The Genuine Acts of Peter

From the Discourse on the Resurrection

GOD DID NOT MAKE EVIL: and He is not in any way the author of evil. But whatever did not keep the law, which He justly established, after being made by Him with the power of free will for the purpose of guarding and keeping it, is called evil. Now the most serious fault is to disobey God by going beyond the limits of that righteousness which agrees with free will.

THE QUESTION HAS ALREADY BEEN RAISED AND ANSWERED: the coats of skins in Genesis 3:21 are not bodies. Nevertheless, let us speak about it again, because it is not enough to mention it only once. Before these coats of skins were made, the first man himself admits that he has both bones and flesh. For when he saw the woman brought to him, he cried out, "This is now bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh." And again, "She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man. For this cause a man shall leave his father" Genesis 2:23-24, "and be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh." For I cannot endure the foolish talk of some who shamelessly twist Scripture, so that their opinion may find support, namely, that the resurrection is without flesh. They imagine rational bones and flesh, and by allegory they change them back and forth in different ways. And Christ confirms that these things are to be taken as they are written. When the Pharisees asked Him about sending away a wife, He answered, "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, 'For this cause a man shall leave his father,'" Matthew 19:4-5, and so on.

III: But it is plainly absurd to think that the body will not exist together with the soul in the eternal state, because it is a bond and fetters, so that, according to their view, we who are to live in the kingdom of light might not be forever condemned to be bondmen of corruption. For since the question has been sufficiently answered, and the statement has been corrected in which they defined the flesh to be the soul's chain, the argument is also destroyed that the flesh will not rise again, lest, if we take it up again, we should be prisoners in the kingdom of light.

SO THEN: in order that man might not become an unending or ever-living evil—as he would have been if sin had ruled within him, since it had sprung up in an immortal body and had immortal nourishment—God declared him mortal and clothed him with mortality. This is what was meant by the coats of skins: that through the body's dissolution, sin might be completely destroyed from its very roots, so that not even the smallest piece of root would be left, from which new shoots of sin might burst out again.

FOR EXAMPLE: suppose a fig tree grows inside the magnificent buildings of a temple. It becomes very large, and its thick roots spread through all the joints of the stones. It does not stop growing until, by loosening the stones from the place where it first sprang up, it is completely torn out. For when the fig tree is removed, the stones can be fitted back into their proper places, so that the temple may be preserved, no longer having to carry what caused its destruction. But the fig tree, torn out by the roots, dies. In the same way, God the builder, by the timely use of death, stopped His own temple, man, when he had nourished sin like a wild fig tree, killing, as Scripture says in Deuteronomy 32:39, and making alive. He does this so that, after sin has withered and died, the flesh may be raised up again like a restored temple, with the same parts, unharmed and immortal, while sin is utterly and completely destroyed. For as long as the body still lives, before it has passed through death, sin also must live with it, because its roots are hidden within us, even though it is outwardly restrained by the wounds given through correction and warning. Otherwise, it would not happen that we do wrong after baptism, since we would be entirely and absolutely free from sin. But as things are, even after believing, and after the time when we have been touched by the water of sanctification, we are often found in sin. For no one can boast that he is so free from sin as not even to have an evil thought. So it has happened that sin is now restrained and put to sleep by faith, so that it does not produce harmful fruits, but still is not torn up by the roots. For now we hold back its shoots, such as evil thoughts, lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble us, as Hebrews 12:15 says, and we do not allow its leaves to unfold and open into shoots, while the Word, like an axe, cuts at its roots growing below. But later, even the very thought of evil will disappear.

BUT COME NOW: since we need many examples in matters like this, let us examine them carefully from this point of view. Let us not stop until our argument reaches a clearer explanation and proof. It is like a skilled craftsman who casts again a fine image that he himself had made from gold or some other material, well proportioned in all its parts, when he suddenly sees that some wicked man has mutilated it. That man, too jealous to endure the image’s beauty, ruined it and so enjoyed the empty pleasure of his jealousy. For notice, most wise Aglaophon, that if the craftsman wants the work on which he has spent so much effort, care, and labor to be completely free from damage, he will be moved to melt it down and restore it to its former condition. But if he does not cast it again or rebuild it, and instead leaves it as it is while trying to repair and restore it, then the image, after passing through the fire and being worked on, can no longer be kept unchanged, but will be altered and worn away. Therefore, if he wants it to be perfectly beautiful and without fault, it must be broken up and cast again, so that all the disfigurements and mutilations caused by treachery and envy may be removed by its breaking up and recasting, while the image itself is restored unharmed and pure to the same form as before, and made as much like itself as possible. For it is impossible for an image under the hands of its original artist to be lost, even if it is melted down again, because it can be restored. But blemishes and damages can be cast off, for they melt away and cannot be restored, because in every work of art the best craftsman looks not for blemish or failure, but for proportion and correctness in his work. Now God’s divine arrangement seems to me to have been the same as what we see among ourselves. For when He saw man, His most beautiful work, corrupted by envious treachery, He could not, because of His love for man, bear to leave him in that condition, lest he should remain forever defective and bear blame for eternity. So He dissolved him again into his original materials, so that by remolding him, all the blemishes in him might waste away and disappear. For the melting down of the statue in the first case corresponds to the death and dissolution of the body in the second, and the remolding of the material in the first corresponds to the resurrection after death in the second. So also the prophet Jeremiah says, for he speaks to the Jews in these words: "And I went down to the potter’s house; and behold, he made a work upon the stones. And the vessel that he made in his hands was broken; and again he made another vessel, as it pleased him to make it. And the word of the Lord came to me, saying, Cannot I do to you as this potter, O house of Israel? Behold, as the clay of the potter are you in my hands." Jeremiah 18:3-6

FOR I WANT TO DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS: as I said, after man's transgression, the Great Hand was not willing to leave its own work as a trophy of victory, after it had been degraded by the Evil One, who wickedly harmed it out of envy. Instead, it moistened it and reduced it to clay, just as a potter breaks up a vessel, so that by reshaping it, all its blemishes and bruises might disappear, and it might be made again fresh, faultless, and pleasing.

