 |
Web Hosting by Netfirms | Free Domain Names by Netfirms |
|
|
|
Let us first get our bearings: it is mid-second Century and Christianity's greatest apologist is writing possible his greatest treatise defending the Gentile Christian faith: Dialogue With Trypho The Jew. Again let us understand that the Great Commission has been undertaken now for at least 80 years following Jesus' crucifixion by his disciples and apostles. That being the case you should understand that the Jesus Movement of Jerusalem has already exerted great influence among the Gentile nations in obeying Jesus' command:
Matt 28:20 20 Teaching them (the Gentile nations) to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (KJV) Matt 28:20 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (KJV)
Justin's Dialogue With Trypho The Jew is the earliest surviving writing which sets out fully the issues which separated Christians and Jews. This fascinating Dialogue With Trypho The Jew was written about 160 C.E. It draws on earlier Christian exegetical traditions; in places it has very deep roots in Jewish-Christian polemic and apologetic.
Although Justin and Trypho argue vigorously, they do not resort to personal abuse or to name-calling. At the end of the Dialogue, they agree to disagree; after praying for one another they go their separate ways. Most later Christian anti-Jewish writings are less moderate in tone; unlike Trypho, the Jewish opponent(s) often cave in and accept the "truth" of Christianity. However, if we have twentieth-century understandings of "tolerance" in mind, it would not be appropriate to claim either Justin or Trypho as models of "tolerance". Both the Christian and his Jewish partner in dialogue not only set out their respective very different religious positions, they go further: they appeal vigorously to one another to change sides, with the clear implication that the other side is wrong-headed.
Answer for yourself: How believable is Justin's claim that his Dialogue With Trypho The Jew records an extended discussion he had with a learned Jew, Trypho, shortly after the second Jewish revolt?
Opinions have differed widely. My own view is that the Dialogue With Trypho The Jew is neither a verbatim account of a two-day debate which took place in Ephesus between a Christian and a Jew, nor a wholly artificial compilation of Christian polemical traditions which is unrelated to discussions between Christians and Jews in the middle decades of the second century. There are points at which Trypho is little more than a puppet: he is allowed to say only what Justin wants him to say. However, many of the arguments and responses of both Justin and Trypho are found in other writings from this period. In several key passages Trypho echoes widely held Jewish objections to Christian claims and sets out Jewish basic convictions or interpretations of Scripture which are well attested elsewhere.
As we examine and analyze Justin's perception of the status quo of Christianity as it existed in 160 C.E. it is important to make sure we note the examples of "Godfearers" as well as "Proselytes" as discussed by Justin as this gives us a picture of what the Gentile was taught to do by those who knew Jesus best...his apostles and disciples. This was the pattern for not only Gentile inclusion into the Israel of God but the pattern of worship as taught the non-Jews by Jesus' closest followers. I hope we are smart enough to understand that any changes to this "pattern" that come after Justin do little more than destroy the efforts of the apostles and disciples to carry out Jesus' wishes and mandate and literally destroy the pattern of worship that you have seen by now that existed long before Abraham and which was reiterated by Moses for both the Jew and non-Jew. As we shall see, the Dialogue contains important references both to "God-fearers" and to "proselytes" which have been overlooked in recent scholarly discussion of these topics and these pictures speak volumes to Gentile Christians today if they have ears to hear.
Several scholars have commented on Justin's characterization of Trypho the Jew. They have stressed that Trypho is a pleasant courteous Jew, and that, unlike many later Christian and Jewish disputants, Justin and Trypho respect one another. However, the role in the Dialogue of Trypho's companions has usually been quietly ignored, from Eusebius right up to the present.
In the very first extant sentence of the Dialogue Justin is met by an unidentified man who is accompanied by companions; the latter are referred to in the second sentence as the man's "friends". Most scholars except that the expected opening dedication is missing and that it probably mentions Ephesus in Asia Minor as the location of the dialogue (Eusebius, History of the Church, 94.18.6).
Answer for yourself: Do you grasp the importance of Ephesus being the location of this Dialogue between a Gentile believer and a Jew? We have in Justin's Dialogue his description of not only 2nd Century Judaism but Gentile believers in God who not only practiced the Jewish faith but were believers in Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. This is phenomenal for our information of the time period and what the Gentile believers in Jesus though Jewish evangelism had been taught concerning not only the accepted religious doctrines concerning Jesus in the 2nd Century long before Rome would take charge of the faith but we also have a through description by Justin of the Gentile's worship of God as it existed in the 2nd Century as taught by Jewish outreach.
