Opening the library…

Search the Bible

On the Flesh of Christ

Tertullian

Chapter 6

About this work

Author: Tertullian

Chapter VI.—The Doctrine of Apelles Refuted, that Christ’s Body Was of Sidereal Substance, Not Born. Nativity and Mortality are Correlative Circumstances, and in Christ’s Case His Death Proves His Birth.

But certain disciples of the heretic of Pontus, compelled

‹ Chapter 5 Chapter 7 ›

to

be

wiser

than

their

teacher

,

concede

to

Christ

real

flesh

,

without

effect

,

however

,

on

their

denial

of

His

nativity

.

He

might

have

had

,

they

say

,

a

flesh

which

was

not

at

all

born

.

So

we

have

found

our

way

“

out

of

a

frying

-

pan

,

”

as

the

proverb

runs

,

“

into

the

fire

,

”

—

from

Marcion

to

Apelles

.

This

man

having

first

fallen

from

the

principles

of

Marcion

into

(

intercourse

with

)

a

woman

,

in

the

flesh

,

and

afterwards

shipwrecked

himself

,

in

the

spirit

,

on

the

virgin

Philumene

,

proceeded

from

that

time

to

preach

that

the

body

of

Christ

was

of

solid

flesh

,

but

without

having

been

born

.

To

this

angel

,

indeed

,

of

Philumene

,

the

apostle

will

reply

in

tones

like

those

in

which

he

even

then

predicted

him

,

saying

,

“

Although

an

angel

from

heaven

preach

any

other

gospel

unto

you

than

that

which

we

have

preached

unto

you

,

let

him

be

accursed

.

”

To

the

arguments

,

however

,

which

have

been

indicated

just

above

,

we

have

now

to

show

our

resistance

.

They

allow

that

Christ

really

had

a

body

.

Whence

was

the

material

of

it

,

if

not

from

the

same

sort

of

thing

as

that

in

which

He

appeared

?

Whence

came

His

body

,

if

His

body

were

not

flesh

?

Whence

came

His

flesh

,

if

it

were

not

born

?

Inasmuch

as

that

which

is

born

must

undergo

this

nativity

in

order

to

become

flesh

.

He

borrowed

,

they

say

,

His

flesh

from

the

stars

,

and

from

the

substances

of

the

higher

world

.

And

they

assert

it

for

a

certain

principle

,

that

a

body

without

nativity

is

nothing

to

be

astonished

at

,

because

it

has

been

submitted

to

angels

to

appear

even

amongst

ourselves

in

the

flesh

without

the

intervention

of

the

womb

.

We

admit

,

of

course

,

that

such

facts

have

been

But

then

,

how

comes

it

to

pass

that

a

faith

which

holds

to

a

different

rule

borrows

materials

for

its

own

arguments

from

the

faith

which

it

impugns

?

What

has

it

to

do

with

Moses

,

who

has

rejected

the

God

of

Moses

?

Since

the

God

is

a

different

one

,

everything

belonging

to

him

must

be

different

also

.

But

let

the

heretics

always

use

the

Scriptures

of

that

God

whose

world

they

also

enjoy

.

The

fact

will

certainly

recoil

on

them

as

a

witness

to

judge

them

,

that

they

maintain

their

own

blasphemies

from

examples

derived

from

Him

.

But

it

is

an

easy

task

for

the

truth

to

prevail

without

raising

any

such

demurrer

against

them

.

When

,

therefore

,

they

set

forth

the

flesh

of

Christ

after

the

pattern

of

the

angels

,

declaring

it

to

be

not

born

,

and

yet

flesh

for

all

that

,

I

should

wish

them

to

compare

the

causes

,

both

in

Christ’s

case

and

that

of

the

angels

,

wherefore

they

came

in

the

flesh

.

Never

did

any

angel

descend

for

the

purpose

of

being

crucified

,

of

tasting

death

,

and

of

rising

again

from

the

dead

.

Now

,

since

there

never

was

such

a

reason

for

angels

becoming

embodied

,

you

have

the

cause

why

they

assumed

flesh

without

undergoing

birth

.

They

had

not

come

to

die

,

therefore

they

also

(

came

not

)

to

be

born

.

Christ

,

however

,

having

been

sent

to

die

,

had

necessarily

to

be

also

born

,

that

He

might

be

capable

of

death

;

for

nothing

is

in

the

habit

of

dying

but

that

which

is

born

.

Between

nativity

and

mortality

there

is

a

mutual

contrast

.

The

law

which

makes

us

die

is

the

cause

of

our

being

born

.

Now

,

since

Christ

died

owing

to

the

condition

which

undergoes

death

,

but

that

undergoes

death

which

is

also

born

,

the

consequence

was

—

nay

,

it

was

an

antecedent

necessity

—

that

He

must

have

been

born

also

,

by

reason

of

the

condition

which

undergoes

birth

;

because

He

had

to

die

in

obedience

to

that

very

condition

which

,

because

it

begins

with

birth

,

ends

in

death

.