BUT IT IS NOT RIGHT TO SAY THAT THE UNIVERSE WILL BE COMPLETELY DESTROYED: and that the sea and air and sky will no longer exist. For the whole world will be flooded with fire from heaven and burned for purification and renewal. However, it will not come to complete ruin and decay. For if it were better for the world not to exist than to exist, why did God, in making the world, choose the worse course? But God did not work in vain or do what was worst. Therefore, God ordered creation with a view to its existence and continuance, as the Book of Wisdom also confirms, saying, "For God created all things that they might exist; and the generations of the world were healthful, and there is no poison of destruction in them." Wisdom 1:14 And Paul also clearly testifies to this, saying, "For the eager expectation of the creation waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it in hope. Because the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." Romans 8:19-21 For the creation was made subject to vanity, he says, and he expects that it will be set free from such slavery, since he means this world when he uses the name creation. For it is not what is unseen, but what is seen, that is subject to corruption. Then, after the creation has been restored to a better and more fitting condition, it remains, rejoicing and exulting over the children of God at the resurrection. For their sake it now groans and labors in pain, while it also waits for our redemption from the corruption of the body, so that, when we have risen and shaken off the mortality of the flesh, according to what is written, "Shake off the dust, arise, and sit down, O Jerusalem," Isaiah 52:2 and have been set free from sin, it also will be freed from corruption and no longer be subject to vanity, but to righteousness. Isaiah also says, "For as the new heaven and the new earth which I make remain before me, says the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain." Isaiah 66:22 And again, "Thus says the Lord who created heaven, He is the one who prepared the earth and created it, He established it; He created it not in vain, but formed it to be inhabited." Isaiah 45:18 For in truth God did not establish the universe in vain, or for no purpose but destruction, as those weak-minded men say, but to exist, and be inhabited, and continue. Therefore the earth and the heaven must exist again after the burning and shaking of all things.

BUT IF OUR OPPONENTS SAY: "How then can this be, if the universe is not destroyed, since the Lord says that heaven and earth will pass away, Matthew 24:35, and the prophet says that the heaven will vanish like smoke, and the earth will grow old like a garment, Isaiah 51:6?" we answer that Scripture commonly calls the world's change from its present condition to a better and more glorious one a destruction, because its earlier form is lost when all things are changed into a state of greater splendor. For there is no contradiction or absurdity in the Holy Scriptures. For it says, not that the world passes away, but that "the form of this world passes away," 1 Corinthians 7:31. So Scripture commonly calls the change from an earlier form to a better and more beautiful state a destruction, just as someone might call it a destruction when a child changes into a mature man, since the child's size is changed into manly stature and beauty. We may expect that the creation will pass away, as if it were to perish in the burning, so that it may be renewed. It will not, however, be destroyed. Then we who are renewed may live in a renewed world without any taste of sorrow, just as it is said, "When You send forth Your Spirit, they shall be created, and You shall renew the face of the earth," God from now on providing the proper condition of what surrounds it. For since the earth is to exist after the present age, there must certainly be inhabitants for it who will no longer be subject to death. They will neither marry nor beget children, but will live in all happiness, like the angels, without change or decay. Therefore it is foolish to argue about what way of life our bodies will then have, if there is no longer air, or earth, or anything else.

BUT BESIDES WHAT HAS BEEN SAID: there is this point that deserves attention, because it causes great confusion, if I may speak plainly about matters of such importance, Aglaophon. You said that the Lord clearly declared that those who obtain the resurrection will then be like the angels, Matthew 22:30. You raised this objection: the angels, being without flesh, are therefore in the highest happiness and glory. So then, since we are to be made equal to the angels, we too must be like them, stripped of flesh, and become angels. But you overlooked this, my excellent friend: He who created and ordered the universe out of nothing arranged the nature of immortal beings to be divided not only among angels and ministers, but also among principalities, thrones, and powers. For the race of angels is one thing, and that of principalities and powers is another. Immortal beings are not all of one order, constitution, tribe, and family, but there are differences of race and tribe. And the cherubim do not leave their own nature and take the form of angels. Nor do angels take the form of the others. For they cannot be anything except what they are and what they were made to be. In the same way, man also, having been appointed by the original order of things to live in the world and to rule over all that is in it, when he becomes immortal, will never be changed from being a man into the form either of angels or of anything else. For angels also do not undergo a change from their original form into another. For Christ, at His coming, did not proclaim that human nature, when it becomes immortal, would be remade or transformed into another nature, but into what it was before the fall. For each one among created things must remain in its own proper place, so that nothing may be lacking to any, but all may be full: heaven with angels, thrones with powers, the heavenly lights with ministers, and the more divine places, and the undefiled and unstained lights, with seraphim, who attend the Supreme Council and uphold the universe, and the world with men. For if we granted that men are changed into angels, it would follow that we must also say that angels are changed into powers, and these into one thing and another, until our argument goes farther than is safe.

GOD DID NOT DECIDE LATER TO MAKE AN ANGEL: as if He had made man badly or made a mistake in forming him, and then repented of His work, the way the worst craftsmen do. Nor did He make man after first wanting to make an angel and then failing, for that would be a sign of weakness, and so on. Why, then, did He make man and not angels, if He wanted men to be angels and not men? Was it because He was unable? It is blasphemy to think that. Or was He so occupied in making the worse thing that He delayed over the better? This also is absurd. For He does not fail to make what is good, nor does He put it off, nor is He unable to do it. Rather, He has the power to act how and when He pleases, since He is Himself power. Therefore, it was because He intended man to be man that He made him that way from the beginning. But if He intended this, and since He intends what is good, then man is good. Now man is said to be made up of soul and body. He cannot, then, exist without a body, but with a body, unless another man besides man is brought into being. For all the ranks of immortal beings must be preserved by God, and man is among these. For the Book of Wisdom says, "God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity." Wisdom 2:23. Therefore, the body does not perish, for man is made up of soul and body.

