But on the other hand, those who do not have the fear of God, living more loosely and despising the needy, shall, as it is written, be in want — being not only negligent and improvident concerning themselves, but also despisers of the law that was given. In this way God makes the poor and the rich, because, while the offense against the law gives birth to poverty, it is said to be done by God as the author of the law; and when some keep the discipline of the law out of fear, by God as the author of the law they become rich. XXXV. By what reasoning does David, after God departed from him, call Saul the Lord's anointed and show him deference?
David, not unaware that the institution belonging to the office of the royal order is divine, therefore honors Saul, still placed in that same institution, lest he should seem to do injury to God, who decreed honor to these orders. For a king bears the image of God, just as a bishop bears the image of Christ. As long, therefore, as he is in that institution, he is to be honored — if not for his own sake, then for the sake of the order. Whence the apostle says: 'Be subject to all the higher powers. For there is no power but from God; and the powers that be are ordained of God.' Hence it is that we honor even a Gentile who is nevertheless placed in power, although he himself be unworthy, who, holding the order of God, gives thanks to the devil. For the power demands honor, because it deserves it.
For it was for this reason that the dream of the coming famine was revealed to Pharaoh, and that Nebuchadnezzar alone, among others standing with him, saw the Son of God in the furnace of fire — not indeed by his own merit, who wished himself to be worshipped in an idol, but by the merit of the royal order. XXXVI. If 'the soul that sins shall itself die,' how is it that Achan the son of Carmi sinned, and thirty-six men were slain on his account? Scripture has spoken in a different sense than is being proposed. For it did not speak of this death, which is indeed common to all, but of that which is called the second. For this latter death receives sinners; but to those who died in battle, it was not the sin of Achan that was requited, but it harmed them in that, no longer aided by divine protection, they could not prevail against the enemy.
For they were not weakened by the cause of Achan, but were by no means fortified by God's help, so that, while they were unable to act valiantly, they were slain. For they were few against many, whence they are known to have been overcome. There is therefore no injustice in the will of God. For He has it in His power, if He wills to give aid: so that, if He be present, He is merciful; if He be unwilling, He is just. For He is not a debtor to such men, that He should be held liable. Hence it is that Joshua son of Nun, grieved, rent his garments, understanding that the Lord had not without cause withdrawn His help. XXXVII. How is it that death, sent into Jacob, came upon Israel, since Jacob himself was called Israel? He set down two names of one people, so that from the names their merits might be understood.
For he who was surnamed Israel was formerly called Jacob. For wrestling with the Savior, he understood Him to be God, whom he saw in the form of a body, and therefore he was called 'a man seeing God.' The people, then, which he here calls Jacob, in this matter signifies the carnal people, just as the names that are imposed upon children by their parents. But these, that is the Jews, on account of their evil works were not called Israelites, because they sacrificed to calves and to groves in Samaria, by the zeal and command of king Jeroboam. But that people, who in Jerusalem offered victims in the temple of the Lord through the priests of God, was called Israel.
Samaria therefore, on account of its impiety, was given over to captivity and death; but Jerusalem was reserved, because it had kings who loved God. But when Jerusalem too followed the impiety of Samaria, the sentence that had been given against Samaria took hold of it also. Therefore it was said: 'God sent death into Jacob' — that is, into the people of Samaria, who conducted themselves carnally, as we said above — 'and it came upon Israel,' that is, upon the people of Jerusalem, because they followed idolatry, imitating Samaria; so that they were carried off into captivity in like manner by Nebuchadnezzar, just as Samaria was by Shalmaneser king of the Assyrians. This is plainly stated: the sentence given against the evil found out the good also, when they ceased to be righteous.
