"Gentiles...circumcised from [their] error by Christ [i.e. Iesous the Christ]", JUSTIN, DIAL., CH. XLVII

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

"Gentiles...circumcised from [their] error by Christ [i.e. Iesous the Christ]", JUSTIN, DIAL., CH. XLVII

Post by gryan »

Re:"those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ"

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR
DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO
CHAPTER XLVII -- JUSTIN COMMUNICATES WITH CHRISTIANS WHO OBSERVE THE LAW. NOT A FEW CATHOLICS DO OTHERWISE.

And Trypho again inquired, "But if some one, knowing that this is so, after he recognises that this man is Christ, and has believed in and obeys Him, wishes, however, to observe these [institutions], will he be saved?"

I said, "In my opinion, Trypho, such an one will be saved, if he does not strive in every way to persuade other men,--I mean those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ, to observe the same things as himself, telling them that they will not be saved unless they do so. This you did yourself at the commencement of the discourse, when you declared that I would not be saved unless I observe these institutions."

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... rypho.html

What does Justin mean by "those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ"? Is he talking about Gentiles circumcised by Christians who are in error in doing so?
Last edited by gryan on Sun Dec 05, 2021 10:09 am, edited 9 times in total.
User avatar
billd89
Posts: 1339
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:27 pm
Location: New England, USA

Re: 'Circumcision of the Heart'

Post by billd89 »

Justin is saying to Trypho that an otherwise 'observant Jew' who has fully accepted Christ will be saved, as long as he isnt forcing Jewish (non-Christ) institutions on Gentiles for salvation.

As in Romans 2:29: "circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter (i.e. the knife)."

'Circumcision of the Heart' is in Philo Judaeus - there's also 'Circumcision of the Tongue' and 'Circumcision of the Ear.' This must have been a widespread concept long before Paul's day.

Penile circumcision is not meant, here.

I too am curious how specifically the 'Circumcision of the Heart' was executed by these spiritual mohels.
Last edited by billd89 on Fri Dec 03, 2021 7:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
GakuseiDon
Posts: 2263
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:10 pm

Re: JUSTIN MARTYR DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO, CH. XLVII

Post by GakuseiDon »

Perhaps it parallels a similar theme in Mark 9:

[37] Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.
[38] And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
[39] But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
[40] For he that is not against us is on our part.

[41] For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: JUSTIN MARTYR DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO, CH. XLVII

Post by MrMacSon »

gryan wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 7:15 am What does Justin mean by "those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ"?

I take this to mean stopped or 'excised' from being in error in their beliefs, "to observe the same things as himself [ie. the same things as Christ]"

."..those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ, to observe the same things as himself ..."

I think the key words are error and from error, which appears a few times in Dialogue, both before and after chapter XLVII, as follows.

nb. I have used the anglicized Greek, Iesous, for both 'Joshua' and Jesus in the following ...

chapter III
."What greater work," said [Justin], "could one accomplish than this, to show the reason which governs all, and having laid hold of it, and being mounted upon it, to look down on the errors of others, and their pursuits? But without philosophy and right reason, prudence would not be present to any man. Wherefore it is necessary for every man to philosophize, and to esteem this the greatest and most honourable work .."

chapter VII
."... they ['the prophets'] both glorified the Creator, the God and Father of all things, and proclaimed His Son, the Christ [sent] by Him: which, indeed, the false prophets, who are filled with the lying unclean spirit, neither have done nor do, but venture to work certain wonderful deeds for the purpose of astonishing men, and glorify the spirits and demons of error. But pray that, above all things, the gates of light may be opened to you ..."

chapter XXXV
."The fact that there are such men confessing themselves to be Christians, and admitting the crucified Iesous to be both Lord and Christ, yet not teaching His doctrines, but those of the spirits of error, causes us who are disciples of the true and pure doctrine of Iesous Christ, to be more faithful and stedfast in the hope announced by Him .."

chapter XXXIX
."..daily some [of you] are becoming disciples in the name of Christ, and quitting the path of error; who are also receiving gifts, each as he is worthy, illumined through the name of this Christ ... it was prophesied that, after the ascent of Christ to heaven, He would deliver us from error and give us gifts...."

chapter XLVII (as already cited above in the OP)
."..those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ, to observe the same things as himself ..."


