Background: The Christian Tradition
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
not the first to draw up an authoritative list. This fact, as we shall see, has a direct bearing on the question of Justin's knowledge of the Gospels. The suggestion that Justin could not have quoted the Canonical Gospels but only used the Uncanonical
Gospel of Peter or the Gospel according to the Hebrews, because our Gospels were not widely known in his day, is very unlikely.t An interesting fact which has emerged from recent study is that the four Gospels were not the earliest books of the New
Testament to be recognised and collected together. This honour belongs rather to the Pauline Epistles. The reason for this was that the Fourth Gospel had to overcome considerable suspicion and even opposition before it was accepted without question.
The earliest grouping of the four Gospels, as we know them today, took place in Gnostic circles perhaps as early as A.D. 130—
140. On the Catholic side Irenaeus, in a famous passage, is the first to recognise the authority of the four Gospels and only four.? It would seem that although four Gospels were known and used well before the middle of the second century what held back orthodox recognition longer than the heretical was uncertainty as to the apostolic authorship of the Fourth Gospel and its congeniality to the heretics. Perhaps that is why direct quotations from that Gospel are so few in early Christian literature.
We now turn to Justin's knowledge of the Gospels. He refers frequently to certain books which he describes as memoirs or records of the Apostles [t& datouvnpovevpata TH&v c&trooTtoAev
(avtot)] which, he says, were called Gospels* and were read in the weekly assembly of Christians interchangeably with 'the prophets' for as long as time permitted.* Once in the First
Apology and seven times in the Dialogue Justin mentions these memoirs of the (or his) Apostles.® Four times in the Dialogue he simply speaks of the memoirs.® Elsewhere he uses other expressions which seem to refer to these books. Speaking of the Annuncia1 This was the view of the German critic Schwegler, Nachapost eitalter
(1846). Schwegler identified the Gospel of Peter with that to the Hebrews.
2 Adv. Haer. m. 11. 11. The anonymous anti-Montanist writer who wrote to Abercius Marcellus c. A.D. 192 seems to refer to a written collection of New Testament writings.
3 T Apol. xvi.
4 TI Apol. Ixvii.
5 J Apol. Ixvii; Dial. c—civ, cvi (twice).
6 Dial. cv (3 times), cvii. ie)
JUSTIN MARTYR
tion he says 'as those who related all things concerning our Saviour Jesus Christ taught'. He refers to 'the Apostles, in the memoirs composed by them; which are called Gospels, thus handed down'.2 Again: 'The Apostles wrote that the Holy
Spirit as a dove flew upon' Jesus after his baptism.? Furthermore: 'In the memoirs which I say were composed by his
Apostles and those who followed them." Finally, speaking of the change of Simon's name to Peter, Justin says 'It is written in his memoirs that it so happened"® which, if the text is
| correct, seems to refer to Peter's memoirs.
Much ink has been spilt over the interpretation of the term memoirs. Certainly for Justin the term was a descriptive one.
The term Gospels or Gospel was well established in his day while the term Memoirs was not. R. G. Heard, in a posthumous article, held that Justin took over Papias' terminology in describing the Gospels as Memoirs.6 Papias had said that Mark, being Peter's interpreter, followed Peter, listened to his teaching about Christ and wrote down some things as he recalled them
(&treuvnudovevoev)." The argument that Justin's dtropvnpovespata presuppose Papias' use of the verb is not conclusive as Justin nowhere else quotes Papias—and their respective approaches to Christianity are quite different. More to the point is Justin's interest in Xenophon. He quotes from his well-known Memoirs in IJ Apol. xi (cf. also I Apol. v; I Apol. x) and, as we have already noted,' points the parallel between the death of Socrates and that of Jesus Christ. It would seem probable, against R. G. Heard's opinion, that Justin consciously took the phrase from Xenophon's well-known *Atrouvnuovevyata ZaKpdTous, which other writers knew. This was apposite as it would give to Justin's non-Christian readers an indication of the type of narrative that the Christian Gospels contained. Yet the fact that Justin also used the phrase in the Dialogue shows that it was his own favourite term—dquite apart from its apologetic usefulness. The Memoirs of the (or his) Apostles was not a title but 1 T Apol. xxxiii.
2 I Apol. \xvi.
3 Dial. \xxxviii.
4 Dial. ciii.
5 Dial. cvi.
& N.T.S. 1 (Nov. 1954), 122-34.
" Eus. H.E. iii. 39; cf. Clem. Rec. m. 1, where Peter says: 'In consuetudine habui, verba Domini mei, quae ab ipso audieram, revocare in memoriam.' The term is also used by Eusebius (H.E. v. 8; vi. 25), though not of the Gospels.
SSPaeas ~~
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
Justin's description of the Gospels which he knew—the Memoirs called Gospels. The plural 'Gospels' was no doubt the term used by the Church in Justin's day, although it is to be noted that he does also use the singular 'Gospel'. Thus in Dial. x Trypho says that he had 'read the precepts in the so-called
Gospel'; and Justin himself says! that 'in the Gospel it is written that Christ said, 'All things are delivered unto me by my Father'''. This seems to refer to a collection of written memoirs as is the case with Irenaeus? and many subsequent writers.