The reader's curiosity is aroused immediately not only as to who is the person who engages Justin in conversation but as to whom are his companions. Before Trypho identifies himself and states that he is a circumcised Jew who has recently fled from the Bar Kochba war, his "followers and companions" inform Justin (and the reader of the Dialogue) that they are keen to hear "some profitable discourse" from Justin. But we are not told anything about the background of Trypho's companions at this point. This silence concerning the identity of Trypho's comparison turns out to be significant for a reason and we shall see soon why Justin desired to keep such identification of the companions identity silent.
The extended discussions between Justin and Trypho take place on two days, on both of which Trypho (but not Justin) is accompanied by friends. Indeed, Justin notes that some additional companions turned up with Trypho on the second day. Occasionally the companions intervene in the discussions to remind the reader of their presence.
Answer for yourself: What possible importance could this intervention by Trypho's friends in this religious dialogue between Justin and this circumcised Jew have? More on that later but you will be amazed!
These friends of Trypho never defend a point of view which differs from that of Trypho, but, as we shall see, these friends of Trypho are distinguished from Trypho in important respects. In the very last chapter (142), Trypho is still accompanied by his companions as he and Justin go their separate ways after praying for one another.
Although the companions are firmly in Trypho's court, Justin takes pains to distinguish between their reaction to Justin's Christian claims and Trypho's own reaction. Trypho's companions are portrayed as being more cynical about Justin's Christian claims than Trypho himself: they are therefore even less likely to become Christians.
Answer for yourself: What message, if any, are we to get from the increased cynicism of Trypho's friends toward Justin and his Christian claims? Again, more on that later.
This distinction (between Trypho and his friends) is set out clearly in the opening chapters, and maintained consistently thereafter; and this is very important and we must not forget that there is a similarity yet a dissimilarity between Trypho and his friends. In the first seven chapters, which are a prologue to the Dialogue as a whole, Justin tells Trypho about his intellectual pilgrimage and his conversion to Christianity. In response Trypho smiles and replies courteously, but his companions "laugh aloud' (8.3).
Answer for yourself: What did Trypho's companions know better than Trypho that made them laugh as Justin's profession of conversion to "Christianity"? Sorry, but you will have to wait for the bombshell to drop in a minute; please keep reading.
In the next chapter the reader is told that they "laughed aloud again and began to shout quite rudely' (9.2).Not surprisingly, Justin is offended and starts to break off the discussion. Trypho urges him to keep his promise and to continue. Justin agrees, with the provision that the companions must behave themselves and listen quietly. At this point two of the companions disappear, "with some jokes, and some jests at our zeal", Justin says ruefully. The remaining companions sit down quietly with Justin and Trypho, and after a brief conversation about the Bar Kochba war, they listen to the discussions between Justin and Trypho.
The hostility of Trypho's companions is not confined to the opening chapters. Towards the end of the second day of the discussions their rudeness is referred to again: "some of those who had come on the second day" protested at one of Justin's claims, and "cried out as though in a theatre" (122.4).
Answer for yourself: What possibly could be so funny that these friends and companions of Trypho would make such fun of Justin Martyr's heart-felt religious commitment?
In terms of the literary structure of the Dialogue, these two chapters are programmatic. They mark the transition from the Prologue to the main body of the Dialogue. Their structural role is confirmed by the fact that only here (8.3), and at the beginning and the end (141.5) of the whole Dialogue does Justin address Marcus Pompeius, the person to whom the Dialogue is dedicated. Most of the themes which will be discussed in the 133 chapters which follow are foreshadowed here.
Justin appeals to Trypho to become a Christian: "If you seek salvation seriously and have trusted in God, it is open to you, once you know the Christ of God and have become an initiate, to live happily."
Answer for yourself: Is there any significance to Justin's use of the term "initiate"?
According to Graham N. Stanton and Guy G. Stroumsa in their Tolerance And Intolerance In Early Judaism And Christianity (pp. 263-278) they tell us that the Greek word for "initiate" as used by Justin in his Dialogue is a technical term used to refer to one initiated into the rites of the mystery religions; in particular to immersions connected to mystery religions (pp. 275).
