[3625] Lit., "is set before."
[3626] So the ms., first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Hildebrand, reading ex commodi sensu, for which all the other edd., following Ursinus and Meursius, read ex communi--"from common sense," i.e., wisely.
[3627] Perhaps, as Orelli evidently understands it, "prefer Him to our own souls"--animis præponimus.
[3628] So Oehler, reading ea for the ms. ut, omitted in all edd.
[3629] Lit., "by your own and internal exertion."
[3630] Lit., "of things."
[3631] Lit., "wings will be at hand."
[3632] The ms. reads di-cimus, "say;" corrected du, as above.
[3633] The first four edd. read res, "things above," for which Stewechius reads, as above, sedes.
[3634] Sponte.
34. Since this is the case, what, pray, is so unfair as that we should be looked on by you as silly in that readiness of belief at which you scoff, while we see that you both have like beliefs, and entertain the same hopes? If we are thought deserving of ridicule because we hold out to ourselves such a hope, the same ridicule awaits you too, who claim for yourselves the hope of immortality. If you hold and follow a rational course, grant to us also a share in it. If Plato in the Phædrus, [3635] or another of this band of philosophers, had promised these joys to us--that is, a way to escape death, or were able to provide it and bring us to the end which he had promised, [3636] it would have been fitting that we should seek to honour him from whom we look for so great a gift and favour. Now, since Christ has not only promised it, but also shown by His virtues, which were so great, that it can be made good, what strange thing do we do, and on what grounds are we charged with folly, if we bow down and worship His name [3637] and majesty from whom we expect to receive both these blessings, that we may at once escape a death of suffering, and be enriched with eternal life? [3638]
[3635] Here, as in c. 7, p. 436, n. 3, the edd. read Phædone, with the exception of the first ed., LB., Hildebrand, and Oehler, who follow the ms. as above.
[3636] Lit., "to the end of promising."
[3637] Meursius suggests numini, "deity," on which it may be well to remark once for all, that nomen and numen are in innumerable places interchanged in one or other of the edd. The change, however, is usually of so little moment, that no further notice will be taken of it.
[3638] So the ms., according to Rigaltius and Hildebrand, reading vitæ æternitate, while Crusius asserts that the ms. gives vita et--"with life and eternity."
35. But, say my opponents, if souls are mortal and [3639] of neutral character, how can they from their neutral properties become immortal? If we should say that we do not know this, and only believe it because said by [3640] One mightier than we, when will our readiness of belief seem mistaken if we believe [3641] that to the almighty King nothing is hard, nothing difficult, and that [3642] what is impossible to us is possible to Him and at His command? [3643] For is there anything which may withstand His will, or does it not follow [3644] of necessity that what He has willed must be done? Are we to infer from our distinctions what either can or cannot be done; and are we not to consider that our reason is as mortal as we ourselves are, and is of no importance with the Supreme? And yet, O ye who do not believe that the soul is of a neutral character, and that it is held on the line midway between life and death, are not all whatever whom fancy supposes to exist, gods, angels, dæmons, or whatever else is their name, themselves too of a neutral character, and liable to change [3645] in the uncertainty of their future? [3646] For if we all agree that there is one Father of all, who alone is immortal and unbegotten, and if nothing at all is found before Him which could be named, [3647] it follows as a consequence that all these whom the imagination of men believes to be gods, have been either begotten by Him or produced at His bidding. Are they [3648] produced and begotten? they are also later in order and time: if later in order and time, they must have an origin, and beginning of birth and life; but that which has an entrance into and beginning of life in its first stages, it of necessity follows, should have an end also.
[3639] The ms. reading is, mortalis est qualitatis. The first five edd. merely drop est--"of mortal, of neutral," etc.; LB. and the others read, es et, as above.
[3640] Lit., "heard from."
[3641] So the ms., according to Crusius, the edd. reading cred-id-imus--"have believed."
[3642] Lit., "if we believe that."
[3643] So the ms., reading ad modum obsecutionis paratum--"prepared to the mode of compliance;" for which the edd. read adm. executioni--"quite prepared for performing," except Hildebrand, who gives adm. obsecutioni--"for obedience."
[3644] So the ms., according to Crusius, but all edd. read sequ-a-tur (for i)--"Is there anything which He has willed which it does not follow," etc.
[3645] So all edd., reading mutabiles, except the two Roman edd. and Oehler, who gives, as the reading of the ms., nu.--"tottering."
[3646] Lit., "in the doubtful condition of their lot."
[3647] Lit., "which may have been of a name."
[3648] LB., followed by the later edd., inserted si, "if they are," which is certainly more consistent with the rest of the sentence.
36. But the gods are said to be immortal. Not by nature, then, but by the good-will and favour of God their Father. In the same way, then, in which the boon [3649] of immortality is God's gift to these who were assuredly produced, [3650] will He deign to confer eternal life upon souls also, although fell death seems able to cut them off and blot them out of existence in utter annihilation. [3651] The divine Plato, many of whose thoughts are worthy of God, and not such as the vulgar hold, in that discussion and treatise entitled the Timæus, says that the gods and the world are corruptible by nature, and in no wise beyond the reach of death, but that their being is ever maintained [3652] by the will of God, their King and Prince; [3653] for that that even which has been duly clasped and bound together by the surest bands is preserved only by God's goodness; and that by no other than [3654] by Him who bound their elements together can they both be dissolved if necessary, and have the command given which preserves their being. [3655] If this is the case, then, and it is not fitting to think or believe otherwise, why do you wonder that we speak of the soul as neutral in its character, when Plato says that it is so even with the deities, [3656] but that their life is kept up by God's [3657] grace, without break or end? For if by chance you knew it not, and because of its novelty it was unknown to you before, now, though late, receive and learn from Him who knows and has made it known, Christ, that souls are not the children of the Supreme Ruler, and did not begin to be self-conscious, and to be spoken of in their own special character after being created by Him; [3658] but that some other is their parent, far enough removed from the chief in rank and power, of His court, however, and distinguished by His high and exalted birthright.
