1. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 1.14-1.18, 3.34 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 328, 347, 354| 1.14. "גּוֹרָלְךָ תַּפִּיל בְּתוֹכֵנוּ כִּיס אֶחָד יִהְיֶה לְכֻלָּנוּ׃", 1.15. "בְּנִי אַל־תֵּלֵךְ בְּדֶרֶךְ אִתָּם מְנַע רַגְלְךָ מִנְּתִיבָתָם׃", 1.16. "כִּי רַגְלֵיהֶם לָרַע יָרוּצוּ וִימַהֲרוּ לִשְׁפָּךְ־דָּם׃", 1.17. "כִּי־חִנָּם מְזֹרָה הָרָשֶׁת בְּעֵינֵי כָל־בַּעַל כָּנָף׃", 1.18. "וְהֵם לְדָמָם יֶאֱרֹבוּ יִצְפְּנוּ לְנַפְשֹׁתָם׃", 3.34. "אִם־לַלֵּצִים הוּא־יָלִיץ ולעניים [וְלַעֲנָוִים] יִתֶּן־חֵן׃", | 1.14. "Cast in thy lot among us; Let us all have one purse’—", 1.15. "My son, walk not thou in the way with them, restrain thy foot from their path;", 1.16. "For their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed blood.", 1.17. "For in vain the net is spread in the eyes of any bird;", 1.18. "And these lie in wait for their own blood, they lurk for their own lives.", 3.34. "If it concerneth the scorners, He scorneth them, But unto the humble He giveth grace.", |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 22.31 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 169| 22.31. "וַיְגַל יְהוָה אֶת־עֵינֵי בִלְעָם וַיַּרְא אֶת־מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה נִצָּב בַּדֶּרֶךְ וְחַרְבּוֹ שְׁלֻפָה בְּיָדוֹ וַיִּקֹּד וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ לְאַפָּיו׃", | 22.31. "Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, with his sword drawn in his hand; and he bowed his head, and fell on his face.", |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Malachi, 3.15 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 295, 354| 3.15. "וְעַתָּה אֲנַחְנוּ מְאַשְּׁרִים זֵדִים גַּם־נִבְנוּ עֹשֵׂי רִשְׁעָה גַּם בָּחֲנוּ אֱלֹהִים וַיִּמָּלֵטוּ׃", | 3.15. "And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are built up; yea, they try God, and are delivered.’", |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 11.4-11.8, 19.17, 24.5 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •moral formation, frank criticism in •moral criticism Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 167; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 351, 541| 11.4. "אַךְ אֶת־זֶה לֹא תֹאכְלוּ מִמַּעֲלֵי הַגֵּרָה וּמִמַּפְרִיסֵי הַפַּרְסָה אֶת־הַגָּמָל כִּי־מַעֲלֵה גֵרָה הוּא וּפַרְסָה אֵינֶנּוּ מַפְרִיס טָמֵא הוּא לָכֶם׃", 11.4. "וְהָאֹכֵל מִנִּבְלָתָהּ יְכַבֵּס בְּגָדָיו וְטָמֵא עַד־הָעָרֶב וְהַנֹּשֵׂא אֶת־נִבְלָתָהּ יְכַבֵּס בְּגָדָיו וְטָמֵא עַד־הָעָרֶב׃", 11.5. "וְאֶת־הַשָּׁפָן כִּי־מַעֲלֵה גֵרָה הוּא וּפַרְסָה לֹא יַפְרִיס טָמֵא הוּא לָכֶם׃", 11.6. "וְאֶת־הָאַרְנֶבֶת כִּי־מַעֲלַת גֵּרָה הִוא וּפַרְסָה לֹא הִפְרִיסָה טְמֵאָה הִוא לָכֶם׃", 11.7. "וְאֶת־הַחֲזִיר כִּי־מַפְרִיס פַּרְסָה הוּא וְשֹׁסַע שֶׁסַע פַּרְסָה וְהוּא גֵּרָה לֹא־יִגָּר טָמֵא הוּא לָכֶם׃", 11.8. "מִבְּשָׂרָם לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ וּבְנִבְלָתָם לֹא תִגָּעוּ טְמֵאִים הֵם לָכֶם׃", 19.17. "לֹא־תִשְׂנָא אֶת־אָחִיךָ בִּלְבָבֶךָ הוֹכֵחַ תּוֹכִיחַ אֶת־עֲמִיתֶךָ וְלֹא־תִשָּׂא עָלָיו חֵטְא׃", 24.5. "וְלָקַחְתָּ סֹלֶת וְאָפִיתָ אֹתָהּ שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה חַלּוֹת שְׁנֵי עֶשְׂרֹנִים יִהְיֶה הַחַלָּה הָאֶחָת׃", | 11.4. "Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that only chew the cud, or of them that only part the hoof: the camel, because he cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, he is unclean unto you.", 11.5. "And the rock-badger, because he cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, he is unclean unto you.", 11.6. "And the hare, because she cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, she is unclean unto you", 11.7. "And the swine, because he parteth the hoof, and is cloven-footed, but cheweth not the cud, he is unclean unto you.", 11.8. "of their flesh ye shall not eat, and their carcasses ye shall not touch; they are unclean unto you.", 19.17. "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart; thou shalt surely rebuke thy neighbour, and not bear sin because of him.", 24.5. "And thou shalt take fine flour, and bake twelve cakes thereof: two tenth parts of an ephah shall be in one cake.", |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Job, 40.17, 40.21 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 328| 40.17. "יַחְפֹּץ זְנָבוֹ כְמוֹ־אָרֶז גִּידֵי פחדו [פַחֲדָיו] יְשֹׂרָגוּ׃", 40.21. "תַּחַת־צֶאֱלִים יִשְׁכָּב בְּסֵתֶר קָנֶה וּבִצָּה׃", | 40.17. "He straineth his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together.", 40.21. "He lieth under the lotus-trees, In the covert of the reed, and fens.", |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.3, 1.28, 3.20, 4.25, 6.1-6.4, 30.11 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 302, 306, 307, 352, 456, 543| 1.3. "וּלְכָל־חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ וּלְכָל־עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּלְכֹל רוֹמֵשׂ עַל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה אֶת־כָּל־יֶרֶק עֵשֶׂב לְאָכְלָה וַיְהִי־כֵן׃", 1.3. "וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים יְהִי אוֹר וַיְהִי־אוֹר׃", 1.28. "וַיְבָרֶךְ אֹתָם אֱלֹהִים וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם אֱלֹהִים פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ וּמִלְאוּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ וְכִבְשֻׁהָ וּרְדוּ בִּדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבְכָל־חַיָּה הָרֹמֶשֶׂת עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃", 4.25. "וַיֵּדַע אָדָם עוֹד אֶת־אִשְׁתּוֹ וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן וַתִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ שֵׁת כִּי שָׁת־לִי אֱלֹהִים זֶרַע אַחֵר תַּחַת הֶבֶל כִּי הֲרָגוֹ קָיִן׃", 6.1. "וַיְהִי כִּי־הֵחֵל הָאָדָם לָרֹב עַל־פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה וּבָנוֹת יֻלְּדוּ לָהֶם׃", 6.1. "וַיּוֹלֶד נֹחַ שְׁלֹשָׁה בָנִים אֶת־שֵׁם אֶת־חָם וְאֶת־יָפֶת׃", 6.2. "וַיִּרְאוּ בְנֵי־הָאֱלֹהִים אֶת־בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם כִּי טֹבֹת הֵנָּה וַיִּקְחוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרוּ׃", 6.2. "מֵהָעוֹף לְמִינֵהוּ וּמִן־הַבְּהֵמָה לְמִינָהּ מִכֹּל רֶמֶשׂ הָאֲדָמָה לְמִינֵהוּ שְׁנַיִם מִכֹּל יָבֹאוּ אֵלֶיךָ לְהַחֲיוֹת׃", 6.3. "וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה לֹא־יָדוֹן רוּחִי בָאָדָם לְעֹלָם בְּשַׁגַּם הוּא בָשָׂר וְהָיוּ יָמָיו מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה׃", 6.4. "הַנְּפִלִים הָיוּ בָאָרֶץ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וְגַם אַחֲרֵי־כֵן אֲשֶׁר יָבֹאוּ בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים אֶל־בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם וְיָלְדוּ לָהֶם הֵמָּה הַגִּבֹּרִים אֲשֶׁר מֵעוֹלָם אַנְשֵׁי הַשֵּׁם׃", 30.11. "וַתֹּאמֶר לֵאָה בגד [בָּא] [גָד] וַתִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ גָּד׃", | 1.3. "And God said: ‘Let there be light.’ And there was light.", 1.28. "And God blessed them; and God said unto them: ‘Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that creepeth upon the earth.’", 3.20. "And the man called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.", 4.25. "And Adam knew his wife again; and she bore a son, and called his name Seth: ‘for God hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel; for Cain slew him.’", 6.1. "And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,", 6.2. "that the sons of nobles saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives, whomsoever they chose.", 6.3. "And the LORD said: ‘My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for that he also is flesh; therefore shall his days be a hundred and twenty years.’", 6.4. "The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of nobles came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.", 30.11. "And Leah said: ‘Fortune is come! ’ And she called his name Gad.", |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 1.7, 20.17, 21.6 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •moral criticism •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128, 354, 355, 440| 1.7. "וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל פָּרוּ וַיִּשְׁרְצוּ וַיִּרְבּוּ וַיַּעַצְמוּ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד וַתִּמָּלֵא הָאָרֶץ אֹתָם׃", 20.17. "וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל־הָעָם אַל־תִּירָאוּ כִּי לְבַעֲבוּר נַסּוֹת אֶתְכֶם בָּא הָאֱלֹהִים וּבַעֲבוּר תִּהְיֶה יִרְאָתוֹ עַל־פְּנֵיכֶם לְבִלְתִּי תֶחֱטָאוּ׃", 21.6. "וְהִגִּישׁוֹ אֲדֹנָיו אֶל־הָאֱלֹהִים וְהִגִּישׁוֹ אֶל־הַדֶּלֶת אוֹ אֶל־הַמְּזוּזָה וְרָצַע אֲדֹנָיו אֶת־אָזְנוֹ בַּמַּרְצֵעַ וַעֲבָדוֹ לְעֹלָם׃", | 1.7. "And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.", 20.17. "And Moses said unto the people: ‘Fear not; for God is come to prove you, and that His fear may be before you, that ye sin not.’", 21.6. "then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.", |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 5.21 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 354, 355| 5.21. "וַתֹּאמְרוּ הֵן הֶרְאָנוּ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ אֶת־כְּבֹדוֹ וְאֶת־גָּדְלוֹ וְאֶת־קֹלוֹ שָׁמַעְנוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָאֵשׁ הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה רָאִינוּ כִּי־יְדַבֵּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם וָחָי׃", | 5.21. "and ye said: ‘Behold, the LORD our God hath shown us His glory and His greatness, and we have heard His voice out of the midst of the fire; we have seen this day that God doth speak with man, and he liveth.", |
|
9. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 23.1, 36.11, 41.13, 49.13, 49.21, 57.5-57.6 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral criticism •moral formation, frank criticism in •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 323, 328, 329, 346, 350, 351, 443, 444, 541| 23.1. "מִזְמוֹר לְדָוִד יְהוָה רֹעִי לֹא אֶחְסָר׃", 36.11. "מְשֹׁךְ חַסְדְּךָ לְיֹדְעֶיךָ וְצִדְקָתְךָ לְיִשְׁרֵי־לֵב׃", 41.13. "וַאֲנִי בְּתֻמִּי תָּמַכְתָּ בִּי וַתַּצִּיבֵנִי לְפָנֶיךָ לְעוֹלָם׃", 49.13. "וְאָדָם בִּיקָר בַּל־יָלִין נִמְשַׁל כַּבְּהֵמוֹת נִדְמוּ׃", 49.21. "אָדָם בִּיקָר וְלֹא יָבִין נִמְשַׁל כַּבְּהֵמוֹת נִדְמוּ׃", 57.5. "נַפְשִׁי בְּתוֹךְ לְבָאִם אֶשְׁכְּבָה לֹהֲטִים בְּנֵי־אָדָם שִׁנֵּיהֶם חֲנִית וְחִצִּים וּלְשׁוֹנָם חֶרֶב חַדָּה׃", 57.6. "רוּמָה עַל־הַשָּׁמַיִם אֱלֹהִים עַל כָּל־הָאָרֶץ כְּבוֹדֶךָ׃", | 23.1. "A Psalm of David. The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.", 36.11. "O continue Thy lovingkindness unto them that know Thee; And Thy righteousness to the upright in heart.", 41.13. "And as for me, Thou upholdest me because of mine integrity, and settest me before Thy face for ever.", 49.13. "But man abideth not in honour; He is like the beasts that perish.", 49.21. "Man that is in honour understandeth not; He is like the beasts that perish.", 57.5. "My soul is among lions, I do lie down among them that are aflame; Even the sons of men, whose teeth are spears and arrows, And their tongue a sharp sword.", 57.6. "Be Thou exalted, O God, above the heavens; Thy glory be above all the earth.", |
|
10. Hesiod, Works And Days, 211 (8th cent. BCE - 7th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 313, 314 | 211. For men: against all evil there shall be |
|
11. Hebrew Bible, Jeremiah, 5.8, 18.13-18.16 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 328, 329, 347, 350, 351, 541| 5.8. "סוּסִים מְיֻזָּנִים מַשְׁכִּים הָיוּ אִישׁ אֶל־אֵשֶׁת רֵעֵהוּ יִצְהָלוּ׃", 18.13. "לָכֵן כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה שַׁאֲלוּ־נָא בַּגּוֹיִם מִי שָׁמַע כָּאֵלֶּה שַׁעֲרֻרִת עָשְׂתָה מְאֹד בְּתוּלַת יִשְׂרָאֵל׃", 18.14. "הֲיַעֲזֹב מִצּוּר שָׂדַי שֶׁלֶג לְבָנוֹן אִם־יִנָּתְשׁוּ מַיִם זָרִים קָרִים נוֹזְלִים׃", 18.15. "כִּי־שְׁכֵחֻנִי עַמִּי לַשָּׁוְא יְקַטֵּרוּ וַיַּכְשִׁלוּם בְּדַרְכֵיהֶם שְׁבִילֵי עוֹלָם לָלֶכֶת נְתִיבוֹת דֶּרֶךְ לֹא סְלוּלָה׃", 18.16. "לָשׂוּם אַרְצָם לְשַׁמָּה שרוקת [שְׁרִיקוֹת] עוֹלָם כֹּל עוֹבֵר עָלֶיהָ יִשֹּׁם וְיָנִיד בְּרֹאשׁוֹ׃", | 5.8. "They are become as well-fed horses, lusty stallions; Every one neigheth after his neighbour’s wife.", 18.13. "Therefore thus saith the LORD: Ask ye now among the nations, Who hath heard such things; The virgin of Israel hath done A very horrible thing.", 18.14. "Doth the snow of Lebanon fail From the rock of the field? Or are the strange cold flowing waters Plucked up?", 18.15. "For My people hath forgotten Me, They offer unto vanity; And they have been made to stumble in their ways, In the ancient paths, To walk in bypaths, In a way not cast up;", 18.16. "To make their land an astonishment, And a perpetual hissing; Every one that passeth thereby shall be astonished, And shake his head.", |
|
12. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 9.15, 28.11-28.12, 49.9 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral formation, frank criticism in •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 167; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 328, 440| 9.15. "וַיִּהְיוּ מְאַשְּׁרֵי הָעָם־הַזֶּה מַתְעִים וּמְאֻשָּׁרָיו מְבֻלָּעִים׃", 28.11. "כִּי בְּלַעֲגֵי שָׂפָה וּבְלָשׁוֹן אַחֶרֶת יְדַבֵּר אֶל־הָעָם הַזֶּה׃", 28.12. "אֲשֶׁר אָמַר אֲלֵיהֶם זֹאת הַמְּנוּחָה הָנִיחוּ לֶעָיֵף וְזֹאת הַמַּרְגֵּעָה וְלֹא אָבוּא שְׁמוֹעַ׃", 49.9. "לֵאמֹר לַאֲסוּרִים צֵאוּ לַאֲשֶׁר בַּחֹשֶׁךְ הִגָּלוּ עַל־דְּרָכִים יִרְעוּ וּבְכָל־שְׁפָיִים מַרְעִיתָם׃", | 9.15. "For they that lead this people cause them to err; and they that are led of them are destroyed.", 28.11. "For with stammering lips and with a strange tongue Shall it be spoken to this people;", 28.12. "To whom it was said: ‘This is the rest, Give ye rest to the weary; And this is the refreshing’; Yet they would not hear.", 49.9. "Saying to the prisoners: ‘Go forth’; To them that are in darkness: ‘Show yourselves’; They shall feed in the ways, And in all high hills shall be their pasture;", |
|
| 13. Homer, Odyssey, 6.267, 14.10, 18.73 (8th cent. BCE - 7th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 313, 314, 333 |
14. Hebrew Bible, Nehemiah, 8.6 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165| 8.6. "וַיְבָרֶךְ עֶזְרָא אֶת־יְהוָה הָאֱלֹהִים הַגָּדוֹל וַיַּעֲנוּ כָל־הָעָם אָמֵן אָמֵן בְּמֹעַל יְדֵיהֶם וַיִּקְּדוּ וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲוֻּ לַיהוָה אַפַּיִם אָרְצָה׃", | 8.6. "And Ezra blessed the LORD, the great God. And all the people answered: ‘Amen, Amen’, with the lifting up of their hands; and they bowed their heads, and fell down before the LORD with their faces to the ground.", |
|
15. Hebrew Bible, 1 Chronicles, 16.36 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165| 16.36. "בָּרוּךְ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִן־הָעוֹלָם וְעַד הָעֹלָם וַיֹּאמְרוּ כָל־הָעָם אָמֵן וְהַלֵּל לַיהוָה׃", | 16.36. "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel, From everlasting even to everlasting. And all the people said: ‘Amen, ‘and praised the LORD.", |
|
| 16. Plato, Sophist, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 306 |
| 17. Plato, Republic, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 443 |
| 18. Plato, Statesman, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 304, 305 |
| 19. Plato, Phaedrus, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 303, 304 |
20. Plato, Cratylus, None (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 303, 304| 400c. σῆμά τινές φασιν αὐτὸ εἶναι τῆς ψυχῆς, ὡς τεθαμμένης ἐν τῷ νῦν παρόντι· καὶ διότι αὖ τούτῳ σημαίνει ἃ ἂν σημαίνῃ ἡ ψυχή, καὶ ταύτῃ σῆμα ὀρθῶς καλεῖσθαι. δοκοῦσι μέντοι μοι μάλιστα θέσθαι οἱ ἀμφὶ Ὀρφέα τοῦτο τὸ ὄνομα, ὡς δίκην διδούσης τῆς ψυχῆς ὧν δὴ ἕνεκα δίδωσιν, τοῦτον δὲ περίβολον ἔχειν, ἵνα σῴζηται , δεσμωτηρίου εἰκόνα· εἶναι οὖν τῆς ψυχῆς τοῦτο, ὥσπερ αὐτὸ ὀνομάζεται, ἕως ἂν ἐκτείσῃ τὰ ὀφειλόμενα, τὸ σῶμα, καὶ οὐδὲν δεῖν παράγειν οὐδʼ ἓν γράμμα. | 400c. ign ( σῆμα ). But I think it most likely that the Orphic poets gave this name, with the idea that the soul is undergoing punishment for something; they think it has the body as an enclosure to keep it safe, like a prison, and this is, as the name itself denotes, the safe ( σῶμα ) for the soul, until the penalty is paid, and not even a letter needs to be changed. |
|
| 21. Aristotle, Poetics, None (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 295 |
| 22. Aristotle, Sophistical Refutations, None (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 293, 294 |
| 23. Aristotle, Prior Analytics, None (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 437 |
| 24. Aristotle, Categories, None (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 293, 294 |
| 25. Aristotle, Rhetoric, None (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 294 |
| 26. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, None (4th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 441 |
27. Cicero, Tusculan Disputations, 4.26 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 440| 4.26. definiunt autem animi aegrotationem opinationem St. fr. 3, 427 vehementem de re non expetenda, tamquam valde expetenda sit, inhaerentem et penitus insitam. quod autem nascitur ex offensione, ita definiunt: opinionem vehementem de re non fugienda inhaerentem et penitus insitam tamquam fugienda; fugienda expetenda KRH haec autem opinatio est iudicatio iuditio K 1 ( add. 2 ) se scire, quod nesciat. aegrotationi autem talia quaedam subiecta sunt: avaritia, ambitio, mulierositas, pervicacia, pervicatia KV ligurritio, vinulentia, vinulentia Non. vinol. X cf. Mue. cuppedia, ambitio ... 23 cuppedia Non. 85, 10 cu pedia G et si qua similia. est autem avaritia opinatio vehemens de pecunia, quasi valde expetenda sit, inhaerens et penitus insita, similisque est eiusdem generis definitio reliquarum. | |
|
| 28. Lucretius Carus, On The Nature of Things, 15.114-15.121 (1st cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 306 |
29. Philo of Alexandria, On The Special Laws, 1.58 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128 | 1.58. But some men have gone to such a pitch of extravagant madness, that they have left themselves no retreat or way to repentance, but hasten onwards to the slavery and service of images made by hands, confessing it in distinct characters, not written on paper, as is the custom in the case of slaves, but branding the characters deep on their persons with a burning iron, in order that they may remain ineffacebly, for these things are not dimmed or weakened by time.XI. |
|
30. Philo of Alexandria, On Husbandry, 175-176 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 440 | 176. Now by the two expressions suddenly and immediately, the involuntary character of the deviation of the soul is manifested. For with reference to intentional sins there is need of time to consider where, and when, and how a thing is to be done. But unintentional sins are committed suddenly, without any consideration, and, if it be possible to say such a thing they strike upon the man without any time at all. |
|
| 31. New Testament, Jude, 15 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 167 |
32. New Testament, James, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 354| 4.6. μείζονα δὲ δίδωσιν χάριν· διὸ λέγει Ὁ θεὸς ὑπερηφάνοις ἀντιτάσσεται ταπεινοῖς δὲ δίδωσιν χάριν. | 4.6. But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, "God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble." |
|
33. New Testament, Apocalypse, 2.14-2.15, 9.10, 9.19, 20.12-20.15 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128, 129, 328, 357| 2.14. ἀλλὰ ἔχω κατὰ σοῦ ὀλίγα, ὅτι ἔχεις ἐκεῖ κρατοῦντας τὴν διδαχὴνΒαλαάμ,ὃς ἐδίδασκεν τῷ Βαλὰκ βαλεῖν σκάνδαλον ἐνώπιοντῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ, φαγεῖν εἰδωλόθυτα καὶ πορνεῦσαι· 2.15. οὕτως ἔχεις καὶ σὺ κρατοῦντας τὴν διδαχὴν Νικολαϊτῶν ὁμοίως. 9.10. καὶ ἔχουσιν οὐρὰς ὁμοίας σκορπίοις καὶ κέντρα, καὶ ἐν ταῖς οὐραῖς αὐτῶν ἡ ἐξουσία αὐτῶν ἀδικῆσαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους μῆνας πέντε. 9.19. ἡ γὰρ ἐξουσία τῶν ἵππων ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτῶν ἐστὶν καὶ ἐν ταῖς οὐραῖς αὐτῶν· αἱ γὰρ οὐραὶ αὐτῶν ὅμοιαι ὄφεσιν, ἔχουσαι κεφαλάς, καὶ ἐν αὐταῖς ἀδικοῦσιν. 20.12. καὶ εἶδον τοὺς νεκρούς, τοὺς μεγάλους καὶ τοὺς μικρούς, ἑστῶτας ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου,καὶ βιβλία ἠνοίχθησαν·καὶ ἄλλοβιβλίονἠνοίχθη, ὅ ἐστιντῆς ζωῆς·καὶ ἐκρίθησαν οἱ νεκροὶ ἐκ τῶν γεγραμμένων ἐν τοῖς βιβλίοιςκατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν. 20.13. καὶ ἔδωκεν ἡ θάλασσα τοὺς νεκροὺς τοὺς ἐν αὐτῇ, καὶ ὁ θάνατος καὶ ὁ ᾄδης ἔδωκαν τοὺς νεκροὺς τοὺς ἐν αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἐκρίθησαν ἕκαστοςκατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν. 20.14. καὶ ὁ θάνατος καὶ ὁ ᾄδης ἐβλήθησαν εἰς τὴν λίμνην τοῦ πυρός. οὗτος ὁ θάνατος ὁ δεύτερός ἐστιν, ἡ λίμνη τοῦ πυρός. 20.15. καὶ εἴ τις οὐχεὑρέθη ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ τῆς ζωῆς γεγραμμένοςἐβλήθη εἰς τὴν λίμνην τοῦ πυρός. | 2.14. But I have a few things against you, because you have there some who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to throw a stumbling block before the children of Israel , to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality. 2.15. So you also have some who hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans in the same way. 9.10. They have tails like those of scorpions, and stings. In their tails they have power to harm men for five months. 9.19. For the power of the horses is in their mouths, and in their tails. For their tails are like serpents, and have heads, and with them they harm. 20.12. I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and they opened books. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged out of the things which were written in the books, according to their works. 20.13. The sea gave up the dead who were in it. Death and Hades gave up the dead who were in them. They were judged, each one according to his works. 20.14. Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. 20.15. If anyone was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire. |
|
34. New Testament, Acts, 15.1-15.29, 18.25, 21.21 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 166; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 133, 322, 323| 15.1. ΚΑΙ ΤΙΝΕΣ ΚΑΤΕΛΘΟΝΤΕΣ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἰουδαίας ἐδίδασκον τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὅτι Ἐὰν μὴ lt*gtιτμηθῆτε τῷ ἔθει τῷ Μωυσέως, οὐ δύνασθε σωθῆναι. 15.2. γενομένης δὲ στάσεως καὶ ζητήσεως οὐκ ὀλίγης τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ τῷ Βαρνάβᾳ πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἔταξαν ἀναβαίνειν Παῦλον καὶ Βαρνάβαν καί τινας ἄλλους ἐξ αὐτῶν πρὸς τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ πρεσβυτέρους εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ περὶ τοῦ ζητήματος τούτου. 15.3. Οἱ μὲν οὖν προπεμφθέντες ὑπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας διήρχοντο τήν τε Φοινίκην καὶ Σαμαρίαν ἐκδιηγούμενοι τὴν ἐπιστροφὴν τῶν ἐθνῶν, καὶ ἐποίουν χαρὰν μεγάλην πᾶσι τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς. 15.4. παραγενόμενοι δὲ εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα παρεδέχθησαν ἀπὸ τῆς ἐκκλησίας καὶ τῶν ἀποστόλων καὶ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, ἀνήγγειλάν τε ὅσα ὁ θεὸς ἐποίησεν μετʼ αὐτῶν. 15.5. Ἐξανέστησαν δέ τινες τῶν ἀπὸ τῆς αἱρέσεως τῶν Φαρισαίων πεπιστευκότες, λέγοντες ὅτι δεῖ περιτέμνειν αὐτοὺς παραγγέλλειν τε τηρεῖν τὸν νόμον Μωυσέως. 15.6. Συνήχθησάν τε οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ἰδεῖν περὶ τοῦ λόγου τούτου. 15.7. Πολλῆς δὲ ζητήσεως γενομένης ἀναστὰς Πέτρος εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς Ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί, ὑμεῖς ἐπίστασθε ὅτι ἀφʼ ἡμερῶν ἀρχαίων ἐν ὑμῖν ἐξελέξατο ὁ θεὸς διὰ τοῦ στόματός μου ἀκοῦσαι τὰ ἔθνη τὸν λόγον τοῦ εὐαγγελίου καὶ πιστεῦσαι, 15.8. καὶ ὁ καρδιογνώστης θεὸς ἐμαρτύρησεν αὐτοῖς δοὺς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον καθὼς καὶ ἡμῖν, 15.9. καὶ οὐθὲν διέκρινεν μεταξὺ ἡμῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν, τῇ πίστει καθαρίσας τὰς καρδίας αὐτῶν. 15.10. νῦν οὖν τί πειράζετε τὸν θεόν, ἐπιθεῖναι ζυγὸν ἐπὶ τὸν τράχηλον τῶν μαθητῶν ὃν οὔτε οἱ πατέρες ἡμῶν οὔτε ἡμεῖς ἰσχύσαμεν βαστάσαι; 15.11. ἀλλὰ διὰ τῆς χάριτος τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ πιστεύομεν σωθῆναι καθʼ ὃν τρόπον κἀκεῖνοι. 15.12. Ἐσίγησεν δὲ πᾶν τὸ πλῆθος, καὶ ἤκουον Βαρνάβα καὶ Παύλου ἐξηγουμένων ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς σημεῖα καὶ τέρατα ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν διʼ αὐτῶν. 15.13. Μετὰ δὲ τὸ σιγῆσαι αὐτοὺς ἀπεκρίθη Ἰάκωβος λέγων Ἄνδρες ἀδελφοί, ἀκούσατέ μου. 15.14. Συμεὼν ἐξηγήσατο καθὼς πρῶτον ὁ θεὸς ἐπεσκέψατο λαβεῖν ἐξ ἐθνῶν λαὸν τῷ ὀνόματι αὐτοῦ. 15.15. καὶ τούτῳ συμφωνοῦσιν οἱ λόγοι τῶν προφητῶν, καθὼς γέγραπται 15.16. 15.17. 15.18. 15.19. διὸ ἐγὼ κρίνω μὴ παρενοχλεῖν τοῖς ἀπὸ τῶν ἐθνῶν ἐπιστρέφουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν θεόν, 15.20. ἀλλὰ ἐπιστεῖλαι αὐτοῖς τοῦ ἀπέχεσθαι τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων καὶ τῆς πορνείας καὶ πνικτοῦ καὶ τοῦ αἵματος· 15.21. Μωυσῆς γὰρ ἐκ γενεῶν ἀρχαίων κατὰ πόλιν τοὺς κηρύσσοντας αὐτὸν ἔχει ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς κατὰ πᾶν σάββατον ἀναγινωσκόμενος. 15.22. Τότε ἔδοξε τοῖς ἀποστόλοις καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις σὺν ὅλῃ τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐκλεζαμένους ἄνδρας ἐξ αὐτῶν πέμψαι εἰς Ἀντιόχειαν σὺν τῷ Παύλῳ καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ, Ἰούδαν τὸν καλούμενον Βαρσαββᾶν καὶ Σίλαν, ἄνδρας ἡγουμένους ἐν τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς, 15.23. γράψαντες διὰ χειρὸς αὐτῶν Οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ἀδελφοὶ τοῖς κατὰ τὴν Ἀντιόχειαν καὶ Συρίαν καὶ Κιλικίαν ἀδελφοῖς τοῖς ἐξ ἐθνῶν χαίρειν. 15.24. Ἐπειδὴ ἠκούσαμεν ὅτι τινὲς ἐξ ἡμῶν ἐτάραξαν ὑμᾶς λόγοις ἀνασκευάζοντες τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν, οἷς οὐ διεστειλάμεθα, 15.25. ἔδοξεν ἡμῖν γενομένοις ὁμοθυμαδὸν ἐκλεξαμένοις ἄνδρας πέμψαι πρὸς ὑμᾶς σὺν τοῖς ἀγαπητοῖς ἡμῶν Βαρνάβᾳ καὶ Παύλῳ, 15.26. ἀνθρώποις παραδεδωκόσι τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 15.27. ἀπεστάλκαμεν οὖν Ἰούδαν καὶ Σίλαν, καὶ αὐτοὺς διὰ λόγου ἀπαγγέλλοντας τὰ αὐτά. 15.28. ἔδοξεν γὰρ τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἁγίῳ καὶ ἡμῖν μηδὲν πλέον ἐπιτίθεσθαι ὑμῖν βάρος πλὴν τούτων τῶν ἐπάναγκες, ἀπέχεσθαι εἰδωλοθύτων καὶ αἵματος καὶ πνικτῶν καὶ πορνείας· 15.29. ἐξ ὧν διατηροῦντες ἑαυτοὺς εὖ πράξετε. Ἔρρωσθε. 18.25. οὗτος ἦν κατηχημένος τὴν ὁδὸν τοῦ κυρίου, καὶ ζέων τῷ πνεύματι ἐλάλει καὶ ἐδίδασκεν ἀκριβῶς τὰ περὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ἐπιστάμενος μόνον τὸ βάπτισμα Ἰωάνου. 21.21. κατηχήθησαν δὲ περὶ σοῦ ὅτι ἀποστασίαν διδάσκεις ἀπὸ Μωυσέως τοὺς κατὰ τὰ ἔθνη πάντας Ἰουδαίους, λέγων μὴ περιτέμνειν αὐτοὺς τὰ τέκνα μηδὲ τοῖς ἔθεσιν περιπατεῖν. | 15.1. Some men came down from Judea and taught the brothers, "Unless you are circumcised after the custom of Moses, you can't be saved." 15.2. Therefore when Paul and Barnabas had no small discord and discussion with them, they appointed Paul and Barnabas, and some others of them, to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders about this question. 15.3. They, being sent on their way by the assembly, passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles. They caused great joy to all the brothers. 15.4. When they had come to Jerusalem, they were received by the assembly and the apostles and the elders, and they reported all things that God had done with them. 15.5. But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses." 15.6. The apostles and the elders were gathered together to see about this matter. 15.7. When there had been much discussion, Peter rose up and said to them, "Brothers, you know that a good while ago God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. 15.8. God, who knows the heart, testified about them, giving them the Holy Spirit, just like he did to us. 15.9. He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith. 15.10. Now therefore why do you tempt God, that you should put a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 15.11. But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they are." 15.12. All the multitude kept silence, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul reporting what signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 15.13. After they were silent, James answered, "Brothers, listen to me. 15.14. Simeon has reported how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15.15. This agrees with the words of the prophets. As it is written, 15.16. 'After these things I will return. I will again build the tent of David, which has fallen. I will again build its ruins. I will set it up, 15.17. That the rest of men may seek after the Lord; All the Gentiles who are called by my name, Says the Lord, who does all these things. 15.18. All his works are known to God from eternity.' 15.19. "Therefore my judgment is that we don't trouble those from among the Gentiles who turn to God, 15.20. but that we write to them that they abstain from the pollution of idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood. 15.21. For Moses from generations of old has in every city those who preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath." 15.22. Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole assembly, to choose men out of their company, and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas: Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, chief men among the brothers. 15.23. They wrote these things by their hand: "The apostles, the elders, and the brothers, to the brothers who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: greetings. 15.24. Because we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, 'You must be circumcised and keep the law,' to whom we gave no commandment; 15.25. it seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose out men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 15.26. men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15.27. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who themselves will also tell you the same things by word of mouth. 15.28. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay no greater burden on you than these necessary things: 15.29. that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality, from which if you keep yourselves, it will be well with you. Farewell." 18.25. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, although he knew only the baptism of John. 21.21. They have been informed about you, that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children neither to walk after the customs. |
|
35. New Testament, 2 Thessalonians, 2.17, 3.12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165| 2.17. παρακαλέσαι ὑμῶν τὰς καρδίας καὶ στηρίξαι ἐν παντὶ ἔργῳ καὶ λόγῳ ἀγαθῷ. 3.12. τοῖς δὲ τοιούτοις παραγγέλλομεν καὶ παρακαλοῦμεν ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ ἵνα μετὰ ἡσυχίας ἐργαζόμενοι τὸν ἑαυτῶν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν. | 2.17. comfort your hearts and establish you in every good work and word. 3.12. Now those who are that way, we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. |
|
