77

do you think what applause and laughter would have broken out from those who jeer, cackling at the elegance of the pretext? With such arguments the wise theologian argues against us and attacks our dogma, truly needing some tutor and staff, so that he might be taught that not all things that are predicated of someone look to one meaning in every case, as is shown by the example we mentioned concerning 1.1.611 Abel and Adam. For it is true to call the same Adam both the father of Abel and the work of God; but it is not the case that because he is both, the two are predicated of Abel. So also in the case of the God of all, the title of 'Father' indicates both what is specifically signified by such a term—I mean, to have begotten the Son—and also shows that no cause is preconceived before the true Father; it is not, however, necessary, whenever we mention the Son, not to say 'Father of the Son', but to call him 'unbegotten of the Son'; nor again, if in relation to the Son 'the unoriginate' is passed over in silence, should we banish 'the unbegotten' from our thought concerning God. But he rejects such a use of names and, like the mimes of comedies, he scoffs at the argument, playing the clown in matters of doctrine with the absurdity of his sophisms. 1.1.612 For again I will recall what was said by him. 20'If it is the same to say 'unbegotten' or 'Father', it will be possible for us, leaving aside the term 'Father' and adopting 'unbegotten' instead, to say: the unbegotten is unbegotten of the Son; for just as the unbegotten is Father of the Son, so conversely the Father is unbegotten of the Son'20. But let us laugh back, if you please, we too, 1.1.613 turning the sophism back on him. If the Father is not the same as the unbegotten, the Son of the Father will not also be the Son of the unbegotten. For having his relation only to the Father, he will in every way be alien in nature to him who is something else and does not coincide with the concept of the Father; 1.1.614 so that if the Father is something other than the unbegotten, and the title of 'Father' does not also include the meaning of 'unbegotten', the Son, being one, cannot be divided into relations to two things, and be the same Son of both the Father and the unbegotten; and just as it was considered absurd to call God 'unbegotten of the Son', so in every way in the converse the same absurdity will be found in calling the Only-begotten 'Son of the unbegotten'; so it is one of two things: either the Father is the same as the unbegotten, so that the Son of the Father is also the Son of the unbegotten, and our argument has been scoffed at in vain; or if the Father is something other than the unbegotten, the Son of the Father has been alienated from the relation to the unbegotten. 