<P> Apologeticus has the typical concerns of other apologetic works of his time, though it is presented in a much more complex manner . According to Wright, the text is constantly shifting "from the philosophical mode to the rhetorical and even juridical". Drawing from his training in literature and law, Tertullian demonstrates his talents as a Latinist and a rhetorician in an attempt to defend his newfound Christian faith . Tertullian's modern editor Otto Bardenhewer further contends that Apologeticus is calm in tone, "a model of judicial discussion". Unlike previous apologists of Christianity, whose appeals for tolerance were made in the name of reason and humanity, Tertullian, influenced by his legal training, spoke as a jurist convinced of the injustice of the laws under which the Christians were persecuted . </P> <P> The following outline and summary is based on Robert D. Sider's translation of Apologeticus . </P> <P> The first section of Apology is concerned with the unjust treatment of the Christians, which Tertullian believes stems from the ignorance of the pagan populace . Simply put, he argues that people praise what they know and hate what they do not . To Tertullian this becomes evident in the cases of people who once hated because they were ignorant towards that they hated, and once their ignorance was gone, so was their hate . Their hatred prevents them from investigating more closely and acknowledging the goodness that is inherent in Christianity, and so they remain ignorant . And there is good in Christianity, Tertullian claims, despite the fact that people remain ignorant to it . Even when brought forth and accused, true Christians do not tremble with fear or deny their faith . It is the authorities that display bad behavior when they deny proper criminal treatment to the Christians . He argues that if Christians are to be treated as criminals, they should not be treated differently from ordinary criminals, who are free to answer to charges, to cross-question and defend themselves . In reality, the Christians are not free to say anything that will clear their name or ensure that the judge conducts a fair trial . If an individual says he is not a Christian, he is tortured until he says he is; if he admits to being a Christian, the authorities want to hear that he is not and torture him until he denies it . They resort to any means necessary to force them to either deny or confess, anything to acquit him . If all this done to someone simply for admitting to be a Christian, then they are surely making a mockery of Roman laws by basing all the charges on the name "Christian". Before hating the name, one must look at and study the founder and the school . </P> <P> In addressing the charges, Tertullian plans to show the hypocrisy that surrounds these charges, demonstrating that those crimes exist among the pagan prosecutors as well . Then he analyzes the laws, claiming it suspicious that a law should refuse to be examined for error and worthless if it demands obedience without examination . If a law is found having an error and being unjust, should it not be reformed or even condemned? Faulty laws have no place in a just judicial system and should thus not be applied and observed . Here Tertullian mentions Nero, and to a certain extent Domitian, as examples of emperors who raged against the Christians through the use of unjust laws, simply for condemning "some magnificent good". He then brings up the good laws, and asks what has become of them; those that "restrained extravagance and bribery", "protected their (women's) modesty and sobriety", of the "conjugal happiness so fostered by high moral living that for nearly six hundred years after Rome was founded no sued for divorce". These traditions and laws are being ignored, neglected and destroyed and yet Rome chooses to concern itself with the "crimes" committed by the Christians . </P>

What is meant by the phrase the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church
find me the text answering this question