On First Principles 1 part 2/4

Now there would have been a plausible defense against these things, had there not been added 'lest they should turn again, and it be forgiven them'—namely, that the Savior did not wish those who would not become noble and good to understand the more mystical things, and for this reason spoke to them in parables.

But as it is, since the words 'lest they should turn again, and it be forgiven them' are set down, the defense is more difficult.

First, then, the passage must be marked out against the heterodox, who hunt for such expressions from the Old Testament where there is shown—as they themselves dare to say—cruelty of the Creator, or a vindictive and retributive disposition toward the worse, or whatever they wish to call such a thing, only that they may say there is no goodness in the One who created;

but who do not approach the New Testament in a similar or fair-minded way, but pass over the things in it that resemble those they consider blameworthy in the Old.

For plainly, even in the Gospel, the Savior is shown—as they themselves assert concerning the former [Scriptures]—not speaking clearly for this reason, that men might not turn, and turning become worthy of the forgiveness of sins;

[these are] the very sort of things charged against the Old.

But if they seek a defense concerning the Gospel, it must be said to them: do they not act blamably, taking dissimilar stands on similar problems—not stumbling at the New but seeking a defense, while concerning similar matters in the Old, when they ought to defend it as they do the New, they level accusations?

From which considerations we shall bring them, by reason of the resemblances, to regard all [the Scriptures] as the writings of one God.

Come then, let us furnish, so far as we are able, a defense for the matter before us also.

We were saying, in examining the case of Pharaoh too, that sometimes to be healed too quickly is not for the good of those being healed, if, having fallen through their own fault into grievous troubles, they should be too easily delivered from those into which they have fallen;

for, despising the evil as being easily cured, and not a second time guarding against falling into it, they will be in it.

Wherefore, in the case of such people, the eternal God, the knower of hidden things, who knows all things before their coming into being, in accordance with His kindness defers the swifter help toward them, and—so to speak—in helping them does not help, this being to their profit.

It is likely, then, that those outside too—of whom the discourse speaks—having been seen by the Savior in the manner before us, would not be steadfast in their conversion if they should hear the things spoken more plainly; [and so] it has been arranged by the Lord that they should not hear the deeper things more clearly,

lest, having too quickly turned and been healed in obtaining forgiveness, then despising the wounds of wickedness as easy and curable, they should again, and quickly, fall into them.

And perhaps too, paying the penalties for their former sins, by which they offended against virtue in forsaking it, they had not yet fulfilled the fitting time of being left by the divine oversight, so that, having been more fully glutted with their own evils which they sowed, they might afterwards be called to a more secure repentance, not soon to fall again into those into which they had formerly fallen, having outraged the worth of good things and given themselves over to the worse.

Those, then, who are called 'outside'—plainly by comparison with those inside—not being altogether far from those inside, hear obscurely (while those inside hear clearly), because the things are spoken to them in parables;

but others among those outside, those called Tyrians—though foreknown that they would long ago have repented sitting in sackcloth and ashes, had the Savior come near their borders—do not even hear the things [given] to those outside, as is likely, being further from the worth of those outside, so that at another season, after it has become more tolerable for them than for those who did not receive the word, among whom He mentioned the Tyrians as well, they might at a more opportune time hear and more securely repent.

But see whether we, in addition to the investigative spirit, do not in every way strive to keep also the reverent attitude concerning God and His Christ, endeavoring by every means to make a defense, as in matters so great and of such a kind, concerning the manifold providence of God, who provides for the immortal soul.

If, then, someone should inquire concerning those who are reproached, that, though seeing wonders and hearing divine words, they are not benefited—whereas the Tyrians would have repented, had such things come to pass and been spoken among them—and should inquire, saying, 'Why ever did the Savior preach to such people to their hurt, that the sin might be reckoned heavier against them?'

It must be said to him that He who discerns the dispositions of all those who blame His providence—as not having believed because of it, which did not grant them to see what He graciously granted others to behold, and did not arrange for them to hear those things which others on hearing were benefited by—wishing to refute their defense as not being reasonable, gives these very things which those who fault His governance demanded:

such things, on seeing and hearing which the sin of those who, after such great and such kind [wonders], did not believe, is convicted as heavier and more grievous.

