| << | Contents | >> |
Archelaus
42. But I shall also offer, to the best of my ability, some expositions of the other words referred to; that is to say, I shall show that Jesus neither said nor did aught that was contrary to Moses. And first, as to the word, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,”[1913]—that is the expression of justice. And as to His injunction, that a man, when struck on the one cheek, should offer the other also, that is the expression of goodness. Well, then, are justice and goodness opposed to each other? Far from it! There has only been an advance from simple justice to positive goodness. And again, we have the saying, “The workman is worthy of his hire.”[1914] But if a person seeks to practise any fraud therein, it is surely most just[1915] that what he has got possession of by fraud should be required of him, most especially when the hire is large. Now this I say, that when the Egyptians afflicted the children of Israel by the taskmasters who were set over them in the process of making bricks, Moses required and exacted the whole at once, with penalties, within one moment of time. But is this, then, to be called iniquity? Far from it! Surely it is the abstinence[1916] of goodness, indeed, when one makes but a moderate use of what is really necessary, and gives up all that goes beyond that. Let us look, again, at the fact that in the Old Testament we find the words, “I make the rich man and the poor man,”[1917] whereas Jesus calls the poor blessed.[1918] Well, in that saying Jesus did not refer to those who are poor simply in worldly substance, but to those who are poor in spirit, that is to say, who are not inflamed[1919] with pride, but have the gentle and lowly dispositions of humility, not thinking of themselves more than they ought to think.[1920] This question, however, is one which our adversary has not propounded correctly. For here I perceive that Jesus also looks on willingly at the gifts of the rich men, when they are put into the treasury.[1921] All too little, at the same time, is it[1922] if gifts are cast into[1923] the treasury by the rich alone; and so there are the two mites of the poor widow which are also received with gladness; and in that offering verily something is exhibited that goes beyond what Moses prescribed on the subject of the receipt of moneys. For he received gifts from those who had; but Jesus receives them even from those who have not. But this man says, further, that it is written, that “except a man shall forsake all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.”[1924] Well, I observe again, that the centurion, a man exceedingly wealthy and well dowered with worldly influence, possessed a faith surpassing that of all Israel;[1925] so that, even if there was any one who had forsaken all, that man was surpassed in faith by this centurion. But some one may now reason with us thus: It is not a good thing, consequently, to give up riches. Well, I reply that it is a good thing for those who are capable of it; but, at the same time, to employ[1926] riches for the work of righteousness and mercy, is a thing as acceptable as though one were to give up the whole at once. Again, as to the assertion that the Sabbath has been abolished, we deny that He has abolished it plainly;[1927] for He was Himself also Lord of the Sabbath.[1928] And this, the law’s relation to the Sabbath, was like the servant who has charge of the bridegroom’s chamber, and who prepares the same with all carefulness, and does not suffer it to be disturbed or touched by any stranger, but keeps it intact against the time of the bridegroom’s arrival; so that when he is come, the same may be used as it pleases himself, or as it is granted to those to use it whom he has bidden enter along with him. And the Lord Jesus Christ Himself gave His testimony to what we affirm, when He said with His heavenly voice, “Can ye make the children of the bride-chamber fast so long as the bridegroom is with them?”[1929] And again, He did not actually reject circumcision; but we should rather say that He received in Himself and in our stead the cause of circumcision,[1930] relieving us by what He Himself endured, and not permitting us to have to suffer any pain to no purpose.[1931] For what, indeed, can it profit a man to circumcise himself, if nevertheless he cherishes the worst of thoughts against his neighbour? He desired, accordingly, rather to open up to us the ways of the fullest life by a brief path,[1932] lest perchance, after we had traversed lengthened courses of our own, we should find our day prematurely closing upon us in night, and lest, while outwardly indeed we might appear splendid to men’s view, we should inwardly be comparable only to ravening wolves,[1933] or be likened to whited sepulchres.[1934] For far above any person of that type of character is to be placed the man who, although clad only in squalid and threadbare attire, keeps no evil hidden in his heart against his neighbour. For it is only the circumcision of the heart that brings salvation; and that merely carnal circumcision can be of no advantage to men, unless they happen also to be fortified with the spiritual circumcision. Listen also to what Scripture has to say on this subject: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”[1935] What need, therefore, is there for me to labour and suffer, seeing that I have been made acquainted with the compendious way of life,[1936] and know that it shall be mine if only I can be pure in heart? And that is quite in accordance with the truth which we have learned now, to wit, that if one prevails in the keeping of the two commandments, he fulfils the whole law and the prophets.