Contents of Book IV.

§1. The fourth book discusses the account of the nature of the “product of generation,” and of the passionless generation of the Only-Begotten, and the text, “In the beginning was the Word,” and the birth of the Virgin.

§2. He convicts Eunomius of having used of the Only-begotten terms applicable to the existence of the earth, and thus shows that his intention is to prove the Son to be a being mutable and created.

§3. He then again admirably discusses the termπρωτότοκος as it is four times employed by the Apostle.

§4. He proceeds again to discuss the impassibility of the Lord’s generation; and the folly of Eunomius, who says that the generated essence involves the appellation of Son, and again, forgetting this, denies the relation of the Son to the Father: and herein he speaks of Circe and of the mandrake poison.

§5. He again shows Eunomius, constrained by truth, in the character of an advocate of the orthodox doctrine, confessing as most proper and primary, not only the essence of the Father, but the essence also of the Only-begotten.

§6. He then exposes argument about the “Generate,” and the “product of making,” and “product of creation,” and shows the impious nature of the language of Eunomius and Theognostus on the “immediate” and “undivided” character of the essence, and its “relation to its creator and maker.”

§7. He then clearly and skilfully criticises the doctrine of the impossibility of comparison with the things made after the Son, and exposes the idolatry contrived by Eunomius, and concealed by the terminology of “Son” and “Only-begotten,” to deceive his readers.

§8. He proceeds to show that there is no “variance” in the essence of the Father and the Son: wherein he expounds many forms of variation and harmony, and explains the “form,” the “seal,” and the “express image.”

§9. Then, distinguishing between essence and generation, he declares the empty and frivolous language of Eunomius to be like a rattle. He proceeds to show that the language used by the great Basil on the subject of the generation of the Only-begotten has been grievously slandered by Eunomius, and so ends the book.

αʹ. Ὁ τέταρτος οὗτος λόγος τὴν περὶ τοῦ γεννήματος φυσιολογίαν καὶ τὴν περὶ τῆς ἀπαθοῦς γεννήσεως τοῦ μονογενοῦς καὶ τὸ Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος ἔτι τε τὴν ἐκ παρθένου γέννησιν σαφῶς διερμηνεύει.
βʹ. Εἶθ' οὕτως τὰ ἁρμόζοντα περὶ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τῆς γη« ίνη »ς ταῦτα περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς τὸν Εὐνόμιον εἰρηκέναι διελέγξας τρεπτὸν αὐτὸν καὶ κτιστὸν βουλόμενον δεῖξαι ἀποδείκνυσιν.
γʹ. Εἶτα τὸν περὶ τοῦ πρωτοτόκου λόγον πάλιν ὡς παρὰ τοῦ ἀποστόλου τετράκις μνημονευθέντα θαυμασίως διέξεισιν.
δʹ. Μετὰ τοῦτο πάλιν τὸ ἀπαθὲς τῆς τοῦ κυρίου γεννήσεως καὶ τὸ τοῦ Εὐνομίου ἀνόητον ὡς τὴν γεννηθεῖσαν οὐσίαν τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ προσηγορίαν ἔχειν εἰπόντος, πάλιν δὲ ἐπιλαθομένου καὶ τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ πρὸς τὸν πατέρα σχέσιν ἀρνουμένου: ἐν οἷς καὶ τὸ κατὰ τὴν Κίρκην καὶ τὸ « τοῦ » μανδραγόρου διέξεισι φάρμακον.
εʹ. Πάλιν τε τὸν Εὐνόμιον ὑπὸ τῆς ἀληθείας ἀναγκαζόμενον τῷ ὀρθῷ συνηγοροῦντα δείκνυσι δόγματι, κυριωτάτην καὶ πρώτην οὐ μόνον τὴν τοῦ πατρός, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν τοῦ μονογενοῦς οὐσίαν ὁμολογοῦντα.
Ϛʹ. Εἶτα τὸν περὶ τοῦ γεννήματος καὶ ποιήματος καὶ κτίσματος γυμνάζει λόγον καὶ τὸ ἀμεσίτευτον καὶ ἀμέριστον τῆς οὐσίας καὶ τὴν πρὸς τὸν κτίσαντα καὶ πεποιηκότα σχέσιν ἀσεβῶς παρά τε Εὐνομίου καὶ Θεογνώστου λεγόμενα ἀποδείκνυσι.
ζʹ. Πρὸς τούτοις τὸ ἀσύγκριτον τῶν μετὰ τὸν υἱὸν γενομένων, καὶ τὴν κακούργως παρὰ τοῦ Εὐνομίου ἐπινοηθεῖσαν διὰ τῆς τοῦ μονογενοῦς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ ὀνομασίας εἰς ἀπάτην τῶν ἀκροωμένων ἐπικεκρυμμένην εἰδωλολατρείαν σοφῶς καὶ ἐντέχνως διελέγχει.
ηʹ. Εἶθ' οὕτως τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ οὐσίαν ἀπαράλλακτον δείκνυσιν: ἐν ᾧ καὶ πολλὰς παραλλαγὰς καὶ ἁρμονίας ἐκδιδάσκει, τήν τε μορφὴν καὶ σφραγῖδα καὶ χαρακτῆρα διασαφῶν.
θʹ. Ἔπειτα οὐσίαν τε καὶ γέννησιν διασαφήσας τὴν τοῦ Εὐνομίου κενολογίαν καὶ φλυαρίαν κροτάλῳ ἐοικέναι ἀποκαλεῖ.
ιʹ. Εἶτα τὰ περὶ τῆς τοῦ μονογενοῦς γεννήσεως παρὰ τοῦ μεγάλου Βασιλείου ῥηθέντα ὡς παρὰ Εὐνομίου κακῶς διαβληθέντα σοφῶς διελέγξας τὸν λόγον πληροῖ.