The Memoirs were then for Justin several evangelical narratives which, according to Dial. ciii, were composed by Apostles or their followers.® Justin does not say how many Gospels there were nor how many were written by the Apostles and how many by their followers. He nowhere gives the names of their authors unless he refers to Peter's Memoirs. In Dial. cvi Justin says, 'It is written év Tois d&trouvnuoveUpaoiv auto that this happened', where avtoU may conceivably refer to Peter although this is not quite certain. In any case for Justin the Gospels or Memoirs related information about Jesus and to them he appealed for examples of Christ's teaching* and for the events of his life.®
They were regularly read in public worship and were commented upon by the chief officer or ruler of the brethren,® which suggests that they were well known and generally accepted reliable public documents. Both Justin and the Church used them as apostolic narratives of the life and teaching of Jesus.
What were these Memoirs or Records called Gospels? Were they identical with our Synoptic Gospels or with the fourfold
Canon or did they also include non-Canonical Gospels? This question can only be answered after an examination of Justin's writings, bearing in mind the fact that he does not always quote his sources exactly but apparently sometimes relies on memory.
Such is the case, as has long been recognised, with Justin's quotations from the LXX. It is true that Justin gives long extracts from the LXX, especially in the Dzalogue, without 2 IDG, & S ANG, Jatin, ting By 08 ly Wiig yh 3 éy yap Tois c&tropvnpovesuaorv, & gnu UT THv ctrooTOA@V avToU Kal
To&v ékelvois TrapaKoAoUinoavTmy ouUVTETaY Pat, 4 I Apol. xv—xvii, Ixvi; Dial. cv, cvii.
5 I Apol. xxxiii; Dial. Ixxxviii, c—civ, cvi.
6 [ Apol. Ixvu.
JUSTIN MARTYR
break or interpolated matter—more than once quoting an entire Psalm no doubt copied from the LXX text which he had before him. But on other occasions he quotes very freely? and sometimes gives a free combination of different passages.?
Other variations occur.? Swete, after a detailed investigation, states that Justin knew an eclectic text of the LX X and even on occasions felt obliged to criticise the LXX reading.*
This freedom in quotation is also a characteristic of Justin's quotations from Classical authors. In the two Apologies there are nine classical quotations—six from Plato, two from Xenophon and one from Euripides. Five of these® are short, familiar phrases which Justin repeats fairly accurately. Another, a passage from Plato, is quoted very freely and its author called 'a certain one of the ancients'.6 Even a passage from the Timaeus, one of Justin's favourite writings, is quoted only loosely." The familiar opening of Xenophon's Memoirs is cited inaccurately® while from the same book Justin gives a condensed account of 'Hercules' choice'.® If therefore there is considerable freedom in quotations from the LXX (which Justin declared to be inspired) and from Classical authors we shall not expect quotations from the Gospels to be any more exact.
We must now examine Justin's account of Jesus' life and teaching, as given in his lengthy writings, with the account given in the Canonical Gospels. It has often been remarked that Justin's account is remarkably full. He is the first postapostolic writer to record at any length details of Our Lord's life and teaching. He records his birth from the Virgin! and the 1 E.g. I Apol. xxxvii (Isa. lviii. 6, 7); I Apol. xliv (Deut. xxx. 15, 19);
I Apol. xlvii (Isa. i. 7); I Apol. Ix (Deut. xxxii. 22); I Apol. lxii (Exod. iii. 5) inter alia.
2 I Apol. xxxii (Isa. xi. 1; Num. xxiv. 17); J Apol. lii (Ez. xxxvii. 7; Isa. xlv. 23) inter alia.
8 I Apol. xxxv, the reference of Zech. ix. g ascribed to Zephaniah; J Apol. li (Dan. vii. 13 to Jeremiah) inter alia. But these may be due to a previous history in the Church's pesher tradition.
4 Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek (Cambridge, 1902), p. 423.
® I Apol. v, Xen. Mem. i. 1; I Apol. xxxix, Eur. Hipp. 607; I Apol. xliv.
De Rep. x, 6178; II Apol. iii, De Rep. x, 5950; I Apol. lx, Tim. 36.
6 J Apol. iii.
? II Apol. x.
§ II Apol. x. Justin alters the order and tense of the clauses, and for ot vouizeiv substitutes pt) tyyeioGa1.
® II Apol. xi.
10 J Apol. xxi, xxii, xlvi; Dial. xliii, lxxxiv, c, inter alia.
~*~
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
events of the infancy.! Jesus, Justin says, waited in obscurity until he was about thirty years of age.? He records the mission of John the Baptist,? the baptism* and temptation® of Jesus; the characteristic features of his teaching;® the fact and variety of his miracles.' Justin gives quotations from, or references to, the accounts of the healing of the centurion's servant® and Matthew's feast;* the choosing of the twelve apostles;!° the naming of Zebedee's sons ;4 the commissioning of the apostles
;!2
Jesus' words after the departure of John the Baptist's messengers;!® the sign of the prophet Jonah; the parable of the Sower;! the Messianic confession of Peter ;!° and the prediction of the Passion.!" The events of the Passion and resurrection are particularly fully recorded and documented. Justin gives passages which substantially correspond to parts of every chapter of St Matthew's Gospel—sometimes to narratives of considerable size—and to all but seven of the chapters of St Luke's
Gospel. It is however to be noted that no words from the discourses of the Fourth Gospel appear in his writings.
The agreement between Justin's account of Jesus' life and teaching taken from the Memoirs and our Synoptic Gospels often extends to small particulars—and this is of significance.
