Tertullian on the Golden Rule (Matt 7:12, Luk 6:31)

"“And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.” In this command is no doubt implied its counterpart: “And as ye would not that men should do to you, so should ye also not do to them likewise.” Now, if this were the teaching of the new and previously unknown and not yet fully proclaimed deity, who had favoured me with no instruction beforehand, whereby I might first learn what I ought to choose or to refuse for myself, and to do to others what I would wish done to myself, not doing to them what I should be unwilling to have done to myself, it would certainly be nothing else than the chance-medley of my own sentiments which he would have left to me, binding me to no proper rule of wish or action, in order that I might do to others what I would like for myself, or refrain from doing to others what I should dislike to have done to myself. For he has not, in fact, defined what I ought to wish or not to wish for myself as well as for others, so that I shape my conduct according to the law of my own will, and have it in my power not to render to another what I would like to have rendered to myself—love, obedience, consolation, protection, and such like blessings; and in like manner to do to another what I should be unwilling to have done to myself—violence, wrong, insult, deceit, and evils of like sort.  Indeed, the heathen who have not been instructed by God act on this incongruous liberty of the will and the conduct. For although good and evil are severally known by nature, yet life is not thereby spent under the discipline of God, which alone at last teaches men the proper liberty of their will and action in faith, as in the fear of God. The god of Marcion, therefore, although specially revealed, was, in spite of his revelation, unable to publish any summary of the precept in question, which had hitherto been so confined, and obscure, and dark, and admitting of no ready interpretation, except according to my own arbitrary thought, because he had provided no previous discrimination in the matter of such a precept. This, however, was not the case with my God, for He always and everywhere enjoined that the poor, and the orphan, and the widow should be protected, assisted, refreshed; thus by Isaiah He says: “Deal thy bread to the hungry, and them that are houseless bring into thine house; when thou seest the naked, cover him.” By Ezekiel also He thus describes the just man: “His bread will he give to the hungry, and the naked will he cover with a garment.” That teaching was even then a sufficient inducement to me to do to others what I would that they should do unto me. Accordingly, when He uttered such denunciations as, “Thou shalt do no murder; thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not bear false witness,” —He taught me to refrain from doing to others what I should be unwilling to have done to myself; and therefore the precept developed in the Gospel will belong to Him alone, who anciently drew it up, and gave it distinctive point, and arranged it after the decision of His own teaching, and has now reduced it, suitably to its importance, to a compendious formula, because (as it was predicted in another passage) the Lord—that is, Christ—“was to make (or utter) a concise word on earth.” (Against Marcion, §16)

"[...]even if the life was tainted, so that condemned to contempt it might be likened to objects held in contempt, the nature was not forthwith taken away, so that there might be supposed to be another under its name.  Rather is the nature preserved, though the life blushes; nor does Christ know other men than those with reference to whom He says, “Whom do men say that I am?” And, “As ye would that men should do to you, do ye likewise so to, them.” Consider whether He may not have preserved a race such that He is looking for a testimony to Himself from them, as well as consisting of those on whom He enjoins the interchange of righteous dealing." (Apology, §17)

Ernest Evans' translation:

" ”And so also any further teaching he gave, this also he had received to add to his inheritance of the heathen. And as ye would that men should do to you, even so do ye to them. In this precept of course the other side of it is to be understood: And as ye would that men should not do to you, neither do ye to them. If this precept was given by a new god, one formerly unknown, and even now not fully revealed, one who had previously given me no formative instruction by which I could know beforehand what I ought to wish for or not to wish for for myself, and so do for others what I wished to be done to me, and abstain from doing what I did not wish to be done to me,—in that case he has left to my own judgement wide possibilities, in no way tying me down to any agreement of acts and wishes, so as to do to others what I would they should do to me, and not do to others what I would not they should do to me. For as he has given no definition of what it is my duty to wish or not to wish, either for myself or for others, so as to equate my action with the law of my will, it follows that I am able not to grant to another that which I should wish another to grant to me, love, respect, consolation, protection, and benefits of that nature, and likewise to do also to another what I should wish another not to do to me, violence, insult, despite, deceit, and evils of that kind. Indeed with such-like disagreement of their acts and their wishes do the heathen conduct themselves who are as yet with- out instruction from God. For although the fact of good and evil is known by nature, yet God's rule of conduct is not: but when this is known, then at length agreement between will and action comes into operation as a result of faith, as under the fear of God. And so Marcion's god, now that he has recently been revealed, if indeed revealed, has not been in a position, in respect of this precept which we are considering, to publish a summary so con- cise and obscure and even yet of hidden meaning, or more easy of interpretation in accordance with my own preferential choice: for he had worked out no previous distinction in the matter. My Creator however has both of old time and in every place pre- scribed that the needy, poor and orphans and widows, must receive protection, help, and refreshment: as by Isaiah, Break thy bread for the indigent, and them that are without shelter bring thou into thy house, and if thou seest the naked, cover him:j also by Ezekiel, con- cerning the just man, He will give his bread to the hungry, and will cover the naked.k As early as that then he taught me well enough to do to others what I would they should do to me. And likewise by such pronouncements as Thou shall not kill, thou shall not com- mit adultery, thou shall not steal, thou shall not bear false witness,l he taught me not to do to others the things I would not they should do to me. Consequently the precept in the gospel will have come from him who of old time both prepared for it, and gave it distinct expression, and set it under the arbitrement of his own rule of conduct, and has now, as was his right, given it summary precision: because also in another context it was foretold that the Lord, which is Christ, would make concise speech upon the earth.” (Marc. IV.16)

Populære opslag fra denne blog

Nein!(?) A negative "point of contact" in the Epistle to Diognetus?