16. Concerning the Canaanitish Woman. Meaning of the “Borders of Tyre and Sidon.”
“And Jesus went out thence and withdrew into the parts of Tyre and Sidon. And behold a Canaanitish woman.” Whence the “thence”? Was it from the land of Gennesaret, concerning which it was said before, “And when they had crossed over they came into the land of Gennesaret?” But He withdrew, perhaps because the Pharisees were offended when they heard that “not that which entereth in, but that which proceedeth out, defileth the man;” and that, because of their being suspected of plotting against Him, it is said, “He withdrew,” is manifest from the passage, “And when He heard that John was delivered up He withdrew into Galilee.” Perhaps also on this account, when describing the things in this place, Mark says that “He rose up and went into the borders of Tyre, and having entered into the house wished no man to know it.” It is probable that He sought to avoid the Pharisees who were offended at His teaching, waiting for the time for His suffering, which was more fitting and rightly appointed. But some one might say that Tyre and Sidon are used for the Gentiles; accordingly when He withdrew from Israel He came into the parts of the Gentiles. Among the Hebrews, then, Tyre is called Sor, and it is interpreted “anguish.” Sidon, which is also the Hebrew name, is rendered “hunters.” And among the Gentiles likewise the hunters are the evil powers, and among them is great distress, the distress, namely, which exists in wickedness and passions. When Jesus, then, went out from Gennesaret He withdrew indeed from Israel and came, not to Tyre and Sidon, but into “the parts” of Tyre and Sidon, with the result that those of the Gentiles now believe in part; so that if He had visited the whole of Tyre and Sidon, no unbeliever would have been left in it. Now, according to Mark, “Jesus rose up and went into the borders of Tyre,”—that is, the distress of the Gentiles,—in order that they also from these borders who believe can be saved, when they come out of them; for attend to this: “And behold a Canaanitish woman came out from these borders and cried saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David, my daughter is terribly vexed with a demon.” And I think that if she had not come out from those borders she would not have been able to cry to Jesus with the great faith to which testimony was borne; and according to the proportion of faith one comes out from the borders among the Gentiles, which “when the Most High divided the nations He set up according to the number of the sons of Israel,” and prevented their further advance. Here, then, certain borders are spoken of as the borders of Tyre and Sidon, but in Exodus the borders of Pharaoh, in which, they say, were formed the plagues against the Egyptians. And we must suppose that each of us when he sins is in the borders of Tyre or Sidon or of Pharaoh and Egypt, or some one of those which are outside the allotted inheritance of God; but when he changes from wickedness to virtue he goes out from the borders of evil, and comes to the borders of the portion of God, there being among these also a difference which will be manifest to those who are able to understand the things that concern the division and the inheritance of Israel, in harmony with the spiritual law. And attend also to the meeting, so to speak, which took place between Jesus and the Canaanitish woman; for He comes as to the parts of Tyre and Sidon, and she comes out of those parts, and cried, saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David.” Now the woman was Canaanitish, which is rendered, prepared for humiliation. The righteous, indeed, are prepared for the kingdom of heaven and for the exaltation in the kingdom of God; but sinners are prepared for the humiliation of the wickedness which is in them, and of the deeds which flow from it and prepare them for it, and of the sin which reigns in their mortal body. Only, the Canaanitish woman came out of those borders and went forth from the state of being prepared for humiliation, crying and saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David.”
