Tertullian And Justin Martyr

Justinian was a powerful emperor, who reconquered previously owned Roman land. During his time of reign, he helped the Byzantine Empire reach its peak in culture and propeserity. Although some see him as deceptive, as it says in document two“ Justinian was crafty, hypocritical, secretive by temperament, and two faced”. Others say he was “similar to God, who rules all” which is said in document three. He left behind what is still remember today. Achievements and accomplishment of Justinian are what is recalled of him. Justinian revived the Roman Empire into the Byzantine Empire by preservation of Greco- Roman culture, his legacy was enriching the Roman Empire into the Byzantine Empire , glorifying God, and enhancing trade and laws throughout the Byzantine Empire.

Where the philosophers contradict one another and even themselves, the prophets are harmonious. On this point, Strecker insightfully identifies Pseudo-Justin’s criteria for truth as non-contradiction. Strecker comments, “because the prophets are all taught by the very same Holy Spirit, they possess the single quality that Pseudo-Justin identifies as the principal mark of truth—non-contradiction” (9). The internal harmony of the prophetic writings is further attestation, over against the contradictions of the Greeks, that the prophets are trustworthy sources of divine truth. A question, in this regard, concerning Pseudo-Justin’s pneumatology is: for Pseudo-Justin, is the move simply to say that even by the Greeks own standards of non-contradiction the prophets are superior? Or, is the work of the Holy Spirit identical with logical consistency? That is, is non-contradiction another name for the doctrine of inspiration? Can Pseudo-Justin be read as tacitly revising Aristotle who articulated the law of non-contradiction as a first principle of logic, but could not himself keep from contradiction? In this case, the prophets were able to write harmoniously because of the presence of the Holy

Justin writing to the Emperor about how Christine teachings parallel similar to the pagan mythology, making it irrational for pagans to persecute Christians. (1 Apology, Ch. 21-22).

Many believe that the writings of early Church Fathers were lectured to different sects. In fact, one may assume that there are Similarities and differences between Tertullian and Justin Martyr. Particularly, let’s compare Tertullian’s and Justin Martyr perspective of faith, reason, and philosophy! Justin Martyr is Known as the defender of the faith (Tony lane), (p.10) He looked for truth in Greek philosophy. Likewise, his apology is in defense of the Christian faith and belief of Christianity. Of the writings that subsist, his First Apology (c. 155 c.e.; English translation, 1861) contains a resilient appeal for justice lectured to Antoninus. In that work, he clarifies Christian morals to influence his reader of Christian faithfulness and honesty. However, also central to this writing is his claim that Hebrew prophecy and Greek philosophy, both informed by the divine Logos (the Word), pointed to the coming of Christ. Through such dispute, he facilitated to institute the early Christian theme which faith is greater than Greek philosophy and is the result of Judaic belief. In Justin’s awareness, merely those who were controlled by fears failed to recognize these facts. His Second Apology (c.

He is called ‘The Father of Latin Christianity’, because he was the link between Greek-speaking Christianity and Latin-speaking Christianity. His many treatises covered his beliefs on Christian practice, human salvation, the Trinity or trinitas, his high regard of martyrs in the church, Greek philosophy, and the place of women in the church. He coined his most famous quote, “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?”, in a piece about his opinion of Pagan philosophy (Weaver). Tertullian drew inspiration from earlier Church Apologists like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and writers like Miltiades and Melito of Sardis

In the question to do with the connection between Jerusalem and Athens, Tertullian and his contemporaries tend to uphold the view that Christian thinking and secular thinking are irreconcilable (Entwistle, 2015). Such people offer the reasoning that for one to be able to uphold Christian faith then he or she must denounce the secularity in his or her life. The big question one would

Justinian I Justinian had a very significant role in world history. There are many things that are overlooked when speaking of Justinian. For instance, Justinian was a great architect. Many times we overlook the little characteristics of Justinian and we focus on the code of Justinian.

