{"slug":"khazarzar-theodoretus-of-cyrrhus-quaestiones-et-responsiones-ad-orthodoxos","id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-theodoretus-of-cyrrhus-quaestiones-et-responsiones-ad-orthodoxos","title":"Quaestiones et responsiones ad orthodoxos","title_source":"Quaestiones et responsiones ad orthodoxos","author":"Theodoretus of Cyrrhus","genre":"commentary","date":null,"tradition":"greek","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor","provider":"Baidu","generated":"2026-11-15T18:32:20Z","cost_usd":0.018746},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-theodoretus-of-cyrrhus-quaestiones-et-responsiones-ad-orthodoxos","work_id":"khazarzar-theodoretus-of-cyrrhus-quaestiones-et-responsiones-ad-orthodoxos","edition":"khazarzar","language":"","license":null,"url":null},"stats":{"passages":168,"english_words":44561,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":180059,"commentary_units":0,"commentary_kinds":0,"derived_notes":15,"ambiguities":0,"work_notes":0,"external_links":0,"timeline":0},"summary":{},"links":[],"checks":{"work":"khazarzar-theodoretus-of-cyrrhus-quaestiones-et-responsiones-ad-orthodoxos","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":168,"translated":168,"commentary_passages":0,"commentary_units":0,"english_words":44561,"source_letters":179215,"commentary_kinds":0},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Greek; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: commentary in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 168 narrative."},{"kind":"caution","severity":"caution","text":"15 passage(s) are fragmentary in the source; the English bridges each break and says so in the note."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: khazarzar."}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":168},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"ΘΕΟΔΩΡΗΤΟΥ ΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΥ ΠΟΛΕΩΣ ΚΥΡΟΥ, ἑνὸς τῶν ἐν Χαλκηδόνι χλʹ ἁγίων πατέρων, πρὸς τὰς ἐπενεχθείσας αὐτῷ ἐρωτήσεις παρά τινος τῶν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἐπισκόπων.\n\nΠίναξ αὐτῶν.\n\nˉαˉʹ. Εἰ εἷς ἐστι θεὸς ὁ θεός, δῆλον ὅτι κατὰ πάντα κέκτηται τὸ ἕν, τὸ ἁπλοῦν ἢ τὸ σύνθετον. πῶς οὖν τοῦ πατρὸς γεννήσαντος καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς; ˉβˉʹ. Εἰ ἔχει ὁ θεὸς ὑπόστασιν ὑπάρχουσαν ἢ βουλὴν ἐνυπάρ χουσαν καὶ υἱὸν ἐνυπάρχοντα, πῶς ἐκ τοσούτων συγκείμενος ἁπλοῦς ὀνομάζεται; ˉγˉʹ. Εἰ ἁπλοῦν μὲν τὸ καθ' ἑαυτό, ὡς ἐπὶ τῶν κατὰ γράμ ματα στοιχείων, οἷον ἰῶτα, σύνθετον δὲ τὸ μεθ' ἑτέρου, οἷον πῖ, πῶς ὁ θεὸς ἀσύνθετος λέγεται; ˉδˉʹ. Εἰ τῶν θείων ὑποστάσεων ἡ ἕνωσίς ἐστιν ἀδιαίρετος, πῶς δύνανται τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις καὶ τρία ὀνομάζεσθαι πρόσωπα; ˉεˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ μὲν θεὸς τῆς οὐσίας, τὸ δὲ πατὴρ τοῦ προσώπου ἐστὶ δηλωτικόν, πῶς ταὐτὸν τὸ λέγειν υἱὸν θεοῦ τῷ λέγειν υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός; ˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν φύσιν, εἴ τι γέννημα, τοῦτο τῷ γεννήσαντι ὁμοούσιον, πῶς οὐχὶ κατ' αὐτὴν εἴ τι γεγέννηται, μεθ' οὗ ὑπάρχει τοῦ γεννήσαντος καὶ ἑξῆς; 2 ˉζˉʹ. Εἰ ἡ θεία οὐσία μία καθέστηκε, πῶς τὴν ἐνανθρώπησιν καὶ τὴν ἕνωσιν καὶ τὴν ἐνοίκησιν ἐν τῇ οἰκονομίᾳ μόνῳ τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ τινὲς περιάπτουσι καὶ ἑξῆς; ˉηˉʹ. Οἱ λέγοντες ἡνῶσθαι τῇ τοῦ δούλου μορφῇ τὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ κυρίως ὄντα υἱόν, πῶς δυάδι υἱῶν οὐ λατρεύουσιν; ˉθˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ περιέχον μεῖζον μέν ἐστι τοῦ περιεχομένου κατ' οὐσίαν, ἧττον δὲ κατ' ἀξίαν, οὐρανὸς καὶ γῆ ἀγγέλων οἶκος καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. ˉιˉʹ.","english":"Of Theodoret, Bishop of the city of Cyrrhus, one of the thirty holy fathers at Chalcedon, to the questions brought to him by one of the bishops from Egypt.\n\nTable of their contents.\n\n1. If God is one God, it is clear that in every respect he possesses the one, whether the simple or the composite. How then is it said that the Father begot, and so on? 2. If God has a subsistence that exists, or an inherent counsel, and an inherent Son, how is he, being composed of so many things, called simple? 3. If that which is simple in itself, as in the case of the letters of the alphabet—for example, iota—is simple, but that which is with another—for example, pi—is composite, how is God said to be incomposite? 4. If the union of the divine subsistences is indivisible, how can three subsistences and three persons be named? 5. If \"God\" is indicative of the essence, but \"Father\" of the person, how is saying \"Son of God\" the same as saying \"Son of the Father\"? 6. If according to our nature, whatever is begotten is consubstantial with the one who begot it, how is it not so according to that nature—whatever has been begotten, with which it exists, of the begetter, and so on? 7. If the divine essence is one, how do some attribute the incarnation and the union and the indwelling in the economy to the divine Word alone, and so on? 8. Those who say that the Son who truly and properly exists has been united to the form of the servant, how do they not worship a duality of sons? 9. If that which contains is greater in essence than that which is contained, but less in worth—heaven and earth are the house of angels, and so on. 10.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Εἰ τὸ περιέχον ἐπὶ φρουρᾷ καὶ συντηρήσει ἐστὶ τοῦ περιεχο μένου, πῶς ὁ θεὸς περιέχων τὸ πᾶν οὐκ ἐπὶ φρουρᾷ καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς; ˉιˉαˉʹ. Ἐπειδὴ συνεχῶς ὁ κύριος υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ οὐχὶ τῆς ἀνθρώπου ἑαυτὸν ὀνομάζει, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πειρῶνται οἱ ἄπιστοι δεικνύναι ὡς ἐκ γαμικῆς συναφείας ὁ δεσποτικὸς γέγονε τόκος καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. ˉιˉβˉʹ. Εἰ οἱ εὐαγγελισταὶ Ματθαῖός τε καὶ Λουκᾶς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα γενεαλογοῦντες τὸν κύριον, ὃ μὲν τὴν κατὰ φύσιν, ὃ δὲ τὴν κατὰ νόμον αὐτοῦ γενεαλογίαν συνέγραψε, πῶς ὁ Λουκᾶς οὐ δείκνυται τῷ Ματθαίῳ μαχόμενος, πλείονας τοὺς κατὰ νόμον τῶν κατὰ φύσιν καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς; ˉιˉγˉʹ. Εἰ κατὰ τὸν Μωσαϊκὸν νόμον ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ τελευτή σαντος ἄπαιδος τὴν γυναῖκα λαμβάνων ἐπαιδοποίει ἐξ αὐτῆς κατὰ φύσιν ἑαυτῷ. ˉιˉδˉʹ. Εἰ ὁ προλεχθεὶς νόμος πρὸ τοῦ Δαυὶδ τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις ἐντέταλτο, πῶς ὁ Ματθαῖος τῶν κατὰ φύσιν πατέρων πρὸ τοῦ Δαυὶδ καὶ μετ' αὐτὸν ἐπίσης ἐμνημόνευσεν, ὁ δὲ Λουκᾶς τῶν κατὰ φύσιν πρὸ τοῦ Δαυὶδ καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς; ˉιˉεˉʹ. Ἐπειδὴ ὁ Ἡσαΐας προφητεύων εἰς τὸν Χριστὸν ἀναφέρει \"τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται\", ἐπὶ δυσδιηγήτου ἢ ἀδιηγήτου λέγει καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς θεότητος ἢ τῆς σαρκός; ˉιˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ τὴν ἀρχαίαν λατρείαν ἀνεῖλεν ὁ θεὸς ὡς μὴ ἀρεσκόμενος αὐτῇ, ἀντεισήγαγε δὲ τὴν χριστιανῶν, πῶς τὴν πλά νην κατέλιπεν ἀνεκρίζωτον; 3 ˉιˉζˉʹ. Εἰ τὰ μέλλοντα γίνεσθαι προφῆται καὶ ἀπόστολοι προ εῖπον καί τινες τῶν Ἑλλήνων, πόθεν οἱ κρείττους γνωρίζονται, γεγενημένης τῆς ἑκατέρων προρρήσεως; ˉιˉηˉʹ.","english":"If that which contains exists for the guarding and preservation of that which is contained, how is it that God, who contains all things, is not for the guarding and so forth? 11. Since the Lord continually calls himself Son of Man and not son of the woman, and on this account the unbelievers attempt to show that the masterly birth came about from a marital union, and so forth. 12. If the evangelists Matthew and Luke, in tracing the genealogy of the Lord according to the flesh, the one wrote his genealogy according to nature and the other according to law, how is Luke not shown to be in conflict with Matthew, [having] more [ancestors] according to law than according to nature, and so forth? 13. If, according to the Mosaic law, the brother of one who died childless, taking the wife, begot children from her for himself according to nature. 14. If the aforementioned law was enjoined upon the Israelites before David, how is it that Matthew made mention equally of the fathers according to nature before David and after him, while Luke [made mention] of those according to nature before David, and so forth? 15. Since Isaiah, prophesying concerning Christ, says, \"Who shall declare his generation?\" — does he speak of that which is hard to declare or of that which cannot be declared, and of the divinity or of the flesh? 16. If God abolished the ancient worship as not being pleased with it, and introduced in its place that of the Christians, how did he leave the error unrooted out? 17. If prophets and apostles foretold the things that were to come, and certain of the Greeks as well, from where are the better ones recognized, when the prediction of each has come to pass? 18.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"Εἰ πάντες ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει οἱ ἡμαρτηκότες κολάζονται, πλέον δὲ οἱ εἰδότες τὸ θέλημα καὶ μὴ ποιήσαντες, τί τὸ κέρδος τοῦ χριστιανοῦ καὶ τοῦ Ἕλληνος; ˉιˉθˉʹ. Εἰ πάσῃ δυνάμει ἔσπευσαν οἱ αἱρετικοὶ γνῶναι τὴν τῶν δογμάτων ἀλήθειαν καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσαν, πῶς οὐκ ἄδικον τούτους κολάσει ἐμβαλεῖν; ˉκˉʹ. Εἰ ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῶν αἱρετικῶν δυνάμεις καὶ θαύ ματα ἐνεργοῦνται, πῶς οὐκ ἀνάγκη ἐκ τούτων ἐν τῇ πλάνῃ βεβαιοῦσθαι ἐκείνους; ˉκˉαˉʹ. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς ἀλγοῦσι καὶ ἡδομένοις τὸ παθητὸν διαδείκνυται, τούτων δὲ οἱ ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετέχουσι, πῶς ἀπάθειαν ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει\n\nκομίζονται; ˉκˉβˉʹ. Εἰ τροπῆς γνώρισμα τὸ τὰ καλὰ καὶ τὰ φαῦλα λαμβά νειν εἰς ἔννοιαν, πῶς ἄτρεπτοι οἱ κολαζόμενοι, τὴν τῶν δικαίων ἐννοοῦντες ἄνεσιν καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς; ˉκˉγˉʹ. Εἰ τὴν γνῶσιν καλοῦ καὶ κακοῦ παρὰ θεοῦ σὺν τῷ εἶναι εἰλήφαμεν, πῶς οὐκ αἴτιος ἑκατέρου ὁ τῇ φύσει ταῦτα ἐνθεὶς πρὸς τὴν αὐτῶν ἐκπλήρωσιν; ˉκˉδˉʹ. Εἰ τὰ προλεχθέντα δέδωκεν ὁ θεός, στεφανοῖ δὲ καὶ κολάζει πρὸς ἃ ἕκαστος ἔπραξε, πῶς δικαίως ἀμφότερα ποιεῖ, παρ' αὐτοῦ δεδομένα; ˉκˉεˉʹ. Εἰ τὰ σωματικώτερον περὶ θεῶν παρὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων καὶ περὶ θεοῦ παρὰ τῶν προφητῶν εἰρημένα κατὰ ἀλληγορίαν ἔχει τὴν νόησιν, πῶς οὐ μῦθος ἀμφότερα; ˉκˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ διὰ τὴν ἀντίδοσιν τῶν ἑκάστῳ βεβιωμένων ἀνάστα σις γίνεται, πῶς οὐ περιττῶς τὰ βρέφη ἢ καὶ τὰ ἐν γαστρὶ τελευτήσαντα ἀναστήσονται; ˉκˉζˉʹ. Εἰ ἐψευσμένον καὶ μάταιον τὸ τῶν αἱρετικῶν ὑπάρχει βάπτισμα καὶ ἡ χειροτονία, πῶς τοὺς τῇ ὀρθοδοξίᾳ προσφεύγοντας οὔτε βαπτίζουσιν, οὔτε χειροτονοῦσιν; ˉκˉηˉʹ.","english":"If all who have sinned are punished in the resurrection, and more so those who knew the will and did not do it, what is the advantage of the Christian over the Greek? 19. If the heretics hastened with all their power to know the truth of the doctrines and could not, how is it not unjust to cast them into punishment? 20. If powers and wonders are worked in the churches of the heretics, how is it not necessary that those men be confirmed in their error by these? 21. If the passible is displayed in those who feel pain and pleasure, and those in judgment partake of these, how do they receive impassibility in the resurrection? 22. If it is a mark of change to receive into thought things good and base, how are those being punished immutable, when they think on the relief of the righteous and so on? 23. If we have received the knowledge of good and evil from God together with our being, how is he not the cause of each, who implanted these in nature for their fulfillment? 24. If God has given the things foretold, and crowns and punishes according to what each has done, how does he justly do both, when they were given by him? 25. If the things said more bodily about the gods by the Greeks, and about God by the prophets, have their meaning allegorically, how are both not a myth? 26. If the resurrection comes about for the recompense of what each has lived, how is it not superfluous that infants, or even those who died in the womb, will rise? 27. If the baptism and ordination of the heretics are false and vain, how do they neither baptize nor ordain those who flee to orthodoxy? 28.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"Εἰ οὐχ ἥμαρτεν ὁ Ἰὼβ ἀρασάμενος τὴν ἡμέραν, δῆλον ὅτι ὡς δίκαιος εἰσηκούσθη. τὸν οἰκεῖον ὁ Θεὸς ἀνέτρεψεν ὅρον καὶ ἀνάγκη ζητεῖν κτλ. ˉκˉθˉʹ. Εἰ ἡ τῶν παλμῶν παρατήρησις ὑπὸ τῶν εὐσεβῶν ἀπηγόρευται, διατί ταύτην οἱ βουλόμενοι ἀπωθεῖσθαι οὐ δύνανται; ˉλˉʹ. Εἰ εἰς θάνατον καὶ φθορὰν οἱ ἁλιεῖς τοὺς ἰχθύας λαμ βάνουσι, πῶς εἰς ζωὴν μέλλων ὁ Χριστὸς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους εἰσα γαγεῖν ἁλιεῖς τοὺς ἀποστόλους ὠνόμασεν; ˉλˉαˉʹ. Εἰ σώφρονι λογισμῷ τὰς γαμικὰς ἡδονὰς οἱ μοναχοὶ ἀπεστράφησαν, διατί καθ' ὕπνους φαντάζονται; καὶ εἰ τῶν μυ στηρίων δεῖ ἀπέχεσθαι. ˉλˉβˉʹ. Εἰ τῷ σίτῳ συναυξάνεσθαι τὰ ζιζάνια ὁ Χριστὸς ἀπη γόρευσε, πῶς τὰ ζιζάνια πεπλήθυνται, ὁ δὲ σῖτος ἐξέλιπεν; ˉλˉγˉʹ. Εἰ πρὸ τοῦ πάθους ὁ κύριος ηὔχετο τηρηθῆναι παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τοὺς μαθητάς, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα Ἰούδας ἀπώλετο, πῶς ἐδέχθη ἡ εὐχή; ˉλˉδˉʹ. Εἰ ὁ θεός ἐστι δημιουργὸς τῆς κτίσεως, πῶς τὰ Ἀπολλωνίου τελέσματα ἐν τοῖς τῆς κτίσεως δύνανται μέρεσιν; ˉλˉεˉʹ. Εἰ ἐπαιδεύθη Μωυσῆς πάσῃ σοφίᾳ Αἰγυπτίων, πῶς ἀστρονομίαν καὶ γεωμετρίαν καὶ ἀστρολογίαν οὐ μετῄει; ˉλˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ πάντα τὰ ὕδατα αἷμα ὑπὸ Μωσέως γέγονε, πῶς λέγει ἡ γραφὴ τὸ \"ἐποίησαν δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ ὡσαύτως\"; ˉλˉζˉʹ. Πῶς ὁ Μωυσῆς τὰ τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ ὀστᾶ ἐπιφερόμενος ἐναν τία ἑαυτῷ ἐνομοθέτησεν, ἀκάθαρτον τὸν ἁπτόμενον νεκροῦ λέγων; ˉλˉηˉʹ. Εἰ τὴν τῶν Φαρισαίων ἐσχηματισμένην εὐλάβειαν ἐλέγ χων ὁ κύριος ἔλεγεν ὅτι \"τάφοι κεκονιαμένοι εἰσί\", τί ἄτοπον ἐργάζονται Ἕλληνες τοὺς νεκροὺς μυσαττόμενοι; ˉλˉθˉʹ.","english":"If Job did not sin when he cursed the day, it is clear that as a righteous man he was heard. God overturned his own decree, and of necessity one must seek etc. 29. If the observation of palpitations is forbidden by the pious, why are those who wish to reject it unable to do so? 30. If fishermen take fish for death and corruption, how is it that Christ, who was about to lead men into life, named the apostles fishermen? 31. If the monks turned away from marital pleasures by a chaste reasoning, why do they experience fantasies in their sleep? And if one must abstain from the mysteries. 32. If Christ forbade the tares to be uprooted together with the wheat, how is it that the tares have multiplied and the wheat has failed? 33. If before his passion the Lord prayed that the disciples be kept by the Father, and after these things Judas perished, how was the prayer accepted? 34. If God is the creator of the creation, how are the works of Apollonius able to exist in the parts of the creation? 35. If Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, why did he not pursue astronomy and geometry and astrology? 36. If all the waters were turned to blood by Moses, how does the scripture say, \"And the enchanters also did likewise\"? 37. How did Moses, carrying the bones of Joseph, legislate contrary to himself, saying that the one who touches a corpse is unclean? 38. If the Lord, reproving the feigned piety of the Pharisees, said, \"They are whitewashed tombs,\" what improper thing do the Greeks do when they abhor the dead? 39.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"Εἰ πεπλήρωτο ὁ οἶκος ἔνθα ὁ κύριος ἦν, πῶς οἱ τὴν ὀροφὴν καθαιροῦντες καὶ τὸν παράλυτον μετὰ τῆς κλίνης καθιέντες τοὺς ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ οὐκ ἔπληξαν; 5 ˉμˉʹ. Εἰ ἑκάστῳ ἀνθρώπῳ ἄγγελος φύλαξ καθέστηκεν, οἱ δὲ ἄνθρωποι αὔξησιν καὶ μείωσιν δεχόμενοι, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ κατακλυ σμοῦ, ποίαν λειτουργίαν οἱ ἄγγελοι μειούμενοι τότε ἐπλήρουν; ˉμˉαˉʹ. Εἰ νεύματι θείῳ αἱ νεφέλαι τὸν ὑετὸν καταπέμπουσι, διατί οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ ἔνθα βούλονται χαλάζας ἀμέτρους καὶ ὑετοὺς ἀκοντίζουσιν; ˉμˉβˉʹ. Εἰ θνητὴν ὁ θεὸς τὴν ἡμετέραν ἔκτισε φύσιν, πῶς λέγει ὅτι ὁ θεὸς θάνατον οὐκ ἐποίησε; ˉμˉγˉʹ. Εἰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἡ φύσις ὡς θνητὴ τὸ οἰκεῖον ἐπι γινώσκει πέρας, ὁ δὲ ἑκάστου χρόνος οὐ κατά τινά ἐστιν ὅρον, πῶς τῷ Ἐζεκίᾳ προσετέθη χρόνος; ˉμˉδˉʹ. Καὶ ὥραις καὶ ἡμέραις τὰ καθ' ἡμᾶς οὐ κατέχεται· πῶς ἐν τῷ γάμῳ εἶπεν ὁ κύριος \"οὔπω ἥκει ἡ ὥρα μου\" καὶ ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς \"οὔπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ὥρα\"; ˉμˉεˉʹ. Εἰ καθὼς φασί τινες ὅτι ὁ κατακλυσμὸς οὐκ ἐν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ γέγονεν, ἀλλ' ἔνθα οἱ ἄνθρωποι ᾤκουν, πῶς λέγει ὅτι ὑψώθη τὸ ὕδωρ ἐπάνω πάντων τόπων; ˉμˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ πάντων τῶν ἀλόγων δημιουργός ἐστιν ὁ θεός, διατί τὰ μὲν αὐτῶν καθαρὰ τὰ δὲ ἀκάθαρτα ἡ γραφὴ προσηγόρευσεν; ˉμˉζˉʹ. Εἰ ἀποχὴν καὶ μετάληψιν ἀκαθάρτων καὶ καθαρῶν μό νοις διηγόρευται τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις, πῶς καὶ οἱ ἐν τῇ νέᾳ μετά ληψιν καθαρῶν καὶ ἀκαθάρτων γινώσκουσιν; ˉμˉηˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ σκεῦος, ὅπερ ὁ Πέτρος ἐθεάσατο, εἶχε πάντα τὰ καθαρὰ καὶ ἀκάθαρτα πετεινὰ καὶ τετράποδα, πῶς οὐ δείκνυται πάντα","english":"If the house where the Lord was was filled, how did those who broke through the roof and let down the paralytic with his bed not crush those in the house? 45. If a guardian angel has been appointed for each human being, but human beings undergo increase and decrease, as in the case of the flood, what ministry did the angels perform when they were diminished at that time? 46. If the clouds send down rain by divine nod, why do sorcerers hurl excessive hail and rains wherever they wish? 47. If God created our nature mortal, how does he say that God did not make death? 48. If the nature of human beings, being mortal, knows its own limit, but the time of each is not according to some fixed boundary, how was time added to Hezekiah? 49. Our affairs are not governed by hours and days; how did the Lord say at the marriage, \"My hour has not yet come,\" and the evangelist, \"His hour had not yet come\"? 50. If, as some say, the flood did not occur in the whole world, but only where people lived, how does it say that the water rose above all places? 51. If God is the creator of all irrational animals, why did Scripture call some of them clean and others unclean? 52. If abstinence from and partaking of unclean and clean things was prescribed only to the Israelites, how do those in the new covenant also know the partaking of clean and unclean things? 53. If the vessel that Peter saw contained all clean and unclean birds and four-footed animals, how is it not shown that all","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"ἀπαγορεύσας ἀκάθαρτα; ˉμˉθˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ θεῖον τροπῆς ἀνεπίδεκτον, διατί περὶ τῆς χρίσεως τοῦ Σαοὺλ λέγει μεταμεμελεῖσθαι καὶ περὶ τῆς Νινευὶ ὅτι μετενόησεν; ˉνˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ Ἰωάννου βάπτισμα μὴ κατὰ νόμον ἦν, πῶς οὐκ ἦν παράνομον; ˉνˉαˉʹ. Εἰ πιστώσασθαι τοὺς μαθητὰς ὁ Ἰωάννης περὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἠβούλετο, ὅτε ἀπέστειλεν αὐτούς, διατί μὴ κατὰ ἀπόφασιν ἀλλὰ κατὰ πεῦσιν αὐτοὺς τῷ Χριστῷ προσήγαγεν; 6 ˉνˉβˉʹ. Εἰ πάντας ἕλκειν πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ὁ δεσπότης Χριστὸς μετὰ τὴν οἰκείαν ὕψωσιν ἐπηγγείλατο, πῶς οὐ πάντες τῇ εἰς αὐτὸν πίστει προσέδραμον; ˉνˉγˉʹ. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς δαιμονῶσιν οἱ δαίμονες διηνεκῶς κατοικοῦσι, πῶς ἑτέροις κατασκευάζουσι βλάβας; ˉνˉδˉʹ. Εἰ μόνου θεοῦ ἐστιν ἰσχὺν καὶ ζωὴν διδόναι τοῖς σώ μασι, πῶς τοῦτο ποιοῦσιν οἱ δαίμονες ἰσχὺν παρέχοντες, ὥστε δεσμὰ διαρρήσσειν; ˉνˉεˉʹ. Εἰ τῶν μερῶν τῆς κτίσεως οἱ δαίμονες οὐκ ἐξουσιά ζουσι, πῶς τῶν χρησμῶν αὐτῶν παρακουσθέντων τοῖς Ἕλλησι τι μωρίαν ἐπήγαγον; ˉνˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ ἐν τῇ κιβωτῷ δύο δύο καὶ ἑπτὰ ἑπτὰ εἰσηνέχθησαν ἄλογα, πῶς οὐ δʹ καὶ ιδʹ εἰσηνέχθησαν; ˉνˉζˉʹ. Ἐπειδὴ τὴν τῶν πολυομμάτων ὀπτασίαν Ἡσαΐας καὶ Ἰεζεκιὴλ ἐθεάσαντο, ἆρα ἀμφοτέροις ἕν τι ἀποκαλύπτεται; ˉνˉηˉʹ. Διατί ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἰεζεκιὴλ ὁ θεὸς κατακέχρηται τῷ \"υἱὲ ἀνθρώπου\", ὅπερ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων προφητῶν οὐκ ἐποίησε, καὶ εἰ ἀληθῶς ἀνέστη τὰ ὀστᾶ ἃ ἐθεάσατο; ˉνˉθˉʹ. Εἰ καλὰ τὰ τοῦ βίου πάντα, διατί οἱ τούτων ἀπεχόμενοι ἐπαινοῦνται ἐν ταῖς γραφαῖς; ˉξˉʹ. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς στοιχείοις οὐ πρόσεστιν αἴσθησις, διατί Μωυσῆς καὶ Ἡσαΐας τούτοις διαμαρτύρεται; ˉξˉαˉʹ.","english":"having forbidden unclean things? 49. If the divine nature is incapable of change, why does it say concerning Saul's rejection that he regretted it, and concerning Nineveh that he repented? 50. If John's baptism was not according to the law, how was it not unlawful? 51. If John wished to assure the disciples concerning Christ when he sent them, why did he bring them to Christ not by way of declaration but by way of question? 6 52. If the Lord Christ promised to draw all to himself after his own exaltation, how is it that not all ran to faith in him? 53. If the demons dwell continually in those who are demon-possessed, how do they contrive harms for others? 54. If it belongs to God alone to give strength and life to bodies, how do the demons do this, supplying strength so as to break bonds? 55. If the demons have no authority over the parts of creation, how, when their oracles were disregarded, did they bring punishment upon the Greeks? 56. If two by two and seven by seven of the irrational animals were brought into the ark, how is it that four and fourteen were not brought in? 57. Since Isaiah and Ezekiel beheld the vision of the many-eyed ones, is one and the same thing revealed to both? 58. Why does God repeatedly address Ezekiel as \"son of man,\" which he did not do with the other prophets, and did the bones that he saw truly rise? 59. If all things in life are good, why are those who abstain from them praised in the Scriptures? 60. If there is no sensation in the elements, why do Moses and Isaiah call them to witness? 61.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Διατί ὁ κύριος ἔλεγε τῇ Μαριὰμ \"μή μου ἅπτου\" καὶ τοῖς μαθηταῖς μετὰ τοῦτο ἐπέ(τρεπε) τοῦτο ποιεῖν; ˉξˉβˉʹ. Τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις τοῦ μόνα δύο θηρία τε καὶ κτήνη ἐν τῇ κοσμοποιίᾳ παρῆχθαι; ἐπειδὴ τοῦτό τινες τῶν εὐσεβῶν εἰρήκασι. ˉξˉγˉʹ. Ἐπειδὴ πάλαι μὲν οἱ παῖδες τὸ \"ὡσαννὰ\" ὕμνουν, ἡμεῖς δὲ τὸ \"ἀλληλούια\" νῦν, τίς ἐστιν ἡ τούτων ἑρμηνεία; ˉξˉδˉʹ. Εἰ ἄτρεπτον τὸ θεῖον, πῶς βλασφημούμενον καὶ εὐφη μούμενον τὰς ἀμοιβὰς ἀμφοτέροις πολλάκις ἀξίως ἀποδίδωσι; ˉξˉεˉʹ. Εἰ εὐσεβεῖ ζήλῳ τὰς ἐγγαστριμύθους Σαοὺλ ἀνεῖλε, διατί παρ' αὐτῶν ἐζήτει πρόρρησιν, καὶ εἰ τῳόντι ἐκείνη τὸν Σαμουὴλ ἀνήγαγε; ˉξˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ ἄρρεν καὶ θῆλυ χάριν παιδοποιίας ἐκτίσθη, ταύτης ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει οὐ γινομένης, ἆρα ἀνιστάμενοι οἱ ἄνθρωποι τὴν τῶν παιδογόνων ἔχουσι μορίων διάπλασιν; ˉξˉζˉʹ. Εἰ τὴν παράβασιν καὶ τὴν μέλλουσαν τιμωρίαν ὁ Μω σῆς τῷ λαῷ προεφήτευσε, διατί μετ' ᾠδῆς αὐτὰ ἔλεγεν; ˉξˉηˉʹ. Εἰ χρήσιμος καὶ ἀναγκαία ἐστὶν ἡ ἰατρικὴ ἐπιστήμη, διατί μὴ ὑπὸ εὐσεβῶν, ἀλλ' ὑπὸ ἐναντίων ἡ ταύτης γεγένηται εὕρεσις; ˉξˉθˉʹ. Εἰ τὰ τελευτῶντα βρέφη ἔπαινον ἢ ψόγον οὐκ ἔχουσι, τίς ἡ διαφορὰ ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει τῶν βαπτισθέντων καὶ μὴ βαπτισθέντων; ˉοˉʹ. Εἰ δύο οὐρανῶν ὁ Μωσῆς διδάσκει γένεσιν, πῶς ἡ γραφὴ πλείονας οὐρανοὺς μέμνηται; ˉοˉαˉʹ. Εἰ πάντων τελείαν πρόγνωσιν ἔχει ὁ Χριστός, πῶς οὐκ ἔστιν αἴτιος τῆς τοῦ Ἰούδα προδοσίας καὶ τῆς τοῦ Πέτρου ἀρνήσεως; ˉοˉβˉʹ. Εἰ ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ὁ ἥλιος ἀποκρύπτεται, πῶς οὐ σφαῖρα ὁ οὐρανὸς δείκνυται; ˉοˉγˉʹ.","english":"Why did the Lord say to Mary, \"Do not touch me,\" and afterwards permit the disciples to do this? 62. What is the proof that only two wild beasts and cattle were brought forth in the creation of the world? since some of the pious have said this. 63. Since of old the children sang \"Hosanna,\" but we now sing \"Alleluia,\" what is the interpretation of these? 64. If the divine nature is incapable of change, how does it, being blasphemed and being spoken well of, often render recompenses to both worthily? 65. If Saul destroyed the ventriloquists with pious zeal, why did he seek a prediction from them, and did that woman truly bring up Samuel? 66. If male and female were created for the sake of procreation, and this does not occur in the resurrection, do humans when raised have the formation of the procreative parts? 67. If Moses foretold to the people the transgression and the coming punishment, why did he speak these things with a song? 68. If the science of medicine is useful and necessary, why was its discovery made not by the pious but by opponents? 69. If infants who die have neither praise nor blame, what is the difference in the resurrection between those who were baptized and those who were not baptized? 70. If Moses teaches the creation of two heavens, how does the Scripture mention more heavens? 71. If Christ has perfect foreknowledge of all things, how is he not the cause of Judas's betrayal and Peter's denial? 72. If the sun is hidden in the night, how is the heaven not shown to be a sphere? 73.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"Εἰ διὰ τὸ σφαῖραν ὄντα κινεῖσθαι τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐν τόπῳ ἐστί, πῶς διὰ τὸ καμάραν πεπῆχθαι, ἢ ὡς δέρριν ἐκτετάσθαι, οὐκ ἐν τόπῳ ἐστίν; ˉοˉδˉʹ. Εἰ ἡ διαφορὰ κατὰ τὰς μορφὰς χρήσιμος ἐνταῦθα διὰ τὰς χρείας καὶ τὰ συναλλάγματα, πῶς ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει οὐκ ἄχρη στος αὕτη; ˉοˉεˉʹ. Εἰ μόνος ἀθάνατος ὁ θεός, πῶς ἄληθες τὸ \"πάντες μὲν οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα\"; ˉοˉϛˉʹ. Ἐν τῇ δʹ ἡμέρᾳ οἱ φωστῆρες ἐγένοντο καὶ ἐξ αὐτῶν ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν ἡμερῶν συνίσταται. ˉοˉζˉʹ. Πῶς ἆρα δεῖ νοεῖν τὸ \"ἐν τῷ ἡλίῳ ἔθετο τὸ σκήνωμα αὐτοῦ\"; δίδαξον. ˉοˉηˉʹ. Εἰ ὥσπερ Ἰωνᾶς ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τοῦ κήτους γʹ ἡμέρας, οὕτω καὶ ὁ κύριος ἐν τῇ γῇ, πῶς οὐ δοκήσει ὁ θάνατος αὐ τοῦ γέγονε; ˉοˉθˉʹ. Ἐπειδή τινες τὴν τοῦ κυρίου παράδοσιν τῇ τετράδι λέ γουσι γεγονέναι, τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις τῆς ἡμέρας, ἐν ᾗ ἡ παράδοσις γέγονε; ˉπˉʹ. Εἰ μὴ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐστὶν ἡ ψυχή, διατί ἐκχυθέντος ἐκείνου τὸ ζῷον ἀπόλλυται; ˉπˉαˉʹ. Διατί ὁ ζʹ ἀριθμὸς ἐναλλαγὴν δέχεται; καὶ γὰρ ἐν σαβ βάτῳ ὡς τὰ πολλὰ ὁ ἀὴρ μεταβάλλεται","english":"If the heaven, because it is a sphere and moves, is in a place, how is it that because it has been fixed as a vault, or stretched out like a skin, it is not in a place? 74. If the difference of forms is useful here for needs and dealings, why will it be useless in the resurrection? 75. If God alone is immortal, how is \"we shall not all sleep\" true? 76. On the fourth day the luminaries came into being, and from them the number of the days is constituted. 77. How then ought one to understand \"in the sun he set his tabernacle\"? Teach me. 78. If, as Jonah was three days in the belly of the sea-monster, so also the Lord was in the earth, how was his death not merely in appearance? 79. Since some say that the Lord's delivery [of teaching] took place on the fourth day, what is the proof of the day on which the delivery took place? 80. If the blood of man is not the soul, why, when it is poured out, does the living creature perish? 81. Why does the number seven admit of change? For on the Sabbath, for the most part, the air changes.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"καὶ ἡ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἡλικία ἐν τούτῳ τῷ ἀριθμῷ λαμβάνει κτλ. ˉπˉβˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ χαίρειν καὶ γαυριᾶν ἐν τοῖς χαρίσμασιν ἀπηγό ρευται ὡς ὑπερηφανίας ποιητικόν, πῶς οὐκ ἀνωφελῆ τὰ χαρίσματα; ˉπˉγˉʹ. Ἐπειδὴ τὴν τοῦ κόσμου σύστασιν #ϛ ἔτη πολλοὶ λέγου σιν, εἰ ἀληθές ἐστι δίδαξον. ˉπˉδˉʹ. Εἰ τότε ἄφθονος ἕκαστος δείκνυται, ὅτε τοῖς πλησίον εὖ ποιεῖ, πῶς οὐ φθονερὸς ὁ θεός, πάντας δυνάμενος ποιῆσαι θεοὺς καὶ μὴ ποιήσας; ˉπˉεˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ καλὸν ὅτε συγκρίνεται τῷ κακῷ, φαίνεται καλόν, καλὸν δὲ ὁ κόσμος, κακὸν δῆλον ὅτι ὁ μὴ κόσμος. ˉπˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ διὰ τὸ νενικῆσθαι τὸν ἑλληνισμὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ χριστια νισμοῦ ἐλπίδα οὐκ ἔχει ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς ἀνακλήσεως, πῶς πάλαι ὑπὸ τοῦ ἑλληνισμοῦ κτλ; ˉπˉζˉʹ. Εἰ ἕως τῆς τῶν σωμάτων ἀναστάσεως ἡ ψυχὴ τῶν πρακτέων τὰς ἀμοιβὰς οὐ κομίζεται, ἐν ποίᾳ ἆρα ταύτης ἐξετά ζεται καταστάσει μέχρι τῆς ἀναστάσεως; ˉπˉηˉʹ. Καὶ εἰ οὐκ ἔστι πρὸ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῶν ἔργων ἀντί δοσις, ποῖον τῷ λῃστῇ προσγέγονεν ὄφελος εἰς τὸν παράδεισον, αὐτοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς εἰσαχθείσης; ˉπˉθˉʹ. Εἰ τῇ συνεργίᾳ τῶν τοῦ σώματος αἰσθήσεων τῶν αἰσθη τῶν ἡ ψυχὴ λαμβάνει τὴν αἴσθησιν, πῶς οὐκ ἀναισθητεῖ ἡ ψυχὴ χωρισθεῖσα τὴν αἴσθησιν; 9 ˉϟˉʹ. Εἰ κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ καρδίαν ὁ θεὸς τὸν Δαυὶδ εἶναι ἀπε φήνατο, πῶς μοιχείαν καὶ φόνον εἰργάσατο; ˉϟˉαˉʹ. Εἰ πάντων βασιλέων Ἰούδα θερμότερον ζῆλον ὁ Ἰωσίας ἐπεδείξατο, τὰς στήλας συντρίψας καὶ τοὺς ναοὺς καὶ βωμοὺς καταστρέψας, ξίφει ἐτελεύτα καὶ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ ᾐχμαλωτεύθησαν. ˉϟˉβˉʹ. Πῶς οὐκ ἔπταισεν Ἑλισσαῖος δι' ἀρᾶς θανατώσας τοὺς παῖδας; ˉϟˉγˉʹ.","english":"And the age of a man is taken in this number, etc. 82. If rejoicing and exulting in gifts is forbidden as productive of arrogance, how are the gifts not useless? 83. Since many say that the constitution of the world is 6,000 years, teach whether this is true. 84. If each person is shown to be generous when he does good to his neighbors, how is God not envious, who is able to make all men gods and did not make them? 85. If the good appears good when it is compared with evil, and the world is good, then clearly the non-world is evil. 86. If, because Hellenism has been conquered by Christianity, Hellenism has no hope of recall, how is it that long ago by Hellenism, etc.? 87. If until the resurrection of bodies the soul does not receive the rewards of things done, in what state, then, is it examined until the resurrection? 88. And if there is no recompense of works before the resurrection, what benefit accrued to the robber that his soul was brought into paradise? 89. If the soul receives sensation through the cooperation of the senses of the body, how does the soul not lack sensation when it is separated from sensation? 90. If God declared David to be according to his own heart, how did he commit adultery and murder? 91. If Josiah displayed a zeal hotter than all kings of Judah, crushing the pillars and overturning the temples and altars, he died by the sword and his sons were taken captive. 92. How did Elisha not err by killing the children through a curse? 93.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"Εἰ πᾶσα ἀπελήλαται πλάνη διὰ τῆς Χριστοῦ παρουσίας, πῶς διὰ τῶν ἐγγαστριμύθων οἱ δαίμονες φθέγγονται; ˉϟˉδˉʹ. Εἰ οὐδαμοῦ ὀνόματα τῶν δαιμόνων ἡ γραφὴ λέγει, πῶς οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐπὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὸ τοῦ Βεελζεβοὺλ ὡς ἐγνωσμένον ὄνομα ὠνόμαζον; ˉϟˉεˉʹ. Εἰ ταῖς τῶν ἀλόγων θυσίαις θεὸς οὐχ ἥδεται, πῶς πρὸ τοῦ νόμου θεὸς τῷ Νῶε προσέταττε θύειν, καὶ μάλιστα εἰδω λικαὶ μηδέπω οὖσαι θυσίαι; ˉϟˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ διπλοῦν τὸ ἐν Ἠλίᾳ χάρισμα αἰτήσας Ἑλισσαῖος ἠκούσθη, πῶς οὔτε ἁπλᾶ τὰ ἔργα ἐποίησεν; ˉϟˉζˉʹ. Εἰ τότε ἐστὶ τελεία ἀνάστασις, ὅτε ὁ τέλειος ἀνίσταται ἄνθρωπος, πῶς μετὰ τὸ δεσποτικὸν πάθος πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων ἠγέρθη; ˉϟˉηˉʹ. Τί ἑρμηνεύεται τὸ ὑφὶ τὸ γόμορ τὸ νέβελ ὁ στατὴρ ἡ δραχμὴ καὶ τὰ λοιπά; ˉϟˉθˉʹ. Εἰ πρὸ τῆς τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ σφαγῆς ὁ Χριστὸς ἐθαυματούργει, πῶς μετὰ τοῦτο ἔλεγεν ὁ Ἡρώδης, ὅτι \"ὃν ἐγὼ ἀπεκεφάλισα Ἰωάννην, οὗτος ἀνέστη καὶ θαυματουργεῖ\"; ˉρˉʹ. Εἰ ὁ Χριστὸς γεννηθεὶς κατὰ σάρκα ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἐποίησε, πῶς λέγει ἡ γραφή, ὅτι \"οὐδείς ἐστι τῶν γεννηθέντων, ὃς οὐχ ἥμαρτε\"; ˉρˉαˉʹ. Εἰ εὐσεβεῖ λογισμῷ οἱ πατριάρχαι ἑαυτοῖς καὶ τοῖς παισὶν ἐκ τῆς ἰδίας συγγενείας γαμετὰς εἰλήφασι, πῶς Ἰωσὴφ καὶ Μωυσῆς ἀλλοφύλους ἠγάγοντο; 10 ˉρˉβˉʹ. Εἰ πρὸ τῆς παραβάσεως Ἀδὰμ οὐδενὸς ἐθεάσατο θάνατον, πῶς ὃν οὐκ εἶδεν ἀπειληθέντα ἐδειλίασε; ˉρˉγˉʹ. Τί διαφέρουσι πρὸς ἄλληλα τὰ παρὰ τῆς γραφῆς λεγό μενα κρίματα καὶ δικαιώματα καὶ μαρτύρια καὶ νόμος καὶ ἐντο λαὶ δίδαξον. ˉρˉδˉʹ.","english":"If all error has been driven out by the coming of Christ, how do the demons speak through ventriloquists? 94. If Scripture nowhere speaks the names of the demons, how did the Jews, in the time of Christ, name the name of Beelzebub as one that was known? 95. If God takes no pleasure in the sacrifices of irrational animals, how did God command Noah before the law to sacrifice, and especially when idolatrous sacrifices did not yet exist? 96. If Elisha, having asked for a double portion of the grace that was in Elijah, was heard, how did he not perform works that were simple? 97. If the perfect resurrection is then, when the perfect man rises, how were many bodies of the holy ones who had fallen asleep raised after the Lord's passion? 98. What is interpreted by \"hup hi to gomor to nebel ho stater he drachme\" and the rest? 99. If Christ worked miracles before the slaughter of the Baptist, how did Herod say after this, \"John, whom I beheaded, has risen and works miracles\"? 100. If Christ, having been born according to the flesh, committed no sin, how does Scripture say, \"There is no one among those born who has not sinned\"? 101. If the patriarchs, with pious reasoning, took wives for themselves and their children from their own kindred, how did Joseph and Moses marry foreigners? 102. If Adam, before the transgression, had seen no one's death, how did he fear what he had not seen threatened? 103. Teach what difference there is between the judgments and statutes and testimonies and law and commandments spoken of by Scripture. 104.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"Εἰ τὰ νῶτα τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεφόρτωται ὕδασι διὰ τὴν πυρώδη τῶν φωστήρων οὐσίαν, πῶς ἀληθεύουσιν οἱ τοῦτο λέγον τες, τῶν φωστήρων οὐκ ἐν οὐρανῷ κτλ; ˉρˉεˉʹ. Εἰ ὡς βιβλίον ὁ οὐρανὸς εἱλίσσεται καὶ τὰ ἄστρα ὡς φύλλα ἐν τῇ βʹ παρουσίᾳ πίπτουσι, πῶς οὐ παντελὴς ἀπώλεια τοῦ στερεώματος δείκνυται; ˉρˉϛˉʹ Εἰ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν χρείαν ἡ κτίσις γέγονεν, ἡμεῖς δὲ ἄφθαρτοι ἀνιστάμεθα καὶ ἀνενδεεῖς, πῶς οὐκ ἄχρηστος ἡ τῆς κτίσεως ἀφθαρσία; ˉρˉζˉʹ. Εἰ τοῖς ἐν γνώσει καλῶς πραττομένοις ἀμοιβαὶ ἀποδί δονται, πῶς τὰ ἐπὶ Ἡρώδου ἀναιρεθέντα νήπια ἀμοιβῶν ἀπολαύσουσι; ˉρˉηˉʹ. Εἰ ἡ χάρις διὰ τὸ τὰ πταίσματα συγχωρεῖν λέγεται χάρις, πῶς μᾶλλον ἐν τῷ νόμῳ τοῦτο εὑρίσκεται, διὰ τῶν περιρραντηρίων τὰ πταίσματα καθαιρόμενοι; ˉρˉθˉʹ. Εἰ τὸν φοβούμενον ὁ κύριος ἀτελῆ ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ φησίν, πῶς πάλιν ὁ αὐτὸς λέγει \"φοβήθητε δὲ μᾶλλον τὸν ψυχὴν καὶ σῶμα ἐν γεέννῃ ἀπολέσαι δυνάμενον\"; ˉρˉιˉʹ. Εἰ τὰς τῶν ἀλόγων θυσίας ὁ θεὸς προσέταξε γίνεσθαι, ὥστε τὴν περὶ αὐτῶν τιμὴν δείκνυσθαι, πῶς οὐχ","english":"If the backs of heaven are weighed down with waters because of the fiery nature of the luminaries, how do those who say this speak the truth, since the luminaries are not in heaven, etc.? 95. If heaven is rolled up like a book and the stars fall like leaves at the second coming, how is this not shown to be the complete destruction of the firmament? 96. If creation came into being for our need, but we rise incorruptible and without need, how is the incorruptibility of creation not useless? 97. If recompenses are given for things done well in knowledge, how will the infants slain in the time of Herod enjoy recompenses? 98. If grace is called grace because it forgives trespasses, how is this found more in the law, since trespasses were cleansed through the basins of sprinkling? 99. If the Lord says that the one who fears is incomplete in love, how does the same one again say, \"But rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna\"? 100. If God commanded that the sacrifices of irrational animals be offered, so that the honor concerning them be shown, how is it not...","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"Ἕλληνες τιμιώτεροι ἀνθρώπους θύοντες; ˉρˉιˉαˉʹ. Εἰ πρὸς σύστασιν τοῦ ἀληθῆ εἶναι τὴν τῶν ὀρθοδόξων λατρείαν τὴν τῶν θαυμάτων χάριν δεδώρηται ὁ Χριστός, διατί αἱρετικοὶ ἐν αὐταῖς λατρεύσαντες, ἡνίκα κτλ; ˉρˉιˉβˉʹ. Εἰ μελέτῃ λογικὸς ἅπας τὴν γνῶσιν κομίζεται, γνώ σεως δὲ νόμος τῶν μειζόνων προτάττειν τὰ ἥσσονα, πῶς ἡμεῖς ἀνακολούθως πρὸ τῶν ἡσσόνων κτλ; 11 ˉρˉιˉγˉʹ. Εἰ περιττὸν καὶ λεῖπον ἐν τῷ σώματι ἡμῶν ὁ δημιουργὸς οὐ πεποίηκε, διατί ὡς περιττὸν τὸ τῆς ἀκροβυστίας μέ ρος τῶν Ἰουδαίων περιετέμνετο; ˉρˉιˉδˉʹ. Εἰ ὁ τὰ κατὰ δύναμιν προσταχθεὶς ποιῆσαι, ἔπαινον ποιήσας κομίζεται, δῆλον ὅτι ὁ τὰ ὑπὲρ δύναμιν μὴ ποιήσας ἐπιτάγματα ἀνεύθυνός ἐστιν. ˉρˉιˉεˉʹ. Εἰ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐγκλημάτων χώραν μετανοίας ὁ νόμος οὐ δίδωσιν, ἀλλ' ἐπάγει κίνδυνον ἀπαραίτητον, πῶς μοιχείαν καὶ φόνον ὁ Δαυὶδ ἐργασάμενος συγγνώμης ἠξίωται; ˉρˉιˉʹ. Εἰ πᾶσι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἀναγκαία ἡ τῆς εὐχῆς βοή θεια, ταύτης δὲ οὐκ ἐδεῖτο ὁ δεσπότης Χριστός, πῶς συχνότερον ταύτῃ ὁ κύριος ἐκέχρητο; ˉρˉιˉζˉʹ. Εἰ πάντων ἀνθρώπων μίαν ἔχει ἡ σὰρξ μίαν ἡ ψυχὴ οὐσίαν, πῶς ὃ μὲν ἀργὸς ὃ δὲ ὀξὺς κάθηται; ˉρˉιˉηˉʹ. Εἰ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀπίστων πρὸς ἀπάτην εὑρέθη τὰ ᾄσματα, τοῖς δὲ ἐν νόμῳ διὰ τὴν νηπιότητα, διατί οἱ ἐν τῇ χάριτι τούτοις κέχρηνται; ˉρˉιˉθˉʹ. Εἰ συγγνώμην ἡ ἀκούσιος ἔχει ἄγνοια, πῶς οἱ ἐξ ἀγνοίας τὸν Χριστὸν σταυρώσαντες Ἰουδαῖοι ἀνυποίστων δεινῶν ἐπειράθησαν; ˉρˉκˉʹ. Εἰ πάντες μέλλουσιν οἱ ἀποθανόντες ἀναστήσεσθαι, πῶς πληρωθήσεται τὸ κρίνειν ζῶντας καὶ νεκροὺς τὸν κύριον; ˉρˉκˉαˉʹ.","english":"Are the Greeks more honorable than humans who sacrifice? 111. If Christ has granted the grace of miracles for the confirmation of the truth of the worship of the orthodox, why did heretics who worshipped in them, when etc.? 112. If every rational person acquires knowledge by study, and the law of knowledge is to place the greater before the lesser, how is it that we, inconsistently, [place] before the lesser etc.? 113. If the Creator has made nothing superfluous or lacking in our body, why was the part of the foreskin circumcised among the Jews as something superfluous? 114. If one who has been commanded to do what is within his power receives praise for having done it, it is clear that one who has not done commands beyond his power is not liable. 115. If the law gives no room for repentance in the case of crimes, but brings an inexorable danger, how is David, who committed adultery and murder, deemed worthy of forgiveness? 116. If the help of prayer is necessary for all humans, and the Lord Christ did not need it, how did the Lord use it rather frequently? 117. If the flesh of all humans has one substance and the soul one, how is one idle and another sharp? 118. If the songs were invented by the unbelievers for deception, and for those under the law because of their infancy, why have those under grace used them? 119. If involuntary ignorance has forgiveness, how did the Jews who crucified Christ out of ignorance experience unbearable horrors? 120. If all who have died are going to rise, how will the Lord's judging the living and the dead be fulfilled? 121.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"Εἰ οἱ καταλιμπάνοντες πατέρα ἢ μητέρα ἢ γυναῖκα ἢ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τὰ λοιπά, ἑκατονταπλασίονα λήψονται, ἆρα καὶ γυ ναῖκας ρʹ ἀπολήψονται; ˉρˉκˉβˉʹ. Εἰ πρὸς σύστασιν τῆς τῶν σωμάτων ἀναστάσεως ὁ ἀπόστολος τῷ κατὰ τὰ σπέρματα ὑποδείγματι ἐχρήσατο, πῶς οἱ καιόμενοι καὶ τεμνόμενοι ἀναστήσονται; ˉρˉκˉγˉʹ. Εἰ τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ δόξαν καὶ τρυφὴν καὶ ἄνεσιν ἐπίγειον οἱ ἀπόστολοι ὑπέλαβον, διατί ὁ κύριος αὐτοὺς οὐ διωρθώσατο, ἀλλ' εἴρηκεν \"οὐχ ὑμῶν ἐστι γνῶναι\"; 12 ˉρˉκˉδˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ τέλειον τότε νοοῦμεν, ὅτε πάντα κέκτηται τέλεια, πῶς ὁ θεὸς προϋπάρχων τῆς κτίσεως μετ' αὐτὴν τὸ δημιουργὸς προσέλαβεν ὄνομα; ˉρˉκˉεˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ δυνάμει τι εἶναι ἔλαττόν ἐστι τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ, πῶς ὁ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ποιήσεως, ποιητὴς ὢν δυνάμει οὐκ ἐνεργείᾳ, ἐλαττώσει οὐχ ὑποπίπτει; ˉρˉκˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ κλίνειν γόνυ ἐν ταῖς εὐχαῖς τῶν ἑστώτων μᾶλλον θεῷ οἰκειοῖ, διατί ἐν ταῖς κυριακαῖς καὶ τὸ πάσχα ὅλον μέχρι τῆς νʹ γόνυ οὐ κλίνουσιν οἱ εὐχόμενοι; ˉρˉκˉζˉʹ. Εἰ ἐκ τοῦ τάφου Χριστὸς ἀναστὰς τὰ ἐντάφια κατέ λιπε, πῶς μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν οὔτε γυμνὸν οὔτε ἄλλοθεν αὐτὸν ἀμφιασθέντα ἡ γραφὴ ἱστορεῖ; ˉρˉκˉηˉʹ. Εἰ σῶμα παχυμερὲς θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων ἀδύνατον εἰσελθεῖν, πῶς εἰσῆλθεν ὁ κύριος; καὶ εἰ τοῦτο ἐγένετο, πῶς τὸν λίθον ὁ ἄγγελος κυλίσας ἀνέστη ὁ κύριος; ˉρˉκˉθˉʹ. Εἰ πάσης τῆς κτίσεως δεσπότης ὁ θεὸς ὑπάρχει, διατί πρὸς μόνον τὸ ἀνατολικὸν κλῖμα τὰς προσευχὰς ποιοῦμεν καὶ οὐκ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ, κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον; ˉρˉλˉʹ.","english":"If those who leave father or mother or wife or brothers and the rest will receive a hundredfold, will they also receive a hundred wives? 122. If the apostle used the example of seeds for the establishment of the resurrection of bodies, how will those who are burned and cut in pieces rise again? 123. If the apostles supposed the kingdom of Israel to be earthly glory and luxury and ease, why did the Lord not correct them, but said, \"It is not for you to know\"? 124. If we understand the perfect then, when it has acquired all things perfect, how is it that God, existing before creation, received after it the name of Creator? 125. If to be something in potentiality is less than in actuality, how does the maker of the world's creation, being a maker in potentiality and not in actuality, not fall into diminution? 126. If bending the knee in prayers brings one nearer to God more than standing, why on the Lord's days and throughout the whole of Pascha do those who pray not bend the knee until the fiftieth day? 127. If Christ, having risen from the tomb, left behind the burial clothes, how does Scripture record that after the resurrection he was neither naked nor clothed from elsewhere? 128. If a body of coarse parts cannot enter through closed doors, how did the Lord enter? And if this happened, how did the Lord rise after the angel rolled away the stone? 129. If God is the master of all creation, why do we make our prayers toward the eastern region only and not in every place, according to the apostle? 130.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"Εἰ μήτε τῶν ἀπὸ τῶν δένδρων καρπῶν μήτε κρεῶν οἱ πρὸ τοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ ἤσθιον, πῶς Κάϊν καὶ Ἄβελ ὃ μὲν ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν ὃ δὲ ἀπὸ τῶν στεάτων θυσίας προσέφερον; ˉρˉλˉαˉʹ. Εἰ βασιλεία θεοῦ ἐστιν ἡ ἀνάστασις, δίκαιοι δὲ καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ ταύτης ἀξιοῦνται, πῶς ὁ ἀπόστολος πόρνους καὶ μοι χοὺς ταύτης ἀποτυχεῖν ἔφησε; ˉρˉλˉβˉʹ. Τίς ἡ διαφορὰ ἀναθέματος καὶ καταθεματισμοῦ δίδαξον. ˉρˉλˉγˉʹ. Εἰ τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἁπάντων τὸ καλλιστόν ἐστιν ὁ θεός, τὸ δὲ κακυνόμενον τὸ πάντων ἐστὶ χείριστον, πῶς οὐ πάσης τῆς κτίσεως ὁ ἄνθρωπος χείριστον, μόνος κακούμενος; ˉρˉλˉδˉʹ. Εἰ τῆς ἑκάστου βιώσεως προγνώστης ἐστὶν ὁ θεός, διατί μὴ τῶν εὐσεβῶν τὰς ψυχὰς ἐν εὐσθενέσιν εἰσῴκισε σώμασιν; ˉρˉλˉεˉʹ. Εἰ κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ καὶ λοιδορίαν ἀντὶ λοιδορίας ἀντιδιδόναι ὁ ἀπόστολος ἀπηγόρευσε, πῶς αὐτὸς ἐναντία ἐποίησε τὸν ἀρχιερέα ὑβρίσας καὶ τὸν Ἀλέξανδρον; ˉρˉλˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ καὶ κατὰ τόνδε τὸν βίον ἐν εὐπραγίαις, ὡς τοὺς κατὰ τὸν Ἀβραάμ, ὁ θεὸς ἀμείβεται, πῶς καὶ τοὺς εἰδωλολάτρας εὐπραγοῦντας","english":"If neither those before the flood ate the fruits of trees nor meats, how did Cain and Abel offer sacrifices, the one from the fruits and the other from the fat portions? 131. If the resurrection is the kingdom of God, and both the righteous and sinners are deemed worthy of it, how did the apostle say that fornicators and adulterers fail to attain it? 132. Teach me what is the difference between anathema and cursing. 133. If God is the most beautiful of all good things, and that which is abused is the worst of all, how is man not the worst of all creation, being alone abused? 134. If God foreknows the life of each person, why did he not place the souls of the pious in strong bodies? 135. If the apostle forbade returning evil for evil and reviling for reviling, how did he himself do the opposite by reviling the high priest and Alexander? 136. If God also repays with prosperity in this present life, as he did for those in the time of Abraham, how is it that idolaters also prosper","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"μέχρι τῆς αὑτοῦ παρουσίας εἴασε; ˉρˉλˉζˉʹ. Εἰ ὁ τὸ ψεῦδος λαλῶν ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἐστι, πῶς ἔξω μέμψεως ὁ Ἰακὼβ νομισθήσεται τῷ πατρὶ ψευσάμενος καὶ τὴν τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ εὐλογίαν κλέψας; ˉρˉλˉηˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ μὴ πληροῦν τὸν νόμον καὶ ἔξω τῆς Ἱερουσαλὴμ ποιεῖν τι παρανομία νενόμισται, πῶς οἱ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι οὐ παρηνόμουν προσευχόμενοι; ˉρˉλˉθˉʹ. Εἰ ἐξ ἀρχῆς πόλεμοι καὶ ἀκοαὶ πολέμων ἀεὶ γίνονται, πῶς ὁ κύριος ὡς ξένα τινὰ ταῦτα πρὸ τῆς συντελείας εἴρηκε γίνεσθαι; ˉρˉμˉʹ. Εἰ τὰ καθόλου στοιχεῖα τῆς κτίσεως ἐθεοποίησαν ἄν θρωποι, ὁ δὲ θεὸς κατ' αὐτῶν ἀπεφήνατο λέγων \"θεοὶ οἳ τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν οὐκ ἐποίησαν\", ἆρα καὶ τὰ στοιχεῖα ἀπο λοῦνται; ˉρˉμˉαˉʹ. Εἰ ὁ ἀποστέλλων ἔνθα οὐκ ἔστιν ἀποστέλλει, ὁ θεὸς ἀπερίγραπτον ἔχων φύσιν καὶ πανταχοῦ παρών, πῶς ἀποστέλλεται; ˉρˉμˉβˉʹ. Εἰ τὰ Σεραφὶμ ἀτενίσαι εἰς τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ δυνά μενα δόξαν καλύπτει τὰ πρόσωπα, πῶς τὰ πολυόμματα ἀτενίσαι οὐκ ἠδύνατο; ˉρˉμˉγˉʹ. Εἰ διὰ τὴν εἰς Χριστὸν ἀπιστίαν ὑποχείριοι Ἰουδαῖοι χριστιανοῖς ἐγένοντο, πῶς οἱ αἱρετικοὶ καὶ αὐτοὺς τοὺς χριστια νοὺς ὑποχειρίους λαβόντες κολάσει ὑπέβαλον; ˉρˉμˉδˉʹ. Εἰ ὅριον τῇ ψάμμῳ ὁ κύριος τῇ θαλάττῃ ἐποίησε, πῶς ἐν διαφόροις ὑπερβαίνει τόποις; ˉρˉμˉεˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ γινόμενον θέλημα τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ θέλοντος δείκνυσι, πῶς ὁ παντοδύναμος θεὸς πάντας θέλων σωθῆναι οὐ σῴζονται κτλ; 14 ˉρˉμˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ προοίμιον καὶ μεσότης καὶ πέρας ἡ φθορὰ τῶν σωμάτων ἐν τῇ γαμικῇ ὁμιλίᾳ καθέστηκε, πῶς ὁ θεὸς ἄφθαρτος ὢν γαμικῶς συνάπτεσθαι τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐπηγγείλατο; ˉρˉμˉζˉʹ.","english":"Until his own coming? 137. If the one who speaks a lie is of the evil one, how will Jacob be considered blameless by his father, having lied to him and stolen his brother's blessing? 138. If not fulfilling the law and doing something outside Jerusalem is reckoned as lawlessness, how did those in Babylon not act lawlessly when they prayed? 139. If from the beginning wars and rumors of wars always occur, how did the Lord say that these things would happen before the end as if they were something strange? 140. If people deified the universal elements of creation, and God pronounced against them, saying, \"gods who did not make heaven and earth,\" will the elements also perish? 141. If one who sends sends where he is not, how is God, who has an uncircumscribed nature and is present everywhere, sent? 142. If the Seraphim, unable to gaze upon the glory of God, cover their faces, how could the many-eyed ones not gaze? 143. If because of unbelief in Christ the Jews became subject to Christians, how did the heretics take even the Christians themselves subject and subject them to punishment? 144. If the Lord made a boundary for the sand of the sea, how does it overstep in different places? 145. If the will that is done shows the power of the one who wills, how is it that God, who is almighty and wills all to be saved, are they not saved, etc.? 146. If corruption of bodies is the beginning, middle, and end in marital intercourse, how did God, being incorruptible, promise to be joined maritally to the faithful? 147.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"Εἰ ἄνωθεν καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς τὰ περὶ ἡμᾶς θείῳ ὅρῳ ἔχει τὴν σύστασιν, πῶς οὐ μάτην ἐν καιρῷ ἀνομβρίας εὐχόμεθα, τοῦ θείου ὅρου ἅπαντα περιέχοντος; ˉρˉμˉηˉʹ. Εἰ ἡ τοῦ σαββάτου ἀργία τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ καταπαύσεως παραδέδοται, πῶς οὐ χρονικὴν τὴν τοῦ ἐργάζεσθαι ἐνέργειαν δείκνυσι; ˉρˉμˉθˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ ἀναιρούμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀναιροῦντος ἀπόλλυται καὶ πολλὰ τὰ ἐν τῇ κτίσει οὐ μόνον πρὸς ἄλληλα ἀπόλλυσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτοὺς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, πῶς πάντα καλά εἰσιν; ˉρˉνˉʹ. Εἰ τὴν φαυλότητα φθόνῳ τῆς τῶν ἀνθρώπων σωτη ρίας ὁ ἐχθρὸς κατεργάζεται μηχανώμενος, ταῖς μελλούσαις ὑπο βάλλειν κολάσεσι βουλόμενος, πῶς οὐ μὴ φαυλότητι φύσεως τὰ ἄλογα ἀεὶ τὰ φαῦλα μετέρχονται; ˉρˉνˉαˉʹ. Εἰ τὸν νόμον τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις ὁ θεὸς διὰ Μωσέως ἔπεμψε, πῶς ἐν τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ νόμος καὶ νομοθέτης ὁ Μωσῆς ὀνομάζεται; ˉρˉνˉβˉʹ. Εἰ ἀληθινός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ τὴν πρᾶξιν καὶ κλῆ σιν ἐπιδεικνύμενος, Ἐμμανουὴλ δὲ αὐτὸν ἡ γραφὴ προσηγόρευσε, πῶς οὐδαμοῦ Ἐμμανουὴλ ἐκλήθη; ˉρˉνˉγˉʹ. Εἰ τὸ τοὺς γονέας ἀθετεῖν ἀπηγόρευται, πῶς ὁ Χρι στὸς τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ γονέας ἀθετήσας ἀναμάρτητος δείκνυται; ˉρˉνˉδˉʹ. Εἰ πρὸ τοῦ τάφου ἡ Μαρία τὸν κύριον τῷ μύρῳ ἤλειψεν, πῶς ἡμεῖς πρὸ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ἐλαίῳ χριόμεθα, ὕστερον δὲ τῷ μύρῳ σφραγιζόμεθα; ˉρˉνˉεˉʹ. Εἰ δίκαιος ὁ τὸν ἡμαρτηκότα τιμωρούμενος, πῶς δί καιος ὁ θεὸς ὁ διὰ τὸν Ἰωνάθαν καὶ τὸν Δαυὶδ τοιοῦτον λαὸν θανατώσας; ˉρˉνˉϛˉʹ. Εἰ κληρονόμον ἑαυτὸν ὁ Χριστὸς διὰ παραβολῆς ὀνο μάζει, τοῦτον δὲ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐπιγνόντες ἐσταύρωσαν, πῶς ὁ Χρι στὸς καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος ἄγνοιαν αὐτοῖς τοῦ τολμήματος ἐμαρτύρησεν;","english":"If from above and from the beginning the things concerning us have their constitution by divine decree, why do we pray in vain in time of drought, since the divine decree encompasses all things? 145. If the rest of the Sabbath was handed down as a figure of God's rest, how does it not show the activity of working to be temporal? 146. If what is destroyed by the destroyer perishes, and many things in creation destroy not only one another but also men themselves, how are all things good? 147. If the enemy brings about wickedness by the envy of men's salvation, contriving and wishing to subject them to future punishments, how is it that irrational creatures always pursue evil things not by wickedness of nature? 148. If God sent the law to the Israelites through Moses, how is Moses called both law and lawgiver in the divine Scripture? 149. If Christ is true, who displays both deed and calling, and the Scripture addressed him as Emmanuel, how is he nowhere called Emmanuel? 150. If it is forbidden to dishonor one's parents, how is Christ shown to be sinless, having dishonored his own parents? 151. If Mary anointed the Lord with myrrh before the tomb, how is it that we are anointed with oil before baptism, and afterward are sealed with myrrh? 152. If the one who punishes the sinner is just, how is God just, who for the sake of Jonathan and David put to death such a people? 153. If Christ calls himself heir by a parable, and the Jews, having recognized him, crucified him, how did Christ and the apostle testify to their ignorance of the daring deed?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"15 ˉρˉνˉζˉʹ. Εἰ μόνος ὁ Χριστὸς τὸν νόμον ἐξεπλήρωσε, πῶς ἐπορεύοντο ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ἄμεμπτοι ὅ τε Ζαχαρίας καὶ ἡ Ἐλισάβετ; ˉρˉνˉηˉʹ. Εἰ ἄγγελος τοῦ οὐρανοῦ ἀνώτερος καὶ θεοὺς ἡ γραφὴ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ὀνομάζει, πῶς οὐχ ἁρμόζει καὶ τοὺς ἀγγέλους θεοὺς ὀνομάζεσθαι; ˉρˉνˉθˉʹ. Εἰ ὑπεραναβέβηκε μὲν τὸ θεός, ὑποβέβηκε δὲ τὸ ἄνθρωπος, πῶς οὐκ ἀτάκτως ὁ ἄνθρωπος θεὸς προσηγόρευται; ˉρˉξˉʹ. Εἰ δι' ὧν ἡ σάρξ, διὰ τούτων καὶ τὸ αἷμα συνίσταται, διατί τὴν μὲν τῆς σαρκὸς βρῶσιν ὁ θεὸς ἐπιτρέπει, τὴν δὲ τοῦ αἵματος κωλύει; ΘΕΟΔΩΡΗΤΟΥ ΕΠΙΣΚΟΠΟΥ ΠΟΛΕΩΣ ΚΥΡΟΥ, ἑνὸς τῶν ἐν Χαλκηδόνι χλʹ ἁγίων πατέρων, πρὸς τὰς ἐπενεχθείσας αὐτῷ ἐπερωτήσεις παρά τινος τῶν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἐπισκόπων.\n\nΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ εἷς ἐστι θεὸς ὁ θεός, δῆλον ὅτι κατὰ πάντα κέκτηται τὸ ἕν, τὸ ἁπλοῦν ἢ τὸ σύνθετον, τὸ θνητὸν ἢ τὸ ἀθάνατον, τὸ γεννητὸν ἢ τὸ ἀγέννητον, τὸ γεννᾶν ἢ μὴ γεννᾶν· πῶς οὖν, τοῦ μὲν πατρὸς γεννήσαντος καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ μὴ γεννηθέντος, καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ μὲν γεννηθέντος, τοῦ δὲ πατρὸς μὴ γεννηθέντος, καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος μὴ γεννήσαντος μηδὲ γεννηθέντος, δύναται εἷς θεὸς καλεῖσθαι ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, τοσαύτην τοῦ γεννᾶσθαι ἢ τοῦ μὴ γεννᾶσθαι καὶ τοῦ γεννᾶν ἣ μὴ γεννᾶν τὴν ἐναντίωσιν κεκτημένου; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς τῇ συνυπάρξει τῶν θείων τριῶν ὑποστάσεων, τῶν διαφερουσῶν ἀλλήλων οὐ τῇ οὐσία, ἀλλὰ τοῖς τῆς ὑπάρξεως τρόποις· ἡ διαφορὰ δὲ τῶν τῆς ὑπάρξεως τρό πων οὐ διαιρεῖ τὸ ἓν τῆς οὐσίας.","english":"15. If only Christ fulfilled the law, how did both Zacharias and Elizabeth walk blamelessly in the law? 146. If an angel of heaven is higher and the Scripture calls men gods, how does it not also befit angels to be called gods? 147. If \"God\" is transcendent and \"man\" is subordinate, how is man not improperly called god? 148. If blood is constituted by the same things as flesh, why does God permit the eating of flesh but forbid that of blood? Of Theodoret, Bishop of the city of Cyrrhus, one of the 630 holy fathers at Chalcedon, in answer to the questions put to him by one of the bishops from Egypt.\n\n1. Question. If God is one God, it is clear that in all respects he possesses the one, whether simple or composite, mortal or immortal, begotten or unbegotten, begetting or not begetting. How then, since the Father has begotten and the Son has not begotten, and the Son has been begotten and the Father has not been begotten, and the Spirit has neither begotten nor been begotten, can the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit be called one God, when there is such opposition between being begotten and not being begotten, and between begetting and not begetting? Answer. God is one by the co-existence of the three divine hypostases, which differ from one another not in essence but in the modes of existence; and the difference of the modes of existence does not divide the oneness of the essence.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":18,"ref":"p18","source":"καὶ ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἀδὰμ καὶ τῆς Εὔας καὶ τοῦ Σὴθ εἷς ἐστι μὲν ὁ τῆς οὐσίας λόγος (ψυχὴ γὰρ λογικὴ καὶ σῶμα θνητόν), τρόποι δὲ τῆς ὑπάρξεως διάφοροι (ὁ μὲν γὰρ Ἀδὰμ γέγονεν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, ἡ δὲ Εὔα ἐκ τῆς πλευ ρᾶς, ὁ δὲ Σὴθ ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος) καὶ ἐν τοῖς διαφόροις τῆς ὑπάρ ξεως τρόποις μένει ὁ τῆς οὐσίας λόγος εἷς, ἀδιαίρετός τε καὶ ἀπαράλλακτος, οὕτως καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ ταὐτότητι τῆς τῶν προσώπων οὐσίας εἶς θεὸς πεπίστευται ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα· οὐδὲν γὰρ συντελεῖ πρὸς τὸν τῆς οὐσίας λόγον ὁ τρόπος τῆς ὑπάρξεως. τὰ μὲν οὖν ἐπὶ τῶν τριῶν θείων ὑπο στάσεων ὡσαύτως ἀπαραλλάκτως λεγόμενα, ἐν τούτοις νόει τὸ ἓν τῆς οὐσίας· τὰ δὲ μὴ ὡσαύτως, ταῦτα νόει τῷ τρόπῳ τῆς τῶν προσώπων ὑπάρξεως.\n\nΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἔχει ὁ θεὸς ὑπόστασιν ὑπάρχουσαν ἢ καὶ βουλὴν ἐνυπάρχουσαν καὶ υἱὸν ἐνυπάρχοντα, πῶς ἐκ τοσούτων συγκείμενος ἁπλοῦς ὀνομάζεται; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ θεὸς ὥσπερ ὅλος ἐστὶ πανταχοῦ καὶ ὅλος ἐν ἑκάστῳ καὶ ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ τούτου πίστιν μὲν ἔχομεν, ζήτησιν δὲ οὐκ ἔχομεν, οὕτως καὶ τὸ ἁπλοῦν αὐτοῦ ὅλον υἱός ἐστι καὶ ὅλον υἱὸν ἔχον ἐστὶ καὶ ὅλον βουλή ἐστι καὶ ὅλον βουλὴν ἔχον ἐστίν· οὐ γὰρ ἔστι κατὰ τὴν κτιστὴν φύσιν ὁ θεός, ὥστε τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν καὶ τὸ ἔχειν ἵνα νοηθῇ ἐν συνθέσει, ὥσπερ ἡ φύσις. ἀλλ' ὡς ὑπὲρ τὴν φύσιν ὤν, οὕτως καὶ τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν καὶ τὸ ἔχειν ἐστὶν ὑπὲρ τὴν σύνθεσιν. Γʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"And just as in the case of Adam and Eve and Seth there is one principle of essence (for a rational soul and a mortal body), but the modes of existence are different (for Adam came to be from the earth, Eve from the side, and Seth from seed), and in the different modes of existence the one principle of essence remains, indivisible and invariable, so also in the case of God, by the identity of the essence of the persons, Father and Son and Holy Spirit are believed to be one God; for the mode of existence contributes nothing to the principle of essence. Therefore, the things said alike and invariably of the three divine hypostases—in these understand the oneness of essence; but the things not said alike—understand these by the mode of existence of the persons.\n\n2. Question. If God has a hypostasis that exists, or also a counsel that is inherent, and a Son that is inherent, how is he, composed of so many things, called simple? Answer. Just as God is wholly everywhere and wholly in each thing and in himself, and of this we have faith but do not have inquiry, so also his simplicity is wholly Son and wholly having a Son and wholly counsel and wholly having counsel; for God is not according to created nature, so that his being and his having should be understood in composition, as is the case with nature. But as he is above nature, so also his being and his having are above composition. 3. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":19,"ref":"p19","source":"Εἰ ἁπλοῦν μὲν τὸ καθ' ἑαυτό, ὡς ἐπὶ τῶν κατὰ γράμματα στοιχείων, οἷον ἰῶτα, σύνθετον δὲ τὸ μεθ' ἑτέρου, οἷον πῖ, καὶ τῷ τῆς αὐτῆς εἶναι οὐσίας ἀμφότερα, τό τε ἰῶτα καὶ τὸ ἐκ τῶν τριῶν ἰῶτα συγκείμενον πῖ, οὐκ ἀφαιρεῖται τοῦ ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων συγκειμένου τὸ σύνθετον, πῶς ὁ θεὸς ἀσύνθετος λέ γεται, τὴν ἐκ δύο προσώπων ὁμοουσίων νοουμένων (πατρὸς λέγω καὶ υἱοῦ) καὶ ἑνὸς προσώπου, ἰδιαζούσης οὐσίας ἐκ τοῦ προχείρου ὑπόνοιαν διδόντος (τοῦ πνεύματος φημὶ τοῦ ἁγίου), τὴν σύνθε σιν ἔχων, καὶ εἷς καλεῖται καὶ ἀπερίγραφος, τοσαύτης καὶ τοιαύτης οὔσης τῆς τῶν ὑποστάσεων αὐτοῦ, εἴτουν τῶν προσώπων, δια κρίσεώς τε καὶ διαιρέσεως; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ ἰῶτα καὶ τὸ πῖ κατ' οὐσίαν ἀλλήλων οὐδὲν διαφέρουσι· γραμμὴ γὰρ ὑπάρχει ἑκάτερον, γραμμὴ δὲ γραμμῆς οὐδὲν διαφέρει· διαφέρει δὲ τὸ ἰῶτα τοῦ πῖ τῇ τοιᾷδε θέσει. καθ' ἣν ἐκεῖνο μὲν ἰῶτα, τοῦτο δὲ πῖ ὑπάρχει. καὶ τὸ μὲν πῖ. εἰ γραμμή ἐστιν, ἕν ἐστιν· εἰ δὲ πῖ ἐστι, τριάς ἐστι καὶ σύνθετον καὶ γενητόν· κατὰ μέρος γὰρ καὶ χρονικῇ παρατάσει τὸ εἶναι πῖ ὑπέστη ὑπὸ τοῦ συντεθεικότος αὐτὸ καὶ πεποιηκότος. χρὴ οὖν τὸν κατά τινα φυσικὴν ἀναλογίαν θεωρεῖν βουλόμενον τὸν ὑπὲρ τὴν φύσιν ὄντα, ἐκεῖνα μόνα λαβεῖν ἐκ τῆς ἀναλογίας, τὰ ἁρμόττοντα τῷ διὰ τῆς ἀναλογίας θεωρουμένῳ. οἷον τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ τρεῖς πρόσεστι τῷ πῖ γενητῶς τε καὶ συνθέτως, τῷ δὲ θεῷ ἀγενήτως τε καὶ ἀσυνθέτως· ὁ γὰρ μὴ ἔχων τὸν πεποιηκότα καὶ συντεθεικότα. οὔτε γενητός ἐστιν οὔτε σύνθετος·","english":"If that which is simple in itself, as in the case of written letters—for example, iota—is one thing, and that which is composite with another, like pi, is another, and both are of the same essence, both the iota and the pi composed of three iotas, the composite character is not taken away from what is composed of both, how is God said to be incomposite, having composition from two persons understood as consubstantial (I mean the Father and the Son) and one person of a distinct essence, giving an easy occasion for suspicion (I mean the Holy Spirit), and is called one and uncircumscribed, when such and so great is the distinction and division of his hypostases, that is, of his persons? Answer. Iota and pi differ in nothing from each other in essence; for each of them is a line, and a line differs in nothing from a line; but iota differs from pi by its particular position, according to which the one is iota and the other is pi. And pi, if it is a line, is one; but if it is pi, it is a triad and composite and generated; for it received its being as pi in parts and by temporal extension from the one who composed and made it. It is necessary, then, for one who wishes to contemplate by some natural analogy the one who is above nature, to take from the analogy only those things which are fitting to what is contemplated through the analogy. For example, the one and the three belong to pi in a generated and composite way, but to God in an ungenerated and incomposite way; for he who does not have a maker and composer is neither generated nor composite.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":20,"ref":"p20","source":"διὸ ἐπὶ μὲν θεοῦ τὴν ἀίδιον λέγομεν συνύπαρξιν, οὐκέτι δὲ καὶ σύνθεσιν, ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ πῖ τὴν σύνθεσιν διὰ τὴν κατὰ μέρος αὐτοῦ γένεσιν. εἷς τοίνυν ἐστὶν ὁ θεός, ἡ τριὰς τῇ μονάδι τῆς οὐσίας, χωρὶς πάσης κατὰ τοῦτο διαιρέσεώς τε\n\nκαὶ διακρίσεως, ὥσπερ ἓν τὸ πῖ τῇ μονάδι τῆς γραμμῆς, χωρὶς πάσης κατὰ τοῦτο διαιρέσεώς τε καὶ διακρίσεως. διαφορὰ δέ ἐστιν ἐν μὲν τῇ ἁγίᾳ τριάδι κατὰ τοὺς τρόπους τῆς τῶν ὑποστάσεων ὑπάρξεως, ἐν δὲ τῷ πῖ κατὰ τὴν ποιὰν θέσιν τῆς γραμμῆς.\n\nΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῶν θείων ὑποστάσεων ἡ ἕνωσίς ἐστιν ἀδιαίρετος, πῶς δύνανται τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις καὶ τρία ὀνομάζεσθαι πρόσωπα καὶ οὐχὶ μᾶλλον μία ὑπόστασις, τριώνυμος, τριπρόσωπος; Ἀπόκρισις. Τῶν θείων ὑποστάσεων τὸ μὲν τῆς οὐσίας ἕν ἐστιν ἀδιαίρετον, τὸ δὲ αὐτῶν τρεῖς ἐστι διαιρετόν. διὸ αἱ τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις ἰδιάζουσιν ὀνόμασίν εἰσι τρεῖς. καὶ τὴν ὑπόστασιν, ἣν καλοῦμεν πατέρα, οὐκέτι τὴν αὐτὴν ὑπόστασιν καλοῦμεν καὶ υἱόν, ἀλλ' ἄλλην· τὴν γὰρ τριάδα τῶν ὀνομάτων τῆς τριάδος λέγομεν εἶναι τῶν ὑποστάσεων, οὐχὶ τῆς μονάδος αὐτῶν. διὸ εἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς τῷ ἑνὶ καὶ ἀδιαιρέτῳ τῆς οὐσίας, τρία δὲ τὰ πρόσωπα τῇ διαιρέσει τῶν ὑποστάσεων.","english":"Therefore in the case of God we speak of eternal co-existence, but no longer of composition; whereas in the case of pi we speak of composition because of its generation part by part. One, then, is God—the Trinity in the unity of the essence, apart from all division and distinction in this respect—just as pi is one in the unity of the line, apart from all division and distinction in this respect. And there is a difference: in the Holy Trinity, according to the modes of the subsistence of the hypostases; in pi, according to the particular position of the line.\n\n4. Question. If the union of the divine hypostases is indivisible, how can three hypostases and three persons be named, and not rather one hypostasis, three-named, three-personed? Answer. Of the divine hypostases, the one of the essence is indivisible, but the three of them is divisible. Therefore the three hypostases are three by their distinctive names. And the hypostasis which we call Father, we no longer call the same hypostasis also Son, but another; for we say that the triad of names belongs to the triad of hypostases, not to their unity. Therefore God is one by the one and indivisible essence, but the persons are three by the division of the hypostases.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":21,"ref":"p21","source":"Εʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ μὲν θεὸς τῆς οὐσίας, τὸ δὲ πατὴρ τοῦ προσώπου ἐστὶ δηλωτικόν, πῶς ταὐτὸν τὸ λέγειν υἱὸν θεοῦ τῷ λέγειν υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός; Ἀπόκρισις. Κἂν διεζευγμένως λέγωμεν τὸν υἱὸν ποτὲ μὲν υἱὸν τοῦ πατρός, ποτὲ δὲ υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ διεζευγμένως αὐτόν· οὐδέποτε νοοῦμεν. υἱὸς οὖν ἐστι τοῦ πατρὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ κατ' οὐ σίαν θεοῦ. ταὐτὸν δὲ τὸ λέγειν υἱὸν τοῦ πατρὸς τῷ λέγειν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐπειδὴ εἴ τί ἐστι τοῦ προσώπου, τοῦτό ἐστι καὶ τῆς τοῦ προσώπου οὐσίας. ςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ κατὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν φύσιν, εἴ τι γέννημα, τοῦτο τῷ γεννήσαντι ὁμοούσιον, πῶς οὐχὶ κατ' αὐτὴν εἴ τι γεγέν νηται, μεθυπάρχει τοῦ γεννήσαντος; εἰ δὲ μὴ τὸ δεύτερον, οὐδ' ἄρα τὸ πρῶτον ὁμοίως ἡμῖν ἐπὶ τῆς θείας γεννήσεως νοηθήσεται. Ἀπόκρισις. Ἡμεῖς ὡς προηγουμένην τῆς γεννήσεως ἔχοντες τὴν ὕπαρξιν, μετὰ τὴν ὕπαρξιν γεννῶμεν. ὁ δὲ θεὸς ἅμα τῷ ὑπάρχειν ἐγέννησε. διὸ οὐκ ἔστι παρὰ τῷ θεῷ μεθύπαρξις γεννήματος, ἐπειδὴ οὐδὲ προΰπαρξις γεννήσεως. Ζʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἡ θεία οὐσία μία καθέστηκε, πῶς τὴν ἐνανθρώπησιν καὶ τὴν ἕνωσιν καὶ τὴν ἐνοίκησιν ἐν τῇ οἰκονομίᾳ μόνῳ τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ τινὲς περιάπτουσι, τὸ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου ἀδιαίρετον ἔχοντος; πῶς οὖν τὰ τῇ ὁμοουσίῳ τριάδι διὰ τὸ ἀδιαίρετον διαφέροντα τῷ ἑνὶ προσώπῳ, τουτέστι τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ, ἀκολούθως ἁρμόττειν δυνήσεται; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἡ μὲν θεία οὐσία μία καθέστηκε καὶ τὰ αὐτῆς πάντα κοινὰ τῶν ἐχόντων ταύτην, αἱ δὲ θεῖαι ὑποστάσεις εἰσὶ τρεῖς, ὧν τὰ ἰδικὰ διῃρημένως ὑπάρχει ἑκάστῃ.","english":"21. Question. If \"God\" is indicative of essence, but \"Father\" of person, how is saying \"Son of God\" the same as saying \"Son of the Father\"? Answer. Even though we sometimes say \"Son of the Father\" and sometimes \"Son of God,\" we never understand him as separated. The Son is therefore Son of the Father, who is God by essence. And saying \"Son of the Father\" is the same as saying \"Son of God,\" since whatever belongs to the person belongs also to the essence of the person. 