Now let us look also concerning the saying 'So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.'

For those who lay hold of it say:

'If it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy, then to be saved is not from what lies within our power, but from a constitution that has come about from the One who so constituted [us], or from the choice of Him who shows mercy whenever He wills.'

Is willing the noble things noble or base? And is running, in one's will to attain the end by hastening toward the noble things, praiseworthy or blameworthy? For if they will say it is blameworthy, they will answer contrary to plain fact, since the saints also will and run, and clearly in this do nothing blameworthy;

but if they will say that willing the noble things and running toward the noble things is noble, we shall ask how the perishing nature wills the better things;

for it would be, as it were, an evil tree bearing good fruits, if indeed to will the better things is noble.

But thirdly they will say that willing the noble things and running toward the noble things is among the indifferent [middle] things, and neither excellent nor base.

And against this it must be said that, if willing the noble things and running toward the noble things is indifferent, then its contrary is also indifferent—that is, willing the evil things and running toward the evil things.

But willing the evil things and running toward the evil things is surely not indifferent;

therefore willing the noble things and running toward the noble things is not indifferent.

Such a defense, then, I think we are able to furnish toward the saying 'So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.'

Solomon says in the Book of Psalms (for the Song of Ascents is his, from which we shall set down the words):

'Unless the Lord builds the house, they who build it labor in vain;

unless the Lord guards the city, in vain has the watchman kept watch'—not turning us away from building, nor teaching us not to keep awake to guard the city in our soul, but setting forth that things built apart from God and not obtaining His guarding are built in vain and kept fruitlessly, the Lord God being reasonably inscribed as Lord of the building and the Master of all as Ruler of the city's watch.

[If we say] that this building is the work not of the builder but of God, and that the keeping of this city unharmed by enemies is not the achievement of the watchman but of the God over all, we shall not err—it being understood that something has come about through the man too, while the manly achievement is thankfully referred to God who brings to perfection;

thus, since the human willing does not suffice for attaining the end, nor the running of those who are, as it were, athletes for laying hold of the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus (for these things are accomplished with God working alongside), it is rightly said, 'It is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.'

As if, in the case of farming too—which is also written—it were said:

'I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase;

so then neither he who plants is anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase'; and we would not say piously that the fruits' having become full is the work of the farmer or the work of the one who watered, but the work of God;

so also our perfecting does not come about with our having done nothing, yet is not completed from ourselves, but God effects the greater part of it.

And that this may be more clearly believed to be what is meant, we shall take the illustration from the art of navigation.

For in relation to the blowing of the winds and the temperateness of the air and the brightness of the stars, all working together for the safety of those who sail, what fraction would the navigator's art be said to have in the safe return to the harbor? Since not even the navigators themselves, out of piety, often dare to acknowledge that they have saved the ship, but refer the whole to God—not because they have done nothing, but because that which comes from providence is exceedingly many times greater than that which comes from the art.

At any rate, the [share] of safety that comes from God is exceedingly many times greater than that which comes from what lies within our power.

Wherefore I think it is said, 'It is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.'

For if, as those people suppose, we must take 'It is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy' [in that way], then the commandments are superfluous, and Paul himself in vain blames some as having fallen away and approves others as having succeeded, and lays down rules for the churches;

and we give ourselves over in vain to willing the better things, [though indeed not also] to running.

But Paul does not in vain give this counsel and blame these and approve those, nor do we in vain give ourselves over to willing the better things and to hastening toward the things that excel.

Therefore those people have not rightly understood the matters touching this passage.

Besides these there was the saying 'both to will and to work is from God.'

If to will is from God and to work is from God, then even if we will evilly and work evilly, these too belong to us from God;

and if this is so, we are not possessed of free will.

And again, on the other hand, when we will the better things and work the things that excel, since both to will and to work are from God, it is not we who have done the things that excel, but we only seemed to, while God bestowed these;

so that in this respect too we are not possessed of free will.

And to this it must be said that the Apostle's wording does not say that to will the evil things is from God, or that to will the good things is from God, and likewise to work the better and the worse things, but [it speaks of] willing in general and working in general.

For just as we have from God our being living creatures and our being human, so also willing in general—as if one were to say also moving in general.