Thus his account of Jesus' infancy is identical with the Synoptic account apart from the statement that Christ was born in a cave and that the Magi came from Arabia.!® The soberness of Justin's narrative is in marked contrast to the accounts in the second-century Apocryphal Gospels which go in for many embellishments. Justin refers to the enrolment under Cyrenius;1®
Jesus' growth from infancy to manhood;?° he names the sons of Zebedee ;?! he records Jesus' silence at his trial;"* Pilate's sending
1 J Apol. xlvi; Dial. Ixxviii, cii, cvi.
2 Dial. \xxxviii.
3 Dial. xlix, li, Ixxxviii.
4 Dial. Ixxxviii.
") IOAL (bik, Orsay 6 I Apol. xiv; Dial. cii.
? Dial. xlix; I Apol. xxii, xxx, xxxi, xlviii; Dial. |xix.
8 Dial. Ixxvi, cxx, cxl.
9 I Apol. xv.
10 J Apol. xxxix; Dial. xlii.
1 Dial. cvi.
12 J Apol. xvi, xix, xiii; Dial. xxxv, Ixxxii.
13 I Apol. \xiii; Dial. li, c, cvi.
1S Dial, Cvite 16 Dial. cxxv.
ID 7 Dial. li, cvi.
18 Dial. Ixxviii.
19 [ Apol. xxxiv, xlvi.
20 Dial. Ixxxviii.
21 Dial-cv1.
2) JD AR Sth, Coil
JUSTIN MARTYR
of him to Herod; and the Jewish story that his body was stolen from the tomb by his disciples.? These coincidences in details, together with the general tenor of his account, suggest that Justin's Memoirs were in substance identical with our Synoptic
Gospels whatever else they may have contained. Whether Justin knew the first three Gospels in the form of a primitive synopsis must however be left an open question.
What of the Fourth Gospel? Did Justin know and quote the Gospel composed nearest to his own time? We have already noted that uncertainty as to its apostolic authority on the part of Catholics apparently held back its recognition for some decades. We should not therefore expect, and do not find, any direct quotations from this Gospel in Justin's writings.
Nevertheless, there are indications that Justin knew it or at the very least the theological background from which it emerged. In the first place Justin's use of the logos, strongly influenced though it is by the Middle Platonist philosophy, presupposes an earlier
Christian use of the logos doctrine. Justin nowhere suggests he is introducing a new element into Christian thought. The very fact that St John's Gospel lacks the philosophical emphasis found in Justin's writings furnishes the presumption that Justin is working on an earlier Christian basis which had found previous expression in the Fourth Gospel.
This supposition would not however carry weight unless there are other considerations which suggest a tentative use by Justin of the Fourth Gospel or the tradition underlying it.
J. N. Sanders, in The Fourth Gospel in the Early Church? notes the following parallels between Justin and the Fourth Gospel.
Justin Fourth Gospel I Apol. xxxii. 10
John i. 14
XXXlll. 2
X1V. 29
Ixi. 4 lil. 3, 5 Ixili. 15
Aa Ixvi. 2
The Eucharistic teaching in John vi Dial. xiv. 1 iv. 10 xiv. 8 xix, 375 Ch Reya7 XXVIl. 5
Vili. 22
XXXIX. 5
XV1. 13
1 Dial. citi.
* Dial. cviii.
», * (Cambridge, 1943), pp. 27=32.
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
Justin Fourth Gospel Ivi. 11 v. 19
Ixill. 2 its Ixix. 6 iv. 10, 14 Ixix27 Vil. 12
Ixxxviii. 7 i. 20
XCl. 4
Mit4* cl, Barn. <1.2% XCVii. 3
XIX. 24
Vist Xlll. 3 cx.
Vil. 27 x4 XV CXXlll. 9 i. 12
CXXVIl. 4 ies cxxxv. 6 ae
CXXXVI1. 3
Xlll. 20, v. 46-7 Not all of these parallels are convincing, as Sanders notes, and nowhere is there a direct citation from the Fourth Gospel. The nearest is provided by J Afol. lxi. 4, 'For Christ said, ''Unless you are born again (avayevvnoijte) you will not enter into the Kingdom of heaven"'', which seems to be a paraphrase or conflation of John iii. 3, 5. Dial. Ixxxviil. 7, which represents John the Baptist as crying out 'I am not the Christ, but the voice of one crying...', is closer to John i. 20 than to the accounts in the Synoptic Gospels which do not make John deny that he is the Christ. However, the cumulative effect of these parallels is impressive and would support the cautious conclusion of Sanders:
The most reasonable conclusion from this examination of the passages from the writings of Justin which appear to show traces of the influence of the Fourth Gospel seems to be that on the whole one may say that certain passages are most naturally explained as reminiscences of the Fourth Gospel, while there are few, if any, which can certainly be said to be dependent upon it. It is therefore going farther than the evidence warrants to say that the theology of Justin is based upon the teaching of the Fourth Gospel. Justin's writings illustrate rather the first tentative use which was made of the Fourth Gospel by an orthodox writer, and this tentativeness makes it difficult to believe that Justin regarded the Fourth Gospel as Scripture or as the work of an apostle.
1 The Fourth Gospel in the Early Church, p. 31. This is substantially the view of H. Chadwick, Early Christian Thought and the Classical Tradition (Oxford,
1966), pp. 124-5.
JUSTIN MARTYR
It is however unlikely that Justin included the Fourth Gospel in his Memoirs, for in passages stated as coming from the Memoirs he never quotes or refers to a passage which could be attributed to that Gospel. Justin is tentatively feeling his way towards a recognition of the Fourth Gospel and in later
Apologists this recognition becomes more explicit. Tatian, when he wrote his Oratio, c. A.D. 160-5, knew the Gospel which he quotes directly four times and later he included it in his
Diatessaron. Irenaeus and Theophilus both recognised the Gospel as authoritative and as scripture in the full sense. Justin, however, wrote at a time when uncertainty still prevailed.
