On the Resurrection — Fragments of Lost Works

Rusticus. Upon being brought before the tribunal, the prefect Rusticus said to Justin: "Come, be obedient to the gods themselves, and to the edicts of the emperors." Justin answered them: "No one can ever be blamed or condemned for having obeyed the precepts of our Savior Jesus Christ." Then the prefect Rusticus said: "In what sort of learning and disciplines are you versed?" Justin replied: "I have endeavored to learn every kind of discipline, and have gained experience in all erudition. Finally, I have adhered to the true discipline of the Christians, although it does not please those who are led by the error of false opinion." Then Rusticus said: "Are you delighted by that learning, you wretched man?" "Indeed," said Justin, "because I follow the Christians with the right dogma." But the prefect asked: "What is this dogma?" Justin answered: "The right dogma which we Christians piously observe, which is this: that we believe in one God, the maker and creator of all things that are seen and that are not discerned by bodily eyes; and we confess the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was long ago foretold by the prophets, who is also to come as a judge of the human race, a herald and teacher of salvation to those who have learned well from Him. I, indeed, being a man, am weak and far too small to be able to say anything great concerning His infinite Deity; I confess that this is the task of the prophets. For they divinely foretold, many ages before, the coming into the world of this very one whom I have said is the Son of God."

II. The prefect asked in what place the Christians met. To whom Justin replied that each one met where he wished and was able. "Do you imagine," he said, "that we all are accustomed to meet in the same place?" "The matter is not so," he continued, "for the God of the Christians is not circumscribed by place; but being invisible, He fills heaven and earth, and is worshipped and glorified everywhere by the faithful." Then the prefect said: "Come, tell me where you meet, or into what place you assemble your disciples." Justin answered: "I have until now stayed near the house of a certain Martin, by the bath known as the Timiotinum. I have come to the city of Rome for the second time, and I know no other place than the one I have mentioned. And if anyone wished to come to me, I have shared with him the doctrine of truth." "Are you therefore a Christian?" asked Rusticus. But Justin ^D replied: "Yes, I am a Christian."

III. Then the prefect said to Chariton: "And are you..."

a Christian?" Chariton said: "I am a Christian ^A by the command of God." The prefect Rusticus said to Charito: "What do you say, Charito?" Charito said: "I am a Christian by the gift of God." Rusticus said to Evelpistus: "And who are you?" Evelpistus, a servant of Caesar, answered: "I too am a Christian, having been set free by Christ, and I participate by the grace of Christ in the same hope." The prefect Rusticus said to Hierax: "And are you a Christian?" Hierax said: "Yes, I am a Christian, for I serve and adore the same God." The prefect Rusticus said: "Did Justin make you Christians?" Hierax said: "I was a Christian, and I shall be." Then Paeon stood up and said: "I too am a Christian." The prefect Rusticus said: "Who taught you?" Paeon said: "From our parents we received this good confession." Evelpistus said: "I heard the words of Justin with pleasure. But from my parents I also learned to be a Christian." The prefect Rusticus said: "Where are your parents?" Evelpistus said: "In Cappadocia." The prefect ^B said to Hierax: "Where are your parents?" And he answered saying: "Our true father is Christ, and our mother is the faith in him; but my earthly parents are dead. And I, having been dragged from Iconium of Phrygia, have come hither." The prefect Rusticus said to Liberianus: "What, do you too say that you are a Christian? And are you not pious?" Liberianus said: "I too am a Christian; for I am pious and I adore the only true God."

IV. The prefect said to Justin: "Listen, you who are called a learned man, and think that you know true doctrines; if you are scourged and beheaded, are you persuaded that you will ascend into heaven?" Justin said: "I hope to possess his doctrines, if I endure these things. For I know that for all who have lived thus there remains the divine favor until the consummation of the whole world." ^C The prefect Rusticus said: "Then you suppose that you will ascend into the heavens to receive some recompense?" Justin said: "I do not suppose it, but I know and am fully persuaded." The prefect Rusticus said: "Let us come, then, to the matter at hand which is urgent. Assemble together with one accord and sacrifice to the gods." Justin said: "No one who is ^D of sound mind falls from piety into impiety."

thoroughly correct, abandons piety, so that it falls into error and impiety. The Prefect Rusticus said: Unless you choose to obey our orders, you will suffer torments without any mercy. Justin, however, said: It is our greatest wish to suffer torments for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ and be saved; for this will procure for us salvation and confidence before the terrible tribunal of that same Lord and Savior, to which the whole world shall stand by divine command. The same was said by all the remaining martyrs, adding this: ^A Prefect Rusticus said: If you do not obey, you will be punished mercilessly. Justin said: We have it as our prayer that, having been punished, we might be saved for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ; for this will bring us salvation and boldness before the more terrible and universal tribunal of our Master and Savior. Likewise, the remaining martyrs also said: Do what you will; for we are Christians, and we do not sacrifice to idols.

