Chap. VI. - The Divine Way of Wisdom, and Greatness, and Might. God’s Hiding of Himself, and Subsequent Revelation. To Marcion’s God Such a Concealment and Manifestation Impossible. God’s Predestination. No Such Prior System of Intention Possible to a God Previously Unknown as Was Marcion’s. The Powers of the World Which Crucified Christ. St. Paul, as a Wise Master-Builder, Associated with Prophecy. Sundry Injunctions of the Apostle Parallel with the Teaching of the Old Testament.
By all these statements, therefore, does he show us what God he means, when he says, “We speak the wisdom of God among them that are perfect.” (1Co_2:6-7) It is that God who has confounded the wisdom of the wise, who has brought to nought the understanding of the prudent, who has reduced to folly138 the world’s wisdom, by choosing its foolish things, and disposing them to the attainment of salvation. This wisdom, he says, once lay hidden in things that were foolish, weak, and lacking in honour; once also was latent under figures, allegories, and enigmatical types; but it was afterwards to be revealed in Christ, who was set “as a light to the Gentiles,” (Isa_42:6) by the Creator who promised through the mouth of Isaiah that He would discover “the hidden treasures, which eye had not seen.” (Isaiah 45:3, LXX) Now, that that god should have ever hidden anything who had never made a cover wherein to practise concealment, is in itself a wholly incredible idea. If he existed, concealment of himself was out of the question - to say nothing139 of any of his religious ordinances.140 The Creator, on the contrary, was as well known in Himself as His ordinances were. These, we know, were publicly instituted141 in Israel; but they lay overshadowed with latent meanings, in which the wisdom of God was concealed142 to be brought to light by and by amongst “the perfect,” when the time should come, but “pre-ordained in the counsels of God before the ages.” (1Co_2:7) But whose ages, if not the Creator’s? For because ages consist of times, and times are made up of days, and months, and years; since also days, and months, and years are measured by suns, and moons, and stars, which He ordained for this purpose (for “they shall be,” says He, “for signs of the months and the years”), (Gen_1:14, inexactly quoted) it clearly follows that the ages belong to the Creator, and that nothing of what was fore-ordained before the ages can be said to be the property of any other being than Him who claims the ages also as His own. Else let Marcion show that the ages belong to his god. He must then also claim the world itself for 441 him; for it is in it that the ages are reckoned, the vessel as it were143 of the times, as well as the signs thereof, or their order. But he has no such demonstration to show us. I go back therefore to the point, and ask him this question: Why did (his god) fore-ordain our glory before the ages of the Creator? I could understand his having predetermined it before the ages, if he had revealed it at the commencement of time.144 But when he does this almost at the very expiration of all the ages145 of the Creator, his predestination before the ages, and not rather within the ages, was in vain, because he did not mean to make any revelation of his purpose until the ages had almost run out their course. For it is wholly inconsistent in him to be so forward in planning purposes, who is so backward in revealing them. In the Creator, however, the two courses were perfectly compatible - both the predestination before the ages and the revelation at the end thereof, because that which He both fore-ordained and revealed He also in the intermediate space of time announced by the pre-ministration of figures, and symbols, and allegories. But because (the apostle) subjoins, on the subject of our glory, that “none of the princes of this world knew it for had they known it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory,” (1Co_2:8) the heretic argues that the princes of this world crucified the Lord (that is, the Christ of the rival god) in order that this blow might even recoil146 on the Creator Himself. Any one, however, who has seen from what we have already said how our glory must be regarded as issuing from the Creator, will already have come to the conclusion that, inasmuch as the Creator settled it in His own secret purpose, it properly enough was unknown to all the princes147 and powers of the Creator, on the principle that servants are not permitted to know their masters’ plans, much less the fallen angels and the leader of transgression himself, the devil; for I should contend that these, on account of their fall, were greater strangers still to any knowledge of the Creator’s dispensations. But it is no longer open to me148 even to interpret the princes and powers of this world as the Creator’s, since the apostle imputes ignorance to them, whereas even the devil according to our Gospel recognised Jesus in the temptation, (Mat_4:1-11) and, according to the record which is common to both (Marcionites and ourselves) the evil spirit knew that Jesus was the Holy One of God, and that Jesus was His name, and that He was