§10. He explains the phrase “The Lord created Me,” and the argument about the origination of the Son, the deceptive character of Eunomius’ reasoning, and the passage which says, “My glory will I not give to another,” examining them from different points of view.

But of course they bring forward the passage in the book of Proverbs which says, “The Lord created Me as the beginning of His ways, for His works313    Prov. viii. 22 (LXX.). The versions of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus (to one or more of which perhaps §9 refers), all render the Hebrew by ἐκτήσατο (“possessed”), not by ἔκτισε (“created”). But Gregory may be referring to mss. of the LXX. version which read ἐκτήσατο. It is clear from what follows that Mr. Gwatkin is hardly justified in his remark (Studies of Arianism, p. 69), that “the whole discussion on Prov. viii. 22 (LXX.), Κύριος ἔκτισέ με, κ.τ.λ., might have been avoided by a glance at the original.” The point of the controversy might have been changed, but that would have been all. Gregory seems to feel that ἐκτήσατο requires an explanation, though he has one ready..” Now it would require a lengthy discussion to explain fully the real meaning of the passage: still it would be possible even in a few words to convey to well-disposed readers the thought intended. Some of those who are accurately versed in theology do say this, that the Hebrew text does not read “created,” and we have ourselves read in more ancient copies “possessed” instead of “created.” Now assuredly “possession” in the allegorical language of the Proverbs marks that slave Who for our sakes “took upon Him the form of a slave314    Phil. ii. 7..” But if any one should allege in this passage the reading which prevails in the Churches, we do not reject even the expression “created.” For this also in allegorical language is intended to connote the “slave,” since, as the Apostle tells us, “all creation is in bondage315    Rom. viii. 20–1..” Thus we say that this expression, as well as the other, admits of an orthodox interpretation. For He Who for our sakes became like as we are, was in the last days truly created,—He Who in the beginning being Word and God afterwards became Flesh and Man. For the nature of flesh is created: and by partaking in it in all points like as we do, yet without sin, He was created when He became man: and He was created “after God316    Eph. iv. 24.,” not after man, as the Apostle says, in a new manner and not according to human wont. For we are taught that this “new man” was created—albeit of the Holy Ghost and of the power of the Highest—whom Paul, the hierophant of unspeakable mysteries, bids us to “put on,” using two phrases to express the garment that is to be put on, saying in one place, “Put on the new man which after God is created317    Eph. iv. 24.,” and in another, “Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ318    Rom. xiii. 14..” For thus it is that He, Who said “I am the Way319    S. John xiv. 6,” becomes to us who have put Him on the beginning of the ways of salvation, that He may make us the work of His own hands, new modelling us from the evil mould of sin once more to His own image. He is at once our foundation before the world to come, according to the words of Paul, who says, “Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid320    1 Cor. iii. 11.,” and it is true that “before the springs of the waters came forth, before the mountains were settled, before He made the depths, and before all hills, He begetteth Me321    Prov. viii. 23–25 (not quite verbal, from the LXX.)..” For it is possible, according to the usage of the Book of Proverbs, for each of these phrases, taken in a tropical sense, to be applied to the Word322    Or “to be brought into harmony with Christian doctrine” (ἐφαρμόσθῆναι τῷ λόγω).. For the great David calls righteousness the “mountains of God323    Ps. xxxvi. 6.,” His judgments “deeps324    Ps. xxxvi. 6.,” and the teachers in the Churches “fountains,” saying “Bless God the Lord from the fountains of Israel325    Ps. lxviii. 26 (LXX.).”; and guilelessness he calls “hills,” as he shows when he speaks of their skipping like lambs326    Cf. Ps. cxiv. 6. Before these therefore is born in us He Who for our sakes was created as man, that of these things also the creation may find place in us. But we may, I think, pass from the discussion of these points, inasmuch as the truth has been sufficiently pointed out in a few words to well-disposed readers; let us proceed to what Eunomius says next.

