Anf-01 ix.iv.xiii Pg 8
Acts ii. 22–27.
Then he proceeds to speak confidently to them concerning the patriarch David, that he was dead and buried, and that his sepulchre is with them to this day. He said, “But since he was a prophet, and knew that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his body one should sit in his throne; foreseeing this, he spake of the resurrection of Christ, that He was not left in hell, neither did His flesh see corruption. This Jesus,” he said, “hath God raised up, of which we all are witnesses: who, being exalted by the right hand of God, receiving from the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, hath shed forth this gift3472 3472 The word δῶρον or δώρημα is supposed by some to have existed in the earliest Greek texts, although not found in any extant now. It is thus quoted by others besides Irenæus.
which ye now see and hear. For David has not ascended into the heavens; but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, until I make Thy foes Thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”3473 3473
Anf-03 iv.ix.xiii Pg 55
For this sense of the word “approve,” comp. Acts ii. 22, Greek and English, and Phil. i. 10, Greek and English.
to be come, let the Jews recognise their own fate,—a fate which they were constantly foretold as destined to incur after the advent of the Christ, on account of the impiety with which they despised and slew Him. For first, from the day when, according to the saying of Isaiah, “a man cast forth his abominations of gold and silver, which they made to adore with vain and hurtful (rites),”1432 1432
Anf-03 v.vii.xv Pg 9
Acts ii. 22.
These passages alone ought to suffice as a prescriptive7156 7156 Vice præscriptionis.
testimony in proof that Christ had human flesh derived from man, and not spiritual, and that His flesh was not composed of soul,7157 7157 Animalis.
nor of stellar substance, and that it was not an imaginary flesh; (and no doubt they would be sufficient) if heretics could only divest themselves of all their contentious warmth and artifice. For, as I have read in some writer of Valentinus’ wretched faction,7158 7158 Factiuncula.
they refuse at the outset to believe that a human and earthly substance was created7159 7159 Informatam.
for Christ, lest the Lord should be regarded as inferior to the angels, who are not formed of earthly flesh; whence, too, it would be necessary that, if His flesh were like ours, it should be similarly born, not of the Spirit, nor of God, but of the will of man. Why, moreover, should it be born, not of corruptible [seed], but of incorruptible? Why, again, since His flesh has both risen and returned to heaven, is not ours, being like His, also taken up at once? Or else, why does not His flesh, since it is like ours, return in like manner to the ground, and suffer dissolution? Such objections even the heathen used constantly to bandy about.7160 7160 Volutabant: see Lactantius, iv. 22.
Was the Son of God reduced to such a depth of degradation? Again, if He rose again as a precedent for our hope, how is it that nothing like it has been thought desirable (to happen) to ourselves?7161 7161 De nobis probatum est: or, perhaps, “has been proved to have happened in our own case.”
Such views are not improper for heathens and they are fit and natural for the heretics too. For, indeed, what difference is there between them, except it be that the heathen, in not believing, do believe; while the heretics, in believing, do not believe? Then, again, they read: “Thou madest Him a little less than angels;”7162 7162
Anf-03 v.ix.xvii Pg 7
Acts ii. 22.
is the Lord of hosts, because all things are by the Father made subject to Him; is the King of Israel because to Him has especially been committed the destiny of that nation; and is likewise “the One that is,” because there are many who are called Sons, but are not. As to the point maintained by them, that the name of Christ belongs also to the Father, they shall hear (what I have to say) in the proper place. Meanwhile, let this be my immediate answer to the argument which they adduce from the Revelation of John: “I am the Lord which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty;”7984 7984
Anf-01 v.xv.ii Pg 7
Deut. xviii. 15; Acts iii. 22, Acts vii. 37.
