What do you think?
Rate this book
Sources chrétiennes #507
First and Second Apologies
An English translation from Greek of Justin Martyr's two major apologetic works, which are recognized as a formative influence on the development of Christian theology in the early church.
78 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 150
75 people are currently reading
905 people want to read
About the author
Justin Martyr
183 books63 followersJustin Martyr, also known as Saint Justin (c. 100–165 CE), was an early Christian apologist, and is regarded as the foremost interpreter of the theory of the Logos in the 2nd century. He was martyred, alongside some of his students, and is considered a saint by the Roman Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, and the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Most of his works are lost, but two apologies and a dialogue did survive. The First Apology, his most well known text, passionately defends the morality of the Christian life, and provides various ethical and philosophical arguments to convince the Roman emperor, Antoninus, to abandon the persecution of the fledgling sect. Further, he also makes the theologically-innovative suggestion that the "seeds of Christianity" (manifestations of the Logos acting in history) actually predated Christ's incarnation. This notion allows him to claim many historical Greek philosophers (including Socrates and Plato), in whose works he was well studied, as unknowing Christians. (Wikipedia)
Most of his works are lost, but two apologies and a dialogue did survive. The First Apology, his most well known text, passionately defends the morality of the Christian life, and provides various ethical and philosophical arguments to convince the Roman emperor, Antoninus, to abandon the persecution of the fledgling sect. Further, he also makes the theologically-innovative suggestion that the "seeds of Christianity" (manifestations of the Logos acting in history) actually predated Christ's incarnation. This notion allows him to claim many historical Greek philosophers (including Socrates and Plato), in whose works he was well studied, as unknowing Christians. (Wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 59 reviews
December 13, 2015
Justin Martyr (AKA Saint Justin) was a second century Christian leader, teacher, and writer. Only three of his works survive today: the lengthy Dialogue with Trypho and two shorter apologies. This book contains both apologies, written around 156-58 or so and addressed to the emperors Antoninus Pius, his sons, and the Roman Senate.
An apology is a special kind of genre in Christian literature where the writer attempts to use logic and reason to defend the faith against outside attack. At the time Justin was writing, Christians were being persecuted by the Roman authorities for a number of reasons. If they weren't quite enemies of the state, their failure to embrace the ruler-cult that the various emperors liked to promote, along with their rejection of many other aspects of classical/pagan culture, made them a most unwelcome sect to many in high places.
Justin’s defense of Christians and their doctrine was much more engaging reading than I expected it to be, particularly the more famous First Apology. A lot of rhetorical literature from the first few centuries AD can be weighed down by sophistry, but Justin largely avoids falling into that trap. His logic is clear, easy to follow, and sound. His language doesn't ascend to the heights one can find in the best written parts of the Bible, but there are moments of quiet grandeur. Justin manages the difficult trick of defending Christian beliefs without ridiculing or belittling the pagan culture surrounding them, a skill some of his contemporaries were unable or unwilling to learn. And the insights into what the Christian faith was like around the year 156, and how that faith interacted with the pagan world around it at that time, were interesting. I found Justin’s descriptions of the mass in general and the Eucharist in particular to be especially fascinating; the similarities between how Christians of 156 and Christians of 2006 practiced their faith are striking. If Justin does descend into sophistry every now and then – particularly when he leans a little too hard on Old Testament prophecy to prove his points – I was more than willing to forgive him given all the things these writings do well.
“You can kill, but not hurt us” Justin proudly proclaims near the beginning of the First Apology. At the macro level, he was correct. Over 1,500 years after the Roman Empire crumbled, the church that Justin died for continues to shape the world. These short works provide an interesting glimpse into the challenges that church faced in the early going, and the arguments it used to defend itself against a sometimes hostile empire. 3.5 stars, recommended.
An apology is a special kind of genre in Christian literature where the writer attempts to use logic and reason to defend the faith against outside attack. At the time Justin was writing, Christians were being persecuted by the Roman authorities for a number of reasons. If they weren't quite enemies of the state, their failure to embrace the ruler-cult that the various emperors liked to promote, along with their rejection of many other aspects of classical/pagan culture, made them a most unwelcome sect to many in high places.
Justin’s defense of Christians and their doctrine was much more engaging reading than I expected it to be, particularly the more famous First Apology. A lot of rhetorical literature from the first few centuries AD can be weighed down by sophistry, but Justin largely avoids falling into that trap. His logic is clear, easy to follow, and sound. His language doesn't ascend to the heights one can find in the best written parts of the Bible, but there are moments of quiet grandeur. Justin manages the difficult trick of defending Christian beliefs without ridiculing or belittling the pagan culture surrounding them, a skill some of his contemporaries were unable or unwilling to learn. And the insights into what the Christian faith was like around the year 156, and how that faith interacted with the pagan world around it at that time, were interesting. I found Justin’s descriptions of the mass in general and the Eucharist in particular to be especially fascinating; the similarities between how Christians of 156 and Christians of 2006 practiced their faith are striking. If Justin does descend into sophistry every now and then – particularly when he leans a little too hard on Old Testament prophecy to prove his points – I was more than willing to forgive him given all the things these writings do well.
“You can kill, but not hurt us” Justin proudly proclaims near the beginning of the First Apology. At the macro level, he was correct. Over 1,500 years after the Roman Empire crumbled, the church that Justin died for continues to shape the world. These short works provide an interesting glimpse into the challenges that church faced in the early going, and the arguments it used to defend itself against a sometimes hostile empire. 3.5 stars, recommended.
February 6, 2017
A well organized appeal to the emperor to stop persecuting Christians. He first appeals to common sense. Why are Christians being persecuted simply because they are so-called? He then moves on to educate those reading the letter about what it is exactly Christians believe, how they are taught to submit to authorities, pay taxes, etc. Finally he seeks to prove Christianity by appeals to fulfilled prophecy. It is also interesting to note his responses to the different heresies of his day. Recommended for those interested in the history of the early church.
Read
October 29, 2024It’s been almost a decade since I’ve read Justin, and he’s even better now. Grateful for this early star in the church’s constellation.
August 5, 2017
But in no instance, not even in any of those called sons of Jupiter, did they imitate the being crucified; for it was not understood by them, all the things said of it having been put symbolically. And this, as the prophet foretold, is the greatest symbol of His power and rule; as is also proved by the things which fall under our observation. For consider all the things in the world, whether without this form they could be administered or have any community. For the sea is not traversed except that trophy which is called a sail abide safe in the ship; and the earth is not ploughed without it: diggers and mechanics do not their work, except with tools which have this shape. And the human form differs from that of the irrational animals in nothing else than in its being erect and having the hands extended, and having on the face extending from the forehead what is called the nose, through which there is respiration for the living creature; and this shows no other form than that of the cross. And so it was said by the prophet, “The breath before our face is the Lord Christ.”
It is not, then, that we hold the same opinions as others, but that all speak in imitation of ours.
It is not, then, that we hold the same opinions as others, but that all speak in imitation of ours.
March 26, 2024
A sobering look into the persecution taking place in the second century churches. Justin Martyr writes his apologies (or appeals) to Emperor Antonius Pius and his son, clarifying the doctrinal positions of the Christian faith compared to that of the pagans, and pleading that Christians not be put to death for following Christ. He argues much of his case from both philosophy and common sense, but also addresses the many written prophecies concerning Christ’s coming, his death, his descent into hades, and his resurrection. He ends the letter explaining why Christians are not afraid of death, and encourages the Emperor to judge rightly. This is an essential work of Christian literature and history.
May 3, 2016
Cité par Eusèbe, Justin de Naplouse est un Chrétien du début du deuxième siècle de notre ère. En ces temps difficiles pour la chrétienté, les autorités traquent les sympathisants de cette doctrine. Ceux qui témoignent (μαρτυρω - martyr) de leur foi, sont contraint d'abjurer sous la menace de tortures que certains préfèrent souffrir plutôt que de renier. On ne connaît pas avec précision les raisons qui motivent ces persécutions, donc on est réduit à supputer que les puissances politiques et religieuses en place pouvaient voir avec inquiétude le développement d'une possible rivale, et qu'elles excitaient les masses en répandant des calomnies odieuses. Ainsi courraient à leur sujet le bruit d'assassinat d'enfants, d'incestes, et autres abominations extravagantes.
Dans cet ouvrage, Justin écrit à l'empereur Marc Aurèle deux apologie des chrétiens, par lesquelles non seulement il souhaite infléchir la politique du souverain pour sauver ses coreligionnaires, mais aussi établir la religion chrétienne comme la seule et vraie philosophie digne adoptée par les sujets de l'Empire Romain. On connaît le goût de Marc-Aurèle pour la philosophie. Notre apologète se révèle également un philosophe très compétent.
Justin, après avoir démontré l'iniquité des persécutions, expose ensuite comment les chrétiens se distinguent avantageusement des païens par leurs mœurs paisibles et justes, et traçant un parallèle avec le procès de Socrate, indique que ceux qui prêchent la vérité sont les victimes des machinations des méchants. On se souvient du fait que Platon rejetait les dieux populaires, que Socrate, par dérision, jurait par le chien, que les fables fantastiques des poètes étaient considérées comme autant d'impiétés, et que Platon invoque plutôt une divinité unique cause de la création du monde, et plaide pour ce mythe du jugement des âmes après la mort. Si on se rapporte aux écrits de Cicéron (la nature des dieux, la divination), on voit qu'en petit comité, et loin des oreilles du peuple, les romains abordaient très librement le sujet de la religion, et qu'ils étaient partagés entre l'hypothèse de dieux sans rapport avec nous, ou bien en une divinité unique, mais que les prêtres polythéistes, sans convictions, avaient surtout à cœur de perpétuer les habitudes anciennes pour préserver la paix publique. Justin va admirablement bien utiliser ces faits pour présenter la doctrine chrétienne comme la véritable philosophie, en exposant toutes les similitudes qu'elles accusent. Il intrique si bien les deux univers qu'en présentant le voyage de Platon en Egypte comme l'occasion donné au philosophe de s'instruire des écrits de Moïse. Paradoxalement, cette thèse fut très bien reçue à Rome, qui vit alors en Platon un juif parlant grec, tant était favorable l'argument de la supériorité des civilisations antiques chez les anciens.
Mais le public auquel il s'adresse n'est pas la foule de la montagne ou de la synagogue de Capharnaüm, qui entend le langage du cœur et de l'espoir, ou qui est familier de la loi mosaïque, mais des responsables politiques romains, soucieux de la concorde, de raison d'état, et fins dialecticiens. Pour emporter leur adhésion, il faut des raisons tirées de la raison. Justin s'acquitte comme un maître de cette nécessité: d'abord, pour appuyer les faits, il se fonde sur l'antiquité des prophéties ayant annoncé la bonne nouvelle. Puis il expose les avantages à gouverner des sujets chrétiens, dociles, respectueux des lois, payant leurs impôts, ennemis des scandales et des séditions, craignant même de se mettre en colère; le voleur n'ose même plus commettre de méfait, retenu par la crainte du châtiment de la divinité, laquelle lit déjà dans l'âme l'intention du mal.
Sur l'article de la morale conjugale, sujet particulièrement cher aux romains, Justin va être très habile. En effet, on peux penser en lisant les Évangiles que le Christ estimait plus les liens d'amitié et de communauté que les liens du sang, source de division et d'accaparement, sinon pourquoi aurait-il dit que l'homme aurait pour ennemis les gens de sa maison ? Il n'accablait pas la femme adultère. Justin, au contraire, met en avant la fidélité et la chasteté des couples chrétiens, et fustige les mœurs des païens vicieux et corrompus. Le premier, il donne pour fin au mariage la procréation et l'éducation des enfants. Ce serait vraiment chicaner que le blâmer de procéder à une telle correction: d'abord il agit sous la nécessité pressante de sauver ceux de sa secte, mais surtout, comme un Solon, il rend possible l'établissement du christianisme, en le rendant acceptable pour toutes les couches de la société.
Enfin, il n'hésite pas à prévenir les réserves que pourraient formuler les sceptiques : pourquoi les chrétiens ne se suicident pas, s'ils attendent une vie future ? Pourquoi Dieu ne fait rien pour les sauver ? Que faire de la fatalité, et pourquoi Dieu punit si tout arrive nécessairement ? Le christianisme est-il fondé sur la crainte ou sur l'amour de la vertu? La diversité des lois humaines exclut-elle toute discussion d'ordre éthique ? A chacune de ces questions graves et passionnantes, Justin répond avec beaucoup de sens, d'érudition et d'à-propos, introduisant des notions nouvelles, comme le libre-arbitre. Il construit une vision du monde complète et cohérente, prête à être adoptée "clef-en-main", par ses contemporains.
J'ai été très impressionné par ces écrits de Justin, chrétien et philosophe, composées lors de circonstances graves. Avec surprise, c'est l'apologie du christianisme la plus convaincante et la plus attachante que j'ai pu lire.
Dans cet ouvrage, Justin écrit à l'empereur Marc Aurèle deux apologie des chrétiens, par lesquelles non seulement il souhaite infléchir la politique du souverain pour sauver ses coreligionnaires, mais aussi établir la religion chrétienne comme la seule et vraie philosophie digne adoptée par les sujets de l'Empire Romain. On connaît le goût de Marc-Aurèle pour la philosophie. Notre apologète se révèle également un philosophe très compétent.
Justin, après avoir démontré l'iniquité des persécutions, expose ensuite comment les chrétiens se distinguent avantageusement des païens par leurs mœurs paisibles et justes, et traçant un parallèle avec le procès de Socrate, indique que ceux qui prêchent la vérité sont les victimes des machinations des méchants. On se souvient du fait que Platon rejetait les dieux populaires, que Socrate, par dérision, jurait par le chien, que les fables fantastiques des poètes étaient considérées comme autant d'impiétés, et que Platon invoque plutôt une divinité unique cause de la création du monde, et plaide pour ce mythe du jugement des âmes après la mort. Si on se rapporte aux écrits de Cicéron (la nature des dieux, la divination), on voit qu'en petit comité, et loin des oreilles du peuple, les romains abordaient très librement le sujet de la religion, et qu'ils étaient partagés entre l'hypothèse de dieux sans rapport avec nous, ou bien en une divinité unique, mais que les prêtres polythéistes, sans convictions, avaient surtout à cœur de perpétuer les habitudes anciennes pour préserver la paix publique. Justin va admirablement bien utiliser ces faits pour présenter la doctrine chrétienne comme la véritable philosophie, en exposant toutes les similitudes qu'elles accusent. Il intrique si bien les deux univers qu'en présentant le voyage de Platon en Egypte comme l'occasion donné au philosophe de s'instruire des écrits de Moïse. Paradoxalement, cette thèse fut très bien reçue à Rome, qui vit alors en Platon un juif parlant grec, tant était favorable l'argument de la supériorité des civilisations antiques chez les anciens.
Mais le public auquel il s'adresse n'est pas la foule de la montagne ou de la synagogue de Capharnaüm, qui entend le langage du cœur et de l'espoir, ou qui est familier de la loi mosaïque, mais des responsables politiques romains, soucieux de la concorde, de raison d'état, et fins dialecticiens. Pour emporter leur adhésion, il faut des raisons tirées de la raison. Justin s'acquitte comme un maître de cette nécessité: d'abord, pour appuyer les faits, il se fonde sur l'antiquité des prophéties ayant annoncé la bonne nouvelle. Puis il expose les avantages à gouverner des sujets chrétiens, dociles, respectueux des lois, payant leurs impôts, ennemis des scandales et des séditions, craignant même de se mettre en colère; le voleur n'ose même plus commettre de méfait, retenu par la crainte du châtiment de la divinité, laquelle lit déjà dans l'âme l'intention du mal.
Sur l'article de la morale conjugale, sujet particulièrement cher aux romains, Justin va être très habile. En effet, on peux penser en lisant les Évangiles que le Christ estimait plus les liens d'amitié et de communauté que les liens du sang, source de division et d'accaparement, sinon pourquoi aurait-il dit que l'homme aurait pour ennemis les gens de sa maison ? Il n'accablait pas la femme adultère. Justin, au contraire, met en avant la fidélité et la chasteté des couples chrétiens, et fustige les mœurs des païens vicieux et corrompus. Le premier, il donne pour fin au mariage la procréation et l'éducation des enfants. Ce serait vraiment chicaner que le blâmer de procéder à une telle correction: d'abord il agit sous la nécessité pressante de sauver ceux de sa secte, mais surtout, comme un Solon, il rend possible l'établissement du christianisme, en le rendant acceptable pour toutes les couches de la société.
Enfin, il n'hésite pas à prévenir les réserves que pourraient formuler les sceptiques : pourquoi les chrétiens ne se suicident pas, s'ils attendent une vie future ? Pourquoi Dieu ne fait rien pour les sauver ? Que faire de la fatalité, et pourquoi Dieu punit si tout arrive nécessairement ? Le christianisme est-il fondé sur la crainte ou sur l'amour de la vertu? La diversité des lois humaines exclut-elle toute discussion d'ordre éthique ? A chacune de ces questions graves et passionnantes, Justin répond avec beaucoup de sens, d'érudition et d'à-propos, introduisant des notions nouvelles, comme le libre-arbitre. Il construit une vision du monde complète et cohérente, prête à être adoptée "clef-en-main", par ses contemporains.