[1937] Moreover Paul, the chief of the apostles, after all these sayings, gives us yet clearer instruction on the subject, when he says, “Or seek ye a proof of that Christ who speaketh in me?”[1938] What have I then to do with circumcision, seeing that I may be justified in uncircumcision? For it is written: “Is any man circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Or is any in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. For neither of these is anything, but only the keeping of the commandments of God.”[1939] Consequently, as circumcision is incompetent to save any, it is not greatly to be required, especially when we see that if a man has been called in uncircumcision, and wishes then to be circumcised, he is made forthwith a transgressor[1940] of the law. For if I am circumcised, I also fulfil the commandments of the law with the view of being in a position to be saved; but if I am uncircumcised, and remain in uncircumcision, much more in keeping the commandments shall I have life. For I have received the circumcision of the heart, in the spirit, and not that of the letter in the mere ink,[1941] in which former there is praise, not of men, but of God.[1942] Wherefore let no charge of this kind be brought against me. For just as the man of wealth, who possesses great treasures of gold and silver, so that he gets everything which is necessary for the uses of his house made of these precious metals, has no need to display any vessel of earthenware in anything belonging to his family and yet it does follow from this circumstance that the productions of the potter, or the art of making vessels of pottery,[1943] are to be held in abhorrence by him; so also I, who have been made rich by the grace of God, and who have obtained the circumcision of the heart, cannot by any means[1944] stand in need of that most profitless fleshly circumcision, and yet, for all that, it does not follow that I should call it evil. Far be it from me to do so! If, however, any one desires to receive still more exact instruction on these matters, he will find them discussed with the greatest fulness in the apostle’s first epistle.[1945]
43. I shall speak now with the utmost brevity of the veil of Moses and the ministration of death. For I do not think that these things at least can introduce very much to the disparagement of the law. The text in question,[1946] then, proceeds thus: “But if the ministration of death, engraven[1947] in letters on the stones, was made in glory, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away;”[1948] and so on. Well, this passage at any rate acknowledges the existence of a glory on the countenance of Moses, and that surely is a fact favourable to our position. And even although it is to be done away, and although there is a veil in the reading of the same, that does not annoy me or disturb me, provided there be glory in it still. Neither is it the case, that whatever is to be done away is reduced thereby under all manner of circumstances to a condition of dishonour.[1949] For when the Scripture speaks of glory, it shows us also that it had cognizance[1950] of differences in glory. Thus it says: “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.”[1951] Although, then, the sun has a greater glory than the moon, it does not follow that the moon is thereby reduced to a condition of dishonour. And even thus, too, although my Lord Jesus Christ excelleth Moses in glory, as the lord excelleth the servant, it does not follow from this that the glory of Moses is to be scorned. For in this way, too, we are able to satisfy our hearers, as the nature of the word itself carries the conviction[1952] with it in that we affirm what we allege on the authority of the Scriptures themselves, or verily make the proof of our statements all the clearer also by illustrations taken from them. Thus, although a person kindles a lamp in the night-time, after the sun has once risen he has no further need of the paltry light of his lamp, on account of that effulgence of the sun which sends forth its rays all the world over; and yet, for all that, the man does not throw his lamp contemptuously away, as if it were something absolutely antagonistic to the sun; but rather, when he has once found out its use, he will keep it with all the greater carefulness. Precisely in this way, then, the law of Moses served as a sort of guardian to the people, like the lamp, until the true Sun, who is our Saviour, should arise, even as the apostle also says to us: “And Christ shall give thee light.”[1953] We must look, however, to what is said further on: “Their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil in the reading of the Old Testament; it is untaken away, becauseit is done away in Christ.[1954] For even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit.”