Saturday, June 8, 2013

Saturday, June 1, 2013 - Litany Lane Blog: Apologetics, Psalms 19-8-11, Sirach 51:12-20, Mark 11:27-33, Pope Francis Daily Homily - The Church is not a cultural organization but the family of Jesus, St. Justin , Canaan, Catholic Catechism Part Two: THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS OF THE CHURCH - Chapter 3 Sacraments of Service at Communion Article 7:5 The Sacrament of Matrimony - The Goods and Requirements of Conjugal Love

Saturday,  June 1, 2013 - Litany Lane Blog:

Apologetics, Psalms 19-8-11, Sirach 51:12-20, Mark 11:27-33, Pope Francis Daily Homily - The Church is not a cultural organization but the family of Jesus, St. Justin , Canaan, Catholic Catechism Part Two: THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS OF THE CHURCH - Chapter 3 Sacraments of Service at Communion Article 7:5 The Sacrament of Matrimony - The Goods and Requirements of Conjugal Love

Year of Faith - October 11, 2012 - November 24, 2013

P.U.S.H. (Pray Until Serenity Happens). It has a remarkable way of producing solace, peace, patience and tranquility and of course resolution...God's always available 24/7.

The world begins and ends everyday for someone.  We are all human. We all experience birth, life and death. We all have flaws but we also all have the gift of knowledge and free will, make the most of these gifts. Life on earth is a stepping stone to our eternal home in Heaven. The Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit: wisdom, understanding, wonder and awe (fear of the Lord) , counsel, knowledge, fortitude, and piety (reverence) and shun the seven Deadly sins: wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy, and gluttony...Its your choice whether to embrace the Gifts of the Holy Spirit rising towards eternal light or succumb to the Seven deadly sins and lost to eternal darkness. Material items, though needed for sustenance and survival on earth are of earthly value only. The only thing that passes from this earth to the Darkness, Purgatory or Heaven is our's God's perpetual gift to us...Embrace it, treasure it, nurture it, protect it...~ Zarya Parx 2013

"Raise not a hand to another unless it is to offer in peace and goodwill." ~ Zarya Parx 2012


Prayers for Today: Saturday in Easter

Rosary - Joyful Mysteries


 Papam Franciscus
(Pope Francis)

Pope Francis June 1 General Audience Address :

The Church is not a cultural organization,” but, “the family of Jesus.

(2013-06-01 Vatican Radio)
“The Church is not a cultural organization,” but, “the family of Jesus.” This was the focus of Pope Francis’ remarks to the faithful gathered for Mass on Saturday morning in the Domus Sanctae Marthae residence at the Vatican. The Pope said that Christians should not be ashamed to live with the scandal of the Cross, and urged them not to be "trapped by the spirit of the world."

Pope Francis took the question put to Jesus by the scribes and chief priests, “By what authority are you doing these things?” as his starting point. Once again, he said, they were looking to set a trap for the Lord, trying to paint Him into a corner, to force Him to make a mistake. The Holy Father went on to ask why the scribes and Pharisees wanted to embarrass Jesus. ”Tthe problem that these people had,” said the Holy Father, was not that Jesus had performed miracles. Rather, he explained, “They were shocked that the demons cried out to Jesus, ‘You are the Son of God, You are the Holy One.” This is the thing about Jesus that really scandalises. “He is God who became incarnate.” For us, too, “do they set traps in life,” though, “[that characteristic] of the Church, which scandalises, is the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word, and, “this cannot be tolerated, this the devil will not suffer.”:

“How many times do you hear people say: ‘But you Christians, be a bit more normal, like other people: be reasonable!’ This is a speech by snake charmers, to be sure: ‘But, be normal, OK? A little more normal, do not be so strict.” But behind this is: ‘Please, do not come with [your] tales, [about] God who became man!’ The Incarnation of the Word: that is the scandal behind it! We can do all the social work we want, and they will say, ‘How nice, the Church, what good social work the Church does’. But if we say that we do this because those people [we help] are the flesh of Christ, there is scandal. And that is the truth, that is the revelation of Jesus: that presence of Jesus incarnate.”

And “this is the point,” said Pope Francis. “Always there will be the [temptation] to do good things without the scandal of the Incarnate Word, without the scandal of the Cross.” Instead, we must “be true to this scandal, to this reality that scandalises.” It is, “better this way: the coherence of the faith.” The Pope then recalled how the Apostle John says: “Those who deny that the Word came in the flesh, are from the antichrist; they are the antichrist.” On the other hand, he continued, “Only those who say that the Word is come in the flesh are of the Holy Spirit.” Pope Francis then said, “It would do us all good to think about this: the Church is not a cultural organisation that [includes] religion and social work.”:

“The Church is the family of Jesus. The Church confesses that Jesus is the Son of God come in the flesh: that is the scandal, that is the reason why they persecuted Jesus. In the end, [the answer that] Jesus had not wanted to [give] to these, to the question, ‘With what authority are you doing this?’ He gives to the high priest. ‘But, at the end of: Thou art the Son of God? - Yes!’ [He was] sentenced to death for that. This is the core of the persecution. If we become “reasonable” Christians, “social” Christians, Christians who only do philanthropy, what will be the consequence? That we will never have martyrs: that will be the consequence.”

When, however, we Christians tell the truth, that “The Son of God is come, and was made flesh,” when we “preach the scandal of the Cross, persecutions will come, the Cross will come,” and that “will be fine,” for “such is our life”:

“We ask the Lord not to be ashamed to live with this scandal of the Cross. [We ask Him for] wisdom: the wisdom to ask not to be trapped by the spirit of the world, that will always make to us polite suggestions, civil proposals, good proposals – but behind those there is precisely the negation of the fact that the Word came in the flesh, of the Incarnation of the Word. That, in the end, is what scandalises those who persecute Jesus, that is what destroys the work of the devil. So be it.”

The Cardinal Archbishop of Havana, Jaime Ortega, concelebrated the Mass, with a group of the Holy Father’s lay attendants, the Gentlemen of His Holiness, in the congregation.


Liturgical Celebrations to be presided over by Pope: Summer

Vatican City, June 2013 (VIS)
Following is the calendar of celebrations scheduled to be presided over by the Holy Father for the Summer of 2013:

2 June, 9th Sunday in Ordinary Time: 6:00pm, Worldwide Eucharistic adoration from Vatican Basilica.

16 June, 11th Sunday in Ordinary Time: 10:30am, Mass for “Evangelium Vitae” Day in St. Peter's Square.

29 Saturday, Solemnity of Sts. Peter and Paul: 9:30am, Mass and imposition of the pallium upon new metropolitans in the papal chapel.

The Prefecture of the Papal Household has released Pope Francis' agenda for the summer period, from July through to the end of August. Briefing journalists, Holy See Press Office director, Fr. Federico Lombardi confirmed that the Pope will remain 'based ' at the Casa Santa Marta residence in Vatican City State for the duration of the summer.

As per tradition, all private and special audiences are suspended for the duration of the summer. The Holy Father's private Masses with employees will end July 7 and resume in September. The Wednesday general audiences are suspended for the month of July to resume August 7 at the Vatican.

7 July, 14th Sunday in Ordinary Time: 9:30am, Mass with seminarians and novices in the Vatican Basilica.

14 July Sunday , Pope Francis will lead the Angelus prayer from the Apostolic Palace of Castel Gandolfo.

Pope Francis will travel to Brazil for the 28th World Youth Day in Rio de Janeiro from Monday July 22 to Monday July 29.  


  • Vatican News. From the Pope. © Copyright 2013 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Accessed 06/1/2013.


May 25, 2013 Our Lady of Medjugorje Message to the World:“Dear children! Today I call you to be strong and resolute in faith and prayer, until your prayers are so strong so as to open the Heart of my beloved Son Jesus. Pray little children, pray without ceasing until your heart opens to God’s love. I am with you and I intercede for all of you and I pray for your conversion. Thank you for having responded to my call.”

May 2, 2013 Our Lady of Medjugorje Message to the World: "Dear children; Anew, I am calling you to love and not to judge. My Son, according to the will of the Heavenly Father, was among you to show you the way of salvation, to save you and not to judge you. If you desire to follow my Son, you will not judge but love like your Heavenly Father loves you. And when it is the most difficult for you, when you are falling under the weight of the cross do not despair, do not judge, instead remember that you are loved and praise the Heavenly Father because of His love. My children, do not deviate from the way on which I am leading you. Do not recklessly walk into perdition. May prayer and fasting strengthen you so that you can live as the Heavenly Father would desire; that you may be my apostles of faith and love; that your life may bless those whom you meet; that you may be one with the Heavenly Father and my Son. My children, that is the only truth, the truth that leads to your conversion, and then to the conversion of all those whom you meet - those who have not come to know my Son - all those who do not know what it means to love. My children, my Son gave you a gift of the shepherds. Take good care of them. Pray for them. Thank you."

April 25, 2013 Our Lady of Medjugorje Message to the World:: "Dear children! Pray, pray, keep praying until your heart opens in faith as a flower opens to the warm rays of the sun. This is a time of grace which God gives you through my presence but you are far from my heart, therefore, I call you to personal conversion and to family prayer. May Sacred Scripture always be an incentive for you. I bless you all with my motherly blessing. Thank you for having responded to my call."


Today's Word:  apologetics  a·pol·o·get·ics  [uh-pol-uh-jet-iks]  

Origin:  1725–35;  see apologetic, -ics

noun ( used with a singular verb  )
1. the branch of theology concerned with the defense or proof of Christianity.


Today's Old Testament Reading -   Psalms 19:8-11

8 The precepts of Yahweh are honest, joy for the heart; the commandment of Yahweh is pure, light for the eyes.
9 The fear of Yahweh is pure, lasting for ever; the judgements of Yahweh are true, upright, every one,
10 more desirable than gold, even than the finest gold; his words are sweeter than honey, that drips from the comb.
11 Thus your servant is formed by them; observing them brings great reward.


Today's Epistle -  Sirach 51:12-20

12 And therefore I shall thank you and praise you, and bless the name of the Lord.
13 When I was still a youth, before I went travelling, in my prayers I asked outright for wisdom.
14 Outside the sanctuary I would pray for her, and to the last I shall continue to seek her.
15 From her blossoming to the ripening of her grape my heart has taken its delight in her. My foot has pursued a straight path, I have sought her ever since my youth.
16 By bowing my ear a little, I have received her, and have found much instruction.
17 Thanks to her I have advanced; glory be to him who has given me wisdom!
18 For I was determined to put her into practice, have earnestly pursued the good, and shall not be put to shame.
19 My soul has fought to possess her, I have been scrupulous in keeping the Law; I have stretched out my hands to heaven and bewailed how little I knew of her;
20 I have directed my soul towards her, and in purity I have found her; having my heart fixed on her from the outset, I shall never be deserted;


Today's Gospel Reading - Mark 11:27-33

Jesus and his disciples returned once more to Jerusalem.
As he was walking in the temple area,
the chief priests, the scribes, and the elders
approached him and said to him,
“By what authority are you doing these things?
Or who gave you this authority to do them?”
Jesus said to them, “I shall ask you one question.
Answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
Was John’s baptism of heavenly or of human origin? Answer me.”
They discussed this among themselves and said,
“If we say, ‘Of heavenly origin,’ he will say,
‘Then why did you not believe him?’
But shall we say, ‘Of human origin’?”–
they feared the crowd,
for they all thought John really was a prophet.
So they said to Jesus in reply, “We do not know.”
Then Jesus said to them,
“Neither shall I tell you by what authority I do these things.”

* "By what authority?". The word "authority" is central to this short passage and contains the secret of the faith journey and spiritual growth that we can fulfill, if we let ourselves be guided by the Word, in meditation of this Gospel. The provocative question addressed to Jesus by the scribes and chief priests makes us understand that how distance there is between him and them and that is why there can be no answer. For the priests and scribes "Authority" is "power," "strength", "dominion", "capable of enforcing laws and judge." But Jesus 'authority' is another thing; in Hebrew this word authority is from a root of the word that also means "similar to." In fact, Jesus makes it clear in the place that he was walking (v. 27) and that would lead us to understand that “authority” is similarity with the Father, the relationship of love with him, as between Father and son. It is no coincidence that he immediately appoints the baptism of John.

* "The baptism of John ...." Jesus leads us now clearly at the starting point, the source, where we really find ourselves in the encounter with God in the banks of the River Jordan, where he was baptized, is also prepared our place, because, like him, go down into the water, the fire of love and allow ourselves to mark with the seal of the Holy Spirit, let us reach out, gather and visit with these words: "You are my Son, the beloved" (Mk 11). Jesus tells us that there is no other authority, or other greatness or riches than this.

* "From heaven or from human origin?". We want to be with God or with men, or we want follow God or men, or we want to enter into the light of the Open Skies (Mark 1, 10) or remain in the darkness of our loneliness?

* "Answer me." It 's beautiful word of Jesus, repeated forcefully twice (vv. 29 and 30). He calls for a clear choice, a clear decision, sincere, authentic and profound. The verb "answer", in Greek means to express the attitude, the ability to distinguish, to separate things well. The Lord wants to invite us to enter into the deepest part of ourselves to let go through his words and so, in this strong relationship with Him, learning more and more to pull ourselves out of important decisions of our lives or even in our days. But there is something more to this word so simple and so beautiful. The Hebrew root expresses at the same time, the response, but also the misery, poverty, grief, humility. That is, there can be no real answer, if not humility, if not listening. Jesus is asking the priests and scribes, but to us, to enter into this dimension of life, this attitude of the soul: to humble before Him, recognizing our poverty, our need for him, because only this may be the real answer to his questions.

* They argued among themselves. "Another important verb that helps us to understand a little bit more about our inner world. This discussion is in fact a "talk through" as we sense from a literal translation of the Greek word used by Mark. These people in this passage are broken inside, are crossed by an injury, are not all in one piece in front of Jesus talking to each other, bringing together a number of reasons and considerations, instead of entering into that relationship and in that dialogue with the Father which was inaugurated with the baptism of Jesus, they remain outside, at a distance, as the son of the parable, who refuses to join in the feast of love (cf. Lk 15, 28). They also do not believe in the Word of God, once again repeated: "You are my Son, my beloved, in you I am well pleased" (Mk 1, 11) and continue to seek and desire the virtue of ' authority and power rather than the weakness of love.

