St. Justin, Paul & Marcion the Heretic
It is common to hear specific internet apologists suggesting that St. Justin Martyr didn’t have access to, or was aware of, the canon of the New Testament since that took centuries to hammer out. They often argue that Justin’s writings indicate that he didn’t even have Paul’s letters within his corpus of sacred writings.
In this post I will refute this assertion by providing clear evidence that Justin knew of and even alluded to the letters of Paul. I will demonstrate that a plausible reason why this blessed saint did not mention Paul’s writings, or explicitly quote them, is due to the audience that he was addressing.
I will use the example of the heretic Marcion to prove my case.
Marcion’s Pernicious Influence on the Canon
Marcion was a wealthy second century Gnostic from Rome who taught that the Old Testament God is an evil, unjust deity who isn’t the same God proclaimed by Jesus Christ. In order to prove his heretical views Marcion had to reject the entire Old Testament along many of the New Testaments. Marcion only accepted Luke’s Gospel and Paul’s letters, but even these he had to redact in order to remove any positive statements about God or the OT canon found within them.
As one online source explains:
It is ironic that perhaps one of the most influential of figures in Church History is also one of the most reviled heretics: Marcion. Although his ideas were completely rejected by the Apostolic Fathers of the second-century church, the very need to reject them forced the second-century church to consider, clarify, and consolidate its beliefs about important issues: the contents of the Christian Bible (the Canon), the relationship between Christianity and Judaism (or between Law and Grace), and finally, the source of the church’s knowledge of Jesus…
MARCION’S TEACHINGS
Marcion’s teachings departed from traditional Christianity in a number of ways. Most dramatically, perhaps, Marcion rejected the idea that the Old Testament God and the New Testament God were the same being. Up until then, the traditional Church had considered the Old Testament to be sacred and assumed that Christianity was a fulfillment or continuation of Judaism. Marcion’s rejection of that idea affected many different doctrines and beliefs.
Marcion’s Own Canon of Scripture
Marcion faced an uphill battle with his revolutionary ideas. He faced a pretty obvious problem. For more than 100 years, Christians had been using the Old Testament as Christian Scripture, and even the most sacred documents of Christians referred to and relied heavily on, the Old Testament. The solution for Marcion was to completely reject the Old Testament and establish a canon that de-emphasized Christianity’s Old Testament and Jewish roots as much as possible.
Paul, with his focus on free grace, was by far Marcion’s favorite Apostle. As a result, he rejected the writings attributed to all the other Apostles and relied on forms of Luke’s Gospel and ten Pauline epistles that he redacted. Although a small number of scholars have, from time to time, argued that Marcion may have had access to earlier forms of the gospels (especially Luke), even John Knox, the most prominent promoter of this theory, admits that Marcion intentionally and knowingly excised as much Old Testament and Jewish influence as he could find in the Paulines and Gospel of Luke. “That Marcion, for example, did not have the account of John the Baptist’s announcement of Jesus as Messiah or the story of Jesus’ temptation is almost certainly to be accounted for by Marcion’s omission of these passages. Not only are they inconsistent with Marcion’s theological position but (more important) they are also deeply imbedded in the Synotpic tradition, and to explain them as late additions to a Gospel which was already dependent (as Marcion’s was) upon that tradition is next to impossible.” John Knox, Marcion and the New Testament, at 95.
The scope of Marcion’s redactions is large. As Dr. Fisher explained, Marcion rejected “the entire Old Testament, [and] settled for Luke’s Gospel (eliminating chapters 1 & 2 as too Jewish) and Paul’s letters (except for the pastoral ones).” “The Canon of the New Testament,” by Milton Fisher, in The Origin of the Bible, ed. Philip Comfort, at 71. Beyond chapters 1 and 2 of Luke, Marcion also removed Luke 4:1-3 (temptation narrative that refers to Dueteronomy 3 times), Luke 4:16-30 (Jesus claiming—while teaching in a synagogue—that his ministry was a fulfillment of the Old Testament), Luke 5:39 (“The old is good”), and Luke 8:19 (reference to Jesus’ family). All of these verses were just too Jewish and conflicted too much with Marcion’s heresies.