Answer for yourself: Is Justin really a follower of Rabbi Yeshua or is he trying to teach pagan religions under the disguise of a man named Jesus and is this the reason why the companions of Typho are laughing and ridiculing him so much because they fully are aware of Justin's agenda since they were themselves Gentile "semi-proselytes" and Godfearers and were well acquainted with what Justin was teaching having been in those pagan religions before repenting and renouncing them and turning to the true faith of God...Biblical Judaism where the non-Jew has a place next to the Jew (Covenant of Noah and the Laws of Noah)?
Answer for yourself: Is there any literature that exists today to show that Justin was teaching paganism in Jesus' name and trying to spread existing paganism under the disguise of a Jewish man who was little more to him than a reincarnated sun-godman? Yes there is.
Eusebius, in his Church History, tells us that Justin, in his Dialogue with Trypho, says "there exists not a people, civilized or semi-civilized, who have not offered up prayers in the name of a crucified Savior to the Father and Creator of all things" (Hist. Eccl. lib i. ch. iv).
Trypho, knowing the re-dressed paganism as taught by Justin, immediately makes a counter-appeal to Justin. "When you have forsaken God and placed your hope on a man, what kind of hope yet remains for you?" From Trypho's perspective the failure of Christians to keep the Laws of their Covenant confirms that they are "Godless." Trypho fully understood that the religion that Justin promoted was literally the forsaking of the Divine Revelation given by the God of the Bible. In kindness Trypho acknowledges Justin as a friend and then urges him to be circumcised, then (as is commanded in the law) to keep the sabbath and the feasts and God's new moons, and, in short, to do all the things that are written in the law, and then perchance he will find mercy from God (8.4).
Answer for yourself: In reality what was Trypho trying to accomplish with Justin? He was inviting Justin to repent and enter into the Covenant with God; a Covenant which required circumcision and obedience to God's Holy Days and appointed times like the Sabbath and Festivals and New Moons.
Trypho then summarizes his own views concerning the Messiah, and alleges that Christians have shaped a kind of Messiah for themselves by denying the Messiah of the Jewish Scriptures and fashioning one of their own making from the personification of solar entities (http:// paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com).
A little later Trypho criticizes Christians for their failure to mark out a boundary between themselves and pagans (10.3). In other words Trypho the Jew blames Christians for maintaining their pagan religious ways and not repenting of such false worship when taught the truth!
I don't wish to prolong this but you need to take just a second to read right now an article concerning disturbing quotes about the paganiziation of the Christian faith by scholars and authors who truly know what they are taking about. They make the same case that Trypho and his companions were making to Justin in the early 2nd Century. THINK!
The issues which separate Justin and Trypho are set out clearly: Justin appeals to Trypho "to know the Christ of God"; Trypho urges Justin to "do all the things that are written in the law". Their agendas are very different. Both refer to a rather different "rite of entry" into their respective communities, baptism and circumcision.
Both claim that the other person has been led astray by false teachers. Trypho claims that Justin has been led astray by false speeches, and has followed men of no account; in fact both single out false teachers as responsible for the false stance taken by the other. Both hope that once the sway of the false teachers is shaken off, their rival will be able to change sides. In other words, from Justin's perspective, both synagogue and church hope that adherents of the rival community will be won over. In spite of tight social boundaries on both sides of the divide, movement is possible. As we shall see, the language of movement, "going over", is found more explicitly in Dialogue 47.
Please understand that Justin in his Dialogue gives for all the world to see a "kodak-moment" of the Gentile Godfearer and his religious belief system as it existed in the 2nd Century A.D.; but few know this because they fail to study their own faith. Instead of reading about the origins of their Christian faith most Christians accept their experience as the barometer of truth instead of historical record and archeology which often will testify to the falsity of one's Christian experience today. One need only compare the religious belief system of the Gentile Godfearer who accepted Jesus as the Messiah in the 2nd Century A.D. with that of contemporary Christianity today to be horrified at the changes that have taken place over 1800 years which has almost completely destroyed the intended results of the Great Commission as first taught over the early centuries of the Jesus Movement before the establishment of the Roman state-religion called "Christianity." One good place to begin your comparison is to fully understand the religious belief system that Justin opposed in his day and which he strongly opposes in his Dialogue and fully understand that this religious belief system that Justin opposed was not only that of the Jews but the Gentile Godfears who has likewise been taught by Jews themselves (these Jews were the Jewish followers of Jesus as we will quickly come to see)!!!!!!!!!!!!
