Pseudo-Augustini Quaestiones Veteris et Novi Testamenti CXXVII

Many, whom this worldly blindness has darkened, greatly disapprove of us if we diligently keep God's commandments, if we flee occasions for sinning, if we strive to fulfill all good things with salutary zeal, if we neglect the seductive allurements of vices and pleasures, if we allow ourselves to be captivated by no worldly sweetness, if we voluntarily undergo torments and punishments for the name of God, if we despise death itself by the strength of the spirit—to them, evidently, for whom this mortal sense has persuaded that nothing which is done is worthy of either praise or blame. For they do not wish any of these things to pertain to God. Some, indeed, desiring to defend their own crimes and offenses, say: 'It profits nothing whether you live well or badly. For God has no such care now as to anxiously hasten to look upon you, conducting yourself variously according to your own disposition and sickness, and sometimes to mingle his eyes with your foul deeds. All things are vain, which are celebrated as one pleases. He who pertains to God is secret and remote from these human affairs, and therefore neither becomes angry nor is moved.

He has no contemplation of human affairs, none of our actions; the whole course of the revolving age and a certain inexplicable whirling of the world seizes and hurls him so that anyone who thinks he can be recalled to the care of God is considered a fool. Nor is the spirit of the martyrs even to be approved, who think that their God, whom they proclaim to be merciful, is delighted by the shedding of their own blood. Nothing in us is dear to God, nothing is hateful; He takes no joy in any condition of our death, nor in any soundness of health, nor does He desire to know what happens where, not because it is impossible for the divine majesty to have knowledge of nearly all things that have been done or are being done, but because He does not wish to know the miseries of men and the vanities of the world. Thus it is finally written: 'Vanity of vanities, all is vanity.' Their opinion, fortified by despair, is dissolved by the authority of divine sense as it is, and is refuted and overcome by their own common speech, which is held to be of the greatest use. For when, amid business and the contracts of different parties, faith and perfidy contend, the divinity is called as a witness, which at other times is said not to know what we do. 'God is witness,' they say, 'God sees, God judges, God acts, God repays.' And when it comes to the necessity of an oath, and the mind of the one swearing fears lest something befall him for perjuring himself, and he demands an oath, he trusts that it can be rendered to him who has sworn falsely.

And when the longed-for health and good condition have been obtained, thanks are given to the divinity; and when, by some chance falling matter, a neighbor escapes unharmed, God is said to have been good and to have provided it; and when, by an adverse blast of winds, the waves of the stirred-up sea rise and the ship is battered and shaken on all sides, the crowds of sailors stretch their hands to the sky, beseech God with suppliant voice, and trust that they can be heard and delivered. Whence these things, if God has no care for us and does not know what we do? Therefore this persuasion is empty: all things are known to God. Let no one flatter himself about impunity for committed crimes. The greatest fruit of a good life is, of a bad one, perpetual punishment and eternal torment. Therefore to us, who believe that God knows all things, who devoutly hasten to martyrdom, an inestimable fruit, eternal life, will be granted; but to the impious, who have taught that God is ignorant of their crimes and the secrets of their wickedness, a consuming flame of fire and an ever-unfailing conflagration will be administered.

III. III–XII = II–XI. XIII. XIII = XXXV. XIIII. XIIII–XXXVI = XII–XXXIIII. XXXVII. WHY DID GOD SAY: 'MY SPIRIT WILL NOT REMAIN IN THESE MEN, BECAUSE THEY ARE FLESH, AND THEIR YEARS WILL BE ONE HUNDRED TWENTY'? When giants were upon the earth in those days, pestilent and proud, puffed up by the stature of their size, pursuing the desires of the flesh, born apostates, then, when they displeased God, He promised that He would destroy the race of men by a flood and set a time, so that if anyone, having heard the anger and indignation of God concerning this, should wish to correct himself, he would have space to amend himself. Finally, the ark seems to have been built for this reason over a hundred years. But before the beginning of the ark, twenty years are reported to have passed. But the narrative seems to obscure this, because after it spoke of the number of Noah's years, it subjoined this. For this sentence is known to have been pronounced before Noah was five hundred years old. For what does it say? 'My spirit will not remain in these men.' And for this reason it also subjoined, because wickedness had increased upon the earth: 'I will destroy man from the face of the earth to the beasts,' which was certainly fulfilled by the flood. For we remember that after the flood men lived for many years, and Aaron, the brother of Moses, is recorded to have lived one hundred twenty-three years. But Moses himself, so that he could not pass one hundred twenty years, did what he did because he did not glorify God in the contradiction of the water. For he was about to enter the promised land, if sin had not stood in the way.

It seems to some that this was said with reference to the time of Moses, since the priest Jehoiada is found to have lived one hundred and thirty years. XXXVIII. WHAT THE BLESSING OF JACOB, WHICH HE GAVE, CONTAINS. Not only from present causes did he foretell the future of each individual tribe, but he also signified future things from future things, of which there was not yet even a shadow, within the Jewish people. For he showed what each tribe would be like in the future in character, faith, discipline, luxury, petulance, and contempt for the faith, so that, although they were from one, they would not, however, preserve unity. For some advanced for the better, others deteriorated, others remained as they were, so that by this they would not claim a prerogative of lineage for themselves, since it had been predicted by him that some of these, who were certainly from his origin, would be reprobate—indeed, that many would perish—so that others would be signified as entering in, who would be inserted into the nature, to their disgrace and damnation, from which those others had fallen. Therefore, he declared that a mixed people would be future in all tribes, by which variety both the good, though few, and the evil, though many, would be understood. And although he gave the scepter to his son Joseph for a time, he nevertheless set Judah over all, not because all from Judah would be suitable in the future, but because the Savior, who is the true king, was to be born from that tribe according to the flesh.

XXXIX. XXXIX = XLII XL. WAS THERE NO OTHER SIGN THAT MOSES COULD HAVE PERFORMED BEFORE PHARAOH EXCEPT THE SERPENT? Whoever thinks this blameworthy should say what else ought to have been done. For he certainly made a serpent, which would inspire terror yet not cause harm, because by a certain stupor it is slower to injure. For if he had made a lion or a bear or some such thing, how would those present have escaped? He did not wish to kill anyone, but only to instill fear and display power, so that, just as the first transgression began through the serpent, so likewise the recollection of the knowledge of God and the correction of morals might come about through the sign of the serpent, so that, as sin was committed, so it might be amended, just as sin committed through a woman was removed through a woman, namely Mary the mother of the Lord, through whom Christ born condemned sin. Eve, still a virgin, transgressed, just as Mary was a virgin. In this way, therefore, things that had been lost were restored to their former state, because the kingdom had been lost through the tasting of wood and was sought again through wood. For the Lord, it says, reigned from the wood. In like manner, the world, in which it was made, was also reformed in it, that is, at the beginning of the first month, which is Passover. Therefore, no nature will be evil except transgression alone, when sin is amended through that by which it was also committed.

XLI. What is the meaning of the Psalm verse: "You will save men and beasts," and of the verse to the prophet Jonah: "I will not spare the city in which one hundred twenty thousand men and many cattle dwell," but on the other hand the Apostle says: "Is God concerned about oxen?" As far as the words are concerned, it seems contradictory; but if the cause of man and of cattle is examined, it will be shown not to be dissimilar. God cares for all things as the maker of all, but He does not preserve cattle for their own sake, but preserves cattle for the sake of men, not men for the sake of cattle. Therefore, He who cares for men preserves cattle, so that it is not that He is concerned about oxen, but about men. For what hope is there in cattle? XLII. IF ADAM WAS MADE BY GOD AND ANIMATED, DID HE RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT, BECAUSE IT IS WRITTEN: "GOD BREATHED INTO HIS FACE THE SPIRIT OF LIFE"? It was not in the order of things that he should receive the Holy Spirit, because this was reserved by God for a later time, so that in the last days, when the mystery of the one God was revealed, it would be given to believers. From the beginning, the Trinity was indeed proclaimed, but its understanding was, as it were, under a veil. For the person of God the Father was first proclaimed and manifested without hesitation and without figure, because all things are from Him. But the persons of His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit were not kept silent, but neither were they manifested. Finally, a question arises from the faithless concerning the Lord and concerning the Holy Spirit.

For some madmen say that the Holy Spirit is the Father himself, just as Sabellius says that the Father and the Son are the same person. But no one doubts the person of God the Father. Therefore, when the Trinity is manifested, then at last the Holy Spirit is given to believers, so that both His person may be made manifest and those who receive Him may have a sign that they are sons of God, by virtue of the fact that they have within them the Spirit of God, who is certainly from God. For this is the meaning of perfection: when it is known that there is a Father, a Son, and a Holy Spirit. This perfection bestows this gift. For the Son of God, coming and revealing and manifesting these things, had to give something more, and it was fitting to bestow this perfection upon believers, because perfection or salvation is found neither in the Son alone nor in the Father alone, but in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Hence the evangelist John says that we have all received from His fullness, grace for grace, because the Law was given through Moses, but grace and truth were brought about through Jesus Christ.

It became clear upon the coming of the Savior that a fullness of truth had been made; for what was hidden and what was promised, while it is revealed and made manifest, becomes a fullness of truth. Then believers, having received the Holy Spirit, become sons of God. For the inspiration which is read to have been made by God in Adam is a transmission of the soul. For "spirit" is frequently put for "soul," as the Gospel says among other things: "And his spirit returned to her," it says, and in the Psalm: "A troubled spirit," it says, "and a contrite heart God does not despise." Yet frequently some manuscripts do not have it thus: "And God inspired," but: "God breathed into his face the breath of life, and man was made a living soul." Not because it said "breath of life" did it signify the Holy Spirit; for concerning animals it also says thus: "in which there was the breath of life." "Breath of life" is said because it animates bodies to life. XLIII. XLIII = XXXVI

XLIIII. XLIIII = XXXVII XLV. "He placed his tabernacle in the sun," he says, that is, his body, in which Christ dwelt, because he was beaten with whips by Pilate. How then is it in the Psalm concerning Christ: "The whip will not approach your tabernacle," especially since he called his body a temple? The body of the Son of Man and the Son of God is understood to be a temple. Yet God, that is, the Son of God, although he came in the flesh, dwelt in the soul; therefore both the soul and the body are the tabernacle of the Son of God, although the Son of God and the Son of Man is one God and one man. Hence from this aspect it is said that the whip did not approach his tabernacle, that is, his soul, in which his divinity dwells, was immune from the punishment of hell or its princes. Lest, because here, as if a sinner, though innocent, he was crucified and the flesh suffered, his soul might be thought to have experienced some sorrow among the dead, the Scripture shows that his soul could not be troubled among the dead, because he descended for this purpose, that is, he allowed himself to suffer, in order to confound the darkness and render its princes powerless. Whence the Lord himself says: "My soul is sad unto death." For it was permitted, as was natural to it, that it be saddened, immediately bearing trophies and spoils from those by whom it had been saddened unto death, after death being established in eternal joy. This can also be understood of the whole man, because one who knew no sin could not be scourged by the law.

