For if someone, in discussing the parable, is able to show that the details concerning the Samaritan who healed the half-dead man who had fallen among robbers refer to no one else but the Savior, he will also demonstrate why he did not deny being a Samaritan.
But another, having observed in Paul the distinction between Jews and those under the law, and having brought those under the law up into the category of the Samaritans, and having grasped, even more than Paul did, that the Savior became all things to all, in order that he might gain all, will say that, because he became to those under the law as one under the law, he likewise became also a Samaritan, and that on this account he did not deny being a Samaritan.
And yet a third, taking up the interpretation of 'Samaritan,' which signifies a guardian, will say that, even if the Jews called him a Samaritan with a different meaning in mind, he himself, understanding the meaning derived from the name, did not deny it, knowing that he is the guardian of human souls, and is the one of whom it is said, 'Behold, he who keeps Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep,' and, 'The Lord, who keeps the little ones.'
'Shomer,' then, is what the Hebrews call 'guardian'; and they also relate that the Samaritans were first so named because they had been sent by the king of the Assyrians as guardians of the land of Israel after the captivity, since the other kingdom, Israel, alongside Judah, had been carried off captive to the Assyrians on account of its many sins. // Jesus answered, 'I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. I do not seek my own glory; there is one who seeks it, and judges.'
If the tree planted beside the courses of water is of such a kind as to yield its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither, but all that it does prospers, what must we suppose concerning our Savior Jesus, but that he himself, being the tree of life, inasmuch as he is wisdom, and wisdom is a tree of life to all who lay hold of it, both bears fruit and also has, besides its fruits, such leaves that not even one of them falls away?
For this reason, no saying of Jesus — especially one that has been deemed worthy of being recorded by his holy disciples — is to be received carelessly, as it happens to fall; rather, every kind of testing must be applied even to those things that are thought to be clear, without despairing that, even concerning the saying thought to be free of hidden meaning and simple, something worthy of that sacred mouth will be found by those who search rightly.
But if in some place we do not find such a meaning, we must blame ourselves, and not the word of Jesus, as though it did not breathe forth the doctrines, full of truth and wisdom, that come from the fullness.
This has been said by me because I wished to examine the saying 'I do not have a demon,' through which all of us who read the Gospel are taught something we did not know even before reading the Gospel. What this is must now be considered.
It is agreed, according to the scriptures, that those who sin do many things contrary to reason for no other cause than that they have become receptive to the working of an evil spirit or to the will of an unclean demon.
Those who said that irascibility is a demon, and likewise slander, did not hesitate to attribute to demons even what would be thought to be the smallest of sins.
It is likely also that countless other things are done to us by demons deluding us with images and working according to their own will; and just as among human beings no one is pure from defilement, and there is no righteous person on earth who will do good and not sin, so also no one has ever been purified from demons for good and never once become receptive of their working.
Therefore, allegorizing the healings in the Gospel — among which are also the expulsions of demons — we shall say that the demons are always driven out by Jesus from all those who, through having been healed by the Word, no longer admit the workings of the demons.
I think, then, that it is the voice of Jesus alone — who alone stripped off the principalities and powers and made a public example of them and triumphed over them on the tree, setting up the cross as a trophy against every opposing power — just as he said, 'The ruler of this world is coming, and he has nothing in me,' so likewise: 'I neither had, nor have, nor will have a demon.'
We too can utter this saying and say, 'I do not have a demon,' but we shall be refuted just like those who denied being possessed by a demon and were shown, by the very facts, to have lied.
Or is it not proof that we are possessed by a demon, whenever, in the condition of madmen, we cry out, burning with wrath and anger, or having become rabid, and as if neighing, we mount even our own wives, like lustful stallions in heat for mares, casting God's words concerning dispassion behind us?
