Eusebius Preparation 7:1
What, then, was there to fear in the dispensation of the Incarnation, since the undefiled was incapable of defilement, and the pure of being soiled by the flesh, and the passionless Word of God of corruption by the proper nature of the body, any more than the rays of the sun are harmed by touching corpses and all sorts of bodily things? Nay, on the contrary, the corruptible was transformed by the divine Word, and was made holy and immortal, even (d) as He willed: yea, and so it ministered to the divine purpose and works of the Spirit. And all this was done by a loving God and by the Word of God for the curing and salvation of all men, in accordance with the words of the prophets who had foretold from ancient days His wondrous Birth of a Virgin. And quite necessarily the prophet prefaces Christ's Birth of a Virgin by an exhortation to attention, crying aloud to his hearers, "If ye will not believe, neither (315) shall ye understand."
And then he adds the following words: |54
"10. And the Lord added to speak unto Ahaz saying, 11. Ask for thyself a sign from the Lord thy God in the depth or in the height. 12. And Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt God. 13. And he said, Hear now, house of David; is it a small thing to you to strive with man, and how do ye strive with the Lord? 14. Therefore the Lord shall give you a sign: Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel: 15. Butter and honey shall he eat, before he knows to choose the good and refuse the evil. 16. Wherefore before the child know good or evil, he does not obey wickedness, that he should choose the good. And the earth shall be forsaken, on account of that which thou fearest, of her two kings."
Such is the prophecy. But the opening of the prophecy (c) is worthy of our study, which bears witness to those that read it, "If ye do not believe, neither will ye understand." And it is above all necessary to note that the words shew that its readers need not only intellect but faith, and not only faith but intellect. Hence the Jews who do not believe in Christ, though they are even now hearers of these words, have not even yet understood Him of Whom the prophecy was given, so that in their case the prediction has its primary fulfilment. For though they hear daily with their ears the prophecies about Christ, they hear them not (d) with the ears of their mind. And the sole cause of their ignorance is unbelief, as the prophecy truly reveals of them and to them. For it says, "If ye will not believe, neither shall ye understand."
And if they say that she who conceived is called not a virgin but a young woman in Scripture (for so it is said it is explained among them) what worthy sign of the promise of God, we answer, would this be, if like all women after union with a man a young woman were naturally to conceive? And how could he that were born of her be God? And not simply God, but "God with us"? For that is the meaning of Emmanuel, which name it says the child is to be called. "For behold a virgin," it says, "shall conceive (316) and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel, which is interpreted God with us." Where would be |55 God's struggle, where His labour and difficulty, if a woman were to bring forth in the accustomed manner?
For in our versions translated by the Seventy, men of Hebrew race, experts in the accuracy of their knowledge of their national language, we find: "Is it a small thing for you to contend with man? And how will ye contend with God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, who (b) shall be called God with us." (For as I said this is the meaning of Emmanuel.) And in the versions of the Jews according to the transcript of Aquila [Aquila was a proselyte, and not a Jew by birth] we have a rendering to the same effect, "Hear then, house of David; is it a small thing with you to weary men that ye would weary my God also? Therefore He will give you this sign: Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and thou shalt call His name Emmanuel." In Symmachus it stands thus— [Symmachus is said to have been an Ebionite. There was a sect of the Jews so designated said to have believed in Christ, to which Symmachus belonged, and his rendering is as follows]—"Hear, house of David, is it not enough for you to weary men, that ye weary my God? "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you this sign: "Behold a young woman conceives and bears a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel." For since the hardness of the Jewish (d) character and their disinclination for holiness caused sweat and toil, and no common labour and struggle to the prophets of old time, therefore he says, "Is it not enough for you to weary the prophets of God, and to contend with men: but now will ye even weary my God, and contend even with my God also?" Such is Theodotion's translation. Thus the prophet calls the God, Who is like to be wearied |56 and challenged to contend, his own God, and not the God of those whom he addresses, which he could hardly do if he referred to the Supreme God of the Jews, among whom it had been handed down from their Fathers that they must (317) preserve the worship of God the Creator of all things. And what could the contest and labour or the toil of this God in the prophecy refer to but His entry by human birth, as I and the Septuagint interpret it, of a virgin, or even according to the current Jewish rendering, of a young woman? For you will find in Moses the phrase "young woman "used of one who is undoubtedly a virgin, at least he uses the word of one who has been violated by one person after her betrothal to another.