Exposition of the Details in the Narrative
17. Exposition of the Details in the Narrative.
Now bring together from the Gospels those who call Him Son of David, as she, and the blind men in Jericho; and who call Him Son of God, and that without the addition “truly” like the demoniacs who say, “What have we to do with Thee, Thou Son of God;” and who call Him so with the addition “truly,” like those in the boat who worshipped Him saying, “Truly Thou art the Son of God.” For the bringing together of these passages will, I think, be useful to you with a view to seeing the difference of those who come (to Jesus); some indeed come as to Him “who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh;” but others come to Him who “was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness;” and of these some with the “truly,” and some without it. Further, observe, that the Canaanitish woman besought Him not about a son, whom she does not seem to have brought forth at all, but about a daughter who was terribly vexed with a demon; but another mother receives back alive her son who was being carried forth dead. And again the ruler of the synagogue makes supplication for a daughter twelve years old, as being dead, but the nobleman about a son as being still sick, and at the point of death. The daughter, accordingly, who was distressed by a demon, and the dead son sprang from two mothers; and the dead daughter, and the son who was sick unto death, sprang from two fathers, of whom the one was a ruler of the synagogue, and the other was a nobleman. And I am persuaded these things contain reasons concerning the diverse kinds of souls which Jesus vivifies and heals. And all the cures that He works among the people, especially those recorded by the Evangelists, took place at that time, that those who would not otherwise have believed unless they saw signs and wonders might believe; for the things aforetime were symbols of the things that are ever being accomplished by the power of Jesus; for there is no time when each of the things which are written is not done by the power of Jesus according to the desert of each. The Canaanitish woman, therefore, because of her race was not worthy even to receive an answer from Jesus, who acknowledged that He had not been sent by the Father for any other thing than to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,—a lost race of souls possessed of clear vision; but, because of her resolution and of having worshipped Jesus as Son of God, she obtains an answer, which reproaches her with baseness of birth and exhibits the measure of her worthiness, namely, that she was worthy of crumbs as the little dogs, but not of the loaves. But when she with intensified resolution, accepting the saying of Jesus, puts forth the claim to obtain crumbs even as a little dog, and acknowledges that the masters are of a nobler race, then she gets a second answer, which bears testimony to her faith as great, and a promise that it shall be done unto her as she wills. And corresponding, I think, “to the Jerusalem above, which is free, the mother” of Paul and those like to him, must we conceive of the Canaanitish woman, the mother of her who was terribly distressed with a demon, who was the symbol of the mother of such a soul. And consider whether it is not according to sound reason that there are also many fathers and many mothers corresponding to the fathers of Abraham to whom the patriarch went away, and to Jerusalem the “mother,” as Paul says, concerning himself and those like to him. And it is probable that she of whom the Canaanitish woman was a symbol came out of the borders of Tyre and Sidon, of which the places on earth were types, and came to the Saviour and besought Him and even now beseeches Him saying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David, my daughter is terribly vexed with a demon.” Then also to those without and to the disciples when necessary He answers and says, “I was not sent;” teaching us that there are some lost souls pre-eminently intellectual and clear of vision, figuratively called sheep of the house of Israel; which things, I think, the simpler who are of opinion that they are spoken in regard to the Israel which is after the flesh will of necessity admit, namely, that our Saviour was sent by the Father to no others than to those lost Jews. But we, who can truthfully boast that “if we have once known Christ after the flesh, but now no longer do we know Him so,” are assured that it is pre-eminently the work of the Word to save the more intelligent, for these are more akin to Him than those who are duller. But since the lost sheep of the house of Israel, with the exception of “the remnant according to the election of grace,” disbelieved the Word, on this account “God chose the foolish things of the world,” namely, that which was not Israel, nor clear of vision, that He might put to shame the wise ones of Israel; and He called “the things which are not,” handing over to them an intelligent nation who were able to admit “the foolishness of the preaching,” and of His good pleasure saved those who believe in this, that He might refute “the things which are,” having perfected praise for Himself, “out of the mouths of babes and sucklings,” when they became hostile to truth. Now, the Canaanitish woman, having come, worshipped Jesus as God, saying, “Lord, help me,” but He answered and said, “It is not possible to take the