[1955] What, then, is meant by this? Is Moses present with us even unto this day? Is it the case that he has never slept, that he has never gone to his rest, that he has never departed this life? How is it that this phrase “unto this day” is used here? Well, only mark the veil, which is placed, where he says it is placed, on their hearts in their reading. This, therefore, is the word of censure upon the children of Israel, because they read Moses and yet do not understand him, and refuse to turn to the Lord; for it is He that was prophesied of by Moses as about to come. This, then, is the veil which was placed upon the face of Moses,[1956] and this also is his testament;[1957] for he says in the law:[1958] “A prince shall not be wanting from Judah, nor a leader from his thighs,[1959] until He come whose he is;[1960] and He will be the expectation of the nations: who shall bind[1961] His foal unto the vine, and His ass’s colt unto the choice vine; He shall wash His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes; His eyes shall be suffused[1962] with wine, and His teeth white with milk;” and so on. Moreover, he indicated who He was, and whence He was to come. For he said: “The Lord God will raise up unto you a Prophet from among your brethren, like unto me: unto Him hearken ye.”[1963] Now it is plain that this cannot be understood to have been said of Jesus the son of Nun.[1964] For there is nothing of this circumcision[1965] found in him. After him, too, there have still been kings from Judah; and consequently this prophecy is far from being applicable to him. And this is the veil which is on Moses; for it was not, as some among the unlearned perhaps fancy, any piece of linen cloth, or any skin that covered his face. But the apostle also takes care to make this plain to us, when he tells us that the veil is put on in the reading of the Old Testament, inasmuch as they who are called Israel from olden time still look for the coming of Christ, and perceive not that the princes have been wanting from Judah, and the leaders from his thighs; as even at present we see them in subjection to kings and princes, and paying tribute to these, without having any power left to them either of judgment or of punishment, such as Judah certainly had, for after he had condemned Thamar, he was able also to justify her.[1966] “But you will also see your life hang (in doubt) before your eyes.”[1967]
44. Now this word also has the veil. For up to the time of Herod they did appear to retain a kingdom in some sort; and it was by Augustus that the first enrolment took place among them, and that they began to pay tribute, and to be rated.[1968] Now it was also from the time when our Lord Jesus Christ began to be prophesied of and looked for that there began to be princes from Judah and leaders of the people; and these, again, failed just at the approach of His advent. If, then, the veil is taken away which is put on in that reading of theirs, they will understand the true virtue of the circumcision; and they will also discover that the generation of Him whom we preach, and His cross, and all the things that have happened in the history of our Lord, are those very matters which had been predicted of that Prophet. And I could wish, indeed, to examine every such passage of Scripture by itself, and to point out its import, as it is meet that it should be understood.[1969] But as it is another subject that is now urgent, these passages shall be discussed by us at some season of leisure. For at present, what I have already said may be sufficient for the purpose of showing, that it is not without reason that the veil is (said to be) put upon the heart of certain persons in the reading of the Old Testament. But those who turn to the Lord shall have the veil taken away from them. What precise force all these things, however, may possess, I leave to the apprehension of those who have sound intelligence. Let us come now again to that word of Moses, in which he says: “The Lord your God shall raise up a Prophet unto you, of your brethren, like unto me.” In this saying I perceive a great prophecy delivered by the servant Moses, as by one cognizant[1970] that He who is to come is indeed to be possessed of greater authority than himself, and nevertheless is to suffer like things with him, and to show like signs and wonders. For there, Moses after his birth was placed by his mother in an ark, and exposed beside the banks of the river;[1971] here, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His birth by Mary His mother, was sent off in flight into Egypt through the instrumentality of an angel.[1972] There, Moses led forth his people from the midst of the Egyptians, and saved them;[1973] and here, Jesus, leading forth His people from the midst of the Pharisees, transferred them to an eternal salvation.[1974] There, Moses sought bread by prayer, and received it from heaven, in order that he might feed the people with it in the wilderness;[1975] here, my Lord Jesus by His own power satisfied[1976] with five loaves five thousand men in the wilderness.[1977] There, Moses when he was tried was set upon the mountain and fasted forty days;[1978] and here, my Lord Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness when He was tempted of the devil, and fasted in like manner forty days.