Significantly, Marcion also took a scalpel to Paul’s letters, eliminating as many positive references to Judaism or the Old Testament as possible. “Marcion dealt with the text of Paul’s letters in the same way as with the text of Luke’s gospel: anything which appeared inconsistent with what he believed to be authentic Pauline teaching was regarded as a corruption proceeding from an alien hand.” F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, at 140. The mention of Abraham as an example of faith was eliminated from Galatians (3:6-9), as well as the connection between the law and the gospels (3:15-25). He removed Romans 1:19-21:1, 3:21-4:25, and most of Romans 9-11, and everything after Romans 14:23.
Additionally, Marcion simply altered the content of many verses in Luke and Paul’s letters to soften the connection with Judaism. For example, in place of “Thy Kingdom Come” in the Lord’s Prayer (Luke 11:2), Marcion’s gospel stated, “Let they Holy Spirit come on us and cleanse us.” Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, at 138. In Ephesians, he changed, “the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things” (3:9) to “the mystery hidden for ages from the God who created all things.” Id. at 139. This simple little change has the creating God being duped by the God of the New Testament. (Marcion, the Canon, the Law, and the Historical Jesus; emphasis mine)
Justin’s Awareness of Marcion
This is where Justin comes into the picture.
The blessed martyr clearly knew of Marcion and even wrote of him, condemning him as a heretic:
Chapter 26. Magicians not trusted by Christians
And, thirdly, because after Christ’s ascension into heaven the devils put forward certain men who said that they themselves were gods; and they were not only not persecuted by you, but even deemed worthy of honours. There was a Samaritan, Simon, a native of the village called Gitto, who in the reign of Claudius Cæsar, and in your royal city of Rome, did mighty acts of magic, by virtue of the art of the devils operating in him. He was considered a god, and as a god was honoured by you with a statue, which statue was erected on the river Tiber, between the two bridges, and bore this inscription, in the language of Rome: —
Simoni Deo Sancto,To Simon the holy God.And almost all the Samaritans, and a few even of other nations, worship him, and acknowledge him as the first god; and a woman, Helena, who went about with him at that time, and had formerly been a prostitute, they say is the first idea generated by him. And a man, Menander, also a Samaritan, of the town Capparetæa, a disciple of Simon, and inspired by devils, we know to have deceived many while he was in Antioch by his magical art. He persuaded those who adhered to him that they should never die, and even now there are some living who hold this opinion of his. And there is Marcion, a man of Pontus, who is even at this day alive, and teaching his disciples to believe in some other god greater than the Creator. And he, by the aid of the devils, has caused many of every nation to speak blasphemies, and to deny that God is the maker of this universe, and to assert that some other being, greater than He, has done greater works. All who take their opinions from these men, are, as we before said, called Christians; just as also those who do not agree with the philosophers in their doctrines, have yet in common with them the name of philosophers given to them. And whether they perpetrate those fabulous and shameful deeds — the upsetting of the lamp, and promiscuous intercourse, and eating human flesh — we know not; but we do know that they are neither persecuted nor put to death by you, at least on account of their opinions. But I have a treatise against all the heresies that have existed already composed, which, if you wish to read it, I will give you…
Chapter 58. And raise up heretics
And, as we said before, the devils put forward Marcion of Pontus, who is even now teaching men to deny that God is the maker of all things in heaven and on earth, and that the Christ predicted by the prophets is His Son, and preaches another god besides the Creator of all, and likewise another son. And this man many have believed, as if he alone knew the truth, and laugh at us, though they have no proof of what they say, but are carried away irrationally as lambs by a wolf, and become the prey of atheistical doctrines, and of devils. For they who are called devils attempt nothing else than to seduce men from God who made them, and from Christ His first-begotten; and those who are unable to raise themselves above the earth they have riveted, and do now rivet, to things earthly, and to the works of their own hands; but those who devote themselves to the contemplation of things divine, they secretly beat back; and if they have not a wise sober-mindedness, and a pure and passionless life, they drive them into godlessness. (First Apology; emphasis mine)