children’s bread and cast it to the little dogs.” But some one might inquire also into the meaning of this saying, since,—inasmuch as there was a measure of loaves such that both the children and the dogs of the household could not eat loaves, unless the dogs ate other loaves than those which were well made,—it was not possible according to right reason for the well-made loaf of the children to be given as food to the little dogs. But no such thing appears in the case of the power of Jesus, for of this it was possible both for the children and those called little dogs to partake. Consider, then, whether perhaps with reference to the saying, “It is not possible to take the bread of children,” we ought to say that, “He who emptied Himself and took upon Him the form of a servant,” brought a measure of power such as the world was capable of receiving, of which power also He was conscious that a certain quantity went forth from Him as is plain from the words, “Some one did touch Me, for I perceived that power had gone forth from Me.” From this measure of power, then, He dispensed, giving a larger portion to those who were pre-eminent and who were called sons, but a smaller portion to those who were not such, as to the little dogs. But though these things were so, nevertheless where there was great faith, to her, who because of her base birth in Canaanitish land was a little dog, He gave as to a child the bread of the children. And perhaps, also, of the words of Jesus there are some loaves which it is possible to give to the more rational, as to children only; and other words, as it were, crumbs from the great house and table of the wellborn and the masters, which may be used by some souls, like the dogs. And according to the law of Moses it is written about certain things, “Ye shall cast them to the dogs,” and it was a matter of care to the Holy Spirit to give instruction about certain foods that they should be left to the dogs. Let others, then, who are strangers to the doctrine of the Church, assume that souls pass from the bodies of men into the bodies of dogs, according to their varying degree of wickedness; but we, who do not find this at all in the divine Scripture, say that the more rational condition changes into one more irrational, undergoing this affection in consequence of great slothfulness and negligence. But, also, in the same way, a will which was more irrational, because of its neglect of reason, sometimes turns and becomes rational, so that that which at one time was a dog, loving to eat of the crumbs that fell from the table of its masters, comes into the condition of a son. For virtue contributes greatly to the making of one a son of God, but wickedness, and mad fury in wanton discourses and shamelessness, contribute to the giving of a man the name of dog according to the word of the Scripture. And the like you will also understand in the case of the other names which are applied to animals without reason. Only, he who is reproached as a dog and yet is not indignant at being called unworthy of the bread of children and with all forbearance repeats the saying of that Canaanitish woman, “Yea, Lord, for even the little dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table,” will obtain the very gentle answer of Jesus saying to him, “Great is thy faith,”—when he has received so great faith—and saying, “Be it done unto thee even as thou wilt,” so that he himself may be healed, and if he has produced any fruit which stands in need of healing, that this, too, may be cured.
Concerning the Multitudes Who Were Healed. Comparison of the Mountain Where Jesus Sat to the Church
18. Concerning the Multitudes Who Were Healed. Comparison of the Mountain Where Jesus Sat to the Church.
“And Jesus departed thence,”—manifestly, from what has been said before, from the parts of Tyre and Sidon,—“and came nigh unto the sea of Galilee,” which is commonly called the Lake of Gennesaret, and again went up into the mountain where He went up and sat. We may say, then, that into this mountain where Jesus sits, not only the sound in health go up, but along with the sound, those also who were suffering from various disorders. And, perhaps, this mountain to which Jesus went up and sat is that which is more commonly called the Church, which has been set up through the word of God over the rest of the world and the men upon it; whither go not the disciples only, leaving the multitudes as in the case of the beatitudes, but great multitudes who were not accused themselves of being deaf or suffering from any affection, but who had such along with themselves. For you may see, along with the multitudes who come to this mountain where the Son of God sits, some who have become deaf to the things promised, and others blind in soul and not looking at the true light, and others who are lame and not able to walk according to reason, and others who are maimed and not able to work according to reason. Those, accordingly, who are suffering in soul from such things, though they go up along with the multitudes into the mountain where Jesus was, so long as they are outside of the feet of Jesus, are not healed by Him; but when, as men suffering from such disorders, they are cast by the multitude at His feet, and at the extremities of the body of Christ, not being worthy to obtain such things so far as they themselves are concerned, they are then healed by Him. And when you see in the congregation