Editing Justin Martyr (section)

==== ''Dialogue of Jason and Papiscus'' ====
The following excerpts from the ''Dialogue with Trypho'' of the [[Baptism of Jesus|baptism]] (''Dial''. 88:3,8) and [[Temptation of Christ|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.

{{blockquote|And then, when Jesus had come to the [[Jordan River|river Jordan]] where [[John the Baptist|John]] was [[Baptism|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 in Christianity|Holy Spirit]] fluttered down upon Him in the form of a dove, as the <U>apostles have written</U> about this very [[Christ]] of ours.|''Dial''. 88:3}}

{{blockquote|And when Jesus came to the Jordan, and being supposed to be the son of [[St. Joseph|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 [[God the Father|Father]] was going to say to Him – 'You are [[Son of God|My Son]], [[Gospel of Luke#Disputed verses|this day I have begotten you]]'."|''Dial''. 88:8<ref name="Skarsaune 1987 p. 198">Skarsaune (1987) ''The Proof From Prophecy'' pp.&nbsp;197–198,391–392; p.&nbsp;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.&nbsp;391–392 – "I have argued above that the narrative of Jesus' baptism in ''Dial''. 88:3 derives from the "recapitulation" source.&nbsp;... 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.&nbsp;... 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."</ref>}}

{{blockquote|...the [[Devil]] himself,...[was] called [[Serpent (Bible)|serpent]] by [[Moses]], the Devil by [[Job (Biblical figure)|Job]] and [[Zechariah (Hebrew prophet)|Zachariah]], and was addressed as [[Satan]]as 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 language|Hebrew]] and [[Aramaic language|Syrian]] tongue means "[[Apostate#Christianity|apostate]]", while "[[Serpent (Bible)|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 <U>memoirs of the apostles</U> 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<ref name="Skarsaune 1987 pp. 222–23,238,383–84,393">Skarsaune (1987) ''The Proof From Prophecy'' pp.&nbsp;222–23,238,383–84,393; p.&nbsp;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.&nbsp;... 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.&nbsp;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."</ref>}}

The quotations refer to the fulfillment of a prophecy of [[Psalm 2|Psalm 2:7]] found in the [[Western text-type]] of Luke 3:22.<ref name="Koester 1990 pp. 394–395">Koester (1990) ''Ancients Christians Gospels'' pp.&nbsp;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.&nbsp;... 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."</ref> Justin's mention of the fire on the Jordan without comment suggests that he was relying on an intermediate source for these gospel quotations,<ref name="Koester 1990 p. 395">Koester (1990) ''Ancients Christians Gospels'' p.&nbsp;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."</ref> 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''.<ref name="Rokeah 2002 pp. 20–21">Rokeah (2002) ''Justin Martyr and the Jews'' pp.&nbsp;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.&nbsp;... ''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''."</ref>

The ''Dialogue'' attributed to Aristo of Pella is believed to have furnished Justin with scriptural [[prooftext]]s 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]]''.<ref name="Skarsaune 2007 pp. 399–400">Skarsaune (2007) ''Jewish Believers in Jesus'' pp.&nbsp;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.&nbsp;... 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.&nbsp;... 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..."</ref>