The first apology of Justin Martyr, addressed to the Emperor Antoninus Pius : prefaced by some account of the writings and opinions of Justin Martyr online

is no quotation, there is a manifest reference to the second
chapter of St. Matthew; and in the latter part there is an
almost exact verbal coincidence with Matt. xii. 39.

P. 327 B. " Having written that He was the Son of God in
the commentaries of the apostles." Here is no quotation.



io8 Some Accoimt of the

The inference which I am disposed to draw from the con-
sideration of the above passages is, not that Justin quoted a
narrative of our Saviour's life and ministry agreeing in sub-
stance with our present Gospels, though differing from them
in expression, but that he quoted our present Gospels from
memory. This inference is, as it appears to me, equally
deducible from those passages which he quotes without any
express reference to the aTrofivrjixovevfxaTa rwi/ 'ATroo-ToAwj/. It
is, moreover, necessary always to bear in mind, as has been
already observed, that Justin does not appeal to the New
Testament as an authority ; he wishes merely to give a true
representation of the doctrines and precepts of the gospel, and
for this purpose it was sufficient to express the meaning with-
out any scrupulous regard to verbal accuracy.

IV. It is objected that " Justin has quoted from his Memoirs
by the Apostles, what does hot exist, either in sense or sub-
stance, in any of our four Gospels." In p. 315 D, we read,
" And when Jesus came to the river Jordan where John was
baptizing, and descended into the water, fire was kindled in
Jordan, and the apostles have written that when He came up
out of the water, the Holy Spirit descended upon Him like a
dove." The construction of this sentence is not very clear,
and it has, in consequence, been conjectured that we ought,
instead of av7](f30r], to read avyjcjiOat. Grabe,^ who has discussed
the passage at considerable length, retains the old reading,
and wishes to restrict the words, "the apostles wrote,"
to the latter part of the sentence, so that the authority
of the apostles is appealed to o/i/y in confirmation of the
descent of the Holy Spirit in the shape of a dove. This fact
Grabe supposes Justin to have obtained from the present
Gospels, and to have added the statement respecting the fire
from tradition. Lardner appears disposed to acquiesce in this
solution of the difficulty, which derives support from the fact

1 Spicil. t. i. p. 19.



Writings of Jttstin Mai'tyr, 109

that, in quoting from the Old Testament, Justin sometimes
mixes up statements not found in the sacred volume.^ I have
already referred to a statement respecting Joshua, the high
priest, who, according to Justin, is said to have been clothed
in filthy garments because he had married a fornicatress : a
statement of which there is no vestige in the prophet Zechariah.^
I referred also to the following statement, in p. 361 D, respect-
ing the children of Israel in their journey through the wilder-
ness : " Whose shoe-latchets were not broken, nor were the
shoes themselves worn out, nor did the garments grow old, but
those of the youths grew larger as they did," where, manifestly
referring to Deut. viii. 4 and xxix. 5, he has mixed up facts
derived from some other source than Scripture. It is not,
therefore, improbable that Justin obtained the statement
respecting the fire from tradition, and added it to the gospel
narrative. The learned prelate, however, whose opinions on
this subject I am venturing to controvert, thinks that Justin
quoted the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which was also
called the Gospel according to the twelve. For, according to
Epiphanius,^ it was recorded in that Gospel that after Christ
had ascended out of the water, and the Holy Spirit had
descended, and the voice had come from heaven, a great light
shone around the place. It has been observed that in Justin

^ Credibility, c. lo, sect. viii.

2 Seep. 103, note 9. Thirlby supposes Justin either to have confounded
Joshua with Hosea, who was commanded to take such a wife, i. 2, or
to have had in his mind Ezra x. 18, where the sons of Jeshua, the son
of Jozadak, are said to have had strange wives.