of what is more commonly called the church the catechumens cast behind those who are at the extreme end of it, and as it were at the feet of the body of Jesus—the church—coming to it with their own deafness and blindness and lameness and crookedness, and in time cured according to the Word, you would not err in saying that such having gone up with the multitudes of the church to the mountain where Jesus was, are cast at His feet and are healed; so that the multitude of the church is astonished at beholding transformations which have taken place from so great evils to that which is better, so that it might say, those who were formerly dumb afterwards speak the word of God, and the lame walk, the prophecy of Isaiah being fulfilled, not only in things bodily but in things spiritual, which said, “Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of him that hath an impediment in his speech be plain.” And there, unless the expression, “the lame man shall leap as an hart,” is to be taken as accidental, we will say that those formerly lame, and who now through the power of Jesus leap as an hart are not without design compared to a hart, which is a clean animal, and hostile to serpents and cannot at all be injured by their poison. But also, in respect of the fact that the dumb are seen speaking is the prophecy fulfilled which said, “And the tongue of him that hath an impediment shall be plain,” or rather that which said, “Hear ye deaf;” but the blind see according to the prophecy following, “Hear ye deaf, and ye blind look up that ye may see.” Now the blind see, when they see the world and from the exceeding great beauty of the things created they contemplate the Creator corresponding in greatness and beauty to them; and when they see clearly “the invisible things of God Himself from the creation of the world, which are perceived through the things that are made;” that is, they see and understand with care and clearness. Now the multitudes seeing these things, glorified the God of Israel, and glorify Him in the persuasion that it is the same God, who is the Father of Him who healed those previously mentioned, and the God of Israel. For He is not the God of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles. Let us then cause to go up along with ourselves to the mountain where Jesus sits—His church—those who wish to go up to it along with us, the deaf, the blind, the lame, the maimed and many others, and let us cast them at the feet of Jesus that He may heal them, so that the multitudes are astonished at their healing; for it is not the disciples who are described as wondering at such things, although at that time they were present with Jesus, as is manifest from the words, “And Jesus called unto Him His disciples and said, I have compassion on the multitudes,” etc.; and perhaps if you attend carefully to the words, “There came unto Him great multitudes,” you would find that the disciples at that time did not come to Him, but had begun long ago to follow Him and followed Him into the mountain. But there came unto Him those who were inferior to the disciples, and were then for the first time approaching Him, who had not the same experience as those who had gone up with them. Observe, moreover, in the Gospel who are described as having followed Jesus, and who as having come to Him, and who as having been brought to Him, and the division between those who go before and of those who follow; and of those who came, who came to Him in the house, and who when He was elsewhere. For by observation, and by comparing things spiritual with spiritual, you would find many things worthy of the accurate wisdom in the Gospels.
Concerning the Seven Loaves. The Narrative of the Feeding of the Four Thousand Compared with that of the Five Thousand
19. Concerning the Seven Loaves. The Narrative of the Feeding of the Four Thousand Compared with that of the Five Thousand.
“And Jesus called unto Him His disciples and said.” Above in the similar history to this about the loaves, before the loaves are spoken of, “Jesus came forth and saw a great multitude and had compassion upon them and healed their sick. And when even was come the disciples came to Him saying, The place is desert and the time is already past, send them away,” etc. But now after the healing of the deaf and the rest, He takes compassion on the multitude which had continued with Him now three days and had nothing to eat. And there the disciples make request concerning the five thousand; but here He speaks of His own accord about the four thousand. Those, too, are fed when it was evening after they had spent a day with Him; but these, who are testified to have continued with Him three days, partake of the loaves lest they might faint by the way. And there the disciples say to Him when He was not inquiring, that they had only five loaves and two fishes; but here to Him making inquiry, they give answer about the seven loaves and the few small fishes. And there He commands the multitudes to sit down or lie upon the grass; for Luke also wrote, “Make them sit down,” and Mark says, “He commanded them all to sit down;” but here He does not command but proclaims to the multitude to sit down. Again, there, the three Evangelists say in the very same words that “He took the five loaves and the two fishes and looking up to heaven He blessed;” but here, as Matthew and Mark have written, “Jesus gave thanks and brake;” there, they