I have deluged my discourse with much nonsense of his, but I trust my hearers will pardon me for not leaving unnoticed even the most glaring of his inanities; not that we take pleasure in our author’s indecorum, (for what advantage can we derive from the refutation of our adversaries’ folly?) but that truth may be advanced by confirmation from whatever quarter. “Since,” says he, “our Lord applies these appellations to Himself, not deeming any one of them first, or second, or more minute and accurate than the rest, you cannot say that these names are the result of conception.” Why, he has forgotten his own object! How comes he by the knowledge of the words against which he declares war? Our master and guide had made mention of an example familiar to all, in illustration of the doctrine of conception, and having explained his meaning by lower illustrations, he lifts the consideration of the question to higher things. He had said that the word “corn,” regarded by itself, is one thing only as to substance, but that, as to the various properties we see in it, it varies its appellations, being called seed, and fruit, and food, and the like. Similarly, says he, our Lord is in respect to Himself what He is essentially, but when named according to the differences of His operations, He has not one appellation in all cases, but takes a different name according to each notion produced in us from the operation. How, then, does what he says disprove our theory that it is possible for many appellations to be attached with propriety, according to the diversity of His operations, and His relation to their effects, to the Son of God, though one in respect of the underlying force, even as corn, though one, has various names apportioned to it, according to the point of view from which we regard it? How, then, can what is said be overthrown by our saying that Christ used all these names of Himself? For the question was not, who ascribed them, but about the meaning of the names, whether they denote essence, or whether they are derived from His operations by the process of conception. But our shrewd and strong-minded opponent, overturning our theory of conception, which declares that it is possible to find many appellations for one and the same subject, according to the significances of its operations, attacks us vigorously, asserting that such names were not given to our Lord by another. But what has this to do with the case in point? Since these names are used by our Lord, will he not allow that they are names, or appellations, or words expressive of ideas? For if he will not admit them to be names, then, in doing away with the appellations, he does away at the same time with the conception. But if he does not deny that these words are names, what harm can he do to our doctrine of conception by showing that such titles were given to our Lord, not by some one else, but by Himself? For what was said was this, that, as in the instance of corn, our Lord, though substantively One, bears epithets suitable to His operations. And as it is admitted that corn has its names by virtue of our conception of its associations, it was shown that these terms significative of our Lord are not of His essence, but are formed by the method of conception in our minds respecting Him. But our antagonist studiously avoids attacking these positions, and maintains that our Lord received these names from Himself, in the same way as, if one sought for the true interpretation of the name “Isaac,” whether it means laughter95    Gen. xviii. 12; xxi. 6., as some say, or something else, one of Eunomius’ way of thinking should confidently reply that the name was given to him as a child by his mother: but that, one might say, was not the question, i.e. by whom the name was given, but what does it mean when translated into our language? And this being the point of the inquiry, whether our Lord’s various appellations were the result of conception, instead of being indicative of His essence, he who thus seeks to demonstrate that they are not so derived because they are used by our Lord Himself,—how can he be numbered among men of sense, warring as he does against the truth, and equipping himself with such alliances for the war as serve to show the superior strength of his enemy?

