On the Resurrection of the Dead 1

Alongside every teaching and argument that holds to the truth about things that exist, some falsehood grows up. It does not grow from any underlying principle, springing up naturally, nor from the cause proper to each thing, but is cultivated by those who value a lawless sowing for the corruption of the truth. This can be seen first from those who in the past devoted themselves to thinking about these matters, and from their disagreement both with their predecessors and with their contemporaries, and not least from the confusion of those who take part in public debate today. Such people have left no truth unslandered: not the being of God, not his knowledge, not his activity, nor the truths that follow from these in due order and sketch out for us the teaching of piety. Some despair utterly and once for all of the truth about these things; others twist it to suit themselves; others make a point of doubting even what is evident. So I think that those who labor on these questions need arguments of two kinds: arguments in defense of the truth, and arguments setting out the truth. Those in defense of the truth are for unbelievers and doubters; those setting it out are for the well-disposed, who receive the truth gladly. For this reason those who wish to examine these questions must consider the need at hand each time, measure their arguments by it, and adapt the order of their treatment to what is required; they must not, for the sake of seeming always to keep the same starting point, neglect what is fitting and the place that belongs to each argument. As regards proof and the natural sequence, the arguments setting out the truth always come before those defending it; but as regards usefulness, the order is reversed, and those defending it come before those setting it out. For a farmer cannot properly cast his seeds into the ground without first clearing away the wild growth that harms the cultivated seeds he sows; nor can a physician introduce healthful medicines into a body that needs treatment without first purging the disease within or stopping what flows in; nor can one who wishes to teach the truth persuade anyone by setting it out, while some false opinion lurks in the minds of his hearers and resists his words. That is why we too, with an eye to usefulness, sometimes put the arguments in defense of the truth before those that set it out; and in considering what is needed, it seems not unprofitable to do the same now with the arguments for the resurrection. For here too we find some who disbelieve entirely, some who doubt, and even some of those who have accepted the first premises as perplexed as the doubters. The most unreasonable thing of all is that they feel this way though they have no ground in the facts for their unbelief, and can find no reasonable cause to give for disbelieving or doubting.