36. New Testament, 2 Corinthians, 1.3-1.7, 2.6, 4.2, 6.17, 11.2-11.3 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165, 167, 168; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 350, 351, 352| 1.3. Εὐλογητὸς ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὁ πατὴρ τῶν οἰκτιρμῶν καὶ θεὸς πάσης παρακλήσεως, 1.4. ὁ παρακαλῶν ἡμᾶς ἐπὶ πάσῃ τῇ θλίψει ἡμῶν, εἰς τὸ δύνασθαι ἡμᾶς παρακαλεῖν τοὺς ἐν πάσῃ θλίψει διὰ τῆς παρακλήσεως ἧς παρακαλούμεθα αὐτοὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ. 1.5. ὅτι καθὼς περισσεύει τὰ παθήματα τοῦ χριστοῦ εἰς ἡμᾶς, οὕτως διὰ τοῦ χριστοῦ περισσεύει καὶ ἡ παράκλησις ἡμῶν. 1.6. εἴτε δὲ θλιβόμεθα, ὑπὲρ τῆς ὑμῶν παραπαθημάτων κλήσεως καὶ σωτηρίας· εἴτε παρακαλούμεθα, ὑπὲρ τῆς ὑμῶν παρακλήσεως τῆς ἐνεργουμένης ἐν ὑπομονῇ τῶν αὐτῶν παθημάτων ὧν καὶ ἡμεῖς πάσχομεν, 1.7. καὶ ἡ ἐλπὶς ἡμῶν βεβαία ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν·ʼ εἰδότες ὅτι ὡς κοινωνοί ἐστε τῶν παθημάτων, οὕτως καὶ τῆς παρακλήσεως. 2.6. ἱκανὸν τῷ τοιούτῳ ἡ ἐπιτιμία αὕτη ἡ ὑπὸ τῶν πλειόνων, 4.2. ἀλλὰ ἀπειπάμεθα τὰ κρυπτὰ τῆς αἰσχύνης, μὴ περιπατοῦντες ἐν πανουργίᾳ μηδὲ δολοῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ τῇ φανερώσει τῆς ἀληθείας συνιστάνοντες ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς πᾶσαν συνείδησιν ἀνθρώπων ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ. 6.17. 11.2. ζηλῶ γὰρ ὑμᾶς θεοῦ ζήλῳ, ἡρμοσάμην γὰρ ὑμᾶς ἑνὶ ἀνδρὶ παρθένον ἁγνὴν παραστῆσαι τῷ χριστῷ· 11.3. φοβοῦμαι δὲ μή πως, ὡςὁ ὄφις ἐξηπάτησενΕὕαν ἐν τῇ πανουργίᾳ αὐτοῦ, φθαρῇ τὰ νοήματα ὑμῶν ἀπὸ τῆς ἁπλότητος [καὶ τῆς ἁγνότητος] τῆς εἰς τὸν χριστόν. | |
|
37. New Testament, 1 Timothy, 4.3-4.5, 6.20 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 346, 357| 4.3. κωλυόντων γαμεῖν, ἀπέχεσθαι βρωμάτων ἃ ὁ θεὸς ἔκτισεν εἰς μετάλημψιν μετὰ εὐχαριστίας τοῖς πιστοῖς καὶ ἐπεγνωκόσι τὴν ἀλήθειαν. 4.4. ὅτι πᾶν κτίσμα θεοῦ καλόν, καὶ οὐδὲν ἀπόβλητον μετὰ εὐχαριστίας λαμβανόμενον, 4.5. ἁγιάζεται γὰρ διὰ λόγου θεοῦ καὶ ἐντεύξεως. 6.20. Ὦ Τιμόθεε, τὴν παραθήκην φύλαξον, ἐκτρεπόμενος τὰς βεβήλους κενοφωνίας καὶ ἀντιθέσεις τῆς ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως, | 4.3. forbidding marriage and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4.4. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it is received with thanksgiving. 4.5. For it is sanctified through the word of God and prayer. 6.20. Timothy, guard that which is committed to you, turning away from the empty chatter and oppositions of the knowledge which is falsely so called; |
|
38. New Testament, 1 Thessalonians, 2.3, 2.12, 3.2, 4.1, 4.10, 4.13-4.18, 5.11, 5.14, 5.20-5.21 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 7, 164, 165, 168, 169, 170, 171| 2.3. ἡ γὰρ παράκλησις ἡμῶν οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ, 2.12. παρακαλοῦντες ὑμᾶς καὶ παραμυθούμενοι καὶ μαρτυρόμενοι, εἰς τὸ περιπατεῖν ὑμᾶς ἀξίως τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ καλοῦντος ὑμᾶς εἰς τὴν ἑαυτοῦ βασιλείαν καὶ δόξαν. 3.2. καὶ ἐπέμψαμεν Τιμό θεον, τὸν ἀδελφὸν ἡμῶν καὶ διάκονον τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ τοῦ χριστοῦ, εἰς τὸ στηρίξαι ὑμᾶς καὶ παρακαλέσαιὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως ὑμῶν 4.1. Λοιπὸν, ἀδελφοί, ἐρωτῶμεν ὑμᾶς καὶ παρακαλοῦ μεν ἐν κυρίῳ Ἰησοῦ, [ἵνα] καθὼς παρελάβετε παρʼ ἡμῶν τὸ πῶς δεῖ ὑμᾶς περιπατεῖν καὶ ἀρέσκειν θεῷ, καθὼς καὶ περιπατεῖτε,— ἵνα περισσεύητε μᾶλλον. 4.10. καὶ γὰρ ποιεῖτε αὐτὸ εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς [τοὺς] ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ Μακεδονίᾳ. Παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, περισσεύειν μᾶλλον, 4.13. Οὐ θέλομεν δὲ ὑμᾶς ἀγνοεῖν, ἀδελφοί, περὶ τῶν κοιμωμένων, ἵνα μὴ λυπῆσθε καθὼς καὶ οἱ λοιποὶ οἱ μὴ ἔχοντες ἐλπίδα. 4.14. εἰ γὰρ πιστεύομεν ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἀνέστη, οὕτως καὶ ὁ θεὸς τοὺς κοιμηθέντας διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ ἄξει σὺν αὐτῷ. 4.15. Τοῦτο γὰρ ὑμῖν λέγομεν ἐν λόγῳ κυρίου, ὅτι ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι εἰς τὴν παρουσίαν τοῦ κυρίου οὐ μὴ φθάσωμεν τοὺς κοιμηθέντας· 4.16. ὅτι αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος ἐν κελεύσματι, ἐν φωνῇ ἀρχαγγέλου καὶ ἐν σάλπιγγι θεοῦ, καταβήσεται ἀπʼ οὐρανοῦ, καὶ οἱ νεκροὶ ἐν Χριστῷ ἀναστήσονται πρῶτον, 4.17. ἔπειτα ἡμεῖς οἱ ζῶντες οἱ περιλειπόμενοι ἅμα σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁρπαγησόμεθα ἐν νεφέλαις εἰς ἀπάντησιν τοῦ κυρίου εἰς ἀέρα· καὶ οὕτως πάντοτε σὺν κυρίῳ ἐσόμεθα. 4.18. Ὥστε παρακαλεῖτε ἀλλήλους ἐν τοῖς λόγοις τούτοις. 5.11. Διὸ παρακαλεῖτε ἀλλήλους καὶ οἰκοδομεῖτε εἷς τὸν ἕνα, καθὼς καὶ ποιεῖτε. 5.14. εἰρηνεύετε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς. Παρακαλοῦμεν δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, νουθετεῖτε τοὺς ἀτάκτους, παραμυθεῖσθε τοὺς ὀλιγοψύχους, ἀντέχεσθε τῶν ἀσθενῶν, μακροθυμεῖτε πρὸς πάντας. 5.20. προφητείας μὴ ἐξουθενεῖτε· 5.21. πάντα [δὲ] δοκιμάζετε, τὸ καλὸν κατέχετε, | 2.3. For our exhortation is not of error, nor of uncleanness, nor in deception. 2.12. to the end that you should walk worthily of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory. 3.2. and sent Timothy, our brother and God's servant in the gospel of Christ, to establish you, and to comfort you concerning your faith; 4.1. Finally then, brothers, we beg and exhort you in the Lord Jesus, that as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, that you abound more and more. 4.10. for indeed you do it toward all the brothers who are in all Macedonia. But we exhort you, brothers, that you abound more and more; 4.13. But we don't want you to be ignorant, brothers, concerning those who have fallen asleep, so that you don't grieve like the rest, who have no hope. 4.14. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so those who have fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 4.15. For this we tell you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive, who are left to the coming of the Lord, will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep. 4.16. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with God's trumpet. The dead in Christ will rise first, 4.17. then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air. So we will be with the Lord forever. 4.18. Therefore comfort one another with these words. 5.11. Therefore exhort one another, and build each other up, even as you also do. 5.14. We exhort you, brothers, admonish the disorderly, encourage the fainthearted, support the weak, be patient toward all. 5.20. Don't despise prophesies. 5.21. Test all things, and hold firmly that which is good. |
|
39. New Testament, 2 Timothy, 3.16 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 442| 3.16. πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἐλεγμόν, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, | 3.16. Every writing inspired by God is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction which is in righteousness, |
|
40. Tacitus, Annals, 15.44 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 349| 15.44. Et haec quidem humanis consiliis providebantur. mox petita dis piacula aditique Sibyllae libri, ex quibus supplicatum Vulcano et Cereri Proserpinaeque ac propitiata Iuno per matronas, primum in Capitolio, deinde apud proximum mare, unde hausta aqua templum et simulacrum deae perspersum est; et sellisternia ac pervigilia celebravere feminae quibus mariti erant. sed non ope humana, non largitionibus principis aut deum placamentis decedebat infamia quin iussum incendium crederetur. ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos et quaesitissimis poenis adfecit quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Christianos appellabat. auctor nominis eius Christus Tiberio imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat; repressaque in praesens exitiabilis superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque. igitur primum correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum multitudo ingens haud proinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis convicti sunt. et pereuntibus addita ludibria, ut ferarum tergis contecti laniatu canum interirent, aut crucibus adfixi aut flammandi, atque ubi defecisset dies in usum nocturni luminis urerentur. hortos suos ei spectaculo Nero obtulerat et circense ludicrum edebat, habitu aurigae permixtus plebi vel curriculo insistens. unde quamquam adversus sontis et novissima exempla meritos miseratio oriebatur, tamquam non utilitate publica sed in saevitiam unius absumerentur. | 15.44. So far, the precautions taken were suggested by human prudence: now means were sought for appeasing deity, and application was made to the Sibylline books; at the injunction of which public prayers were offered to Vulcan, Ceres, and Proserpine, while Juno was propitiated by the matrons, first in the Capitol, then at the nearest point of the sea-shore, where water was drawn for sprinkling the temple and image of the goddess. Ritual banquets and all-night vigils were celebrated by women in the married state. But neither human help, nor imperial munificence, nor all the modes of placating Heaven, could stifle scandal or dispel the belief that the fire had taken place by order. Therefore, to scotch the rumour, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices, whom the crowd styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilatus, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judaea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue. First, then, the confessed members of the sect were arrested; next, on their disclosures, vast numbers were convicted, not so much on the count of arson as for hatred of the human race. And derision accompanied their end: they were covered with wild beasts' skins and torn to death by dogs; or they were fastened on crosses, and, when daylight failed were burned to serve as lamps by night. Nero had offered his Gardens for the spectacle, and gave an exhibition in his Circus, mixing with the crowd in the habit of a charioteer, or mounted on his car. Hence, in spite of a guilt which had earned the most exemplary punishment, there arose a sentiment of pity, due to the impression that they were being sacrificed not for the welfare of the state but to the ferocity of a single man. |
|
41. New Testament, Colossians, 1.7, 3.15 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in •moral criticism Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 166; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 302, 303| 1.7. καθὼς ἐμάθετε ἀπὸ Ἐπαφρᾶ τοῦ ἀγαπητοῦ συνδούλου ἡμῶν, ὅς ἐστιν πιστὸς ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν διάκονος τοῦ χριστοῦ, 3.15. καὶ ἡ εἰρήνη τοῦ χριστοῦ βραβευέτω ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ὑμῶν, εἰς ἣν καὶ ἐκλήθητε ἐν [ἑνὶ] σώματι· καὶ εὐχάριστοι γίνεσθε. | 1.7. even as you learned of Epaphras our beloved fellow servant, who is a faithful minister of Christ on our behalf, 3.15. And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful. |
|
42. New Testament, Ephesians, 2.3 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 328| 2.3. ἐν οἷς καὶ ἡμεῖς πάντες ἀνεστράφημέν ποτε ἐν ταῖς ἐπιθυμίαις τῆς σαρκὸς ἡμῶν, ποιοῦντες τὰ θελήματα τῆς σαρκὸς καὶ τῶν διανοιῶν, καὶ ἤμεθα τέκνα φύσει ὀργῆς ὡς καὶ οἱ λοιποί·— | 2.3. among whom we also all once lived in the lust of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. |
|
43. New Testament, Galatians, 5.21, 6.1-6.4, 6.6, 6.12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 7, 166, 169; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128, 129| 5.21. φθόνοι, μέθαι, κῶμοι, καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις, ἃ προλέγω ὑμῖν καθὼς προεῖπον ὅτι οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα πράσσοντες βασιλείαν θεοῦ οὐ κληρονομήσουσιν. 6.1. Ἀδελφοί, ἐὰν καὶ προλημφθῇ ἄνθρωπος ἔν τινι παραπτώματι, ὑμεῖς οἱ πνευματικοὶ καταρτίζετε τὸν τοιοῦτον ἐν πνεύματι πραΰτητος, σκοπῶν σεαυτόν, μὴ καὶ σὺ πειρασθῇς. 6.2. Ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη βαστάζετε, καὶ οὕτως ἀναπληρώσατε τὸν νόμον τοῦ χριστοῦ. 6.3. εἰ γὰρ δοκεῖ τις εἶναί τι μηδὲν ὤν, φρεναπατᾷ ἑαυτόν· 6.4. τὸ δὲ ἔργον ἑαυτοῦ δοκιμαζέτω [ἕκαστος], καὶ τότε εἰς ἑαυτὸν μόνον τὸ καύχημα ἕξει καὶ οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἕτερον, 6.6. Κοινωνείτω δὲ ὁ κατηχούμενος τὸν λόγον τῷ κατηχοῦντι ἐν πᾶσιν ἀγαθοῖς. 6.12. Ὅσοι θέλουσιν εὐπροσωπῆσαι ἐν σαρκί, οὗτοι ἀναγκάζουσιν ὑμᾶς περιτέμνεσθαι, μόνον ἵνα τῷ σταυρῷ τοῦ χριστοῦ [Ἰησοῦ] — μὴ διώκωνται· | 5.21. envyings,murders, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these; of which Iforewarn you, even as I also forewarned you, that those who practicesuch things will not inherit the Kingdom of God. 6.1. Brothers, even if a man is caught in some fault, you who arespiritual must restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; looking toyourself so that you also aren't tempted. 6.2. Bear one another'sburdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. 6.3. For if a man thinkshimself to be something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 6.4. But let each man test his own work, and then he will take pride inhimself and not in his neighbor. 6.6. But let him who is taught in the word share all goodthings with him who teaches. 6.12. As many as desire to look good in the flesh, they compel you tobe circumcised; only that they may not be persecuted for the cross ofChrist. |
|
44. New Testament, Philippians, 1.9-1.10, 2.1, 4.9, 4.11 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165, 166, 170| 1.9. καὶ τοῦτο προσεύχομαι ἵνα ἡ ἀγάπη ὑμῶν ἔτι μᾶλλον καὶ μᾶλλον περισσεύῃ ἐν ἐπιγνώσει καὶ πάσῃ αἰσθήσει, 1.10. εἰς τὸ δοκιμάζειν ὑμᾶς τὰ διαφέροντα, ἵνα ἦτε εἰλικρινεῖς καὶ ἀπρόσκοποι εἰς ἡμέραν Χριστοῦ, 2.1. Εἴ τις οὖν παράκλησις ἐν Χριστῷ, εἴ τι παραμύθιον ἀγάπης, εἴ τις κοινωνία πνεύματος, εἴ τις σπλάγχνα καὶ οἰκτιρμοί, 4.9. ἃ καὶ ἐμάθετε καὶ παρελάβετε καὶ ἠκούσατε καὶ εἴδετε ἐν ἐμοί, ταῦτα πράσσετε· καὶ ὁ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης ἔσται μεθʼ ὑμῶν. 4.11. οὐχ ὅτι καθʼ ὑστέρησιν λέγω, ἐγὼ γὰρ ἔμαθον ἐν οἷς εἰμὶ αὐτάρκης εἶναι· οἶδα καὶ ταπεινοῦσθαι, | 1.9. This I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and all discernment; 1.10. so that you may approve the things that are excellent; that you may be sincere and without offense to the day of Christ; 2.1. If there is therefore any exhortation in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies and compassion, 4.9. The things which you learned, received, heard, and saw in me: do these things, and the God of peace will be with you. 4.11. Not that I speak in respect to lack, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content in it. |
|
45. New Testament, Romans, 2.4, 2.16, 2.18, 3.30, 5.7, 5.12, 5.20, 7.2, 7.4, 7.7, 7.18, 8.5, 8.6, 8.7, 8.8, 8.15, 8.29, 8.30, 9.21, 11.20, 11.21, 11.22, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.4, 12.5, 14, 14.3, 14.23-16.27, 15, 15.2, 15.4, 15.14, 16.17 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 166| 16.17. Παρακαλῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς, ἀδελφοί, σκοπεῖν τοὺς τὰς διχοστασίας καὶ τὰ σκάνδαλα παρὰ τὴν διδαχὴν ἣν ὑμεῖς ἐμάθετε ποιοῦντας, καὶ ἐκκλίνετε ἀπʼ αὐτῶν· | 16.17. Now I beg you, brothers, look out for those who are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and turn away from them. |
|
46. New Testament, John, 11.19, 11.31 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165| 11.19. πολλοὶ δὲ ἐκ τῶν Ἰουδαίων ἐληλύθεισαν πρὸς τὴν Μάρθαν καὶ Μαριὰμ ἵνα παραμυθήσωνται αὐτὰς περὶ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ. 11.31. οἱ οὖν Ἰουδαῖοι οἱ ὄντες μετʼ αὐτῆς ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ καὶ παραμυθούμενοι αὐτήν, ἰδόντες τὴν Μαριὰμ ὅτι ταχέως ἀνέστη καὶ ἐξῆλθεν, ἠκολούθησαν αὐτῇ δόξαντες ὅτι ὑπάγει εἰς τὸ μνημεῖον ἵνα κλαύσῃ ἐκεῖ. | 11.19. Many of the Jews had joined the women around Martha and Mary, to console them concerning their brother. 11.31. Then the Jews who were with her in the house, and were consoling her, when they saw Mary, that she rose up quickly and went out, followed her, saying, "She is going to the tomb to weep there." |
|
47. New Testament, Luke, 1.1, 2.49, 3.16, 3.19, 6.30, 10.26, 11.3, 20.38 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 167; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128, 295, 541, 543| 1.1. ΕΠΕΙΔΗΠΕΡ ΠΟΛΛΟΙ ἐπεχείρησαν ἀνατάξασθαι διήγησιν περὶ τῶν πεπληροφορημένων ἐν ἡμῖν πραγμάτων, 2.49. καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς Τί ὅτι ἐζητεῖτέ με; οὐκ ᾔδειτε ὅτι ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός μου δεῖ εἶναί με; 3.16. ἀπεκρίνατο λέγων πᾶσιν ὁ Ἰωάνης Ἐγὼ μὲν ὕδατι βαπτίζω ὑμᾶς· ἔρχεται δὲ ὁ ἰσχυρότερός μου, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς λῦσαι τὸν ἱμάντα τῶν ὑποδημάτων αὐτοῦ· αὐτὸς ὑμᾶς βαπτίσει ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πυρί· 3.19. ὁ δὲ Ἡρῴδης ὁ τετραάρχης, ἐλεγχόμενος ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ περὶ Ἡρῳδιάδος τῆς γυναικὸς τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ καὶ περὶ πάντων ὧν ἐποίησεν πονηρῶν ὁ Ἡρῴδης, 6.30. παντὶ αἰτοῦντί σε δίδου, καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ αἴροντος τὰ σὰ μὴ ἀπαίτει. 10.26. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτόν Ἐν τῷ νόμῳ τί γέγραπται; πῶς ἀναγινώσκεις; 11.3. τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δίδου ἡμῖν τὸ καθʼ ἡμέραν· 20.38. θεὸς δὲ οὐκ ἔστιν νεκρῶν ἀλλὰ ζώντων, πάντες γὰρ αὐτῷ ζῶσιν. | 1.1. Since many have undertaken to set in order a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, 2.49. He said to them, "Why were you looking for me? Didn't you know that I must be in my Father's house?" 3.16. John answered them all, "I indeed baptize you with water, but he comes who is mightier than I, the latchet of whose sandals I am not worthy to loosen. He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire, 3.19. but Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Herodias, his brother's wife, and for all the evil things which Herod had done, 6.30. Give to everyone who asks you, and don't ask him who takes away your goods to give them back again. 10.26. He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read it?" 11.3. Give us day by day our daily bread. 20.38. Now he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all are alive to him." |
|
48. New Testament, Mark, 10.29-10.30 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 293| 10.29. ἔφη ὁ Ἰησοῦς Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, οὐδεὶς ἔστιν ὃς ἀφῆκεν οἰκίαν ἢ ἀδελφοὺς ἢ ἀδελφὰς ἢ μητέρα ἢ πατέρα ἢ τέκνα ἢ ἀγροὺς ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ καὶ [ἕνεκεν] τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, 10.30. ἐὰν μὴ λάβῃ ἑκατονταπλασίονα νῦν ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τούτῳ οἰκίας καὶ ἀδελφοὺς καὶ ἀδελφὰς καὶ μητέρας καὶ τέκνα καὶ ἀγροὺς μετὰ διωγμῶν, καὶ ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τῷ ἐρχομένῳ ζωὴν αἰώνιον. | 10.29. Jesus said, "Most assuredly I tell you, there is no one who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or land, for my sake, and for the gospel's sake, 10.30. but he will receive one hundred times more now in this time, houses, brothers, sisters, mothers, children, and land, with persecutions; and in the age to come eternal life. |
|
49. New Testament, Matthew, 3.11, 5.4, 5.9, 8.12, 18.15, 18.20, 18.26, 19.6, 19.12, 20.21, 22.13, 22.30, 25.30 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •moral criticism •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 167, 169; Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128, 307, 346, 347, 349, 352, 357, 440, 541, 543| 3.11. ἐγὼ μὲν ὑμᾶς βαπτίζω ἐν ὕδατι εἰς μετάνοιαν· ὁ δὲ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος ἰσχυρότερός μου ἐστίν, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς τὰ ὑποδήματα βαστάσαι· αὐτὸς ὑμᾶς βαπτίσει ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ καὶ πυρί· 5.4. μακάριοι οἱ πενθοῦντες, ὅτι αὐτοὶ παρακληθήσονται. 5.9. μακάριοι οἱ εἰρηνοποιοί, ὅτι [αὐτοὶ] υἱοὶ θεοῦ κληθήσονται. 8.12. οἱ δὲ υἱοὶ τῆς βασιλείας ἐκβληθήσονται εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον· ἐκεῖ ἔσται ὁ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων. 18.15. Ἐὰν δὲ ἁμαρτήσῃ ὁ ἀδελφός σου, ὕπαγε ἔλεγξον αὐτὸν μεταξὺ σοῦ καὶ αὐτοῦ μόνου. ἐάν σου ἀκούσῃ, ἐκέρδησας τὸν ἀδελφόν σου· 18.20. οὗ γάρ εἰσιν δύο ἢ τρεῖς συνηγμένοι εἰς τὸ ἐμὸν ὄνομα, ἐκεῖ εἰμὶ ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν. 18.26. πεσὼν οὖν ὁ δοῦλος προσεκύνει αὐτῷ λέγων Μακροθύμησον ἐπʼ ἐμοί, καὶ πάντα ἀποδώσω σοι. 19.6. ὥστε οὐκέτι εἰσὶν δύο ἀλλὰ σὰρξ μία· ὃ οὖν ὁ θεὸς συνέζευξεν ἄνθρωπος μὴ χωριζέτω. 19.12. εἰσὶν γὰρ εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες ἐκ κοιλίας μητρὸς ἐγεννήθησαν οὕτως, καὶ εἰσὶν εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνουχίσθησαν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ εἰσὶν εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνούχισαν ἑαυτοὺς διὰ τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. ὁ δυνάμενος χωρεῖν χωρείτω. 20.21. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτῇ Τί θέλεις; λέγει αὐτῷ Εἰπὲ ἵνα καθίσωσιν οὗτοι οἱ δύο υἱοί μου εἷς ἐκ δεξιῶν καὶ εἷς ἐξ εὐωνύμων σου ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ σου. 22.13. τότε ὁ βασιλεὺς εἶπεν τοῖς διακόνοις Δήσαντες αὐτοῦ πόδας καὶ χεῖρας ἐκβάλετε αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον· ἐκεῖ ἔσται ὁ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων. 22.30. ἐν γὰρ τῇ ἀναστάσει οὔτε γαμοῦσιν οὔτε γαμίζονται, ἀλλʼ ὡς ἄγγελοι ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ εἰσίν· 25.30. καὶ τὸν ἀχρεῖον δοῦλον ἐκβάλετε εἰς τὸ σκότος τὸ ἐξώτερον· ἐκεῖ ἔσται ὁ κλαυθμὸς καὶ ὁ βρυγμὸς τῶν ὀδόντων. | 3.11. I indeed baptize you in water for repentance, but he who comes after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit. 5.4. Blessed are those who mourn, For they shall be comforted. 5.9. Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God. 8.12. but the sons of the kingdom will be thrown out into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and the gnashing of teeth." 18.15. "If your brother sins against you, go, show him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained back your brother. 18.20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in the midst of them." 18.26. The servant therefore fell down and kneeled before him, saying, 'Lord, have patience with me, and I will repay you all.' 19.6. So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, don't let man tear apart." 19.12. For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake. He who is able to receive it, let him receive it." 20.21. He said to her, "What do you want?"She said to him, "Command that these, my two sons, may sit, one on your right hand, and one on your left hand, in your kingdom." 22.13. Then the king said to the servants, 'Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and throw him into the outer darkness; there is where the weeping and grinding of teeth will be.' 22.30. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like God's angels in heaven. 25.30. Throw out the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' |
|
| 50. Pliny The Elder, Natural History, 154, 36 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 333 |
| 51. New Testament, Philemon, 7 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 165 |
52. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, None (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 171, 186| 13.5. οὐκ ἀσχημονεῖ, οὐ ζητεῖ τὰ ἑαυτῆς, οὐ παροξύνεται, οὐ λογίζεται τὸ κακόν, | 13.5. doesn't behave itself inappropriately,doesn't seek its own way, is not provoked, takes no account of evil; |
|
53. New Testament, 1 Peter, 2.16, 5.5 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 352, 354| 2.16. ὡς ἐλεύθεροι, καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐπικάλυμμα ἔχοντες τῆς κακίας τὴν ἐλευθερίαν, ἀλλʼ ὡς θεοῦ δοῦλοι. 5.5. Ὁμοίως, νεώτεροι, ὑποτάγητε πρεσβυτέροις. Πάντες δὲ ἀλλήλοις τὴν ταπεινοφροσύνην ἐγκομβώσασθε, ὅτι[ὁ] θεὸς ὑπερηφάνοις ἀντιτάσσεται ταπεινοῖς δὲ δίδωσιν χάριν. | 2.16. as free, and not using your freedom for a cloak of wickedness, but as bondservants of God. 5.5. Likewise, you younger ones, be subject to the elder. Yes, all of you gird yourselves with humility, to subject yourselves to one another; for "God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble." |
|
| 54. Plutarch, On Stoic Self-Contradictions, None (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 446 |
55. Ignatius, To The Philadelphians, 7.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 167 | 7.1. For even though certain persons desired to deceive me after the flesh, yet the spirit is not deceived, being from God; for it knoweth whence it cometh and where it goeth, and it searcheth out the hidden things. I cried out, when I was among you; I spake with a loud voice, with God's own voice, Give ye heed to the bishop and the presbytery and deacons. |
|
56. Ignatius, To The Philadelphians, 7.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral formation, frank criticism in Found in books: Allison (2020), Saving One Another: Philodemus and Paul on Moral Formation in Community, 167 | 7.1. For even though certain persons desired to deceive me after the flesh, yet the spirit is not deceived, being from God; for it knoweth whence it cometh and where it goeth, and it searcheth out the hidden things. I cried out, when I was among you; I spake with a loud voice, with God's own voice, Give ye heed to the bishop and the presbytery and deacons. |
|
| 57. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 1.27.171-1.27.172, 1.42.4, 2.7.23, 2.16.72-2.16.73, 3.7.57-3.7.59, 3.18.106-3.18.107, 4.9.71-4.9.75, 4.12.81-4.12.88, 7.16.100-7.16.102 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 346, 347, 348 |
| 58. Clement of Alexandria, Christ The Educator, 2.16.4 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 347 |
| 59. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation To The Greeks, 1.6.3, 10.89.1, 10.96.2, 10.105.4 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 440, 444 |
| 60. Clement of Alexandria, A Discourse Concerning The Salvation of Rich Men, 15.3, 20.2, 39.3 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 323, 441 |
| 61. Clement of Alexandria, Extracts From The Prophets, 25.1 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128 |
62. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, 4.2.1, 5.12-5.18, 5.13.9, 5.16.1, 7.20.1, 7.20.5, 7.34, 10.10.1 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 455, 456 | 5.12. This is the diversified wisdom of the Peratic heresy, which it is difficult to declare in its entirety, so intricate is it on account of its seeming to consist of the astrological art.' As far forth, then, as this is possible, we shall briefly explain the whole force of this (heresy). In order, however, that we may by a compendious statement elucidate the entire doctrine of these persons, it appears expedient to subjoin the following observations. According to them, the universe is Father, Son, (and) Matter; (but) each of these three has endless capacities in itself. Intermediate, then, between the Matter and the Father sits the Son, the Word, the Serpent, always being in motion towards the unmoved Father, and (towards) Matter itself in motion. And at one time he is turned towards the Father, and receives the powers into his own person; but at another time takes up these powers, and is turned towards Matter. And Matter, (though) devoid of attribute, and being unfashioned, moulds (into itself) forms from the Son which the Son moulded from the Father. But the Son derives shape from the Father after a mode ineffable, and unspeakable, and unchangeable; (that is,) in such a manner as Moses says that tire colors of the conceived (cattle) flowed from the rods which were fixed in the drinking-troughs. And in like manner, again, that capacities flowed also from the Son into Matter, similarly to the power in reference to conception which came from the rods upon the conceived (cattle). And the difference of colors, and the dissimilarity which flowed from the rods through the waters upon the sheep, is, he says, the difference of corruptible and incorruptible generation. As, however, one who paints from nature, though he takes nothing away from animals, transfers by his pencil all forms to the canvas; so the Son, by a power which belongs to himself, transfers paternal marks from the Father into Matter. All the paternal marks are here, and there are not any more. For if any one, he says, of those (beings) which are here will have strength to perceive that he is a paternal mark transferred hither from above, (and that he is) incarnate - just as by the conception resulting from the rod a something white is produced - he is of the same substance altogether with the Father in heaven, and returns there. If, however, he may not happen upon this doctrine, neither will he understand the necessity of generation, just as an abortion born at night will perish at night. When, therefore, he says, the Saviour observes, your Father which is in heaven, he alludes to that one from whom the Son deriving his characteristics has transferred them hither. When, however, (Jesus) remarks, Your father is a murderer from the beginning, he alludes to the Ruler and Demiurge of matter, who, appropriating the marks delivered from the Son, generated him here who from the beginning was a murderer, for his work causes corruption and death. No one, then, he says, can be saved or return (into heaven) without the Son, and the Son is the Serpent. For as he brought down from above the paternal marks, so again he carries up from thence those marks roused from a dormant condition and rendered paternal characteristics, substantial ones from the unsubstantial Being, transferring them hither from thence. This, he says, is what is spoken: I am the door. And he transfers (those marks), he says, to those who close the eyelid, as the naphtha drawing the fire in every direction towards itself; nay rather, as the magnet (attracting) the iron and not anything else, or just as the backbone of the sea falcon, the gold and nothing else, or as the chaff is led by the amber. In this manner, he says, is the portrayed, perfect, and con-substantial genus drawn again from the world by the Serpent; nor does he (attract) anything else, as it has been sent down by him. For a proof of this, they adduce the anatomy of the brain, assimilating, from the fact of its immobility, the brain itself to the Father, and the cerebellum to the Son, because of its being moved and being of the form of (the head of) a serpent. And they allege that this (cerebellum), by an ineffable and inscrutable process, attracts through the pineal gland the spiritual and life-giving substance emanating from the vaulted chamber (in which the brain is embedded). And on receiving this, the cerebellum in an ineffable manner imparts the ideas, just as the Son does, to matter; or, in other words, the seeds and the genera of the things produced according to the flesh flow along into the spinal marrow. Employing this exemplar, (the heretics) seem to adroitly introduce their secret mysteries, which are delivered in silence. Now it would be impious for us to declare these; yet it is easy to form an idea of them, by reason of the many statements that have been made. 5.13. But since I consider that I have plainly explained the Peratic heresy, and by many (arguments) have rendered evident (a system that hitherto) has always escaped notice, and is altogether a tissue of fable, and one that disguises its own peculiar venom, it seems expedient to advance no further statement beyond those already put forward; for the opinions propounded by (the heretics) themselves are sufficient for their own condemnation. 