Homily I.

 1. It is right that any one beginning to narrate the formation of the world should begin with the good order which reigns in visible things. I am abou

 2. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” I stop struck with admiration at this thought. What shall I first say? Where shall I begin

 3. Do not then imagine, O man! that the visible world is without a beginning and because the celestial bodies move in a circular course, and it is di

 4. One day, doubtless, their terrible condemnation will be the greater for all this worldly wisdom, since, seeing so clearly into vain sciences, they

 5. It appears, indeed, that even before this world an order of things existed of which our mind can form an idea, but of which we can say nothing, bec

 6. Such being the different senses of the word beginning, see if we have not all the meanings here. You may know the epoch when the formation of this

 7. Among arts, some have in view production, some practice, others theory. The object of the last is the exercise of thought, that of the second, the

 8. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” If we were to wish to discover the essence of each of the beings which are offered for our

 9. Do you suppose that a heavier body prevents the earth from falling into the abyss? Then you must consider that this support needs itself a support

 10. There are inquirers into nature who with a great display of words give reasons for the immobility of the earth. Placed, they say, in the middle of

 11. We might say the same thing of the heavens. With what a noise of words the sages of this world have discussed their nature! Some have said that he

 Homily II.

 1. In the few words which have occupied us this morning we have found such a depth of thought that we despair of penetrating further. If such is the f

 2. But the corrupters of the truth, who, incapable of submitting their reason to Holy Scripture, distort at will the meaning of the Holy Scriptures, p

 3. God created the heavens and the earth, but not only half —He created all the heavens and all the earth, creating the essence with the form. For He

 4. “Darkness was upon the face of the deep.” A new source for fables and most impious imaginations if one distorts the sense of these words at the wil

 5. Do not then go beyond yourself to seek for evil, and imagine that there is an original nature of wickedness. Each of us, let us acknowledge it, is

 6.  And the Spirit of God was borne upon the face of the waters  .

 7.  And God said, Let there be light  .

 8. “  And God called the light Day and the darkness he called Night  .”

 Homily III.

 1. We have now recounted the works of the first day, or rather of one day. Far be it from me indeed, to take from it the privilege it enjoys of having

 2. And God said “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” Yesterday we heard God’s decree,

 3. In the second place, does the firmament that is called heaven differ from the firmament that God made in the beginning? Are there two heavens? The

 4. “  And God said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and

 5. But let us continue our explanation: “  Let it divide the waters from the waters  .”

 6. Survey creation you will see the power of heat reigning over all that is born and perishes. On account of it comes all the water spread over the e

 7. Therefore we read: “  Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters  .” I have said what the wo

 8. “  And God called the firmament heaven  .”

 9. But as far as concerns the separation of the waters I am obliged to contest the opinion of certain writers in the Church who, under the shadow of h

 10. “  And God saw that it was good  .” God does not judge of the beauty of His work by the charm of the eyes, and He does not form the same idea of b

 Homily IV.

 1. There are towns where the inhabitants, from dawn to eve, feast their eyes on the tricks of innumerable conjurors. They are never tired of hearing d

 2. “  And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear, and it was so  .” And the water

 3. “Let the waters be gathered together.” It was ordered that it should be the natural property of water to flow, and in obedience to this order, the

 4. To say that the waters were gathered in one place indicates that previously they were scattered in many places. The mountains, intersected by deep

 5. And God said: “  Let the waters be gathered together unto one place and let the dry land appear  .” He did not say let the earth appear, so as not

 6. “  And God saw that it was good  .”

 7. Thus, in the eyes of God, the sea is good, because it makes the under current of moisture in the depths of the earth. It is good again, because fro

 Homily V.