^ Part of the passage is quoted in p. 144, note i. x-a) u; av^x^sv aTo roZ
v^xros, K. r. i. . . . xa) il6vs ^ipnXxf/.-4'i rov •roTov (pS; fiiyx, *' And as He
came out of the water, etc. . . . and straightway a great light shone
round about the place." The author of the tract de Baptismo Hareticoru?n,
printed with Cyprian's works, says that a similar account was given in an
heretical forgery extant under the title PrcBdicatio Petri. " Item, quum
baptizaretur, ignem super aquam visum. Quod in Evangelio nuUo est
scripttcm" " When He was baptized, there was a fire upon the face of the
water, which is written in no Gospel," p. 30, ed. Oxon.



no Some Account oj^the

the fire is said to liave been lighted when Jesus descended
into the water ; whereas, in the Gospel according to the
Hebrews, the light shone after Jesus had come up out of the
water ; a difference not merely of words, but of fact. The
learned prelate, however, considers this difference of no im-
portance. To Dodwell ^ it appeared of so much weight that he
was induced to conclude from it that Justin did not quote the
Ebionite Gospel, but obtained the account from tradition.
Lardner suggests that the words -Kvp av^cjiOr], " fire was kindled,"
may be nothing more than a particular explication of the
words avei^xOrjcrav ol ovpavoi, " the heavens were opened," in
our present Gospels. Is it not more likely that they arose
out of the declaration of the Baptist, that He who was to come
after him would baptize with the Holy Ghost and ivithjire'^

The learned prelate urges another passage,^ in which Justin
quotes a saying of our Lord not to be found in our present
Gospels, " Wherefore also our Lord Jesus Christ said, ' Them
whom I shall catch unawares among you, even them will I
judge.'" This saying of our Lord is also quoted by Clemens
Alexandrinus ; ^ and because Clemens has on another occasion
expressly quoted the Gospel according to the Hebrews, the
learned prelate argues that both he and Justin obtained the
saying from that Gospel. But this is surely to draw conclu-
sions from very insufficient premises. We find in the Acts of
the Apostles ^ a saying of our Lord not recorded in the Gospels ;
why might not the saying in question have been handed down
in the same manner by tradition ? ^



1 Diss, in Ire^iceiim, ii. sect. ix.

2 Dial. p. 267 A.

3 Quis dives salvehir? sect. xl. 40, t. ii. p. 957, ed. Pot. Clemens
does not ascribe the saying expressly to Christ.

' X. 35.

° See Jones On the Canon, t. i. appendix, part 2, sect, xii, Grabe,
Spicil. t. i. p. 327.



W^^itings of Justin Martyr. 1 1 1

I will conclude my remarks on this interesting question
with the words of an able writer/ who, at the same time that
he protests against a gross misrepresentation which had been
made of the learned prelate's opinion, thus expresses his
dissent from the opinion itself: " In fact, the modern German
divines appear to have been the first who thought the verbal
diversity of Justin's quotations from the present text of the
evangelists to be of any consequence. As a question of
criticism, I own it is a difficult one ; and, did I think that
Justin had not quoted our present books, I should not hesitate
a moment to avow it. But when we reflect that there is no
difference in \h^fads mentioned ; that the verbal coincidence
is sometimes exact, and sometimes so great as to appear exact
in a translation ; that Justin calls his books by the name of
Gospels, and says that they were written by apostles and
apostolic men, which precisely corresponds with ours, two of
which are by apostles and two by apostolic men ; and that
Irenaeus makes no mention of any other books so similar to
ours as Justin's were, if they be not the same ; — when we
reflect on these things, we shall find it hard to believe that
Justin quoted any other Gospels than ours. If, however, it be
thought necessary, notwithstanding all this, to grant that he
did not quote our books, then it will be an inference scarcely
less favourable to Christianity, that a set of sacred writings,
different from ours, did yet testify to the truth of the same
facts."

^ Everett, Defence of Christianity ^ etc. , p. 474.



1 1 2 Some Account of the



CHAPTER IX.

CONTAINING ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS
FROM THE WRITINGS OF TATIAN, ATHENAGORAS, AND
THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH, WITH ADDITIONAL REMARKS.

Page 6, note 2. Tatian uses the words ^eoXoyetv, OeoTroulv
to signify what we express by the word ^(^/yj^, pp. 149 D, 157 B.
Athenagoras uses OeoXoyelv in a sense approaching more nearly
to that in which it is used in the Hortatory Address. Legatio,
pp. 18 D, 24 C. ^eoTTotetv means to deify, in 24 B, D.

