Cloud of Witnesses
3 witnesses

Against Praxeas; Against Marcion; On Baptism; Apology

An Answer to the Jews.

Chapter I.—Occasion of Writing. Relative Position of Jews and Gentiles Illustrated.

It happened very recently a dispute was held between a Christian and a Jewish proselyte. Alternately with contentious cable they each spun out the day until evening. By the opposing din, moreover, of some partisans of the individuals, truth began to be overcast by a sort of cloud. It was therefore our pleasure that that which, owing to the confused noise of disputation, could be less fully elucidated point by point, should be more carefully looked into, and that the pen should determine, for reading purposes, the questions handled.

For the occasion, indeed, of claiming Divine grace even for the Gentiles derived a pre-eminent fitness from this fact, that the man who set up to vindicate God's Law as his own was of the Gentiles, and not a Jew "of the stock of the Israelites."1 For this fact—that Gentiles are admissible to God's Law—is enough to prevent Israel from priding himself on the notion that "the Gentiles are accounted as a little drop of a bucket," or else as "dust out of a threshing-floor:"2 although we have God Himself as an adequate engager and faithful promiser, in that He promised to Abraham that "in his seed should be blest all nations of the earth;"3 and that4 out of the womb of Rebecca "two peoples and two nations were about to proceed,"5 —of course those of the Jews, that is, of Israel; and of the Gentiles, that is ours. Each, then, was called a people and a nation; lest, from the nuncupative appellation, any should dare to claim for himself the privilege of grace. For God ordained "two peoples and two nations" as about to proceed out of the womb of one woman: nor did grace6 make distinction in the nuncupative appellation, but in the order of birth; to the effect that, which ever was to be prior in proceeding from the womb, should be subjected to "the less," that is, the posterior. For thus unto Rebecca did God speak: "Two nations are in thy womb, and two peoples shall be divided from thy bowels; and people shall overcome people, and the greater shall serve the less."7 Accordingly, since the people or nation of the Jews is anterior in time, and "greater" through the grace of primary favour in the Law, whereas ours is understood to be "less" in the age of times, as having in the last era of the world8 attained the knowledge of divine mercy: beyond doubt, through the edict of the divine utterance, the prior and "greater" people—that is, the Jewish—must necessarily serve the "less;" and the "less" people—that is, the Christian—overcome the "greater." For, withal, according to the memorial records of the divine Scriptures, the people of the Jews—that is, the more ancient—quite forsook God, and did degrading service to idols, and, abandoning the Divinity, was surrendered to images; while "the people" said to Aaron, "Make us gods to go before us."9 And when the gold out of the necklaces of the women and the rings of the men had been wholly smelted by fire, and there had come forth a calf-like head, to this figment Israel with one consent (abandoning God) gave honour, saying, "These are the gods who brought us from the land of Egypt."10 For thus, in the later times in which kings were governing them, did they again, in conjunction with Jeroboam, worship golden kine, and groves, and enslave themselves to Baal.11 Whence is proved that they have ever been depicted, out of the volume of the divine Scriptures, as guilty of the crime of idolatry; whereas our "less"—that is, posterior—people, quitting the idols which formerly it used slavishly to serve, has been converted to the same God from whom Israel, as we have above related, had departed.12 For thus has the "less"—that is, posterior—people overcome the "greater people," while it attains the grace of divine favour, from which Israel has been divorced.

Chapter II.—The Law Anterior to Moses.

Stand we, therefore, foot to foot, and determine we the sum and substance of the actual question within definite lists.

For why should God, the founder of the universe, the Governor of the whole world,13 the Fashioner of humanity, the Sower14 of universal nations be believed to have given a law through Moses to one people, and not be said to have assigned it to all nations? For unless He had given it to all by no means would He have habitually permitted even proselytes out of the nations to have access to it. But—as is congruous with the goodness of God, and with His equity, as the Fashioner of mankind—He gave to all nations the selfsame law, which at definite and stated times He enjoined should be observed, when He willed, and through whom He willed, and as He willed. For in the beginning of the world He gave to Adam himself and Eve a law, that they were not to eat of the fruit of the tree planted in the midst of paradise; but that, if they did contrariwise, by death they were to die.15 Which law had continued enough for them, had it been kept. For in this law given to Adam we recognise in embryo16 all the precepts which afterwards sprouted forth when given through Moses; that is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God from thy whole heart and out of thy whole soul; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself;17 Thou shalt not kill; Thou shalt not commit adultery; Thou shalt not steal; False witness thou shalt not utter; Honour thy father and mother; and, That which is another's, shalt thou not covet. For the primordial law was given to Adam and Eve in paradise, as the womb of all the precepts of God. In short, if they had loved the Lord their God, they would not have contravened His precept; if they had habitually loved their neighbour—that is, themselves18 —they would not have believed the persuasion of the serpent, and thus would not have committed murder upon themselves,19 by falling20 from immortality, by contravening God's precept; from theft also they would have abstained, if they had not stealthily tasted of the fruit of the tree, nor had been anxious to skulk beneath a tree to escape the view of the Lord their God; nor would they have been made partners with the falsehood-asseverating devil, by believing him that they would be "like God;" and thus they would not have offended God either, as their Father, who had fashioned them from clay of the earth, as out of the womb of a mother; if they had not coveted another's, they would not have tasted of the unlawful fruit.