At the end of a series of scriptural citations in chapters 21 and 22, Justin brings his argument to a climax by challenging Trypho and his companions: "If this is not so, tell me what you all think about the matters under discussion." And when no one answers, Justin adds: "Therefore to you, Trypho, and to those who wish to become proselytes I proclaim the Divine message ..." (23.3).
This is the first time the reader is given any specific information about the companions: they "want to become proselytes." This phrase can be understood in three ways:
Perhaps our first inclination is to assume that Trypho's companions are fellow Jews who are seriously interested in becoming Christians. That might seem appropriate in view of Justin's opening appeal to Trypho which we have just noted. However, the sustained hostility and cynicism of the companions makes this unlikely that they are Jews who are seriously interested in becoming Christians. In addition, the immediate context rules out the possibility that the companions are Jews. This passage comes at the climax of an extended discussion about circumcision which follows the programmatic chapters 8 and 9. Two sentences after the reference to the companions who wish to become proselytes, Justin makes an impassioned plea to them: "Stay as you have been born". And a familiar line of argument about Abraham's justification before circumcision then follows: the latter was just a sign. If Trypho's companions were Jews, there would not be any need to urge them to stay as they are and not to bother with circumcision. So the companions must be Gentiles.
Answer for yourself: Do they wish to become proselytes (i.e. convert fully) to Judaism, or to Christianity?
The latter view has been influential, largely as a result of the most widely available English translation, by A. L. Williams. Williams clarifies the ambiguous Greek by adding in brackets after "proselytes" the phrase "to the true faith". In other words Williams thinks that Trypho's companions are keen to become "proselytes" to Christianity. He is terribly wrong and this is how lies and false teachings are spread which led the flock astray.
Justin is keen to dissuade Trypho's companions from taking the final step of circumcision, for he knows (probably from experience) that it is even more difficult to convert to Christ those have become proselytes to Judaism than it is to convert Jews like Trypho. So he argues vigorously and at length that circumcision was not part of God's original purposes.
Answer for yourself: Again what do we see from Justin's account? We see that it was common for non-Jews to be instructed in the Torah and the Covenants of God whereby they and Jews were not only friends but often accepted circumcision and full conversion to Judaism as was the intention of the Great Commission which was to teach in all the world the Covenant of Noah and the opportunity for such Godfearers to make full conversion to Judaism if they so desired.
At the beginning of their lengthy discussion on this topic Justin lets Trypho have first say. Justin seems to be generous in allowing Trypho to deal the first card, but, as we shall see, Justin himself holds the trump card. Trypho's first card, (10.3) is the very first of the numerous explicit citations of Scripture in the Dialogue, Genesis 17:14: "The person who has not been circumcised on the eighth day shall be cut off from God's people." Trypho then claims that this command refers not only to born Israelites, but also to foreigners (including Justin himself), and to purchased slaves.
Answer for yourself: Did we not see in the prior articles that Abraham, a non-Jew, was circumcised as a "mark" of his Covenant with God long before Moses was commanded to be circumcised and later applied this to the whole of the Jewish males? We sure did.
In interpreting Genesis 17:14 to refer to three groups, Trypho goes further than the MT or the LXX which refer to only two groups: born Israelites and (foreign) purchased slaves.
But Justin ignores the point at this stage in the Dialogue and concentrates on his own arguments concerning circumcision. At the climax Justin attempts to trump Trypho's card concerning Genesis 17:14: he insists once again that circumcision was given as a sign, but not for righteousness. The sentences which follow are highly rhetorical:
Understand that the blood of that circumcision has been made useless, and we have believed the blood that brings salvation . . . Jesus Christ circumcises all those who will ... Come with me, all who fear God who wish to see the good things of Jerusalem. Come, let us go in the light of the Lord, for he has set his people free, even the house of Jacob ... (24.3).
These words are addressed directly to Trypho and his companions. The plea, "Come with me, all who fear God", is intriguing. These words are addressed directly to the companions: they fear God, and wish to see the good things of Jerusalem - and Justin urges them to join his side. We learn from this that Trypho's companions are referred to here as "those who fear God", a phrase found in several passages in Acts (10:2, 22, 35; 13:16, 26).
