Skip to content
The Historic Faith
Sign in
All Questions
Question 5
He says Justin Martyr’s use of the Old Testament “opened my eyes up to the power of the Old Testament in persuading unbelievers,” similar to Acts; what would it look like for you to actually argue for Christ from Old Testament patterns the way Justin did—what fears, skill-gaps, or theological assumptions get exposed when you imagine doing that?
Another way to ask: What would it look like for you to persuade someone about Jesus using Old Testament patterns like Justin Martyr did? What fears, missing skills, or beliefs would get in the way?

Direct Answer The transcript suggests arguing like Justin would mean using detailed Old Testament patterns and “foreshadowings” to explain Jesus, not only quoting direct predictions. Imagining doing that exposes how dependent many of us are on the New Testament alone, and how untrained we may be in recognizing and explaining typology convincingly.

Support from Transcript:

  • Chuck says Justin “used [the Old Testament] tremendously effectively to explain and defend the faith.”
  • He describes Justin’s Dialogue with Trypho as a debate “over the Old Testament,” with a Jewish critic challenging Christian claims.
  • Chuck says Justin “opened my eyes up…to the power of the Old Testament in persuading unbelievers,” and links it to Acts: “this is how people came to faith…Old Testament prophecies.”
  • He emphasizes foreshadowings “not necessarily mentioned by New Testament writers, but the early Christians saw them nonetheless.”
  • He notes his own learning curve: reading the fathers included things “a little speculative…a little strange,” yet it expanded his ability to see patterns.
Discussion Follow-ups Which feels harder for you: finding the patterns, or defending them to a skeptic? What resources or practice would close that gap?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10
Back Questions Next