XLVI. Why did Adam, placed in the world, receive a command or law, when he held dominion over the rest? Although Adam was placed in the world as lord, yet because he did not receive this from himself, but from God, he had to receive the signification of this matter through the law, so that he, who seems to be lord, would be subject through the law to the one who had given him this power, so that the authority of the creator would inspire reverence in him through the law, lest such great dominion exalt him and he become unmindful of God his creator. XLVII. The Old Law alleges that God swore — for it says thus: "I swore by myself three times," says the Lord — but the Savior forbade swearing: how did he not destroy the old things? Before knowledge of God existed on earth, it was necessary to provoke men to unheard-of hope in no other way than by a promise made to them under oath, by him whom they did not know as was fitting. But when he began to be known, it was not fitting for him to swear, whom it would not be right to think could lie. Therefore the Lord also commanded that servants should no longer swear, but should so conduct themselves that faith is placed in their words. For the sacrament of an oath is demanded either by perfidy or by the deceit of the inconstant, so that, because men are accustomed to deceive, they might perhaps be restrained by fear of God; or certainly it will be enough even for the one who is deceived, because from this he incurs offense.

XLVIII. Why in the Law was it said even to Aaron himself that he should offer holocausts for his sins, when David says: 'You have not demanded a holocaust for offenses' and in the following: 'You will not take delight in holocausts.' How did he command to be offered what he does not delight in? It is manifest that God does not delight in holocausts, but that for the satisfaction of sin, pardon can be merited through groaning and grief of heart. He wished the sacrifice, however, to be a testimony of sin, so that the sinner, through the offering of a sacrifice, would confess that he had sinned. But how pardon might be obtained, he himself shows in another place, saying: Break your bread for the hungry; if you see someone naked, clothe him, and you will not despise the members of your own household; or certainly: A contrite and humbled heart God does not despise. First, therefore, he urged that the offense be confessed; then he showed how forgiveness can be granted. For he never commanded a sacrifice for a manifest offense, but for unknown ones, because even when a man does not know it, he sins, and when he thinks he is acting rightly, he offends in some intention. Such a sin, he said, can be purified through sacrifice.

XLIX. Why did Solomon have the spirit of wisdom, when he did not have a pure life? For he took great delight in women and through this sinned. First, he received the spirit of prudence by his own merit; afterwards, when he began to use women excessively and through this to sin, if he had the spirit of wisdom, he had it by merit of the kingdom, just as Nebuchadnezzar, by merit of the kingdom, saw Christ in the furnace. L. In Tobit: 'To reveal and confess the works of God is honorable,' he says; but the Savior, doing the work of God, says: 'Tell no one.' The Savior did not say that the works of God ought to be concealed—for in another place he says: go, and tell how much God has done for you—but he sometimes rejected their testimony and suppressed their boasting, lest he appear, which is absurd to the prudent, to bear witness for himself as a deceiver. LI. Why were circumcision and the precepts given to the people, which previously did not exist and are now not held in authority?

Circumcision is a sign of Abraham’s faith, so that when this sign was seen in his sons, they would be known to be his sons, who, believing in God, had received this sign. But the precepts of the sabbaths were given both as a testimony of past things and as a figure of future things. For the future sabbath, which will give rest in eternity, is figured by this sabbath, which was instituted on the completion of the week. Moreover, the law concerning foods was not given at the beginning of the law, but when, under a leader, their faithlessness refused to give credence to God’s words and promises, they received, on account of the hardness of their heart, precepts that were not good, as the prophet Jeremiah says. For this was done so that their neck might be bowed down for their own improvement—for proud and stubborn men ought not to have the whole of creation subjected to them—but afterwards, with the coming of God’s mercy, freedom of eating was restored, whence the apostle Peter says: “Why do you impose a yoke upon the neck of brothers, which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear?

LII. LII = XXXVIII LIII. LIII = XXXVIIII LIIII. IN WISDOM: 'WHO CREATED,' IT SAYS, 'THE WORLD FROM INVISIBLE MATTER' AND AGAINST: 'BECAUSE WE WERE MADE FROM NOTHING.' That God created substances simultaneously in a confused state is declared by the sense of the scriptures. With darkness certainly intermingled, this confusion of things, that is, air, water, dark earth, he called invisible matter, as is read in Genesis: 'But the earth,' it says, 'was invisible and unformed.' From this confusion, therefore, he created the world by establishing the firmament, so that within it, with the waters gathered into one, a dwelling place might be made for the human race. For by separating and distinguishing the substances, he made a habitable home in the hollow. LV. LV. LVI = XL. XLI QUESTIONS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT. I = XLVIII. II. II = LXXXVII III. WHY WERE THE DEEDS AND SAYINGS OF THE LORD SET DOWN IN SCRIPTURE IN FOUR VOLUMES AND BY FOUR WRITERS? It was fitting that the acceptable year of the Lord, as the prophet says, be contained in four volumes as if in four seasons. For just as the year unfolds through four seasons so that they need each other in turn, so also the deeds and sayings of the Lord are defined in four books, so that one needs the other; together, however, they are complete in fullness. But that they were arranged by four writers, this was the reason: because the names of the seasons are different, the names of the gospels were also to be different.

And if some things seem contradictory in words, they do not, however, differ in meaning through an interpretation suited to the case, just as seasons, although they appear diverse in name, air, and course of the stars, do not differ in the effect of the things that are generated. LIIII. SINCE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT FOUR BOOKS OF THE DEEDS AND SAYINGS OF THE LORD WERE PROPERLY WRITTEN, IT MUST BE KNOWN WHAT THEIR ORDER IS. The Gospel is gathered by arrangement rather than by time. Matthew, therefore, is to be placed first, because it took its beginning from the promise itself, that is, from Abraham, to whom the promise of the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ was made. After him, Luke, because he narrates how this incarnation was accomplished. Third, Mark, who testifies that the Gospel, which was preached by Christ, was promised in the law. Fourth, however, John, because he, with clear voice, shows that the one who was promised to Abraham to be incarnated—and by Luke it was told how he was incarnated, and by Mark it was shown that his Gospel was preached according to the prophecy of Isaiah—is God, saying: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

V. Why does Matthew, when describing Christ’s Gospel, say: “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David,” when Abraham is earlier? He began in this way so that he might first speak of him by describing his genealogy from the promise of his incarnation, as the apostle says: whose fathers and from whom Christ according to the flesh. Therefore he said “book of generation,” because the incarnation of Christ consists of many and diverse elements, so that, since from one they began to be diverse, he might draw corporeality from all—from Jews and Gentiles, and from the worthy and unworthy, because Ruth was a Moabitess and Bathsheba was made a wife from a harlot, so that by drawing the flesh of all to himself he might recall them to genuine unity. Moreover, he says “Jesus Christ, son of David,” although Abraham is earlier, because Christ is specifically called the son of David on account of the kingdom, so that, just as God from God, so also a king from a king might take his origin according to the flesh. For thus it was said to David: “From the fruit of your womb I will place upon your throne.

VI. Why did he divide all the generations into three parts above, as the Apostle Matthew is said to have done? Causes and times make divisions; for this reason he distinguished from Abraham up to David. For the first part of the cause is from Abraham up to David, because Abraham is the father of faith and David is the father of the kingdom—for Saul, having been found unworthy, deprived himself of the kingdom—; from David up to the deportation is another part of the cause, in which the Jews, having become reprobate, lost the kingdom; after the deportation of Babylon, however, up to Christ is a third part of lamentation and misery, of their captivity and dispersion, because, although after the deportation of Babylon and the period of seventy years, when they were released by Cyrus and returned to their own lands, they never had rest or respite. For afterwards Judea was never able to rule, but they were always anxious and wandering. For certainly at the time of Christ’s birth they were captives, saying: “We have no king but Caesar.” For this reason, therefore, Matthew made three degrees of generation, so that he might show the changes of merits and causes from the promise made up to Christ, but the times of the years remain in one grace until the end.

VII. Why, when there are forty-one generations, does the evangelist appear to have counted forty-two? For three times fourteen make what but forty-two? According to the number, forty-one generations are counted, but according to the rationale, forty-two are proven. Now Jeconiah was born during the deportation, that is, made king, as is contained in the Paralipomenon; he made an end to the second part, and because after the deportation he remained in the kingdom with the permission of King Nebuchadnezzar, the third part begins from him, which comes down to Christ. And therefore he is counted twice, so that Jeconiah both concludes the second part and initiates the third. For thus it reads: "And after the deportation of Babylon, Jeconiah begot Salathiel." Now up to that Salathiel, those who are from Judah reigned, but from whose root Joseph is born. For Jeconiah first had a son named Asyr, but since Joseph traces his origin through the root of Salathiel, with Asyr passed over, Salathiel was joined to his father Jeconiah, so that one might come to Joseph, to whom the virgin Mary was betrothed. For also after Josiah, Jeconiah follows, but because through Joachim, the father of Jeconiah, one comes to Joseph, with him, that is Joachim, passed over, he placed Jeconiah, so that he would not exceed the number of fourteen generations, and because after Jeconiah come Salathiel and his son, through whom Joseph arises.

VIII. Why did the Savior fast for forty days after his baptism and then become hungry? For if he fasted for forty days, could he not have already ceased to be hungry? It is written: "Son, when approaching the service of God, stand in righteousness and fear, and prepare your mind for temptation." Therefore the Savior, to give us an example, fasted, so that we likewise, by persisting in fasts, might overcome every assault of the devil against us with the help of God, knowing from the Savior's example that the adversary's snares are especially to be guarded against when we approach the fear of God. For he grieves that we have withdrawn from him; therefore he rages more fiercely against us. This the Savior did for us, not for himself. Similarly, that he became hungry was not for his own sake, but for ours. For when the devil's temptations had been overcome by fasts—which are not written because they do not pertain to edification—afterward, that is after forty days, he allowed himself to suffer hunger, so that—what was human—he would suffer hunger, so that the devil, who had already been defeated, seeing the weakness of hunger in him, would be incited again to tempt, seeing that the one by whom he was being vanquished was a man.