come to destroy them. (Luk_4:34) The parable also of the strong man armed, whom a stronger than he overcame and seized his goods, is admitted by Marcion to have reference to the Creator:149 therefore the Creator could not have been ignorant any longer of the God of glory, since He is overcome by him;150 nor could He have crucified him whom He was unable to cope with. The inevitable inference, therefore, as it seems to me, is that we must believe that the princes and powers of the Creator did knowingly crucify the God of glory in His Christ, with that desperation and excessive malice with which the most abandoned slaves do not even hesitate to slay their masters. For it is written in my Gospel151 that “Satan entered into Judas.” (Luk_22:3) According to Marcion, however, the apostle in the passage under consideration (1Co_2:8) does not allow the imputation of ignorance, with respect to the Lord of glory, to the powers of the Creator; because, indeed, he will have it that these are not meant by “the princes of this world.” But (the apostle) evidently152 did not speak of spiritual princes; so that he meant secular ones, those of the princely people, (chief in the divine dispensation, although) not, of course, amongst the nations of the world, and their rulers, and king Herod, and even Pilate, and, as represented by him,153 that power of Rome which was the greatest in the world, and then presided over by him. Thus the arguments of the other side are pulled down, and our own proofs are thereby built up. But you still maintain that our glory comes from your god, with whom it also lay in secret. Then why does your god employ the self-same Scripture154 which the apostle also relies on? What has your god to do at all with the sayings of the prophets? “Who hath discovered the mind of the Lord, or who hath been His counsellor?” (Isa_40:13) So says Isaiah. What has he also to do with illustrations from our God? For when (the apostle) calls himself “a wise master-builder,” (1Co_3:10) we find that the Creator by Isaiah designates the teacher who sketches155 out the divine discipline by the same title, “I will take away from Judah the cunning artificer,”156 442 etc. And was it not Paul himself who was there foretold, destined “to be taken away from Judah” - that is, from Judaism - for the erection of Christianity, in order “to lay that only foundation, which is Christ?” (1Co_3:11) Of this work the Creator also by the same prophet says, “Behold, I lay in Sion for a foundation a precious stone and honourable; and he that resteth thereon shall not be confounded.” (Isa_28:16) Unless it be, that God professed Himself to be the builder up of an earthly work, that so He might not give any sign of His Christ, as destined to be the foundation of such as believe in Him, upon which every man should build at will the superstructure of either sound or worthless doctrine; forasmuch as it is the Creator’s function, when a man’s work shall be tried by fire, (or) when a reward shall be recompensed to him by fire; because it is by fire that the test is applied to the building which you erect upon the foundation which is laid by Him, that is, the foundation of His Christ.157 “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” (1Co_3:16) Now, since man is the property, and the work, and the image and likeness of the Creator, having his flesh, formed by Him of the ground, and his soul of His afflatus, it follows that Marcion’s god wholly dwells in a temple which belongs to another, if so be we are not the Creator’s temple. But “if any man defile the temple of God, he shall be himself destroyed”158 - of course, by the God of the temple. (1Co_3:17) If you threaten an avenger, you threaten us with the Creator. “Ye must become fools, that ye may be wise.” (1Co_3:18) Wherefore? “Because the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.” (1Co_3:19) With what God? Even if the ancient Scriptures have contributed nothing in support of our view thus far,159 an excellent testimony turns up in what (the apostle) here adjoins: “For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness; and again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.” (1Co_3:19-20; Job_5:13; Psa_94:11) For in general we may conclude for certain that he could not possibly have cited the authority of that God whom he was bound to destroy, since he would not teach for Him.160 “Therefore,” says he, “let no man glory in man;” (1Co_3:21) an injunction which is in accordance with the teaching of the Creator, “wretched is the man that trusteth in man;” (Jer_27:5) again, “It is better to trust in the Lord than to confide in man;” (Psa_118:8) and the same thing is said about glorying (in princes). (Psa_118:9)
Chap. VII. - St. Paul’s Phraseology Often Suggested by the Jewish Scriptures. Christ Our Passover - A Phrase Which Introduces Us to the Very Heart of the Ancient Dispensation. Christ’s True Corporeity. Married and Unmarried States. Meaning of the Time Is Short. In His Exhortations and Doctrine, the Apostle Wholly Teaches According to the Mind and Purposes of the God of the Old Testament. Prohibition of Meats and Drinks Withdrawn by the Creator.
