Fragments
Fragmenta
The Supremacy of Jesus' Name§1
1That no name greater than Jesus has been named among those on earth, the Gospel testifies, where 'the angel' said to Mary, 'do not fear,' for 'you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. This one will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High' (Luke 1:30-32).
It is also clear from the prophecy of Zechariah, having prophesied long ago concerning this name, for he says, 'the Lord showed to me Jesus the great priest, standing before the face of an angel of the Lord, and the devil was standing at his right hand to oppose him. And the Lord said to the devil: the Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you' (Zechariah 3:1). For when did he rebuke him? When he joined to himself by word the man loved by him. 'The one who has chosen,' he says, 'Jerusalem,' making it clear that this is our Jerusalem, concerning which the apostle says, 'but our Jerusalem is above; for this one serves with her children' (Galatians 4:26).
For just then in that same great Jerusalem, that is, in our church, having come, he rebuked the devil according to the prophecy, saying, 'Go behind me, Satan, for you are a stumbling block to me' (Matthew 16:23). This, therefore, is the great priest, whose type Jesus was saving.
For it was not possible for that one to be called a great priest, even though he had become glorious among all, without Moses being named great (for Moses was not yet great, since he was heard to be a servant of God and was named god of Pharaoh by him, that god). And if anyone thinks to say Jesus is great according to this, that he was worthy to lead the people into the holy land and did many other wonderful things, let him know also through this, that the greatness spoken of Jesus did not differ so much in the actual matter from the typical, but rather in the small matter of being about to lead his own people into this great Jerusalem later on.
Not only, therefore, does the apostle say that he is the firstborn of the 'new creation,' but also firstborn 'from the dead,' through no other means, it seems to me, but so that through the firstborn 'of the dead,' just as it is said, 'firstborn of all creation,' he might be able to be known. For our Lord Jesus Christ did not rise first from the dead; rather, he who rose through the prophet Elisha rose earlier, and Lazarus rose before his own resurrection, and in the time of the passion 'many bodies of those asleep' rose.
Now let us examine one explicit thing written by Asterius; for he said: 'For another is the Father, who begat from himself the only-begotten Word and firstborn of all creation.' Having joined both terms as only-begotten and firstborn, despite there being much opposition in these names, which is easy even for the very dull-witted to know. For it is clear that the only-begotten, if he truly be only-begotten, can no longer be firstborn, and the firstborn, as firstborn, cannot be only-begotten.
Therefore, if he is indeed the 'firstborn' of 'all creation,' and 'in him all things were created,' it is fitting for us to know that the apostle now remembers his economy according to the flesh.
Thus, he was named 'firstborn' of 'all creation' because of his birth according to the flesh, not because of the first creation, as they themselves think.
Greek · §1
Fragmenta 1 Ὅτι οὐδὲν ὄνομα μεῖζον Ἰησοῦ τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὀνομασθέντων γέγονεν, μαρτυρεῖ μὲν τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον, ἔνθα "ὁ ἄγγελος" τῇ Μαριὰμ "μὴ φοβοῦ" ἔφη "εὗρες γὰρ χάριν παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ. καὶ ἰδοὺ συλλήψῃ ἐν γαστρὶ καὶ τέξῃ υἱόν, καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦν. οὗτος ἔσται μέγας, καὶ υἱὸς ὑψίστου κληθήσεται"· δῆλον δέ ἐστιν καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ Ζαχαρίου προφητείας, πάλαι περὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος τούτου προφητευσάσης, "ἔδειξεν" γάρ "μοι" φησὶν "κύριος Ἰησοῦν τὸν ἱερέα τὸν μέγαν, ἑστῶτα πρὸ προσώπου ἀγγέλου κυρίου, καὶ ὁ διάβολος εἱστήκει ἐκ δεξιῶν αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἀντικεῖσθαι αὐτῷ. καὶ εἶπεν κύριος πρὸς τὸν διάβολον· ἐπιτιμήσαι κύριος ἐν σοὶ ὁ ἐκλεξάμενος τὴν Ἱερουσαλήμ". πότε γὰρ αὐτῷ ἐπετίμησεν; ὅτε τὸν ἀγαπηθέντα ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ἄνθρωπον τῷ ἑαυτοῦ συνῆψεν λόγῳ. "ὁ ἐκλεξάμενος" φησὶν "τὴν Ἱερουσαλήμ", δηλονότι ταύτην τὴν ἡμετέραν, περὶ ἧς ὁ ἀπόστολος λέγει "ἡ δὲ ἡμετέρα Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἄνω ἐστίν· αὕτη γὰρ δουλεύει μετὰ τῶν τέκνων αὐτῆς". τηνικαῦτα γὰρ ἐν τῇ μεγάλῃ αὐτῇ Ἱερουσαλήμ, τουτέστιν ἐν τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ ἐκκλησίᾳ, γενόμενος ἐπετίμησεν τῷ διαβόλῳ κατὰ τὴν προφητείαν εἰπὼν "ἄπελθε ὀπίσω μου, σατανᾶ, ὅτι σκάνδαλον εἶ ἐμοί". οὗτος τοίνυν ἐστὶν ὁ ἱερεὺς ὁ μέγας, οὗ τύπον ἔσῳζεν ὁ τηνικαῦτα Ἰησοῦς. οὐ γὰρ ἦν δυνατὸν ἐκεῖνον μέγαν κληθῆναι ἱερέα, καίτοι ἔνδοξον ἐν πᾶσιν γεγονότα, Μωσέως μὴ ὀνομασθέντος μεγάλου (οὔπω γὰρ μέγας ἦν Μωσῆς, ὅτι καὶ θεράπων ἤκουσεν θεοῦ καὶ θεὸς τοῦ Φαραὼ ὑπ' αὐτοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ ὠνομάσθη). εἰ δέ τις κατὰ τοῦτο μέγαν εἰρῆσθαι τὸν Ἰησοῦν νομίζοι, ὅτι αὐτὸς ἠξιώθη εἰσαγαγεῖν τὸν λαὸν εἰς τὴν ἁγίαν γῆν καὶ ἕτερα πολλὰ θαυμαστὰ ἐποίησεν, γνώτω καὶ διὰ τούτου, ὅτι οὐ τῷ τυπικῷ τοσοῦτον διέφερεν πράγματι τὸ λεχθὲν μέγεθος ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ, ἀλλὰ τῷ μικρὸν ὕστερον τὸν ἑαυτοῦ λαὸν εἰς τὴν μεγάλην ταύτην Ἱερουσαλὴμ εἰσαγαγεῖν μέλλοντι. 2 οὐ μόνον τοίνυν τῆς "καινῆς κτίσεως" πρωτότοκον αὐτὸν ὁ ἀπόστολος εἶναι φησίν, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρωτότοκον "ἐκ νεκρῶν", δι' οὐδὲν ἕτερον, ἐμοὶ δοκεῖν, ἀλλ' ἵνα διὰ τοῦ πρωτοτόκου "τῶν νεκρῶν", ὅπως καὶ "πρωτότοκος ἁπάσης κτίσεως" εἴρηται, γνωσθῆναι δυνηθῇ. οὐ γὰρ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀνέστη πρῶτος ὁ δεσπότης ἡμῶν Ἱησοῦς Χριστός· ἀλλ' ὁ δι' Ἐλισσαίου τοῦ προφήτου ἀναστὰς ἀνέστη πρότερος, καὶ Λάζαρος δὲ πρὸ τῆς αὐτοῦ ἀναστάσεως ἀνέστη, καὶ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τοῦ πάθους "πολλὰ σώματα τῶν κεκοιμημένων" ἀνέστησαν. 3 νυνὶ δὲ ἐξετάσωμεν ἕν τι ῥητὸν τῶν ὑπὸ Ἀστερίου γραφέντων· ἔφη γὰρ οὗτος· ἄλλος μὲν γάρ ἐστιν ὁ πατήρ, ὁ γεννήσας ἐξ αὑτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ λόγον καὶ πρωτότοκον πάσης κτίσεως. ἀμφότερα συνάψας γέγραφεν μονογενῆ καὶ πρωτότοκον, πολλῆς ἐναντιότητος ἐν τοῖς ὀνόμασιν οὔσης τούτοις, ὡς ἔστιν ῥᾴδιον καὶ τοῖς σφόδρα δυσμαθέσιν γνῶναι. δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι ὁ μονογενής, εἰ ὄντως μονογενὴς εἴη, οὐκέτι πρωτότοκος εἶναι δύναται, καὶ ὁ πρωτότοκος ᾗ πρωτότοκος οὐ δύναται μονογενὴς εἶναι. 4 οὐκοῦν εἰ "πρωτότοκος" μέν ἐστιν "ἁπάσης κτίσεως" αὐτός, "ἐν αὐτῷ" δὲ "ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα", προσήκει εἰδέναι ἡμᾶς, ὅτι περὶ τῆς κατὰ σάρκα οἰκονομίας αὐτοῦ ὁ ἀπόστολος νυνὶ μέμνηται. 5 "πρωτότοκος" οὖν "ἁπάσης κτίσεως" διὰ τὴν κατὰ σάρκα γένεσιν ὠνομάσθη, οὐ διὰ τὴν πρώτην, ὡς αὐτοὶ οἴονται, κτίσιν20. 6 οὐ τοίνυν οὗτος ὁ ἁγιώτατος λόγος πρὸ τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως "πρωτότοκος ἁπάσης κτίσεως" ὠνόμαστο (πῶς γὰρ δυνατὸν τὸν ἀεὶ ὄντα πρωτότοκον εἶναί τινος;), ἀλλὰ τὸν πρῶτον "καινὸν ἄνθρωπον", εἰς ὃν "τὰ πάντα ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι" ἐβουλήθη ὁ θεός, τοῦτον αἱ θεῖαι γραφαὶ "πρωτότοκον πάσης" ὀνομάζουσιν "κτίσεως". 7 ἀκούεις ὅπως οὐ μόνον ταῦτα, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὰ προϋπάρχοντα "ἔν τε οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἐν αὐτῷ" κατὰ τὴν καινὴν κτίσιν "ἐκτίσθαι" συμβαίνει. 8 καὶ μὴ τοῦτο ἀπίθανον εἶναι νομιζέτω Ἀστέριος, εἰ νεώτερον ὂν αὐτοῦ
The Creation of the Flesh§2
2The body was able to attain such antiquity. But let one understand that even if it happens that the human flesh is most especially newer, yet the Word, having deemed it worthy to take this up through a pure virgin, having thus united it to himself, did not only labor tirelessly to create the man formed within himself as 'firstborn of all creation' (Col 1:15), but he also intends to be the beginning of all things, not of those on earth only, but also of those in the heavens.
Therefore, this main point of the Proverb (Prov 8:22) is not intended to present the beginning of the divinity of our Savior, as they themselves think, saying 'the Lord created me,' but the second economy according to the flesh; for this reason he mentions creation as a convenient way of referring to the human flesh. Surely the creation differs in its actual matter regarding his being according to man. Therefore he says, 'the Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for his works'; he says 'created me' clearly through the virgin Mary, through whom God intended to unite the human flesh to his own Word.
Because of this, then, having it thus, it is following to observe with the mind that main point of the Proverb said in this way: 'the Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for his works' (Prov 8:22). For our Lord God, the Master, having created what was not, has brought it into being; for the flesh, which the Word took up, was not existing, but rather, not existing, 'he created the beginning of his ways.' So then, fittingly, since the ancient things have passed away and new things are going to be, all through the newness of our Savior, our Lord Christ cried out through the prophet saying, 'the Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for his works' (Prov 8:22).
For this has become to us, those of us who are about to live justly in godliness, a way; the beginning of all the ways following these. And he has appropriately said 'beginning' and 'ways' concerning the Lord our Savior, because even of the other ways, which we have possessed, after the first way, a beginning has become, the traditions made manifest through the holy apostles of the 'from on high,' according to the prophecy, having preached to us this new mystery of 'proclamation.' 'He therefore created me,' he says, 'as the beginning of his ways for his works' (Prov 8:22). And what works does he say? Concerning which the Savior says, 'my Father is working until now, and I am working' (John 4:34), and again he says, 'the work,' 'I have finished what you gave me to do' (John 17:4).
For who could have believed, before the demonstration of the things, that the Word, having been begotten through a virgin, would take up our flesh and bodily demonstrate the whole deity in it? (16) 'Before the age he founded me,' calling this a foundation, refers to the economy predestined according to his flesh. (17) As also the apostle says, 'for no one can lay another foundation except that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ' (1 Corinthians 3:11). And of one age he mentions here, from which he said the things concerning Christ were to be founded, even though many ages have passed, as David said, 'the one existing before the ages' (Psalm 90:2). (17) For since Asterius has said that the Word came into being before the ages, the very words themselves refute him as lying; so as to protest not only the matter, but also the letter. (18) For if Proverbs says, 'before the age he founded me' (Proverbs 8:23), how did he say that he himself had come into being before the ages? For it is one thing to be founded before the age, and another to have come into being before the ages.
Just as the Pantokrator God predestined the church of old, (19) so also the economy according to the flesh of Christ, through whom he predestined to call the race of the God-fearing 'unto adoption of sonship,' having previously founded it in his own thought. (19) Because of this, the apostle clearly pre-announces by the Holy Spirit 'the predestined Son of God,' saying. (20) Surely, if even a mystery most new has appeared at the end of times, such that because of this it was predestined before this age, it is fitting that the prophet said, 'before the age he founded me,' making clear the flesh, because of the communion with the Word, his true Son. (21)
Then he says, 'in the beginning,' 'before making the earth' (Genesis 1:1). What earth, this one? Meaning our flesh, the earth which becomes again after the disobedience. (21) For 'earth' he says, 'I am,' and 'and into earth I shall depart' (Genesis 3:19). For it was necessary for this to receive healing, having shared in some way with the Holy Word. (22) Then he says, 'before making the abysses' (Psalm 36:9); here the prophet proverbially says the abysses are the hearts of the saints, those having the gift of the Spirit in their own depth. (23)
What then is this main point, 'before the springs of the waters came forth' (Psalm 36:9)? He says they are the holy apostles. (23) And this mystery presents to us the scripture of Exodus, pre-announcing long ago the types of the apostles. (24) For twelve...