Another blessed saint and martyr, Irenaeus, mentions Justin’s writing a refutation to Marcion that no longer exists:
2. But if Christ did then [only] begin to have existence when He came [into the world] as man, and [if] the Father did remember [only] in the times of Tiberius Cæsar to provide for [the wants of] men, and His Word was shown to have not always coexisted with His creatures; [it may be remarked that] neither then was it necessary that another God should be proclaimed, but [rather] that the reasons for so great carelessness and neglect on His part should be made the subject of investigation. For it is fitting that no such question should arise, and gather such strength, that it would indeed both change God, and destroy our faith in that Creator who supports us by means of His creation. For as we do direct our faith towards the Son, so also should we possess a firm and immoveable love towards the Father. In his book AGAINST MARCION, JUSTIN does well say: I would not have believed the Lord Himself, if He had announced any other than He who is our framer, maker, and nourisher. But because the only-begotten Son came to us from the one God, who both made this world and formed us, and contains and administers all things, summing up His own handiwork in Himself, my faith towards Him is steadfast, and my love to the Father immoveable, God bestowing both upon us. (Adversus haereses (Against Heresies), BOOK IV, Chapter 6 Explanation of the words of Christ, “No man knows the Father, but the Son,” etc.; which words the heretics misinterpret. proof that, by the Father revealing the Son, and by the Son being revealed, the Father was never unknown.)
Seeing that Marcion employed Paul’s letters, and seeing that Justin knew of and responded to this Gnostic heretic, it is hard to understand why certain individuals would claim that this blessed saint did not have access to or possess copies of Paul’s inspired epistles.
In fact, Marcion may be another reason for Justin’s reluctance to cite Paul more often or even to mention him by name. As the following scholar notes:
“It would appear, then, that the Christian destination is the most likely option just because it is the least problematic. The threat of Marcion to Justin’s church at Rome37 and the problem of law-keeping foisted upon gentile Christians (see Dial 47) adequately explains Dialogue’s preoccupation with Old Testament matters. These two known internal situations, the Marcionite problem and the ‘Judaizing’ phenomenon, render more conjectural extra-church reconstructions for the context of the Dialogue unnecessary. Furthermore, even apart from these two internal situations, the Jewish/Old Testament focus on the Dialogue is not surprising in view of the church as the “new” Israel, its sense of its own place at the culmination of salvation history. This self-understanding definition in terms of the Old Testament and an internal urgency for the meeting of Jewish objections to Christianity.38
“Indeed, the main themes of the Dialogue are among the most serious faced by the church of the second century: the problem with the Mosaic law,39 that of the Old Testament as canon, and especially the question of Christian self-definition over against Judaism and yet in terms of the Old Testament…” (Charles H. Cosgrove, “Justin Martyr and the Emerging Christian Canon: Observations on the Purpose and Destination of the Dialogue with Trypho”, in Vigiliae Christianae [E. J. Brill, Leiden, Sep., 1982, pp. 209-232 (Justin Martyr and the Emerging Christian Canon.pdf)], Vol. 36, No. 3, p. 218; emphasis mine)
Cosgrove goes on to write:
“There is good reason to approach the question of Justin’s canon via the Dialogue with Trypho. The results of the foregoing suggest that here Justin writes for Christians, and we may expect that he does so with the special problem of canon at least to some extent in mind. The latter contention may appear surprising, but it follows from the internal and ex- ternal contexts of the Dialogue. If the Dialogue was written for the Roman church sometime after A.D. 153,42 it was at the height of Marcion’s anti-Jewish program.43 Since Marcion was the first, as far as can be ascertained, to promulgate a fixed canon, and since the radical canon which he produced was a result of a theology which he was excommunicated from the Roman Church, Justin would have found it necessary to deal with the question of canon as posed by Marcion. This would be true whether or not the church had reflected on the canon issue or had come to any consensus on certain writings before Marcion. Justin’s preoccupation in the Dialogue with the Jewish Scriptures and the Mosaic law is reflective of his struggle with Marcionism, hence it is quite instructive to compare the Dialogue with Tertullian’s Adversus Marcionem (not as evidence of the Dialogue’s Christian destination over against the Jewish or pagan, but in the light of that destination):
1) On free will and the problem of evil (Dial 102 and Adv Marc 11.6, 9).
