illaria ramelli - origen, bardaisan, and the origin of universal salvation

HTR 102:2 (2009) 13568

Origen, Bardaian, and the Origin of Universal Salvation*Ilaria L. E. RamelliCatholic University of the Sacred HeartMilan, Italy

The Question at StakeIs Origen of Alexandria the inventor of the eschatological doctrine of apokatastasisof 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 rst 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, signicant 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 signicantly revised and expanded version of a paper I delivered at the SBL

International Meeting, Vienna; 2226 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) 31356; eadem, Origene ed il lessico delleternit, Adamantius 14 (2008) 10029.

136 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW

Premises in Early Christian Apocrypha: Intercession, Postmortem Conversion, and Christs RoleI shall argue that a few early Christian apocrypha2 are extremely signicant for understanding the background to Origens 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.

The Apocalypse 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, Lapocryphe ltroit, Apocrypha 1 (1990) 69117; ric Junod, Apocryphes du Nouveau Testament. Une appellation errone et une collection articielle,Apocrypha 3 (1992) 1746; Angelo Di Berardino, Gli apocri cristiani e il loro signicato, in Storia della teologia (ed. Angelo Di Beradino and Basil Studer; Casale Monferrato: Marietti, 1993) 1:273303; Tobias Nicklas, crits apocryphes chrtiens. Ein Sammelband als Spiegel eines weitreichenden Paradigmenwechsels in der Apokryphenforschung, VChr 61 (2007) 7095, 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, HTR90 (1997) 5987; Jutta Tloka, Griechische Christen, Christliche Griechen (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006) 11224 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 Eusebiuss information about Origen as a disciple of Clement but think, as the majority of scholars do nowadays, that the HMHEWOEPIMDSRshould 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) 91137, 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 inuence 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 Istvn Czachesz; Leuven: Peeters, 2003), esp. Kristi Barrett Copeland, Sinners and Post-mortem Baptism in the Acherusian Lake, 92107; Das Petrusevangelium und die Petrusapokalypse (ed. Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004) with an edition of the Akhmm and Rainer fragments. Additional studies of Apoc. Pet. include: Richard John Bauckham, The Apocalypse of Peter, Apocrypha 5 (1994) 7111; 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

ILARIA L. 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. 100135 C.E., according to Mller.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,9although not by all.10 James supposed that the Apoc. Pet. might be as ancient as thatof 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 specically 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) 22838.

5 See Buchholz, Your Eyes, 38898: 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, Ges Messia? (Roma: Carocci, 2006). On Christology in apocalyptic texts, see Richard Bauckham, The Worship of Jesus in Apocalyptic Christianity, NTS 27 (1981) 32241.

6 It is included in the Muratorian Canon of the second century and in the Codex Claromontanus

catalogue of the fourth to sixth centuries. 7 See Enrico Norelli, s.v. Apocri cristiani antichi, in Dizionario di omiletica (ed. Manlio Sodi

and Achille M. Triacca; Torino: LDC/Leumann, 1998) 10211.8 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, RSB 19(2007) 1164.

9 Bauckham, The Fate of the Dead, 16061; Paolo Marrassini, LApocalisse di Pietro, in

Etiopia e oltre, Studi in onore di L. Ricci (ed. Yaqob Beyene; Naples: Istituto Universitario Orientale, 1994) 171232; Enrico Norelli, Pertinence thologique et canonicit. Les premires apocalypses chrtiennes, Apocrypha 8 (1997) 14764, at 157; Attila Jakab, The Reception of the Apocalypse of Peter in Ancient Christianity, in The Apocalypse of Peter (ed. Bremmer and Czachesz), 17486, at 174; Jnos Bolyki, False Prophets in the Apocalypse of Peter, in The Apocalypse of Peter,5262.

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] 6377), 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 ptriniens, Apocrypha 2 [1991] 3138). There emerges an ancient Petrine tradition historically connected with Antioch. From the doctrinal point of view, see Michel Tardieu, Hrsiographie de lApocalypse de Pierre, in Histoire et conscience historique dans les civilisations du Proche-Orient ancien (Actes du colloque de Cartigny 1986; Leuven: Peeters, 1989) 3339.


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, Peters disciple and interpreter (I.VQLRIYXLZb).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 Phaedothat 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 Alexandrias 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 work Clement 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) 323.14

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 Peters words into Latin or Greek. For Papias, see The Apostolic Fathers (ed. Bart D. Ehrman; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003) 2:85118. 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) 17185. On the secret gospel of Mark, attested by Clement of Alexandria and rst studied by Morton Smith in 1973, see Scott G. Brown, Marks Other Gospel (Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfrid Laurier University, 2005); Hugh M. Humphrey, From Q to Secret Mark (London: T&T Clark, 2006); Henny F. Hgg, Clement of Alexandria and the Beginning of Christian Apophaticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006) 13540; Peter Jeffery, The Secret Gospel of Mark Unveiled (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007); Pierluigi Piovanelli, Lvangile secret de Marc trente-trois ans aprs, RB 114 (2007) 5272, 23754; Allan Pantuck and Scott G. Brown, Morton Smith as M. Madiotes, Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 6 (2008) 10625. 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, rst 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), 114. 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, Perpetuas brother, see Jeffrey A. Trumbower, Rescue for the Dead (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001) 7690; Ilaria Ramelli, Alle origini della gura dellintercessore, in Mediadores con lo divino en el Mediterrneo antiguo, Actas del Congreso Internacional de Historia de las Religiones, Palma 1315.X.2005 (Palma de Mallorca: Universitat de les Illes Balears, 2009).

18 Regarding these motifs, see below.


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 Christs descensus ad inferos,20 which is well attested in Petrine texts such as 1 Pet 3:1921where Christ is said to have announced salvation even to the wicked who had perished in the ood and are a type (XYZTSb) of the non-baptizedand 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 nal 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 at 41 he even quotes a section from this Apocalypseassigning it to Scripture (Scripture says that . . .), just as Methodius, an author deeply inuenced 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 Clements and Methodiuss quotations are also found in the Ethiopic translation of the Apoc. Pet., which constitutes its widest recension,22we 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) 4155; 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) 93113.

20 Trumbower, Rescue, 91107; Henryk Pietras, Lescatologia della Chiesa (Rome: Augustinianum,

2006) 3746; for later developments (fourth to sixth cent.), see Rmi Gounelle, La descente du Christ aux enfers (Turnhout: Brepols, 2000).

21 The specic 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 46.161192; ed. Hadwiga Hrner, GNO 3.2.6597). 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 mes des dfunts, in Origeniana Octava (ed. Lorenzo Perrone; Leuven: Peeters, 2003) 36775.

22 It presents Peters revelation to Clement concerning the world from creation to judgment.

See Buchholz, Your Eyes, with status quaestionis, particularly 13952 and 41323 on the Akhmm fragment, found in a Giza manuscript, preserved at Cairo. Two other short Greek fragments, concerning suffering in hell, are in a folio of a fth-century manuscript in the Oxford Bodleian Library (Madans 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.


In the Ethiopic text, Christ afrms 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 justied, 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 version and 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 [TEVLZWSQEMXSMDbOPLXSMDbQSYOEMINOPIOXSMDbQSYSaRINEREMNXLZW[RXEMZQIINOXLDbOSPEZWI[b]. And I shall grant them a beautiful baptism in salvation [OEPSRFEZTXMWQEINRW[XLVMZE] in the Acherusian Lake, which is said to be in the Elysian valley, a sharing of justice and justication with my saints [QIZVSbHMOEMSWYZRLbQIXEX[DRE.KMZ[RQSY]. And I and my elect will go and rejoice together with the Patriarchs in my eternal Kingdom [OEMENTIPIYZWSQEMINK[OEMSM.INOPIOXSMZQSYENKEPPM[DRXIbQIXEX[DRTEXVMEZVG[RIMNbXLREMN[RMZERQSYFEWMPIMZER], and with them I shall keep my promises, made by me and by my Father who is in heaven [OEMTSMLZW[QIXEYNX[DRXEbINTEKKIPMZEbQSYEabINTEKKIMPEZQLRINK[OEMTEXLZVQSYS.INRXSMDbSYNVERSMDb].27 The Ethiopic text is secondary, and it is signicant 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, 18; Buchholz, Your Eyes, 98118, 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 Buchholzs translation of the Ethiopic text in Your Eyes, 22430.

