35

having taken refuge and as if in a fortress having fenced himself with Jewish hardness of heart, he put forward the denial of the son of God. 2.19.1 Listen then to what sort of words he uses, writing thus word for word: “Whom then does Asterius think the one saying ‘I am who I am’ to be, the son or the father? For he said there were two hypostases, of the father and of the son, looking to the human flesh which the Word of God assumed and because of it imagining thus, thus separating the son of God from the father, as someone might separate a son of man from his natural father. 2.19.2 And he adds next: If then he will say that the father, separating himself from the son, said these things to Moses, he will confess that the son is not God. For how is it possible for the one saying ‘I am who I am’ not to agree that in contradistinction to what is not, he says that he is the one who is? But if one should say that the son, divided in hypostasis, says this, ‘I am who I am,’ it will be thought that the same is said again concerning the father; but each of these is impious. 2.19.3 And again, attempting to show that the father and the son are one, he writes thus: For he himself confesses, saying, ‘the father is in me and I am in the father’; and that he has not said this simply nor without purpose, is clear also from another apostolic saying; for he who said ‘one Lord, one faith, one baptism’ 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 the 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 might include the father also, and whenever he speaks about the father he might testify that the Word of God is not outside.” 2.19.4 Marcellus, having said these things, next brings together more scriptures from the 2.19.5 Old Testament as proof that God does not have a son. For saying that God is an indivisible monad, he maintained that the same is father and the same is son, writing in this manner: “What then? If, not attending to the spirit, we should think the monad to be indivisible in power, shall we not sin, since the Word clearly teaches us, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God 2.19.6 and him only shall you serve’? And he preaches the same thing also through the Gospel according to Mark; for when a certain scribe came to him and asked, which was the first of the commandments, he answered him, saying thus: ‘First of all: Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord, and you shall love the Lord your God with all your soul and with all your strength. This is the first; and the second is like it: You shall love 2.19.7 your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these. And the scribe said to him: Well, teacher, you have said in truth that God is one and there is none besides him.’ 2.19.8 But the scribe, seeming to have learned piety through the law, is seen praising the saying of the savior, ‘Hear, O Israel,’ saying, ‘the Lord your God is one’ and confirming by an oath that it was well said; for he says, ‘In truth you have said that God is one and there is no other besides him.’ But those who boast that they know the mysteries of the new testament, these wish to fabricate a second God separated from the father in hypostasis and in power. 2.19.9 To these things he adds, constructing the argument that God is one and that there is no son, through these words: That the divine scripture knows to call the monad Lord and God, has already been made clear from what has been said before, through which words God spoke to his servant Moses: ‘And God said again to Moses: Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel: The Lord, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ Do you see how, showing us one 2.19.10 person here, he addresses the same as Lord and God? And again likewise the scripture says, ‘And the Lord spoke all these words, saying: I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods besides me.’ Do you hear how through the