“Existing in the Beginning,” he says, “not without beginning.” In what fashion does he who plumes himself on his superior discernment understand the oracles of God? He declares Him Who was in the beginning Himself to have a beginning: and is not aware that if He Who is in the beginning has a beginning, then the Beginning itself must needs have another beginning. Whatever He says of the beginning he must necessarily confess to be true of Him Who was in the beginning: for how can that which is in the beginning be severed from the beginning? and how can any one imagine a “was not” as preceding the “was”? For however far one carries back one’s thought to apprehend the beginning, one most certainly understands as one does so that the Word which was in the beginning (inasmuch as It cannot be separated from the beginning in which It is) does not at any point of time either begin or cease its existence therein. Yet let no one be induced by these words of mine to separate into two the one beginning we acknowledge. For the beginning is most assuredly one, wherein is discerned, indivisibly, that Word Who is completely united to the Father. He who thus thinks will never leave heresy a loophole to impair his piety by the novelty of the term “ungenerate.” But in Eunomius’ next propositions his statements are like bread with a large admixture of sand. For by mixing his heretical opinions with sound doctrines, he makes uneatable even that which is in itself nutritious, by the gravel which he has mingled with it. For he calls the Lord “living wisdom,” “operative truth,” subsistent power, and “life”:—so far is the nutritious portion. But into these assertions he instils the poison of heresy. For when he speaks of the “life” as “generate” he makes a reservation by the implied opposition to the “ungenerate” life, and does not affirm the Son to be the very Life. Next he says:—“As Son of God, quickening the dead, the true light, the light that lighteneth every man coming into the world327    Cf. S. John i. 9, good, and the bestower of good things.” All these things he offers for honey to the simple-minded, concealing his deadly drug under the sweetness of terms like these. For he immediately introduces, on the heels of these statements, his pernicious principle, in the words “Not partitioning with Him that begat Him His high estate, not dividing with another the essence of the Father, but becoming by generation glorious, yea, the Lord of glory, and receiving glory from the Father, not sharing His glory with the Father, for the glory of the Almighty is incommunicable, as He hath said, ‘My glory will I not give to another.328    Is. xlii. 8.’” These are his deadly poisons, which they alone can discover who have their souls’ senses trained so to do: but the mortal mischief of the words is disclosed by their conclusion:—Receiving glory from the Father, not sharing glory with the Father, for the glory of the Almighty is incommunicable, as He hath said, ‘My glory will I not give to another.’ Who is that “other” to whom God has said that He will not give His glory? The prophet speaks of the adversary of God, and Eunomius refers the prophecy to the only begotten God Himself! For when the prophet, speaking in the person of God, had said, “My glory will I not give to another,” he added, “neither My praise to graven images.” For when men were beguiled to offer to the adversary of God the worship and adoration due to God alone, paying homage in the representations of graven images to the enemy of God, who appeared in many shapes amongst men in the forms furnished by idols, He Who healeth them that are sick, in pity for men’s ruin, foretold by the prophet the loving-kindness which in the latter days He would show in the abolishing of idols, saying, “When My truth shall have been manifested, My glory shall no more be given to another, nor My praise bestowed upon graven images: for men, when they come to know My glory, shall no more be in bondage to them that by nature are no gods.” All therefore that the prophet says in the person of the Lord concerning the power of the adversary, this fighter against God, refers to the Lord Himself, Who spake these words by the prophet! Who among the tyrants is recorded to have been such a persecutor of the faith as this? Who maintained such blasphemy as this, that He Who, as we believe, was manifested in the flesh for the salvation of our souls, is not very God, but the adversary of God, who puts his guile into effect against men by the instrumentality of idols and graven images? For it is what was said of that adversary by the prophet that Eunomius transfers to the only-begotten God, without so much as reflecting that it is the Only-begotten Himself Who spoke these words by the prophet, as Eunomius himself subsequently confesses when he says, “this is He Who spake by the prophets.”