26 See Montague Rhodes James, The Rainer Fragment of the Apocalypse of Peter, JTS 32

(1931) 27079; Buchholz, Your Eyes, 15255; James Keith Elliott, The Apocalypse of Peter, in The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993) 593613; Caspar Detlef Gustav Mller, Offenbarung des Petrus, in Neutestamentliche Apokryphen (ed. Edgar Hennecke and Wilhelm Schneemelcher; 2 vols.; 5th ed.; Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1989) 2:56278; Richard Bauckham, The Apocalypse of Peter: An Account of Research, ANRW 2.25.6 (1988) 471350; idem, The Conict of Justice and Mercy, in idem, The Fate of the Dead, 13248. The text was published by Wesseley as a part of the Acts of Peter, in Patrologia Orientalis 18 (1924) 48283, and again by Karl Prmm, De genuino Apocalypsis Petri textu, Biblica 10 (1929) 6280, 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) 96117, but includes all the Greek manuscripts of the Apoc. Pet. The editors question whether the second part of the Akhmm fragment belongs not to the Apoc. Pet. but to the Gospel of Peter (on these texts, see also Enrico Norelli, Situation des apocryphes ptriniens, Apocrypha 2 [1991] 3183). In any case, the editors offer the entire Akhmm 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 Akhmm 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, 34462. According to James, The Rainer Fragment, 278,


to the Rainer fragment it plainly underwent modications, 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 modications, 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 Platos Phaedo. In Phaedo 113Dwhich is, notably, included in Eusebiuss lengthy quotationthe sinners are said to be puried in the Acherusian Lake, which frees them (ENTSPYZ[) 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 re 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 OSZPEWMbEMN[ZRMSb, indicating not an eternal punishment, but rather, one that lasts for an indenite period in the world to come.31 The conclusion of chapter 13, in fact, runs as follows: The ainios 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) 12757, at 15152.

29 See Buchholz, Your Eyes, 34262; 42526. The Ethiopic text is much longer than the Greek

of the Akhmm fragment, and includes a lengthy section on Christs second coming and the nal judgment (chs. 16) and a shorter one on the Ascension (ch. 17) which are absent from the Akhmm fragment, as are the Ethiopic chs. 1314. Furthermore, in the Ethiopic translation the description of the damned comes before that of the blessed, whereas in the Akhmm fragment the opposite is the case. Moreover, in the Akhmm 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 Akhmm recension. See ibid., 41718.

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 %-;2 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), 1539, at 32 seems to be misguided: OSZPEWMbEMN[ZRMSb 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.)


have no life left. And they all will say: Gods 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 ainios punishment 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 14Jesus unequivocally announces their nal salvation. There is no contradiction here, however, since behind the Ethiopic eternal stands the Greek EMN[ZRMSb,33 which in the biblical lexicon signies eternal only when it refers to God; otherwise it means ancient, remote, enduring, divine, heavenly or pertaining to the future world.34 The adjective EMN[ZRMSb for punishment and re 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. 34), 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 Gods 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 5.89, infernal punishment is described through traditional images employed in the Gospels, such as the re that cannot be put out (TYDVE?WFIWXSR) and the gnashing of teeth. These punishments are evidently not deemed to be opposed to the eventual salvation of the damned anticipated in chapters 34 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 nd 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 EMN[RMZEFEWMPIMZE, which in fact

is attested in the Rainer fragment (in other Greek texts we have EMN[ZRMSbFEWMPIMZE).34

See Ramelli and Konstan, Terms for Eternity, 3770. 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, 38798.


The fundamental role of Jesus as Savior of the sinners is evident when he liberates them from the torments and plunges them into the Acherusian Lake. This is why as early as 3.5 he is called the Savior in the discussion concerning the ultimate fate of sinners. The cross that precedes him on his Parousia in 1.6 indicates the salvicpower of Christs sacrice, which will be revealed only in the eschatological scene. This is thus not in sharp contrast with passages such as 6.6: They will prepare for them a place where they will be punished eternally, each one in conformity to his own sin, where the Greek had EMN[RMZ[b, indenitely, in the world to come; 6.9: They will be burnt together with them in the eternal re . . . they will punish them eternally, where the underlying Greek was the New Testament expression TYDVEMN[ZRMSR, the re of the world to come, which lasts indenitely,EMN[RMZ[b and 7.8: We didnt know that we were to come to the eternal punishment, where the Greek Vorlage surely had OSZPEWMbEMN[ZRMSb, the only biblical phrase that correspondsfor there exists no OSZPEWMbENM"ZHMSb (eternal punishment) in the Bible, no UEZREXSbENM"ZHMSb (eternal death), no TYDVENM"ZHMSR (eternal re).37

The Ethiopic translation of the Apoc. Pet. is found within the Ethiopic version of the Pseudo-Clementines,38 in which a long dialogue between Peter and Jesus is entirely devoted to the problem of sinners salvation (139rb144rb). The result is the nal salvation of sinners39 after their torments. In this case, it is Jesus himself who intercedes for them, rather than the blessed. Peter asks Jesus to reveal to him the fate of the sinners on the last day and is upset at the thought of the second death (139rb140ra). Jesus answers that sinners will not repent if they understand (140ra), that is, if they know that they will eventually be saved in any way. This is an idea that Origen, who read and knew the Apoc. Pet., would develop: he was convinced that awareness of universal salvation might facilitate sin, especially in morally immature persons who need to be motivated by fear in order to do good. (Origen expresses this concern several times and says that it is better to believe in eternal damnation and repent than not to believe in it and remain in sin.40) Peter

37 In fact, when sinners arrive at their punishment, they cannot realize that it is eternal, but they

know perfectly well that it is the punishment of the other world. Likewise, in 7.11 they say: We didnt know that we would come to this eternal place of punishment, where the Greek Vorlagehad XSZTSbEMN[ZRMSb which means, not eternal place, but other-worldly place.

38 On which, in addition to Buchholz, see Monika Pesthy, Thy Mercy, O Lord, is in the Heavens,

and thy Righteousness Reaches into the Clouds, in The Apocalypse of Peter (ed. Bremmer and Czachesz), 4051. Pesthy is concerned only with the Ps. Clementine work entitled The Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead, edited by Sylvain Grbaut in ROC 15 (1910) 198214, 30723, 42539. Both this work and another Ps. Clementine text that follows it, The Mystery of the Judgment of Sinners (ed. Sylvain Grbaut in ROC 12 [1907] 13951, and 13 [1908] 28587) are considered to contain Origenistic elements by Gianfrancesco Lusini, Tradizione origeniana in Etiopia, in Origeniana Octava, 117784. That these two writings form one whole is claimed by Roger W. Cowley, The Ethiopic Work Which is Believed to Contain the Material of the Ancient Greek Apocalypse of Peter, JTS 36 (1985) 15153.

39 See Buchholz, Your Eyes, 37681.

40 See Ilaria Ramelli, Origens Exegesis of Jeremiah: Resurrection Announced throughout the

Bible and its Twofold Conception, Augustinianum 48 (2008) 5978.


intervenes as a defender, observing that he is the rst sinner because he denied the Lord three times (140rab). Jesus replies that it will be up to the Father to grant mercy (140rb140vb): Because the mercy of my Father is like this: as the sun rises and the rain falls in the same way, so shall we have mercy and compassion for all of our creatures (140rb). When Peter asks him to speak clearly, Jesus answers that upon his return he will destroy the devil and severely punish the sinners (140vb141vb). Peter then expresses his concern about the second death consisting in other-worldly punishment for sinners (141vb), but Jesus replies: You will have no more mercy on the sinners than I do, for I was crucied because of the sinners, in order to obtain mercy for them by my Father. The Lord will have mercy upon them and will give each of them life, glory, and kingdom without end, in that Jesus will intercede for them, but this ought to be kept secret, in order not to provoke sin (141vb142bv). This was a real concern, which must have been felt also by those who believed in the ultimate salvation of all.41

Peter thanks Jesus for the explanation and says that he now can believe without doubting any more, after knowing that only Satan and the demons will descend to Sheol (143vb144ra). Peter concludes by describing the various orders of saved humanity according to Pauls words in 1 Cor 15, on which Origen comments as well: each one in his/her own order. This dialogue is reported by Peter to Clement with the recommendation to keep this mystery secret: truth concerning the ultimate salvation of the damned should not be communicated overtly, because this might encourage sin.

Thus, the Apoc. Pet. seems to have been a good basis for the doctrine of apokatastasis, even though it does not yet maintain it expressly, and it certainly was known to both Clement and Origen. Moreover, it stresses the indispensable role of Christs sacrice in the nal restoration of the sinners, an important trait that will be emphasized by Origen, according to whom the apokatastasis is made possible by Christs cross.

