Yazmera Colvin
Professor Michael Oliver
Christianity and Culture 2101 BC
March 5, 2014
Truth
Friedrich Nietzsche once said “The word 'Christianity' is already a misunderstanding - in reality there has been only one Christian and he died on the Cross.” That leaves the unanswered question of what is a “true Christian.” Some may learn and adapt to everyday things because of what we are taught. Others may have to see it or witness it to believe it. Justin Martyr and Tertullian both took on the concept of truth within Christianity, believed that the Word of God was the only thing to be accepted; however their approaches were contrary to one another.
Justin Martyr was a Christian who believed that Christianity was not about the religion, but it was the reasoning or philosophy behind it. Although there is no evidence of him actually saying that philosophy goes with Christianity. In the First Apology he uses philosophy to argue why his belief is right. It was his duty to show Emperor Titus Aelius Adrianus Antoninus Pius Augustus Caesar, that it would be easier and safer for him and his peers to just deny their faith in God when they were asked. He then says, “But we scorn to purchase life at the expense of a lie.” Their value of life would mean nothing after denying God, they might as well consider themselves as evil as those who killed the martyrs for accepting God to be their ruler.
Martyr uses Socrates to explain how Christians were not the only ones being murdered and prosecuted for something they believed in. Socrates tried to separate the men away from demons, who judged him upon his faith. Ultimately he was murdered by the same men he attempted to save because they sided with the demons and felt he was an atheist. “Logos” ...
... middle of paper ...
... you cannot put words with everything, just feel what is right and go with it. However, he provides a wonderful example of the fact that denying a connection puts one in a situation in which one is likely to make just such a connection without realizing it.
Justin Martyr explains that the people are demons, while Tertullian proclaims that is not the individual who is evil; it is the soul of the individual. Therefore when the martyrs are prosecuted it is not because they believe in Christianity it is because deep down inside they are channeling their evilness to those who are trying to an explanation or philosophic view on God. Justin focuses more on persuading the readers, giving them facts, and other situations to refer to. Tertullian, whom believes in divine revelation, does not even refer to the bible; he feels as if what better evidence than God himself is.
When asking how important the state is, the law asks; “Is your…country to be honored more than…all your ancestors…that it counts for more among the gods and sensible men, that you must worship it…?” Rather than a statement, Socrates makes his point that the law must be upheld, even in his case of a death sentence. It is important to note that Socrates accepted his fate, even though he felt the accusations against him were false. Yet, as if speaking on behalf of the law, recognized that escaping would only turn those untruthful indictments into the truth, and as a destroyer of laws; “You will strengthen the conviction of the jury that they passed the right sentence on you.” By the definition of the word martyr, as one who dies for a cause, in this instance the laws of the state, Socrates is justifiably fitting of that label. The narrative of the Roman woman Perpetua is a tale of martyrdom, but the cause is from a higher power beyond the Roman
Socrates is faced with a death sentence after getting accused of devaluing the Athens religion through his practice of philosophy. Most people will feel outraged and betrayed, but not Socrates. He accepts his punishment and takes it on as faith.
Many people have gone through their lives conforming their beliefs and practices for the sake of fitting in or for the happiness of others, but Socrates was not one of these people. In “The Apology” Plato shows Socrates unwillingness to conform through a speech given by Socrates while on trial for supposedly corrupting the youth of Athens and believing in false gods. Although the title of the dialogue was labeled “The Apology,” Socrates’ speech was anything but that, it was a defense of himself and his content along his philosophical journey. At no time during the trial was Socrates willing to change his ways in order to avoid punishment, two reasons being his loyalty to his God and his philosophical way of life.
A Christian worldview leads us to believe in moral absolutes, miracles, human dignity, and the possibility of redemption. True Christianity is more than a set of ideas used at church. Christianity, as taught in the Bible, is itself a worldview. The Bible never dis...
In Plato’s Apology, Socrates uses religious appeals, proof by contradictions and various examples to argue for his innocence in court. Socrates is forced to argue for the sake of his life to prove that he is not guilty. In Socrates’ speech, however, he is not apologizing for anything instead, the word comes from the Greek word “apologia,” that translates to a speech made in defense. In this paper, I will argue that Socrates’ decision to stay in Athens and to accept suicide was unethical, because he purposefully antagonized the people who control his fate and this ultimately led to the death penalty.
The martyrs in the document take on the role of mediator between God and man, spreading the Word of God to the masses of people and the relaying to them his holy message, in a sense taking on the role of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Perpetua, one of the martyrs when confronted about her faith by her father retorts, “I am Christian” (para.6). Another martyr, Felicity, confidently defends her faith and proclaims it openly by stating, “Stand fast in the faith, and love you all one another; and be not offended because of our passion” (para.20). This statement portrays to the reader the ...
