The writings of Origen_ Vol. 1 (of 2) Origen 2286 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of The writings of Origen, Vol. 1
(of 2)
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.

Title: The writings of Origen, Vol. 1 (of 2)

Author: Origen

Contributor: Sextus Julius Africanus

Translator: Frederick Crombie

Release date: April 15, 2023 [eBook #70561]

Language: English

Original publication: United Kingdom: T. & T. Clark, 1869

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/70561

Credits: Wouter Franssen, David King, and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net. (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive.)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE WRITINGS
OF ORIGEN, VOL. 1 (OF 2) ***

The Writings of Origen, Vol. 1 of 2

MURRAY AND GIBB, EDINBURGH,
PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY’S STATIONERY OFFICE.

THE WRITINGS OF ORIGEN.
TRANSLATED BY

REV. FREDERICK CROMBIE, M.A.,
PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL CRITICISM, ST. MARY’S
COLLEGE, ST. ANDREWS.

VOL. I.

EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.
LONDON: HAMILTON & CO. DUBLIN: JOHN ROBERTSON & CO.
MDCCCLXIX.

CONTENTS.

Introductory Notice, vii
Prologue of Rufinus to the De Principiis, xi

ORIGEN DE PRINCIPIIS.
Preface, 1

BOOK I.
Chap. I. On God, 8
Chap. II. On Christ, 18
Chap. III. On the Holy Spirit, 33
Chap. IV. On Defection, or Falling Away, 43
Chap. V. On Rational Natures, 44
Chap. VI. On the End or Consummation, 53
Chap. VII. On Incorporeal and Corporeal Beings, 59
Chap. VIII. On the Angels, 65
Fragments from the First Book, 71

BOOK II.
Chap. I. On the World, 72
Chap. II. On the Perpetuity of Bodily Nature, 77
Chap. III. On the Beginning of the World, and its Causes, 79

Chap. IV. The God of the Law and the Prophets, and the Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, is the same God, 91
Chap. V. On Justice and Goodness, 97
Chap. VI. On the Incarnation of Christ, 105
Chap. VII. On the Holy Spirit, 113
Chap. VIII. On the Soul (Anima), 118
Chap. IX. On the World, and the Movements of Rational Creatures, whether
good or bad; and on the Causes of them, 126
Chap. X. On the Resurrection, and the Judgment, the Fire of Hell, and
Punishments, 136
Chap. XI. On Counter Promises, 145

BOOK III.
Preface of Rufinus, 154
Chap. I. On the Freedom of the Will, 156
Chap. II. On the Opposing Powers, 222
Chap. III. On Threefold Wisdom, 237
Chap. IV. On Human Temptations, 244
Chap. V. That the World took its Beginning in Time, 253
Chap. VI. On the End of the World, 262

BOOK IV.
Chap. I. That the Scriptures are divinely inspired, 274
INDEX, 357

Letter to Origen from Africanus about the History of Susanna, 369
Letter from Origen to Africanus, 371

Letter from Origen to Gregory, 388

ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS—
Book I., 393

INTRODUCTORY NOTICE.

The name of the illustrious Origen comes before us in this volume in
connection with his works De Principiis, Epistola ad Africanum, and
Contra Celsum. Of these, the first two have been given entire, while of the
third we have been able at present only to give the first book. A full account
of the life and writings of the author will be prefixed to our next volume of
his works. Meanwhile, we restrict ourselves to a brief notice of the three
which have been mentioned.
It is in his treatise Περὶ Ἀρχῶν, or, as it is commonly known under the Latin
title, De Principiis, that Origen most fully develops his system, and brings
out his peculiar principles. None of his works exposed him to so much
animadversion in the ancient church as this. On it chiefly was based the
charge of heresy which some vehemently pressed against him,—a charge
from which even his firmest friends felt it no easy matter absolutely to
defend him. The points on which it was held that he had plainly departed
from the orthodox faith, were the four following:—First, That the souls of
men had existed in a previous state, and that their imprisonment in material
bodies was a punishment for sins which they had then committed. Second,
That the human soul of Christ had also previously existed, and been united
to the Divine nature before that incarnation of the Son of God which is
related in the Gospels. Third, That our material bodies shall be transformed
into absolutely ethereal ones at the resurrection; and fourth, That all men,
and even devils, shall be finally restored through the mediation of Christ.
His principles of interpreting Scripture are also brought out in this treatise;
and while not a little ingenuity is displayed in illustrating and maintaining
them, the serious errors into which they might too easily lead will be at
once perceived by the reader.
It is much to be regretted that the original Greek of the De Principiis has for
the most part perished. We possess it chiefly in a Latin translation by

Rufinus. And there can be no doubt that he often took great liberties with
his author. So much was this felt to be the case, that Jerome undertook a
new translation of the work; but only small portions of his version have
reached our day. He strongly accuses Rufinus of unfaithfulness as an
interpreter, while he also inveighs bitterly against Origen himself, as having
departed from the catholic faith, specially in regard to the doctrine of the
Trinity. There seems, however, after all, no adequate reason to doubt the
substantial orthodoxy of our author, although the bent of his mind and the
nature of his studies led him to indulge in many vain and unauthorized
speculations.
The Epistle to Africanus was drawn forth by a letter which that learned
writer had addressed to Origen respecting the story of Susanna appended to
the book of Daniel. Africanus had grave doubts as to the canonical authority
of the account. Origen replies to his objections, and seeks to uphold the
story as both useful in itself, and a genuine portion of the ancient
prophetical writings.
The treatise of Origen Against Celsus is, of all his works, the most
interesting to the modern reader. It is a defence of Christianity in opposition
to a Greek philosopher named Celsus, who had attacked it in a work
entitled Ἀληθὴς Λόγος, that is, The True Word, or The True Discourse. Of
this work we know nothing, except from the quotations contained in the
answer given to it by Origen. Nor has anything very certain been
ascertained respecting its author. According to Origen, he was a follower of
Epicurus, but others have regarded him as a Platonist. If we may judge of
the work by those specimens of it preserved in the reply of Origen, it was
little better than a compound of sophistry and slander. But there is reason to
be grateful for it, as having called forth the admirable answer of Origen.
This work was written in the old age of our author, and is composed with
great care; while it abounds with proofs of the widest erudition. It is also
perfectly orthodox; and, as Bishop Bull has remarked, it is only fair that we
should judge from a work written with the view of being considered by the
world at large, and with the most elaborate care, as to the mature and finally
accepted views of the author.
The best edition of Origen’s works is that superintended by Charles and
Charles Vincent de la Rue, Paris 1783, 4 vols. fol., which is reprinted by
Migne. There is also an edition in 25 volumes, based upon that of De la

Rue, but without the Latin translation, by Lommatzsch, Berlin 1831-1848.
The De Principiis has been separately edited by Redepenning, Leipzig
1836. Spencer edited the Contra Celsum, Cambridge 1677.

PROLOGUE OF RUFINUS TO THE DE PRINCIPIIS.

I know that very many of the brethren, induced by their thirst for a
knowledge of the Scriptures, have requested some distinguished men, well
versed in Greek learning, to translate Origen into Latin, and so make him
accessible to Roman readers. Among these, when our brother and
colleague[1] had, at the earnest entreaty of Bishop Damasus, translated two
of the Homilies on the Song of Songs out of Greek into Latin, he prefixed
so elegant and noble a preface to that work, as to inspire every one with a
most eager desire to read and study Origen, saying that the expression, “The
King hath brought me into his chamber,”[2] was appropriate to his feelings,
and declaring that while Origen in his other works surpassed all writers, he
in the Song of Songs surpassed even himself. He promises, indeed, in that
very preface, that he will present the books on the Song of Songs, and
numerous others of the works of Origen, in a Latin translation, to Roman
readers. But he, finding greater pleasure in compositions of his own,
pursues an end that is attended with greater fame, viz. in being the author
rather than the translator of works. Accordingly we enter upon the
undertaking, which was thus begun and approved of by him, although we
cannot compose in a style of elegance equal to that of a man of such
distinguished eloquence; and therefore I am afraid lest, through my fault,
the result should follow, that that man, whom he deservedly esteems as the
second teacher of knowledge and wisdom in the church after the apostles,
should, through the poverty of my language, appear far inferior to what he
is. And this consideration, which frequently recurred to my mind, kept me
silent, and prevented me from yielding to the numerous entreaties of my
brethren, until your influence, my very faithful brother Macarius, which is
so great, rendered it impossible for my unskilfulness any longer to offer
resistance. And therefore, that I might not find you too grievous an exactor,
I gave way, even contrary to my resolution; on the condition and
arrangement, however, that in my translation I should follow as far as

possible the rule observed by my predecessors, and especially by that
distinguished man whom I have mentioned above, who, after translating
into Latin more than seventy of those treatises of Origen which are styled
Homilies, and a considerable number also of his writings on the apostles, in
which a good many “stumbling-blocks” are found in the original Greek, so
smoothed and corrected them in his translation, that a Latin reader would
meet with nothing which could appear discordant with our belief. His
example, therefore, we follow, to the best of our ability; if not with equal
power of eloquence, yet at least with the same strictness of rule, taking care
not to reproduce those expressions occurring in the works of Origen which
are inconsistent with and opposed to each other. The cause of these
variations we have explained more freely in the Apologeticus, which
Pamphilus wrote in defence of the works of Origen, where we added a brief
tract, in which we showed, I think, by unmistakeable proofs, that his books
had been corrupted in numerous places by heretics and malevolent persons,
and especially those books of which you now require me to undertake the
translation, i.e. the books which may be entitled De Principiis or De
Principatibus, and which are indeed in other respects full of obscurities and
difficulties. For he there discusses those subjects with respect to which
philosophers, after spending all their lives upon them, have been unable to
discover anything. But here our author strove, as much as in him lay, to turn
to the service of religion the belief in a Creator, and the rational nature of
created beings, which the latter had degraded to purposes of wickedness. If,
therefore, we have found anywhere in his writings, any statement opposed
to that view, which elsewhere in his works he had himself piously laid
down regarding the Trinity, we have either omitted it, as being corrupt, and
not the composition of Origen, or we have brought it forward, agreeably to
the rule which we frequently find affirmed by himself. If, indeed, in his
desire to pass rapidly on, he has, as speaking to persons of skill and
knowledge, sometimes expressed himself obscurely, we have, in order that
the passage might be clearer, added what we had read more fully stated on
the same subject in his other works, keeping explanation in view, but
adding nothing of our own, but simply restoring to him what was his,
although occurring in other portions of his writings.
These remarks, therefore, by way of admonition, I have made in the
preface, lest slanderous individuals perhaps should think that they had a
second time discovered matter of accusation. But let perverse and

disputatious men have a care what they are about. For we have in the
meantime undertaken this heavy labour, if God should aid your prayers, not
to shut the mouths of slanderers (which is impossible, although God
perhaps will do it), but to afford material to those who desire to advance in
the knowledge of these things. And, verily, in the presence of God the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, I adjure and beseech every
one, who may either transcribe or read these books, by his belief in the
kingdom to come, by the mystery of the resurrection from the dead, and by
that everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels, that, as he would
not possess for an eternal inheritance that place where there is weeping and
gnashing of teeth, and where their fire is not quenched and their worm dieth
not, he add nothing to Scripture, and take nothing away from it, and make
no insertion or alteration, but that he compare his transcript with the copies
from which he made it, and make the emendations and distinctions
according to the letter, and not have his manuscript incorrect or indistinct,
lest the difficulty of ascertaining the sense, from the indistinctness of the
copy, should cause greater difficulties to the readers.

ORIGEN DE PRINCIPIIS.

PREFACE.

1. All who believe and are assured that grace and truth were obtained
through Jesus Christ, and who know Christ to be the truth, agreeably to His
own declaration, “I am the truth,”[3] derive the knowledge which incites men
to a good and happy life from no other source than from the very words and
teaching of Christ. And by the words of Christ we do not mean those only
which He spake when He became man and tabernacled in the flesh; for
before that time, Christ, the Word of God, was in Moses and the prophets.
For without the Word of God, how could they have been able to prophesy of
Christ? And were it not our purpose to confine the present treatise within
the limits of all attainable brevity, it would not be difficult to show, in proof
of this statement, out of the Holy Scriptures, how Moses or the prophets
both spake and performed all they did through being filled with the Spirit of
Christ. And therefore I think it sufficient to quote this one testimony of Paul
from the Epistle to the Hebrews, in which he says: “By faith Moses, when
he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter;
choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the
pleasures of sin for a season; esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches
than the treasures of the Egyptians.”[4] Moreover, that after His ascension
into heaven He spake in His apostles, is shown by Paul in these words: “Or
do you seek a proof of Christ, who speaketh in me?”[5]
2. Since many, however, of those who profess to believe in Christ differ
from each other, not only in small and trifling matters, but also on subjects
of the highest importance, as e.g. regarding God, or the Lord Jesus Christ,
or the Holy Spirit; and not only regarding these, but also regarding others
which are created existences, viz. the powers[6] and the holy virtues;[7] it
seems on that account necessary first of all to fix a definite limit and to lay
down an unmistakeable rule regarding each one of these, and then to pass to
the investigation of other points. For as we ceased to seek for truth
(notwithstanding the professions of many among Greeks and Barbarians to
make it known) among all who claimed it for erroneous opinions, after we
had come to believe that Christ was the Son of God, and were persuaded
that we must learn it from Himself; so, seeing there are many who think

they hold the opinions of Christ, and yet some of these think differently
from their predecessors, yet as the teaching of the church, transmitted in
orderly succession from the apostles, and remaining in the churches to the
present day, is still preserved, that alone is to be accepted as truth which
differs in no respect from ecclesiastical and apostolical tradition.
3. Now it ought to be known that the holy apostles, in preaching the faith of
Christ, delivered themselves with the utmost clearness on certain points
which they believed to be necessary to every one, even to those who
seemed somewhat dull in the investigation of divine knowledge; leaving,
however, the grounds of their statements to be examined into by those who
should deserve the excellent gifts of the Spirit, and who, especially by
means of the Holy Spirit Himself, should obtain the gift of language, of
wisdom, and of knowledge: while on other subjects they merely stated the
fact that things were so, keeping silence as to the manner or origin of their
existence; clearly in order that the more zealous of their successors, who
should be lovers of wisdom, might have a subject of exercise on which to
display the fruit of their talents,—those persons, I mean, who should
prepare themselves to be fit and worthy receivers of wisdom.
4. The particular points[8] clearly delivered in the teaching of the apostles
are as follow:
First, That there is one God, who created and arranged all things, and who,
when nothing existed, called all things into being—God from the first
creation and foundation of the world—the God of all just men, of Adam,
Abel, Seth, Enos, Enoch, Noe, Sem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the twelve
patriarchs, Moses, and the prophets; and that this God in the last days, as He
had announced beforehand by His prophets, sent our Lord Jesus Christ to
call in the first place Israel to Himself, and in the second place the Gentiles,
after the unfaithfulness of the people of Israel. This just and good God, the
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Himself gave the law, and the prophets, and
the gospels, being also the God of the apostles and of the Old and New
Testaments.
Secondly, That Jesus Christ Himself, who came [into the world], was born
of the Father before all creatures; that, after He had been the servant of the
Father in the creation of all things—“For by Him were all things made”[9]—
He in the last times, divesting Himself [of His glory], became a man, and

was incarnate although God, and while made a man remained the God
which He was; that He assumed a body like to our own, differing in this
respect only, that it was born of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit: that this
Jesus Christ was truly born, and did truly suffer, and did not endure this
death common [to man] in appearance only, but did truly die; that He did
truly rise from the dead; and that after His resurrection He conversed with
His disciples, and was taken up [into heaven].
Then, thirdly, the apostles related that the Holy Spirit was associated in
honour and dignity with the Father and the Son. But in His case it is not
clearly distinguished whether He is to be regarded as born or innate,[10] or
also as a Son of God or not: for these are points which have to be inquired
into out of sacred Scripture according to the best of our ability, and which
demand careful investigation. And that this Spirit inspired each one of the
saints, whether prophets or apostles; and that there was not one Spirit in the
men of the old dispensation, and another in those who were inspired at the
advent of Christ, is most clearly taught throughout the churches.
5. After these points, also, the apostolic teaching is that the soul, having a
substance[11] and life of its own, shall, after its departure from the world, be
rewarded according to its deserts, being destined to obtain either an
inheritance of eternal life and blessedness, if its actions shall have procured
this for it, or to be delivered up to eternal fire and punishments, if the guilt
of its crimes shall have brought it down to this: and also, that there is to be a
time of resurrection from the dead, when this body, which now “is sown in
corruption, shall rise in incorruption,” and that which “is sown in dishonour
will rise in glory.”[12] This also is clearly defined in the teaching of the
church, that every rational soul is possessed of free-will and volition; that it
has a struggle to maintain with the devil and his angels, and opposing
influences,[13] because they strive to burden it with sins; but if we live
rightly and wisely, we should endeavour to shake ourselves free of a burden
of that kind. From which it follows, also, that we understand ourselves not
to be subject to necessity, so as to be compelled by all means, even against
our will, to do either good or evil. For if we are our own masters, some
influences perhaps may impel us to sin, and others help us to salvation; we
are not forced, however, by any necessity either to act rightly or wrongly,
which those persons think is the case who say that the courses and
movements of the stars are the cause of human actions, not only of those

which take place beyond the influence of the freedom of the will, but also
of those which are placed within our own power. But with respect to the
soul, whether it is derived from the seed by a process of traducianism, so
that the reason or substance of it may be considered as placed in the seminal
particles of the body themselves, or whether it has any other beginning; and
this beginning itself, whether it be by birth or not, or whether bestowed
upon the body from without or no, is not distinguished with sufficient
clearness in the teaching of the church.
6. Regarding the devil and his angels, and the opposing influences, the
teaching of the church has laid down that these beings exist indeed; but
what they are, or how they exist, it has not explained with sufficient
clearness. This opinion, however, is held by most, that the devil was an
angel, and that, having become an apostate, he induced as many of the
angels as possible to fall away with himself, and these up to the present
time are called his angels.
7. This also is a part of the church’s teaching, that the world was made and
took its beginning at a certain time, and is to be destroyed on account of its
wickedness. But what existed before this world, or what will exist after it,
has not become certainly known to the many, for there is no clear statement
regarding it in the teaching of the church.
8. Then, finally, that the Scriptures were written by the Spirit of God, and
have a meaning, not such only as is apparent at first sight, but also another,
which escapes the notice of most. For those [words] which are written are
the forms of certain mysteries,[14] and the images of divine things.
Respecting which there is one opinion throughout the whole church, that
the whole law is indeed spiritual; but that the spiritual meaning which the
law conveys is not known to all, but to those only on whom the grace of the
Holy Spirit is bestowed in the word of wisdom and knowledge.
The term ἀσώματον, i.e. incorporeal, is disused and unknown, not only in
many other writings, but also in our own Scriptures. And if any one should
quote it to us out of the little treatise entitled The Doctrine of Peter,[15] in
which the Saviour seems to say to His disciples, “I am not an incorporeal
demon,”[16] I have to reply, in the first place, that that work is not included
among ecclesiastical books; for we can show that it was not composed
either by Peter or by any other person inspired by the Spirit of God. But

even if the point were to be conceded, the word ἀσώματον there does not
convey the same meaning as is intended by Greek and Gentile authors when
incorporeal nature is discussed by philosophers. For in the little treatise
referred to he used the phrase “incorporeal demon” to denote that that form
or outline of demoniacal body, whatever it is, does not resemble this gross
and visible body of ours; but, agreeably to the intention of the author of the
treatise, it must be understood to mean that He had not such a body as
demons have, which is naturally fine,[17] and thin as if formed of air (and for
this reason is either considered or called by many incorporeal), but that He
had a solid and palpable body. Now, according to human custom,
everything which is not of that nature is called by the simple or ignorant
incorporeal; as if one were to say that the air which we breathe was
incorporeal, because it is not a body of such a nature as can be grasped and
held, or can offer resistance to pressure.
9. We shall inquire, however, whether the thing which Greek philosophers
call ἀσώματον, or “incorporeal,” is found in holy Scripture under another
name. For it is also to be a subject of investigation how God Himself is to
be understood,—whether as corporeal, and formed according to some
shape, or of a different nature from bodies,—a point which is not clearly
indicated in our teaching. And the same inquiries have to be made regarding
Christ and the Holy Spirit, as well as respecting every soul, and everything
possessed of a rational nature.
10. This also is a part of the teaching of the church, that there are certain
angels of God, and certain good influences, which are His servants in
accomplishing the salvation of men. When these, however, were created, or
of what nature they are, or how they exist, is not clearly stated. Regarding
the sun, moon, and stars, whether they are living beings or without life,
there is no distinct deliverance.
Every one, therefore, must make use of elements and foundations of this
sort, according to the precept, “Enlighten yourselves with the light of
knowledge,”[18] if he would desire to form a connected series and body of
truths agreeably to the reason of all these things, that by clear and necessary
statements he may ascertain the truth regarding each individual topic, and
form, as we have said, one body of doctrine, by means of illustrations and
arguments,—either those which he has discovered in holy Scripture, or

which he has deduced by closely tracing out the consequences and
following a correct method.

BOOK I.

CHAPTER I.
ON GOD.

1. I know that some will attempt to say that, even according to the
declarations of our own Scriptures, God is a body, because in the writings
of Moses they find it said, that “our God is a consuming fire;”[19] and in the
Gospel according to John, that “God is a Spirit, and they who worship Him
must worship Him in spirit and in truth.”[20] Fire and spirit, according to
them, are to be regarded as nothing else than a body. Now, I should like to
ask these persons what they have to say respecting that passage where it is
declared that God is light; as John writes in his epistle, “God is light, and in
Him there is no darkness at all.”[21] Truly He is that light which illuminates
the whole understanding of those who are capable of receiving truth, as is
said in the thirty-sixth Psalm, “In Thy light we shall see light.”[22] For what
other light of God can be named, “in which any one sees light,” save an
influence of God, by which a man, being enlightened, either thoroughly
sees the truth of all things, or comes to know God Himself, who is called
the truth? Such is the meaning of the expression, “In Thy light we shall see
light;” i.e. in Thy word and wisdom, which is Thy Son, in Himself we shall
see Thee the Father. Because He is called light, shall He be supposed to
have any resemblance to the light of the sun? Or how should there be the
slightest ground for imagining, that from that corporeal light any one could
derive the cause of knowledge, and come to the understanding of the truth?
2. If, then, they acquiesce in our assertion, which reason itself has
demonstrated, regarding the nature of light, and acknowledge that God
cannot be understood to be a body in the sense that light is, similar
reasoning will hold true of the expression “a consuming fire.” For what will
God consume in respect of His being fire? Shall He be thought to consume
material substance, as wood, or hay, or stubble? And what in this view can

be called worthy of the glory of God, if He be a fire, consuming materials
of that kind? But let us reflect that God does indeed consume and utterly
destroy; that He consumes evil thoughts, wicked actions, and sinful desires,
when they find their way into the minds of believers; and that, inhabiting
along with His Son those souls which are rendered capable of receiving His
word and wisdom, according to His own declaration, “I and the Father shall
come, and we shall make our abode with him,”[23] He makes them, after all
their vices and passions have been consumed, a holy temple, worthy of
Himself. Those, moreover, who, on account of the expression “God is a
Spirit,” think that He is a body, are to be answered, I think, in the following
manner. It is the custom of sacred Scripture, when it wishes to designate
anything opposed to this gross and solid body, to call it spirit, as in the
expression, “The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life,”[24] where there can
be no doubt that by “letter” are meant bodily things, and by “spirit”
intellectual things, which we also term “spiritual.” The apostle, moreover,
says, “Even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart:
nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away:
and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.”[25] For so long as any
one is not converted to a spiritual understanding, a veil is placed over his
heart, with which veil, i.e. a gross understanding, Scripture itself is said or
thought to be covered: and this is the meaning of the statement that a veil
was placed over the countenance of Moses when he spoke to the people, i.e.
when the law was publicly read aloud. But if we turn to the Lord, where
also is the word of God, and where the Holy Spirit reveals spiritual
knowledge, then the veil is taken away, and with unveiled face we shall
behold the glory of the Lord in the holy Scriptures.
3. And since many saints participate in the Holy Spirit, He cannot therefore
be understood to be a body, which being divided into corporeal parts, is
partaken of by each one of the saints; but He is manifestly a sanctifying
power, in which all are said to have a share who have deserved to be
sanctified by His grace. And in order that what we say may be more easily
understood, let us take an illustration from things very dissimilar. There are
many persons who take a part in the science[26] or art of medicine: are we
therefore to suppose that those who do so take to themselves the particles of
some body called medicine, which is placed before them, and in this way
participate in the same? Or must we not rather understand that all who with
quick and trained minds come to understand the art and discipline itself,

may be said to be partakers of the art of healing? But these are not to be
deemed altogether parallel instances in a comparison of medicine to the
Holy Spirit, as they have been adduced only to establish that that is not
necessarily to be considered a body, a share in which is possessed by many
individuals. For the Holy Spirit differs widely from the method or science
of medicine, in respect that the Holy Spirit is an intellectual existence,[27]
and subsists and exists in a peculiar manner, whereas medicine is not at all
of that nature.
4. But we must pass on to the language of the Gospel itself, in which it is
declared that “God is a Spirit,” and where we have to show how that is to be
understood agreeably to what we have stated. For let us inquire on what
occasion these words were spoken by the Saviour, before whom He uttered
them, and what was the subject of investigation. We find, without any
doubt, that He spoke these words to the Samaritan woman, saying to her,
who thought, agreeably to the Samaritan view, that God ought to be
worshipped on Mount Gerizim, that “God is a Spirit.” For the Samaritan
woman, believing Him to be a Jew, was inquiring of Him whether God
ought to be worshipped in Jerusalem or on this mountain; and her words
were, “All our fathers worshipped on this mountain, and ye say that in
Jerusalem is the place where we ought to worship.”[28] To this opinion of the
Samaritan woman, therefore, who imagined that God was less rightly or
duly worshipped, according to the privileges of the different localities,
either by the Jews in Jerusalem or by the Samaritans on Mount Gerizim, the
Saviour answered that he who would follow the Lord must lay aside all
preference for particular places, and thus expressed Himself: “The hour is
coming when neither in Jerusalem nor on this mountain shall the true
worshippers worship the Father. God is a Spirit, and they who worship Him
must worship Him in spirit and in truth.”[29] And observe how logically He
has joined together the spirit and the truth: He called God a Spirit, that He
might distinguish Him from bodies; and He named Him the truth, to
distinguish Him from a shadow or an image. For they who worshipped in
Jerusalem worshipped God neither in truth nor in spirit, being in subjection
to the shadow or image of heavenly things; and such also was the case with
those who worshipped on Mount Gerizim.
5. Having refuted, then, as well as we could, every notion which might
suggest that we were to think of God as in any degree corporeal, we go on

to say that, according to strict truth, God is incomprehensible, and incapable
of being measured.[30] For whatever be the knowledge which we are able to
obtain of God, either by perception or reflection, we must of necessity
believe that He is by many degrees far better than what we perceive Him to
be. For, as if we were to see any one unable to bear a spark of light, or the
flame of a very small lamp, and were desirous to acquaint such a one,
whose vision could not admit a greater degree of light than what we have
stated, with the brightness and splendour of the sun, would it not be
necessary to tell him that the splendour of the sun was unspeakably and
incalculably better and more glorious than all this light which he saw? So
our understanding, when shut in by the fetters of flesh and blood, and
rendered, on account of its participation in such material substances, duller
and more obtuse, although, in comparison with our bodily nature, it is
esteemed to be far superior, yet, in its efforts to examine and behold
incorporeal things, scarcely holds the place of a spark or lamp. But among
all intelligent, that is, incorporeal beings, what is so superior to all others—
so unspeakably and incalculably superior—as God, whose nature cannot be
grasped or seen by the power of any human understanding, even the purest
and brightest?
6. But it will not appear absurd if we employ another similitude to make the
matter clearer. Our eyes frequently cannot look upon the nature of the light
itself—that is, upon the substance of the sun; but when we behold his
splendour or his rays pouring in, perhaps, through windows or some small
openings to admit the light, we can reflect how great is the supply and
source of the light of the body. So, in like manner, the works of Divine
Providence and the plan of this whole world are a sort of rays, as it were, of
the nature of God, in comparison with His real substance and being. As,
therefore, our understanding is unable of itself to behold God Himself as He
is, it knows the Father of the world from the beauty of His works and the
comeliness of His creatures. God, therefore, is not to be thought of as being
either a body or as existing in a body, but as an uncompounded intellectual
nature,[31] admitting within Himself no addition of any kind; so that He
cannot be believed to have within Him a greater and a less, but is such that
He is in all parts Μονάς, and, so to speak, Ἑνάς, and is the mind and source
from which all intellectual nature or mind takes its beginning. But mind, for
its movements or operations, needs no physical space, nor sensible
magnitude, nor bodily shape, nor colour, nor any other of those adjuncts

which are the properties of body or matter. Wherefore that simple and
wholly intellectual nature[32] can admit of no delay or hesitation in its
movements or operations, lest the simplicity of the divine nature should
appear to be circumscribed or in some degree hampered by such adjuncts,
and lest that which is the beginning of all things should be found composite
and differing, and that which ought to be free from all bodily intermixture,
in virtue of being the one sole species of Deity, so to speak, should prove,
instead of being one, to consist of many things. That mind, moreover, does
not require space in order to carry on its movements agreeably to its nature,
is certain from observation of our own mind. For if the mind abide within
its own limits, and sustain no injury from any cause, it will never, from
diversity of situation, be retarded in the discharge of its functions; nor, on
the other hand, does it gain any addition or increase of mobility from the
nature of particular places. And here, if any one were to object, for example,
that among those who are at sea, and tossed by its waves, the mind is
considerably less vigorous than it is wont to be on land, we are to believe
that it is in this state, not from diversity of situation, but from the
commotion or disturbance of the body to which the mind is joined or
attached. For it seems to be contrary to nature, as it were, for a human body
to live at sea; and for that reason it appears, by a sort of inequality of its
own, to enter upon its mental operations in a slovenly and irregular manner,
and to perform the acts of the intellect with a duller sense, in as great degree
as those who on land are prostrated with fever; with respect to whom it is
certain, that if the mind do not discharge its functions as well as before, in
consequence of the attack of disease, the blame is to be laid not upon the
place, but upon the bodily malady, by which the body, being disturbed and
disordered, renders to the mind its customary services under by no means
the well-known and natural conditions: for we human beings are animals
composed of a union of body and soul, and in this way [only] was it
possible for us to live upon the earth. But God, who is the beginning of all
things, is not to be regarded as a composite being, lest perchance there
should be found to exist elements prior to the beginning itself, out of which
everything is composed, whatever that be which is called composite.
Neither does the mind require bodily magnitude in order to perform any act
or movement; as when the eye by gazing upon bodies of larger size is
dilated, but is compressed and contracted in order to see smaller objects.
The mind, indeed, requires magnitude of an intellectual kind, because it

grows, not after the fashion of a body, but after that of intelligence. For the
mind is not enlarged, together with the body, by means of corporal
additions, up to the twentieth or thirtieth year of life; but the intellect is
sharpened by exercises of learning, and the powers implanted within it for
intelligent purposes are called forth; and it is rendered capable of greater
intellectual efforts, not being increased by bodily additions, but carefully
polished by learned exercises. But these it cannot receive immediately from
boyhood, or from birth, because the framework of limbs which the mind
employs as organs for exercising itself is weak and feeble; and it is unable
to bear the weight of its own operations, or to exhibit a capacity for
receiving training.
7. If there are any now who think that the mind itself and the soul is a body,
I wish they would tell me by way of answer how it receives reasons and
assertions on subjects of such importance—of such difficulty and such
subtlety? Whence does it derive the power of memory? and whence comes
the contemplation of invisible[33] things? How does the body possess the
faculty of understanding incorporeal existences? How does a bodily nature
investigate the processes of the various arts, and contemplate the reasons of
things? How, also, is it able to perceive and understand divine truths, which
are manifestly incorporeal? Unless, indeed, some should happen to be of
opinion, that as the very bodily shape and form of the ears or eyes
contributes something to hearing and to sight, and as the individual
members, formed by God, have some adaptation, even from the very
quality of their form, to the end for which they were naturally appointed; so
also he may think that the shape of the soul or mind is to be understood as if
created purposely and designedly for perceiving and understanding
individual things, and for being set in motion by vital movements. I do not
perceive, however, who shall be able to describe or state what is the colour
of the mind, in respect of its being mind, and acting as an intelligent
existence. Moreover, in confirmation and explanation of what we have
already advanced regarding the mind or soul—to the effect that it is better
than the whole bodily nature—the following remarks may be added. There
underlies every bodily sense a certain peculiar sensible substance,[34] on
which the bodily sense exerts itself. For example, colours, form, size,
underlie vision; voices and sound, the sense of hearing; odours, good or
bad, that of smell; savours, that of taste; heat or cold, hardness or softness,
roughness or smoothness, that of touch. Now, of those senses enumerated

above, it is manifest to all that the sense of mind is much the best. How,
then, should it not appear absurd, that under those senses which are inferior,
substances should have been placed on which to exert their powers, but that
under this power, which is far better than any other, i.e. the sense of mind,
nothing at all of the nature of a substance should be placed, but that a power
of an intellectual nature should be an accident, or consequent upon bodies?
Those who assert this, doubtless do so to the disparagement of that better
substance which is within them; nay, by so doing, they even do wrong to
God Himself, when they imagine He may be understood by means of a
bodily nature, so that according to their view He is a body, and that which
may be understood or perceived by means of a body; and they are unwilling
to have it understood that the mind bears a certain relationship to God, of
whom the mind itself is an intellectual image, and that by means of this it
may come to some knowledge of the nature of divinity, especially if it be
purified and separated from bodily matter.
8. But perhaps these declarations may seem to have less weight with those
who wish to be instructed in divine things out of the holy Scriptures, and
who seek to have it proved to them from that source how the nature of God
surpasses the nature of bodies. See, therefore, if the apostle does not say the
same thing, when, speaking of Christ, he declares, that “He is the image of
the invisible God, the first-born of every creature.”[35] Not, as some suppose,
that the nature of God is visible to some and invisible to others: for the
apostle does not say “the image of God invisible” to men or “invisible” to
sinners, but with unvarying constancy pronounces on the nature of God in
these words: “the image of the invisible God.” Moreover, John in his
Gospel, when asserting that “no one hath seen God at any time,”[36]
manifestly declares to all who are capable of understanding, that there is no
nature to which God is visible: not as if He were a being who was visible by
nature, and merely escaped or baffled the view of a frailer creature, but
because by the nature of His being it is impossible for Him to be seen. And
if you should ask of me what is my opinion regarding the Only-begotten
Himself, whether the nature of God, which is naturally invisible, be not
visible even to Him, let not such a question appear to you at once to be
either absurd or impious, because we shall give you a logical reason. It is
one thing to see, and another to know: to see and to be seen is a property of
bodies; to know and to be known, an attribute of intellectual being.
Whatever, therefore, is a property of bodies, cannot be predicated either of

the Father or of the Son; but what belongs to the nature of deity is common
to the Father and the Son.[37] Finally, even He Himself, in the Gospel, did
not say that no one has seen the Father, save the Son, nor any one the Son,
save the Father; but His words are: “No one knoweth the Son, save the
Father; nor any one the Father, save the Son.”[38] By which it is clearly
shown, that whatever among bodily natures is called seeing and being seen,
is termed, between the Father and the Son, a knowing and being known, by
means of the power of knowledge, not by the frailness of the sense of sight.
Because, then, neither seeing nor being seen can be properly applied to an
incorporeal and invisible nature, neither is the Father, in the Gospel, said to
be seen by the Son, nor the Son by the Father, but the one is said to be
known by the other.
9. Here, if any one lay before us the passage where it is said, “Blessed are
the pure in heart, for they shall see God,”[39] from that very passage, in my
opinion, will our position derive additional strength; for what else is seeing
God in heart, but, according to our exposition as above, understanding and
knowing Him with the mind? For the names of the organs of sense are
frequently applied to the soul, so that it may be said to see with the eyes of
the heart, i.e. to perform an intellectual act by means of the power of
intelligence. So also it is said to hear with the ears when it perceives the
deeper meaning of a statement. So also we say that it makes use of teeth,
when it chews and eats the bread of life which cometh down from heaven.
In like manner, also, it is said to employ the services of other members,
which are transferred from their bodily appellations, and applied to the
powers of the soul, according to the words of Solomon, “You will find a
divine sense.”[40] For he knew that there were within us two kinds of senses:
the one mortal, corruptible, human; the other immortal and intellectual,
which he now termed divine. By this divine sense, therefore, not of the
eyes, but of a pure heart, which is the mind, God may be seen by those who
are worthy. For you will certainly find in all the Scriptures, both old and
new, the term “heart” repeatedly used instead of “mind,” i.e. intellectual
power. In this manner, therefore, although far below the dignity of the
subject, have we spoken of the nature of God, as those who understand it
under the limitation of the human understanding. In the next place, let us
see what is meant by the name of Christ.