THEREFORE: notice that these are the very things the Lord wanted to teach the Sadducees, who did not believe in the resurrection of the flesh. For this was the opinion of the Sadducees. So, after they made up the case about the woman and the seven brothers in order to cast doubt on the resurrection of the flesh, the Sadducees came to Him, as it says in Matthew 22:23, who say that there is no resurrection. Then, if there had been no resurrection of the flesh, and only the soul were saved, Christ would have agreed that their opinion was right and excellent. But instead, He answered and said, "In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels in heaven," Matthew 22:23, not because they have no flesh, but because they do not marry or are given in marriage, and from now on are incorruptible. And He speaks of our being near the angels in this respect: just as the angels in heaven, so we also in paradise spend our time no longer in marriage feasts or other celebrations, but in seeing God and living life under the direction of Christ. For He did not say they shall be angels, but like angels, being, for example, crowned, as it is written, "with glory and honor," differing a little from the angels while coming near to being like angels. It is just as if He had said, while looking at the beautiful order of the sky, the stillness of the night, and everything lit by the moon's heavenly light, that the moon shines like the sun. We would not then say that He declared the moon to be the sun itself, but like the sun. In the same way, something that is not gold, but comes near the nature of gold, is said not to be gold, but to be like gold. But if it were gold, it would be said to be gold, and not to be like gold. Since it is not gold, but comes near its nature and has its appearance, it is said to be like gold. So also, when He says that the saints in the resurrection shall be like the angels, we do not understand Him to say that they will actually be angels, but that they will come near the condition of angels. So it is completely unreasonable to say, "Since Christ declared that the saints in the resurrection appear as angels, therefore their bodies do not rise," although the very words used clearly prove what the real case is. For the term resurrection is not used of what has not fallen, but of what has fallen and rises again, as when the prophet says, "I will also raise up again the tabernacle of David which has fallen down," Amos 9:11. Now the much-desired tabernacle of the soul has fallen and sunk down into the dust of the earth, Daniel 12:2. For it is not what is not dead, but what is dead, that is laid down. But it is the flesh that dies; the soul is immortal. So then, if the soul is immortal, and the body is the corpse, those who say that there is a resurrection, but not of the flesh, deny any resurrection. Because it is not what remains standing, but what has fallen and been laid down, that is raised up, according to what is written, "Does not he who falls rise again, and he who turns aside return?" Jeremiah 8:4.

SINCE THE FLESH WAS MADE TO STAND BETWEEN INCORRUPTION AND CORRUPTION: being itself neither one nor the other, and since it was overcome by corruption for the sake of pleasure, though it was the work and property of incorruption, it therefore became corruptible and was laid in the dust of the earth. Then, when it had been overcome by corruption and handed over to death through disobedience, God did not leave it to corruption to be claimed as its possession. Instead, after conquering death by the resurrection, He gave it back again to incorruption, so that corruption might not receive the property of incorruption, but incorruption might receive that of corruption. Therefore the apostle answers in this way: "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality," 1 Corinthians 15:53. Now when the corruptible and mortal puts on immortality, what else is this but that which "is sown in corruption and raised in incorruption," 1 Corinthians 15:42? For the soul is not corruptible or mortal. Rather, what is mortal and decaying is the flesh. This is so that, "as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly," 1 Corinthians 15:49. For the image of the earthy that we have borne is this: "Dust you are, and to dust shall you return," Genesis 3:19. But the image of the heavenly is the resurrection from the dead and incorruption, so that, "as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life," Romans 6:4. But if anyone thinks that the earthy image is the flesh itself, while the heavenly image is some other spiritual body besides the flesh, let him first consider that Christ, the heavenly man, when He appeared, bore the same form of limbs and the same image of flesh as ours. Through this also, He who was not man became man, so that "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive," 1 Corinthians 15:22. For if He bore flesh for any other reason than to set the flesh free and raise it up, why did He bear flesh needlessly, if He intended neither to save it nor to raise it up? But the Son of God does nothing needlessly. He did not, then, take the form of a servant for no purpose, but to raise it up and save it. For He truly was made man, and died, not merely in appearance, but so that He might truly be shown to be the first begotten from the dead, changing the earthy into the heavenly, and the mortal into the immortal. Then, when Paul says that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," 1 Corinthians 15:50, he is not speaking against the regeneration of the flesh. Rather, he means to teach that the kingdom of God, which is eternal life, is not possessed by the body, but that the body is possessed by life. For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were possessed by the body, then life would be used up by corruption. But as it is, life possesses what is dying, so that "death may be swallowed up in victory," 1 Corinthians 15:54, by life, and so that the corruptible may be seen to belong to incorruption and immortality, as it becomes released and free from death and sin, yet the slave and servant of immortality. So the body may be the possession of incorruption, and not incorruption the possession of the body.

IF: then, from such a drop—small, and previously having no existence, in its actual state of wetness, smallness, and insignificance, in fact out of nothing—a man is brought into being, how much more will a man come into being again from a man who previously existed? For it is not as difficult to make something anew after it has once existed and fallen into decay as it is to produce out of nothing what has never existed. Now if we choose to show the seed discharged from a man, and place beside it a corpse, each by itself, which of them, as they both lie open to view, will the spectators think is more likely to become a man—that drop, which is nothing at all, or that which already has shape, size, and substance? For if the very thing that is nothing at all becomes a man simply because God is pleased to do it, how much more will that which has existence and has been brought to completion become a man again, if God is pleased to do so? For what was the purpose of the theologian Moses in introducing, in a mystical sense, the Feast of Tabernacles in the Book of Leviticus? Was it so that we may keep a feast to God, as the Jews, with their low view of the Scriptures, interpret it? As if God took pleasure in such tabernacles, decorated with fruits and branches and leaves, which quickly wither and lose their greenness. We cannot say that. Tell me, then, what was the purpose of the Feast of Tabernacles? It was introduced to point to this real tabernacle of ours, which, after it had fallen into corruption through the transgression of the law and had been broken apart by sin, God promised to put together again and to raise up in incorruptibility, so that we may truly celebrate in His honor the great and famous Feast of Tabernacles at the resurrection. Then our tabernacles will be put together in the perfect order of immortality and harmony, and raised up from the dust in incorruption. Then the dry bones, according to the most true prophecy, will hear a voice, and by God the Creator and perfect Craftsman they will be brought to their joints, and He will renew the flesh and bind it on, no longer with such bonds as those by which it was first held together, but with such as will be forever undecaying and indissoluble. For I once saw on Olympus, a mountain of Lycia, fire bursting up from the ground by itself on the top of the mountain. Beside it stood an agnos tree, so flourishing, green, and shady that one might think a never-failing stream of water had fed its growth, rather than what was actually the case. Therefore, although the natures of things are corruptible, and their bodies are consumed by fire, and it is impossible for things that are by nature flammable once to remain untouched by fire, yet this tree, far from being burned, is actually more vigorous and greener than usual, though it is naturally flammable, and even though the fire is blazing around its very roots. I myself threw some branches of trees from the nearby wood onto the place where the fire burst out, and they immediately caught fire and were burned to ashes. Now then, tell me why it is that what cannot bear even the heat of the sun, but withers under it unless it is sprinkled with water, is not consumed when surrounded by such fiery heat, but instead both lives and thrives. What does this wonder mean? God appointed this as an example and an introduction to the day that is coming, so that we may know more certainly that, when all things are flooded with fire from heaven, the bodies marked by chastity and righteousness will be taken up by Him as free from all harm from the fire as if they were in cold water. For truly, O kind and generous Lord, the creature that serves You, who are the Maker, increases its strength against the unrighteous for their punishment, and lessens its strength for the good of those who put their trust in You; Wisdom 16:24. And at Your pleasure fire becomes cool, and harms nothing that You decide to preserve; and again, water burns more fiercely than fire, and nothing withstands Your unconquerable power and might. For You created all things out of nothing; therefore You also change and transform all things as You will, since they are Yours, and You alone are God.

