But, like a mighty wrestler, he will not relinquish his irresistible hold on us, and affirms in so many words, that “these names are the work of human thought and conception, and that, by the exercise of this operation of the mind by some, results are arrived at which no Apostle or Evangelist has taught.” And after this doughty onslaught he raises that sanctimonious voice of his, spitting out his foul abuse at us with a tongue well schooled to such language. “For,” says he, “to ascribe homonyms, drawn from analogy, to human thought and conception is the work of a mind that has lost all judicial sense, and that studies the words of the Lord with an enfeebled understanding and dishonest habit of thought.” Mercy on us! what a logical argument! how scientifically it proceeds to its conclusion! Who after this will dare to speak up for the cause of conception, when such a stench is poured forth from his mouth upon those who attempt speaking? I suppose, then, that we, who do attempt speaking, must forbear to examine his argument, for fear of his stirring up against us the cesspool of his abuse. And verily it is weak-minded80    ῏Η μικροψύχων κ.τ.λ. Oehler’s stopping here (and accent) is better than that of the Codices. i.e. ὑποκινήσειεν, ἢ κ.τ.λ. to let ourselves be irritated by childish absurdities. We will therefore allow our insolent adversary full liberty to indulge in his method as he will. But we will return to the Master’s argument, that thence too we may muster reinforcements for the truth. Eunomius has been reminded of “analogy” and has perceived “the homonyms to be derived from it.” Now where or from whom did he learn these terms? Not from Moses, not from the Prophets and Apostles, not from the Evangelists. It is impossible that he should have learned them from the teaching of any Scripture. How came he, then, to use them? The very word which describes this or that signification of a thought as analogy, is it not the invention of the thinking faculty of him who utters it81    In other words, analogy implies thought (λόγος).? How is it, then, that he fails to perceive that he is using the views he fights against as his allies in the war? For he makes war against our principle of words being formed by the operation of conception, and would endeavour to establish, by the aid of words formed on that very principle, that it is unlawful to use them. “It is not,” says he, “the teaching of any of the sacred writers.” To whom, then, of the ancients do you yourself ascribe the term “ungenerate,” and its being predicated of the essence of God? or is it allowable for you, when you want to establish some of your impious conclusions, to coin and invent terms to your own liking; but if anything is said by some one else in contravention of your impiety, to deprive your adversary of similar licence? Great indeed would be the power you would assume if you could make good your claim to such authority as this, that what you refuse to others should be allowable to you alone, and that what you yourself presume to do by virtue of it, you should prevent others from doing. You condemn, as by an edict, the doctrine that these names were applied to Christ as a result of conception, because none of the sacred writers have declared that they ought so to be applied. How, then, can you lay down the law that the Divine essence should be denoted by the word “ungenerate”—a term which none of the sacred writers can be shown to have handed down to us? For if this is the test of the right use of words, that only such shall be employed as the inspired word of Scripture shall authorize, the word “ungenerate” must be erased from your own writings, since none of the sacred writers has sanctioned the expression. But perhaps you accept it by reason of the sense that resides in it. Well, we ourselves in the same way accept the term “conception” by reason of the sense that resides in it. Accordingly we will either exclude both from use, or neither, and whichever alternative be adopted, we are equally masters of the field. For if the term “ungenerate” be altogether suppressed, all our adversaries’ clamour against the truth is suppressed along with it, and a doctrine worthy of the Only-begotten Son of God will shine forth, inasmuch as logical opposition can furnish no name82    i.e.no other name. See note on ᾽Αγέννητος, p. 100. to detract from the majesty of the Lord. But if both be retained, in that case also the truth will prevail, and we along with it, when we have altered the word “ungeneracy” from the substance, into a conception, of the Deity. But so long as he does not exclude the term “ungenerate” from his own writings, let our modern Pharisee admonish himself not to behold the mote that is in our eye, before he has cast out the beam that is in his own.