6. Question. If according to our nature whatever is begotten is consubstantial with its begetter, how is it that according to that nature whatever has been begotten does not exist after its begetter? And if the second is not so, then neither will the first be understood by us in the same way in the case of the divine generation. Answer. We, having existence as prior to generation, beget after existence. But God begat together with existing. Therefore there is no subsequent existence of the begotten in God, since there is no prior existence of generation. 7. Question. If the divine essence is one, how do some attribute the incarnation and the union and the indwelling in the economy to God the Word alone, since the Word of God has his indivisibility with the Father and the Spirit of God? How then can the things that belong to the consubstantial Trinity, being distinguished by their indivisibility, consistently befit the one person, that is, God the Word? Answer. The divine essence is one, and all its properties are common to those who possess it; but the divine hypostases are three, of which the individual properties belong separately to each.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":22,"ref":"p22","source":"ἐπειδὴ οὖν ἡ ἔνσαρκος οἰκονομία ἰδική ἐστι τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου, εἰς φανέρωσιν γὰρ αὐτοῦ τῆς σαρκὸς ἐγένετο ἡ λῆψις, διὰ τοῦτο ἀκολούθως προσάπτωμεν τῷ θεῷ λόγῳ κατὰ τὸν τρόπον τῆς ἀντιδείξεως τὰ τῆς οἰκονομίας. διὰ τοῦτο δὲ καὶ ἡ θεία γραφὴ εἰς τὸν πατέρα καὶ εἰς τὴν οἰκονο μίαν διῃρημένως ποιεῖ τοὺς λόγους, ὡς ὅταν λέγῃ \"ὁ πατήρ με ἀγαπᾷ\" καὶ \"ὁ πατήρ, ὃς δέδωκέ μοι\". ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ εἰς τὴν οἰκονομίαν διαιρεῖ τοὺς λόγους, ὡς τὸ \"ἐξέ βαλεν αὐτὸν εἰς τὴν ἔρημον τὸ πνεῦμα πειρασθῆναι ὑπὸ τοῦ δια βόλου\" καὶ τὸ \"εἰ ἐγὼ ἐν πνεύματι θεοῦ ἐκβάλλω τὰ δαιμόνια\". εἰς δὲ τὸν θεοῦ λόγον καὶ εἰς τὴν οἰκονομίαν οὐδαμῶς ποιεῖ τὴν τοιαύτην διαίρεσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀντιδείξεως περὶ ἑνὸς καὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ προσώπου ποιεῖ ἀδιαιρέτως τὴν διήγησιν τῶν ἑκάστῃ φύσει διῃρημένως ἁρμοττόντων. Ηʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Οἱ λέγοντες ἡνῶσθαι τῇ τοῦ δούλου μορφῇ τὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ κυρίως καὶ ὄντως ὄντα υἱὸν τῇ ἀντιδιαστολῇ τοῦ μὴ ἀληθῶς μηδὲ κυρίως μηδὲ ὄντως ὄντος υἱοῦ, υἱοῦ δὲ ὅμως καὶ τούτου καλουμένου, πῶς δυάδι υἱῶν οὐ λατρεύουσι, κἂν ἑτεροούσια τὰ δύο τυγχάνουσι πρόσωπα; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἡ τοιαύτη γεγένηται ἀντιδιαστολὴ πρὸς σαφήνειαν τοῦ τίς τί τίνι ἔδωκε, τουτέστιν ὅτι ἡ μορφὴ τοῦ θεοῦ λαβοῦσα τὴν τοῦ δούλου μορφὴν ἐν τάξει ἑαυτῆς, ἔδειξεν αὐτὴν τῇ κτίσει. διὸ καὶ ἡ θεία γραφὴ ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς γνώσεως ὁρμωμένη τὸν ἕνα κύριον","english":"Since, then, the incarnate economy is the Word of God's own, for the taking of flesh came about for his manifestation, for this reason we fittingly attach the things of the economy to God the Word in the manner of reciprocal reference. And for this reason divine Scripture also makes its statements separately, sometimes with reference to the Father and sometimes to the economy, as when it says \"the Father loves me\" and \"the Father who has given me.\" Likewise it also divides its statements with reference to the Spirit and to the economy, as in \"the Spirit drove him out into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil\" and \"if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God.\" But with reference to the Word of God and to the economy it nowhere makes such a division; rather, in the manner of reciprocal reference, concerning one and the same person it gives the account indivisibly of the things that separately belong to each nature. 8. Question. Those who say that the Son who truly and properly and really is, is united to the form of the servant, by way of distinction from the one who is not truly nor properly nor really a son, though he too is called a son—how do they not worship a duality of sons, even if the two persons are of different essence? Answer. Such a distinction has been made for the sake of clarity as to who gave what to whom, that is, that the form of God, having received the form of the servant in its own order, showed it to creation. Therefore divine Scripture also, starting from this knowledge, the one Lord","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":23,"ref":"p23","source":"Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν καταγγέλλει ποτὲ μὲν κατὰ τὴν ἄθετον αὐτοῦ υἱότητα, ὅταν λέγῃ \"δι' οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας ἐποίησε\", ποτὲ δὲ κατὰ τὴν τιθεμένην, ὅταν λέγῃ \"ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν υἱῷ, ὃν ἔθετο κληρονόμον πάντων, δι' οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας ἐποίησε\". [ταῦτα] τῇ τοῦ δούλου μορφῇ οὐχ ἁρμόττει. διὰ τοῦτο τῇ τοιαύτῃ ἀντιδιαστολῇ ἑκάστῃ μορφῇ τὸ ἁρμόζον ἀποδέδοται· εἰ γὰρ μὴ κατ' ἄλλην φύσιν υἱὸς ἄθετος ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ κατ' ἄλλην θετός, καθὼς ὁ τῆς ἀντιδιαστολῆς βούλεται λόγος, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὴν αὐτὴν φύσιν ἐστὶν ἄθετος ὁ υἱὸς καὶ θετὸς ὁ Χριστός–ἀδύνατον γὰρ τὰς γραφικὰς φωνάς, καταγγελλούσας τὸν Χριστὸν ἄθετον καὶ θετὸν [τὸν] υἱόν, ἀναιρεθῆναι–, ἀνάγκη τὸν θεὸν λόγον κατὰ τὴν ἀντιδιαστολὴν τοῦ ἀληθῶς καὶ κυρίως καὶ ὄντως καὶ τοῦ μήτε ἀληθῶς μήτε κυρίως μήτε ὄντως νοεῖν υἱόν· εἰ δὲ τοῦτο προδήλως ἄτοπον, ἀδιάβλητος ἄρα ἡ τῶν φύσεων ἀντιδιαστολὴ ἐπὶ τῇ δυάδι αὐτῶν, ὡς ταύτης οὖσα κατασκευαστική. τὸ δὲ ἐν τάξει τῆς μορφῆς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁρᾶσθαι τὴν τοῦ δούλου μορφὴν καὶ μὴ ἐν τῷ οἰκείῳ προσώπῳ πάσης τῆς κατὰ πρόσωπον αὐθεντίας τε καὶ τι μῆς, δυάδος υἱῶν ἐστιν ἀναιρετικόν· τὸ γὰρ ἐν τάξει ταὐτόν ἐστι τῷ τάξαντι προσώπῳ καὶ οὐ φύσει. Θʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ περιέχον μεῖζον μέν ἐστι τοῦ περιεχο μένου κατ' οὐσίαν, ἧττον δὲ κατ' ἀξίαν, οἷον οὐρανὸς καὶ γῆ ἀγγέ λων τε καὶ ἀνθρώπων, οἶκος οἰκούντων σῶμά τε ψυχῆς, περιέχει δὲ τὸ πᾶν ὁ θεός, πῶς οὐκ ἔστιν ἥττων τοῦ παντὸς τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἀξίας; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ λόγος οὗτος οὐκ ἔστι καθόλου. διὸ οὔτε ὑγιῶς ἠρωτήθη·","english":"He proclaims Jesus Christ sometimes according to his unposited sonship, when he says \"through whom also he made the ages,\" and sometimes according to the posited one, when he says \"in these last days he spoke to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the ages.\" These things do not fit the form of a servant. For this reason, by such a distinction, what is fitting has been assigned to each form. For if Christ is an unposited son according to one nature and a posited one according to another, just as the account of the distinction intends, but the son is unposited and the Christ posited according to the same nature—for it is impossible that the scriptural utterances, which proclaim Christ an unposited and a posited son, be abolished—then it is necessary that God the Word, according to the distinction of the truly and properly and really [son] and of the one who is neither truly nor properly nor really [son], be understood as son. But if this is manifestly absurd, then the distinction of the natures in their duality is beyond reproach, as being that which establishes it. And that the form of a servant is seen in the rank of the form of God, and not in its own person, of all authority and honor according to person, is destructive of a duality of sons; for \"in the rank of\" is the same as \"in the person that ranked,\" and not in nature. 9. Question. If the containing is greater in essence than the contained, but less in worth, as heaven and earth than angels and men, a house than those who dwell in it, a body than a soul, and God contains the whole, how is he not less than the whole in the account of worth? Answer. This argument is not universal. Therefore it was not soundly asked either.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":24,"ref":"p24","source":"ὧν γὰρ τὸ ἐναντίον διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν ἐνδέχεται εὑ ρεθῆναι, ταῦτα ὡς μὴ ἔχοντα τὸ ἀναγκαῖον οὐδὲ τὸ πιστὸν ἔχει ἔστι γάρ τινα περιεχόμενα ἥσσονα ὄντα τῶν περιεχόντων καὶ τῇ οὐσίᾳ καὶ τῇ ἀξίᾳ, ὡς τὰ γίγαρτα τῶν ὀπωρῶν. ἔτι δὲ τὰ λε χθέντα περιεκτικὰ τῷ εἶναι περιέχει τὰ περιεχόμενα, ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῇ βουλήσει περιέχει τὸ πᾶν. καὶ τὰ μὲν ἄλλα περιεχόμενα χρῄζουσι καὶ αὐτὰ τοῦ περιέχοντος, ὁ δὲ θεὸς οὐ χρῄζει τοῦ περιέχοντος αὐτόν. καὶ τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις περιεχομένοις τὸ εἶναι καὶ τὸ διαμένειν οὐκ ἔστιν ἐκ τῶν περιεχόντων αὐτά, τῷ δὲ παντὶ ἀμφότερα ὑπάρχει ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ. καὶ τὰ μὲν λεχθέντα περιεκτικὰ διὰ τὰ περιεχόμενα ὑπάρχουσιν, ὁ δὲ θεὸς οὐ διὰ τὸ πᾶν ὑπάρχει. διὸ μείζων ὁ θεὸς τοῦ παντός, ὥσπερ τῇ οὐσίᾳ, οὕτω καὶ τῇ ἀξίᾳ. Ιʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ περιέχον ἐπὶ φρουρᾷ καὶ συντηρήσει ἐστὶ τοῦ περιεχομένου, πῶς ὁ θεὸς περιέχων τὸ πᾶν οὐκ ἐπὶ φρουρᾷ τοῦ κακοῦ καὶ διαμονῇ περιέχει τὸ πᾶν; καὶ γὰρ ἐν τῷ μέρει τοῦ παντὸς τὸ κακὸν θεωρεῖται. Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ πᾶν ἔργον ἐστὶ τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ τηρῶν ὁ θεὸς τὸ πᾶν, τὸ ἔργον αὑτοῦ τηρεῖ. καὶ ὥσπερ οὐκ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεός τι φύσει κακόν, οὕτως οὐδὲ τηρεῖ τι φύσει κακόν. ΙΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Ἐπειδὴ συνεχῶς ὁ κύριος υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ οὐχὶ τῆς ἀνθρώπου ἑαυτὸν ὀνομάζει, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πειρῶνται οἱ ἄπιστοι δεικνύναι ὡς ἐκ γαμικῆς συναφείας ὁ δεσποτικὸς γέγονε τόκος–τὸ γὰρ \"τοῦ ἀνθρώπου\" φασὶν οὐ θηλείας ἐστὶν ἀλλ' ἄρρενος ὄνομα–, τίσι λόγοις χρησάμενοι τὴν τοιαύτην λοιδορίαν μα ταίαν ἐλέγξομεν; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"For those things whose opposite can be found through the same means, these, as not having what is necessary, do not have what is credible either. For there are certain things that are contained which are lesser than those that contain them, both in substance and in worth, as the seeds of fruits are lesser than the fruits. Furthermore, the things said to be containing contain the contained by their very being, but God contains all things by his will. And the other contained things themselves need the container, but God does not need what contains him. And for the other contained things, their being and their remaining do not come from the things that contain them, but for the whole, both belong to it from God. And the things said to be containing exist because of the things contained, but God does not exist because of the whole. Therefore God is greater than the whole, both in substance and in worth. 10. Question. If that which contains exists for the guarding and preservation of what is contained, how does God, containing the whole, not contain the whole for the guarding and continuance of evil? For evil is observed in a part of the whole. Answer. The whole is the work of God, and God, guarding the whole, guards his own work. And just as God did not make anything evil by nature, so he does not guard anything evil by nature. 11. Question. Since the Lord continually calls himself son of man and not of woman, and for this reason the unbelievers try to show that the lordly offspring came from a marital union—for \"of man,\" they say, is not the name of a female but of a male—with what arguments shall we refute such empty slander? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":25,"ref":"p25","source":"Εἰ ἐκ γαμικῆς συναφείας ὁ δεσποτικὸς τόκος ἐγένετο, οὐκ ἂν εἶπεν ἡ γραφὴ τὸ \"ὡς ἐνομίζετο υἱὸς τοῦ Ἰωσήφ\"· τὸ γὰρ \"ὡς ἐνομίζετο\" ἐπὶ τῶν ἐκ γαμικῆς συναφείας τικτομένων χώραν οὐκ ἔχει, τὸ δὲ διὰ μιᾶς ἀσαφοῦς τε καὶ ἐλλιποῦς φωνῆς πάσας τὰς φωνὰς ἐκείνας τὰς προδήλως καταγγελ λούσας τὸν Χριστὸν ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς παρθέ νου γεγεννημένον ἀνατρέπειν τῶν ἀτοπωτάτων ἐστί. πρὸς ἀναίρεσιν δὲ τῆς ματαίας αὐτῶν ἐπιχειρήσεως κεχρήμεθα λόγοις τοιού τοις· εἰ διὰ τὸ μὴ εἰπεῖν τὸν Χριστὸν ἑαυτὸν υἱὸν τῆς ἀνθρώ που οὐκ ἔστι διὰ τοῦτο τῆς ἀνθρώπου, δῆλον ἄρα καὶ διὰ τὸ μὴ εἰπεῖν ἑαυτὸν υἱόν τινος ἀνθρώπου. εἰ δὲ τινὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἔστιν υἱὸς ὁ Χριστός, ἐξ ἀνάγκης οὐδὲ υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου ἐστίν. ἔτι δέ, εἰ καθώσπερ υἱὸς τοῦ Ἠλὶ ἐχρηματίσθη ὁ Ἰωσὴφ κατὰ τὸν νόμον χωρὶς γαμικῆς συναφείας, τοῦ θεοῦ τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ βουληθέντος δοῦναι τὸν Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸν τῷ Ἠλί, τί ἄτοπον οὕτως καὶ τὸν Χριστὸν\n\nδοῦναι υἱὸν τῷ Ἰωσὴφ χωρὶς γαμικῆς συναφείας; τούτου γὰρ ἕνεκεν προῳκονόμησεν ἡ θεία χάρις τὴν παρθένον μνηστευθῆναι ἀνδρὶ δύο πατέρας ἐσχηκότι, ἕνα μὲν κατὰ φύσιν ἐκ γαμικῆς συναφείας, ἕνα δὲ κατὰ τὸν νόμον χωρὶς συναφείας, ἐν τῇ ἐκείνου γεννήσει προζωγραφοῦσα τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν γέν νησιν, τοῦ γεννηθέντος μὲν ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου υἱοῦ τῷ θεῷ, γεννηθέντος δὲ ἐκ τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ υἱοῦ τῷ Ἰωσήφ· \"πνεῦμα\", φησίν, \"ἅγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ, καὶ δύναμις ὑψί στου ἐπισκιάσει σοι. διὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ἐκ σοῦ ἅγιον. κληθήσεται υἱὸς θεοῦ\".","english":"If the Lord's birth had come about from a marital union, the Scripture would not have said, \"as it was supposed, the son of Joseph\"; for the phrase \"as it was supposed\" has no place in the case of those born from a marital union. But to overturn, by means of one obscure and defective phrase, all those phrases that plainly proclaim that Christ was born of the Holy Spirit and Mary the virgin is among the most absurd things. For the refutation of their vain attempt we have used arguments such as these: if because Christ did not call himself the son of the woman, he is therefore not the son of the woman, then clearly also because he did not call himself the son of some man. And if Christ is not the son of some man, then by necessity he is not the son of man either. Furthermore, if Joseph was styled the son of Eli according to the law without marital union, God having willed in this way to give Joseph as a son to Eli, what is absurd in Christ thus also being given as a son to Joseph without marital union? For this reason divine grace beforehand arranged for the virgin to be betrothed to a man who had two fathers, one by nature from marital union, and one according to the law without union, prefiguring in that man's birth the birth of Christ—of him who was born of the Holy Spirit as a son to God, and born of the woman as a son to Joseph. \"The Holy Spirit,\" it says, \"will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore also the holy one born of you will be called the son of God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":26,"ref":"p26","source":"ἀλλ' εἰ τὸ γεννώμενον ἐκ τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ Ἠλὶ υἱός ἐστι τοῦ Ἠλὶ κατὰ τὸν νόμον τοῦ θεοῦ, πολλῷ μᾶλλον τὸ γεννώμενον ἐκ τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ κατὰ τὴν θείαν εὐδοκίαν υἱός ἐστι τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ χωρὶς γαμικῆς συναφείας. ΙΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ οἱ εὐαγγελισταὶ Ματθαῖος καὶ Λουκᾶς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα γενεαλογοῦντες τὸν κύριον, ὃ μὲν τὴν κατὰ φύσιν ὃ δὲ τὴν κατὰ νόμον αὐτοῦ γενεαλογίαν συνέγραψε διὰ τὸ οὕτως τὰ γένη τῶν Ἰουδαίων συνίστασθαι, πῶς ὁ μακάριος Λουκᾶς οὐ δείκνυται τῷ Ματθαίῳ μαχόμενος, πλείονας τοὺς κατὰ νόμον τῶν κατὰ φύσιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ γεννήτορας διὰ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τοῦ οἰ κείου ἐκθέμενος, τοὐναντίον παρ' αὐτοῦ γραφῆναι ὀφείλοντος, ἐπειδὴ ἥσσονας τοὺς κατὰ νόμον τῶν κατὰ φύσιν πατέρων ἀνάγκη λογίζεσθαι; ἐνδέχεται γὰρ κατὰ νόμον γενέσθαι πατέρα, ἅπαξ τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν πατρὸς τὸν παῖδα γεννήσαντος. πῶς οὖν, καθάπερ ἔφην, παρὰ τοῖς εὐαγγελισταῖς ἡ τάξις ἀντέστραπται καὶ ὁ Λου κᾶς, ὁ ἴσους μᾶλλον δὲ ἥσσονας τοὺς κατὰ νόμον τῶν κατὰ φύσιν ὀφείλων τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὀνομάζειν γεννήτορας, πλείονας ὀνομάζων εὑρίσκεται; εἰ δὲ ἐν τῇ γενεαλογίᾳ ἑαυτοῖς καὶ ἀλλήλοις μαχό μενα λέγουσι, πῶς ἐν τοῖς λοιποῖς περὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος διδάγμασι τὸ ἀξιόπιστον κεκτῆσθαι δύνανται. ἐκ προοιμίων πρὸς ἀντίρρησιν κινοῦντες τὸν μετὰ λόγου τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ θρῃσκείᾳ προστεθῆναι βουλόμενον; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐν τῇ κατὰ Λουκᾶν γενεαλογίᾳ ὁ Ἠλὶ μόνος ἐστὶ πατὴρ τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ κατὰ τὸν νόμον·","english":"But if the one born from the wife of Eli is the son of Eli according to the law of God, much more is the one born from the wife of Joseph, according to the divine good pleasure, the son of Joseph without marital union. 12. Question: If the evangelists Matthew and Luke, when giving the genealogy of the Lord according to the flesh—the one writing his genealogy according to nature and the other according to law, because the generations of the Jews were constituted in this way—how is it that the blessed Luke is not shown to be in conflict with Matthew, since through his own Gospel he sets forth more ancestors of Christ according to law than according to nature, when the opposite ought to have been written by him, since it must be reckoned that those according to law are fewer than the fathers according to nature? For it is possible for one to become a father according to law once the father according to nature has begotten the child. How then, as I said, has the order been reversed among the evangelists, and Luke, who ought to name equal, or rather fewer, ancestors of Christ according to law than according to nature, is found naming more? But if in the genealogy they say things that conflict with themselves and with each other, how can they possess credibility in the remaining teachings about the Savior, since from the very outset they move to objection the one who wishes to be added to our religion with reason? Answer: In the genealogy according to Luke, Eli alone is the father of Joseph according to the law.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":27,"ref":"p27","source":"ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ Ἠλὶ ἕως τοῦ Νάθαν πάντες οἱ ὑποτεταγμένοι κατὰ φύσιν εἰσὶν υἱοὶ τῶν προτεταγμένων, τῶν διὰ τὴν σχέσιν, ἣν ἔχει ὁ Ἠλὶ πρὸς τὸν Ἰωσήφ, πάππων καὶ προπάππων λογιζομένων, τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ μὲν μόνου κατὰ τὸν νόμον, τῶν λοιπῶν δὲ πάντων κατὰ φύσιν. τούτου δὲ οὕτως νοουμένου, ἀναιρεῖται πᾶσα ἡ τῶν εὐαγγελιστῶν ἐπὶ τῇ ἀντιλογίᾳ διαβολή, ἡ ἐκ τῆς παρανοίας τῶν ἐκείνων φωνῶν νομισθεῖσα τοῖς παρανοήσασιν.\n\nΙΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ κατὰ τὸν μωσαϊκὸν νόμον ὁ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ τελευτήσαντος ἄπαιδος τὴν γυναῖκα τοῦ μετηλλαχότος λαμβάνων ἐπαιδοποίει ἐξ αὐτῆς, κατὰ φύσιν μὲν ἑαυτῷ, κατὰ νόμον δὲ τῷ ἀδελφῷ, ἆρα, εἰ συνέβη τὸν περιόντα ἀδελφὸν ἔχειν γαμετήν, σὺν ταύτῃ καὶ τὴν τοῦ τελευτήσαντος ἀδελφοῦ γαμετὴν εἰς γυναῖκα ἐλάμβανε; καὶ πῶς οὐκ ἄτοπον; εἰ δὲ ἡ τοιαύτη καὶ στεῖρα ἐτύγχανε, πῶς πρὸς τῷ ἀτόπῳ καὶ τὸ ἀνωφελὲς ὁ γάμος οὐκ ἐπήγετο καὶ τοῦ νόμου τὸ πρόσταγμα πανταχόθεν ἐδείκνυτο ἄπο ρον, τοῦ τελευτήσαντος οὐ λαμβάνοντος τὸ διὰ παιδοποιίας μνη μόσυνον; τί δὲ καὶ τῷ ἀποθανόντι προσεγένετο ὄφελος; τὸ διὰ παιδοποιίας ἑτέρου ἐκεῖνον μετὰ τέλος πατέρα ἀλλοτρίας γονῆς ὀνομάζεσθαι; Ἀπόκρισις. Τοῦ νόμου μὴ κωλύοντος τοὺς Ἰσραηλίτας γυναῖκα ἐπὶ γυναῖκα λαβεῖν εἰ βούλοιντο, οὐ μόνον συγγενίδα, ἀλλὰ καὶ αἰχμαλώτιδα καὶ παλλακίδα, οὐδὲν ἄρα ἄτοπον ἀνακύπτει ἐκ τοῦ γυναῖκα ἐπὶ γυναῖκα λαβεῖν τὸν ἀδελφὸν τοῦ τελευτή σαντος, τοῦ νόμου μὴ παρακουομένου· πᾶσα γὰρ ἀτοπία ἐπὶ τῇ παρακοῇ τοῦ νόμου ὑφίσταται.","english":"But from Eli to Nathan, all those listed are natural sons of those listed before them, since the grandfathers and great-grandfathers are reckoned through the relationship that Eli has to Joseph—Joseph alone being so according to the law, but all the rest according to nature. When this is understood in this way, every slander of the evangelists concerning the contradiction is removed, the slander that was supposed by those who misunderstood, from the folly of their words.\n\n13. Question. If, according to the Mosaic law, the brother of one who died childless, taking the wife of the deceased, begot children from her—children who were his own according to nature but his brother's according to the law—then, if it happened that the surviving brother already had a wife, did he take, along with her, the wife of the deceased brother as a wife as well? And how is this not absurd? But if such a woman also happened to be barren, how did the marriage not bring, besides the absurdity, also uselessness, and how was the command of the law shown on every side to be without resource, since the deceased did not receive the memorial through the begetting of children? And what benefit accrued to the dead man—to be called, through another's begetting of children, after the end, the father of another's offspring? Answer. Since the law did not prevent the Israelites from taking wife upon wife if they wished—not only a kinswoman, but also a captive woman and a concubine—no absurdity arises from the brother of the deceased taking wife upon wife, so long as the law is not disobeyed; for all absurdity consists in disobedience to the law.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":28,"ref":"p28","source":"κἂν συμβαίη δὲ στεῖραν τὴν γυναῖκα ὑπάρχειν, ἀλλ' ἄδηλον τοῦτο τῷ ἀνδρὶ καὶ τῇ γυναικί, τῷ δὲ ἀδήλῳ οὐκ ἔστι δίκαιον παριδεῖν τὸν νόμον. ἐτέθη δὲ ὁ νόμος οὗτος, ἵνα ὧν ἀφείλετο ὁ θάνατος τὸν τετελευτηκότα, τουτέστι τῆς τε πατρότητος καὶ τοῦ κληρονόμου, ταῦτα παράσχῃ αὐτῷ τῇ τοῦ νόμου προνοίᾳ· εἰ γὰρ μνημοσύνης ἕνεκεν κληρονόμου ἐπὶ τὸν γάμον οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἔρχονται, δῆλον ὅτι ᾧ\n\nτρόπῳ βουληθείη θεὸς ταῦτα παρασχεῖν ἀνθρώπῳ, ἀνωφελὲς οὐ γίνεται τὸ πρᾶγμα. πρόσεστι δὲ τούτῳ τῷ νόμῳ καὶ ἕτερόν τι ὠφέλιμον, ἵνα ταύτῃ τῇ ἐπιγα μίᾳ ὁ κλῆρος μείνῃ ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ φυλῇ καὶ μὴ μεταβῇ εἰς ἑτέραν φυλήν. καὶ ἐπειδὴ ἅπαξ συναφθεῖσα ἡ γυνὴ τῷ πρώτῳ ἀνδρὶ ἓν σῶμα γέγονε, διὰ τοῦτο οὐ γίνεται πατὴρ ἀλλοτρίας γονῆς ὁ τελευτήσας, ἀλλὰ τοῦ ἐκ τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος τικτομένου· ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ τικτόμενος ἐκ τῆς τοιαύτης συναφείας υἱὸς ὀνομάζεται τοῦ τελευτήσαντος, οὕτω καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἐκείνου ὀνομάζεται γυνή.\n\nΙΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὁ προλεχθεὶς νόμος πρὸ τῶν χρόνων τοῦ Δαυὶδ τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις ἐντέταλται, πῶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς Ματθαῖος τῶν κατὰ φύσιν πατέρων πρὸ τοῦ Δαυὶδ καὶ μετὰ τὸν Δαυὶδ ἐπίσης ἐμνημόνευσεν, ὁ δὲ Λουκᾶς πρὸ μὲν τοῦ Δαυὶδ τῶν κατὰ φύσιν, μετὰ δὲ τὸν Δαυὶδ τῶν κατὰ νόμον πατέρων τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὴν μνήμην πεποίηται; καὶ εἰ τὰ ὀνόματα τῶν κατὰ φύσιν καὶ κατὰ νόμον πατέρων ἀπαραλείπτως μετὰ τὴν μετοικεσίαν Βαβυλῶνος ἐν θείαις γραφαῖς οὐχ εὑρίσκεται, ἀλλὰ κατὰ ἀπόφασιν γέγραπται, πῶς τὰ κατὰ ἀπόφασιν γραφέντα ὑπὸ τῶν ἀκριβεστέρων πιστευθῆναι δυνήσονται; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"And even if it should happen that the woman is barren, this is unknown to the man and the woman; but in a matter that is unknown, it is not right to disregard the law. This law was established so that whatever death took away from the deceased—that is, both his fatherhood and his heir—the law's provision might supply to him. For if men enter into marriage for the sake of the memory of an heir, it is clear that in whatever way God might wish to supply these things to a man, the matter does not become useless. There is also something else beneficial in this law: that by this union the lot might remain in the same tribe and not pass over to another tribe. And since a woman, once joined to her first husband, has become one body, for this reason the deceased does not become the father of another's offspring, but of the child born from his own body. For just as the child born from such a union is called the son of the deceased, so also the woman is called his wife.\n\n14. Question. If the aforementioned law was enjoined upon the Israelites before the times of David, how is it that the evangelist Matthew made mention equally of the natural fathers before David and after David, while Luke made mention before David of the natural fathers, but after David of the fathers of Christ according to the law? And if the names of the fathers according to nature and according to the law are not found without omission in the divine Scriptures after the Babylonian captivity, but are written by negation, how will the things written by negation be able to be believed by the more accurate? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":29,"ref":"p29","source":"Καὶ ὁ Λουκᾶς τῶν κατὰ φύσιν πατέρων τοῦ Ἠλὶ ἐμνήσθη, τῶν τε πρὸ τοῦ Δαυὶδ καὶ τῶν μετὰ τὸν Δαυίδ· ὁ δὲ Ἠλὶ μόνος ἦν κατὰ νόμον πατὴρ τοῦ Ἰωσήφ, τοῦ διὰ τὴν κατὰ νόμον υἱότητα ἕως τοῦ Νάθαν κατὰ τὴν σχέσιν ἀναγομένου. τὸ δὲ τὸν δεσπότην Χριστὸν ὀνομασθῆναι υἱὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ δύο πατέρας ἐσχηκότος, τὸν μὲν κατὰ φύσιν τὸν δὲ κατὰ νόμον, ἡ θεία χάρις ᾠκονόμησεν, ἵνα, ὅταν ἀκούωμεν τὸν Χριστὸν υἱὸν μὲν ὄντα τοῦ Ἰωσήφ, μὴ γεννηθέντα δὲ ἐξ αὐτοῦ, μὴ ξενισθῶμεν· ὥσπερ γὰρ αὐτὸς ὁ Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς μὲν ἐκλήθη τοῦ Ἠλί, μὴ γεννηθεὶς δὲ ἐξ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι τῷ θείῳ νόμῳ οὕτως ἔδοξεν ἐκ τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ Ἠλὶ δοῦναι υἱὸν τῷ Ἠλί, οὕτως ἔδοξε τῷ θεῷ ἐκ τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ δοῦναι υἱὸν τῷ Ἰωσὴφ μὴ γεννηθέντα κατὰ φύσιν ἐξ αὐτοῦ. \"Ἰωσήφ\", φησίν, \"υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαριὰμ τὴν γυναῖκά σου\"· τὸ γὰρ ἐκ τῆς γυναικός τινος χωρὶς πορνείας τικτόμενον υἱός ἐστιν ἐξ ἀνάγκης τοῦ ἀνδρὸς καὶ τῆς γυναικός, ᾧ τρόπῳ βούλεται δοῦναι ὁ θεὸς υἱὸν τῷ ἀνδρί, ἢ διὰ συνάφειαν ἢ χωρὶς συναφείας. οὐκ ἀποφάσει δὲ χρώμενοι οἱ εὐαγγελισταὶ τὴν ἔκθεσιν ἐποιήσαντο τῶν ἐν ταῖς γενεαλογίαις ὀνομασθέντων, ἀλλὰ ταῖς ἐγγράφοις ἱστορίαις. Ἑβραῖοι γὰρ ἦσαν ἐξ Ἑβραίων οἱ τὰς γενεαλογίας συγγραψάμενοι ἅγιοι εὐαγγελισταί, παρ' οἷς πολλή τις ἦν ἡ σπουδὴ τοῦ ἐγγράφως ἔχειν τῆς βασι λικῆς τε καὶ ἱερατικῆς φυλῆς τὴν γενεαλογίαν. ἀμέλει μετὰ τὴν ἐκ Βαβυλῶνος ἐπάνοδον ὁ Ἔσδρας οὓς οὐχ εὗρεν ἐν τῷ τῶν ἱερέων καταλόγῳ γενεαλογουμένους, τούτους ἐξέβαλεν ἀπὸ τῆς ἱερατικῆς λειτουργίας, καὶ τοῦτο δείκνυται ἐκ τῆς βίβλου τῶν Παραλειπομένων. ΙΕʹ.","english":"And Luke mentioned the natural fathers of Eli, both those before David and those after David; but Eli alone was according to the law the father of Joseph, who through legal sonship was traced in relationship as far as Nathan. But that the Lord Christ was named son of Joseph, who had two fathers, one according to nature and the other according to law, divine grace arranged, so that when we hear that Christ is the son of Joseph but was not begotten from him, we might not be surprised. For just as Joseph himself was called the son of Eli but was not begotten from him, because the divine law so decreed that a son be given to Eli from the wife of Eli, so it seemed good to God to give a son to Joseph from the wife of Joseph, not begotten from him according to nature. \"Joseph,\" it says, \"son of David, do not fear to take Mary your wife.\" For what is born from a man's wife without fornication is by necessity the son of the man and the wife, in whatever way God wishes to give a son to the man, either through union or without union. But the evangelists did not make their exposition of those named in the genealogies by way of assertion, but by written records. For the holy evangelists who composed the genealogies were Hebrews from Hebrews, among whom there was great zeal for having in writing the genealogy of the royal and priestly tribe. Indeed, after the return from Babylon, Ezra expelled from the priestly service those whom he did not find enrolled in the register of the priests, and this is shown from the book of Paraleipomena. 15.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":30,"ref":"p30","source":"Ἐρώτησις. Ἐπειδὴ ὁ Ἡσαΐας εἰς τὸν δεσπότην Χριστὸνπροφητεύων φησί \"τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται\", ἐπὶ δυσδιη γήτου ἆρα ἢ ἀδιηγήτου λέγει, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς θεότητος ἢ ἐπὶ τῆς σαρκὸς ταύτην ἐκληπτέον τὴν δόξαν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἡ μὲν κατὰ σάρκα γέννησις τοῦ Χριστοῦ γενεαλογεῖται καὶ ὁ τρόπος ταύτης ἐν γραφικῇ διαθέσει κατήγγελται, καθάπερ ἤδη προείπαμεν, ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας θεοτόκου καὶ ἀειπαρθένου Μαρίας· ἡ δὲ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα αὐτοῦ γέννησίς ἐστιν ἀγενεαλόγητος. ἐμφαίνει οὖν ἡ προφητικὴ ῥῆσις τὸ ἀδιήγητον, οὐ τὸ δυσδιήγητον τῆς γεννήσεως.\n\nΙςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὴν ἀρχαίαν μὲν λατρείαν ἀνεῖλεν ὁ θεός, ὡς αὐτῇ μὴ ἀρεσκόμενος, τὴν δὲ τῶν χριστιανῶν ὡς ἀρεστὴν αὐτῷ ἀντεισήγαγεν, οἱ δὲ ὀρθόδοξοι μόνοι θεῷ ἀρέσκοντες Ἑλλή νων τε καὶ Ἰουδαίων καὶ πάντων αἱρετικῶν κατὰ τὸν ἀριθμόν. ὑπάρχουσιν ἥσσονες, τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις τοῦ μὴ κατὰ πτωχείαν δυνάμεως τοῦ ταύτην ἀντ' ἐκείνης ἑλομένου λατρείαν τὴν πλάνην μένειν ἀνεκρίζωτον, πῶς δὲ οὐκ ἀνωφελὴς ἡ ἐκείνης κατάλυσις, πλάνης ἑτέρας κατεχούσης τὸν κόσμον; Ἀπόκρισις. Τοῦ δεσπότου θεοῦ λατρείαν λατρείας ἀντει","english":"Question: Since Isaiah, prophesying of the Lord Christ, says, \"Who shall declare his generation,\" does he speak of what is hard to declare or of what cannot be declared, and is this saying to be understood of his divinity or of his flesh? Answer: The generation of Christ according to the flesh is traced in a genealogy, and its manner has been proclaimed in the disposition of Scripture, as we have already said before—from the Holy Spirit and from the holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary; but his generation according to his divinity is without genealogy. The prophetic utterance therefore indicates that the generation is beyond declaration, not hard to declare.\n\n16. Question: If God abolished the ancient worship, as not being pleased with it, and introduced in its place the worship of the Christians as pleasing to him, yet the orthodox alone, who please God, are fewer in number than the Greeks and Jews and all heretics, what is the proof that it was not through poverty of power that he who chose this worship in place of that one left the error unrooted, and how is the abolition of that worship not useless, when another error holds the world? Answer: The Lord God, in place of a worship, introduced a worship...","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":31,"ref":"p31","source":"σάγειν διὰ τῆς παλαιᾶς διαθήκης προωρισμένου, εἰ μὴ ἀντεισήγαγε ταύτην ἐκείνης, ἐνῆν τότε μόνον ἐπὶ πτωχείᾳ δυνάμεως διαβάλλειν τὸν θεόν, ὡς προορισάμενον τὰ ὑπὲρ δύναμιν· νῦν δὲ ταύτην ἀντ' ἐκείνης εἰσαγαγών, πρῶτον μὲν κηρυττομένην λόγοις θείαις δυνάμεσι μαρτυρουμένοις ἀνεῖλεν ἰουδαϊσμόν τε καὶ ἑλληνισμόν, ὕστερον δὲ ἔργοις θείαις ὡσαύτως δυνάμεσι γινομένοις πάσης τῆς ἐν ἀνθρώποις τε καὶ δαίμοσι πλάνης ποιεῖ τὴν ἐκρίζωσιν, σὺν ταύτῃ δὲ καὶ πάντων τῶν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ κακῶν. τὸ δὲ κατὰ τὴν λατρείαν, διδασκαλίαν πίστεώς τε καὶ πολιτείας, εἰ μὴ πάντες οἱ δεξάμενοι τὴν λατρείαν τὴν αὐτὴν δόξαν περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν πραγμάτων ἔσχον καὶ ἔχουσιν, ἀλλ' οἳ μὲν ὀρθῶς, οἳ δὲ οὐκ ὀρθῶς, τοῦτο οὐκ ἔστι κατηγόρημα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπὶ πτωχείᾳ δυνάμεως, τὸ ἐκείνους ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας ἀμελείας ἢ ἑτέρας ἀσθενείας ὀρθῶς μὴ νοεῖν τὰ ὑπ' αὐτῶν πιστευόμενα, ἀλλὰ τῆς ἐκείνων ἀμελείας. εἴρηται δὲ ἐν τῇ εἰσαγομένῃ λατρείᾳ περὶ τῆς τῶν ὀρθοδόξων ὀλιγότητος. ποτὲ μὲν \"πολλοὶ μέν\" φησί \"κλητοί, ὀλίγοι δὲ ἐκλεκτοί\", ποτὲ δὲ \"ὅτι στενὴ καὶ τεθλιμμένη ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἀπάγουσα εἰς τὴν ζωὴν καὶ ὀλίγοι εἰσὶν οἱ εὑρίσκοντες αὐτήν\". ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν αἱρέσεων, ἃς ὁ κύριος ἐν ταῖς ἑαυτοῦ παραβολαῖς ζιζάνια καὶ σαπροὺς ἰχθύας ὠνόμασεν.","english":"to carry through the old covenant, unless he had introduced this in place of that, it was possible then only to accuse God of poverty of power, as having foreordained things beyond his power; but now, having introduced this in place of that, he first abolished Judaism and Hellenism, the one proclaimed by divine words attested by divine powers, and later by works likewise becoming divine powers he brings about the eradication of all error among men and demons, and along with this also of all evils in the world. But as regards worship and the teaching of faith and conduct, if not all who have received the worship have held and do hold the same opinion about the same matters, but some rightly and some not rightly, this is not a charge against God for poverty of power—that those men, from their own negligence or some other weakness, do not rightly understand what they believe—but it is [a charge] of their negligence. And in the worship that is introduced, it has been said concerning the fewness of the orthodox: at one time, \"Many are called, but few are chosen,\" and at another, \"that narrow and pressed is the way that leads to life, and few are those who find it.\" Likewise also concerning the heresies, which the Lord in his own parables called tares and rotten fish.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":32,"ref":"p32","source":"εἰ τοίνυν μηδὲν ἐψευσμένον ἐστὶν ἐν τῇ τῶν χριστιανῶν λατρείᾳ, ἀλλὰ τῇ τῶν πραγμάτων μαρτυρίᾳ * ἐκ τῶν προλαβόντων πεπιστευμένα ἔχουσα τὰ μέλλοντα, οὐδαμῶς ἄρα ὑπολέλειπται πρόφασις ἡ τοῦ διαβάλλειν τὸν θεὸν ἐπὶ πτωχείᾳ δυνάμεως, ἢ τοῦ ἀνωφελῆ λέ γειν τὴν λατρείαν, λατρείας ἀντεισαγομένην, νῦν μὲν λυτικὴν οὖ σαν ἰουδαϊσμοῦ τε καὶ ἑλληνισμοῦ, ὕστερον δὲ καὶ τῶν αἱρέσεων.\n\nΙΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὰ μέλλοντα γίνεσθαι, οἷον πολέμων τρό παια, λοιμῶν ἐφόδους, τῶν τεμενῶν τὰς λύσεις, προειρήκασι προ φῆται καὶ ἀπόστολοι, προεῖπον δὲ καὶ παρ' Ἕλλησι διὰ χρησμῶν λόγοι, πόθεν οἱ τούτων κρείττους γνωρίζονται, ἅπαξ παρ' ἑκατέ ρου μέρους τῆς τῶν ἐσομένων γεγενημένης προρρήσεως; Ἀπόκρισις. Τοῦ αὐτοῦ θεοῦ ἐστι ταῦτα πάντα, καὶ ἡ πρόρρησις τῶν λόγων καὶ ἡ ἔκβασις τῶν ἔργων, τοῦ καὶ διὰ τῶν προφητῶν τε καὶ ἀποστόλων προμηνύσαντος ἃ ἔμελλε ποιεῖν. ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ διὰ τῶν ἔξωθεν τῆς εὐσεβείας αὐτὸς προεμήνυεν ἃ ἔμελλε ποιεῖν· ὥσπερ γὰρ διὰ τοῦ μάντεως Βαλαὰμ τὸν μὲν Ἰσραὴλ εὐλόγησε, τοὺς δ' ἐχθροὺς αὐτοῦ κατηράσατο, ἑκάτερα δὲ ποιήσας διὰ τῆς προμηνύσεως τῶν ἐσομένων, ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ διὰ μαντείας τῷ Ναβουχοδονόσορ βασιλεῖ Βαβυλῶνος τὴν ἅλωσιν τῆς Ἱερουσαλὴμ προεμήνυσε, καθά φησιν ὁ προφήτης Ἰεζεκιήλ– \"καὶ στήσεται βασιλεὺς Βαβυλῶνος ἐπὶ τὴν ἀρχαίαν ὁδόν, ἐπ' ἀρχῆς τῶν δύο ὁδῶν, τοῦ μαντεύεσθαι μαντείαν καὶ τοῦ ἀναβράσαι ῥάβδον καὶ τοῦ ἐπερωτῆσαι ἐν τοῖς γλυπτοῖς καὶ ἡπατοσκοπήσασθαι ἐκ δεξιῶν αὐτοῦ·","english":"If, therefore, nothing false is found in the worship of the Christians, but by the testimony of the facts it holds the future as already believed from things that came before, then no pretext at all is left either for slandering God on account of poverty of power, or for calling the worship useless—a worship introduced in place of another, now being the means of release from Judaism and Hellenism, and later also from the heresies.\n\n17. Question. If the prophets and apostles foretold the things that were going to happen—such as the turns of wars, the onsets of plagues, the destructions of temples—and if among the Greeks too words through oracles foretold them, how are those who are superior to these recognized, since on each side alike the foretelling of future events has taken place? Answer. All these things belong to the same God—both the foretelling of the words and the outcome of the deeds—to him who through the prophets and apostles foretold beforehand what he was going to do. In the same way also, through those outside the faith, he himself foretold beforehand what he was going to do; for just as through the seer Balaam he blessed Israel and cursed its enemies, doing both by foretelling what was to come, so also through divination he foretold to Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, the capture of Jerusalem, as the prophet Ezekiel says: \"And the king of Babylon shall stand at the ancient road, at the head of the two roads, to divine a divination and to make the rod burn and to inquire of the graven images and to inspect the liver on his right.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":33,"ref":"p33","source":"καὶ ἐγένετο μαντεῖον ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ\" καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς–, οὕτω καὶ διὰ τῶν παρ' Ἕλλησι μάντεων, ὅσα διὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐδέξατο τὴν ἔκβασιν, αὐτὸς προεμήνυσε. δια φορὰ δὲ τῶν προφητῶν καὶ τῶν μάντεων πολλή, πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι θεὸν οὗ τῷ ὀνόματι προεφήτευσαν οἱ προφῆται καὶ οἱ ἀπόστολοι, τούτου ἐσχήκασι τὴν γνῶσιν καὶ τὴν πίστιν καὶ τὴν λατρείαν· καὶ πάντα ὅσα περί τε τῆς τῶν ἑλληνικῶν θεῶν τε καὶ μαντείων καθαιρέσεως καὶ τῆς τῶν χριστιανικῶν πραγμάτων συστάσεως προεῖπον οἱ προφῆται, τὴν ἔκβασιν ἐδέξατο· ἔπειτα δέ, ὅτι οὐδὲν ὧν προεῖπον οἱ μάντεις, ἢ κατὰ τοῦ τῆς ἀληθείας θεοῦ καὶ τῶν σεβομένων αὐτόν, ἢ ὑπὲρ τῆς συστάσεως τῶν ἑλληνικῶν πραγμά των, τὴν ἔκβασιν ἐδέξατο. καὶ τούτων μάρτυς ἡ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων ἀναίρεσις, οἳ ἀπὸ τῆς οἰκείας μαντείας ὁρμώμενοι ἔλεγον \"μὴ ἄνευ κυρίου. ἀνέβην ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν ταύτην τοῦ ἐρημῶσαι αὐτήν; κύριός μοι εἶπεν ἀνάβηθι καὶ ἐρήμωσον αὐτήν\", καὶ ἀναβὰς παρὰ τὴν μαντείαν ἐρημώθη.\n\nΙΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πάντες μὲν ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει οἱ ἡμαρτηκότες κολάζονται, πλέον δὲ οἱ ἐγνωκότες τὸ τοῦ θεοῦ θέλημα καὶ μὴ ποιήσαντες, τί τὸ κέρδος τοῦ","english":"And it came to be an oracle in Jerusalem, and so on—in this way also through the oracles among the Greeks, as many as received their fulfillment through the events, he himself foretold. But the difference between the prophets and the oracles is great: first, because the God whose name the prophets and the apostles foretold, of this God they had the knowledge and the faith and the worship; and all things whatsoever the prophets foretold concerning both the destruction of the Greek gods and oracles and the establishment of Christian affairs received their fulfillment; and secondly, because none of the things the oracles foretold, either against the God of truth and those who worship him, or in favor of the establishment of Greek affairs, received fulfillment. And of these things the destruction of the Assyrians is a witness, who, setting out from their own oracle, said, \"Have I gone up to this land to desolate it without the Lord? The Lord said to me, Go up and desolate it,\" and having gone up contrary to the oracle, he was destroyed.\n\n18. Question. If all who have sinned are punished in the resurrection, but more so those who have known the will of God and have not done it, what is the gain of the","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":34,"ref":"p34","source":"χριστιανοῦ καὶ τοῦ Ἕλληνος, τοῦ βαπτισθέντος καὶ τοῦ μὴ βαπτισθέντος, τοῦ ὀρθοδόξου καὶ τοῦ μὴ ὀρθοδόξου; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον Παῦλον ὁ πιστὸς ὁ μὴ προνοῶν τῶν ἰδίων ἀρνησίθεός ἐστι καὶ τῶν ἀπίστων χείρων, δῆλον ὅτι ὁ μὴ σὺν τῇ γνώσει καὶ πίστει καὶ βαπτίσματι καὶ τὸν τρόπον ἐπαγόμενος χαρακτηριστικὸν τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ μαθητείας, ἀλλὰ μόρφωσιν μὲν ἔχων εὐσεβείας, τὴν δὲ δύναμιν αὐτῆς ἠρνημένος, χείρων ἐστὶ τῶν ἀπίστων· τοσοῦτον γὰρ χείρων ἐστὶ τῶν ἀπίστων, ὅσον χεῖρόν ἐστι τὸ μετὰ γνώσεως ἁμαρτάνειν τοῦ ἄνευ γνώσεως, ὅσον τὸ ἀναπολόγητον ἁμάρτημα τοῦ ἀπολογίαν ἔχοντος ἁμαρτήματος. ΙΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πάσῃ δυνάμει ἔσπευσαν οἱ αἱρετικοὶ γνῶναι καὶ φυλάξαι τὴν τῶν δογμάτων ἀλήθειαν καὶ οὐκ ἴσχυσαν, πῶς οὐκ ἄδικον τὸ τούτους ὡς ἀποσφαλέντας τῆς ἀληθείας ὑποβάλλειν κολάσεσιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Τοσοῦτον οὐκ ἐζήτησαν οἱ αἱρετικοὶ πάσῃ δυνάμει τὴν ἀλήθειαν, ὅσον καὶ ὑποδεικνυμένην αὐτοῖς ταύτην παρὰ τῶν αὐτὴν εὑρηκότων οὐκ ἀνέχονται δέξασθαι αὐτήν. καὶ εἰ μὲν ἀληθὴς αὕτη ἡ ἀπολογία, ἐχρῆν αὐτοὺς ἀλλήλοις συγγινώσκειν σφαλλομένοις, ὡς ἀσθενείᾳ δυνάμεως καὶ οὐ πονηρίᾳ γνώμης τὰς αἱρέσεις συστησαμένοις, μαχομένας ἑαυταῖς τε καὶ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ. νῦν δέ, καθὰ κατακρίνουσιν ἀλλήλους ἐπὶ τῷ ἀλλοτρίῳ τοῦ φρο νήματος, δῆλοί εἰσιν ὅτι ἐκ τῆς φιλοδοξίας ἢ ἀντιπαθείας τῶν αἱρεσιαρχῶν πᾶσαι αἱ αἱρέσεις τὰς ἀφορμὰς ἐσχήκασι τῆς συστάσεως αὐτῶν· δι' ἣν αἰτίαν \"λύκοι βαρεῖς\" ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀποστόλου ὠνομά σθησαν οἱ τῶν αἱρέσεων ἀρχηγοί.","english":"of a Christian and a Greek, of the baptized and the unbaptized, of the orthodox and the non-orthodox? Answer. If, according to the apostle Paul, the believer who does not provide for his own is worse than an unbeliever and an denier of God, it is clear that the one who does not with knowledge and faith and baptism also bring the manner that is characteristic of discipleship to Christ, but has a form of piety while denying its power, is worse than the unbelievers; for he is as much worse than the unbelievers as sinning with knowledge is worse than sinning without knowledge, as a sin without excuse is worse than a sin that has an excuse. Question 19. If the heretics hastened with all their power to know and keep the truth of the doctrines and could not, how is it not unjust to subject them to punishments as having fallen away from the truth? Answer. The heretics did not seek the truth with all their power to the same extent that, even when it is pointed out to them by those who have found it, they do not endure to receive it. And if this defense were true, they ought to forgive one another for their errors, as having established their heresies through weakness of power and not through wickedness of mind—heresies that fight both against themselves and against the truth. But as it is, inasmuch as they condemn one another for the alien character of their mind, they are clearly shown that all the heresies have had the occasions of their establishment from the love of glory or the antipathy of the heresiarchs; for which reason the founders of the heresies were called by the apostle \"grievous wolves.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":35,"ref":"p35","source":"ὅτι δὲ ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν ἀποτυχεῖν τῆς εὑρήσεως τῷ ἐν ὅλῃ καρδίᾳ τε καὶ δυνάμει ζητοῦντι τὴν ἀλήθειαν, μαρτυρεῖ ὁ κύριος λέγων \"πᾶς ὁ αἰτῶν λαμβά νει καὶ ὁ ζητῶν εὑρίσκει καὶ τῷ κρούοντι ἀνοιγήσεται\".\n\nΚʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις τῶν αἱρετικῶν δυνάμεις ἐνεργοῦνται, οἷον νοσημάτων ἰάσεις καὶ πνευμάτων διωγμοὶ ἀκα θάρτων, καρπῶν γῆς τε φορὰ καὶ ἐλαίου ἀνάβλυσις, πῶς οὐκ ἀνάγκη ἐκ τούτων ἐν τῇ πλάνῃ βεβαιοῦσθαι ἐκείνους; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὥσπερ τὸ \"ἀνέτειλε τὸν ἥλιον ἐπὶ πονηροὺς καὶ ἀγαθοὺς καὶ βρέχει ἐπὶ δικαίους καὶ ἀδίκους\" οὐκ ἔστι βεβαιωτικὸν πονηρῶν καὶ ἀδίκων ἐν τῇ πονηρίᾳ καὶ ἀδικίᾳ, ἀλλὰ παρασκευαστικὸν εἰς δικαίαν τιμωρίαν, οὕτως οὐκ ἔστι βεβαιωτικὸν τῶν αἱρετικῶν ἐν τῇ πλάνῃ τὸ ἐνεργεῖσθαί τινας ἐν αὐτοῖς δυνά μεις. εἰ γὰρ ἦν ἀπόδειξις καὶ σημεῖον εὐσεβείας τὸ ἐνεργεῖν δυ νάμεις, οὐκ ἂν ὁ κύριος ἀδοκίμους τε καὶ ἀναξίους τῆς πρὸς αὐ τὸν οἰκειώσεως ἀπεφαίνετο τοὺς εἰρηκότας· \"κύριε, οὐ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι προεφητεύσαμεν καὶ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι δαιμόνια ἐξεβάλομεν καὶ τῷ σῷ ὀνόματι δυνάμεις πολλὰς ἐποιήσαμεν\"; λέγων πρὸς αὐτοὺς \"οὐδέποτε ἔγνων ὑμᾶς· ἀποχωρεῖτε ἀπ' ἐμοῦ οἱ ἐργαζό μενοι τὴν ἀνομίαν\"· ὁ γὰρ διδάξας ἡμᾶς ψωμίζειν καὶ ποτίζειν ἐχθρὸν πεινῶντα καὶ διψῶντα, πολλῷ μᾶλλον αὐτὸς τὰ ὅμοια ὧν ἐδίδαξεν ἡμᾶς ποιεῖ, σωρεύων πῦρ ἐπὶ τὰς κεφαλὰς τῶν ἀξίως τὸν δοτῆρα τῆς χάριτος οὐκ ἐγνωκότων.","english":"That it is impossible for one who seeks the truth with his whole heart and strength to fail to find it, the Lord testifies, saying, \"Everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.\"\n\n20. Question. If powers are worked in the churches of the heretics—such as healings of diseases and expulsions of unclean spirits, abundance of the fruits of the earth and gushing forth of oil—how is it not necessary that those men be confirmed in their error by these things? Answer. Just as \"he made his sun rise on the evil and the good, and he rains on the just and the unjust\" is not a confirmation of the evil and unjust in their evil and injustice, but a preparation for just punishment, so neither is the working of certain powers among the heretics a confirmation of them in their error. For if the working of powers were a proof and sign of piety, the Lord would not have declared those who said, \"Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name cast out demons, and in your name do many mighty works?\" to be reprobate and unworthy of fellowship with himself, saying to them, \"I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.\" For he who taught us to feed and give drink to an enemy who is hungry and thirsty, much more himself does the like of what he taught us, heaping fire upon the heads of those who have not worthily acknowledged the giver of grace.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":36,"ref":"p36","source":"ΚΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς ἀλγοῦσι καὶ ἡδομένοις τὸ παθητὸν διαδείκνυται, τούτου δὲ οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ κἀκείνου οἱ δίκαιοι ἐν τῇ κρίσει μετέχουσι, πῶς ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων ἀπάθειαν μετὰ τὴν ἀνά στασιν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους κομίζεσθαι; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀπαθεῖς λεγόμεθα ἀνστάντες, ὅτι ἀφ' ὧν ἐσμεν κατὰ φύσιν, τροπὴν οὐ δεχόμεθα, οὔτε εἰς τὰ ἀντικείμενα κατὰ τὸ ὂν καὶ μὴ ὄν, οὔτε εἰς τὰ ἐναντία κατὰ τὸ μᾶλλον καὶ ἧττον· οἷον, ἐκ τῆς χαρᾶς οὐ τρεπόμεθα εἰς λύπην, οὔτε χαίρομεν ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, ποτὲ μὲν μᾶλλον, ποτὲ δὲ ἧττον. κἂν ἐπὶ μείζοσι μὲν ἀγαθοῖς μᾶλλον χαιρόμεθα, ἐπ' ἐλάττοσι δὲ ἧττον, ἀλλὰ καὶ οὕτω κατὰ τὴν ἀναλογίαν τῶν ἀγαθῶν μένει τὸ ποσὸν τῆς χαρᾶς ἄτρεπτον. καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἐπὶ τῶν εἰς ζωὴν ἀνισταμένων· ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν εἰς κρίσιν ἀνισταμένων ὁ αὐτὸς λόγος, ὅταν ἀπαλλάττωνται, ὥσπερ τοῦ θανάτου, οὕτω καὶ τῆς κρίσεως· κατὰ γὰρ τὸν σωτῆρα, τῶν ἀνισταμένων οἳ μὲν εἰς ζωὴν οἳ δὲ εἰς κρίσιν ἀνίστανται.\n\nΚΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τροπῆς γνώρισμα τὸ τὰ καλὰ καὶ τὰ φαῦλα λαμβάνειν εἰς ἔννοιαν, πῶς ἄτρεπτοι οἱ κολαζόμενοι καὶ τὴν τῶν δικαίων λογιζόμενοι ἄνεσιν, ἢ πάλιν οἱ ἐν ἀνέσει τυγχάνοντες καὶ τὴν τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν ἐνθυμούμενοι κόλασιν; τότε γὰρ ἑκάτερον πλείονα δίδωσι θατέρῳ τὴν αἴσθησιν, ὅτε τῶν ἐναντίων ἡ παρά θεσις δείκνυται. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ τῷ μέλλοντι αἰῶνι τὸ ποσὸν τῆς αἰσθή σεως τιμῆς τε καὶ τιμωρίας ἐν τῷ μέτρῳ κεῖται τιμῆς τε καὶ τιμωρίας, καὶ οὐκ ἐνδέχεται τῇ παραθέσει τῶν ἀντικειμένων δέ ξασθαι τὴν αἴσθησιν τὴν αὔξησιν ἢ τὴν μείωσιν·","english":"21. Question. If the capacity for passion is shown in those who feel pain and those who feel pleasure, and in the judgment sinners partake of the one and the righteous of the other, how is he who says that human beings receive impassibility after the resurrection speaking truth? Answer. We are said to be impassible when we have risen, because in respect of what we are by nature we do not admit change, neither into the things that are opposed according to being and non-being, nor into the contraries according to more and less; for example, we are not turned from joy into grief, nor do we rejoice in the same good sometimes more and sometimes less. And even if we rejoice more in greater goods and less in lesser ones, yet even so, in proportion to the goods, the quantity of joy remains unchangeable. And this is the case with those who rise to life; but with those who rise to judgment the same account holds, whenever they are released, just as from death, so also from judgment; for according to the Savior, of those who rise, some rise to life and some to judgment.\n\n22. Question. If it is a mark of change to take the good and the base into thought, how are those who are punished unchangeable when they reckon the relief of the righteous, or again those who are in relief when they ponder the punishment of sinners? For then each gives the other a greater perception, when the juxtaposition of contraries is shown. Answer. If in the age to come the quantity of the perception of honor and of punishment lies in the measure of honor and of punishment, and it is not possible for perception to receive increase or diminution by the juxtaposition of opposites—","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":37,"ref":"p37","source":"ἄτρεπτα γὰρ τὰ ἐκεῖ πάντα, ὥσπερ κατὰ τὸ ποιόν, οὕτως καὶ κατὰ τὸ ποσόν. ΚΙʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὴν γνῶσιν καλοῦ τε καὶ κακοῦ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ σὺν τῷ εἶναι εἰλήφαμεν, πῶς οὐκ ἔστιν αἴτιος ἑκατέρου ὁ καὶ τὴν γνῶσιν ἀμφοτέρων καὶ δύναμιν ἐγκαταβεβλημένος τῇ φύσει πρὸς τὴν ἐκείνων ἐκπλήρωσιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐ μόνον τοῦ εἶναι ἡμᾶς καὶ τοῦ γινώσκειν τε καὶ πράττειν τὸ καλὸν καὶ μὴ πράττειν τὸ κακὸν δέδωκεν ἡμῖν τὴν δύναμιν ὁ θεός, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ αὐθαίρετον ἡμῖν ἐχαρίσατο καὶ τοῦ κατὰ προτίμησιν αἱρεῖσθαι τῶν γινωσκομένων τὸ δοκοῦν κατέ στησεν ἡμᾶς κυρίους. καὶ τὸ ἀγαθοὺς ἡμᾶς εἶναι ἢ κακοὺς οὐκ ἐν τῇ γνώσει ἔθηκε τῶν γινωσκομένων, ἀλλ' ἐν τῇ αἱρέσει τῶν αἱρουμένων. οὐκ ἄρα οὖν ὁ θεὸς αἴτιος τοῦ εἶναι ἡμᾶς ἀγαθοὺς ἢ κακούς, ἀλλ' ἡ προαίρεσις ἡμῶν· ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ ὁρῶν γυναῖκα πόρνην καὶ γινώσκων ταύτην εἶναι πόρνην οὐκ ἔστι πόρνος ἀπὸ τῆς γνώσεως, ἀλλ' ὅταν ἡ γνῶσις ἐξυπνίσῃ τὸ τῆς ἐπιθυμίας πάθος, οὐδ' οὕτω πόρνος ἐστίν, ἀλλ' ὅταν συγκατατίθεται τῷ πά θει ἡ προαίρεσις, τότε ἐστὶ πόρνος ἢ κατὰ τὴν πρᾶξιν ἢ κατὰ τὴν διάθεσιν, οὕτω καὶ τῶν ἀγαθῶν καὶ κακῶν ἀνθρώπων οὐχ ἡ γνῶσίς ἐστιν αἰτία τοῦ ἀγαθοὺς αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἢ κακούς, ἀλλ' ἡ προαίρεσις ἡ κατὰ προτίμησιν τὸ δοκοῦν αἱρησαμένη.","english":"For all things there are unchangeable, both in quality and in quantity. 21. Question. If we have received from God the knowledge of good and evil together with our being, how is he not the cause of each, who has implanted in our nature both the knowledge of both and the power for their fulfillment? Answer. God has given us the power not only to be and to know and to do the good and not to do the evil, but he has also granted us free will and has established us as masters of choosing by preference whatever seems best among the things known. And he has placed our being good or evil not in the knowledge of things known, but in the choice of those who choose. Therefore God is not the cause of our being good or evil, but our own choice is; for just as a man who sees a prostitute and knows that she is a prostitute is not a fornicator because of the knowledge, but when the knowledge awakens the passion of desire, not even so is he a fornicator, but when the choice consents to the passion, then he is a fornicator either in act or in disposition, so also for good and evil men the cause of their being good or evil is not the knowledge, but the choice that has chosen by preference whatever seems best.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":38,"ref":"p38","source":"ΚΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὰ προλεχθέντα δέδωκεν ὁ θεός, στεφανοῖ δὲ καὶ κολάζει πρὸς τὴν πρᾶξιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἕκαστον, πῶς δικαίως ποιεῖ τὰ ἀμφότερα, ἑκάτερα παρ' αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἔχοντος; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ ἡμεῖς καὶ τὸ ἐφ' ἡμῖν ἀλλήλων διαφέρει. ἡμεῖς μὲν ἄρρενες καὶ θήλειαι ἐσμέν, ἐφ' ἡμῖν δὲ τὸ εἶναι σώφρονας ἢ πόρνους. στεφανούμεθα οὖν ἢ κολαζόμεθα διὰ τὸ ἐφ' ἡμῖν· ἐφ' ἃ γὰρ ἡ προαίρεσις ἡμῶν ἄγει ἡμᾶς, δι' αὐτὰ στεφανούμεθα ἢ κολαζόμεθα· ἃς γὰρ πρὸς τὸ πράττειν δέδωκεν ἡμῖν ὁ θεὸς δυνάμεις, ταύτας ὑπέταξε τῇ ἐξουσίᾳ τῆς προαιρέσεως, καὶ πρὸς τὴν προαίρεσιν ἔχει ὁ θεὸς τὴν δίκην, κυβερνητικὴν οὖ σαν τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν προαιρετικῶν δυνάμεων, καὶ οὐ πρὸς τὴν φύσιν. ἐλάβομεν δὲ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ πράττειν καὶ τοῦ μὴ πράττειν τὴν ἐξουσίαν, πράττειν μὲν τὰ δίκαια, μὴ πράττειν δὲ τὰ ἄδικα. ὅταν οὖν οὕτω πράττωμεν καὶ μὴ πράττωμεν, δικαίως στεφανούμεθα· μετατιθέντες δὲ τὸ πράττειν καὶ τὸ μὴ πράττειν εἰς τὸ ἀντικείμενον, δικαίως κολαζόμεθα.","english":"24. Question. If God has given the things previously stated, and yet crowns and punishes each person according to their action, how does he do both justly, since he has each of the two from the human being himself? Answer. \"We\" and \"what is up to us\" differ from one another. We are male and female, but it is up to us to be temperate or unchaste. We are therefore crowned or punished because of what is up to us; for the things to which our choice leads us, it is on account of these that we are crowned or punished. For the powers that God has given us for acting, these he has subjected to the authority of choice, and God's judgment is directed toward the choice, which is the governing principle of the powers of choice within us, and not toward nature. We have received from God the authority to act and not to act—to do what is just, and not to do what is unjust. When, then, we act and do not act in this way, we are justly crowned; but when we transfer acting and not acting to the opposite, we are justly punished.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":39,"ref":"p39","source":"ΚΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὰ σωματικώτερον περί τε θεῶν παρὰ τῶν ποιητῶν καὶ περὶ τοῦ θεοῦ παρὰ τῶν προφητῶν εἰρημένα κατὰ ἀλληγορίαν ἑτέραν ἔχει τὴν νόησιν, πῶς οὐ μῦθος ἀμφότερα δείκνυται; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὰ ἀλληγορικῶς παρὰ τῶν προφητῶν περὶ τοῦ θεοῦ λεχθέντα κατὰ ἀναφορὰν ἐλέχθη ἐκ τῶν φύσει εἰς τὰ μὴ φύσει, οἷον ὡς τὸ \"ὠσφράνθη κύριος ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας\". ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὸ \"ὠσφράνθη\" κατὰ φύσιν, ἐπὶ δὲ θεοῦ κατα χρηστικῶς καὶ οὐ φύσει. τὰ δὲ παρὰ τῶν ποιητῶν μυθικῶς περὶ τῶν θεῶν λεγόμενα οὐ λέγεται κατὰ ἀναφορὰν ἐκ τῶν φύσει εἰς τὰ μὴ φύσει· οὐ γὰρ καταπίνει ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπον κατὰ φύ σιν, ἵνα κατὰ ἀναφορὰν νοήσωμεν καὶ τὸν Κρόνον καταπιόντα τὸν Δία. ἔστι δὲ ὁ μῦθος λόγος ἀσύστατος, πλὴν τοῦ ψεύδους οὐκ ἔχων ἄλλο τι. Κςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ γίνεται ἡ ἀνάστασις διὰ τὴν τῶν βεβιωμένων ἑκάστῳ ἀντίδοσιν, πῶς τὰ βρέφη ἢ καὶ τὰ ἐν γαστρὶ τελευτήσαντα περιττῶς οὐκ ἀνίστανται, οὔτε τῶν ἔργων ἀμοιβὰς κομι ζόμενα, οὔτε ἀνέσεως ἢ θλίψεως διὰ τὸ τῆς ἡλικίας","english":"25. Question. If the things said more bodily concerning the gods by the poets and concerning God by the prophets have another meaning by allegory, how are both not shown to be myth? Answer. The things spoken allegorically by the prophets concerning God were said by transference from things natural to things not natural, as for instance \"the Lord smelled a sweet savour.\" In the case of human beings \"he smelled\" is according to nature, but in the case of God it is by usage and not by nature. But the things said mythically by the poets concerning the gods are not said by transference from things natural to things not natural; for man does not swallow man according to nature, so that by transference we should also understand Cronus swallowing Zeus. And myth is an account without consistency, having nothing other than falsehood. 26. Question. If the resurrection takes place for the recompense of each person's way of life, how is it that infants, or even those who die in the womb, do not rise superfluously, receiving neither rewards for deeds nor relief or affliction because of their age","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":40,"ref":"p40","source":"ἄωρον λα βεῖν δυνάμενα αἴσθησιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Τῷ πιστεύοντι ἀληθὲς εἶναι τὸ \"σπείρεται ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ, ἐγείρεται ἐν δυνάμει\", τούτῳ δυνατὸν καὶ πρέπον ἐστὶ καὶ τὸ πιστεύειν τῶν βρεφῶν τὴν ἀνάστασιν· ὁ γὰρ τὴν ἀφθαρ σίαν αὐτοῖς παρέχων, δύναται καὶ τὴν αἰσθητικὴν τῶν προσόντων ἀγαθῶν χαρίσασθαι αὐτοῖς δύναμιν. πλὴν οὐδὲ \"ἔστιν ἐκεῖ μικρὸς ἢ μέγας\", ἀλλὰ πάντες τὴν πνευματικὴν ἡλικίαν τέλειοι· τὸ γὰρ \"ἐγείρεται ἐν δυνάμει\" οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἢ τοῦτο ἐμφαίνει. ἔτι δέ, εἰ οὐ γίνεται τῶν βρεφῶν ἀνάστασις, εὑρεθήσεται ὁ θεὸς μάτην πλασάμενος αὐτά. εἰ δὲ μάτην ποιεῖ ὁ θεὸς οὐδέν, ἀνάγκη ἄρα καὶ αὐτὰ εἰς τὸ εἶναι παραγενέσθαι διὰ τῆς ἀναστάσεως. πῶς δὲ οὐκ ἄκαιρον τὸ πρὸς τὴν ἐκδίκησιν τῆς τῶν βρεφῶν ἀναιρέσεως κατακρίνειν τὸν Ἡρώδην, τῶν βρεφῶν οὐκ ὄντων τῶν ἐκδικουμένων; μαρτυρεῖ δὲ τούτοις τὰ τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ Ἰωάννου ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τῆς μητρός, τῆς ἀγαλλιάσεως σκιρτήματα, καὶ ὁ ὕμνος τῶν νηπίων καὶ θηλαζόντων. ΚΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐψευσμένον ὑπάρχει καὶ μάταιον τὸ ὑπὸ τῶν αἱρετικῶν διδόμενον βάπτισμα, διατί οἱ ὀρθόδοξοι τὸν προσ φεύγοντα τῇ ὀρθοδοξίᾳ αἱρετικὸν οὐ βαπτίζουσιν, ἀλλ' ὡς ἐν ἀλη θεῖ τῷ νόθῳ ἐῶσι βαπτίσματι; εἰ δὲ καὶ χειροτονίαν τύχοι παρ' ἐκείνων δεξάμενος καὶ ταύτην ὡς βεβαίαν αὐτοὶ ἀποδέχονται, πῶς οὖν ὁ δεχθεὶς καὶ οἱ δεξάμενοι τὸ ἄμεμπτον ἔχουσιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Τοῦ αἱρετικοῦ ἐπὶ τὴν ὀρθοδοξίαν ἐρχομένου.","english":"Question. Can infants attain perception? Answer. To one who believes that \"it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power\" is true, it is both possible and fitting to believe also in the resurrection of infants; for he who grants them incorruption is able also to bestow on them the perceptive power of the good things that are present. Moreover, \"there is no small or great there,\" but all are perfect in spiritual stature; for \"it is raised in power\" signifies nothing other than this. Furthermore, if there is no resurrection of infants, God will be found to have fashioned them in vain. But if God makes nothing in vain, it is necessary that they too come into being through the resurrection. And how is it not out of place to condemn Herod for the avenging of the slaughter of the infants, if the infants are not those who are avenged? To these things testify the leaping for joy of John the Baptist in his mother's womb, and the hymn of infants and nursing babes. 27. Question. If the baptism given by heretics is false and vain, why do the orthodox not baptize a heretic who flees to orthodoxy, but leave him in the spurious baptism as though it were true? And if he happens to have received ordination from them, and they themselves accept it as valid, how then do the one received and those who received him keep themselves blameless? Answer. When a heretic comes to orthodoxy.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":41,"ref":"p41","source":"τὸ σφάλμα διορθοῦται, τῆς μὲν κακοδοξίας τῇ μεταθέσει τοῦ φρονήματος, τοῦ δὲ βαπτίσματος τῇ ἐπιχρίσει τοῦ ἁγίου μύρου, τῆς δὲ χειροτονίας τῇ χειροθεσίᾳ, καὶ οὐδὲν τῶν πάλαι μένει ἄλυτον. ΚΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ οὐχ ἥμαρτεν ὁ Ἰὼβ ἀρασάμενος τὴν ἡμέραν, δῆλον ὅτι ὡς δίκαιος εἰσηκούσθη· καὶ εἰ μὲν ἠκούσθη, τὸν οἰκεῖον ὁ θεὸς ἀνέτρεψεν ὅρον καὶ ἀνάγκη ζητεῖν ἐν τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ τὴν ἐκείνης τῆς ἡμέρας ἀπώλειαν· εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἠκούσθη, πῶς οὐ δείκνυται ἁμαρτωλὸς παρακουσθείς; \"θέλημα γάρ\" φησί \"τῶν φοβουμένων αὐτὸν ποιήσει\"· περὶ δὲ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν, ὅτι \"ἐὰν πληθύνητε τὴν δέησιν, οὐκ εἰσακούσομαι ὑμῶν\". Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ σκοπὸς τοῦ Ἰὼβ οὗτος ἦν ἐν τῇ προκειμένῃ κατάρᾳ, ὡς εἰ ἔλεγεν \"εἴθε ἦν ἡ ἡμέρα ἐκείνη, ἐν ᾗ ἐγεν νήθην, κατὰ τὴν ἡμέραν ταύτην κεκατηραμένη\". διατί; \"ἵνα ἐγώ\" φησί \"μὴ ἐγεννήθην\". οὐ γὰρ ἐνδέχεταί τινα γεννηθῆναι ἐν τῇ τοιαύτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ οὕτω κεκατηραμένῃ. ἢ οὐκ ἔστιν οὖν ἡ κατάρα αὕτη οὕτω γεγενημένη, ὡς ἀναμένουσα τὴν ἔκβασιν; εἰ γὰρ ἦν οὕτως γεγενημένη, ἀνεκαλέσατο ἂν τὴν ἰδίαν φωνήν, ἀπαλλαγέντος αὐτοῦ τῶν θλίψεων καὶ ἐν τοῖς κρείττοσι γενομένου· διὰ γὰρ τὴν ὑπερβολὴν τῆς αὐτοῦ θλίψεως τὰ τῆς κατάρας ἐφθέγξατο ῥήματα, ἧς ἀπαλλαγεὶς οὐκ ἔστι δῆλον ὅτι τὴν αὐτὴν περὶ τῆς αὐτῆς ἡμέρας εἶχε γνώμην.","english":"The error is corrected—the evil opinion by the change of mind, the baptism by the anointing of holy myrrh, the ordination by the laying on of hands—and nothing of the former things remains unresolved. Question 28. If Job did not sin when he cursed the day, it is clear that as a righteous man he was heard; and if he was heard, God overturned his own decree, and it is necessary to seek in the divine Scripture the destruction of that day; but if he was not heard, how is he not shown to be a sinner, having been disregarded? For \"the will of those who fear him he will do,\" it says; but concerning sinners, \"though you multiply your supplication, I will not hear you.\" Answer. The purpose of Job in the curse set before us was this, as if he were saying, \"Would that that day had been, in which I was born, cursed according to this day.\" Why? \"That I,\" he says, \"had not been born.\" For it is not possible for anyone to be born on such a day, so cursed as it is. Or is this curse, then, not made in such a way as to await its outcome? For if it had been made so, he would have revoked his own utterance, once he had been released from his afflictions and had come into better circumstances; for it was because of the excess of his affliction that he uttered the words of the curse, and once released from it, it is clear that he did not hold the same opinion concerning the same day.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":42,"ref":"p42","source":"ΚΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς ἀπηγορευμένοις ὑπὸ τῶν εὐσεβῶν ἡ τῶν παλμῶν ἐστι παρατήρησις, διατί οἱ εὐσεβεῖς πάσῃ δυνάμει ταύτην ἀπωθεῖσθαι βουλόμενοι οὐκ ἰσχύουσιν, ἢ φαιδρὸν ἢ σκυθρωπὸν μηνυούσης ταύτης; καὶ εἰ μὲν φαῦλον τοῦτο, πῶς παρὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν ἐπιγίνεται πρόθεσιν; εἰ δὲ ἀγαθόν, ὅπερ οὐκ οἶμαι, τίνος ἕνεκεν ἀπηγόρευται; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἡ μὲν πρόγνωσις τῶν μελλόντων τῆς ψυχῆς ἐστιν ὑπὸ τοῦ θείου πνεύματος φωτιζομένης πρὸς τὴν εἴδησιν τῶν τέως ἀδήλων καὶ οὐχ ὑπὸ τῆς ἀβουλήτου κινήσεως τοῦ σώ ματος· ὁ δὲ παλμὸς πάθος ἐστὶ σωματικὸν ἐκ τῆς διαδρομῆς τοῦ φυσικοῦ πνεύματος ἐν τῷ σώματι ὑφιστάμενον πάντων τῶν ζῴων. διὸ ἀνάξιον ἔκριναν οἱ ἅγιοι εἶναι κριτήριον τῶν μελλόντων τὸ τοιοῦτον σωματικὸν κίνημα. καθάπερ οἱ πταρμοὶ ῥινῶν καὶ ἦχοι ὤτων παρὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν παραγίνονται πρόθεσιν, οὕτω καὶ ὁ παλμός· ἔτι δὲ τοῖς εἰληφόσι τῆς μελλούσης καταστάσεως τὴν ἐλπίδα καὶ ἕνα ἔχουσι τὸν σκοπόν, τὸ πρὸς ἐκείνην διὰ παντὸς παρεσκευασμένως ὑποβλέπειν, περιττόν ἐστι τὸ φαιδρὸν ἢ σκυθρωπὸν ἐνταῦθα διὰ παλμῶν προγινώσκειν. καὶ εἰ ὁ αὐτὸς παλ μὸς ὁ προμηνύων πλοῦτον τῷ βιωτικῷ ἀνθρώπῳ προσγίνεται καὶ τῷ ἀσκητῇ, πῶς οὐ διέψευσται ἡ διὰ παλμοῦ προμήνυσις","english":"29. Question. If the observation of pulsations is among the things forbidden by the pious, why do the pious, wishing with all their power to reject it, not prevail, since it indicates either a cheerful or a gloomy outcome? And if this is a base thing, how does it arise contrary to our intention? But if it is good—which I do not think—for what reason has it been forbidden? Answer. Foreknowledge of future things belongs to the soul when it is illuminated by the divine Spirit for the knowledge of things hitherto unknown, and not to the involuntary motion of the body. But the pulsation is a bodily affection subsisting from the coursing of the natural spirit in the body, in all living creatures. Therefore the saints judged such a bodily movement unworthy to be a criterion of future things. Just as sneezings of the nostrils and sounds of the ears arise contrary to our intention, so also does the pulsation. Moreover, for those who have received the hope of the future state and have one aim—to look forward to that continually in a state of readiness—it is superfluous to foreknow here the cheerful or the gloomy through pulsations. And if the same pulsation that foretokens wealth occurs to the worldly man and also to the ascetic, how is the foretoken through pulsation not proved false?