“And the hidden things of darkness He will Himself bring to light,” (1Co_4:5) even by Christ; for He has promised Christ to be a Light, (Isa_42:6) and Himself He has declared to be a lamp, “searching the hearts and reins.” (Psa_7:9) From Him also shall “praise be had by every man,” (1Co_4:5) from whom proceeds, as from a judge, the opposite also of praise. But here, at least, you say he interprets the world to be the God thereof, when he says: “We are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.” (1Co_4:9) For if by world he had meant the people thereof, he would not have afterwards specially mentioned “men.” To prevent, however, your using such an argument as this, the Holy Ghost has providentially explained the meaning of the passage thus: “We are made a spectacle to the world,” i.e., “both to angels,” who minister therein, “and to men,” who are the objects of their ministration.161 Of course,162 a man of the noble courage of our apostle (to say nothing of the Holy Ghost) was afraid, when writing to the children whom he had begotten in 443 the gospel, to speak freely of the God of the world; for against Him he could not possibly seem to have a word to say, except only in a straightforward manner!163 I quite admit, that, according to the Creator’s law, (Lev_18:8) the man was an offender” who had his father’s wife.” (1Co_5:1) He followed, no doubt,164 the principles of natural and public law. When, however, he condemns the man “to be delivered unto Satan,” (1Co_5:5) he becomes the herald of an avenging God. It does not matter165 that he also said, “For the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord,” (1Co_5:5) since both in the destruction of the flesh and in the saving of the spirit there is, on His part, judicial process; and when he bade “the wicked person be put away from the midst of them,” (1Co_5:13) he only mentioned what is a very frequently recurring sentence of the Creator. “Purge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened.” (1Co_5:7) The unleavened bread was therefore, in the Creator’s ordinance, a figure of us (Christians). “For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.” (1Co_5:7) But why is Christ our passover, if the passover be not a type of Christ, in the similitude of the blood which saves, and of the Lamb, which is Christ? (Exo_12:1-51) Why does (the apostle) clothe us and Christ with symbols of the Creator’s solemn rites, unless they had relation to ourselves? When, again, he warns us against fornication, he reveals the resurrection of the flesh. “The body,” says he, “is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body,” (1Co_6:13) just as the temple is for God, and God for the temple. A temple will therefore pass away166 with its god, and its god with the temple. You see, then, how that “He who raised up the Lord will also raise us up.” (1Co_6:14) In the body will He raise us, because the body is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And suitably does he add the question: “Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ?” (1Co_6:15) What has the heretic to say? That these members of Christ will not rise again, for they are no longer our own? “For,” he says, “ye are bought with a price.” (1Co_6:20) A price! surely none at all was paid, since Christ was a phantom, nor had He any corporeal substance which He could pay for our bodies! But, in truth, Christ had wherewithal to redeem us; and since He has redeemed, at a great price, these bodies of ours, against which fornication must not be committed (because they are now members of Christ, and not our own), surely He will secure, on His own account, the safety of those whom He made His own at so much cost! Now, how shall we glorify, how shall we exalt, God in our body, (1Co_6:20) which is doomed to perish? We must now encounter the subject of marriage, which Marcion, more continent167 than the apostle, prohibits. For the apostle, although preferring the grace of continence, (1Co_7:7-8) yet permits the contraction of marriage and the enjoyment of it, (1Co_7:9, 1Co_7:13-14) and advises the continuance therein rather than the dissolution thereof. (1Co_7:27) Christ plainly forbids divorce, Moses unquestionably permits it.168 Now, when Marcion wholly prohibits all carnal intercourse to the faithful (for we will say nothing169 about his catechumens), and when he prescribes repudiation of all engagements before marriage, whose teaching does he follow, that of Moses or of Christ? Even Christ,170 however, when He here commands “the wife not to depart from her husband, or if she depart, to remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband,” (1Co_7:10-11) both permitted divorce, which indeed He never absolutely prohibited, and confirmed (the sanctity) of marriage, by first forbidding its dissolution; and, if separation had taken place, by wishing the nuptial bond to be resumed by reconciliation. But what reasons does (the apostle) allege for continence? Because “the time is short.” (1Co_7:29) I had almost thought it was because in Christ there was another god! And yet He from whom emanates this shortness of the time, will also send what suits the said brevity. No one makes provision for the time which is another’s. You degrade your god, O Marcion, when you make him circumscribed at all by the Creator’s time. Assuredly also, when (the apostle) rules that marriage should be “only in the Lord,” (1Co_7:39) that no Christian should intermarry with a 444 heathen, he maintains a law of the Creator, who everywhere prohibits marriage with strangers. But when he says, “although there be that are called gods, whether in l heaven or in earth,” (1Co_8:5) the meaning of his words is clear - not as if there were gods in reality, but as if there were some who are called gods, without being truly so. He introduces his discussion about meats offered to idols with a statement concerning idols (themselves): “We know that an idol is nothing in the world.” (1Co_8:4) Marcion, however, does not say that the Creator is not God; so that the