Questions for Reflection
* The Lord teaches me his authority, even in my life, not domination, oppression or force but is love, and the ability to be alike, to be near. I would like to accept this authority of Jesus in my life, I would truly enter into this relationship of resemblance with him, am I ready to take the steps of this choice? Am I determined to follow this through?
* Maybe, approaching this Gospel, I did not expect to come back to the episode of Baptism and the experience so fundamental and source of the relationship with God the Father. Instead, once again, the Lord wanted to reveal his love so immense, that does not shrink in any effort, any obstacles just to reach me. Is my heart, right now, before him? Can I hear the voice of the Father speaks to me and calls me "son", saying my name? Can I accept this statement of love? Do I trust him, believe him, and I give myself to Him? Do I choose heaven or still the earth?
* I cannot think out of this meditation without having given my answer. Jesus asks me specifically, that "Answer me" is also addressed to me today. I learned that there can be no one to answer without a real hearing and listening that can only come from true humility ... Do I want to take these steps? Or just want to continue to respond with my own convictions, my old ways of thinking and feeling, from my conceit and self-sufficiency?
* One last thing. Looking inside of my heart, do I feel being 'too divided, as enemies of Jesus? Is there any wound in me that not allow me to be whole Christian, or a friend of Christ, or his disciple? What's in my life that I am broken, which separates me from him?

Reference: Courtesy of Order of Carmelites,


Featured Item of the Day from Litany Lane


Saint of the Day:  St Justin

Feast DayJune 1

Patron Saint:  n/a
Attributes:  n/a

Justin Martyr, also known as Saint Justin (AD 100–ca.165), was an early Christian apologist, and is regarded as the foremost interpreter of the theory of the Logos in the 2nd century.[2] Most of his works are lost, but two apologies and a dialogue did survive. He is considered a saint by the Roman Catholic Church,[3] the Anglican Church,[4] and the Eastern Orthodox Church.[5]

Most of what is known about the life of Justin Martyr comes from his own writings. He was born at Flavia Neapolis (today Nablus) in Palestine into a pagan family, and defined himself as a Gentile.[6] His grandfather, Bacchius, had a Greek name, while his father, Priscus, bore a Latin name, which has led to speculations that his ancestors may have settled in Neapolis soon after its establishment or that they were descended from a Roman 'diplomatic' community that had been sent there.[7] He received a Greek education. He tells us (Dialogue 2-8) that he tried first the school of a Stoic philosopher, who was unable to explain God's being to him. He then attended a Peripatetic philosopher but was put off because the philosopher was too eager for his fee. Then he went to hear a Pythagorean philosopher who demanded that he first learn music, astronomy and geometry, which he did not wish to do. Subsequently, he adopted Platonism after encountering a Platonist thinker who had recently settled in his city. Some time afterwards, he chanced upon an old man, possibly a Palestinian or Syrian Christian,[8] in the vicinity of the seashore, who engaged him in a dialogue about God and spoke of the testimony of the prophets as being more reliable than the reasoning of philosophers. It was this argument, Justin avers, which kindled in him a love of Christ and led him to embrace Christianity.[9] He was influenced in this decision by the fearless conduct of Christians who were facing execution (Apol. 2:12). His conversion is commonly assumed to have taken place at Ephesus[10][11] though it may have occurred anywhere on the road from Palestine to Rome.[12]

He then adopted the dress of a philosopher himself and traveled about teaching. During the reign of Antoninus Pius (138-161), he arrived in Rome and started his own school. Tatian was one of his pupils.[13] In the reign of Marcus Aurelius, after disputing with the cynic philosopher Crescens, he was denounced by the latter to the authorities, according to Tatian (Address to the Greeks 19) and Eusebius (HE IV 16.7-8). Justin was tried, together with six companions, by Junius Rusticus, who was urban prefect from 163-167, and was beheaded, probably in 165. The martyrdom of Justin preserves the court record of the trial.[10]

The church of St. John the Baptist in Sacrofano, a few miles north of Rome, claims to have his relics.[14]

In 1882 Pope Leo XIII had a Mass and an Office composed for his feast day, which he set at 14 April,[15] one day after the date of his death as indicated in the Martyrology of Florus; but since this date quite often falls within the main Paschal celebrations, the feast was moved in 1968 to 1 June, the date on which he has been celebrated in the Byzantine Rite since at least the 9th century.[16]


The earliest mention of Justin is found in the Oratio ad Graecos by Tatian who, after calling him "the most admirable Justin," quotes a saying of his and says that the Cynic Crescens laid snares for him. Irenaeus[17] speaks of Justin's martyrdom and of Tatian as his disciple. Irenaeus quotes Justin twice[18] and shows his influence in other places. Tertullian, in his Adversus Valentinianos, calls Justin a philosopher and a martyr and the earliest antagonist of heretics. Hippolytus and Methodius of Olympus also mention or quote him. Eusebius of Caesarea deals with him at some length,[19] and names the following works:
  1. The First Apology addressed to Antoninus Pius, his sons, and the Roman Senate;[20]
  2. a Second Apology addressed to the Roman Senate;
  3. the Discourse to the Greeks, a discussion with Greek philosophers on the character of their gods;
  4. an Hortatory Address to the Greeks;
  5. a treatise On the Sovereignty of God, in which he makes use of pagan authorities as well as Christian;
  6. a work entitled The Psalmist;
  7. a treatise in scholastic form On the Soul; and
  8. the Dialogue with Trypho.
Eusebius implies that other works were in circulation; from St Irenaeus he knows of the apology "Against Marcion," and from Justin's "Apology"[21] of a "Refutation of all Heresies ".[22] Epiphanius[23] and St Jerome[24] mention Justin.

Rufinus borrows from his Latin original of Hadrian's letter.

After Rufinus, Justin was known mainly from St Irenaeus and Eusebius or from spurious works. The Chronicon Paschale assigns his martyrdom to the year 165. A considerable number of other works are given as Justin's by Arethas, Photius, and other writers, but this attribution is now generally admitted to be spurious. The Expositio rectae fidei has been assigned by Draseke to Apollinaris of Laodicea, but it is probably a work of as late as the 6th century. The Cohortatio ad Graecos has been attributed to Apollinaris of Laodicea, Apollinaris of Hierapolis, as well as others. The Epistola ad Zenam et Serenum, an exhortation to Christian living, is dependent upon Clement of Alexandria, and is assigned by Pierre Batiffol to the Novatian Bishop Sisinnius (c. 400). The extant work under the title "On the Sovereignty of God" does not correspond with Eusebius' description of it, though Harnack regards it as still possibly Justin's, and at least of the 2nd century. The author of the smaller treatise To the Greeks cannot be Justin, because he is dependent on Tatian; Harnack places it between 180 and 240.


The Dialogue is a later work than the First Apology; the date of composition of the latter, judging from the fact that it was addressed to Antoninus Pius and his adopted sons Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, must fall between 147 and 161.

Dialogue with Trypho

In the Dialogue with Trypho, after an introductory section, Justin undertakes to show that Christianity is the new law for all men.

On The Resurrection

The fragments of the work "On the Resurrection" begin with the assertion that the truth, and God the author of truth, need no witness, but that as a concession to the weakness of men it is necessary to give arguments to convince those who gainsay it. It is then shown, after a denial of unfounded deductions, that the resurrection of the body is neither impossible nor unworthy of God, and that the evidence of prophecy is not lacking for it. Another fragment takes up the positive proof of the resurrection, adducing that of Christ and of those whom he recalled to life. In yet another fragment the resurrection is shown to be that of what has gone down, i.e., the body; the knowledge concerning it is the new doctrine, in contrast to that of the old philosophers. The doctrine follows from the command to keep the body in moral purity.

The treatise On the Resurrection, of which extensive fragments are preserved in the Sacra parallela, is not so generally accepted. Even earlier than this collection, it is referred to by Procopius of Gaza (c. 465-528). Methodius appeals to Justin in support of his interpretation of 1 Corinthians 15:50 in a way which makes it natural to assume the existence of a treatise on the subject, to say nothing of other traces of a connection in thought both here in Irenaeus (V., ii.-xiii. 5) and in Tertullian, where it is too close to be anything but a conscious following of the Greek. The Against Marcion is lost, as is the Refutation of all Heresies to which Justin himself refers in Apology, i. 26; Hegesippus, besides perhaps Irenaeus and Tertullian, seems to have used it.

Role within the Church

Flacius discovered "blemishes" in Justin's theology, which he attributed to the influence of pagan philosophers; and in modern times Semler and S.G. Lange have made him out a thorough Hellene, while Semisch and Otto defend him from this charge.

In opposition to the school of Ferdinand Christian Baur, who considered him a Jewish Christian, Albrecht Ritschl has pointed out that it was precisely because he was a Gentile Christian that he did not fully understand the Old Testament foundation of Paul's teaching, and explained in this way the modified character of his Paulinism and his legal mode of thought.

M. von Engelhardt has attempted to extend this line of treatment to Justin's entire theology, and to show that his conceptions of God, of free will and righteousness, of redemption, grace, and merit prove the influence of the cultivated Greek pagan world of the 2nd century, dominated by the Platonic and Stoic philosophy.

But he admits that Justin is a Christian in his unquestioning adherence to the Church and its faith, his unqualified recognition of the Old Testament, and his faith in Christ as the Son of God the Creator, made manifest in the flesh, crucified, and risen, through which belief he succeeds in getting away from the dualism of both pagan and Gnostic philosophy.

Justin was confident that his teaching was that of the Church at large. He knows of a division among the orthodox only on the question of the millennium and on the attitude toward the milder Jewish Christianity, which he personally is willing to tolerate as long as its professors in their turn do not interfere with the liberty of the Gentile converts; his millenarianism seems to have no connection with Judaism, but he believes firmly in a millennium, and generally in the Christian eschatology.

Justin saw himself as a scholar, although his skills in Hebrew were either non-existent or minimal. His opposition to Judaism was typical of church leaders in his day but does not descend to the level of anti-semitism. After collaborating with a Jewish convert to assist him with Hebrew, Justin published an attack on Judaism based upon a no-longer-extant text of a Midrash. This Midrash was reconstructed and published by Saul Lieberman.

Conversion and teachings

Justin had, like others, the idea that the Greek philosophers had derived, if not borrowed, the most essential elements of truth found in their teaching from the Old Testament. But at the same time he adopted the Stoic doctrine of the "seminal word," and so philosophy was to him an operation of the Word—in fact, through his identification of the Word with Christ, it was brought into immediate connection with him.[25]

Thus he does not scruple to declare that Socrates and Heraclitus were Christians (Apol., i. 46, ii. 10). His aim, of course, is to emphasize the absolute significance of Christ, so that all that ever existed of virtue and truth may be referred to him. The old philosophers and law-givers had only a part of the Logos, while the whole appears in Christ.[25]

While the gentile peoples, seduced by demons, had deserted the true God for idols, the Jews and Samaritans possessed the revelation given through the prophets and awaited the Messiah. The law, however, while containing commandments intended to promote the true fear of God, had other prescriptions of a purely pedagogic nature, which necessarily ceased when Christ, their end, appeared; of such temporary and merely relative regulations were circumcision, animal sacrifices, the Sabbath, and the laws as to food. Through Christ the abiding law of God has been fully proclaimed. In his character as the teacher of the new doctrine and promulgator of the new law lies the essential nature of his redeeming work.[25]

The idea of an economy of grace, of a restoration of the union with God which had been destroyed by sin, is not foreign to him. It is noteworthy that in the "Dialogue" he no longer speaks of a "seed of the Word" in every man, and in his non-apologetic works the emphasis is laid upon the redeeming acts of the life of Christ rather than upon the demonstration of the reasonableness and moral value of Christianity, though the fragmentary character of the latter works makes it difficult to determine exactly to what extent this is true and how far the teaching of Irenaeus on redemption is derived from him.[25]

Doctrine of the logos

Justin's use of the idea of the Logos has always attracted attention. It is probably too much to assume a direct connection with Philo of Alexandria in this particular. The idea of the Logos was widely familiar to educated men, and the designation of the Son of God as the Logos was not new to Christian theology. The significance is clear, however, of the manner in which Justin identifies the historical Christ with the rational force operative in the universe, which leads up to the claim of all truth and virtue for the Christians and to the demonstration of the adoration of Christ, which aroused so much opposition, as the only reasonable attitude. It is mainly for this justification of the worship of Christ that Justin employs the Logos-idea, though where he explicitly deals with the divinity of the Redeemer and his relation to the Father, he makes use of the Old Testament, not of the Logos-idea, which thus can not be said to form an essential part of his Christology.[25]

The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia notes that scholars have differed on whether Justin's writings on the nature of God were meant to express his firm opinion on points of doctrine, or to speculate on these matters. Specific points Justin addressed include that the Logos is "numerically distinct from the Father" though "born of the very substance of the Father", and that through the "through the Word, God has made everything". Justin used a metaphor of fire, to describe the Logos as spreading like a flame, rather than "dividing" the substance of the father. He also defended the Holy Spirit as a member of the Trinity, as well as the birth of Jesus to his mother Mary when she was a virgin. The Encyclopedia states that Justin places the genesis of the Logos as a voluntary act of the Father at the beginning of creation, noting that this is an "unfortunate" conflict with later Christian teachings.[26]

Memoirs of the apostles

Justin Martyr, in his First Apology (ca. 155) and Dialogue with Trypho (ca. 160),[27] sometimes refers to written sources consisting of narratives of the life of Jesus and quotations of the sayings of Jesus as "memoirs of the apostles" (Greek: ἀπομνημονεύματα τῶν ἀποστόλων; transliteration: apomnêmoneúmata tôn apostólôn) and less frequently as gospels (Greek: εὐαγγέλιον; transliteration: euangélion) which, Justin says, were read every Sunday in the church at Rome (1 Apol. 67.3 – "and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are being read as long as it is allowable").[28]