At Dialogue 10.4 the phrase "those who fear God" refers to Gentiles sympathetic to Judaism (many other scholars hold the same idea like Feldman, Jew and Gentile, p. 357). In this passage Trypho complains that Christians who claim to know God, do not keep the commandments - yet even those who fear God do (the reason being that obeying the Commandments shows God your adherence to His Covenant with them and their love for Him). Perhaps Trypho even has in mind his own companions, as well as other Gentiles sympathetic to Judaism. It is important to note that in both 10.4 and 24.3 the phrase "those who fear God' is a very general way of referring to those sympathetic to Judaism and that this "pattern" is shown in many passages in the New Testament as well as found in Acts 10:2 and 10:22 with Cornelius and then again used in a universal sense in Acts 10:35. Again those Gentiles partial to Judaism is again seen in Acts 13:16 in Antioch of Pisidia in Asia Minor. In the context of these passages we see these non-Jewish Gentile Godfearers observing the Sabbath because Paul and Barnabas addressed them on the Sabbath day in the synagogues in Asia Minor (notice they were not "churches" in Asia Minor.
Justin's identification of Trypho's companions as Gentiles closely attached to Judaism who wish to become proselytes is striking. The companions are "God-fearers", even though Justin does not explicitly refer to them as such. In recent years (especially since the discovery of the Aphrodisias inscription) literature on "Godfearers" has become a growth industry. As far as I can see, none of the recent writers on this topic makes more than a passing reference to Justin. This is unfortunate. I am convinced that when Justin's evidence is set alongside the other varied and often baffling evidence, we are forced to conclude that Gentiles were attracted to Judaism for many reasons and that their relationship to Judaism took many forms. Today Gentile Christianity has little to do with Judaism and this is terribly unfortunate because it separation from the mother faith has robbed it of the "pattern" or worship God intended the Jew and Gentile share.
Before we leave chapter 23, we must ask why Justin has so much to say about circumcision in his opening exchanges with Trypho.
Several observations for the Christian need to be made from Dialogue 47. We have already seen that the programmatic chapters 8 and 9 imply that there is movement in both directions between Judaism and Christianity; in other words both were competing for recruits: this is what both Justin and Trypho assume in their opening appeals to one another. At 47.1 Justin reminds his readers of Trypho's initial appeal to him in 8.4 to become a proselyte.
Now here is where we must pay close attention. In response to a question from Trypho, Justin concedes that Jews who have become Christians and still wish to keep the law fully are to be accepted as long as they do not persuade Gentiles to keep the law, and as long as they have full fellowship with Gentile Christians.
Answer for yourself: What did we learn from this statement from Justin?
Justin admits that many Jews were currently believers in Yeshua/Jesus and such Jewish "believers in Jesus" were continually keeping the Law. Notice also that such Jewish believers in Jesus as Messiah did not at that time follow Paulinism whereby they replaced Law with grace as we have been taught today. In other words Paulinism was not successful in the 2nd Century as it has become today under the influence and power of the Roman state in the 4th Century A.D. Justin refers to this issue three times in this one fairly short but very important chapter.
The third reference is particularly important as it concerns the Gentile believers in both God and Jesus:
Justin concedes, somewhat reluctantly, that Gentile Christians who have been persuaded by Jewish Christians to keep the law will be saved. This means that Judaism even had influence among Gentile Christians (Justin's people). Justin then notes that there are some Gentile Christians who are much less tolerant than he is: they will not converse or share table-fellowship with those who acknowledge Christ and keep the law (both non-Jew & Jews). This means that the dividing lines were being drawn over the Law and not the issue of the Messiah and Law as you now know is the heart of one's Covenant with God!
In reality Justin is denying the Covenant of God and replacing it with one of the Gentile's own making...and this has continued for 1800 years up to our day!
Answer for yourself: What else is so striking about the above verse by Justin? He admits that salvation exists within Judaism and not only in Christianity as Christianity would have you believe today! WOW!
