BOOK II.
CHAP. I.—ON THE WORLD.
I. Although all the discussions in the preceding book have had
reference to the world and its arrangements, it now seems to follow mat
we should specially re-discuss a few points respecting the world itself,
i.e., its beginning and end, or those dispensations of Divine Providence
which have taken place between the beginning and the end, or those events
which are supposed to have occurred before the creation of the world, or
are to take place after the end.
In this investigation, the first point which clearly appears is,
that the world in all its diversified and varying conditions is composed
not only of rational and diviner natures, and of a diversity of bodies,
but of dumb animals, wild and tame beasts, of birds, and of all things
which live in the waters ;[1] then, secondly, of places, i.e., of the heaven
or heavens, and of the earth or water, as well as of the air, which is
intermediate, and which they term aether, and of everything which proceeds
from the earth or is born in it. Seeing, then,[2] there is so great a variety
in the world, and so great a diversity among rational beings themselves,
on account of which every other variety and diversity also is supposed
to have come into existence, what other cause than this ought to be assigned
for the existence of the world, especially if we have regard to that end
by means of which it was shown in the preceding book that all things are
to be restored to their original condition? And if this should seem to
be logically stated, what other cause, as we have already said, are we
to imagine for so great a diversity in the world, save the diversity and
variety in the movements and declensions of those who fell from that primeval
unity and harmony in which they were at first created by God, and who,
being driven from that state of goodness, and drawn in various directions
by the harassing influence of different motives and desires, have changed,
according to their different tendencies, the single and undivided goodness
of their nature into minds of various sorts?[3]
2. But God, by the ineffable skill of His wisdom, transforming
and restoring all things, in whatever manner they are made, to some useful
aim, and to the common advantage of all, recalls those very creatures which
differed so much from each other in mental conformation to one agreement
of labour and purpose; so that, although they are under the influence of
different motives, they nevertheless complete the fulness and perfection
of one world, and the very variety of minds tends to one end of perfection.
For it is one power which grasps and holds together all the diversity of
the world, and leads the different movements towards one work, lest so
immense an undertaking as that of the world should be dissolved by the
dissensions of souls. And for this reason we think that God, the Father
of all things, in order to ensure the salvation of all His creatures through
the ineffable plan of His word and wisdom, so arranged each of these, that
every spirit, whether soul or rational existence, however called, should
not be compelled by force, against the liberty of his own will, to any
other course than that to which the motives of his own mind led him (lest
by so doing the power of exercising free-will should seem to be taken away,
which certainly would produce a change in the nature of the being itself);
and that the varying purposes of these would be suitably and usefully adapted
to the harmony of one world, by some of them requiring help, and others
being able to give it, and others again being the cause of struggle and
contest to those who are making progress, amongst whom their diligence
would be deemed more worthy of approval, and the place of rank obtained
after victory be held with greater certainty, which should be established
by the difficulties of the contest.[1]
3. Although the whole world is arranged into offices of different
kinds, its condition, nevertheless, is not to be supposed as one of internal
discrepancies and discordances; but as our one body is provided with many
members, and is held together by one soul, so I am of opinion that the
whole world also ought to be regarded as some huge and immense animal,
which is kept together by the power and reason of God as by one soul. This
also, I think, is indicated in sacred Scripture by the declaration of the
prophet, "Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord;"[2] and again,
"The heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool;"[3] and by the
Saviour's words, when He says that we are to swear "neither by heaven,
for it is God's throne; nor by the earth, for it is His footstool:"[4]
To the same effect also are the words of Paul, in his address to the Athenians,
when he says, "In Him we live, and move, and have our being."[5] For how
do we live, and move, and have our being in God, except by His comprehending
and holding together the whole world by His power? And how is heaven the
throne of God, and the earth His footstool, as the Saviour Himself declares,
save by His power filling all things both in heaven and earth, according
to the Lord's own words? And that God, the Father of all things, fills
and holds together the world with the fulness of His power, according to
those passages which we have quoted, no one, I think, will have any difficulty
in admitting. And now, since the course of the preceding discussion has
shown that the different movements of rational beings, and their varying
opinions, have brought about the diversity that is in the world, we must
see whether it may not be appropriate that this world should have a termination
like its beginning. For there is no doubt that its end must be sought amid
much diversity and variety; which variety, being found to exist in the
termination of the world, will again furnish ground and occasion for the
diversities of the other world which is to succeed the present.
4. If now, in the course of our discussion, it has been ascertained
that these things are so, it seems to follow that we next consider the
nature of corporeal being, seeing the diversity in the world cannot exist
without bodies. It is evident from the nature of things themselves, that
bodily nature admits of diversity and variety of change, so that it is
capable of undergoing all possible transformations, as, e.g., the conversion
of wood into fire, of fire into smoke, of smoke into air, of oil into fire.
Does not food itself, whether of man or of animals, exhibit the same ground
of change? For whatever we take as food, is converted into the substance
of our body. But how water is changed into earth or into air, and air again
into fire, or fire into air, or air into water, although not difficult
to explain, yet on the present occasion it is enough merely to mention
them, as our object is to discuss the nature of bodily matter. By matter,
therefore, we understand that which is placed under bodies, viz., that
by which, through the bestowing and implanting of qualities, bodies exist;
and we mention four qualities—heat, cold, dryness, humidity. These four
qualities being implanted in the ulh , or matter (for matter is found to
exist in its own nature without those qualities before mentioned), produce
the different kinds of bodies. Although this matter is, as we have said
above, according to its own proper nature without qualities, it is never
found to exist without a quality. And I cannot understand how so many distinguished
men have been of opinion that this matter, which is so great, and possesses
such properties as to enable it to be sufficient for all the bodies in
the world which God willed to exist, and to be the attendant and slave
of the Creator for whatever forms and species He wished in all things,
receiving into itself whatever qualities He desired to bestow upon it,
was uncreated, i.e., not formed by God Himself, who is the Creator of all
things, but that its nature and power were the result of chance. And I
am astonished that they should find fault with those who deny either God's
creative power or His providential administration of the world, and accuse
them of impiety for thinking that so great a work as the world could exist
without an architect or overseer; while they themselves incur a similar
charge of impiety in saying that matter is uncreated, and co-eternal with
the uncreated God. According to this view, then, if we suppose for the
sake of argument that matter did not exist, as these maintain, saying that
God could not create anything when nothing existed, without doubt He would
have been idle, not having matter on which to operate, which matter they
say was furnished Him not by His own arrangement, but by accident; and
they think that this, which was discovered by chance, was able to suffice
Him for an undertaking of so vast an extent, and for the manifestation
of the power of His might, and by admitting the plan of all His wisdom,
might be distinguished and formed into a world. Now this appears to me
to be very absurd, and to be the opinion of those men who are altogether
ignorant of the power and intelligence of un-crested nature. But that we
may see the nature of things a little more clearly, let it be granted that
for a little time matter did not exist, and that God, when nothing formerly
existed, caused those things to come into existence which He desired, why
are we to suppose that God would create matter either better or greater,
or of another kind, than that which He did produce from His own power and
wisdom, in order that that might exist which formerly did not? Would He
cream a worse and inferior matter, or one the same as that which they call
uncreated? Now I think it will very easily appear to any one, that neither
a better nor inferior matter could have assumed the forms and species of
the world, if it had not been such as that which actually did assume them.
And does it not then seem impious to call that uncreated, which, if believed
to be formed by God, would doubtless be found to be such as that which
they call uncreated?
5. But that we may believe on the authority of holy Scripture
that such is the case, hear how in the book of Maccabees, where the mother
of seven martyrs exhorts her son to endure torture, this truth is confirmed;
for she says, "I ask of thee, my son, to look at the heaven and the earth,
and at all things which are in them, and beholding these, to know that
God made all these things when they did not exist."[1] In the book of the
Shepherd also, in the first commandment, he speaks as follows: "First of
all believe that there is one God who created and arranged all things,
and made all things to come into existence, and out of a state of nothingness."[2]
Perhaps also the expression in the Psalms has reference to this: "He spake,
and they were made; He commanded, and they were created."[3] For the words,
"He spake, and they were made," appear to show that the substance of those
things which exist is meant; while the others, "He commanded, and they
were created," seem spoken of the qualities by which the substance itself
has been moulded.
CHAP. II. — ON THE PERPETUITY OF BODILY NATURE.
I. On this topic some are wont to inquire whether, as the Father
generates an uncreated Son, and brings forth a Holy Spirit, not as if He
had no previous existence, but because the Father is the origin and source
of the Son or Holy Spirit, and no anteriority or posteriority can be understood
as existing in them; so also a similar kind of union or relationship can
be understood as subsisting between rational natures and bodily matter.
And that this point may be more fully and thoroughly examined, the commencement
of the discussion is generally directed to the inquiry whether this very
bodily nature, which bears the lives and contains the movements of spiritual
and rational minds, will be equally eternal with them, or will altogether
perish and be destroyed. And that the question may be determined with greater
precision, we have, in the first place, to inquire if it is possible for
rational natures to remain altogether incorporeal after they have reached
the summit of holiness and happiness (which seems to me a most difficult
and almost impossible attainment), or whether they must always of necessity
be united to bodies. If, then, any one could show a reason why it was possible
for them to dispense wholly with bodies, it will appear to follow,: hat
as a bodily nature, created out of nothing after intervals of time, was
produced when it did not exist, so also it must cease to be when the purposes
which it served had no longer an existence.
2. If, however, it is impossible for this point to be at all maintained,
viz., that any other nature than the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit can live
without a body, the necessity of logical reasoning compels us to understand
that rational natures were indeed created at the beginning, but that material
substance was separated from them only in thought and understanding, and
appears to have been formed for them, or after them, and that they never
have lived nor do live without it; for an incorporeal life will rightly
be considered a prerogative of the Trinity alone. As we have remarked above,
therefore, that material substance of this world, possessing a nature admitting
of all possible transformations, is, when dragged down to beings of a lower
order, moulded into the crasser and more solid condition of a body, so
as to distinguish those visible and varying forms of the world; but when
it becomes the servant of more perfect and more blessed beings, it shines
in the splendour of celestial bodies, and adorns either the angels of God
or the sons of the resurrection with the clothing of a spiritual body,
out of all which will be filled up the diverse and varying state of the
one world. But if any one should desire to discuss these matters more fully,
it will be necessary, with all reverence and fear of God, to examine the
sacred Scriptures with greater attention and diligence, to ascertain whether
the secret and hidden sense within them may perhaps reveal anything regarding
these matters; and something may be discovered in their abstruse and mysterious
language, through the demonstration of the Holy Spirit to those who are
worthy, after many testimonies have been collected on this very point.
CHAP. III. — ON THE BEGINNING OF THE WORLD, AND ITS CAUSES.
I. The next subject of inquiry is, whether there was any other
world before the one which now exists; and if so, whether it was such as
the present, or somewhat different, or inferior; or whether there was no
world at all, but something like that which we understand will be after
the end of all things, when the kingdom shall be delivered up to God, even
the Father; which nevertheless may have been the end of another world,—of
that, namely, after which this world took its beginning; and whether the
various lapses of intellectual natures provoked God to produce this diverse
and varying condition of the world. This point also, I think, must be investigated
in a similar way, viz., whether after this world there will be any (system
of) preservation and amendment, severe indeed, and attended with much pain
to those who were unwilling to obey the word of God, but a process through
which, by means of instruction and rational training, those may arrive
at a fuller understanding of the truth who have devoted themselves in the
present life to these pursuits, and who, after having had their minds purified,
have advanced onwards so as to become capable of attaining divine wisdom;
and after this the end of all things will immediately follow, and there
will be again, for the correction and improvement of those who stand in
need of it, another world, either resembling that which now exists, or
better than it, or greatly inferior; and how long that world, whatever
it be that is to come after this, shall continue; and if there will be
a time when no world shall anywhere exist, or if there has been a time
when there was no world at all; or if there have been, or will be several;
or if it shall ever come to pass that there will be one resembling another,
like it in every respect, and indistinguishable from it.
2. That it may appear more clearly, then, whether bodily matter
can exist during intervals of time, and whether, as it did not exist before
it was made, so it may again be resolved into non-existence, let us see,
first of all, whether it is possible for any one to live without a body.
For if one person can live without a body, all things also may dispense
with them; seeing our former treatise has shown that all things tend towards
one end. Now, if all things may exist without bodies, there will undoubtedly
be no bodily substance, seeing there will be no use for it. But how shall
we understand the words of the apostle in those passages, in which, discussing
the resurrection of the dead, he says, "This corruptible must put on incorruption,
and this mortal must put on immortality. When this corruptible shall have
put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then
shall be brought to pass the saying which is written, Death is swallowed
up in victory ! Where, O death, is thy victory? O death, thy sting has
been swallowed up: the sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is
the law."[1] Some such meaning, then, as this, seems to be suggested by
the apostle. For can the expression which he employs, "this corruptible,"
and "this mortal," with the gesture, as it were, of one who touches or
points out, apply to anything else than to bodily matter? This matter of
the body, then, which is now corruptible shall put on incorruption when
a perfect soul, and one furnished with the marks[2] of incorruption, shall
have begun to inhabit it. And do not be surprised if we speak of a perfect
soul as the clothing of the body (which, on account of the Word of God
and His wisdom, is now named incorruption), when Jesus Christ Himself,
who is the Lord and Creator of the soul, is said to be the clothing of
the saints, according to the language of the apostle, "Put ye on the Lord
Jesus Christ."[3] As Christ, then, is the clothing of the soul, so for
a kind of reason sufficiently intelligible is the soul said to be the clothing
of the body, seeing it is an ornament to it, covering and concealing its
mortal nature. The expression, then, "This corruptible must put on incorruption,"
is as if the apostle had said, "This corruptible nature of the body must
receive the clothing of incorruption—a soul possessing in itself incorruptibitity,"
because it has been clothed with Christ, who is the Wisdom and Word of
God. But when this body, which at some future period we shall possess in
a more glorious state, shall have become a partaker of life, it will then,
in addition to being immortal, become also incorruptible. For whatever
is mortal is necessarily also corruptible; but whatever is corruptible
cannot also be said to be mortal. We say of a stone or a piece of wood
that it is corruptible, but we do not say that it follows that it is also
mortal. But as the body partakes of life, then because life may be, and
is, separated from it, we consequently name it mortal, and according to
another sense also we speak of it as corruptible. The holy apostle therefore,
with remarkable insight, referring to the general first cause of bodily
matter, of which (matter), whatever be the qualities with which it is endowed
(now indeed carnal, but by and by more refined and pure, which are termed
spiritual), the soul makes constant use, says, "This corruptible must put
on incorruption." And in the second place, looking to the special cause
of the body, he says, "This mortal must put on immortality." Now, what
else will in-corruption and immortality be, save the wisdom, and the word,
and the righteousness of God, which mould; and clothe, and adorn the soul?
And hence it happens that it is said, "The corruptible will put on incorruption,
and the mortal immortality." For although we may now make great proficiency,
yet as we only know in part, and prophesy in part, and see through a glass,
darkly, those very things which we seem to understand, this corruptible
does not yet put on incorruption, nor is this mortal yet clothed with immorality;
and as this training of ours in the body is protracted doubtless to a longer
period, up to the time, viz., when those very bodies of ours with which
we are enveloped may, on account of the word of God, and His wisdom and
perfect righteousness, earn incorruptibility and immortality, therefore
is it said, "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal
must put on immortality."