The designation "memoirs of the apostles" occurs twice in Justin's First Apology (66.3, 67.3–4) and thirteen times in the Dialogue, mostly in his interpretation of Psalm 22, whereas the term "gospel" is used only three times, once in 1 Apol. 66.3 and twice in the Dialogue. The single passage where Justin uses both terms (1 Apol. 66.3) makes it clear that "memoirs of the apostles" and "gospels" are equivalent, and the use of the plural indicates Justin's awareness of more than one written gospel. ("The apostles in the memoirs which have come from them, which are also called gospels, have transmitted that the Lord had commanded...").[29] Justin may have preferred the designation "memoirs of the apostles" as a contrast to the "gospel" of his contemporary Marcion to emphasize the connections between the historical testimony of the gospels and the Old Testament prophecies which Marcion rejected.[30]

The origin of Justin's use the name "memoirs of the apostles" as a synonym for the gospels is uncertain. Scholar David E. Aune has argued that the gospels were modeled after classical Greco-Roman biographies, and Justin's use of the term apomnemoneumata to mean all the Synoptic Gospels should be understood as referring to a written biography such as the Memorabilia of Xenophon because they preserve the authentic teachings of Jesus.[31] However, scholar Helmut Koester has pointed out the Greek title "Memorabilia" was not applied to Xenophon's work until the Middle Ages, and it is more likely apomnemoneumata was used to describe the oral transmission of the sayings of Jesus in early Christianity. Papias uses a similar term meaning "remembered" (apomnemoneusen) when describing how Mark accurately recorded the "recollections of Peter", and Justin also uses it in reference to Peter in Dial. 106.3, followed by a quotation found only in the Gospel of Mark (Mk 3:16–17). Therefore, according to Koester, it is likely that Justin applied the name "memoirs of the apostles" analogously to indicate the trustworthy recollections of the apostles found in the written record of the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and possibly also an apocryphal gospel.[32]

Justin expounded on the gospel texts as an accurate recording of the fulfillment of prophecy, which he combined with quotations of the prophets of Israel from the LXX to demonstrate a proof from prophecy of the Christian kerygma.[33] The importance which Justin attaches to the words of the prophets, which he regularly quotes with the formula "it is written", shows his estimate of the Old Testament Scriptures. However, the scriptural authority he attributes to the "memoirs of the apostles" is less certain. Koester articulates a majority view among scholars that Justin considered the "memoirs of the apostles" to be accurate historical records but not inspired writings,[34] whereas scholar Charles E. Hill, though acknowledging the position of mainstream scholarship, contends that Justin regarded the fulfillment quotations of the gospels to be equal in authority.[35]


Scriptural sources


Justin uses material from the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) in the composition of the First Apology and the Dialogue, either directly, as in the case of Matthew,[36] or indirectly through the use of a gospel harmony, which may have been composed by Justin or his school.[37] However, his use, or even knowledge, of the Gospel of John is uncertain. One possible reference to John is a saying that is quoted in the context of a description of Christian baptism (1 Apol. 61.4 – "Unless you are reborn, you cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven."). However, Koester contends that Justin obtained this saying from a baptismal liturgy rather than a written gospel.[38]


Justin does not quote from the Book of Revelation directly, yet he clearly refers to it, naming John as its author (Dial. 81.4 "Moreover also among us a man named John, one of the apostles of Christ, prophesied in a revelation made to him that those who have believed on our Christ will spend a thousand years in Jerusalem; and that hereafter the general and, in short, the eternal resurrection and judgment of all will likewise take place"). Scholar Brooke Westcott notes that this reference to the author of the single prophetic book of the New Testament illustrates the distinction Justin made between the role of prophecy and fulfillment quotations from the gospels, as Justin does not mention any of the individual canonical gospels by name.[39]


Reflecting his opposition to Marcion, Justin's attitude toward the Pauline epistles generally corresponds to that of the later Church. In Justin's works, distinct references are found to Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians, and possible ones to Philippians, Titus, and 1 Timothy. It seems likely that he also knew Hebrews and 1 John. The apologetic character of Justin's habit of thought appears again in the Acts of his martyrdom, the genuineness of which is attested by internal evidence.[40]

Testimony sources

According to scholar Oskar Skarsaune, Justin relies on two main sources for his proofs from prophecy that probably circulated as collections of scriptural testimonies within his Christian school. He refers to Justin's primary source for demonstrating scriptural proofs in the First Apology and parallel passages in the Dialogue as a "kerygma source". A second source, which was used only in the Dialogue, may be identical to a lost dialogue attributed to Aristo of Pella on the divine nature of the Messiah, the Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus (ca. 140). Justin brings in biblical quotes verbatim from these sources, and he often appears to be paraphrasing his sources very closely, even in his interpretive remarks.[41]

Justin occasionally uses the Gospel of Matthew directly as a source for Old Testament prophecies to supplement his testimony sources.[36][42] However, the fulfillment quotations from these sources most often appear to be harmonizations of the gospels of Matthew and Luke.[43] Koester suggests that Justin had composed an early harmony along the lines of his pupil Tatian's Diatesseron.[37] However, the existence of a harmony independent of a collection of sayings for exposition purposes has been disputed by scholar Arthur Bellinzoni.[44][45] The question of whether the harmonized gospel materials found in Justin's writings came from a preexisting gospel harmony or were assembled as part of an integral process of creating scriptural prooftexts is an ongoing subject of scholarly investigation.[46]

The "kerygma source"

The following excerpt from 1 Apol. 33:1,4–5 (partial parallel in Dial. 84) on the annunciation and virgin birth of Jesus shows how Justin used harmonized gospel verses from Matthew and Luke to provide a scriptural proof of the messiah-ship of Jesus based on fulfillment of the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14.[47]
"And hear again how Isaiah in express words foretold that He should be born of a virgin; for he spoke thus: 'Behold, the virgin will conceive in the womb and bear a son, and they will say in his name, God with us' (Mt 1:23)." (1 Apol. 33:1)[48][49]
"...the power of God, coming down upon the virgin, overshadowed her and made her while yet a virgin to conceive (cf. Lk 1:35), and the angel of God proclaimed to her and said, 'Behold, you will conceive in the womb from the Holy Spirit and bear a son (Mt 1:20/Lk 1:31) and he will be called Son of the Most High (Lk 1:32). And you shall call his name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins (Mt 1:21),' as those who have made memoirs of all things about our savior Jesus Christ taught... (1 Apol. 33:4–5)[50]
According to Skarsaune, the harmonized gospel narratives of Matthew and Luke were part of a tradition already circulating within Justin's school that expounded on the life and work of Jesus as the Messiah and the apostolic mission. Justin then rearranged and expanded these testimonia to create his First Apology.[51][52] The "kerygma source" of prooftexts (contained within 1 Apol. 31–53) is believed to have had a Two Parousias Christology, characterized by the belief that Jesus first came in humility, in fulfillment of prophecy, and will return in glory as the Messiah to the Gentiles.[53] There are close literary parallels between the Christology of Justin's source and the Apocalypse of Peter.[54]

Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus

The following excerpts from the Dialogue with Trypho of the baptism (Dial. 88:3,8) and temptation (Dial. 103:5–6) of Jesus, which are believed to have originated from the Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus, illustrate the use of gospel narratives and sayings of Jesus in a testimony source and how Justin has adopted these "memoirs of the apostles" for his own purposes.
"And then, when Jesus had come to the river Jordan where John was baptizing, and when Jesus came down into the water, a fire was even kindled in the Jordan, and when He was rising up from the water, the Holy Spirit fluttered down upon Him in the form of a dove, as the apostles have written about this very Christ of ours." (Dial. 88:3)
"And when Jesus came to the Jordan, and being supposed to be the son of Joseph the carpenter..., the Holy Spirit, and for man's sake, as I said before, fluttered down upon Him, and a voice came at the time out of the heavens – which was spoken also by David, when he said, impersonating Christ, what the Father was going to say to Him – 'You are My Son, this day I have begotten you'." (Dial. 88:8)[55]
"...the Devil himself,...[was] called serpent by Moses, the Devil by Job and Zachariah, and was addressed as Satanas by Jesus. This indicated that he had a compound name made up of the actions which he performed; for the word "Sata" in the Hebrew and Syrian tongue means "apostate", while "nas" is the word which means in translation "serpent", thus, from both parts is formed the one word "Sata-nas". It is narrated in the memoirs of the apostles that as soon as Jesus came up out of the river Jordan and a voice said to him: 'You are My Son, this day I have begotten you', this Devil came and tempted him, even so far as to exclaim: 'Worship me'; but Christ replied: 'Get behind me, Satanas, the Lord your God shall you worship, and Him only shall you serve'. For, since the Devil had deceived Adam, he fancied that he could in some way harm him also." (Dial. 103:5–6)[56]
The quotations refer to the fulfillment of a prophecy of Psalm 2:7 found in the Western text-type of Luke 3:22.[57] Justin's mention of the fire on the Jordan without comment suggests that he was relying on an intermediate source for these gospel quotations,[58] and his literal interpretation of a pseudo-etymology of the Hebrew word Satan indicates a dependence on a testimony source with a knowledge of Hebrew, which was probably the Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus.[59]

The Dialogue attributed to Aristo of Pella is believed to have furnished Justin with scriptural prooftexts on the divinity of the Messiah by combining a Wisdom Christology – Christ as the incarnation of preexistent Wisdom – with a Second Adam Christology – the first Adam was conquered by Satan, but this Fall of Man is reversed by Christ as the Second Adam who conquers Satan. This is implied in the pseudo-etymology in Dial. 103:5–6 linking the name of Satan to the "apostate-serpent". The Christology of the source is close to that of the Ascension of Isaiah.[60]

Catechal sources

Justin quotes many sayings of Jesus in 1 Apol. 15–17 and smaller sayings clusters in Dial. 17:3–4; 35:3; 51:2–3; and 76:4–7. The sayings are most often harmonizations of Matthew and Luke that appear to be grouped together topically and organized into sayings collections, including material that probably originated from an early Christian catechism.[61][62]

The following example of an ethical teaching On Swearing Oaths in 1 Apol. 16:5 shows a combination of sayings material found in Matthew and the Epistle of James:
"Do not swear at all (Mt 5:34). Let your Yes be Yes and your No be No (Jas 5:12). Everything beyond these is from evil (Mt 5:37)."
The saying "Let your Yes be Yes and your No be No" from James 5:12 is interpolated into a sayings complex from Matthew 5:34,37. The text appears in a large number of Patristic quotations and twice in the Clementine Homilies (Hom. 3:55, 19:2). Thus, it is likely that Justin was quoting this harmonized text from a catechism.[63][64]

The harmonization of Matthew and Luke is evident in the following quotations of Mt 7:22–23 and Lk 13:26–27, which are used by Justin twice, in 1 Apol. 16:11 and Dial. 76:5:
"Many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not in your name eat and drink and do powerful deeds?' And then I shall say to them, 'go away from me, workers of lawlessness'."
"Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not in your name eat and drink and prophecy and drive out demons?' And I shall say to them, 'go away from me'."
In both cases, Justin is using the same harmonized text of Matthew and Luke, although neither of the quotations includes the entire text of those gospel passages. The last phrase, "workers of lawlessness", has an exact parallel with 2 Clement 4:5. This harmonized text also appears in a large number of quotations by the Church Fathers.[65][66] 1 Apol. 16:11 is part of a larger unit of sayings material in 1 Apol 16:9–13 which combines a warning against being unprepared with a warning against false prophets. The entire unit is a carefully composed harmony of parallel texts from Matthew and Luke.[67][68] This unit is part of a larger collection of sayings found in 1 Apol. 15–17 that appear to have originated from a catechism used by Justin's school in Rome, which may have had a wide circulation. Justin excerpted and rearranged the catechetical sayings material to create Apol. 15–17 and parallel passages in the Dialogue.[69][70]

Other sources

Justin includes a tract on Greek mythology in 1 Apol. 54 and Dial. 69 which asserts that myths about various pagan deities are imitations of the prophecies about Christ in the Old Testament. There is also a small tract in 1 Apol. 59–60 on borrowings of the philosophers from Moses, particularly Plato. These two tracts may be from the same source, which may have been an early Christian Apology.[71]

Prophetic exegesis

Justin's writings constitute a storehouse of early interpretation of the prophetic Scriptures.

Belief in prophecy

The truth of the prophets, he declares, compels assent. The Old Testament is an inspired guide and counselor. He puts the following words in the mouth of the Christian philosopher who converted him:
" 'There existed, long before this time, certain men more ancient than all those who are esteemed philosophers, both righteous and beloved by God, who spoke by the Divine Spirit, and foretold events which would take place, and which are now taking place. They are called prophets. These alone both saw and announced the truth to men, neither reverencing nor fearing any man. not influenced by a desire for glory, but speaking those things alone which they saw and which they heard, being filled with the Holy Spirit. Their writings are still extant, and he who has read them is very much helped in his knowledge of the beginning and end of things. . . And those events which have happened, and those which are happening, compel you to assent to the utterances made by them.'"[72]
Then Justin tells of his own experience:
"Straightway a flame was kindled in my soul; and a love of the prophets, and of those men who are friends of Christ, possessed me; and whilst revolving his words in my mind, I found this philosophy alone to be safe and profitable."[73]


Justin talks of the following fulfillments of Bible prophecy
  • The prophecies concerning the Messiah, and the particulars of His life.[74]
  • The destruction of Jerusalem.[75]
  • The Gentiles accepting Christianity.[76]
  • Isaiah predicted that Jesus would be born of a virgin.[77]
  • Micah mentions Bethlehem as the place of His birth.[78]
  • Zechariah forecasts His entry into Jerusalem on the foal of an ass.[79]

Second coming and Daniel 7

Justin connects Christ's second coming with the climax of the prophecy of Daniel 7.
"But if so great a power is shown to have followed and to be still following the dispensation of His suffering, how great shall that be which shall follow His glorious advent! For He shall come on the clouds as the Son of man, so Daniel foretold, and His angels shall come with Him." [Then follows Dan. 7:9-28.][80]


The second glorious advent Justin places, moreover, close upon the heels of the appearance of the Antichrist, or "man of apostasy."[81] Justin's interpretation of prophecy is, however, less clear and full than that of others who follow.

