32. Moreover, as to this
word which is written in the Gospel, “Ye are of your father the
devil,”1740
and so forth, we
say in brief that there is a
devil working in us, whose aim it has
been, in the
strength of his own will, to make us like himself.
For all the creatures that
God made, He made very good; and He gave to
every individual the sense of free-will, in accordance with which
standard He also instituted the
law of
judgment. To
sin is ours,
and that we
sin not is
God’s
gift, as our will is constituted to
choose either to
sin or not to
sin. And this you doubtless
understand well enough yourself, Manes; for you know that, although you
were to bring together all your
disciples and
admonish1741
| 1741
Reading commonens for communis ne. Communiens is
also suggested. |
them not to
commit any
transgression or do any
unrighteousness, every one of them
might still pass by the
law of
judgment. And certainly whosoever
will, may keep the
commandments; and whosoever shall
despise them, and
turn aside to what is contrary to them, shall yet without doubt have to
face this
law of
judgment. Hence also certain of the
angels,
refusing to submit themselves to the
commandment of
God,
resisted His will; and one of them indeed fell like a flash of
lightning1742
upon the
earth,
while others,
1743
| 1743 We
have another instance here of a characteristic opinion of the Jewish
rabbis adopted by a Christian father. This notion as to the
intercourse of the angels with the daughters of men was a current
interpretation among the Jews from the times of Philo and Josephus, and
was followed in whole or in part by Tertullian, Justin, Irenæus,
Clemens Alexandrinus, Athenagoras, Methodius, Cyprian, Lactantius,
etc. Consult the note in Migne; [also p. 131, note 2,
supra]. |
harassed by
the
dragon, sought their felicity in intercourse with the
daughters of
men,
1744
| 1744
We give the above as a possible rendering. Routh,
however, understands the matter otherwise. The text is,
“alii vero in felicitate hominum filiabus admisti a
dracone afflicti,” etc. Routh takes the phrase in
felicitate as ="adhuc in statu felici
existentes:” so that the sense would be, “others,
while they still abode in the blessed estate, had intercourse,”
etc. [Routh, R. S., vol. v. pp. 118–122.] |
and thus
brought on themselves the merited award of the
punishment of
eternal
fire. And that
angel who was cast down to
earth, finding no
further admittance into any of the
regions of
heaven, now flaunts about
among men, deceiving them, and luring them to become
transgressors like
himself, and even to this day he is an
adversary to the
commandments of
God. The example of his fall and
ruin, however, will not be
followed by all, inasmuch as to each is given
liberty of will.
For this reason also has he obtained the name of
devil, because
he has passed over from the heavenly places, and appeared on
earth as
the disparager of
God’s
commandment.
1745
| 1745
Archelaus seems here to assign a twofold etymology for the name
devil, deriving the Greek διάβολος,
accuser, from διαβάλλω, in its
two senses of trajicere and traducere, to cross over and
to slander. |
But because it was
God who first
gave the
commandment, the
Lord Jesus Himself said to the
devil,
“Get thee behind me,
Satan;”
1746
and, without doubt, to go behind
God is
the sign of being His
servant. And again He says, “Thou
shalt
worship the
Lord thy
God, and Him only shalt thou
serve.”
1747
Wherefore, as certain men were inclined to yield obedience to his
wishes, they were addressed in these terms by the Saviour:
“Ye are of your
father the
devil, and the
lusts of your
father ye
will do.”
1748
And,
in fine, when they are found to be actually doing his will, they are
thus addressed: “O generation of
vipers, who hath
warned
you to
flee from the
wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits
meet for repentance.”
1749
From all this, then, you ought to
see how weighty a matter it is for man to have
freedom of will.
However, let my antagonist here say whether there is a
judgment for the
godly and the
ungodly, or not.
Manes said: There is
a
judgment.
Archelaus said: I think that what
we
1750
| 1750 Reading
a nobis for the a vobis of the codex. |
have said
concerning the
devil contains no
small measure of reason as well as of
piety. For every creature, moreover, has its own order; and there
is one order for the human race, and another for
animals, and another
for
angels. Furthermore, there is but one only inconvertible
substance, the
divine substance,
eternal and
invisible, as is known to
all, and as is also borne out by this scripture: “No man
hath seen
God at any time,
save the only begotten Son, which is in the
bosom of the
Father.”
1751
All the other creatures,
consequently, are of necessity visible,—such as
heaven,
earth,
sea, men,
angels,
archangels. But if
God has not been seen by any
man at any time, what consubstantiality can there be between Him and
those creatures? Hence we hold that all things whatsoever have,
in their several positions, their own proper substances, according to
their proper order. You, on the other
hand, allege that every
living thing which moves is made of one,
1752
and you say that every object has
received like substance from
God, and that this substance is capable of
sinning and of being brought under the
judgment; and you are
unwilling
to accept the word which declares that the
devil was an
angel, and that
he fell in
transgression, and that he is not of the same substance with
God. Logically, you ought to do away with any allowance of the
doctrine of a
judgment, and that would make it clear which of us is in
error.
1753
| 1753 The
sense is obscure here. The text runs, “Interimere debes
judicii ratione ut quis nostrum fallat appareat.” Migne
proposes to read rationem, as if the idea intended was
this: That, consistently with his reasonings, Manes ought not to
admit the fact of a judgment, because the notions he has propounded on
the subject of men and angels are not reconcilable with such a
belief.—If this can be accepted as the probable meaning, then it
would seem that the use of the verb interimere may be due to the
fact that the Greek text gave ἀνᾶιρεῖν, between the
two senses of which—viz. to kill and to remove—the
translator did not correctly distinguish. Routh, however,
proposes to read interimi, taking it as equivalent to
condemnari, so that the idea might be = on all principles of
sound judgment you ought to be condemned, etc. |
If,
indeed, the
angel that has been
created by
God is incapable of falling
in
transgression, how can the
soul, as a part of
God, be capable of
sinning? But, again, if you say that there is a
judgment for
sinning souls, and if you hold also that these are of one substance
with
God; and if still, even although you maintain that they are of the
divine nature, you
affirm that, notwithstanding that fact, they do not
keep
1754
| 1754 The
codex reads simply, Dei servare mandata. We may adopt
either Dei non servare mandata, as above, or, Dei servare vel
non servare mandata, in reference to the freedom of will, and so =
they may or may not keep the commandments. |
the
commandments
of
God, then, even on such grounds, my argument will pass very
well,
1755
| 1755 The
codex has præcedit, for which procedit is
proposed. |
which avers that
the
devil fell first, on account of his failure to keep the
commandments of
God. He was not indeed of the substance of
God. And he fell, not so much to do hurt to the race of man, as
rather to be set at nought
1756
| 1756
Reading “læderet—illuderetur.” But might
it not rather be “læderet—illidertur,”
not to bruise, but rather to be bruised, etc.? |
by the same. For He “gave unto us
power to tread on
serpents and scorpions, and over all the strength of the
enemy.”
1757
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