J'ai été très impressionné par ces écrits de Justin, chrétien et philosophe, composées lors de circonstances graves. Avec surprise, c'est l'apologie du christianisme la plus convaincante et la plus attachante que j'ai pu lire.
January 17, 2025
Iustin este unul din acei autori uitati de istorie. Tot ce trebuie sa faci este sa il recitesti ca sa fii surprins, nu neaparat de profunzimea scrierilor sale, ci de un mod total diferit de a practica crestinismul decat cunoastem noi.
La apologeti accentul cade, in primul rand pe similitudinile de vocabular si concepte cu filosofia greaca - metafizic vorbind, platonica; etic vorbind, stoica. Incercarile lor de a le armoniza nu pot fi puse pe seama unui furt de idei - ci tocmai pe incercarea de a gasi un teren comun. Iar acel teren comun, ar spune ei, este ceea ce Logos-ul a implantat in om la creatie - ratiunea. Prin aceasta ratiune, zice Iustin, Socrate care a pus la indoiala zeii greci a fost condamnat la moarte ca "ateu". Iustin merge asa departe incat sa-i numeasca crestini pe anticii ce gandeau "cu logos-ul". Daca vrei teologie naturala, o gasesti pe indelete la apologeti. Mark Edwards intr-un studiu vorbeste de relevanta acestor scriitori pentru dezbaterile pe teologia naturala din secolul trecut.
Un alt lucru ce surprinde este perspectiva foarte inalta asupra liberului arbitru, ceva ce Iustin imparte si cu ceilalti apologeti. Incercand sa-i apere pe crestini de acuzele ce li se faceau, argumentul sau merge in felul urmator: de ce ne pedepsiti pe noi? Nu suntem noi cei mai virtuosi? Ar trebui sa fim, caci, daca nu suntem, credinta noastra ne asigura ca vom fi judecati pentru faptele noastre. La fel, aparand credinta crestina in fata fatalismului stoic, Iustin apara liberul arbitru, folosind un argument clasic la acea vreme: daca nu am fi liberi sa alegem intre bine si rau, atunci nu putem fi nici laudati, nici pedepsiti. Daca Dumnezeu pedepseste pe cel ce a facut pur si simplu ceea ce trebuia sa faca, atunci Dumnezeu face rau, ceea ce nu e posibil. Interesant ce raza lunga are argumentul asta, din secolul II pana la Wesleienii din zilele noastre.
Practic vorbind, in Apologiile sale, Iustin e cel mai cunoscut pentru marturia sacramentala din secolul II. In ultima parte a primei apologii, el vorbeste pe indelete despre inchinarea crestina. Desi are o viziune foarte inalta si asupra botezului si asupra euharistiei, inchinarea e una extrem de simpla, respectuasa, demna - departe, pe de-o parte, si de ce pretind traditionalii ca ar fi fost biserica primara, dar departe si de evanghelicii contemporani. Botezul pentru iertarea pacatelor (inclusiv al celui Adamic) si prezenta reala a lui Hristos in Euharistie, sunt lucruri pe care Iustin pare ca le ia de gata, parte a credintei sale generale si stravechi(?).
Pana la urma, de asta citesc textele din biserica primara - sfarama asteptarile. Suntem departe de ei si orice am zice altfel, gresim. Intrebarea e daca trebuie sa inceram sa ne intoarcem acolo sau nu. Primitivismul crestin ne-a aruncat de-atatea ori de-a lungul istoriei in tot felul de erezii, care mai de care mai detaliate. Dar chiar si asa, cateodata, o reintoarcere la acele origini - macar cu gandul - o regandire a lor, este necesara.
8.5/10
La apologeti accentul cade, in primul rand pe similitudinile de vocabular si concepte cu filosofia greaca - metafizic vorbind, platonica; etic vorbind, stoica. Incercarile lor de a le armoniza nu pot fi puse pe seama unui furt de idei - ci tocmai pe incercarea de a gasi un teren comun. Iar acel teren comun, ar spune ei, este ceea ce Logos-ul a implantat in om la creatie - ratiunea. Prin aceasta ratiune, zice Iustin, Socrate care a pus la indoiala zeii greci a fost condamnat la moarte ca "ateu". Iustin merge asa departe incat sa-i numeasca crestini pe anticii ce gandeau "cu logos-ul". Daca vrei teologie naturala, o gasesti pe indelete la apologeti. Mark Edwards intr-un studiu vorbeste de relevanta acestor scriitori pentru dezbaterile pe teologia naturala din secolul trecut.
Un alt lucru ce surprinde este perspectiva foarte inalta asupra liberului arbitru, ceva ce Iustin imparte si cu ceilalti apologeti. Incercand sa-i apere pe crestini de acuzele ce li se faceau, argumentul sau merge in felul urmator: de ce ne pedepsiti pe noi? Nu suntem noi cei mai virtuosi? Ar trebui sa fim, caci, daca nu suntem, credinta noastra ne asigura ca vom fi judecati pentru faptele noastre. La fel, aparand credinta crestina in fata fatalismului stoic, Iustin apara liberul arbitru, folosind un argument clasic la acea vreme: daca nu am fi liberi sa alegem intre bine si rau, atunci nu putem fi nici laudati, nici pedepsiti. Daca Dumnezeu pedepseste pe cel ce a facut pur si simplu ceea ce trebuia sa faca, atunci Dumnezeu face rau, ceea ce nu e posibil. Interesant ce raza lunga are argumentul asta, din secolul II pana la Wesleienii din zilele noastre.
Practic vorbind, in Apologiile sale, Iustin e cel mai cunoscut pentru marturia sacramentala din secolul II. In ultima parte a primei apologii, el vorbeste pe indelete despre inchinarea crestina. Desi are o viziune foarte inalta si asupra botezului si asupra euharistiei, inchinarea e una extrem de simpla, respectuasa, demna - departe, pe de-o parte, si de ce pretind traditionalii ca ar fi fost biserica primara, dar departe si de evanghelicii contemporani. Botezul pentru iertarea pacatelor (inclusiv al celui Adamic) si prezenta reala a lui Hristos in Euharistie, sunt lucruri pe care Iustin pare ca le ia de gata, parte a credintei sale generale si stravechi(?).
Pana la urma, de asta citesc textele din biserica primara - sfarama asteptarile. Suntem departe de ei si orice am zice altfel, gresim. Intrebarea e daca trebuie sa inceram sa ne intoarcem acolo sau nu. Primitivismul crestin ne-a aruncat de-atatea ori de-a lungul istoriei in tot felul de erezii, care mai de care mai detaliate. Dar chiar si asa, cateodata, o reintoarcere la acele origini - macar cu gandul - o regandire a lor, este necesara.
8.5/10
May 26, 2023
Justin Martyr must be read for two simple reasons:
1. he is the first recorder apologist of the Christian Faith
2. For all apologists, they must copy Justin’s technique.
Justin is speaking to the emperor of Rome pleading for justice for Christian’s not to be persecuted for their beliefs. Justin, as a former Platonist philosopher, uses stoic thought and Roman religions and traditions to show not only how their practices are similar and therefore shouldn’t be punished for belief alone, but how he believes that Christianity fulfills the desires in all those beliefs.
He does not claim moral superiority, belittles the other views, or condemns them to hell. Justin argues if you find a Christian to be wicked-stealing, lying, murdering, etc— please go ahead and double the punishment on them, they should know better if they claim to be Christian.
His humility, firmness, and understanding of scripture must be replicated in the current cultural dialogue. He does not speak from power, showing that every faith and action is nurtured within the person alone—only asking to be treated equally to his fellow citizens and showing where they agree and can disagree.
The most profound things that set Justin apart from all other apologists are these two quotes:
“and if anyone says that this is incredible or impossible? This mistake of ours is one which concerns us only, and no one else, as long as we are not convicted of doing any evil.”
And
“From from now on we will be silent, having done as much as we could, and having added the prayer that all people everywhere may be counted worthy of the truth.”
If an apologist cannot say these two things sincerely, while humbly engaging another’s idea and understanding of the world, they are not worth emulating in any manner.
1. he is the first recorder apologist of the Christian Faith
2. For all apologists, they must copy Justin’s technique.
Justin is speaking to the emperor of Rome pleading for justice for Christian’s not to be persecuted for their beliefs. Justin, as a former Platonist philosopher, uses stoic thought and Roman religions and traditions to show not only how their practices are similar and therefore shouldn’t be punished for belief alone, but how he believes that Christianity fulfills the desires in all those beliefs.
