Unsettled Christianity

One blog to rule them all, One blog to find them, One blog to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

Archive for the ‘Justin Martyr’ Category

October 18th, 2012 by Joel

More on Ἀπομνημονεύματα and the Gospels

First, read here. Dr. Bird has responded. The reason the connection between Justin and the Socratic defense by Xenophon is that it fits an earlier theory announced by Theodore Zahn and promoted by Robert Grant. (See here: Terence Y. Mullins Vigiliae Christianae Vol. 14, No. 4 (Dec., 1960), pp. 216-224.)

Simply, this: Connecting the Gospels to the ahistorical defense is important because it affirms the possibility that this was the most common understanding of the Gospels. Not so much biography, but bios, in the Plutarchian sense. Anne O’Leary covers some of this in her book, Matthew’s Judaization of Mark. The idea is this: While the person is historical, the person has now become ahistorical, as is the defense of the person. The defense is a philosophical one, an almost judicial defense. It allows the lawyer, so to speak, to defend the person using elements of historical fact and the teaching of the community (kerygma?). In other words, Mark used only some of Peter’s teaching – Peter’s teaching providing the authority of acceptance – to tell the story of Jesus.

But, this is why I am attracted to this notion of Justine and Xenophon because it underscores the understanding of Zahn and Grant (and me).

Thoughts?

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
October 16th, 2012 by Joel

Ἀπομνημονεύματα – Justin Martyr, Xenophon, and the Evangelists

Sanzio 01 Socrates

Sanzio 01 Socrates (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Just putting some thoughts on paper here. The first recorded genre classification of the Gospels were by Justin Martyr. He writes,

All who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits (Apology I 67.3)

So, some have taken this to point to the ancient biographies although few knew the difference between ancient and modern biographies. But, I was thinking… Maybe Justin, the Platonist, used the word in a similar fashion to Xenophon who wrote some memoirs of Socrates (So-crates). These Memorabilia of Socrates presents the teacher as defending himself against the charges of the Athenians, but unlike Socrates’ Apology by the same author, this work is a running commentary on sayings and other things of Socrates meant to prove the innocence of the philosopher who died for his people. It is filled with dialogue, narrative, and other genres cobbled together by Xenophon, not as a matter of recording history but as a matter of preserving truth. Tons of stuff in there.

I’m not saying Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John were writing to in the style of Xenophon; however, their style may have allowed Justin to place the two together, especially if the early Church understand the Gospels as a defense of Jesus rather than a record of Jesus.

Thoughts?

Enhanced by Zemanta
July 5th, 2011 by Joel

Justin Martyr – Christus Victor

What is truth?

Image via Wikipedia

I’ve recently become interested in the powers which Christ defeated in the mythic Christus Victor. No one seems to name them. Perhaps I’m wrong, but the usual suspects, i.e., sin, death, etc…, are principalities where the powers rule. In reading modern theologians who espouse the Christus Victor model, even without calling it as such – I’m looking at you Bishop Willimon – no one actually names the powers.

I remembered reading somewhere, some time ago, that Justin Martyr referred to the other gods of the age as demons. Now, I generally have no use for Justin until I need him. He is either a heretic or a reference point, but nothing in between. Well, at least in my usage of him. Here, he serves as a valuable reference point.

His starting point is Psalm 95.5, in the LXX (if we would have needed the Hebrew, God wouldn’t have given us the Septuagint and St. Augustine), which reads,

Declare his glory among the nations (v3a) … because great is the Lord and very much praiseworthy; he is terrible to all the gods (v4), because all the gods of the nations are demons, but the Lord made the heavens. (v5) – New English Translation of the Septuagint.

Justin connects these demons to the story in Genesis 6.1-4 when the sons of God and the daughters of men produced heirs which were for Justin, demons. These demons tricked humanity into worshiping them as gods. Bauckham notes that Justin was able to use to denounce pagan culture as demonic, something altogether different than wicked and/or sinful. In Justin’s 2nd Apology, chapter 5, we read,

But if this idea take possession of some one, that if we acknowledge God as our helper, we should not, as we say, be oppressed and persecuted by the wicked; this, too, I will solve. God, when He had made the whole world, and subjected things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruits and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law–for these things also He evidently made for man–committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons; and besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and the punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they were enslaved by lustful passions; and among men they sowed murders, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness. Whence also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that it was the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them that did these things to men, and women, and cities, and nations, which they related, ascribed them to god himself, and to those who were accounted to be his very offspring, and to the offspring of those who were called his brothers, Neptune and Pluto, and to the children again of these their offspring. For whatever name each of the angels had given to himself and his children, by that name they called them.