ἀλλ' οὐ μεθίησι καθάπερ οἱ δεινοὶ τῶν ἀγωνιστῶν τὴν ἄφυκτον ταύτην καθ' ἡμῶν λαβὴν καί φησιν οὑτωσὶ κατὰ λέξιν ὅτι « ταῦτα δι' ἐπινοίας ἀνθρωπίνης ἐστὶ τὰ ὀνόματα καὶ κατ' ἐπίνοιαν λέγεταί τινων, ἃ οὐδεὶς ἀποστόλων οὐδὲ εὐαγγελιστῶν ἐδίδαξε ». καὶ μετὰ τὴν ἄμαχον ταύτην ἐπιχείρησιν ἐπιφέρει τὴν ἱερὰν ἐκείνην φωνήν, τῇ πεπαιδευμένῃ τὰ τοιαῦτα γλώσσῃ τὴν δυσώδη πάλιν καθ' ἡμῶν λοιδορίαν ἐκπτύων. « τὸ γάρ τοι », φησί, « τὴν ἐξ ἀναλογίας ὁμωνυμίαν προφέρειν εἰς ἀνθρωπίνην ἐπίνοιαν, ψυχῆς ἔργον τὸν μὲν ἐρρωμένον νοῦν κατὰ δίκην παρῃρημένης, ἀρρώστῳ δὲ διανοίᾳ καὶ πεφωρημένῃ τινὶ συνηθείᾳ τοὺς τοῦ κυρίου λόγους ἐπισκοπούσης ». βαβαὶ τῆς διαλεκτικῆς ἀποδείξεως, ὡς τεχνικῶς ὁ λόγος αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸν σκοπὸν συμπεραίνεται. τίς ἂν ἔτι συσταίη τῷ κατ' ἐπίνοιαν λόγῳ, τοσαύτης ὀσμῆς ἐκ τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ τοῖς ἐπιχειροῦσί τι λέγειν προχεομένης; ἆρ' οὖν ἀφεκτέον καὶ ἡμῖν διὰ τοῦτο τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν τοῦ λόγου συνεξετάσεως, ὡς ἂν μὴ καὶ καθ' ἡμῶν τὴν ἀμάραν ταύτην τῆς λοιδορίας ὑποκινήσειεν; ἢ μικροψύχων ἐστὶ τὸ πρὸς τὰς νηπιώδεις παραφροσύνας ἀντιτραχύνεσθαι; οὐκοῦν συγχωρητέον τῷ ὑβριστῇ κεχρῆσθαι πρὸς τὸ δοκοῦν τῷ τρόπῳ. ἐπαναληπτέον δὲ τὸν ἐκείνου λόγον, ὡς ἂν κἀκεῖθεν γένοιτο συμμαχία πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν.
« Ἀναλογίας » ἐμνήσθη καὶ τὴν ἐκ ταύτης ὁμωνυμίαν ἐνόησε. πόθεν ταῦτα μαθὼν καὶ παρὰ τίνος τὰ ῥήματα; Μωϋσῆς οὐκ εἶπε, προφητῶν καὶ ἀποστόλων οὐκ ἤκουσεν, εὐαγγελισταὶ τὰς τοιαύτας φωνὰς σεσιγήκασιν: οὐδεμιᾶς ἔστι γραφῆς ταῦτα διδασκούσης μαθεῖν. πόθεν οὖν αὐτῷ τὸ οὕτως εἰπεῖν; ἆρ' οὐχὶ τῆς τοῦ εἰπόντος διανοίας εὕρημα ὁ τοιοῦτος λόγος ἐστὶν ὁ τὴν ποιὰν τοῦ νοήματος σημασίαν ἀναλογίαν προσαγορεύων; πῶς οὖν οὐ συνίησιν οἷς πολεμεῖ, τούτοις συμμάχοις πρὸς τὸν πόλεμον χρώμενος; πολεμεῖ δὲ τῷ κατ' ἐπίνοιαν λόγῳ αὐτὸς διὰ τῶν τῆς ἐπινοίας λόγων τὸ μὴ δεῖν κατ' ἐπίνοιάν τι λέγειν κατασκευάζων. ἀλλ' « οὐδείς », φησί, « τοῦτο τῶν ἁγίων ἐδίδαξεν ». σὺ δὲ εἰς τίνα