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":43,"ref":"p43","source":"τοῦ πλούτου, τῆς προαιρέσεως τοῦ ἀσκητοῦ οὐ μόνον τὴν ἐπίκτησιν τῶν οὐ παρόντων οὐχ αἱρουμένης, ἀλλ' οὐδὲ τὴν κτῆσιν τῶν παρόντων; Λʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ εἰς θάνατον καὶ φθορὰν οἱ ἁλιεῖς τοὺς ἰχθύας ἀπὸ τῶν ὑδάτων λαμβάνουσι, πῶς \"εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον\" ὁ δεσπότης Χριστὸς μέλλων διὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων τοὺς ἀνθρώπους εἰσαγαγεῖν \"ἁλιεῖς\" αὐτοὺς εἶναι \"ἀνθρώπων\" ἐπηγγείλατο; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ ἐχρῆν τοὺς ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἀγρευομένους ἀνθρώπους τῇ σαγήνῃ τῆς βασιλείας ἀποθανεῖν ἀπὸ τῆς προτέρας αὐτῶν ἐν ἁμαρτίαις ζωῆς, διὰ τοῦτο τῇ ἄγρᾳ τῶν ἰχθύων παρείκασεν ὁ κύριος τὴν ἄγραν τῶν ἀνθρώπων. προσέ θηκε δὲ τὸ \"εἰς ζωήν\", τὸ ἐλλεῖπον τοῦ ὑποδείγματος τῷ ὑπο δεικνυμένῳ προσθέμενος.\n\nΛΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ σώφρονι λογισμῷ οἱ μοναχοὶ κατεχόμενοι τὰς γαμικὰς ἡδονὰς ἀπεστράφησαν, διατί ἐν ταῖς καθ' ὕπνον φαντασίαις τὰ ἀβούλητα πάσχουσι, καὶ οὐ μόνον εἰς τὰς τυχούσας ἀλλ' ἔστιν ὅτε μητράσι καὶ ἀδελφαῖς ὁμιλεῖν ἐν τῇ φαντα σίᾳ νομίζουσι; τίσιν οὖν χρηστέον πρὸς τὴν ἀπαλλαγὴν τοῦ τοιού του πολέμου; καὶ εἰ τὸν πολεμηθέντα δεῖ τῶν μυστηρίων ἀπέ χεσθαι καὶ εἰ προσιέναι αὐτοῖς χρή, ἢ λουσάμενον ἢ ἑτέρῳ τινὶ χρησάμενον, ὥστε μὴ ἰουδαϊκῶς καθαίρεσθαι δίδαξον, ἐπειδὴ πολλή ἐστι περὶ τούτου καὶ παρὰ τῶν λογικωτέρων ἡ ζήτησις. Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ οἱ ἀνακείμενοι θεῷ ἄγρυπνον ἔχουσιν ἐχθρὸν ἀντίπαλον, τὸν πᾶσι τοῖς δυνατοῖς αὐτῷ τρόποις μηχανώμενον θεῖναι τοῖς εὐσεβέσι μῶμον, διὰ τοῦτο τὰ ἀβούλητα καθ' ὕπνον πάσχουσι.","english":"of wealth, since the ascetic's purpose does not choose even the acquisition of things not present, nor indeed the possession of things present? 30. Question. If fishermen take fish from the waters unto death and corruption, how is it that the Lord Christ, being about to lead men through the apostles \"unto eternal life,\" promised that they would be \"fishers of men\"? Answer. Since it was necessary that the men caught by the apostles with the net of the kingdom should die to their former life in sins, for this reason the Lord compared the catching of men to the catching of fish. And he added \"unto life,\" supplying to what was indicated what was lacking in the illustration.\n\n31. Question. If monks, possessed by a sound reasoning, have turned away from the pleasures of marriage, why do they suffer involuntary things in fantasies during sleep, and not only do they think in fantasy that they converse with chance women, but sometimes even with mothers and sisters? With what, then, should one deal for deliverance from such warfare? And whether the one who has been warred against ought to abstain from the mysteries, and whether one should approach them, either after bathing or after using something else, so as not to be cleansed in a Jewish manner, teach, since there is much inquiry about this even among the more rational. Answer. Since those who are devoted to God have an unsleeping enemy and adversary, who by all the means in his power contrives to put a blemish on the pious, for this reason they suffer involuntary things during sleep.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":44,"ref":"p44","source":"καίτοι εἰδὼς ὁ ἀντίπαλος, ὅτι τοῖς οὐκ ἐφ' ἡμῖν οὔτε ἐπὶ τοῖς σεμνοῖς ἐπαινούμεθα, οὔτε ἐπὶ τοῖς αἰσχροῖς ψεγό μεθα–ὁ γὰρ ἔπαινος καὶ ὁ ψόγος τῶν μετὰ συγκαταθέσεως τοῦ λογισμοῦ ὑφ' ἡμῶν πραττομένων ἐστί–, καὶ ὅτι τὰ ἐνύπνια τῶν οὐκ ἐφ' ἡμῖν ἐστιν, ἀλλ' ὅμως καὶ διὰ τῶν ἐνυπνίων κινεῖ ἐν ἡμῖν ἀμφοτέρων τὰς πράξεις, καὶ τῶν σεμνῶν καὶ τῶν αἰσχρῶν ταύτας ἔχων ἐν ἑαυτῷ τὰς ἐλπίδας, μήπως ἢ τῇ τῶν σεμνῶν καὶ τῶν αἰσχρῶν ἐργασίᾳ ἐξεγείραι ἡμᾶς εἰς ματαίαν καύχησιν τῶν ἡμῖν μὴ πεπραγμένων, ἢ τῇ τῶν αἰσχρῶν ἐργασίᾳ δυνηθείη εὑρεῖν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ τῇ ἀνόμῳ πράξει τερπομένους. ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν ἰδεῖν τὰ τοιαῦτα ἐνύπνια οὐκ ἔστιν ἐφ' ἡμῖν· τὸ δὲ τερφθῆναι ἐπὶ τῇ οὕτως ἀβουλήτῳ πράξει ἢ λυπηθῆναι, τοῦτο ἐφ' ἡμῖν ἐστι. κἂν μὲν οὖν εὑρῇ ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ τῇ ἀβουλήτῳ πράξει τερπομένους, καυχᾶται ὡς νικητὴς ὁ ἀντίπαλος· ἐὰν δὲ λυπουμένους ἡμᾶς, μα ταιοῦται τῇ βουλῇ ἡττώμενος. ἱκανὸν οὖν ὑπάρχει πρὸς τὴν ἀπαλ λαγὴν τοῦ κακοῦ τὸ λυπηθῆναι ἐπὶ τῷ ἀβουλήτως συμβεβηκότι καὶ δάκρυσιν ἀποπλύνειν τὸ μυσαρὸν τῶν οὕτως ἀβουλήτως ἐν ἡμῖν ὑφισταμένων φαντασιῶν, ἀπέχεσθαι δὲ τοὺς οὕτω τὰ ἀβούλητα πάσχοντας τῆς κοινωνίας τῶν θείων μυστηρίων οὐδ' ὅλως δίκαιόν ἐστιν· εἰ δὲ μή γε, ἀναιροῦμεν κατὰ τοῦτο τῶν βουλητῶν τε καὶ τῶν ἀβουλήτων κακῶν τὴν διαφοράν.","english":"And yet the adversary knows that for things not in our power we are neither praised for what is noble nor blamed for what is shameful—for praise and blame pertain to things done by us with the assent of the reason—and that dreams are among things not in our power; nevertheless even through dreams he stirs up in us the deeds of both, both the noble and the shameful, holding these hopes in himself: that either by the working of noble and shameful things he might rouse us to vainglorious boasting over things we have not done, or by the working of shameful things he might be able to find us taking pleasure in lawless action. But to see such dreams is not in our power; yet to take pleasure in such an involuntary act, or to be grieved by it, this is in our power. So then, if he finds us taking pleasure in the involuntary act, the adversary boasts as a victor; but if he finds us grieved, he is made vain by his purpose, being defeated. Therefore, to be grieved over what has happened involuntarily and to wash away with tears the foulness of the fantasies thus involuntarily arising in us is sufficient for deliverance from evil; but for those who suffer such involuntary things to abstain from the communion of the divine mysteries is not at all just. And if this is not so, we thereby abolish the difference between voluntary and involuntary evils.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":45,"ref":"p45","source":"ΛΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῷ σίτῳ συναυξάνεσθαι τὰ ζιζάνια ὁ κύριος καὶ δεσπότης Χριστὸς ἀπεφήνατο, πῶς τὰ μὲν ζιζάνια πεπλήθυνται, σχεδὸν δὲ ὁ σῖτος ἐξέλιπε; καὶ τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις τοῦ εἶναι σῖτον τὸν ἐκλείψαντα; πῶς δὲ τῆς συναυξήσεως τούτων ἡ πρόρ ρησις οὐ διέψευσται; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀπόδειξις τοῦ σῖτον εἶναι τὸν ἐκλείψαντα αὕτη ἐστίν, ἡ περὶ αὐτοῦ πρόρρησις λέγουσα· \"διὰ τὸ πληθυν θῆναι τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ψυγήσεται ἡ ἀγάπη τῶν πολλῶν\". καὶ πάλιν· \"ἐν ὑστέροις καιροῖς ἀφίστανταί τινες τῆς πίστεως καὶ προσέχουσι πνεύμασι πλάνης καὶ διδασκαλίαις δαιμονίων\". καὶ πάλιν· \"ἀπὸ μὲν τῆς ἀληθείας ἀποστρέφονται, ἐπὶ δὲ τοὺς μύθους ἐκτραπήσονται\". καὶ πάλιν· \"εἰσελεύσονται λύκοι βαρεῖς εἰς ὑμᾶς, μὴ φειδόμενοι τοῦ ποιμνίου τοῦ ἀποσπᾶν τοὺς μαθητὰς ὀπίσω αὑτῶν\". ὅτι δὲ ἕως τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος οὐκ ἐκλείπει ὁ σῖτος, δηλοῖ ὁ κύριος λέγων· \"διὰ δὲ τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς, οὓς ἐξε λέξατο ὁ πατήρ, κολοβωθήσονται αἱ ἡμέραι ἐκεῖναι\". ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν συνέβη τι τῷ σίτῳ, τὸ μὴ εἰρημένον περὶ αὐτοῦ αὐξανομένου τε καὶ ἐκλειπομένου, δῆλον ὅτι διέψευσται ὁ","english":"32. Question. If the Lord and Master Christ declared that the tares grow together with the wheat, how is it that the tares have multiplied while the wheat has almost failed? And what is the proof that what has failed is wheat? And how is the prophecy of their growing together not falsified? Answer. This is the proof that what has failed is wheat: the prediction concerning it, which says, \"Because iniquity has multiplied, the love of many will grow cold.\" And again: \"In later times some will depart from the faith, attending to deceiving spirits and teachings of demons.\" And again: \"They turn away from the truth and will be turned aside to myths.\" And again: \"Fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock, to draw away the disciples after themselves.\" But that the wheat does not fail until the consummation of the age, the Lord makes clear when he says, \"But for the sake of the elect, whom the Father chose, those days will be shortened.\" But if something has happened to the wheat—the very thing not spoken of concerning it, that it both grows and fails—it is clear that he has been falsified","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":46,"ref":"p46","source":"περὶ αὐτοῦ λόγος· εἰ δὲ ἐξ ἀρχῆς τοῦ κηρύγματος ἕως τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος πάντα τὰ συμβησόμενα αὐτῷ διὰ τῶν προρρήσεων δεδήλωται, φανερὸν ὑπάρχει ὅτι οὐδαμῶς διέψευσται ὁ περὶ αὐτοῦ λόγος, ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν ἔστι τὰ ζιζάνια, ἀνάγκη εἶναι καὶ τὸν σῖτον· ἐκ γὰρ τῆς ἀλλή λων παραθέσεως ὁ μὲν σῖτος γνωρίζεται ὅπερ ἐστίν, ὡσαύτως καὶ τὰ ζιζάνια· καὶ θατέρου μὴ ὄντος, οὐδὲ τὸ ἕτερον γνωρίζεται ὅπερ ἐστίν.\n\nΛΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πρὸ μὲν τοῦ πάθους ὁ κύριος ηὔχετο ἁγια σθῆναι καὶ τηρηθῆναι ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς τοὺς μαθητάς, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ὁ Ἰούδας ἀπώλετο, πῶς ἡ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν προσενεχθεῖσα εὐχὴ φαίνεται δεδεγμένη; πῶς δὲ δείκνυται ἀληθές, ὅτι \"οἶδα ὅτι πάντοτέ μου ἀκούεις\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἡ μὲν τοῦ Ἰούδα ἀπώλεια ἔκτοτε γεγένηται,ἐξ οὗ τε λαβὼν ὁ κύριος τὸν ψωμὸν καὶ βάψας αὐτῷ ἐπέδωκε· καὶ λαβὼν ὁ Ἰούδας τὸ ψωμίον εἰσῆλθεν εἰς αὐτὸν ὁ Σατανᾶς, καὶ ἐξελθὼν ἀπέρρηξεν ἑαυτὸν τῶν λοιπῶν μαθητῶν. ἡ δὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν μαθητῶν εὐχὴ μετὰ τὸν χωρισμὸν τοῦ Ἰούδα ἐγένετο, καὶ τοῦτο δείκνυται ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς εὐχῆς· εὐξάμενος γὰρ ὁ κύριος ἔλε γεν· \"οὓς δέδωκάς μοι ἐφύλαξα, καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐξ αὐτῶν ἀπώλετο, εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱὸς τῆς ἀπωλείας, ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ\". γέγονε μὲν οὖν πρῶτον ἡ τοῦ Ἰούδα ἀπώλεια, ὕστερον δὲ ἡ ὑπὲρ τῶν μα θητῶν εὐχή, ἔπειτα τὸ πάθος τοῦ κυρίου. ΛΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὁ θεός ἐστι δημιουργὸς καὶ δεσπότης τῆς κτίσεως, πῶς τὰ Ἀπολλωνίου τελέσματα ἐν τοῖς μέρεσι τῆς κτί σεως δύνανται; καὶ γὰρ θαλάττης ὁρμὰς καὶ ἀνέμων φορὰς καὶ μυῶν καὶ θηρίων ἐπιδρομάς, ὡς ὁρῶμεν, κωλύουσι.","english":"The account concerning him: but if from the beginning of the preaching until the consummation of the age all the things that would befall him have been made clear through the prophecies, it is evident that the account concerning him has in no way been falsified; but if the tares exist, the wheat must also exist; for from their juxtaposition the wheat is recognized for what it is, and likewise the tares; and if the one does not exist, neither is the other recognized for what it is.\n\n33. Question. If before the passion the Lord prayed that the disciples be sanctified and kept by the Father, and after these things Judas perished, how does the prayer offered on their behalf appear to have been received? And how is it shown to be true that \"I know that you always hear me\"? Answer. The perdition of Judas took place from that time when the Lord, having taken the morsel and dipped it, gave it to him; and when Judas had taken the morsel, Satan entered into him, and going out he separated himself from the rest of the disciples. But the prayer on behalf of the disciples took place after the departure of Judas, and this is shown from the prayer itself; for when the Lord had prayed, he said: \"Those whom you have given me I have guarded, and none of them perished except the son of perdition, that the scripture might be fulfilled.\" So then, first the perdition of Judas took place, later the prayer on behalf of the disciples, and then the passion of the Lord.\n\n34. Question. If God is the creator and master of creation, how are the works of Apollonius able to operate in the parts of creation? For, as we see, they hinder the rush of the sea and the courses of the winds and the inroads of mice and wild beasts.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":47,"ref":"p47","source":"καὶ εἰ τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ κυρίου μὲν γεγονότα θαύματα ἐν μόνῃ τῇ διηγήσει φέρεται, τὰ δὲ παρ' ἐκείνου πλεῖστα καὶ ἐπ' αὐτῶν δεικνύμενα τῶν πραγμάτων, πῶς οὐκ ἀπατᾷ τοὺς ὁρῶντας; καὶ εἰ μὲν κατὰ θείαν τοῦτο συγχώρησιν γέγονε, πῶς ὁδηγὸς πρὸς ἑλληνισμὸν οὐ γέγονεν ἡ τοιαύτη συγχώρησις; εἰ δὲ μὴ τοῦτο, πῶς οὐ δυνάμει τῶν δαιμόνων ἐκεῖνα γεγένηται; πάλιν δέ, εἴπερ [ὁ θεὸς] ὡς ἀγαπητῷ γινομένῳ ἡδόμενος ἐκείνῳ συνήργησε, διατί μὴ διὰ προφητῶν ἢ δι' ἀπο στόλων τὰ τοιαῦτα γεγένηται; εἰ δὲ μὴ ἠρέσκετο ὡς φαύλῳ, τίνος ἕνεκεν τὸ φαῦλον ἢ εὐθὺς οὐκ ἐκώλυσεν, ἢ μετὰ βραχὺ οὐ κατέλυσεν, ἀλλ' ἕως αἰῶνος τῶν μερῶν τῆς κτίσεως κρατεῖν συνεχώρησεν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ μὲν Ἀπολλώνιος, ὡς ἀνὴρ ἐπιστήμων τῶνφυσικῶν δυνάμεων καὶ τῶν ἐν αὐταῖς συμπαθειῶν τε καὶ ἀντιπαθειῶν, κατὰ ταύτην τὴν ἐπιστήμην τὰ τελέσματα ἐποιεῖτο, οὐ κατὰ τὴν θείαν αὐθεντίαν. διὸ ἐν ἅπασι τοῖς ἀποτελέσμασιν ἐδεήθη τῆς τῶν ἐπιτηδείων ὑλῶν παραλήψεως, συνεργούσης αὐτῷ πρὸς τὴν τοῦ τελουμένου ἐκπλήρωσιν. ὁ δὲ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν Χριστὸς κατὰ τὴν θείαν αὑτοῦ αὐθεντίαν ποιῶν τὰ θαύματα, οὐδαμῶς ἐδεήθη ὕλης, ἀλλὰ τοῖς προστάγμασιν αὐτοῦ καὶ προρρήσεσιν ἠκο λούθει καὶ ἀκολουθοῦσι τὰ πράγματα. καὶ τὰ μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἀπολλωνίου γεγονότα τελέσματα, ἐπειδὴ κατὰ τὴν ἐπιστήμην γεγένηνται τῶν φυσικῶν δυνάμεων πρὸς τὴν σωματικὴν τῶν ἀνθρώπων εὐεργεσίαν, οὐκ ἀνέτρεψεν ὁ κύριος· αὐτὸν δὲ τὸν δαίμονα τὸν ἐν τῷ ἐκείνου ἀγάλματι ἱδρυμένον, τὸν ἐν ταῖς μαντείαις ἀπατήσαντα τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ὡς θεὸν σέβειν καὶ τιμᾶν τὸν Ἀπολλώνιον ἐφίμωσε, καταργήσας αὐτοῦ τὰς μαντείας·","english":"And if the wonders done by the Lord are reported only in narrative, while those done by that man are for the most part displayed in the very facts themselves, how does he not deceive those who see them? And if this came about by divine permission, how has such permission not become a guide to Hellenism? But if not this, how were those things done by the power of demons? Again, if God, delighting in him as one beloved, cooperated with him, why were such things not done through prophets or through apostles? But if he was not pleased with him as wicked, for what reason did he not either immediately prevent the wicked thing, or after a short time destroy it, but permitted it to prevail over the parts of creation until the end of the age? Answer. Apollonius, as a man learned in the natural powers and in the sympathies and antipathies within them, performed his effects according to this knowledge, not according to divine authority. Therefore in all his effects he needed the procurement of suitable materials, cooperating with him for the completion of what was being accomplished. But our Savior Christ, performing his wonders according to his own divine authority, in no way needed material, but his commands and declarations were followed, and the facts follow. And the effects wrought by Apollonius, since they came about according to the knowledge of natural powers for the bodily benefit of men, the Lord did not overturn; but the demon himself, established in that man's statue, who in his oracles deceived men to worship and honor Apollonius as a god, he silenced, abolishing his oracles.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":48,"ref":"p48","source":"σὺν αὐτῷ δὲ καὶ τῶν λοι πῶν δαιμόνων τῶν ἐν τῷ θεῶν ὀνόματι ὑπὸ τῶν Ἑλλήνων τιμωμένων καθεῖλε τὴν δυναστείαν, καθὼς ὁρᾶται τὰ πράγματα. ἔχοντες δὲ ἐν τούτοις τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ δυνάμεως τὰ γνωρί σματα, οὐ χρὴ λέγειν τὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ θαύματα ἐν ψιλῇ κεῖσθαι διηγήσει.\n\nΛΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ \"ἐπαιδεύθη Μωυσῆς ἐν πάσῃ σοφίᾳ Αἰγυπτίων καὶ ἦν δυνατὸς ἐν ἔργοις καὶ λόγοις\", καθώς φησιν ἡ γραφή, πῶς ἀστρονομίαν καὶ γεωμετρίαν καὶ ἀστρολογίαν καὶ τὰ τούτοις ἑπό μενα οὐ μετῄει ὁ αὐτὸς μακάριος προφήτης; τῶν γὰρ Αἰγυπτίων τότε ἡ σοφία τὰ τῆς πλάνης ὑπῆρχε διδάσκουσα διδάγματα. διατί οὖν ἐπὶ τοιούτοις λόγοις ἢ ἔργοις θαυμάζεται; Ἀπόκρισις.\n\nΘαυμάζει τὸν προφήτην ἡ θεία γραφὴ ἐπὶ τῇ δυνάμει τῶν ἔργων καὶ τῶν λόγων, οὐχ ἕνεκεν τῶν λόγων καὶ τῶν ἔργων καθ' αὑτά· ἀνάξια γὰρ ἦν ἐκεῖνα καθ' αὑτὰ πρὸς τὰ ἐγκώμια τοῦ προφήτου· ἀλλ' ἐπειδὴ δι' ἑκατέρας μὲν περίβλεπτος ὑπῆρχε τοῖς Αἰγυπτίοις ὁ προφήτης, τῆς τε τοῦ λόγου παιδείας καὶ τῆς τοῦ βίου κοσμικῆς λαμπρότητος, ἀμφοτέρων δὲ τὴν εἰς θεὸν εὐσέβειαν προετίμησε, διὰ τοῦτο αὐτὸν ἐθαύμασεν ἡ γραφή. ἀστρονομία δὲ καὶ ἀστρολογία καὶ γεωμετρία παρ' Αἰγυπτίοις τότε χυδαῖά τε καὶ πεζὰ καὶ ἀγοραῖα μαθήματα λελόγιστο. τίμια δὲ ἦν παρ' αὐτοῖς τότε μαθήματα τὰ ἱερογλυφικὰ καλούμενα, τὰ ἐν τοῖς ἀδύτοις οὐ τοῖς τυχοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἐγκρίτοις παραδιδόμενα· ὧν ὁ προφήτης, εἰ καὶ τὴν εἴδησιν εἶχεν, ἀλλ' οὐκέτι καὶ τὴν χρῆσιν, ὡς ἀντικειμένην τῇ κατὰ θεὸν πολιτείᾳ τῶν Ἑβραίων.","english":"And along with him he also overthrew the dominion of the remaining demons who were honored by the Greeks under the name of gods, just as the facts are seen to be. And since in these things we have the marks of Christ's power, one must not say that Christ's wonders lie in mere narrative.\n\n35. Question. If \"Moses was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and was mighty in deeds and words,\" as the Scripture says, how is it that the same blessed prophet did not pursue astronomy and geometry and astrology and the subjects that follow these? For the wisdom of the Egyptians at that time was teaching the lessons of error. Why then is he admired for such words or deeds? Answer.\n\nThe divine Scripture admires the prophet for the power of his deeds and words, not on account of the words and deeds themselves; for those things were in themselves unworthy of the prophet's praises; but because through both the prophet was conspicuous to the Egyptians—both through the education of speech and through the worldly splendor of his life—and he preferred piety toward God above both, for this reason the Scripture admired him. But astronomy and astrology and geometry were at that time reckoned by the Egyptians to be vulgar, commonplace, and market-place studies. But the honored studies among them at that time were the so-called hieroglyphics, which were handed down in the inner sanctuaries not to just anyone but to the select; of these the prophet, even if he had knowledge, did not however also have their use, as being opposed to the Hebrew polity according to God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":49,"ref":"p49","source":"δι' ἣν καταφρονήσας πάσης τῆς ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ βασιλικῆς δυναστείας τε καὶ τιμῆς εἵλετο συγκακουχεῖσθαι τῷ λαῷ τοῦ θεοῦ.\n\n45 Λςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πάντα τὰ ὕδατα αἷμα ὑπὸ Μωσέως γέγονε, πῶς ἐπάγει ἡ γραφὴ τὸ \"ἐποίησαν δὲ καὶ οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ ὡσαύτως οἱ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων\"; ἢ γὰρ ψευδὲς τὸ πάντα γενέσθαι αἷμα ὑπὸ Μωυσέως τὰ ὕδατα, ἢ πάλιν τὸ τοὺς ἐπαοιδοὺς πεποιηκέναι ὡσαύτως. καὶ περὶ τῶν λοιπῶν τῶν κατ' αὐτοὺς θαυμάτων ὁ αὐ τὸς λόγος. Ἀπόκρισις. Πάντων τῶν ὑδάτων τῶν ἐπάνω τῆς γῆς αἷμα γενομένων, ἠναγκάζοντο οἱ Αἰγύπτιοι κύκλῳ τοῦ ποταμοῦ ὀρύττειν φρέατα καὶ ἀντλεῖν ὕδωρ, ποτίζειν τε ἐξ αὐτοῦ ἑαυτούς τε καὶ τὰ ζῷα αὑτῶν καὶ τὰ θρέμματα. ἐκ τούτου οὖν τοῦ ὕδατος, τοῦ ἐκ τῶν φρεάτων ἀντλουμένου, ἐποίησαν οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ τὸ αἷμα, καὶ οὐδαμῶς διέψευσται ὁ λόγος. καὶ τὰ μὲν ὑπὸ Μωσέως γενόμενα θαύματα, ἅτε κατὰ τὴν θείαν γεγενημένα ἐνέργειαν, κατὰ μετα βολὴν γεγένηται φύσεως, τοῦ προκειμένου εἰς τὴν φύσιν τοῦ ἐκτε λουμένου μεθισταμένου. τὰ δὲ ὑπὸ τῶν ἐπαοιδῶν γενόμενα κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν ἐγένοντο τῶν δαιμόνων, τῶν φαντασάντων τὰς ὄψεις τῶν ὁρώντων τὸν μὴ ὄφιν ὁρᾶν ὡς ὄφιν καὶ τὸ μὴ αἷμα ὡς αἷμα καὶ τοὺς μὴ βατράχους ὡς βατράχους.","english":"Because of this, despising all the royal power and honor in Egypt, he chose to be mistreated along with the people of God.\n\n45 Question. If all the waters were turned to blood by Moses, how does the Scripture add, \"And the enchanters of the Egyptians did likewise\"? For either it is false that all the waters were turned to blood by Moses, or again that the enchanters did likewise. And the same argument applies to the rest of the wonders done by them. Answer. When all the waters above the earth had become blood, the Egyptians were compelled to dig wells all around the river and to draw water, and from it to give drink to themselves and their animals and their livestock. From this water, then, which was drawn from the wells, the enchanters made blood, and the account is in no way false. And the wonders done by Moses, since they were performed by divine power, came about by a change of nature, the element in question being transformed into the nature of that into which it was changed. But the things done by the enchanters were done by the operation of demons, who impressed upon the sight of those who saw so that what was not a snake was seen as a snake, and what was not blood as blood, and what were not frogs as frogs.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":50,"ref":"p50","source":"ΛΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐναντία ἑαυτῷ Μωυσῆς οὐκ ἐδίδασκε, τὰ μὲν ὀστέα τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ ἐπαγόμενος, τὸν δὲ ἁπτόμενον νεκροῦ ὡς ἀκάθαρτον μυσαττόμενος, καὶ εἰ ἦν τις ἄλογος περὶ τούτων αἰ τία, ταύτην μὲν νυνὶ μάθωμεν· τίνος δὲ ἕνεκεν ἡ γραφὴ οὐκ εἶπε δι' ἣν αἰτίαν ἐκεῖνα ποιῶν Μωυσῆς ταῦτα ἐδίδασκεν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ τελευτῶν Ἰωσὴφ περὶ τῆς μετακομιδῆς τῶν ὀστέων αὑτοῦ ὥρκισε τοὺς υἱοὺς Ἰσραήλ, καὶ ἦν ἀμφό τερα τῷ Μωυσῇ εἰς φυλακὴν προκείμενα, τὸ μὴ παραβαίνειν τὸν ὅρκον καὶ τὸ μὴ ἅπτεσθαι νεκροῦ, διὰ τοῦτο τῇ λύσει τοῦ νόμου, λέγοντος \"μὴ ἅψησθε νεκροῦ\", ἐφύλαξε τὸν ὅρκον ἀπαράβατον· ἀδύνατον γὰρ ἦν αὐτῷ ἀμφότερα φυλάττειν ἀπαράβατα, καὶ τὸν νόμον καὶ τὸν ὅρκον. τῇ μὲν οὖν φυλακῇ τοῦ ὅρκου λύει τὴν ἐλάττονα φυλακὴν τοῦ νόμου· πανταχοῦ γὰρ τὸ ἔλαττον αἱρετώτερον τοῦ μείζονος κακοῦ· καὶ τοιαῦτα πολλὰ εὑρίσκεται ἐν τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ, ἅτινα οὐ λογίζεται ὁ θεὸς εἰς ἁμαρτίαν τῶν παραβαινόντων αὐτὰ διὰ τὴν ἐν αὐτοῖς συμβεβηκυῖαν ἀνάγκην, ὡς τὴν ὀκταήμερον περιτομὴν καὶ τὴν ἑπταήμερον περικύκλωσιν τῆς Ἱεριχὼ καὶ τὴν ἐν σαββάτῳ προσαγωγὴν τῶν θυσιῶν, ἅτινα περιέ χουσι τοῦ σαββάτου τὴν λύσιν. ἔτι δέ, εἰ ἔταξεν ὁ προφήτης τοὺς ἐκ διαδοχῆς βαστάζοντας τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τὰ ὀστέα καὶ κατὰ καιροὺς διὰ τῆς ἐν τῷ καθαρῷ ὕδατι κατὰ τὸν νόμον ἀποπλύσεως τούτους τοῦ μιάσματος καθαρίζεσθαι, οὐδ' οὕτως ἐναντίον ὧν εἶ πέν τι διεπράξατο ὁ προφήτης· τὸ δὲ ζητεῖν διατί οὐκ εἶπεν ὁ προφήτης τούτων τὴν αἰτίαν, ὅμοιόν ἐστι τῷ λέγειν διατί μὴ πᾶσαι αἱ γραφαὶ ἡρμηνευμέναι παρεδόθησαν παρὰ τῶν ἐκτεθεικότων αὐτάς·","english":"37. Question. If Moses was not teaching things contrary to himself—bringing along the bones of Joseph, yet abhorring one who touches a corpse as unclean—and if there was some irrational explanation concerning these things, let us learn it now. But for what reason did the Scripture not state the cause for which Moses, in doing those things, taught these? Answer. Since Joseph at his death put the sons of Israel under oath concerning the transfer of his bones, and both things lay before Moses to be kept—not to transgress the oath and not to touch a corpse—for this reason, by the dissolution of the law that says, \"Do not touch a corpse,\" he kept the oath inviolate; for it was impossible for him to keep both inviolate, both the law and the oath. By keeping the oath, then, he dissolves the lesser observance of the law; for everywhere the lesser evil is preferable to the greater. And many such things are found in the divine Scripture, which God does not reckon as sin for those who transgress them because of the necessity that has befallen them, such as circumcision on the eighth day and the seven-day encirclement of Jericho and the offering of sacrifices on the Sabbath, which involve the dissolution of the Sabbath. Moreover, if the prophet appointed those who in succession carried the bones of Joseph and at the proper times were cleansed from defilement by washing in clean water according to the law, not even in this way did the prophet do anything contrary to what he had said. But to ask why the prophet did not state the cause of these things is like saying why all the Scriptures were not handed down interpreted by those who set them forth.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":51,"ref":"p51","source":"ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἐν τῇ τοῦ πράγματος διηγήσει ἐμφαντικῶς περιέχεται ἡ τοῦ πράγματος αἰτία, διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐδοκίμασε τὸ ἐκθετικῶς ταύτην δηλῶσαι.\n\nΛΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὴν τῶν Φαρισαίων ἐσχηματισμένην ὁ κύριος ἐλέγχων εὐλάβειαν ἔλεγεν ὅτι τάφοι κεκονιαμένοι εἰσί, πε πληρωμένοι ὀστέων νεκρῶν καὶ πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας, καὶ ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὁ ἁπτόμενος νεκροῦ ἀκάθαρτος λέγεται, τί ἄτοπον ἐργάζονται Ἕλληνες τοὺς νεκροὺς καὶ τοὺς τούτων μυσαττόμενοι τάφους, ὑπό τε παλαιᾶς καὶ καινῆς ἀκαθάρτου τοῦ νεκροῦ καλουμένου; πῶς δὲ ἀμφοτέροις ὁ κύριος ἐναντία οὐκ ἔπραξεν, ὅτε τὸν υἱὸν τῆς χήρας ἀνιστῶν ἥψατο τῆς σοροῦ καὶ τὴν θυγατέρα τοῦ Ἰαείρου τῆς χειρὸς ἐκράτησεν; εἰ γὰρ ἀμφότεροι τελευταῖον ἀνέστησαν. ἀλλὰ τὴν ἁφὴν τὰ νεκρὰ ἐδέξαντο σώματα. Ἀπόκρισις. Τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὰ νεκρὰ σώματα καὶ οἱ τού των τάφοι μυσάττονται διὰ τὴν ἑπομένην αὐτοῖς βαρεῖαν δυσω δίαν, οὐχ ἁπλῶς διὰ τὴν νέκρωσιν· εἰ γὰρ ἁπλῶς διὰ τὴν νέκρωσιν ἐμυσάττοντο τῶν νεκρῶν τὰ σώματα, οὐκ ἄρα ἐχρῆν τοῖς τῶν ζῴων νεκρῶν σωμάτων μέρεσι κεχρῆσθαι πρὸς τὴν τῶν ζών των χρείαν, ὡς τοῖς δέρμασι καὶ τοῖς κέρασι καὶ τρίχαις καὶ χολαῖς καὶ τοῖς στέασι καὶ ταῖς σαρξίν, ἅτινα οὐδεὶς λόγος δύναται ὑπεξελεῖν τῆς προσούσης αὐτοῖς νεκρώσεως.","english":"For since the cause of the matter is contained manifestly in the narration of the matter, for this reason he did not think it fit to declare it explicitly.\n\n38. Question. If the Lord, refuting the pretentious piety of the Pharisees, said that they are whitewashed tombs, full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness, and in the law the one who touches a corpse is called unclean, what improper thing do the Greeks do when they loathe corpses and their tombs, since the corpse is called unclean by both the old and the new law? And how did the Lord not act in opposition to both, when raising the widow's son he touched the bier and took hold of the hand of Jairus's daughter? For if both rose at the last. But their dead bodies received the touch. Answer. Men loathe dead bodies and their tombs because of the heavy stench that follows them, not simply because of the death; for if they loathed the bodies of the dead simply because of the death, then it would not be right to use the parts of dead animals' bodies for the needs of the living, as skins and horns and hair and gall and fat and flesh, things which no argument can remove from the death that belongs to them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":52,"ref":"p52","source":"εἰ δὲ νεκρὰ μὲν καὶ ταῦτα, οὐ μυσαττόμενα δὲ διὰ τὴν ἐξ αὐτῶν χρείαν, πῶς οὐκ ἔστι τῶν ἀτοπωτάτων τὸ καθαρὰ μὲν ἡγεῖσθαι ταῦτα διὰ τὴν ἐξ αὐτῶν χρείαν, μυσάττεσθαι δὲ τῶν ἁγίων μαρτύρων τὰ σώματα καὶ τοὺς τάφους ὑπὸ Ἑλλήνων, φυλακτικὰ ὄντα ἀν θρώπων τῆς τῶν δαιμόνων ἐπιβουλῆς καὶ ἰαματικὰ νοσημάτων τῶν κατὰ τὴν τῶν ἰατρῶν τέχνην ὄντων ἀνιάτων; παρεικάζει δὲ ὁ κύριος τὴν τῶν Φαρισαίων ἐσχηματισμένην εὐλάβειαν τάφοις κεκονιαμένοις, ὅτι ὥσπερ τῇ αἰσθήσει τῶν ζώντων βδελυκτή ἐστι τῶν νεκρῶν σωμάτων ἡ δυσωδία καὶ ἡ ἀκαθαρσία, οὕτω καὶ ἡ ἐκείνων ἀνομία βδελυκτή ἐστι τῇ νοήσει τῶν εὐσεβῶν, τρόπον τινὰ οὖσα αὕτη ψυχῆς νέκρωσις καὶ δυσωδία καὶ ἀκαθαρσία. ὥσπερ γὰρ χωρισθείσης τῆς ψυχῆς τοῦ σώματος νεκρὸν τὸ σῶμα καὶ δυσῶδες καὶ ἀκάθαρτον, οὕτω χωρισθέντος τοῦ φόβου τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς νεκρὰ ὑπάρχει ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ δυσώδης καὶ ἀκάθαρτος. κατ' ἐναντίω σιν δὲ πράξας ὁ κύριος οὐδὲν οὔτε τῇ παλαιᾷ οὔτε τῇ καινῇ δείκνυται· οὐκ ἦν γὰρ ὑπὸ τὸν νόμον, ὅτε τοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐρωτήσει ἤγειρε νεκρούς· ἀπὸ γὰρ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ἤρξατο ὁ κύριος τῆς εὐαγγελικῆς πολιτείας, οὔσης ἔξωθεν τῆς τοῦ νόμου φυλακῆς. διὸ οὐκ ἐμιάνθη ἁψάμενος τοῦ νεκροῦ. κατὰ δὲ τὴν καινὴν ἐκεῖνα μόνα ἦν μιαντικὰ ἀνθρώπων, τὰ ἐκ τῆς καρδίας ἐξερχόμενα κακά. τὸ δὲ ἅπτεσθαι νεκροῦ οὐ μιαίνει τὸν ἄνθρωπον.","english":"But if these things are dead and yet are not loathed because of the use derived from them, how is it not among the most absurd things to regard these as clean because of the use derived from them, but to loathe the bodies and tombs of the holy martyrs—[tombs] made by the Greeks—which are guardians of men against the plots of demons and healers of diseases that are incurable according to the art of physicians? And the Lord likens the pretentious piety of the Pharisees to whitewashed tombs, because just as the stench and uncleanness of dead bodies is loathsome to the senses of the living, so also their lawlessness is loathsome to the understanding of the pious, being in a certain way a deadening and stench and uncleanness of the soul. For just as, when the soul is separated from the body, the body is dead and foul-smelling and unclean, so when the fear of God is separated from the soul, the soul is dead and foul-smelling and unclean. And the Lord is shown to have acted in nothing contrary either to the old or to the new [covenant]; for he was not under the law when he raised the dead in the question. For the Lord began the gospel way of life from baptism, which is outside the keeping of the law. Therefore he was not defiled by touching the dead. But according to the new [covenant], those things alone were defiling to men: the evils that proceed out of the heart. But touching a dead body does not defile a man.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":53,"ref":"p53","source":"ΛΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πεπλήρωτο ὁ οἶκος ἔνθα ὁ κύριος ἦν, ὁπηνίκα ὁ παράλυτος ἔμελλε θεραπεύεσθαι, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἠναγ κάσθησαν οἱ βαστάζοντες αὐτὸν καταλῦσαι τὴν ὀροφὴν καὶ δι' αὐτῆς καθεῖναι τὸν ἀσθενοῦντα, πῶς οἱ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ ἠθροισμένοι ὄχλοι οὐκ ἐπλήγησαν, τῆς ὀροφῆς λυομένης; Ἀπόκρισις. Αἰσθανόμενοι οἱ ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ μελλούσης τῆς ὀροφῆς ἀποστεγοῦσθαι πάντως ὑπεχώρησαν· οὐ γὰρ οὕτως ἦσαν ἀνόητοι οἱ τὴν ὀροφὴν ἀποστεγοῦντες, ὥστε μὴ βοᾶν τοῖς ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ ὑποχωρεῖν, ἵνα μὴ πλήσσωνται· οὐδὲ γὰρ ὅλης τῆς ὀροφῆς ἦν χρεία ἀποστεγοῦσθαι, ἀλλὰ τόσον ὅσον ἤρκει εἰς τὴν ὑποχάλασιν τοῦ παραλύτου. Μʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἑκάστῳ ἀνθρώπῳ ἄγγελος παρέπεται φύλαξ, καθὼς ἡ θεία διδάσκει γραφή, οἱ δὲ ἄνθρωποι ποτὲ μὲν αὔξησιν, ποτὲ δὲ μείωσιν, ὡς ἐπὶ τοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ καὶ τῶν λοι πῶν συμφορῶν, διὰ τὰς ἑαυτῶν πράξεις ὑπέμειναν, οἱ τούτων ἄγγελοι αὐξήσεως καὶ μειώσεως ὄντες ἀνεπίδεκτοι, ποίαν τότε λειτουργίαν ἐπλήρουν, ἑκάστου τῶν ἀγγέλων παρὰ θεοῦ λειτουρ γίαν ἐξ ἀρχῆς εἰληφότος; Ἀπόκρισις. Οἱ μὲν ἄγγελοι πάντες, ἄρχοντές τε καὶ ἀρ χόμενοι, ἀεὶ λειτουργίαν ἐκπληροῦσι χρειώδη τοῖς ἀνθρώποις καὶ τοῖς διὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπον· οἱ δὲ λειτουργίαν εἰληφότες τὸ παρέπεσθαι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις φύλακες ἀεὶ μὲν αὔξονται, μειοῦνται δὲ οὐδέποτε· ἢ γὰρ παρέπονται τῷ συναμφοτέρῳ, ψυχῇ λέγω καὶ σώματι, ἢ παρέπονται τῇ ψυχῇ μετὰ τὴν ἐκ τοῦ σώματος ἔξοδον τῆς ψυχῆς, ἕως τοῦ καιροῦ","english":"39. Question: If the house where the Lord was had been filled, when the paralytic was about to be healed, and for this reason those carrying him were compelled to break up the roof and through it to lower the sick man, how were the crowds gathered in the house not struck when the roof was being broken up? Answer: Those in the house, perceiving that the roof was about to be stripped off, certainly withdrew; for those who were stripping off the roof were not so senseless as not to shout to those in the house to withdraw, so that they might not be struck; for it was not necessary to strip off the whole roof, but only as much as sufficed for the lowering down of the paralytic. 40. Question: If a guardian angel accompanies each man, as the divine Scripture teaches, and men at one time suffered increase, at another diminution, as in the case of the flood and the other calamities, because of their own deeds, their angels, being incapable of increase and diminution, what ministry did they then fulfill, since each of the angels received a ministry from God from the beginning? Answer: All the angels, both rulers and those ruled, always fulfill a ministry useful to men and to those things that exist for man's sake; but those who have received the ministry of accompanying men as guardians are always increased, and are never diminished; for either they accompany the composite whole, I mean soul and body, or they accompany the soul after the soul's departure from the body, until the time","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":54,"ref":"p54","source":"τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ἀνακτήσεως· πρὶν ἢ δὲ ταγῶσι παρέπεσθαι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις καὶ φυλάττειν αὐτούς, ἐν ταῖς ἄλλαις ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπων λειτουργίαις λειτουργοῦσι τοῖς οἰκείοις ἄρχουσιν.\n\nΜΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ νεύματι θείῳ αἱ νεφέλαι τὸν ὑετὸν τῇ γῇ καταπέμπουσι, διατί τὰς νεφέλας οἱ καλούμενοι νεφοδιῶκται ἐπαοιδαῖς τισι παρασκευάζουσιν ἔνθα βούλονται χαλάζας καὶ ἀμέτρους ὑετοὺς ἀκοντίζειν; Ἀπόκρισις. Τοῦτο ἐπειδὴ κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς ἀμάρτυρον. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἄπιστον· καὶ γὰρ αὐτὸς ὁ ταύτην περὶ τούτου ἐρω τήσας τὴν ἐρώτησιν, οὐκ ἀφ' ὧν ἐθεάσω γιγνομένων τὴν ἐρώ τησιν πεποίηκας, ἀλλ' ἀφ' ὧν ἤκουσας.\n\nΜΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ θνητὴν ὁ θεὸς τὴν ἡμετέραν ἔκτισε φύσιν, πῶς λέγει \"ὅτι ὁ θεὸς θάνατον οὐκ ἐποίησεν\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐκ εἴ τι θνητὸν τῇ φύσει, τοῦτο ἀνάγκη πάντως ἀποθανεῖν. καὶ τούτου ἡ ἀπόδειξις τὸ θνητοὺς ὄντας τῇ φύσει τόν τε Ἐνὼχ καὶ τὸν Ἠλίαν ἐν ἀθανασίᾳ ἔτι διαμένειν, τοῦ \"γῆ εἶ καὶ εἰς γῆς ἀπελεύσῃ\" γενομένους ἀνωτέρω. ἀληθὲς οὖν τὸ θνητὴν τὴν φύσιν πεποιηκέναι τὸν θεὸν καὶ τὸν θάνατον εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὸν κόσμον τῇ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου παρακοῇ· εἰ μὲν γὰρ ὥσπερ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς θνητὴν τὴν φύσιν, οὕτως ἐποίησε καὶ τὸν θάνατον, οὐκ ἂν διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς τοῦτον εἰσήγαγεν, ἀλλὰ χωρὶς παρακοῆς· εἰ δὲ διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς ὁ θάνατος καὶ ὁ θεὸς τὴν παρακοὴν οὐκ ἐποίησεν, οὐδ' ἄρα τὸν θάνατον. ΜΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἡ φύσις ὡς θνητὴ μὲν τὸ οἰκεῖον ἐπιγινώσκει πέρας, ὁ δὲ ἑκάστου χρόνος οὐ κατά τινά ἐστιν ὅρον, ὅπερ καλοῦσιν οἱ ἐκτὸς εἱμαρμένην, πῶς τῷ Ἐζεκίᾳ προσετέθησαν χρόνοι;","english":"of the world's restoration; but before they were appointed to accompany men and guard them, they minister in the other services on behalf of men to their own rulers.\n\n41. Question: If the clouds send down rain upon the earth by divine nod, why do those called cloud-chasers prepare the clouds by certain incantations to hurl hail and immoderate rains wherever they wish? Answer: This is because it is unattested in the Scriptures; therefore it is also incredible. For you yourself who asked this question about it did not ask on the basis of what you have seen happening, but on the basis of what you have heard.\n\n42. Question: If God created our nature mortal, how does he say, \"that God did not make death\"? Answer: It does not follow that whatever is mortal by nature must by all means die. And the proof of this is that Enoch and Elijah, being mortal by nature, still remain in immortality, having become higher than \"you are earth and to earth you shall depart.\" It is true, then, that God made our nature mortal and that death entered the world through man's disobedience. For if God had made death just as he made our nature mortal, he would not have brought it in through disobedience, but without disobedience. But if death came through disobedience, and God did not make disobedience, then neither did he make death.\n\n43. Question: If the nature of men, being mortal, recognizes its own limit, but the time of each is not according to some boundary, which those outside call fate, how were times added to Hezekiah?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":55,"ref":"p55","source":"τὸ γὰρ προστεθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ προορισθέντος ἀριθμοῦ δῆλον ὅτι λαμβάνεται. πόθεν οὖν ἐπὶ τῶν τελευτώντων τὸ τοῦ χρόνου ἀόριστον δείκνυται; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὅτι δὲ οὐχ ὥρισται τῆς ἑκάστου ζωῆς ὁ χρόνος, δείκνυται ἐκ τῶν γραφικῶν φωνῶν οὕτως. \"ἐάν\" φησίν \"ἐν τῷ πεδίῳ εὕρῃ ἄνθρωπος νεάνιδα μεμνηστευμένην καὶ βιασάμενος αὐτὴν κοιμηθῇ μετ' αὐτῆς, τὸν μὲν ἄνθρωπον ἀποκτείνατε, τὴν δὲ νεάνιδα μὴ ἀποκτείνητε· ὃν γὰρ τρόπον ἐπεγείρεται ἄνθρωπος ἐπὶ τὸν πλησίον αὐτοῦ καὶ πατάσσων αὐτὸν (φονεύεται) ψυχή, οὕτως ἐγένετο τὸ πρᾶγμα τοῦτο· καὶ ἐβόησεν ἡ νεᾶνις καὶ ὁ βοηθῶν αὐτῇ οὐκ ἦν\". οὐκ ἂν δὲ παρείκασεν ἡ θεία γραφὴ τὴν βεβιασμένην κοί μησιν τῇ βεβιασμένῃ ἀναιρέσει, εἰ ἦν ὁ θάνατος τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ὡρισμένος· τὸ γὰρ παρὰ θεοῦ ὡρισμένον ἀβίαστόν τε καὶ ἀπαρά βατον· ἀλλ' εἰ τοῦτο, δῆλον ὅτι οὔτε τῇ προωρισμένῃ ζωῇ τοῦ Ἐζεκία προσετέθησαν οἱ χρόνοι τῆς ζωῆς, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἀορίστως προλαβοῦσιν ἔτεσιν αὐτοῦ, ὧν τὸ τέλος ἐγίνετο διὰ τοῦ θανατικοῦ πάθους, μὴ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκ τοῦ πάθους ἰασαμένου αὐτὸν καὶ εἰς τὸ ζῆν αὐτὸν ἀποκαταστήσαντος. ΜΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Καὶ εἰ ὥραις καὶ ἡμέραις τὰ καθ' ἡμᾶς οὐ κατέχεται, πῶς ἐν τῷ γάμῳ ὁ κύριος ἔλεγε τὸ \"οὔπω ἥκει ἡ ὥρα μου\" καὶ ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς περὶ αὐτοῦ τὸ \"οὐδεὶς ἐπέβαλεν ἐπ' αὐτὸν τὰς χεῖρας, ὅτι οὔπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ὥρα αὐτοῦ\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ καὶ ὥραις καὶ ἡμέραις τὰ καθ' ἡμᾶς οὐ κατέχεται, ἀλλ' ὅμως τῶν παρ' ἡμῖν ἢ περὶ ἡμᾶς γιγνομένων τὰ μὲν γίγνεται ἐν ἐπιτηδείῳ καιρῷ, τὰ δὲ ἐν ἀνεπιτηδείῳ.","english":"For what is added by the predetermined number is evidently taken. How, then, is the indefiniteness of time shown in the case of those who die? Answer. That the time of each one's life is not fixed is shown from the scriptural voices as follows. \"If,\" it says, \"a man finds in the field a young woman betrothed and forces her and lies with her, kill the man, but do not kill the young woman; for in the manner in which a man rises up against his neighbor and strikes him, so this matter happened; and the young woman cried out and there was no one to help her.\" But the divine Scripture would not have compared the forced lying-together to the forced killing, if the death of the man were fixed; for what is fixed by God is both unforced and unavoidable. But if this is so, it is clear that neither were the times of his life added to the predetermined life of Hezekiah, but to his years that had previously passed indefinitely, whose end was coming through the fatal disease, God not having healed him from the disease and restored him to life. 44. Question. And if the things that concern us are not governed by hours and days, how did the Lord say at the marriage, \"My hour has not yet come,\" and the evangelist say concerning him, \"No one laid hands on him, because his hour had not yet come\"? Answer. Even if the things that concern us are not governed by hours and days, nevertheless of the things that happen among us or concerning us, some happen at a suitable time and some at an unsuitable time.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":56,"ref":"p56","source":"κα λεῖ οὖν ἡ θεία γραφὴ τὸν ἐπιτήδειον πρὸς τὸ γιγνόμενον πρᾶγμα καιρὸν παρουσίαν τῆς ὥρας, τὸν δὲ ἀνεπιτήδειον ἀπουσίαν τῆς ὥρας· καὶ ἐπειδὴ μετὰ τὴν ποίησιν τοῦ οἴνου καιρὸν ἐπιτήδειον ἡγεῖτο ὁ κύριος τῆς ἐκ τοῦ γάμου ἀναχωρήσεως, διὰ τοῦτο πρὸ τῆς ποιήσεως τοῦ οἴνου εἶπεν \"οὔπω ἥκει ἡ ὥρα μου\". καὶ πάλιν ἐπειδὴ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τοῦ πάσχα τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἐχρῆν τὸν κύριον συλληφθῆναι καὶ παθεῖν ἃ ἔπαθε, διὰ τοῦτο πρὸ τοῦ πάσχα ἐρρέθη περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι \"οὐδεὶς ἐπέβαλεν ἐπ' αὐτὸν τὰς χεῖρας, ὅτι οὔπω ἐληλύθει ἡ ὥρα αὐτοῦ\", οὐ τῆς ἀνάγκης τῆς ὥρας κωλυούσης αὐτοῦ τὴν σύλληψιν, ἀλλ' ἡ τοῦ θεοῦ πρόνοια. εἰ γὰρ τῇ ἀνάγκῃ τῆς ὥρας ἐκωλύετο τοῦ κυρίου ἡ σύλληψις, οὐκ ἂν ταύτην προσῆψεν ἡ θεία γραφὴ τῷ χωρισμῷ τοῦ τόπου· \"ἀνεχώρησε\" γάρ, φησίν, \"ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἰς τὴν Γαλιλαίαν· οὐ γὰρ ἤθελεν ἐν τῇ\n\nἸουδαίᾳ περιπατεῖν, ὅτι οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐζήτουν αὐτὸν ἀποκτεῖναι\"· οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ πρὸ τούτου εἰς Αἴγυπτον ἀνεχώρει, ἱκανῆς οὔσης τῆς ὥρας φυλάττειν αὐτὸν ἀσύλληπτον.","english":"The divine Scripture calls the suitable time for the thing that is coming to be the presence of the hour, and the unsuitable time the absence of the hour. And since after the time of the making of the wine the Lord considered it a suitable time to depart from the wedding, for this reason before the making of the wine he said, \"My hour has not yet come.\" And again, since in the time of the Passover of the Jews the Lord had to be arrested and suffer what he suffered, for this reason before the Passover it was said concerning him that \"no one laid hands on him, because his hour had not yet come\"—not that the necessity of the hour was preventing his arrest, but the providence of God. For if the Lord's arrest had been prevented by the necessity of the hour, the divine Scripture would not have attributed this to the departure from the place; for it says, \"Jesus departed into Galilee, for he did not wish to walk in Judea, because the Jews were seeking to kill him.\" Indeed, not even before this did he depart into Egypt, though the hour was sufficient to keep him unarrested.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":57,"ref":"p57","source":"52 ΜΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ καθώς φασί τινες ὁ κατακλυσμὸς ἐν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ οὐ γέγονεν, ἀλλ' ἔνθα οἱ τότε ἄνθρωποι ᾤκουν, πῶς ἀληθὲς ὅτι \"ὑψώθη τὸ ὕδωρ ἐπάνω πάντων τῶν ὑψηλῶν ὀρέων ιδʹ πήχεις\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐ δοκεῖ ἀληθὲς εἶναι τὸ μὴ ἐν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ τὸν κατακλυσμὸν γεγονέναι, εἰ μή τι ἄρα κοιλότεροι ἦσαν οἱ τόποι, ἔνθα ὁ κατακλυσμὸς γεγένηται, τῶν λοιπῶν τόπων τῆς γῆς. Μςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῶν ἀλόγων ἁπάντων δημιουργὸς εἷς ἐστιν, ὁ θεός, διατί τὸ διχηλοῦν ὁπλὴν καὶ μηρυκισμὸν ἔχον καθαρὸν εἶναι ἀπεφήνατο; καὶ πάλιν, διατί τὸ μηρυκισμὸν μὲν ἔχον, οἷον κάμηλος, ὁπλὴν δὲ μὴ διχηλοῦν ἐν τοῖς ἀκαθάρτοις τέτακται; καὶ τὸ ἔμπαλιν, τὸ ὁπλὴν μὲν διχηλοῦν, μηρυκισμὸν δὲ μὴ ἔχον, οἷον χοῖρος, ἐν τοῖς καθαροῖς οὐ λελόγισται, καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἰχθύσι δὲ τὰ ἀλεπίδωτα; καὶ τὰ πετεινὰ δὲ διατί διῄρηνται, καίτοι τινῶν καθαρῶν, εἴ γε συγχωροῦνται, ταὐτὰ τοῖς ἀκαθάρτοις ἐσθιόντων καὶ πραττόντων; Ἀπόκρισις. Φύσει μὲν καθαρὰ ὑπάρχει πάντα τὰ ζῷα καὶ καλὰ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ γεγονότα, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον \"καὶ εἶδεν ὁ θεὸς πάντα ὅσα ἐποίησε καὶ ἰδοὺ καλὰ λίαν\" καὶ τῆς θείας τετυχηκότα εὐλογίας, λεγούσης \"αὐξάνεσθε καὶ πληθύνεσθε\". ἀλλ' ἐπειδὴ ἐβούλετο ὁ θεός, ὥσπερ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἀνθρωπίνοις, οὕτως καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἐσθιομένοις, ὑπὸ τὸν ζυγὸν τῆς τοῦ νόμου δου λείας ποιήσασθαι τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, διὰ τοῦτο τῶν ζῴων καὶ πετεινῶν καὶ ἰχθύων τινὰ μὲν ὠνόμασε καθαρά, ὧν τὴν σφαγὴν καὶ τὴν βρῶσιν τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ἐπέτρεψε, τινὰ δὲ ἀκάθαρτα ὠνό μασεν, ὧν τὴν βρῶσιν ἀπεῖργε.","english":"Question 45. Question: If, as some say, the flood did not occur over the whole world, but only where the people of that time lived, how is it true that \"the water rose fourteen cubits above all the high mountains\"? Answer: It does not seem true that the flood did not occur over the whole world, unless perhaps the places where the flood occurred were lower than the rest of the places on the earth.\n\nQuestion 46. Question: If there is one creator of all irrational animals, God, why did he declare that what has a cloven hoof and chews the cud is clean? And again, why is what chews the cud but does not have a cloven hoof, such as the camel, ranked among the unclean? And conversely, what has a cloven hoof but does not chew the cud, such as the pig, is not counted among the clean, and among fish those without scales? And why are birds divided, although some clean ones are permitted, if indeed those who eat and do the same things as the unclean are allowed? Answer: By nature all animals are clean and were made good from the beginning by God, according to what is said: \"And God saw all things that he had made, and behold, they were very good,\" and they obtained the divine blessing, which says, \"Increase and multiply.\" But since God wished, as in all human matters, so also in matters of eating, to bring the Jews under the yoke of the slavery of the law, for this reason he named some of the animals and birds and fish clean, whose slaughter and eating he permitted to the Jews, and he named some unclean, whose eating he forbade.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":58,"ref":"p58","source":"καθαρὰ οὖν ταῦτα καὶ ἀκάθαρτα λέγονται, καθαρὰ μὲν διὰ τὴν φύσιν, ἀκάθαρτα δὲ διὰ τὸν νόμον. ἄλλως δὲ πάλιν καθαρὰ καὶ ἀκάθαρτα λέγονται διὰ ταύτην τὴν αἰτίαν· ἐπειδὴ ἐν τῇ Αἰγύπτῳ τότε πάντα τὰ ζῷα πλὴν χοίρου ἐθεοποιοῦντο, διὰ τοῦτο τῶν ζῴων τὰ μὲν καθαρὰ τὰ δὲ ἀκάθαρτα ὠνόμασεν, καὶ τὰ μὲν καθαρὰ ἐπέτρεψεν αὐτοῖς θύειν καὶ ἐσθίειν, τὰ δὲ μὴ ἐσθίειν ὡς ἀκάθαρτα, δι' ἑκατέρου δει κνύων αὐτὰ ἀνάξια ὄντα τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ προσηγορίας τε καὶ τιμῆς, καὶ διὰ τὸ θύεσθαι καὶ ἐσθίεσθαι αὐτὰ καὶ διὰ τὸ καλεῖσθαι αὐτὰ ἀκάθαρτα.\n\nΜΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἀποχὴν καὶ μετάληψιν ἀκαθάρτων τε καὶ καθαρῶν τοῖς ἐν τῇ παλαιᾷ νόμοις ἡ διάταξις ἡ νομικὴ διηγόρευσε, πῶς καὶ οἱ ἐν τῇ νέᾳ μετάληψιν καθαρῶν καὶ ἀποχὴν ἀκαθάρτων γινώσκουσιν, οὐδενὸς αὐτοῖς νόμου ταύτην τὴν διαφορὰν ἐκδιδάξαντος; ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν τοῦτο ποιοῦσι κατὰ τὴν τοῦ νόμου παράδοσιν, ἐχρῆν αὐτοὺς πάντων μεταλαμβάνειν καὶ ἀπέχεσθαι ὧν ὁ νόμος ἐκήρυξε. πῶς οὖν πάντων κατὰ νόμον οὐκ ἐσθίουσιν, [οἷον] καμηλοπαρδάλεως; εἰ δὲ μὴ τῷ νόμῳ δεδούλωνται, πῶς πάλιν τῶν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ἀπαγορευθέντων ἀπέχονται, οἷον ἵππου ἢ καμήλου ἢ μυὸς ἤ τινος τῶν λοιπῶν ἀκαθάρτων; νυνὶ δὲ μηδὲ καθόλου τῷ νόμῳ πειθόμενοι, μηδὲ εἰς τὸ παντελὲς αὐτῷ ἀπειθοῦντες, πῶς οὐ δοκοῦσιν ἀπὸ μέρους ποιεῖσθαι τὴν ἑκάστου φυλακὴν καὶ παράβασιν, λέγω δὴ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῆς χάριτος, καὶ τῇ ἀμφοτέρων ἀπειθείᾳ καὶ πεισμονῇ ὑπὸ νόμον καὶ χάριν [εἶναι] καὶ πάλιν μὴ ὑπὸ τούτοις καθεστάναι; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐν τῇ νέᾳ διαθήκῃ οὐδὲν τῶν εἰσερχομένων εἰς τὸ στόμα κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον.","english":"These things, then, are called clean and unclean: clean by nature, but unclean by the law. And in another way again they are called clean and unclean for this reason: since in Egypt at that time all animals except the pig were being deified, for this cause he named some of the animals clean and others unclean, and he permitted them to sacrifice and eat the clean ones, but not to eat the unclean ones, by both means demonstrating that they are unworthy of God's name and honor—both by their being sacrificed and eaten, and by their being called unclean.\n\n47. Question. If the legal ordinance in the old law prescribed abstinence from and partaking of unclean and clean things for those under it, how is it that those in the new covenant also know partaking of clean things and abstinence from unclean things, when no law has taught them this distinction? But if they do this according to the tradition of the law, they ought to partake of all things and abstain from those things which the law proclaimed. How then do they not eat all things according to the law, [for instance] the giraffe? But if they are not enslaved to the law, how again do they abstain from things forbidden by it, such as the horse or the camel or the mouse or any of the other unclean things? But as it is, since they neither obey the law at all nor are entirely disobedient to it, how do they not seem to make the observance and transgression of each—I mean of the law and of grace—partial, and by disobedience and compliance with both to be under law and grace and again not to be subject to these? Answer. In the new covenant nothing that enters into the mouth defiles a man.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":59,"ref":"p59","source":"ἀπέχονται δὲ ὧν οὐ μετα λαμβάνουσιν, οὐ κατὰ διαγόρευσιν τοῦ νόμου, ἀλλὰ κατὰ [τὸ] δυσάρεστον τῆς τῶν οὐ μεταλαμβανόντων ἑκουσίου συνειδήσεως. τινὲς δὲ διὰ τὴν κατόρθωσιν τῆς ἐγκρατείας, κατὰ τὴν οἰκείαν ἀρέσκειαν κοινῶς ἀπέχονται καθαρῶν τε καὶ ἀκαθάρτων, καίτοι εἰ δότες \"ὅτι πᾶν κτίσμα θεοῦ καλὸν καὶ οὐδὲν ἀπόβλητον μετ' εὐχα ριστίας λαμβανόμενον\". ἀλλ' ὅμως τὴν ἐπὶ τῇ κατορθώσει τῆς ἐγκρατείας εὐχαριστίαν μείζονα τῆς ἐπὶ τῇ μεταλήψει βρωμάτων εὐχαριστίας τίθενται. διὰ ταῦτα οὖν οὐδέν ἐστι κοινὸν * νόμου καὶ χάριτος ἀνὰ μέρος, ἀλλὰ χάριτος μόνης τὸ\n\nπᾶν ὑπάρχει, τῆς τε μετοχῆς καὶ τῆς ἀποχῆς τῶν μεταλαμβανόντων κατὰ τὸν εἰρη μένον τρόπον.\n\nΜΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ σκεῦος, ὅπερ ὁ Πέτρος ἐν τῇ ὀπτασίᾳ τεθέαται, εἶχε τὰ καθαρὰ καὶ ἀκάθαρτα πετεινὰ καὶ τετράποδα, καθὼς ἡμῖν ἡ γραφὴ παραδίδωσιν–ἡ γὰρ τοῦ \"πάντα\" φωνὴ περιληπτικὴ ἀμφοτέρων τῶν προλεχθέντων καθέστηκεν–, εἶτα θῦσαι καὶ φαγεῖν ὁ αὐτὸς ἀπόστολος ἀπροσδιορίστως κελευόμενος παρῃτήσατο, \"μηδαμῶς κύριε\" λέγων, \"ὅτι οὐδέποτε κοινὸν ἢ ἀκάθαρτον ἔφαγον\", πῶς διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν ῥημάτων οὐ δείκνυται πάντα μὲν ἀπαγορεύσας τὰ ἄλογα ὡς ἀκάθαρτα, μεμφόμενος δὲ τὸν * τὴν βρῶσιν αὐτῶν * τὴν ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐπιτρέψαντι, ὡς ἀκαθάρτου ἐδωδῆς κελεύσαντι ἀπογεύσασθαι; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ Πέτρου ἀποκρίσεως μανθάνομεν τίνα ἦν τὰ ἐνόντα ἐν τῇ σινδόνι, τουτέστι τὰ ἀκάθαρτα μόνα, καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἀνάγκης ἡ τοῦ \"πάντα\" φωνὴ περιέχει καὶ τὰ καθαρά· δυνατὸν γὰρ [τῷ] \"πάντα τὰ τετράποδα καὶ τὰ πετεινὰ τῆς γῆς\" λέγεσθαι καὶ τὰ ἀκάθαρτα.","english":"They abstain from things of which they do not partake, not by the distinction of the law, but by the unpleasantness of the voluntary conscience of those who do not partake. But some, for the sake of the rightness of continence, abstain commonly from both clean and unclean things according to their own preference, although they know \"that every creature of God is good and nothing is to be rejected when received with thanksgiving.\" But nevertheless they place the thanksgiving for the rightness of continence above the thanksgiving for the partaking of foods. For these reasons, then, nothing is common to law and grace in turn, but the whole belongs to grace alone, both the partaking and the abstaining of those who partake in the manner that has been stated.\n\n48. Question. If the vessel that Peter saw in the vision contained clean and unclean birds and quadrupeds, as the Scripture hands down to us—for the word \"all\" is inclusive of both the things previously mentioned—and then the same apostle, being commanded without specification to sacrifice and eat, refused, saying, \"By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything common or unclean,\" how is it not shown by these same words that he rejected all irrational animals as unclean, and blamed the one who permitted the eating of them, as though he had commanded them to taste unclean food? Answer. From Peter's answer we learn what things were contained in the sheet, that is, the unclean only, and the word \"all\" does not necessarily include the clean as well; for it is possible for \"all the quadrupeds and the birds of the earth\" to be said even of the unclean.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":60,"ref":"p60","source":"τὸ δὲ \"οὐδαμῶς κύριε, ὅτι οὐ δέποτε κοινὸν ἢ ἀκάθαρτον ἔφαγον\" πρὸς τὴν θέαν πάντων τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ σινδόνι δειχθέντων αὐτῷ ἀπεκρίνατο καὶ οὔ τινων. τὸ οὖν σκεῦος, ἐν ᾧ ἦν \"πάντα τὰ πετεινὰ καὶ τὰ τετράποδα τῆς γῆς\", κατὰ παράληψιν εἴρηται τοῦ ἀκαθάρτου, ἀντὶ τοῦ \"ἐν ᾧ ἦν πάντα τὰ ἀκάθαρτα πετεινά τε καὶ τετράποδα τῆς γῆς\". καὶ ὥσπερ ὅταν λέγῃ ἡ γραφή, ὅτι \"παντὸς ἀνδρὸς ἡ κεφαλὴ ὁ Χριστός ἐστιν\", ἡ τοῦ \"παντὸς\" φωνὴ οὐ περιέχει πιστόν τε καὶ ἄπιστον ἄνδρα, ἀλλὰ πιστὸν μόνον–ὁ γὰρ πιστὸς ἀνήρ ἐστι σῶμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς τοῦ πιστοῦ ἀνδρὸς λέγεται κεφαλή–, οὕτως οὐδὲ ἡ τοῦ \"πάντα\" φωνὴ περιεκτική ἐστι καθαρῶν τε καὶ ἀκαθάρτων, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἀκαθάρτων μόνον, δι' ὧν προεμηνύθη τῷ Πέτρῳ ἡ πρόσληψις τῶν ἀκαθάρτων ἐθνῶν, ὧν τῇ πίστει τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἐκαθάρισεν ὁ θεὸς τὰς καρδίας. ΜΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ θεῖον τροπῆς ἀνεπίδεκτον, διατί περὶ τῆς χρίσεως τοῦ Σαοὺλ λέγει μεταμεμελῆσθαι καὶ περὶ τῆς κατα στροφῆς τῆς Νινευὴ ὅτι μετενόησεν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ δεσπότης Χριστὸς καὶ κατὰ τὸ ὑπάρχειν καὶ κατὰ τὸ πράττειν τὰς πρεπούσας αὐτῷ πράξεις ἄτρεπτός ἐστι· προνοῶν δὲ τῶν τρεπομένων πρὸς τὸ λυσιτελὲς τοῖς ὑπ' αὐτοῦ προνοουμένοις τρέπει τὰ πράγματα. διὸ καὶ πρὸς τὸ συγγινώσκειν καὶ πρὸς τὸ μὴ συγγινώσκειν ἀτρέπτως ἔχει. συγγινώσκει ἄρα τρεπτῶς τοῖς διορθοῦσι τὰ ἑαυτῶν πταίσματα, τοῖς δὲ ἀδιορθώτως ἔχουσι πρὸς τὰ κακά, ἀτρέπτως οὐ συγγινώσκει. τὸ οὖν \"μετα μεμέλημαι\" τὸ ἄτρεπτον αὐτοῦ ἐμφαίνει, τὸ μὴ κατὰ τὸ συγγινώσκειν· ἄτρεπτος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ θεός.","english":"But the statement \"By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything common or unclean\" he answered with a view to the sight of all the things shown to him on the sheet, and not of some. The vessel, then, in which were \"all the birds and the four-footed animals of the earth,\" is spoken of by way of inclusion of the unclean, in place of \"in which were all the unclean birds and four-footed animals of the earth.\" And just as when the Scripture says that \"the head of every man is Christ,\" the word \"every\" does not include both believer and unbeliever, but the believer only—for the believing man is a body of Christ, and Christ is called the head of the believing man—so neither does the word \"all\" include both clean and unclean, but the unclean only, through which was fore-signified to Peter the reception of the unclean nations, whose hearts God cleansed by faith in Christ. 49. Question. If the divine is incapable of change, why does it say concerning Saul's anointing that he repented, and concerning the destruction of Nineveh that he repented? Answer. The Lord Christ, both in respect of existing and in respect of doing the acts that befit him, is unchangeable; but providing for those who are changed toward what is advantageous for those provided for by him, he changes circumstances. Therefore he is unchangeably disposed both toward forgiving and toward not forgiving. He forgives, then, in a changeable manner those who correct their own faults, but toward those who are incorrigibly disposed to evil he unchangeably does not forgive. The phrase \"I have repented,\" therefore, makes clear his unchangeableness, namely that it is not in respect of forgiving; for God is unchangeable.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":61,"ref":"p61","source":"τὸ δὲ \"μετενόησεν ὁ κύριος\" τὸ αὐτὸ δηλοῖ, τὸ μὴ κατὰ τὸ συγγινώσκειν· ἄτρεπτος γὰρ ἔστιν ὁ θεὸς καὶ ἀεὶ ἐν τοῖς αὐτῷ πρέπουσι ποιεῖν διαμένει· τροπὴν γὰρ εἰς τὸ ποιεῖν τὰ μὴ πρέποντα αὐτῷ οὐ δέχεταί ποτε.\n\n56 Νʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ Ἰωάννου βάπτισμα μὴ κατὰ νόμον ἦν, ὥσπερ οὔτε ἦν, πῶς οὐκ ἦν παρὰ τὸν νόμον; εἰ δὲ παρὰ τὸν νόμον ἦν, πῶς ὑπὸ τῶν ἐννόμων ἐδέχθη; πῶς δὲ οὐ παράνομοι οἱ ὑπὸ τὸν νόμον ὄντες καὶ τὸ παρὰ τὸν νόμον δεξάμενοι βάπτισμα; εἰ δὲ ὑπὲρ τὸν νόμον ἐτύγχανε τὸ τῆς χάριτος βάπτισμα, μήτε κατὰ νόμον μήτε παρὰ νόμον μήτε ὑπὲρ νόμον λεγόμενον, κατὰ τί γινόμενον εὑρεθήσεται; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ βάπτισμα Ἰωάννου προοίμιον ἦν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου τῆς χάριτος, διὸ καὶ ὑπὲρ τὸν νόμον ἦν· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐνεδέχετο τοὺς κατὰ νόμον ἁμαρτήσαντας ἐν τούτῳ διὰ μετανοίας καὶ πίστεως τοῦ Χριστοῦ δέξασθαι τὴν συγχώρησιν, μὴ ὄντι ὑπὲρ τὸν νόμον.\n\nΝΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πιστώσασθαι τοὺς μαθητὰς ὁ Ἰωάννης περὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ἠβούλετο, ὅτε ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς πρὸς αὐτόν, τοῦτο γάρ τινες εἰρήκασι, διατί μὴ κατὰ ἀπόφασιν εἶπεν αὐτοῖς, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πεῦσιν δι' αὐτῶν τῷ Χριστῷ προσήγα γεν; εἰ δὲ αὐτὸς διὰ τὸ τῇ εἱρκτῇ ἑαυτὸν ἐμβεβλῆσθαι ἐκ τῶν λεγομένων ποικίλως εἰς τὴν περὶ αὐτοῦ ἀμφιβολίαν κατέστη, καὶ γὰρ τοῦτο","english":"The statement \"the Lord repented\" means the same thing—not that he grants forgiveness; for God is immutable and always remains in what is fitting for him to do; for he never admits a change into doing what is not fitting for him.\n\n56. Question. If John's baptism was not according to the law, as indeed it was not, how was it not contrary to the law? But if it was contrary to the law, how was it accepted by those who were under the law? And how are those who are under the law and who accepted a baptism contrary to the law not lawbreakers? But if the baptism of grace happened to be above the law, being called neither according to the law nor contrary to the law nor above the law, in what respect will it be found to occur? Answer. John's baptism was a prelude to the gospel of grace, and for this reason it was also above the law; for it was not possible for those who had sinned under the law to receive forgiveness in this baptism through repentance and faith in Christ, had it not been above the law.\n\n51. Question. If John wished to assure his disciples concerning Christ that he is the one, when he sent them to him—for some have said this—why did he not speak to them by way of declaration, but brought them to Christ through a question? But if he himself, because he had been cast into prison, was variously brought by what was said into doubt concerning him—for this too","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":62,"ref":"p62","source":"εἰρήκασιν ἕτεροι, διατί. ὡς μηδέπω αὐτὸν ἐλθόντα ἐγνωκὼς ἐπηρώτα; τὸ γὰρ \"σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος, ἢ ἕτερον προσδοκῶμεν\", ὡς μηδέπω μὲν τὸν Χριστὸν παραγενόμενον, ἔρχεσθαι δὲ αὐτὸν προσδοκώμενον τὴν ὑπόνοιαν δίδωσι· πεπεισμένος γὰρ τοῦτο, οὐκ ἂν ἐπηρώτησε \"σὺ εἶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος ἢ ἕτερός τις παρ' ἐκεῖνον\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὅτι μὲν οὐκ ἠγνόει ὁ Ἰωάννης, ὅτι ἐλήλυθενἤδη ὁ Χριστός, παντί που δῆλόν ἐστιν· ἐπειδὴ δὲ διάφοροι φῆμαι περὶ ὧν ἐποιήσατο θαυμάτων ὁ Ἰησοῦς διέτρεχον, τῶν μὲν λε γόντων Ἠλίας εἶναι ὁ ταῦτα πεποιηκώς, τῶν δὲ Ἱερεμίας. τῶν δὲ ἄλλος τις τῶν προφητῶν, ταύτας τὰς φήμας ἀκούων ὁ Ἰωάννης ἐν τῇ εἱρκτῇ πέμπει τοὺς μαθητὰς αὑτοῦ μαθεῖν, εἰ ὁ τὰ σημεῖα ποιῶν αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ ὑπ' αὐτοῦ μαρτυρηθείς, ἢ ἕτερός τις, ὁ παρὰ τῶν πολλῶν θρυλλούμενος. γνοὺς δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς τοῦ Ἰωάννου τὸν σκοπόν, ἐπὶ τῆς παρουσίας τῶν μαθητῶν Ἰωάννου ἐποίησε πολλὰ θαύματα, πείθων αὐτοὺς καὶ δι' αὐτῶν καὶ τὸν Ἰωάννην, ὡς αὐτὸς εἴη πεποιηκὼς καὶ τὰ ἐπ' ὀνόματι ἑτέρων φημιζόμενα θαύματα, ὁ ὑπ' αὐτοῦ μαρτυρηθείς. ΝΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πάντας ἕλκειν πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ὁ δεσπότης Χρι στὸς μετὰ τὴν οἰκείαν ὕψωσιν ἐπηγγείλατο, πῶς οὐ πάντες τῇ εἰς αὐτὸν πίστει προσέδραμον; πῶς δὲ αὐτὸς ἐπαγγειλάμενος πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ἕλκειν οὐκ ἐναντιοῦται τῷ \"οὐδεὶς ἔρχεται πρός με, ἐὰν μὴ ὁ πατήρ μου ἑλκύσῃ αὐτόν\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀπὸ τοῦ οἰκείου τέλους πᾶς λόγος κρίνεται· τέλος δὲ τὸ πάντας ἕλκειν πρὸς ἑαυτόν, \"ὅταν καταργήσῃ πᾶσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ ἐξουσίαν καὶ δύναμιν\". οὐ χρὴ οὖν τὰ τοῦ τέλους πρὸ τοῦ τέλους ἀπαιτεῖν.","english":"Others have said this: why did he ask as if he did not yet know that he had come? For the statement \"Are you the one who is coming, or do we expect another?\" suggests the notion that Christ had not yet arrived, but was expected to come; for if he had been convinced of this, he would not have asked, \"Are you the one who is coming, or is there some other besides him?\" Answer. That John did not fail to know that Christ had already come is clear to everyone, surely; but since various reports were circulating about the wonders Jesus had performed—some saying that the one who had done these things was Elijah, others Jeremiah, and others some other of the prophets—John, hearing these reports in prison, sends his disciples to learn whether the one performing the signs is himself the one testified to by him, or whether it is some other, the one bruited about by the many. And Jesus, perceiving John's purpose, in the presence of John's disciples performed many wonders, persuading them, and through them John as well, that he himself had also performed the wonders noised abroad under the names of others—the one testified to by him. 52. Question. If the Lord Christ promised to draw all to himself after his own exaltation, how is it that not all ran to him in faith? And how is it that he himself, having promised to draw to himself, does not contradict the statement \"No one comes to me unless my Father draws him\"? Answer. Every account is judged by its own end; and the end is to draw all to himself, \"when he has abolished every rule and every authority and power.\" It is not necessary, then, to demand the things of the end before the end.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":63,"ref":"p63","source":"ἕλκει δὲ ὁ πατὴρ πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν τῷ δοῦναι τῷ υἱῷ τὴν ἐξουσίαν τε καὶ δύναμιν τοῦ δύνασθαι πάντας ἕλκειν πρὸς ἑαυτόν· διὸ οὐδὲν ἐναντίον ἐν τοῖς λόγοις.\n\nΝΙʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς δαιμονιῶσιν οἱ δαίμονες διηνεκῶς ἐνοικοῦσι, πῶς ἑτέροις κατασκευάζουσι βλάβας; εἰ δὲ τοῦτο ποιοῦσι τῶν πασχόντων πρὸς βραχὺ χωριζόμενοι, πῶς, ὅτε ἀοράτῳ δυνάμει ἀπ' αὐτῶν διωχθῶσιν, οὐκέτι ἐν αὐτοῖς ἴχνη τῆς οἰκείας παρουσίας δεικνύουσιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀδύνατον τὸν [δαίμονα] τοῖς δαιμονιῶσι ποιῆσαι τῇ ἀπουσίᾳ ἅπερ ποιεῖ τῇ παρουσίᾳ· οὐ γὰρ βουλήσει μόνον ἐνεργοῦσιν [οἱ δαίμονες], ἀλλὰ καὶ παρουσίᾳ. διὸ μὴ παρόντος τοῦ δαίμονος, οὐδὲ τὰ ἴχνη αὐτοῦ πάρεστιν. ἡ γὰρ ἀπελαύνουσα αὐτὸν ἀόρατος δύναμις φόβον αὐτῷ ἐντίθησι τοῦ μηκέτι πλησιάζειν τῷ θεραπευομένῳ. ΝΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μόνου θεοῦ ἐστιν ἰσχὺν καὶ ζωὴν διδόναι τοῖς σώμασι, πῶς τοῦτο ποιοῦσιν οἱ δαίμονες, ἐνισχύοντες τῶν δαιμονιώντων τὰ σώματα, ὥστε δεσμὰ καὶ ἁλύσεις συντρίβειν; \"ἐδεσμεῖτο γάρ\", φησίν, \"ἁλύσεσι καὶ πέδαις καὶ διαρρήσσων τὰ δεσμὰ ἠλαύνετο ὑπὸ τοῦ δαίμονος εἰς τὴν ἔρημον\". Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐ τῷ σώματι παρέσχεν ὁ δαίμων τὴν δύναμιν πρὸς τὸ δύνασθαι συντρίβειν καὶ διαρρήσσειν τὰ δεσμὰ καὶ τὰς ἁλύσεις, ἀλλ' αὐτὸς ὁ δαίμων συνέτριβε καὶ διέρρησσε τὰ δεσμὰ καὶ τὰς ἁλύσεις, εἰ καὶ ἡ θεία γραφὴ τῷ δαιμονιῶντι προσῆψε τὰ τοῦ δαίμονος ἔργα.","english":"The Father draws to the Son by giving the Son the authority and power to be able to draw all to himself; therefore there is nothing contradictory in these words.\n\nNINTH QUESTION. If the demons dwell continually in those who are demon-possessed, how do they cause harm to others? But if they do this by departing for a short time from those who suffer, how is it that when they are driven away from them by an invisible power, they no longer show in them any traces of their own presence? ANSWER. It is impossible for the demon to do by his absence the things he does by his presence; for the demons act not only by will but also by presence. Therefore when the demon is not present, not even his traces are present. For the invisible power that drives him away instills in him fear of no longer approaching the one who is being healed.