9

they would confess the unbegotten, and he calls his own impiety the payment of a debt, so that he might not seem to say something on his own account, but to be fulfilling what is necessarily owed to God, And he indicates to the rest that by positing the unbegotten in the substance, they will be released without accountability; but if they should suppose otherwise according to the pious manner, as having failed to pay the oldest and most necessary of all debts, they will receive an inexorable wrath. I would therefore gladly examine him, whether he maintains this conscientiousness equally in all things said of God, or only concerning this term? For if he considers nothing at all as a concept, so that he may not seem to dignify God with human appellations, he will confess that all things predicated of God are equally substance. How then is it not ridiculous to say that the creative is substance? or again that the provident is substance? or again likewise the foreknowing? And in short, to posit every activity as substance? And if all these things tend to one meaning, it is wholly necessary that the names have the same force as one another, as in the case of those with many names, when we say Simon and Peter and Cephas are the same person. Therefore, one hearing of the unchangeable of God will be led to the unbegotten; and one hearing of the indivisible will be carried over to the creative. And what could be more absurd than this confusion, to take away the proper significance of each of the names, and to legislate against both common usage and the teaching of the Spirit? And yet when we hear concerning God, that He made all things in wisdom, we are taught of his creative skill; and when, that He opens his hand, and fills every living thing with his good pleasure, of the providence that has extended through all things; and when, that He made darkness his hiding place, we are instructed in the invisibility of his nature. Again, from that which is said from the person of God, 29.529 I am, and I have not been changed, we learn the ever-sameness and immutability of the divine substance. How then is it not manifest madness, to say that a proper meaning is not attached to each of the names, but that, contrary to their operation, all the names can be defined as having the same force as one another? Then, even if we should grant this, not even so will anything more accrue to them for their purpose. For if all these things, taken with reference to God the Father, signify his substance—I mean the unchangeable, and the invisible, and the incorruptible—it is clear that likewise in the case of the only-begotten Son of God, they will be indicative of substance. For we also call the only-begotten Son invisible, and unchangeable, and incorruptible, and indivisible, and all such things. And so their cleverness will turn out to the contrary for them. For they will not be able to prove him unlike in substance on