Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| The Divine Power Shown in Christ's Incarnation. Meaning of St. Paul's Phrase. Likeness of Sinful Flesh. No Docetism in It. Resurrection of Our Real Bodies. A Wide Chasm Made in the Epistle by Marcion's Erasure. When the Jews are Upbraided by the Apostle for Their Misconduct to God; Inasmuch as that God Was the Creator, a Proof is in Fact Given that St. Paul's God Was the Creator. The Precepts at the End of the Epistle, Which Marcion Allowed, Shown to Be in Exact Accordance with the Creator's Scriptures.
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Chapter XIV.—The
Divine Power Shown in Christ’s Incarnation. Meaning of St.
Paul’s Phrase. Likeness of Sinful Flesh. No Docetism in It.
Resurrection of Our Real Bodies. A Wide Chasm Made in the Epistle by
Marcion’s Erasure. When the Jews are Upbraided by the Apostle for
Their Misconduct to God; Inasmuch as that God Was the Creator, a Proof
is in Fact Given that St. Paul’s God Was the Creator. The
Precepts at the End of the Epistle, Which Marcion Allowed, Shown to Be
in Exact Accordance with the Creator’s Scriptures.
If the Father “sent His Son in the likeness
of sinful flesh,”5837
it must not
therefore be said that the flesh which He seemed to have was but a
phantom. For he in a previous verse ascribed sin to the flesh, and made
it out to be “the law of sin dwelling in his members,” and
“warring against the law of the mind.”5838
On this account, therefore, (does he mean to
say that) the Son was sent in the likeness of sinful flesh, that He
might redeem this sinful flesh by a like substance, even a fleshly one,
which bare a resemblance to sinful flesh, although it was itself free
from sin. Now this will be the very perfection of divine power to
effect the salvation (of man) in a nature like his own.5839
For it would be no great matter if the
Spirit of God remedied the flesh; but when a flesh, which is the very
copy5840
of the sinning substance—itself flesh
also—only without sin, (effects the remedy, then doubtless it is
a great thing). The likeness, therefore, will have
reference to the quality5841
of the sinfulness,
and not to any falsity5842
of the substance.
Because he would not have added the attribute
“sinful,”5843
| 5843 This vindication
of these terms of the apostle from Docetism is important. The
word which our A.V. has translated sinful is a stronger term in
the original. It is not the adjective ἁμαρτωλοῦ, but the
substantive ἁμαρτίας,
amounting to “flesh of sin,” i.e. (as Dean Alford
interprets it) “the flesh whose attribute and character is
sin.” “The words ἐν
ὁμοιώματι
σαρκὸς
ἁμαρτίας, De Wette
observes, appear almost to border on Docetism, but in reality contain a
perfectly true and consistent sentiment; σὰρξ
ἁμαρτίας; is flesh, or
human nature, possessed with sin.…The likeness, predicated in
Rom. viii. 3, must be referred not only to σάρξ, but also to the epithet
τῆς
ἁμαρτίας”
(Greek Testament, in loc.). | if he meant the
“likeness” to be so predicated of the substance as to deny
the verity thereof; in that case he would only have used the word
“flesh,” and omitted the “sinful.” But inasmuch
as he has put the two together, and said “sinful flesh,”
(or “flesh of sin,”)5844
he has both
affirmed the substance, that is, the flesh and referred the
likeness to the fault of the substance, that is, to its sin. But
even suppose5845
that the likeness
was predicated of the substance, the truth of the said substance will
not be thereby denied. Why then call the true substance
like? Because it is indeed true, only not of a seed of like
condition5846
with our own; but
true still, as being of a nature5847
| 5847 Censu: perhaps
“birth.” This word, which originally means the
censor’s registration, is by our author often used
for origo and natura, because in the registers
were inserted the birthdays and the parents’ names (Oehler). | not really
unlike ours.5848
| 5848 It is better that we
should give the original of this sentence. Its structure is
characteristically difficult, although the general sense, as Oehler
suggests, is clear enough: “Quia vera quidem, sed non ex
semine de statu simili (similis, Latinius and
Junius and Semler), sed vera de censu non vero
dissimili (dissimilis, the older reading and
Semler’s).” We add the note of Fr. Junius:
“The meaning is, that Christ’s flesh is true indeed, in
what they call the identity of its substance, although not of
its origin (ortus) and qualities—not
of its original, because not of a (father’s) seed, as in the case
of ourselves; not of qualities, because these have not in Him the like
condition which they have in us.” | And again, in
contrary things there is no likeness. Thus the likeness of flesh would
not be called spirit, because flesh is not susceptible of any