THE APOSTLE CERTAINLY: after assigning planting and watering to skill and to earth and water, gave growth to God alone, where he says, "Neither is he who plants anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the increase." 1 Corinthians 3:7 For he knew that Wisdom, the first-born of God, the parent and maker of all things, brings everything into the world. The ancients called her Nature and Providence, because she, with constant provision and care, gives birth and growth to all things. For the Wisdom of God says, "My Father works until now, and I work." John 5:17 Now it is for this reason that Solomon called Wisdom the maker of all things, since God is in no way poor, but is able richly to create, make, order in different ways, and increase all things.

GOD: who created all things and provides for and cares for all things, took dust from the ground and made our outer man.

THE SECOND DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION:

FOR EXAMPLE: the images of our kings here are honored by everyone, even if they are not made from more precious materials like gold or silver. People do not respect the ones made of far more precious material while looking down on those made of less valuable material. Instead, they honor every image, even if it is made of chalk or bronze. And if someone speaks against either of them, he is not cleared as though he had only spoken against clay, nor is he condemned for despising gold, but because he has shown disrespect toward the King and Lord Himself. We make the images of God's angels, the principalities and powers, which are fashioned in gold, to His honor and glory.

FROM THE DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION:

READ THE BOOK ON THE RESURRECTION BY SAINT METHODIUS: bishop and martyr. What follows is a selection from it. It says that the body is not the soul's chain, as Origen thought. Nor does the prophet Jeremiah call souls chained because they are in bodies. For he lays down the principle that the body does not hinder the powers of the soul. Rather, the body is carried along by the soul and works together with it in whatever the soul commits to it. But how are we to understand the opinion of Gregory the Theologian, and many others?

ORIGEN SAID THAT THE BODY WAS GIVEN TO THE SOUL LIKE A CHAIN AFTER THE FALL: and that before that it lived without a body. He also said that this body we wear is the cause of our sins. Therefore he also called it a chain, since it can keep the soul from good works.

III: If the body was given to the soul after the fall as a chain, then it must have been given as a chain either for evil or for good. Now it is impossible that it was for good. No doctor or craftsman gives a remedy to something that has gone wrong in order to make it go wrong even more, much less would God do so. So it remains that it was a chain upon evil. But clearly we see that, in the beginning, Cain, clothed in this body, committed murder. And it is plain into what wickedness those who came after him rushed. The body, then, is not a chain upon evil. In fact, it is not a chain at all. Nor was the soul clothed in it for the first time after the fall.

A MAN: in terms of his nature, is most truly said to be neither a soul without a body nor, on the other hand, a body without a soul. Rather, he is a being made from the union of soul and body into one beautiful form. But Origen said that the soul alone is man, as Plato also did.

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MAN AND THE OTHER LIVING CREATURES: They were given many kinds of natural form and shape, as many as the physical and visible powers of nature produced at God's command. But to man was given the form and image of God, with every part exactly completed, after the very original likeness of the Father and the only begotten Son. Now we must consider how the saint states this.

HE SAYS THAT PHIDIAS THE SCULPTOR: after he had made the ivory image at Pisa, ordered oil to be poured out in front of it, so that, as much as he could make sure of it, it might be kept from perishing.

HE SAYS: as Athenagoras also said, that the devil is a spirit made by God, close to matter, just as the rest of the angels are. He says that the devil was entrusted with oversight of matter and the forms of matter. For according to the original order of the angels, God made them in His providence to care for the universe. In this way, while God exercises perfect and general oversight over everything, and keeps the highest authority and power over all things—for their existence depends on Him—the angels appointed for this purpose take care of particular things. Now the rest of them remained in the positions for which God made and appointed them. But the devil became insolent, and after becoming envious of us, acted wickedly in the charge committed to him. The same was true of those who later became enamored with bodily beauty and had unlawful relations with the daughters of men. For to them also, as in the case of men, God granted possession of their own choice. And how is this to be understood?

HE SAYS THAT THE COATS OF SKINS MEAN DEATH: For he says about Adam that when Almighty God saw that, through treachery, he, though immortal, had become evil, just as his deceiver the devil was, He prepared the coats of skins for this reason: so that when he was thus, as it were, clothed in mortality, all that was evil in him might die in the breaking up of the body.

HE SAYS THAT SAINT PAUL HAD TWO REVELATIONS: He says the apostle does not mean that paradise is in the third heaven, according to those who knew how to notice the fine points of language, when he says, "I know such a man caught up to the third heaven; and I know such a man, whether in the body or out of the body, God knows, that was caught up into paradise" in 2 Corinthians 12:2-3. Here he means that he saw two revelations, since he was clearly taken up twice: once to the third heaven, and once into paradise. For the words, "I know such a man caught up," make it certain that he himself was shown a revelation about the third heaven. And the words that follow, "And I know such a man, whether in the body or out of the body, God knows, that he was caught up into paradise," show that another revelation was made to him about paradise. Now he was led to make this statement because his opponent had argued from the apostle's words that paradise is only an idea, since it is above heaven, in order to conclude that life in paradise is without a body.

HE SAYS THAT IT IS IN OUR POWER TO DO EVIL OR TO AVOID DOING IT: Otherwise, we would not be punished for doing evil or rewarded for doing good. But whether evil thoughts are present or absent does not depend on us. Therefore even the blessed Paul says, "For what I want, that I do not do; but what I do not want, that I do," Romans 7:15. That is, my thoughts are not what I want, but what I do not want. Now he says that the habit of imagining evil is rooted out when physical death comes near, since for this reason death was appointed by God for the sinner, so that evil might not remain forever.

But what does this statement mean? It should be noted that it has also been made by other Fathers among us. What does it mean, since those who meet death find in it, at that time, neither an increase nor a decrease of sins?

