Translation Hide
Reply to Faustus the Manichaean

13.

In the passage where we read of the Jews saying to Christ, Thou bearest witness of thyself, thy witness is not true, you do not see that Christ replies by saying that Moses wrote of Him, simply because you have not got the eye of piety to see with. The answer of Christ is this: "It is written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true; I am one who bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me." ¹ What does this mean, if rightly understood, but that this number of witnesses required by the law was fixed upon and consecrated in the spirit of prophecy, that even thus might be prefigured the future revelation of the Father and Son, whose spirit is the Holy Spirit of the inseparable Trinity? So it is written: "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established." ² As a matter of fact, one witness generally speaks the truth, while a number tell lies. And the world, in its conversion to Christianity, believed one apostle preaching the gospel rather than the mistaken multitude who persecuted him. There was a special reason for requiring this number of witnesses, and in His answer the Lord implied that Moses prophesied of Him. Do you carp at His saying your law instead of the law of God? But, as every one knows, this is the common expression in Scripture. Your law means the law given to you. So the apostle speaks of his gospel, while at the same time he declares that he received it not from man, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. You might as well say that Christ denies God to be His Father, when He uses the words your Father instead of our Father. Again, you should refuse to believe the voice which you allude to as having come from heaven, This is my beloved Son, believe Him, because you did not hear it. But if you believe this because you find it in the sacred Scriptures, you will also find there what you deny, that Moses wrote of Christ, besides many other things that you do not acknowledge as true. Do you not see that your own mischievous argument may be used to prove that this voice never came from heaven? To your own destruction, and to the detriment of the welfare of mankind, you try to weaken the authority of the gospel, by arguing that it cannot be true that Christ said that Moses wrote of Him; because if He had said this, the ingenious hostility of the Jews would have led them at once to ask what He supposed Moses to have written of Him. In the same way, it might be impiously argued that if that voice had really come from heaven, all the Jews who heard it would have believed. Why are you so unreasonable as not to consider that, as it was possible for the Jews to remain hardened in unbelief after hearing the voice from heaven, so it was possible for them, when Christ said that Moses wrote of Him, to refrain from asking what Moses wrote, because in their ingenious hostility they were afraid of being proved to be in the wrong?

Edition Hide
Contra Faustum Manichaeum libri triginta tres

13.

Illic autem, ubi ei dictum est a Iudaeis: Tu de te testificaris; testimonium tuum non est verum, non mirum est non te videre prosecutum eum, ut diceret de se prophetasse Moysen; non enim habes pium oculum, quo id possis videre. Nam ecce id ipsum, quod eis respondit: Nempe in lege vestra scriptum est, quia duorum hominum testimonium verum est. Ego sum, qui testificor de me, et testificatur de me, qui me misit pater, quid aliud sonat recte intellegentibus nisi illum testium numerum in lege prophetico spiritu consecratum et commendatum, ut etiam sic praenuntiaretur futura revelatio patris et filii, quorum spiritus est in illa inseparabili trinitate spiritus sanctus? p. 452,13 Ideo scriptum est: In ore duorum vel trium testium stabit omne verbum. Alioquin et unus testis plerumque verum dicit et plures plerumque mentiuntur, potiusque creditum est in exordio fidei gentium uni apostolo evangelizanti quam populis errantibus, a quibus persecutionem patiebatur. Non igitur frustra quodam modo consecratus est iste numerus testium, et cum hoc dominus respondit, eo quoque ipso intellegi voluit de se prophetasse Moysen. An forte inde calumniamini, quia non ait in lege dei, sed in lege vestra scriptum est? Ubi usitatam locutionem scripturarum quis non agnoscat? In lege vestra<(i> enim dixit vobis data, p. 452,23 sicut dicit apostolus evangelium suum, quod se tamen accepisse testatur, non ab homine, sed per revelationem Iesu Christi. An et Christum dicitis negasse se habere patrem deum, ubicumque non ait: pater noster, sed pater vester? Iam vero vocem illam, quam commemorasti caelo delatam: Hic est filius meus dilectissimus, credite illi, quia vos non audistis, nolite illi credere. Si autem ideo creditis, quia eam in scripturis sanctis invenistis, ibi est et ista, cui credere non vultis de Christo scripsisse Moysen; ibi aliae multae, quibus pariter fidem derogatis nec timetis, miseri, ne ita profanus aliquis dicat istam vocem omnino non sonuisse de caelo. p. 453,9 Et sicut vos contra salutem generis humani, quae omnibus gentibus evangelica auctoritate confertur, etiam in vestram perniciem argumentamini, cum dicitis propterea non esse credendum, quod dixerit Christus de se scripsisse Moysen, quia si hoc ille dixisset, nec Iudaei tacere potuissent, quin statim, utpote maligni et astuti, quaererent, quidnam illud esset, quod de se a Moyse scriptum putaret*, sic et ille vanus et perditus dicat: si de caelo vox illa sonuisset, omnes Iudaei, qui audierant, credidissent? Cur ergo non consideratis, insani, sicut fieri potuit, ut et post illam caelestem vocem dura Iudaeorum infidelitas permaneret, ita fieri potuisse, ut cum Christus diceret de se scripsisse Moysen, hoc magis maligna astutia timentes, unde convincerentur, audire omnino non quaererent, quid de illo scripserit Moyses? p. 453,23