Therefore, in this general and primordial law of God, the observance of which, in the case of the tree's fruit, He had sanctioned, we recognise enclosed all the precepts specially of the posterior Law, which germinated when disclosed at their proper times. For the subsequent superinduction of a law is the work of the same Being who had before premised a precept; since it is His province withal subsequently to train, who had before resolved to form, righteous creatures. For what wonder if He extends a discipline who institutes it? if He advances who begins? In short, before the Law of Moses,21 written in stone-tables, I contend that there was a law unwritten, which was habitually understood naturally, and by the fathers was habitually kept. For whence was Noah "found righteous,"22 if in his case the righteousness of a natural law had not preceded? Whence was Abraham accounted "a friend of God,"23 if not on the ground of equity and righteousness, (in the observance) of a natural law? Whence was Melchizedek named "priest of the most high God,"24 if, before the priesthood of the Levitical law, there were not levites who were wont to offer sacrifices to God? For thus, after the above-mentioned patriarchs, was the Law given to Moses, at that (well-known) time after their exode from Egypt, after the interval and spaces of four hundred years. In fact, it was after Abraham's "four hundred and thirty years"25 that the Law was given. Whence we understand that God's law was anterior even to Moses, and was not first (given) in Horeb, nor in Sinai and in the desert, but was more ancient; (existing) first in paradise, subsequently reformed for the patriarchs, and so again for the Jews, at definite periods: so that we are not to give heed to Moses' Law as to the primitive law, but as to a subsequent, which at a definite period God has set forth to the Gentiles too and, after repeatedly promising so to do through the prophets, has reformed for the better; and has premonished that it should come to pass that, just as "the law was given through Moses"26 at a definite time, so it should be believed to have been temporarily observed and kept. And let us not annul this power which God has, which reforms the law's precepts answerably to the circumstances of the times, with a view to man's salvation. In fine, let him who contends that the Sabbath is still to be observed as a balm of salvation, and circumcision on the eighth day because of the threat of death, teach us that, for the time past, righteous men kept the Sabbath, or practised circumcision, and were thus rendered "friends of God." For if circumcision purges a man since God made Adam uncircumcised, why did He not circumcise him, even after his sinning, if circumcision purges? At all events, in settling him in paradise, He appointed one uncircumcised as colonist of paradise. Therefore, since God originated Adam uncircumcised, and inobservant of the Sabbath, consequently his offspring also, Abel, offering Him sacrifices, uncircumcised and inobservant of the Sabbath, was by Him commended; while He accepted27 what he was offering in simplicity of heart, and reprobated the sacrifice of his brother Cain, who was not rightly dividing what he was offering.28 Noah also, uncircumcised—yes, and inobservant of the Sabbath—God freed from the deluge.29 For Enoch, too, most righteous man, uncircumcised and inobservant of the Sabbath, He translated from this world;30 who did not first taste31 death, in order that, being a candidate for eternal life,32 he might by this time show us that we also may, without the burden of the law of Moses, please God. Melchizedek also, "the priest of the most high God," uncircumcised and inobservant of the Sabbath, was chosen to the priesthood of God.33 Lot, withal, the brother34 of Abraham, proves that it was for the merits of righteousness, without observance of the law, that he was freed from the conflagration of the Sodomites.35

Chapter III.—Of Circumcision and the Supercession of the Old Law.