3. But, nevertheless, those who think that rational creatures
can at any time lead an existence out of the body, may here raise such
questions as the following. If it is true that this corruptible shall put
on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality, and that death is
swallowed up at the end; this shows that nothing else than a material nature
is to be destroyed, on which death could operate, while the mental acumen
of those who are in the body seems to be blunted by the nature of corporeal
matter. If, however, they are out of the body, then they will altogether
escape the annoyance arising from a disturbance of that kind. But as they
will not be able immediately to escape all bodily clothing, they are just
to be considered as inhabiting more refined and purer bodies, which possess
the property of being no longer overcome by death, or of being wounded
by its sting; so that at last, by the gradual disappearance of the material
nature, death is both swallowed up, and even at the end exterminated, and
all its sting completely blunted by the divine grace which the soul has
been rendered capable of receiving, and has thus deserved to obtain incorruptibility
and immortality. And then it will be deservedly said by all, "O death,
where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? The sting of death is
sin." If these conclusions, then, seem to hold good, it follows that we
must believe our condition at some future time to be incorporeal; and if
this is admitted, and all are said to be subjected to Christ, this (incorporeity)
also must necessarily be bestowed on all to whom the subjection to Christ
extends; since all who are subject to Christ will be in the end subject
to God the Father, to whom Christ is said to deliver up the kingdom; and
thus it appears that then also the need of bodies will cease.[1] And if
it ceases, bodily matter returns to nothing, as formerly also it did not
exist.
Now let us see what can be said in answer to those who make these
assertions. For it will appear to be a necessary consequence that, if bodily
nature be annihilated, it must be again restored and created; since it
seems a possible thing that rational natures, from whom the faculty of
free-will is never taken away, may be again subjected to movements of some
kind, through the special act of the Lord Himself, lest perhaps, if they
were always to occupy a condition that was unchangeable, they should be
ignorant that it is by the grace of God and not by their own merit that
they have been placed in that final state of happiness; and these movements
will undoubtedly again be attended by variety and diversity of bodies,
by which the world is always adorned; nor will it ever be composed (of
anything) save of variety and diversity,—an effect which cannot be produced
without a bodily matter.
4. And now I do not understand by what proofs they can maintain
their position, who assert that worlds sometimes come into existence which
are not dissimilar to each other, but in all respects equal. For if there
is said to be a world similar in all respects (to the present), then it
will come to pass that Adam and Eve will do the same things which they
did before: there will be a second time the same deluge, and the same Moses
will again lead a nation numbering nearly six hundred thousand out of Egypt;
Judas will also a second time betray the Lord; Paul will a second time
keep the garments of those who stoned Stephen; and everything which has
been done in this life will be said to be repeated,—a state of things which
I think cannot be established by any reasoning, if souls are actuated by
freedom of will, and maintain either their advance or retrogression according
to the power of their will. For souls are not driven on in a cycle which
returns after many ages to the same round, so as either to do or desire
this or that; but at whatever point the freedom of their own will aims,
thither do they direct the course of their actions. For what these persons
say is much the same as if one were to assert that if a medimnus of grain
were to be poured out on the ground, the fall of the grain would be on
the second occasion identically the same as on the first, so that every
individual grain would lie for the second time close beside that grain
where it had been thrown before, and so the medimnus would be scattered
in the same order, and with the same marks as formerly; which certainly
is an impossible result with the countless grains of a medimnus, even if
they were to be poured out without ceasing for many ages. So therefore
it seems to me impossible for a world to be restored for the second time,
with the same order and with the same amount of births, and deaths, and
actions; but that a diversity of worlds may exist with changes of no unimportant
kind, so that the state of another world may be for some unmistakeable
reasons better (than this), and for others worse, and for others again
intermediate. But what may be the number or measure of this I confess myself
ignorant, although, if any one can tell it, I would gladly learn.
5. But this world, which is itself called an age, is said to be
the conclusion of many ages. Now the holy apostle teaches that in that
age which preceded this, Christ did not suffer, nor even in the age which
preceded that again; and I know not that I am able to enumerate the number
of anterior ages in which He did not suffer. I will show, however, from
what statements of Paul I have arrived at this understanding. He says,
"But now once in the consummation of ages, He was manifested to take away
sin by the sacrifice of Himself."[1] For He says that He was once made
a victim, and in the consummation of ages was manifested to take away sin.
Now that after this age, which is said to be formed for the consummation
of other ages, there will he other ages again to follow, we have clearly
learned from Paul himself, who says, "That in the ages to come He might
show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness towards us."[2]
He has not said, "in the age to come," nor "in the two ages to come," whence
I infer that by his language many ages are indicated. Now if there is something
greater than ages, so that among created beings certain ages may be understood,
but among other beings which exceed and surpass visible creatures, (ages
still greater) (which perhaps will be the case at the restitution of all
things, when the whole universe will come to a perfect termination), perhaps
that period in which the consummation of all things will take place is
to be understood as something more than an age. But here the authority
of holy Scripture moves me, which says, "For an age and more."[3] Now this
word "more" undoubtedly means something greater than an age; and see if
that expression of the Saviour, "I will that where I am, these also may
be with Me; and as I and Thou are one, these also may be one in Us,"[4]
may not seem to convey something more than an age and ages, perhaps even
more than ages of ages, — that period, viz., when all things are now no
longer in an age, but when God is in all.
6. Having discussed these points regarding the nature of the world
to the best of our ability, it does not seem out of place to inquire what
is the meaning of the term world, which in holy Scripture is shown frequently
to have different significations. For what we call in Latin mundus, is
termed in Greek kosmos , and kosmos signifies not only a world, but also
an ornament. Finally, in Isaiah, where the language of reproof is directed
to the chief daughters of Sion, and where he says, "Instead of an ornament
of a golden head, thou wilt have baldness on account of thy works,"[5]
he employs the same term to denote ornament as to denote the world, viz.,
kosmos . For the plan of the world is said to be contained in the clothing
of the high priest, as we find in the Wisdom of Solomon, where he says,
"For in the long garment was the whole world."[6] That earth of ours, with
its inhabitants, is also termed the world, as when Scripture says, "The
whole world lieth in wickedness."[7] Clement indeed, a disciple of the
apostles, makes mention of those whom the Greeks called 'A ntikqones ,
and other parts of the earth, to which no one of our people can approach,
nor can any one of those who are there cross over to us, which he also
termed worlds, saying, "The ocean is impassable to men; and those are words
which are on the other side of it, which are governed by these same arrangements
of the ruling God."[8] That universe which is bounded by heaven and earth
is also called a world, as Paul declares: "For the fashion of this world
will pass away."[9] Our Lord and Saviour also points out a certain other
world besides this visible one, which it would indeed be difficult to describe
and make known. He says, "I am not of this world."[10] For, as if He were
of a certain other world, He says, "I am not of this world." Now, of this
world we have said beforehand, that the explanation was difficult; and
for this reason, that there might not be afforded to any an occasion of
entertaining the supposition that we maintain the existence of certain
images which the Greeks call "ideas:" for it is certainly alien to our
(writers) to speak of an incorporeal world existing in the imagination
alone, or in the fleeting. world of thoughts; and how they can assert either
that the Saviour comes from thence, or that the saints will go thither,
I do not see. There is no doubt, however, that something more illustrious
and excellent than this present world is pointed out by the Saviour, at
which He incites and encourages believers to aim. But whether that world
to which He desires to allude be far separated and divided from this either
by situation, or nature, or glory; or whether it be superior in glory and
quality, but confined within the limits of this world (which seems to me
more probable), is nevertheless uncertain, and in my opinion an unsuitable
subject for human thought. But from what Clement seems to indicate when
he says, "The ocean is impassable to men, and those worlds which are behind
it," speaking in the plural number of the worlds which are behind it, which
he intimates are administered and governed by the same providence of the
Most High God, he appears to throw out to us some germs of that view by
which the whole universe of existing things, celestial and super-celestial,
earthly and infernal, is generally called one perfect world, within which,
or by which, other worlds, if any there are, must be supposed to be contained.
For which reason he wished the globe of the sun or moon, and of the other
bodies called planets, to be each termed worlds. Nay, even that pre-eminent
globe itself which they call the non-wandering ( aplanh ), they nevertheless
desire to have properly called world. Finally, they summon the book of
Baruch the prophet to bear witness to this assertion, because in it the
seven worlds or heavens are more clearly pointed out. Nevertheless, above
that sphere which they call non-wandering ( aplanh ), they will have another
sphere to exist, which they say, exactly as our heaven contains all things
which are under it, comprehends by its immense size and indescribable extent
the spaces of all the spheres together within its more magnificent circumference;
so that all things are within it, as this earth of ours is under heaven.
And this also is believed to be called in the holy Scriptures the good
land, and the land of the living, having its own heaven, which is higher,
and in which the names of the saints are said to be written, or to have
been written, by the Saviour; by which heaven that earth is confined and
shut in, which the Saviour in the Gospel promises to the meek and merciful.
For they would have this earth of ours, which formerly was named "Dry,"
to have derived its appellation from the name of that earth, as this heaven
also was named firmament from the title of that heaven. But we have treated
at greater length of such opinions in the place where we had to inquire
into the meaning of the declaration, that in the beginning "God made the
heavens and the earth." For another heaven and another earth are shown
to exist besides that "firmanent" which is said to have been made after
the second day, or that "dry land" which was afterwards called "earth."
Certainly, what some say of this world, that it is corruptible because
it was made, and yet is not corrupted, because the will of God, who made
it and holds it together lest corruption should rule over it, is stronger
and more powerful than corruption, may more correctly be supposed of that
world which we have called above a "non-wandering "sphere, since by the
will of God it is not at all subject to corruption, for the reason that
it has not admired any causes of corruption, seeing it is the world of
the saints and of the thoroughly purified, and not of the wicked, like
that world of ours. We must see, moreover, lest perhaps it is with reference
to this that the apostle says, "While we look not at the things which are
seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen
are temporal, but the things which are unseen are eternal. For we know
that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a
building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens."[1]
And when he says elsewhere, "Because I shall see the heavens, the works
of Thy fingers,"[2] and when God said, regarding all things visible, by
the mouth of His prophet, "My hand has formed all these things,"[3] He
declares that that eternal house in the heavens which He promises to His
saints was not made with hands, pointing out, doubtless, the difference
of creation in things which are seen and in those which are not seen. For
the same thing is not to be understood by the expressions, "those things
which are not seen," and "those things which are invisible." For those
things which are invisible are not only not seen, but do not even possess
the property of visibility, being what the Greeks call aswmata , i.e.,
incorporeal; whereas those of which Paul says, "They are not seen," possess
indeed the property of being seen, but, as he explains, are not yet beheld
by those to whom they are promised.
7. Having sketched, then, so far as we could understand, these three opinions regarding the end of all things, and the supreme blessedness, let each one of our readers determine for himself, with care and diligence, whether any one of them can be approved and adopted.[1] For it has been said that we must suppose either that an incorporeal existence is possible, after all things have become subject to Christ, and through Christ to God the Father, when God, will be all and in all; or that when, notwithstanding all things have been made subject to Christ, and through Christ to God (with whom they formed also one spirit, in respect of spirits being rational natures), then the bodily substance itself also being united to most pure and excellent spirits, and being changed into an ethereal condition in proportion to the quality or merits of those who assume it (according to the apostle's words, "We also shall be changed"), will shine forth in splendour; or at least that when the fashion of those things which are seen passes away, and all corruption has been shaken off and cleansed away, and when the whole of the space occupied by this world, in which the spheres of the planets are said to be, has been left behind and beneath,[2] then is reached the fixed abode of the pious and the good situated above that sphere, which is called non-wandering ( aplanhs ), as in a good land, in a land of the living, which will be inherited by the meek and gentle; to which land belongs that heaven (which, with its more magnificent extent, surrounds and contains that land itself) which is called truly and chiefly heaven, in which heaven and earth, the end and perfection of all things, may be safely and most confidently placed,—where, viz., these, after their apprehension and their chastisement for the offences which they have undergone by way of purgation, may, after having fulfilled and discharged every obligation, deserve a habitation in that land; while those who have been obedient to the word of God, and have henceforth by their obedience shown themselves capable of wisdom, are said to deserve the kingdom of that heaven or heavens; and thus the prediction is more worthily fulfilled, "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth;"[3] and, "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for they shall inherit the kingdom of heaven;"[4] and the declaration in the Psalm, "He shall exalt thee, and thou shalt inherit the land."[5] For it is called a descent to this earth, but an exaltation to that which is on high. In this way, therefore, does a sort of road seem to be opened up by the departure of the saints from that earth to those heavens; so that they do not so much appear to abide in that land, as to inhabit it with an intention, viz., to pass on to the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, when they have reached that degree of perfection also.
CHAP. IV.—THE GOD OF THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS, AND THE FATHER OF OUR
LORD JESUS CHRIST, IS THE SAME GOD.
I. Having now briefly arranged these points in order as we best
could, it follows that, agreeably to our intention from the first, we refute
those who think that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is a different
God from Him who gave the answers of the law to Moses, or commissioned
the prophets, who is the God of our fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
For in this article of faith, first of all, we must be firmly grounded.
We have to consider, then, the expression of frequent recurrence in the
Gospels, and subjoined to all the acts of our Lord and Saviour, "that it
might be fulfilled which was spoken by this or that prophet," it being
manifest that the prophets are the prophets of that God who made the world.
From this therefore we draw the conclusion, that He who sent the prophets,
Himself predicted what was to be foretold of Christ. And there is no doubt
that the Father Himself, and not another different from Him, uttered these
predictions. The practice, moreover, of the Saviour or His apostles, frequently
quoting illustrations from the Old Testament, shows that they attribute
authority to the ancients. The injunction also of the Saviour, when exhorting
His disciples to the exercise of kindness, "Be ye perfect, even as your
Father who is in heaven is perfect; for He commands His sun to rise upon
the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust,"[6]
most evidently suggests even to a person of feeble understanding, that
He is proposing to the imitation of His disciples no other God than the
maker of heaven and the bestower of the rain. Again, what else does the
expression, which ought to be used by those who pray, "Our Father who art
in heaven,"[7] appear to indicate, save that God is to be sought in the
better parts of the world, i.e., of His creation? Further, do not those
admirable principles which He lays down respecting oaths, saying that we
ought not to "swear either by heaven, because it is the throne of God;
nor by the earth, because it is His footstool,"[1] harmonize most clearly
with the words of the prophet, "Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My
footstool?"[2] And also when casting out of the temple those who sold sheep,
and oxen, and doves, and pouring out the tables of the money-changers,
and saying, "Take these things, hence, and do not make My Father's house
a house of merchandise,"[3] He undoubtedly called Him His Father, to whose
name Solomon had raised a magnificent temple. The words, moreover, "Have
you not read what was spoken by God to Moses: I am the God of Abraham,
and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; He is not a God of the dead,
but of the living,"[4] most clearly teach us, that He called the God of
the patriarchs (because they were holy, and were alive) the God of the
living, the same, viz., who had said in the prophets, "I am God, and besides
Me there is no God."[5] For if the Saviour, knowing that He who is written
in the law is the God of Abraham, and that it is the same who says, "I
am God, and besides Me there is no God, acknowledges that very one to be
His Father who is ignorant of the existence of any other God above Himself,
as the heretics suppose, He absurdly declares Him to be His Father who
does not know of a greater God. But if it is not from ignorance, but from
deceit, that He says there is no other God than Himself, then it is a much
greater absurdity to confess that His Father is guilty of falsehood. From
all which this conclusion is arrived at, that He knows of no other Father
than God, the Founder and Creator of all things.