Πολὺν ἐπήντλησα τῷ λόγῳ τὸν ἐκεῖθεν λῆρον: ἀλλὰ παραιτοῦμαι τοὺς ἐντυγχάνοντας συγγνώμην ἔχειν, εἰ μηδὲ τὰ πρόδηλα τῶν ματαίων περιορῶμεν ἀκατανόητα, οὐχ ὡς ἐμφαιδρυνόμενοι τῇ ἀσχημοσύνῃ τοῦ λογογράφου (τί γὰρ φέρει κέρδος ἡμῖν ἐλεγχομένη τῶν ἐναντίων ἡ ἄνοια;) ἀλλ' ὡς ἂν ὁδῷ προΐοι συνιστῶσα διὰ πάντων ἑαυτὴν ἡ ἀλήθεια. « ἐπειδή », φησίν, « ἑαυτῷ ταύτας ἐπέθηκε τὰς προσηγορίας ὁ κύριος οὔτε τι πρῶτον νοῶν οὔτε δεύτερον οὔτε λεπτότερόν τι ἢ ἀκριβέστερον, οὐκ ἔστιν ἐξ ἐπινοίας εἶναι ταῦτα εἰπεῖν τὰ ὀνόματα ». πῶς μέμνηται τοῦ ἰδίου σκοποῦ; πῶς οἶδε τοὺς λόγους καθ' ὧν τὸν πόλεμον ἐνεστήσατο; ἐμνήσθη τινὸς τῶν ὑποτρεχόντων τῇ συνηθείᾳ πρὸς τὴν ἑρμηνείαν τῆς ἐπινοίας ὁ καθηγητὴς ὁ ἡμέτερος καὶ ἐν τοῖς κατωτέροις τῶν ὑποδειγμάτων τὸν νοῦν διασαφήσας οὕτως προσβιβάζει τοῖς ἄνω τὴν θεωρίαν τοῦ λόγου. εἶπεν γὰρ ὅτι καθ' ἑαυτὸν ὁ σῖτος ἕν τι πρᾶγμα κατὰ τὴν ὑπόστασιν φαίνεται, πρὸς δὲ τὰς ἐπιθεωρουμένας αὐτῷ ποικίλας ἰδιότητας ἐξαλλάσσει τὰς κλήσεις καὶ σπόρος γινόμενος καὶ καρπὸς καὶ τροφὴ καὶ ὅσα γίνεται, τοσαῦτα ὀνομαζόμενος. παραπλησίως δέ, φησί, καὶ ὁ κύριος ἐστὶ μὲν καθ' ἑαυτὸν ὅ τι ποτὲ κατὰ τὴν φύσιν ἐστί, ταῖς δὲ τῶν ἐνεργειῶν διαφοραῖς συνονομαζόμενος οὐ μίαν ἐπὶ πάντων ἴσχει προσηγορίαν, ἀλλὰ καθ' ἑκάστην ἔννοιαν τὴν ἐξ ἐνεργείας ἐγγινομένην ἡμῖν μεταλαμβάνει τὸ ὄνομα. τί οὖν ὁ λόγος ἡμῶν διὰ τῶν εἰρημένων ἐλέγχεται ὁ εἰπὼν δυνατὸν εἶναι πολλὰς ἐφαρμόζεσθαι προσηγορίας κατὰ τὰς τῶν ἐνεργειῶν διαφορὰς καὶ τὴν πρὸς τὰ ἐνεργούμενα σχέσιν ἑνὶ κατὰ τὸ ὑποκείμενον ὄντι τῷ υἱῷ τοῦ θεοῦ, ὡς καὶ ὁ σῖτος εἷς ὢν ἐκ τῶν ποικίλων περὶ αὐτοῦ νοημάτων διαφόροις ἐπωνυμίαις ἐπιμερίζεται; πῶς οὖν ἀνατρέπει τὰ εἰρημένα ὁ λέγων περὶ ἑαυτοῦ ταῦτα τὸν Χριστὸν τὰ ὀνόματα λέγειν; οὐ γὰρ ὅστις ὁ κατονομάσας τὸ ζητούμενον ἦν, ἀλλὰ περὶ τῆς τῶν ὀνομάτων ἐννοίας ἡ θεωρία προέκειτο πότερον φύσιν ἐνδείκνυται ἢ ἐπινοητικῶς ἐκ τῶν ἐνεργειῶν ὀνομάζεται. ἀλλ' ὁ δριμὺς οὗτος καὶ ἀμφιλαφὴς τὴν διάνοιαν ἀνατρέπων τὸν ἀποδοθέντα περὶ τῆς ἐπινοίας λόγον τὸν εἰπόντα δυνατὸν εἶναι ἑνὶ τῷ ὑποκειμένῳ πολλὰς ἐξευρίσκειν προσηγορίας κατὰ τῶν ἐνεργειῶν τὰς σημασίας