He does not claim moral superiority, belittles the other views, or condemns them to hell. Justin argues if you find a Christian to be wicked-stealing, lying, murdering, etc— please go ahead and double the punishment on them, they should know better if they claim to be Christian.
His humility, firmness, and understanding of scripture must be replicated in the current cultural dialogue. He does not speak from power, showing that every faith and action is nurtured within the person alone—only asking to be treated equally to his fellow citizens and showing where they agree and can disagree.
The most profound things that set Justin apart from all other apologists are these two quotes:
“and if anyone says that this is incredible or impossible? This mistake of ours is one which concerns us only, and no one else, as long as we are not convicted of doing any evil.”
And
“From from now on we will be silent, having done as much as we could, and having added the prayer that all people everywhere may be counted worthy of the truth.”
If an apologist cannot say these two things sincerely, while humbly engaging another’s idea and understanding of the world, they are not worth emulating in any manner.
August 22, 2020
Very interesting documents by a second-century christian philosopher to the Roman Emperor (First Apology) and the Roman Senate (Second Apology) defending Christianity. Unfortunately, the edition I read contained no commentary which I think would greatly increase understanding of this book.
Of note, the First Apology provides one of the earliest descriptions of a church service and the eucharist. He also advances the argument that other religions were the work of demons who were fallen angels.
Of note, the First Apology provides one of the earliest descriptions of a church service and the eucharist. He also advances the argument that other religions were the work of demons who were fallen angels.
November 5, 2021
Vibrante défense de la foi chrétienne soutenant son antériorité et sa supériorité sur la philosophie et la mythologie greco-romaine, qui sans l'allusion à la régénération baptismale aurait mérité 5 étoiles.
Read
May 3, 2020I read both of these awhile back, though not in this edition. Used sections in the First Apology for teaching high school students apologetics this spring.
March 30, 2021
Första apologin är betydligt intressantare än den andra. I båda fallen försöker författaren förklara kristendomen för icketroende. Tyvärr kommer jag faktiskt inte ihåg hans argument, vilket s.a.s. talar mot bokens beständighet.
October 28, 2024
What did the church believe and do?
Read.
Read.
May 19, 2025
Good apologies for Christianity and gives you more context to how Christians were living at the time in the Roman world.
December 28, 2018
The other set of books that I have stored at my parents' place is a complete set of the works of the early Church fathers. After my mission, I was intent on reading everything I could about early Christianity, but never was able to actually tackle the huge library of works by Augustine, Hippolytus, Basil, Hilary, and Jerome. I have run into the names in many other works I have read along the way, and perhaps can appreciate some of the context I get this time around.
I chose to start with the first volume, which includes works by... These are really the earliest works we have of early Christianity, from the 2nd and 3rd centuries, a few generations after the first apostles and disciples. From the introduction to the works of Justin, I gather that many before Latter-Day Saints have turned to these works in attempts to find correlations with their own doctrines: in one passage on the Eucharist, a footnote explains that Lutherans, etc, have sought to justify their doctrine for/against transubstantiation, as it isn't very clear. While such hunts are interesting, that isn't my primary intention here. Rather, I want to get a feel for what the faith of these early saints was like, what it was like to be a minority faith in a time of great change and persecution, and perhaps also to witness how they reconciled their doctrines with the world around them.
## Christians accused of atheism
Justin addresses his apologies of the Christian faith to the Roman emperor and Senate. Interestingly enough, throughout both apologies, one of Justin's main criticisms he seeks to address is the accusation of atheism. Because Christians refused to worship the many Roman gods, insisting on a strict monotheism (granted, it is clear throughout the letter that the doctrine of the Trinity is not established) that perhaps could come off as atheism:
*In obedience to Him, we not only deny that they who did such things [the Greek and Roman gods who performed many heinous acts], but assert that they are wicked and impious demons, whose actions will not bear comparison with those even of men desirous of virtue. Hence we are called atheists. And we confess that we are atheists, so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the most true God, the Father of righteousness and temperance and other virtues, who is free from all impurity.*
I find it compelling that both Christians and atheists were fellow sufferers and outcasts at one point in time. Christianity lived long enough to become the bad guy, and atheists and Christians don't seem to always be on the best of terms these days (granted, perhaps they weren't buddy buddy back then either). Still, perhaps we could learn a bit if we reflected on a time when Christianity wasn't a dominant force in society, we could learn form the vibrant yet humble example of these saints in the early Church.
## References to Greek/Roman philosophy and gods
The Bible makes some references to the religion and philosophy of Greeks and Romans. One memorable example is Paul's creative use of the altar to the unknown god:
*Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious.
For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with the inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him I declare unto you.*
But later generations of Christians, including philosopher converts such as Justin Martyr, who really interact with it and use it as a teaching tool. Justin uses several stories of Greek gods to demonstrate that what Christians believe isn't any crazier than what they already believe:
*And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Aesulapius who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt and ascended to heaven.*
He also called upon Greek philosophers such as Socrates and Plato, using them both as an example of similar persecution and claiming them as pre-Christian forbears:
*And those who by human birth were more ancient than Christ, when they attempted to consider and prove things by reason, were brought before the tribunals as impious persons and busybodies. And Socrates, who was more zealous in this direction than all of them, was accused of the very same crimes as ourselves. For they said that he was introducing new divinities, and did not consider those to be gods whom the state recognized.*
Perhaps if Talmage had read this (and perhaps he had), he would argue that this was already evidence that the Church had begun its long descent into apostasy, adding in elements of Greek and Roman philosophy to make it more respectable, but losing truth (read *The Great Apostasy* for his entire take on the matter). Perhaps so. But I think it is an inevitable aspect of having a growing, dynamic, and living Church on the one hand, and also an important admission that faith shouldn't divorce itself from reason. I think of the recent conference talk by Elder Soares where be compared the Amazon River to the community of saints:
*In a similar way that the Solimoes and Negro Rivers flow together to make the great Amazon River, the children of God come together in the restored Church of Jesus Christ from different social backgrounds, traditions, and cultures, forming this wonderful community of Saints in Christ. Eventually, as we encourage, support, and love each other, we combine to form a mighty force for good in the world. As followers of Jesus Christ, flowing as one river in this river of goodness, we will be able to provide "fresh water" to a thirsty world.*
I loved this talk, because it emphasized the good and even necessary aspect of bringing our own unique backgrounds to the table. It isn't just a dash of salt or pepper, but something integral to the structure and growth of the Church. What Justin Martyr brought to the early church as a philosopher and seeker of truth feels like it added a lot to the Church of his day.
## Devils abroad spreading negative things about Christians
There was one aspect of Justin's writings that made me look twice: he is constantly referring to demons, and warning his readers to not give heed to them because they will try to blind them to the truth:
*For we forewarn you to be on your guard, lest those demons whom we have been accusing should deceive you, and quite divert you from reading and understanding what we say.*
It sounds silly here, even a weak attempt at manipulation. When you are convinced of your message, and you tell your listeners not to listen to any sources that disagree with you because they're evil, you don't really believe your message can stand on its own merits. Latter-Day Saints have a similar tactic, though. I remember missionaries and members warning new converts to be extra careful after they are baptized, because Satan will do everything within his power to make sure they don't show up the next Sunday to receive the Holy Ghost.
## Doctrine of free will
I was also impressed by the centrality of free will, or in Mormon lingo, free agency (I suppose we can't say that anymore; read "moral agency") in Justin's message. Take this passage here where Justin refutes the idea of fate:
*But lest some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever happens, happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man's actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be. But it is by free choice they both walk uprightly and stumble, we thus demonstrate.*
That could have come out of a 2nd century edition of *Preach My Gospel*. We too assert the central aspect of free will in God's plan. Future Church fathers will make this all much more complicated (Pelagius, another advocate of free will, was accused by Augustine and others of denying grace). But Justin Martyr's logic here seems very sound, if both justice and mercy are to abound.
The apologies of Justin give a compelling picture of how the early saints wrestled with their faith. It still seems to be the same doctrine as preached in the Bible.
I chose to start with the first volume, which includes works by... These are really the earliest works we have of early Christianity, from the 2nd and 3rd centuries, a few generations after the first apostles and disciples. From the introduction to the works of Justin, I gather that many before Latter-Day Saints have turned to these works in attempts to find correlations with their own doctrines: in one passage on the Eucharist, a footnote explains that Lutherans, etc, have sought to justify their doctrine for/against transubstantiation, as it isn't very clear. While such hunts are interesting, that isn't my primary intention here. Rather, I want to get a feel for what the faith of these early saints was like, what it was like to be a minority faith in a time of great change and persecution, and perhaps also to witness how they reconciled their doctrines with the world around them.