Justin's knowledge of the New Testament writings, outside the Gospels, can be described briefly. He mentions the Apocalypse by name: 'And further, there was a certain man with us, whose name was John, one of the apostles of Christ, who prophesied, by a revelation that was made to him, that those who believed in our Christ would dwell a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that thereafter the general, and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgement of all men would likewise take place."! This corresponds closely with Rev. xx. 2. Justin mentions the author by name as an instance of prophetic power at work in the Church although the status and authorship of the Apocalypse was clearly the subject of dispute in some circles.
Dionysius of Alexandria says that even in his day there were people who discredited the Apocalypse because it predicted a literal reign of Christ on earth for a thousand years and in any case was written by Cerinthus the heretic.? Justin has no doubts that the Apocalypse is the work of John, the apostle and prophet.
Justin's writings contain no certain quotations from the rest of the New Testament writings although incidental allusions appear. He has contacts with Acts,® the Epistle to the Romans
(Justin's argument about Abraham's circumcision in Dial. xxiii undoubtedly echoes Rom. iv. 10, 11),4 I Corinthians,®
1 Dial. Ixxxi.
2 On the Gospels, 3.
° I Apol. xlix, cf. Acts xiii. 27, 28, 48; I Apol. 1, cf. Acts i. 8, 9, ii. 33; Dial. xvi, cf. Acts vii. 52; I Apol. xl, cf. Acts iv. 27.
4 Cf. also Dial. xliv with Rom. ix. 7.
® Cf. Dial. xiv and cxi with I Cor. v. 8. Cf. also Dial. xxxix with I Cor. xii. 7-10.
~ 02°
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
II Thessalonians,! and the Epistles to the Galatians,? Colossians? and Hebrews. Especially noticeable is the constant reiteration o: the Pauline phrase trpwtdtoKos Tr&ons KTicews. The fact that Justin knew of Marcion's work and activity and was prepared to take issue with him is an indication that he was familiar with the Pauline Epistles. He has contacts with I John® and possibly with I Peter.6 Only the Pastoral Epistles appear to have left no impression on Justin's writings."
We conclude that Justin was familiar with the four Canonical Gospels. His Memoirs were in substance identical with our
Synoptic Gospels; he valued St John's Gospel chiefly for doctrinal reasons and he was perhaps conscious that its apostolic authority was not everywhere accepted. Justin also knew most of the Epistles, with the exception of the Pastorals, although he nowhere cites them directly. This, no doubt, is to be explained by his apologetic purpose which prevented his appealing to purely Christian teachers and writings as authorities. For Justin the incarnation of the logos was the central fact of human history and it was therefore natural that he should give the original Christian teaching in the words of the logos, rather than in those of his followers.
JUSTIN, ORAL TRADITION AND
UNCANONICAL GOSPELS
As is well known the early Fathers of the Church saw no incongruity in quoting from apocryphal books which they must have known were not accepted as authoritative by the Church.®
Ignatius of Antioch quotes from the Gospel according to the 1 Cf. Dial. xxxii with II Thess. ii. 3, 4, 8.
2 Cf. Dial. xliv with Gall. iii.
3 For references to tewtdtoKxos see J Apol. xxiii, xxxiii, xlvi, liii, Lxiii, Dial. \xxxiv, c, cxxv, cxxxvili. These seem to reflect Col. i. 15.
4 In I Apol. xii, lxiii Christ is called &tté0ToAos; cf. Heb. iii. 1 only in New Testament.
5 Cf. Dial. cxxiii with I John iii. 1-3.
6 Cf. Dial. cxxxix with I Pet. iii. 9.
7 Is it significant that the Gospel of Truth likewise shows no knowledge of the Pastorals ?
8 See R. P. C. Hanson, Tradition in the Early Church, pp. 224-34 for a good discussion.
JUSTIN MARTYR
Hebrews! and reproduces a saying 'near the sword is near to God' which also reappears in the Gospel of Thomas and is quoted by Origen.? The homily of unknown authorship known as II Clement quotes five sayings from apocryphal works or traditions one of which appears in the Gospel of Thomas.®
Justin gives several sayings, facts and details not found in the Canonical Gospels. He says that Cyrenius was the first procurator of Judaea;4 that Joseph was 'of Bethlehem';* that Jesus was born in a cave near Bethlehem;® that the Magi were from Arabia;? and that Jesus was deformed, or not of a comely aspect, as had been predicted.* He speaks of John the Baptist
'sitting' by the Jordan® and states that when Jesus went down to the water to be baptised, a fire was kindled in the Jordan,' and that the voice from heaven repeated the words of Ps. ii. 7,
'Thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee.'" Justin states that Christ healed those who from birth were blind, dumb and lame'? although the Jews ascribed these miracles to magic;}8 the ass's colt used in the Palm Sunday entry was found 'bound to a vine at the entrance of a village'.14 He states that Pilate sent
Jesus bound to Herod as a compliment; and represents Herod Antipas as a successor of Archelaus in the dominion of Herod the Great.16 At the crucifixion the mocking bystanders not only shook their heads and shot out their lips!" but 'twisted their noses to each other'!® and cried, 'Let Him who raised the dead deliver Himself'.19 Moreover, Justin quotes two sayings of Christ not found in the Canonical Gospels, that is, 'In whatsoever I find you, in this will I also judge you';?° and, 'there shall be schisms and heresies'
.?!