But Abraham, (you say,) was circumcised. Yes, but he pleased God before his circumcision;36 nor yet did he observe the Sabbath. For he had "accepted"37 circumcision; but such as was to be for "a sign" of that time, not for a prerogative title to salvation. In fact, subsequent patriarchs were uncircumcised, like Melchizedek, who, uncircumcised, offered to Abraham himself, already circumcised, on his return from battle, bread and wine.38 "But again," (you say) "the son of Moses would upon one occasion have been choked by an angel, if Zipporah,39 had not circumcised the foreskin of the infant with a pebble; whence, "there is the greatest peril if any fail to circumcise the foreskin of his flesh." Nay, but if circumcision altogether brought salvation, even Moses himself, in the case of his own son, would not have omitted to circumcise him on the eighth day; whereas it is agreed that Zipporah did it on the journey, at the compulsion of the angel. Consider we, accordingly, that one single infant's compulsory circumcision cannot have prescribed to every people, and founded, as it were, a law for keeping this precept. For God, foreseeing that He was about to give this circumcision to the people of Israel for "a sign," not for salvation, urges the circumcision of the son of Moses, their future leader, for this reason; that, since He had begun, through him, to give the People the precept of circumcision, the people should not despise it, from seeing this example (of neglect) already exhibited conspicuously in their leader's son. For circumcision had to be given; but as "a sign," whence Israel in the last time would have to be distinguished, when, in accordance with their deserts, they should be prohibited from entering the holy city, as we see through the words of the prophets, saying, "Your land is desert; your cities utterly burnt with fire; your country, in your sight, strangers shall eat up; and, deserted and subverted by strange peoples, the daughter of Zion shall be derelict, like a shed in a vineyard, and like a watchhouse in a cucumber-field, and as it were a city which is being stormed."40 Why so? Because the subsequent discourse of the prophet reproaches them, saying, "Sons have I begotten and upraised, but they have reprobated me;"41 and again, "And if ye shall have outstretched hands, I will avert my face from you; and if ye shall have multiplied prayers, I will not hear you: for your hands are full of blood;"42 and again, "Woe! sinful nation; a people full of sins; wicked sons; ye have quite forsaken God, and have provoked unto indignation the Holy One of Israel."43 This, therefore, was God's foresight,—that of giving circumcision to Israel, for a sign whence they might be distinguished when the time should arrive wherein their above-mentioned deserts should prohibit their admission into Jerusalem: which circumstance, because it was to be, used to be announced; and, because we see it accomplished, is recognised by us. For, as the carnal circumcision, which was temporary, was in wrought for "a sign" in a contumacious people, so the spiritual has been given for salvation to an obedient people; while the prophet Jeremiah says, "Make a renewal for you, and sow not in thorns; be circumcised to God, and circumcise the foreskin of your heart:"44 and in another place he says, "Behold, days shall come, saith the Lord, and I will draw up, for the house of Judah and for the house of Jacob,45 a new testament; not such as I once gave their fathers in the day wherein I led them out from the land of Egypt."46 Whence we understand that the coming cessation of the former circumcision then given, and the coming procession of a new law (not such as He had already given to the fathers), are announced: just as Isaiah foretold, saying that in the last days the mount of the Lord and the house of God were to be manifest above the tops of the mounts: "And it shall be exalted," he says, "above the hills; and there shall come over it all nations; and many shall walk, and say, Come, ascend we unto the mount of the Lord, and unto the house of the God of Jacob,"47 —not of Esau, the former son, but of Jacob, the second; that is, of our "people," whose "mount" is Christ, "præcised without concisors' hands,48 filling every land," shown in the book of Daniel.49 In short, the coming procession of a new law out of this "house of the God of Jacob" Isaiah in the ensuing words announces, saying, "For from Zion shall go out a law, and the word of the Lord out of Jerusalem, and shall judge among the nations,"—that is, among us, who have been called out of the nations,—"and they shall join to beat their glaives into ploughs, and their lances into sickles; and nations shall not take up glaive against nation, and they shall no more learn to fight."50 Who else, therefore, are understood but we, who, fully taught by the new law, observe these practices,—the old law being obliterated, the coming of whose abolition the action itself51 demonstrates? For the wont of the old law was to avenge itself by the vengeance of the glaive, and to pluck out "eye for eye," and to inflict retaliatory revenge for injury.52 But the new law's wont was to point to clemency, and to convert to tranquillity the pristine ferocity of "glaives" and "lances," and to remodel the pristine execution of "war" upon the rivals and foes of the law into the pacific actions of "ploughing" and "tilling" the land.53 Therefore as we have shown above that the coming cessation of the old law and of the carnal circumcision was declared, so, too, the observance of the new law and the spiritual circumcision has shone out into the voluntary obediences54 of peace. For "a people," he says, "whom I knew not hath served me; in obedience of the ear it hath obeyed me."55 Prophets made the announcement. But what is the "people" which was ignorant of God, but ours, who in days bygone knew not God? and who, in the hearing of the ear, gave heed to Him, but we, who, forsaking idols, have been converted to God? For Israel—who had been known to God, and who had by Him been "upraised"56 in Egypt, and was transported through the Red Sea, and who in the desert, fed forty years with manna, was wrought to the semblance of eternity, and not contaminated with human passions,57 or fed on this world's58 meats, but fed on "angel's loaves"59 —the manna—and sufficiently bound to God by His benefits—forgot his Lord and God, saying to Aaron: "Make us gods, to go before us: for that Moses, who ejected us from the land of Egypt, hath quite forsaken us; and what hath befallen him we know not." And accordingly we, who "were not the people of God" in days bygone, have been made His people,60 by accepting the new law above mentioned, and the new circumcision before foretold.

