Justin Martyr’s varied use of myth has led to conflicting opinions regarding his overall attitude to these stories. In particular, scholars have struggled reconciling how Justin could allude to them in any positive light when throughout his writings he denounced them on the grounds of their diabolical origin and purpose. The solutions that have been proffered to resolve this dilemma range from viewing these troublesome allusions as only ostensibly positive in nature (Chadwick) to declaring that the contradiction in his approach to myth the result of Justin’s rambling prose (Contreras).
Unlike these previous assessments, I will contend that his diverse use of myth in 1 Apology reveals a dynamic pedagogy in which he incorporated certain aspects of these popular religious narratives and yet was able to declare Christianity’s separation from them as well. This dynamic form of pedagogy is confirmed by the flow of 1 Apology where Justin’s first sustained treatment of myth (§18-22) incorporates myth to illuminate Christian belief. This is then followed by a section (§ 23-29) where Justin focused solely upon separation from myth so to signal his readers that they must shift their trust from the narratives of the ancestral religion to Moses and the Prophets. This switch begins in chapter 30 where Justin devoted a massive block of material (§ 30-53) to demonstrate how the predictions of Christ are most clearly seen in Moses and the Prophets. Although mythical allusions are altogether sparse within this section, it is my contention that there exists a typological correspondence between the pagan foreshadowings that Justin previously established in the first section (§21-22) with this section (§ 30-53). Finally, Justin concluded his pedagogy by employing a decisive separation from myth altogether in chapters 54 through 66.
No comments:
Post a Comment