This indeed was the mystery of the Savior, that, because the devil was insulting and lording it over a defeated man, he would be conquered by a man, so that the power of God might acquire victory for man. Thus Satan was made more contemptible, when he both sees a man and understands that the power is not of man. For he was amazed, stupefied with wonder, that a mystery was present which was hidden from him, so that he had the power to approach, but not to ensnare. For he was tormented for two reasons. For seeing weakness, he approached and found strength, so that, perceiving a man, he was suspicious of the power of God. For this reason, therefore, he became hungry, in order to mock the cunning of Satan. He did not, however, fast longer for this reason, so that he might be in harmony with Moses and Elijah. XVIII. IF 'THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS WERE UNTIL JOHN,' FROM WHOM THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN WAS PROCLAIMED — FOR HE IS THE BEGINNER OF THE NEW PREACHING — WHY DID HIS BAPTISM CEASE? The baptism of John, once begun, did not cease, but what was lacking was added to it. For John only baptized; he did not give the Holy Spirit to believers, just as he himself says about the Savior: 'I indeed baptize you in water for repentance, but he himself will baptize you in the Holy Spirit.' This is what he says: 'Through me there is remission of sins, yet the Holy Spirit is not given, so that the purified may be called sons; for this was reserved for the Savior, as the Lord, so that men would not become sons of God unless they had received the Holy Spirit from the Son of God.

The effect, therefore, of John's baptism was that it worked silently without interrogation, yet not without mention of the Savior, so that what it did might be firm; it is a gift of the Trinity, which the Savior's condescension showed by giving the form of three names, which from the beginning under the name or person of the one God have performed one work and an undifferentiated one. Interpretation, therefore, was added to John's baptism with the revelation of a mystery long hidden; and a further gift was added, so that those baptized, having received the Holy Spirit, are sons of God. It was therefore amplified, not emptied. XIX. WHY ARE 'THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS UP TO JOHN' RIGHTLY SAID TO HAVE CEASED? BECAUSE THE ONE OF WHOM THEY PROPHESIED HAS COME. WHY 'THE LAW UP TO JOHN,' WHEN THE APOSTLE SAYS WE OUGHT TO BE SUBJECT TO THE LAW? 'BUT THOSE,' HE SAYS, 'WHICH ARE, ARE ORDAINED BY GOD.' The law indeed has one name, but it has a threefold understanding. For the first part of the law is about God; for if law is named from 'lection' (reading), so that you may know what to choose from many things, then placed among errors they received it so as to choose the true, that is, having rejected the devil, to choose God. The second part of the law, however, is this, which is contained in the six precepts, which begin thus: honor your father and mother. The third, indeed, is in the new moons and in the sabbath and in distinguishing and choosing foods and in circumcision and in offering sacrifices of cattle. This law, therefore, it says is to be observed up to John, not beyond. For it was given in such a way that, when its time was completed, it would cease.

For it was not from the beginning, but a cause was given to it for a time, so that with the coming of the Savior the law would cease. Therefore, both the law of precepts and his nature, which without doubt is from him and cannot be abolished, remain from God. For through it one advances toward the promised reward. For fear produces anxiety. XX. XX = LXVIIII XXI. XXI = LX XXII. THE SABBATH IS CERTAINLY A LAW OR A PART OF THE LAW: HOW THEN HAS THE LAW NOT BEEN ABROGATED, WHEN THE SABBATH WAS DISSOLVED, WITH THE EVANGELIST SAYING: 'BECAUSE HE NOT ONLY DISSOLVED THE SABBATH' AND THE REST? The Savior indeed dissolved the Sabbath, but without prejudice to the Sabbath as given. For when the time of the Sabbath was already ceasing, but the Jews asserted that the Sabbath still remained, the Savior, working on the Sabbaths and ordering his bed to be carried to a sick man on the Sabbaths, was dissolving the Sabbath according to the understanding of the Jews. For according to the truth of the matter, it is as if one were to say that what had already ceased is such as if one were to say of someone who is to be called an ex-prefect and suffered an injury, because the prefecture suffered an injury; therefore the Sabbath was not dissolved, but the men who imprudently claimed the authority of the Sabbath were deceived, since a new law had already succeeded the Sabbath.

XXIII. Why the Savior Called His Disciples Sons of Thunder, Who Would Seem More Fittingly Called Sons of God? For Thunders Are Said to Occur by the Collision of Clouds. Because thunders strike terror, for this reason the Lord called the disciples sons of thunder, as it were sons of him who is to be feared. For although thunders occur by the collision of clouds, they occur by the will of God and are terrible. XXIIII. XXIIII = LVIIII XXV. XXV = LXI XXVI. XXVI = LXIII XXVII. XXVII = LXII XXVIII. It Is Manifest That the Savior Was Born the Son of God and Was Called Christ: Why Then After Baptism Did the Tempter Approach Him Saying, 'If You Are the Son of God?' and the Rest? The Savior was born from a virgin in such a way that he was both Christ and the Son of God, not by creation but by birth. However, while still in a younger age, diminishing his power, that is, dissembling his authority, he did not provoke the impudence of the devil. But after being baptized, with the Holy Spirit descending upon him, when he had appeared to men through the testimony of God the Father as to who he was, the enemy was led by zeal to envy, seeing that this deed was done to his own detriment; for he understood that the ordinance of baptism was procured for the salvation of men. And therefore he approaches the Savior, the author of this matter, not to approve, but to find an opportunity to subvert. For temptation is sometimes made for testing, sometimes deceitfully for subversion.

He judged that, as if he had drawn out a response from the Savior according to the deceit of his own will, he would have his entire kingdom, secure that with the leader of the Savior's teaching subjected, no one would escape his death. XXIX. WHY DID THE SAVIOR REPLY TO THE TEMPTING DEVIL NOT OTHERWISE THAN WITH EXAMPLES FROM THE LAW? The Savior replied not only to the tempting devil, but also to the Jews, through whom he carried out the impiety of his cruelty against the Savior. For, foreknowing that the Jews would call him an enemy of the law, he crushed the shamelessness of their father [the devil] with testimonies from the law, so that he might condemn the father in the sons and the sons in the father. XXX. XXX = LVII. XXXI. XXXI = LVIII. XXXII. THE GOSPEL TESTIFIES THAT NO ONE HAS SEEN GOD; AGAINST THIS, JACOB, MOSES, AND ISAIAH ASSERT THAT THEY HAVE SEEN GOD. BUT SOMEONE SAYS: "NO ONE HAS SEEN THE FATHER." WHAT OF IT? IF THE SON HAS BEEN SEEN, THE FATHER HAS ALSO BEEN SEEN, SINCE THE FATHER AND THE SON, BOTH, ARE ONE GOD BOTH IN SUBSTANCE AND IN IMAGE, BECAUSE THE IMAGE OF THE TWO IS ONE, AND, AS HE HIMSELF SAYS: "HE WHO SEES ME, SEES ALSO THE FATHER." HOW THEN HAS NO ONE SEEN THE FATHER, GOD, WHEN THE SON SAYS THAT THE FATHER IS SEEN, WHEN HE HIMSELF IS SEEN, BECAUSE HE IS NOT A DIFFERENT GOD? IF, THEREFORE, HE IS NOT DIFFERENT, BUT THE SAME, BECAUSE HE IS ONE, GOD HAS BEEN SEEN.

As far as the evangelist is concerned, he said this about God the Father, because no one has seen God except the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, has revealed him. Let us believe the Son; for he has revealed that no one except himself has seen God. He said this, however, in order to teach that he himself always appeared to the patriarchs and prophets. Therefore this does not pertain to the one God, but to the person of the Father, of whom it cannot be said otherwise than God the Father. The Son, however, says that he is seen in such a way that he is nevertheless invisible, even in the very act when he is thought to be seen. For "seen" here is understood, because he was certainly not seen with the eyes, but understood with the mind, and to have seen was to have understood, in that God was present there in that which appeared. But when the Savior says, "He who sees me sees also the Father," he did not refer this to the sight of the eyes, but to that of the mind, and so that nothing diverse might be thought to exist between Father and Son. Therefore neither of them has been seen according to substance; but in circumappearance, the Son alone has been seen with the mind, not with carnal eyes, because he is invisible like the Father.

XXXIII. Why is it that the Savior denied mercy to a foreign woman, that is, a Canaanite woman, at the beginning, when he did not deny the benefit of granting healing to a foreign centurion and to a leper, whom Jesus himself called a foreigner? The reason itself indicates the worthiness of the Savior’s action. For it would have been absurd and would have worked to the injury of the promise to the patriarchs if a woman who had not confessed the God of the Jews were to receive the benefit promised to the people who do confess God. Therefore, it was denied to her at the beginning. But when she bowed her neck and did not deny faith in the Savior’s words, but confessed that believing Jews are sons, while Gentiles are dogs or servants, she thereby joined herself to the Lord’s faith, because servants indicate a master, and a master is not without servants; unity was established between the subject and the one who subjects. Hence it is that she deserved to obtain what she had begged for. The centurion, however, who received the benefit from the Savior without hesitation, had long ago involved himself in the affairs of God. Indeed, the Jewish elders say to the Lord: “He is worthy for you to grant it to him; for he loves our people and the synagogue, and he himself built it for us.” As for the leper, the Lord called him a foreigner not in faith, but in nationality. For he was a Samaritan, who are known to be of Babylonian origin by descent. And yet even he obtained the benefit not without confession, because it had been said by the Lord to the disciples: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter the city of the Samaritans.

But go rather to the sheep of the house of Israel that have perished; that is, that the gospel should not be preached to the Samaritans and the Gentiles before the Jews, to whom this promise had been made. However, when the Jews began to reject the faith of Christ, then the Savior offered himself to the Samaritan woman, and after the cross to the centurion Cornelius; but when asked by the Canaanite woman, he received her, because it was not yet the time for salvation to be offered to her. XXXIV. XXXIV = LXIV, XXXV. XXXV = LXV, XXXVI. XXXVI = LXVII, XXXVII. XXXVII = LXVI, XXXVIII. XXXVIII = LXVIII, XXXIX. The Apostle Peter says: ‘Christ died for us,’ but the Apostle Paul asserts that he also died for himself: ‘He was,’ he says, ‘obedient unto death; on account of which God gave him a name which is above every name.’ If this is so, he who through his works made an increase will seem to have been imperfect. No believer doubts that the Son of God was born perfect from God. For he received all the attributes of the paternal divinity by being born from God the Father. He then received the name which is above every name, that is, that he be called what the Father is, God. For nothing is said to be future with him; he has everything before him. Therefore he was born to create and restore all these things. For indeed order and reason require that every knee be bent to the Father’s name. The Father gave this to the Son on account of what he was to do; he gave it, however, when he begot him. For he begot him in such a way that he would be in the same honor as the Father himself is.