[1979] There, before the sight of Moses, all the first-born of the Egyptians perished on account of the treachery of Pharaoh;[1980] and here, at the time of the birth of Jesus, every male among the Jews suddenly perished by reason of the treachery of Herod.[1981] There, Moses prayed that Pharaoh and his people might be spared the plagues;[1982] and here, our Lord Jesus prayed that the Pharisees might be pardoned, when He said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”[1983] There, the countenance of Moses shone with the glory of the Lord, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look upon his face, on account of the glory of his countenance;[1984] and here, the Lord Jesus Christ shone like the sun,[1985] and His disciples were not able to look upon His face by reason of the glory of His countenance and the intense splendour of the light. There, Moses smote down with the sword those who had set up the calf;[1986] and here, the Lord Jesus said, “I came to send a sword upon the earth, and to set a man at variance with his neighbour,”[1987] and so on. There, Moses went without fear into the darkness of the clouds that carry water;[1988] and here, the Lord Jesus walked with all power upon the waters.[1989] There, Moses gave his commands to the sea;[1990] and here, the Lord Jesus, when he was on the sea,[1991] rose and gave His commands to the winds and the sea.[1992] There, Moses, when he was assailed, stretched forth his hands and fought against Amalek;[1993] and here, the Lord Jesus, when we were assailed and were perishing by the violence of that erring spirit who works now in the just,[1994] stretched forth His hands upon the cross, and gave us salvation. But there are indeed many other matters of this kind which I must pass by, my dearly beloved Diodorus, as I am in haste to send you this little book with all convenient speed; and these omissions of mine you will be able yourself to supply very easily by your own intelligence. Write me, however, an account of all that this servant of the adversary’s cause may do hereafter. May the Omnipotent[1995] God preserve you whole in soul and in spirit!
45. On receipt of this letter, Diodorus made himself master of its contents, and then entered the lists against Manes. This he did too with such spirit, that he was commended greatly by all for the careful and satisfactory demonstration which he gave of the fact that there is a mutual relationship between the two testaments, and also between the two laws.[1996] Discovering also more arguments for himself he was able to bring forward many points of great pertinency and power against the man, and in defence of the truth. He also reasoned in a conclusive manner against his opponent on verbal grounds.[1997] For example, he argued with him in the following manner:—Did you say that the testaments are two? Well, then, say either that there are two old testaments, or that there are two new testaments. For you assert that there are two unbegottens[1998] belonging to the same time, or rather eternity: and if there are in this way two, there should be either two old testaments or two new testaments. If, however, you do not allow this, but affirm, on the contrary, that there is one old testament and that there is also another new testament, that will only prove again that there is but one author for both; and the very sequence will show that the Old Testament belongs to Him to whom also the New Testament pertains. We may illustrate this by the case of a man who says to some other individual,[1999] Lease me your old house. For by such a mode of address does he not pronounce the man to be also the owner of a new house? Or, on the other hand, if he says to him, Show me[2000] your new house; does he not by that very word designate him also as the possessor of an old house? Then, again, this also is to be considered, that since there are two beings, having an unbegotten nature, it is also necessary from that to suppose each of them to have (what must be called) an old testament, and thus there will appear to be two old testaments; if indeed you affirm that both these beings are ancient, and both indeed without a beginning.[2001] But I have not learned doctrine like that; neither do the Scriptures contain it. You, however, who allege that the law of Moses comes from the prince of evil, and not from the good God, tell me who those were who withstood Moses to the face—I mean Jamnes and Mambres?[2002] For, every object that withstands, withstands not itself, but some other one, either better or worse; as Paul also gives us to understand when he writes in the following terms in his second Epistle to Timothy: “As Jamnes and Mambres withstood Moses, so have these also resisted the truth: men of corrupt mind, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly is manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.”