11

since he is incorruptible? Therefore, if something is of a corruptible nature, does it cut its essence in begetting and is begotten by itself and begets itself and becomes its own father and son, 64 because it is not incorruptible? But if these things are so, Abraham, being corruptible, did not beget Ishmael and Isaac, but begot himself through both the handmaid and the lawful wife or, according to the other monstrousness of the argument, he divided his own substance into those who were born; and first, at the birth through Hagar, being divided into two parts, he becomes Ishmael in one of the halves and in the other remains half an Abraham, and after these things the remainder of Abraham's substance, being divided off, produced Isaac. Therefore a fourth part of Abraham's substance was divided for the twofold birth of Isaac, so that 65 an eighth part came to be in each of his grandchildren. How could anyone mince into minute parts the eighth part among the twelve patriarchs, or among the seventy-five souls with whom Jacob went down into Egypt? And why do I say these things, when it is necessary to refute the foolishness of what is said starting from the first man; for if it belongs only to the incorruptible not to divide its nature in begetting, but Adam was corruptible, to whom it was said that *You are earth and to earth you shall return*, he certainly divided his own substance, being cut, according to Eunomius’ argument, into those born from him; but with the multitude of those being born afterward, since the portion of substance found in each one is necessarily divided according to the number of those being born, the substance of Adam is spent before the hypostasis of Abraham, having been scattered among the countless myriads of those who came from him through those minute and indivisible particles, and a remnant of substance from Adam is no longer found to be divided into Abraham and those from him, since it was already consumed among the countless myriads of those who came before him through the fine division of the portions of nature. 66 See the foolishness of one who does not know what he says nor about what he is making firm assertions. For in saying: “since he is incorruptible, he neither divides his substance nor begets himself nor becomes his own father,” he granted that we should consequently understand those things to happen in the begetting of everything subject to corruption, which he insisted do not belong to the incorruptible alone. But although there are many other things which could show the futility of what is said, I think what has been said is sufficient for a demonstration of the foolishness.

This is certainly admitted by those who know to look to what follows, that by attributing incorruptibility to the Father alone, he constructs all things conceived after the Father to be corruptible by contrast to the incorruptible, so as not even to prove the Son to be 67 free from corruption. If therefore he contrasts the Son with the incorruptible, not only does he define him to be corruptible, but he also constructs all the other things concerning him, which he says do not belong to the incorruptible alone. For necessarily if the Father alone neither begets himself nor is begotten by himself, everything that is not incorruptible both begets itself and is begotten by itself and becomes its own father and son, being adapted to either state of the substance. For if being incorruptible belongs to the Father alone, and it is proper to the incorruptible not to be these things, then the Son is certainly not incorruptible according to the argument of the heresy, and all these things certainly pertain to him: the dividing of the substance, the begetting of himself and being begotten by himself, the becoming his own father and son.

68 Or perhaps it is futile to dwell at greater length on foolish things, but let us move on to the next part of the argument. For he adds to these things: not needing matter or parts or natural instruments in his making; for he is in need of nothing. This thought, even if Eunomius sets it forth rather weakly in its wording, we nevertheless do not reject from piety. For having learned that *He spoke, and they were made; he commanded, and they were created*, we know that the Word is the maker of matter, immediately working together

