Does Irenaeus indicate that people were raised from the dead in the 2nd century?

score:9

Accepted answer

Christians from both sides of the continuation of spiritual gifts debate understand Irenaeus's quote here more charitably than Gibbon, and do not see it as evidence that people were being raised from the dead in the late 2nd century. I'll refer to the writings of cessationist B. B. Warfield and charismatic Ronald A. N. Kydd.

Warfield addresses Gibbon directly and agrees with his assessment of the period, saying "Irenaeus alone of all the writers of this period speaks of raisings of the dead at all." Eusebius mentions one raising told by Papias from the apostolic age, but his overall work indicates the scarcity of such events:

It is very clear that Eusebius was not familiar with raisings from the dead in his own day, and also that Papias was not familiar with them in his day; and it is equally clear that Eusebius did not know of numerous instances of such a transaction having been recorded as occurring in the course of the early history of the church, which history he was in the act of transcribing. (14)

Warfield cites the writings of several other early authors, such as Theophilus of Antioch and Tertullian. The latter in particular, in On Modesty, XXI, contrasts the spiritual powers of the apostles from their successors, saying that the former "raised the dead." Warfield concludes:

It is an understatement to say that Irenaeus's contemporaries were unaware that the dead were being raised in their day. What they say amounts to testimony that they were not being raised. (14)

So why, then, does Irenaeus say this? Kydd defends Irenaeus as a scholar, citing the vindication of his writings on Gnosticism following the discovery of the Gnostic Nag Hammadi documents in the 1940s. And based on their analysis of the passage, Kydd and Warfield hold that Irenaeus is actually refering to the apostolic-era raisings of the dead, not ones happening in his own day. Warfield writes:

Irenaeus throws the raisings from the dead well into the past. This is made evident not only from the past tenses employed, which are markedly contrasted with the present tenses used in the rest of the passage, but also from the statement that those who were thus raised had lived after their resuscitation a considerable number of years, which shows that recent resuscitations are not in view. (242)

Warfield also notes the phrase, "as we said," which he argues points back to Irenaeus's mention of raisings from the dead in the apostolic era (5.7.2), not recent instances. Kydd summarizes:

Warfield concludes by saying that "there is no reason why the cases he [Irenaeus] has in mind may not have occurred during the lifetime of the Apostles or of Apostolic men," and I think he is right. (45)

Upvote:1

Papias, Irenaeus, and others record certain miracles. Here are examples.

And so far are they from being able to raise the dead, as the Lord raised them, and the apostles did by means of prayer, and as has been frequently done in the brotherhood on account of some necessity—the entire Church in that particular locality entreating [the boon] with much fasting and prayer, the spirit of the dead man has returned, and he has been bestowed in answer to the prayers of the saints—that they do not even believe this can be possibly be done, [and hold] that the resurrection from the dead3263 is simply an acquaintance with that truth which they proclaim. A.H. 2.31.2

1461 Adv. Hær. II. 31. 2. The sentence as it stands in Eusebius is incomplete. Irenæus is refuting the pretended miracles of Simon and Carpocrates. The passage runs as follows: “So far are they [i.e. Simon and Carpocrates] from being able to raise the dead as the Lord raised them and as the apostles did by means of prayer, and as has been frequently done in the brotherhood on account of some necessity—the entire Church in that locality entreating with much fasting and prayer [so that] the spirit of the dead man has returned, and he has been bestowed in answer to the prayer of the saints—that they do not even believe this can possibly be done, [and hold] that the resurrection from the dead is simply an acquaintance with that truth which they proclaim.” This resurrection of the dead recorded by Irenæus is very difficult to explain, as he is a truth-loving man, and we can hardly conceive of his uttering a direct falsehood. Even Augustine, “the iron man of truth,” records such miracles, and so the early centuries are full of accounts of them. The Protestant method of drawing a line between the apostolic and post-apostolic ages in this matter of miracles is arbitrary, and based upon dogmatic, not historical grounds. The truth is, that no one can fix the point of time at which miracles ceased; at the same time it is easy to appreciate the difference between the apostolic age and the third, fourth, and following centuries in this regard. That they did cease at an early date in the history of the Church is clear enough. Upon post-apostolic miracles, see Schaff, Ch. Hist. II. p. 116 ff., J. H. Newman’s Two Essays on Biblical and Eccles. Miracles, and J. B. Mozley’s Bampton lectures On Miracles. -Commentary-

We must now point out how Papias, who lived at the same time, relates that he had received a wonderful narrative from the daughters of Philip. For he relates that a dead man was raised to life in his day. Papias Fragment VI

Upvote:3

From a Biblical perspective, I don't understand why one should be incredulous about Irenaeus' claims. Jesus said He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do [John 14:12].

The Synaxaria tell of other Christian saints who were granted the gift of raising the dead. These include:

Upvote:6

Yes, there is no doubt that Irenaeus was speaking of some raising the dead in his own time. The following extract contains the words by Irenaeus that appear to be cited by Eusebius and criticised by Gibbon. Irenaeus is comparing the powerlessness of his opponents to perform miracles with what the Christian brotherhood is capable of performing. After dismissing the claims of his opponents as magical deceptions, Irenaeus then makes bold claims about what the Christian brotherhood had done, apparently in the recent past at least, then finally reproaching his opponents for not believing that it is possible to raise the dead:

Against Heresies II.31.2: Moreover, those also will be thus confuted who belong to Simon and Carpocrates, and if there be any others who are said to perform miracles— who do not perform what they do either through the power of God, or in connection with the truth, nor for the well-being of men, but for the sake of destroying and misleading mankind, by means of magical deceptions, and with universal deceit, thus entailing greater harm than good on those who believe them, with respect to the point on which they lead them astray. For they can neither confer sight on the blind, nor hearing on the deaf, nor chase away all sorts of demons— [none, indeed,] except those that are sent into others by themselves, if they can even do so much as this. Nor can they cure the weak, or the lame, or the paralytic, or those who are distressed in any other part of the body, as has often been done in regard to bodily infirmity. Nor can they furnish effective remedies for those external accidents which may occur. And so far are they from being able to raise the dead, as the Lord raised them, and the apostles did by means of prayer, and as has been frequently done in the brotherhood on account of some necessity — the entire Church in that particular locality entreating [the boon] with much fasting and prayer, the spirit of the dead man has returned, and he has been bestowed in answer to the prayers of the saints — that they do not even believe this can be possibly be done, [and hold] that the resurrection from the dead is simply an acquaintance with that truth which they proclaim.

The fourth-century Church historian Eusebius believed that Irenaeus was speaking of his own time, saying:

These things Irenæus, in agreement with the accounts already given by us, records in the work which comprises five books, and to which he gave the title Refutation and Overthrow of the Knowledge Falsely So-called. In the second book of the same treatise he shows that manifestations of divine and miraculous power continued to his time in some of the churches.

The following statement by David Zeisberger comes from The Christian Observer, Volume 26 (July 1826), pages 395-6:

As to Irenaeus, such is the extravagance of his assertion in the passage quoted from him, and such the structure of the sentence, that I would submit for consideration, whether the most objectionable part may not be an interpolation. If it is genuine, then Dr. Hey's censure of Irenaeus is fully justified... [A]ccording to Irenaeus, after the Apostles were dead, and were succeeded by men confessedly inferior to them in spiritual gifts, these inferior men do very often this greatest of all miracles, which their predecessors had done very sparingly!

More post

Search Posts

Related post