And so take heed, O soul, that if you succumb to him, you will not be drawn into his power; then we will not be able to ransom for you. For what ransom shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (Matt. 16:26) It would be good and gratifying if we did not have those who oppose us and fight with us. But since this is impossible, and we cannot attain what we desire (for we desire not to have those who carry us away in passions; then we could be saved without difficulty; but what we desire is not done, but what we do not want happens; because, as I said, we need a test), therefore let us not yield, O soul, let us not yield to the evil one, but let us put on the whole armor of God, which protects us and prepares us for the struggle, let us put on the breastplate of righteousness, and let us shod our feet with the readiness to preach the gospel of peace; and above all, let us take up the shield of faith, with which we will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the devil; and let us take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, that we may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil (Eph. 6:11-17), and to cast down every arrogance that rises up against the knowledge of God (2 Cor. 10:5); for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood (Eph. 6:12). I say this because this is the nature of the writings of the Apostle. For much can be said about each utterance in this epistle, how correctly and strictly it is expressed; but it would be long to consider each of them in this way. I now intended to show only the nature and purpose of his speech. He justly says: for I do not what I will, but what I hate, I do; I agree with the law that he is good; and therefore it is no longer I who do this, but the sin that dwells in me. For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh (Romans 7:15-18). However, you remember that we have set limits for ourselves above, and if I, with all my haste, wishing to explain everything quickly, slow down too much, and the length of my speech has become longer than I expected, then it is necessary to try to end it; otherwise we shall never reach the end of the argument proposed.

Chapter 49.

And so we have said, if you remember that from the time that a man was deceived and broke the commandment, the sin that beginning with that disobedience entered into him. Thus at first there was an indignation, and we were filled with the desires and thoughts of strangers, having been deprived of the Spirit (εμθυσήματος) of God and filled with carnal lust, which the most cunning serpent had placed in us when we left the circle of God's command in a short time. Therefore, for the destruction of sin, God invented death for us; otherwise, in us immortals, he himself, as I said, would be immortal. Thus, by saying, "I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh," the Apostle wants to show that as a result of transgression, by means of desire, sin has entered into us, from which, like young offspring and shoots, voluptuous thoughts always arise in us. For there are two kinds of thoughts in us: one arises from lust that has crept into the body, which, as I have said, has come from the influence of the carnal (υλαια) spirit; others are derived from the law of the commandment, which we have received as an innate and natural law, stirring us up to good, and correcting our thoughts. That is why according to the mind we conform to the law of God (this is the inner man), and according to the lust that dwells in the flesh we conform to the law of the devil; — this is the law that opposes and opposes the law of God, i.e. the striving of the mind for good, the same law that always produces in us passionate and carnal inclinations to iniquity, completely drawing us to voluptuousness.

Chapter 50.

It seems to me that Paul evidently presupposes here three laws, one of which corresponds to the good innate in us, which he clearly called the law of the mind; another comes from the admixture of the evil one, and often draws the soul into passionate notions, which he called warring against the law of the mind; the third, which took root in the flesh as a result of sin from lust, and which he called the law of sin, which dwells in the members (Romans 7:23). Establishing himself on this law and governing it, the evil one often takes up arms against us, forcing us to unrighteousness and evil deeds. The law inspired by the evil one from without, and through the senses, like asphalt lava, pouring inward into the very soul, it is supported by the law that is in the flesh as a result of lust. It seems that in ourselves there is one principle that is better, and another that is worse. When the best by nature is stronger than the worst, then the whole mind is directed towards the good: and when the worst, having intensified, suppresses the best, which is called a war against the good put into us, then, on the contrary, man is again attracted to all sorts of dreams and evil thoughts.

Chapter 51.