Chapter CXIII is highly significant. It starts with

." What I mean is this. Iesous (Joshua)...who was called Oshea when he was sent to spy out the land of Canaan was [re]named 'Iesous' by Moses. Why he did this you neither ask, nor are at a loss about it, nor make strict inquiries. Therefore Christ has escaped your notice; and though you read, you understand not; and even now, though you hear that [the Jewish] Iesous is [now] our Christ, you consider not that the name was bestowed on Him not purposelessly nor by chance. ..."

That's pretty assertive if not arrogant rhetoric (to hammer home a point).

Then chapter CXIII middle
."But you make a theological discussion as to why one rho was added to Abraham's first name; and as to why one 'p' was added to Sarah's name, you use similar high-sounding disputations. But why do you not similarly investigate the reason why the name of Oshea the son of Nave (Nun), which his father gave him, was changed to Iesous? But since not only was his name altered, but he was also appointed successor to Moses, being the only one of his contemporaries who came out from Egypt, he led the surviving people into the Holy Land; and as he, not Moses, led the people into the Holy Land, and as he distributed it by lot to those who entered along with him, so also Iesous the Christ will turn again the dispersion of the people, and will distribute the good land to each one, though not in the same manner. For the former gave them a temporary inheritance, seeing he was neither Christ who is God, nor the Son of God; but the latter, after the holy resurrection, shall give us the eternal possession. The former, after he had been named Iesous, and after he had received strength from His Spirit, caused the sun to stand still."

Then chapter CXIII, end
."For I have 'proved' that it was Iesous who appeared to and conversed with Moses and Abraham and all the other patriarchs without exception, ministering to the will of the Father; who also, I say, came to be born man by the Virgin Mary, and lives for ever. For the latter is He after whom and by whom the Father will renew both the heaven and the earth; this is He who shall shine an eternal light in Jerusalem; this is he who is the king of Salem after the order of Melchizedek, and the eternal Priest of the Most High.
<paragraphed by me : no omission>
The former is said to have circumcised the people a second time with knives of stone (which was a sign of this circumcision with which Iesous Christ Himself has circumcised us from the idols made of stone and of other materials), and to have collected together those who were circumcised from the uncircumcision, ie., from the error of the world, in every place by the knives of stone, to wit, the words of our Lord Iesous. For I have shown that Christ was proclaimed by the prophets in parables a Stone and a Rock. Accordingly the knives of stone we shall take to mean His words, by means of which so many who were in error have been circumcised from uncircumcision with the circumcision of the heart, with which God by Iesous commanded those from that time to be circumcised who derived their circumcision from Abraham, saying that Iesous would circumcise a second time "with knives of stone" [ie. His words] those who entered into that holy land."

See two posts down for that last part of chapter CXIII without the colour

Dialogue chapter CXIII reads like a blueprint for how Christianity could have come about through a re-visioned Iesous
Last edited by MrMacSon on Sat Dec 04, 2021 6:54 pm, edited 9 times in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: JUSTIN MARTYR DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO, CH. XLVII

Post by MrMacSon »

fwiw (and for posterity for myself wrt any possible relationship b/w Paul & Justin)

J.M.G. Barlcay, Paul And Philo on Circumcision: Romans 2.25–9 in Social and Cultural Context, New Testament Studies, Vol 44 (4), 1998, pp. 536-56

Extract
Stimulated by the work of D. Boyarin, the topic of circumcision is examined in Philo (Spec. Leg. 1.1–11; Migr. Abr. 89–93) and Paul (Rom 2.25–9). Philo limits his allegorizing tendencies in view of the conservative instincts of the Jewish community. Paul is far more radical in relation to Jewish opinion: Rom 2.29 indicates his willingness to dispense with human praise in such matters. On the other hand, his intellectual framework is far less acculturated than that of Philo; pace Boyarin, none of the contrasts in Rom 2.28–9 reflect Hellenizing influence. Paul's hermeneutical revolution matched no contemporary form of Judaism.

Romans 2.25–9 (NRSV)
25 Circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law; but if you break the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 So, if those who are uncircumcised keep the requirements of the law, will not their uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 27 Then those who are physically uncircumcised but keep the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. 28 For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. 29 Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart—it is spiritual and not literal. Such a person receives praise not from others but from God.30
.


