1 Corinthians 3:10

The philosophers did not exert themselves in contemning the appearance of the Lord. It therefore follows that it is the opinion of the wise among the Jews which the apostle inveighs against. Wherefore he adds, “But we preach, as it is written, what eye hath not seen, and ear hath not heard, and hath not entered into the heart of man, what God hath prepared for them that love Him. For God hath revealed it to us by the Spirit. For the Spirit searcheth all things, even the deep things of God.” For he recognises the spiritual man and the Gnostic as the disciple of the Holy Spirit dispensed by God, which is the mind of Christ. …

In the Creator, however, the two courses were perfectly compatible, both the predestination before the ages and the revelation at the end thereof, because that which He both fore-ordained and revealed He also in the intermediate space of time announced by the pre-ministration of figures, and symbols, and allegories. But because (the apostle) subjoins, on the subject of our glory, that “none of the princes of this world knew it, for had they known it they would not have crucified the Lord of glory,” the heretic argues that the princes of this world crucified the Lord (that is, the Christ of the rival god) in order that this blow might even recoil on the Creator Himself. …

2. First then, it is to be seen, what is said by persons of that profession, who will not work: then, if we shall find that they think not aright, what is meet to be said for their correction? “It is not,” say they, “of this corporal work in which either husbandmen or handicraftsmen labor, that the Apostle gave precept, when he said, ‘If any will not work, neither let him eat.’” For he could not be contrary to the Gospel, where the Lord Him self saith, “Therefore I say unto you, be not solicitous for your life, what ye shall eat, neither for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Consider the fowls of heaven, that they sow not, nor reap, nor gather into barns; and your heavenly Father feedeth them. …

Although, therefore, we say that obedience is the gift of God, we still exhort men to it. But to those who obediently hear the exhortation of truth is given the gift of God itself, that is, to hear obediently; while to those who do not thus hear it is not given. For it was not some one only, but Christ who said, “No man cometh unto me, except it were given him of my Father;” and, “To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” And concerning continence He says, “Not all receive this saying, but they to whom it is given.” And when the apostle would exhort married people to conjugal chastity, he says, “I would that all men were even as I myself; but every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, another after that;” where he plainly shows not only that continence is a gift of God, but even the chastity of those who are married. …

14. “Thou shalt arise, and have mercy upon Sion: for it is time that Thou have mercy upon her” ( ver. 13 ). What time? “But when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the Law.” And where is Sion? “To redeem them that were under the Law.” First then were the Jews: for thence were the Apostles, thence those more than five hundred brethren, thence that later multitude, who had but one heart and one soul toward God. Therefore, “the time is come.” What time? “Behold, now is the accepted time: behold, now is the day of salvation.” Who saith this? That Servant of God, that Builder, who said, “Ye are God’s building.”

Ver. 10 . “According to the Grace of God which was given unto me, as a wise master-builder I laid a foundation.” In this place he calls himself wise, not exalting himself, but to give them an ensample, and to point out that this is a wise man’s part, to lay a foundation. You may observe as one instance of his modest bearing, that in speaking of himself as wise, he allowed not this to stand as though it were something of his own; but first attributing himself entirely unto God, then and not till then calls himself by that name. For, “according to the Grace of God,” saith he, “which was given unto me.” Thus, at once he signifies both that the whole is of God; and that this most of all is Grace, viz. the not being divided, but resting on One Foundation. …

[5.] Ver. 12 . “If any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, stubble.” For after the faith there is need of edification: and therefore he saith elsewhere, “Edify one another with these words.” (perhaps 1 Thes. v. 11; iv. 5 .) For both the artificer and the learner contribute to the edifying. Wherefore he saith, “But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereon.” ( 1 Cor. iii. 10 .) But if faith had been the subject of these sayings, the thing affirmed is not reasonable. For in the faith all ought to be equal, since “there is but one faith;” ( Ephes. iv. 5 .) but in goodness of life it is not possible that all should be the same. Because the faith is not in one case less, in another more excellent, but the same in all those who truly believe. …

He joins them with the Saints and again returns to his former image, nowhere suffering them to be disunited from Christ. Doubtless then, this is a building that shall go on until His coming. Doubtless it was for this reason that Paul said, “As a wise master builder, I laid a foundation.” ( 1 Cor. iii. 10, 11 .) And again that Christ is the foundation. What then means all this? You observe that the comparisons have all referred to the subject-matters, and that we must not expound them to the very letter. The Apostle speaks from analogy as Christ does, where He calls the Father an husbandman, ( John xv. 1 .) and Himself a root. ( Rev. xxii. 16 .)

“The Firstborn of all creation.” “What then,” saith one, “Lo, He is a creature.” Whence? tell me. “Because he said ‘Firstborn .’ ” However, he said not “first created,” but “firstborn.” Then it is reasonable that he should be called many things. For he must also be called a brother “in all things.” ( Heb. ii. 17 .) And we must take from Him His being Creator; and insist that neither in dignity nor in any other thing is He superior to us? And who that hath understanding would say this? For the word “firstborn” is not expressive of dignity and honor, nor of anything else, but of time only. What does “the firstborn” signify? That he is created, is the answer. Well. If then this be so, it has also kindred expressions. But otherwise the firstborn is of the same essence with those of whom he is firstborn. …

But if this be “the Beginning,” what else is our doctrine save to repent “from dead works,” and through the Spirit to receive “the faith,” in “the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment”? But what is “the Beginning”? “The Beginning,” he says, is nothing else than this, when there is not a strict life. For as it is necessary to instruct one who is entering on the study of grammar, in the Elements first, so also must the Christian know these things accurately, and have no doubt concerning them. And should he again have need of teaching, he has not yet the foundation. For one who is firmly grounded ought to be fixed and to stand steady, and not be moved about. …

Let no one then foolishly suppose that the Christ is any other than the only begotten Son. Let us not imagine ourselves wiser than the gift of the Spirit. Let us hear the words of the great Peter, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Let us hear the Lord Christ confirming this confession, for “On this rock,” He says, “I will build my church and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.” Wherefore too the wise Paul, most excellent master builder of the churches, fixed no other foundation than this. “I,” he says, “as a wise master builder have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereon. …

2. Certain persons find fault with me because in the books which I have written against Jovinian I have been excessive (so they say) in praise of virginity and in depreciation of marriage; and they affirm that to preach up chastity till no comparison is left between a wife and a virgin is equivalent to a condemnation of matrimony. If I remember aright the point of the dispute, the question at issue between myself and Jovinian is that he puts marriage on a level with virginity, while I make it inferior; he declares that there is little or no difference between the two states, I assert that there is a great deal. Finally, a result due under God to your agency, he has been condemned because he has dared to set matrimony on an equality with perpetual chastity. …