## Christians accused of atheism
Justin addresses his apologies of the Christian faith to the Roman emperor and Senate. Interestingly enough, throughout both apologies, one of Justin's main criticisms he seeks to address is the accusation of atheism. Because Christians refused to worship the many Roman gods, insisting on a strict monotheism (granted, it is clear throughout the letter that the doctrine of the Trinity is not established) that perhaps could come off as atheism:
*In obedience to Him, we not only deny that they who did such things [the Greek and Roman gods who performed many heinous acts], but assert that they are wicked and impious demons, whose actions will not bear comparison with those even of men desirous of virtue. Hence we are called atheists. And we confess that we are atheists, so far as gods of this sort are concerned, but not with respect to the most true God, the Father of righteousness and temperance and other virtues, who is free from all impurity.*
I find it compelling that both Christians and atheists were fellow sufferers and outcasts at one point in time. Christianity lived long enough to become the bad guy, and atheists and Christians don't seem to always be on the best of terms these days (granted, perhaps they weren't buddy buddy back then either). Still, perhaps we could learn a bit if we reflected on a time when Christianity wasn't a dominant force in society, we could learn form the vibrant yet humble example of these saints in the early Church.
## References to Greek/Roman philosophy and gods
The Bible makes some references to the religion and philosophy of Greeks and Romans. One memorable example is Paul's creative use of the altar to the unknown god:
*Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are too superstitious.
For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with the inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him I declare unto you.*
But later generations of Christians, including philosopher converts such as Justin Martyr, who really interact with it and use it as a teaching tool. Justin uses several stories of Greek gods to demonstrate that what Christians believe isn't any crazier than what they already believe:
*And when we say also that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter. For you know how many sons your esteemed writers ascribed to Jupiter: Mercury, the interpreting word and teacher of all; Aesulapius who, though he was a great physician, was struck by a thunderbolt and ascended to heaven.*
He also called upon Greek philosophers such as Socrates and Plato, using them both as an example of similar persecution and claiming them as pre-Christian forbears:
*And those who by human birth were more ancient than Christ, when they attempted to consider and prove things by reason, were brought before the tribunals as impious persons and busybodies. And Socrates, who was more zealous in this direction than all of them, was accused of the very same crimes as ourselves. For they said that he was introducing new divinities, and did not consider those to be gods whom the state recognized.*
Perhaps if Talmage had read this (and perhaps he had), he would argue that this was already evidence that the Church had begun its long descent into apostasy, adding in elements of Greek and Roman philosophy to make it more respectable, but losing truth (read *The Great Apostasy* for his entire take on the matter). Perhaps so. But I think it is an inevitable aspect of having a growing, dynamic, and living Church on the one hand, and also an important admission that faith shouldn't divorce itself from reason. I think of the recent conference talk by Elder Soares where be compared the Amazon River to the community of saints:
*In a similar way that the Solimoes and Negro Rivers flow together to make the great Amazon River, the children of God come together in the restored Church of Jesus Christ from different social backgrounds, traditions, and cultures, forming this wonderful community of Saints in Christ. Eventually, as we encourage, support, and love each other, we combine to form a mighty force for good in the world. As followers of Jesus Christ, flowing as one river in this river of goodness, we will be able to provide "fresh water" to a thirsty world.*
I loved this talk, because it emphasized the good and even necessary aspect of bringing our own unique backgrounds to the table. It isn't just a dash of salt or pepper, but something integral to the structure and growth of the Church. What Justin Martyr brought to the early church as a philosopher and seeker of truth feels like it added a lot to the Church of his day.
## Devils abroad spreading negative things about Christians
There was one aspect of Justin's writings that made me look twice: he is constantly referring to demons, and warning his readers to not give heed to them because they will try to blind them to the truth:
*For we forewarn you to be on your guard, lest those demons whom we have been accusing should deceive you, and quite divert you from reading and understanding what we say.*
It sounds silly here, even a weak attempt at manipulation. When you are convinced of your message, and you tell your listeners not to listen to any sources that disagree with you because they're evil, you don't really believe your message can stand on its own merits. Latter-Day Saints have a similar tactic, though. I remember missionaries and members warning new converts to be extra careful after they are baptized, because Satan will do everything within his power to make sure they don't show up the next Sunday to receive the Holy Ghost.
## Doctrine of free will
I was also impressed by the centrality of free will, or in Mormon lingo, free agency (I suppose we can't say that anymore; read "moral agency") in Justin's message. Take this passage here where Justin refutes the idea of fate:
*But lest some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever happens, happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man's actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be. But it is by free choice they both walk uprightly and stumble, we thus demonstrate.*
That could have come out of a 2nd century edition of *Preach My Gospel*. We too assert the central aspect of free will in God's plan. Future Church fathers will make this all much more complicated (Pelagius, another advocate of free will, was accused by Augustine and others of denying grace). But Justin Martyr's logic here seems very sound, if both justice and mercy are to abound.
The apologies of Justin give a compelling picture of how the early saints wrestled with their faith. It still seems to be the same doctrine as preached in the Bible.
Read
February 18, 2017#2 Catholic Lifetime Reading Plan
Geen review van het boek zelf, daar ben ik niet voor gekwalificeerd.
Wel een review van deze editie (Paulist Press). Ik ben blij dat ik deze editie gekozen heb. Prijzig, maar zeer de moeite waard. Het boek bestaat voor 2/3 uit voetnoten en zonder die voetnoten had ik er niets van kunnen maken. Zelfs de voetnoten waren nog erg lastig om te lezen, vol verwijzingen naar vorige voetnoten en andere literatuur.
Geen review van het boek zelf, daar ben ik niet voor gekwalificeerd.
Wel een review van deze editie (Paulist Press). Ik ben blij dat ik deze editie gekozen heb. Prijzig, maar zeer de moeite waard. Het boek bestaat voor 2/3 uit voetnoten en zonder die voetnoten had ik er niets van kunnen maken. Zelfs de voetnoten waren nog erg lastig om te lezen, vol verwijzingen naar vorige voetnoten en andere literatuur.
May 11, 2013
So refreshing to read Justin Martyr defend Christianity with sound reason in the midst of a Roman and Greek culture that worshiped pagan gods. He does an excellent job showing how many Greek gods imitated Christ partially, but none of them grasped who he really was because none of them grasped the cross. I enjoyed reading Justin's view of how Christ was the 'Logos' that the philosophers talked about and contemplated. Even Plato reasoned about eternal things, but couldn't grasp Christ being the Logos incarnate. Justin does an excellent job going through the prophets' messianic references and how Christ fulfilled them. I would recommend this book to one seeking Truth.
April 11, 2022
Justin martyr was one of the first apologists for the Christian faith and I really enjoyed reading this. I would have benefited from an edition with some sort of annotations or notes, however, because there were many things I ended up researching because I wasn't sure what he meant or was referring to.
June 12, 2016
The Logos
As a result of having recently read A History Of Christianity , I compiled a list of historically influential Christian writers to consider reading. Among the earliest was Justin Martyr (100–165) who appealed to me because he was one of the first to identify Christ in conjunction with the “Logos” (the Word, Reason, or Rationality). Some of the basis for this assertion is John I: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” and also the book of Genesis wherein God uses His Word to speak forth the creation, i.e. “And God said, ‘let their be light’ and there was light”, and on and on.
Justin asserts that the “Logos” existed in the earth even before the appearance of Christ, referring specifically to Socrates , as one given to the elevation of Reason (the Word, the Logos). Justin quotes Socrates saying: “But a man must in no wise be honored before the truth.” It is interesting that Socrates was similarly martyred, like Justin, for refusing to worship the gods of the State.
Justin acknowledges that Reason subsequently took shape and became Man, in the form of Jesus Christ. Perhaps the latent conception originates here for the “Mental Concept Of Reason” as God; being a prerequisite for the later “Physical Manifestation Of Reason” as Jesus, which is subsequently followed by the embodiment of “Reason In Humanity”, as Spirit.
Martyrdom
Another reason Justin is interesting is because he was among the earliest martyrs. Justin writes as follows in the First and Second Apologies.
“Reason directs those who are truly pious and philosophical to honor and love only what is true, declining to follow traditional opinions, if these be worthless. It is incumbent on the lover of truth, by all means, and if death be threatened, even before his own life, to choose to do and say what is right. To not be flattered by prejudice or by a desire of pleasing superstitious men, nor induced by irrational impulse.” -Justin Martyr
Isn’t this exactly what Christ died for? For refusing to deny His Sonship? For simply standing firm in the truth? For simply refusing to acquiescence to a lie? Why can’t we humans today emulate such a stance? Is standing up for the truth that difficult? Apparently it is, as it has cost the lives of countless early Christians, such as Justin, who sacrificed themselves as martyrs doing that very thing.