apostle can hardly be thought to have ranked the Creator amongst those who are called gods, without being so; since, even if they had been gods, “to us there is but one God, the Father.” (1Co_8:6) Now, from whom do all things come to us, but from Him to whom all things belong? And pray, what things are these? You have them in a preceding part of the epistle: “All things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come.” (1Co_3:21-22) He makes the Creator, then the God of all things, from whom proceed both the world and life and death, which cannot possibly belong to the other god. From Him, therefore, amongst the “all things” comes also Christ. (1Co_3:23) When he teaches that every man ought to live of his own industry, (1Co_9:13) he begins with a copious induction of examples - of soldiers, and shepherds, and husbandmen. (1Co_9:7) But he171 wanted divine authority. What was the use, however, of adducing the Creator’s, which he was destroying? It was vain to do so; for his god had no such authority! (The apostle) says: “Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn,” (1Co_9:9; Deu_25:4) and adds: “Doth God take care of oxen?” Yes, of oxen, for the sake of men! For, says he, “it is written for our sakes.” (1Co_11:10) Thus he showed that the law had a symbolic reference to ourselves, and that it gives its sanction in favour of those who live of the gospel. (He showed) also, that those who preach the gospel are on this account sent by no other god but Him to whom belongs the law, which made provision for them, when he says: “For our sakes was this written.” (compare 1Co_9:13; Deu_18:1-2) Still he declined to use this power which the law gave him, because he preferred working without any restraint.172 Of this he boasted, and suffered no man to rob him of such glory (1Co_9:15) - certainly with no view of destroying the law, which he proved that another man might use. For behold Marcion, in his blindness, stumbled at the rock whereof our fathers drank in the wilderness. For since “that rock was Christ,” (1Co_10:4) it was, of course, the Creator’s, to whom also belonged the people. But why resort to the figure of a sacred sign given by an extraneous god?173 Was it to teach the very truth, that ancient things prefigured the Christ who was to be educed174 out of them? For, being about to take a cursory view of what befell the people (of Israel) he begins with saying: “Now these things happened as examples for us.” (1Co_10:6) Now, tell me, were these examples given by the Creator to men belonging to a rival god? Or did one god borrow examples from another, and a hostile one too? He withdraws me to himself in alarm175 from Him from whom he transfers my allegiance. Will his antagonist make me better disposed to him? Should I now commit the same sins as the people, shall I have to suffer the same penalties, or not? (1Co_10:7-10) But if not the same, how vainly does he propose to me terrors which I shall not have to endure! From whom, again, shall I have to endure them? If from the Creator, What evils does it appertain to Him to inflict? And how will it happen that, jealous God as He is, He shall punish the man who offends His rival, instead of rather encouraging176 him. If, however, from the other god - but he knows not how to punish. So that the whole declaration of the apostle lacks a reasonable basis, if it is not meant to relate to the Creator’s discipline. But the fact is, the apostle’s conclusion corresponds to the beginning: “Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples; and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.” (1Co_10:11) What a Creator! how prescient already, and considerate in warning Christians who belong to another god! Whenever cavils occur the like to those which have been already dealt with, I pass them by; certain others I despatch briefly. A great argument for another god is the permission to eat of all kinds of meats, contrary to the law. (1Co_10:25-27) Just as if we did not ourselves allow that the burdensome 445 ordinances of the law were abrogated - but by Him who imposed them, who also promised the new condition of things.177 The same, therefore, who prohibited meats, also restored the use of them, just as He had indeed allowed them from the beginning. If, however, some strange god had come to destroy our God, his foremost prohibition would certainly have been, that his own votaries should abstain from supporting their lives on the resources of his adversary.
Chap. VIII. - Man the Image of the Creator and Christ the Head of the Man. Spiritual Gifts. The Sevenfold Spirit Described by Isaiah. The Apostle and the Prophet Compared. Marcion Challenged to Produce Anything like These Gifts of the Spirit Foretold in Prophecy His God.
“The head of every man is Christ.” (1Co_11:3) What Christ, if He is not the author of man? The head he has here put for authority; now “authority” will accrue to none else than the “author.” Of what man indeed is He the head? Surely of him concerning whom he adds soon afterwards: “The man ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image of God.” (1Co_11:7) Since then he is the image of the Creator (for He, when looking on Christ His Word, who was to become man, said, “Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness” (Gen_1:26)), how can I possibly have another head but Him whose image I am? For if I am the image of the Creator there is no room in me for another head But wherefore “ought the woman to have power over her head, because of the angels?” (1Co_11:10) If it is because “she was created for the man,” (1Co_11:9) and taken out of the man, according to the Creator’s purpose, then in this way too has the apostle maintained the discipline of that God from whose institution he explains the reasons of His discipline. He adds: “Because of the angels.” (1Co_11:10) What angels? In other words, whose angels? If he means the fallen angels of the Creator, (see more concerning these in chap. xviii. of this book. Compare Gen_6:1-4) there is great propriety in his meaning. It