7

allowing us to think that things came into being spontaneously, or that they had their beginning from something else. For this reason he says, “God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night.” For since the illuminating power is by nature unable to rest, when the light passed through the upper part of the circle, and its course was towards what lies beneath, of necessity by the running under of the fire the part above was cast into shadow, as the denser nature, as is likely, obstructed the ray. He therefore named the withdrawal of the light, evening. And again, when the fire ran around the circle below and brought the ray back to the parts above, he called what came to be morning, thus naming the dawn. But let us take up the account again briefly, so that the cited passages of the divine Scripture may also cooperate with the train of the theory we have rendered. For in the first place, the account of the world's creation said that “In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.” And this we have understood, that the account presents the constitution of beings all at once, indicating also what is within from what contains it. For by the extremities the middle parts are also completely contained. And extremities, with respect to human perception, are heaven and earth. Because by these on either side the sight of men is bounded. Just as, therefore, he who said that *In his hand are the ends of the earth* also included the middle parts in the compass of the ends; so also Moses made the indication of the material foundation of the whole cosmos through its extremities; and we say that the words in between cooperate with such an understanding. For it is written, that “The earth was invisible and unfurnished;” from which it is clear that in potentiality all things were in God's first impulse concerning creation, as if some seminal power were laid down for the genesis of the universe, but in actuality the individual things were not yet. For the earth, he says, was invisible and unfurnished. Which 80 is equivalent to saying that it was, and it was not. For the qualities had not yet come together around it; and the proof of this thought is that the account says it was invisible. For what is invisible is not a color; and color is like an emanation of the shape upon the surface, and shape is not without a body. If, therefore, it was invisible, it was also completely colorless. And with this is contemplated its shapelessness; and with that, its bodilessness; therefore, in the sudden foundation of the world, the earth was among the things that exist, as were all other things. But it awaited its furnishing through its qualities, which is to come into being. For by saying it was invisible, the account indicates that