Guido Baltes, '‘Circumcision of the Heart’ in Paul: From a Metaphor of Torah Obedience to a Metaphor of Torah Polemics?', chapter 5 in The Challenge of the Mosaic Torah in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Brill, 2020 ('Studies on the Children of Abraham' series, Volume 7)

Abstract
It has often been claimed that a major difference between “Jewish Christianity” and “Pauline Christianity” was the continuation or discontinuation of male genital circumcision. Evidence for the abandonment of physical circumcision within “Pauline” circles has been drawn from Paul’s opposition against gentile circumcision in the letters to the Galatians and Corinthians, as well from his imagery of “circumcision of the heart” in Romans 2. However, a closer examination of the metaphor of “circumcision of the heart” and other images of “inward circumcision” in biblical, early Jewish and post-Pauline Christian texts shows that the Pauline use of the image stands closer to the early Jewish understanding, in which “inward” and “outward” circumcision complement each other, than to later Christian readings, in which the “inward” circumcision replaces or denigrates the “outward”. The Pauline metaphor of “heart circumcision” is therefore not an image of Tora abandonment, but rather of Tora obedience and can be placed well within the possible spectrum of other contemporary Jewish understandings of the metaphor.

Last edited by MrMacSon on Fri Dec 03, 2021 11:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: JUSTIN MARTYR DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO, CH. XLVII

Post by MrMacSon »

MrMacSon wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 8:36 pm
J.M.G. Barlcay, Paul And Philo on Circumcision: Romans 2.25–9 in Social and Cultural Context, New Testament Studies, Vol 44 (4), 1998, pp. 536-56

Extract
Stimulated by the work of D. Boyarin, the topic of circumcision is examined in Philo (Spec. Leg. 1.1–11; Migr. Abr. 89–93) and Paul (Rom 2.25–9). Philo limits his allegorizing tendencies in view of the conservative instincts of the Jewish community. Paul is far more radical in relation to Jewish opinion: Rom 2.29 indicates his willingness to dispense with human praise in such matters. On the other hand, his intellectual framework is far less acculturated than that of Philo; pace Boyarin, none of the contrasts in Rom 2.28–9 reflect Hellenizing influence. Paul's hermeneutical revolution matched no contemporary form of Judaism.

Guido Baltes, '‘Circumcision of the Heart’ in Paul: From a Metaphor of Torah Obedience to a Metaphor of Torah Polemics?', chapter 5 in The Challenge of the Mosaic Torah in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Brill, 2020 ('Studies on the Children of Abraham' series, Volume 7)

Abstract
It has often been claimed that a major difference between “Jewish Christianity” and “Pauline Christianity” was the continuation or discontinuation of male genital circumcision. Evidence for the abandonment of physical circumcision within “Pauline” circles has been drawn from Paul’s opposition against gentile circumcision in the letters to the Galatians and Corinthians, as well from his imagery of “circumcision of the heart” in Romans 2. However, a closer examination of the metaphor of “circumcision of the heart” and other images of “inward circumcision” in biblical, early Jewish and post-Pauline Christian texts shows that the Pauline use of the image stands closer to the early Jewish understanding, in which “inward” and “outward” circumcision complement each other, than to later Christian readings, in which the “inward” circumcision replaces or denigrates the “outward”. The Pauline metaphor of “heart circumcision” is therefore not an image of Tora abandonment, but rather of Tora obedience and can be placed well within the possible spectrum of other contemporary Jewish understandings of the metaphor.

It'd be interesting to know if these articles note Dialogue CXIII / 113

For I have proved that it was Jesus who appeared to and conversed with Moses, and Abraham, and all the other patriarchs without exception, ministering to the will of the Father; who also, I say, came to be born man by the Virgin Mary, and I lives for ever. For the latter is He after whom and by whom the Father will renew both the heaven and the earth; this is He who shall shine an eternal light in Jerusalem; this is he who is the king of Salem after the order of Melchizedek, and the eternal Priest of the Most High. The former [Hebrew Iesous] is said to have circumcised the people a second time with knives of stone (which was a sign of this circumcision with which Jesus Christ Himself has circumcised us from the idols made of stone and of other materials), and to have collected together those who were circumcised from the uncircumcision, i.e., from the error of the world, in every place by the knives of stone, to wit, the words of our Lord Jesus. For I have shown that Christ was proclaimed by the prophets in parables a Stone and a Rock. Accordingly the knives of stone we shall take to mean His words, by means of which so many who were in error have been circumcised from uncircumcision with the circumcision of the heart, with which God by Jesus commanded those from that time to be circumcised who derived their circumcision from Abraham, saying that Iesous would circumcise a second time with knives of stone those who entered into that holy land.

