Tertullian's Apology is a strong defense of the Christian faith, but it sometimes seems more than a bit provocative. What's your overall impression? Is this work more likely to make the Roman authorities think twice about torturing and executing Christians, or is it more likely to irritate them. Or does it do something of both? How would you have reacted to this work if you had been a Roman official directly or indirectly involved in the trials of Christians?
Tertullian made an excellent defense of the faith in the fact that he calls out the beliefs of the Pagans as well as what the people believe Christianity entails. Also, he makes a great defense as to why Christians are model citizens who want to work for the good of the country and empire.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a Roman official, I would have definitely pay attention and pay heed to what Tertullian was saying. Not only was Tertullian giving an excellent justification, but it could lead to even more advancement of the Roman empire.
Kent Johnsen
It at first seems that Tertullian is trying to insult the people in the higher offices. This, I believe, may have been a mistake; however if you keep reading he points out how chirstians are model citizens that really could help the empire. The point where he would alienate the officals is when he shows the injustice of how the chirstians have been treated in comparison to other prisoners. No one in office wants to be shown that they are wrong, also if you alienate the officals it is hard to change the minds of the common people.
ReplyDeleteTrent Dean
"We do not worship your gods, because we know that there are no such beings."
ReplyDeleteIf I was a pagan, Tertullian starting out by telling me that my gods aren't real would offend me and we wouldn't get very far in the conversation. As a Christian, I agree with what he says, but he says it very aggressively and with little patience for paganism. His writing comes off to me as arrogant and gruff. I would think that people who have committed their lives to the pagan gods would not respond well to this apology.
Claire
I feel like he is trying to anger the higher ups in the Roman authorities. Although I don't think this was his intention, it is how it comes across. He manages to do this by basically telling them that their gods are all fake and that Christian God is the right one to believe in.
ReplyDeleteIf I were an official in Rome at this time, hearing this wouldn't make me want to stop persecuting the Christians. It would make me want to keep persecuting and executing them since I would be under the impression that they all believed that my gods were fake and not offer any guidance or reasoning behind it.
I can’t tell how Tertullian’s Apology would’ve made Roman authorities feel… In Chapter X, he writes, “we know that there are no such beings,” in reference to the deities worshipped in Roman culture. In Chapter XXI, he mentions “Nero’s cruel sword” which spilled “Christian blood.”
ReplyDeleteI think these things could put a Roman on the defensive. “You’re telling me my gods are not real? You’re reminding me of the bad things one of my leaders did to your people?” No one’s going to want to hear those things, and generally, when we get defensive, we close our minds to anything, reasonable or not, that someone else is saying to us.
The rest of his apology was well-written, and an excellent defense against the attacks of Christianity. As a Christian, I support it. But how would I have reacted had I been a Roman? I don’t think very well. I was raised as a Christian, and have always believed what I’ve learned about Christianity. I haven’t always been a very good Christian, but I cannot imagine completely leaving behind my faith to follow something new, no matter how convincing it may be. If I were a Roman, I think I would’ve become defensive of my Roman faith and tried not to pay much attention to Christianity, even when presented by highly intelligent apologetics.
The whole of Turtilian's work must be examined very closely to get the big picture in which he wishes to drive home. Yes, he does dive head first and brutally attack and very bluntly address the things being done to Christians. His defense is also done in the utmost Christain way. You see, he questions Roman authorities and their logic and reasoning skills. He does this, however, to show them that the claims brought against Christians cannot be valid.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, he attacks the claims that Christians are atheists and their supposed practices of incest and abortion of children. He does this in a way that brings the harsh reality of these things, getting images into the heads of the Roman leaders that the leaders likely would have instead not thought of. Then he sets them up with these images burning in their mind and their barbarian nature to ask them if one in the hope of eternity gains eternity by this measure; there is no point. Now on the atheist, he, rather than using the claim to refute, shows what an atheist is and infers, yes, if you mean atheist, as in not believing as you do, I suppose we Christians are Atheists. However, that claim is followed by the fact that we are not true atheists as we believe in a God and the one true God.
Tertullian also brings about peace through his talks, though likely through his learnings of Christian practices. He points to how by no means do Christians desire for the empire to fall but rather the ridiculous religions within the kingdom. In the here and now, I can define this with Mark 12:17. Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. Right here shows Christians could, in some form, submit to Rome; however, with their spiritual lives being given to God, the one true God, they could never submit to another religion.
How would I have felt as a Roman while I ponder this question in a modern sense as I exist today? Today in America, our political parties have created a sense of tribalism. People feel that our political parties describe us and who we are, even who we are in Christ. However, I say I am to God in all ways God calls me to, so if I am asked where I stand. I first stand with Christ's teachings in scripture, but if there is a matter which has no evidence of which way I must move. Then I get to choose for myself which way seems the best. So give me my faith, and I will use my faith to strengthen society however I can.
At least some Romans may have noticed this message giving a slightly lessened fear of Christians, even if not noticed immediately. You see, a person willing to be loyal so long as you allow them to go on loving and helping others can be a powerful ally. Turturtillian's Apology seems to overview that in many different ways. Give us our freedom; do not kill us, and you will have something to gain from what we offer. Then in fear, if you do not, you will experience unpleasantries, but he does not control those actions himself. Choose a war you cannot win or a people who can change your society. Romans would likely have had to have thought on this long and hard, and as we know, they did change their minds. Were the seeds planted here showing Christians were powerful but loyal? They may have been very well, even if it predated Christianities to freedom from Rome by around one hundred years.
Tanner Simon