Hope vs Justice III: the ‘Apocalypse of Peter’, intercessions and later Ethiopian developments with a note on Origen of Alexandria

 

Hope vs Justice III: the ‘Apocalypse of Peter’, intercessions and later Ethiopian developments with a note on Origen of Alexandria

In this post, I’ll cite the analysis of the scholar Eric J. Beck provided in Chapter 8 of the book “Beyond Canon: Early Christianity and the Ethiopic Textual Tradition” [1] that discusses some texts that seem to allow the possibility of post-mortem salvation via either intercessions or God’s mercy. The first text is the Rainer fragment, a quotation of an early version of the Apocalypse of Peter[2], which narrates the journey of Peter the Apostle into the realms of the dead (both hell and Paradise). This Rainer fragment speaks of the possibility of post-mortem salvation of sinners in hell via the intercession of the saints (to, however, a lower degree of blessedness). After that, a quotation of the Sybilline Oracles is provided that closely resembles the Rainer fragment. After that, the later Ethiopian legacy of the Apocalypse of Peter is discussed and it is shown that a different version of ‘post-mortem’ salvation is present in a later Ethiopian text, i.e. the teaching that it is God’s mercy that saves the sinners rather than the intercessions with an advice to not divulge such a ‘secret teaching’. Finally, a note on Origen of Alexandria is provided, in which it is shown both the hesitancy of Origen to speak about these topics and, probably, his views that, while salvation will be universal, the degree of blessedness will be different according to the merits in this life.  

In his analysis “The Apocalypse of Peter: The Relationship of the Versions”, the scholar Eric J. Beck reports the evolution of the text ‘Apocalypse of Peter’. The part of our interest is his analysis about how the idea of post-mortem salvation via intercession was addressed by the Ethiopic manuscript tradition. Beck first quotes the Rainer fragment[3] (in the quotes all the italic text is mine and is made to distinguish Beck’s commentary from the ancient text. For the latter I use the italic):

“I will give to my called and my elect whomever they ask of me out of punishment, and I will give them a good baptism in the salvation of the so-called Acherusian Lake in the Elysian Field, a part of righteousness with my holy ones. And I will depart, I and my elect, rejoicing with the patriarchs to my eternal kingdom. And I will accomplish with them my promises, which I promised to them, I and my father who is in heaven.” (Apocalypse of Peter, Rainer fragment)

Beck comments on this text in this way:

“Two details in this portrayal of apokatastasis deserve mention: 1) it is only through the request of the righteous that the wicked are able to obtain salvation, and 2) the wicked only receive a part of the salvation reserved for the righteous.”[4]

As evidence of the presence of the doctrine of a possible post-mortem salvation in the early versions of the ‘Apocalypse of Peter’, Beck quotes an excerpt from the Sybilline Oracles:

“To these pious ones imperishable God, the universal ruler, will also give another thing. Whenever they ask the imperishable God to save men from the raging fi re and deathless gnashing he will grant it, and he will do this. For he will pick them out again from the undying fi re and set them elsewhere and send them on account of his own people to another eternal life with the immortals in the Elysian plain where he has the long waves of the deep perennial Acherusian lake.” (Sib. Or. 2.330–338)

The corresponding part of the Ethiopian version of the ‘Apocalypse of Peter’ (chapter 14) is markedly different from the Rainer fragment and reads in the following way:

“And then I will give to my elect and to my righteous ones the baptism and salvation which they have asked of me in the fi eld of Acherusia, which is called Elysium. A portion of the righteous ones has bloomed and I will depart when I will rejoice with them. I will lead the nations into my eternal kingdom. And I will do for them what I promised them eternally, I and my heavenly father.” (Eth Apoc Pet 14.1–3a)[5]

However, interestingly, Beck then mentions that the idea recurs in another variant of the Apocalypse of Peter:

“The doctrine of apokatastasis was indeed removed from Eth Apoc Pet 14, but it was not removed from ‘Th e Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead’. In the Pseudo-Clementine additions of the Eth Apoc Pet, Peter is in great distress, having seen the horrible fate of the wicked. By way of comforting him and answering his questions, Jesus reveals to Peter that there will be mercy for the wicked, but that he must not tell them, for they would simply sin all the more as a result of obtaining this knowledge. Jesus’ explanation is long and abstruse, but it can be summarized with a few key sentences from folio 142 of d’Abbadie 51:

As for mercy, my father is merciful and I also show mercy, because that which is my father’s is mine, and everything which is mine is my father’s. And when the sinners who believed in me begged, [and] I also will beg my father with them while I seek mercy for them from my father ... And therefore, the father will give to everyone life, honour, and a kingdom which will not end, and his judgment which will not be divided, and a crown of honour which is beautiful and shining, and glory ... And now again, you will not reveal (this) to those who are not able to bear it, so that they might not sin against their neighbour.

Th is section of the Pseudo-Clementine text adheres to the doctrine of apokatastasis just as clearly as does the Rainer fragment. However, the expression of the doctrine is not consistent between the two recensions. Whereas the Rainer fragment has salvation for the wicked come through the request of the righteous, the Eth Apoc Pet, with its Pseudo-Clementine additions, teaches that salvation for the wicked is a direct result of the mercy of Jesus. Likewise, ‘Th e Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead’ makes no mention of the wicked receiving only partial salvation, but instead offers the same afterlife bliss to everyone. Finally, the text adds the important caveat that this doctrine is not to be shared with those who will simply continue sinning as a result. Th ese differences show that while both recensions of the Apoc Pet adhere to the doctrine of apokatastasis, their understandings of how the doctrine is best conveyed diverge significantly.”[6]

Note: Similarities with Origen of Alexandria

Beck briefly discusses the views of Origen of Alexandria on the topic. He first says that Origen also expressed caution regarding the divulgation of doctrines about the fate of the wicked:

“Unlike the Apoc Pet, Origen occasionally showed some hesitancy to discuss his thoughts on the afterlife. In one of his homilies on Luke, prior to discussing the topic, Origen says:

“I do not know whether we should bring out such mystical things before this kind of an audience, especially among those who do not examine the marrow of the Scriptures but are fascinated by the superficial sense alone. It is risky; but I have to touch on it cursorily and briefly.” (Homilies in Lucam 23.5)”[7]

Interestingly, Beck adds that Origen also believed that one’s eschatological ultimate fate is dependent on the status of the soul before death (even if all will be ultimately saved) and quotes a citation of De Principiis in support of this claim:

“As Origen explains in his First Principles, although all human beings will eventually be fully reconciled with God, one’s eschatological abode is contingent upon whether such reconciliation came before or aft er death:

In this heaven and earth the end and perfection of all things may find a safe and most sure abode. There, for instance, those who have for their offences endured the sharp reproof of punishments by way of purgation and have fulfilled and discharged every obligation may be found worthy of a dwelling-place in the earth; while those who have been obedient to the word of God and have already here by their submission shown themselves receptive of his wisdom may be said to gain the kingdom of that heaven or heavens. (Princ . 2.3.7)

The idea that the wicked who receive salvation aft er death remain on the new earth while the righteous are taken to heavenly paradise closely aligns with the Rainer fragment. In the older recension of the Apoc Pet, the wicked, aft er receiving baptism in the Acherusian Lake, remain in the Elysian Field, while the righteous depart with Jesus to the eternal kingdom. Th erefore, while it appears as though the Eth Apoc Pet may have acquired some more Origenian conceptions of apokatastasis than what was originally in the Apoc Pet, it also lost others.”[8]

 

 

 

 

 


[3] Beyond Canon, p.121

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid. p. 121-2

[6] Iibid. p. 122; the ‘doctrine of the reserve’ was also practised in the Chruch of the East. See: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/01/on-presence-of-universalism-in-east.html . The same hesitancy was also shared by Origen of Alexandria (see the quotation later and note 7).

