Introduction
Both the Apologies by Justin Martyr form a plea for just treatment of the Christians by the Roman authorities. Currently they are facing persecution and martyrdom merely because they bear the name ‘Christian’. Even though he also expects to martyred, he makes a bold address to the authorities, calling them to ignore rumours and to investigate the lives of the Christians fairly.
Justin’s First Apology
His First Apology was addressed to Emperor Antoninius Pius and the Senate, as a petition on behalf of the Christians. He writes to protest against injustice, pointing out that although Christians are atheists concerning the Greek gods, they worship the most true God, the Maker of the universe, who does not need material offerings. Instead of burning sacrifices, they recognise that God provides material things to be used for his glory. Compared with this true God, it is mere folly to worship idols. Christians are looking for a heavenly kingdom, and are therefore not afraid of being martyred. Because Christians live their lives before God and are accountable to him, they are good citizens of the empire, and live to the high moral standards taught by Jesus. Christians are marked by a change in lifestyle, forsaking fornication and magic, and instead chose chastity and the worship of God. Justin gives many examples of this moral teaching from the four Gospels, particularly the Sermon on the Mount, pointing out that Christ taught his followers to be obedient to the civil authorities and pay their taxes.
Justin gives an accurate description of the Christian life and moral teaching, and motive for living, and uses this to bring a bold challenge to the authorities. He seeks to correct misunderstandings and appeals that any charges against the Christians be investigated fairly. Justin contrasts the high moral standards of Jesus with pagan immorality, and uses this to prove the innocence of the Christians. This is one of the strengths of Justin’s writings. Christians should be marked by high moral standards, which should be in contrast to those in the world. In their moral behaviour, Christians stand innocent before the authorities.
He continues to argue that the Greek philosophers recognised the Logos (pure reason), who later became a man in the person of Jesus. He also describes several heathen analogies to Christian doctrines, including the resurrection, and even the virgin birth. One of the weaknesses of Justin’s approach is that he can rightly be accused of undermining the uniqueness of Jesus. If all these characteristics of Jesus are also found in heathen mythology, then what is so special about Jesus? However, he uses the teaching of the philosophers to argue against the unjust way Christians are being treated. If the philosophers teach a similar but more limited message, then why are the Christians being persecuted? Even though Justin often sees too many parallels with Greek philosophy and religion, he does show the stark contrast between the moral life and teaching of Jesus with the immorality of the Greek gods, and of those who worship them.
Justin also contrasts the Christian message with false teachings spread by magicians, such as Simon Magus, Menander and Marcion. These false teachers twist the truth and practice gross immorality, being inspired by demons. True Christians abstain from immoral practices, such as exposing children, promiscuous sex and cannibalism. Justin demonstrates an understanding of the spiritual battle between good and evil, and the role of demons to corrupt philosophy, deceive people into worshipping idols, raise up heretics, and cause the persecution of Christians. This understanding is frequently dismissed today as mere superstition, when it should still be taken seriously.
He also gives a lengthy description of predictions from the Hebrew prophets which were fulfilled in the life and ministry of Jesus, beginning with Moses, and including the virgin birth, his rejection by the Jews, crucifixion, resurrection and second coming. He gives a large number of quotations from the Psalms, as well as from the prophets. He even considers the philosophical problem of whether divine prediction removes human responsibility, and gives evidence that God still held humans responsible for their actions. Justin employs an allegorical approach to the Scriptures, normally ignoring any meaning to Old Testament Israel, seeing Christ in some unlikely places, and often reading too much into the passages. Sometimes his quotations of Scripture are not totally relevant to the point he was making. Justin shows a great love of the Scriptures, and clearly knows them well, probably quoting them from memory. Fulfilment of prophecy is a powerful apologetic tool, and one used effectively in the preaching of the apostles, like Paul. Justin shows that this can also be used with pagan audiences.