35

καταφυγὼν καὶ ὥσπερ ἐν ὀχυρώματι ἑαυτὸν τῇ Ἰουδαϊκῇ περιφράξας σκληροκαρδίᾳ, τὴν ἄρνησιν προὐβάλλετο τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ. 2.19.1 ἐπάκουσον γοῦν οἵαις κέχρηται φωναῖς, ὧδε γράφων κατὰ λέξιν τίνα τοίνυν τὸν «ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν» λέγοντα Ἀστέριος εἶναι οἴεται, τὸν υἱὸν ἢ τὸν πατέρα; δύο γὰρ ὑποστάσεις, εἰς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἣν ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος ἀνείληφεν σάρκα ἀφορῶν καὶ δι' αὐτὴν οὕτω φανταζόμενος, πατρός τε καὶ υἱοῦ ἔφησεν εἶναι, οὕτω τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ χωρίζων τοῦ πατρός, ὡς καὶ υἱὸν ἀν θρώπου χωρίσειεν ἄν τις τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν πατρός. 2.19.2 καὶ ἐπιλέγει ἑξῆς εἰ τοίνυν τὸν πατέρα χωρίζοντα ἑαυτὸν τοῦ υἱοῦ πρὸς τὸν Μωσέα ταῦτ' εἰρηκέναι φήσει, οὐκ εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν θεὸν ὁμο λογήσει. πῶς γὰρ ἐγχωρεῖ τὸν λέγοντα «ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν» μὴ συνομολογεῖν ὅτι κατὰ ἀντιδιαστολὴν τοῦ μὴ ὄντος ὁ ὢν ἑαυτὸν εἶναί φησιν; εἰ δὲ τὸν υἱὸν ὑποστάσει διῃρημένον τοῦτο φάσκοι λέγειν τὸ «ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν», ταὐτὸν αὖθις περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς λέγειν νομισθήσεται· ἑκάτερον δὲ τούτων ἀσεβές. 2.19.3 καὶ πάλιν ἓν εἶναι τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν ἐπιδεῖξαι πειρώμενος, οὕτως γράφει 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 πάν των 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. 2.19.4 ταῦτα Μάρκελλος εἰπὼν ἑξῆς πλείους συνάγει γραφὰς ἀπὸ τῆς πα2.19.5 λαιᾶς διαθήκης εἰς ἀπόδειξιν τοῦ μὴ ὑπάρχειν υἱὸν τῷ θεῷ. μονάδα γοῦν εἶναι ἀδιαίρετον τὸν θεὸν φάσκων, τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι πατέρα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι υἱὸν παρίστη, γράφων τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον τί οὖν; εἰ μὴ τῷ πνεύματι προσέχοντες δυνάμει ἀδιαί ρετον τὴν μονάδα εἶναι νομίζοιμεν, ἆρα οὐχ ἁμαρτησόμεθα, σαφῶς τοῦ λόγου διδάσκοντος ἡμᾶς «κύριον τὸν θεόν σου προσ2.19.6 κυνήσεις καὶ αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύσεις»; τὸ αὐτὸ δὲ καὶ διὰ τοῦ κατὰ Μᾶρκον Εὐαγγελίου κηρύττει· ἑνὸς γάρ τινος γραμματέως προσελθόντος αὐτῷ καὶ πυνθανομένου, τίς εἴη πρώτη τῶν ἐντο λῶν, ἀπεκρίνατο πρὸς αὐτὸν οὕτως εἰπὼν «πάντων πρῶτον· ἄκουε, Ἰσραήλ, κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν κύριος εἷς ἐστιν, καὶ ἀγαπή σεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος σου. αὕτη πρώτη· καὶ δευτέρα ὁμοία ταύτῃ· ἀγαπήσεις 2.19.7 τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν. μείζων τούτων ἄλλη ἐντολὴ οὐκ ἔστιν. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ γραμματεύς· καλῶς, διδάσκαλε, ἐπ' ἀλη θείας εἶπας ὅτι εἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν πλὴν αὐτοῦ». 2.19.8 ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν γραμματεὺς διὰ τοῦ νόμου τὴν θεοσέβειαν μεμαθη κέναι δοκῶν, ἐπαινῶν τὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος ῥητὸν φαίνεται «ἄκουε, Ἰσραήλ», λέγοντος «κύριος ὁ θεός σου εἷς ἐστιν» καὶ ὅρκῳ καλῶς εἰρῆσθαι πιστούμενος· «ἐπ' ἀληθείας» γάρ φησιν «εἶπας ὅτι εἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ». οἱ δὲ τὰ τῆς νέας διαθήκης αὐχοῦντες εἰδέναι μυστήρια, οὗτοι καὶ δεύτερον ἀναπλάττειν θεὸν βούλονται ὑποστάσει καὶ δυνάμει χωριζό μενον τοῦ πατρός. 2.19.9 τούτοις προστίθησιν κατασκευάζων ὅτι εἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς καὶ ὅτι μή ἐστιν υἱὸς διὰ τούτων ὅτι δὲ τὴν μονάδα κύριον καὶ θεὸν οἶδεν καλεῖν ἡ θεία γραφή, ἤδη καὶ ἐκ τῶν προειρημένων δῆλον γέγονεν, δι' ὧν πρὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ θεράποντα Μωσέα ὁ θεὸς ἔφη «εἶπεν δὲ ὁ θεὸς πάλιν πρὸς Μωσέα· οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ· κύριος ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν, ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραὰμ καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰσαὰκ καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰακώβ, ἀπέσταλκέν με πρὸς ὑμᾶς». ὁρᾷς ὅπως ἓν ἐπιδεικνὺς ἡμῖν 2.19.10 ἐνταῦθα πρόσωπον τὸ αὐτὸ κύριον καὶ θεὸν προσαγορεύει. αὖθίς τε ὁμοίως ἡ γραφὴ λέγει «καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πάντας τοὺς λό γους τούτους λέγων· ἐγὼ κύριος ὁ θεός σου, ὁ ἐξαγαγών σε ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, ἐξ οἴκου δουλείας. οὐκ ἔσονταί σοι θεοὶ ἕτεροι πλὴν ἐμοῦ»· ἀκούεις ὅπως διὰ τῆς