Chapter IV.—Of the Observance of the Sabbath.

It follows, accordingly, that, in so far as the abolition of carnal circumcision and of the old law is demonstrated as having been consummated at its specific times, so also the observance of the Sabbath is demonstrated to have been temporary.

For the Jews say, that from the beginning God sanctified the seventh day, by resting on it from all His works which He made; and that thence it was, likewise, that Moses said to the People: "Remember the day of the sabbaths, to sanctify it: every servile work ye shall not do therein, except what pertaineth unto life."61 Whence we (Christians) understand that we still more ought to observe a sabbath from all "servile work"62 always, and not only every seventh day, but through all time. And through this arises the question for us, what sabbath God willed us to keep? For the Scriptures point to a sabbath eternal and a sabbath temporal. For Isaiah the prophet says, "Your sabbaths my soul hateth;"63 and in another place he says, "My sabbaths ye have profaned."64 Whence we discern that the temporal sabbath is human, and the eternal sabbath is accounted divine; concerning which He predicts through Isaiah: "And there shall be," He says, "month after month, and day after day, and sabbath after sabbath; and all flesh shall come to adore in Jerusalem, saith the Lord;"65 which we understand to have been fulfilled in the times of Christ, when "all flesh"—that is, every nation—"came to adore in Jerusalem" God the Father, through Jesus Christ His Son, as was predicted through the prophet: "Behold, proselytes through me shall go unto Thee."66 Thus, therefore, before this temporal sabbath, there was withal an eternal sabbath foreshown and foretold; just as before the carnal circumcision there was withal a spiritual circumcision foreshown. In short, let them teach us, as we have already premised, that Adam observed the sabbath; or that Abel, when offering to God a holy victim, pleased Him by a religious reverence for the sabbath; or that Enoch, when translated, had been a keeper of the sabbath; or that Noah the ark-builder observed, on account of the deluge, an immense sabbath; or that Abraham, in observance of the sabbath, offered Isaac his son; or that Melchizedek in his priesthood received the law of the sabbath.

But the Jews are sure to say, that ever since this precept was given through Moses, the observance has been binding. Manifest accordingly it is, that the precept was not eternal nor spiritual, but temporary,67 which would one day cease. In short, so true is it that it is not in the exemption from work of the sabbath—that is, of the seventh day—that the celebration of this solemnity is to consist, that Joshua the son of Nun, at the time that he was reducing the city Jericho by war, stated that he had received from God a precept to order the People that priests should carry the ark of the testament of God seven days, making the circuit of the city; and thus, when the seventh day's circuit had been performed, the walls of the city would spontaneously fall.68 Which was so done; and when the space of the seventh day was finished, just as was predicted, down fell the walls of the city. Whence it is manifestly shown, that in the number of the seven days there intervened a sabbath-day. For seven days, whencesoever they may have commenced, must necessarily include within them a sabbath-day; on which day not only must the priests have worked, but the city must have been made a prey by the edge of the sword by all the people of Israel. Nor is it doubtful that they "wrought servile work," when, in obedience to God's precept, they drave the preys of war. For in the times of the Maccabees, too, they did bravely in fighting on the sabbaths, and routed their foreign foes, and recalled the law of their fathers to the primitive style of life by fighting on the sabbaths.69 Nor should I think it was any other law which they thus vindicated, than the one in which they remembered the existence of the prescript touching "the day of the sabbaths."70

Whence it is manifest that the force of such precepts was temporary, and respected the necessity of present circumstances; and that it was not with a view to its observance in perpetuity that God formerly gave them such a law.

Chapter V.—Of Sacrifices.