A SUMMARY OF SOME APOSTOLIC WORDS FROM THE SAME DISCOURSE:

LET ME GIVE A BRIEF EXPLANATION OF SOME APOSTOLIC WORDS FROM THE SAME DISCUSSION: Let us see, then, what we have tried to say about the apostle. His statement, "I was alive without the law once," Romans 7:9, refers to the life lived in paradise before the law by our first parents. It was not without a body, but with a body, as we showed above. For we lived without concupiscence, being completely ignorant of its attacks. For if a person has no law by which he ought to live, and no power establishing what kind of life he ought to choose, so that he may justly be approved or blamed, he is considered free from accusation. Because no one can lust after things from which he is not restrained; and even if he did lust after them, he would not be blamed. For lust is not aimed at things that are before us and in our power, but at things that are before us and not in our power. For how should anyone care about a thing that is neither forbidden nor necessary for him? And for this reason it is said, "I had not known lust, except the law had said, You shall not covet," Romans 7:7. For when our first parents heard, "Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it; for in the day you eat of it you shall surely die," Genesis 2:17, then they conceived lust and took it in. Therefore it was said, "I had not known lust, except the law had said, You shall not covet." Nor would they have desired to eat, unless it had been said, "You shall not eat of it." For it was from there that sin took an occasion to deceive me. For when the law was given, the devil had power to work lust in me; for "without the law, sin was dead," Romans 7:8, which means that when the law had not been given, sin could not be committed. But "I was alive and blameless before the law," having no commandment by which it was necessary to live. But when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. "And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be to death," Romans 7:9-10. For after God had given the law, and had commanded me what I ought to do and what I ought not to do, the devil worked lust in me. For the promise of God given to me was for life and incorruption, so that by obeying it I might have ever-flourishing life and joy leading to incorruption. But for the one who disobeyed it, it would end in death. But the devil, whom he calls sin because he is the author of sin, taking occasion by the commandment to deceive me into disobedience, deceived me and killed me. In this way he made me subject to the condemnation, "In the day that you eat of it you shall surely die," Genesis 2:17. Therefore, "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just and good," Romans 7:12, because it was given not to harm, but to protect. For let us not suppose that God makes anything useless or harmful. "What then? Was that which is good made death to me?" Romans 7:13. That is, was what was given as a law, so that it might be the cause of the greatest good, made death to me? God forbid. For it was not the law of God that became the cause of my being brought under corruption, but the devil, so that he might be shown as the one who, through what is good, worked evil, and so that the inventor of evil might be shown and proved to be the greatest of all sinners. For we know that "the law is spiritual," Romans 7:14, and therefore it cannot in any way be harmful to anyone. For spiritual things are far removed from irrational lust and sin. But "I am carnal, sold under sin," Romans 7:14, which means this: I, being carnal and placed between good and evil as a voluntary agent, am such that I have it in my power to choose what I will. For, "Behold I set before you life and death," meaning that death would result from disobedience to the spiritual law, that is, the commandment; and from obedience to the carnal law, that is, the serpent's counsel. For by such a choice I am sold to the devil, having fallen under sin. Therefore evil, as if besieging me, clings to me and dwells in me, since justice gives me up to be sold to the Evil One because I violated the law. Therefore also the words, "That which I do, I allow not, and what I hate, that do I," Romans 7:15, are not to be understood as doing evil, but only as thinking it. For it is not in our power to think or not think of improper things, but to act or not act on our thoughts. For we cannot keep thoughts from coming into our minds, since we receive them when they are stirred up in us from outside. But we are able to keep from obeying them and acting on them. Therefore it is in our power to will not to think these things; but it is not in our power to make them go away so that they do not come into the mind again. For this does not lie in our power, as I said. This is the meaning of that statement, "The good that I would, I do not," Romans 7:19. For I do not will to think the things that injure me, for this good is completely innocent. But "the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do"—that is, I do not want to think, and yet I think what I do not want. And consider whether it was not for these very things that David pleaded with God, grieving that he thought of things that he did not want: "O cleanse me from my secret faults. Keep Your servant also from presumptuous sins, lest they get dominion over me; so shall I be undefiled, and innocent from the great offense." And the apostle also says in another place, "Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ," 2 Corinthians 10:5.

BUT IF ANYONE SHOULD DARE TO OPPOSE THIS STATEMENT AND REPLY THAT THE APOSTLE TEACHES THAT WE HATE NOT ONLY THE EVIL THAT IS IN THOUGHT: but also that we do what we do not want, and hate it even while doing it—for he says, “For the good that I want to do, I do not do; but the evil I do not want to do, that I do,” Romans 7:19—if the one who says this speaks the truth, let us ask him to explain what evil it was that the apostle hated and did not want to do, but did; and what good it was that he wanted to do, but did not. And, in turn, whether every time he wanted to do good, he failed to do the good he wanted, and did the evil he did not want. And how can he say, while urging us to throw off every kind of sin, “Be followers of me, even as I also am of Christ,” 1 Corinthians 11:1? So he meant that the things already mentioned, which he did not want to do, were not to be actually done, but only thought about. For how else could he be an exact imitation of Christ? It would be excellent and most pleasant if we did not have those who oppose us and struggle against us. But since this is impossible, we cannot do what we want. For we do not want to have those who lead us into passion, because then we could be saved without weariness and effort. But what we want does not happen; instead, what we do not want happens. For it is necessary, as I said, that we should be tested. Let us not then, O my soul, let us not yield to the Evil One. Instead, putting on the whole armor of God, which is our protection, let us have the breastplate of righteousness, and your feet fitted with the readiness of the Gospel of peace. Above all, taking the shield of faith, with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, so that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of Christ, 2 Corinthians 10:5. For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, Ephesians 6:12. For “I do not understand what I am doing. For what I want to do, that I do not do; but what I hate, that I do. If then I do what I do not want, I agree with the law that it is good. But now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. For I know that in me—that is, in my flesh—dwells no good thing,” Romans 7:15-18. And this is rightly said. For remember how it has already been shown that, from the time man went astray and disobeyed the law, sin then, receiving its beginning from his disobedience, dwelt in him. For in this way an upheaval was stirred up, and we were filled with disturbances and foreign imaginations, being emptied of the divine inspiration and filled with fleshly desire, which the crafty serpent poured into us. And therefore God brought in death for our sake, so that He might destroy sin, lest, rising up in us as immortals, as I said, it should be immortal. When the apostle says, “For I know that in me—that is, in my flesh—dwells no good thing,” by these words he means to show that sin dwells in us from the transgression, through lust. Out of this, like young shoots, thoughts of pleasure spring up around us. For there are two kinds of thoughts in us. One arises from the lust that lies in the body, which, as I said, came from the craft of the Evil Spirit. The other comes from the law that agrees with the commandment, which was planted in us as a natural law, stirring our thoughts toward good, when we delight in the law of God according to our mind; for this is the inner man. But there is also the law of the devil according to the lust that dwells in the flesh. For the one who fights against and opposes the law of God—that is, the mind's tendency toward good—is the same one who stirs up fleshly and sensual impulses toward lawlessness.

