when referring to the apostolic fathers there are typically three primary figures that Christians will reference Clement of Rome Ignatius of Antioch and this man that we will be examining here today polycarp of Smyrna and like Clement and like Ignatius polycarp teaches a number of distinctively Protestant and reformed doctrines demonstrating that these concepts are not Novelties of the Protestant Reformation but are rather retrievals of the apostolic Doctrine taught in the divinely inspired scriptures and later on afterwards in the writings of the early church fathers like Clement of Rome we only have one surviving document that was written by polycarp himself that has survived to the present day and that would be his letter to the church in Philippi but despite the fact that we only have one letter of polycarp's which is significantly shorter than Clement's letter polycarp nonetheless details a number and I mean a vast number of distinctively protest doctrines that again allow us to demonstrate that the Protestant Reformation was not a historical novelty but a retrieval of the apostolic teachings of the Christian church in addition to polycarp's genuine epistle there is also a second document from this Apostolic father's time period entitled The martyrdom of polycarp that we will also be examining here today the martyrdom of polycarp as the name suggests gives an account of polycarp's martyrdom to the hands of the Roman authorities while he he was in the Church of Smyrna and obviously for this reason he did not write this letter but it nonetheless demonstrates the teachings of polycarp that survive to his followers in the Church of smna who likely wrote this letter with that historical and background context out of the way let us now examine these two very important documents from church history starting on the topic of unconditional election we will begin our examination in the very first verse of polycarp's letter to the Philippians chapter 1 verse one as we can see in the opening words of polycarp's letter it is clear that the doctrine of election is an important element of his soteriology as he regards Saints as those truly chosen by God and our Lord now this passage in particular does not clarify whether polycarp's view of election is either conditional or unconditional I'm merely highlighting this quote to emphasize the importance of election in polycarp's theology since after all he references it in the very first words of his letter but as we will see in subsequent quotations it is clear that polycarp like Ignatius and like Clement his contemporaries polycarp holds to an unconditional view of election in the same passage just two verses later polycarp practically quotes the Apostle Paul's famous words from Ephesians CH 2: 8 and 9 emphatically stating that the Philippian Christians were were saved by grace and not by works furthermore he clarifies that this Saving Grace is a result of the will of God through Jesus Christ we will certainly be returning to this passage on the topic of salvation by faith alone or Sol of feiday but for now we will continue to address the point of unconditional election and based on his words from verse one we know that polycarp believes that the Saints are specifically chosen by God and based on his words here from verse three we know that the Saints are not chosen because of their own works but by Grace the Protestant understanding of a passage such as this one or Ephesians chapter 2 from the Bible would suggest that if Grace is not received by works then it must be received by faith which is certainly the correct interpretation however someone who rejects unconditional election can fairly point out that in this particular passage polycarp doesn't clarify whether or not faith can be created or developed on the part of the human it could very well be the case that a person freely decides whether or not they'd like to have faith this passage from polycarp doesn't appear to rule out that possible interpretation as we will see in the following quotations however polycarp does ultimately reject this conditional view of election and maintains that it is God who provides not only the Grace that saves the individual but he also provides the faith that lays hold to the grace that saves their souls an example of this can be seen in chapter 3 where polycarp explicitly states that faith is given to the Philippians this suggests that faith is not something they could have developed on their own by their own abilities for someone to Believe In Christ God must first grant that person Faith because Fallen humans are incapable of developing faith on their own as Hebrews 11:6 teaches it is impossible to please God without first possessing Faith but if a person who does not believe in Christ can't please God unless they have faith and if having faith in Christ is an action that is pleasing to God then it logically follows that it is impossible for a person who does not believe in Christ to decide to have faith in him if they were able to have faith in Christ by their own ability then it would not be impossible for them to please God since they were able to please God by choosing to believe in Christ this ultimately contradicts the entire point of this passage from Hebrews and further validates that polycarp's view of election is unconditional Faith must be given by God because Fallen humans cannot generate Faith by their own ability and because not everyone possesses Faith this ultimately means that God has not granted Faith to