For death sent into Jacob, as was shown above, reached into Israel, not passing over Samaria; but while the cause for which it was sent into Samaria was found in Jerusalem also, the death sent there came also upon that place in which it discloses the same. For vengeance follows the cause, not distinguishing the person. XXXVIII. If the horse and the mule have no understanding, how much more is the earth a thing without sense? How then is it said that the earth blesses God? It is not to be understood as the words sound. For a work, although it be mute, is said to cry out the praise of its Creator; for it exhorts those who behold it to bless its Maker, just as every well-fashioned vessel praises its craftsman, since indeed it is read in the Psalms:
'Shall the dust confess to you,' he says, 'or shall it declare your truth?' In every senseless substance, therefore, it is not the will — which is indeed none at all — but the works that bless the Author. But if you wish to take this spiritually, understand that the earth signifies man, according to the saying of the prophet — for he says, 'Remember, O Lord, that we are earth' — whom the works of creation exhort to break forth into the praise of his Creator. XXXIX. What is it that is read in Solomon: 'There is hope,' he says, 'in darkness; better is a dog than a dead lion'? Darkness signifies the heathen state and ignorance. He wishes it to be understood that there is more hope in a heathen than in an apostate, by that which he added, saying:
'Better is a dog than a dead lion,' because, just as the lion is stronger than all wild beasts, so also Christianity is stronger than all sects. If anyone, therefore, departs from this, he loses salvation, so that he becomes worse than a heathen. For it can happen that a heathen believes and acquires the salvation which the apostate lost. And if he does not believe, he is worse than the apostate, because it is worse to have lost salvation than never to have had it. But that 'dog' signifies 'the heathen,' the Savior shows, saying: 'It is not lawful to take the children's bread and to cast it to the dogs.' XL. What is it that the prophet says: 'Rejoice, O barren, that bears not; break forth and cry aloud, you that travail not; for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that has a husband'?
Since the children of the earthly Jerusalem apostatized from God, joy cannot be ascribed to her, but mourning. To the reproach, therefore, of this Jerusalem, the prophet says that the higher Jerusalem ought to rejoice, which the apostle calls our mother, because without groaning and pains she has far more children than this one which brings them forth carnally with tears — namely the Jews — while she brings forth Christians spiritually through faith; whom he therefore calls 'desolate,' because she is the very Life which the first Adam deserted, and followed death. When men are regenerated, therefore, they return to that Life which they had deserted. This Life is Christ, because He Himself said: 'I am the Life.' God the Father also is Life, for the Lord says:
'As the Father has life, so He gave to the Son to have life.' Without doubt the Holy Spirit also is life, since the Lord says: 'He shall receive of mine.' He, then, who receives of the Life, is Life. The three, therefore, are one Life. This is the Life, through faith in which we are regenerated. She is our mother, just as we also read in Genesis: 'For she is' — that is, Life — 'the mother of all the living.' Who are they that live, except those who believe? XLI. Whether the Spirit which was borne over the waters is to be understood as the Holy Spirit, because it is said: 'The Spirit of God was borne over the water.' If for this reason the Holy Spirit is supposed by some, because it is read to be 'the Spirit of God,' it is an invalid and empty assertion.
For not only does the order of things not allow this, and reason refuses it, but the very words themselves are proved too weak to establish that case. For with these same words we frequently find another meaning signified in the law; for among other things the Lord God says: 'My spirit shall not remain in these men, for they are flesh.' And in what follows: 'But I will blot out,' He says, 'all things from man even to beast,' because He was about to bring a flood upon the earth. Can the Holy Spirit be understood here? Was He not speaking of souls? For not only are our souls called spirits, but also those of cattle. For thus it is written:
'And all flesh died in the water, in which was the spirit of life.' And in the prophet Ezekiel it is thus said, while God promises concerning the reforming of men, saying: 'Thus says the Lord to these bones: I will stretch skin over you and will put my spirit in you, and you shall live.' Was He speaking of the Holy Spirit and not of the soul? All heavenly things, indeed, are spirits, but they differ from one another; and God is spirit, but in a far different way. Every spirit, therefore, is God's; yet it is not God, except the Spirit who is of Him, whose distinguishing mark is this, that He is called 'Holy.' For men too are called sons of God, and Christ is called the Son of God; but there is a difference, because this one is true, those are adoptive.
So also among the spirits of God there is a difference. For the Holy Spirit is of God, consubstantial with Him; but the other spirits are said to be of God, yet they are creatures. But it does not even accord with the order of things that the Holy Spirit should be understood to be borne over the waters, since reason teaches that there is a spiritual creature over the waters, and one that has above itself another, more excellent creature, because creature differs from creature in brightness. For whatever draws near to the throne of God, the ministries there are brighter. Whence the angel Raphael says, among other things: 'I am,' he says, 'one of the seven holy angels, who stand and minister before the majesty of God.' XLII. Why did the angel sent to speak to Moses appear in fire and in a bush on the mountain? God is exalted on high;
it was therefore fitting that He should appear on high, in a place which is near to heaven. And because fire ever seeks the higher regions, growing upward toward heaven, in it the Lord of the heavens ought to appear, who reaches from the dust toward the things above. But in the bush, the cause of sins brought it about that He should appear. For since He had come down to give the law on account of sins, and thorns are signified among sins — for 'I waited,' He says, 'that it should bring forth a grape, but it brought forth thorns' — and the law had not come at once to take vengeance, but first to show forth, therefore the fire did not consume the bush, that is, the law that was given did not make men guilty as sinners on account of the past. For since sins also are not of nature, but of accident, the bush — that is, the substance of thorns — does not have a root armed with thorns.
