The Ways of the Worldviews (Part 11): Early Christian Philosophers–Tertullian and Irenaeus of Lyons

In my last post, I began to look at a number of Christian philosophers from the first couple of centuries of the early Church who proved themselves to be some of the most influential philosophers of their time. I looked at Justin Martyr, Athenagoras of Athens, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen of Alexandria.

In this post, I want to look at two more people: Tertullian and Irenaeus of Lyons.

Tertullian (160-240 AD)
A fifth key Christian figure of that time was Tertullian. A temperamental and crotchety man, born to pagan parents and trained as a lawyer, Tertullian is often the one held up by moderns as an example of Christian intolerance and ignorance. After all, he is famous for saying, “What indeed as Athens [i.e. pagan scholarship] to do with Jerusalem [i.e. Christianity]?  What concord is there between the Academy and the Church? What between heretics and Christians? …Away with all attempts to produce a mottled Christianity of Stoic, Platonic, and dialectic composition!” If that doesn’t sound like Christianity being hostile to classical philosophy, then what does?

And if that’s not bad enough, then there’s this quote, “I believe because it is absurd.” Ever since the time of Sir Thomas Browne (1605-1682), this quote has been held up as an example how Christianity is, at its very foundations, irrational, and how, in their stupidity, Christians actually hold up such irrational faith as a virtue. The fact, though, is that Tertullian never said such a thing. What he said was part of a larger argument regarding the truthfulness of Christianity. He said:

“The Son of God was crucified: I am not ashamed – because it is shameful.
The Son of God died: it is immediately credible – because it is silly.
He was buried, and rose again: it is certain – because it is impossible.”

What Tertullian said was not “I believe because it is absurd,” but rather, “It is certain, because it is impossible.” But what does that mean? Well, Tertullian was actually using an argument that he borrowed from, of all people, Aristotle. In Rhetoric 2.23.21, Aristotle says this:

“Another line of argument refers to things which are supposed to happen and yet seem incredible. We may argue that people could not have believed them, if they had not been true or nearly true: even that they are the more likely to be true because they are incredible. For the things which men believe are either facts or probabilities: if, therefore, a thing that is believed is improbable and even incredible, it must be true, since it is certainly not believed because it is at all probable or credible.”

Simply put, the argument is that if something according to convention is considered impossible or ridiculous, but people claim that they actually experienced that supposedly impossible thing occur, one must strongly consider the fact that what they’re claiming really is true, despite what convention accepts.

Convention says, for example, that dead people do not resurrect. If one person came out of Judea, claiming to have spoken to a resurrected Jesus, it would be reasonable to assume that person was insane. But if 5, 10, even 500 people claim to have witnessed the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Christ, then it would be reasonable to pause and consider the fact that perhaps such an “impossible” thing really, in fact, happened. That was what Tertullian was saying. Agree with him or not, but you cannot misquote the man, and then use that misquote to make the false claim that Christians prize ignorance and absurdity over reason. To do such a thing would be unreasonable to say the least.

Nevertheless, one must admit that Tertullian’s contempt for pagan philosophy seems rather odd, since he actually employs various philosophical methods in his defense of Christianity. So what exactly was his problem with Athens? It wasn’t the method of Greek philosophy, but rather many of its conclusions. For example, Tertullian attacked pagan philosophy for was how some philosophers associated various things in the natural world (i.e. the sun, moon, stars, etc.) with the gods. One can almost hear Tertullian taunt them, “What are you, sophists or sophomores? The sun isn’t a god! It’s a great ball of fire! Only a moron would think it’s a god!”

Tertullian really was somewhat of a curmudgeon who absolutely despised the vanity and materialism of the pagan world. In fact, that was one of the main differences about Christianity that he highlighted in his attacks on the pagan world. He said, “…we Christians have everything in common except our wives.  It is our care of the helpless, our practice of loving-kindness that brands us in the eyes of many of our opponents. ‘Only look,’ they say, ‘look how they love one another.”

He also pointed out that the money that Christians raised was not  “spent on feasts, and drinking bouts, and eating houses, but to support and bury poor people, to supply the wants of boys and girls destitute of means and parents, and of old persons confined to the house; such too as have suffered shipwreck; and if there happen to be any in the mines, or banished to the islands, or shut up in the prisons for nothing but the fidelity to the cause of God’s Church, they become nurslings of their confession.”

Eventually, he even grew exasperated with what he perceived to be a growing worldiness in the Church; so much so that he joined the fringe-charismatic heretical group known as the Montanists. Despite that, he nevertheless greatly impacted the growth and formation of Christianity. He was, after all, the first to coin the term Trinity. He, as so many other Christians at that time, spoke out against imperial persecution of Christians. In opposition to the Roman practice of abortion, he even argued that human life begins at conception.

