Über die Autorin bzw. den Autor

Editorial Director John F. Petruccione is associate professor in the Department of Greek and Latin at the Catholic University of America.

Auszug. © Genehmigter Nachdruck. Alle Rechte vorbehalten.

The Questions on the Octateuch On Genesis and Exodus

The Catholic University of America Press

Contents

Acknowledgments...........................................................................................................viiAbbreviations.............................................................................................................xiIntroduction to Theodoret's Life and Works................................................................................xix1. Theodoret.............................................................................................................xix2. The Circumstances of Composition of the Questions on the Octateuch....................................................xx3. Theodoret's Biblical Text.............................................................................................xxii4. Theodoret's Approach to Scripture.....................................................................................xxvii5. The Sources of Theodoret's Exegesis...................................................................................xxx6. Theodoret's Style of Commentary: The Genre of Questions...............................................................xxxii7. Theodoret's Position on the Octateuch.................................................................................xxxvii8. Theodoret as Interpreter of the Octateuch.............................................................................xli9. Theological Issues in the Questions on the Octateuch..................................................................xlvi10. Theodoret's Achievement in the Questions on the Octateuch.............................................................l11. The Identification, Translation, and Presentation of Theodoret's Quotations of Scripture [J.F.P.].....................liiIntroduction to the Greek Text (J.F.P.)...................................................................................lvii1. This Edition and Its Antecedents.......................................................................................lvii2. Corrigenda to the Madrid Edition.......................................................................................lxxviiiBibliography..............................................................................................................lxxxviiConspectus siglorum.......................................................................................................xcvii1. The Manuscripts and Their Contents.....................................................................................xcvii2. Signs and Abbreviations Used in the Greek Text and the Critical Notes..................................................ciiiTHE QUESTIONS ON THE OCTATEUCHThe Questions on Genesis..................................................................................................2The Questions on Exodus...................................................................................................222

Chapter One

I

Why did the author not first set down the true doctrine of God before relating the creation of the universe?

Holy Scripture normally adapts the contents to the learners: to those who are mature proposing mature teachings, but to the immature the elements, in keeping with their capacity. Since the Egyptians used to worship the visible creation, and Israel, in their long association with them, had joined in this idolatry, he had to set out the facts of creation and explicitly teach them that it had a beginning of existence, and that the God of the universe was its Creator. Not that he passed over a treatment of the true doctrine of God. The statement that heaven and earth and the other parts of the universe were created and the revelation that the God of the universe was their Creator provided a true doctrine of God sufficient for people of that time. Indeed, whereas he conveyed the beginning of created things, he was not capable of inquiring into God's beginning. Now, knowing God to be eternal, he very wisely associated the theological with the natural by referring to him as Creator of everything and a good Creator.

Those he was teaching, however, had already learned of the eternity of God. When the divinely inspired Moses was sent into Egypt by God, he was commanded to say to his fellows, "He Who Is has sent me to you." Now, "He Who Is" conveys eternity, and it will be obvious to the attentive that that statement was made before the teaching in this chapter. He taught them the former while they were still living in Egypt but composed this chapter in the wilderness.

II

Why did he not mention the creation of the angels?

The people who were receiving the Law had no firm and stable basis; after all, immediately after many ineffable marvels, they hailed the image of the calf as a god. So if those people could so easily regard the likenesses of cattle as gods, what would they not have done, if they had acquired knowledge of powers of an invisible nature? This is why, up to the time of Abraham, a fully mature man, the God of the universe never communicated with the people of olden times by means of an angel.

The divinely inspired Moses first made mention of an angel in the case of Hagar, and rightly so; Hagar was a type of the old covenant. According to the holy apostle, "Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to the present Jerusalem." So, as the Law was given through angels-"It was ordained through angels by a mediator"; and again, "If the message declared through angels was valid"-it was also entirely appropriate for the God of the universe to employ an angel to speak of her slavery and to foretell the fate of the child that was to be born.

Now, holy Scripture clearly teaches us that angels and archangels and anything else incorporeal-the Holy Trinity excepted-have a created nature. Thus, the prophet David commands them also to sing God's praise: "All you his angels, sing his praise; sing his praise, all you his powers." And to convey the reason, he adds, "Because he spoke, and they were made; he gave orders, and they were created." And again in another psalm: "He who makes his angels winds and his ministers a flaming fire." Furthermore, the three blessed young men in the furnace composed their divinely inspired hymn and, beginning with a very fitting introduction, sang that excellent verse: "Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord," and then, "Bless the Lord, angels of the Lord; bless the Lord, all you powers of the Lord." In fact, I feel it is superfluous to go on at length about them; all the inspired Scripture is full of this doctrine.

III

Did the angels come into being before heaven and earth, or were they made along with them?