For this reason the Apostle desires to get rid of this, considering it death and destruction, as the prophet also says: "Cleanse me from my secrets" (Psalm 18:13). This is also expressed in the following words: for according to the inner man I find pleasure in the law of God: but in my members I see another law, which is opposed to the law of my mind, and makes me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Poor man I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? (Romans 7:22-24) He does not call the body death, but the law of sin, which, as a result of transgression, is hidden in our members and, always deceiving the soul, leads it to sinful death. Wherefore, considering from what death he wished to be delivered, and who would deliver him, he immediately adds, I thank God through Jesus Christ, v. 25. It is necessary, Aglaophon, to pay attention to the fact that if the Apostle had called this body death, as you think, he would not have mentioned Christ as finally delivering him from such evil. For what is special or what advantage have we received in this respect from the coming of Christ? And why does the Apostle say in general that as a result of the coming of Christ he can be delivered by God from death, when everyone had to die even before the coming of Christ into the world? For all, when they were separated from their bodies at their departure from this life, were delivered (from them); even alike all the souls of both the faithful and the unfaithful were separated from their bodies on the day of death. What more did the Apostle try to obtain in comparison with others who had spent their lives in unbelief? Or if he considered the body to be the death of the soul, why did he wish to get rid of the body, when this would certainly have happened to him even without his desire, since all are destined to die and their souls to be separated from their bodies? And so it is not this body, Aglaophon, that he calls death, but the sin that has settled in the body through lust, from which God has delivered man by the coming of Christ. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set us free from the law of sin and death (Rom. 8:2), so that He who raised Christ from the dead might also revive our mortal bodies by His Spirit which dwelleth in us (v. 11), after condemning the sin which is in the body to destruction, that the demand of the law of nature might be manifested in its former power, according to the commandment which draweth us to good,  — a demand which, because of the predominance of sin over the flesh before the coming of Christ, having become powerless, was suppressed by earthly concerns. For God strengthened the weakness of the goodness that is natural in us, weakened by the predominance of lust in the body, by sending His Son, Who took on flesh like sinful flesh (for what appeared was the truth, and not a phantom), so that after the condemnation of sin to destruction, so that it no longer bore fruit in the flesh, the justification of the natural law would be fulfilled and increased by obedience in those, who walk not according to the lust of the flesh, but according to the desire and instruction of the Spirit (Romans 8:3,4). For the law of the Spirit of life, that is, the gospel, being distinct from the above-mentioned laws, offered by preaching for obedience and for the forgiveness of sins, has freed us from the law of sin and death (v. 2), having utterly overcome the sin that reigns in the flesh. "And so, Theophilus, what they object to and what they misinterpret from the words of the Apostle, I have explained and expounded. Now I will turn to another, if we find ourselves an assistant in the presentation of speech; for what follows is confused and not quite convenient for refutation; Wherefore I am not so willing to proceed to this, seeing how long and difficult their proofs will be, unless a whiff of wisdom suddenly blows from heaven and leads us, as it were, sailing in the midst of the sea, to an unstormed harbor and to the surest proofs.

On the Resurrection (continued) [19]

Plants, says Methodius, do not feed or grow from the earth. For," he says, "someone may ask how the earth, when changing, can enter into the composition of trees? If the earth beneath them were constantly rising by the roots into the whole composition of the tree, then the place on which the tree grew would have to be desolate. Consequently, such a reasoning of them (i.e., the Origenists) about transformation in bodies is unfounded. How can the earth, entering through the roots into the trunks of plants and being broken up through passages through all their branches, change into leaves and fruits? There are very tall trees, cedars, pines, spruces, and others, which annually produce many leaves and fruits; Obviously, they do not draw anything from the earth under them into the composition of their matter. For if the earth, rising by the roots, were really turned into a tree, then the whole place around them would be desolate; for dry matter cannot, like wet matter, constantly flow to the place of diminishing matter. Meanwhile, fig trees and other similar plants, as is known, often grow on monument buildings without drawing anything into themselves from the building. And if anyone wanted to calculate their fruits and leaves over the course of many years, he would see that their weight is several times greater than the earth on the monuments. Therefore it is very absurd to think that the earth that is drawn in turns into growing fruit and leaves, although everything happens through it, using it as a place and a seat. In the same way, bread is not produced without a millstone, and a place, and a time, and a fire; however, none of these will be eaten or become bread. It is the same with other innumerable things.

Saying: "For we know that when our earthly house of tabernacles is destroyed," etc. (2 Cor. 5:1), the Origenists refute the resurrection of the body, calling the body a tabernacle, and the spiritual garments they mention a house not made with hands in heaven. But, says St. Methodius, by an earthly house, in a figurative sense, we must understand this earthly, short-lived life, and not this tabernacle. For if you think that the Apostle calls the body a decaying earthly house, then tell me, what is a tabernacle whose house is destroyed? For the tabernacle is one thing, the house of the tabernacle is another, and we, to whom the tabernacle belongs, are another. For, he says, when our earthly house of the tabernacle is destroyed, that is, calling our souls us, the tabernacle the body, and the house of the tabernacle the use of the flesh in the present life, in a figurative sense. And so, when the present bodily life is destroyed, like a house, then we will have a house not made with hands in heaven; not made with hands, he says, in contrast to the present life, which is called man-made, because all the comforts and occupations of life are accomplished by human hands. The body, as the work of God, is not called man-made, because it is not made by human art. If they were to call it man-made because it was created by God, then the souls, the angels, and the spiritual garments in heaven would be made with hands; for they also are the works of God. And so, what is a house not made by hands? This is the very short-lived life, as I have said, which is built by human hands; for it is said, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat thy bread" (Gen. 3:19); — and after the destruction of which we have a future life not made with hands, as the Lord also explained, saying: "Make friends for yourselves with unrighteous riches, so that when you become poor, they may receive you into eternal abodes" (Luke 16:9). What the Lord called abodes here, the Apostle called garments there; what here (the Lord called) friends of iniquity, there the Apostle called them crumbling houses. Just as, at the end of the days of our present life, our souls will be received into the beautiful edifices of charity, which we have acquired in the midst of worldly unrighteousness, because the world lies in evil (1 John 5:19), so, after the destruction of the short-lived life, we, the souls, will have, before the resurrection, a dwelling place with God, until we receive for ourselves an unrenewable and indestructible home. For this reason we sigh, wishing not to throw off the body, but to put on another life in it (2 Cor. 5:2). For the heavenly dwelling place, in which we desire to put on (2 Cor. 5:4), is immortality, in which, when we put on, all that is weak and mortal in us will be destroyed, being swallowed up in eternal life.