[3649] The ms. reading is utterly corrupt and meaningless--immortalitatis largiter est donum dei certa prolatis. Gelenius, followed by Canterus, Oberthür, and Orelli, emended largi-tio...certe, as above. The two Roman edd. read, -tatem largitus...certam--"bestowed, assured immortality as God's gift on," etc.
[3650] i.e., who must therefore have received it if they have it at all.
[3651] Lit., "out, reduced to nothing with annihilation, not to be returned from."
[3652] Lit., "they are held in a lasting bond," i.e., of being.
[3653] Plato makes the supreme God, creator of the inferior deities, assure these lesser gods that their created nature being in itself subject to dissolution, His will is a surer ground on which to rely for immortality, than the substance or mode of their own being (Timæus, st. p. 41; translated by Cicero, de Univ., xi., and criticised de Nat. Deor., i. 8 and iii. 12).
[3654] The ms. and both Roman edd. read neque ullo ab-olitio-nis unintelligibly, for which Gelenius proposed nexusque abolitione--"and by the destruction of the bond;" but the much more suitable reading in the margin of Ursinus, translated above, ullo ab alio nis-i, has been adopted by later edd.
[3655] Lit., "be gifted with a saving order." So the ms., reading salutari iussione, followed by both Rom. edd.; LB. and Orelli read vinctione--"bond;" Gelenius, Canterus, Elmenh., and Oberthür, m-issione--"dismissal."
[3656] Lit., "that to the gods themselves the natures are intermediate."
[3657] Lit., "supreme"--principali.
[3658] Cf. i. 48. On this passage Orelli quotes Irenæus, i. 21, where are enumerated several gnostic theories of the creation of the world and men by angels, who are themselves created by the "one unknown Father." Arnobius is thought, both by Orelli and others, to share in these opinions, and in this discussion to hint at them, but obscurely, lest his cosmology should be confounded by the Gentiles with their own polytheistic system. It seems much more natural to suppose that we have here the indefinite statement of opinions not thoroughly digested.
37. But if souls were, as is said, the Lord's children, and begotten by [3659] the Supreme Power, nothing would have been wanting to make them perfect, as they would have been born with the most perfect excellence: they would all have had one mind, and been of one accord; they would always dwell in the royal palace; and would not, passing by the seats of bliss in which they had learned and kept in mind the noblest teachings, rashly seek these regions of earth, that [3660] they might live enclosed in gloomy bodies amid phlegm and blood, among these bags of filth and most disgusting [3661] vessels of urine. But, an opponent will say, it was necessary that these parts too should be peopled, and therefore Almighty God sent souls hither to form some colonies, as it were. And of what use are men to the world, and on account of what are they necessary, [3662] so that they may not be believed to have been destined to live here and be the tenants of an earthly body for no purpose? They have a share, my opponent says, in perfecting the completeness of this immense mass, and without their addition this whole universe is incomplete and imperfect. What then? If there were not men, would the world cease to discharge its functions? would the stars not go through their changes? would there not be summers and winters? would the blasts of the winds be lulled? and from the clouds gathered and hanging overhead would not the showers come down upon the earth to temper droughts? But now [3663] all things must go on in their own courses, and not give up following the arrangement established by nature, even if there should be no name of man heard in the world, and this earth should be still with the silence of an unpeopled desert. How then is it alleged that it was necessary that an inhabitant should be given to these regions, since it is clear that by man comes nothing to aid in perfecting the world, and that all his exertions regard his private convenience always, and never cease to aim at his own advantage?
[3659] Lit., "a generation of."
[3660] Canterus, Elmenhorst, Oberthür, and Orelli omit ut, which is retained as above by the rest.
[3661] Lit., "obscene."
[3662] Elmenhorst endeavours to show that Arnobius coincides in this argument with the Epicureans, by quoting Lucr. v. 165 sqq. and Lact. vii. 5, where the Epicurean argument is brought forward, What profit has God in man, that He should have created him? In doing this, it seems not to have been observed that the question asked by Arnobius is a very different one: What place has man in the world, that God should be supposed to have sent him to fill it?
[3663] i.e., so far from this being the case.
38. For, to begin with what is important, what advantage is it to the world that the mightiest kings are here? What, that there are tyrants, lords, and other innumerable and very illustrious powers? What, that there are generals of the greatest experience in war, skilled in taking cities; soldiers steady and utterly invincible in battles of cavalry, or in fighting hand to hand on foot? What, that there are orators, grammarians, poets, writers, logicians, musicians, ballet-dancers, mimics, actors, singers, trumpeters, flute and reed players? What, that there are runners, boxers, charioteers, vaulters, [3664] walkers on stilts, rope-dancers, jugglers? What, that there are dealers in salt fish, salters, fishmongers, perfumers, goldsmiths, bird-catchers, weavers of winnowing fans and baskets of rushes? What, that there are fullers, workers in wool, embroiderers, cooks, confectioners, dealers in mules, pimps, butchers, harlots? What, that there are other kinds of dealers? What do the other kinds of professors and arts, for the enumeration of which all life would be too short, contribute to the plan and constitution [3665] of the world, that we should believe [3666] that it could not have been founded without men, and would not attain its completeness without the addition of [3667] a wretched and useless being's exertion? [3668]