V. Hearing these things, the prefect pronounced such a sentence: Those who have not wished to sacrifice to the gods and to yield to the emperor's command are to be scourged and led away to suffer the capital penalty, as the laws require. Thus the holy martyrs, glorifying God and having been led away to the usual place, were beheaded and completed their martyrdom in the confession of the Savior. But certain of the faithful, having secretly taken their bodies, buried them in a suitable place, through the cooperation of the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom is the glory for ever and ever. Amen. ^B Prefect Rusticus declared, saying: Those who have not wished to sacrifice to the gods and to yield to the command of the emperor are to be scourged and led away to pay the penalty of beheading in accordance with the sequence of the laws. The holy martyrs, glorifying God, having gone out to the usual place, were beheaded, and they completed their testimony in the confession of the Savior. But some of the faithful, having secretly taken their bodies, laid them in a suitable place, the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ having cooperated with them, to whom is the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Mart., p. 24. Thus also holy Felicity, p. 26: "I can neither be swayed by your blandishments, nor broken by your terrors." And one of her sons, by name Felix: "Let blows threaten, let bloody designs stand: our faith can neither be vanquished nor changed." Cyprian to the proconsul Paternus: "A good will, which has known God, cannot be changed." Pliny testifies in his letter to Trajan, lib. x, ep. 97, that he had dismissed several who, being accused of being Christians, had invoked the gods, and had supplicated the image of the emperor and the statues of the gods with incense and wine, and had cursed Christ, of whom it is said that it is impossible to force those who are truly Christians: "Therefore, I thought they should be released." ^C ...to be saved by suffering. For this will be our salvation and confidence before that terrible tribunal of our Lord and Savior, to which the whole world will stand. Similarly, the remaining martyrs also said: Do what you wish; for we are Christians and we do not sacrifice to idols.

FRAGMENTS OF THE LOST WORKS OF ST. JUSTIN

ΤΟΥ ΑΓΙΟΥ ΙΟΥΣΤΙΝΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΦΙΛΟΣΟΦΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΜΑΡΤΥΡΟΣ ΕΚ ΤΟΥ ΠΕΡΙ ΑΝΑΣΤΑΣΕΩΣ

OF SAINT JUSTIN PHILOSOPHER AND MARTYR FROM THE BOOK ON THE RESURRECTION

1. The discourse of truth is free and its own master, and does not wish to fall under any test of argument, nor to sustain an examination by proof before its hearers. ^D For its nobility and its confidence in Him who sent it desire that faith be placed in Him. Therefore its freedom is not arrogant. For because it is sent with power, 1. The discourse of truth is free and autonomous, not wishing to fall under any torture of proof, nor to undergo an examination by demonstration before those who hear. For its nobility and its confidence desire that trust be placed in the One who sent it. The word of truth is sent from God; wherefore it is also free

^A from being burdensome regarding Himself. For since He is carried by authority, it naturally follows that He does not wish for proofs of what is said to be demanded; because there are no other [proofs] apart from the truth itself, which is God. For every proof turns out to be stronger and more worthy of belief than that which is being proven; for if the thing that was previously disbelieved, before the proof arrived, has now, upon the arrival of that proof, attained belief and appeared as it was said to be, [then the proof is superior]. But there is nothing stronger or more worthy of belief than the truth; so that he who asks for a proof of this is like one who wishes that things appearing to the senses should be proven by arguments, on the ground that they appear. For the criterion of things grasped by reason is sense perception; but there is no criterion for sense perception itself except itself. Just as, therefore, we conduct things hunted by reason to sense perception, and by this we judge what sort of things they should happen to be—whether the things said are true or false—and we judge no further, but have trust in the sense; so too we refer human and worldly ^B arguments to the truth, and by it we judge whether they happen to be base or not. But we judge the things of the truth by nothing else, trusting in it. And the truth is God, the Father of all, who is a perfect mind. Whose Son, the Word, came to us, bearing flesh, revealing both Himself and the Father, giving us in Himself the resurrection from the dead and the life thereafter eternal. And this is Jesus Christ our Savior and Lord. This One, therefore, is himself the faith and the proof ^C of Himself and of all things. Wherefore those who follow Him, having known Him, having the faith in Him as a proof, will find rest in Him. And since the adversary does not cease warring against many, but uses many and various methods for his plotting—against those who have believed, that he may turn them away from the faith, and against those still faithless, that they may not believe—it seems to me necessary that we also, armed with the discourses of the faith which are invincible, should war against him in return for the sake of the weak.

