Caleb
Patrick
10/27/13
Justin Martyr: First Apology
During the second century rumors spread throughout the Roman Empire regarding the immoral and barbaric lives’ of Christians, leading to some of them being killed as martyrs. After the martyrdom of the elderly Polycarp, Justin, who was later martyred as well, wrote his first appeal to the Emperor and his philosophers around 156 CE (Norris, 38). In his letter he appeals to the reason, justice, and the piety of the rulers and philosophers of the day. He calls for the investigation of Christians’ lives that they not be put to death because of adhering to the name, which is Christian (Norris, 39). To do this he acknowledges the leaders’ ability to reason and think critically, then goes into the charges brought against Christians, then he attacks the gods made by humans, then shows how the mythic Greek gods show an incomplete picture of the true God and his coming to earth as Jesus Christ. Justin then gives some proofs of the authenticity of the beliefs and teachings of Christianity by referring to the Hebrew prophecies and at last asserts the innocence of Christians (Norris, 39). He does this by using, “deliberative rhetoric,” to encourage the Emperor to discourage mob action and false accusations against Christians (Norris, 39).
First, Justin appeals to reason, “Reason dictates that those who are truly pious and philosophers should honor and love only the truth,” (First Apology, 2). This first point is to bring to light the prejudices which have occurred against Christians because of false rumors and accusations. He asks that the charges brought against Christians be investigated just like in any other case they are required to be (F.A., 2). This is not an appeal to stop trying Christians but to give them a fair trial in which their deeds are examined. Plato is quoted from his Republic saying, “Unless both rulers and ruled love wisdom it is impossible to make cities prosper,” this is used to show that even the ancient philosophers know that it is vital for authorities to rule wisely and honestly (F.A., 3). Justin then writes that Christians pledge to abstain from wickedness unlike the charges brought against them claim (F.A., 5).
Next, Justin acknowledges that Christians do not worship the gods made by human hands and for good reason. They do not sacrifice to statues of gods because, “…we know that they are lifeless and dead,” (F.A., 9). He uses words such as irrational, stupidity and insulting to describe the worship of such statues and gods because they are made by humans and thought up by human imagination (F.A., 9). Then he appeals to their sober mindedness in concurring that Christians then are not atheists as previously charged but worship the true God. Christians believe that God does not need anything from them so they give to those people who are in need with thanksgiving for the provision which God has given them (F.A., 9). He then goes into the defining and defense of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Before he goes straight into the defense of the gospel, Justin summarizes the peace and piety of Christian lives’ (F.A., 14). The list of life changes is rather long but in short it addresses chastity, renouncing of magic, giving wealth away, sharing with the needy, loving people from all tribes, praying for enemies, and living in peace with God (F.A., 14). He then lists some of Jesus’ sayings to show that the teachings Christians adhere to are moral and good rather than immoral and evil. Again he refers back to ancient philosophers to speak about what happens after death to show that the Christian beliefs are not as implausible as people thought. To challenge to possibility of resurrection he uses an interesting argument appealing to the complexity of life coming from a “single drop of human seed”, most likely referring to procreation (F.A.,19). It is unbelievable, except for the fact that it happens, to think that a person can be brought to life by a small seed he argues, so why not after death peoples’ bodies laid in the ground become like seeds that God then raises up from the dead? (F.A., 19) From here the letter turns to the myths that Romans believe about sons of Zeus and other deities.
Justin shows his knowledge of the mythic gods by giving brief stories of some and pointing out their inferiority to Jesus as the Son of God. He compares the virgin birth of Christ to the story of Perseus, the healing miracles to those done by Asclepius, the announcing of God’s word to Hermes, the suffering and death to Dionysus (F.A., 21). Then he explains that the proof of authenticity of Christ can be found in the prophecies of the Jewish Scriptures. From which demons took and formulated stories of the mythic gods to try and trick people from trusting in Jesus. Here is what Justin says regarding prophecies, “…he was predicted before he appeared, first five thousand years ago, and again three thousand, and then two thousand, and again one thousand, and yet again eight hundred,” (F.A., 31). This would appeal to the Romans’ view that divinities of antiquity are good and new divinities are dangerous. Starting with Moses, who was older than all the other writers that Romans held in high esteem, all the way to Isaiah different prophecies regarding Christ’s life and death are told and shown to be imitated by demons in the myths of the previously mentioned gods. The one prophecy which could not be imitated by the demons, because they did not understand it, is the cross that Jesus died on and was then resurrected three days later. This is the sign of the power of God that shows up even in the processions of the Romans to show their power. Humans are driven and set apart by the symbol of the cross even without knowing why Justin asserts (F.A., 55).