Why should I pursue this part of the subject in more detail? For the words preceding also are tainted with the same profanity—“receiving glory from the Father, not sharing glory with the Father, for the glory of the Almighty God is incommunicable.” For my own part, even had his words referred to Moses who was glorified in the ministration of the Law,—not even then should I have tolerated such a statement, even if it be conceded that Moses, having no glory from within, appeared completely glorious to the Israelites by the favour bestowed on him from God. For the very glory that was bestowed on the lawgiver was the glory of none other but of God Himself, which glory the Lord in the Gospel bids all to seek, when He blames those who value human glory highly and seek not the glory that cometh from God only329    Cf. S. John v. 44. For by the fact that He commanded them to seek the glory that cometh from the only God, He declared the possibility of their obtaining what they sought. How then is the glory of the Almighty incommunicable, if it is even our duty to ask for the glory that cometh from the only God, and if, according to our Lord’s word, “every one that asketh receiveth330    S. Matt. vii. 8?” But one who says concerning the Brightness of the Father’s glory, that He has the glory by having received it, says in effect that the Brightness of the glory is in Itself devoid of glory, and needs, in order to become Himself at last the Lord of some glory, to receive glory from another. How then are we to dispose of the utterances of the Truth,—one which tells us that He shall be seen in the glory of the Father331    S. Mark viii. 38., and another which says, “All things that the Father hath are Mine332    S. John xvi. 15”? To whom ought the hearer to give ear? To him who says, “He that is, as the Apostle says, the ‘heir of all things333    Heb. i. 2.’ that are in the Father, is without part or lot in His Father’s glory”; or to Him Who declares that all things that the Father hath, He Himself hath also? Now among the “all things,” glory surely is included. Yet Eunomius says that the glory of the Almighty is incommunicable. This view Joel does not attest, nor yet the mighty Peter, who adopted, in his speech to the Jews, the language of the prophet. For both the prophet and the apostle say, in the person of God,—“I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh334    