Well, he names the powers, or at least the demons which suffered defeat. For him, the demons were the pagan gods. They were real, not just non-corporeal regimes. The demons were Zeus, Isis, Fudo and others who had long since tricked humanity into following them instead of the One True God. Justin goes on to set Christ against these powers:

…..for the sake of believing men, and for the destruction of the demons. And now you can learn this from what is under your own observation. For numberless demoniacs throughout the whole world, and in your city, many of our Christian men exorcising them in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, have healed and do heal, rendering helpless and driving the possessing devils out of the men, though they could not be cured by all the other exorcists, and those who used incantations and drugs. (2nd Apology, 6)

Greg Boyd notes that others among these early writers saw demons as the corrupting forces of this world:

Along the same lines, Tertullian argued that “[d]iseases and other grievous calamities” were the result of demons whose “great business is the ruin of mankind.” When “poison in the breeze blights the apples and the grain while in the flower, or kills them in the bud, or destroys them when they have reached maturity…” one can discern the work of these rebellious guardian spirits (Apology 22). For Tertullian, as for Origen and Athenagorus (and we could add Tatian, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria and others), creation doesn’t consistently reflect the beauty of its Creator because it has been, and is being, corrupted by demonic forces.

I haven’t read all of Justin, because I noted before, he is only present when I need him to bolster my arguments either against him or against someone else, which almost inevitably is still against him. It may be, however, that he has something to offer me in looking for the ‘biblical’ model of atonement. Other authors, more learned than I, note that he contains traces of the penal substitution theory, and that’s fine, so does the New Testament. But, there is an over-arching victory in the whole of the Canon, and one in which we are made partakers (we the Church) and indeed, more than conquerors which we cannot ignore. In this victory, Christ has defeated the powers and their principalities.

For some fuller treatments, see here and here. (Warning, .pdfs)

Enhanced by Zemanta
September 24th, 2010 by Joel

Justin Martyr on Fearlessly Confessing because of Creation

But lest some one say to us, “Go then all of you and kill yourselves, and pass even now to God, and do not trouble us,” I will tell you why we do not so, but why, when examined, we fearlessly confess. We have been taught that God did not make the world aimlessly, but for the sake of the human race; and we have before stated that He takes pleasure in those who imitate His properties, and is displeased with those that embrace what is worthless either in word or deed. If, then, we all kill ourselves we shall become the cause, as far as in us lies, why no one should be born, or instructed in the divine doctrines, or even why the human race should not exist; and we shall, if we so act, be ourselves acting in opposition to the will of God. But when we are examined, we make no denial, because we are not conscious of any evil, but count it impious not to speak the truth in all things, which also we know is pleasing to God, and because we are also now very desirous to deliver you from an unjust prejudice. Justin Martyr, Second Apology in ANF(1):189-90. (HT)

March 19th, 2010 by Joel

Isaiah 54.9, Wisdom 14: Which ἀντίτυπον of Baptism in 1st Peter 3.20-21?

In the Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Justin writes:

Read the rest of this entry »

December 24th, 2009 by Joel

The Virgin Birth and Justin Martyr

He is not my favorite Church Father, nor do I really consider him as a Church Father…but that is another story. Coming from Palestine, his take on this matter is still of some importance.

Read the rest of this entry »

December 18th, 2009 by Joel

Justin Martyr on the Eucharist

Doing a little study on this, for a reason, but found this interesting -

Read the rest of this entry »

October 28th, 2009 by Joel

Justin Martyr: Prophetic Gifts as Proof of Christianity

“For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time. And hence you ought to understand that [the gifts] formerly among your nation have been transferred to us. And just as there were false prophets contemporaneous with your holy prophets, so are there now many false teachers amongst us, of whom our Lord forewarned us to beware; so that in no respect are we deficient, since we know that He foreknew all that would happen to us after His resurrection from the dead and ascension to heaven. For He said we would be put to death, and hated for His name’s sake; and that many false prophets and false Christs would appear in His name, and deceive many: and so has it come about. For many have taught godless, blasphemous, and unholy doctrines, forging them in His name; have taught, too, and even yet are teaching, those things which proceed from the unclean spirit of the devil, and which were put into their hearts. Therefore we are most anxious that you be persuaded not to be misled by such persons, since we know that every one who can speak the truth, and yet speaks it not, shall be judged by God, as God testified by Ezekiel, when He said, I have made thee a watchman to the house of Judah. If the sinner sin, and thou warn him not, he himself shall die in his sin; but his blood will I require at thine hand. But if thou warn him, thou shalt be innocent.’4 And on this account we are, through fear, very earnest in desiring to converse [with men] according to the Scriptures, but not from love of money, or of glory, or of pleasure. For no man can convict us of any of these [vices]. No more do we wish to live like the rulers of your people, whom God reproaches when He says, Your rulers are companions of thieves, lovers of bribes, followers of the rewards.’5 Now, if you know certain amongst us to be of this sort, do not for their sakes blaspheme the Scriptures and Christ, and do not assiduously strive to give falsified interpretations. (Dialogue, 82)

September 28th, 2009 by Joel

How Emergent Was the Ancient Church?