Greek · §2
τὸ σῶμα τοσαύτης τυχεῖν ἀρχαιότητος ἐδυνήθη· ἀλλ' ἐννοείτω, ὅτι εἰ καὶ μάλιστα τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σάρκα νεωτέραν εἶναι συμβαίνει, ὅμως ὁ ταύτην ἀναλαβεῖν δι' ἁγνῆς ἀξιώσας παρθένου λόγος, ταύτῃ τὸ ἑαυτοῦ ἑνώσας, οὐ μόνον "πρωτότοκον πάσης κτίσεως" τὸν ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἄνθρωπον κτισθέντα ἀπειργάσατο, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀρχὴν ἁπάντων αὐτὸν εἶναι βούλεται, οὐ τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἐν οὐρανοῖς. 9 τὸ τοίνυν κεφάλαιον τουτὶ τῆς Παροιμίας οὐ τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς θεότητος, ὥσπερ αὐτοὶ νομίζουσιν, τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν παραστῆσαι βουλόμενον "κύριος ἔκτισέν με" ἔφη, ἀλλὰ τὴν δευτέραν κατὰ σάρκα οἰκονομίαν· διὸ καὶ κτίσεως μέμνηται προσφόρως τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης σαρκός. 10 οὐκοῦν ἡ κτίσις τῇ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον αὐτοῦ διαφέρει πραγματείᾳ. διό φησιν "κύριος ἔκτισέν με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ", ἔκτισέν με δηλονότι διὰ τῆς παρθένου Μαρίας δι' ἧς ὁ θεὸς ἑνῶσαι τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σάρκα τῷ ἑαυτοῦ λόγῳ προείλετο. 11 τούτου τοίνυν οὕτως ἔχοντος, ἀκόλουθόν ἐστιν σκοπεῖν τῇ διανοίᾳ τὸ παροιμιωδῶς εἰρημένον τουτὶ κεφάλαιον "κύριος ἔκτισέν με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ". ἔκτισεν γὰρ ἀληθῶς τὸ μὴ ὂν πεποιηκὼς ὁ δεσπότης ἡμῶν θεός· οὐκ οὖσαν γὰρ τὴν σάρκα, ἣν ἀνείληφεν ὁ λόγος, ἀλλὰ μὴ οὖσαν "ἔκτισεν ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ". 12 οὐκοῦν εἰκότως τῶν ἀρχαίων παρεληλυθότων, καινῶν δὲ ἔσεσθαι μελλόντων ἁπάντων διὰ τῆς τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν καινότητος, ὁ δεσπότης ἡμῶν ὁ Χριστὸς διὰ τοῦ προφήτου ἐβόα λέγων "κύριος ἔκτισέν με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ". 13 οὗτος γὰρ ἡμῖν τοῖς δικαίως πολιτεύεσθαι μέλλουσιν θεοσεβείας ὁδὸς γέγονεν· ἀρχὴ πασῶν τῶν μετὰ ταῦτα ὁδῶν. 14 "ἀρχὴν" δὲ "ὁδῶν" διὰ τοῦτο εἰκότως εἴρηκεν τὸν δεσπότην ἡμῶν τὸν σωτῆρα, διότι καὶ τῶν ἑτέρων, ὧν ἐσχήκαμεν, ὁδῶν μετὰ τὴν πρώτην ὁδὸν ἀρχὴ γέγονεν, τὰς διὰ τῶν ἱερῶν ἀποστόλων δηλῶν παραδόσεις τῶν "μετὰ ὑψηλοῦ" κατὰ τὴν προφητείαν "κηρύγματος" κηρυξάντων ἡμῖν τὸ καινὸν τοῦτο μυστήριον. 15 "ἔκτισεν οὖν με" φησὶν "ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ". ποῖα δὲ ἔργα φησίν; περὶ ὧν ὁ σωτὴρ λέγει "ὁ πατήρ μου ἕως ἄρτι ἐργάζεται, κἀγὼ ἐργάζομαι" καὶ αὖθις "τὸ ἔργον" φησὶν "ἐτελείωσα ὃ δέδωκάς μοι". 16 τίς γὰρ πρὸ τῆς τῶν πραγμάτων ἀποδείξεως ἐπίστευσεν ἂν ὅτι λόγος θεοῦ διὰ παρθένου τεχθεὶς τὴν ἡμετέραν ἀναλήψεται σάρκα καὶ τὴν πᾶσαν θεότητα ἐν αὐτῇ σωματικῶς ἐπιδείξεται; 17 "πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέν με", θεμέλιον μὲν τοῦτον ὀνομάζων, τὴν κατὰ σάρκα αὐτοῦ προορισθεῖσαν οἰκονομίαν. ὡς καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολος λέγει "θεμέλιον γὰρ ἄλλον οὐδεὶς δύναται θεῖναι παρὰ τὸν κείμενον, ὅς ἐστιν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός". ἑνὸς δὲ αἰῶνος ἐνταῦθα μέμνηται, ἀφ' οὗ τὰ κατὰ τὸν Χριστὸν τεθεμελιῶσθαι ἔφη, καίτοι πολλῶν παρεληλυθότων αἰώνων, ὡς ὁ ∆αυὶδ ἔφη "ὁ ὑπάρχων πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων". 18 Ἀστερίου γὰρ εἰρηκότος πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων γεγεννῆσθαι τὸν λόγον, αὐτὸ τὸ ῥητὸν αὐτὸν ἐλέγχει ψευδόμενον· ὥστε μὴ μόνον αὐτὸν τοῦ πράγματος, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦ γράμματος διαμαρτεῖν. εἰ γὰρ "πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέν με" φησὶν ἡ Παροιμία, πῶς αὐτὸς γεγεννῆσθαι αὐτὸν πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἔφη; ἕτερον γὰρ πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος τεθεμελιῶσθαι αὐτόν, καὶ ἕτερον πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων γεγεννῆσθαι. 19 ὥσπερ οὖν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν πάλαι προωρίσατο ὁ παντοκράτωρ 19 θεός, οὕτω καὶ τὴν κατὰ σάρκα τοῦ Χριστοῦ οἰκονομίαν, δι' οὗ τὸ τῶν θεοσεβῶν γένος "εἰς υἱοθεσίαν" καλέσαι προωρίσατο, πρότερον θεμελιώσας ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ διανοίᾳ. διὰ τοῦτο ὁ ἀπόστολος τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι σαφῶς προαγορεύει "τοῦ προορισθέντος υἱοῦ θεοῦ" λέγων. οὐκοῦν εἰ καὶ τὰ μάλιστα ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν καιρῶν τουτὶ καινὸν ἐπεφάνη μυστήριον, ὡς διὰ τοῦτο πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου προωρίσθαι, εἰκότως ὁ προφήτης ἔφη "πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέν με", δηλονότι τὴν σάρκα, διὰ τὴν πρὸς τὸν ἀληθῶς υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον κοινωνίαν. 21 εἶτα "ἐν ἀρχῇ" φησὶν "πρὸ τοῦ τὴν γῆν ποιῆσαι". γῆν ποίαν ταύτην; δηλονότι τὴν ἡμετέραν σάρκα, τὴν μετὰ τὴν παρακοὴν γῆν αὖθις γενομένην; "γῆ" γὰρ "εἶ" φησὶν "καὶ εἰς γῆν ἀπελεύσῃ". ἔδει γὰρ ταύτην ἰάσεως τυχεῖν, τινὰ τρόπον κοινωνήσασαν τῷ ἁγίῳ λόγῳ. 22 εἶτα "πρὸ τοῦ τὰς ἀβύσσους ποιῆσαι" φησίν· ἐνταῦθα τὰς ἀβύσσους παροιμιωδῶς ὁ προφήτης τὰς τῶν ἁγίων καρδίας εἶναι λέγει τὰς ἐν τῷ ἑαυτῶν βάθει τὴν τοῦ πνεύματος ἐχούσας δωρεάν. 23 τί τοίνυν ἔστιν καὶ τουτὶ τὸ κεφάλαιον "πρὸ τοῦ προελθεῖν τὰς πηγὰς τῶν ὑδάτων"; τοὺς ἱεροὺς ἀποστόλους εἶναί φησιν. τοῦτο δὲ ἡμῖν τὸ μυστήριον παρίστησιν ἡ τῆς Ἐξόδου γραφὴ τοὺς τῶν ἀποστόλων τύπους πάλαι προαγορεύουσα. δώδεκα γὰρ
The Twelve Springs and the Star§3
3Regarding the number of the apostles, twelve springs are remembered. Thus, concerning the fleshly generation, the Lord spoke through the prophet Solomon, saying, 'before the springs of the waters came forth' (Ps 89:9). Likewise, the Savior said toward the holy springs, 'having gone, make disciples of all nations' (Matt 28:19). It is evident from everywhere that the holy apostles and springs were tropically named by the prophet. Since we have spoken about those that went before, it follows to fill up the remainder. The remainder concerns the mountains and the hills. For he says, 'before the mountain was established' (Ps 132:6), and 'before all the hills, I beget you' (Ps 132:5). He calls the apostles and the successors of the apostles mountains and hills, so that the just administration concerning them might be indicated proverbially among other men.
Therefore, it seems to me that it is good to pass through even those things which we have not yet previously passed through. For most of those written by him have become clear to us from those already mentioned to us. 'From the womb,' he says, 'before the Morning Star, I begat you' (Ps 71:6), instead of 'I brought you forth'; for he thought that someone, having stolen the intention, would join in with the opinion of the heresy. Therefore, regarding the most important matter, having removed the syllable 'ex', he wished to indicate his ancient rebirth.
How then do those who are 'full of guile and fraudulence' (1 Tim 4:2), to speak apostolically, transfer the word to his first, as they think, creation, even though David clearly spoke this concerning his fleshly generation? For since darkness existed previously through the ignorance of godliness, he appropriately names the Morning Star after the day that is about to shine ('I am,' he says, 'the day' Ps 110:3). Therefore, because the Morning Star, who makes the day manifest, was so named by the prophet David, it is no longer right to seek who this Morning Star is, whoever he may be; for he was the star that appeared most recently, both bringing and declaring the day to the magi.
It is therefore evident that the phrase 'I begot you before the morning star' Rev 22:16, spoken by the Pantokrator regarding the Word being born with human flesh through the Virgin, clearly signifies this of the Gospel: first, that our Lord was produced through the Virgin, and later, that the star which indicates the day appeared. For where else from the divine utterances can we find written that one is unbegotten and one is begotten in this way, as they themselves believed him to have been begotten; neither have prophets, evangelists, or apostles said this?
Therefore, the holy apostle and disciple of the Lord, John, remembering his simplicity, became a true witness of the Word, saying, 'In the beginning was the Word' John 1:1, 'and the Word was with God, and the Word was God' John 1:1. Not mentioning any beginning of the Word there, but using three alternating testimonies, he established that the Word was in the beginning. I will remind you of what he himself wrote, presenting it to those written badly by Eusebius, so that you may know it clearly stands apart from the former promise. For he wrote to them in these words: the main point of the epistle is to bring forward the will of the Father regarding the generation of the Son, and not to let the birth of God appear as a passion. This is what the wisest of the fathers declared in their local compositions, guarding against the impiety of the heretics, who, setting forth dogmas, falsely judged the Godhead's childbearing to be something physical and passional.
Thus, Asterius, wishing to sympathize with Eusebius who wrote badly, by mentioning the nature of the Father and the nature of the unbegotten, has himself become his own accuser. For it was much better for the depth of Eusebius's meaning, as he himself wrote, to be left unexamined lying in brevity, than to use such a theory to bring the craftiness of the letter into the light. To say that he was begotten before the ages seems to follow; for an offspring comes from the one preceding it as a father. But regarding the other matter, he has not responded to it healthily or piously. For to not say that the one proceeding from him is the Word, and that this is the true manner of the generation, but merely a son, seems to provide some to those hearing a human perspective.
