Traduction Masquer
Against Hermogenes

Chapter XXV.--The Assumption that There are Two Earths Mentioned in the History of the Creation, Refuted.

He accordingly maintains that there are two earths set before us in the passage in question: one, which God made in the beginning; the other being the Matter of which God made the world, and concerning which it is said, "And the earth was without form, and void." ¹ Of course, if I were to ask, to which of the two earths the name earth is best suited, ² I shall be told that the earth which was made derived the appellation from that of which it was made, on the ground that it is more likely that the offspring should get its name from the original, than the original from the offspring. This being the case, another question presents itself to us, whether it is right and proper that this earth which God made should have derived its name from that out of which He made it? For I find from Hermogenes and the rest of the Materialist heretics, ³ that while the one earth was indeed "without form, and void," this one of ours obtained from God in an equal degree ⁴ both form, and beauty, and symmetry; and therefore that the earth which was created was a different thing from that out of which it was created. Now, having become a different thing, it could not possibly have shared with the other in its name, after it had declined from its condition. If earth was the proper name of the (original) Matter, this world of ours, which is not Matter, because it has become another thing, is unfit to bear the name of earth, seeing that that name belongs to something else, and is a stranger to its nature. But (you will tell me) Matter which has undergone creation, that is, our earth, had with its original a community of name no less than of kind. By no means. For although the pitcher is formed out of the clay, I shall no longer call it clay, but a pitcher; so likewise, although electrum ⁵ is compounded of gold and silver, I shall yet not call it either gold or silver, but electrum. When there is a departure from the nature of any thing, there is likewise a relinquishment of its name--with a propriety which is alike demanded by the designation and the condition. How great a change indeed from the condition of that earth, which is Matter, has come over this earth of ours, is plain even from the fact that the latter has received this testimony to its goodness in Genesis, "And God saw that it was good;" ⁶ while the former, according to Hermogenes, is regarded as the origin and cause of all evils. Lastly, if the one is Earth because the other is, why also is the one not Matter as the other is? Indeed, by this rule both the heaven and all creatures ought to have had the names of Earth and Matter, since they all consist of Matter. I have said enough touching the designation Earth, by which he will have it that Matter is understood. This, as everybody knows, is the name of one of the elements; for so we are taught by nature first, and afterwards by Scripture, except it be that credence must be given to that Silenus who talked so confidently in the presence of king Midas of another world, according to the account of Theopompus. But the same author informs us that there are also several gods.

Edition Masquer
Adversus Hermogenem

XXV.

[1] Vult igitur duas proponi terras in ista scriptura, unam quam in principio deus fecit, aliam materiam ex qua fecit, de qua dictum sit: Terra autem erat inuisibilis et rudis. Utique si quaeram ex duabus quae cui nomen terrae adcommodare debeat, dicetur hanc quae facta sit ex illa ex qua facta est uocabulum deriuasse, quia ueri similius sit ab origine sobolem potius quam originem a sobole uocitari. Hoc si ita est, alia nobis obuoluitur quaestio, an competat terram hanc quam deus fecit ex illa ex qua fecit cognomentum deriuasse. [2] Audio enim apud Hermogenem ceterosque materiarios haereticos terram quidem illam informem et inuisibilem et rudem fuisse, hanc uero nostram proinde et formam et conspectum et cultum a deo consecutam, aliud ergo factam quam erat ea ex qua facta est. Porro aliud facta non potuit cum ea de nomine sociari a cuius condicione desciuerat. Si nomen proprium materiae illius fuit terra, haec quae non est materia, aliud scilicet facta, terrae quoque non capit nomen alienum et statu suo extraneum. [3] 'Sed materia facta, id est haec terra, habuit cum sua origine consortium nominis, sicut et generis.' Non adeo. Nam et testam, licet ex argilla confectam, iam non argillam uocabo sed testam, et electrum, licet ex auro et argento foederatum, nec argentum tamen nec aurum appellabo sed electmm. A cuius habitu quid diuertit, pariter et a uocatu eius recedit appellationis sicut et condicionis proprietate. Quam autem transierit de statu terrae illius, id est materiae, ista terra uel eo palam est quod haec apud Genesin testimonium boni accipit: Et uidit deus quia bonum, illa autem apud Hermogenem in originem et causam malorum deputatur. [4] Postremo si ideo haec terra quia et illa, cur non et materia haec quoque quia et illa? Immo iam et caelum et omnia, si ex materia constant, et terrae et materiae uocari debuerunt. [5] Satis ista de terrae nomine in quo[d] materiam intellegi uoluit; quod nomen unius elementi omnes sciunt natura primum, dehinc scriptura docente, nisi si et Sileno illi apud Midam regem adseueranti de alio orbe credendum est auctore Theopompo; sed et deos multos idem refert.