likeness to spirit; but it would be called phantom, if it seemed
to be that which it really was not. It is, however, called
likeness, since it is what it seems to be. Now it is (what it
seems to be), because it is on a par with the other thing (with which
it is compared).5849
| 5849 Dum alterius par
est. | But a phantom,
which is merely such and nothing else,5850
is
not a likeness. The apostle, however, himself here comes to our aid;
for, while explaining in what sense he would not have us
“live in the flesh,” although in the flesh—even by not
living in the works of the flesh5851
—he shows
that when he wrote the words, “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the
kingdom of God,”5852
it was not with the
view of condemning the substance (of the flesh), but the works thereof;
and because it is possible for these not to be committed by us whilst
we are still in the flesh, they will therefore be properly
chargeable,5853
| 5853 Non ad reatum
substantiæ sed ad conversationis pertinebunt. | not on the
substance of the flesh, but on its conduct. Likewise, if “the
body indeed is dead because of sin” (from which statement we see
that not the death of the soul is meant, but that of the body),
“but the spirit is life because of righteousness,”5854
it follows that this life accrues to
that which incurred death because of sin, that is, as we have just
seen, the body. Now the body5855
| 5855 Understand
“corpus” (Oehler). | is
only restored to him who had lost it; so that the resurrection of the
dead implies the resurrection of their bodies. He accordingly subjoins:
“He that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your
mortal bodies.”5856
In these words he
both affirmed the resurrection of the flesh (without which nothing can
rightly be called5857
| 5857 Dici capit:
capit, like the Greek ἐνδέχεται, means,
“is capable or susceptible;” often so in Tertullian. | body, nor can
anything be properly regarded as mortal), and proved the bodily
substance of Christ; inasmuch as our own mortal bodies will be
quickened in precisely the same way as He was raised; and that was in
no other way than in the body. I have here a very wide gulf of expunged
Scripture to leap across;5858
| 5858 We do not know from
either Tertullian or Epiphanius what mutilations Marcion made in this
epistle. This particular gap did not extend further than from
Rom. viii. 11 to x. 2. “However, we are informed by
Origen (or rather Rufinus in his edition of Origen’s commentary
on this epistle, on xiv. 23) that Marcion omitted the last two
chapters as spurious, ending this epistle of his Apostolicon
with the 23d verse of chap. xiv. It is also observable that Tertullian
quotes no passage from chaps. xv.; xvi. in his confutation of Marcion from this
epistle” (Lardner). | however, I alight
on the place where the apostle bears record of Israel “that they
have a zeal of God”—their own God, of
course—“but not according to knowledge. For,” says
he, “being ignorant of (the righteousness of) God, and going
about to establish their own righteousness, they have not submitted
themselves unto the righteousness of God; for Christ is the end of the
law for righteousness to every one that believeth.”5859
Hereupon we shall be confronted with an
argument of the heretic, that the Jews were ignorant of the superior
God,5860
| 5860 The god of the New
Testament, according to Marcion. | since, in opposition to him, they set up
their own righteousness—that is, the righteousness of their
law—not receiving Christ, the end (or finisher) of the law. But
how then is it that he bears testimony to their zeal for their own God,
if it is not in respect of the same God that he upbraids them for their
ignorance? They were affected indeed with zeal for God, but it
was not an intelligent zeal: they were, in fact, ignorant of Him,
because they were ignorant of His dispensations by Christ, who was to
bring about the consummation of the law; and in this way did they
maintain their own righteousness in opposition to Him. But so does the
Creator Himself testify to their ignorance concerning Him:
“Israel hath not known me; my people have not understood
me;”5861
and as to their
preferring the establishment of their own righteousness, (the Creator
again describes them as) “teaching for doctrines the commandments
of men;”5862
moreover, as
“having gathered themselves together against the Lord and against
His Christ”5863
—from
ignorance of Him, of course. Now nothing can be expounded of another
god which is applicable to the Creator; otherwise the apostle would not
have been just in reproaching the Jews with ignorance in respect of a
god of whom they knew nothing. For where had been their sin, if
they only maintained the righteousness of their own God against one of
whom they were ignorant? But he exclaims: “O the depth of the