It was therefore with reason that it came about that the Lord thus appeared to Moses. XLIII. Since we know that Abraham was forbidden by God to sacrifice his son, why was Jephthah, when he offered up his daughter, not forbidden, but paid his vow to God with human blood? There is a great difference between the case of Abraham and that of Jephthah. First, indeed, Abraham was lawfully born, but Jephthah was illegitimate; for he was the son of a harlot. Next, Abraham was of the best conduct, but Jephthah was a chief of robbers. Abraham was a righteous man and proved in temptation; but in Jephthah there was no testimony of righteousness.
To Abraham, therefore, it was commanded that he should offer his son to God, even to show to men how greatly Abraham believed God, who did not hesitate to slay even his own son at His command. For He who against the hope of the world could cause him to be born of a barren and aged woman — there was no doubt that, against the reckoning of the world, He could raise him up again from the dead. By this deed Abraham was heaped up with righteousness. For God showed that He had not demanded the blood of the boy, but that His servant Abraham might by this deed be made greater. For He wills that those who love Him should suffer something, so that He may seem justly to advance them. But Jephthah, a wicked and improvident man, by a foolish devotion promised a gift to God, saying:
'Whatever shall meet me as I return from the slaughter before the doors of my house, this I will offer to God.' Was he compelled to make the vow, or did he understand how he ought to make a vow? For what if a dog or an ass had met him, which God forbade to be offered? Or if a stranger's son, or if his wife, so that exulting in another's grief he would pay his vow? Therefore, what in his improvidence he had impiously vowed to another's destruction was, by divine judgment, turned back upon his very self. And to such a degree was Jephthah senseless that not even afterward did he recognize that he had foolishly vowed, so that his error, which had begun from himself, might through himself also be corrected.
For he ought to have understood that God is not delighted with such a sacrifice, and to have prayed concerning his foolishness, and to have offered something else which was not contrary to the law. But the fool showed himself faithful as a parricide, although it is established that a foolish faith is not only of no profit, but is harmful. In the case of his daughter, therefore, he himself was the one slain, whence God also dissembled from such a sacrifice. For if He had forbidden it, He would have seemed to wish him to offer something else, although He knew that he ought not to offer an unworthy thing. But his daughter gained profit, because, dying innocent amid her father's evils, she escaped the punishment of hell, which perhaps by living long she could not have escaped. But that the triumph of victory might attend Jephthah, it was not his merit that brought it about, nor the people's;
for it is not read that they were suppliants to God, asking Him to give them a defender. Or did God send Jephthah himself, or address him? But because the foreigners praised their own gods, as though it were these that subjected the children of Israel to them, reviling the God of Abraham, therefore, for the honor of His own name, God took vengeance upon the foreigners — if not for these people's sake, then for the merit of Abraham and His own preeminence. Or shall it be said that, because the spirit of the Lord leaped upon Samson while he consorted with a harlot, he was therefore worthy, when this deed is to be understood as for the destruction of the foreigners? XLIV. Against the Jews. It is written in the prophet Isaiah: 'My house shall be called a house of prayer for all nations.' But perhaps the Jews may say:
'The house of God, that is, the synagogue, stands open to all.' Nor do we resist this, provided however that, as always, the circumcised be joined to the law. For the law belongs to those who were commanded to be circumcised after the manner of Abraham. Nothing new, therefore, can seem to be in this example of the prophet, because anyone coming from whatever nation was not forbidden to attach himself to the law from the very beginning of Judaism. Nothing new can be reckoned to have been said by the prophet; rather it is superfluous, if always Gentiles were admitted to serve the God of Abraham and are never found to have been forbidden. And it is true that those who subject themselves to the law are never found to have been not received. If, therefore, these things are so, the prophet seems to have admonished superfluously, since what was once handed down has always been kept. And could anyone so dull be found,
who would say that the prophet spoke only a superfluous and empty thing? I know not for whom it would be safe even to hear this and not forbid it. For since the Jewish people, on account of the sins by which they offended against the Lord, seeking favors from idols, were often rebuked by the prophets and yet would not enter the way of repentance so as to return to God, to their reproach God signified that He would open His house to all nations for prayer, so that, the Jews being cast off, He would show that He would set others in their place. For if the Gentiles were always admitted to the law, as was said above, how did the prophet say this would come to pass in the future, unless because he signified something other than what had been commanded before? For he could not be speaking of a thing that was done daily,
as though it were yet to come. Whence it is manifest that this serves to the destruction of the Jews. To them the prophet shows that others, these being removed, were to be called to receive the gift of God's grace, which had been promised to the Jews. But what it was that was promised, the prophet Isaiah teaches, saying: 'There shall come out of Zion he who shall deliver and shall turn away impiety from Jacob; and this is the testament to them from me.' This testament, therefore, is the abolition of sins. For this is the new testament, which was promised through Jeremiah, who says: 'Behold, the days shall come, says the Lord, and I will complete with the house of Israel and the house of Judah a new testament, not according to the testament which I made with their fathers in the day,
in which I took hold of their hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they did not abide in my testament, and I neglected them, says the Lord.' This is their transgression: when they made the image of the calf, then they corrupted the testament. Whence also the tables on which the law had been given were broken beneath the mountain, because they deserved to receive grievous precepts. But because God is clement and merciful, He promised through the prophets that He would change the law, so as to give another testament, which would differ from that which He had given before; so that not only what was burdensome should be changed, but also those things which had been given in a figure, that is, the sabbath and circumcision; so that, because they had long been oppressed, being relieved in all things they might give thanks to God as suppliants.