I regard this sort of question as over-curious; after all, what benefit could accrue from a knowledge of the exact moment of the creation of the angels? I am also aware that the holy apostle urges the admirable Timothy "to instruct certain people not to teach any different doctrine or give heed to mythological fables and endless genealogies." Yet I shall state what I believe is in keeping with the purpose of holy Scripture. We were taught that the divine nature alone is uncircumscribed in that it is uncreated, without beginning, and eternal, whereas things that have had a beginning of existence clearly have limits to their existence. Therefore, even though we declare that the angels possess an incorporeal nature, we say that their substance is circumscribed. Indeed, how could anyone, in the words of the divinely inspired Daniel, form the notion of "thousands of thousands and myriads of myriads" without understanding each one to exist within its own limits?

I believe, however, that no one contests that the angels have a being that is circumscribed. Christ the Lord said that each human being has been placed in the care of a single angel: "Be careful not to despise one of the least of those who believe in me, because their angels gaze constantly on the face of my Father in heaven." Holy Scripture also says that an angel presides over each nation. The angel that conversed with the prophet Daniel mentioned a ruler of the Persians, a ruler of the Greeks, and Michael the ruler of the Jews. And in his song, the mighty Moses declares, "When the Most High divided the nations, when he dispersed the children of Adam, he set boundaries for nations according to the number of God's angels." If, then, one was appointed to rule this group and another that, and each human being lives in the care of an angel, they clearly have a being that is circumscribed.

Now, if this is in fact true, and, of course it is, it follows that they require a place; only the divinity, uncircumscribed in being, does not occupy a place. But if what is circumscribed occupies a place, how could the angels have come into being before heaven and earth? If there was nothing to offer support, how could anything exist that needed to be supported?

IV

Yet, some commentators claim that the angels prexisted heaven and earth, for "if there were no angels," they ask, "how was the God of the universe praised in song?"

(1) Those who make this claim do not realize that it presents the angels as without beginning and without end. If the God of the universe needed singers of his praises and always had them singing his praises, it follows that the angels would be co-eternal with God. If, on the other hand, they did not always exist, and he created them only when he wished, it follows that there was a time when the God of the universe did not have anyone singing his praises. The Lord God, therefore, does not need anyone to sing his praises, for he is by nature free of need. Instead, it was only out of his goodness that he conferred existence on angels, and archangels, and all of creation.

Furthermore, what service would they have rendered if they had existed before creation when there was no one in existence who needed their assistance? In fact, the holy apostle cries out that they minister to God by caring for human beings: "Are they not all ministering spirits sent on a mission of service for the sake of those who are due to inherit salvation?" Thus, it is obvious that, whereas we need their assistance, God has no need of anyone, yet, being an abyss of goodness, he wanted to give a share of existence to those who did not exist at all.

(2) Nevertheless, those who insist that the angels prexisted heaven and earth quote to us as a convincing and irrefutable proof text the statement that the God of the universe made to Job: "As I made the stars, all my angels sang my praises." But this is to miss the fact that it was on the fourth day that God brought the stars into being along with the sun and the moon. Now, the angels were probably created along with heaven and earth so that on seeing the light created from no prexistent material, the firmament fixed in the midst of the waters, the water separated from the land, the earth beautified with all kinds of plants as soon as God spoke, and everything else made at God's discretion, they might realize, through what they saw, that they also have a created nature and receive existence from him. The holy apostle, in fact, links them to the world in saying, "We have become a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to human beings."

Now, I do not state this dogmatically, my view being that it is rash to speak dogmatically where holy Scripture does not make an explicit statement; rather, I have stated what I consider to be consistent with orthodox thought. Of course, we should all realize this fact: that everything in existence, with the exception of the Holy Trinity, has a created nature. If this is granted, the claim that the masses of angels were created before heaven and earth does not undermine the orthodox position. Yet the holy apostle clearly prohibits "disputation which does no good but only ruins those who are listening."

V

If the earth was in existence, how did it come to be, since the historian says, "The earth was in existence"?

This is a silly, foolish question. He who said, "In the beginning God made heaven and earth," did not say that the earth was eternal, but that it received its existence after, or along with, heaven. Furthermore, the historian did not simply say, "The earth was in existence," but connected it with what follows: "The earth was invisible and formless." That is, though made by the God of the universe, it was invisible, because still covered by the water, and formless, because not yet arrayed with growth or sprouting meadows, groves, and crops.

VI

Did Moses fail to teach us that God created the waters as well?

In fact, after saying, "The earth was invisible and formless, and darkness was over the deep," he showed that the waters, like the earth, have a nature that is created. The God of the universe spoke in similar terms also when legislating about the Sabbath: "Work on six days, but on the seventh there is to be a Sabbath, a rest, for the Lord your God; in six days the Lord God made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them." So it is clear that, with the exception of the divine essence, whatever is in them, visible or invisible, material or spiritual, has a created nature. Indeed, after declaring, "Blessed is the one whose helper is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord his God, who made heaven and earth," the divinely inspired David proceeded to mention, "the sea, and all that is in them."