recline upon the grass, but here they sit down upon the ground. You will moreover investigate in the accounts in the different places the variation found in John, who wrote in regard to that transaction that Jesus said, “Make the men sit down,” and that, having given thanks, He gave of the loaves to them that were set down, but he did not mention this miracle at all. Attending, then, to the difference of those things which are written in the various places in regard to the loaves, I think that these belong to a different order from those; wherefore these are fed in a mountain, and those in a desert place; and these after they had continued three days with Jesus, but those one day, on the evening of which they were fed. And further, unless it be the same thing for Jesus to do a thing of Himself and to act after having heard from the disciples, consider if those to whom Jesus shows kindness are not superior when He fed them on the spot with a view to showing them kindness. And, if according to John, they were barley loaves of which the twelve baskets remained over, but nothing of this kind is said about these, how are not these superior to the former? And the sick of those He healed, but here He heals these, along with the multitudes, who were not sick but blind, and lame, and deaf, and maimed; wherefore also in regard to these the four thousand marvel, but in regard to the sick no such thing is said. And these I think who ate of the seven loaves for which thanks were given, are superior to those who ate of the five which were blessed; and these who ate the few little fishes to those who ate of the two, and perhaps also these who sat down upon the ground to those who sat down on the grass. And those from fewer loaves leave twelve baskets, but these from a greater number leave seven baskets, inasmuch, as they were able to receive more. And perhaps these tread upon all earthly things and sit down upon them, but those upon the grass—upon their flesh only—for “all flesh is grass.” Consider also after this, that Jesus does not wish to send them away fasting lest they faint on the way, as being without the loaves of Jesus, and while they were still on the way—the way to their own concerns—might suffer injury. Take note also of the cases where Jesus is recorded to have sent any one away, that you may see the difference of those who were sent away by Him after being fed, and those who had been sent away otherwise; and, as a pattern of one who was sent away otherwise, take “Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity.” But further the disciples who are always with Jesus are not sent away by Him; but the multitudes after they have eaten are sent away. Likewise, again, the disciples who conceive nothing great about the Canaanitish woman say, “Send her away, for she crieth after us;” but the Saviour does not at all appear to send her away; for saying unto her, “O woman, great is thy faith, be it done to thee even as thou wilt,” He healed her daughter from that hour: it is not however written that He sent her away. So far at the present time have we been able to investigate and see into the passage before us.
Concerning Those Who Asked Him to Show Them a Sign from Heaven
Book XII
1. Concerning Those Who Asked Him to Show Them a Sign from Heaven.
“And the Sadducees and Pharisees came, and tempting Him kept asking Him to shew them a sign from heaven.” The Sadducees and Pharisees who disagreed with each other in regard to the most essential truths,—for the Pharisees champion the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, hoping that there will be a world to come, while the Sadducees know nothing after this life in store for a man whether he has been advancing towards virtue, or has made no effort at all to come out from the mountains of wickedness,—these, I say, agree that they may tempt Jesus. Now, a similar thing, as Luke has narrated, happened in the case of Herod and Pilate, who became friends with one another that they might kill Jesus; for, perhaps, their hostility with one another would have prevented Herod from asking that He should be put to death, in order to please the people, who said, “Crucify Him, Crucify Him,” and would have influenced Pilate, who was somewhat inclined against His condemnation, his hostility with Herod giving fresh impulse to the inclination which he previously cherished to release Jesus. But their apparent friendship made Herod stronger in his demand against Jesus with Pilate, who wished, perhaps, also because of the newly-formed friendship to do something to gratify Herod and all the nation of the Jews. And often even now you may see in daily life those who hold the most divergent opinions, whether in the philosophy of the Greeks or in other systems of thought, appearing to be of one mind that they may scoff at and attack Jesus Christ in the person of His disciples. And from these things I think you may go on by rational argument to consider, whether when forces join in opposition which are in disagreement with one another, as of Pharaoh with Nebuchadnezzar, and of Tirhakah, king of the Ethiopians, with Sennacherib, a combination then takes place against Jesus and His people. So perhaps, also, “The kings of the earth set themselves and the rulers were gathered together,” though not at all before at harmony with one another, that having taken counsel against the Lord and His Christ, they might slay the Lord of glory.
