In the middle of the second century, St. Justin the Martyr, as we already know, conversed with Tryphon the Jew. Whether his "Conversation" is a record of a real conversation or it is only a dialogical depiction of a typical, exemplary argument is not so important. The formulation of questions and their coverage are important. A Christian had to prove to a Jew that Jesus Christ was also God, and not only a man. Nevertheless, St. Justin also clearly emphasizes the fullness of humanity in Christ. He constantly refers to individual events in the earthly life of the Savior and explains their meaning and significance. With special attention he dwells on the origin of Christ from the house of David, from the tribe of Judah, from the family of Abraham. Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, during the Quirinian census, in Bethlehem. St. Justin speaks about the appearance of the star and the adoration of the Magi. He tells about the Baptist. He recounts the Gospel stories about the preaching and miracles of Christ. He describes the last days, the Last Supper, the prayer of Gethsemane, the taking in the garden, the trial of Pilate, the crucifixion, the apparitions after the resurrection. St. Justin reproduces the Gospel image of Christ, and precisely as a real historical image. Christ the Messiah, who came to fulfill prophecies. The reference to prophecies has the weight of a historical argument. The messianic dignity of Christ is also a historical feature. Christ became and was man, was born, grew, although He was from eternity as God. His whole life bears witness to the fullness and reality of his humanity, and especially to his sufferings – all these instructions of St. Justin are all the more powerful because it was precisely this that perplexed his interlocutors. In front of the Jews, he draws an image of the suffering Messiah, which is seductive and unacceptable to them. He proves to them a completely paradoxical position for them. And together with the affirmation of real humanity, it reveals the Divine dignity of Christ. He testifies to the same before the pagans in his Apologies.

To the second half of the second century belong the works of St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, a Western teacher in the place of his activity and Eastern in his origin and original connections. He was a pupil and listener of Polycarp in Smyrna and will forever remember his lessons. And Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostles, and especially of Ap. John, he dealt with many who had seen Christ. And in his conversations he told about them, "remembered their words, how and what he heard from them about the Lord, recounted about His miracles and teachings, about which he received tradition from people who themselves saw the Word of Life"... Polycarp receives the tradition of Christ from self-seers, and the image of Christ preserves in his memory all the vividness of the original direct living perception. In the same direct painting, St. Irenaeus remembers him. This connection with the self-witnesses is of decisive importance for Irenaeus, he always remembers it. And in his creations the living voice of the original vision still resounds. The immutability of the apostolic tradition is one of the most basic ideas of St. Irenaeus, and, above all, it extends to the image of Christ. Comparatively recently, the half-lost, half-forgotten work of St. Irenaeus, "The Proof of the Apostolic Preaching," has become available to us – an attempt at a brief, catechetical and edifying exposition of the basic tenets of the Christian faith. The main idea of this book is the fulfillment of prophecies. Christ is God, and St. Irenaeus speaks of this clearly and in detail. And in the last days, He became a true man and lived among people, preaching and healing. He was mocked, tortured and killed, crucified on the cross. And he was resurrected. St. Irenaeus gives the details of the Gospel. Like St. Justin, he proves that all these events were foretold by the prophets. And in the whole composition of this proof it is felt that he proceeds from the direct image of the Gospel and seeks Old Testament parallels to it. At the same time, he goes, in fact, along the line of greatest resistance. He proves a difficult position, difficult for doubters. And all the persuasiveness of the proof is connected with the direct vividness and authenticity of the Gospel image of Christ. The false teachers of the second century, the Gnostics, with whom St. Irenaeus fought and argued a lot, made this task easier for themselves by denying the real fullness of Christ's historical existence, by admitting the illusory nature of his humanity. Such an idea fits most easily into the framework of the usual pagan views. They corrupted the Gospel image. St. Irenaeus defends the ancient image and relies primarily on the unchanging historical memory emanating from a living vision. This is the apostolic vision of the historical Christ Jesus. But the apostles did not see a mere man, but a man and God, a God who became a man, and a man who was God. This image stands vividly in the consciousness of St. Irenaeus. He emphasizes both sides: both deity and humanity. The whole value of the face and work of Christ is that the true God became true man, "took from man the essence of the flesh," "became what we were." He was indeed born, although of the Virgin, he grew, ate and hungered, wept and grieved, really suffered and died, crucified on the cross. In the life of Christ, the human path has been traversed in its entirety, and therefore this life acquires for everyone the character of a prototype and an example. And at the same time, in the life of Christ, as well as both God and man, the real reunification of man with God was realized. In this realism lies all the pathos of St. Irenaeus, and he recognizes it as the apostolic tradition. This reference to the apostolic tradition was not disputed by the opponents of St. Irenaeus, and this provides a new historical argument: it was realism and historicism that had the proof of antiquity behind them. The same is evidenced by the works of St. Irenaeus' younger contemporary, the Carthaginian presbyter Tertullian. And his worldview is entirely determined by the real historical image of Christ.

There is no need to continue the historical study further. Subsequent centuries preserve the historical tradition of the past with complete fidelity and affirm their confession in the Gospel image of Christ. No one doubts the historical existence of the Savior even among the most evil haters of the Christian faith. And the hatred itself is directed at the very person of Christ, and in this lies a new proof of all the indisputability with which the people of that time perceived His image. It is especially expressive and convincing that such doubts have never been raised at all. The very defenders of modern mythology do not deny that since the beginning of the second century Christian writers (the very ones whose testimony we have just cited) have indisputably confessed "humanity," i.e., the historical reality of Christ, but they see in this an innovation that is not based on any historical memory or knowledge, "an invention dictated by the political and practical needs of the young Christian Church in her struggle for existence." in the struggle against gnosis, which supposedly continued the ideological movement that gave rise to the "synoptic" Gospels. In this assertion there is no agreement with the actual historical relations as they are established by sober and completely free critical investigation. In reality, there was no gap in the Church's perception and consciousness.

On the contrary, it was Gnosticism, which weakened (but did not at all denie) the historical reality of Christ's image by its squeamish Docetism, that rejected and changed the Gospel tradition. Outside the Church, they abhorred Gospel realism and therefore curtailed the Gospel story. It was here that the continuity was broken. And it is immediately felt that a struggle is being waged here with the established tradition. The break assumed by mythologists did not exist at all, did not manifest itself in any way.

Christ came into the world unrecognized. "Outsiders" simply did not notice Him in their time, hence the paucity of ancient non-Christian testimonies about Him. His image was remembered and preserved by those who were illumined by His Divine Person. His preaching and deeds. And they fixed their vision in the word - this is the first historical testimony about Him, fanned by all the vividness of direct personal communication. They conveyed the same vision in oral speech. All early Christianity gathers around the living historical image of Jesus of Nazareth, Christ, the Son of God. And in a harmonious chorus they bear witness to Him. Against this testimony, which goes back to eyewitnesses and to living communion, any doubt remains powerless, based only on the preconceived idea of the impossibility of the God-man.

Printed according to the edition: YMCA PRESS PARIS Publishing House "Dobro" Warsaw, 1929