Paulinus did not write these things reminding of evangelical teaching, but confessing that some move thus from themselves, and some have this manner from the readings of the aforementioned men. Then finally, as if bringing a crown to the proof, he himself subscripted from the original words in his letter,
Greek · §3
ὄντων τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν ἀποστόλων, δώδεκα πηγῶν μέμνηται. 24 εἰκότως οὖν περὶ τῆς κατὰ σάρκα γενέσεως ὁ δεσπότης διὰ τοῦ προφήτου Σολομῶνος λέγοντος "πρὸ τοῦ προελθεῖν τὰς πηγὰς τῶν ὑδάτων" ἔφη. 25 οὕτω γὰρ ὁ σωτὴρ πρὸς τὰς ἱερὰς πηγὰς ἔφη "πορευθέντες μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη". 26 πανταχόθεν δῆλόν ἐστιν τοὺς ἱεροὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ πηγὰς τροπικῶς ὠνομάσθαι ὑπὸ τοῦ προφήτου. 27 οὐκοῦν ἐπειδήπερ περὶ τῶν προαγόντων εἰρήκαμεν, ἀκόλουθόν ἐστιν καὶ τὸ λεῖπον ἀναπληρῶσαι. λείπει δὲ τὸ κατὰ τὰ ὄρη καὶ τοὺς βουνούς. "πρὸ" γὰρ "τοῦ ὄρη ἑδρασθῆναι" φησὶν "πρὸ δὲ πάντων τῶν βουνῶν γεννᾷ με". ὄρη καὶ βουνοὺς τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ τοὺς τῶν ἀποστόλων διαδόχους λέγει, ἵνα παρὰ τοὺς ἄλλους ἀνθρώπους τὴν κατ' αὐτοὺς δικαίαν πολιτείαν παροιμιωδῶς σημήνῃ. 28 διὰ τοῦτο τοίνυν δοκεῖ μοι καλῶς ἔχειν ἔτι περὶ ὧν μηδέπω πρότερον διῆλθον νυνὶ διελθεῖν. τὰ γὰρ πλεῖστα τῶν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ γραφέντων ἐκ τῶν ἤδη προειρημένων ἡμῖν γέγονεν δῆλα. "ἐκ γαστρὸς" φησὶν "πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε" ἀντὶ τοῦ "ἐξεγέννησά σε" ᾤετο γὰρ πάντως που τὴν ἐξ πρόθεσιν κλαπεῖσαν συνδραμεῖσθαι τῇ τῆς αἱρέσεως γνώμῃ. διὸ τὸ κυριώτατον, τὴν συλλαβὴν ἐξ, ἐξελὼν τὴν ἀρχαίαν αὐτοῦ ἀναγέννησιν σημῆναι ἐβουλήθη. 29 πῶς οὖν οἱ "πλήρεις δόλου καὶ ῥᾳδιουργίας", ἀποστολικῶς εἰπεῖν, μεταφέρουσιν τὸ ῥητὸν εἰς τὴν πρώτην αὐτοῦ, ὡς οἴονται, κτίσιν, καὶ ταῦτα τοῦ ∆αυὶδ περὶ τῆς κατὰ σάρκα αὐτοῦ γενέσεως σαφῶς εἰρηκότος. 30 σκότους γὰρ ὄντος πρότερον διὰ τὴν τῆς θεοσεβείας ἄγνοιαν, τῆς δὲ ἡμέρας φαίνεσθαι μελλούσης ("ἐγὼ" γάρ "εἰμι" φησὶν "ἡ ἡμέρα") εἰκότως τὸν ἀστέρα ἑωσφόρον ὀνομάζει. 31 διὰ τοῦτο τοίνυν τοῦ τὴν ἡμέραν δηλοῦντος ἀστέρος ἑωσφόρου ὑπὸ τοῦ προφήτου ∆αυὶδ εἰκότως ὀνομασθέντος, οὐκέτι ζητεῖσθαι δίκαιον τὸν ἑωσφόρον, τίς δήποτε ὢν οὗτος τυγχάνει· οὗτος γὰρ ἦν ὁ τηνικαῦτα φανεὶς ἀστήρ, ὁ φέρων τε καὶ δηλῶν τὴν ἡμέραν τοῖς μάγοις. πρόδηλον οὖν τὸ "πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε" ὑπὸ τοῦ παντοκράτορος εἰρῆσθαι δεσπότου περὶ τοῦ διὰ τῆς παρθένου γεννηθέντος σὺν τῇ ἀνθρωπίνῃ σαρκὶ λόγου, σαφῶς καὶ τοῦτο τοῦ εὐαγγελίου σημαίνοντος, πρότερον μὲν τὸν δεσπότην ἡμῶν διὰ τῆς παρθένου τετέχθαι, ὕστερον δὲ τὸν ἀστέρα φανῆναι τὸν τὴν ἡμέραν δεικνύντα. 32 ἐπεὶ πόθεν ἡμῖν ἐκ τῶν θείων δυνήσονται δεῖξαι ῥητῶν, ὅτι εἷς μὲν ἀγέννητος, εἷς δὲ γεννητὸς οὕτως, ὡς αὐτοὶ γεγεννῆσθαι αὐτὸν πεπιστεύκασιν, οὔτε προφητῶν οὔτε εὐαγγελιστῶν ἢ ἀποστόλων τοῦτ' εἰρηκότων; 33 ὁ τοίνυν ἱερὸς ἀπόστολός τε καὶ μαθητὴς τοῦ κυρίου Ἰωάννης τῆς ἀιδιότητος αὐτοῦ μνημονεύων ἀληθὴς ἐγίγνετο τοῦ λόγου μάρτυς, "ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος" λέγων "καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος". οὐδὲν γενέσεως ἐνταῦθα μνημονεύων τοῦ λόγου, ἀλλ' ἐπαλλήλοις τρισὶν μαρτυρίαις χρώμενος, ἐβεβαίου ἐν ἀρχῇ τὸν λόγον εἶναι. 34 ὑπομνήσω δέ σε ὧν αὐτὸς γέγραφεν συνιστάμενος τοῖς κακῶς ὑπὸ Εὐσεβίου γραφεῖσιν, ἵνα γνῷς ὅτι ἀφίσταται σαφῶς τῆς προτέρας ἐπαγγελίας. γέγραφεν γὰρ αὐταῖς λέξεσιν οὕτως· τὸ γὰρ κεφάλαιον εἶναι τῆς ἐπιστολῆς ἐπὶ τὴν βουλὴν τοῦ πατρὸς ἀνενεγκεῖν τοῦ υἱοῦ τὴν γένεσιν, καὶ μὴ πάθος ἀποφῆναι τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν γονήν. ὅπερ οἱ σοφώτατοι τῶν πατέρων ἐν τοῖς οἰκείοις συντάγμασιν ἀπεφήναντο, φυλαξάμενοι τῶν αἱρετικῶν τὴν ἀσέβειαν, οἳ σωματικήν τινα καὶ παθητικὴν κατεψεύσαντο τοῦ θεοῦ τὴν τεκνογονίαν, τὰς προβολὰς δογματίζοντες. 35 ὥστε συνηγορῆσαι Εὐσεβίῳ κακῶς γράψαντι βουλόμενος Ἀστέριος, φύσεώς τε πατρὸς καὶ φύσεως [ἀ]γεννητοῦ μνημονεύσας, αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ κατήγορος γέγονεν. πολὺ γὰρ βέλτιον ἦν τὸ βάθος τοῦ νοήματος Εὐσεβίου, ὡς αὐτὸς γέγραφεν, ἐν βραχυλογίᾳ κείμενον ἀνεξέταστον καταλιπεῖν, ἢ τοιαύτῃ θεωρίᾳ χρησάμενον τὸ πανοῦργον τοῦ γράμματος εἰς φῶς ἀγαγεῖν. 36 τὸ μὲν οὖν πρὸ τῶν αἰώνων αὐτὸν γεγεννῆσθαι φῆσαι, ἀκολούθως εἰρηκέναι δοκεῖ· γέννημα γὰρ τὸ προελθὸν τοῦ προεμένου γίγνεται πατρός. θάτερον δ' οὐκέτι ὑγιῶς οὐδ' εὐσεβῶς αὐτῷ παρείληπται. τὸ γὰρ μὴ λόγον εἶναι φῆσαι τὸν ἐξ αὐτοῦ προελθόντα καὶ τοῦτον εἶναι τὸν τῆς γεννήσεως ἀληθῆ τρόπον, ἀλλ' ἁπλῶς υἱὸν μόνον, ἔμφασίν τινα τοῖς ἀκούουσιν ἀνθρωπίνης ὄψεως παρέχειν εἴωθεν. 37 οὐκ εὐαγγελικῆς ὑπομιμνήσκων διδασκαλίας ταῦτ' ἔγραψεν Παυλῖνος, ὁμολογῶν δὲ ἐνίους μὲν ἀφ' ἑαυτῶν οὕτω κινεῖσθαι, ἐνίους δὲ ἐκ τῶν ἀναγνωσμάτων τῶν προειρημένων ἀνδρῶν τοῦτον ἦχθαι τὸν τρόπον. εἶτα τέλος, ὥσπερ τινὰ κορωνίδα τῆς ἀποδείξεως ἐπάγων, ἐκ τῶν Ὠριγένους ῥητῶν τῇ ἑαυτοῦ ὑπέγραψεν ἐπιστολῇ,
Critique of Origen's Trinitarianism§4
4Rather, it is possible to convince others by the evangelists and the apostles. And these are the spoken words: having repeated the formula concerning Father and Son and Holy Spirit, a few of those left from that time are to be set forth; concerning the Father, as being undivided and without division, he becomes Father of the Son, not putting him forth, as some suppose. For if the Son of the Father is a thing put forth and a generation from him, like the generations of living creatures, it is necessary for the one putting forth and the one being put forth to be a body.
Origen wrote these things, not desiring to learn the simplicity of the word from the holy prophets and apostles, but daring to narrate a second hypothesis of the word, having given it to himself. For that Origen writes such things using his own dogmas is evident from which he also many times overturns his own teachings. In another passage where he speaks concerning God, it is necessary to remind the reader.
And he writes thus: For God the Father did not begin to be a father being hindered, as men who become fathers are, by the fact of not being able to be fathers yet. For if God is always perfect, and there is in him the power to be himself Father, and to be a good Father of such a Son, why is it necessary for him to cast himself down and to make himself secure, and, so to speak, as it is possible to be Father, does he not become Father? The same thing, however, must be said concerning the Holy Spirit.
How then, after Origen had written even this, did the blessed Paulinus, according to him, consider it not dangerous to conceal this, but to use it for the construction of what seemed right to him against the opponents, whose argument I would not say even Origen could be able to refute? And Paulinus, being persuaded by these spoken words and by this man's father, is not hesitant to say and to write the same things, sometimes calling Christ a second god and this one having become a more human god, sometimes defining him to be a creature. For he held that Christ is a creature, even towards us, when pursuing the heretics at Ancyra.
And because of this, he does not call himself the Son of God, but everywhere he calls himself the Son of Man, so that through such a confession he might prepare the man to become a son of God through the fellowship with him, and after the end of the work, again, as the Word, he might be united with God, fulfilling that which was foretold by the apostle: 'then he himself will subject to him all things who have subjected all things to him, so that God may be all and in all' (1 Cor 15:28). For it will be like what it was before.
For the Word 'was in the beginning' (John 1:1) was nothing other than the Word. But the man having been united to the Word, who was not previously, has become a man as John teaches us, saying, 'and the Word became flesh' (John 1:14). Therefore, it seems he mentions only the Word, whether the divine Scripture mentions the name of Jesus or Christ, appearing to name the Word of God who is after the flesh of the human. And if anyone promises to be able to show the name of Christ or Jesus solely upon the Word before the new covenant, he will find this said prophetically, as is also clear from this: 'the kings of the earth and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against His Christ' (Acts 4:26).
So it is evident from every side that it is not fitting to fit any name other than that which the most holy disciple and apostle of the Lord, John, said at the beginning of the Gospel, due to the simplicity of the Word. Since Christ and Jesus are preached after the ascension of the flesh, and as life and the way and the day and the resurrection and the door and the bread (John 14:6), if anything else were named by the divine Scriptures, it does not befit us to ignore the first name, that he was the Word. For this reason also the most holy evangelist and disciple of the Lord, being very awake in the spirit, remembering the beginning from above and nothing newer, said, 'In the beginning was the Word' (John 1:1), and 'the Word was with God, and the Word was God' (John 1:1), in order that he might show that if there is a new and newer name, it is from the new economy of Him according to the flesh.
For Sabellius himself, having slipped from the right faith, knew neither God accurately nor His holy Word. For he who did not know the Word ignored also the Father. For he says, 'no one knows the Father except the Son' (John 1:18), that is, the Word; for the Word provides the knowledge of the Father through himself. In this way also toward those who claim to know God like the Jews, while rejecting His Word, through whom...
Greek · §4
ὡς μᾶλλον πεῖσαι δυναμένου παρὰ τοὺς εὐαγγελιστὰς καὶ τοὺς ἀποστόλους. ἔστιν δὲ τὰ ῥητὰ ταῦτα· ὥρα ἐπαναλαβόντα περὶ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ ἁγίου πνεύματος, ὀλίγα τῶν τότε παραλελειμμένων διεξελθεῖν· περὶ πατρὸς ὡς ἀδιαίρετος ὢν καὶ ἀμέριστος υἱοῦ γίγνεται πατήρ, οὐ προβαλὼν αὐτόν, ὡς οἴονταί τινες. εἰ γὰρ πρόβλημά ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ γέννημα ἐξ αὐτοῦ, ὁποῖα τὰ τῶν ζῴων γεννήματα, ἀνάγκη σῶμα εἶναι τὸν προβαλόντα καὶ τὸν προβεβλημένον. 38 ταῦτα Ὠριγένης γέγραφεν, μὴ παρὰ τῶν ἱερῶν προφητῶν τε καὶ ἀποστόλων περὶ τῆς ἀιδιότητος τοῦ λόγου μαθεῖν βουληθείς, ἀλλ' ἑαυτῷ δεδωκὼς πλεῖον δευτέραν ὑπόθεσιν διηγήσασθαι τοῦ λόγου μάτην τολμᾷ. 39 ὅτι τὰ τοιαῦτα γράφων Ὠριγένης ἰδίοις ἐχρῆτο δόγμασιν, δῆλον ἀφ' ὧν καὶ τὰ ἑαυτοῦ ἀνατρέπει πολλάκις. ἐν γοῦν ἑτέρῳ χωρίῳ ἅτινα περὶ θεοῦ λέγει, ἀκόλουθόν ἐστιν ὑπομνῆσαι. γράφει δὲ οὕτως· οὐ γὰρ ὁ θεὸς πατὴρ εἶναι ἤρξατο κωλυόμενος, ὡς οἱ γινόμενοι πατέρες ἄνθρωποι, ὑπὸ τοῦ μὴ δύνασθαί πω πατέρες εἶναι. εἰ γὰρ ἀεὶ τέλειος ὁ θεός, καὶ πάρεστιν αὐτῷ δύναμις τοῦ πατέρα αὐτὸν εἶναι, καὶ καλὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι πατέρα τοιούτου υἱοῦ, τί ἀναβάλλεται καὶ τοῦ καλοῦ ἑαυτὸν στερίσκει καί, ὡς ἔστιν εἰπεῖν, ἐξ οὗ δύναται πατὴρ εἶναι, οὐ γίνεται πατήρ; τὸ αὐτὸ μέντοιγε καὶ περὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος λεκτέον. πῶς οὖν Ὠριγένους καὶ τοῦτο γράψαντος, ὁ μακάριος κατ' αὐτὸν Παυλῖνος τοῦτο μὲν ἀποκρύψασθαι οὐκ ἀκίνδυνον ἐνόμισεν, χρήσασθαι δὲ εἰς κατασκευὴν τῶν ἑαυτῷ δοκούντων τοῖς ἐναντίοις, ὧν οὐδὲ αὐτὸν ἂν Ὠριγένη εἴποιμι τὸν λόγον ἀποδοῦναι δυνατὸν εἶναι; 40 τούτοις δὲ τοῖς ῥητοῖς καὶ ὁ τούτου πατὴρ πειθόμενος Παυλῖνος, ταὐτὰ λέγειν τε καὶ γράφειν οὐκ ὀκνεῖ, ποτὲ μὲν δεύτερον θεὸν λέγων τὸν Χριστὸν καὶ τοῦτον ἀνθρωπικώτερον γεγενῆσθαι θεόν, ποτὲ δὲ κτίσμα αὐτὸν εἶναι διοριζόμενος. ὅτι δὲ τοῦθ' οὕτως ἔχει, καὶ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ποτε, τὴν Ἀγκύραν διιών, κτίσμα εἶναι τὸν Χριστὸν ἔφασκεν. 41 καὶ διὰ τοῦτο οὐχ υἱὸν θεοῦ ἑαυτὸν ὀνομάζει, ἀλλὰ πανταχοῦ υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου ἑαυτὸν λέγει, ἵνα διὰ τῆς τοιαύτης ὁμολογίας θέσει τὸν ἄνθρωπον διὰ τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν κοινωνίαν υἱὸν θεοῦ γενέσθαι παρασκευάσῃ καὶ μετὰ τὸ τέλος τῆς πράξεως αὖθις, ὡς λόγος, ἑνωθῇ τῷ θεῷ, πληρῶν ἐκεῖνο τὸ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀποστόλου προειρημένον· "τότε αὐτὸς ὑποταγήσεται τῷ ὑποτάξαντι αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα, ἵνα ᾖ πάντα καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν ὁ θεός". ἔσται γὰρ τηνικαῦτα τοῦθ' ὅπερ πρότερον ἦν. 42 ὁ μὲν γὰρ λόγος "ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν", μηδὲν ἕτερον ὢν ἢ λόγος. ὁ δὲ τῷ λόγῳ ἑνωθεὶς ἄνθρωπος, οὐκ ὢν πρότερον, γέγονεν [ἄνθρωπος] ὡς διδάσκει ἡμᾶς Ἰωάννης λέγων "καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο". διὰ τοῦτο τοίνυν τοῦ λόγου μνημονεύων φαίνεται μόνου· εἴτε γὰρ Ἰησοῦ εἴτε Χριστοῦ ὀνόματος μνημονεύει ἡ θεία γραφή, τὸν μετὰ [τὸν] τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης ὄντα σαρκὸς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον ὀνομάζειν φαίνεται. εἰ δέ τις καὶ πρὸ τῆς νέας διαθήκης τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἢ Ἰησοῦ ὄνομα ἐπὶ τοῦ λόγου μόνου δεικνύναι δύνασθαι ἐπαγγέλλοιτο, εὑρήσει τοῦτο προφητικῶς εἰρημένον, ὥσπερ καὶ ἀπὸ τούτου δῆλον· "παρέστησαν" γάρ φησιν "οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντες συνήχθησαν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ κατὰ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ κατὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ". 43 ὥστε πανταχόθεν δῆλόν ἐστιν μηδὲν ἕτερον τῇ ἀιδιότητι τοῦ λόγου ἁρμόττειν ὄνομα ἢ τοῦθ' ὅπερ ὁ ἁγιώτατος τοῦ κυρίου μαθητὴς καὶ ἀπόστολος Ἰωάννης ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου εἴρηκεν. ἐπειδὴ γὰρ [τὴν] μετὰ τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀνάληψιν Χριστός τε καὶ Ἰησοῦς κηρύττεται, ζωή τε καὶ ὁδὸς καὶ ἡμέρα καὶ ἀνάστασις καὶ θύρα καὶ ἄρτος καὶ εἴ τι ἕτερον ὑπὸ τῶν θείων ὀνομάζοιτο γραφῶν, οὐ παρὰ τοῦτο ἀγνοεῖν ἡμᾶς προσήκει τὸ πρῶτον ὄνομα, ὅτι λόγος ἦν. διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ὁ ἁγιώτατος εὐαγγελιστὴς καὶ μαθητὴς τοῦ κυρίου, σφόδρα ἐγρηγορὼς τῷ πνεύματι, τῆς ἄνωθεν μνημονεύων ἀρχῆς καὶ μηδενὸς νεωτέρου, "ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος" ἔφη "καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος", ἵνα δείξῃ ὅτι, εἴ τι καινὸν καὶ νεώτερον ὄνομα, τοῦτ' ἀπὸ τῆς καινῆς αὐτῷ καὶ νέας ὑπῆρξε κατὰ σάρκα οἰκονομίας. 44 Σαβέλλιος γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς τῆς ὀρθῆς ὀλισθήσας πίστεως οὔτε τὸν θεὸν ἀκριβῶς ἔγνω οὔτε τὸν ἅγιον αὐτοῦ λόγον. ὁ γὰρ μὴ τὸν λόγον γνοὺς ἠγνόησεν καὶ τὸν πατέρα. "οὐδεὶς" γὰρ "οἶδεν" φησὶν "τὸν πατέρα, εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱός", τουτέστιν ὁ λόγος· ὁ γὰρ λόγος δι' ἑαυτοῦ τὴν τοῦ πατρὸς παρέχει γνῶσιν. οὕτω γὰρ καὶ πρὸς τοὺς οἰομένους τηνικαῦτα τῶν Ἰουδαίων εἰδέναι τὸν θεόν, ἀθετοῦντας δ' αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον, δι' οὗ
The Logos before and after Incarnation§5
5God is known only through the Son; He said, "No one knows the Father except the Son, and whomever the Son shall reveal to Him" (Matthew 11:27). For since it was impossible to know God in any other way, He teaches men to know Him through His own Word, so that even he the critic fails to know accurately the Father and the Word of the latter. Therefore, let one learn that the Word of God has come—not a word named improperly, as they claim, but a Word existing truly.