But the Apoc. Pet. is not the only ancient apocryphal text that contains such suggestions. Other texts, some of which depend on it, express a similar idea of intercession for the damned, which paves the way for their salvation. The Coptic Apocalypse of Elijah, a text that is related to Jewish apocalypticism42 and likewise derives from the Egyptian region, dating to the second or third century C.E., includes a passage that bears a close resemblance to the conception expressed by the Rainer

41 A strong supporter of universal salvation, Gregory of Nyssa, however, was not in the least touched by this concern, and preached the doctrine of apokatastasis everywhere, even expounding it (including the salvation of the devil!) in Oratio Catechetica 26, among the fundamental Christian doctrines to be taught by catechists.

42 See David T. M. Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt: The Apocalypse of Elijah and Early

Egyptian Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997); also Giovanni Maria Vian, Lescatologia nel Giudaismo ellenistico, ASE 16 (1999) 2134; Edmondo Lupieri, Escatologia nel Giudaismo apocalittico, ASE 16 (1999) 3543.


fragment. Here it is the just, already blessed, who intercede for sinners,43 just as in a text of apostolic tradition which originated in Syria in the rst decades of the second century,44 the Epistula Apostolorum 40.45 Another example is the second book of the Oracula Sibyllina,46 which derives from the Apoc. Pet. and dates to the mid-secondcentury. (The rst two books of the Oracula are closely connected to one another and are Christian).47 The Oracula are well known in early Patristics and are quoted by Justin, Clement, and Origen.48 They contain a paraphrase of a long section of the Apoc. Pet. in Greek hexameters. Indeed, some editors include Oracula 2.190338 as an appendix to the Apoc. Pet.49

The context of the relevant portion of the Oracula is eschatological. Soon after describing the terrible torments of the damned, which are abundantly represented in the Apoc. Pet. as well, the Oracula depict the dwelling place of the blessed.50

43 The just will contemplate sinners in their sufferings, and those who have persecuted, betrayed,

or handed them [to hostile people]. The sinners will contemplate the place where the just will be living, and will take part in Grace. In that day the just will be granted that for which they will often have prayed, that is, salvation for the sinners (23.1124.12). In H. P. Houghton, The Coptic Apocalypse, III, Akhmimite: The Apocalypse of Elias, Aegyptus 39 (1959) 179210. That the Apocalypse of Elijah was based on that of Peter was already supposed by James, whose hypothesis is accepted by Buchholz, Your Eyes, 6061.

44 For an Asiatic context in the second century C.E., see Alistair Stewart-Sykes, The Asian Context

of the New Prophecy and of Epistula Apostolorum, VChr 51 (1997) 41638; see also Charles E. Hill, The Epistula Apostolorum, JECS 7 (1999) 153, who places the Epistle in Asia Minor in the rst half of the second century, probably soon after 120 C.E., or at the latest in the Forties of the second century, on the basis of parallels with works of the same area and the possible social contextualization of its group, and the historical circumstances reected in the document; Julian Hills also takes the document to reect early-second-century traditions: Hills, Tradition and Composition in the Epistula Apostolorum (2d ed.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006).

45 The very expression in the Apocalypse of Elijah here occurs in Jesus words: The just are sorry

for the sinners, and pray for them. . . . And I shall listen to the prayer of the just, which they utter for the sinners. Editions: Epistula Apostolorum, nach dem thiopischen und koptischen Texte (ed. Hugo Duensing; Bonn: Adolph Marcus und Eduard Weber, 1925); Manfred Hornschuh, Studien zur Epistula Apostolorum (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1965); Buchholz, Your Eyes, 4748; C. Detlef G. Mller, trans., Epistula Apostolorum, in New Testament Apocrypha (ed. Edgar Hennecke and Wilhelm Schneemelcher; trans. R. Mcl. Wilson; Louisville: John Knox, 2003) 1:24984.

46 These Oracles as a whole are a collection of texts from different epochs, from the second century

B.C.E. to the fourth century C.E. Editions: Sibyllinische Weissagungen (ed. Alfons Kurfess and J. D. Gauger; Dsseldorf-Zrich: Artemis, 1998); Peter Dronke, Hermes and the Sibyls: Continuations and Creations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990); Thomas H. Tobin, Philo and the Sibyl, StudPhilon 9 (1997) 84103.

47 See Emil Schrer et al., The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (3 vols.;

Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986) 3/1:645; Sibyllinische Weissagungen (ed. Alfons Kurfess and Jrg-Dieter Gauger) 41819. According to Jane L. Lightfoot, The Sibylline Oracles (Oxford: University Press, 2007) 150, the author of books 12 is a second-century Christian.

48 See Gerard J. M. Bartelink, Die Oracula Sibyllina in den frhchristlichen griechischen

Schriften von Justin bis Origenes, in Early Christian Poetry (ed. Jan Den Boeft and Anton Hilhorst; Leiden: Brill, 1993) 2333.

49 So James, The Apocryphal New Testament, 52124; Elliott, The Apocalypse of Peter, 613.

50 There will be no seasons or days, no marriage or death, but a single long daybeyond time.


Immediately after comes the relevant passage (2.33038): And to these pious persons immortal and omnipotent God will grant another gift: when they will ask him, he will grant them to save the human beings from the erce re, andfrom the EMN[ZRMSb gnashing of teeth, and will do so after having pulled them out of the imperishable ame and removed them, destining them, for the sake of his own elect, to the other life, that of the world to come, for immortals [ENTSJPSKSbENOEQEZXSMSE?PPSWENTSWXLZWEbTIZQ]IMHMEPESRI.EYXSYDIMNb^[LRI.XIZVEROEMEMN[ZRMSRENUEREZXSMWMR], in the Elysian Fields, where there are the long waves of the Acherusian Lake, imperishable, which has a deep bed.51 The correspondence with the Rainer fragment of the Apoc. Pet. is striking. Moreover, it is remarkable that the intercession of the just frees the damned not from purgatory, a subsequent theological construction, but from hell itself, according to its evangelical description (gnashing of teeth, unquenchable ame, etc.). It is signicant that in the manuscript tradition, in correspondence to this fundamental passage, some iambic verses of uncertain date protest against the doctrine of apokatastasis that their author found expressed here and rightly connect this passage to Origens doctrine.52 The closeness of these passages in the Apoc. Pet. and the Sibylline Oracles to Origens doctrine is patent, and I deem it probable that such texts inuenced the Alexandrian theologian in the elaboration of his hypothesis.

Another apocryphal text is very interesting in this connection. In the Greek recension of the Life of Adam and Eve 37.36,53 Adam is forgiven by his Lord and brought into heaven before the Final Judgment, for which he waits together with Eve. He is washed three times by a seraph and is introduced by Michael into paradise. In this way, the text indicates that even after death, and even for the original sinners, it is possible to obtain forgiveness and salvation. Above all, in a Latin codex54 that is particularly close to the Greek text, God assures that in the

51 Vv. 33238 run as follows: INOQEPIVSMDSTYVSbOEMENUEREZX[RENTSFVYKQ[DR /ENRUV[ZTSYb

W[DWEM H[ZWIM OEM XSYDXS TSMLZWIM / PI\EZQIRSb KEV INWEYDUMb ENTS JPSKSb ENOEQEZXSMS / E?PPSWENTSWXLZWEbTIZQ]IMHMEPESRI.EYXSYD/ IMNb^ [LRI.XIZVEROEMEMN[ZRMSRENUEREZXSMWMR/,PYWMZ[TIHMZ[S_UMSM.TIZPIOYZQEXEQEOVEZ/PMZQRLbENIREZSY%GIVSYWMEZHSbFEUYOSZPTSYFor their connection to the Apoc. Pet., see Trumbower, Rescue, 4954.

52 At the assertion that the damned will be removed from the torments, the scholiast says: It

is completely false, because the re will never cease to torment the damned. I may pray that this be the case, since I am marked by the deep scars of transgressions that are in need of the greatest Grace. But shame be on Origen for his mendacious words, who claims that there will be an end to the torments. Likewise, in the manuscript tradition of Gregory of Nyssas De anima et resurrectioneglosses are scattered throughout endeavoring to explain that Gregory did not really hold Origens heretical doctrine of universal salvation, and that passages referring to purifying re and the like should be understood in reference to purgatory. Origen himself lamented that his writings were interpolated already during his life, and Runus attests to this also for the subsequent period in his De adulteratione librorum Origenis.

