4

that the “firstborn of all creation” has been shown not to have existed at some point before; then, in addition to so great an absurdity, while not even from the time he supposed granting to Christ an infinite and unending life and kingdom, he should bring for him an end that is not even favorable, nor like that for those who through him will be deemed worthy of the promises which the Savior himself has promised, having promised eternal life and incorruption and immortality and the kingdom of heaven to those who love him 1.1.23; but at that time, according to the awaited hope for these things, he should say that for all others the things of the kingdom will last for an unending age, but for Christ himself alone there will be a sudden deprivation of all these things, his kingdom having ceased, and the flesh which he assumed being left desolate, and of the Word himself, who pre-existed in God, being separated from the body, even if this is immortal and incorruptible, and being joined to God, so as to become one and the same again with God as he also was before; what 1.1.24 excess of impiety would be left for this man? Wherefore for these things necessary is the testimony of the apostolic distinction, which said “even if an angel from heaven should preach a gospel contrary to what you received, let him be accursed.” And it occurs to me to marvel as I consider the apostolic thought. For as if prophesying the future, he was making precise for the Galatians themselves the theology of the Savior, immediately at the beginning of the epistle to them writing more unusually than was customary, thus “Paul, an apostle, not from men 1.1.25 nor through man but through Jesus Christ.” One would not at least find him having written thus to others; because, as is likely, none of the others to whom he wrote were similar with regard to the faith. For as to those who suppose Christ to be a mere man he offered the correction, teaching at the beginning of the epistle that he is not a man; and proceeding, he said to the same people that “my gospel, which was preached to you, is not according to man, nor did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but through a revelation of Jesus Christ,” 1.1.26 through which he again showed that Jesus Christ was not a man. But what he was, if not a man, he again clarified as he proceeded, saying, “But when God, who had set me apart from my mother's womb, was pleased to reveal his Son in me.” Do you see how he clearly proclaimed the Savior to be Son of God, 1.1.27 and for this reason God. And that indeed he knew him to be the Son of God before the incarnate presence, he showed most clearly by adding in the same epistle to the Galatians “But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman.” Therefore not now, but before he was born of a woman, the Father sent him, being and pre-existing as Son; so that the one who was long ago Son of God might also become Son 1.1.28 of man, having been born “of a woman.” But he also teaches that he became mediator of the Mosaic law, defining the principle of the mediation through what he says: “Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not for one party, but God is one.” Do you hear how in these things the apostle taught the Galatians themselves to know from 1.1.29 that passage the one God, and the one mediator of God and of angels. which indeed he also made clear in other places, saying “For there is one God; and one mediator between God and men, the man Jesus Christ.” But when he named him mediator “of God and of men,” he reasonably called him a man on account of the incarnation; but when he introduced the same one not as mediator of God and of men, but of God and of angels, he no longer named him a man, but says only “mediator”, saying the law was ordained 1.1.30 “through angels by the hand of a mediator,” and by a necessary distinction clarifying the name of “mediator” in saying, “Now a mediator is not for one party, but God is one.” Therefore neither would God be the mediator—for of whom would he be a mediator?—nor the mediator himself himself