XL. XL = LXXII. XLI. XLI = LXXIII. XLII. JOHN TO THE LORD: 'ARE YOU THE ONE WHO IS TO COME, OR ARE WE TO EXPECT ANOTHER?' He pleads the cause of his disciples in his own person. For John did not doubt, who had said: behold the Lamb of God, behold the one who takes away the sin of the world, but, to satisfy his disciples, he sends them with his own words, so that by the mouth of the Savior he might confirm what he himself taught about him, so that after his departure his disciples would follow Christ without any hesitation. XLIII. WHY IS IT THAT, WHEN THE SAVIOR HAD HEALED ALMOST EVERYONE WITH A WORD, HE NEVERTHELESS RESTORED THE EYES OF A BLIND MAN THROUGH MUD MADE FROM SPITTLE? The Savior did this to confound those who accuse creation. For when he corrected a defect—an accident of the body—in no other way than the creator made it, he commended the author of this work. For he corrected it through that by which it was made. For everything that is made, if when fallen it is restored through that by which it was made, it will be proven to have been made correctly. For if the Savior testifies through these things that he is God, because he corrected damages and defects of the body, how much more is God the one who is the inventor of the body itself!

44. Why is it that, when about to perform an astonishing and unknown miracle—namely, to raise Lazarus from the dead—he wept, or sought the place where he was laid as if he did not know it? The Savior is God and man, and through this he always acted in two ways: what pertained to human emotion, he wept; but because he was also God, he raised the one he wept for. Therefore, from the least things one always proceeds to greater ones, so that, since he was perceived as a man, he would prove himself to be what he seemed; but he asserted himself as God through his works. 45. Why is it that we read above that Herod died, but below, and after many years, that Herod killed John, when John survived the death of Herod above? Herod was king of Judea; he had four sons: Archelaus, Herod, Philip, and Lysanias. But when their father Herod died, Archelaus succeeded him. When Archelaus died, the kingdom of the aforementioned Herod was divided into four parts, so that Pilate was admitted into the fourth part of the kingdom as a governor, not as a king, while Herod's sons were called kings. Finally, when Philip died again, his brother Herod took his wife, for which he was rebuked by John the Baptist, and for this reason Herod, the son of the aforementioned Herod, killed him. For what does it say? "Herod," it says, "the tetrarch," that is, placed in the fourth part of the kingdom of his father Herod. Why, then, is there doubt, when the meaning of the added surname shows that this is a different Herod?

For he it is who also killed James with a sword, the brother of John, who later, struck by an angel of God, swarming with worms, expired. XLVI. XLVI = LXXXVI XLVII. XLVII = LXXV. XLVIII. WHY DOES THE APOSTLE SAY HE BECAME ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE, A THING WHICH SEEMS THE ACT OF A FLATTERER AND A HYPOCRITE? A flatterer is one who gives his consent so as not to offend the one he wishes to have well-disposed toward him. For one who does something for the sake of avoiding scandal—something not indeed dangerous, but superfluous—is concerned for the salvation of the one he does not wish to suffer scandal. When the Apostle Paul circumcised Timothy for the sake of the Jews and entered the temple purified, he presented himself in such a way that those who were zealous for the ancestral tradition would not, having suffered scandal, either kill him or consider our religion hostile to them. He therefore wished to concede less so that he might gain more. For he could have sinned gravely if he had not made himself a Jew when going into the temple to pray; he therefore subjected himself in order to benefit them. But with those who were under the Law, that is, the Samaritans, he agreed on this principle, by which it is established that they rightly confess the books of Moses to be from God and that circumcision and the Sabbath were given by God. And among these, moreover, he showed them that the Christ whom they awaited was the one he was proclaiming. For thus you have it in the Samaritan woman’s words to the Lord: “I know that the Messiah is coming; when he comes, he will announce everything to us.

Therefore, according to this understanding, he was interpreting the words of the books of Moses, who said that the Lord your God will raise up a prophet for you from among your brothers. But to those who were without the law, he assented in this respect, because they say that the world and the human race were made by God. For he says: "As some of you have said: For we are of this race." Thus he became all things to all people, so that he might benefit their salvation. XLIX. XLIX = LXXVI L. WHEN WE PROFESS THAT THE SAVIOR WAS BORN, WHY DOES THE APOSTLE SAY THAT HE WAS MADE FROM THE SEED OF DAVID, SINCE IT IS ONE THING TO BE MADE, ANOTHER TO BE BORN? Although in this passage the making could be understood as birth—for making differs from generation, indeed, but in other matters, not where the nature of flesh and body is concerned—nevertheless, the apostle did not speak in such words without reason, because in another place he says: "made from a woman." Therefore, he signified something by this expression. For since the Lord's flesh was not formed in the virgin's womb by human seed and made into a body, but by the effect and power of the Holy Spirit, the apostle spoke thus. For it is one thing to mix seed with blood, coagulate, and generate, and another to procreate not by mixture but by power. Therefore, he said "made" because it was unbegotten.

Why did the Apostle say to the Galatians, whom he so reproaches and rebukes throughout the whole epistle: 'Be as I am,' he says, 'because I am as you are'? If, therefore, he presented himself as such as they were, it was superfluous to say: 'Be as I am'; or perhaps he had begun to be an imitator of them in some things and in some things he wants them to be his imitators? Who among them could imitate the apostle? or what was lacking to the teacher of the Gentiles? but he exhorts them to be his imitators, and since it is not impossible, he thus reproves, when he says: 'because I am what you are. For you are men, just as I am; therefore do what I do.' It can also be referred to that, since he says he became everything to everyone through agreement, in those things in which they did not deviate from the truth, especially the Gentiles. For there was nothing of theirs which it was no longer appropriate to do, but which had previously been done rightly, such as circumcision, observance of the sabbath, of the new moons, of foods. But if he approved of anything of the Gentiles, he shows that it should not now cease. For they say the world was made by God and men—this always stands: if, therefore, by agreeing with them in these things he became as they are, he exhorts them that in a similar way they also should become as he is, agreeing with his teaching.

LII. How are we free in will and choice, when the Apostle says: 'The flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, so that you do not do what you wish'? And if the flesh lusts against the spirit, it is evil; for the spirit suggests good things. By 'flesh' in this place you should understand not the substance of the flesh, but evil acts and faithlessness signified in the flesh. For because every error arises from visible and worldly things, and the flesh is akin to them—since it is composed of the elements—he calls every error 'flesh.' He calls not only adulteries, fornications, and luxuries the works of the flesh, but also idolatry, sorceries, blasphemies, and such things. Does the flesh compel blasphemy or idolatry? Are these not vices of the soul, when it consents to error? But of those who act rightly, he says that they are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, and yet they are still in the body. Therefore, he who walks well and does not despair of the hope of the faithful, though placed in the flesh, is said not to be in the flesh; but he who acts evilly and is a blasphemer is said to be in the flesh, because just as those who act rightly are spiritual even with the flesh itself, so those who live wickedly are carnal even with the soul itself. For that is called what it does.

Here then is the error, which he calls "the flesh," that lusts against the spirit—that is, it suggests evils against that same spirit, which is the law of God. For he introduces two laws, that of God and that of the devil. Hence he speaks of "spirit" because the law of God is spiritual, and it fights against the flesh—that is, against the vices—so as to preserve man for God. The law of the devil, however, which is error, contradicts through the enticements of luxury and worldly sweetness. With these two opposing forces, man stands in the middle. When he consents to the spirit, the flesh does not wish it; but when he gives his hand to the flesh, he scorns the spirit—that is, he despises the law of God. Therefore, to one consenting to the flesh, the spirit calls him back, so that he does not do what he wishes; but to one assenting to the spirit, the flesh tempts him, so that he does not do what he thinks is beneficial. Yet the spirit rightly and providently contradicts and calls back, so as to snatch man from the counsels of Satan; but the flesh, which is the opposing law, tempts and resists the spirit of the law for this reason: so that through deceit it may ensnare him.

Therefore the apostle publicizes these things to show to which thing the human will entrusts its own choice, not to void the freedom of choice, but he teaches to what thing the choice should join itself. But if there were no will's choice, neither the law of the devil, which is the flesh, nor the law of God, which is the spirit, would, by opposing each other, solicit a man with their counsels. For he who solicits, persuades; he who persuades, does not inflict force, but circumvents; he who is circumvented, his will is changed by certain deceptions. But if there were no free choice, an unwilling man would be dragged to those things which he does not want. LIII. BY WHAT REASON IS THE WISDOM OF THE FLESH HOSTILE TO GOD, OR WHAT IS THAT WISDOM ITSELF WHICH IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE LAW OF GOD? This question does not differ in sense from the previous one. For by saying "flesh," what it signifies has been declared; whence what its wisdom is can be easily discerned. We have said, therefore, that all elements are called flesh, that is, the substances of visible things, whose nature is such that they think nothing can be done without a spiritual mixture, and they abhor and judge as foolish the reason of simple power. For those who, distrusting spiritual things, follow carnal things, taste and think nothing else true except what the reason of the elements contains, so that they believe neither that a virgin gave birth nor in the resurrection of the flesh, because this is the reason of the flesh, that is, of the elements.

does not receive it—for all things that are born in time are generated by the working of mixture—and that dead and dissolved bodies cannot be restored to life again, because each element, once the mixture is separated, returns to its own nature. Puffed up by these arguments, they deny the future or the past that we believe, and through this their assertion is hostile to God, since it considers foolish and vain what God has done and what He has promised to do. LIIII. LIIII = LXXVII LV. WHY IS IT THAT, ALTHOUGH JOHN THE BAPTIST FIRST BORE WITNESS TO THE SAVIOR, HE LATER DOUBTED, SAYING THROUGH HIS DISCIPLES: "ARE YOU THE ONE WHO IS TO COME, OR DO WE EXPECT ANOTHER?" Those who think that John doubted detract from the Savior. For either they assert that he rightly doubted, or else they certainly accuse the Savior of ignorance, because, as they think, he praised one who thought ill of him. But since it is impossible for the Savior to be mistaken, John was rightly praised by him. If he was rightly praised, he did not doubt. For at the very time when John sent his disciples from prison to Jesus, saying: "Are you the one who is to come, or do we expect another?" then Jesus answered his disciples, saying: "Go, tell John what you have seen and heard. The blind see, the deaf hear, lepers are cleansed, the lame walk, the dead rise again; and blessed is he who has not been scandalized by me." And as John's messengers were departing, Jesus began to say to the crowds concerning John the Baptist: "Why did you go out into the desert to see?