5.14. Let us then see what the Sithians affirm. To these it appears that there are three definite principles of the universe, and that each of these principles possesses infinite powers. And when they speak of powers let him that hears take into account that they make this statement. Everything whatsoever you discern by an act of intelligence, or also omit (to discern) as not being understood, this by nature is fitted to become each of the principles, as in the human soul every art whatsoever which is made the subject of instruction. Just for instance, he says, this child will be a musician, having waited the requisite time for (acquiring a knowledge of) the harp; or a geometrician, (having previously undergone the necessary study for acquiring a knowledge) of geometry; (or) a grammarian, (after having sufficiently studied) grammar; (or) a workman, (having acquired a practical acquaintance) with a handicraftsman's business; and to one brought into contact with the rest of the arts a similar occurrence will take place. Now of principles, he says, the substances are light and darkness; and of these, spirit is intermediate without admixture. The spirit, however, is that which has its appointed place in the midst of darkness which is below, and light which is above. It is not spirit as a current of wind, or some gentle breeze that can be felt; but, as it were, some odour of ointment or of incense formed out of a compound. (It is) a subtle power, that insinuates itself by means of some impulsive quality in a fragrance, which is inconceivable and better than could be expressed by words. Since, however, light is above and darkness below, and spirit is intermediate in such a way as stated between these; and since light is so constituted, that, like a ray of the sun, it shines from above upon the underlying darkness; and again, since the fragrance of the spirit, holding an intermediate place, is extended and carried in every direction, as in the case of incense-offerings placed upon fire, we detect the fragrance that is being wafted in every direction: when, I say, there is a power of this description belonging unto the principles which are classified under three divisions, the power of spirit and light simultaneously exists in the darkness that is situated underneath them. But the darkness is a terrible water, into which light is absorbed and translated into a nature of the same description with spirit. The darkness, however, is not devoid of intelligence, but altogether reflective, and is conscious that, where the light has been abstracted from the darkness, the darkness remains isolated, invisible, obscure, impotent, inoperative, (and) feeble. Wherefore it is constrained, by all its reflection and understanding, to collect into itself the lustre and scintillation of light with the fragrance of the spirit. And it is possible to behold an image of the nature of these in the human countece; for instance, the pupil of the eye, dark from the subjacent humours, (but) illuminated with spirit. As, then, the darkness seeks after the splendour, that it may keep in bondage the spark, and may have perceptive power, so the light and spirit seek after the power that belongs to themselves, and strive to uprear, and towards each other to carry up their intermingled powers into the dark and formidable water lying underneath. But all the powers of the three originating principles, which are as regards number indefinitely infinite, are each according to its own substance reflective and intelligent, unnumbered in multitude. And since what are reflective and intelligent are numberless in multitude, while they continue by themselves, they are all at rest. If, however, power approaches power, the dissimilarity of (what is set in) juxtaposition produces a certain motion and energy, which are formed from the motion resulting from the concourse effected by the juxtaposition of the coalescing powers. For the concourse of the powers ensues, just like any mark of a seal that is impressed by means of the concourse correspondingly with (the seal) which prints the figure on the substances that are brought up (into contact with it). Since, therefore, the powers of the three principles are infinite in number, and from infinite powers (arise) infinite concourses, images of infinite seals are necessarily produced. These images, therefore, are the forms of the different sorts of animals. From the first great concourse, then, of the three principles, ensues a certain great form, a seal of heaven and earth. The heaven and the earth have a figure similar to the womb, having a navel in the midst; and if, he says, any one is desirous of bringing this figure under the organ of vision, let him artfully scrutinize the pregt womb of whatsoever animal he wishes, and he will discover an image of the heaven and the earth, and of the things which in the midst of all are unalterably situated underneath. (And so it is, that the first great concourse of the three principles) has produced such a figure of heaven and earth as is similar to a womb after the first coition. But, again, in the midst of the heaven and the earth have been generated infinite concourses of powers. And each concourse did not effect and fashion anything else than a seal of heaven and earth similar to a womb. But, again, in the earth, from the infinite seals are produced infinite crowds of various animals. But into all this infinity of the different animals under heaven is diffused and distributed, along with the light, the fragrance of the Spirit from above. From the water, therefore, has been produced a first-begotten originating principle, viz., wind, (which is) violent and boisterous, and a cause of all generation. For producing a sort of ferment in the waters, (the wind) uplifts waves out of the waters; and the motion of the waves, just as when some impulsive power of pregcy is the origin of the production of a man or mind, is caused when (the ocean), excited by the impulsive power of spirit, is propelled forward. When, however, this wave that has been raised out of the water by the wind, and rendered pregt in its nature, has within itself obtained the power, possessed by the female, of generation, it holds together the light scattered from above along with the fragrance of the spirit - that is, mind moulded in the different species. And this (light) is a perfect God, who from the unbegotten radiance above, and from the spirit, is borne down into human nature as into a temple, by the impulsive power of Nature, and by the motion of wind. And it is produced from water being commingled and blended with bodies as if it were a salt of existent things, and a light of darkness. And it struggles to be released from bodies, and is not able to find liberation and an egress for itself For a very diminutive spark, a severed splinter from above like the ray of a star, has been mingled in the much compounded waters of many (existences), as, says he, (David) remarks in a psalm. Every thought, then, and solicitude actuating the supernal light is as to how and in what manner mind may be liberated, by the death of the depraved and dark body, from the Father that is below, which is the wind that with noise and tumult uplifted the waves, and who generated a perfect mind his own Son; not, however, being his peculiar (offspring) substantially. For he was a ray (sent down) from above, from that perfect light, (and) was overpowered in the dark, and formidable, and bitter, and defiled water; and he is a luminous spirit borne down over the water. When, therefore, the waves that have been upreared from the waters have received within themselves the power of generation possessed by females, they contain, as a certain womb, in different species, the infused radiance, so as that it is visible in the case of all animals. But the wind, at the same time fierce and formidable, whirling along, is, in respect of its hissing sound, like a serpent. First, then, from the wind - that is, from the serpent - has resulted the originating principle of generation in the manner declared, all things having simultaneously received the principle of generation. After, then, the light and the spirit had been received, he says, into the polluted and baneful (and) disordered womb, the serpent - the wind of the darkness, the first-begotten of the waters - enters within and produces man, and the impure womb neither loves nor recognises any other form. The perfect Word of supernal light being therefore assimilated (in form) to the beast, (that is,) the serpent, entered into the defiled womb, having deceived (the womb) through the similitude of the beast itself, in order that (the Word) may loose the chains that encircle the perfect mind which has been begotten amidst impurity of womb by the primal offspring of water, (namely,) serpent, wind, (and) beast. This, he says, is the form of the servant, and this the necessity of the Word of God coming down into the womb of a virgin. But he says it is not sufficient that the Perfect Man, the Word, has entered into the womb of a virgin, and loosed the pangs which were in that darkness. Nay, more than this was requisite; for after his entrance into the foul mysteries of the womb, he was washed, and drank of the cup of life-giving bubbling water. And it was altogether needful that he should drink who was about to strip off the servile form, and assume celestial raiment. 5.15. These are the statements which the patrons of the Sethian doctrines make, as far as it is possible to declare in a few words. Their system, however, is made up (of tenets) from natural (philosophers), and of expressions uttered in reference to different other subjects; and transferring (the sense of) these to the Eternal Logos, they explain them as we have declared. But they assert likewise that Moses confirms their doctrine when he says, Darkness, and mist, and tempest. These, (the Sethian) says, are the three principles (of our system); or when he states that three were born in paradise - Adam, Eve, the serpent; or when he speaks of three (persons, namely) Cain, Abel, Seth; and again of three (others)- Shem, Ham, Japheth; or when he mentions three patriarchs - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob; or when he speaks of the existence of three days before sun and moon; or when he mentions three laws- prohibitory, permissive, and adjudicatory of punishment. Now, a prohibitory law is as follows: of every tree that is in paradise you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you may not eat. But in the passage, Come forth from your land and from your kindred, and hither into a land which I shall show you, this law, he says, is permissive; for one who is so disposed may depart, and one who is not so disposed may remain. But a law adjudicatory of punishment is that which makes the following declaration: You shall not commit adultery, you shall not kill, you shall not steal; for a penalty is awarded to each of these acts of wickedness. The entire system of their doctrine, however, is (derived) from the ancient theologians Musaeus, and Linus, and Orpheus, who elucidates especially the ceremonies of initiation, as well as the mysteries themselves. For their doctrine concerning the womb is also the tenet of Orpheus; and the (idea of the) navel, which is harmony, is (to be found) with the same symbolism attached to it in the Bacchanalian orgies of Orpheus. But prior to the observance of the mystic rite of Celeus, and Triptolemus, and Ceres, and Proserpine, and Bacchus in Eleusis, these orgies have been celebrated and handed down to men in Phlium of Attica. For antecedent to the Eleusinian mysteries, there are (enacted) in Phlium the orgies of her denominated the Great (Mother). There is, however, a portico in this (city), and on the portico is inscribed a representation, (visible) up to the present day, of all the words which are spoken (on such occasions). Many, then, of the words inscribed upon that portico are those respecting which Plutarch institutes discussions in his ten books against Empedocles. And in the greater number of these books is also drawn the representation of a certain aged man, grey-haired, winged, having his pudendum erectum, pursuing a retreating woman of azure color. And over the aged man is the inscription phaos ruentes, and over the woman pereeµphicola . But phaos ruentes appears to be the light (which exists), according to the doctrine of the Sethians, and phicola the darkish water; while the space in the midst of these seems to be a harmony constituted from the spirit that is placed between. The name, however, of phaos ruentes manifests, as they allege, the flow from above of the light downwards. Wherefore one may reasonably assert that the Sethians celebrate rites among themselves, very closely bordering upon those orgies of the Great (Mother which are observed among) the Phliasians. And the poet likewise seems to bear his testimony to this triple division, when he remarks, And all things have been triply divided, and everything obtains its (proper) distinction; that is, each member of the threefold division has obtained (a particular) capacity. But now, as regards the tenet that the subjacent water below, which is dark, ought, because the light has set (over it), to convey upwards and receive the spark borne clown from (the light) itself; in the assertion of this tenet. I say, the all-wise Sethians appear to derive (their opinion) from Homer: - By earth I swore, and yon broad Heaven above, And Stygian stream beneath, the weightiest oath of solemn power, to bind the blessed gods. That is, according to Homer, the gods suppose water to be loathsome and horrible. Now, similar to this is the doctrine of the Sethians, which affirms (water) to be formidable to the mind. 5.16. These, and other assertions similar to these, are made (by the Sethians) in their interminable commentaries. They, however, persuade their disciples to become conversant with the theory respecting composition and mixture. But this theory has formed a subject of meditation to many, but (among others) also to Andronicus the Peripatetic. The Sethians, then, affirm that the theory concerning composition and mixture is constituted according to the following method: The luminous ray from above is intermingled, and the very diminutive spark is delicately blended in the dark waters beneath; and (both of these) become united, and are formed into one compound mass, just as a single savour (results) from the mixture of many incense-offerings in the fire, and (just as) an adept, by having a test in an acute sense of smell, ought to be able from the single odour of the incense to distinguish accurately each (ingredient) of the incense-offerings that have been mingled in the fire - whether, for example, storax, and myrrh, and frankincense, or whatever other (ingredient) may be mixed (in the incense). They, however, employ also other examples, saying both that brass is mixed with gold, and that some art has been discovered which separates the brass from the gold. And, in like manner, if tin or brass, or any substance homogeneous with it, be discovered mixed with silver, these likewise, by some art superior to that of mixing, are distinguished. But already some one also distinguishes water mingled with wine. So, say they, though all things are commingled, they are capable of being separated. Nay, but, he says, derive the same lesson from the case of animals. For when the animal is dead, each of its parts is separated; and when dissolution takes place, the animal in this way vanishes. This is, he says, what has been spoken: I came not to send peace on the earth, but a sword, - that is, the division and separation of the things that have been commingled. For each of the things that have been commingled is separated and divided when it reaches its proper place. For as there is one place of mixture for all animals, so also has there been established one (locality) of separation. And, he says, no one is aware of this (place), save we alone that have been born again, spiritual, not carnal, whose citizenship is in heaven above. In this manner insinuating themselves, they corrupt their pupils, partly by misusing the words spoken (by themselves), while they wickedly pervert, to serve any purpose they wish, what has been admirably said (in Scripture); and partly by concealing their nefarious conduct, by means of whatever comparisons they please. All these things, then, he says, that have been com-mingled, possess, as has been declared, their own particular place, and hurry towards their own peculiar (substances), as iron towards the magnet, and the chaff to the vicinity of amber, and the gold to the spur of the sea falcon. In like manner, the ray of light which has been com-mingled with the water, having obtained from discipline and instruction its own proper locality, hastens towards the Logos that comes from above in servile form; and along with the Logos exists as a logos in that place where the Logos is still: (the light, I say, hastens to the Logos with greater speed) than the iron towards the magnet. And that these things, he says, are so, and that all things that have been commingled are separated in their proper places, learn. There is among the Persians in a city Ampa, near the river Tills, a well; and near the well, at the top, has been constructed a certain reservoir, supplied with three outlets; and when one pumps from this well, and draws off some of its contents in a vessel, what is thus pumped out of the well, whatever it is at all, he pours into the reservoir hard by. And when what is thus infused reaches the outlets, and when what is taken up (out of each outlet) in a single vessel is examined, a separation is observed to have taken place. And in the first of the outlets is exhibited a concretion of salt, and in the second of asphalt, and in the third of oil; and the oil is black, just as, he says, Herodotus also narrates, and it yields a heavy smell, and the Persians call this rhadinace. The similitude of the well is, say the Sethians, more sufficient for the demonstration of their proposition than all the statements that have been previously made. 5.17. The opinion of the Sethians appears to us to have been sufficiently elucidated. If, however, any one is desirous of learning the entire doctrine according to them, let him read a book inscribed Paraphrase of Seth; for all their secret tenets he will find deposited there. But since we have explained the opinions entertained by the Sethians, let us see also what are the doctrines advanced by Justinus. 5.18. Justinus was entirely opposed to the teaching of the holy Scriptures, and moreover to the written or oral teaching of the blessed evangelists, according as the Logos was accustomed to instruct His disciples, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles; and this signifies that they should not attend to the futile doctrine of the Gentiles. This (heretic) endeavours to lead on his hearers into an acknowledgment of prodigies detailed by the Gentiles, and of doctrines inculcated by them. And he narrates, word for word, legendary accounts prevalent among the Greeks, and does not previously teach or deliver his perfect mystery, unless he has bound his dupe by an oath. Then he brings forward (these) fables for the purpose of persuasion, in order that they who are conversant with the incalculable trifling of these books may have some consolation in the details of these legends. Thus it happens as when in like manner one making a long journey deems it expedient, on having fallen in with an inn, to take repose. And so it is that, when once more they are induced to turn towards studying the diffuse doctrine of these lectures, they may not abhor them while they, undergoing instruction unnecessarily prolix, rush stupified into the transgression devised by (Justinus); and previously he binds his followers with horrible oaths, neither to publish nor abjure these doctrines, and forces upon them an acknowledgment (of their truth). And in this manner he delivers the mysteries impiously discovered by himself, partly, according to the statements previously made, availing himself of the Hellenic legends, and partly of those pretended books which, to some extent, bear a resemblance to the foresaid heresies. For all, forced together by one spirit, are drawn into one profound abyss of pollution, inculcating the same tenets, and detailing the same legends, each after a different method. All those, however, style themselves Gnostics in this peculiar sense, that they alone themselves have imbibed the marvellous knowledge of the Perfect and Good (Being). |
|
63. Irenaeus, Refutation of All Heresies, 1.1.3, 1.6.3, 1.8.1, 1.11.1, 1.13, 1.13.1, 1.13.3, 1.13.5, 1.13.7, 1.22.1, 1.23.4, 1.24.5, 1.25.3-1.25.6, 1.26.2-1.26.3, 1.28.1-1.28.2, 1.29.1, 1.30.15, 1.31.1-1.31.2, 2.14.5, 2.30.1, 2.32.2, 2.34.3, 3.11.2, 3.11.7, 3.12.14, 3.21.1, 4.2.1, 4.33.4, 4.41.3-4.41.4, 5.1.3, 5.8.2-5.8.3, 5.12-5.18, 5.13.9, 5.16.1, 7.20.1, 7.20.5, 7.34, 10.10.1 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 128, 129, 131, 132, 133, 302, 306, 307, 345, 346, 351, 352, 357, 438, 455, 456 | 1.13. One Ecphantus, a native of Syracuse, affirmed that it is not possible to attain a true knowledge of things. He defines, however, as he thinks, primary bodies to be indivisible, and that there are three variations of these, viz., bulk, figure, capacity, from which are generated the objects of sense. But that there is a determinable multitude of these, and that this is infinite. And that bodies are moved neither by weight nor by impact, but by divine power, which he calls mind and soul; and that of this the world is a representation; wherefore also it has been made in the form of a sphere by divine power. And that the earth in the middle of the cosmical system is moved round its own centre towards the east. 5.12. This is the diversified wisdom of the Peratic heresy, which it is difficult to declare in its entirety, so intricate is it on account of its seeming to consist of the astrological art.' As far forth, then, as this is possible, we shall briefly explain the whole force of this (heresy). In order, however, that we may by a compendious statement elucidate the entire doctrine of these persons, it appears expedient to subjoin the following observations. According to them, the universe is Father, Son, (and) Matter; (but) each of these three has endless capacities in itself. Intermediate, then, between the Matter and the Father sits the Son, the Word, the Serpent, always being in motion towards the unmoved Father, and (towards) Matter itself in motion. And at one time he is turned towards the Father, and receives the powers into his own person; but at another time takes up these powers, and is turned towards Matter. And Matter, (though) devoid of attribute, and being unfashioned, moulds (into itself) forms from the Son which the Son moulded from the Father. But the Son derives shape from the Father after a mode ineffable, and unspeakable, and unchangeable; (that is,) in such a manner as Moses says that tire colors of the conceived (cattle) flowed from the rods which were fixed in the drinking-troughs. And in like manner, again, that capacities flowed also from the Son into Matter, similarly to the power in reference to conception which came from the rods upon the conceived (cattle). And the difference of colors, and the dissimilarity which flowed from the rods through the waters upon the sheep, is, he says, the difference of corruptible and incorruptible generation. As, however, one who paints from nature, though he takes nothing away from animals, transfers by his pencil all forms to the canvas; so the Son, by a power which belongs to himself, transfers paternal marks from the Father into Matter. All the paternal marks are here, and there are not any more. For if any one, he says, of those (beings) which are here will have strength to perceive that he is a paternal mark transferred hither from above, (and that he is) incarnate - just as by the conception resulting from the rod a something white is produced - he is of the same substance altogether with the Father in heaven, and returns there. If, however, he may not happen upon this doctrine, neither will he understand the necessity of generation, just as an abortion born at night will perish at night. When, therefore, he says, the Saviour observes, your Father which is in heaven, he alludes to that one from whom the Son deriving his characteristics has transferred them hither. When, however, (Jesus) remarks, Your father is a murderer from the beginning, he alludes to the Ruler and Demiurge of matter, who, appropriating the marks delivered from the Son, generated him here who from the beginning was a murderer, for his work causes corruption and death. No one, then, he says, can be saved or return (into heaven) without the Son, and the Son is the Serpent. For as he brought down from above the paternal marks, so again he carries up from thence those marks roused from a dormant condition and rendered paternal characteristics, substantial ones from the unsubstantial Being, transferring them hither from thence. This, he says, is what is spoken: I am the door. And he transfers (those marks), he says, to those who close the eyelid, as the naphtha drawing the fire in every direction towards itself; nay rather, as the magnet (attracting) the iron and not anything else, or just as the backbone of the sea falcon, the gold and nothing else, or as the chaff is led by the amber. In this manner, he says, is the portrayed, perfect, and con-substantial genus drawn again from the world by the Serpent; nor does he (attract) anything else, as it has been sent down by him. For a proof of this, they adduce the anatomy of the brain, assimilating, from the fact of its immobility, the brain itself to the Father, and the cerebellum to the Son, because of its being moved and being of the form of (the head of) a serpent. And they allege that this (cerebellum), by an ineffable and inscrutable process, attracts through the pineal gland the spiritual and life-giving substance emanating from the vaulted chamber (in which the brain is embedded). And on receiving this, the cerebellum in an ineffable manner imparts the ideas, just as the Son does, to matter; or, in other words, the seeds and the genera of the things produced according to the flesh flow along into the spinal marrow. Employing this exemplar, (the heretics) seem to adroitly introduce their secret mysteries, which are delivered in silence. Now it would be impious for us to declare these; yet it is easy to form an idea of them, by reason of the many statements that have been made. 5.13. But since I consider that I have plainly explained the Peratic heresy, and by many (arguments) have rendered evident (a system that hitherto) has always escaped notice, and is altogether a tissue of fable, and one that disguises its own peculiar venom, it seems expedient to advance no further statement beyond those already put forward; for the opinions propounded by (the heretics) themselves are sufficient for their own condemnation. 5.14. Let us then see what the Sithians affirm. To these it appears that there are three definite principles of the universe, and that each of these principles possesses infinite powers. And when they speak of powers let him that hears take into account that they make this statement. Everything whatsoever you discern by an act of intelligence, or also omit (to discern) as not being understood, this by nature is fitted to become each of the principles, as in the human soul every art whatsoever which is made the subject of instruction. Just for instance, he says, this child will be a musician, having waited the requisite time for (acquiring a knowledge of) the harp; or a geometrician, (having previously undergone the necessary study for acquiring a knowledge) of geometry; (or) a grammarian, (after having sufficiently studied) grammar; (or) a workman, (having acquired a practical acquaintance) with a handicraftsman's business; and to one brought into contact with the rest of the arts a similar occurrence will take place. Now of principles, he says, the substances are light and darkness; and of these, spirit is intermediate without admixture. The spirit, however, is that which has its appointed place in the midst of darkness which is below, and light which is above. It is not spirit as a current of wind, or some gentle breeze that can be felt; but, as it were, some odour of ointment or of incense formed out of a compound. (It is) a subtle power, that insinuates itself by means of some impulsive quality in a fragrance, which is inconceivable and better than could be expressed by words. Since, however, light is above and darkness below, and spirit is intermediate in such a way as stated between these; and since light is so constituted, that, like a ray of the sun, it shines from above upon the underlying darkness; and again, since the fragrance of the spirit, holding an intermediate place, is extended and carried in every direction, as in the case of incense-offerings placed upon fire, we detect the fragrance that is being wafted in every direction: when, I say, there is a power of this description belonging unto the principles which are classified under three divisions, the power of spirit and light simultaneously exists in the darkness that is situated underneath them. But the darkness is a terrible water, into which light is absorbed and translated into a nature of the same description with spirit. The darkness, however, is not devoid of intelligence, but altogether reflective, and is conscious that, where the light has been abstracted from the darkness, the darkness remains isolated, invisible, obscure, impotent, inoperative, (and) feeble. Wherefore it is constrained, by all its reflection and understanding, to collect into itself the lustre and scintillation of light with the fragrance of the spirit. And it is possible to behold an image of the nature of these in the human countece; for instance, the pupil of the eye, dark from the subjacent humours, (but) illuminated with spirit. As, then, the darkness seeks after the splendour, that it may keep in bondage the spark, and may have perceptive power, so the light and spirit seek after the power that belongs to themselves, and strive to uprear, and towards each other to carry up their intermingled powers into the dark and formidable water lying underneath. But all the powers of the three originating principles, which are as regards number indefinitely infinite, are each according to its own substance reflective and intelligent, unnumbered in multitude. And since what are reflective and intelligent are numberless in multitude, while they continue by themselves, they are all at rest. If, however, power approaches power, the dissimilarity of (what is set in) juxtaposition produces a certain motion and energy, which are formed from the motion resulting from the concourse effected by the juxtaposition of the coalescing powers. For the concourse of the powers ensues, just like any mark of a seal that is impressed by means of the concourse correspondingly with (the seal) which prints the figure on the substances that are brought up (into contact with it). Since, therefore, the powers of the three principles are infinite in number, and from infinite powers (arise) infinite concourses, images of infinite seals are necessarily produced. These images, therefore, are the forms of the different sorts of animals. From the first great concourse, then, of the three principles, ensues a certain great form, a seal of heaven and earth. The heaven and the earth have a figure similar to the womb, having a navel in the midst; and if, he says, any one is desirous of bringing this figure under the organ of vision, let him artfully scrutinize the pregt womb of whatsoever animal he wishes, and he will discover an image of the heaven and the earth, and of the things which in the midst of all are unalterably situated underneath. (And so it is, that the first great concourse of the three principles) has produced such a figure of heaven and earth as is similar to a womb after the first coition. But, again, in the midst of the heaven and the earth have been generated infinite concourses of powers. And each concourse did not effect and fashion anything else than a seal of heaven and earth similar to a womb. But, again, in the earth, from the infinite seals are produced infinite crowds of various animals. But into all this infinity of the different animals under heaven is diffused and distributed, along with the light, the fragrance of the Spirit from above. From the water, therefore, has been produced a first-begotten originating principle, viz., wind, (which is) violent and boisterous, and a cause of all generation. For producing a sort of ferment in the waters, (the wind) uplifts waves out of the waters; and the motion of the waves, just as when some impulsive power of pregcy is the origin of the production of a man or mind, is caused when (the ocean), excited by the impulsive power of spirit, is propelled forward. When, however, this wave that has been raised out of the water by the wind, and rendered pregt in its nature, has within itself obtained the power, possessed by the female, of generation, it holds together the light scattered from above along with the fragrance of the spirit - that is, mind moulded in the different species. And this (light) is a perfect God, who from the unbegotten radiance above, and from the spirit, is borne down into human nature as into a temple, by the impulsive power of Nature, and by the motion of wind. And it is produced from water being commingled and blended with bodies as if it were a salt of existent things, and a light of darkness. And it struggles to be released from bodies, and is not able to find liberation and an egress for itself For a very diminutive spark, a severed splinter from above like the ray of a star, has been mingled in the much compounded waters of many (existences), as, says he, (David) remarks in a psalm. Every thought, then, and solicitude actuating the supernal light is as to how and in what manner mind may be liberated, by the death of the depraved and dark body, from the Father that is below, which is the wind that with noise and tumult uplifted the waves, and who generated a perfect mind his own Son; not, however, being his peculiar (offspring) substantially. For he was a ray (sent down) from above, from that perfect light, (and) was overpowered in the dark, and formidable, and bitter, and defiled water; and he is a luminous spirit borne down over the water. When, therefore, the waves that have been upreared from the waters have received within themselves the power of generation possessed by females, they contain, as a certain womb, in different species, the infused radiance, so as that it is visible in the case of all animals. But the wind, at the same time fierce and formidable, whirling along, is, in respect of its hissing sound, like a serpent. First, then, from the wind - that is, from the serpent - has resulted the originating principle of generation in the manner declared, all things having simultaneously received the principle of generation. After, then, the light and the spirit had been received, he says, into the polluted and baneful (and) disordered womb, the serpent - the wind of the darkness, the first-begotten of the waters - enters within and produces man, and the impure womb neither loves nor recognises any other form. The perfect Word of supernal light being therefore assimilated (in form) to the beast, (that is,) the serpent, entered into the defiled womb, having deceived (the womb) through the similitude of the beast itself, in order that (the Word) may loose the chains that encircle the perfect mind which has been begotten amidst impurity of womb by the primal offspring of water, (namely,) serpent, wind, (and) beast. This, he says, is the form of the servant, and this the necessity of the Word of God coming down into the womb of a virgin. But he says it is not sufficient that the Perfect Man, the Word, has entered into the womb of a virgin, and loosed the pangs which were in that darkness. Nay, more than this was requisite; for after his entrance into the foul mysteries of the womb, he was washed, and drank of the cup of life-giving bubbling water. And it was altogether needful that he should drink who was about to strip off the servile form, and assume celestial raiment. 