First Apology of Justin Martyr - Historical and Literary Significance

Historical and Literary Significance

There has been significant scholarly debate about the extent to which Justin’s Apologies differed from prior and future apologetic discourse. Paul Parvis, a prominent Justin scholar from the University of Edinburgh, has noted that the First Apology is unlike any apology that preceded it. It presents itself as legal petition, a standard Roman administrative genre that seeks to change a legal precedent (in this case, asking Christians to be charged based on evil deeds rather than for being Christian in and of itself). But by including the descriptions of Christian practice and belief, Parvis argues that “hat Justin did was to hijack this normal Roman administrative procedure and turn it into a vehicle for articulating and disseminating the message of the Gospel.” Sara Parvis, also from Edinburgh, further argues that scholars should do away with the classic conception of Christian apology as a “vague group of writings offering some kind of defense of Christianity,” and instead think of the category as one that was actually invented by Justin Martyr and then refined by later authors like Tertullian.

Scholars also note the importance of the explanation of Christian practice in defending the community as a whole. Robert Grant, has noted that Justin did not provide much detail into the theological reasoning behind early Church practices. Instead, he argues that Justin aimed to provide this information to both “put forth the real nature of Christian life” and refute the slanderous claims of pagan critics.