These are the only substantial deviations from the Canonical Gospels found in Justin's writings and it will be noted how few they are compared with the large area of agreement, even in small matters, between Justin and our Gospels. If Justin, as has
1 Ad Smyrn. iii. 2, iv. 2.
2 Logion 82; Origen. Hom. in Jer. xx. 3.
* II Clem. viii. 5, iv. 5, v. 3, ix. 11, xii. 2. Cf. Thomas logion 22.
4 I Apol. xxxiv.
5 Dial. \xxviii.
6 Dial. \xxviii.
* Dial. \xxviii.
8 Dial. xiv, xlix, Ixxxi, Ixxxviii, c, cx, cxxi.
® Dial. li, Ixxxviii.
10 Dial. Ixxxviii.
Dial. \xxxviii, ciii.
12 T Apol. xxii.
13 Dial. \xix.
4 T Apol. xxxii.
© JOnah Ctl.
LSS Dial veins ' T Apol. xxxviii; Dial. ci.
18 Dial. ciii.
19 T Apol. xxxviii.
20 Dial. xlvii.
21 Dial. xxxv.
Ny 64 ~
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
sometimes been supposed, was drawing widely on an Uncanonical Gospel or Gospels then we must suppose that this
Gospel was more or less identical with the Synoptic Gospels.
What, then, is the explanation of these differences? It is significant that Justin nowhere cites the authority of the Memoirs for these uncanonical details. In fact he is careful to avoid doing so as may be seen from his account of the fire kindled in the Jordan at Jesus' baptism where he explicitly makes the Apostles responsible only for the descent of the Spirit in the form of a dove. As to the differences some are obvious mistakes—such as the reference to Cyrenius as first procurator of Judaea—and his ignorance of the civil position of the Herods in Roman Palestine. Others are inferences drawn from the Gospels such as the description of Joseph as 'of Bethlehem' and Pilate's sending of Jesus bound to Herod as a compliment.
Others are general summarising statements, no doubt coloured by tricks of memory, such as when Justin says that Christ healed not only the blind from birth, but also those born dumb and lame. In other instances a desire to show the fulfilment of prophecy has coloured Justin's words as in the description of Christ as deformed based on Isa. liii. 2, 'He was without form or comeliness.' In one case Justin reflects a textual difference found in certain MSS of the Gospels. The words of the Divine voice at the baptism, 'Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee', are found in D and the old Latin versions and may possibly represent a piece of floating tradition or a traditional interpretation. The detail about the fire kindled in the Jordan at Christ's baptism is also found in several Jewish-Christian works and in a fragment of Egerton Papyrus 2? and is akin to the great light on the Jordan at the baptism which is mentioned in Tatian's Diatessaron and in the Gospel of 'Thomas.® It seems to represent a traditional Jewish-Christian interpretation.
1 This is the position adopted by E. R. Buckley, 7.T.S. (April 1935), pp. 173-6, who believes that Justin first became acquainted with the sayings of Jesus in a single Gospel (now lost) from which he quotes; only later did he read our Synoptic Gospels. This 'solution' raises more difficulties than it solves.
2 Fr, 2, verso, which also speaks of Jesus sprinkling something on the water, and as a result people are amazed. Cf. the anonymous De Rebaptismate 17(g0) which says that the Preaching of Paul described a fire upon the water at Jesus' baptism. See Hanson, Tradition in the Early Church, p. 225.
3 Hanson, ibid. p. 230.
BJM
JUSTIN MARTYR
The two extra-canonical sayings which Justin attributes to Jesus present difficult problems. The first, 'In whatsoever I find you, in this will I also judge you', is very well attested, but no writer, apart from Justin, attributes it to Jesus. Usually it is quoted without any indication of source, and if a source is mentioned it is ascribed to Ezekiel! or one of the prophets.
Jeremias? points out that it is difficult to conceive that the dominical origin of such a frequently quoted saying should have been entirely forgotten if the saying is genuine, and he concludes that Justin took it from the apocryphal Book of Ezekiel but mistakenly attributed it to Jesus.
The second saying 'there shall be schisms and heresies' is also found in the Syrian Didascalia v1. 5, and the Pseudo-Clementine
Homilies also contain two references to dominical prophecies about party strife.3 As these sources appear to be independent of one another it is possible that the saying represents a very early floating tradition which was known to Justin. On the other hand it could be a free rendering of Matt. x. 35 f. reflecting the Church's own experience of party strife or an expression, in St Paul's language,* of Christ's warning against false prophets. In any case there is little to indicate that Justin is quoting from an Uncanonical Gospel.°®
The uncanonical material found in Justin is of small compass compared with his agreements with the Canonical Gospels. The marvel is that so little legendary material appears in his works when we compare them with the fanciful accounts of the second-century apocryphal Gospels and even with traditions contained in other of the early Fathers. To compare Justin's sober account of the Magi with the account given by Ignatius of the Star of Bethlehem*® some forty years before is most instructive. Justin always gives the simple, unadorned story rather than fanciful embellishments. His few differences from our Gospels are due to lapses of memory, a desire to show a fulfilment of prophecy, the use of traditional Jewish-Christian oral material and possibly certain apocryphal books.
Athanasius, Vita S. Antonii 15; Joh. Climacus, Scala paradisi 7.
® Unknown Sayings of Jesus (London, 1964), pp. 28-9.
SAC Sei, JETS Wy Tay SAU Dit 4 I Cor. xi. 18-19.
® Justin also knew the spurious Acta Pilati (I Apol. xxxv. g, xlviii. 3) which he used to prove the correctness of his information about Jesus.
