being foolish, how is God just, who killed so many people for the offenses of others? I mean the offenses of Jonathan and David: the one who out of ignorance broke the fast by tasting honey, the other who rashly numbered the people. But if someone should say that the death of the subjects was for the punishment of the rulers, how does he not act unjustly by subjecting the innocent to punishments? And it is contrary to the scripture which says that The soul that sins, it shall die. Response. That the most bitter punishment for sinning kings is the punishment of the people, the blessed David himself makes clear, praying to God to transfer the plague from the people to himself and to his house. For the reduction of the governed is a shaking of the kingdom. Likewise also Saul was about to kill his son Jonathan, in order that by his death he might heal the plague of the people, had not the people intervened and sworn not to let Jonathan die. And just as a man is composed of soul and body, so also a kingdom is composed of the king and the governed. And just as, if a man has committed a sin with his hand and is struck on the back, the one who struck him does not do an injustice, so God does not do an injustice by punishing the people for the offenses of kings. For he knows that the plague of the people greatly grieves the kings. For the plague of the people is the punishment of the kingdom. Question 139. If God is one God, it is clear that he also possesses everything as one; such as being simple or composite, mortal or immortal, begotten or unbegotten, to beget or not to beget. How then, with the Father having begotten and the Son not having begotten, and the Son having been begotten, but the Father not having been begotten, can the Father and the Son and the Spirit be called one God, since from this very fact of being begotten or not being begotten, and of begetting and not begetting, they are thought to possess opposition? Response. God is one in the co-existence of the three divine hypostases, which differ from one another not in essence but in the modes of their existence. But the difference in the modes of existence does not divide the oneness in essence. And just as in the case of Adam and Eve and Seth the principle of essence is one (for it is a rational soul and a mortal body), but the modes of existence are different (for Adam came from the earth, Eve from the rib, and Seth from seed), and in different modes of existence the principle of essence remains one, indivisible and unchangeable, so also in the case of God, by the identity of the essence of the persons, one God is believed in, both the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. For the mode of existence contributes nothing to the principle of the essence. Therefore, those things that are said in the same unvarying way concerning the three divine hypostases, in these understand the oneness of the essence; but those that are not said in the same way,