53 See Daniel A. Bertrand, La vie grecque dAdam et dve (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1987); I.

Michael Stone, A History of the Literature of Adam and Eve (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992).54

Paris, Bibliothque Nationale, lat. 3832, edited by Jean-Pierre Pettorelli, Vie latine dAdam et dve. La recension de Paris, BNF, lat. 3832, Archivum Latinitatis Medii Aevi 57 (1999) 552.


end he will have mercy on all, by way and for the sake of his Son. He addresses these words to Michael: Put him [Adam] in Paradise, in the third heaven, until the day of dispensation, which is called oikonomia, when I shall have mercy upon all, through my most beloved Child (pone eum [Adam] in Paradiso in tertio caelo, usque in diem dispensationis qui dicitur economia, quando faciam omnibus misericordiam per dilectissimum Filium meum). The term omnibus is particularly relevant, since in the documents I have analyzed so far it is not expressly stated that all the damned will be saved, whereas here it is said that Gods mercy will be bestowed upon all.55 Here, as in the Apoc. Pet., the central role of Christ in universal salvation is manifest (per dilectissimum lium); this core idea is shared by Origen, who ascribes to Christ a crucial function in the apokatastasis, as I think should be stressed.56 By way of example, I limit myself to quoting one signicanttext, Comm. Rom. 4.10, from which it is clear that Origen has the apokatastasisdepend on Christ, and in particular on his sacrice: I declare that the power and effectiveness of Christs cross and of this death of his are so great as to be enough to set right and save, not only the present and the future aeon, but also all the past ones, and not only this order of us humans, but also the heavenly orders and powers.57 In Cels. 8.72, too, it is Christ-Logos who determines the apokatastasis,which is made possible by the complete elimination of evil: The Logos is more powerful than any illness that may exist in the souls: he applies to everyone the necessary therapy, according to Gods will, and the end (XIZPSb) of all will consist in the elimination of evil.

55 In Christian Greek, SMNOSRSQMZE precisely means Gods saving action toward humans. When

it refers to Christ, in the Greek Fathers the expression (I?RWEVOSb)SMNOSRSQMZE indicates the salvicplan of his incarnation, his permanence on earth up to his death, e.g., in Maximus the Confessor. See Massimo il Confessore, Ambigua (ed. Claudio Moreschini; Milan: Bompiani, 2003) 154. Whereas Christs divine nature is often called UISPSKMZE by the Greeks, his human nature is called SMNOSRSQMZE.In the Bible, in Gal 4 and Eph 1 there decidedly emerges the meaning of salvic economy linked to Gods government in history; in the classical world, instead, SMNOSRSQMZE means service, economy, orderespecially in rhetoricor government, mainly in philosophy, among the Stoics, in Plato, in Philo. The biblical meaning was inherited by the Fathers, who focus this economy on the incarnation, beginning with Ignatius in his Epistle to the Ephesians, then Polycarp, Athenagoras, and above all Justin, and Irenaeus, who uses this term in an anti-gnostic meaning in the context of his doctrine of the ENREOIJEPEMZ[WMb of all in Christ. See Giulio Maspero, Storia e salvezza: il concetto di oikonomia no allinizio del secolo III, in Pagani e cristiani, 23960.

56 See Samuel Fernndez Eyzaguirre, El carcter cristolgico de la bienaventuranza nal, in

Origeniana Octava, 64148; Tzamalikos, Origen: Philosophy of History, 65116; Ilaria Ramelli, The Universal and Eternal Validity of Jesus High-Priestly Sacrice, in A Cloud of Witnesses: The Theology of Hebrews in Its Ancient Contexts (ed. Richard J. Bauckham et al.; Library of New Testament Studies 387; London: T&T Clark, 2008) 21021; eadem, La dottrina dellapocatastasi eredit origeniana nel pensiero escatologico del Nisseno, in Ilaria Ramelli, Gregorio di Nissa. Sullanima e la resurrezione (Milan: Bompiani, 2007), with new edition, essays, and commentary on this dialogue.

57 Tantam esse vim crucis Christi et mortis huius . . . asserimus, quae ad sanitatem et remedium

non solum praesentis et futuri, sed etiam praeteritorum saeculorum, et non solum humano huic nostro ordini, sed etiam caelestibus virtutibus ordinibusque sufciat.


Antecedents in Clement: Pedagogical Perspective and the Ubiquitousness of Gods Providence Seeds of the theory of apokatastasis were already present in the writing of Clement of Alexandria,58 who, as I mentioned, knew at least the Apoc. Pet. and considered it inspired just like the other texts that subsequently constituted the canonical New Testament. Clement, who, like Origen, stressed each humans free will and responsibility,59 insisted on the pedagogical and therapeutic value of all suffering inicted by God60 and on Gods salvic will and providence for each and every creature (TVSbXLRXSYDS_PSYW[XLVMZERX[DX[DRS_P[R/YVMZ[TEZRXEINWXMHMEXIXEKQIZREOEMOEUSZPSYOEMINTMQIZVSYb), since God is good and from eternity and eternally saves through his Son and the task of salvic justice is to lead each being to what is better (Strom. 7.2.12; see also 1.17.86.12). This is why the necessary instructions (TEMHIYZWIMb) are not retributive punishments, but are inicted by God out of goodness (ENKEUSZXLXM), not only in preliminary judgments, but also in the nal judgment, and they force even those who are extremely hardened to convert (INOFMEZ^ SRXEMQIXERSIMDR) (Strom. 7.2.12). Indeed, according to Clement, salvic repentance (QIXEZRSME) is always possible, both here on earth and on the other side, because Gods goodness operates absolutely everywhere (Strom. 4.6.37.7; see also 6.6.4547). Clement states that Gods providence operates in two ways, either through good deeds or through punishment, but the end of both is salvation through conversion from evil to virtue (Strom. 1.17.173).

Moreover, as will be the case in Origens thought, the main agent of this salvicprovidence is Christ-Logos, who always encourages, admonishes, saves (Protr.1.6.2; see also 9.87.6). Above all, in Strom. 2.22.134.4 Clement, on the basis of Rom 6:22, identies the end (XIZPSb) with life in the other world (^[LEMN[ZRMSb)and expressly afrms that Paul teaches that this end is the hoped-for apokatastasis(XIZPSbHMHEZWOIMXLRXLDbINPTMZHSbENTSOEXEZWXEWMR). In 7.10.57.14, moreover, he describes the apokatastasis as the passage from unbelief to faith and from faith to knowledge (KR[DWMb, which yields love ENKEZTLwhich will be closely related to apokatastasis by Origen as welland leads to the restoration, explicitly named ENTSOEXEZWEWMb and described as peace and rest (ENREZTEYWMb).61 Indeed, in 7.10.56.2

58 John R. Sachs, Apocatastasis in Patristic Theology, ThSt 54 (1993) 61740, esp. section 1 on

Clement; complete demonstration with further arguments in Ramelli, Gregorio di Nissa SullAnima 833, 843, 849, 883900.

59 E.g., in Strom. 1.1.4.1; 2.1415.6071; 5.14.136; indeed, like Origen, he asserted this of every

rational creature, including the devil, who was not forced by nature to choose evil (1.17.8384). In 2.3 he maintains the freedom of human will in polemic against the Valentinians (also in 1.20.11516) and Basilides.

60 E.g., in Strom. 2.15.6971; 7.16.102.13; 7.6.34.13 regarding the TYDVEMN[ZRMSR, which is not

eternal but of the other world. See Ramelli, Apocatastasi. Clement also regarded this world as a place of instruction, a TEMHIYXLZVMSR.

61 Compare to Peters description of the ENTSOEXEZWXEWMbTEZRX[R as ENREZ]Y\Mb in Acts 3:2021,

a passage Origen, and probably Clement, read as referring to the eventual universal restoration.


5 Clement explains that the apokatastasis, which he nominally mentions again, will come after the necessary purication of all our sins through a salvic instruction (TEMZHIYWMb; then we shall enjoy the apokatastasis in eternal contemplation. To be sure, Clement did not develop a consistent and thorough theory of apokatastasis,but all this clearly paved the way to the theory of universal salvation.