\n\nFIFTY-FOURTH QUESTION. If it belongs to God alone to give strength and life to bodies, how do the demons do this, strengthening the bodies of the demon-possessed so that they break bonds and chains? \"For he was bound,\" it says, \"with chains and fetters, and breaking the bonds he was driven by the demon into the wilderness.\" ANSWER. The demon did not give the body the power to be able to break and shatter the bonds and chains, but the demon himself broke and shattered the bonds and chains, even if the divine Scripture attributed the works of the demon to the demon-possessed man.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":64,"ref":"p64","source":"ΝΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῶν μερῶν τῆς κτίσεως οἱ δαίμονες οὐκ ἐξουσιάζουσι, διατί παρακουσθέντων τῶν χρησμῶν τοῖς Ἕλλησι τιμωρίας ἐπήγαγον, καὶ θεραπευθέντων τῶν εἰδώλων ταύτας ἀνέ σχον καὶ ἀγαθὰ αὐτοῖς ἀντὶ τούτων παρέσχον; πόθεν οὖν αὐτοῖς δύναμις εἰς τὴν ἑκατέρου ἐνέργειαν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἔθος ἦν τοῖς δαίμοσι πρὸς πλάνην ἀνθρώπων προσάπτειν ἑαυτοῖς, ὥσπερ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ὄνομα, οὕτω καὶ τὰ ἔργα. ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἔστι τοῖς δαίμοσιν ἰσχὺς ἀμυντικὴ τῶν ἀνη κόων, δείκνυται ἐκ τῆς καταλύσεως, ἣν ὑπέμεινεν ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς ὑπὸ τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ· φανερῶς γὰρ ὤφθη ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς οὐχ ἑτέρᾳ δυνάμει κατὰ τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ χρησάμενος, πλὴν τῇ διὰ χειρὸς ἀνθρώπων καὶ ξιφῶν· εἰ γὰρ εὐπόρει ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς θείας δυνάμεως, ὑπερμαχούσης αὐτοῦ καταλυομένου, οὐκ ἂν τῇ ἀνθρω πίνῃ δυνάμει ἐχρήσατο, σῴζειν ἐν αὐτῇ μάτην προσδοκήσας καὶ ἑαυτὸν καὶ\n\nτοὺς θεοὺς αὑτοῦ ἐκ τῆς καταλύσεως· ὅπερ ἐστὶ μέγιστος ἔλεγχος τῆς τῶν δαιμόνων καταλύσεως καὶ ἀσθενείας καὶ τοῦ μηδέποτε αὐτοὺς δυνηθῆναι θεῖα ἔργα ἐκτελεῖν. τιμωρητικὰ τῶν ἐναντίων καὶ εὐεργετικὰ τῶν ὑπηκόων. ἔτι δέ, εἰ πᾶσα θεραπεία ζώντων ἐστὶ καὶ αἰσθανομένων, πῶς οὐκ ἔστι προδήλως ψευδὲς τὸ \"θεραπευθέντων δὲ τῶν δαιμόνων ἀνέσχον τὰς τιμω ρίας\", τῶν μήτε ζώντων μήτε αἰσθανομένων, ἀλλ' ὥσπερ πρὸς τὰς θεραπείας, οὕτω καὶ πρὸς τὴν παρακοὴν τῶν χρησμῶν ἀναισθή τως ἐχόντων;","english":"NINTH QUESTION. If the demons do not have authority over the parts of creation, why, when their oracles were disobeyed, did they bring punishments upon the Greeks, and when their idols were worshipped, did they hold back these punishments and provide good things to them instead? From where, then, do they have power for either activity? ANSWER. It was a habit of the demons, for the deception of men, to attach to themselves, just as the name of God, so also his works. But that the demons have no power to defend the disobedient is shown from the destruction which Hellenism endured at the hands of Christianity; for it was plainly seen that Hellenism used no other power against Christianity except that through the hand of men and swords. For if Hellenism had possessed divine power fighting on its behalf when it was being destroyed, it would not have used human power, vainly hoping in it to save both itself and its own gods from destruction—which is the greatest proof of the destruction and weakness of the demons, and that they were never able to perform divine works, either punitive against opponents or beneficent toward subjects. Moreover, if all worship is of living and sentient beings, how is it not plainly false that \"when the demons were worshipped, they held back the punishments,\" since they are neither living nor sentient, but are as insensible to the worship as to the disobedience of the oracles?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":65,"ref":"p65","source":"Νςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ λέγει ὅτι \"δύο δύο\" καὶ \"ἑπτὰ ἑπτὰ\" ἐν τῇ κιβωτῷ εἰσηνέχθησαν ἄλογα, πῶς οὐ δʹ καὶ ιδʹ ἐκ τῶν ἀκαθάρτων καὶ καθαρῶν εἰσηνέχθη; τινὲς γὰρ εἰρήκασι τοῦτο, τινὲς δὲ ὅτι δύο καὶ ἑπτὰ μόνον. τίς οὖν ἐκ τῶν δύο ἀληθέστερον εἶπεν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀληθέστερον εἶπεν ὁ εἰπὼν δʹ καὶ ιδʹ τοῦ εἰπόντος δύο καὶ ἑπτά· τὸ γὰρ \"δύο δύο\" εἶπεν ἀντὶ τοῦ δύο ἄρρενα καὶ δύο θήλεα, καὶ \"ἑπτὰ ἑπτὰ\" ἀντὶ τοῦ ἑπτὰ ἄρρενα καὶ ἑπτὰ θήλεα, καθαρὰ μὲν τὰ ἑπτὰ ἑπτά, ἀκάθαρτα δὲ τὰ δύο δύο.\n\nΝΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Ἐπειδὴ τὴν τῶν πολυομμάτων ζῴων ὀπτασίαν Ἡσαΐας καὶ Ἰεζεκιὴλ ἐθεάσατο, ἆρα ἀμφοτέροις ἕν τι ἀπεκαλύπτετο, ἢ θατέρῳ ἐδείκνυτο θάτερον; τί δὲ καὶ ἐδήλου τὸ δεικνύμενον; Ἀπόκρισις. Διὰ μὲν τῆς κατὰ τὸν προφήτην Ἡσαΐαν ὀπτασίας τὸ κατὰ Χριστὸν ἐδήλου μυστήριον, καθήμενον ἐπὶ θρόνου δόξης καὶ τῇ βρώσει τῆς ἁγίας αὑτοῦ σαρκὸς καθαρισμὸν ποιοῦντα ἁμαρτίας εὐσεβῶν ἀνθρώπων τῶν ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ δοξαζόντων τὴν ἁγίαν καὶ ὁμούσιον τριάδα ἐπὶ τῷ μεγέθει τῶν θείων δω ρεῶν, ἧς τῷ ὀνόματι βαπτισθέντες ἐδικαιώθησαν, λαβόντες τῆς τῶν οὐρανίων τε καὶ αἰωνίων ἀγαθῶν μετουσίας τὴν ἐλπίδα· ὃν γὰρ ἐθεάσατο ὁ προφήτης ἄνθρακα τοῖς ἀκαθάρτοις αὐτοῦ χείλεσι προσαγόμενον εἰς κάθαρσιν ἀνομιῶν καὶ ἁμαρτιῶν, μήνυμα εἶχε τῆς δεσποτικῆς σαρκός, καθαριζούσης τὸ συνειδὸς τῶν ἐσθιόντων αὐτὴν ἀπὸ πάσης ἁμαρτίας. διὰ δὲ τῆς κατὰ τὸν προφήτην Ἰεζεκιὴλ ὀπτασίας τὰ μέλλοντα ἐδήλου συμβήσεσθαι τῷ Ναβουχοδονόσορ βασιλεῖ Βαβυλῶνος, ψυχαγωγίαν ἔχοντα τῶν ἐν τῇ αἰχμα λωσίᾳ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι ὄντων Ἰσραηλιτῶν·","english":"SIXTY-FIFTH QUESTION. If in the time of the flood he says that \"two by two\" and \"seven by seven\" of the irrational animals were brought into the ark, how is it that not four and fourteen of the unclean and clean were brought in? For some have said this, but others that only two and seven. Which of the two, then, spoke more truthfully? ANSWER. He spoke more truthfully who said four and fourteen than he who said two and seven; for \"two by two\" he said in place of two males and two females, and \"seven by seven\" in place of seven males and seven females—the sevens being clean, and the twos being unclean.\n\nSIXTY-SEVENTH QUESTION. Since Isaiah and Ezekiel beheld the vision of the many-eyed living creatures, was one and the same thing revealed to both, or was one thing shown to the one and the other to the other? And what did the thing shown signify? ANSWER. Through the vision according to the prophet Isaiah the mystery concerning Christ was signified—him who sits upon the throne of glory and by the eating of his holy flesh makes purification of sin for pious men who in all the earth glorify the holy and consubstantial Trinity for the greatness of the divine gifts, in whose name having been baptized they were justified, receiving the hope of participation in the heavenly and eternal good things. For the coal which the prophet saw brought to his unclean lips for the cleansing of lawlessness and sins was a token of the master's flesh, which cleanses the conscience of those who eat it from every sin. And through the vision according to the prophet Ezekiel he signified the things that were to befall Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, having for their purpose the encouragement of the Israelites who were in the captivity in Babylon.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":66,"ref":"p66","source":"ἐθεάσατο γὰρ ὁ προφή της τὰ τετραπρόσωπα ζῷα, ὁμοίωμα ἔχοντα ἀνθρώπου τε καὶ λέοντος, μόσχου τε καὶ ἀετοῦ. λέγει δὲ καὶ ὁ προφήτης Δανιὴλ περὶ τοῦ Ναβουχοδονόσορ, ὅτι ηὐξήθησαν οἱ ὄνυχες αὐτοῦ ὡς ἀετοῦ καὶ αἱ τρίχες αὐτοῦ ὡς λέοντος, καὶ χόρτον ἐψώμισαν αὐτὸν ὡς τὸν μόσχον, καὶ καρδία ἀνθρώπου ἐδόθη αὐτῷ. ἐκ ταύ της δὲ τῆς ὀπτασίας ψυχαγωγίαν τινὰ ἐντίθησι τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις τοῖς πρὸς τὴν κραταιάν τε καὶ ἰσχυρὰν σφόδρα τῶν Βαβυλωνίων δυναστείαν ἀποβλεψαμένοις, ἐν ἀπογνώσει καθεστῶσι τοῦ μὴ δύνασθαι ἔτι ἐκ τῆς τοιαύτης αἰχμαλωσίας τυχεῖν ἐλευθερίας. ἵνα οὖν ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς ἀπογνώσεως μεταστήσῃ τοὺς Ἰσραηλίτας ὁ θεὸς καὶ παρασκευάσῃ αὐτοὺς πρὸς τὴν αὑτοῦ δυναστείαν ἀποβλέπειν, δείκνυσι τῷ προφήτῃ ἡμέρου τε καὶ ἀνημέρου ζῴου τὴν σύζευξιν καὶ βαρυσώ μου καὶ πετεινοῦ τὴν σύμπτησιν· ἥμερον γὰρ ζῷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ἀνή μερον δὲ ὁ λέων καὶ βαρύσωμον μὲν ζῷον ὁ μόσχος, πετεινὸν δὲ καὶ κοῦφον ζῷον ὁ ἀετός. ἐν ἐκείνοις μὲν δηλοῖ τὴν τῆς βασιλείας ἐξ ἀνημέρου εἰς ἡμερότητα μετάστασιν, ἐν τούτοις δὲ [τὴν] τῆς βαρύτητος τῆς δουλείας εἰς τὴν ἐλευθερίαν μεταβολήν· ὑπόζυγος γὰρ ὁ μόσχος, ζυγοῦ δὲ ἐλεύθερος ὁ ἀετός. δείκνυσι δὲ τῷ προφήτῃ καὶ τροχόν, ἐν τῷ τροχῷ μηνύων τὴν τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἀναγωγὴν εἰς αἰχμαλωσίαν καὶ ἐπαναγωγὴν εἰς τὰ ἴδια. ΝΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Διατί ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἰεζεκιὴλ κατακέχρηται ὁ θεῖος χρησμὸς τῷ τοῦ \"υἱὲ ἀνθρώπου\" προσρήματι, ὅπερ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων προφητῶν οὐκ ἐποίησε;","english":"For the prophet saw the four-faced living creatures, having a likeness of a man and a lion, a calf and an eagle. And the prophet Daniel also says concerning Nebuchadnezzar that his nails grew like an eagle's and his hair like a lion's, and they fed him grass like the calf, and a man's heart was given to him. From this vision he instills a certain encouragement into the Israelites, who were looking toward the mighty and exceedingly strong dominion of the Babylonians, being in despair of ever being able to obtain freedom from such captivity. In order, therefore, that God might remove the Israelites from this despair and prepare them to look toward his own dominion, he shows the prophet the yoking together of a tame and an untame animal, and the coupling of a heavy-bodied beast and a bird; for man is a tame animal, the lion an untame one, the calf a heavy-bodied animal, and the eagle a bird and a light animal. In those he signifies the transition of the kingdom from untameness to tameness, and in these the change of the heaviness of slavery into freedom; for the calf is a beast of burden, but the eagle is free of the yoke. He shows the prophet also a wheel, signifying in the wheel the leading away of the Jews into captivity and their leading back to their own land. FIFTY-EIGHTH QUESTION. Why does the divine oracle use the address \"son of man\" in the case of Ezekiel, which it did not do in the case of the other prophets?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":67,"ref":"p67","source":"καὶ εἰ τὴν παγκόσμιον ἀνάστασιν ἐπὶ τῶν ξηρῶν ὀστέων ὁ αὐτὸς προφήτης τεθέαται, καὶ εἰ τῷ ὄντι ἀνέστησαν τὰ ὀστέα, ἄνθρωποι γενόμενοι τέλειοι, καθὼς ἡ τοῦ αὐτοῦ προφήτου βίβλος διδάσκει, σαφήνισον. Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ ἔμελλε διὰ τοῦ προφήτου\n\nἸεζεκιὴλκατ' ὀπτασίαν προζωγραφεῖσθαι τῶν νεκρῶν ἡ ἀνάστασις, μέλ λουσα γίνεσθαι ἐπὶ πραγμάτων διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον \"ἔρχεται ὥρα καὶ νῦν ἐστιν, ἐν ᾗ πάντες οἱ ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις ἀκούσονται τῆς φωνῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ οἱ ἀκούσαντες ζήσονται\". διὰ τοῦτο καλεῖται τῷ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοὺ ἀνθρώπου ὀνόματι· καὶ καθάπερ Ἰησοῦς τοῦ Ναυὴ μέλλων κατ' αὐθεντίαν ἡλίῳ καὶ σελήνῃ προστάττειν τὴν στάσιν λαμβάνει τοῦ Ἰησοῦ τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ὑπὸ τῆς κτίσεως (διὰ) τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ προστάγματος τιμώμενον, οὕτω καὶ ὁ Ἰεζεκιὴλ λαμβάνει τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τὸ ὄνομα καὶ διὰ τῆς ὀπτασίας ἐγείρει τοὺς νεκροὺς τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ προσρήματος, ἦν δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἰεζεκιὴλ τὰ πάντα ὀπτασία, καὶ τὰ ὀστέα καὶ ἡ τούτων ἀνάστασις. δείκνυσιν οὖν τῷ προφήτῃ ταύτην τὴν ὀπτασίαν ὁ θεός, προηγουμένως μὲν μηνύων δι' αὐτῆς τὴν ἐσομένην διὰ Χριστοῦ πανδημικὴν ἀνάστασιν τῶν νεκρῶν, ἔπειτα δὲ πρὸς τὴν ψυχαγωγίαν τῶν Ἰσραηλιτῶν, ἀπογνόντων ἑαυτοὺς τοῦ δύνασθαι ἔτι ἐλευθεροῦσθαι τῆς τῶν βαβυλωνίων δουλείας· καθάπερ γὰρ νεκρὰ σώματα ἐν τοῖς μνη μείοις κείμενα ἐλπίδα οὐκ ἔχοντα ἐγέρσεως, οὕτως ἑαυτοὺς ἐλο γίσαντο εἶναι ἐν Βαβυλῶνι, χωρὶς πάσης ἐλπίδος τῆς ἐπανόδου. δηλοῖ δὲ τοῦτο ὁ αὐτὸς προφήτης ἐν οἷς λέγει· \"καὶ ἐλάλησε κύριος πρός με λέγων·","english":"And if the same prophet beheld the worldwide resurrection upon the dry bones, and if the bones truly rose, becoming perfect men, just as the book of the same prophet teaches, make it clear. Answer. Since it was going to be that the resurrection of the dead would be depicted beforehand through the prophet Ezekiel in a vision, being about to take place in reality through the Son of Man according to what is said, \"The hour is coming and now is, in which all who are in the tombs will hear the voice of the Son of Man, and those who hear will live.\" For this reason it is called by the name of the Son of Man; and just as Joshua the son of Nun, being about to command the sun and the moon to stand still by his own authority, receives the name of Jesus, which is honored by creation because of the obedience of the command, so too Ezekiel receives the name of the Son of Man and through the vision raises the dead by the power of the appellation. And in the case of Ezekiel everything was a vision, both the bones and their resurrection. God therefore shows this vision to the prophet, primarily signifying through it the universal resurrection of the dead that was to come through Christ, and then for the encouragement of the Israelites, who had despaired of themselves being able any longer to be freed from the slavery of the Babylonians; for just as dead bodies lying in tombs have no hope of resurrection, so they supposed themselves to be in Babylon, without any hope of return. The same prophet makes this clear in what he says: \"And the Lord spoke to me, saying:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":68,"ref":"p68","source":"υἱὲ ἀνθρώπου, τὰ ὀστᾶ ταῦτα πᾶς οἶκος Ἰσραήλ ἐστιν· αὐτοὶ λέγουσι ξηρὰ γέγονε τὰ ὀστᾶ ἡμῶν· ἀπώ λετο ἡ ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν\" καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. ΝΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ καλὰ τὰ τοῦ βίου πάντα, διατί οἱ τού των ἀπεχόμενοι ἐν γραφαῖς ἐπαινοῦνται καὶ οἱ ἀντεχόμενοι αὐτῶν διαβάλλονται; εἰ δὲ φαῦλα τυγχάνει, διατί τὰ φαῦλα τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ ζωῇ συμπαρέζευκται, καὶ ταῦτα ἀγαθοῦ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ τυγχάνοντος Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἐπαινετὸν τὸ ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν τοῦ βίου καλῶν, οὔτε ἁπλῶς ψεκτὸν τὸ ἀντέχεσθαι αὐτῶν, ἀλλ' ἑκά τερον πρέποντι λόγῳ γινόμενον, καὶ τὸ ἀπέχεσθαι καὶ τὸ ἀντέχεσθαι αὐτῶν ἐστιν ἐπαινετόν. ἐναντίως δὲ γινόμενον, ἀμφότερά ἐστι ψεκτά. ὅτι δὲ οὐδὲν φαῦλον κατ' οὐσίαν συμπαρέζευκται τῇ ἡμε τέρᾳ ζωῇ, δηλοῖ ἡ θεία γραφὴ τῶν δημιουργημάτων ἐπαινοῦσα τὴν γένεσιν, λέγουσα \"καὶ εἶδεν ὁ θεὸς πάντα ὅσα ἐποίησε, καὶ ἰδοὺ καλὰ λίαν\". παρατρεψάντων δὲ ἡμῶν ἑκουσίως τὰ καλά, τὰ φαῦλα ὑφίσταται· οὐκ ἔστι γὰρ φαῦλον ἐν τῷ βίῳ, τῶν ἐν αὐτῷ καλῶν ἀτρέπτων μενόντων, ὥστε μηδὲν εἶναι φαῦλον παρὰ τὴν παρατροπὴν τοῦ καλοῦ. οὐδὲν οὖν συμπαρέζευκται φαῦλον τῇ ἡμε τέρᾳ ζωῇ· τὰ γὰρ φαῦλα χρήσει ἀλόγῳ ἐστὶ φαῦλα καὶ οὐ φύσει, προαιρετὸν δὲ καὶ τὸ χρῆσθαι καὶ τὸ μὴ κεχρῆσθαι ἢ κα λῶς ἢ φαύλως.","english":"Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; they say, Our bones are dried up, our hope is lost, and so on. 59. Question. If all the things of life are good, why are those who abstain from them praised in the Scriptures, and those who cleave to them condemned? But if they are evil, why are evil things yoked together with our life, and this when the Creator is good? Answer. Abstaining from the good things of life is not simply praiseworthy, nor is cleaving to them simply blameworthy; but each, when done with fitting reason, both the abstaining and the cleaving to them, is praiseworthy. Done in the opposite way, both are blameworthy. That nothing evil by nature is yoked together with our life, the divine Scripture shows by praising the creation of the works made, saying, \"And God saw all things whatsoever he had made, and behold, they were very good.\" But when we pervert good things willingly, evil things come to be; for there is no evil in life while the good things in it remain unperverted, so that nothing is evil besides the perversion of the good. Nothing evil, then, is yoked together with our life; for evil things are evil by irrational use and not by nature, and both the using and the not using, whether well or evilly, are matters of choice.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":69,"ref":"p69","source":"Ξʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς στοιχείοις οὐ πρόσεστιν αἴσθησις. διατί Μωυσῆς μὲν οὐρανὸν καὶ γῆν τῷ λαῷ διαμαρτύρεται, Ἡσαΐας δὲ κατηγορῶν τοῦ λαοῦ τούτοις ἀκούειν ἐγκελεύεται; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὰ λεγόμενα πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν. πρὸς τοὺς ἐν αὐτοῖς λέγεται λογικούς, ὡς τὰ λεγόμενα πρὸς τὴν πόλιν πρὸς τοὺς πολίτας λέγεται, ὡς τὸ \"Ἱερουσαλὴμ Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἡ ἀποκτείνουσα τοὺς προφήτας καὶ λιθοβολοῦσα τοὺς ἀπεσταλμένους πρὸς αὐτήν\". οὐ γὰρ ἡ πόλις ἀπέκτεινε καὶ ἐλιθοβόλησεν, ἀλλ' οἱ πολῖται.\n\nΞΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Διατί ὁ κύριος ἔλεγε, πρὸς τὴν Μαρίαν μετὰ τὴν ἔγερσιν \"μή μου ἅπτου, οὔπω γὰρ ἀναβέβηκα πρὸς τὸν πα τέρα\"; εἰ μὲν οὖν πρὸ τῆς ἀναλήψεως οὐδενὶ ἐξῆν αὐτοῦ ἅπτε σθαι, πῶς μετὰ μικρὸν τοῖς μαθηταῖς καὶ τῷ Θωμᾷ ποιεῖν ἐπέτρεπε τοῦτο; εἰ δὲ ἐξῆν, πῶς ὃ ἔμελλε μετὰ μικρὸν τοῖς πολ λοῖς ἐπιτρέπειν, ἀπηγόρευσε πρὸ μικροῦ ἐπὶ ταύτης; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ \"μή μου ἅπτου\" εἴρηται πρὸς τὴν Μα ρίαν ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος, κατὰ τὴν ἔννοιαν τοῦ \"μή μοι ἀκολούθει, ὥστε διὰ παντὸς συνεῖναί μοι κατὰ τὴν πρὸ τοῦ σταυροῦ μου διαγωγήν\"· ἐβούλετο γὰρ κατὰ μικρὸν ἀπεθίζειν τοὺς μαθητὰς τῆς τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ θέας καὶ παρουσίας. διὸ οὔτε διὰ παντὸς ὡρᾶτο τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἐν ταῖς τεσσαράκοντα ἡμέραις, ἐν αἷς διέτριβεν ἐπὶ","english":"60. Question. If there is no perception in the elements, why does Moses call heaven and earth to witness to the people, and Isaiah, when accusing the people, command them to hear? Answer. What is said to heaven and earth is said to the rational beings in them, just as what is said to a city is said to its citizens, as in \"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her.\" For it was not the city that killed and stoned, but the citizens.\n\n61. Question. Why did the Lord say to Mary after the resurrection, \"Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father\"? If, then, before the ascension it was not permitted to anyone to touch him, how is it that shortly afterward he allowed the disciples and Thomas to do this? But if it was permitted, why did he forbid this woman shortly before what he was about to permit to many shortly afterward? Answer. The \"Do not touch me\" was spoken to Mary by the Savior in the sense of \"Do not follow me, so as to be with me continually in the manner of my way of life before my cross.\" For he wished gradually to wean the disciples from the sight and presence of his body. Therefore he was not seen by the disciples continually during the forty days in which he stayed on","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":70,"ref":"p70","source":"τῆς γῆς μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν, οὔτε πάντῃ ἀθέατον αὐ τοῖς ἑαυτὸν κατέστησεν· ἀλλ' ἐκ διαλείμματος ἀμφότερα ἐποιεῖτο, καὶ τὸ ὁρᾶσθαι αὐτοῖς καὶ τὸ μὴ ὁρᾶσθαι. ΞΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις τοῦ μόνα δύο θηρία τε καὶ κτήνη, ἄρρεν καὶ θῆλυ, ἐν τῇ κοσμοποιίᾳ παρῆχθαι; ἐπειδὴ τοῦτό τινες τῶν εὐσεβῶν εἰρήκασι πρὸς σύστασιν τοῦ μὴ ἐξ ἀλό γων δορᾶς τοὺς δερματίνους χιτῶνας τοῖς πρώτοις ἀνθρώποις ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ δεδόσθαι. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ ἐν ἑκάστῳ γένει ἔστι τινὰ γεναρχῆ, καὶ τὰ μὲν γεναρχῆ εἰσιν ἔργα τοῦ θεοῦ, τὰ δὲ ὑπὸ τὰ γεναρχῆ εἰσιν ἔργα φύσεως. διὰ σπορᾶς καὶ γεννήσεως ὑφεστῶτα, δῆλον ὅτι ἑκάστου γένους * πλὴν τῆς μιᾶς ζυγῆς ἑκάστου γένους ἀρρενοθήλεος οὐκ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεός. χιτῶνας δὲ δερματίνους ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς οὐκ ἀνθρωπίνως, ἀλλὰ δημιουργικῶς· οὐ γὰρ ζῷα σφάξας καὶ τούτων τὰ δέρματα συρράψας χιτῶνας ἐποίησεν, ἀλλ' αὐτοὺς χιτῶνας τοὺς δερματίνους ἐδημιούργησεν. ἀλλ' ἴσως ἐρεῖ τις ὅτι, εἰ ἐδημιούργησεν ὁ θεὸς τοὺς δερματίνους χιτῶνας μετὰ ἑπτὰ ἡμέρας τῆς δημιουργίας, πῶς λέγει ἡ γραφή, ὅτι \"κατέπαυσεν ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἔργων ᾧ ἤρξατο ποιεῖν\"; γινωσκέτω ὁ τοῦτο λέγων, ὅτι ὧν ἤρξατο ποιεῖν κατέπαυσε τὴν ποίησιν, τουτέστι τοῦ ποιεῖν τὰ μὴ ὄντα· τὰ δὲ δέρματα, ἃ νῦν ποιεῖ, οὐ νῦν ἄρχεται ποιεῖν, ἀλλ' ἐν τῇ ποιή σει τῶν ζῴων καὶ τὰ δέρματα αὐτῶν ἐγένοντο πάλαι. κατὰ ταῦτα δὲ καὶ τὸ \"ἔπλασεν ἔτι κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς πάντα τὰ κτήνη καὶ τὰ θηρία τῆς γῆς καὶ ἤγαγεν αὐτὰ πρὸς τὸν Ἀδὰμ\" καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς· τὸ γὰρ \"ἔτι\" τὴν δευτέραν σημαίνει τούτων γένεσιν. ΞΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"of the earth after the resurrection, nor did he make himself entirely invisible to them; but he did both alternately—both being seen by them and not being seen. 62. Question. What is the proof that only two beasts and cattle, male and female, were brought forth in the creation of the world? Since some of the pious have said this to establish that the leathern tunics were not given to the first humans by God from the hide of dumb animals. Answer. If in each kind there are certain things that are generative of the kind, and the things generative of the kind are works of God, while the things under the generative things are works of nature, subsisting through seed and generation, it is clear that God did not make each kind—except the one pair, male and female, of each kind. But God made the leathern tunics not in a human way, but creatively; for he did not slaughter animals and sew their hides together to make tunics, but he created the leathern tunics themselves. But perhaps someone will say: if God created the leathern tunics after the seven days of creation, how does the Scripture say, \"And God rested on the seventh day from all his works which he had begun to do\"? Let the one who says this know that he rested from the making of the things he had begun to make—that is, from making the things that were not; but the hides, which he now makes, he did not now begin to make, but in the making of the animals their hides also came to be long ago. And in accordance with these things also is the saying, \"And the Lord God formed yet from the earth all the cattle and the beasts of the earth, and brought them to Adam,\" and what follows; for \"yet\" signifies the second generation of these. 63. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":71,"ref":"p71","source":"Ἐπειδὴ πάλαι μὲν οἱ παῖδες, νῦν δὲ ἡμεῖς ὑμνοῦντες τῇ ὡσαννὰ φωνῇ καὶ τῇ τοῦ ἀλληλούια κεχρήμεθα, τίς ἐστιν ἡ τούτων ἑρμηνεία; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἑρμηνεία ἐστὶ τοῦ μὲν ἀλληλούια τὸ \"ὑμνήσατε μετὰ μέλους τὸ ὅν\", τοῦ δὲ ὡσαννὰ \"μεγαλωσύνη ὑπερ κειμένη\".\n\nΞΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἄτρεπτον τὸν θεῖον, πῶς βλασφημούμενον καὶ εὐφημούμενον τὰς ἀμοιβὰς ἀμφοτέροις τῆς ἑκατέρων πράξεως πολλάκις ἀξίας ἀντέδωκεν; Ἀπόκρισις. Μένων ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῇ οἰκείᾳ αἰσθήσει τε καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ ἀτρέπτως ἑκάστῳ τὸ κατ' ἀξίαν ἀποδίδωσιν, οὐ νῦν κατὰ παρατροπὴν τοῦτο ποιεῖν εὑρών, ἀλλ' ἀεὶ ἐσχηκὼς καὶ ἔχων τὸ ἐν τούτοις ἄτρεπτον· τὸ δὲ ἐν ἴσῃ τάξει ἔχειν τοὺς βλασφήμους καὶ τοὺς εὐχαρίστους ἀναισθησίας ἦν ἢ ἀδικίας, ἅπερ ἐστὶ θεοῦ ἀλλότρια.\n\nΞΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ εὐσεβεῖ ζήλῳ κινούμενος ὁ Σαοὺλ τὰς ἐγγαστριμύθους ἀνεῖλε, διατί συνηλάθη, ὥστε παρ' ἐγγαστριμύθου ζη τῆσαι πρόρρησιν; καὶ εἰ τῷ ὄντι ἐκείνη τὸν Σαμουὴλ ἀνήγαγεν, ἐπειδὴ τοῦτο φησὶν ἡ γραφή; καὶ ὅτι ἀληθεύει μὲν αὕτη, τὸ δὲ πρᾶγμα ἀσεβὲς δῆλον. Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ ζήλῳ θείῳ ποιῶν τι, οὗτος οὐ θεομαχεῖ. ὑπόνοιαν δὲ ὁ Σαοὺλ ἐσχηκὼς εἰς τὸν Δαυίδ, ὡς ὅτι εἰς αὐτὸν μετέθηκεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν βασιλείαν, παντοίως ἐμηχανᾶτο ἀναιρεῖν τὸν Δαυίδ, ἵνα εἰς ἔργον μὴ ἐκβῇ ἡ ἐπ' αὐτὸν θεία ψῆφος. ἀνεῖλε δὲ τὰς ἐγγαστριμύθους, τούτῳ προσδοκήσας διαλλάξαι τὸν θεόν, ὥστε ἀνατρέψαι τὴν ἀποδοκιμάσασαν αὐτὸν τῆς βασιλείας οἰ κείαν ψῆφον, οὐ τὴν ἀσέβειαν τῶν ἐγγαστριμύθων μισῶν, ἀλλὰ τὴν βασιλείαν φιλῶν.","english":"Since formerly the children, and now we, have used the cry \"Hosanna\" and \"Alleluia\" in our hymns, what is their interpretation? Answer. The interpretation of \"Alleluia\" is \"Praise with melody the One who is,\" and of \"Hosanna\" is \"greatness that is exalted above.\"\n\n64. Question. If the divine is unchangeable, how is it that when blasphemed and when praised, it has often rendered to both the recompense worthy of each one's action? Answer. God, remaining in his own perception and justice unchangeably, renders to each according to worth, not now finding it possible to do this by a turning aside, but always having had and having the unchangeableness in these matters; for to hold the blasphemers and the grateful in equal rank would be a mark of insensibility or injustice, which are alien to God.\n\n65. Question. If Saul, moved by pious zeal, destroyed the ventriloquists, why was he brought together so as to seek a prediction from a ventriloquist? And if that woman truly brought up Samuel, since the Scripture says this? And that she speaks truth, but the matter is plainly impious. Answer. He who does something with divine zeal does not fight against God. But Saul, having conceived a suspicion against David, that God had transferred the kingdom to him, contrived in every way to kill David, so that the divine vote concerning him might not come to fulfillment. He destroyed the ventriloquists, expecting by this to reconcile God, so as to overturn the own vote that had rejected him from the kingdom, not hating the impiety of the ventriloquists, but loving the kingdom.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":72,"ref":"p72","source":"καὶ ἐπειδὴ οὐ προσεδέξατο ὁ θεὸς τὸν σκοπὸν αὐτοῦ, διὰ τοῦτο αὐτὸν ἐγκατέλιπεν ἐπιδεηθῆναι ὧν οὐκ ἀγαθῷ σκοπῷ ἐποιή σατο τὴν ἀναίρεσιν· τὰ δὲ ἄλλα πάντα τὰ ὑπὸ τῆς ἐγγαστριμύθου γε γονότα, κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν γεγένηται τοῦ δαίμονος τοῦ τὰς ὄψεις φαντάσαντος τῶν ὁρώντων τὸν οὐκ ὄντα Σαμουὴλ ὡς τὸν Σα μουὴλ ὁρᾶν. ἡ δὲ ἀλήθεια τῶν ῥημάτων γέγονεν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ δεδωκότος τῷ δαίμονι ἐν σχήματι τοῦ Σαμουὴλ ὀφθῆναι τῇ ἐγγαστριμύθῳ καὶ δεῖξαι τοῦ μέλλοντος τὴν δήλωσιν. καὶ ἐπειδὴ τοῦ Σαμουὴλ οὐκ ἤκουσεν ὁ Σαούλ, τοῦ εἰρηκότος αὐτῷ τῆς βασιλείας τὴν ἀφαίρεσιν, ἀλλὰ καὶ μετὰ τὴν θείαν ψῆφον τὴν ἀποδοκιμάσασαν αὐτὸν τῆς βασιλείας ἔτι ἀντεποιεῖτο τῆς βασιλείας, διὰ τοῦτο\n\nἀνάξιον αὐτὸν ἔκρινεν ὁ θεὸς τοῦ διὰ τῶν ἀνακειμένων αὐτῷ προμηνῦσαι αὐτῷ τὰ ἐσόμενα, καθάπερ πεποίηκε καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν Ἀχαὰβ βασιλέα τοῦ Ἰσραήλ, τὸν ἀπιστήσαντα τοῖς τῆς ἀληθείας προφήταις καὶ πιστεύσαντα τοῖς ψευδοπροφήταις· δι' ἣν αἰτίαν ἔπεμψεν αὐτῷ πνεῦμα ψευδές, καθώς φησιν ἡ βίβλος τῶν Βασιλειῶν· ᾧ πιστεύσας ὁ Ἀχαάβ, ἀπατηθεὶς ἀπῆλθεν εἰς πόλεμον καὶ ζῶν οὐκ ἀνέκαμψεν. Ξςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἄρρεν καὶ θῆλυ ἕνεκεν παιδοποιίας ἐκτίσθη, ταύτης ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει οὐ γινομένης, ἆρα ἀνίστανται οἱ ἄνθρω ποι τὴν τῶν παιδοποιῶν μορίων διαφορὰν ἔχοντες; καὶ εἰ τοῦτο, πῶς οὐκ ἔστι περιττὸν τὸ μέλη ἐπάγεσθαι ἄπρακτα; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ καὶ πρὸς παιδοποιίαν οὐκ ἔστι χρήσιμα τὰ γεννητικὰ μόρια μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν, ἀλλὰ πρὸς ἀνάμνησιν τοῦ διὰ τῶν τοιούτων μορίων εἰληφέναι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τὴν γέννησίν τε καὶ αὔξησιν καὶ τὴν διαμονήν ἐστι χρήσιμα·","english":"And since God did not accept his purpose, for this reason he abandoned him to be in need of those things which he had undertaken to destroy with no good purpose. But all the other things that came about through the ventriloquist came about through the operation of the demon who presented visions to the sight of those who saw, so that they seemed to see Samuel who was not Samuel. But the truth of the words came from God, who granted the demon to appear in the form of Samuel to the ventriloquist and to show the declaration of what was to come. And since Saul did not listen to Samuel, who had told him of the removal of his kingdom, but even after the divine vote that rejected him from the kingdom still laid claim to the kingdom, for this reason God judged him unworthy to be foretold the things to come through those consecrated to him, just as he also did in the case of Ahab king of Israel, who disbelieved the prophets of truth and believed the false prophets; for which cause he sent him a false spirit, as the book of Kings says; believing which, Ahab was deceived and went to war and did not return alive. 66. Question. If male and female were created for the sake of procreation, and this does not take place in the resurrection, do humans rise having the difference of the procreative parts? And if so, how is it not superfluous to bear members that are inactive? Answer. Even if the generative parts are not useful for procreation after the resurrection, yet they are useful for the remembrance that through such parts humans received their birth and growth and continuance.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":73,"ref":"p73","source":"εἰσαγόμεθα γὰρ δι' αὐτῶν εἰς ἔννοιαν τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ σοφίας τῆς ταῦτα μηχάνημα κατὰ τοῦ θανάτου ταξαμένης φυλακτικὰ τοῦ γένους ἡμῶν ἐν ἀθανασίᾳ τῇ διαδοχῇ τῶν τικτομένων.\n\nΞΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὴν παράβασιν καὶ τὴν μέλλουσαν δι' αὐτῆς ἐπάγεσθαι τῷ λαῷ τιμωρίαν ὁ Μωσῆς προεφήτευσε, διατί μετ' ᾠδῆς αὐτὰ ἔλεγε, χαύνωσιν μᾶλλον ἤπερ ὠφέλειαν εἰδότος τῶν ᾀσμάτων τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἐνεργάζεσθαι; Ἀπόκρισις. Κατὰ τὰ ἐν ταῖς ᾠδαῖς ἐμφερόμενα διηγή ματα ἁρμοδίως καὶ οἱ ῥυθμοὶ τῶν μελῶν ἐγένοντο, ἄγοντες τὰς ψυχὰς εἰς τὴν πρέπουσαν τοῖς ᾀδομένοις αἴσθησιν· ἢ γὰρ γοερὼς ἢ θρηνῳδῶς ἢ κατανυκτικῶς ἢ τρόποις ἑτέροις ᾔδοντο, ἐξοριστι κοῖς χαυνώσεως ἐκ τῆς διανοίας τῶν ᾀδόντων.\n\nΞΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ χρήσιμον καὶ ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν ἡ ἰατρικὴ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, ὡς τὰ πράγματα δείκνυσι, τίνος ἕνεκεν μὴ ὑπὸ εὐσεβῶν ἀλλ' ὑπὸ τῶν ἐναντίων ἡ τοῦ τοιούτου ἀγαθοῦ γεγένηται εὕρεσις; Ἀπόκρισις. Πολλὰ μὲν εὕρηται καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν εὐσεβῶν ἰαματικὰ τῶν σωματικῶν νοσημάτων καὶ ὑπὸ Σολομῶντος τοῦ βα σιλέως, ὧν οὐδεὶς τῶν ἔξωθεν τῆς εὐσεβείας εἶχε τὴν κατάληψιν· ἰατρικὴν δὲ ἀληθινὴν ἡγοῦντο οἱ εὐσεβεῖς τὴν τὰς ψυχὰς ἰατρεύουσαν, ὡς τῇ τεθεραπευμένῃ ψυχῇ ἕπεται τοῦ σώματος ἡ σω τηρία· ὁ γὰρ φροντίζων τῆς σωτηρίας ὡς δεῖ, τῆς ἐκ τῶν ὑλι κῶν οὐ δεῖται βοηθείας, ὑπήκοον ἔχων ἀεὶ τὴν θείαν χάριν εἰς παροχὴν σώματός τε καὶ ψυχῆς ἀγαθῶν· ἀψευδὴς γὰρ ὁ λόγος ὁ τοῦ σωτῆρος, ὁ λέγων \"ζητεῖτε τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ταῦτα πάντα προστεθήσεται ὑμῖν\". ΞΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"For through them we are led to an understanding of the wisdom of God, which arranged these devices against death as safeguards for our race in immortality through the succession of those who are born.\n\n37. Question: If Moses foretold the transgression and the punishment that was to be brought upon the people through it, why did he speak these things with a song, since songs are known to produce rather relaxation than benefit in men? Answer: In accordance with the narratives contained in the songs, the rhythms of the melodies were also fittingly composed, leading the souls to the perception appropriate to the things sung; for they were sung either mournfully or lamentingly or in a compunctionate manner or in other modes, banishing relaxation from the mind of those who sang.\n\n38. Question: If medicine is useful and necessary for men, as the facts show, for what reason did the discovery of such a good come not from the pious but from their opponents? Answer: Many remedies for bodily diseases were discovered both by the pious and by Solomon the king, of which none of those outside piety had comprehension; but the pious regarded as true medicine that which heals the souls, since to the soul that has been cared for, the salvation of the body follows; for he who properly cares for salvation has no need of help from material things, always having divine grace obedient for the provision of the goods of both body and soul; for the word of the Savior is true, which says, \"Seek the kingdom of God, and all these things will be added to you.\"\n\n39. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":74,"ref":"p74","source":"Εἰ τὰ τελευτῶντα βρέφη ἔπαινον ἢ ψόγον ἐξ ἔργων οὐκ ἔχουσι, τίς ἡ διαφορὰ ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει τῶν ὑπὸ ἄλλων μὲν βαπτισθέντων καὶ μηδὲν πραξάντων καὶ τῶν μὴ βαπτι σθέντων καὶ ὁμοίως μηδὲν πραξάντων; Ἀπόκρισις. Αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ διαφορὰ τῶν βαπτισθέντων πρὸς τὰ μὴ βαπτισθέντα, τοῦ τυχεῖν μὲν τὰ βαπτισθέντα τῶν διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ἀγαθῶν, τὰ δὲ μὴ βαπτισθέντα μὴ τυχεῖν· ἀξιοῦνται δὲ τῶν διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ἀγαθῶν τῇ πίστει τῶν προσφερόντων αὐτὰ τῷ βαπτίσματι.\n\nΟʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ δύο ἡμῖν ὁ Μωσῆς οὐρανῶν ἐξέθετο τὴν γένεσιν, πῶς πλειόνων διδάσκει ἡμᾶς ἡ γραφὴ ὕπαρξιν, ποτὲ μὲν λέγουσα \"οἱ οὐρανοὶ τῶν οὐρανῶν\", ποτὲ δὲ \"ἠνεῴχθησαν αὐτῷ οἱ οὐρανοὶ\" καὶ \"θεωρῶ τοὺς οὐρανοὺς ἀνεῳγμένους\" καὶ \"ἡρπάγη ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ\", καὶ οὐκ εἶπεν ἕως τρίτου μέρους τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, ἀλλὰ ἀπολύτως \"ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ\"; καὶ πολλὰ δὲ τούτοις εὑρήσει τις ἐν τῇ γραφῇ παραπλήσια. πῶς οὖν τὰ ἐναντία ἀλλήλοις ἀμφότερα δυνατὸν ἀληθεύειν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ Μωσῆς μὲν ἡμῖν τοὺς οὐρανοὺς ἀριθμῶν οὐ παρέδωκεν οὔτε ἕνα οὔτε δύο οὔτε πλείονας· εἴωθεν δὲ ἡ γραφὴ τὰ διαστήματα τῶν διαστημάτων ἐν τῷ ἀέρι ὑπερκείμενα οὐρανοὺς ὀνομάζειν, ὡς \"τὰ πετεινὰ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ\" καὶ \"ὑετὸς ἐξ οὐ ρανοῦ\" καὶ \"τὰ ἄστρα τοῦ οὐρανοῦ\". ἐκ τῆς ἀκολουθίας οὖν τῶν κειμένων φωνῶν νοοῦμεν οὐρανοὺς κατ' οὐσίαν μὲν δύο καὶ πρὸς τούτοις","english":"If infants who die have neither praise nor blame from works, what is the difference in the resurrection between those baptized by others and having done nothing, and those not baptized and likewise having done nothing? Answer. This is the difference between the baptized and the unbaptized: that the baptized obtain the goods that come through baptism, while the unbaptized do not obtain them; and they are deemed worthy of the goods that come through baptism by the faith of those who bring them to baptism.\n\n40. Question. If Moses set forth to us the generation of two heavens, how does the Scripture teach us the existence of more, sometimes saying \"the heavens of heavens,\" and sometimes \"the heavens were opened to him\" and \"I see the heavens opened\" and \"he was caught up to the third heaven,\" and it did not say \"to the third part of heaven,\" but absolutely \"to the third heaven\"? And one will find many similar things to these in the Scripture. How, then, can both be true, though contrary to each other? Answer. Moses did not hand down to us the heavens by number, neither one nor two nor more; but the Scripture is accustomed to call the intervals of the intervals that lie above in the air \"heavens,\" as \"the birds of heaven\" and \"rain from heaven\" and \"the stars of heaven.\" From the sequence, then, of the expressions that lie before us we understand the heavens: in essence, two, and in addition to these","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":75,"ref":"p75","source":"ἕτερον, οὗπερ τῆς θέας ἔτυχεν ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος, κατὰ διαστήματα δὲ καὶ πλείονας. οὕτω δὲ νοουμένων τῶν οὐρανῶν οὐδεμία ἐναντίωσις ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ὑπολειφθήσεται.\n\nΟΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ προσάπτειν τῷ Χριστῷ ἄγνοιαν ἐστὶν ἀσεβές, δῆλον ὅτι πάντων ἔχει τελείαν τὴν πρόγνωσιν. πῶς οὖν οὐκ ἔστιν αἴτιος τῆς τοῦ Ἰούδα προδοσίας καὶ τῆς τοῦ Πέτρου ἐνωμότου ἀρνήσεως ὁ ταῦτα μὲν προγνούς, τούτους δὲ ἐκλεξάμενος; καὶ περὶ τῆς τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τοῦ πρωτοπλάστου ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ποιήσεως ὁ αὐτὸς λόγος ἁρμόσειεν; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ ἔδει τὸν Χριστὸν δι' ἑνὸς τῶν αὐτοῦ μαθη τῶν παραδοθῆναι, \"ἵνα ἡ γραφὴ πληρωθῇ\", δῆλον ὅτι αἴτιός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστὸς τῆς ἐκπληρώσεως τῆς γραφῆς καὶ οὐ τῆς προδοσίας τοῦ Ἰούδα· ταύτης γὰρ αὐτὸς ὁ Ἰούδας ἦν αἴτιος, ἣν μέλλουσαν προειδὼς ὁ θεὸς προεῖπε διὰ τῆς γραφῆς. καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ πρό γνωσις αἰτία τοῦ μέλλοντος ἔσεσθαι, ἀλλὰ τὸ μέλλον ἔσεσθαι αἴτιον τῆς προγνώσεως· οὐ γὰρ τῇ προγνώσει ἕπεται τὸ μέλλον, ἀλλὰ τῷ μέλλοντι ἕπεται ἡ πρόγνωσις. οὐδαμῶς οὖν ὁ προγινώ σκων αἴτιός ἐστι τοῦ μέλλοντος ἔσεσθαι. ὥστε οὐχ ὁ Χριστός ἐστιν αἴτιος τῆς προδοσίας, ἀλλ' ἡ προδοσία αἰτία τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ προγνώσεως. καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ διαβόλου καὶ τοῦ πρωτοπλάστου ὁ αὐτὸς λόγος.","english":"Another, of which the blessed Paul obtained the vision, and at intervals even several. And when the heavens are understood in this way, no contradiction will be left in the accounts.\n\n41. Question. If to attribute ignorance to Christ is impious, it is clear that he has perfect foreknowledge of all things. How then is he not the cause of Judas's betrayal and of Peter's sworn denial, since he foreknew these things and chose these men? And will the same argument apply concerning the devil and the first-formed man being made by God? Answer. If it was necessary that Christ be handed over by one of his disciples, \"that the scripture might be fulfilled,\" it is clear that Christ is the cause of the fulfillment of the scripture, and not of Judas's betrayal; for Judas himself was the cause of that betrayal, which God, foreknowing that it would be, foretold through the scripture. And foreknowledge is not the cause of what is going to be, but what is going to be is the cause of the foreknowledge; for what is going to be does not follow foreknowledge, but foreknowledge follows what is going to be. In no way, then, is the one who foreknows the cause of what is going to be. So that it is not Christ who is the cause of the betrayal, but the betrayal is the cause of Christ's foreknowledge. And concerning the devil and the first-formed man the same argument applies.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":76,"ref":"p76","source":"ΟΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ὁ ἥλιος ἀποκρύπτεται, πῶς οὐ σφαῖρα ὁ οὐρανὸς ἀποδείκνυται; ὁ γὰρ ἀπὸ φιλοσόφων ὅσιος ἀνὴρ εἶπεν ὅτι, \"ὥσπερ σικύα σώματι, οὕτως ὁ οὐρανὸς ἐπίκειται τῇ γῇ, καὶ ὃ μὲν διὰ τὸ κοῦφον ἀνωφερής, ἣ δὲ διὰ τὸ βαρύ ἐστι κατωφερής· διὸ τῇ ἀνθολκῇ ὑπ' ἀλλήλων συνέχονται\". εἰ δὲ τοῦτο ἀληθές, ὅλου τοῦ οὐρανίου κύκλου εἰς τὴν γῆν ἐρηρεισμένου, ἔνδον ἀνάγκη ὑπάρχειν τοὺς φωστῆρας καὶ φαίνειν ἀεί. πῶς οὖν ἀπο κρύπτονται; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ ὁμολογουμένως πολλά ἐστιν ἕτερα τὰ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ καὶ ἴσῳ ἐπιπέδῳ ὄντα καὶ διὰ τὸ μῆκος τοῦ διαστή ματος κεκρυμμένα ὄντα τῆς ὄψεως, οἷον τὰ πλοῖα τὰ ἐν τῇ θα λάσσῃ ὑπ' ἀλλήλων μὴ ὁρώμενα, τοῦ πλάτους τῇ τῶν ὑδάτων ἐπιφανείᾳ περιορίζοντος τὴν ὄψιν περαιτέρω μὴ ἀνατείνεσθαι τοῦ ὁρίζοντος, τί θαυμαστόν, εἰ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν φωστήρων γίνεται ἡ ἐπίκρυψις διὰ τὴν αὐτὴν αἰτίαν; τὸ δὲ διὰ τὴν ἀνθολκὴν οὐρα νοῦ καὶ γῆς ἵστασθαι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν, ἐπὶ μὲν τοῦ πρώ του οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς ἔνεστι τοῦτο εἰκάσαι διὰ τὸ ἅμα γεγενῆσθαι αὐτά, ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ στερεώματος καὶ τῆς γῆς οὐκέτι· ἵστατο γὰρ ἡ γῆ πρὸ τοῦ στερεώματος, τὴν ἅπασαν βαστάζουσα ὑγρὰν οὐσίαν, χωρὶς ἀνθολκῆς τοῦ στερεώματος· ὕστερον γὰρ τῆς γῆς γέγονε τὸ στερέωμα.","english":"76. Question. If the sun is hidden at night, how is the heaven not shown to be a sphere? For the holy man from among the philosophers said that, \"just as a cupping-glass is to a body, so heaven lies upon the earth, and the one is borne upward because of its lightness, and the other is borne downward because of its weight; therefore by their mutual attraction they are held together.\" But if this is true, since the whole celestial circle is fixed upon the earth, the luminaries must necessarily be within and shine always. How then are they hidden? Answer. If it is agreed that many other things are in the same and equal plane and are hidden from sight because of the length of the distance, such as ships at sea not seen by one another, since the expanse of the water's surface limits the sight so that it cannot extend beyond the horizon, what wonder is it if the hiding of the luminaries also happens for the same cause? But that heaven and earth stand fast by the mutual attraction of heaven and earth—this can be conjectured in the case of the first heaven and the earth, because they came into being together, but no longer in the case of the firmament and the earth; for the earth stood before the firmament, bearing the whole liquid substance, without the mutual attraction of the firmament; for the firmament came into being later than the earth.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":77,"ref":"p77","source":"ΟΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ διὰ τὸ καθ' Ἕλληνας σφαῖραν ὄντα καὶ κινεῖσθαι τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐν τόπῳ ἐστί, πῶς διὰ τὸ ὡς καμάραν πεπῆχθαι ἢ ὡς δέρριν κατὰ τὴν γραφὴν ἐκτετάσθαι ὁ οὐρανὸς οὐκ ἐν τόπῳ ἐστίν; ὥσπερ γὰρ τὸ κινούμενον, οὕτω καὶ τὸ πηγνύμενον ἐν τόπῳ ἀνάγκη νομίζεσθαι. εἰ δὲ τοῦτο, πῶς τὴν ἐπὶ τῇ περιγραφῇ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ παρ' ἀλλήλων κατάγνωσιν δικαίαν οὐχ ἕξομεν; εἰ δὲ ὁ οὐρανὸς κατὰ ἀμφοτέρους ἐν τόπῳ καὶ ἑκατέροις ἡ τοῦ τόπου ποιότης καὶ ποσότης καθέστηκεν ἄγνωστος, τί πλέον θάτεροι θατέρων κεκτῆσθαι δυνάμεθα, τῆς περὶ τῶν προλεχθέντων καταγνώσεώς τε καὶ ἀγνοίας ἑκατέρους ἐπίσης κατε χούσης; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἔλεγον οἱ χριστιανοὶ τὸν οὐρανὸν μὴ εἶναι ἐν τόπῳ, καθάπερ λέγουσιν οἱ Ἕλληνες, ἴση ἂν ἔμελλεν εἶναι ἡ παρ' ἀλλήλων κατάγνωσις, λεγόντων μὴ εἶναι τὸν οὐρανὸν ἐν τόπῳ· φωναῖς δὲ σημαντικαῖς τοῦ ἐν τόπῳ εἶναι τὸν οὐρανὸν πρὸς ἀλλήλους χρησαμένων, παντελῶς ἀνῄρηται ἡ τοιαύτη κατάγνωσις. εἰ δὲ τοῦ μὲν σφαῖραν εἶναι τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ σφαιρικῶς κινεῖσθαι ἀδυνάτου ὄντος, τοῦ δὲ ὡς καμάραν εἶναι αὐτοῦ δυνατοῦ δεικνυμένου, οὐδεμία ἄρα ἡ τῶν χριστιανῶν ἐπὶ τῇ ἀγνοίᾳ κατάγνωσις. περὶ δὲ τοῦ τόπου ἐκ τῶν καθ' ἡμᾶς στοχαζόμεθα περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ὥσπερ παρ' ἡμῖν ὅταν ᾖ περιφερὲς σῶμα, ὁμαλόν τε καὶ κοῖλον καὶ πανταχόθεν","english":"77. Question. If, because according to the Greeks heaven is a sphere and moves, it is in a place, how is it that, because it is fixed like a vault or stretched out like a skin according to the Scripture, heaven is not in a place? For just as what moves, so also what is fixed must be considered to be in a place. But if this is so, how shall we not have a just condemnation of one another concerning the delineation of heaven? But if heaven according to both is in a place, and to each side the quality and quantity of the place is unknown, what more can we possess than the other side, since condemnation and ignorance concerning the things previously said equally possess both? Answer. For if the Christians said that heaven is not in a place, just as the Greeks say, the condemnation of one another would be equal, since they say that heaven is not in a place; but since they use significant words to one another of heaven's being in a place, such condemnation is entirely done away with. But if, on the one hand, heaven's being a sphere and moving spherically is impossible, while, on the other hand, its being like a vault is shown to be possible, then the Christians' condemnation on account of ignorance is none at all. But concerning place, we conjecture about it from what is in our own experience, that just as among us, whenever there is a spherical body, smooth and hollow and from every side","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":78,"ref":"p78","source":"ἰσοπερίμετρον, ἐὰν πωμασθῇ ἐπὶ τὰ ὕδατα, βαστάζεται ἐπὶ τῶν ὑδάτων, τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ βαστάζεται ὁ οὐρανὸς ὑπὸ τῶν ὑδάτων. \"ὁ τανύσας\", φησί, \"τὸν οὐρανὸν ὡσεὶ καμάραν\"· τῷ τῆς καμάρας ὀνόματι τὸ περιφερὲς ἐδήλωσε τοῦ σώματος τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. βαστάζει οὖν τὸν μὲν οὐρανὸν τὰ ὕδατα, τὰ δὲ ὕδατα ἡ γῇ, τὴν δὲ γῆν τὸ θεῖον πρόσταγμα· \"ὁ κρεμάσας γὰρ τὴν γῆν\" φησίν \"ἐπ' οὐδενός\". ΟΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἡ διαφορὰ κατὰ τὰς μορφὰς χρήσιμος ἡμῖν ἐνταῦθα ὑπάρχει διά τε τὰς τοῦ σώματος χρείας καὶ τὰ ἐπιτη δεύματα καὶ τὰ συναλλάγματα, ἀνενδεοῦς ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει ἀνισταμένου τοῦ σώματος, εἰ μὲν τῇ αὐτῇ τῶν μορφῶν διαφορᾷ ἀνιστάμεθα, πῶς οὐκ ἄχρηστος αὕτη; εἰ δὲ ἐν μιᾷ ὁμοιότητι, τίς ἡ τούτου ἀπόδειξις; πῶς δὲ ἡ περὶ Λαζάρου καὶ τοῦ πλουσίου παραβολὴ τῶν μορφῶν οὐ δείκνυται τὸ διάφορον; πάντως γὰρ ἐκ ταύτης τὸν Λάζαρον ἐπέγνω ὁ πλούσιος. εἰ δὲ λέγοιέν τινες, ὡς γνῶσις ἐδόθη αὐτῷ πρὸς τὴν τοῦ Λαζάρου καὶ τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ ἐπί γνωσιν, πόθεν τοῦτο παραστήσουσι; καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου δέ, ἡνίκα τὰ \"σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων ἀνέστη καὶ ἐνεφανίσθησαν πολλοῖς\"; πάντως τῇ ἰδίᾳ μορφῇ τοῖς γνωρίμοις ἕκαστος εὐεπίγνωστος γέγονεν. Ἀπόκρισις. Πολλαὶ μέν εἰσιν αἱ αἰτίαι δι' ἃς χρὴ τοὺς ἀνισταμένους ἐν τῇ οἰκείᾳ ἀνίστασθαι μορφῇ, πρῶτον μὲν πρὸς ἔνδειξιν τῆς θείας καὶ μεγάλης γνώσεως τοῦ θεοῦ, τοῦ δυνηθέντος ἐν τοσούτῳ ἀριθμήτῳ πλήθει τῶν ἀνισταμένων ἑκάστῳ ἀπο σῴζειν τὴν οἰκείαν μόρφωσιν·","english":"equal in circumference, if it is covered over upon the waters, it is borne upon the waters; in this way heaven is borne by the waters. \"He who stretched out,\" it says, \"the heaven like a vault\"; by the name of vault he indicated the spherical form of the body of heaven. The waters, then, bear heaven, the earth bears the waters, and the divine command bears the earth; for \"He who hung the earth,\" it says, \"upon nothing.\" 74. Question. If the difference in forms is useful to us here both for the needs of the body and for occupations and for dealings with one another, but the body rises in the resurrection without need, then if we rise with the same difference of forms, how is it not useless? But if in one likeness, what is the proof of this? And how does the parable concerning Lazarus and the rich man not show the difference of forms? For certainly from this the rich man recognized Lazarus. But if some should say that knowledge was given to him for the recognition of Lazarus and Abraham, from where will they establish this? And in the case of the Lord too, when \"the bodies of the holy ones who had fallen asleep rose and appeared to many\"? Certainly each became easily recognizable to those who knew him by his own form. Answer. There are many reasons why those who rise ought to rise in their own form, first for the demonstration of the divine and great knowledge of God, who was able in so great a multitude of those who rise to preserve for each his own form.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":79,"ref":"p79","source":"ἔπειτα δὲ ἵνα μὴ νομισθῇ δημιουρ γῶν καινοὺς ἀνθρώπους καὶ μὴ τοὺς τεθνηκότας ἀνιστῶν, διὰ τοῦτο ἕκαστον τῶν ἀνισταμένων ἐν τῇ οἰκείᾳ ἐγείρει μορφῇ, οὐκ ἀώρῳ μέντοι τῇ ἡλικίᾳ· ἔτι δέ, ἵνα μὴ ἀπόλλυται τῆς κρίσεως τὸ δίκαιον, χρὴ ἕκαστον ἐκ τῶν ἀνισταμένων τὴν οἰκείαν ἔχειν μορφήν· ἀγνοουμένων γὰρ τῶν μορφῶν τοῦ τε ἀδικήσαντος καὶ τοῦ ἀδικηθέντος, ἀπόλλυται τῆς κρίσεως τὸ δίκαιον· ἔτι δέ, εἰ λυθεισῶν τῶν χρειῶν δι' ἃς ἀναγκαία γέγονε τῶν μορφῶν ἡ διαφορά, περιττὴ καὶ ἄχρη στος εὑρίσκεται αὕτη. ἀνάγκη ἄρα σὺν ταύτῃ περιττὴ καὶ ἄχρη στος εἶναι καὶ τῶν ὀνομασιῶν ἡ διαφορά. πῶς οὖν ὁ πλούσιος τὸν Λάζαρον καλεῖ, ἐκ τῆς κατὰ τὴν ὀνομασίαν διαφορᾶς μὴ γνωριζομένων τῶν προσώπων; τὸ δὲ κατὰ τὸν Λάζαρον καὶ τὸν πλού σιον διήγημα οὔτε παραβολή ἐστιν, εἰ καὶ παραβολικῶς εἴρηται, οὔτε ἱστορία, εἴ γε ἡ μὲν παραβολή ἐστι λόγος ὁμοιότητα περιέ χων τοῦ γεγονότος πράγματος πρὸς τὸ ἐσόμενον, ἱστορία δὲ λόγος διήγησιν περιέχων τοῦ ἤδη γεγονότος πράγματος· οὔτε γὰρ πρὸ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῶν ἑκάστῳ βεβιωμένων ἡ ἀνταπόδοσις γίνεται, οὔτε μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἀληθὲς τὸ \"ἔχουσι Μωσέα καὶ τοὺς προφήτας· ἀκουσάτωσαν αὐτῶν\". ἔστι δὲ τὸ περὶ τοῦ πλουσίου καὶ τοῦ Λαζάρου διήγημα ὑποτύπωσις λόγου διδασκαλίαν ἔχοντος τοῦ μὴ δύνασθαι μετὰ τὴν ἐκ τοῦ σώματος ἔξοδον τῆς ψυχῆς κατὰ πρόνοιάν τινα ἢ σπουδὴν ὠφελείας τινὸς τυχεῖν τοὺς ἀν θρώπους.","english":"Then, so that he not be thought to be creating new humans and not raising the dead, for this reason he raises each of those who rise in his own form, though not at an untimely age; and further, so that the justice of the judgment not be destroyed, each of those who rise must have his own form; for if the forms of the wrongdoer and the wronged are unknown, the justice of the judgment is destroyed; and further, if the uses for which the difference of forms became necessary are dissolved, this difference is found to be superfluous and useless. Therefore it is necessary that along with it the difference of names also be superfluous and useless. How then does the rich man call Lazarus, if the persons are not recognized from the difference in name? But the account concerning Lazarus and the rich man is neither a parable, even if it is spoken parabolically, nor a history, since a parable is a discourse containing a likeness of a thing that has happened to a thing that will be, while a history is a discourse containing a narrative of a thing that has already happened; for neither does the recompense for what each has lived occur before the resurrection, nor after the resurrection is \"they have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them\" true. But the account concerning the rich man and Lazarus is a sketch of a discourse having the teaching that humans cannot, after the soul's departure from the body, obtain any benefit by some providence or effort.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":80,"ref":"p80","source":"ΟΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μόνος ἀθάνατός ἐστιν ὁ θεός, κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον, πῶς ἀληθὲς κατ' αὐτὸν τὸ \"πάντες μὲν οὐ κοιμηθησόμεθα\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Μόνος ἔχων τὴν ἀθανασίαν λέγεται ὁ θεός, ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ θελήματος ἄλλου ταύτην ἔχει, καθάπερ οἱ λοιποὶ πάντες ἀθάνατοι, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας οὐσίας. Οςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῇ τετάρτῃ ἡμέρᾳ τῶν φωστήρων ἡ ποίησις γέγονεν, ἐξ αὐτῶν δὲ ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν ἡμερῶν συνίσταται, πῶς αἱ πρὸ τῆς παραγωγῆς τῶν φωστήρων τρεῖς ἡμέραι ἀμφίβολον τὸν μετὰ τὴν παραγωγὴν τῶν φωστήρων ἀριθμὸν οὐ δεικνύουσιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐκ τῆς παραγωγῆς τοῦ φωτὸς ὁ διαμερισμὸς γέγονε φωτὸς καὶ σκότους, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ διαμερισμοῦ φωτὸς καὶ σκότους ἡ ἡμέρα καὶ ἡ νὺξ ὑπέστη. ὅθεν δῆλον ὅτι πρὸ τῆς τῶν φωστήρων ποιήσεως ἡ κατὰ τὸν ὅρον τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπικράτεια φωτὸς ἐποίει τὴν ἡμέραν καὶ ἡ ἐπικράτεια τοῦ σκότους τὴν νύκτα. γενομένων δὲ τῶν φωστήρων ἐτάχθησαν ἐξουσιάζειν ὃ μὲν τοῦ φωτὸς καὶ τῆς ἡμέρας, ὃ δὲ τοῦ σκότους καὶ τῆς νυκτός· ὁ γὰρ δημιουργὸς τὸ φῶς μετὰ τῆς","english":"Question 95. If God alone is immortal, according to the apostle, how is it true according to him that \"we shall not all sleep\"? Answer. God is said to be the only one having immortality, because he has it not by the will of another, as all others who are immortal do, but from his own essence. Question 96. If the creation of the luminaries took place on the fourth day, and the number of the days is constituted from them, how do the three days before the production of the luminaries not show the number after the production of the luminaries to be doubtful? Answer. From the production of light came the division of light and darkness, and from the division of light and darkness day and night came into being. Hence it is clear that before the making of the luminaries, the dominion of light according to God's ordinance made the day, and the dominion of darkness made the night. But when the luminaries came into being, they were appointed to have authority, one over the light and the day, the other over the darkness and the night; for the Creator, with the light...","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":81,"ref":"p81","source":"ὡρισμένης αὐτοῦ ἐπικρατείας τῷ μείζονι τῶν φωστήρων ἀπεκλήρωσε· καὶ τοιαύτας ἡμέρας, ἃς νῦν ποιεῖ τὸ φῶς μετὰ τοῦ φωστῆρος, ἐποίει καὶ πρὸ τῆς ποιήσεως τῶν φωστήρων, κατὰ τὸν ὅρον τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ τὴν ἐπικράτειαν αὐτοῦ ὁρίσαντος δωδεκάωρον· ἐκεῖνος γὰρ ὁ ὅρος καὶ νῦν ἐπείγει τὸν ἥλιον πρὸς τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἔμμετρον δωδεκάωρον κίνησιν.\n\nΟΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Ἐπειδὴ διαφόρως τινὲς ἡρμήνευσαν καὶ ἀσαφῶς τὸ \"ἐν τῷ ἡλίῳ ἔθετο τὸ σκήνωμα αὐτοῦ\", τὴν σαφήνειαν αὐτοῦ δίδαξον. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἴπομεν ἐν τοῖς ἀνωτέρω, ὅτι οὐρανοὺς οἶδεν ἡ θεία γραφὴ καλεῖν ἢ τοὺς κατ' οὐσίαν, ὡς τὸν πρῶτον οὐρανὸν καὶ τὸ στερέωμα, ἢ τοὺς κατὰ τὰ ἐν τῷ ἀέρι διαστήματα. τὸ οὖν \"ἐν τῷ ἡλίῳ ἔθετο τὸ σκήνωμα αὐτοῦ\", ἵνα εἴπῃ τοὺς οὐρανοὺς ἔθετο σκήνωμα τοῦ ἡλίου· ἡ γὰρ ἐκ τῆς τῶν Ἑβραίων γλώττης εἰς τὴν τῶν Σύρων γλῶτταν μεταγωγὴ τῆς λέξεως οὕτω γεγένηται· \"ἐν αὐτοῖς ἔθετο τοῦ ἡλίου τὸ σκήνωμα\". δηλοῖ δὲ δι' ἑτέρου ψαλμοῦ ὁ προφήτης Δαυὶδ αὐτὸ τοῦτο, καὶ φησίν \"ὁ ἐκτείνων τὸν οὐρανὸν ὡσεὶ δέρριν\"· ἡ γὰρ ἔκτασις τῶν δέρρεων τὴν σκηνὴν ἀποτελεῖ. τῇ ποικιλίᾳ οὖν τῶν οὐσιῶν καὶ τῇ διαφορᾷ τῶν χρειῶν δείκνυσιν αὐτοὺς εἶναι γενητούς· ἡ γὰρ ἀγένητος φύσις πρὸς τὴν ἀγένητον φύσιν κατὰ τὴν φύσιν οὐκ ἔχει διαφοράν, τὸ δὲ καὶ χρείας ἕνεκεν εἶναι τοιόνδε ἢ τοιόνδε ἀλλότριόν ἐστι τῆς ἀγενήτου φύσεως.","english":"having allotted to the greater of the luminaries his defined dominion; and such days as the light now makes together with the luminary, he made also before the making of the luminaries, according to the decree of God who defined his dominion as twelve hours; for that decree even now urges the sun to its measured twelve-hour motion from the beginning.\n\nQuestion 97. Question. Since some have interpreted variously and obscurely the words \"in the sun he set his tabernacle,\" teach its clear meaning. Answer. We said in the passages above that divine Scripture is known to call heavens either those according to substance, as the first heaven and the firmament, or those according to the intervals in the air. So then \"in the sun he set his tabernacle,\" meaning that he set the heavens as a tabernacle for the sun; for the translation of the phrase from the language of the Hebrews into the language of the Syrians has been made thus: \"in them he set the tabernacle of the sun.\" And the prophet David shows this very thing through another psalm, saying \"who stretches out the heaven like a skin\"; for the stretching out of skins makes a tent. By the variety of substances, then, and the difference of their uses, he shows that they are created; for uncreated nature has no difference in nature toward uncreated nature, but that it exists for the sake of uses as such and such is foreign to uncreated nature.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":82,"ref":"p82","source":"ΟΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ \"ὥσπερ Ἰωνᾶς ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τοῦ κήτους τὸ τριήμερον, οὕτως καὶ ὁ κύριος ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ τῆς γῆς\", πῶς οὐ δοκήσει τοῦ κυρίου ὁ θάνατος γέγονεν; Ἰωνᾶς γὰρ μὴ θανὼν ἐνο μίσθη τεθνάναι. εἰ δὲ κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ὁ κύριος τοῦ θανάτου ἐγεύσατο, πῶς τὸ κατὰ τὸν Ἰωνᾶν ὑπόδειγμα οὐ διέψευσται; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐ τὸν θάνατον τῷ θανάτῳ συμπαρέβαλεν, ἀλλὰ τὴν τριήμερον ἐν τῷ τάφῳ παραμονὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος τῇ τριημέρῳ ἐν τῷ κήτει παραμονῇ τοῦ Ἰωνᾶ. ἄλλως δέ, εἰ κατὰ πάντα ὅμοια ἦν τὰ κατὰ τὸν Ἰωνᾶν τοῖς κατὰ τὸν σωτῆρα, οὐκ έτι ἐδύνατο ἐκεῖνα τούτων εἶναι τύποι ἢ εἰκόνες. χρὴ οὖν τὴν ἀλήθειαν πλέον τι τοῦ τύπου ἔχειν, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον \"πλέον τοῦ Ἰωνᾶ ὧδε\". ὑπόδειγμα δὲ ἀψευδὲς νοεῖται τὸ κατὰ τὸν Ἰωνᾶν τοῦ κατὰ τὸν σωτῆρα τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον· ὅτι, ὥσπερ ὁ Ἰωνᾶς σημεῖον πίστεως εἶχε τοῦ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀποσταλῆναι αὐτὸν κήρυκα τῆς καταστροφῆς τῶν Νινευιτῶν τὴν τριήμερον ἐκ τοῦ κήτους ἀναγωγήν, οὕτω καὶ ὁ σωτὴρ σημεῖον πίστεως εἶχε τοῦ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀποσταλῆναι αὐτὸν κήρυκα τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν τὴν τριήμερον ἐκ τοῦ τάφου ἀνάστασιν. ΟΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Ἐπειδή τινες τὴν τοῦ κυρίου παράδοσιν τῇ τετράδι λέγουσι γεγονέναι, ἐκ τῆς ποσότητος τοῦτο τῶν τότε πρα χθέντων στοχαζόμενοι, τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις τῆς ἡμέρας, ἐν ᾗ ἡ παρά δοσις γέγονεν; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀπόδειξις τοὺ μὴ τῇ τετράδι, ἀλλὰ τῇ πέμπτῃ παραδεδόσθαι τὸν κύριον, αὕτη ἐστίν. ἐν τῇ νυκτί, ἐν ᾗ παρε δόθη, ἐν ταύτῃ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ πρεσβυτέρων ἐκρίθη καὶ κατεκρίθη· τῷ πρωὶ δὲ ἐχομένῳ τῆς νυκτὸς ταύτης παρέδωκαν αὐτὸν τῷ Πιλάτῳ.","english":"82. Question. If “as Jonah was in the belly of the whale for three days, so also the Lord was in the heart of the earth,” how was the Lord’s death not merely in appearance? For Jonah, not having died, was thought to have died. But if the Lord truly tasted death, how has the example of Jonah not been falsified? Answer. He did not compare death with death, but the Savior’s three-day stay in the tomb with Jonah’s three-day stay in the whale. Otherwise, if the events concerning Jonah were in all respects like those concerning the Savior, those things could no longer be types or images of these. The truth must therefore have something more than the type, according to the saying, “something greater than Jonah is here.” The example of Jonah is understood to be a truthful demonstration of the Savior’s case in this way: that, just as Jonah had the three-day return from the whale as a sign of faith that he had been sent by God as a herald of the destruction of the Ninevites, so also the Savior had the three-day resurrection from the tomb as a sign of faith that he had been sent by God as a herald of the kingdom of heaven. 89. Question. Since some say that the Lord’s betrayal took place on the fourth day, inferring this from the quantity of things done at that time, what is the proof of the day on which the betrayal took place? Answer. The proof that the Lord was betrayed not on the fourth day but on the fifth is this: on the night in which he was betrayed, during that same night he was judged and condemned by the chief priests and elders; and in the morning following that night they handed him over to Pilate.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":83,"ref":"p83","source":"ἐν ᾗ δὲ ἡμέρᾳ παρέλαβεν αὐτὸν ὁ Πιλᾶτος, ἐν ταύτῃ αὐτὸν καὶ ἐσταύρωσε. παραλαβὼν δὲ αὐτὸν τῷ πρωὶ τῆς παρα σκευῆς ἐσταύρωσεν αὐτόν. οὐ χρὴ οὖν ταῖς γραφικῶς ὡρισμέναις ὥραις προσθεῖναι κατὰ στοχασμὸν τὸ ἀσύστατον· φησὶ γὰρ Ματθαῖος ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς οὕτως· \"πρωίας δὲ γενομένης, συμβού λιον ἔλαβον πάντες οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι τοῦ λαοῦ κατὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ὥστε θανατῶσαι αὐτόν. καὶ δήσαντες αὐτὸν ἀπήγαγον καὶ παρέδωκαν Ποντίῳ Πιλάτῳ τῷ ἡγεμόνι\". ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ Ἰωάννης ὁ εὐαγγελιστής φησιν· \"ἄγουσιν οὖν τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἀπὸ τοῦ Καϊάφα εἰς τὸ πραιτώριον· ἦν δὲ πρωί\". καὶ πάλιν· \"ὁ οὖν Πιλᾶτος ἀκούσας τούτων τῶν λόγων ἤγαγεν ἔξω τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος, εἰς τόπον λεγόμενον Λιθόστρωτον, ἑβραϊστὶ δὲ Γαβαθᾶ. ἦν δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα, ὥρα ἦν ὡσεὶ ἕκτη\". εἰ τοίνυν τῇ νυκτὶ μὲν παρεδόθη καὶ ἐκρίθη ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχιερέων καὶ κατεκρίθη, τῷ\n\nπρωὶ δὲ παρεδόθη τῷ Πιλάτῳ καὶ τῇ ἕκτῃ ὥρᾳ τῆς παρασκευῆς ἐσταυρώθη, δῆλον ὅτι τῇ πέμπτῃ ἡ παράδοσις γεγένηται.","english":"On the day Pilate received him, on that same day he also crucified him. But having received him in the morning of the Preparation, he crucified him. It is not right, then, to add by conjecture the inconsistent to the hours defined in Scripture. For Matthew the evangelist says thus: \"When morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death. And having bound him, they led him away and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor.\" And John the evangelist likewise says: \"So they bring Jesus from Caiaphas into the praetorium; and it was early.\" And again: \"So Pilate, having heard these words, brought Jesus outside and sat down on the judgment seat, at a place called the Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the Preparation of the Passover, and it was about the sixth hour.\" If, therefore, he was delivered and judged by the chief priests during the night and condemned, but in the morning he was delivered to Pilate and crucified at the sixth hour of the Preparation, it is clear that the delivery took place at the fifth hour.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":84,"ref":"p84","source":"Πʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μὴ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐστὶν ἡ ψυχή, διατί ἐκχυθέντος ἐκείνου τὸ ζῷον ἀπόλλυται, καὶ διὰ ποίων ὑπο δειγμάτων δείκνυται ὅτι ἐστὶ ψυχὴ ἐν τῷ σώματι ἢ ἕτερόν τι ἐν τῇ κτίσει ἀόρατον; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἔχοντες τὰς φωνὰς τοῦ δημιουργοῦ τῆς κτίσεως τὰς διαστελλούσας τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ σώματος, ἀξιοπιστότερα τούτων ὑποδείγματα εἰς παράστασιν τῆς τοῦ ζητουμένου ἀληθείας οὐκ ὀφείλομεν ἀπαιτεῖν· τῷ γὰρ δοῦναι τῷ Διαβόλῳ κατὰ πάσης τῆς σωματικῆς τοῦ Ἰὼβ συστάσεως ἐξουσίαν τοῦ πατάξαι αὐτήν, ὡς βούλεται, καὶ κωλῦσαι αὐτὸν τοῦ μὴ ἅψασθαι αὐτοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς, δείκνυσι τὴν ἄπληκτον ψυχὴν ἕτερόν τι παρὰ τὴν πεπληγ μένην αὐτοῦ σάρκα. ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ τὸ \"μὴ φοβεῖσθε ἀπὸ τῶν ἀποκτεινόντων τὸ σῶμα τὴν δὲ ψυχὴν μὴ δυναμένων ἀποκτεῖναι\" τοῦτο δηλοῖ, τὸ εἶναί τι τοῦ ἀναιρεθέντος ἀνθρώπου τὸ ἐν ἀθανασίᾳ διαμένον καὶ μετὰ τὸν τοῦ σώματος θάνατον, ὅπερ ἄτοπον λέγειν αἷμα τὸ ἐκχυθὲν καὶ φθαρέν. πρόδηλον ἄρα ὅτι ἔστι τι ἡ ψυχὴ ἀόρατον τοῖς ἀνθρώποις κατὰ τὴν οἰκείαν φύσιν. ΠΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Διατί ὁ ἑπτὰ ἀριθμὸς ἐναλλαγὴν δέχεται; καὶ γὰρ ἐν σαββάτῳ ὡς τὰ πολλὰ ὁ ἀὴρ μεταβάλλεται, καὶ ἡ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου κατὰ τὴν ἡλικίαν προκοπὴ ἐν τούτῳ τῷ ἀριθμῷ λαμ βάνει τὴν ἐπίδοσιν, ὀδόντων μὲν φυομένων τῷ ἑβδόμῳ μηνί, τῷ δ' αὐτῷ ἔτει ἀλλασσομένων τούτων, διπλασιασθέντων δὲ πάλιν, σπερματικὴν προσκτωμένου δύναμιν. καὶ ἵνα συντόμως εἴπω, ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν ἑπτὰ τὴν αὔξησιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐργάζεται καὶ τῶν νοσημάτων ποιεῖται διάκρισιν, καὶ ἐν νόμῳ δὲ τῶν λοιπῶν ἀριθμῶν τὸ αἰδεσιμώτερον κέκτηται. Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"84. Question. If the blood of a man is not the soul, why, when it is poured out, does the living being perish, and by what demonstrations is it shown that the soul is in the body, or that there is something else in creation invisible? Answer. Since we have the utterances of the Creator of creation that distinguish the soul from the body, we ought not to demand demonstrations more trustworthy than these for the establishment of the truth of the matter inquired into. For by giving to the Devil authority over the whole bodily constitution of Job to smite it as he wishes, and by preventing him from touching his soul, he shows that the soul is something other than his flesh that was smitten, and is not smitten. Likewise also this declares it: \"Do not fear those who kill the body but are not able to kill the soul\"—namely, that there is something of the slain man that remains in immortality even after the death of the body, which it is absurd to call the blood that was poured out and corrupted. It is evident, then, that the soul is something invisible to men according to its own nature. 