It is not a word named improperly, even if those teaching falsely tear the truth apart by lying, but a Word existing principally and truly. [...] Among those teaching them, as if ashamed to remember the Word, which in this way all divine Scriptures proclaim. For David says about Him, "By the word of the Lord the heavens were established" (Psalm 8:3), and again, "He sent out His word and healed them" (Psalm 18:1). And Solomon says, "Evil men will seek me, and will not find me. For they hated wisdom, and did not choose the word of the Lord" (Proverbs 8:12). And Isaiah says, "For out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem" (Isaiah 2:3). And again Jeremiah says, "The wise have been defiled, and they have been foolish, and they have fallen, because they rejected the word of the Lord" (Jeremiah 23:29). And the prophet Hosea says, "They have hated Him in the gates while rebuking, and they have loathed a holy word" (Hosea 8:12). And Micah similarly, remembering the Word, says, "Out of Zion shall go forth law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem" (Micah 4:2).
Indeed, before the descent and being born of a virgin, there was only the Word. For what else was there before the one who descended "in the last days" (Hebrews 1:2), and having been born of a virgin, took upon himself flesh? There was nothing else but the Word.
It is quite so, then, that before the descent this was the case, as we have often said: the Word. But after the descent and the assumption of flesh, it has encountered various objections, since "the Word became flesh" (John 1:14).
For what other mystery was hidden than that concerning the Word? It was thus hidden 'in God'; this mystery was prior, so that no one of the former people was to know clearly the things concerning the Word, but we now enjoy the wealth of 'the glory' and the hidden mystery.
The holy apostle John, both disciple and student of the Lord, clearly and explicitly teaches at the beginning of the Gospel, as something previously unknown among men, naming it the Word of the Pantokrator, thus saying, 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God' (John 1:1). He employs more than one witness to signify the eternity of the Word. In saying 'In the beginning was the Word', he shows by power that the Word is in the Father (for God is the beginning of all things 'from whom all things are') cf. Rom 11:36; and in 'and the Word was with God', he shows the Word to be with God in activity ('for all things were made through him, and without him not one thing was made' John 1:3); and in 'the Word was God', he says not to divide the divinity, since the Word is in Him and He is in the Word; for he says, 'the Father is in me, and I in the Father' (John 14:10).
Thus you hear the harmony of the Holy Spirit, testifying to the eternity of the Word through many and diverse persons. Because of this, he begins from the eternity of the Word, saying 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God' (John 1:1). Using three successive witnesses, he intends to demonstrate the eternity of the Word.
What then was this thing that descended before the incarnation? He says certainly: a spirit. For if he wished to say anything other than this, the angel who spoke to the virgin would not permit him, saying 'the Holy Spirit will come upon you' (Luke 1:35). But if he says it is a spirit, let him hear the Savior saying 'Spirit is God' (1 John 5:20). Yet it seems that the Father is in the Word, even if it does not seem so to Asterius and to those who think the same as him. For this seems to the prophetic prophet Isaiah,
Greek · §5
μόνου γινώσκεται ὁ θεός, ἔλεγεν "οὐδεὶς ἐπιγινώσκει τὸν πατέρα εἰ μὴ ὁ υἱὸς καὶ ᾧ ἂν ὁ υἱὸς ἀποκαλύψῃ". ἐπειδὴ γὰρ ἀδύνατον ἦν ἑτέρως γνῶναι τὸν θεόν, διὰ τοῦ ἰδίου λόγου εἰδέναι αὐτὸν τοὺς ἀνθρώπους διδάσκει, ὥστε ἐσφάλη μὲν κἀκεῖνος μὴ τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν τούτου λόγον ἀκριβῶς γνούς. 45 καὶ μανθανέτω τοίνυν θεοῦ λόγον ἐληλυθέναι, οὐ λόγον καταχρηστικῶς ὀνομασθέντα, ὡς αὐτοί φασιν, ἀλλ' ἀληθῆ ὄντα λόγον. 46 οὐ καταχρηστικῶς λόγος ὀνομασθείς, κἂν διαρραγῶσιν οἱ ἑτεροδιδασκαλοῦντες ψευδόμενοι, ἀλλὰ κυρίως τε καὶ ἀληθῶς ὑπάρχων λόγος. 47 * * * * * τῶν δὲ διδασκόντων αὐτοὺς ὥσπερ αἰδουμένων μεμνῆσθαι τοῦ λόγου, ὃν οὕτω πᾶσαι αἱ θεῖαι κηρύττουσιν γραφαί. ∆αυὶδ μὲν γὰρ περὶ αὐτοῦ λέγει "τῷ λόγῳ κυρίου οἱ οὐρανοὶ ἐστερεώθησαν", αὖθίς τε ὁ αὐτὸς "ἐξαπέστειλεν τὸν λόγον αὐτοῦ καὶ ἰάσατο αὐτούς". Σολομὼν δὲ "ζητήσουσίν με κακοί, καὶ οὐχ εὑρήσουσιν. ἐμίσησαν γὰρ σοφίαν, τὸν δὲ λόγον κυρίου οὐ προείλοντο". Ἡσαΐας τε "ἐκ γὰρ Σιὼν ἐξελεύσεται" ἔφη "νόμος, καὶ λόγος κυρίου ἐξ Ἱερουσαλήμ". καὶ αὖθις Ἱερεμίας "ᾐσχύνθησαν σοφοὶ" φησὶν "καὶ ἐπτοήθησαν καὶ ἑάλωσαν, ὅτι τὸν λόγον κυρίου ἀπεδοκίμασαν". καὶ Ὡσηὲ δὲ ὁ προφήτης "ἐμίσησαν" ἔφη "ἐν πύλαις ἐλέγχοντα, καὶ λόγον ὅσιον ἐβδελύξαντο". Μιχαίας τε ὁμοίως καὶ αὐτὸς περὶ τοῦ λόγου μνημονεύων "ἐκ Σιὼν" ἔφη "ἐξελεύσεται νόμος, καὶ λόγος κυρίου ἐξ Ἱερουσαλήμ". 48 οὐκοῦν πρὸ μὲν τοῦ κατελθεῖν καὶ διὰ τῆς παρθένου τεχθῆναι λόγος ἦν μόνον. ἐπεὶ τί ἕτερον ἦν πρὸ τοῦ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀναλαβεῖν σάρκα τὸ κατελθὸν "ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν", ὡς καὶ αὐτὸς γέγραφεν, καὶ γεννηθὲν ἐκ τῆς παρθένου; οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν ἢ λόγος. 49 εἰκότως οὖν πρὸ τῆς καθόδου τοῦτο ἦν, ὅπερ πολλάκις ἔφαμεν, λόγος· μετὰ δὲ τὴν κάθοδον καὶ τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀνάληψιν διαφόρων καὶ τῶν ἐπηγοριῶν τετύχηκεν, ἐπειδὴ "ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο". 50 τί γὰρ ἕτερον ἦν ἀποκεκρυμμένον μυστήριον ἢ τὸ κατὰ τὸν λόγον; οὕτως δὲ ἦν ἀποκεκρυμμένον "ἐν τῷ θεῷ" τουτὶ πρότερον τὸ μυστήριον, ὥστε μηδένα τοῦ προτέρου λαοῦ σαφῶς τὰ κατὰ τὸν λόγον εἰδέναι, ἀλλ' ἡμᾶς τοῦ πλούτου "τῆς δόξης" καὶ τοῦ ἀποκεκρυμμένου μυστηρίου ἀπολαύειν νυνί. 51 ὁ δὲ ἱερὸς ἀπόστολός τε καὶ μαθητὴς τοῦ κυρίου Ἰωάννης σαφῶς καὶ διαρρήδην ἐν ἀρχῇ τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου διδάσκων, ὡς ἀγνοούμενον ἐν ἀνθρώποις πρότερον, λόγον αὐτὸν τοῦ παντοκράτορος ὀνομάζων, οὕτως ἔφη "ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος". οὐ μιᾷ μαρτυρίᾳ χρώμενος τὴν ἀιδιότητα τοῦ λόγου σημαίνει. 52 ἵν' ἐν μὲν τῷ φῆσαι "ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος" δείξῃ δυνάμει ἐν τῷ πατρὶ εἶναι τὸν λόγον (ἀρχὴ γὰρ ἁπάντων τῶν γεγονότων ὁ θεὸς "ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα"), ἐν δὲ τῷ "καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεὸν" ἐνεργείᾳ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν εἶναι τὸν λόγον ("πάντα" γὰρ "δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν"), ἐν δὲ τῷ θεὸν εἶναι τὸν λόγον εἰρηκέναι μὴ διαιρεῖν τὴν θεότητα, ἐπειδὴ ὁ λόγος τε ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ αὐτὸς ἐν τῷ λόγῳ· "ἐν ἐμοὶ" γάρ φησιν "ὁ πατήρ, κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί". 53 ἀκούεις τοίνυν τῆς συμφωνίας τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, διὰ πολλῶν καὶ διαφόρων προσώπων τῇ τοῦ λόγου μαρτυρούσης ἀιδιότητι. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἄρχεται μὲν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀιδιότητος τοῦ λόγου, "ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος" λέγων "καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος". τρισὶν ἐπαλλήλοις μαρτυρίαις χρώμενος τὴν ἀιδιότητα τοῦ λόγου δεικνύναι βούλεται. 54 τί τοίνυν ἦν τὸ κατελθὸν τοῦτο πρὸ τοῦ ἐνανθρωπῆσαι; πάντως πού φησιν· πνεῦμα. εἰ γάρ τι παρὰ τοῦτο ἐθέλοι λέγειν, οὐ συγχωρήσει αὐτῷ ὁ πρὸς τὴν παρθένον εἰρηκὼς ἄγγελος "πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπὶ σέ". εἰ δὲ πνεῦμα εἶναι φήσει, ἀκουέτω τοῦ σωτῆρος λέγοντος "πνεῦμα ὁ θεός". 55 ἀλλ' ἔοικεν ἐν τῷ λόγῳ ὁ πατὴρ εἶναι, κἂν Ἀστερίῳ μὴ δοκῇ 55 καὶ τοῖς τὰ αὐτὰ ἐκείνῳ φρονοῦσιν. δοκεῖ γὰρ τοῦτο τῷ θεσπεσίῳ προφήτῃ Ἡσαΐᾳ,
The Divine Logos and Creation§6
6Regarding the one saying through the Holy Spirit, 'and they shall worship you, and in you they shall pray; for in you is God, and there is no other besides you. For you are God' (Rev 22:8), you see how he uproots the skillful cunning of those teaching falsely. Likewise, there the prophet discourses about the Word having taken our flesh. A spirit of shadow could never have become a creative spirit. And because he is God himself, the Savior said, 'Spirit, God' (John 1:1). And because God is light, he himself teaches us, saying, 'I am the light' (John 8:12).
For who else, whether of the holy angels or of righteous men, was reliable enough to loose the penalty set for him from the face of God, if not the Word himself, who is both co-existing and co-forming, toward whom the Father said, 'Let us make man in our image and likeness' (Gen 1:26), with no other god existing who would be able to co-form with him? 'I am,' he says, 'the first God, and I after these things, and besides me no other god exists.' Nor was there any younger god, nor was any other god being 'after these things' able to work together with God.
But if anyone uses a small and human example like ours to examine the divine action as if through an icon: just as a skilled man who is a statue-maker, desiring to fashion a man, first observes his forms and characters within himself, then conceives what breadth and length is becoming, and examines the proportion of the whole in each individual part, having prepared the appropriate material of bronze, and having modeled the coming man after his own intellect and seeing him mentally, consciously cooperating with the Logos—by which he reasons and by which he is accustomed to do all things (for nothing beautiful comes into being without the Logos)—beginning this sensible work, he exhorts himself as if to another, saying, 'Come, let us make, come, let us fashion a man';
Thus the Lord of all, God, making the ensouled man from the earth, exhorts no one else but his own Logos, saying, 'Let us make man' (Gen 1:26), not in the same way as the others; for the whole creation came into being by the Logos. For God did not need any other preparation, such as matter or some other human thing, but this preparation which is in his own intellect.