Why the Pharisees Asked a Sign from Heaven
2. Why the Pharisees Asked a Sign from Heaven.
Now, to this point we have come in our discourse, because of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming together unto Jesus, who disagreed in matters relating to the resurrection, but came, as it were, to an agreement for the sake of tempting our Saviour, and asking Him to show them a sign from heaven. For, not satisfied with the wonderful signs shown among the people in the healing of all forms of disease and sickness, and with the rest of the miracles which our Saviour had done in the knowledge of many, they wished Him to show to them also a sign from heaven. And I conjecture that they suspected that the signs upon earth might possibly not be of God; for they did not hesitate indeed to say, “Jesus casts out demons by Beelzebub the prince of the demons;” and it seemed to them that a sign from heaven could not spring from Beelzebub or any other wicked power. But they erred in regard to both, in regard to signs upon earth as well as to signs from heaven, not being “approved money-changers,” nor knowing how to distinguish between the spirits that are working, which kind are from God, and which have revolted from Him. And they ought to have known that even many of the portents wrought against Egypt in the time of Moses, though they were not from heaven, were clearly from God, and that the fire which fell from heaven upon the sheep of Job was not from God; for that fire belonged to the same one as he to whom belonged those who carried off, and made three bands of horsemen against, the cattle of Job. I think, moreover, that in Isaiah—as if signs could be shown both from the earth and from heaven, the true being from God, but “with all power and signs and lying wonders” those from the evil one—it was said to Ahaz, “Ask for thyself a sign from the Lord thy God in the depth or in the height.” For, unless there had been some signs in the depth or in the height which were not from the Lord God, this would not have been said, “Ask for thyself a sign from the Lord thy God in the depth or in the height.” But I know well that such an interpretation of the passage, “Ask for thyself a sign from the Lord thy God,” will seem to some one rather forced; but give heed to that which is said by the Apostle about the man of sin, the son of perdition, that, “with all power and signs and lying wonders and with all deceit of unrighteousness,” he shall be manifested to them that are perishing, imitating all kinds of wonders, to-wit, those of truth. And as the enchanters and magicians of the Egyptians, as being inferior to the man of sin and the son of perdition, imitated certain powers, both the signs and wonders of truth, doing lying wonders so that the true might not be believed; so I think the man of sin will imitate signs and powers. And perhaps, also, the Pharisees suspected these things because of the prophecies concerning Him; but I inquire whether also the Sadducees tempting Him asked Jesus to show them a sign from heaven. For unless we say that they suspected this, how shall we describe their relation to the portents which Jesus wrought, who continued hard-hearted and were not put to shame by the miraculous things that were done? But if any one supposes that we have given an occasion of defence to the Pharisees and Sadducees, both when they say that the demons were cast out by Jesus through Beelzebub, and when tempting Him, they ask Jesus about a heavenly sign, let him know that we plausibly say that they were drawn away to the end that they might not believe in the miracles of Jesus; but not as to deserve forgiveness; for they did not look to the words of the prophets which were being fulfilled in the acts of Jesus, which an evil power was not at all capable of imitating. But to bring back a soul which had gone out, so that it came out of the grave when already stinking and passing the fourth day, was the work of no other than Him who heard the word of the Father, “Let us make man after our image and likeness.” But also to command the winds and to make the violence of the sea cease at a word, was the work of no other than Him through whom all things, both the sea itself and the winds, have come into being. Moreover also as to the teaching which stimulates men to the love of the Creator, in harmony with the law and the prophets, and which checks passions and moulds morals according to piety, what else did it indicate to such as were able to see, than that He was truly the Son of God who wrought works so mighty? In respect of which things He said also to the disciples of John, “Go your way and tell John what great things ye see and hear; the blind receive their sight,” etc.
The Answer of Jesus to Their Request
3. The Answer of Jesus to Their Request.
Next let us remark in what way, when asked in regard to one sign, that He might show it from heaven, to the Pharisees and Sadducees who put the question, He answers and says, “An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall be no sign given to it, but the sign of Jonah the prophet, ” when also, “He left them and departed.” But the sign of Jonah, in truth, according to their question, was not merely a sign but also a sign from heaven; so that even to those who tempted Him and sought a sign from heaven He, nevertheless, out of His own great goodness gave the sign. For if, as Jonah passed three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so the Son of man did in the heart of the earth, and after this rose up from it,—whence but from heaven shall we say that the sign of the resurrection of Christ came? And especially when, at the time of the passion, He became a sign to the robber who obtained favour from Him to enter into the paradise of God; after this, I think, descending into Hades to the dead, “as free among the dead.” And the Saviour seems to me to conjoin the sign which was to come from Himself with the reason of the sign in regard to Jonah when He says, not merely that a sign like to that is granted by Him but that very sign; for attend to the words, “And there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet.” Accordingly that sign was this sign, because that became indicative of this, so that the elucidation of that sign, which was obscure on the face of it, might be found in the fact that the Saviour suffered, and passed three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. At the same time also we learn the general principle that, if the sign signifies something, each of the signs which are recorded, whether as in actual history, or by way of precept, is indicative of something afterwards fulfilled; as for example, the sign of Jonah going out after three days from the whale’s belly was indicative of the resurrection of our Saviour, rising after three days and three nights from the dead; and that which is called circumcision is the sign of that which is indicated by Paul in the words: “We are the circumcision.” Seek you also every sign in the Old Scriptures as indicative of some passage in the New Scripture, and that which is named a sign in the New Covenant as indicative of something either in the age about to be, or even in the subsequent generations after that the sign has taken place.