85. Question. Why does the number seven admit of change? For indeed on the Sabbath the air for the most part changes, and the advance of a man according to age receives its progress in this number, teeth growing in the seventh month, and in the same year being changed, and again being doubled, when he acquires the power of seed. And to speak briefly, the number seven brings about the growth of men and makes the distinction of diseases, and in the law it has obtained the more reverend place among the other numbers. Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":85,"ref":"p85","source":"Πρὸς τὴν δύναμιν τῆς φύσεως τῶν ἔργων ἡ τῆς φύσεως ἐκπλήρωσις γίνεται καὶ οὐ πρὸς τὴν χρονικὴν παράτασιν ἑβδομάδι μηνῶν ἢ ἐνιαυτῶν ὡρισμένην· διὸ τὰ ὀνομα σθέντα ἔργα τῆς φύσεως ἐν τῇ ἐρωτήσει πολλάκις θᾶττον ἢ βραδύτερον τῶν ἑπτὰ ἀριθμῶν ἐπὶ τὴν οἰκείαν ἄγει ἡ φύσις τελειό τητα· ἅπερ οὐκ ἂν ἐγίνετο, εἰ ἡ φύσις τῇ ἑβδομάδι καὶ μὴ ἡ ἑβδομὰς τῇ φύσει ἠκολούθει. οὐχ ἡ ἑβδομὰς οὖν αἰτία τῆς ἐκ πληρώσεως τῶν ἔργων τῆς φύσεως, ἀλλ' ἡ δύναμις τῆς φύσεως αἰτία τῆς ἑβδομάδος, καθ' ἣν συμβῆναι τῇ φύσει τὰ οἰκεῖα ἔργα ἐκτελέσαι. ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀριθμῶν μηνῶν τε καὶ ἐνιαυτῶν, δι' ὧν ἐκπληροῦται τὸ ἔργον τῆς φύσεως ἐν τοῖς λοιποῖς ζῴοις τε καὶ φυτοῖς, ἡ δύναμις τῆς φύσεώς ἐστιν αἰτία τοῦ ἴσου χρόνου, καὶ τοῦ πλείονος καὶ ἐλάττονος. αἰδεσιμώτερος δὲ ἐν τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ ὁ ἑπτὰ ἀριθμός, ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ περιέχεται ὁ πᾶς χρόνος τῆς τε τοῦ κόσμου ποιήσεως καὶ τῆς τοῦ πεποιη κότος αὐτὸν καταπαύσεως, ἑξὰς μὲν τῆς ποιήσεως, μονὰς δὲ τῆς καταπαύσεως. ἵνα οὖν φυλαχθῇ ἡ μνήμη τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ποιή σεως ἐν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, διὰ τοῦτο τιμιώτερον τῶν ἄλλων ἀριθμῶν ἔταξε τὸν ἐπτὰ ἀριθμὸν ἐν τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ.","english":"The fulfillment of nature's works comes about according to the power of nature, and not according to a temporal extension defined by a week of months or of years; therefore the works of nature named in the question, nature often brings to their proper perfection sooner or later than the seven numbers; which would not happen if nature followed the hebdomad and not the hebdomad nature. The hebdomad, then, is not the cause of the fulfillment of nature's works, but the power of nature is the cause of the hebdomad, according to which it befell nature to accomplish its proper works. Likewise also concerning the other numbers of months and years, through which the work of nature is fulfilled in the remaining living beings and plants, the power of nature is the cause of the equal time, both of the longer and of the shorter. But the number seven is more venerable in the divine Scripture, because in it is contained the whole time both of the creation of the world and of the rest of the one who made it—six for the creation, and one for the rest. In order, then, that the memory of the creation of the world be preserved among men, for this reason God appointed the number seven more honored than the other numbers in the divine Scripture.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":86,"ref":"p86","source":"ΠΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ χαίρειν καὶ γαυριᾶν ἐν τοῖς χαρίσμασιν ἀπηγόρευται ὡς ὑπερηφανείας ποιητικόν, ταπεινοφροσύνη δὲ καὶ ἐπιείκεια τοῖς ταῦτα εἰληφόσιν ὑπὸ τῆς θείας γραφῆς παραδέδοται, πῶς οὐκ ἀνωφελῆ αὐτοῖς τὰ δωρήματα, αἴσθησιν ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος ἐκείνοις τοῦ οἰκείου καλοῦ παρασχεῖν οὐ δυνάμενα; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ χαίρειν ἐπὶ τοῖς χαρίσμασι μετὰ τῆς ὑπερη φανείας ἀπαγορεύει, ὡς ἀναιρετικὸν τοῦ χαίρειν καλῶς· τὸ χαίρειν δὲ ἐπὶ τοῖς χαρίσμασι μετὰ τῆς ἐπιεικείας, οὐ μόνον οὐκ ἀποτρέπει, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐναντίον ἐπὶ τὴν τοιαύτην χαρὰν ἐπιτρέπει, ποτὲ μὲν λέγων ὁ σωτήρ \"χαίρετε ὅτι τὰ ὀνόματα ὑμῶν ἐγράφη ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς\", ποτὲ δὲ ὁ ἀπόστολος φησίν \"χαίρετε ἐν κυρίῳ πάντοτε· πάλιν ἐρῶ χαίρετε· τὸ ἐπιεικὲς ὑμῶν γνωσθήτω πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις\", τῷ διπλασιασμῷ τοῦ \"χαίρετε\" τὴν ἐπίτασιν τῆς χαρᾶς ἐμφαί νων. οὔτε οὖν ἡ χαρὰ ἀναιρεῖ τὴν\n\nἐπιείκειαν, οὔτε ἡ ἐπιείκεια ἀναιρεῖ τὴν αἴσθησιν τῆς χαρᾶς, ἀλλὰ δι' ἑκατέρας ἑκατέρα φυ λάττεται.","english":"86. Question. If rejoicing and exulting in one's gifts is forbidden as producing arrogance, but humility and gentleness are handed down by divine Scripture to those who have received them, how are the gifts not useless to them, since they are unable at present to give them a perception of their own good? Answer. He forbids rejoicing in one's gifts together with arrogance, as destructive of right rejoicing; but rejoicing in one's gifts together with gentleness he not only does not discourage, but on the contrary permits such joy, the Savior saying at one time, \"Rejoice that your names have been written in the heavens,\" and at another the apostle saying, \"Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice; let your gentleness be known to all men,\" by the doubling of \"rejoice\" showing the intensity of the joy. Therefore neither does joy destroy gentleness, nor does gentleness destroy the perception of joy, but by each the other is preserved.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":87,"ref":"p87","source":"ΠΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Ἐπειδή τινες περὶ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου συστάσεως ἔφασαν στοχαζόμενοι ὡς ἑξακισχίλια ἔτη μόνα συστήσεται, εἰ ἀληθὲς τοῦτο δι' ὑποδειγμάτων ἐναργῶν ἐπιδείκνυται εἴ τε ἐκ τῆς θείας γραφῆς καὶ εἰ ἄδηλον, μάθωμεν. Ἀπόκρισις. Ἔνεστι διὰ πολλῶν γραφικῶν φωνῶν τεκμήρασθαι ἀληθεύειν τοὺς λέγοντας ἑξακισχίλια ἔτη εἶναι τὸν χρό νον τῆς παρούσης τοῦ κόσμου συστάσεως, ποτὲ μὲν λέγουσα \"ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν τούτων ἐλάλησεν ἡμῖν ἐν υἱῷ\", ποτὲ δὲ \"εἰς οὓς τὰ τέλη τῶν αἰώνων κατήντησε\", ποτὲ δὲ \"ὅτε ἦλθε τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου\". πᾶσαι δὲ αἱ τοιαῦται φωναὶ ἐν τῇ ἕκτῃ ἐρρέθησαν χιλιάδι, ἐν ᾗ ἐσμεν.\n\nΠΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τότε ἄφθονος δείκνυται ἕκαστος, ὅτε, ὅπερ ἐπίσταται καὶ δύναται καλὸν ποιεῖν, τοῖς πλησίον χαρίζεται, πῶς οὐ φθονερὸς ὁ θεὸς πάντας δυνάμενος ποιῆσαι θεοὺς καὶ μὴ ποιή σας; ἐπεὶ δὲ καλὸν τὸ θεός * εἰ δὲ μὴ φθονερός, πῶς οὐκ ἀδυνα μίᾳ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐποίησε; δυοῖν γὰρ θάτερον ὑποπτεύειν ἀνάγκη. Ἀπόκρισις. Πολύτροπός τίς ἐστιν ἡ ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ ἐρωτήσει περιεχομένη ἀτοπία· ἐν αὐτῇ γὰρ συντέτακται τοῖς κτίσμασιν ὁ θεός, τοῖς ἀφθόνως χαριζομένοις τοῖς πλησίον ἃ δύνανται ποιεῖν ἢ ἐπίστανται καλά· τὸ γὰρ πλησίον θεοῦ, οὐ χρῄζει θεοῦ εἰς παροχήν· ἔχει γὰρ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐν ἅπασι τὸ ἴσον. ἔτι δέ, εἰ θεοὺς μόνον ἐποίει ὁ θεός, τὸν κόσμον οὐκ ἂν ἐποίει· ἀναγ καίως γὰρ χρῄζει ὁ κόσμος τῶν μερῶν τῶν καθυπέρβασιν καὶ ὑπόβασιν οὐσίας ἀλλήλων διαφερόντων·","english":"87. Question. Since some have said, conjecturing about the constitution of the world, that it will last only six thousand years, let us learn whether this is true, and whether it is demonstrated by clear examples, and whether it comes from divine Scripture or is unclear. Answer. It is possible to infer from many scriptural utterances that those who say the time of the present constitution of the world is six thousand years speak the truth, since at one time it says, \"In these last days he spoke to us in a Son,\" and at another, \"on whom the ends of the ages have come,\" and at another, \"when the fullness of time came.\" And all such utterances were spoken in the sixth millennium, in which we are.\n\n88. Question. If each person is shown to be generous when he grants to his neighbors the good that he knows and is able to do, how is God not envious, who was able to make all things gods and did not? Since being God is good—and if he is not envious, how did he not do this out of inability? For of two things, one must be suspected. Answer. The absurdity contained in this question is manifold; for in it God is classed together with created things, which generously grant to their neighbors the good things they are able to do or know. For that which is near to God does not need God for provision, since it has equality with him in all things. Moreover, if God made only gods, he would not have made the world; for the world necessarily needs its parts, which differ from one another by the transcendence and subordination of their substance.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":88,"ref":"p88","source":"ἔτι δέ, εἰ τῶν ἀδυνάτων γίνεται οὐδέν, ἀδύνατον δὲ γενέσθαι θεόν–ἄκτιστος γὰρ καὶ ἀποίητος ὁ θεός–, πῶς οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλογον τότε λέγειν τὸν θεὸν ἄφθονον, ὅτε τὰ μὴ ἐνδεχόμενα ποιεῖ; ἔτι δὲ καλόν ἐστιν ὁ θεός, ὅτι ἄκτιστός ἐστι καὶ κτίστης. οὐδὲν δὲ τῶν κτιστῶν κατ' οὐσίαν δύναται γενέσθαι ἄκτιστον, τουτέστι θεός, ἔοικε δὲ αὕτη ἡ ἐρώτησις τῷ λέγοντι λόγῳ \"καλός ἐστιν ὁ ὀφθαλμὸς καὶ τιμιώ τερος τῶν ποδῶν\". ἀλλ' εἰ ἄφθονός ἐστιν ὁ θεός, διατί οὐκ ἐποίησε τοὺς πόδας ὀφθαλμούς; συνάγει γὰρ καὶ ὁ λόγος οὗτος τὴν αὐτὴν ἄλογον ἀτοπίαν, τὸ ἢ διὰ φθόνον ἢ δι' ἀδυναμίαν μὴ πεποιη κέναι τὸν θεὸν τοὺς πόδας ὀφθαλμούς.\n\nΠΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τότε καλὸν φαίνεται τὸ καλόν, ὅτε συγκρί νεται τῷ κακῷ, καλὸν δὲ ὁ κόσμος, δῆλον ὅτι κακὸν ὁ μὴ κόσμος, τουτέστι τὸ πρὸ κόσμου. καὶ εἰ μὲν ἀμφότερα ἐκ θεοῦ, τουτέστι τὸ πρὸ κόσμου καὶ ὁ κόσμος, πῶς οὐχ ἑκάτερα ἐξ αὐ τοῦ, τουτέστι τὸ καλὸν καὶ τὸ φαῦλον; εἰ δὲ θάτερον μὲν ἐξ αὐτοῦ, ἕτερον δὲ οὐκ ἐξ αὐτοῦ, πῶς οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτόματον καὶ μὴ ὑπ' αὐτὸν τὸ μὴ ἐξ αὐτοῦ; πῶς δὲ ἀληθεύει ὁ λέγων, \"ὅτι ἐξ αὐτοῦ τὰ πάντα\"; ἐν γὰρ τοῖς πᾶσι καὶ τὰ πρώην οὐκ ὄντα καὶ νῦν ὄντα περιέχεται. Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ κακὸν οὐδὲν ἕτερόν ἐστι παρὰ τὴν ἐκ τροπὴν τοῦ καλοῦ. διὸ ὕστερον τοῦ καλοῦ τὸ κακόν· ἐκτροπὴ γάρ ἐστι τοῦ καλοῦ· ἀλλ' εἰ τοῦτο, δῆλον ὅτι οὐκ ἐκ τῆς συγ κρίσεως τοῦ καλοῦ τὸ κακὸν φαίνεται κακόν, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας φύσεως. τὸ δὲ πρὸ τοῦ κόσμου μὴ ὄν, πάντῃ οὐκ ὂν ἦν· καὶ τὸ πάντῃ μὴ ὄν, οὔτε καλόν ἐστιν οὔτε κακόν. διὸ τῷ οὕτω μὴ ὄντι οὐδὲν συγκρίνεται.","english":"Furthermore, if nothing impossible comes to be, and it is impossible for God to come to be—for God is uncreated and unmade—how is it not irrational to call God then ungrudging, when he does things that are not possible? Moreover, God is good, because he is uncreated and creator. But none of created things can by nature become uncreated, that is, God. And this question resembles the argument that says, \"The eye is good and more honorable than the feet.\" But if God is ungrudging, why did he not make the feet eyes? For this argument also draws the same irrational absurdity—that God failed to make the feet eyes either through envy or through inability.\n\n95. Question. If the good appears good only when it is compared with evil, and the world is good, it is clear that what is not the world, that is, what is before the world, is evil. And if both are from God—that is, what is before the world and the world—how is it not the case that each is from him, that is, the good and the base? But if one is from him and the other is not from him, how is what is not from him not spontaneous and not under his control? And how does he speak truth who says, \"that all things are from him\"? For in \"all things\" are included both the things that formerly were not and the things that now are. Answer. Evil is nothing other than the turning away of the good. Therefore evil is later than the good; for it is a turning away of the good. But if this is so, it is clear that evil appears evil not from comparison with the good, but from its own nature. And what was before the world, being not, was in every way not being; and what is in every way not being is neither good nor evil. Therefore nothing is compared with what is thus not being.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":89,"ref":"p89","source":"ἔτι δὲ τὸ πάντῃ μὴ ὂν οὔτε ἐκ θεοῦ οὔτε ἐξ ἄλλου οὔτε αὐτόματόν ἐστι. πρὸ τοῦ κόσμου οὖν οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν, πλὴν θεοῦ. τοίνυν τῆς συγκρίσεως τῶν ὄντων οὔσης πρὸς τὰ ὄντα, οὐκ ἄρα συγκρίνεται ὁ κόσμος τῷ μὴ κόσμῳ, οὐδὲ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ περιέχεται τὸ μὴ κόσμος· τὸ γὰρ μὴ κόσμος οὐδέν ἐστι, τὸ δὲ περιεχόμενον ὄν ἐστι. καὶ ὅτε λέγομεν ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος τὸν θεὸν πεποιηκέναι τὰ ὄντα, οὐ θέσιν τοῦ ὄντος διδόαμεν τῷ μὴ ὄντι, ἀλλὰ τὴν παντελῆ ἀναίρεσιν τοῦ ὄντος. Πς ʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ διὰ τὸ νενικῆσθαι τὸν ἑλληνισμὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ ἐλπίδα οὐκ ἔχει ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς ἀνακλήσεως, πῶς πάλαι ὑπὸ τοῦ ἑλληνισμοῦ νικηθεῖσα ἡ ἀληθὴς θεοσέβεια νυνὶ τὴν ἀνάκλησιν δέδεκται; ὅτι γὰρ πρὸ τῆς πλάνης\n\nἐκράτει ἡ ἀλή θεια, μαρτυροῦσιν αἱ θεῖαι γραφαί, τὸν Ἀδὰμ καὶ πολλοὺς ἐφεξῆς μετ' αὐτὸν δηλοῦσαι οὐκ εἰδώλοις ἀλλὰ τῷ θεῷ λατρεύσαντας, κἄν τινες αὐτῶν ἐν ἀτόποις ἐξητάσθησαν πράξεσιν. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ τῆς παρούσης καταστάσεως τὸ τέλος ἐστὶν ἡ διὰ τοῦ πυρὸς κρίσις τῶν ἀσεβῶν, καθά φασιν αἱ γραφαὶ προ φητῶν τε καὶ ἀποστόλων, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τῆς Σιβύλλης, καθώς φησιν ὁ μακάριος Κλήμης ἐν τῇ πρὸς Κορινθίους ἐπιστολῇ–γίνεται δὲ αὕτη ἡ κρίσις διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ σταυρωθέντος ὑπὸ τῶν Ἰουδαίων, τοῦ αἰωνίως βασιλεύοντος τῶν χριστιανῶν \"βασιλείαν ἀσάλευτον\" τὴν κατὰ τὸν προφήτην Δανιὴλ δοθεῖσαν αὐτῷ–, δῆλον ὅτι οὐδεμίαν ἀνακλήσεως ἔχει ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς ἐλπίδα.","english":"Furthermore, that which in every way does not exist is neither from God nor from anything else, nor is it spontaneous. Before the world, therefore, there was nothing other than God. Since, then, the comparison of beings is with beings, the world is not compared with that which is not world, nor is that which is not world contained in the world; for that which is not world is nothing, whereas that which is contained is a being. And when we say that God made the things that are out of that which is not, we do not give a positing of being to that which is not, but the complete abolition of being. 86. Question. If, because Hellenism has been conquered by Christianity, Hellenism has no hope of recall, how is it that true religion, having long ago been conquered by Hellenism, has now received recall? For that the truth prevailed before the error, the divine Scriptures testify, showing that Adam and many after him in succession served not idols but God, even if some of them were found in improper deeds. Answer. If the end of the present state is the judgment of the impious through fire, as the Scriptures of the prophets and apostles say, and moreover also the Sibyl, as the blessed Clement says in his epistle to the Corinthians—and this judgment comes about through Jesus Christ, who was crucified by the Jews, who reigns eternally over the Christians with the \"kingdom that cannot be shaken\" given to him according to the prophet Daniel—it is clear that Hellenism has no hope of recall.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":90,"ref":"p90","source":"ἄλλως τε, εἰ καθ' ἣν ἐκράτει ποτὲ δυναστείαν ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς τὸν λαὸν τοῦ θεοῦ, λυθείσης ταύτης, οὐδαμῶς πάλιν ταύτην ἀνέλαβε, πῶς οὐ μάτην νῦν προσδοκᾷ τὴν ἀνάκλησιν τῆς παλαιᾶς αὑτοῦ δυναστείας; τίνος δὲ ἕνεκεν καὶ προσδοκᾷ ταύτην ὁ ἑλληνισμός; πάντως ἵνα βασάνοις ἀναγκάσῃ τοὺς χριστιανοὺς ἀφίστασθαι μὲν τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀγάπης τε καὶ πίστεως, προσέχειν δὲ ταῖς λατρείαις τῶν δαιμόνων. ἀλλ' αἱ βάσανοι αὗται, αἷς πάλαι χρησάμενος ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς καὶ προσδοκήσας ἐν αὐταῖς ἄλυτον φυλάττειν ἑαυτόν, τὸν μὲν ἑλληνισμὸν ἔλυσαν, τὸν δὲ χριστιανισμὸν ἔστησαν κατὰ κράτος. ΠΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἕως τῆς τῶν σωμάτων ἐγέρσεως ἡ ψυχὴ τῶν πρακτέων τὰς ἀμοιβὰς οὐ κομίζεται, ἐν ποίᾳ ἆρα ταύτῃ ἐξετάζεται καταστάσει μέχρι τῆς ἀναστάσεως; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐχ ἣν ἔχουσιν αἱ ψυχαὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος κατάστασιν, ταύτην ἔχουσι καὶ μετὰ τὴν τοῦ σώματος ἔξοδον. ἐν ταῦθα μὲν τὰ τῆς φύσεως πάντα κοινὰ ὑπάρχει, δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων, καὶ οὐδεμία ἐστὶν ἐν αὐτοῖς διαφορὰ κατὰ τοῦτο, οἶον τὸ γεννᾶσθαι καὶ τὸ ἀποθνήσκειν, τὸ ὑγιαίνειν καὶ τὸ νοσεῖν, τὸ πλουτεῖν καὶ τὸ πένεσθαι καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τὰ τούτοις ὅμοια. μετὰ δὲ τὴν ἐκ τοῦ σώματος ἔξοδον εὐθὺς γίνεται τῶν δικαίων τε καὶ τῶν ἀδίκων ἡ διαστολή· ἄγονται γὰρ ὑπὸ τῶν ἀγγέλων εἰς ἀξίους αὐτῶν τόπους, αἱ μὲν τῶν δικαίων ψυχαὶ εἰς τὸν παράδεισον, ἔνθα συντυχία τε καὶ θέα ἀγγέλων τε καὶ ἀρχαγγέλων, κατ' ὀπτα σίαν δὲ καὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος Χριστοῦ, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον \"ἐκδημοῦν τος ἐκ τοῦ σώματος καὶ ἐνδημοῦντος πρὸς τὸν κύριον\"·","english":"Besides, if the Hellenism that once prevailed over the people of God by its dominion, when that dominion was dissolved, never again recovered it, how is it not in vain that it now expects the recall of its former dominion? And for what reason does Hellenism expect this? Certainly so that by torments it may compel the Christians to renounce the love and faith of Christ and to attend to the worship of demons. But these torments, which Hellenism formerly employed and hoped by them to preserve itself unbroken, dissolved Hellenism and established Christianity in power. 87. Question. If the soul does not receive the rewards of its deeds until the resurrection of bodies, in what state, then, is it examined until the resurrection? Answer. The souls do not have after the departure from the body the same state that they have at present. Here all things of nature are common to just and unjust alike, and there is no difference among them in this respect, such as being born and dying, being healthy and being sick, being rich and being poor, and other things like these. But after the departure from the body, the distinction between the just and the unjust comes immediately; for they are led by the angels to places worthy of them, the souls of the just to paradise, where there is converse with and sight of angels and archangels, and by vision also of the Savior Christ, according to what is said: \"being absent from the body and present with the Lord.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":91,"ref":"p91","source":"αἱ δὲ τῶν ἀδίκων ψυχαὶ εἰς τοὺς ἐν τῷ Ἅδῃ τόπους, κατὰ τὸ εἰρη μένον περὶ τοῦ Ναβουχοδονόσορ βασιλέως Βαβυλῶνος· \"ὁ Ἅδης κάτωθεν ἐπικράνθη συναντήσας σοι\" καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. καὶ εἰσὶν ἐν τοῖς ἀξίοις αὐτῶν τόποις φυλαττόμενοι ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας τῆς ἀνα στάσεως καὶ ἀνταποδόσεως. ΠΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Καὶ εἰ, καθὼς ἔφης, πρὸ τῆς ἀναστάσεως οὐκ ἔστι τῶν ἔργων ἀντίδοσις, ποῖον τῷ λῃστῇ προσγέγονεν ὄφε λος, εἰς τὸν παράδεισον αὐτοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς εἰσαχθείσης, καὶ μάλισθ' ὅτι ὁ μὲν παράδεισος αἰσθητός, νοητὴ δὲ ἔστι τῆς ψυχῆς ἡ οὐσία; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὄφελος γέγονε τῷ λῃστῇ, εἰς τὸν παράδεισον εἰσελθόντι, τὸ ἔργοις μαθεῖν τῆς πίστεως τὸ ὠφέλιμον, δι' ἧς ἠξιώθη τοῦ συναθροίσματος τῶν ἁγίων, ἐν ᾧ φυλάττεται ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας τῆς ἀναστάσεώς τε καὶ ἀνταποδόσεως· καὶ ἔχει τοῦ παραδείσου τὴν αἴσθησιν, καθ' ἣν ὁρῶσιν αἱ ψυχαὶ ἑαυτάς, ἔτι δὲ καὶ τοὺς ἀγγέλους καὶ τοὺς δαίμονας–οὐ γὰρ νοήσει ὁρᾷ ψυχὴ ψυχήν, οὔτε ἄγγελος ἄγγελον, οὔτε δαίμων δαίμονα, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὴν ῥηθεῖσαν ἐννοηματικὴν αἴσθησιν ὁρῶσιν ἑαυτούς τε καὶ ἀλλή λους–, ἔτι τε καὶ τὰ σωματικὰ πάντα ΠΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῇ συνεργίᾳ τῶν τοῦ σώματος αἰσθήσεων τῶν αἰσθητῶν ἡ ψυχὴ λαμβάνει τὴν αἴσθησιν, αἰσθητὰ δὲ τὰ καλὰ καὶ τὰ φαῦλα τυγχάνουσι, πῶς οὐκ ἀναισθητεῖ ἡ ψυχὴ χωρισθεῖσα τοῦ σώματος; εἰ δὲ ἀναισθητεῖ, δῆλον ὅτι νενέκρωται· νεκρῶν γὰρ καὶ ζώντων διαφορὰν ἀναισθησία διακρίνει καὶ αἴσθησις, Ἀπόκρισις. Πᾶσαι αἱ κτισταί τε καὶ λογικαὶ οὐσίαι διπλᾶς ἔχουσι καταληπτικὰς δυνάμεις, αἰσθητικήν τε καὶ νοητικήν·","english":"But the souls of the unjust go to the places in Hades, according to what was said concerning Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon: \"Hades below was embittered at meeting you,\" and the rest. And they are kept in the places worthy of them until the day of resurrection and recompense. Question 89. And if, as you said, before the resurrection there is no recompense of works, what benefit accrued to the robber, his soul having been brought into paradise, and especially since paradise is perceptible, while the essence of the soul is intelligible? Answer. A benefit came to the robber, having entered into paradise, namely to learn by works the profitableness of faith, through which he was deemed worthy of the assembly of the saints, in which he is kept until the day of resurrection and recompense; and he has the perception of paradise, according to which souls see themselves, and further also the angels and the demons—for a soul does not see a soul by thought, nor an angel an angel, nor a demon a demon, but according to the said conceptual perception they see both themselves and one another—and further also all bodily things. Question 90. If by the cooperation of the senses of the body the soul receives the perception of perceptible things, and the perceptible things happen to be both good and base, how is the soul not without perception when separated from the body? But if it is without perception, it is clear that it has died; for insensibility and sensation distinguish the difference between the dead and the living. Answer. All created and rational essences have twofold apprehensive powers, both perceptive and intellectual.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":92,"ref":"p92","source":"αἰσθητικὴν μὲν τὴν ἐννοηματικὴν λεγομένην, καθ' ἣν καταλαμβά νουσιν ἑαυτάς τε καὶ ἀλλήλας· νοητικὴν δέ, καθ' ἣν\n\nδέχονται τὴν γνῶσιν τοῦ ὑπὲρ ἐκείνας. οὐ συνεργίᾳ οὖν τοῦ σώματος αἱ ψυχαὶ τῶν αἰσθητῶν λαμβάνουσι τὴν αἴσθησιν, ἀλλ' αὐτὴ ἡ ψυχὴ αἴ σθησις οὖσα τῇ ἑαυτῆς παρουσίᾳ αἰσθητικὸν τὸ ζῷον ποιεῖ. καὶ ὡς μὲν πρὸς τὸ ζῷόν ἐστιν αἴσθησις, ὡς δὲ πρὸς ἑαυτὴν αἰσθητική, καὶ οὐδέποτε γίνεται νεκρά· ἡ γὰρ νέκρωσις τοῦ ἐμψύχου, θνητοῦ ὑπάρχει καὶ οὐχὶ τῆς ψυχῆς. συνεργίας οὖν δέεται τοῦ σώματος πρὸς τὴν κατάληψιν τῶν αἰσθητῶν τὸ ἔμψυχον καὶ ἡ ἐμψυχία, οὐχὶ ἡ ψυχή· ἄλλο γὰρ τὸ ἔμψυχον καὶ ἄλλο ἡ ψυχή, ὥσπερ ἄλλο τὸ κατὰ μετουσίαν καὶ ἄλλο τὸ κατ' οὐσίαν. ςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ κατὰ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ καρδίαν εἶναι τὸν Δαυὶδ ὁ θεὸς ἀπεφήνατο, πῶς μετὰ ταῦτα μοιχείαν καὶ φόνον ὁ αὐτὸς προφήτης εἰργάσατο; καὶ εἰ ταῦτα ὑπὸ θεοῦ ὡς φαῦλα μεμίσηνται, διατί ἐκ τῆς μοιχαλίδος τὸ γένος ὁ θεὸς τοῦ προφήτου συνέστησε καὶ τὸν δεσπότην Χριστὸν ἐξ αὐτῆς γενεαλογεῖσθαι ἐποίησε; τούτου δὲ ἔχοντος οὕτως, πῶς ἡ γραφὴ ἀληθεύει λέ γουσα, ὅτι \"τέκνα μοιχῶν ἀτέλεστα\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Καὶ καθὸ διὰ τῆς μετανοίας τὰ οἰκεῖα σφάλματα διωρθώσατο ὁ Δαυίδ, καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο εὑρέθη ὡς καρδία θεοῦ τοῦ μὴ βουλομένου \"τὸν θάνατον τοῦ ἁμαρτωλοῦ, ὡς τὸ ἐπι στρέψαι καὶ ζῆν αὐτόν\". καὶ ὃν μὲν μοιχικῶς ἐγέννησεν ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Οὐρίου, τοῦτον ἐθανάτωσεν ὁ θεὸς διὰ τὸ εἶναι \"τέκνα μοι χῶν ἀτέλεστα\", τοὺς δὲ μετὰ τοῦτον γεννηθέντας οὐκ ἐθανάτωσε διὰ τὸ λαβεῖν αὐτὸν ταύτην μετὰ τὴν ἀναίρεσιν τοῦ Οὐρίου εἰς γυναῖκα ἔννομον.","english":"The soul possesses what is called the conceptual faculty of perception, by which souls apprehend themselves and one another; and the intellectual faculty, by which they receive the knowledge of that which is above them. Therefore the souls do not receive the perception of sensible things by the cooperation of the body, but the soul itself, being perception, makes the living being perceptive by its own presence. And as it is perception in relation to the living being, so it is perceptive in relation to itself, and it never becomes dead; for the death belongs to the ensouled, mortal being, and not to the soul. Therefore the ensouled being and the ensoulment need the cooperation of the body for the apprehension of sensible things, not the soul; for the ensouled being is one thing and the soul another, just as that which exists by participation is one thing and that which exists by essence is another.\n\n6. Question. If God declared that David was according to his own heart, how did the same prophet afterward commit adultery and murder? And if these things are hated by God as base, why did God establish the race of the prophet from the adulteress, and cause the Lord Christ to be genealogized from her? And this being so, how is the Scripture true when it says, \"The children of adulterers are imperfect\"?\n\nAnswer. Both because David corrected his own faults through repentance, and in this respect he was found as the heart of God, who does not will \"the death of the sinner, but that he turn and live.\" And the one whom he begot adulterously from the wife of Uriah, God put to death, because it was \"children of adulterers, imperfect\"; but those born after him he did not put to death, because he took her as a lawful wife after the removal of Uriah.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":93,"ref":"p93","source":"τιμῶν δὲ τὴν μετάνοιαν ὁ θεὸς ἐν τοῖς ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Οὐρίου γεννηθεῖσι συνεστήσατο τοῦ Δαυὶδ τὸ γένος καὶ τὸν Χρι στὸν διὰ τὴν αὐτὴν αἰτίαν ἐξ αὐτῆς κατάγεσθαι πεποίηκεν. ςΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πάντων τῶν βασιλέων Ἰσραὴλ καὶ Ἰούδατὸν περὶ τὴν εὐσέβειαν ζῆλον ὁ Ἰωσίας θερμότερον ἐπεδείξατο, τὰς στήλας τῶν εἰδώλων συντρίψας καὶ τοὺς ναοὺς αὐτῶν καὶ βω μοὺς καταστρέψας καὶ σὺν τοῖς εἰδωλικοῖς θυσιαστηρίοις τῶν Ἑλλήνων τὰ ὀστέα τεφρώσας καὶ τὰ ἄλση τῆς πλάνης ἄρδην ἐκκόψας καὶ τοὺς ἐν τοῖς ὑψηλοῖς θυμιῶντας τοῦ ταῦτα ἐκτελεῖν ἀποστήσας καὶ τὴν θείαν ἀνυψώσας λατρείαν καὶ λαμπρῶς τὰς τοῦ νόμου ἑορτάς, ὡς μαρτυρεῖ ἡ γραφή, τὸν λαὸν ἐπιτελέσαι ποιήσας, καὶ ξίφει μὲν ἑλληνικῷ τὴν ζωὴν ἐκεῖνος ἀπέθετο βιαίως, οἱ δὲ τούτου παῖδες αἰχμάλωτοι εἰς Βαβυλῶνα ἀνηνέχθησαν καὶ πρὸς δουλείαν ἐξεδόθησαν πολυχρόνιον Ἕλλησιν, πῶς ἐπὶ τούτοις οὐκ ἂν εἴποιεν ἀληθεύοντες Ἕλληνες, ὅτι, ἀνθ' ὧν εἰς τὰ σεβά σματα αὐτῶν ἐπλημμέλησεν, ἡ οὕτως αὐτῷ πικρὰ συνήντησεν ἔκβασις; ποῦ δὲ καὶ εὑρήσομεν αὐτὸν ἀμοιβὰς τοσούτων κατορθω μάτων δεξάμενον, καὶ πρὸς ποῖον ἔπειτα ὄφελος μετὰ τοσούτων κατορθωμάτων μέγεθος αἱ περὶ τὸν Ἰωσίαν συναντήσασαι συμφο ραὶ γραφῇ παρεδόθησαν; Ἀπόκρισις. Καιρὸς ἀμοιβῆς τῶν ἐν εὐσεβείᾳ μετὰ ἀρε τῆς κατορθωμάτων οὐχ ὁ παρών ἐστιν, ἀλλ' ὁ μέλλων, καθ' ὃν αἱ ἀμοιβαὶ ἀναφαίρετοι εἰσαεὶ προσμένουσι τοῖς δεχομένοις αὐτάς.","english":"But God, honoring repentance, established the family of David among the descendants born of Uriah, and caused Christ too, for the same reason, to be descended from her. 91. Question. If Josiah displayed a more fervent zeal for piety than all the kings of Israel and Judah, shattering the pillars of the idols and overthrowing their temples and altars, and burning the bones of the Greeks together with their idolatrous altars, and utterly cutting down the groves of error, and causing those who burned incense on the high places to cease from doing these things, and exalting the divine worship and splendidly causing the people to celebrate the feasts of the law, as the Scripture testifies—and yet he laid down his life violently by a Greek sword, and his children were carried captive to Babylon and given over to long-lasting slavery to the Greeks—how, in view of these things, would the Greeks not say truthfully that, in return for the wrong he did against their objects of reverence, such a bitter outcome befell him? And where shall we find that he received recompense for so many achievements, and to what further benefit, after such great achievements, were the calamities that befell Josiah handed down in Scripture? Answer. The time of recompense for achievements in piety accompanied by virtue is not the present, but the future, in which the recompenses remain irrevocable forever for those who receive them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":94,"ref":"p94","source":"ὀδυνηρὸν δὲ τέλος ἐδέξατο τῆς ζωῆς Ἰωσίας, διὰ τὸ παρακούειν αὐτὸν τοῦ προφήτου Ἱερεμίου, εἰρηκότος αὐτῷ ἐκ προστάγματος τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ ἐξελθεῖν εἰς συνάντησιν τοῦ βασιλέως Αἰγύπτου εἰς πόλεμον, καθώς φησιν ὁ Ἔσδρας. ἵνα οὖν καθαρὸν ἁμαρτη μάτων αὐτὸν ἐκ τοῦ βίου παραλάβῃ ὁ δεσπότης θεός, διὰ τοῦτο συνεχώρησεν ἑλληνικῷ ξίφει δίκας δοῦναι ταύτης τῆς παρακοῆς πρὸς τὴν διδασκαλίαν τῶν ἑξῆς ἀνθρώπων, τοῦ τε μὴ ἀπειθεῖν τοῖς προφήταις καὶ τοῦ \"εἰ ὁ δίκαιος μόλις σῴζεται, ὁ ἀσεβὴς καὶ ἁμαρτωλὸς ποῦ φανεῖται\"; οἱ δὲ υἱοὶ τοῦ Ἰωσίου, εἰ μεινάντων αὐτῶν ἐν τῇ εὐσεβείᾳ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτῶν αἰχμάλωτοι ἐγένοντο, εἶχεν ἂν χώραν ὁ τῶν Ἑλλήνων λόγος, ὅτι ἀνθ' ὧν ἐπλημμέλησεν ὁ Ἰω σίας εἰς τὰ τῶν εἰδώλων σεβάσματα, οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτοῦ αἰχμάλωτοι ἐγένοντο. εἰ δὲ ἀπέστησαν μὲν τῆς εὐσεβείας τοῦ πατρὸς αὑτῶν, ἀνελάβοντο δὲ τῶν εἰδώλων τὴν λατρείαν καὶ εἰδωλολατροῦντες ᾐχμαλωτίσθησαν, προδήλως ψευδὴς ὁ τῶν Ἑλλήνων λόγος.","english":"Josiah received a painful end to his life because he disobeyed the prophet Jeremiah, who had told him by God's command not to go out to meet the king of Egypt in battle, as Ezra says. So then, in order that the Lord God might receive him clean of sins from this life, for this reason he allowed him to pay the penalty for this disobedience by a Greek sword, for the instruction of subsequent people—both that they not disobey the prophets and that \"if the righteous man is scarcely saved, where will the impious and sinful man appear?\" But if the sons of Josiah, while they remained in their father's piety, had been taken captive, the argument of the Greeks would have had a place—that in return for the fact that Josiah sinned against the objects of idolatrous worship, his sons were taken captive. But if they departed from their father's piety, and took up the worship of idols and were taken captive while practicing idolatry, the argument of the Greeks is plainly false.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":95,"ref":"p95","source":"ςΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μακροθυμεῖν ἡμᾶς πρὸς πάντας ἡ γραφὴ διδάσκει, πῶς οὐκ ἔπταισεν Ἑλισσαῖος θανατώσας δι' ἀρᾶς τοὺς ὑβρίσαντας αὐτὸν παῖδας, καὶ μάλισθ' ὅτι βρέφεσιν ἀπειροκάλοις μνησικακήσας τὸν διὰ τῶν θηρίων αὐτοῖς ἀντὶ ψιλῆς καὶ εὐτε λοῦς ὕβρεως ἐπήγαγε θάνατον; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὅτε διὰ μακροθυμίας τῶν σφαλλομένων οὐ γίνεται διόρθωσις, τότε ἡ ἀποτομία τῆς μακροθυμίας τοῖς ἀδιορθώτως πταίουσίν ἐστι χρησιμωτέρα. οὐ χρὴ οὖν διαβάλλειν τὸν προφήτην ἐπὶ τῇ ἀποτομίᾳ, εἰρηκότα τὴν μακροθυμίαν μὴ παρέ χουσαν τοῖς ἁμαρτάνουσι τῆς ἁμαρτίας τὴν αἴσθησιν. καὶ ἐπειδὴ τὰς φωνὰς ταύτας, ἃς ἀτιμάζοντες τὸν προφήτην ἔλεγον οἱ παῖ δες, παρὰ τῶν γονέων αὑτῶν ἐδιδάχθησαν, τῶν ἀεὶ πρὸς τοὺς προφήτας ἀπεχθῶς ἐσχηκότων–τὸ γὰρ \"ἀνάβαινε, φαλακρέ\", πρὸς διασυρμὸν ἔλεγον τῆς τοῦ Ἠλία ἀναλήψεως, ὡσανεὶ τοῦτο λέγοντες· \"λαμβανέτω καὶ σὲ πνεῦμα καὶ ῥιψάτω σε εἰς ὄρος ἄβα τον, ὡς κἀκεῖνον ἔρριψεν, ἵνα ἀπαλλαγῶμεν καὶ σοῦ, ὡς ἀπηλλάγημεν ἐκείνου–, διὰ τοῦτο τῇ ἀναιρέσει τῶν παίδων ἐμαστίγωσε τοὺς γονεῖς, ἵνα μάθωσι μὴ ἀτιμάζειν τοὺς προφήτας καὶ δι' αὐ τῶν τὸν θεόν. ςΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πᾶσα πλάνη τῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ παρουσίᾳ κατήργηται, πῶς διὰ τῶν καλουμένων ἐγγαστριμύθων οἱ δαίμονες φθέγγονται; πῶς δὲ οὐκ εὐτελῆ καὶ καταφρονήσεως ἄξιον τὸν χριστιανισμὸν παριστῶσιν, ὅταν ἐν σώμασι χριστιανῶν τὰ μὲν τῆς ἀπάτης ἐπιδείκνυνται ἔργα, τοὺς δὲ τῆς μαντείας ἀποφθέγγονται λόγους; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"95. Question. If the Scripture teaches us to be patient toward all, how did Elisha not err in putting to death by a curse the boys who insulted him, and especially since, bearing a grudge against foolish infants, he brought death upon them through wild beasts for a mere and worthless insult? Answer. When through patience there is no correction of those who go astray, then severity is more useful than patience for those who sin incorrigibly. It is not right, then, to slander the prophet for his severity, since he had said that patience does not give sinners a sense of their sin. And since those words which the boys spoke in dishonoring the prophet they had been taught by their own parents, who had always been hostile toward the prophets—for they said \"Go up, baldhead\" in mockery of Elijah's assumption, as if saying this: \"Let a spirit take you too and cast you onto a desolate mountain, as it cast him, so that we may be rid of you as we were rid of him\"—for this reason he scourged the parents through the destruction of the boys, so that they might learn not to dishonor the prophets and through them God. 96. Question. If all error has been abolished by the coming of Christ, how do demons speak through those called ventriloquists? And how do they not present Christianity as worthless and deserving of contempt, when in the bodies of Christians they display the works of deception and utter the words of divination? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":96,"ref":"p96","source":"Εἰ κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον \"οὔπω ὁρῶμεν αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα ὑποτεταγμένα\", ἀλλ' \"ὅταν καταργήσῃ πᾶσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ ἐξου σίαν καὶ δύναμιν\", δῆλον ὅτι οὔπω κατήργηται πᾶσα τῶν δαιμόνων ἡ πλάνη, ἀλλ' οἷς μὲν ὁ Χριστὸς πεπίστευται, τούτοις πᾶσα τῶν δαιμόνων ἡ πλάνη κατήργηται· οἷς δὲ ὁ Χριστὸς ἔτι ἀπιστεῖται, τούτοις ἐνεργοῦσιν οἱ δαίμονες τὴν πλάνην. τὰ δὲ σώματα, οἷς οἱ ἐγγαστρίμυθοι κέχρηνται πρὸς τὸ λαλεῖν καὶ πράττειν τὰ τῆς μαντείας ῥήματά τε καὶ ἔργα, οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθινὰ σώματα, ἀλλὰ φαντάζουσιν οἱ δαίμονες τὰς ὄψεις τῶν ὁρώντων ὡς σώματα ὁρᾶν τὰ μὴ σώματα.\n\nς Δʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ οὐδαμοῦ ὀνόματα δαιμόνων ἡ γραφὴ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἐδίδαξε, πῶς οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου τὸ τοῦ Βεελζεβοὺλ ὡς ἐγνωσμένον ὠνόμαζον ὄνομα, ἐν τούτῳ φάσκοντες αὐτὸν ἐκβάλλειν τοὺς δαίμονας; καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ δεσπότης ὡς γινώ σκουσι τοῖς μαθηταῖς τὴν τοῦ δαίμονος κλῆσιν ἔλεγεν, \"εἰ τὸν οἰκοδεσπότην Βεελζεβοὺλ ἐκάλεσαν\". τίς δὲ ἡ ἑρμηνεία τοῦ τοιούτου ὀνόματος; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὥσπερ τὸ εἶναι δαίμονας ὑπ' αὐτῶν τῶν δαιμόνων ἐμάνθανον οἱ ἄνθρωποι, οὕτω καὶ τὰς ὀνομασίας αὐτῶν ὑπ' αὐτῶν ἐδιδάχθησαν· πρῶτον γὰρ ἔθυσαν οἱ ἄνθρωποι τοῖς δαίμοσι καὶ οὐ θεῷ, ὕστερον εἶπεν ἡ θεία γραφὴ \"ἔθυσαν δαιμονίοις καὶ οὐ Θεῷ\", καὶ καθάπερ περὶ τοῦ εἶναι τοὺς δαί μονας οὐδαμοῦ φαίνεται ἡ γραφὴ εἰρηκυῖα, ὅμως δὲ λέγει ὅτι \"ἔθυσαν δαιμονίοις καὶ οὐ θεῷ\", οὕτω καὶ περὶ τῆς ὀνομασίας αὐ τῶν μηδὲν εἰρηκυῖα λέγει τῶν δαιμόνων τὰ ὀνόματα, τοῦ τε Βεελζεβοὺλ καὶ τοῦ Βελίαρ· \"ποία\" φησί \"συμφώνησις Χριστοῦ πρὸς Βελίαρ\";","english":"If, according to what is said, \"we do not yet see all things subjected to him,\" but \"when he has abolished all rule and authority and power,\" it is clear that the whole deception of the demons has not yet been abolished, but for those who have believed in Christ the whole deception of the demons has been abolished; while for those who still disbelieve in Christ, the demons work their deception. And the bodies which the ventriloquists use for speaking and for performing the words and deeds of divination are not real bodies, but the demons impress upon the sight of those who see, so that they seem to see as bodies things that are not bodies.\n\n4. Question. If the Scripture nowhere taught men the names of demons, how did the Jews in the time of the Lord name Beelzebub as a known name, saying that he cast out the demons by him? And the Master himself spoke to his disciples of the demon's name as one they knew: \"If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub.\" And what is the interpretation of such a name? Answer. Just as men learned that demons exist from the demons themselves, so also were they taught their names by them. For at first men sacrificed to demons and not to God; later the divine Scripture said, \"They sacrificed to demons and not to God.\" And just as the Scripture nowhere appears to have stated that demons exist, yet says, \"They sacrificed to demons and not to God,\" so also, though it has said nothing about their names, it speaks of the names of the demons, both of Beelzebub and of Beliar: \"What,\" it says, \"fellowship has Christ with Beliar?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":97,"ref":"p97","source":"οἷς γὰρ ἐκέχρηντο οἱ ἐπαοιδοὶ δαίμοσι πρὸς τὰ προ κείμενα αὐτοῖς ἔργα, τούτων ἀναγκαίως παρ' αὐτῶν ἐμάνθανον, ὥσπερ τὸν τρόπον τῆς θεραπείας, οὕτω καὶ τὴν προσηγορίαν τῆς κλήσεως αὐτῶν. Εἴρηται δὲ τῷ Ὠριγένει τούτων τῶν ὀνομάτων ἡ ἑρμηνεία ἐν τῇ ἑρμηνείᾳ τῶν ἑβραϊκῶν ὀνομάτων. ςΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ταῖς τῶν ἀλόγων θυσίαις τὸ θεῖον οὐχ ἥδεται, καθώς τινες ἔφασαν καὶ ἡ νῦν διδάσκει κατάστασις, διατί πρὸ νόμου τὸ θύειν προσέταττεν τῷ Νῶε καὶ μάλιστα ὅτι εἰδω λικαὶ θυσίαι οὐδέπω ἐγένοντο; εἰ δὲ ἥδετο ταύταις, διατί μετὰ τὸν νόμον ἡ τούτων χρῆσις ἐπαύσατο; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐδεὶς τῶν θυσάντων τὰ ἄλογα θυσίαν τῷ θεῷ πρὸ τοῦ νόμου κατὰ τὴν θείαν διάταξιν ἔθυσε, κἂν φαίνε ται ὁ θεὸς ταύτην προσδεξάμενος, τῇ ταύτης ἀποδοχῇ δεικνύων τὸν θύσαντα εὐάρεστον αὐτῷ. ἃ δὲ προσέταξε τῷ Ἁβραὰμ λαβεῖν ζῷα τριετίζοντα, ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ κριόν, ὃν\n\nὑπὲρ τοῦ Ἰσαὰκ προσήνεγκε θῦσαι, οὐχ ὡς ταῖς τούτων θυσίαις ἡδόμενος, ἀλλὰ χρείας ἕνεκεν προμηνυτικῆς τῶν ἐσομένων· τῷ δὲ Νῶε οὐδαμοῦ φαίνεται ὁ θεὸς προστάξας προσαγαγεῖν αὐτῷ τὴν τῶν ἀλόγων θυσίαν. ςς ʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ διπλοῦν τὸ ἐν Ἠλίᾳ χάρισμα αἰτήσας Ἑλιςσαῖος ἠκούσθη, πῶς οὔτε ἁπλᾶ οὔτε διπλᾶ τὰ ἔργα Ἠλιοὺ ἐποίησεν, οἷον ὑετῶν ἐποχὴν καὶ λιμοῦ ἐπαγωγήν, πυρὸς κατὰ θυσιῶν οὐ ράνιον φοράν, ἱερέων Ἑλλήνων σφαγάς, πεντηκοντάρχων ὁλοκαυτώσεις καὶ τὰ λοιπά, ἀλλ' ἕτερα μὲν ἐκεῖνος, ἕτερα δὲ οὗτος εἰργάσατο θαύματα; πόθεν οὖν ὁ Ἑλισσαῖος δειχθήσεται τὴν ἑαυ τοῦ αἴτησιν καὶ τὴν τοῦ Ἠλία ὑπόσχεσιν κομισάμενος; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"For the demons whom the sorcerers used for the works that lay before them, they necessarily learned from them, just as the manner of the cure, so also the name of their invocation. And Origen has stated the interpretation of these names in the Interpretation of the Hebrew Names. 96. Question. If the divine is not pleased by the sacrifices of irrational animals, as some have said and as the present understanding also teaches, why before the law did he command Noah to sacrifice, and especially since idolatrous sacrifices had not yet taken place? But if he was pleased by these, why after the law did their use cease? Answer. None of those who sacrificed irrational animals to God before the law sacrificed according to the divine ordinance, even if God appears to have accepted this, showing by his acceptance of it that the one who sacrificed was pleasing to him. But the animals three years old that he commanded Abraham to take, and likewise the ram which he brought to sacrifice in place of Isaac, were not because he was pleased by the sacrifices of these, but for the sake of a need foretelling what was to come; but to Noah God nowhere appears to have commanded him to bring to him the sacrifice of irrational animals. 97. Question. If Elisha, having asked for the double gift in Elijah, was heard, how is it that he performed neither single nor double the works of Elijah, such as the withholding of rains and the bringing on of famine, the bringing down of fire from heaven upon sacrifices, the slaughter of the priests of the Greeks, the consuming of fifties, and the rest, but that one performed some wonders and this one others? From where, then, will Elisha be shown to have received his own request and the promise of Elijah? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":98,"ref":"p98","source":"Οὐκ ᾐτήσατο Ἑλισσαῖος τὸ διπλοῦν τοῦ πνεύματος, πρὸς ποίησιν τῶν αὐτῶν διπλῶν ἔργων, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ ἰσχύειν ἁπλῶς ἐκτελεῖν ὅσα ἦν χρεία τοῦ γενέσθαι ὑπ' αὐτοῦ μετὰ μείζονος δυνάμεως περιουσίας. τῆς δὲ αἰτήσεως, ὅτι οὐκ ἀπέτυχε. μαρτυροῦσι τὰ δι' αὐτοῦ γεγονότα θαύματα, ὧν τινὰ μὲν διπλᾶ, τινὰ δὲ ἁπλᾶ ἐξετέλεσε· τὸ γὰρ ἐγείρειν δύο νεκρούς, ἕνα μὲν ζῶντος αὐτοῦ, ἕνα δὲ τελευτήσαντος, τὸ διπλοῦν ἐδήλου τῆς ἐν λοιποῖς θαύμασιν, εἰ ἐβούλετο περιουσίας, τῆς ἐν αὐτῷ θείας τοῦ πνεύματος χάριτος. καὶ ἐπὶ μὲν τοῦ Ἠλία πρὸς τὴν χρείαν ἐγένετο τοῦ ἐλαίου ἡ ἐπίδοσις, ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ Ἑλισσαίου καὶ ὑπὲρ τὴν χρείαν. καὶ ὁ μὲν Ἠλίας πῦρ κατήγαγεν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πρὸς τὴν ἄμυναν τῶν ἐχθρῶν, ὁ δὲ Ἑλισσαῖος ἵππους πυρὸς καὶ ἀναβάτας κατήγαγεν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πρὸς βοήθειαν τῷ Ἰσραήλ. ςΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τότε ἐστὶ τελεία ἀνάστασις, ὅτε ὁ τέλειος ἀνίσταται ἄνθρωπος, πῶς λέγει μετὰ τὸ δεσποτικὸν πάθος ἡ γραφή, ὅτι \"πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων ἠγέρθη\", ὅπερ οὐκ εἶπεν ἐπί τινος τῶν ἄλλων, ὧν ὁ κύριος ἤγειρεν, οἷον ἐπὶ Λαζάρου, ἢ τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς χήρας, ἢ τῆς θυγατρὸς τοῦ Ἰαείρου, ἀλλ' ἀπολύτως ὅτι τόνδε ἢ τήνδε ἀνέστησε; πῶς οὖν ἐπὶ τούτων μόνον σωμάτων ἀναστάσεως μέμνηται καὶ ἐπάγει, ὅτι \"ἐνεφανίσθη σαν πολλοῖς\", ὅπερ τῷ πλείστῳ μέρει φαντασίας ὑπόνοιαν δίδωσι; καὶ εἰ τῷ ὄντι ἄψυχα ἀνέστησαν σώματα καὶ ἐπεβίωσαν, ἢ εὐθέως ἐτελεύτησαν, ἢ μένουσιν ἐν ἀθανασίᾳ καὶ ὅποι, καὶ τί τοῖς μετ' ἐκείνους ἐκ τῶν ἐπ' αὐτοῖς γεγονότων τὸ ὄφελος δίδωσι, δίδαξον. Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"Elisha did not ask for the double portion of the spirit for the performance of the same works twice over, but simply for the strength to accomplish whatever needed to be done by him with greater power and abundance. And that he did not fail in his request, the wonders that came about through him bear witness, of which he performed some twice and some once; for to raise two dead—one while he was alive and one after he had died—signified the double portion of the divine grace of the Spirit that was in him, in respect of the abundance in the remaining wonders, if he so willed. And in the case of Elijah, the supply of oil was for the need; but in the case of Elisha, it was even beyond the need. And Elijah brought fire down from heaven for the defense against his enemies, but Elisha brought down from heaven horses of fire and riders for the help of Israel. 97. Question. If the perfect resurrection is then, when the perfect man rises, how does the Scripture say after the Lord's passion, that \"many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised,\" which it did not say in the case of any of the others whom the Lord raised—for instance, in the case of Lazarus, or the son of the widow, or the daughter of Jairus—but simply that he raised this one or that one? How then does it mention the resurrection of bodies only in these cases, and add that \"they appeared to many,\" which gives the majority an occasion for suspecting a phantasm? And if truly soulless bodies rose and came back to life, either they died immediately, or they remain in immortality—and where? And what benefit does it give to those after them from what was done in their case? Teach us. Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":99,"ref":"p99","source":"Εἰ τελείαν ἀνάστασιν ταύτην καλοῦμεν τῶν ἀνισταμένων ἀνθρώπων, τῶν ψυχῶν εἰσοικιζομένων πάλιν εἰς τὰ σώματα τῶν ἀνισταμένων, δῆλον ὅτι πάντες, οἵ τε ἤδη ἀναστάν τες, οἵ τε μέλλοντες ἀνίστασθαι ὑπὸ τοῦ κυρίου, τέλειοι ἀνέ στησαν· ἀδύνατον γὰρ νεκρῶν γενέσθαι ἀνάστασιν, τῆς ψυχῆς μὴ εἰσοικιζομένης εἰς τὸ οἰκεῖον σῶμα. κἂν οὖν εἴπῃ ἡ θεία γραφή, ὅτι ὁ δεῖνα ἀνέστη ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, ἢ ὅτι σώματα ἀνέστησαν ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, χρὴ ἡμᾶς δι' ἑκατέρας φωνῆς τὴν τελείαν νοεῖν ἀνάστα σιν, τὴν κατὰ ἀπόδοσιν ψυχῆς τῷ σώματι γινομένην. καὶ καθώσπερ ὅταν εἴπῃ ἡ θεία γραφή \"ὁ ἐγείρας τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν ζωοποιήσει τὰ θνητὰ ὑμῶν σώ ματα\", οὔτε ἀτελῆ λέγει τὴν ἀνάστασιν, οὔτε φαντασίας ὑπόνοιαν δίδωσιν, ἀλλὰ τελείας ἀναστάσεως τὴν πίστιν, οὕτως καὶ ὅταν λέγῃ \"πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων ἁγίων ἠγέρθη\", τὴν τε λείαν λέγει ἀνάστασιν. γέγονε δὲ τούτων τῶν ἁγίων ἡ ἀνάστασις ἀπόδειξις τοῦ λυτικὸν εἶναι τὸν τοῦ Χριστοῦ θάνατον τοῦ θανάτου πάντων ἀνθρώπων τοῖς ἐν τῷ παρόντι πιστεύουσι καὶ πάσαις ταῖς ἐν τῷ Ἅδῃ ψυχαῖς· δι' ἣν αἰτίαν οὐδὲ ἐτελεύτησαν πάλιν, ἀλλὰ μένουσιν ἐν ἀθανασίᾳ, καθάπερ Ἐνὼχ καὶ Ἠλίας, καὶ εἰσὶ σὺν αὐτοῖς ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ, ἀναμένοντες τὴν κοινωνίαν τῆς τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἀναστάσεως, γινομένην κατὰ τὴν ἐναλλαγήν, καθ' ἥν, ὥς φησιν ὁ ἅγιος ἀπόστολος, \"πάντες ἀλλαγησόμεθα\"· εἰς γὰρ ἀθάνατόν τε καὶ ἄφθαρτον ζωὴν οὔπω γέγονέ τινος ἡ ἀνάστασις, πλὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος Χριστοῦ. διὸ \"καὶ πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν\" καὶ \"ἀπαρχὴ τῶν κεκοιμημένων\" ἀνηγόρευται.","english":"If we call this a complete resurrection of the risen men—the souls being settled again into the bodies of those who rise—it is clear that all, both those who have already risen and those who are going to rise by the Lord, have risen complete; for it is impossible for there to be a resurrection of the dead unless the soul is settled into its own body. So even if the divine Scripture says that a certain person rose from the dead, or that bodies rose from the dead, we must understand through either expression the complete resurrection, which comes about by the restoration of the soul to the body. And just as when the divine Scripture says, \"He who raised our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies,\" it neither calls the resurrection incomplete nor gives any suggestion of illusion, but [declares] the faith of a complete resurrection, so also when it says, \"Many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised,\" it means the complete resurrection. And the resurrection of these saints became a proof that the death of Christ is a ransom from the death of all men, for those who believe in the present age and for all the souls in Hades; for this reason they did not die again, but remain in immortality, like Enoch and Elijah, and are with them in paradise, awaiting the fellowship of Christ's resurrection, which comes about through the change by which, as the holy apostle says, \"we shall all be changed.\" For the resurrection of anyone to immortal and incorruptible life has not yet happened, except that of the Savior Christ. Therefore he is proclaimed both \"firstborn from the dead\" and \"firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":100,"ref":"p100","source":"ςΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Τί ἑρμηνεύεται τὸ ὑφί, τὸ νέβελ, τὸ γόμορ, τὸ σίκλον, τὸ βασιλικὸν καὶ τὸ ἅγιον, ὁ στατήρ, ἡ δραχμή, ὁ κοδράντης, ὁ ὁρμίσκος, τὸ δίδραχμον, τὸ τάλαντον, τὸ ἀσσάριον, τὸ θεραφίμ, τὸ βεζέκ, τὸ σαβαώθ, τὸ ἀδωναΐ, τὸ ἐφούδ; ἀμφο τέρων δὲ ἡμῖν ἀναγκαία ἡ γνῶσις, ἐπειδὴ ἑκάτερα τῇ γραφῇ περιέχεται. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἴρηται τῷ Ὠριγένει, ἀνδρὶ ἐπισταμένῳ τὴν τῶν Ἑβραίων διάλεκτον, πάντων τῶν ἐν ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς ἐμφερομένων ἑβραϊκῶν ὀνομάτων ἢ μέτρων ἡ ἑρμηνεία. τὴν ἑρμη νείαν ἐκείνην ζητήσας εὑρήσεις ἐν αὐτῇ τὴν πάντων ἑρμηνείαν ὧν ἐζήτησας.\n\nςΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πρὸ τῆς τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ ἀναιρέσεως τῇ ποιή σει τῶν θαυμάτων ὁ δεσπότης διέπρεπε, καθώς φησιν ὁ Ματ θαῖος, καὶ πάντας ἡ περὶ τούτων φήμη τοὺς ἐν τῇ Ἰουδαίᾳ κατέλαβε, πῶς μετὰ τὴν τοῦ προδρόμου ἀναίρεσιν ἀκούων τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ γενόμενα θαύματα Ἡρώδης τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ἔλεγεν, ὅτι Ἰωάννης ἐστὶ πρὸς ζωὴν ὑποστρέψας ὁ ποιῶν τὰ σημεῖα; ταῦτα γὰρ ἡμῖν διηγεῖται ὁ μακάριος Μάρκος. Ἀπόκρισις. Ὅτι μὴ πάντα τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος γεγονότα θαύματα πάντες οἱ ἀκούσαντες ἐνὶ καιρῷ ἤκουσαν, ἀλλ' οἳ μὲν πρότερον, οἳ δὲ ὕστερον, μαρτυροῦσιν αἱ φωναὶ τῶν εἰρηκό των τὸν Ἰωάννην εἶναι ἐργάτην τῶν θαυμάτων τῶν γεγενημένων ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος μετὰ τὴν ἀναίρεσιν τοῦ Ἰωάννου· οὐκ ἂν γὰρ ἔλεγον τοῦτο, εἰ ἦσαν ἀκούσαντες τὰ πρὸ τῆς ἀναιρέσεως Ἰωάν νου γεγονότα θαύματα ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος. οὐδὲν οὖν θαυμαστόν, εἰ καὶ ὁ Ἡρώδης μετὰ τὴν ἀναίρεσιν Ἰωάννου ἀκούει τὰ ἔργα τῶν μαθητῶν τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, τὰ ἐπ' ὀνόματι τοῦ Ἰησοῦ γεγονότα·","english":"47. Question. What is the meaning of \"uphi,\" \"nebel,\" \"gomor,\" \"siklon,\" \"the royal\" and \"the holy,\" the stater, the drachma, the kodrantes, the hormiskos, the didrachmon, the talent, the assarion, the theraphim, the bezek, \"sabaoth,\" \"adonai,\" the ephoud? The knowledge of both is necessary for us, since both are contained in Scripture. Answer. It has been stated by Origen, a man versed in the Hebrew language, that the interpretation of all the Hebrew names or measures found in the divine Scriptures is [available]. Seek that interpretation and you will find in it the interpretation of all the things you have sought.\n\n48. Question. If before the murder of the Baptist the Lord was distinguished by the working of miracles, as Matthew says, and the report of these things reached all those in Judea, how is it that after the murder of the Forerunner Herod, hearing the miracles performed by Christ, said to the Jews that John had returned to life and was the one performing the signs? For the blessed Mark relates these things to us. Answer. Because not all who heard the miracles performed by the Savior heard them at one and the same time, but some earlier and some later—the statements of those who said that John was the worker of the miracles performed by the Savior after John's murder bear witness to this. For they would not have said this if they had heard of the miracles performed by the Savior before John's murder. There is nothing surprising, then, if Herod also, after John's murder, heard of the works of Jesus' disciples, the works done in the name of Jesus.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":101,"ref":"p101","source":"τότε γὰρ ἤκουσεν ὁ Ἡρώδης τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ὅτε ἀπέστειλε τοὺς μαθητὰς αὑτοῦ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἰς τὰς πόλεις καὶ κώμας κηρύτ τειν τὴν μετάνοιαν καὶ θεραπεύειν τὰς νόσους, καθά φησι Μάρκος ὁ εὐαγγελιστής· καὶ γὰρ αὐτὸς Ἰωάννης πρὸ τῆς ἐγέρσεως τοῦ υἱοῦ τῆς χήρας οὐκ ἦν ἀκούσας πάντα ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἔν τε τῇ Γαλιλαίᾳ καὶ ἐν τῇ Ἱερουσαλήμ, καίτοι πολλῶν ὄντων τῶν ἤδη γεγενημένων ὑπὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος θαυμάτων, καὶ πρὸ τοῦ βληθῆναι τὸν Ἰωάννην εἰς φυλακὴν καὶ μετὰ τὸ βληθῆναι αὐτόν· τότε γὰρ ἀπέστειλε τοὺς μαθητὰς αὑτοῦ ὁ Ἰωάννης πρὸς τὸν Ἰησοῦν μαθεῖν, εἰ αὐτὸς εἴη ὁ προσδοκώμενος ἐλθεῖν, καθά φησι Λουκᾶς, [ὅτε] * * *, [Λουκᾶς] μὲν ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς τοῦτο, Ἰωάννης δὲ ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς ἐκεῖνο. Ρʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ, καθὼς ἡ θεία διδάσκει γραφὴ καὶ ἡμεῖς πεπιστεύκαμεν, \"ἁμαρτίαν\" γεννηθεὶς ὁ Χριστὸς \"οὐκ ἐποίησε\", πῶς πάλιν ἀληθεύει ἡ γραφὴ μεθ' ὅρκου βοῶσα, ὅτι \"οὐδεὶς γεννηθεὶς, ὃς οὐχ ἥμαρτεν, οὐδὲ πεφυκώς, ὃς οὐκ ἠνόμησεν\"; πῶς δὲ καὶ βρέφος τὸ σύγχρονον τῷ τόκῳ τὸ τέλος δεξάμενον, ἢ βραχυήμερον ζωὴν κομισάμενον, ἁμαρτίαν καὶ ἀνομίαν ἢ τὰ τούτων ἐναντία ποιῆσαι ἠδύνατο; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ \"οὐδεὶς γεννηθεὶς ὃς οὐχ ἥμαρτεν, οὐδὲ πεφυκὼς ὃς οὐκ ἠνόμησεν\", οὐ δείκνυσι ψευδὲς τὸ περὶ τοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰρημένον, τὸ \"ἁμαρτίαν οὐκ ἐποίησε\"· περὶ γὰρ τοῦ ἐξ ἀνδρὸς καὶ γυναικὸς γεννηθέντος εἴρηται ὁ λόγος οὗτος. ὁ δὲ Χριστὸς ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας καὶ θεοτόκου ἐγεννήθη Μαρίας. νοεῖται δὲ καὶ ὁ λόγος οὕτως. οὐδεὶς πεφυκὼς ἁμαρτάνειν ἢ ἀνομεῖν, ὃς οὐχ ἥμαρτεν ἢ οὐκ ἠνόμησε·","english":"For Herod heard the name of Jesus at that time when Jesus sent out his own disciples into the cities and villages to preach repentance and to heal diseases, as Mark the evangelist says. For John himself, before the raising of the widow's son, had not heard all that Jesus did both in Galilee and in Jerusalem, although there were many wonders already performed by the Savior, both before John was cast into prison and after he was cast in. For at that time John sent his own disciples to Jesus to learn whether he was the one who was expected to come, as Luke says, [when] * * *, Luke the evangelist [says] this, and John the evangelist that.\n\n100. Question. If, as the divine Scripture teaches and we have believed, Christ, when born, \"committed no sin,\" how again is the Scripture true when it cries out with an oath, that \"no one born who did not sin, nor anyone by nature who did not transgress the law\"? And how could an infant, receiving its end at the same time as its birth, or brought to a life of few days, have been able to commit sin and transgression, or the opposites of these? Answer. The saying \"no one born who did not sin, nor anyone by nature who did not transgress the law\" does not show to be false what was said about Christ, namely \"he committed no sin\"; for this statement was made about one born of a man and a woman. But Christ was born of the Holy Spirit and of the holy and God-bearing Mary. And the statement is also understood thus: no one by nature sins or transgresses the law, who has not sinned or transgressed the law.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":102,"ref":"p102","source":"πέφυκε δὲ ἁμαρτάνειν ὁ κατὰ τὴν αὐθαίρετον προαίρεσιν ἄγων ἑαυτὸν εἰς τὸ πράττειν ἃ βούλεται, εἴτε ἀγαθὰ εἴτε φαῦλα. τὸ δὲ βρέφος, ἅτε οὔπω ὂν τῆς τοιαύτης δυνάμεως, δῆλον ὅτι οὐδὲ πέφυκεν ἁμαρτάνειν. καὶ τὸ \"τίς καθαρὸς ἔσται ἀπὸ ῥύπου; ἀλλ' οὐδείς, ἐὰν καὶ μία ἡμέρα ὁ βίος αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς\", οὐδενὶ τρόπῳ ἁρ μόττει τῷ βρέφει· τὸ γὰρ \"βίος\" ἀντὶ τῆς πολιτείας εἴληπται ἐνταῦθα, τῷ βρέφει δὲ ὥσπερ οὐκ ἔστι πολιτεία, οὐδὲ βίος.\n\nΡΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ εὐσεβεῖ λογισμῷ οἱ πατριάρχαι κινούμενοι ἑαυτοῖς καὶ τοῖς παισὶ τὰς γαμετὰς ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας συγγενείας εἰλήφασι, πῶς οὐ παρὰ τὸν εὐσεβῆ τῶν προγόνων σκοπὸν Ἰωσὴφ καὶ Μωυσῆς διεπράξαντο, ὃ μὲν Αἰγυπτίαν, ὃ δὲ Μαδιανίτιδα γυναῖκα γημάμενος; Ἀπόκρισις. Οἱ μὲν πατριάρχαι, φόβῳ τοῦ μὴ\n\nἐκτραπῆναι τοὺς αὑτῶν τῆς εὐσεβείας, οὐκ ἐπέτρεπον αὐτοῖς ἐκ τῶν ἐθνικῶν λαβεῖν γυναῖκας· ὁ δὲ Μωυσῆς καὶ Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ τοιούτου φόβου ἦσαν ἀνώτεροι. οὐδὲν οὖν κατὰ παράβασιν τοῦ σκοποῦ τῶν πα τέρων πεποιηκότες φαίνονται ὅ τε Μωυσῆς καὶ Ἰωσήφ, λαβόντες γαμετὰς ἐθνικάς· οὐ γὰρ μόνον αὐτοὶ οὐκ ἐξετράπησαν τῆς εὐσεβείας ὑπὸ τῶν γυναικῶν ἑαυτῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὰς μετέφερον εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν εὐσέβειαν.","english":"By nature, he sins who of his own free choice leads himself to do what he wishes, whether good or evil. But an infant, since it is not yet possessed of such power, clearly does not by nature sin either. And the saying, \"Who shall be clean from defilement? No one, even if his life on earth be but one day,\" in no way applies to an infant; for \"life\" here is taken in place of \"conduct,\" and an infant has no conduct, and therefore no life.\n\nQuestion 141. If the patriarchs, moved by pious reasoning, took wives for themselves and their sons from their own kindred, how did Joseph and Moses act contrary to the pious purpose of their forefathers, the one marrying an Egyptian woman and the other a Midianite? Answer. The patriarchs, for fear that their own people might be turned aside from piety, did not permit them to take wives from among the Gentiles; but Moses and Joseph were above such fear. So Moses and Joseph appear to have done nothing in violation of the purpose of the fathers in taking Gentile wives; for not only were they themselves not turned aside from piety by their wives, but they even converted their wives to their own piety.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":103,"ref":"p103","source":"ΡΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πρὸ τῆς παραβάσεως ὁ Ἀδὰμ λογικοῦ ἢ ἀλόγου οὐ τεθέαται θάνατον, πῶς ὃν οὐκ εἶδεν ὡς ἑωρακὼς ἀπειληθέντα ἐδειλίασε θάνατον; πῶς δὲ τοῦτον ἀγνοούμενον αὐτῷ, ὡς ἐγνω σμένον ἠπείλησεν ὁ θεός; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ λογικὸν ἐκεῖνον καλοῦμεν, τὸν ἔχοντα ἐν ἑαυτῷ τῶν ὑπὸ τῶν ὀνομάτων σημαινομένων τὰς ἐννοίας, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ ὁ Ἀδὰμ λογικὸς ὢν εἶχεν ἐν ἑαυτῷ τοῦ θανάτου τὴν ἔν νοιαν. καὶ καθώσπερ μὴ ἑωρακὼς μὲν ὁ Ἀδὰμ λογικὸν ἐπὶ τῇ ἑαυτοῦ γυμνώσει αἰσχυνόμενον, ὅμως δὲ γυμνωθεὶς ᾐσχύνθη, ἐσχη κὼς ἐν ἑαυτῷ τῆς αἰσχύνης τὸ ὄνομα καὶ τὴν ἔννοιαν, οὕτως εἶχεν ἐν ἑαυτῷ καὶ τοῦ θανάτου τὴν ἔννοιαν, κἂν τὸ πρᾶγμα ἐν ἄλλῳ μήπω ἦν θεασάμενος. διὸ εὐλόγως ἐδειλίασε τὸν θάνατον, εἰδὼς αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῆς ἐννοίας αὐτοῦ ἀντικείμενον ὄντα τῆς ζωῆς. ΡΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Ἐπειδὴ ἡ γραφὴ λέγει κρίματα καὶ δικαιώματα καὶ μαρτύρια καὶ νόμον, ἐντολὰς καὶ προστάγματα, εἰ ταῦτά εἰσιν ἀλλήλοις ἀμφότερα, ἢ ἑκάτερον ἔχει λόγον ἰδιάζοντα, δίδαξον. Ἀπόκρισις. Κρίματα μὲν λέγει τοὺς λόγους τοὺς διαστέλ λοντας τῶν οὐ πρακτέων τὰ πρακτέα, * καὶ τιμὴν μὲν τὴν ἐπὶ τῇ ὑπακοῇ, τιμωρίαν δὲ τὴν ἐπὶ τῇ παρακοῇ ὁρισαμένου· δικαιώ ματα δὲ λέγει τῶν κριμάτων τὴν ὀρθότητα, ἀπονεμητικὴν τῶν κατ' ἀξίαν ἑκάστῳ· νόμον δὲ λέγει τὴν ἔγγραφον περίληψιν πάσης τῆς ἰουδαϊκῆς λατρείας, μαρτυρίαν δὲ καλεῖ τὴν ἐπὶ τοῖς πραττομένοις ὑπὸ τῶν δεξαμένων τὸν νόμον, ἀξίαν δι' εὐλογίας καὶ κατάρας ἀμοιβήν, ἣν πολλάκις ὁ Μωυσῆς διαμαρτυρόμενος ἔλεγε τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις συμβήσεσθαι αὐτοῖς πειθομένοις ἢ ἀπειθοῦσιν·","english":"103. Question. If Adam had not seen death, either rational or irrational, before the transgression, how did he fear death, which he had not seen, as though he had seen it threatened? And how did God threaten him with this death, unknown to him, as though it were known? Answer. If we call that rational which has within itself the concepts of the things signified by names, it is clear that Adam, being rational, also had within himself the concept of death. And just as Adam, though he had not seen a rational being ashamed at his own nakedness, nevertheless was ashamed when he was naked, having within himself the name and concept of shame, so too he had within himself the concept of death, even though he had not yet beheld the thing itself in another. Therefore he reasonably feared death, knowing from his concept of it that it is opposed to life.\n\n104. Question. Since Scripture speaks of judgments and ordinances and testimonies and law, commandments and precepts, teach whether these are both the same as one another, or each has its own distinct meaning. Answer. It calls judgments the words that distinguish what is to be done from what is not to be done, and that define honor for obedience and punishment for disobedience. It calls ordinances the correctness of the judgments, distributing to each according to worth. It calls law the written summary of the whole Jewish worship. It calls testimony the recompense, worthy through blessing and curse, for the things done by those who received the law, which Moses often, solemnly testifying, said would happen to the Jews whether they obeyed or disobeyed.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":104,"ref":"p104","source":"ἐν τολὰς δὲ καὶ προστάγματα λέγει, κατὰ τὸν τρόπον τῶν λόγων ὀνομάζων τοὺς λόγους, ἐνταλτικῶς ἢ προστακτικῶς λεχθέντας, κατὰ τὴν ἔμφασιν τῆς θείας αὐθεντίας τοῦ ταῦτα ἐντειλαμένου ἢ προστάξαντος. ΡΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὰ νῶτα τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεφόρτωται ὕδασι. καθώς φησιν ἡ γραφή, ὅπερ τινὲς ἔφασαν γεγονέναι διὰ τὴν πυρώδη τῶν φωστήρων οὐσίαν, ὥστε τοῖς ἐπικειμένοις τὸν οὐρανὸν πιαινόμενον ὕδασι τῇ ὑποκειμένῃ τῶν φωστήρων φλογὶ μένειν ἀχείρωτον, πῶς οἱ ταῦτα λέγοντες ἀληθεύουσι, τῶν φωστήρων οὐκ ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ἀλλ' ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανὸν κινουμένων; εἰ δὲ τού τους ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ λέγοιεν εἶναι, πῶς τὴν κινητικὴν ἐνέργειαν ἔχουσι, τοῦ οὐρανίου σώματος τὸ ἀκίνητον ἔχοντος; εἰ δὲ σὺν τῷ οὐρανῷ τὰ ἄστρα λαμβάνει τὴν κίνησιν, πῶς οὐκ ἀληθεύσειεν ὁ σφαῖραν τὸν οὐρανὸν προσαγορεύων μῦθος; εἰ δὲ τοῦτο μὲν ἀπρεπές, τὸ δὲ προλεχθὲν περὶ τῶν φωστήρων νοῆσαι ἀκόλουθον, πῶς οὐκ ἄχρηστος τῶν ἄνω ὑδάτων ἡ σύστασις; τί δὲ καὶ αὐτὴ ἐν τῇ συντελείᾳ γενήσεται, ἄνω μὲν τῶν δικαίων, κάτω δὲ τῶν ἁμαρ τωλῶν τὰς τῶν πρακτέων ἀμοιβὰς τότε μελλόντων κομίζεσθαι; Ἀπόκρισις. Κἂν ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν εἰσιν οἱ φωστῆρες, ἀλλ' ἡ φορὰ τῆς τῶν πυρωδῶν οὐσιῶν ἐνεργείας κατὰ φύσιν ἐπὶ τὰ ἄνω γίνεται. διὸ εὔλογον αἰτίαν ἀποδεδώκασιν οἱ εἰρηκότες πρὸς διαμονὴν τοῦ στερεώματος πεφορτῶσθαι τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τὰ νῶτα τοῖς ὕδασιν.","english":"And he calls them \"commandments\" and \"ordinances,\" naming the words in the manner of words, as spoken by way of injunction or command, according to the emphasis of the divine authority of the one who enjoined or commanded these things. 104. Question. If the back of heaven is laden with waters, as the Scripture says—which some have said came to be because of the fiery nature of the luminaries, so that the heaven, being fattened by the waters laid upon it, remains unconquered by the flame of the luminaries beneath it—how do those who say these things speak the truth, when the luminaries move not in heaven but under heaven? But if they should say that these are in heaven, how do they have the power of motion, when the heavenly body possesses immobility? And if the stars receive their motion together with heaven, how would the myth that calls heaven a sphere not be true? But if this is unfitting, and what was said before about the luminaries is consistent to understand, how is the constitution of the waters above not useless? And what will it itself become at the consummation, when the righteous are above and the sinners below, about to receive then the recompenses of their deeds? Answer. Even if the luminaries are under heaven, nevertheless the motion of the activity of fiery natures is by nature upward. Therefore those who said that the back of heaven is laden with waters for the preservation of the firmament have given a reasonable cause.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":105,"ref":"p105","source":"οὐ τοῦτο δὲ μόνον ἐστὶν αἴτιον τοῦ εἶναι τὰ ὕδατα ἐν τοῖς νώτοις τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, τὸ ἀχείρωτον αὐτὸν εἶναι τῇ ὑποκειμένῃ φλογὶ τῶν φωστήρων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ βαρεῖσθαι αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ κάτω ὑπὸ τοῦ πλήθους τῶν ἐν νώτοις αὐτοῦ ὑδάτων καὶ μὴ δονεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τῆς βιαίας τῶν ἀνέμων φορᾶς, καὶ τὸ τὴν ἄκραν ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὸ κάτω πέμπεσθαι ψυχρότητα, ἀφ' ἧς μιγείσης τῇ ἄκρᾳ τοῦ ἡλίου θερμότητι ἀποτελεῖται τῶν ἀέρων ἡ σύγκρασις πρὸς τὴν διαμονὴν τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ζῴων τε καὶ φυτῶν. ἐν δὲ τῇ συντελείᾳ, οὐκ ἐν τῷ νῦν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐν τῇ νῦν γῇ κομίζονται τῶν\n\nπρακτέων τὰς ἀμοιβὰς οἱ ἄνθρωποι, ἀλλ' ἐν τῷ καινῷ οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐν τῇ καινῇ γῇ, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον· \"ἔσται γὰρ ὁ οὐρανὸς καινὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ καινή, ἣν ἐγὼ ποιῶ· μένει ἐνώπιόν μου εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας\". καὶ πάλιν· \"κατ' ἀρχὰς σύ, κύριε, τὴν γῆν ἐθεμελίωσας καὶ ἔργα τῶν χειρῶν σου εἰσὶν οἱ οὐρανοί· αὐτοὶ ἀπολοῦνται, σὺ δὲ διαμένεις καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται καὶ ὡσεὶ περιβόλαιον ἑλίξεις αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀλλαγήσονται\". καὶ πάλιν· \"ἔτι ἅπαξ ἐγὼ σείω τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν\"· τὸ δὲ σαλευόμενον δηλοῖ τὴν μετάστασιν, ἵνα μείνῃ τὰ μὴ σαλευόμενα. ΡΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὡς βιβλίον τὸν οὐρανὸν ἑλίσσεσθαι καὶ τὰ ἄστρα ὡς φύλλα πίπτειν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς προλέγει μὲν ὁ κύριος, καὶ ὁ προφήτης δὲ τούτοις προκατήγγειλε σύμφωνα, πῶς ἡ παντελὴς τοῦ στερεώματος ἀπώλεια διὰ τῶν ἐκείνων λόγων οὐ δείκνυται; τίς οὖν ἡ τῶν τοιούτων ῥημάτων διάνοια καὶ πῶς τὸ τῶν στοιχείων συνίσταται ἄφθαρτον; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"And this is not the only cause of the waters being on the back of the heaven—namely, that it is unassailable by the flame of the luminaries that lies beneath it—but also that it is weighed down toward the lower region by the multitude of the waters on its back and is not shaken by the violent rush of the winds, and that the extreme cold from them is sent downward, from which, when mixed with the extreme heat of the sun, the tempering of the airs is brought about for the preservation of the living creatures and plants upon the earth. But in the consummation, humans receive the recompenses of their deeds not in the present heaven and the present earth, but in the new heaven and the new earth, according to what is said: \"For there shall be a new heaven and a new earth, which I make; it remains before me forever.