Joel ii. 28; Acts ii. 17..” He then Who did not grudge the partaking in His own Spirit to all flesh,—how can it be that He does not impart His own glory to the only-begotten Son, Who is in the bosom of the Father, Who has all things that the Father has? Perhaps one should say that Eunomius is here speaking the truth, though not intending it. For the term “impart” is strictly used in the case of one who has not his glory from within, whose possession of it is an accession from without, and not part of his own nature: but where one and the same nature is observed in both Persons, He Who is as regards nature all that the Father is believed to be stands in no need of one to impart to Him each several attribute. This it will be well to explain more clearly and precisely. He Who has the Father dwelling in Him in His entirety—what need has He of the Father’s glory, when none of the attributes contemplated in the Father is withdrawn from Him?

Ἀλλὰ τὴν παροιμιώδη φωνὴν πάντως προφέρουσιν, ἥ φησιν ὅτι Κύριος ἔκτισέ με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ, εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ. τοῦτο δὲ διὰ πλειόνων μὲν ἔστιν παραθέσθαι σαφέστερον ὅπως ἔχει: πλὴν δυνατὸν ἂν εἴη καὶ δι' ὀλίγων τοῖς εὐγνώμοσι παραδοῦναι τὸ νόημα. λέγουσι γὰρ καὶ τοῦτό τινες τῶν δι' ἀκριβείας τὰ θεῖα πεπαιδευμένων, ὅτι οὐ γέγραπται παρ' Ἑβραίοις τὸ Ἔκτισε, καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐν ἀρχαιοτέραις βίβλοις ἀνέγνωμεν Ἐκτήσατο γεγραμμένον ἀντὶ τοῦ Ἔκτισέ με. ἐμφαίνει δὲ πάντως τὸν δοῦλον ἡ κτῆσις διὰ τῶν παροιμιακῶν αἰνιγμάτων τὸν δι' ἡμᾶς ἀναλαβόντα τὴν τοῦ δούλου μορφήν. εἰ δέ τις καὶ τὴν ἐπικρατοῦσαν ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις ἀνάγνωσιν ἐν τῷ μέρει τούτῳ προβάλοιτο, οὐδὲ τὴν Ἔκτισε φωνὴν ἀποβάλλομεν. καὶ τοῦτο γὰρ πρὸς τὴν τοῦ δούλου σημασίαν διὰ τοῦ αἰνίγματος βλέπει, ἐπειδὴ πᾶσα ἡ κτίσις δουλεύει, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ταύτην τὴν φωνὴν εὐσεβῶς ἔχειν φαμέν. ἐκτίσθη γὰρ ἀληθῶς ἐπ' ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡμερῶν ὁ δι' ἡμᾶς καθ' ἡμᾶς γενόμενος, ὁ ἐν μὲν τῇ ἀρχῇ λόγος ὢν καὶ θεός, μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ σὰρξ γενόμενος καὶ ἄνθρωπος. κτιστὴ δὲ τῆς σαρκὸς ἡ φύσις: ἧς μετασχὼν κατὰ πάντα καθ' ὁμοιότητα χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας ἐκτίσθη γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος, ἐκτίσθη