every single person tying this passage back to polycarp's words in chapter 1 ver3 if God's Grace is not dependent upon works and it is not dependent upon a person's ability to generate Faith then there remains nothing left within the person that would warrant God's favor towards them apart from his own good will and pleasure as polycarp articulates this concept is further elaborated in the very next chapter in chapter 4 when polycarp exhorts the Philippians to quote teach your wives to walk in the faith given to them and as we have seen in previous videos of mine on Ignatius of Antioch God does not merely Grant Faith to his Saints but he also grants them repentance alongside faith for it is impossible to have one without the other and like his contemporary Ignatius polycarp affirms that repentance is a gift that is granted unto a person by God because Fallen humans are incapable of generating repentance by their own ability and as I have pointed out in my videos on Ignatius the language of God granting repentance is in perfect accordance with the Divine words of scripture particularly seen in passages such as 2 Timothy Chapter 2 and acts 11 and a similar concept is articulated by polycarp in chapter 12 where God not only gives his Saints faith and repentance but he also gives them a share and a place with his other Saints as a result of re generating their hearts through faith and repentance because polycarp held to such a strong doctrine of unconditional election it should not be a surprise to see the same Doctrine expressed by those taught by polycarp and this is made evident for us in the accounts of polycarp's martyrdom written by those as I said following after polycarp in the Church of Smyrna in chapter 16 of this document we see that polycarp's followers held to an explicit and sharp distinction between those who are elected and those who do not believe I.E the non-elect now again similar to the point I made earlier regarding those who reject the doctrine of unconditional election one could rightly point out that this passage does not clarify the basis upon which a person is elected potentially opening the door for one to suggest that after all God might base his decision of election upon his forn knowledge of those who would choose to believe in him however this notion is again quickly dispelled by a later passage in this same document specifically in chapter 20 when the author explains that God's chosen ones are specifically appointed by him a person cannot be appointed to a position that they already possess therefore if God appoints his chosen ones to eternal life which includes all the benefits of eternal life such as faith and repentance then this must mean that his chosen ones did not previously possess Faith before the appointing this demonstrates that God's Sovereign choice is not dependent upon his for knowledge of who will believe in him in the future because the very reason why they believe is because they have been appointed beforehand by God to do just that further clarification is presented by the author in the very next sentence here when he suggests that God is the one who is able to bring us all in his grace and gift and of course this language of God appointing his elect unto eternal life is consistent with the biblical language on the topic as we see in Acts 13:48 for example where Luke describes that as many as were appointed to eternal life believed the gospel I'm especially excited to see this language regarding unconditional election in Apostolic fathers like polycarp and Clement and Ignatius because it demonstrates and debunks the claim that this concept of conditional election did not exist in the Christian church prior to Augustine in the fourth and fifth centuries you'll hear this from specifically Armenians or provisionist I suppose is a popular movement here in this modern day and age where the claims have been made like I said that the church fathers prior to Augustine had no concept whatsoever of unconditional election and that the idea itself is entirely unbiblical however as we have seen here from polycarp and the other Apostolic fathers that I've have shown and obviously of course the scriptural passages as well we can see that that claim is utterly false and incorrect the apostolic fathers the Bible itself and many Church fathers prior to Augustine did vehemently hold to the doctrine of unconditional election because the doctrine of unconditional election is Apostolic I mention all of that to say don't let anybody try to come to you in your personal life and claim that none of the church fathers taught the precepts of Calvinism or unconditional election prior to the time of Augustine because you can simply refer to passages such as this one from polycarp's letter to the Philippians as just one example demonstrating that claim to be in all honesty outlandish and once again false and incorrect so don't let anybody make that claim to you is essentially what I'm saying a complimentary Doctrine to unconditional election is the doctrine of the perseverance of the Saints after all if God out of his own will decides to elect a person unto salvation based on no condition that they had met ahead of time then it is also reasonable to assume that God is likewise going to Grant the grace necessary to preserve that elect person in their faith for all eternity and we see elements of this not only in Clement of Rome not only in Ignatius of Antioch but we also see this pretty evident here in polycarp's letter to the