Justin Martyr asserts that it is by ones deeds that it becomes apparent what kind of person they are. If we truly desire the eternal and pure life, why would we ever deny the Logos? Justin contends that such denial is a quest for a personal human kingdom (a kingdom of the “self”), instead of God’s righteous kingdom. But such a denial is clearly contrary to the truth integrated into us by the Logos; and to utter a lie is to utter that which is contrary to God’s kingdom. Early Christians, like Justin, chose martyrdom instead of falsifying against the kingdom. Their firm stance was necessary for sustaining the early church.
The Idolatry of Society
Why can’t we follow that which pleases our Rational faculties? There are many who refrain from espousing their Reason for fear of what others may think or say about them. There are many who wouldn’t dare to publish their convictions, or even assert themselves in a public discussion, for fear of what others might think or say of them. This is governance, not by Reason, but by the dictates of society. This is enslavement by an unrepressed fear of what others may say or think. Quite simply, this is about being more concerned with ones personal perception to others than of transmission of Truth and Reason. Such is the idolatry of societies. And, in the times of Justin that society embraced the Greek and Roman pantheon of paganism.
Justin Martyr responded to those who would challenge the manifestation of God as Logos by questioning the absurdity of the pantheon of Greek Gods, labeling them as demonic and in such proliferation that one could scarcely even remember them all. Justin rightly asserted that this pantheon called men away from Reason. Such a pantheon persists, even today, in popular Christian mythologies that seek to deify and worship an entire host of heavenly beings.
Justin contended that it is evil spirits that demand pagan sacrifices and that people who choose “custom” over Truth are foolish. Justin points out that the Logos has no need of streams of blood, libations, and incense. Justin contends that it is a violation of Reason to waste by fire that which God has brought into being for human sustenance; and that we should instead use it with gratitude. Justin illustrates that Jesus Christ was born for the purpose of showing us the absurdity of animal sacrifice and the glory in self-sacrifice (of sacrificing our worldliness by standing firm in the Truth that is God). We come to God, not through ritual and sacrifice, but through conscious devotion to the Truth.
What Constitutes A Conscious Devotion to the Truth (Logos)?
When one understands that God knows and sees all, that nothing, whether actually done, intended, or even merely thought, escapes the knowledge of God, then one may endeavor to maintain a purity of thought and action, even when confronted with those who would coerce one toward evil motivations. Knowing that we are constantly observed is life changing.
We are different when we are watched. The idea of being watched by a Holy One is a revelation because we come to understand that all acts, and even all thoughts, are seen by Him. This revelation, once it leaps to the forefront of our consciousness, changes our lives. When sustained in our consciousness, it can defeat every sin.
As the struggle against the physical urges gains magnitude, we can relish in the fact that He is there, with us, constantly aware of our temptations, and aware that we possess the capacity to win, if we will but dwell in Him. His presence elevates us above and beyond mere physicality, lifting us to an awareness of our spirit, which grows and gains sustenance through the defeat of physical temptations. As It grows, our physical self is diminished in Its favor.
God’s Semen
Justin finds it curious that some men can believe that a small drop of slimy human seed can come to form a fully operable person but not believe in the resurrection. Justin suggests that you should observe the human seed from a man and contemplate it, that you might consider how this slimy substance could produce the workable constituency of bones, muscles, and flesh that constitute a living person.
How can one believe that persons can be produced from such a small drop of slime and incredulous that persons might arise again, even after they have been dissolved? For in those persons who believe, the seed of God abides. Wouldn’t the seed of God be much more powerful than the seed of man? God’s seed is the Word and it is by this seed that the first born of God emerged. God uttered the Word such that the Word was begotten among men. (Justin actually deploys the term: “spermatic Word”)
And from Him went forth more, twelve in number, illiterate, but bearing forth the Word, the seed of God, which is now proclaimed throughout the earth. Those who let Him enter and thereby receive His grace are implanted with His seed, which impregnates them with immortality. Justin writes of this as follows:
“…these things can be heard and learned from persons who do not even know the forms of the letters, who are uneducated and barbarous in speech, though wise and believing in mind; some, indeed, even maimed and deprived of eyesight; so that you may understand that these things are not the effect of human wisdom, but are uttered by the power of God.” –Justin Martyr
Writing much later, in the 20th century, theologian Paul Tillich, remarks about the Protestant rejection of sexual symbolism in Christianity as follows: "Protestantism, in rejecting sexual symbolism, is in danger not only of losing much symbolic wealth but also of cutting off the sexual realm from the ground of being and meaning in which it is rooted and from which it gets its consecration."
The Barren & Unfruitful
But we know that some seeds fall upon rocky soil and some men allow fear and selfishness to pervert their blossoming. Instead, they stay enslaved to themselves. The most insidious form of slavery is slavery to yourself: to the shackles of obesity, to lustful passions, to the bondage of substance abuse, to the forced labor of pathological accumulation, to the trappings of prideful arrogance, etc. The worst forms of slavery are self-inflicted and may be broken wherever and whenever one succeeds in removing the blinding scales from their eyes and awakening. The Word comes to us in order to free us from these self-inflicted shackles.
Christ signifies the freedom that awaits us. Justin points out that the human form, being erect and having the hands extended, shows no other form than that of the cross. As such, the cross becomes a symbol for humanity. The cross symbolizes Christ’s stance for humanity against all who would exploit others for the sake of the pathological accumulation of resources. There are those who hoard resources even in the very presence of those who suffer miserably due to a lack of those very same resources. Resources are hoarded in such abundance that they could never ever possibly be used up by the hoarder, not even in the hoarders entire lifetime!
When such hoarding persists for several generations, the hoarders can become self-inflated, thinking of themselves as above common humanity, and believing they are specially blessed by God to dwell in luxury, in the very face of the oppressed. Such ones may perversely refer to this as “grace”, as God singling them out for special blessings of wealth, instead of themselves conveying these blessings on to others, as Christ so graciously distributed his power upon the afflicted.
Quite simply, it is to the barren and the unfruitful that those actually and truly blessed are called to minister. We know them by their unfruitfulness. They are not to be shunned, but rather they are the very ones in need of ministry. They are barren because they have yet to become impregnated with the Word.
I loved this. It’s so cool to read something written more than 1800 years ago.
October 12, 2022
A fundamental text of early Christian apologetics which sketches a model for the relation of theology and philosophy which is still debated in the 21st century, St Justin Martyr's "First Apology" and "Second Apology" were written around 150 A.D. by a skilled Christian philosopher who was born near Samaria but was most active in Rome, where he was eventually martyred.
There are several notable moves that Justin makes in these apologies which we would be wise to note today. The first is his point that Logos is the Word or Reason which underlies all things in the cosmos, this is the Son incarnated in Jesus Christ. Since this Logos is pre-existent and reveals the mind of God, it therefore can be glimpsed in all who loved truth and pursued the right worship of the one God before the very birth of Christ. Socrates is the greatest exemplar (other than the Israelite patriarchs, prophets and pious kings).
This leads Justin to describe his idea of "Logos spermatikos," or "sowing Word." His idea is that the Word is the Sower in the Lord's parable (Matt. 13:1-23) who sows and disseminates the seed of reason/truth across Greek and barbarian civilizations. The pre-Socratic Heraclitus is one who had this Logos sown within himself along with Socrates. The "Logos spermatikos" leaves its mark in people as is evidenced by their rejection of false gods and demons and their pursuit of the high God. Justin writes in paragraph 10 of the Second Apology: "What we have, then, appears to be greater than all human teaching, because the whole rational principle became Christ, who appeared fro our sake, body, and reason, and soul. For whatever either lawgivers or philosophers uttered well, they elaborated according to their share of logos by invention and contemplation. But since they did not know all that concerns logos, who is Christ, they often contradicted themselves" (80). In another interesting passage, Justin points out that Christ taught in short, pithy statements as He was no sophist, like the true philosophers' opponents. The Word will not waste words in elaborate demonstrates of eloquence; it will shove away falsehood and embrace truth and goodness only.
Like Philo and other Jewish or Christian philosophers from the early centuries A.D., Justin tries to demonstrate that Plato borrowed ideas from Moses, and that Moses is an undeniably more ancient authority than any Greek philosopher. Greek philosophy, via Egypt, is therefore reliant upon Israelite religion for its understanding of creation, Logos, God.
Another key idea is that the cross of Jesus is a fundamental shape and pattern, underlying everything in the human experience from the plough which breaks up the soil to the victory banners of the Romans. In this we moderns see a cosmic-picture of the cross that we've perhaps lost. We see it as a torture device, a demonstration of the lengths that God's Son would take to empty Himself of glory and die for our sakes. Justin sees this as well, but then he sees the pattern of cruciformity throughout all creation and even all culture. Justin even sees the human face (nose and brow) as making a cross.
