Apologetics -- History -- Early church, ca. 30-600; Celsus (Platonic philosopher), active 180; Theology -- History -- Early Church, ca. 30-600
first indeed with small offences, but who have poured out wickedness to
such a degree, and attained such proficiency in evil, that in the
measure of their wickedness they are equal even to the opposing powers:
and again, if, by means of many severe administrations of punishment,
they are able at some future time to recover their senses, and gradually
attempt to find healing for their wounds, they may, on ceasing from
their wickedness, be restored to a state of goodness. Whence we are of
opinion that, seeing the soul, as we have frequently said, is immortal
and eternal, it is possible that, in the many and endless periods of
duration in the immeasurable and different worlds, it may descend from
the highest good to the lowest evil, or be restored from the lowest evil
to the highest good.
FROM THE GREEK.
21. And at the same time, it is clearly shown that, as far as regards
the underlying nature,[589] as there is one [piece of] clay which is
under the hands of the potter, from which piece vessels are formed unto
honour and dishonour; so the one nature of every soul being in the hands
of God, and, so to speak, there being [only] one lump of reasonable
beings,[590] certain causes of more ancient date led to some being
created vessels unto honour, and others vessels unto dishonour. But if
the language of the apostle convey a censure when he says, “Nay but, O
man, who art thou that repliest against God?” it teaches us that he who
has confidence before God, and is faithful, and has lived virtuously,
would not hear the words, “Who art thou that repliest against God?” Such
an one, _e.g._, as Moses was, “For Moses spake, and God answered him
with a voice;”[591] and as God answers Moses, so does a saint also
answer God. But he who does not possess this confidence, manifestly,
either because he has lost it, or because he investigates these matters
not from a love of knowledge, but from a desire to find fault,[592] and
who therefore says, “Why does He yet find fault? for who hath resisted
His will?” would merit the language of censure, which says, “Nay but, O
man, who art thou that repliest against God?” Now to those who introduce
different natures, and who make use of the declaration of the apostle
[to support their view], the following must be our answer. If they
maintain[593] that those who perish and those who are saved are formed
of one lump, and that the Creator of those who are saved is the Creator
also of them who are lost, and if He is good who creates not only
spiritual but also earthy [natures] (for this follows from their view),
it is nevertheless possible that he who, in consequence of certain
former acts of righteousness,[594] had now been made a vessel of honour,
but who had not [afterwards] acted in a similar manner, nor done things
befitting a vessel of honour, was converted in another world into a
vessel of dishonour; as, on the other hand, it is possible that he who,
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account