But even if, humbled and clouded over, dragged down by grief, and having lost the proper dignity of rational beings, we forget that without God a sparrow does not fall into a snare, and that the judgments concerning each one of the things that befall human beings are just, what shall we say except that we suffer these things because a demon has conquered us and muddied our ruling faculty?
But also fears of things that are not fearful, and excessive joys over things worth nothing — whose workings could these be, other than of demons filling those who are unable to say with truth, 'I do not have a demon'?
But it is likely that someone will confront us for examination by bringing forward the holy patriarchs, or the sacred servant, or the wondrous prophets, or the most powerful apostles of our Savior Jesus, saying that these too would say, like Jesus, 'I do not have a demon.' To such a person one may say: did these too, then, at some time sin, or is it false that 'For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,' and is it not true that 'No one is pure from defilement,' nor was it spoken without insight, 'There is no righteous person on earth who will do good and not sin'? But it is clear that all the scriptures are true, and that not always, nor from the beginning, could even those who turned to a life according to virtue say 'I do not have a demon' — rather, this was from the beginning the voice of the man conceived of according to the Savior alone; and for this reason it was he alone who, most properly and most truly, honored the Father, for no one who honors something among the things not honored by God thereby honors him, but rather honors the one who dishonors the things honored by him.
No one who sins has the Spirit of adoption; for the one begotten of God does not sin. And how does someone honor the Father, who honors glory that comes from men, or silver, or earthly wealth, or beauty made of flesh and blood, or, simply put, anything belonging to matter and to corruption?
It is clear, then, how 'I honor the Father' is a saying of the Savior — which saying, as far as we are able, we must be zealous to utter, our conscience bearing witness with us in the Holy Spirit, rendering honor to the one to whom honor is due, and not apportioning it to another.
And rightly indeed, he who, when the fullness of time had come, was sent by God to be born of a woman and to be born under the law — being thus under the law that says, 'Honor your father and mother, that it may be well with you' — having no other father than the God in the heavens, says:
'But I honor my Father' (we too shall utter this saying, having understood the washing of regeneration and having washed according to it, upon becoming sons of God, and no longer calling anyone on earth father, since we have become sons of the Father in the heavens and brothers of him who said: 'I am going to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.')
It is clear, then, that since Jesus said most properly and most perfectly, 'I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father,' his imitators, each according to his ability, having been made strong in all things by Christ Jesus who strengthens him, will also say, 'I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father.' But who, dwelling among the dead and living in tombs, could be able to say, 'I do not have a demon'?
Or who, honoring something else besides God and his Word and the things commanded by the Word, giving honor to another when he ought to render it to the one to whom it is due, could say, as a disciple of Jesus, 'But I honor my Father'?
Next in order comes 'And you dishonor me,' spoken to those who had dishonored him and said to him, 'Do we not rightly say that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?' — thinking that what had been badly spoken had been well said; for, thinking wickedly, they declared the Savior to be a Samaritan and to have a demon.
It should be thought that 'And you dishonor me' was said then not only to those persons, but also to all who continually dishonor him: by the things they do contrary to the right reason of God, they dishonor him; by the things through which they wrong Christ, who is righteousness, they dishonor him; and they dishonor him also through the ways in which, on account of incapacity and weakness, they fall short in matters pertaining to the power of God, which is the Savior.
But also, if it is necessary for someone, so far as it depends on him, to be at peace with all people, so that he could utter that prophetic saying, 'I was peaceable with those who hate peace,' and if it is necessary to take up the peace of God that surpasses all understanding, guarding the heart and thoughts of the one who has taken it up —
— but if someone is warlike and biting and accusing and devouring his neighbor, and filled with the faction of the passions in his own ruling faculty, to him too could be said, 'You dishonor me.' For Christ is our peace.
Furthermore, since 'everyone who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light,' and the light is he who said, 'I am the light of the world,' it is clear that the one who does evil dishonors the light, that is, Christ, and he himself will hear, 'And you dishonor me.'