A reed moved by the wind, or a man clothed in soft garments? Behold, those who are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings. But why have you gone out to see? A prophet? I tell you that he is more than a prophet. This is the one of whom it is written: Behold, I send my angel before your face, who will prepare your way. Then even the tax collectors praised God, having been baptized by the baptism of John. How great, then, is the praise given to John, that he was said to be more than a prophet! And the Savior calls blessed the one who does not stumble over him: how was John praised if he stumbled through doubt? But he certainly did not doubt. For the praise proves him blessed, because he did not stumble. And the Savior, indeed, at that very time burst forth into praise of John, in order to show that John’s mind was free from the doubt of his disciples. For John, wishing to strengthen his wavering disciples in their faith in the Savior, knowing that his own end was imminent, wanted the things he said about him to be confirmed by the Savior’s own mouth. Therefore, so that he might be a true witness, he implores the testimony of a greater authority, so that by their concord all ambiguity might be removed. This is John’s device: to send his own men, as it were, to the Savior in doubt, so that hearing from the Savior the same things they had heard from John, they might be confirmed, knowing that the testimony of a suitable agent and of the heavenly Lord cannot be called into doubt. For this reason, the Savior also replied, as it were, to John, so that between John questioning and the Savior answering, they might learn the truth.

LVI. LVI = LXXVIII LVII. WHY IS IT THAT THE APOSTLE SAYS TO THE GALATIANS: 'I MARVEL THAT YOU ARE SO QUICKLY TRANSFERRED FROM HIM WHO CALLED YOU IN GRACE TO ANOTHER GOSPEL, WHICH IS NOT ANOTHER? IF IT IS CERTAINLY ANOTHER, IT IS NOT THE SAME; IF IT IS NOT THE SAME, HOW IS IT NOT ANOTHER?' He said 'another gospel' for this reason, because that to which they had been called was not what the Galatians had subsequently begun to follow. For they had been led away from the gospel of Christ and drawn into Judaism under the name of Christ, as if this were to be followed, and they affirmed something other than what the apostle was preaching. Hence it is added: 'as they persuade you.' For the pseudo-apostles, when they deceived believing Gentiles, said that what they themselves taught had been handed down by the Savior, as is contained in the Acts of the Apostles: because unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved. Moved by the grief of their perversion, the apostle writes to them saying: I marvel that you are so quickly transferred from him who called you in grace to another gospel, which is not another.

He marvels, therefore, that after a gentle and less burdensome matter they would devote themselves to harshness and to a burden, that is, that after the simplicity of faith they would permit themselves to be circumcised for the elements, would observe the new moons and the sabbath, subjected to the elements. And lest he seem to have given occasion to the false apostles, who say that what the Galatians had received is other than what the tradition of truth holds, he immediately subjoined: that it is not another, except that there are some who disturb you and are unwilling to convert the gospel of Christ. Therefore, the gospel to which they had been called by the apostle was one thing, and what they had begun to follow under the impulse of the false apostles was another; yet it was not other than what Christ had handed down, so that through this they might recognize that they had been led into error and would follow only faith, professing Christ as God and that he suffices to grant salvation, through whom they had obtained remission of sins, not through the law, because without the law the grace of God bestows forgiveness of offenses.

LVIII. When many sins seem to be committed against the body — for everyone who inflicts violence upon himself from any part of his body certainly sins against his own body; there is the one who castrates himself, the one who ends his life by the noose, the one who thrusts a blade into himself — why does the Apostle say: 'Every sin,' he says, 'whatever a man may commit, is outside the body; but he who fornicates sins against his own body'? Do you think the apostle was ignorant, or do you desire the meaning of the statement to be explained? For the apostle, in saying 'body,' did not signify an individual man, but included the woman as well. Because woman is a portion of man. For all the aforementioned crimes, which someone violently inflicts upon himself, do not defile the whole body; the individual sins, and by this alone becomes guilty. In fornication, however, the whole body is polluted, because the consent to defilement holds both the man and the woman: therefore fornication is a grave offense. For one sins most grievously when he seeks a companion for his own crime to the point of perdition. For if, as one who lives well will also receive a reward for the one he has gained, and the evil man is guilty not only in himself but also in the one whom he wished to make a partner in damnation, how much more so he who fornicates, whom it is established by one offense contaminates himself twice, in a certain way! For if he sins against the flesh, which is from itself, he certainly adulterates himself twice.

If, however, someone thinks to transform this question so as to apply this statement either to the Church or to the body of Christ, it will not stand. For it will be said improperly and will be similar to the Novatians, who, in order to support the cause of their madness, declare that one who fornicates does not sin against his own body, but against Christ’s, because Christians are members and the body of Christ, so that fornication is the same as sacrilege, and that such a person is said to sin against Christ, just as one who denies Christ. This is indeed weak and fragile, because from any side it sticks in the snare and does not escape. For if one who fornicates sins against the body of Christ, then other sins will not be committed against Christ, as if a Christian kills a brother or sacrifices to idols or commits another kind of sin, because every sin is outside the body except fornication. But if every sin is not outside the body, but whatever is committed is committed against Christ, then one who steals, or who perjures, or who lies, or who strikes a brother, or commits any such thing, is said to sin against Christ or against the Holy Spirit, which is very absurd. And yet the apostle calls the Church the members and body of Christ, so that we are mutually members; how then does one who fornicates sin against his own body and not rather against Christ’s? Because according to the mystery of the Church we are called not our own body, but Christ’s, and.

This is far from the case, because one who fornicates sins in his own body, since the whole of Adam is contaminated. LIX. LIX = LXXIX. LX. WHY DID THE APOSTLE PAUL REPROVE HIS FELLOW APOSTLE PETER, BECAUSE, 'FEARING THOSE WHO WERE OF THE CIRCUMCISION, HE WITHDREW HIMSELF' FROM THE GENTILES, WHEN HE HIMSELF, FEARING THOSE WHO WERE OF THE CIRCUMCISION, 'TOOK AND CIRCUMCISED' TIMOTHY, WHICH HE FORBADE TO BE DONE, AND THEREFORE HE HIMSELF IS TO BE REPROVED? It is incredible that so great an apostle would have reproved another in a matter in which he knew himself to have succumbed. It is not right to believe that such a thing was done by so great a man, because this befits those who live carnally. Therefore, the act of the apostle Paul is free from reproach. For when he preached that one should not be circumcised, but wishing to take Timothy with him, who was born of a Jewish mother but a Greek father, and this was a scandal to the Jews, that he would take with him one born of a Jewess who was uncircumcised, then he submitted to subjection for the moment and, taking him, circumcised him. He therefore did a superfluous thing, with the permission of the one who suffered it. For because he was from a Jewish mother, instructed from infancy in the synagogue in the sacred scriptures, that is, the books of the Hebrews, he permitted himself to be circumcised, in order to remove the scandal from the Jews, because they had zeal for their own race. Finally: when Titus, he says, was a Greek, he was not compelled to be circumcised. But Timothy, because he was from a Jewish mother, as I have said, the Jews did not allow an uncircumcised man to be taken among the teachers.

For this purpose the apostle took him on, so that he might ordain him bishop, as indeed he did. For, being learned in the prophetic writings, he was found to be a suitable teacher for asserting Christ. For the apostle Peter would not have been reproved, if he had separated himself from the Gentiles out of fear of the Jews, lest he be a scandal to them. But this was reproved in the apostle Peter: that, although he previously lived in a Gentile manner among the believing Greeks, when Jews arriving from James made him subject to fear, he began to teach that Gentiles ought to Judaize. Hence he hears: "If you, though a Jew, live in a Gentile manner, why do you force Gentiles to Judaize?" For he had caused doubt about the evangelical discipline, which is a crime, while he was destroying what he had built. Therefore the apostle Paul calls this a pretense, since it is established that, if he had circumcised Timothy, he would not have kept silent about doing something superfluous for the sake of their scandal, and therefore he yielded, because he had a Jewish mother. For the Jews would not have insisted, had it not been for the minimal occasion of his Jewish mother, because they could then reproach the Gentiles with this discovery and would not easily be scandalized by those who were not of the race of Israel. Therefore he did not do this by pretense, but by force; for the aforementioned cause had no small pretense. For many were reproved in this matter, so that some of the Jews and even Barnabas consented to this pretense.

LXI. WHAT SPIRIT DOES THE APOSTLE DEEM TO BE SAVED, WHEN HE SAYS THAT A MAN OF THIS KIND IS DELIVERED TO SATAN FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THE FLESH? The destruction of the flesh is when someone, given over to pleasures and carnal desires, procures hell for himself; for he acquires destruction from the work of the flesh. For from these things he becomes entirely carnal, because, just as one living according to the law becomes wholly spiritual, so that even the flesh is said to be what the soul is, so if one lives according to the desires of the world and the pleasures of lusts, the whole man becomes flesh, advancing toward the destruction of the flesh; that is, so that just as the flesh, because it is fluid, corruptible, and mortal, is disfigured when the soul is lost—lacking form, it flows away into destruction; for it perishes when it loses the vigor of all its members—so also the soul is disfigured from such a body, whose vigor it had despised, being in punishment with the flesh in which it stained itself with vices, so that there is no benefit to the flesh through the soul, but the soul suffers destruction through the flesh, because it did not govern the body spiritually, although it was given as queen to the flesh, but itself teaches carnal works.

Therefore, when the church casts out such a man, it has its spirit safe, that is, the Holy Spirit, who is the guardian of the church, because if they were to suffer having such a man among them—one who defiled his father’s wife with lust—so that they could compel him by law not to contaminate everyone, and the Holy Spirit were to depart from the church on account of the polluted man, the church would not have its spirit safe. For what is lost is not safe, and on the Lord’s day, found naked of the Spirit, they will not be able to be counted among the sons of God. For the Spirit bears witness that we are sons of God. The apostle speaks this to the people, because bishops had not yet been ordained for the churches in all places. Therefore, he commands the people to do what he himself would do if a bishop had been created there: that is, conspiring together, they should cast him out of their assembly, lest they appear to consent to his works, because whoever does not rebuke the one whom he can, but receives him as if he were not erring, supplies fuel for his wrongdoing, by reason of which he himself is also contaminated, driving the Holy Spirit away from himself.

To the Thessalonians, likewise, among other things, he says: "May your spirit, soul, and body be kept whole and without complaint at the coming of our Lord." This is the same sense; for "to be safe" is the same as "to be whole." For the king says to Daniel: "Are the signs safe, Daniel?" And he replied: "They are safe, O king," that is, "whole." So that our spirit may be whole for us, when it does not abandon us. For those whom the spirit abandons will no longer be whole in the matter of regeneration, because they do not have that by which they were called sons of God. Nor is this contrary, if we say that the spirit itself abandons us when we sin and is not whole. For it is not whole precisely because it abandons us, it which was our guide and ruler, because, if it is our head, we are its members. But when we act against something, it is not it that seems to abandon us, but we seem to abandon it, and then it seems not to be whole, when it loses us. For this is true and manifest: that it does not turn itself away from us, but we turn away from it, when we sin. And to the Colossians, among other things, he says: "From which the whole body is supplied and produced, and grows into the increase of the Lord." If we take this according to the sound of the words, it does not fit—for God does not lack anything, so as to make increase through us—but, when we return to the author of our life and confess him, he acquires us for salvation, and the divinity makes increase in us; therefore, in those who depart from him, there is loss.

