III. Theophilus of Antioch—Man Created a Candidate for Immortality

It will be remembered that it was at Antioch, in the church raised up by the apostles, that the early followers of Christ were first called Christians. ^{1414) Acts 11:22-26.} And THEOPHILUS (died c. A.D. 180) is listed as becoming the sixth bishop of Antioch, about A.D. 168, in succession to Euodius. According to the records, by the close of the third century Antioch was one of the largest Christian churches in the Roman Empire. The statements of such a leader therefore carry considerable weight in our quest.CFF1 840.2

Theophilus was educated as a pagan, but tells us he was converted to Christianity by the reading of the Scriptures. His numerous writings, extant at the time of Eusebius and Jerome, included a commentary on the Gospels and a treatise against heresies, both of which have been lost. Theophilus’ main work, his apology for Christianity, is in the form of a lengthy letter addressed to a pagan friend named Autolycus, an “idolater and scorner of Christians.” ^{1515) Theophilus to Autolycus, book 1, chap. 1, in ANF, vol. 2, p. 89.} Theophilus states that he writes as an avowed Christian. This treatise is a detailed examination of the evidences of Christianity derived from Scripture and history, and a careful exposition of Christian doctrines. It was designed to convince Autolycus of the absurdities of paganism and the truth of Christianity. It was a learned work, showing the familiarity of the author with the Greek classics. More important, according to Bishop Coxe, it revealed “a profound acquaintance with the inspred writings.”CFF1 841.1

Theophilus was a disciple of Polycarp of Smyrna, who was also a Conditionalist. He was likewise a contemporary of Athenagoras, under whom significant departures were appearing. (For Theophilus’ chronological and categorical placement, see Tabular Chart F, on page 758.) The evidence is overwhelming that Theophilus did not believe in the innate or inherent immortality of man, holding instead that we are immortalized only by and in Christ. He likewise enunciated another fundamental principle of Conditionalism—that God created Adam neither mortal (that is, certain to die) nor yet immortal (that is, certain not to die), but created him capable of either destiny, and master of his own fate. And he further taught that the penalty for sin is terminable—that the true penalty of sin is endless because it is final destruction, from which there is no return.CFF1 841.2

Theophilus, it should be stated, wrote his apology before the Neoplatonic philosophy, already beginning to find its way into the church, had been widely accepted. It is to be noted that no one censured Theophilus for his avowed position on the nature and destiny of man, for what he taught from so high a post was still the received and orthodox doctrine of many—if not, indeed, still the majority view at that time. But the rising tide of a radically different concept had already set in, destined erelong to overwhelm the earlier position of the Apostolic Fathers. The turning point in this area of the faith of the church was immediately ahead.CFF1 841.3