P. 8. In the Dialogue with Trypho^ Justin alludes to the
charge which was brought against the Christians of eating
human flesh, and of indulging in the most horrible sensuality.
Tatian alludes to the same charge, and complains of the
injustice of condemning the Christians merely because they
were Christians.^ Athenagoras ^ complains that the Christians
were not allowed the liberty, which all other subjects of the
Roman Empire enjoyed, of worshipping the gods whom they
preferred ; and that they were persecuted only on account of
their name : he affirms also that no proof was ever brought
forward that they were guilty of the crimes laid to their charge.
The same calumnies are noticed by Theophilus.*

P. 8, note 2. Theophilus also plays upon the words
"Christ" and "good."^

^ P. 227 B, referred to in chap. vi. note 3, p. 86.
- Pp. 149 B, 158 D, 162 D, 164 A.
^ Legatio, stib in. pp. 2 C, 3 A, 4 C, 7 D, 34 D, 38 B.
â– 1 L, iii. pp. 119 B, 126 D.

^ lyu f/Xv ovv of/.oko'ycu I'/voci 'X.ptimcc.vo;, xoci (popeo -to B-oipiXt; ovoy-a, tovto,

iX'ffiZ,tA)v ivpcp'^ffTos uvat Tu @iu, " For I declare myself to be a Christian,
and I bear the name of Theophilus, hoping to be serviceable to God."
L. i. p. 69 B. Compare p. 77 B.



Writings of Justin Martyr. 1 1



o



P. 8. In Apol. i. p. 64 D (25), Justin says that the
Christians prayed for • the Emperors. So also Athenagoras,
Leg. sub fin. Theophilus, 1. i. p. 76 D.

P. 17, note 5. Athenagoras speaks of " the common, inborn
notion/ 1 We find also " the eternal judgments." Dial.
p. 246 A.

P. 48, note 3. Athenagoras ^ quotes the same passage from
the second Epistle of Plato, and thus argues upon it : ap' ovv 6
Tov a'iStov vovv Koi \6yio KaTaXafifSavofxevov ircpLvoija'as 0eov, kol
ra iTTLcrvfJifSelSyjKOTa avTw e^etTrcov, to ovtws ov, to fxovoff^vls, to
ayaObv ojtt avTov aTTO^eo/xei/oi^, ovrep icrTlv aXrjO^ia' koL Trept
TrpMTTjs Swa/xecos* kol ws Trcpt tov Trai/rcov ^a(riXca Travra ecrt, Kat

CKCtVoV €V€K€V TTOLVTO., KOL Ik^VO oItIOV TTOVTOiV' KOL TTCpl SvO KOL

rpia* BcvTcpov 8e Trepi, ra Sevrepa* Kat TpcTov irepi, to. rptra* irept
Twv iK TOiV alcrOrjTwv y?)? re Kat ovpavov Xcyo/iiivoiv yeyovevat
fXGL^ov rj KaO* iavTov TaXrjOh fiaOexv ivofiLO-ev ; rj ovk ecrrt]/ elireLV.
He had just before said, nXarwv 8e to, aAAa liri-^^wv, kol auros
€ts T€ TOV ayevvrjTOV 0eov Kat rovg ^tto tov ayew^TOV ets ko(T[lov
tov ovpavov ycyovoras, to^;s T€ TrAavr/ra? Kat rovs (XTrAavets ao-repas,
Kat ets Aaifxova<s T€fxv€f Trept wv Aat/xwcoi/ avros aira^MV Xey€LV
TOts TTcpt avTwv elp-qKoa-iv 7rpocr€;)(€ti/ d^iot. Then follows a
quotation from the Timceus of Plato.^ If Athenagoras had
supposed that the writings of the Greek philosopher contained
any intimations of the doctrine of the Trinity, here, surely, was
a favourable opportunity for introducing the subject : but he
is silent.