2. It would be tedious to collect out of all the passages in the
Gospels the proofs by which the God of the law and of the Gospels is shown
to be one and the same. Let us touch briefly upon the Acts of the Apostles,[6]
where Stephen and the other apostles address their prayers to that God
who made heaven and earth, and who spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets,
calling Him the "God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob;" the God who "brought
forth His people out of the land of Egypt." Which expressions undoubtedly
clearly direct our understandings to faith in the Creator, and implant
an affection for Him in those who have learned piously and faithfully thus
to think of Him; according to the words of the Saviour Himself, who, when
He was asked which was the greatest commandment in the law, replied, "Thou
shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul,
and with all thy mind. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love
thy neighbour as thyself." And to these He added: "On these two commandments
hang all the law and the prophets."[7] How is it, then, that He commends
to him whom He was instructing, and was leading to enter on the office
of a disciple, this commandment above all others, by which undoubtedly
love was to be kindled in him towards the God of that law, inasmuch as
such had been declared by the law in these very words? But let it be granted,
notwithstanding all these most evident proofs, that it is of some other
unknown God that the Saviour says, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with
all thy heart," etc., etc. How, in that case, if the law and the prophets
are, as they say, from the Creator, i.e., from another God than He whom
He calls good, shall that appear to be logically said which He subjoins,
viz., that "on these two commandments hang the law and the prophets?" For
how shall that which is strange and foreign to God depend upon Him? And
when Paul says, "I thank my God, whom I serve my spirit from my forefathers
with pure conscience,"[8] he clearly shows that he came not to some new
God, but to Christ. For what other forefathers of Paul can be intended,
except those of whom he says, "Are they Hebrews? so am I: are they Israelites?
so am I."[9] Nay, will not the very preface of his Epistle to the Romans
clearly show the same thing to those who know how to understand the letters
of Paul, viz., what God he preaches? For his words are: "Paul, the servant
of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart to the Gospel of God,
which He had promised afore by His prophets in the holy Scriptures concerning
His Son, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and
who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit
of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead of Christ Jesus our Lord,"[10]etc.
Moreover, also the following, "Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox
that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? or saith he it
altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that
he that plougheth should plough in hope, and he that thresheth in hope
of partaking of the fruits."[11] By which he manifestly shows that God,
who gave the law on our account, i.e., on account of the apostles, says,
"Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn;"
whose care was not for oxen, but for the apostles, who were preaching the
Gospel of Christ. In other passages also, Paul, embracing the promises
of the law, says, "Honour thy father and thy mother, which is the first
commandment with promise; that it may be well with thee, and that thy days
may be long upon the land, the good land, which the Lord thy God will give
thee."[1] By which he undoubtedly makes known that the law, and the God
of the law, and His promises, are pleasing to him.
3. But as those who uphold this heresy are sometimes accustomed
to mislead the hearts of the simple by certain deceptive sophisms, I do
not consider it improper to bring forward the assertions which they are
in the habit of making, and to refute their deceit and falsehood. The following,
then, are their declarations. It is written, that "no man hath seen God
at any time."[2] But that God whom Moses preaches was both seen by Moses
himself, and by his fathers before him; whereas He who is announced by
the Saviour has never been seen at all by any one. Let us therefore ask
them and ourselves whether they maintain that He whom they acknowledge
to be God, and allege to be a different God from the Creator, is visible
or invisible. And if they shall say that He is visible, besides being proved
to go against the declaration of Scripture, which says of the Saviour,
"He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature,"[3]
they will fall also into the absurdity of asserting that God is corporeal.
For nothing can be seen except by help of form, and size, and colour, which
are special properties of bodies. And if God is declared to be a body,
then He will also be found to be material, since every body is composed
of matter. But if He be composed of matter, and matter is undoubtedly corruptible,
then, according to them, God is liable to corruption! We shall put to them
a second question. Is matter made, or is it uncreated, i.e., not made?
And if they shall answer that it is not made, i.e., uncreated, we shall
ask them if one portion of matter is God, and the other part the world?
But if they shall say of matter that it is made, it will undoubtedly follow
that they confess Him whom they declare to be God to have been made!—a
result which certainly neither their reason nor ours can admit. But they
will say, God is invisible. And what will you do? If you say that He is
invisible by nature, then neither ought He to be visible to the Saviour.
Whereas, on the contrary, God, the Father of Christ, is said to be seen,
because "he who sees the Son," he says, "sees also the Father."[4] This
certainly would press us very hard, were the expression not understood
by us more correctly of understanding, and not of seeing. For he who has
understood the Son will understand the Father also. In this way, then,
Moses too must be supposed to have seen God, not beholding Him with the
bodily eye, but understanding Him with the vision of the heart and the
perception of the mind, and that only in some degree. For it is manifest
that He, viz., who gave answers to Moses, said, "You shall not see My face,
but My hinder parts."[5] These words are, of course, to be understood in
that mystical sense which is befitting divine words, those old wives' fables
being rejected and despised which are invented by ignorant persons respecting
the anterior and posterior parts of God. Let no one indeed suppose that
we have indulged any feeling of impiety in saying that even to the Saviour
the Father is not visible. Let him consider the distinction which we employ
in dealing with heretics. For we have explained that it is one thing to
see and to be seen, and another to know and to be known, or to understand
and to be understood.[6] To see, then, and to be seen, is a property of
bodies, which certainly will not be appropriately applied either to the
Father, or to the Son, or to the Holy Spirit, in their mutual relations
with one another. For the nature of the Trinity surpasses the measure of
vision, granting to those who are in the body, i.e., to all other creatures,
the property of vision in reference to one another. But to a nature that
is incorporeal and for the most part intellectual, no other attribute is
appropriate save that of knowing or being known, as the Saviour Himself
declares when He says, "No man knoweth the Son, save the Father; nor does
any one know the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal
Him."[7] It is clear, then, that He has not said, "No one has seen the
Father, save the Son;" but, "No one knoweth the Father, save the Son."
4. And now, if, on account of those expressions which occur in the Old Testament, as when God is said to be angry or to repent, or when any other human affection or passion is described, (our opponents) think that they are furnished with grounds for refuting us, who maintain that God is altogether impassible, and is to be regarded as wholly free from all affections of that kind, we have to show them that similar statements are found even in the parables of the Gospel; as when it is said, that he who planted a vineyard, and let it out to husbandmen, who slew the servants that were sent to them, and at last put to death even the son, is said in anger to have taken away the vineyard from them, and to have delivered over the wicked husbandmen to destruction, and to have handed over the vineyard to others, who would yield him the fruit in its season. And so also with regard to those citizens who, when the head of the household had set out to receive for himself a kingdom, sent messengers after him, saying, "We will not have this man to reign over us;''[1] for the head of the household having obtained the kingdom, returned, and in anger commanded them to be put to death before him, and burned their city with fire. But when we read either in the Old Testament or in the New of the anger of God, we do not take such expressions literally, but seek in them a spiritual meaning, that we may think of God as He deserves to be thought of. And on these points, when expounding the verse in the second Psalm, "Then shall He speak to them in His anger, and trouble them in His fury,''[2] we showed, to the best of our poor ability, how such an expression ought to be understood.
CHAP. V.—ON JUSTICE AND GOODNESS.
I. Now, since this consideration has weight with some, that the
leaders of that heresy (of which we have been speaking) think they have
established a kind of division, according to which they have declared that
justice is one thing and goodness another, and have applied this division
even to divine things, maintaining that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ
is indeed a good God, but not a just one, whereas the God of the law and
the prophets is just, but not good; I think it necessary to return, with
as much brevity as possible, an answer to these statements. These persons,
then, consider goodness to be some such affection as would have benefits
conferred on all, although the recipient of them be unworthy and undeserving
of any kindness; but here, in my opinion, they have not rightly applied
their definition, inasmuch as they think that no benefit is conferred on
him who is visited with any suffering or calamity. Justice, on the other
hand, they view as .that quality which rewards every one according to his
deserts. But here, again, they do not rightly interpret the meaning of
their own definition. For they think that it is just to send evils upon
the wicked and benefits upon the good; i.e., so that, according to their
view, the just God does not appear to wish well to the bad, but to be animated
by a kind of hatred against them. And they gather together instances of
this, Wherever they find a history in the Scriptures of the Old Testament,
relating, e.g., the punishment of the deluge, or the fate of those who
are described as perishing in it, or the, destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah
by a shower of fire and brimstone, or the falling of all the people in
the wilderness on account of their sins, so that none of those who had
left Egypt were found to have entered the promised land, with the exception
of Joshua and Caleb. Whereas from the New Testament they gather together
words of compassion and piety, through which the disciples are trained
by the Saviour, and by which it seems to be declared that no one is good
save God the Father only; and by this means they have ventured to style
the Father of the Saviour Jesus Christ a good God, but to say that the
God of the world is a different one, whom they are pleased to term just,
but not also good.
2. Now I think they must, in the first place, be required to show,
if they can, agreeably to their own definition, that the Creator is just
in punishing according to their deserts, either those who perished at the
time of the deluge, or the inhabitants of Sodom, or those who had quitted
Egypt, seeing we sometimes behold committed crimes more wicked and detestable
than those for which the above-mentioned persons were destroyed, while
we do not yet sere every sinner paying the penalty of his misdeeds. Will
they say that He who at one time was just has been made good? Or will they
rather be of opinion that He is even now just, but is patiently enduring
human offences, while that then He was not even just, inasmuch as He exterminated
innocent and sucking children along with cruel and ungodly giants? Now,
such are their opinions, because they know not how to understand anything
beyond the letter; otherwise they would show how it is literal justice
for sins to be visited upon the heads of children to the third and fourth
generation, and on children's children after them. By us, however, such
things are not understood literally; but, as Ezekiel taught[3] when relating
the parable, we inquire what is the inner meaning contained in the parable
itself. Moreover, they ought to explain this also, how He is just, and
rewards every one according to his merits, who punishes earthly-minded
persons and the devil, seeing they have done nothing worthy of punishment.[4]
For they could not do any good if, according to them, they were of a wicked
and ruined nature. For as they style Him a judge, He appears to be a judge
not so much of actions as of natures; and if a bad nature cannot do good,
neither can a good nature do evil. Then, in the next place, if He whom
the), call good is good to all, He is undoubtedly good also to those who
are destined to perish. And why does He not save them? If He does not desire
to do so, He will be no longer good; if He does desire it, and cannot effect
it, He will not be omnipotent. Why do they not rather hear the Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ in the Gospels, preparing fire for the devil and
his angels? And how shall that proceeding, as penal as it is sad, appear
to be, according to their view, the work of the good God? Even the Saviour
Himself, the Son of the good God, protests in the Gospels, and declares
that "if signs and wonders had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would
have repented[1] long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes." And when He
had come near to those very cities, and had entered their territory, why,
pray, does He avoid entering those cities, and exhibiting to them abundance
of signs and wonders, if it were certain that they would have repented,
after they had been performed, in sackcloth and ashes? But as He does not
do this, He undoubtedly abandons to destruction those whom the language
of the Gospel shows not to have been of a wicked or mined nature, inasmuch
as it declares they were capable of repentance. Again, in a certain parable
of the Gospel, where the king enters in to see the guests reclining at
the banquet, he beheld a certain individual not clothed with wedding raiment,
and said. to him, "Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding
garment?" and then ordered his servants, "Bind him hand and foot, and cast
him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth."[2]
Let them tell us who is that king who entered in to see the guests, and
finding one amongst them with unclean garments, commanded him to be bound
by his servants, and thrust out into outer darkness. Is he the same whom
they call just? How then had he commanded good and bad alike to be invited,
without directing their merits to be inquired into by his servants? By
such procedure would be indicated, not the character of a just God who
rewards according to men's deserts, as they assert, but of one who displays
undiscriminating goodness towards all. Now, if this must necessarily be
understood of the good God, i.e., either of Christ or of the Father of
Christ, what other objection can they bring against the justice of God's
judgment? Nay, what else is there so unjust charged by them against the
God of the law as to order him who had been invited by His servants, whom
He had sent to call good and bad alike, to be bound hand and foot, and
to be thrown into outer darkness, because he had on unclean garments?
3. And now, what we have drawn from the authority of Scripture
ought to be sufficient to refute the arguments of the heretics. It will
not, however, appear improper if we discuss the matter with them shortly,
on the grounds of reason itself. We ask them, then, if they know what is
regarded among men as the ground of virtue and wickedness, and if it appears
to follow that we can speak of virtues in God, or, as they think, in these
two Gods. Let them give an answer also to the question, whether they consider
goodness to be a virtue; and as they will undoubtedly admit it to be so,
what will they say of injustice? They will never certainly, in my opinion,
be so foolish as to deny that justice is a virtue. Accordingly, if virtue
is a blessing, and justice is a virtue, then without doubt justice is goodness.
But if they say that justice is not a blessing, it must either be an evil
or an indifferent thing. Now I think it folly to return any answer to those
who say that justice is an evil, for I shall have the appearance of replying
either to senseless words, or to men out of their minds. How can that appear
an evil which is able to reward the good with blessings, as they themselves
also admit? But if they say that it is a thing of indifference, it follows
that since justice is so, sobriety also, and prudence, and all the other
virtues, are things of indifference. And what answer shall we make to Paul,
when he says, "If there be any virtue, and, if there be any praise, think
on these things, which ye have learned, and received, and heard, and seen
in me?"[3] Let them learn, therefore, by searching the holy Scriptures,
what are the individual virtues, and not deceive themselves by saying that
that God who rewards every one according to his merits, does, through hatred
of evil, recompense the wicked with evil, and not because those who have
sinned need to be treated with severer remedies, and because He applies
to them those measures which, with the prospect of improvement, seem nevertheless,
for the present, to produce a feeling of pain. They do not read what is
written respecting the hope of those who were destroyed in the deluge;
of which hope Peter himself thus speaks in his first Epistle: "That Christ,
indeed, was put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit, by
which He went and preached to the spirits who were kept in prison, who
once were unbelievers, when they awaited the long-suffering of God in the
days of Noah, when the ark was preparing, in which a few, i.e., eight souls,
were saved by water. Whereunto also baptism by a like figure now saves
you."[4] And with regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, let them tell us whether
they believe the prophetic words to be those of the Creator God—of Him,
viz., who is related to have rained upon them a shower of fire and brimstone.
What does Ezekiel the prophet say of them? "Sodom," he says, "shall be
restored to her former condition."[1] But why, in afflicting those who
are deserving of punishment, does He not afflict them for their good?—who
also says to Chaldea, "Thou hast coals of fire, sit upon them; they will
be a help to thee."[2] And of those also who fell in the desert, let them
hear what is related in the seventy-eighth Psalm, which bears the superscription
of Asaph; for he says, "When He slew them, then they sought Him."[3] He
does not say that some sought Him after others had been slain, but he says
that the destruction of those who were killed was of such a nature that,
when put to death, they sought God. By all which it is established, that
the God of the law and the Gospels is one and the same, a just and good
God, and that He confers benefits justly, and punishes with kindness; since
neither goodness without justice, nor justice without goodness, can display
the (real) dignity of the divine nature.
We shall add the following remarks, to which we are driven by
their subtleties. If justice is a different thing from goodness, then,
since evil is the opposite of good, and injustice of justice, injustice
will doubtless be something else than an evil; and as, in your opinion,
the just man is not good, so neither will the unjust man be wicked; and
again, as the good man is not just, so the wicked man also will not be
unjust. But who does not see the absurdity, that to a good God one should
be opposed that is evil; while to a just God, whom they allege to be inferior
to the good, no one should be opposed! For there is none who can be called
unjust, as there is a Satan who is called wicked. What, then, are we to
do? Let us give up the position which we defend, for they will not be able
to maintain that a bad man is not also unjust, and an unjust man wicked.
And if these qualities be indissolubly inherent in these opposites, viz.,
injustice in wickedness, or wickedness in injustice, then unquestionably
the good man will be inseparable from the just man, and the just from the
good; so that, as we speak of one and the same wickedness in malice and
injustice, we may also hold the virtue of goodness and justice to be one
and the same.
