JUSTIN"
1107
JUSTIN
aXoyog, Cum Tryphone Jiidao Dialogus. Tliis dialogue, in which Justin defends Christianity against the objec- tions of Trj'pho, professes to be the record of an actual discussion, held, according to Eusebius {Ilist. Eccles. iv, 18), at Ephesus. Trypho describes himself as a Jew, " Hying from the war now raging," probably occasioned by the revolt under Barchochebas, in the reign of Ha- drian, A.D. 132-134. But, though the discussion prob- ably took place at the time, it was not committed to writing, at least not finished, till some years after, as Justin makes a reference to his first Apology, which is assigned, as we have seen, to A.D. 138 or 139. It has been conjectured that Trypho is the Eabbi Tarphon of the Talmudists, teacher or colleague of the celebrated Kabbi Akiba, but he does not appear as a rabbi in the dialogue. The dialogue is perhaps founded upon the conversation of Justin with Trypho rather than an ac- curate record of it. After an introduction, in which Justin gives an account of the manner of his conversion to Christianity, and earnestly exhorts Trj^pho to follow his example, Trypho replies to the exhortation by say- ing that Justin would have acted more wisely in adhe- ring to any one of the philosophical sects to which he had formerly been attached than in leaving God, and placing all his reliance upon a man. In the former case, if he lived virtuously, he might hope to obtain sal- vation ; in the latter he could have no hope. His only safe course, therefore, was to be circumcised, and com- ply with the other requisitions of the Mosaic law. Jus- tin answers that the Christians had not deserted God, though they no longer observed the ceremonial law. They worshipped the God who brought the forefathers of the Jews out of tlie land of Egypt, and gave the law, but who had plainly declared by the projihets that he would give a new law — a law appointing a new mode of piu-irication from sin, by the baptism of repentance and of the luiowledge of God— and requiring a spiritual, not a carnal circumcision. The ceremonial law was, in truth, given to the Jews on account of the hardness of their heart; as a mark of God's displeasure at their apostasy, when they made the golden calf in Horeb. All its ordinances, its sacrifices, its Sabbath, the prohi- bition of certain kinds of food, were designed to coun- teract the inveterate tendency of the Jews to fall into idolatry. If, says Justin, we contend that the ceremo- nial law is of universal and perpetual obligation, we run the liazard of charging God with inconsistency, as if he had appointed diiferent modes of justification at differ- ent times; since they who lived before Abraham were not circumcised, and they who lived before Moses nei- ther observed the Sabbath nor oifered sacrifices, although God bore testimony to them that they were righteous. Having, as he thinks, satisfactorily proved that the cer- emonial law is no longer binding, Justin replies to an _ argument used by Trypho, that the prophecy of Dan. vii, 9 taught the Jews to expect that the IMessiah woiUd be great and glorious; whereas the Messiah of the Christians was unhonored and inglorious, and fell under the extreme curse of the law, for he was crucified. Jus- tin's answer is, that the Scriptures of the Old Testament speak of two advents of the Messiah, one in humiliation and the other in glory; though the Jews, blinded by their prejudices, looked only to those passages which foretold the latter. He then proceeds to quote passages of the Old Testament in which the Messiah is called God, and Lord of Hosts. In this part of the dialogue Justin extracts from the Old Testament several texts in which he finds allusions to the Gospel historj'. Thus the paschal lamb was a type of Christ's crucifixion ; the oifering of fine flour for tliose who were cleansed from the leprosy was a type of the bread in the Eucharist ; the twelve bells attached to the robe of the high-priest, of the twelve apostles. Justin next undertakes to prove that the various prophecies respecting the IMessiah were fulfilled in Jesus ; but, having quoted Isaiah vii to prove that the Messiah was to be born of a virgin, he first runs into a digression caused by an inquiry from Try-
pho, whether Jews who led holy lives, like Job, Enoch, and Noah, but observed the Mosaic law, could be saved ; and afterwards into a second digression, occasioned by a remark of Trypho's that the Christian doctrine respect- ing the pre-existence and divinity of Christ, and his subseiiuent assumption of humanitj', was monstrous and absurd. Combating these points, Trypho next inquires of Justin whether he really believes that Jerusalem would be rebuilt, and all the Gentiles, as well as the Jews and proselytes, collected there imder the govern- ment of the Jlessiah ; or whether he merely jirofessed such a belief in order to conciliate the Jews. Justin, in answer, admits that the belief was not universal among the orthodox Christians, but that he himself maintained that the dead would rise again in the body, and live for a thousand years in Jerusalem, which would be rebuilt, and beautified and enlarged He appeals in support of his opinion to Isaiah, and to the Apocalypse, which he ascribes to John, one of Christ's apostles. Justin then concludes the interview by debating the conversion of the Gentiles. He contends that the Christians are the true people of God, inasmuch as they fulfil the spiritual meaning of the law, and do not merely conform, like the Jews, to the letter. They have the true circumcision of the heart ; they are the true race of priests dedicated to God, and typified by Jesus, the high-priest in the prophecy of Zechariah; they offer the true spiritual sacrifices which are pleasing to God, agreeably to the prophecy of Malachi; they are the seed promised to Abraham, because they are actuated by the same prin- ciple of faith which actuated Abraham ; they are, in a word, the true Israel. The dialogue with Trj'pho ap- pears to be mutilated, but to what extent is a matter of dispute. Two fragments are assigned to it by Grabe (Spidkffium, Sfec. ii, 175), but it is doubtful with what correctness. "It is to be observed," says Smith (Dic- tionary of Greek and Roman Bioijraphy), "that, al- though Otto ranks the Dialofjus cum Tryphone among the undisputed works of Justin, its genuineness has been repeatedly attacked. The first assault was by C. G. Koch, of Apenrade, in the duchy of Sleswick (Justini Murtjp-is Dialogus cum Tryphone . . . vo'btvanaq , . . convicius), but this attack was regarded as of little mo- ment. That of AVetstein (Proley. in Nov. Test, i, 66), founded on the difference of the citations from the text of the Sept. and their agreement with that of the Hex- aplar edition of Origen, and perhaps of the version of Symmachus, which are both later than the time of Jus- tin, was more serious, and has called forth elaborate re- plies from Krom (^Diatribe de Authentia Dialog. Justini Martyr, cum Tryph., etc., 1778, 8vo), Eichhorn {Einlei- tung in das A . T.), and Ivredner {Beitriige'zur Einleitring, etc.). Tlie attack was renewed at a later period by Lange, but -vrith little result. An account of the contro- versy is given by Semisch (book ii, sect, i, ch. ii), who contends earnestly for the genuineness of the work. It may be observed that the genuineness even of the t^>'o Apologies was attacked by the learned but eccentric Hardouin."