FOR THE APOSTLE HERE CLEARLY SETS OUT: as I think, three laws. One agrees with the good planted in us, and he plainly calls this the law of the mind. Another is the law that comes from the attack of evil, and it often pulls the soul toward lustful thoughts. This, he says, wars against the law of the mind, Romans 7:23. And the third agrees with sin, which is settled in the flesh through lust. He calls this the law of sin that dwells in our members, Romans 7:23. The Evil One urges this on and often stirs it up against us, driving us to unrighteousness and evil deeds. For there seems to be in us one thing that is better and another that is worse. When what is better by nature is about to become stronger than what is worse, the whole mind is carried toward what is good. But when what is worse grows and outweighs it, a man is driven instead toward evil thoughts. Because of this, the apostle prays to be delivered from it, regarding it as death and destruction. The prophet does the same when he says, "Cleanse me from my secret faults." The same meaning is shown by the words, "For I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" Romans 7:22-24. By this he does not mean that the body is death, but the law of sin that is in his members, lying hidden in us through the transgression and always deceiving the soul into the death of unrighteousness. And he immediately adds, clearly showing what kind of death he wanted to be delivered from, and who it was that delivered him: "I thank God, through Jesus Christ." Romans 7:25. And this should be considered, O Aglaophon: if he had said that this body was death, as you supposed, he would not afterward mention Christ as the one delivering him from so great an evil. For in that case, what strange thing would we have received from the coming of Christ? And how could the apostle have said this, as if he could be delivered from death by the coming of Christ, when it was appointed for all to die before Christ came into the world? Therefore, O Aglaophon, he does not say that this body was death, but the sin that dwells in the body through lust, from which God delivered him by the coming of Christ. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death," so that "He that raised up Jesus from the dead shall also give life to your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwells in you." He condemned sin that is in the body to its destruction, so that the righteousness of the law of nature, which draws us to good and agrees with the commandment, might be kindled and made known. For what the law of nature could not do, because it was weak and was overcome by the lust that lies in the body, God gave power to accomplish by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh. Thus sin was condemned to its destruction, so that it would never again bear fruit in the flesh, and so that the righteousness of the law of nature might be fulfilled, overflowing in the obedience of those who walk not according to the lust of the flesh, but according to the desire and guidance of the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life, which is the Gospel, is different from the earlier laws. By its preaching, it leads to obedience and the remission of sins, and it delivered us from the law of sin and death after completely conquering the sin that ruled over our flesh.

HE SAYS THAT PLANTS ARE NOT NOURISHED OR INCREASED FROM THE EARTH: For he says, let anyone consider how the earth could be changed and taken up into the substance of trees. If that were so, then the place of the earth around the tree, which was drawn up through the roots into the whole size of the tree as it grew, would have to be hollowed out. So the idea they hold about the flowing of bodies is absurd. For how could the earth first enter through the roots into the trunks of plants, and then pass through their channels into all their branches, and be turned into leaves and fruit? Now there are large trees, such as the cedar, pine, and fir, which every year bear many leaves and fruit. Yet one can see that they do not consume any of the surrounding earth into the bulk and substance of the tree. For if it were true that the earth went up through the roots and was turned into wood, then the whole place where the earth lay around them would have to be hollowed out. For it is not the nature of a dry substance to flow in like a moist substance, and fill the place of what moved away. Also, there are fig trees and other similar plants that often grow in the buildings of monuments, and yet they never consume the whole building into themselves. But if anyone chose to gather their fruit and leaves for many years, he would see that their bulk had become much greater than the earth on the monuments. Therefore it is absurd to suppose that the earth is used up into the crop of fruits and leaves. And even if they were all made by it, they would be so only by using it as their seat and place. For bread is not made without a mill, a place, time, and fire, and yet bread is not made out of any of these things. The same may be said of a thousand other things.

NOW THE FOLLOWERS OF ORIGEN BRING FORWARD THIS PASSAGE: "For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved," 2 Corinthians 5:1, and so on, to argue against the resurrection of the body. They say that the tabernacle is the body, and that the house not made with hands in the heavens is our spiritual clothing. Therefore, the holy Methodius says that by this earthly house we should figuratively understand our short-lived life here, and not this tabernacle. For if you decide to think that the body is the earthly house that is dissolved, tell us what the tabernacle is whose house is dissolved. For the tabernacle is one thing, the house of the tabernacle is another, and we ourselves who have the tabernacle are still another thing. For he says, "If our earthly house of this tabernacle be dissolved," and by this he shows that we ourselves are the souls, that the body is a tabernacle, and that the house of the tabernacle figuratively means the enjoyment of the flesh in this present life. If, then, this present bodily life is dissolved like a house, we shall have that which is not made with hands in the heavens. He says "not made with hands" to show the difference, because this life may be called made with hands, since all the tasks and pursuits of life are carried on by the hands of men. For the body, being the workmanship of God, is not said to be made with hands, since it is not formed by the arts of men. But if they say that it is made with hands because it was the workmanship of God, then our souls also, and the angels, and the spiritual clothing in the heavens, are made with hands, for all these things also are the workmanship of God. What, then, is the house that is made with hands? It is, as I have said, the short-lived life that is supported by human hands. For God said, "In the sweat of your face shall you eat bread," Genesis 3:19. And when that life is dissolved, we have the life that is not made with hands. As the Lord also showed when He said, "Make for yourselves friends by means of the mammon of unrighteousness, so that when you fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations," Luke 16:9. For what the Lord there called habitations, the apostle here calls clothing. And what He there calls friends of unrighteousness, the apostle here calls houses dissolved. So then, when the days of our present life fail, those good deeds of kindness that we have gained in this unrighteous life, and in this world which lies in wickedness, 1 John 5:19, will receive our souls. So also, when this perishable life is dissolved, we shall have the habitation that is before the resurrection. That is, our souls shall be with God until we receive the new house that is prepared for us, and that will never fall. Therefore also we groan, not because we want to be unclothed, as to the body, but clothed upon, 2 Corinthians 5:4, by it in the other life. For the house in heaven with which we desire to be clothed is immortality. And when we are clothed with it, every weakness and mortality will be completely swallowed up in it, being consumed by endless life. For we walk by faith, not by sight, 2 Corinthians 5:7. That is, we still go forward by faith, seeing the things beyond with an unclear understanding and not plainly, so that we may later see these things, enjoy them, and be in them. Now this I say, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither does corruption inherit incorruption, 1 Corinthians 15:50. By flesh, he did not mean flesh itself, but the irrational impulse toward the lustful pleasures of the soul. And therefore, when he says, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," he adds the explanation, "Neither does corruption inherit incorruption." Now corruption is not the thing that is corrupted, but the thing that corrupts. For when death prevails, the body sinks into corruption. But when life still remains in it, it stands uncorrupted. Therefore, since the flesh is the boundary between corruption and incorruption, not being either corruption or incorruption, it was overcome by corruption because of pleasure, although it was the work and possession of incorruption. Therefore it became subject to corruption. When, then, it had been overcome by corruption and was handed over to death for chastisement, He did not leave it to be overcome and handed over as an inheritance to corruption. Instead, by conquering death again through the resurrection, He restored it to incorruption, so that corruption might not inherit incorruption, but incorruption might inherit what is corruptible. And therefore the apostle answers, "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal immortality," 1 Corinthians 15:53. But when the corruptible and mortal put on incorruption and immortality, what else is this but that which is sown in corruption rising in incorruption? 1 Corinthians 15:42. For, as we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. For the image of the earthly that we have borne refers to the saying, "Dust you are, and to dust you shall return." And the image of the heavenly is the resurrection from the dead and incorruption.