So, again, we show that sacrifices of earthly oblations and of spiritual sacrifices71 were predicted; and, moreover, that from the beginning the earthly were foreshown, in the person of Cain, to be those of the "elder son," that is, of Israel; and the opposite sacrifices demonstrated to be those of the "younger son," Abel, that is, of our people. For the elder, Cain, offered gifts to God from the fruit of the earth; but the younger son, Abel, from the fruit of his ewes. "God had respect unto Abel, and unto his gifts; but unto Cain and unto his gifts He had not respect. And God said unto Cain, Why is thy countenance fallen? hast thou not—if thou offerest indeed aright, but dost not divide aright—sinned? Hold thy peace. For unto thee shalt thy conversion be and he shall lord it over thee. And then Cain said unto Abel his brother, Let us go into the field: and he went away with him thither, and he slew him. And then God said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: am I my brother's keeper? To whom God said, The voice of the blood of thy brother crieth forth unto me from the earth. Wherefore cursed is the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive the blood of thy brother. Groaning and trembling shalt thou be upon the earth, and every one who shall have found thee shall slay thee."72 From this proceeding we gather that the twofold sacrifices of "the peoples" were even from the very beginning foreshown. In short, when the sacerdotal law was being drawn up, through Moses, in Leviticus, we find it prescribed to the people of Israel that sacrifices should in no other place be offered to God than in the land of promise; which the Lord God was about to give to "the people" Israel and to their brethren, in order that, on Israel's introduction thither, there should there be celebrated sacrifices and holocausts, as well for sins as for souls; and nowhere else but in the holy land.73 Why, accordingly, does the Spirit afterwards predict, through the prophets, that it should come to pass that in every place and in every land there should be offered sacrifices to God? as He says through the angel Malachi, one of the twelve prophets: "I will not receive sacrifice from your hands; for from the rising sun unto the setting my Name hath been made famous among all the nations, saith the Lord Almighty: and in every place they offer clean sacrifices to my Name."74 Again, in the Psalms, David says: "Bring to God, ye countries of the nations"—undoubtedly because "unto every land" the preaching of the apostles had to "go out"75 —"bring to God fame and honour; bring to God the sacrifices of His name: take up76 victims and enter into His courts."77 For that it is not by earthly sacrifices, but by spiritual, that offering is to be made to God, we thus read, as it is written, An heart contribulate and humbled is a victim for God;"78 and elsewhere, "Sacrifice to God a sacrifice of praise, and render to the Highest thy vows."79 Thus, accordingly, the spiritual "sacrifices of praise" are pointed to, and "an heart contribulate" is demonstrated an acceptable sacrifice to God. And thus, as carnal sacrifices are understood to be reprobated—of which Isaiah withal speaks, saying, "To what end is the multitude of your sacrifices to me? saith the Lord"80 —so spiritual sacrifices are predicted81 as accepted, as the prophets announce. For, "even if ye shall have brought me," He says, "the finest wheat flour, it is a vain supplicatory gift: a thing execrable to me;" and again He says, "Your holocausts and sacrifices, and the fat of goats, and blood of bulls, I will not, not even if ye come to be seen by me: for who hath required these things from your hands?"82 for "from the rising sun unto the setting, my Name hath been made famous among all the nations, saith the Lord."83 But of the spiritual sacrifices He adds, saying, "And in every place they offer clean sacrifices to my Name, saith the Lord."84

Chapter VI.—Of the Abolition and the Abolisher of the Old Law.

Therefore, since it is manifest that a sabbath temporal was shown, and a sabbath eternal foretold; a circumcision carnal foretold, and a circumcision spiritual pre-indicated; a law temporal and a law eternal formally declared; sacrifices carnal and sacrifices spiritual foreshown; it follows that, after all these precepts had been given carnally, in time preceding, to the people Israel, there was to supervene a time whereat the precepts of the ancient Law and of the old ceremonies would cease, and the promise85 of the new law, and the recognition of spiritual sacrifices, and the promise of the New Testament, supervene;86 while the light from on high would beam upon us who were sitting in darkness, and were being detained in the shadow of death.87 And so there is incumbent on us a necessity88 binding us, since we have premised that a new law was predicted by the prophets, and that not such as had been already given to their fathers at the time when He led them forth from the land of Egypt,89 to show and prove, on the one hand, that that old Law has ceased, and on the other, that the promised new law is now in operation.

And, indeed, first we must inquire whether there be expected a giver of the new law, and an heir of the new testament, and a priest of the new sacrifices, and a purger of the new circumcision, and an observer of the eternal sabbath, to suppress the old law, and institute the new testament, and offer the new sacrifices, and repress the ancient ceremonies, and suppress90 the old circumcision together with its own sabbath,91 and announce the new kingdom which is not corruptible. Inquire, I say, we must, whether this giver of the new law, observer of the spiritual sabbath, priest of the eternal sacrifices, eternal ruler of the eternal kingdom, be come or no: that, if he is already come, service may have to be rendered him; if he is not yet come, he may have to be awaited, until by his advent it be manifest that the old Law's precepts are suppressed, and that the beginnings of the new law ought to arise. And, primarily, we must lay it down that the ancient Law and the prophets could not have ceased, unless He were come who was constantly announced, through the same Law and through the same prophets, as to come.

Chapter VII.—The Question Whether Christ Be Come Taken Up.