If Origen drew inspiration from Clement for his conception of the apokatastasis,Clement and Origen seem to me to have been inspired by Philo, although Philo did not believe in universal salvation.62 In Her. 293 Philo interprets Gen 15:16(XIXEZVXLHIKIRIEDENTSWXVEJLZWSRXEM[`HI) allegorically, observing that this was said in order to present the perfect restoration of the soul (Y.TIVXSYDXIPIMZERENTSOEXEZWXEWMR]YGLDbTEVEWXLDWEM), that is, its return to its original perfection, unsullied by sins. In fact, as Philo explains in 29399, at the beginning it is like a wax tablet without any mark, but soon it begins to acquire evils (OEOEZ), sins (E.QEVXLZQEXE), and passions (TEZUL). This requires the intervention of philosophy in its therapeutic function (MNEXVMOLJMPSWSJMZE) with its reasoning bringing about health (PSZKSMbY.KMIMRSMDbOEMW[XLVMZSMb). As a result, vigor and strength grow in the soul, which will be steadfast in all virtues. This is the apokatastasis of the soul, which, from sin, returns to its original purity (ENTSWXVEJIMDWEXSYDHMEQEVXEZRIMR)and inherits wisdom (OPLVSRSZQSbENTSHIMZORYXEMWSJMZEb). This apokatastasis is also described as a restoration of the soul to health (Y.KMZIME) after the abandonment of evil (ENTSWXVIJSZQIRSMXEJEYDPE). This therapeutic and medical imagery, too, will be dear to Clement and Origen as well.

Both Clement and Origen, as I have mentioned, knew at least the Apoc. Pet.among the Christian apocrypha that seem to have anticipated, to some extent, the theory of universal salvation, and they considered the Apoc. Pet. to be an inspired writing. In this regard, it is important to highlight that the main supporters of the doctrine of apokatastasis, especially Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, in their writings continually based it on Scriptureswhat became the canonical Scriptureespecially on Paul (their favorite passage is 1 Cor 15:2628),63 but also on many other passages from both the Old and the New Testaments. Indeed, they regarded the entire Bible as full of hints of universal salvation, which they noted in their exegesis, and they believed that the foremost antecedents to the doctrine of apokatastasis were to be found in Scripture.

62 See Ilaria Ramelli, Philosophical Allegoresis of Scripture in Philo and Its Legacy in Gregory

of Nyssa, SPhilo 20 (2008) 5599.63

See Ramelli, Christian Soteriology; eadem, Origens Interpretation of Hebrews 10:13, the Eventual Elimination of Evil and the Apokatastasis, Augustinianum 47 (2007) 8593; eadem, In Illud: Tunc et Ipse Filius . . . (1Cor 15,2728): Gregory of Nyssas Exegesis, Some Derivations from Origen, and Early Patristic Interpretations Related to Origens, seminar paper delivered at the 2007 Oxford Patristic Conference, forthcoming in StPatr.


Bardaians Parallel: Apokatastasis and Defense of Human Free WillAmong the precursors of Origen in supporting universal salvation, the hellenized Syrian philosopher Bardaian of Edessawho probably knew at least the OraculaSibyllina passage concerning the eventual salvation of the damned, and perhaps also the Epistula Apostolorum and some of the other early Christian apocrypha that are a prelude to the doctrine of apokatastasisis the one who presents this theory in its most developed, coherent, and philosophical form, closest to that of Origen. Indeed, a deep and impressive connection exists between Bardaians and Origens eschatological doctrines, which, to my knowledge, has never been pointed out by scholars: Origen and Bardaian64 both held the same doctrine of apokatastasis, in addition to both writing in defense of human free will against deterministic theories. Both were Christian philosophers and teachers of philosophy, deeply engaged in the controversies of their own day, and deeply committed to scriptural exegesis.

Bardaian, a very learned Christian philosopher and theologian, had a school in Edessa where Greek philosophy was studied just as it was at the school of Origen, both in Alexandria and in Caesarea.65 Bardaian, like Origen, was later accused of Gnosticism, but this allegation in both cases was ultimately unfounded: although both these Christian philosophers were notoriously objects of harsh polemics, reected respectively in the heresiological reports on Bardaian and in the so-called Origenistic controversy,66 both wrote against gnostic and Marcionite doctrines,67 above all against the Valentinian theory of predestination, with its anthropology of differentiation into categories of human beings, and against

64 On Bardaian, see, among others, Han J. W. Drijvers, Bardaian of Edessa (Assen: van Gorcum,

1966), with an overview on the sources concerning Bardaian; Ilaria Ramelli, Linee generali per una presentazione e per un commento del Liber legum regionum, con traduzione italiana del testo siriaco e dei frammenti greci, Rendiconti dellIstituto Lombardo, Accademia di Scienze e Lettere133 (1999) 31155; eadem, Bardesane e la sua scuola tra la cultura occidentale e quella orientale: il lessico della libert nel Liber legum regionum (testo siriaco e versione greca), in Pensiero e istituzioni del mondo classico nelle culture del Vicino Oriente (ed. Rosa Bianca Finazzi and Alfredo Valvo; Alessandria: DellOrso, 2001) 23755, with further documentation; eadem, Bardesane Kata Heimarmens (Bologna: ESD, 2009).

65 See, e.g., Tloka, Griechische Christen, 4750 and 6476, 7985.

66 The heresiological accounts on Bardaian, after Drijvers, have been further investigated by

Alberto Camplani, Rivisitando Bardesane. Note sulle fonti siriache del Bardesanismo e sulla sua collocazione storico-religiosa, CNS 19 (1998) 51996; on the Origenistic controversy, see especially Elizabeth A. Clark, The Origenist Controversy (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1992) and Emanuela Prinzivalli, Magister Ecclesiae. Il dibattito su Origene fra III e IV secolo (SEA 82; Rome: Augustinianum, 2002).

67 For Origens polemic against the gnostics, see below; he also constantly opposed the Marcionites,

who separated the OT and the NT, their respective divinities, and justice and mercy in God. For Bardaians refutations of gnostics and Marcionites the main sources are Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.30; Jerome, Vir. ill. 33; Epiphanius, Pan. 56, and Moses of Chorene, Patmutiwn Hayoc 2.66.


astrological determinism; their position was to be inherited by Gregory of Nyssa.68Han J. W. Drijvers and other scholars have presented Bardaian as a philosopher,69following Ephraem who called him the Aramaic philosopher, and surely there are good reasons to do so, although Ute Possekel has rightly called attention to the remarkable theological aspects of his thought,70 without denying that he also used many philosophical categories. Surely the distinction between philosophy and theology is more a modern than an ancient idea, and in patristic philosophy it is hardly correct, from an historical and methodological point of view, to speak of philosophy as separate from theology and vice-versa. Possekels assessment, however, is well grounded in Bardaians way of presenting and understanding himself, his ethics, his doctrine of the resurrection, the communitarian organization of his school, etc., and is perfectly true: Bardaian considered himself primarily a Christian who tried to render his faith acceptable from an intellectual point of view. This characterization, I believe, is also perfectly suited to Origen, a Christian philosopher71 who played an essential role in making Christianity acceptable even to the most intellectually demanding, among whom were many gnostics.72 Origen and Bardaian played the same role in the intellectual landscape of the late second and early third centuries, when Christianity was endeavoring to acquire a cultural, and even specically philosophical, credibility.

Bardaian (154222 C.E.) lived somewhat earlier than Origen (ca. 186255 C.E.), which would assign him priority in the formulation of the theory of universal salvation. However, his doctrine of apokatastasis is attested in the so-called Liber legum regionum, which is preserved in a single Syriac manuscript and was probably written by a disciple of Bardaian. Eusebius, who excerpts this dialogue in Praep. ev. 6.10, says that it was composed by Bardaian himself and attests its

68 For Gregorys polemic against astrology, see, e.g., Beatrice Motta, Lastrologia nel Contra

fatum di Gregorio di Nissa, in La cultura scientico-naturalistica nei Padri della Chiesa (XXXV Incontro di studiosi dellantichit cristiana, Rome, 46.V. 2006; SEA 101; Rome: Augustinianum, 2007) 67784. Above all, Gregory adopted Origens defense of free will and doctrine of apokatastasis:see Ramelli, Gregorio di Nissa Sullanima, rst integrative essay.

69 E.g., Drijvers, Bardaian; idem, Bardaian of Edessa and the Hermetica, JEOL 21 (1970)

190210; Taeke Jansma, Natuur, lot en vrijheid. Bardesanes, de losoof der Aramers en zijn images(Cahiers bij het Nederlands Theologisch Tijdschrift 6; Wageningen: Veenman, 1969); Albrecht Dihle, Libert et destin dans lAntiquit tardive, RTP 121 (1989) 12947; Javier Teixidor, Bardesane ddesse: la premire philosophie syriaque (Paris: Cerf, 1992); John F. Healey, The Edessan Milieu and the Birth of Syriac, Hugoye 10 (2007) 134, who describes Bardaians writings as philosophical works in Syriac ( 31).