JUSTIN OF NEAPOLIS: a man not far removed either from the times of the apostles or from their virtues, says that what is mortal is inherited, but life does the inheriting; and that flesh dies, but the kingdom of heaven lives. So then, when Paul says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven, he is not speaking as if he were treating the regeneration of the flesh lightly. Rather, he is teaching that the kingdom of God, which is eternal life, is not inherited by the body, but that the body is inherited by life. For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were inherited by the body, then it would follow that life was swallowed up by corruption. But as it is, life inherits what is mortal, so that death may be swallowed up by life in victory, and so that what is corruptible may appear as the possession of incorruption. It is made free from death and sin, and becomes the slave and subject of immortality, so that the body may become the possession of incorruption, and not incorruption become the possession of the body.

NOW METHODIUS EXPLAINS THE PASSAGE: "The dead in Christ shall rise first: then we who are alive," in this way: these are our bodies. For the souls are we ourselves, and when we rise, we take up again that which is dead from the earth. Then, being caught up with them to meet the Lord, we may gloriously celebrate the splendid festival of the resurrection, because we have received our everlasting tabernacles, which will no longer die or be dissolved.

I SAW: he says, on Olympus—Olympus is a mountain in Lycia—a fire rising by itself from the earth on the top of the mountain. Beside it was the plant Puragnos, so thriving, green, and shady that it seemed to grow from a fountain rather than from the ground. Why was this plant not burned up, but instead even more flourishing, though things of that kind are by nature perishable and their bodies are consumed by fire? In its own nature it burns easily, and yet the fire was burning around its roots. Then I threw branches from the trees in the surrounding wood into the place where the fire was pouring out, and they immediately burst into flame and were turned into ashes. What, then, is the meaning of this contrast? God appointed this as a sign and a warning beforehand of the coming Day, so that we may know that when all things are covered by fire, the bodies that are marked by chastity and righteousness will pass through it as if it were cold water.

9. Consider also, he says, whether the blessed John, when he says, "And the sea gave up the dead who were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead who were in them," means the parts given up by the elements for the rebuilding of each person. By the sea he means the moist element. By hell, he means the air, from the Greek word ἀειδές, because it is invisible, as Origen said. And by death, he means the earth, because those who die are laid in it. For this reason, it is also called in the Psalms "the dust of death," Christ saying that He is brought into the dust of death.

FOR: he says, whatever is made up of pure air and pure fire, and is of the same substance as the angelic beings, cannot have the nature of earth and water, since it would then be earthly. And Origen has shown that the body of man that will rise will be of this kind and made up of these things, and he also said that it would be spiritual.

HE ASKS WHAT THE RISEN BODY WILL LOOK LIKE: if this human form, which he thinks is useless, completely disappears. This human form is the most beautiful of all forms found in living creatures, since it is the form that God Himself uses, as the very wise Paul explains: “For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God.” In keeping with this, the rational bodies of the angels are also arranged. So then, will that body be round, or many-sided, or square, or pyramid-shaped? For there are very many kinds of forms. But this is impossible. What, then, are we to think of the claim that the godlike form is to be rejected as something less noble, when he himself admits that the soul is like the body, and that man is to rise again without hands or feet?

THE TRANSFORMATION: he says, is the restoring of the body to a state that cannot suffer and is full of glory. For now, the body is a body of desire and humiliation, and that is why Daniel was called a man of desires. But then it will be changed into a body that cannot suffer, not by changing the arrangement of its members, but because it will no longer desire fleshly pleasures.

THEN HE SAYS: while refuting Origen: Origen thinks that the same flesh will not be restored to the soul. Instead, he says that the form of each person, according to the outward appearance by which the flesh is now recognized, will rise impressed upon another spiritual body. So each person will appear again in the same form. And he says that this is the resurrection that is promised. For, he says, the material body is fluid and does not remain the same in itself at all. Rather, it wears out and is replaced around the appearance by which its shape is recognized, and by which the figure is held together. Therefore, he says, the resurrection must be only that of the form.

THEN: after a little while, he says: “If, then, Origen, you maintain that the resurrection of the body, changed into a spiritual body, is to be expected only in appearance, and you present the vision of Moses and Elijah as a very strong proof of it, saying that they appeared after they had departed from life, with no different appearance from what they had from the beginning, then the resurrection of all men will be the same. But Moses and Elijah rose and appeared in this form of which you speak before Christ suffered and rose. How then could Christ be proclaimed by prophets and apostles as the first begotten of the dead? For if Christ is believed to be the first begotten of the dead, He is the first begotten of the dead because He rose before all others. But Moses appeared to the apostles before Christ suffered, having this form in which you say the resurrection is fulfilled. Therefore, there is no resurrection of the form without the flesh. For either there is a resurrection of the form, as you teach, and then Christ is no longer the first begotten of the dead, since souls appeared before Him in this form after death; or He is truly the first begotten, and it is completely impossible that anyone should have been considered worthy of a resurrection before Him, so as not to die again. But if no one rose before Him, and Moses and Elijah appeared to the apostles not having flesh, but only its appearance, then the resurrection in the flesh is clearly shown. For it is utterly absurd that the resurrection should be presented only in form, since souls, after they depart from the flesh, never seem to lay aside the form which, he says, rises again. But if that remains with them, so that it cannot be taken away, as with the soul of Moses and Elijah, and if it neither perishes, as you think, nor is destroyed, but is present with them everywhere, then surely that form which never fell cannot be said to rise again.”

