Lesson 3: Argue with unregenerate men from the standpoint of their reasonable conscience
Justin makes a plea based on reason when he says in chapter three: “But if no one can convict us of anything, true reason forbids you, for the sake of a wicked rumour, to wrong blameless men, and indeed rather yourselves, who think fit to direct affairs, not by judgment, but by passion.”
Justin had on his side the “goodness” of the Christian people and thus the logical argument that they should not be punished. He, like Thomas Aquinas after him, believed that God had given all men an innate understanding of what is right and wrong.
Is it ok to use a philosophy of reason not based on scripture?
Justin did not appeal to godless reason but to reason on the foundation of the creator God who will judge all things: “For if, when ye have learned the truth, you do not what is just, you will be before God without excuse.”
Verses to remember:
*For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel. Rom. 2:14-16
*Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. I Pet. 3:16