(b) But also Emmanuel, the child of the Virgin, is to be endowed with more than human power, He is to choose the good before He knows evil, and to refuse evil in choosing the good: and this not in manhood but in childhood. Therefore it runs, "Before the child knows good or evil, he shall refuse evil in choosing the good," which shews that He is completely immune from evil. And He (c) bears a greater than any human name, God with us. And this is why the sign connected with Him is said to have depth, and also height: depth, by reason of His descent to humanity, and His presence here even unto death: height, by reason of the restitution of His divine glory from the depth, or because of the divine nature of His pre-existence. Emmanuel can only be He Who has already |57 been proved to be God the Lord, Who was seen by Abraham in human shape. And if the Jews refer the prophecy to Hezekiah, son of Ahaz, saying that his birth was thus (d) predicted to his father, we answer that Hezekiah was not God with us, nor was any sign shewn forth in him of a divine nature. Nor was there any divine struggle or labour attendant on his birth. Hezekiah, moreover, can be shewn to be excluded by the date of the prophecy. For this prophecy was given about future events when his father Ahaz was actually king, whereas Hezekiah is known to have been born before Ahaz came to the throne. And if the prophecy we are considering has no reference to him, it is still further from referring to any other Jew who lived after its date, except to the birth of the true Emmanuel, that is, (318) God born with us, and to the sojourn among men of our Saviour the Word of God. For the land of the Jews was left desolate by the loss of its two kings, as the oracle said would come to pass as follows: "The land shall be deserted from the face of two kings"; and this actually and literally took place. For in the time of King Ahaz and Isaiah son of Amos at the date of this prophecy, the king of Syria in Damascus, and the king of Israel in Samaria, not the king (b) who ruled at Jerusalem, but the king of the multitude of Jews who revolted from the law of God, made a compact one with another, and besieged them that were under the sovereignty of David's successors. The prophecy foretells the destruction of both these kings, both the Jew and the one of foreign race, who had combined together against the Lord's people, and says that they will swiftly be severed and give up the war: and that their kingdom and succession (c) will be completely destroyed and extinguished after the birth of Him who is foretold as "God with us."
Now recognize at what date the kingdoms of Damascus and Judaea both ceased to exist, and at what period the land of the Jews was left without a king, as well as the land of the Damascenes, once so powerful, formerly the great overlord of all Syria. For the probability is that at the time of their destruction Emmanuel would be born, and He that was foretold would come. If we to-day could see the (d) kingdoms referred to still in existence, it would be vain to inquire further, we could only extend our hopes into the future; but if their destruction is actually evident, so that |58 our time sees no kingdom either of Damascus or of Judaea, it is clear that the prophecy has been fulfilled which said, "And the land shall be deserted from the face of two kings, whom thou fearest, from their face,"—kings being used for "kingdoms." For Symmachus says, "The land shall be left, from which you suffer ill, by the face of her two kings." And Aquila, "The land shall be left, which thou disdainest, from the face of her two kings." And Theodotion translates thus, "The land shall be left, which thou hatest, from the face of her two kings." Do you see how it is prophesied that the land shall be left kingless? What land, but that of Damascus, and that of Israel? For the kings to whom the prophecy refers ruled these lands. It was their lands that Ahaz despised or hated, wearied and suffering under their attacks. When then did they fall? For if this part of the prophecy was fulfilled, the foregoing part must have also taken place, and this was, that a Virgin should bear "God with us."
Now if we inquire of history it is abundantly clear that the line of kings of Damascus was uninterrupted up to the date of the appearance of our Saviour Jesus Christ. The holy apostle mentions Aretas, King of Damascus, and the kingship of the Jews continued untouched even until then, though it was irregular: for Herod and his successors in the time of our Saviour did not inherit the throne as being of David's line.
And it was after His Appearing, and the preaching of the Gospel of the Virgin's Son to all mankind, that the land was "left of the face of two kings." For from that date by the rule of the Roman Emperor over all nations, all local dominion in city and state ceased, and the prophecy before us in common with the others was fulfilled. |59
Such was the literal fulfilment. But the prophecy also shews figuratively the stability, the calmness and peace of every soul, who receives the God that was born, Emmanuel Himself. For now that the one Christ, and the Word (d) proclaimed by Him, rule as kings over the souls of men, the old enemies have been put to flight, the two forms of sin, the one that leads men into idolatry and into a diversity of varied beliefs, the other that tempts them to moral ruin. Of these I say the earthly kings of old above-named were symbols. Of these the king of Damascus was the picture of the Gentile errors with regard to idols. And the other, of those who had rebelled from Jerusalem, that is to say from the worship of God according to the Law.
