150

Therefore he is also unbegotten in respect to being without end, and "without end" and "unbegotten" are the same in meaning; and he agrees that the Son is without end, so from this sequence he will necessarily agree that the Son is also unbegotten, if indeed "without end" is the same as "without beginning," as he has said. 2.1.534 For just as he sees "without end" in "unbegotten," so he confesses to have understood "without beginning" in "without end." For he would not otherwise have made the inversion of the names on an equal basis. But "by nature and not by comparison with the ages," he says, "God is unbegotten." But who contends about this, that God is not by nature everything 2.1.535 that he is also called? For indeed we do not say that God is just and powerful and Father and incorruptible by comparison with the ages, nor by reference to anything else that exists, but we contemplate every pious conception about the subject itself, whatever it is by nature. So that if, by hypothesis, neither an age nor anything else conceived in creation had been created, God would no less have been what he is now believed to be, needing none of the ages in order to 2.1.536 become what he is. But "he does not have," he says, "an acquired nor a composite nor a different life; for he himself is the eternal life, immortal by life itself, incorruptible by immortality itself." These things we have learned also concerning the Only-begotten, and there is no one who contradicts, unless perhaps someone were to openly fight against the words of John. For life was neither introduced to the Son ("For I am," he says, "the life") nor is his life composite or different, but he is immortal by life itself (for in what else could one contemplate immortality except in life?) and incorruptible by immortality itself. For that which is superior to death is altogether insusceptible to corruption. 2.1.537 Up to this point our argument also follows. But let those trained in the wisdom of Pronicus interpret the riddle composed along with what has been said; for it seems to me that he has produced what has been said from that school of thought. For what does he say? "Being incorruptible, he is beginninglessly unbegotten endlessly, being spoken of neither according to another nor through another nor in relation to another." For one whose hearing is cleansed and whose mind is discerning knows even before my words that apart from the crash of the words, which he has clapped together in their strange combination, no trace of scientific 2.1.538 thought is found in what has been said. But if perchance even a shadow of a thought should be found in the noise of the phrases, what is found will be altogether impious or ridiculous. For what do you mean when you