4. They again recall us, however, to the words of Scripture, by bringing forward that celebrated question of theirs, affirming that it is written, "A bad tree cannot produce good fruits; for a tree is known by its fruit."[4] What, then, is their position? What sort of tree the law is, is shown by its fruits, i.e., by the language of its precepts. For if the law be found to be good, then undoubtedly He who gave it is believed to be a good God. But if it be just rather than good, then God also will be considered a just legislator. The Apostle Paul makes use of no circumlocution, when he says, "The law is good; and the commandment is holy, and just, and good."[5] From which it is clear that Paul had not learned the language of those who separate justice from goodness, but had been instructed by that God, and illuminated by His Spirit, who is at the same time both holy, and good, and just; and speaking by whose Spirit he declared that the commandment of the law was holy, and just, and good. And that he might show more clearly that goodness was in the commandment to a greater degree than justice and holiness, repeating his words, he used, instead of these three epithets, that of goodness alone, saying, "Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid."[6] As he knew that goodness was the genus of the virtues, and that justice and holiness were species belonging to the genus, and having in the former verses named genus and species together, he fell back, when repeating his words, on the genus alone. But in those which follow he says, "Sin wrought death in me by that which is good,"[6] where he sums up generically what he had beforehand explained specifically. And in this way also is to be understood the declaration, "A good man, out of the good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth good things; and an evil man, out of the evil treasure, bringeth forth evil things."[7] For here also he assumed that there was a genus in good or evil, pointing out unquestionably that in a good man there were both justice, and temperance, and prudence, and piety, and everything that can be either called or understood to be good. In like manner also he said that a man was wicked who should without any doubt be unjust, and impure, and unholy, and everything which singly makes a bad man. For as no one considers a man to be wicked without these marks of wickedness (nor indeed can he be so), so also it is certain that without these virtues no one will be deemed to be good. There still remains to them, however, that saying of the Lord in the Gospel, which they think is given them in a special manner as a shield, viz., "There is none good but one, God the Father."[8] This word they declare is peculiar to the Father of Christ, who, however, is different from the God who is Creator of all things, to which Creator he gave no appellation of goodness. Let us see now if, in the Old Testament, the God of the prophets and the Creator and Legislator of the word is not called good. What are the expressions which occur in the Psalms? "How good is God to Israel, to the upright in heart!"[1] and, "Let Israel now say that He is good, that His mercy endureth for ever;"[2] the language in the Lamentations of Jeremiah, "The Lord is good to them that wait for Him, to the soul that seeketh Him."[3] As therefore God is frequently called good in the Old Testament, so also the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is styled just in the Gospels. Finally, in the Gospel according to John, our Lord Himself, when praying to the Father, says, "O just Father, the world hath not known Thee."[4] And lest perhaps they should say that it was owing to His having assumed human flesh that He called the Creator of the world "Father," and styled Him "Just," they are excluded from such a refuge by the words that immediately follow, "The world hath not known Thee." But, according to them, the world is ignorant of the good God alone. For the word unquestionably recognises its Creator, the Lord Himself saying that the world loveth what is its own. Clearly, then, He whom they consider to be the good God, is called just in the Gospels. Any one may at leisure gather together a greater number of proofs, consisting of those passages, where in the New Testament the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is called just, and in the Old also, where the Creator of heaven and earth is called good; so that the heretics, being convicted by numerous testimonies, may perhaps some time be put to the blush.
CHAP. VI.—ON THE INCARNATION OF CHRIST.
1. It is now time, after this cursory notice of these points,
to resume our investigation of the incarnation of our Lord and Saviour,
viz., how or why He became man. Having therefore, to the best of our feeble
ability, considered His divine nature from the contemplation of His own
works rather than from our own feelings, and having nevertheless beheld
(with the eye) His visible creation while the invisible creation is seen
by faith, because human frailty can neither see all things with the bodily
eye nor comprehend them by reason, seeing we men are weaker and frailer
than any other rational beings (for those which are in heaven, or are supposed
to exist above the heaven, are superior), it remains that we seek a being
intermediate between all created things and God, i.e., a Mediator, whom
the Apostle Paul styles the "first-born of every creature."[5] Seeing,
moreover, those declarations regarding His majesty which are contained
in holy Scripture, that He is called the "image of the invisible God, and
the first-born of every creature," and that "in Him were all things created,
visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities,
or powers, all things were created by Him, and in Him: and He is before
all things, and by Him all things consist,"[6] who is the head of all things,
alone having as head God the Father; for it is written, "The head of Christ
is God; "[7] seeing clearly also that it is written, "No one knoweth the
Father, save the Son, nor doth any one know the Son, save the Father"[8]
(for who can know what wisdom is, save He who called it into being? or,
who can understand clearly what truth is, save the Father of truth? who
can investigate with certainty the universal nature of His Word, and of
God Himself, which nature proceeds from God, except God alone, with whom
the Word was), we ought to regard it as certain that this Word, or Reason
(if it is to be so termed), this Wisdom, this Truth, is known to no other
than the Father only; and of Him it is written, that "I do not think that
the world itself could contain the books which might be written,"[9] regarding,
viz., the glory and majesty of the Son of God. For it is impossible to
commit to writing (all) those particulars which belong to the glory of
the Saviour. After the consideration of questions of such importance concerning
the being of the Son of God, we are lost in the deepest amazement that
such a nature, pre-eminent above all others, should have divested itself
of its condition of majesty and become man, and tabernacled amongst men,
as the grace that was poured upon His lips testifies, and as His heavenly
Father bore Him witness, and as is confessed by the various signs and wonders
and miracles[10] that were performed by Him; who also, before that appearance
of His which He manifested in the body, sent the prophets as His forerunners,
and the messengers of His advent; and after His ascension into heaven,
made His holy apostles, men ignorant and unlearned, taken from the ranks
of tax-gatherers or fishermen, but who were filled with the power of His
divinity, to itinerate throughout the world, that they might gather together
out of every race and every nation a multitude of devout believers in Himself.
2. But of all the marvellous and mighty acts related of Him, this
altogether surpasses human admiration, and is beyond the power of mortal
frailness to understand or feel, how that mighty power of divine majesty,
that very Word of the Father, and that very wisdom of God, in which were
created all things, visible and invisible, can be believed to have existed
within the limits of that man who appeared in Judea; nay, that the Wisdom
of God can have entered the womb of a woman, and have been born an infant,
and have uttered wailings like the cries of little children! And that afterwards
it should be related that He was greatly troubled in death, saying, as
He Himself; declared, "My soul is sorrowful even unto death; "[1] and that
at the last He was brought to that death which is accounted the most shameful
among men, although He rose again on the third day. Since, then, we see
in Him some things so human that they appear to differ in no respect from
the common frailty of mortals, and some things so divine that they can
appropriately belong to nothing else than to the primal and ineffable nature
of Deity, the narrowness Of human understanding can find no outlet; but,
overcome with the amazement of a mighty admiration, knows not whither to
withdraw, or what to take hold of, or whither to turn. If it think of a
God, it goes a mortal; if it think of a man; it beholds Him returning from
the grave, after overthrowing the empire of death, laden with its spoils.
And therefore the spectacle is to be contemplated with all fear and reverence,
that the truth of both natures may be clearly shown to exist in one and
the same Being; so that nothing unworthy or unbecoming may be perceived
in that divine and ineffable substance nor yet those things which were
done be supposed to be the illusions of imaginary appearances. To utter
these things in human ears, and to explain them in words, far surpasses
the powers either of our rank, or of our intellect and language. I think
that it surpasses the power even of the holy apostles; nay, the explanation
of that mystery may perhaps be beyond the grasp of the entire creation
of celestial powers. Regarding Him, then, we shall state, in the fewest
possible words, the contents of our creed rather than the assertions which
human reason is wont to advance; and this from no spirit of rashness, but
as called for by the nature of our arrangement, laying before you rather
(what may be termed) our suspicions than any clear affirmations.
3. The Only-begotten of God, therefore, through whom, as the previous
course of the discussion has shown, all things were made, visible and invisible,
according to the view of Scripture, both made all things, and loves what
He made. For since He is Himself the invisible image of the invisible God,
He conveyed invisibly a share in Himself to all His rational creatures,
so that each one obtained a part of Him exactly proportioned to the amount
of affection with which he regarded Him. But since, agreeably to the faculty
of free-will, variety and diversity characterized the individual souls,
so that one was attached with a warmer love to the Author of its being,
and another with a feebler and weaker regard, that soul (anima) regarding
which Jesus said, "No one shall take my life (animam) from me,"[2] inhering,
from the beginning of the creation, and afterwards, inseparably and indissolubly
in Him, as being the Wisdom and Word of God, and the Truth and the true
Light, and receiving Him wholly, and passing into His light and splendour,
was made with Him in a pre-eminent degree[3] one spirit, according to the
promise of the apostle to those who ought to imitate it, that "he who is
joined in the Lord is one spirit."[4] This substance of a soul, then, being
intermediate between God and the flesh—it being impossible for the nature
of God to intermingle with a body without an intermediate instrument—the
God-man is born, as we have said, that substance being the intermediary
to whose nature it was not contrary to assume a body. But neither, on the
other hand, was it opposed to the nature of that soul, as a rational existence,
to receive God, into whom, as stated above, as into the Word, and the Wisdom,
and the Truth, it had already wholly entered. And therefore deservedly
is it also called, along with the flesh which it had assumed, the Son of
God, and the Power of God, the Christ, and the Wisdom of God, either because
it was wholly in the Son of God, or because it received the Son of God
wholly into itself. And again, the Son of God, through whom all things
were created, is named Jesus Christ and the Son of man. For the Son of
God also is said to have died—in reference, viz., to that nature which
could admit of death; and He is called the Son of man, who is announced
as about to come in the glory of God the Father, with the holy angels.
And for this reason, throughout the whole of Scripture, not only is the
divine nature spoken of in human words, but the human nature is adorned
by appellations of divine dignity. More truly indeed of this than of any
other can the statement be affirmed, "They shall both be in one flesh,
and are no longer two, but one flesh."[5] For the Word of God is to be
considered as being more in one flesh with the soul than a man with his
wife. But to whom is it more becoming to be also one spirit with God, than
to this soul which has so joined itself to God by love as that it may justly
be said to be one spirit with Him? 4. That the perfection of his love and
the sincerity of his deserved affection[1] formed for it this inseparable
union with God, so that the assumption of that soul was not accidental,
or the result of a personal preference, but was conferred as the reward
of its virtues, listen to the prophet addressing it thus: "Thou hast loved
righteousness, and hated wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed
thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows."[2] As a reward for its
love, then, it is anointed with the oil of gladness; i.e., the soul of
Christ along with the Word of God is made Christ. Because to be anointed
with the oil of gladness means nothing else than to be filled with the
Holy Spirit. And when it is said "above thy fellows," it is meant that
the grace of the Spirit was not given to it as to the prophets, but that
the essential fulness of the Word of God Himself was in it, according to
the saying of the apostle, "In whom dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead
bodily."[3] Finally, on this account he has not only said, "Thou hast loved
righteousness;" but he adds, "and Thou hast hated wickedness." For to have
hated wickedness is what the Scripture says of Him, that "He did no sin,
neither was any guile found in His mouth,"[4] and that "He was tempted
in all things like as we are, without sin."[5] Nay, the Lord Himself also
said, "Which of you will convince Me of sin?"[6] And again He says with
reference to Himself, " Behold, the prince of this world cometh, and findeth
nothing in Me."[7] All which (passages) show that in Him there was no sense
of sin; and that the prophet might show more clearly that no sense of sin
had ever entered into Him, he says, "Before the boy could have knowledge
to call upon father or mother, He turned away from wickedness."[8]
5. Now, if our having shown above that Christ possessed a rational
soul should cause a difficulty to any one, seeing we have frequently proved
throughout all our discussions that the nature of souls is capable both
of good and evil, the difficulty will be explained in the following way.
That the nature, indeed, of His soul was the same as that of all others
cannot be doubted otherwise it could not be called a soul were it not truly
one. But since the power of choosing good and evil is within the reach
of all, this soul which belonged to Christ elected to love righteousness,
so that in proportion to the immensity of its love it clung to it unchangeably
and inseparably, so that firmness of purpose, and immensity of affection,
and an inextinguishable warmth of love, destroyed all susceptibility (sensum)
for alteration and change; and that which formerly depended upon the will
was changed by the power of long custom into nature; and so we must believe
that there existed in Christ a human and rational soul, without supposing
that it had any feeling or possibility of sin.
6. To explain the matter more fully, it will not appear absurd
to make use of an illustration, although on a subject of so much difficulty
it is not easy to obtain suitable illustrations. However, if we may speak
without offence, the metal iron is capable of cold and heat. If, then,
a mass of iron be kept constantly in the fire, receiving the heat through
all its pores and veins, and the fire being continuous and the iron never
removed from it, it become wholly converted into the latter; could we at
all say of this, which is by nature a mass of iron, that when placed in
the fire, and incessantly burning, it was at any time capable of admitting
cold? On the contrary, because it is more consistent with truth, do we
not rather say, what we often see happening in furnaces, that it has become
wholly fire, seeing nothing but fire is visible in it? And if any one were
to attempt to touch or handle it, he would experience the action not of
iron, but of fire. In this way, then, that soul which, like an iron in
the fire, has been perpetually placed in the Word, and perpetually in the
Wisdom, and perpetually in God,[9] is God in all that it does, feels, and
understands, and therefore can be called neither convertible nor mutable,
inasmuch as, being incessantly heated, it possessed immutability from its
union with the Word of God. To all the saints, finally, some warmth from
the Word of God must be supposed to have passed; and in this soul the divine
fire itself must be believed to have rested, from which some warmth may
have passed to others. Lastly, the expression, "God, thy God, anointed
thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows,"[10] shows that that soul
is anointed m one way with the oil of gladness, i.e., with the word of
God and wisdom; and his fellows, i.e., the holy prophets and apostles,
in another. For they are said to have "run in the odour of his ointments;"[11]
and that soul was the vessel which contained that very ointment of whose
fragrance all the worthy prophets and apostles were made partakers. As,
then, the substance of an ointment is one thing and its odour another,
so also Christ is one thing and His fellows another. And as the vessel
itself, which contains the substance of the ointment, can by no means admit
any foul smell; whereas it is possible that those who enjoy its odour may,
if they remove a little way from its fragrance, receive any foul odour
which comes upon them: so, in the same way, was it impossible that Christ,
being as it were the vessel itself, in which was the substance of the ointment,
should receive an odour of an opposite kind, while they who are His "fellows"
will be partakers and receivers of His odour, in proportion to their nearness
to the vessel.
7. I think, indeed, that Jeremiah the prophet, also, understanding
what was the nature of the wisdom of God in him, which was the same also
which he had assumed for the salvation of the world, said, "The breath
of our countenance is Christ the Lord, to whom we said, that under His
shadow we shall live among the nations."[1] And inasmuch as the shadow
of our body is inseparable from the body, and unavoidably performs and
repeats its movements and gestures, I think that he, wishing to point out
the work of Christ's soul, and the movements inseparably belonging to it,
and which accomplished everything according to His movements and will,
called this the shadow of Christ the Lord, under which shadow we were to
live among the nations. For in the mystery of this assumption the nations
live, who, imitating it through faith, come to salvation. David also, when
saying, "Be mindful of my reproach, O Lord, with which they reproached
me in exchange for Thy Christ,''[2] seems to me to indicate the same. And
what else does Paul mean when he says, "Your life is hid with Christ in
God;"[3] and again in another passage, "Do you seek a proof of Christ,
who speaketh in me?''[4] And now he says that Christ was hid in God. The
meaning of which expression, unless it be shown to be something such as
we have pointed out above as intended by the prophet in the words "shadow
of Christ," exceeds, perhaps, the apprehension of the human mind. But we
see also very many other statements in holy Scripture respecting the meaning
of the word "shadow," as that well-known one in the Gospel according to
Luke, where Gabriel says to Mary, "The Spirit of the Lord shall come upon
thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee."[5] And the apostle
says with reference to the law, that they who have circumcision in the
flesh, "serve for the similitude and shadow of heavenly things."[6] And
elsewhere, "Is not our life upon the earth a shadow?"[7] If, then, not
only the law which is upon the earth is a shadow, but also all our life
which is upon the earth is the same, and we live among the nations under
the shadow of Christ, we must see whether the truth of all these shadows
may not come to be known in that revelation, when no longer through a glass,
and darkly, but face to face, all the saints shall deserve to behold the
glory of God, and the causes and truth of things. And the pledge of this
truth being already received through the Holy Spirit, the apostle said,
"Yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know
we Him no more.''[8]
The above, meanwhile, are the thoughts which have occurred to us, when treating of subjects of such difficulty as the incarnation and deity of Christ. If there be any one, indeed, who can discover something better, and who can establish his assertions by clearer proofs from holy Scriptures, let his opinion be received in preference to mine.
