Edition Hide
Adversus Iudaeos

II.

[1] Igitur gradum conseramus et summam quaestionis certis lineis terminemus. Cur etenim deus universitatis conditor mundi totius gubernator hominis plasmator universarum gentium sator legem per Moysen uni populo dedisse credatur et non omnibus gentibus adtribuisse dicatur? [2] Nisi enim omnibus eam dedisset, nullo pacto ad eam etiam proselytos ex gentibus accessum habere permitteret. Sed ut congruit bonitati dei et aequitati ipsius utpote plasmatoris generis humani, omnibus gentibus eandem legem dedit, quam certis statutis temporibus observari praecepit, quando voluit et per quos voluit et sicut voluit. Namque in principio mundi ipsius Adae et Evae legem dedit, ne de fructu arboris plantatae in medio paradisi ederent; quod si contra fecissent, morte morerentur. Quae lex eis sufficeret, si esset custodita. [3] In hac enim lege Adae data omnia praecepta condita recognoscimus quae postea pullulaverunt data per Moysen, id est: Diliges dominum deum tuum de toto corde tuo et ex tota anima tua, et: Diliges proximum tibi tamquam te, et: Non occides, non moechaberis, non fraudaberis, falsum testimonium non dices, honora patrem tuum et matrem, et: Alienum non concupisces. [4] Primordialis enim lex est data Adae et Evae in paradiso quasi matrix omnium praeceptorum dei. Denique si dominum deum suum dilexissent, contra praeceptum eius non fecissent; si proximum diligerent id est semetipsos, persuasioni serpentis non credidissent atque ita in semetipsos homicidium non commisissent, excidendo de immortalitate faciendo contra dei praeceptum; [5] a furto quoque abstinuissent, si de fructu arboris non clam degustassent, nec a conspectu domini dei sui sub arbore delitescere gestissent, nec falsum adseveranti diabolo participes efficerentur credendo ei quod similes dei essent futuri, atque ita nec deum offendissent ut patrem qui eos de limo terrae quasi ex utero matris figuraverat; si alienum non concupissent, de fructu inlicito non degustassent. [6] Igitur in hac generali et primordiali dei lege, quam in arboris fructu observari deus sanxerat, omnia praecepta legis posterioris specialiter indita fuisse cognoscimus, quae suis temporibus edita germinaverunt. Eiusdem est enim postea superducere legem qui ante praemiserat praeceptum, quoniam et ipsius est erudire postea qui ante iustos formare instituerat. [7] Quid enim mirum, si is auget disciplinam qui instituit, si is perficit qui coepit? Denique ante legem Moysei scriptam in tabulis lapideis legem fuisse contendo non scriptam, quae naturaliter intellegebatur et a patribus custodiebatur. Nam unde Noe iustus inventus, si non illi naturalis legis iustitia praecedebat ? Unde Abraham amicus dei deputatus, si non de aequitate et iustitia legis naturalis ? Unde Melchisedech sacerdos dei summi nuncupatus, si non ante Leviticae legis sacerdotium Levitae fuerunt qui sacrificia deo offerebant ? [8] Sic etenim post supra scriptos patriarchas data lex est Moysi eo tempore, posteaquam ab Aegypto excesserunt, post [intervallum] multorum temporum spatia. Denique post quadringentos et triginta annos Abrahae data est lex. [9] Unde intellegimus dei legem iam ante Moysen nec in Choreb tantum aut in Sina et in eremo primum, sed antiquiorem primum in paradiso, post deinde patriarchis atque ita et Iudaeis certis temporibus datam quando voluit et certis temporibus reformatam, ut non iam ad Moysi legem ita adtendamus quasi ad principalem legem, sed ad subsequentem quam certo tempore deus et gentibus exhibuit [et] repromissam per prophetas et in melius reformavit et praemonuit futurum, ut, sicuti certo tempore data est lex per Moysen, ita temporaliter observata et custodita credatur.