Justin Martyr’s First Apology concludes with the assertion that through this letter he has proved that Christians are innocent even if the Romans do not believe (F.A., 55). He formulated his defense by appealing to reason first, then to the absurdity of man-made gods, then proving the morality of Christian lives’, then by appealing to ancient philosophers regarding the afterlife, next showing how the messianic prophecies from Hebrew scriptures were twisted by demons to create myths, then showing how the prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus’ life, finally he asserted that the cross of Christ is the ultimate sign that he is the true Son of God. He did this to gain fair trials of Christians, to show the rationality of Christian beliefs, and to disband the rumors that were circulating regarding Christian practices. This first apology set the stage for future apologists and provided Christians with a tangible way to defend their faith.
Norris, Richard A. “The Apologists.” In The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature. eds. Frances Young, Lewis Ayres, and Andrew Louth, 36-44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
10/27/13
Justin Martyr: First Apology
During the second century rumors spread throughout the Roman Empire regarding the immoral and barbaric lives’ of Christians, leading to some of them being killed as martyrs. After the martyrdom of the elderly Polycarp, Justin, who was later martyred as well, wrote his first appeal to the Emperor and his philosophers around 156 CE (Norris, 38). In his letter he appeals to the reason, justice, and the piety of the rulers and philosophers of the day. He calls for the investigation of Christians’ lives that they not be put to death because of adhering to the name, which is Christian (Norris, 39). To do this he acknowledges the leaders’ ability to reason and think critically, then goes into the charges brought against Christians, then he attacks the gods made by humans, then shows how the mythic Greek gods show an incomplete picture of the true God and his coming to earth as Jesus Christ. Justin then gives some proofs of the authenticity of the beliefs and teachings of Christianity by referring to the Hebrew prophecies and at last asserts the innocence of Christians (Norris, 39). He does this by using, “deliberative rhetoric,” to encourage the Emperor to discourage mob action and false accusations against Christians (Norris, 39).
First, Justin appeals to reason, “Reason dictates that those who are truly pious and philosophers should honor and love only the truth,” (First Apology, 2). This first point is to bring to light the prejudices which have occurred against Christians because of false rumors and accusations. He asks that the charges brought against Christians be investigated just like in any other case they are required to be (F.A., 2). This is not an appeal to stop trying Christians but to give them a fair trial in which their deeds are examined. Plato is quoted from his Republic saying, “Unless both rulers and ruled love wisdom it is impossible to make cities prosper,” this is used to show that even the ancient philosophers know that it is vital for authorities to rule wisely and honestly (F.A., 3). Justin then writes that Christians pledge to abstain from wickedness unlike the charges brought against them claim (F.A., 5).
Next, Justin acknowledges that Christians do not worship the gods made by human hands and for good reason. They do not sacrifice to statues of gods because, “…we know that they are lifeless and dead,” (F.A., 9). He uses words such as irrational, stupidity and insulting to describe the worship of such statues and gods because they are made by humans and thought up by human imagination (F.A., 9). Then he appeals to their sober mindedness in concurring that Christians then are not atheists as previously charged but worship the true God. Christians believe that God does not need anything from them so they give to those people who are in need with thanksgiving for the provision which God has given them (F.A., 9). He then goes into the defining and defense of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Before he goes straight into the defense of the gospel, Justin summarizes the peace and piety of Christian lives’ (F.A., 14). The list of life changes is rather long but in short it addresses chastity, renouncing of magic, giving wealth away, sharing with the needy, loving people from all tribes, praying for enemies, and living in peace with God (F.A., 14). He then lists some of Jesus’ sayings to show that the teachings Christians adhere to are moral and good rather than immoral and evil. Again he refers back to ancient philosophers to speak about what happens after death to show that the Christian beliefs are not as implausible as people thought. To challenge to possibility of resurrection he uses an interesting argument appealing to the complexity of life coming from a “single drop of human seed”, most likely referring to procreation (F.A.,19). It is unbelievable, except for the fact that it happens, to think that a person can be brought to life by a small seed he argues, so why not after death peoples’ bodies laid in the ground become like seeds that God then raises up from the dead? (F.A., 19) From here the letter turns to the myths that Romans believe about sons of Zeus and other deities.