P. 39. Athenagoras,^ in like manner, appeals to the belief
of the Christians in the doctrine of the Trinity, for the pur-

1 De Mart. Res. p. 54 D.

2 Legatw, p. 26 A.

3 Tom. iii. p. 40, ed. Serr.
^ Legatio, p. 1 1 A.



1 1 4 Some Account of the

pose of defending them against the charge of atheism : rU ovv
ovK av air oprjcr at, Aeyovras ©€ov irarepa koX vlov ©coi/ kcCi Trv(.vjxa
aytov, SeLKvvvTa<i avroiv koi rrjv iv rfj kvuicrei Svvafxiv, kol rrjv iv
rrj Tci^a Siatpccriv, aKovaas dOiovs Ka\ovjxivov<3 ; he had before
said : ovSk rj/xcis aOeoL, vcf) ov Xoyco SeS-qfiLovpyrjTaL kol tw Trap'
avTov TTvevfiaTL crwt^erat tol Travra, tovtov etSores kol KparovvTes
©eoV.-^ In a subsequent passage we find, v-n-b ixovov Bk irapa-
Tre/xTTO/x-evot tovtov, bv lo'ws (f. toracrt) @e6v, kol tov Trap* avTov
\6yov elSivau, tls v) tov TraiSos Trpos tov Trarepa ci/ott/s, re's 7]
TOV Trarpos Trpos tov vlov KOivinvia, tl to Tri/evyaa, tls rj twv
ToaovTiov €V(jicrLS Koi Statpecrts, ivovfiivoiv tov TTvevfxaTOS, tov
7rat8o5, TOV Trarpos.^ And again, ws yap ©eov tfiajjikv, kol vlov
TOV Xoyov avTov, Kai irvevfxa aytov, evovfxeva fiev Kara 8wa/xtv,
TOV Trarepa, tov vlov, to irvevfjia' otl vovs, Xoyos, cro^ia vlo<i tov
Trarpos* koX diroppoia, ws cfiC><5 diro vrvpos, to TTV€.vp.a.^ With
respect to Theophilus, it is well known that he is the earliest
Christian writer who has used the word rpias, " Trinity." In
his second book he is commenting on the work of creation, as
described in the first chapter of Genesis. Having assigned a
reason why the sun and moon were not created till the fourth
day, he goes on to say that the sun is a type of God, the moon,
of man ; and then adds, wo-avrws koX at rpets rjfxepai (f. ins.
Trpo) Twv (famaT'^poiv yeyovvlau tvttoi clcrX r^s TpidSog, tov 0€ov, Kat
TOV Adyov avTOV, kol ttJs aocfitas avTOV. TCTapTio Se TVirto (f. totto))
io'Tlv dvOpiMTTO'i 6 TrpoarS^yjs tov ^wto5, ti^a fj ©eos, Aoyos, cro^ta,
av^pojTTos.* It is not very easy to discover wherein the corre-
spondence between the types and antitypes consists ; one thing,
however, is certain, that, according to the notions of Theophilus,
God, His Word, and His Wisdom constitute a Trinity, and, it
should seem, a Trinity of persons ; for man, whom he after-
wards adds, is a person. One remarkable circumstance is,
that Theophilus assigns to the third Person the title o-ocfita,



1 Legalio, p. 7 A. ^\\\2 C.

» P. 27 A. " P. 94 D-



Writivgs of Just ill Martyr. t 1 5

" Wisdom," 1 which is usually assigned by the early Fathers to
the second, as in the passage just quoted from Athenagoras.^