 1. “  And God said Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself 

 2. “  Let the earth bring forth grass yielding seed after his kind  .” So that although some kind of grass is of service to animals, even their gain i

 3. Up to this point, the order in which plants shoot bears witness to their first arrangement. Every herb, every plant proceeds from a germ. If, like

 4. What shall I say? What shall I leave unsaid? In the rich treasures of creation it is difficult to select what is most precious the loss of what is

 5. “  Let the earth bring forth grass  .” What spontaneous provision is included in these words,—that which is present in the root, in the plant itsel

 6. “  Let the earth  ,” the Creator adds, “  bring forth the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself 

 7. But let us return to the examination of the ingenious contrivances of creation. How many trees then arose, some to give us their fruits, others to

 8. Plants reproduce themselves in so many different ways, that we can only touch upon the chief among them. As to fruits themselves, who could review

 9. But what need is there to continue, when in the same fig tree we have the most opposite flavours, as bitter in the sap as it is sweet in the fruit?

 10. “  Let the earth bring forth  .” This short command was in a moment a vast nature, an elaborate system. Swifter than thought it produced the count

 Homily VI.

 1. At the shows in the circus the spectator must join in the efforts of the athletes. This the laws of the show indicate, for they prescribe that all

 2. “  And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, and to divide the day from the night  .”

 3. And let no one suppose it to be a thing incredible that the brightness of the light is one thing, and the body which is its material vehicle is ano

 4. “  And let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years  .”

 5. But those who overstep the borders, making the words of Scripture their apology for the art of casting nativities, pretend that our lives depend up

 6. But what effects are produced? Such an one will have curly hair and bright eyes, because he is born under the Ram such is the appearance of a ram.

 7. They do not, however, stop here even our acts, where each one feels his will ruling, I mean, the practice of virtue or of vice, depend, according

 8. Let us return to the words which follow. “Let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years.” We have spoken about signs. By times, we u

 9. “  And God made two great lights  .”

 10. See again another evident proof of its greatness. Although the heaven may be full of stars without number, the light contributed by them all could

 11. On its variations depends also the condition of the air, as is proved by sudden disturbances which often come after the new moon, in the midst of

 Homily VII.

 1. “  And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life  ” after their kind, “  and fowl that may fly above the e

 2. “Let the waters bring forth moving creatures after their kind.” God caused to be born the firstlings of each species to serve as seeds for nature.

 3. The food of fish differs according to their species. Some feed on mud others eat sea weed others content themselves with the herbs that grow in w

 4. It is not thus with us. Why? Because we incessantly move the ancient landmarks which our fathers have set. We encroach, we add house to house, fiel

 5. I myself have seen these marvels, and I have admired the wisdom of God in all things. If beings deprived of reason are capable of thinking and of p

 6. Let husbands listen as well: here is a lesson for them. The viper vomits forth its venom in respect for marriage and you, will you not put aside t

 Homily VIII.

 1. And God said “  Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle and creeping things, and beast of the earth after his kind an

 2. “  Let the earth bring forth a living soul  .” Why did the earth produce a living soul? so that you may make a difference between the soul of cattl

 3. There are also innumerable kinds of birds. If we review them all, as we have partly done the fish, we shall find that under one name, the creatures

 4. What a variety, I have said, in the actions and lives of flying creatures. Some of these unreasoning creatures even have a government, if the featu

 5. How shall we make an exact review of all the peculiarities of the life of birds? During the night cranes keep watch in turn some sleep, others mak

 6. It is said that the turtle-dove, once separated from her mate, does not contract a new union, but remains in widowhood, in remembrance of her first

 7. “  Let the waters bring forth the moving creatures that have life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven  .” They r

 8. If we simply read the words of Scripture we find only a few short syllables. “Let the waters bring forth fowl that may fly above the earth in the o

 Homily IX.

 1. How did you like the fare of my morning’s discourse? It seemed to me that I had the good intentions of a poor giver of a feast, who, ambitious of h

 2. “  Let the earth bring forth the living creature  .”

