273

to receive understanding of divine dogmas for guidance. For having shaken off every carnal and material concept of the divine and lofty dogmas, we will have the most secure guidance to the high and inaccessible things through the remaining thought, when it has been cleansed of such things. 3.1.77 For it is confessed even by our opponents that the God who is over all both is and is called the Father of the Only-begotten, but they also name the Only-begotten God who is from the Father 20generate20 because he was begotten. Since, therefore, among men the name of father has certain conjoined implications, from which the undefiled nature is estranged, it is fitting, having left behind all the material thoughts that enter in concerning the carnal meaning of father, to impress upon oneself a certain God-befitting thought, indicative only of genuineness in the case of God the Father. 3.1.78 Since, therefore, not only are all the things which the flesh supposes to be understood comprehended in the concept of a human father, but also a certain concept of interval is in every way co-conceived with human fatherhood, it would be well, along with the bodily filth, to cast away also the concept of interval in the case of the divine generation, so that, with the material property having been washed away from all sides, the transcendent generation might be pure of every passionate, but also of every intervallic, thought. 3.1.79 Therefore, he who calls God Father will include the 'what he is' in the concept of 'that God is.' For he whose being is from some beginning, for him the 'what he is' also by all means begins from something; but for him whose being did not begin, neither does anything else contemplated concerning him have its beginning from something. But truly, God is Father. Therefore, from eternity He is what He is; for He did not become, but He is Father. For in the case of God, what 3.1.80 was, also is and will be. But if anything ever was not, it neither is nor will be; for he is not believed to be the Father of such a one, without whom it is pious to say that God ever existed by Himself. For the Father is Father of life and of truth and of wisdom and of light and of holiness and of power and of all such things, as many as the Only-begotten both is and is named. Therefore, when it is contrived by the enemies that the light once was not, I do not know whose loss is greater, whether that of the light itself, when it is not light, or of the one having it, when he does not 3.1.81 have the light. So also concerning life and truth and power and all the other things, as many as fill the Father's bosom, *** the Only-begotten God being all things in His own fullness. For the absurdity is equal in each case, and the impiety against the Father is a counterbalance to the blasphemy against the Son. For in saying that the Lord once was not, you will not simply posit that power was not, but you will say that the power of God was not, of the Father 3.1.82 of power. Therefore, the