5.15. These are the statements which the patrons of the Sethian doctrines make, as far as it is possible to declare in a few words. Their system, however, is made up (of tenets) from natural (philosophers), and of expressions uttered in reference to different other subjects; and transferring (the sense of) these to the Eternal Logos, they explain them as we have declared. But they assert likewise that Moses confirms their doctrine when he says, Darkness, and mist, and tempest. These, (the Sethian) says, are the three principles (of our system); or when he states that three were born in paradise - Adam, Eve, the serpent; or when he speaks of three (persons, namely) Cain, Abel, Seth; and again of three (others)- Shem, Ham, Japheth; or when he mentions three patriarchs - Abraham, Isaac, Jacob; or when he speaks of the existence of three days before sun and moon; or when he mentions three laws- prohibitory, permissive, and adjudicatory of punishment. Now, a prohibitory law is as follows: of every tree that is in paradise you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you may not eat. But in the passage, Come forth from your land and from your kindred, and hither into a land which I shall show you, this law, he says, is permissive; for one who is so disposed may depart, and one who is not so disposed may remain. But a law adjudicatory of punishment is that which makes the following declaration: You shall not commit adultery, you shall not kill, you shall not steal; for a penalty is awarded to each of these acts of wickedness. The entire system of their doctrine, however, is (derived) from the ancient theologians Musaeus, and Linus, and Orpheus, who elucidates especially the ceremonies of initiation, as well as the mysteries themselves. For their doctrine concerning the womb is also the tenet of Orpheus; and the (idea of the) navel, which is harmony, is (to be found) with the same symbolism attached to it in the Bacchanalian orgies of Orpheus. But prior to the observance of the mystic rite of Celeus, and Triptolemus, and Ceres, and Proserpine, and Bacchus in Eleusis, these orgies have been celebrated and handed down to men in Phlium of Attica. For antecedent to the Eleusinian mysteries, there are (enacted) in Phlium the orgies of her denominated the Great (Mother). There is, however, a portico in this (city), and on the portico is inscribed a representation, (visible) up to the present day, of all the words which are spoken (on such occasions). Many, then, of the words inscribed upon that portico are those respecting which Plutarch institutes discussions in his ten books against Empedocles. And in the greater number of these books is also drawn the representation of a certain aged man, grey-haired, winged, having his pudendum erectum, pursuing a retreating woman of azure color. And over the aged man is the inscription phaos ruentes, and over the woman pereeµphicola . But phaos ruentes appears to be the light (which exists), according to the doctrine of the Sethians, and phicola the darkish water; while the space in the midst of these seems to be a harmony constituted from the spirit that is placed between. The name, however, of phaos ruentes manifests, as they allege, the flow from above of the light downwards. Wherefore one may reasonably assert that the Sethians celebrate rites among themselves, very closely bordering upon those orgies of the Great (Mother which are observed among) the Phliasians. And the poet likewise seems to bear his testimony to this triple division, when he remarks, And all things have been triply divided, and everything obtains its (proper) distinction; that is, each member of the threefold division has obtained (a particular) capacity. But now, as regards the tenet that the subjacent water below, which is dark, ought, because the light has set (over it), to convey upwards and receive the spark borne clown from (the light) itself; in the assertion of this tenet. I say, the all-wise Sethians appear to derive (their opinion) from Homer: - By earth I swore, and yon broad Heaven above, And Stygian stream beneath, the weightiest oath of solemn power, to bind the blessed gods. That is, according to Homer, the gods suppose water to be loathsome and horrible. Now, similar to this is the doctrine of the Sethians, which affirms (water) to be formidable to the mind. 5.16. These, and other assertions similar to these, are made (by the Sethians) in their interminable commentaries. They, however, persuade their disciples to become conversant with the theory respecting composition and mixture. But this theory has formed a subject of meditation to many, but (among others) also to Andronicus the Peripatetic. The Sethians, then, affirm that the theory concerning composition and mixture is constituted according to the following method: The luminous ray from above is intermingled, and the very diminutive spark is delicately blended in the dark waters beneath; and (both of these) become united, and are formed into one compound mass, just as a single savour (results) from the mixture of many incense-offerings in the fire, and (just as) an adept, by having a test in an acute sense of smell, ought to be able from the single odour of the incense to distinguish accurately each (ingredient) of the incense-offerings that have been mingled in the fire - whether, for example, storax, and myrrh, and frankincense, or whatever other (ingredient) may be mixed (in the incense). They, however, employ also other examples, saying both that brass is mixed with gold, and that some art has been discovered which separates the brass from the gold. And, in like manner, if tin or brass, or any substance homogeneous with it, be discovered mixed with silver, these likewise, by some art superior to that of mixing, are distinguished. But already some one also distinguishes water mingled with wine. So, say they, though all things are commingled, they are capable of being separated. Nay, but, he says, derive the same lesson from the case of animals. For when the animal is dead, each of its parts is separated; and when dissolution takes place, the animal in this way vanishes. This is, he says, what has been spoken: I came not to send peace on the earth, but a sword, - that is, the division and separation of the things that have been commingled. For each of the things that have been commingled is separated and divided when it reaches its proper place. For as there is one place of mixture for all animals, so also has there been established one (locality) of separation. And, he says, no one is aware of this (place), save we alone that have been born again, spiritual, not carnal, whose citizenship is in heaven above. In this manner insinuating themselves, they corrupt their pupils, partly by misusing the words spoken (by themselves), while they wickedly pervert, to serve any purpose they wish, what has been admirably said (in Scripture); and partly by concealing their nefarious conduct, by means of whatever comparisons they please. All these things, then, he says, that have been com-mingled, possess, as has been declared, their own particular place, and hurry towards their own peculiar (substances), as iron towards the magnet, and the chaff to the vicinity of amber, and the gold to the spur of the sea falcon. In like manner, the ray of light which has been com-mingled with the water, having obtained from discipline and instruction its own proper locality, hastens towards the Logos that comes from above in servile form; and along with the Logos exists as a logos in that place where the Logos is still: (the light, I say, hastens to the Logos with greater speed) than the iron towards the magnet. And that these things, he says, are so, and that all things that have been commingled are separated in their proper places, learn. There is among the Persians in a city Ampa, near the river Tills, a well; and near the well, at the top, has been constructed a certain reservoir, supplied with three outlets; and when one pumps from this well, and draws off some of its contents in a vessel, what is thus pumped out of the well, whatever it is at all, he pours into the reservoir hard by. And when what is thus infused reaches the outlets, and when what is taken up (out of each outlet) in a single vessel is examined, a separation is observed to have taken place. And in the first of the outlets is exhibited a concretion of salt, and in the second of asphalt, and in the third of oil; and the oil is black, just as, he says, Herodotus also narrates, and it yields a heavy smell, and the Persians call this rhadinace. The similitude of the well is, say the Sethians, more sufficient for the demonstration of their proposition than all the statements that have been previously made. 5.17. The opinion of the Sethians appears to us to have been sufficiently elucidated. If, however, any one is desirous of learning the entire doctrine according to them, let him read a book inscribed Paraphrase of Seth; for all their secret tenets he will find deposited there. But since we have explained the opinions entertained by the Sethians, let us see also what are the doctrines advanced by Justinus. 5.18. Justinus was entirely opposed to the teaching of the holy Scriptures, and moreover to the written or oral teaching of the blessed evangelists, according as the Logos was accustomed to instruct His disciples, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles; and this signifies that they should not attend to the futile doctrine of the Gentiles. This (heretic) endeavours to lead on his hearers into an acknowledgment of prodigies detailed by the Gentiles, and of doctrines inculcated by them. And he narrates, word for word, legendary accounts prevalent among the Greeks, and does not previously teach or deliver his perfect mystery, unless he has bound his dupe by an oath. Then he brings forward (these) fables for the purpose of persuasion, in order that they who are conversant with the incalculable trifling of these books may have some consolation in the details of these legends. Thus it happens as when in like manner one making a long journey deems it expedient, on having fallen in with an inn, to take repose. And so it is that, when once more they are induced to turn towards studying the diffuse doctrine of these lectures, they may not abhor them while they, undergoing instruction unnecessarily prolix, rush stupified into the transgression devised by (Justinus); and previously he binds his followers with horrible oaths, neither to publish nor abjure these doctrines, and forces upon them an acknowledgment (of their truth). And in this manner he delivers the mysteries impiously discovered by himself, partly, according to the statements previously made, availing himself of the Hellenic legends, and partly of those pretended books which, to some extent, bear a resemblance to the foresaid heresies. For all, forced together by one spirit, are drawn into one profound abyss of pollution, inculcating the same tenets, and detailing the same legends, each after a different method. All those, however, style themselves Gnostics in this peculiar sense, that they alone themselves have imbibed the marvellous knowledge of the Perfect and Good (Being). |
|
| 64. Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, 33 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 456 |
65. Tertullian, On The Flesh of Christ, 14, 4 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 302 | 4. Since, therefore, you do not reject the assumption of a body as impossible or as hazardous to the character of God, it remains for you to repudiate and censure it as unworthy of Him. Come now, beginning from the nativity itself, declaim against the uncleanness of the generative elements within the womb, the filthy concretion of fluid and blood, of the growth of the flesh for nine months long out of that very mire. Describe the womb as it enlarges from day to day, heavy, troublesome, restless even in sleep, changeful in its feelings of dislike and desire. Inveigh now likewise against the shame itself of a woman in travail which, however, ought rather to be honoured in consideration of that peril, or to be held sacred in respect of (the mystery of) nature. of course you are horrified also at the infant, which is shed into life with the embarrassments which accompany it from the womb; you likewise, of course, loathe it even after it is washed, when it is dressed out in its swaddling-clothes, graced with repeated anointing, smiled on with nurse's fawns. This reverend course of nature, you, O Marcion, (are pleased to) spit upon; and yet, in what way were you born? You detest a human being at his birth; then after what fashion do you love anybody? Yourself, of course, you had no love of, when you departed from the Church and the faith of Christ. But never mind, if you are not on good terms with yourself, or even if you were born in a way different from other people. Christ, at any rate, has loved even that man who was condensed in his mother's womb amidst all its uncleannesses, even that man who was brought into life out of the said womb, even that man who was nursed amidst the nurse's simpers. For his sake He came down (from heaven), for his sake He preached, for his sake He humbled Himself even unto death - the death of the cross. Philippians 2:8 He loved, of course, the being whom He redeemed at so great a cost. If Christ is the Creator's Son, it was with justice that He loved His own (creature); if He comes from another god, His love was excessive, since He redeemed a being who belonged to another. Well, then, loving man He loved his nativity also, and his flesh as well. Nothing can be loved apart from that through which whatever exists has its existence. Either take away nativity, and then show us your man; or else withdraw the flesh, and then present to our view the being whom God has redeemed - since it is these very conditions which constitute the man whom God has redeemed. And are you for turning these conditions into occasions of blushing to the very creature whom He has redeemed, (censuring them), too, as unworthy of Him who certainly would not have redeemed them had He not loved them? Our birth He reforms from death by a second birth from heaven; our flesh He restores from every harassing malady; when leprous, He cleanses it of the stain; when blind, He rekindles its light; when palsied, He renews its strength; when possessed with devils, He exorcises it; when dead, He reanimates it - then shall we blush to own it? If, to be sure, He had chosen to be born of a mere animal, and were to preach the kingdom of heaven invested with the body of a beast either wild or tame, your censure (I imagine) would have instantly met Him with this demurrer: This is disgraceful for God, and this is unworthy of the Son of God, and simply foolish. For no other reason than because one thus judges. It is of course foolish, if we are to judge God by our own conceptions. But, Marcion, consider well this Scripture, if indeed you have not erased it: God has chosen the foolish things of the world, to confound the wise. 1 Corinthians 1:27 Now what are those foolish things? Are they the conversion of men to the worship of the true God, the rejection of error, the whole training in righteousness, chastity, mercy, patience, and innocence? These things certainly are not foolish. Inquire again, then, of what things he spoke, and when you imagine that you have discovered what they are will you find anything to be so foolish as believing in a God that has been born, and that of a virgin, and of a fleshly nature too, who wallowed in all the before-mentioned humiliations of nature? But some one may say, These are not the foolish things; they must be other things which God has chosen to confound the wisdom of the world. And yet, according to the world's wisdom, it is more easy to believe that Jupiter became a bull or a swan, if we listen to Marcion, than that Christ really became a man. |
|
66. Tertullian, Against Marcion, 1.8, 1.23 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 302 | 1.8. In the first place, how arrogantly do the Marcionites build up their stupid system, bringing forward a new god, as if we were ashamed of the old one! So schoolboys are proud of their new shoes, but their old master beats their strutting vanity out of them. Now when I hear of a new god, who, in the old world and in the old time and under the old god was unknown and unheard of; whom, (accounted as no one through such long centuries back, and ancient in men's very ignorance of him), a certain Jesus Christ, and none else revealed; whom Christ revealed, they say- Christ himself new, according to them, even, in ancient names - I feel grateful for this conceit of theirs. For by its help I shall at once be able to prove the heresy of their tenet of a new deity. It will turn out to be such a novelty as has made gods even for the heathen by some new and yet again and ever new title for each several deification. What new god is there, except a false one? Not even Saturn will be proved to be a god by all his ancient fame, because it was a novel pretence which some time or other produced even him, when it first gave him godship. On the contrary, living and perfect Deity has its origin neither in novelty nor in antiquity, but in its own true nature. Eternity has no time. It is itself all time. It acts; it cannot then suffer. It cannot be born, therefore it lacks age. God, if old, forfeits the eternity that is to come; if new, the eternity which is past. The newness bears witness to a beginning; the oldness threatens an end. God, moreover, is as independent of beginning and end as He is of time, which is only the arbiter and measurer of a beginning and an end. 1.23. Here is another rule for him. All the properties of God ought to be as rational as they are natural. I require reason in His goodness, because nothing else can properly be accounted good than that which is rationally good; much less can goodness itself be detected in any irrationality. More easily will an evil thing which has something rational belonging to it be accounted good, than that a good thing bereft of all reasonable quality should escape being regarded as evil. Now I deny that the goodness of Marcion's god is rational, on this account first, because it proceeded to the salvation of a human creature which was alien to him. I am aware of the plea which they will adduce, that that is rather a primary and perfect goodness which is shed voluntarily and freely upon strangers without any obligation of friendship, on the principle that we are bidden to love even our enemies, such as are also on that very account strangers to us. Now, inasmuch as from the first he had no regard for man, a stranger to him from the first, he settled beforehand, by this neglect of his, that he had nothing to do with an alien creature. Besides, the rule of loving a stranger or enemy is preceded by the precept of your loving your neighbour as yourself; and this precept, although coming from the Creator's law, even you ought to receive, because, so far from being abrogated by Christ, it has rather been confirmed by Him. For you are bidden to love your enemy and the stranger, in order that you may love your neighbour the better. The requirement of the undue is an augmentation of the due benevolence. But the due precedes the undue, as the principal quality, and more worthy of the other, for its attendant and companion. Since, therefore, the first step in the reasonableness of the divine goodness is that it displays itself on its proper object in righteousness, and only at its second stage on an alien object by a redundant righteousness over and above that of scribes and Pharisees, how comes it to pass that the second is attributed to him who fails in the first, not having man for his proper object, and who makes his goodness on this very account defective? Moreover, how could a defective benevolence, which had no proper object whereon to expend itself, overflow on an alien one? Clear up the first step, and then vindicate the next. Nothing can be claimed as rational without order, much less can reason itself dispense with order in any one. Suppose now the divine goodness begin at the second stage of its rational operation, that is to say, on the stranger, this second stage will not be consistent in rationality if it be impaired in any way else. For only then will even the second stage of goodness, that which is displayed towards the stranger, be accounted rational, when it operates without wrong to him who has the first claim. It is righteousness which before everything else makes all goodness rational. It will thus be rational in its principal stage, when manifested on its proper object, if it be righteous. And thus, in like manner, it will be able to appear rational, when displayed towards the stranger, if it be not unrighteous. But what sort of goodness is that which is manifested in wrong, and that in behalf of an alien creature? For perhaps a benevolence, even when operating injuriously, might be deemed to some extent rational, if exerted for one of our own house and home. By what rule, however, can an unjust benevolence, displayed on behalf of a stranger, to whom not even an honest one is legitimately due, be defended as a rational one? For what is more unrighteous, more unjust, more dishonest, than so to benefit an alien slave as to take him away from his master, claim him as the property of another, and suborn him against his master's life; and all this, to make the matter more iniquitous still while he is yet living in his master's house and on his master's garner, and still trembling beneath his stripes? Such a deliverer, I had almost said kidnapper, would even meet with condemnation in the world. Now, no other than this is the character of Marcion's god, swooping upon an alien world, snatching away man from his God, the son from his father, the pupil from his tutor, the servant from his master - to make him impious to his God, undutiful to his father, ungrateful to his tutor, worthless to his master. If, now, the rational benevolence makes man such, what sort of being prithee would the irrational make of him? None I should think more shameless than him who is baptized to his god in water which belongs to another, who stretches out his hands to his god towards a heaven which is another's, who kneels to his god on ground which is another's, offers his thanksgivings to his god over bread which belongs to another, and distributes by way of alms and charity, for the sake of his god, gifts which belong to another God. Who, then, is that so good a god of theirs, that man through him becomes evil; so propitious, too, as to incense against man that other God who is, indeed, his own proper Lord? |
|
| 67. Tatian, Oration To The Greeks, 24.5 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 543 |
| 68. Tertullian, On Modesty, 12.4 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 133 |
| 69. Origen, Homiliae In Genesim (In Catenis), 2.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 543 |
| 70. Origen, Homilies On Numbers, 7.1, 9.4, 12.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
| 71. Origen, Homilies On Leviticus, 5.1, 7.6, 9.2, 13.4, 14.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 543 |
| 72. Origen, Homilies On Luke, 14.3-14.4, 14.7, 16.4-16.6, 18.5, 20.2, 25.4-25.5 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 543 |
| 73. Origen, On Jeremiah (Homilies 1-11), 1.16, 2.1, 4.4, 5.8, 7.3, 9.1, 10.5, 12.4-12.5, 16.9, 18.6, 18.9 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