And because, persisting in their fathers' transgression, they were unwilling to turn their minds away from idols, He bears witness that the Gentiles, together with the remnant who kept the faith, were to enjoy the testament which He had said would come; so that in a twofold manner the faithless Jews might be tormented under burdens. For both in the present they were burdened with precepts, and in the future they shall pay fitting penalties, because they were found faithful neither in the old nor in the new testament. Therefore He said He would give a new testament, that the old might cease, which had been given to the fathers. And by this means, whoever serves God in this testament keeps neither the sabbath nor the new moons nor circumcision, nor the distinctions of foods, but has only the fear of God in faith, because he is not justified by the law,
but by faith, as the prophet Habakkuk says: 'For the just shall live by my faith,' so that he should no longer use many precepts to merit God, but few — Isaiah again saying the same concerning this sense; for he says: 'If the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, the remnant of them shall be saved. For He is a Word completing and abridging in righteousness, because the Lord will make an abridged Word upon the whole earth.' To the remnant, who persevered in the faith of the promise while the rest disbelieved, He shows the abridged Word of the law, that is, the new testament which He promised. And it would not otherwise be called a testament, unless in like manner this too were confirmed by the testimony of blood, as was the old testament, so that the name of both should be one;
but in the old there are many precepts, while in the new there are few. As He promised, that because He had said Abraham would be the father of many nations, in the same manner his sons should be justified just as the father had been justified, so that, those things ceasing which had begun after Abraham's faith, those receiving the faith through which the same Abraham was justified might be sons of Abraham, as was said by the Lord. Which indeed is neither marvelous nor unheard of, that men should be justified without care for the sabbath and circumcision and the rest of the commandments of this kind. For it was not through this that Enoch pleased God, so as to be translated, nor was Noah by keeping these things alone found righteous in the flood, nor was Abraham himself justified after he was circumcised:
'For Abraham,' it says, 'believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.' Then he was circumcised, that there might be in him a sign that he had believed, when he was old, that he would have a son. Therefore it is not circumcision that commends Abraham, but faith. And so for those who believe, faith suffices for justification, that they may be sons of Abraham in faith, not in circumcision, because for these there is no need of circumcision. For that is not believed which Abraham believed. But the Jews were commanded to be circumcised for this reason, that they might have the sign of Abraham's faith — not of their own faith, but that they might be known as his sons according to the flesh; but if they believe, they shall be his sons unto justification too. For what does it profit to be called the son of a powerful man, if one be powerless — unless it rather does harm?
For it is a disgrace to be the son of a man of dignity without honor. For the circumcision of the flesh is of so little merit that God says, through the prophet Jeremiah, that He will take vengeance upon all the circumcised in the foreskin, if they have not been circumcised in heart. But He is not angry with those who, circumcised in heart, are uncircumcised in flesh, because no one without circumcision of the heart has pleased God. Whoever, therefore, are circumcised in the flesh signify the race of Abraham according to the flesh; but those who are circumcised in heart signify the race of God according to faith, because, circumcised from every worldly error, they profess God as their parent. What, then, does the circumcision of the flesh profit, when, if faith be lacking in the Jew, he cannot attain to the merit of Abraham?