no other quality was to be observed about it. And by naming it unfurnished, it gives us to understand that it had not yet been condensed with its bodily properties. But such a thought is clarified more plainly through the writing of Symmachus and Theodotion and Aquila; one of them saying, "And the earth was idle and indistinct;" and another, "Emptiness and nothing;" and the other, "Nothing and nothing." For by these, according to my account, it is shown, through "idle," that it was not yet in actuality, but had its being only in potentiality; and through "indistinct," that each of the qualities had not yet separated from the others and was not known individually on its own, but the whole was seen in a certain confused and indistinct quality, with neither color, nor shape, nor bulk, nor weight, nor magnitude, nor any other such thing being observed on its own according to its proper definition in the underlying subject. And “emptiness and nothing” indicates the same thought to us. For he signified the capacity for qualities by the word “emptiness;” so that through this we may learn that the Creator of the universe laid down beforehand a receptive power for the qualities; and this was a kind of void and had nothing in itself, before it was filled up with the qualities. But the third account, as having been found in the philosophy of Epicurus, I think should be left unexamined. For he says something similar concerning the first principle of beings, but empty-sounding and nothing the non-existent

7

γεγενημένων αὐτομάτως, ἢ ἀφ' ἑτέρου τινὸς ἐσχηκέναι τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐννοεῖν ἐπιτρέπων. ∆ιὰ τοῦτο φησίν· «Ὁ Θεὸς ἐκάλεσε τὸ φῶς ἡμέραν, καὶ τὸ σκότος ἐκάλεσε νύκτα.» Τῆς γὰρ φωτιστικῆς δυνάμεως ἀτρεμεῖν ἐκ φύσεως ἀδυνατούσης, ὅτε τῷ ἄνω μέρει τοῦ κύκλου διεξῆλθε τὸ φέγγος, καὶ πρὸς τὸ ὑποκείμενον ἦν ἡ φορὰ, ἐξ ἀνάγκης τῇ ὑποδρομῇ τοῦ πυρὸς τὸ ὑπερκείμενον ἀπεσκιάσθη, τῆς παχυ τέρας, ὡς εἰκὸς, φύσεως τὴν αὐγὴν ἐπιπροσθούσης. Τὴν οὖν τοῦ φωτὸς ὑποχώρησιν, ἐσπέραν ὠνόμασεν. Καὶ πάλιν ἐκπεριδραμόντος τοῦ πυρὸς τὸν ὑποκείμε νον κύκλον, καὶ τοῖς ἄνω τὴν αὐγὴν ἐπαναγαγόντος, πρωΐαν τὸ γινόμενον προσηγόρευσεν, οὕτως ὀνομά σας τὸν ὄρθρον. Μικρὸν δὲ τὸν λόγον ἐπαναλάβωμεν, ὡς ἂν καὶ τὰ παραθέντα τῆς θείας Γραφῆς, πρὸς τὸν εἱρμὸν τῆς ἀποδοθείσης θεωρίας ἡμῖν συνεργήσειεν. Εἶπε γὰρ ἐν πρώτοις ὁ τῆς κοσμογενεΐας λόγος, ὅτι «Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν.» Τοῦτο δὲ ἡμεῖς ὑπελάβομεν, ὅτι ἀθρόον τῆς τῶν ὄντων συστάσεως ὁ λόγος παρίστησιν, ἐκ τοῦ περιέχοντος καὶ τὸ ἐντὸς ἐνδεικνύμενος. Τοῖς γὰρ ἄκροις καὶ τὰ μέσα πάντως ἐμπεριέχεται. Ἄκρα δὲ ὡς πρὸς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην αἴσθησιν, οὐρανός ἐστι καὶ γῆ. ∆ιότι τούτοις ἑκατέρωθεν ἡ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὄψις ὁρίζεται. Ὥσπερ τοίνυν ὁ εἰπὼν ὅτι Ἐν τῇ χειρὶ αὐτοῦ τὰ πέρατα τῆς γῆς, καὶ τὰ μέσα τῇ περιοχῇ τῶν περάτων συμπεριέλαβεν· οὕτω καὶ ὁ Μωϋσῆς τῆς ὑλικῆς τοῦ παντὸς κόσμου καταβολῆς τὴν ἔνδειξιν διὰ τῶν περάτων πεποίηται· συνεργεῖν δέ φαμεν πρὸς τὴν τοιαύτην ὑπόληψιν, τὰ διὰ μέσου ῥή ματα. Γέγραπται γὰρ, ὅτι «Ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος· «ὡς ἐκ τούτου δῆλον εἶναι, ὅτι τῇ μὲν δυνάμει τὰ πάντα ἦν ἐν πρώτῃ τοῦ Θεοῦ περὶ τὴν κτίσιν ὁρμῇ, οἱονεὶ σπερματικῆς τινος δυ νάμεως πρὸς τὴν τοῦ παντὸς γένεσιν καταβληθείσης, ἐνεργεία δὲ τὰ καθ' ἕκαστον οὔπω ἦν. Ἡ γὰρ γῆ, φησὶν, ἦν ἀόρατος, καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος. Ὅπερ 80 ἶσόν ἐστι τῷ λέγειν, ὅτι ἦν, καὶ οὐκ ἦν, Οὐ γάρ που συνδεδραμήκεισαν περὶ αὐτὴν αἱ ποιότητες· ἀπό δειξις δὲ τῆς διανοίας ταύτης, ὅτι ἀόρατον αὐτὴν ὁ λόγος εἶναι φησίν. Τὸ γὰρ ἀόρατον, χρῶμα οὐκ ἐστι· τὸ δὲ χρῶμα, οἷόν τις ἀποῤῥοὴ τοῦ κατὰ τὴν ἐπι φάνειαν σχήματος γίνεται, τὸ δὲ σχῆμα οὐκ ἄνευ σώ ματος. Εἰ οὖν ἀόρατον ἦν, καὶ ἀχρωμάτιστον πάν τως. Τούτῳ δὲ συνθεωρεῖται τὸ ἀσχημάτιστον· ἐκεί νῳ δὲ τὸ ἀσώματον· οὐκοῦν ἐν τῷ ἀθρόῳ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου καταβολῆς, ἦν μὲν ἐν τοῖς οὖσιν ἡ γῆ, ὡς καὶ τὰ ἄλλα πάντα. Ἀνέμεινε δὲ τὸ διὰ τῆς τῶν ποιοτήτων κατασκευῆς. ὅπερ ἐστὶ γενέσθαι. ∆ιὰ γὰρ τοῦ ἀόρατον αὐτὴν εἰπεῖν εἶναι, τὸ μηδὲ ἄλλην τινὰ ποιότητα θεωρεῖσθαι περὶ αὐτὴν ὁ λόγος ἐνδείκνυται. Καὶ διὰ τοῦ ἀκατασκεύαστον ὀνομάσαι, νοεῖν δίδωσι τὸ μήπω αὐτὴν πεπυκνῶσθαι ταῖς σωματικαῖς ἰδιότησιν. Φανερώτερον δὲ διὰ τῆς Συμμάχου καὶ Θεοδο τίωνος καὶ Ἀκύλα γραφῆς ἡ τοιαύτη διά νοια σαφηνίζεται· τοῦ μὲν εἰπόντος· «Ἡ δὲ γῆ ἦν ἀργὸν καὶ ἀδιάκριτον·» τοῦ δὲ ἑτέρου, «Κένωμα καὶ οὐθέν·» τοῦ δὲ ἄλλου. «Οὐθὲν καὶ οὐθέν.» ∆ηλοῦται γὰρ διὰ τούτων, κατὰ τὸν ἐμὸν λόγον, διὰ μὲν τοῦ ἀργοῦ, ὅτι ἐνεργείᾳ μὲν οὔπω ἦν· ἐν μόνῃ δὲ τῇ δυνάμει τὸ εἶναι εἶχε· διὰ δὲ τοῦ ἀδιακρίτου, τὸ μη δέπω ἀποστῆναι ἀπ' ἀλλήλων καὶ ἐφ' ἑαυτῆς ἰδιαζόν τως ἑκάστην τῶν ποιοτήτων γνωρίζεσθαι, ἀλλ' ἐν συγκεχυμένῃ τινὶ καὶ ἀδιακρίτῳ ποιότητι τὸ πᾶν καθ ορᾶσθαι, μὴ χρώματος, μὴ σχήματος, μὴ ὄγκου, μὴ βάρους, μὴ πηλικότητος, μὴ ἄλλου τινὸς τῶν τοιούτων ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ κατὰ τὸν ἴδιον λόγον ἐν τῷ ὑποκειμένῳ θεωρουμένου. Τὴν δὲ αὐτὴν διάνοιαν ἐνδείκνυται ἡμῖν, καὶ τὸ κένωμα καὶ οὐθέν. Τὴν γὰρ χωρητικὴν τῶν ποιοτήτων δύναμιν, τῇ τοῦ κενώματος φωνῇ παρεδή λωσεν· ὥστε διὰ τούτου μαθεῖν, ὅτι δεκτικὴν δύνα μιν τῶν ποιοτήτων ὁ τοῦ παντὸς κτίστης προκατ εβάλλετο· κενὴ δέ τις ἦν αὕτη καὶ ἐν ἑαυτῇ εἶχεν οὐθὲν, πρὶν συμπληρωθῆναι αὐτὴν ταῖς ποιότησι. Τὸν δὲ τρίτον λόγον, ὡς ἐκ τῆς Ἐπικούρου φιλοσοφίας παρευρεθέντα, καταλιπεῖν οἶμαι ἀθεώρητον. Ὅμοιον γάρ τι κἀκεῖνός φησι περὶ τῆς πρώτης τῶν ὄντων ἀρχῆς, κενόφωνον δὲ καὶ μηδὲν τὴν ἀνυπό στατον