II. Regarding the Resurrection of the Flesh

II. Those who profess the worse view say that there is no resurrection of the flesh. For they say it is impossible that that which has been corrupted and dissolved into small pieces should be gathered together into the same state. For ^D they assert that its salvation is both impossible and disadvantageous, and they accuse it, bringing forward its defects, and pronounce it to be the sole cause of sins, so that, if the flesh is to rise again, they say, its defects will also rise again.

^A They weave such sophistries: If the flesh rises again, it will either rise whole and with all its parts, or defective. But if it is to rise defective, this demonstrates the impotence of God, in that He was able to save some parts but not others; but if it is to have all its parts, it will clearly have its limbs as well. To say that such things exist after the resurrection from the dead, how is it not absurd, since the Savior has said, They neither marry nor are given in marriage, but shall be as the angels in heaven? But the angels, they say, have neither flesh, nor do they eat, nor do they have intercourse; therefore, there will be no resurrection of the flesh. These, then, and similar things they assert, attempting to distort those who are of the faith. There are some ^B who also say that Jesus himself was present only as a spirit, and no longer in the flesh, but that he displayed an appearance of flesh; attempting, they too, to deprive the flesh of the promise. First, therefore, let us resolve what seems to them to be inexplicable; then, thus, in order, we shall introduce the argument concerning the flesh, which demonstrates that it is not excluded from salvation.

III. Therefore they say: If the body rises whole and receives all its members, it is necessary that the functions of the members also exist: for the uterus to conceive, and for the male member to emit seed, and similarly for the rest. But let this argument be suspended on one example. For if that is shown to be false, their whole argument will collapse. It is manifest that the members which function perform the acts we see here. But that they are compelled to perform these from the beginning, is by no means necessary. To make this clear, let us consider the matter thus. ^C The function of the uterus is to conceive, and of the male member to emit seed. But just as, even if they are to have such perfections, it is not therefore necessary that they operate from the beginning (for we see many women who do not conceive, such as the barren, even though they have uteri), so it is not immediately necessary that she who has a uterus should conceive; but even those who are not barren from the beginning have practiced virginity and abstained from intercourse, while others have done so from a certain time. Likewise, men ^D who from the beginning have lived lives of virginity, we see, and others from a certain time; so that by themselves they frustrate the...

^A unlawful marriage of desire. Moreover, we find certain animals that are barren, although they possess wombs, such as the mule; and male mules likewise do not beget. Thus, we see that by men, as well as by irrational creatures, intercourse is brought to naught even before the coming world is seen. Our Lord Jesus Christ also was born of a virgin for no other reason than that He might do away with the generation of unlawful desire, and show to the prince [of this world] that ^B even without human intercourse it is possible for God to form a human being. And having been born, and having lived the rest of His bodily life—I mean in food, and drink, and clothing—He did not practice this one thing alone which occurs through intercourse, but those desires of the flesh which are necessary He accepted, while those which are not necessary He did not admit. For flesh, if deprived of food, and drink, and clothing, is itself destroyed; but if it is deprived of intercourse permitted by law, it suffers no evil at all. At the same time, He also foretold ^C that the union which occurs through intercourse is to be brought to naught in the future world, as He says: "The sons of this world marry and are given in marriage, but the sons of the future world neither marry nor are given in marriage, but shall be as the angels in heaven." Let not those, therefore, who are outside the faith be amazed if the flesh, which is even now being brought to naught from such works, He shall also bring to naught in the future world.

IV. "Yes," they say, "if, therefore, the flesh rises again, it rises again such as it lay down; so that if one is buried ^D with one eye, he is to rise again with one eye; if lame, lame; if any other part of the body should be lacking, the man shall also rise again in such a lesser state." O truly blinded eyes of the heart! For have they not seen upon the earth blind men receiving sight, and lame men walking, by the word of Him? All these things the Savior did, first that what was spoken through the prophets concerning Him might be fulfilled, that "the blind see, and the deaf hear," and the like; and furthermore, for the sake of faith, that the flesh indeed will rise again in the resurrection. For if upon the earth He healed the infirmities of the flesh and rendered the body whole, how much more will He do this in the resurrection, so that the flesh may rise again both sound and whole? Thus, therefore, shall those things which seem to them incurable be healed.