 3. “  Let the earth bring forth the living creature  .” Thus when the soul of brutes appeared it was not concealed in the earth, but it was born by th

 4. Virtues exist in us also by nature, and the soul has affinity with them not by education, but by nature herself. We do not need lessons to hate ill

 5. But let us return to the spectacle of creation. The easiest animals to catch are the most productive. It is on account of this that hares and wild

 6. Beasts bear witness to the faith. Hast thou confidence in the Lord? “Thou shalt walk upon the asp and the basilisk and thou shalt trample under fee

4. “Darkness was upon the face of the deep.”  8  Gen. i. 2. A new source for fables and most impious imaginations if one distorts the sense of these words at the will of one’s fancies. By “darkness” these wicked men do not understand what is meant in reality—air not illumined, the shadow produced by the interposition of a body, or finally a place for some reason deprived of light. For them “darkness” is an evil power, or rather the personification of evil, having his origin in himself in opposition to, and in perpetual struggle with, the goodness of God. If God is light, they say, without any doubt the power which struggles against Him must be darkness, “Darkness” not owing its existence to a foreign origin, but an evil existing by itself. “Darkness” is the enemy of souls, the primary cause of death, the adversary of virtue. The words of the Prophet, they say in their error, show that it exists and that it does not proceed from God. From this what perverse and impious dogmas have been imagined! What grievous wolves,  9  Acts xx. 29. tearing the flock of the Lord, have sprung from these words to cast themselves upon souls! Is it not from hence that have come forth Marcions and Valentini,  10  Marcion and Valentinus are roughly lumped together as types of gnostic dualism. On the distinction between their systems see Dr. Salmon in D.C.B. iii. 820. Marcion, said to have been the son of a bishop of Sinope, is the most Christian of the gnostics, and “tries to fit in his dualism with the Christian creed and with the scriptures.” But he expressly “asserted the existence of two Gods.” The Valentinian ideas and emanations travelled farther afield. and the detestable heresy of the Manicheans,  11  On Manicheism, videBeausobre’s Critical History of Manicheism, and Walch, Hist. Ketz. i. 770. With its theory of two principles it spread widely over the empire in the 4th c., was vigorous in Armenia in the 9th, and is said to have appeared in France in the 12th. (cf. Bayle, Dict. s.v.) On the view taken of the heresy in Basil’s time cf. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius i. § 35. which you may without going far wrong call the putrid humour of the churches.

O man, why wander thus from the truth, and imagine for thyself that which will cause thy perdition? The word is simple and within the comprehension of all. “The earth was invisible.” Why? Because the “deep” was spread over its surface. What is “the deep”? A mass of water of extreme depth. But we know that we can see many bodies through clear and transparent water. How then was it that no part of the earth appeared through the water? Because the air which surrounded it was still without light and in darkness. The rays of the sun, penetrating the water, often allow us to see the pebbles which form the bed of the river, but in a dark night it is impossible for our glance to penetrate under the water. Thus, these words “the earth was invisible” are explained by those that follow; “the deep” covered it and itself was in darkness. Thus, the deep is not a multitude of hostile powers, as has been imagined;  12  i.e. by those who would identify the ἄβυσσος (Tehôm) of Gen. i. 2 with that of Luke i. 31, and understand it to mean the abode in prison of evil spirits. The Hebrew word occurs in Job xxviii. 14 and Deut. xxxiii. 13 for the depth of waters. nor “darkness” an evil sovereign force in enmity with good. In reality two rival principles of equal power, if engaged without ceasing in a war of mutual attacks, will end in self destruction. But if one should gain the mastery it would completely annihilate the conquered. Thus, to maintain the balance in the struggle between good and evil is to represent them as engaged in a war without end and in perpetual destruction, where the opponents are at the same time conquerors and conquered. If good is the stronger, what is there to prevent evil being completely annihilated? But if that be the case, the very utterance of which is impious, I ask myself how it is that they themselves are not filled with horror to think that they have imagined such abominable blasphemies.

