13

The same evangelist establishes his hypostasis by adding, "John bears witness to him and cried out, saying: This was he who comes after me, who was made before me, because he was first of me. Because from his 1.20.14 fullness we have all received." But although John shouts that "he was first" of him, the new Sabellius does not listen. And yet according to the flesh John the Baptist preceded the Savior's birth; how then is it testified, that he was made first of him? For in his birth according to the flesh the Savior was not 1.20.15 first of him; therefore, insofar as he was the only-begotten of God he was "first" of John and "was made before" him. Do these things then allow to be referred to the Father and God of all, or to a Word without being and without hypostasis in God, being the same as God? And how would it be possible for "he was made before me" to be said about a non-subsistent Word? Who would be so mad as to think that John the Baptist said concerning the God of all, "he was made before me" and "because he was first of me"? 1.20.16 Therefore through these things it has been shown that the one of whom theology speaks pre-existed the birth of John and was made before him, and it is established that he existed and was named not only as Word but also as God and Light and Only-begotten before the incarnate presence. 5. From where did the evangelist have this knowledge? He himself will declare, saying next "The only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him." You see from whom he learned the theo1.20.17logy of the Son. For not Moses says this, nor any of the prophets after Moses, nor indeed any of the angels or the greater powers, but "the only-begotten Son himself declared this." Therefore the invisible God did not declare it, but the only-begotten Son, having become visible, made the declaration concerning the Father to men, being clearly other than the invisible God. But he also pre-existed not in the thought of the Father, as it seemed to Marcellus, but in his bosom; just as indeed the Savior has promised us to rest in the bosom of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, so also the Son was "in the bosom of the Father," not being one and the same as the Father, since neither will we be the same 1.20.18 as the holy fathers. But indeed, observe in these things, how after once naming him Word and proclaiming him God and calling him Light and saying he is Only-begotten and confessing him Son of God, he no longer names him Word, but henceforth he also relates that the Savior did not call himself Word, but Son and Only-begotten and Light and Life and Truth and countless other things, just as it is possible to hear him teaching somewhere as follows: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish," and again "For God did not send the Son into the 1.20.19 world, to judge the world," and again "but he who does not believe is already judged, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God." And here again God was giving and "sending the Son as Savior of the world," and he was being sent, being clearly other than the one sending. Therefore it seems to me that in the following, as if to Marcellus himself and to those who are jealous of the Son's nature, it was written that our Savior himself said: "Is it not written in 1.20.20 the law that I said: 'You are gods'? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said: 'I am the Son of God'?" Do you hear how many times the Savior himself named himself not Word, but Son, and called himself Only-begotten, 1.20.21 and how he taught that he had been sent and consecrated by the Father before being sent, and how he shames those who hesitate to confess him Son of God by teaching from the divine Scripture that not only sons of God but also gods, men mortal by nature, were called; wherefore one ought not to think it to be blasphemous to confess1.20.22 as both Son of God and God "him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world." What then should he suffer, the one who after so many voices