70 Ute Possekel, Bardaian of Edessa: Philosopher or Theologian? ZAC 10 (2007) 44261.

71 On Origen as fully philosopher and fully Christian and the polemics that this identity ignited

among both pagans and Christians, see Ilaria Ramelli, Origen, Patristic Philosophy, and Christian Platonism: Re-Thinking the Christianization of Hellenism, VC 63 (2009) 10750.

72 See, most recently, Tloka, Griechische Christen, ch. 2, with my review in Adamantius 14

(2008) 64145; Christoph Markschies, Origenes und sein Erbe (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007), also with a review of mine forthcoming in Adamantius.


original title, 4IVMIM.QEVQIZRLbHMEZPSKSb(Hist. eccl. 4.30).73 In fact, it is a Platonic dialogue, and, again according to Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 4.30), it was dedicated to an Antoninus whom Jerome identies with Marcus Aurelius, the philosopher emperor (Vir. ill. 33: liber quem Marco Antonino de fato tradidit). This would situate this dialogue within the lifetime of Bardaian: the persecution that Eusebius places under Antoninus perfectly ts the great anti-Christian persecution that took place under Marcus Aurelius.74 This is further supported by Epiphaniuss attestation that under this emperor Bardaian was, if not a martyr, certainly a confessor of the Christian faith.75 Scholars, however, tend to think that the addressee was Caracalla or Elagabalus (although no persecution occurred under their reigns) and that the dialogue was written by a disciple of Bardaian.76 In any case, the Liber, which

73 Even if we assume that the Liber legum regionum, as we have it in Syriac, is the product

of a disciple, it is probable that it faithfully reects his masters thought, expressed in his 4IVMIM.QEVQIZRLb, or better, according to Epiphanius and Theodoretus, /EXEIM.QEVQIZRLb. See Ramelli, Bardesane kata heimarmens, with thorough argument and documentation.

74 )RSM`bINWXMROEMS.TVSb%RX[RMDRSRM.OER[ZXEXSbEYNXSYD4IVMIM.QEVQIZRLbHMEZPSKSbS_WEXIE?PPEJEWMREYNXSRTVSJEZWIMXSYDXSZXIHM[KQSYDWYKKVEZ]EM Under Marcus Aureliuss persecution several Christian apologies were written. On this persecution, see Marta Sordi, I Cristiani e lImpero romano (2d ed.; Milan: Jaca Book, 2004) 10316; Ilaria Ramelli, Montanismo e Impero Romano nel giudizio di Marco Aurelio, Contributi dellIstituto di Storia Antica dellUniversit Cattolica di Milano 25 (1999) 8197; eadem, Protector Christianorum, Aevum 76 (2002) 10112. On the connection between this persecution and Bardaians dialogue, see eadem, Bardesane kata heimarmens.

75 Pan. 56: %TSPP[RMZ[ HI X[D XSYD %RX[RMZRSY I.XEMZV[ ENRXLDVI TEVEMRSYQIZR[ ENVRLZWEWUEMXS'VMWXMERSRI.EYXSRPIZKIMRS.HIWGIHSRINRXEZ\IMS.QSPSKMZEbOEXIZWXLPSZKSYbXIWYRIXSYbENTIOVMZREXSY.TIVIYNWIFIMZEbENRHVIMZ[bENTSPSKSYZQIRSbUEZREXSRQLHIHMIZREMJLZWEbSaRENREZKOLI?WIWUEMOEARXIX[DFEWMPIMDQLENRXIMZTSM(Apollonius, Antoninuss friend, exhorted him to deny that he was a Christian, but Bardaian resisted and almost joined the number of the confessors. He replied with intelligent discourses, courageously defending piety, and said that he did not fear death, since it would necessarily come, even if he had not opposed the emperor.)

76 Porphyry, De Styge, fr. 376 Smith (ap. Stob. 1.3.56 = 1.66.2470.13 Wachsmuth), places the

composition of Bardaians work on India at the time of the emperor Antoninus from Emesa, i.e., Elagabalus; the same is indicated by Moses of Chorene, PH 2.66, who locates Bardaians oruitunder the last Antoninus. Elagabaluss name was Varius Avitus. Now, Bardaians interlocutor in the Liber is Avid, the Syriac transposition of Avitus. In the initial frame he is presented as a heathen who is philosophically interested in Christian monotheism and theodicy. Moreover, the other interlocutor is the young Philip, who might even be M. Julius Philippus the Arab, from Bostra, who was either a Christian or not hostile to Christianity; see Ramelli, Linee generali, 31518. Origens letters to Philip and his wife in defense of his own orthodoxy (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 16.36.34) and the hostility of all pagan sources to Philip may suggest that he was a Christian, as is implied by Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.34, who mentions that a bishop forbade him to take part in the churchs prayers on Easters eve before penitence for his crimes (cf. Jerome, Vir. ill. 54). John Chrysostom, Bab. 6 identies that bishop with Babylas of Antioch, who died during Deciuss persecution, which was a reaction to Philip according to Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.39.1. Philips contemporary, Dionysius of Alexandria, a disciple of Origen, in a letter speaks of emperors who were said to have been publicly Christian (SM.PIGUIZRXIbENREJERHSR'VMWXMERSMKIKSRIZREM, ap. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 1.7.10), which cannot but refer to Philip. On Philip, see Pat Southern, The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine(London: Routledge, 2001) 7174. Favorable to the theory that he was a Christian are John M. York, Philip the Arab, the First Christian Emperor of Rome (Ph.D. diss., University of Southern


expresses Bardaians thought, is an important example of hellenization in the Edessan milieu. John Healey admits that Bardaian forms a prominent peak of Hellenism in the landscape of the early Edessan environment of Syrian Christianity, and that he had a group of supporters and followers who shared his interests, although it is not clear that he is the tip of an iceberg of any great signicancein that landscape.77 In fact, notwithstanding that in those days Edessa was a sort of detachment of the Roman Empire and its rulers were at home in Rome,78 a better parallel for Bardaian, his intellectual activity, and his school seems to be constituted by Origens activity and his school in Alexandria (and later in Caesarea),79 rather than by the Osrhoene environment, as I shall endeavor to demonstrate. Moreover, Bardaian, just like Origen according to Eusebiuss biographical account,80 received a Greek education in liberal disciplines and philosophy.81

In this connection, the most interesting features of the Liber are its main philosophical doctrines: that of free will, held against astrological determinism, and, at the very end of the dialogue, that of apokatastasis, which, surprisingly enough, has never been realized by scholars. This theory is here expressly attributed to Bardaian, who is by far the main character of the dialogue. Let us briey analyze both these doctrines, which are strongly interrelated in Bardaians thinking and constitute a close parallel toand perhaps an anticipation ofOrigens conception of apokatastasis and rational creatures free will.

California, 1965), Dissertation Abtracts 25 (1965) 523031 and Sordi, I Cristiani, 13539. In any case, Philip was not at all hostile to Christianity.

77 Healey, The Edessan Milieu, quotations from 32.

78 Steven K. Ross, Roman Edessa: Politics and Culture in the Eastern Fringe of the Roman

Empire (London: Routledge, 2001); Ilaria Ramelli, Abgar Ukkama e Abgar il Grande alla luce di recenti apporti storiograci, Aevum 78 (2004) 1038.

79 When Origen moved to Caesarea, Bardaian had already died, but his school was still alive

and well: His followers continued to exist for centuries. 80

Origen studied the customary curriculum of the Greek disciplines (XLDX[DRINKOYOPMZ[RTEMHIMZEX[DR)PPLRMO[DRQEULQEZX[R), which were crowned by philosophy, and after his fathers death he deepened his knowledge of them (Hist. eccl. 6.2.15). Many learned pagans who had received a philosophical education (X[DRXIENTSTEMHIMZEbOEMJMPSWSJMZEb) were won over by his teaching (6.3.13). Even after handing the teaching of the WXSMGIMDE to Heraclas (6.15.1), Origen did not stop teaching philosophy, and many renowned philosophers attended his classes in order to be instructed not only in the divine things, but also in pagan philosophy, consisting not only in the liberal arts, but also in the doctrines of the various philosophical sects (6.17.23). Origen himself in a letter claims that while he was studying Scripture, he was approached by heretics, philosophers, and experts in Greek disciplines ()PPLRMOEQEULZQEXE), and thus he had to examine both the heretics opinions and what the philosophers claimed to say concerning the truth. He adduces Pantaenus and Heraclas, Christian philosophers in Alexandria, whom he imitates (ap. Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 6.19.1214).