riches and the wisdom of God; how unsearchable also are His
ways!”5864
Whence this
outburst of feeling? Surely from the recollection of the Scriptures,
which he had been previously turning over, as well as from his
contemplation of the mysteries which he had been setting forth above,
in relation to the faith of Christ coming from the law.5865
| 5865 In fidem Christi ex
lege venientem. By “the law” he means the Old Testament in
general, and probably refers to Rom. x. 17. | If Marcion had an object in his
erasures,5866
| 5866 Rigaltius (after
Fulvius Ursinus) read “non erasit,” but with
insufficient authority; besides, the context shows that he was
referring to the large erasure which he had already mentioned, so that
the non is inadmissible. Marcion must, of course, be
understood to have retained Rom. xi. 33; hence the argument in this
sentence. | why does his
apostle utter such an exclamation, because his god has no riches for
him to contemplate? So poor and indigent was he, that he created
nothing, predicted nothing—in short, possessed nothing; for it
was into the world of another God that he descended. The truth is, the
Creator’s resources and riches, which once had been hidden, were
now disclosed. For so had He promised: “I will give to them
treasures which have been hidden, and which men have not seen will I
open to them.”5867
Hence, then, came
the exclamation,
“O the depth of the riches and the wisdom of God!” For His
treasures were now opening out. This is the purport of what Isaiah
said, and of (the apostle’s own) subsequent quotation of the
self-same passage, of the prophet: “Who hath known the mind of
the Lord? or who hath been His counsellor? Who hath first given to Him,
and it shall be recompensed to him again?”5868
Now, (Marcion,) since you have expunged so
much from the Scriptures, why did you retain these words, as if they
too were not the Creator’s words? But come now, let us see
without mistake5869
the precepts of
your new god: “Abhor that which is evil, and cleave to that which
is good.”5870
Well, is the
precept different in the Creator’s teaching? “Take away the
evil from you, depart from it, and be doing good.”5871
Then again: “Be kindly
affectioned one to another with brotherly love.”5872
Now is not this of the same import as:
“Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self?”5873
(Again, your apostle says:) “Rejoicing
in hope;”5874
that is, of God.
So says the Creator’s Psalmist: “It is better
to hope in the Lord, than to hope even in princes.”5875
“Patient in
tribulation.”5876
You have (this in)
the Psalm: “The Lord hear thee in the day of
tribulation.”5877
“Bless, and
curse not,”5878
(says your
apostle.) But what better teacher of this will you find than Him who
created all things, and blessed them? “Mind not high things, but
condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own
conceits.”5879
For against such a
disposition Isaiah pronounces a woe.5880
“Recompense to no man evil for evil.”5881
(Like unto which is the Creator’s
precept:) “Thou shalt not remember thy brother’s evil
against thee.”5882
(Again:)
“Avenge not yourselves;”5883
for it is
written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the
Lord.”5884
“Live
peaceably with all men.”5885
The retaliation of
the law, therefore, permitted not retribution for an injury; it rather
repressed any attempt thereat by the fear of a recompense. Very
properly, then, did he sum up the entire teaching of the Creator in
this precept of His: “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself.”5886
Now, if this is the
recapitulation of the law from the very law itself, I am at a loss to
know who is the God of the law. I fear He must be Marcion’s god
(after all).5887
| 5887 Ironically said.
He has been quoting all along from Marcion’s text of St.
Paul, turning its testimony against Marcion. | If also the gospel
of Christ is fulfilled in this same precept, but not the
Creator’s Christ, what is the use of our contending any longer
whether Christ did or did not say, “I am not come to destroy the
law, but to fulfil it?”5888
In vain has (our
man of) Pontus laboured to deny this statement.5889
| 5889 For although he
rejected St. Matthew’s Gospel, which contains the statement, he
retained St. Paul’s epistle, from which the statement is clearly
proved. | If
the gospel has not fulfilled the law, then all I can say is,5890
the law has fulfilled the gospel. But it is
well that in a later verse he threatens us with “the
judgment-seat of Christ,”—the Judge, of course, and the
Avenger, and therefore the Creator’s (Christ). This
Creator, too, however much he may preach up another god, he
certainly sets forth for us as a Being to be served,5891
if he holds Him thus up as an object to be
feared.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