6 Ad. Eph. xix.
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
JUSTIN'S USE OF TESTIMONIA
The phenomenon of quotations from the Old Testament which appear in the New Testament and Patristic writers has been the subject of much scholarly investigation in the last fifty years.
While not the originator of this study! it was J. Rendel Harris who first put forward the theory, in his pioneer work Testimonies," that there once existed a single collection of Old
Testament texts which bore witness to Christ and Christianity and which existed before the composition of the Canonical
Gospels. This 'apostolic work' was a vade mecum for all who wished to answer Jewish objections to the Gospel—it was the propaganda material of the new religion. Rendel Harris believed that this Book of Testimonies continued in existence throughout the first, second and third centuries and indeed was known as late as the twelfth, and perhaps even to the time of the invention of printing, although it received certain expansions and modifications in the course of the centuries.
This theory has now been generally abandoned, at least in the form in which Rendel Harris propounded it. Professor
C. H. Dodd® has shown that the Testimonies from the Old Testament found in the New Testament were not drawn out at random but certain key passages were widely known and used and these belong together. These passages form the substructure of Christian theology and when a particular quotation is made the whole passage from which it was selected was in the mind of the writer. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has also provided evidence of a continuous work of biblical exegesis within Judaism which differed from rabbinical interpretation and exegesis. This employed the pesher method by which a series of historical events, contemporary with the writer, is regarded as the reality to which the Old Testament testimonies pointed forward. This sometimes involved, for the Qumran exegetes, alterations and modifications to the original texts to bring them into line with their beliefs.
1 This belongs to E. Hatch. See his Essays in Biblical Greek (1889), p. 203.
See also Sanday and Headlam, I.C.C. Commentary on Romans (1895), pp. 264, 282.
2 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1916 and 1920).
3 According to the Scriptures. This book is of fundamental importance.
5-2
JUSTIN MARTYR
K. Stendahl! and B. Lindars? have carefully studied the Church's own version of the midrash pesher. The latter particularly emphasises the shift of application and modification of the text which sometimes occurred in quotations from wellknown basic passages. This is most frequent in the Old Testament quotations found in Matthew and John although it also occurs elsewhere. According to Lindars a varied work of biblical exegesis went on in the early Church in the principal Church centres rather similar to the Qumran Pesharim.? This theory has received some criticisms but in general may be accepted. It is clear that no, one, fixed, stereotyped Testimony Book ever existed. Probably what we have to envisage is a series of Old
Testament passages known in various centres, and interpreted according to a common method, which were drawn on orally by catechists, teachers and those engaged in anti-Jewish apologetic, together with a variety of partial transcripts committed to writing. The early Church thus had access to a corpus of traditional interpretation of the Old Testament.
Recent study has not however considered questions which are germane to this book. Did the original basic testimonia continue to exert an influence on Patristic writers after New Testament times? How far in fact was the early Church's pesher method known and used? Were new testimonies drawn out from existing interpretation ? By the time of Cyprian the Testimonies are found collected together and grouped under specific headings in written form. The real problem is the period between the New Testament and Cyprian and here the witness of Justin Martyr is crucial.
Justin's use of Old Testament Testimonies presents complicated problems. The very length of his quotations in the Dialogue with Trypho, in comparison with those in the New
Testament, shows how the Testimonies grew in bulk and rules out the possibility that he is only carrying on the method found in the New Testament. Justin uses the Old Testament in a way which would appeal to educated Jews. He is not simply repro1 The School of St Matthew (Uppsala, 1954).
® New Testament Apologetic (London, 1961).
3 Ibid. p. 285.
* A similar situation is to be found in the Mission Field today where the catechist will sometimes deliver his teaching orally and sometimes from notes. i Gos
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
ducing texts in the manner of the New Testament or the Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus. The main burden of his argument is as follows:
(i) The Old Testament itself looks forward to the torah being superseded.
(ii) The Old Testament foretells the coming of the Messiah and predicts details about him which are fulfilled in Jesus. It tells of his two advents; of his pre-existence and divine nature; of his life on earth. Justin deals particularly with the coming of Elijah; the Virgin Birth; the descent of the Holy Spirit at the baptism; Jesus' humiliation, crucifixion and resurrection.
(iii) Justin believes in the millennium in a Jerusalem rebuilt, adorned and enlarged as foretold by Ezekiel, Isaiah and other prophets.
(iv) He dwells at some length on the Call of the Gentiles, God's present relation to the Jews and their behaviour towards him as foretold in the Old Testament.
In producing his massive catena of Old Testament texts in support of (i)—(iv) Justin passes far beyond the restrained use found in the New Testament. The Dialogue was too complicated a work to pass on 'the method' of testimony quotation easily and naturally. Justin is throughout dominated by his own theories as to how small incidents in the story of Christ were predicted in advance in the Old Testament. Typology, and the argument for literal fulfilment, are not distinguished, as in the New Testament, but merge into one another. Nevertheless, it would be an error to assume, and a priori unlikely, that Justin was totally ignorant of the corpus of traditional interpretation of the Old Testament known in the first century. We now give some examples of this:
(a) He knew some of the Church's pesher texts which he apparently quotes from memory reproducing variations found elsewhere. Thus in J Afol. xxxv. 11 he cites the testimony of the Triumphal Entry (Zech. ix. g) in a form similar to that of Matt. xxi. 5 although including the introductory words of Zech. ix. 9 instead of substituting Isa. Ixii. 11 for them. Yet Justin ascribes the text to Zephaniah. Lindars has acutely pointed out! that the opening words of Zech. ix. 9 are identical with Zeph. iii.