That we should understand the passage figuratively can (320) also be seen from what follows, where it is prophesied that in the time of Emmanuel certain flies and bees will attack the Jews, some from Egypt, some from Assyria, and that a man will shave their head and feet and beard, and that a man will nourish a heifer and two sheep, and other things destined to happen at one and the same time, which it is impossible to understand literally, but only figuratively. (b)
This, then, is so. And the proof that the Scripture before us foretold the manner of the Birth of our Saviour Jesus Christ, is supported by the Evangelist, who wrote:
"18. The birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise. When his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. 19. And Joseph her husband being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly. 20. And while he thus intended, behold the Angel of the Lord appeared to him saying, Joseph, Son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. 21. And she shall bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins. 22. And all this was done that the word of the Lord spoken by the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel, which is being interpreted, God with us." |60
And thus according to our teaching the reality of the divine foreknowledge is confirmed by the course of events, otherwise the truth of the prophecy could not have been shewn. Let us now consider the important things which it is said in the next part of the prophecy will happen in that day, that is to say at the time of Christ's appearing.
Irenaeus 3.16.4 Now these are the works of Christ. He therefore was Himself Christ, whom Simeon carrying [in his arms] blessed the Most High; on beholding whom the shepherds glorified God; whom John, while yet in his mother's womb, and He (Christ) in that of Mary, recognising as the Lord, saluted with leaping; whom the Magi, when they had seen, adored, and offered their gifts [to Him], as I have already stated, and prostrated themselves to the eternal King, departed by another way, not now returning by the way of the Assyrians. "For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, Father or mother, He shall receive the power of Damascus, and the spoils of Samaria, against the king of the Assyrians; " declaring, in a mysterious manner indeed, but emphatically, that the Lord did fight with a hidden hand against Amalek. For this cause, too, He suddenly removed those children belonging to the house of David, whose happy lot it was to have been born at that time, that He might send them on before into His kingdom; He, since He was Himself an infant, so arranging it that human infants should be martyrs, slain, according to the Scriptures, for the sake of Christ, who was born in Bethlehem of Judah, in the city of David.
Tertullian Against the Jews
Begin we, therefore, to prove that the BIRTH of Christ was announced by prophets; as Isaiah (e.g.,) foretells, "Hear ye, house of David; no petty contest have ye with men, since God is proposing a struggle. Therefore God Himself will give you a sign; Behold, the virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and ye shall call his name Emmanuel" (which is, interpreted, "God with us"): "butter and honey shall he eat;": "since, ere the child learn to call father or mother, he shall receive the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria, in opposition to the king of the Assyrians."
Accordingly the Jews say: Let us challenge that prediction of Isaiah, and let us institute a comparison whether, in the case of the Christ who is already come, there be applicable to Him, firstly, the name which Isaiah foretold, and (secondly) the signs of it which he announced of Him. Well, then, Isaiah foretells that it behoves Him to be called Emmanuel; and that subsequently He is to take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria, in opposition to the king of the Assyrians. "Now," say they, "that (Christ) of yours, who is come, neither was called by that name, nor engaged in warfare." But we, on the contrary, have thought they ought to be admonished to recall to mind the context of this passage as well. For subjoined is withal the interpretation of Emmanuel--"God with us"--in order that you may regard not the sound only of the name, but the sense too. For the Hebrew sound, which is Emmanuel, has an interpretation, which is, God with us. Inquire, then, whether this speech, "God with us" (which is Emmanuel), be commonly applied to Christ ever since Christ's light has dawned, and I think you will not deny it. For they who out of Judaism believe in Christ, ever since their believing on Him, do, whenever they shall wish to say Emmanuel, signify that God is with us: and thus it is agreed that He who was ever predicted as Emmanuel is already come, because that which Emmanuel signifies is come--that is, "God with us." Equally are they led by the sound of the name when they so understand "the power of Damascus," and "the spoils of Samaria," and "the kingdom of the Assyrians," as if they portended Christ as a warrior; not observing that Scripture premises, "since, ere the child learn to call father or mother, he shall receive the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria, in opposition to the king of the Assyrians." For the first step is to look at the demonstration of His age, to see whether the age there indicated