Relational Identity and the Bones of the Soul

This is understood by those making progress: that they have labored to possess something, but not perfectly. For what is the difference between 'upon the Lord' and 'in the Lord'? One who takes the prepositions unskillfully will say there is no difference. But it can be so: for instance, someone is rejoiced upon his child if he is healthy, but rejoiced in a drink of wine. He has a different cause for each.

Let us take the proof from another word: 'everyone' (as he says), 'who confesses in me in the presence of men' (Romans 10:10)—he did not say 'upon me'—'and I will confess him.' If the preposition had been placed simply, 'in' would have been placed even in the denial: 'and everyone denying in me, I will deny in him' (Matthew 10:33). But it was impossible 'to be denying in Christ' the one denying him, or for Christ to deny the one existing in him. Therefore, the one denying has been severed. The one who denies God has been severed, and his God has turned away. But the one confessing him is in him, so that you may not receive the confession by voice alone; for those honoring with lips confess, but they are not in him.

Since, therefore, our connection to God is also different, at times we say we rejoice upon him as upon a savior, as upon a benefactor, as upon a general who has secured the victory for us, but at other times 'in him' as in wisdom, as in sanctification, as in righteousness. The one confessing, therefore, is in Christ. And take from another example: one confessing knowledge cannot confess it otherwise than if he knew it.

But if so, is it as in essence or in quality? Let these things be left for later; for now the inquiry is about the difference of the prepositions. Whether one participates in essence or in quality, let it be at another time. And the same: for God is not a different Father becoming of the righteous, a different Creator of them, or a different King of them, in thought. From which we take the thoughts, since there is not in it a distribution of thought from thought. God is light, and is also sanctification and righteousness and wisdom, and it is not possible to separate existence from existence. But we separate relation from relation. Let a man be father and master and teacher and ruler; for he does not differ from himself. If, however...

You may hear that a ruler is a ruler in relation to those being ruled, and a king in relation to those being kinged, and a father in relation to the one born, and a master in relation to the slave, and a physician in relation to the one being treated, and a teacher in relation to the one learning; it is not the person himself in relation to himself that makes the difference, but the relation which is directed toward one other and another that makes the distinction. Just as it happens to the same person to be both father and teacher and the others, it also happens for the same disciple to be to the ruler and to the learner. Again, since one is not always said in relation to one—for it happens to find a son of another and the same one to be a disciple of another and a friend of another—9 he will be delighted in his salvation. Regarding 'salvation' here he means 'salvation'; for often 'salvation' signifies 'salvation'. And there is a case where even the agent of salvation is called thus, as if he were saying: 'The ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God' (Ps 18:45), instead of 'the Savior.' Therefore the soul 'is delighted' in 'the salvation.' It does not seek salvation from elsewhere than from this God, from Him, eternal salvation from the one saving; for 'Israel' 'is saved by the Lord with eternal salvation' (Ps 106:1).

10 'All my bones shall say, Lord, Lord, who is like you?' (Ps 62:11). First, it is theology to know what the holiness of God is and who is able or unable to be made like Him. Therefore apply this theology and the knowledge of God to your own bones, from which it appears that he is not speaking about his own bones, those which hold together the other members of the body and the flesh and the nerves, but about the agile powers, of which we have often said that they are the bones of the inner man. Therefore 'all' 'my bones shall say'; the agile doctrines, my agile movements, according to which I recognize and understand, confess God, that no one of the created things happens to be like Him. Furthermore: the 'who' refers to how? —in the context of the impossible, as in: 'God, who shall be like you?'; regarding the Son we do not take this to mean likeness in the future; for he does not have the likeness in what is to come, but being the 'character of the substance' he is eternally like. Therefore two things can be taken: if concerning likeness of essence, no one is made like Him. But if concerning likeness according to virtue and holiness, he who is made like Him is rare.