Thanks to Fr. Stephen for this tip, which has helped to provide fodder for a few other posts this week. Blame him if you don’t like them.

Nathan Busenitz has posted on the growing trend among some in the Emergent Church to ‘get back to the roots of Christianity.’ I have to wonder if they would feel the same way if they read either Justin or Pliny the Younger’s account of the early Christian worship service:

Read the rest of this entry »

June 8th, 2009 by Joel

The Trinity: Comparing Numenius and Justin

justinmartyr_icon

Justin Martyrin the Philosopher's Pallium

Justin was one of the most learned men to ever take upon himself the name of Christian, of that there is no doubt – yet Justin has not fared well in later scholarship, due to his drive to combine Christianity with Platonist thought.

In the West he is known as the Martyr; in the East, he is known as the Philosopher – indeed, in his icons, he is always pictured with his philosopher’s pallium. In Rome, during the last years of his life, he opened up his own philosopher’s school, akin to those around him in learning the Greek Sophists.

There is little doubt that Justin had made himself known to the philosophers around him of his day – indeed, he progressed through each school before finding the Church. One of those he no doubt had some sort of contact with was Numenius of Apamea, who was a forefunner of the Neoplatonists.Origen as well as , Theodoret and Eusebius of Caesarea preserves his interaction with Christianity. Each of these can trace their doctrine of the Godhead directly to Justin, and perhaps past him to Valens. Numenius sought to restore the doctrines of Plato and to show that Plato did not stand at odds with Brahmins, Jews, Magi and Egyptians. He regularly called Plato the ‘Hellenized Moses.’ He even ventured an interpretation of Genesis.

Numenius stands as a forerunner to the semi-Arian trinity more fully developed by the Eusebian Party. But, how does Numenius and Justin compare? (For a brief analysis of G. Reale’s connection, see here.)

Numenius and Justin used the language of the philosopher’s – God was a Triad. In the Neoplatonic Writings of Numenius (Selene Books, 1917), we find language shared among Justin and the Neoplatonists of his day, including Justin’s ‘True God’ (which for both groups was transcendental that He had to create another, the Logos) and the ‘Another God’ which just used the hospitality of Abraham to demonstrate.

Justin did not use Numenius alone – but spoke of Philo (three times in his dialogues with Trypho) and can be associated with Xenocrates of Chalcedon (d.314 b.c.), Plato’s successor. It was Numenius, however, who had the most direct influence on Justin, and thus on Christianity. It was Numenius who had invented, rather redefined and introduced into the theological system, such terms as One, Demiurge, Father, Logos, World Soul. It seems that the first and major breaking point between Justin and Numenius was that Justin declared Christ to be the Second God and the Incarnation, the Logos.

Attached is a chart of the comparisons between Justin and Numenius. I have had a difficult time in attaching a table – so it is in pdf format.

March 17th, 2009 by Joel

Creeds: Second Century

We are continuing our week of examining early Church creeds with two creedal statements from the 2nd Century. The below creed is from Justin Martyr (Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldon, New York: The Christian Literature Company). We know that Justin generally referred to Christ as ‘another God’ (Trypho, 56).

We worship the God of the Christians, whom we consider One from the beginning, the creator and maker of all creation, visible and invisible.

And the Lord Jesus Christ, the Servant of God, who had also been proclaimed beforehand by the prophets as about to be present with race of men, the herald of salvation and teacher of good instructions.

Justin forcefully distinguishes the Servant of God from the God of the Christians.

During Hippolytus’ schism with the Church at Rome, during the trouble Modalism, he enlisted the aid of past Elders who seemingly issued a creedal statement against Noetus

We also know in truth one God, we know Christ, we know the Son, suffering as he suffered, dying as he died, and risen on the third day, and abiding at the right hand of the Father, and coming to judge the living and the dead. And in saying this we say what has been handed down to us.

According to Hippolytus, Noetus had stated,

“When indeed, then, the Father had not been born, He yet was justly styled Father; and when it pleased Him to undergo generation, having been begotten, He Himself became His own Son, not another’s.” (Book IX Refutation of All Heresies)

It should be remembered that while Justin had proclaimed Heraclitus as a ‘Christian’ although he lived some 600 years before Christ, Hippolytus accused the same deceased as being the progenitor of the heresy of Noetus. The heresy of Noetus is that the Father produced the Son and declared the Son the Father, creating a paradox and troublesome thought of patripassianism.

Unlike Justin in Europe, the Asians carried from God to Christ to the Son without removing Christ from God, but assigning the suffering to the Son.