Apologetics -- History -- Early church, ca. 30-600; Celsus (Platonic philosopher), active 180; Theology -- History -- Early Church, ca. 30-600
2. Now, of these opinions, let us first discuss that which is maintained
by some, that there is in us a good and heavenly soul, and another
earthly and inferior; and that the better soul is implanted within us
from heaven, such as was that which, while Jacob was still in the womb,
gave him the prize of victory in supplanting his brother Esau, and which
in the case of Jeremiah was sanctified from his birth, and in that of
John was filled by the Holy Spirit from the womb. Now, that which they
term the inferior soul is produced, they allege, along with the body
itself out of the seed of the body, whence they say it cannot live or
subsist beyond the body, on which account also they say it is frequently
termed flesh. For the expression, “The flesh lusteth against the
spirit,”[696] they take to be applicable not to the flesh, but to this
soul, which is properly the soul of the flesh. From these words,
moreover, they endeavour notwithstanding to make good the declaration in
Leviticus: “The life of all flesh is the blood thereof.”[697] For, from
the circumstance that it is the diffusion of the blood throughout the
whole flesh which produces life in the flesh, they assert that this
soul, which is said to be the life of all flesh, is contained in the
blood. This statement, moreover, that the flesh struggles against the
spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; and the further statement,
that “the life of all flesh is the blood thereof,” is, according to
these writers, simply calling the wisdom of the flesh by another name,
because it is a kind of material spirit, which is not subject to the law
of God, nor can be so, because it has earthly wishes and bodily desires.
And it is with respect to this that they think the apostle uttered the
words: “I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my
mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my
members.”[698] And if one were to object to them that these words were
spoken of the nature of the body, which indeed, agreeably to the
peculiarity of its nature, is dead, but is said to have sensibility, or
wisdom,[699] which is hostile to God, or which struggles against the
spirit; or if one were to say that, in a certain degree, the flesh
itself was possessed of a voice, which should cry out against the
endurance of hunger, or thirst, or cold, or of any discomfort arising
either from abundance or poverty,—they would endeavour to weaken and
impair the force of such [arguments], by showing that there were many
other mental perturbations[700] which derive their origin in no respect
from the flesh, and yet against which the spirit struggles, such as
ambition, avarice, emulation, envy, pride, and others like these; and
seeing that with these the human mind or spirit wages a kind of contest,
they lay down as the cause of all these evils, nothing else than this
corporal soul, as it were, of which we have spoken above, and which is
generated from the seed by a process of traducianism.
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