praising harmony, they said "all things were common among them," and in the case of men who are able to be in harmony, one ought to consider all things to be common, how much more was it necessary for the Father and the Son to share in communion, being divided into two hypostases? But now, in saying "all that the Father has is mine," the Son appears to be taking advantage of the Father; and in claiming not even to be master of his own word, but that the Father is of this also (for "the word which you hear," he says, "is not mine but the Father's who sent me"), he shows the Father taking away what is proper to the Son. Both of these, according to Asterius's opinion, appear to have been said inconsistently. For one who is in harmony ought not to seize the rights belonging to another, for this is avaricious, but to consider what belongs to each to be common. So that when we look to the human flesh, we will not find the Savior to have said "I and the Father are one" in the way Asterius has written, for it was not because of the precise harmony in all words and deeds, as he himself has written, that the Savior said, "I and the Father are one." For if this were the case, he would have surely said: I and the Father are in harmony with each other in all things. But as it is, he said, "I and the Father are one." Therefore, if there was some disharmony in those things, but it is necessary for the Lord to speak the truth, it is fitting that the Savior knew precisely, that whenever he says, "I and the Father are one," at that time he says this not looking to the man whom he assumed, but to the Word who came forth from the Father. For if any disharmony should seem to exist, this ought to be referred to the weakness of the flesh, which the Word assumed, not having had it before. But if unity is spoken of, this appears to pertain to the Word. Hence he not only reasonably said, "I and the Father are one," but also that: "Have I been with you so long a time, Philip, and you say: show me the Father," clearly not with these eyes, but with the intellectual eyes that are able to see intellectual things. For both the Father and his Word are invisible to the eyes of the flesh. Therefore, it was not because of harmony in all things that he said this to Philip. 75 For he himself confesses, saying, "the Father is in me and I in the Father"; and that he has not said this simply or without purpose is clear also from another apostolic saying: For he who said "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" also said "one God and Father, who is over all and through all and in all." You see that not even here does he depart from harmony, but even here he has experienced the same thing. For having said "one Lord" he again said "one God," so that whenever he mentions the one Lord, he may also include the Father, and whenever he speaks of the Father, he may testify that the Word of God is not outside. 76 But if you also wish to hear other prophecies from the same one confirming for us one God, "I am God," he says, "the first, and for the things to come, I am"; for "I" is indicative of one person, for the two sayings signify one person to us. For having said "I," he adds also "am," so that through the two parts of speech, a pronoun and a verb, the unity of the Godhead is testified. But if another testimony is needed, again I will provide the same prophet to him saying, "I am the first and I am after these things, and besides me there is no God." If Asterius thinks the Son is divided from the Father in hypostasis as a son of man, being scandalized by the human flesh which he took up for our sake, let him show us who is saying these things; for here also the saying that is spoken is of one person. Who then is it who says, "there is no God besides me"? But let him also hear another prophecy saying, "there is none besides me who is just and a savior." If he should think there are two gods, it is necessary for him to confess that the other is neither just nor a savior. But if he is neither just nor a savior, how can he still be God? For he declares that there is one who is just and a savior. And again he says, "Before me there was no other, and after me there will be none, I am God, and there will be none saving besides me." But if he wishes also to hear another prophetic saying, perhaps concerning him and those who similarly concerning the Godhead

συμφωνίαν ἐπαινοῦσαι "πάντα ἦν αὐτοῖς κοινὰ" ἔφασαν, καὶ ἐπ' ἀνθρώπων τῶν συμφωνεῖν δυναμένων κοινὰ εἶναι πάντα νομίζειν ὀφείλει, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἔδει τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν κοινωνίας μετέχειν, εἰς δύο ὑποστάσεις διῃρημένους; νυνὶ δὲ ἐν μὲν τῷ λέγειν "πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστιν" πλεονεκτῶν ὁ υἱὸς τὸν πατέρα φαίνεται· ἐν δὲ τῷ φάσκειν μηδὲ τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ λόγου κύριον εἶναι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τούτου τὸν πατέρα ("ὁ" γὰρ "λόγος ὃν ἀκούετε" φησὶν "οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὸς ἀλλὰ τοῦ πέμψαντός με πατρός"), ἀφαιρεῖσθαι τὸν πατέρα τὰ ἴδια τοῦ παιδὸς δείκνυσιν. ἑκάτερα δὲ κατὰ τὴν Ἀστερίου οἴησιν οὐκ ἀκολούθως εἰρημένα φαίνεται. ἔδει γὰρ τὸν συμφωνοῦντα μὴ τὰ τῷ ἑτέρῳ προσόντα παρασπᾶσθαι δίκαια, πλεονεκτικὸν γὰρ τοῦτό γε, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἑκατέρῳ προσόντα κοινὰ εἶναι νομίζειν. ὥστε ὅταν μὲν εἰς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀποβλέπωμεν σάρκα, οὐχ ὥσπερ Ἀστέριος γέγραφεν, οὕτως εὑρήσομεν εἰρηκότα τὸν σωτῆρα "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν", οὐ γὰρ διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν λόγοις τε καὶ ἔργοις ἀκριβῆ συμφωνίαν, ὡς αὐτὸς γέγραφεν, ὁ σωτὴρ εἴρηκεν "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν". εἰ γὰρ τοῦτ' ἦν, πάντως ἂν ἔφη· ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν ἅπασιν πρὸς ἀλλήλους συμφωνοῦμεν. νυνὶ δὲ "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" ἔφη. οὐκοῦν εἰ ἐν ἐκείνοις ἀσυμφωνία τις ἦν, ἀνάγκη δὲ τὸν δεσπότην ἀληθεύειν, τὸν σωτῆρα ἀκριβῶς εἰδέναι προσήκει, ὅτι ἡνίκα ἂν "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" λέγῃ, τηνικαῦτα οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὃν ἀνείληφεν ἀποβλέπων τοῦτό φησιν, ἀλλ' εἰς τὸν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς προελθόντα λόγον. εἰ γάρ τις ἀσυμφωνία εἶναι δοκοίη, αὕτη ἀναφέρεσθαι εἰς τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀσθένειαν ὀφείλει, ἣν μὴ πρότερον ἔχων ἀνείληφεν ὁ λόγος. εἰ δὲ ἑνότης λέγοιτο, αὕτη τῷ λόγῳ διαφέρουσα φαίνεται. ὅθεν οὐ μόνον τὸ "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" εἰκότως ἔφη, ἀλλὰ κἀκεῖνο· "τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ μεθ' ὑμῶν εἰμι, Φίλιππε, καὶ λέγεις· δεῖξόν μοι τὸν πατέρα", δῆλον ὅτι οὐ τούτοις τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς, ἀλλὰ τοῖς νοητοῖς τὰ νοητὰ ὁρᾶν δυναμένοις. ἀόρατος γὰρ τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ὄμμασιν ὅ τε πατὴρ ὑπάρχει καὶ ὁ τούτου λόγος. οὐ διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν οὖν συμφωνίαν τοῦτ' ἔφη πρὸς Φίλιππον. 75 αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁμολογεῖ λέγων "ἐν ἐμοὶ ὁ πατὴρ κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί"· ὅτι δὲ τοῦτο οὐχ ἁπλῶς οὐδὲ ἀσκόπως εἴρηκεν, δῆλον καὶ ἀφ' ἑτέρας ἀποστολικῆς ῥήσεως· "εἷς" γὰρ ὁ εἰπὼν "κύριος, μία πίστις, ἓν βάπτισμα" "εἷς θεὸς" ἔφη "καὶ πατήρ, ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων καὶ διὰ πάντων καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν". ὁρᾷς ὅτι οὐδ' ἐνταῦθα ἀφίσταται τῆς συμφωνίας, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐνταῦθα τὸ αὐτὸ πέπονθεν. "εἷς" γὰρ εἰπὼν "κύριος" αὖθις "εἷς θεὸς" ἔφη, ἵνα ἡνίκα ἂν τοῦ ἑνὸς κυρίου μνημονεύῃ περιλαμβάνῃ καὶ τὸν πατέρα, ἡνίκα δ' ἂν περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς λέγῃ μὴ ἐκτὸς εἶναι τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ μαρτυρῇ. 76 εἰ δὲ καὶ βούλει καὶ ἑτέρας ἀκοῦσαι τοῦ αὐτοῦ προφητείας ἕνα ἡμῖν θεὸν βεβαιούσης, "ἐγὼ θεὸς" φησὶν "πρῶτος, καὶ εἰς τὰ ἐπερχόμενα ἐγώ εἰμι"· τὸ γὰρ ἐγὼ ἑνὸς προσώπου δεικτικόν ἐστιν, αἱ γὰρ δύο ῥήσεις ἓν ἡμῖν πρόσωπον σημαίνουσιν. "ἐγὼ" γὰρ εἰπὼν ἐπάγει καὶ τὸ "εἰμί", ὥστε διὰ τῶν δύο τοῦ λόγου μερῶν, ἀντωνυμίας τε καὶ ῥήματος, τὴν τῆς θεότητος μαρτυρεῖσθαι μονάδα. εἰ δὲ δέοιτο καὶ ἑτέρας μαρτυρίας, αὖθις τὸν αὐτὸν αὐτῷ παρέξομαι προφήτην λέγοντα "ἐγὼ πρῶτος καὶ ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα, καὶ πλὴν ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν θεός". εἰ ὑποστάσει διῃρημένον τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ πατρὸς ὡς υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου Ἀστέριος εἶναι οἴεται, ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης σαρκὸς ἣν δι' ἡμᾶς ἀνέλαβεν σκανδαλιζόμενος, δεικνύτω ἡμῖν τὸν ταῦτα λέγοντα· ἑνὸς γάρ ἐστιν κἀνταῦθα προσώπου ἡ λεγομένη ῥῆσις. τίς οὖν ἔστιν ὁ λέγων "οὐκ ἔστιν πλὴν ἐμοῦ θεός"; ἀκουέτω δὲ καὶ ἑτέρας προφητείας λεγούσης "οὐκ ἔστιν πλὴν ἐμοῦ δίκαιος καὶ σωτήρ". εἰ δύο θεοὺς εἶναι νομίζοι, ἀνάγκη αὐτὸν τὸν ἕτερον μὴ δίκαιον ὁμολογεῖν εἶναι μηδὲ σωτῆρα. εἰ δὲ οὐ δίκαιος οὐδὲ σωτήρ, πῶς ἔτι θεὸς εἶναι δύναται; ἕνα γὰρ ἀποφαίνεται δίκαιον καὶ σωτῆρα εἶναι. καὶ αὖθις "ἔμπροσθέν μου" φησὶν "οὐκ ἐγένετο ἄλλος, καὶ μετ' ἐμὲ οὐκ ἔσται, ἐγὼ θεός, καὶ οὐκ ἔσται παρὲξ ἐμοῦ σῴζων". εἰ δὲ βούλεται καὶ ἑτέρου προφητικοῦ ἀκοῦσαι ῥητοῦ, τάχα που πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ τοὺς ὁμοίως περὶ θεότητος