273

flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever, amen.” But they want to narrate it in a single clause, in this manner as Theodotus; that one having described him by nature most extremely as a mere man, this one again another extreme in a single fashion, considering the same to be God the Father and Son and Holy Spirit, having suffered in the flesh and having been born. Therefore, neither those from Theodotus said anything in truth, nor this Noetus and those from him, but rather foolish in power, just as the divine scriptures refute both and all who have been led astray. 3. But to everyone who has his mind set on God * and has been enlightened by divine scripture and by the Holy Spirit, their argument will appear easily refutable and full of all foolishness. For the work is of audacity and the thought * of blindness, which asserts that the same is Father and the same Son and the same has suffered; so that those who assert such things will be judged by right reasoning and logic. For how could the same be Father, being also Son? For if he is a son, he must surely be the son of someone, from whom he has been begotten. But if he is a father, it is impossible for him to beget himself. And again, the one called son did not beget himself, but was begotten of a father. And oh, the great madness of men and their incorrigible reasoning. For the logical position is, is not as these men think, but as the truth shows us through divine scripture. For immediately the Lord declares, saying, “Behold, my beloved servant will understand, whom I have chosen, whom my 2.348 soul has loved; I will put my spirit upon him.” And you see how the voice of the Father shows a Son by nature, upon whom he also places his spirit. Then the only-begotten himself says, “Glorify me, Father, with the glory which I had with you before the world was made.” And he who says, “Father, glorify me,” does not call himself father, but knows his own Father. Again in another place, “a voice came from heaven, ‘This is my son, listen to him.’” And he did not say, “I am my son, listen to me,” nor again, “I have become a son,” but, “This is my son, listen to him.” And in saying, “I and my Father are one,” he did not say, “I and my Father, I am one,” but, “I and my Father, we are one.” And the phrase “I and the Father,” with the article “the” and the “and” in between, signifies the Father by nature as Father and the Son by nature as Son. 4. And again concerning the Holy Spirit, “if I go away, that one comes, the Spirit of truth.” And this is much clearer: “I go and that one comes.” He did not say, “I go and I come,” but from the “I” and “that one” he signified the Son as a distinct person, the Holy Spirit as a distinct person. And again, “the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father and receives from me,” in order to show the Father as a distinct person, the Son as a distinct person, and the Holy Spirit as a distinct person. And again at the Jordan, the Father spoke from above, the Son went down into the Jordan, and the Spirit in between appeared in the form of a dove and came upon him, although the Spirit did not bear flesh nor put on a body. But so that it would not be thought to be a mixture with the 2.349 Son, the Holy Spirit is formed in the likeness of a dove, so that the Spirit might be seen by nature as a distinct person. From where else do we not have proof to show against these who are engrafting madness into themselves? For if their thought is true, and their stale argument which has no substance nor power nor reasoning of understanding or significance, then indeed the scriptures must be cast out, which everywhere know the Father as Father and the Son as Son and the Holy Spirit as Holy Spirit. But what do you say, O you? Will they not consider it polytheism, those who truly offer worship to the Trinity, who are sons of the truth and of the one apostolic and catholic church? And not so. For who will not say that there is one God of truth,