This, therefore, is not to be whole, which is also to suffer loss. LXII. WHY DOES THE SAVIOR SAY: 'PRAY,' HE SAYS, 'THAT YOUR FLIGHT NOT BE IN WINTER OR ON THE SABBATH,' WHEN THE TIME OF THIS PERSECUTION CANNOT BE DELAYED, THE APOSTLE SAYING: 'WHICH WILL BE REVEALED IN ITS OWN TIME,' AND IN THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES: 'DEFINING,' HE SAYS, 'THE TIMES AND TERMS OF THEIR HABITATION'? AND WHY IS IT NOT PERMISSIBLE TO FLEE IN WINTER OR TO DEPART ON THE SABBATH? In winter, flight is not safe; for there are cold, constant rains, it snows, it freezes, rivers overflow; and therefore it is very burdensome for those fleeing. For they cannot hide in the woods nor in the mountains nor in caves. On the Sabbath, moreover, according to the Jews, it is not permitted to go out farther from the city nor to ascend to a height, and for this reason you cannot flee on the Sabbath. Just as these times do not make flight safe because of the aforementioned impediments, so too our flight will not be safe if the predicted persecution finds us bound by carnal impediments. For worldly desires and mundane possessions detain men like fetters, and they cannot escape the seduction of the devil. Therefore, it is to be prayed that at the time when one must flee, the condition of winter and the Sabbath not be found in us, but that God's aid may render us free from these impediments, so that there may be nothing that, having captivated us by its desire, delivers us over to the world.

Since, therefore, the Savior was speaking about the final persecution, which will occur in the time of Antichrist, he set winter, which is the last season; and likewise the Sabbath, which is the last day, so that, just as at these times flight is harsh and difficult, he might signify that at that time persecutions and pressures will be so severe that hardly anyone will be able to escape them. LXIII. LXIII = LXXX LXIIII. LXIIII = LXXXI LXV. WHAT IS IT THAT THE APOSTLE SAYS: 'NO ONE CAN SAY THE LORD JESUS EXCEPT IN THE HOLY SPIRIT'? THEREFORE, CAN PHOTINUS, WHO DENIES THAT CHRIST IS GOD, CONFESS OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST IN THE HOLY SPIRIT? AND MARCION AND MANICHAEUS, WHO DENY THAT CHRIST CAME IN THE FLESH, CAN THEY SAY THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IN THE HOLY SPIRIT? OR HARLOTS AND THE LEWD, SINCE THE HOLY SPIRIT DOES NOT DWELL IN A BODY SUBJECT TO SINS AND WISDOM DOES NOT ENTER A MALEVOLENT SOUL?

Truth is not proven or disproven by the person; for whatever is said well and truly is without doubt said in the Holy Spirit. Therefore, if someone is guilty in other matters, he ought not to be prejudged in this, that he speaks the truth. Yet it is not he who is prejudged, but Christ the Lord who is contradicted. For whoever denies that this man speaks the truth does an injury to Christ. But if it is said to be true, and it is denied that what is true is spoken in the Holy Spirit—which Christ also admits (for no good person rebukes one who speaks the truth about himself; nor is what is learned through tradition learned through revelation)—no one who speaks the truth can be disapproved. LXVI. IF IN THE LAW NO ONE IS JUSTIFIED BEFORE GOD, WHY IS IT WRITTEN: 'CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT REMAIN IN ALL THINGS THAT ARE WRITTEN IN THE BOOK OF THE LAW, SO AS TO DO THEM'? IF MEN ARE JUSTIFIED BY FAITH AND NOT BY THE LAW, WHY IS THE ONE WHO DID NOT FULFILL THE LAW CURSED, SINCE IT DOES NOT AVAIL FOR JUSTICE?

The Law given through Moses had justice indeed, but earthly justice, so that those keeping the law would be just for the present, so that they would not become guilty. For one is just according to the law who harms no one. Whence the Apostle: "The law," he says, "is not from faith, but whoever has done it will live in them," that is, doing the law he will not die, but will live for the present; but the justice which is from faith justifies men before God, so that they are rewarded in the future. For they added the justice of faith to temporal justice. For it is just to know from whom and through whom we are, so that the true confession of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit may lead us to the heavenly kingdoms. For even the ancients who not only kept the law of precepts, but also loved God, having hope in the promise, were justified before God. For it says that the law alone does not justify men before God, just as faith alone does not; except that good works commend one to God, but earthly and divine justice preserved makes men perfect. Whence the Lord says: "Unless justice abounds, justice more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

LXVII. If in Christ all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden, how is it that the same Savior says he does not know the day and hour of the future judgment? But if he does know and says he does not know, he seems to lie. This statement contains a twofold sense. For it says that in Christ all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in such a way that whoever has Christ has him in place of all wisdom and knowledge, so that to know Christ is to know and have comprehended all wisdom, just as he says to the Colossians: "Let no one circumvent you through philosophy and empty seduction according to the elements of this world and not according to Christ, because in him dwells all the fullness of divinity bodily"; that is, he who believes in Christ lacks nothing for salvation, but has it in abundance, because the fullness of divinity is in his faith. And again in the same epistle, among other things, he says: "Let no one seduce you in the humiliation of the heart and in the superstition of angels, which appears exalting itself, vainly puffed up in the mind of its own flesh and not holding to the head, from which the whole body is supplied and produced and grows into the increase of God." If, therefore, believers in Christ venerate the head of all principality and power, they lack nothing, but have everything that is necessary for salvation; it will not harm them to be ignorant of inferior things, which contribute nothing to salvation, when they know what is necessary.

Therefore, those who know what is beneficial for their salvation are to be said to know everything in this manner. There is also this: in the Savior all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden, for all the paternal mysteries are known to him, and he himself measures every creature; and the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, and no one knows what is in God except the Spirit of God, who is also the Spirit of Christ. How, then, is he to be said not to know the day and hour of the future judgment, when his Spirit knows what is in God, of whom he said that he received from him? If, therefore, he who received from him knows what is to come, how does Christ not know, who sent the Holy Spirit to us? And can it be that the judge does not know the day of the future judgment, especially since he has given all the signs by which it is to be expected? Perhaps he is even said truly not to know those to whom he will say: "Amen, I say to you, I do not know you." Nor will he be said not to know the foolish and improvident virgins, because he also said—when they were saying, "Lord, Lord, open to us"—"Amen, I say to you, I do not know you." Therefore, there is a reason for him to say he does not know what he knows. Finally, he speaks thus: "Watch, therefore, because you do not know at what hour your Lord will come." So, in order to make us anxious and watchful, when asked, he said he did not know the day and hour of the future judgment, but to benefit us, he denied knowing what he knows. Therefore, since we are ignorant, what benefit is it to us—for we wish to know what, if we knew, would harm us—Christ, however,

The provider of our salvation, lest we hear what would be against us, said he did not know. Surely, if someone in pain asks for a sword to kill himself, and the one who has it answers that he does not have it, will he be accused of lying for denying what, if he did not deny, he would know would be harmful? LXVIII. LXVIII = LXXXII LXVIIII. The Savior says: 'He who has not left all his things,' that is, house and field and the rest, 'cannot be my disciple,' and the contrary. The Evangelist says: 'Joseph of Arimathea came, a rich man, who himself was a disciple of Jesus, awaiting the kingdom of God.' Why is it that the Evangelist professes him a disciple, whom the Savior denied? For Zacchaeus was also rich, and Cornelius the centurion was rich, and the women who ministered to him from their resources. The apostle settles this sense in few words, saying: let those who have be as if they do not have, and those who use this world be as if they do not use it, and those who buy be as if they do not possess. Therefore, he who has these things in such a way that he seems not to have them, appears to have left them. For when he does not presume upon them nor boast, but walks humbly not only in dress but also in mind, understanding himself to be a steward and minister given to these things, he seems to have left all his own. For that is said to be left which recedes from desire and has no favor.

LXX. Why is it that the Savior says to Mary, who wishes to touch him out of joy, "Do not touch me; for I have not yet ascended to the Father," when it is read that he was both touched and adored by the other women? These are the words of one speaking indignantly: "Do not touch me." For although she desired the Savior, while others believed in his resurrection, she stood weeping at the tomb, when she ought already to have rejoiced. For she had heard from the apostles John and Peter that the Lord had risen. For thus you have: and she saw the linen cloth and the sudarium in one place and believed; for they did not yet know the Scriptures, that he must rise from the dead. But Mary, because she had not seen him risen, did not believe. For excessive love made her doubt. Indeed, those whom we love, if they suffer misfortune, we do not believe they escape; but those whom we hate, even if they are near death, it seems incredible to us. Therefore, to Mary, because she was stunned and suffering grief out of love, when she ought to have followed the faith of the disciples, the Lord first showed himself, that she might cease from grief, yet not without indignation. Hence she hears: "Do not touch me," that is, "You follow a carnal sense; refrain from that and follow spiritual things, which are not seen." "For I have not yet," he says, "ascended to the Father.

This is like that of John the Baptist sending his disciples to Jesus and saying: "Go and say: John the Baptist sent us to you, saying: Are you the one who is to come, or do we await another?" He pleads the cause of his disciples in his own person. For John did not doubt, who had said: "Behold the Lamb of God, behold the one who takes away the sin of the world," but to satisfy his disciples, he sends them with his own words, so that by the mouth of the Savior what he himself taught about him might be confirmed, so that after his death his disciples would follow Christ without any hesitation. So also the Savior reproaches Mary in himself, saying: "I have not yet ascended to the Father," that is: "Your heart is still pressed to the ground, you who, if you do not see, do not believe." For if she had raised her heart to God, she would have believed that the Lord had risen with the disciples. LXXI. Why is it that the Savior says: "I am the door; those who were before me are thieves and robbers"? This saying seems to attack the prophets.

Because no one goes to God the Father except through faith in Christ, the Savior therefore calls himself the door of the kingdom of heaven. If, then, he uses the words of a door, what need was there for him to speak of those who came before, saying: "as many as were before me," when no question was being raised about the past, but rather, as a present door, he would be asked about present matters? For the Savior speaks of the Jews, who thought they could enter the kingdom of God not through faith, but through the righteousness of the law. For those coming before the Savior—that is, standing before him—slandered him, contradicting him, so as also to turn others away from faith in him, for which reason they were called thieves and robbers. For these words were spoken at the time when the Pharisees were disputing with him, concerning the man who was blind from birth, to whom the Savior restored eyes that nature had denied, whom they wished to turn away from faith in the Savior, saying that one could not enter through this faith, because it violated the Sabbath, but that entry into the kingdom of God was through the righteousness of the law. Then the Savior said: "I am the door. If anyone enters through me, he will be saved and will find pasture; but if anyone wishes to enter from elsewhere, he is a thief and a robber.