Since it was impossible to conceive of God apart from the Word and the wisdom approaching the Word regarding the construction of the heavens, he rightly said, 'Whenever he was preparing the heavens, I was with him' (Proverbs 8:30). For before the world existed, the Word was in the Father. When the Almighty God set to make all things in the heavens and upon the earth, the genesis of the world required an active energy. And because of this, with no other existing besides God (for all is confessed to have come from him), the Word, having come forth, became the maker of the world, he who previously was inwardly preparing it, just as the prophet Solomon teaches us, saying, 'Whenever he was preparing the heavens, I was with him' (Proverbs 8:30) and 'As he was establishing springs under the heavens, whenever he was making the strong foundations of the earth, I was with him, fittingly joined to him; I was there as he was being applied' (Proverbs 8:29). For the Father rightly rejoiced in making all things through the Word with wisdom and power.
Just as all things that happened came from the Father through the Word, so also the things said by the Father are signified through the Word. For this reason also the most holy Moses names the Word an angel there, because he appeared through no other, but so that he might announce to Moses those things which he knew would be effective for the sons of Israel; and he knew they would be effective for believing that there is one God. Therefore also to him he said, 'I am the Being' (Exodus 3:14), in order that he might teach that no other besides himself is God. This is easy, I think, for those thinking well to know from a small and humble example among us. For it is not possible for anyone to separate the word of a man in power and substance; for the word is one and the same to a man, and is not separated from anything else, except by the energy of the act alone.
Here the Father says 'I am the Being' (Exodus 3:14) to Moses, but he says it clearly through the Word. For all that the Father says, he seems to be saying everywhere through the Word. And this is clear also from ourselves, in whatever small things we compare to the great and divine; for we also do all that we wish to say and do through our own word, according to our ability.
What then, does Asterios suppose the one saying 'I am the Being' (Exodus 3:14) to be, the Son or the Father? For two substances, setting aside the one which the Word of God took flesh into, the human one, and [...]
Greek · §6
τῷ δι' ἁγίου λέγοντι πνεύματος "καὶ προσκυνήσουσίν σοι, καὶ ἐν σοὶ προσεύξονται· ὅτι ἐν σοὶ ὁ θεός, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν σοῦ. σὺ γὰρ εἶ ὁ θεός." ὁρᾷς ὅπως πρόρριζον ἀνατρέπει τὴν τῶν ἑτεροδιδασκαλούντων ἔντεχνον κακουργίαν. 56 κἀνταῦθα ὁμοίως ὁ προφήτης περὶ τοῦ τὴν ἡμετέραν ἀνειληφότος σάρκα λόγου διαλέγεται. 57 πνεῦμα σκιᾶς ποιητικὸν οὐκ ἄν ποτε γένοιτο. πνεῦμα δὲ ὅτι αὐτὸς ὁ θεός, ὁ σωτὴρ ἔφη "πνεῦμα ὁ θεός". ὅτι δὲ ὁ θεὸς φῶς ἐστιν, αὐτὸς διδάσκει ἡμᾶς "ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ φῶς" λέγων. 58 τίς γὰρ οὕτως ἢ τῶν ἁγίων ἀγγέλων ἢ ἀνδρῶν δικαίων ἀξιόπιστος ἦν τὴν ἐκ προσώπου τοῦ θεοῦ ὁρισθεῖσαν αὐτῷ τιμωρίαν λῦσαι, εἰ μὴ αὐτὸς ὁ λόγος ὁ συμπαρών τε καὶ συμπλάττων, πρὸς ὃν ὁ πατὴρ "ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον" ἔφη "κατ' εἰκόνα ἡμετέραν καὶ ὁμοίωσιν", οὐκ ὄντος ἑτέρου θεοῦ τοῦ συμπλάττειν αὐτῷ δυναμένου. "ἐγὼ" γάρ εἰμι, φησίν, "θεὸς πρῶτος καὶ ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα, καὶ πλὴν ἐμοῦ θεὸς ἕτερος οὐκ ἔστιν". οὔτε οὖν νεώτερός τις θεὸς ἦν, οὔτε ἄλλος τις "μετὰ ταῦτα" θεὸς ὢν θεῷ συνεργεῖν δυνατὸς ἦν. ἀλλ' εἴ τις μικρῷ τινι καὶ ἀνθρωπίνῳ καθ' ἡμᾶς παραδείγματι χρώμενος ὡς διὰ εἰκόνος τὴν θείαν ἐξετάζοι πρᾶξιν· ὥσπερ ἄν τις ἀνδριαντοποιὸς ἐπιστήμων ἀνήρ, ἀνδριάντα πλάσαι βουλόμενος, πρῶτον μὲν τοὺς τύπους αὐτοῦ καὶ χαρακτῆρας ἐν ἑαυτῷ σκοπεῖ, ἔπειτα πλάτος τε καὶ μῆκος ὅσον εὐπρεπὲς ἐννοεῖ, ἀναλογίαν τε τοῦ παντὸς ἐν τῷ καθ' ἕκαστον ἐξετάζει μέρει, χαλκοῦ τε τὴν πρόσφορον ἑτοιμάσας ὕλην καὶ τὸν ἐσόμενον ἀνδριάντα τῇ ἑαυτοῦ προτυπώσας διανοίᾳ καὶ νοητῶς ὁρᾶν νομίσας συνειδώς τε ἑαυτῷ συνεργεῖν τὸν λόγον, ᾧ λογίζεται καὶ ᾧ πάντα πράττειν εἴωθεν (οὐδὲν γὰρ μὴ λόγῳ γιγνόμενον καλόν), ἀρχόμενος τῆς αἰσθητῆς ταύτης ἐργασίας πρὸς ἑαυτὸν ὡς πρὸς ἕτερον παρακελεύεται λέγων· ἄγε ποιήσωμεν, ἄγε πλάσωμεν ἀνδριάντα· οὕτως ὁ τῶν ὅλων δεσπότης θεὸς τὸν ἔμψυχον ἐκ γῆς ἀνδριάντα ποιῶν οὐκ ἄλλῳ τινὶ ἀλλὰ τῷ ἑαυτοῦ λόγῳ παρακελεύεται λέγων "ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον", οὐ τὸν αὐτὸν τοῖς ἄλλοις τρόπον· λόγῳ γὰρ ἡ πᾶσα ἐγένετο κτίσις. 59 οὐ γὰρ δὴ ἑτέρας ἑτοιμασίας, οἷον ὕλης ἢ ἄλλης τινὸς ἀνθρωπίνης, ὁ θεὸς ἐδεῖτο πρὸς κατασκευήν, ἀλλὰ ταύτης τῆς ἐν τῇ αὐτοῦ διανοίᾳ ἑτοιμασίας. ἐπεὶ οὖν ἀδύνατον ἦν χωρὶς λόγου καὶ τῆς προσούσης τῷ λόγῳ σοφίας ἐννοῆσαι περὶ τῆς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ κατασκευῆς τὸν θεόν, εἰκότως ἔφη "ἡνίκα ἡτοίμαζεν τὸν οὐρανόν, συμπαρήμην αὐτῷ". 60 πρὸ γὰρ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι ἦν ὁ λόγος ἐν τῷ πατρί. ὅτε δὲ ὁ παντοκράτωρ θεὸς πάντα τὰ ἐν οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς ποιῆσαι προέθετο, ἐνεργείας ἡ τοῦ κόσμου γένεσις ἐδεῖτο δραστικῆς· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο, μηδενὸς ὄντος ἑτέρου πλὴν θεοῦ (πάντα γὰρ ὁμολογεῖται ὑπ' αὐτοῦ γεγενῆσθαι), τότε ὁ λόγος προελθὼν ἐγίνετο τοῦ κόσμου ποιητής, ὁ καὶ πρότερον ἔνδον νοητῶς ἑτοιμάζων αὐτόν, ὡς διδάσκει ἡμᾶς ὁ προφήτης Σολομὼν "ἡνίκα ἡτοίμαζεν τὸν οὐρανόν" λέγων "συμπαρήμην αὐτῷ" καὶ "ὡς ἀσφαλεῖς ἐτίθει πηγὰς τῆς ὑπ' οὐρανόν, ἡνίκα ἰσχυρὰ ἐποίει τὰ θεμέλια τῆς γῆς, ἤμην παρ' αὐτῷ ἁρμόζουσα· ἐγὼ ἤμην ᾗ προσέχαιρεν"· ἔχαιρεν γὰρ εἰκότως ὁ πατὴρ μετὰ σοφίας καὶ δυνάμεως διὰ τοῦ λόγου πάντα ποιῶν. 61 ὥσπερ γὰρ τὰ γεγονότα πάντα ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς διὰ τοῦ λόγου γέγονεν, οὕτω καὶ τὰ λεγόμενα ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρὸς διὰ τοῦ λόγου σημαίνεται. διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ ὁ ἁγιώτατος Μωσῆς ἄγγελον ἐνταῦθα ὀνομάζει τὸν λόγον, ὅτι δι' οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἐφάνη, ἀλλ' ἵνα ἀναγγείλῃ τῷ Μωσεῖ ταῦτα ἅπερ λυσιτελεῖν τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραὴλ ἠπίστατο· ἠπίστατο δὲ λυσιτελεῖν ἕνα θεὸν εἶναι νομίζειν. διὸ καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν" ἔφη, ἵνα μηδένα ἐκτὸς ἑαυτοῦ ἕτερον θεὸν εἶναι διδάξῃ. τοῦτο δὲ ῥᾴδιον, οἶμαι, τοῖς εὖ φρονοῦσιν καὶ ἀπὸ μικροῦ τινος καὶ ταπεινοῦ καθ' ἡμᾶς παραδείγματος γνῶναι. οὐδὲ γὰρ τὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου λόγον δυνάμει καὶ ὑποστάσει χωρίσαι τινὶ δυνατόν· ἓν γάρ ἐστιν καὶ ταὐτὸν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ὁ λόγος, καὶ οὐδενὶ χωριζόμενος ἑτέρῳ ἢ μόνῃ τῇ τῆς πράξεως ἐνεργείᾳ. 62 ἐνταῦθα "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν" λέγει μὲν τῷ Μωσεῖ ὁ πατήρ, λέγει δὲ δηλονότι διὰ τοῦ λόγου. πάντα γὰρ ὅσα ἂν ὁ πατὴρ λέγῃ, ταῦτα πανταχοῦ διὰ τοῦ λόγου λέγων φαίνεται. τοῦτο δὲ δῆλόν ἐστιν καὶ ἀφ' ἡμῶν αὐτῶν, ὅσα μικρὰ τοῖς μεγάλοις καὶ θείοις ἀπεικάσαι· καὶ ἡμεῖς γὰρ πάντα ὅσα ἂν θέλωμεν κατὰ τὸ δυνατὸν λέγειν τε καὶ ποιεῖν τῷ ἡμετέρῳ ποιοῦμεν λόγῳ. 63 τίνα τοίνυν τὸν "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν" λέγοντα Ἀστέριος εἶναι οἴεται, τὸν υἱὸν ἢ τὸν πατέρα; δύο γὰρ ὑποστάσεις, εἰς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἣν ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος ἀνείληφεν σάρκα ἀφορῶν καὶ
The Distinction of Hypostases§7
7By imagining him thus, he calls the Father and the Son to be such, thereby separating the Son of God from the Father, just as anyone would separate a son of a man from his father according to nature. If he is said to have spoken these things to Moses while separating the Father from himself as the Son, he will not confess the Son to be God. For how can he allow the one saying 'I am the Being' (Exodus 3:14) not to agree that the Being says he is in opposition to non-being? But if he would posit the Son as being separated, he would be said to say 'I am the Being' regarding the Father as well. Either of these is impious.
Therefore, I shall begin to oppose each of those who have written incorrectly, starting from the epistle written by him. He wrote to believe in the Father as God the Almighty, and in his Son the only-begotten God, the Lord our Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit; and he says that he has learned this way of godliness from the divine writings. And I, when he says this, accept the things said very much, for this is the common way of godliness for all of us, to believe in the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit; but when, not having considered the divine, he says the Father is Father and the Son is Son more humanly to us through some technical theory, one can no longer praise such a theory as harmless. For through such a theory, the heresy currently conceived by them comes to increase, which I think is easy to demonstrate clearly from his own words. For he said that one must believe the Father to be truly Father and the Son truly Son, and the Holy Spirit likewise.
For it is impossible for three hypostases to be one unity, unless the Trinity first has its beginning from a unity. For the holy Paul said that those things are being recapitulated into a unity, which differ from God in nothing regarding unity; for the Word and the Spirit alone differ from God in unity.
If, therefore, the Word seems to have come forth from the Father and come to us, and the Holy Spirit, as Asterius also confessed, proceeds from the Father, the Savior immediately says concerning the Spirit that 'he will not speak of himself, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are coming' (John 16:13).
"He shall take from mine and he will announce to you" (John 16:5), the monad does not appear here clearly and manifestly, but in a secret word, expanding into a trinity yet by no means undergoing division. For if the Word proceeds from the Father, and the Spirit also is confessed to proceed from the Father, and immediately regarding the Spirit the Savior says, "He shall take from mine and he will announce to you" (John 16:5), is it not then evident that a mystery is being hidden to be revealed? For how, if the monad being undivided were not expanding into a trinity, could it contain him regarding the Spirit to say at times that he proceeds from the Father, and at times to say, "He shall take from mine and he will announce to you" (John 16:5), and immediately after having breathed upon the disciples, "Receive Holy Spirit" (John 20:22) having said?
For how, if he proceeds from the Father, does he promise to receive this ministry from the Son? For it is necessary either that, being divided into two, as Asterius said, there be persons, or that the Spirit proceeding from the Father must not be in need of the ministry from the Son (for everything proceeding from the Father must be perfect, by no means being dependent on the help of another), or, if he receives from the Son and by his power ministers the grace, he no longer proceeds from the Father. If, however, the Gospel said that having breathed upon the disciples, "Receive Holy Spirit" (John 20:22), he had said, it is evident that the Spirit came forth from the Word. How then, if the Spirit proceeded from the Word, does it again proceed from the Father?
Therefore, he has not spoken correctly nor appropriately, having said that there are three hypostases, not once, but a second time. We know the economy according to the flesh to differ for the man, but we have believed the incorcorporeality according to the spirit to be united to the Father. For if the examination of the Spirit were the only one, it would seem fitting that the Word be one and the same with God; but if the addition according to the flesh upon the Savior were being examined, it seems that the divinity is being expanded by energy alone, so that it would seem fitting that the monad truly is undivided.
For Asterius had decided that there are one and the same, according to this, only the Father and the Son, in accordance with which they agree in all things. For so he said: and because of the precise account in all words and works...