P. 40, note I. Immediately after one of the passages
just quoted from Athenagoras, follow these words, kox ovk
eVt rovTOL<; to OeoXoyiKov r]fxC)V icrfaTat ix€po<;, dXXa ical 7rXf;^o?
'AyyeAwv Kal Xeirovpywv </)a/x-€i/, ovs 6 Trotr^r^s Kal S^^/^iovpyo?
Kua-fJiov 0eos Sta tov irap avTOV Xoyov 8teVct/xe kol SteVa^e irept
re ra aroLx^la etvac Kal Tovs ovpavov^, Kal tov KocTfxov Kal ra
eV avro), Kal ttjv rovroiv eira^iav.^ Here Athenagoras sa)S
nothing of any worship to be paid to angels, though his words
seem to imply that, in order fully to state the notions of the
Christians respecting the Deity, it was necessary to add that
they believed in the existence of a multitude of angels who
were to have their attention continually directed to the ele-
ments, heavens, etc. We should bear in mind that Justin
and Athenagoras were replying to a charge of atheism ; and
they appear to have thought that they strengthened their case
by saying, " We not only believe in God, but also that He has
subject to Him a multitude of ministering angels." It is to
be observed that, according to the statement of Athenagoras,
God distributed to those angels their various offices through
the instrumentality of the Aoyos ; so that they were, in fact,
the ministers of the Aoyo?.

P. 42, note I. Thus Tatian, 0£os 6 KaO' rjfxa^ ovk e^t

I'Compare 1. i. p. 74 B : @m hx rod Xoyov ulroZ ««) rm <ro(pUi Wo',r,<n
r^l^.roc. rZ yko Xoya> ahroZ l<rrs^s^V.<r«v o\ cvp^yo), ^c) rZ ^n6f.^r.uvTcv
^«<rS h ^.'v«/.;,' cclrZ.. I give the passage as it stands in the Benedictine
edition ; the latter part is a quotation from Ps. xxxiu. Again, 1. u. p.
96 D : i'r. f.m x«i ^, ^c^hUi ZPV^'-^ ° ®^^^ ivp'"^K^rcc. Xeym, -ro.musy^

v ru icAvrnZ X'oyM x.a] rn ia,urov <ro(pix. _ ..

2'Theophilus himself gives the title .0(^1^^ to the second Person in 1. 11,
pp. 88 C, 100 A, and to God absolutely, 1. i. p- 7 1 B.

3 Legatio, p. 1 1 A.



ii6 Some Accotmt of the

(TvcrT<x(JLV kv )(povii), ix6vo<i avapy^os wi/, koI avT6<s VTrdp^oiV twv
o\(ji)v apx^/'^ Again, t6v di/wi/o/xao-rov 0eoi/,- Again, vtto tov
TrdvTOiv Srj/jLLovpyov.^ Again, 6 Se rwv oAoov SecrTTor');?.^ Unless,
as was before remarked, it should be thought that some of
these passages are to be understood of God absolutely. In
Athenagoras we find, eVa ©eov — rov toCSc rov iza.vro'i TroirjTTjv,
avTOV fxkv ov yevofjxvov (ort to ov ov ytyverat, dXXa to jmr) ov) iravra
Se Sta rov irap avrov Xoyov ire-rrovqKOTa, etc.^ Again, eVa rov
SrjfXiovpyov rCov oXoiv vodv dyivviqrov ®cov.^ Again, 6 rovh^ rov
iravros SrjfJiLOvpyo? koL irariqpj Again, airoirLTTTOva-t tw (1. rov)
Aoyo) OeioprjTov ®eov.^ Theophilus, in like manner, uses the
expressions 6 ©eo? dyiwrjros wv kol dvaAXot'ooTos ^ — rov Trotyryjv
KOL SrjfXLovpyov r^v oAtoj/ — 6 fxev roL y€ ©eo? kol 7raT>/p koI Kxtcrrry?
T(ov oAoor.^'^

P. 42, note 3. Theophilus ^^ supposes the following objec-
tion to be made : — " You say that God cannot be limited to a
place, yet you say that He walked in Paradise." Theophilus
answers, " It is true that God cannot be limited to a place, or
be found in a place ; for He has no place of His rest (Isa.
Ivi. i). But His Word, by whom He made all things, being
His Power and Wisdom, assuming the person of the Father
and Lord of the universe, came into Paradise in the person
of God, and conversed with Adam. For the Divine Scripture
itself instructs us that Adam said that he heard a voice ; but
what is this voice else than the Word of God, who is His
Son."

P. 57. Tatian thus states his view of the Christian doc-

' P. 144 C. 2 p^ 1^4 D^

3 P. 145 D. " P. 151 D.

' Legatio^ P- 5 C. ^ P. 7 A. See also p. 10 A,

" P. 13 B. 8 p 24 B. See pp. 5 B, 26 A.