Finally, I'll point out that Justin understands that the Old Testament prophetically predicts the events of Christ's birth, ministry, death, and resurrection, and that the Bible points to a final judgment of resurrected people. Some will enter eternal life and others will enter eternal fire. The choice is up to each individual, for God has given humans freedom and reason (Logos) to choose righteousness. Without God's gifts, however, especially his gift of the Logos-made-flesh to save humanity from sin and death, salvation would be impossible. Indeed, without Christ-Logos all human striving is utterly worthless.
There are several notable moves that Justin makes in these apologies which we would be wise to note today. The first is his point that Logos is the Word or Reason which underlies all things in the cosmos, this is the Son incarnated in Jesus Christ. Since this Logos is pre-existent and reveals the mind of God, it therefore can be glimpsed in all who loved truth and pursued the right worship of the one God before the very birth of Christ. Socrates is the greatest exemplar (other than the Israelite patriarchs, prophets and pious kings).
This leads Justin to describe his idea of "Logos spermatikos," or "sowing Word." His idea is that the Word is the Sower in the Lord's parable (Matt. 13:1-23) who sows and disseminates the seed of reason/truth across Greek and barbarian civilizations. The pre-Socratic Heraclitus is one who had this Logos sown within himself along with Socrates. The "Logos spermatikos" leaves its mark in people as is evidenced by their rejection of false gods and demons and their pursuit of the high God. Justin writes in paragraph 10 of the Second Apology: "What we have, then, appears to be greater than all human teaching, because the whole rational principle became Christ, who appeared fro our sake, body, and reason, and soul. For whatever either lawgivers or philosophers uttered well, they elaborated according to their share of logos by invention and contemplation. But since they did not know all that concerns logos, who is Christ, they often contradicted themselves" (80). In another interesting passage, Justin points out that Christ taught in short, pithy statements as He was no sophist, like the true philosophers' opponents. The Word will not waste words in elaborate demonstrates of eloquence; it will shove away falsehood and embrace truth and goodness only.
Like Philo and other Jewish or Christian philosophers from the early centuries A.D., Justin tries to demonstrate that Plato borrowed ideas from Moses, and that Moses is an undeniably more ancient authority than any Greek philosopher. Greek philosophy, via Egypt, is therefore reliant upon Israelite religion for its understanding of creation, Logos, God.
Another key idea is that the cross of Jesus is a fundamental shape and pattern, underlying everything in the human experience from the plough which breaks up the soil to the victory banners of the Romans. In this we moderns see a cosmic-picture of the cross that we've perhaps lost. We see it as a torture device, a demonstration of the lengths that God's Son would take to empty Himself of glory and die for our sakes. Justin sees this as well, but then he sees the pattern of cruciformity throughout all creation and even all culture. Justin even sees the human face (nose and brow) as making a cross.
Finally, I'll point out that Justin understands that the Old Testament prophetically predicts the events of Christ's birth, ministry, death, and resurrection, and that the Bible points to a final judgment of resurrected people. Some will enter eternal life and others will enter eternal fire. The choice is up to each individual, for God has given humans freedom and reason (Logos) to choose righteousness. Without God's gifts, however, especially his gift of the Logos-made-flesh to save humanity from sin and death, salvation would be impossible. Indeed, without Christ-Logos all human striving is utterly worthless.
November 11, 2017
After the age of the Apostolic Fathers came the age of the Apologists (Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Aristides), and undoubtedly the greatest of these was Justin Martyr. This marked a new era of Christian engagement with the Greco-Roman world (e.g. Justin's 1st & 2nd Apologies), but also with Jewish thought (e.g. Justin's 'Dialogue with Trypho').
Whilst both Judaism and Christianity's monotheism precluded the syncretism of also worshipping the pantheon of gods, Judaism was - uniquely - tolerated, while Christianity was despised. Why? Because what was ancient was respected and even revered and, even though Judaism excluded Roman gods, at least it was old and therefore respectable. Christianity, on the other hand, was perceived as a brand new cult with nothing to recommend it (new = bad, the precise opposite of today!). In his Apologies, Justin argues that Christianity is in actual fact the oldest of all philosophies, even going so far as to saying that the philosophy and religion of the Greco-Roman world actually plagiarised from the Old Testament prophets!
Things that struck me when reading this:
- Justin's nuanced theology of other religions. There's been much debate on whether other religions - from the perspective of Christianity - stem from either seeds of the truth and sincerely seeking the true God, or whether they must have demonic origin. Justin deftly finds that the true origin of all religion is from the True Logos, which all humans (as logical animals) participate in to some degree. However, demons have twisted this Logic to get men to worship idols and take them away from the True Logos, preventing them from knowing the Unbegotten God. And so other religions can only be properly understood theologically from the integration of both these perspectives.
- His numerous Trinitarian formulas. The Trinity originated at the Council of Nicaea, you say? Put some of Justin in your pipe and smoke it!
- His copious - and sometimes lengthy - quotations from the Old and New Testaments. This has huge significance for how early New Testament documents were treated as Scripture, and how it was specifically the canonical writings that were treated as such the vast majority of the time. A lesson for budding apologists, if there ever was one, about the importance of using of Scripture when engaging with outsiders.
- Neo-Pelagian notes and soundings at various points, which knocked off a star for me.
-His repeated emphasis on an eternal hell. He talks about it time and time again.
Whilst both Judaism and Christianity's monotheism precluded the syncretism of also worshipping the pantheon of gods, Judaism was - uniquely - tolerated, while Christianity was despised. Why? Because what was ancient was respected and even revered and, even though Judaism excluded Roman gods, at least it was old and therefore respectable. Christianity, on the other hand, was perceived as a brand new cult with nothing to recommend it (new = bad, the precise opposite of today!). In his Apologies, Justin argues that Christianity is in actual fact the oldest of all philosophies, even going so far as to saying that the philosophy and religion of the Greco-Roman world actually plagiarised from the Old Testament prophets!
Things that struck me when reading this:
- Justin's nuanced theology of other religions. There's been much debate on whether other religions - from the perspective of Christianity - stem from either seeds of the truth and sincerely seeking the true God, or whether they must have demonic origin. Justin deftly finds that the true origin of all religion is from the True Logos, which all humans (as logical animals) participate in to some degree. However, demons have twisted this Logic to get men to worship idols and take them away from the True Logos, preventing them from knowing the Unbegotten God. And so other religions can only be properly understood theologically from the integration of both these perspectives.
- His numerous Trinitarian formulas. The Trinity originated at the Council of Nicaea, you say? Put some of Justin in your pipe and smoke it!
- His copious - and sometimes lengthy - quotations from the Old and New Testaments. This has huge significance for how early New Testament documents were treated as Scripture, and how it was specifically the canonical writings that were treated as such the vast majority of the time. A lesson for budding apologists, if there ever was one, about the importance of using of Scripture when engaging with outsiders.
- Neo-Pelagian notes and soundings at various points, which knocked off a star for me.
-His repeated emphasis on an eternal hell. He talks about it time and time again.
February 16, 2020
The last complete works by Justin Martyr on my list to read, the First Apology I actually listened to on Librivox. The reading was enough to keep me engaged, which is more than I can say for many such recordings (I think only the stories of H. Beam Piper have previously been very compelling--and those like listening to old sci-fi radio shows, they were so good). Part of my engagement here likely had to do with my interest in the subject, so I'm not how well the listening my translate to others.
As for the text itself, it falls in line with Justin's second apology. What struck me of particular interest in this particular apology were Justin's angeology (his idea that demons are the pagan gods), his concepts about the Holy Spririt (contradictory--worshipping it in chapter 6 but seeming to claim it more like a power of God elsewhere), early worship practices, and his ideas about eternal punishment. One sees, to some extent, how by Justin's time many of the doctrines of the later Christian church were already forged--and different to some extent from New Testament writings.
The much shorter "Second Apology" I read on my phone over the course of a few days. It too includes some interesting ideas about angels and eternal punishment. Both apologies focus much on trying to get the Roman rulers to not afflict Christians with punishment for their mere declaration of belief.
As for the text itself, it falls in line with Justin's second apology. What struck me of particular interest in this particular apology were Justin's angeology (his idea that demons are the pagan gods), his concepts about the Holy Spririt (contradictory--worshipping it in chapter 6 but seeming to claim it more like a power of God elsewhere), early worship practices, and his ideas about eternal punishment. One sees, to some extent, how by Justin's time many of the doctrines of the later Christian church were already forged--and different to some extent from New Testament writings.
The much shorter "Second Apology" I read on my phone over the course of a few days. It too includes some interesting ideas about angels and eternal punishment. Both apologies focus much on trying to get the Roman rulers to not afflict Christians with punishment for their mere declaration of belief.