τῶν ἀρχαίων ἀναφέρειν ἔχεις τὴν τῆς « ἀγεννησίας » φωνὴν καὶ ὅτι αὐτῆς κατηγορεῖται τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς οὐσίας, « μᾶλλον δὲ αὐτό ἐστι τὸ ἀγέννητον ἡ οὐσία »; ἢ σοὶ μὲν ἔξεστιν ἐν οἷς ἂν μέλλῃ τι τῶν ἀσεβῶν συμπεραίνεσθαι καινοτομεῖν τε καὶ παρευρίσκειν τὰς ἀρεσκούσας φωνάς, εἰ δέ τι πρὸς τὴν τῆς ἀσεβείας καθαίρεσιν παρ' ἑτέρου λέγοιτο, παραιρεῖσθαι τῆς ἐξουσίας τὸν ἀντιλέγοντα; μεγάλης τἂν εἴης τυραννίδος ἐπειλημμένος, εἰ ταύτην σεαυτῷ τὴν ἐξουσίαν κρατύνειας, ὡς ἅπερ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων κωλύεις, σοὶ ταῦτα ποιεῖν ἐξεῖναι μόνῳ καὶ ἅπερ αὐτὸς κατ' ἐξουσίαν τολμᾷς, τούτων ἀπείργειν τοὺς ἄλλους. διὰ προστάγματος ἀθετεῖς τὸ κατ' ἐπίνοιαν ἐπιλέγεσθαι ταῦτα τῷ Χριστῷ τὰ ὀνόματα, ὅτι μηδεὶς τῶν ἁγίων τὸ δεῖν οὕτω λέγεσθαι διετάξατο. πῶς οὖν τῇ τοῦ « ἀγεννήτου » φωνῇ νομοθετεῖς τὴν θείαν οὐσίαν χαρακτηρίζεσθαι, ἣν οὐδεὶς τῶν ἁγίων παραδεδωκὼς ἐπιδείκνυται; εἰ γὰρ οὗτος ὅρος τῆς τῶν ῥημάτων ὀρθότητος, τὸ μόνον ἐκεῖνα φθέγγεσθαι, ἅπερ ἂν ὁ θεόπνευστος λόγος τῆς γραφῆς ὑφηγήσηται, ἐξαλειπτέον ἂν εἴη τῶν συγγραμμάτων σου τὸ « ἀγέννητον », μηδενὸς τῶν ἁγίων τὴν φωνὴν ταύτην « θεσμοθετήσαντος ». ἀλλὰ διὰ τὸν ἐγκείμενον τῷ προσρήματι τούτῳ νοῦν παραδέχῃ τὴν λέξιν. καὶ ἡμεῖς ὡσαύτως διὰ τὴν ἐγκειμένην ἔννοιαν τὴν φωνὴν τῆς ἐπινοίας παρεδεξάμεθα. οὐκοῦν ἢ τὰ δύο τῆς χρήσεως ἐξαιρήσομεν ἢ οὐθέτερον, ὅ τι δ' ἂν γένηται τούτων, δι' ἑκατέρων νικήσομεν. σιωπηθείσης μὲν γὰρ καθόλου τῆς « ἀγεννησίας », πᾶσα συγκατεσβέσθη τῶν ἐναντίων κατὰ τῆς ἀληθείας φωνὴ καὶ « ἡ » πρέπουσα τῷ μονογενεῖ θεῷ δόξα παρὰ πάντων ἐκλάμψει, μηδενὸς ὄντος ὀνόματος τοῦ ἐξ ἀντιδιαιρέσεως τὸ μεγαλεῖον τοῦ κυρίου κατασμικρύνοντος. εἰ δὲ μένοι ἀμφότερα, καὶ οὕτως ἐπικρατήσει μεθ' ἡμῶν ἡ ἀλήθεια, εἰς τὴν ἐπίνοιαν ἐκ τῆς οὐσίας μετατεθέντος τοῦ τῆς « ἀγεννησίας » ὀνόματος. ἀλλ' ἕως οὐκ ἐξαιρεῖ τῶν ἰδίων λόγων τὴν τοῦ ἀγεννήτου φωνήν, νουθετησάτω ἑαυτὸν ὁ καθ' ἡμᾶς Φαρισαῖος μὴ πρότερον πρὸς τὸ ἡμέτερον διαβλέπειν κάρφος, πρὶν τὴν ἐγκειμένην αὐτῷ δοκὸν ἀποβαλεῖν τῶν ὀμμάτων.