It

was

not

fitting

for

Him

not

to

be

born

under

the

pretence

that

it

was

fitting

for

Him

to

die

.

But

the

Lord

Himself

at

that

very

time

appeared

to

Abraham

amongst

those

angels

without

being

born

,

and

yet

in

the

flesh

without

doubt

,

in

virtue

of

the

before

-

mentioned

diversity

of

cause

.

You

,

however

,

cannot

admit

this

,

since

you

do

not

receive

that

Christ

,

who

was

even

then

rehearsing

how

to

converse

with

,

and

liberate

,

and

judge

the

human

race

,

in

the

habit

of

a

flesh

which

as

yet

was

not

born

,

because

it

did

not

yet

mean

to

die

until

both

its

nativity

and

mortality

were

previously

(

by

prophecy

)

announced

.

Let

them

,

then

,

prove

to

us

that

those

angels

derived

their

flesh

from

the

stars

.

If

they

do

not

prove

it

because

it

is

not

written

,

neither

will

the

flesh

of

Christ

get

its

origin

therefrom

,

for

which

they

borrowed

the

precedent

of

the

angels

.

It

is

plain

that

the

angels

bore

a

flesh

which

was

not

naturally

their

own

;

their

nature

being

of

a

spiritual

substance

,

although

in

some

sense

peculiar

to

themselves

,

corporeal

;

and

yet

they

could

be

transfigured

into

human

shape

,

and

for

the

time

be

able

to

appear

and

have

intercourse

with

men

.

Since

,

therefore

,

it

has

not

been

told

us

whence

they

obtained

their

flesh

,

it

remains

for

us

not

to

doubt

in

our

minds

that

a

property

of

angelic

power

is

this

,

to

assume

to

themselves

bodily

shape

out

of

no

material

substance

.

How

much

more

,

you

say

,

is

it

(

within

their

competence

to

take

a

body

)

out

of

some

material

substance

?

That

is

true

enough

.

But

there

is

no

evidence

of

this

,

because

Scripture

says

nothing

.

Then

,

again

,

how

should

they

who

are

able

to

form

themselves

into

that

which

by

nature

they

are

not

,

be

unable

to

do

this

out

of

no

material

substance

?

If

they

become

that

which

they

are

not

,

why

cannot

they

so

become

out

of

that

which

is

not

?

But

that

which

has

not

existence

when

it

comes

into

existence

,

is

made

out

of

nothing

.

This

is

why

it

is

unnecessary

either

to

inquire

or

to

demonstrate

what

has

subsequently

become

of

their

bodies

.

What

came

out

of

nothing

,

came

to

nothing

.

They

,

who

were

able

to

convert

themselves

into

flesh

have

it

in

their

power

to

convert

nothing

itself

into

flesh

.

It

is

a

greater

thing

to

change

a

nature

than

to

make

matter

.

But

even

if

it

were

necessary

to

suppose

that

angels

derived

their

flesh

from

some

material

substance

,

it

is

surely

more

credible

that

it

was

from

some

earthly

matter

than

from

any

kind

of

celestial

substances

,

since

it

was

composed

of

so

palpably

terrene

a

quality

that

it

fed

on

earthly

ailments

.

Suppose

that

even

now

a

celestial

flesh

had

fed

on

earthly

aliments

,

although

it

was

not

itself

earthly

,

in

the

same

way

that

earthly

flesh

actually

fed

on

celestial

aliments

,

although

it

had

nothing

of

the

celestial

nature

(

for

we

read

of

manna

having

been

food

for

the

people

:

“

Man

,

”

says

the

Psalmist

,

“

did

eat

angels

’

bread

,

”

)

yet

this

does

not

once

infringe

the

separate

condition

of

the

Lord’s

flesh

,

because

of

His

different

destination

.

For

One

who

was

to

be

truly

a

man

,

even

unto

death

,

it

was

necessary

that

He

should

be

clothed

with

that

flesh

to

which

death

belongs

.

Now

that

flesh

to

which

death

belongs

is

preceded

by

birth

.

Notes

1
He has Appelles mainly in view.
2
Sine præjudicio tamen. “Without prejudice to their denial, etc.”
3
The Roman version of the proverb is “out of the lime-kiln into the coal-furnace.”
4
See Tertullian, de Præscr. Hæret. c. xxx.
5
Ab eo: or, “from that event of the carnal contact.” A good reading, found in most of the old books, is ab ea, that is, Philumene.
6
Gal. i. 8.
7
Ex ea qualitate in qua.
8
Ipsius: the Creator.
9
Forma.
10
Æque.
11
Quod, quia nascitur, moritur.
12
Pro.
13
Ediscebat. Compare a fine passage of Tertullian on this subject in our Anti-Marcion, note 10, p. 112, Edin.
14
Ceterum.
15
The angels’.
16
Sidera. Drawn, as they thought, from the stars.
17
Ps. lxxviii. 24.