'J P. 82 C. See p. 71 C. 10 P. no B. See pp. 122 D, 89 A.

^' L. ii. p. 100 A. Theophilus calls God to^oj tuv oXuv, " the place of

the universe," 1. 2, p. 81 D, and ioivrov toto;, "His place," p. 88 B.



Writings of Jus i in Martyr. 1 1 7

trine respecting the second Person in the Trinity -} " God was
in the beginning ; but we understand the beginning to be the
power of the Word. For the Lord of all things, being Him-
self the substance of all things, with reference to the creation
which did not yet exist, was alone ; but inasmuch as He
comprehended all power, and all things, visible and invisible,
subsisted in Him, all things were with Him. For with Him
also by a rational power subsisted the Word, who was in Him.
By the unity of His will the Word went forth ; and the Word
going forth not ineffectually (but so as to produce an effect,
viz. the creation of the universe), became the first-born work

^ 050? '^v b a,p^^' rhv Ti a^ix/Av Aoyov ^vvx/jtiv ^apuX^ipeitfAsv' o yap ^itTTor'/ts
rav oXav, avroi vcrccp^av tou <xavrli h V'^'offrcctrts^ kcctoc fiiv rijv fiyioiTco
yiyivxf^ivT^v ^oir,(riv [Jb'avos *W xx6o Vi vrocira. o{)vu,y.n opa<ruv ri koc) uopoiruv uuros
vToffTKtns j)v, <rvv aura! to, TavTO,' trvv ahrZ yap oia XoytnTi; owdfuu; alros
xai koyoSf 0; viv \v avTui, v<ri(rrYi(Ti' CiX'/ifJi-aTi %% tjjj aTXar'/iros avrov rrpoT'/iha,
koyos' Ti koyos, oh xara xivod ^cup^tras, spyov 'TtpuroroKOV rov Tvivf^aro;
(f. ^arpos) yiyvsTai' toutov "fffi^v tou k'o(T(ji.ou rhv ap^nv. yiyovi oi na-ra,
fjt,ipi(r[ji.ov, oh Kura a-ffoxo'Ttnv. to yap a^rar^Jj^sv 7ou Trpuirov x,ix,^pifTat' ro os
LtipttrSiv oixovof/.ixs ryiv a'tpitriv TpoffXafhov ovx ivdia tov o^iv iiX'/i'^Tat 'TTi'ffotYiXiv.
uff'jeip yap aTo f/,ia; ^a^o; avdcrrsrai (Av 'ffvpa voXXa, rTi; oi Tpuryi; oaooi
3/a T^v 'i^a\piv tmv toXXuv ^a'^cuv olx IXarrovron ro <pu;' ovru xat o Xoyog,
9tpoiX&a)V IK TYi; rov 'ffarpo; ^vvdy,iui, ovx, aXoyov 'Tti'Troinxi rov yiyiw/ixora.
Ku) yap avro; lyu XaXu, xa) vi^ili dxovin, xai ol dvi'^rov oia rvis f^srafiacnco;
rov Xoyov xivos o <rpQffoij>.iXuiv X'oyou yiyvofAai' -^pofiaXXofiivo? ol ryjv if^avrou
(^MVYiv, ^iaxo(rju.uv rviv tv vfjuv ax'oiriJ.'ATov vXjjv <7rporpYi[Jcat. xai xa^aftp o Xoyo$,
£v apx''^ ysw/jhi;, avnysw/itn rnv xa9 nfjt.as •ffoino'iv, avro; savreo mv vA'/tv
trifjt.iovpymai' ourco xayu xara rhv rov Xoyov fi'ifiYiffiv dvayivv/ihi?, xai mv rov
dXn9ov$ xardXn^iv <^iToiyi[ji,ivo$, f/,irappv^f^,iZM rtig ffvyytvov; vX'/i; mv (rvyx,v(nv,
p. 145 A. This difficult passage has furnished ample room for discussion.
Petavius, and the author of the Dissertation on Tatian^ in the Oxford
edition, thought that by Xoyov IvvayAv, "the power of the Word," was
meant the same as by Xoyix~Ai lvvdfA,-oji which follows, that is, the power
of reason by which God produces all things ; in other words, that, before
the emission of the A.oyo'„ He existed only in posse, not in esse. Bull,
on the contrary, and Le Nourry contend, that by Xoyov ^vvafiis we must
understand the power of the Word, that is, the Word Himself, referring
in support of this interpretation to -h Tt rov Xoyov Ivva^M; in p. 146 D.
The expression Xoyixn? ^vvdy-iw, occurs again in p. 146 B. A'oyoc yap