BUT IF ANYONE: finding this unacceptable, answers, “How then, if no one rose before Christ went down into Hades, are several people recorded as having risen before Him?” Among them are the son of the widow of Sarepta, the son of the Shunammite woman, and Lazarus. We must say this: they rose only to die again. But we are speaking about those who, after rising, will never die. And if anyone speaks with doubt about the soul of Elijah, saying that the Scriptures say he was taken up in the flesh, while we say that he appeared to the apostles without the flesh, we must say that allowing that he appeared to the apostles in the flesh supports our argument even more. For this case shows that the body can receive immortality, as was also proved by the translation of Enoch. For if he could not receive immortality, he could not have remained for so long a time in a state of insensibility. If, then, he appeared with the body, that was truly after he was dead, but certainly not as one who had risen from the dead. And we may say this if we agree with Origen when he says that the same form is given to the soul after death, when it is separated from the body. This is the most impossible of all things, because the form of the flesh had already been destroyed by its changes, just as the form of a melted statue is destroyed before its complete dissolution. Because a quality cannot be separated from the material so as to exist by itself, the shape that disappears from the bronze is separated from the melted statue and no longer has substantial existence.

15. Since the form is said in death to be separated from the flesh, come, let us consider in how many ways something that is separated is said to be separated. A thing is said to be separated from another either in act and subsistence, or in thought, or else in act but not in subsistence. For example, if someone should separate wheat and barley that had been mixed together, then, as they are separated in movement, they are said to be separated in act. And as they stand apart when separated, they are said to be separated in subsistence. They are separated in thought when we separate matter from its qualities, and qualities from matter. They are separated in act, but not in subsistence, when something separated from another no longer exists, because it does not have a substantial existence. And it may be seen that this is so in mechanics as well, when one looks at a statue or a bronze horse after it has been melted. For when he considers these things, he will see their natural form changing, and they change into another shape from which the original form disappears. For if anyone should melt down works made in the likeness of a man or a horse, he will find that the appearance of the form disappears, but the material itself remains. Therefore, it cannot be maintained that the form will rise again in no way corrupted, while the body in which the form was impressed is destroyed.

XVI: But he says that it will be so, because it will be changed into a spiritual body. Therefore, it is necessary to confess that the very same thing that first came forth does not rise again, since it is changed and corrupted along with the flesh. For although it is changed into a spiritual body, that will not properly be the original substance, but a certain likeness of it, formed in an ethereal body. However, if it is not the same form, and if the body that rises is not that body, then it is another body in place of the first. For what is merely like something, being different from what it resembles, cannot be that very first thing according to which it was made.

MOREOVER: he says that appearance or form is what shows the sameness of the parts in the distinct character of the form.

AND WHEN ORIGEN EXPLAINS AS AN ALLEGORY WHAT THE PROPHET EZEKIEL SAYS ABOUT THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD: and twists it to mean the return of the Israelites from their captivity in Babylon, the saint, while refuting him, says this also after many other remarks: For they did not gain complete freedom, nor did they defeat their enemies by greater power and live again in Jerusalem. And when they often tried to build the temple, other nations stopped them. Therefore they were hardly able to build in forty-six years what Solomon finished from the foundation in seven years. But what more do we need to say about this? For from the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and those who ruled Babylon after him, until the time of the Persian campaign against the Assyrians, and the empire of Alexander, and the war stirred up by the Romans against the Jews, Jerusalem was overthrown by its enemies six times. And Josephus records this, saying, "Jerusalem was taken in the second year of the reign of Vespasian. It had been taken five times before, but now for the second time it was destroyed. For Asochaeus king of Egypt, and after him Antiochus, then Pompey, and after these Sosius with Herod, took the city and burned it; but before these, the king of Babylon conquered and destroyed it."

XIX: He says that Origen holds these opinions, which he refutes. And there may be a doubt concerning Lazarus and the rich man. Simpler people think that these things were spoken as though both were receiving what was due for the things they had done in life in their bodies. But the more accurate think that, since no one is left in life after the resurrection, these things do not happen at the resurrection. For the rich man says, "I have five brothers; ... lest they also come into this place of torment, send Lazarus, that he may tell them of those things which are here." Therefore, if we ask about the tongue, and the finger, and Abraham's bosom, and the reclining there, it may perhaps be that the soul, in the change, receives a form similar in appearance to its gross and earthly body. If, then, anyone of those who have fallen asleep is recorded as having appeared, in the same way he has been seen in the form which he had when he was in the flesh. Besides, when Samuel appeared, it is clear that, being seen, he was clothed in a body. And this must especially be admitted if we are pressed by arguments which prove that the essence of the soul is incorporeal, and is manifested by itself. But the rich man in torment, and the poor man who was comforted in the bosom of Abraham, are said, the one to be punished in Hades, and the other to be comforted in Abraham's bosom, before the appearing of the Savior, and before the end of the world, and therefore before the resurrection. This teaches that already now, at the change, the soul rises a body. Therefore, the saint says as follows: "Setting forth that the soul, after its removal from here, has a form similar in appearance to this body that can be sensed, does Origen, after Plato, represent the soul as being incorporeal? And how should that which, after removal from the world, is said to have need of a vehicle and a clothing, so that it might not be found naked, be in itself other than incorporeal? But if it is incorporeal, must it not also be incapable of passion? For it follows, from its being incorporeal, that it is also impassible and imperturbable. If, then, it was not distracted by any irrational desire, neither was it changed by a pained or suffering body. For neither can that which is incorporeal sympathize with a body, nor a body with that which is incorporeal, if indeed the soul should seem to be incorporeal, in accordance with what has been said. But if it sympathize with the body, as is proved by the testimony of those who appear, it cannot be incorporeal. Therefore God alone is celebrated as the unbegotten, independent, and unwearied nature; being incorporeal, and therefore invisible; for no man has seen God. But souls, being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members visible to reason, having received this impression. From where also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence."

AT THE END: the saint says: The words, "For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living," must be understood as referring to souls and bodies. The souls are the living, because they are immortal, and the bodies are the dead.

XXI: Since the human body is more honorable than other living creatures, because it is said to have been formed by the hands of God, and because it has become the vessel of the rational soul, why is it so short-lived, even shorter-lived than some irrational creatures? Is it not clear that its long-lasting life will be after the resurrection?