literaryhistoryo02crut - Carmel Apologetics

328 TIIK Al'OLO(;iSTS.
of redemption, and the survival of the holy seed upon the
eiirth
to maintain the strife against the demons, and to delay
the final catastrophe. He connects this view with his remarkable
theory of the Logos, which in various partial and
imperfect manifestati(jns has kept alive, through all human
history, the true ideal of righteousness. We shall reserve
our criticism of this theory to a later part of the chapter.
It is the main contribution of this Apology to the body of
Christian thought.
The Dialogrue with Trypho the Jew.—This is a far
longer and more elaljorate treatise than either of the Apologies,
and contains, more or less fully drawn out, all the
leading points of Christian divinity. In form it is modelled
on the Dialogues of Plato; l)ut, with the exception of the
opening scene, there is nothing dramatic about it. Substantially,
it is a defence of the Christian interpretation of the
Old Testament, and of Christianity as the successor and
supplanter of Judaism. It is conducted tliroughout on the
principles of calm reasoning, and forms a highly favourable
example of a controversial treatise. There is no reason to
doubt that it embodies with tolerable accuracy the incidents
of a real discussion, wliich Justin tells us occupied two days.
Tlie position of Tryplio is this. He admits the high moral
and spiritual level of Christianity, and only fears that it is
too high for practice.
He also admits that the Deity, whom
genuine Cliristians acknowledge, is the One God revealed in
the Old Testament, the Creator of heaven and earth. On
this ground he is at one with Justin, and willing to ai-gue
with him. He then advances liis objections. These are
two. (Jranting the Old Testament to be a revelation of the
Divine Will, he asks (i) How can those who believe in God
set at nought His revealed I^iw ? (2) How can any man
believe in salvation l)y a human Saviour?
These are, of course, very real and weighty i)oints. And
the reply made by Justin rests entirely upon the authority
of Holy Scrij)ture. In meeting Tryi)ho's lirst objection, he
had been j)reced(*d ])y S. Paul, who, in the Epistles to the
Eomans and Galatians, had gone to the root of the question,