V. Moreover, of those who say that the flesh does not rise again, some say it is impossible for it to rise, others...

say that in the beginning it was not promised a resurrection. ^A First, therefore, it seems to me necessary to discourse against those who say that it is impossible for God to raise the flesh, because they are unaware that, while they profess to be believers by word, they demonstrate by their deeds that they are unbelievers, and more unbelieving than the unbelievers themselves. For since all the nations have believed in their idols and are persuaded that all things are possible for them—just as Homer, their poet, said: "The gods can do all things, and easily" (he added the word 'easily' to declare the magnitude of the power of the gods)—many of them appear more faithless than these. For if the nations believe ^B that it is possible for their idols, their gods—which have ears and do not hear, and have eyes and do not see—to do all things, being demons, just as the Scripture says, "The gods of the nations are demons," how much more ought we, who hold to a right and excellent and true faith, to believe in our God, seeing that we have proofs? And, first of all, the generation of the protoplast, that he was made from the earth by God; for this is a clear proof of God's power. Then, indeed, one may consider and marvel even more at the generation which subsequently occurs from both, how from the smallest drop of moisture ^C such an animal is formed. And, in truth, even if this were only contained in a promise and were not seen to occur, it would be much more incredible than other things; but the result renders it more credible. Yet, indeed, concerning the resurrection, the Savior has shown us the effects, which we shall mention a little later. But now we are demonstrating that the resurrection of the flesh is possible, asking pardon from the children of the Church if we use reasons that appear extraneous and worldly: first, because nothing is outside of God, not even the world itself, for it is His work; ^D and second, because we are addressing these discourses to the unbelieving. For if we were speaking to believers, it would be enough to say that we have believed; but now it is necessary to proceed by proofs. Therefore, although the arguments already produced were sufficiently suitable for demonstrating that the resurrection of the flesh is possible, yet, on account of their excessive unbelief, I shall employ an argument which is more urgent, not indeed derived from faith—from which they are strangers—but from the mother of their unbelief, I mean, from worldly reasons. For if we demonstrate to them from these that the resurrection of the flesh is possible, they are surely worthy of great shame if they can follow neither the things that are of faith nor the things of the world.

^A The so-called physical philosophers of this world say that the universe consists, for some—like Plato—of matter and God; for others—like Epicurus—of atoms and void; and for others—like the Stoics—of the four elements: fire, water, air, and earth. It is sufficient to mention the most prevalent opinions. Plato says that all things were made from matter by God and according to his providence; Epicurus and his followers, that they come from the atom and void by some accidental movement of the natural motion of bodies; and the Stoics, that they come from the four elements, with God pervading through them.

Given such disagreement among them, there are certain common doctrines acknowledged by all: first, that nothing comes into being from what is not, nor is it dissolved and destroyed into what is not; and second, that the elements from which the generation of each thing comes to be are incorruptible. Since matters stand thus, it will appear to all of them that the resurrection of the flesh is possible. ^B For whether, according to Plato, there exist matter and God, both of which are incorruptible—with God holding the place of an artisan, such as a sculptor, and matter holding the place of clay, or wax, or something similar—the work made from matter, such as a statue or image, is subject to corruption, but the matter itself, such as clay, or wax, or another such kind of matter, is incorruptible. Thus, a sculptor fashions from wax or clay and brings to life the form of a living creature; and again, if the work is dissolved, it is not impossible for him, having mixed the same matter and renewed it, to make the same work again. Therefore, according to Plato, neither for God—who is incorruptible and possesses matter that is incorruptible—will it be impossible, after the work made from it has been dissolved, to renew it and restore the same work, such as it was before.

^C But also according to the Stoics, since the body is produced from the mixture of the four elements, and since this is dissolved into the four while these remain incorruptible, it is possible for the four elements again, having received the same mixture and tempering from God who pervades them, to make the body that he had made before; just as if someone were to make a mixture from gold, and silver, and bronze, and tin, and then wished to dissolve it again so that each might exist separately, and then wished again to mix them, he would make the same mixture from them that he had made before. ^D And also according to Epicurus, since the atoms and the void are incorruptible, both other compounds and the body are formed by the atoms being put together in a certain order and position; and when it is dissolved by time, it is dissolved again into the atoms from which it came to be. Since these remain incorruptible, it is not impossible that, having come

together again and having taken the same position and order, they should constitute the body that was made from them, the same and similar to it; just as if a mosaic worker were to make the shape of an animal from tiles, and then, after these had been dissolved by time or by the maker himself, he were to gather up the same tiles that were scattered, it would not be impossible for him, once they were collected and arranged similarly as before, to represent the same animal form. But will God, by gathering together the members of the flesh that have been dissolved from one another, not be able to make a body the same as that which He had made before? ^A