Just as importantly, Tertullian argued that human reason alone was not enough if one was to come to a fuller understanding of the world. God’s revelation was needed. Pagan thought by itself—that famed “wisdom” of the Greeks—amounted to nothing more that sophomoric speculation. Simply put, Christian faith did not negate or oppose reason. It bore witness to the self-revelation of God in the person of Jesus Christ—and that revelation within history fulfilled not only the Jewish Scriptures, but it also provided the answers to the questions and conundrums in pagan philosophy.

Irenaeus of Lyons (130-200 AD)
One more early Church Father who contributed greatly to the formation of Christian philosophy deserves mention: Irenaeus of Lyons. Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the apostle John—so what we read in Irenaeus probably gives us the earliest picture outside of the New Testament as to what the apostles themselves taught. Sent to Lyons by Polycarp himself, Ireneaus’ most vital contribution to the formation of Christian philosophy and doctrine would have to be his work, Against Heresies, in which he provides an in depth summary and critique of Gnosticism.

Gnosticism was a pre-Christian philosophical worldview that quickly sought to incorporate traditional Christianity into its already skewed view of reality. Much like the general mindset today, Gnosticism held fast to a stark dualism between “the spiritual world,” defined in terms of being pure and good, precisely because it was non-material, and “the material world,” defined in terms of being sinful, corrupt, and just plain icky, precisely because it was material.

Such a view stated that (1) God was so spiritual that he would have nothing to do with the material world, (2) the material creation was bad and evil, (3) human beings were spirits trapped in material bodies, and (4) Jesus was a pure spirit being who only seemed to be a human being, but in reality would never contaminate himself with matter; therefore he was not really born, he didn’t really die, and he certainly didn’t rise physically from the dead; instead, he came to reveal “secret knowledge” to the select few—the knowledge that would unlock the mortal chains of the material world.

Quite obviously, Gnosticism contradicted the fundamental claims of the early Church. It was also very attractive to a culture steeped in Platonic thought. Therefore, Irenaeus took it upon himself to methodically spell out the Gnostic philosophy and claims, and to show how it was a completely anti-Christian worldview. His main means of defense for the traditional Christian teachings was to point to both the authority of Scripture, and to the line of Church Tradition—the teachings and practices that had been handed down from the original apostles to the subsequent bishops of the Church.

Philosophical presuppositions matter—and Irenaeus not only exposed those philosophical presuppositions of the Gnostic movement, he also upheld the traditional Christian teaching, by not only making philosophical arguments, but by appealing to the authority of Scripture and Church Tradition that bore witness to the historical reality of Jesus himself.

One final thing to note about Irenaeus. Given the fact that he was so adamant about preserving the traditional teachings of the Church, it might surprise some people that he openly speculated that Jesus lived to be about 50 years old, and that the story of Adam and Eve in Genesis 2-3 was not so much a story about the first two human beings, but rather about the state of every human being.

Conclusions about Early Christian Philosophy
Although these past two posts have just briefly looked at a handful of early Christian philosophers, one thing should be evident. Contrary to the modern narrative of Christianity, Christianity was decidedly not anti-intellectual or irrational. Just as the moral and ethical convictions of everyday Christians proved to be a counter-cultural movement within the Roman Empire, the philosophical acumen of numerous Christian philosophers proved that Christianity was a formidable philosophical worldview that would eventually intellectually trump the pagan philosophy of the classical period. They taught that reason was a good thing that was indispensable to understanding both the world and God’s will. At the same time, though, they taught that human reason alone was insufficient, for human beings were fallible and limited; only revelation from God could illuminate a limited and darkened human reason, and bring it into the full light of reality.

The early Christians bore witness to the fact that the full light of reality consisted of convictions regarding the equality all human beings, the dignity and worth of women, children, and the unborn, and extending charity and mercy to anyone in need. The Christian philosophical worldview that emerged from the revelation, teaching, death and resurrection of Christ was one that taught the goodness of God, the power of God manifested in sacrifice, the dignity and worth of all humanity, and the goodness of creation. It was a worldview of the Kingdom of God, and it slowly but surely upended a violent and inhumane pagan world.

Early Christian thinkers did not praise irrationality. They did not define faith as “virtuous ignorance and stupidity.” They were men who were well versed in classical philosophy, and they employed all the rationality, reason, and philosophical learning of the classical world in their defense of the Christian faith and their formulation of a broad and dynamic Christian worldview that would impact one’s view of ethics, politics, aesthetics, and ultimately science.

Christian philosophers rejected pagan notions of blind fate, of supernatural deities within the elements of nature, of a cyclical view of history, and the purposelessness of human existence. Instead, they argued for the existence of a rational God who was personally concerned with human beings. They argued that history had a purpose and that human beings were significant. They argued that the natural world is just that—the natural world, and that since a rational God created it, that it was good and worthy to be investigated and studied. Simply put, it was Christian philosophy that revolutionized how human beings understood God, humanity, history, and the natural world itself.