On “Not Three Gods.” To Ablabius.

 Ye that are strong with all might in the inner man ought by rights to carry on the struggle against the enemies of the truth, and not to shrink from t

 In truth, the question you propound to us is no small one, nor such that but small harm will follow if it meets with insufficient treatment. For by th

 The argument which you state is something like this:—Peter, James, and John, being in one human nature, are called three men: and there is no absurdit

 What, then, is the reason that when we count one by one those who are exhibited to us in one nature, we ordinarily name them in the plural and speak o

 We say, then, to begin with, that the practice of calling those who are not divided in nature by the very name of their common nature in the plural, a

 Most men think that the word “Godhead” is used in a peculiar degree in respect of nature: and just as the heaven, or the sun, or any other of the cons

 But some one will say that the proof of our argument does not yet regard the question. For even if it were granted that the name of “Godhead” is a com

 As we have to a certain extent shown by our statement that the word “Godhead” is not significant of nature but of operation, perhaps one might reasona

 Since, then, the character of the superintending and beholding power is one, in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as has been said in our previous argumen

 If, then, every good thing and every good name, depending on that power and purpose which is without beginning, is brought to perfection in the power

 It does not seem to me absolutely necessary, with a view to the present proof of our argument, to contend against those who oppose us with the asserti

 But if it pleases our adversaries to say that the significance of the term is not operation, but nature, we shall fall back upon our original argument

 As, then, the golden staters are many, but the gold is one, so too those who are exhibited to us severally in the nature of man, as Peter, James, and

 Indeed, it would be a lengthy task to set out in detail from the Scriptures those constructions which are inexactly expressed, in order to prove the s

 If, however, any one cavils at our argument, on the ground that by not admitting the difference of nature it leads to a mixture and confusion of the P

 But in speaking of “cause,” and “of the cause,” we do not by these words denote nature (for no one would give the same definition of “cause” and of “n

 Thus, since on the one hand the idea of cause differentiates the Persons of the Holy Trinity, declaring that one exists without a Cause, and another i

If, then, every good thing and every good name, depending on that power and purpose which is without beginning, is brought to perfection in the power of the Spirit through the Only-begotten God, without mark of time or distinction (since there is no delay, existent or conceived, in the motion of the Divine will from the Father, through the Son, to the Spirit): and if Godhead also is one of the good names and concepts, it would not be proper to divide the name into a plurality, since the unity existing in the action prevents plural enumeration. And as the Saviour of all men, specially of them that believe21    1 Tim. iv. 10., is spoken of by the Apostle as one, and no one from this phrase argues either that the Son does not save them who believe, or that salvation is given to those who receive it without the intervention of the Spirit; but God who is over all, is the Saviour of all, while the Son works salvation by means of the grace of the Spirit, and yet they are not on this account called in Scripture three Saviours (although salvation is confessed to proceed from the Holy Trinity): so neither are they called three Gods, according to the signification assigned to the term “Godhead,” even though the aforesaid appellation attaches to the Holy Trinity.

Εἰ δὴ πᾶν ἀγαθὸν πρᾶγμα καὶ ὄνομα τῆς ἀνάρχου δυνάμεώς τε καὶ βουλῆς ἐξημμένον ἐν τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πνεύματος διὰ τοῦ μονογενοῦς θεοῦ ἀχρόνως καὶ ἀδιαστάτως εἰς τελείωσιν ἄγεται, οὐδεμιᾶς παρατάσεως ἐν τῇ τοῦ θείου βουλήματος κινήσει ἀπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ ἐπὶ τὸ πνεῦμα γινομένης ἢ νοουμένης, ἓν δὲ τῶν ἀγαθῶν ὀνομάτων τε καὶ νοημάτων καὶ ἡ θεότης, οὐκ ἂν εἰκότως εἰς πλῆθος τὸ ὄνομα διαχέοιτο, τῆς κατὰ τὴν ἐνέργειαν ἑνότητος κωλυούσης τὴν πληθυντικὴν ἀπαρίθμησιν. Καὶ ὥσπερ εἷς ὁ πατὴρ σωτὴρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων μάλιστα πιστῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀποστόλου ὠνόμασται καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐκ τῆς φωνῆς ταύτης ἢ τὸν υἱὸν λέγει μὴ σῴζειν τοὺς πιστεύοντας ἢ δίχα τοῦ πνεύματος τὴν σωτηρίαν τοῖς μετέχουσι γίνεσθαι, ἀλλὰ γίνεται πάντων σωτὴρ ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς ἐνεργοῦντος τοῦ υἱοῦ τὴν σωτηρίαν ἐν τῇ τοῦ πνεύματος χάριτι καὶ οὐδὲν μᾶλλον διὰ τοῦτο τρεῖς σωτῆρες ὑπὸ τῆς γραφῆς ὀνομάζονται, εἰ καὶ ὁμολογεῖται παρὰ τῆς ἁγίας τριάδος ἡ σωτηρία, οὕτως οὐδὲ τρεῖς θεοὶ κατὰ τὴν ἀποδεδομένην τῆς θεότητος σημασίαν, κἂν ἐφαρμόζῃ τῇ ἁγίᾳ τριάδι ἡ τοιαύτη κλῆσις.