CHAP. VII.—ON THE HOLY SPIRIT.
I. As, then, after those first discussions which, according to
the requirements of the case, we held at the beginning regarding the Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit, it seemed right that we should retrace our steps,
and show that the same God was the creator and founder of the world, and
the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, i.e., that the God of the law and
of the prophets and of the Gospel was one and the same; and that, in the
next place, it ought to be shown, with respect to Christ, in what manner
He who had formerly been demonstrated to be the Word and Wisdom of God
became man; it remains that we now return with all possible brevity to
the subject of the Holy Spirit.
It is time, then, that we say a few words to the best of our ability
regarding the Holy Spirit, whom our Lord and Saviour in the Gospel according
to John has named the Paraclete. For as it is the same God Himself, and
the same Christ, so also is it the same Holy Spirit who was in the prophets
and apostles, i.e., either in those who believed in God before the advent
of Christ, or in those who by means of Christ have sought refuge in God.
We have heard, indeed, that certain heretics have dared to say that there
are two Gods and two Christs, but we have never known of the doctrine of
two Holy Spirits being preached by any one.[9] For how could they maintain
this out of Scripture, or what distinction could they lay down between
Holy Spirit and Holy Spirit, if indeed any definition or description of
Holy Spirit can be discovered? For although we should concede to Marcion
or to Valentinus that it is possible to draw distinctions in the question
of Deity, and to describe the nature of the good God as one, and that of
the just God as another, what will he devise, or what will he discover,
to enable him to introduce a distinction in the Holy Spirit? I consider,
then, that they are able to discover nothing which may indicate a distinction
of any kind whatever.
2. Now we are of opinion that every rational creature, without
any distinction, receives a share of Him in the same way as of the Wisdom
and of the Word of God. I observe, however, that the chief advent of the
Holy Spirit is declared to men, after the ascension of Christ to heaven,
rather than before His coming into the world. For, before that, it was
upon the prophets alone, and upon a few individuals—if there happened to
be any among the people deserving of it—that the gift of the Holy Spirit
was conferred; but after the advent of the Saviour, it is written that
the prediction of the prophet Joel was fulfilled, "In the last days it
shall come to pass, and I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and they
shall prophesy,"[1] which is similar to the well-known statement, "All
nations shall serve Him."[2] By the grace, then, of the Holy Spirit, along
with numerous other results, this most glorious consequence is clearly
demonstrated, that with regard to those things which were written in the
prophets or in the law of Moses, it was only a few persons at that time,
viz., the prophets themselves, and scarcely another individual out of the
whole nation, who were able to look beyond the mere corporeal meaning and
discover something greater, i.e., something spiritual, in the law or in
the prophets; but now there are countless multitudes of believers who,
although unable to unfold methodically and clearly the results of their
spiritual understanding,[3] are nevertheless most firmly persuaded that
neither ought circumcision to be understood literally, nor the rest of
the Sabbath, nor the pouring out of the blood of an animal, nor that answers
were given by God to Moses on these points. And this method of apprehension
is undoubtedly suggested to the minds of all by the power of the Holy Spirit.
3. And as there are many ways of apprehending Christ, who, although
He is wisdom, does not act the part or possess the power of wisdom in all
men, but only in those who give themselves to the study of wisdom in Him;
and who, although called a physician, does not act as one towards all,
but only towards those who understand their feeble and sickly condition,
and flee to His compassion that they may obtain health; so also I think
is it with the Holy Spirit, in whom is contained every kind of gifts, For
on some is bestowed by the Spirit the word of wisdom, on others the word
of knowledge, on others faith; and so to each individual of those who are
capable of receiving Him, is the Spirit Himself made to be that quality,
or understood to be that which is needed by the individual who has deserved
to participate.[4] These divisions and differences not being perceived
by those who hear Him called Paraclete in the Gospel, and not duly considering
in consequence of what work or act He is named the Paraclete, they have
compared Him to some common spirits or other, and by this means have tried
to disturb the Churches of Christ, and so excite dissensions of no small
extent among brethren; whereas the Gospel shows Him to be of such power
and majesty, that it says the apostles could not yet receive those things
which the Saviour wished to teach them until the advent of the Holy Spirit,
who, pouring Himself into their souls, might enlighten them regarding the
nature and faith of the Trinity. But these persons, because of the ignorance
of their understandings, are not only unable themselves logically to state
the truth, but cannot even give their attention to what is advanced by
us; and entertaining Unworthy ideas of His divinity, have delivered themselves
over to errors and deceits, being depraved by a spirit of error, rather
than instructed by the teaching of the Holy Spirit, according to the declaration
of the apostle, "Following the doctrine of devils, forbidding to marry,
to the destruction and ruin of many, and to abstain from meats, that by
an ostentatious exhibition of stricter observance they may seduce the souls
of the innocent."[5]
4. We must therefore know that the Paraclete is the Holy Spirit, who teaches truths which cannot be uttered in words, and which are, so to speak, unutterable, and "which it is not lawful for a man to utter,"[6] i.e., which cannot be indicated by human language. The phrase "it is not lawful" is, we think, used by the apostle instead of "it is not possible;" as also is the case in the passage where he says, "All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me; but all things edify not."[7] For those things which are in our power because we may have them, he says are lawful for us. But the Paraclete, who is called the Holy Spirit, is so called from His work of consolation, para- clesis being termed in Latin consolatio. For if any one has deserved to participate in the Holy Spirit by the knowledge of His ineffable mysteries, he undoubtedly obtains comfort and joy of heart. For since he comes by the teaching of the Spirit to the knowledge of the reasons of all things which happen—how or why they occur—his soul can in no respect be troubled, or admit any feeling of sorrow; nor is he alarmed by anything, since, clinging to the Word of God and His wisdom, he through the Holy Spirit calls Jesus Lord. And since we have made mention of the Paraclete, and have explained as we were able what sentiments ought to be entertained regarding Him; and since our Saviour also is called the Paraclete in the Epistle of John, when he says, "If any of us sin, we have a Paraclete with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and He is the propitiation for our sins;"[1] let us consider whether this term Paraclete should happen to have one meaning when applied to the Saviour, and another when applied to the Holy Spirit. Now Paraclete, when spoken of the Saviour, seems to mean intercessor. For in Greek, Paraclete has both significations—that of intercessor and comforter. On account, then, of the phrase which follows, when he says, "And He is the propitiation for our sins," the name Paraclete seems to be understood in the case of our Saviour as meaning intercessor; for He is said to intercede with the Father because of our sins. In the case of the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete must be understood in the sense of comforter, inasmuch as He bestows consolation upon the souls to whom He openly reveals the apprehension of spiritual knowledge.
CHAP. VIII.—ON THE SOUL (ANIMA).
1. The order of our arrangement now requires us, after the discussion
of the preceding subjects, to institute a general inquiry regarding the
soul;[2] and, beginning with points of inferior importance, to ascend to
those that are of greater. Now, that there are souls[3] in all living things,
even in those which live in the waters, is, I suppose, doubted by no one.
For the general opinion of all men maintains this; and confirmation from
the authority of holy Scripture is added, when it is said that "God made
great whales, and every living creature[4] that moveth which the waters
brought forth after their kind."[5] It is confirmed also from the common
intelligence of reason, by those who lay down in certain words a definition
of soul. For soul is defined as follows: a substance fantastikh and ormhtikh
, which may be rendered into Latin, although not so appropriately, sensibilis
et mobilis.[6] This certainly may be said appropriately of all living beings,
even of those which abide in the waters; and of winged creatures too, this
same definition of anima may be shown to hold good. Scripture also has
added its authority to a second opinion, when it says, "Ye shall not eat
the blood, because the life[7] of all flesh is its blood; and ye shall
not eat the life with the flesh; "[8] in which it intimates most clearly
that the blood of every animal is its life. And if any one now were to
ask how it can be said with respect to bees, wasps, and ants, and those
other things which are in the waters, oysters and cockles, and all others
which are without blood, and are most clearly shown to be living things,
that the "life of all flesh is the blood," we must answer, that in living
things of that sort the force which is exerted in other animals by the
power of red blood is exerted in them by that liquid which is within them,
although it be of a different colour; for colour is a thing of no importance,
provided the substance be endowed with life.[9] That beasts of burden or
cattle of smaller size are endowed with souls,[10] there is, by general
assent, no doubt whatever. The opinion of holy Scripture, however, is manifest,
when God says, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its
kind, four-footed beasts, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth
after their kind."[11] And now with respect to man, although no one entertains
any doubt, or needs to inquire, yet holy Scripture declares that "God breathed
into his countenance the breath of life, and man became a living soul."[12]
It remains that we inquire respecting the angelic order whether they also
have souls, or are souls; and also respecting the other divine and celestial
powers, as well as those of an opposite kind. We nowhere, indeed, find
any authority in holy Scripture for asserting that either the angels, or
any other divine spirits that are ministers of God, either possess souls
or are called souls, and yet they are felt by very many persons to be endowed
with life. But with regard to God, we find it written as follows: "And
I will put My soul upon that soul which has eaten blood, and I will root
him out from among his people;"[13] and also in another passage, "Your
new moons, and sabbaths, and great days, I will not accept; your fasts,
and holidays, and festal days, My soul hateth."[1] And in the twenty-second
Psalm, regarding Christ—for it is certain, as the Gospel bears witness,
that this Psalm is spoken of Him—the following words occur: "O Lord, be
not far from helping me; look to my defence: O God, deliver my soul from
the sword, and my beloved one from the hand of the dog; "[2] although there
are also many other testimonies respecting the soul of Christ when He tabernacled
in the flesh.
2. But the nature of the incarnation will render unnecessary any
inquiry into the soul of Christ. For as He truly possessed flesh, so also
He truly possessed a soul. It is difficult indeed both to feel and to state
how that which is called in Scripture the soul of God is to be understood;
for we acknowledge that nature to be simple, and without any intermixture
or addition. In whatever way, however, it is to be understood, it seems,
meanwhile, to be named the soul of God; whereas regarding Christ there
is no doubt. And therefore there seems to me no absurdity in either understanding
or asserting some such thing regarding the holy angels and the other heavenly
powers, since that definition of soul appears applicable also to them.
For who can rationally deny that they are "sensible and moveable?" But
if that definition appear to be correct, according to which a soul is said
to be a substance rationally "sensible and moveable," the same definition
would seem also to apply to angels. For what else is in them than rational
feeling and motion? Now those beings who are comprehended under the same
definition have undoubtedly the same substance. Paul indeed intimates that
there is a kind of animal-man[3] who, he says, cannot receive the things
of the Spirit of God, but declares that the doctrine of the Holy Spirit
seems to him foolish, and that he cannot understand what is to be spiritually
discerned. In another passage he says it is sown an animal body, and arises
a spiritual body, pointing out that in the resurrection of the just there
will be nothing of an animal nature. And therefore we inquire whether there
happen to be any substance which, in respect of its being anima, is imperfect.
But whether it be imperfect because it falls away from perfection, or because
it was so created by God, will form the subject of inquiry when each individual
topic shall begin to be discussed in order. For if the animal man receive
not the things of the Spirit of God, and because he is animal, is unable
to admit the understanding of a better, i.e., of a divine nature, it is
for this reason perhaps that Paul, wishing to teach us more plainly what
that is by means of which we are able to comprehend those things which
are of the Spirit, i.e., spiritual things, conjoins and associates with
the Holy Spirit an understanding[4] rather than a soul.[5] For this, I
think, he indicates when he says, "I will pray with the spirit, I will
pray with the understanding also; I will sing with the spirit, I will sing
with the understanding also.'[6] And he does not say that "I will pray
with the soul," but with the spirit and the understanding. Nor does he
say, "I will sing with the soul," but with the spirit and the understanding.
3. But perhaps this question is asked, If it be the understanding
which prays and sings with the spirit, and if it be the same which receives
both perfection and salvation, how is it that Peter says, "Receiving the
end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls?"[7] If the soul neither
prays nor sings with the spirit, how shall it hope for salvation? or when
it attains to blessedness, shall it be no longer called a soul?s Let us
see if perhaps an answer may be given in this way, that as the Saviour
came to save what was lost, that which formerly was said to be lost is
not lost when it is saved; so also, perhaps, this which is saved is called
a soul, and when it has been placed in a state of salvation will receive
a name from the Word that denotes its more perfect condition. But it appears
to some that this also may be added, that as the thing which was lost undoubtedly
existed before it was lost, at which time it was something else than destroyed,
so also will be the case when it is no longer in a ruined condition. In
like manner also, the soul which is said to have perished will appear to
have been something at one time, when as yet it had not perished, and on
that account would be termed soul, and being again freed from destruction,
it may become a second time what it was before it perished, and be called
a soul. But from the very signification of the name soul which the Greek
word conveys, it has appeared to a few curious inquirers that a meaning
of no small importance may be suggested. For in sacred language God is
called a fire, as when Scripture says," Our God is a consuming fire."[9]
Respecting the substance of the angels also it speaks as follows: "Who
maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a burning fire;"[1] and in
another place, "The angel of the Lord appeared in a flame of fire in the
bush."[2] We have, moreover, received a commandment to be "fervent in spirit;
"[3] by which expression undoubtedly the Word of God is shown to be hot
and fiery. The prophet Jeremiah also hears from Him, who gave him his answers,
"Behold, I have given My words into thy mouth a fire."[4] As God, then,
is a fire, and the angels a flame of fire, and all the saints are fervent
in spirit, so, on the contrary, those who have fallen away from the love
of God are undoubtedly said to have cooled in their affection for Him,
and to have become cold. For the Lord also says, that, "because iniquity
has abounded, the love of many will grow cold."[5] Nay, all things, whatever
they are, which in holy Scripture are compared with the hostile power,
the devil is said to be perpetually finding cold; and what is found to
be colder than he? In the sea also the dragon is said to reign. For the
prophet[6] intimates that the serpent and dragon, which certainly is referred
to one of the wicked spirits, is also in the sea. And elsewhere the prophet
says, "I will draw out my holy sword upon the dragon the flying serpent,
upon the dragon the crooked serpent, and will slay him."[7] And again he
says: "Even though they hide from my eyes, and descend into the depths
of the sea, there will I command the serpent, and it shall bite them."[8]
In the book of Job also, he is said to be the king of all things in the
waters.[9] The prophet[10] threatens that evils will be kindled by the
north wind upon all who inhabit the earth. Now the north wind is described
in holy Scripture as cold, according to the statement in the book of Wisdom,
"That cold north wind;"[11] which same thing also must undoubtedly be understood
of the devil. If, then, those things which are holy are named fire, and
light, and fervent, while those which are of an opposite nature are said
to be cold; and if the love of many is said to wax cold; we have to inquire
whether perhaps the name soul, which in Greek is termed yukh , be so termed
from growing cold[12] out of a better and more divine condition, and be
thence derived, because it seems to have cooled from that natural and divine
warmth, and therefore has been placed in its present position, and called
by its present name. Finally, see if you can easily find a place in holy
Scripture where the soul is properly mentioned in terms of praise: it frequently
occurs, on the contrary, accompanied with expressions of censure, as in
the passage, "An evil soul ruins him who possesses it;"[13] and, "The soul
which sinneth, it shall die."[14] For after it has been said, "All souls
are Mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is Mine,"[15]
it seemed to follow that He would say, "The soul that doeth righteousness,
it shall be saved," and "The soul which sinneth, it shall die." But now
we see that He has associated with the soul what is censurable, and has
been silent as to that which was deserving of praise. We have therefore
to see if, perchance, as we have said is declared by the name itself, it
was called yukh , i.e., anima, because it has waxed cold from the fervour
of just things,[16] and from participation in the divine fire, and yet
has not lost the power of restoring itself to that condition of fervour
in which it was at the beginning. Whence the prophet also appears to point
out some such state of things by the words, "Return, O my soul, unto thy
rest."[17] From all which this appears to be made out, that the understanding,
falling away from its status and dignity, was made or named soul; and that,
if repaired and corrected, it returns to the condition of the understanding.[18]
4. Now, if this be the case, it seems to me that this very decay
and falling away of the understanding is not the same in all, but that
this conversion into a soul is carried to a greater or less degree in different
instances, and that certain understandings retain something even of their
former vigour, and others again either nothing or a very small amount.