74. Origen, On First Principles, 1.5.3, 1.7.2, 1.7.4, 1.8.1, 2.3.4, 2.4.1-2.4.4, 2.5, 2.9.5-2.9.7, 3.1.8-3.1.9, 3.1.16, 3.1.18, 3.2.6, 3.4.5, 3.5.5, 4.2.1, 4.3.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 | 1.5.3. After the enumeration, then, of so many and so important names of orders and offices, underlying which it is certain that there are personal existences, let us inquire whether God, the creator and founder of all things, created certain of them holy and happy, so that they could admit no element at all of an opposite kind, and certain others so that they were made capable both of virtue and vice; or whether we are to suppose that He created some so as to be altogether incapable of virtue, and others again altogether incapable of wickedness, but with the power of abiding only in a state of happiness, and others again such as to be capable of either condition. In order, now, that our first inquiry may begin with the names themselves, let us consider whether the holy angels, from the period of their first existence, have always been holy, and are holy still, and will be holy, and have never either admitted or had the power to admit any occasion of sin. Then in the next place, let us consider whether those who are called holy principalities began from the moment of their creation by God to exercise power over some who were made subject to them, and whether these latter were created of such a nature, and formed for the very purpose of being subject and subordinate. In like manner, also, whether those which are called powers were created of such a nature and for the express purpose of exercising power, or whether their arriving at that power and dignity is a reward and desert of their virtue. Moreover, also, whether those which are called thrones or seats gained that stability of happiness at the same time with their coming forth into being, so as to have that possession from the will of the Creator alone; or whether those which are called dominions had their dominion conferred on them, not as a reward for their proficiency, but as the peculiar privilege of their creation, so that it is something which is in a certain degree inseparable from them, and natural. Now, if we adopt the view that the holy angels, and the holy powers, and the blessed seats, and the glorious virtues, and the magnificent dominions, are to be regarded as possessing those powers and dignities and glories in virtue of their nature, it will doubtless appear to follow that those beings which have been mentioned as holding offices of an opposite kind must be regarded in the same manner; so that those principalities with whom we have to struggle are to be viewed, not as having received that spirit of opposition and resistance to all good at a later period, or as falling away from good through the freedom of the will, but as having had it in themselves as the essence of their being from the beginning of their existence. In like manner also will it be the case with the powers and virtues, in none of which was wickedness subsequent or posterior to their first existence. Those also whom the apostle termed rulers and princes of the darkness of this world, are said, with respect to their rule and occupation of darkness, to fall not from perversity of intention, but from the necessity of their creation. Logical reasoning will compel us to take the same view with regard to wicked and maligt spirits and unclean demons. But if to entertain this view regarding maligt and opposing powers seem to be absurd, as it is certainly absurd that the cause of their wickedness should be removed from the purpose of their own will, and ascribed of necessity to their Creator, why should we not also be obliged to make a similar confession regarding the good and holy powers, that, viz., the good which is in them is not theirs by essential being, which we have manifestly shown to be the case with Christ and the Holy Spirit alone, as undoubtedly with the Father also? For it was proved that there was nothing compound in the nature of the Trinity, so that these qualities might seem to belong to it as accidental consequences. From which it follows, that in the case of every creature it is a result of his own works and movements, that those powers which appear either to hold sway over others or to exercise power or dominion, have been preferred to and placed over those whom they are said to govern or exercise power over, and not in consequence of a peculiar privilege inherent in their constitutions, but on account of merit. 1.7.2. Now, when it is said that all things were made by Him, and that in Him were all things created, both things in heaven and things on earth, there can be no doubt that also those things which are in the firmament, which is called heaven, and in which those luminaries are said to be placed, are included among the number of heavenly things. And secondly, seeing that the course of the discussion has manifestly discovered that all things were made or created, and that among created things there is nothing which may not admit of good and evil, and be capable of either, what are we to think of the following opinion which certain of our friends entertain regarding sun, moon, and stars, viz., that they are unchangeable, and incapable of becoming the opposite of what they are? Not a few have held that view even regarding the holy angels, and certain heretics also regarding souls, which they call spiritual natures. 1.7.4. And now we have to ascertain whether those beings which in the course of the discussion we have discovered to possess life and reason, were endowed with a soul along with their bodies at the time mentioned in Scripture, when God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, and the stars also, or whether their spirit was implanted in them, not at the creation of their bodies, but from without, after they had been already made. I, for my part, suspect that the spirit was implanted in them from without; but it will be worth while to prove this from Scripture: for it will seem an easy matter to make the assertion on conjectural grounds, while it is more difficult to establish it by the testimony of Scripture. Now it may be established conjecturally as follows. If the soul of a man, which is certainly inferior while it remains the soul of a man, was not formed along with his body, but is proved to have been implanted strictly from without, much more must this be the case with those living beings which are called heavenly. For, as regards man, how could the soul of him, viz., Jacob, who supplanted his brother in the womb, appear to be formed along with his body? Or how could his soul, or its images, be formed along with his body, who, while lying in his mother's womb, was filled with the Holy Ghost? I refer to John leaping in his mother's womb, and exulting because the voice of the salutation of Mary had come to the ears of his mother Elisabeth. How could his soul and its images be formed along with his body, who, before he was created in the womb, is said to be known to God, and was sanctified by Him before his birth? Some, perhaps, may think that God fills individuals with His Holy Spirit, and bestows upon them sanctification, not on grounds of justice and according to their deserts; but undeservedly. And how shall we escape that declaration: Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid! or this: Is there respect of persons with God? For such is the defense of those who maintain that souls come into existence with bodies. So far, then, as we can form an opinion from a comparison with the condition of man, I think it follows that we must hold the same to hold good with heavenly beings, which reason itself and scriptural authority show us to be the case with men. 1.8.1. A similar method must be followed in treating of the angels; nor are we to suppose that it is the result of accident that a particular office is assigned to a particular angel: as to Raphael, e.g., the work of curing and healing; to Gabriel, the conduct of wars; to Michael, the duty of attending to the prayers and supplications of mortals. For we are not to imagine that they obtained these offices otherwise than by their own merits, and by the zeal and excellent qualities which they severally displayed before this world was formed; so that afterwards in the order of archangels, this or that office was assigned to each one, while others deserved to be enrolled in the order of angels, and to act under this or that archangel, or that leader or head of an order. All of which things were disposed, as I have said, not indiscriminately and fortuitously, but by a most appropriate and just decision of God, who arranged them according to deserts, in accordance with His own approval and judgment: so that to one angel the Church of the Ephesians was to be entrusted; to another, that of the Smyrnæans; one angel was to be Peter's, another Paul's; and so on through every one of the little ones that are in the Church, for such and such angels as even daily behold the face of God must be assigned to each one of them; and there must also be some angel that encamps round about them that fear God. All of which things, assuredly, it is to be believed, are not performed by accident or chance, or because they (the angels) were so created, lest on that view the Creator should be accused of partiality; but it is to be believed that they were conferred by God, the just and impartial Ruler of all things, agreeably to the merits and good qualities and mental vigour of each individual spirit. 2.3.4. And now I do not understand by what proofs they can maintain their position, who assert that worlds sometimes come into existence which are not dissimilar to each other, but in all respects equal. For if there is said to be a world similar in all respects (to the present), then it will come to pass that Adam and Eve will do the same things which they did before: there will be a second time the same deluge, and the same Moses will again lead a nation numbering nearly six hundred thousand out of Egypt; Judas will also a second time betray the Lord; Paul will a second time keep the garments of those who stoned Stephen; and everything which has been done in this life will be said to be repeated — a state of things which I think cannot be established by any reasoning, if souls are actuated by freedom of will, and maintain either their advance or retrogression according to the power of their will. For souls are not driven on in a cycle which returns after many ages to the same round, so as either to do or desire this or that; but at whatever point the freedom of their own will aims, there do they direct the course of their actions. For what these persons say is much the same as if one were to assert that if a medimnus of grain were to be poured out on the ground, the fall of the grain would be on the second occasion identically the same as on the first, so that every individual grain would lie for the second time close beside that grain where it had been thrown before, and so the medimnus would be scattered in the same order, and with the same marks as formerly; which certainly is an impossible result with the countless grains of a medimnus, even if they were to be poured out without ceasing for many ages. So therefore it seems to me impossible for a world to be restored for the second time, with the same order and with the same amount of births, and deaths, and actions; but that a diversity of worlds may exist with changes of no unimportant kind, so that the state of another world may be for some unmistakeable reasons better (than this), and for others worse, and for others again intermediate. But what may be the number or measure of this I confess myself ignorant, although, if any one can tell it, I would gladly learn. 2.4.1. Having now briefly arranged these points in order as we best could, it follows that, agreeably to our intention from the first, we refute those who think that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is a different God from Him who gave the answers of the law to Moses, or commissioned the prophets, who is the God of our fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For in this article of faith, first of all, we must be firmly grounded. We have to consider, then, the expression of frequent recurrence in the Gospels, and subjoined to all the acts of our Lord and Saviour, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by this or that prophet, it being manifest that the prophets are the prophets of that God who made the world. From this therefore we draw the conclusion, that He who sent the prophets, Himself predicted what was to be foretold of Christ. And there is no doubt that the Father Himself, and not another different from Him, uttered these predictions. The practice, moreover, of the Saviour or His apostles, frequently quoting illustrations from the Old Testament, shows that they attribute authority to the ancients. The injunction also of the Saviour, when exhorting His disciples to the exercise of kindness, Be perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect; for He commands His sun to rise upon the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust, most evidently suggests even to a person of feeble understanding, that He is proposing to the imitation of His disciples no other God than the maker of heaven and the bestower of the rain. Again, what else does the expression, which ought to be used by those who pray, Our Father who art in heaven, appear to indicate, save that God is to be sought in the better parts of the world, i.e., of His creation? Further, do not those admirable principles which He lays down respecting oaths, saying that we ought not to swear either by heaven, because it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, because it is His footstool, harmonize most clearly with the words of the prophet, Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool? And also when casting out of the temple those who sold sheep, and oxen, and doves, and pouring out the tables of the money-changers, and saying, Take these things, hence, and do not make My Father's house a house of merchandise, He undoubtedly called Him His Father, to whose name Solomon had raised a magnificent temple. The words, moreover, Have you not read what was spoken by God to Moses: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; He is not a God of the dead, but of the living, most clearly teach us, that He called the God of the patriarchs (because they were holy, and were alive) the God of the living, the same, viz., who had said in the prophets, I am God, and besides Me there is no God. For if the Saviour, knowing that He who is written in the law is the God of Abraham, and that it is the same who says, I am God, and besides Me there is no God, acknowledges that very one to be His Father who is ignorant of the existence of any other God above Himself, as the heretics suppose, He absurdly declares Him to be His Father who does not know of a greater God. But if it is not from ignorance, but from deceit, that He says there is no other God than Himself, then it is a much greater absurdity to confess that His Father is guilty of falsehood. From all which this conclusion is arrived at, that He knows of no other Father than God, the Founder and Creator of all things. 2.4.2. It would be tedious to collect out of all the passages in the Gospels the proofs by which the God of the law and of the Gospels is shown to be one and the same. Let us touch briefly upon the Acts of the Apostles, where Stephen and the other apostles address their prayers to that God who made heaven and earth, and who spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets, calling Him the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob; the God who brought forth His people out of the land of Egypt. Which expressions undoubtedly clearly direct our understandings to faith in the Creator, and implant an affection for Him in those who have learned piously and faithfully thus to think of Him; according to the words of the Saviour Himself, who, when He was asked which was the greatest commandment in the law, replied, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. And the second is like it, You shall love your neighbour as yourself. And to these He added: On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. How is it, then, that He commends to him whom He was instructing, and was leading to enter on the office of a disciple, this commandment above all others, by which undoubtedly love was to be kindled in him towards the God of that law, inasmuch as such had been declared by the law in these very words? But let it be granted, notwithstanding all these most evident proofs, that it is of some other unknown God that the Saviour says, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, etc., etc. How, in that case, if the law and the prophets are, as they say, from the Creator, i.e., from another God than He whom He calls good, shall that appear to be logically said which He subjoins, viz., that on these two commandments hang the law and the prophets? For how shall that which is strange and foreign to God depend upon Him? And when Paul says, I thank my God, whom I serve in my spirit from my forefathers with pure conscience, he clearly shows that he came not to some new God, but to Christ. For what other forefathers of Paul can be intended, except those of whom he says, Are they Hebrews? So am I: are they Israelites? So am I. Nay, will not the very preface of his Epistle to the Romans clearly show the same thing to those who know how to understand the letters of Paul, viz., what God he preaches? For his words are: Paul, the servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart to the Gospel of God, which He had promised before by His prophets in the holy Scriptures concerning His Son, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead of Christ Jesus our Lord, etc. Moreover, also the following, You shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treads out the grain. Does God take care for oxen? Or says he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he that ploughs should plough in hope, and he that threshes in hope of partaking of the fruits. By which he manifestly shows that God, who gave the law on our account, i.e., on account of the apostles, says, You shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treads out the grain; whose care was not for oxen, but for the apostles, who were preaching the Gospel of Christ. In other passages also, Paul, embracing the promises of the law, says, Honour your father and your mother, which is the first commandment with promise; that it may be well with you, and that your days may be long upon the land, the good land, which the Lord your God will give you. By which he undoubtedly makes known that the law, and the God of the law, and His promises, are pleasing to him. 2.4.3. But as those who uphold this heresy are sometimes accustomed to mislead the hearts of the simple by certain deceptive sophisms, I do not consider it improper to bring forward the assertions which they are in the habit of making, and to refute their deceit and falsehood. The following, then, are their declarations. It is written, that no man has seen God at any time. But that God whom Moses preaches was both seen by Moses himself, and by his fathers before him; whereas He who is announced by the Saviour has never been seen at all by any one. Let us therefore ask them and ourselves whether they maintain that He whom they acknowledge to be God, and allege to be a different God from the Creator, is visible or invisible. And if they shall say that He is visible, besides being proved to go against the declaration of Scripture, which says of the Saviour, He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature, they will fall also into the absurdity of asserting that God is corporeal. For nothing can be seen except by help of form, and size, and color, which are special properties of bodies. And if God is declared to be a body, then He will also be found to be material, since every body is composed of matter. But if He be composed of matter, and matter is undoubtedly corruptible, then, according to them, God is liable to corruption! We shall put to them a second question. Is matter made, or is it uncreated, i.e., not made? And if they shall answer that it is not made, i.e., uncreated, we shall ask them if one portion of matter is God, and the other part the world? But if they shall say of matter that it is made, it will undoubtedly follow that they confess Him whom they declare to be God to have been made!— a result which certainly neither their reason nor ours can admit. But they will say, God is invisible. And what will you do? If you say that He is invisible by nature, then neither ought He to be visible to the Saviour. Whereas, on the contrary, God, the Father of Christ, is said to be seen, because he who sees the Son, he says, sees also the Father. This certainly would press us very hard, were the expression not understood by us more correctly of understanding, and not of seeing. For he who has understood the Son will understand the Father also. In this way, then, Moses too must be supposed to have seen God, not beholding Him with the bodily eye, but understanding Him with the vision of the heart and the perception of the mind, and that only in some degree. For it is manifest that He, viz., who gave answers to Moses, said, You shall not see My face, but My hinder parts. These words are, of course, to be understood in that mystical sense which is befitting divine words, those old wives' fables being rejected and despised which are invented by ignorant persons respecting the anterior and posterior parts of God. Let no one indeed suppose that we have indulged any feeling of impiety in saying that even to the Saviour the Father is not visible. Let him consider the distinction which we employ in dealing with heretics. For we have explained that it is one thing to see and to be seen, and another to know and to be known, or to understand and to be understood. To see, then, and to be seen, is a property of bodies, which certainly will not be appropriately applied either to the Father, or to the Son, or to the Holy Spirit, in their mutual relations with one another. For the nature of the Trinity surpasses the measure of vision, granting to those who are in the body, i.e., to all other creatures, the property of vision in reference to one another. But to a nature that is incorporeal and for the most part intellectual, no other attribute is appropriate save that of knowing or being known, as the Saviour Himself declares when He says, No man knows the Son, save the Father; nor does any one know the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him. It is clear, then, that He has not said, No one has seen the Father, save the Son; but, No one knows the Father, save the Son. 2.4.4. And now, if, on account of those expressions which occur in the Old Testament, as when God is said to be angry or to repent, or when any other human affection or passion is described, (our opponents) think that they are furnished with grounds for refuting us, who maintain that God is altogether impassible, and is to be regarded as wholly free from all affections of that kind, we have to show them that similar statements are found even in the parables of the Gospel; as when it is said, that he who planted a vineyard, and let it out to husbandmen, who slew the servants that were sent to them, and at last put to death even the son, is said in anger to have taken away the vineyard from them, and to have delivered over the wicked husbandmen to destruction, and to have handed over the vineyard to others, who would yield him the fruit in its season. And so also with regard to those citizens who, when the head of the household had set out to receive for himself a kingdom, sent messengers after him, saying, We will not have this man to reign over us; for the head of the household having obtained the kingdom, returned, and in anger commanded them to be put to death before him, and burned their city with fire. But when we read either in the Old Testament or in the New of the anger of God, we do not take such expressions literally, but seek in them a spiritual meaning, that we may think of God as He deserves to be thought of. And on these points, when expounding the verse in the second Psalm, Then shall He speak to them in His anger, and trouble them in His fury, we showed, to the best of our poor ability, how such an expression ought to be understood. 2.9.5. Now, when we say that this world was established in the variety in which we have above explained that it was created by God, and when we say that this God is good, and righteous, and most just, there are numerous individuals, especially those who, coming from the school of Marcion, and Valentinus, and Basilides, have heard that there are souls of different natures, who object to us, that it cannot consist with the justice of God in creating the world to assign to some of His creatures an abode in the heavens, and not only to give such a better habitation, but also to grant them a higher and more honourable position; to favour others with the grant of principalities; to bestow powers upon some, dominions on others; to confer upon some the most honourable seats in the celestial tribunals; to enable some to shine with more resplendent glory, and to glitter with a starry splendour; to give to some the glory of the sun, to others the glory of the moon, to others the glory of the stars; to cause one star to differ from another star in glory. And, to speak once for all, and briefly, if the Creator God wants neither the will to undertake nor the power to complete a good and perfect work, what reason can there be that, in the creation of rational natures, i.e., of beings of whose existence He Himself is the cause, He should make some of higher rank, and others of second, or third, or of many lower and inferior degrees? In the next place, they object to us, with regard to terrestrial beings, that a happier lot by birth is the case with some rather than with others; as one man, e.g., is begotten of Abraham, and born of the promise; another, too, of Isaac and Rebekah, and who, while still in the womb, supplants his brother, and is said to be loved by God before he is born. Nay, this very circumstance — especially that one man is born among the Hebrews, with whom he finds instruction in the divine law; another among the Greeks, themselves also wise, and men of no small learning; and then another among the Ethiopians, who are accustomed to feed on human flesh; or among the Scythians, with whom parricide is an act sanctioned by law; or among the people of Taurus, where strangers are offered in sacrifice — is a ground of strong objection. Their argument accordingly is this: If there be this great diversity of circumstances, and this diverse and varying condition by birth, in which the faculty of free-will has no scope (for no one chooses for himself either where, or with whom, or in what condition he is born); if, then, this is not caused by the difference in the nature of souls, i.e., that a soul of an evil nature is destined for a wicked nation, and a good soul for a righteous nation, what other conclusion remains than that these things must be supposed to be regulated by accident and chance? And if that be admitted, then it will be no longer believed that the world was made by God, or administered by His providence; and as a consequence, a judgment of God upon the deeds of each individual will appear a thing not to be looked for. In which matter, indeed, what is clearly the truth of things is the privilege of Him alone to know who searches all things, even the deep things of God. 2.9.6. We, however, although but men, not to nourish the insolence of the heretics by our silence, will return to their objections such answers as occur to us, so far as our abilities enable us. We have frequently shown, by those declarations which we were able to produce from the holy Scriptures, that God, the Creator of all things, is good, and just, and all-powerful. When He in the beginning created those beings which He desired to create, i.e., rational natures, He had no other reason for creating them than on account of Himself, i.e., His own goodness. As He Himself, then, was the cause of the existence of those things which were to be created, in whom there was neither any variation nor change, nor want of power, He created all whom He made equal and alike, because there was in Himself no reason for producing variety and diversity. But since those rational creatures themselves, as we have frequently shown, and will yet show in the proper place, were endowed with the power of free-will, this freedom of will incited each one either to progress by imitation of God, or reduced him to failure through negligence. And this, as we have already stated, is the cause of the diversity among rational creatures, deriving its origin not from the will or judgment of the Creator, but from the freedom of the individual will. Now God, who deemed it just to arrange His creatures according to their merit, brought down these different understandings into the harmony of one world, that He might adorn, as it were, one dwelling, in which there ought to be not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay (and some indeed to honour, and others to dishonour), with those different vessels, or souls, or understandings. And these are the causes, in my opinion, why that world presents the aspect of diversity, while Divine Providence continues to regulate each individual according to the variety of his movements, or of his feelings and purpose. On which account the Creator will neither appear to be unjust in distributing (for the causes already mentioned) to every one according to his merits; nor will the happiness or unhappiness of each one's birth, or whatever be the condition that falls to his lot, be deemed accidental; nor will different creators, or souls of different natures, be believed to exist. 2.9.7. But even holy Scripture does not appear to me to be altogether silent on the nature of this secret, as when the Apostle Paul, in discussing the case of Jacob and Esau, says: For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him who calls, it was said, The elder shall serve the younger, as it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. And after that, he answers himself, and says, What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? And that he might furnish us with an opportunity of inquiring into these matters, and of ascertaining how these things do not happen without a reason, he answers himself, and says, God forbid. For the same question, as it seems to me, which is raised concerning Jacob and Esau, may be raised regarding all celestial and terrestrial creatures, and even those of the lower world as well. And in like manner it seems to me, that as he there says, The children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, so it might also be said of all other things, When they were not yet created, neither had yet done any good or evil, that the decree of God according to election may stand, that (as certain think) some things on the one hand were created heavenly, some on the other earthly, and others, again, beneath the earth, not of works (as they think), but of Him who calls, what shall we say then, if these things are so? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. As, therefore, when the Scriptures are carefully examined regarding Jacob and Esau, it is not found to be unrighteousness with God that it should be said, before they were born, or had done anything in this life, the elder shall serve the younger; and as it is found not to be unrighteousness that even in the womb Jacob supplanted his brother, if we feel that he was worthily beloved by God, according to the deserts of his previous life, so as to deserve to be preferred before his brother; so also is it with regard to heavenly creatures, if we notice that diversity was not the original condition of the creature, but that, owing to causes that have previously existed, a different office is prepared by the Creator for each one in proportion to the degree of his merit, on this ground, indeed, that each one, in respect of having been created by God an understanding, or a rational spirit, has, according to the movements of his mind and the feelings of his soul, gained for himself a greater or less amount of merit, and has become either an object of love to God, or else one of dislike to Him; while, nevertheless, some of those who are possessed of greater merit are ordained to suffer with others for the adorning of the state of the world, and for the discharge of duty to creatures of a lower grade, in order that by this means they themselves may be participators in the endurance of the Creator, according to the words of the apostle: For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who has subjected the same in hope. Keeping in view, then, the sentiment expressed by the apostle, when, speaking of the birth of Esau and Jacob, he says, Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid, I think it right that this same sentiment should be carefully applied to the case of all other creatures, because, as we formerly remarked, the righteousness of the Creator ought to appear in everything. And this, it appears to me, will be seen more clearly at last, if each one, whether of celestial or terrestrial or infernal beings, be said to have the causes of his diversity in himself, and antecedent to his bodily birth. For all things were created by the Word of God, and by His Wisdom, and were set in order by His Justice. And by the grace of His compassion He provides for all men, and encourages all to the use of whatever remedies may lead to their cure, and incites them to salvation. 