And just as, having through our being living creatures the power to move and, for example, to move these particular limbs, hands or feet, we would not reasonably say that we have from God this specific thing—namely, the moving toward striking or killing or carrying off what belongs to others—but we received the generic thing, moving, from God, while we ourselves use the moving toward the worse or toward the better;

so the working, insofar as we are living creatures, we have received from God, and the willing we received from the Creator, but we ourselves use the willing either toward the noblest things or toward the contrary, and likewise the working.

Further, against our being possessed of free will, the apostolic saying will seem to draw [the mind aside], where, raising an objection to himself, he says:

'So then He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

Why then does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will? Indeed, O man, who are you, you who answer back to God? Will the thing molded say to the one who molded it,

Why have you made me thus? Or has the potter no authority over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?' For someone will say:

'If, as the potter from the same lump makes some vessels for honor and others for dishonor, so God [makes] some for salvation and others for destruction, then being saved or perishing does not come about by reason of ourselves, nor are we possessed of free will.'

But it must be said to the one who so uses these texts: is he able to conceive of the Apostle as saying things that contradict himself? I do not think anyone will dare to say this.

If, then, the Apostle does not utter things contrary to himself, how, according to the one who has so understood [him], does he reasonably blame, finding fault with the man in Corinth who committed fornication, or those who had fallen away and not repented of the licentiousness and incontinence they had practiced? And how does he bless, as having done well, those whom he praises—such as the household of Onesiphorus—saying:

'May the Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chain, but when he was in Rome he sought me out diligently and found me;

may the Lord grant him to find mercy from the Lord in that day'? It is not [consistent], according to the same Apostle, to censure the sinner as deserving of blame and to approve as praiseworthy the one who has done well, and then again to assert, as though nothing lay within our power, that it is by reason of the Creator's agency that one is a vessel for honor and another for dishonor.

...[according to what the deeds] of the body [it has done], whether good or evil, is sound—those who have done evil things having come to this kind of conduct because they were created vessels of dishonor, and those who have lived virtuously, because they were from the beginning fashioned for this and became vessels of honor, having done the good? And further, how does it not contradict the saying elsewhere—that, as they suppose from the texts we have set down, it is by reason of the Creator's agency that a vessel is honorable or dishonorable—namely:

'In a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, and some for honor and some for dishonor.

If, then, anyone cleanses himself, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful to the Master, prepared for every good work'? For if he who cleanses himself becomes a vessel for honor, and he who has overlooked his own uncleansed state [becomes] a vessel for dishonor, then, so far as these expressions go, the Creator is in no way the cause.

For the Creator makes vessels of honor and vessels of dishonor, not from the beginning according to foreknowledge, since He does not according to it pre-condemn or pre-justify, but [makes] vessels of honor of those who have cleansed themselves and vessels of dishonor of those who have overlooked their own uncleansed state;

so that it is from prior causes of the fashioning of the vessels for honor and for dishonor that one comes to be for honor and another for dishonor.

But if we once admit that there are certain prior causes of the vessel of honor and the vessel of dishonor, what absurdity is there, ascending to the topic concerning the soul, in conceiving prior causes for Jacob's having been loved and Esau's having been hated—prior, in Jacob's case, to his embodiment, and in Esau's case, to his coming into Rebecca's womb? And at the same time it is clearly shown that, so far as concerns the underlying nature—just as one clay underlies the potter, from which lump come vessels for honor and for dishonor—so, since one nature underlies God as that of every soul and, so to speak, there is one lump of the rational subsistences, certain prior causes brought it about that these should be for honor and those for dishonor.

But if the Apostle's wording rebukes—the wording that says:

'Indeed, O man, who are you, you who answer back to God?'—perhaps it teaches that the one who has boldness toward God, and is faithful and has lived well, would not hear:

'Who are you, you who answer back to God?'—such as Moses was;

for Moses spoke, and God answered him with a voice;

and as God answers Moses, so also the holy one answers God.

But he who has not acquired this boldness—plainly either having lost it, or inquiring about these things not in a love of learning but in a love of contention, and for this reason saying:

'Why then does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?'—this one would be deserving of the rebuke that says:

'Indeed, O man, who are you, you who answer back to God?' .. But to those who introduce the [fixed] natures and use the text, these things must be said.