4

πρωτότοκον «πάσης κτίσεως» μὴ ὄντα πρότερόν ποτε ἀποδεδεῖχθαι· εἶτ' ἐπὶ τῇ τοσαύτῃ ἀτοπίᾳ μηδ' ἐξ οὗπερ ὑπέθετο χρόνου τὴν εἰς ἄπειρον καὶ ἀτελεύτητον ζωήν τε καὶ βασιλείαν τῷ Χριστῷ διδούς, τέλος δὲ αὐτῷ μηδ' αἴσιον ἐπάγοι μηδ' οἷον τοῖς δι' αὐτοῦ τῶν ἐπαγγελιῶν καταξιωθησομένοις ὧν αὐτὸς ὁ σωτὴρ ἐπήγγελται, ζωὴν αἰώνιον καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν ἀθανασίαν τε καὶ βασιλείαν οὐρανῶν τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτὸν 1.1.23 ὑποσχόμενος· τηνικαῦτα δὲ κατὰ τὴν προσδοκωμένην τούτων ἐλπίδα τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις ἅπασιν τὰ τῆς βασιλείας εἰς ἀτελεύτητον διαρκέσειν αἰῶνα φάσκοι, μόνῳ δὲ αὐτῷ τῷ Χριστῷ τούτων ἁπάντων ἀθρόαν γενήσεσθαι στέρησιν, παυθησομένης μὲν αὐτοῦ τῆς βασιλείας, τῆς δὲ σαρκὸς ἧς ἀνείληφεν καταλειφθησομένης ἐρήμου, αὐτοῦ δὲ τοῦ προόντος ἐν θεῷ λόγου ἀφοριζομένου μὲν τοῦ σώματος κἂν ἀθάνατον τοῦτο καὶ ἄφθαρτον ᾖ τῷ δὲ θεῷ συναφθησομένου, ὡς ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸν πάλιν τῷ θεῷ γενήσεσθαι καθὰ καὶ πρότερον ἦν· τίς 1.1.24 ἂν λείποιτο τούτῳ δυσσεβείας ὑπερβολή; διὸ δὴ τούτοις ἀναγκαία ἡ τῆς ἀποστολικῆς διαστολῆς μαρτυρία φήσασα «κἂν ἄγγελος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ εὐαγγελίζηται παρ' ὃ παρελάβετε, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω». θαυμάζειν δέ μοι ἔπεισιν ἐπιθεωροῦντι τὴν ἀποστολικὴν διάνοιαν. ὥσπερ γὰρ θεσπίζων τὸ μέλλον αὐτοῖς Γαλάταις τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος ἐξηκρίβου θεολογίαν, αὐτόθεν ἐν ἀρχῇ τῆς πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἐπιστολῆς καινότερον ἢ κατὰ τὸ σύνηθες γράφων ὧδε «Παῦλος ἀπόστολος, οὐκ ἀπ' ἀνθρώ1.1.25 πων οὐδὲ δι' ἀνθρώπου ἀλλὰ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ». οὐκ ἂν γοῦν οὕτω γράψαντα εὕροι τις αὐτὸν ἑτέροις· τῷ μηδένας εἶναι, ὡς εἰκός, περὶ τὴν πίστιν ὁμοίως, οἷς ἔγραφεν, ἑτέρους. ὡς γὰρ ψιλὸν ἄνθρωπον ὑπολαμβάνουσιν τὸν Χριστὸν προσῆγεν τὴν διόρθωσιν, οὐκ ἄνθρωπον αὐτὸν κατὰ τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς ἐπιστολῆς διδάσκων· καὶ προϊὼν τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἔλεγεν ὅτι «τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου, τὸ εὐαγγελισθὲν εἰς ὑμᾶς, οὐκ ἔστιν κατὰ ἄνθρωπον, οὐδὲ ἐγὼ παρὰ ἀνθρώπου παρέλαβον αὐτὸ οὐδὲ ἐδιδάχθην, ἀλλὰ δι' ἀποκαλύψεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ», 1.1.26 δι' ὧν αὖθις ὅτι μὴ ἄνθρωπος ἦν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς παρίστη. τί δὲ ἦν, εἰ μὴ ἄνθρωπος, προϊὼν αὖθις διεσάφει λέγων «ὅτε δὲ εὐδόκησεν ὁ θεὸς ὁ ἀφορίσας με ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν ἐμοί». ὁρᾷς πῶς υἱὸν θεοῦ σαφῶς ἀνηγόρευε τὸν σωτῆρα, 1.1.27 καὶ διὰ τοῦτο θεόν. καὶ ὅτι γε πρὸ τῆς ἐνσάρκου παρουσίας υἱὸν αὐτὸν τοῦ θεοῦ ὄντα ἠπίστατο, τρανότατα παρίστησιν ἐπιλέγων ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ πρὸς Γαλάτας ἐπιστολῇ «ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου, ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός». οὐκοῦν οὐ νῦν, ἀλλὰ πρὶν ἢ γενέσθαι ἐκ γυναικός, υἱὸν ὄντα καὶ προόντα ἀπέστειλεν ὁ πατήρ· ὡς ἂν ὁ πάλαι υἱὸς θεοῦ καὶ υἱὸς 1.1.28 ἀνθρώπου γένοιτο, γενόμενος «ἐκ γυναικός». ἀλλὰ καὶ μεσίτην αὐτὸν τοῦ Μωσέως νόμου γενέσθαι διδάσκει, διορίζων τὸν τῆς μεσιτείας λόγον δι' ὧν φησιν «τί οὖν; ὁ νόμος τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν ἐτέθη, ἄχρι ἂν ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται, διαταγεὶς δι' ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου. ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν, ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν». ἀκούεις ὅπως ἐν τούτοις ὁ ἀπόστολος Γαλάτας αὐτοὺς ἐδίδαξεν ἐξ 1.1.29 ἐκείνου ἕνα τὸν θεὸν εἰδέναι, καὶ ἕνα τὸν μεσίτην θεοῦ καὶ ἀγγέλων. ὃ δὴ καὶ ἐν ἑτέροις ἐδήλου λέγων «εἷς γὰρ ὁ θεός· εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός». ἀλλ' ὅτε μὲν «θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων» μεσίτην αὐτὸν ὠνόμαζεν, εἰκότως ἄνθρωπον αὐτὸν διὰ τὴν ἐνανθρώπησιν ἐκάλει ὅτε δὲ οὐ μεσίτην θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἀλλὰ θεοῦ καὶ ἀγγέλων τὸν αὐτὸν εἰσῆγεν, οὐκέτ' ἄνθρωπον ὠνόμαζεν, μόνον δὲ μεσίτην φησίν, τὸν νόμον διατετάχθαι εἰπὼν 1.1.30 «δι' ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου», διαιρέσει τε ἀναγκαίως τὸ τοῦ μεσίτου ὄνομα διασαφῶν ἐν τῷ λέγειν «ὁ δὲ μεσίτης ἑνὸς οὐκ ἔστιν, ὁ δὲ θεὸς εἷς ἐστιν». οὔτε ἄρα ὁ θεὸς εἴη ἂν ὁ μεσίτης τίνος γὰρ καὶ γένοιτ' ἂν μεσίτης; οὔτε ὁ μεσίτης αὐτὸς αὐτὸς