It is equally impious to say that evil has its origin from God;  13  With this view Plutarch charges the Stoics. Αὐτοὶ τῶν κακῶν ἀρχὴν ἀγαθὸν ὄντα τὸν Θεον ποιοῦσι. (c. Stoicos, 1976.) But it is his deduction from their statements—not their own statements. cf. Mosheim’s note on Cudworth iv. § 13. Origen (c. Celsum vi.) distinguishes between την κακίαν καὶ τὰς ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς πράξεις, and κακόν as punitive and remedial; if the latter can rightly be called evil in any sense, God is the author of it. cf. Amos iii. 6. Vide, also, Basil’s treatment of this question in his Treatise ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν αἰτιος τῶν κακῶν ὁ θεος. cf. Schroeck. Kirchengeschichte xiii. 194. because the contrary cannot proceed from its contrary. Life does not engender death; darkness is not the origin of light; sickness is not the maker of health.  14  Fialon points out the correspondence with Plat. Phæd. § 119, καί τίς εἰπε τῶν παρόντων ἀκούσας…πρὸς Θεν, οὐκ ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν ἡμῖν λόγοις αὐτὸ τὸ ἐναντίον τῶν νυνὶ λεγομένων ὡμολογεῖτο, ἐκ τοῦ ἐλάττονος τὸ μεῖζον γίγνεσθαι, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ μείζονος τὸ ἔλαττον, καὶ ἀτεχνῶς αὕτη εἶναι ἡ γένεσις τοῖς ἐναντίοις ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων ; νῦν δέ μοι δοκεῖ λέγεσθαι ὅτι τοῦτο οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο. Καὶ ὁ Σωκράτης …ἔφη…οὐκ ἐννοεῖς τὸ διαφέρον τοῦ τι νῦν λεγομένου καί τοῦ τότε· τότε· μὲν γὰρ ἐλέγετο ἐκ τοῦ ἐναντίου πράγματος τὸ ἐναντίον πρᾶγμα γίγνεσθαι, νῦν δὲ ὅτι αὐτὸ τὸ ἐναντίον ἑαυτῷ ἐναντίον οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο, οὔτε τὸ ἐν ἡμῖν οὔτε τὸ ἐν φύσει· τότε μὲν γὰρ περὶ τῶν ἐχόντων τῶν ἐναντίων ἐλέγομεν, ἐπονομάζοντες αὐτὰ τῇ ἐκείνων ἐπωνυμί& 139·, νῦν δὲ περὶ ἐκείνων αὐτῶν ὧν ἐνόντων, ἔχει τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν τὰ ὀνομαζόμενα, αὐτὰ δ᾽ ἐκείνα οὐκ ἄν ποτέ φαμεν ἐθεγῆσαι γένεσιν ἀλλήλων δέξασθαι. In the changes of conditions there are transitions from one condition to the contrary; but in genesis each being proceeds from its like, and not from its contrary. If then evil is neither uncreate nor created by God, from whence comes its nature? Certainly that evil exists, no one living in the world will deny. What shall we say then? Evil is not a living animated essence; it is the condition of the soul opposed to virtue, developed in the careless on account of their falling away from good.  15  “Cette phrase est prise textuellement dans Denys l’Aréopagite, ou du moins dans l’ouvrage qui lui est attribué. (De Div. Nom. iv. 18. Laur. Lyd. de mensib. ed. Rœth. 186, 28.).” Fialon. In the Treatise referred to, περὶ Θείων ᾽Ονομάτων, “evil” is said to be “nothing real and positive, but a defect, a negation only. Στέρησις ἄρα ἐστὶ τὸ κακὸν, καὶ ἔλλειψις, και ἀσθένεια, καὶ ἀσυμμετρία.” D.C.B. i. 846. cf. “Evil is null, is nought, is silence implying sound.” Browning. Abt. Vogler.