2) On the two advents of Christ (Dial 52 and Adv III.7).
3) On the connection between the names “Jesus” and “Joshua” and its christological implication (Dial 75 and Adv Marc 111.16).
4) On the use of Ps 21 (LXX) as an Old Testament proof text for Christ’s suffering (Dial 98 and Adv Marc 111.1).
5) On the reality of the millennial hope in a restored Jerusalem (Dial 80- 81, in a context which attacks Christian heretics, and Adv Marc 111.24).
“Further traces of anti-Marcionite polemic are perhaps the repeated stress on the reality of Christ’s incarnation (recall above), Justin’s fondness for divine appellatives which accent the ‘creatorship’ of God (e.g., “Father of the Universe,” etc.; see Dial 108.3; 114.4; 115.4; 116.3; 117.5; 128.2; 133.6), his protestation against the Old Testament God’s alleged ignorance (Dial 111.4; cf. 99.3 and Adv Marc 11.25), and his ad- dressing of the problem of Old Testament polygamy (Dial 134.3).” (Ibid., pp. 219-220)
The author shows places where Justin was clearly dependent upon Paul’s concepts and theology:
“These considerations regarding the Gospel writings combine with implications which may be drawn from the absence of Paul in Justin’s writings to suggest that he was moving in an opposite direction from viewing Christian writings as approaching Old Testament Script authority. The significance of Paul’s absence in Justin is defined by the use he might have made of the apostle. An example is Justin’s salvation-history approach to the law, which so parallels Paul’s. This is particularly striking in Dial 95.1 and 96.1 where Deut 27:26 and 21 are used in a way that suggests dependence upon Gal 3:10-13. Another example is Justin’s use of Abraham (Gen 15), which recalls Rom 4 (see Dial 11.5 and 23.4). Marcion’s reliance on Paul no doubt explains catholic failure to appeal to him even where he would be helpful.70 Since Paul is not a source for sayings of Jesus or facts concerning his life, Justin avoids him. Justin, along with Hegesippus71 and perhaps Papias,72 represents a movement against the stream that celebrated Paul in the second century, namely, that of Polycarp73 and the author II Peter (II Pet 3:15-16). The latter solve the problem of ‘unorthodox’ use of Paul, whether Valentinian or Marcionite, by ‘correctly’ interpret Paul against such ‘false teachers’.
“Justin solves the problem of Marcion’s fixed, written canon threat, theologically-loaded as it is with apostolic interpretation, by retreating to the authority of the Logos alone, whether inscripturated in the Old Testament or found on the lips of Jesus. The emerging authority of the ‘Gospel and Apostle’ is resisted and the writings for which these stand are employed for their historical rather than their interpretive value. Perhaps Dial 48.4, standing as it does in a context where Christian heresy is at issue,74 expresses Justin’s opinion most precisely:
‘We are commanded by Christ himself to trust not in human doctrines but in those proclaimed by the blessed prophets and taught by him.’ (my translation)
“This formulation is not unlike that of Hegesippus: ‘… in each city things are as the law, the prophets, and the Lord.’75” (Ibid., pp. 224-225; emphasis mine)
The author concludes by noting:
“Only that which the Logos taught (in the Old Testament or in Jesus) is included in Justin’s canon. One can only conjecture about his opinion of Paul’s theology or, if we may properly speak of it, that of a Gospel writer. There is no evidence that he had formed negative judgments of them, but they do stand outside his canon. Perhaps as ‘interpretive writings’ the letters of Paul are excluded in reaction to Marcion’s exploitation of such ‘secondary theologizing’ for heretical purposes…” (Ibid., p. 226; emphasis mine)
Justin’s Allusions to the Pauline Writings
I will cite places in Justin’s writings in order to bolster Cosgrove’s point that this blessed martyr did in fact allude to and relied upon certain Pauline themes and concepts.