Answer for yourself: Why is Justin himself so cautious about Jewish Christians, and why are some of his fellow Christians so intolerant? Justin gives one answer himself: Jewish Christians who insist on keeping the law arouse the suspicion of Gentile Christians and their lives as examples of high piety was always a stimulus for the Gentile Christian to begin to examine the Jewish faith and the Torah whereby if one did such an activity he would quickly see for himself the falsification of the doctrines and teachings of Gentile Christianity and reject it and become converts to the Jewish faith (all the while maintaining belief in Jesus as Messiah). Justin knew that the end result of such activity would persuade Gentile Christians to keep the law, a position Justin will not tolerate (47.3).
Answer for yourself: Why should Gentiles who "believe on this Christ" not be encouraged by Jewish Christians to "live in accordance with the law appointed by Moses'?
Answer for yourself: Why is Justin, tolerant in many other respects, so intolerant at precisely this point concerning the Law?
As we find throughout history Jewish Christians have always insisted that the law should be kept as a sine qua non as far as salvation is concerned; but the Bible never really teaches this. Obedience is expected of one who has received the grace of God and His Salvation by faith (not faith in Messiah but faith in God). These Jewish Christians mean well but they fail to present to the non-Jew his Covenant with God which preceded the Mosaic Covenant; the Covenant of Noah. Failing to do this they assume that the only way the Gentile can find acceptance with God is through total conversion into the Covenant of Moses; such by now you have learned is not correct. However, Justin does not say that this is their position. He implies that they are encouraging Gentiles to keep the law alongside their faith in Christ (this law being the law of Moses and not the Law of Noah).
One senses Justin's fear at what is going on. Justin and the Gentile Christians are loosing the quest for converts and Biblical Judaism is winning. What Gentile Christians fail to realize is that Biblical Judaism was a world religion and it would not be until Rome will throw her power as a Political State behind religion would Judaism being to wain and Roman Christianity surge to the forefront. So we see Justin's hidden agenda at this point. The clue to a probable explanation comes in 47.4: Justin notes that some Gentile Christians who have been persuaded to keep the law have moved over completely to the Jewish religion; they have denied that "this is the Christ", and therefore cannot be saved. Their denial of "the Christ" involved the Gentile's belief in Jesus which is questioned once they realize that the Greek Scriptures have been purposefully falsified, misquoted, and mistranslated in order to promote a sun-godman of the Essenes in 200 B.C.E. Such Greek Scriptures the Jews have always rejected as false representations of the true Jewish Scriptures. That being so then one quickly comes to learn what were the true Jewish prophecies and in the light of their failure to be "fulfilled" then questions concerning Jesus as Messiah arise. I have dealt in other websites with these falsifications and the failures of these prophecies to be fulfilled:
Once one the student familiarizes himself with both the falsifications of the texts by the Essenes and later Gentiles as well as the failure of the true Jewish prophecies to be fulfilled then he can see more clearly why the events expected by the Jews did not occur and that such a failure cannot be laid at the feet of Jesus. Therefore the question about Jesus as Messiah cannot be truthfully answered and it yet remains a matter of faith. Time will tell.
Justin suspects that some Jewish Christians who encourage Gentile Christians to keep the law may in fact be responsible for turning them into proselytes to Judaism. The continuing attraction of Judaism to Gentiles, whether Christian or not, suggests that this is a plausible explanation. So I suggest that Justin is extremely sensitive concerning the status of Jews who have become Christians because he fears that some of them will encourage Gentile Christians to keep the law - and that will prove to be the crucial step on the path towards a complete transfer to Judaism.
This explanation is strengthened by sociological considerations. Justin's Dialogue provides ample evidence that in his day Judaism and Christianity were such keen rivals that sporadic conflict was always likely. Sociologists remind us that where groups are in conflict, the sharpness of the reaction to the "inner enemy" is in proportion to the sharpness of the conflict with the outer enemies. A group at odds with its arch-rival will react with even more hostility to a heretic than to an apostate, for a heretic still shares many of the goals of his former fellow members. Hatred is directed, not in the first place against opponents of its own view of the world order, but against the dreaded "internal enemy" who is competing for the same end.
In these terms, Jewish Christians who seek to persuade Gentile Christians to keep the law are an "inner enemy", "heretics", whose influence is to be feared.
These two chapters contain a set of vigorous exchanges over the interpretation of Isaiah 49:6 and 42:6ff., passages which refer to Israel as a "light for the Gentiles". Justin says to Trypho (and his companions): "You all indeed suppose that this [i.e. Isa. 49:6] was said of the stranger and the proselytes. But in reality these words were said of us (as if the Gentile Christians were the light of the world of whom Isaiah spoke and not Israel) who have been enlightened through Jesus ..." (121.1).
