Resurrection in The Shepherd of Hermas
(avg. read time: 6–11 mins.)
With today’s entry, the part of this series covering the Apostolic Fathers is complete. See the previous entries below:
Polycarp of Smyrna (Letter and Martyrdom)
This last and longest of the corpus is a text written from Rome in maybe the first half of the second century. But dating and authorship questions are difficult to answer confidently, especially as it is not clear if it was written by one person or written by multiple people and edited by one person (or even edited by multiple people). The Hermas in question may or may not be the same Hermas of Rome in Rom 16:14 (the name was common, after all). It is divided into three large sections of Visions (1–25), Mandates (26–49) and Similitudes (50–114), all linked by the primary concerns of sin, repentance, and righteousness.
For our subject, the Shepherd of Hermas does not have a lot to say directly about resurrection. Neither of the two most common verbs for resurrection in the NT—ἐγείρω and ἀνίστημι—are used for resurrection, and the latter of these two does not appear at all. But as with the Epistle to Diognetus, there is more relevant material in the implicit links made with resurrection. The author tends to rely on background knowledge for more fundamental matters like this, while his focus in his text is elsewhere.
Explicit References
The first explicit reference to resurrection comes around halfway through the book, specifically in the section known as the Similitudes/Parables. At the end of the interpretation of a parable, Hermas has this exchange with his angelic guide:
“I was glad,” I said, “Sir, for hearing this explanation.”
“Listen now,” he said, “keep this flesh of yours pure and undefiled, in order that the spirit/Spirit that/who dwells in it shall testify for it, and your flesh may be justified/made right. 2 See that it never comes up in your heart that this flesh of yours is to be perishable, and that you should misuse it in some defilement. For if you defile your flesh, you will defile the holy spirit/Holy Spirit also, but if you do not defile the flesh, you will live [ζήσῃ].”
3 “But if,” I said, “Sir, there has been any ignorance aforetime, before these words could be heard, how will the one be saved who defiled his own flesh?”
“Concerning the earlier,” he said, “the deeds of ignorance, it is God’s power alone to give healing, for all authority is his. 4 But now keep [guard over] yourself, and the Lord Almighty, being generous in compassion, for the earlier deeds of ignorance will give healing, if henceforth you do not defile your flesh nor the spirit/Spirit; for both have a common share [or, more loosely, participate in a fellowship] and they are not able to be defiled without one another. Therefore, keep both pure, and you will live to God [ζήσῃ]. (Sim. 5.7.1–4 [60.1–4])
The verb I have highlighted here is not one of the two most common verbs for referring to resurrection, but we have seen it plenty of times in the NT and in this series. This particular case is not as obvious in its referent to resurrection as others, since there is no explicit reference to death or any of the other markers that are most helpful for determining a resurrection sense. Whether this is an aorist subjunctive or a future middle, either form may be suggestive as they tend to have future reference in this kind of construction (also see here), but it is admittedly not especially strong evidence. Note that the same form is used for a promise of resurrection in Mark 5:23 and for living properly in Luke 10:28. Yet the future sense of either form combined with other hints from the context, such as rebuking the attitude to the flesh about it being perishable (or corruptible) and the justification of the flesh—which implies a context of judgment—imply a permanent consequence and eschatological setting for this future life, rather than simply being about the future span in this life.
Moreover, the specific promise is that those who live in this way will live “to God.” This is one of many times we will encounter the verb plus this dative construction in the Shepherd of Hermas, as we will return to below. The future sense differs from other uses of the phrase in 4 Macc 7:19 and 16:25, where the present is used and that primarily in reference to the patriarchs. It is perhaps more akin to the metaphorical use of resurrection imagery in Rom 6:11 (as well as 6:13), but the future sense likely removes that metaphorical edge. Even more appropriate, not least because of the reference to the gospel story in Sim. 5.6 [59] prior to this, is Gal 2:19, which refers to dying to the law in order to live to God (see here and here). If this is the case here, it informs other uses of the phrase in many other places in this text, although the phrase does not always mean the same thing.
What is especially noteworthy about this use of “living” terminology that is also suggestive of a resurrection sense is the importance placed on emphasizing the union of flesh and spirit (or possibly flesh and the Holy Spirit, depending on larger considerations of the text we will not be interacting with here). They have a common share in the fate of one another. One does not defile one without the other, and one does not live without both of them. By implication, one does not treat the flesh as perishable because it has a place in the age to come and the life to come in that age. This instruction against defiling the flesh because of that time to come is reminiscent of what we have seen in 2 Clement (linked above), where it was linked with resurrection imagery and expectation present throughout that homily.
As I said previously, the reference to the justification of the flesh rather strongly indicates an eschatological role for the flesh, which only makes sense in the context of resurrection. We have seen this elsewhere in this series with the use of the word translated “flesh” (σάρξ). The reference to justification also implies a context of final judgment, which we have seen many times before is a typical collocation for the expectation of resurrection. Alternatively, if the sense of the verb is about “making [it] right,” it may imply the setting of final judgment or to the transformation that comes with the eschatological resurrection of the righteous, although one might think that this sense would be better conveyed through reference to the terminology of transformation or to the notion of being made complete.