8 Gen. i. 2.
9 Acts xx. 29.
10 Marcion and Valentinus are roughly lumped together as types of gnostic dualism. On the distinction between their systems see Dr. Salmon in D.C.B. iii. 820. Marcion, said to have been the son of a bishop of Sinope, is the most Christian of the gnostics, and “tries to fit in his dualism with the Christian creed and with the scriptures.” But he expressly “asserted the existence of two Gods.” The Valentinian ideas and emanations travelled farther afield.
11 On Manicheism, videBeausobre’s Critical History of Manicheism, and Walch, Hist. Ketz. i. 770. With its theory of two principles it spread widely over the empire in the 4th c., was vigorous in Armenia in the 9th, and is said to have appeared in France in the 12th. (cf. Bayle, Dict. s.v.) On the view taken of the heresy in Basil’s time cf. Gregory of Nyssa, Against Eunomius i. § 35.
12 i.e. by those who would identify the ἄβυσσος (Tehôm) of Gen. i. 2 with that of Luke i. 31, and understand it to mean the abode in prison of evil spirits. The Hebrew word occurs in Job xxviii. 14 and Deut. xxxiii. 13 for the depth of waters.
13 With this view Plutarch charges the Stoics. Αὐτοὶ τῶν κακῶν ἀρχὴν ἀγαθὸν ὄντα τὸν Θεον ποιοῦσι. (c. Stoicos, 1976.) But it is his deduction from their statements—not their own statements. cf. Mosheim’s note on Cudworth iv. § 13. Origen (c. Celsum vi.) distinguishes between την κακίαν καὶ τὰς ἀπ᾽ αὐτῆς πράξεις, and κακόν as punitive and remedial; if the latter can rightly be called evil in any sense, God is the author of it. cf. Amos iii. 6. Vide, also, Basil’s treatment of this question in his Treatise ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν αἰτιος τῶν κακῶν ὁ θεος. cf. Schroeck. Kirchengeschichte xiii. 194.
14 Fialon points out the correspondence with Plat. Phæd. § 119, καί τίς εἰπε τῶν παρόντων ἀκούσας…πρὸς Θεν, οὐκ ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν ἡμῖν λόγοις αὐτὸ τὸ ἐναντίον τῶν νυνὶ λεγομένων ὡμολογεῖτο, ἐκ τοῦ ἐλάττονος τὸ μεῖζον γίγνεσθαι, καὶ ἐκ τοῦ μείζονος τὸ ἔλαττον, καὶ ἀτεχνῶς αὕτη εἶναι ἡ γένεσις τοῖς ἐναντίοις ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων ; νῦν δέ μοι δοκεῖ λέγεσθαι ὅτι τοῦτο οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο. Καὶ ὁ Σωκράτης …ἔφη…οὐκ ἐννοεῖς τὸ διαφέρον τοῦ τι νῦν λεγομένου καί τοῦ τότε· τότε· μὲν γὰρ ἐλέγετο ἐκ τοῦ ἐναντίου πράγματος τὸ ἐναντίον πρᾶγμα γίγνεσθαι, νῦν δὲ ὅτι αὐτὸ τὸ ἐναντίον ἑαυτῷ ἐναντίον οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο, οὔτε τὸ ἐν ἡμῖν οὔτε τὸ ἐν φύσει· τότε μὲν γὰρ περὶ τῶν ἐχόντων τῶν ἐναντίων ἐλέγομεν, ἐπονομάζοντες αὐτὰ τῇ ἐκείνων ἐπωνυμί& 139·, νῦν δὲ περὶ ἐκείνων αὐτῶν ὧν ἐνόντων, ἔχει τὴν ἐπωνυμίαν τὰ ὀνομαζόμενα, αὐτὰ δ᾽ ἐκείνα οὐκ ἄν ποτέ φαμεν ἐθεγῆσαι γένεσιν ἀλλήλων δέξασθαι.
15 “Cette phrase est prise textuellement dans Denys l’Aréopagite, ou du moins dans l’ouvrage qui lui est attribué. (De Div. Nom. iv. 18. Laur. Lyd. de mensib. ed. Rœth. 186, 28.).” Fialon. In the Treatise referred to, περὶ Θείων ᾽Ονομάτων, “evil” is said to be “nothing real and positive, but a defect, a negation only. Στέρησις ἄρα ἐστὶ τὸ κακὸν, καὶ ἔλλειψις, και ἀσθένεια, καὶ ἀσυμμετρία.” D.C.B. i. 846. cf. “Evil is null, is nought, is silence implying sound.” Browning. Abt. Vogler.

