Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts
For centuries heresy hunters have labeled those who deny the pre-existence of Jesus “adoptionists.” This ancient category was based on the idea some Christian groups denied the virgin birth, thinking instead that Jesus became the son of God at his baptism when God adopted him. Modern scholars such as Bart Ehrman and Michael Bird employ this term to describe several early unitarian Christian groups. My guest today is Dr. Jeremiah Coogan, a scholar of the New Testament and early Christianity. He’s written a really helpful journal article analyzing the early so-called adoptionist groups. His conclusion? None of them actually qualifies as adoptionists.
—— Links ——
- Read Jeremiah Coogan’s article here
- Visit Professor Coogan’s faculty page
- More episodes on adoptionism
- See also my class on early church history
- Get the transcript of this episode
- Support Restitutio by donating here
- Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF
- Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air
- Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library.
- Who is Sean Finnegan? Read his bio here
—— Interview Questions ——
– Today I’m interviewing Dr. Jeremiah Coogan. He is the Assistant Professor of NT at the Jesuit School of Theology. He has a PhD from Notre Dame in Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity. Welcome to Restitutio, I’m so glad to talk with you today.
– Today we’re talking about your article “Rethinking Adoptionism: An Argument for Dismantling a Dubious Category,” published in the Scottish Journal of Theology early this year. In this article you argue that the label of adoptionism is a problematic anachronism. To make sure everyone is up to speed on this issue, could you briefly describe what adoptionism is?
– Describe the problem with modern scholars retrojecting Nicene controversies into earlier Christian history.
– You argue that though there may have existed adoptionists somewhere in the ante-Nicene period, we have no evidence for them. What about Cerinthus?
– Let’s talk about the Ebionites? Weren’t they adoptionists?
– Do you think there’s a connection between the Christian community of James in Jerusalem and the Ebionites?
– What about Theodotus? He and his followers are often cited as adoptionists, but they affirmed the virginal conception of Christ, right?
– Let’s move on to Paul of Samosata. I see you cited Paul Sample. I got a hold of his dissertation from Northwestern a little while ago and was impressed to see he had collected and translated so many sources about Paul. What do you make of Paul of Samosata’s christology?
– So your conclusion after analyzing the evidence is that none of these authors were adoptionists? Why then, do you think scholars for so long have clung to this category? Do you think it was a delegitimizing tactic? Oh, they’re not real Christians since they deny what Matthew and Luke say about the virgin birth…
– What I look for in a source is virgin birth. If I find that, I know that the group can’t hold adoptionism.
– Let’s talk about early high christology. You steered clear of it in your article, but I’m curious to hear your thoughts?
– Have you had any feedback on your paper?
– What are you working on now?
– How can people find out more about you?
– Thanks for talking with me today.