Justin shows his knowledge of the mythic gods by giving brief stories of some and pointing out their inferiority to Jesus as the Son of God. He compares the virgin birth of Christ to the story of Perseus, the healing miracles to those done by Asclepius, the announcing of God’s word to Hermes, the suffering and death to Dionysus (F.A., 21). Then he explains that the proof of authenticity of Christ can be found in the prophecies of the Jewish Scriptures. From which demons took and formulated stories of the mythic gods to try and trick people from trusting in Jesus. Here is what Justin says regarding prophecies, “…he was predicted before he appeared, first five thousand years ago, and again three thousand, and then two thousand, and again one thousand, and yet again eight hundred,” (F.A., 31). This would appeal to the Romans’ view that divinities of antiquity are good and new divinities are dangerous. Starting with Moses, who was older than all the other writers that Romans held in high esteem, all the way to Isaiah different prophecies regarding Christ’s life and death are told and shown to be imitated by demons in the myths of the previously mentioned gods. The one prophecy which could not be imitated by the demons, because they did not understand it, is the cross that Jesus died on and was then resurrected three days later. This is the sign of the power of God that shows up even in the processions of the Romans to show their power. Humans are driven and set apart by the symbol of the cross even without knowing why Justin asserts (F.A., 55).
Justin Martyr’s First Apology concludes with the assertion that through this letter he has proved that Christians are innocent even if the Romans do not believe (F.A., 55). He formulated his defense by appealing to reason first, then to the absurdity of man-made gods, then proving the morality of Christian lives’, then by appealing to ancient philosophers regarding the afterlife, next showing how the messianic prophecies from Hebrew scriptures were twisted by demons to create myths, then showing how the prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus’ life, finally he asserted that the cross of Christ is the ultimate sign that he is the true Son of God. He did this to gain fair trials of Christians, to show the rationality of Christian beliefs, and to disband the rumors that were circulating regarding Christian practices. This first apology set the stage for future apologists and provided Christians with a tangible way to defend their faith.
Norris, Richard A. “The Apologists.” In The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature. eds. Frances Young, Lewis Ayres, and Andrew Louth, 36-44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Tertullian: Apology
Austin W.
Tertullian, who hailed from Carthage, wrote his apology in the late years of the first century, interestingly enough, soon after his conversion to Christianity. With his pagan up bringing and secular education, Tertullian is well versed in defending the Christian religion by pointing out flaws or inconsistencies in the Roman’s religion. Examples of his knowledge and effective use of pagan beliefs against are found all through out his work. One of these examples is when he asks, “Who has ever kept for the judge’s inspection the jaws of Cyclopes and Sirens, bloodstained as he had found them?” Tertullian asks why, if there is no evidence of common pagan beliefs, is it that they not punished as the Christians are for their lack of proof. Tertullian is certainly seen as an effective apologist for his use of rhetoric and knowledge on pagan beliefs and philosophy.
Tertullian begins his apology by asking why the Christians do not get the same (less harsh than what they are receiving) treatment than those who are accused of similar crimes (unwillingness to worship Roman Gods or sacrifice to the emperor). Tertullian outlines the ridiculous crimes such as Thyestean feasts and adultery and asks why they do not prove that these events are taking place, and if they cannot, why they do not stop believing such rumors. Tertullian then moves to address the more serious charges. He explains how Christians view God and principles by which Christians come to know God and how God eventually judges the living and the dead. Tertullian then shows how Christianity is not as new as Romans make claim; that in fact their first prophet, Moses, dates back to 300 years before the first Roman man, Danaus. He then asks why they are getting such an opposition from the Romans, but other peoples are allowed to have their own. He questions the Roman religion by claiming that their great empire came about by human leadership, not by their religious beliefs. Tertullian makes several claims that the Christian people are really more powerful than the Roman Empire; that if they so chose, they could go to war and destroy them. Tertullian ends his apology in a way that portrays the Christians having the last laugh, by thanking the Romans for executing them.