3.1.8. Let us begin, then, with those words which were spoken to Pharaoh, who is said to have been hardened by God, in order that he might not let the people go; and, along with his case, the language of the apostle also will be considered, where he says, Therefore He has mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardens. For it is on these passages chiefly that the heretics rely, asserting that salvation is not in our own power, but that souls are of such a nature as must by all means be either lost or saved; and that in no way can a soul which is of an evil nature become good, or one which is of a virtuous nature be made bad. And hence they maintain that Pharaoh, too, being of a ruined nature, was on that account hardened by God, who hardens those that are of an earthly nature, but has compassion on those who are of a spiritual nature. Let us see, then, what is the meaning of their assertion; and let us, in the first place, request them to tell us whether they maintain that the soul of Pharaoh was of an earthly nature, such as they term lost. They will undoubtedly answer that it was of an earthly nature. If so, then to believe God, or to obey Him, when his nature opposed his so doing, was an impossibility. And if this were his condition by nature, what further need was there for his heart to be hardened, and this not once, but several times, unless indeed because it was possible for him to yield to persuasion? Nor could any one be said to be hardened by another, save him who of himself was not obdurate. And if he were not obdurate of himself, it follows that neither was he of an earthly nature, but such an one as might give way when overpowered by signs and wonders. But he was necessary for God's purpose, in order that, for the saving of the multitude, He might manifest in him His power by his offering resistance to numerous miracles, and struggling against the will of God, and his heart being by this means said to be hardened. Such are our answers, in the first place, to these persons; and by these their assertion may be overturned, according to which they think that Pharaoh was destroyed in consequence of his evil nature. And with regard to the language of the Apostle Paul, we must answer them in a similar way. For who are they whom God hardens, according to your view? Those, namely, whom you term of a ruined nature, and who, I am to suppose, would have done something else had they not been hardened. If, indeed, they come to destruction in consequence of being hardened, they no longer perish naturally, but in virtue of what befalls them. Then, in the next place, upon whom does God show mercy? On those, namely, who are to be saved. And in what respect do those persons stand in need of a second compassion, who are to be saved once by their nature, and so come naturally to blessedness, except that it is shown even from their case, that, because it was possible for them to perish, they therefore obtain mercy, that so they may not perish, but come to salvation, and possess the kingdom of the good. And let this be our answer to those who devise and invent the fable of good or bad natures, i.e., of earthly or spiritual souls, in consequence of which, as they say, each one is either saved or lost. 3.1.8. Let us begin, then, with what is said about Pharaoh— that he was hardened by God, that he might not send away the people; along with which will be examined also the statement of the apostle, Therefore has He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardens. And certain of those who hold different opinions misuse these passages, themselves also almost destroying free-will by introducing ruined natures incapable of salvation, and others saved which it is impossible can be lost; and Pharaoh, they say, as being of a ruined nature, is therefore hardened by God, who has mercy upon the spiritual, but hardens the earthly. Let us see now what they mean. For we shall ask them if Pharaoh was of an earthy nature; and when they answer, we shall say that he who is of an earthy nature is altogether disobedient to God: but if disobedient, what need is there of his heart being hardened, and that not once, but frequently? Unless perhaps, since it was possible for him to obey (in which case he would certainly have obeyed, as not being earthy, when hard pressed by the signs and wonders), God needs him to be disobedient to a greater degree, in order that He may manifest His mighty deeds for the salvation of the multitude, and therefore hardens his heart. This will be our answer to them in the first place, in order to overturn their supposition that Pharaoh was of a ruined nature. And the same reply must be given to them with respect to the statement of the apostle. For whom does God harden? Those who perish, as if they would obey unless they were hardened, or manifestly those who would be saved because they are not of a ruined nature. And on whom has He mercy? Is it on those who are to be saved? And how is there need of a second mercy for those who have been prepared once for salvation, and who will by all means become blessed on account of their nature? Unless perhaps, since they are capable of incurring destruction, if they did not receive mercy, they will obtain mercy, in order that they may not incur that destruction of which they are capable, but may be in the condition of those who are saved. And this is our answer to such persons. 3.1.9. And now we must return an answer also to those who would have the God of the law to be just only, and not also good; and let us ask such in what manner they consider the heart of Pharaoh to have been hardened by God— by what acts or by what prospective arrangements. For we must observe the conception of a God who in our opinion is both just and good, but according to them only just. And let them show us how a God whom they also acknowledge to be just, can with justice cause the heart of a man to be hardened, that, in consequence of that very hardening, he may sin and be ruined. And how shall the justice of God be defended, if He Himself is the cause of the destruction of those whom, owing to their unbelief (through their being hardened), He has afterwards condemned by the authority of a judge? For why does He blame him, saying, But since you will not let My people go, lo, I will smite all the first-born in Egypt, even your first-born, and whatever else was spoken through Moses by God to Pharaoh? For it behooves every one who maintains the truth of what is recorded in Scripture, and who desires to show that the God of the law and the prophets is just, to render a reason for all these things, and to show how there is in them nothing at all derogatory to the justice of God, since, although they deny His goodness, they admit that He is a just judge, and creator of the world. Different, however, is the method of our reply to those who assert that the creator of this world is a maligt being, i.e., a devil. 3.1.9. But to those who think they understand the term hardened, we must address the inquiry, What do they mean by saying that God, by His working, hardens the heart, and with what purpose does He do this? For let them observe the conception of a God who is in reality just and good; but if they will not allow this, let it be conceded to them for the present that He is just; and let them show how the good and just God, or the just God only, appears to be just, in hardening the heart of him who perishes because of his being hardened: and how the just God becomes the cause of destruction and disobedience, when men are chastened by Him on account of their hardness and disobedience. And why does He find fault with him, saying, You will not let My people go; Lo, I will smite all the first-born in Egypt, even your first-born; and whatever else is recorded as spoken from God to Pharaoh through the intervention of Moses? For he who believes that the Scriptures are true, and that God is just, must necessarily endeavour, if he be honest, to show how God, in using such expressions, may be distinctly understood to be just. But if any one should stand, declaring with uncovered head that the Creator of the world was inclined to wickedness, we should need other words to answer them. 3.1.16. There is next brought before us that declaration uttered by the Saviour in the Gospel: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest they should happen to be converted, and their sins be forgiven them. On which our opponent will remark: If those who shall hear more distinctly are by all means to be corrected and converted, and converted in such a manner as to be worthy of receiving the remission of sins, and if it be not in their own power to hear the word distinctly, but if it depend on the Instructor to teach more openly and distinctly, while he declares that he does not proclaim to them the word with clearness, lest they should perhaps hear and understand, and be converted, and be saved, it will follow, certainly, that their salvation is not dependent upon themselves. And if this be so, then we have no free-will either as regards salvation or destruction. Now were it not for the words that are added, Lest perhaps they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them, we might be more inclined to return the answer, that the Saviour was unwilling that those individuals whom He foresaw would not become good, should understand the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, and that therefore He spoke to them in parables; but as that addition follows, Lest perhaps they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them, the explanation is rendered more difficult. And, in the first place, we have to notice what defense this passage furnishes against those heretics who are accustomed to hunt out of the Old Testament any expressions which seem, according to their view, to predicate severity and cruelty of God the Creator, as when He is described as being affected with the feeling of vengeance or punishment, or by any of those emotions, however named, from which they deny the existence of goodness in the Creator; for they do not judge of the Gospels with the same mind and feelings, and do not observe whether any such statements are found in them as they condemn and censure in the Old Testament. For manifestly, in the passage referred to, the Saviour is shown, as they themselves admit, not to speak distinctly, for this very reason, that men may not be converted, and when converted, receive the remission of sins. Now, if the words be understood according to the letter merely, nothing less, certainly, will be contained in them than in those passages which they find fault with in the Old Testament. And if they are of opinion that any expressions occurring in such a connection in the New Testament stand in need of explanation, it will necessarily follow that those also occurring in the Old Testament, which are the subject of censure, may be freed from aspersion by an explanation of a similar kind, so that by such means the passages found in both Testaments may be shown to proceed from one and the same God. But let us return, as we best may, to the question proposed. 3.1.16. There was after this the passage from the Gospel, where the Saviour said, that for this reason did He speak to those without in parables, that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand; lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them. Now, our opponent will say, If some persons are assuredly converted on hearing words of greater clearness, so that they become worthy of the remission of sins, and if it does not depend upon themselves to hear these words of greater clearness, but upon him who teaches, and he for this reason does not announce them to them more distinctly, lest they should see and understand, it is not within the power of such to be saved; and if so, we are not possessed of free-will as regards salvation and destruction. Effectual, indeed, would be the reply to such arguments, were it not for the addition, Lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them,— namely, that the Saviour did not wish those who were not to become good and virtuous to understand the more mystical (parts of His teaching), and for this reason spoke to them in parables; but now, on account of the words, Lest they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them, the defense is more difficult. In the first place, then, we must notice the passage in its bearing on the heretics, who hunt out those portions from the Old Testament where is exhibited, as they themselves daringly assert, the cruelty of the Creator of the world in His purpose of avenging and punishing the wicked, or by whatever other name they wish to designate such a quality, so speaking only that they may say that goodness does not exist in the Creator; and who do not deal with the New Testament in a similar manner, nor in a spirit of candour, but pass by places similar to those which they consider censurable in the Old Testament. For manifestly, and according to the Gospel, is the Saviour shown, as they assert, by His former words, not to speak distinctly for this reason, that men might not be converted, and, being converted, might become deserving of the remission of sins: which statement of itself is nothing inferior to those passages from the Old Testament which are objected to. And if they seek to defend the Gospel, we must ask them whether they are not acting in a blameworthy manner in dealing differently with the same questions; and, while not stumbling against the New Testament, but seeking to defend it, they nevertheless bring a charge against the Old regarding similar points, whereas they ought to offer a defense in the same way of the passages from the New. And therefore we shall force them, on account of the resemblances, to regard all as the writings of one God. Come, then, and let us, to the best of our ability, furnish an answer to the question submitted to us. 3.1.18. Let us now look to the expression, It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy. For our opponents assert, that if it does not depend upon him that wills, nor on him that runs, but on God that shows mercy, that a man be saved, our salvation is not in our own power. For our nature is such as to admit of our either being saved or not, or else our salvation rests solely on the will of Him who, if He wills it, shows mercy, and confers salvation. Now let us inquire, in the first place, of such persons, whether to desire blessings be a good or evil act; and whether to hasten after good as a final aim be worthy of praise. If they were to answer that such a procedure was deserving of censure, they would evidently be mad; for all holy men both desire blessings and run after them, and certainly are not blameworthy. How, then, is it that he who is not saved, if he be of an evil nature, desires blessing, and runs after them, but does not find them? For they say that a bad tree does not bring forth good fruits, whereas it is a good fruit to desire blessings. And how is the fruit of a bad tree good? And if they assert that to desire blessings, and to run after them, is an act of indifference, i.e., neither good nor bad, we shall reply, that if it be an indifferent act to desire blessings, and to run after them, then the opposite of that will also be an indifferent act, viz., to desire evils, and to run after them; whereas it is certain that it is not an indifferent act to desire evils, and to run after them, but one that is manifestly wicked. It is established, then, that to desire and follow after blessings is not an indifferent, but a virtuous proceeding. 3.1.18. Let us look next at the passage: So, then, it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy. For they who find fault say: If it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy, salvation does not depend upon ourselves, but upon the arrangement made by Him who has formed us such as we are, or on the purpose of Him who shows mercy when he pleases. Now we must ask these persons the following questions: Whether to desire what is good is virtuous or vicious; and whether the desire to run in order to reach the goal in the pursuit of what is good be worthy of praise or censure? And if they shall say that it is worthy of censure, they will return an absurd answer; since the saints desire and run, and manifestly in so acting do nothing that is blameworthy. But if they shall say that it is virtuous to desire what is good, and to run after what is good, we shall ask them how a perishing nature desires better things; for it is like an evil tree producing good fruit, since it is a virtuous act to desire better things. They will give (perhaps) a third answer, that to desire and run after what is good is one of those things that are indifferent, and neither beautiful nor wicked. Now to this we must say, that if to desire and to run after what is good be a thing of indifference, then the opposite also is a thing of indifference, viz., to desire what is evil, and to run after it. But it is not a thing of indifference to desire what is evil, and to run after it. And therefore also, to desire what is good, and to run after it, is not a thing of indifference. Such, then, is the defense which I think we can offer to the statement, that it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy. Solomon says in the book of Psalms (for the Song of Degrees is his, from which we shall quote the words): Unless the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it; except the Lord keep the city, the watchman wakes in vain: not dissuading us from building, nor teaching us not to keep watch in order to guard the city in our soul, but showing that what is built without God, and does not receive a guard from Him, is built in vain and watched to no purpose, because God might reasonably be entitled the Lord of the building; and the Governor of all things, the Ruler of the guard of the city. As, then, if we were to say that such a building is not the work of the builder, but of God, and that it was not owing to the successful effort of the watcher, but of the God who is over all, that such a city suffered no injury from its enemies, we should not be wrong, it being understood that something also had been done by human means, but the benefit being gratefully referred to God who brought it to pass; so, seeing that the (mere) human desire is not sufficient to attain the end, and that the running of those who are, as it were, athletes, does not enable them to gain the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus — for these things are accomplished with the assistance of God — it is well said that it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy. As if also it were said with regard to husbandry what also is actually recorded: I planted, Apollos watered; and God gave the increase. So then neither is he that plants anything, neither he that waters; but God that gives the increase. Now we could not piously assert that the production of full crops was the work of the husbandman, or of him that watered, but the work of God. So also our own perfection is brought about, not as if we ourselves did nothing; for it is not completed by us, but God produces the greater part of it. And that this assertion may be more clearly believed, we shall take an illustration from the art of navigation. For in comparison with the effect of the winds, and the mildness of the air, and the light of the stars, all co-operating in the preservation of the crew, what proportion could the art of navigation be said to bear in the bringing of the ship into harbour? — since even the sailors themselves, from piety, do not venture to assert often that they had saved the ship, but refer all to God; not as if they had done nothing, but because what had been done by Providence was infinitely greater than what had been effected by their art. And in the matter of our salvation, what is done by God is infinitely greater than what is done by ourselves; and therefore, I think, is it said that it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy. For if in the manner which they imagine we must explain the statement, that it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy, the commandments are superfluous; and it is in vain that Paul himself blames some for having fallen away, and approves of others as having remained upright, and enacts laws for the Churches: it is in vain also that we give ourselves up to desire better things, and in vain also (to attempt) to run. But it is not in vain that Paul gives such advice, censuring some and approving of others; nor in vain that we give ourselves up to the desire of better things, and to the chase after things that are pre-eminent. They have accordingly not well explained the meaning of the passage. 3.2.6. Nor are we, indeed, to suppose that struggles of this kind are carried on by the exercise of bodily strength, and of the arts of the wrestling school; but spirit contends with spirit, according to the declaration of Paul, that our struggle is against principalities, and powers, and the rulers of the darkness of this world. Nay, the following is to be understood as the nature of the struggles; when, e.g., losses and dangers befall us, or calumnies and false accusations are brought against us, it not being the object of the hostile powers that we should suffer these (trials) only, but that by means of them we should be driven either to excess of anger or sorrow, or to the last pitch of despair; or at least, which is a greater sin, should be forced, when fatigued and overcome by any annoyances, to make complaints against God, as one who does not administer human life justly and equitably; the consequence of which is, that our faith may be weakened, or our hopes disappointed, or we may be compelled to give up the truth of our opinions, or be led to entertain irreligious sentiments regarding God. For some such things are written regarding Job, after the devil had requested God that power should be given him over his goods. By which also we are taught, that it is not by any accidental attacks that we are assailed, whenever we are visited with any such loss of property, nor that it is owing to chance when one of us is taken prisoner, or when the dwellings in which those who are dear to us are crushed to death, fall in ruins; for, with respect to all these occurrences, every believer ought to say, You could have no power at all against Me, except it were given you from above. For observe that the house of Job did not fall upon his sons until the devil had first received power against them; nor would the horsemen have made an irruption in three bands, to carry away his camels or his oxen, and other cattle, unless they had been instigated by that spirit to whom they had delivered themselves up as the servants of his will. Nor would that fire, as it seemed to be, or thunderbolt, as it has been considered, have fallen upon the sheep of the patriarch, until the devil had said to God, Have You not made a hedge about all that is without and within his house and around all the rest of his property? But now put forth Your hand, and touch all that he has, (and see) if he do not renounce You to Your face. 3.4.5. With respect, however, to the following being ranked among the works of the flesh, viz., heresies, and envyings, and contentions, or other (vices), they so understand the passage, that the mind, being rendered grosser in feeling, from its yielding itself to the passions of the body, and being oppressed by the mass of its vices, and having no refined or spiritual feelings, is said to be made flesh, and derives its name from that in which it exhibits more vigour and force of will. They also make this further inquiry, Who will be found, or who will be said to be, the creator of this evil sense, called the sense of the flesh? Because they defend the opinion that there is no other creator of soul and flesh than God. And if we were to assert that the good God created anything in His own creation that was hostile to Himself, it would appear to be a manifest absurdity. If, then, it is written, that carnal wisdom is enmity against God, and if this be declared to be a result of creation, God Himself will appear to have formed a nature hostile to Himself, which cannot be subject to Him nor to His law, as if it were (supposed to be) an animal of which such qualities are predicated. And if this view be admitted, in what respect will it appear to differ from that of those who maintain that souls of different natures are created, which, according to their natures, are destined either to be lost or saved? But this is an opinion of the heretics alone, who, not being able to maintain the justice of God on grounds of piety, compose impious inventions of this kind. And now we have brought forward to the best of our ability, in the person of each of the parties, what might be advanced by way of argument regarding the several views, and let the reader choose out of them for himself that which he thinks ought to be preferred. 3.5.5. This arrangement of things, then, which God afterwards appointed (for He had, from the very origin of the world, clearly perceived the reasons and causes affecting those who, either owing to mental deficiencies, deserved to enter into bodies, or those who were carried away by their desire for visible things, and those also who, either willingly or unwillingly, were compelled, (by Him who subjected the same in hope), to perform certain services to such as had fallen into that condition), not being understood by some, who failed to perceive that it was owing to preceding causes, originating in free-will, that this variety of arrangement had been instituted by God, they have concluded that all things in this world are directed either by fortuitous movements or by a necessary fate, and that nothing is within the power of our own will. And, therefore, also they were unable to show that the providence of God was beyond the reach of censure. |
|
| 75. Origen, Homilies On Judges, 1.1 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
| 76. Origen, Homilies On Ezekiel, 1.1, 1.3-1.4, 1.11-1.12, 2.2, 3.2, 3.4, 7.2-7.3, 8.6, 13.2, 14.4 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
| 77. Origen, Philocalia, 25.1 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 542 |
| 78. Origen, Philocalia, 25.1 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 542 |
| 79. Origen, Selections On Psalms, 1.6, 4.7 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
80. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 131, 133| 74a. רב פפא אמר במפותה ודברי הכל,אביי אמר ביכול להציל באחד מאבריו ורבי יונתן בן שאול היא דתניא רבי יונתן בן שאול אומר רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו להורגו ויכול להצילו באחד מאבריו ולא הציל נהרג עליו,מאי טעמא דרבי יונתן בן שאול דכתיב (שמות כא, כב) וכי ינצו אנשים (יחדו) וגו' וא"ר אלעזר במצות שבמיתה הכתוב מדבר דכתיב (שמות כא, כג) ואם אסון יהיה ונתתה נפש תחת נפש ואפ"ה אמר רחמנא ולא יהיה אסון ענוש יענש,אי אמרת בשלמא יכול להציל באחד מאבריו לא ניתן להצילו בנפשו היינו דמשכחת לה דיענש כגון שיכול להציל באחד מאבריו,אלא אי אמרת יכול להציל באחד מאבריו נמי ניתן להצילו בנפשו היכי משכחת לה דיענש,דילמא שאני הכא דמיתה לזה ותשלומין לזה,לא שנא דאמר רבא רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו ושיבר את הכלים בין של נרדף ובין של כל אדם פטור מאי טעמא מתחייב בנפשו הוא,ונרדף ששיבר את הכלים של רודף פטור של כל אדם חייב של רודף פטור שלא יהא ממונו חביב עליו מגופו של כל אדם חייב שמציל עצמו בממון חבירו,ורודף שהיה רודף אחר רודף להצילו ושיבר את הכלים בין של רודף בין של נרדף בין של כל אדם פטור ולא מן הדין שאם אי אתה אומר כן נמצא אין לך כל אדם שמציל את חבירו מיד הרודף:,אבל הרודף אחר בהמה: תניא רשב"י אומר העובד עבודת כוכבים ניתן להצילו בנפשו מק"ו ומה פגם הדיוט ניתן להצילו בנפשו פגם גבוה לא כל שכן וכי עונשין מן הדין קא סבר עונשין מן הדין,תניא רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אומר המחלל את השבת ניתן להצילו בנפשו סבר לה כאבוה דאמר עונשין מן הדין ואתיא שבת בחילול חילול מעבודת כוכבים,א"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יהוצדק נימנו וגמרו בעליית בית נתזה בלוד כל עבירות שבתורה אם אומרין לאדם עבור ואל תהרג יעבור ואל יהרג חוץ מעבודת כוכבים וגילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים,ועבודת כוכבים לא והא תניא א"ר ישמעאל מנין שאם אמרו לו לאדם עבוד עבודת כוכבים ואל תהרג מנין שיעבוד ואל יהרג ת"ל (ויקרא יח, ה) וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם,יכול אפילו בפרהסיא תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כב, לב) ולא תחללו את שם קדשי ונקדשתי,אינהו דאמור כר"א דתניא ר"א אומר (דברים ו, ה) ואהבת את ה' אלהיך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאדך אם נאמר בכל נפשך למה נאמר בכל מאדך ואם נאמר בכל מאדך למה נאמר בכל נפשך,אם יש לך אדם שגופו חביב עליו מממונו לכך נאמר בכל נפשך ואם יש לך אדם שממונו חביב עליו מגופו לכך נאמר בכל מאדך,גילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים כדרבי דתניא רבי אומר (דברים כב, כו) כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה וכי מה למדנו מרוצח,מעתה הרי זה בא ללמד ונמצא למד מקיש רוצח לנערה המאורסה מה נערה המאורסה ניתן להצילו בנפשו אף רוצח ניתן להצילו בנפשו,ומקיש נערה המאורסה לרוצח מה רוצח יהרג ואל יעבור אף נערה המאורסה תהרג ואל תעבור,רוצח גופיה מנא לן סברא הוא דההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבה ואמר ליה אמר לי מרי דוראי זיל קטליה לפלניא ואי לא קטלינא לך אמר ליה לקטלוך ולא תיקטול מי יימר דדמא דידך סומק טפי דילמא דמא דהוא גברא סומק טפי,כי אתא רב דימי א"ר יוחנן לא שנו אלא שלא בשעת גזרת המלכות) אבל בשעת גזרת המלכות אפי' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,כי אתא רבין א"ר יוחנן אפי' שלא בשעת גזרת מלכות לא אמרו אלא בצינעא אבל בפרהסיא אפי' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,מאי מצוה קלה אמר רבא בר רב יצחק אמר רב | 74a. b Rav Pappa says: /b The ruling of the mishna, which lists his sister among those for whom he must pay a fine, is stated b with regard to /b a young woman who was b seduced, and /b in the case of seduction b all agree /b that the woman is not saved at the cost of the seducer’s life, as the intercourse was consensual., b Abaye says: /b The ruling of the mishna is stated b with regard to /b a young woman who was raped in a case b where /b one was b able to save /b her by injuring the pursuer b in one of his limbs, /b so that it was not necessary to kill him in order to achieve her rescue, b and it is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yonatan ben Shaul. As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yonatan ben Shaul says: /b If b a pursuer was pursuing another to kill him, and /b one was b able to save /b the pursued party without killing the pursuer, but instead by injuring him b in one of his limbs, but he did not save him /b in this manner and rather chose to kill him, b he is executed on his account /b as a murderer.,The Gemara explains: b What is the reason of Rabbi Yonatan ben Shaul? As it is written: “If men strive /b and strike a woman with child, so that her fruit departs, and yet no further harm ensues, he shall be punished, according to the demands that the woman’s husband makes on him; and he shall pay it as the judges determine” (Exodus 21:22). b And /b concerning this b Rabbi Elazar says: The verse is speaking of striving to kill, /b where each man was trying to kill the other. The proof is b that it is written: “But if any harm ensues, then you shall give life for life” /b (Exodus 21:23), and if there was no intention to kill, why should he be executed? b And even so, the Merciful One states: “And yet no further harm ensues, he shall be punished,” /b teaching that he must pay the monetary value of the fetus to the woman’s husband., b Granted, if you say /b that in a case where one is b able to save /b the pursued party by injuring the pursuer b in one of his limbs, he may not save /b the pursued party b at /b the cost of the pursuer’s b life, /b and if he killed the pursuer rather than injure him he is liable to receive the death penalty, b that is how you find /b the possibility b that /b the one who ultimately struck the woman b would be punished. /b This would be in a case b where it was possible to save /b the man under attack, i.e., one of the men who were fighting, by injuring the pursuer, i.e., the other man, who ultimately struck the woman, b in one of his limbs. /b In this case, the one who ultimately struck the woman was not subject to being killed. Therefore, he is subject to pay a fine., b But if you say /b that even if one is b able to save /b the pursued party by injuring the pursuer b in one of his limbs, he can also save him at /b the cost of the pursuer’s b life, how can you find /b the possibility b that /b the one who ultimately struck the woman b would be punished? /b When he was going to strike the other man, he was at risk of being killed, as anybody could have killed him at that time, and the i halakha /i is that anybody who commits an act warranting death exempts himself from any monetary obligation ensuing from that act.,The Gemara tries to refute this reasoning: b Perhaps it is different here because /b his two liabilities are not on account of the same person; rather, his liability to be put to b death is on account of this /b person, the man with whom he fought, b while /b his liability to give b payment is on account of that /b person, the woman he ultimately struck. Consequently, he is liable to receive both punishments.,The Gemara rejects this distinction: There b is no difference. As Rava says: /b If b a pursuer was pursuing another /b to kill him, b and /b during the course of the chase the pursuer b broke vessels /b belonging b either to the person being pursued or to anyone else, /b he is b exempt /b from paying for the broken vessels. b What is the reason /b for this? The reason is that b he is liable to be killed, /b since everyone is entitled to kill him in order to save the victim’s life, and one who commits an act rendering himself liable to be killed is exempt from any monetary obligation arising from that act, even if the payment were to be made to a person not connected to the act for which he is liable to be killed.,Rava continues: b And /b if b the pursued /b party b broke vessels /b while fleeing from the pursuer, if those vessels b belonged to the pursuer, /b the pursued party is b exempt. /b But if they b belonged to anyone /b else, he is b liable /b to pay for them. The Gemara explains: If the vessels b belonged to the pursuer, /b he is b exempt. /b The reason for this is b so that the /b pursuer’s b property should not be more precious to /b the pursuer b than his /b own b body. /b Were the one being pursued to cause the pursuer bodily harm, he would be exempt; all the more so when the pursued one breaks the pursuer’s vessels. And if the vessels belonged b to anyone /b else, he is b liable, as he saved himself at /b the expense of b another’s property, /b and that other person should not have to suffer a loss on his account.,Rava continues: b But /b if one b pursuer was pursuing /b another b pursuer /b in order b to save him, /b i.e., if he was trying to save the person being pursued by killing the pursuer, b and /b while doing so b he broke vessels /b belonging b either to the pursuer or to the one being pursued, or to anyone /b else, he is b exempt /b from paying for them. The Gemara comments: This b is not by /b strict b law, /b as if one who saves himself at another’s expense is liable to pay for the damage, certainly one who saves another at the expense of a third party should bear similar liability. Rather, it is an ordice instituted by the Sages. This is b because if you do not say /b that he is exempt, it will b be found that no person will save another from a pursuer, /b as everyone will be afraid of becoming liable to pay for damage caused in the course of saving the pursued party.,§ The mishna teaches: b But /b with regard to b one who pursues an animal /b to sodomize it, or one who seeks to desecrate Shabbat, or one who is going to engage in idol worship, they are not saved at the cost of their lives. b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: One who /b seeks to b worship idols may be saved /b from transgressing b at /b the cost of b his life. /b This is derived b through an i a fortiori /i /b inference: b If /b to avoid b the degradation of an ordinary /b person, such as in the case of a rapist who degrades his victim, b he can be saved /b even b at /b the cost of b his life, all the more so /b is it b not /b clear that one may kill the transgressor to avoid b the degrading of /b the honor of b God /b through the worship of idols? The Gemara asks: b But does /b the court b administer punishment /b based b on /b an i a fortiori /i b inference? /b The Gemara answers: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai b maintains /b that the court b administers punishment /b based b on /b an i a fortiori /i b inference. /b , b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: One who /b seeks to b desecrate Shabbat may be saved /b from transgressing even b at /b the cost of b his life. /b The Gemara explains that Rabbi Elazar b holds in accordance with /b the opinion of b his father, /b Rabbi Shimon, b who says: /b The court b administers punishment /b based b on /b an i a fortiori /i b inference, and /b the i halakha /i with regard to one who desecrates b Shabbat is derived from /b the i halakha /i with regard to b idol worship /b by way of a verbal analogy between the word b “desecration” /b mentioned in the context of Shabbat and the word b “desecration” /b mentioned in the context of idol worship.,§ The Gemara now considers which prohibitions are permitted in times of mortal danger. b Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: /b The Sages who discussed this issue b counted /b the votes of those assembled b and concluded in the upper story of the house of Nitza in /b the city of b Lod: /b With regard to b all /b other b transgressions in the Torah, if a person is told: Transgress /b this prohibition b and you will not be killed, he may transgress /b that prohibition b and not be killed, /b because the preserving of his own life overrides all of the Torah’s prohibitions. This is the i halakha /i concerning all prohibitions b except for /b those of b idol worship, forbidden sexual relations, and bloodshed. /b Concerning those prohibitions, one must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress them.,The Gemara asks: b And /b should one b not /b transgress the prohibition of b idol worship /b to save his life? b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yishmael said: From where /b is it derived b that if a person is told: Worship idols and you will not be killed, from where /b is it derived b that he should worship /b the idol b and not be killed? The verse states: /b “You shall keep My statutes and My judgments, which a person shall do, b and he shall live by them” /b (Leviticus 18:5), thereby teaching that the mitzvot were given to provide life, b but /b they were b not /b given so b that /b one will b die due to their /b observance.,The i baraita /i continues: One b might /b have thought that it is permitted to worship the idol in this circumstance b even in public, /b i.e., in the presence of many people. Therefore, b the verse states: “Neither shall you profane My holy name; but I will be hallowed /b among the children of Israel: I am the Lord Who sanctifies you” (Leviticus 22:32). Evidently, one is not required to allow himself to be killed so as not to transgress the prohibition of idol worship when in private; but in public he must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress.,The Gemara answers: b Those /b in the upper story of the house of Nitza b stated /b their opinion b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer. As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Eliezer says: /b It is stated: b “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might” /b (Deuteronomy 6:5). b If it is stated: “With all your soul,” why is it /b also b stated: “With all your might,” /b which indicates with all your material possessions? b And if it is stated: “With all your might,” why is it /b also b stated: “With all your soul”? /b One of these clauses seems to be superfluous.,Rather, this serves to teach that b if you have a person whose body is more precious to him than his property, it is therefore stated: “With all your soul.” /b That person must be willing to sacrifice even his life to sanctify God’s name. b And if you have a person whose property is more precious to him than his body, it is therefore stated: “With all your might.” /b That person must even be prepared to sacrifice all his property for the love of God. According to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, one must allow himself to be killed rather than worship an idol.,From where is it derived that one must allow himself to be killed rather than transgress the prohibition of b forbidden sexual relations and /b the prohibition of b bloodshed? /b This is b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi. b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b says: /b With regard to the rape of a betrothed young woman it is written: “But you shall do nothing to the young woman; the young woman has committed no sin worthy of death; b for as when a man rises against his neighbor, and slays him, /b so too with this matter” (Deuteronomy 22:26). But why would the verse mention murder in this context? b But what do we learn /b here b from a murderer? /b , b Now, /b the mention of murder b came /b in order b to teach /b a i halakha /i about the betrothed young woman, b and it turns out /b that, in addition, b it derives /b a i halakha /i from that case. The Torah b juxtaposes /b the case of b a murderer to /b the case of b a betrothed young woman /b to indicate that b just as /b in the case of a betrothed young woman b one may save her at /b the cost of the rapist’s b life, so too, /b in the case of b a murderer, one may save /b the potential victim b at /b the cost of the murderer’s b life. /b , b And /b conversely, the Torah b juxtaposes a betrothed young woman to a murderer /b to indicate that b just as /b with regard to a potential b murderer, /b the i halakha /i is that if one was ordered to murder another, b he must be killed and not transgress /b the prohibition of bloodshed, b so too, /b with regard to b a betrothed young woman, /b if she is faced with rape, b she must be killed and not transgress /b the prohibition of forbidden sexual relations.,The Gemara asks: b From where do we /b derive this i halakha /i with regard to b a murderer himself, /b that one must allow himself to be killed rather than commit murder? The Gemara answers: b It is /b based on b logical reasoning /b that one life is not preferable to another, and therefore there is no need for a verse to teach this i halakha /i . The Gemara relates an incident to demonstrate this: b As /b when b a certain person came before Rabba and said to him: The lord of my place, /b a local official, b said to me: Go kill so-and-so, and if not I will kill you, /b what shall I do? Rabba b said to him: /b It is preferable that b he should kill you and you should not kill. Who is to say that your blood is redder /b than his, that your life is worth more than the one he wants you to kill? b Perhaps that man’s blood is redder. /b This logical reasoning is the basis for the i halakha /i that one may not save his own life by killing another.,§ b When Rav Dimi came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, b he said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa /b said: The Sages b taught /b that one is permitted to transgress prohibitions in the face of mortal danger b only when it is not a time of /b religious b persecution. But in a time of /b religious b persecution, /b when the gentile authorities are trying to force Jews to violate their religion, b even /b if they issued a decree about b a minor mitzva, one must be killed and not transgress. /b , b When Ravin came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even when /b it is b not a time of /b religious b persecution, /b the Sages b said /b that one is permitted to transgress a prohibition in the face of mortal danger b only /b when he was ordered to do so b in private. But /b if he was ordered to commit a transgression b in public, even /b if they threaten him with death if he does not transgress b a minor mitzva, he must be killed and not transgress. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What is a minor mitzva /b for this purpose? b Rava bar Yitzḥak says /b that b Rav says: /b |
|
| 81. Origen, Homilies On Joshua, 7.5, 9.8, 10.2, 12.1-12.3, 13.1 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
| 82. Origen, Fragments On Luke, 91, 75 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 543 |
| 83. Porphyry, On Abstinence, 4.18.1 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 332 |
| 84. Origen, Fragments On Proverbs, 2.17 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
| 85. Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras, 7.34 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy •gnosticism, orthodox criticism of morality of Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 446 |
| 86. Eusebius of Caesarea, Preparation For The Gospel, 14.4.9 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 306 |
| 87. Origen, Fragmenta In Evangelium Matthaei, 310, 339, 388 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
88. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of The Philosophers, None (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 440 | 7.23. Again he would say that if we want to master the sciences there is nothing so fatal as conceit, and again there is nothing we stand so much in need of as time. To the question Who is a friend? his answer was, A second self (alter ego). We are told that he was once chastising a slave for stealing, and when the latter pleaded that it was his fate to steal, Yes, and to be beaten too, said Zeno. Beauty he called the flower of chastity, while according to others it was chastity which he called the flower of beauty. Once when he saw the slave of one of his acquaintance marked with weals, I see, said he, the imprints of your anger. To one who had been drenched with unguent, Who is this, quoth he, who smells of woman? When Dionysius the Renegade asked, Why am I the only pupil you do not correct? the reply was, Because I mistrust you. To a stripling who was talking nonsense his words were, The reason why we have two ears and only one mouth is that we may listen the more and talk the less. |
|
| 89. Origen, Commentary On The Song of Songs, 2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
90. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, 4.22.7, 6.12.6, 6.29.2, 6.38 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 456, 543 | 4.22.7. And he wrote of many other matters, which we have in part already mentioned, introducing the accounts in their appropriate places. And from the Syriac Gospel according to the Hebrews he quotes some passages in the Hebrew tongue, showing that he was a convert from the Hebrews, and he mentions other matters as taken from the unwritten tradition of the Jews. 6.12.6. For having obtained this Gospel from others who had studied it diligently, namely, from the successors of those who first used it, whom we call Docetae; (for most of their opinions are connected with the teaching of that school ) we have been able to read it through, and we find many things in accordance with the true doctrine of the Saviour, but some things added to that doctrine, which we have pointed out for you farther on. So much in regard to Serapion. |
|
| 91. Origen, Commentary On Genesis, None (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
| 92. Origen, Commentariorum Series In Evangelium Matthaei (Mt. 22.342763), 117, 121, 137, 33, 38, 45-47, 51, 28 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 543 |
93. Origen, Commentary On Matthew, 10.11, 10.15, 11.14, 12.5, 12.40, 13.11, 13.23, 14.13, 15.3.11, 16.16, 17.14, 17.18, 17.31-17.33 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 | 10.11. Again the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was cast into the sea. Matthew 13:47 As in the case of images and statues, the likenesses are not likenesses in every respect of those things in relation to which they are made; but, for example, the image painted with wax on the plane surface of wood has the likeness of the surface along with the color, but does not further preserve the hollows and prominences, but only their outward appearance; and in the moulding of statues an endeavour is made to preserve the likeness in respect of the hollows and the prominences, but not in respect of the color; and, if the cast be formed of wax, it endeavours to preserve both, I mean both the color and also the hollows and the prominences, but is not indeed an image of the things in the respect of depth; so conceive with me also that, in the case of the similitudes in the Gospel, when the kingdom of heaven is likened unto anything, the comparison does not extend to all the features of that to which the kingdom is compared, but only to those features which are required by the argument in hand. And here, accordingly, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was cast into the sea, not (as supposed by some, who represent that by this word the different natures of those who have come into the net, to-wit, the evil and the righteous, are treated of), as if it is to be thought that, because of the phrase which gathered of every kind, there are many different natures of the righteous and likewise also of the evil; for to such an interpretation all the Scriptures are opposed, which emphasise the freedom of the will, and censure those who sin and approve those who do right; or otherwise blame could not rightly attach to those of the kinds that were such by nature, nor praise to those of a better kind. For the reason why fishes are good or bad lies not in the souls of the fishes, but is based on that which the Word said with knowledge, Let the waters bring forth creeping things with living souls, Genesis 1:20 when, also, God made great sea-monsters and every soul of creeping creatures which the waters brought forth according to their kinds. Genesis 1:21 There, accordingly, The waters brought forth every soul of creeping animals according to their kinds, the cause not being in it; but here we are responsible for our being good kinds and worthy of what are called vessels, or bad and worthy of being cast outside. For it is not the nature in us which is the cause of the evil, but it is the voluntary choice which works evil; and so our nature is not the cause of righteousness, as if it were incapable of admitting unrighteousness, but it is the principle which we have admitted that makes men righteous; for also you never see the kinds of things in the water changing from the bad kinds of fishes into the good, or from the better kind to the worse; but you can always behold the righteous or evil among men either coming from wickedness to virtue, or returning from progress towards virtue to the flood of wickedness. Wherefore also in Ezekiel, concerning the man who turns away from unrighteousness to the keeping of the divine commandments, it is thus written: But if the wicked man turn away from all his wickednesses which he has done, etc., down to the words, that he turn from his wicked way and live; Ezekiel 18:20-23 but concerning the man who returns from the advance towards virtue unto the flood of wickedness it is said, But in the case of the righteous man turning away from his righteousness and committing iniquity, etc., down to the words, in his sins which he has sinned in them shall he die. Ezekiel 18:24 Let those who, from the parable of the drag-net, introduce the doctrine of different natures, tell us in regard to the wicked man who afterwards turned aside from all the wickednesses which he committed and keeps all the commandments of God, and does that which is righteous and merciful, of what nature was he when he was wicked? Clearly not of a nature to be praised. If verily of a nature to be censured, of what kind of nature can he reasonably be described, when he turns away from all his sins which he did? For if he were of the bad class of natures, because of his former deeds, how did he change to that which was better? Or if because of his subsequent deeds you would say that he was of the good class, how being good by nature did he become wicked? And you will also meet with a like dilemma in regard to the righteous man turning away from his righteousness and committing unrighteousness in all manner of sins. For before he turned away from righteousness, being occupied with righteous deeds he was not of a bad nature, for a bad nature could not be in righteousness, since a bad tree - that is wickedness- cannot produce good fruits - the fruits that spring from virtue. Again, on the other hand, if he had been of a good and unchangeable nature he would not have turned away from the good after being called righteous, so as to commit unrighteousness in all his sins which he committed. 10.15. Now since every scribe who has been made a disciple to the kingdom of heaven is like a man that is a householder who brings forth out of his treasury things new and old, Matthew 13:52 it clearly follows, by conversion of the proposition, as it is called, that every one who does not bring forth out of his treasury things new and old, is not a scribe who has been made a disciple unto the kingdom of heaven. We must endeavour, therefore, in every way to gather in our heart, by giving heed to reading, to exhortation, to teaching, 1 Timothy 4:13 and by meditating in the law of the Lord day and night, not only the new oracles of the Gospels and of the Apostles and their Revelation, but also the old things in the law which has the shadow of the good things to come, Hebrews 10:1 and in the prophets who prophesied in accordance with them. And these things will be gathered together, when we also read and know, and remembering them, compare at a fitting time things spiritual with spiritual, not comparing things that cannot be compared with one another, but things which admit of comparison, and which have a certain likeness of diction signifying the same thing, and of thoughts and of opinions, so that by the mouth of two or three or more witnesses Matthew 18:16 from the Scripture, we may establish and confirm every word of God. By means of them also we must refute those who, as far as in them lies, cleave in two the Godhead and cut off the New from the Old, so that they are far removed from likeness to the householder who brings forth out of his treasury things new and old. And since he who is likened to any one is different from the one to whom he is likened, the scribe who is made a disciple unto the kingdom of heaven will be the one who is likened, but different from him is the householder who brings out of his treasury things new and old. But he who is likened to him, as in imitation of him, wishes to do that which is like. Perhaps, then, the man who is a householder is Jesus Himself, who brings forth out of His treasury, according to the time of the teaching, things new, things spiritual, which also are always being renewed by Him in the inner man of the righteous, who are themselves always being renewed day by day, 2 Corinthians 4:16 and old things, things written and engraven on stones, 2 Corinthians 3:7 and in the stony hearts of the old man, so that by comparison of the letter and by exhibition of the spirit He may enrich the scribe who is made a disciple unto the kingdom of heaven, and make him like Himself; until the disciple shall be as the Master, imitating first the imitator of Christ, and after him Christ Himself, according to that which is said by Paul, Be imitators of me even as I also of Christ. 1 Corinthians 11:1 And likewise, Jesus the householder may in the simpler sense bring forth out of His treasury things new - that is, the evangelic teaching - and things old - that is, the comparison of the sayings which are taken from the law and the prophets, of which we may find examples in the Gospels. And with regard to these things new and old, we must attend also to the spiritual law which says in Leviticus, And you shall eat old things, and the old things of the old, and you shall bring forth the old from before the new; and I will set my tabernacle among you. Leviticus 26:10-11 For we eat with blessing the old things - the prophetic words - and the old things of the old things - the words of the law; and, when the new and evangelical words came, living according to the Gospel we bring forth the old things of the letter from before the new, and He sets His tabernacle in us, fulfilling the promise which He spoke, I will dwell among them and walk in them. 11.14. After this, it is worth while to look at the phrase which has been assailed in a sophistical way by those who say that the God of the law and the God of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not the same; for they say that the heavenly Father of Jesus Christ is not the husbandman of those who think that they worship God according to the law of Moses. Jesus Himself said that the Pharisees, who were worshipping the God who created the world and the law, were not a plant which His heavenly Father had planted, and that for this reason it was being rooted up. Matthew 15:13 But you might also say this, that even if it were the Father of Jesus who brought in and planted the people, when it came out of Egypt, to the mountain of His own inheritance, to the place which He had prepared for Himself to dwell in, Exodus 15:17 yet Jesus would have said, in regard to the Pharisees, Every plant which My heavenly Father planted not, shall be rooted up. Now, to this we will say, that as many as on account of their perverse interpretation of the things in the law were not a plant of His Father in heaven, were blinded in their minds, as not believing the truth, but taking pleasure in unrighteousness, 2 Thessalonians 2:12 by him who is deified by the sons of this world, and on this account is called by Paul the god of this world. 2 Corinthians 4:4 And do not suppose that Paul said that he was truly God; for just as the belly, though it is not the god of those who prize pleasure too highly, being lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, is said by Paul to be their god, Philippians 3:19 so the prince of this world, in regard to whom the Saviour says, Now has the prince of this world been judged, John 16:11 though he is not God, is said to be the god of those who do not wish to receive the spirit of adoption, in order that they may become sons of that world, and sons of the resurrection from the dead, and who, on this account, abide in the sonship of this world. I have deemed it necessary to introduce these matters, even though they may have been spoken by way of digression, because of the saying, They are blind guides of the blind. Matthew 15:14 Who are such? The Pharisees, whose minds the god of this world has blinded as they are unbelieving, because they have not believed in Jesus Christ; and he has blinded them so that the light of the Gospel of the glory of God in the face of Christ should not dawn upon them. 2 Corinthians 4:4 But not only must we avoid being guided by those blind ones who are conscious that they are in need of guides, because they have not yet received the power of vision of themselves; but even in the case of all who profess to guide us in sound doctrine, we must hear with care, and apply a sound judgment to what is said, lest being guided according to the ignorance of those who are blind, and do not see the things that concern sound doctrine, we ourselves may appear to be blind because we do not see the sense of the Scriptures, so that both he who guides and he who is guided will fall into the ditch of which we have spoken before. Next to this, it is written in what way Peter answered and said to the Saviour, as if he had not understood the saying, Not that which comes into the mouth defiles the man, but that which goes out of the mouth, Declare unto us the parable. Matthew 15:11 To which the Saviour says, Are ye also, even yet, without understanding? Matthew 15:16 As if He had said, Having been so long time with Me, do ye not yet understand the meaning of what is said, and do ye not perceive that for this reason that which goes into his mouth does not defile the man, because it passes into the belly, and going out from it is cast into the draught? Matthew 15:17 It was not in respect of the law in which they appeared to believe, that the Pharisees were not a plant of the Father of Jesus, but in respect of their perverse interpretation of the law and the things written in it. For since there are two things to be understood in regard to the law, the ministration of death which was engraven in letters and which had no kinship with the spirit, and the ministration of life which is understood in the spiritual law, those who were able with a sincere heart to say, We know that the law is spiritual, Romans 7:14 and therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and righteous and good, Romans 7:12 were the plant which the heavenly Father planted; but those who were not such, but guarded with care the letter which kills only, were not a plant of God but of him who hardened their heart, and put a veil over it, which veil had power over them so long as they did not turn to the Lord; for if any one should turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away, and the Lord is the Spirit. 2 Corinthians 3:16-17 Now some one when dealing with the passage might say, that just as not that which enters into the mouth defiles the man, Matthew 15:11 of even though it may be thought by the Jews to be defiled, so not that which enters into the mouth sanctifies the man, even though what is called the bread of the Lord may be thought by the simpler disciples to sanctify. And the saying is I think, not to be despised, and on this account, demands clear exposition, which seems to me to be thus; as it is not the meat but the conscience of him who eats with doubt which defiles him that eats, for he that doubts is condemned if he eat, because he eats not of faith, Romans 14:23 and as nothing is pure to him who is defiled and unbelieving, not in itself, but because of his defilement and unbelief, so that which is sanctified through the word of God and prayer does not, in its own nature, sanctify him who uses it, for, if this were so, it would sanctify even him who eats unworthily of the bread of the Lord, and no one on account of this food would become weak or sickly or asleep for something of this kind Paul represented in saying, For this cause many among you are weak and sickly and not a few sleep. 1 Corinthians 11:30 And in the case of the bread of the Lord, accordingly, there is advantage to him who uses it, when with undefiled mind and pure conscience he partakes of the bread. And so neither by not eating, I mean by the very fact that we do not eat of the bread which has been sanctified by the word of God and prayer, are we deprived of any good thing, nor by eating are we the better by any good thing; for the cause of our lacking is wickedness and sins, and the cause of our abounding is righteousness and right actions; so that such is the meaning of what is said by Paul, For neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we eat not are we the worse. 