CHAPTER II.
ON CHRIST.

1. In the first place, we must note that the nature of that deity which is in
Christ in respect of His being the only-begotten Son of God is one thing,
and that human nature which He assumed in these last times for the
purposes of the dispensation [of grace] is another. And therefore we have
first to ascertain what the only-begotten Son of God is, seeing He is called
by many different names, according to the circumstances and views of
individuals. For He is termed Wisdom, according to the expression of
Solomon: “The Lord created me—the beginning of His ways, and among
His works, before He made any other thing; He founded me before the ages.
In the beginning, before He formed the earth, before He brought forth the
fountains of waters, before the mountains were made strong, before all the
hills, He brought me forth.”[41] He is also styled First-born, as the apostle
has declared: “who is the first-born of every creature.”[42] The first-born,
however, is not by nature a different person from the Wisdom, but one and
the same. Finally, the Apostle Paul says that “Christ [is] the power of God
and the wisdom of God.”[43]
2. Let no one, however, imagine that we mean anything impersonal[44] when
we call Him the wisdom of God; or suppose, for example, that we
understand Him to be, not a living being endowed with wisdom, but
something which makes men wise, giving itself to, and implanting itself in,
the minds of those who are made capable of receiving His virtues and
intelligence. If, then, it is once rightly understood that the only-begotten
Son of God is His wisdom hypostatically[45] existing, I know not whether
our curiosity ought to advance beyond this, or entertain any suspicion that
that ὑπόστασις or substantia contains anything of a bodily nature, since
everything that is corporeal is distinguished either by form, or colour, or
magnitude. And who in his sound senses ever sought for form, or colour, or
size, in wisdom, in respect of its being wisdom? And who that is capable of
entertaining reverential thoughts or feelings regarding God, can suppose or
believe that God the Father ever existed, even for a moment of time,[46]
without having generated this Wisdom? For in that case he must say either
that God was unable to generate Wisdom before He produced her, so that
He afterwards called into being her who formerly did not exist, or that He

possessed the power indeed, but—what cannot be said of God without
impiety—was unwilling to use it; both of which suppositions, it is patent to
all, are alike absurd and impious: for they amount to this, either that God
advanced from a condition of inability to one of ability, or that, although
possessed of the power, He concealed it, and delayed the generation of
Wisdom. Wherefore we have always held that God is the Father of His
only-begotten Son, who was born indeed of Him, and derives from Him
what He is, but without any beginning, not only such as may be measured
by any divisions of time, but even that which the mind alone can
contemplate within itself, or behold, so to speak, with the naked powers of
the understanding. And therefore we must believe that Wisdom was
generated before any beginning that can be either comprehended or
expressed. And since all the creative power of the coming creation[47] was
included in this very existence of Wisdom (whether of those things which
have an original or of those which have a derived existence), having been
formed beforehand and arranged by the power of foreknowledge; on
account of these very creatures which had been described, as it were, and
prefigured in Wisdom herself, does Wisdom say, in the words of Solomon,
that she was created the beginning of the ways of God, inasmuch as she
contained within herself either the beginnings, or forms, or species of all
creation.
3. Now, in the same way in which we have understood that Wisdom was the
beginning of the ways of God, and is said to be created, forming beforehand
and containing within herself the species and beginnings of all creatures,
must we understand her to be the Word of God, because of her disclosing to
all other beings, i.e. to universal creation, the nature of the mysteries and
secrets which are contained within the divine wisdom; and on this account
she is called the Word, because she is, as it were, the interpreter of the
secrets of the mind. And therefore that language which is found in the Acts
of Paul,[48] where it is said that “here is the Word a living being,” appears to
me to be rightly used. John, however, with more sublimity and propriety,
says in the beginning of his Gospel, when defining God by a special
definition to be the Word, “And God was the Word,[49] and this was in the
beginning with God.” Let him, then, who assigns a beginning to the Word
or Wisdom of God, take care that he be not guilty of impiety against the
unbegotten Father Himself, seeing he denies that He had always been a
Father, and had generated the Word, and had possessed wisdom in all

preceding periods, whether they be called times or ages, or anything else
that can be so entitled.
4. This Son, accordingly, is also the truth and life of all things which exist.
And with reason. For how could those things which were created live,
unless they derived their being from life? or how could those things which
are, truly exist, unless they came down from the truth? or how could
rational beings exist, unless the Word or reason had previously existed? or
how could they be wise, unless there were wisdom? But since it was to
come to pass that some also should fall away from life, and bring death
upon themselves by their declension—for death is nothing else than a
departure from life—and as it was not to follow that those beings which had
once been created by God for the enjoyment of life should utterly perish, it
was necessary that, before death, there should be in existence such a power
as would destroy the coming death, and that there should be a resurrection,
the type of which was in our Lord and Saviour, and that this resurrection
should have its ground in the wisdom and word and life of God. And then,
in the next place, since some of those who were created were not to be
always willing to remain unchangeable and unalterable in the calm and
moderate enjoyment of the blessings which they possessed, but, in
consequence of the good which was in them being theirs not by nature or
essence, but by accident, were to be perverted and changed, and to fall
away from their position, therefore was the Word and Wisdom of God made
the Way. And it was so termed because it leads to the Father those who walk
along it.
Whatever, therefore, we have predicated of the wisdom of God, will be
appropriately applied and understood of the Son of God, in virtue of His
being the Life, and the Word, and the Truth, and the Resurrection: for all
these titles are derived from His power and operations, and in none of them
is there the slightest ground for understanding anything of a corporeal
nature which might seem to denote either size, or form, or colour; for those
children of men which appear among us, or those descendants of other
living beings, correspond to the seed of those by whom they were begotten,
or derive from those mothers, in whose wombs they are formed and
nourished, whatever that is, which they bring into this life, and carry with
them when they are born.[50] But it is monstrous and unlawful to compare
God the Father, in the generation of His only-begotten Son, and in the

substance[51] of the same, to any man or other living thing engaged in such
an act; for we must of necessity hold that there is something exceptional
and worthy of God which does not admit of any comparison at all, not
merely in things, but which cannot even be conceived by thought or
discovered by perception, so that a human mind should be able to
apprehend how the unbegotten God is made the Father of the only-begotten
Son. Because His generation is as eternal and everlasting as the brilliancy
which is produced from the sun. For it is not by receiving the[52] breath of
life that He is made a Son, by any outward act, but by His own nature.
5. Let us now ascertain how those statements which we have advanced are
supported by the authority of holy Scripture. The Apostle Paul says, that the
only-begotten Son is the “image of the invisible God,” and “the first-born of
every creature.”[53] And when writing to the Hebrews, he says of Him that
He is “the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person.”[54]
Now, we find in the treatise called the Wisdom of Solomon the following
description of the wisdom of God: “For she is the breath of the power of
God, and the purest efflux[55] of the glory of the Almighty.”[56] Nothing that
is polluted can therefore come upon her. For she is the splendour of the
eternal light, and the stainless mirror of God’s working, and the image of
His goodness. Now we say, as before, that Wisdom has her existence
nowhere else save in Him who is the beginning of all things: from whom
also is derived everything that is wise, because He Himself is the only one
who is by nature a Son, and is therefore termed the Only-begotten.
6. Let us now see how we are to understand the expression “invisible
image,” that we may in this way perceive how God is rightly called the
Father of His Son; and let us, in the first place, draw our conclusions from
what are customarily called images among men. That is sometimes called
an image which is painted or sculptured on some material substance, such
as wood or stone; and sometimes a child is called the image of his parent,
when the features of the child in no respect belie their resemblance to the
father. I think, therefore, that that man who was formed after the image and
likeness of God may be fittingly compared to the first illustration.
Respecting him, however, we shall see more precisely, God willing, when
we come to expound the passage in Genesis. But the image of the Son of
God, of whom we are now speaking, may be compared to the second of the
above examples, even in respect of this, that He is the invisible image of the

invisible God, in the same manner as we say, according to the sacred
history, that the image of Adam is his son Seth. The words are, “And Adam
begat Seth in his own likeness, and after his own image.”[57] Now this image
contains the unity of nature and substance belonging to Father and Son. For
if the Son do, in like manner, all those things which the Father doth, then, in
virtue of the Son doing all things like the Father, is the image of the Father
formed in the Son, who is born of Him, like an act of His will proceeding
from the mind. And I am therefore of opinion that the will of the Father
ought alone to be sufficient for the existence of that which He wishes to
exist. For in the exercise of His will He employs no other way than that
which is made known by the counsel of His will. And thus also the
existence[58] of the Son is generated by Him. For this point must above all
others be maintained by those who allow nothing to be unbegotten, i.e.
unborn, save God the Father only. And we must be careful not to fall into
the absurdities of those who picture to themselves certain emanations, so as
to divide the divine nature into parts, and who divide God the Father as far
as they can, since even to entertain the remotest suspicion of such a thing
regarding an incorporeal being is not only the height of impiety, but a mark
of the greatest folly, it being most remote from any intelligent conception
that there should be any physical division of any incorporeal nature. Rather,
therefore, as an act of the will proceeds from the understanding, and neither
cuts off any part nor is separated or divided from it, so after some such
fashion is the Father to be supposed as having begotten the Son, His own
image; namely, so that, as He is Himself invisible by nature, He also begat
an image that was invisible. For the Son is the Word, and therefore we are
not to understand that anything in Him is cognisable by the senses. He is
wisdom, and in wisdom there can be no suspicion of anything corporeal. He
is the true light, which enlightens every man that cometh into this world;
but He has nothing in common with the light of this sun. Our Saviour,
therefore, is the image of the invisible God, inasmuch as compared with the
Father Himself He is the truth: and as compared with us, to whom He
reveals the Father, He is the image by which we come to the knowledge of
the Father, whom no one knows save the Son, and he to whom the Son is
pleased to reveal Him. And the method of revealing Him is through the
understanding. For He by whom the Son Himself is understood,
understands, as a consequence, the Father also, according to His own
words: “He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father also.”[59]

7. But since we quoted the language of Paul regarding Christ, where he says
of Him that He is “the brightness of the glory of God, and the express figure
of his person,”[60] let us see what idea we are to form of this. According to
John, “God is light.” The only-begotten Son, therefore, is the glory of this
light, proceeding inseparably from [God] Himself, as brightness does from
light, and illuminating the whole of creation. For, agreeably to what we
have already explained as to the manner in which He is the Way, and
conducts to the Father; and in which He is the Word, interpreting the secrets
of wisdom, and the mysteries of knowledge, making them known to the
rational creation; and is also the Truth, and the Life, and the Resurrection,—
in the same way ought we to understand also the meaning of His being the
brightness: for it is by its splendour that we understand and feel what light
itself is. And this splendour, presenting itself gently and softly to the frail
and weak eyes of mortals, and gradually training, as it were, and
accustoming them to bear the brightness of the light, when it has put away
from them every hindrance and obstruction to vision, according to the
Lord’s own precept, “Cast forth the beam out of thine eye,”[61] renders them
capable of enduring the splendour of the light, being made in this respect
also a sort of mediator between men and the light.
8. But since He is called by the apostle not only the brightness of His glory,
but also the express figure of His person or subsistence,[62] it does not seem
idle to inquire how there can be said to be another figure of that person
besides the person of God Himself, whatever be the meaning of person and
subsistence. Consider, then, whether the Son of God, seeing He is His Word
and Wisdom, and alone knows the Father, and reveals Him to whom He will
(i.e. to those who are capable of receiving His word and wisdom), may not,
in regard of this very point of making God to be understood and
acknowledged, be called the figure of His person and subsistence; that is,
when that Wisdom, which desires to make known to others the means by
which God is acknowledged and understood by them, describes Himself
first of all, it may by so doing be called the express figure of the person of
God. In order, however, to arrive at a fuller understanding of the manner in
which the Saviour is the figure of the person or subsistence of God, let us
take an instance, which, although it does not describe the subject of which
we are treating either fully or appropriately, may nevertheless be seen to be
employed for this purpose only, to show that the Son of God, who was in
the form of God, divesting Himself [of His glory], makes it His object, by

this very divesting of Himself, to demonstrate to us the fulness of His deity.
For instance, suppose that there were a statue of so enormous a size as to
fill the whole world, and which on that account could be seen by no one;
and that another statue were formed altogether resembling it in the shape of
the limbs, and in the features of the countenance, and in form and material,
but without the same immensity of size, so that those who were unable to
behold the one of enormous proportions, should, on seeing the latter,
acknowledge that they had seen the former, because it preserved all the
features of its limbs and countenance, and even the very form and material,
so closely, as to be altogether undistinguishable from it; by some such
similitude, the Son of God, divesting Himself of His equality with the
Father, and showing to us the way to the knowledge of Him, is made the
express image of His person: so that we, who were unable to look upon the
glory of that marvellous light when placed in the greatness of His Godhead,
may, by His being made to us brightness, obtain the means of beholding the
divine light by looking upon the brightness. This comparison, of course, of
statues, as belonging to material things, is employed for no other purpose
than to show that the Son of God, though placed in the very insignificant
form of a human body, in consequence of the resemblance of His works and
power to the Father, showed that there was in Him an immense and
invisible greatness, inasmuch as He said to His disciples, “He who sees me,
sees the Father also;” and, “I and the Father are one.” And to these belong
also the similar expression, “The Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
9. Let us see now what is the meaning of the expression which is found in
the Wisdom of Solomon, where it is said of Wisdom that “it is a kind of
breath of the power of God, and the purest efflux of the glory of the
Omnipotent, and the splendour of eternal light, and the spotless mirror of
the working or power of God, and the image of His goodness.”[63] These,
then, are the definitions which He gives of God, pointing out by each one of
them certain attributes which belong to the Wisdom of God, calling wisdom
the power, and the glory, and the everlasting light, and the working, and the
goodness of God. He does not say, however, that wisdom is the breath of
the glory of the Almighty, nor of the everlasting light, nor of the working of
the Father, nor of His goodness, for it was not appropriate that breath
should be ascribed to any one of these; but, with all propriety, he says that
wisdom is the breath of the power of God. Now, by the power of God is to
be understood that by which He is strong; by which He appoints, restrains,

and governs all things visible and invisible; which is sufficient for all those
things which He rules over in His providence; among all which He is
present, as if one individual. And although the breath of all this mighty and
immeasurable power, and the vigour itself produced, so to speak, by its own
existence, proceed from the power itself, as the will does from the mind, yet
even this will of God is nevertheless made to become the power of God.[64]
Another power accordingly is produced, which exists with properties of its
own,—a kind of breath, as Scripture says, of the primal and unbegotten
power of God, deriving from Him its being, and never at any time non-
existent. For if any one were to assert that it did not formerly exist, but
came afterwards into existence, let him explain the reason why the Father,
who gave it being, did not do so before. And if he shall grant that there was
once a beginning, when that breath proceeded from the power of God, we
shall ask him again, why not even before the beginning, which he has
allowed; and in this way, ever demanding an earlier date, and going
upwards with our interrogations, we shall arrive at this conclusion, that as
God was always possessed of power and will, there never was any reason of
propriety or otherwise, why He may not have always possessed that
blessing which He desired. By which it is shown that that breath of God’s
power always existed, having no beginning save God Himself. Nor was it
fitting that there should be any other beginning save God Himself, from
whom it derives its birth. And according to the expression of the apostle,
that Christ “is the power of God,”[65] it ought to be termed not only the
breath of the power of God, but power out of power.
10. Let us now examine the expression, “Wisdom is the purest efflux of the
glory of the Almighty;” and let us first consider what the glory of the
omnipotent God is, and then we shall also understand what is its efflux. As
no one can be a father without having a son, nor a master without
possessing a servant, so even God cannot be called omnipotent unless there
exist those over whom He may exercise His power; and therefore, that God
may be shown to be almighty, it is necessary that all things should exist. For
if any one would have some ages or portions of time, or whatever else he
likes to call them, to have passed away, while those things which were
afterwards made did not yet exist, he would undoubtedly show that during
those ages or periods God was not omnipotent, but became so afterwards,
viz. from the time that He began to have persons over whom to exercise

power; and in this way He will appear to have received a certain increase,
and to have risen from a lower to a higher condition; since there can be no
doubt that it is better for Him to be omnipotent than not to be so. And now
how can it appear otherwise than absurd, that when God possessed none of
those things which it was befitting for Him to possess, He should
afterwards, by a kind of progress, come into the possession of them? But if
there never was a time when He was not omnipotent, of necessity those
things by which He receives that title must also exist; and He must always
have had those over whom He exercised power, and which were governed
by Him either as king or prince, of which we shall speak more fully in the
proper place, when we come to discuss the subject of the creatures. But
even now I think it necessary to drop a word, although cursorily, of
warning, since the question before us is, how wisdom is the purest efflux of
the glory of the Almighty, lest any one should think that the title of
Omnipotent was anterior in God to the birth of Wisdom, through whom He
is called Father, seeing that Wisdom, which is the Son of God, is the purest
efflux of the glory of the Almighty. Let him who is inclined to entertain this
suspicion hear the undoubted declaration of Scripture pronouncing, “In
wisdom hast Thou made them all,”[66] and the teaching of the gospel, that
“by Him were all things made, and without Him nothing was made;”[67] and
let him understand from this that the title of Omnipotent in God cannot be
older than that of Father; for it is through the Son that the Father is
almighty. But from the expression “glory of the Almighty,” of which glory
Wisdom is the efflux, this is to be understood, that Wisdom, through which
God is called Omnipotent, has a share in the glory of the Almighty. For
through Wisdom, which is Christ, God has power over all things, not only
by the authority of a ruler, but also by the voluntary obedience of subjects.
And that you may understand that the omnipotence of Father and Son is one
and the same, as God and the Lord are one and the same with the Father,
listen to the manner in which John speaks in the Apocalypse: “Thus saith
the Lord God, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the
Almighty.”[68] For who else was “He which is to come” than Christ? And as
no one ought to be offended, seeing God is the Father, that the Saviour is
also God; so also, since the Father is called omnipotent, no one ought to be
offended that the Son of God is also called omnipotent. For in this way will
that saying be true which He utters to the Father, “All mine are Thine, and
Thine are mine, and I am glorified in them.”[69] Now, if all things which are

the Father’s are also Christ’s, certainly among those things which exist is
the omnipotence of the Father; and doubtless the only-begotten Son ought
to be omnipotent, that the Son also may have all things which the Father
possesses. “And I am glorified in them,” He declares. For “at the name of
Jesus every knee shall bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and
things under the earth; and every tongue shall confess that the Lord Jesus is
in the glory of God the Father.”[70] Therefore He is the efflux of the glory of
God in this respect, that He is omnipotent—the pure and limpid Wisdom
herself—glorified as the efflux of omnipotence or of glory. And that it may
be more clearly understood what the glory of omnipotence is, we shall add
the following. God the Father is omnipotent, because He has power over all
things, i.e. over heaven and earth, sun, moon, and stars, and all things in
them. And He exercises His power over them by means of His Word,
because at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, both of things in
heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth. And if every knee is
bent to Jesus, then, without doubt, it is Jesus to whom all things are subject,
and He it is who exercises power over all things, and through whom all
things are subject to the Father; for through wisdom, i.e. by word and
reason, not by force and necessity, are all things subject. And therefore His
glory consists in this very thing, that He possesses all things, and this is the
purest and most limpid glory of omnipotence, that by reason and wisdom,
not by force and necessity, all things are subject. Now the purest and most
limpid glory of wisdom is a convenient expression to distinguish it from
that glory which cannot be called pure and sincere. But every nature which
is convertible and changeable, although glorified in the works of
righteousness or wisdom, yet by the fact that righteousness or wisdom are
accidental qualities, and because that which is accidental, may also fall
away, its glory cannot be called sincere and pure. But the Wisdom of God,
which is His only-begotten Son, being in all respects incapable of change or
alteration, and every good quality in Him being essential, and such as
cannot be changed and converted, His glory is therefore declared to be pure
and sincere.
11. In the third place, wisdom is called the splendour of eternal light. The
force of this expression we have explained in the preceding pages, when we
introduced the similitude of the sun and the splendour of its rays, and
showed to the best of our power how this should be understood. To what we
then said we shall add only the following remark. That is properly termed

everlasting or eternal which neither had a beginning of existence, nor can
ever cease to be what it is. And this is the idea conveyed by John when he
says that “God is Light.” Now His wisdom is the splendour of that light, not
only in respect of its being light, but also of being everlasting light, so that
His wisdom is eternal and everlasting splendour. If this be fully understood,
it clearly shows that the existence of the Son is derived from the Father, but
not in time, nor from any other beginning, except, as we have said, from
God Himself.
12. But wisdom is also called the stainless mirror of the ἐνέργεια or
working of God. We must first understand, then, what the working of the
power of God is. It is a sort of vigour, so to speak, by which God operates
either in creation, or in providence, or in judgment, or in the disposal and
arrangement of individual things, each in its season. For as the image
formed in a mirror unerringly reflects all the acts and movements of him
who gazes on it, so would Wisdom have herself to be understood when she
is called the stainless mirror of the power and working of the Father: as the
Lord Jesus Christ also, who is the Wisdom of God, declares of Himself
when He says, “The works which the Father doeth, these also doeth the Son
likewise.”[71] And again He says, that the Son cannot do anything of
Himself, save what He sees the Father do. As therefore the Son in no
respect differs from the Father in the power of His works, and the work of
the Son is not a different thing from that of the Father, but one and the same
movement, so to speak, is in all things, He therefore named Him a stainless
mirror, that by such an expression it might be understood that there is no
dissimilarity whatever between the Son and the Father. How, indeed, can
those things which are said by some to be done after the manner in which a
disciple resembles or imitates his master, or according to the view that those
things are made by the Son in bodily material which were first formed by
the Father in their spiritual essence, agree with the declarations of Scripture,
seeing in the Gospel the Son is said to do not similar things, but the same
things in a similar manner?
13. It remains that we inquire what is the “image of His goodness;” and
here, I think, we must understand the same thing which we expressed a little
ago, in speaking of the image formed by the mirror. For He is the primal
goodness, doubtless, out of which the Son is born, who, being in all respects
the image of the Father, may certainly also be called with propriety the

image of His goodness. For there is no other second goodness existing in
the Son, save that which is in the Father. And therefore also the Saviour
Himself rightly says in the Gospel, “There is none good save one only, God
the Father,” that by such an expression it may be understood that the Son is
not of a different goodness, but of that only which exists in the Father, of
whom He is rightly termed the image, because He proceeds from no other
source but from that primal goodness, lest there might appear to be in the
Son a different goodness from that which is in the Father. Nor is there any
dissimilarity or difference of goodness in the Son. And therefore it is not to
be imagined that there is a kind of blasphemy, as it were, in the words,
“There is none good save one only, God the Father,” as if thereby it may be
supposed to be denied that either Christ or the Holy Spirit was good. But, as
we have already said, the primal goodness is to be understood as residing in
God the Father, from whom both the Son is born and the Holy Spirit
proceeds, retaining within them, without any doubt, the nature of that
goodness which is in the source whence they are derived. And if there be
any other things which in Scripture are called good, whether angel, or man,
or servant, or treasure, or a good heart, or a good tree, all these are so
termed catachrestically,[72] having in them an accidental, not an essential
goodness. But it would require both much time and labour to collect
together all the titles of the Son of God, such e.g. as the true light, or the
door, or the righteousness, or the sanctification, or the redemption, and
countless others; and to show for what reasons each one of them is so given.
Satisfied, therefore, with what we have already advanced, we go on with
our inquiries into those other matters which follow.

CHAPTER III.
ON THE HOLY SPIRIT.

1. The next point is to investigate as briefly as possible the subject of the
Holy Spirit. All who perceive, in whatever manner, the existence of
Providence, confess that God, who created and disposed all things, is
unbegotten, and recognise Him as the parent of the universe. Now, that to
Him belongs a Son, is a statement not made by us only; although it may

seem a sufficiently marvellous and incredible assertion to those who have a
reputation as philosophers among Greeks and Barbarians, by some of
whom, however, an idea of His existence seems to have been entertained, in
their acknowledging that all things were created by the word or reason of
God. We, however, in conformity with our belief in that doctrine, which we
assuredly hold to be divinely inspired, believe that it is possible in no other
way to explain and bring within the reach of human knowledge this higher
and diviner reason as the Son of God, than by means of those Scriptures
alone which were inspired by the Holy Spirit, i.e. the gospels and epistles,
and the law and the prophets, according to the declaration of Christ
Himself. Of the existence of the Holy Spirit no one indeed could entertain
any suspicion, save those who were familiar with the law and the prophets,
or those who profess a belief in Christ. For although no one is able to speak
with certainty of God the Father, it is nevertheless possible for some
knowledge of Him to be gained by means of the visible creation and the
natural feelings of the human mind; and it is possible, moreover, for such
knowledge to be confirmed from the sacred Scriptures. But with respect to
the Son of God, although no one knoweth the Son save the Father, yet it is
from sacred Scripture also that the human mind is taught how to think of
the Son; and that not only from the New, but also from the Old Testament,
by means of those things which, although done by the saints, are
figuratively referred to Christ, and from which both His divine nature, and
that human nature which was assumed by Him, may be discovered.
2. Now, what the Holy Spirit is, we are taught in many passages of
Scripture, as by David in the fifty-first Psalm, when he says, “And take not
Thy Holy Spirit from me;”[73] and by Daniel, where it is said, “The Holy
Spirit which is in thee.”[74] And in the New Testament we have abundant
testimonies, as when the Holy Spirit is described as having descended upon
Christ, and when the Lord breathed upon His apostles after His resurrection,
saying, “Receive the Holy Spirit;”[75] and the saying of the angel to Mary,
“The Holy Spirit will come upon thee;”[76] the declaration by Paul, that no
one can call Jesus Lord, save by the Holy Spirit.[77] In the Acts of the
Apostles, the Holy Spirit was given by the imposition of the apostles’ hands
in baptism.[78] From all which we learn that the person of the Holy Spirit
was of such authority and dignity, that saving baptism was not complete
except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of them all, i.e. by the
naming of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and by joining to the unbegotten

God the Father, and to His only-begotten Son, the name also of the Holy
Spirit. Who, then, is not amazed at the exceeding majesty of the Holy Spirit,
when he hears that he who speaks a word against the Son of man may hope
for forgiveness; but that he who is guilty of blasphemy against the Holy
Spirit has not forgiveness, either in the present world or in that which is to
come![79]
3. That all things were created by God, and that there is no creature which
exists but has derived from Him its being, is established from many
declarations of Scripture; those assertions being refuted and rejected which
are falsely alleged by some respecting the existence either of a matter co-
eternal with God, or of unbegotten souls, in which they would have it that
God implanted not so much the power of existence, as equality and order.
For even in that little treatise called The Pastor or Angel of Repentance,
composed by Hermas, we have the following: “First of all, believe that
there is one God who created and arranged all things; who, when nothing
formerly existed, caused all things to be; who Himself contains all things,
but Himself is contained by none.”[80] And in the book of Enoch also we
have similar descriptions. But up to the present time we have been able to
find no statement in holy Scripture in which the Holy Spirit could be said to
be made or created,[81] not even in the way in which we have shown above
that the divine wisdom is spoken of by Solomon, or in which those
expressions which we have discussed are to be understood of the life, or the
word, or the other appellations of the Son of God. The Spirit of God,
therefore, which was borne upon the waters, as is written in the beginning
of the creation of the world, is, I am of opinion, no other than the Holy
Spirit, so far as I can understand; as indeed we have shown in our
exposition of the passages themselves, not according to the historical, but
according to the spiritual method of interpretation.
4. Some indeed of our predecessors have observed, that in the New
Testament, whenever the Spirit is named without that adjunct which denotes
quality, the Holy Spirit is to be understood; as e.g. in the expression, “Now
the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, and peace;”[82] and, “Seeing ye began in
the Spirit, are ye now made perfect in the flesh?”[83] We are of opinion that
this distinction may be observed in the Old Testament also, as when it is
said, “He that giveth His Spirit to the people who are upon the earth, and
Spirit to them who walk thereon.”[84] For, without doubt, every one who

walks upon the earth (i.e. earthly and corporeal beings) is a partaker also of
the Holy Spirit, receiving it from God. My Hebrew master also used to say
that those two seraphim in Isaiah, which are described as having each six
wings, and calling to one another, and saying, “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord
God of hosts,”[85] were to be understood of the only-begotten Son of God
and of the Holy Spirit. And we think that that expression also which occurs
in the hymn of Habakkuk, “In the midst either of the two living things, or of
the two lives, Thou wilt be known,”[86] ought to be understood of Christ and
of the Holy Spirit. For all knowledge of the Father is obtained by revelation
of the Son through the Holy Spirit, so that both of these beings which,
according to the prophet, are called either “living things” or “lives,” exist as
the ground of the knowledge of God the Father. For as it is said of the Son,
that “no one knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son will
reveal Him,”[87] the same also is said by the apostle of the Holy Spirit, when
he declares, “God hath revealed them to us by His Holy Spirit; for the Spirit
searcheth all things, even the deep things of God;”[88] and again in the
Gospel, when the Saviour, speaking of the divine and profounder parts of
His teaching, which His disciples were not yet able to receive, thus
addresses them: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear
them now; but when the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, is come, He will teach
you all things, and will bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I
have said unto you.”[89] We must understand, therefore, that as the Son, who
alone knows the Father, reveals Him to whom He will, so the Holy Spirit,
who alone searches the deep things of God, reveals God to whom He will:
“For the Spirit bloweth where He listeth.”[90] We are not, however, to
suppose that the Spirit derives His knowledge through revelation from the
Son. For if the Holy Spirit knows the Father through the Son’s revelation,
He passes from a state of ignorance into one of knowledge; but it is alike
impious and foolish to confess the Holy Spirit, and yet to ascribe to Him
ignorance. For even although something else existed before the Holy Spirit,
it was not by progressive advancement that He came to be the Holy Spirit;
as if any one should venture to say, that at the time when He was not yet the
Holy Spirit He was ignorant of the Father, but that after He had received
knowledge He was made the Holy Spirit. For if this were the case, the Holy
Spirit would never be reckoned in the unity of the Trinity, i.e. along with the
unchangeable Father and His Son, unless He had always been the Holy
Spirit. When we use, indeed, such terms as “always” or “was,” or any other

designation of time, they are not to be taken absolutely, but with due
allowance; for while the significations of these words relate to time, and
those subjects of which we speak are spoken of by a stretch of language as
existing in time, they nevertheless surpass in their real nature all conception
of the finite understanding.
5. Nevertheless it seems proper to inquire what is the reason why he who is
regenerated by God unto salvation has to do both with Father and Son and
Holy Spirit, and does not obtain salvation unless with the co-operation of
the entire Trinity; and why it is impossible to become partaker of the Father
or the Son without the Holy Spirit. And in discussing these subjects, it will
undoubtedly be necessary to describe the special working of the Holy
Spirit, and of the Father and the Son. I am of opinion, then, that the working
of the Father and of the Son takes place as well in saints as in sinners, in
rational beings and in dumb animals; nay, even in those things which are
without life, and in all things universally which exist; but that the operation
of the Holy Spirit does not take place at all in those things which are
without life, or in those which, although living, are yet dumb; nay, is not
found even in those who are endued indeed with reason, but are engaged in
evil courses, and not at all converted to a better life. In those persons alone
do I think that the operation of the Holy Spirit takes place, who are already
turning to a better life, and walking along the way which leads to Jesus
Christ, i.e. who are engaged in the performance of good actions, and who
abide in God.
6. That the working of the Father and the Son operates both in saints and in
sinners, is manifest from this, that all who are rational beings are partakers
of the word, i.e. of reason, and by this means bear certain seeds, implanted
within them, of wisdom and justice, which is Christ. Now, in Him who truly
exists, and who said by Moses, “I am what I am,”[91] all things, whatever
they are, participate; which participation in God the Father is shared both by
just men and sinners, by rational and irrational beings, and by all things
universally which exist. The Apostle Paul also shows truly that all have a
share in Christ, when he says, “Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into
heaven? (i.e. to bring Christ down from above;) or who shall descend into
the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But what saith
the Scripture? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy
heart.”[92] By which he means that Christ is in the heart of all, in respect of

His being the word or reason, by participating in which they are rational
beings. That declaration also in the Gospel, “If I had not come and spoken
unto them, they had not had sin; but now they have no excuse for their
sin,”[93] renders it manifest and patent to all who have a rational knowledge
of how long a time man is without sin, and from what period he is liable to
it, how, by participating in the word or reason, men are said to have sinned,
viz. from the time they are made capable of understanding and knowledge,
when the reason implanted within has suggested to them the difference
between good and evil; and after they have already begun to know what evil
is, they are made liable to sin, if they commit it. And this is the meaning of
the expression, that “men have no excuse for their sin,” viz. that, from the
time the divine word or reason has begun to show them internally the
difference between good and evil, they ought to avoid and guard against
that which is wicked: “For to him who knoweth to do good, and doeth it
not, to him it is sin.”[94] Moreover, that all men are not without communion
with God, is taught in the Gospel thus, by the Saviour’s words: “The
kingdom of God cometh not with observation; neither shall they say, Lo
here! or, lo there! but the kingdom of God is within you.”[95] But here we
must see whether this does not bear the same meaning with the expression
in Genesis: “And He breathed into his face the breath of life, and man
became a living soul.”[96] For if this be understood as applying generally to
all men, then all men have a share in God.
7. But if this is to be understood as spoken of the Spirit of God, since Adam
also is found to have prophesied of some things, it may be taken not as of
general application, but as confined to those who are saints. Finally, also, at
the time of the flood, when all flesh had corrupted their way before God, it
is recorded that God spoke thus, as of undeserving men and sinners: “My
Spirit shall not abide with those men for ever, because they are flesh.”[97] By
which it is clearly shown that the Spirit of God is taken away from all who
are unworthy. In the Psalms also it is written: “Thou wilt take away their
spirit, and they will die, and return to their earth. Thou wilt send forth Thy
Spirit, and they shall be created, and Thou wilt renew the face of the
earth;”[98] which is manifestly intended of the Holy Spirit, who, after sinners
and unworthy persons have been taken away and destroyed, creates for
Himself a new people, and renews the face of the earth, when, laying aside,
through the grace of the Spirit, the old man with his deeds, they begin to
walk in newness of life. And therefore the expression is competently

applied to the Holy Spirit, because He will take up His dwelling, not in all
men, nor in those who are flesh, but in those whose land[99] has been
renewed. Lastly, for this reason was the grace and revelation of the Holy
Spirit bestowed by the imposition of the apostles’ hands after baptism. Our
Saviour also, after the resurrection, when old things had already passed
away, and all things had become new, Himself a new man, and the first-
born from the dead, His apostles also being renewed by faith in His
resurrection, says, “Receive the Holy Spirit.”[100] This is doubtless what the
Lord the Saviour meant to convey in the Gospel, when He said that new
wine cannot be put into old bottles, but commanded that the bottles should
be made new, i.e. that men should walk in newness of life, that they might
receive the new wine, i.e. the newness of grace of the Holy Spirit. In this
manner, then, is the working of the power of God the Father and of the Son
extended without distinction to every creature; but a share in the Holy Spirit
we find possessed only by the saints. And therefore it is said, “No man can
say that Jesus is Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.”[101] And on one occasion,
scarcely even the apostles themselves are deemed worthy to hear the words,
“Ye shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost coming upon you.”[102] For
this reason, also, I think it follows that he who has committed a sin against
the Son of man is deserving of forgiveness; because if he who is a
participator of the word or reason of God cease to live agreeably to reason,
he seems to have fallen into a state of ignorance or folly, and therefore to
deserve forgiveness; whereas he who has been deemed worthy to have a
portion of the Holy Spirit, and who has relapsed, is, by this very act and
work, said to be guilty of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Let no one
indeed suppose that we, from having said that the Holy Spirit is conferred
upon the saints alone, but that the benefits or operations of the Father and of
the Son extend to good and bad, to just and unjust, by so doing give a
preference to the Holy Spirit over the Father and the Son, or assert that His
dignity is greater, which certainly would be a very illogical conclusion. For
it is the peculiarity of His grace and operations that we have been
describing. Moreover, nothing in the Trinity can be called greater or less,
since the fountain of divinity alone contains all things by His word and
reason, and by the Spirit of His mouth sanctifies all things which are worthy
of sanctification, as it is written in the Psalm: “By the word of the Lord
were the heavens strengthened, and all their power by the Spirit of His
mouth.”[103] There is also a special working of God the Father, besides that

by which He bestowed upon all things the gift of natural life. There is also a
special ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ to those upon whom He confers by
nature the gift of reason, by means of which they are enabled to be rightly
what they are. There is also another grace of the Holy Spirit, which is
bestowed upon the deserving, through the ministry of Christ and the
working of the Father, in proportion to the merits of those who are rendered
capable of receiving it. This is most clearly pointed out by the Apostle Paul,
when demonstrating that the power of the Trinity is one and the same, in the
words, “There are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit; there are
diversities of administrations, but the same Lord; and there are diversities of
operations, but it is the same God who worketh all in all. But the
manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.”[104] From
which it most clearly follows that there is no difference in the Trinity, but
that which is called the gift of the Spirit is made known through the Son,
and operated by God the Father. “But all these worketh that one and the
self-same Spirit, dividing to every one severally as He will.”[105]
8. Having made these declarations regarding the unity of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, let us return to the order in which we began
the discussion. God the Father bestows upon all, existence; and
participation in Christ, in respect of His being the word of reason, renders
them rational beings. From which it follows that they are deserving either of
praise or blame, because capable of virtue and vice. On this account,
therefore, is the grace of the Holy Ghost present, that those beings which
are not holy in their essence may be rendered holy by participating in it.
Seeing, then, that firstly, they derive their existence from God the Father;
secondly, their rational nature from the Word; thirdly, their holiness from
the Holy Spirit,—those who have been previously sanctified by the Holy
Spirit are again made capable of receiving Christ, in respect that He is the
righteousness of God; and those who have earned advancement to this
grade by the sanctification of the Holy Spirit, will nevertheless obtain the
gift of wisdom according to the power and working of the Spirit of God.
And this I consider is Paul’s meaning, when he says that to “some is given
the word of wisdom, to others the word of knowledge, according to the
same Spirit.” And while pointing out the individual distinction of gifts, he
refers the whole of them to the source of all things in the words, “There are
diversities of operations, but one God who worketh all in all.”[106] Whence
also the working of the Father, which confers existence upon all things, is

found to be more glorious and magnificent, while each one, by participation
in Christ, as being wisdom, and knowledge, and sanctification, makes
progress, and advances to higher degrees of perfection; and seeing it is by
partaking of the Holy Spirit that any one is made purer and holier, he
obtains, when he is made worthy, the grace of wisdom and knowledge, in
order that, after all stains of pollution and ignorance are cleansed and taken
away, he may make so great an advance in holiness and purity, that the
nature which he received from God may become such as is worthy of Him
who gave it to be pure and perfect, so that the being which exists may be as
worthy as He who called it into existence. For, in this way, he who is such
as his Creator wished him to be, will receive from God power always to
exist, and to abide for ever. That this may be the case, and that those whom
He has created may be unceasingly and inseparably present with Him, who
IS, it is the business of wisdom to instruct and train them, and to bring them
to perfection by confirmation of His Holy Spirit and unceasing
sanctification, by which alone are they capable of receiving God. In this
way, then, by the renewal of the ceaseless working of Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit in us, in its various stages of progress, shall we be able at some future
time perhaps, although with difficulty, to behold the holy and the blessed
life, in which (as it is only after many struggles that we are able to reach it)
we ought so to continue, that no satiety of that blessedness should ever
seize us; but the more we perceive its blessedness, the more should be
increased and intensified within us the longing for the same, while we ever
more eagerly and freely receive and hold fast the Father, and the Son, and
the Holy Spirit. But if satiety should ever take hold of any one of those who
stand on the highest and perfect summit of attainment, I do not think that
such an one would suddenly be deposed from his position and fall away, but
that he must decline gradually and little by little, so that it may sometimes
happen that if a brief lapsus take place, and the individual quickly repent
and return to himself, he may not utterly fall away, but may retrace his
steps, and return to his former place, and again make good that which had
been lost by his negligence.