Whence some are found from the very commencement of their lives to be of
more active intellect, others again of a slower habit of mind, and some
are born wholly obtuse, and altogether incapable of instruction. Our statement,
however, that the understanding is converted into a soul, or whatever else
seems to have such a meaning, the reader must carefully consider and settle
for himself, as these views are not be regarded as advanced by us in a
dogmatic manner, but simply as opinions, treated in the style of investigation
and discussion. Let the reader take this also into consideration, that
it is observed with regard to the soul of the Saviour, that of those things
which are written in the Gospel, some are ascribed to it under the name
of soul, and others under that of spirit. For when it wishes to indicate
any suffering or perturbation affecting Him, it indicates it under the
name of soul; as when it says, "Now is My soul troubled; "[1] and, "My
soul is sorrowful, even unto death; "[2] and, "No man taketh My soul[3]
from Me, but I lay it down of Myself."[4] Into the hands of His Father
He commends not His soul, but His spirit; and when He says that the flesh
is weak, He does not say that the soul is willing, but the spirit: whence
it appears that the soul is something intermediate between the weak flesh
and the willing spirit.
5. But perhaps some one may meet us with one of those objections
which we have ourselves warned you of in our statements, and say, "How
then is there said to be also a soul of God?" To which we answer as follows:
That as with respect to everything corporeal which is spoken of God, such
as fingers, or hands, or arms, or eyes, or feet, or mouth, we say that
these are not to be understood as human members, but that certain of His
powers are indicated by these names of members of the body; so also we
are to suppose that it is something else which is pointed out by this title—soul
of God. And if it is allowable for us to venture to say anything more on
such a subject, the soul of God may perhaps be understood to mean the only-begotten
Son of God. For as the soul, when implanted in the body, moves all things
in it, and exerts its force over everything on which it operates; so also
the only-begotten Son of God, who is His Word and Wisdom, stretches and
extends to every power of God, being implanted in it; and perhaps to indicate
this mystery is God either called Or described in Scripture as a body.
We must, indeed, take into consideration whether it is not perhaps on this
account that the soul of God may be understood to mean His only-begotten
Son, because He Himself came into this world of affliction, and descended
into this valley of tears, and into this place of our humiliation; as He
says in the Psalm, "Because Thou hast humiliated us in the place of affliction."[5]
Finally, I am aware that certain critics, in explaining the words used
in the Gospel by the Saviour, "My soul is sorrowful, even unto death,"
have interpreted them of the apostles, whom He termed His soul, as being
better than the rest of His body. For as the multitude of believers is
called His body, they say that the apostles, as being better than the rest
of the body, ought to be understood to mean His soul.
We have brought forward as we best could these points regarding the rational soul, as topics of discussion for our readers, rather than as dogmatic and well-defined propositions. And with respect to the souls of animals and other dumb creatures, let that suffice which we have stated above in general terms.
CHAP. IX.—ON THE WORLD AND THE MOVEMENTS OF RATIONAL CREATURES, WHETHER
GOOD OR BAD ; AND ON THE CAUSES OF THEM.
1. But let us now return to the order of our proposed discussion,
and behold the commencement of creation, so far as the understanding can
behold the beginning of the creation of God. In that commencement,[6] then,
we are to suppose that God created so great a number of rational or intellectual
creatures (or by whatever name they are to be called), which we have formerly
termed understandings, as He foresaw would be sufficient. It is certain
that He made them according to some definite number, predetermined by Himself:
for it is not to be imagined, as some would have it, that creatures have
not a limit, because where there is no limit there can neither be any comprehension
nor any limitation. Now if this were the case, then certainly created things
could neither be restrained nor administered by God. For, naturally, whatever
is infinite will also be incomprehensible. Moreover, as Scripture says,
"God has arranged all things in number and measure; "[7] and therefore
number will be correctly applied to rational creatures or understandings,
that they may be so numerous as to admit of being arranged, governed, and
controlled by God. But measure will be appropriately applied to a material
body; and this measure, we are to believe, was created by God such as He
knew would be sufficient for the adorning of the world. These, then, are
the things which we are to believe were created by God in the beginning,
i.e., before all things. And this, we think, is indicated even in that
beginning which Moses has introduced in terms somewhat ambiguous, when
he says, "In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth."[1] For it
is certain that the firmament is not spoken of, nor the dry land, but that
heaven and earth from which this present heaven and earth which we now
see afterwards borrowed their names.
2. But since those rational natures, which we have said above
were made in the beginning, were created when they did not previously exist,
in consequence of this very fact of their nonexistence and commencement
of being, are they necessarily changeable and mutable; since whatever power
was in their substance was not in it by nature, but was the result of the
goodness of their Maker. What they are, therefore, is neither their own
nor endures for ever, but is bestowed by God. For it did not always exist;
and everything which is a gift may also be taken away, and disappear. And
a reason for removal will consist in the movements of souls not being conducted
according to right and propriety. For the Creator gave, as an indulgence
to the understandings created by Him, the power of free and voluntary action,
by which the good that was in them might become their own, being preserved
by the exertion of their own will; but slothfulness, and a dislike of labour
in preserving what is good, and an aversion to and a neglect of better
things, furnished the beginning of a departure from goodness. But to depart
from good is nothing else than to be made bad. For it is certain that to
want goodness is to be wicked. Whence it happens that, in proportion as
one falls away from goodness, in the same proportion does he become involved
in wickedness. In which condition, according to its actions, each understanding,
neglecting goodness either to a greater or more limited extent, was dragged
into the opposite of good, which undoubtedly is evil. From which it appears
that the Creator of all things admitted certain seeds and causes of variety
and diversity, that He might create variety and diversity in proportion
to the diversity of understandings, i.e., of rational creatures, which
diversity they must be supposed to have conceived from that cause which
we have mentioned above. And what we mean by variety and diversity is what
we now wish to explain.
3. Now we term world everything which is above the heavens, or
in the heavens, or upon the earth, or in those places which are called
the lower regions, or all places whatever that anywhere exist, together
with their inhabitants. This whole, then, is called world. In which world
certain beings are said to be super-celestial, i.e., placed in happier
abodes, and clothed with heavenly and resplendent bodies; and among these
many distinctions are shown to exist, the apostle, e.g., saying, " That
one is the glory of the sun, another the glory of the moon, another the
glory of the stars; for one star differeth from another star in glory."[2]
Certain beings are called earthly, and among them, i.e., among men, there
is no small difference; for some of them are Barbarians, others Greeks;
and of the Barbarians some are savage and fierce, and others of a milder
disposition. And certain of them live under laws that have been thoroughly
approved; others, again, under laws of a more common or severe kind;[3]
while some, again, possess customs of an inhuman and savage character,
rather than laws. And certain of them, from the hour of their birth, are
reduced to humiliation and subjection, and brought up as slaves, being
placed under the dominion either of masters, or princes, or tyrants. Others,
again, are brought up in a manner more consonant with freedom and reason:
some with sound bodies, some with bodies diseased from their early years;
some defective in vision, others in hearing and speech; some born in that
condition, others deprived of the use of their senses immediately after
birth, or at least undergoing such misfortune on reaching manhood. And
why should I repeat and enumerate all the horrors of human misery, from
which some have been free, and in which others have been involved, when
each one can weigh and consider them for himself? There are also certain
invisible powers to which earthly things have been entrusted for administration;
and amongst them no small difference must be believed to exist, as is also
found to be the case among men. The Apostle Paul indeed intimates that
there are certain lower powers,[4] and that among them, in like manner,
must undoubtedly be sought a ground of diversity. Regarding dumb animals,
and birds, and those creatures which live in the waters, it seems superfluous
to require; since it is certain that these ought to be regarded not as
of primary, but of subordinate rank.
4. Seeing, then, that all things which have been created are said
to have been made through Christ, and in Christ, as the Apostle Paul most
clearly indicates, when he says, "For in Him and by Him were all things
created, whether things in heaven or things on earth, visible and invisible,
whether they be thrones, or powers, or principalities, or dominions; all
things were created by Him, and in Him;"[5] and as in his Gospel John indicates
the same thing, saying, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God: the same was in the beginning with God:
all things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made;"[1]
and as in the Psalm also it is written," In wisdom hast Thou made them
all;"[2]—seeing, then, Christ is, as it were, the Word and Wisdom, and
so also the Righteousness, it will undoubtedly follow that those things
which were created in the Word and Wisdom are said to be created also in
that righteousness which is Christ; that in created things there may appear
to be nothing unrighteous or accidental, but that all things may be shown
to be in conformity with the law of equity and righteousness. How, then,
so great a variety of things, and so great a diversity, can be understood
to be altogether just and righteous, I am sure no human power or language
can explain, unless as prostrate suppliants we pray to the Word, and Wisdom,
and Righteousness Himself, who is the only-begotten Son of God, and who,
pouring Himself by His graces into our senses, may deign to illuminate
what is dark, to lay open what is concealed, and to reveal what is secret;
if, indeed, we should be found either to seek, or ask, or knock so worthily
as to deserve to receive when we ask, or to find when we seek, or to have
it opened to us when we knock. Not relying, then, on our own powers, but
on the help of that Wisdom which made all things, and of that Righteousness
which we believe to be in all His creatures, although we are in the meantime
unable to declare it, yet, trusting in His mercy, we shall endeavour to
examine and inquire how that great variety and diversity in the world may
appear to be consistent with all righteousness and reason. I mean, of course,
merely reason in general; for it would be a mark of ignorance either to
seek, or of folly to give, a special reason for each individual case.
5. Now, when we say that this world was established in the variety
in which we have above explained that it was created by God, and when we
say that this God is good, and righteous, and most just, there are numerous
individuals, especially those who, coming from the school of Marcion, and
Valentinus, and Basilides, have heard that there are souls of different
natures, who object to us, that it cannot consist with the justice of God
in creating the word to assign to some of His creatures an abode in the
heavens, and not only to give such a better habitation, but also to grant
them a higher and more honourable position ; to favour others with the
grant of principalities; to bestow powers upon some, dominions on others;
to confer upon some the most honourable seats in the celestial tribunals;
to enable some to shine with more resplendent glory, and to glitter with
a starry splendour; to give to some the glory of the sun, to others the
glory of the moon, to others the glory of the stars; to cause one star
to differ from another star in glory. And, to speak once for all, and briefly,
if the Creator God wants neither the will to undertake nor the power to
complete a good and perfect work, what reason can there be that, in the
creation of rational natures, i.e., of beings of whose existence He Himself
is the cause, He should make some of higher rank, and others of second,
or third, or of many lower and inferior degrees? In the next place, they
object to us, with regard to terrestrial beings, that a happier lot by
birth is the case with some rather than with others; as one man, e.g.,
is begotten of Abraham, and born of the promise; another, too, of Isaac
and Rebekah, and who, while still in the womb, supplants his brother, and
is said to be loved by God before he is born. Nay, this very circumstance,—especially
that one man is born among the Hebrews, with whom he finds instruction
in the divine law; another among the Greeks, themselves also wise, and
men of no small learning; and then another amongst the Ethiopians, who
are accustomed to feed on human flesh; or amongst the Scythians, with whom
parricide is an act sanctioned by law; or amongst the people of Taurus,
where strangers are offered in sacrifice,—is a ground of strong objection.
Their argument accordingly is this: If there be this great diversity of
circumstances, and this diverse and varying condition by birth, in which
the faculty of free-will has no scope (for no one chooses for himself either
where, or with whom, or in what condition he is born); if, then, this is
not caused by the difference in the nature of souls, i.e., that a soul
of an evil nature is destined for a wicked nation, and a good soul for
a righteous nation, what other conclusion remains than that these things
must be supposed to be regulated by accident and chance? And if that be
admitted, then it will be no longer believed that the world was made by
God, or administered by His providence; and as a consequence, a judgment
of God upon the deeds of each individual will appear a thing not to be
looked for. In which matter, indeed, what is dearly the truth of things
is the privilege of Him alone to know who searches all things, even the
deep things of God.
6. We, however, although but men, not to nourish the insolence
of the heretics by our silence, will return to their objections such answers
as occur to us, so far as our abilities enable us. We have frequently shown,
by those declarations which we were able to produce from the holy Scriptures,
that God, the Creator of all things, is good, and just, and all-powerful.
When He in the beginning created those beings which He desired to create,
i.e., rational natures, He had no other reason for creating them than on
account of Himself, i.e., His own goodness. As He Himself, then, was the
cause of the existence of those things which were to be created, in whom
there was neither any variation nor change, nor want of power, He created
all whom He made equal and alike, because there was in Himself no reason
for producing variety and diversity. But since those rational creatures
themselves, as we have frequently shown, and will yet show in the proper
place, were endowed with the power of free-will, this freedom of will incited
each one either to progress by imitation of God, or reduced him to failure
through negligence. And this, as we have already stated, is the cause of
the diversity among rational creatures, deriving its origin not from the
will or judgment of the Creator, but from the freedom of the individual
will. Now God, who deemed it just to arrange His creatures according to
their merit, brought down these different understandings into the harmony
of one world, that He might adorn, as it were, one dwelling, in which there
ought to be not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay
(and some indeed to honour, and others to dishonour), with those different
vessels, or souls, or understandings. And these are the causes, in my opinion,
why that world presents the aspect of diversity, while Divine Providence
continues to regulate each individual according to the variety of his movements,
or of his feelings and purpose. On which account the Creator will neither
appear to be unjust in distributing (for the causes already mentioned)
to every one according to his merits; nor will the happiness or unhappiness
of each one's birth, or whatever be the condition that falls to his lot,
be deemed accidental; nor will different creators, or souls of different
natures, be believed to exist.
7. But even holy Scripture does not appear to me to be altogether
silent on the nature of this secret, as when the Apostle Paul, in discussing
the case of Jacob and Esau, says: "For the children being not yet born,
neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according
to election might stand, not of works, but of Him who calleth, it was said,
The elder shall serve the younger, as it is written, Jacob have I loved,
but Esau have I hated."[1] And after that, he answers himself, and says,
"What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?" And that he
might furnish us with an opportunity of inquiring into these matters, and
of ascertaining how these things do not happen without a reason, he answers
himself, and says, "God forbid."[2] For the same question, as it seems
to me, which is raised concerning Jacob and Esau, may be raised regarding
all celestial and terrestrial creatures, and even those of the lower world
as well. And in like manner it seems to me, that as he there says, "The
children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil," so
it might also be said of all other things, "When they were not yet" created,
"neither had yet done any good or evil, that the decree of God according
to election may stand," that (as certain think) some things on the one
hand were created heavenly, some on the other earthly, and others, again,
beneath the earth, "not of works" (as they think), "but of Him who calleth,"
what shall we say then, if these things are so? "Is there unrighteousness
with God? God forbid." As, therefore, when the Scriptures are carefully
examined regarding Jacob and Esau, it is not found to be unrighteousness
with God that it should be said, before they were born, or had done anything
in this life, "the elder shall serve the younger;" and as it is found not
to be unrighteousness that even in the womb Jacob supplanted his brother,
if we feel that he was worthily beloved by God, according to the deserts
of his previous life, so as to deserve to be preferred before his brother;
so also is it with regard to heavenly creatures, if we notice that diversity
was not the original condition of the creature, but that, owing to causes
that have previously existed, a different office is prepared by the Creator
for each one in proportion to the degree of his merit, on this ground,
indeed, that each one, in respect of having been created by God an understanding,
or a rational spirit, has, according to the movements of his mind and the
feelings of his soul, gained for himself a greater or less amount of merit,
and has become either an object of love to God, or else one of dislike
to Him; while, nevertheless, some of those who are possessed of greater
merit are ordained to suffer with others for the adorning of the state
of the world, and for the discharge of duty to creatures of a lower grade,
in order that by this means they themselves may be participators in the
endurance of the Creator, according to the words of the apostle: "For the
creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him
who hath subjected the same in hope."[3] Keeping in view, then, the sentiment
expressed by the apostle, when, speaking of the birth of Esau and Jacob,
he says, "Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid," I think it fight
that this same sentiment should be carefully applied to the case of all
other creatures, because, as we formerly remarked, the righteousness of
the Creator ought to appear in everything. And this, it appears to me,
will be seen more clearly at last, if each one, whether of celestial or
terrestrial or infernal beings, be said to have the causes of his diversity
in himself, and antecedent to his bodily birth. For all things were created
by the Word of God, and by His Wisdom, and were set in order by His Justice.
And by the grace of His compassion He provides for all men, and encourages
all to the use of whatever remedies may lead to their cure, and incites
them to salvation.
8. As, then, there is no doubt that at the day of judgment the good will be separated from the bad, and the just from the unjust, and all by the sentence of God will be distributed according to their deserts throughout those places of which they are worthy, so I am of opinion some such state of things was formerly the case, as, God willing, we shall show in what follows. For God must be believed to do and order all things and at all times according to His judgment. For the words which the apostle uses when he says, "In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth, and some to honour and some to dishonour;"[1] and those which he adds, saying, "If a man purge himself, he will be a vessel unto honour, sanctified and meet for the Master's use, unto every good work,"[2] undoubtedly point out this, that he who shall purge himself when he is in this life, will be prepared for every good work in that which is to come; while he who does not purge himself will be, according to the amount of his impurity, a vessel unto dishonour, i.e., unworthy. It is therefore possible to understand that there have been also formerly rational vessels, whether purged or not, i.e., which either purged themselves or did not do so, and that consequently every vessel, according to the measure of its purity or impurity, received a place, or region, or condition by birth, or an office to discharge, in this world. All of which, down to the humblest, God providing for and distinguishing by the power of His wisdom, arranges all things by His controlling judgment, according to a most impartial retribution, so far as each one ought to be assisted or cared for in conformity with his deserts. In which certainly every principle of equity is shown, while the inequality of circumstances preserves the justice of a retribution according to merit. But the grounds of the merits in each individual case are only recognised truly and clearly by God Himself, along with His only-begotten Word, and His Wisdom, and the Holy Spirit.
CHAP. X.—ON THE RESURRECTION, AND THE JUDGMENT, THE FIRE OF HELL, AND
PUNISHMENTS.
1. But since the discourse has reminded us of the subjects of
a future judgment and of retribution, and of the punishments of sinners,
according to the threatenings of holy Scripture and the contents of the
Church's teaching—viz., that when the time of judgment comes, everlasting
fire, and outer darkness, and a prison, and a furnace, and other punishments
of like. nature, have been prepared for sinners—let us see what our opinions
on these points ought to be.[3] But that these subjects may be arrived
at in proper order, it seems to me that we ought first to consider the
nature of the resurrection, that we may know what that (body) is which
shall come either to punishment, or to rest, or to happiness; which question
in other treatises which we have composed regarding the resurrection we
have discussed at greater length, and have shown what our opinions were
regarding it. But now, also, for the sake of logical order in our treatise,
there will be no absurdity in restating a few points from such works, especially
since some take offence at the creed of the Church, as if our belief in
the resurrection were foolish, and altogether devoid of sense; and these
are principally heretics, who, I think, are to be answered in the following
manner. If they also admit that there is a resurrection of the dead, let
them answer us this, What is that which died? Was it not a body? It is
of the body, then, that there will be a resurrection. Let them next tell
us if they think that we are to make use of bodies or not. I think that
when the Apostle Paul says, that "it is sown a natural body, it will arise
a spiritual body,"[4] they cannot deny that it is a body which arises,
or that in the resurrection we are to make use of bodies. What then? If
it is certain that we are to make use of bodies, and if the bodies which
have fallen are declared to rise again (for only that which before has
fallen can be properly said to rise again), it can be a matter of doubt
to no one that they rise again, in order that we may be clothed with them
a second time at the resurrection. The one thing is closely connected with
the other. For if bodies rise again, they undoubtedly rise to be coverings
for us; and if it is necessary for us to be invested with bodies, as it
is certainly necessary, we ought to be invested with no other than our
own. But if it is true that these rise again, and that they arise "spiritual"
bodies, there can be no doubt that they are said to rise from the dead,
after casting away corruption and laying aside mortality; otherwise it
will appear vain and superfluous for any one to arise from the dead in
order to die a second time. And this, finally, may be more distinctly comprehended
thus, if one carefully consider what are the qualities of an animal body,
which, when sown into the earth, recovers the qualities of a spiritual
body. For it is out of the animal body that the very power and grace of
the resurrection educe the spiritual body, when it transmutes it from a
condition of indignity to one of glory.
2. Since the heretics, however, think themselves persons of great
learning and wisdom, we shall ask them if every body has a form of some
kind, i.e., is fashioned according to some shape. And if they shall say
that a body is that which is fashioned according to no shape, they will
show themselves to be the most ignorant and foolish of mankind. For no
one will deny this, save him who is altogether without any learning. But
if, as a matter of course, they say that every body is certainly fashioned
according to some definite shape, we shall ask them if they can point out
and describe to us the shape of a spiritual body; a thing which they can
by no means do. We shall ask them, moreover, about the differences of those
who rise again. How will they show that statement to be true, that there
is "one flesh of birds, another of fishes; bodies celestial, and bodies
terrestrial; that the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the
terrestrial another; that one is the glory of the sun, another the glory
of the moon, another the glory of the stars; that one star differeth from
another star in glory; and that so is the resurrection of the dead?"[1]
According to that gradation, then, which exists among heavenly bodies,
let them show to us the differences in the glory of those who rise again;
and if they have endeavoured by any means to devise a principle that may
be in accordance with the differences in heavenly bodies, we shall ask
them to assign the differences in the resurrection by a comparison of earthly
bodies. Our understanding of the passage indeed is, that the apostle, wishing
to describe the great difference among those who rise again in glory, i.e.,
of the saints, borrowed a comparison from the heavenly bodies, saying,
"One is the glory of the sun, another the glory of the moon, another the
glory of the stars." And wishing again to teach us the differences among
those who shall come to the resurrection, without having purged themselves
in this life, i.e., sinners, he borrowed an illustration from earthly things,
saying, "There is one flesh of birds, another of fishes." For heavenly
things are worthily compared to the saints, and earthly things to sinners.
These statements are made in reply to those who deny the resurrection of
the dead, i.e., the resurrection of bodies.
3. We now turn our attention to some of our own (believers), who,
either from feebleness of intellect or want of proper instruction, adopt
a very low and abject view of the resurrection of the body. We ask these
persons in what manner they understand that an animal body is to be changed
by the grace of the resurrection, and to become a spiritual one; and how
that which is sown in weakness will arise in power; how that which is planted
in dishonour will arise in glory; and that which was sown in corruption,
will be changed to a state of incorruption. Because if they believe the
apostle, that a body which arises in glory, and power, and incorruptibility,
has already become spiritual, it appears absurd and contrary to his meaning
to say that it can again be entangled with the passions of flesh and blood,
seeing the apostle manifestly declares that "flesh and blood shall not
inherit the kingdom of God, nor shall corruption inherit incorruption."
But how do they understand the declaration of the apostle, "We shall all
be changed?" This transformation certainly is to be looked for, according
to the order which we have taught above; and in it, undoubtedly, it becomes
us to hope for something worthy of divine grace; and this we believe will
take place in the order in which the apostle describes the sowing in the
ground of a "bare grain of corn, or of any other fruit," to which "God
gives a body as it pleases Him," as soon as the grain of corn is dead.
For in the same way also our bodies are to be supposed to fall into the
earth like a grain; and (that germ being implanted in them which contains
the bodily substance) although the bodies die, and become corrupted, and
are scattered abroad, yet by the word of God, that very germ which is always
safe in the substance of the body, raises them from the earth, and restores
and repairs them, as the power which is in the grain of wheat, after its
corruption and death, repairs and restores the grain into a body having
stalk and ear. And so also to those who shall deserve to obtain an inheritance
in the kingdom of heaven, that germ of the body's restoration, which we
have before mentioned, by God's command restores out of the earthly and
animal body a spiritual one, capable of inhabiting the heavens; while to
each one of those who may be of inferior merit, or of more abject condition,
or even the lowest in the scale, and altogether thrust aside, there is
yet given, in proportion to the dignity of his life and soul, a glory and
dignity of body,—nevertheless in such a way, that even the body which rises
again of those who are to be destined to everlasting fire or to severe
punishments, is by the very change of the resurrection so incorruptible,
that it cannot be corrupted and dissolved even by severe punishments. If,
then, such be the qualities of that body which will arise from the dead,
let us now see what is the meaning of the threatening of eternal fire.
4. We find in the prophet Isaiah, that the fire with which each
one is punished is described as his own; for he says, "Walk in the light
of your own fire, and in the flame which ye have kindled.''[1] By these
words it seems to be indicated that every sinner kindles for himself the
flame of his own fire, and is not plunged into some fire which has been
already kindled by another, or was in existence before himself. Of this
fire the fuel and food are our sins, which are called by the Apostle Paul
wood, and hay, and stubble.''[2] And I think that, as abundance of food,
and provisions of a contrary kind and amount, breed fevers in the body,
and fevers, too, of different sorts and duration, according to the proportion
in which the collected poison supplies material and fuel for disease (the
quality of this material, gathered together from different poisons, proving
the causes either of a more acute or more lingering disease); so, when
the soul has gathered together a multitude of evil works, and an abundance
of sins against itself, at a suitable time all that assembly of evils boils
up to punishment, and is set on fire to chastisements; when the mind itself,
or conscience, receiving by divine power into the memory all those things
of which it had stamped on itself certain signs and forms at the moment
of sinning, will see a kind of history, as it were, of all the foul, and
shameful, and unholy deeds which it has done, exposed before its eyes:
then is the conscience itself harassed, and, pierced by its own goads,
becomes an accuser and a witness against itself. And this, I think, was
the opinion of the Apostle Paul himself, when he said, "Their thoughts
mutually accusing or excusing them in the day when God will judge the secrets
of men by Jesus Christ, according to my Gospel."[4] From which it is understood
that around the substance of the soul certain tortures are produced by
the hurtful affections of sins themselves.
5. And that the understanding of this matter may not appear very
difficult, we may draw some considerations from the evil effects of those
passions which are wont to befall some souls, as when a soul is consumed
by the fire of love, or wasted away by zeal or envy, or when the passion
of anger is kindled, or one is consumed by the greatness of his madness
or his sorrow ; on which occasions some, finding the excess of these evils
unbearable, have deemed it more tolerable to submit to death than to endure
perpetually torture of such a kind. You will ask indeed whether, in the
case of those who have been entangled in the evils arising from those vices
above enumerated, and who, while existing in this life, have been unable
to procure any amelioration for themselves, and have in this condition
departed from the world, it be sufficient in the way of punishment that
they be tortured by the remaining in them of these hurtful affections,
i.e., of the anger, or of the fury, or of the madness, or of the sorrow,
whose fatal poison was in this life lessened by no healing medicine; or
whether, these affections being changed, they will be subjected to the
pains of a general punishment. Now I am of opinion that another species
of punishment may be understood to exist; because, as we feel that when
the limbs of the body are loosened and torn away from their mutual supports,
there is produced pain of a most excruciating kind, so, when the soul shall
be found to be beyond the order, and connection, and harmony in which it
was created by God for the purposes of good and useful action and observation,
and not to harmonize with itself in the connection of its rational movements,
it must be deemed to bear the chastisement and torture of its own dissension,
and to feel the punishments of its own disordered condition. And when this
dissolution and rending asunder of soul shall have been tested by the application
of fire, a solidification undoubtedly into a firmer structure will take
place, and a restoration be effected.
6. There are also many other things which escape our notice, and
are known to Him alone who is the physician of our souls. For if, on account
of those bad effects which we bring upon ourselves by eating and drinking,
we deem it necessary for the health of the body to make use of some unpleasant
and painful drug, sometimes even, if the nature of the disease demand,
requiring the severe process of the amputating knife; and if the virulence
of the disease shall transcend even these remedies, the evil has at last
to be burned out by fire; how much more is it to be understood that God
our Physician, desiring to remove the defects of our souls, which they
had contracted from their different sins and crimes, should employ penal
measures of this sort, and should apply even, in addition, the punishment
of fire to those who have lost their soundness of mind! Pictures of this
method of procedure are found also in the holy Scriptures. In the book
of Deuteronomy, the divine word threatens sinners with the punishments
of fevers, and colds, and jaundice,[5] and with the pains of feebleness
of vision, and alienation of mind and paralysis, and blindness, and weakness
of the reins. If any one, then, at his leisure gather together out of the
whole of Scripture all the enumerations of diseases which in the threatenings
addressed to sinners are called by the names of bodily maladies, he will
find that either the vices of souls, or their punishments, are figuratively
indicated by them. To understand now, that in the same way in which physicians
apply remedies to the sick, in order that by careful treatment they may
recover their health, God so deals towards those who have lapsed and fallen
into sin, is proved by this, that the cup of God's fury is ordered, through
the agency of the prophet Jeremiah,[1] to be offered to all nations, that
they may drink it, and be in a state of madness, and vomit it forth. In
doing which, He threatens them, saying, That if any one refuse to drink,
he shall not be cleansed.[2] By which certainly it is understood that the
fury of God's vengeance is profitable for the purgation of souls. That
the punishment, also, which is said to be applied by fire, is understood
to be applied with the object of healing, is taught by Isaiah, who speaks
thus of Israel: "The Lord will wash away the filth of the sons or daughters
of Zion, and shall purge away the blood from the midst of them by the spirit
of judgment, and the spirit of burning."[3] Of the Chaldeans he thus speaks:
"Thou hast the coals of fire; sit upon them: they will be to thee a help."[4]
And in other passages he says, "The Lord will sanctify in a burning fire"[5]
and in the prophecies of Malachi he says, "The Lord sitting will blow,
and purify, and will pour forth the cleansed sons of Judah."[6]
7. But that fate also which is mentioned in the Gospels as overtaking
unfaithful stewards who, it is said, are to be divided, and a portion of
them placed along with unbelievers, as if that portion which is not their
own were to be sent elsewhere, undoubtedly indicates some kind of punishment
on those whose spirit, as it seems to me, is shown to be separated from
the soul. For if this Spirit is of divine nature, i.e., is understood to
be a Holy Spirit, we shall understand this to be said of the gift of the
Holy Spirit: that when, whether by baptism, or by the grace of the Spirit,
the word of wisdom, or the word of knowledge, or of any other gift, has
been bestowed upon a man, and not rightly administered, i.e., either buried
in the earth or tied up in a napkin, the gift of the Spirit will certainly
be withdrawn from his soul, and the other portion which remains, that is,
the substance of the soul, will be assigned its place with unbelievers,
being divided and separated from that Spirit with whom, by joining itself
to the Lord, it ought to have been one spirit. Now, if this is not to be
understood of the Spirit of God, but of the nature of the soul itself,
that will be called its better part which was made in the image and likeness
of God; whereas the other part, that which afterwards, through its fall
by the exercise of free-will, was assumed contrary to the nature of its
original condition of purity,—this part, as being the friend and beloved
of matter, is punished with the fate of unbelievers. There is also a third
sense in which that separation may be understood, this viz., that as each
believer, although the humblest in the Church, is said to be attended by
an angel, who is declared by the Saviour always to behold the face of God
the Father, and as this angel was certainly one with the object of his
guardianship; so, if the latter is rendered unworthy by his want of obedience,
the angel of God is said to be taken from him, and then that part of him—the
part, viz., which belongs to his human nature—being rent away from the
divine part, is assigned a place along with unbelievers, because it has
not faithfully observed the admonitions of the angel allotted it by God.