δὲ κατὰ θεόν, οὐ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος, καινόν τινα τρόπον καὶ οὐ κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην συνήθειαν. ἐμάθομεν γὰρ ὅτι ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ τῆς τοῦ ὑψίστου δυνάμεως, πλὴν ἀλλ' ἐκτίσθη ὁ καινὸς οὗτος ἄνθρωπος, ὃν κελεύει ὁ τῶν ἀρρήτων μυστηρίων ὑφηγητὴς Παῦλος ἐνδύσασθαι ἡμᾶς διχῶς ὀνομάζων τὸ ἔνδυμα, νῦν μὲν λέγων Ἐνδύσασθε τὸν καινὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν κατὰ θεὸν κτισθέντα, πάλιν δὲ ὅτι Ἐνδύσασθε τὸν κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν. οὗτος γὰρ ἡμῖν τοῖς ἐνδυσαμένοις αὐτὸν γίνεται ἀρχὴ τῶν ὁδῶν τῆς σωτηρίας ὁ εἰπὼν Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ὁδός, ἵνα ἔργα τῶν ἑαυτοῦ χειρῶν ποιήσῃ ἡμᾶς, ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ πλάσματος τῆς ἁμαρτίας πρὸς τὴν ἰδίαν εἰκόνα πάλιν μετεργασάμενος. ὁ δὲ αὐτὸς καὶ θεμέλιος ἡμῖν γίνεται πρὸ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος κατὰ τὴν τοῦ Παύλου φωνήν, ὅς φησιν ὅτι Θεμέλιον οὐδεὶς δύναται θεῖναι παρὰ τὸν κείμενον, καὶ Πρὸ τοῦ ἐλθεῖν τὰς πηγὰς τῶν ὑδάτων καὶ πρὸ τοῦ ὄρη ἑδρασθῆναι καὶ πρὸ τοῦ τὰς ἀβύσσους ποιῆσαι καὶ πρὸ πάντων βουνῶν γεννᾷ με. δυνατὸν γὰρ ἕκαστον τούτων κατὰ τὴν παροιμιώδη συνήθειαν μεταληφθὲν εἰς τροπικὴν θεωρίαν ἐφαρμοσθῆναι τῷ λόγῳ. ὁ γὰρ μέγας Δαβὶδ δικαιοσύνην ὀνομάζει τὰ ὄρη τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀβύσσους δὲ τὰ κρίματα, πηγὰς δὲ τοὺς διδασκάλους ἐν ἐκκλησίαις λέγων Εὐλογεῖτε τὸν θεὸν κύριον ἐκ πηγῶν Ἰσραήλ: βουνοὺς δὲ τὴν ἀκακίαν, ἣν διὰ τοῦ σκιρτήματος τῶν ἀρνίων ἐνεδείξατο. πρὸ τούτων οὖν ἐν ἡμῖν γεννᾶται ὁ δι' ἡμᾶς κτισθεὶς ἄνθρωπος, ἵνα καὶ ἡ τῶν τοιούτων κτίσις ἐν ἡμῖν χώραν εὕρῃ. ἀλλὰ παραδραμεῖν οἶμαι χρῆναι τὸν περὶ τούτων λόγον, ἱκανῶς τοῖς εὐγνώμοσιν ὑποδειχθείσης δι' ὀλίγων τῆς ἀληθείας: ἐπὶ δὲ τὰ ἐφεξῆς τῶν τοῦ Εὐνομίου λόγων μετέλθωμεν. « Ἐν ἀρχῇ », φησίν, « ὄντα, οὐκ ἄναρχον ». ὢ πῶς νοεῖ τὰς θείας φωνὰς ὁ ἐπὶ συνέσει ὑπὲρ τοὺς ἄλλους φρονῶν; τὸν ἐν ἀρχῇ ὄντα ἀρχὴν ἔχοντα ἑρμηνεύει, καὶ οὐκ οἶδεν ὅτι, εἰ ἀρχὴν ἔχει ὁ ἐν ἀρχῇ ὤν, καὶ ἡ ἀρχὴ πάντως ἔχει ἄλλην ἀρχήν. ὃ γὰρ ἂν ἐπὶ τῆς ἀρχῆς εἴπῃ, τοῦτο κατ' ἀνάγκην καὶ περὶ τοῦ ἐν τῇ ἀρχῇ ὄντος ὁμολογήσει πάντως. πῶς γὰρ τὸ ἐν τῇ ἀρχῇ ὂν τῆς ἀρχῆς χωρισθήσεται; πῶς δέ τις τὸ οὐκ ἦν προεπινοήσει τοῦ ἦν; ὅπως γὰρ ἄν τις ἀναγαγὼν ἑαυτοῦ τὴν διάνοιαν πρὸς τὴν κατανόησιν τῆς ἀρχῆς