Γ. Ταῦτα δέ μου διεξιόντος μεταξὺ κατασείσασα τῇ χειρὶ ἡ διδάσκαλος
_ Γ. Τί οὖν ἂν εἴη, φημὶ, τὸ πῦρ, ἢ τὸ χάσμα, ἢ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν εἰρημένων, ἢ μὴ ἃ λέγεται
Γ. Τί οὖν, εἶπον, ἐν τούτοις ἐστὶ τὸ δόγμα
_ Γ. Τί οὖν χρὴ λέγειν, εἶπον, πρὸς τοὺς μικροψύχως ταῖς συμβολαῖς διακειμένους
_ Μ. Τί οὖν, φησὶ, τούτων ἀμνημόνευτον ἐν τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἐστίν
_ Γ. Αὐτὸ, φημὶ, τὸ δόγμα τῆς ἀναστάσεως.
Μ. Καὶ μὴν πολλὰ, φησὶ, τῶν νῦν διεξοδικῶς εἰρημένων, πρὸς τοῦτον τὸν σκοπὸν φέρει.
That is very true, the Teacher replied. For we may hear these opponents urging the following difficulty. “The atoms are resolved, like to like, into the universe; by what device, then, does the warmth, for instance, residing in such and such a man, after joining the universal warmth, again dissociate itself from this connection with its kindred75 ἀμιγὲς τοῦ συγγενοῦς πάλιν ἀποκριθῆναι. Krabinger’s and Oehler’s reading. But Krabinger, more correctly than Oehler, opposes ἐν τῷδε to ἐν τῷ καθ᾽ ὅλου (quod est hic calidum, si fuerit in universo): though neither he, nor Oehler, nor Schmidt himself appears to have any suspicion that τῷδε maymean “so and so:” and yet it is quite in accordance with Gregory’s usage, and makes better sense, as contrasting the particular and universal heat more completely. ᾽Αμιγὲς is proleptic: the genitive may depend either on it or on the verb. Just below ἀναπλασσόμενον is read by 5 of Krabinger’s Codd. (including the Hasselmann). This is better than Migne’s ἀπαλλασσόμενον, which is hardly supported by 1 Cor. xv. 51., so as to form this man who is being ‘remoulded’? For if the identical individual particle does not return and only something that is homogeneous but not identical is fetched, you will have something else in the place of that first thing, and such a process will cease to be a resurrection and will be merely the creation of a new man. But if the same man is to return into himself, he must be the same entirely, and regain his original formation in every single atom of his elements.”
_Μ. Καί φησιν ἡ διδάσκαλος: Ἀληθὲς τοῦτο λέγεις. Ἔστι γὰρ λεγόντων ἀκούειν τῶν πρὸς τὸν λόγον τοῦτον ἐνισταμένων, ὅτι Εἰς τὸ πᾶν κατὰ τὸ συγγενὲς γινομένης τῶν στοιχείων τῆς ἀναλύσεως: τίς μηχανὴ τὸ ἐν τῷδε θερμὸν ἐν τῷ καθόλου γενόμενον συμμιγὲς, τοῦ συγγενοῦς πάλιν ἀποκριθῆναι πρὸς τὸ συστῆναι τὸν ἀπαλλασσόμενον ἄνθρωπον; Εἰ γὰρ μὴ ἀκριβῶς τὸ ἴδιον ἐπανέλθοι, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ ὁμογενοῦς ἀντὶ τοῦ ἰδιάζοντός τι παραληφθείη: ἕτερον ἀνθ' ἑτέρου γενήσεται, καὶ οὐκέτι ἂν εἴη τὸ τοιοῦτον ἀνάστασις, ἀλλὰ καινοῦ ἀνθρώπου δημιουργία. Εἰ δὲ χρὴ τὸν αὐτὸν εἰς ἑαυτὸν πάλιν ἐπανελθεῖν, δι' ὅλου εἶναι προσήκει τὸν αὐτὸν, ἑαυτοῖς πᾶσι τοῖς τῶν στοιχείων μέρεσι τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐπαναλαβόντα φύσιν.