construction through your argument that the Son once was not constructs nothing other than a destitution of every good concerning the Father. See to what the sagacity of the wise leads. How true, even through these things, is the voice of the Lord, which says: "He who rejects me rejects Him who sent me"? For by the things through which they reject the 'to be at some time' of the Only-begotten, through these they dishonor the Father, having stripped by their argument every good name and concept from the Father's glory. 3.1.83 Therefore, through the things that have been said, the feebleness of the writer's villainy has been clearly exposed, who, attempting to construct an opposition of the substance of the Only-begotten to that of the Father by calling one unbegotten and the other begotten, was refuted, trifling with incoherent things. 3.1.84 For it was shown through his own words, first, that the name of substance is one thing and that of generation is another, and then, that no new and altered substance, different from the substance of the Father, came to exist in the Son, but what the Father is in the principle of nature, this also is He who is from Him, the nature not having been changed into otherness in the hypostasis of the Son, according to the truth of the argument 3.1.85 previously shown to us in the contemplation of Abel and Adam. For as there he who was not begotten was the same in the principle of substance as he who was begotten, in like manner also the generation of Abel the of the nature

273

θείων δογμάτων κατανόησιν εἰς ὁδηγίαν λαβεῖν. πᾶσαν γὰρ σαρκώδη καὶ ὑλικὴν ἔννοιαν τῶν θείων τε καὶ ὑψηλῶν δογμάτων ἀποσεισάμενοι ἀσφα λεστάτην ἕξομεν διὰ τοῦ καταλειπομένου νοήματος, ὅταν ἐκκαθαρθῇ τῶν τοιούτων, τὴν ἐπὶ τὰ ὑψηλά τε καὶ ἀπρόσ ιτα χειραγωγίαν. 3.1.77 Ὁμολογεῖται γὰρ καὶ παρὰ τῶν ἐναντίων τὸν ἐπὶ πάν των ὄντα θεὸν πατέρα τοῦ μονογενοῦς καὶ εἶναι καὶ λέ γεσθαι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν μονογενῆ θεὸν τὸν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ὄντα 20γεννητὸν20 διὰ τὸ γεννηθῆναι κατονομάζουσιν. ἐπεὶ οὖν ἐν ἀνθρώποις τὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ὄνομα συνεζευγμένας ἔχει τινὰς ἐμφάσεις, ὧν ἡ ἀκήρατος ἠλλοτρίωται φύσις, πάντα προσήκει ὅσα περὶ τὴν σαρκώδη τοῦ πατρὸς σημασίαν ὑλικὰ νοήματα συνεισέρχεται καταλιπόντα θεοπρεπῆ τινα διάνοιαν ἐμφαντικὴν μόνης τῆς γνησιότητος ἐπὶ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς 3.1.78 ἐντυπώσασθαι. ἐπεὶ οὖν οὐ μόνον ὅσα ἡ σὰρξ νοεῖν ὑπο τίθεται τῇ τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνου πατρὸς ἐννοίᾳ συγκαταλαμβά νεται, ἀλλὰ καὶ διαστηματική τις ἔννοια συνεπινοεῖται πάν τως τῇ ἀνθρωπίνῃ πατρότητι, καλῶς ἂν ἔχοι τῷ σωματικῷ ῥύπῳ καὶ τὴν διαστηματικὴν ἔννοιαν ἐπὶ τῆς θείας συν αποβαλεῖν γεννήσεως, ὡς ἂν πανταχόθεν ἐκπλυθείσης τῆς ὑλικῆς ἰδιότητος καθαρεύοι παντὸς οὐ μόνον ἐμπαθοῦς, ἀλλὰ καὶ διαστηματικοῦ νοήματος ἡ ὑπερέχουσα γέννησις. 