1 1 8 Some Accoitnt of the

of the Father. Him (the Word) we know to be the beginning
of the universe."

" He was begotten by division, not by abscission. For that
which is cut off is separated from the original ; but that which
is divided, voluntarily taking its part in the economy, does
not impoverish Him from Whom it is taken. As many fires
are lighted from one torch, yet the light of the first torch is
not diminished by the lighting of many from it ; so the Word
(or Reason) proceeding from the power of the Father, did not
render Him who begat destitute of Word (or Reason). For
I speak, and you hear ; yet I who converse am not, by the
transfer of the words, rendered destitute of the word j but

i^ovpdvioSf ^viv/iu ytyovu; a.'Tfo tou Totrpos, x.ut Aoyos Ix tjjj Koyixris ovvoifAieoSy
where the Oxford editor translates Ik tyu Xoyixiis "Swcifz.sa;, " Ex potentia
divina rod Xoyov productrice." Petavius also differs from Bull respecting
the translation of the words ^lu Xoyixtis ^vvccfAius avros xa) o Aoyos, os «v
iv ciuTo/, v-7r'i(TTr,ffiy which the former renders ^^ per rationalem vim Aoyos ipse,
qui in eoerat, extitit:" the latter, ^^ per rationalem potentiam turn ipse, turn
Aoyos qtd in ipso erat, substitil." I have followed Petavius, thinking his
translation more agreeable both to the construction of the sentence, and
to the whole scope of the passage ; being further confirmed in this opinion
by a corresponding passage of TertuUian, quoted by the Oxford editor,
^^ Ante omnia Dens er at solus, quia nihil aliud extrinsecus prceter ilium.
Caterum ne turn quide7?i solus: habebat enim secum, quam habebat in
semetipso Rationem suam scilicet^'' — contra Praxeam, c. 5. The Oxford
editor suggests very plausibly that we should read ahrov instead of avrss.
In p. 155 D, Tatian speaks of demons who were smitten, XoyM @iov ^wa.-
fitus. We find >.oyou '^uvoif/.u, p. 157 C, with reference to the healing of
diseases. Bull translates the words h'krty.a.rL 'hX rns a.-rXoryiro; cthrov literally
by the words " Voluntate autem simplicitatis sucb ; " and Waterland is angry
with Whitby for not allowing the words to appear as they lie in the
author, without the mean artifice of giving them a false turn. By the
will of His simplicity the Word proceeded forth, torn. iii. p. 271. I wish
that Bull and Waterland had told us the exact meaning which ought to
be attached to the words. By the will of His simplicity I conceive that
Tatian meant to express the simplicity of the divine nature, and the
consequent unity of the divine will.



Writings of Justin Maj^tyr, 119

sending forth my voice, I design to reduce into order the
confused matter in you. And as the Word, being begotten
in the beginning, begat in turn the creation in which we are,
having formed matter for His own use ; so I also, being
begotten again after the imitation of the Word, and having
arrived at the comprehension of the truth, reduce into order
the confusion of kindred matter." In this passage we find
the notion respecting the subsistence of the Aoyos from
eternity in a state of most intimate union with the P'ather,
which I have stated to be common among the Ante-Nicene
Fathers, but not to be clearly expressed by Justin.^ When,
too, Tatian says that the Aoyos was not only in^ but with the
Father, he appears to intend to express a distinct personality.
Waterland has observed, that he speaks only of a temporal
geiieration.- In order to explain the mode of it, he uses the