\" And again: \"In the beginning you, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands; they shall perish, but you remain, and all shall grow old as a garment, and as a cloak you shall roll them up and they shall be changed.\" And again: \"Yet once more I shake the heaven and the earth\"; and what is shaken indicates the removal, so that the things that are not shaken may remain. 195. Question. If the Lord foretells that the heaven shall be rolled up like a book and the stars shall fall upon the earth like leaves, and the prophet also proclaimed things in agreement with these beforehand, how is the complete destruction of the firmament not shown through those words? What, then, is the meaning of such utterances, and how does the incorruptibility of the elements hold together? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":106,"ref":"p106","source":"Ὥσπερ τοῦ στερεώματος τὴν ποίησιν παραβολικῶς ἡ θεία γραφὴ παρείκασε ποτὲ μὲν τῇ ἐκτάσει τῆς δέρ ρεως, λέγουσα \"ὁ ἐκτείνων τὸν οὐρανὸν ὡσεὶ δέρριν\", ποτὲ δὲ τῷ καπνῷ στερεωμένῳ (\"ὁ οὐρανός\" φησίν \"ὡσεὶ καπνὸς ἐστε ρεώθη\"), ποτὲ δὲ τῷ περιφερεῖ τῆς καμάρας (\"ὁ τανύσας\" φησί \"τὸν οὐρανὸν ὡσεὶ καμάραν\"), οὕτω καὶ τὴν ἀνάλυσιν αὐτοῦ παραβολικῶς παρείκασε ποτὲ μὲν βιβλίῳ ἑλισσομένῳ, ποτὲ δὲ στοιχείῳ λυομένῳ πυρί, καθά φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος Πέτρος ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ αὑτοῦ καθολικῇ ἐπιστολῇ, ποτὲ δὲ ἱματίῳ παλαιουμένῳ· ἀνάγκη γὰρ τῇ εἰσαγωγῇ τοῦ κρείττονος οὐρανοῦ τοῦ καινῶς γινο μένου ἀναιρεῖσθαι τὸ στερέωμα, ὡς ἄχρηστον ὂν πρὸς ἐκείνην τὴν κατάστασιν, ἵνα τῇ αὐτοῦ ἀπωλείᾳ κἂν τότε τὸ μάταιον τοῦ περὶ τῆς ἀγεννησίας τε καὶ ἀφθαρσίας τοῦ οὐρανοῦ φρονήματος μά θωσιν οἱ ἀίδιόν τε καὶ ἀγένητον θεόν τε καὶ ἔμφρονα τοῦτον εἰρηκότες.\n\nΡς ʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν χρείαν κατ' ἀρχὰς ἡ παραγωγὴ τῆς κτίσεως γέγονε, καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν ὁμοίως χρείαν τὰ μὲν φθείρεται, τὰ δὲ ἀφθαρσίαν ἐν τῇ συντελείᾳ ἐνδύεται, οἷον κτήνη μὲν καὶ θηρία καὶ πετεινὰ φθείρεται, οὐρανὸς δὲ καὶ γῆ φθορᾶς ἀπαλλάσσεται, καὶ τὰ μὲν φθείρεται, ὡς ἀνενδεοῦς ἡμῶν ἀνισταμένου τοῦ σώματος, ἐν ἀφθαρσίᾳ δὲ τὰ δηλωθέντα μένει στοιχεῖα, [ὡς] τῶν πραχθέντων ἡμῖν μελλόντων ἡμῶν ἐν αὐτοῖς κομίζεσθαι τὴν ἀντίδοσιν, ἀὴρ καὶ θάλαττα πῶς οὐκ ἄχρηστα, εἰ τότε μένοιεν ἄφθαρτα, οὔτε εἰς πνοὰς οὔτε ἐμπορίας οὔτε ἰχθυοφαγίας ἢ ἑτέρας τινὸς βοηθείας [ἕνεκα] χρῃζόντων ἡμῶν ἐξ αὐτῶν διὰ τὸ ἀνενδεές, ὡς ἔφην, τοῦ σώματος; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"Just as divine Scripture figuratively compared the making of the firmament sometimes to the stretching out of a hide, saying, \"who stretches out the heaven like a hide,\" and sometimes to smoke that has been made firm (\"the heaven,\" it says, \"was made firm like smoke\"), and sometimes to the curve of a vault (\"who stretched out,\" it says, \"the heaven like a vault\"), so also it figuratively compared its dissolution sometimes to a scroll being rolled up, sometimes to an element being dissolved by fire, as the apostle Peter says in his second catholic epistle, and sometimes to a garment growing old. For by the introduction of the better heaven, which is made new, the firmament must necessarily be done away with, since it is useless for that state, so that by its destruction they may then at least learn the vanity of their opinion concerning the unbegottenness and incorruptibility of heaven—those who have called it eternal and unbegotten, both divine and endowed with mind.\n\nQuestion 146. Question: If at the beginning the production of creation came about for our need, and likewise for our need some things are corrupted while others put on incorruptibility at the consummation—for example, cattle and wild beasts and birds are corrupted, but heaven and earth are released from corruption—and some things are corrupted because we rise with a body that has no needs, while the elements indicated remain in incorruptibility, [since] we are to receive in them the recompense for what we have done, how are air and sea not useless, if they then remain incorruptible, when we have no need of them either for breathing or for trade or for eating fish or for any other assistance, because the body, as I said, has no needs? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":107,"ref":"p107","source":"Εἰ κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον Παῦλον \"παράγει τὸ σχῆμα τοῦ κόσμου τούτου\", δῆλον ὅτι ἐξ ἀνάγκης καὶ τὰ ἄλλα πάντα, τὰ τοῦ σχήματος ἕνεκεν τοῦ κόσμου γεγονότα, συμπαρα χθήσεται τῷ τοῦ κόσμου σχήματι, εἰσαχθήσεται δὲ \"καινὸς οὐρανὸς καὶ καινὴ γῆ\", ἐν οἷς μέλλει δίδοσθαι δικαίοις τε καὶ ἀδίκοις ἡ τῶν πρακτέων ἀμοιβή. τῷ δὲ ἀέρι, εἰ καὶ πρὸς ἀναπνοὴν τότε οὐ χρῄζομεν, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὴν κίνησίν τε καὶ τοπικὴν μετάβασιν ἀναγκαίως αὐτῷ χρησόμεθα· \"ἁρπαγησόμεθα\" γάρ, φησίν, \"ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα\".\n\nΡΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μόνοις τοῖς κατὰ γνώμην καλοῖς παρὰ θεοῦ ἔπαινος δίδοται, οἱ παῖδες οἱ παρ' Ἡρώδου τὴν διὰ ξίφους λα βόντες ἀναίρεσιν καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου νήπια, ἡνίκα ἐπὶ τοῦ κτή νους καθήμενος τὴν Ἱερουσαλὴμ κατελάμβανε, τὸν ὕμνον φθεγξά μενα, ποῖον ἔχουσι δικαίως χρεωστούμενον ἔπαινον; κἀκεῖνοι γὰρ τὴν σφαγὴν παρὰ γνώμην ἐδέξαντο, καὶ ταῦτα οὐ γνώμῃ οἰκείᾳ, ἀλλὰ χάριτι θείᾳ ἐν Ἱερουσαλὴμ τὸν ὕμνον ἐφθέγξαντο. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ χάρισμα θεοῦ ἐστι τὸ ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ πά σχειν–\"ὑμῖν\" φησίν \"ἐχαρίσθη οὐ μόνον τὸ εἰς αὐτὸν πιστεύειν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ πάσχειν\"–, ἔπασχον δὲ καὶ τὰ βρέφη ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ, θείας ἄρα ἠξιώθησαν χάριτος. τίς οὖν οὐκ ἐπαινέσειε ταῦτα δικαίως, τῇ δόσει τῆς θείας χάριτος ἐπαι νεθέντα ὑπὸ θεοῦ τοῦ καὶ τοῖς παρὰ γνώμην καλοῖς τὸν ἔπαι νον","english":"If, according to the apostle Paul, \"the form of this world is passing away,\" it is clear that of necessity all other things as well, which came to be for the sake of the form of the world, will be removed together with the form of the world, and \"a new heaven and a new earth\" will be brought in, in which the recompense for deeds is to be given to the righteous and the unrighteous. But as for the air, even if we do not then need it for breathing, we will necessarily use it for motion and change of place; for \"we shall be caught up,\" he says, \"in clouds to meet the Lord in the air.\"\n\n107. Question. If praise is given by God only for things that are good according to intention, what praise do the children who received death by the sword at Herod's hands, and the infants in the Lord's time, who uttered the hymn when he was seated on the beast and was entering Jerusalem, justly have owed to them? For those children received slaughter against their will, and these infants uttered the hymn in Jerusalem not by their own intention but by divine grace. Answer. If it is a gift of God to suffer for Christ—\"to you,\" he says, \"it was granted not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him\"—and the infants also suffered for Christ, then they were deemed worthy of divine grace. Who, then, would not justly praise these, who were praised by God through the giving of divine grace—he who grants praise even for things good against intention","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":108,"ref":"p108","source":"δαψιλευομένου; ἔτι δέ, εἰ πρὸς τὸν ἔπαινον τῶν διὰ τὴν εὐσέβειαν θλιβομένων ἀνταποδίδωσιν ὁ θεὸς θλῖψιν τοῖς θλί ψασιν αὐτούς, ἀνάγκη ἄρα καὶ τὰ βρέφη τὰ ἀναιρεθέντα ὑπὸ Ἡρώδου ἐπαινεῖσθαι τούτῳ τῷ ἐπαίνῳ, τῷ διὰ τὴν ἐκδίκησιν τῶν θλίψεων. \"δίκαιον\" φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος Παῦλος \"παρὰ θεῷ ἀνταποδοῦναι τοῖς θλίψασιν ὑμᾶς θλῖψιν, ὑμῖν δὲ τοῖς θλιβομένοις ἄνεσιν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ αὐτοῦ\". ΡΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἡ χάρις διὰ τοῦτο κέκληται χάρις, διὰ τὸ τοῖς πταίουσι τοῦ νόμου συγχωρεῖν ἑτοιμότερον, πῶς τὰ τῇ χάριτι πρέποντα ἐν τῷ νόμῳ μᾶλλον εὑρίσκεται; ὃ μὲν γὰρ ῥαντισμοῖς τισι καὶ θυσίαις ἀλόγων καὶ διαφοραῖς βαπτισμάτων τοὺς πταίοντας καθ' ἑκάστην ἀποπλύνει τῆς μέμψεως, ἡ δὲ χάρις ἓν μόνον χαρίζεται βάπτισμα, τῆς τῶν ἁμαρτημάτων παρεκτικὸν συγχωρήσεως. ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν ἅπαξ μόνον ὑπεπίπτομεν πταίσμασιν, ἅπαξ μόνον καὶ τῆς ἀφέσεως ἐδεόμεθα. πολλάκις δὲ ἁμαρτάνοντες, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ πολλάκις τῆς ἀφέσεως χρῄζομεν· ὅπερ οὐχ ἡ χάρις, ἀλλ' ὁ νόμος διὰ τῶν προλεχθέντων ῥαντισμῶν καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν παρέ χειν ἐπίσταται. πῶς οὖν οὐ δειχθήσεται τοῦ νόμου ἡ χάρις φι λανθρωποτέρα περὶ τοὺς ἁμαρτάνοντας, ὡς προείρηται ἐχόντων τῶν πραγμάτων; Ἀπόκρισις. Τῶν τοιούτων πταισμάτων ὁ νόμος διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος καὶ θυσίας δίδωσι τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν μηδὲν συντελούντων εἰς βλάβην πολιτείας καὶ ζωῆς ἀνθρώπων, οἷον ὡς τὸ ἅψα σθαι νεκροῦ ἢ λεπροῦ ἤ τινος τῶν τοιούτων·","english":"If God, in return for the praise of those who are afflicted for the sake of piety, repays affliction to those who afflicted them, then of necessity the infants slain by Herod must also be praised with this praise, the praise that comes through the avenging of their afflictions. \"It is just,\" says the apostle Paul, \"with God to repay affliction to those who afflicted you, and to you who are afflicted, relief in his kingdom.\"\n\nQuestion 108. If grace is called grace for this reason, because it more readily forgives those who stumble against the law, how is it that the things befitting grace are found more in the law? For the law washes away the blame of those who stumble each time by certain sprinklings and sacrifices of irrational animals and various baptisms, but grace grants only one baptism, which provides forgiveness of sins. But if we had fallen into sins only once, we would have needed forgiveness only once. But since we sin often, it is clear that we also need forgiveness often; and this the law knows how to provide through the aforementioned sprinklings and the rest, but grace does not. How then will grace not be shown to be more humane toward sinners than the law, since matters stand as has been said?\n\nAnswer. The law gives forgiveness of such sins through baptism and sacrifice—sins that contribute nothing to the harm of the conduct and life of men, such as touching a dead body or a leper or any of the like.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":109,"ref":"p109","source":"τῶν δὲ ἄλλων πται σμάτων γεγενημένων εἰς βλάβην πολιτείας ἢ ζωῆς ἀνθρώπων οὐ δίδωσι συγχώρησιν, οὔτε διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος οὔτε διὰ τῆς τῶν ἀλόγων θυσίας, ἀλλὰ δικαίαν τε καὶ ἀξίαν ἀμοιβὴν τοῖς πταίσασι δίδωσι διὰ τοῦ ἴσου τῆς ἀντιπλήξεως. \"ψυχήν\" φησίν \"ἀντὶ ψυχῆς, ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ, ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος\". ὅπου δὲ τὸ ἴσον τῆς ἀνταποδόσεώς ἐστιν ἀπρεπές, ἐκεῖ τὸν διὰ πυρὸς ἢ λίθου ἢ ξίφους θάνατον ἀνταποδίδωσι τοῖς πταίσασι· τὴν μὲν γὰρ θυγατέρα τοῦ ἱερέως πορνεύσασαν διὰ πυρὸς ἀναλίσκει, τὴν δὲ τοῦ λαϊκοῦ ἀνδρὸς διὰ λίθου, τὴν δὲ ὕπανδρον διὰ ξίφους, καὶ οὐδαμοῦ ἰσχὺς τῷ νόμῳ ἐκ φιλανθρωπίας διὰ βαπτισμῶν τε καὶ θυσιῶν σῶσαι τῶν τοιούτων τινά. τῆς δὲ χάριτος πολλή τίς ἐστι πρὸς τὴν τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων σωτηρίαν ἡ ἰσχύς· αὕτη γὰρ καὶ τοῦ νόμου κρατοῦντος, εἰ μὴ κατέλαβε τὸν βασιλέα Δαυὶδ διπλοῖς θανατηφόροις περιπεπτωκότα ἁμαρτήμασιν, ἀνοίξασα αὐτῷ τῆς με τανοίας τὴν θύραν, οὐκ ἂν εὗρε παρὰ τῷ νόμῳ σωστικὴν ἁμαρ τωλῶν φιλανθρωπίαν. αὕτη ἔταξεν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν ἰατρὸν δόκιμον, τὴν μετάνοιαν, τὴν δυναμένην καὶ τοὺς \"ἑβδομη κοντάκις ἑπτὰ\" πταίοντας ἰάσασθαι, μόνον εἰ βουληθεῖεν κεχρῆσθαι τῶν τῆς μετανοίας βοηθημάτων. ΡΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸν φόβον ὁ κύριος οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον δι' ὧν λέγει παρίστησι–φησὶ γὰρ \"ὁ φοβούμενος οὐ τετελείωται ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ\"–, πῶς πάλιν ὁ αὐτὸς διδάσκει τοὺς μαθητὰς \"φοβεῖσθε\" λέγων \"τὸν ψυχὴν καὶ σῶμα ἐν γεέννῃ ἀπολέσαι δυνάμενον\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐκ εἴρηται μὲν τῷ κυρίῳ τὸ \"ὁ φοβούμενος οὐ τετελείωται ἐν τῇ ἀγάπῃ\", εἰ καὶ ὁ εἰρηκὼς τοῦτο κατὰ κύριον εἴρηκε·","english":"But for other offenses that have caused harm to the community or to human life, he grants no forgiveness, neither through baptism nor through the sacrifice of irrational animals, but gives to those who have sinned a just and fitting recompense through the principle of equal retaliation. \"A soul for a soul,\" he says, \"an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.\" But where the equality of repayment is unseemly, there he repays to the offenders death by fire or stone or sword. For the daughter of the priest who committed fornication he consumes by fire, the daughter of a layman by stone, and the married woman by the sword; and nowhere does the law have the strength, out of philanthropy, to save any such person through baptisms and sacrifices. But the power of grace for the salvation of sinners is great; for this grace, even while the law prevailed, if it had not overtaken King David when he had fallen into double deadly sins, opening to him the door of repentance, he would not have found in the law a saving philanthropy for sinners. This grace appointed in the world a proven physician for sinners, repentance, which is able to heal even those who sin \"seventy times seven,\" provided only that they wish to make use of the helps of repentance. 109. Question. If the Lord does not present fear as necessary by what he says—for he says, \"The one who fears has not been made perfect in love\"—how again does the same Lord teach his disciples, saying, \"Fear the one who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna\"? Answer. The saying \"The one who fears has not been made perfect in love\" was not spoken by the Lord, even if the one who said it spoke with reference to the Lord.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":110,"ref":"p110","source":"τὸ δὲ \"φοβεῖσθε μᾶλλον τὸν δυνάμενον καὶ ψυχὴν καὶ σῶμα ἐν γεέννῃ ἀπολέσαι\", οὐκ εἴρηται πρὸς ἀναίρεσιν τῆς τε λείας ἀγάπης, ἀλλὰ πρὸς φυλακὴν αὐτῆς· ὁ γὰρ τῷ μείζονι φόβῳ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν ἐλάττονα ἐκλύων τῶν ἀνθρώπων φόβον τῇ ἀγάπῃ τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦτο ποιεῖ, ὥστε εἶναι τὸν μείζονα φόβον τοῦ θεοῦ ἕνεκεν τοῦ μὴ ἐκπεσεῖν τῶν ἠγαπημένων· ὅσον γὰρ τίμιόν ἐστι τὸ πιστευόμενον, τοσοῦτον ἀγαπᾶται, καὶ ὅσον ἀγαπᾶται, τοσοῦτον ὁ ἀγαπῶν τὴν ἔκπτωσιν αὑτοῦ φοβεῖται, ἕως ἄν ἐστιν ἐν τῷ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀγαπωμένου ἀγῶνι. λυθέντος δὲ τοῦ ἀγῶνος, συλλύεται αὐτῷ καὶ ὁ φόβος τῆς τῶν ἀγαπωμένων ἐκπτώσεως. ὥστε ἕως τότε ἀναγκαῖός ἐστιν ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ φόβος· οὐδὲ γὰρ ὡς τὸ μισεῖν ἀναιρετικόν ἐστι τῆς ἀγάπης–ἀδύνατον γὰρ τὸ τὸν αὐτὸν καὶ μι σεῖν καὶ ἀγαπᾶν–οὕτω καὶ τὸ φοβεῖσθαι· ἐνδέχεται γὰρ τὸν αὐτὸν καὶ ἀγαπᾶν καὶ φοβεῖσθαι.\n\nΡΙʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὰς τῶν ἀλόγων θυσίας ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ προσέταξε γίνεσθαι, ὥστε ταύταις τὴν περὶ αὐτὸν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τιμὴν ἐπιδείκνυσθαι, πῶς διὰ τὸ θύειν ἀνθρώπους Ἕλληνες δεί κνυνται [τοῖς] ἑαυτῶν [θεοῖς] ἀσεβέστεροι (ὅπερ φάσκουσιν ὑπὸ τῶν παλαιῶν γεγονέναι χάριν τοῦ πλείονος τιμῆς τοὺς παρ' αὐτοῖς νομι ζομένους θεοὺς ἀξιοῦσθαι), μειζόνως αὐτοὺς τῇ τῶν λογικῶν θυσίᾳ τιμῶντες; ὅσῳ γὰρ τοῦ ἀλόγου τὸ λογικὸν τιμιώτερον, τοσούτῳ καὶ ἡ τούτου θυσία σεμνοτέρα ἐκείνης. καὶ τοῦτο δείκνυται ἐκ τῶν κατὰ τὸν Ἰεφθάε σαφέστερον, ὅς, τὴν ἰδίαν θυγατέρα προσκομίσας θυσίαν, ἐν τῇ πρὸς Ἑβραίους ἐπιστολῇ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἐν τῷ καταλόγῳ τῶν εὐσεβῶν μνημονεύεται. Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"But the saying \"Fear rather him who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna\" was not spoken to abolish perfect love, but to guard it; for when a man, by the greater fear of God, loosens the lesser fear of men, he does this by the love of God, so that the greater fear of God exists for the sake of not falling away from those who are loved. For insofar as what is believed is precious, so much is it loved; and insofar as it is loved, so much does the one who loves fear his own falling away, as long as he is in the struggle on behalf of the beloved. But when the struggle is ended, the fear of falling away from the beloved is dissolved together with it. So until then the fear of God is necessary; for just as hating is not destructive of love—for it is impossible for the same person both to hate and to love—so neither is fearing; for it is possible for the same person both to love and to fear.\n\n110. Question. If God commanded in the Law that sacrifices of irrational animals be offered, so that by these men might display the honor due to him, how are the Greeks shown to be more impious than their own gods by sacrificing human beings (which they claim was done by the ancients so that the gods esteemed among them might be deemed worthy of greater honor), honoring them more greatly by the sacrifice of rational beings? For by as much as the rational is more precious than the irrational, by so much is the sacrifice of the former more august than that of the latter. And this is shown more clearly from the case of Jephthah, who, offering his own daughter as a sacrifice, is mentioned by the apostle in the Epistle to the Hebrews in the list of the pious. Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":111,"ref":"p111","source":"Οὐ χρὴ ἡμᾶς σκοπεῖν τὴν κατὰ τὸν νόμον [τῷ] θεῷ προσφερομένην θυσίαν, ὅτι τῶν ἀλόγων ἐστὶν αἷμα, ἀλλὰ τὸ πῶς προσεδέξατο ταύτην ὁ θεὸς προσαγομένην αὐτῷ. εἰ μὲν γὰρ τὸ αἷμα τῶν ἀλόγων τῷ θεῷ προσφερόμενον οὕτως προσεδέξατο ὁ θεός, ὡς εἰ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ψυχὴν προσέφερεν ὁ τοῦτο προσενέγκας, δῆλον ὅτι ἡ μὲν θυσία τὴν πρώτην τάξιν ἔσχεν ἀπὸ τῆς εὐδο κίας τοῦ ταύτην οὕτως προσδεξαμένου καὶ ὁ θεὸς τὴν πρώτην τιμήν· ὅτι δὲ ὡς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ψυχὴν οὕτως προσέφερε τῷ θεῷ ὁ τὸ αἷμα τῶν ἀλόγων προσενέγκας, μαρτυρεῖ ἡ θεία γραφὴ λέγουσα· \"ἀντὶ τὴς ψυχῆς\" φησί \"τῶν προσφερόντων τὸ αἷμα τῶν θυσιῶν αὐτῶν εἰσφέρεται εἰς τὰ ἅγια τῶν ἁγίων\". μὴ οὖν ἀπὸ τῆς φύ σεως τοῦ προσαγομένου, ἀλλ' ἀπὸ τῆς διαθέσεως τοῦ προσδεχομένου κρῖναι [δεῖ] τῆς θυσίας τὴν τάξιν καὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν τιμήν, τοῦ διὰ τὸ φείδεσθαι τοῦ γένους τῶν ἀνθρώπων μὴ βουληθέντος ἀνα λῶσαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους εἰς θυσίαν καθ' ἡμέραν προσαγομένους καὶ ἀφανίσαι τὸ γένος, ἀλλὰ δεδωκότος τοῖς μὲν ἀνθρώποις τὸ αὐξά νεσθαί τε καὶ διαμένειν, ταῖς δὲ θυσίαις αὐτῶν τὴν μεγίστην τά ξιν. οἱ δὲ παρ' Ἕλλησι θρῃσκευόμενοι θεοί, ἅτε δαιμόνων αὐτῶν πονηρῶν καὶ μισανθρώπων ὄντων, θυσίαις ἔχαιρον μειωτικαῖς τε καὶ ἀφανιστικαῖς τοῦ γένους τῶν ἀνθρώπων· ὅπερ ἐστὶ δεῖγμα μέγι στον τῆς μὲν αὐτῶν θηριώδους ἀπανθρωπίας, τῆς δὲ τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἀθεότητος, τῷ ἀφανισμῷ τοῦ γένους τῶν ἀνθρώπων μειζόνως, ὥς φασι, μᾶλλον δὲ αἰσχίστως πειρωμένων τιμᾶν τοὺς ἑαυτῶν θεούς. αἰτία δὲ δι' ἣν ὁ Ἰεφθάε ἐν τῷ καταλόγῳ τῶν εὐσεβῶν ἠριθμήθη, αὕτη ἐστίν. ᾐτήσατο ὁ Ἰεφθάε νίκην κατὰ τῶν ἐχθρῶν.","english":"We should not look at the sacrifice offered to God according to the law as being the blood of irrational animals, but at how God accepted it when it was offered to him. For if God so accepted the blood of irrational animals offered to him as if the one who offered it had offered his own soul, it is clear that the sacrifice held the first rank because of the good pleasure of the one who so accepted it, and God held the first honor; and that the one who offered the blood of irrational animals offered it to God as his own soul, the divine Scripture bears witness, saying: \"Instead of the soul of those who offer, the blood of their sacrifices is brought into the holy of holies.\" Therefore one must judge the rank of the sacrifice and the honor of God not from the nature of what is offered, but from the disposition of the one who accepts it—since God, out of sparing the human race, did not wish to destroy men who were offered daily as sacrifice and to wipe out the race, but granted to men both to increase and to endure, and to their sacrifices the greatest rank. But the gods worshipped among the Greeks, being evil and man-hating demons, took pleasure in sacrifices that diminished and destroyed the human race; which is the greatest proof of their beastly inhumanity and of the godlessness of the Greeks, who tried to honor their own gods—as they say—more greatly, or rather most shamefully, by the destruction of the human race. And the reason why Jephthah was numbered in the list of the pious is this: Jephthah asked for victory over his enemies.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":112,"ref":"p112","source":"ὑπὲρ ταύ της τῆς νίκης εὐχαριστικὴν εὐχὴν ἀορίστως ηὔξατο τῷ θεῷ, προσαγαγεῖν εἰς θυσίαν τὸ ἐκ τοῦ οἴκου ἐξερχόμενον πρῶτον καὶ προσερχόμενον εἰς ἀπάντησιν αὐτῷ ἐκ τοῦ πολέμου τροπαιούχῳ ἐπανερχομένῳ. δραξάμενος δὲ ὁ διάβολος τὸ ἀόριστον τῆς εὐχῆς ἐμηχανᾶτο ἐξ αὐτοῦ θεῖναι τῷ Ἰεφθάε παγίδα παραβάσεως· καὶ κινεῖ τὴν θυγατέρα αὐτοῦ, μονογενῆ οὖσαν, μετὰ κιθάρας ἐξελθεῖν ἐκ τοῦ οἴκου εἰς τὴν ἀπάντησιν αὐτοῦ, ἵνα φεισαμένου τοῦ Ἰεφθάε τῆς θυγατρὸς ἀναγκασθῇ ποιήσασθαι τῆς εὐχῆς τὴν ἀθέτησιν. ἀλλ' ὅμως παγίδα θεὶς ὁ διάβολος τοῦ θηράματος οὐκ ἔτυχε, προ τιμωτέραν ἡγησαμένου τοῦ Ἰεφθάε τῆς ζωῆς τῆς θυγατρὸς τὴν ἀπόδοσιν τῆς εὐχῆς. συνεχώρησε δὲ ὁ θεὸς προσενεχθῆναι αὐτὴν εἰς θυσίαν, οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρωπίνῳ αἵματι τερπόμενος, ἀλλὰ πρὸς διδασκαλίαν τῶν ἑξῆς ἀνθρώπων τοῦ μηδέποτε ἀορίστως εὔξασθαι τῷ θεῷ· πολλὰ γάρ ἐστιν ἄτοπα τὰ κατὰ τὴν οὕτως ἀόριστον εὐχὴν συμβησόμενα, ὧν τοῦ μὴ γενέσθαι προνοησάμενος ὁ θεὸς συνεχώρησε θυσίαν γενέσθαι τοῦ Ἰεφθάε τὴν θυγατέρα· ὅπερ οὐκ ἦν τῆς προαιρέσεως προηγουμένως οὔτε τοῦ θεοῦ οὔτε τοῦ Ἰεφθάε, ἀλλὰ συμβεβηκός πως τῷ ἀορίστῳ τῆς εὐχῆς. ἐπειδὴ οὖν ὁ Ἰεφθάε τὴν εἰς θεὸν εὐσέβειαν φυλάττων διὰ τῆς θυσίας τῆς θυγατρὸς ἀνεδείχθη, διὰ τοῦτο αὐτοῦ γέγονεν ἡ μνήμη ἐν τῷ καταλόγῳ τῶν δικαίων.","english":"For this victory he prayed to God an indefinite thanksgiving prayer, to offer as a sacrifice the first thing that came out of his house and came to meet him as he returned from war bearing the trophy. But the devil, seizing on the indefiniteness of the prayer, contrived from it to set a snare of transgression for Jephthah; and he moved his daughter, who was an only child, to come out of the house with lyres to meet him, so that if Jephthah spared his daughter he would be compelled to annul his prayer. But nevertheless the devil, having set the snare, did not obtain the prey, since Jephthah regarded the payment of his prayer as more honorable than the life of his daughter. And God permitted her to be offered as a sacrifice, not as taking pleasure in human blood, but for the instruction of later men never to pray to God indefinitely; for many are the absurdities that would result from such an indefinite prayer, and God, providing that they should not come to pass, permitted the daughter of Jephthah to become a sacrifice; which was not primarily the purpose either of God or of Jephthah, but happened in some way as a consequence of the indefiniteness of the prayer. Since, therefore, Jephthah was shown, through the sacrifice of his daughter, to preserve his piety toward God, for this reason his memory has been made in the catalogue of the righteous.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":113,"ref":"p113","source":"ΡΙΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πρὸς σύστασιν τοῦ ἀληθῆ εἶναι τὴν παρὰ τῶν ὀρθοδόξων γενομένην λατρείαν τὴν τῶν θαυμάτων χάριν ἐν ταῖς αὐτῶν ἐκκλησίαις κατ' ἀρχὰς ὁ δεσπότης δεδώρηται Χριστός, διατί, ἡνίκα αἱρετικοὶ ἐν αὐταῖς λατρεύσαντες ἀπ' αὐτῶν τῶν ὀρθοδόξων ἀπέστησαν, οὐ συναπέστη τοῖς ὀρθοδόξοις ἀπὸ τῶν\n\nἐκκλησιῶν καὶ τὰ θεῖα χαρίσματα, ἀλλ' ἡ μὲν τῆς πλάνης λα τρεία ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἐπεισέφρησε, τὰ δὲ πρὸς τὴν αὔξησιν τῆς ὀρθοδοξίας ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ δωρηθέντα καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν αἱρετικῶν τὴν αὐτὴν ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις εἶχεν ἐνέργειαν; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ μὲν τῶν αἱρετικῶν ζώντων ἢ ἀποθανόντων ἡ θεία χάρις ἐνήργει τὰ χαρίσματα, εἶχεν ἂν τὸ γιγνόμενον εὔλογον ἀπορίαν· εἰ δὲ οἱ τὰ θεῖα θαύματα ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἐνεργοῦντες ἅγιοί εἰσιν ἀπόστολοι προφῆται καὶ μάρτυρες, ὧν τὰ λείψανα κεῖν ται ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ νῦν οἱ ὀρθόδοξοι ἐνεργοῦσι τὰ θαύματα· ὀρθόδοξοι γάρ εἰσιν οἱ ἀπόστολοι προφῆταί τε καὶ μάρτυρες, ὧν τοῖς θείοις ἔργοις διαμαρτύρεται τῷ κόσμῳ ὁ θεὸς ἐκείνων εἶναι τὰς ἐκκλησίας, δι' ὧν τὰ θαύματα ἐκτελεῖται, του τέστι τῶν ὀρθοδόξων.","english":"113. Question. If the Master Christ granted the grace of miracles in their churches at the beginning as a confirmation that the worship performed by the orthodox is true, why is it that when heretics worshipped in them and separated from the orthodox themselves, the divine gifts did not also depart with the orthodox from the churches, but the worship of error crept into the churches, while the things granted by God for the increase of orthodoxy had the same effect in the churches even among the heretics? Answer. If the divine grace worked the gifts while the heretics were alive or dead, what happened would reasonably raise a difficulty. But if those who work the divine miracles in the churches are holy apostles, prophets, and martyrs, whose relics lie in the churches, it is clear that even now the orthodox work the miracles; for the apostles, prophets, and martyrs are orthodox, and by their divine works God testifies to the world that the churches in which the miracles are performed belong to them, that is, to the orthodox.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":114,"ref":"p114","source":"ΡΙΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μελέτῃ λογικὸς ἅπας τὴν γνῶσιν κομίζεται, γνώσεως δὲ νόμος τῶν μειζόνων προτάττειν τὰ ἥσσονα–ὅπερ κρατῆσαν ἐπὶ τῶν Ἰουδαίων σαφέστερον δείκνυται–πρότερον τὰ τοῦ νόμου, εἶθ' οὕτως τὰ εὐαγγελικὰ παρειληφότων μαθήματα, πῶς ἡμεῖς οὐκ ἀνακολούθως μανθάνομεν πρὸ τῶν ἡσσόνων τὰ μείζονα μανθάνοντες, λέγω δὲ τὰ τοῦ νόμου ἥσσονα, τὰ δὲ τῶν εὐαγγελίων μείζονα; μιᾶς γὰρ ἡμῶν καὶ τῶν πρὸ ἡμῶν τυγχα νούσης τῆς φύσεως, μίαν εἶναι καὶ τὴν τάξιν ἐχρῆν τῆς μαθή σεως, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ἐν τοῖς μαθήμασιν, ἐὰν μὴ φθάσῃ τὰ χείρονα, τὰ ἀμείνω κωλύεται. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ τὴν ἀνάγκην, ἣν ἔχει ἐκεῖνα τὰ μαθή ματα, ὧν, εἰ μὴ προηγεῖται τῶν ἡσσόνων ἡ μάθησις, τὰ ἀμείνω κωλύεται, ταύτην εἶχε καὶ τὰ ἡμέτερα μαθήματα, οὐδ' ἂν ἐδυ νήθημεν οὐδὲ ἀνακολούθως μαθεῖν τὰ ἡμέτερα μαθήματα. ἀλλ' ἐπειδὴ τὰ ἡμέτερα δυνατὸν καὶ ἀνακολούθως μαθεῖν, δῆλον ὅτι ἀπήλλακται τὰ ἡμέτερα μαθήματα ἐκείνης τῆς ἀνάγκης. τὸ δὲ ἀνάγκης ἀπηλλαγμένον, ὡς ἂν γένηται, ἀδιάβλητόν ἐστιν ἐπὶ τῇ ἀνακολουθίᾳ. καὶ ταῦτα μὲν ὡς πρὸς τὴν λύσιν τοῦ ἐν τῇ ἐρω τήσει σοφίσματος· πρὸς αὐτὴν δὲ τὴν ἐρώτησιν οὕτως ἀποκρινόμεθα· ὅτι οὐδὲ ἡμεῖς ἀνακολούθως διδασκόμεθα, ἀλλ' ὡς ἐμάνθανον οἱ ἀπόστολοι πρῶτον μὲν τὰ τοῦ νόμου, ὕστερον δὲ τὰ εὐαγγέλια, οὕτω καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐδίδαξαν· μαρτυροῦσι δὲ τούτων αὐτῶν αἱ φωναί, ἐν αἷς κατήγγειλαν τὸ εὐαγγέλιον· πανταχοῦ γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ νόμου τὸν Χριστὸν κηρύξαντες ἐκ τῶν πρώτων τὰ ἥσσονα καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἡσσόνων τὰ μείζονα δείκνυται·","english":"114. Question. If every rational person acquires knowledge by study, and the law of knowledge is to place the lesser before the greater—which is shown more clearly to have prevailed among the Jews, since they first received the teachings of the law and then the teachings of the gospel—how is it that we do not learn in inverted order, learning the greater before the lesser, I mean the lesser things of the law and the greater things of the gospel? For since our nature is one and the same as that of those before us, the order of learning should also be one, since even in studies, if the inferior things do not come first, the better things are hindered. Answer. If our teachings had that necessity which those studies have, whose better parts are hindered unless the learning of the lesser comes first, then we could not have learned our teachings in inverted order either. But since it is possible to learn our teachings even in inverted order, it is clear that our teachings are freed from that necessity. And what is freed from necessity, however it comes about, is beyond reproach for its inverted order. This much, then, as regards the solution of the sophism in the question; but to the question itself we answer as follows: that we too are not taught in inverted order, but just as the apostles learned first the things of the law and later the gospels, so they also taught us. The very words in which they proclaimed the gospel bear witness to this; for everywhere, having proclaimed Christ from the law, they show the lesser from the first things and the greater from the lesser.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":115,"ref":"p115","source":"τὸ γὰρ \"προφήτην ὑμῖν ἀναστήσει κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν ἐκ τῶν ἀδελφῶν ὑμῶν κατ' ἐμέ\", καὶ τὸ \"εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου\", καὶ τὸ \"οὐκ ἐγκαταλείψεις τὴν ψυχήν μου εἰς ᾅδην, οὐδὲ ἡ σάρξ μου εἶδε διαφθοράν\", φωναί εἰσι τοῦ νόμου, προκαταγγείλαντος ἐν αὐ ταῖς τὸν Χριστόν· αἷς καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος Πέτρος χρησάμενος τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἐκήρυξε. καὶ ὡς μὲν πρὸς τὴν μάθησιν οὐδὲν διέστηκε τοῦ νόμου τὰ εὐαγγέλια, ὡς δὲ πρὸς τὴν ἐπαγ γελίαν καὶ ἀπόδοσιν διέστηκε· τί γάρ ἐστιν ὁ νόμος; εὐαγγέλιον προκατηγγελμένον. τί δὲ τὸ εὐαγγέλιον; νόμος πεπληρωμένος.\n\nΡΙΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ περιττὸν καὶ λεῖπον ἐν τῇ τοῦ σώματος ἡμῶν κατασκευῇ ὁ δημιουργὸς οὐ πεποίηκε, διατί ὡς περιττὸν τὸ τῆς ἀκροβυστίας μέρος τῶν Ἰουδαίων περιετέμνετο; εἰς τί δὲ χρή σιμον οὐκ ἐν ἑτέρῳ μέρει, ἀλλ' ἐν τῷ παιδοποιῷ μορίῳ τὴν περιτομὴν οἱ πρὸ τῆς τοῦ δεσπότου Χριστοῦ παρουσίας εἰλήφασι; διατί δὲ ὡς χρησίμην ἐκείνων ταύτην λαβόντων, τῇ τοιαύτῃ χει ρουργίᾳ ὁμοίως καὶ ἡμεῖς οὐ κεχρήμεθα; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ διὰ τὸ γῆρας τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ καὶ τῆςἐλευθέρας γαμετῆς αὐτοῦ ἐν ἀπογνώσει τοῦ παιδοποιεῖν ἐξ αὐτῆς καθισταμένου, ἐπαγγελίαν παιδοποιίας ἐδέξατο παρὰ θεοῦ, καὶ πιστεύσας τῷ θεῷ παρὰ καιρὸν ἡλικίας ἔσεσθαι πατὴρ τοῦ ἐκ τῆς γεγηρακυίας στείρας αὐτῷ γενομένου υἱοῦ, διὰ τοῦτο δέδωκεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεὸς σφραγῖδα ταύτης τῆς πίστεως τὴν περιτομὴν τοῦ τῆς ἀκροβυστίας μορίου, τοῦ διὰ μὲν τὸ γῆρας πρὸς παιδοποιίαν ἀχρήστου γενομένου, διὰ δὲ τὴν πίστιν τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ εἰς παιδο ποιίαν χρησίμου γενομένου. παρέπεμψε δὲ","english":"For the words \"The Lord our God will raise up for you a prophet from among your brethren like me,\" and \"The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand,\" and \"You will not abandon my soul to Hades, nor will my flesh see corruption,\" are voices of the law, which foretold Christ in them; and the apostle Peter, using these, preached the gospel to the Jews. And in respect of learning, the gospels differ in nothing from the law, but in respect of promise and recompense they differ; for what is the law? A gospel foretold. And what is the gospel? A law fulfilled.\n\n113. Question. If the Creator has made nothing superfluous or deficient in the construction of our body, why was the part of the foreskin circumcised among the Jews as though it were superfluous? And for what useful purpose, not in another part but in the generative member, did those before the coming of the Lord Christ receive circumcision? And why, since they received it as useful, do we not likewise use such a handiwork? Answer. Since, because of Abraham's old age and that of his freeborn wife, he was in despair of begetting children by her, he received a promise of offspring from God, and believing God that beyond the season of age he would be a father of the son born to him from the aged barren woman, for this reason God gave him as a seal of this faith the circumcision of the part of the foreskin, which through old age had become useless for begetting children, but through Abraham's faith became useful for begetting children. And he passed on","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":116,"ref":"p116","source":"ταύτην τὴν περιτομὴν εἰς ὅλον τὸ γένος τὸ ἐκ τοῦ παρ' ἐλπίδα πατρὸς γενομένου ὑφιστάμενον εἰς ἀνεξάλειπτον μνημόσυνον τῆς τε τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ πίστεως καὶ τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ δυνάμεως, \"τοῦ ζωοποιοῦντος τοὺς νε κροὺς καὶ καλοῦντος τὰ μὴ ὄντα ὡς ὄντα.\" περιτεμνόμεθα δὲ καὶ ἡμεῖς, τῇ περιτομῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ἐκδυόμενοι τὸν Ἀδάμ, δι' ὃν ἁμαρτωλοὶ κατασταθέντες τεθνήκαμεν, καὶ ἐν δυόμενοι τὸν Χριστόν, δι' ὃν δικαιωθέντες ἀνιστάμεθα ἐκ τῶν νε κρῶν· \"ἐν ᾧ\" φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος \"περιετμήθητε περιτομὴν ἀχειροποίητον ἐν τῇ ἀπεκδύσει τοῦ σώματος ὑμῶν\".\n\nΡΙΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὁ προσταχθεὶς ποιῆσαι τὰ κατὰ δύναμιν ἔπαινον ἢ μέμψιν ἐν τῷ ποιῆσαι ἢ μὴ ποιῆσαι κομίζεται, δῆλον ὅτι ὁ τὰ ὑπὲρ δύναμιν μὴ ποιήσας ἐπιτάγματα ὑπάρχει ἀνεύθυνος. πῶς οὖν ὁ νόμος τὰ ὑπὲρ δύναμιν ἐπιτάττων, τουτέστι τὸ μὴ ἁμαρτάνειν, τὸν ἁμαρτάνοντα ὑποβάλλει κολάσεσι, τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀδυνάτου ὄντος πρὸς τὴν τοῦ νόμου ἐκπλήρωσιν; μαρτυρεῖ δὲ τούτοις ὁ ἀπόστολος, \"οὐ δικαιωθήσεται\" λέγων \"ἐξ ἔργων νό μου πᾶσα σάρξ\". Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ ἀδύνατον, τοῦτο καὶ τινὶ ἀνθρώπων ὑπάρχει δυνατόν· οἷον τὸ πέτεσθαι ἐν τῷ ἀέρι, ὡς ὁ ἀετός, τινὶ ἀνθρώπων ἐστὶν ἀδύνατον. καὶ ἀνάπαλιν τὸ τινὶ ἀν θρώπῳ δυνατόν, ὡς τὸ πλεῖν, τοῦτο καὶ παντὶ ἀνθρώπῳ δυνατὸν ὑπάρχει. ἀλλ' εἰ, καθώς φησιν ἡ θεία γραφή, τινὲς τῶν ὑπὸ τὸν νόμον τῇ κατὰ τὸν νόμον δικαιοσύνῃ γεγόνασιν ἄμεμπτοι, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ὑπὸ τὸν νόμον ὑπῆρχε δυνατὸν τῷ ὁμοίῳ τρόπῳ κατὰ τὴν ἐκ νόμου δικαιοσύνην γενέσθαι ἀμέμπτοις·","english":"This circumcision was for the whole race that came into being from the father who was born contrary to hope, as an indelible memorial of both the faith of Abraham and the power of God, \"who gives life to the dead and calls the things that are not as though they were.\" And we too are circumcised, with the circumcision of Christ through baptism, putting off Adam, through whom we were made sinners and died, and putting on Christ, through whom we were justified and raised from the dead; \"in whom,\" says the apostle, \"you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the putting off of the body of your flesh.\"\n\nQuestion 114. Question. If the one who has been commanded to do what is within his power receives praise or blame for doing or not doing it, it is clear that the one who has not done commandments beyond his power is not liable. How then does the law, commanding things beyond power—that is, not to sin—subject the sinner to punishments, when man is unable to fulfill the law? The apostle testifies to this, saying, \"By the works of the law no flesh will be justified.\" Answer. What is impossible for every man is also possible for some man; for example, to fly in the air, as the eagle does, is impossible for some man. And conversely, what is possible for some man, as for example to sail, is also possible for every man. But if, as the divine Scripture says, some of those under the law became blameless by the righteousness according to the law, it is clear that it was also possible for all those under the law to become blameless in the same manner according to the righteousness that comes from the law.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":117,"ref":"p117","source":"λέγει γὰρ ὁ μὲν μακάριος Παῦλος ὁ ἀπόστολος περὶ ἑαυτοῦ, ὅτι \"κατὰ δικαιο σύνην τὴν ἐκ νόμου γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος\"· ὁ δὲ μακάριος Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς περὶ τοῦ Ζαχαρίου καὶ τῆς γυναικὸς αὐτοῦ Ἐλισάβετ, ὅτι \"ἦσαν δίκαιοι ἀμφότεροι ἐναντίον τοῦ θεοῦ, πορευό μενοι ἐν πάσαις ταῖς ἐντολαῖς καὶ δικαιώμασι τοῦ κυρίου ἄμεμπτοι\". τί δέ ἐστι πᾶσα ἡ κατὰ τὸν νόμον δικαιοσύνη, ἢ τὸ ἀγα πᾶν μὲν τὸν θεὸν ὑπὲρ ἑαυτόν, τὸν πλησίον δὲ ὡς ἑαυτόν, ὅπερ οὐκ ἔστιν ἀδύνατον ἀνθρώποις βουληθεῖσι; τὸ \"ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται πᾶσα σάρξ\", οὐ διὰ τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι τὰ ἀδύ νατα λέγει, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ μὴ βούλεσθαι τὰ δυνατά· τῇ γὰρ βου λήσει πρὸς τὰ δυνατὰ κεχρήμεθα, οὐ πρὸς τὰ ἀδύνατα· τοῖς γὰρ δυνατοῖς καὶ ἐφ' ἡμῖν οὖσιν ὁ ἔπαινος ἢ ὁ ψόγος γίνεται πραχθεῖσιν ἢ μὴ πραχθεῖσι· τοῦ δὲ διὰ τὸ μὴ αἱρεῖσθαι καὶ οὐ διὰ τὸ μὴ δύνασθαι ἁμαρτάνομεν οἱ ἄνθρωποι, ἔστι τοῦτο σημεῖον, τὸ μὴ πάντας ἀνθρώπους πᾶσι τοῖς τῆς ἁμαρτίας εἴδεσιν ἐμπεσεῖν, ἀλλὰ τινὰς μὲν τούτῳ τῷ εἴδει τῆς ἁμαρτίας, τινὰς δὲ ἑτέρῳ, καὶ τινὰς μὲν πλείοσι, τινὰς δὲ ἐλάττοσι, τινὰς δὲ οὐδενί, κατὰ τοὺς προειρημένους δικαίους· ὅπερ οὐκ ἂν συνέβη ἀνθρώποις, τὸ τινὶ μὲν εἴδει τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἁμαρτάνειν, τινὶ δὲ οὐδέποτε ἁμαρ τάνειν, εἰ ἀδυναμίᾳ φύσεως καὶ οὐκ ἀβουλίᾳ προαιρέσεως ἁμαρτάνομεν οἱ ἄνθρωποι. ΡΙΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐγκλημάτων χώραν μετανοίας ὁ νόμος τῷ ἡμαρτηκότι οὐ δίδωσιν, ἀλλὰ κίνδυνον αὐτῷ ἐπάγει ἀπαραίτητον, πῶς μοιχείαν καὶ φόνον ὁ προφήτης Δαυὶδ ἐργασά μενος οὐ παρὰ τὸν σκοπὸν τοῦ νόμου συγγνώμης ἠξίωται;","english":"For the blessed Paul the apostle says of himself, \"according to the righteousness which is from the law, blameless\"; and the blessed Luke the evangelist says of Zacharias and his wife Elizabeth, that \"they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.\" And what is all the righteousness according to the law, except to love God above oneself, and one's neighbor as oneself, which is not impossible for men who will it? The saying \"by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified\" does not speak because we are unable to do the impossible things, but because we are unwilling to do the possible things; for we employ our will toward things possible, not toward things impossible; for praise or blame arises for things possible and within our power, when they have been done or not done. And that we men sin because we do not choose, and not because we are unable, this is a sign: that not all men fall into all the forms of sin, but some into this form of sin, some into another, and some into more, some into fewer, and some into none, according to the righteous men previously mentioned. And this would not have happened to men—that some sin in one form of sin, but others never sin in any—if we men sinned by an incapacity of nature and not by an unwillingness of choice.\n\n117. Question. If, in the case of offenses, the law does not give the sinner room for repentance, but brings upon him an inexorable danger, how is it that the prophet David, having committed adultery and murder, was deemed worthy of forgiveness contrary to the aim of the law?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":118,"ref":"p118","source":"καὶ εἰ μὲν ἀγαθὸν ἡ συγγνώμη, διατί τὸ ἀσύγγνωστον τῷ νόμῳ συνέ ζευκται; εἰ δὲ φαῦλον, ὅπερ οὐκ οἶμαι, πῶς ὁ τῶν ἀγαθῶν χορηγὸς τὸ φαῦλον τῷ προφήτῃ κεχάρισται; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ ἐπὶ τῶν ἐγκλημάτων χώραν μετανοίας τῷ ἡμαρτηκότι ὁ νόμος οὐ δίδωσι, πῶς ἐν τῇ ρηʹ ἐρωτήσει προτέ τακται τῆς χάριτος ὁ νόμος, ὡς ταύτης ἑτοιμότερος καὶ φιλανθρωπότερος εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτημάτων τοῖς ἁμαρτάνουσιν, οὓς καθ' ἑκάστην ἡμέραν διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος καὶ διὰ τῆς τῶν ἀλόγων θυσίας τῆς μέμψεως ἀπολύει, νῦν δὲ ἐν τῇ προκειμένῃ ἐρωτήσει ῥανὶς οὐχ ὑπολέλειπται τῷ νόμῳ φιλανθρωπίας, ἀλλὰ συνέζευκται αὐτῷ τὸ ἀσύγγνωστον, κίνδυνον ἐπάγον τῷ ἡμαρτηκότι ἀπαραίτητον; καὶ πρὸς μὲν τὸ μὴ ἀνεπισήμαντον ἐᾶν τῶν ἐρωτήσεων τὴν ἐναντίωσιν εἰρήσθω ταῦτα· πρὸς δὲ τὴν\n\nἐρώτησιν ἀποκρι νούμεθα, ὅτι εἰ καὶ ὁ νόμος τὸ ἀσύγγνωστον ἔχει, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡ χάρις μετάνοιαν δέδωκε τῷ ἡμαρτηκότι· τὸ γὰρ \"αἱ χεῖρες ὑμῶν αἵματος πλήρεις, ἀλλὰ λούσασθε καὶ καθαροὶ γένεσθε· καὶ ἐὰν ὦσιν αἱ ἁμαρτίαι ὑμῶν ὡς φοινικοῦν, ὡς χιόνα λευκανῶ\"· καὶ τὸ \"οὐ βούλομαι τὸν θάνατον τοῦ ἁμαρτωλοῦ ὡς τὸ ἐπιστρέψαι καὶ ζῆν αὐτόν\", φωναί εἰσι τῆς θείας χάριτος, ἁμαρτωλοὺς καλοῦσαι εἰς εὐπείθειαν τοῦ νόμου, διὰ μετανοίας εἰληφότας τῶν προημαρτημένων τὴν συγγνώμην. ἀγαθὴ μὲν οὖν ἐστιν ἡ συγγνώμη καὶ τῆς θείας χάριτος δῶρον· οὐκ ἔστι δὲ οὐδὲ κατὰ τὸν νόμον οὐδὲ κατὰ τοῦ νόμου, ἀλλ' ὑπὲρ τὸν νόμον καὶ ὑπὲρ τοῦ νόμου· ὑπὲρ τὸν νόμον μέν, ὅτι χάρις· ὑπὲρ τοῦ νόμου δέ, ὅτι διὰ τῆς μετανοίας ἄγει τοὺς ἁμαρτωλοὺς εἰς εὐπείθειαν τοῦ νόμου, καθάπερ καὶ τὸν Δαυίδ. ΡΙ ʹ.","english":"And if forgiveness is good, why has the law been joined with the unforgivable? But if it is base, which I do not think, how has the provider of good things granted the base thing to the prophet? Answer. If the law does not give place for repentance to the one who has sinned in the case of accusations, how in the 100th question has the law been set before grace, as being readier and more philanthropic than it for the remission of sins to those who sin, whom it releases from blame each day through baptism and through the sacrifice of irrational animals, but now in the present question not even a drop of philanthropy has been left to the law, but the unforgivable has been joined with it, bringing inevitable danger upon the one who has sinned? And these things have been said to the end that the opposition of the questions not be left unremarked; but to the question we shall answer, that even if the law has the unforgivable, yet grace has also given repentance to the one who has sinned; for \"your hands are full of blood, but wash and become clean; and if your sins be as scarlet, I will whiten them as snow\"; and \"I do not will the death of the sinner as that he turn and live,\" are voices of divine grace, calling sinners to obedience to the law, having received through repentance the forgiveness of former sins. Forgiveness, then, is good and a gift of divine grace; and it is neither according to the law nor against the law, but above the law and on behalf of the law: above the law, because it is grace; on behalf of the law, because through repentance it leads sinners to obedience to the law, just as also David. 110.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":119,"ref":"p119","source":"Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πᾶσι μὲν ἀνθρώποις διὰ τὸ ἀσθενὲς τῆς φύσεως ἀναγκαία ἡ διὰ τῆς εὐχῆς ὑπάρχει βοήθεια, ταύτης δὲ οὐ προσέδει τῷ δεσπότῃ Χριστῷ, οἷα δεσπότῃ καὶ ἀρκοῦσαν πρὸς πάντα κεκτημένῳ τὴν δύναμιν, διατί παρὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων συχνότερον ὑπὸ τῆς γραφῆς τὸν κύριον μανθάνομεν προσευχόμενον; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὥσπερ πεινάσας ὁ κύριος καὶ διψήσας καὶ κοπιάσας, δακρύσας τε καὶ ἱδρώσας, καίτοι δυνάμενος διὰ περιου σίαν δυνάμεως μηδὲν τούτων ὑπομένειν, διὰ δὲ τὸ παρέχειν γνώρισμα τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης αὑτοῦ φύσεως ἑκουσίως ὑπέμεινε τὰ τῆς φύσεως αὐτοῦ ἀσθενῆ, οὕτως καὶ τὸ εὔξασθαι διὰ τὴν αὐτὴν αἰτίαν· εἰ γὰρ ἑκουσίως ὑπομεμενηκότος αὐτοῦ τὰ ἀσθενήματα τῆς ἑαυτοῦ φύσεως τολμῶσί τινες λέγειν μὴ ὑπάρχειν αὐτὸν τῆς ἡμετέρας φύσεως, πῶς οὐκ ἂν ἔλεγον αὐτὸ τοῦτο μετὰ περιουσίας τῆς ἀποδείξεως, εἰ συνέβη αὐτῷ μηδαμῶς αὐτὸν εὔξασθαι τῷ θεῷ; καὶ ἐπειδὴ περὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων οὐδεμία γέγονεν ἀμφιβολία, εἰ ἄνθρωποι ἦσαν, περὶ δὲ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἔμελλε γίνεσθαι ἀμφιβολία, διὰ τοῦτο συχνότερον αὐτὸν τοῖς λοιποῖς ἀνθρώποις καὶ τὸ εὔξασθαι αὐτὸν ἡ θεία κατήγγειλε γραφή· εἰ γὰρ τῶν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀσθενειῶν ἀνώτερος διὰ τῆς ἀναστάσεως γενόμενος, ὡς \"ἀρχιερεὺς τῆς ὁμο λογίας ἡμῶν\", ἐντυγχάνει τῷ θεῷ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, πῶς οὐχὶ μᾶλλον ἔτι ὑποκειμένου αὐτοῦ \"τῇ ἀσθενείᾳ τῆς σαρκὸς\" ἐδεῖτο μεγάλης κραυγῆς, καὶ \"κραυγῆς ἰσχυρᾶς καὶ δακρύων\", μεθ' ὧν τὴν δέησιν προσέφερε τῷ δυναμένῳ ῥύσασθαι αὐτὸν ἐκ θανάτου; ΡΙΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"Question. If for all men, because of the weakness of nature, the help that comes through prayer is necessary, but the Master Christ had no need of it, as being Master and possessing power sufficient for all things, why do we learn from the Scripture that the Lord prayed more frequently, as recorded by the apostles? Answer. Just as the Lord hungered and thirsted and was weary, and wept and sweat, although by the abundance of his power he was able to endure none of these things, yet for the sake of providing a token of his human nature he willingly endured the weaknesses of his nature, so also he prayed for the same reason. For if, when he had willingly endured the weaknesses of his own nature, some dare to say that he is not of our nature, how would they not have said this very thing with an abundance of proof, if it had happened that he never prayed to God at all? And since concerning the apostles there was no doubt at all that they were men, but concerning the Savior doubt was going to arise, for this reason the divine Scripture proclaimed more frequently, in addition to the rest of men, that he also prayed. For if, having become superior to the weaknesses of the flesh through the resurrection, as \"high priest of our confession,\" he intercedes with God on our behalf, how much more, while he was still subject to \"the weakness of the flesh,\" did he need great crying, and \"strong crying and tears,\" with which he offered his supplication to the one who was able to deliver him from death? 117. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":120,"ref":"p120","source":"Εἰ πάντων τῶν ἀνθρώπων μίαν ἔχει ἡ σὰρξ καὶ μίαν ἡ ψυχὴ τὴν οὐσίαν, πῶς ὃ μὲν ἀργὸς ὃ δὲ περὶ τὴν νόησίν ἐστιν ὀξύτερος; ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν ἡ ψυχὴ τῆς τοιαύτης διαφορᾶς ἐστιν ἡ αἰτία, ἀνάγκη τῶν ψυχῶν ὑπονοεῖν τὴν οὐσίαν διάφορον, κατὰ τὴν διαφορὰν τῆς νοήσεως. εἰ δὲ ἡ σάρξ, ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ περὶ αὐτῆς λόγος ἁρμόσειεν. εἰ δὲ ἔκ τινος χυμοῦ, οἷον ξηροῦ ἢ ὑγροῦ, ἢ θερμοῦ ἢ ψυχροῦ, πλεονασμοῦ ἢ ἐλλείψεως τοῦ θατέρου τὸ θάτερον ἐπικρατέστερον γίνεται, οἷον ἀφροσύνη καὶ φρόνησις, πόθεν ἢ ὅπως γίνεται τῆς τοιαύτης ποιότητος ἡ ἐπικράτεια, ἡ παρασκευάζουσα τὸ πολύνουν ἢ τὸ ἄνουν ἐν ἡμῖν πλεονάζειν; Ἀπόκρισις. Τῆς τοῦ νοεῖν ὀξύτητος ἢ νωθρότητος αἰτίαν ἀποδεδώκασί τινες τῶν τε στοιχείων, ἐξ ὧν σύγκειται τὰ ἡμέτερα σώματα, τὴν εὐκρασίαν καὶ τὴν δυσκρασίαν καὶ τῶν ὀργανικῶν μορίων τὴν συμμετρίαν καὶ τὴν ἀσυμμετρίαν, καὶ δοκοῦσιν ὀρθῶς ἀποδεδωκέναι τὰς τούτων αἰτίας· εἰσὶ γάρ τινες ἐν μὲν τῇ νεότητι γεννητικοί τε καὶ ἐπινοητικοί, ὀξεῖς νοημάτων τυγχάνοντες, ἐν δὲ τῷ γήρει εἰς τὸ ἐναντίον μεταβαλλόμενοι γίνονται περὶ τὸ νοεῖν ἀργοί. ἔστι δὲ τοῦτο σημεῖον τοῦ τὴν εὐκρασίαν τε καὶ δυσκρασίαν εἶναι αἰτίαν τῆς τοιαύτης μεταβολῆς. ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ οἱ λίαν μεγαλοκέφαλοι, οἱ λεγόμενοι βαρυκέφαλοι, καὶ οἱ ἄγαν μικροκέ φαλοι, διὰ τὸ μὴ σῴζειν σύμμετρον ἀναλογίαν πρὸς τὰ ἄλλα μέρη τοῦ σώματος, διὰ τὴν ὑπερβολὴν μικρότητος ἢ μεγέθους, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἀνεπιτήδειοί εἰσι τοῦ δύνασθαι εἶναι γεννητικοί τε καὶ ἐπιδεκτικοὶ νοημάτων.","english":"If the flesh of all men has one substance and the soul one substance, how is it that one man is sluggish and another is sharper in understanding? But if the soul is the cause of such a difference, one must suspect that the substance of souls is different, in accordance with the difference in understanding. And if the flesh is the cause, the same argument will apply to it as well. But if it is from some humor, such as dry or moist, or hot or cold, the excess or deficiency of the one making the other more prevalent—such as folly and prudence—whence or how does the prevalence of such a quality arise, which disposes the thoughtful or the thoughtless to abound in us? Answer. Some have assigned as the cause of quickness or slowness of thought the good and bad temperament of the elements from which our bodies are composed, and the symmetry and asymmetry of the organic parts, and they seem to have correctly assigned the causes of these things. For there are some who in youth are productive and inventive, being quick in thoughts, but in old age change to the opposite and become sluggish in thinking. And this is a sign that good and bad temperament is the cause of such a change. Likewise also those who are very large-headed, called heavy-headed, and those who are excessively small-headed, because they do not preserve a proportionate ratio to the other parts of the body, on account of the excess of smallness or greatness, are themselves unfit to be able to be productive and receptive of thoughts.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":121,"ref":"p121","source":"γίνονται δὲ καὶ ἄλλοι πρὸς τὴν κατάληψιν τῶν τῇ γνώσει συνεστώτων πραγμάτων ὀξεῖς τε καὶ ἕτοιμοι καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς θείας χάριτος, ὡς τὸ \"ὁ κύριος ἔδωκε τῷ Σολομῶντι πλάτος καρδίας, ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τὴν\n\nπαρὰ τὸ χεῖλος τῆς θαλάσ σης\", καὶ ὡς τὸ \"οἷς μὲν δέδοται διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος λόγος σοφίας, ἄλλοις δὲ λόγος γνώσεως\".\n\nΡΙΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὑπὸ μὲν τῶν ἀπίστων πρὸς ἀπάτην εὑρέθη τὰ ᾄσματα, τοῖς δὲ ἐν νόμῳ εἰσηγήθη διὰ φρενῶν νηπιότητα, οἱ τῆς χάριτος τέλεια καὶ τῶν ῥηθέντων τρόπων ἀλλότρια παρειληφότες μαθήματα διατί ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις κατὰ τοὺς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ νηπίους τοῖς ᾄσμασι κέχρηνται; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐ τὸ ᾆσαι ἁπλῶς ἐστι τοῖς νηπίοις ἁρμό διον, ἀλλὰ τὸ μετὰ τῶν ἀψύχων ὀργάνων ᾆσαι καὶ μετὰ ὀρχήσεως καὶ κροτάλων. διὸ ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις περιαίρεται ἡ χρῆσις τῶν τοιούτων ὀργάνων καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῶν νηπίοις ὄντων ἁρμο δίων, καὶ ὑπολέλειπται τὸ ᾆσαι ἁπλῶς· ἡδύνει γὰρ τὴν ψυχὴν πρὸς ζέοντα πόθον τοῦ ἐν τοῖς ᾄσμασιν ᾀδομένου, κοιμίζει τὰ ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς ἐπανιστάμενα πάθη, τοὺς ὑπὸ τῶν ἀοράτων ἐχθρῶν ἐμβαλλομένους ἡμῖν λογισμοὺς ἀπωθεῖται, ἀρδεύει τὴν ψυχὴν πρὸς καρποφορίαν παντοίων ἀγαθῶν, γενναίους πρὸς τὴν ἐν τοῖς δεινοῖς καρτερίαν τοὺς ἀγωνιστὰς ἐργάζεται τῆς εὐσεβείας, πάντων τῶν ἐν τοῖς βιωτικοῖς λυπηρῶν ἰαματικὸν γίνεται τοῖς εὐσεβέσι, –\"μά χαιραν\" τοῦτο ὁ Παῦλος \"τοῦ πνεύματος\" ὀνομάζει, ἐν ᾧ κατὰ τῶν ἀοράτων πολεμίων ὁπλίζει τοὺς ὁπλίτας τῆς εὐσεβείας· ῥῆμα γάρ ἐστι τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ καὶ ἐνθυμούμενον καὶ ᾀδόμενον καὶ ἀνα γινωσκόμενον–, δαιμόνων γίνεται ἀπελατικόν.","english":"But others also become sharp and ready for the apprehension of things that consist in knowledge, and this from divine grace, as in the saying, \"The Lord gave Solomon breadth of heart, as the sand by the shore of the sea,\" and as in the saying, \"To one is given through the Spirit the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge.\"\n\n121. Question. If the songs were invented by the unbelievers for deception, but were introduced to those under the law because of their childishness of mind, why do those who have received the perfect teachings of grace, which are foreign to the modes just mentioned, use songs in the churches like the children under the law? Answer. It is not singing simply that is fitting for children, but singing with lifeless instruments and with dancing and cymbals. Therefore in the churches the use of such instruments and of the other things fitting for children is removed, and singing simply is left; for it sweetens the soul toward a burning longing for what is sung in the songs, it lulls to rest the passions that rise up from the flesh, it drives away the thoughts cast into us by the invisible enemies, it waters the soul for the bearing of fruit of all good things, it makes the champions of piety brave for endurance in hardships, it becomes a healing of all the sorrows of life for the pious—Paul calls this \"the sword of the Spirit,\" with which he arms the soldiers of piety against the invisible enemies; for the word of God, whether pondered or sung or read, becomes a driver-away of demons.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":122,"ref":"p122","source":"ἅπερ ἐστὶν ἅπαντα τελειωτικὰ τῆς ψυχῆς ἐν ταῖς κατ' εὐσέβειαν ἀρεταῖς, διὰ τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν ᾀσμάτων τοῖς εὐσεβέσι προσγινόμενα. ΡΙΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ συγγνώμην ἡ ἀκούσιος ἐφέλκεται ἄγνοια, καθὼς ὑπὸ τῆς γραφῆς διδασκόμεθα, πῶς οἱ μὲν πάλαι Ἰουδαῖοι τὸν Χριστὸν ἐξ ἀγνοίας σταυρώσαντες πλείστων καὶ ἀνυποίστων δεινῶν ἐπειράθησαν, ὡς ἐν τοῖς περὶ ἁλώσεως λόγοις μαρτυρεῖ ὁ Ἰώσηπος, οἱ δὲ νῦν αὐτῶν τῷ Χριστῷ ἀπειθοῦντες τῆς μὲν οἰκείας πατρίδος ἀπελαθέντες εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν ἐλικμίσθησαν, τοῖς δὲ ἔθνεσιν εἰς δουλείαν ἐξεδόθησαν ἄτιμον, ὡς τὰ πράγματα στήλης βοᾷ περιφανέστερον, τὴν δὲ ἐν ἑκατέροις αὐτῶν συνίστη σιν ἄγνοιαν, ποτὲ μὲν λέγων ὁ κύριος \"πάτερ ἄφες αὐτοῖς· οὐ γὰρ οἴδασι τί ποιοῦσι\", ποτὲ δὲ ὁ ἀπόστολος φάσκων \"εἰ γὰρ ἔγνωσαν, οὐκ ἂν τὸν κύριον τῆς δόξης ἐσταύρωσαν\"; καὶ ταῦτα μὲν περὶ τῶν παλαιῶν Ἰουδαίων· περὶ δὲ τῶν νῦν \"μαρτυρῶ\" φησίν \"αὐτοῖς ὅτι ζῆλον θεοῦ ἔχουσιν, ἀλλ' οὐ κατ' ἐπίγνωσιν\". Ἀπόκρισις. Ὅτε ἡ ἀκούσιος ἄγνοια τοῖς ἀγνοοῦσι νομισθῇ γνῶσις, τότε ἡ ἀπόβασις τοῦ κατὰ ἄγνοιαν πραττομένου πράγμα τος δείκνυσι τὴν γνῶσιν κατὰ ἀλήθειαν οὖσαν γνῶσιν, ἢ κατὰ πλάνην καὶ ἄγνοιαν. δειχθείσης δὲ τῆς νομιζομένης γνώσεως διὰ τῆς ἀποβάσεως τοῦ πράγματος ἀγνοίας ὑπαρχούσης, ἐὰν ἐμμείνῃ τῇ αὐτῇ ἀγνοίᾳ ὁ ἀγνοήσας, οὐκέτι ἐφέλκεται συγγνώμην, ἀλλὰ τιμωρίαν ἀπαραίτητον. ἀλλ' ὅτι μὲν οὕτως ἐσταύρωσαν οἱ Ἰου δαῖοι τὸν Χριστόν, ὡς γινώσκοντες αὐτὸν ἀντίθεον καὶ σύμψηφον ἔχοντες τὸν θεὸν ἐν τῇ ἀναιρέσει αὐτοῦ, παντὶ δῆλον·","english":"All these things perfect the soul in the virtues that accord with piety, coming to the pious through the songs of the Church. 119. Question. If involuntary ignorance draws forgiveness, as we are taught by the Scripture, how is it that the Jews of old, who crucified Christ out of ignorance, experienced very many unbearable evils, as Josephus testifies in his account of the capture, while those of them now who disobey Christ have been driven from their own homeland and scattered like chaff over all the earth, and have been handed over to the nations for dishonorable slavery, as the facts proclaim more clearly than any monument—and yet he establishes their ignorance in both cases, sometimes the Lord saying, \"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing,\" and sometimes the apostle saying, \"For if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory\"? And this concerns the Jews of old; but concerning those now he says, \"I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge.\" Answer. When involuntary ignorance is reckoned as knowledge by those who are ignorant, then the outcome of the deed done in ignorance shows whether the knowledge is truly knowledge, or is according to error and ignorance. And when the supposed knowledge has been shown by the outcome of the deed to be ignorance, if the one who was ignorant remains in that same ignorance, he no longer draws forgiveness, but inexorable punishment. But that the Jews crucified Christ in such a way as knowing him to be opposed to God and reckoning God as consenting to his destruction, is clear to everyone.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":123,"ref":"p123","source":"οὐκ ἂν γὰρ αὐτὸν ἐσταύρωσαν, εἰ ἦσαν γινώσκοντες, ὅτι μετὰ τὸν θάνα τον αὐτοῦ ὁ θεὸς αὐτὸν ἐγερεῖ ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν. ἐγερθεὶς δὲ ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἔδειξε τὴν νομιζομένην κατὰ Χριστὸν γνῶσιν τῶν Ἰουδαίων κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ἄγνοιαν οὖσαν. ἐπειδὴ οὖν μετὰ τὸ ἀναστῆναι τὸν κύριον ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν καὶ δειχθῆναι μήτε τὸν θεὸν σύμψηφον γεγονότα τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ, μήτε τὸν Χριστὸν ἀνεγέρτως μένειν ἐν τῷ τάφῳ κατὰ τὴν προσδοκίαν τῶν αὐτὸν σταυρωσάντων, ἔτι τοὺς Ἰουδαίους ἐν τῇ ἀπειθείᾳ μένειν, διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ ἦσαν συγγνώμης ἄξιοι· τὸ γὰρ ἐξαργυρίζειν αὐτοῦ τὴν ἀνάστασιν καὶ κλοπὴν ταύτην ὀνομάζειν καὶ κωλύειν τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ μὴ ἐκτελεῖν θεῖα ἔργα ἐν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος γινόμενα, οὐκ ἔστιν ἀκουσίου ἀγνοίας συγγνώμην ἐφελκομένης, ἀλλ' ἐγνωσμένης ἑκου σίου θεομαχίας τιμωρίαν ἐπισπωμένης· εἰ μὲν γὰρ ταύτῃ τῇ ἐλπίδι ἐσταύρωσαν τὸν Χριστὸν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι, τοῦ μὴ κρατῆσαι τὴν διδασκαλίαν αὐτοῦ καὶ τοῦ μὴ λυθῆναι τὸν Ἰουδαϊσμόν, πῶς οὐκ","english":"For they would not have crucified him, if they had known that after his death God would raise him from the dead. But when he was raised from the dead by God, he showed that the knowledge of the Jews concerning Christ, which they thought to be knowledge, was in truth ignorance. Since, therefore, after the Lord rose from the dead and it was shown neither that God had been in agreement with the Jews in the death of Christ, nor that Christ remained unraised in the tomb according to the expectation of those who crucified him, the Jews still remained in their disobedience—for this reason they were not worthy of forgiveness. For to make a profit from his resurrection and to call it a theft, and to prevent the apostles from performing divine works in his name done in the power of the Holy Spirit—this is not the kind of thing that draws forgiveness for involuntary ignorance, but rather brings upon itself the punishment of deliberate, known hostility to God. For if the Jews crucified Christ with this hope—that his teaching would not prevail and that Judaism would not be dissolved—how is it that they","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":124,"ref":"p124","source":"ἔστιν ἡ ἀμφοτέρων ἀποτυχία λυτικὴ τῆς Ἰουδαίων κατὰ Χριστοῦ ἀκουσίου ἀγνοίας; τὸ οὖν \"πάτερ ἄφες αὐτοῖς, οὐ γὰρ οἴδασι τί ποιοῦσι\", κατὰ ταύτην εἴρηται τὴν ἔννοιαν· ὅτι \"γνόντες ὅτι κατὰ ἄγνοιαν με ἐσταύρωσαν καὶ αἰτοῦσιν ἄφεσιν τῶν πλημμελειῶν αὐτῶν, παράσχου αὐτοῖς\". οὐ γὰρ δίδοται ἄφεσις τῷ νομίζοντι τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἁμαρτίαν μὴ εἶναι ἁμαρτίαν, ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνην. καὶ τὸ εἰρημένον τῷ Παύλῳ, τὸ \"μαρτυρῶ αὐτοῖς ὅτι ζῆλον θεοῦ ἔχουσιν, ἀλλ' οὐ κατ' ἐπίγνωσιν\", πεφεισμένως εἴρηται τῇ τοῦ λόγου συγκαταβάσει, \"ἀσθενὴς τοῖς ἀσθενοῦσι\" γινόμενος, \"ἵνα\" κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον \"σώσῃ τοὺς ἀσθενεῖς\".\n\nΡΚʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ τῆς ἀναστάσεως δῶρον πᾶσι τοῖς θνήσκουσιν ὁ θεὸς διδόναι ὑπέσχετο, καὶ πάντες ἐκ τῶν τάφων ἀνα στάντες ζῶντες τῷ κριτῇ παρίστασθαι μέλλουσι, πῶς πληρωθή σεται τὸ κρίνειν νεκροὺς καὶ ζῶντας τὸν κύριον; πῶς δὲ νεκροὶ κριθῆναι δυνήσονται, ὧν τὸ μὲν σῶμα ἐν μνήμασιν ἔρριπται, ἡ δὲ ψυχὴ τῶν σωμάτων κεχώρισται;","english":"Is the failure of both a release from the involuntary ignorance of the Jews concerning Christ? The saying, then, \"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing,\" was spoken with this meaning: that \"since they have come to know that they crucified me in ignorance and they ask forgiveness of their transgressions, grant it to them.\" For forgiveness is not given to one who thinks his own sin is not sin, but righteousness. And the statement made to Paul, \"I bear them witness that they have zeal for God, but not according to knowledge,\" was spoken with forbearance, by the condescension of the word, becoming \"weak to the weak,\" \"so that,\" as it is said, \"he might save the weak.\"\n\n124. Question. If God promised to give the gift of resurrection to all who die, and all who rise from the tombs will be about to stand living before the judge, how will the Lord's judging the dead and the living be fulfilled? And how will the dead be able to be judged, whose body is cast in tombs, but whose soul is separated from the bodies?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":125,"ref":"p125","source":"Ἀπόκρισις.\n\n\"Οὐ πάντες\" φησί \"κοιμηθησόμεθα, πάντες δὲ ἀλλαγησόμεθα\". κρίνει οὖν ζῶντας μὲν τοὺς τότε ζῶντας, νεκροὺς δὲ τοὺς ἀνισταμένους ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν. \"ἔρχεται\" φησίν \"ὥρα καὶ νῦν ἐστιν, ἐν ᾗ πάντες οἱ ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις ἀκούσονται τῆς φωνῆς τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, καὶ ἐξέρχονται οἱ τὰ ἀγαθὰ ποιήσαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν ζωῆς, καὶ οἱ τὰ φαῦλα πράξαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν κρίσεως\". ἐχρῆν οὖν κατὰ τὸ πιστὸν τοῦ λόγου θεωρεῖν τὸ δυνατὸν τοῦ πράγματος καὶ μὴ ἀπορεῖν τὴν ἄλογον ἀπορίαν. ΡΚΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τοῖς καταλιμπάνουσι πατέρα ἢ μητέρα, γυναῖκα ἢ τέκνα, ἀδελφοὺς ἢ ἀδελφάς, οἰκίας ἢ ἀγρούς, ἑκατονταπλασίονα ἐπηγγείλατο διδόναι ἐν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι ὁ κύριος, ἆρα καὶ γυναῖκας ἑκατὸν οἱ τοιοῦτοι ἀπολήψονται; πῶς δέ, πολλῶν τὰ εἰρημένα διὰ τὴν ἐντολὴν καταλιπόντων καὶ ἐν πτωχείᾳ καὶ μονότητι καὶ ἐρημίᾳ τελευτησάντων, οὐ διέψευσται ἡ τοιαύτη ὑπό σχεσις; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὥσπερ πατέρας καὶ μητέρας καὶ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ ἀδελφὰς λέγει τοὺς κατ' οἰκειωτικὴν διάθεσιν * προσλαμβανόμενον τὸ διὰ Χριστὸν καταλείψαντα τοὺς φύσει πατέρας τε καὶ μητέρας, ἀδελφούς τε καὶ ἀδελφάς, οὕτω καὶ γυναῖκα λέγει τὴν ἐν καιρῷ τῆς διὰ Χριστὸν ἐγκαταλείψεως προνοουμένην τοῦ καταλείψαντος τὴν φύσει γυναῖκα.","english":"Answer.\n\n\"Not all,\" he says, \"will we sleep, but all will be changed.\" He judges, then, the living as those living at that time, and the dead as those rising from the dead. \"The hour is coming,\" he says, \"and now is, in which all who are in the tombs will hear the voice of the Son of Man, and they will come out—those who have done good to a resurrection of life, and those who have practiced evil to a resurrection of judgment.\" It was necessary, then, in accordance with the credibility of the word, to consider what is possible in the matter and not to be at a loss with unreasoning perplexity. 121. Question. If to those who leave father or mother, wife or children, brothers or sisters, houses or fields, the Lord promised to give a hundredfold in this present age, will such persons also receive a hundred wives? And how, when many who left the things spoken of for the sake of the commandment and died in poverty and solitude and desolation, has such a promise not proved false? Answer. Just as he calls fathers and mothers and brothers and sisters those who, according to an affectionate disposition, are received in place of those who for Christ's sake left their natural fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, so too he calls a wife her who, at the time of the abandonment for Christ's sake, is provided for the one who left his natural wife.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":126,"ref":"p126","source":"ἡ δὲ ἐκκλησία τοῦ δεσπότου Χριστοῦ, ἡ ἐξ ἀρχῆς τοῦ χριστιανικοῦ κηρύγματος ὑπὸ τῶν αὐτῇ ἀντικειμένων Ἑλλήνων τε καὶ Ἰουδαίων διωκομένη, ἁρπαζομένη πολυχρονίως, πόθεν ἔν τε τοῖς πνευματικοῖς καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀνθρω πίνοις τοσαύτην, ἣν ὁρῶμεν, ἐπίδοσιν ἐδέξατο, μὴ τῆς θείας τε καὶ ζώσης τοῦ σωτῆρος φωνῆς τοῦ κατὰ πολυπλασιασμὸν * ὑπο σχομένης τὴν ἀνταπόδοσιν ἐνεργησάσης ἐν αὐτῇ; πόθεν δὲ πλού σιοι ἄνδρες καὶ γυναῖκες τὰς ἑαυτῶν ὑπάρξεις ἐπιφερόμενοι ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ τοὺς ἐκεῖσε διὰ Χριστὸν ἀναχωρήσαντας ἐζήτησαν, καὶ τούτων τὰ ὑστερήματα ἀνεπλήρωσαν, καθὰ ἔγνωμεν ἐκ τῆς ἱστο ρίας τῶν ἁγίων ἀρχομένων ἀνδρῶν, μὴ τοῦ δεσπότου Χριστοῦ δι' αὐτῶν τὴν ἰδίαν ὑπόσχεσιν ἀγαγόντος εἰς πέρας; ΡΚΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πρὸς σύστασιν τῆς τῶν σωμάτων ἀναστά σεως ὡς καιρίῳ τῷ κατὰ τὰ σπέρματα ὑποδείγματι ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐν τῇ πρὸς Κορινθίους ἐχρήσατο, πῶς οἱ τεμνόμενοι ἢ καιόμενοι ἀναστήσονται, τῶν σπερμάτων μετὰ τομὴν ἢ καῦσιν οὐ βλαστανόντων, ἀλλ' εἰς τὸ παντελὲς φθειρομένων; Ἀπόκρισις. Τῆς φύσεως οὔσης τῆς ἐργαζομένης τὰ ἐκ τῶν σπερμάτων γινόμενα, ὡς ἔμμετρον λαβούσης παρὰ τοῦ δη μιουργοῦ τὴν δύναμιν, ἀνάγκη ἐπιτήδεια εἶναι τὰ σπέρματα πρὸς ποίησιν τῶν ἐξ αὐτῶν γιγνομένων. διὸ ἐὰν καῇ ἢ τμηθῇ τὰ σπέρ ματα, ἄχρηστα γίνεται τῇ φύσει πρὸς ποίησιν τῶν ἐξ αὐτῶν γιγνομένων· ὁ δὲ θεὸς ἅτε οὐκ ἔμμετρον ἔχων τὴν δύναμιν, διὰ τοῦτο οὐδέν ἐστιν αὐτῷ ἀνεπιτήδειον πρὸς ποίησιν πάντων ὧν βούλεται, οὐδὲ κωλύεται ὑπὸ τῆς τομῆς καὶ καύσεως τῶν σω μάτων τοῦ ποιήσασθαι αὐτῶν τὴν ἀνάστασιν·","english":"But the Church of the Master Christ, persecuted from the beginning of the Christian preaching by the Greeks and Jews who opposed her, plundered for many years—from where did she receive so great an increase, which we see, both in spiritual and in human matters, unless the divine and living voice of the Savior, which promised the recompense in manifold multiplication, worked it in her? And from where did rich men and women, bringing their own possessions into the wilderness, seek out those who had withdrawn there for Christ's sake, and fill up their deficiencies, as we have learned from the history of the holy men who were the beginnings—unless the Master Christ through them brought his own promise to fulfillment? 