Philippians we'll go back to Philippians chapter 1 to get our first quotation on the map matter where polycarp describes the Philippians Faith as a secure root that continues and bears fruit to our Lord Jesus Christ while stronger language admittedly has been used to articulate the doctrine of the perseverance of the Saints labeling one's Faith as secure implies a position that is not easily shaken which obviously is the foundation of the perseverance of the Saints polycarp uses even stronger language later in his letter in chapter 8 where he describes Des cribes the righteousness we possess as a down payment now the Greek word for down payment as described In this passage is arone which is the exact same word that the Apostle Paul uses in Ephesians chap 1 ver14 where he describes the Holy Spirit as an arone the guarantee or down payment of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it as we've already seen from chapter 1 in his letter to the Philippians polycarb has already demonstrated a familiarity with Paul's letter to the Ephesians in his reference to Ephesians 2: 8 and9 so it's not unreasonable to believe that polycarp is again referring to Ephesians to describe the righteousness we possess as a down payment by describing the Holy Spirit as the down payment who guarantees our inheritance the Apostle Paul teaches that genuine Christians are preserved in the Faith by God throughout their lives until their possession of the Heavenly Realms upon their Earthly death death this same concept is communicated by polycarp in his epistle when he exhorts his audience to persevere unceasingly in their hope because their hope is the direct result of the down payment of the righteousness they possess that righteousness namely being Jesus Christ whose righteousness is communicated to them by the work of the Holy Spirit polycarp's followers in their accounts of his martyrdom likewise affirm this concept of a persevering Faith a clear expression of this is found in chapter 17 where the author boldly declares that they will never be able to abandon the Christ if God is the one who grants a person faith and repentance again it is not unreasonable whatsoever to assume he will likewise grant them perseverance to remain in this Faith throughout all eternity to conclude this point we may return once again to chapter 20 of polycarp's martyrdom where the author to this point in the passage describes God as him who is able to bring bring us all in his grace and gift to his Heavenly Kingdom by his one and only child Jesus Christ this teaching mimics biblical language such as found in 1 Corinthians chapter 1 where the Apostle Paul describes God as one who will sustain you until the end and in Jude who describes God as him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy we now move on to the material cause of the Protestant Reformation the doctrine of Sola salvation by faith alone and as much as Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Christians would like to suggest that this Doctrine has no historical basis in the early church we can see from writings such as polycarp's letter to the Philippians and others that this claim like the claim that unconditional election wasn't taught in the early church is indeed a little outlandish because the concepts of Sola if not outright taught definitely do exist in form in the early church fathers and we are going to demonstrate that here in polycarp's letter to the Philippians we'll return once again to chapter 1 verse three a verse that we've already examined where we find polycarp as I previously mentioned undoubtedly quoting Ephesians chap 2: 8 and9 in an effort to articulate his view of soteriology that is the doctrine of salvation God's elect are not saved by their own works but rather by the grace of God presented through his own will in Jesus Christ this articulation implies Sola because if works are not the instrument by which a person accesses the grace of God then that leaves Faith as the sole instrumental cause by which a person receives God's grace this concept is more precisely laid out in the language of the Apostle Paul in Ephesians chapter 2 and this is of course because polycarp is quoting that likely this is consistent with all the historical Protestant understandings of how one is Justified before God now objections to this understanding of polycarp soteriology can and have been made by those who reject solid one such objection is found in the very next chapter in Chapter 2: 2 where polycarp states that God will raise us if we do his will and follow in his Commandments and love the things he loved this language it is argued certainly seems to suggest that our Salvation is truly dependent upon our own work works and obedience to God's Commandments but remember in the preceding chapter polycarp already explained that salvation is not rendered to a person on the basis of works so any interpretation that suggests works are the basis for one's salvation is an incorrect interpretation and as I've pointed out in my first video on Ignatius exhorting Christians to obey God's commands and to do good works is not a defeater of solop because if a Christian has genuine faith then they will necessarily perform good works but that does not mean the works themselves procure one's justification before God thus Protestants have no problem excepting that polycarp teaches Christians will be raised up only if they follow God's Will and Commandments since a regenerate Christian with a genuine faith will naturally do