For example, in the following citation Justin seems to have in mind Paul’s catena of OT texts in Romans 3:10-18:
Chapter 27. Why God taught the same things by the prophets as by Moses
Trypho: Why do you select and quote whatever you wish from the prophetic writings, but do not refer to those which expressly command the Sabbath to be observed? For Isaiah thus speaks:
If you shall turn away your foot from the Sabbaths, so as not to do your pleasure on the holy day, and shall call the Sabbaths the holy delights of your God; if you shall not lift your foot to work, and shall not speak a word from your own mouth; then you shall trust in the Lord, and He shall cause you to go up to the good things of the land; and He shall feed you with the inheritance of Jacob your father: for the mouth of the Lord has spoken it. Isaiah 58:13-14
Justin: I have passed them by, my friends, not because such prophecies were contrary to me, but because you have understood, and do understand, that although God commands you by all the prophets to do the same things which He also commanded by Moses, it was on account of the hardness of your hearts, and your ingratitude towards Him, that He continually proclaims them, in order that, even in this way, if you repented, you might please Him, and neither sacrifice your children to demons, nor be partakers with thieves, nor lovers of gifts, nor hunters after revenge, nor fail in doing judgment for orphans, nor be inattentive to the justice due to the widow nor have your hands full of blood. ‘For the daughters of Zion have walked with a high neck, both sporting by winking with their eyes, and sweeping along their dresses. Isaiah 3:16 For they are all gone aside,’ He exclaims, ‘they are all become useless. There is none that understands, there is not so much as one. With their tongues they have practised deceit, their throat is an open sepulchre, the poison of asps is under their lips, destruction and misery are in their paths, and the way of peace they have not known.’ So that, as in the beginning, these things were enjoined you because of your wickedness, in like manner because of your steadfastness in it, or rather your increased proneness to it, by means of the same precepts He calls you to a remembrance or knowledge of it. But you are a people hard-hearted and without understanding, both blind and lame, children in whom is no faith, as He Himself says, honouring Him only with your lips, far from Him in your hearts, teaching doctrines that are your own and not His. For, tell me, did God wish the priests to sin when they offer the sacrifices on the Sabbaths? Or those to sin, who are circumcised and do circumcise on the Sabbaths; since He commands that on the eighth day— even though it happen to be a Sabbath— those who are born shall be always circumcised? Or could not the infants be operated upon one day previous or one day subsequent to the Sabbath, if He knew that it is a sinful act upon the Sabbaths? Or why did He not teach those— who are called righteous and pleasing to Him, who lived before Moses and Abraham, who were not circumcised in their foreskin, and observed no Sabbaths— to keep these institutions? (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Chapters 10-30)
Justin even appeals to Abraham to make his case that a man is not justified by the Law of Moses, just as the blessed Apostle does in his epistles to the Romans and Galatians:
Chapter 23. The opinion of the Jews regarding the law does an injury to God
Justin: But if we do not admit this, we shall be liable to fall into foolish opinions, as if it were not the same God who existed in the times of Enoch and all the rest, who neither were circumcised after the flesh, nor observed Sabbaths, nor any other rites, seeing that Moses enjoined such observances; or that God has not wished each race of mankind continually to perform the same righteous actions: to admit which, seems to be ridiculous and absurd. Therefore we must confess that He, who is ever the same, has commanded these and such like institutions on account of sinful men, and we must declare Him to be benevolent, foreknowing, needing nothing, righteous and good. But if this be not so, tell me, sir, what you think of those matters which we are investigating.