can possibly exhibit the Christ as already a man, not to say a general. Forsooth, by His babyish cry the infant would summon men to arms, and would give the signal of war not with clarion, but with rattle, and point out the foe, not from His charger's back or from a rampart, but from the back or neck of His suckler and nurse, and thus subdue Damascus and Samaria in place of the breast. (It is another matter if, among you, infants rush out into battle,--oiled first, I suppose, to dry in the sun, and then armed with satchels and rationed on butter,--who are to know how to lance sooner than how to lacerate the bosom!) Certainly, if nature nowhere allows this,-- (namely,) to serve as a soldier before developing into manhood, to take "the power of Damascus" before knowing your father,--it follows that the pronouncement is visibly figurative. "But again," say they, "nature suffers not a 'virgin' to be a parent; and yet the prophet must be believed." And deservedly so; for he bespoke credit for a thing incredible, by saying that it was to be a sign. "Therefore," he says, "shall A SIGN be given you. Behold, a virgin shall conceive in womb, and bear a son." But a sign from God, unless it had consisted in some portentous novelty, would not have appeared a sign. In a word, if, when you are anxious to cast any down from (a belief in) this divine prediction, or to convert whoever are simple, you have the audacity to lie, as if the Scripture contained (the announcement), that not "a virgin," but "a young female," was to conceive and bring forth; you are refuted even by this fact, that a daily occurrence--the pregnancy and parturition of a young female, namely--cannot possibly seem anything of a sign. And the setting before us, then, of a virgin-mother is deservedly believed to be a sign; but not equally so a warrior-infant. For there would not in this case again be involved the question of a sign; but, the sign of a novel birth having been awarded, the next step after the sign is, that there is enunciated a different ensuing ordering of the infant, who is to eat "honey and butter." Nor is this, of course, for a sign. It is natural to infancy. But that he is to receives "the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria in opposition to the king of the Assyrians," this is a wondrous sign. Keep to the limit of (the infant's) age, and inquire into the sense of the prediction; nay, rather, repay to truth what you are unwilling to credit her with, and the prophecy becomes intelligible by the relation of its fulfilment. Let those Eastern magi be believed, dowering with gold and incense the infancy of Christ as a king; and the infant has received "the power of Damascus" without battle and arms. For, besides the fact that it is known to all that the "power"--for that is the "strength"--of the East is wont to abound in gold and odours, certain it is that the divine Scriptures regard "gold" as constituting the "power" also of all other nations; as it says through Zechariah: "And Judah keepeth guard at Jerusalem, and shall amass all the vigour of the surrounding peoples, gold and silver." For of this gift of "gold" David likewise says, "And to Him shall be given of the gold of Arabia;" and again, "The kings of the Arabs and Saba shall bring Him gifts." For the East, on the one hand, generally held the magi (to be) kings; and Damascus, on the other hand, used formerly to be reckoned to Arabia before it was transferred into Syrophoenicia on the division of the Syrias: the "power" whereof Christ then "received" in receiving its ensigns,--gold, to wit, and odours. "The spoils," moreover, "of Samaria" (He received in receiving) the magi themselves, who, on recognising Him, and honouring Him with gifts, and adoring Him on bonded knee as Lord and King, on the evidence of the guiding and indicating star, became "the spoils of Samaria," that is, of idolatry--by believing, namely, on Christ. For (Scripture) denoted idolatry by the name of "Samaria," Samaria being ignominious on the score of idolatry; for she had at that time revolted from God under King Jeroboam. For this, again, is no novelty to the Divine Scriptures, figuratively to use a transference of name grounded on parallelism of crimes. For it calls your rulers "rulers of Sodore," and your people the "people of Gomorrha," when those dries had already long been extinct. And elsewhere it says, through a prophet, to the people of Israel, "Thy father (was) an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite;" of whose race they were not begotten, but (were called their sons) by reason of their consimilarity in impiety, whom of old (God) had called His own sons through Isaiah the prophet: "I have generated and exalted sons." So, too, Egypt is sometimes understood to mean the whole world in that prophet, on the count of superstition and malediction. So, again, Babylon, in our own John, is a figure of the city Rome, as being equally great and proud of her sway, and triumphant over the saints. On this wise, accordingly, (Scripture) entitled the magi also with the appellation of "Samaritans,"--"despoiled" (of that) which they had had in common with the Samaritans, as we have said--idolatry in opposition to the Lord. (It adds), "in opposition," moreover, "to the king of the Assyrians,"--in opposition to the devil, who to this hour thinks himself to be reigning, if he detrudes the saints from the religion of God.