CHAPTER IV.
ON DEFECTION, OR FALLING AWAY.

1. To exhibit the nature of defection or falling away, on the part of those
who conduct themselves carelessly, it will not appear out of place to employ
a similitude by way of illustration. Suppose, then, the case of one who had
become gradually acquainted with the art or science, say of geometry or
medicine, until he had reached perfection, having trained himself for a
lengthened time in its principles and practice, so as to attain a complete
mastery over the art: to such an one it could never happen, that, when he lay
down to sleep in the possession of his skill, he should awake in a state of
ignorance. It is not our purpose to adduce or to notice here those accidents
which are occasioned by any injury or weakness, for they do not apply to
our present illustration. According to our point of view, then, so long as that
geometer or physician continues to exercise himself in the study of his art
and in the practice of its principles, the knowledge of his profession abides
with him; but if he withdraw from its practice, and lay aside his habits of
industry, then, by his neglect, at first a few things will gradually escape him,
then by and by more and more, until in course of time everything will be
forgotten, and be completely effaced from the memory. It is possible,
indeed, that when he has first begun to fall away, and to yield to the
corrupting influence of a negligence which is small as yet, he may, if he be
aroused and return speedily to his senses, repair those losses which up to
that time are only recent, and recover that knowledge which hitherto had
been only slightly obliterated from his mind. Let us apply this now to the
case of those who have devoted themselves to the knowledge and wisdom
of God, whose learning and diligence incomparably surpass all other
training; and let us contemplate, according to the form of the similitude
employed, what is the acquisition of knowledge, or what is its
disappearance, especially when we hear from the apostle what is said of
those who are perfect, that they shall behold face to face the glory of the
Lord in the revelation of His mysteries.
2. But in our desire to show the divine benefits bestowed upon us by Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit, which Trinity is the fountain of all holiness, we have
fallen, in what we have said, into a digression, having considered that the
subject of the soul, which accidentally came before us, should be touched
on, although cursorily, seeing we were discussing a cognate topic relating to
our rational nature. We shall, however, with the permission of God through
Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, more conveniently consider in the proper

place the subject of all rational beings, which are distinguished into three
genera and species.

CHAPTER V.
ON RATIONAL NATURES.

1. After the dissertation, which we have briefly conducted to the best of our
ability, regarding the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it follows that we offer a
few remarks upon the subject of rational natures, and on their species and
orders, or on the offices as well of holy as of malignant powers, and also on
those which occupy an intermediate position between these good and evil
powers, and as yet are placed in a state of struggle and trial. For we find in
holy Scripture numerous names of certain orders and offices, not only of
holy beings, but also of those of an opposite description, which we shall
bring before us, in the first place; and the meaning of which we shall
endeavour, in the second place, to the best of our ability, to ascertain. There
are certain holy angels of God whom Paul terms “ministering spirits, sent
forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation.”[107] In the
writings also of St. Paul himself we find him designating them, from some
unknown source, as thrones, and dominions, and principalities, and powers;
and after this enumeration, as if knowing that there were still other rational
offices[108] and orders besides those which he had named, he says of the
Saviour: “Who is above all principality, and power, and might, and
dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in
that which is to come.”[109] From which he shows that there were certain
beings besides those which he had mentioned, which may be named indeed
in this world, but were not now enumerated by him, and perhaps were not
known by any other individual; and that there were others which may not be
named in this world, but will be named in the world to come.
2. Then, in the next place, we must know that every being which is
endowed with reason, and transgresses its statutes and limitations, is
undoubtedly involved in sin by swerving from rectitude and justice. Every
rational creature, therefore, is capable of earning praise and censure: of

praise, if, in conformity to that reason which he possesses, he advance to
better things; of censure, if he fall away from the plan and course of
rectitude, for which reason he is justly liable to pains and penalties. And this
also is to be held as applying to the devil himself, and those who are with
him, and are called his angels. Now the titles of these beings have to be
explained, that we may know what they are of whom we have to speak. The
name, then, of Devil, and Satan, and Wicked One, who is also described as
Enemy of God, is mentioned in many passages of Scripture. Moreover,
certain angels of the devil are mentioned, and also a prince of this world,
who, whether the devil himself or some one else, is not yet clearly manifest.
There are also certain princes of this world spoken of as possessing a kind
of wisdom which will come to nought; but whether these are those princes
who are also the principalities with whom we have to wrestle, or other
beings, seems to me a point on which it is not easy for any one to
pronounce. After the principalities, certain powers also are named with
whom we have to wrestle, and carry on a struggle even against the princes
of this world and the rulers of this darkness. Certain spiritual powers of
wickedness also, in heavenly places, are spoken of by Paul himself. What,
moreover, are we to say of those wicked and unclean spirits mentioned in
the gospel? Then we have certain heavenly beings called by a similar name,
but which are said to bend the knee, or to be about to bend the knee, at the
name of Jesus; nay, even things on earth and things under the earth, which
Paul enumerates in order. And certainly, in a place where we have been
discussing the subject of rational natures, it is not proper to be silent
regarding ourselves, who are human beings, and are called rational animals;
nay, even this point is not to be idly passed over, that even of us human
beings certain different orders are mentioned in the words, “The portion of
the Lord is His people Jacob; Israel is the cord of His inheritance.”[110] Other
nations, moreover, are called a part of the angels; since “when the Most
High divided the nations, and dispersed the sons of Adam, He fixed the
boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God.”[111]
And therefore, with other rational natures, we must also thoroughly
examine the reason of the human soul.
3. After the enumeration, then, of so many and so important names of
orders and offices, underlying which it is certain that there are personal
existences, let us inquire whether God, the creator and founder of all things,
created certain of them holy and happy, so that they could admit no element

at all of an opposite kind, and certain others so that they were made capable
both of virtue and vice; or whether we are to suppose that He created some
so as to be altogether incapable of virtue, and others again altogether
incapable of wickedness, but with the power of abiding only in a state of
happiness, and others again such as to be capable of either condition. In
order, now, that our first inquiry may begin with the names themselves, let
us consider whether the holy angels, from the period of their first existence,
have always been holy, and are holy still, and will be holy, and have never
either admitted or had the power to admit any occasion of sin. Then in the
next place, let us consider whether those who are called holy principalities
began from the moment of their creation by God to exercise power over
some who were made subject to them, and whether these latter were created
of such a nature, and formed for the very purpose of being subject and
subordinate. In like manner, also, whether those which are called powers
were created of such a nature and for the express purpose of exercising
power, or whether their arriving at that power and dignity is a reward and
desert of their virtue. Moreover, also, whether those which are called
thrones or seats gained that stability of happiness at the same time with their
coming forth into being,[112] so as to have that possession from the will of
the Creator alone; or whether those which are called dominions had their
dominion conferred on them, not as a reward for their proficiency, but as
the peculiar privilege of their creation,[113] so that it is something which is in
a certain degree inseparable from them, and natural. Now, if we adopt the
view that the holy angels, and the holy powers, and the blessed seats, and
the glorious virtues, and the magnificent dominions, are to be regarded as
possessing those powers and dignities and glories in virtue of their nature,
[114]
it will doubtless appear to follow that those beings which have been
mentioned as holding offices of an opposite kind must be regarded in the
same manner; so that those principalities with whom we have to struggle
are to be viewed, not as having received that spirit of opposition and
resistance to all good at a later period, or as falling away from good through
the freedom of the will, but as having had it in themselves as the essence of
their being from the beginning of their existence. In like manner also will it
be the case with the powers and virtues, in none of which was wickedness
subsequent or posterior to their first existence. Those also whom the apostle
termed rulers and princes of the darkness of this world, are said, with
respect to their rule and occupation of darkness, to fall not from perversity

of intention, but from the necessity of their creation. Logical reasoning will
compel us to take the same view with regard to wicked and malignant
spirits and unclean demons. But if to entertain this view regarding
malignant and opposing powers seem to be absurd, as it is certainly absurd
that the cause of their wickedness should be removed from the purpose of
their own will, and ascribed of necessity to their Creator, why should we
not also be obliged to make a similar confession regarding the good and
holy powers, that, viz., the good which is in them is not theirs by essential
being, which we have manifestly shown to be the case with Christ and the
Holy Spirit alone, as undoubtedly with the Father also? For it was proved
that there was nothing compound in the nature of the Trinity, so that these
qualities might seem to belong to it as accidental consequences. From
which it follows, that in the case of every creature it is a result of his own
works and movements, that those powers which appear either to hold sway
over others or to exercise power or dominion, have been preferred to and
placed over those whom they are said to govern or exercise power over, and
not in consequence of a peculiar privilege inherent in their constitutions, but
on account of merit.
4. But that we may not appear to build our assertions on subjects of such
importance and difficulty on the ground of inference alone, or to require the
assent of our hearers to what is only conjectural, let us see whether we can
obtain any declarations from holy Scripture, by the authority of which these
positions may be more credibly maintained. And, firstly, we shall adduce
what holy Scripture contains regarding wicked powers; we shall next
continue our investigation with regard to the others, as the Lord shall be
pleased to enlighten us, that in matters of such difficulty we may ascertain
what is nearest to the truth, or what ought to be our opinions agreeably to
the standard of religion. Now we find in the prophet Ezekiel two prophecies
written to the prince of Tyre, the former of which might appear to any one,
before he heard the second also, to be spoken of some man who was prince
of the Tyrians. In the meantime, therefore, we shall take nothing from that
first prophecy; but as the second is manifestly of such a kind as cannot be at
all understood of a man, but of some superior power which had fallen away
from a higher position, and had been reduced to a lower and worse
condition, we shall from it take an illustration, by which it may be
demonstrated with the utmost clearness, that those opposing and malignant
powers were not formed or created so by nature, but fell from a better to a

worse position, and were converted into wicked beings; that those blessed
powers also were not of such a nature as to be unable to admit what was
opposed to them if they were so inclined and became negligent, and did not
guard most carefully the blessedness of their condition. For if it is related
that he who is called the prince of Tyre was amongst the saints, and was
without stain, and was placed in the paradise of God, and adorned also with
a crown of comeliness and beauty, is it to be supposed that such an one
could be in any degree inferior to any of the saints? For he is described as
having been adorned with a crown of comeliness and beauty, and as having
walked stainless in the paradise of God: and how can any one suppose that
such a being was not one of those holy and blessed powers which, as being
placed in a state of happiness, we must believe to be endowed with no other
honour than this? But let us see what we are taught by the words of the
prophecy themselves. “The word of the Lord,” says the prophet, “came to
me, saying, Son of man, take up a lamentation over the prince of Tyre, and
say to him, Thus saith the Lord God, Thou hast been the seal of a
similitude, and a crown of comeliness among the delights of paradise; thou
wert adorned with every good stone or gem, and wert clothed with
sardonyx, and topaz, and emerald, and carbuncle, and sapphire, and jasper,
set in gold and silver, and with agate, amethyst, and chrysolite, and beryl,
and onyx: with gold also didst thou fill thy treasures, and thy storehouses
within thee. From the day when thou wert created along with the cherubim,
I placed thee in the holy mount of God. Thou wert in the midst of the fiery
stones: thou wert stainless in thy days, from the day when thou wert
created, until iniquities were found in thee: from the greatness of thy trade,
thou didst fill thy storehouses with iniquity, and didst sin, and wert
wounded from the mount of God. And a cherub drove thee forth from the
midst of the burning stones; and thy heart was elated because of thy
comeliness, thy discipline was corrupted along with thy beauty: on account
of the multitude of thy sins, I cast thee forth to the earth before kings; I gave
thee for a show and a mockery on account of the multitude of thy sins, and
of thine iniquities: because of thy trade thou hast polluted thy holy places.
And I shall bring forth fire from the midst of thee, and it shall devour thee,
and I shall give thee for ashes and cinders on the earth in the sight of all
who see thee: and all who know thee among the nations shall mourn over
thee. Thou hast been made destruction, and thou shalt exist no longer for
ever.”[115] Seeing, then, that such are the words of the prophet, who is there

that on hearing, “Thou wert a seal of a similitude, and a crown of
comeliness among the delights of paradise,” or that “From the day when
thou wert created with the cherubim, I placed thee in the holy mount of
God,” can so enfeeble the meaning as to suppose that this language is used
of some man or saint, not to say the prince of Tyre? Or what fiery stones
can he imagine in the midst of which any man could live? Or who could be
supposed to be stainless from the very day of his creation, and wickedness
being afterwards discovered in him, it be said of him then that he was cast
forth upon the earth? For the meaning of this is, that He who was not yet on
the earth is said to be cast forth upon it: whose holy places also are said to
be polluted. We have shown, then, that what we have quoted regarding the
prince of Tyre from the prophet Ezekiel refers to an adverse power, and by
it it is most clearly proved that that power was formerly holy and happy;
from which state of happiness it fell from the time that iniquity was found
in it, and was hurled to the earth, and was not such by nature and creation.
We are of opinion, therefore, that these words are spoken of a certain angel
who had received the office of governing the nation of the Tyrians, and to
whom also their souls had been entrusted to be taken care of. But what
Tyre, or what souls of Tyrians, we ought to understand, whether that Tyre
which is situated within the boundaries of the province of Phœnicia, or
some other of which this one which we know on earth is the model; and the
souls of the Tyrians, whether they are those of the former or those which
belong to that Tyre which is spiritually understood, does not seem to be a
matter requiring examination in this place; lest perhaps we should appear to
investigate subjects of so much mystery and importance in a cursory
manner, whereas they demand a labour and work of their own.
5. Again, we are taught as follows by the prophet Isaiah regarding another
opposing power. The prophet says, “How is Lucifer, who used to arise in
the morning, fallen from heaven! He who assailed all nations is broken and
beaten to the ground. Thou indeed saidst in thy heart, I shall ascend into
heaven; above the stars of heaven shall I place my throne; I shall sit upon a
lofty mountain, above the lofty mountains which are towards the north; I
shall ascend above the clouds; I shall be like the Most High. Now shalt thou
be brought down to the lower world, and to the foundations of the earth.
They who see thee shall be amazed at thee, and shall say, This is the man
who harassed the whole earth, who moved kings, who made the whole
world a desert, who destroyed cities, and did not unloose those who were in

chains. All the kings of the nations have slept in honour, every one in his
own house; but thou shalt be cast forth on the mountains, accursed with the
many dead who have been pierced through with swords, and have
descended to the lower world. As a garment clotted with blood, and stained,
will not be clean; neither shalt thou be clean, because thou hast destroyed
my land and slain my people: thou shalt not remain for ever, most wicked
seed. Prepare thy sons for death on account of the sins of thy father, lest
they rise again and inherit the earth, and fill the earth with wars. And I shall
rise against them, saith the Lord of hosts, and I shall cause their name to
perish, and their remains, and their seed.”[116] Most evidently by these words
is he shown to have fallen from heaven, who formerly was Lucifer, and who
used to arise in the morning. For if, as some think, he was a nature of
darkness, how is Lucifer said to have existed before? Or how could he arise
in the morning, who had in himself nothing of the light? Nay, even the
Saviour Himself teaches us, saying of the devil, “Behold, I see Satan fallen
from heaven like lightning.”[117] For at one time he was light. Moreover our
Lord, who is the truth, compared the power of His own glorious advent to
lightning, in the words, “For as the lightning shineth from the height of
heaven even to its height again, so will the coming of the Son of man
be.”[118] And notwithstanding He compares him to lightning, and says that
he fell from heaven, that He might show by this that he had been at one
time in heaven, and had had a place among the saints, and had enjoyed a
share in that light in which all the saints participate, by which they are made
angels of light, and by which the apostles are termed by the Lord the light
of the world. In this manner, then, did that being once exist as light before
he went astray, and fell to this place, and had his glory turned into dust,
which is peculiarly the mark of the wicked, as the prophet also says;
whence, too, he was called the prince of this world, i.e. of an earthly
habitation: for he exercised power over those who were obedient to his
wickedness, since “the whole of this world”—for I term this place of earth,
world—“lieth in the wicked one,”[119] and in this apostate. That he is an
apostate, i.e. a fugitive, even the Lord in the book of Job says, “Thou wilt
take with a hook the apostate dragon,” i.e. a fugitive.[120] Now it is certain
that by the dragon is understood the devil himself. If then they are called
opposing powers, and are said to have been once without stain, while
spotless purity exists in the essential being of none save the Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit, but is an accidental quality in every created thing; and

since that which is accidental may also fall away, and since those opposite
powers once were spotless, and were once among those which still remain
unstained, it is evident from all this that no one is pure either by essence or
nature, and that no one was by nature polluted. And the consequence of this
is, that it lies within ourselves and in our own actions to possess either
happiness or holiness; or by sloth and negligence to fall from happiness into
wickedness and ruin, to such a degree that, through too great proficiency, so
to speak, in wickedness (if a man be guilty of so great neglect), he may
descend even to that state in which he will be changed into what is called an
“opposing power.”

CHAPTER VI.
ON THE END OR CONSUMMATION.

1. An end or consummation would seem to be an indication of the
perfection and completion of things. And this reminds us here, that if there
be any one imbued with a desire of reading and understanding subjects of
such difficulty and importance, he ought to bring to the effort a perfect and
instructed understanding, lest perhaps, if he has had no experience in
questions of this kind, they may appear to him as vain and superfluous; or if
his mind be full of preconceptions and prejudices on other points, he may
judge these to be heretical and opposed to the faith of the church, yielding
in so doing not so much to the convictions of reason as to the dogmatism of
prejudice. These subjects, indeed, are treated by us with great solicitude and
caution, in the manner rather of an investigation and discussion, than in that
of fixed and certain decision. For we have pointed out in the preceding
pages those questions which must be set forth in clear dogmatic
propositions, as I think has been done to the best of my ability when
speaking of the Trinity. But on the present occasion our exercise is to be
conducted, as we best may, in the style of a disputation rather than of strict
definition.
The end of the world, then, and the final consummation, will take place
when every one shall be subjected to punishment for his sins; a time which

God alone knows, when He will bestow on each one what he deserves. We
think, indeed, that the goodness of God, through His Christ, may recall all
His creatures to one end, even His enemies being conquered and subdued.
For thus says holy Scripture, “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit Thou at my
right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”[121] And if the
meaning of the prophet’s language here be less clear, we may ascertain it
from the Apostle Paul, who speaks more openly, thus: “For Christ must
reign until He has put all enemies under His feet.”[122] But if even that
unreserved declaration of the apostle do not sufficiently inform us what is
meant by “enemies being placed under His feet,” listen to what he says in
the following words, “For all things must be put under Him.” What, then, is
this “putting under” by which all things must be made subject to Christ? I
am of opinion that it is this very subjection by which we also wish to be
subject to Him, by which the apostles also were subject, and all the saints
who have been followers of Christ. For the name “subjection,” by which we
are subject to Christ, indicates that the salvation which proceeds from Him
belongs to His subjects, agreeably to the declaration of David, “Shall not
my soul be subject unto God? From Him cometh my salvation.”[123]
2. Seeing, then, that such is the end, when all enemies will be subdued to
Christ, when death—the last enemy—shall be destroyed, and when the
kingdom shall be delivered up by Christ (to whom all things are subject) to
God the Father; let us, I say, from such an end as this, contemplate the
beginnings of things. For the end is always like the beginning: and,
therefore, as there is one end to all things, so ought we to understand that
there was one beginning; and as there is one end to many things, so there
spring from one beginning many differences and varieties, which again,
through the goodness of God, and by subjection to Christ, and through the
unity of the Holy Spirit, are recalled to one end, which is like unto the
beginning: all those, viz., who, bending the knee at the name of Jesus, make
known by so doing their subjection to Him: and these are they who are in
heaven, on earth, and under the earth: by which three classes the whole
universe of things is pointed out, those, viz., who from that one beginning
were arranged, each according to the diversity of his conduct, among the
different orders, in accordance with their desert; for there was no goodness
in them by essential being, as in God and His Christ, and in the Holy Spirit.
For in the Trinity alone, which is the author of all things, does goodness
exist in virtue of essential being; while others possess it as an accidental and

perishable quality, and only then enjoy blessedness, when they participate
in holiness and wisdom, and in divinity itself. But if they neglect and
despise such participation, then is each one, by fault of his own
slothfulness, made, one more rapidly, another more slowly, one in a greater,
another in a less degree, the cause of his own downfall. And since, as we
have remarked, the lapse by which an individual falls away from his
position is characterized by great diversity, according to the movements of
the mind and will, one man falling with greater ease, another with more
difficulty, into a lower condition; in this is to be seen the just judgment of
the providence of God, that it should happen to every one according to the
diversity of his conduct, in proportion to the desert of his declension and
defection. Certain of those, indeed, who remained in that beginning which
we have described as resembling the end which is to come, obtained, in the
ordering and arrangement of the world, the rank of angels; others that of
influences, others of principalities, others of powers, that they may exercise
power over those who need to have power upon their head. Others, again,
received the rank of thrones, having the office of judging or ruling those
who require this; others dominion, doubtless, over slaves; all of which are
conferred by Divine Providence in just and impartial judgment according to
their merits, and to the progress which they had made in the participation
and imitation of God. But those who have been removed from their primal
state of blessedness have not been removed irrecoverably, but have been
placed under the rule of those holy and blessed orders which we have
described; and by availing themselves of the aid of these, and being
remoulded by salutary principles and discipline, they may recover
themselves, and be restored to their condition of happiness. From all which
I am of opinion, so far as I can see, that this order of the human race has
been appointed in order that in the future world, or in ages to come, when
there shall be the new heavens and new earth, spoken of by Isaiah, it may
be restored to that unity promised by the Lord Jesus in His prayer to God
the Father on behalf of His disciples: “I do not pray for these alone, but for
all who shall believe on me through their word: that they all may be one, as
Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us;”[124]
and again, when He says: “That they may be one, even as we are one; I in
them, and Thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one.”[125] And this
is further confirmed by the language of the Apostle Paul: “Until we all
come in the unity of the faith to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature

of the fulness of Christ.”[126] And in keeping with this is the declaration of
the same apostle, when he exhorts us, who even in the present life are
placed in the church, in which is the form of that kingdom which is to
come, to this same similitude of unity: “That ye all speak the same thing,
and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined
together in the same mind and in the same judgment.”[127]
3. It is to be borne in mind, however, that certain beings who fell away from
that one beginning of which we have spoken, have sunk to such a depth of
unworthiness and wickedness as to be deemed altogether undeserving of
that training and instruction by which the human race, while in the flesh, are
trained and instructed with the assistance of the heavenly powers; and
continue, on the contrary, in a state of enmity and opposition to those who
are receiving this instruction and teaching. And hence it is that the whole of
this mortal life is full of struggles and trials, caused by the opposition and
enmity of those who fell from a better condition without at all looking back,
and who are called the devil and his angels, and the other orders of evil,
which the apostle classed among the opposing powers. But whether any of
these orders who act under the government of the devil, and obey his
wicked commands, will in a future world be converted to righteousness
because of their possessing the faculty of freedom of will, or whether
persistent and inveterate wickedness may be changed by the power of habit
into nature, is a result which you yourself, reader, may approve of, if neither
in these present worlds which are seen and temporal, nor in those which are
unseen and are eternal, that portion is to differ wholly from the final unity
and fitness of things. But in the meantime, both in those temporal worlds
which are seen, as well as in those eternal worlds which are invisible, all
those beings are arranged, according to a regular plan, in the order and
degree of their merits; so that some of them in the first, others in the second,
some even in the last times, after having undergone heavier and severer
punishments, endured for a lengthened period, and for many ages, so to
speak, improved by this stern method of training, and restored at first by the
instruction of the angels, and subsequently by the powers of a higher grade,
and thus advancing through each stage to a better condition, reach even to
that which is invisible and eternal, having travelled through, by a kind of
training, every single office of the heavenly powers. From which, I think,
this will appear to follow as an inference, that every rational nature may, in
passing from one order to another, go through each to all, and advance from

all to each, while made the subject of various degrees of proficiency and
failure according to its own actions and endeavours, put forth in the
enjoyment of its power of freedom of will.
4. But since Paul says that certain things are visible and temporal, and
others besides these invisible and eternal, we proceed to inquire how those
things which are seen are temporal—whether because there will be nothing
at all after them in all those periods of the coming world, in which that
dispersion and separation from the one beginning is undergoing a process of
restoration to one and the same end and likeness; or because, while the form
of those things which are seen passes away, their essential nature is subject
to no corruption. And Paul seems to confirm the latter view, when he says,
“For the fashion of this world passeth away.”[128] David also appears to
assert the same in the words, “The heavens shall perish, but Thou shalt
endure; and they all shall wax old as a garment, and Thou shalt change
them like a vesture, and like a vestment they shall be changed.”[129] For if
the heavens are to be changed, assuredly that which is changed does not
perish, and if the fashion of the world passes away, it is by no means an
annihilation or destruction of their material substance that is shown to take
place, but a kind of change of quality and transformation of appearance.
Isaiah also, in declaring prophetically that there will be a new heaven and a
new earth, undoubtedly suggests a similar view. For this renewal of heaven
and earth, and this transmutation of the form of the present world, and this
changing of the heavens, will undoubtedly be prepared for those who are
walking along that way which we have pointed out above, and are tending
to that goal of happiness to which, it is said, even enemies themselves are to
be subjected, and in which God is said to be “all and in all.” And if any one
imagine that at the end material, i.e. bodily, nature will be entirely
destroyed, he cannot in any respect meet my view, how beings so numerous
and powerful are able to live and to exist without bodies, since it is an
attribute of the divine nature alone—i.e. of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
—to exist without any material substance, and without partaking in any
degree of a bodily adjunct. Another, perhaps, may say that in the end every
bodily substance will be so pure and refined as to be like the æther, and of a
celestial purity and clearness. How things will be, however, is known with
certainty to God alone, and to those who are His friends through Christ and
the Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER VII.
ON INCORPOREAL AND CORPOREAL BEINGS.

1. The subjects considered in the previous chapter have been spoken of in
general language, the nature of rational beings being discussed more by
way of intelligent inference than strict dogmatic definition, with the
exception of the place where we treated, to the best of our ability, of the
persons of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We have now to ascertain what
those matters are which it is proper to treat in the following pages according
to our dogmatic belief, i.e. in agreement with the creed of the church. All
souls and all rational natures, whether holy or wicked, were formed or
created, and all these, according to their proper nature, are incorporeal; but
although incorporeal, they were nevertheless created, because all things
were made by God through Christ, as John teaches in a general way in his
Gospel, 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 nothing made.”[130] The
Apostle Paul, moreover, describing created things by species and numbers
and orders, speaks as follows, when showing that all things were made
through Christ: “And in Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and
that are in earth, 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, and He is the head.”[131] He therefore
manifestly declares that in Christ and through Christ were all things made
and created, whether things visible, which are corporeal, or things invisible,
which I regard as none other than incorporeal and spiritual powers. But of
those things which he had termed generally corporeal or incorporeal, he
seems to me, in the words that follow, to enumerate the various kinds, viz.
thrones, dominions, principalities, powers, influences.
These matters now have been previously mentioned by us, as we are
desirous to come in an orderly manner to the investigation of the sun, and
moon, and stars by way of logical inference, and to ascertain whether they
also ought properly to be reckoned among the principalities on account of
their being said to be created in Ἀρχὰς, i.e. for the government of day and
night; or whether they are to be regarded as having only that government of

day and night which they discharge by performing the office of illuminating
them, and are not in reality chief of that order of principalities.
2. Now, when it is said that all things were made by Him, and that in Him
were all things created, both things in heaven and things on earth, there can
be no doubt that also those things which are in the firmament, which is
called heaven, and in which those luminaries are said to be placed, are
included amongst the number of heavenly things. And secondly, seeing that
the course of the discussion has manifestly discovered that all things were
made or created, and that amongst created things there is nothing which
may not admit of good and evil, and be capable of either, what are we to
think of the following opinion which certain of our friends entertain
regarding sun, moon, and stars, viz. that they are unchangeable, and
incapable of becoming the opposite of what they are? Not a few have held
that view even regarding the holy angels, and certain heretics also regarding
souls, which they call spiritual natures.
In the first place, then, let us see what reason itself can discover respecting
sun, moon, and stars,—whether the opinion, entertained by some, of their
unchangeableness be correct,—and let the declarations of holy Scripture, as
far as possible, be first adduced. For Job appears to assert that not only may
the stars be subject to sin, but even that they are actually not clean from the
contagion of it. The following are his words: “The stars also are not clean in
Thy sight.”[132] Nor is this to be understood of the splendour of their
physical substance, as if one were to say, for example, of a garment, that it
is not clean; for if such were the meaning, then the accusation of a want of
cleanness in the splendour of their bodily substance would imply an
injurious reflection upon their Creator. For if they are unable, through their
own diligent efforts, either to acquire for themselves a body of greater
brightness, or through their sloth to make the one they have less pure, how
should they incur censure for being stars that are not clean, if they receive
no praise because they are so?
3. But to arrive at a clearer understanding on these matters, we ought first to
inquire after this point, whether it is allowable to suppose that they are
living and rational beings; then, in the next place, whether their souls came
into existence at the same time with their bodies, or seem to be anterior to
them; and also whether, after the end of the world, we are to understand that
they are to be released from their bodies; and whether, as we cease to live,

so they also will cease from illuminating the world. Although this inquiry
may seem to be somewhat bold, yet, as we are incited by the desire of
ascertaining the truth as far as possible, there seems no absurdity in
attempting an investigation of the subject agreeably to the grace of the Holy
Spirit.
We think, then, that they may be designated as living beings, for this reason,
that they are said to receive commandments from God, which is ordinarily
the case only with rational beings. “I have given a commandment to all the
stars,”[133] says the Lord. What, now, are these commandments? Those,
namely, that each star, in its order and course, should bestow upon the
world the amount of splendour which has been entrusted to it. For those
which are called “planets” move in orbits of one kind, and those which are
termed ἀπλανεῖς are different. Now it manifestly follows from this, that
neither can the movement of that body take place without a soul, nor can
living things be at any time without motion. And seeing that the stars move
with such order and regularity, that their movements never appear to be at
any time subject to derangement, would it not be the height of folly to say
that so orderly an observance of method and plan could be carried out or
accomplished by irrational beings? In the writings of Jeremiah, indeed, the
moon is called the queen of heaven.[134] Yet if the stars are living and
rational beings, there will undoubtedly appear among them both an advance
and a falling back. For the language of Job, “the stars are not clean in His
sight,” seems to me to convey some such idea.
4. And now we have to ascertain whether those beings which in the course
of the discussion we have discovered to possess life and reason, were
endowed with a soul along with their bodies at the time mentioned in
Scripture, when “God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the
day, and the lesser light to rule the night, and the stars also,”[135] or whether
their spirit was implanted in them, not at the creation of their bodies, but
from without, after they had been already made. I, for my part, suspect that
the spirit was implanted in them from without; but it will be worth while to
prove this from Scripture: for it will seem an easy matter to make the
assertion on conjectural grounds, while it is more difficult to establish it by
the testimony of Scripture. Now it may be established conjecturally as
follows. If the soul of a man, which is certainly inferior while it remains the
soul of a man, was not formed along with his body, but is proved to have

been implanted strictly from without, much more must this be the case with
those living beings which are called heavenly. For, as regards man, how
could the soul of him, viz. Jacob, who supplanted his brother in the womb,
appear to be formed along with his body? Or how could his soul, or its
images, be formed along with his body, who, while lying in his mother’s
womb, was filled with the Holy Ghost? I refer to John leaping in his
mother’s womb, and exulting because the voice of the salutation of Mary
had come to the ears of his mother Elisabeth. How could his soul and its
images be formed along with his body, who, before he was created in the
womb, is said to be known to God, and was sanctified by Him before his
birth? Some, perhaps, may think that God fills individuals with His Holy
Spirit, and bestows upon them sanctification, not on grounds of justice and
according to their deserts, but undeservedly. And how shall we escape that
declaration: “Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid!”[136] or this:
“Is there respect of persons with God?”[137] For such is the defence of those
who maintain that souls come into existence with bodies. So far, then, as we
can form an opinion from a comparison with the condition of man, I think it
follows that we must hold the same to hold good with heavenly beings,
which reason itself and scriptural authority show us to be the case with
men.
5. But let us see whether we can find in holy Scripture any indications
properly applicable to these heavenly existences. The following is the
statement of the Apostle Paul: “The creature was made subject to vanity, not
willingly, but by reason of Him who subjected the same in hope, because
the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption
into the glorious liberty of the children of God.”[138] To what vanity, pray,
was the creature made subject, or what creature is referred to, or how is it
said “not willingly,” or “in hope of what?” And in what way is the creature
itself to be delivered from the bondage of corruption? Elsewhere, also, the
same apostle says: “For the expectation of the creature waiteth for the
manifestation of the sons of God.”[139] And again in another passage, “And
not only we, but the creation itself groaneth together, and is in pain until
now.”[140] And hence we have to inquire what are the groanings, and what
are the pains. Let us see then, in the first place, what is the vanity to which
the creature is subject. I apprehend that it is nothing else than the body; for
although the body of the stars is ethereal, it is nevertheless material.
Whence also Solomon appears to characterize the whole of corporeal nature

as a kind of burden which enfeebles the vigour of the soul in the following
language: “Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher; all is vanity. I have
looked, and seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all
is vanity.”[141] To this vanity, then, is the creature subject, that creature
especially which, being assuredly the greatest in this world, holds also a
distinguished principality of labour, i.e. the sun, and moon, and stars, are
said to be subject to vanity, because they are clothed with bodies, and set
apart to the office of giving light to the human race. “And this creature,” he
remarks, “was subjected to vanity not willingly.” For it did not undertake a
voluntary service to vanity, but because it was the will of Him who made it
subject, and because of the promise of the Subjector to those who were
reduced to this unwilling obedience, that when the ministry of their great
work was performed, they were to be freed from this bondage of corruption
and vanity when the time of the glorious redemption of God’s children
should have arrived. And the whole of creation, receiving this hope, and
looking for the fulfilment of this promise now, in the meantime, as having
an affection for those whom it serves, groans along with them, and patiently
suffers with them, hoping for the fulfilment of the promises. See also
whether the following words of Paul can apply to those who, although not
willingly, yet in accordance with the will of Him who subjected them, and
in hope of the promises, were made subject to vanity, when he says, “For I
could wish to be dissolved,” or “to return and be with Christ, which is far
better.”[142] For I think that the sun might say in like manner, “I would desire
to be dissolved,” or “to return and be with Christ, which is far better.” Paul
indeed adds, “Nevertheless, to abide in the flesh is more needful for you;”
while the sun may say, “To abide in this bright and heavenly body is more
necessary, on account of the manifestation of the sons of God.” The same
views are to be believed and expressed regarding the moon and stars.
Let us see now what is the freedom of the creature, or the termination of its
bondage. When Christ shall have delivered up the kingdom to God even the
Father, then also those living things, when they shall have first been made
the kingdom of Christ, shall be delivered, along with the whole of that
kingdom, to the rule of the Father, that when God shall be all in all, they
also, since they are a part of all things, may have God in themselves, as He
is in all things.