just that at best those who reject solop could suggest that polycarp is merely referring to initial salvation when stating that we are saved by by grace and not by works but that our final salvation is dependent upon our obedience to God's Commandments however this is a distinction that must be derived from the text which I of course do not believe can be done those who reject solop must demonstrate that when polycarp States we have not been saved by works he is only referring to the act of initial salvation alone and not final salvation again I don't believe this can be substantiated not only in polycarp's letter but the scriptures themselves as well as polycarp appears to talk about salvation in a general sense the fact that the entirety of our Salvation is dependent solely upon Grace which therefore means the entirety of our Salvation is not dependent upon Works a second objection is also often raised in polycarp's letter to the Philippians chapter 5:2 which says the following if we please him in this present age we will receive also that which is to come just as he promised us to raise us from the dead and that if we conduct our lives in a manner worthy of him we will also reign with him if indeed we have faith so once again you get the language toward the back half of this verse that we will be raised up and reign with Christ only if we conduct our lives in a manner worthy of him suggesting that works play a part of our justification before God again I would appeal to the language and the description of the Protestant understanding of Salvation that I articulated in the previous objection that simply exhorting Christians to do good works is not a defeater of Soul Aid because a person who has a genuine faith in Christ will do good works they will conduct their lives in a manner worthy of Christ but that does not mean the works themselves play a justifying role in the way that Faith does specifically holding on to the righteousness of Christ which specifically justifies us but as a second point I would just points to the last five words of this verse to conclude my contention that Sol Aid is the proper understanding of polycarp's message here and that is we will be raised up and conduct our lives in a manner worthy of him if indeed we have faith yes we will reign with Christ we will conduct our lives in a manner worthy of Christ we will live the Christian Life and Obey God's Will and Commandments only if we have faith and if we have faith we can be assured that we will necessarily do those things because God is the one who works in us to Will and to act in order to fulfill his good pleasure but once again none of the language that polycarp articulates here suggests that the works play a justifying role in Salvation in the same way that Faith does as many Protestants before me have articulated faith alone saves but saving faith is never alone from the material cause of the Reformation we will now move to the formal cause of the Reformation the doctrine of Sola scriptura that the Bible alone is the infallible authority of the Christian church and that all other authorities subject themselves to scripture alone and we see elements of this in polycarp's letter to the Philippians we'll go now to chapter 3 to examine the same in chapter 3 polycarp admits that neither him nor another like him is able to follow after the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Apostle Paul and in this bolded section here he says that Paul who was absent from the church of Philippi wrote letters to the Church of Philippi as we know obviously in the Bible we see Paul's letter to the Philippians but it's with this last part of the phrase that I want to take a look at that highlights the doctrine of solos scriptura polycarp says the following if you examine them that is the letters that Paul wrote you will be able to build eles up in the faith given to you now this seems a little subtle it doesn't seem that abrasively teaching the doctrine of solos scriptura but consider the implications that polycarp is suggesting here He suggests that simply by examining the writings of Paul the Philippian church will be able to build themselves up in the faith that God granted them simply by again reading and Examining the Scriptures the letters of Paul they will be able to build themselves up in faith this implies that the scriptures contain all that is necessary for building themselves up in the faith and that while other authorities are necessary and helpful they are not in the same manner able in an infallible sense to build up the church simply by submitting to their own authorities because there is no Authority that shares the infallible Authority that is possessed by the word of God polycarp does not mention any other external authority to Aid the Philippians in building themselves up in the faith because it is understood that the word of God again contains all that is necessary to do just that now obviously the Holy Spirit guides Us in this process but that is God working with his own word to teach Christians exactly what they must need to know to build up their faith again no external Authority outside of God himself and his word is implied here by polycarp a similar idea can also be seen just four chapters later in chapter 7:2 where polycarp exorts the Philippians to leave behind the idle speculation of the crowd and their false teachings by turning back to the word which was delivered to us from the beginning the implication is that the word of God contains again