Time, times, and a half

Daniel's "time, times, and a half", Justin believed, was nearing its consummation, when Antichrist would speak his blasphemies against the Most High. And he contends with Trypho over the meaning of a "time" and "times". Justin expects the time to be very short, but Trypho disagrees.
"The times now running on to their consummation; and he whom Daniel foretells would have dominion for a time, and times, and an half, is even already at the door, about to speak blasphemous and daring things against the Most High. But you, being ignorant of how long he will have dominion, hold another opinion. For you interpret the 'time' as being a hundred years. But if this is so, the man of sin must, at the shortest, reign three hundred and fifty years, in order that we may compute that which is said by the holy Daniel--'and times'--to be two times only." [82]


Justin's statements in his First Apology are some of the earliest Christian expressions on the Eucharist.
"And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist] ... For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." [83]


Editions of the text include:
  • Thirlby, S., London, 1722.
  • Maran, P., Paris, 1742 (the Benedictine edition, reprinted in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, Vol. VI. Paris, 1857).
  • Otto, J. C., Jena, 1842 (3d ed., 1876–1881).
  • Krüger, G., Leipzig, 1896 (3d ed., Tübingen, 1915).
  • Goodspeed, E. J., Göttingen, 1914 (in Die ältesten Apologeten).[84]
  • Miroslav Marcovich, ed. Iustini Martyris Dialogus cum Tryphone (Patristische Texte und Studien 47, Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1997).
Halton, TP and M Slusser, eds, Dialogue with Trypho, trans TB Falls, Selections from the Fathers of the Church, 3, (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press)
  • Minns, Denis, and Paul Parvis. Justin, Philosopher and Martyr: Apologies. Edited by Henry Chadwick, Oxford Early Christian Texts. Oxford: OUP, 2009.

Literary references

  • The Rector of Justin (1964), perhaps Louis Auchincloss's best regarded novel, is the tale of a renowned headmaster of a New England prep school—similar to Groton—and how he came to found his institution. He choses the name Justin Martyr for his Episcopal school. ("The school was named for the early martyr and scholar who tried to reconcile the thinking of the Greek philosophers with the doctrines of Christ. Not for Prescott [the headmaster] were the humble fishermen who had their faith and faith alone."[85]