VII. Now, that the resurrection of the flesh is possible has been sufficiently demonstrated by me against the unbelievers. But if, even according to the opinion of the unbelievers, the resurrection of the flesh is not found to be impossible, how much more so is it according to the believers? Next, furthermore, the discourse must be turned toward those who defame the flesh and say that it is not worthy of the resurrection, nor of the heavenly city; first, because its substance is earth, and then because it is full of sins, so that it compels the soul also to sin along with it. But these men seem to be ignorant of the entire operation of God, and the first creation and formation of man, and the things in the world for whose sake they were made. For does not Scripture say: "Let us make man according to our image and likeness"? Whom? He evidently means the fleshly man. For Scripture says: "And God took dust from the earth and formed man." It is clear, therefore, that the man who was formed according to the image of God was fleshly. To this, how is it not absurd to say that the flesh, which was formed by God according to His own image, is vile and worth nothing? Yet it is sufficiently clear that the flesh is a precious possession in the sight of God, first because it was formed by Him—if indeed an image is precious to its sculptor and painter—and secondly, it is easy to learn this from the rest of the creation of the world. For that for whose sake the rest were made is, to the One who made it, the most precious of all. ^{B C}

VIII. "Certainly," they say, "but the flesh is sinful, so much so that it compels the soul also to sin with it." They blame it rashly and ascribe the sins of both to it alone. For in what way will the flesh sin by itself, unless it has the soul leading and provoking it? For just like a yoke of oxen, if one be separated from the other, neither of them can plow by itself; so too, neither soul nor body, once the bond of their union is dissolved, can do anything individually. But if the flesh alone is sinful, for its sake alone, therefore, did the Savior come, as He says: "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." Since, then, it has been shown that the flesh is dear to God and precious above all works, ^D

it will justly be saved by Him. We must, therefore, reply to those who say that, although it is indeed the work of God and precious to Him above all else, it does not for that reason have the promise of the resurrection. ^A Yet how is it not absurd that a thing which has been made with such great care, and is precious beyond all other things, should be disregarded by its Maker, so that it no longer exists? Furthermore, if a molder and a painter wish the statues and paintings which they have made to remain so that they may be glorified through them, and if they renew them when they are decaying, would God disregard His own possession and work, allowing it to pass into non-existence, and to be no longer, and should we call Him one who labors in vain? ^B If someone, having built a house, should then destroy it, or disregard it while it is being destroyed, though he had the power to restore it, would we not blame God for laboring in vain? But such is not the Incorruptible One; the Mind of the universe is not foolish. Let the unbelievers be silenced, if they have not the faith themselves. But indeed, He has also called it to the resurrection, and promises it eternal life. For where He brings the glad tidings to man to save him, He brings them to the flesh as well. ^C For what is man, but a rational animal consisting of soul and body? Is the soul by itself man? By no means; it is the soul of a man. Should the body, then, be called man? Not at all; it is called the body of a man. If, therefore, neither of these is by itself man, but that which is composed of the union of both is called man, and God has called man to life and resurrection, He has called not a part, but the whole, which is the soul and the body. Since, how is it not absurd that, while both exist at the same time and in the same state, He should save the one and not the other? And since it has been shown that it is not impossible for the flesh to have the regeneration, what is the distinction ^D such that the soul is saved, but the flesh is not? Or do they make God envious? But He is good, and desires all to be saved. And through Him and His preaching, not only did our soul hear, along with the flesh, and believe in Christ Jesus, but both were washed, and both wrought righteousness. Do they, then, declare God to be ungrateful or unjust, if, when both believe in Him, He would save only one, or does He...

^A desire to save the one, but not the other? Yes, they say; but the soul is incorruptible, being a part of God and an inspiration, and for this reason He desired to save that which is His own and kindred; but the flesh is corruptible, and not from Him, as the soul is. Then what grace is there for Him, and what demonstration of His power and kindness, if He were going to save that which is by nature saved and exists as a part of Him? For it had its salvation from itself; so that in saving the soul, He does no great thing. For salvation is present to it, because it is a part of Him, being His inspiration. But there is no grace for Him in saving that which is His own; for this is to save Himself. For he who saves a part of himself saves himself by himself, lest that part should become lacking; such a thing is not of a good man. For no one will call a man good who does a kindness to his own children and descendants. For even the most fierce of beasts do this; and if it be necessary to die for their offspring, they willingly endure it. But if one should provide the same for his slaves, he might justly be called good. For this reason the Saviour also taught us to love our enemies; for what grace is there for us, He says? Thus He has shown us that it is a good work not only to love those born of oneself, but also those who are outside. And what He has commanded us, He does Himself long before.