8. But the outer darkness, in nay judgment, is to be understood not so much of some dark atmosphere without any light, as of those persons who, being plunged in the darkness of profound ignorance, have been placed beyond the reach of any light of the understanding. We must see, also, lest this perhaps should be the meaning of the expression, that as the saints will receive those bodies in which they have lived in holiness and purity in the habitations of this life, bright and glorious after the resurrection, so the wicked also, who in this life have loved the darkness of error and the night of ignorance, may be clothed with dark and black bodies after the resurrection, that the very mist of ignorance which had in this life taken possession of their minds within them, may appear in the future as the external covering of the body. Similar is the view to be entertained regarding the prison. Let these remarks, which have been made as brief as possible, that the order of our discourse in the meantime might be preserved, suffice for the present occasion.
CHAP. XI.—ON COUNTER PROMISES.[7]
1. Let us now briefly see what views we are to form regarding
promises.
It is certain that there is no living thing which can be altogether
inactive and immoveable, but delights in motion of every kind, and in perpetual
activity and volition; and this nature, I think it evident, is in all living
things. Much more, then, must a rational animal, i.e., the nature of man,
be in perpetual movement and activity. If, indeed, he is forgetful of himself,
and ignorant of what becomes him, all his efforts are directed to serve
the uses of the body, and in all his movements he is occupied with his
own pleasures and bodily lusts; but if he be one who studies to care or
provide for the general good, then, either by consulting for the benefit
of the state or by obeying the magistrates, he exerts himself for that,
whatever it is, which may seem certainly to promote the public advantage.
And if now any one be of such a nature as to understand that there is something
better than those things which seem to be corporeal, and so bestow his
labour upon wisdom and science, then he will undoubtedly direct all his
attention towards pursuits of that kind, that he may, by inquiring into
the truth, ascertain the causes and reason of things. As therefore, in
this life, one man deems it the highest good to enjoy bodily pleasures,
another to consult for the benefit of the community, a third to devote
attention to study and learning; so let us inquire whether in that life
which is the true one (which is said to be hidden with Christ in God, i.e.,
in that eternal life), there will be for us some such order and condition
of existence.
2. Certain persons, then, refusing the labour of thinking, and
adopting a superficial view of the letter of the law, and yielding rather
in some measure to the indulgence of their own desires and lusts, being
disciples of the letter alone, are of opinion that the fulfilment of the
promises of the future are to be looked for in bodily pleasure and luxury;
and therefore they especially desire to have again, after the resurrection,
such bodily structures[1] as may never be without the power of eating,
and drinking, and performing all the functions of flesh and blood, not
following the opinion of the Apostle Paul regarding the resurrection of
a spiritual body. And consequently they say, that after the resurrection
there will be marriages, and the begetting of children, imagining to themselves
that the earthly city of Jerusalem is to be rebuilt, its foundations laid
in precious stones, and its walls constructed of jasper, and its battlements
of crystal; that it is to have a wall composed of many precious stones,
as jasper, and sapphire, and chalcedony, and emerald, and sardonyx, and
onyx, and chrysolite, and chrysoprase, and jacinth, and amethyst. Moreover,
they think that the natives of other countries are to be given them as
the ministers of their pleasures, whom they are to employ either as tillers
of the field or builders of walls, and by whom their ruined and fallen
city is again to be raised up; and they think that they are to receive
the wealth of the nations to live on, and that they will have control over
their riches; that even the camels of Midian and Kedar will come, and bring
to them gold, and incense, and precious stones. And these views they think
to establish on the authority of the prophets by those promises which are
written regarding Jerusalem; and by those passages also where it is said,
that they who serve the Lord shall eat and drink, but that sinners shall
hunger and thirst; that the righteous shall be joyful, but that sorrow
shall possess the wicked. And from the New Testament also they quote the
saying of the Saviour, in which He makes a promise to His disciples concerning
the joy of wine, saying, "Henceforth I shall not drink of this cup, until
I drink it with you new in My Father's kingdom."[2] They add, moreover,
that declaration, in which the Saviour calls those blessed who now hunger
and thirst,[3] promising them that they shall be satisfied; and many other
scriptural illustrations are adduced by them, the meaning of which they
do not perceive is to be taken figuratively. Then, again, agreeably to
the form of things in this life, and according to the gradations of the
dignities or ranks in this world, or the greatness of their powers, they
think they are to be kings and princes, like those earthly monarchs who
now exist; chiefly, as it appears, on account of that expression in the
Gospel: "Have thou power over five cities."[4] And to speak shortly, according
to the manner of things in this life in all similar matters, do they desire
the fulfilment of all things looked for in the promises, viz., that what
now is should exist again. Such are the views of those who, while believing
in Christ, understand the divine Scriptures in a sort of Jewish sense,
drawing from them nothing worthy of the divine promises.
3. Those, however, who receive the representations of Scripture
according to the understanding of the apostles, entertain the hope that
the saints will eat indeed, but that it will be the bread of life, which
may nourish the soul with the food of truth and wisdom, and enlighten the
mind, and cause it to drink from the cup of divine wisdom, according to
the declaration of holy Scripture: "Wisdom has prepared her table, she
has killed her beasts, she has mingled her wine in her cup, and she cries
with a loud voice, Come to me, eat the bread which I have prepared for
you, and drink the wine which I have mingled."[5] By this food of wisdom,
the understanding, being nourished to an entire and perfect condition like
that in which man was made at the beginning, is restored to the image and
likeness of God; so that, although an individual may depart from this life
less perfectly instructed, but who has done works that are approved of,[1]
he will be capable of receiving instruction in that Jerusalem, the city
of the saints, i.e., he will be educated and moulded, and made a living
stone, a stone elect and precious, because he has undergone with firmness
and constancy the struggles of life and the trials of piety; and will there
come to a truer and clearer knowledge of that which here has been already
predicted, viz., that "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every
word which proceedeth from the mouth of God."[2] And they also are to be
understood to be the princes and rulers who both govern those of lower
rank, and instruct them, and teach them, and train them to divine things.
4. But if these views should not appear to fill the minds of those
who hope for such results with a becoming desire, let us go back a little,
and, irrespective of the natural and innate longing of the mind for the
thing itself, let us make inquiry so that we may be able at last to describe,
as it were, the very forms of the bread of life, and the quality of that
wine, and the peculiar nature of the principalities, all in conformity
with the spiritual view of things.[3] Now, as in those arts which are usually
performed by means of manual labour, the reason why a thing is done, or
why it is of a special quality, or for a special purpose, is an object
of investigation to the mind,[4] while the actual work itself is unfolded
to view by the agency of the hands; so, in those works of God which were
created by Him, it is to be observed that the reason and understanding
of those things which we see done by Him remains undisclosed. And as, when
our eye beholds the products of an artist's labour, the mind, immediately
on perceiving anything of unusual artistic excellence, burns to know of
what nature it is, or how it was formed, or to what purposes it was fashioned;
so, in a much greater degree, and in one that is beyond all comparison,
does the mind burn with an inexpressible desire to know the reason of those
things which we see done by God. This desire, this longing, we believe
to be unquestionably implanted within us by God; and as the eye naturally
seeks the light and vision, and our body naturally desires food and drink,
so our mind is possessed with a becoming and natural desire to become acquainted
with the truth of God and the causes of things. Now we have received this
desire from God, not in order that it should never be gratified or be capable
of gratification; otherwise the love of truth would appear to have been
implanted by God into our minds to no purpose, if it were never to have
an opportunity of satisfaction. Whence also, even in this life, those who
devote themselves with great labour to the pursuits of piety and religion,
although obtaining only some small fragments from the numerous and immense
treasures of divine knowledge, yet, by the very circumstance that their
mind and soul is engaged in these pursuits, and that in the eagerness of
their desire they outstrip themselves, do they derive much advantage; and,
because their minds are directed to the study and love of the investigation
of truth, are they made fitter for receiving the instruction that is to
come; as if, when one would paint an image, he were first with a light
pencil to trace out the outlines of the coming picture, and prepare marks
for the reception of the features that are to be afterwards added, this
preliminary sketch in outline is found to prepare the way for the laying
on of the true colours of the painting; so, in a measure, an outline and
sketch may be traced on the tablets of our heart by the pencil of our Lord
Jesus Christ. And therefore perhaps is it said, "Unto every one that hath
shall be given, and be added."[5] By which it is established, that to those
who possess in this life a kind of outline of truth and knowledge, shall
be added the beauty of a perfect image in the future.
5. Some such desire, I apprehend, was indicated by him who said,
"I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be with
Christ, which is far better; "[6] knowing that when he should have returned
to Christ he would then know more clearly the reasons of all things which
are done on earth, either respecting man, or the soul of man, or the mind;
or regarding any other subject, such as, for instance, what is the Spirit
that operates, what also is the vital spirit, or what is the grace of the
Holy Spirit that is given to believers. Then also will he understand what
Israel appears to be, or what is meant by the diversity of nations; what
the twelve tribes of Israel mean, and what the individual people of each
tribe. Then, too, will he understand the reason of the priests and Levites,
and of the different priestly orders, the type of which was in Moses, and
also what is the true meaning of the jubilees, and of the weeks of years
with God. He will see also the reasons for the festival days, and holy
days, and for all the sacrifices and purifications. He will perceive also
the reason of the purgation from leprosy, and what the different kinds
of leprosy are, and the reason of the purgation of those who lose their
seed. He will come to know, moreover, what are the good influences,[1]
and their greatness, and their qualities; and those too which are of a
contrary kind, and what the affection of the former, and what the strife-causing
emulation of the latter is towards men. He will behold also the nature
of the soul, and the diversity of animals (whether of those which live
in the water, or of birds, or of wild beasts), and why each of the genera
is subdivided into so many species; and what intention of the Creator,
or what purpose of His wisdom, is concealed in each individual thing. He
will become acquainted, too, with the reason why certain properties are
found associated with certain roots or herbs, and why, on the other hand,
evil effects are averted by other herbs and roots. He will know, moreover,
the nature of the apostate angels, and the reason why they have power to
flatter in some things those who do not despise them with the whole power
of faith, and why they exist for the purpose of deceiving and leading men
astray. He will learn, too, the judgment of Divine Providence on each individual
thing; and that, of those events which happen to men, none occur by accident
or chance, but in accordance with a plan so carefully considered, and so
stupendous, that it does not overlook even the number of the hairs of the
heads, not merely of the saints, but perhaps of all human beings, and the
plan of which providential government extends even to caring for the sale
of two sparrows for a denarius, whether sparrows there be understood figuratively
or literally. Now indeed this providential government is still a subject
of investigation, but then it will be fully manifested. From all which
we are to suppose, that meanwhile not a little time may pass by until the
reason of those things only which are upon the earth be pointed out to
the worthy and deserving after their departure from life, that by the knowledge
of all these things, and by the grace of full knowledge, they may enjoy
an unspeakable joy. Then, if that atmosphere which is between heaven and
earth is not devoid of inhabitants, and those of a rational kind, as the
apostle says, "Wherein in times past ye walked according to the course
of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit
who now worketh in the children of disobedience."[2] And again he says,
"We shall be caught up in the clouds to meet Christ in the air, and so
shall we ever be with the Lord."[3]
6. We are therefore to suppose that the saints will remain there
until they recognise the twofold mode of government in those things which
are performed in the air. And when I say "twofold mode," I mean this: When
we were upon earth, we saw either animals or trees, and beheld the differences
among them, and also the very great diversity among men; but although we
saw these things, we did not understand the reason of them; and this only
was suggested to us from the visible diversity, that we should examine
and inquire upon what principle these things were either created or diversely
arranged. And a zeal or desire for knowledge of this kind being conceived
by us on earth, the full understanding and comprehension of it will be
granted after death, if indeed the result should follow according to our
expectations. When, therefore, we shall have fury comprehended its nature,
we shall understand in a twofold manner what we saw on earth. Some such
view, then, must we hold regarding this abode in the air. I think, therefore,
that all the saints who depart from this life will remain in some place
situated on the earth, which holy Scripture calls paradise, as in some
place of instruction, and, so to speak, class-room or school of souls,
in which they are to be instructed regarding all the things which they
had seen on earth, and are to receive also some information respecting
things that are to follow in the future, as even when in this life they
had obtained in some degree indications of future events, although "through
a glass darkly," all of which are revealed more clearly and distinctly
to the saints in their proper time and place. If any one indeed be pure
in heart, and holy in mind, and more practised in perception, he will,
by making more rapid progress, quickly ascend to a place in the air, and
reach the kingdom of heaven, through those mansions, so to speak, in the
various places which the Greeks have termed spheres, i.e., globes, but
which holy Scripture has called heavens; in each of which he will first
see clearly what is done there, and in the second place, will discover
the reason why things are so done: and thus he will in order pass through
all gradations, following Him who hath passed into the heavens, Jesus the
Son of God, who said, "I will that where I am, these may be also."[4] And
of this diversity of places He speaks, when He says, "In My Father's house
are many mansions." He Himself is everywhere, and passes swiftly through
all things; nor are we any longer to understand Him as existing in those
narrow Limits in which He was once confined for our sakes, i.e., not in
that circumscribed body which He occupied on earth, when dwelling among
men, according to which He might be considered as enclosed in some one
place.
7. When, then, the saints shall have reached the celestial abodes, they will clearly see the nature of the stars one by one, and will under- 300
stand whether they are endued with life, or their condition, whatever it is. And they will comprehend also the other reasons for the works of God, which He Himself will reveal to them. For He will show to them, as to children, the causes of things and the power of His creation,[1] and will explain why that star was placed in that particular quarter of the sky, and why it was separated from another by so great an intervening space; what, e.g., would have been the consequence if it had been nearer or more remote; or if that star had been larger than this, how the totality of things would not have remained the same, but all would have been transformed into a different condition of being. And so, when they have finished all those matters which are connected with the stars, and with the heavenly revolutions, they will come to those which are not seen, or to those whose names only we have heard, and to things which are invisible, which the Apostle Paul has informed us are numerous, although what they are, or what difference may exist among them, we cannot even conjecture by our feeble intellect. And thus the rational nature, growing by each individual step, not as it grew in this life in flesh, and body, and soul, but enlarged in understanding and in power of perception, is raised as a mind already perfect to perfect knowledge, no longer at all impeded by those carnal senses, but increased in intellectual growth; and ever gazing purely, and, so to speak, face to face, on the causes of things, it attains perfection, firstly, viz., that by which it ascends to (the truth),[2] and secondly, that by which it abides in it, having problems and the understanding of things, and the causes of events, as the food on which it may feast. For as in this life our bodies grow physically to what they are, through a sufficiency of food in early life supplying the means of increase, but after the due height has been attained we use food no longer to grow, but to live, and to be preserved in life by it; so also I think that the mind, when it has attained perfection, eats and avails itself of suitable and appropriate food in such a degree, that nothing ought to be either deficient or superfluous. And in all things this food is to be understood as the contemplation and understanding of God, which is of a measure appropriate and suitable to this nature, which was made and created; and this measure it is proper should be observed by every one of those who are beginning to see God, i.e., to understand Him through purity of heart.
End of Etext ORIGEN DE PRINCIPIIS, v2 by ORIGEN
Return to www.BrainFly.Net