How does this pertain to the person of the prophets? Were the prophets thieves and robbers? Did the prophets say that the teaching of Christ, through the righteousness of the law, could merit God without faith—they who knew that Christ was coming in the flesh? Therefore he said this about those present, so that whoever among those standing or sitting before him are understood to be thieves and robbers. For they were calling away the man who had been blind, wanting to turn him from faith in the Savior, saying: "Give honor to God; we know that this man is a sinner." He refutes them, saying: "Never since the beginning of the world has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. Unless this one were from God, he could do nothing." Therefore, concerning this man, because he persevered in faith, and concerning those who said: "These are not the words of one possessed; can a demon open the eyes of the blind?" the Savior said: "But the sheep did not hear them"—those, that is, whom he called thieves and robbers. For how did the sheep not hear the prophets, when it is established in the scriptures that all the good obey the prophets and the evil obey the false prophets?

LXXII. The Apostle says that Christ died for all; for he speaks thus: 'Therefore all have died and He died for all.' But the Lord Himself says: 'The Son of Man came to give His soul as a ransom for many.' In this way there is a contradiction. The words are indeed different, but the meaning is one, just as, conversely, the same words have a different meaning, as for example: what is not from faith is sin, and: the law, it is said, is not from faith, yet it is not sin. Therefore those whom the Savior called 'many,' the Apostle signified as 'all.' For they are many, because the greater part of every people and nation was believed to believe in the Savior. These believers the Apostle called 'all'; for among other things he says: and He died for all, that is, for those who have believed and will believe. He also died for those who are unwilling to believe, but because they do not receive the benefit, they are unwilling that Christ died for them, and through this He does not seem to have died for those to whom He was of no profit, but rather a hindrance. For those, however, He is rightly said to have died, for whom victory was acquired, who, understanding the mystery, give thanks to God through our Lord Christ.

LXXIII. Why is it that David says: 'Let them be confounded and blush who say to me: "Well done, well done,"' but the Lord says: 'Well done, good and faithful servant,' and so forth? That which David took as a reproach and an evil, did the Savior show to be worthy of good merits? This does not differ greatly from the preceding question. For one word has different meanings, as I mentioned above. For David's detractors, when they favored his misfortunes, rejoiced in his evils. For while he suffered pressures and distresses from Saul and from his son Absalom, they said that it was right and well done. It is as if someone says of a man who suffers injuries: 'It is well for him that this happens, rejoicing in evils,' that is to say: 'It serves him right; for he deserves it.' In a similar way, the Savior, joyful in good works, pronounces the merit of a man, saying: 'Well done, good and faithful servant.' For he rejoices because the servant has made himself more worthy, saying: 'Well,' that is: 'You have acted rightly, so that you might place a greater merit.' Therefore, one word is applied to two contrary causes. For we are accustomed to say of someone: 'He has been judged,' but how it is said is made clear either by the following or the preceding cause; for sometimes it is said for good, sometimes for evil, just as 'desire' is sometimes applied to good, sometimes to evil.

LXXIV. LXXIV = XCIX LXXV. The Apostle calls the Law given by Moses holy and just and good and spiritual, and elsewhere says: 'For the Law works wrath' and: 'Where there is no Law, there is no transgression.' For without these things there is security. By comparing the statements themselves, you ought to have satisfied yourself. For those who are uncertain usually raise questions in such a way that the statements of one whom it is not lawful to reproach are sought out as contradictory and hostile. For if the Apostle calls the Law holy and just and good and spiritual, a man preeminent in every praise and fortified on all sides by truth, this would suffice for faith; and concerning this which seems contrary, it ought to have been inquired without obstinacy. For this proposition wishes for impunity in sinning. For the Apostle, when he preferred the law of faith according to the merit of the time and grace among the Romans, who had been brought into the law under the faith of Christ—'into the law' I say, not that which is natural (for certainly the Romans were under a law, which ten men sent from Athens and later two others had brought, which was written on two tablets, which were buried in the Capitol), but the same law which is called the law of works, so that they would be circumcised, observe the Sabbath and the new moons, distinguish foods, be concerned about purifying vessels, and other things of this kind which are contained in the law—this law, therefore, he says works wrath.

For this reason these things were added by an angry God, so that they would be a burden to the faithlessness of the Jews; for with so many things, it is inevitable that something is omitted. Hence the Apostle Peter says: "Why," he says, "do you place a yoke upon the neck of brothers, which neither our fathers nor we ourselves were able to bear?" Finally, God says through the prophet Jeremiah: "I gave them commandments not." For after many offenses and temptations against God, and insults made to Moses, and slanders made against God, these things were given, which they were to observe, so that their stiff neck might be weighed down, and wherever they turned, they would have the law, so that there would be no respite for them. Therefore, in order to remove them from this law, the Apostle says: "Where there is no law, there is no transgression," so that they might securely and by a shortcut be able to serve God spiritually, (because), he says, "by keeping the law of the Jews, it is necessary that you transgress; for the precepts are so many that it is impossible to fulfill them.

For how could he speak about that law which is natural?—which Moses wrote in order to strengthen its authority, not because it did not exist before, since we read that vengeance was taken before Moses—but to explain that the Romans ought not to live any longer under the law, those whom it was expedient to act under the law; for they could not otherwise preserve justice. Finally, he says to them: "Do you wish not to fear power? Do good," and: "Those who despise, they themselves acquire condemnation for themselves." Therefore, he calls this law spiritual, which he shows to be both holy and just and good. This is what we have called natural, which forbids sinning; for it is the guide of a good life. To this, the law of faith is added, which makes a person perfect. For because this law, which I have called natural, and that which is called the law of deeds are both designated by a common name, the apostle seems to speak against the law, but lest he appear to nullify this law, without which this life cannot be governed, he says: "We know that the law is spiritual," so that it would be known that he nullifies the law of the Sabbath, of circumcision, of foods, and of new moons. For that law is called spiritual because it lays aside all sins.

LXXVI. IF ON ACCOUNT OF DISTRUST AND DETRACTIONS THE JEWS RECEIVED HARSH COMMANDMENTS, WHAT HAD THEIR CHILDREN SINNED, THAT THEY ALSO SHOULD BE BOUND BY THESE COMMANDMENTS? The law was given to the fathers, which would be a burden to the sons as well. For afterwards they sinned against God no less, but perhaps more, than their fathers. For God, being prescient, gave this law more for the sons, because all those fathers died in the wilderness. LXXVII. WHEREAS THE SAVIOR SAYS: 'I PRAY FOR THEM. FOR THOSE WHOM YOU HAVE GIVEN TO ME, I DO NOT PRAY FOR THE WORLD', THE APOSTLE JOHN ON THE CONTRARY SAYS: 'WE HAVE', HE SAYS, 'AN ADVOCATE WITH THE FATHER, AN INTERCESSOR FOR OUR SINS, AND NOT ONLY FOR OURS, BUT FOR THE WHOLE WORLD': THIS SEEMS CONTRARY. Although the sense is not far apart, nevertheless it is one thing that the Savior says, and another that the apostle John affirms. For the Savior prays for the disciples, that they may be kept safe from the assault of evil. Indeed, he speaks thus: I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from evil. The apostle John, however, introduces another kind of prayer; for he says: we have an advocate who pleads for our sins and for those of the whole world. For Christians, therefore, he pleads in a twofold manner, because he both prays for their sins and that they may be kept safe from the assault of the devil. For those, however, who do not believe, this alone is the intercession: that, although they deserve to be punished for their sins and faithlessness, the goodness and patience of God may wait for them, if perhaps they might wish to be corrected.

Nor indeed does he ask that their sins be forgiven to those who are distrustful, but that they receive a long delay, so that, if they should correct themselves, their offenses may be remitted to them. This, therefore, the Savior asks on their behalf, as we have said. LXXVIII. IN THE GOSPEL WE READ THAT THE ANGEL SAYS TO MARY, THE MOTHER OF THE LORD, THAT 'OF HIS KINGDOM,' THAT IS, OF CHRIST'S, 'THERE WILL BE NO END,' AND DANIEL SPEAKS TO THE SAME EFFECT CONCERNING HIM; FOR HE SAYS: THEN AN ETERNAL KINGDOM WILL ARISE, WHICH WILL NEVER BE CORRUPTED. CONTRARY TO THIS, THE APOSTLE SAYS CONCERNING THE LORD: 'WHEN HE HAD DELIVERED,' HE SAYS, 'THE KINGDOM TO GOD THE FATHER.' HOW WILL HE HAVE AN ETERNAL KINGDOM, WHICH IS SAID TO BE ABOUT TO DELIVER TO GOD THE FATHER? In the matter of the Father and the Son, that is, of God and Christ, the delivery is understood not as an abolition. For consider how the Father delivered the kingdom to the Son, with the Lord Himself testifying: For all things, He says, have been delivered to me by my Father. If, therefore, the Father ceased to have it when He delivered it, it can also be said of the Savior that, when He delivered it, He lost it. For the Son, after he said that the kingdom had been delivered to him by the Father, still preferring the Father, says: But this is eternal life, that they may know you alone and the true God and Jesus Christ whom you sent. According to this sense, therefore, the Son also does not lose the kingdom when he delivers it, so that these things may be true, and the Angel and Daniel are said not to disagree with this sense. For whoever thinks that the testimony of these is to be disparaged is full of faithlessness.

But now let us see, for those remaining in this faith, what it means for the Son to hand over the kingdom to the Father; for this is what the Apostle says elsewhere among other things: then the Son himself will be subject to him who subjected all things to him, so that God may be all in all. This subjection, therefore, is itself the handing over of the kingdom. Hence, at this point an interpretation seems necessary, so that the Son is not denied to be subject to the Father, and yet is said to possess the eternal kingdom nonetheless—that is, the kingdom of the Son—because in his name all knees bend: the celestial, the terrestrial, and the infernal. This the Apostle Peter also affirms, saying: there is no other name given under heaven in which we ought to be saved. And the Lord himself says to the disciples: until now you have asked nothing in my name; ask, and I will do it. Thus the Son reigns, when all things are saved in his name and what is asked is granted, until the end of the world. But after all things have confessed Christ, whether by force or by will, and have been subjected to his power, to which they had resisted, the mystery of the one God will be made manifest to all, and all thanksgiving will be referred to the Father, from whom all things come, so that, with preaching ceasing, the one God may be known in the mystery of the Trinity. For when all powers, principalities, and dominions have bent the knee to Christ, then the Son will make it manifest that he is not the one from whom all things come, but his Son, and that the Father is seen in him. This is the subjection and the handing over of the kingdom.