Greek · §7
δι' αὐτὴν οὕτω φανταζόμενος, πατρός τε καὶ υἱοῦ ἔφησεν εἶναι, οὕτω τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ χωρίζων τοῦ πατρός, ὡς καὶ υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου χωρίσειεν ἄν τις τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν πατρός. 64 εἰ τοίνυν τὸν πατέρα χωρίζοντα ἑαυτὸν τοῦ υἱοῦ πρὸς τὸν Μωσέα ταῦτ' εἰρηκέναι φήσει, οὐκ εἶναι τὸν υἱὸν θεὸν ὁμολογήσει. πῶς γὰρ ἐγχωρεῖ τὸν λέγοντα "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὢν" μὴ συνομολογεῖν ὅτι κατὰ ἀντιδιαστολὴν τοῦ μὴ ὄντος ὁ ὢν ἑαυτὸν εἶναί φησιν; εἰ δὲ τὸν υἱὸν ὑποστάσει διῃρημένον τοῦτο φάσκοι λέγειν τὸ "ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν", ταὐτὸν αὖθις περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς λέγειν νομισθήσεται. ἑκάτερον δὲ τούτων ἀσεβές. 65 ἄρξομαι τοίνυν ἀπὸ τῆς ὑπ' αὐτοῦ γραφείσης ἐπιστολῆς πρὸς ἕκαστον τῶν μὴ ὀρθῶς γραφέντων ἀντιλέγειν. γέγραφεν πιστεύειν εἰς πατέρα θεὸν παντοκράτορα, καὶ εἰς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ θεόν, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, καὶ εἰς τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον· καί φησιν ἐκ τῶν θείων γραφῶν μεμαθηκέναι τοῦτον τὸν τῆς θεοσεβείας τρόπον. ἐγὼ δὲ ὅταν μὲν τοῦτο λέγῃ ἀποδέχομαι σφόδρα τὰ λεγόμενα, κοινὸς γὰρ οὗτος ἁπάντων ἡμῶν τῆς θεοσεβείας ὁ τρόπος, πιστεύειν εἰς πατέρα καὶ υἱὸν καὶ ἅγιον πνεῦμα· ὅταν δὲ μὴ τῆς θείας ἐστοχασμένος δυνάμεως ἀνθρωπικώτερον ἡμῖν διά τινος ἐντέχνου θεωρίας τόν τε πατέρα πατέρα λέγῃ καὶ τὸν υἱὸν υἱόν, οὐκέτ' ἐπαινεῖν τὴν τοιαύτην θεωρίαν ἀκίνδυνον. διὰ γὰρ τῆς τοιαύτης θεωρίας τὴν νῦν αὐτοῖς ἐπινοουμένην αἵρεσιν αὐξάνεσθαι συμβαίνει, ὅπερ σαφῶς ἐπιδεῖξαι ῥᾴδιον οἶμαι ἐκ τῶν αὐτοῦ λόγων. ἔφη γὰρ τὸν μὲν πατέρα δεῖν ἀληθῶς πατέρα εἶναι νομίζειν καὶ τὸν υἱὸν ἀληθῶς υἱὸν καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ὡσαύτως. 66 ἀδύνατον γὰρ τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις οὔσας ἑνοῦσθαι μονάδι, εἰ μὴ πρότερον ἡ τριὰς τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀπὸ μονάδος ἔχοι. ἐκεῖνα γὰρ ἀνακεφαλαιοῦσθαι ἔφησεν μονάδι ὁ ἱερὸς Παῦλος, ἃ μηδὲν τῇ ἑνότητι τῷ θεῷ διαφέρει· ἑνότητι γὰρ ὁ λόγος καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τῷ θεῷ διαφέρει μόνα. 67 εἰ τοίνυν ὁ λόγος φαίνοιτο ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐξελθὼν καὶ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἐληλυθώς, τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, ὡς καὶ Ἀστέριος ὡμολόγησεν, παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται, αὖθίς τε ὁ σωτήρ φησιν περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος ὅτι "οὐκ ἀφ' ἑαυτοῦ λαλήσει, ἀλλ' ὅσα ἀκούσει λαλήσει, καὶ τὰ ἐρχόμενα ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν. ἐκεῖνός με δοξάσει, ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήψεται καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν", οὐ σαφῶς καὶ φανερῶς ἐνταῦθα ἀπορρήτῳ δὲ λόγῳ ἡ μονὰς φαίνεται, πλατυνομένη μὲν εἰς τριάδα, διαιρεῖσθαι δὲ μηδαμῶς ὑπομένουσα; εἰ γὰρ ὁ μὲν λόγος ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται, τὸ δὲ πνεῦμα καὶ αὐτὸ ὁμολογεῖται ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεσθαι, αὖθίς τε περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος τὸν σωτῆρα λέγειν "ἐκεῖνος ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήψεται καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν", οὐκ ἄρα πρόδηλόν ἐστιν κεκρυμμένον ἀνακαλύπτεσθαί τι μυστήριον; πῶς γάρ, εἰ μὴ ἡ μονὰς ἀδιαίρετος οὖσα εἰς τριάδα πλατύνοιτο, ἐγχωρεῖ αὐτὸν περὶ τοῦ πνεύματος ποτὲ μὲν λέγειν ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται, ποτὲ δὲ λέγειν "ἐκεῖνος ἐκ τοῦ ἐμοῦ λήψεται καὶ ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν", αὖθίς τε ἐμφυσήσαντα τοῖς μαθηταῖς "λάβετε πνεῦμα ἅγιον" εἰρηκέναι; πῶς γὰρ εἰ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται παρὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ τὴν διακονίαν ταύτην λαμβάνειν ἐπαγγέλλεται; ἀνάγκη γὰρ εἰ δύο διαιρούμενα, ὡς Ἀστέριος ἔφη, πρόσωπα εἴη, ἢ τὸ πνεῦμα ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον μὴ δεῖσθαι τῆς παρὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ διακονίας (πᾶν γὰρ τὸ ἐκ πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον τέλειον εἶναι ἀνάγκη, μηδαμῶς προσδεόμενον τῆς παρ' ἑτέρου βοηθείας), ἤ, εἰ παρὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ λαμβάνοι καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἐκείνου δυνάμεως διακονοίη τὴν χάριν, μηκέτι ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεσθαι. 68 εἰ δὲ τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον ὅτι ἐμφυσήσας τοῖς μαθηταῖς "λάβετε πνεῦμα ἅγιον" ἔφησεν, δῆλον ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ λόγου τὸ πνεῦμα ἐξῆλθεν. πῶς οὖν, εἰ ἐκ τοῦ λόγου τὸ πνεῦμα προῆλθεν, πάλιν τὸ αὐτὸ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορεύεται; 69 οὐκ ὀρθῶς οὖν οὐδὲ προσηκόντως εἴρηκεν τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις εἶναι φήσας οὐχ ἅπαξ, ἀλλὰ καὶ δεύτερον. 70 τὴν μὲν κατὰ σάρκα οἰκονομίαν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ διαφέρειν γιγνώσκομεν, τὴν δὲ κατὰ πνεῦμα ἀιδιότητα ἡνῶσθαι τῷ πατρὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν. 71 εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἡ τοῦ πνεύματος ἐξέτασις γίγνοιτο μόνη, ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸν εἰκότως ἂν ὁ λόγος εἶναι τῷ θεῷ φαίνοιτο· εἰ δὲ ἡ κατὰ σάρκα προσθήκη ἐπὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἐξετάζοιτο, ἐνεργείᾳ ἡ θεότης μόνῃ πλατύνεσθαι δοκεῖ ὥστε εἰκότως μονὰς ὄντως ἐστὶν ἀδιαίρετος. 72 ἓν γὰρ εἶναι καὶ ταὐτὸν Ἀστέριος κατὰ τοῦτο ἀπεφήνατο μόνον τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν, καθ' ὃ ἐν πᾶσιν συμφωνοῦσιν. οὕτω γὰρ ἔφη· καὶ διὰ τὴν ἐν πᾶσιν λόγοις τε καὶ ἔργοις ἀκριβῆ
The Harmony of the Son and Father§8
8Regarding the harmony of 'I and the Father are one' (John 10:30). If, therefore, He himself says these things: 'I went forth from the Father and I have come,' and again, 'and the Word, which you hear, is not mine, but belongs to Him who sent me the Father,' and 'all things that the Father has are mine' (John 16:15), it is clear that He was rightly saying even that: 'the Father is in me and I in the Father' (John 16:33), so that the Word, saying this, might be in God, and the Father might be in the Word, because the Word is the power of the Father. For a trustworthy witness has declared Him to be 'the power of God and the wisdom of God.'
The Savior does not say 'I and the Father are one' because of a precise harmony in all words and works, as Asterius said, but because it is impossible to divide the Word of God or God Himself from the Word. Since Asterius thinks the Savior said this because of a harmony in everything, and desires to learn the truth without paying attention to the second economy, it is necessary to remind him how, at times, one sees what appears to be a discord. For such is what the spoken words teach us.
For what kind of harmony is there in the time of the passion when He says this, 'Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me' (Luke 22:42), but then adds that, 'yet not as I will, but as You' (Luke 22:42)? For there was no harmony at first in saying, 'let this cup pass from me'; nor does it seem that there is any agreement in what is being added, for He says, 'not my will, but Yours, Father, let it be done.' You hear how the letter declares a discord, according to appearances, of the one willing and of the one not willing. For the Father clearly willed that which willed happened through the things from which it was clear; but the Son's not willing is made clear through the things by which He renounces it. And again He says, 'I do not seek my own will, but the will of Him who sent me the Father' (John 5:30). How, then, does he say that the Savior said, 'I and the Father are one' because of a harmony in everything?
How can the Son have harmony toward the Father, or the Father toward the Son, when the Son says, 'all things that the Father has are mine' (John 16:15)? For, contrary to the Son encroaching upon the Father, he says, 'all things that the Father has are mine.' For this reason, passing over the fact that all things the Father has are common, he said, 'all things that the Father has are mine.'
Even if it was not proper for the one in agreement to speak in this way, rather: all that the Father has is common. For if the Acts of the Apostles, praising the agreement of those approaching with faith like the ones mentioned, said, "all things were common to them" (Acts 4:32), and one ought to consider all things to be common for men capable of agreeing, how much more ought the Father and the Son to partake in communion, being divided into two hypostases?
But now, in saying, "all that the Father has is mine" (John 16:15), the Son seems to be grasping at the Father's; and in stating that not even his own word is master, but rather the Father of this word (for he says, "the word which you hear is not mine but of Him who sent me, the Father" John 8:28), it shows the Father being deprived of his own things of the Son. Furthermore, according to the opinion of Asterius, the two sides seem not to have spoken in accordance. For the one in agreement ought not to justly snatch away what belongs to the other, for this is grasping, but ought to consider what belongs to each to be common.
So when we look down toward the flesh in a human way, we will not find the Savior having said, "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30), just as Asterius has written. For it was not because of the precise agreement in all words and works, as he himself has written, that the Savior said, "I and the Father are one." For if it were this, he certainly would have said: "I and the Father agree with one another in all things." But now he said, "I and the Father are one."
So if there were any disagreement in those things, and since the Lord must speak the truth, it is fitting to know the Savior precisely, that whenever he says, "I and the Father are one," he says this not looking down toward the man whom he took upon himself, but toward the Word proceeding from the Father. For if any disagreement were thought to exist, this ought to be referred to the weakness of the flesh, which the Word did not have previously when he was taken. But if unity were being spoken of, this seems to differ from the Word. Therefore, not only did he say, "I and the Father are one" appropriately, but also that: "For such a long time I have been with you, Philip, and you say: show me the Father" (John 14:9), it is clear that he said this for those capable of seeing the intelligible things not with these eyes, but with the intellectual ones. For both the Father and his Word exist invisible to the eyes of the flesh. Therefore, not because of the agreement in all things...