not only what is necessary to build up the Philippians in the faith but it also contains everything necessary to to leave behind the false teachings and the idle speculation of the Pagan crowds the scriptures as Paul states are sufficient to teach rebuke correct and train in righteousness so that the servant of God is Thoroughly equipped for every good work the scriptures are clear the scriptures are uniquely authoritative and the scriptures are able to build up a Christian in the faith and defend the Faith from out iders of the church which is exactly what polycarp addresses here in these two simple and short quotes in his letter to the Philippians in my previous videos on Ignatius of Antioch I made the claim that Ignatius was the only one of the apostolic fathers who held to a distinct three office structure of church government and I listed polycarp as an example of one of ignatius' contemporaries who held to the two office Presbyterian view of church government that we see written in the new test and obviously because I made that claim I believe that that claim can be substantiated by polycarp's letter to the Philippians demonstrating that polycarp held to a presbyterian view of church government we can see this specifically in his letter to the Philippians chapter 5 verse 2 through chapter 6 verse one I'm not going to put chapter 5:3 on the screen and honestly it's not all that relevant because it's not elaborating on a specific office of church government but you can read it if you like I promise I'm not cherry-picking quotes here I'm just giving the context of what polycarp is writing about when he writes these words but nonetheless we'll go to chapter 5:2 where polycarp lists the first office of church government deacons who must be blameless in the presence of his righteousness as Servants of God and of Christ and not of people and he goes on from there so he lists deacons as one office and then just two verses later in the same context chapter 6 verse1 he lists presor as a second office who must be compassionate merciful to all and the rest of the qualifications there these are the only two offices of church government that polycarp mentions in his letter he mentions presb he mentions deacons but he does not mention Bishops now this doesn't mean that Bishops didn't exist during the time of the apostolic fathers I as a presbyterian for example would hold the view that bishop and preser are interchangeable words for the same office of Church government and I think this is easily seen in the writing of Clement of Rome's letter to the Corinthians where again he conflates the words bishop and preser to refer to the same office of church government and he outlines two specific offices of church government specifically citing it as a fulfillment of Prophecy and even in contemporaries such as Ignatius of Antioch who does have a clear distinction between bishop and preser I have argued in previous videos that this can be harmonized with presbyterianism by suggesting that a bishop is still in the ontologically same office as a preser but is singled out for specific functional reasons relating to the unity of the church and is given a new title as a result of that I believe polycarp fits very well very comfortably in the Presbyterian model of church government since like Clement of Rome he only mentions two offices of church government presb and deacons now there are fair objections made by Epis op alans suggesting that polycarp actually did hold to an Episcopal structure of church government despite the fact he only lists two offices of church government in his letter texts that are used to support this objection include the salutation of polycarp's letter where he introduces himself as polycarp and the preser with him which could imply that polycarp is not a preser in the same way that the presor with him are but that rather he is a bishop in an ontologically distinct role a similar passage supporting this objection is found in chapter 16 of the martyrdom of polycarp which lists polycarp as a bishop of the Catholic church in Smyrna again suggesting that by being a bishop he ranks above the presb in terms of church governmental structure my response to this is twofold the first response is in better alignment with Clement of Rome and the the second response is in better alignment with Ignatius of Antioch the First Response regarding Clement of Rome is that just as Clement lists two offices of church government in his letter polycarp also only lists two offices of church government in his letter indicating that both figures only believed in two offices of church government the second and more in-depth response has more in common with the way I have harmonized Ignatius of Antioch with presbyterianism Ignatius like I said has a clear distinction between Bishop and preser but that does not necessarily mean that Ignatius held to a bishop being an ontologically distinct office as that of a preser and in the same way these texts from polycarp's letter and polycarp's martyrdom just because they may suggest or outright say that polycarp is a bishop and distinct from the presor in his church in some manner that does not necessarily mean it is an ontological distinction in the way that Roman Catholics or Episcopal anglicans would suggest and so while I do believe there is a valid and reasonable objection that can be made to the Presbyterian understanding of polycarp I do not personally believe it is as strong as the argument for ignacious holding to an Episcopal