Therefore upon this issue plant we foot to foot, whether the Christ who was constantly announced as to come be already come, or whether His coming be yet a subject of hope. For proof of which question itself, the times likewise must be examined by us when the prophets announced that the Christ would come; that, if we succeed in recognising that He has come within the limits of those times, we may without doubt believe Him to be the very one whose future coming was ever the theme of prophetic song, upon whom we—the nations, to wit—were ever announced as destined to believe; and that, when it shall have been agreed that He is come, we may undoubtedly likewise believe that the new law has by Him been given, and not disavow the new testament in Him and through Him drawn up for us. For that Christ was to come we know that even the Jews do not attempt to disprove, inasmuch as it is to His advent that they are directing their hope. Nor need we inquire at more length concerning that matter, since in days bygone all the prophets have prophesied of it; as Isaiah: "Thus saith the Lord God to my Christ (the) Lord,92 whose right hand I have holden, that the nations may hear Him: the powers of kings will I burst asunder; I will open before Him the gates, and the cities shall not be closed to Him." Which very thing we see fulfilled. For whose right hand does God the Father hold but Christ's, His Son?—whom all nations have heard, that is, whom all nations have believed,—whose preachers, withal, the apostles, are pointed to in the Psalms of David: "Into the universal earth," says he, "is gone out their sound, and unto the ends of the earth their words."93 For upon whom else have the universal nations believed, but upon the Christ who is already come? For whom have the nations believed,—Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and they who inhabit Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia, Cappadocia, and they who dwell in Pontus, and Asia, and Pamphylia, tarriers in Egypt, and inhabiters of the region of Africa which is beyond Cyrene, Romans and sojourners, yes, and in Jerusalem Jews,94 and all other nations; as, for instance, by this time, the varied races of the Gætulians, and manifold confines of the Moors, all the limits of the Spains, and the diverse nations of the Gauls, and the haunts of the Britons—inaccessible to the Romans, but subjugated to Christ, and of the Sarmatians, and Dacians, and Germans, and Scythians, and of many remote nations, and of provinces and islands many, to us unknown, and which we can scarce enumerate? In all which places the name of the Christ who is already come reigns, as of Him before whom the gates of all cities have been opened, and to whom none are closed, before whom iron bars have been crumbled, and brazen gates95 opened. Although there be withal a spiritual sense to be affixed to these expressions,—that the hearts of individuals, blockaded in various ways by the devil, are unbarred by the faith of Christ,—still they have been evidently fulfilled, inasmuch as in all these places dwells the "people" of the Name of Christ. For who could have reigned over all nations but Christ, God's Son, who was ever announced as destined to reign over all to eternity? For if Solomon "reigned," why, it was within the confines of Judea merely: "from Beersheba unto Dan" the boundaries of his kingdom are marked.96 If, moreover, Darius "reigned" over the Babylonians and Parthians, he had not power over all nations; if Pharaoh, or whoever succeeded him in his hereditary kingdom, over the Egyptians, in that country merely did he possess his kingdom's dominion; if Nebuchadnezzar with his petty kings, "from India unto Ethiopia" he had his kingdom's boundaries;97 if Alexander the Macedonian he did not hold more than universal Asia, and other regions, after he had quite conquered them; if the Germans, to this day they are not suffered to cross their own limits; the Britons are shut within the circuit of their own ocean; the nations of the Moors, and the barbarism of the Gætulians, are blockaded by the Romans, lest they exceed the confines of their own regions. What shall I say of the Romans themselves,98 who fortify their own empire with garrisons of their own legions, nor can extend the might of their kingdom beyond these nations? But Christ's Name is extending everywhere, believed everywhere, worshipped by all the above-enumerated nations, reigning everywhere, adored everywhere, conferred equally everywhere upon all. No king, with Him, finds greater favour, no barbarian lesser joy; no dignities or pedigrees enjoy distinctions of merit; to all He is equal, to all King, to all Judge, to all "God and Lord."99 Nor would you hesitate to believe what we asseverate, since you see it taking place.

