The (anonymous) Epistle to Diognetus in many ways provides us with a beautiful ecclesiology, Christology, and even soteriology (the significance of ch. 9's statement ὢν τῆς γλθκείας ἀνταλλαγῆς ["Oh, the sweet exchange!", Ehrman's translation], as a possible early expression of the imputation of righteousness has, I believe, been overlooked). I have come to the realization, though, that it is possible to take EpD's "new race" philosophy too far, in an unbiblical direction, and that EpD's unbalanced trajectory on this may have lent itself to its own unhealthy anti-semitism.
To be clear, much of what EpD says regarding the Christian church as a "new race" is good; I'm just arguing that it was unbalanced. Here is what EpD says (I am using Ehrman's new Loeb translation:
Chapter 1--"Since I see, most excellent Diognetus, that you are extremely eager to learn about the religion of the Christians, . . ., and what deep affection they have for one another, and just why this new race [καινὸν τοῦτο γένος] or way of life came into being now and not before, I welcome this eagerness of yours . . ."
Chapter 5
1–2. "For Christians are no different from other people in terms of their country, language, or customs. Nowhere do they inhabit cities of their own, use a strange dialect, or live life out of the ordinary."
5. "They live in their respective countries but only as resident aliens [πάροικοι]; they participate in all things as citizens, and they endure all things as foreigners. Every foreign territory is a homeland for them, every homeland foreign territory."
9–11. "They live on earth but participate in the life of heaven. They are obedient to the laws that have been made, and by their own lives they supersede the laws. They love everyone and are persecuted by all."
17. "They are attacked by Jews as foreigners and persecuted by Greeks. And those who hate them cannot explain the cause of their enmity."
Naturally we can recognize here a reflection of key biblical motifs, especially as expressed in First Peter 2:9–11; Hebrew 11:10, 13–16; and Philippians 3:20. In a sense, Christians are a "new race," all brothers and sisters united together by the blood of Jesus Christ, a bond which supersedes ethnicity, skin color, DNA, etc. An American Christian, for example, must always be a Christian first and an American only as a distant second.
What I have come to realize more clearly, however, is that Jesus does not abolish national or ethnic distinctions per se [I do not use the term "racial" since arguably "race" as we know if it today is a modern construct, not the same the ethnos or genos of the 1st and 2nd centuries. But that's a different discussion for a different time]. Even eternity does not abolish national distinctions. Revelation 2:24 and 26, when describing the New Jerusalem, clearly indicates that nations will benefit from its glory (v. 24: KJV: "And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it . . ."; ESV, "By its light will the nations walk"; v. 26: KJV, "And they shall bring the glory and honor of the nations into it"). In other words, the fact that we are all part of a new era does not mean that all national distinctions disappear, nor does it justify pitting the "one nation" of the Christian church against nationalities in general, and the Jewish people in particular, which EpD seems to do.
Chapters 3 and 4 in EpD essentially constitute one long diatribe against the Jewish race (e.g., 4.6, "I suppose you have learned enough about how the Christians are right to abstain from the vulgar silliness, deceit, and meddling ways of the Jews, along with their arrogance"), a diatribe all the more ugly because other parts of EpD are so pretty. Significantly, EpD essentially throws the entire sacrificial system of the OT under the bus, comparing it to pagan rituals (3.2–3), seemingly forgetting that God wrote the OT. (Do we see, in EpD, the beginning of an unhealthy Marcionite stream of thought even amongst the orthodox??) Indeed, in 11.3b the author makes a distinction between the Jewish people as a whole and the nations in general: "This word was dishonored by the people [i.e., the Jewish people] but proclaimed by the apostles and believed by the nations," seemingly forgetting that the entire first half of the book of Acts exists only because thousands of Jewish people did hearken to the [Jewish] apostles' message.
In this way, by contrasting the Christian "one race" with the Jewish race, EpD becomes guilty of what may be the earliest expressions of supersessionist theology. I firmly believe that the Apostle Paul had a better perspective: God still loves the Jewish people and will somebody rescue them as Jews (Romans 11).
Random note #1: Many believe that chs. 10–11 of EpD were written by a different person, though in my opinion 11.3 shows a very similar theme to the earlier chapters regarding the Jewish people.
Random note #2: The author of EpD is capable of punning: "They [Christians] encourage a common table [τράπεζαν κοινὴν], but not a common bed [κοίτην]" (my own translation, not Ehrman's).
Cited: "The Epistle to Diognetus," pages 121–159 in The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 2, edited and translated by Bart D. Ehrman, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge: MS: Harvard University Press, 2003).
Recommended reading:
Florenc Mene, "Diognetus and the Parting of the Ways," Themelios 46, no. 2 (August 2021): 354–364 (open access).
Chapter 11 of Judith M. Lieu, Neither Jew nor Greek? Construction Early Christianity, Studies of the New Testament and Its World (London: T&T Clar, 2002), pages 179–183.
Horacio E. Lona, "Diognetus," pages 197–213 in The Apostolic Fathers: An Introduction, ed. Wilhelm Pratscher (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2010).