Moreover, this our interpretation will be supported while (we find that) elsewhere as well the Scriptures designate Christ a warrior, as we gather from the names of certain weapons, and words of that kind. But by a comparison of the remaining senses the Jews shall be convicted. "Gird thee," says David, "the sword upon the thigh." But what do you read above concerning the Christ? "Blooming in beauty above the sons of men; grace is outpoured in thy lips." But very absurd it is if he was complimenting on the bloom of his beauty and the grace of his lips, one whom he was girding for war with a sword; of whom he proceeds subjunctively to say, "Outstretch and prosper, advance and reign!" And he has added, "because of thy lenity and justice." Who will ply the sword without practising the contraries to lenity and justice; that is, guile, and asperity, and injustice, proper (of course) to the business of battles? See we, then, whether that which has another action be not another sword,--that is, the Divine word of God, doubly sharpened with the two Testaments of the ancient law and the new law; sharpened by the equity of its own wisdom; rendering to each one according to his own action. Lawful, then, it was for the Christ of God to be precinct, in the Psalms, without warlike achievements, with the figurative sword of the word of God; to which sword is congruous the predicated "bloom," together with the "grace of the lips;" with which sword He was then "girt upon the thigh," in the eye of David, when He was announced as about to come to earth in obedience to God the Father's decree. "The greatness of thy right hand, he says, "shall conduct thee"--the virtue to wit, of the spiritual grace from which the recognition of Christ is deduced. "Thine arrows," he says, "are sharp,"--God's everywhere-flying precepts (arrows) threatening the exposure of every heart, and carrying compunction and transfixion to each conscience: "peoples shall fall beneath thee,"--of course, in adoration. Thus mighty in war and weapon-bearing is Christ; thus will He "receive the spoils," not of "Samaria" alone, but of all nations as well. Acknowledge that His "spoils" are figurative whose weapons you have learnt to be allegorical. And thus, so far, the Christ who is come was not a warrior, because He was not predicted as such by Isaiah. [9]
Tertullian Against Marcion 18:
For since the Creator was sure to know, some time or other, that hidden mystery of the superior god, even on the supposition that the true reading was (as Marcion has it)--"hidden from the God who created all things"--he ought then to have expressed the conclusion thus: "in order that the manifold wisdom of God might be made known to Him, and then to the principalities and powers of God, whosoever He might be, with whom the Creator was destined to share their knowledge." So palpable is the erasure in this passage, when thus read, consistently with its own true bearing. I, on my part, now wish to engage with you in a discussion on the allegorical expressions of the apostle. What figures of speech could the novel god have found in the prophets (fit for himself)? "He led captivity captive,"
says the apostle. With what arms? In what conflicts? From the devastation of what Country? From the overthrow of what city? What women, what children, what princes did the Conqueror throw into chains? For when by David Christ is sung as "girded with His sword upon His thigh," or by Isaiah as "taking away the spoils of Samaria and the power of Damascus," you make Him out to be really and truly a warrior confest to the eye. Learn then now, that His is a spiritual armour and warfare, since you have already discovered that the captivity is spiritual, in order that you may further learn that this also belongs to Him, even because the apostle derived the mention of the captivity from the same prophets as suggested to him his precepts likewise: "Putting away lying," (says he,) "speak every man truth with his neighbour;" and again, using the very words in which the Psalm expresses his meaning, (he says,) "Be ye angry, and sin not;" "Let not the sun go down upon your wrath." "Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness;" for (in the Psalm it is written,) "With the holy man thou shalt be holy, and with the perverse thou shalt be perverse;" and, "Thou shalt put away evil from among you."
Tertullian On the Resurrection 20
Now, to upset all conceits of this sort, let me dispel at once the preliminary idea on which they rest--their assertion that the prophets make all their announcements in figures of speech. Now, if this were the case, the figures themselves could not possibly have been distinguished, inasmuch as the verities would not have been declared, out of which the figurative language is stretched. And, indeed, if all are figures, where will be that of which they are the figures? How can you hold up a mirror for your face, if the face nowhere exists? But, in truth, all are not figures, but there are also literal statements; nor are all shadows, but there are bodies too: so that we have prophecies about the Lord Himself even, which are clearer than the day For it was not figuratively that the Virgin conceived in her womb; nor in a trope did she bear Emmanuel, that is, Jesus, God with us. Even granting that He was figuratively to take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria, still it was literally that He was to "enter into judgment with the elders and princes of the people." For in the person of Pilate "the heathen raged," and in the person of Israel "the people imagined vain things;" "the kings of the earth" in Herod, and the rulers in Annas and Caiaphas, were gathered together against the Lord, and against His anointed." He, again, was "led as a sheep to the slaughter, and as a sheep before the shearer," that is, Herod, "is dumb, so He opened not His mouth." "He gave His back to scourges, and His cheeks to blows, not turning His face even from the shame of spitting." "He was numbered with the transgressors;" "He was pierced in His hands and His feet;" "they cast lots for his raiment" "they gave Him gall, and made Him drink vinegar;" "they shook their heads, and mocked Him;" "He was appraised by the traitor in thirty pieces of silver." What figures of speech does Isaiah here give us?