Some skeptics, such as Candida Moss, claim that Christians view Christian martyrdom as “special” or “unique.” She argues that if Christian martyrdom is support for the truth of Christianity then other religions martyrdom should also be evidence for the truth of those religions. She writes, “why would early Christians have been martyred if Christianity weren 't true? Today, we are pointedly aware that martyrdom is not an exclusively Christian practice; virtually every religious group holds the deaths of their heroes in high esteem, and many people have died for religions that no longer exist. Yet many still declare that there is something special about the character and nature of Christian martyrs.”2 However, Moss doesn 't seem to completely understand the
"Was Socrates a Prophet? Similarities between Socrates and Jesus Christ." The Ancient Greeks: Tragedy, Philosophy, and Politics. Eastman School of Music, 24 Mar. 2011. Web. 25 Feb. 2012.
Some of the best sources of information about Socrates' philosophical views are the early dialogues of his student Plato, who tried to provide a faithful picture of the methods and teachings of the great master. The Apology is one of the many-recorded dialogues about Socrates. It is about how Socrates was arrested and charged with corrupting the youth, believing in no god(s) (Atheism) and for being a Sophist. He attended his trial and put up a good argument. I believe that Socrates was wrongfully accused and should not have been sentenced to death. Within the duration of this document, I will be discussing the charges laid against Socrates and how he attempted to refute the charges.
The official definition of a martyr is “a person who sacrifices something of great value for the sake of principle”; therefore Jon Hus is undoubtedly a martyr (Merriam-Webster 1). His radical ideas caught the attention of thousands of followers while simultaneously undermining core practices of the Church. His beliefs led to what is known as the Hussite Reformation and ultimately, his death. John Hus’s death was ordered by the Church because his unorthodox principles threatened to disperse or even diminish some of the Church’s power and would cause an abundance of changes within the religious system as a whole during the 15th century, and possibly forever. The fears of the Church would later prove to be legitimate concerns but their efforts to prevent these changes from occurring failed, and not only did they prevent these changes from happening, but the Church’s attempts to get rid of John Hus’s ideals only “fanned the flames his messages ignited” (Joyner 52). Now, centuries after his death, John Hus is still revered by many as “one of the first true reformers of the church” (Joyner 42).
Imagine the time just after the death of Socrates. The people of Athens were filled with questions about the final judgment of this well-known, long-time citizen of Athens. Socrates was accused at the end of his life of impiety and corruption of youth. Rumors, prejudices, and questions flew about the town. Plato experienced this situation when Socrates, his teacher and friend, accepted the ruling of death from an Athenian court. In The Last Days of Socrates, Plato uses Socrates’ own voice to explain the reasons that Socrates, though innocent in Plato’s view, was convicted and why Socrates did not escape his punishment as offered by the court. The writings, “Euthyphro,” “The Apology,” “Crito,” and “Pheado” not only helped the general population of Athens and the friends and followers of Socrates understand his death, but also showed Socrates in the best possible light. They are connected by their common theme of a memoriam to Socrates and the discussion of virtues. By studying these texts, researchers can see into the culture of Athens, but most important are the discussions about relationships in the book. The relationships between the religion and state and individual and society have impacted the past and are still concerns that are with us today.
In this literature review I will discuss both Socrates and Jesus Christ (Jesus). I will compare and distinguish them, by their trial, misdeeds (through the view of society), law, justice and punishment. In addition, I will write about their influence in today’s society and what impact they have made through time. Both Socrates and Jesus had many things in common yet, they we’re different. Both had different religious beliefs. While, Socrates was polytheistic, believing in several gods. Jesus, in the other hand was monotheism, believed in only one God. Both were charged, tried, and executed for their “radical” behavior with society. Overall, both men sacrificed themselves for the possible chance of change.
Plato’s “Defense of Socrates” follows the trial of Socrates for charges of corruption of the youth. His accuser, Meletus, claims he is doing so by teaching the youth of Athens of a separate spirituality from that which was widely accepted.
Tertullian spent his life dedicated to his faith in a way that few have done. He was bold and wasn’t afraid of making a defense, he knew how to. Because Tertullian wasn’t afraid to stand up, he made an impact on both the secular and Christian world. The results of his writings were that many came to believe, as it was the only logical thing to do after reading his defense. Many Christians changed their ways to pursue holiness because of Tertullian. And today we could still learn much from him, as Christians have strayed far from
In conclusion, Irenaeus’ attacks against Christian Heresies had a major impact on the social world of that time and influenced many other heresy hunters to follow, so it is evident that his description Gnosticism and other Christian heresies is historically accurate. We can assume that the heretical groups of Christians still exists but that the true Christians don’t even acknowledge them as a threat. During Irenaeus’ time they were a threat because Christianity was still developing and people were trying to understand Christianity, and what it really is. All these critics and writers helped in developing a true understanding of Christianity.