81 He was taught the Greek paideia together with king Abgar the Great, as Epiphanius attests in

Pan. 56: In his youth he was friends with Abgar, king of Edessa, a very pious and learned man; he shared his Greek education and collaborated with him (%YNKEZV[HIX[DX[DR)HIWWLR[DRHYREZWXLENRHVMS.WM[XEZX[OEMPSKM[XEZX[IN\SMOIMSYZQIRSbXETV[DXEOEMWYQTVEZXX[RXIE_QEOEMXLDbEYNXSYDQIXEWG[RTEMHIMZEb). He received a Greco-Roman instruction, and also knew Greek very well.


The doctrine of free will is the core thesis of the dialogue, which Bardaian, the protagonist, supports, arguing that human beings do not depend on the inuenceof stars in their choices. Their habits vary from nation to nation and from religion to religion, but do not depend on celestial bodies or on the astrological zones (OPMZQEXE). The doctrine of free will, which was already stressed by Clement of Alexandria (e.g., in Strom. 1.1.4; 2.14.6062; 2.16.75; 4.24.153, etc.), was elaborated at length and strongly defended by Origen, like Bardaian, against both astrological determinism and the Valentinian tripartition of human beings into classes, which asserts their predestination by nature. Origen develops his polemics in many passages and especially in Book 3 of his De Principiis, which is devoted to free will and the philosophical and theological problems connected to it, an issue that was hotly debated in the philosophy of his time.82 In the very preface to Book 1 of De Principiis, 5, he argues against astral determinism that the church maintains as a dogma that every rational creature is endowed with free will and is not subject to necessity. In several commentaries on Old Testament books (such as Hom. Judic. 3.3; Hom. Jes. Nav. 7.4) and in Philocalia 23, largely based on his lost Commentary on Genesis, Origen continues his critique. Against both gnostic and astrological determinism, he insists that God is not responsible for the different conditions of the rational creatures (PSKMOSMZ), that he is no respecter of persons (Rom 9:14; Origen, Princ. 1.7.4), and that there is no unrighteousness with God. Present sufferings must be explained either as pedagogical strategies applied by God, or as a result of ones demerits in an existence previous to the present, or as a choice of some generous souls who are willing to suffer in this life in order to assist the process of salvation (Princ. 2.9.7).83

Indeed, my hypothesis is that the doctrine of human free will was at the very basis of Origens theoretical elaboration of the doctrine of apokatastasis,as is evident, again, in Book 3 of his De Principiis. Here, indeed, he begins by

82 See Ilaria Ramelli, La coerenza della soteriologia origeniana: dalla polemica contro il

determinismo gnostico alluniversale restaurazione escatologica, in Pagani e cristiani alla ricerca della salvezza (Atti del XXXIV Incontro di Studiosi dellAntichit Cristiana, Rome 57 May, 2005; SEA, 96; Rome: Augustinianum, 2006) 66188, and George Boys-Stones, Middle Platonism on Fate and Human Autonomy, in Greek and Roman Philosophy 100 BC200 AD (ed. Richard Sorabji and Robert W. Sharples; London: Institute of Classical Studies, 2007) 43147. Also see Alain Le Boulluec, La place de la polmique antignostique dans le Peri Archn, in Origeniana (Bari: Edipuglia, 1975) 4761; Albrecht Dihle, Die Vorstellung philosophischer Lehren vom Schicksal und Freiheit in der Frhchristlichen Theologie, JAC 30 (1987) 1428; Henri Crouzel, Theological Construction and Research: Origen on Freewill, in Scripture, Tradition and Reason (ed. Benjamin Drewery and Richard Bauckham; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1988) 23965; Enrico Norelli, Marcione e gli gnostici sul libero arbitrio e la polemica di Origene, in Il cuore indurito del Faraone, Origene e il problema del libero arbitrio (ed. Lorenzo Perrone; Genova: Marietti, 1992) 130; Josep Rius Camps, Orgenes frente al desafo de los gnsticos, in Origeniana Quinta (Leuven: Peeters 1992) 5778; Hendrik S. Benjamins, Eingeordnete Freiheit. Freiheit und Vorsehung bei Origenes(Leiden: Brill, 1994).

83 See Clark, The Origenist Controversy, 19596.


contrasting the mainly Valentinian84 deterministic theory of the threefold division of humanity into eshly, psychic, and spiritual persons (WEVOMOSMZ]YGMOSMZand TRIYQEXMOSMZ), destined respectively to damnation, an inferior salvation, and perfect salvation; then he goes on to argue that the Bible supports the doctrine of free will everywhere, and he explains away such passages as the hardening of Pharaohs heart, which would seem to contradict this doctrine, by invoking Gods pedagogical care and the conciliation of universally saving Providence and individual free will. At the same time, he also polemicizes against the gnostic and Marcionite distinction between the Old and New Testaments and between the justice and goodness in God. Thus, he paves the way for the doctrine of apokatastasis of all rational creatures after the purication and instruction needed by each one, as the glorious triumph not only of divine justice, but also of divine goodness. It is precisely with this doctrine that he concludes this strongly coherent book, which constitutes a complete argument and signicantly begins with the polemic against the opponents of the doctrine of human free will. In this way, Book 3 of De Principiis seems to provide an archaeological reconstruction of the theoretical genesis of Origens argument for the apokatastasis as not at all undermining each human beings free will, but indeed grounded in his defense of it against predestinationism.85 Moreover, that the theoretical basis, grounded in theodicy, of Origens doctrine of apokatastasis is his defense of human free will and of the coincidence of justice and goodness in God was well seen by Runus, who in Apol. Hier. 2.12 remarked that the supporters of apokatastasisespecially Origenintended to defend Gods justice and counter those who maintain that all is determined by fate or chance . . . eagerly wishing to defend Gods justice . . . it becomes that good, immutable, and simple nature of the Trinity to eventually restore all of its creatures into the same state in which they were created at the beginning, and, after long sufferings, enduring for whole aeons, to nally put an end to torments.86 The theoretical motive of the apokatastasis, according to Runuswho of course knew the third book of Origens De Principiis perfectly wellis the defense of both Gods goodness and Gods justice against determinism.

84 Rather than gnostic tout court. Of course, when speaking of Gnosticism, it is always

necessary to be aware of the often puzzling complexity of this category. See Karen L. King, What Is Gnosticism? (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2003); Ilaria Ramelli, review of Kings book, Invigilata Lucernis 25 (2003) 33134; eadem, Gnosticismo, in Nuovo Dizionario Patristico e di Antichit Cristiane (ed. Angelo Di Berardino; Genoa: Marietti, 2007) 2:236480.

85 Full demonstration in Ramelli, La coerenza, 66188, where, on the basis of Princ. 3 and

other evidence, it is hypothesized that Origen elaborated the doctrine of apokatastasis in opposition to Valentinian predestinationism and Marcionite division of justice and mercy in God, which parallels the separation of the two Testaments.

86 Dei iustitiam defendere et respondere contra eos qui vel fato vel casu cuncta moveri dicunt . . . Dei iustitiam defendere cupientes . . . bonae illi et incommutabili ac simplici naturae Trinitatis convenire ut omnem creaturam suam in ne omnium restituat in hoc quod ex initio creata est et post longa et spatiis saeculorum exaequata supplicia nem statuat aliquando poenarum.


Now, both the polemic against determinism and the separation of justice and goodness in God and the doctrine of apokatastasis markedly characterize Bardaians philosophical reection as well. Bardaian too, in the same period as Origen and very probably a little earlier than he, maintained the very same theory of apokatastasis, which is clearly stated at the end of the Liber legum regionum,albeit briey. Indeed, after a long confutation of astrological determinism typical of Chaldaic doctrines, and after arguing that God is both good and just and has endowed each rational creature with free will, Bardaian offers a nal perspective in which he expounds what is evidently the doctrine of apokatastasis. Thus he, like Origen, links the defense of free will and the polemic against the separation of justice from goodness in God to universal salvation, and grounds the apokatastasis in the theory of free will. This is the relevant passage, in the closing section of Bardaians Liber:

What should we say, then, concerning the new race of us, the Christians, whom Christ established in every land and in all regions at his coming? For, behold, in whatever land we are, we are all called Christians, from the one name of Christ. And in the same day, the rst of the week, we come together, and in the prescribed days we fast. And neither do our brothers who are in Gaul marry men, nor are those who live in Judea circumcised . . . nor do those who live in Edessa kill their wives who commit fornication, or their sisters, but they separate themselves from them and hand them to Gods judgment. Nor do those who live in Hatra stone thieves, but in whatever land they are, and in whatever place, local laws cannot separate them from the law of their Christ: the Principates power does not force them to do or use things that are impure for them, but illness and good health, richness and poverty, all that does not depend on their freewill happens to them wherever they are. For, just as human freewill is not governed by the necessity of the Seven [sc. planets], and, if it is governed, it is able to stand against its governors, so this visible human being, too, is unable to easily get rid of its Principalities government, since he is a slave and a subjectfor, if we could do all, we would be all; if we couldnt decide anything, we would be the instruments of others.