is right that that face which was a snare to them should wear some mark of a humble guise and obscured beauty. If, however, the angels of the rival god are referred to, what fear is there for them? for not even Marcion’s disciples, (to say nothing of his angels,) have any desire for women. We have often shown before now, that the apostle classes heresies as evil (1Co_11:18-19) among “works of the flesh,” and that he would have those persons accounted estimable178 who shun heresies as an evil thing. In like manner, when treating of the gospel, (see above, in book iv. chap. xl.) we have proved from the sacrament of the bread and the cup (Luk_22:15-20; 1Co_11:23-29) the verity of the Lord’s body and blood in opposition to Marcion’s phantom; whilst throughout almost the whole of my work it has been contended that all mention of judicial attributes points conclusively to the Creator as to a God who judges. Now, on the subject of “spiritual gifts,” (1Co_12:1) I have to remark that these also were promised by the Creator through Christ; and I think that we may derive from this a very just conclusion that the bestowal of a gift is not the work of a god other than Him who is proved to have given the promise. Here is a prophecy of Isaiah “There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a flower179 shall spring up from his root; and upon Him shall rest the Spirit of the Lord.” After which he enumerates the special gifts of the same “The spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of religion.180 And with the fear of the Lord181 shall the Spirit fill Him.” (Isa_11:1-3) In this figure of a flower he shows that Christ was to arise out of the rod which sprang from the stem of Jesse; in other words, from the virgin of the race of David, the son of Jesse. In this Christ the whole substantia of the Spirit would have to rest, not meaning that it would be as it were some subsequent acquisition accruing to Him who was always, even before His incarnation, the Spirit of God;182 so that you cannot argue from this that the prophecy has reference to that Christ who (as mere man of the race only of David) was to obtain the Spirit of his God. (The prophet says,) on the contrary, that from the time when (the true Christ) should appear in the flesh as the flower predicted,183 rising from the root of Jesse, there would have to rest upon Him the entire operation of the Spirit of grace, which, so far as the Jews were concerned, would cease and come to an end. This result the case itself shows; for after this time the Spirit 446 of the Creator never breathed amongst them. From Judah were taken away “the wise man, and the cunning artificer, and the counsellor, and the prophet;” (see Isa_3:2-3) that so it might prove true that “the law and the prophets were until John.” (Luk_16:16) Now hear how he declared that by Christ Himself, when returned to heaven, these spiritual gifts were to be sent: “He ascended up on high,” that is, into heaven; “He led captivity captive,” meaning death or slavery of man; “He gave gifts to the sons of men,” (1Co_12:4-11; Eph_4:8; Psa_68:18) that is, the gratuities, which we call charismata. He says specifically “sons of men,”184 and not men promiscuously; thus exhibiting to us those who were the children of men truly so called, choice men, apostles. “For,” says he, “I have begotten you through the gospel;” (1Co_4:15) and “Ye are my children, of whom I travail again in birth.” (Gal_4:19) Now was absolutely fulfilled that promise of the Spirit which was given by the word of Joel: “In the last days will I pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh, and their sons and their daughters shall prophesy; and upon my servants and upon my handmaids will I pour out of my Spirit.” (Joe_2:28, applied by St. Peter, Act_2:17-18) Since, then, the Creator promised the gift of His Spirit in the latter days; and since Christ has in these last days appeared as the dispenser of spiritual gifts (as the apostle says, “When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son;” (Gal_4:4) and again, “This I say, brethren, that the time is short” (1Co_7:29)185), it evidently follows in connection with this prediction of the last days, that this gift of the Spirit belongs to Him who is the Christ of the predicters. Now compare the Spirit’s specific graces, as they are described by the apostle, and promised by the prophet Isaiah. “To one is given,” says he, “by the Spirit the word of wisdom;” this we see at once is what Isaiah declared to be “the spirit of wisdom.” “To another, the word of knowledge;” this will be “the (prophet’s) spirit of understanding and counsel.” “To another, faith by the same Spirit;” this will be “the spirit of religion and the fear of the Lord.” “To another, the gifts of healing, and to another the working of miracles;” this will be “the spirit of might.” “To another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits, to another divers kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues;” this will be “the spirit of knowledge.” (compare 1Co_12:8-11; Isa_11:1-3) See how the apostle agrees with the prophet both in making the distribution of the one Spirit, and in interpreting His special graces. This, too, I may confidently say: he who has likened the unity of our body throughout its manifold and divers members to the compacting together of the various gifts of the Spirit, (compare 1Co_12:12-30; Eph_4:16) shows also that there is but one Lord of the human body and of the Holy Spirit. This Spirit, (according to the apostle’s showing,)186 meant not187 that the service188 of these gifts should be in the body,189 nor did He place them in the human body); and on the subject of the superiority of love190 above all these gifts, He even taught the apostle that it was the chief commandment, (compare 1Co_12:31; 1Co_13:1, 1Co_13:13) just as Christ has shown it to be: “Thou shalt love the Lord with all thine heart and soul,191 with all thy strength, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbour as thine own self.” (Luk_10:27) When