1 Corinthians 8:8 Now, if everything that enters into the mouth goes into the belly and is cast out into the drought, Matthew 15:17 even the meat which has been sanctified through the word of God and prayer, in accordance with the fact that it is material, goes into the belly and is cast out into the draught, but in respect of the prayer which comes upon it, according to the proportion of the faith, becomes a benefit and is a means of clear vision to the mind which looks to that which is beneficial, and it is not the material of the bread but the word which is said over it which is of advantage to him who eats it not unworthily of the Lord. And these things indeed are said of the typical and symbolic body. But many things might be said about the Word Himself who became flesh, John 1:14 and true meat of which he that eats shall assuredly live for ever, no worthless person being able to eat it; for if it were possible for one who continues worthless to eat of Him who became flesh, who was the Word and the living bread, it would not have been written, that every one who eats of this bread shall live forever. John 6:51 12.5. And His disciples came to the other side and forgot to take loaves. Matthew 16:5 Since the loaves which they had before they came to the other side were no longer useful to the disciples when they came to the other side, for they needed one kind of loaves before they crossed and a different kind when they crossed - on this account, being careless of taking loaves when going to the other side, they forgot to take loaves with them. To the other side then came the disciples of Jesus who had passed over from things material to things spiritual, and from things sensible to those which are intellectual. And perhaps that He might turn back those who, by crossing to the other side, had begun in spirit, from running back to carnal things, Jesus said to them when on the other side, Take heed and beware. Matthew 16:6 For there was a certain lump of teaching and of truly ancient leaven - that according to the bare letter, and on this account not freed from those things which arise from wickedness - which the Pharisees and Sadducees offered, of which Jesus does not wish His own disciples any longer to eat, having made for them a new and spiritual lump, offering Himself to those who gave up the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees and had come to Him - the living bread which came down from heaven and gives life to the world. John 6:33, 51 But since, to him who is no longer going to use the leaven and the lump and the teaching of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, the first thing is to see and then to beware, so that no one, by reason of not seeing and from want of taking heed, may ever partake of their forbidden leaven - on this account He says to the disciples, first, see, and then, beware. It is the mark of the clear-sighted and careful to separate the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees and every food that is not of the unleavened-bread of sincerity and truth 1 Corinthians 5:8 from the living bread, even that which came down from heaven, so that no one who eats may adopt the things of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, but by eating the living and true bread may strengthen his soul. And we might seasonably apply the saying to those who, along with the Christian way of life, prefer to live as the Jews, materially, for these do not see nor beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, but, contrary to the will of Jesus who forbade it, eat the bread of the Pharisees. Yea and also all, who do not wish to understand that the law is spiritual, and has a shadow of the good things to come, Hebrews 10:1 and is a shadow of the things to come, Colossians 2:17 neither inquire of what good thing about to be each of the laws is a shadow, nor do they see nor beware of the leaven of the Pharisees; and they also who reject the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead are not on their guard against the leaven of the Sadducees. And there are many among the heterodox who, because of their unbelief in regard to the resurrection of the dead, are imbued with the leaven of the Sadducees. Now, while Jesus said these things, the disciples reasoned, saying not aloud, but in their own hearts, We took no loaves. Matthew 16:7 And something like this was what they said, If we had loaves we would not have had to take of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees; but since, from want of loaves, we run the risk of taking from their leaven, while the Saviour does not wish us to run back to their teaching, therefore He said to us, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. Matthew 16:6 And these things then they reasoned; Jesus, while looking to that which was in their hearts, and hearing the reasons in them, as the true overseer of hearts, reproves them because they did not see nor remember the loaves which they received from Him; on account of which, even when they appeared to be in want of loaves, they did not need the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees. 12.40. But let us next see what was the thought of Peter when he answered and said to Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here; let us make three tabernacles, etc. And on this account these words call for very special examination, because Mark, in his own person, has added, For he knew not what to answer, Mark 9:6 but Luke, not knowing, he says, what he spoke. Luke 9:33 You will consider, therefore, if he spoke these things as in a trance, being filled with the spirit which moved him to say these things, which could not be a Holy Spirit; for John taught in the Gospel that, before the resurrection of the Saviour, no one had the Holy Spirit, saying, For the Spirit was not yet, because Jesus was not yet glorified. John 7:39 But if the Spirit was not yet, and he, not knowing what he said, spoke under the influence of some spirit, the spirit which caused these things to be said was some one of the spirits which had not yet been triumphed over in the cross, nor made a show of along with them, about whom it is written, Having put off from Himself the principalities and the powers, He made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in the cross. Colossians 2:15 But this spirit was perhaps that which is called a stumbling-block by Jesus, and which is spoken of as Satan in the passage, Get behind Me, Satan; you are a stumbling-block unto me. Matthew 16:23 But I know well that such things will offend many who meet with them, because they think that it is opposed to sound reason that he should be spoken ill of who a little before had been pronounced blessed by Jesus, on the ground that the Father in heaven had revealed to him the things concerning the Saviour, to-wit, that He was verily Jesus, and the Christ, and the Son of the living God. But let such an one attend more exactly to the statements about Peter and the rest of the Apostles, how even they made requests as if they were yet alien from Him who was to redeem them from the enemy and purchase them with His own precious blood; or let them also, who will have it that even before the passion of Jesus the Apostles were perfect, tell us whence it came about that Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep. Luke 9:32 But to anticipate something else of what follows and apply it to the subject in hand, I would raise in turn these questions - whether it is possible for any one to find occasion of stumbling in Jesus apart from the working of the devil who caused him to stumble; and whether it is possible for any one to deny Jesus, and that in presence of a little maid and a doorkeeper and men most worthless, unless a spirit had been with him in his denial hostile to the Spirit which is given and the wisdom, (which is given) to those who are assisted by God to make confession, according to a certain desert of theirs. But he who has learned to refer the roots of sin to the father of sin, the devil, will not say that apart from him either the Apostles were caused to stumble, or that Peter denied Christ thrice before that well-known cock-crowing. But if this be so, consider whether perhaps with a view to make Jesus stumble, so far as was in his power, and to turn Him aside from the dispensation whose characteristic was suffering that brought salvation to men, which He undertook with great willingness, seeking to effect these things which seemed to contribute to this end, he himself also here wishes as it were, by deceit, to draw away Jesus, as if calling upon Him no longer to condescend to men, and come to them, and undergo death for them, but to abide on the high mountain with Moses and Elijah. But he promised also to build three tabernacles, one apart for Jesus, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah, as if one tabernacle would not have sufficed for the three, if it had been necessary for them to be in tabernacles and in the high mountain. And perhaps also in this he acted with evil intent, when he incited him who did not know what he said, not desiring that Jesus and Moses and Elijah should be together, but desiring to separate them from one another, under pretext of the three tabernacles. And likewise it was a lie, It is good for us to be here; Matthew 17:4 for if it had been a good thing they would also have remained there. But if it were a lie, you will seek to know who caused the lie to be spoken; and especially since according to John, When he speaks a lie he speaks of his own; for he is a liar and the father thereof; John 8:44 and as there is no truth apart from the working of Him who says, I am the Truth, John 14:6 so there is no lie apart from him who is the enemy of truth. These contrary qualities, accordingly, were still in Peter truth and falsehood; and from truth he said, You are the Christ, the son of the living God, Matthew 16:16 but from falsehood he said, May God be propitious to You, Lord, this shall not be unto You, Matthew 16:20 and also, It is good for us to be here. Matthew 17:4 But if any one will not admit that Peter spoke these things from any evil inspiration, but that his words were of his own mere choice, and it is demanded of him how he will interpret, not knowing what he said, and, Luke 9:33 for he did not know what to answer, Mark 9:6 he will say, that in the former case Peter held it to be a shameful thing and unworthy of Jesus to admit that the Son of the living God, the Christ, whom already the Father had revealed to him, should be killed; and in the present case that, as having seen the two forms of Jesus and the one at the transfiguration which was much more excellent, being well pleased with that, he said that it was good to make their sojourning in that mountain, in order that he himself and those with him might rejoice as they beheld the transfiguration of Jesus and His face shining as the sun, and His garments white as the light, and, in addition to these things, might always behold in glory those whom they had once seen in glory, Moses and Elijah; and that they might rejoice at the things which they might hear, as they talked and held intercourse with each other, Moses and Elijah with Jesus, and Jesus with them. 13.11. And this may be put in another way. There are some who are kings' sons on the earth, and yet they are not sons of those kings, but sons, and sons absolutely; but others, because of their being strangers to the sons of the kings of the earth, and sons of no one of those upon the earth, but on this very account are sons, whether of God or of His Son, or of some one of those who are God's. If, then, the Saviour inquires of Peter, saying, The kings of the earth from whom do they receive toll or tribute - from their own sons or from strangers? Matthew 17:25 and Peter replies not from their own sons, but from strangers, then Jesus says about such as are strangers to the kings of the earth, and on account of being free are sons, Therefore the sons are free; Matthew 17:26 for the sons of the kings of the earth are not free, since every one that commits sin is the bond-servant of sin, John 8:34 but they are free who abide in the truth of the word of God, and on this account, know the truth, that they also may become free from sin. If, any one then, is a son simply, and not in this matter wholly a son of the kings of the earth, he is free. And nevertheless, though he is free, he takes care not to offend even the kings of the earth, and their sons, and those who receive the half-shekel; wherefore He says, Let us not cause them to stumble, but go and cast your net, and take up the fish that first comes up, Matthew 17:27 etc. But I would inquire of those who are pleased to make myths about different natures, of what sort of nature they were, whether the kings of the earth, or their sons, or those who receive the half-shekel, whom the Saviour does not wish to offend; it appears of a verity, ex hypothesi, that they are not of a nature worthy of praise, and yet He took heed not to cause them to stumble, and He prevents any stumbling-block being put in their way, that they may not sin more grievously, and that with a view to their being saved - if they will - even by receiving Him who has spared them from being caused to stumble. And as in a place verily of consolation - for such is, by interpretation, Capernaum - comforting the disciple as being both free and a son, He gives to him the power of catching the fish first, that when it came up Peter might be comforted by its coming up and being caught, and by the stater being taken from its mouth, in order to be paid to those whose the stater was, and who demanded as their own such a piece of money. 13.23. Next we must test accurately the meaning of the word necessity in the passage, For there is a necessity that the occasions come, Matthew 18:7 and to the like effect in Luke, It is 'inadmissible' but that occasions of stumbling should come, Luke 18:1 instead of impossible. And as it is necessary that that which is mortal should die, and it is impossible but that it should die, and as it must needs be that he who is in the body should be fed, for it is impossible for one who is not fed to live, so it is necessary and impossible but that occasions of stumbling should arise, since there is a necessity also that wickedness should exist before virtue in men, from which wickedness stumbling-blocks arise; for it is impossible that a man should be found altogether sinless, and who, without sin, has attained to virtue. For the wickedness in the evil powers, which is the primal source of the wickedness among men, is altogether eager to work through certain instruments against the men in the world. And perhaps also the wicked powers are more exasperated when they are cast out by the word of Jesus, and their worship is lessened, their customary sacrifices not being offered unto them; and there is a necessity that these offenses come; but there is no necessity that they should come through any particular one; wherefore the woe falls on the man through whom the stumbling-block comes, as he has given a place to the wicked power whose purpose it is to create a stumbling-block. But do not suppose that by nature, and from constitution, there are certain stumbling-blocks which seek out men through whom they come; for as God did not make death, so neither did He create stumbling-blocks; but free-will begot the stumbling-blocks in some who did not wish to endure toils for virtue. 14.13. Only, I have said these things with the view of referring his return when he comes with his kingdom to the consummation, when he commanded the servants to whom he had given the money to be called to him that he might know what they had gained by trading, and from a desire to demonstrate from this, and from the parable of the Talents, that the passage he who wished to make a reckoning with his own servants Matthew 18:23 is to be referred to the consummation when now he is king, receiving the kingdom, on account of which, according to another parable, Luke 19:12 he went into a far country, to receive for himself a kingdom and to return. Therefore, when he returned after receiving the kingdom, he wished to make a reckoning with his own servants. And when he had begun to reckon, there was brought unto him one who owed many talents, Matthew 18:24 and he was brought as to a king by those who had been appointed his ministers - I think, the angels. And perhaps he was one of those under the kingdom who had been entrusted with a great administration and had not dispensed it well, but had wasted what had been entrusted to him, so that he came to owe the many talents which he had lost. This very man, perhaps not having the means to pay, is ordered by the king to be sold along with his wife, by intercourse with whom he became the father of certain children. But it is no easy task to see what is intellectually meant by father and mother and children. What this means in point of truth God may know, and whether He Himself has given insight to us or not, he who can may judge. Only this is our conception of the passage; that, as the Jerusalem which is above is the mother Galatians 4:26 of Paul and of those like him, so there may be a mother of others after the analogy of Jerusalem, the mother, for example, of Syene in Egypt, or Sidon, or as many cities as are named in the Scriptures. Then, as Jerusalem is a bride adorned for her husband, Revelation 21:2 Christ, so there may be those mothers of certain powers who have been allotted to them as wives or brides. And as there are certain children of Jerusalem, as mother, and of Christ, as father, so there would be certain children of Syene, or Memphis, or Tyre, or Sidon, and the rulers set over them. Perhaps then, too, this one, the debtor of many talents who was brought to the king, has, as we have said, a wife and children, whom at first the king ordered to be sold, and also all that he had to be sold; but afterwards, being moved with compassion, he released him and forgave him all the debt; not, as if he were ignorant of the future, but, in order that we might understand what happened, it was written that he did so. Each one then of those who have, as we have said, a wife and children will render an account whenever the king comes to make a reckoning, having received the kingdom and having returned; and each of them as a ruler of any Syene or Memphis, or Tyre or Sidon, or any like them, has also debtors. This one, then, having been released, and having been forgiven all the debt, went out from the king and found one of his fellow-servants, Matthew 18:28 etc.; and, on this account, I suppose that he took him by the throat, when he had gone out from the king, for unless he had gone out he would not have taken his own fellow-servant by the throat. Then observe the accuracy of the Scripture, how that the one fell down and worshipped, but the other fell down and did not worship but besought; and the king being moved with compassion released him and forgave him all the debt, but the servant did not wish even to pity his own fellow-servant; and the king before his release ordered him to be sold and what was his, while he who had been forgiven cast him into prison. And observe that his fellow-servants did not bring any accusation or said, but told, Matthew 18:31 and that he did not use the epithet wicked at the beginning in regard to the money lost, but reserved it afterwards for his action towards the fellow-servant. But mark also the moderation of the king; he does not say, You worshipped me, but You besought me; and no longer did he order him and his to be sold, but, what was worse, he delivered him to the tormentors, because of his wickedness. Matthew 18:34 But who may these be but those who have been appointed in the matter of punishments? But at the same time observe, because of the use made of this parable by adherents of heresies, that if they accuse the Creator of being passionate, because of words that declare the wrath of God, they ought also to accuse this king, because that being angry, he delivered the debtor to the tormentors. But it must further be said to those whose view it is that no one is delivered by Jesus to the tormentors - pray, explain to us, good sirs, who is the king who delivered the wicked servant to the tormentors? And let them also attend to this, So therefore also shall My heavenly Father do unto you; Matthew 18:35 and to the same persons also might rather be said the things in the parable of the Ten Pounds that the Son of the good God said, Howbeit these mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them, Luke 19:27 etc. The conclusion of the parable, however, is adapted also to the simpler; for all of us who have obtained the forgiveness of our own sins, and have not forgiven our brethren, are taught at once that we shall suffer the lot of him who was forgiven but did not forgive his fellow-servant. |
|
94. Origen, Against Celsus, 1.57, 4.11, 6.28, 7.41-7.42 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology •clement of alexandria, moral criticism of heresy Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 443, 456, 543 | 1.57. The Jew, moreover, in the treatise, addresses the Saviour thus: If you say that every man, born according to the decree of Divine Providence, is a son of God, in what respect should you differ from another? In reply to whom we say, that every man who, as Paul expresses it, is no longer under fear, as a schoolmaster, but who chooses good for its own sake, is a son of God; but this man is distinguished far and wide above every man who is called, on account of his virtues, a son of God, seeing He is, as it were, a kind of source and beginning of all such. The words of Paul are as follow: For you have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but you have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. But, according to the Jew of Celsus, countless individuals will convict Jesus of falsehood, alleging that those predictions which were spoken of him were intended of them. We are not aware, indeed, whether Celsus knew of any who, after coming into this world, and having desired to act as Jesus did, declared themselves to be also the sons of God, or the power of God. But since it is in the spirit of truth that we examine each passage, we shall mention that there was a certain Theudas among the Jews before the birth of Christ, who gave himself out as some great one, after whose death his deluded followers were completely dispersed. And after him, in the days of the census, when Jesus appears to have been born, one Judas, a Galilean, gathered around him many of the Jewish people, saying he was a wise man, and a teacher of certain new doctrines. And when he also had paid the penalty of his rebellion, his doctrine was overturned, having taken hold of very few persons indeed, and these of the very humblest condition. And after the times of Jesus, Dositheus the Samaritan also wished to persuade the Samaritans that he was the Christ predicted by Moses; and he appears to have gained over some to his views. But it is not absurd, in quoting the extremely wise observation of that Gamaliel named in the book of Acts, to show how those persons above mentioned were strangers to the promise, being neither sons of God nor powers of God, whereas Christ Jesus was truly the Son of God. Now Gamaliel, in the passage referred to, said: If this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought (as also did the designs of those men already mentioned after their death); but if it be of God, you cannot overthrow this doctrine, lest haply you be found even to fight against God. There was also Simon the Samaritan magician, who wished to draw away certain by his magical arts. And on that occasion he was successful; but now-a-days it is impossible to find, I suppose, thirty of his followers in the entire world, and probably I have even overstated the number. There are exceedingly few in Palestine; while in the rest of the world, through which he desired to spread the glory of his name, you find it nowhere mentioned. And where it is found, it is found quoted from the Acts of the Apostles; so that it is to Christians that he owes this mention of himself, the unmistakeable result having proved that Simon was in no respect divine. 4.11. After this, being desirous to show that it is nothing either wonderful or new which we state regarding floods or conflagrations, but that, from misunderstanding the accounts of these things which are current among Greeks or barbarous nations, we have accorded our belief to our own Scriptures when treating of them, he writes as follows: The belief has spread among them, from a misunderstanding of the accounts of these occurrences, that after lengthened cycles of time, and the returns and conjunctions of planets, conflagrations and floods are wont to happen, and because after the last flood, which took place in the time of Deucalion, the lapse of time, agreeably to the vicissitude of all things, requires a conflagration and this made them give utterance to the erroneous opinion that God will descend, bringing fire like a torturer. Now in answer to this we say, that I do not understand how Celsus, who has read a great deal, and who shows that he has perused many histories, had not his attention arrested by the antiquity of Moses, who is related by certain Greek historians to have lived about the time of Inachus the son of Phoroneus, and is acknowledged by the Egyptians to be a man of great antiquity, as well as by those who have studied the history of the Phœnicians. And any one who likes may peruse the two books of Flavius Josephus on the antiquities of the Jews, in order that he may see in what way Moses was more ancient than those who asserted that floods and conflagrations take place in the world after long intervals of time; which statement Celsus alleges the Jews and Christians to have misunderstood, and, not comprehending what was said about a conflagration, to have declared that God will descend, bringing fire like a torturer. 6.28. With some such object as this in view does Celsus seem to have been actuated, when he alleged that Christians term the Creator an accursed divinity; in order that he who believes these charges of his against us, should, if possible, arise and exterminate the Christians as the most impious of mankind. Confusing, moreover, things that are distinct, he states also the reason why the God of the Mosaic cosmogony is termed accursed, asserting that such is his character, and worthy of execration in the opinion of those who so regard him, inasmuch as he pronounced a curse upon the serpent, who introduced the first human beings to the knowledge of good and evil. Now he ought to have known that those who have espoused the cause of the serpent, because he gave good advice to the first human beings, and who go far beyond the Titans and Giants of fable, and are on this account called Ophites, are so far from being Christians, that they bring accusations against Jesus to as great a degree as Celsus himself; and they do not admit any one into their assembly until he has uttered maledictions against Jesus. See, then, how irrational is the procedure of Celsus, who, in his discourse against the Christians, represents as such those who will not even listen to the name of Jesus, or omit even that He was a wise man, or a person of virtuous character! What, then, could evince greater folly or madness, not only on the part of those who wish to derive their name from the serpent as the author of good, but also on the part of Celsus, who thinks that the accusations with which the Ophites are charged, are chargeable also against the Christians! Long ago, indeed, that Greek philosopher who preferred a state of poverty, and who exhibited the pattern of a happy life, showing that he was not excluded from happiness although he was possessed of nothing, termed himself a Cynic; while these impious wretches, as not being human beings, whose enemy the serpent is, but as being serpents, pride themselves upon being called Ophites from the serpent, which is an animal most hostile to and greatly dreaded by man, and boast of one Euphrates as the introducer of these unhallowed opinions. 7.41. But let us consider who those persons are whose guidance Celsus would have us to follow, so that we may not be in want of guides who are recommended both by their antiquity and sanctity. He refers us to divinely inspired poets, as he calls them, to wise men and philosophers, without mentioning their names; so that, after promising to point out those who should guide us, he simply hands us over in a general way to divinely inspired poets, wise men, and philosophers. If he had specified their names in particular, we should have felt ourselves bound to show him that he wished to give us as guides men who were blinded to the truth, and who must therefore lead us into error; or that if not wholly blinded, yet they are in error in many matters of belief. But whether Orpheus, Parmenides, Empedocles, or even Homer himself, and Hesiod, are the persons whom he means by inspired poets, let any one show how those who follow their guidance walk in a better way, or lead a more excellent life, than those who, being taught in the school of Jesus Christ, have rejected all images and statues, and even all Jewish superstition, that they may look upward through the Word of God to the one God, who is the Father of the Word. Who, then, are those wise men and philosophers from whom Celsus would have us to learn so many divine truths, and for whom we are to give up Moses the servant of God, the prophets of the Creator of the world, who have spoken so many things by a truly divine inspiration, and even Him who has given light and taught the way of piety to the whole human race, so that no one can reproach Him if he remains without a share in the knowledge of His mysteries? Such, indeed, was the abounding love which He had for men, that He gave to the more learned a theology capable of raising the soul far above all earthly things; while with no less consideration He comes down to the weaker capacities of ignorant men, of simple women, of slaves, and, in short, of all those who from Jesus alone could have received that help for the better regulation of their lives which is supplied by his instructions in regard to the Divine Being, adapted to their wants and capacities. 7.42. Celsus next refers us to Plato as to a more effective teacher of theological truth, and quotes the following passage from the Tim us: It is a hard matter to find out the Maker and Father of this universe; and after having found Him, it is impossible to make Him known to all. To which he himself adds this remark: You perceive, then, how divine men seek after the way of truth, and how well Plato knew that it was impossible for all men to walk in it. But as wise men have found it for the express purpose of being able to convey to us some notion of Him who is the first, the unspeakable Being - a notion, namely; which may represent Him to us through the medium of other objects - they endeavour either by synthesis, which is the combining of various qualities, or by analysis, which is the separation and setting aside of some qualities, or finally by analogy - in these ways, I say, they endeavour to set before us that which it is impossible to express in words. I should therefore be surprised if you could follow in that course, since you are so completely wedded to the flesh as to be incapable of seeing ought but what is impure. These words of Plato are noble and admirable; but see if Scripture does not give us an example of a regard for mankind still greater in God the Word, who was in the beginning with God, and who was made flesh, in order that He might reveal to all men truths which, according to Plato, it would be impossible to make known to all men, even after he had found them himself. Plato may say that it is a hard thing to find out the Creator and Father of this universe; by which language he implies that it is not wholly beyond the power of human nature to attain to such a knowledge as is either worthy of God, or if not, is far beyond that which is commonly attained (although if it were true that Plato or any other of the Greeks had found God, they would never have given homage and worship, or ascribed the name of God, to any other than to Him: they would have abandoned all others, and would not have associated with this great God objects which can have nothing in common with Him). For ourselves, we maintain that human nature is in no way able to seek after God, or to attain a clear knowledge of Him without the help of Him whom it seeks. He makes Himself known to those who, after doing all that their powers will allow, confess that they need help from Him, who discovers Himself to those whom He approves, in so far as it is possible for man and the soul still dwelling in the body to know God. |
|
| 95. Origen, Fragments On 1 Corinthians, 11, 37, 76, 81, 84, 34 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
| 96. Origen, Commentary On Romans, 1.3, 1.15, 1.18-1.19, 2.1, 2.4, 2.10, 2.13-2.14, 3.1, 3.4, 3.7, 3.10-3.11, 4.4, 4.7, 4.10, 4.12, 5.6, 5.10, 6.3, 7.8, 7.16, 8.8, 8.11, 9.2, 10.43 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
| 97. Epiphanius, Panarion, 32.3.4 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 333 |
| 98. Theodoret of Cyrus, Compendium Against Heresies, 1.1, 1.17, 2.7 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism, role in development of heresiology •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 456, 543 |
| 99. Theodoret of Cyrus, Cure of The Greek Maladies, 2.18 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 306 |
| 100. Origen, Hom. Ps., 2.6, 4.4, 5.5 Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
| 101. Origen, Hom. 1 Reg., 1.13 Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
| 102. Origen, Fr.Jo., 49, 51, 43 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
| 103. Origen, Hom. Jer. Lat., 2.3.12, 2.5 Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541, 542, 543 |
| 104. Origen, Sel. Job, 41.11 Tagged with subjects: •moral criticism Found in books: Boulluec (2022), The Notion of Heresy in Greek Literature in the Second and Third Centuries, 541 |