But whenever God likes, everything can be, with no obstacle at all. In fact, there is nothing that can impede that great and holy will. For, even those who are convinced to resist God, do not resist by their force, but they are in evil and error, and this can be only for a short time, because God is kind and gentle, and allows all natures to remain in the state in which they are, and to govern themselves by their own will, but at the same time they are condi-tioned by the things that are done and the plans that have been conceived [sc. by God]87 in order to help them. For this order and this government that have been given [sc. by God], and the association of one with another, damps the natures force, so that they cannot be either completely harmful or completely harmed, as they were harmful and harmed before the creation of the world.

87 Bardaian often uses theological passives, just as the Bible and Origen do.


And there will come a time when even this capacity for harm that remains in them will be brought to an end by the instruction that will obtain in a differ-ent arrangement of things: and, once that new world will be constituted, all evil movements88 will cease, all rebellions will come to an end, and the fools will be persuaded, and the lacks will be lled, and there will be safety and peace, as a gift of the Lord of all natures.89

Saving divine Providence (the plans conceived by God to help all creatures), the total eviction of evila state in which it is impossible that any being can remain foreverthe instruction and purication of the wicked, their voluntary renunciation of rebellion, and the apokatastasis are here clearly foreseen. According to Bardaians argument, each creature endowed with reason is free, and its free will is not conditioned by the stars, but God does not allow this freedom to bring the creature itself to total perdition: Till the end of time (EMN[DRIb), the divinity lets the creatures govern themselves by their free will, but in the end, on the basis of its own plans conceived in order to help them, it will annihilate all evil according to its purely negative nature from the ontological point of view. This is why being in evil is being, not in force, but in weakness and error, and such a state cannot endure forever. As a consequence, all creatures, once puried and set free from evil, through persuasion and teaching and the lling of all lacks, will adhere to the Good, that is God, voluntarily. The fools will be persuaded, not forced into submission.

Now, all these ideas are present both in Bardaians and in Origens thought. Furthermore, the apokatastasis is expressly characterized by Bardaian as a free gift of God (a gift of the Lord of all natures or beings), just as it is conceived by Origen, who, quoting St. Paul, afrmed in Comm. Rom. Catenae 22.11: GEZVMWQEXSYD5ISYD^ [LEMN[ZRMSbSYNKEVIN\L.Q[DR5ISYDXSH[DVSR. (The true life ainios, in Origens view, is, on the spiritual plane, ultimate salvation, according to the polysemy of life and death that is typical of both Origen and Bardaian).90Again, the apokatastasis is described as complete peace by Bardaian, in the very same way as Origen depicts it, for example, in Hom. Luc. 36: God has not yet established peace . . . there is still war due to the existence of evil, but there will denitely be an absolute peace; Comm. Jo. 10.39: when peace will be perfect, after the years of the oikonomia (S_XERL.IMNVLZRLXIPIM[ULDQIXEI?XLXLDbSMNOSRSQMZEb).One of the closest resemblances between Bardaian and Origen is that according

88 Remarkably, the language is exactly the same as in Origen: Movement here indicates an act

of will. See, e.g., Princ. 3.3.5: Freewill is always moved to good or evil by the souls movements; our rational faculty, that is, our mind or soul, never can be without any movement, either good or evil. These movements constitute the rationale for deserts (motibus suis [animae] . . . libertas arbitrii vel ad bona semper vel ad mala movetur, nec umquam rationabilis sensus, is est mens vel anima, sine motu aliquo esse vel bono vel malo potest, quos motus causas praestare meritorum).

89 Patrologia Syriaca, ed. Franois Nau, 2.60811. [My translation; emphasis mine].90

As documented by Ramelli, Origens Exegesis of Jeremiah for Origen, and idem, Bardesane kata heimarmens for Bardaian.


to both, Providence does not force our free will, but acts in harmony with it, and yet does not fail to achieve its objective, which is universal salvation. Bardaianspeaks of things that are done and plans that have been conceived [by God] in order to help the creatures; Origen says that Providence is applied [by God] to all, in accord with each ones freewill (Cels. 5.21). Both employ a theological passive and express the very same thought: Gods Providence respects human free will, but it infallibly leads all rational creatures to salvation.91

Ultimate annihilation of evil is one of the main metaphysical pillars of the doctrine of apokatastasis, and it is clearly asserted by Bardaian, by Origen, and subsequently, thanks to Origens inuence, by all the supporters of this doctrine, especially Gregory of Nyssa and Evagrius.92 Moreover, both Origen and Bardaian maintained the centrality of Christ in soteriology. Indeed, Bardaian, who considered Jesus Christ to be generated by God and by the Virgin (as attested by Ephraem and Philoxenus of Mabbug), thought that, just as he intervened as Logos in the creation (as attested by Moses Bar Kepha), he plays a core role in redemption and salvation, and ascribed a universal salvic effect to his cross.93 In fact, in his treatise on India, ap. Porphyry, De Styge fr. 376 Smith (= Stob. 1.3.56), he described a statue located in a place where all possible sins are tested, representing the whole universe with all its inhabitants, including the angels, in the shape of a human being, standing with its arms outstretched in the symbol of the cross (ENRHVMEZbI.WX[bSNVUSZbI?G[RXEbGIMDVEbL.TP[QIZREbINRXYZT[WXEYVSYD). This cross, representing Jesus Christs crucixion in its cosmic value,94 is further related to Christ-Logos through the Logoss activity in creation, since (in a manner reminiscent of Platos Timaeus) it was given by the Father to the Son as a model for the creation of this world (HIH[OIZREMXSRUISRX[DYM.[DS.TLRMZOEXSROSZWQSRI?OXM^IRM_REUIEXSRI?GLTEVEZHIMKQE). Thus, just as it is evident in Origen, in Bardaian, too, Christ-Logos plays an essential role both in creation and in soteriologyand the latter, in Bardaian just as in Origen, culminates in the apokatastasis. In the thought of both these authors, as will be the case with Gregory of Nyssa as well,95 the

91 For this notion in Origen, see Ramelli, La coerenza.

92 Documentation in Ramelli, Apocatastasi and, for Gregory of Nyssa, eadem, Gregorio di

Nissa, integrative essay 2.93

All these testimonia de Bardesane are collected and discussed at length by Ramelli, Bardesane kata heimarmens, including a strong valorization of Porphyrys fragments from Bardaian, thus far widely neglected in the reconstruction of his thinking. On the cross in early Christian thinking (Ps.Barnabas, Gospel of Peter, Justin, Oracula Sibyllina, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Origen), see Jean-Marc Prieur, La croix chez les Pres (Strasbourg: Universit Marc Bloch, 2006).

94 On the cosmic Christ and cross, see Werner Thiede, Wer ist der kosmische Christus? (Gttingen:

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2001); Ramelli, Gregorio di Nissa sullanima, 78386.95

For the christological foundation of Gregorys doctrine of apokatastasis, see Steven R. Harmon, The Work of Jesus Christ and the Universal Apokatastasis, in Jesus Christ in St. Gregory of Nyssas Theology (ed. lias Moutsoulas; Athens: Eptalophos, 2005) 22543, with very partial, but correct, argumentation; much more complete argumentation in Ramelli, La dottrina; see also eadem, In Illud . . . Gregory of Nyssas Exegesis.


apokatastasis, far from being a pagan doctrineas it has been repeatedly accused of being especially in the course of the Origenist controversyis rmly grounded in Christology.

All these convergences in thought between Origen and Bardaian revolving around the doctrine of apokatastasis are striking. It is not unlikely that Origen actually knew Bardaians thinking to some extent, just as many of his followers did, as I shall show. One possibility, among others, is that Clement may have brought to Alexandria the knowledge of Bardaians ideas. Indeed, the Syrian man (XMbX[DR %WWYVMZ[R) whom Clement mentions in Strom. 1.1.11.2 as a Christian teacher whom he met in the ENREXSPLZ, just before meeting Pantaenus in Alexandria, may well be Bardaian. (I

illaria ramelli - origen, bardaisan, and the origin of universal salvation

Documents

christian platonism

christian soteriology

philosophy of history

apocalypse of peter

early christian apocrypha2

stakeis origen of alexandria

origin of universal

apocalypse of elijah