He also emphasises the antiquity of Moses, who is more ancient than all Greek philosophers, and even claims that Plato drew some of his understanding from Moses. He claims that Plato taught about the cross and even about the Trinity. Here again Justin is probably claiming too much common ground between the teaching of the philosophers and the Christian Gospel. This can cause us to wonder how much Justin actually believed that Jesus achieved through the cross. Justin’s lack of teaching on the cross is in great contrast to Paul, who makes the cross the centre of his message.
Justin also gave a brief description of weekly Christian worship and the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist, seeing parallels with pagan baptism. He probably gave these descriptions to answer accusations of secrecy which were often made against Christians. He shows that the Christians have nothing to hide and do nothing shameful. He concludes boldly with a strong warning of judgement to his readers if they continue in their injustice.
Justin’s Second Apology
The Second Apology is shorter and written in response to a particular occasion. A Christian teacher called Ptolemaeus had recently been martyred. He had discipled a Christian woman married to a intemperate non-Christian husband. No longer wishing to participate in her husband’s drunkenness and immorality, she divorced him. The husband then turned his anger on Ptolemaeus, who was imprisoned and killed merely because he was a Christian.
Again, Justin appeals for just treatment of Christians, raising many of the same themes found in his First Apology, challenging the unjust prejudice Christians are experiencing. He criticises the philosopher Crescens for bearing false witness against the Christians to please the mob, while failing to investigate the teachings of Christ.
Justin gives a brief explanation of Christian doctrine, including the titles of God the Father, the Creator; and of his Son, the eternal Word, who is Jesus the Saviour. Contrasting to these are the demons, the children from the fallen angels (Gen 6). Judgement of evil and the destruction of the world by fire is delayed for the sake of the Christians. These Christian beliefs are contrasted with the teaching of the Stoics, who believe in fate, rather than in God. He admires the moral teaching of the Stoics, claiming that this comes from the seed of reason, the Logos. He claims that the
philosophers found some part of this Word, who is Christ, including Socrates, who was a Christian without knowing it, and was accused of the same crimes as the Christians.
As in the First Apology, Justin draws close connections between Christian doctrines and the teaching of the Greek philosophers. Justin was previously a follower of Plato, and came to see Christianity as the true philosophy, with similarities with the teachings of Plato. What the philosophers knew in part, the Christians know in full, as the Word (Logos), who became flesh and partook in our sufferings, thus bringing healing. The danger again is that he sought too much continuity between Greek philosophy and Christianity, thus reducing the work of the cross, and minimising the contrast and dichotomy between the old and the new.
As a follower of Plato, he was impressed with the Christians lack of fear of death, seeing this as proving their innocence. Any sensual intemperate person would rather continue their present life, rather than be deprived of his physical enjoyments. Justin himself saw that evil spirits distorted Christian teaching, keeping people in deception. Although Justin saw the value in philosophy, (perhaps too much value), he strongly criticised the immoral behaviour of the Greek gods, of those that worship them, and the depraved rituals involved in their worship. He concludes with
an appeal to publish this book, and a condemnation of Simon and other heretics.
Conclusion
Justin’s writings are an inspiration to us today. They have great strengths, but also some significant weaknesses. On the positive side we see his fervour and bold defence of the Christians, appealing for fair treatment, and for their so-called crimes to investigated without prejudice. He can therefore become a model for to those today who are seeking justice for the oppressed and persecuted.
Justin is also to be commended for his high moral standards. He is clearly impressed with the moral teaching of Jesus, which he contrasts with the depraved forms of worship and licentious lifestyles of the pagans. Today also we need not to be afraid to use the high moral teaching of Jesus, as well as the godly lifestyle of Christians, as an apologetic tool in today’s immoral society. This obviously also brings a strong challenge to Christians to be a people who genuinely
follow the moral teaching of Jesus.
The main criticism of his writing is that he was not critical enough of the philosophical world that he grew up in. He continually sees too much continuity between Greek philosophy and Christianity through an over-emphasis of the Word (Logos), and tends to minimise the difference made through the ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus. It can be helpful to bring continuity with the old as an apologetic tool, but Justin takes this far too far, and thereby weakens the message of the cross.