11

ἐπειδή ἐστιν ἄφθαρτος; οὐκοῦν εἴ τίς ἐστι φθαρτῆς φύσεως, τέμνει τὴν οὐσίαν ἐν τῷ γεννᾶν καὶ ὑφ' ἑαυτοῦ γεννᾶται καὶ ἑαυτὸν γεννᾷ καὶ πατὴρ καὶ υἱὸς αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ 64 γίνεται, διότι ἄφθαρτος οὐκ ἔστιν; εἰ δὲ ταῦτα οὕτως ἔχει, οὐκ ἐγέννησε διὰ τὸ φθαρτὸς εἶναι ὁ Ἀβραὰμ τὸν Ἰσμαήλ τε καὶ Ἰσαάκ, ἀλλ' ἑαυτὸν διά τε τῆς παιδίσκης καὶ τῆς νομίμου γαμετῆς ἐτεκνώσατο ἤ, κατὰ τὴν ἑτέραν τερατείαν τοῦ λόγου, ἐμέρισεν εἰς τοὺς γεννηθέντας ἑαυτοῦ τὴν οὐσίαν· καὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἐπὶ τοῦ διὰ τῆς Ἄγαρ τόκου εἰς δύο τμή ματα διαιρεθεὶς ἐν τῷ ἑνὶ τῶν ἡμιτόμων γίνεται Ἰσμαὴλ καὶ ἐν τῷ ἑτέρῳ διαμένει ἥμισυς Ἀβραάμ, μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ τὸ λειπόμενον τῆς τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ οὐσίας ἀπομερισθὲν τὸν Ἰσαὰκ ὑπεστήσατο. οὐκοῦν τὸ τέταρτον τῆς τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ οὐσίας εἰς τὸν διπλοῦν τόκον τοῦ Ἰσαὰκ ἐμερίσθη, ὥστε 65 τὸ ὄγδοον ἐν ἑκατέρῳ τῶν ἐγγόνων γενέσθαι. πῶς ἄν τις ἐν τοῖς δώδεκα πατριάρχαις κερματίσειεν εἰς μέρη δια λεπτύνων τὸ ὄγδοον ἢ ἐν ταῖς πέντε καὶ ἑβδομήκοντα ψυ χαῖς, ἐν αἷς ὁ Ἰακὼβ κατῆλθεν εἰς Αἴγυπτον; καὶ τί ταῦτα λέγω, δέον ἀπὸ τοῦ πρώτου ἀνθρώπου διελέγξαι τῶν λεγομένων τὴν ἄνοιαν· εἰ γὰρ μόνου τοῦ ἀφθάρτου ἐστὶν μὴ μερίζειν τὴν φύσιν ἐν τῷ γεννᾶν, φθαρτὸς δὲ ὁ Ἀδάμ, πρὸς ὃν ἐρρήθη ὅτι Γῆ εἶ καὶ εἰς γῆν ἀπελεύσῃ, ἐμέριζε πάντως ἑαυτοῦ τὴν οὐσίαν, κατὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ Εὐνομίου εἰς τοὺς παρ' ἑαυτοῦ γεννωμένους τεμνόμενος· τῷ δὲ πλήθει τῶν ἐπιγινομένων, ἀναγκαίως τοῦ εὑρισκομένου παρ' ἑκάστῳ τῆς οὐσίας τμήματος κατὰ τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν τικτομένων διαιρουμένου, προδαπανᾶται τῆς τοῦ Ἀβραὰμ ὑποστάσεως ἡ τοῦ Ἀδὰμ οὐσία, ταῖς ἀπείροις τῶν ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγονότων μυριάσι διὰ τῶν λεπτῶν τε καὶ ἀτόμων ἐκείνων μορίων σκεδασθεῖσα, καὶ οὐκέτι ἐνευρίσκεται λείψανον οὐσίας τὸ ἐκ τοῦ Ἀδὰμ εἰς τὸν Ἀβραὰμ καὶ τοὺς ἐξ αὐτοῦ μεριζόμενον, προαναλωθείσης ἐν ταῖς ἀπείροις τῶν πρὸ αὐτοῦ γεγονότων μυριάσι διὰ τῆς λεπτομερείας τῶν τμημάτων τῆς φύσεως. 66 Ὁρᾶτε τὴν ἄνοιαν τοῦ μὴ εἰδότος ἃ λέγει μηδὲ περὶ τίνων διαβεβαιοῦται. ἐν γὰρ τῷ εἰπεῖν· ἐπειδὴ ἄφθαρτός ἐστιν, οὔτε μερίζει τὴν οὐσίαν οὔτε ἑαυτὸν γεννᾷ οὔτε ἑαυτοῦ πατὴρ γίνεται, ἔδωκεν ἐπὶ παντὸς τοῦ φθορᾷ ὑπο κειμένου ἐκ τοῦ ἀκολούθου ἐκεῖνα νοεῖν ἐπὶ τῆς γεννήσεως συμβαίνειν, ὅσα μόνῳ τῷ ἀφθάρτῳ μὴ προσεῖναι διϊσχυρί σατο. ἀλλὰ πολλῶν ὄντων καὶ ἄλλων τῶν δυναμένων ἐπι δεῖξαι τὴν ματαιότητα τῶν λεγομένων, ἀρκεῖν οἴομαι πρὸς ἀπόδειξιν τῆς ἀνοίας τὰ εἰρημένα.