CHAPTER VIII.
ON THE ANGELS.

1. A similar method must be followed in treating of the angels; nor are we
to suppose that it is the result of accident that a particular office is assigned
to a particular angel: as to Raphael, e.g., the work of curing and healing; to
Gabriel, the conduct of wars; to Michael, the duty of attending to the
prayers and supplications of mortals. For we are not to imagine that they
obtained these offices otherwise than by their own merits, and by the zeal
and excellent qualities which they severally displayed before this world was
formed; so that afterwards, in the order of archangels, this or that office was
assigned to each one, while others deserved to be enrolled in the order of
angels, and to act under this or that archangel, or that leader or head of an
order. All of which things were disposed, as I have said, not
indiscriminately and fortuitously, but by a most appropriate and just
decision of God, who arranged them according to deserts, in accordance
with His own approval and judgment: so that to one angel the church of the
Ephesians was to be entrusted; to another, that of the Smyrnæans; one angel
was to be Peter’s, another Paul’s; and so on through every one of the little
ones that are in the church, for such and such angels as even daily behold
the face of God must be assigned to each one of them;[143] and there must
also be some angel that encampeth round about them that fear God.[144] All
of which things, assuredly, it is to be believed, are not performed by
accident or chance, or because they [the angels] were so created, lest on that
view the Creator should be accused of partiality; but it is to be believed that
they were conferred by God, the just and impartial Ruler of all things,
agreeably to the merits and good qualities and mental vigour of each
individual spirit.
2. And now let us say something regarding those who maintain the
existence of a diversity of spiritual natures, that we may avoid falling into
the silly and impious fables of such as pretend that there is a diversity of
spiritual natures both among heavenly existences and human souls, and for
that reason allege that they were called into being by different creators; for
while it seems, and is really, absurd that to one and the same creator should
be ascribed the creation of different natures of rational beings, they are
nevertheless ignorant of the cause of that diversity. For they say that it

seems inconsistent for one and the same creator, without any existing
ground of merit, to confer upon some beings the power of dominion, and to
subject others again to authority; to bestow a principality upon some, and to
render others subordinate to rulers. Which opinions indeed, in my
judgment, are completely rejected by following out the reasoning explained
above, and by which it was shown that the cause of the diversity and variety
among these beings is due to their conduct, which has been marked either
with greater earnestness or indifference, according to the goodness or
badness of their nature, and not to any partiality on the part of the Disposer.
But that this may more easily be shown to be the case with heavenly beings,
let us borrow an illustration from what either has been done or is done
among men, in order that from visible things we may, by way of
consequence, behold also things invisible.
Paul and Peter are undoubtedly proved to have been men of a spiritual
nature. When, therefore, Paul is found to have acted contrary to religion, in
having persecuted the church of God, and Peter to have committed so grave
a sin as, when questioned by the maid-servant, to have asserted with an oath
that he did not know who Christ was, how is it possible that these—who,
according to those persons of whom we speak, were spiritual beings—
should fall into sins of such a nature, especially as they are frequently in the
habit of saying that a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruits? And if a good
tree cannot produce evil fruit, and as, according to them, Peter and Paul
were sprung from the root of a good tree, how should they be deemed to
have brought forth fruits so wicked? And if they should return the answer
which is generally invented, that it was not Paul who persecuted, but some
other person, I know not whom, who was in Paul; and that it was not Peter
who uttered the denial, but some other individual in him; how should Paul
say, if he had not sinned, that “I am not worthy to be called an apostle,
because I persecuted the church of God?”[145] Or why did Peter weep most
bitterly, if it were another than he who sinned? From which all their silly
assertions will be proved to be baseless.
3. According to our view, there is no rational creature which is not capable
both of good and evil. But it does not follow, that because we say there is
no nature which may not admit evil, we therefore maintain that every nature
has admitted evil, i.e. has become wicked. As we may say that the nature of
every man admits of his being a sailor, but it does not follow from that, that

every man will become so; or, again, it is possible for every one to learn
grammar or medicine, but it is not therefore proved that every man is either
a physician or a grammarian; so, if we say that there is no nature which may
not admit evil, it is not necessarily indicated that it has done so. For, in our
view, not even the devil himself was incapable of good; but although
capable of admitting good, he did not therefore also desire it, or make any
effort after virtue. For, as we are taught by those quotations which we
adduced from the prophets, there was once a time when he was good, when
he walked in the paradise of God between the cherubim. As he, then,
possessed the power either of receiving good or evil, but fell away from a
virtuous course, and turned to evil with all the powers of his mind, so also
other creatures, as having a capacity for either condition, in the exercise of
the freedom of their will, flee from evil, and cleave to good. There is no
nature, then, which may not admit of good or evil, except the nature of God
—the fountain of all good things—and of Christ; for it is wisdom, and
wisdom assuredly cannot admit folly; and it is righteousness, and
righteousness will never certainly admit of unrighteousness; and it is the
Word, or Reason, which certainly cannot be made irrational; nay, it is also
the light, and it is certain that the darkness does not receive the light. In like
manner, also, the nature of the Holy Spirit, being holy, does not admit of
pollution; for it is holy by nature, or essential being. If there is any other
nature which is holy, it possesses this property of being made holy by the
reception or inspiration of the Holy Spirit, not having it by nature, but as an
accidental quality, for which reason it may be lost, in consequence of being
accidental. So also a man may possess an accidental righteousness, from
which it is possible for him to fall away. Even the wisdom which a man has
is still accidental, although it be within our own power to become wise, if
we devote ourselves to wisdom with the zeal and effort of our life; and if
we always pursue the study of it, we may always be participators of
wisdom: and that result will follow either in a greater or less degree,
according to the desert of our life or the amount of our zeal. For the
goodness of God, as is worthy of Him, incites and attracts all to that blissful
end, where all pain, and sadness, and sorrow fall away and disappear.
4. I am of opinion, then, so far as appears to me, that the preceding
discussion has sufficiently proved that it is neither from want of
discrimination, nor from any accidental cause, either that the
“principalities” hold their dominion, or the other orders of spirits have

obtained their respective offices; but that they have received the steps of
their rank on account of their merits, although it is not our privilege to know
or inquire what those acts of theirs were, by which they earned a place in
any particular order. It is sufficient only to know this much, in order to
demonstrate the impartiality and righteousness of God, that, conformably
with the declaration of the Apostle Paul, “there is no acceptance of persons
with Him,”[146] who rather disposes everything according to the deserts and
moral progress of each individual. So, then, the angelic office does not exist
except as a consequence of their desert; nor do “powers” exercise power
except in virtue of their moral progress; nor do those which are called
“seats,” i.e. the powers of judging and ruling, administer their powers
unless by merit; nor do “dominions” rule undeservedly, for that great and
distinguished order of rational creatures among celestial existences is
arranged in a glorious variety of offices. And the same view is to be
entertained of those opposing influences which have given themselves up to
such places and offices, that they derive the property by which they are
made “principalities,” or “powers,” or rulers of the darkness of the world, or
spirits of wickedness, or malignant spirits, or unclean demons, not from
their essential nature, nor from their being so created, but have obtained
these degrees in evil in proportion to their conduct, and the progress which
they made in wickedness. And that is a second order of rational creatures,
who have devoted themselves to wickedness in so headlong a course, that
they are unwilling rather than unable to recall themselves; the thirst for evil
being already a passion, and imparting to them pleasure. But the third order
of rational creatures is that of those who are judged fit by God to replenish
the human race, i.e. the souls of men, assumed in consequence of their
moral progress into the order of angels; of whom we see some assumed into
the number: those, viz., who have been made the sons of God, or the
children of the resurrection, or who have abandoned the darkness, and have
loved the light, and have been made children of the light; or those who,
proving victorious in every struggle, and being made men of peace, have
been the sons of peace, and the sons of God; or those who, mortifying their
members on the earth, and, rising above not only their corporeal nature, but
even the uncertain and fragile movements of the soul itself, have united
themselves to the Lord, being made altogether spiritual, that they may be
for ever one spirit with Him, discerning along with Him each individual
thing, until they arrive at a condition of perfect spirituality, and discern all

things by their perfect illumination in all holiness through the word and
wisdom of God, and are themselves altogether undistinguishable by any
one.
We think that those views are by no means to be admitted, which some are
wont unnecessarily to advance and maintain, viz. that souls descend to such
a pitch of abasement that they forget their rational nature and dignity, and
sink into the condition of irrational animals, either large or small; and in
support of these assertions they generally quote some pretended statements
of Scripture, such as, that a beast, to which a woman has unnaturally
prostituted herself, shall be deemed equally guilty with the woman, and
shall be ordered to be stoned; or that a bull which strikes with its horns,
shall be put to death in the same way; or even the speaking of Balaam’s ass,
when God opened its mouth, and the dumb beast of burden, answering with
human voice, reproved the madness of the prophet. All of which assertions
we not only do not receive, but, as being contrary to our belief, we refute
and reject. After the refutation and rejection of such perverse opinions, we
shall show, at the proper time and place, how those passages which they
quote from the sacred Scriptures ought to be understood.

FRAGMENT FROM THE FIRST BOOK OF THE DE PRINCIPIIS.
Translated by Jerome in his Epistle to Avitus.

“It is an evidence of great negligence and sloth, that each one should fall
down to such (a pitch of degradation), and be so emptied, as that, in coming
to evil, he may be fastened to the gross body of irrational beasts of burden.”

ANOTHER FRAGMENT FROM THE SAME.
Translated in the same Epistle to Avitus.

“At the end and consummation of the world, when souls and rational
creatures shall have been sent forth as from bolts and barriers,[147] some of
them walk slowly on account of their slothful habits, others fly with rapid
flight on account of their diligence. And since all are possessed of free-will,
and may of their own accord admit either of good or evil, the former will be
in a worse condition than they are at present, while the latter will advance to
a better state of things; because different conduct and varying wills will
admit of a different condition in either direction, i.e. angels may become
men or demons, and again from the latter they may rise to be men or
angels.”

BOOK II.

CHAPTER I.
ON THE WORLD.

1. Although all the discussions in the preceding book have had reference to
the world and its arrangements, it now seems to follow that 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;[148] 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 æther, and
of everything which proceeds from the earth or is born in it. Seeing, then,
[149]
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?[150]
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.[151]
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;”[152] and again,
“The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool;”[153] 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.”[154] 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.”[155] 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 ὕλη, 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 uncreated 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 create 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.”[156] 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.”[157] Perhaps also the
expression in the Psalms has reference to this: “He spake, and they were
made; He commanded, and they were created.”[158] 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.

CHAPTER II.
ON THE PERPETUITY OF BODILY NATURE.

1. 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, that 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.

CHAPTER III.
ON THE BEGINNING OF THE WORLD, AND ITS CAUSES.

1. 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.”[159] 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[160] 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.”[161] 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 incorruptibility,”
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 incorruption 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 immortality; 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.[162] 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.”[163] 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 be 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.”[164] 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.”[165] 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,”[166] 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 κόσμος, and κόσμος 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,”[167] he employs the
same term to denote ornament as to denote the world, viz. κόσμος. 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.”[168] That earth of ours, with its inhabitants, is
also termed the world, as when Scripture says, “The whole world lieth in
wickedness.”[169] Clement indeed, a disciple of the apostles, makes mention
of those whom the Greeks called Ἀντίχθονες, 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 worlds which are on the other side of it,
which are governed by these same arrangements of the ruling God.”[170]
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.”[171] 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.”[172] 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 (ἀπλανῆ), 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
(ἀπλανῆ), 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 “firmament” 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 admitted 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.”[173]
And when he says elsewhere, “Because I shall see the heavens, the works of
Thy fingers,”[174] and when God said, regarding all things visible, by the
mouth of His prophet, “My hand has formed all these things,”[175] 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 ἀσώματα, 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.[176] 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,[177] then is reached the fixed
abode of the pious and the good situated above that sphere, which is called
non-wandering (ἀπλανής), 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;”[178] and, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for they shall
inherit the kingdom of heaven;”[179] and the declaration in the Psalm, “He
shall exalt thee, and thou shalt inherit the land.”[180] 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.

CHAPTER IV.
THE GOD OF THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS, AND THE FATHER
OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST, IS THE SAME GOD.

1. 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,”[181] 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,”[182] 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,”[183] harmonize
most clearly with the words of the prophet, “Heaven is my throne, and the
earth is my footstool?”[184] 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,”[185] He undoubtedly called Him his
Father, to whose name Solomon had raised a magnificent temple. The
words, moreover, “Have ye 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,”[186] 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.”[187] 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,[188] 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.”[189] 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 in my
spirit from my forefathers with pure conscience,”[190] 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.”[191] 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,”[192] 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.”[193] 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.”[194] 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.”[195] 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,”[196] 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.”[197] 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.”[198] 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.[199] 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.”[200] 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;”[201] 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,”[202] we showed, to the best of our
poor ability, how such an expression ought to be understood.

CHAPTER V.
ON JUSTICE AND GOODNESS.

1. 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 Gomorrha 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 see 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[203]
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. 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 they 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[204] 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 ruined 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.”[205]
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?”[206] 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.”[207] And with
regard to Sodom and Gomorrha, 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.”[208] 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.”[209] 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.”[210] 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.”[211]
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.”[212] 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.”[213] 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,” 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.”[214] 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.”[215] 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 world is not called good. What are the expressions which occur in the
Psalms? “How good is God to Israel, to the upright in heart!”[216] and, “Let
Israel now say that He is good, that His mercy endureth for ever;”[217] the
language in the Lamentations of Jeremiah, “The Lord is good to them that
wait for Him, to the soul that seeketh Him.”[218] 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.”[219] 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 world 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.

CHAPTER 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.”[220] 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,”[221] who is the head of all things,
alone having as head God the Father; for it is written, “The head of Christ is
God;”[222] 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”[223] (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,”[224] 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[225] 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;”[226] 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 sees 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,”[227] 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[228] 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.”[229] 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.”[230] 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[231] 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.”[232] 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.”[233] 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,”[234]
and that “He was tempted in all things like as we are, without sin.”[235] Nay,
the Lord Himself also said, “Which of you will convince me of sin?”[236]
And again He says with reference to Himself, “Behold, the prince of this
world cometh, and findeth nothing in me.”[237] 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.”[238]
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,[239] 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,”[240] shows
that that soul is anointed in 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;”[241] 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.”[242] 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,”[243] seems to me to indicate the same. And what
else does Paul mean when he says, “Your life is hid with Christ in God;”[244]
and again in another passage, “Do you seek a proof of Christ, who speaketh
in me?”[245] 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.”[246] 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.”[247] And
elsewhere, “Is not our life upon the earth a shadow?”[248] 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.”[249]
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.

CHAPTER VII.
ON THE HOLY SPIRIT.

1. 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.[250] 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,”[251] which is similar to the
well-known statement, “All nations shall serve Him.”[252] 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,[253] 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.[254] 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.”[255]
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,”[256] 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.”[257]
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, paraclesis 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;”[258] 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.

CHAPTER 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;[259] and,
beginning with points of inferior importance, to ascend to those that are of
greater. Now, that there are souls[260] 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[261] that moveth which the waters brought forth after their
kind.”[262] 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 φανταστικὴ and ὁρμητικὴ, which may be rendered
into Latin, although not so appropriately, sensibilis et mobilis.[263] 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[264] of all flesh is its blood; and ye shall not eat the life with the
flesh;”[265] 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.[266]
That beasts of burden or cattle of smaller size are endowed with souls,[267]
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.”[268] 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.”[269] 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;”[270] 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.”[271] 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;”[272]
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[273] 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[274] rather than a soul.[275] 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.”[276] 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?”[277] 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?[278] 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.”[279] Respecting the substance
of the angels also it speaks as follows: “Who maketh His angels spirits, and
His ministers a burning fire;”[280] and in another place, “The angel of the
Lord appeared in a flame of fire in the bush.”[281] We have, moreover,
received a commandment to be “fervent in spirit;”[282] 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.”[283] 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.”[284] 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[285] 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.”[286] 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.”[287] In the book of Job also, he is said to be
the king of all things in the waters.[288] The prophet[289] 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;”[290] 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 ψυχή, be so termed from growing cold[291] 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;”[292] and, “The soul which sinneth, it shall die.”[293] 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,”[294] 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 ψυχή, i.e. anima, because it has waxed cold from the
fervour of just things,[295] 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.”[296] 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.[297]
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 to 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;”[298] and, “My soul is sorrowful, even unto death;”[299]
and, “No man taketh my soul[300] from me, but I lay it down of myself.”[301]
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.”[302]
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.

CHAPTER 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,[303] 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;”[304] 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.”[305] 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 non-existence 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.”[306] 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;[307] 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,
[308]
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 inquire; 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;”[309] 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;”[310]
and as in the Psalm also it is written, “In wisdom hast Thou made them
all;”[311]—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 world 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 clearly
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.”[312] 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.”[313] 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.”[314] 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 right 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;”[315] 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,”[316]
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.

CHAPTER 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. 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 re-stating 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,”[317] 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?”[318] 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.”[319] 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.[320] 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[321] 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.”[322] 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,[323] 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,[324] 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.[325]
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.”[326] Of the Chaldeans he thus speaks: “Thou hast the coals of fire;
sit upon them: they will be to thee a help.”[327] And in other passages he
says, “The Lord will sanctify in a burning fire;”[328] and in the prophecies of
Malachi he says, “The Lord sitting will blow, and purify, and will pour forth
the cleansed sons of Judah.”[329]
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 my 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.

CHAPTER XI.
ON COUNTER PROMISES.[330]

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[331] 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.”[332] They add,
moreover, that declaration, in which the Saviour calls those blessed who
now hunger and thirst,[333] 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.”[334] 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.”[335] 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,[336] 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.”[337] 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.[338] 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,[339]
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.”[340] 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;”[341] 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,[342] 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.”[343]
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.”[344]
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 fully 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.”[345] 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 understand 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,[346] 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],[347] 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.

BOOK III.

PREFACE OF RUFINUS.

Reader, remember me in your prayers, that we too may deserve to be made
emulators of the spirit. The two former books on The Principles I translated
not only at your instance, but even under pressure from you during the days
of Lent;[348] but as you, my devout brother Macarius, were not only living
near me during that time, but had more leisure at your command than now,
so I also worked the harder; whereas I have been longer in explaining these
two latter books, seeing you came less frequently from a distant extremity
of the city to urge on my labour. Now if you remember what I warned you
of in my former preface,—that certain persons would be indignant, if they
did not hear that we spoke some evil of Origen,—that, I imagine, you have
forthwith experienced, has come to pass. But if those demons[349] who excite
the tongues of men to slander were so infuriated by that work, in which he
had not as yet fully unveiled their secret proceedings, what, think you, will
be the case in this, in which he will expose all those dark and hidden ways,
by which they creep into the hearts of men, and deceive weak and unstable
souls? You will immediately see all things thrown into confusion, seditions
stirred up, clamours raised throughout the whole city, and that individual
summoned to receive sentence of condemnation who endeavoured to dispel
the diabolical darkness of ignorance by means of the light of the gospel
lamp.[350] Let such things, however, be lightly esteemed by him who is
desirous of being trained in divine learning, while retaining in its integrity
the rule of the Catholic faith.[351] I think it necessary, however, to remind
you that the principle observed in the former books has been observed also
in these, viz. not to translate what appeared contrary to Origen’s other
opinions, and to our own belief, but to pass by such passages as being
interpolated and forged by others. But if he has appeared to give expression
to any novelties regarding rational creatures (on which subject the essence
of our faith does not depend), for the sake of discussion and of adding to

our knowledge, when perhaps it was necessary for us to answer in such an
order some heretical opinions, I have not omitted to mention these either in
the present or preceding books, unless when he wished to repeat in the
following books what he had already stated in the previous ones, when I
have thought it convenient, for the sake of brevity, to curtail some of these
repetitions. Should any one, however, peruse these passages from a desire
to enlarge his knowledge, and not to raise captious objections, he will do
better to have them expounded by persons of skill. For it is an absurdity to
have the fictions of poetry and the ridiculous plays of comedy[352]
interpreted by grammarians, and to suppose that without a master and an
interpreter any one is able to learn those things which are spoken either of
God or of the heavenly virtues, and of the whole universe of things, in
which some deplorable error either of pagan philosophers or of heretics is
confuted; and the result of which is, that men would rather rashly and
ignorantly condemn things that are difficult and obscure, than ascertain
their meaning by diligence and study.

CHAPTER I.

[Transcriber’s Note: As described in the following footnote,
the original book printed the translations from both the Latin
and Greek originals. In the original book, the top of each page
printed lines from the translation from the Latin, and the
bottom of the page printed lines from the translation from the
Greek, and the reader would be able to compare them, with the
text for the numbered sections running over multiple printed
pages. In this e-book, instead, the Latin translation for an entire
numbered section will be printed, followed by that paragraph’s
Greek translation, and then the next section.]

TRANSLATED FROM LATIN OF RUFINUS.
CHAPTER I.
ON THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL.[353]

1. Some such opinions, we believe, ought to be entertained regarding the
divine promises, when we direct our understanding to the contemplation of
that eternal and infinite world, and gaze on its ineffable joy and blessedness.
But as the preaching of the church includes a belief in a future and just
judgment of God, which belief incites and persuades men to a good and
virtuous life, and to an avoidance of sin by all possible means; and as by
this it is undoubtedly indicated that it is within our own power to devote
ourselves either to a life that is worthy of praise, or to one that is worthy of
censure, I therefore deem it necessary to say a few words regarding the
freedom of the will, seeing that this topic has been treated by very many
writers in no mean style. And that we may ascertain more easily what is the
freedom of the will, let us inquire into the nature of will and of desire.[354]

TRANSLATION FROM THE GREEK.
CHAPTER I.
ON THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL[355], WITH AN EXPLANATION
AND INTERPRETATION OF THOSE STATEMENTS OF SCRIPTURE
WHICH APPEAR TO NULLIFY IT.

1. Since in the preaching of the church there is included the doctrine
respecting a just judgment of God, which, when believed to be true, incites
those who hear it to live virtuously, and to shun sin by all means, inasmuch
as they manifestly acknowledge that things worthy of praise and blame are
within our own power, come and let us discuss by themselves a few points
regarding the freedom of the will—a question of all others most necessary.
And that we may understand what the freedom of the will is, it is necessary
to unfold the conception of it,[356] that this being declared with precision, the
subject may be placed before us.

FROM THE LATIN.

2. Of all things which move, some have the cause of their motion within
themselves, others receive it from without: and all those things only are
moved from without which are without life, as stones, and pieces of wood,
and whatever things are of such a nature as to be held together by the
constitution of their matter alone, or of their bodily substance.[357] That view
must indeed be dismissed which would regard the dissolution of bodies by
corruption as motion, for it has no bearing upon our present purpose.
Others, again, have the cause of motion in themselves, as animals, or trees,
and all things which are held together by natural life or soul; among which
some think ought to be classed the veins of metals. Fire, also, is supposed to
be the cause of its own motion, and perhaps also springs of water. And of
those things which have the causes of their motion in themselves, some are
said to be moved out of themselves, others by themselves. And they so
distinguish them, because those things are moved out of themselves which
are alive indeed, but have no soul;[358] whereas those things which have a
soul are moved by themselves, when a phantasy,[359] i.e. a desire or
incitement, is presented to them, which excites them to move towards
something. Finally, in certain things endowed with a soul, there is such a
phantasy, i.e. a will or feeling,[360] as by a kind of natural instinct calls them
forth, and arouses them to orderly and regular motion; as we see to be the
case with spiders, which are stirred up in a most orderly manner by a
phantasy, i.e. a sort of wish and desire for weaving, to undertake the
production of a web, some natural movement undoubtedly calling forth the
effort to work of this kind. Nor is this very insect found to possess any other
feeling than the natural desire of weaving; as in like manner bees also
exhibit a desire to form honeycombs, and to collect, as they say, aerial
honey.[361]

FROM THE GREEK.

2. Of things that move, some have the cause of their motion within
themselves; others, again, are moved only from without. Now only portable
things are moved from without, such as pieces of wood, and stones, and all
matter that is held together by their constitution alone.[362] And let that view
be removed from consideration which calls the flux of bodies motion, since
it is not needed for our present purpose. But animals and plants have the

cause of their motion within themselves, and in general whatever is held
together by nature and a soul, to which class of things they say that metals
also belong. And besides these, fire too is self-moved, and perhaps also
fountains of water. Now, of those things which have the cause of their
movement within themselves, some, they say, are moved out of themselves,
others from themselves: things without life, out of themselves; animate
things, from themselves. For animate things are moved from themselves, a
phantasy[363] springing up in them which incites to effort. And again, in
certain animals phantasies are formed which call forth an effort, the nature
of the phantasy[364] stirring up the effort in an orderly manner, as in the
spider is formed the phantasy of weaving; and the attempt to weave follows,
the nature of its phantasy inciting the insect in an orderly manner to this
alone. And besides its phantasial nature, nothing else is believed to belong
to the insect.[365] And in the bee there is formed the phantasy to produce
wax.

FROM THE LATIN.

3. But since a rational animal not only has within itself these natural
movements, but has moreover, to a greater extent than other animals, the
power of reason, by which it can judge and determine regarding natural
movements, and disapprove and reject some, while approving and adopting
others, so by the judgment of this reason may the movements of men be
governed and directed towards a commendable life. And from this it
follows that, since the nature of this reason which is in man has within itself
the power of distinguishing between good and evil, and while
distinguishing possesses the faculty of selecting what it has approved, it
may justly be deemed worthy of praise in choosing what is good, and
deserving of censure in following that which is base or wicked. This indeed
must by no means escape our notice, that in some dumb animals there is
found a more regular movement[366] than in others, as in hunting-dogs or
war-horses, so that they may appear to some to be moved by a kind of
rational sense. But we must believe this to be the result not so much of
reason as of some natural instinct,[367] largely bestowed for purposes of that
kind. Now, as we had begun to remark, seeing that such is the nature of a
rational animal, some things may happen to us human beings from without;

and these, coming in contact with our sense of sight, or hearing, or any
other of our senses, may incite and arouse us to good movements, or the
contrary; and seeing they come to us from an external source, it is not
within our own power to prevent their coming. But to determine and
approve what use we ought to make of those things which thus happen, is
the duty of no other than of that reason within us, i.e. of our own judgment;
by the decision of which reason we use the incitement, which comes to us
from without for that purpose, which reason approves, our natural
movements being determined by its authority either to good actions or the
reverse.

FROM THE GREEK.

3. The rational animal, however, has, in addition to its phantasial nature,
also reason, which judges the phantasies, and disapproves of some and
accepts others, in order that the animal may be led according to them.
Therefore, since there are in the nature of reason aids towards the
contemplation of virtue and vice, by following which, after beholding good
and evil, we select the one and avoid the other, we are deserving of praise
when we give ourselves to the practice of virtue, and censurable when we
do the reverse. We must not, however, be ignorant that the greater part of
the nature assigned to all things is a varying quantity[368] among animals,
both in a greater and a less degree; so that the instinct in hunting-dogs and
in war-horses approaches somehow, so to speak, to the faculty of reason.
Now, to fall under some one of those external causes which stir up within us
this phantasy or that, is confessedly not one of those things that are
dependent upon ourselves; but to determine that we shall use the occurrence
in this way or differently, is the prerogative of nothing else than of the
reason within us, which, as occasion offers,[369] arouses us towards efforts
inciting to what is virtuous and becoming, or turns us aside to what is the
reverse.

FROM THE LATIN.

4. If any one now were to say that those things which happen to us from an
external cause, and call forth our movements, are of such a nature that it is
impossible to resist them, whether they incite us to good or evil, let the
holder of this opinion turn his attention for a little upon himself, and
carefully inspect the movements of his own mind, unless he has discovered
already, that when an enticement to any desire arises, nothing is
accomplished until the assent of the soul is gained, and the authority of the
mind has granted indulgence to the wicked suggestion; so that a claim
might seem to be made by two parties on certain probable grounds as to a
judge residing within the tribunals of our heart, in order that, after the
statement of reasons, the decree of execution may proceed from the
judgment of reason.[370] For, to take an illustration: if, to a man who has
determined to live continently and chastely, and to keep himself free from
all pollution with women, a woman should happen to present herself,
inciting and alluring him to act contrary to his purpose, that woman is not a
complete and absolute cause or necessity of his transgressing,[371] since it is
in his power, by remembering his resolution, to bridle the incitements to
lust, and by the stern admonitions of virtue to restrain the pleasure of the
allurement that solicits him; so that, all feeling of indulgence being driven
away, his determination may remain firm and enduring. Finally, if to any
men of learning, strengthened by divine training, allurements of that kind
present themselves, remembering forthwith what they are, and calling to
mind what has long been the subject of their meditation and instruction, and
fortifying themselves by the support of a holier doctrine, they reject and
repel all incitement to pleasure, and drive away opposing lusts by the
interposition of the reason implanted within them.

FROM THE GREEK.

4. But if any one maintain that this very external cause is of such a nature
that it is impossible to resist it when it comes in such a way, let him turn his
attention to his own feelings and movements, [and see] whether there is not
an approval, and assent, and inclination of the controlling principle towards
some object on account of some specious arguments.[372] For, to take an
instance, a woman who has appeared before a man that has determined to
be chaste, and to refrain from carnal intercourse, and who has incited him to

act contrary to his purpose, is not a perfect[373] cause of annulling his
determination. For, being altogether pleased with the luxury and allurement
of the pleasure, and not wishing to resist it, or to keep his purpose, he
commits an act of licentiousness. Another man, again (when the same
things have happened to him who has received more instruction, and has
disciplined himself[374]), encounters, indeed, allurements and enticements;
but his reason, as being strengthened to a higher point, and carefully
trained, and confirmed in its views towards a virtuous course, or being near
to confirmation,[375] repels the incitement, and extinguishes the desire.

FROM THE LATIN.

5. Seeing, then, that these positions are thus established by a sort of natural
evidence, is it not superfluous to throw back the causes of our actions on
those things which happen to us from without, and thus transfer the blame
from ourselves, on whom it wholly lies? For this is to say that we are like
pieces of wood, or stones, which have no motion in themselves, but receive
the causes of their motion from without. Now such an assertion is neither
true nor becoming, and is invented only that the freedom of the will may be
denied; unless, indeed, we are to suppose that the freedom of the will
consists in this, that nothing which happens to us from without can incite us
to good or evil. And if any one were to refer the causes of our faults to the
natural disorder[376] of the body, such a theory is proved to be contrary to the
reason of all teaching.[377] For, as we see in very many individuals, that after
living unchastely and intemperately, and after being the captives of luxury
and lust, if they should happen to be aroused by the word of teaching and
instruction to enter upon a better course of life, there takes place so great a
change, that from being luxurious and wicked men, they are converted into
those who are sober, and most chaste and gentle; so, again, we see in the
case of those who are quiet and honest, that after associating with restless
and shameless individuals, their good morals are corrupted by evil
conversation, and they become like those whose wickedness is complete.[378]
And this is the case sometimes with men of mature age, so that such have
lived more chastely in youth than when more advanced years have enabled
them to indulge in a freer mode of life. The result of our reasoning,
therefore, is to show that those things which happen to us from without are

not in our own power; but that to make a good or bad use of those things
which do so happen, by help of that reason which is within us, and which
distinguishes and determines how these things ought to be used, is within
our power.

FROM THE GREEK.

5. Such being the case, to say that we are moved from without, and to put
away the blame from ourselves, by declaring that we are like to pieces of
wood and stones, which are dragged about by those causes that act upon
them from without, is neither true nor in conformity with reason, but is the
statement of him who wishes to destroy[379] the conception of free-will. For
if we were to ask such an one what was free-will, he would say that it
consisted in this, that when purposing to do some thing, no external cause
came inciting to the reverse. But to blame, on the other hand, the mere
constitution of the body,[380] is absurd; for the disciplinary reason,[381] taking
hold of those who are most intemperate and savage (if they will follow her
exhortation), effects a transformation, so that the alteration and change for
the better is most extensive,—the most licentious men frequently becoming
better than those who formerly did not seem to be such by nature; and the
most savage men passing into such a state of mildness,[382] that those
persons who never at any time were so savage as they were, appear savage
in comparison, so great a degree of gentleness having been produced within
them. And we see other men, most steady and respectable, driven from their
state of respectability and steadiness by intercourse with evil customs, so as
to fall into habits of licentiousness, often beginning their wickedness in
middle age, and plunging into disorder after the period of youth has passed,
which, so far as its nature is concerned, is unstable. Reason, therefore,
demonstrates that external events do not depend on us, but that it is our own
business to use them in this way or the opposite, having received reason as
a judge and an investigator[383] of the manner in which we ought to meet
those events that come from without.

FROM THE LATIN.

6. And now, to confirm the deductions of reason by the authority of
Scripture—viz. that it is our own doing whether we live rightly or not, and
that we are not compelled, either by those causes which come to us from
without, or, as some think, by the presence of fate—we adduce the
testimony of the prophet Micah, in these words: “If it has been announced
to thee, O man, what is good, or what the Lord requires of thee, except that
thou shouldst do justice, and love mercy, and be ready to walk with the
Lord thy God.”[384] Moses also speaks as follows: “I have placed before thy
face the way of life and the way of death: choose what is good, and walk in
it.”[385] Isaiah, moreover, makes this declaration: “If you are willing, and
hear me, ye shall eat the good of the land. But if you be unwilling, and will
not hear me, the sword shall consume you; for the mouth of the Lord has
spoken this.”[386] In the psalm, too, it is written: “If my people had heard me,
if Israel had walked in my ways, I would have humbled her enemies to
nothing;”[387] by which he shows that it was in the power of the people to
hear, and to walk in the ways of God. The Saviour also saying, “I say unto
you, Resist not evil;”[388] and, “Whoever shall be angry with his brother,
shall be in danger of the judgment;”[389] and, “Whosoever shall look upon a
woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his
heart;”[390] and in issuing certain other commands,—conveys no other
meaning than this, that it is in our own power to observe what is
commanded. And therefore we are rightly rendered liable to condemnation
if we transgress those commandments which we are able to keep. And
hence He Himself also declares: “Every one who hears my words, and
doeth them, I will show to whom he is like: he is like a wise man who built
his house upon a rock,” etc.[391] So also the declaration: “Whoso heareth
these things, and doeth them not, is like a foolish man, who built his house
upon the sand,” etc.[392] Even the words addressed to those who are on His
right hand, “Come unto me, all ye blessed of my Father,” etc.; “for I was an
hungered, and ye gave me to eat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink,”[393]
manifestly show that it depended upon themselves, that either these should
be deserving of praise for doing what was commanded and receiving what
was promised, or those deserving of censure who either heard or received
the contrary, and to whom it was said, “Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting
fire.” Let us observe also, that the Apostle Paul addresses us as having
power over our own will, and as possessing in ourselves the causes either of
our salvation or of our ruin: “Dost thou despise the riches of His goodness,

and of His patience, and of His long-suffering, not knowing that the
goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But, according to thy hardness
and impenitent heart, thou art treasuring up for thyself wrath on the day of
judgment and of the revelation of the just judgment of God, who will render
to every one according to his work: to those who by patient continuance in
well-doing seek for glory and immortality, eternal life;[394] while to those
who are contentious, and believe not the truth, but who believe iniquity,
anger, indignation, tribulation, and distress, on every soul of man that
worketh evil, on the Jew first, and [afterwards] on the Greek; but glory, and
honour, and peace to every one that doeth good, to the Jew first, and
[afterwards] to the Greek.”[395] You will find also innumerable other
passages in Holy Scripture, which manifestly show that we possess freedom
of will. Otherwise there would be a contrariety in commandments being
given us, by observing which we may be saved, or by transgressing which
we may be condemned, if the power of keeping them were not implanted in
us.

FROM THE GREEK.

6. Now, that it is our business to live virtuously, and that God asks this of
us, as not being dependent on Him nor on any other, nor, as some think,
upon fate, but as being our own doing, the prophet Micah will prove when
he says: “If it has been announced to thee, O man, what is good, or what
does the Lord require of thee, except to do justice and to love mercy?”[396]
Moses also: “I have placed before thy face the way of life, and the way of
death: choose what is good, and walk in it.”[397] Isaiah too: “If you are
willing, and hear me, ye shall eat the good of the land; but if ye be
unwilling, and will not hear me, the sword will consume you: for the mouth
of the Lord hath spoken it.”[398] And in the Psalms: “If my people had heard
me, and Israel had walked in my ways, I would have humbled their enemies
to nothing, and laid my hand upon those that afflicted them;”[399] showing
that it was in the power of His people to hear and to walk in the ways of
God. And the Saviour also, when He commands, “But I say unto you, Resist
not evil;”[400] and, “Whosoever shall be angry with his brother, shall be in
danger of the judgment;”[401] and, “Whosoever shall look upon a woman to
lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart;”[402] and

by any other commandment which He gives, declares that it lies with
ourselves to keep what is enjoined, and that we shall reasonably[403] be liable
to condemnation if we transgress. And therefore He says in addition: “He
that heareth my words, and doeth them, shall be likened to a prudent man,
who built his house upon a rock,” etc. etc.; “while he that heareth them, but
doeth them not, is like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand,”
etc.[404] And when He says to those on His right hand, “Come, ye blessed of
my Father,” etc.; “for I was an hungered, and ye gave me to eat; I was
athirst, and ye gave me to drink,”[405] it is exceedingly manifest that He
gives the promises to these as being deserving of praise. But, on the
contrary, to the others, as being censurable in comparison with them, He
says, “Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire!”[406] And let us observe how
Paul also converses[407] with us as having freedom of will, and as being
ourselves the cause of ruin or salvation, when he says, “Dost thou despise
the riches of His goodness, and of His patience, and of His long-suffering;
not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But,
according to thy hardness and impenitent heart, thou art treasuring up for
thyself wrath on the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment
of God; who will render to every one according to his works: to those who,
by patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glory and immortality,
eternal life; while to those who are contentious, and believe not the truth,
but who believe iniquity, anger, wrath, tribulation, and distress, on every
soul of man that worketh evil; on the Jew first, and on the Greek: but glory,
and honour, and peace to every one that worketh good; to the Jew first, and
to the Greek.”[408] There are, indeed, innumerable passages in the Scriptures
which establish with exceeding clearness the existence of freedom of will.

FROM THE LATIN.

7. But, seeing there are found in the sacred Scriptures themselves certain
expressions occurring in such a connection, that the opposite of this may
appear capable of being understood from them, let us bring them forth
before us, and, discussing them according to the rule of piety,[409] let us
furnish an explanation of them, in order that from those few passages which
we now expound, the solution of those others which resemble them, and by
which any power over the will seems to be excluded, may become clear.

Those expressions, accordingly, make an impression on very many, which
are used by God in speaking of Pharaoh, as when He frequently says, “I
will harden Pharaoh’s heart.”[410] For if he is hardened by God, and commits
sin in consequence of being so hardened, the cause of his sin is not himself.
And if so, it will appear that Pharaoh does not possess freedom of will; and
it will be maintained, as a consequence, that, agreeably to this illustration,
neither do others who perish owe the cause of their destruction to the
freedom of their own will. That expression, also, in Ezekiel, when he says,
“I will take away their stony hearts, and will give them hearts of flesh, that
they may walk in my precepts, and keep my ways,”[411] may impress some,
inasmuch as it seems to be a gift of God, either to walk in His ways or to
keep His precepts,[412] if He take away that stony heart which is an obstacle
to the keeping of His commandments, and bestow and implant a better and
more impressible heart, which is called now[413] a heart of flesh. Consider
also the nature of the answer given in the Gospel by our Lord and Saviour
to those who inquired of Him why He spoke to the multitude in parables.
His words are: “That seeing they may not see; and hearing they may hear,
and not understand; lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven
them.”[414] The words, moreover, used by the Apostle Paul, that “it is not of
him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth
mercy;”[415] in another passage also, “that to will and to do are of God;”[416]
and again, elsewhere, “Therefore hath He mercy upon whom He will, and
whom He will He hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet
find fault? For who shall resist His will? O man, who art thou that repliest
against God? Shall the thing formed say to him who hath formed it, Why
hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the
same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another to dishonour?”[417]
—these and similar declarations seem to have no small influence in
preventing very many from believing that every one is to be considered as
having freedom over his own will, and in making it appear to be a
consequence of the will of God whether a man is either saved or lost.

FROM THE GREEK.

7. But since certain declarations of the Old Testament and of the New lead
to the opposite conclusion—namely, that it does not depend on ourselves to

keep the commandments and to be saved, or to transgress them and to be
lost—let us adduce them one by one, and see the explanations of them, in
order that from those which we adduce, any one selecting in a similar way
all the passages that seem to nullify free-will, may consider what is said
about them by way of explanation. And now, the statements regarding
Pharaoh have troubled many, respecting whom God declared several times,
“I will harden Pharaoh’s heart.”[418] For if he is hardened by God, and
commits sin in consequence of being hardened, he is not the cause of sin to
himself; and if so, then neither does Pharaoh possess free-will. And some
one will say that, in a similar way, they who perish have not free-will, and
will not perish of themselves. The declaration also in Ezekiel, “I will take
away their stony hearts, and will put in them hearts of flesh, that they may
walk in my precepts, and keep my commandments,”[419] might lead one to
think that it was God who gave the power to walk in His commandments,
and to keep His precepts, by His withdrawing the hindrance—the stony
heart, and implanting a better—a heart of flesh. And let us look also at the
passage in the Gospel—the answer which the Saviour returns to those who
inquired why He spake to the multitude in parables. His words are: “That
seeing they might not see; and hearing they may hear, and not understand;
lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them.”[420] The
passage also in Paul: “It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth,
but of God that showeth mercy.”[421] The declarations, too, in other places,
that “both to will and to do are of God;”[422] “that God hath mercy upon
whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth. Thou wilt say
then, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will?” ”The
persuasion is of Him that calleth, and not of us.”[423] “Nay, O man, who art
thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that hath
formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the
clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto
dishonour?”[424] Now these passages are sufficient of themselves to trouble
the multitude, as if man were not possessed of free-will, but as if it were
God who saves and destroys whom He will.

FROM THE LATIN.

8. Let us begin, then, with those words which were spoken to Pharaoh, who
is said to have been hardened by God, in order that he might not let the
people go; and, along with his case, the language of the apostle also will be
considered, where he says, “Therefore He hath mercy on whom He will,
and whom He will He hardeneth.”[425] For it is on these passages chiefly that
the heretics rely, asserting that salvation is not in our own power, but that
souls are of such a nature as must by all means be either lost or saved; and
that in no way can a soul which is of an evil nature become good, or one
which is of a virtuous nature be made bad. And hence they maintain that
Pharaoh, too, being of a ruined nature, was on that account hardened by
God, who hardens those that are of an earthly nature, but has compassion on
those who are of a spiritual nature. Let us see, then, what is the meaning of
their assertion; and let us, in the first place, request them to tell us whether
they maintain that the soul of Pharaoh was of an earthly nature, such as they
term lost. They will undoubtedly answer that it was of an earthly nature. If
so, then to believe God, or to obey Him, when his nature opposed his so
doing, was an impossibility. And if this were his condition by nature, what
further need was there for his heart to be hardened, and this not once, but
several times, unless indeed because it was possible for him to yield to
persuasion? Nor could any one be said to be hardened by another, save him
who of himself was not obdurate. And if he were not obdurate of himself, it
follows that neither was he of an earthly nature, but such an one as might
give way when overpowered[426] by signs and wonders. But he was
necessary for God’s purpose, in order that, for the saving of the multitude,
He might manifest in him His power by his offering resistance to numerous
miracles, and struggling against the will of God, and his heart being by this
means said to be hardened. Such are our answers, in the first place, to these
persons; and by these their assertion may be overturned, according to which
they think that Pharaoh was destroyed in consequence of his evil nature.[427]
And with regard to the language of the Apostle Paul, we must answer them
in a similar way. For who are they whom God hardens, according to your
view? Those, namely, whom you term of a ruined nature, and who, I am to
suppose, would have done something else had they not been hardened. If,
indeed, they come to destruction in consequence of being hardened, they no
longer perish naturally, but in virtue of what befalls them. Then, in the next
place, upon whom does God show mercy? On those, namely, who are to be
saved. And in what respect do those persons stand in need of a second

compassion, who are to be saved once by their nature, and so come
naturally to blessedness, except that it is shown even from their case, that,
because it was possible for them to perish, they therefore obtain mercy, that
so they may not perish, but come to salvation, and possess the kingdom of
the good. And let this be our answer to those who devise and invent the
fable[428] of good or bad natures, i.e. of earthly or spiritual souls, in
consequence of which, as they say, each one is either saved or lost.

FROM THE GREEK.

8. Let us begin, then, with what is said about Pharaoh—that he was
hardened by God, that he might not send away the people; along with which
will be examined also the statement of the apostle, “Therefore hath He
mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth.”[429]
And certain of those who hold different opinions misuse these passages,
themselves also almost destroying free-will by introducing ruined natures
incapable of salvation, and others saved which it is impossible can be lost;
and Pharaoh, they say, as being of a ruined nature, is therefore hardened by
God, who has mercy upon the spiritual, but hardens the earthly. Let us see
now what they mean. For we shall ask them if Pharaoh was of an earthy
nature; and when they answer, we shall say that he who is of an earthy
nature is altogether disobedient to God: but if disobedient, what need is
there of his heart being hardened, and that not once, but frequently? Unless
perhaps, since it was possible for him to obey (in which case he would
certainly have obeyed, as not being earthy, when hard pressed by the signs
and wonders), God needs him to be disobedient to a greater degree,[430] in
order that He may manifest His mighty deeds for the salvation of the
multitude, and therefore hardens his heart. This will be our answer to them
in the first place, in order to overturn their supposition that Pharaoh was of
a ruined nature. And the same reply must be given to them with respect to
the statement of the apostle. For whom does God harden? Those who
perish, as if they would obey unless they were hardened, or manifestly
those who would be saved because they are not of a ruined nature. And on
whom has He mercy? Is it on those who are to be saved? And how is there
need of a second mercy for those who have been prepared once for
salvation, and who will by all means become blessed on account of their

nature? Unless perhaps, since they are capable of incurring destruction, if
they did not receive mercy, they will obtain mercy, in order that they may
not incur that destruction of which they are capable, but may be in the
condition of those who are saved. And this is our answer to such persons.

FROM THE LATIN.

9. And now we must return an answer also to those who would have the
God of the law to be just only, and not also good; and let us ask such in
what manner they consider the heart of Pharaoh to have been hardened by
God—by what acts or by what prospective arrangements.[431] For we must
observe the conception of a God[432] who in our opinion is both just and
good, but according to them only just. And let them show us how a God
whom they also acknowledge to be just, can with justice cause the heart of a
man to be hardened, that, in consequence of that very hardening, he may sin
and be ruined. And how shall the justice of God be defended, if He Himself
is the cause of the destruction of those whom, owing to their unbelief
(through their being hardened), He has afterwards condemned by the
authority of a judge? For why does He blame him, saying, “But since thou
wilt not let my people go, lo, I will smite all the first-born in Egypt, even
thy first-born,”[433] and whatever else was spoken through Moses by God to
Pharaoh? For it behoves every one who maintains the truth of what is
recorded in Scripture, and who desires to show that the God of the law and
the prophets is just, to render a reason for all these things, and to show how
there is in them nothing at all derogatory to the justice of God, since,
although they deny His goodness, they admit that He is a just judge, and
creator of the world. Different, however, is the method of our reply to those
who assert that the creator of this world is a malignant being, i.e. a devil.

FROM THE GREEK.

9. But to those who think they understand the term “hardened,” we must
address the inquiry, What do they mean by saying that God, by His
working, hardens the heart, and with what purpose does He do this? For let

them observe the conception[434] of a God who is in reality just and good;
but if they will not allow this, let it be conceded to them for the present that
He is just; and let them show how the good and just God, or the just God
only, appears to be just, in hardening the heart of him who perishes because
of his being hardened: and how the just God becomes the cause of
destruction and disobedience, when men are chastened by Him on account
of their hardness and disobedience. And why does He find fault with him,
saying, “Thou wilt not let my people go;”[435] “Lo, I will smite all the first-
born in Egypt, even thy first-born;”[436] and whatever else is recorded as
spoken from God to Pharaoh through the intervention of Moses? For he
who believes that the Scriptures are true, and that God is just, must
necessarily endeavour, if he be honest,[437] to show how God, in using such
expressions, may be distinctly[438] understood to be just. But if any one
should stand, declaring with uncovered head that the Creator of the world
was inclined to wickedness,[439] we should need other words to answer them.

FROM THE LATIN.

10. But since we acknowledge the God who spoke by Moses to be not only
just, but also good, let us carefully inquire how it is in keeping with the
character of a just and good Deity to have hardened the heart of Pharaoh.
And let us see whether, following the example of the Apostle Paul, we are
able to solve the difficulty by help of some parallel instances: if we can
show, e.g., that by one and the same act God has pity upon one individual,
but hardens another; not purposing or desiring that he who is hardened
should be so, but because, in the manifestation of His goodness and
patience, the heart of those who treat His kindness and forbearance with
contempt and insolence is hardened by the punishment of their crimes being
delayed; while those, on the other hand, who make His goodness and
patience the occasion of their repentance and reformation, obtain
compassion. To show more clearly, however, what we mean, let us take the
illustration employed by the Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews,
where he says, “For the earth, which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft
upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, will
receive blessing from God; but that which beareth thorns and briers is
rejected, and is nigh unto cursing, whose end is to be burned.”[440] Now from

those words of Paul which we have quoted, it is clearly shown that by one
and the same act on the part of God—that, viz. by which He sends rain
upon the earth—one portion of the ground, when carefully cultivated,
brings forth good fruits; while another, neglected and uncared for, produces
thorns and thistles. And if one, speaking as it were in the person of the rain,
[441]
were to say, “It is I, the rain, that have made the good fruits, and it is I
that have caused the thorns and thistles to grow,” however hard[442] the
statement might appear, it would nevertheless be true; for unless the rain
had fallen, neither fruits, nor thorns, nor thistles would have sprung up,
whereas by the coming of the rain the earth gave birth to both. Now,
although it is due to the beneficial action of the rain that the earth has
produced herbs of both kinds, it is not to the rain that the diversity of the
herbs is properly to be ascribed; but on those will justly rest the blame for
the bad seed, who, although they might have turned up the ground by
frequent ploughing, and have broken the clods by repeated harrowing, and
have extirpated all useless and noxious weeds, and have cleared and
prepared the fields for the coming showers by all the labour and toil which
cultivation demands, have nevertheless neglected to do this, and who will
accordingly reap briers and thorns, the most appropriate fruit of their sloth.
And the consequence therefore is, that while the rain falls in kindness and
impartiality[443] equally upon the whole earth, yet, by one and the same
operation of the rain, that soil which is cultivated yields with a blessing
useful fruits to the diligent and careful cultivators, while that which has
become hardened through the neglect of the husbandman brings forth only
thorns and thistles. Let us therefore view those signs and miracles which
were done by God, as the showers furnished by Him from above; and the
purpose and desires of men, as the cultivated and uncultivated soil, which is
of one and the same nature indeed, as is every soil compared with another,
but not in one and the same state of cultivation. From which it follows that
every one’s will,[444] if untrained, and fierce, and barbarous, is either
hardened by the miracles and wonders of God, growing more savage and
thorny than ever, or it becomes more pliant, and yields itself up with the
whole mind to obedience, if it be cleared from vice and subjected to
training.

FROM THE GREEK.

10. But since they say that they regard Him as a just God, and we as one
who is at the same time good and just, let us consider how the good and just
God could harden the heart of Pharaoh. See, then, whether, by an
illustration used by the apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews, we are able to
prove that by one operation[445] God has mercy upon one man while He
hardens another, although not intending to harden; but, [although] having a
good purpose, hardening follows as a result of the inherent principle of
wickedness in such persons,[446] and so He is said to harden him who is
hardened. “The earth,” he says, “which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft
upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them for whom it is dressed,
receiveth blessing from God; but that which beareth thorns and briers is
rejected, and is nigh to cursing, whose end is to be burned.”[447] As respects
the rain, then, there is one operation; and there being one operation as
regards the rain, the ground which is cultivated produces fruit, while that
which is neglected and is barren produces thorns. Now, it might seem
profane[448] for Him who rains to say, “I produced the fruits, and the thorns
that are in the earth;” and yet, although profane, it is true. For, had rain not
fallen, there would have been neither fruits nor thorns; but, having fallen at
the proper time and in moderation, both were produced. The ground, now,
which drank in the rain which often fell upon it, and yet produced thorns
and briers, is rejected and nigh to cursing. The blessing, then, of the rain
descended even upon the inferior land; but it, being neglected and
uncultivated, yielded thorns and thistles. In the same way, therefore, the
wonderful works also done by God are, as it were, the rain; while the
differing purposes are, as it were, the cultivated and neglected land, being
[yet], like earth, of one nature.

FROM THE LATIN.

11. But, to establish the point more clearly, it will not be superfluous to
employ another illustration, as if, e.g., one were to say that it is the sun
which hardens and liquefies, although liquefying and hardening are things
of an opposite nature. Now it is not incorrect to say that the sun, by one and
the same power of its heat, melts wax indeed, but dries up and hardens
mud:[449] not that its power operates one way upon mud, and in another way
upon wax; but that the qualities of mud and wax are different, although

according to nature they are one thing,[450] both being from the earth. In this
way, then, one and the same working upon the part of God, which was
administered by Moses in signs and wonders, made manifest the hardness
of Pharaoh, which he had conceived in the intensity of his wickedness[451],
but exhibited the obedience of those other Egyptians who were
intermingled with the Israelites, and who are recorded to have quitted Egypt
at the same time with the Hebrews. With respect to the statement that the
heart of Pharaoh was subdued by degrees, so that on one occasion he said,
“Go not far away; ye shall go a three days’ journey, but leave your wives,
and your children, and your cattle,”[452] and as regards any other statements,
according to which he appears to yield gradually to the signs and wonders,
what else is shown, save that the power of the signs and miracles was
making some impression on him, but not so much as it ought to have done?
For if the hardening were of such a nature as many take it to be, he would
not indeed have given way even in a few instances. But I think there is no
absurdity in explaining the tropical or figurative[453] nature of that language
employed in speaking of “hardening,” according to common usage. For
those masters who are remarkable for kindness to their slaves, are
frequently accustomed to say to the latter, when, through much patience and
indulgence on their part, they have become insolent and worthless: “It is I
that have made you what you are; I have spoiled you; it is my endurance
that has made you good for nothing: I am to blame for your perverse and
wicked habits, because I do not have you immediately punished for every
delinquency according to your deserts.” For we must first attend to the
tropical or figurative meaning of the language, and so come to see the force
of the expression, and not find fault with the word, whose inner meaning we
do not ascertain. Finally, the Apostle Paul, evidently treating of such, says
to him who remained in his sins: “Despisest thou the riches of His
goodness, and forbearance, and long-suffering; not knowing that the
goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? but, after thy hardness and
impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath on the day of wrath and
revelation of the righteous judgment of God.”[454] Such are the words of the
apostle to him who is in his sins. Let us apply these very expressions to
Pharaoh, and see if they also are not spoken of him with propriety, since,
according to his hardness and impenitent heart, he treasured and stored up
for himself wrath on the day of wrath, inasmuch as his hardness could never

have been declared and manifested, unless signs and wonders of such
number and magnificence had been performed.

FROM THE GREEK.

11. And as if the sun, uttering a voice, were to say, “I liquefy and dry up,”
liquefaction and drying up being opposite things, he would not speak
falsely as regards the point in question;[455] wax being melted and mud being
dried by the same heat; so the same operation, which was performed
through the instrumentality of Moses, proved the hardness of Pharaoh on
the one hand, the result of his wickedness, and the yielding of the mixed
Egyptian multitude who took their departure with the Hebrews. And the
brief statement[456] that the heart of Pharaoh was softened, as it were, when
he said, “But ye shall not go far: ye will go a three days’ journey, and leave
your wives,”[457] and anything else which he said, yielding little by little
before the signs, proves that the wonders made some impression even upon
him, but did not accomplish all [that they might]. Yet even this would not
have happened, if that which is supposed by the many—the hardening of
Pharaoh’s heart—had been produced by God Himself. And it is not absurd
to soften down such expressions agreeably to common usage:[458] for good
masters often say to their slaves, when spoiled by their kindness and
forbearance, “I have made you bad, and I am to blame for offences of such
enormity.” For we must attend to the character and force of the phrase, and
not argue sophistically,[459] disregarding the meaning of the expression. Paul
accordingly, having examined these points clearly, says to the sinner: “Or
despisest thou the riches of His goodness, and forbearance, and long-
suffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
but, after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath
against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of
God.”[460] Now, let what the apostle says to the sinner be addressed to
Pharaoh, and then the announcements made to him will be understood to
have been made with peculiar fitness, as to one who, according to his
hardness and unrepentant heart, was treasuring up to himself wrath; seeing
that his hardness would not have been proved nor made manifest unless
miracles had been performed, and miracles, too, of such magnitude and
importance.

FROM THE LATIN.

12. But if the proofs which we have adduced do not appear full enough, and
the similitude of the apostle seem wanting in applicability,[461] let us add the
voice of prophetic authority, and see what the prophets declare regarding
those who at first, indeed, leading a righteous life, have deserved to receive
numerous proofs of the goodness of God, but afterwards, as being human
beings, have fallen astray, with whom the prophet, making himself also one,
says: “Why, O Lord, hast Thou made us to err from Thy way? and hardened
our heart, that we should not fear Thy name? Return, for Thy servants’ sake,
for the tribes of Thine inheritance, that we also for a little may obtain some
inheritance from Thy holy hill.”[462] Jeremiah also employs similar
language: “O Lord, Thou hast deceived us, and we were deceived; Thou
hast held [us], and Thou hast prevailed.”[463] The expression, then, “Why, O
Lord, hast Thou hardened our heart, that we should not fear Thy name?”
used by those who prayed for mercy, is to be taken in a figurative, moral
acceptation,[464] as if one were to say, “Why hast Thou spared us so long,
and didst not requite us when we sinned, but didst abandon us, that so our
wickedness might increase, and our liberty of sinning be extended when
punishment ceased?” In like manner, unless a horse continually feel the
spur[465] of his rider, and have his mouth abraded by a bit,[466] he becomes
hardened. And a boy also, unless constantly disciplined by chastisement,
will grow up to be an insolent youth, and one ready to fall headlong into
vice. God accordingly abandons and neglects those whom He has judged
undeserving of chastisement: “For whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth,
and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth.”[467] From which we are to
suppose that those are to be received into the rank and affection of sons,
who have deserved to be scourged and chastened by the Lord, in order that
they also, through endurance of trials and tribulations, may be able to say,
“Who shall separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus? shall
tribulation, or anguish, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?”[468] For
by all these is each one’s resolution manifested and displayed, and the
firmness of his perseverance made known, not so much to God, who knows
all things before they happen, as to the rational and heavenly virtues,[469]
who have obtained a part in the work of procuring human salvation, as
being a sort of assistants and ministers to God. Those, on the other hand,

who do not yet offer themselves to God with such constancy and affection,
and are not ready to come into His service, and to prepare their souls for
trial, are said to be abandoned by God, i.e. not to be instructed, inasmuch as
they are not prepared for instruction, their training or care being
undoubtedly postponed to a later time. These certainly do not know what
they will obtain from God, unless they first entertain the desire of being
benefited; and this finally will be the case, if a man come first to a
knowledge of himself, and feel what are his defects, and understand from
whom he either ought or can seek the supply of his deficiencies. For he who
does not know beforehand of his weakness or his sickness, cannot seek a
physician; or at least, after recovering his health, that man will not be
grateful to his physician who did not first recognise the dangerous nature of
his ailment. And so, unless a man has first ascertained the defects of his life,
and the evil nature of his sins, and made this known by confession from his
own lips, he cannot be cleansed or acquitted, lest he should be ignorant that
what he possesses has been bestowed on him by favour, but should consider
as his own property what flows from the divine liberality, which idea
undoubtedly generates arrogance of mind and pride, and finally becomes
the cause of the individual’s ruin. And this, we must believe, was the case
with the devil, who viewed as his own, and not as given him by God, the
primacy[470] which he held at the time when he was unstained;[471] and thus
was fulfilled in him the declaration, that “every one who exalteth himself
shall be abased.”[472] From which it appears to me that the divine mysteries
were concealed from the wise and prudent, according to the statement of
Scripture, that “no flesh should glory before God,”[473] and revealed to
children—to those, namely, who, after they have become infants and little
children, i.e. have returned to the humility and simplicity of children, then
make progress; and on arriving at perfection, remember that they have
obtained their state of happiness, not by their own merits, but by the grace
and compassion of God.

FROM THE GREEK.

12. But since such narratives are slow to secure assent,[474] and are
considered to be forced,[475] let us see from the prophetical declarations also,
what those persons say, who, although they have experienced the great

kindness of God, have not lived virtuously, but have afterwards sinned.
“Why, O Lord, hast Thou made us to err from Thy ways? Why hast Thou
hardened our heart, so as not to fear Thy name? Return for Thy servants’
sake, for the tribes of Thine inheritance, that we may inherit a small portion
of Thy holy mountain.”[476] And in Jeremiah: “Thou hast deceived me, O
Lord, and I was deceived; Thou wert strong, and Thou didst prevail.”[477]
For the expression, “Why hast Thou hardened our heart, so as not to fear
Thy name?” uttered by those who are begging to receive mercy, is in its
nature as follows: “Why hast Thou spared us so long, not visiting us
because of our sins, but deserting us, until our transgressions come to a
height?” Now He leaves the greater part of men unpunished, both in order
that the habits of each one may be examined, so far as it depends upon
ourselves, and that the virtuous may be made manifest in consequence of
the test applied; while the others, not escaping notice from God—for He
knows all things before they exist—but from the rational creation and
themselves, may afterwards obtain the means of cure, seeing they would not
have known the benefit had they not condemned themselves. It is of
advantage to each one, that he perceive his own peculiar nature[478] and the
grace of God. For he who does not perceive his own weakness and the
divine favour, although he receive a benefit, yet, not having made trial of
himself, nor having condemned himself, will imagine that the benefit
conferred upon him by the grace of Heaven is his own doing. And this
imagination, producing also vanity,[479] will be the cause of a downfall:
which, we conceive, was the case with the devil, who attributed to himself
the priority which he possessed when in a state of sinlessness.[480] “For
every one that exalteth himself shall be abased,” and “every one that
humbleth himself shall be exalted.”[481] And observe, that for this reason
divine things have been concealed from the wise and prudent, in order, as
says the apostle, that “no flesh should glory in the presence of God;”[482] and
they have been revealed to babes, to those who after childhood have come
to better things, and who remember that it is not so much from their own
effort, as by the unspeakable goodness [of God], that they have reached the
greatest possible extent of blessedness.

FROM THE LATIN.

13. It is therefore by the sentence of God that he is abandoned who deserves
to be so, while over some sinners God exercises forbearance; not, however,
without a definite principle of action.[483] Nay, the very fact that He is long-
suffering conduces to the advantage of those very persons, since the soul
over which He exercises this providential care is immortal; and, as being
immortal and everlasting, it is not, although not immediately cared for,
excluded from salvation, which is postponed to a more convenient time. For
perhaps it is expedient for those who have been more deeply imbued with
the poison of wickedness to obtain this salvation at a later period. For as
medical men sometimes, although they could quickly cover over the scars
of wounds, keep back and delay the cure for the present, in the expectation
of a better and more perfect recovery, knowing that it is more salutary to
retard the treatment in the cases of swellings caused by wounds, and to
allow the malignant humours to flow off for a while, rather than to hasten a
superficial cure, by shutting up in the veins the poison of a morbid humour,
which, excluded from its customary outlets, will undoubtedly creep into the
inner parts of the limbs, and penetrate to the very vitals of the viscera,
producing no longer mere disease in the body, but causing destruction to
life; so, in like manner, God also, who knows the secret things of the heart,
and foreknows the future, in much forbearance allows certain events to
happen, which, coming from without upon men, cause to come forth into
the light the passions and vices which are concealed within, that by their
means those may be cleansed and cured who, through great negligence and
carelessness, have admitted within themselves the roots and seeds of sins,
so that, when driven outwards and brought to the surface, they may in a
certain degree be cast forth and dispersed.[484] And thus, although a man may
appear to be afflicted with evils of a serious kind, suffering convulsions in
all his limbs, he may nevertheless, at some future time, obtain relief and a
cessation from his trouble; and, after enduring his afflictions to satiety, may,
after many sufferings, be restored again to his [proper] condition. For God
deals with souls not merely with a view to the short space of our present
life, included within sixty years[485] or more, but with reference to a
perpetual and never-ending period, exercising His providential care over
souls that are immortal, even as He Himself is eternal and immortal. For He
made the rational nature, which He formed in His own image and likeness,
incorruptible; and therefore the soul, which is immortal, is not excluded by
the shortness of the present life from the divine remedies and cures.

FROM THE GREEK.

13. It is not without reason, then, that he who is abandoned, is abandoned to
the divine judgment, and that God is long-suffering with certain sinners; but
because it will be for their advantage, with respect to the immortality of the
soul and the unending world,[486] that they be not quickly brought[487] into a
state of salvation, but be conducted to it more slowly, after having
experienced many evils. For as physicians, who are able to cure a man
quickly, when they suspect that a hidden poison exists in the body, do the
reverse of healing, making this more certain through their very desire to
heal, deeming it better for a considerable time to retain the patient under
inflammation and sickness, in order that he may recover his health more
surely, than to appear to produce a rapid recovery, and afterwards to cause a
relapse, and [thus] that hasty cure last only for a time; in the same way, God
also, who knows the secret things of the heart, and foresees future events, in
His long-suffering, permits [certain events to occur], and by means of those
things which happen from without extracts the secret evil, in order to
cleanse him who through carelessness has received the seeds of sin, that
having vomited them forth when they come to the surface, although he may
have been deeply involved in evils, he may afterwards obtain healing after
his wickedness, and be renewed.[488] For God governs souls not with
reference, let me say, to the fifty[489] years of the present life, but with
reference to an illimitable[490] age: for He made the thinking principle
immortal in its nature, and kindred to Himself; and the rational soul is not,
as in this life, excluded from cure.

FROM THE LATIN.

14. But let us take from the Gospels also the similitudes of those things
which we have mentioned, in which is described a certain rock, having on it
a little superficial earth, on which, when a seed falls, it is said quickly to
spring up; but when sprung up, it withers as the sun ascends in the heavens,
and dies away, because it did not cast its root deeply into the ground.[491]
Now this rock undoubtedly represents the human soul, hardened on account
of its own negligence, and converted into stone because of its wickedness.

For God gave no one a stony heart by a creative act; but each individual’s
heart is said to become stony through his own wickedness and
disobedience. As, therefore, if one were to blame a husbandman for not
casting his seed more quickly upon rocky ground, because seed cast upon
other rocky soil was seen to spring up speedily, the husbandman would
certainly say in reply: “I sow this soil more slowly, for this reason, that it
may retain the seed which it has received; for it suits this ground to be sown
somewhat slowly, lest perhaps the crop, having sprouted too rapidly, and
coming forth from the mere surface of a shallow soil, should be unable to
withstand the rays of the sun.” Would not he who formerly found fault
acquiesce in the reasons and superior knowledge of the husbandman, and
approve as done on rational grounds what formerly appeared to him as
founded on no reason? And in the same way, God, the thoroughly skilled
husbandman of all His creation, undoubtedly conceals and delays to another
time those[492] things which we think ought to have obtained health sooner,
in order that not the outside of things, rather than the inside, may be cured.
But if any one now were to object to us that certain seeds do even fall upon
rocky ground, i.e. on a hard and stony heart, we should answer that even
this does not happen without the arrangement of Divine Providence;
inasmuch as, but for this, it would not be known what condemnation was
incurred by rashness in hearing and indifference in investigation,[493] nor,
certainly, what benefit was derived from being trained in an orderly manner.
And hence it happens that the soul comes to know its defects, and to cast
the blame upon itself, and, consistently with this, to reserve and submit
itself to training, i.e. in order that it may see that its faults must first be
removed, and that then it must come to receive the instruction of wisdom.
As, therefore, souls are innumerable, so also are their manners, and
purposes, and movements, and appetencies, and incitements different, the
variety of which can by no means be grasped by the human mind; and
therefore to God alone must be left the art, and the knowledge, and the
power of an arrangement of this kind, as He alone can know both the
remedies for each individual soul, and measure out the time of its cure. It is
He alone then who, as we said, recognises the ways of individual men, and
determines by what way He ought to lead Pharaoh, that through him His
name might be named in all the earth, having previously chastised him by
many blows, and finally drowning him in the sea. By this drowning,
however, it is not to be supposed that God’s providence as regards Pharaoh

was terminated; for we must not imagine, because he was drowned, that
therefore he had forthwith completely[494] perished: “for in the hand of God
are both we and our words; all wisdom, also, and knowledge of
workmanship,”[495] as Scripture declares. But these points we have discussed
according to our ability, treating of that chapter[496] of Scripture in which it
is said that God hardened the heart of Pharaoh, and agreeably to the
statement, “He hath mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He
will He hardeneth.”[497]

FROM THE GREEK.

14. Come now, and let us use the following image[498] from the Gospel.
There is a certain rock, with a little surface-soil, on which, if seeds fall, they
quickly spring up; but when sprung up, as not having root, they are burned
and withered when the sun has arisen. Now this rock is a human soul,
hardened on account of its negligence, and converted to stone because of its
wickedness; for no one receives from God a heart created of stone, but it
becomes such in consequence of wickedness. If one, then, were to find fault
with the husbandman for not sowing his seed sooner upon the rocky soil,
when he saw other rocky ground which had received seed flourishing, the
husbandman would reply, “I shall sow this ground more slowly, casting in
seeds that will be able to retain their hold, this slower method being better
for the ground, and more secure than that which receives the seed in a more
rapid manner, and more upon the surface.” [The person finding fault] would
yield his assent to the husbandman, as one who spoke with sound reason,
and who acted with skill: so also the great Husbandman of all nature
postpones that benefit which might be deemed premature,[499] that it may not
prove superficial. But it is probable that here some one may object to us
with reference to this: “Why do some of the seeds fall upon the earth that
has superficial soil, the soul being, as it were, a rock?” Now we must say, in
answer to this, that it was better for this soul, which desired better things
precipitately,[500] and not by a way which led to them, to obtain its desire, in
order that, condemning itself on this account, it may, after a long time,
endure to receive the husbandry which is according to nature. For souls are,
as one may say, innumerable; and their habits are innumerable, and their
movements, and their purposes, and their assaults, and their efforts, of

which there is only one admirable administrator, who knows both the
seasons, and the fitting helps, and the avenues, and the ways, viz. the God
and Father of all things, who knows how He conducts even Pharaoh by so
great events, and by drowning in the sea, with which latter occurrence His
superintendence of Pharaoh does not cease. For he was not annihilated
when drowned: “For in the hand of God are both we and our words; all
wisdom also, and knowledge of workmanship.”[501] And such is a moderate
defence with regard to the statements that “Pharaoh’s heart was hardened,”
and that “God hath mercy upon whom He will have mercy, and whom He
will He hardeneth.”

FROM THE LATIN.

15. Let us now look at those passages of Ezekiel where he says, “I will take
away from them their stony heart, and I will put in them a heart of flesh,
that they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine ordinances.”[502] For if
God, when He pleases, takes away a heart of stone and bestows a heart of
flesh, that His ordinances may be observed and His commandments may be
obeyed, it will then appear that it is not in our power to put away
wickedness. For the taking away of a stony heart seems to be nothing else
than the removal of the wickedness by which one is hardened, from
whomsoever God pleases to remove it. Nor is the bestowal of a heart of
flesh, that the precepts of God may be observed and His commandments
obeyed, any other thing than a man becoming obedient, and no longer
resisting the truth, but performing works of virtue. If, then, God promises to
do this, and if, before He takes away the stony heart, we are unable to
remove it from ourselves, it follows that it is not in our power, but in God’s
only, to cast away wickedness. And again, if it is not our doing to form
within us a heart of flesh, but the work of God alone, it will not be in our
power to live virtuously, but it will in everything appear to be a work of
divine grace. Such are the assertions of those who wish to prove from the
authority of Holy Scripture that nothing lies in our own power. Now to
these we answer, that these passages are not to be so understood, but in the
following manner. Take the case of one who was ignorant and untaught, and
who, feeling the disgrace of his ignorance, should, driven either by an
exhortation from some person, or incited by a desire to emulate other wise

men, hand himself over to one by whom he is assured that he will be
carefully trained and competently instructed. If he, then, who had formerly
hardened himself in ignorance, yield himself, as we have said, with full
purpose of mind to a master, and promise to obey him in all things, the
master, on seeing clearly the resolute nature of his determination, will
appropriately promise to take away all ignorance, and to implant knowledge
within his mind; not that he undertakes to do this if the disciple refuse or
resist his efforts, but only on his offering and binding himself to obedience
in all things. So also the word of God promises to those who draw near to
Him, that He will take away their stony heart, not indeed from those who do
not listen to His word, but from those who receive the precepts of His
teaching; as in the Gospels we find the sick approaching the Saviour, asking
to receive health, and thus at last be cured. And in order that the blind might
be healed and regain their sight, their part consisted in making supplication
to the Saviour, and in believing that their cure could be effected by Him;
while His part, on the other hand, lay in restoring to them the power of
vision. And in this way also does the Word of God promise to bestow
instruction by taking away the stony heart, i.e. by the removal of
wickedness, that so men may be able to walk in the divine precepts, and
observe the commandments of the law.

FROM THE GREEK.

15. Let us look also at the declaration in Ezekiel, which says, “I shall take
away their stony hearts, and will put in them hearts of flesh, that they may
walk in my statutes and keep my precepts.”[503] For if God, when He wills,
takes away the stony hearts, and implants hearts of flesh, so that His
precepts are obeyed and His commandments are observed, it is not in our
power to put away wickedness. For the taking away of the stony hearts is
nothing else than the taking away of the wickedness, according to which
one is hardened, from him from whom God wills to take it; and the
implanting of a heart of flesh, so that a man may walk in the precepts of
God and keep His commandments, what else is it than to become somewhat
yielding and unresistent to the truth, and to be capable of practising virtues?
And if God promises to do this, and if, before He takes away the stony
hearts, we do not lay them aside, it is manifest that it does not depend upon

ourselves to put away wickedness; and if it is not we who do anything
towards the production within us of the heart of flesh, but if it is God’s
doing, it will not be our own act to live agreeably to virtue, but altogether
[the result of] divine grace. Such will be the statements of him who, from
the mere words [of Scripture], annihilates free-will.[504] But we shall answer,
saying, that we ought to understand these passages thus: That as a man, e.g.,
who happened to be ignorant and uneducated, on perceiving his own
defects, either in consequence of an exhortation from his teacher, or in some
other way, should spontaneously give himself up to him whom he considers
able to introduce[505] him to education and virtue; and, on his yielding
himself up, his instructor promises that he will take away his ignorance, and
implant instruction, not as if it contributed nothing to his training, and to the
avoiding of ignorance, that he brought himself to be healed, but because the
instructor promised to improve him who desired improvement; so, in the
same way, the word of God promises to take away wickedness, which it
calls a stony heart, from those who come to it, not if they are unwilling, but
[only] if they submit themselves to the Physician of the sick, as in the
Gospels the sick are found coming to the Saviour, and asking to obtain
healing, and so are cured. And, let me say, the recovery of sight by the blind
is, so far as their request goes, the act of those who believe that they are
capable of being healed; but as respects the restoration of sight, it is the
work of our Saviour. Thus, then, does the word of God promise to implant
knowledge in those who come to it, by taking away the stony and hard
heart, which is wickedness, in order that one may walk in the divine
commandments, and keep the divine injunctions.

FROM THE LATIN.

16. There is next brought before us that declaration uttered by the Saviour
in the Gospel: “That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing
they may hear, and not understand; lest they should happen to be converted,
and their sins be forgiven them.”[506] On which our opponent will remark:
“If those who shall hear more distinctly are by all means to be corrected and
converted, and converted in such a manner as to be worthy of receiving the
remission of sins, and if it be not in their own power to hear the word
distinctly, but if it depend on the Instructor to teach more openly and

distinctly, while he declares that he does not proclaim to them the word
with clearness, lest they should perhaps hear and understand, and be
converted, and be saved, it will follow, certainly, that their salvation is not
dependent upon themselves. And if this be so, then we have no free-will
either as regards salvation or destruction.” Now were it not for the words
that are added, “Lest perhaps they should be converted, and their sins be
forgiven them,” we might be more inclined to return the answer, that the
Saviour was unwilling that those individuals whom He foresaw would not
become good, should understand the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,
and that therefore He spoke to them in parables; but as that addition
follows, “Lest perhaps they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven
them,” the explanation is rendered more difficult. And, in the first place, we
have to notice what defence this passage furnishes against those heretics
who are accustomed to hunt out of the Old Testament any expressions
which seem, according to their view, to predicate severity and cruelty of
God the Creator, as when He is described as being affected with the feeling
of vengeance or punishment, or by any of those emotions, however named,
from which they deny the existence of goodness in the Creator; for they do
not judge of the Gospels with the same mind and feelings, and do not
observe whether any such statements are found in them as they condemn
and censure in the Old Testament. For manifestly, in the passage referred to,
the Saviour is shown, as they themselves admit, not to speak distinctly, for
this very reason, that men may not be converted, and when converted,
receive the remission of sins. Now, if the words be understood according to
the letter merely, nothing less, certainly, will be contained in them than in
those passages which they find fault with in the Old Testament. And if they
are of opinion that any expressions occurring in such a connection in the
New Testament stand in need of explanation, it will necessarily follow that
those also occurring in the Old Testament, which are the subject of censure,
may be freed from aspersion by an explanation of a similar kind, so that by
such means the passages found in both Testaments may be shown to
proceed from one and the same God. But let us return, as we best may, to
the question proposed.

FROM THE GREEK.

16. There was after this the passage from the Gospel, where the Saviour
said, that for this reason did He speak to those without in parables, that
“seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand; lest they
should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them.”[507] Now, our
opponent will say, “If some persons are assuredly converted on hearing
words of greater clearness, so that they become worthy of the remission of
sins, and if it does not depend upon themselves to hear these words of
greater clearness, but upon him who teaches, and he for this reason does not
announce them to them more distinctly, lest they should see and understand,
it is not within the power of such to be saved; and if so, we are not
possessed of free-will as regards salvation and destruction.” Effectual,
indeed, would be the reply to such arguments, were it not for the addition,
“Lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them,”—namely,
that the Saviour did not wish those who were not to become good and
virtuous to understand the more mystical [parts of His teaching], and for
this reason spake to them in parables; but now, on account of the words,
“Lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them,” the
defence is more difficult. In the first place, then, we must notice the passage
in its bearing on the heretics, who hunt out those portions from the Old
Testament where is exhibited, as they themselves daringly assert, the
cruelty[508] of the Creator of the world[509] in His purpose of avenging and
punishing the wicked,[510] or by whatever other name they wish to designate
such a quality, so speaking only that they may say that goodness does not
exist in the Creator; and who do not deal with the New Testament in a
similar manner, nor in a spirit of candour,[511] but pass by places similar to
those which they consider censurable in the Old Testament. For manifestly,
and according to the Gospel, is the Saviour shown, as they assert, by His
former words, not to speak distinctly for this reason, that men might not be
converted, and, being converted, might become deserving of the remission
of sins: which statement of itself is nothing inferior[512] to those passages
from the Old Testament which are objected to. And if they seek to defend
the Gospel, we must ask them whether they are not acting in a blameworthy
manner in dealing differently with the same questions; and, while not
stumbling against the New Testament, but seeking to defend it, they
nevertheless bring a charge against the Old regarding similar points,
whereas they ought to offer a defence in the same way of the passages from
the New. And therefore we shall force them, on account of the

resemblances, to regard all as the writings of one God. Come, then, and let
us, to the best of our ability, furnish an answer to the question submitted to
us.

FROM THE LATIN.

17. We said formerly, when discussing the case of Pharaoh, that sometimes
it does not lead to good results for a man to be cured too quickly, especially
if the disease, being shut up within the inner parts of the body, rage with
greater fierceness. Whence God, who is acquainted with secret things, and
knows all things before they happen, in His great goodness delays the cure
of such, and postpones their recovery to a remoter period, and, so to speak,
cures them by not curing them, lest a too favourable state of health[513]
should render them incurable. It is therefore possible that, in the case of
those to whom, as being “without,” the words of our Lord and Saviour were
addressed, He, seeing from His scrutiny of the hearts and reins that they
were not yet able to receive teaching of a clearer type, veiled by the
covering of language the meaning of the profounder mysteries, lest perhaps,
being rapidly converted and healed, i.e. having quickly obtained the
remission of their sins, they should again easily slide back into the same
disease which they had found could be healed without any difficulty. For if
this be the case, no one can doubt that the punishment is doubled, and the
amount of wickedness increased; since not only are the sins which had
appeared to be forgiven repeated, but the court[514] of virtue also is
desecrated when trodden by deceitful and polluted beings,[515] filled within
with hidden wickedness. And what remedy can there ever be for those who,
after eating the impure and filthy food of wickedness, have tasted the
pleasantness of virtue, and received its sweetness into their mouths, and yet
have again betaken themselves to the deadly and poisonous provision of
sin? And who doubts that it is better for delay and a temporary
abandonment to occur, in order that if, at some future time, they should
happen to be satiated with wickedness, and the filth with which they are
now delighted should become loathsome, the word of God may at last be
appropriately made clear to them, and that which is holy be not given to the
dogs, nor pearls be cast before swine, which will trample them under foot,
and turn, moreover, and rend and assault those who have proclaimed to

them the word of God? These, then, are they who are said to be “without,”
undoubtedly by way of contrast with those who are said to be “within,” and
to hear the word of God with greater clearness. And yet those who are
“without” do hear the word, although it is covered by parables, and
overshadowed by proverbs. There are others, also, besides those who are
without, who are called Tyrians, and who do not hear at all, respecting
whom the Saviour knew that they would have repented long ago, sitting in
sackcloth and ashes, if the miracles performed among others had been done
amongst them, and yet these do not hear those things which are heard even
by those who are “without:” and I believe, for this reason, that the rank of
such in wickedness was far lower and worse than that of those who are said
to be “without,” i.e. who are not far from those who are within, and who
have deserved to hear the word, although in parables; and because, perhaps,
their cure was delayed to that time when it will be more tolerable for them
on the day of judgment, than for those before whom those miracles which
are recorded were performed, that so at last, being then relieved from the
weight of their sins, they may enter with more ease and power of endurance
upon the way of safety. And this is a point which I wish impressed upon
those who peruse these pages, that with respect to topics of such difficulty
and obscurity we use our utmost endeavour, not so much to ascertain clearly
the solutions of the questions (for every one will do this as the Spirit gives
him utterance), as to maintain the rule of faith in the most unmistakeable
manner,[516] by striving to show that the providence of God, which equitably
administers all things, governs also immortal souls on the justest principles,
[conferring rewards] according to the merits and motives of each
individual; the present economy of things[517] not being confined within the
life of this world, but the pre-existing state of merit always furnishing the
ground for the state that is to follow,[518] and thus by an eternal and
immutable law of equity, and by the controlling influence of Divine
Providence, the immortal soul is brought to the summit of perfection. If
one, however, were to object to our statement, that the word of preaching
was purposely put aside by certain men of wicked and worthless character,
and [were to inquire] why the word was preached to those over whom the
Tyrians, who were certainly despised, are preferred in comparison (by
which proceeding, certainly, their wickedness was increased, and their
condemnation rendered more severe, that they should hear the word who
were not to believe it), they must be answered in the following manner:

God, who is the Creator of the minds of all men, foreseeing complaints
against His providence, especially on the part of those who say, “How could
we believe when we neither beheld those things which others saw, nor
heard those words which were preached to others? in so far is the blame
removed from us, since they to whom the word was announced, and the
signs manifested, made no delay whatever, but became believers,
overpowered by the very force of the miracles;” wishing to destroy the
grounds for complaints of this kind, and to show that it was no concealment
of Divine Providence, but the determination of the human mind which was
the cause of their ruin, bestowed the grace of His benefits even upon the
unworthy and the unbelieving, that every mouth might indeed be shut, and
that the mind of man might know that all the deficiency was on its own
part, and none on that of God; and that it may, at the same time, be
understood and recognised that he receives a heavier sentence of
condemnation who has despised the divine benefits conferred upon him
than he who has not deserved to obtain or hear them, and that it is a
peculiarity of divine compassion, and a mark of the extreme justice of its
administration, that it sometimes conceals from certain individuals the
opportunity of either seeing or hearing the mysteries of divine power, lest,
after beholding the power of the miracles, and recognising and hearing the
mysteries of its wisdom, they should, on treating them with contempt and
indifference, be punished with greater severity for their impiety.

FROM THE GREEK.

17. We asserted also, when investigating the subject of Pharaoh, that
sometimes a rapid cure is not for the advantage of those who are healed, if,
after being seized by troublesome diseases, they should easily get rid of
those by which they had been entangled. For, despising the evil as one that
is easy of cure, and not being on their guard a second time against falling
into it, they will be involved in it [again]. Wherefore, in the case of such
persons, the everlasting God, the Knower of secrets, who knows all things
before they exist, in conformity with His goodness, delays sending them
more rapid assistance, and, so to speak, in helping them does not help, the
latter course being to their advantage. It is probable, then, that those
“without,” of whom we are speaking, having been foreseen by the Saviour,

according to our supposition, as not [likely] to prove steady in their
conversion,[519] if they should hear more clearly the words that were spoken,
were [so] treated by the Saviour as not to hear distinctly the deeper [things
of His teaching],[520] lest, after a rapid conversion, and after being healed by
obtaining remission of sins, they should despise the wounds of their
wickedness, as being slight and easy of healing, and should again speedily
relapse into them. And perhaps also, suffering punishment for their former
transgressions against virtue, which they had committed when they had
forsaken her, they had not yet filled up the [full] time; in order that, being
abandoned by the divine superintendence, and being filled[521] to a greater
degree by their own evils which they had sown, they may afterwards be
called to a more stable repentance; so as not to be quickly entangled again
in those evils in which they had formerly been involved when they treated
with insolence the requirements of virtue, and devoted themselves to worse
things. Those, then, who are said to be “without” (manifestly by comparison
with those “within”), not being very far from those “within,” while those
“within” hear clearly, do themselves hear indistinctly, because they are
addressed in parables; but nevertheless they do hear. Others, again, of those
“without,” who are called Tyrians, although it was foreknown that they
would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes, had the
Saviour come near their borders, do not hear even those words which are
heard by those “without” (being, as is probable, very far inferior in merit to
those “without”[522]), in order that at another season, after it has been more
tolerable for them than for those who did not receive the word (among
whom he mentioned also the Tyrians), they may, on hearing the word at a
more appropriate time, obtain a more lasting repentance. But observe
whether, besides our desire to investigate [the truth], we do not rather strive
to maintain an attitude of piety in everything regarding God and His Christ,
[523]
seeing we endeavour by every means to prove that, in matters so great
and so peculiar regarding the varied providence of God, He takes an
oversight of the immortal soul. If, indeed, one were to inquire regarding
those things that are objected to, why those who saw wonders and who
heard divine words are not benefited, while the Tyrians would have
repented if such had been performed and spoken amongst them; and should
ask, and say, Why did the Saviour proclaim such to these persons, to their
own hurt, that their sin might be reckoned to them as heavier? we must say,
in answer to such an one, that He who understands the dispositions[524] of all

those who find fault with His providence—[alleging] that it is owing to it
that they have not believed, because it did not permit them to see what it
enabled others to behold, and did not arrange for them to hear those words
by which others, on hearing them, were benefited—wishing to prove that
their defence is not founded on reason, He grants those advantages which
those who blame His administration asked; in order that, after obtaining
them, they may notwithstanding be convicted of the greatest impiety in not
having even then yielded themselves to be benefited, and may cease from
such audacity; and having been made free in respect to this very point, may
learn that God occasionally, in conferring benefits upon certain persons,
delays and procrastinates, not conferring the favour of seeing and hearing
those things which, when seen and heard, would render the sin of those who
did not believe, after acts so great and peculiar, heavier and more serious.

FROM THE LATIN.

18. Let us now look to the expression, “It is not of him that willeth, nor of
him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.”[525] For our opponents
assert, that if it does not depend upon him that willeth, nor on him that
runneth, but on God that showeth mercy, that a man be saved, our salvation
is not in our own power. For our nature is such as to admit of our either
being saved or not, or else our salvation rests solely on the will of Him who,
if He wills it, shows mercy, and confers salvation. Now let us inquire, in the
first place, of such persons, whether to desire blessings be a good or evil
act; and whether to hasten after good as a final aim[526] be worthy of praise.
If they were to answer that such a procedure was deserving of censure, they
would evidently be mad; for all holy men both desire blessings and run after
them, and certainly are not blameworthy. How, then, is it that he who is not
saved, if he be of an evil nature, desires blessings, and runs after them, but
does not find them? For they say that a bad tree does not bring forth good
fruits, whereas it is a good fruit to desire blessings. And how is the fruit of a
bad tree good? And if they assert that to desire blessings, and to run after
them, is an act of indifference,[527] i.e. neither good nor bad, we shall reply,
that if it be an indifferent act to desire blessings, and to run after them, then
the opposite of that will also be an indifferent act, viz. to desire evils, and to
run after them; whereas it is certain that it is not an indifferent act to desire

evils, and to run after them, but one that is manifestly wicked. It is
established, then, that to desire and follow after blessings is not an
indifferent, but a virtuous proceeding.
Having now repelled these objections by the answer which we have given,
let us hasten on to the discussion of the subject itself, in which it is said, “It
is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth
mercy.”[528] In the book of Psalms—in the songs of Degrees, which are
ascribed to Solomon—the following statement occurs: “Except the Lord
build the house, they labour in vain that build it; except the Lord keep the
city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”[529] By which words he does not
indeed indicate that we should cease from building or watching over the
safe keeping of that city which is within us; but what he points out is this,
that whatever is built without God, and whatever is guarded without Him, is
built in vain, and guarded to no purpose. For in all things that are well built
and well protected, the Lord is held to be the cause either of the building or
of its protection. As if, e.g., we were to behold some magnificent structure
and mass of splendid building reared with beauteous architectural skill,
would we not justly and deservedly say that such was built not by human
power, but by divine help and might? And yet from such a statement it will
not be meant that the labour and industry of human effort were inactive, and
effected nothing at all. Or again, if we were to see some city surrounded by
a severe blockade of the enemy, in which threatening engines were brought
against the walls, and the place hard pressed by a vallum, and weapons, and
fire, and all the instruments of war, by which destruction is prepared, would
we not rightly and deservedly say, if the enemy were repelled and put to
flight, that the deliverance had been wrought for the liberated city by God?
And yet we would not mean, by so speaking, that either the vigilance of the
sentinels, or the alertness of the young men,[530] or the protection of the
guards, had been wanting. And the apostle also must be understood in a
similar manner, because the human will alone is not sufficient to obtain
salvation; nor is any mortal running able to win the heavenly [rewards], and
to obtain the prize of our high calling[531] of God in Christ Jesus, unless this
very good will of ours, and ready purpose, and whatever that diligence
within us may be, be aided or furnished with divine help. And therefore
most logically[532] did the apostle say, that “it is not of him that willeth, nor
of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy;” in the same manner as
if we were to say of agriculture what is actually written: “I planted, Apollos

watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth
anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.”[533] As,
therefore, when a field has brought good and rich crops to perfect maturity,
no one would piously and logically assert that the husbandman had made
those fruits, but would acknowledge that they had been produced by God;
so also is our own perfection brought about, not indeed by our remaining
inactive and idle,[534] [but by some activity on our part]: and yet the
consummation of it will not be ascribed to us, but to God, who is the first
and chief cause of the work. So, when a ship has overcome the dangers of
the sea, although the result be accomplished by great labour on the part of
the sailors, and by the aid of all the art of navigation, and by the zeal and
carefulness of the pilot, and by the favouring influence of the breezes, and
the careful observation of the signs of the stars, no one in his sound senses
would ascribe the safety of the vessel, when, after being tossed by the
waves, and wearied by the billows, it has at last reached the harbour in
safety, to anything else than to the mercy of God. Not even the sailors or
pilot venture to say, “I have saved the ship,” but they refer all to the mercy
of God; not that they feel that they have contributed no skill or labour to
save the ship, but because they know that while they contributed the labour,
the safety of the vessel was ensured by God. So also in the race of our life
we ourselves must expend labour, and bring diligence and zeal to bear; but
it is from God that salvation is to be hoped for as the fruit of our labour.
Otherwise, if God demand none of our labour, His commandments will
appear to be superfluous. In vain, also, does Paul blame some for having
fallen from the truth, and praise others for abiding in the faith; and to no
purpose does he deliver certain precepts and institutions to the churches: in
vain, also, do we ourselves either desire or run after what is good. But it is
certain that these things are not done in vain; and it is certain that neither do
the apostles give instructions in vain, nor the Lord enact laws without a
reason. It follows, therefore, that we declare it to be in vain, rather, for the
heretics to speak evil of these good declarations.

FROM THE GREEK.

18. Let us look next at the passage: “So, then, it is not of him that willeth,
nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.”[535] For they who

find fault say: If “it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of
God that showeth mercy,” salvation does not depend upon ourselves, but
upon the arrangement[536] made by Him who has formed[537] us such as we
are, or on the purpose[538] of Him who showeth mercy when He pleases.
Now we must ask these persons the following questions: Whether to desire
what is good is virtuous or vicious; and whether the desire to run in order to
reach the goal in the pursuit of what is good be worthy of praise or censure?
And if they shall say that it is worthy of censure, they will return an absurd
answer;[539] since the saints desire and run, and manifestly in so acting do
nothing that is blameworthy. But if they shall say that it is virtuous to desire
what is good, and to run after what is good, we shall ask them how a
perishing nature desires better things;[540] for it is like an evil tree producing
good fruit, since it is a virtuous act to desire better things. They will give
[perhaps] a third answer, that to desire and run after what is good is one of
those things that are indifferent,[541] and neither beautiful[542] nor wicked.
Now to this we must say, that if to desire and to run after what is good be a
thing of indifference, then the opposite also is a thing of indifference, viz. to
desire what is evil, and to run after it. But it is not a thing of indifference to
desire what is evil, and to run after it. And therefore also, to desire what is
good, and to run after it, is not a thing of indifference. Such, then, is the
defence which I think we can offer to the statement, that “it is not of him
that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.”[543]
Solomon says in the book of Psalms (for the song of Degrees[544] is his, from
which we shall quote the words): “Unless the Lord build the house, they
labour in vain that build it; except the Lord keep the city, the watchman
waketh in vain:”[545] not dissuading us from building, nor teaching us not to
keep watch in order to guard the city in our soul, but showing that what is
built without God, and does not receive a guard from Him, is built in vain
and watched to no purpose, because God might reasonably be entitled the
Lord of the building; and the Governor of all things, the Ruler of the guard
of the city. As, then, if we were to say that such a building is not the work of
the builder, but of God, and that it was not owing to the successful effort of
the watcher, but of the God who is over all, that such a city suffered no
injury from its enemies, we should not be wrong,[546] it being understood
that something also had been done by human means, but the benefit being
gratefully referred to God who brought it to pass; so, seeing that the [mere]
human desire is not sufficient to attain the end, and that the running of those

who are, as it were, athletes, does not enable them to gain the prize of the
high calling of God in Christ Jesus—for these things are accomplished with
the assistance of God—it is well said that “it is not of him that willeth, nor
of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.” As if also it were said
with regard to husbandry what also is actually recorded: “I planted, Apollos
watered; and God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth
anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.”[547]
Now we could not piously assert that the production of full crops was the
work of the husbandman, or of him that watered, but the work of God. So
also our own perfection is brought about, not as if we ourselves did nothing;
[548]
for it is not completed[549] by us, but God produces the greater part of it.
And that this assertion may be more clearly believed, we shall take an
illustration from the art of navigation. For in comparison with the effect of
the winds,[550] and the mildness of the air,[551] and the light of the stars, all
co-operating in the preservation of the crew, what proportion[552] could the
art of navigation be said to bear in the bringing of the ship into harbour?—
since even the sailors themselves, from piety, do not venture to assert often
that they had saved the ship, but refer all to God; not as if they had done
nothing, but because what had been done by Providence was infinitely[553]
greater than what had been effected by their art. And in the matter of our
salvation, what is done by God is infinitely greater than what is done by
ourselves; and therefore, I think, is it said that “it is not of him that willeth,
nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy.” For if in the
manner which they imagine we must explain the statement,[554] that “it is not
of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth
mercy,” the commandments are superfluous; and it is in vain that Paul
himself blames some for having fallen away, and approves of others as
having remained upright, and enacts laws for the churches: it is in vain also
that we give ourselves up to desire better things, and in vain also [to
attempt] to run. But it is not in vain that Paul gives such advice, censuring
some and approving of others; nor in vain that we give ourselves up to the
desire of better things, and to the chase after things that are pre-eminent.
They have accordingly not well explained the meaning of the passage.[555]

FROM THE LATIN.

19. After this there followed this point, that “to will and to do are of
God.”[556] Our opponents maintain that if to will be of God, and if to do be
of Him, or if, whether we act or desire well or ill, it be of God, then in that
case we are not possessed of free-will. Now to this we have to answer, that
the words of the apostle do not say that to will evil is of God, or that to will
good is of Him; nor that to do good or evil is of God; but his statement is a
general one, that to will and to do are of God. For as we have from God this
very quality, that we are men,[557] that we breathe, that we move; so also we
have from God [the faculty] by which we will, as if we were to say that our
power of motion is from God,[558] or that the performing of these duties by
the individual members, and their movements, are from God. From which,
certainly, I do not understand this, that because the hand moves, e.g. to
punish unjustly, or to commit an act of theft, the act is of God, but only that
the power of motion[559] is from God; while it is our duty to turn those
movements, the power of executing which we have from God, either to
purposes of good or evil. And so what the apostle says is, that we receive
indeed the power of volition, but that we misuse the will either to good or
evil desires. In a similar way, also, we must judge of results.

FROM THE GREEK.

19. Besides these, there is the passage, “Both to will and to do are of
God.”[560] And some assert that, if to will be of God, and to do be of God,
and if, whether we will evil or do evil, these [movements] come to us from
God, then, if so, we are not possessed of free-will. But again, on the other
hand, when we will better things, and do things that are more excellent,[561]
seeing that willing and doing are from God, it is not we who have done the
more excellent things, but we only appeared [to perform them], while it was
God that bestowed them;[562] so that even in this respect we do not possess
free-will. Now to this we have to answer, that the language of the apostle
does not assert that to will evil is of God, or to will good is of Him (and

similarly with respect to doing better and worse); but that to will in a
general[563] way, and to run in a general way, [are from Him]. For as we have
from God [the property] of being living things and human beings, so also
have we that of willing generally, and, so to speak, of motion in general.
And as, possessing [the property] of life and of motion, and of moving, e.g.
these members, the hands or the feet, we could not rightly say[564] that we
had from God this species of motion,[565] whereby we moved to strike, or
destroy, or take away another’s goods, but that we had received from Him
simply the generic[566] power of motion, which we employed to better or
worse purposes; so we have obtained from God [the power] of acting, in
respect of our being living things, and [the power] to will from the Creator,
[567]
while we employ the power of will, as well as that of action, for the
noblest objects, or the opposite.

FROM THE LATIN.

20. But with respect to the declaration of the apostle, “Therefore hath He
mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth.
Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath
resisted His will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?
Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me
thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make
one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?”[568] Some one will
perhaps say, that as the potter out of the same lump makes some vessels to
honour, and others to dishonour, so God creates some men for perdition,
and others for salvation; and that it is not therefore in our own power either
to be saved or to perish; by which reasoning we appear not to be possessed
of free-will. We must answer those who are of this opinion with the
question, Whether it is possible for the apostle to contradict himself? And if
this cannot be imagined of an apostle, how shall he appear, according to
them, to be just in blaming those who committed fornication in Corinth, or
those who sinned, and did not repent of their unchastity, and fornication,
and uncleanness, which they had committed? How, also, does he greatly
praise those who acted rightly, like the house of Onesiphorus, saying, “The
Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus; for he oft refreshed me, and
was not ashamed of my chain: but, when he had come to Rome, he sought

me out very diligently, and found me. The Lord grant unto him that he may
find mercy of the Lord in that day.”[569] Now it is not consistent with
apostolic gravity to blame him who is worthy of blame, i.e. who has sinned,
and greatly to praise him who is deserving of praise for his good works; and
again, as if it were in no one’s power to do any good or evil, to say that it
was the Creator’s doing that every one should act virtuously or wickedly,
seeing He makes one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour. And how
can he add that statement, “We must all stand before the judgment-seat of
Christ, that every one of us may receive in his body, according to what he
hath done, whether it be good or bad?”[570] For what reward of good will be
conferred on him who could not commit evil, being formed by the Creator
to that very end? or what punishment will deservedly be inflicted on him
who was unable to do good in consequence of the creative act of his
Maker?[571] Then, again, how is not this opposed to that other declaration
elsewhere, that “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. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel
unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the Master’s use, prepared unto every
good work.”[572] He, accordingly, who purges himself, is made a vessel unto
honour, while he who has disdained to cleanse himself from his impurity is
made a vessel unto dishonour. From such declarations, in my opinion, the
cause of our actions can in no degree be referred to the Creator. For God the
Creator makes a certain vessel unto honour, and other vessels to dishonour;
but that vessel which has cleansed itself from all impurity He makes a
vessel unto honour, while that which has stained itself with the filth of vice
He makes a vessel unto dishonour. The conclusion from which, accordingly,
is this, that the cause of each one’s actions is a pre-existing one; and then
every one, according to his deserts, is made by God either a vessel unto
honour or dishonour. Therefore every individual vessel has furnished to its
Creator out of itself the causes and occasions of its being formed by Him to
be either a vessel unto honour or one unto dishonour. And if the assertion
appear correct, as it certainly is, and in harmony with all piety, that it is due
to previous causes that every vessel be prepared by God either to honour or
to dishonour, it does not appear absurd that, in discussing remoter causes in
the same order, and in the same method, we should come to the same
conclusion respecting the nature of souls, and [believe] that this was the

reason why Jacob was beloved before he was born into this world, and Esau
hated, while he still was contained in the womb of his mother.

FROM THE GREEK.