ἰσχυρῶς κέχρηται καθ' ἡμῶν τῇ μάχῃ λέγων « μὴ παρ' ἑτέρου τινὸς τεθεῖσθαι τῷ κυρίῳ τὰς τοιαύτας φωνάς ». τί οὖν ταῦτα πρὸς τὴν νῦν προκειμένην σπουδήν; μὴ ἐπειδὴ παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου τὰ ὀνόματα λέγεται, οὐδὲ ὀνόματα δώσει ταῦτα εἶναι οὐδὲ προσηγορίας οὐδὲ φωνὰς νοημάτων σημαντικάς; εἰ μὲν γὰρ οὐ δέχεται τὸ εἶναι ταῦτα ὀνόματα, τῇ τῶν προσηγοριῶν ἀναιρέσει καὶ ἡ ἐπίνοια συνανῄρηται: εἰ δὲ οὐκ ἀντιλέγει τὸ τὰς φωνὰς ταύτας ὀνόματα εἶναι, τί βλάπτει τὸν κατ' ἐπίνοιαν λόγον διὰ τοῦ δεῖξαι μὴ παρ' ἑτέρου τινός, ἀλλὰ παρ' αὐτοῦ τοῦ κυρίου τὰς τοιαύτας τεθεῖσθαι κλήσεις; τὸ γὰρ λεγόμενον ἦν, ὅτι παραπλησίως τῷ κατὰ τὸν σῖτον ὑποδείγματι ἓν κατὰ τὸ ὑποκείμενον ὁ κύριος ὢν πρόσφορα ταῖς ἐνεργείαις ἔχει καὶ τὰ ὀνόματα. τοῦ δὲ σίτου κατὰ τὴν τῶν περὶ αὐτὸν θεωρουμένων ἐπίνοιαν τὰς ὀνομασίας ἔχειν ὁμολογουμένου συγκατεσκευάζετο καὶ τὸ μὴ φύσεως εἶναι ταύτας ἐπὶ τοῦ κυρίου σημαντικὰς τὰς φωνάς, ἀλλὰ τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἐπινοίας ἐν τοῖς περὶ αὐτὸν νοουμένοις συνίστασθαι. ὁ δὲ ἀντιλέγων ὑπὸ πολλῆς προσοχῆς οὐ πρὸς τὰ τεθέντα ποιεῖται τὴν μάχην, ἀλλά φησιν αὐτὸν ὑφ' ἑαυτοῦ ταῦτα κατονομάζεσθαι, ὅμοιον ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις τοῦ κατὰ τὸν Ἰσαὰκ ὀνόματος τὴν ἑρμηνείαν ζητῶν, πότερον γέλως ὥς φασί τινες ἑρμηνεύεται ἢ ἄλλο τι σημαίνει τὸ ὄνομα, ὁ δέ τις τῶν κατὰ Εὐνόμιον ἐπιστατικῶς ἀποκρίνοιτο παρὰ τῆς μητρὸς τεθεῖσθαι τῷ παιδὶ τὴν κλῆσιν: ἀλλ' οὐ τοῦτο, φαίη τις ἄν, τὸ ζητούμενον ἦν, παρὰ τίνος ἡ ἐπωνυμία πεπόρισται, ἀλλὰ τί σημαίνει μεταληφθεῖσα πρὸς τὴν ἡμετέραν γλῶσσαν ἡ τοῦ ὀνόματος ἔννοια. καὶ ἐνταῦθα τοίνυν τῆς ζητήσεως οὔσης, εἰ τὰ ποικίλως ἐπιλεγόμενα τῷ κυρίῳ κατ' ἐπίνοιαν λέγεται καὶ οὐχὶ τῆς φύσεως τὴν ἔνδειξιν ἔχει, ὁ τοιαύτην ἐπαγαγὼν τὴν ἀπόδειξιν τοῦ μὴ ἐν ἐπινοίᾳ θεωρεῖσθαι τὰς προσηγορίας, τὸ παρ' αὐτοῦ τοῦ κυρίου λέγεσθαι ταύτας, πῶς μετὰ τῶν σωφρονούντων ἀριθμηθήσεται ὁ καὶ πολεμῶν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ καὶ τοιαύταις πρὸς τὸν πόλεμον συμμαχίαις χρώμενος, δι' ὧν ἰσχυρότερον ἀποφαίνει τὸν πολεμούμενον;