[10] Nec adimamus hanc dei potestatem pro temporum condicione legis praecepta reformantem in hominis salutem. Denique qui contendit et sabbatum adhuc observandum quasi salutis medellam et circumcisionem octavi diei propter mortis comminationem, doceat in praeteritum iustos sabbatizasse aut circumcidisse et sic amicos dei effectos. [11] Nam si circumcisio purgat hominem, deus Adam incircumcisum cum faceret, cur eum non circumcidit vel posteaquam deliquit, si purgat circumcisio ? Certe in paradiso constituens eum incircumcisum colonum paradisi praefecit. [12] Igitur cum neque circumcisum neque sabbatizantem deus Adam instituerit, consequenter quoque sobolem eius Abel offerentem sibi sacrificia incircumcisum nec sabbatizantem laudavit, accepto ferens quae offerebat in simplicitate cordis et reprobans sacrificium fratris eius Cain, qui quod offerebat non recte dividebat. [13] Noe quoque incircumcisum deus sed et non sabbatizantem de diluvio liberavit. Nam et Enoch iustissimum non circumcisum nec sabbatizantem de hoc mundo transtulit qui necdum mortem gustavit, ut aeternitatis candidatus iam nobis ostenderet nos quoque sine legis onere Moysis deo placere posse. [14] Melchisedech quoque summi dei sacerdos incircumcisus et non sabbatizans ad sacerdotium dei adlectus est. Probat et Loth frater Abrahae, quod pro meritis iustitiae suae sine legis observatione de Sodomitarum incendio sit liberatus.

Translation Hide
An Answer to the Jews

Chapter II.--The Law Anterior to Moses.

Stand we, therefore, foot to foot, and determine we the sum and substance of the actual question within definite lists.

For why should God, the founder of the universe, the Governor of the whole world, ¹ the Fashioner of humanity, the Sower ² of universal nations be believed to have given a law through Moses to one people, and not be said to have assigned it to all nations? For unless He had given it to all by no means would He have habitually permitted even proselytes out of the nations to have access to it. But--as is congruous with the goodness of God, and with His equity, as the Fashioner of mankind--He gave to all nations the selfsame law, which at definite and stated times He enjoined should be observed, when He willed, and through whom He willed, and as He willed. For in the beginning of the world He gave to Adam himself and Eve a law, that they were not to eat of the fruit of the tree planted in the midst of paradise; but that, if they did contrariwise, by death they were to die. ³ Which law had continued enough for them, had it been kept. For in this law given to Adam we recognise in embryo ⁴ all the precepts which afterwards sprouted forth when given through Moses; that is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God from thy whole heart and out of thy whole soul; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; ⁵ Thou shalt not kill; Thou shalt not commit adultery; Thou shalt not steal; False witness thou shalt not utter; Honour thy father and mother; and, That which is another's, shalt thou not covet. For the primordial law was given to Adam and Eve in paradise, as the womb of all the precepts of God. In short, if they had loved the Lord their God, they would not have contravened His precept; if they had habitually loved their neighbour--that is, themselves ⁶ --they would not have believed the persuasion of the serpent, and thus would not have committed murder upon themselves, ⁷ by falling ⁸ from immortality, by contravening God's precept; from theft also they would have abstained, if they had not stealthily tasted of the fruit of the tree, nor had been anxious to skulk beneath a tree to escape the view of the Lord their God; nor would they have been made partners with the falsehood-asseverating devil, by believing him that they would be "like God;" and thus they would not have offended God either, as their Father, who had fashioned them from clay of the earth, as out of the womb of a mother; if they had not coveted another's, they would not have tasted of the unlawful fruit.

Therefore, in this general and primordial law of God, the observance of which, in the case of the tree's fruit, He had sanctioned, we recognise enclosed all the precepts specially of the posterior Law, which germinated when disclosed at their proper times. For the subsequent superinduction of a law is the work of the same Being who had before premised a precept; since it is His province withal subsequently to train, who had before resolved to form, righteous creatures. For what wonder if He extends a discipline who institutes it? if He advances who begins? In short, before the Law of Moses, ⁹ written in stone-tables, I contend that there was a law unwritten, which was habitually understood naturally, and by the fathers was habitually kept. For whence was Noah "found righteous," ¹⁰ if in his case the righteousness of a natural law had not preceded? Whence was Abraham accounted "a friend of God," ¹¹ if not on the ground of equity and righteousness, (in the observance) of a natural law? Whence was Melchizedek named "priest of the most high God," ¹² if, before the priesthood of the Levitical law, there were not levites who were wont to offer sacrifices to God? For thus, after the above-mentioned patriarchs, was the Law given to Moses, at that (well-known) time after their exode from Egypt, after the interval and spaces of four hundred years. In fact, it was after Abraham's "four hundred and thirty years"