20. Still the declaration of the apostle will appear to drag us to the
conclusion that we are not possessed of freedom of will, in which, objecting
against himself, he says, “Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have
mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why
doth He yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will? Nay but, O man,
who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him
that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power
over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and
another unto dishonour?”[573] For it will be said: If the potter of the same
lump make some vessels to honour and others to dishonour, and God thus
form some men for salvation and others for ruin, then salvation or ruin does
not depend upon ourselves, nor are we possessed of free-will. Now we must
ask him who deals so with these passages, whether it is possible to conceive
of the apostle as contradicting himself. I presume, however, that no one will
venture to say so. If, then, the apostle does not utter contradictions, how can
he, according to him who so understands him, reasonably find fault,
censuring the individual at Corinth who had committed fornication, or those
who had fallen away, and had not repented of the licentiousness and
impurity of which they had been guilty? And how can he bless those whom
he praises as having done well, as he does the house of Onesiphorus in
these words: “The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus; for he oft
refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain: but, when he was in
Rome, he sought me out very diligently, and found me. The Lord grant to
him that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day.”[574] It is not consistent
for the same apostle[575] to blame the sinner as worthy of censure, and to
praise him who had done well as deserving of approval; and again, on the
other hand, to say, as if nothing depended on ourselves, that the cause was
in the Creator[576] why the one vessel was formed to honour, and the other to
dishonour. And how is this statement correct:[577] “For we must all appear
before the judgment-seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things
done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or

bad,”[578] since they who have done evil have advanced to this pitch of
wickedness[579] because they were created vessels unto dishonour, while
they that have lived virtuously have done good because they were created
from the beginning for this purpose, and became vessels unto honour? And
again, how does not the statement made elsewhere conflict with the view
which these persons draw from the words which we have quoted (that it is
the fault of the Creator that one vessel is in honour and another in
dishonour), viz. “that 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. If a man therefore purge himself, he shall be a vessel unto
honour, sanctified, and meet for the Master’s use, and prepared unto every
good work;”[580] for if he who purges himself becomes a vessel unto honour,
and he who allows himself to remain unpurged[581] becomes a vessel unto
dishonour, then, so far as these words are concerned, the Creator is not at all
to blame. For the Creator makes vessels of honour and vessels of dishonour,
not from the beginning according to His foreknowledge,[582] since He does
not condemn or justify beforehand[583] according to it; but [He makes] those
into vessels of honour who purged themselves, and those into vessels of
dishonour who allowed themselves to remain unpurged: so that it results
from older causes[584] [which operated] in the formation of the vessels unto
honour and dishonour, that one was created for the former condition, and
another for the latter. But if we once admit that there were certain older
causes [at work] in the forming of a vessel unto honour, and of one unto
dishonour, what absurdity is there in going back to the subject of the soul,
and [in supposing] that a more ancient cause for Jacob being loved and for
Esau being hated existed with respect to Jacob before his assumption of a
body, and with regard to Esau before he was conceived in the womb of
Rebecca?

FROM THE LATIN.

21. Nay, that very declaration, that from the same lump a vessel is formed
both to honour and to dishonour, will not push us hard; for we assert that
the nature of all rational souls is the same, as one lump of clay is described
as being under the treatment of the potter. Seeing, then, the nature of
rational creatures is one, God, according to the previous grounds of merit,

[585]
created and formed out of it, as the potter out of the one lump, some
persons to honour and others to dishonour. Now, as regards the language of
the apostle, which he utters as if in a tone of censure, “Nay but, O man, who
art thou that repliest against God?” he means, I think, to point out that such
a censure does not refer to any believer who lives rightly and justly, and
who has confidence in God, i.e. to such an one as Moses was, of whom
Scripture says that “Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice;”[586]
and as God answered Moses, so also does every saint answer God. But he
who is an unbeliever, and loses confidence in answering before God owing
to the unworthiness of his life and conversation, and who, in relation to
these matters, does not seek to learn and make progress, but to oppose and
resist, and who, to speak more plainly, is such an one as to be able to say
those words which the apostle indicates, when he says, “Why, then, does He
yet find fault? for who will resist His will?”—to such an one may the
censure of the apostle rightly be directed, “Nay but, O man, who art thou
that repliest against God?” This censure accordingly applies not to believers
and saints, but to unbelievers and wicked men.
Now, to those who introduce souls of different natures,[587] and who turn this
declaration of the apostle to the support of their own opinion, we have to
reply as follows: If even they are agreed as to what the apostle says, that out
of the one lump are formed both those who are made to honour and those
who are made to dishonour, whom they term of a nature that is to be saved
and destroyed, there will then be no longer souls of different natures, but
one nature for all. And if they admit that one and the same potter may
undoubtedly denote one Creator, there will not be different creators either
of those who are saved, or of those who perish. Now, truly, let them choose
whether they will have a good Creator to be intended who creates bad and
ruined men, or one who is not good, who creates good men and those who
are prepared to honour. For the necessity of returning an answer will extort
from them one of these two alternatives. But according to our declaration,
whereby we say that it is owing to preceding causes that God makes vessels
either to honour or to dishonour, the approval of God’s justice is in no
respect limited. For it is possible that this vessel, which owing to previous
causes was made in this world to honour, may, if it behave negligently, be
converted in another world, according to the deserts of its conduct, into a
vessel unto dishonour: as again, if any one, owing to preceding causes, was
formed by his Creator in this life a vessel unto dishonour, and shall mend

his ways and cleanse himself from all filth and vice, he may, in the new
world, be made a vessel to honour, sanctified and useful, and prepared unto
every good work. Finally, those who were formed by God in this world to
be Israelites, and who have lived a life unworthy of the nobility of their
race, and have fallen away from the grandeur of their descent, will, in the
world to come, in a certain degree[588] be converted, on account of their
unbelief, from vessels of honour into vessels of dishonour; while, on the
other hand, many who in this life were reckoned among Egyptian or
Idumean vessels, having adopted the faith and practice of Israelites, when
they shall have done the works of Israelites, and shall have entered the
church of the Lord, will exist as vessels of honour in the revelation of the
sons of God. From which it is more agreeable to the rule of piety to believe
that every rational being, according to his purpose and manner of life, is
converted, sometimes from bad to good, and falls away sometimes from
good to bad: that some abide in good, and others advance to a better
condition, and always ascend to higher things, until they reach the highest
grade of all; while others, again, remain in evil, or, if the wickedness within
them begin to spread itself further, they descend to a worse condition, and
sink into the lowest depth of wickedness. Whence also we must suppose
that it is possible there may be some who began at first indeed with small
offences, but who have poured out wickedness to such a degree, and
attained such proficiency in evil, that in the measure of their wickedness
they are equal even to the opposing powers: and again, if, by means of
many severe administrations of punishment, they are able at some future
time to recover their senses, and gradually attempt to find healing for their
wounds, they may, on ceasing from their wickedness, be restored to a state
of goodness. Whence we are of opinion that, seeing the soul, as we have
frequently said, is immortal and eternal, it is possible that, in the many and
endless periods of duration in the immeasurable and different worlds, it may
descend from the highest good to the lowest evil, or be restored from the
lowest evil to the highest good.

FROM THE GREEK.

21. And at the same time, it is clearly shown that, as far as regards the
underlying nature,[589] as there is one [piece of] clay which is under the

hands of the potter, from which piece vessels are formed unto honour and
dishonour; so the one nature of every soul being in the hands of God, and,
so to speak, there being [only] one lump of reasonable beings,[590] certain
causes of more ancient date led to some being created vessels unto honour,
and others vessels unto dishonour. But if the language of the apostle convey
a censure when he says, “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against
God?” it teaches us that he who has confidence before God, and is faithful,
and has lived virtuously, would not hear the words, “Who art thou that
repliest against God?” Such an one, e.g., as Moses was, “For Moses spake,
and God answered him with a voice;”[591] and as God answers Moses, so
does a saint also answer God. But he who does not possess this confidence,
manifestly, either because he has lost it, or because he investigates these
matters not from a love of knowledge, but from a desire to find fault,[592] and
who therefore says, “Why does He yet find fault? for who hath resisted His
will?” would merit the language of censure, which says, “Nay but, O man,
who art thou that repliest against God?” Now to those who introduce
different natures, and who make use of the declaration of the apostle [to
support their view], the following must be our answer. If they maintain[593]
that those who perish and those who are saved are formed of one lump, and
that the Creator of those who are saved is the Creator also of them who are
lost, and if He is good who creates not only spiritual but also earthy
[natures] (for this follows from their view), it is nevertheless possible that
he who, in consequence of certain former acts of righteousness,[594] had now
been made a vessel of honour, but who had not [afterwards] acted in a
similar manner, nor done things befitting a vessel of honour, was converted
in another world into a vessel of dishonour; as, on the other hand, it is
possible that he who, owing to causes more ancient than the present life,
was here a vessel of dishonour, may after reformation become in the new
creation “a vessel of honour, sanctified and meet for the Master’s use,
prepared unto every good work.” And perhaps those who are now Israelites,
not having lived worthily of their descent, will be deprived of their rank,
being changed, as it were, from vessels of honour into those of dishonour;
and many of the present Egyptians and Idumeans who came near to Israel,
when they shall have borne fruit to a larger extent, shall enter into the
church of the Lord, being no longer accounted Egyptians and Idumeans, but
becoming Israelites: so that, according to this view, it is owing to their
[varying] purposes that some advance from a worse to a better condition,

and others fall from better to worse; while others, again, are preserved in a
virtuous course, or ascend from good to better; and others, on the contrary,
remain in a course of evil, or from bad become worse, as their wickedness
flows on.

FROM THE LATIN.

22. But since the words of the apostle, in what he says regarding vessels of
honour or dishonour, that “if a man therefore purge himself, he will be a
vessel unto honour, sanctified and meet for the Master’s service, and
prepared unto every good work,” appear to place nothing in the power of
God, but all in ourselves; while in those in which he declares that “the
potter hath power over the clay, to make of the same lump one vessel to
honour, another to dishonour,” he seems to refer the whole to God,—it is
not to be understood that those statements are contradictory, but the two
meanings are to be reduced to agreement, and one signification must be
drawn from both, viz. that we are not to suppose either that those things
which are in our own power can be done without the help of God, or that
those which are in God’s hand can be brought to completion without the
intervention of our acts, and desires, and intention; because we have it not
in our own power so to will or do anything, as not to know that this very
faculty, by which we are able to will or to do, was bestowed on us by God,
according to the distinction which we indicated above. Or again, when God
forms vessels, some to honour and others to dishonour, we are to suppose
that He does not regard either our wills, or our purposes, or our deserts, to
be the causes of the honour or dishonour, as if they were a sort of matter
from which He may form the vessel of each one of us either to honour or to
dishonour; whereas the very movement of the soul itself, or the purpose of
the understanding, may of itself suggest to him, who is not unaware of his
heart and the thoughts of his mind, whether his vessel ought to be formed to
honour or to dishonour. But let these points suffice, which we have
discussed as we best could, regarding the questions connected with the
freedom of the will.

FROM THE GREEK.

22. But since the apostle in one place does not pretend that the becoming of
a vessel unto honour or dishonour depends upon God, but refers back the
whole to ourselves, saying, “If, then, a man purge himself, he will be a
vessel unto honour, sanctified, meet for the Master’s use, and prepared unto
every good work;” and elsewhere does not even pretend that it is dependent
upon ourselves, but appears to attribute the whole to God, saying, “The
potter hath power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto
honour and another to dishonour;” and as his statements are not
contradictory, we must reconcile them, and extract one complete statement
from both. Neither does our own power,[595] apart from the knowledge[596] of
God, compel us to make progress; nor does the knowledge of God [do so],
unless we ourselves also contribute something to the good result; nor does
our own power, apart from the knowledge of God, and the use of the power
that worthily belongs to us,[597] make a man become [a vessel] unto honour
or dishonour; nor does the will of God alone[598] form a man to honour or
dishonour, unless He hold our will to be a kind of matter that admits of
variation,[599] and that inclines to a better or worse course of conduct. And
these observations are sufficient to have been made by us on the subject of
free-will.

CHAPTER II.
ON THE OPPOSING POWERS.

1. We have now to notice, agreeably to the statements of Scripture, how the
opposing powers, or the devil himself, contends with the human race,
inciting and instigating men to sin. And in the first place, in the book of
Genesis,[600] the serpent is described as having seduced Eve; regarding
whom, in the work entitled The Ascension of Moses[601] (a little treatise, of
which the Apostle Jude makes mention in his epistle), the archangel
Michael, when disputing with the devil regarding the body of Moses, says
that the serpent, being inspired by the devil, was the cause of Adam and
Eve’s transgression. This also is made a subject of inquiry by some, viz.
who the angel was that, speaking from heaven to Abraham, said, “Now I
know that thou fearest God, and on my account hast not spared thy beloved

son, whom thou lovedst.”[602] For he is manifestly described as an angel who
said that he knew then that Abraham feared God, and had not spared his
beloved son, as the Scripture declares, although he did not say that it was on
account of God that Abraham had done this, but on his, that is, the speaker’s
account. We must also ascertain who that is of whom it is stated in the book
of Exodus that he wished to slay Moses, because he was taking his
departure for Egypt;[603] and afterwards, also, who he is that is called the
destroying[604] angel, as well as he who in the book of Leviticus is called
Apopompæus, i.e. Averter, regarding whom Scripture says, “One lot for the
Lord, and one lot for Apopompæus, i.e. the Averter.”[605] In the first book of
Kings, also, an evil spirit is said to strangle[606] Saul; and in the third book,
Micaiah the prophet says, “I saw the Lord of Israel sitting on His throne,
and all the host of heaven standing by Him, on His right hand and on His
left. And the Lord said, Who will deceive Achab king of Israel, that he may
go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner, and another
said on that manner. And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the
Lord, and said, I will deceive him. And the Lord said to him, Wherewith?
And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all
his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt deceive him, and prevail also: go
forth, and do so quickly. And now therefore the Lord hath put a lying spirit
in the mouth of all thy prophets: the Lord hath spoken evil concerning
thee.”[607] Now by this last quotation it is clearly shown that a certain spirit,
from his own [free] will and choice, elected to deceive [Achab], and to
work a lie, in order that the Lord might mislead the king to his death, for he
deserved to suffer. In the first book of Chronicles also it is said, “The devil,
Satan, stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number the
people.”[608] In the Psalms, moreover, an evil angel is said to harass[609]
certain persons. In the book of Ecclesiastes, too, Solomon says, “If the spirit
of the ruler rise up against thee, leave not thy place; for soundness will
restrain many transgressions.”[610] In Zechariah[611] we read that the devil
stood on the right hand of Joshua, and resisted him. Isaiah says that the
sword of the Lord arises against the dragon, the crooked[612] serpent.[613] And
what shall I say of Ezekiel, who in his second vision prophesies most
unmistakeably to the prince of Tyre regarding an opposing power, and who
says also that the dragon dwells in the rivers of Egypt?[614] Nay, with what
else are the contents of the whole work which is written regarding Job
occupied, save with the [doings] of the devil, who asks that power may be

given him over all that Job possesses, and over his sons, and even over his
person? And yet the devil is defeated through the patience of Job. In that
book the Lord has by His answers imparted much information regarding the
power of that dragon which opposes us. Such, meanwhile, are the
statements made in the Old Testament, so far as we can at present recall
them, on the subject of hostile powers being either named in Scripture, or
being said to oppose the human race, and to be afterwards subjected to
punishment.
Let us now look also to the New Testament, where Satan approaches the
Saviour, and tempts Him: wherein also it is stated that evil spirits and
unclean demons, which had taken possession of very many, were expelled
by the Saviour from the bodies of the sufferers, who are said also to be
made free by Him. Even Judas, too, when the devil had already put it in his
heart to betray Christ, afterwards received Satan wholly into him; for it is
written, that after the sop “Satan entered into him.”[615] And the Apostle Paul
teaches us that we ought not to give place to the devil; but “put on,” he
says, “the armour of God, that ye may be able to resist the wiles of the
devil:”[616] pointing out that the saints have to “wrestle not against flesh and
blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the
darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”[617] Nay,
he says that the Saviour even was crucified by the princes of this world,
who shall come to nought,[618] whose wisdom also, he says, he does not
speak. By all this, therefore, holy Scripture teaches us that there are certain
invisible enemies that fight against us, and against whom it commands us to
arm ourselves. Whence, also, the more simple among the believers in the
Lord Christ are of opinion, that all the sins which men have committed are
caused by the persistent efforts of these opposing powers exerted upon the
minds of sinners, because in that invisible struggle these powers are found
to be superior [to man]. For if, for example, there were no devil, no single
human being[619] would go astray.
2. We, however, who see the reason [of the thing] more clearly, do not hold
this opinion, taking into account those [sins] which manifestly originate as a
necessary consequence of our bodily constitution.[620] Must we indeed
suppose that the devil is the cause of our feeling hunger or thirst? Nobody, I
think, will venture to maintain that. If, then, he is not the cause of our
feeling hunger and thirst, wherein lies the difference when each individual

has attained the age of puberty, and that period has called forth the
incentives of the natural heat? It will undoubtedly follow, that as the devil is
not the cause of our feeling hunger and thirst, so neither is he the cause of
that appetency which naturally arises at the time of maturity, viz. the desire
of sexual intercourse. Now it is certain that this cause is not always so set in
motion by the devil that we should be obliged to suppose that bodies would
not possess a desire for intercourse of that kind if the devil did not exist. Let
us consider, in the next place, if, as we have already shown, food is desired
by human beings, not from a suggestion of the devil, but by a kind of
natural instinct, whether, if there were no devil, it were possible for human
experience to exhibit such restraint in partaking of food as never to exceed
the proper limits; i.e. that no one would either take otherwise than the case
required, or more than reason would allow; and so it would result that men,
observing due measure and moderation in the matter of eating, would never
go wrong. I do not think, indeed, that so great moderation could be
observed by men (even if there were no instigation by the devil inciting
thereto), as that no individual, in partaking of food, would go beyond due
limits and restraint, until he had learned to do so from long usage and
experience. What, then, is the state of the case? In the matter of eating and
drinking it was possible for us to go wrong, even without any incitement
from the devil, if we should happen to be either less temperate or less
careful [than we ought]; and are we to suppose, then, in our appetite for
sexual intercourse, or in the restraint of our natural desires, our condition is
not something similar?[621] I am of opinion, indeed, that the same course of
reasoning must be understood to apply to other natural movements, as those
of covetousness, or of anger, or of sorrow, or of all those generally which
through the vice of intemperance exceed the natural bounds of moderation.
There are therefore manifest reasons for holding the opinion, that as in good
things the human will[622] is of itself weak to accomplish any good (for it is
by divine help that it is brought to perfection in everything); so also, in
things of an opposite nature we receive certain initial elements, and, as it
were, seeds of sins, from those things which we use agreeably to nature;[623]
but when we have indulged them beyond what is proper, and have not
resisted the first movements to intemperance, then the hostile power,
seizing the occasion of this first transgression, incites and presses us hard in
every way, seeking to extend our sins over a wider field, and furnishing us
human beings with occasions and beginnings of sins, which these hostile

powers spread far and wide, and, if possible, beyond all limits. Thus, when
men at first for a little desire money, covetousness begins to grow as the
passion increases, and finally the fall into avarice takes place. And after
this, when blindness of mind has succeeded passion, and the hostile powers,
by their suggestions, hurry on the mind, money is now no longer desired,
but stolen, and acquired by force, or even by shedding human blood.
Finally, a confirmatory evidence of the fact that vices of such enormity
proceed from demons, may be easily seen in this, that those individuals who
are oppressed either by immoderate love, or incontrollable anger, or
excessive sorrow, do not suffer less than those who are bodily vexed by
devils. For it is recorded in certain histories, that some have fallen into
madness from a state of love, others from a state of anger, not a few from a
state of sorrow, and even from one of excessive joy; which results, I think,
from this, that those opposing powers, i.e. those demons, having gained a
lodgment in their minds which has been already laid open to them by
intemperance, have taken complete possession of their sensitive nature,[624]
especially when no feeling of the glory of virtue has aroused them to
resistance.
3. That there are certain sins, however, which do not proceed from the
opposing powers, but take their beginnings from the natural movements of
the body, is manifestly declared by the Apostle Paul in the passage: “The
flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are
contrary the one to the other; so that ye cannot do the things that ye
would.”[625] If, then, the flesh lust against the Spirit, and the Spirit against
the flesh, we have occasionally to wrestle against flesh and blood, i.e. as
being men, and walking according to the flesh, and not capable of being
tempted by greater than human temptations; since it is said of us, “There
hath no temptation taken you, but such as is common to man: but God is
faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able.”[626]
For as the presidents of the public games do not allow the competitors to
enter the lists indiscriminately or fortuitously, but after a careful
examination, pairing in a most impartial consideration either of size or age,
this individual with that—boys, e.g., with boys, men with men, who are
nearly related to each other either in age or strength; so also must we
understand the procedure of divine providence, which arranges on most
impartial principles all who descend into the struggles of this human life,
according to the nature of each individual’s power, which is known only to

Him who alone beholds the hearts of men: so that one individual fights
against one temptation of the flesh,[627] another against a second; one is
exposed to its influence for so long a period of time, another only for so
long; one is tempted by the flesh to this or that indulgence, another to one
of a different kind; one has to resist this or that hostile power, another has to
combat two or three at the same time; or at one time this hostile influence,
at another that; at some particular date having to resist one enemy, and at
another a different one; being, after the performance of certain acts,
exposed to one set of enemies, after others to a second. And observe
whether some such state of things be not indicated by the language of the
apostle: “God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above what
ye are able,”[628] i.e. each one is tempted in proportion to the amount of his
strength or power of resistance.[629] Now, although we have said that it is by
the just judgment of God that every one is tempted according to the amount
of his strength, we are not therefore to suppose that he who is tempted
ought by all means to prove victorious in the struggle; in like manner as he
who contends in the lists, although paired with his adversary on a just
principle of arrangement, will nevertheless not necessarily prove conqueror.
But unless the powers of the combatants are equal, the prize of the victor
will not be justly won; nor will blame justly attach to the vanquished,
because He allows us indeed to be tempted, but not “beyond what we are
able:” for it is in proportion to our strength that we are tempted; and it is not
written that, in temptation, He will make also a way to escape so as that we
should bear it, but a way to escape so as that we should be able to bear it.[630]
But it depends upon ourselves to use either with energy or feebleness this
power which He has given us. For there is no doubt that under every
temptation we have a power of endurance, if we employ properly the
strength that is granted us. But it is not the same thing to possess the power
of conquering and to be victorious, as the apostle himself has shown in very
cautious language, saying, “God will make a way to escape, that you may
be able to bear it,”[631] not that you will bear it. For many do not sustain
temptation, but are overcome by it. Now God enables us not to sustain
[temptation], [otherwise there would appear to be no struggle], but to have
the power of sustaining it.[632] But this power which is given us to enable us
to conquer may be used, according to our faculty of free-will, either in a
diligent manner, and then we prove victorious, or in a slothful manner, and
then we are defeated. For if such a power were wholly given us as that we

must by all means prove victorious, and never be defeated, what further
reason for a struggle could remain to him who cannot be overcome? Or
what merit is there in a victory, where the power of successful resistance[633]
is taken away? But if the possibility of conquering be equally conferred on
us all, and if it be in our own power how to use this possibility, i.e. either
diligently or slothfully, then will the vanquished be justly censured, and the
victor be deservedly lauded. Now from these points which we have
discussed to the best of our power, it is, I think, clearly evident that there
are certain transgressions which we by no means commit under the pressure
of malignant powers; while there are others, again, to which we are incited
by instigation on their part to excessive and immoderate indulgence.
Whence it follows that we have to inquire how those opposing powers
produce these incitements within us.
4. With respect to the thoughts which proceed from our heart, or the
recollection of things which we have done, or the contemplation of any
things or causes whatever, we find that they sometimes proceed from
ourselves, and sometimes are originated by the opposing powers; not
seldom also are they suggested by God, or by the holy angels. Now such a
statement will perhaps appear incredible,[634] unless it be confirmed by the
testimony of holy Scripture. That, then, thoughts arise within ourselves,
David testifies in the Psalms, saying, “The thought of a man will make
confession to Thee, and the rest of the thought shall observe to Thee a
festival day.”[635] That this, however, is also brought about by the opposing
powers, is shown by Solomon in the book of Ecclesiastes in the following
manner: “If the spirit of the ruler rise up against thee, leave not thy place;
for soundness restrains great offences.”[636] The Apostle Paul also will bear
testimony to the same point in the words: “Casting down imaginations, and
every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of Christ.”[637]
That it is an effect due to God, nevertheless, is declared by David, when he
says in the Psalms, “Blessed is the man whose help is in Thee, O Lord, Thy
ascents (are) in his heart.”[638] And the apostle says that “God put it into the
heart of Titus.”[639] That certain thoughts are suggested to men’s hearts either
by good or evil angels, is shown both by the angel that accompanied Tobias,
and by the language of the prophet, where he says, “And the angel who
spoke in me answered.”[640] The book of the Shepherd[641] declares the same,
saying that each individual is attended by two angels; that whenever good
thoughts arise in our hearts, they are suggested by the good angel; but when

of a contrary kind, they are the instigation of the evil angel. The same is
declared by Barnabas in his epistle,[642] where he says there are two ways,
one of light and one of darkness, over which he asserts that certain angels
are placed,—the angels of God over the way of light, the angels of Satan
over the way of darkness. We are not, however, to imagine that any other
result follows from what is suggested to our heart, whether good or bad,
save a [mental] commotion only, and an incitement instigating us either to
good or evil. For it is quite within our reach, when a malignant power has
begun to incite us to evil, to cast away from us the wicked suggestions, and
to resist the vile inducements, and to do nothing that is at all deserving of
blame. And, on the other hand, it is possible, when a divine power calls us
to better things, not to obey the call; our freedom of will being preserved to
us in either case. We said, indeed, in the foregoing pages, that certain
recollections of good or evil actions were suggested to us either by the act
of divine providence or by the opposing powers, as is shown in the book of
Esther, when Artaxerxes had not remembered the services of that just man
Mordecai, but, when wearied out with his nightly vigils, had it put into his
mind by God to require that the annals of his great deeds should be read to
him; whereon, being reminded of the benefits received from Mordecai, he
ordered his enemy Haman to be hanged, but splendid honours to be
conferred on him, and impunity from the threatened danger to be granted to
the whole of the holy nation. On the other hand, however, we must suppose
that it was through the hostile influence of the devil that the suggestion was
introduced into the minds of the high priests and the scribes which they
made to Pilate, when they came and said, “Sir, we remember that that
deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.”[643]
The design of Judas, also, respecting the betrayal of our Lord and Saviour,
did not originate in the wickedness of his mind alone. For Scripture testifies
that the “devil had already put it into his heart to betray Him.”[644] And
therefore Solomon rightly commanded, saying, “Keep thy heart with all
diligence.”[645] And the Apostle Paul warns us: “Therefore we ought to give
the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest perhaps we
should let them slip.”[646] And when he says, “Neither give place to the
devil,”[647] he shows by that injunction that it is through certain acts, or a
kind of mental slothfulness, that room is made for the devil, so that, if he
once enter our heart, he will either gain possession of us, or at least will
pollute the soul, if he has not obtained the entire mastery over it, by casting

on us his fiery darts; and by these we are sometimes deeply wounded, and
sometimes only set on fire. Seldom indeed, and only in a few instances, are
these fiery darts quenched, so as not to find a place where they may wound,
i.e. when one is covered by the strong and mighty shield of faith. The
declaration, indeed, in the Epistle to the Ephesians, “We wrestle not against
flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers
of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high
places,”[648] must be so understood as if “we” meant, “I Paul, and you
Ephesians, and all who have not to wrestle against flesh and blood:” for
such have to struggle against principalities and powers, against the rulers of
the darkness of this world, not like the Corinthians, whose struggle was as
yet against flesh and blood, and who had been overtaken by no temptation
but such as is common to man.
5. We are not, however, to suppose that each individual has to contend
against all these [adversaries]. For it is impossible for any man, although he
were a saint, to carry on a contest against all of them at the same time. If
that indeed were by any means to be the case, as it is certainly impossible it
should be so, human nature could not possibly bear it without undergoing
entire destruction.[649] But as, for example, if fifty soldiers were to say that
they were about to engage with fifty others, they would not be understood
to mean that one of them had to contend against the whole fifty, but each
one would rightly say that “our battle was against fifty,” all against all; so
also this is to be understood as the apostle’s meaning, that all the athletes
and soldiers of Christ have to wrestle and struggle against all the
adversaries enumerated,—the struggle having, indeed, to be maintained
against all, but by single individuals either with individual powers, or at
least in such manner as shall be determined by God, who is the just
president of the struggle. For I am of opinion that there is a certain limit to
the powers of human nature, although there may be a Paul, of whom it is
said, “He is a chosen vessel unto me;”[650] or a Peter, against whom the gates
of hell do not prevail; or a Moses, the friend of God: yet not one of them
could sustain, without destruction to himself,[651] the whole simultaneous
assault of these opposing powers, unless indeed the might of Him alone
were to work in him, who said, “Be of good cheer, I have overcome the
world.”[652] And therefore Paul exclaims with confidence, “I can do all
things through Christ, who strengtheneth me;”[653] and again, “I laboured
more abundantly than they all; yet not I, but the grace of God which was

with me.”[654] On account, then, of this power, which certainly is not of
human origin, operating and speaking in him, Paul could say, “For I am
persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor
powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor
power, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of
God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”[655] For I do not think that human
nature can alone of itself maintain a contest with angels, and with the
powers of the height and of the abyss,[656] and with any other creature; but
when it feels the presence of the Lord dwelling within it, confidence in the
divine help will lead it to say, “The Lord is my light, and my salvation;
whom shall I fear? The Lord is the protector of my life; of whom shall I be
afraid? When the enemies draw near to me, to eat my flesh, my enemies
who trouble me, they stumbled and fell. Though an host encamp against
me, my heart shall not fear; though war should rise against me, in Him shall
I be confident.”[657] From which I infer that a man perhaps would never be
able of himself to vanquish an opposing power, unless he had the benefit of
divine assistance. Hence, also, the angel is said to have wrestled with Jacob.
Here, however, I understand the writer to mean, that it was not the same
thing for the angel to have wrestled with Jacob, and to have wrestled
against him; but the angel that wrestles with him is he who was present
with him in order to secure his safety, who, after knowing also his moral
progress, gave him in addition the name of Israel, i.e. he is with him in the
struggle, and assists him in the contest; seeing there was undoubtedly
another angel against whom he contended, and against whom he had to
carry on a contest. Finally, Paul has not said that we wrestle with princes, or
with powers, but against principalities and powers. And hence, although
Jacob wrestled, it was unquestionably against some one of those powers
which, Paul declares, resist and contend with the human race, and
especially with the saints. And therefore at last the Scripture says of him
that “he wrestled with the angel, and had power with God,” so that the
struggle is supported by help of the angel, but the prize of success conducts
the conqueror to God.
6. Nor are we, indeed, to suppose that struggles of this kind are carried on
by the exercise of bodily strength, and of the arts of the wrestling school;[658]
but spirit contends with spirit, according to the declaration of Paul, that our
struggle is against principalities, and powers, and the rulers of the darkness
of this world. Nay, the following is to be understood as the nature of the

struggles; when, e.g., losses and dangers befall us, or calumnies and false
accusations are brought against us, it not being the object of the hostile
powers that we should suffer these [trials] only, but that by means of them
we should be driven either to excess of anger or sorrow, or to the last pitch
of despair; or at least, which is a greater sin, should be forced, when
fatigued and overcome by any annoyances, to make complaints against
God, as one who does not administer human life justly and equitably; the
consequence of which is, that our faith may be weakened, or our hopes
disappointed, or we may be compelled to give up the truth of our opinions,
or be led to entertain irreligious sentiments regarding God. For some such
things are written regarding Job, after the devil had requested God that
power should be given him over his goods. By which also we are taught,
that it is not by any accidental attacks that we are assailed, whenever we are
visited with any such loss of property, nor that it is owing to chance when
one of us is taken prisoner, or when the dwellings in which those who are
dear to us are crushed to death, fall in ruins; for, with respect to all these
occurrences, every believer ought to say, “Thou couldst have no power at
all against me, except it were given thee from above.”[659] For observe that
the house of Job did not fall upon his sons until the devil had first received
power against them; nor would the horsemen have made an irruption in
three bands,[660] to carry away his camels or his oxen, and other cattle,
unless they had been instigated by that spirit to whom they had delivered
themselves up as the servants of his will. Nor would that fire, as it seemed
to be, or thunderbolt, as it has been considered, have fallen upon the sheep
of the patriarch, until the devil had said to God, “Hast Thou not made a
hedge about all that is without and within his house, and around all the rest
of his property? But now put forth Thy hand, and touch all that he hath,
[and see] if he do not renounce Thee to Thy face.”[661]
7. The result of all the foregoing remarks is to show, that all the occurrences
in the world which are considered to be of an intermediate kind, whether
they be mournful or otherwise, are brought about, not indeed by God, and
yet not without Him; while He not only does not prevent those wicked and
opposing powers that are desirous to bring about these things [from
accomplishing their purpose], but even permits them to do so, although only
on certain occasions and to certain individuals, as is said with respect to Job
himself, that for a certain time he was made to fall under the power of
others, and to have his house plundered by unjust persons. And therefore

holy Scripture teaches us to receive all that happens as sent by God,
knowing that without Him no event occurs. For how can we doubt that such
is the case, viz. that nothing comes to man without [the will of] God, when
our Lord and Saviour declares, “Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?
and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father who is in
heaven.”[662] But the necessity of the case has drawn us away in a
lengthened digression on the subject of the struggle waged by the hostile
powers against men, and of those sadder events which happen to human
life, i.e. its temptations—according to the declaration of Job, “Is not the
whole life of man upon the earth a temptation?”[663]—in order that the
manner of their occurrence, and the spirit in which we should regard them,
might be clearly shown. Let us notice next, how men fall away into the sin
of false knowledge, or with what object the opposing powers are wont to
stir up conflict with us regarding such things.

CHAPTER III.
ON THREEFOLD WISDOM.