If they maintain that those who perish and those who are saved come about from one lump, and that the Creator of those who are saved is also Creator of those who perish, and that He who makes not only spiritual but also earthy beings is good (for this follows for them), then it is surely possible for one who, from certain prior good deeds, is now a vessel of honor, but has not done things like and consequent to the vessel of honor, to become in another age a vessel of dishonor;

as again it is possible for one who, through prior causes of this present life, has here become a vessel of dishonor, when set right in the new creation, to become a vessel of honor, sanctified and useful to the Master, prepared for every good work.

And perhaps the present Israelites, not having lived worthily of their noble birth, will fall away from their race, as it were changing from vessels of honor into a vessel of dishonor;

and many of the present Egyptians and Idumeans, having come over to Israel, when they bear fruit more abundantly, will enter into the assembly of the Lord, no longer reckoned to be Egyptians and Idumeans but becoming Israelites;

[so that] some advance toward better things, while others fall down from better things to worse, and others are kept in the noble things or ascend from noble things to better, while yet others remain in the evil things, or, as wickedness pours forth, become worse from evil things.

<...> .. But since in one place the Apostle does not lay claim to the [matter] resting with God for one to become a vessel for honor or for dishonor, but refers the whole to us, saying:

'If, then, anyone cleanses himself, he will be a vessel for honor, sanctified and useful to the Master, prepared for every good work'; while in another place he does not lay claim to what lies within us, but seems to refer the whole to God, saying:

'The potter has authority over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honor and another for dishonor'—and the things said by him are not contradictions—we must bring both together and render from both one perfect account:

neither does what lies within us [accomplish anything] apart from the knowledge of God, nor does the knowledge of God compel us to advance, unless we too contribute something toward the good; nor, apart from the knowledge of God and the [proper] employment of what lies within us according to desert, does what lies within us bring it about that someone becomes for honor or for dishonor; nor does that which rests with God alone fashion someone for honor or for dishonor, unless it has as a kind of material of distinction our own free choice, inclining toward the better things or toward the worse.

And let these things, then, have been adequately set forth by us concerning free will.

On the inspiration of the divine Scripture. — Since, in examining matters of such importance, not being content with the common notions and the plain evidence of things seen, we take in addition, for the demonstration that appears to us of the things being said, testimonies from what we believe to be the divine Scriptures—both the so-called Old Testament and the so-called New—and by reasoning we attempt to confirm our faith, and we have not yet discussed the Scriptures as divine;

come, let us also treat of these matters briefly, as in a summary, setting forth the things that move us [to regard them] as divine writings.

And first, indeed, to make use of the very writings and the things declared in them in plain words, the following points must be discussed concerning Moses and Jesus Christ, the lawgiver of the Hebrews and the introducer of the saving doctrines according to Christianity.

For though very many lawgivers have arisen among Greeks and barbarians, and teachers proclaiming doctrines that profess truth, we have recorded no lawgiver who has been able to implant zeal in the remaining nations for accepting his words;

and though those who profess to philosophize about truth have brought in much apparatus together with seeming logical demonstration, no one has been able to implant the truth he held in different nations, or in considerable multitudes of even a single nation.

And yet the lawgivers would have wished to make the laws that appeared to be good prevail, if possible, among the whole human race, and the teachers to spread everywhere over the inhabited world what they imagined to be the truth.

But, as being unable to summon those of other tongues and of the many nations to the keeping of the laws and the reception of the teachings, they did not even attempt this at the outset, having not unwisely considered that such a thing was impossible for them.

But all Greece and barbarian land throughout our inhabited world has countless zealots who have left their ancestral laws and reputed gods for the keeping of the laws of Moses and the discipleship of the words of Jesus Christ;

and that though those who attach themselves to the law of Moses are hated by the worshipers of images, and those who have received the word of Jesus Christ are, besides being hated, in danger of death.

And although the teachers were not numerous, that it should be proclaimed everywhere in the inhabited world, so that Greeks and barbarians, wise and foolish, attached themselves to the worship of God through Jesus—that the matter is greater than what accords with man we shall not hesitate to say, since Jesus taught with all authority and persuasiveness concerning the prevailing of His word;

so that one might reasonably regard His sayings as oracles—such as, that 'You shall be brought before kings and governors for My sake, for a testimony to them and to the nations,' and 'Many will say to Me in that day:

Lord, Lord, did we not eat in Your name and drink in Your name and cast out demons in Your name? And I will declare to them:

Depart from Me, you who work lawlessness; I never knew you.'