Why Jesus Called Them an Adulterous Generation. The Law as Husband
4. Why Jesus Called Them an Adulterous Generation. The Law as Husband.
And He called them, indeed, “an evil generation,” because of the quality arising from evil which had been produced in them, for wickedness is voluntary evil-doing, but “adulterous” because that when the Pharisees and Sadducees left that which is figuratively called man, the word of truth or the law, they were debauched by falsehood and the law of sin. For if there are two laws, the law in our members warring against the law of the mind, and the law of the mind, we must say that the law of the mind—that is, the spiritual—is man, to whom the soul was given by God as wife, that is, to the man who is law, according to what is written, “A wife is married to a man by God;” but the other is a paramour of the soul which is subject to it, which also on account of it is called an adulteress. Now that the law is husband of the soul Paul clearly exhibits in the Epistle to the Romans, saying, “The law hath dominion over a man for so long time as he liveth; for the woman that hath a husband is bound to the husband while he liveth, to the husband who is law,” etc. For consider in these things that the law hath dominion over the man so long time as the law liveth,—as a husband over a wife. “For the woman that hath a husband,” that is, the soul under the law, “is bound to the husband while he liveth,” to the husband who is the law; but if the husband—that is, the law die—she is discharged from the law, which is her husband. Now the law dies to him who has gone up to the condition of blessedness, and no longer lives under the law, but acts like to Christ, who, though He became under law for the sake of those under law, that He might gain those under law, did not continue under law, nor did He leave subject to law those who had been freed by Him; for He led them up along with Himself to the divine citizenship which is above the law, which contains, as for the imperfect and such as are still sinners, sacrifices for the remission of sins. He then who is without sin, and stands no longer in need of legal sacrifices, perhaps when he has become perfect has passed beyond even the spiritual law, and comes to the Word beyond it, who became flesh to those who live in the flesh, but to those who no longer at all war after the flesh, He is perceived as being the Word, as He was God in the beginning with God, and reveals the Father. Three things therefore are to be thought of in connection with this place—the woman that hath a husband, who is under a husband—the law; and the woman who is an adulteress, to-wit, the soul, which, while her husband, the law, liveth, has become joined to another husband, namely, the law of the flesh; and the woman who is married to the brother of the dead husband, to the Word who is alive and dies not, who “being raised from the dead dieth no more, for death hath no more dominion over Him.” So far then because of the saying, “But if the husband die she is discharged from the law, the husband,” and because of this, “so then, while her husband liveth, she shall be called an adulteress, if she be joined to another man,” and because of this, “but if the husband die, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress though she be joined to another man.” But this very saying, “So then while her husband liveth, she shall be called an adulteress,” we have brought forward, wishing clearly to show why in answer to the Pharisees and Sadducees who were tempting Him and asking Him to show them a sign from heaven, He said not only “a wicked generation,” but an “adulterous” generation. In a general way, then, the law in the members which wars against the law of the mind, as a man who is an adulterer, is an adulterer of the soul. But now also every power that is hostile, which gains the mastery over the human soul, and has intercourse with it, commits adultery with her who had a bridegroom given to her by God, namely, the Word. After these things it is written that “He left them and departed.” For how was the bridegroom—the Word—not going to leave the adulterous generation and depart from it? But you might say that the Word of God, leaving the synagogue of the Jews as adulterous, departed from it, and took a wife of fornication, namely, those from the Gentiles; since those who were “Sion, a faithful city,” have become harlots; but these have become like the harlot Rahab, who received the spies of Joshua, and was saved with all her house; after this no longer playing the harlot, but coming to the feet of Jesus, and wetting them with the tears of repentance, and anointing them with the fragrance of the ointment of holy conversation, on account of whom, reproaching Simon the leper,—the former people,—He spoke those things which are written.