June 3, 2021
Interesting read from an early Church father, Justin Martyr. Two apologies or defenses for the Christians in his day that were facing persecution for very erroneous ideas. He gives a good amount of attention (at least what stood out to me) to a lot of the ancient world's mythology and philosophy being based on demonic influence, with the intention of blurring the Gospel with all sorts of false ideas. They (demonic influence) were ignorant though of certain prophecies so the world was flooded with myths, legends, gods and goddesses that are all twists on the truth. There is more on Rome's hypocritical condemning of Christians for things they believed yet accepting similar ideas or 'truths' from their own (and Greek) philosophers. Justin seemed familiar with the rampant philosophy of his day and took it head on in his defense.
Not a must read for every Christian but a recommended read none the less. One thing I'm noticing with early church writers is that the more threatening death was on the lives of early believers, the less regard they had for death. It was an immediate resolve they had for it. How I feel that has reversed over the years in the evangelical world.
About 2.5 hours reading time for an average/slow reader.
Not a must read for every Christian but a recommended read none the less. One thing I'm noticing with early church writers is that the more threatening death was on the lives of early believers, the less regard they had for death. It was an immediate resolve they had for it. How I feel that has reversed over the years in the evangelical world.
About 2.5 hours reading time for an average/slow reader.
April 5, 2018
Can't Beat Second Century Literature!
Obviously, Justin Martyr is required reading for anyone wanting to get closer to the Apostolic Fathers (and Mothers). Writing to Caesar Antonius Pius (one of the "5 Good Emperors), he clearly stated the theology of the Word, thereby validating the existing religion with the caveat that it was incomplete. Where previous men had recieved the Word but did not know the Word, Christ was the Word in flesh. Justin also showed how Christians at the time (in devotion to Christ and through the influence of the Holy Spirit) adhered to the highest moral standards of the Roman people, yet the Roman gods would be considered immoral by Roman ethics. Also, the Romans performed acts to their gods that reproduced the crimes the Christians were accused of doing (pouring blood on an alternative for the god's nourishment was compared to "drinking the blood of Christ" - one was literal and one was figurative). I have to admit, this copy had some minor spelling errors and strange font at times. But I didn't pay much for this edition and I will read it again.
Obviously, Justin Martyr is required reading for anyone wanting to get closer to the Apostolic Fathers (and Mothers). Writing to Caesar Antonius Pius (one of the "5 Good Emperors), he clearly stated the theology of the Word, thereby validating the existing religion with the caveat that it was incomplete. Where previous men had recieved the Word but did not know the Word, Christ was the Word in flesh. Justin also showed how Christians at the time (in devotion to Christ and through the influence of the Holy Spirit) adhered to the highest moral standards of the Roman people, yet the Roman gods would be considered immoral by Roman ethics. Also, the Romans performed acts to their gods that reproduced the crimes the Christians were accused of doing (pouring blood on an alternative for the god's nourishment was compared to "drinking the blood of Christ" - one was literal and one was figurative). I have to admit, this copy had some minor spelling errors and strange font at times. But I didn't pay much for this edition and I will read it again.
July 30, 2018
Decent translation, great content and important figure.
This short book is a great glimpse into what the 2nd century church had to deal with in opposition; much of it misunderstanding and ignorance on the opposing sides of the Christians. Christians got accused of immorality, atheism and even cannibalism. The majority of this book is Justin defending Christians and their positions that were completely misunderstood and outright lied about. Justin spends much of his time refuting these accusations, even appealing to the pagan foundation of truth (wisdom) and seeking Justice from Rome, to the Christians.
Another good aspect of this book was the case Justin made for Christianity. Some of his primary reasons were prophesy, perseverance through persecution and the superior morality of Christianity in comparing to Pagan Rome.
In sum, good read, and inspirational with an “okay” translation.
This short book is a great glimpse into what the 2nd century church had to deal with in opposition; much of it misunderstanding and ignorance on the opposing sides of the Christians. Christians got accused of immorality, atheism and even cannibalism. The majority of this book is Justin defending Christians and their positions that were completely misunderstood and outright lied about. Justin spends much of his time refuting these accusations, even appealing to the pagan foundation of truth (wisdom) and seeking Justice from Rome, to the Christians.
Another good aspect of this book was the case Justin made for Christianity. Some of his primary reasons were prophesy, perseverance through persecution and the superior morality of Christianity in comparing to Pagan Rome.
In sum, good read, and inspirational with an “okay” translation.
June 30, 2022
One of the earliest known apologetic Christian works, written in the second century, gives a lot of insight into what Christians faced at the hands of the Romans at that time. Written in concise and clear language, Justyn argues for the superiority of Christianity over the pagan religions of Rome. He seeks to demonstrate by the sayings of Jesus, his fulfillment of prophecy, and the profound effect it has had on people’s lives to that Christianity is the one true religion. In this way it is a precursor to St. Augustine’s City of God written 300 years later.He also discusses how the principles and symbols used in the Old Testament had an effect on the Greek poets and philosophers. While it lacks the depth and brilliance of St. Augustine’s work, the date it was written makes it a significant work of Christianity.
January 10, 2022
Justin Martyr, a second-century (AD/CE) Christian, wrote two letters - one to the Roman emperor Pius and his sons and the other to the Roman senate. Christians were being persecuted and killed by Romans with full consent and collusion from those in charge and Justin was pointing out what they were doing was unjust and why it was unjust.
Basically, many Romans who held high offices considered themselves to be philosophers or Stoics and were proud of their 'broad-mindedness'. Therefore Justin, who was very familiar with Greek mythology and philosophy, wrote a point-by-point letter of why Christianity was and is true, using and comparing a variety of philosophies.
His letters are as applicable today as in the second century. Excellent logic and thought.
Basically, many Romans who held high offices considered themselves to be philosophers or Stoics and were proud of their 'broad-mindedness'. Therefore Justin, who was very familiar with Greek mythology and philosophy, wrote a point-by-point letter of why Christianity was and is true, using and comparing a variety of philosophies.
His letters are as applicable today as in the second century. Excellent logic and thought.
August 8, 2023
What a beautiful apology on Christianity's fulfillment of both Jewish revelation and Greek rationalism in the figure of Jesus Christ.
St Justin Martyr wrote this as an apology for the Christian faith and as a defence against the accusations of Christians like him. We all sense the Logos within us, we perceive it in the world, and those who seek to follow the Logos are Christians and those who do not are enemies of God. He demonstrates how Jesus Christ was present throughout Jewish Scriptures, how God had revealed Himself throughout the history of Israel. Simultaneously, the seeds of the Logos were scattered amongst the Gentiles. Virtuous Gentiles like Socrates sought to follow the Logos. And in the person of Jesus Christ, the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us.
St Justin Martyr wrote this as an apology for the Christian faith and as a defence against the accusations of Christians like him. We all sense the Logos within us, we perceive it in the world, and those who seek to follow the Logos are Christians and those who do not are enemies of God. He demonstrates how Jesus Christ was present throughout Jewish Scriptures, how God had revealed Himself throughout the history of Israel. Simultaneously, the seeds of the Logos were scattered amongst the Gentiles. Virtuous Gentiles like Socrates sought to follow the Logos. And in the person of Jesus Christ, the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us.
February 27, 2024
Justin's apology helped set a standard for what apologetics looks like. He interacts a lot with philosophy and the normal arguments of his day. Much of his argument tries to refute the objections people have against Christianity. Justin is worth reading not just because of his apologetic work but because Justin gives us a clear picture of what the church looked like in his day. He spends time describing what the normal worship was like each Sunday.
The introduction and notes are short, accessible, and helpful for dealing with Justin's work. The appendix has a section dealing with Justin's eschatology that is particularly valuable. I was surprised to see him teaching an idea of a future 1000-year reign of Christ.
The introduction and notes are short, accessible, and helpful for dealing with Justin's work. The appendix has a section dealing with Justin's eschatology that is particularly valuable. I was surprised to see him teaching an idea of a future 1000-year reign of Christ.
January 4, 2025
This is a well-done translation of Justin Martyr’s two apologies. Justin lays out a defense of Christian faith and practice that wears well with time. In this book, however, one of the most valuable sections is the appendix exploring Justin’s eschatology. In this essay, Leslie Barnard successfully argues that the New Testament doesn’t evidence a growth in eschatological theology because of some unexpected delay in Jesus’s return but that Paul and others use different language based on the theme of their discourse. He then argues that Justin follows this practice and uses the language of realized eschatology when addressing individuals while using apocalyptic themes when addressing the future of the cosmos. The book is well worth reading for its appendix alone.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 59 reviews