structure for example and I don't really think anybody would disagree with that but in the same manner I believe that polycarp can much more easily be reconciled with presbyterianism than someone like Ignatius even though though I do not deny Ignatius can be reconciled with presbyterianism with that I believe I've made my case clear I believe I've made the objection clear and so we will move on to the topic that honestly I have been the most excited about when preparing for this video and that is discussing the doctrine of limited atonement unlike a vast majority if not all of these doctrines limited atonement really is a doctrine that is uniquely and specific to the reformed tradition for example the doctrines of Sola and solar scriptura are not only held by Presbyterians but they're also held by all classical Protestants Lutheran anglicans and whatnot um even the doctrine of unconditional election is not only held to by reformed Presbyterians but it is also held by even non-protestant such as Tom mistic Roman Catholics for example but the doctrine of limited atonement and I'm talking in general terms here really is specific to the reformed tradition there may be few exceptions here and there but again in general limited atonement is a reformed Doctrine and limited atonement because of its widespread criticism is often seen out of all of the reformed doctrines as the one that is most definitely a novelty of the Protestant Reformation and that it has no historical basis whatsoever in the early church well I'm here to tell you that that idea just as it is in the case of unconditional elction ction or Sol Aid or other reformed doctrines the idea that limited atonement is a novelty of the Protestant Reformation is historically inaccurate and we can see perhaps the clearest example of this in all of the church fathers from a document from the first and 2 centuries in the martyrdom of polycarp let me introduce to you if you've never read this document before to the 17th chapter of the martyrdom of polycarp where we get as I've already said probably the most explicit affirmation of limited atonement that we see in any of the church fathers now I am not claiming to have read every single one of the church fathers and all of their extent works but based on some of the studies that I have done in preparing for this video I am willing to make that seemingly bold claim because it is an accurate claim we read here in chapter 17 Again the author is giving an account of polycarp's martyrdom and what happens to his body after his martyrdom he's describing how the Christians desperately want to retain polycarp's body but the Jews were hesitant to give it over and he says in passing that we will never be able to abandon the Christ who suffered for the Salvation of the whole world of those who are saved again pay very careful attention to the specific word choice that the author uses here to describe the suffering of the Lord Jesus Christ he says that the Christ who suffered for the Salvation of the whole world of those who are saved now if you were to stop the sentence after the words the whole world you would get the pretty typical General atonement understanding of the atonement of Jesus Christ that Jesus Christ suffered for the Salvation of the whole world and that implies that he died for the sins of every single person throughout the entire world but that's not how the sentence ends does it we read on that Christ suffered for the whole world of those who are saved and this is a beautiful Declaration of the doctrine of limited atonement it is true that Jesus Christ did die for the sins of the whole world but what does that specifically mean people who reject limited atonement often suggest that Jesus Christ by dying ding for the whole world died for every individual person of the whole world whereas reformed Christians embracing limited atonement understand that when Jesus died for the whole world he did indeed die for every tribe every tongue Every Nation people from all over the world but that does not mean he died for every individual person of the world rather he died for every individual ual elect person who is found in every tribe tongue and Nation throughout the world and this is exactly what this passage here from the martyrdom of polycarp is articulating Jesus Christ suffered for the Salvation of the whole world but only of those who are saved and what is fascinating to point out is that traditionally speaking polycarp has been regarded as a direct disciple of the Apostle John and there is a verse from John's first letter 1 John 2:2 that is the verse which is most cited to quote unquote contradict the claim of limited atonement the verse suggests that the Lord Jesus Christ is the propitiation not only for our sins but the sins of the whole world suggesting that Jesus Christ again died for the sins of every single individual person however if it is true that polycarp himself was a direct disciple of the Apostles John and the writers of the modom of polycarp were direct Disciples of polycarp himself then this statement here from martyrdom of polycarp chap 17:2 could actually provide us great clarity and insight into what the Apostle John specifically meant when he wrote the words of 1 John 2:2 understanding the historical relationship between the Apostle John polycarp and polycarp's disciples can show us that what the Disciples of polycarp understood by the doctrine of limited atonement is the doctrine that they received from polycarp and the Apostle