Notes

  1. Comp. Phil. iii. 5. ↩
  2. See Isa. xl. 15: "dust of the balance," Eng. Ver.; rhope zugou LXX. For the expression "dust out of a threshing-floor," however, see Ps. i. 4, Dan. ii. 35. ↩
  3. See Gen. xxii. 18; and comp. Gal. iii. 16, and the reference in both places. ↩
  4. This promise may be said to have been given "to Abraham," because (of course) he was still living at the time; as we see by comparing Gen. xxi. 5 with xxv. 7 and 26. See, too, Heb. xi. 9. ↩
  5. Or, "nor did He make, by grace, a distinction." ↩
  6. Or, "nor did He make, by grace, a distinction." ↩
  7. See Gen. xxv. 21-23, especially in the LXX.; and comp. Rom. ix. 10-13. ↩
  8. Sæculi. ↩
  9. Ex. xxxii. 1, 23; Acts vii. 39, 40. ↩
  10. Ex. xxxii. 4: comp. Acts vii. 38-41; 1 Cor. x. 7; Ps. cvi. 19-22. ↩
  11. Comp. 1 Kings xii. 25-33; 2 Kings xvii. 7-17 (in LXX. 3 and 4 Kings). The Eng. ver. speaks of "calves;" the LXX. call them "heifers." ↩
  12. Comp. 1 Thess. i. 9, 10. ↩
  13. Mundi. ↩
  14. Comp. Jer. xxxi. 27 (in LXX. it is xxxviii. 27); Hos. ii. 23; Zech. x. 9; Matt. xiii. 31-43. ↩
  15. See Gen. ii. 16, 17; iii. 2, 3. ↩
  16. Condita. ↩
  17. Deut. vi. 4, 5; Lev. xix. 18; comp. Matt. xxii. 34-40; Mark xii. 28-34; Luke x. 25-28; and for the rest, Ex. xx. 12-17; Deut. v. 16-21; Rom. xiii. 9. ↩
  18. Semetipsos.? Each other. ↩
  19. Semetipsos.? Each other. ↩
  20. Excidendo; or, perhaps, "by self-excision," or "mutual excision." ↩
  21. Or, "the Law written for Moses in stone-tables." ↩
  22. Gen. vi. 9; vii. 1; comp. Heb. xi. 7. ↩
  23. See Isa. xli. 8; Jas. ii. 23. ↩
  24. Gen. xiv. 18, Ps. cx. (cix. in. LXX.) 4; Heb. v. 10, vii. 1-3, 10, 15, 17. ↩
  25. Comp. Gen. xv. 13 with Ex. xii. 40-42 and Acts vii. 6. ↩
  26. John i. 17. ↩
  27. Or, "credited him with." ↩
  28. Gen. iv. 1-7, especially in the LXX.; comp. Heb. xi. 4. ↩
  29. Gen. vi. 18; vii. 23; 2 Pet. ii. 5. ↩
  30. See Gen. v. 22, 24; Heb. xi. 5. ↩
  31. Or, perhaps, "has not yet tasted." ↩
  32. Æternitatis candidatus. Comp. ad Ux. l. i. c. vii., and note 3 there. ↩
  33. See above. ↩
  34. i.e., nephew. See Gen. xi. 31; xii. 5. ↩
  35. See Gen. xix. 1-29; and comp. 2 Pet. ii. 6-9. ↩
  36. See Gen. xii.-xv. compared with xvii. and Rom. iv. ↩
  37. Acceperat. So Tertullian renders, as it appears to me, the elabe of St. Paul in Rom. iv. 11. q. v. ↩
  38. There is, if the text be genuine, some confusion here. Melchizedek does not appear to have been, in any sense, "subsequent" to Abraham, for he probably was senior to him; and, moreover, Abraham does not appear to have been "already circumcised" carnally when Melchizedek met him. Comp. Gen. xiv. with Gen. xvii. ↩
  39. Tertullian writes Seffora; the LXX. in loco, Sepphora Ex. iv. 24-26, where the Eng. ver. says, "the Lord met him," etc.; the LXX angelos Kuriou. ↩
  40. Isa. i. 7, 8. See c. xiii. sub fin. ↩
  41. Again an error; for these words precede the others. These are found in Isa. i. 2. ↩
  42. Isa. i. 15. ↩
  43. Isa. i. 4. ↩
  44. Jer. iv. 3, 4. In Eng. ver., "break up your fallow ground;" but comp. de Pu. c. vi. ad init. ↩
  45. So Tertullian. In Jer. ibid. "Israel and...Judah." ↩
  46. Jer. xxxi. 31, 32 (in LXX. ibid. xxxviii. 31, 32); comp. Heb. viii. 8-13. ↩
  47. Isa. ii. 2, 3. ↩
  48. Perhaps an allusion to Phil. iii. 1, 2. ↩
  49. See Dan. ii. 34, 35, 44, 45. See c. xiv. below. ↩
  50. Isa. ii. 3, 4. ↩
  51. i.e., of beating swords into ploughs, etc. ↩
  52. Comp. Ex. xxi. 24, 25; Lev. xxiv. 17-22; Deut. xix. 11-21; Matt. v. 38. ↩
  53. Especially spiritually. Comp. 1 Cor. iii. 6-9; ix. 9, 10, and similar passages. ↩