Greek · §8
συμφωνίαν "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν". 73 εἰ οὖν αὐτὸς λέγει ταῦτα "ἐγὼ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἥκω", καὶ αὖθις "καὶ ὁ λόγος, ὃν ἀκούετε, οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμός, ἀλλὰ τοῦ πέμψαντός με πατρός" καὶ "πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστιν", δῆλον ὅτι εἰκότως κἀκεῖνο ἔλεγεν "ἐν ἐμοὶ ὁ πατὴρ κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί", ἵνα ἐν θεῷ μὲν ᾖ ὁ λόγος ὁ τοῦτο λέγων, ἐν δὲ τῷ λόγῳ ὁ πατήρ, ὅτι δύναμις τοῦ πατρὸς ὁ λόγος. "θεοῦ" γὰρ αὐτὸν "δύναμιν καὶ θεοῦ σοφίαν" ἀξιόπιστος εἴρηκεν μάρτυς. οὐ διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν οὖν λόγοις τε καὶ ἔργοις ἀκριβῆ συμφωνίαν, ὡς Ἀστέριος ἔφη, ὁ σωτὴρ λέγει "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν", ἀλλὰ διότι ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν, ἢ λόγον θεοῦ ἢ θεὸν τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ μερίζεσθαι λόγου. ἐπεὶ εἰ διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν συμφωνίαν τοῦτο εἰρηκέναι τὸν σωτῆρα Ἀστέριος οἴεται, καὶ μὴ τῇ δευτέρᾳ οἰκονομίᾳ προσέχων τἀληθὲς μανθάνειν ἐθέλει, ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν ὑπομνῆσαι αὐτόν, πῶς ἐνίοτε [τὸ] κατὰ τὸ [σὴν] φαινόμενον ἀσυμφωνίαν ἔστιν ἰδεῖν. οὕτω γὰρ ἡμᾶς τὰ ῥητὰ διδάσκει. ποία γὰρ ἐν καιρῷ τοῦ πάθους συμφωνία τοῦτο λέγοντος "πάτερ, εἰ δυνατόν, παρελθέτω τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο", ἐπιφέροντος δὲ κἀκεῖνο "πλὴν μὴ ὡς ἐγὼ θέλω, ἀλλ' ὡς σύ". οὐ συμφωνοῦντος γὰρ ἦν πρῶτον μὲν τὸ λέγειν "παρελθέτω τὸ ποτήριον τοῦτο"· οὐδὲν δὲ ἐχόμενον συμφωνίας καὶ τὸ ἐπιφερόμενον εἶναι δοκεῖ, λέγει γὰρ "μὴ τὸ ἐμόν, ἀλλὰ τὸ σὸν γενέσθω, πάτερ, θέλημα". ἀκούεις ὅπως ἀσυμφωνίαν κατὰ τὸ φαινόμενον δηλοῖ τὸ γράμμα, τοῦ μὲν θέλοντος. τοῦ δὲ μὴ θέλοντος. ὅτι μὲν γὰρ ἐβούλετο ὁ πατὴρ δῆλον ἀφ' ὧν ὃ ἐβούλετο γέγονεν· ὅτι δὲ οὐκ ἐβούλετο ὁ υἱὸς δῆλον δι' ὧν παραιτεῖται. καὶ αὖθις "οὐ ζητῶ" φησὶν "τὸ θέλημα τὸ ἐμὸν ἀλλὰ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός με πατρός". πῶς οὖν διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν συμφωνίαν τὸν σωτῆρα εἰρηκέναι φησὶν "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν". 74 πῶς συμφωνίαν ἔχειν πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ὁ υἱὸς δύναται ἢ ὁ πατὴρ πρὸς τὸν υἱόν, τοῦ υἱοῦ "πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστιν" λέγοντος; ἄντικρυς γὰρ πλεονεκτοῦντος ἦν τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸν πατέρα τὸ λέγειν "πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστιν". τούτου γὰρ χάριν, παρεὶς τὸ πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ κοινά ἐστιν εἰπεῖν, "πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστιν" ἔφη. καίτοι οὐκ ἦν ἴδιον τοῦ συμφωνοῦντος οὕτω λέγειν, ἀλλά· πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ κοινά ἐστιν. εἰ γὰρ αἱ τῶν ἀποστόλων Πράξεις τὴν τῶν τηνικαῦτα προσιόντων τῇ πίστει συμφωνίαν ἐπαινοῦσαι "πάντα ἦν αὐτοῖς κοινὰ" ἔφασαν, καὶ ἐπ' ἀνθρώπων τῶν συμφωνεῖν δυναμένων κοινὰ εἶναι πάντα νομίζειν ὀφείλει, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἔδει τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱὸν κοινωνίας μετέχειν, εἰς δύο ὑποστάσεις διῃρημένους; νυνὶ δὲ ἐν μὲν τῷ λέγειν "πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὁ πατὴρ ἐμά ἐστιν" πλεονεκτῶν ὁ υἱὸς τὸν πατέρα φαίνεται· ἐν δὲ τῷ φάσκειν μηδὲ τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ λόγου κύριον εἶναι, ἀλλὰ καὶ τούτου τὸν πατέρα ("ὁ" γὰρ "λόγος ὃν ἀκούετε" φησὶν "οὐκ ἔστιν ἐμὸς ἀλλὰ τοῦ πέμψαντός με πατρός"), ἀφαιρεῖσθαι τὸν πατέρα τὰ ἴδια τοῦ παιδὸς δείκνυσιν. ἑκάτερα δὲ κατὰ τὴν Ἀστερίου οἴησιν οὐκ ἀκολούθως εἰρημένα φαίνεται. ἔδει γὰρ τὸν συμφωνοῦντα μὴ τὰ τῷ ἑτέρῳ προσόντα παρασπᾶσθαι δίκαια, πλεονεκτικὸν γὰρ τοῦτό γε, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἑκατέρῳ προσόντα κοινὰ εἶναι νομίζειν. ὥστε ὅταν μὲν εἰς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀποβλέπωμεν σάρκα, οὐχ ὥσπερ Ἀστέριος γέγραφεν, οὕτως εὑρήσομεν εἰρηκότα τὸν σωτῆρα "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν", οὐ γὰρ διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν λόγοις τε καὶ ἔργοις ἀκριβῆ συμφωνίαν, ὡς αὐτὸς γέγραφεν, ὁ σωτὴρ εἴρηκεν "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν". εἰ γὰρ τοῦτ' ἦν, πάντως ἂν ἔφη· ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἐν ἅπασιν πρὸς ἀλλήλους συμφωνοῦμεν. νυνὶ δὲ "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" ἔφη. οὐκοῦν εἰ ἐν ἐκείνοις ἀσυμφωνία τις ἦν, ἀνάγκη δὲ τὸν δεσπότην ἀληθεύειν, τὸν σωτῆρα ἀκριβῶς εἰδέναι προσήκει, ὅτι ἡνίκα ἂν "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" λέγῃ, τηνικαῦτα οὐκ εἰς τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὃν ἀνείληφεν ἀποβλέπων τοῦτό φησιν, ἀλλ' εἰς τὸν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς προελθόντα λόγον. εἰ γάρ τις ἀσυμφωνία εἶναι δοκοίη, αὕτη ἀναφέρεσθαι εἰς τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀσθένειαν ὀφείλει, ἣν μὴ πρότερον ἔχων ἀνείληφεν ὁ λόγος. εἰ δὲ ἑνότης λέγοιτο, αὕτη τῷ λόγῳ διαφέρουσα φαίνεται. ὅθεν οὐ μόνον τὸ "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" εἰκότως ἔφη, ἀλλὰ κἀκεῖνο· "τοσούτῳ χρόνῳ μεθ' ὑμῶν εἰμι, Φίλιππε, καὶ λέγεις· δεῖξόν μοι τὸν πατέρα", δῆλον ὅτι οὐ τούτοις τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς, ἀλλὰ τοῖς νοητοῖς τὰ νοητὰ ὁρᾶν δυναμένοις. ἀόρατος γὰρ τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ὄμμασιν ὅ τε πατὴρ ὑπάρχει καὶ ὁ τούτου λόγος. οὐ διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν οὖν συμφωνίαν τοῦτ'
The Unity of Christ's Divinity§9
9He spoke to Philip. For he himself confesses, saying, "The Father is in me, and I am in the Father" (John 14:10). That he has not spoken this merely or aimlessly is evident also from another apostolic saying: "one" is he who said, "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" (Ephesians 4:5), and "one God" he said, "and Father, who is over all and through all and in all" (1 Corinthians 8:6). You see that the concord does not fail even there, but the same thing has suffered even there. For having said "one Lord," he again said "one God," so that whenever he mentions the one Lord, he includes the Father, and whenever he speaks concerning the Father, he testifies that the Word is not outside Him.
If you wish to hear something else of the same prophecy confirming one God for us, he says, "I am God first, and I am the one who is to come" (Isaiah 43:10). For the "I" is indicative of a single person, for the two sayings signify one person to us. For having said "I," the "am" follows, so that through these two parts of the word, both the pronoun and the verb, the unity of the divinity is testified. If other testimony were required, I would immediately provide you with the same prophet saying, "I am first, and I am after these things, and besides me there is no God" (Isaiah 45:5).
If Asterius, having supposed the Son of the Father to be divided, assumes him to be a son of a man, being stumbled by the human flesh which He took for our sakes, let him show us this saying; for the said saying is of one person even there. Who then is he who says, "There is no God besides me"? Let him hear also another prophecy saying, "There is no just one and savior besides me" (Isaiah 43:11).
If it is thought that there are two gods, it is necessary for him to confess that the other is not just, nor a savior. But if he is not just nor a savior, how can he still be God? For he appears to be the one who is just and a savior.
And again he says, 'Before me no other came, and with me no other shall be; I am God, and no savior shall be besides me.' If one wishes to hear another prophetic word, perhaps regarding him and those similarly disputing about divinity as he spoke, let him hear Isaiah saying, 'Repent, you wanderers, turn to the heart, and remember the former things from eternity, for I am God and there is none besides me' (Isaiah 43:10). He did not say, 'I am God,' so that he might clearly demonstrate a single God existing through the addition of the article.
And what of the prophet Hosea? Does he not himself testify to the same things, saying, 'I brought you up out of Egypt' and 'you shall know no god besides me, and no savior is besides me' (Hosea 13:4)? And again Malachi says, 'Did not one God create you?' and 'Is not one Father of all you?' (Malachi 2:10). But Asterios will say that David said nothing about this, even though being older than the other prophets according to Moses, and because of this he is in doubt, whether it is proper to suppose two gods existing as divided substances or not.
I think, however, that in order not to say this, it would follow for him to show him the same things with the aforementioned holy ones saying: 'Listen,' he says, 'my people, and I will speak to you; Israel, and I testify to you. If you listen to me, there shall not be among you a near god, nor shall you worship a foreign god. For I am the Lord your God.' In demonstrating himself and saying, 'I am,' is it not clear that he is saying there is only one God, that is, himself?
What then? If we do not consider the unity to be indivisible by power through the Spirit, shall we not sin, clearly being taught by the word, 'You shall worship the Lord your God and to him alone you shall serve'? The same is also proclaimed through the Gospel according to Mark; for a certain scribe having come to him and inquiring what is the first of the commandments, he answered him thus, having said, 'First of all: Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one, and you shall love the Lord your God with all your...'
Greek · §9
ἔφη πρὸς Φίλιππον. 75 αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁμολογεῖ λέγων "ἐν ἐμοὶ ὁ πατὴρ κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί"· ὅτι δὲ τοῦτο οὐχ ἁπλῶς οὐδὲ ἀσκόπως εἴρηκεν, δῆλον καὶ ἀφ' ἑτέρας ἀποστολικῆς ῥήσεως· "εἷς" γὰρ ὁ εἰπὼν "κύριος, μία πίστις, ἓν βάπτισμα" "εἷς θεὸς" ἔφη "καὶ πατήρ, ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων καὶ διὰ πάντων καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν". ὁρᾷς ὅτι οὐδ' ἐνταῦθα ἀφίσταται τῆς συμφωνίας, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐνταῦθα τὸ αὐτὸ πέπονθεν. "εἷς" γὰρ εἰπὼν "κύριος" αὖθις "εἷς θεὸς" ἔφη, ἵνα ἡνίκα ἂν τοῦ ἑνὸς κυρίου μνημονεύῃ περιλαμβάνῃ καὶ τὸν πατέρα, ἡνίκα δ' ἂν περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς λέγῃ μὴ ἐκτὸς εἶναι τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ μαρτυρῇ. 76 εἰ δὲ καὶ βούλει καὶ ἑτέρας ἀκοῦσαι τοῦ αὐτοῦ προφητείας ἕνα ἡμῖν θεὸν βεβαιούσης, "ἐγὼ θεὸς" φησὶν "πρῶτος, καὶ εἰς τὰ ἐπερχόμενα ἐγώ εἰμι"· τὸ γὰρ ἐγὼ ἑνὸς προσώπου δεικτικόν ἐστιν, αἱ γὰρ δύο ῥήσεις ἓν ἡμῖν πρόσωπον σημαίνουσιν. "ἐγὼ" γὰρ εἰπὼν ἐπάγει καὶ τὸ "εἰμί", ὥστε διὰ τῶν δύο τοῦ λόγου μερῶν, ἀντωνυμίας τε καὶ ῥήματος, τὴν τῆς θεότητος μαρτυρεῖσθαι μονάδα. εἰ δὲ δέοιτο καὶ ἑτέρας μαρτυρίας, αὖθις τὸν αὐτὸν αὐτῷ παρέξομαι προφήτην λέγοντα "ἐγὼ πρῶτος καὶ ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα, καὶ πλὴν ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν θεός". εἰ ὑποστάσει διῃρημένον τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ πατρὸς ὡς υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου Ἀστέριος εἶναι οἴεται, ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης σαρκὸς ἣν δι' ἡμᾶς ἀνέλαβεν σκανδαλιζόμενος, δεικνύτω ἡμῖν τὸν ταῦτα λέγοντα· ἑνὸς γάρ ἐστιν κἀνταῦθα προσώπου ἡ λεγομένη ῥῆσις. τίς οὖν ἔστιν ὁ λέγων "οὐκ ἔστιν πλὴν ἐμοῦ θεός"; ἀκουέτω δὲ καὶ ἑτέρας προφητείας λεγούσης "οὐκ ἔστιν πλὴν ἐμοῦ δίκαιος καὶ σωτήρ". εἰ δύο θεοὺς εἶναι νομίζοι, ἀνάγκη αὐτὸν τὸν ἕτερον μὴ δίκαιον ὁμολογεῖν εἶναι μηδὲ σωτῆρα. εἰ δὲ οὐ δίκαιος οὐδὲ σωτήρ, πῶς ἔτι θεὸς εἶναι δύναται; ἕνα γὰρ ἀποφαίνεται δίκαιον καὶ σωτῆρα εἶναι. καὶ αὖθις "ἔμπροσθέν μου" φησὶν "οὐκ ἐγένετο ἄλλος, καὶ μετ' ἐμὲ οὐκ ἔσται, ἐγὼ θεός, καὶ οὐκ ἔσται παρὲξ ἐμοῦ σῴζων". εἰ δὲ βούλεται καὶ ἑτέρου προφητικοῦ ἀκοῦσαι ῥητοῦ, τάχα που πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ τοὺς ὁμοίως περὶ θεότητος αὐτῷ διακειμένους λεχθέντος, ἀκουέτω αὐτοῦ Ἡσαΐου λέγοντος "μετανοήσατε, οἱ πλανώμενοι, ἐπιστρέψατε τῇ καρδίᾳ, καὶ μνήσθητε τὰ πρότερα ἀπὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος, ὅτι ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν πλὴν ἐμοῦ". οὐκ εἶπεν· ἐγὼ θεός, ἵνα καὶ διὰ τῆς τοῦ ἄρθρου προσθήκης ἕνα θεὸν ὄντα σαφῶς ἐπιδείξῃ. τί δὲ καὶ Ὡσηὲ ὁ προφήτης; οὐ καὶ αὐτὸς τὰ αὐτὰ μαρτυρεῖ, "ἐγὼ ἀνήγαγόν σε ἐξ Αἰγύπτου" λέγων "καὶ θεὸν πλὴν ἐμοῦ οὐ γνώσῃ, καὶ σῴζων οὐκ ἔστιν παρὲξ ἐμοῦ"; αὖθίς τε ὁ Μαλαχίας "οὐχὶ θεὸς εἷς ἔκτισεν ὑμᾶς;" φησὶν "οὐχὶ πατὴρ εἷς πάντων ὑμῶν;" ἀλλὰ τὸν ∆αυὶδ φήσει που Ἀστέριος μηδὲν εἰρηκέναι περὶ τούτου, καίτοι πρεσβύτατον παρὰ Μωσέα τῶν ἄλλων προφητῶν ὄντα, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀμφιγνοεῖν, εἴτε δύο θεοὺς ὑποστάσει διῃρημένους νομίζειν εἶναι προσήκει εἴτε καὶ μή. οὐκοῦν ἵνα μὴ τοῦτο λέγῃ, ἀκόλουθον ἡγοῦμαι καὶ αὐτὸν ἐπιδεῖξαι αὐτῷ τὰ αὐτὰ τοῖς προειρημένοις ἁγίοις λέγοντα· "ἄκουσον," φησὶν "λαός μου, καὶ λαλήσω σοι· Ἰσραήλ, καὶ διαμαρτύρομαί σοι. ἐὰν ἀκούσῃς μου, οὐκ ἔσται ἐν σοὶ θεὸς πρόσφατος, οὐδὲ προσκυνήσεις θεῷ ἀλλοτρίῳ. ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι κύριος ὁ θεός σου". ὁ αὑτὸν ἐπιδεικνὺς καὶ λέγων "ἐγώ εἰμι", οὐ δῆλός ἐστιν ἕνα θεὸν μόνον εἶναι λέγων, τουτέστιν ἑαυτόν; 77 τί οὖν; εἰ μὴ τῷ πνεύματι προσέχοντες δυνάμει ἀδιαίρετον τὴν μονάδα εἶναι νομίζοιμεν, ἆρα οὐχ ἁμαρτησόμεθα, σαφῶς τοῦ λόγου διδάσκοντος ἡμᾶς "κύριον τὸν θεόν σου προσκυνήσεις καὶ αὐτῷ μόνῳ λατρεύσεις"; τὸ αὐτὸ δὲ καὶ διὰ τοῦ κατὰ Μᾶρκον Εὐαγγελίου κηρύττει· ἑνὸς γάρ τινος γραμματέως προσελθόντος αὐτῷ καὶ πυνθανομένου, τίς εἴη πρώτη τῶν ἐντολῶν, ἀπεκρίνατο πρὸς αὐτὸν οὕτως εἰπὼν "πάντων πρῶτον· ἄκουε, Ἰσραήλ, κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν κύριος εἷς ἐστιν, καὶ ἀγαπήσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης τῆς
The Unity of God in Scripture§10
10...of your soul and with all your strength. This is the first; and the second is like unto this: you shall love your neighbor as yourself (Mark 12:30-31). Greater than these no other commandment exists. And the scribe said to him: 'Well, Teacher, in truth you have spoken, that one is the God and there is none other besides him' (Mark 12:32-33). But the scribe, seeming to have learned piety through the law, appears to be praising the explicit word of the Savior: 'Hear, O Israel' (Deuteronomy 6:4), saying, 'the Lord our God is one,' and believing that he has spoken well by an oath; for he says, 'in truth you have spoken that one is the God and there is no other besides him.'