Ἀλλὰ καὶ σκότος, φησὶν, ἐπάνω τῆς ἀβύσσου: Πάλιν ἄλλαι μύθων ἀφορμαὶ, καὶ πλασμάτων δυσσεβεστέρων ἀρχαὶ πρὸς τὰς ἰδίας ὑπονοίας παρατρεπόντων τὰ ῥήματα. Τὸ γὰρ σκότος οὐχ ὡς πέφυκεν ἐξηγοῦνται ἀέρα τινὰ ἀφώτιστον, ἢ τόπον ἐξ ἀντιφράξεως σώματος σκιαζόμενον, ἢ ὅλως καθ' ὁποιανοῦν αἰτίαν τόπον φωτὸς ἐστερημένον, ἀλλὰ δύναμιν κακὴν, μᾶλλον δὲ αὐτὸ τὸ κακὸν, παρ' ἑαυτοῦ τὴν ἀρχὴν ἔχον, ἀντικείμενον καὶ ἐναντίον τῇ ἀγαθότητι τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐξηγοῦνται τὸ σκότος. Εἰ γὰρ ὁ Θεὸς φῶς ἐστι, δηλονότι ἡ ἀντιστρατευομένη αὐτῷ δύναμις σκότος ἂν εἴη, φησὶ, κατὰ τὸ τῆς διανοίας ἀκόλουθον. Σκότος, οὐ παρ' ἑτέρου τὸ εἶναι ἔχον, ἀλλὰ κακὸν αὐτογέννητον. Σκότος, πολέμιον ψυχῶν, θανάτου ποιητικὸν, ἀρετῆς ἐναντίωσις: ὅπερ καὶ ὑφεστάναι, καὶ μὴ παρὰ Θεοῦ γεγενῆσθαι, ὑπ' αὐτῶν μηνύεσθαι τῶν τοῦ προφήτου λόγων ἐξαπατῶνται. Ἐκ δὴ τούτου τί οὐχὶ συνεπλάσθη τῶν πονηρῶν καὶ ἀθέων δογμάτων; Ποῖοι λύκοι βαρεῖς διασπῶντες τὸ ποίμνιον τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐχὶ ἀπὸ τῆς μικρᾶς ταύτης φωνῆς τὴν ἀρχὴν λαβόντες ἐπεπόλασαν ταῖς ψυχαῖς; Οὐχὶ Μαρκιῶνες; οὐχὶ Οὐαλεντῖνοι ἐντεῦθεν; οὐχ ἡ βδελυκτὴ τῶν Μανιχαίων αἵρεσις, ἣν σηπεδόνα τις τῶν Ἐκκλησιῶν προσειπὼν οὐχ ἁμαρτήσεται τοῦ προσήκοντος; Τί μακρὰν ἀποτρέχεις τῆς ἀληθείας, ἄνθρωπε, ἀφορμὰς σεαυτῷ τῆς ἀπωλείας ἐπινοῶν; Ἁπλοῦς ὁ λόγος, καὶ πᾶσιν εὔληπτος. Ἀόρατος ἦν ἡ γῆ, φησί. Τίς ἡ αἰτία; Ἐπειδὴ ἄβυσσον εἶχεν ἐπιπολάζουσαν ἑαυτῇ. Ἀβύσσου δὲ ἔννοια τίς; Ὕδωρ πολὺ δυσέφικτον ἔχον ἑαυτοῦ τὸ πέρας ἐπὶ τὸ κάτω. Ἀλλ' ἔγνωμεν πολλὰ τῶν σωμάτων καὶ δι' ὕδατος λεπτοτέρου καὶ διαυγοῦς πολλάκις διαφαινόμενα. Πῶς οὖν οὐδὲν μέρος τῆς γῆς διὰ τῶν ὑδάτων ἐδείκνυτο; Ὅτι ἀλαμπὴς ἔτι καὶ ἐσκοτισμένος ἦν ὁ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ κεχυμένος ἀήρ. Ἀκτὶς μὲν γὰρ ἡλίου δι' ὑδάτων διικνουμένη, δείκνυσι πολλάκις