▾
Athenagoras, On the Resurrection of the Dead
⎗←→⎘
▾
Chapter I.—Defence of the Truth Should Precede Discussions Regarding It.
Chapter II.—A Resurrection is Not Impossible.
Chapter III.—He Who Could Create, Can Also Raise Up the Dead.
Chapter IV.—Objection from the Fact that Some Human Bodies Have Become Part of Others.
Chapter V.—Reference to the Processes of Digestion and Nutrition.
Chapter VI.—Everything that is Useless or Hurtful is Rejected.
Chapter VII.—The Resurrection-Body Different from the Present.
Chapter VIII.—Human Flesh Not the Proper or Natural Food of Men.
Chapter IX.—Absurdity of Arguing from Man’s Impotency.
Chapter X.—It Cannot Be Shown that God Does Not Will a Resurrection.
Chapter XII.—Argument for the Resurrection From the Purpose Contemplated in Man’s Creation.
Chapter XIII.—Continuation of the Argument.
Chapter XIV.—The Resurrection Does Not Rest Solely on the Fact of a Future Judgment.
Chapter XV.—Argument for the Resurrection from the Nature of Man.
Chapter XVI—Analogy of Death and Sleep, and Consequent Argument for the Resurrection.
Chapter XVII.—The Series of Changes We Can Now Trace in Man Renders a Resurrection Probable.
Chapter XIX.—Man Would Be More Unfavourably Situated Than the Beasts If There Were No Resurrection.
Chapter XXI.—Continuation of the Argument.
Chapter XXII.—Continuation of the Argument.
Chapter XXIII.—Continuation of the Argument.
Chapter XXIV.—Argument for the Resurrection from the Chief End of Man.
As there are many things of more importance to the inquiry before us, I beg to be excused from replying for the present to those who take refuge in the works of men, and even the constructors of them, who are unable to make anew such of their works as are broken in pieces, or worn out by time, or otherwise destroyed, and then from the analogy of potters and carpenters attempt to show that God neither can will, nor if He willed would be able, to raise again a body that is dead, or has been dissolved,—not considering that by such reasoning they offer the grossest insult to God, putting, as they do, on the same level the capabilities of things which are altogether different, or rather the natures of those who use them, and comparing the works of art with those of nature. To bestow any serious attention on such arguments would be not undeserving of censure, for it is really foolish to reply to superficial and trifling objections. It is surely far more probable, yea, most absolutely true, to say that what is impossible with men is possible with God. And if by this statement of itself as probable, and by the whole investigation in which we have just been engaged reason shows it to be possible, it is quite clear that it is not impossible. No, nor is it such a thing as God could not will.
Πολλῶν δὲ ὄντων τῶν εἰς τὴν προκειμένην ἐξέτασιν χρησιμωτέρων, παραιτοῦμαι δὴ νῦν τοὺς καταφεύγοντας ἐπὶ τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἔργα καὶ τοὺς τούτων δημιουργοὺς ἀνθρώπους, οἳ τὰ συντριβέντα τῶν ἔργων ἢ χρόνῳ παλαιωθέντα ἢ καὶ ἄλλως διαφθαρέντα καινουργεῖν ἀδυνατοῦσιν, εἶτα ἐξ ὁμοίου τοῖς κεραμεῦσι καὶ τέκτοσι δεικνύναι πειρωμένους τὸ καὶ τὸν θεὸν μήτ' ἂν βουληθῆναι μήτε βουληθέντα δυνηθῆναι νεκρωθὲν ἢ καὶ διαλυθὲν ἀναστῆσαι σῶμα, καὶ μὴ λογιζομένους ὅτι διὰ τούτων [ἐπ' ἴσης] τοῖς χειρίστοις ἐξυβρίζουσιν εἰς θεόν, συνεξισοῦντες τῶν πάντῃ διεστηκότων τὰς δυνάμεις, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ τῶν ταύταις χρωμένων τὰς οὐσίας καὶ τὰ τεχνητὰ τοῖς φυσικοῖς. περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτων σπουδάζειν οὐκ ἀνεπιτίμητον· ἠλίθιον γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς τὸ τοῖς ἐπιπολαίοις καὶ ματαίοις ἀντιλέγειν. μακρῷ γε μὴν ἐνδοξότερον καὶ πάντων ἀληθέστατον τὸ φῆσαι τὸ παρ' ἀνθρώποις ἀδύνατον παρὰ θεῷ δυνατόν. εἰ δὲ δι' αὐτῶν τούτων ὡς ἐνδόξων καὶ διὰ πάντων τῶν μικρῷ πρόσθεν ἐξητασμένων δείκνυσιν ὁ λόγος δυνατόν, εὔδηλον ὡς οὐκ ἀδύνατον. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδ' ἀβούλητον.