For to have uttered these things in vain, so that they should not come true, was perhaps likely;

but when the things spoken with such great authority have come to pass, it shows that God truly became man and delivered to men doctrines of salvation.

And what need is there to say also that it was prophesied [that Christ would come], that then the rulers and leaders called 'of Judah' and 'from his loins' would fail, when He should come for whom it is laid up—namely, the kingdom—and the expectation of the nations should arrive? For it is plainly clear from history and from the things seen today that from the times of Jesus there have no longer been kings reigning over the Jews, all the Jewish institutions in which they took pride being abolished—I mean those concerning the temple and the altar and the worship performed and the garments of the high priest.

For the prophecy was fulfilled that says:

'Many days the children of Israel shall sit without a king and without a ruler, without sacrifice and without altar and without priesthood and without manifest signs.'

And we use these texts against those who, in their affliction [distress in argument], allege, on the basis of the things said by Jacob to Judah in Genesis, that the ethnarch—being of the tribe of Judah—rules the people, and that those of his seed will not fail until the coming of the Christ they imagine.

For if the children of Israel shall sit many days without a king and without a ruler, without sacrifice and without altar and without priesthood and without manifest signs—and since the temple was razed there is no sacrifice nor altar nor priesthood—it is clear that the ruler from Judah and the leader from his loins has failed.

But since the prophecy says:

'The ruler shall not fail from Judah, nor the leader from his loins, until there come the things laid up for him'—it is clear that He has come for whom the things are laid up, the expectation of the nations.

And this is plain from the multitude of the nations who through Christ have believed in God.

And in the Song of Deuteronomy too there is prophetically shown the election of the foolish nations, [an election] that would come about because of the sins of the former people, brought about by none other than Jesus.

'For they,' He says, 'provoked Me to jealousy with what is no god, they angered Me with their idols;

and I will provoke them to jealousy with what is no nation, with a foolish nation I will anger them.'

And it is very plainly possible to grasp in what way the Hebrews, said to have provoked God to jealousy with what is no god and to have angered Him with their idols, were provoked to jealousy at what is no nation, the foolish nation which God chose through the coming of Christ Jesus and His disciples.

We see, then, our calling, that not many are wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many of noble birth;

but God chose the foolish things of the world, that He might put to shame the wise, and God chose the base things and the despised things and the things that are not, that He might bring to nothing the things that formerly were, so that no Israel according to the flesh (called by the Apostle 'flesh') might boast before God.

And what need is there to speak of the prophecies in the Psalms concerning Christ—a certain song being inscribed 'concerning the beloved,' whose tongue is said to be 'the pen of a ready writer'?

'Grace was poured out upon His lips'; for proof of the grace poured out upon His lips is the fact that, though but a little time of His teaching had elapsed (for He taught about a year and a few months), the inhabited world was filled with His teaching and with the worship of God through Him.

For in His days righteousness arose and abundance of peace, remaining until the consummation, which is called 'the taking away of the moon';

and He remains, holding dominion from sea to sea and from the rivers to the ends of the inhabited world.

And a sign was given to the house of David:

'For the virgin [conceived and] was with child and bore a son, and His name is Immanuel,' which is 'God with us.'

It has been fulfilled, as the same prophet says:

'Know, O nations, and be conquered; you who are strong, be conquered.'

For we who are of the nations have been conquered and vanquished, taken captive by the grace of His word.

But also the place of His birth was foretold in Micah:

'And you,' He says, 'Bethlehem, land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;

for out of you shall come forth a leader, who shall shepherd My people Israel.'

And the seventy weeks were fulfilled up to Christ the leader, according to Daniel.

And He came, according to Job, the One who subdued the great sea-monster and gave authority to His genuine disciples to tread upon serpents and scorpions and upon all the power of the enemy, they being in no way harmed by them.

And let someone attend also to the journeying everywhere of the apostles who were sent by Jesus to proclaim the gospel, and he will see both that the daring was beyond what accords with man and that the success was divine.