ὑπερτείνῃ, συγκατανοεῖ πάντως τὸν ἐν αὐτῇ ὄντα λόγον χωρισθῆναι τῆς ἐν ᾗ ἐστιν ἀρχῆς μὴ δυνάμενον, οὐδέποτε τοῦ ἐν αὐτῇ εἶναι οὔτε ἀρχόμενον οὔτε παυόμενον. μηδεὶς δὲ διὰ τούτων εἰς δύο ἀρχὰς διασχιζέτω τὸ δόγμα. μία γάρ ἐστιν ὡς ἀληθῶς ἡ ἀρχή, ᾗ ἀχωρίστως ἐνθεωρεῖται ὁ λόγος ὁ διὰ πάντων πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ἡνωμένος. ὁ ταῦτα φρονῶν οὐδεμίαν δώσει τῇ αἱρέσει πάροδον διὰ τῆς καινοτομίας τοῦ ἀγέννητος ὀνόματος τῇ εὐσεβείᾳ λυμαίνεσθαι. ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἐφεξῆς ἐκτεθεῖσιν ἄρτῳ ἔοικεν ὁ λόγος αὐτοῦ πολλὴν ἔχοντι τὴν ἐπιμιξίαν τῆς ἄμμου. τοῖς γὰρ ὑγιῶς λεγομένοις τὰ αἱρετικὰ συμμίξας νοήματα ἄβρωτον διὰ τοῦ συμμεμειγμένου λίθου ποιεῖ καὶ τὸ τρόφιμον. λέγει γὰρ « σοφίαν ζῶσαν » τὸν κύριον « καὶ ἀλήθειαν ἐνεργοῦσαν καὶ δύναμιν ὑφεστῶσαν καὶ ζωήν »: ἕως τούτου τὸ τρόφιμον. ἐντίθησι δὲ τοῖς εἰρημένοις τὸν ἰὸν τῆς αἱρέσεως. « γεννητὴν γὰρ τὴν ζωὴν » ὀνομάσας ἄλλο τι τῇ πρὸς τὴν ἀγέννητον ζωὴν ἀντιδιαστολῇ νοεῖν καὶ οὐχὶ τὴν ὄντως ζωὴν τὸν υἱὸν ὑποτίθεται. εἶτά φησιν « ὡς υἱὸν θεοῦ ζωοποιοῦντα τοὺς ζῶντας καὶ ζωοποιοῦντα τοὺς νεκρούς, φῶς ἀληθινόν, φῶς φωτίζον πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ἀγαθὸν καὶ χορηγὸν ἀγαθῶν ». ταῦτα πάντα ἀντὶ μέλιτός τινος τοῖς ἀκεραιοτέροις προτείνων ὑποκρύπτει τῇ γλυκύτητι τῶν ῥημάτων τούτων τὸ δηλητήριον. εὐθὺς γὰρ ἐπάγει τοῖς εἰρημένοις τὸ φθοροποιὸν αὐτοῦ νόημα, λέγων « οὐχὶ τῷ γεννήσαντι συμμερισάμενον τὴν ἀξίαν, οὐκ ἄλλῳ τινὶ τὴν πατρικὴν οὐσίαν, ἀλλὰ γενόμενον ἐκ γεννήσεως ἔνδοξον καὶ τῆς δόξης κύριον καὶ λαβόντα παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς δόξαν, οὐ τῆς ἐκείνου μεταλαβόντα δόξης: ἀμετάδοτος γὰρ ἡ δόξα τοῦ παντοκράτορος, καθὼς εἶπε Τὴν δόξαν μου ἑτέρῳ οὐ δώσω ». ταῦτά ἐστιν τὰ ἐπιθανάτια φάρμακα, ἃ μόνοι διαγινώσκουσιν οἱ γεγυμνασμένοι τὰ τῆς ψυχῆς αἰσθητήρια. τούτων δὲ ἡ θανατηφόρος κακία φανερώτερον ἐν τοῖς τελευταίοις τῶν εἰρημένων ἀνακαλύπτεται. « Λαβόντα », φησί, « παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς δόξαν, οὐ τῆς ἐκείνου μεταλαβόντα δόξης: ἀμετάδοτος γὰρ ἡ δόξα τοῦ παντοκράτορος, καθὼς εἶπε Τὴν δόξαν μου ἑτέρῳ οὐ δώσω ». τίς ἐστιν ὁ ἕτερος ἐκεῖνος ᾧ εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς τὴν δόξαν μὴ δώσειν; ὁ μὲν προφήτης περὶ τοῦ ἀντικειμένου λέγει, ὁ δὲ Εὐνόμιος εἰς αὐτὸν τὸν μονογενῆ θεὸν ἀναφέρει τὴν προφητείαν. εἰπὼν γὰρ ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ προφήτης