The second explicit reference that may be pertinent appears much later in the book. As part of a long parable involving a building and various kinds of stones, Hermas eventually asks about the stones that came out of the deep waters and placed in the building. The angel informs them that it was necessary for them to come up through the water, “in order that they might be made alive [ζωοποιηθῶσιν]” (Sim. 9.16.2 [93.2]). This is another term used on occasion for resurrection in the NT. It can have a simpler sense of “invigorate,” but it has the stronger sense associated with resurrection when it appears in contexts of reference to death. That is the case here, as we are told, “for they could not otherwise enter into the kingdom of God, except by taking off from themselves the deadness of their former life” (Sim. 9.16.2 [93.2]). The imagery of death continues with reference to sleep in the next verse (9.16.3 [93.3]) along with the references to “entering” the kingdom. As the angel says further, “” for before … the person is to bear the name of the Son of God, he is dead, but whenever he receives the seal, he takes off from himself the deadness and takes up life” (9.16.3 [93.3]). The subsequent exposition applies the imagery of baptism to the seal, particularly in terms of going down into the water dead and coming up living (ζῶντες; 9.16.4 [93.4]). By this means they enter the kingdom of God.
The imagery is further elaborated by the notion that the apostles and other early teachers proclaimed the gospel and its crystallizing representation in baptism to those who died before them (Sim. 9.16.5 [93.5]). In contrast to these others, they went down alive and came up alive (both ζῶντες), whereas the others went down dead and came up alive (ζῶντες; 9.16.6 [93.6]). It was by this they were said to be “made alive” (ἐζωοποιήθησαν; 9.16.7 [93.7]).
While resurrection imagery is used here, the question is whether this should be better understood as “revival” usage that has a broader sense than bodily resurrection as such, or if this is using resurrection language in a sort of anticipatory fashion. A spiritual revival would certainly make sense in this context, given the reference to the faithful who died before the major gospel events. It would also make sense of the aorist as intuitively having a past referent. But the past may simply be something of a narrative past or a past within the scope of the text, which befits a visionary/apocalyptic context in which what is past is not necessarily past in the historical time of the author. At the same time, the aorists could be what has been known as futuristic/proleptic aorists, which convey confidence about the accomplishment of future events. While I am inclined to think it is the former sense of spiritual revival here (which is inherently more ambiguous than the more common terms for resurrection, as I have observed here), I do not know that this other sense can be definitively ruled out.
Implicit Links
While resurrection imagery and resurrection language do not appear that often in the Shepherd of Hermas, there are many implicit links to the subject throughout the text. The most pervasive of these is the motif of the promise to “live to God” (besides the first explicit reference in ch. 60 noted above, see Mand. 1.2 [26.2]; 2.6 [27.6]; 3.5 [28.5]; 4.2.4 [30.4]; 4.4.3 [32.3]; 6.2.10 [36.10]; 7.4–5 [37.4–5]; 8.4, 6 [38.4, 6], 11–12 [38.11–12]; 9.12 [39.12]; 10.3.4 [42.4]; 12.2.2 [45.2]; 12.3.1 [46.1]; 12.6.2–3, 5 [49.2–3, 5]; Sim. 5.1.5 [54.5]; 6.1.4 [61.4]; 8.11.1, 3–4 [77.1, 3–4]; 9.22.4 [99.4]; 9.29.3 [106.3]; 9.30.5 [107.5]; 9.33.1 [110.1]). Again, with as many contexts in which it is used, it does not have the exact same sense in every case. But we have noted above how it can be related to resurrection in some contexts and with good reason. Resurrection to everlasting life, or otherwise being transformed for receiving everlasting life, is rightly considered the culmination of this motif, the endpoint at which all other references come to fruition with the reception of the divine life. And indeed there are other references to the promise of everlasting life (Vis. 2.3.2 [7.2]; 3.8.4 [16.4]; 4.3.5 [24.5]), which we have seen frequently linked with the promise of resurrection in the NT and the Apostolic Fathers.
Likewise, resurrection is tied to another of the central concerns of this book: repentance. One of the terms sometimes used for resurrection—ζῳοποιέω—appears once in reference to repentance (Mand. 4.3.7 [31.7]). A similar idea without the precise terminology appears in Sim. 8.6.6 [72.6]. Both are metaphorical uses of resurrection imagery, but they work in linking repentance to receiving the promise of everlasting life on the other side of death since, spiritually speaking, one is made alive through repentance after one has sinned.
There may be other implied links to resurrection based on commonalities with NT motifs, which have also appeared in other works of the Apostolic Fathers. One of these is the motif of describing death in terms of sleep (Vis. 3.5.1 [13.1]; 3.11.3 [19.3]; Mand. 4.4.1 [32.1]; Sim. 9.15.6 [92.6]; 9.16.3, 5–7 [93.3, 5–7]), although the appropriate complement of resurrection terminology with the sense of “waking up” is lacking. We have also already noted the language of “entering” the kingdom, particularly since the reality of the kingdom/new creation is expected to be an embodied reality (Sim. 9.12.3–5, 8 [89.3–5, 8]; 9.16.2–4 [93.2–4]; 9.20.2–3 [97.2–3]; 9.31.2 [108.2]). And as with the instruction on not defiling the flesh, the promise of reward for undefiled flesh indicates an eschatological setting in which resurrection to everlasting life would be such a reward (Sim. 5.6.7 [59.7]). In the vicinity of the same, there is an implied reference to Jesus’s resurrection when it says after he cleansed the sins of the people, “he showed them the paths of life” (Sim. 5.6.3 [59.3]). Other such continuities include the expectation of vindication for the suffering faithful (Vis. 3.1.9–2.2 [9.9–10.2]; 4.3.4 [24.4]; Sim. 9.28.1–8 [105.1–8]), the notion of dwelling in the age to come with God (Sim. 4.2, 8 [53.2, 8]; 9.24.4 [101.4]; 9.29.2 [106.2]), the hope of being joint heirs with the Son (Sim. 5.2.11 [55.11]; cf. esp. Rom 8:17), the warning against everlasting death (Sim. 6.2.2–4 [62.2–4]; 9.18.2 [95.2]), and the expectation of his parousia (Sim. 5.5.3 [58.3]).