say this, tell me, that he is without beginning endlessly and without end beginninglessly? Do you think that the beginning is the same as the end and that the two terms stand for one concept, just as the names Peter and Simon signify one subject through themselves? And for this reason, just as you think the beginning is the same as the end, have you thus joined to one meaning the two terms that negate each of these (I mean of the end and of the beginning), understanding from the converse that "without beginning" is the same as "without end," and made the two terms one by confusing them with each other, and is this what your mixture of names means in saying he is unbegotten endlessly and without end unbegottenly? 2.1.539 And how did you not see what is at once impious and ridiculous in what you are saying? For if the inversion of names happens on an equal basis through this new mixture, such that "unbegotten" is unbegotten endlessly and "without end" is without end unbegottenly, it is altogether necessary that everything without end not be otherwise unless it be unbegottenly; and so, dearest friend, your much-vaunted "unbegottenness," which alone, according to you, characterizes the substance of the Father, is found to be made common to everything that is immortal and making all things consubstantial with the Father, because it appears equally in all those for whom life proceeds to the infinite through immortality: archangels, angels, human souls, and perhaps even to the apostate 2.1.540 power itself, to the devil and the demons. For if what is without end and

150

τοίνυν καὶ κατὰ τὸ ἀτελεύτητόν ἐστιν ἀγέννητος καὶ ταὐτόν ἐστι κατὰ τὸ σημαινόμενον τὸ ἀτελεύτητόν τε καὶ ἀγέννητον, ἀτελεύτητον δὲ καὶ τὸν υἱὸν εἶναι συντίθεται, ἀγέννητον ἐκ τῆς ἀκολουθίας ταύτης καὶ τὸν υἱὸν κατ' ἀνάγκην συν θήσεται, εἴπερ ταὐτόν ἐστι, καθὼς εἴρηκε, τῷ ἀνάρχῳ τὸ 2.1.534 ἀτελεύτητον. ὡς γὰρ ἐν τῷ ἀγεννήτῳ βλέπει τὸ ἀτελεύ τητον, οὕτως ὁμολογεῖ νενοηκέναι καὶ ἐν τῷ ἀτελευτήτῳ τὸ ἄναρχον. οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἐν τῷ ἴσῳ τὴν τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀνα στροφὴν ἐποιήσατο. ἀλλὰ 20φύσει καὶ οὐ παραθέσει τῶν αἰώνων20, φησίν, 20ὁ θεός ἐστιν ἀγέννητος20. τίς δὲ ὁ περὶ τούτου μαχόμενος, τὸ μὴ φύσει τὸν θεὸν πᾶν 2.1.535 εἶναι ὅ τι καὶ λέγεται; καὶ γὰρ καὶ δίκαιον καὶ δυνατὸν καὶ πατέρα καὶ ἄφθαρτον οὔτε τῇ πρὸς τοὺς αἰῶνας παρα θέσει λέγομεν τὸν θεὸν εἶναι οὔτε τῇ πρὸς ἕτερόν τι τῶν ὄντων ἀναφορᾷ, ἀλλὰ περὶ αὐτὸ τὸ ὑποκείμενον, ὅ τι ποτὲ κατὰ τὴν φύσιν ἐστίν, πᾶσαν εὐσεβῆ θεωροῦμεν ὑπόληψιν. ὡς εἴ γε καθ' ὑπόθεσιν μήτε αἰὼν μήτε τι ἄλλο τῶν κατὰ τὴν κτίσιν νοουμένων δεδημιούργητο, οὐδὲν ἧττον ἦν ἂν ὁ θεὸς ὅπερ νῦν εἶναι πεπίστευται, οὐδὲν τῶν αἰώνων εἰς τὸ 2.1.536 γενέσθαι ὅ ἐστι προσδεόμενος. ἀλλ' 20οὐκ ἐπείσακτον20, φησίν, 20οὐδὲ σύνθετον οὐδὲ διάφορον ἔχει ζωήν· αὐτὸς γάρ ἐστιν ἡ ἀΐδιος ζωὴ κατ' αὐτὴν τὴν ζωὴν ἀθάνατος, κατ' αὐτὴν τὴν ἀθανασίαν ἄ φθαρτος20. ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς μεμαθήκαμεν, καὶ ὁ ἀντιλέγων οὐκ ἔστι, εἰ μή τις ἄρα ταῖς Ἰωάννου φωναῖς ἐκ τοῦ προφανοῦς διαμάχοιτο. οὔτε γὰρ ἐπεισήχθη τῷ υἱῷ ἡ ζωή (Ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι, φησίν, ἡ ζωή) οὔτε σύνθετος αὐτοῦ ἡ ζωὴ οὔτε διάφορος, ἀλλὰ κατ' αὐτήν ἐστι τὴν ζωὴν ἀθάνατος (<ἐν> τίνι γὰρ ἄν τις ἄλλῳ τὸ ἀθάνατον πλὴν ἐν ζωῇ θεωρήσειε;) καὶ κατ' αὐτὴν τὴν ἀθανασίαν ἄφθαρτος. τὸ γὰρ θανάτου κρεῖττον καὶ φθορᾶς πάντως ἐστὶν ἀνεπίδεκτον. 2.1.537 Μέχρι τούτου καὶ ὁ ἡμέτερος ἕπεται λόγος. τὸν δὲ συγγεγραμμένον τοῖς εἰρημένοις γρῖφον ἑρμηνευόντων οἱ τῇ Προυνίκου σοφίᾳ ἐγγυμνασθέντες· ἐξ ἐκείνης γὰρ δοκεῖ μοι τῆς παρασκευῆς τὰ εἰρημένα προενηνοχέναι. τί γάρ φησιν; 20ἄφθαρτος ὢν ἀνάρχως ἀγέννητός ἐστιν ἀτε λευτήτως οὔτε καθ' ἕτερον οὔτε δι' ἕτερον οὔτε πρὸς ἕτερον λεγόμενος20. ὁ γὰρ κεκαθαρμένος τὴν ἀκοὴν καὶ διορατικὸς τὴν διάνοιαν οἶδε καὶ πρὸ τῶν ἐμῶν λόγων ὅτι πλὴν τοῦ πατάγου τῶν ὀνομάτων, ἃ τῇ ἀλλοκότῳ αὐτῶν συμπλοκῇ κατεκρότησεν, οὐδὲν ἴχνος ἐπι 2.1.538 στημονικῆς διανοίας ἐν τοῖς εἰρημένοις εὑρίσκεται. εἰ δὲ ἄρα τις καὶ σκιὰ νοήματος τῷ ψόφῳ τῶν ῥημάτων ἐνευ ρεθείη, ἀσεβὲς τὸ εὑρεθὲν ἔσται πάντως ἢ καταγέλαστον. τί γὰρ νοῶν τοῦτο λέγεις, εἰπέ μοι, ὅτι ἄναρχός ἐστιν ἀτελευτήτως καὶ ἀτελεύτητος ἀνάρχως; ἆρα ταὐτὸν οἴει τὴν ἀρχὴν εἶναι τῷ τέλει καὶ καθ' ἑνὸς κεῖσθαι νοήματος τὰς δύο φωνάς, ὡς Πέτρου καὶ Σίμωνος αἱ προσηγορίαι ἕν τι τὸ ὑποκείμενον δι' ἑαυτῶν δηλοῦσι, καὶ τούτου χάριν ὥσπερ τὴν ἀρχὴν τῷ τέλει ταὐτὸν εἶναι νομίζεις, οὕτως συνάψας πρὸς μίαν σημασίαν τὰς δύο φωνὰς τὰς ἑκατέρου τούτων ἀναιρετικάς, τοῦ τέλους λέγω καὶ τῆς ἀρχῆς, ἐκ τοῦ ἀντιστρόφου νοήσας τῷ ἀνάρχῳ ταὐτὸν εἶναι τὸ ἀτε λεύτητον μίαν τὰς δύο φωνὰς συγχέας ἐν ἀλλήλαις ἐποίησας, καὶ τοῦτό σοι βούλεται τῶν ὀνομάτων ἡ μίξις ἐν τῷ λέγειν ἀγέννητον εἶναι ἀτελευτήτως καὶ ἀτελεύτητον ἀγεννήτως; 2.1.539 καὶ πῶς οὐκ εἶδες τὸ ἀσεβὲς ἐν τοῖς λεγομένοις ἅμα καὶ καταγέλαστον; εἰ γὰρ ἐκ τοῦ ἴσου γίνεται διὰ τῆς καινῆς ταύτης μίξεως ἡ τῶν ὀνομάτων ἀναστροφή, ὡς τὸ ἀγέν νητον ἀτελευτήτως εἶναι ἀγέννητον καὶ τὸ ἀτελεύτητον ἀγεννήτως εἶναι ἀτελεύτητον, ἀνάγκη πᾶσα πᾶν ἀτελεύτητον μὴ ἄλλως εἶναι εἰ μὴ ἀγεννήτως εἴη· καὶ οὕτως εὑρίσκεταί σοι, ὦ φίλτατε, ἡ πολυθρύλητος 20ἀγεννησία20 ἡ μόνη κατὰ σὲ τοῦ πατρὸς τὴν οὐσίαν χαρακτηρίζουσα κοινοποιουμένη πρὸς πᾶν τὸ ἀθάνατον καὶ πάντα ποιοῦσα τῷ πατρὶ ὁμο ούσια, διὰ τὸ πᾶσιν ὁμοίως ἐμφαίνεσθαι, οἷς διὰ τῆς ἀθα νασίας πρόεισιν ἡ ζωὴ πρὸς τὸ ἄπειρον, ἀρχαγγέλοις ἀγγέ λοις ἀνθρωπίναις ψυχαῖς, τάχα δὲ καὶ αὐτῇ τῇ ἀποστατικῇ 2.1.540 δυνάμει, τῷ διαβόλῳ καὶ τοῖς δαίμοσιν. εἰ γὰρ τὸ ἀτελεύ τητόν τε