And why should I prolong the discourse further, unfolding and showing who are those who are reproved by Jesus and hear from him, 'You dishonor me,' since this is already clear from what has been given and from the things that can be joined to these in agreement with them?
After this let us see what is meant by, 'But I do not seek my own glory; there is one who seeks and judges.' God seeks — having given us his own Son — in each one of those who have received him, the glory of Christ; which glory he will find in those who take care of themselves and cultivate the seeds implanted for virtue, but will not find in those who are not such; and, not finding it, he will judge those in whom he does not find the glory of his own Son, to whom he will say: 'Because of you my name is continually blasphemed among the nations.'
But someone might raise a difficulty regarding 'There is one who seeks and judges' — whether this should be referred to God — since the Savior has clearly said: 'For neither does the Father judge anyone, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father.'
But see whether you can make use, for this purpose, of: 'I can do nothing of myself; as I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I do not seek my own will, but the will of him who sent me.'
For if our Savior judges just as he hears from the Father, seeking not his own will but that of the Father who sent him, and for this reason his judgment is just, then perhaps, more properly speaking, the judgment that the one who hears renders is not that of the one who hears, but of the one who speaks to the one who hears.
And even if he says, 'My judgment is just,' listen to what is said in the same Gospel: 'All that is mine is yours.' For if what was said by the Savior, 'All that is mine is yours,' is true, it is clear that this very judgment too, concerning which he says, 'My judgment is just,' is the Father's judgment.
But if the judgment is the Father's, then the difficulty raised concerning 'But I do not seek my own glory; there is one who seeks, judging' can be resolved.
What is said in 'But I do not seek my own glory' also carries a certain implication of the freedom from vanity that befits the Savior; for it would not have been at all fitting for him to demand his own glory and on that basis judge those who had not rendered it to him — rather, it was necessary that the Father, having given glory to the Son, should demand it from those who deprive him of it, and judge them on this account.
Perhaps, then, the Savior too, being an imitator of the Father, seeks the glory of God from those who learn the things concerning God; and if he should not find the Father's glory in some, he would judge them, since he has received authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.
Heracleon, however, does not refer 'There is one who seeks and judges' to the Father, but says the following: 'The one who seeks and judges is the one who avenges me, the servant appointed for this, who does not bear the sword in vain, the avenger of the King; and this is Moses' — according to what he had said to them beforehand, saying:
And thinking that he resolves the objection, he says the following: 'He speaks rightly; for the judge, as a servant doing the will of this one, judges — just as also appears to happen among men.'
But as for how he attributes the judgment to someone else — as inferior to the Savior, according to what he supposes, [namely] to the Demiurge — even in this way he cannot demonstrate it, since it is clearly written: 'For neither does the Father judge anyone, but has given all judgment to the Son'; and: 'He gave him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.' 'Truly, truly I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.'
Just as there is a certain life that is indifferent, being neither good nor bad, according to which we say that even the impious and the irrational animals live; and another life that is not indifferent but good, concerning which Paul says, 'Our life is hidden with Christ in God,' and our Lord himself concerning himself, 'I am the life' — so likewise you will call the death opposite to the indifferent life an indifferent death; but the death hostile to him who said, 'I am the life,' [you will call] a certain evil and grievous death, in which the one who dies is held; concerning which it is written:
'Death, the last enemy, is being destroyed.' And it should be thought that the apostle speaks of this death when he says: 'Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned; for until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not reckoned when there is no law; but death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned after the likeness of the transgression of Adam'; and shortly after: 'For if by the trespass of the one, death reigned through the one, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of righteousness reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ.'
For what is the death that entered the world through sin, if not the last enemy that will be destroyed by Christ? And what is the death that spread to all men because all sinned, if not this very death that also reigned from Adam until Moses?
Now Moses, that is, the Law, lasted until the coming of our Lord Jesus; and death indeed reigned by the trespass of the one through the one, until those who received the abundance of grace and of righteousness should reign in life through the one, Christ Jesus.