he mentions the fact that “it is written in the law,”192 how that the Creator would speak with other tongues and other lips, whilst confirming indeed the gift of tongues by such a mention, he yet cannot be thought to have affirmed that the gift was that of another god by his reference to the Creator’s prediction. (1Co_14:21) In precisely the same manner,193 when enjoining on women silence in the church, that they speak not for the mere sake194 of learning (1Co_14:34-35) (although that even they have the right of prophesying, he has already shown (1Co_11:5-6)195 when he covers the woman that prophesies with a veil), he goes to the law for his sanction that woman should be under obedience. (1Co_14:34, where Gen_3:16 is referred to) Now this law, let me say once for all, he ought to have made no other acquaintance with, than to destroy it. But that we may now leave the subject of spiritual gifts, facts themselves will be enough to prove which of us acts rashly in claiming them for his God, and whether it is possible that they are opposed to our side, even if196 the Creator promised them for His Christ who is not yet revealed, as being destined only for the Jews, to have their operations in His time, in His Christ, and among His people. Let Marcion 447 then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have both predicted things to come, and have made manifest197 the secrets of the heart; (1Co_14:25) let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer (1Co_14:26) - only let it be by the Spirit,198 in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture,199 whenever an interpretation of tongues has occurred to him; let him show to me also, that any woman of boastful tongue200 in his community has ever prophesied from amongst those specially holy sisters of his. Now all these signs (of spiritual gifts) are forthcoming from my side without any difficulty, and they agree, too, with the rules, and the dispensations, and the instructions of the Creator; therefore without doubt the Christ, and the Spirit, and the apostle, belong severally201 to my God. Here, then, is my frank avowal for any one who cares to require it.
Chap. IX. - The Doctrine of the Resurrection. The Body Will Rise Again. Christ’s Judicial Character. Jewish Perversions of Prophecy Exposed and Confuted. Messianic Psalms Vindicated. Jewish and Rationalistic Interpretations on This Point Similar. Jesus - Not Hezekiah or Solomon - The Subject of These Prophecies in the Psalms. None but He Is the Christ of the Old and the New Testaments.
Meanwhile the Marcionite will exhibit nothing of this kind; he is by this time afraid to say which side has the better right to a Christ who is not yet revealed. Just as my Christ is to be expected,202 who was predicted from the beginning, so his Christ therefore has no existence, as not having been announced from the beginning. Ours is a better faith, which believes in a future Christ, than the heretic’s, which has none at all to believe in. Touching the resurrection of the dead, (1Co_15:12) let us first inquire how some persons then denied it. No doubt in the same way in which it is even now denied, since the resurrection of the flesh has at all times men to deny it. But many wise men claim for the soul a divine nature, and are confident of its undying destiny, and even the multitude worship the dead (see his treatise, De Resur. Carnis chap. i. (Oehler)) in the presumption which they boldly entertain that their souls survive. As for our bodies, however, it is manifest that they perish either at once by fire or the wild beasts,203 or even when most carefully kept by length of time. When, therefore, the apostle refutes those who deny the resurrection of the flesh, he indeed defends, in opposition to them, the precise matter of their denial, that is, the resurrection of the body. You have the whole answer wrapped up in this.204 All the rest is superfluous. Now in this very point, which is called the resurrection of the dead, it is requisite that the proper force of the words should be accurately maintained.205 The word dead expresses simply what has lost the vital principle,206 by means of which it used to live. Now the body is that which loses life, and as the result of losing it becomes dead. To the body, therefore, the term dead is only suitable. Moreover, as resurrection accrues to what is dead, and dead is a term applicable only to a body, therefore the body alone has a resurrection incidental to it. So again the word Resurrection, or (rising again), embraces only that which has fallen down. “To rise,” indeed, can be predicated of that which has never fallen down, but had already been always lying down. But “to rise again” is predicable only of that which has fallen down; because it is by rising again, in consequence of its having fallen down, that it is said to have re-risen.207 For the syllable RE always implies iteration (or happening again). We say, therefore, that the body falls to the ground by death, as indeed facts themselves show, in accordance with the law of God. For to the body it was said, (“Till thou return to the ground, for out of it wast thou taken; for) dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.” (Gen_3:19)208 That, therefore, which came from the ground shall return to the ground. Now that falls down which returns to the ground; and that rises again which falls down. “Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection.” (1Co_15:21) Here in the word man, who consists of bodily sub stance, as we have often shown already, is presented to me the body of Christ. But if we are all so made alive in Christ, as we die in Adam, it follows of necessity that we are made alive in Christ as a bodily substance, since we died in Adam as a bodily substance. The similarity, indeed, is not complete, unless our revival209 in Christ concur in identity 448 of substance with our mortality210 in Adam. But at this point211 (the apostle) has made a parenthetical statement212 concerning Christ, which, bearing as it does on our present