1.1.615 And if this holds, that the Only-begotten is not from the unbegotten, the consequence of the argument will certainly show that the Father is for him begotten; for that which is, but is not unbegottenly, has in every way a begotten hypostasis. If, therefore, the Father is begotten according to them, being something other than the unbegotten, where is that much-vaunted unbegottenness? Where is the foundation and the 1.1.616 base of the heretical tower-building? It is gone and has vanished because of the stickiness of the sophisms, the 'unbegotten' having slipped from the grasp of those who for a time seemed to hold it; and the construction of the 'dissimilar', like some dream flowing away, has escaped the contact of reason, flying away together with the 'unbegotten'. Thus whenever any falsehood is honored before the truth, even if for a little while it flourishes through deceit, it quickly collapses in on itself and is dissolved by its own constructions. 1.1.617 But these things, so far as to smile at the elegance of the 'dissimilar' rebuttal, have been brought forward by us also. 1.1.618 But it would be time to bring the argument back to its sequence. Eunomius does not want the meaning of 'unbegotten' to be represented by the term 'Father', in order that he may construct the idea that the Only-begotten once was not. For this question is also common among his disciples: 1.1.619 how is he who is, begotten? And the cause of this, I think, is their unwillingness to depart from the human use of names even in the case of divine concepts. But we, benevolently for him, the error of his supposition into the straight

77

ἂν οἴει κρότον καὶ γέλωτα παρὰ τῶν διακωθωνιζο μένων ῥαγῆναι, ἐπικαγχαζόντων τῇ κομψείᾳ τοῦ παρευρέ ματος; τοιούτοις ὁ σοφὸς θεολόγος ἰσχυρίζεται καθ' ἡμῶν τοῖς λόγοις καὶ κατατρέχει τοῦ δόγματος, παιδαγωγοῦ τινος ὄντως καὶ βακτηρίας δεόμενος, ὡς ἂν διδαχθείη ὅτι οὐ πάντα ὅσα κατά τινος κατηγορεῖται πρὸς ἓν πάντως τὸ σημαινόμενον βλέπει, ὡς διὰ τοῦ ῥηθέντος ἡμῖν κατὰ τὸν 1.1.611 Ἄβελ καὶ τὸν Ἀδὰμ ὑποδείγματος δείκνυται. τὸν γὰρ Ἀδὰμ τὸν αὐτὸν καὶ πατέρα τοῦ Ἄβελ καὶ ἔργον τοῦ θεοῦ λέγειν ἀληθές ἐστιν· οὐ μὴν ἐπειδὴ αὐτὸς ἀμφότερα, ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἄβελ τὰ δύο. οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τῶν ὅλων ἡ τοῦ πατρὸς προσηγορία δηλοῖ μὲν καὶ τὸ ἰδίως ὑπὸ τῆς τοιαύτης φωνῆς σημαινόμενον, τὸ γεγεννηκέναι λέγω τὸν υἱόν, ἐνδείκνυται δὲ καὶ τὸ μηδεμίαν αἰτίαν προεπινοεῖσθαι τοῦ ἀληθῶς πατρός· οὐ μὴν ἐπάναγκες, ὅταν τοῦ υἱοῦ μνησθῶμεν, μὴ πατέρα υἱοῦ λέγειν, ἀλλ' ἀγέννητον υἱοῦ προσαγορεύειν· οὐδ' αὖ πάλιν εἰ πρὸς τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ σχέσιν τὸ ἄναρχον σιωπηθείη, ἐκβάλλειν τῆς διανοίας ἡμῶν ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ τὸ ἀγέννητον. ἀλλ' ἀπωθεῖται τὴν τοιαύτην χρῆσιν τῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ κατὰ τοὺς μίμους τῶν γελοίων διαχλευάζει τὸν λόγον τῷ ἀλλοκότῳ τῶν σοφισμάτων γελω τοποιῶν ἐν τοῖς δόγμασι. 1.1.612 Πάλιν γὰρ τῶν παρ' αὐτοῦ ῥηθέντων ἐπιμνησθήσομαι. 