122. Question. If, for the establishment of the resurrection of bodies, the apostle used the example of seeds as timely, how will those who are cut in pieces or burned rise again, since seeds do not sprout after cutting or burning, but are utterly destroyed? Answer. Since nature is what works the things that come from seeds, having received from the Creator a measured power, it is necessary that the seeds be suitable for producing the things that come from them. Therefore, if the seeds are burned or cut, they become useless to nature for producing the things that come from them. But God, since he does not have a measured power, for this reason nothing is unsuitable to him for producing all things that he wills, nor is he hindered by the cutting and burning of bodies from effecting their resurrection.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":127,"ref":"p127","source":"οὐ γὰρ νόμῳ καὶ μέτρῳ φύσεως ἐργάζεται ὁ θεός, ἀλλ' αὐθεντίᾳ βουλῆς τῆς ἐν μηδενὶ ἀπορουμένης πρὸς ποίησιν ὧν βούλεται ποιεῖν.\n\nἐχρήσατο δὲ ὁ ἀπόστολος τῷ κατὰ τὰ σπέρματα ὑποδείγματι πρὸς πίστωσιν τῆς τῶν νεκρῶν ἀναστάσεως, ἵνα κατὰ ἀναλογίαν πιστώσηται τῆς ἀναστάσεως τὸν λόγον, ὅτι, ὥσπερ οὐκ ἀπιστοῦμεν τὴν βλά στησιν τοῦ σπέρματος ὁρῶντες ἐν τῇ γῇ ἀποθανόντος καὶ ἀποβεβληκότος τοῦ σπέρματος τὴν φύσιν, οὕτως οὐκ ὀφείλομεν ἀπιστεῖν τῶν νεκρῶν τὴν ἀνάστασιν· ὁ γὰρ θεὸς ὁ δεδωκὼς τῇ φύσει τὸ διὰ τοῦ θανάτου τοῦ σπέρματος ἐργάσασθαι τὴν βλάστησιν, πολλῷ μᾶλλον αὐτὸς δύναται ἐκ τοῦ θανάτου ἐγεῖραι τοὺς νεκρούς.\n\nΡΚΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ δόξαν καὶ τρυφὴν καὶ ἄνεσιν ἐπίγειον οἱ ἀπόστολοι ὑπελάμβανον, καθά τινες ἔφασαν, διατί ὁ κύριος περὶ ταύτης παρ' αὐτῶν ἐρωτώμενος οὐ μόνον αὐτοὺς οὐ διωρθώσατο, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐπέσφιγξεν αὐτῶν τὴν ἄγνοιαν, φήσας πρὸς αὐτούς· \"οὐχ ὑμῶν ἐστι γνῶναι χρόνους ἢ καιρούς, οὓς ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ ἔθετο ἐξουσίᾳ\"; αὕτη δὲ ἡ ἀπό κρισις βεβαιοῖ τὴν ἐκείνων ἐρώτησιν. Ἀπόκρισις. Καὶ τοῦτο ἕν ἐστι τῶν πρὸ τῆς ἐπιφοιτήσεως τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος μὴ δυναμένων γνωσθῆναι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων, κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον \"πολλὰ ἔχω λέγειν ὑμῖν, ἀλλ' οὐ δύνασθε βαστάζειν ἄρτι· ὅταν δὲ ἔλθῃ ὁ παράκλητος, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας, ἐκεῖνο ὁδηγήσει ὑμᾶς πρὸς πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν\".","english":"For God does not work by law and the measure of nature, but by the authority of a will that is at no loss in any thing for the doing of what he wills to do.\n\nAnd the apostle used the example of seeds to confirm the resurrection of the dead, so that by analogy he might establish the account of the resurrection: that just as we do not disbelieve the sprouting of the seed when we see it die in the earth and the seed cast off its nature, so we ought not to disbelieve the resurrection of the dead. For God, who gave to nature to accomplish the sprouting through the death of the seed, much more can himself raise the dead from death.\n\n127. Question. If the apostles supposed the kingdom of Israel to be earthly glory and luxury and ease, as some have said, why did the Lord, when asked by them about this, not only not correct them, but even tighten their ignorance, saying to them: \"It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has placed in his own authority\"? And this answer confirms their question. Answer. This too is one of the things that could not be known by the apostles before the visitation of the Holy Spirit, according to what is written: \"I have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now; but when the Comforter comes, the Spirit of truth, he will guide you into all the truth.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":128,"ref":"p128","source":"μαθόντες δὲ ὑπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος τὸ \"τὴν κοιλίαν καὶ τὰ βρώματα ὁ θεὸς καταργεῖ\", ἐκ τῆς ἰουδαϊκῆς ὑπολήψεως εἰς τὴν ἔννοιαν μετηνέχθησαν, τὴν πρέπουσαν τῇ καταστάσει τῶν ἀνισταμένων ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, ἐν ᾗ οὔτε βρῶσις οὔτε πόσις οὔτε γάμος, ἀλλ' ἰσάγγελοι ἔσονται οἱ τῆς ἀναστάσεως υἱοί. τὸ οὖν \"οὐχ ὑμῶν ἐστι γνῶναι χρόνους ἢ καιρούς, οὓς ὁ πατὴρ ἔθετο ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ ἐξουσίᾳ\", οὐκ ἔχει σχῆμα βεβαιωτικὸν τῶν ἐρωτησάντων ἐν τῇ κατὰ ἄγνοιαν ὑπολήψει, ἀλλ' ἀπωστικὸν ἀμφοτέρων, τῆς τε κατὰ τὸν χρόνον καὶ τῆς κατὰ τὸν τόπον ὑπολήψεως τῶν ἐρωτησάντων. δηλοῖ δὲ καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος Παῦλος τὸν τρόπον ἐκείνης τῆς καταστάσεως ἐν οἷς λέγει· \"ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ οὐκ ἔστι βρῶσις καὶ πόσις, ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνη καὶ εἰρήνη καὶ χαρὰ ἐν πνεύ ματι ἁγίῳ\". ΡΚΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τέλειον τότε νοοῦμεν τὸ τέλειον, ὅτε πάντα κέκτηται τέλεια, τέλειον δὲ ἄκρως τὸ καθοτιοῦν προσθήκην ἢ αὔξησιν μὴ δεχόμενον, πῶς ὁ θεὸς μὲν προϋπάρχων τῆς κτί σεως, ὕστερον δὲ τὴν κτίσιν ποιησάμενος, οὕτω θεὸς τὸ δημιουρ γὸς ὄνομά τε καὶ πρᾶγμα προσέλαβε καὶ ἐκ τοῦ θεὸς εἰς τὸ καὶ δημιουργὸς εἶναι τὴν αὔξησίν τε καὶ τὴν γένεσιν δέδεκται; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἄλλο τὸ αὐτὸ εἶναι καὶ ἄλλο τὸ ἄλλου εἶναι, ἄσχετον μὲν τὸ αὐτὸ εἶναι, σχετικὸν δὲ τὸ ἄλλου εἶναι. ἐπειδὴ οὖν τὸ τέλειον τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν τῷ αὐτὸ εἶναι, διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ αὔξει αὐτὸν τὸ ἄλλου εἶναι.","english":"Having learned from the Spirit that \"God will bring to nothing both the belly and foods,\" they were transferred from the Jewish supposition to the understanding befitting the state of those who rise from the dead, in which there is neither eating nor drinking nor marriage, but the sons of the resurrection will be equal to angels. Therefore the saying \"It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has set in his own authority\" does not have the form of confirming those who asked in their supposition according to ignorance, but of rejecting both—both the supposition concerning time and that concerning place—of those who asked. And the apostle Paul also makes clear the manner of that state in what he says: \"The kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.\" 124. Question. If we understand the perfect then to be perfect when it possesses all things perfectly, and the perfect in the highest degree to be that which in no way admits addition or increase, how is it that God, pre-existing the creation and later making the creation, thus received the name and the thing of \"Creator,\" and from being God has accepted increase and coming-to-be in being also Creator? Answer. One thing is to be the same, and another to be of another; \"to be the same\" is unrelated, but \"to be of another\" is relative. Since, then, the perfection of God lies in being the same, for this reason being of another does not increase him.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":129,"ref":"p129","source":"καὶ καθάπερ τὸ ἀρχὴν εἶναι ἀριθμοῦ οὐδὲν συν τελεῖ τῷ ἑνὶ πρὸς τὴν αὐτοῦ τελειότητα, –καὶ γὰρ μὴ ὄντος αὐτοῦ ἀρχῆς ἀριθμοῦ τέλειον ἦν, καὶ γενομένου αὐτοῦ ἀρχῆς ἀριθμοῦ οὐκ ηὐξήθη–οὕτω καὶ ὁ θεὸς πρὸ τῆς κτίσεως ἦν τέλειος καὶ μετὰ τὴν κτίσιν οὐκ ηὐξήθη. οὐδὲν οὖν τῶν διὰ τῆς κτίσεως αὔξει θεόν– \"σὺ γάρ φησιν ὁ αὐτὸς εἶ\"–, ἀλλὰ τὴν σχέσιν ἣν ἔχει πρὸς τὴν κτίσιν πολυτρόπως (\"σφόδρα\", φησίν, \"ὑπε ρυψώθης ὑπὲρ πάντας τοὺς θεούς\"), καὶ γὰρ ὡς πατὴρ καὶ δεσπό της καὶ κριτὴς καὶ ποιμὴν καὶ τὰ τούτοις ὅμοια. καὶ καθάπερ μὴ ποιήσας ὁ θεὸς πλείονας κόσμους, οὓς ἠδύνατο καὶ δύναται ποιεῖν, οὐκ ἀτελὴς ἐδείχθη ἡ αὐτοῦ τελειότης, οὕτω καὶ ἕνα ποιήσας κόσμον οὐκ ηὐξήθη ἐκ τούτου ἡ αὐτοῦ τελειότης εἰς τὸ ὑπερτέλειον. εἰ δὲ μὴ ποιήσας πλείονας κόσμους οὐκ ἐμειώθη, οὐδ' ἂν ποιήσας ἕνα κόσμον ηὐξήθη. ΡΚΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ εἶναί τι δυνάμει τοῦ εἶναι τοῦτο ἐνερ γείᾳ καθέστηκεν ἔλαττον, πῶς ὁ τοῦ κόσμου ποιητής, πρὸ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου ποιήσεως ποιητὴς ὢν τοῦ κόσμου δυνάμει καὶ οὐκ ἐνερ γείᾳ, τῷ τῆς ἐλαττώσεως οὐχ ὑποπίπτει ὀνόματι; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὧν ἡ δύναμις τῆς ἐνεργείας φυσικῇ τινι ἀνάγκῃ ἀφέστηκε, τούτων ἡ δύναμις ἔλαττον τῆς ἐνεργείας καθέστηκεν· οὗ δὲ ἡ δύναμις τῆς ἐνεργείας οὐ","english":"And just as being the beginning of number contributes nothing to the one for its own perfection—for when it was not the beginning of number, it was perfect, and when it became the beginning of number, it was not increased—so also God was perfect before creation and was not increased after creation. Nothing, therefore, of the things that come through creation increases God—\"For you are the same,\" as the same one says—but rather the relation he has toward creation in many ways (\"You are greatly exalted,\" he says, \"above all gods\"), for as father and master and judge and shepherd and the like. And just as God, not having made more worlds, which he could and can make, did not thereby show his perfection to be incomplete, so also, having made one world, his perfection was not increased by this to the super-perfect. But if, not having made more worlds, he was not diminished, neither would he have been increased by having made one world. 125. Question. If to be something in potentiality is established as less than to be this in actuality, how is the maker of the world, being before the making of the world a maker of the world in potentiality and not in actuality, not subject to the name of diminution? Answer. For those whose potentiality is separated from actuality by some natural necessity, the potentiality of these is established as less than the actuality; but for whom the potentiality of actuality is not","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":130,"ref":"p130","source":"φυσικῇ ἀνάγκῃ ἀλλ' ἰδίᾳ βουλῇ ἀφέστηκεν, οὗτος ἀνυπόβλητος τῷ τῆς ἐλαττώσεως ὀνόματι. \"διενοήθης\", φησί, \"καὶ πάντα σοι πάρεστι\". ΡΚς ʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ κλίνειν γόνυ ἐν ταῖς εὐχαῖς τὸ ἑστῶ τας εὔχεσθαι μᾶλλον θεῷ τοὺς εὐχομένους παρίστησι, καὶ πλέον ἐφέλκεται τὴν θείαν συμπάθειαν, διατί ἐν ταῖς κυριακαῖς ἡμέ ραις καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πάσχα ἕως τῆς πεντηκοστῆς γόνυ οὐ κλίνουσιν οἱ εὐχόμενοι; πόθεν δὲ καὶ ἡ τοιαύτη ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις εἰσῆλθε συνήθεια; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ ἐχρῆν ἀμφοτέρων ἡμᾶς ἀεὶ μεμνῆ σθαι, καὶ τῆς ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις πτώσεως ἡμῶν καὶ τῆς χάριτος τοῦ Χριστοῦ, δι' ἧς ἐκ τῆς πτώσεως ἀνέστημεν, διὰ τοῦτο ἡ ἐν ταῖς ἓξ ἡμέραις γονυκλισία ἡμῶν σύμβολόν ἐστι τῆς ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρ τίαις ἡμῶν πτώσεως· τὸ δὲ ἐν τῇ κυριακῇ μὴ κλίνειν γόνυ σύμβολόν ἐστι τῆς ἀναστάσεως, δι' ἧς τῇ τοῦ Χριστοῦ χάριτι τῶν τε ἁμαρτημάτων καὶ τοῦ ἐπ' αὐτῶν τεταγμένου θανάτου ἐλυτρώθημεν. ἐκ τῶν ἀποστολικῶν δὲ χρόνων ἡ τοιαύτη συνήθεια ἔλαβε τὴν ἀρχήν, καθώς φησιν ὁ μακάριος Εἰρηναῖος ὁ μάρτυς καὶ ἐπί σκοπος Λουγδούνων ἐν τῷ περὶ τοῦ πάσχα λόγῳ, ἐν ᾧ μέμνη ται καὶ περὶ τῆς πεντηκοστῆς, ἐν ᾗ οὐ κλίνομεν γόνυ, ἐπειδὴ ἰσοδυναμεῖ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῆς κυριακῆς, κατὰ τὴν ῥηθεῖσαν περὶ αὐτῆς αἰτίαν. ΡΚΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἀνιστάμενος ὁ δεσπότης ἀπὸ τοῦ μνήματος τὰ ἐντάφια ἐν τῷ τάφῳ κατέλιπε, πῶς μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἢ γυμνὸν αὐτὸν ὀφθέντα ἢ ἑτέρωθεν ἐσθῆτα κομισάμενον ἡ γραφὴ οὐχ ἱστόρησεν; εἰ δὲ μήτε ἑτέρωθεν ἀμφιάσματα εἴληφε, μήτε γυμνὸς τοῖς τότε αὐτὸν ὁρῶσιν ἐφαίνετο, πῶς ἄληθες ὅτι τὰ ἱμάτια ἐν τῷ τάφῳ κατέλιπεν; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"by natural necessity but by his own will, he is not subject to the name of diminution. \"You thought,\" he says, \"and all things are present to you.\" 126. Question. If bending the knee in prayers shows that those who pray stand rather than pray to God, and draws more the divine compassion, why on the Lord's days and from Pascha until Pentecost do those who pray not bend the knee? And whence did such a custom enter the churches? Answer. Since it was necessary for us always to remember both our fall into sins and the grace of Christ, through which we rose from the fall, for this reason our kneeling during the six days is a symbol of our fall into sins; but not bending the knee on the Lord's day is a symbol of the resurrection, through which by the grace of Christ we were redeemed both from sins and from the death appointed on account of them. And from the apostolic times such a custom took its beginning, as the blessed Irenaeus, martyr and bishop of Lugdunum, says in his discourse On Pascha, in which he also makes mention of Pentecost, on which we do not bend the knee, since it is equivalent to the day of the Lord's day, according to the reason stated concerning it. 127. Question. If the Lord, rising from the tomb, left the burial clothes in the grave, how is it that after the resurrection the Scripture has not recorded that he was seen either naked or having obtained clothing from elsewhere? But if he neither received garments from elsewhere, nor appeared naked to those who saw him then, how is it true that he left the garments in the tomb? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":131,"ref":"p131","source":"Τὰ μὲν ἱμάτια τοῦ σωτῆρος μετὰ τὸ σταυ ρωθῆναι αὐτὸν οἱ στρατιῶται διεμερίσαντο, τὰ δὲ μετ' αὐτοῦ εἰσενεχθέντα εἰς τὸν τάφον ἱμάτια εἰς φόρεσιν τοῦ ζῶντος ἀνεπιτήδεια ἦν. τὰ οὖν ἱμάτια, ἃ ἐφόρει ὁ κύριος μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν, ἢ ἐδημιούργησεν, ἢ ἔλαβεν ἀλλαχόθεν, ὡς ἔλαβε τὸν πῶλον εἰς κάθισμα· ἑκατέρως γὰρ ἐδύνατο, καὶ τὸ δημιουργῆσαι καὶ τὸ λα βεῖν ἀλλαχόθεν. πολλῶν δὲ ὄντων τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ κυρίου λεχθέν των τε καὶ πραχθέντων, ὧν ἡ θεία γραφὴ τὰς ἱστορίας οὐ περιέχει, ἐξ ὧν ἐστι καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν τὰ ἐνδύματα τοῦ κυρίου, οὐκ ἔστιν εὔλογον τὸ ἐκ πάντων τῶν ἀνιστορήτων τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνιστορήτου ζητεῖν τὴν αἰτίαν. οὐ χρὴ οὖν ἐκ τοῦ ἀνιστορήτου κατασκευάζειν τὴν ἀπορίαν τοῦ περὶ τοῦ ἐνδύματος τοῦ κυρίου, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ λαβεῖν τὴν πίστιν περὶ τοῦ ἐνδύματος αὐτοῦ.\n\nΡΚΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ σῶμα παχυμερὲς θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων κεκωλυμένην ἔχει τὴν πάροδον, πῶς μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν \"τῶν θυ ρῶν κεκλεισμένων\" πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς εἰσῆλθεν ὁ κύριος; ἀλλ' εἰ μὲν ἀληθὲς ὅτι κεκλεισμένων τῶν θυρῶν ἔνδον ὁρμώμενον σῶμα ἐτύγχανε, πῶς ὁ λίθος ὁ τῷ δεσποτικῷ ἐπικείμενος μνήματι ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀγγέλου ἀπεκυλίσθη διὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ τοῦ σώματος ἔγερσιν; εἰ δὲ ἀληθεύει ἡ γραφὴ περὶ τῆς τῶν θυρῶν λέγουσα κλείσεως, δῆλον ὅτι οὐ σῶμα ἀλλὰ πνεῦμα εἰσῆλθεν· εἰ δὲ τὸ σῶμα ποτὲ μὲν σῶμα ποτὲ δὲ πνεῦμα ἐγίνετο, πῶς οὐχὶ τροπὴν τὰ τῆς τοῦ σώ ματος οὐσίας ἐδέχετο; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"The soldiers divided the garments of the Savior after he was crucified, but the garments brought with him into the tomb were unfit for the use of the living. Therefore the garments that the Lord wore after the resurrection he either created or received from elsewhere, as he received the colt to sit upon; for he was able to do both—both to create and to receive from elsewhere. But since there are many things said and done by the Lord whose histories the divine Scripture does not contain—among which is also the clothing of the Lord after the resurrection—it is not reasonable to seek the cause of one unrecorded matter out of all the unrecorded matters. It is not necessary, then, to construct the difficulty concerning the Lord's clothing from what is unrecorded, but to take faith concerning his clothing from his power.\n\n128. Question. If a body of coarse substance has its passage blocked when the doors are closed, how did the Lord enter to the disciples after the resurrection \"when the doors were closed\"? But if it is true that when the doors were closed a body was present inside, how was the stone lying upon the Lord's tomb rolled away by the angel for his body's rising? And if the Scripture is true in speaking of the closing of the doors, it is clear that not a body but a spirit entered. But if the body became sometimes a body and sometimes a spirit, how did it not admit change in the substance of the body? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":132,"ref":"p132","source":"Ὥσπερ οὐ κατὰ τὴν ἐκ τοῦ σώματος εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τροπὴν περιεπάτησεν ὁ κύριος ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν, ἀλλὰ τῇ θείᾳ αὑτοῦ δυνάμει βατὴν ἐποίησεν εἰς περίπατον τὴν ἄβα τον θάλασσαν, οὐ μόνον τῷ ἑαυτοῦ σώματι ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ τοῦ Πέ τρου, οὕτω τῇ ἑαυτοῦ θείᾳ δυνάμει καὶ τοῦ μνήματος ἐξῆλθε, τοῦ λίθου ἐπικειμένου τῷ μνήματι, καὶ πρὸς τοὺς μαθητὰς εἰσῆλθε τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων· οὐ γὰρ διὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ ἔγερσιν τοῦ λίθου ἐκ τοῦ μνήματος ἐγένετο ἡ ἀφαίρεσις, ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸ δηλωθῆναι τοῖς ὁρῶσι τὴν ἀνάστασιν· τὸ γὰρ ἐν τῷ μνήματι τὰ μὲν τοῦ ἐνταφιασμοῦ αὐτοῦ ὁρᾶν ἱμάτια, αὐτὸν δὲ μὴ ὁρᾶν, δεῖγμα ἐναργέστατον τῆς αὐτοῦ γέγονεν ἀναστάσεως. χρὴ δὲ ἡμᾶς ἐννοῆσαι, ὅτι τὰ ἰσοδύναμα τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχει πίστιν συγχωρουμένων αὐτῶν, καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχει ἀπιστίαν ἀναιρουμένων αὐτῶν–ἰσοδυναμεῖ δὲ τὸ περιπατεῖν ἐπὶ τὴν θάλασσαν ἐν\n\nἀτρέπτῳ σώματι τῷ εἰσελθεῖν πρὸς τοὺς ἀποστόλους ἐν ἀτρέπτῳ σώματι τῶν θυρῶν κεκλεισμένων– καὶ ὅτι τὰ ὑπὲρ φύσιν μὲν τῇ φύσει γινόμενα κατὰ τὴν θείαν δύναμιν, τούτων ἀδύνατον κατὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς φύσεως ποιήσασθαι τὴν παράστασιν. διὸ πτοηθέντων τῶν μαθητῶν ἐν τῇ τοιαύτῃ εἰσόδῳ ἐπέτρεψεν αὐτοὺς ψηλαφᾶν τοὺς πεπονθότας τόπους τοῦ σώματος αὑτοῦ, ὅτι οὐ κατὰ τρόπον τοῦ σώματος εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα ἐποίησε πρὸς αὐτοὺς τὴν εἴσοδον, ἀλλ' ἐν παχυμερεῖ σώματι τῇ θείᾳ αὑτοῦ δυνάμει ποιητικῇ τῶν ὑπὲρ φύσιν. ΡΚΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"Just as the Lord did not walk upon the sea by a transformation from body into spirit, but by his own divine power made the impassable sea passable for walking—not only for his own body but also for Peter's—so too by his own divine power he came out of the tomb while the stone lay upon the tomb, and entered to the disciples while the doors were closed. For the removal of the stone from the tomb did not happen for the sake of his resurrection, but so that the resurrection might be made evident to those who saw; for to see the burial garments in the tomb but not to see him was the most vivid proof of his resurrection. And we must consider that things of equal power have the same credibility when they are granted, and the same incredulity when they are denied—and walking upon the sea in an unchanging body is equivalent to entering to the apostles in an unchanging body while the doors were closed—and that things which occur contrary to nature by divine power cannot be demonstrated by the principle of nature. Therefore, when the disciples were terrified at such an entrance, he permitted them to touch the places of his body that had suffered, because he did not make his entrance to them by a transformation of the body into spirit, but in a body of gross substance by his own divine power which effects things beyond nature. 129. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":133,"ref":"p133","source":"Εἰ πάντα ὁ θεὸς ποιήσας τὸν κύκλον τῆς σώ ματος κτίσεως, τοῦ παντὸς δεσπότης καθέστηκε–διὸ καὶ Δαυὶδ ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ τῆς τοῦ κυρίου δεσποτείας εὐλογεῖν ἡμῖν τὸν κύριον ἐγκελεύεται, ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἐπαίρειν ἡμᾶς ὁσίους χεῖρας πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἐντέλλεται–, διατί ὡς μόνον ἔργον τε καὶ οἰκητήριον θεῖον τὸ ἀνατολικὸν κλῖμα νομί ζοντες, ἐν αὐτῷ ἀφορῶντες τοὺς ὕμνους καὶ τὰς προσευχὰς θεῷ ἀναπέμπομεν; τίνες δὲ καὶ οἱ ταύτην τὴν συνήθειαν τοὺς χριστιανοὺς ἐκδιδάξαντες; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ τῶν παρ' ἡμῖν ἀεὶ τὰ τιμιώτερα εἰς τιμὴν τοῦ θεοῦ ἀφορίζομεν, κατὰ δὲ τὴν τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὑπόληψιν τιμιωτέρα ἐστὶν ἡ ἀνατολὴ τῶν ἄλλων μερῶν τῆς κτίσεως, διὰ τοῦτο ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς προσευχῆς νεύομεν πρὸς ἀνατολὴν πάντες. καὶ καθώσπερ τῇ δεξιᾷ χειρὶ ἐν ὀνόματι Χριστοῦ κατα σφραγίζομεν τοὺς τῆς σφραγῖδος ταύτης δεομένους, ἐπειδὴ τιμιω τέρα νενόμισται τῆς ἀριστερᾶς, καίτοι θέσει καὶ οὐ φύσει διαφέ ρουσα ταύτης ὑπάρχει, οὕτως καὶ ἡ ἀνατολὴ ὡς τιμιώτερον μέ ρος τῆς κτίσεως εἰς προσκύνησιν τοῦ θεοῦ ἀφώρισται. οὐκ ἐναντιοῦται δὲ τῇ προφητικῇ τε καὶ ἀποστολικῇ φωνῇ τὸ πρὸς τὴν ἀνατολὴν ποιεῖν ἡμᾶς τὰς εὐχάς· ἐν παντὶ γὰρ τόπῳ ὑπάρχει ἡ ἀνατολὴ τοῖς εὐχομένοις.","english":"If God, having made the whole circle of bodily creation, is established as Lord of all—for which reason David also enjoins us to bless the Lord in every place of the Lord's dominion, and likewise the apostle commands us to lift up holy hands to God in every place—, why is it that, regarding the eastern region alone as a work and dwelling-place of God, we look toward it and send up hymns and prayers to God? And who are those who taught the Christians this custom? Answer. Since we always set apart the more honorable things among us for the honor of God, and according to human estimation the east is more honorable than the other parts of creation, for this reason at the time of prayer we all bow toward the east. And just as with the right hand we seal with the name of Christ those who need this seal, since it has been considered more honorable than the left, although it differs from it by position and not by nature, so too the east has been set apart as the more honorable part of creation for the worship of God. Nor is it opposed to the prophetic and apostolic voice that we make our prayers toward the east; for the east is present in every place for those who pray.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":134,"ref":"p134","source":"καὶ ἐπειδὴ ἐφ' ὃ μέρος τὴν ὁρατικὴν αἴσθησιν κεκτήμεθα, κατὰ τοῦτο τὸ μέρος προσκυνοῦμεν, ἀδύνατον δὲ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς προσευχῆς εἰς τὰ τέσσαρα μέρη τοῦ σώμα τος ἀποβλέπειν, διὰ τοῦτο τῷ ἑνὶ μέρει τῆς κτίσεως ἀφορῶντες ποιοῦμεν τὴν προσευχήν, οὐχ ὡς μόνον ἔργον τοῦ θεοῦ, οὐδ' ὡς εἰς κατοικητήριον θεοῦ τοῦτο ἀφωρισμένον, ἀλλ' εἰς τόπον προσ κυνήσεως τῆς παρ' ἡμῶν προσαγομένης θεῷ. δοκεῖ δὲ παρ' ὧν εἴληφεν ἡ ἐκκλησία τὸ εὔξασθαι, παρὰ τούτων εἰληφέναι καὶ τὸ ποῦ εὔξασθαι, τουτέστι παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων ἀποστόλων. ΡΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μήτε τοὺς ἐκ τῶν δένδρων καρπούς, μήτε τῆς τῶν κρεῶν ἐδωδῆς οἱ πρὸ τοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ μετελάμβανον, καθώς τινες τῶν πατέρων ἐδίδαξαν, πῶς ὁ Ἄβελ ἐκ τῶν στεάτων τῶν προβάτων ὦν ἐποίμαινε καὶ ὁ Κάιν ἐξ ὧν ἐγεώργει καρπῶν τῆς γῆς ὁμοίως προσέφερε; καὶ δῆλον ὡς ἑκάτερος αὐτῶν τῆς οἰκείας βρώσεως προτιμῶν τὸ θεῖον τοιαύτῃ θυσίᾳ ἐκέχρητο. εἰ δὲ τὰ ἄχρηστα ἑαυτοῖς τῷ θεῷ προσεκόμιζον, πῶς τῇ τοι αύτῃ προσφορᾷ τὸ θεῖον οὐχ ὕβριζον; ἀζήμιον γὰρ αὐτῷ καὶ χλευαστικὴν χάριν ἕκαστος αὐτῶν κατετίθετο. πῶς οὖν ἡ μὲν τοῦ Κάιν θυσία ἀπόβλητος, τὰ δὲ τοῦ Ἄβελ δῶρα αἰδέσιμα γέγονε; Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ μακάριος ἀπόστολος, ὁ τῶν πατέρων πατὴρ καὶ τῆς εὐσεβείας διδάσκαλος, φησί· \"τίς φυτεύει ἀμπελῶνα καὶ ἐκ τοῦ καρποῦ αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἐσθίει; τίς ποιμαίνει ποίμνην καὶ ἐκ τοῦ γάλακτος τῆς ποίμνης οὐκ ἐσθίει\"; –ἀντὶ τοῦ οὐδείς.","english":"And since it is by that part with which we possess the faculty of sight that we worship, and it is impossible during the time of prayer to look toward the four parts of the body, for this reason, looking toward one part of creation, we make our prayer—not as though this alone were the work of God, nor as though it were set apart as a dwelling-place of God, but as a place of worship which is offered by us to God. And it seems that the Church has received from those from whom she received the practice of praying also the practice of where to pray—that is, from the holy apostles.\n\n141. Question. If neither the fruits of trees nor the eating of meats were partaken of by those before the flood, as some of the fathers have taught, how is it that Abel offered from the fat of the sheep which he shepherded, and Cain likewise offered from the fruits of the earth which he cultivated? And it is clear that each of them, preferring the divine to his own food, employed such a sacrifice. But if they were bringing to God things useless to themselves, how did they not insult the divine with such an offering? For each of them was depositing a harmless and mocking favor for him. How then is Cain's sacrifice rejected, while Abel's gifts have become honorable?\n\nAnswer. The blessed apostle, the father of fathers and teacher of piety, says: \"Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruit? Who shepherds a flock and does not eat of the milk of the flock?\"—that is, no one.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":135,"ref":"p135","source":"ἀλλ' εἰ μηδείς, δῆλον ὅτι οὔτε Ἄβελ ἐποίμαινε τὴν ποίμνην, ἵνα μὴ ἐσθίῃ τοῦ γάλακτος τῆς ποίμνης αὑτοῦ, οὔτε ὁ Κάιν ἐγεώργει τὴν γῆν, ἵνα μὴ ἐσθίῃ τῶν καρπῶν αὐτῆς, ἔτι δέ, εἰ ἄχρηστοι ἦσαν τῷ Κάιν οἱ καρποὶ τῆς γῆς, τίνος ἕνεκεν τοῖς χείροσι μὲν ἐτίμα τὸν θεόν, τοῖς κρείττοσι δὲ ἑαυτὸν τοῦ θεοῦ προετίμησε (διὸ ἀπόβλητος αὐτοῦ γέγονεν ἡ θυσία), μὴ χρῄζων τῶν καρπῶν τῆς γῆς; εἰ δὲ προετίμησεν ὁ μὲν Ἄβελ τῆς οἰκείας χρείας τὸν θεόν, ὁ δὲ Κάιν τὴν ἰδίαν χρείαν τοῦ θεοῦ, δῆλον ἄρα ὅτι ἕκαστος αὐτῶν τῆς ἐκ τῶν οἰκείων καρπῶν ἔχρῃζε θεραπείας.\n\nΡΛΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ βασιλείαν θεοῦ τὴν ἀνάστασίν τινες ὑπειλήφασι, δίκαιοι δὲ καὶ ἁμαρτωλοὶ ταύτης ἀξιωθῆναι πιστεύονται, πῶς τοὺς τὰ ἀπηγορευμένα\n\nποιήσαντας ἀποκληρονόμους ὁ Παῦλος ἀπέφῃνε, φήσας ὅτι \"οὔτε πόρνοι οὔτε μοιχοὶ\" καὶ οἱ ἐφεξῆς \"βασιλείαν θεοῦ κληρονομήσουσιν\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Βασιλείαν θεοῦ οἶδεν ἡ θεία γραφὴ ὀνομά ζειν οὐ τὴν ἀνάστασιν ἁπλῶς, ἀλλὰ τὴν μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν κατάστασιν, ἐν ᾗ γίνεται κολαζομένων τε καὶ δοξαζομένων ἡ διαίρεσις, τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπὸ πάντων ἀναμφιβόλως ὁμολογουμένου, τοῦ τὴν δόξαν ἐν τοῖς δοξαζομένοις ἐνεργοῦντος καὶ τὴν κόλασιν ἐν τοῖς κολαζομένοις. \"ἀκούσονται τῆς φωνῆς τοῦ θεοῦ οἱ ἐν τοῖς μνημείοις καὶ ἐξελεύσονται οἱ τὰ ἀγαθὰ ποιήσαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν ζωῆς, καὶ οἱ τὰ φαῦλα πράξαντες εἰς ἀνάστασιν κρίσεως\". διαι ρεῖται οὖν ἡ ἀνάστασις εἰς ζωὴν καὶ κρίσιν, κατὰ τὰς διαφορὰς δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων· ἐπὶ πλέον γὰρ ἡ ἀνάστασις τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ θεοῦ·","english":"But if no one did, it is clear that neither did Abel tend his flock so as not to eat of the milk of his flock, nor did Cain till the earth so as not to eat of its fruits. And further, if the fruits of the earth were useless to Cain, for what reason did he honor God with the worse things, but prefer himself to God with the better things (for which reason his sacrifice became rejected), if he did not need the fruits of the earth? But if Abel preferred God to his own need, and Cain preferred his own need to God, it is clear, then, that each of them needed the service that came from his own fruits.\n\n135. Question. If some have supposed the kingdom of God to be the resurrection, and it is believed that both the righteous and sinners are deemed worthy of it, how does Paul declare those who have done the forbidden things to be disinherited, saying that \"neither fornicators nor adulterers\" and those next in order \"will inherit the kingdom of God\"? Answer. Divine Scripture knows how to name as the kingdom of God not the resurrection simply, but the state after the resurrection, in which the division between those being punished and those being glorified takes place, God being confessed by all without doubt, who works glory in those being glorified and punishment in those being punished. \"Those in the tombs will hear the voice of God and will come forth, those who have done good to a resurrection of life, and those who have practiced evil to a resurrection of judgment.\" The resurrection, then, is divided into life and judgment, according to the differences between the righteous and the unrighteous; for the resurrection is more extensive than the kingdom of God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":136,"ref":"p136","source":"ἡ μὲν γὰρ ἀνάστασις δικαίους καὶ ἀδίκους περιέχει, ἡ δὲ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ μόνους τοὺς δικαίους. ΡΛΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἀναθεματισμὸν μόνον ἐπὶ τῶν ἀτόπων ἡ παλαιά τε καὶ νέα διαθήκη ἐπίσταται, πῶς ὁ μακάριος Πέτρος ἐν τῷ πάθει τὸν δεσπότην ἀρνούμενος καταθεματίζειν ἤρξατο; τίς δὲ ἡ διαφορὰ ἀμφοτέρων, τουτέστι τοῦ ἀναθεματισμοῦ καὶ τοῦ καταθεματισμοῦ, καὶ τί τὸ ὑπὸ θατέρου σημαινόμενον; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀνάθεμα λέγεται ἢ τὸ ἀνακείμενον καὶ ἀφωρισμένον θεῷ καὶ εἰς κοινὴν χρῆσιν μηκέτι λαμβανόμενον, ἢ τὸ ἀπηλλοτριωμένον θεῷ διὰ κακίαν. κατάθεμα δέ ἐστι τὸ συνθέσθαι τοῖς ἀναθεματίζουσιν.\n\nΡΛΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ ἀγαθὸν ἁπάντων ἐστὶ τὸ κάλλιστον καὶ τὸ κακυνόμενον τῶν ὄντων ἐστὶ [τὸ] χείριστον, καὶ ἀγαθὸς μέν ἐστιν ὁ θεός, κακυνόμενος δὲ ὁ ἄνθρωπος, πῶς οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἁπάντων τὸ κάκιστον; οὐδενὸς γὰρ τῶν ὄντων ἑτέρου–οὐρανοῦ λέγω καὶ γῆς, ἀέρος, φωστήρων καὶ τῶν τοιούτων–δυναμένου κακύνεσθαι, μόνος ὁ ἄνθρωπος τὸ κακύνεσθαι κέκτηται. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ ἀνθρώπου ἕνεκεν ὅλα τὰ ὀνομασθέντα εἰσί, τὰ δὲ τίνος ἕνεκεν ὑπάρχοντα ἐλάττονα ἐκείνου ἐστί, κάλλιστος ἄρα ὁ ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν ὑπὲρ τὰ δι' αὐτὸν ὑπάρχοντα· εἰ δὲ καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ κακύνεσθαι συντελεῖ πρὸς τὴν βελτίωσιν ἀνθρώπου, κάλλιστός ἐστιν ὁ ἄνθρωπος καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο, ὑπὸ τῆς θείας προνοίας τοῖς κακωτικοῖς ἰατρευόμενος ἀπὸ τῆς ἰδίας γνωμικῆς αὐτοῦ κα κίας. χρὴ δὲ τὸν βουλόμενον τὸν ἀγαθὸν ἄνθρωπον καταμαθεῖν πρὸς τὸ τέλος ἀποβλέπειν τὸ μετὰ τὴν ἀποβίωσιν ἀποκείμενον ἀνθρώπῳ·","english":"For the resurrection encompasses both the just and the unjust, but the kingdom of God encompasses only the just. 132. Question. If both the Old and the New Testament recognize anathematization only in the case of things out of place, how is it that blessed Peter, when he denied the Lord in his passion, began to curse? And what is the difference between the two, that is, between anathema and curse, and what is signified by each? Answer. An anathema is said to be either that which is dedicated and set apart to God and no longer taken for common use, or that which has been alienated from God through wickedness. A curse, however, is to agree with those who anathematize.\n\n133. Question. If the good is the most beautiful of all things and that which is made evil is the worst of beings, and God is good while man is made evil, how is man not the worst of all things? For since no other of beings—I mean heaven and earth, air, luminaries, and the like—is able to be made evil, man alone possesses being made evil. Answer. If all the things named exist for the sake of man, and the things that exist for the sake of something are less than that thing, then man is most beautiful, above the things that exist for his sake. And if being made evil itself contributes to the improvement of man, man is most beautiful in this respect too, being healed by divine providence through afflictions from his own wickedness of will. But one who wishes to understand the good man must look to the end laid up for man after his departure from life.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":137,"ref":"p137","source":"ἐκεῖνο γὰρ τῆς παρούσης ζωῆς ἐστιν ὁ καρπός, του τέστι μακαριότης ἀτελεύτητος ἀντὶ τῆς ὀλιγοχρονίως κακυνομένης ζωῆς.\n\nΡΛΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τῆς ἑκάστου βιώσεως προγνώστης ὁ δεσπότης καθέστηκε, διατί μὴ τῶν εὐσεβῶν τὰς ψυχὰς ἐν σώμασιν εὐσθε νέσιν εἰσῴκισεν; εἰ δὲ θησαυρίζων αὐτοῖς τὰς ἀμοιβὰς ἐν τοῖς μέλλουσιν, ἐν τοῖς παροῦσιν αὐτοῖς συνεχώρησε θλίβεσθαι, διατί μὴ πάντες ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν ὁμοίως οἱ εὐσεβεῖς ἐξετάζονται; ὥστε δῆλον ἐκ τούτου τὸν καλὸν καὶ τὸν δεινὸν διαδείκνυσθαι. εἰ δ' ἀμφότερα παρ' ἀμφοτέροις εὑρίσκεται, πῶς οὐκ ἄδηλος ὁ τὸ κρεῖτ τον ἑλόμενος; πῶς δὲ ὡς ἔτυχε τὰ πάντα φερόμενα ἀπρονόητα ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ οὐ δείκνυσιν, εὐσεβοῦς καὶ ἀσεβοῦς οὐκ οὔσης τινὸς διακρίσεως; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐκ ἐβούλετο ὁ θεὸς τοῖς παροῦσιν ὑπὲρ ἀρετῆς τιμῆσαι τοὺς αὐτῷ ἀνακειμένους· τὰ γὰρ τῷ θανάτῳ τῶν εὐσεβῶν γνωριζόμενα οὐκ ἔστι μισθὸς ἀρετῆς. καὶ καθώσπερ λέγονται οἱ εὐσεβεῖς μὴ εἶναι ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου, οὕτως καὶ ἡ δόξα αὐτῶν καὶ ὁ πλοῦτος οὐκ ἔστι γήινα. ὅταν οὖν ὁρῶμεν προσόντα τοῖς εὐσεβέσιν ἃ πρόσεστι καὶ τοῖς ἀσεβέσιν, ἀναλογισώμεθα ἐκ τούτου μὴ εἶναι ἄξια τὰ παρόντα τῶν τῆς ἀρετῆς πόνων. καὶ εἰ φαίνεται θεὸς τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ποτὲ ὑψώσας τινὰς τῶν αὐτῷ ἀνα κειμένων, ὡς τὸν Ἰωσὴφ καὶ τὸν Δαυίδ, ἀλλ' ὅμως οὐ τῆς ἀρε τῆς αὐτῶν τούτοις ἀμειβόμενος, ἀλλὰ διὰ μὲν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τῆς τοῦ Ἰσραηλιτικοῦ γένους αὐξήσεως προνοούμενος, διὰ δὲ τοῦ Δαυὶδ τὴν τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ βασιλείαν συνεστήσατο. διαφέρουσι δὲ οἱ εὐσεβεῖς τῶν ἀσεβῶν ἐν τοῖς","english":"For that is the fruit of the present life, that is, unending blessedness in exchange for a life briefly defiled.\n\n134. Question. If the Master is foreknower of each one's manner of life, why did he not settle the souls of the pious in strong bodies? And if, storing up their rewards for them in things to come, he allowed them to be afflicted in the present, why are not all the pious tested alike in afflictions? So that from this the good man and the wicked man are clearly shown. But if both are found in both, how is the one who has chosen the better not unclear? And how does he not show that all things are borne at random and without providence in the world, there being no distinction between the pious and the impious? Answer. God did not wish to honor those consecrated to him with present things in return for virtue; for the things recognized by the death of the pious are not a reward of virtue. And just as the pious are said not to be of the world, so also their glory and their wealth are not earthly. When, then, we see present among the pious the things that are also present among the impious, let us reckon from this that present things are not worthy of the labors of virtue. And if God appears at times to have exalted certain of those consecrated to him, as Joseph and David, yet he was not repaying them for their virtue, but through Joseph he provided for the increase of the Israelite race, and through David he established the kingdom of Israel. But the pious differ from the impious in","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":138,"ref":"p138","source":"ὑλικοῖς τε καὶ σωματικοῖς οὐδαμῶς· πάντα γὰρ πρόσεστιν ἀμφοτέροις, τά τε ἡδέα καὶ τὰ λυπηρά· διαφέρουσι δὲ ἀλλήλων προηγουμένως μὲν τῇ τε ἐλπίδι τῶν μελλόντων καὶ τοῖς ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐσεβείας παθήμασιν, ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ ταῖς θείαις συμμαχίαις, ἐν αἷς πολλάκις περιβλέπτους τοὺς ἰδίους ἐποίησεν ὁ θεός, ποτὲ μὲν τὴν τῶν Αἰγυπτίων δυναστείαν καταλύων, ποτὲ δὲ τοὺς Χαναναίους τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις ὑποτάσσων, ποτὲ δὲ τῶν Ἀσσυρίων τὸ θράσος κοιμίζων, ποτὲ δὲ τῶν Βαβυλωνίων καθαιρῶν τὴν βασιλείαν, ποτὲ δὲ δρόμον τε καὶ στάσιν παρὰ φύσιν προσ τάσσων τῷ ἡλίῳ. ἐν τούτοις μὲν ἡ πρόνοια διαδείκνυται τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐν ἐκείνοις δὲ παρασκευάζει τοὺς εὐσεβεῖς πρὸς ἄλλον βίον ἀφο ρᾶν, ἐν ᾧ γίνεται κατὰ δόξαν τε καὶ ἀδοξίαν δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδί κων ἡ διαίρεσις.\n\nΡΛΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἀποδιδόναι κακὸν ἀντὶ κακοῦ, ἢ λοιδορίαν ἀντὶ λοιδορίας ὁ ἀπόστολος ἀπηγόρευσε, πῶς αὐτὸς ὧν εἶπεν ἐναντία ἔπραξε, ποτὲ μὲν τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ, ποτὲ δὲ Ἀλεξάνδρῳ τῷ χαλκεῖ ἀρασάμενος; Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ μὲν ἀντέτυπτεν ὁ Παῦλος τὸν τυπτήσαντα αὐτὸν ἀρχιερέα, ἢ ἀντεκάκωσε τὸν κακώσαντα αὐτὸν Ἀλέξανδρον, ἐνῆν λέγειν ὅτι τὰ ἐναντία ὧν ἐδίδασκεν ἔπραττε· τὸ δὲ λέγειν τὰ ἑκάστῳ μέλλοντα συμβήσεσθαι παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, τῷ μὲν ἀρχιε ρεῖ τὸ \"τύπτειν σε μέλλει ὁ θεὸς τοῖχε κεκονιαμένε\", τῷ δὲ Ἀλεξάνδρῳ τὸ \"ἀποδώσει αὐτῷ κύριος ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ\", οὐκ ἔστιν οὔτε κατάρα οὔτε λοιδορία, ἀλλὰ πρόρρησις πρέπουσα ἀνδρὶ ἀποστόλῳ ἑαυτὸν μὴ ἐκδικοῦντι, ἀλλὰ διδόντι τόπον τῇ ὀργῇ. ΡΛ ʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"in no way material and bodily; for both have all things present with them, both the pleasant and the painful; but they differ from one another primarily in the hope of things to come and in the sufferings endured for piety, and then also in the divine alliances, in which God often made his own people conspicuous, sometimes overthrowing the dominion of the Egyptians, sometimes subjecting the Canaanites to the Israelites, sometimes lulling the insolence of the Assyrians, sometimes destroying the kingdom of the Babylonians, sometimes commanding the sun's course and station contrary to nature. In these things the providence of God is displayed; in those other things he prepares the pious to look toward another life, in which the separation of just and unjust according to glory and dishonor takes place.\n\n135. Question. If the apostle forbade rendering evil for evil, or reviling for reviling, how did he himself do things contrary to what he said, sometimes cursing the high priest, sometimes Alexander the coppersmith? Answer. If Paul had struck back at the high priest who struck him, or had returned evil for evil to Alexander who did him harm, it could be said that he did things contrary to what he taught; but to declare what was going to happen to each from God—to the high priest, \"God is about to strike you, you whitewashed wall,\" and to Alexander, \"The Lord will repay him in that day\"—is neither a curse nor a reviling, but a foretelling befitting a man who is an apostle, one who does not avenge himself but gives place to wrath. 136. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":139,"ref":"p139","source":"Εἰ τοὺς εὐσεβεῖς ἀμείβεται ὁ θεὸς τῇ κατὰ τόνδε τὸν βίον λαμπρότητι, ὡς τὸν Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ καὶ τοὺς ἐξ αὐτῶν, πλούτῳ καὶ εὐπαιδίᾳ καὶ καρπῶν εὐθηνίᾳ, πόθεν καὶ τὰ ὅμοια παρείποντο Ἕλλησιν, ἡνίκα τὰ εἴδωλα παν ταχοῦ ἐθεράπευον; πῶς δὲ ὁ ἑλληνισμὸς οὐ δείκνυται ὁσιώτερος; ὅτι ἕως μὲν ἐκεῖνος κατεῖχε τῶν πόλεων, πᾶσαι αἱ πόλεις καὶ οἱ ἀγροὶ εὐπραγίαν καὶ εὐθηνίαν ἐκέκτηντο, καὶ ταῦτα οὐ συχνότερον πολεμούμεναι· ἀφ' οὗ δὲ αὐτὰς τὸ χριστιανικὸν κατέλαβε κήρυγμα, καὶ οἴκων καὶ οἰκούντων καὶ τῆς λοιπῆς εὐθηνίας κατέστησαν ἔρημοι, καὶ μόλις τὰ λείψανα τῶν πάλαι ὑπὸ τῶν Ἑλλήνων γεγε νημένων κτισμάτων κατέχουσαι τοῦ ποτὲ πόλεις γεγενῆσθαι δεικνύουσι, τῆς παλαιᾶς εὐθηνίας καὶ τῆς νέας ἐρημίας ἑκατέρας τὰς θρῃσκείας αἰτίας ἀμφοτέρων προσφέρουσαι. Ἀπόκρισις. Παρὰ τοῦ δεσπότου θεοῦ, τοῦ τὸν ἥλιον αὑτοῦ ἀνατέλλοντος ἐπὶ πονηροὺς καὶ ἀγαθοὺς καὶ βρέχοντος ἐπὶ δι καίους καὶ ἀδίκους, ἀμφοτέροις χορηγεῖται ἡ κατὰ τὸν παρόντα βίον σωματικὴ λαμπρότης· οὗ γὰρ τῇ δυνάμει ὁ κόσμος γεγένηται, τούτου καὶ τῇ προνοίᾳ διοικεῖται. ἵνα οὖν ἑαυτοὺς ὁρῶντες οἱ δί καιοι πλεονάζοντας μὲν ἐν τοῖς ὑπὲρ εὐσεβείας πόνοις, ἰσαζομέ νους δὲ τοῖς ἀσεβέσιν ἐν τοῖς βιωτικοῖς, βίον ἕτερον προσδοκῶσιν, ἐν ᾧ γίνεται τῇ διαφορᾷ τιμῆς τε καὶ τιμωρίας δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων ἡ διάκρισις· οὐ γάρ ἐστιν ἄδικος ὁ θεός, ὥστε μὴ ποιεῖν δικαίων τε καὶ ἀδίκων τὴν διαστολήν, καθὰ προείρηται.","english":"If God rewards the pious with splendor in this life, as he did Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and their descendants, with wealth, good children, and abundance of crops, why did similar things also attend the Greeks, when they worshipped idols everywhere? And how is Hellenism not shown to be more holy? For while it held the cities, all the cities and the fields possessed prosperity and abundance, and these were not even more frequently at war; but since the Christian preaching took hold of them, they have become destitute of houses and inhabitants and the rest of their abundance, and scarcely holding the remnants of buildings once made by the Greeks, they show that they were once cities, offering the religions of both as the causes of both the old abundance and the new desolation. Answer. From the master God, who makes his sun rise on the evil and the good and sends rain on the just and the unjust, bodily splendor in the present life is supplied to both; for the world that came to be by his power is also governed by his providence. So that the just, seeing themselves abounding in labors for piety but equated with the impious in worldly things, may expect another life, in which the distinction between the just and the unjust comes about by the difference of honor and punishment; for God is not unjust, so as not to make the separation of the just and the unjust, as has been said before.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":140,"ref":"p140","source":"ὅτι δὲ κρατοῦντος τοῦ ἑλληνισμοῦ ἐγένοντο οἱ ἀφανισμοὶ πόλεών τε καὶ ἀγρῶν, μαρτυρεῖ ἡ ἐρημία τῶν τε Βαβυλωνίων καὶ Ἀσσυρίων καὶ τῆς Νινευὴ καὶ ἑτέρων ἐθνῶν πολλῶν. ποία δὲ πόλις τῶν ἐμφανῶν πόλεων κρατοῦντος τοῦ χριστιανισμοῦ ἐρημώθη, οὐκ ἔστι δεῖξαι. ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς ἀφθονίας τε καὶ ἀφορίας οἰκήσεώς τε καὶ ἐρημίας πόλεών τε καὶ ἀργῶν οὐκ ἔστι τεκμήρασθαι τῶν κρειτ τόνων τὴν ὁσιότητα, τοῦ δεσπότου θεοῦ τῶν αὐτῶν πρὸς τὸ λυσιτελὲς πᾶσι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις τὴν παροχὴν ποιοῦντος καὶ τὴν ἀφαίρεσιν. κρίνεται δὲ τῶν κρειττόνων ἡ ὁσιότης ἐκ τῶν κατὰ προαίρεσιν ὑπ' αὐτῶν πραττομένων καλῶν. τὸ δὲ ἀνθρώπους προσάγειν δαίμοσιν εἰς θυσίαν–\"ἔθυσαν\" φησί \"τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτῶν καὶ τὰς θυγατέρας αὐτῶν τοῖς δαιμονίοις\"–καὶ τὸ τοῖς ἀψύχοις τὴν θεῷ πρέπουσαν προσφέρειν τιμήν, τῶν Ἑλλήνων κρατούντων ἐγίνετο· τὸ δὲ κωλύεσθαι τὰς τοιαύτας Ἑλληνικὰς ἀνοσιουργίας χριστιανῶν κρατούντων ἐγίνετο. χρὴ οὖν ἀπὸ\n\nτῶν τοιούτων γνωρίζειν τῶν χριστιανῶν τὴν ὁσιότητα καὶ μὴ ἀπὸ τῆς εὐθηνίας τε καὶ οἰκή σεως πόλεών τε καὶ ἀγρῶν. τοσοῦτον δὲ πλεονάζει ὁ χριστιανισμὸς καὶ ἐν τούτοις, ὅσον κρατοῦντος αὐτοῦ ἔλαττον πολεμεῖται ὁ κόσμος, ὧν ἐπολεμεῖτο κρατήσαντος τοῦ ἑλληνισμοῦ.","english":"That the destructions of cities and fields occurred while Hellenism prevailed is witnessed by the desolation of the Babylonians and Assyrians and of Nineveh and many other nations. But which notable city was laid waste while Christianity prevailed, it is not possible to show. From abundance and scarcity, from habitation and desolation of cities and fields, it is not possible to infer the piety of the better sort, since the master God makes both the provision and the removal of these things for the benefit of all men. Rather, the piety of the better sort is judged from the good deeds done by them according to their own choice. But that men should bring their own to the demons as a sacrifice—\"they sacrificed,\" he says, \"their sons and their daughters to the demons\"—and that they should offer to lifeless things the honor befitting God, happened while the Greeks prevailed; whereas the prevention of such Greek impieties happened while the Christians prevailed. One must therefore recognize the piety of the Christians from such things, and not from prosperity and the habitation of cities and fields. And Christianity abounds even in these respects to the extent that, while it prevails, the world is less warred upon than it was warred upon while Hellenism prevailed.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":141,"ref":"p141","source":"ΡΛΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ [ὁ] λαλῶν τὸ ψεῦδος ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἐστι, καθὼς ὁ κύριος ἀπεφήνατο, πῶς ἔξω μέμψεως ὁ μακάριος Ἰακὼβ νομισθήσεται, τῷ μὲν πατρὶ χάριν τοῦ οἰκείου ὀνόματος τοσαυτάκις ψευσάμενος, τὴν δὲ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ εὐλογίαν μετὰ δόλου παρὰ τὴν πρόθεσιν τοῦ πατρὸς κομισάμενος; πῶς δὲ καὶ ὁ Παῦλος, ἡνίκα ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀρχιερέως ἐκρίνετο, μὴ εἰδέναι φήσας ὅτι ἀρχιερεύς ἐστι, τῇ μέμψει τοῦ ψεύδους οὐχ ὑπαχθήσεται; ὅτι δὲ ἠπίστατο ἀρχιερέα τὸν κρίνοντα, αὐτὸ τὸ ὑπ' αὐτοῦ αὐτὸν κρίνεσθαι σαφέστατα δείκνυσιν. Ἀπόκρισις. Οὔτε ὁ δίκαιος Ἰακὼβ ἐψεύσατο εἰπὼν τῷ πατρὶ αὑτοῦ \"ἐγὼ εἰμὶ ὁ υἱός σου ὁ πρωτότοκος\", οὔτε ὁ ἀπό στολος Παῦλος εἰπών \"οὐκ ἔγνων ὅτι ἀρχιερεύς ἐστιν ὁ κελεύσας τύπτεσθαι αὐτόν\"· ὁ μὲν γὰρ Ἰακὼβ ἦν προωνησάμενος τὴν πρω τοτοκίαν παρὰ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὑτοῦ Ἡσαῦ, καὶ ἵνα μὴ εὑρεθῇ ὁ μακάριος Ἰσαὰκ ἀνέκβατον εὐλογίαν εὐλογῶν τὸν Ἡσαῦ, τὸν βρώματι πεπρακότα τὴν πρωτοτοκίαν, διὰ τοῦτο ᾠκονόμησεν ἡ θείᾳ χάρις τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ χωρῆσαι εἰς τὸν Ἰακὼβ τὴν εὐλογίαν, τὸν ἐσχηκότα τὴν πρωτοτοκίαν. ὁ δὲ ἀπόστολος Παῦλος πρὸς τὸ παρά νομον τῆς τοῦ ἀρχιερέως κρίσεως ἀφορῶν ἔλεγεν, ὅτι \"οὐκ ἔγνων ὅτι ἀρχιερεύς ἐστι\". διὸ εὐλόγως τοῖχον κεκονιαμένον αὐτὸν ὠνό μασεν· ὥσπερ γὰρ τὸ κονίαμα τοῦ τοίχου τοῦ μνήματος καθαρὸν οὐ δείκνυσι τὸν τοῖχον διὰ τὴν ἔνδοθεν δυσωδίαν τε καὶ ἀκαθαρσίαν, οὕτως οὐδὲ ἡ περιβολὴ τῆς ἀρχιερατικῆς ἀξίας ἀρχιερέα δείκνυσι τὸν ἔνδοθεν ἐπὶ τῆς ψυχῆς φέροντα τὸ παράνομον τῆς κρίσεως.","english":"Question 137. Question: If the one who speaks a lie is of the evil one, as the Lord declared, how will the blessed Jacob be considered free from blame, who lied to his father so many times for the sake of his own name, and who obtained his brother's blessing by deceit against his father's intention? And how will Paul also, when he was being judged on behalf of the high priest, saying that he did not know that he was high priest, not be subject to the charge of lying? For that he did know that the one judging him was high priest, the very fact that he was being judged by him shows most clearly. Answer: Neither did the righteous Jacob lie when he said to his father, \"I am your firstborn son,\" nor did the apostle Paul lie when he said, \"I did not know that he was high priest who commanded that he be struck.\" For Jacob had previously purchased the birthright from his brother Esau, and so that the blessed Isaac might not be found blessing Esau with an irrevocable blessing—Esau who had sold his birthright for food—for this reason divine grace arranged that in this manner the blessing should pass to Jacob, who had held the birthright. And the apostle Paul, looking to the unlawfulness of the high priest's judgment, said, \"I did not know that he is high priest.\" Therefore with good reason he called him a whitewashed wall; for just as the plaster of a tomb's wall does not make the wall clean because of the foul smell and uncleanness within, so neither does the outward vesture of the high-priestly dignity show a man to be a high priest when he carries within, in his soul, the lawlessness of his judgment.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":142,"ref":"p142","source":"φαίνεται δὲ ὁ κύριος τάφους κεκονιαμένους τοὺς γραμ ματεῖς τε καὶ φαρισαίους καλέσας τοὺς ἀξιώμασί τε ἐσθήμασιν ἑαυτοὺς ὡραΐζοντας, ἔνδον δὲ πεφωλευμένην ἔχοντας τήν τε ἁρπα γὴν καὶ τὴν ἀκρασίαν.\n\nΡΛΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ μὴ πληροῦν τὸν νόμον τὸν ἐν νόμῳ παρανομία νενόμισται καὶ τὸ ἔξω Ἱερουσαλὴμ ποιεῖν τι τῶν νό μων ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου ἀπηγόρευται, πῶς ποιοῦντες ἢ μὴ ποιοῦντές τι τῶν ἐν νόμῳ οἱ περὶ τὸν Δανιὴλ ἐν Βαβυλῶνι οὐ παρηνόμησαν; ὅτι δὲ προσηύχοντο κυρίῳ τῷ θεῷ, ὅπερ ἦν κατὰ νόμον, σαφῶς περὶ αὐτῶν ἡ γραφὴ διηγόρευσε, \"Δανιὴλ\" λέγουσα \"ἦν τρεῖς καιροὺς τῆς ἡμέρας κατὰ ἀνατολὰς προσευχόμενος\". εἰ δὲ καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ ἡ αὐτὴ γραφὴ ἐσιώπησε, χρὴ νοεῖν ὅτι πάντα ἐπλήρωσαν. διὸ καὶ δίκαιοι ὑπ' αὐτῆς ὠνομάσθησαν. Ἀπόκρισις. Εὐχὰς μὲν καὶ δεήσεις ἐκτελεῖν τοὺς Ἰουδαίους, ἐν τῇ αἰχμαλωσίᾳ ὄντας, οὐ μόνον οὐκ ἀπηγόρευσεν ὁ νόμος, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐναντίον καὶ προετρέψατο αὐτούς, καὶ τοῦτο ἔνεστι μαθεῖν ἡμᾶς ἐκ πολλῶν τῶν προφητῶν· τὴν δὲ προσαγωγὴν τῶν θυσιῶν καὶ τὸ ποιεῖν πάσχα ἐκώλυσε, καὶ τοῦτο δείκνυται ἐκ τῆς βίβλου τοῦ προφήτου Δανιήλ· \"ἐγώ\" φησὶ Δανιήλ \"ἤμην πενθῶν τρεῖς ἑβδομάδας ἡμερῶν· ἄρτον ἐπιθυμιῶν οὐκ ἔφαγον, καὶ κρέας καὶ οἶνος οὐκ εἰσῆλθεν εἰς τὸ στόμα μου, καὶ ἄλειμμα οὐκ ἠλειψάμην ἕως τριῶν ἑβδομάδων ἡμερῶν. καὶ ἐν ἡμέρᾳ εἰκοστῇ καὶ τετάρτῃ τοῦ μηνὸς τοῦ πρώτου\" ἔρχεται πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁ ἄγγελος ὁ μηνύσας αὐτῷ ὅτι εἰσηκούσθη αὐτοῦ ἡ προσευχὴ καὶ ἡ δέησις, καί φησι πρὸς αὐτόν·","english":"But the Lord appears to have called the scribes and Pharisees whitewashed tombs—those who adorned themselves with honors and garments, while within they had a den of robbery and incontinence.\n\nQuestion 138. Question: If not fulfilling the law is reckoned as transgression in the law, and doing any of the things of the law outside Jerusalem is forbidden by the law, how is it that those around Daniel in Babylon, whether doing or not doing any of the things in the law, did not transgress? For that they prayed to the Lord God, which was according to the law, the Scripture clearly recounted concerning them, saying, \"Daniel was praying three times a day toward the east.\" But if the same Scripture has passed over the rest in silence, one must understand that they fulfilled all things. Therefore they were also called righteous by it. Answer: The law did not merely not forbid the Jews, while they were in captivity, to offer up prayers and supplications, but on the contrary even exhorted them to it, and this we can learn from many of the prophets. But the bringing of sacrifices and the keeping of the Passover it prevented, and this is shown from the book of the prophet Daniel: \"I,\" says Daniel, \"was mourning three weeks of days; I ate no pleasant bread, and meat and wine did not enter my mouth, and I did not anoint myself with oil, until three weeks of days. And on the twenty-fourth day of the first month\" the angel comes to him who announced to him that his prayer and supplication had been heard, and says to him:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":143,"ref":"p143","source":"\"μὴ φοβοῦ, Δανιήλ, ὅτι ἀπὸ τῆς ἡμέρας τῆς πρώτης ἧς ἔδωκας τὴν καρδίαν σου τοῦ συνιέναι καὶ κακω θῆναι ἔναντι κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ σου, ἠκούσθησαν οἱ λόγοι σου· καὶ ὁ ἄρχων βασιλείας Περσῶν εἱστήκει ἐξεναντίον μου εἴκοσι καὶ μίαν ἡμέραν\". εἰ τοίνυν ἐν ταῖς εἴκοσι καὶ μιᾷ ἡμέραις τῶν τριῶν ἑβδομάδων τοῦ πρώτου μηνός, ἐν αἷς νηστεύσας [ἦν] ὁ προφήτης νηστείαν πενθικήν τε καὶ ὀδυνηράν, ἡ ιδʹ ἡμέρα τοῦ πάσχα καὶ ἡ ἑβδομὰς τῶν ἀζύμων περιεχόμεναί εἰσι, δῆλον ὅτι παράνομον ἐλογίσατο ὁ προφήτης τὸ ποιεῖν πάσχα ἔξωθεν τῆς Ἱερουσαλήμ· εἰ δὲ μὴ τοῦτο, ἀλλ'\n\nἠνόμησεν ὁ προφήτης ἔξωθεν τῆς Ἱερουσαλὴμ μὴ ποιήσας τὸ πάσχα κατὰ τὴν τοῦ νόμου διάταξιν, πῶς εἰσηκούσθη αὐτοῦ ἡ δέησις καὶ ἡ προσευχή; θεὸς γὰρ ἁμαρτω λῶν οὐκ ἀκούει· εἰ δὲ νόμον ἐφύλαξε μὴ ποιήσας τὸ πάσχα ἔξω θεν τῆς ἱερουσαλήμ, πῶς οὐ προδήλως παρανομοῦσιν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι νῦν, ἔξωθεν τῆς Ἱερουσαλὴμ ποιοῦντες τὸ πάσχα; ΡΛΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἐξ ἀρχῆς πόλεμοι καὶ ἀκοαὶ πολέμων, ἔθνος ἐπ' ἔθνος καὶ βασιλεία ἐπὶ βασιλείαν, λιμοί τε καὶ λοιμοὶ καὶ σεισμοὶ κατὰ τόπους ἐγένοντο, καθὼς οὐ μόνον αἱ ἅγιαι γραφαὶ ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἐκτὸς βιβλία σημαίνουσι, διατί ὁ κύριος ὡς ξένα τινὰ τὰ προλεχθέντα σημεῖα εἶναι τῆς συντελείας ὡρίσατο, τῶν αὐτῶν ἀεὶ– ὡς εἴρηται–τῷ κόσμῳ συμβαίνειν εἰωθότων; πῶς δὲ αὐτὸς τὴν κατάλληλον τῶν ἐθνῶν προεπὼν ἐπανάστασιν οὐ δοκεῖ ἀνα τρέπειν τὰ πάλαι περὶ τῆς τῶν ἐθνῶν εἰρήνης ὑπὸ τοῦ προφήτου Ἡσαΐου λεχθέντα; φησὶ γὰρ ὁ προφήτης, ὅτι \"οὐ λήψεται ἔθνος ἐπ' ἔθνος μάχαιραν καὶ οὐ μὴ μάθωσιν ἔτι πολεμεῖν\". Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you gave your heart to understand and to afflict yourself before the Lord your God, your words were heard; and the ruler of the kingdom of Persia stood against me for twenty-one days.\" If, then, within the twenty-one days of the three weeks of the first month, during which the prophet was fasting a fast of mourning and grief, the fourteenth day of the Passover and the week of unleavened bread are included, it is clear that the prophet considered it unlawful to celebrate the Passover outside Jerusalem; but if not this, then the prophet transgressed the law by not celebrating the Passover outside Jerusalem according to the ordinance of the law—how was his petition and his prayer heard? For God does not hear sinners. But if he kept the law by not celebrating the Passover outside Jerusalem, how do the Jews now manifestly transgress the law, celebrating the Passover outside Jerusalem? Question 139. Question: If from the beginning there were wars and rumors of wars, nation against nation and kingdom against kingdom, famines and pestilences and earthquakes in various places, as not only the holy Scriptures but also the books outside indicate, why did the Lord define the aforementioned signs as something strange belonging to the consummation, when the same things—as has been said—have always been accustomed to happen to the world? And how does he himself, foretelling the fitting uprising of the nations, not seem to overturn the things long ago spoken by the prophet Isaiah concerning the peace of the nations? For the prophet says, \"Nation shall not take up sword against nation, and they shall no longer learn to war.\" Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":144,"ref":"p144","source":"Οἱ ἐν τῇ συντελείᾳ τοῦ αἰῶνος γινόμενοι πόλεμοί τε καὶ λιμοὶ καὶ λοιμοὶ καὶ σεισμοὶ διαφέρουσι τῶν ἤδη πολλάκις γεγονότων τῷ τε μεγέθει καὶ πλήθει καὶ τῷ συχνῷ τε καὶ ἅμα καὶ πανταχοῦ, ὥστε ταῖς οἰκείαις διαφοραῖς σημαίνειν τοῦ καιροῦ τῆς συντελείας τὴν ἐγγύτητα· παραγινομένου δὲ τοῦ σωτῆρος εἰς σωτηρίαν τῶν αὐτὸν ἐκδεχομένων, πάντων τῶν λυ πηρῶν γίνεται ἡ ἀναίρεσις, καὶ τότε ἡ προφητικὴ διὰ τοῦ Ἡσαΐου πρόρρησις δέχεται τελείαν τὴν ἔκβασιν· ἐκείνην γὰρ τὴν εἰρηνικὴν κατάστασιν προεμήνυσεν ὁ προφήτης Ἡσαΐας διὰ τῆς ἐν τῇ προ κειμένῃ ἐρωτήσει μνημονευθείσης φωνῆς, τὴν διὰ τῆς δευτέρας παρουσίας τοῦ σωτῆρος πληρουμένην, καθ' ἣν παύεται μὲν πᾶσα ἡ τῶν ἀνθρώπων τε καὶ δαιμόνων ἀπείθειά τε καὶ ἀντιλογία, κρατεῖ δὲ ἐν τοῖς πᾶσι τὰ θεῷ ἀρεσκόμενα. ΡΜʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὰ καθόλου στοιχεῖα καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ μέρη τῆς κτίσεως κατὰ πλάνην ἐθεοποίησαν εἴτουν ἐθεολόγησαν ἄν θρωποι, ποτὲ μὲν αὐτὰ καθ' αὑτὰ θαυμάσαντες, οἷον οὐρανὸν γῆν ἥλιον σελήνην ἀστέρας πῦρ ὕδωρ ἀέρα, ποτὲ δὲ τὰ αὐτὰ ἑτέρως μυθολογήσαντες, οἷον τὸν μὲν ἥλιον Ἀπόλλωνα, τὴν δὲ γῆν Δή μητραν, τὸν δὲ αἰθέρα Δία καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ ὁμοίως, ἀπεφήνατο δὲ ὁ θεὸς κατ' αὐτῶν λέγων \"θεοί, οἳ οὐκ ἐποίησαν τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν, ἀπολέσθωσαν\", πῶς οὐ κατὰ πάντων τῶν στοιχείων ἐξήγαγε τὴν τῆς ἀπωλείας ἀπόφασιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Θεοί, ὧν τὴν ἀπώλειαν ἀπεφήνατο ἡ θεία γραφή, δαίμονές εἰσι πονηροὶ κατὰ τὴν πλάνην τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὑπὲρ τὴν φύσιν τὴν κλῆσιν ἐσχηκότες θεοῦ, κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον· \"ἔθυσαν δαιμονίοις καὶ οὐ θεῷ\". καὶ πάλιν·","english":"The wars and famines and plagues and earthquakes that occur at the consummation of the age differ from those that have often already happened in magnitude and number and in being frequent and at the same time everywhere, so that by their own differences they signify the nearness of the time of the consummation. But when the Savior comes for the salvation of those who await him, the removal of all grievous things takes place, and then the prophetic foretelling through Isaiah receives its complete fulfillment; for the prophet Isaiah foretold that peaceful condition through the voice mentioned in the question set before us, which is fulfilled through the second coming of the Savior, at which all the disobedience and contradiction of both men and demons ceases, and what is pleasing to God prevails in all things. 140. Question. If men, in their error, deified or made gods of the universal elements and the other parts of creation—sometimes marveling at them in themselves, such as heaven, earth, sun, moon, stars, fire, water, air, and sometimes mythologizing about these same things in another way, such as calling the sun Apollo, the earth Demeter, the aether Zeus, and the rest likewise—and God declared against them, saying, \"Gods who did not make heaven and earth, let them perish,\" how is it that he did not issue the sentence of destruction against all the elements? Answer. The gods whose destruction the divine Scripture declared are evil demons who, through the error of men, have received the title of god beyond their nature, according to what is said: \"They sacrificed to demons and not to God.\" And again:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":145,"ref":"p145","source":"\"πάντες οἱ θεοὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν δαιμόνια\". τούτων τῶν δαιμόνων ὁ προφήτης προλέγει τὴν ἀπώλειαν. ἀπώλεια δὲ τῶν δαιμόνων ἐστὶ τὸ πάσης μὲν τῆς ἐκ πλάνης ἀνθρώπων προγεγονυίας αὐτοῖς ἀποστερεῖσθαι θεολογίας τε καὶ τιμῆς, ἐν τοῖς διηνεκέσι δὲ βασάνοις ζῆν ὀδυνηρῶς. τῶν δαιμόνων τε τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ βασανιζομένων εἰς ἔλεγχον τοῦ μὴ ὑπάρχειν αὐτοὺς θεούς, γίνεται ἡ ἀπώλεια τῆς ὀνομασίας αὐτῶν τε καὶ τῶν μερῶν τῆς κτίσεως, καθ' ἣν ὑπὸ τῶν πεπλανημένων ἀνθρώπων ψευδῶς ὠνομάσθησαν. καὶ καθώς περ ὅταν λέγῃ ἡ θεία γραφὴ περὶ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι \"αὐτοὶ μὲν ἀπο λοῦνται σὺ δὲ διαμένεις καὶ πάντες ὡς ἱμάτιον παλαιωθήσονται καὶ ὡσεὶ περιβόλαιον ἑλίξεις αὐτοὺς καὶ ἀλλαγήσονται\", οὐ τὴν ἀνυπαρξίαν τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτῶν σημαίνει τῷ τῆς ἀπωλείας ὀνόματι, ἀλλὰ τῆς παλαιότητος αὐτῶν, οὕτω καὶ ἐνταῦθα τῶν θεῶν λέγει τὴν ἀπώλειαν, οὐ πρὸς σημασίαν τῆς ἀνυπαρξίας τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτῶν, ἀλλὰ τῆς ὀνομασίας αὐτῶν, καθ' ἣν σὺν τοῖς μέρεσι τῆς κτίσεως θεοὶ ὑπὸ τῶν πεπλανημένων ἀνθρώπων ἐκλή θησαν.","english":"All the gods of the nations are demons.\" The prophet foretells the destruction of these demons. And the destruction of the demons is this: that they are deprived of all the theology and honor that formerly accrued to them from the error of men, and that they live in pain in unceasing torments. And when the demons are tormented in this way, as a proof that they are not gods, there comes about the destruction of their name and of the parts of creation by which they were falsely named by erring men. And just as when the divine Scripture says concerning heaven and earth, \"They shall perish, but you remain, and all of them shall grow old like a garment, and like a cloak you will roll them up, and they shall be changed,\" it does not signify by the word \"destruction\" the non-existence of their substance, but their oldness, so also here it speaks of the destruction of the gods, not to signify the non-existence of their substance, but of their name, by which, together with the parts of creation, they were called gods by erring men.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":146,"ref":"p146","source":"ΡΜΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πᾶς ὁ ἀποστέλλων τινὰ ἐκεῖ ἀποστέλλει ἔνθα αὐτὸς μὴ πάρεστι, καὶ ὁ ἀποσταλεὶς ἀποστέλλεται ἐν οἷς ὁ ἀποστείλας ἄπεστι, τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ἀπερίγραφον ἔχοντος καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τὸ παρεῖναι πανταχοῦ κεκτημένου, πῶς ὁ δεσπότης Χριστὸς λέγει ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἑαυτὸν ἀπεσταλμένον;\n\nἈπόκρισις. Ὁ θεὸς μὲν ἀπερίγραπτος ὑπάρχων, πανταχοῦ πάρεστιν· \"ἐάν\" φησίν \"ἀναβῶ εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν, σὺ ἐκεῖ εἶ· ἐὰν καταβῶ εἰς τὸν ᾅδην, πάρει\". οὐκ εἶπεν \"ἐὰν ἀναβῶ εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν, καὶ σὺ ἐκεῖ ἀναβαίνεις\", ἀλλὰ \"σὺ ἐκεῖ εἶ\". οὐδὲ \"ἐὰν καταβῶ εἰς τὸν ᾅδην, καὶ σὺ καταβαίνεις\", ἀλλὰ \"πάρει\". λέγεται δὲ περὶ αὐτοῦ ἐξ οἰκονομίας τὸ παρεῖναι, παρεῖναι μὲν τῇ προβολῇ ὀπτασίας τε καὶ ἐνεργείας *. τὰ μὲν οὖν πρέποντα τῇ οὐσίᾳ νόει κατ' οὐσίαν, καὶ τὰ πρέποντα τῇ οἰκονομίᾳ νόει κατ' οἰκονομίαν, καὶ οὐδὲν ἀνακύπτει ἄτοπον· ἄλλος γὰρ ὁ λόγος τῆς θείας οὐ σίας καὶ ἄλλος ὁ τρόπος τῆς θείας οἰκονομίας· ὑπὲρ ἡμᾶς γὰρ ὁ λόγος τῆς θείας οὐσίας, καθ' ἡμᾶς δὲ ὁ τῆς οἰκονομίας, καθ' ὃν ἡμῖν προσέρχεται ὁ θεός· ἄλλως γὰρ ἀδύνατον δέξασθαι ἡμᾶς γνῶσιν θεοῦ, μὴ τοῦ θεοῦ τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ εἰς γνῶσιν ἡμᾶς χειραγωγοῦντος τὴν αὑτοῦ. διό, ὥσπερ κυριολογοῦμεν τὸν περίπατον, οὕτω καὶ τὸ ἀπέστειλε. θεοῦ γὰρ ἀμφότερα καὶ καθ' ἡμᾶς ἀμφότερα καὶ δι' ἡμᾶς ἀμφότερα καὶ ἐξ οἰκονομίας ἀμφό τερα. \"καὶ ἤκουσε\" φησὶν ὁ Ἀδὰμ \"φωνὴν κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ περιπατοῦντος ἐν τῷ παραδείσῳ\". ὡσαύτως καὶ τὸ \"ἐξαπέστει λεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ\".","english":"146. Question. If everyone who sends someone sends him there where he himself is not present, and the one sent is sent among those where the sender is absent, while God possesses uncircumscribedness and for this reason has the property of being present everywhere, how does the Lord Christ say that he was sent by God into the world?\n\nAnswer. God, being uncircumscribed, is present everywhere. \"If I ascend,\" it says, \"into heaven, you are there; if I descend into Hades, you are present.\" It did not say, \"If I ascend into heaven, you also ascend there,\" but \"you are there\"; nor \"If I descend into Hades, you also descend,\" but \"you are present.\" But it is said of him by economy that he is present—present by the projection of vision and energy. Understand, then, the things proper to the essence according to essence, and the things proper to the economy according to economy, and nothing absurd arises. For one is the account of the divine essence and another the manner of the divine economy; for the account of the divine essence is beyond us, but that of the economy is according to us, according to which God comes to us. For it is impossible for us otherwise to receive knowledge of God, unless God in this manner leads us by the hand to his own knowledge. Therefore, just as we speak literally of the walking, so also of the sending. For both are of God, both are according to us, both are for our sake, and both are from economy. \"And Adam heard,\" it says, \"the voice of the Lord God walking in paradise.\" Likewise also the phrase \"God sent forth his Son.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":147,"ref":"p147","source":"ΡΜΒ.ʹ Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὰ Σεραφὶμ καλύπτει τὰ πρόσωπα, ἀτενί σαι εἰς θεοῦ δόξαν μὴ δυνάμενα, πῶς πάλιν ἑτέρως οὐκ ἠτένιζεν ὅλα ὀφθαλμῶν καταγέμοντα; εἰ δὲ μὴ ἠτένιζε, πῶς οὐ περιττῶς τὸ τοσοῦτον πλῆθος πανταχόθεν τῶν ὀμμάτων ἐκέκτητο; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἄλλη ἐστὶν ἡ κατὰ τὸν προφήτην Ἡσαίαντῶν Σεραφὶμ ὀπτασία, καὶ ἄλλη ἡ κατὰ τὸν προφήτην Ἰεζεκιήλ. ἐκεῖ μὲν παρὰ τῷ Ἡσαΐᾳ τὰ Σεραφὶμ ἑξαπτέρυγα, ἐνταῦθα δὲ παρὰ τῷ Ἰεζεκιὴλ τὰ Χερουβὶμ τετραπτέρυγα καὶ τετραπρόσωπα. καὶ ἐν μὲν τῇ κατὰ τὸν προφήτην Ἰεζεκιὴλ ὀπτασίᾳ οὐκ ἦν χρεία τοῦ κατακαλύπτειν τὰ Σεραφὶμ τὰ πρόσωπα ἑαυτῶν, κάτωθεν τοῦ κρυσταλλοειδοῦς στερεώματος ἑστηκότα τήν τε στάσιν καὶ τὴν πτῆσιν, ἐφ' οὗ ἦν ὁ θρόνος τῆς δόξης. ἠτένιζε δὲ τὰ Σεραφὶμ οὐ μόνον τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τοῖς ἐν τοῖς προσώποις τῶν ζῴων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις μέρεσι τοῦ σώματος αὐτῶν. καὶ ἐπειδὴ ἐν τῷ πορεύεσθαι τὰ Σεραφὶμ ἀνάκαμψις καὶ ἀνα στροφὴ οὐκ ἐγένετο τῆς τῶν ζῴων ὄψεως, διὰ τοῦτο χρεία ἦν τοῦ πανταχοῦ αὐτὰ ἀτενίζειν οἷς ἐκέκτηντο ὀφθαλμοῖς. ὥστε οὐ μάτην ἐκέκτηντο τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ὀμμάτων. ΡΜΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"147. Question. If the Seraphim cover their faces, being unable to gaze upon the glory of God, how is it again that in another way they did not gaze, though they were entirely full of eyes? And if they did not gaze, how was it not superfluous that they possessed such a great multitude of eyes from every side? Answer. One is the vision of the Seraphim according to the prophet Isaiah, and another is that according to the prophet Ezekiel. There, in Isaiah, the Seraphim have six wings; here, in Ezekiel, the Cherubim have four wings and four faces. And in the vision according to the prophet Ezekiel, there was no need for the Seraphim to cover their own faces, standing beneath the crystalline firmament—both their station and their flight—upon which was the throne of glory. And the Seraphim gazed not only with the eyes in the faces of the living creatures, but also with those in the other parts of their body. And since, when the Seraphim moved, there was no turning back or turning around of the living creatures' sight, for this reason there was need for them to gaze everywhere with the eyes they possessed. So that it was not in vain that they possessed the multitude of eyes. 143. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":148,"ref":"p148","source":"Εἰ διὰ τὴν εἰς Χριστὸν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἀπείθειαν ὑποχείριοι τοῖς Χριστῷ πειθομένοις ἐδόθησαν, οἱ δὲ τὸν ἀληθῆ Χριστὸν μὴ γινώσκοντες χριστιανοὶ ἀληθῶς οὐ δύνανται εἶναι, κἂν χριστιανοὶ ὀνομάζονται, οἷά ἐστι τῶν αἱρετικῶν τὰ συστήματα, πῶς οἱ τοιοῦτοι οὐ μόνον Ἰουδαίων, ἀλλὰ καὶ [τῶν] τὸν ἀληθῆ Χριστὸν δεσπότην τοῦ παντὸς γνωριζόντων ἐκράτησαν καὶ μυρίοις δεινοῖς περιέβαλον, τοῦ ἀληθοῦς χριστιανισμοῦ οὐ μόνον Ἰουδαίων, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ψευδοχριστιανῶν διὰ τὸ ἀληθὲς δεσπόζειν ὀφείλοντος; εἰ δὲ τὸ δεσπόζειν ὀφεῖλον ὑπὸ τῆς πλάνης δεσπόζεται, πῶς τὴν δουλείαν τῶν Ἰουδαίων τῇ εἰς Χριστὸν ἀπειθείᾳ ἐπιγράφομεν, καὶ αὐτῶν σὺν τοῖς ἀληθινοῖς χριστιανοῖς τοῖς ψευδωνύμοις Χρι στιανοῖς δεδουλευκότων πολλάκις; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ κράτος τῆς τοῦ δεσπότου Χριστοῦ δυνα στείας ἐν τῇ καθαιρέσει τῶν αὐτῷ ἀπειθησάντων Ἰουδαίων δείκνυται, τὸ ὅλως αὐτοὺς ἐκπεσεῖν μὲν ἁπάντων τῶν πάλαι παρ' αὐτοῖς σεμνῶν τε καὶ τιμίων, εἶναι δὲ ἐν τῇ δουλείᾳ τῶν ἐθνῶν. τὸ δὲ δεσποτικῶς ἐν τῷ παρόντι βίῳ ἄρχειν τῶν γηίνων πραγ μάτων οὐκ ἔστι κληρονομία τῶν ἀληθινῶν χριστιανῶν, εἴ γε κατὰ τὸν ἀπόστολον Παῦλον \"εἰ ἐν τῇ ζωῇ ταύτῃ ἠλπικότες ἐσμὲν ἐν Χριστῷ, ἐλεεινότεροι πάντων ἀνθρώπων ἐσμέν\". ὁ οὖν τῶν ἀλη θινῶν χριστιανῶν βουλόμενος τὴν δεσποτείαν καταμαθεῖν, πρὸς τὴν μέλλουσαν κατάστασιν ὀφείλει ἀποβλέπειν. τὸ γὰρ ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος δεσποτικῶς ἄρχειν τῶν ὑλικῶν πραγμάτων οὐκ ἔστιν ἀμοιβὴ τῆς τῶν χριστιανῶν πίστεως, ἀλλὰ λειτουργία τις, κατὰ τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ διάταξιν πρὸς τὴν συγκρότησιν τῆς τῶν ἀνθρώπων εὐνόμου πολιτείας","english":"If, because of the Jews' disobedience toward Christ, they were given over as subject to those who obey Christ, and those who do not know the true Christ cannot truly be Christians, even if they are called Christians, as is the case with the assemblies of the heretics, how is it that such people prevailed not only over the Jews but also over those who recognize the true Christ as Lord of all, and encompassed them in countless terrors, when true Christianity ought to rule not only over the Jews but also over the false Christians because of the true Lord? But if that which ought to rule is ruled by error, how do we ascribe the servitude of the Jews to their disobedience toward Christ, when they themselves, together with the true Christians, have often been enslaved to the falsely named Christians? Answer. The power of the Lord Christ's dominion is shown in the overthrow of the Jews who disobeyed him—that they fell away entirely from all the things once held venerable and precious among them, and are in servitude to the nations. But to rule lordly over earthly affairs in the present life is not the inheritance of true Christians, since according to the apostle Paul, \"if in this life we have hoped in Christ, we are more pitiable than all men.\" Therefore, one who wishes to learn thoroughly the dominion of true Christians ought to look to the future state. For to rule lordly over material affairs in the present is not a recompense for the faith of Christians, but a certain service, according to God's ordinance, for the maintenance of the lawful constitution of men.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":149,"ref":"p149","source":"ἐγχειριζομένη ἀνθρώποις, ποτὲ μὲν χριστιανοῖς, ποτὲ δὲ αἱρετικοῖς, ποτὲ δὲ Ἕλλησιν· ἐφ' ὅσον γὰρ ἐν τοῖς ὑπὲρ ἀρετῆς ἀγῶσίν εἰσιν οἱ χριστιανοὶ καὶ τὴν στενὴν καὶ τεθλιμμένην βαδίζοντες ὁδόν, εἰς ὑπουργίαν προκείμενοι παντὶ ἀγγαρεύειν αὐτοὺς βουλομένῳ, ἔξω τοῦ δεσπόζειν εἰσί· λυθέντων δὲ τῶν ἀγώνων καὶ τοῦ καιροῦ τῶν στεφάνων παραγινομένου, τότε οἱ ἄξιοι δεσπόζουσι δεσποτείαν ἀσάλευτον, ὅτε κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον \"οἱ ἅγιοι τὸν κόσμον κρινοῦσι\" καθεζόμενοι ἐπὶ δώδεκα θρόνων, κρίνοντες τὰς δώδεκα φυλὰς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ. ΡΜΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὅριον ἔθετο τῇ θαλάττῃ τὴν ψάμμον ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὁ θεός, κατὰ τὸν λέγοντα \"μέχρι τούτου ἐλεύσῃ καὶ οὐχ ὑπερβήσῃ\", πῶς ὑπερβαίνουσα ἐν διαφόροις τόποις τὸ τοιοῦτον ὅριον ἡ θάλαττα δείκνυται; ἐν γὰρ τῇ διοικήσει ταύτῃ τινῶν μὲν τόπων ἀπέδρα, τινὰς δὲ τόπους τῆς ξηρᾶς ἀπέδειξε θάλατταν. Ἀπόκρισις. \"Ὅριον ἔθου\", φησὶν ἡ γραφή, \"καὶ οὐ παρελεύσεται, οὐδὲ ἐπιστρέψουσι καλύψαι τὴν γῆν\", ἵνα εἴπῃ, ὅτι τῷ θείῳ ὅρῳ κατεχομένη ἡ θάλασσα ἐν τοῖς κατὰ φύσιν οἰκείοις τόποις μένει καὶ οὐχ ὑπερβαίνει κατακαλύψαι τὴν γῆν, ὡς τὸ πρῶτον κατεκάλυπτεν, ὅτε ἦν κατὰ πρόσωπον πάσης τῆς γῆς ἐκκεχυμένη καὶ τοὺς κατὰ φύσιν κατέχουσα οἰκείους τόπους. τοῦτο δὲ τὸ ὅριον οὐδέποτε ὤφθη ἡ θάλασσα ὑπερβεβηκυῖα. τὸ δὲ ἐν μερικοῖς τόποις διὰ τὴν εὐεργεσίαν ἢ παιδείαν τῶν ἀνθρώπων ποιεῖν τῶν θαλαττῶν ἢ ποταμιαίων ὑδάτων τὴν μετάστασιν, τοῦτο οὐ δυνατὸν λογισθῆναι εἰς παράβασιν τοῦ θείου ὅρου. \"ἔθετο\" φησίν \"ποταμοὺς εἰς ἔρημον\". καὶ πάλιν \"ἔθετο ἔρημον εἰς λίμνας ὑδάτων\".","english":"being handed over to men, sometimes to Christians, sometimes to heretics, sometimes to Greeks; for as long as Christians are in the struggles for virtue and walking the narrow and constricted way, being exposed to service for anyone who wishes to press them into service, they are outside of ruling; but when the struggles are loosed and the time of crowns arrives, then those who are worthy rule with an unshakable dominion, when, according to what is said, \"the saints will judge the world,\" sitting on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 144. Question. If God set the sand as a boundary for the sea from the beginning, according to him who says, \"You shall come this far and shall not pass beyond,\" how is the sea shown to pass beyond such a boundary in various places? For in this administration it has fled from some places, and has made some places of dry land into sea. Answer. \"You set a boundary,\" says the Scripture, \"and it shall not pass by, nor shall they turn back to cover the earth,\" so as to say that the sea, held by the divine boundary, remains in its own natural places and does not pass beyond to cover the earth, as it first covered it, when it was poured out over the face of all the earth and held its own natural places. But this boundary the sea has never been seen to have passed beyond. But that in particular places, for the benefit or discipline of men, it makes a removal of seas or river waters, this cannot be reckoned as a transgression of the divine boundary. \"He set,\" it says, \"rivers into a desert.\" And again, \"He set a desert into pools of waters.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":150,"ref":"p150","source":"οὐ πρὸς τὴν μερικὴν οὖν μετάστασιν τῶν ὑδά των ὁ λόγος ἐκφέρεται ὁ λέγων \"ὅριον ἔθου καὶ οὐ παρελεύσεται\", ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὴν καθόλου μετάστασιν τῶν ὑδάτων ἐκ τῶν κατὰ φύσιν ἀνοικείων τόπων εἰς τοὺς κατὰ φύσιν οἰκείους τόπους.\n\nΡΜΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ γινόμενον θέλημα τὴν δύναμιν καὶ πρό γνωσιν τοῦ θέλοντος δείκνυσι, δῆλον ὅτι τὸ μὴ γινόμενον θέλημα ἀσθένειαν καὶ ἄγνοιαν τοῦ θέλοντος τὰ μὴ γινόμενα συνίστησι. πῶς οὖν ὁ θεὸς παντοδύναμος ὢν θέλει πάντας σωθῆναι καὶ οὐ σῴζονται, καὶ τὸν τοῦ ἁμαρτωλοῦ οὐ βούλεται θάνατον, καὶ ἐπά γει \"καὶ τῆς Ἱερουσαλὴμ τὰ τέκνα πολλάκις ἐπισυνάξαι ἠθέλησε, καὶ μὴ θελήσαντα οὐκ ἐπεσυνήχθησαν\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ δύναμιν εἴσπραξιν καὶ ἐξουσίαν εἰς αἵρεσιν καὶ νόμον εἰς διδασκαλίαν τῶν ἐναντίων δέδωκεν ἡμῖν ὁ θεὸς καὶ τοῦ κατὰ προτίμησιν αἱρεῖσθαι τῶν ἐναντίων τὸ δοκοῦν κατέστησεν ἡμᾶς κυρίους, καὶ τῇ μὲν ἐπαγγελίᾳ τῆς ζωῆς προ τρέπει ἡμᾶς εἰς ἀρετήν, τῇ δὲ ἀπειλῇ τοῦ θανάτου ἀποτρέπει ἡμᾶς τῆς κακίας, διὰ τοῦτο τῷ θελήματι τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ θέλοντος πάντας ἀνθρώπους σωθῆναι, ὅταν ᾖ τὸ θέλημα τῶν σῳζομένων συνεζευγμένον, γίνεται πάντως ἡ σωτηρία. ἐὰν δὲ τὸ θέλημα τῶν ἀνθρώπων μὴ ᾖ ἑπόμενον τῷ θελήματι τοῦ θεοῦ, οὐκ ἐξ ἀσθε νείας τοῦ θεοῦ οὐ γίνεται τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς τῶν ἀνθρώπων τῶν μὴ θελησάντων ἃ ἠθέλησεν ὁ θεός. ἐν οἷς δὲ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς τῶν λογικῶν θελήσεως κεχώρισται, ἐν πᾶσι τούτοις ἐξ ἀνάγκης γίνεται τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ ἀνεμπόδιστον.","english":"The statement \"You have set a boundary, and it shall not pass\" is therefore not brought forward with reference to the partial displacement of the waters, but with reference to the universal displacement of the waters from places naturally unsuitable to places naturally suitable.\n\nRME'. Question. If a will that is fulfilled demonstrates the power and foreknowledge of the one who wills, it is clear that a will that is not fulfilled establishes the weakness and ignorance of the one who wills the things that are not fulfilled. How then does God, being almighty, will that all be saved and they are not saved, and he does not will the death of the sinner, and he brings forward \"and how often I wished to gather the children of Jerusalem, and they were not gathered because they did not wish it\"? Answer. Since God has given us power, authority for choice, and law for the teaching of opposites, and has made us masters of choosing by preference whatever seems best among opposites, and by the promise of life urges us to virtue, and by the threat of death turns us away from evil, for this reason, when the will of those being saved is joined together with the will of God who wills all men to be saved, salvation certainly comes to pass. But if the will of men does not follow the will of God, the will of God is not unfulfilled because of any weakness of God, but because of the men who did not will what God willed. And in all those cases in which the will of God is separated from the will of rational beings, in all of these the will of God necessarily comes to pass unhindered.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":151,"ref":"p151","source":"ΡΜς ʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ προοίμιον καὶ μεσότης καὶ πέρας ἡ φθορὰ τῶν σωμάτων ἐν τῇ γαμικῇ συναφείᾳ καθέστηκε, πῶς ὁ θεὸς ἄφθαρτος ὢν καὶ ἐπὶ ἀφθαρσίαν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους προτρέπων γα μικῶς συνάπτεσθαι τοῖς πιστοῖς ἐπηγγείλατο, τοῦ ὑποδείγματος τῇ οὐσίᾳ καὶ τοῦ σκοποῦ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐναντίου τυγχάνοντος; Ἀπόκρισις. Οὐ πάντα ὅσα πρόσεστι τῇ φύσει τοῦ ὑπο δείγματος, ταῦτα ἀνάγκη προσεῖναι καὶ τῇ φύσει τοῦ ὑποδεικνυ μένου, * ἀλλ' ὄν τι ἁπλοῦν, καθὸ σῴζεται τοῦ ὑποδείγματος πρὸς τὸ ὑποδεικνύμενον ἡ ἀναλογία τῆς ὁμοιώσεως· ὥσπερ γὰρ ἡ βα σιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν ὁμοία λέγεται τῷ κόκκῳ τῆς σινάπεως, καθὸ ἐκ τοῦ βραχυτάτου μεγέθους εἰς ἄμετρον μέγεθος τὴν αὔξησιν ἐδέξατο, οὐκέτι καὶ καθότι φθαρτός ἐστιν ὁ κόκκος τῆς σινάπεως σῴζει πρὸς αὐτὸν ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν τῆς ὁμοιώσεως τὴν\n\nἀναλογίαν, οὕτως πρὸς δήλωσιν μόνης τῆς ὄντως ἀγάπης, ἣν ἔχει ὁ μὲν θεὸς πρὸς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, ἡ δὲ ἐκκλησία πρὸς τὸν θεόν, τὸ κατὰ τὴν γαμικὴν συνάφειαν ὑπόδειγμα παρείληπται τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ. \"ὡς εὐφραίνεται\", φησὶν Ἡσαΐας, \"νυμφίος ἐπὶ νύμφῃ, οὕτως εὐφρανθήσεται κύριος ἐπὶ σοί\". ΡΜΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἄνωθεν καὶ πρὸ αἰώνων τὰ περὶ ἡμᾶς καὶ καθ' ἡμᾶς θείῳ ὅρῳ ἔχει τὴν σύστασιν, ἐν καιρῷ ἀβροχίας ἢ πολυομβρίας ἢ ἑτέρου οἱοσδηποτοῦν συναντήματος πῶς οὐ μά την βουλευόμεθα ἢ εὐχόμεθα, ἅπαξ τοῦ θείου ὅρου περὶ πάντων * κατέχοντος; πῶς δὲ διὰ τῆς τοιαύτης εὐχῆς πλέον ἁμαρτάνοντες οὐ δεικνύμεθα, τοῦ οἰκείου ὅρου τὸν θεὸν κατόπιν ἐλθεῖν βιαζό μενοι, ὅπερ γενέσθαι οὐκ ἐνδέχεται;","english":"147. Question. If corruption is the beginning, middle, and end of bodies in marital union, how did God, being incorruptible and urging humans toward incorruption, promise the faithful to be joined in marriage, when the model is contrary in substance and in God's purpose? Answer. Not everything that belongs to the nature of the model must necessarily belong also to the nature of what is modeled, but rather the analogy of likeness is preserved between the model and what is modeled in some one simple respect, insofar as it is saved. For just as the kingdom of heaven is said to be like a mustard seed insofar as it received growth from the smallest size to immeasurable size, the kingdom of heaven no longer preserves the analogy of likeness to it in respect of the mustard seed's being corruptible; so too, for the manifestation of the true love alone which God has for the church and the church for God, the model of marital union has been taken up by divine Scripture. \"As a bridegroom rejoices,\" says Isaiah, \"over his bride, so shall the Lord rejoice over you.\" 148. Question. If the things concerning us and according to us have their constitution from above and before the ages by divine decree, how is it that in a time of drought or heavy rain or any other kind of occurrence whatsoever we do not consult or pray, since the divine decree once for all governs all things? And how is it that through such prayer we are not shown to sin more, forcing God to come behind his own decree, which cannot happen?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":152,"ref":"p152","source":"εἰ γὰρ ταῦτα ἔχει, ὡς εἴρη ται, πῶς ὑπὸ πάντων μὲν τῶν εὐσεβῶν εὐχὴ τῷ θεῷ προσκε κόμισται, ὑπὸ δέ τινων πολλὰ δι' εὐχῆς ἐπὶ συμφέροντι γεγόνασι θαύματα; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἀναλόγως τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ καταστάσει ὥρισται παρὰ θεῷ τιμὴ μὲν ἐπὶ τῇ ὑπακοῇ, τιμωρία δὲ ἐπὶ τῇ παρακοῇ. καὶ ἐπειδή ἐσμεν αὐθαίρετοί τε καὶ τρεπτοί, διὰ τοῦτο ἔδω κεν ἡμῖν ὁ δεσπότης θεὸς τὴν ἐκ τῆς μετανοίας βοήθειαν, δι' ἧς ἔνεστιν αὐθαιρέτως ἐκκλίνειν ἡμᾶς τῆς τε παρακοῆς καὶ τῆς ἐν αὐτῇ ὡρισμένης τιμωρίας· ὥρισται γὰρ καὶ τοῦτο. μετανοεῖν δὲ καὶ τῶν ἐπταισμένων λαβεῖν τὴν συγχώρησιν εὐχῆς καὶ βουλή σεως ἐκτὸς ἀδύνατον. πρὸς ἔνδειξιν δὲ τοῦ μὴ ἀλόγῳ φορᾷ αὐτο μάτως γίνεσθαι τὰ γινόμενα, ἀλλὰ θείᾳ προνοίᾳ διοικεῖσθαι τὰ καθ' ἡμᾶς, ἐνεργοῦσιν αἱ εὐχαὶ τῶν ἁγίων, οὐχ ἵνα τὸν θεῖον ἀνατρέψωσιν ὅρον–ἀδύνατον γάρ–, ἀλλ' ἵνα τοῦ κρείττονος ὁρι σμοῦ τύχωσιν, ὅπερ ἐστὶ τιμὴ τῶν ἁγίων, τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ ὑπακοῇ τοῦ θεοῦ ἠκουσμένων ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ· ἐπίπονος γὰρ ἡ κτῆσις τῶν καλῶν, τῶν ἀναγκαίων μὲν διὰ τὴν φύσιν, ἐκδεχομένων δὲ διὰ τὴν κτῆσιν· καὶ χρῄζουσιν οἱ κτώμενοι τῆς θείας διὰ προσευχῆς βοη θείας πρὸς τὸ δύνασθαι πονεῖν.","english":"For if these things are so, as has been said, how is it that prayer has been offered to God by all the pious, and by some many miracles have come to pass through prayer for their benefit? Answer. In accordance with our condition, honor has been appointed by God for obedience, and punishment for disobedience. And since we are self-determining and changeable, for this reason the master God has given us the help that comes from repentance, through which it is possible for us to turn aside of our own free will from disobedience and from the punishment appointed in it; for this too has been appointed. But to repent and to receive forgiveness of one's sins is impossible apart from prayer and resolve. And to show that things which happen do not come about irrationally by random impulse, but that our affairs are governed by divine providence, the prayers of the saints are effective—not that they might overturn the divine decree (for that is impossible), but that they might obtain the better decree, which is the honor of the saints, of those who have been heard by God in their obedience to God. For the acquisition of good things is laborious—things necessary by nature, but awaited through acquisition—and those who acquire them need divine help through prayer, in order to be able to labor.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":153,"ref":"p153","source":"ΡΜΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἡ τοῦ σαββάτου ἀργία κατά τινα τύπον τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις παραδέδοται τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ καταπαύσεως, ἤτοι ἐν τῇ κοσμοποιίᾳ, ἤτοι καὶ ἐν τῇ συντελείᾳ, κατέπαυσε δὲ ἢ καταπαύ σει κατὰ τὸν τύπον ὁ δεσπότης τοῦ βουλήσει ἢ προνοίᾳ ἐργάζε σθαι, πῶς οὐ χρονικὴν αὐτοῦ τὴν τοῦ ἐργάζεσθαι ἐνέργειαν ὁ λόγος ὁ τοιοῦτος παρίστησι; παυσαμένης γὰρ αὐτοῦ τῆς ἐνεργείας, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ ἡ ἐνέργεια πέπαυται. οἷον, τὸ πῦρ τοῦ καίειν καὶ φλογίζειν παυσάμενον, καὶ τοῦ εἶναι παύεται. Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ μὲν δεσπότης θεὸς ἐν ταῖς ἓξ ἡμέραις πᾶσαν κτίσιν ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ εἶναι παρήγαγε καὶ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατέπαυσε τοῦ κατὰ τὰς οἰκείας ἀρχὰς ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ εἶναι παραγαγεῖν ἔτι τινά. \"καὶ κατέπαυσε\" φησί \"κύριος ὁ θεὸς τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ ἀπὸ πάντων τῶν ἔργων ὧν ἤρξατο ποιεῖν\". ἐνετείλατο δὲ τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις ἓξ ἡμέρας ἐργά ζεσθαι καὶ τῇ ἑβδόμῃ ἡμέρᾳ σαββατίζειν, ἵνα, ἐργαζομένων τε αὐτῶν καὶ παυομένων τῆς ἐργασίας, τυπικῶς φυλαχθῇ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἡ μνήμη τῆς τε ἐργασίας καὶ τῆς καταπαύσεως τοῦ θεοῦ. καὶ τὴν μὲν δύναμιν, καθ' ἣν τὴν κτίσιν πεποίηκεν ὁ θεός, ἀιδίως εἶχε καὶ ἔχει· ἐνεργεῖ δὲ κατὰ ταύτην τὴν ἀίδιον δύναμιν, ὅτε βούλεται, τῆς δυνάμεως ἐν τῇ ἰδίᾳ ἰσχύι μενούσης ἀιδίως καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἐνεργείας καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν, πάσης τῆς ἐν χρόνῳ ἀπο βολῆς τε καὶ προσλήψεως ἀπηλλαγμένης. διὸ δύναται ποιεῖν ἀεὶ πάντα ὅσα βούλεται ποιεῖν. οὐκ ἔτι δὲ βούλεται ποιεῖν πάντα ὅσα δύναται ποιεῖν·","english":"153. Question. If the rest of the Sabbath was handed down to the Jews as a certain type of God's resting, whether in the creation of the world or also in the consummation, and the Lord rested or will rest according to the type from working by will or by providence, how does such an account not present his activity of working as temporal? For when his activity has ceased, it is clear that the activity has also ceased. For example, fire that has ceased from burning and blazing also ceases from existing. Answer. The Lord God in the six days brought all creation from non-being into being, and on the seventh day he rested from bringing any further things from non-being into being according to their proper principles. \"And the Lord God rested,\" it says, \"on the seventh day from all the works which he had begun to do.\" And he commanded the Jews to work for six days and to keep Sabbath on the seventh day, so that, while they work and cease from work, the memory of God's working and resting might be preserved among them typologically. And the power by which God made creation he had and has eternally; but he works according to this eternal power when he wills, the power remaining in its own strength eternally both before the activity and after the activity, all temporal expenditure and addition being wholly removed. Therefore he can always do all things that he wills to do. But he no longer wills to do all things that he can do.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":154,"ref":"p154","source":"καὶ γὰρ πλείονας ἡλίους ἠδύνατο καὶ δύναται ποι εῖν, ἀλλ' ὅμως ἕνα μόνον ἥλιον ἐποίησεν, ὅτι ἕνα μόνον ἐβούλετο ποιεῖν. ἐπειδὴ οὖν βουλήσει καὶ οὐ τῷ εἶναι ποιεῖ ὁ θεός, διὰ τοῦτο οὐ παύεται τοῦ εἶναι [θεός], παυσαμένης τῆς ἐνεργείας αὐτοῦ· ὧν γὰρ τῇ καταπαύσει τῆς ἐνεργείας συμπαύεται καὶ τὸ εἶναι, τούτοις ἐνεργεῖν τὸ εἶναι καὶ οὐ τὸ βούλεσθαι πρόσεστιν· οἷον, τὸ πῦρ ἅμα ὑπάρχειν καὶ τὸ εἶναι καὶ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν καὶ τὸ μὴ ὑπάρχειν καὶ τὸ ἐνεργεῖν οὐχ ὑπάρχει. διὸ καὶ ἡ κατάφασις οὐσίας τε καὶ ἐνεργείας αὐτοῦ ἀντιστρέφει· ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ἡ ἀπό φασις αὐτῷ· οἷόν ἐστι τὸ πῦρ·\n\nἐνεργεῖ τὸ πῦρ; ἔστι τὸ πῦρ. οὐκ ἐνεργεῖ τὸ πῦρ; οὐκ ἔστι τὸ πῦρ. ΡΜΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ ἀναιρούμενον ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀναιροῦντος ἀπόλλυται καὶ τὸ ἀναιροῦν φαυλότητι τὰ τῆς ἀπωλείας ἐργάζεται (πλεῖ στα δὲ τοιαῦτα ἐν τοῖς ἐμψύχοις πάντων τῶν ἀλόγων εὑρίσκεται καὶ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐστι θεάσασθαι οὐ μόνον κατ' ἀλλήλων ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων τὰ τῆς ἐπιβουλῆς ἐπεκτεινόμενα), πῶς ἀλη θεύει ὁ λέγων ὅτι ὁ θεὸς πάντα καλὰ λίαν ἐποίησεν; εἰ δὲ ἀλη θεύει, ἀγαθὰ δὲ καὶ φαῦλα ἐν τῇ κτίσει ὑπάρχουσι, πῶς τὰ μὲν ἀγαθὰ ἀγαθοῦ, τὰ δὲ φαῦλα φαύλου δημιουργοῦ οὐ γνωρίζονται καὶ δύο ἐναντίαι ἀρχαὶ κατὰ Μανιχαίους οὐ δείκνυνται; εἰ δὲ ἡ ἀναίρεσις τῶν ἀναιρουμένων ἐπ' ἀγαθῷ γίνεται, καθὼς τοῦτο παρ' ἐνίοις ὑπείληπται, πῶς οὐκ ἦν ἀγαθώτερον τὸ ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος εἰς τὸ μὴ εἶναι αὐτῶν κωλυθῆναι τὴν πάροδον; Ἀπόκρισις.","english":"For he could have made, and can make, more suns, yet he made only one sun, because he wished to make only one. Since, then, God creates by will and not by being, for this reason he does not cease to be [God] when his activity ceases; for things whose being ceases together with the cessation of their activity have being in their activity and not in their will—for example, fire has both existence and activity at once, and when it does not exist, it does not have activity. Therefore both the affirmation of his essence and activity converts, and likewise the negation for it; such as is the case with fire:\n\nDoes the fire act? The fire exists. Does the fire not act? The fire does not exist. 149. Question. If what is destroyed by the destroyer perishes, and the destroyer by its depravity works the things of destruction (and most such things are found among living beings, more than among all irrational creatures, and in them one may observe the plots extended not only against one another but also against humans), how is he who says that God made all things very good speaking truth? But if he speaks truth, and good and evil things exist in creation, how are the good things not recognized as belonging to a good creator, and the evil things to an evil one, and how are two contrary principles, according to the Manichaeans, not demonstrated? But if the destruction of those being destroyed happens for a good end, as this has been supposed by some, how was it not better that their passage from non-being into non-being be prevented from the beginning? Answer.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[{"kind":"lacuna","severity":"caution","text":"The source is fragmentary here: the edition marks a break or an editorial bracket, and the English carries across it. Treat the bridge as supplied, not translated."}]},{"i":155,"ref":"p155","source":"Ὁ ἐκ τῆς δημιουργίας τῶν ἐμψύχων λογικῶν τε καὶ ἀλόγων περὶ τοῦ δημιουργοῦ ἀκόλουθον ποιούμενος τὴν ζή τησιν, πρὸς τὴν φύσιν αὐτῶν ὀφείλει ἀποβλέπειν, τὴν κατὰ τὸν τοῦ δημιουργοῦ ὅρον ἄγουσαν τὰ θνητὰ πάντα, ὥσπερ εἰς γένε σιν, οὕτως καὶ εἰς φθοράν τε καὶ ἀπώλειαν. εἰ δὲ κατὰ ταῦτα μὲν ζῴου πρὸς ζῷον οὐκ ἔστι διαφορά, τῶν δὲ διαφορῶν εἷς καὶ αὐτός ἐστι δημιουργός, δῆλον ἄρα ὅτι πάντων τῶν ζῴων λογικῶν τε καὶ ἀλόγων εἷς καὶ ὁ αὐτός ἐστι δημιουργός· ἣν δὲ ἐκ τῆς ὑπ' ἀλλήλων ἐπιβουλῆς ὑπομένουσιν ἀπώλειαν, κατὰ τὴν θείαν πρό νοιαν συγκεχώρηται συμβαίνειν αὐτοῖς· εἰ γάρ, ὑποκειμένων αὐτῶν τῇ τε κατὰ φύσιν καὶ τῇ κατὰ ἐπιβουλὴν φθορᾷ τε καὶ ἀπωλείᾳ, οὐ παρῃτήσαντό τινες θεοποιῆσαι αὐτά, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἂν ἐθεοποιοῦντο, εἰ βλάβης τε καὶ ἀπωλείας διὰ παντὸς ἐκτὸς μεμενή κασιν; ἵν' οὖν ἀφ' ὧν ὑπομένουσι γνωρισθῶσιν ὅπερ εἰσί, τουτέστιν ἀνάξια τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ τιμῆς τε καὶ προσηγορίας, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ φύσει καὶ ἐπιβουλῇ ὑπομένουσιν ἃ ὑπομένουσιν. γέγονε δὲ τὰ ἄλογα ζῷα εἰς ὑπουργίαν ἀνθρώπου, τὰ μὲν εἰς τροφήν, τὰ δὲ εἰς παιδείαν, ὡς τὸ \"ὀδόντας θηρίων ἐπαποστελῶ εἰς αὐτούς, μετὰ θυμοῦ συρόντων ἐπὶ γῆς\". ἀλλ' εἰ ἀγαθόν ἐστι τὸ τρέφε σθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐκ τῶν ἀλόγων ζῴων καὶ ὑπουργεῖσθαι ὑπ' αὐτῶν καὶ παιδεύεσθαι δι' αὐτῶν, ἀγαθὴ ἄρα ἡ εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτῶν πάροδος καὶ ἀδιάβλητος ἐπὶ φαυλότητι φύσεως καὶ τῆς ἐξ αὐτῶν χρείας. εἰ δὲ τοῦτο, δῆλον ὅτι ἑνὸς δημιουργοῦ ἐστιν ἀγαθοῦ πάντα τὰ ἄλογα ζῷα δημιουργήματα. ΡΝʹ. Ἐρώτησις.","english":"He who makes the consequent inquiry concerning the Creator from the creation of living things, both rational and irrational, ought to look to their nature, which, according to the definition of the Creator, leads all mortal things alike to generation and to corruption and destruction. But if in these respects there is no difference between one living thing and another, and the differences have one and the same Creator, it is clear, then, that there is one and the same Creator of all living things, both rational and irrational. And the destruction which they suffer from plotting against one another has been permitted by divine providence to befall them. For if, when they were subject both to natural and to deliberate corruption and destruction, some did not refrain from deifying them, how much more would they have been deified if they had remained at all times free from harm and destruction? In order, then, that from what they suffer they might be recognized for what they are—that is, unworthy of the honor and appellation of God—for this reason they suffer, both by nature and by plotting, the things which they suffer. And the irrational animals have come into being for the service of man, some for food, some for instruction, as it is written: \"I will send upon them the teeth of beasts, with fury dragging upon the earth.\" But if it is good for man to be nourished by irrational animals and to be served by them and instructed through them, then their passage into being is good and blameless as regards any baseness of nature and the use made of them. And if this is so, it is clear that all irrational animals are the creations of one good Creator. 150. Question.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":156,"ref":"p156","source":"Εἰ τὴν προλεχθεῖσαν φαυλότητα φθόνῳ τῆς τῶν ἀνθρώπων σωτηρίας ἐν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ὁ ἐχθρὸς κατεργά ζεται, μηχανώμενος διὰ τούτων ταῖς μελλούσαις αὐτοὺς ὑποβάλ λειν κολάσεσι, τὰ ἄλογα μήτε σωτηρίαν μήτε τιμωρίαν ἐν τοῖς μέλλουσι κομίζεσθαι μέλλοντα καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τὸ ἀπολέμητον ἔχοντα, πῶς οὐ μὴ φαυλότητι φύσεως τὰ φαῦλα μετέρχονται; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ ἐπὶ φαυλότητι φύσεως διαβάλλειν τῶν ἀλό γων τὰς φύσεις οὐκ ἔστιν εὔλογον· τῶν γὰρ λόγου μετεχόντων ἐστὶ τὸ ἀγαθῶς ἢ φαύλως τι διαπράξασθαι, οὐχὶ τῶν λόγου ἀμετόχων. καὶ ἐπειδὴ διὰ τὴν προλεχθεῖσαν χρείαν γέγονε τῶν ἀλό γων ἡ φύσις, διὰ τοῦτο δῆλον ὅτι, ἀγαθῆς οὔσης τῆς χρείας, ἀγαθή ἐστι καὶ ἡ φύσις. ΡΝΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸν νόμον τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις ὁ θεὸς διὰ Μωσέως κατέπεμψε, πῶς ἐν πλείοσι τόποις τῆς θείας γραφῆς νόμος καὶ τοῦ νόμου νομοθέτης ὁ Μωσῆς ὀνομάζεται; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἔθος ἐστὶν οὐ μόνον ἐν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῇ θείᾳ γραφῇ, τῷ τοῦ εἰρηκότος τὸν λόγον ὀνόματι ὀνομά ζειν τὸν λόγον, εἰς δήλωσιν τοῦ τίνος εἶναι τὸν λόγον, ὡς τὸ \"ἐκάθητο ὁ εὐνοῦχος ἐπὶ τοῦ ἅρματος καὶ ἀνεγίνωσκε τὸν προ φήτην Ἡσαΐαν\". καὶ πάλιν· \"τὸ βδέλυγμα\" φησί \"τῆς ἐρημώ σεως τὸ εἰρημένον ἐν τῷ προφήτῃ Δανιήλ\"· ὣς δὲ καὶ ἡμῖν ἔθος λέγειν \"ἐκτησάμην τὸ προφήτην Ἱερεμίαν\" ἢ \"τὸν ἀπό στολον\". ΡΝΒʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ἀληθινός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ τὴν πρᾶξιν καὶ κλῆσιν κατὰ τὴν θείαν γραφὴν ἐπιδεικνύμενος, Ἐμμανουὴλ δὲ καλεῖσθαι τὸν Χριστὸν ἡ θεία γραφὴ προηγόρευσε, πῶς ἀληθινὸς ὁ Χριστὸς νομισθήσεται, ὁ μετὰ τὸ τεχθῆναι","english":"If the enemy works this wickedness among men through envy of their salvation, contriving by these means to subject them to future punishments, how is it that irrational animals, which are to receive neither salvation nor punishment in the things to come and therefore possess what cannot be warred against, do not pursue evil things by wickedness of nature? Answer. It is not reasonable to slander the natures of irrational animals on the ground of wickedness of nature; for it belongs to those who partake of reason to do something well or badly, not to those who have no share in reason. And since the nature of irrational animals came to be for the aforementioned use, it is clear that, the use being good, the nature is also good. 151. Question. If God sent the law to the Israelites through Moses, how is it that in many places of divine Scripture both law and Moses the lawgiver of the law are named? Answer. It is a custom not only among men but also in divine Scripture to name the word by the name of the one who spoke the word, to indicate whose the word is, as in \"the eunuch was sitting in the chariot and was reading the prophet Isaiah\"; and again: \"the abomination,\" he says, \"of desolation, which was spoken of in the prophet Daniel\"; and as we also are accustomed to say \"I acquired the prophet Jeremiah\" or \"the apostle.\" 152. Question. If Christ is true, who displays his action and calling according to divine Scripture, and divine Scripture foretold that Christ would be called Emmanuel, how will Christ be considered true, who after being born","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":157,"ref":"p157","source":"μηδαμοῦ τοῦ Ἐμμανουὴλ τὴν προσηγορίαν δεξάμενος; οὐδεὶς γὰρ τὸν ἐλ θόντα Χριστὸν τῇ κλήσει τοῦ Ἐμμανουὴλ ἐπὶ λέξεως προση γόρευσεν. Ἀπόκρισις. Εἰ ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελικοῖς διηγήμασι περιέχεται τῶν θείων περὶ Χριστοῦ προρρήσεων ἡ ἔκβασις, παραδέδωκε δὲ ἡμῖν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὸν κατὰ θείαν πρόρρησιν προορισθέντα τῷ τοῦ Ἐμμανουὴλ καλεῖσθαι ὀνόματι ὁ μακάριος Ματθαῖος, πῶς οὐ καλεῖται τῷ τοῦ Ἐμμανουὴλ ὀνόματι; οὐ διέλιπεν ἡ ἁγία τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκκλησία, μαθοῦσα ἐκ τῆς διδασκαλίας τοῦ ἁγίου εὐαγγε λίου, Ἐμμανουὴλ ὀνομάζειν τὸν Χριστόν. ἔχομεν δὲ καὶ ἐν τῇ ὀνομασίᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ πάσας τὰς λοιπὰς ὀνομασίας αὐτοῦ περιεχομένας, εἰ καὶ μὴ πάσαις ἀεὶ κεχρήμεθα· οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐπειδὴ καλεῖται Ἐμμανουήλ ἐστιν Ἐμμανουήλ, ἀλλ' ἐπειδή ἐστι καλεῖται. ΡΝΓʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ τὸ τοὺς γονέας ἀθετεῖν ὑπὸ τῆς θείας γραφῆς ἀπηγόρευται καὶ ὁ μετιὼν τὰ ἀπηγορευμένα ἁμαρτωλὸς ὀνομάζεται, πῶς ἐν διαφόροις τόποις τοὺς οἰκείους γονέας ὁ δε σπότης Χριστὸς ἀθετήσας ἀναμάρτητος δείκνυται; ἐν μὲν γὰρ τῷ γάμῳ \"τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοὶ γύναι\" τῇ μητρὶ λέγων ἐπέπληξεν, καὶ ἡνίκα αὐτὸν θεάσασθαι ἡ μήτηρ ἠθέλησε, μητέρα καὶ ἀδελφοὺς τοὺς τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ ποιοῦντας ὠνόμασε. καὶ πάλιν, ὅτε ἐμακαρίζετο ἡ βαστάσασα αὐτὸν κοιλία καὶ μαστοὶ οὓς ἐθήλασε, τοὺς ποιοῦντας τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτὸς ἐμακάριζεν· ἅπερ ἅπαντα ἐφ' ὕβρει τῆς μητρὸς παρ' αὐτοῦ νομίζονται λέγεσθαι, διότι τῆς μητρὸς ὀνομασθείσης καὶ μακαρισθείσης κατὰ ἀντιδιαστολὴν αὐτῆς ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ἐμακαρίσθησαν ἕτεροι. ἡ δὲ ἀντιδιαστολὴ δῆλον ὅτι ἐπὶ ἐναντίων πραγμάτων λαμβάνεται.","english":"without ever receiving the name Emmanuel? For no one literally addressed the coming Christ by the name Emmanuel. Answer. If the fulfillment of the divine predictions concerning Christ is contained in the Gospel narratives, and the blessed Matthew has handed down to us that he is the one foreordained by divine prediction to be called by the name Emmanuel, how is he not called by the name Emmanuel? The holy Church of God has not ceased, having learned from the teaching of the holy Gospel, to name Christ Emmanuel. And we have in the naming of Christ all his other names contained, even if we do not always use them all; for he is not Emmanuel because he is called so, but he is called so because he is.\n\n153. Question. If it is forbidden by divine Scripture to dishonor one's parents, and one who pursues what is forbidden is called a sinner, how is it that in various places the Lord Christ, having dishonored his own parents, is shown to be without sin? For at the wedding, when he said to his mother, \"What have I to do with you, woman?\" he rebuked her; and when his mother wished to see him, he named as mother and brothers those who do the will of God. And again, when the womb that bore him and the breasts that he nursed were being blessed, he himself blessed those who do the will of God; all of which are thought to have been said by him in insult to his mother, because when his mother was named and blessed, others were blessed by him in contrast to her. And the contrast is clearly taken in the sense of opposites.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":158,"ref":"p158","source":"ἄλλως τε, εἰ τὴν ἁγίαν παρθέ νον ὁ θεὸς εἰς τοσαύτην οἰκονομίας ὑπουργίαν ἐκλέλεκται, πῶς ἀναξία μακαρισμοῦ κατὰ τὰ προλεχθέντα ἡ παρθένος νενόμισται; εἰ δὲ τὰ ῥηθέντα ἐναντίως ἔχει πρὸς ἄλληλα, πῶς τὰ ἀλλήλοις ἐναντία τὴν παρ' ἀλλήλων οὐ λαμβάνει κατάλυσιν; Ἀπόκρισις. Τὸ \"τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σὺ γύναι\" οὐ πρὸς ἐπίπληξιν εἴρηται τῇ Μαρίᾳ παρὰ τοῦ σωτῆρος, ἀλλὰ πρὸς ἔνδειξιν τοῦ μὴ ἡμᾶς, φησίν, εἶναι τοὺς ἀναδεδεγμένους τοῦ ἐν τῷ γάμῳ ἀναλισκομένου οἴνου τὴν φροντίδα. ὅμως ἐκ πολλῆς ἀγάπης, εἰ θέλεις, ἵνα μὴ λείψῃ αὐτοῖς οἶνος, εἰπὲ τοῖς ὑπηρέταις ἵνα ποιήσωσιν ὃ λέγω αὐτοῖς, καὶ βλέπεις ὅτι οὐ λείψει αὐτοῖς οἶνος· ὅπερ καὶ γέγονεν. οὐκ ἂν οὖν λέξει τὴν μητέρα ἐπέπληξεν, ἣν τοῖς ἔργοις ἐτίμα· ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἄλλαις φωναῖς οὐ χωρίζει τὴν μητέρα τῆς πρεπούσης. τιμῆς, ἀλλὰ δείκνυσι κατὰ ποίαν μητρότητα μακαρι στή ἐστιν ἡ παρθένος· εἰ γὰρ ὁ ἀκούων τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ φυλάττων οὗτος ἀδελφὸς καὶ ἀδελφὴ καὶ μήτηρ ἐστί, προσῆν δὲ τῇ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ ἀμφότερα, δῆλον ὅτι κατὰ ταύτην τὴν μητρότητα βούλεται μακαρίζεσθαι τὴν μητέρα αὑτοῦ. τὸ γὰρ ἀκούειν τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ φυλάττειν ἀρετῆς ἐστι τῆς καθαρᾶς ψυχῆς, ὅλης πρὸς τὸν θεὸν ἀποβλεπούσης. καὶ ἐπειδὴ οὐ τὴν τυχοῦσαν γυναῖκα ἐπελέξατο ὁ θεὸς γενέσθαι μητέρα τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἀλλὰ τὴν πᾶσαν τῶν γυναικῶν ταῖς ἀρεταῖς ὑπερκειμένην, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ὁ Χριστὸς ἀπὸ ταύτης τῆς ἀρετῆς ἐβούλετο μακαρίζεσθαι τὴν μητέρα αὑτοῦ, δι' ἧς ἠξιώθη ἡ παρθένος μήτηρ αὐτοῦ γε νέσθαι.","english":"Besides, if God chose the holy virgin for such a great service of the divine plan, how is the virgin considered unworthy of blessing, according to what was said before? And if the things said are contrary to one another, how do things contrary to one another not receive their dissolution from one another? Answer. The words \"What is it to me and to you, woman?\" were not spoken to Mary by the Savior as a rebuke, but to show that, as he says, we are not the ones who have taken on the care of the wine consumed at the wedding. Nevertheless, out of great love, if you wish that wine not fail them, tell the servants to do what I tell them, and you will see that wine will not fail them; and this indeed happened. He would not, then, have rebuked with a word the mother whom he honored with deeds; and in the other sayings he does not separate his mother from the honor that is fitting, but shows according to what kind of motherhood the virgin is blessed. For if the one who hears the word of God and keeps it is brother and sister and mother, and both belonged to his mother, it is clear that according to this motherhood he wishes his mother to be blessed. For to hear the word of God and keep it is the mark of a pure soul's virtue, looking wholly toward God. And since God did not choose just any woman to become the mother of Christ, but the one who surpassed all women in virtues, for this reason Christ also wished his mother to be blessed from this virtue, through which the virgin was deemed worthy to become his mother.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":159,"ref":"p159","source":"ὅτι δὲ πρὸς τὴν ἀτιμίαν ἢ ἀπείθειαν τῶν γονέων οὐδαμῶς φαίνεται ὁ Χριστός τι διαπραξάμενος, μαρτυρεῖ Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγ γελιστὴς λέγων περὶ αὐτοῦ, ὅτι \"κατέβη μετὰ Ἰωσὴφ καὶ Μαρίας ἀπὸ Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ ἦν ὑποτασσόμενος αὐτοῖς\".\n\nΡΝΔʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ πρὸ τοῦ τάφου τῷ μύρῳ ἡ Μαρία τὸν κύριον ἤλειψεν, ἡμεῖς δὲ τοῦ πάθους καὶ τῆς ἀναστάσεως αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βαπτίσματι τελοῦμεν τὰ σύμβολα, πῶς πρῶτον μὲν ἐλαίῳ χριόμενοι, ἔπειτα δὲ τὰ προλεχθέντα ἐν τῇ κολυμβήθρᾳ τελέ σαντες σύμβολα, τῷ μύρῳ σφραγιζόμεθα ὕστερον, καὶ κατ' ἐναντίωσιν τῶν περὶ τὸν κύριον γεγονότων ταῦτα ποιεῖν οὐ νομίζομεν, εἴ γε πρῶτον ὁ κύριος τῷ μύρῳ ἠλείψατο καὶ ὕστερον ἔπαθεν; πῶς δὲ καὶ οὐ περιττὴ ἡ τοῦ ἐλαίου χρῖσις προσφέρεται τοῖς βαπτίζεσθαι μέλλουσιν, εἴ γε μόνῳ τῷ μύρῳ πρὸς τῷ πάθει ἐχρίσθη ὁ κύριος; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἐπειδὴ ἃ ποιεῖ τις πρὸς τὸν ἐνταφιασμὸν τοῦ\n\nἐνταφιαζομένου μετὰ τὸν θάνατον αὐτοῦ ποιεῖ, ἡ δὲ μακαρία Μαρία πρὸ τοῦ θανάτου ἐμύρισε τοῦ κυρίου τὸ σῶμα–κατὰ τὸ εἰρημένον· \"ὃ ἐποίησε\" φησίν \"αὕτη, πρὸς ἐνταφιασμὸν ἐποίησε· προλαβοῦσα ἐμύρισέ μου τὸ σῶμα\". τὸ δὲ \"προλαβοῦσα\", ἀντὶ τοῦ \"πρὸ τοῦ δέοντος καιροῦ ἐμύρισέ μου τὸ σῶμα\"–, διὰ τοῦτο οὐδὲν γίνεται κατὰ ἐναντίωσιν, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου γεγονὸς πρὸ τοῦ καιροῦ τοῦτο ἐπὶ τῶν βαπτιζομένων γίνεται ἐν τῷ δέοντι καιρῷ.","english":"That Christ is in no way shown to have done anything toward the dishonor or disobedience of his parents, Luke the evangelist bears witness, saying of him that \"he went down with Joseph and Mary from Jerusalem, and he was subject to them.\"\n\nQuestion 154. If Mary anointed the Lord with myrrh before the tomb, and we in baptism perform the symbols of his passion and resurrection, how is it that we are first anointed with oil, then after performing the aforementioned symbols in the font are afterward sealed with myrrh, and we do not consider that we are doing these things in opposition to what happened in the case of the Lord, if indeed the Lord was first anointed with myrrh and afterward suffered? And how is the anointing with oil not superfluous when brought to those about to be baptized, if indeed the Lord was anointed with myrrh alone in addition to his passion? Answer. Since what a person does for the burial of the one being buried, he does after his death, but the blessed Mary anointed the Lord's body before his death—according to what was said: \"What she did,\" he says, \"she did for my burial; she has anointed my body beforehand\"—and \"having come beforehand\" means \"before the proper time she anointed my body\"—for this reason nothing is done in opposition, but what happened in the case of the Lord before the time, this happens in the case of those being baptized at the proper time.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":160,"ref":"p160","source":"χριόμεθα δὲ τῷ μὲν ἐλαίῳ, ἵνα γινώμεθα χριστιανοί, τῷ δὲ μύρῳ πρὸς ἀνάμνησιν τοῦ τὴν χρῖσιν τοῦ μύρου ἐνταφιασμὸν αὐτοῦ λογισαμένου, καὶ τύπῳ μὲν ἐπὶ τοῦ παρόντος, ἀληθείᾳ δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος εἰς τὴν κοινωνίαν τῶν τε ἑαυτοῦ παθημάτων καὶ τῆς δόξης τοῦ ἡμᾶς καλεσαμένου σωτῆρος Χριστοῦ. ΡΝΕʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ δίκαιός ἐστιν ὁ τὸν ἡμαρτηκότα ὑπὲρ ὧν ἥμαρτε τιμωρούμενος, πῶς δίκαιος ὁ θεὸς ὁ τοσοῦτον λαὸν διὰ πταίσματα θανατώσας ἑτέρων; λέγω δὲ πταίσαντας τὸν Ἰωνάθαν καὶ τὸν Δαυίδ, τὸν μὲν ἐξ ἀγνοίας λύσαντα τὴν νηστείαν τῇ γεύσει τοῦ μέλιτος, τὸν δὲ προπετῶς τὸν λαὸν ἀριθμήσαντα. εἰ δέ τις λέγοι, ὡς τῶν ὑπηκόων ὁ θάνατος ἐπὶ τιμωρίᾳ τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐγίνετο, πῶς οὐκ ἀδικεῖ τοὺς ἀναιτίους ὑποβάλλων κολάσεσιν; ἐναντιοῦται δὲ καὶ τῇ λεγούσῃ γραφῇ, ὅτι \"ψυχὴ ἡ ἁμαρτήσασα, αὐτὴ ἀποθανεῖται. Ἀπόκρισις. Ὅτι δὲ πικροτάτη ἐστὶ τιμωρία τῶν ἡμαρτηκότων βασιλέων ἡ πτῶσις τοῦ λαοῦ, δηλοῖ αὐτὸς ὁ μακάριος Δαυίδ, δεόμενος τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς αὑτόν τε καὶ εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ τοῦ λαοῦ μεταγαγεῖν τὴν πληγήν· σάλος γάρ ἐστι τῆς βα σιλείας ἡ μείωσις τῶν βασιλευομένων. ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ὁ Σαοὺλ ἔμελλεν ἀναιρεῖν τὸν υἱὸν αὑτοῦ Ἰωνάθαν, ἵνα τῇ ἀναιρέσει αὐτοῦ τὴν πληγὴν ἰάσηται τοῦ λαοῦ, εἰ μὴ φθάσας ὁ λαὸς ὤμοσε μὴ ἀποθανεῖν τὸν Ἰωνάθαν. καὶ ὡς σύγκειται ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, οὕτως καὶ ἡ βασιλεία σύγκειται ἐκ τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ τῶν βασιλευομένων.","english":"We are anointed with oil, so that we may become Christians, and with myrrh as a reminder of him who reckoned the anointing of myrrh to be his burial, and as a type for the present, but in truth for the future, unto the communion of his own sufferings and of the glory of the Savior Christ who called us. 155. Question. If he is just who punishes the one who has sinned for the things he sinned, how is God just who put to death so great a people because of the transgressions of others? I mean Jonathan and David who sinned, the one having broken the fast in ignorance by tasting honey, the other having rashly numbered the people. But if someone should say that the death of the subjects came as a punishment for the rulers, how does he not act unjustly in subjecting the innocent to chastisements? And it also contradicts the Scripture which says, \"The soul that has sinned, it shall die.\" Answer. That the fall of the people is a most bitter punishment of the kings who have sinned, the blessed David himself makes clear, beseeching God to transfer the blow from the people to himself and to his house; for the diminution of the ruled is a shaking of the kingdom. Likewise also Saul was about to kill his own son Jonathan, in order that by his killing he might heal the blow of the people, unless the people, having anticipated, had sworn that Jonathan should not die. And as man is composed of soul and body, so also the kingdom is composed of the king and the ruled.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":161,"ref":"p161","source":"καὶ ὥσπερ ἁμαρτήσας ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἁμαρ τήματα διὰ χειρὸς καὶ τυπτηθεὶς εἰς τὸν νῶτον οὐκ ἀδικεῖ ὁ τυπτήσας αὐτόν, οὕτως οὐκ ἀδικεῖ ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ τοῖς τῶν βασι λέων πταίσμασι τὸν λαὸν τιμωρούμενος· μεγάλως γὰρ οἶδεν ἀνιᾶν τοὺς βασιλεῖς ἡ πληγὴ τοῦ λαοῦ· τῆς γὰρ βασιλείας ἐστὶ τιμωρία ἡ πληγὴ τοῦ λαοῦ. ΡΝ ςʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ κληρονόμον ἑαυτὸν ὁ Χριστὸς ὀνομάζει, τοῦτον δὲ κατὰ τὴν παραβολὴν οἱ γεωργοί, τουτέστιν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐπέγνωσαν, καὶ τῆς γεωργίας δεσπόται γενέσθαι ποθήσαντες ὡς κληρονόμον τὸν Χριστὸν ἀπέκτειναν, πῶς αὐτὸς ὁ Χριστὸς καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος Παῦλος τοῦ τολμήματος αὐτοῖς ἐμαρτύρησαν ἄγνοιαν, ὃ μὲν λέγων αὐτοῖς \"ἄφες αὐτοῖς, οὐ γὰρ οἴδασι τί ποιοῦσιν\", ὃ δὲ φάσκων \"εἰ γὰρ ἔγνωσαν, οὐκ ἂν τὸν κύριον τῆς δόξης ἐσταύρωσαν\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Διχῶς ἡ ἄγνοια νοεῖται· ἢ γὰρ μὴ βουλόμε νός τις ἀγνοεῖ, ὅταν πράγματα ὁδηγοῦντα εἰς γνῶσιν οὐκ ἔχει, ἢ βουλόμενος ἀγνοεῖ, ὅταν πράγματα μὲν ἔχῃ ὁδηγοῦντα εἰς γνῶ σιν, μὴ βουλόμενος δὲ γνῶναι. ταύτην δὲ τὴν βουλητὴν ἄγνοιαν οἶδεν ἡ θεία γραφὴ ποτὲ μὲν ἄγνοιαν ποτὲ δὲ γνῶσιν ὀνομάζειν· ἄγνοιαν μέν, ὡς ὅταν λέγῃ \"οὔτε ἐμὲ οἴδατε οὔτε τὸν πατέρα μου\"· γνῶσιν δέ, ὡς ὅταν λέγῃ \"καὶ ἐμὲ οἴδατε καὶ πόθεν εἰμὶ οἴδατε\", ἀντὶ τοῦ \"δύνασθε ἀφ' ὧν ἐργάζομαι γνῶναι τῆς τε ὀνομασίας τῆς ἐμῆς καὶ τῶν λόγων μου τὴν ἀλήθειαν\"· ψευδό μενος γὰρ οὐ δύναται τοιαῦτα ἔργα ποιεῖν.","english":"And just as a man who has sinned sins with his hand and is struck on the back, the one who struck him does no wrong, so God does no wrong when he punishes the people for the transgressions of kings; for the plague of the people greatly knows how to grieve kings; for the plague of the people is a punishment of the kingdom. 156. Question. If Christ calls himself an heir, and the farmers in the parable, that is, the Jews, recognized him as such, and desiring to become masters of the farm killed Christ as an heir, how did Christ himself and the apostle Paul testify that they were ignorant of the outrage, the one saying to them, \"Forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing,\" and the other declaring, \"For if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory\"? Answer. Ignorance is understood in two ways: for either one is ignorant unwillingly, when he does not have the things that lead to knowledge, or he is ignorant willingly, when he has the things that lead to knowledge but does not wish to know. This willing ignorance divine Scripture sometimes calls ignorance and sometimes knowledge: ignorance, as when it says, \"You neither know me nor my Father\"; and knowledge, as when it says, \"And you know me and you know where I am from,\" instead of \"You are able from the works I do to know the truth of my name and of my words\"; for a liar cannot do such works.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":162,"ref":"p162","source":"τὸ δὲ ὑπὸ τῶν γεωρ γῶν γνωρισθῆναι τὸν κληρονόμον, καθὸ ἐθεάσαντο αὐτὸν ὑπὲρ πάντα εἶναι ἄνθρωπον ἐν τῇ παρούσῃ ζωῇ, τοῖς ἔργοις οἷς ἐποίει καὶ τῇ κλήσει τοῦ υἱοῦ κατὰ τὴν ὑποτύπωσιν τῆς παραβολῆς. ὅτι δὲ μετὰ τὸ ἀποθανεῖν αὐτὸν ἀνίστησιν αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν εἰς ἀθάνατον ζωήν, καὶ τίθησιν αὐτὸν κληρονόμον, οὐκ ἔγνωσαν· οὔτε γὰρ ἡ ὑποτύπωσις τῆς παραβολῆς εἶχε τούτου τὴν ἔμφασιν. κατὰ ταύτην οὖν τὴν ἄγνοιαν εἶπεν ὁ σωτήρ· \"πάτερ, ἄφες αὐτοῖς, οὐ γὰρ οἴδασι τί ποιοῦσιν\". ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος· \"εἰ γὰρ ἔγνωσαν, οὐκ ἂν τὸν κύριον τῆς δόξης ἐσταύρωσαν\".\n\nΡΝΖʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ μόνος ὁ Χριστὸς τὸν θεῖον νόμον ἀκριβῶς ἐξετέλεσε, πῶς ἐπορεύοντο ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ἄμεμπτοι ὅ τε Ζαχαρίας καὶ ἡ Ἐλισάβετ, περὶ ὧν ταῦτα ὁ Λουκᾶς ἐμαρτύρησε, καὶ ὁ Παῦλος δὲ \"κατὰ δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ νόμου γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἄλλο τὸ ἄμεμπτον καὶ ἄλλο τὸ ἀναμάρτητον· ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἀναμάρτητος ἐκ παντὸς καὶ ἄμεμπτος, οὐκ ἔτι δὲ ὁ ἄμεμπτος ἐξ ἀνάγκης καὶ ἀναμάρτητός ἐστιν· ὁ γὰρ ἁμαρτάνων παρὰ τὸν νόμον συγγνωστὴν ἁμαρτίαν τῇ προσαγωγῇ τῶν θυσιῶν καὶ τῇ ἐξαγορεύσει τοῦ πταίσματος λαβὼν τὴν ἄφεσιν γίνεται καθαρὸς καὶ ἄμεμπτος \"κατὰ τὴν ἐκ νόμου δικαιοσύνην\"· ὁ δὲ Χρι στός, ἅτε ἀναμάρτητος ὢν καὶ οὐδαμῶς παραβὰς τὸν νόμον, οὔτε διεπράξατό τι διορθώσεως δεόμενον· ἐδέξατο δὲ καὶ τὸν βαπτιστὴν Ἰωάννην καὶ ἐβαπτίσθη ὑπ' αὐτοῦ, ἵνα πληρώσῃ πᾶσαν δικαιο σύνην, ἣν ὁ Παῦλος πρὸ τοῦ πιστεῦσαι τῷ Χριστῷ οὔπω ἦν δεξάμενος, ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἂν ἐδίωξε τὴν ἐκκλησίαν. διὰ τοῦτο οὖν ὁ Χριστὸς μόνος λέγεται ἀναμάρτητος εἶναι.","english":"But the fact that the heir was made known by the farmers, in that they saw him to be a man above all others in the present life, was shown by the works he did and by the calling of the son, according to the figure of the parable. But that after he died God raises him from the dead to immortal life and makes him heir, they did not know; for neither did the figure of the parable contain an indication of this. It was in accordance with this ignorance, then, that the Savior said: \"Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.\" And likewise the apostle: \"For if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.\"\n\n157. Question. If only Christ fulfilled the divine law exactly, how did Zechariah and Elizabeth walk blamelessly in the law, concerning whom Luke gave this testimony, and Paul too, \"having become blameless according to the righteousness that is from the law\"? Answer. One thing is blameless and another is sinless; for the sinless one is in every respect also blameless, but the blameless one is not necessarily also sinless; for the one who sins contrary to the law, having received forgiveness through the offering of sacrifices and the confession of the offense, becomes clean and blameless \"according to the righteousness that is from the law\"; but Christ, being sinless and in no way a transgressor of the law, neither did anything needing correction; and he also received John the Baptist and was baptized by him, in order to fulfill all righteousness, which Paul had not yet received before he believed in Christ, since otherwise he would not have persecuted the church. For this reason, then, Christ alone is said to be sinless.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":163,"ref":"p163","source":"ΡΝΗʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὁ ἄγγελος τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀνώτερος καὶ θεοὺς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἡ γραφὴ ὀνομάζει, πῶς οὐχ ἁρμόττει καὶ τοὺς ἀγγέλους θεοὺς παρ' ἡμῶν ὀνομάζεσθαι; Ἀπόκρισις. Τῶν ἀγγέλων ὅσοι ἐν τάξει θεοῦ ὤφθησαν ἢ ἐλάλησαν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, ἐσχήκασι καὶ αὐτοὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν κλῆ σιν, ὡς ὁ λαλήσας τῷ Ἰακὼβ καὶ τῷ Μωσεῖ· ἐκλήθησαν δὲ καὶ οἱ ἄνθρωποι θεοί· ἑκατέροις δὲ διὰ τὴν ἐγχειρισθεῖσαν αὐτοῖς χρείαν ἐδόθη τοῦ θεοῦ ἡ τάξις καὶ ἡ προσηγορία. πληρωθείσης δὲ τῆς χρείας παύονται τοῦ καλεῖσθαι θεοὶ οἱ χρείας τινὸς ἕνε κεν εἰληφότες τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν κλῆσιν· ὅτε μὲν γὰρ ἐνεχείρισε τῷ ἀγ γέλῳ τὴν ἐπιστασίαν τοῦ λαοῦ, ἔφασκε τῷ Μωσεῖ περὶ αὑτοῦ· \"μὴ ἀπειθήσῃς αὐτῷ, ὅτι ὄνομά μου κεῖται ἐπ' αὐτόν\". ὅτε δὲ ἐνεχείρισε τοῖς ἄρχουσι τὴν κρίσιν τοῦ λαοῦ, φησὶ πρὸς αὐτούς· \"δικαίαν κρίσιν κρίνατε, ὅτι κρίσις τοῦ θεοῦ ἐστιν\". καὶ πάλιν 146 \"ἐγὼ εἶπον θεοί ἐστε καὶ υἱοὶ ὑψίστου πάντες\" πρὸς τοὺς αὐτοὺς ἔλεγεν, ἀντὶ τοῦ \"δέδωκα ὑμῖν τὴν τιμὴν τὴν ἐμὴν καὶ τὴν τάξιν καὶ τὴν κλῆσιν. ὡς οὖν ἐμοῦ κρίνοντος, οὕτως κρίνατε τὸν λαόν\".","english":"163. Question. If an angel is superior to man, and the Scripture calls men gods, how does it not follow that angels too should be called gods by us? Answer. Those angels who appeared or spoke to men in the rank of God have themselves also received the appellation of God, as did the one who spoke to Jacob and to Moses. But men also were called gods; and to both alike, because of the service entrusted to them, the rank and the title of God were given. But when the service is fulfilled, those who received the appellation of God for the sake of some service cease to be called gods. For when he entrusted to the angel the oversight of the people, he said to Moses concerning him: \"Do not disobey him, for my name is upon him.\" And when he entrusted to the rulers the judgment of the people, he says to them: \"Judge a righteous judgment, for it is the judgment of God.\" And again: \"I said, you are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High,\" he said to the same, meaning \"I have given you my honor and my rank and my appellation. As I judge, so judge the people.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":164,"ref":"p164","source":"ΡΝΘʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ ὑπεραναβέβηκε μὲν τὸ θεός, ὑποβέβηκε δὲ τὸ ἄνθρωπος, πῶς οὐκ ἀτάκτως ὁ ἄνθρωπος θεὸς προσηγόρευται; Ἀπόκρισις. Αὕτη ἡ ἐρώτησις οὔτε χριστιανῷ ἁρμόζει, οὔτε Ἕλληνι· καθ' ἑκάτερον δὲ εἰς τοὺς ὑποβεβηκότας μετενήνεκται τοῦ ὑπεραναβεβηκότος ἡ κλῆσις κατὰ τὴν ἑκάστου δόξαν. οὐ χρὴ δὲ ἐκ τῶν ὁμολογουμένων κατασκευάζειν τὴν ἀπορίαν, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῶν ἀμφιβόλων. ΡΞʹ. Ἐρώτησις. Εἰ δι' ὧν ἡ σάρξ, διὰ τούτων καὶ τὸ αἷμα συνίσταται, διατί τὴν μὲν βρῶσιν τῆς τῶν ζῴων σαρκὸς ὁ θεὸς ἐπιτρέπει, τὴν δὲ σὺν τῷ αἵματι ἀπαγορεύει μετάληψιν, \"πλὴν κρέας\" λέγων \"ἐν αἵματι μὴ φάγεσθε\"; Ἀπόκρισις. Ἵνα καὶ ἐν τούτῳ χωρίσῃ ἡμᾶς ὁ θεὸς τῆς τῶν θηρίων ὁμοιότητος, τῶν σὺν τῇ βρώσει τῆς σαρκὸς λαπτόντων καὶ τὸ αἷμα ὧν τὰς σάρκας ἐσθίουσι. ΡΞΑʹ. Ἐρώτησις. \"Καιρὸς τοῦ λαλῆσαι καὶ καιρὸς τοῦ σιγῆσαι\" φησὶν ὁ Σολομών· ἐγὼ δέ, ὁρῶν ἐμαυτὸν ἔξω καὶ τοῦ καιροῦ καὶ τῶν λόγων φερόμενον, ὅμως ἓν ἔτι τοῖς ζητήμασι προσενείρας τοῦ ἐπερωτᾶν καταπαύσω. τὸ δέ ἐστιν, εἰ ὁ θεὸς ἐπὶ τῶν ἀληθῆ τὴν ἔκβασιν ἐσχηκότων καὶ διὰ τῶν παρ' Ἕλλησι μάντεων τὸ μέλλον ἔσεσθαι προεμήνυσεν, ἡνίκα Ἕλληνες πρὸς Ἕλληνας διεμάχοντο, πολλάκις κατὰ χρησμὸν πράξαντές τι ὧν ἡ θεία γραφὴ τὴν πρᾶξιν ἀπηγόρευσε, τῶν ἐν τῇ ιζʹ πεύσει κειμένων δεινῶν ἀπηλλάγησαν;","english":"164. Question. If \"God\" is transcendent and \"man\" is subordinate, how is it that man is called \"god\" without impropriety? Answer. This question suits neither a Christian nor a Greek; but in either case the designation has been transferred to those who are subordinate, in accordance with the transcendent one, according to each one's opinion. But one ought not to construct the difficulty from things agreed upon, but from things ambiguous.\n\n165. Question. If blood is constituted by the same things as flesh, why does God permit the eating of the flesh of animals but forbid the partaking of it together with the blood, saying, \"Only flesh with its blood you shall not eat\"? Answer. So that in this too God may separate us from the likeness of beasts, which, along with eating the flesh, also lap up the blood of those whose flesh they eat.\n\n166. Question. \"There is a time to speak and a time to be silent,\" says Solomon; but I, seeing myself carried outside both time and words, will nevertheless, having brought one more matter to the inquiries, cease from questioning. And it is this: whether God, in the case of those whose outcome has come to pass truly, also foretold through the seers among the Greeks what was going to be, when Greeks were fighting against Greeks, and having often done some act by oracle which the divine Scripture forbade, they were delivered from the evils set forth in the seventeenth inquiry?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":165,"ref":"p165","source":"οἷον ἐπὶ μὲν πολέμου, ὡς ὅταν οἱ ἑπτὰ ἐπὶ Θήβας ἄρδην μὲν καταστρέφειν τὴν προρρηθεῖσαν ἤμελλον πόλιν, μαντευσαμένου δὲ Τειρεσίου ὁ Μενοικεὺς κατὰ τὸ δοκοῦν τῇ μαντεία ἑαυτὸν ἑτοίμως κατέσφαξεν, καὶ οὕτως κατὰ τὴν πρόρρησιν τῆς μαντείας ἡ μὲν πόλις ἐσώθη, οἱ δὲ πολέμιοι ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν τῇ πόλει ἀνῃρέθησαν. καὶ τοῦτο μὲν περὶ τῶν ἐν πολέμοις τροπαίων ἓν ἐκ πολλῶν ἡμῖν εἴρηται. Ἀπόκρισις. Ὁ πρὸς τὴν λύσιν τῶν\n\nζητουμένων ὁρμώμενος πρῶτον ὀφείλει θεῖναι τὰ ὁμολογούμενα, εἶθ' οὕτως ἐξ αὐτῶν ποιήσασθαι τῶν ὁμολογουμένων τὴν λύσιν. ἔστι δὲ τῶν ὁμολο γουμένων τὸ ἕνα εἶναι θεὸν δημιουργόν τε καὶ προνοητὴν τοῦ κόσμου παντός, ὃν καταγγέλλουσιν αἱ θεῖαι τῶν χριστιανῶν γρα φαὶ λόγοις θείαις δυνάμεσι μεμαρτυρημένοις, παρ' οὗ ἐστι τῶν μελλόντων ἥ τε πρόγνωσις καὶ ἡ πρόρρησις καὶ ἡ ἔκβασις. ἐκβάλ λουσι δὲ αἱ γραφαὶ αἱ τοῦτον καταγγέλλουσαι τοὺς τῶν Ἑλλήνων θεοὺς τοῦ εἶναι θεούς. \"εἰ ἀλλάξουσι\" φασί \"τὰ ἔθνη τοὺς θεοὺς αὐτῶν, καὶ αὐτοὶ οὐκ εἰσὶ θεοί\"· ὧν δὲ οὐκ εἰσὶν οἱ θεοὶ θεοί, τούτων οὐδὲ οἱ μάντεις εἰσὶν ἀληθείας προφῆται, οὐδὲ ἡ δι' αὐτῶν πρόρρησις ἀναπόδραστόν τε καὶ ἀψευδῆ ἔχει τὴν ἔκβασιν· εἰσὶ γὰρ ὥσπερ μακρὰν τῆς ἀληθινῆς θεότητος, οὕτως καὶ τῆς τῶν μελλόντων προγνώσεως· ὅτι δὲ καὶ ἐν τῇ μάχῃ τῶν Ἑλλήνων πρὸς Ἕλληνας, τῶν πολυτρόπως, μάλιστα ἐν τοῖς πολέμοις, ταῖς μαντείαις χρησαμένων, ὁ τῆς ἀληθείας τῶν χριστιανῶν θεὸς τὴν ἰδίαν ἔστησε βούλησιν, μαρτυρεῖ ἡ μάχη Ἀλεξάνδρου καὶ Δαρείου, τοῦ μὲν κρατύνας τὰς μαντείας, τοῦ δὲ καταργήσας.","english":"For example, in the case of war, as when the Seven against Thebes were about to utterly destroy the aforementioned city, and Teiresias having prophesied, Menoeceus, in accordance with what seemed good to the oracle, readily slaughtered himself, and thus according to the prediction of the oracle the city was saved, and the enemies were slain by those in the city. And this one instance out of many has been cited by us concerning victories in wars. Answer. He who sets out to the solution of the questions under investigation must first lay down the things agreed upon, and then from these agreed-upon things make the solution. It is among the things agreed upon that there is one God, creator and provident ruler of the whole cosmos, whom the divine writings of the Christians proclaim with words attested by divine powers, from whom is the foreknowledge and the foretelling and the outcome of future things. But the writings that proclaim this cast out the gods of the Greeks from being gods. \"If the nations will change,\" they say, \"their gods, and they themselves are not gods\"; and of those whose gods are not gods, neither are their seers prophets of truth, nor does the foretelling through them have an inescapable and unerring outcome; for as they are far from true divinity, so also are they from the foreknowledge of future things. And that even in the battle of Greeks against Greeks, of those who used oracles in many ways, especially in wars, the God of the Christians, the God of truth, established his own will, the battle of Alexander and Darius bears witness—the one confirming the oracles, the other nullifying them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":166,"ref":"p166","source":"μαρτυρεῖ δὲ καὶ τοῦ Ἀσσυρίου ἡ μάχη, ἣν ἔσχε πρὸς τὰ ἄλλα πολλὰ ἑλληνικὰ ἔθνη· ὃν ὁ θεὸς ῥάβδον τῆς ὀργῆς καὶ πρίονα ὠνόμασε, ποτὲ μὲν λέγων \"ἰδοὺ ὁ Ἀσ σύριος ῥάβδος ἐστὶ τῆς ὀργῆς μου· ἐπὶ ἔθνος ἁμαρτωλὸν ἀποστελῶ αὐτόν\"· ποτὲ δὲ λέγων περὶ αὐτοῦ· \"μὴ ὑψοῦται πρίων ἄνευ τοῦ ἕλκοντος αὐτόν\"; καίτοι νομίσας ὁ Ἀσσύριος, ὅτι κατὰ τὰς ἐπιτυχίας τῶν χρησμῶν, οὓς εἴληφε παρὰ τῶν θεῶν αὑτοῦ διὰ τῶν μάντεων, πρίζει καὶ πατάσσει τὰ ἑλληνικὰ ἔθνη, τὰ ὁμοίως αὐτῷ τῇ πεποιθήσει τῶν χρησμῶν συμβεβληκότα αὐτῷ εἰς πόλε μον καὶ ἀποτετυχηκότα τῆς διὰ τῶν χρησμῶν ἐλπίδος, τοῦ θεοῦ συγχωρήσαντος ἐπιτυχεῖν μὲν τὸν Ἀσσύριον τῶν χρησμῶν, ἀπο τυχεῖν δὲ τὰ ἔθνη· περὶ ὧν ὁ μὲν θεὸς διὰ τοῦ προφήτου Ἡσαΐου φησίν \"ἀνῆκα τὴν χεῖρά μου καὶ ἐξηράνθησαν\", ὁ δὲ Ἀσσύριος φησίν \"μὴ ἐρρύσαντο οἱ θεοὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν τὴν γῆν αὐτῶν ἐκ τῆς χειρός μου, ὅτι ῥύσεται κύριος τὴν Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἐκ τῆς χειρός μου\"; κατὰ δὲ τοὺς χρησμούς, οὓς ἐδέξατο ὁ Ἀσσύριος παρὰ τῶν μάντεων, τοιαύτας ἐφθέγξατο φωνὰς καὶ κατὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν καὶ κατὰ τῆς Ἱερουσαλήμ, καὶ τοῦ θεοῦ συγχωρήσαντος ἐπέ τυχεν ὁ Ἀσσύριος τῶν χρησμῶν κατὰ τῶν ἐθνῶν· κατὰ δὲ τῆς Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἀπέτυχε τῶν χρησμῶν, τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ συγχω ρήσαντος. πῶς οὖν ἀπέτυχον τῆς μαντείας οἱ ἑπτὰ ἐπὶ Θή βας τοῦ ἄρδην ἀπολέσαι τὴν πόλιν; ἡ γὰρ ἀποτυχία τῆς μαν τείας ἔλεγχος γίνεται τῆς ἀσθενείας τοῦ θεοῦ, τοῦ διὰ τῆς μαν τείας προμηνύσαντος τὰ ἀνέκβατα.","english":"The battle of the Assyrian also bears witness, which he waged against the many other Greek nations; whom God named the rod of anger and a saw, sometimes saying, \"Behold, the Assyrian is the rod of my anger; I will send him against a sinful nation\"; and sometimes saying concerning him, \"Is the saw exalted without the one who draws it?\" And yet the Assyrian, thinking that according to the successes of the oracles which he had received from his own gods through the seers, he saws and strikes down the Greek nations—nations that had likewise, in reliance on their oracles, joined battle with him and failed of the hope that came through their oracles, God having permitted the Assyrian to succeed in his oracles but the nations to fail—concerning which God says through the prophet Isaiah, \"I have let go my hand, and they have dried up,\" while the Assyrian says, \"Did the gods of the nations deliver their land out of my hand, that the Lord will deliver Jerusalem out of my hand?\" And according to the oracles which the Assyrian received from the seers, he uttered such words both against the nations and against Jerusalem, and God having permitted it, the Assyrian succeeded in his oracles against the nations; but against Jerusalem he failed of his oracles, God not permitting it. How then did the Seven against Thebes fail of their divination to destroy the city utterly? For the failure of the divination becomes a proof of the weakness of the god who foretold through the divination things that did not come to pass.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":167,"ref":"p167","source":"καὶ εἰ κατὰ τὴν ἀψευδῆ τοῦ σω τῆρος φωνὴν χωρὶς θεοῦ στρουθίον \"οὐ πεσεῖται ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς\", πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἔθνος ὅλον, πόλις ὅλη, οὐκ ἂν ἀπόλλυτο, μὴ τοῦ θεοῦ συγχωρήσαντος. ὅτι δὲ πᾶν ἔθνος ἑλληνικὸν ὑπὸ ἔθνους ἑλληνικοῦ ἀπολλύμενον ὑπὸ τῆς ῥάβδου καὶ πρίονος, τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀπόλλυται, φανερὸν καθέστηκεν ἐκ τῶν περὶ Ἀσσυρίων εἰρημένων. ἔτι δέ, εἰ τὰ παρὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων παρὰ τοῦ μάντεως Τειρεσίου εἰρημένα παντάπασίν ἐστι καταγέλαστα, πῶς ἐνδέ χεται τὰ δι' αὐτοῦ λεχθέντα εἶναι ἀληθῆ; φασὶ γὰρ περὶ αὐτοῦ ἄνδρα καὶ γυναῖκα αὐτὸν γεγονέναι καὶ ἀμφοτέρων ἔχειν τὰς πλά σεις, καὶ πολλὰς μάχας τῶν ἐθνῶν διαλύσαντα*. καὶ διὰ ταύτην τὴν αἰτίαν ἡ μὲν Ἥρα χολωθεῖσα αὐτῷ ἐπήρωσεν αὐτόν, ὁ δὲ Ζεὺς εἰς παραμυθίαν τῆς πηρώσεως αὐτοῦ ἐχαρίσατο αὐτῷ τὴν μαντικήν. ἀλλ' εἰ ἀλλότρια πίστεως ὑπάρχει τὰ περὶ αὐτοῦ μυθευόμενα, πῶς ἐνδέχεται ἀληθῆ εἶναι τὰ ὑπ' αὐτοῦ μαντευό μενα; ἔτι δὲ εἰ, καθώς φασιν Ἕλληνες, τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν Μοιρῶν ἐπικλωθόμενα ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν ἀνακλωθῆναι, πῶς οὐκ εἰσὶν ἀνωφελεῖς αἱ μαντεῖαι τοῖς χρωμένοις αὐταῖς, τῶν Μοιρῶν ἐπὶ τὸ ἀναπόδραστον τέλος ἀναγκαίως ἀγουσῶν τὰ ὑπ' αὐτῶν ἐπικλωθόμενα; ἀλλ' ἐπεὶ ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχει, πῶς οὐκ εἰσὶ ψευδεῖς αἵ τε Μοῖραι καὶ αἱ μαντεῖαι ὑπ' ἀλλήλων ἀναιρούμεναι; πῶς δὲ οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ Μενοικεὺς μάτην κατασφάξας ἑαυτὸν κατὰ τὸ δοκοῦν τῇ μαντείᾳ, τῆς αἰτίας τοῦ ἀναιρεῖσθαι μὲν τοὺς πολεμίους, σῴζεσθαι δὲ τὴν","english":"And if, according to the truthful voice of the Savior, not even a sparrow \"falls to the ground\" without God, how much more would a whole nation, a whole city, not perish unless God permitted it. And that every Greek nation, when destroyed by a Greek nation, is destroyed by the rod and the saw, the anger of God, has been made evident from what was said concerning the Assyrians. Furthermore, if the things said by the Greeks through the seer Teiresias are altogether ridiculous, how can it be possible that the things spoken through him are true? For they say of him that he became both man and woman and possessed the forms of both, and that he reconciled many battles of the nations. And for this reason Hera, angered at him, blinded him, and Zeus, as a consolation for his blindness, granted him the gift of prophecy. But if the myths told about him are foreign to faith, how can it be possible that the prophecies uttered by him are true? Furthermore, if, as the Greeks say, it is impossible for what the Fates have spun to be spun back, how are the oracles not useless to those who consult them, since the Fates necessarily bring what has been spun by them to an inescapable end? But since these things are so, how are not both the Fates and the oracles false, destroying one another? And how is it not the case that Menoeceus slaughtered himself in vain according to the seeming of the oracle, since the cause of destroying the enemies and saving the","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]},{"i":168,"ref":"p168","source":"πόλιν, μὴ ἐκ τοῦ δαίμονος τοῦ διὰ μάντεως χρηματίσαντος ὑπαρχούσης, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῆς τοῦ δεσπότου τοῦ κόσμου συγχωρήσεως; οὐκοῦν ἔχεις τῶν ζητημάτων τὰς λύσεις, κατὰ μὲν τὸ τῆς διανοίας ἡμῶν ἐφικτὸν ἀνελλιπεῖς, σκιὰν δὲ ὥσπερ καὶ εἰκόνα τυγχανούσας τῆς ἀληθείας· εἰ γὰρ ὁ μηδὲν ἑαυτῷ συνειδώς, ὁ τῶν ἀρρήτων μυστηρίων θεατής, Παῦλος ὁ ἀπόστολος, ἐκ μέρους γινώσκει καὶ ἐκ μέρους προφητεύει, τί θαυμαστὸν εἰ ἡμᾶς τοὺς πολὺ τῆς ἐκείνου ἀρετῆς τε καὶ πολιτείας ἀποδέοντας κατόπιν δεήσοι τῆς ἀληθείας ὀφθῆναι; διόπερ ἐνταῦθα τὸν λόγον σφραγίσαντες, μόνῃ τῇ ἀκαταλήπτῳ τριάδι πάντων ἀκριβῆ τὴν γνῶσιν κεκτῆσθαι συγχωρήσωμεν, αἰτούμενοι τῶν παρ' αὐτῆς ἡμῖν ἐπηγγελμένων αἰωνίων ἀγαθῶν ἐπιτυχεῖν χάριτι καὶ φιλανθρωπίᾳ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. ἀμήν.","english":"a city, existing not because of the demon who gave an oracle through the seer, but because of the permission of the Master of the world? Therefore you have the solutions to the questions, complete as far as the reach of our understanding allows, but being, as it were, a shadow and an image of the truth. For if the one who knew nothing against himself, the beholder of the ineffable mysteries, Paul the apostle, knows in part and prophesies in part, what wonder is it if we, who fall far short of his virtue and conduct, should be seen to lag behind the truth? Therefore, having sealed the discourse here, let us concede that only the incomprehensible Trinity possesses exact knowledge of all things, asking to obtain the eternal goods promised to us by it, through the grace and love for humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory and the dominion unto the ages of ages. Amen.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[],"ambiguities":[],"confidence":"","notes":[]}]}