Translated by J.B.Lightfoot, 1891
Edited by Baruch, 1993
Visits since 12 August, 2001:
EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION
(If you've read this introduction already, then just go straight to
the list of manuscripts)
The Shepherd of Hermas was originally written somewhere between
the last part of the first century and probably the first part of the
second century. The Didache was written about that time, as well,
although probably earlier. In that time period, most of the original
Apostles had died --the last one, John, died AD 100--, and the cannon of
scripture hadn't been fully agreed on yet. In other words, many people
were still not sure exactly which epistles and gospels were really
inspired New Testament scripture, and which weren't. It was only later on that the
Leadership of the church decided more or less unanimously which books would make up
the cannon of scripture. (It was definatly the wisdom of God that they did, as I,
for one, would hate to see what would happen if such a decision were left to the
church in the state we've been in ever since!)
The Didache is sort of a hand-book for early Christians --
especially those who didn't have copies of any of the gospels or
epistles. It contains probably what someone like Apostle Peter, or James
would have taught had they started a church in some town far from Jerusalem.
The Shepherd of Hermas is a series of visions, or revelations
received by a slave, named Hermas, who lived in Rome. The "shepherd" is
actually the angel of repentance who gives him most of the revelations in
the second and third parts of the book. The Shepherd of Hermas
made a great impression on the early church. In fact, many of the church
fathers, such as Irenaeus, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian
--thought he later changed his mind--, treated it as though it were
divinely inspired scripture. Again, it had not yet been agreed at that
point, exactly which books were, in fact scripture.
My own experience in reading The Shepherd of Hermas, is
probably like many other's. I was confused by some of the strange,
powerful statements that were made, and put it down, and didn't read it
again until many years later. Then, I began to get something out of it.
In fact, the more I read it, the more I am convinced that there is a
vital message for the twentieth century church.
Part of the problem in reading the full text of what now exists, is
that it was written by hand, and subsequently copied by hand. Rome, at
that time, not being a major centre of Christianity as it became later,
they were probably not as careful in preserving the writings as they were
in places such as Ephesus, Antioch and Alexandria, where what now are
known as New Testament scriptures were kept. Therefore, as the book was
copied, it's possible that some people's pet doctrines crept in. If they
sincerely believed something to be so, some people felt perfectly
justified in "correcting" someone else's literary work, or at least
making marginal notes. Later copiests mistook the marginal notes for
corrections, and added them in. Therefore, if you read the full text
--available at the
Christian History library web site -- you will find certain other
ideas that don't seem to make sense, but were floating around during the
second century.
Since I don't know the original languages, nor do I have access to the
original texts, I am not a qualified textual critic. However, I have
edited the English translation as much as I dare to. I've left out some
of the parts that would confuse rather than edify, with the opinion that
they might not have been in the original visions of Hermas to begin with.
Therefore this isn't a "version" based on a textual edition, but rather,
an "abridged reader's edition", meant solely for the purpose of edifying
the Body of Christ in the twentieth century. What I did find, however, is that
when the questionable texts are removed, the whole thing reads even more
smoothly than before, as though they didn't belong in the first place!
In reading, you will find that Hermas and his shepherding angel were
neither Calvinists nor dispensationalists. I really can't help it -- they
really weren't! However, if you are one who believes that it's just
possible that a document can fail to support those two relatively recent
doctrines, and yet be true to Scripture, you should be edified by the
reading of The Shepherd of Hermas. One of the overpowering themes
is cleansing oneself of double-mindedness. One truth that is emphasized
is that, by following the desires that come as a natural part of the
born-again experience, one is able to overcome sin. In this desire is the
fear of God. For the double-minded Christian, the Christian life is
extremely difficult, especially when confronted with some of the hard
sayings in The Shepherd...etc. However, once repentance is made,
and the soul is cleansed of a double mind, following these things comes
very naturally. There are also some striking statements about faith and
unbelief that would seem to have been spoken by some of the more radical Bible teachers of our time. In all, the Shepherd will remind the reader of the book of James, only
very much expanded.
The Didache has been presented in its entirety, with only the
language of the translation updated --thees and thous changed to yous and yours.
Finally, I am in no way insinuating that these works be treated on a
level with Holy Scripture. Though they were rejected from the cannon of scripture, they
were never the less acknowdeged as profitible for personal edification; just as
many books today, such as C.S.Lewis, A.W.Tozer, Martin Luther etc. are good
reading, but definatly not part of the Bible. Moreover, many prophecies and visions by
Elijah, the "sons of the prophets", Agabus, the believers in Corinth and many others
were never included in Scripture (nor even suitable as such), though they were no
doubt edifying to those who heard them. The Scritpure is already complete without
them, and we must test what we read by comparing it to revealed truth in
scripture.
I trust that you will do just that, and what you find to apply in the
light of Truth, you will receive for edification.