273

σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν». βούλονται δὲ διηγεῖσθαι μονοκώλως, τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον ὡς Θεόδοτος· ἐκεῖνος μὲν φύσει ἀκροτάτως ἄνθρωπον ψιλὸν διηγησάμενος, οὗτος δὲ πάλιν ἄλλην ἀκρότητα μονοτύπως. τὸν αὐτὸν πατέρα θεὸν καὶ υἱὸν καὶ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἐν σαρκὶ πεπονθότα καὶ γεννηθέντα ἡγησάμενος. οὔτε οὖν ἐκεῖνοι οἱ ἀπὸ Θεοδότου τι ἐν ἀληθείᾳ ἔφασαν οὔτε οὗτος ὁ Νόητος καὶ οἱ ἀπ' αὐτοῦ, ἀνόητος δὲ μᾶλλον τῇ δυνάμει, καθάπερ αἱ θεῖαι γραφαὶ ἀμφοτέρους καὶ πάντας τοὺς πεπλανημένους διελέγχουσι. 3. Παντὶ δὲ τῷ τὸν νοῦν εἰς θεὸν * κεκτημένῳ καὶ ἐν θείᾳ γραφῇ καὶ ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ κατηυγασμένῳ εὐθυέλεγκτος ὁ αὐτῶν λόγος καὶ πάσης ἀνοίας ἔμπλεως φανεῖται. τόλμης γὰρ τὸ ἔργον καὶ τυφλώσεως * ἡ διάνοια φάσκουσα τὸν αὐτὸν πατέρα ὄντα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν πεπονθότα· ὡς καὶ ἀπ' ὀρθοῦ λογισμοῦ καὶ εὐλόγου κριθήσονται οἱ τὰ τοιαῦτα φάσκοντες. πῶς γὰρ εἴη πατὴρ ὁ αὐτὸς καὶ υἱὸς ὑπάρχων; εἰ γὰρ υἱὸς ὑπάρχει, πάντως που τινὸς υἱὸς εἴη, ἀφ' οὗπερ γεγέννηται. εἰ δὲ πατήρ ἐστιν, ἑαυτὸν γεννᾶν ἀδύνατον. πάλιν δὲ τὸ καλούμενον υἱὸς ἑαυτὸν οὐκ ἐγέννησεν, ἀλλὰ ἐκ πατρὸς γεγέννηται. καὶ ὦ τῆς τῶν ἀνθρώπων πολλῆς φρενοβλαβείας καὶ ἀκατορθώτου λογισμοῦ. ἔστι γάρ, ἔστιν τὸ εὔλογον οὐχ ὡς οὗτοι δοξάζουσιν, ἀλλ' ὡς ἡ ἀλήθεια διὰ θείας γραφῆς ἡμῖν ὑποδείκνυσιν. εὐθὺς γὰρ φάσκει ὁ κύριος λέγων «ἰδού, συνήσει ὁ παῖς μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ὃν ᾑρέτισα, ὃν ἠγάπησεν ἡ 2.348 ψυχή μου· θήσομαι τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπ' αὐτῷ». καὶ ὁρᾷς πῶς φωνὴ μὲν πατρὸς δείκνυσι φύσει υἱόν, ἐφ' ᾧ καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα αὐτοῦ τίθησιν. εἶτα δὲ αὐτὸς ὁ μονογενής φησι «δόξασόν με, πάτερ, ἐν τῇ δόξῃ ᾗ εἶχον παρὰ σοὶ πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον γενέσθαι». ὁ δὲ λέγων «πάτερ, δόξασόν με» οὐχ ἑαυτὸν πατέρα καλεῖ, πατέρα δὲ τὸν αὐτοῦ γινώσκει. πάλιν δὲ ἐν ἄλλῳ τόπῳ «ἦλθε φωνὴ ἀπ' οὐρανοῦ, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου, αὐτοῦ ἀκούσατε». καὶ οὐκ εἶπεν «ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ υἱός μου, ἐμοῦ ἀκούσατε», οὐδὲ πάλιν «γέγονα υἱός», ἀλλὰ «οὗτος ὁ υἱός μου, αὐτοῦ ἀκούσατε». καὶ τῷ εἰπεῖν «ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατήρ μου ἕν ἐσμεν», οὐκ εἶπεν «ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατήρ μου εἷς εἰμι», ἀλλά «ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατήρ μου ἕν ἐσμεν». τὸ δὲ «ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατήρ», ὄντος τοῦ ἄρθρου τοῦ «ὁ» καὶ τοῦ «καί» ἀνὰ μέσον, σημαίνει πατέρα φύσει πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν φύσει υἱόν. 4. Καὶ πάλιν περὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος «ἐὰν ἀπέλθω, ἐκεῖνος ἔρχεται, τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας». πολὺ δὲ σαφέστατόν ἐστι τοῦτο τό «ἐγὼ ὑπάγω καὶ ἐκεῖνος ἔρχεται». οὐκ εἶπεν «ἐγὼ ὑπάγω καὶ ἐγὼ ἔρχομαι», ἀλλὰ ἀπὸ τοῦ «ἐγώ» καί «ἐκεῖνος» ἐσήμανεν ἐνυπόστατον τὸν υἱόν, ἐνυπόστατον τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα. καὶ πάλιν «τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἀληθείας τὸ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον καὶ ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λαμβάνον», ἵνα δείξῃ ἐνυπόστατον τὸν πατέρα, ἐνυπόστατον τὸν υἱὸν καὶ ἐνυπόστατον τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα. καὶ πάλιν δὲ ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἰορδάνου ἄνωθεν ὁ πατὴρ ἐλάλει, υἱὸς δὲ ἐν Ἰορδάνῃ κατήρχετο, τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα μεσαίτατον ἐν εἴδει περιστερᾶς ἐφαίνετο καὶ ἦλθεν ἐπ' αὐτόν, καίτοι γε τοῦ πνεύματος μὴ φορέσαντος σάρκα μήτε ἐνδυσαμένου σῶμα. διὰ δὲ τὸ μὴ νομίζεσθαι συναλοιφὴν εἶναι πρὸς τὸν 2.349 υἱόν, τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα σχηματίζεται ἐν εἴδει περιστερᾶς διὰ τὸ ὀπτάνεσθαι φύσει ἐνυπόστατον τὸ πνεῦμα. πόθεν δὲ ἀλλαχόθεν οὐκ ἔχομεν δεῖξαι κατὰ τούτων τῶν τὴν φρενοβλάβειαν ἑαυτοῖς ἐγκισσώντων; εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἀληθεύει ἡ αὐτῶν διάνοια καὶ ὁ λόγος ὁ ἕωλος καὶ μὴ ἔχων σύστασιν μήτε δύναμιν μήτε συνέσεως λογισμὸν ἢ ἔμφασιν, ἄρα γοῦν ἐκβλητέαι εἰσὶν αἱ γραφαί, αἱ πάντῃ μὲν πατέρα πατέρα γινώσκουσαι καὶ υἱὸν υἱὸν καὶ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἅγιον πνεῦμα. Ἀλλὰ τί φάσκεις, ὦ οὗτος; μὴ πολυθεΐαν ἡγήσοιντο οἱ τὸ σέβας ἀληθινῶς τῇ τριάδι προσφέροντες, οἵτινές εἰσιν υἱοὶ τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ τῆς μόνης ἀποστολικῆς καὶ καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας; καὶ οὐχ οὕτως. τίς γὰρ οὐκ ἐρεῖ ἕνα θεὸν εἶναι τῆς ἀληθείας,