1. The holy apostle, wishing to teach us some great and hidden truth
respecting science and wisdom, says, in the first Epistle to the Corinthians:
“We speak wisdom among them that are perfect; yet not the wisdom of this
world, nor of the princes of the world, that come to nought: but we speak
the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God
ordained before the world unto our glory: which none of the princes of the
world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord
of glory.”[664] In this passage, wishing to describe the different kinds of
wisdom, he points out that there is a wisdom of this world, and a wisdom of
the princes of this world, and another wisdom of God. But when he uses the
expression “wisdom of the princes of this world,” I do not think that he
means a wisdom common to all the princes of this world, but one rather that
is peculiar to certain individuals among them. And again, when he says,
“We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom,
which God ordained before the world unto our glory,”[665] we must inquire
whether his meaning be, that this is the same wisdom of God which was

hidden from other times and generations, and was not made known to the
sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets,
and which was also that wisdom of God before the advent of the Saviour,
by means of which Solomon obtained his wisdom, and in reference to
which the language of the Saviour Himself declared, that what He taught
was greater than Solomon, in these words, “Behold, a greater than Solomon
is here,”[666]—words which show, that those who were instructed by the
Saviour were instructed in something higher than the knowledge of
Solomon. For if one were to assert that the Saviour did indeed Himself
possess greater knowledge, but did not communicate more to others than
Solomon did, how will that agree with the statement which follows: “The
queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment, and condemn the men of
this generation, because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the
wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here?”[667]
There is therefore a wisdom of this world, and also probably a wisdom
belonging to each individual prince of this world. But with respect to the
wisdom of God alone, we perceive that this is indicated, that it operated to a
less degree in ancient and former times, and was [afterwards] more fully
revealed and manifested through Christ. We shall inquire, however,
regarding the wisdom of God in the proper place.
2. But now, since we are treating of the manner in which the opposing
powers stir up those contests, by means of which false knowledge is
introduced into the minds of men, and human souls led astray, while they
imagine that they have discovered wisdom, I think it necessary to name and
distinguish the wisdom of this world, and of the princes of this world, that
by so doing we may discover who are the fathers of this wisdom, nay, even
of these kinds of wisdom.[668] I am of opinion, therefore, as I have stated
above, that there is another wisdom of this world besides those [different
kinds of] wisdom[669] which belong to the princes of this world, by which
wisdom those things seem to be understood and comprehended which
belong to this world. This wisdom, however, possesses in itself no fitness
for forming any opinion either respecting divine things,[670] or the plan of
the world’s government, or any other subjects of importance, or regarding
the training for a good or happy life; but is such as deals wholly with the art
of poetry, e.g., or that of grammar, or rhetoric, or geometry, or music, with
which also, perhaps, medicine should be classed. In all these subjects we
are to suppose that the wisdom of this world is included. The wisdom of the

princes of this world, on the other hand, we understand to be such as the
secret and occult philosophy, as they call it, of the Egyptians, and the
astrology of the Chaldeans and Indians, who make profession of the
knowledge of high things,[671] and also that manifold variety of opinion
which prevails among the Greeks regarding divine things. Accordingly, in
the holy Scriptures we find that there are princes over individual nations; as
in Daniel[672] we read that there was a prince of the kingdom of Persia, and
another prince of the kingdom of Græcia, who are clearly shown, by the
nature of the passage, to be not human beings, but certain powers. In the
prophecies of Ezekiel,[673] also, the prince of Tyre is unmistakeably shown to
be a kind of spiritual power. When these, then, and others of the same kind,
possessing each his own wisdom, and building up his own opinions and
sentiments, beheld our Lord and Saviour professing and declaring that He
had for this purpose come into the world, that all the opinions of science,
falsely so called, might be destroyed, not knowing what was concealed
within Him, they forthwith laid a snare for Him: for “the kings of the earth
set themselves, and the rulers assembled together, against the Lord and His
Christ.”[674] But their snares being discovered, and the plans which they had
attempted to carry out being made manifest when they crucified the Lord of
glory, therefore the apostle says, “We speak wisdom among them that are
perfect, but not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world,
who are brought to nought, which none of the princes of this world knew:
for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.”[675]
3. We must, indeed, endeavour to ascertain whether that wisdom[676] of the
princes of this world, with which they endeavour to imbue men, is
introduced into their minds by the opposing powers, with the purpose of
ensnaring and injuring them, or only for the purpose of deceiving them, i.e.
not with the object of doing any hurt to man; but, as these princes of this
world esteem such opinions to be true, they desire to impart to others what
they themselves believe to be the truth: and this is the view which I am
inclined to adopt. For as, to take an illustration, certain Greek authors, or
the leaders of some heretical sect, after having imbibed an error in doctrine
instead of the truth, and having come to the conclusion in their own minds
that such is the truth, proceed, in the next place, to endeavour to persuade
others of the correctness of their opinions; so, in like manner, are we to
suppose is the procedure of the princes of this world, in which to certain
spiritual powers has been assigned the rule over certain nations, and who

are termed on that account the princes of this world. There are besides, in
addition to these princes, certain special energies[677] of this world, i.e.
spiritual powers, which bring about certain effects, which they have
themselves, in virtue of their freedom of will, chosen to produce, and to
these belong those princes who practise the wisdom of this world: there
being, for example, a peculiar energy and power, which is the inspirer of
poetry; another, of geometry; and so a separate power, to remind us of each
of the arts and professions of this kind. Lastly, many Greek writers have
been of opinion that the art of poetry cannot exist without madness;[678]
whence also it is several times related in their histories, that those whom
they call poets[679] were suddenly filled with a kind of spirit of madness. And
what are we to say also of those whom they call diviners,[680] from whom,
by the working of those demons who have the mastery over them, answers
are given in carefully constructed verses? Those persons, too, whom they
term Magi or Malevolent,[681] frequently, by invoking demons over boys of
tender years, have made them repeat poetical compositions which were the
admiration and amazement of all. Now these effects we are to suppose are
brought about in the following manner: As holy and immaculate souls, after
devoting themselves to God with all affection and purity, and after
preserving themselves free from all contagion of evil spirits,[682] and after
being purified by lengthened abstinence, and imbued with holy and
religious training, assume by this means a portion of divinity, and earn the
grace of prophecy, and other divine gifts; so also are we to suppose that
those who place themselves in the way of the opposing powers, i.e. who
purposely admire and adopt their manner of life and habits,[683] receive their
inspiration, and become partakers of their wisdom and doctrine. And the
result of this is, that they are filled with the working of those spirits to
whose service they have subjected themselves.
4, With respect to those, indeed, who teach differently regarding Christ
from what the rule of Scripture allows, it is no idle task to ascertain whether
it is from a treacherous purpose that these opposing powers, in their
struggles to prevent a belief in Christ, have devised certain fabulous and
impious doctrines; or whether, on hearing the word of Christ, and not being
able to cast it forth from the secrecy of their conscience, nor yet to retain it
pure and holy, they have, by means of vessels that were convenient to their
use,[684] and, so to speak, through their prophets, introduced various errors
contrary to the rule of Christian truth. Now we are to suppose rather that

apostate and refugee powers,[685] which have departed from God out of the
very wickedness of their mind and will,[686] or from envy of those for whom
there is prepared (on their becoming acquainted with the truth) an ascent to
the same rank, whence they themselves had fallen, did, in order to prevent
any progress of that kind, invent these errors and delusions of false
doctrine. It is then clearly established, by many proofs, that while the soul
of man exists in this body, it may admit different energies, i.e. operations,
from a diversity of good and evil spirits. Now, of wicked spirits there is a
twofold mode of operation: i.e. when they either take complete and entire
possession of the mind,[687] so as to allow their captives[688] the power neither
of understanding nor feeling; as, for instance, is the case with those
commonly called possessed,[689] whom we see to be deprived of reason, and
insane (such as those were who are related in the Gospel to have been cured
by the Saviour); or when by their wicked suggestions they deprave a
sentient and intelligent soul with thoughts of various kinds, persuading it to
evil, of which Judas is an illustration, who was induced at the suggestion of
the devil to commit the crime of treason, according to the declaration of
Scripture, that “the devil had already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot to
betray Him.”[690]
But a man receives the energy, i.e. the working, of a good spirit, when he is
stirred and incited to good, and is inspired to heavenly or divine things; as
the holy angels and God Himself wrought in the prophets, arousing and
exhorting them by their holy suggestions to a better course of life, yet so,
indeed, that it remained within the will and judgment of the individual,
either to be willing or unwilling to follow the call to divine and heavenly
things. And from this manifest distinction, it is seen how the soul is moved
by the presence of a better spirit, i.e. if it encounter no perturbation or
alienation of mind whatever from the impending inspiration, nor lose the
free control of its will; as, for instance, is the case with all, whether
prophets or apostles, who ministered to the divine responses without any
perturbation of mind. Now, that by the suggestions of a good spirit the
memory of man is aroused to the recollection of better things, we have
already shown by previous instances, when we mentioned the cases of
Mordecai and Artaxerxes.
5. This too, I think, should next be inquired into, viz. what are the reasons
why a human soul is acted on at one time by good [spirits], and at another

by bad: the grounds of which I suspect to be older than the bodily birth of
the individual, as John [the Baptist] showed by his leaping and exulting in
his mother’s womb, when the voice of the salutation of Mary reached the
ears of his mother Elisabeth; and as Jeremiah the prophet declares, who was
known to God before he was formed in his mother’s womb, and before he
was born was sanctified by Him, and while yet a boy received the grace of
prophecy.[691] And again, on the other hand, it is shown beyond a doubt, that
some have been possessed by hostile spirits from the very beginning of
their lives: i.e., some were born with an evil spirit; and others, according to
credible histories, have practised divination[692] from childhood. Others have
been under the influence of the demon called Python, i.e. the ventriloquial
spirit, from the commencement of their existence. To all which instances,
those who maintain that everything in the world is under the administration
of divine providence (as is also our own belief), can, as it appears to me,
give no other answer, so as to show that no shadow of injustice rests upon
the divine government, than by holding that there were certain causes of
prior existence, in consequence of which the souls, before their birth in the
body, contracted a certain amount of guilt in their sensitive nature, or in
their movements, on account of which they have been judged worthy by
Divine Providence of being placed in this condition. For a soul is always in
possession of free-will, as well when it is in the body as when it is without
it; and freedom of will is always directed either to good or evil. Nor can any
rational and sentient being, i.e. a mind or soul, exist without some
movement either good or bad. And it is probable that these movements
furnish grounds for merit even before they do anything in this world; so that
on account of these merits or grounds they are, immediately on their birth,
and even before it, so to speak, assorted by Divine Providence for the
endurance either of good or evil.
Let such, then, be our views respecting those events which appear to befall
men, either immediately after birth, or even before they enter upon the light.
But as regards the suggestions which are made to the soul, i.e. to the faculty
of human thought, by different spirits, and which arouse men to good
actions or the contrary, even in such a case we must suppose that there
sometimes existed certain causes anterior to bodily birth. For occasionally
the mind, when watchful, and casting away from it what is evil, calls to
itself the aid of the good; or if it be, on the contrary, negligent and slothful,
it makes room through insufficient caution for these spirits, which, lying in

wait secretly like robbers, contrive to rush into the minds of men when they
see a lodgment made for them by sloth; as the Apostle Peter says, “that our
adversary the devil goes about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may
devour.”[693] On which account our heart must be kept with all carefulness
both by day and night, and no place be given to the devil; but every effort
must be used that the ministers of God—those spirits, viz., who were sent to
minister to them who are called to be heirs of salvation[694]—may find a
place within us, and be delighted to enter into the guest-chamber[695] of our
soul, and dwelling within us may guide us by their counsels; if, indeed, they
shall find the habitation of our heart adorned by the practice of virtue and
holiness. But let that be sufficient which we have said, as we best could,
regarding those powers which are hostile to the human race.

CHAPTER IV.
ON HUMAN TEMPTATIONS.

1. And now the subject of human temptations must not, in my opinion, be
passed over in silence, which take their rise sometimes from flesh and
blood, or from the wisdom of flesh and blood, which is said to be hostile to
God. And whether the statement be true which certain allege, viz. that each
individual has as it were two souls, we shall determine after we have
explained the nature of those temptations, which are said to be more
powerful than any of human origin, i.e. which we sustain from principalities
and powers, and from the rulers of the darkness of this world, and from
spiritual wickedness in high places, or to which we are subjected from
wicked spirits and unclean demons. Now, in the investigation of this
subject, we must, I think, inquire according to a logical method whether
there be in us human beings, who are composed of soul and body and vital
spirit, some other element, possessing an incitement of its own, and evoking
a movement towards evil. For a question of this kind is wont to be
discussed by some in this way: whether, viz., as two souls are said to co-
exist within us, the one is more divine and heavenly and the other inferior;
or whether, from the very fact that we inhere in bodily structures which
according to their own proper nature are dead, and altogether devoid of life

(seeing it is from us, i.e. from our souls, that the material body derives its
life, it being contrary and hostile to the spirit), we are drawn on and enticed
to the practice of those evils which are agreeable to the body; or whether,
thirdly (which was the opinion of some of the Greek philosophers),
although our soul is one in substance, it nevertheless consists of several
elements, and one portion of it is called rational and another irrational, and
that which is termed the irrational part is again separated into two affections
—those of covetousness and passion. These three opinions, then, regarding
the soul, which we have stated above, we have found to be entertained by
some, but that one of them, which we have mentioned as being adopted by
certain Grecian philosophers, viz. that the soul is tripartite, I do not observe
to be greatly confirmed by the authority of holy Scripture; while with
respect to the remaining two there is found a considerable number of
passages in the holy Scriptures which seem capable of application to them.
2. Now, of these opinions, let us first discuss that which is maintained by
some, that there is in us a good and heavenly soul, and another earthly and
inferior; and that the better soul is implanted within us from heaven, such as
was that which, while Jacob was still in the womb, gave him the prize of
victory in supplanting his brother Esau, and which in the case of Jeremiah
was sanctified from his birth, and in that of John was filled by the Holy
Spirit from the womb. Now, that which they term the inferior soul is
produced, they allege, along with the body itself out of the seed of the body,
whence they say it cannot live or subsist beyond the body, on which
account also they say it is frequently termed flesh. For the expression, “The
flesh lusteth against the spirit,”[696] they take to be applicable not to the
flesh, but to this soul, which is properly the soul of the flesh. From these
words, moreover, they endeavour notwithstanding to make good the
declaration in Leviticus: “The life of all flesh is the blood thereof.”[697] For,
from the circumstance that it is the diffusion of the blood throughout the
whole flesh which produces life in the flesh, they assert that this soul, which
is said to be the life of all flesh, is contained in the blood. This statement,
moreover, that the flesh struggles against the spirit, and the spirit against the
flesh; and the further statement, that “the life of all flesh is the blood
thereof,” is, according to these writers, simply calling the wisdom of the
flesh by another name, because it is a kind of material spirit, which is not
subject to the law of God, nor can be so, because it has earthly wishes and
bodily desires. And it is with respect to this that they think the apostle

uttered the words: “I see another law in my members, warring against the
law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in
my members.”[698] And if one were to object to them that these words were
spoken of the nature of the body, which indeed, agreeably to the peculiarity
of its nature, is dead, but is said to have sensibility, or wisdom,[699] which is
hostile to God, or which struggles against the spirit; or if one were to say
that, in a certain degree, the flesh itself was possessed of a voice, which
should cry out against the endurance of hunger, or thirst, or cold, or of any
discomfort arising either from abundance or poverty,—they would
endeavour to weaken and impair the force of such [arguments], by showing
that there were many other mental perturbations[700] which derive their
origin in no respect from the flesh, and yet against which the spirit
struggles, such as ambition, avarice, emulation, envy, pride, and others like
these; and seeing that with these the human mind or spirit wages a kind of
contest, they lay down as the cause of all these evils, nothing else than this
corporal soul, as it were, of which we have spoken above, and which is
generated from the seed by a process of traducianism. They are accustomed
also to adduce, in support of their assertion, the declaration of the apostle,
“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these, fornication,
uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, poisonings,[701] hatred, contentions,
emulations, wrath, quarrelling, dissensions, heresies, sects, envyings,
drunkenness, revellings, and the like;”[702] asserting that all these do not
derive their origin from the habits or pleasures of the flesh, so that all such
movements are to be regarded as inherent in that substance which has not a
soul, i.e. the flesh. The declaration, moreover, “For ye see your calling,
brethren, how that not many wise men among you according to the flesh are
called,”[703] would seem to require to be understood as if there were one kind
of wisdom, carnal and material, and another according to the spirit, the
former of which cannot indeed be called wisdom, unless there be a soul of
the flesh, which is wise in respect of what is called carnal wisdom. And in
addition to these passages they adduce the following: “Since the flesh
lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, so that we cannot
do the things that we would.”[704] What are these things now respecting
which he says, “that we cannot do the things that we would?” It is certain,
they reply, that the spirit cannot be intended; for the will of the spirit suffers
no hindrance. But neither can the flesh be meant, because if it has not a soul
of its own, neither can it assuredly possess a will. It remains, then, that the

will of this soul be intended which is capable of having a will of its own,
and which certainly is opposed to the will of the spirit. And if this be the
case, it is established that the will of the soul is something intermediate
between the flesh and the spirit, undoubtedly obeying and serving that one
of the two which it has elected to obey. And if it yield itself up to the
pleasures of the flesh, it renders men carnal; but when it unites itself with
the spirit, it produces men of the spirit, and who on that account are termed
spiritual. And this seems to be the meaning of the apostle in the words, “But
ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit.”[705]
We have accordingly to ascertain what is this very will [intermediate]
between flesh and spirit, besides that will which is said to belong to the
flesh or the spirit. For it is held as certain, that everything which is said to
be a work of the spirit is [a product of] the will of the spirit, and everything
that is called a work of the flesh [proceeds from] the will of the flesh. What
else then, besides these, is that will of the soul which receives a separate
name,[706] and which will, the apostle being opposed to our executing, says:
“Ye cannot do the things that ye would?” By this it would seem to be
intended, that it ought to adhere to neither of these two, i.e. to neither flesh
nor spirit. But some one will say, that as it is better for the soul to execute
its own will than that of the flesh; so, on the other hand, it is better to do the
will of the spirit than its own will. How, then, does the apostle say, “that ye
cannot do the things that ye would?” Because in that contest which is
waged between flesh and spirit, the spirit is by no means certain of victory,
it being manifest that in very many individuals the flesh has the mastery.
But since the subject of discussion on which we have entered is one of great
profundity, which it is necessary to consider in all its bearings,[707] let us see
whether some such point as this may not be determined: that as it is better
for the soul to follow the spirit when the latter has overcome the flesh, so
also, if it seem to be a worse course for the former to follow the flesh in its
struggles against the spirit, when the latter would recall the soul to its
influence, it may nevertheless appear a more advantageous procedure for
the soul to be under the mastery of the flesh than to remain under the power
of its own will. For, since it is said to be neither hot nor cold, but to
continue in a sort of tepid condition, it will find conversion a slow and
somewhat difficult undertaking. If indeed it clung to the flesh, then, satiated
at length, and filled with those very evils which it suffers from the vices of

the flesh, and wearied as it were by the heavy burdens of luxury and lust, it
may sometimes be converted with greater ease and rapidity from the
filthiness of matter to a desire for heavenly things, and [to a taste for]
spiritual graces. And the apostle must be supposed to have said, that “the
spirit contends against the flesh, and the flesh against the spirit, so that we
cannot do the things that we would” (those things, undoubtedly, which are
designated as being beyond the will of the spirit, and the will of the flesh),
meaning (as if we were to express it in other words) that it is better for a
man to be either in a state of virtue or in one of wickedness, than in neither
of these; but that the soul, before its conversion to the spirit, and its union
with it,[708] appears during its adherence to the body, and its meditation of
carnal things, to be neither in a good condition nor in a manifestly bad one,
but resembles, so to speak, an animal. It is better, however, for it, if
possible, to be rendered spiritual through adherence to the spirit; but if that
cannot be done, it is more expedient for it to follow even the wickedness of
the flesh, than, placed under the influence of its own will, to retain the
position of an irrational animal.
These points we have now discussed, in our desire to consider each
individual opinion, at greater length than we intended, that those views
might not be supposed to have escaped our notice which are generally
brought forward by those who inquire whether there is within us any other
soul than this heavenly and rational one, which is naturally opposed to the
latter, and is called either the flesh, or the wisdom of the flesh, or the soul of
the flesh.
4. Let us now see what answer is usually returned to these statements by
those who maintain that there is in us one movement, and one life,
proceeding from one and the same soul, both the salvation and the
destruction of which are ascribed to itself as a result of its own actions.
And, in the first place, let us notice of what nature those commotions[709] of
the soul are which we suffer, when we feel ourselves inwardly drawn in
different directions; when there arises a kind of contest of thoughts in our
hearts, and certain probabilities are suggested us, agreeably to which we
lean now to this side, now to that, and by which we are sometimes
convicted of error, and sometimes approve of our acts.[710] It is nothing
remarkable, however, to say of wicked spirits, that they have a varying and
conflicting judgment, and one out of harmony with itself, since such is

found to be the case in all men, whenever, in deliberating upon an uncertain
event, counsel is taken, and men consider and consult what is to be chosen
as the better and more useful course. It is not therefore surprising that, if
two probabilities meet, and suggest opposite views, they should drag the
mind in contrary directions. For example, if a man be led by reflection to
believe and to fear God, it cannot then be said that the flesh contends
against the spirit; but, amidst the uncertainty of what may be true and
advantageous, the mind is drawn in opposite directions. So, also, when it is
supposed that the flesh provokes to the indulgence of lust, but better
counsels oppose allurements of that kind, we are not to suppose that it is
one life which is resisting another, but that it is the tendency of the nature of
the body, which is eager to empty out and cleanse the places filled with
seminal moisture; as, in like manner, it is not to be supposed that it is any
opposing power, or the life of another soul, which excites within us the
appetite of thirst, and impels us to drink, or which causes us to feel hunger,
and drives us to satisfy it. But as it is by the natural movements of the body
that food and drink are either desired or rejected,[711] so also the natural
seed, collected together in course of time in the various vessels, has an
eager desire to be expelled and thrown away, and is so far from never being
removed, save by the impulse of some exciting cause, that it is even
sometimes spontaneously emitted. When, therefore, it is said that “the flesh
struggles against the spirit,” these persons understand the expression to
mean that habit or necessity, or the delights of the flesh, arouse a man, and
withdraw him from divine and spiritual things. For, owing to the necessity
of the body being drawn away, we are not allowed to have leisure for divine
things, which are to be eternally advantageous. So again, the soul, devoting
itself to divine and spiritual pursuits, and being united to the spirit, is said to
fight against the flesh, by not permitting it to be relaxed by indulgence, and
to become unsteady through the influence of those pleasures for which it
feels a natural delight. In this way, also, they claim to understand the words,
“The wisdom of the flesh is hostile to God,”[712] not that the flesh really has
a soul, or a wisdom of its own. But as we are accustomed to say, by an
abuse[713] of language, that the earth is thirsty, and wishes to drink in water,
this use of the word “wishes” is not proper, but catachrestic,—as if we were
to say again, that this house wants to be rebuilt,[714] and many other similar
expressions; so also is the wisdom of the flesh to be understood, or the
expression, that “the flesh lusteth against the spirit.” They generally connect

with these the expression, “The voice of thy brother’s blood crieth unto me
from the ground.”[715] For what cries unto the Lord is not properly the blood
which was shed; but the blood is said improperly to cry out, vengeance
being demanded upon him who had shed it. The declaration also of the
apostle, “I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my
mind,”[716] they so understand as if he had said, That he who wishes to
devote himself to the word of God is, on account of his bodily necessities
and habits, which like a sort of law are ingrained in the body, distracted, and
divided, and impeded, lest, by devoting himself vigorously to the study of
wisdom, he should be enabled to behold the divine mysteries.
5. With respect, however, to the following being ranked among the works of
the flesh, viz. heresies, and envyings, and contentions, or other [vices], they
so understand the passage, that the mind, being rendered grosser in feeling,
from its yielding itself to the passions of the body, and being oppressed by
the mass of its vices, and having no refined or spiritual feelings, is said to
be made flesh, and derives its name from that in which it exhibits more
vigour and force of will.[717] They also make this further inquiry, “Who will
be found, or who will be said to be, the creator of this evil sense, called the
sense of the flesh?” Because they defend the opinion that there is no other
creator of soul and flesh than God. And if we were to assert that the good
God created anything in His own creation that was hostile to Himself, it
would appear to be a manifest absurdity. If, then, it is written, that “carnal
wisdom is enmity against God,”[718] and if this be declared to be a result of
creation, God Himself will appear to have formed a nature hostile to
Himself, which cannot be subject to Him nor to His law, as if it were
[supposed to be] an animal of which such qualities are predicated. And if
this view be admitted, in what respect will it appear to differ from that of
those who maintain that souls of different natures are created, which,
according to their natures,[719] are destined either to be lost or saved? But
this is an opinion of the heretics alone, who, not being able to maintain the
justice of God on grounds of piety, compose impious inventions of this
kind. And now we have brought forward to the best of our ability, in the
person of each of the parties, what might be advanced by way of argument
regarding the several views, and let the reader choose out of them for
himself that which he thinks ought to be preferred.

CHAPTER V.
THAT THE WORLD TOOK ITS BEGINNING IN TIME.

1. And now, since there is one of the articles of the church[720] which is held
principally in consequence of our belief in the truth of our sacred history,
viz. that this world was created and took its beginning at a certain time, and,
in conformity to the cycle of time[721] decreed to all things, is to be
destroyed on account of its corruption, there seems no absurdity in re-
discussing a few points connected with this subject. And so far, indeed, as
the credibility of Scripture is concerned, the declarations on such a matter
seem easy of proof. Even the heretics, although widely opposed on many
other things, yet on this appear to be at one, yielding to the authority of
Scripture.
Concerning, then, the creation of the world, what portion of Scripture can
give us more information regarding it, than the account which Moses has
transmitted respecting its origin? And although it comprehends matters of
profounder significance than the mere historical narrative appears to
indicate, and contains very many things that are to be spiritually
understood, and employs the letter, as a kind of veil, in treating of profound
and mystical subjects; nevertheless the language of the narrator shows that
all visible things were created at a certain time. But with regard to the
consummation of the world, Jacob is the first who gives any information, in
addressing his children in the words: “Gather yourselves together unto me,
ye sons of Jacob, that I may tell you what shall be in the last days,” or “after
the last days.”[722] If, then, there be “last days,” or a period “succeeding the
last days,” the days which had a beginning must necessarily come to an end.
David, too, declares: “The heavens shall perish, but Thou shalt endure; yea,
all of them shall wax old as doth a garment: as a vesture shalt Thou change
them, and they shall be changed: but Thou art the same, and Thy years shall
have no end.”[723] Our Lord and Saviour, indeed, in the words, “He who
made them at the beginning, made them male and female,”[724] Himself
bears witness that the world was created; and again, when He says,
“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away,”[725]
He points out that they are perishable, and must come to an end. The
apostle, moreover, in declaring that “the creature was made subject to
vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in

hope, because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of
corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God,”[726] manifestly
announces the end of the world; as he does also when he again says, “The
fashion of this world passeth away.”[727] Now, by the expression which he
employs, “that the creature was made subject to vanity,” he shows that there
was a beginning to this world: for if the creature were made subject to
vanity on account of some hope, it was certainly made subject from a cause;
and seeing it was from a cause, it must necessarily have had a beginning:
for, without some beginning, the creature could not be subject to vanity, nor
could that [creature] hope to be freed from the bondage of corruption,
which had not begun to serve. But any one who chooses to search at his
leisure, will find numerous other passages in holy Scripture in which the
world is both said to have a beginning and to hope for an end.
2. Now, if there be any one who would here oppose either the authority or
credibility of our Scriptures,[728] we would ask of him whether he asserts
that God can, or cannot, comprehend all things? To assert that He cannot,
would manifestly be an act of impiety. If then he answer, as he must, that
God comprehends all things, it follows from the very fact of their being
capable of comprehension, that they are understood to have a beginning and
an end, seeing that which is altogether without any beginning cannot be at
all comprehended. For however far understanding may extend, so far is the
faculty of comprehending illimitably withdrawn and removed when there is
held to be no beginning.
3. But this is the objection which they generally raise: they say, “If the
world had its beginning in time, what was God doing before the world
began? For it is at once impious and absurd to say that the nature of God is
inactive and immoveable, or to suppose that goodness at one time did not
do good, and omnipotence at one time did not exercise its power.” Such is
the objection which they are accustomed to make to our statement that this
world had its beginning at a certain time, and that, agreeably to our belief in
Scripture, we can calculate the years of its past duration. To these
propositions I consider that none of the heretics can easily return an answer
that will be in conformity with the nature of their opinions. But we can give
a logical answer in accordance with the standard of religion,[729] when we
say that not then for the first time did God begin to work when He made
this visible world; but as, after its destruction, there will be another world,

so also we believe that others existed before the present came into being.
And both of these positions will be confirmed by the authority of holy
Scripture. For that there will be another world after this, is taught by Isaiah,
who says, “There will be a new heavens, and a new earth, which I shall
make to abide in my sight, saith the Lord;”[730] and that before this world
others also existed is shown by Ecclesiastes, in the words: “What is that
which hath been? Even that which shall be. And what is that which has been
created? Even this which is to be created: and there is nothing altogether
new under the sun. Who shall speak and declare, Lo, this is new? It hath
already been in the ages which have been before us.”[731] By these
testimonies it is established both that there were ages[732] before our own,
and that there will be others after it. It is not, however, to be supposed that
several worlds existed at once, but that, after the end of this present world,
others will take their beginning; respecting which it is unnecessary to repeat
each particular statement, seeing we have already done so in the preceding
pages.
4. This point, indeed, is not to be idly passed by, that the holy Scriptures
have called the creation of the world by a new and peculiar name, terming it
καταβολή, which has been very improperly translated into Latin by
“constitutio;” for in Greek καταβολή signifies rather “dejicere,” i.e. to cast
downwards,—a word which has been, as we have already remarked,
improperly translated into Latin by the phrase “constitutio mundi,” as in the
Gospel according to John, where the Saviour says, “And there will be
tribulation in those days, such as was not since the beginning of the
world;”[733] in which passage καταβολή is rendered by beginning
(constitutio), which is to be understood as above explained. The apostle
also, in the Epistle to the Ephesians, has employed the same language,
saying, “Who hath chosen us before the foundation of the world;”[734] and
this foundation he calls καταβολή, to be understood in the same sense as
before. It seems worth while, then, to inquire what is meant by this new
term; and I am, indeed, of opinion[735] that, as the end and consummation of
the saints will be in those [ages] which are not seen, and are eternal, we
must conclude (as frequently pointed out in the preceding pages), from a
contemplation of that very end, that rational creatures had also a similar
beginning. And if they had a beginning such as the end for which they hope,
they existed undoubtedly from the very beginning in those [ages] which are
not seen, and are eternal. And if this is so, then there has been a descent

from a higher to a lower condition, on the part not only of those souls who
have deserved the change by the variety of their movements, but also on
that of those who, in order to serve the whole world, were brought down
from those higher and invisible spheres to these lower and visible ones,
although against their will—“Because the creature was subjected to vanity,
not willingly, but because of him who subjected the same in hope;”[736] so
that both sun, and moon, and stars, and angels might discharge their duty to
the world, and to those souls which, on account of their excessive mental
defects, stood in need of bodies of a grosser and more solid nature; and for
the sake of those for whom this arrangement was necessary, this visible
world was also called into being. From this it follows, that by the use of the
word καταβολή, a descent from a higher to a lower condition, shared by all
in common, would seem to be pointed out. The hope indeed of freedom is
entertained by the whole of creation—of being liberated from the
corruption of slavery—when the sons of God, who either fell away or were
scattered abroad,[737] shall be gathered together into one, or when they shall
have fulfilled their other duties in this world, which are known to God
alone, the Disposer of all things. We are, indeed, to suppose that the world
was created of such quality and capacity as to contain not only all those
souls which it was determined should be trained in this world, but also all
those powers which were prepared to attend, and serve, and assist them. For
it is established by many declarations that all rational creatures are of one
nature: on which ground alone could the justice of God in all His dealings
with them be defended, seeing every one has the reason in himself, why he
has been placed in this or that rank in life.
5. This arrangement of things, then, which God afterwards appointed (for
He had, from the very origin of the world, clearly perceived the reasons and
causes affecting those who, either owing to mental deficiencies, deserved to
enter into bodies, or those who were carried away by their desire for visible
things, and those also who, either willingly or unwillingly, were compelled,
[by Him who subjected the same in hope], to perform certain services to
such as had fallen into that condition), not being understood by some, who
failed to perceive that it was owing to preceding causes, originating in free-
will, that this variety of arrangement had been instituted by God, they have
concluded that all things in this world are directed either by fortuitous
movements or by a necessary fate, and that nothing is within the power of

our own will. And, therefore, also they were unable to show that the
providence of God was beyond the reach of censure.
6. But as we have said that all the souls who lived in this world stood in
need of many ministers, or rulers, or assistants; so, in the last times, when
the end of the world is already imminent and near, and the whole human
race is verging upon the last destruction, and when not only those who were
governed by others have been reduced to weakness, but those also to whom
had been committed the cares of government, it was no longer such help
nor such defenders that were needed, but the help of the Author and Creator
Himself was required to restore to the one the discipline of obedience,
which had been corrupted and profaned, and to the other the discipline of
rule. And hence the only-begotten Son of God, who was the Word and the
Wisdom of the Father, when He was in the possession of that glory with the
Father, which He had before the world was, divested Himself[738] of it, and,
taking the form of a servant, was made obedient unto death, that He might
teach obedience to those who could not otherwise than by obedience obtain
salvation. He restored also the laws of rule and government[739] which had
been corrupted, by subduing all enemies under His feet, that by this means
(for it was necessary that He should reign until He had put all enemies
under His feet, and destroyed the last enemy—death) He might teach rulers
themselves moderation in their government. As He had come, then, to
restore the discipline, not only of government, but of obedience, as we have
said, accomplishing in Himself first what He desired to be accomplished by
others, He became obedient to the Father, not only to the death of the cross,
but also, in the end of the world, embracing in Himself all whom He
subjects to the Father, and who by Him come to salvation, He Himself,
along with them, and in them, is said also to be subject to the Father; all
things subsisting in Him, and He Himself being the Head of all things, and
in Him being the salvation and the fulness of those who obtain salvation.
And this consequently is what the apostle says of Him: “And when all
things shall be subjected to Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject
to Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.”
7. I know not, indeed, how the heretics, not understanding the meaning of
the apostle in these words, consider the term “subjection” degrading as
applied to the Son; for if the propriety of the title be called in question, it
may easily be ascertained from making a contrary supposition. Because if it

be not good to be in subjection, it follows that the opposite will be good,
viz. not to be in subjection. Now the language of the apostle, according to
their view, appears to indicate by these words, “And when all things shall
be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him
that put all things under Him,”[740] that He, who is not now in subjection to
the Father, will become subject to Him when the Father shall have first
subdued all things unto Him. But I am astonished how it can be conceived
to be the meaning, that He who, while all things are not yet subdued to
Him, is not Himself in subjection, should—at a time when all things have
been subdued to Him, and when He has become King of all men, and holds
sway over all things—be supposed then to be made subject, seeing He was
not formerly in subjection; for such do not understand that the subjection of
Christ to the Father indicates that our happiness has attained to perfection,
and that the work undertaken by Him has been brought to a victorious
termination, seeing He has not only purified the power of supreme
government over the whole of creation, but presents to the Father the
principles of the obedience and subjection of the human race in a corrected
and improved condition.[741] If, then, that subjection be held to be good and
salutary by which the Son is said to be subject to the Father, it is an
extremely rational and logical inference to deduce that the subjection also
of enemies, which is said to be made to the Son of God, should be
understood as being also salutary and useful; as if, when the Son is said to
be subject to the Father, the perfect restoration of the whole of creation is
signified, so also, when enemies are said to be subjected to the Son of God,
the salvation of the conquered and the restoration of the lost is in that
understood to consist.
8. This subjection, however, will be accomplished in certain ways, and after
certain training, and at certain times; for it is not to be imagined that the
subjection is to be brought about by the pressure of necessity (lest the whole
world should then appear to be subdued to God by force), but by word,
reason, and doctrine; by a call to a better course of things, by the best
systems of training, by the employment also of suitable and appropriate
threatenings, which will justly impend over those who despise any care or
attention to their salvation and usefulness. In a word, we men also, in
training either our slaves or children, restrain them by threats and fear while
they are, by reason of their tender age, incapable of using their reason; but
when they have begun to understand what is good, and useful, and

honourable, the fear of the lash being over, they acquiesce through the
suasion of words and reason in all that is good. But how, consistently with
the preservation of freedom of will in all rational creatures, each one ought
to be regulated, i.e. who they are whom the word of God finds and trains, as
if they were already prepared and capable of it; who they are whom it puts
off to a later time; who these are from whom it is altogether concealed, and
who are so situated as to be far from hearing it; who those, again, are who
despise the word of God when made known and preached to them, and who
are driven by a kind of correction and chastisement to salvation, and whose
conversion is in a certain degree demanded and extorted; who those are to
whom certain opportunities of salvation are afforded, so that sometimes,
their faith being proved by an answer alone,[742] they have unquestionably
obtained salvation;[743]—from what causes or on what occasions these
results take place, or what the divine wisdom sees within them, or what
movements of their will leads God so to arrange all these things, is known
to Him alone, and to His only-begotten Son, through whom all things were
created and restored, and to the Holy Spirit, through whom all things are
sanctified, who proceedeth from the Father,[744] to whom be glory for ever
and ever. Amen.

CHAPTER VI.
ON THE END OF THE WORLD.

1. Now, respecting the end of the world and the consummation of all things,
we have stated in the preceding pages, to the best of our ability, so far as the
authority of Holy Scripture enabled us, what we deem sufficient for
purposes of instruction; and we shall here only add a few admonitory
remarks, since the order of investigation has brought us back to the subject.
The highest good, then, after the attainment of which the whole of rational
nature is seeking, which is also called the end of all blessings,[745] is defined
by many philosophers as follows: The highest good, they say, is to become
as like to God as possible. But this definition I regard not so much as a
discovery of theirs, as a view derived from holy Scripture. For this is
pointed out by Moses, before all other philosophers, when he describes the