1 New Testament Apologetic, p. 26 n. 2. This is a very valuable footnote.
JUSTIN MARTYR
14 in the LXX and that the briefer form of Zech. ix. 9 in John xii. 15 takes its opening words from Zeph. iii. 16 (M.T.).
This suggests that Justin is déaling with a pesher text based on a correlation of Zechariah and Zephaniah. It would seem unlikely that Justin is borrowing directly from Matt. xxi. 5 in view of the differences between them; rather it looks as if he is quoting traditional interpretation from memory. It is interesting that he quotes this testimony again in Dial. lili. 3, this time closer to the LXX, and ascribes it correctly to Zechariah. This suggests he has looked it up in his copy of the LXX—no doubt in view of the knowledge of Trypho. It is indeed possible that many of Justin's erroneous attributions may have had a previous history in the Church's midrash pesher+ (6) Justin knew certain of the Old Testament passages which Professor Dodd classifies as primary testimonia, i.e. passages which were understood as wholes although only particular verses from them might be quoted by the various New Testament writers.
A good example of this is Justin's use of the famous Stone testimonium (and we shall deal mainly with this) which shows how a testimonium, originating with Jesus, had drawn to itself other testimonies by Justin's time. As is well known this testimony had its origin in the verba Christi Mark xu. 10-113 cf. Matt. xxi.
42, Luke xx. 7, 'Have ye not read even this scripture; the stone which the builders rejected, the same was made the cornerstone:
This was from the Lord, and it is marvellous in our eyes?' This is an exact quotation of Ps. cxviii. 22-3 and it became one of 1-Cf. I Apol. li. 8 f. (Dan. vii. 13 ascribed to Jeremiah); liii. 10 f. (Jer. ix.
26 ascribed to Isaiah) ; Dial. xii. 2 (Isa. vi. 10 ascribed to Jeremiah); xiv. 8
(Zech. xii. 10 ascribed to Hosea) ; xlix. 2 (Mal. iv. 5 ascribed to Zechariah).
See further Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, p. 26. J. S. Sibinga's work on the Old Testament Text of Justin (see Appendix 3) is of great importance for the study of the testimony material in Justin. See also the important work of P. Prigent, Zustin et l'Ancien Testament (Paris, 1964). Prigent identifies the reference in I Aol. xxvi. 8 to a lost treatise against all the heresies
(the Syntagma) with a work used not only by Justin but by Irenaeus, Tertullian and other writers and which circulated widely in the early Church.
This theory seems to be a return, in another form, to Rendel Harris' theory of a single testimony source. Dr R. A. Kraft points out to me (in a letter) that it is significant that the sections of Justin's writings which Prigent believes were originally in the Syntagma also rest heavily on the Testimonia and other school traditions. These are the important matters rather than the name of a particular stage in their history of growth and use. See further the review of Prigent by R. M. Grant in 7.T.S. xvu (1966), 167-70.
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
'the sheet anchors of the early Church'.! From this basis other texts containing the word 'stone' soon became attached to the original testimonium—in particular Isa. viii. 14. and xxviii. 16.
Thus I Pet. ii. 6-8 quotes Isa. xxviii. 16, Ps. cxviii. 22, Isa. viii.
14 in that order while Rom. ix. 33 conflates the two Isaianic passages—both writers quoting the testimonia in a version close to the Hebrew text. To this catena was added Dan. ii. 34, 44-5, which mentions the stone cut out of the mountain without hands which smites and breaks in pieces the feet of the great image. Luke xx. 18 appears to be the first to equate the Stone of Daniel with the earlier stone testimonia. There are therefore indications within the New Testament that the testimonies concerning the stone were growing in bulk, although how far, in the early stage, they remained in an oral stage of development cannot be ascertained with certainty. Certainly the cento Isa. xxvill. 16, Ps. cxviii. 22 and Isa. viii. 14 existed in writing in some areas in a version different from the LXX, although there is no indication of their inclusion in a written testimony book.
A later stage of the development of these stone testimonia occurs in Ep. Barn. vi. 2-4 (¢. A.D. 120) where they occur as part of a series of proof texts which are referred to the plotting of the Jews against Jesus, the entry into Christ through baptism, the second creation and Christian worship. Barnabas has this sequence: Isa. vii. 14 or Dan. ii. 34, 45; Isa. xxvii. 16; Isa. xxviii. 17; Isa. 1. 7; Ps. cxvill. 22; Ps. cxviii. 24. He clearly felt free to adapt and supplement the original testimonia in accordance with local needs—bringing in references to Isa. xxviii. 17,1. 7 and Ps. cxviii. 24 not found in the New Testament.
This procedure does not suggest he was using a written Greek testimony book or directly quoting the New Testament Epistles.
This somewhat lengthy background is essential for the understanding of Justin Martyr's references to Christ as the Stone.
This equation is very important for him as he frequently alludes to it and, in two passages, it appears among a series of headings:
For Christ is proclaimed as King and Priest and God and Lord and Angel and Man and Chief Captain and Stone and Child Born, and liable to suffering at first, then as going up to heaven and coming again with glory and having his Kingdom for ever, as I prove from all the scriptures (Dial. xxxiv. 2).
1 E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of St Peter, p. 269.
JUSTIN MARTYR
He also is termed both Wisdom and Day and Dayspring and Sword and Stone and Rod and Jacob and Israel in this fashion or in that, in the words of the prophets. .
. (Dial. c. 4).
