The Literal Meaning of Genesis (continued)
BOOK TEN Teel of a woman who had been conceived from the flesh of a sinful race, nevertheless, since it was not conceived in her womb in the manner in which she had been conceived, it was not sinful flesh but the likeness of sinful flesh.8° For He did not thereby contract the guilt that brings death, manifesting itself by involuntary motions of the flesh which must be conquered by the will and against which the spirit has its desires.8! But He received a body immune to the contagion of sin, a body which would be able to pay the debt to death that He did not owe and to show forth the promised resurrection, thus taking fear from us and giving us hope.8?
33. Finally, if I am asked from what source Jesus Christ received His soul, I should prefer to hear the opinions of better and more learned men; but as far as I can grasp the matter, I should respond that it was from the source whence Adam received his, rather than from Adam's own soul. For if dust taken from the earth on which no man had worked was worthy of being animated by the power of God, how much more fittingly did the body taken from the flesh on which no man had worked receive by lot a good soul. In the first case, he who was to fall would be raised up; and in the second, He who would lift the other up would descend to earth. And perhaps He said, A good soul fell to my lot (if this ought to be applied to our Lord), because what is given by lot is given by God; or perhaps, in conformity with our faith, it was to keep us from thinking that even the soul of Christ was raised to such excellence by any previous deeds meriting that the Word should become flesh with it and dwell among us, and thus the word "lot" was used to remove any suspicion of antecedent merits.
CHAPTER 19
The soul of Christ was not in the loins of Abraham, and hence it was not transmitted from the soul of Adam.
34. In the epistle which is called "To the Hebrews," there is a passage that merits our careful consideration. For through
J Ae THE LITERAL MEANING OF GENESIS
Melchizedek, in whom there was a figure of the future reality, the author of the Epistle distinguished the priesthood of Christ from that of Levi when he said: Consider how great this man 1s to whom even Abraham the patriarch gave a tenth part of the chotcest of the spoils. And those who are from the sons of Levi, receiving the priestly office, have a commandment according to the law to take tithes from the people, that 1s, from their brothers, though these also have come from the loins of Abraham. But this man, who has not the same descent, received tithes from Abraham and blessed him who had the promises. Now it 1s beyond all dispute that the inferior is blessed by the superior. And here, indeed, mortal men receive tithes, but there it is one who testiftes that he lives. And, as it 1s right to say it, Levi also, though receiving tithes, paid tithes through Abraham. For he was still in the loins of his father.*3
If this tribute, therefore, after so long a time can show how great was the priesthood of Christ compared to that of Levi, because Christ the Priest was prefigured by Melchizedek, who imposed a tithe on Abraham, and through Abraham also on Levi, he surely imposed no tithe on Christ. But if Levi had to pay the tithe because he was in the loins of Abraham, Christ did not have to pay a tithe precisely because he was not in the loins of Abraham. If we understand, however, that Levi was in Abraham not according to the soul but only according to the flesh, Christ was there also, because Christ too was from the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, and the tithe, therefore, was imposed on Him.
What, then, is significant about the marked distinction between the priesthood of Christ and the priesthood of Levi on the basis of the fact that Levi paid tithes to Melchidezek since he was in the loins of Abraham? Christ was there also, and hence they both paid tithes. But the point is that we must understand that Christ was not there in a certain sense. Yet who would deny that He was there according to the flesh? Therefore, it was according to the soul that He was not there. The soul of Christ, therefore, was not transmitted from the soul of Adam who sinned; otherwise it also would have been there.