τὰς ἐν τῷ βάθει ψηφῖδας: ἐν νυκτὶ δέ τις βαθείᾳ οὐδενὶ ἂν τρόπῳ τὰ ὑπὸ τὸ ὕδωρ κατίδοι. Ὥστε τοῦ ἀόρατον εἶναι τὴν γῆν κατασκευαστικόν ἐστι τὸ ἐπαγόμενον, ὅτι καὶ ἄβυσσος ἦν ἡ ἐπέχουσα, καὶ αὕτη ἐσκοτισμένη. Οὔτε οὖν ἄβυσσος, δυνάμεων πλῆθος ἀντικειμένων, ὥς τινες ἐφαντάσθησαν: οὔτε σκότος, ἀρχική τις καὶ πονηρὰ δύναμις ἀντεξαγομένη τῷ ἀγαθῷ. Δύο γὰρ ἐξισάζοντα ἀλλήλοις κατ' ἐναντίωσιν, φθαρτικὰ ἔσται πάντως τῆς ἀλλήλων συστάσεως: καὶ πράγματα ἕξει διηνεκῶς καὶ παρέξει ἀπαύστως πρὸς ἄλληλα συνεχόμενα τῷ πολέμῳ. Κἂν ὑπερβάλλῃ δυνάμει τῶν ἀντικειμένων τὸ ἕτερον, δαπανητικὸν ἐξάπαντος τοῦ κρατηθέντος γίνεται. Ὥστε εἰ μὲν ἰσόρροπον λέγουσι τοῦ κακοῦ τὴν πρὸς τὸ ἀγαθὸν ἐναντίωσιν, ἄπαυστον εἰσάγουσι πόλεμον καὶ διηνεκῆ τὴν φθορὰν, κρατούντων ἐν μέρει καὶ κρατουμένων. Εἰ δὲ ὑπερέχει δυνάμει τὸ ἀγαθὸν, τίς ἡ αἰτία τοῦ τὴν φύσιν τοῦ κακοῦ μὴ παντελῶς ἀνῃρῆσθαι; Εἰ δὲ, ὃ μὴ θέμις εἰπεῖν, θαυμάζω πῶς οὐχὶ φεύγουσιν αὐτοὶ ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς οὕτως ἀθεμίτους βλασφημίας ὑποφερόμενοι. Οὐ μὴν οὐδὲ παρὰ Θεοῦ τὸ κακὸν τὴν γένεσιν ἔχειν εὐσεβές ἐστι λέγειν, διὰ τὸ μηδὲν τῶν ἐναντίων παρὰ τοῦ ἐναντίου γίνεσθαι. Οὔτε γὰρ ἡ ζωὴ θάνατον γεννᾷ, οὔτε τὸ σκότος φωτός ἐστιν ἀρχὴ, οὔτε ἡ νόσος ὑγείας δημιουργὸς, ἀλλ' ἐν μὲν ταῖς μεταβολαῖς τῶν διαθέσεων ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων πρὸς τὰ ἐναντία αἱ μεταστάσεις: ἐν δὲ ταῖς γενέσεσιν, οὐκ ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων, ἀλλ' ἐκ τῶν ὁμογενῶν ἕκαστον τῶν γινομένων προέρχεται. Εἰ τοίνυν, φησὶ, μήτε ἀγέννητον, μήτε παρὰ Θεοῦ γεγονὸς, πόθεν ἔχει τὴν φύσιν; Τὸ γὰρ εἶναι τὰ κακὰ οὐδεὶς ἀντερεῖ τῶν μετεχόντων τοῦ βίου. Τί οὖν φαμέν; Ὅτι τὸ κακόν ἐστιν οὐχὶ οὐσία ζῶσα καὶ ἔμψυχος, ἀλλὰ διάθεσις ἐν ψυχῇ ἐναντίως ἔχουσα πρὸς ἀρετὴν, διὰ τὴν ἀπὸ τοῦ καλοῦ ἀπόπτωσιν τοῖς ῥᾳθύμοις ἐγγινομένη.