CHAP. II. thought that it was fitter for pity than for ridicule; but Origen speaks highly of its dramatic skill1. It is uncertain whether it has been attributed rightly to Aristo of Pella; for that late belief may have arisen from its known connexion with the Church to which he belonged". The general plan of the writer, however, is exactly characteristic of the position which a teacher at Pella may be supposed to have occuIts character. pied. It was his object to represent a Hebrew Christian convincing an Alexandrine Jew from

to the translation is appended to many editions of Cyprian. Cf. Routh, p. 109.

1 Orig. c. Cels. iv. 52.: Παπίσκου τινὸς καὶ Ἰάσονος ἀντιλογίαν ἔγνων (in the words of Celsus) οὐ γέλωτος ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἐλέους καὶ μίσους ἀξίαν. The book, as Origen allows, was more adapted in some parts for the simpler sort of men than for the educated: δυνάμενον μέν τι πρὸς τοὺς πολλοὺς καὶ ἁπλουστέρους πίστεως χάριν συμβαλέσθαι, οὐ μὴν οἷόν τε καὶ συνετωτέρους κινῆσαι (1. c.). Afterwards he adds: καίτοιγε οὐκ ἀγεννῶς οὐδ ̓ ἀπρεπῶς τῷ Ἰουδαϊκῷ προσώπῳ τοῦ ἑτέρου ἱσταμένου πρὸς τὸν λόγον.

2 Origen and Jerome quote the Dialogue without mentioning the author's name; and it is not given in the Preface of Celsus. The fragment quoted from Aristo by Eusebius (H. E. iv. 6) appears to belong to an entirely different work. Maximus (7th cent.) is the earliest writer who attributes the Dialogue to Aristo, adding: ἣν [διάλεξιν] Κλήμης ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεὺς ἐν ἔκτῳ βιβλίῳ τῶν Ὑποτυπώσεων τὸν ἅγιον Λουκᾶν φησὶν ἀναγράψαι. This tradition is probably due to the identification of Jason with the Jason mentioned in the Acts (xvii. 5).

Of the Apology which Aristo is said to have offered to Hadrian (Chron. Pasch. 477, ap. Routh, p. 104, if the reading be correct,) nothing is known.

the Old Testament Scriptures, (ἐκ τῶν Ἰουδαϊκῶν CHAP.II. ypaper), showing that the Messianic prophecies were applicable to Jesus'.' To this end he

apparently made frequent use of allegorical interpretations of Scripture; but it is more important to notice that he speaks of Jesus as the Son of God, the Creator of the World'. The words, though few, are key-words of Christianity, and, as the single expression of the early doctrine of the Church of Palestine, they go far to expose the unreality of the hypothesis which exhibits it as Ebionitic. They do not prove anything as to the existence of a New Testament Canon; but, as far as they have any meaning, they tend to show that no such divisions had place in the Church as have been supposed to render it impossible3.

Agrippa Castor introduces a new form of the The writings

1 Pref. Cels. ap. Routh, p. 97: Orig. 1. c.

2 Orig. 1. c.:-Cels. Pref. 1. c. :-) -Hieron. Quæst. Hebr. ii. 507 (ap. Routh, p. 95). In the last instance he reads Gen. i. 1, In filio fecit Deus cœlum et terram. Cf. Routh, p. 100.

3 The Dialogue was in circulation in the time of Celsus, and consequently its composition cannot be placed long after the death of Hadrian.

It may be concluded from Origen's notice (1. c.) that the doctrine of the Resurrection of the body suggested some of Celsus' objections, probably in connexion with the Second Advent. The reference to a strange and memorable narrative' contained in one of the Christian books probably refers to the dialogue (compare c. 53, p. 200, init. with c. 52, init.)

of Agrippa Castor

CHAP. II. Apology.

Hitherto we have noticed in succes

Nothing appears to
He is said to have

sion defences of Christianity addressed to persecutors, philosophers, and Jews; he maintained the truth against heretics. be known of his history. been a very learned man,' and was probably of Jewish descent'. Eusebius speaks of him as a contemporary of Saturninus and Basilides, and adds, that he was the most famous among the many writers of the time who defended the doctrine of the Apostles and the Church chiefly on philosophic principles (λoywτepov)2.' In particular, he composed 'a most satisfactory (ikavwTaTos) refutation of Basilides,' in which he noticed his commentaries on the Gospel, and exposed the claims of certain supposititious (ávúπapкTOL) prophets, whom he had used to support his docshow signs of trines. This slight fact shows that historic criticism was not wholly wanting in the Church as soon as it was required. It would not, as far as we can see, have been an easy matter to secure a reception for forgeries, claiming to be authoritative, even at the beginning of the second century.

historical criticism.

1 Vir valde doctus. Hieron. de Vir. Ill. xxi. His Jewish descent appears to follow from the fact that he charged Basilides with teaching 'indifference in eating meats offered to idols' (Euseb. H. E. iv. 7); yet see Just. M. Dial. c. 35. His controversy with Basilides probably indicates some connexion with Alexandria.

2 Euseb. 1. c.

CHAP. II.

§ 7. Justin Martyr.

rative fulness

and of our know

In

ledge of Justin.

The writings and character of Justin Martyr The compastand out in clear relief from the fragments names which we have hitherto reviewed. stead of interpreting isolated phrases we can now examine complete and continuous works: instead of painfully collecting a few dry details from tradition we can contemplate the image which a Christian himself has drawn of his own life and experience. Justin was of Greek descent, but his family had been settled for two generations in the Roman colony of Flavia Neapolis, which was founded in the time of Vespasian near the site of the ancient Sichem1. The date of his birth is uncertain, but it was probably at the close of the first century. He tells us that his countrymen generally were addicted to the errors of Simon Magus2, but it appears that he himself escaped that delusion, and began his search for truth among the teachers of the old philosophic schools.

1 Ap. i. 1.

2 Ap. i. 26: Σχεδόν πάντες μὲν Σαμαρεῖς, ὀλίγοι δὲ καὶ ἐν ἄλλοις ἔθνεσιν, ὡς τὸν πρῶτον θεὸν ἐκεῖνον (Simon) ὁμολογοῦντες [ἐκεῖνον] καὶ προσκυνοῦσι. Cf. Dial. c. 120. It is an instructive fact that Sadducæism also prevailed in Samaria. [Hipp.] Adv. Hær. ix. 29.

CHAP. II. First he applied to a Stoic1; but after some His own ac- time he found that he learned nothing of God philosophic from him, and his master affirmed that such

count of his

studies.

knowledge was unnecessary. Next he betook himself to a Peripatetic, 'a shrewd man,' he adds, in his own opinion.' But before many days were over, the Philosopher was anxious to settle with his pupil the price of his lessons, that their intercourse might prove profitable to them both. So Justin thought that he was no philosopher at all; and still yearning for knowledge (τῆς ψυχῆς ἔτι σπαργώσης) he applied to a Pythagorean, who enjoyed a great reputation, and prided himself on his wisdom. But a knowledge of Music, Astronomy, and Geometry, was the necessary passport to his lectures; and, since he was not possessed of it, Justin, as he seemed near to the fulfilment of his hopes, was once again doomed to disappointment. He fared better, however, with a Platonist, his next teacher, and in his company he seemed to grow wiser every day. It was at that time-when in his folly,' as he says, 'he hoped soon to attain to a clear vision of God,'-that, seeking calm and retirement by the sea-shore, he met an aged man, meek and venerable, who led him at length

1 The following account is given chiefly in a translation from his own striking narrative. Dial. cc. ii. sqq.