ὅτι Τὴν δόξαν μου ἑτέρῳ οὐ δώσω, προσέθηκεν ὅτι Καὶ τὰς ἀρετάς μου τοῖς γλυπτοῖς. ἐπεὶ γὰρ τὴν θεῷ χρεωστουμένην λατρείαν καὶ προσκύνησιν τῷ ἀντικειμένῳ προσῆγον δι' ἀπάτης οἱ ἄνθρωποι, τοῖς τῶν γλυπτῶν ἀφιδρύμασι τὸν ἐχθρὸν τοῦ θεοῦ σεβαζόμενοι τὸν πολυειδῶς ἐν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις διὰ τῶν εἰδώλων μορφούμενον, οἶκτον λαβὼν τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης ἀπωλείας ὁ τοὺς κακῶς ἔχοντας ἰατρεύων τὴν χρόνοις ὕστερον γενησομένην παρ' αὐτοῦ φιλανθρωπίαν ἐν τῷ ἀφανισμῷ τῶν εἰδώλων διὰ τοῦ προφήτου προηγόρευσε λέγων ὅτι φανερωθείσης τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκέτι ἡ ἐμὴ δόξα ἄλλῳ δοθήσεται οὐδὲ αἱ ἐμαὶ ἀρεταὶ τοῖς γλυπτοῖς ἀνατεθήσονται. οὐκέτι γὰρ δουλεύσουσι τοῖς φύσει μὴ οὖσι θεοῖς τὴν ἐμὴν δόξαν ἐπιγνόντες οἱ ἄνθρωποι. ὅσα τοίνυν περὶ τῆς ἀντικειμένης ἐνεργείας ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ κυρίου ὁ προφήτης φησί, ταῦτα ὁ θεομάχος εἰς αὐτὸν ἀναφέρει τὸν κύριον τὸν ταῦτα διὰ τοῦ προφήτου φθεγξάμενον. τίς τοιοῦτος ἐν τοῖς τυράννοις μνημονεύεται γεγενῆσθαι διώκτης τῆς πίστεως; τίς τοῦτο κατεσκεύασεν, ὡς ὁ ἐπὶ σωτηρίᾳ τῶν ψυχῶν ἡμῶν διὰ σαρκὸς ἐπιφανείς, καθὼς ἐπιστεύσαμεν, οὐκ ἀληθινός ἐστι θεός, ἀλλ' ὁ τῷ θεῷ ἀντικείμενος, ὁ ἐν τοῖς γλυπτοῖς τε καὶ τοῖς εἰδώλοις ἐνεργῶν τὴν κατὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἀπάτην; ἃ γὰρ περὶ ἐκείνου εἴρηται διὰ τοῦ προφήτου, ταῦτα ὁ Εὐνόμιος εἰς τὸν μονογενῆ θεὸν μετατίθησιν, οὐδὲ αὐτὸ τοῦτο νοήσας, ὅτι αὐτὸς ὁ μονογενής ἐστιν ὁ ταῦτα ἐν τῷ προφήτῃ φθεγξάμενος, καθὼς αὐτὸς οὗτος ἐν τοῖς ἐφεξῆς λέγει ὅτι « οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐν τοῖς προφήταις λαλήσας ».
Τί με χρὴ πλείω περὶ τούτων διεξιέναι; τῆς αὐτῆς γὰρ ἔχεται βλασφημίας καὶ τὰ πρὸ τούτων εἰρημένα. « λαβόντα », φησίν, « παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς δόξαν, οὐ τῆς ἐκείνου μεταλαβόντα δόξης: ἀμετάδοτος γὰρ ἡ δόξα τοῦ παντοκράτορος θεοῦ ». ἐγὼ γὰρ εἰ καὶ περὶ Μωϋσέως ὁ λόγος ἦν τοῦ δοξασθέντος ἐν τῇ διακονίᾳ τοῦ νόμου, οὐδ' οὕτως ἤνεγκα ἂν τὸν τοιοῦτον λόγον, εἰ καὶ *** ὅτι μηδεμίαν ἔχων οἴκοθεν δόξαν ἐκεῖνος διὰ τῆς γενομένης αὐτῷ θεόθεν δωρεᾶς ἔνδοξος ἀθρόως τοῖς Ἰσραηλίταις ἐφάνη. αὐτὴ γὰρ ἡ γενομένη τῷ νομοθέτῃ δόξα οὐκ ἄλλου τινὸς ἦν, ἀλλ' αὐτοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἣν πάντας κελεύει ζητεῖν ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ ὁ κύριος, δι' ὧν