentation in Ramelli, Apocatastasi.
33 E.g., at 14.2 behind the Ethiopic “eternal Kingdom” there lies (cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:91)(cid:82)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:69)(cid:4)(cid:70)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:77)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:69), which in fact
is attested in the Rainer fragment (in other Greek texts we have (cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:78)(cid:91)(cid:90)(cid:82)(cid:77)(cid:83)(cid:98)(cid:4)(cid:70)(cid:69)(cid:87)(cid:77)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:77)(cid:90)(cid:69)).
34 See Ramelli and Konstan, Terms for Eternity, 37–70.
35 The kind of death that is at stake here is not simply bodily death, which will be overcome
by universal resurrection, but the sinners’ spiritual death, the resurrection from which coincides
with salvation. This is also the case in Origen, where “death” and “life” bear multiple meanings,
illustrated, e.g., in his Dialogue with Heraclides. A good parallel to this passage from the Apoc.
Pet. is provided, in my view, by a scene in the synoptic gospels in which it is salvation, not only
resurrection, to which Jesus refers when he declares that everything is possible for God (Matt 19:26,
Mark 10:27, Luke 18:27).
36 This is well demonstrated by Buchholz, Your Eyes, 387–98.