In a remarkable passage Justin! says that the rock from which Mithra was born (and at which converts to Mithraism were initiated) was a deliberate imitation of the prophecy in Dan. ii. 34 f. 'a stone cut without hands out of a great mountain'.
This passage from Daniel was of significance for Justin, for he quotes it again in Dial. Ixxvi. 1: 'And his saying a stone cut without hands proclaims the same thing in a mystery. For saying that it has been cut out without hands means that it is not a human work, but of the will of God, the Father of the universe, who brought it forward',? i.e. the Messiah was not of human but of divine origin. This is the only Old 'Testament passage actually quoted by Justin in support of the testimonium
Christ = the Stone, although twice he refers to other passages:
'And that Christ was proclaimed in figure as a Stone by many passages of Scripture we have likewise proved' (Dial. Ixxxvi. 3) ; cf. Dial. cxxvi. 1, 'Christ and Stone by many'. Justin is certainly familiar with the earlier stone testimonia found in the New
Testament such as Ps. cxviii. 22, Isa. viii. 14, xxviii. 16 (in any case he would have found them in the Memoirs), although he only quotes the Daniel prophecy.
In several passages Justin produces a new testimony to Christ as the Stone. He does not limit himself to this image but says that the circumcision by knives of stone (Josh. v. 2) suggests the same equation. True circumcision of the heart is only brought about by the true stone, Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ circumcises all them who will, with knives of stone, as was proclaimed from of old... (Dial. xxiv. 2).
He (Joshua) is said to have circumcised the people with knives of stone as their second circumcision (which was a proclamation of that circumcision wherewith Jesus himself circumcises us, thus cleansing us from stones and all other idols) and making heaps of them who in every place were circumcised from their uncircumcision, that is to say from the error of the world, with knives of stone, (namely) the words of our Lord Jesus (Dial. cxiii. 6; cf. cxiv. 4).
2 DMs Wee. Tie * The rabbis held that the great mountain is the King Messiah; see
Tanchuma (Buber, Beresh. p. 140).
BACKGROUND: THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION
This testimonium to Christ as the Stone and New Circumciser is found later in the Dialogue of Athanasius and Zacchaeus
125 and in Aphraat Hom. xi on Circumcision 12. It may have originated with Justin himself in opposition to the Midrashic explanation which sees in the 'stone' the merits of the Fathers.!
We have dealt in some detail with this important primitive testimonium as it shows how, by Justin's day, references to Christ as the Stone were growing in bulk. Justin knows the early tradition, although he never quotes the primary testimonia found in the New Testament apart from Dan. ii. 34 f. which appealed to him. To these he has added Josh. v. 2. It is possible, although it cannot be proved, that in Justin's time the stone testimonia had been collected together under the heading
'Christ = the Stone'.
(c) Certain testimonies, which appear frequently in later Patristic writers, originated with Justin. A good example of this is Isa. vii. 14, 'The riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be carried away before the King of Assyria.' According to Justin this is fulfilled in the coming of the Wise Men from the East to acknowledge Christ.
We cannot grant you [Justin says to Trypho], as you desire to expound it, that Hezekiah made war on the men in Damascus, or in Samaria, in the presence of the King of Assyria. ..And you cannot prove that this has ever happened to anyone among the Jews, but we can prove that it took place in the case of our Christ. For at the very time that he was born wise men came from Arabia and worshipped him, after they had first been to Herod who was king at that time in your land, whom the word calls the King of Assyria because of his godless and wicked mind.
And again:
That saying, also of Isaiah, 'He shall take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria', meant that the power of the devil, who dwelt in Damascus, should be overcome by Christ at his very birth.
And this proved to have taken place. For the Wise Men, who had been carried off as spoils for all kinds of evil actions, which were wrought in them by that daemon, by coming and worshipping
1 Ex. R. on Exod. xii. 2.
JUSTIN MARTYR
Christ are shown to have departed from that power which had taken them as spoil, which (power) the word signified to us in a mystery as dwelling in Damascus.
Justin continues:
And that selfsame power, as being sinful and wicked, he rightly calls Samaria in parable. Now that Damascus did and does belong to the land of Arabia, even though it is now allotted to that which is called
Syrophoenicia, not even any of you can deny. So that it would be well, Gentlemen, if you were to learn the things that you do not understand from them who have received grace from God, even us
Christians, and not to be always striving to prop up your own doctrines, and do despite to those of God.
We may briefly summarise our conclusions in this chapter.
Justin frequently refers to the Memoirs of the Apostles. These Memoirs were in substance identical with our Synoptic Gospels.
He also shows a tentative use of the Fourth Gospel although he was conscious that its authority was not everywhere accepted.
Justin knew most of the other New Testament writings with the exception of the Pastoral Epistles, although nowhere quoting directly from them. Justin's uncanonical material probably came to him by way of traditional Jewish-Christian oral tradition and certain Apocryphal books. There is little to indicate that he was using any Uncanonical Gospel(s). In his use of Old Testament testimonies Justin follows the earlier pesher method of quotation, quoting some texts from memory and reproducing variations found elsewhere. He also knew certain of the primary testimonia, as classified by Professor Dodd, such as the stone testimonium, although he supplements these by new texts and interpretations. New testimonies also originate with him. The Dialogue was however too complicated a literary work to pass on the 'method' of testimony quotation easily and naturally. Justin is throughout strongly influenced by his own theories as to how small incidents in the life and work of Christ were predicted in advance in the Old Testament.
Earlier testimonia are in fact immersed in a mass of prophecies which Justin believed had been literally fulfilled.
1 Dial. \xxvii-Ixxviii. 9-10.