[7] Ibid. p. 123 (with slight alteration of the title of Origen’s work). Also, in his Contra Celsus: “It is in the precincts of Jerusalem, then, that punishments will be inflicted upon those who undergo the process of purification, who have received into the substance of their soul the elements of wickedness, which in a certain place is figuratively termed lead, and on that account iniquity is represented in Zechariah as sitting upon a talent of lead. But the remarks which might be made on this topic are neither to be made to all, nor to be uttered on the present occasion; for it is not unattended with danger to commit to writing the explanation of such subjects, seeing the multitude need no further instruction than that which relates to the punishment of sinners; while to ascend beyond this is not expedient, for the sake of those who are with difficulty restrained, even by fear of eternal punishment, from plunging into any degree of wickedness, and into the flood of evils which result from sin.” (source: https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04166.htm )

[8] Ibid. p. 124

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ in Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia

Ancient and Medieval witnesses of the presence of ‘universalism’ [1] in  Diodore of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia Introduction In this text, witnesses of Theodore of Mopsuestia’s and Diodore of Tarsus’ eschatological ‘universalist’ views, are reported.  As shall we see, the attestations of Diodore’s endorsement of a form of apokatastasis are always accompanied by an attestation of his disciple, Theodore, endorsing the same view. All these common testimonies are from Syriac sources, both Eastern-Syriac - Isaac of Nineveh (fl. 7 th century in his Second Part, 39.7-14; for Theodore only in his Second Part, 3.3.94 ), Solomon of Basra (fl. 13 th century in his book of the Bee, 60 ), Theodore bar Konai (fl. 8 th century in his Liber Scholiorum 2.63 ) - and Western-Syriac - John of Dara (fl. 9 th century in his On the Resurrection of Human Bodies 4.21 ). There is a brief comparison of a passage in Isaac’s Third Part (discourse 6) about eschatological punishments and the cont...
Read more

On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors

  On the possible presence of universalism in some ancient Christians Latin authors Introduction In what follows, I’ll present some evidence for the presence of a doctrine or a sympathy of universalism (i.e. the belief that all human beings will be ultimately saved) in some Latin Fathers. There are some suggestive passages in the writings of Ambrose of Milan and John Cassian. Also, Rufinus of Aquileia, in his quarrel against Jerome of Stridon, while admitting that the fate of the wicked is a mystery shows a clear sympathy for the doctrine of universalism. However, it should be noted that none of the figures I quote in this post have been cited as universalists (as far as I know) before the 19 th century and, also, the interpretation of their texts never seem to have caused controversy among later writers (again, as far as I know) about the possible presence of genuine universalist beliefs or interpolations in their texts. While this fact alone doesn’t exclude an universalist...
Read more

On the presence of universalism in East Syrian tradition

On the presence of universalism [1] in East Syrian tradition East Syrian theologians were influenced by Diodore of Tarsus (fl. 4 th century), his disciple Theodore of Mopsuestia (fl. 4-5 th century) who is called the ‘Interpreter/Exegete/Expositor’ in the East Syrian church (also called ‘Church of the East’), and Evagrius Ponticus (fl. 4 th century) [2] .  The point of this text is to show that there a was significant prevalence of the idea in this tradition (this doesn’t necessarily mean that it was a majority view). For more details about Diodore and Theodore see my previous post: https://ancientafterlifebelifs.blogspot.com/2026/01/ancient-and-medieval-witnesses-of_28.html A testimony of an opponent: Babai the Great (fl. 6 th century): Let me start with the testimony of an opponent of ‘universalism’ in the East-Syrian Church. This testimony is particularly interesting because it provides evidence that ‘universalism’ was often actively contested in this Tradition. Also, it p...
Read more