He, then, who keeps the word of the Only-begotten and Firstborn of all creation — a word which by its nature prevents death from being seen — will not see this death forever.
Thus should 'If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death' be understood: as if he who says these things, having granted light to his hearers, were saying to them, 'If anyone keeps this light of mine, he will never see darkness.'
For it is impossible for darkness to come to be for the one who keeps the light; but if someone loses this light, it follows for the one who has lost it immediately to see the darkness. Thus, then, also in the Word, in the beginning, with God, life came to be.
Therefore the Beginning — that is, Wisdom, who says, 'God created me as the beginning of his ways for his works' — concerning the Word that is in her, in whom life came to be, will teach and say: 'If anyone keeps my word, he shall never see death.' For one will keep the Word at the same time as the life that has become inseparable from him, in him — which life is at the same time also the light of men, the light that shines in the darkness and is not overtaken by it.
If, then, the prophet, as if inquiring, says, 'Who is the man who will live and not see death?' — having learned from our Savior, we shall answer and say that the man who will live and not see death is he who keeps the word of him who said, 'If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.'
At the same time, on this passage I inquire whether perhaps 'forever' should be taken in common with both clauses, so that the whole would be as follows: 'If anyone keeps my word forever, he will not see death.'
But if one is also able to go back to the deeper matters, and understand how it could be said by a human being, 'You have brought me down to the dust of death,' and by Paul, 'Who will deliver me from the body of this death?' — he will observe in what manner, so long as the word was kept, death was not seen by the one keeping it; but when someone, having grown weary in attentiveness and keeping of the word, or having become careless about keeping it, no longer kept it, then he saw death, from no other cause than himself.
And this should be considered a doctrine and an eternal law, always to be spoken to us once we have received the word: 'If anyone keeps my word, he shall never see death.'
But just as — to name it this way — darkness, when gazed upon too much, destroys the sight of the one who beholds it, so also death, when beheld by the one who has not kept the word, puts to death and deadens the sight that has beheld it, and blinds it, so that on this account one has need of him who opens the eyes of the blind.
And I think that for this reason the blind — of whom the blind in the Gospel were a symbol — have lost their sight, since, not having kept the word, they saw death. 'The Jews said to him: Now we know that you have a demon.'
The majority, even among the wise, think that every kind of sin — of which sin in speech is also a species — comes from nothing other than wicked judgments; but those who have believed the holy scriptures to be divine hold, concerning the things done by human beings contrary to right reason, that such things are accomplished not without demons or certain opposing powers of whatever kind.
The Jews, then, supposed that Jesus had spoken 'Truly, truly I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death' by the working of a demon.
And they suffered this, having neither kept the word nor observed the power of what was said; for he, knowing a certain death hostile to the Word, which sinners die, said that this death would never be seen forever by the one who keeps his word; but they, supposing that what was said concerned the more common death, thought the speaker was raving: 'Abraham died, and the prophets, and yet you say, "If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death forever." Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died. Who do you make yourself out to be?'
If, according to the simpler interpretation, as we ourselves have also rendered it, the substance of the Jews' supposition seems clear — when they responded to the Savior's saying concerning Abraham and the prophets as having died — nonetheless we must not leave the examination of this unmarked, but must set it alongside a comparison with other similar passages.
For did they perhaps think that the Savior had spoken 'If anyone keeps my word, he will never see death' with no reason at all, and therefore responded with something plain to his saying?
Or did they understand that he had not spoken concerning the more common death, and, reasoning concerning Abraham and the prophets as having themselves once come to be in the worse death, without accepting his word or supposing him to be as great as he who spoke had promised, do they say:
'Now we know that you have a demon'? We have examined the like thing in the case of many of his other sayings and the responses made to them above — for example, in the case of the Samaritan woman: after Jesus said to her, 'Give me to drink,' he added other things such as: 'If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, Give me to drink, you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.'
