Justin Martyr, On the Resurrection 5

Some who deny the resurrection of the flesh say it is impossible for it to rise; others claim it is not fitting for God to raise it because of its worthlessness and contemptibility; and still others argue that it has neither beginning nor promise. I think we should first engage with those who say it is impossible for God to raise it, because they are ignorant: they claim by word to be faithful, yet by their deeds they prove themselves unfaithful and even more unfaithful than the faithless. All the nations have believed in idols and have been persuaded that all things are possible for them, just as Homer, their poet, declares: 'The gods can do all things, and easily' (he added 'easily'—that is, *eukherōs*—to display the greatness of the gods' power). Yet these deniers appear far more unfaithful than the pagans. For if the nations have believed of their idols, their gods—who have ears but do not hear, eyes but do not see—that they can do all things, even though those gods are demons, as Scripture says, 'The gods of the nations are demons' (Psalm 96:5), then how much more ought we, who possess the exceptional and true faith, to trust our God, since we have proofs? First, there is the creation of the first-formed man, who was made from earth by God; this alone is a sufficient demonstration of God's power. Moreover, by observing the generation that follows from one another, we can see and marvel even more: from a tiny drop of moist seed such a vast living being is shaped. And indeed, if this came to pass only by promise and were not visibly occurring, it would be more unbelievable than anything else; but the result makes it more credible. Besides, our Savior has shown us the outcomes of the resurrection, which we will discuss shortly. For now, we demonstrate that the resurrection of the flesh is possible, asking pardon from the children of truth if we also appeal to arguments that seem external and worldly: first, because nothing lies outside God, not even the world itself, for it is His creation; second, because we address these arguments to the faithless. If we were speaking to the faithful, it would be enough to answer that we have believed; but now we must proceed through demonstrations. The proofs already mentioned are sufficient to show that the resurrection of the flesh is possible; yet because they are extremely faithless, we will bring a more compelling argument—not from faith, since they lack it, but from their own unfaithfulness, their mother, I mean worldly reasoning. For if we prove to them from these very sources that the resurrection of the flesh is possible, they deserve great shame if they can follow neither the things of faith nor the things of the world.