Or what does the foreskin harm, since no one attains to the righteousness of Abraham except him who has been an emulator of Abraham's faith? Superfluously, therefore, do they glory in the circumcision of the flesh, since they see that it has no merit before God. And if, as has been shown, it is better to have faith than circumcision, the Gentiles are better than the Jews, because these have faith, while the Jews have circumcision. And which, do you suppose, does He rather acknowledge as the sons of Abraham: those who are like him according to the flesh, or those who are like him in faith? But Abraham's faith bears witness, and by this means he glories not in the flesh but in faith. And therefore He receives as His sons those whom He sees to be imitators of His glory.
For how can He call those sons in whom He sees an aversion to that whereby He pleased God and was justified? Therefore He will be able to judge these not as sons but as enemies. For they seem to be envious of him, spurning the faith through which he was glorified. Nor is it any wonder if the Jews are detected to be faithless, by no means receiving the new testament, since we know that they were not faithful even in the old. For they were always rebellious and contumacious against God, whence they received such precepts as would press down their necks, which were unbending. For they never wished to hope for good from God, whose so great benefits and such wondrous powers they had recognized. Hence it is that the prophet Ezekiel says, among other things:
'I lifted up my hand against them in the wilderness, that they should be scattered among the nations and dispersed in the regions, because they did not perform my justifications and rejected my precepts'; and in what follows: 'And I gave them precepts that were not good, and justifications in which they shall not live.' He shows for what cause precepts so many and so harsh were given to them: namely, that, because they proved ungrateful for such great goods, at the dictate of justice they might be pressed down with severer precepts. For this reason He called them 'not good,' although they were just, because they did not avail them unto justification, but unto destruction; and a punishment, though worthily inflicted, is nevertheless not good to the one who suffers it. After these things, however, because God is merciful,
He promised that He would give a new testament, in which an abridgement of the law being made should justify those who believe, just as Abraham was justified; so that, the new moons and the sabbath and circumcision and the other precepts ceasing — not those which are of the natural law, that is, murder, adultery, and such things — they might be justified just as Abraham was. For with the faith of Abraham renewed, He willed that all those things should cease, so that there might be such a time as there had been when Abraham believed. But perhaps the Jews may say: 'If those things which were given by Moses are said to cease through the abridgement of the law, was circumcision given by Moses, that it should cease? And by this means we have the sign of our father, that we are sons of Abraham, which on account of the testimony of lineage ought not to cease.'
Circumcision was indeed to be observed in its own time, that is, before the New Testament was given, which had been promised. But once, by the bestowal of God's grace, the burdens of the Law were commanded to cease, what need is there of being circumcised? For this reason a new Law was given, that is, a spiritual one, so that carnal observances might cease, and that those who received it might receive its sign; so that, just as in the old covenant they had the sign of Abraham, from whom the Old Testament began, so also in the new they might have the sign of the Savior, who is the founder of the New Testament. For just as the Hebrews were called so after Abraham, so too the Christians are named after Christ.
Therefore whoever are still called Hebrews have not received the New Testament which God promised, bringing to nothing the benefit and the mercy of God—God who, no longer willing that His people be reckoned under the name of a man, deigned to establish them under the name of His own Son. With what audacity, then, do the Jews say that we do not use our own law but theirs, when David says, 'I will confess to thee among the Gentiles,' and again, 'Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people'? And to the prophet Jeremiah the Lord says, 'Before I formed thee in the womb I knew thee, and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I appointed thee a prophet unto the Gentiles.' Judaism certainly has its own proper designations;
for this people is signified either in Jacob, or in Samaria, or in Jerusalem, or in Judah, or in Israel. But concerning the Gentiles it is plain that He signifies them otherwise than the Jews are signified. Jeremiah, therefore, is our prophet. For although in all the prophets God has shown the Gentiles to be sharers of His gift, yet to Jeremiah He speaks especially, because He gave him to us as a prophet. For he signified the New Testament that was to come, which would profit the Gentiles more than the Jews—as now appears to be made clear. For since the preaching of the New Testament is in all the earth, a believing Jew is found so rarely and with such difficulty that all the churches of the New Testament are named after the Gentiles, as was said in the prophet Hosea:
'I will call that which was not my people, my people, and her that was not beloved, beloved.' Therefore, the Jews being rejected, He summons the Gentiles by that grace of mercy whereby He deigned to call Abraham also. For neither did Abraham know the Lord unless he was called. And so He who deemed Abraham worthy, the same deemed the Gentiles also worthy. Why then do they say, 'The law is ours,' when it is manifest that the gift of God belongs to all who are willing? Let this rashness of presumption cease, therefore, since the grace of God is common to all. For with what shamelessness do they deny that our Christ was promised in the Law, when they see in Him all the signs which the Law foretold would come to pass?