VII

If God created the light, how could he have made the darkness, as these are opposed to each other?

(1) While they are opposed, they are both still necessary to human beings. One assists men with work and industry, brings visible things to their attention, and prompts them to sing the praises of their maker. The other gives rest and renewal and relieves the weariness caused by labor; it gathers people to their homes, and gives animals security in foraging. The holy David teaches us this quite explicitly: "You put darkness in place, and night fell. All the beasts of the forest travel about in it: lion cubs roaring to hunt and to search for their food from God. The sun rose, and they gathered and will sleep in their lairs. Man will go to his work and his business until evening." After saying this, he expressed admiration for the Creator's magnificence: "How magnificent are your works, O Lord! You made everything with your wisdom."

Thus, we have precise knowledge of the necessity of darkness. And it is simple to grasp the truth that it is not a substance of some kind but only an accident, being a shadow cast by heaven and earth. This is why it vanishes when the light appears. Light, on the other hand, is and subsists as a substance; after setting, it rises, and after departing, it returns. In other words, just as our body is a substance, but the shadow created by the body is an accident, not a substance, so heaven and earth, the largest bodies, are substances of different kinds, but the shadow caused by them in the absence of light is called "darkness," and once the light enters, the darkness disappears.

(2) Other considerations lead to the same conclusion. A house with no windows is full of darkness, but when a lamp is brought in, it lights up-not that darkness has moved off elsewhere, for, being insubstantial, it does not subsist. Rather, it is completely dissolved with the coming of the light. After all, a shadow is caused by the roof, the floor, and the walls, and is dissipated by the beams of light. We see this occurring every day. When the light recedes, the shadow cast by heaven and earth brings darkness, and when the light rises again, the darkness is dissipated.

Darkness, then, is neither an uncreated nor a created substance. Caused by created things, it is necessary and useful and proclaims God's wisdom. Indeed, the prophet regards this as yet another reason to praise the God of the universe: "I am he who created light and caused darkness." He has mentioned each in a very appropriate way: "created" in the case of the light and "caused" in the case of the darkness, which is an accident that is brought about and dissipated. The three blessed young men also, in summoning creation to sing praise, linked night to day and joined the darkness to the light, for in their mutual succession they allow the measurement of time and provide the composite elements of human life.

VIII

Which spirit "moved over the water"?

Some commentators believe it was the most Holy Spirit vivifying the nature of the waters and foreshadowing the grace of baptism. But I think it more likely that by "spirit" he is here referring to the air. After declaring that God made heaven and earth and mentioning the waters by reference to "the deep," he logically goes on to mention as well the air, which extends from the water's surface to heaven, for air naturally moves over bodies lying under it. Now, it was very apposite for him to say "moved over" and not "lying on": "moved" implying the kinetic character of the air.

Should you reject this view because Scripture says, "A spirit of God moved over the water," listen to blessed David speaking of the God of the universe: "He will breathe his spirit, and waters will flow." The fact that this constitutes a reference to the wind is obvious and needs no comment of mine. In the natural course of events, frozen water melts when the east or south wind blows.

IX

To whom does God say, "Let there be light" and "Let there be a firmament"?

He was not commanding anyone else to create but summoning things not in existence, his will constituting a command. Scripture says, "God made everything he wished." If, however, he also used speech in the act of creation, it was clearly not for the benefit of the lifeless elements but for the invisible powers, so that they might learn that, at his bidding, the non-existent comes into existence.

X

Why did the historian set down the statement: "God saw that it was good"?

To persuade ungrateful people not to find fault with what God esteems good.

XI

Is there one heaven or two?

(1) Since holy Scripture teaches, "In the beginning God made heaven and earth," and then says that the firmament was made on the second day after the creation of light, the question betrays the foolishness of those who raise it. After all, from both the time and, indeed, the manner of creation one should grasp the difference. One heaven was created before the light, the other after; one from nothing else, the other from water. Scripture says, "Let a firmament be made in the midst of the water, and let it divide water from water." Then, after saying that the word took effect, which is the meaning of, "And so it was," he conveys also how it came to be: "God made the firmament, and God separated the water that was under the firmament from the water that was above the firmament. And God called the firmament heaven."

Now, from the very beginning, the first heaven was not called "firmament," but "heaven." The second got its name from the act of creation itself. Since it was composed of the fluid substance of the waters, and this liquid nature became quite firm and dense, it was called "firmament." Then, positioned on high, and meeting our need for the first heaven, it was given also the name "heaven." The God of the universe made a twofold division in the nature of the waters: some he placed above the firmament, and some he left below, the purpose being that what was placed above with its moisture and coolness would not permit the firmament to be damaged by the fire of the luminous bodies, while what remained below would sustain with its mist the air parched and dried by the fire overhead.

(Continues...)

Excerpted from The Questions on the Octateuch On Genesis and Exodusby Theodoret of Cyrus Copyright © 2007 by The Catholic University of America Press. Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.