And when no one responded:
Wherefore, Trypho, I will proclaim to you, and to those who wish to become proselytes, the divine message which I heard from that man. Do you see that the elements are not idle, and keep no Sabbaths? Remain as you were born. For if there was no need of circumcision before Abraham, or of the observance of Sabbaths, of feasts and sacrifices, before Moses; no more need is there of them now, after that, according to the will of God, Jesus Christ the Son of God has been born without sin, of a virgin sprung from the stock of Abraham. For when Abraham himself was in uncircumcision, he was justified and blessed by reason of the faith which he reposed in God, as the Scripture tells. Moreover, the Scriptures and the facts themselves compel us to admit that He received circumcision for a sign, and not for righteousness. So that it was justly recorded concerning the people, that the soul which shall not be circumcised on the eighth day shall be cut off from his family. And, furthermore, the inability of the female sex to receive fleshly circumcision, proves that this circumcision has been given for a sign, and not for a work of righteousness. For God has given likewise to women the ability to observe all things which are righteous and virtuous; but we see that the bodily form of the male has been made different from the bodily form of the female; yet we know that neither of them is righteous or unrighteous merely for this cause, but [is considered righteous] by reason of piety and righteousness. (Ibid.)
Chapter 95. Christ took upon Himself the curse due to us
Justin: For the whole human race will be found to be under a curse. For it is written in the law of Moses, ‘Cursed is every one that continues not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them.’ Deuteronomy 27:26 And no one has accurately done all, nor will you venture to deny this; but some more and some less than others have observed the ordinances enjoined. But if those who are under this law appear to be under a curse for not having observed all the requirements, how much more shall all the nations appear to be under a curse who practise idolatry, who seduce youths, and commit other crimes? If, then, the Father of all wished His Christ for the whole human family to take upon Him the curses of all, knowing that, after He had been crucified and was dead, He would raise Him up, why do you argue about Him, who submitted to suffer these things according to the Father’s will, as if He were accursed, and do not rather bewail yourselves? For although His Father caused Him to suffer these things in behalf of the human family, yet you did not commit the deed as in obedience to the will of God. For you did not practise piety when you slew the prophets. And let none of you say: If His Father wished Him to suffer this, in order that by His stripes the human race might be healed, we have done no wrong. If, indeed, you repent of your sins, and recognise Him to be Christ, and observe His commandments, then you may assert this; for, as I have said before, remission of sins shall be yours. But if you curse Him and them that believe in Him, and, when you have the power, put them to death, how is it possible that requisition shall not be made of you, as of unrighteous and sinful men, altogether hard-hearted and without understanding, because you laid your hands on Him?
Chapter 96. That curse was a prediction of the things which the Jews would do
Justin: For the statement in the law, ‘Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree,’ Deuteronomy 21:23 confirms our hope which depends on the crucified Christ, not because He who has been crucified is cursed by God, but because God foretold that which would be done by you all, and by those like to you, who do not know that this is He WHO EXISTED BEFORE ALL, who is the eternal Priest of God, and King, and Christ. And you clearly see that this has come to pass. For you curse in your synagogues all those who are called from Him Christians; and other nations effectively carry out the curse, putting to death those who simply confess themselves to be Christians; to all of whom we say, You are our brethren; rather recognise the truth of God. And while neither they nor you are persuaded by us, but strive earnestly to cause us to deny the name of Christ, we choose rather and submit to death, in the full assurance that all the good which God has promised through Christ He will reward us with. And in addition to all this we pray for you, that Christ may have mercy upon you. For He taught us to pray for our enemies also, saying, ‘Love your enemies; be kind and merciful, as your heavenly Father is.’ Luke 6:35 For we see that the Almighty God is kind and merciful, causing His sun to rise on the unthankful and on the righteous, and sending rain on the holy and on the wicked; all of whom He has taught us He will judge. (Ibid., Chapters 89-108)
For more cases of Justin relying upon and/or alluding to the writings of Paul I recommend the following post: Justin’s Knowledge of Paul.
The foregoing should put to rest the erroneous notion that St. Justin’s canon did not include the Pauline epistles either because he was unaware of them or did not have access to these writings.
Further Reading
Justin’s Knowledge of Paul Pt. 2