discussion, must not pass unnoticed. For the resurrection of the body will receive all the better proof, in proportion as I shall succeed in showing that Christ belongs to that God who is believed to have provided this resurrection of the flesh in His dispensation. When he says, “For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet,” (1Co_15:25, 1Co_15:27) we can see at once213 from this statement that he speaks of a God of vengeance, and therefore of Him who made the following promise to Christ: “Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. The rod of Thy strength shall the Lord send forth from Sion, and He shall rule along with Thee in the midst of Thine enemies.” (Psa_110:1-2; Psa_8:6) It is necessary for me to lay claim to those Scriptures which the Jews endeavour to deprive us of, and to show that they sustain my view. Now they say that this Psalm (Psa_110:1-7) was a chant in honour of Hezekiah,214 because “he went up to the house of the Lord,”215 and God turned back and removed his enemies. Therefore, (as they further hold,) those other words, “Before the morning star did I beget thee from the womb,”216 are applicable to Hezekiah, and to the birth of Hezekiah. We on our side217 have published Gospels (to the credibility of which we have to thank218 them219 for having given some confirmation, indeed, already in so great a subject220); and these declare that the Lord was born at night, that so it might be “before the morning star,” as is evident both from the star especially, and from the testimony of the angel, who at night announced to the shepherds that Christ had at that moment been born,221 and again from the place of the birth, for it is towards night that persons arrive at the (eastern)” inn.” Perhaps, too, there was a mystic purpose in Christ’s being born at night, destined, as He was, to be the light of the truth amidst the dark shadows of ignorance. Nor, again, would God have said, “I have begotten Thee,” except to His true Son. For although He says of all the people (Israel), “I have begotten222 children,” (Isa_1:2) yet He added not “from the womb.” Now, why should He have added so superfluously this phrase “from the womb” (as if there could be any doubt about any one’s having been born from the womb), unless the Holy Ghost had wished the words to be with especial care223 understood of Christ? “I have begotten Thee from the womb,” that is to say, from a womb only, without a man’s seed, making it a condition of a fleshly body224 that it should come out of a womb. What is here added (in the Psalm), “Thou art a priest for ever,” (Psa_110:4) relates to (Christ) Himself. Hezekiah was no priest; and even if he had been one, he would not have been a priest for ever. “After the order,” says He, “of Melchizedek.” Now what had Hezekiah to do with Melchizedek, the priest of the most high God, and him uncircumcised too, who blessed the circumcised Abraham, after receiving from him the offering of tithes? To Christ, however, “the order of Melchizedek” will be very suitable; for Christ is the proper and legitimate High Priest of God. He is the Pontiff of the priesthood of the uncircumcision, constituted such, even then, for the Gentiles, by whom He was to be more fully received, although at His last coming He will favour with His acceptance and blessing the circumcision also, even the race of Abraham, which by and by is to acknowledge Him. Well, then, there is also another Psalm, which begins with these words: “Give Thy judgments, O God, to the King,” that is, to Christ who was to come as King, “and Thy righteousness unto the King’s son,” (Psa_72:1) that is, to Christ’s people; for His 449 sons are they who are born again in Him. But it will here be said that this Psalm has reference to Solomon. However, will not those portions of the Psalm which apply to Christ alone, be enough to teach us that all the rest, too, relates to Christ, and not to Solomon? “He shall come down,” says He, “like rain upon a fleece,225 and like dropping showers upon the earth,” (Psa_72:6) describing His descent from heaven to the flesh as gentle and unobserved.226 Solomon, however, if he had indeed any descent at all, came not down like a shower, because he descended not from heaven. But I will set before you more literal points.227 “He shall have dominion,” says the Psalmist, “from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.” (Psa_72:8) To Christ alone was this given; whilst Solomon reigned over only the moderately-sized kingdom of Judah. “Yea, all kings shall fall down before Him.” Whom, indeed, shall they all thus worship, except Christ? “All nations shall serve Him.” (Psa_72:11) To whom shall all thus do homage, but Christ? “His name shall endure for ever.” Whose name has this eternity of fame, but Christ’s? “Longer than the sun shall His name remain,” for longer than the sun shall be the Word of God, even Christ. “And in Him shall all nations be blessed.” (Psa_72:17) In Solomon was no nation blessed; in Christ every nation. And what if the Psalm proves Him to be even God? “They shall call Him blessed.” (Psa_72:17) (On what ground?) Because blessed Is the Lord God of Israel, who only doeth wonderful things.” (Psa_72:18) “Blessed also is His glorious name, and with His glory shall all the earth be filled.” (Psa_72:19) On the contrary, Solomon (as I make bold to affirm) lost even the glory which he had from God, seduced by his love of women even into idolatry. And thus, the statement which occurs in about the middle of this Psalm, “His enemies shall lick the dust” (Psa_72:9) (of course, as having been, (to use the apostle’s phrase,) “put under His feet” (1Co_15:25, 1Co_15:27)), will bear upon the very object which I had in view, when I both introduced the Psalm, and insisted on my opinion of its sense, - namely, that I might demonstrate both the glory of His kingdom and the subjection of His enemies in pursuance of the Creator’s own plans, with the view of laying down228 this conclusion, that none but He can be believed to be the Christ of the Creator.