μωρούμενος, πῶς δίκαιος ὁ θεὸς ὁ τοσοῦτον λαὸν διὰ πταί σματα θανατώσας ἑτέρων; Λέγω δὲ πταίσαντας τὸν Ἰωνάθαν καὶ τὸν ∆αυΐδ· τὸν μὲν ἐξ ἀγνοίας λύσαντα τὴν νηστείαν τῇ γεύσει τοῦ μέλιτος, τὸν δὲ προπετῶς τὸν λαὸν ἀριθμήσαντα. Eἰ δέ τις λέγοι ὡς τῶν ὑπηκόων ὁ θάνατος ἐπὶ τιμωρίᾳ τῶν ἀρχόντων ἐγίνετο, πῶς οὐκ ἀδικεῖ τοὺς ἀναιτίους ὑποβάλλων κολάσεσιν; Ἐναντιοῦται δὲ τῇ λεγούσῃ γραφῇ ὅτι Ψυχὴ ἡ ἁμαρτήσασα αὐτὴ ἀποθανεῖται. Ἀπόκρισις. Ὅτι πικροτάτη τιμωρία τῶν ἡμαρτηκότων βασιλέων ἡ τι μωρία τοῦ λαοῦ, δηλοῖ αὐτὸς ὁ μακάριος ∆αυΐδ, δεόμενος τοῦ θεοῦ εἰς αὑτόν τε καὶ εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὑτοῦ μεταγαγεῖν ἀπὸ τοῦ λαοῦ τὴν πληγήν. Σάλος γάρ ἐστι τῆς βασιλείας ἡ μείωσις τῶν βασιλευομένων. Ὡσαύτως δὲ καὶ ὁ Σαοὺλ ἔμελλεν ἀναι ρεῖν τὸν υἱὸν αὑτοῦ Ἰωνάθαν, ἵνα τῇ ἀναιρέσει αὐτοῦ τὴν πληγὴν ἰάσηται τοῦ λαοῦ, εἰ μὴ φθάσας ὁ λαὸς ὤμοσε μὴ ἀπο θανεῖν ἐᾶσαι τὸν Ἰωνάθαν. Καὶ ὡς σύγκειται ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐκ ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, οὕτως καὶ ἡ βασιλεία σύγκειται ἐκ τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ τῶν βασιλευομένων. Καὶ ὥσπερ, ἁμαρτήσας ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἁμάρτημα διὰ χειρὸς κἂν τυπτηθῇ εἰς τὸν νῶτον, οὐκ ἀδικεῖ ὁ τυπτήσας αὐτόν, οὕτως οὐκ ἀδικεῖ θεὸς ἐπὶ τοῖς τῶν βασιλέων πταίσμασιν τὸν λαὸν τιμωρούμενος. Μεγάλως γὰρ οἶδεν ἀνιᾶν τοὺς βασιλεῖς ἡ πληγὴ τοῦ λαοῦ. Τῆς γὰρ βασιλείας ἐστὶ τιμωρία ἡ πληγὴ τοῦ λαοῦ. Ἐρώτησις ρλθ. Eἰ εἷς ἐστι θεὸς ὁ θεός, δῆλον ὅτι καὶ πάντα κέκτηται τὸ εἶναι ἕν· οἷον τὸ ἁπλοῦν ἢ τὸ σύνθετον, τὸ θνητὸν ἢ τὸ ἀθάνατον, τὸ γεννητὸν ἢ τὸ ἀγέννητον, τὸ γεννᾶν ἢ τὸ μὴ γεν νᾶν. Πῶς οὖν, τοῦ μὲν πατρὸς γεννήσαντος καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ μὴ γεννήσαντος, καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ γεννηθέντος, τοῦ δὲ πατρὸς μὴ γεν νηθέντος, δύναται εἷς θεὸς καλεῖσθαι ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα, ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ γεννᾶσθαι ἢ μὴ γεννᾶσθαι, καὶ τοῦ γεννᾶν καὶ μὴ γεννᾶν, τὴν ἐναντίωσιν κεκτῆσθαι νομιζομένου; Ἀπόκρισις. Eἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς τῇ συνυπάρξει τῶν τριῶν θείων ὑπο στάσεων, τῶν διαφερουσῶν ἀλλήλων οὐ τῇ οὐσίᾳ ἀλλὰ τοῖς τῆς ὑπάρξεως τρόποις. Ἡ διαφορὰ δὲ τῶν τῆς ὑπάρξεως τρό πων οὐ διαιρεῖ τὸ ἓν τῇ οὐσίᾳ. Καὶ ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἀδὰμ καὶ τῆς Eὔας καὶ τοῦ Σὴθ εἷς μέν ἐστιν ὁ τῆς οὐσίας λόγος (ψυχὴ γὰρ λογικὴ καὶ σῶμα θνητόν), τρόποι δὲ τῆς ὑπάρξεως διάφοροι (ὁ μὲν γὰρ Ἀδὰμ γέγονεν ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς, ἡ δὲ Eὔα ἐκ τῆς πλευρᾶς, ὁ δὲ Σὴθ ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματος), καὶ ἐν διαφόροις τῆς ὑπάρξεως τρόποις μένει ὁ τῆς οὐσίας λόγος εἷς ἀδιαίρετός τε καὶ ἀπαράλλακτος, οὕτως καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ, τῇ ταὐτότητι τῆς τῶν προσώπων οὐσίας, εἷς θεὸς πεπίστευται, ὅ τε πατὴρ καὶ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα. Oὐδὲν γὰρ συντελεῖ πρὸς τὸν τῆς οὐσίας λόγον ὁ τρόπος τῆς ὑπάρξεως. Τὰ μὲν οὖν ἐπὶ τῶν θείων τριῶν ὑποστάσεων ὡσαύτως ἀπαραλλάκτως λεγό μενα, ἐν τούτοις νόει τὸ ἓν τῆς οὐσίας· τὰ δὲ μὴ ὡσαύτως,