20εἰ ταὐτόν ἐστιν εἰπεῖν ἀγέννητος ἢ πατήρ, ἐξέσται ἡμῖν καταλιποῦσι τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς φωνήν, μεταλαβοῦσι δὲ τὸ ἀγέννητον εἰπεῖν· ὁ ἀγέννητος υἱοῦ ἐστιν ἀγέννητος· ὥσπερ γὰρ ὁ ἀγέννητος υἱοῦ πατήρ, οὕτως ἔμπαλιν υἱοῦ ἀγέννητος ὁ πατήρ20. ἀλλ' ἀντιγελάσωμεν εἰ δοκεῖ καὶ 1.1.613 ἡμεῖς, εἰς τοὐναντίον αὐτῷ περιαγαγόντες τὸ σόφισμα. εἰ οὐκ ἔστι ταὐτὸν ὁ πατὴρ τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ, ὁ τοῦ πατρὸς υἱὸς οὐκ ἔσται καὶ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου υἱός. πρὸς γὰρ τὸν πατέρα μόνον τὴν σχέσιν ἔχων ἀλλοτρίως πάντως ἕξει κατὰ τὴν φύσιν πρὸς τὸν ἄλλο τι ὄντα καὶ τῇ ἐννοίᾳ τοῦ πατρὸς μὴ 1.1.614 συμβαίνοντα· ὥστε εἰ ἄλλο τι παρὰ τὸν ἀγέννητόν ἐστιν ὁ πατὴρ καὶ οὐ περιλαμβάνει τοῦ πατρὸς ἡ προσηγορία καὶ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου τὸ σημαινόμενον, οὐ δύναται εἷς ὢν ὁ υἱὸς εἰς δύο πραγμάτων σχέσεις καταμερίζεσθαι, καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς εἶναι τοῦ τε πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου υἱός· καὶ ὡς ἄτοπον ἐνομίσθη υἱοῦ ἀγέννητον τὸν θεὸν λέγειν, οὕτω πάντως καὶ ἐν τῷ ἀντιστρέφοντι τὸ ἴσον ἄτοπον εὑρεθήσεται τοῦ ἀγεννήτου υἱὸν <τὸν> μονογενῆ λέγειν· ὥστε τῶν δύο τὸ ἕτερον, ἢ ταὐτόν ἐστι τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ ὁ πατήρ, ἵνα ὁ τοῦ πατρὸς υἱὸς καὶ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου υἱὸς ᾖ, καὶ μάτην ἡμῶν διεχλευάσθη ὁ λόγος, ἢ εἰ ἕτερόν τι παρὰ τὸ ἀγέννητόν ἐστιν ὁ πατήρ, ὁ τοῦ πατρὸς υἱὸς τῆς πρὸς τὸ ἀγέννητον σχέσεως ἠλλο 1.1.615 τρίωται. καὶ ἐὰν τοῦτο κρατήσῃ, μὴ ἐκ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου εἶναι τὸν μονογενῆ, γεννητὸν αὐτῷ πάντως ἡ ἀκολουθία τοῦ λόγου τὸν πατέρα ἐνδείξεται· τὸ γὰρ ὂν μὲν μὴ ἀγεννήτως δὲ ὂν γεννητὴν πάντως ὑπόστασιν ἔχει. εἰ οὖν γεννητὸς ὁ πατὴρ κατ' ἐκείνους ἄλλο τι ὢν παρὰ τὸν ἀγέννητον, ποῦ ἡ πολυθρύλητος ἀγεννησία ἐκείνη; ποῦ ἡ κρηπὶς καὶ ἡ 1.1.616 ὑποβάθρα τῆς αἱρετικῆς πυργοποιΐας; οἴχεται καὶ ἠφά νισται διὰ τοῦ γλίσχρου τῶν σοφισμάτων ἐκ τῶν κατέχειν τέως δοκούντων διολισθῆσαν τῆς λαβῆς τὸ ἀγέννητον, καὶ ἡ τοῦ ἀνομοίου κατασκευὴ καθάπερ τι ὄναρ διαρρυεῖσα τοῦ λόγου τὴν ἐπαφὴν διαπέφευγε τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ συναποπτᾶσα. οὕτως ὅταν τι ψεῦδος ᾖ πρὸ τῆς ἀληθείας τιμώμενον, κἂν πρὸς ὀλίγον διὰ τῆς ἀπάτης ἀνθήσῃ, ταχέως περὶ ἑαυτὸ καταρρεῖ καὶ ταῖς ἰδίαις κατασκευαῖς διαλύεται. 1.1.617 Ἀλλὰ ταῦτα μέν, ὅσον ἐπιμειδιᾶσαι τῇ κομψείᾳ τῆς τοῦ ἀνομοίου ἀνταποδόσεως, καὶ παρ' ἡμῶν προενήνεκται. 1.1.618 καιρὸς δ' ἂν εἴη πάλιν ἐπαναγαγεῖν ἐπὶ τὴν ἀκολου θίαν τὸν λόγον. οὐ βούλεται ὁ Εὐνόμιος ὑπὸ τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς φωνῆς καὶ τοῦ ἀγεννήτου τὴν σημασίαν παρίστασθαι, ἵνα τὸ ποτὲ μὴ εἶναι τὸν μονογενῆ κατασκευάσῃ. καὶ γὰρ καὶ πολὺ τοῦτο παρὰ τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ τὸ ἐρώτημα ὅτι, 1.1.619 ὁ ὢν πῶς γεννᾶται; αἴτιον δὲ τούτου οἶμαι τὸ μὴ ἐθέλειν τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης χρήσεως τῶν ὀνομάτων καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν θείων διανοημάτων ἀφίστασθαι. ἀλλ' ἡμεῖς εὐνοϊκῶς αὐτῷ τὸ πεπλανημένον τῆς ὑπονοίας εἰς τὸ εὐθὲς