Answer for yourself: Are you aware that besides Ignatius who began replacement religion in his few letters around 110 C.E. one must wait for Justin around 160 C.E. for a an official construction of replacement religious doctrines to arise which would be the foundation for all that would come later in the Gentile Church?
Answer for yourself: Did you notice that in Justin's mind the Gentile Church which is apart from Judaism and Jewish Christianity has take the place of Israel in the Bible?
Justin continues, "These things also [Isa 42:6ff.], Gentlemen, have been spoken with reference to the Christ, and concerning the Gentiles that have been enlightened. Or will you say again: with reference to the Law and the proselytes he says these things"' (122.3).
Then some of those who had come on the second day (other Gentiles who have been enlightened toward Judaism and Trypho's friends) cried out as though in a theatre: 'What then? Does He [God] not say them with reference to the Law and those that have been enlightened by it" Now these are the proselytes' (122.4). These Gentile semi-proselytes to Judaism knew full ware themselves that the passage misapplied by Justin was intended for them. They were the living proof and fulfillment of the verses in Isaiah; they had received the truth from the Jews as God had always intended!
In his reply Justin insists that Isaiah 42:6ff. does not refer to "the old law and its proselytes, but Christ and his proselytes, us Gentiles, whom he enlightened...'. Justin denies not only that the Jews have enlightened Gentiles since Jacob but the historical fulfillment of the passage and since failing to exegete the passage properly reads into the passage what he desires; this has been done now for 1800 years by Gentile Christianity.
There are several points of particular interest in this passage.
Rom 2:17-20 17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God, 18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; 19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness, 20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law. (KJV)
Trypho and his companions quote this well-established Jewish exegetical tradition and insist that it refers to them. Justin, however, takes it over and replaces the law with Christ. In short, Justin and Trypho are rivals, both seeking "proselytes" among Gentiles; both claim that Scripture supports their appeal to Gentiles.
Justin's Dialogue indicates that in the middle of the second century both Judaism and Christianity were concerned to maintain tight boundaries. Trypho complains that Christians (unlike Jews) do not mark themselves off from pagans (Christians were indistinguishable often from the pagans). Take time now to read the article entitled: Disturbing Quotes which concerns the Gentile Christian faith by scholars which speak about how Gentile Christianity is basically paganism unchanged where they only have attributed to a Jewish Rabbi prior pagan concepts and have tried to pass this off to the world as Divine Revelation He also mentions that some Jewish teachers forbid Jews to enter into conversation with Christians - lest they be persuaded by "blasphemous" Christian claims (38.1; 112.4). Justin's references to alleged Jewish persecution of Christians also point to Jewish anxiety lest community boundaries be breached.
Justin is concerned to maintain tight boundaries on the Christian side. He will not tolerate Jewish Christians who are not in full fellowship with Gentile Christians. Justin is very sensitive about Jewish Christians who persuade Gentile Christians to keep the law: he suspects that under their influence some Gentile Christians may move over completely to the Jewish polity (47.3-4).
And yet in spite of the concerns of both "synagogue' and "church" to maintain tight boundaries, there is movement across both boundary lines. This has happened in the past, and there is an expectation that it will happen in the future; but this is mainly determined by the availability of knowledge of the truth and it's availability to the Gentiles who never had the opportunity to know the truth about Jesus and the Jewish Scriptures before they were altered by the Essenes and later by Rome. In short, there is keen "on the ground" rivalry - and this is surely the mainspring of the intolerance expressed on both sides.
Justin's Dialogue suggests that there were different levels of attachment to both communities. On the Jewish side there were proselytes whose status was often ambiguous; would-be proselytes, such as Trypho's companions; other Gentile sympathizers or "Godfearers"; some Jews who acknowledged Christ, but were not in full fellowship with Gentile Christians; and some Gentile Christians who had "gone over" to Judaism.
On the Christian side there were two kinds of Jewish Christians, one acceptable to Justin, and one not; there were also Gentile Christians who seemed likely to go over to Judaism (47.1-4).
