Abstract
This article focuses on Justin Martyr’s apologetical intent in his use of the term ‘logos’, recognizing ambiguity and word-play. The lengthy, complex discussions of Justin’s use of ‘logos’ (from early Christian debates on subordinationism, to more recent claims of A. Harnack regarding Justin’s ‘Hellenization’), have neglected the apologetical aspect. The author highlights the epistemological character of Justin’s central part/whole argument. Accordingly, both the position which understands Justin affirming a general revelation that gives more than partial access to truth outside of Christ (H. Chadwick), as well as one which affirms an unbridgeable chasm in knowledge of truth between Christians and unbelievers (R. Holte) is rejected. While only Christ, as ‘logos’, gives the complete revelation of God, Justin denies that this truth was totally veiled to unbelievers; they are without excuse in unjustly persecuting Christians.”
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