And after a few words:

IX. If He had no need of the flesh for any purpose, why did He even heal it? And what is stronger than all, He raised the dead. For what reason? Was it not to show what the resurrection was going to be? How, then, did He raise the dead? Whether [did He raise] the souls or the bodies? But it is clear that [He raised] both. But if ^B the resurrection were only spiritual, it would have been necessary for Him, rising again, to show the body lying apart, and the soul existing apart. But now He did not do this, but He raised the body, confirming in it the promise of life. For what reason, then, did He rise in the flesh which had suffered, if not to show the resurrection of the flesh? And wishing to confirm this, when His disciples did not believe that He had truly risen in the body, but saw Him and doubted, He said to them: ^C You have no faith yet, He says; see that I am ^D

He. And He permitted them to touch Him, and He showed them the prints of the nails in His hands. And when they had considered Him on all sides, that it is He, and that He is in the body, they besought Him to eat with them, that even through this they might know most certainly that He had truly risen ^A in the body. And He ate a honeycomb and a fish. And having thus shown them that there is truly a resurrection of the flesh, wishing to show also this—as He said that our habitation is in heaven—that it is not impossible for flesh also to ascend into heaven, He was taken up, while they looked on, into heaven, as He was in the flesh. Wherefore, if anyone after all these things that have been said demands demonstrative arguments concerning the resurrection, he differs in no way from the Sadducees, since the resurrection of the flesh is a power of God and is above all reason, established indeed by faith, but perceived by works.

And after a little:

X. The resurrection is of the flesh which has fallen. For the spirit does not fall; the soul is in the body, and that which is without a soul does not live. The body, when the soul departs, is not. For the body is the house of the soul, and the soul is the house of the spirit. These three will be saved in those who have a sincere hope and an undoubting faith in God. Since we consider even worldly arguments, and find according to them that the regeneration of the flesh is not impossible, and besides all this that the Savior throughout the whole Gospel declares the salvation of our flesh: why then do we endure the words of unbelievers and those that cause stumbling, and why do we catch ourselves turning ^C backward, when we hear that the soul is immortal, but the body is corruptible and no longer able to live again? For these things we heard even before we knew the truth, from Pythagoras and Plato. If, therefore, the Savior said these things and proclaimed the salvation of the soul alone, what new thing did He bring us beyond Pythagoras and Plato and their chorus? But now He has come, proclaiming a new and strange hope to men. And it was a strange and new thing for God to promise that He would not keep incorruption for incorruption, but would give incorruption to corruption. But since the prince of wickedness could not otherwise corrupt the doctrine, he sent forth his apostles, introducing evil and pestilential teachings, having chosen them from those who had crucified our Savior; they bore the name of the Savior, but they did the works of him who had sent them, ^D because of whom blasphemy has followed even the name. But if the flesh does not rise, why is it also kept, and why do we not rather allow it to indulge in its desires? And why do we not imitate the physicians, as they say, who, when they have a person despaired of, and who cannot be saved, permit him to indulge his own desires? They know

as one who is to perish; which indeed those who hate the flesh certainly do, and, as far as in them lies, cast it out from the inheritance; for this reason they treat it even as a future corpse with contempt. But if our physician, Christ the God, weaning us from our desires, prescribes for our flesh a temperate and continent mode of life, it is manifest that he does this in order to guard it, as having the hope of salvation, from sins; just as physicians do not allow men who have the hope of salvation to serve their pleasures.

OTHER FRAGMENTS

^B II. (VII.) From Tatian’s *Oration against the Greeks*, n. 18. The most admirable Justin correctly declared the aforementioned (demons) to be like robbers.

^B III. (II.) From Irenaeus’s book IV *Against Heresies*, chap. 6. And well does Justin say in the book which is against Marcion: "For I would not have believed the Lord himself, had he announced any other God besides our Creator and Maker and Nourisher." But since from the one God, who both made this world and fashioned us, and contains and administers all things, the only-begotten Son came to us, recapitulating his own handiwork in himself; firm is my faith towards him, and immovable my love towards the Father: both being bestowed upon us by God.

^C IV. (III.) 596 From the same Irenaeus’s book V, chap. 26. Well did Justin say: "That before the coming of the Lord, Satan never dared to blaspheme God; for he did not yet know his own condemnation," since it had been spoken of him in parables and allegories by the prophets. But after the coming of the Lord, learning from the discourses of Christ and his apostles, he knows clearly that eternal fire is prepared for him who departs from God of his own will, and for all who without repentance persevere in apostasy; through such a man he blasphemes that God who brings judgment, as if he were already condemned, and imputes the sin of his apostasy to his Creator, and not to his own will and judgment.

^C V. (IV.) From the book of John the Patriarch of Antioch, whose title is *Selection of chapters collected from various books*. Reg. Cod. 873. Setting forth the reason why the devil does not cease to lay snares for us, he says: "Before the coming of the Lord ^D he did not so much produce blasphemers against the Creator with many schemes, that is, through all the heretics who have been mentioned." That is a remarkable error, "Wherefore God attributed to him the same form and appellation." For God did not curse Satan under the name of a serpent because Satan thought he was hidden; but rather Satan thought he was hidden because God attributed the same form and appellation to Satan as to the serpent—that is, he designated Satan under the form and appellation of the serpent. It seems, therefore, that this was the word *di* (because) in the context, which, since it can signify "because" and "wherefore," the interpreter less aptly fastened upon the latter. Now these words prove the testimony of Justin taken from the same book against Marcion: "Through such a man," namely Marcion, "he blasphemes that God," etc.

