On the Resurrection of the Dead · §24 · Athenagoras

The end proper to human nature

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

Athenagoras is concluding his summary argument by turning to the argument from the proper end of human life, which he says belongs to the complete human being, not to the soul alone.

Now that the questions set before us have been examined to some degree, what remains would be to examine the argument from the end. This argument has already appeared in what has been said, but it needs only so much attention and addition that we do not seem to leave unmentioned any of the things said by us briefly, or to harm the subject or the division made from the beginning. For the sake of these things, then, and of the things that will be pressed upon these, it would be well to indicate only this much: that there must be a proper end of each of the things constituted by nature and of the things produced by art. The common understanding of all people teaches us this, and the things before our eyes bear witness to it.

For do we not observe that one end underlies farming, and another underlies medicine, and again that one end belongs to the things that grow from the earth, and another to the animals that are nourished upon it and are born according to a certain natural sequence? But if this is clear, and if the end according to nature must in every case follow the natural or artistic powers and the activities that come from them, then it is absolutely necessary that the end of human beings, since it belongs to a nature that is distinct, be removed from the commonality of the others. For it is not even lawful to suppose that the same end belongs to those who lack rational judgment and to those who act according to the innate law and reason, who employ intelligent life and justice.

Therefore freedom from pain could not be the proper end of these, for this would belong also to those who are altogether without perception. Nor could the enjoyment and abundance of pleasures that nourish or delight the body be their end; otherwise the brutish life would necessarily take first place, and the life according to virtue would be incomplete. For I think this is the proper end of cattle and grazing animals, not of human beings who employ an immortal soul and rational judgment.

Greek

Ἐξητασμένων δὲ ποσῶς τῶν προτεθέντων ὑπόλοιπον ἂν εἴη καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ τέλους διασκέψασθαι λόγον, ἥδη μὲν τοῖς εἰρημένοις ἐμφαινόμενον, τοσαύτης δὲ μόνον ἐπιστασίας καὶ προσθήκης δεόμενον, ὡς μὴ δοκεῖν τι τῶν μικρῶς ἡμῖν εἰρημένων ἀμνημόνευτον καταλιπεῖν καὶ παραβλάψαι τὴν ὑπόθεσιν ἢ τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς γενομένην διαίρεσιν. Τούτων τε οὖν ἕνεκεν καὶ τῶν ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐγκεισομένων καλῶς ἂν ἔχοι τοσοῦτον ἐπισημήνασθαι μόνον, ὅτι δεῖ καὶ τῶν ἐκ φύσεως συνισταμένων καὶ τῶν κατὰ τέχνην γινομένων οἰκεῖον ἑκάστου τέλος εἶναι, τοῦτό που καὶ τῆς κοινῆς πάντων ἐννοίας ἐκδιδασκούσης ἡμᾶς καὶ τῶν ἐν ὀφθαλμοῖς στρεφομένων ἐπιμαρτυρούντων.Ἦ γὰρ οὐ θεωροῦμεν ἕτερόν τι τοῖς γεωργοῦσιν, ἕτερον δὲ τοῖς ἰατρεύουσιν ὑποκείμενον τέλος, καὶ πάλιν ἄλλο μέν τι τῶν ἐκ γῆς φυομένων, ἄλλο δὲ τῶν ἐπ᾿ αὐτῆς τρεφομένων ζώων καὶ κατά τινα φυσικὸν εἱρμὸν γεννωμένων; Εἰ δὲ τοῦτ᾿ ἔστιν ἐναργὲς καὶ δεῖ πάντως ταῖς φυσικαῖς ἢ τεχνικαῖς δυνάμεσι καὶ ταῖς ἐκ τούτων ἐνεργείαις τὸ κατὰ φύσιν ἕπεσθαι τέλος, ἀνάγκη πᾶσα καὶ τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων τέλος, ὡς ἰδιαζούσης ὂν φύσεως, ἐξῃρῆσθαι τῆς τῶν ἄλλων κοινότητος· ἐπεὶ μηδὲ θεμιτὸν ταὐτὸν ὑποθέσθαι τέλος τῶν τε λογικῆς κρίσεως ἀμοιρούντων καὶ τῶν κατὰ τὸν ἔμφυτον νόμον καὶ λόγον ἐνεργούντων, ἔμφρονί τε ζωῇ καὶ δίκῃ χρωμένων. Οὔτ᾿ οὖν τὸ ἄλυπον οἰκεῖον τούτοις ἂν εἴη τέλος, μετείη γὰρ ἂν τούτου καὶ τοῖς παντελῶς ἀναισθητοῦσιν· ἀλλ᾿ οὐδὲ τῶν τὸ σῶμα τρεφόντων ἢ τερπόντων ἀπόλαυσις καὶ πλῆθος ἡδονῶν· ἢ πρωτεύειν ἀνάγκη τὸν κτηνώδη βίον, ἀτελῆ δὲ εἶναι τὸν κατ᾿ ἀρετήν. Κτηνῶν γὰρ οἶμαι καὶ βοσκημάτων οἰκεῖον τοῦτο τέλος, οὐκ ἀνθρώπων ἀθανάτῳ ψυχῇ καὶ λογικῇ κρίσει χρωμένων.

About this text

Athenagoras argues that God can raise the dead, and that the rising of the body fits God's purpose, human nature, and justice.

Athenagoras (fl. c. 177) was an Athenian philosopher who converted to Christianity and wrote in Greek as a Christian apologist. This treatise is addressed to those who disbelieve or doubt the resurrection of the dead, urging them to examine the question rationally rather than by idle speculation. He wrote to show that bodily resurrection is both possible for God and consistent with God's purpose, human nature, and divine justice.

The work answers pagan philosophers and other critics who claimed that resurrection was impossible or contrary to God's will. Athenagoras first argues that disbelief is unreasonable unless critics can prove resurrection impossible or unwilled by God. He then shows that God's knowledge and power make resurrection possible, and that apparent difficulties such as bodies eaten by animals do not prevent it, because only what is truly proper food can be united to a body.

A reader will meet the critics who raise objections, including the mythological figure Thyestes as an example of cannibalism, and an unnamed apostle quoted as saying that the corruptible must put on incorruptibility. Athenagoras argues from God's purpose in creating humans, from human nature as a compound of soul and body, and from divine justice, which requires that the whole human being receive reward or punishment. The apostle quoted is Paul, and the saying about the corruptible putting on incorruptibility comes from 1 Corinthians 15:54.

New English from the Greek base text; no published English used as wording.

Printed text used

Translated from Athenagorae Philosophi Atheniensis Opera Athenagoras Johann Karl Theodor von Otto Mauke Jena 1857 (Greek)

This work has not yet been re-checked against its source. This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Greek on each section for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.