Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 6 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 6
The chapter points out that Jesus had no correction for Smyrna and Philadelphia, and that Polycarp, a disciple of John, was connected with Smyrna. How should the faithfulness of Smyrna affect our willingness to listen seriously to second-century Christian witnesses such as Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus?
Another way to ask: Jesus gave no correction to Smyrna and Philadelphia, and Polycarp, a student of John, was connected to Smyrna. How should Smyrna’s faithfulness affect how seriously we listen to second-century Christians like Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus?

Direct Answer

The transcript argues that Smyrna’s faithfulness gives significant historical weight to second-century witnesses connected with it, especially Polycarp and those in communion with him. It does not say these writers are infallible, but it presents them as important evidence against the idea of an immediate post-apostolic collapse.

Support from Transcript

- Bercot says Jesus had "no correction whatsoever" for Smyrna and Philadelphia. - Jesus described Smyrna as "spiritually rich." - Polycarp was "one of the personal disciples of the apostle John at Smyrna." - Bercot says Polycarp was "almost certainly part of the church at Smyrna when Revelation was written" and "very likely was an elder there." - Polycarp commended Ignatius’s letters, saying they would provide "a great deal of benefit" concerning "faith and perseverance." - Irenaeus was "a personal student of Polycarp" and testified that the church around A.D. 180 still held "the same gospel as that known by Polycarp."

Discussion Follow-ups

The chapter supports taking these witnesses seriously as historical links to apostolic Christianity, while still basing the argument on Scripture and history.