The devil did not clearly know the power of his own punishment, ^A because the divine prophets had spoken of it only enigmatically, just as Isaiah, putting on the mask of the Assyrian, revealed the entire plot of the devil's condemnation in a tragic manner. But after the Lord came, and the devil sensed that the eternal fire had been clearly laid up and prepared for him and his angels, he did not cease to conspire against the faithful, wishing to have many associates in his apostasy, so that he might not endure the ignominy of condemnation alone, soothing himself with this cold and envious consolation.

VI. (VIII.) From the book of Methodius *On the Resurrection*, in Photius, codex 294.

Justin of Neapolis, a man neither far removed in time from the apostles nor in virtue, says: "That which is mortal is to be inherited, but that which ^B lives is to inherit," and he says that the flesh dies, but the kingdom of heaven lives.

VII. (XXIII.) From the Coislinian codex 276.

Neither is there narrowness with God, nor is anything not absolute in its numbers.

From the *Parallels* of St. John Damascene.

VIII. (X.) We do not harm God by ignoring him, but we deprive ourselves of his love.

IX. (XVIII.) The ignorance of the teacher brings ruin upon the disciples, and the negligence of the disciples brings danger to the teacher, especially when they are slothful through his lack of knowledge.

X. (XV.) The soul is hard to return to the good things from which it has fallen, and difficult to drag away from the evils to which it has become accustomed. If you had ever wished to blame yourself, by the remedy of repentance I might perhaps have cherished some good hopes for you; ^C but since you have utterly despised the fear of God, and have spat upon the very faith in Christ, it would have been better for you had you not been born from the womb.

"God does all things by measure and order, and nothing is without measure with him, because nothing is without number."

Of the holy Justin, philosopher and martyr, to the Greeks.

^A A'. By the two birds is signified Christ, both dead as man and living as God. He is compared to a bird because he is understood and said to be from above and from heaven. The living bird, after being dipped in the blood of the dead one, was then released; for in the crucified and dead temple, the living and divine Word was present, as a participant in the passion, and impassible as God.

B'. By that which was done over the living water, in which the wood and the hyssop and the scarlet were dipped, the bloody passion of Christ through the wood is signified, and the salvation of those who are sprinkled by spirit and water and blood is pointed out; so that the subject of the purification was not primarily about leprosy, but about the remission of sins, in order that leprosy might be understood as a parable of sin, and the things sacrificed as a parable of the things destined to be sacrificed for sins.

C'. For this reason, he consequently commanded that the scarlet be dipped into the water at the same time, prophesying of the flesh which no longer possesses natural defects. For this reason also there were two birds: one sacrificed over water, and one dipped into the blood and into the water, and released, just as has been said concerning the goats.

D'. The scapegoat fulfilled the type of Him who took upon himself the sins of men. But the two birds contained the single dispensation of God having become man. For He was wounded because of our iniquities, and He himself bore the sins of many, and was delivered up because of our iniquities.

XII. (IX.) From the book of Leontius against the Eutychians and Nestorians, in Grabius, *Spicileg.* tom. II, p. 172.

When God had fashioned man from the beginning, He made ^C those things that pertained to his nature depend upon his will, and made an experiment by one commandment. For He brought it about that if he kept this, he would obtain immortal life; if he did not keep it, the opposite. Thus, the man so created, when he looked immediately toward the violation of the commandment, received corruption naturally. But with corruption having acceded to his nature, it was necessary that He who wished to save should destroy the cause that brings about corruption. And this could not have happened otherwise, unless that which is life according to nature approached him who had received corruption, destroying the corruption, while for the future becoming…

that which had received it and keeping it immortal. For this reason, it was necessary for the Word to come to be in a body, so that He might deliver us from the natural corruption of death. For if, as you say, He had warded off our death by a mere nod, death would indeed not have approached because of His will; nevertheless, we would have been corruptible once again, carrying the corruption naturally within ourselves.

^A XIII. (XIV.) From the Parallels of St. John of Damascus, p. 369, in Grab. Spicileg., vol. II, no. 173. As it is inherent in all bodies created by God that they should have a shadow, so it is consistent for God, being just, to distribute to each according to his merit, both to those who have chosen good things and to those who have preferred to embrace vice.