Τοῦτο δὲ πάντως προωμολόγηται παρὰ τοῖς ἐπισταμένοις πρὸς τὸ ἀκόλουθον βλέπειν, ὅτι μόνῳ τῷ πατρὶ προσμαρτυρήσας τὸ ἄφθαρτον πάντα τὰ μετὰ τὸν πατέρα νοούμενα τῇ πρὸς τὸ ἄφθαρτον ἀντιδιαστολῇ φθαρτὰ εἶναι κατασκευάζει, ὡς μηδὲ τὸν υἱὸν 67 φθορᾶς ἀποδεικνύειν ἐλεύθερον. εἰ οὖν ἀντιδιαστέλλει τὸν υἱὸν τῷ ἀφθάρτῳ, οὐ μόνον φθαρτὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι διορίζεται, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ ἄλλα πάντα περὶ αὐτοῦ κατασκευάζει, ὅσα μόνῳ τῷ ἀφθάρτῳ μὴ προσεῖναι λέγει. ἀναγκαίως γὰρ εἰ μόνος ὁ πατὴρ οὔτε ἑαυτὸν γεννᾷ οὔτε ὑφ' ἑαυτοῦ γεν νᾶται, πᾶν ὃ μὴ ἄφθαρτόν ἐστι καὶ ἑαυτὸ γεννᾷ καὶ ὑφ' ἑαυτοῦ γεννᾶται καὶ πατὴρ καὶ υἱὸς αὐτὸ ἑαυτοῦ γίνεται, πρὸς ἑκάτερα τῆς οὐσίας μεθαρμοζόμενον. εἰ γὰρ μόνου τοῦ πατρός ἐστι τὸ ἄφθαρτον εἶναι, ἴδιον δὲ τοῦ ἀφθάρτου τὸ μὴ ταῦτα εἶναι, οὔτε ἄφθαρτος πάντως ὁ υἱὸς κατὰ τὸν τῆς αἱρέσεως λόγον καὶ ταῦτα πάντα περὶ αὐτὸν πάντως ἐστί, τὸ μερίζεσθαι τὴν οὐσίαν, τὸ τίκτειν ἑαυτὸν καὶ ὑφ' ἑαυτοῦ γεννᾶσθαι, τὸ πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ γίνεσθαι.

68 Ἢ μάταιον ἴσως ἐπὶ πλέον ἐμφιλοχωρεῖν τοῖς ἀνοή τοις, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ ἐφεξῆς τοῦ λόγου μετέλθωμεν. προσ τίθησι γὰρ τούτοις· οὐκ ἐν τῷ ποιεῖν ὕλης ἢ μερῶν ἢ φυσικῶν ὀργάνων προσδεόμενος· ἔστι γὰρ παντὸς ἀπροσδεής. τοῦτο τὸ νόημα, εἰ καὶ ἀτονώ τερον κατὰ τὴν λέξιν ἐκτίθεται ὁ Εὐνόμιος, ὅμως τῆς εὐσε βείας οὐκ ἀποβάλλομεν. μαθόντες γὰρ ὅτι Αὐτὸς εἶπε καὶ ἐγενήθησαν, αὐτὸς ἐνετείλατο καὶ ἐκτίσθησαν, οἴδαμεν ὅτι ποιητής ἐστι τῆς ὕλης ὁ λόγος, εὐθὺς συναπεργαζό