And the woman says to him: 'Sir, you have nothing to draw with, and the well is deep; from where then do you have the living water?' And again: 'Sir, give me this water, that I may not thirst nor come here to draw.'
For it was not plausible that the Samaritan woman was answering him concerning sensible water, and had asked him for bodily water so as no longer to thirst nor to come to draw from Jacob's sensible well.
But also, when the Lord had said, 'The bread that I will give is my flesh, for the life of the world,' when the Jews contended with one another, saying, 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?' — we showed that the hearers were not so foolish as to suppose that the speaker was inviting his hearers to come forward and eat his flesh.
And it is likely that, in the sayings now being examined by us, the Jews said 'Abraham died, and the prophets,' having learned in what manner through one man sin entered the world and through sin death; and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned; and they also saw that death reigned over those who had sinned after the likeness of the transgression of Adam; and their reasoning concerned the death that had spread to all men because of sin, on the ground that all had sinned.
But concerning what follows on these matters, since they had not accepted the words of Jesus, they did not know it — namely, that the free gift is not like the trespass.
Nor indeed were they able somehow to reason that if by the trespass of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift in the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.
Nor did they understand how the gift was not like the death that came through the one who sinned; for they had not yet been instructed that the free gift came from many trespasses into justification.
Nor indeed did they see that 'those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift will reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ.' And they did indeed consider the death of Abraham and the prophets,
hearing that even Samuel, as being under the earth because of death, was brought up by the medium, who supposed that gods were somewhere below the earth and said, 'I saw gods coming up from the earth' — but they did not grasp the life of Abraham and the prophets, nor that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was God not of the dead but of the living; and, supposing the prophets to be dead, they built their tombs, and were for this reason to be pitied.
I think that it was also for this reason that, in response to 'Abraham died,' the Savior said — teaching that Abraham was alive — 'Abraham your father rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it, and was glad.'
But if someone does not wish the matters concerning Abraham to be so, let him tell us whether the one who saw the day of our Savior and rejoiced and was glad at this still sees death, or whether, having seen the day of the Savior and having rejoiced and been glad, having been deemed worthy of such a sight as one worthy of it, he was afterward deprived of what he had seen.
For if each of these is absurd, then Abraham, having seen the day of Jesus, at the same time as seeing it also heard his word and kept it, and no longer sees death; and the Jews were not speaking soundly when they said 'Abraham died,' as though he were still in death.
You may say the same regarding the prophets as well. For God is not the God of the dead but of the living, and just as he is the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, so also he is the God of the rest of the prophets, and the prophets too are alive. For they also kept the word of the Son of God, when 'the word of the Lord came to Hosea,' or 'the word came to Jeremiah,' or 'the word came to Isaiah.' For no other word of God came to any of these, but rather the one who in the beginning was with God — his Son, God the Word.
Similarly, then, false is the statement made by the Jews: 'Now we know that you have a demon; Abraham died, and the prophets.' For they neither truly knew that the one who commands demons had a demon (for no one knows what does not exist), nor were Abraham and the prophets still in death when the Jews said 'Abraham died, and the prophets.'
After this we inquire why on earth, when the Savior had said concerning everyone who keeps his word that 'he shall not see death forever,' the Jews, after what was previously examined, though they ought to have said correspondingly to 'he shall not see death forever' — 'And you say: If anyone keeps my word, he shall not see death forever' — instead say not this, but what was not said by the Savior; for he did not say 'if anyone keeps my word, he shall not taste death forever,' which is what these people put forward as having been said by our Lord.
And see whether it is not because there is a difference between 'not seeing death' and 'not tasting death' that it was said, together, by the remaining evangelists concerning 'not tasting death,' about those standing near Jesus, 'until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom' — Matthew's being: 'Truly, truly I say to you, there are some of those standing here who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.' And Mark's:
'Truly, truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God having come in power.' And Luke's: