Report on St. Justin's Dialogue with Tryphy (part 2 of 2)

 

Chs. LXXIII-CXLII

Much of the second half of the dialogue is a recapitulation of the first half for the sake of some new auditors who had been invited by Trypho to hear Justin the second day of their conversation. I will here cover a few of the main points of interest to me from the second half.

1

The first point of interest is the reference to Joshua as a figure of Christ. A typological connection is drawn by Justin between Jesus and Joshua. It is meant to provide also further evidence that it was Jesus himself, and not the Father, who spoke to Moses, Joshua, and the Patriarchs.

(God speaks to Moses of Joshua at Exodus 23: 20-) ‘And the Lord spake to Moses, Say to this people, Behold, I send My angel before thy face, to keep thee in the way, to bring thee into the land… Give heed to Him, and obey Him… for My name is in Him.' Now understand that He who led your fathers into the land is called by this name Jesus, and first called Auses (Oshea). For if you shall understand this, you shall likewise perceive that the name of Him who said to Moses, 'for My name is in Him,' was Jesus. (LXXV)

Ref: Numbers 13: 16. These are the names of the men whom Moses sent to spy out the land; and Moses called Ause the son of Naue, Joshua.

None of the commentaries that I have looked at (https://biblehub.com/commentaries/exodus/23-20.htm), including the Jerome and the Jewish ones (JPS Tanakh, Elliott Friedman) , treat this as a reference to Joshua (although this meaning is nowhere controverted) but rather to an angelic emissary of God who would lead the people into the promised land.

Justin continues with some justification: 

Now Isaiah shows that those prophets who are sent to publish tidings from God are called His angels and apostles. For Isaiah says in a certain place, ‘Send me’ (LXXV).

Ref: Isaiah 6: 6-8. 8 And I heard the voice of the Lord, saying: Whom shall I send? and who shall go for us? And I said: Lo, here am I, send me. (The us, the tower of babel reference…)

*Notice the use of the plural 'and who shall go for us?' We'll return to this. 

The Isaiah text is used to give an instance of a prophet called an angel. This isn’t the best passage for that. ‘Send’ implies ‘messenger’ (Heb. ‘malak’ , angel) but the word is missing. Justin might as well just have noted merely that the term ‘angel’) just means messenger, and is used in various places in scripture (e.g., Job 1: 14) to refer to human messengers. 

Original Word: מֲלְאָךְ

Part of Speech: Noun Masculine

Transliteration: malak

Phonetic Spelling: (mal-awk')

Definition: a messenger (https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4397.htm)

The Exodus text bears Justin’s interpretation.

And Joshua is generally accepted today as a type of Christ.

Justin observes further that a sign of the cross was made by Moses while Joshua led the victory over the Amalekites...

When the people… waged war with Amalek, and the son of Nave (Nun) by name Jesus (Joshua), led the fight, Moses himself prayed to God, stretching out both hands, and Hur with Aaron supported them during the whole day, so that they might not hang down when he got wearied. For if he gave up any part of this sign, which was an imitation of the cross, the people were beaten, as is recorded in the writings of Moses [Exodus 17: 8-13]; but if he remained in this form, Amalek was proportionally defeated, and he who prevailed prevailed by the cross. For it was not because Moses so prayed that the people were stronger, but because, while one who bore the name of Jesus (Joshua) was in the forefront of the battle, he himself made the sign of the cross…” (DWTJ, XC)

This connection (the sign of the cross) has not been picked up by modern commentators—although the Jerome commentary indicates that Moses is here presented as a “mediator Christ figure.” This surprises me. The typological connection appears obvious once noticed.

2

The serpent is lifted up on a standard (banner in a cross or 'T' shape)… Joshua explains this as an anticipation the cross/salvation… explains the role of the serpent and of the curse.

First the Scriptural text...

And the Lord sent among the people deadly serpents, and they bit the people, and much people of the children of Israel died. And the people came to Moses and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord, and against thee: pray therefore to the Lord, and let him take away the serpent from us. And Moses prayed to the Lord for the people; and the Lord said to Moses, Make thee a serpent, and put it on a signal-staff; and it shall come to pass that whenever a serpent shall bite a man, every one so bitten that looks upon it shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a signal-staff: and it came to pass that whenever a serpent bit a man, and he looked on the brazen serpent, he lived. (Numbers, 21: 6-9)

Christ himself draws the connection...

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him, may not perish; but may have life everlasting. (John 3: 14-15)

Justin brings out the typological connections...

And it seems that the type and sign, which was erected to counteract the serpents which bit Israel, was intended for the salvation of those who believe that death was declared to come thereafter on the serpent through Him that would be crucified, but salvation to those who had been bitten by him and had betaken themselves to Him that sent His Son into the world to be crucified. For the Spirit of prophecy by Moses did not teach us to believe in the serpent, since it shows us that he was cursed…  (XCI)

Why a serpent on the cross? A paradox is proposed as holding a message…

For tell me, was it not God who commanded by Moses that no image or likeness…  should be made, and yet who caused the brazen serpent to be made by Moses in the wilderness, and set it up for a sign by which those bitten by serpents were saved? Yet is He free from unrighteousness. For by this, as I previously remarked, He proclaimed the mystery, by which He declared that He would break the power of the serpent which occasioned the transgression of Adam, and [would bring] to them that believe on Him [who was foreshadowed] by this sign, i.e., Him who was to be crucified, salvation from the fangs of the serpent, which are wicked deeds, idolatries, and other unrighteous acts. Unless the matter be so understood, give me a reason why Moses set up the brazen serpent for a sign, and bade those that were bitten gaze at it, and the wounded were healed; and this, too, when he had himself commanded that no likeness of anything whatsoever should be made."

[In sum] … Just as God commanded the sign to be made by the brazen serpent, and yet He is blameless; even so, though a curse lies in the law against persons who are crucified, yet no curse lies on the Christ of God, by whom all that have committed things worthy of a curse are saved.  (XCIV)

Reference in the book of Wisdom...

For he that turned himself toward it was not saved by the thing that he saw, but by thee, that art the Saviour of all. (Wisdom 16: 17)

Many of the Jews apparently misunderstood...

[Hezekiah] removed the high places, and broke in pieces the pillars, and utterly destroyed the groves, and the brazen serpent which Moses made: because until those days the children of Israel burnt incense to it: and he called it Neesthan. (2 Kings 18: 4)

There is something profound in this, but perhaps too profound for me to understand.

3

The EMJ angle... The rejection of the Logos and the JRS...

And for all this they have not repented, but their hand is still high.' For verily your hand is high to commit evil, because ye slew the Christ, and do not repent of it; but so far from that, ye hate and murder us who have believed through Him in the God and Father of all, as often as ye can; and ye curse Him without ceasing, as well as those who side with Him… CXXXIII

For indeed you are not in the habit of sacrificing to Baal, as were your fathers, or of placing cakes in groves and on high places for the host of heaven: but you have not accepted God's Christ. For he who knows not Him, knows not the will of God; and he who insults and hates Him, insults and hates Him that sent Him. And whoever believes not in Him, believes not the declarations of the prophets, who preached and proclaimed Him to all. CXXXVI

He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me; and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that sent me. (Luke 10: 16)

4

On the Father and the Son 

Again, the distinction manifest at Sodom, and the relation is redescribed...

… this power which the prophetic word calls God, as has been also amply demonstrated, and Angel, is not numbered [as different] in name only like the light of the sun but is indeed something numerically distinct, I have discussed briefly in what has gone before; when I asserted that this power was begotten from the Father, by His power and will, but not by abscission, as if the essence of the Father were divided; as all other things partitioned and divided are not the same after as before they were divided: and, for the sake of example, I took the case of fires kindled from a fire, which we see to be distinct from it, and yet that from which many can be kindled is by no means made less, but remains the same. CXXVIII

Numerical distinction is again reaffirmed and defended...

When Scripture says,' The Lord rained fire from the Lord out of heaven,' the prophetic word indicates that there were two in number: One upon the earth, who, it says, descended to behold the cry of Sodom; Another in heaven, who also is Lord of the Lord on earth, as He is Father and God; the cause of His power and of His being Lord and God…

And on the use of the plural...

Again, when the Scripture records that God said in the beginning, 'Behold, Adam has become like one of Us,' this phrase, 'like one of Us,' is also indicative of number; and the words do not admit of a figurative meaning, as the sophists endeavour to affix on them, who are able neither to tell nor to understand the truth…

When I repeated these words, I added:… “and that which is begotten is numerically distinct from that which begets, any one will admit.” (CXXIX) 

Regarding the use of the plural, I noticed another connection...

And a man said to his neighbour, Come, let us make bricks and bake them with fire. And the brick was to them for stone, and their mortar was bitumen. And they said, Come, let us build to ourselves a city and tower, whose top shall be to heaven, and let us make to ourselves a name, before we are scattered abroad upon the face of all the earth. (Gen. 11: 3-4)

5

An interesting tidbit… Apparently, the journeying Israelites were taken care of...

… the latchets of your shoes did not break, and your shoes waxed not old, and your garments wore not away, but even those of the children grew along with them. (CXXXI)

Thy garments grew not old from off thee, thy shoes were not worn from off thee, thy feet were not painfully hardened, lo! these forty years. (Deut. 8: 4)

And thou didst sustain them forty years in the wilderness; thou didst not allow anything to fail them: their garments did not wax old, and their feet were not bruised. (Num. 9: 21)

 

DSMW