  54. Obsequia. See de Pa. c. iv. note 1. ↩
  55. See Ps. xviii. 43, 44 (xvii. 44, 45 in LXX.), where the Eng. ver. has the future; the LXX., like Tertullian, the past. Comp. 2 Sam. (in LXX. 2 Kings) xxii. 44, 45, and Rom. x. 14-17. ↩
  56. Comp. Isa. i. 2 as above, and Acts xiii. 17. ↩
  57. Sæculi. ↩
  58. Or, perhaps, "not affected, as a body, with human sufferings;" in allusion to such passages as Deut. viii. 4; xxix. 5; Neh. ix. 21. ↩
  59. Ps. lxxviii. (lxxvii. in LXX.) 25; comp. John vi. 31, 32. ↩
  60. See Hos. i. 10; 1 Pet. ii. 10. ↩
  61. Comp. Gal. v. 1; iv. 8, 9. ↩
  62. See Ex. xx. 8-11 and xii. 16 (especially in the LXX.). ↩
  63. Isa. i. 13. ↩
  64. This is not said by Isaiah; it is found in substance in Ezek. xxii. 8. ↩
  65. Isa. lxvi. 23 in LXX. ↩
  66. I am not acquainted with any such passage. Oehler refers to Isa. xlix. in his margin, but gives no verse, and omits to notice this passage of the present treatise in his index. ↩
  67. Or, "temporal." ↩
  68. Josh. vi. 1-20. ↩
  69. See 1 Macc. ii. 41, etc. ↩
  70. See Ex. xx. 8; Deut. v. 12, 15: in LXX. ↩
  71. This tautology is due to the author, not to the translator: "sacrificia...spiritalium sacrificiorum." ↩
  72. See Gen. iv. 2-14. But it is to be observed that the version given in our author differs widely in some particulars from the Heb. and the LXX. ↩
  73. See Lev. xvii. 1-9; Deut. xii. 1-26. ↩
  74. See Mal. i. 10, 11, in LXX. ↩
  75. Comp. Matt. xxviii. 19, 20, Mark xvi. 15, 16, Luke xxiv. 45-48, with Ps. xix. 4 (xviii. 5 in LXX.), as explained in Rom. x. 18. ↩
  76. Tollite = Gr. arate. Perhaps ="away with." ↩
  77. See Ps. xcvi. (xcv. in LXX.) 7, 8; and comp. xxix. (xxviii. in LXX.) 1, 2. ↩
  78. See Ps. li. 17 (in LXX. l. 19). ↩
  79. Ps. l. (xlix. in LXX.) 14. ↩
  80. Isa. i. 11. ↩
  81. Or, "foretold." ↩
  82. Comp. Isa. i. 11-14, especially in the LXX. ↩
  83. See Mal. i. as above. ↩
  84. See Mal. i. as above. ↩
  85. Or, "sending forth"—promissio. ↩
  86. The tautology is again due to the author. ↩
  87. Comp. Luke i. 78, 79, Isa. ix. 1, 2, with Matt. iv. 12-16. ↩
  88. Comp. 1 Cor. ix. 16. ↩
  89. See ch. iii. above. ↩
  90. Here again the repetition is the author's. ↩
  91. Cum suo sibi sabbato. Unless the meaning be—which the context seems to forbid—"together with a sabbath of His own:" the Latinity is plainly incorrect. ↩
  92. The reference is to Isa. xlv. 1. A glance at the LXX. will at once explain the difference between the reading of our author and the genuine reading. One letter—an "i"—makes all the difference. For Kuro has been read Kurio. In the Eng. ver. we read "His Anointed." ↩
  93. Ps. xix. 4 (xviii. 5. in LXX.) and Rom. x. 18. ↩
  94. See Acts ii. 9, 10; but comp. ver. 5. ↩
  95. See Isa. xlv. 1, 2 (especially in Lowth's version and the LXX.). ↩
  96. See 1 Kings iv. 25. (In the LXX. it is 3 Kings iv. 25; but the verse is omitted in Tischendorf's text, ed. Lips. 1860, though given in his footnotes there.) The statement in the text differs slightly from Oehler's reading; where I suspect there is a transposition of a syllable, and that for "in finibus Judæ tantum, a Bersabeæ," we ought to read "in finibus Judææ tantum, a Bersabe." See de Jej. c. ix. ↩
  97. See Esth. i. 1; viii. 9. ↩
  98. [Dr. Allix thinks these statements define the Empire after Severus, and hence accepts the date we have mentioned, for this treatise.] ↩
  99. Comp. John xx. 28. ↩
An Answer to the Jews. — Against Praxeas; Against Marcion; On Baptism; Apology · Tertullian · Cloud of Witnesses