While the themes presented in Tertullian’s apology are similar to those in other apologies, there are some that stand out more than in other apologetic texts. One theme that is more prevalent in this text is Christian superiority over Romans. For example, in chapter 37, Tertullian claims that considering numbers, if the Christians so chose to, they could wipe out the Roman Empire by force and that the only reason they do not is because that conflicts with their ethical values. Another Theme expressed in Tertullian’s apology is Roman foolishness. Instead of portraying the Roman judgers as intelligent or sensible but mistaken, Tertullian conveys that they are irrational or unintelligent. In chapter 7, Tertullian says, “yet you take no pains to bring into the light the charges which for so long a time have been made against us. Now, either bring them into the light, if you believe them, or stop believing them, inasmuch as you have not brought them to the light!” as if they were had no intention of actually finding out the truth as someone uneducated would (76). Lastly, the theme of Christian necessity is found in the apology. In chapter 37, Tertullian expresses, that if it were not for the Christians, the Roman Empire would have no citizens to make the empire thrive (80). These examples also push forward the theme of Christian dominance and could have been intended to increase the Christian morale.
In the Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies, Mark Edwards, in his chapter on Apologetics, claims that “[Tertullian] makes little use of the language of philosophy” (26.1.3). It seems appropriate to say that were this apology actually intended for a pagan Roman audience (that would ultimately judge the fate of the Christians), it would have held a more humble tone and included more references to philosophy. It could be argued that Justin Martyr did write for the purpose of actually persuading the Roman audience as well as to help the Christian morale, because he did appeal more to philosophy and address the Roman emperor, his son, and philosophers with respect. Justin was in fact, as Edwards claims, “the one apologist who is known to have been martyred” (26.1.1). That could point to a conclusion that his apology actually was read by those to whom it was addressed. However, it could also be asserted that he wrote in this way to exemplify a more respectable or proper behavior that he felt Christians of the time should uphold when being accused. Nevertheless, Tertullian’s lack of philosophical context in his work does seem to indicate that the text was never really intended for a pagan Roman audience, but rather for a Christian audience.
In his text, Edwards discusses the various patterns seen throughout apologies. In one observation Edwards states, “It is not, however, uncommon for true apologists to support the claims of Christ by appeal to prophecy, or to counter the charge of novelty by arguing that the Gospel was the fulfillment of a Law that antedated the oldest writings of the Greeks” (26.1.1). This is true in the case of Tertullian as he argues that “The origin of this religion…dates from the time of Tiberius” (Ehrman 4.13.7.3). Another example is from chapter 19, “[Moses] is 1,000 years earlier than the Trojan War and, therefore, the time of Saturn himself” (78). This sort of tacking on the Jewish prophet Moses as a prophet of Christianity through realization of prophesy is exactly what Edwards explains in the above quotation. Another Observation Edwards makes is about the tendency of apologists to go from defending Christianity to attacking pagan beliefs. Edwards writes that, “when the magistrate was a Gentile, an apology for Christ could easily turn into a polemic against idolatry” (26.1). This is apparent in Tertullian’s apology in chapter 24 when he discusses how Romans are wrong to sacrifice to a man (the emperor) and other gods instead of the one true God.
Works Cited
Ehrman, Bart D.. "Tertullian: Apology." In After the New Testament: a reader in early Christianity. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. 224-226.
Edwards, Mark. “Apologetics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies. eds. Susan Ashbrook Harvey and David G. Hunter, 549-564. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Tertullian, who hailed from Carthage, wrote his apology in the late years of the first century, interestingly enough, soon after his conversion to Christianity. With his pagan up bringing and secular education, Tertullian is well versed in defending the Christian religion by pointing out flaws or inconsistencies in the Roman’s religion. Examples of his knowledge and effective use of pagan beliefs against are found all through out his work. One of these examples is when he asks, “Who has ever kept for the judge’s inspection the jaws of Cyclopes and Sirens, bloodstained as he had found them?” Tertullian asks why, if there is no evidence of common pagan beliefs, is it that they not punished as the Christians are for their lack of proof. Tertullian is certainly seen as an effective apologist for his use of rhetoric and knowledge on pagan beliefs and philosophy.
Tertullian begins his apology by asking why the Christians do not get the same (less harsh than what they are receiving) treatment than those who are accused of similar crimes (unwillingness to worship Roman Gods or sacrifice to the emperor). Tertullian outlines the ridiculous crimes such as Thyestean feasts and adultery and asks why they do not prove that these events are taking place, and if they cannot, why they do not stop believing such rumors. Tertullian then moves to address the more serious charges. He explains how Christians view God and principles by which Christians come to know God and how God eventually judges the living and the dead. Tertullian then shows how Christianity is not as new as Romans make claim; that in fact their first prophet, Moses, dates back to 300 years before the first Roman man, Danaus. He then asks why they are getting such an opposition from the Romans, but other peoples are allowed to have their own. He questions the Roman religion by claiming that their great empire came about by human leadership, not by their religious beliefs. Tertullian makes several claims that the Christian people are really more powerful than the Roman Empire; that if they so chose, they could go to war and destroy them. Tertullian ends his apology in a way that portrays the Christians having the last laugh, by thanking the Romans for executing them.
While the themes presented in Tertullian’s apology are similar to those in other apologies, there are some that stand out more than in other apologetic texts. One theme that is more prevalent in this text is Christian superiority over Romans. For example, in chapter 37, Tertullian claims that considering numbers, if the Christians so chose to, they could wipe out the Roman Empire by force and that the only reason they do not is because that conflicts with their ethical values. Another Theme expressed in Tertullian’s apology is Roman foolishness. Instead of portraying the Roman judgers as intelligent or sensible but mistaken, Tertullian conveys that they are irrational or unintelligent. In chapter 7, Tertullian says, “yet you take no pains to bring into the light the charges which for so long a time have been made against us. Now, either bring them into the light, if you believe them, or stop believing them, inasmuch as you have not brought them to the light!” as if they were had no intention of actually finding out the truth as someone uneducated would (76). Lastly, the theme of Christian necessity is found in the apology. In chapter 37, Tertullian expresses, that if it were not for the Christians, the Roman Empire would have no citizens to make the empire thrive (80). These examples also push forward the theme of Christian dominance and could have been intended to increase the Christian morale.
In the Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies, Mark Edwards, in his chapter on Apologetics, claims that “[Tertullian] makes little use of the language of philosophy” (26.1.3). It seems appropriate to say that were this apology actually intended for a pagan Roman audience (that would ultimately judge the fate of the Christians), it would have held a more humble tone and included more references to philosophy. It could be argued that Justin Martyr did write for the purpose of actually persuading the Roman audience as well as to help the Christian morale, because he did appeal more to philosophy and address the Roman emperor, his son, and philosophers with respect. Justin was in fact, as Edwards claims, “the one apologist who is known to have been martyred” (26.1.1). That could point to a conclusion that his apology actually was read by those to whom it was addressed. However, it could also be asserted that he wrote in this way to exemplify a more respectable or proper behavior that he felt Christians of the time should uphold when being accused. Nevertheless, Tertullian’s lack of philosophical context in his work does seem to indicate that the text was never really intended for a pagan Roman audience, but rather for a Christian audience.
In his text, Edwards discusses the various patterns seen throughout apologies. In one observation Edwards states, “It is not, however, uncommon for true apologists to support the claims of Christ by appeal to prophecy, or to counter the charge of novelty by arguing that the Gospel was the fulfillment of a Law that antedated the oldest writings of the Greeks” (26.1.1). This is true in the case of Tertullian as he argues that “The origin of this religion…dates from the time of Tiberius” (Ehrman 4.13.7.3). Another example is from chapter 19, “[Moses] is 1,000 years earlier than the Trojan War and, therefore, the time of Saturn himself” (78). This sort of tacking on the Jewish prophet Moses as a prophet of Christianity through realization of prophesy is exactly what Edwards explains in the above quotation. Another Observation Edwards makes is about the tendency of apologists to go from defending Christianity to attacking pagan beliefs. Edwards writes that, “when the magistrate was a Gentile, an apology for Christ could easily turn into a polemic against idolatry” (26.1). This is apparent in Tertullian’s apology in chapter 24 when he discusses how Romans are wrong to sacrifice to a man (the emperor) and other gods instead of the one true God.
Works Cited
Ehrman, Bart D.. "Tertullian: Apology." In After the New Testament: a reader in early Christianity. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. 224-226.
Edwards, Mark. “Apologetics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies. eds. Susan Ashbrook Harvey and David G. Hunter, 549-564. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.