John himself so not only does 1 John 2:2 not refute limited atonement but in actuality it upholds and proves that limited atonement is exactly what he had in mind when he wrote this passage so so much for the clearest Bible verse that refutes the doctrine of limited atonement in reality just like the rest of the Scriptures it is a doctrine that beautifully upholds the perfect application of the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ to every single person that he intended to save by that atonement of course if the Disciples of polycarp receive this teaching from polycarp himself then it is reasonable to assume that we can see this same language in polycarp's genuine epistle as well and we do see similar language like that specifically in Philippians 1: 2 where he says that our Lord Jesus Christ endured because of our sins to reach even death again the very specific word our sins not necessarily everyone's sins similar again to how the Bible describes the fact that Jesus in Matthew chapter 1 is going to be called Jesus because he will save his people people from their sins polycarb articulates this in an even clearer fashion later on in his letter in chapter 8 verse1 where he describes Christ Jesus as the one who bore again our sins in his own body on the tree who committed no sin and no deceit was found in his mouth but because of us in order that again we might live in him endured all things polycarp specifically uses the words our he uses the word we to describ that the atonement was specific for us as Christians and not necessarily every individual person throughout the world and just while we're on the topic of the atonement I believe this is a great articulation of the penal substitutionary view of atonement as well suggesting that Christ Jesus bore our sins in his own body on the tree and in exchange we receive the righteousness of Christ as is articulated in texts such as Colossians chapter 2 and 2 Corinthians 5: 21 amongst others we're getting close to the end of the video and there is a couple more topics that I very briefly want to mention I don't want to go too in depth on them the first one is a quote that I found that may be regarding the doctrine of amillennialism which suggests as a reformed doctrine that the millennial reign of the Lord Jesus Christ as articulated in Revelation chap 20 is a Reign that is happening right now in a spiritual sense sense as the Lord Jesus reigns from Heaven over the Earth and I believe that some of that language can be seen in the martyrdom of polycarp CH 21 verse1 when the author mentions that Jesus Christ was reigning as king forever again this is a pretty generic broad statement there would be much more that needed to be hashed out regarding what kind of Reign is Jesus Christ performing at this moment but I thought it was at least worth mentioning and putting out there just for those that may be interested in whether or not there was any language whatsoever regarding amillennialism that could be found in the apostolic fathers admittedly the topic of the millennial kingdom was not a doctrine that the early church was at all concerned about defending in the way that they were the Divinity of Christ and maintaining the unity of the church and fighting off the gnostics and whatnot that doesn't mean the doctrine isn't important but it just simply means that that was not the doctrine that they were specifically focused on at that time the last point that I'll touch on is regarding the Roman Catholic practices of venerating saints holding masses for the dead and collecting relics of some saints because there are a few passages from the martyrdom of polycarp specifically chapters 17 and 18 in which the author again in his account that I briefly touched on earlier is recalling the instance between the Christians and the Jews where the Christians were anxious to retrieve the bones of polycarp and the Jews were hesitant to give them over in chapter 17 verse one the author suggests that the proconsul took care that not even polycarp's body should be taken away by the Christians although many desired to do this in the very next verse in verse two the Jews made the appeal to the magistrate not to hand over the body of polycarp and then eventually in the very next chapter in chapter 18 the author says that we finally took away his bones more precious than costly stones and honored more than gold depositing them in a Fitting Place apparently these passages suggest from the Roman Catholic view that the reason the Christians wanted to retain polycarp's bones was to use them as holy relics for the purposes of veneration or holding a Mass for his soul all I will say is that all of those ideas are true Novelties that are definitely read into the text there is no suggestion whatsoever of any of those ideas that are outlined by the author of The martydom of polycarp it could simp simply just be that the Christians wanted to retain polyc carbs bones out of respect and a proper burial a proper depositing of them but nowhere does it suggest any of these medieval Roman Catholic Concepts that are held today by the Roman Catholic church and with that that concludes my examination of protestant Theology and reformed theology in the epistle and martydom of polycarp thank you again for your time I'll see you in the next video and I pray that God would richly bless bless you in your studies and as you proclaim the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in your thought word and deed take care and God bless