13

ὑπόστασιν αὐτοῦ συνίστησιν ὁ αὐτὸς εὐαγγελιστὴς ἐπιφέρων «Ἰωάννης μαρτυρεῖ περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ κέκραγεν λέγων· οὗτος ἦν ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος, ὃς ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν, ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν. ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος 1.20.14 αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς πάντες ἐλάβομεν». ἀλλὰ βοῶντος Ἰωάννου ὅτι «πρῶτος ἦν» αὐτοῦ, οὐκ ἀκούει ὁ νέος Σαβέλλιος. καίτοι κατὰ σάρκα προῆγεν τοῦ σωτῆρος τὴν γένεσιν ὁ βαπτιστὴς Ἰωάννης· πῶς οὖν μαρτύρεται, ὅτι πρῶτος αὐτοῦ γέγονεν; τῇ μὲν γὰρ κατὰ σάρκα γενέσει οὐκ ἦν 1.20.15 πρῶτος αὐτοῦ ὁ σωτήρ· οὐκοῦν καθ' ὃ μονογενὴς ἦν τοῦ θεοῦ «πρῶτος» ἦν Ἰωάννου καὶ «ἔμπροσθεν» αὐτοῦ «γέγονεν». ἆρ' οὖν ἐπιδέχεται ταῦτα ἐπὶ τὸν πατέρα καὶ θεὸν τῶν ὅλων ἀναφέρεσθαι, ἢ ἐπὶ ἀνούσιον καὶ ἀνυπόστατον ἐν τῷ θεῷ λόγον τὸν αὐτὸν ὄντα τῷ θεῷ; καὶ πῶς ἂν εἴη δυνατὸν περὶ τοῦ μὴ ὑφεστῶτος λόγου λέγεσθαι τὸ «ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν»; τίς δ' οὕτως ἂν μανείη, ὡς νομίσαι Ἰωάννην τὸν βαπτιστὴν περὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν ὅλων εἰρηκέναι τὸ «ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν» καὶ «ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν»; 1.20.16 οὐκοῦν δέδεικται διὰ τούτων προϋπάρχων τῆς Ἰωάννου γενέσεως ὁ θεολογούμενος καὶ ἔμπροσθεν αὐτοῦ γεγονώς, συνέστη τε οὐ μόνον λόγος ἀλλὰ καὶ θεὸς καὶ φῶς καὶ μονογενὴς πρὸ τῆς ἐνσάρκου παρουσίας ὑπάρχων τε καὶ ὠνομασμένος. εʹ. τούτων δὲ πόθεν ἡ γνῶσις τῷ εὐαγγελιστῇ, αὐτὸς δηλώσει λέγων ἑξῆς «ὁ μονογενὴς υἱὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρός, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο». ὁρᾷς παρὰ τίνος μεμάθηκεν τοῦ υἱοῦ τὴν θεο1.20.17 λογίαν. οὐ γὰρ Μωσῆς φησιν οὐδὲ προφητῶν τις τῶν μετὰ Μωσέα οὐδέ γε ἀγγέλων τις ἢ τῶν κρειττόνων δυνάμεων, ἀλλ' αὐτὸς «ὁ μονογενὴς υἱὸς τοῦτ' ἐξηγήσατο». οὐκοῦν ὁ μὲν ἀόρατος θεὸς οὐκ ἐξηγήσατο, ὁ δὲ μονογενὴς υἱὸς ὁρατὸς γενόμενος τὴν περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀνθρώποις ἐξήγησιν ἐποιήσατο, ἕτερος ὢν δηλαδὴ παρὰ τὸν ἀόρατον θεόν. ἀλλὰ καὶ προϋπάρχων ἦν οὐκ ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ τοῦ πατρός, ὡς ἐδόκει Μαρκέλλῳ, ἀλλ' ἐν τοῖς κόλποις αὐτοῦ· ὥσπερ δὴ ἡμῖν ἐπήγγελται ὁ σωτὴρ εἰς κόλπους Ἀβραὰμ καὶ Ἰσαὰκ καὶ Ἰακὼβ διαναπαύσασθαι, οὕτως καὶ ὁ υἱὸς «εἰς τὸν κόλπον» ἦν «τοῦ πατρός», οὐχ εἷς καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς ὢν τῷ πατρί, ἐπεὶ μηδὲ ἡμεῖς οἱ αὐτοὶ 1.20.18 ἐσόμεθα τοῖς ἁγίοις πατράσιν. ἀλλὰ γὰρ ἐπὶ τούτοις τήρει, ὅπως μετὰ τὸ ἅπαξ ὀνομάσαι λόγον καὶ θεὸν τὸν αὐτὸν ἀνειπεῖν καὶ φῶς ἀποκαλέσαι καὶ μονογενῆ φάναι καὶ υἱὸν θεοῦ ὁμολογῆσαι, οὐκέτι λόγον ὀνομάζει, ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸν λοιπὸν ἱστορεῖ τὸν σωτῆρα οὐ λόγον ἑαυτὸν ἀποκαλοῦντα, ἀλλὰ υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ καὶ φῶς καὶ ζωὴν καὶ ἀλήθειαν καὶ ἄλλα μυρία, ὥσπερ οὖν ἀκοῦσαι πάρεστιν αὐτοῦ ὧδέ πη διδάσκοντος «οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται», καὶ πάλιν «οὐ γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν εἰς τὸν 1.20.19 κόσμον, ἵνα κρίνῃ τὸν κόσμον», καὶ αὖθις «ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται, ὅτι οὐ πεπίστευκεν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ». καὶ ἐνταῦθα πάλιν ὁ μὲν θεὸς ἐδίδου καὶ «ἀπέστελλεν τὸν υἱὸν σωτῆρα τοῦ κόσμου», ὁ δὲ ἀπεστέλλετο ἕτερος ὢν δηλαδὴ παρὰ τὸν ἀποστέλλοντα. διό μοι δοκεῖ διὰ τῶν ἑξῆς ὡς πρὸς αὐτὸν Μάρκελλον καὶ πρὸς τοὺς διαφθονουμένους τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ φύσει ἀναγεγράφθαι αὐτὸς ὁ σωτὴρ ἡμῶν εἰρηκὼς «οὐκ ἔστιν γεγραμμένον ἐν 1.20.20 τῷ νόμῳ ὅτι ἐγὼ εἶπα· θεοί ἐστε; εἰ ἐκείνους εἶπεν θεοὺς πρὸς οὓς ὁ λόγος ἐγένετο τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ οὐ δύναται λυθῆναι ἡ γραφή, ὃν ὁ πατὴρ ἡγίασεν καὶ ἀπέστειλεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι βλασφημεῖς, ὅτι εἶπον· υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ εἰμί». ἀκούεις ὁσάκις αὐτὸς ὁ σωτὴρ ἑαυτὸν οὐ λόγον, ἀλλὰ υἱὸν ὠνόμασεν καὶ μονογενῆ προσεῖπεν, 1.20.21 ὅπως δὲ ἀπεστάλθαι ἑαυτὸν καὶ ἡγιάσθαι πρὸ τοῦ ἀποσταλῆναι ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐδίδασκεν, καὶ ὡς τοὺς ὀκνοῦντας υἱὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν τοῦ θεοῦ δυσωπεῖ διδάσκων ἐκ τῆς θείας γραφῆς ὡς οὐ μόνον υἱοὶ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ καὶ θεοὶ θνητοὶ τὴν φύσιν ἄνδρες ἐκλήθησαν· διὸ μὴ χρῆναι νομίζειν βλάσφημον εἶναι τὸ καὶ υἱὸν θεοῦ καὶ θεὸν ὁμολο1.20.22 γεῖν «ὃν ὁ πατὴρ ἡγίασεν καὶ ἀπέστειλεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον». τί οὖν ἐχρῆν παθεῖν τὸν μετὰ τὰς τοσαύτας φωνὰς