Content
Rather than trying to convert others to Christianity, 2 Clement appears to be directed at an audience of Christians who had converted from Paganism. 2 Clement seems to reference a history of idolatry: " we were maimed in our understanding - we were worshipping stones and pieces of wood, and gold and silver and copper - all of them made by humans".
Despite their pagan background, the speaker and audience in 2 Clement appear to consider the Jewish texts to be scripture - the speaker quotes repeatedly from the Book of Isaiah and interprets the text. The speaker also regards the words of Jesus as scripture - for example, 2 Clement 2:4 quotes a saying of Jesus (one which has parallels, for example, in Mark 2:17, and Matthew 9:13).
In addition to the canonical literature, the author of 2 Clement appears to have had access to Christian writings or oral tradition aside from those found in the New Testament. Some quotes attributed to Jesus are found only here, e.g. 4:5. In 2 Clement 5:2-4, the author quotes a saying of Jesus which is partially found in the New Testament, but the version quoted in 2 Clement is substantially longer than the version found in the New Testament. In the 20th century, a manuscript fragment was discovered that suggests this saying is a quote from the Gospel of Peter, much of which has been lost. Similarly, in 2 Clement 12, the author quotes from the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, which was lost until the mid-20th century; this quotation was also ascribed to Cassianus and to the Greek Gospel of the Egyptians by Clement of Alexandria.
Read more about this topic: Second Epistle Of Clement
Famous quotes containing the word content:
“People disparage knowing and the intellectual life, and urge doing. I am content with knowing, if only I could know.”
—Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882)
“I could be content that we might procreate like trees, without conjunction, or that there were any way to perpetuate the world without this trivial and vulgar way of coition.”
—Thomas Browne (1605–1682)
“Science asks no questions about the ontological pedigree or a priori character of a theory, but is content to judge it by its performance; and it is thus that a knowledge of nature, having all the certainty which the senses are competent to inspire, has been attained—a knowledge which maintains a strict neutrality toward all philosophical systems and concerns itself not with the genesis or a priori grounds of ideas.”
—Chauncey Wright (1830–1875)