For we walk by faith, and not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:7), i.e. we are still guided by faith, seeing the things there very dimly, and not so clearly as to behold them and enjoy them and be in them.

But this I say to you, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and corruption does not inherit incorruption" (1 Cor. 15:50). He does not call the flesh the flesh itself, but the insane desire of the soul for shameful pleasures. Having said that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, he added: "And corruption does not inherit incorruption." Corruption is not the most corruptible, but corrupting. When death gains dominion, the body is inclined to decay, and when life is restored to it, it becomes indestructible. Since the flesh, being between incorruption and corruption, and being neither corruption nor incorruption, fell under the power of corruption through voluptuousness, then, although it was a creature and the acquisition of incorruption, therefore it itself was subjected to corruption. But after it had fallen into corruption and was put to death for punishment, God did not leave it to corruption, as if it were its inheritance after victory, but having again conquered death by resurrection, He restored it to incorruption, so that not corruption should have incorruption, but incorruptibility. For this reason the Apostle adds: "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality" (1 Cor. 15:53). And the perishable and mortal, clothed in incorruptibility and immortality, what else can there be, except that which is sown in corruption and rises in incorruptibility (for the soul is not perishable and mortal, but this body is subject to death and corruption), so that, as we bore the image of the earthly, we may also bear the image of the heavenly? (1 Cor. 15:49) For the image of the earthly which we wore is contained in the words: "Dust thou art and to dust shalt thou return" (Gen. 3:19); and the image of heaven is the resurrection from the dead and incorruption, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4). And if anyone thinks to call the flesh itself a earthly image, and another spiritual body besides the flesh a heavenly image, let him think beforehand that Christ, the heavenly man, when He appeared, bore members of the same kind, the same image and the same flesh with ours, according to which He also became man, without being man, so that, as in Adam all die, so in Christ all may be made alive (1 Cor. 15:22). If He had not taken flesh for the liberation and resurrection of the flesh, why did He wear flesh in vain, which He did not intend to save or resurrect? But the Son of God does nothing in vain. Consequently, He did not take the form of a servant without benefit, but for resurrection and salvation. For He truly became man and died, and not illusory, in order to truly appear as the firstborn from the dead (Rev. 1:5), changing the earthly into the heavenly and the mortal into the immortal. Justin of Naples [21], a man not far removed from the Apostles both in time and in virtue, says that mortal things are inherited, but life inherits, and the flesh dies, and the kingdom of heaven lives. Thus, when Paul says, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 15:50), he declares this, he says, not in order to deny the existence of the flesh, but to teach that it is not the kingdom of God, which is eternal life, that is inherited by the body, but the body by life. For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were inherited by the body, it would be found that life is swallowed up by corruption. Meanwhile, life inherits the mortal, so that death may be victoriously swallowed up by life, and the corruptible may become the property of incorruption, freed from death and sin, and become a slave and subject to immortality, so that the body may be the property of incorruption, and not incorruption the property of the body.

Concerning the saying: "And the dead in Christ shall rise first, then we shall remain alive" (Sol. 4:16), St. Methodius says: "These (the dead) are the very bodies; and we who remain alive are souls who receive the dead (i.e., bodies) raised from the ground, so that we, who are caught up together with them to meet the Lord, may solemnly celebrate before Him the radiant feast of the resurrection, because we will receive eternal abodes, which have no way to die or be destroyed.

If from such a drop, small and completely insignificant neither in moisture, nor in content and density, as if from nothing, comes man, then is it not more convenient for man to become man again from a man who has already existed? For it is not so difficult to rebuild what already existed and then collapsed, as it is to create from nothing what did not yet exist.