XIV. (XXIV.) From cod. Barocc. which is a Catena on the Psalms, on those words of the 11th Psalm: “Let us break their bonds asunder.” In Grab. Spicileg. p. 174. He is not speaking of alien nations, but of the (people) conspiring with the nations, according to the saying of Jeremiah (ch. II, v. 19): “It is a bitter thing for you to have forsaken me, says the Lord your God, because from of old you have broken your yoke, and torn asunder your bonds, and said: I will not serve you, but I will go up to every high mountain and under every spreading tree, and there I will be poured out in my fornication.”

XV. (XI.) From cod. Barocc. 143, fol. 253, and the Parallels of St. John of Damascus, p. 557, Spicileg. p. 175. ^C Neither will light ever be darkness, as long as there is light; nor will the truth of our affairs ever be refuted by falsehood. For truth is that than which nothing can be stronger. Whoever is able to speak the truth and does not do so, shall be condemned by God.

XVI. From the seventh book of the Anagogical Contemplations on the Hexaemeron by Anastasius, cod. 139. Ms. in the Library of New College. Grab. Spicileg., p. 195. And the fact that it is not said on the seventh day, as it is on the other days, “And there was evening and there was morning, one day,” is an evident sign of the consummation which took place in it before it was ended, as the holy fathers say, and especially those around the holy Clement and Irenaeus, and Justin the martyr and philosopher, who, commenting most wisely upon the six of the number of the sixth day, says that the intelligent soul of man and his five senses are the six works of the sixth day. ^D Whence also, when he had discussed much concerning the sixth...

number, he says that all things created by God are divided in six ways: that is, into intellectual and immortal beings, such as the angels; into rational and mortal beings, such as men; into sensible and irrational beings, such as beasts, and birds, and fishes; into mobile and insensate beings—which proceed forth—such as the winds, the clouds, the waters, and the stars; into things that grow but do not move, such as trees; and into insensate and immovable beings, such as the mountains, the earth, and the like. For all the creatures of God, in heaven and on earth, fall under one of these six divisions and are bounded within them. ^B

XVII. (XII.) From the *Parallel* of St. John of Damascus, p. 363.

Sound doctrine does not enter into a hard and rebellious mind, but like something recoiling, it returns upon itself.

XVIII. (XIII.) Ibid., p. 398.

As health is the good of the body, so the knowledge of God is the good of the soul, being a kind of health of the soul, by which divine likeness is acquired.

XIX. (XIX.) XX. (XX.) In Antonius Melissa, Book I, Sermon 19. Spicileg., p. 197.

To succumb and give way to one's passions is the deepest servitude, just as to master them is the only freedom. The greatest good is not to sin; the second good is to be corrected by punishment; but he who remains unpunished while acting wickedly for a long time, him it is proper to consider the most unfortunate. ^C

XXI. (XXI.) In the same, Book II, chap. 6.

It is necessary for the horses yoked to a charioteer who lacks skill and possesses malice to be carried over precipices, just as it is for them, through skill and virtue, to be kept safe.

XXII. (XXII.) And chap. 43.

The end for the philosopher is to be assimilated to God insofar as it is possible.

XXIII. (XVII.) From the *Parallels* of St. John of Damascus, p. 754.

^D Of Saint Justin, philosopher and martyr, from the fifth part of his Apology. I do not think that being well consists in anything else, men, than living according to the precept of truth. But one cannot live well and according to truth unless we understand the nature of things.

XXIV. (XVI.) Ibid., p. 753.

They are truly ignorant that he who has approached the truth from error through true faith knows himself sincerely—not being mad with frenzy, as they say—but that he has been truly liberated from that unstable and variable corruption, governed by all sorts of varying error, through the simple and always uniformly holding truth.

FRAGMENTS FROM THE LOST BOOKS OF TATIAN AND ST. THEOPHILUS

In Clement of Alexandria Strom. III, page 460.

Ex libro De perfectione secundum Salvatorem.

In Excerptis ex Theodoto, apud eumdem Clementem, p. 806, col. 2.

Ex libro Origenis De oratione, num. 24.

Ex Clementis Alex. Strom. III, p. 460.

^D The rashness of those who twist the Scriptures to suit their own trifles is great; but I do not know if Tatian has surpassed them all in this kind. What Paul permits and approves, he says he forbids: that which he permits and approves for the reason that no handle may be given to the devil for tempting, he denies can be observed without serving the devil. For not only does he pervert the sentiment of the Apostle, but the very words themselves, which indeed we learn by other instances Tatian dared to do from Eusebius, Hist., lib. v, c. 29. For in place of that which is in Paul, "Lest Satan tempt you for your incontinency," Tatian read "because of Satan and incontinency." From this corrupted context he concludes that the Apostle, while he approves and permits the use of marriage so that service may be rendered to the devil and intemperance, in reality forbids that which he grants not without manifest irony.