Chapter XXVII.--Jewish Chronology Continued.
But since it does not seem irrational to prove that these nations that had their attention engrossed with the speculations of philosophy are of more modern date than those that had habitually worshipped the true God, [1070] it is reasonable that we should state both whence the family of these latter originated; and that when they took up their abode in these countries, they did not receive a name from the actual localities, but claimed for themselves names from those who were primarily born, and had inhabited these. Noah had three sons--Shem, Ham, and Japheth. From these the entire family of man was multiplied, and every quarter of the earth owes its inhabitants in the first instance to these. For the word of God to them prevailed, when the Lord said, "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth." So great efficacy had that one word that from the three sons of Noah are begotten in the family 72 children,--(viz.,) from Shem, 25; from Japheth, 15; and from Ham, 32. Unto Ham, however, these 32 children are born in accordance with previous declarations. And among Ham's children are: Canaan, [1071] from whom came the Canaanites; Mizraim, from whom the Egyptians; Cush, from whom the Ethiopians; and Phut, from whom the Libyans. These, according to the language prevalent among them, are up to the present day styled by the appellation of their ancestors; nay, even in the Greek tongue they are called by the names by which they have been now denominated. But even supposing that neither these localities had been previously inhabited, nor that it could be proved that a race of men from the beginning existed there, nevertheless these sons of Noah, a worshipper of God, are quite sufficient to prove the point at issue. For it is evident that Noah himself must have been a disciple of devout people, for which reason he escaped the tremendous, though transient, threat of water.
How, then, should not the worshippers of the true God be of greater antiquity than all Chaldeans, Egyptians, and Greeks, for we must bear in mind that the father of these Gentiles was born from this Japheth, [1072] and received the name Javan, and became the progenitor of Greeks and Ionians? Now, if the nations that devoted themselves to questions concerning philosophy are shown to belong to a period altogether more recent than the race of the worshippers of God as well as the time of the deluge, how would not the nations of the barbarians, and as many tribes as in the world are known and unknown, appear to belong to a more modern epoch than these? Therefore ye Greeks, Egyptians, Chaldeans, and the entire race of men, become adepts in this doctrine, and learn from us, who are the friends of God, what the nature of God is, and what His well-arranged creation. And we have cultivated this system, not expressing ourselves in mere pompous language, but executing our treatises in terms that prove our knowledge of truth and our practice of good sense, our object being the demonstration of His Truth. [1073]
[1070] [See note 4, p. 148, supra.]
[1071] [The only son of Ham who did not go to Africa, vol. iii. p. 3.]
[1072] [The fable of Iapetus cannot be explained away as a corroboration of the biblical narrative. Hor., Od., i. 3, 27.]
[1073] [Here the Edinburgh has "nature." The context seems to require the more comprehensive word "Truth."]
Chapter XXVIII.--The Doctrine of the Truth.
The first and only (one God), [1074] both Creator and Lord of all, had nothing coeval with Himself; not infinite chaos, nor measureless water, nor solid earth, nor dense air, not warm fire, nor refined spirit, nor the azure canopy [1075] of the stupendous firmament. But He was One, alone in Himself. By an exercise of His will He created things that are, which antecedently had no existence, except that He willed to make them. For He is fully acquainted with whatever is about to take place, for foreknowledge also is present to Him. The different principles, however, of what will come into existence, He first fabricated, viz., fire and spirit, water and earth, from which diverse elements He proceeded to form His own creation. And some objects He formed of one essence, but others He compounded from two, and others from three, and others from four. And those formed of one substance were immortal, for in their case dissolution does not follow, for what is one will never be dissolved. Those, on the other hand, which are formed out of two, or three, or four substances, are dissoluble; wherefore also are they named mortal. For this has been denominated death; namely, the dissolution of substances connected. I now therefore think that I have sufficiently answered those endued with a sound mind, who, if they are desirous of additional instruction, and are disposed accurately to investigate the substances of these things, and the causes of the entire creation, will become acquainted with these points should they peruse a work of ours comprised (under the title), Concerning the Substance of the Universe. [1076] I consider, however, that at present it is enough to elucidate those causes of which the Greeks, not being aware, glorified, in pompous phraseology, the parts of creation, while they remained ignorant of the Creator. And from these the heresiarchs have taken occasion, and have transformed the statements previously made by those Greeks into similar doctrines, and thus have framed ridiculous heresies.
[1074] The margin of the ms. has the words "Origen and Origen's opinion." This seemed to confirm the criticism which ascribes The Refutation to Origin. But even supposing Origen not the author, the copyer of the ms. might have written Origen's name on the margin, as indicating the transcriber's opinion concerning the coincidence of creed between Origen and the author of The Refutation. The fact, however, is that the doctrine of eternal punishment, asserted in the concluding chapter of The Refutation, was actually controverted by Origen. See translator's Introductory Notice. [See also Wordsworth (a lucid exposition), p. 20, etc., and infra, cap. xxix. note 5.]
[1075] orophen (Scott). The ms. has morphen.
[1076] Here we have another reference intimately bearing on the authorship of The Refutation. What follows corresponds with a fragment having a similar title to that stated above, first published by Le Moyne, and inserted in Fabricius (i. pp. 220-222) as the work of Hippolytus. Photius mentions this work, and gives an extract from it corresponding with what is furnished by Hippolytus. Photius, however, mentions that the book On the Substance of the Universe was said to be written by Josephus, but discovers in marginal notes the ascription of it to Caius. But Caius cannot be the writer, since Photius states that the author of The Labyrinth affirmed that he had written On the Substance of the Universe. Now Hippolytus informs us that he is author of The Labyrinth. Hippolytus thus refers to three of his works in The Refutation: (1) heterai bibloi, i.e., on Chronology; (2) Concerning the Substance of the Universe; (3) Little Labyrinth. Except Hippolytus and Photius refer to different works in speaking of The Labyrinth, the foregoing settles the question of the authorship of The Refutation. [See the case of Caius stated, Wordsworth, cap. iv. p. 27, etc.]