account of a difference in one appellation, any more than they will be forced by the very necessity of the given data to confess him like on account of the communion in the majority of them. But if he should say that he has employed this reverence only with the term 'unbegotten,' but is unguarded regarding the others, let us ask him again, what is the special allotment, that when so many things are said about God, he displays precision in this one alone, and in this one fulfills for Him the confession of being what He is, while not refusing to dignify Him in countless others with human concepts? For a debtor of many things is not so much conscientious in the payment of one as he is exceedingly unconscientious in the withholding of the majority. Thus then, like the cunning wild beasts, he is caught by his own devices, being all the more refuted by those things by which he attempts to escape notice. 29.532 But consider what follows in the argument. Having shown, as he thinks, that it is impossible to grasp the unbegotten by concept, he adds: {EUN.} But certainly not by privation either; if indeed privations are privations of things that exist by nature, and are secondary to the states of possession. {BAS.} And that he chatters these things from the wisdom of the world, by which he was led astray and has undertaken such innovations in his arguments, is not difficult to show. For they are Aristotle's, as

9

ὁμολογήσειαν τὸ ἀγέννη τον, καὶ ὀφλήματος ἔκτισιν τὴν ἰδίαν ἀσέβειαν ὀνο μάζει, ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ παρ' ἑαυτοῦ τι λέγειν, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἀναγκαίως τῷ Θεῷ ὀφειλόμενον ἐκπληροῦν, Καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς ἐνδείκνυται, ὅτι ἐν μὲν τῇ οὐσίᾳ τιθέμενοι τὸ ἀγέννητον, ἀνεύθυνοι ἀφεθήσονται· εἰ δὲ ἑτέρως κατὰ τὸν εὐσεβῆ τρόπον ὑπολαμβάνοιεν, ὡς ἐλλε λοιπότες τὸ πάντων χρεῶν πρεσβύτατον καὶ ἀναγκαιό τατον ἔκτισμα, ἀπαραίτητον τὴν ὀργὴν ἐκδέξονται, Ἡδέως οὖν ἂν αὐτὸν ἐξετάσαιμι, τὴν εὐγνωμο σύνην ταύτην ὁμοίως ἐπὶ πάντων τῶν περὶ Θεοῦ λε γομένων φυλάσσει, ἢ κατὰ τοῦτο μόνον τὸ ῥῆμα; Εἰ μὲν γὰρ οὐδὲν ὅλως κατ' ἐπίνοιαν θεωρεῖ, ἵνα μὴ δόξῃ ἀνθρωπίναις τὸν Θεὸν σεμνύνειν προσηγορίαις, πάντα ὁμοίως οὐσίαν ὁμολογήσει τὰ ἐπιλεγόμενα τῷ Θεῷ. Πῶς οὖν οὐ καταγέλαστον, τὸ δημιουργικὸν οὐσίαν εἶναι λέγειν; ἢ τὸ προνοητικὸν πάλιν οὐσίαν; ἢ τὸ προγνωστικὸν πάλιν ὡσαύτως; καὶ ἁπαξ απλῶς, πᾶσαν ἐνέργειαν, οὐσίαν τίθεσθαι; Καὶ εἰ πάντα ταῦτα πρὸς ἓν σημαινόμενον τείνει, ἀνάγκη πᾶσα ταυτὸν ἀλλήλοις δύνασθαι τὰ ὀνόματα· ὡς ἐπὶ τῶν πολυωνύμων· ὅταν Σίμωνα καὶ Πέτρον καὶ Κηφᾶν τὸν αὐτὸν λέγωμεν. Οὐκοῦν ὁ ἀκούσας τὸ ἀναλλοίωτον τοῦ Θεοῦ, πρὸς τὸ ἀγέννητον ὑπαχθήσεται· καὶ ὁ ἀκούσας τὸ ἀμερὲς, πρὸς τὸ δημιουργικὸν ἀπο φέρεται. Καὶ ταύτης τί ἂν γένοιτο τῆς συγχύσεως ἀτοπώτερον, ἀφελόμενον τὴν ἰδίαν σημασίαν ἑκάστου τῶν ὀνομάτων, ἀντινομοθετεῖν τῇ τε κοινῇ χρήσει καὶ τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ τοῦ Πνεύματος; Καίτοι ὅταν μὲν ἀκού σωμεν περὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὅτι πάντα ἐν σοφίᾳ ἐποίησε, τὴν δημιουργικὴν τέχνην αὐτοῦ διδασκόμεθα· ὅταν δὲ, ὅτι ἀνοίγει τὴν χεῖρα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἐμπιπλᾷ πᾶν ζῶον εὐδοκίας, τὴν διὰ πάντων κεχωρηκυῖαν πρόνοιαν· ὅταν δὲ, ὅτι Ἔθετο σκότος ἀποκρυφὴν αὐτοῦ, τὸ ἀόρατον τῆς αὐτοῦ φύσεως παιδευόμεθα. Πάλιν δὲ τὸ ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ Θεοῦ λεγόμενον, 29.529 Ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ οὐκ ἠλλοίωμαι, τὸ ἀεὶ ταυτὸν καὶ ἄτρεπτον τῆς θείας οὐσίας μανθάνομεν. Πῶς οὖν οὐχὶ μανία σαφὴς, μὴ ἴδιον σημαινόμενον ἑκάστῳ τῶν ὀνομάτων ὑποβεβλῆσθαι λέγειν, ἀλλὰ, παρὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν, πάντα ταυτὸν δύνασθαι ἀλλήλοις δι ορίζεσθαι τὰ ὀνόματα; Ἔπειτα ἐὰν καὶ δῶμεν τοῦτο, οὐδ' οὕτω πλέον αὐτοῖς οὐδὲ εἰς τὸν σκοπὸν περιέσται. Εἰ γὰρ πάντα ταῦτα, ἐπὶ τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ Πατρὸς λαμ βανόμενα, τὴν οὐσίαν αὐτοῦ σημαίνει, τὸ ἀναλλοίωτον λέγω, καὶ τὸ ἀόρατον, καὶ τὸ ἄφθαρτον, παραπλη σίως δηλονότι καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς Υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ, οὐσίας ἔσται δηλωτικά. Ἀόρατον γὰρ, καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον, καὶ ἄφθαρτον, καὶ ἀμερῆ, καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα πάντα, καὶ τὸν μονογενῆ Υἱὸν ὀνομάζομεν. Καὶ οὕτω τὸ σοφὸν αὐτοῖς εἰς τὸ ἐναντίον περιελεύσε ται. Οὐ γὰρ μᾶλλον διὰ τὸ ἐν μιᾷ προσηγορίᾳ διάφορον ἀνόμοιον κατὰ τὴν οὐσίαν ἀποδεικνύειν ἔξουσιν, ἢ διὰ τὴν ἐν τοῖς πλείοσι κοινωνίαν ὅμοιον ὁμολογεῖν ὑπ' αὐτῆς τῆς ἀνάγκης τῶν δεδομένων ἐκβιασθήσονται. Εἰ δὲ λέγοι ἐπὶ μόνης τῆς τοῦ ἀγεν νήτου φωνῆς τῇ εὐλαβείᾳ ταύτῃ κεχρῆσθαι, ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν ἄλλων ἀφυλάκτως ἔχειν· πάλιν αὐτὸν ἐρωτή σωμεν, τίς ἡ ἀποκλήρωσις, τοσούτων ὄντων τῶν περὶ Θεοῦ λεγομένων, ἐν ἑνὶ τούτῳ μόνῳ τὴν ἀκρί βειαν ἐπιδείκνυσθαι, καὶ ἐν ἑνὶ τούτῳ ἀποπληροῦν τα αὐτῷ τὴν τοῦ εἶναι ὅ ἐστιν ὁμολογίαν, ἐν ἑτέροις παμπληθέσιν ἀνθρωπίναις ἐπινοίαις σεμνύ νειν μὴ παραιτεῖσθαι; Ὁ γὰρ πλειόνων ὀφειλέ της οὐ μᾶλλον εὐγνώμων ἐν τῇ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀποδόσει ἢ ὑπερβάλλων ἀγνωμοσύνῃ ἐν τῇ τῶν πλειόνων ἀποστε ρήσει. Οὕτω μὲν οὖν, ὡς τὰ πανοῦργα τῶν θηρίων, ταῖς ἑαυτοῦ τέχναις ἁλίσκεται, οἷς λανθάνειν ἐπιχει ρεῖ, τούτοις πλέον διελεγχόμενος. 29.532 Τίνα δέ ἐστι τὰ ἑξῆς τοῦ λόγου σκοπεῖτε. ∆είξας, ὡς οἴεται, ὅτι ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν ἐπινοίᾳ λαβεῖν τὸ ἀγέννητον, ἐπάγει· {ΕΥΝ.} Ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδὲ κατὰ στέρησιν· εἴ γε τῶν κατὰ φύσιν αἱ στερήσεις εἰσὶ στερήσεις, καὶ τῶν ἕξεων δεύτεραι. {ΒΑΣ.} Ταῦτα δὲ, ὅτι ἐκ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου σοφίας περιλαλεῖ, ὑφ' ἧς ἐκτραχηλισθεὶς, ταῖς τοιαύταις τῶν λόγων ἐπέθετο καινοτομίαις, οὐ χαλεπὸν ἐπιδεῖ ξαι. Ἀριστοτέλους γάρ εἰσιν, ὡς