3.1.79 οὐκοῦν ὁ πατέρα τὸν θεὸν λέγων τῇ τοῦ εἶναι τὸν θεὸν ἐννοίᾳ καὶ τὸ τὶ εἶναι συμπεριλήψεται. ᾧ γὰρ ἀπό τινος ἀρχῆς ἐστι τὸ εἶναι, τούτῳ καὶ τὸ τὶ εἶναι πάντως ἀπό τινος ἄρχεται· ἐφ' οὗ δὲ τὸ εἶναι οὐκ ἤρξατο, οὐδὲ εἴ τι ἄλλο περὶ αὐτὸν θεωρεῖται ἀπό τινος τὴν ἀρχὴν ἔχει. ἀλλὰ μὴν πατὴρ ὁ θεός. οὐκοῦν ἐξ ἀϊδίου ἐστὶν ὅπερ ἐστίν· οὐ γὰρ ἐγένετο, ἀλλ' ἐστὶ πατήρ· ἐπὶ θεοῦ γὰρ ὃ 3.1.80 ἦν, καὶ ἐστὶ καὶ ἔσται. εἰ δέ τί ποτε μὴ ἦν, οὔτε ἐστὶν οὔτε ἔσται· οὐ γὰρ τοιούτου τινὸς πεπίστευται εἶναι πατήρ, οὗ χωρὶς εὐσεβές ἐστιν ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ ποτε τὸν θεὸν εἶναι λέγειν. ζωῆς γάρ ἐστι πατὴρ ὁ πατὴρ ἀληθείας τε καὶ σοφίας καὶ φωτὸς καὶ ἁγιασμοῦ καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ πάντων τῶν τοιούτων, ὅσα ὁ μονογενής ἐστί τε καὶ ὀνομάζεται. ὅταν τοίνυν παρὰ τῶν ἐχθρῶν κατασκευάζηται τὸ μὴ εἶναί ποτε φῶς, οὐκ οἶδα τίνος πλείων ἐστὶν ἡ ζημία, πότερον αὐτοῦ τοῦ φωτός, ὅταν μὴ τὸ φῶς ᾖ, ἢ τοῦ ἔχοντος, ὅταν μὴ 3.1.81 ἔχῃ τὸ φῶς. οὕτω καὶ περὶ τῆς ζωῆς καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ τῆς δυνάμεως καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πάντων, ὅσα τὸν πατρικὸν πληροῖ κόλπον, *** ὁ μονογενὴς θεὸς ἐν τῷ ἰδίῳ πληρώ ματι τὰ πάντα ὤν. ἴση γὰρ καθ' ἑκάτερόν ἐστιν ἡ ἀτοπία καὶ τῆς κατὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ βλασφημίας ἀντίρροπος ἡ κατὰ τοῦ πατρός ἐστιν ἀσέβεια. ἐν γὰρ τῷ εἰπεῖν ποτε μὴ εἶναι τὸν κύριον οὐχ ἁπλῶς δώσεις τὸ μὴ εἶναι τὴν δύναμιν, ἀλλὰ τοῦ θεοῦ μὴ εἶναι λέξεις τὴν δύναμιν, τοῦ πατρὸς 3.1.82 τῆς δυνάμεως. οὐκοῦν ἡ τοῦ μὴ εἶναί ποτε τὸν υἱὸν διὰ τοῦ σοῦ λόγου κατασκευὴ οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ παντὸς ἀγαθοῦ ἐρημίαν περὶ τὸν πατέρα κατασκευάζει. ὁρᾶτε πρὸς ὅ τι καταστρέφει τῶν σοφῶν ἡ ἀγχίνοια. πῶς ἀληθεύει καὶ διὰ τούτων ἡ τοῦ κυρίου φωνή, ἥ φησιν ὅτι ὁ ἀθετῶν ἐμὲ ἀθετεῖ τὸν ἀποστείλαντά με; δι' ὧν γὰρ τὸ εἶναί ποτε τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἀθετοῦσι, διὰ τούτων ἀτιμάζουσι τὸν πατέρα, πᾶν ἀγαθὸν ὄνομά τε καὶ νόημα τῆς πατρικῆς δόξης τῷ λόγῳ περισυλήσαντες. 3.1.83 Οὐκοῦν ἐναργῶς πεφώραται διὰ τῶν εἰρημένων τοῦ λογογράφου ἡ ἀτονία τῆς κακουργίας, ὃς κατασκευάζειν ἐπιχειρῶν τὴν τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ μονογενοῦς πρὸς τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς ἐναντίωσιν διὰ τοῦ τὴν μὲν ἀγέννητον τὴν δὲ γεν νητὴν ὀνομάζειν ἀπηλέγχθη τοῖς ἀσυστάτοις ἐμματαιάζων. 3.1.84 ἐδείχθη γὰρ διὰ τῶν παρ' αὐτοῦ λόγων πρῶτον μὲν ἕτερον εἶναι τὸ τῆς οὐσίας καὶ ἄλλο τὸ τῆς γεννήσεως ὄνομα, ἔπειτα δὲ ὅτι οὐκ οὐσία τις καινὴ καὶ παρηλλαγμένη παρὰ τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς οὐσίαν ἐν τῷ υἱῷ ὑπέστη, ἀλλ' ὅπερ ἐστὶν ὁ πατὴρ ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῆς φύσεως, τοῦτο καὶ ὁ ἐξ ἐκείνου ἐστίν, οὐ μεταβληθείσης εἰς ἑτερότητα ἐν τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ ὑπο στάσει τῆς φύσεως, κατὰ τὴν προδειχθεῖσαν ἡμῖν τοῦ λόγου 3.1.85 ἀλήθειαν ἐπὶ τῆς τοῦ Ἄβελ καὶ τοῦ Ἀδὰμ θεωρίας. ὡς γὰρ ἐκεῖ ὁ αὐτὸς ἦν ἐν τῷ τῆς οὐσίας λόγῳ τῷ γεννη θέντι ὁ μὴ γεννηθεὶς ὁμοιοτρόπως καὶ ἡ γέννησις τοῦ Ἄβελ τὴν τῆς φύσεως