Entwistle enhances the history of the religious and science communities by informing his readers on how they have interacted throughout the centuries; he does this so that his readers will have a greater understanding of modern psychological thoughts regarding Christianity. Entwistle explained human reasons and faith based on Tertullian and Blamires 's opinion. He gets his point across by telling about a newspaper article that talked about a group of worshippers that fell ill in their church from carbon monoxide poisoning; due to their constant prayer even after feeling lightheaded and nauseated. Tertullian believed that human reason (Athens) and faith (Jerusalem) are inherently irreconcilable. On the other hand, Blamires provided an alternative to Tertullian 's viewpoint. Blamires did not see Athens and Jerusalem as being opposed to one

3. After the churches split into East and West, there were multiple differences and rules between them. In the Western churches, they were all about building relationships and approaching issues with an organized context in politics, theology, and leadership. According to Noll, “The Western churches urged to equalize relationships among the members of the Trinity short-circuited the full personality of the Spirit and so crippled understanding of what the Spirit was to do.” (pg. 128). The western church had the tendency to violate the spirit and words of Nicaea. The Western church had a powerful representative on their side known as Tertullian. Tertullian was a worthwhile representative for the Western churches because he took care of business and did it with a plan. Unlike the representative for the Eastern churches, Tertullian was a lawyer so he knew his boundaries and knew how to make a case. According to Noll, “Tertullian boldly challenged the pagan cultures of his days with the realities of the Cristian Faith and was eager to construct formulas of faith” (pg.126).

Truth has always been preposterous for the worldly wise. Those who engage themselves with a quest for truth have never been accepted by the world and have been alienated and even put to death. The life and death of Jesus Christ is an example. The great men like Galileo Galeilei, the renowned astronomer, and Michael Servetus, the theologian and the first European to correctly describe blood circulation between heart and lungs, met with almost the same fate. The Hollywood movie Lucy portrays a similar character whose acquiring of the ultimate knowledge results in her dispersal into the universe putting an end to her existence as a human being. The paper is an in depth examination of the life and death of Jesus Christ, born in 6 BC, and Lucy, the heroine of a 21st century Hollywood movie Lucy. The following study is further a reflection on the theme of sacrifice portrayed in the movie through Lucy and the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, both having certain aspects in common irrespective of the different ages in which they lived. This study attempts to compare and contrast the events in the life of both the characters and offers a critique of the claim of certain critics that the film is a vindication of Luciferian philosophy.

Describe what we learn about faith from this centurion’s response to Jesus, a faith so unusual that Jesus marvels at it.

The purpose of the paper is to differentiate between Christ of faith and Jesus of history. New Testament biblical scholars from the 19th Century have been preoccupied by the notion of Christ of faith versus Jesus of History. Jesus of history can be described as the quest for historical Jesus, while the Christ of Faith is the Christ of Christian belief either through the Church or historically. Some traditions even went ahead to argue that the Jesus of History could never be found and therefore the Christ of faith is the only way forward for Christians. On the other hand, those who have been promoting the Jesus of History have often assumed that the historical Jesus is much superior as compared to the Christ of Faith. Despite the key differences between Christ of faith and the historical Jesus, both these aspect have an implication for Western Christianity.

Athenagoras (c. 133 – c. 190) was a Greek philosopher who converted to Christianity, after which he wrote apologies for Christians and a treatise on the Resurrection. According to Athenagoras, the Son of God “‘is the Logos (Reason) of the Father in idea and operation.’ ‘Through it all things were made.’ ‘The Son of God is the understanding and reason of the Father.’ ‘God from the beginning being eternal reason, had in himself the Logos (Reason), being always rational’” (pp. 121-122). Thus, the “attribute reason, or wisdom, was eternal, but not the Son as a personal being” (p. 122).

He had studied two great philosophers, Plato and Socrates. He wanted to reconcile faith and reason. According to the Bible, God does not ask man to abandon reason in order to accept its truth. “Come now,” says Isaiah, “and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow” (Isaiah 1:18). The Apostle Peter encourages Christians to present logical, compelling reasons for their hope in Christ. Faith precedes reason or, as Justin puts it, “Faith correctly viewed is that illumination by which true rationality begins.” In other words, every worldview begins with a basic assumption about the nature of reality that cannot be proven by using the scientific method or logical deduction. This becomes the starting point from which all men build a total view of life. Therefore, one is using philosophy to rationally think about the Bible. I believe that Justin’s view on philosophy is closest to the Bible’s

copping out, as some accused James of doing, Tillich gives such a detailed definition of faith that it is impossible to accuse him of taking the easy path. He does stray away from incorporating all religion when discussing mythology. He says that Christianity is superior to religions bound to a natural myth. This is clearly a very biased statement, and throughout the book it is obvious that Tillich is much more familiar with Christianity than other traditions. However, he is very quick to remind us that Christianity, too, is a myth.