    1. ^ Thomas Whitlaw, Commentary on John (1885), p. xl
    2. ^ Rokeah (2002) Justin Martyr and the Jews p.22.
    3. ^ "St. Justin Martyr". Retrieved 2011-04-02.
    4. ^ "For All the Saints". Retrieved 2012-11-08.
    5. ^ "Justin the Philosopher & Martyr and his Companions". Retrieved 2011-04-02.
    6. ^ Craig D. Allert, Revelation, Truth, Canon, and Interpretation: Studies in Justin Martyr's Dialogue With Trypho, page 28 (Leiden, Brill, 2002). ISBN 90-04-12619-8
    7. ^ Reinhold Plummer,Early Christian authors on Samaritans and Samaritanism, Mohr Siebeck, 2002 p.14.
    8. ^ Oskar Skarsaune, The proof from prophecy: a study in Justin Martyr's proof-text tradition:text-type, provenance, theological profile, Brill, 1987 p.246.
    9. ^ Dialogue with Trypho, chapters 3-8.
    10. ^ J. Quasten, Patrology vol. 1, p.196-7.
    11. ^ Plummer, 2002 p.15.
    12. ^ Skarsaune, The proof from prophecy,pp.245-6 and notes 1 and 2.
    13. ^ Marian Hillar, From Logos to Trinity: The Evolution of Religious Beliefs from Pythagoras to Tertullian, page 139 (Cambridge University Press, 2012). ISBN 978-1-107-01330-8
    14. ^ Sacrofano - Church of Saint John the Baptist, "...the bones of St. Justin are preserved in a great urn under the coloured marble high altar, built in 1515." [1]
    15. ^ Catholic Encyclopedia: St. Justin Martyr
    16. ^ Calendarium Romanum (Libreria Editrice Vaticana 1969), p. 94
    17. ^ Haer. I., xxviii. 1.
    18. ^ IV., vi. 2, V., xxvi. 2.
    19. ^ Church History, iv. 18.
    20. ^ David Rokéah, Justin Martyr and the Jews, page 2 (Leiden, Brill, 2002). ISBN 90-04-12310-5
    21. ^ i. 26
    22. ^ Church History, IV., xi. 10.
    23. ^ Haer., xlvi. 1.
    24. ^ De vir. ill., ix.
    25. ^ New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge 3rd ed. 1914. Pg 284[Exact Quote]
    26. ^ 1913 Old Catholic Encyclopedia, "St. Justin Martyr" The Word is numerically distinct from the Father (Dial., cxxviii, cxxix; cf. lvi, lxii). He was born of the very substance of the Father, not that this substance was divided, but He proceeds from it as one fire does from another at which it is lit (cxxviii, lxi); this form of production (procession) is compared also with that of human speech (lxi). The Word (Logos) is therefore the Son: much more, He alone may properly be called Son (II Apol., vi, 3); He is the monogenes, the unigenitus (Dial., cv). Elsewhere, however, Justin, like St. Paul, calls Him the eldest Son, prototokos (I Apol., xxxiii; xlvi; lxiii; Dial., lxxxiv, lxxxv, cxxv). The Word is God (I Apol., lxiii; Dial., xxxiv, xxxvi, xxxvii, lvi, lxiii, lxxvi, lxxxvi, lxxxvii, cxiii, cxv, cxxv, cxxvi, cxviii). His Divinity, however, seems subordinate, as does the worship which is rendered to Him (I Apol., vi; cf. lxi, 13; Teder, "Justins des Märtyrers Lehre von Jesus Christus", Freiburg im Br., 1906, 103-19). The Father engendered Him by a free and voluntary act (Dial., lxi, c, cxxvii, cxxviii; cf. Teder, op. cit., 104), at the beginning of all His works (Dial., lxi, lxii, II Apol., vi, 3); in this last text certain authors thought they distinguished in the Word two states of being, one intimate, the other outspoken, but this distinction, though found in some other apologists, is in Justin very doubtful. Through the Word God has made everything (II Apol., vi; Dial., cxiv). The Word is diffused through all humanity (I Apol., vi; II, viii; xiii); it was He who appeared to the patriarchs (I Apol., lxii; lxiii; Dial., lvi, lix, lx etc.). Two influences are plainly discernible in the aforesaid body of doctrine. It is, of course, to Christian revelation that Justin owes his concept of the distinct personality of the Word, His Divinity and Incarnation; but philosophic speculation is responsible for his unfortunate concepts of the temporal and voluntary generation of the Word, and for the subordinationism of Justin's theology. It must be recognized, moreover, that the latter ideas stand out more boldly in the "Apology" than in the "Dialogue."
    27. ^ Rokeah (2002) Justin Martyr and the Jews p. 2 – His First Apology dates from about 155 CE, for it mentions (chap. 29) the procurator of Egypt, Felix, who served in this capacity between 151 and 154. Grant (Greek Apologists pp. 53–54) links the First Apology to the martyrdom of Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna, which occurred in 155 or 156; he finds allusions in the Apology to the description of Polycarp's death at the stake found in a letter sent by the Christian community of Smyrna to other Christian communities immediately after the event. ... The First Apology is mentioned in the Dialogue (end of chap. 120), and it is therefore likely that the latter was composed around 160 CE."
    28. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels p. 38 – "It is clear that these "memoirs" are indeed gospel writings and that they are used liturgically as instructions for the sacrament and as texts for homilies."
    29. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development pp. 38,40–41; p. 38 – Dial. 100.4; 101.3; 102.5; 103.6,8; 104.1; 105.1,5,6; 106.1,3,4; 107.1 "In each instance the materials quoted derive from written gospels, usually from Matthew and Luke, in one instance from Mark, and each time the term serves to quote, or to refer to, gospel materials which demonstrate that the prophecy of the Psalm has been fulfilled in the story of Jesus. The "memoirs of the apostles" are used as reliable historical records." p40 – "Justin uses the term gospel only three times 1 Apol. 66.3, Dial. 10.2; 100.1." p. 41 – "It is evident that "gospel" refers to the same literature that Justin otherwise calls "memoirs of the apostles". The use of the plural in 1 Apol. 66.3 indicates that Justin knew of more than one written gospel."
    30. ^ Koester 1990 Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development pp. 36–37,43; pp. 36–37 – "...there is no evidence that anyone before Marcion had used the term "gospel" as a designation for a written document. ...those writings of Justin which are preserved, his two Apologies and his Dialogue with Trypho, clearly show the effects of Marcion's challenge." p. 43 – "In direct antithesis to Marcion's use of the written gospel, Justin binds these gospels to the prophetic revelation in the Old Testament scriptures."
    31. ^ Aune (1987) The New Testament in its Literary Environment p. 67 – "Justin Martyr (writing ca. 155) described the Gospels as 'reminiscences [apomnemoneumata] of the apostles' (1 Apology 66.3; 67.3) and 'reminiscences of Peter' (Dialogue with Trypho 106.3). Thus Justin, like Matthew, Luke, and Papias, prefers to designate the Gospels by a recognized literary form. Though apomnemoneumata are not carefully defined in rhetorical handbooks, they are essentially expanded chreiai, i.e., sayings and/or actions of or about specific individuals, set in a narrative framework and transmitted by memory (hence "reliable"). ... His use of the term "reminiscences", therefore, suggests a connection to Xenophon's Memorabilia (in Greek apomnemoneumata), a "biography" of Socrates."
    32. ^ Koester 1990 Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development pp. 33–34,38–40; pp. 33–34 – "What Papias says about Mark reflects the use of categories which are drawn from the oral tradition. ... The written gospels' authority is assured by the same technical terms which had been established for the oral tradition. ... The term "remember" (mnemoneuein/apomnemoneuein) was decisive for the trustworthiness of the oral tradition." pp. 39–40 – "The composite form of the verb "to remember" (apomnemoneuein) had been used by Papias of Hierapolis as a technical term for the transmission of oral materials about Jesus. If Justin's term "memoirs of the apostles" is derived from this usage, it designates the written gospels as the true recollections of the apostles, trustworthy and accurate, and more reliable than any oral tradition which they are destined to replace."
    33. ^ Koester 1990 Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development p. 377 – "The Christian proclamation about Jesus as Son of God, however, is true (in contrast to pagan myths), because the Christians possess trustworthy historical documents – "remembrances of the apostles" – from which it can be shown that everything in Christ's appearance and work happened in complete agreement with prophecy. What is demonstrated to be true is the Christian kerygma, not the story of the gospels. The reports contained in the gospels are used to show that the facts about Christ which the kerygma proclaims happened in complete agreement with the prophecy that announced them."
    34. ^ Koester 1990 Ancient Christian Gospels: Their History and Development p. 41 – "These gospels for Justin possess the authority of written records. Although they are read in the service of the church, they are not "Holy Scripture" like the law and the prophets."
    35. ^ Hill (2004) pp. 345–46; p. 345 – "It is commonly held that in Rome of Justin's day even the Memoirs themselves possessed only a quite limited authority."; p. 346 – He sees in Justin "a parity of authority between these two groups of writings".
    36. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy pp. 130,163; p. 130 – "Justin sometimes had direct access to Matthew and quotes OT texts directly from him. ... (The direct borrowings are most frequent in the Dialogue; in the Apology, Mic 5:1 in 1 Apol. 34:1 may be the only instance.)" p. 163 note: Diagram of the internal structure of the putative "kerygma source", showing the insertion of scriptural quotation of Mic 5:1 from Mt. 2:6
    37. ^ Koester, (2000) Introduction to the New Testament: History and literature of Early Christianity. 2nd ed., 1982 1st ed., p. 344 – "On the basis of the gospel quotations of the First Apology and the Dialogue with Trypho, one can conclude with great certainty that Justin also had composed a harmony of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke (he did not know the Gospel of John), which is lost but was used by his student Tatian for the composition of his famous and influential four-gospel harmony known as the Diatessaron."
    38. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels pp. 360–361; p. 360 – "He knew and quoted especially the Gospels of Matthew and Luke; he must have known the Gospel of Mark as well, though there is only one explicit reference to this Gospel (Dial. 106.3); he apparently had no knowledge of the Gospel of John." footnote #2: "The only possible reference to the Gospel of John is the quotation of a saying in 1 Apol. 61.4.."
    39. ^ Westcott (1875) A general survey of the canon of the New Testament, p. 120 – "To quote prophecy habitually without mentioning the Prophet's name would be to deprive it of half it's value; and if it seem strange that Justin does not quote the Evangelists like Prophets, it is no less worthy of notice that he does quote by name the single prophetic book of the New Testament. ... This reference to the Apocalypse appears to illustrate the difference which Justin makes between his quotations from the Prophecies and the Gospels."
    40. ^ Bonwetsch (1914) New Schaff–Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, p. 284; Also see, Martyrdom of Justin Martyr at Wikisource
    41. ^ Skarsaune (2007) Jewish Believers in Jesus pp. 380–81
    42. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels pp. 382–383 – "In the discussion of the prophecy for the place of Jesus' birth (1 Apology 34), Justin only quotes the prophecy of Micah 5:1 and then remarks that Jesus was born in this 'village in the land of Judah which is 35 stades from Jerusalem' (1 Apol. 34:2). No actual narrative material from a gospel is quoted. ... However, the quotation of the text of Micah 5:1 is not given in the text of the LXX; rather, Justin follows the form of the text quoted in Matt. 2:6. ... The form of the quotation that appears in Matt 2:6 departs considerably from both the LXX and the Hebrew text. It is, in fact, a combination of Micah 5:1 and 2 Sam 5:2; only the latter speaks of the prince's function as the Shepard of Israel. The conflated quotation was wholly the work of Matthew. There can be no question that Justin is quoting this Matthean text."
    43. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels p. 365 – "The vast majority of the sayings quoted in Justin's writings are harmonizations of the texts of Matthew and Luke. These harmonizations are not casual or accidental, but systematic and consistent, (this certainly excludes...careless quotation from memory as an explanation for Justin's harmonizations) and they involve the composition of longer sections of parallel sayings from both gospels."
    44. ^ Bellinzoni (1967) Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr p. 141 – "It must, however, be emphasized that there is absolutely no evidence that Justin ever composed a complete harmony of the synoptic gospels; his harmonies were of limited scope and were apparently composed for didactic purposes. Whether the thought of a full gospel harmony ever occurred to Justin can only be conjectured, but he apparently never undertook to compose such a work."
    45. ^ Koester (1990) The Ancient Christian Gospels p. 370 footnote 2: "Bellinzoni (Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr p. 100) collapses stage (1) [a systematic harmonization of the texts of Matthew and Luke] and (2) [the composition of a cluster of sayings that warn against false prophets] of this process. He assumes that the harmonizations were made specifically for the composition of a catechism. This assumption, however, cannot explain why also the narrative materials quoted by Justin were drawn from a harmonized gospel text."
    46. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels p. 378 – "The question is whether Justin composed these harmonizations and inserted additional phrases just for the purpose of his demonstration of scriptural proof or whether he drew on a written gospel text that was already harmonized and expanded. It seems to me that we are not witnessing the work of an apologist who randomly selects pieces of various gospels and invents additional phrases for the purpose of a tight argument of literal fulfillment of scripture; nor can one solve the complex problems of Justin's quotations of gospel narrative materials by the hypothesis of a ready-made, established text of a harmonized gospel as his source. Rather, his writings permit insights into a school of scriptural exegesis in which careful comparison of written gospels with the prophecies of scripture endeavored to produce an even more comprehensive new gospel text."
    47. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy p. 145 – "1 Apol. 33 contains an elaborate explanation of Is 7:14. ... One notices that the fulfillment report is stylized so as to match the prophecy perfectly. That Justin did not entirely formulate it ad hoc is demonstrated by the close parallel in the Proteuangelium Iakobi (PJ 11:3), where much of the same combination of Matthean and Lukan elements occurs. Probably all three elements (Prophecy – Exposition – Fulfillment report) were present in Justin's source. And – as pointed out by Koester [Koester (1956) p. 67] – it seems the same source is employed once more in Dial. 84."
    48. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels p. 379 – "1 Apol. 33 gives as proof concerning Jesus' birth the prophecy of Isa 7:14. The text of this scriptural passage is presented in a form that is influenced by its quotation in Matt 1:23."
    49. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy pp. 32–34; p. 32 – "It is obvious that Justin's quotation of IS 7:14 in 1 Apol. 33:1 has Mt 1:23 as its
    50. direct or indirect source. There are indications in the context which indicate that we should reckon with an intermediary source between Mt and Justin. This intermediary source may account for the deviations from Matthew's text." p. 33 – Diagram of Mt 1:23, Is 7:14 LXX, and 1 Apol. 33:1 p. 34 – "To conclude: Although Is 7:14 has its peculiar problems in Justin, ... we have found confirmation for our thesis concerning Justin and his 'testimony sources': Justin claims the text from Mt 1:23 – probably transmitted through an intermediary source – as the true LXX."
    51. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels pp. 380–81 – "The text of 1 Apol. 33:5 is a harmony of two angelic announcements, the one from Matthew in which the angel calls Joseph in a dream, the other from Luke's narrative of the annunciation. While the passage begins with a sentence from Luke, 'from the Holy Spirit' is interpolated from Matt 1:20. The naming of Jesus and the reason for this name is given according to Matt 1:21. ... But in order to argue for the fulfillment of Isa 7:14 in 1 Apol. 33:3–6, the report of the command to name the child 'Jesus' did not need to refer to the Matthean form. ... It is evident, therefore, that Justin is quoting from a harmonized gospel text... Justin's gospel text must have continued with the remainder of the Lukan pericope of the annunciation. In the introduction to the harmonization of Luke 1:31–32 and Matt 1:20–21, Justin had already alluded to the Lukan continuation of the story: 1 Apol. 33:4 ... recalls Luke 1:35 ("The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.")
    52. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy pp. 143,425; p. 143 – "Taking as a working hypothesis that Justin in 1 Apol. 32/35 and Dial. 52–54 is using a source containing OT prophecies, expositions and fulfillment reports, it is easy to recognize the different procedure in the Apology and the Dialogue. In the Apology, Justin reproduces the source rather faithfully, only rearranging the material... In the Dialogue Justin is much more independent in his handling of his (kerygma) source. He has turned to the primary sources behind the testimony source, that is, he has turned to the LXX and Matthew." p. 425 – "The prooftexts themselves were presented in a free, targumizing version of the standard LXX text, closely adapted to Christian exegesis and polemic concerns. ... Justin may have become heir to Schriftbeweistraktate which were part of a school tradition. These tracts probably also comprised brief fulfillment reports. We encounter this tradition of texts and exposition in its purest form in 1 Apol. 31–53. Here Justin is still almost entirely dependent on the received texts and the adjacent exegesis. ... Justin's main modification is a rearrangement within the series, motivated by Justin's fear that his readers might not recognize some of his prooftexts as real prophecies."
    53. ^ Skarsaune (2007) Jewish Believers in Jesus pp. 381–85; p. 381 – "The reason I have called this hypothetical source the "kerygma source" is twofold. First, it share some striking parallels with the lost writing The Kerygma of Peter (ca. 125) of which a few fragments are quoted in Clement of Alexandria. Second, it seems to have had a creed-like enumeration of Jesus' messianic career, a christological "kerygma", as its basic structure.
    54. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy pp. 154–56; p. 156 – "In the Apology, the idea is the following: Since the prophecies covering the first coming of Christ can be shown to have been fulfilled in great detail, we may safely conclude that those prophecies which predict His glorious second coming will also be fulfilled."
    55. ^ Skarsaune (2007) Jewish Believers in Jesus pp. 388–9 – "The Christology is clearly messianic in function: the 'Son of God' concept is demonstrated functionally as the Messiah being enthroned at God's right hand, ruling, and coming to judge the living and the dead, thus acting in a divine role. On the whole, this Christology is very close to that of Matthew, but also to the Christology of Justin's source in 1 Apol. 31–53.
    56. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy pp. 197–198,391–392; p. 197 – "Justin's narrative is a harmonization of the Synoptic accounts. There are other non-synoptic details in the context, however, which may indicate a non-synoptic source besides the Synoptic Gospels." pp. 391–392 – "I have argued above that the narrative of Jesus' baptism in Dial. 88:3 derives from the "recapitulation" source. ... Men believed that Jesus was the son of Joseph, but the heavenly voice proclaimed him as God's son. Perhaps the mention of the fire is related to this idea: It may have been conceived of as a purifying or testing fire. ... Jesus at his baptism was tested as God's son by the fire, but not made God's son at his baptism. This, I gather, is also the idea embodied in Justin's narrative: Jesus was not made or established as God's son in his baptism, but he was proved to be God's son – proved by testing, or by conquering the fire."
    57. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy pp. 222–23,238,383–84,393; p. 384 – "In the temptation story, Christ as the Son of God, the second Adam, is tested. The temptation follows immediately after the heavenly voice has proclaimed 'Thou art my son...'. This is especially clear in Dial. 103:5f. ... The special relevance of this passage is that it proves how deeply the recapitulation idea is integrated into Justin's inherited material. The etymology given for Satanas has a special function: It proves that the 'Satanas' encountered by Jesus in his temptation was the same as the 'serpent' encountered by Adam – Satanas means 'apostate serpent', i.e. the serpent of Gen. 3. In other words: Jesus met the same adversary as the first Adam." p. 393 – "It is interesting to notice that only two Semitic etymologies provided by Justin both refer to the temptation story: 'Satanas' and 'Israel' (Dial. 103:5 and Dial. 125:4) – and as we have seen already, they presuppose a harmonistic version of the temptation story which is not created ad hoc by Justin. The gist of the whole material is succinctly summarized in Dial. 103:6: As the devil led Adam astray, he thought he could seduce the second Adam also."
    58. ^ Koester (1990) Ancients Christians Gospels pp. 394–395 – "In Dial. 88, Justin twice reports the coming of the holy spirit upon Jesus at his baptism. He gives this report in order to demonstrate the fulfillment of the prophecies of Isa 11:1–3 and Joel 2:28–29 about the coming of the spirit which he had quoted in Dial. 87:2 and 6. ... Finally, the heavenly voice is given by Justin in a citation of Ps. 2:7, while Mark and Matthew present a wording of the heavenly voice which is a conflation of Isa 42:1 and 44:2. Only the Western text of Luke 3:22 presents the heavenly voice in the form that must be presupposed for Justin's source. Justin cannot have been the author of this form of the heavenly voice; he had no special interest in proving the fulfillment of this scriptural text, although he is quite aware of its appearance in scripture as a word of David, i.e., a psalm that David wrote. That Justin's source already contained this form of the heavenly voice is confirmed in Dial. 103:6, where he refers to it once more in passing; introducing a remark about Jesus' temptation, he again quotes the exact text of Luke 3:22 D = Ps. 2:7."
    59. ^ Koester (1990) Ancients Christians Gospels p. 395 – "In order to prove the fulfillment of the prophecies of Isa 11:1–3 and Joel 2:28–29, Justin only had to report the coming of the spirit upon Jesus. But not only does he add the report about the heavenly voice, he also mentions 'that a fire was lit in the Jordan'. Nothing in the context of Justin's discussion requires a mention of this phenomenon. It must have been part of the text Justin was quoting."
    60. ^ Rokeah (2002) Justin Martyr and the Jews pp. 20–21 – "The accepted view is that Justin did not know Hebrew. There is clear-cut and overwhelming evidence for Justin's absolute reliance upon the Septuagint. The explanation for any apparent acquaintance or knowledge of Hebrew in Justin's writings should be sought elsewhere: in his sources. ... Dial. 103:5 contains the only two Hebrew–Aramaic etymologies in the entire work: of satan, and of yisrael. The source of these is apparently the work of Aristo of Pella, The Altercation of Jason and Papiscus."
    61. ^ Skarsaune (2007) Jewish Believers in Jesus pp. 399–400; "In Justin's source, the Messiah is presented as God's preexistent Wisdom who has descended to earth, and ascended again to his heavenly glory. ... Here I add another aspect of great significance in Justin's source, namely that Jesus is portrayed as the second and anti-typical Adam. He reverses the fall of Adam by conquering where Adam was conquered. He "recapitulates" in his own story the story of Adam, but with the opposite point of departure, the opposite direction and the opposite result. ... The very point of the (pseudo-)etymology given for Satanas in this passage is to identify the Tempter addressed by Jesus in Matt 4:11 (conflated with Matt 16:23) with the serpent that tempted the first man. In this way the parallelism between the first and second Adam is made plain. Since Justin knew no Hebrew and probably no Aramaic, there is every reason to think he got this midrashic etymology from a source..."
    62. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels p. 361 – "The most striking feature is that these sayings exhibit many harmonizations of the text of Matthew and Luke. However, the simple assumption of a harmonized gospel cannot explain all the peculiarities of the quotations."
    63. ^ Bellinzoni (1967) Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr pp. 99–100 – "It has already been argued above that the entire section Apol. 15–17 may have been based on a single source different from the sources underlying the rest of Justin's sayings of Jesus, and I have tried to indicate that this section has many features in common with primitive Christian catechisms."
    64. ^ Bellinzoni (1967) Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr pp. 64–67; p. 66 – "the form of the saying in James is a more simple paranetic form than the text of Matthew, where each example is elaborated and where the command is not what one should do but what one should say. It, therefore, appears that the form of the saying in Jas. 5:12 is older than Matthew's version. ... This evidence would seem to indicate that Apol. 16:5 was here based on the text of Mt. 5:34,37 that had either been harmonized in part with Jas. 5:12 or with the parenetic tradition that underlies Jas. 5:12. The evidence of several of the fathers indicates a widespread knowledge of a text similar to Apol. 16:5." (Clem. of Alex. Strom. V 14,99; Clem. of Alex. Strom. VII 11,67; Cyril of Alex. De Ador. et Verit. VI; Eusebius Dem. Ev. III 3,13; Eusebius Comm. in Ps. 14 4; Epiphanius Adv. Her. XIX 6,21; Gregory of Nyssa In Cant. of Cant. Homily XIII)
    65. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels p. 363 – " is not likely that Justin is quoting from the text of Matthew but from a catechism, whose text was influenced by the formulation preserved in Jas 5:12 but not necessarily dependent upon the Epistle of James."
    66. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels pp. 356,365–67; p. 367 – "The method of harmonization includes two different procedures: (1) whenever the texts of Matthew and Luke are closely parallel, either the Matthean or the Lukan phrase or a conflation of both is chosen; (2) whenever the texts of Matthew and Luke differ considerably, as in Matt 7:22 and Luke 13:26, major portions of the two texts are combined; thus, one finds Luke's 'we were eating and drinking' as well as Matthew's 'we prophesied etc.'."
    67. ^ Bellinzoni (1967) Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr pp. 22–25; pp. 24–25 – "These consistent features of harmonization found in Apol. 16:11 and Dial. 76:5 leave little doubt that Justin used as a source for these passages a written harmony of Mt. 7:22f and Lk. 13:26f, and this harmonization of Matthew and Luke is further evident in several of the early fathers quoted in the texts below. ... A comparison of this harmonization of Matthew and Luke in the patristic quotations leaves little doubt that Justin used a harmony of Mt. 7:22f and Lk. 13:26f and that this harmony was known to other fathers in substantially the same form as that used by Justin (Origen Contra Celsum II 49; Origen Ev. Jo. XXXII 8,11; Pamphilius Apol. pro Orig. V). Further, the witness of 2 Clement here proves the existence of this harmonization of Matthew and Luke previous to Justin."
    68. ^ Bellinzoni (1967) Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr pp. 98–99; p. 99 – "Therefore we can conclude with certainty that these five verses are based on a source that was a carefully composed harmony of material from Matthew and Luke and that was based on the order of Matthew 7."
    69. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels pp. 367–370; p. 369 – "This section of Justin's quotation of Jesus' sayings rests on deliberate and careful composition of the parallel texts of Matthew and Luke, but is also disrupted by interpolations from different contexts." p. 370 – "Thus Justin himself did not compose this cluster of sayings for this particular context. He use an already existing collection."
    70. ^ Bellinzoni (1967) Sayings of Jesus in Justin Martyr p. 100 – "It is, therefore, quite probable from the foregoing discussion that there is underlying Apol. 15–17 a primitive Christian catechism in use in Justin's school in Rome, a catechism that was known in similar form to Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and the author of the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies, a catechism based primarily on the text of the Sermon on the Mount but that harmonized related material from Mark, Luke, and from other parts of Matthew, and a catechism whose tradition was of great influence in later manuscript witnesses of the synoptic gospels."
    71. ^ Koester (1990) Ancient Christian Gospels p. 375 – "The catechetical character of these clusters of sayings is evident in their usage by Justin ... It is difficult to determine in each instance the degree to which Justin has supplemented and rearranged these collections. But it appears that the catechetical collections already existed and that Justin himself did not compose them."
    72. ^ Skarsaune (1987) The Proof From Prophecy pp. 52–53,148–150,431; p. 150 – "This tract must have had a somewhat other orientation than the source employed by Justin in 1 Apol. 32–35. It was not concerned with a prophecy–fulfillment scheme, but with correspondence between OT texts and Greek mythology." p. 53 – "It is unlikely that it (the text in 1 Apol. 60:9 introduced as a prophecy of Moses) ever occurred in a Bible is more likely that Justin took it from the source which also provided him with the (harmonistic) 'citations' from Plato in A 60. ... In this case we have reason to suspect a tractate of some kind, which included Plato quotations as well." p. 431 – "It remains to be remarked that Justin also has made other additions from sources containing OT material, but these are strictly speaking not parts of the scriptural proof. In 1 Apol. 54f and Dial. 69f Justin has added material from a source which was occupied with demonic imitations of OT Messianic prophecies, and in 1 Apol. 59f he has a little tract on philosophic borrowings from Moses. One should not exclude the possibility that these two blocks of material derive from the same source, which might well be an earlier Christian Apology."
    73. ^ Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 7
    74. ^ Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 8
    75. ^ First Apology, Chapter 31
    76. ^ First Apology, chapter 47
    77. ^ First Apology, Chapter 49
    78. ^ First Apology, Chapter 33
    79. ^ First Apology, Chapter 34
    80. ^ first Apology, Chapter 35
    81. ^ Dailogue with Trypho, chapter 31
    82. ^ Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 110
    83. ^ Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 32
    84. ^ First Apology, Chapter LXVI
    85. ^ Early Christian Fathers | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
    86. ^ Auchincloss, Louis (1964), The Rector of Justin; Houghton Mifflin Company, pg 163.

