What do we say about such an approach? Some will find it instinctively satisfying while others might think of it rather as a clever subterfuge. What I’d like to say here is that Calvin’s view, whether he knew it or not, was surprisingly ancient.42 In the second and early third centuries, well before the historian can speak of a final consensus in the church, and before there was any centralized church hierarchy that could even claim the prerogative of determining the books in Scripture, Christian thinkers were speaking of Scripture in tones that sound surprisingly “Protestant.”
This comes through most clearly not in intra-Christian discussion or debate (there were no Protestant-Catholic ecumenical dialogues) but in the encounters between Christians and their critics in educated Greco-Roman society. In the competitive and sometimes treacherous marketplace of ideas in the Greco-Roman world, a persistent indictment lobbed at Christianity was its apparent lack of verification. Apodeixis (Greek ἀπόδειξιϛ, from which we get our word “apodictic”), meaning proof or demonstration, is the main term used. For people like the famous second-century physician and philosopher Galen, Christianity was contemptible for its inability or unwillingness to “demonstrate” its teachings on philosophical grounds. Galen saw Jews and Christians as believing on the basis of unproved assertions.43 Some Christians ventured into the fray, interacting with the philosophical objections of the time in their efforts to present the claims of Christ to both Jews and Greeks.
The first of these is a man whose name is lost to posterity. We know him only from a report of an encounter he had late in life with a much younger man, a student of Greek philosophy named Justin, later known as “Justin Martyr” due to his death by martyrdom in about 165 C.E. In Justin’s report of this meeting, the old man introduced the young philosopher to the Hebrew prophets, who, he declares, “did not make their statements by means of proof [or demonstration: μετὰ ἀποδείξεωϛ] seeing that they were trustworthy witnesses of the truth above all proof” (Dial. 7.2).
To his own astonishment, when Justin turned his attention from the Greek philosophers to the Hebrew prophets, he found it to be as the old man had said.44 He read not only the prophets but also those whom he calls “the friends of Christ” and put his faith in the crucified one.
When later arguing with Trypho, a Jew, Justin constantly finds “proofs” for his Christian views in the Jewish Scriptures, Scriptures that Justin and Trypho held in common.45 Typical is Dialogue 57.4, where Justin offers to collect “proofs” on a topic, and then proceeds simply to quote and recap Scriptural passages from Genesis and Exodus. Or Dialogue 39.7–8, where we hear Trypho acknowledge: “For that the messiah suffers and comes again in glory and will receive eternal kingship over all peoples, all of whom will be subjected to his rule, this has been sufficiently proven46 by you from the aforementioned scriptures. But that this man [Jesus] is he, prove to us. And I replied, ‘It has been proven already, gentlemen, to those who have ears.…’” Justin’s reply shows his understanding that recognizing the truth of self-attesting Scripture requires the work of the Spirit, who gives ears to hear.
But for Justin, there were other writings, besides the writings of the Old Testament prophets, which conveyed the same divine power. Justin testifies that Jesus’ words, in the Gospels or Apostolic Memoirs, “possess a certain awe in themselves, and are able to put to shame those who turn aside from the straight path; while the sweetest rest is afforded those who diligently practice them” (Dial. 8.2).47 Justin also refers to “God’s voice spoken by the apostles of Christ” (Dial. 109), and to “the mighty word which his apostles … preached everywhere” (1 Apol. 45). In effect, this reflects the familiar division of the New Testament writings between “Gospel” and “the apostles.”
To Justin and the old man, the words of Jesus, his apostles, and the prophets, particularly their predictive words that came true in history, were the highest form of proof (1 Apol. 30.1). Thus Justin is keen to testify that Christians have not “believed empty fables, or undemonstrated words [ἀναποδείκτοιϛ λόγοιϛ] but words filled with the Spirit of God and big with power, and flourishing with grace” (Dial. 9.1). The words of Scripture, given by the Spirit of God, had a divine power in and of themselves, even if full recognition of that apodictic power came only to those equipped by the Spirit to hear.
Snyder believes “Justin’s use of proof language appears to be one of his signal contributions to the development of early Christian intellectual discourse.”48 Justin and his evangelizer, however, were not the only Christians who thought this way. Near the end of the second century Clement of Alexandria (ca. 145 – ca. 215) would join the conversation about justifying “proof.” Borrowing a concept from Aristotle in order to counter Aristotelian objections to Christianity, Clement speaks of God and of Scripture as a “first principle,” something that is true by necessity, though itself indemonstrable through logical proofs.
If a person has faith in the divine Scriptures and a firm judgment, then he receives as an irrefutable demonstration [ἀπόδειξιν ἀναντίρρητον] the voice of the God who has granted him those Scriptures. The faith no longer requires the confirmation of a demonstration [δι’ ἀποδείξεωϛ]. ‘Blessed are those who without seeing have believed’ (John 20.29). (Stromateis 2.2.9.6).49
Clement later expands on the idea.
For in the Lord we have the first principle of instruction, guiding us to knowledge from first to last … through the prophets and the gospel and the blessed apostles. And, if any one were to suppose that the first principle stood in need of something else, it could no longer be really maintained as a first principle. He then who of himself believes the Lord’s Scripture and his actual voice is worthy of belief…. Certainly we use it [Scripture] as a criterion [κριτερίῳ] for the discovery of the real facts. But whatever comes into judgment is not to be believed before it is judged, so that what is in need of judgment cannot be a first principle. With good reason therefore having apprehended our first principle by faith without proof [ἀναπόδεικτον], we get our proofs [ἀποδείξειϛ] about the first principle ex abundanti from the principle itself, and are thus trained by the voice of the Lord for the knowledge of the truth. … we do not wait for the witness of men, but we establish the point in question by the voice of the Lord, which is more to be relied on than any demonstration or rather which is the only real demonstration [ἀπόδειξιϛ]. (Stromateis 7.16.95)50
In tune with Justin and Clement is an anonymous author of the second or third century, who began his treatise on the resurrection this way:
The word of truth is free, and carries its own authority,51 disdaining to fall under any skilful argument, or to endure scrutiny through proof [διὰ ἀποδειξεωϛ] by its hearers. But it would be believed for its own nobility, and for the confidence due to him who sends it. Now the word of truth is sent from God; wherefore the freedom claimed by the truth is not arrogant. For being sent with authority, it were not fit that it should be required to produce proof [ἀποδείξειϛ] of what is said; since neither is there any [proof] beyond itself, which is God. For every proof [ἀπόδειξιϛ] is more powerful and trustworthy than that which it proves [ἀποδεικνυμένου]…. But nothing is either more powerful or more trustworthy than the truth (Res. 1.1–6).
Again, Scripture, the word of truth, because it comes from God, carries with it its own authority and does not depend on the skillful proofs of men. I cite one last expression of the theme, this one from Origen in his great work against Celsus written ca. 246, who traces this way of thinking back to its apostolic source.
We have to say, moreover, that the Gospel has a demonstration [ἀπόδειξιϛ] of its own, more divine than any established by Grecian dialectics. And this diviner method is called by the apostle the “demonstration [ἀπόδειξιν] of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor. 2.4) (CCels. 1.2).
It was Paul who testified to the Corinthians that his speech and message “were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor. 2:4), who reported that his gospel came to the Thessalonians “not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction” (1 Thess. 1:5), accepted “not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers” (1 Thess. 2:13).