No doubt both sides hoped to consolidate the level of commitment of those on the "fringes" of their communities. From a later period a tradition expresses what is likely to have been the case in Justin's "school" as well as in synagogues: "when the sage takes his seat to expound doctrine, many strangers become proselytes" (Cant. Rab. 1.15; cf. 1.3 and 4.2). This is simply because one the Jewish sages and scholars begin to teach the truth about history, the corruption of their Holy texts, God's warnings about the Gentile nations repenting from idolatry and sun-worship, and the truth about the Messianic prophecies then these Gentiles were become associated with Judaism in great numbers. Such threatened the powers of be in the Gentile world such as governments for example. This tide of association with Judaism had to stop. We seen the attitude of such Gentiles who had been instructed in Judaism having been once enlightened: they ridiculed and mocked Justin for failing to see what they had been shown and his failure to turn from such folly once it is exposed. To them Justin was a laughing stock. These enlightened Gentiles now recognized their solar worship for what it was; an affront to God and crude idolatry and they turned from idols to serve the living God.
1Thes 1:9 9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; (KJV)
Justin would not do that. As we have seen, the Dialogue contains important neglected evidence for the existence in the middle of the second century of "God-fearers", even though Justin does not use a specific term for Gentiles who already have some attachment to the synagogue.
Answer for yourself: Why did Justin write his Dialogue? I do not think that his main aim was to "win over" Jews such as Trypho. If that had been his hope and expectation, he would not have allowed Trypho to go his own way. Justin must have recognized that some Gentiles (such as Trypho's companions) were so strongly attached to Judaism that their conversion was unlikely. Perhaps his primary appeal (via his Christian "school') was to Gentiles who were broadly sympathetic to both Judaism and Christianity - Gentiles who did not appreciate the differences, Gentiles with a weak level of attachment either to Christianity or to Judaism. In other words he was trying to lay a foundation that not only might work in his day to dissuade Gentiles from associating with Judaism (semi-proselytes or fully converted Proselytes) as well as the days to come. Justin might not have succeeded with Trypho and his Gentile Godfearers but Rome will use this piece of literature to it's fullest advantage and Justin and his Dialogue become the very foundational document for Rome's Replacement Religious doctrines for 2000 years.
Let us end with this thought. Justin's friends, the two Gentiles who had been instructed in religious matters and texts by Israelites (the light of the world) both knew and saw the folly of Gentile Christianity. Let us not forget that they had once been where Justin was at...in the middle of idolatry and they like Justin did not know it. Upon instruction in the Torah and accepting their Covenant with God (the Covenant of Noah) they were contemplating going beyond the Laws of Noah and fulfilling Isa. 56 in their lives whereby they would acquire more mitzvoth and make full conversion to Judaism. They, unlike Christians today, did not see the Law as a burden or a curse. What did they know that you have not been taught? These companions of Trypho demonstrate that it is perfectly permissible to believe in Jesus as Israel's Messiah and yet obey the Law of your Covenant. This is the way God intended...obedience to the Laws of our Covenant. The issues of the Messiah will honestly never be decided for sure until the Messiah either appears or returns. But belief in Messiah was never contingent upon salvation for either the Jew or the non-Jew and we see Justin admitting this in the 2nd Century C.E. Let us leave with this concluding remark The Great Commission had been continuing for almost 150 years and we see the fruit of it in the lives of Tyrpho's (himself a Jew) friends (themselves non-Jewish). They were practicing Biblical faith under the umbrella of Biblical Judaism and not Roman Christianity whereby they adhered to the Laws of their Covenant and desired to do more. The kodak-moment left to us by Justin is telling; Biblical Judaism whereby it is a light to the nations was a world power to be reckoned with as God intended. Sadly the power of Rome would later triumph over the power of Israel.
Answer for yourself: Understanding this picture as historically accurate from an "adversaries viewpoint" then did the Apostles go out carry out the Great Commission wrong following Pentecost? Not at all in fact we see that Gentile followers of Jesus were taught Judaism and their place within it way into the 2nd Century in fulfillment of the Great Commission. You need now ask yourself how we got so far away from the faith of Jesus and investigate to find the answers for yourself. Only then will you be fully convinced that we as non-Jews and Christian believers have lived our lives under the Roman yoke and not the yoke of the Torah and this has assured us that we live as apostates from the faith once given to the saints.
Besides commentary much of the above article was taken from Graham N. Stanton and Guy G. Stroumsa in their Tolerance And Intolerance In Early Judaism And Christianity (pp. 263-278)