St. Justin begins with the account of his philosophical journey and conversion.
He saw it as the duty of the philosopher to seek God. Was disappointed in Stoicism...
“having spent a considerable time with [the Stoic teacher], when I had not acquired any further knowledge of God… I left him and betook myself to another…” (2)
And also in Platonism…
“… and such was my stupidity, I expected forthwith to look upon God, for this is the end of Plato's philosophy.” (2)
Saw it as an obvious fact and one to be
explained that the world is ordered and is caused by an unchanging first cause
of all other things, “the reason that governs all”:
““But what do you call God?” said he. “That which always maintains the same nature, and in the same manner, and is the cause of all other things—that, indeed, is God.”” (3)
The old man asks whether Divine revelation is required, whether natural reason can achieve this:
“Is there then,” says he, “such and so great power in our mind?... Will the mind of man see God at any time, if it is uninstructed by the Holy Spirit?” (4)
In 4 and 5, Old Man plays Socrates, causing Justin to see the limits of natural reason, represented by Platonism. The focus is on the Plato’s doctrine of the soul. A typical exchange…
[Justin] “You are right.”
[Old Man] “These philosophers know nothing, then, about these things…”
[Justin] “It does not appear so.”
He sees the teaching of the Platonists is incoherent and ,so, infers that it is missing something. He's at a loss; his confidence in natural philosophy destroyed…
“Should any one, then, employ a teacher?... or whence may any one be helped, if not even in them there is truth?”
The old man introduces Justin to to Divine
revelation, the prophets, backed up by events.
There existed, long before this time, certain men more ancient than all those who are esteemed philosophers, both righteous and beloved by God, who spoke by the Divine Spirit, and foretold events which would take place, and which are now taking place. They are called prophets. These alone both saw and announced the truth to men, neither reverencing nor fearing any man, not influenced by a desire for glory, but speaking those things alone which they saw and which they heard, being filled with the Holy Spirit. Their writings are still extant, and he who has read them is very much helped in his knowledge of the beginning and end of things, and of those matters which the philosopher ought to know, provided he has believed them. (7)
He's sent off with an exhortation…
“But pray that, above all things, the gates of light may be opened to you; for these things cannot be perceived or understood by all, but only by the man to whom God and His Christ have imparted wisdom.” (7)
Has a conversion of the heart.
When he had spoken these and many other things, which there is no time for mentioning at present, he went away, bidding me attend to them; and I have not seen him since. But straightway a flame was kindled in my soul; and a love of the prophets, and of those men who are friends of Christ, possessed me; and whilst revolving his words in my mind, I found this philosophy alone to be safe and profitable. Thus, and for this reason, I am a philosopher. (8)
Justin is one who can be persuaded by
reason. He’s a lover of truth, and such a one is always open to discovering it.
He believes this to hold for others as well… he thinks the best of them… and
seeks to persuade others with the same arguments by which he has been
persuaded.
At this point Trypho interjects…
“… it were better for you still to abide in the philosophy of Plato, or of some other man, cultivating endurance, self-control, and moderation, rather than be deceived by false words, and follow the opinions of men of no reputation. For if you remain in that mode of philosophy, and live blamelessly, a hope of a better destiny were left to you; but when you have forsaken God, and reposed confidence in man, what safety still awaits you?” (8)
Trypho advises Justin to take the path of safety. This is often but not always sage advice.
This orientation can take several forms.
Empiricism. Natural reason. The lover of truth, and not safety, will throw off
such where there is the chance of attaining to important truth.
An aside... William James, “The Will to Believe” (1896)
There are opposing epistemological directives—to believe truth and to avoid error. Each is embraced at the expense of the other. Which is the more important?
Choosing the one directive or the other colors the whole of our intellectual life. Whether one goes the one way or the other is an expression of one’s passions rathr than reason. It comes down to whether one’s desire to believe truth more powerful than one’s fear of believing falsehood.
[I'm paving over some technicalities here. The idea is that there are certain claims proposed for belief are are live, forced, and momentous. When these features come together, the option of believing is a living option; we cannot but follow our passions with regard to believing or not believing.]
Preaching skepticism in such cases as where some momentous truth might be lost by remaining skeptical is a passional rather than a rational admonition. In fact, it's irrational. James hammers this fact home with an illustration...
It is as if a man should hesitate indefinitely to ask a certain woman to marry him because he was not perfectly sure that she would prove an angel after he brought her home. Would he not cut himself off from that particular angel-possibility as decisively as if he went and married some one else? Scepticism, then, is not avoidance of option; it is option of a certain particular kind of risk. Better risk loss of truth than chance of error…
This is where Justin gets going. Regarding
that claim that he has believed groundless stories…
“I excuse and forgive you, my friend,” I said. “For you know not what you say, but have been persuaded by teachers who do not understand the Scriptures… I shall prove to you as you stand here that we have not believed empty fables…” (9)
Here, he begins to recite the arguments from
prophecy and the fulfilment of prophecy that earlier converted him.
A New Covenant was prophesied.
Isaiah 51. Hear me, hear me, my people; and ye kings, hearken to me: for a law shall proceed from me, and my judgment shall be for a light of the nations. My righteousness speedily draws nigh, and my salvation shall go forth as light, and on mine arm shall the Gentiles trust: the isles shall wait for me, and on mine arm shall they trust. (4-5)
Jeremiah 31. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Juda not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day when I took hold of their hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; for they abode not in my covenant, and I disregarded them, saith the Lord. (31-32)
Malachi 1. 'I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord; and I shall not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for from the rising of the sun unto its setting My name shall be glorified among the Gentiles; and in every place a sacrifice is offered unto My name, even a pure sacrifice: for My name is honoured among the Gentiles, saith the Lord; but ye profane it. (10-11)
Christ is presented as the New Covenant.
Some themes…
Circumcision of the heart vs of the flesh
But you have understood all things in a carnal sense, and you suppose it to be piety if you do such things, while your souls are filled with deceit, and, in short, with every wickedness. (14)
Deut 10:16. Circumcise, therefore, the foreskin of your heart. (15)
It is due to the hardness of their hearts and
their consequent persistent persecutions of the righteousness that they suffer.
For you are not recognised among the rest of men by any other mark than your fleshly circumcision. For none of you, I suppose, will venture to say that God neither did nor does foresee the events, which are future, nor fore-ordained his deserts for each one. Accordingly, these things have happened to you in fairness and justice, for you have slain the Just One, and His prophets before Him; and now you reject those who hope in Him, and in Him who sent Him--God the Almighty and Maker of all things--cursing in your synagogues those that believe on Christ. (16)
Circumcision not necessary for salvation.
Given as a sign, not for righteousness. Unknown before Abraham. Righteousness
does not consist in this. Because of the hardness of their hearts.
Moses, under whom your nation appeared unrighteous and ungrateful to God, making a calf in the wilderness: wherefore God, accommodating Himself to that nation, enjoined them also to offer sacrifices, as if to His name, in order that you might not serve idols. Which precept, however, you have not observed; nay, you sacrificed your children to demons. And you were commanded to keep Sabbaths, that you might retain the memorial of God. (19)
The righteous of old and have been saved through
Christ.
Then he said, "Tell me, then, shall those who lived according to the law given by Moses, live in the same manner with Jacob, Enoch, and Noah, in the resurrection of the dead, or not?"
I replied to him… Since those who [obeying the law of Moses] did that which is universally, naturally, and eternally good are pleasing to God, they shall be saved through this Christ in the resurrection equally with those righteous men who were before them, namely Noah, and Enoch, and Jacob, and whoever else there be, along with those who have known this Christ, Son of God, who was before the morning star and the moon, and submitted to become incarnate… (45)
Keeping the law contributes nothing to
righteousness. The law is a sign.
Apparently, there were Christians who did
not believe that Christ existed formerly!
For there are some, my friends," I said, "of our race, who admit that He is Christ, while holding Him to be man of men; with whom I do not agree, nor would I, even though most of those who have[now] the same opinions as myself should say so… (48)
Distinction made between God, the Maker, and
God of the patriarchs
I shall attempt to persuade you, since you have understood the Scriptures, [of the truth] of what I say, that there is, and that there is said to be, another God and Lord subject to the Maker of all things; who is also called an Angel, because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things--above whom there is no other God--wishes to announce to them. (56)
Justin begins with the visitation to Abraham
Proves that the Angel of the Lord was God.
I shall endeavour to persuade you, that He who is said to have appeared to Abraham, and to Jacob, and to Moses, and who is called God, is distinct from Him who made all things,--numerically, I mean, not [distinct] in will.
Follows up with the appearances to Jacob, Moses, and Joshua, proving that the God of these appearances is identified with the God who appeared to Abraham.
On the connection between the Begotten and
the Father
… God begat before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power[proceeding] from Himself (61)
… He was begotten of the Father by an act of will; just as we see happening among ourselves: for when we give out some word, we beget the word; yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us, when we give it out: and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire, which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains the same; and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself, not diminishing that from which it was kindled. (61)
Cites Prov. 8: The Lord made me the beginning of His ways for His works. From everlasting He established me in the beginning, before He had made the earth, and before He had made the deeps, before the springs of the waters had issued forth, before the mountains had been established. Before all the hills He begets me… When He made ready the heavens, I was along with Him… I was with Him arranging. (61)
Cites the creation narrative… the use of ‘Us’
“Let us make man after our image and likeness”… “Behold, Adam has become as one of us, to know good and evil.”
[God] conversed with some one who was numerically distinct from Himself, and also a rational Being… In saying, therefore, “as one of us,” [Moses] has declared that [there is a certain] number of persons associated with one another, and that they are at least two.
And the Holy Spirit? The concept of the holy Spirit is not clearly laid out.
Suggests that scripture passages were removed at Alexandria! (by the 72?)
But I am far from putting reliance in your teachers, who refuse to admit that the interpretation made by the seventy elders who were with Ptolemy[king] of the Egyptians is a correct one; and they attempt to frame another. And I wish you to observe, that they have altogether taken away many Scriptures from the translations effected by those seventy elders who were with Ptolemy, and by which this very man who was crucified is proved to have been set forth expressly as God, and man, and as being crucified, and as dying. (71)
Trypho: “… tell us some of the Scriptures
which you allege have been completely cancelled.”
Justin cites cases…
One from Ezra
And Esdras said to the people, This Passover is our Saviour and our refuge. And if you have understood, and your heart has taken it in, that we shall humble Him on a standard, and thereafter hope in Him, then this place shall not be forsaken for ever, says the God of hosts. But if you will not believe Him, and will not listen to His declaration, you shall be a laughing-stock to the nations. (Passage unknown)
Jeremiah 11:19
And from the sayings of Jeremiah they have cut out the following: “I [was] like a lamb that is brought to the slaughter: they devised a device against me, saying, Come, let us lay on wood on His bread, and let us blot Him out from the land of the living; and His name shall no more be remembered.” [Justin continues] And since this passage from the sayings of Jeremiah is still written in some copies [of the Scriptures] in the synagogues of the Jews (for it is only a short time since they were cut out). (72)
Another from Jeremiah
And again, from the sayings of the same Jeremiah these have been cut out: “The Lord God remembered His dead people of Israel who lay in the graves; and He descended to preach to them His own salvation.”
A note in the Ante-Nicene Fathers: This is wanting in our Scriptures: it is cited by Iren., iii. 20, under the name of Isaiah, and in iv. 22 under that of Jeremiah.—Maranus
A closing comment (From my article on the evangelization of protestants)
The fact that there are interpretations of the Hebrew Scriptures that do not support the claims of the Church should not surprise. As a matter of necessity, these were long ago re-understood by those who rejected Christ in a manner that undercuts those claims.
The confidence of the Jew regarding his interpretations is also to be expected. It is a consequence of the institutionalization of once-novel understandings .
This holds true also for Protestants. A Protestant will tell you that the claims of the Catholic Church are refuted by the Bible. He will confidently present you with a number of scriptural passages by which its claims are “easily refuted.”
Is it a surprise that he finds Protestantism proved on every page? Revisionist understandings of the texts have now long-been institutionalized. What were once novel re-interpretations now cloud out all others. What meanings could these passages have other than their obvious meanings when viewed through the lens of Protestantism?
The Protestant, like the Jew, is nested in a complex of distortions that constitute a nearly impenetrable safeguard against finding the truth.
DSMW
And now this...