    Featured Items Panel from Litany Lane


    Today's Snippet I:  Canaan

    Canaan  was a Semitic-speaking region in the Ancient Near East, roughly corresponding to the Levant, i.e. modern-day Israel, Palestinian territories, Lebanon, and the western parts of Jordan and Syria. Canaan was of significant geopolitical importance in the Late Bronze Age Amarna period as the area where the spheres of interest of the Egyptian, Hittite, and Assyrian Empires converged. Canaan is historically attested throughout the 4th millennium BC; the later Amarna Letters use Kinaḫḫu, while other sources of the Egyptian New Kingdom mention numerous military campaigns conducted in Ka-na-na. In modern usage, the name is often associated with the Hebrew Bible, where the "Land of Canaan" extends from Lebanon southward to the "Brook of Egypt" and eastward to the Jordan River Valley.

    Much of the modern knowledge about Canaan stems from archaeological excavation in this area. Canaanite culture apparently developed in situ from the Circum-Arabian Nomadic Pastoral Complex, which developed from a fusion of Near Eastern Harifian hunter gatherers with Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (PPNB) farming cultures, practicing animal domestication, during the 6200 BC climatic crisis. Linguistically, the Canaanite languages form a group within the Northwest Semitic languages; its best-known member today is the Hebrew language, being mostly known from Iron Age epigraphy. Other Canaanite languages are Phoenician, Ammonite, Moabite, and Edomite.

    The various Canaanite nations of the Bronze and Iron Ages are mentioned in the Bible and Mesopotamian (Assyrian and Babylonian), Hittite and Ancient Egyptian texts. The Late Bronze Age state of Ugarit (at Ras Shamra in Syria) is considered quintessentially Canaanite archaeologically,[3] even though its Ugaritic language does not belong to the Canaanite group proper.


    Canaanites as they were portrayed in the Ancient Egyptian "Book of Gates", dated to the 13th century BC.
    Canaan included what today is Israel, the Palestinian territories, Lebanon, northwestern Jordan, and some western areas of Syria According to archaeologist Jonathan N. Tubb, "Ammonites, Moabites, Israelites and Phoenicians undoubtedly achieved their own cultural identities, and yet ethnically they were all Canaanites", "the same people who settled in farming villages in the region in the 8th millennium BC."

    Ebla and Amorites at Hazor, Kadesh (Qadesh-on-the-Orontes), and elsewhere in the Syrian area bordered Canaan in the north and northeast. (Ugarit may be included among these Amoritic entities.) Lebanon, in northern Canaan, bordered by the Litani river to the watershed of the Orontes river, was known by the Egyptians as upper Retjenu. In Egyptian campaign accounts, the term Djahi was used to refer to the watershed of the Jordan river. Many earlier Egyptian sources also mention numerous military campaigns conducted in Ka-na-na, just inside Asia.

    In Biblical usage, the name was confined to the country west of the Jordan, the Canaanites being described as dwelling "by the sea, and along by the side of the Jordan" (Numbers 33:51; Joshua 22:9), and was especially identified with Phoenicia (Isaiah 23:11). The Philistines, while an integral part of the Canaanite milieu, do not seem to have been ethnic Canaanites; the Hurrians (who spoke a language isolate), Hittites (Indo-European speakers), as well as the Semitic Arameans, Moabites, and Ammonites, are also considered "distinct" from generic Canaanites/Amorites, in scholarship or in tradition, although in the Biblical Book of Nations, "Heth", representing the Hittites, is a son of Canaan, despite the fact that it has been proven beyond doubt that the Hittites spoke an Indo-European language.

    The Biblical narrative makes a point of the renaming of the "Land of Canaan" to the "Land of Israel" as marking the Israelite conquest of the Promised Land.


    The English term Canaan (pronounced /'keɪnən/ since c. AD 1500, thanks to the Great Vowel Shift) comes from the Hebrew כנען (knʿn), via Greek Χαναάν Khanaan and Latin Canaan. It appears as KUR ki-na-ah-na in the Amarna letters (14th century BC), and knʿn is found on coins from Phoenicia in the last half of the 1st millennium. It first occurs in Greek in the writings of Hecataeus as Khna(Χνᾶ). The Bible derives the name from that of an alleged ancestor, Canaan son of Ham. Scholars connect the name Canaan with knʿn, Kana'an, the general Northwest Semitic name for this region.

    The etymology is uncertain. One explanation is that it has an original meaning of "lowlands", from a Semitic root knʿ "to be low, humble, depressed", in contrast with Aram, "highlands". An alternative suggestion derives the term from Hurrian Kinahhu, purportedly referring to the colour purple, so that Canaan and Phoenicia would be synonyms ("Land of Purple"), but it is just as common to assume that Kinahhu was simply the Hurrian rendition of the Semitic knʿn.

    Mesopotamian references

    Certain scholars of the Semitic Eblaite material (dated 2350 BC) from the archive of Tell Mardikh see the oldest reference to Canaanites in the ethnic name ga-na-na which provides a third millennium reference to the name Canaan.

    Canaan is mentioned in a document from the 18th century BC found in the ruins of Mari, a former Sumerian and at that time Assyrian outpost in Syria, located along the Middle Euphrates. Apparently Canaan at this time existed as a distinct political entity (probably a loose confederation of city-states). A letter from this time complains about certain "thieves and Canaanites (i.e. Kinahhu)" causing trouble in the town of Rahisum.
    Tablets found in the Mesopotamian city of Nuzi use the term Kinahnu ("Canaan") as a synonym for red or purple dye, laboriously produced by the Kassite rulers of Babylon from murex shells as early as 1600 BC, and on the Mediterranean coast by the Phoenicians from a byproduct of glassmaking. Purple cloth became a renowned Canaanite export commodity which is mentioned in Exodus. The dyes may have been named after their place of origin. The name 'Phoenicia' is connected with the Greek word for "purple", apparently referring to the same product, but it is difficult to state with certainty whether the Greek word came from the name, or vice versa. The purple cloth of Tyre in Phoenicia was well known far and wide and was associated by the Romans with nobility and royalty.

    Anne Killebrew has shown that cities such as Jerusalem were large and important walled settlements in the 'Pre-Israelite' Middle Bronze IIB and the Israelite Iron Age IIC period (ca. 1800–1550 and 720–586 BCE), but that during the intervening Late Bronze (LB) and Iron Age I and IIA/B Ages sites like Jerusalem were small and relatively insignificant and unfortified towns.

    References to Canaanites are also found throughout the Amarna letters of Pharaoh Akenaton circa 1350 BC, and a reference to the "land of Canaan" is found on the statue of Idrimi of Alalakh in modern Syria. After a popular uprising against his rule, Idrimi was forced into exile with his mother's relatives to seek refuge in "the land of Canaan", where he prepared for an eventual attack to recover his city. Texts from Ugarit also refer to an individual Canaanite (*kn'ny), suggesting that the Semitic people of Ugarit, contrary to much modern opinion, considered themselves to be non-Canaanite.

    Archaeological excavations of a number of sites, later identified as Canaanite, show that prosperity of the region reached its apogee during this Middle Bronze Age period, under leadership of the city of Hazor, at least nominally tributary to Egypt for much of the period. In the north, the cities of Yamkhad and Qatna were hegemons of important confederacies, and it would appear that Biblical Hazor was the chief city of another important coalition in the south. In the early Late Bronze Age, Canaanite confederacies were centered on Megiddo and Kadesh, before again being brought into the Egyptian Empire and Hittite Empire. Later still, the region was conquered into the Neo Assyrian Empire.

    Greco-Roman historiography

    In the 6th century BC, Hecataeus of Miletus affirms that Phoenicia was formerly called χνα, a name that Philo of Byblos subsequently adopted into his mythology as his eponym for the Phoenicians: "Khna who was afterwards called Phoinix". Quoting fragments attributed to Sanchuniathon, he relates that Byblos, Berytus and Tyre were among the first cities ever built, under the rule of the mythical Cronus, and credits the inhabitants with developing fishing, hunting, agriculture, shipbuilding and writing.

    The southern highlands of the region were later named Judea after the kingdom of Judah, while the coastal region came to be known as Παλαιστίνη in Greek (Latin Palaestina), from the name of the Philistines. That name was extended to a larger area in the 2nd century, with the establishment of the Roman province of Syria Palaestina.

    Saint Augustine also mentions that one of the terms the seafaring Phoenicians called their homeland was "Canaan". This is further confirmed by coins of the city of Laodicea in modern day Syria, that bear the legend, "Of Laodicea, a metropolis in Canaan"; these coins are dated to the reign of Antiochus IV (175–164 BC) and his successors. Augustine also records that the rustic people of Hippo retained the Punic self-designation Chanani.



    • Prior to 3500 BCE (prehistory – Stone Age and Chalcolithic): hunter-gatherer societies slowly giving way to farming and herding societies, and early metal-working in the last thousand years;
    • 3500–2000 (Early Bronze): invention of writing;
    • 2000–1550 (Middle Bronze): city-states;
    • 1550–1200 (Late Bronze): Egyptian hegemony;
    • 1200–586 (Iron Age, divided into Iron Age I and II): village societies in Iron I giving way to kingdoms in Iron II.
    After the Iron Age the periods are named after the various empires that ruled the region: Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Greek (Hellenistic) and Roman.

    Canaanite civilization was a response to long periods of stable climate interrupted by short periods of climate change. During these periods, Canaanites profited from their intermediary position between the ancient civilizations of the Middle East — Ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia (Sumer, Akkad, Assyria, Babylonia), the Hittites, and Minoan Crete — to become city states of merchant princes along the coast, with small kingdoms specializing in agricultural products in the interior. This polarity, between coastal towns and agrarian hinterland, was illustrated in Canaanite mythology by the struggle between the storm god, variously called Teshub (Hurrian) or Ba'al Hadad (Semitic Amorite/Aramean) and Ya'a, Yaw, Yahu or Yam, god of the sea and rivers. Early Canaanite civilization was characterized by small walled market towns, surrounded by peasant farmers growing a range of local horticultural products, along with commercial growing of olives, grapes for wine, and pistachios, surrounded by extensive grain cropping, predominantly wheat and barley. Harvest in early summer was a season when transhumance nomadism was practiced — shepherds staying with their flocks during the wet season and returning to graze them on the harvested stubble, closer to water supplies in the summer. Evidence of this cycle of agriculture is found in the Gezer calendar and in the Biblical cycle of the year.

    Periods of rapid climate change generally saw a collapse of this mixed Mediterranean farming system; commercial production was replaced with subsistence agricultural foodstuffs; and transhumance pastoralism became a year-round nomadic pastoral activity, whilst tribal groups wandered in a circular pattern north to the Euphrates, or south to the Egyptian delta with their flocks. Occasionally, tribal chieftains would emerge, raiding enemy settlements and rewarding loyal followers from the spoils or by tariffs levied on merchants. Should the cities band together and retaliate, a neighbouring state intervene or should the chieftain suffer a reversal of fortune, allies would fall away or inter-tribal feuding would return. It has been suggested that the Patriarchal tales of the Bible reflect such social forms. During the periods of the collapse of Akkadian Empire in Mesopotamia and the First Intermediate Period of Egypt, the Hyksos invasions and the end of the Middle Bronze Age in Assyria and Babylonia, and the Late Bronze Age collapse, trade through the Canaanite area would dwindle, as Egypt, Babylonia, and to a lesser degree Assyria, withdrew into their isolation. When the climates stabilized, trade would resume firstly along the coast in the area of the Philistine and Phoenician cities. As markets redeveloped, new trade routes that would avoid the heavy tariffs of the coast would develop from Kadesh Barnea, through Hebron, Lachish, Jerusalem, Bethel, Samaria, Shechem, Shiloh through Galilee to Jezreel, Hazor and Megiddo. Secondary Canaanite cities would develop in this region. Further economic development would see the creation of a third trade route from Eilath, Timna, Edom (Seir), Moab, Ammon and thence to the Aramean states of Damascus and Palmyra. Earlier states (for example the Philistines and Tyrians in the case of Judah and Israel, for the second route, and Judah and Israel for the third route) tried generally unsuccessfully to control the interior trade.