[2003] Do you observe how he compares Jamnes and Mambres to men of corrupt mind, and reprobate concerning the faith; while he likens Moses, on the other hand, to the truth? But the holy John, the greatest of the evangelists, also tells us of the giving and diffusing of grace for grace;[2004] for he indicates, indeed, that we have received the law of Moses out of the fulness of Christ, and he means that for that one grace this other grace has been made perfect in us through Jesus Christ. It was also to show this to be the case that our Lord Jesus Christ Himself spake in these terms: “Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye hope. For had ye believed Moses, ye would indeed have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?”[2005] And besides all these words, there are still many other passages that might be adduced both from the Apostle Paul and from the Gospels, by which we are able to prove that the old law belongs to no other one than that Lord to whom also the new testament appertains, and which it would suit us very well to set forth, and to make use of in a satisfactory manner.[2006] Now, however, the evening prevents us from doing so; for the day is drawing to its close, and it is right that we should now bring our disputation to an end. But an opportunity will be given you to-morrow to put questions to us on any points you are pleased to take up. And after these words they went their way.[2007]
46. Next morning, however, Archelaus suddenly made his appearance at this residence[2008] in which Diodorus was staying, before any one was yet stirring abroad. Manes accordingly, all unconscious of the fact that Archelaus was now on the spot again, challenged Diodorus publicly to engage in a disputation with him; his intention being to crush him with a verbal display, because he perceived that he was a man of a simple nature, and not very deeply learned in questions concerning the Scriptures. For he had now had a taste of the doctrine of Archelaus. When, therefore, the multitudes had again collected in the place usually set apart for the disputation, and when Manes had just begun to reason, all on a sudden Archelaus appeared among them, and embraced Diodorus, and saluted him with an holy kiss. Then truly were Diodorus, and all those who were present, filled with wonder at the dispensation of divine providence which thus provided that Archelaus should arrive among them at the very time when the question was just raised; for in reality, as must be confessed, Diodorus, with all his religiousness, had been somewhat afraid of the conflict. But when Manes caught sight of Archelaus, he at once drew back from his insulting attitude; and with his pride cast down not a little, he made it quite plain that he would gladly flee from the contest. The multitude of hearers, however, looked upon the arrival of Archelaus as something like the advent of an apostle, because he had shown himself so thoroughly furnished, and so prompt and ready for a defence of the truth by speech. Accordingly, after demanding silence from the people by a wave of his right hand,—for no inconsiderable tumult had arisen,—Archelaus began an address in the following terms:—Although some amongst us have gained the honour of wisdom and the meed of glory, yet this I beg of you, that you retain in your minds the testimony of those things which have been said before my arrival.[2009] For I know and am certain, brethren, that I now take the place of Diodorus, not on account of any impossibilities attaching to him,[2010] but because I came to know this person here at a previous time, when he made his way with his wicked designs into the parts where I reside, by the favour of Marcellus,[2011] that man of illustrious name, whom he endeavoured to turn aside from our doctrine and faith, with the object, to wit, of making him an effective supporter of this impious teaching. Nevertheless, in spite of all his plausible addresses, he failed to move him or turn him aside from the faith in any one particular. For this most devout Marcellus was only found to be like the rock on which the house was built with the most solid foundations; and when the rain descended, and the floods and the winds burst in and beat upon that house, it stood firm: for it had been built on the most solid and immoveable foundations.[2012] And the attempt thus made by this person who is now before you, brought dishonour rather than glory upon himself. Moreover, it does not seem to me that he can be very excusable if he proves to be ignorant of what is in the future; for surely he ought to know beforehand those who are on his own side: certainly he should have this measure of knowledge, if it be true indeed that the Spirit of the Paraclete dwells in him. But inasmuch as he is really a person blinded with the darkness of ignorance, he ran in vain when he journeyed to Marcellus, and he did but show himself to be like the stargazer,[2013] who busies himself with describing things celestial, while all the time he is ignorant of what is passing in his own home. But lest it should appear as if I were setting aside the question in hand by speaking in this strain, I shall now refrain from such discourse. And I shall also give this man the privilege of taking up any point which may suit him best as a commencement to any treatment of the subject and the question. And to you, as I have said already, I only address the request that ye be impartial judges, so as to give to him who speaks the truth the proper honour and the palm.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0001 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page