Channels, Fall 2016

Page 8 Little • Emotions and the Divine Nature opinions, nor are governed by their passions (απαθης).” 42 Furthermore, those who follow God’s commands are described as impassible in both The Second Apology and the Dialogue with Trypho . 43 Thus, for Justin, to be impassible and not governed by one’s passions is a core element of virtue. Admittedly, whether he intends this to be understood as the governing of one’s passions and emotions or the complete erasure of one’s emotions is unclear. However, his nearly mystical passion for the truth 44 and previous insistence upon God still caring for virtue (with the implication being that we ought also to care for virtue) suggest that Justin views this righteous impassibility as the mastery of certain passions but not complete emotionlessness. His willingness to describe God in emotionally colored terms and to use terms that are semantically tied to strong lusts supports interpreting virtuous impassibility as the control and limitation of one’s passions rather than complete emotionlessness. 45 In the case of the divine nature, Justin affirms God’s freedom from corrupt desires without denying his providential care. God is fully righteous in part because he will never be subject to sinful lusts. He is beyond the passions that tormented the Homeric deities. God’s impassibility safeguards his moral purity without converting him into a static, uncaring being. The impassibility of God in Justin Martyr’s writings serves as an apophatic concept that safeguards the transcendence and righteousness of God. As a negative concept describing the ineffable God, impassibility does not serve as a positive, comprehensive description of God. Rather, it serves as a safeguard against ascribing improper passions of God. God is impassible and is therefore not vexed nor governed by the world that he created. Thus, Justin describes a self-sufficient and righteous God who is not swayed by changing passions but maintains providential interest in the world. Athenagoras Athenagoras the Athenian was one of the later Christian apologists who lived and wrote during the latter part of the second century. 46 He was likely based in Athens. 47 He claimed to be both “philosopher and Christian” 48 and presents his arguments in a more philosophically sensitive and intellectually sophisticated manner than Justin. 49 In his Legatio, the text in which he discusses impassibility, he is likely drawing heavily from the format established by Justin Martyr’s apologies. 50 In a similar fashion to Justin, he presents 42 Justin Martyr, The First Apology , 53. 43 Grant, The Early Christian Doctrine of God, 111. 44 See Goodenough, The Theology of Justin Martyr, 72-73. 45 This assessment is furthered by Justin’s apparent acceptance of Trypho’s claim that he believed of the Word that “he became man, of like passions with all, as you said previously.” It seems unlikely that Justin would assent to this if he thought the righteous eliminate all passions/emotions. See Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 58. 46 Rankin, Athenagoras, 6. 47 Ibid, 6-10. 48 Ibid, 14. 49 Parvis, “Justin Martyr and the Apologetic Tradition,” 125. 50 Parvis, “Justin Martyr and the Apologetic Tradition,” 123-125.