I wonder if, "Jesus Christ Himself has 'circumcised' us from the idols made of stone and of other materials," is a dig at the Romans

... a dig at the 'iconified,' deified Roman emperors

Can "circumcised from uncircumcision with the circumcision of the heart" be unpacked a few ways?
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: JUSTIN MARTYR DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO, CH. XLVII

Post by MrMacSon »

MrMacSon wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 8:36 pm It'd be interesting to know if these articles note Dialogue CXIII / 113

It seems Barclay's 'Paul And Philo on Circumcision' likely doesn't, as indicated by the References listed here
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... 34B0C05508


Judith Lieu refers to Justin in 'Circumcision, Women and Salvation, New Testament Studies, Vol 40 (3), 1994, pp. 358-70

The references are listed here https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals ... DEE5CD4439

For example:

.
2. Justin's use of the phrase ‘eternal just enactments’ in 46.2 must be an ironical echo of his opponent's assessment [dunno what text this refers to: Dialogue? The earlychristianwritings version has decrees in Dialogue 46(2)]

4. Justin's text here, in contrast to the LXX, aids his argument. In the LXX the text reads ‘every uncircumcised male who does not circumcise his uncircumcised flesh on the eighth day, that person shall be cut off from that race’ [Genesis 17:14]. Justin uses the same text in Dial. 10.3.

20. Justin, dependent on the Greek, believes it to be a matter of an additional a for Abraham, and p for Sarah [this would seem to be a reference to Dial. CXII, cited above, though that citation has rho.]
.

Lieu's reference [note] 16 is interesting (though is a different context to the OP)

Philo is not alone in linking circumcision with procreation; Gen.Rabb. 46.4 makes a direct link because God's covenant with Abraham included the promise of progeny. When Josephus says the purpose of circumcision was to prevent mixing he too may be making this sort of connection but with a view to the prohibition of intermarriage.

gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: JUSTIN MARTYR DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO, CH. XLVII

Post by gryan »

MrMacSon wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 8:20 pm
gryan wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 7:15 am What does Justin mean by "those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ"?

I take this to mean stopped or 'excised' from being in error in their beliefs, "to observe the same things as himself [ie. the same things as Christ]"

I think the key word is error, which appears a few times in Dialogue with Trypho, both before and after chapter XLVII.

nb. I have used the anglicized Greek, Iesous, for both 'Joshua' and Jesus in the following ...
@MrMacSon

The significance of the name Iesous, for both 'Joshua' and Jesus is duly noted (I've now altered the title of this thread to reflect this significant observation, which is only one part of a generally brilliant exposition provided above on the topic of what Justin meant by "Gentiles...circumcised from error by Christ").
gryan
Posts: 1120
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 4:11 am

Re: "Gentiles...circumcised from error by Christ [i.e. Iesous the Christ]", JUSTIN, DIALOGUE, CH. XLVII

Post by gryan »

gryan wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 7:15 am Re:"those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ"

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR
DIALOGUE WITH TRYPHO
CHAPTER XLVII -- JUSTIN COMMUNICATES WITH CHRISTIANS WHO OBSERVE THE LAW. NOT A FEW CATHOLICS DO OTHERWISE.

And Trypho again inquired, "But if some one, knowing that this is so, after he recognises that this man is Christ, and has believed in and obeys Him, wishes, however, to observe these [institutions], will he be saved?"

I said, "In my opinion, Trypho, such an one will be saved, if he does not strive in every way to persuade other men,--I mean those Gentiles who have been circumcised from error by Christ, to observe the same things as himself, telling them that they will not be saved unless they do so. This you did yourself at the commencement of the discourse, when you declared that I would not be saved unless I observe these institutions."

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... rypho.html
Re: The Greek word translated "error"
http://remacle.org/bloodwolf/eglise/justin/tryphon.htm

Justin
"those Gentiles who have been circumcised from [their] error (τῆς πλάνης) by Christ"

Cf. Rom 1:27b
"Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for
their error (τῆς πλάνης)."
Post Reply