αἰτιᾶται τοὺς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην δόξαν περὶ πολλοῦ ποιουμένους, τὴν δὲ παρὰ τοῦ μόνου θεοῦ δόξαν μὴ ζητοῦντας. δι' ὧν γὰρ ζητεῖν ἐνεκελεύσατο τὴν παρὰ τοῦ μόνου θεοῦ δόξαν, τὸ δυνατὸν εἶναι τυχεῖν τοῦ ζητουμένου κατεπηγγείλατο. πῶς οὖν « ἀμετάδοτος ἡ δόξα τοῦ παντοκράτορος », εἴ γε καὶ χρὴ τὴν παρὰ τοῦ μόνου θεοῦ δόξαν αἰτεῖν καὶ πᾶς ὁ αἰτῶν λαμβάνει κατὰ τὴν τοῦ κυρίου φωνήν; ὁ δὲ περὶ τοῦ ἀπαυγάσματος τῆς δόξης λέγων ὅτι λαβὼν ἔχει τὴν δόξαν οὐδὲν ἕτερον λέγει ἢ ὅτι ἄδοξον καθ' ἑαυτὸ τὸ τῆς δόξης ἐστὶν ἀπαύγασμα, χρῄζει δὲ λαβεῖν παρ' ἑτέρου δόξαν, ἵνα οὕτω ποτὲ καὶ αὐτὸς γένηται κύριος τῆς δόξης. ποῦ τοίνυν θήσομεν τὰς τῆς ἀληθείας φωνάς, τήν τε λέγουσαν ὀφθήσεσθαι αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ δόξῃ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ πάλιν ὅτι Πάντα, ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατήρ, ἐμά ἐστιν; τίνι χρὴ προσέχειν τὸν ἀκούοντα, τῷ λέγοντι ὅτι ἀμέτοχός ἐστι τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς δόξης ὁ πάντων τῶν ἐν τῷ πατρὶ κληρονόμος, καθώς φησιν ὁ ἀπόστολος, ἢ τῷ ὁμολογοῦντι ὅτι πάντα, ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατήρ, καὶ αὐτὸς ἔχει; ἐν δὲ τοῖς πᾶσι καὶ ἡ δόξα πάντως ἐστίν.
Ἀλλ' « ἀμετάδοτον εἶναί » φησι « τὴν δόξαν τοῦ παντοκράτορος ». τοῦτο οὔτε Ἰωὴλ οὔτε ὁ μέγας Πέτρος μαρτύρεται ὁ τὸν προφητικὸν λόγον ἐν τῇ δημηγορίᾳ τῇ πρὸς τοὺς Ἰουδαίους οἰκειωσάμενος. φησὶ γὰρ ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ θεοῦ ὅ τε προφήτης καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος ὅτι Ἐκχεῶ ἀπὸ τοῦ πνεύματός μου ἐπὶ πᾶσαν σάρκα. ὁ τοίνυν τοῦ ἰδίου πνεύματος τῆς κοινωνίας πάσῃ σαρκὶ μὴ φθονήσας πῶς τῷ μονογενεῖ υἱῷ τῷ ὄντι ἐν τοῖς κόλποις τοῦ πατρός, τῷ πάντα ἔχοντι ὅσα ὁ πατὴρ ἔχει, τῆς οἰκείας δόξης οὐ μεταδίδωσιν; ἢ τάχα εἴποι τις ἂν ἀληθεύειν τὸν Εὐνόμιον ἐν τούτῳ καὶ μὴ βουλόμενον. ἐπὶ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ μὴ ἔχοντος οἴκοθεν τὴν δόξαν κυρίως ἡ μετάδοσις λέγεται, ᾧ τὸ ἔχειν ἑτέρωθεν προσγίνεται, οὐκ ἐκ φύσεως: ὅπου δὲ μία καὶ ἡ αὐτὴ καταλαμβάνεται φύσις, οὐ χρῄζει τοῦ καθ' ἕκαστον μεταδιδόντος ὁ ἐκεῖνο κατὰ τὴν φύσιν ὤν, ὅπερ ὁ πατὴρ εἶναι πεπίστευται. μᾶλλον δὲ τρανότερόν τε καὶ φανερώτερον εἰπεῖν ἔχει καλῶς. τί χρῄζει τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς δόξης ὁ ὅλον ἔχων ἐν ἑαυτῷ τὸν πατέρα, οὐδενὸς τῶν ἐν τῷ πατρὶ θεωρουμένων ὑφῃρημένου;