For in showing that the Father is the one from whom all things come, He subjects Himself to Him, when He says that He is from Him. For such great brightness and majesty will be seen in the coming of the Son that all the powers and choirs of angels will think this one to be the singular God. But the Saviour, when He has said that He is not that one who is called the Father, but His Son, while reigning hands over the kingdom to the Father. In this matter both the subjection and the handing over of the kingdom are made manifest, because, when He professes Himself to be from the Father, whatever He has, He acknowledges to be the Father's, referring the whole sum to Him. LXXIX. LXXIX = LXXXIII LXXX. WHAT NEED WAS THERE FOR THE APOSTLE, WHEN REBUKING THE GALATIANS, TO INTERPOSE THIS — FOR TO THE GALATIANS, WHO AFTER THE GOSPEL WERE FLEEING TO THE LAW, HE SAYS AMONG OTHER THINGS: 'FOR A MEDIATOR OF ONE IS NOT, BUT GOD IS ONE' — AS IF THE GALATIANS DENIED ONE GOD, ESPECIALLY SINCE THEY WERE LED BY THIS REASON INTO THE LAW, SO THAT THEY BELIEVED IN ONE GOD AND A SINGULAR ONE, BUT THAT CHRIST CAME AS A MINISTER ONLY, BY PREDESTINATION, TO DISPENSE THE GIFT OF GOD'S GRACE?

It is clear that the Galatians were led into the Law in such a way that they also professed Christ, but not as is fitting, but in the manner of Photinus, so that, because the Law proclaims one God, it is against the Law if Christ is called God. This is a contrivance of the Jews, who, overcome by the great deeds of power, believed in Christ after the cross, so that, while professing Christ, they nevertheless kept the Law, as if all hope were not to be placed in Christ. These are the ones whom the apostle calls false brothers. Therefore, after the tradition of the apostles, these men had corrupted the understanding of the Galatians, so that they made them Jews under the name of the Savior. Hence the apostle says that Christ came as the arbiter of circumcision and the foreskin, as he says to the Ephesians: making peace in one new man. If, therefore, Christ came as arbiter, and an arbiter makes peace between two parties in such a way that he lays down a new rule, removing the professions of both, he reconciles them so that, having followed his judgment, they lay aside their former discord. For when the Jew claims circumcision and the Gentile claims the foreskin, discord arises; when this is removed, peace is made.

If therefore these things are so, how is it,' he says, 'that you Galatians, having become Jews, corrupt the judgment of Christ?' For this reason he said to them: you have been emptied by Christ. For the law of reconciliation, which he had established among them, they spurned and turned back to the former mindset of the Jews, accusing both themselves and the reconciler; for everything that displeases is accused. And because this matter had compelled the Galatians to convert to the Law, so that they would confess one God without mystery, as if it were hostile to the Law if Christ were called God, he says: an arbiter, that is, a mediator, is not of one — but of two, certainly; you, however, having turned to the Law, have rejected the arbiter — yet God is one. By this statement he testifies that he does not proclaim Christ as God in such a way as to make another God or to profess two, but that God is one, just as it is said in the Law, because when Christ is proclaimed as God from God, it does not redound to another God, since what is from God does not permit itself to be called another God. For whether it is God, or what is from God, God is one. For there is no difference at all between God and what is from God; for it is another. He himself is another on account of the person, who is called Son, but he himself is the same on account of the unity of substance. Lest it seem reprehensible that I said 'person'; for some are accustomed to deny it, but let us follow the apostle who says: for what I have given, if I have given anything, I have given for your sake in the person of Christ.

LXXXI. The Savior, when He said that He would suffer and would rise again on the third day, added: 'And after I have risen, I will go before you into Galilee; there you will see Me.' And the angel said similarly to the women. Yet He is found to have been seen by the women and by His disciples in Jerusalem. To retract the words of the Savior is impious, but I see that you do not doubt the words of the Savior, but seek the meaning: why, when He was seen in Jerusalem after His passion, He said that He would be seen by them in Galilee. He was seen in Jerusalem, but individually, to revive the spirits of the disciples; in Galilee, however, by all together. Therefore, for those who were to see Him in Jerusalem in parts, He appointed that in Galilee He would appear to all at once and give precepts for ordering the discipline. LXXXII. The Apostle Paul indicates that one should not grieve for the dead; for it is a sign of despair to grieve, and he himself says of Epaphroditus: 'He was near death. But God had mercy on him; and not only on him, but also on me, lest I have grief upon grief.' How does he forbid grieving, when he himself declares that he would have grieved if he had died?

Otherwise he indicated that he would be saddened by the death of Epaphroditus, if it had occurred, and otherwise he forbids being saddened. For here, on account of the solace of his assistance, which he used in the gospel, he said he would be saddened if he had died; but he forbids us to be saddened in such a way that we mourn the dead as though they were extinguished and lost, despairing of the resurrection. It is one thing, therefore, to seek solace as for one absent, and another to grieve for the destruction of one who will no longer exist. In the former case, consolation ceases; in the latter, despair is excluded. LXXXIII. WHY IS IT THAT, WHEN THE APOSTLES HAD HEALED ALL THE CURES OFFERED TO THEM, THEY NEVERTHELESS DID NOT GIVE REMEDY TO THEIR OWN SICK? FOR SURELY EPAPHRODITUS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ILL UNTO DEATH, IF THE APOSTLE'S INTERCESSION HAD BEEN HEARD. FOR WHO WOULD DOUBT THAT THE APOSTLE OFTEN PRAYED FOR THIS AND DID NOT OBTAIN IT? FOR IF HE HAD BEEN HEARD, THE INFIRMITY WOULD HAVE BEEN REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. Signs and miracles were performed by the apostles for this reason, so that unbelief might be compelled to faith, so that, seeing deeds which are impossible for men, they would recognize that the preaching is from God and would prove by the power that there is reason in the faith, so that, since words are always contradicted, the witness of power was set forth, to which, when words yield, it signifies that there is reason in the faith, which cannot be expressed in words. Among the faithful, therefore, signs and wonders are no longer necessary, but firm hope.

Afterwards, when it is learned that what was promised is true, the mind arms itself for this purpose, so that, despising present things, it may become worthy of future ones, establishing merit for itself through labor, as Solomon testifies, who says: "Son, approaching the service of God, stand in justice and fear, and prepare your soul for temptation." Because man advances through temptations, these warnings were given. Hence the apostle: "Through tribulations," he says, "we must enter the kingdom of God." These tribulations and temptations occur in various ways, so that a persevering spirit in the faith it has accepted may be crowned. For man is tempted not only in faith, but also in sickness, in loss, in persecution, and in the death of loved ones, so that, if in these passions he is not led away to seek the help of demons, he may earn martyrdom without the price of blood. Therefore, the apostle did not fail to obtain what he asked to the detriment of Epaphroditus, but to his advancement, because also in his own case, when he had made a request, he heard: "My grace is sufficient for you"; for virtue is perfected in weakness.

LXXXIV. LXXXIV = XCV LXXXV. LXXXV = LXXI LXXXVI. LXXXVI = LXXXIV LXXXVII. LXXXVII = LXXXIX LXXXVIII. LXXXVIII = XC LXXXIX. LXXXIX = XCII XC. XC = XCIII XCI. XCI = XCVI XCII. ON THE ETERNITY OF THE SON. Since there are some who, still not having the darkness of error dispelled nor the decay of a sluggish life cleansed or wiped away, judging with an earthly mind, either doubt concerning the Son of God or that the two are one—for the perfidious and obstinate nation of the Jews, to whom the source of the law and the treasures of the sacraments lay open, does not doubt, but denies with impious words—I will set forth briefly, as far as the more restricted scope of the treatise permits. For hope is left intact for the ignorant, if they wish to learn; perpetual punishment is destined for those who dissemble. God Almighty, since He is more excellent in magnitude and goodness, ought to have brought forth and exhibited from Himself something great and supremely good. But if He had brought forth something that would be contrary to the measure of His excellence, it would seem either that He could not do more—which does not befit the Almighty—or that He did not wish to—which does not befit the Most Benign. Certainly, for the supreme God it would not have been great to have made something which, placed within Himself, would not possess the force of full supremacy. Therefore, nothing was above Him—for there is nothing that overcomes God—and below Him would have been too little, because the lesser did not befit the greatest.

Therefore, creating a son most similar to himself, he brought forth from himself, as it were, another self, and thus that highest and greatest good, which comes to us from God, overflowed to us through his propagation to us. Moreover, this reasoning must also be understood at the same time: that God, who founded this world, and who, among other wonders of beauty and order, also bestowed upon each kind the nature of creating, for the purpose of producing offspring of its own kind, must first have had himself what he gave. For no one gives what he himself does not have. Therefore, he who had a son corresponding to him in all parts of likeness—that is, one with one, upright with upright, good with kind, blessed with blessed, greatest with greatest, everlasting with eternal—certainly had, before the world, the primacy of created offspring, from which an example was imparted to things coming into being, so that the offspring of those who beget would be compelled to correspond to their seeds. Nor, indeed, did the legitimate order allow otherwise, than that the one who was to be the father of things should first have been a father in his own right, that is, of his own offspring.

But when we say that a son was brought forth, it is not to be understood as if he had a birth like ours, or that he was born in the way we see mortals born, when with the bursting forth of the fetus things come into existence which did not exist before. For those things, conceived by seeds implanted from elsewhere, coalesce into a species of their own kind through the difference of elements; but this divine being, with no help from any external mixture, brought forth and produced from itself that which it always had in itself and with itself. For if we say that light is born from the sun, because it proceeds and flows from it, we certainly do not speak as if the sun could at some time exist or have existed without light, as if it generated light from itself at some time as something superior, but rather that what it always possessed with itself, namely light born from itself without any distinction of a beginning, because it always shines, always illuminates from itself as if by a renewing gift, so the Son of God, cohering with the Father from eternity, also held this likeness of him, that he has neither beginning nor end. And as God is without origin and eternal, so also the Son is eternal; and as God is one, simple, and the same, so he is mingled with the Father, so that they are indeed distinct in names and affections, but are the same, one in both and each in one, continuous in inseparable majesty.

Therefore, God did not draw forth a son from discordant materials, but brought him forth from the simple and singular stock and seed of his own nature, always held within himself and never sent away from himself by any separation, and so contains and embraces him with himself that nothing in either of them is changed from that unity. XCIII. XCIII = XCI XCIIII. XCIIII = XCVII XCV. XCV does not exist.