Other ancient texts · Early Christian writings

Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans

A short letter from Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, to the church at Smyrna, written while he was being taken under guard to Rome to be executed. People read it for its strong defence of Jesus' real body, death and resurrection, for its early view of the Lord's Supper, and because it is the first known writing to use the phrase "the catholic [universal] church."

  • about AD 110
  • Greek
  • Protestant Catholic Orthodox Ethiopian

Should it be in the Bible?

The case for

  1. It is one of the earliest Christian writings outside the New Testament, by a bishop who lived alongside the apostles' own students.

    The evidence

    Polycarp of Smyrna, the church it is addressed to, mentions collecting and sending out Ignatius' letters within a few years of his death (Polycarp, Philippians 13). Eusebius (Church History 3.36, c. 325) lists Smyrnaeans among Ignatius' seven letters and quotes its chapter 3.

  2. Its teaching about Jesus agrees closely with the New Testament and was used to defend it.

    The evidence

    Against people who said Jesus only seemed to have a body (docetists), it insists he was truly born, baptized by John, nailed to a cross under Pontius Pilate and Herod, and raised in the flesh (chapters 1–3). This matches the warnings in 1 John 4:2–3 and 2 John 7, and later church teachers drew on it.

  3. Its genuineness has been carefully tested and is accepted by most scholars.

    The evidence

    After centuries of confusion with expanded and forged Ignatius letters, the seven-letter 'middle' collection was identified by Ussher (1644) and Vossius (1646) and defended at length by Zahn and J. B. Lightfoot (1885). Most modern editions (Holmes, Ehrman's Loeb) treat Smyrnaeans as authentic and early.

The case against

  1. No church ever treated it as scripture, and Ignatius did not claim to write it.

    The evidence

    It appears on no canon list: not the Muratorian fragment, Athanasius (367), Hippo or Carthage, Trent, or the Ethiopian canon, and no ancient Bible codex includes it. Ignatius himself says he does not give orders 'as Peter and Paul did' (Romans 4:3; compare Trallians 3:3).

  2. Its view of church leadership goes further than the New Testament.

    The evidence

    It says to follow the single bishop as Jesus followed the Father, and that no Eucharist, baptism or love-feast is valid without him (chapter 8). In the New Testament 'overseer' and 'elder' seem to name the same office (Acts 20:17, 28; Titus 1:5–7), so many Protestants see Ignatius as describing a later development.

  3. The text has a tangled history, and a minority still question its date and author.

    The evidence

    In the 4th century it was expanded with additions (the 'long recension'), and six forged Ignatius letters circulated with it. Calvin (Institutes 1.13.29), who knew only these expanded versions, rejected them. A minority of modern scholars argue that even the seven-letter form is a 2nd-century forgery.

Both sides are written as strongly as the honest evidence allows, so you can decide for yourself. Researched by claude-opus-5-5.

When, where and by whom

Tradition, following Eusebius, says Ignatius wrote it at Troas around AD 107–110, under the emperor Trajan, on his way to martyrdom in Rome. Most scholars accept it as genuine and date it roughly 105–140, though a minority (e.g. Hübner, Lechner, Vinzent) argue the seven letters were forged around 160–170.

Jesus, the New Testament and this book
  • Says Jesus was baptized by John 'so that all righteousness might be fulfilled' (1:1), the wording of Matthew 3:15. (strong link)
  • The risen Jesus tells Peter's group, 'Take hold, handle me, and see that I am not a bodiless demon' (3:2), close to Luke 24:39 ('touch me and see, a spirit does not have flesh and bones'). Jerome and Origen tied the exact words to other early sources, so it may be a shared tradition rather than a quotation of Luke. (likely link)
  • Says the risen Jesus ate and drank with the disciples (3:3), as in Acts 10:41 and Luke 24:42–43. (likely link)
  • Calls Jesus descended from David 'according to the flesh' and Son of God by God's power (1:1), echoing Romans 1:3–4. (likely link)
  • Shares 1 and 2 John's opposition to those who deny that Jesus came in the flesh (1 John 4:2–3; 2 John 7). (likely link)
  • 'Let the one who can receive it receive it' (6:1) echoes Jesus' words in Matthew 19:12. (likely link)
  • Names Herod the tetrarch alongside Pilate at the crucifixion (1:2), a detail found only in Luke 23:6–12 among the Gospels (see also Acts 4:27). (possible link)
How it came down to us

The original seven-letter Greek text survives mainly in one 11th-century manuscript in Florence (Codex Mediceus Laurentianus 57.7), and a 5th-century Greek papyrus in Berlin (P.Berol. 10581) preserves part of the middle chapters. Translations into Latin, Armenian, Syriac (fragments), Arabic and Coptic confirm the text. Through the Middle Ages the church mostly copied the expanded 4th-century 'long recension,' and the shorter original form was only recovered in the 1640s.

  • Greek text in Codex Mediceus Laurentianus 57.7 (11th century) and papyrus P.Berol. 10581
  • Ancient Latin, Armenian and Syriac translations; the 4th-century long recension
  • Polycarp, Letter to the Philippians 13
  • Eusebius, Church History 3.36
  • J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, Part 2: Ignatius and Polycarp (1885)
  • Modern critical editions: M. W. Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers; B. D. Ehrman, Loeb Apostolic Fathers
  • Minority arguments on dating and authenticity: R. Hübner, T. Lechner, M. Vinzent
  • Calvin, Institutes 1.13.29

Chapters

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13