    Eventually, the prosperity of this trade would attract more powerful regional neighbours, such as Ancient Egypt, Assyria, the Babylonians, Persians, Ancient Greeks and Romans, who would control the Canaanites politically, levying tribute, taxes and tariffs. Often in such periods, thorough overgrazing would result in a climatic collapse and a repeat of the cycle (e.g. PPNB, Ghassulian, Uruk, and the Bronze Age cycles already mentioned). The fall of later Canaanite civilization occurred with the incorporation of the area into the Greco-Roman world (as Iudaea province), and after Byzantine times, into the Muslim Arab and proto-Muslim Umayyad Caliphate. Western Aramaic, one of the two lingua francas of Canaanite civilization, is still spoken in a number of small Syrian villages, whilst Phoenician Canaanite disappeared as a spoken language in about 100 AD. A separate Akkadian-infused Eastern Aramaic is still spoken by the existing Assyrians of Iraq, Iran, northeast Syria and southeast Turkey.

    One of the earliest settlements in the region was at Jericho in Canaan. The earliest settlements were seasonal, but, by the Bronze Age, had developed into large urban centres. By the Early Bronze Age other sites had developed, such as Ebla (where an East Semitic tongue was spoken), which by ca. 2300 BC was incorporated into the Mesopotamia-based Akkadian Empire of Sargon the Great and Naram-Sin of Akkad (Biblical Accad). Sumerian references to the Mar.tu ("tent dwellers" – considered to be Amorite) country West of the Euphrates date from even earlier than Sargon, at least to the reign of the Sumerian king, Enshakushanna of Uruk. The archives of Ebla show reference to a number of Biblical sites, including Hazor, Jerusalem, and as a number of people have claimed, to Sodom and Gomorrah mentioned in Genesis as well. The collapse of the Akkadian Empire in 2154 BC saw the arrival of peoples using Khirbet Kerak Ware pottery, coming originally from the Zagros Mountains (in modern Iran) east of the Tigris.

    Early Bronze Age (3500–2000)

    The first cities in the southern Levant arose during this period. These "proto-Canaanites" were in regular contact with the other peoples to their south such as Egypt, and to the north Asia Minor (Hurrians, Hattians, Hittites, Luwians) and Mesopotamia (Sumer, Akkad, Assyria), a trend that continued through the Iron Age. The end of the period is marked by the abandonment of the cities and a return to lifestyles based on farming villages and semi-nomadic herding, although specialised craft production continued and trade routes remained open.

    Middle Bronze Age (2000–1550)

    Urbanism returned and the region was divided among small city-states, the most important of which seems to have been Hazor. Many aspects of Semitic Canaanite material culture now reflected a Mesopotamian influence, and the entire region became more tightly integrated into a vast international trading network. It was during this period too that Canaanites invaded the eastern Delta of Egypt, where, known as the Hyksos, they became the dominant power. In Egyptian inscriptions, Amar and Amurru (Amorites) are applied strictly to the more northerly mountain region east of Phoenicia, extending to the Orontes. In the Akkadian Empire, as early as Naram-Sin's reign (ca. 2240 BC), Amurru was called one of the "four quarters" surrounding Sumer, along with Subartu/Assyria, Akkad, and Elam. Amorite dynasties also came to dominate in much of Mesopotamia, including in Larsa, Isin and founding the state of Babylon in 1894 BC. Later on, Amurru became the Assyrian/Akkadian term for the interior of south as well as for northerly Canaan. At this time the Canaanite area seemed divided between two confederacies, one centred upon Tel Megiddo in the Jezreel Valley, the second on the more northerly city of Kadesh on the Orontes River. An Amorite chieftain named Sumu-abum founded Babylon as an independent city-state in 1894 BC. One Amorite king of Babylonia, Hammurabi (1792–1750 BC) founded the first Babylonian Empire, which lasted only as long as his lifetime. Upon his death, the Amorites were driven from Assyria, but remained masters of Babylonia until 1595 BC, when they were ejected by the Hittites.

    Late Bronze Age (1550–1200)

    Map of the Ancient Near East during the Amarna Period, showing the great powers of the day: Egypt (green), Hatti (yellow), the Kassite kingdom of Babylon (purple), Middle Assyrian Empire (grey), and Mitanni (red). Lighter areas show direct control, darker areas represent spheres of influence. The extent of the Achaean/Mycenaean civilization is shown in orange.
    During the 2nd millennium BC, Ancient Egyptian texts use the term Canaan to refer to an Egyptian-ruled colony, whose boundaries generally corroborate the definition of Canaan found in the Hebrew Bible, bounded to the west by the Mediterranean Sea, to the north in the vicinity of Hamath in Syria, to the east by the Jordan Valley, and to the south by a line extended from the Dead Sea to around Gaza. Nevertheless, the Egyptian and Hebrew uses of the term are not identical: the Egyptian texts also identify the coastal city of Qadesh in north west Syria near Turkey as part of the "Land of Canaan", so that the Egyptian usage seems to refer to the entire Levantine coast of the Mediterranean Sea, making it a synonym of another Egyptian term for this coastland, Retenu.

    There is uncertainty about whether the name Canaan refers to a specific Semitic ethnic group wherever they live, the homeland of this ethnic group, or a region under the control of this ethnic group, or perhaps any of the three.

    At the end of what is referred to as the Middle Kingdom of Egypt, there was a breakdown in centralised power, the assertion of independence by various nomarchs and the assumption of power in the Delta by Pharaohs of the 17th Dynasty. Around 1674 BC, these Canaanites, whom the Egyptians referred to as "rulers of foreign lands" (Egyptian, Heqa Khasut), hence "Hyksos" (Greek), invaded Egypt, where they would rule for over a century.

    Among the migrant Semitic tribes who appear to have settled in the region were the Amorites, who had earlier controlled Babylonia. In the Old Testament, the Amorites are mentioned in the Table of Peoples (Gen. 10:16–18a). Evidently, the Amorites played a significant role in the early history of Canaan. In Gen. 14:7 f., Josh. 10:5 f., Deut. 1:19 f., 27, 44, we find them located in the southern mountain country, while in Num. 21:13, Josh. 9:10, 24:8, 12, etc., we are told of two great Amorite kings residing at Heshbon and Ashteroth, east of the Jordan. However, in other passages such as Gen. 15:16, 48:22, Josh. 24:15, Judg. 1:34, etc., the name Amorite is regarded as synonymous with "Canaanite"—only "Amorite" is never used for the population on the coast.

    In the centuries preceding the appearance of the Biblical Hebrews, parts of Canaan and southwestern Syria became tributary to the Egyptian Pharaohs, although domination by the Egyptians was sporadic, and not strong enough to prevent frequent local rebellions and inter-city struggles. Other areas such as northern Canaan and northern Syria came to be ruled by the Assyrians during this period.

    Under Thutmose III (1479–1426 BC) and Amenhotep II (1427–1400 BC), the regular presence of the strong hand of the Egyptian ruler and his armies kept the Amorites and Canaanites sufficiently loyal. Nevertheless, Thutmose III reported a new and troubling element in the population. Habiru or (in Egyptian) 'Apiru, are reported for the first time. These seem to have been mercenaries, brigands or outlaws, who may have at one time led a settled life, but with bad-luck or due to the force of circumstances, contributed a rootless element of the population, prepared to hire themselves to whichever local mayor, king or princeling prepared to undertake their support.

    Although Habiru SA-GAZ (a Sumerian ideogram glossed as "brigand" in Akkadian), and sometimes Habiri (an Akkadian word) had been reported in Mesopotamia from the reign of the Sumerian king, Shulgi of Ur III, their appearance in Canaan appears to have been due to the arrival of a new state based in Asia Minor to the north of Assyria based upon Maryannu aristocracy of horse-drawn charioteers, associated with the Indo-Aryan rulers of the Hurrians, known as Mitanni.

    The Habiru seem to have been more a social class than any ethnic group. One analysis shows that the majority were, however, Hurrian (a non Semitic group from Asia Minor who spoke a language isolate), though there were a number of Semites and even some Kassite and Luwian adventurers amongst their number. The reign of Amenhotep III, as a result was not quite so tranquil for the Asiatic province, as Habiru/'Apiru contributed to greater political instability. It is believed that turbulent chiefs began to seek their opportunities, though as a rule could not find them without the help of a neighbouring king. The boldest of the disaffected nobles was Aziru, son of Abdi-Ashirta, a prince of Amurru, who even before the death of Amenhotep III, endeavoured to extend his power into the plain of Damascus. Akizzi, governor of Katna (Qatna?) (near Hamath), reported this to the Pharaoh, who seems to have sought to frustrate his attempts. In the next reign, however, both father and son caused infinite trouble to loyal servants of Egypt like Rib-Hadda, governor of Gubla (Gebal), not the least through transferring loyalty from the Egyptian crown to that of the expanding neighbouring Asia Minor based Hittite Empire under Suppiluliuma I.

    Egyptian power in Canaan thus suffered a major setback when the Hittites (or Hatti) advanced into Syria in the reign of Amenhotep III, and became even more threatening in that of his successor, displacing the Amorites and prompting a resumption of Semitic] migration. Abd-Ashirta and his son Aziru, at first afraid of the Hittites, afterwards made a treaty with their king, and joining with the Hittites, attacked and conquered the districts remaining loyal to Egypt. In vain did Rib-Hadda send touching appeals for aid to the distant Pharaoh, who was far too engaged in his religious innovations to attend to such messages.

    In the Amarna letters (circa 1350 BC), some of which were sent by governors and princes of Canaan to their Egyptian overlord Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV) in the 14th century BC, are found, beside Amar and Amurru (Amorites), the two forms Kinahhi and Kinahni, corresponding to Kena' and Kena'an respectively, and including Syria in its widest extent, as Eduard Meyer has shown. The letters are written in the official and diplomatic Akkadian language of Assyria and Babylonia, though "Canaanitish" words and idioms are also in evidence.

    In the Amarna letters, we meet with the Habiri in northern Syria. Etakkama wrote thus to the Pharaoh,
    "Behold, Namyawaza has surrendered all the cities of the king, my lord to the SA-GAZ in the land of Kadesh and in Ubi. But I will go, and if thy gods and thy sun go before me, I will bring back the cities to the king, my lord, from the Habiri, to show myself subject to him; and I will expel the SA-GAZ."
    Similarly, Zimrida, king of Sidon (named 'Siduna'), declared, "All my cities which the king has given into my hand, have come into the hand of the Habiri." The king of Jerusalem, Abdi-Heba, reported to the Pharaoh,
    "If (Egyptian) troops come this year, lands and princes will remain to the king, my lord; but if troops come not, these lands and princes will not remain to the king, my lord."
    Abdi-heba's principal trouble arose from persons called Iilkili and the sons of Labaya, who are said to have entered into a treasonable league with the Habiri. Apparently this restless warrior found his death at the siege of Gina. All these princes, however, maligned each other in their letters to the Pharaoh, and protested their own innocence of traitorous intentions. Namyawaza, for instance, whom Itakkama (see above) accused of disloyalty, wrote thus to the Pharaoh,
    "Behold, I and my warriors and my chariots, together with my brethren and my SA-GAZ, and my Suti ?9 are at the disposal of the (royal) troops to go whithersoever the king, my lord, commands."
    From the mid 14th century BC through to the 11th century BC, much of Canaan (particularly the north, central and eastern regions of Syria and the north western Mediterranean coastal regions) fell to the Middle Assyrian Empire, and both Egyptian and Hittite influence waned as a result. Powerful Assyrian kings forced tribute on Caananite states and cities from north, east and central Syria as far as the Mediterranean. Arik-den-ili (c. 1307-1296 BC), consolidated Assyrian power in the Levant, he defeated and conquered Semitic tribes of the so-called Ahlamu group. He was followed by Adad-nirari I (1295–1275 BC) who continued expansion to the northwest, mainly at the expense of the Hittites and Hurrians, conquering Hittite territories such as Carchemish and beyond. In 1274 BC Shalmaneser I ascended the throne, a powerful warrior king, he annexed territories in Syria and Canaan previously under Egyptian or Hittite influence, and the growing power of Assyria was perhaps the reason why these two states made peace with one another. This trend continued under Tukulti-Ninurta I (1244–1208 BC) and after a hiatus, Tiglath-Pileser I (1115–1077 BC) who conquered the Arameans of northern Syria, and thence he proceeded to conquer Damascus and the Canaanite/Phoenician cities of (Byblos), Sidon, Tyre and finally Arvad.

    Bronze Age collapse

    The name Canaan occurs in hieroglyphs as k3nˁnˁ on the Merneptah Stele in the 13th century BC
    Just after the Amarna period a new problem arose which was to trouble the Egyptian control of southern Canaan (the rest of the region now being under Assyrian control). Pharaoh Horemhab campaigned against Shasu (Egyptian = "wanderers") or living in nomadic pastoralist tribes, who had moved across the Jordan to threaten Egyptian trade through Galilee and Jezreel. Seti I (ca. 1290 BC) is said to have conquered these Shasu, Semitic nomads living just south and east of the Dead Sea, from the fortress of Taru (Shtir?) to "Ka-n-'-na". After the near collapse of the Battle of Kadesh, Rameses II had to campaign vigorously in Canaan to maintain Egyptian power. Egyptian forces penetrated into Moab and Ammon, where a permanent fortress garrison (Called simply "Rameses") was established.

    After the collapse of the Levant under the so-called "Peoples of the Sea" Ramesses III (ca. 1194 BC) is said to have built a temple to the god Amen to receive tribute from the southern Levant. This was described as being built in Pa-Canaan, a geographical reference whose meaning is disputed, with suggestions that it may refer to the city of Gaza or to the entire Egyptian-occupied territory in the south west corner of the Near East.

    Some believe the "Habiru" signified generally all the nomadic tribes known as "Hebrews", and particularly the early Israelites, who sought to appropriate the fertile region for themselves. However, the term was rarely used to describe the Shasu. Whether the term may also include other related Semitic peoples such as the Moabites, Ammonites and Edomites is uncertain. It may not be an ethnonym at all; see the article Habiru for details.

    Iron Age

    Map of the southern Levant, c.830s BC.
      Kingdom of Judah
      Kingdom of Israel
      Philistine city-states
      Phoenician states
      Kingdom of Ammon
      Kingdom of Edom
      Kingdom of Aram-Damascus
      Aramean tribes
      Arubu tribes
      Nabatu tribes
      Assyrian Empire
      Kingdom of Moab
    By the Early Iron Age, the southern Levant came to be dominated by the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, besides the Philistine city-states on the Mediterranean coast, and the kingdoms of Moab, Ammon and Aram-Damascus east of the Jordan River, and Edom to the south. The northern Levant was divided into various petty kingdoms, the so-called Syro-Hittite states and the Phoenician city-states.