Chap. X. - Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body, Continued. How Are the Dead Raised? and with what Body Do They Come? These Questions Answered in Such a Sense as to Maintain the Truth of the Raised Body, Against Marcion. Christ as the Second Adam Connected with the Creator of the First Man. Let Us Bear the Image of the Heavenly. The Triumph over Death in Accordance with the Prophets. Hosea and St. Paul Compared.
Let us now return to the resurrection, to the defence of which against heretics of all sorts we have given indeed sufficient attention in another work of ours. (He refers to his De Resurrect. Carnis, chap. xlviii.) But we will not be wanting (in some defence of the doctrine) even here, in consideration of such persons as are ignorant of that little treatise. “What,” asks he, “shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not?” (1Co_15:29) Now, never mind229 that practice, (whatever it may have been.) The Februarian lustrations230 will perhaps231 answer him (quite as well), by praying for the dead.232 Do not then suppose that the apostle here indicates some new god as the author and advocate of this (baptism for the dead. His only aim in alluding to it was) that he might all the more firmly insist upon the resurrection of the body, in proportion as they who were vainly baptized for the dead resorted to the practice from their belief of such a resurrection. We have the apostle in another passage defining “but one baptism.” (Eph_4:5) To be “baptized for the dead” therefore means, in fact, to be baptized for the body;233 for, as we have shown, it is the 450 body which becomes dead. What, then, shall they do who are baptized for the body, (Eph_4:5) if the body234 rises not again? We stand, then, on firm ground (when we say) that235 the next question which the apostle has discussed equally relates to the body. But “some man will say, ‘How are the dead raised up? With what body do they come?’” (1Co_15:35) Having established the doctrine of the resurrection which was denied, it was natural236 to discuss what would be the sort of body (in the resurrection), of which no one had an idea. On this point we have other opponents with whom to engage, For Marcion does not in any wise admit the resurrection of the flesh, and it is only the salvation of the soul which he promises; consequently the question which he raises is not concerning the sort of body, but the very substance thereof. Notwithstanding,237 he is most plainly refuted even from what the apostle advances respecting the quality of the body, in answer to those who ask, “How are the dead raised up? with what body do they come?” For as he treated of the sort of body, he of course ipso facto proclaimed in the argument that it was a body which would rise again. Indeed, since he proposes as his examples “wheat grain, or some other grain, to which God giveth a body, such as it hath pleased Him;” (1Co_15:37-38) since also he says, that “to every seed is its own body;” (1Co_15:38) that, consequently,238 “there is one kind of flesh of men, whilst there is another of beasts, and (another) of birds; that there are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial; and that there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars” (1Co_15:39-41) - does he not therefore intimate that there is to be239 a resurrection of the flesh or body, which he illustrates by fleshly and corporeal samples? Does he not also guarantee that the resurrection shall be accomplished by that God from whom proceed all the (creatures which have served him for) examples? “So also,” says he, “is the resurrection of the dead.” (1Co_15:42) How? Just as the grain, which is sown a body, springs up a body. This sowing of the body he called the dissolving thereof in the ground, “because it is sown in corruption,” (but “is raised) to honour and power.” (1Co_15:42-43) Now, just as in the case of the grain, so here: to Him will belong the work in the revival of the body, who ordered the process in the dissolution thereof. If, however, you remove the body from the resurrection which you submitted to the dissolution, what becomes of the diversity in the issue? Likewise, “although it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.” (1Co_15:44) Now, although the natural principle of life240 and the spirit have each a body proper to itself, so that the “natural body” may fairly be taken241 to signify the soul,242 and “the spiritual body” the spirit, yet that is no reason for supposing243 the apostle to say that the soul is to become spirit in the resurrection, but that body (which, as being born along with the soul, and as retaining its life by means of the soul,244 admits of being called animal (or natural245) will became spiritual, since it rises through the Spirit to an eternal life. In short, since it is not the soul, but the flesh which is “sown in corruption,” when it turns to decay in the ground, it follows that (after such dissolution) the soul is no longer the natural body, but the flesh, which was the natural body, (is the subject of the future change), forasmuch as of a natural body it is made a spiritual body, as he says further down, “That was not first which is spiritual.” (1Co_15:46) For to this effect he just before remarked of Christ Himself: &ldqu