    The entire region (including all Phoenician/Canaanite and Aramean states, together with Israel, Philistia and Samarra) was conquered by the Neo-Assyrian Empire during the 10th and 9th centuries BC, and would remain so for three hundred years until the end of the 7th century BC. Assyrian emperor-kings such as Ashurnasirpal, Adad-nirari II, Sargon II, Tiglath-Pileser III, Esarhaddon, Sennacherib and Ashurbanipal came to dominate Canaanite affairs. The Egyptians, then under a Nubian Dynasty, made a failed attempt to regain a foothold in the region, but were vanquished by the Assyrians, leading to an Assyrian invasion and conquest of Egypt and the destruction of the Kushite Empire. The Kingdom of Judah was forced to pay tribute to Assyria. Between 616 and 605 BC the Assyrian Empire collapsed due to a series of bitter internal civil wars, followed by an attack by an alliance of Babylonians, Medes and Persians and the Scythians.

    The Babylonians inherited the western part of the empire of their Assyrian brethren, including all the lands in Canaan and Syria, together with Israel and Judah. They successfully defeated the Egyptians, who had belatedly attempted to aid their former masters, the Assyrians, and then remained in the region in an attempt to regain a foothold in the Near East. The Babylonian Empire itself collapsed in 539 BC, and Canaan fell to the Persians and became a part of the Achaemenid Empire. It remained so until in 332 BC it was conquered by the Greeks under Alexander the Great, later to fall to Rome in the late 2nd century BC, and then Byzantium, until the Arab Islamic invasion and conquest of the 7th century AD.

    Canaan in the Hebrew Bible

    Map of Canaan, with the border defined by Numbers 34:1–12 shown in red.
    Canaan and the Canaanites are mentioned some 160 times in the Hebrew Bible, mostly in the Pentateuch and the books of Joshua and Judges. Canaan first appears as one of Noah's grandsons, cursed with perpetual slavery because his father Ham had "looked upon" the drunk and naked Noah; God later promises Canaan's land to Abraham and eventually delivers it to the Israelites. The Biblical history has become increasingly problematic as the archaeological and textual evidence supports the idea that the early Israelites were in fact themselves Canaanites.

    The Hebrew Bible lists borders for the land of Canaan. Numbers 34:2 includes the phrase "the land of Canaan as defined by its borders." The borders are then delineated in Numbers 34:3–12. The term "Canaanites" in Biblical Hebrew is applied especially to the inhabitants of the lower regions, along the sea coast and on the shores of Jordan, as opposed to the inhabitants of the mountainous regions. By the time of the Second Temple, "Canaanite" in Hebrew had come to be not an ethnic designation, so much as a general synonym for "merchant", as it is interpreted in, for example, Job 40:30, or Proverbs 31:24.

    John N. Oswalt notes that "Canaan consists of the land west of the Jordan and is distinguished from the area east of the Jordan." Oswalt then goes on to say that in Scripture Canaan "takes on a theological character" as "the land which is God's gift" and "the place of abundance".

    The Hebrew Bible describes the Israelite conquest of Canaan in the "Former Prophets" (Nevi'im Rishonim [נביאים ראשונים] ), viz. the books of Joshua, Judges, 1st & 2nd Samuel, 1st & 2nd Kings. These five books of the Old Testament canon give the narrative of the Israelites after the death of Moses and Joshua leading them into Canaan. In 586 BC, the Israelites in turn lost the land to the Babylonians. These narratives of the Former Prophets are also "part of a larger work, called the Deuteronomistic History".

    Biblical Canaanites

    The part of the book of Genesis in the Hebrew Bible often called the Table of Nations describes the Canaanites as being descended from an ancestor called Canaan The son of Ham, the Grandson of Noah (Hebrew: כְּנַעַן‎, Knaan), saying (Genesis 10:15–19):
    Canaan is the father of Sidon, his firstborn; and of the Hittites, Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, Arvadites, Zemarites, and Hamathites. Later the Canaanite clans scattered, and the borders of Canaan reached [across the Mediterranean coast] from Sidon toward Gerar as far as Gaza, and then [inland around the Jordan Valley] toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha.
    The Sidon whom the Table identifies as the firstborn son of Canaan has the same name as that of the coastal city of Sidon, in Lebanon. This city dominated the Phoenician coast, and may have enjoyed hegemony over a number of ethnic groups, who are said to belong to the "Land of Canaan".
    Similarly, Canaanite populations are said to have inhabited:
    • the Mediterranean coastlands (Joshua 5:1), including Lebanon corresponding to Phoenicia (Isaiah 23:11) and the Gaza Strip corresponding to Philistia (Zephania 2:5).
    • the Jordan Valley (Joshua 11:3, Numbers 13:29, Genesis 13:12).
    The Canaanites (Hebrew: כנענים, Modern Kna'anim Tiberian Kənaʻănîm) are said to have been one of seven regional ethnic divisions or "nations" driven out by the Israelites following The Exodus. Specifically, the other nations include the Hittites, the Girgashites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites (Deuteronomy 7:1).
    According to the Book of Jubilees, the Israelite conquest of Canaan, and the curse, are attributed to Canaan's steadfast refusal to join his elder brothers in Ham's allotment beyond the Nile, and instead "squatting" on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean, within the inheritance delineated for Shem.

    One of the 613 mitzvot (precisely n. 596) prescribes that no inhabitants of the cities of six Canaanite nations, the same as mentioned in 7:1, minus the Girgashites, were to be left alive.

    While the Hebrew Bible contrasts the Canaanites ethnically from the Ancient Israelites, modern scholars Jonathan Tubb and Mark Smith have theorized the kingdoms of Israel and Judah to be a subset of Canaanite culture, based on archaeological and linguistic grounds.

    Archaeological sites

    University of Haifa excavations, 2011
    Tel Kabri (Hebrew: תל כברי‎) is an archaeological site on the grounds of Kibbutz Kabri, near the city of Nahariya, Israel. Tel Kabri is notable for its Minoan-style frescoes, the only such frescoes ever discovered in Israel.

    The area of Kabri was first settled 16,000 years ago, during the Neolithic period. Permanent structures appeared around the year 10000 BCE.

    The tel contains the remains of a Canaanite city from the Middle Bronze Age (2000-1550 B.C.). It was the most important of the cities in the Western Galilee during that period and had a palace at its center. Tel Kabri is the only Canaanite city that can be excavated in its entirety because no other city was built over its remains. The palace, which occupies 1 to 1.5 acres (6,100 m2), is also the only Canaanite palace of this period that can be excavated fully. The city's preservation offers a complete picture of political and social life in the Canaanite period, answered questions about whether or not it had a central government, whether taxes were levied and the type of agriculture practiced there.

    Excavations began at Tel Kabri in 1986 under the direction of Aharon Kempinski, but were halted in 1993. Renewed excavations have taken place since 2005 by an international team co-directed by Assaf Yasur-Landau of the Leon Recanati Institute for Maritime Studies at the University of Haifa and Prof. Eric H. Cline of The George Washington University. During the summer of 2009, additional Aegean style frescoes were found at the site.


    • Bishop Moore, Megan; Kelle, Brad E. (2011). Biblical History and Israel's Past: The Changing Study of the Bible and History. Eerdmans. ISBN 9780802862600.
    • Day, John (2002). Yahweh and the gods and goddesses of Canaan. Continuum. ISBN 9780826468307.
    • Coogan, Michael D. (1978). Stories from Ancient Canaan. Westminster Press. ISBN 0-8061-3108-X.
    • Finkelstein, Israel (1996). "Towards a new periodization and nomenclature of the archaeology of the southern Levant". In Cooper, Jerrold S.; Schwartz, Glenn M. The study of the ancient Near East in the twenty-first century. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 9780931464966.
    • Golden, Jonathan M. (2009). Ancient Canaan and Israel: An Introduction. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195379853.
    • Killebrew, Ann E. (2005). Biblical peoples and ethnicity. SBL. ISBN 9781589830974.
    • Na'aman, Nadav (2005). Canaan in the 2nd millennium B.C.E.. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 9781575061139.
    • Lemche, Niels-Peter (1991). The Canaanites and their land: the tradition of the Canaanites. Continuum. ISBN 9780567451118.
    • Noll, K.L. (2001). Canaan and Israel in antiquity: an introduction. Continuum. ISBN 9781841273181.
    • Smith, Mark S. (2002). The early history of God. Eerdmans.
    • Tubb, Jonathan N. (1998). Canaanites. University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN 0-8061-3108-X.


     Catechism of the Catholic Church

    Part Two: The Celebration of the Christian Mystery, 

    Section Two: The Seven Sacraments of the Church 





    1533 Baptism, Confirmation, and Eucharist are sacraments of Christian initiation. They ground the common vocation of all Christ's disciples, a vocation to holiness and to the mission of evangelizing the world. They confer the graces needed for the life according to the Spirit during this life as pilgrims on the march towards the homeland.

    1534 Two other sacraments, Holy Orders and Matrimony, are directed towards the salvation of others; if they contribute as well to personal salvation, it is through service to others that they do so. They confer a particular mission in the Church and serve to build up the People of God.

    1535 Through these sacraments those already consecrated by Baptism and Confirmation LG 10 for the common priesthood of all the faithful can receive particular consecrations. Those who receive the sacrament of Holy Orders are consecrated in Christ's name "to feed the Church by the word and grace of God."LG 11 # 2 On their part, "Christian spouses are fortified and, as it were, consecrated for the duties and dignity of their state by a special sacrament."GS 48  # 2

    Article 7
    1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."CIC, can. 1055 # 1; cf. GS 48 # 1

    V. The Goods and Requirements of Conjugal Love
    1643 "Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love, but with a new significance which not only purifies and strengthens them, but raises them to the extent of making them the expression of specifically Christian values."FC 13

    The unity and indissolubility of marriage
    1644 The love of the spouses requires, of its very nature, the unity and indissolubility of the spouses' community of persons, which embraces their entire life: "so they are no longer two, but one flesh."Mt 19:6; cf. Gen 2:24 They "are called to grow continually in their communion through day-to-day fidelity to their marriage promise of total mutual self-giving."FC 19 This human communion is confirmed, purified, and completed by communion in Jesus Christ, given through the sacrament of Matrimony. It is deepened by lives of the common faith and by the Eucharist received together.
    1645 "The unity of marriage, distinctly recognized by our Lord, is made clear in the equal personal dignity which must be accorded to man and wife in mutual and unreserved affection."GS 49 # 2 Polygamy is contrary to conjugal love which is undivided and exclusive.Cf. FC 19

    The fidelity of conjugal love
    1646 By its very nature conjugal love requires the inviolable fidelity of the spouses. This is the consequence of the gift of themselves which they make to each other. Love seeks to be definitive; it cannot be an arrangement "until further notice." the "intimate union of marriage, as a mutual giving of two persons, and the good of the children, demand total fidelity from the spouses and require an unbreakable union between them."GS 48 # 1

    1647 The deepest reason is found in the fidelity of God to his covenant, in that of Christ to his Church. Through the sacrament of Matrimony the spouses are enabled to represent this fidelity and witness to it. Through the sacrament, the indissolubility of marriage receives a new and deeper meaning.

    1648 It can seem difficult, even impossible, to bind oneself for life to another human being. This makes it all the more important to proclaim the Good News that God loves us with a definitive and irrevocable love, that married couples share in this love, that it supports and sustains them, and that by their own faithfulness they can be witnesses to God's faithful love. Spouses who with God's grace give this witness, often in very difficult conditions, deserve the gratitude and support of the ecclesial community.Cf. FC 20

    1649 Yet there are some situations in which living together becomes practically impossible for a variety of reasons. In such cases the Church permits the physical separation of the couple and their living apart. the spouses do not cease to be husband and wife before God and so are not free to contract a new union. In this difficult situation, the best solution would be, if possible, reconciliation. the Christian community is called to help these persons live out their situation in a Christian manner and in fidelity to their marriage bond which remains indissoluble.FC 83; CIC, cann. 1151-1155

    1650 Today there are numerous Catholics in many countries who have recourse to civil divorce and contract new civil unions. In fidelity to the words of Jesus Christ - "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery"Mk 10:11-12 The Church maintains that a new union cannot be recognized as valid, if the first marriage was. If the divorced are remarried civilly, they find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God's law. Consequently, they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists. For the same reason, they cannot exercise certain ecclesial responsibilities. Reconciliation through the sacrament of Penance can be granted only to those who have repented for having violated the sign of the covenant and of fidelity to Christ, and who are committed to living in complete continence.

    1651 Toward Christians who live in this situation, and who often keep the faith and desire to bring up their children in a Christian manner, priests and the whole community must manifest an attentive solicitude, so that they do not consider themselves separated from the Church, in whose life they can and must participate as baptized persons:

    They should be encouraged to listen to the Word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts for justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God's grace.FC 84

    The openness to fertility
    1652 "By its very nature the institution of marriage and married love is ordered to the procreation and education of the offspring and it is in them that it finds its crowning glory."GS 48 # 1; 50

    Children are the supreme gift of marriage and contribute greatly to the good of the parents themselves. God himself said: "It is not good that man should be alone," and "from the beginning (he) made them male and female"; wishing to associate them in a special way in his own creative work, God blessed man and woman with the words: "Be fruitful and multiply." Hence, true married love and the whole structure of family life which results from it, without diminishment of the other ends of marriage, are directed to disposing the spouses to cooperate valiantly with the love of the Creator and Savior, who through them will increase and enrich his family from day to day.Gen 2:18; Mt 19:4; Gen 1:28

    1653 The fruitfulness of conjugal love extends to the fruits of the moral, spiritual, and supernatural life that parents hand on to their children by education. Parents are the principal and first educators of their children.GE 3 In this sense the fundamental task of marriage and family is to be at the service of life.FC 28

    1654 Spouses to whom God has not granted children can nevertheless have a conjugal life full of meaning, in both human and Christian terms. Their marriage can radiate a fruitfulness of charity, of hospitality, and of sacrifice.