But those who follow the new covenant, desiring to know mysteries, these also wish to reconstruct a god, wanting to separate him by substance and power from the Father. For the divine Scripture knows to call the unity Lord and God; it has already become clear from the things previously mentioned, through which the God said to Moses, his own servant: 'And God spoke again to Moses: Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel: The Lord, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you' (Exodus 3:6).
You see how, by demonstrating one thing here, he addresses the same person as Lord and God. And immediately likewise the Scripture says, 'And the Lord spoke all these words, saying: I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. There shall not be to you other gods besides me' (Exodus 20:2-3); you hear how through the pronoun it is made apparent that there is only one God. And again a little later he says, 'I am the Lord your God,' saying that he himself is Lord and God.
And what else do we learn through other Scripture? 'And you shall know this day,' he says, 'and your mind shall not be diverted, that the Lord your God, this is God in the heaven above and upon the earth below, and there is none besides him' (Deuteronomy 4:39). And again in the same Deuteronomy he says, 'Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind' (Deuteronomy 6:4-5). And again in the same: 'Behold, behold that I am, and there is no God besides me; I will kill and I will make live; I will strike and I will heal' (Deuteronomy 32:39).
How then, pretending to follow the holy Scriptures simply and boldly, Asterius did not recognize this part of the saying: "The Lord your God, this is God in the heaven above and upon the earth below, and there is none other besides him" (Deuteronomy 6:4), and that "He is one" and "there is no other besides him"?
How then will the holy prophet Jeremiah not clearly expose him as teaching a different doctrine? For he, prophesying to us according to the Savior, thus said: "This is our God; another shall not be reckoned against him. He found every way of knowledge, and he gave Jacob to his child and Israel to the one beloved by him. After these things he appeared upon the earth, and he associated himself with men" (Jeremiah 24:7).
So that even if someone says, by first constructing a first god and a second, as Narcissus has written with those words (for even he who says, "Let us make man in our image and after our likeness" Genesis 1:26, does not forgive), that both he himself and his father are two, we have heard this in part from the testimony of the Lord and of the holy Scriptures. If, therefore, Narcissus intends to divide the Word of the Father through this, let him know that the prophet who wrote, speaking as if of God, "Let us make man in our image and after our likeness," himself wrote, "And God made the man" (Genesis 1:27).
For having encountered the letter of Narcissus, the leader of the Neronians, which he wrote to one Christian and to Euphronius and Eusebius, as the Holy Bishop had asked him whether he says the same as Eusebius of the two substances of Palestine, I knew from what was written that he believes there are three substances, while answering. For having dared to divide the Word of God and to name another god the Word, and having divided the substance and the power of the Father, it is easy to learn clearly from the very words written by them into what blasphemy he has fallen. For he wrote with those words thus: the image and that of which the image is are not conceived as one and the same, but rather two substances and two things and two powers, as are so many distinctions. But the Apostle writes such things concerning the faith of the Galatians; yet Eusebius, transferring the apostolic meaning, through which the Apostle, on account of the aforementioned reason, said, "My children, whom I again labor with until Christ is formed in you" (Galatians 4:19), fastened down the Galatians as not having the correct view concerning the glory of God. For he truly labored with a certain sharpness...
Greek · §10
ψυχῆς σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος σου. αὕτη πρώτη· καὶ δευτέρα ὁμοία ταύτῃ· ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν. μείζων τούτων ἄλλη ἐντολὴ οὐκ ἔστιν. καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ γραμματεύς· καλῶς, διδάσκαλε, ἐπ' ἀληθείας εἶπας ὅτι εἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν πλὴν αὐτοῦ". ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν γραμματεὺς διὰ τοῦ νόμου τὴν θεοσέβειαν μεμαθηκέναι δοκῶν, ἐπαινῶν τὸ τοῦ σωτῆρος ῥητὸν φαίνεται "ἄκουε, Ἰσραήλ", λέγοντος "κύριος ὁ θεός σου εἷς ἐστιν" καὶ ὅρκῳ καλῶς εἰρῆσθαι πιστούμενος· "ἐπ' ἀληθείας" γάρ φησιν "εἶπας ὅτι εἷς ἐστιν ὁ θεὸς καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ". οἱ δὲ τὰ τῆς νέας διαθήκης αὐχοῦντες εἰδέναι μυστήρια, οὗτοι καὶ δεύτερον ἀναπλάττειν θεὸν βούλονται ὑποστάσει καὶ δυνάμει χωριζόμενον τοῦ πατρός. 78 ὅτι δὲ τὴν μονάδα κύριον καὶ θεὸν οἶδεν καλεῖν ἡ θεία γραφή, ἤδη καὶ ἐκ τῶν προειρημένων δῆλον γέγονεν, δι' ὧν πρὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ θεράποντα Μωσέα ὁ θεὸς ἔφη "εἶπεν δὲ ὁ θεὸς πάλιν πρὸς Μωσέα· οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ἰσραήλ· κύριος ὁ θεὸς τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν, ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραὰμ καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰσαὰκ καὶ ὁ θεὸς Ἰακώβ, ἀπέσταλκέν με πρὸς ὑμᾶς". ὁρᾷς ὅπως ἓν ἐπιδεικνὺς ἡμῖν ἐνταῦθα πρόσωπον τὸ αὐτὸ κύριον καὶ θεὸν προσαγορεύει. αὖθίς τε ὁμοίως ἡ γραφὴ λέγει "καὶ ἐλάλησεν κύριος πάντας τοὺς λόγους τούτους λέγων· ἐγὼ κύριος ὁ θεός σου, ὁ ἐξαγαγών σε ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, ἐξ οἴκου δουλείας. οὐκ ἔσονταί σοι θεοὶ ἕτεροι πλὴν ἐμοῦ"· ἀκούεις ὅπως διὰ τῆς ἀντωνυμίας ἕνα εἶναι θεὸν μόνον ἀποφαίνεται. καὶ αὖθις μικρὸν ὕστερον "ἐγώ εἰμι κύριος ὁ θεός σου" φησίν, ἑαυτὸν κύριον καὶ θεὸν εἶναι λέγων. τί δὲ καὶ δι' ἑτέρας γραφῆς μανθάνομεν; "καὶ γνώσῃ σήμερον" φησὶν "καὶ οὐ διαστραφήσῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ, ὅτι κύριος ὁ θεός σου, οὗτος θεὸς ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ἄνω καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς κάτω, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι πλὴν αὐτοῦ". καὶ αὖθις ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ∆ευτερονομίῳ "ἄκουε, Ἰσραήλ" φησὶν "κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν κύριος εἷς ἐστιν· καὶ ἀγαπήσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης καρδίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης ψυχῆς σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης διανοίας". καὶ πάλιν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ "ἴδετε ἴδετε ὅτι ἐγώ εἰμι, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν θεὸς πλὴν ἐμοῦ· ἐγὼ ἀποκτενῶ καὶ ζῆν ποιήσω· πατάξω καὶ ἰάσομαι". πῶς οὖν Ἀστέριος ταῖς ἁγίαις γραφαῖς ἁπλῶς καὶ ἐμφόβως ἀκολουθεῖν προσποιούμενος οὐκ ἔγνω τὸ μέρος τοῦτο λέγον "κύριος ὁ θεός σου, οὗτος θεὸς ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ἄνω καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς κάτω, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἔτι πλὴν αὐτοῦ", καὶ ὅτι "εἷς ἐστιν" καὶ "πλὴν αὐτοῦ ἕτερος οὐκ ἔστιν"; 79 πῶς οὖν ὁ ἱερὸς προφήτης Ἱερεμίας οὐ φανερῶς αὐτὸν ἑτεροδιδασκαλοῦντα ἐλέγξει; τὰ γὰρ κατὰ τὸν σωτῆρα ἡμῖν προφητεύων οὕτως ἔφη "οὗτος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν, οὐ λογισθήσεται ἕτερος πρὸς αὐτόν. ἐξεῦρεν πᾶσαν ὁδὸν ἐπιστήμης, καὶ ἔδωκεν Ἰακὼβ τῷ παιδὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ Ἰσραὴλ τῷ ἠγαπημένῳ ὑπ' αὐτοῦ. μετὰ ταῦτα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὤφθη, καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συνανεστράφη". 80 ὥστε κἂν ἐκεῖνό τις λέγῃ, κατασκευάζων πρῶτον εἶναι θεὸν καὶ δεύτερον, ὡς Νάρκισσος αὐταῖς λέξεσιν γέγραφεν (οὐδὲ γὰρ συγχωρεῖ ὁ λέγων "ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον κατ' εἰκόνα ἡμετέραν καὶ καθ' ὁμοίωσιν"), ὅτι μὲν αὐτὸς καὶ ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ δύο εἰσίν, αὐτοῦ τοῦ κυρίου μαρτυροῦντος καὶ τῶν ἁγίων γραφῶν ἐκ μέρους ἠκούσαμεν. εἰ τοίνυν Νάρκισσος διὰ τοῦτο διαιρεῖν δυνάμει τὸν λόγον τοῦ πατρὸς ἐθέλοι, γνώτω ὅτι ὁ γράψας προφήτης ὡς τοῦ θεοῦ εἰρηκότος "ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον κατ' εἰκόνα ἡμετέραν καὶ καθ' ὁμοίωσιν", αὐτὸς γέγραφεν "καὶ ἐποίησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον". 81 ἐντυχὼν γὰρ Ναρκίσσου τοῦ Νερωνιάδος προεστῶτος ἐπιστολῇ, ἣν γέγραφεν πρὸς Χρηστόν τινα καὶ Εὐφρόνιον καὶ Εὐσέβιον, ὡς Ὁσίου τοῦ ἐπισκόπου ἐρωτήσαντος αὐτόν, εἰ, ὥσπερ Εὐσέβιος ὁ τῆς Παλαιστί νης δύο οὐσίας εἶναί φησιν, οὕτως καὶ αὐτὸς λέγοι, ἔγνων αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τῶν γραφέντων τρεῖς εἶναι πιστεύειν οὐσίας ἀποκρινόμενον. 82 διελεῖν γὰρ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ τολμήσας καὶ ἕτερον θεὸν τὸν λόγον ὀνομάσαι, οὐσίᾳ τε καὶ δυνάμει διεστῶτα τοῦ πατρός, εἰς ὅσην βλασφημίαν ἐκπέπτωκεν ἔνεστιν σαφῶς ἀπ' αὐτῶν τῶν ὑπ' αὐτοῦ γραφέντων ῥητῶν ῥᾳδίως μανθάνειν. γέγραφεν δ' αὐταῖς λέξεσιν οὕτως· οὐ δήπου δὲ ἡ εἰκὼν καὶ τὸ οὗ ἐστιν ἡ εἰκὼν ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸν ἐπινοεῖται, ἀλλὰ δύο μὲν οὐσίαι καὶ δύο πράγματα καὶ δύο δυνάμεις, ὡς καὶ τοσαῦται προσηγορίαι. 83 ἀλλ' ὁ μὲν ἀπόστολος τοιαῦτα περὶ τῆς Γαλατῶν πίστεως γράφει· Εὐσέβιος δὲ μεταφέρων τὴν ἀποστολικὴν ἔννοιαν, δι' ἣν τοῦθ' ὁ ἀπόστολος τῆς προειρημένης αἰτίας ἕνεκα, "τέκνα μου" εἶπεν "οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω ἄχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν", καθήψατο Γαλατῶν ὡς μὴ ὀρθὴν ἐχόντων περὶ θεοῦ δόξαν. ὤδινεν γὰρ ἀληθῶς δριμεῖάν τινα
The Error of Asterius regarding Eusebius§11
11And a bitter pain, because he believed the Galatians regarding godliness to be not as that man was boasting, nor even two substances, but that things and powers and gods were being spoken of. Thus also Eusebius of Caesarea has written, having the same glory for both Paul and those from the outside regarding gods. For he wrote not as if there were only one god, but as there is one of the only true God. Therefore, having learned, Asterius's father Paulinus thought that there were newer gods.
How then did these, having turned to the same worst path as those from the outside, intend to teach and write the same things, as Eusebius spoke similarly to Valentinus and Hermas, and Narcissus to Marcian and Plato? But having set aside the true knowledge, he provided for us an artful system and now has demonstrated a theory. For not having the will to construct his own from the divine writings, he rushes upon the wisest, as he thinks, a father claiming; which the wisest of the fathers in their own local arrangements have decided.
Asterius says that his father has decided upon a resolution and has written a dogma regarding God from their own choice. For the name of dogma has the character of human will and opinion. And that this is so, the dogmatic art of the physicians testifies sufficiently to us, and the so-called dogmas of the philosophers also testify; and that even those things which seemed to be in agreement are still called dogmas of agreement, I think no one is ignorant of.
For having wished to sympathize with Eusebius, who wrote the letter badly, he said, first of all, not having developed the dogma teaching-wise, that he arranged the letter; for the letter was not made for the church nor for those who are ignorant, but for the blessed Paulinus, having said blessed him for this reason, that he had the same glory as Asterius. Since we have learned that the wisest of the fathers are Asterius's, I think it follows to say that he became a teacher of both Paulinus and the others. For from the letter of Paulinus, he having become his teacher would have been evident to us.
Even if it is necessary to speak the truth about Origen, it is fitting to say this: that he, having lately turned away from the studies according to philosophy and having preferred to converse with the divine through words before the precise grasp of the Scriptures, began to write by preferring the much and ambitious external education to that which is necessary; he was provided with words by those of philosophy, and through them he did not write well. It is evident; for he, still remembering the dogmas of Plato and the difference regarding the principles with him, wrote a book 'On Principles' and placed this as the title upon the treatise. A greatest example of this is that he made the beginning of the words from nothing other than the title of the book, but from the sayings spoken by Plato; for he wrote beginning thus: 'Those who have believed and have been persuaded.' This spoken thing, having been said thus, one would find in Plato's Gorgias.
And I deem it worthy of those encountering the holy writings, having truly received seeds and principles of this explanation, to add more proofs to those things said, so that even more the predispositions of those turning away from the faith might be checked. For truly, the God who begat them 'left them, and they dug for themselves broken cisterns' (Jeremiah 2:13).
I think it follows to speak briefly and concerning the icon. For he wrote: 'Another is he who was born from him, who is the icon of the invisible God' (Colossians 1:15). Because of this 'icon,' Asterius remembers the invisible God, in order to teach how much the God of the Word differs, just as a man seems to differ from his own icon.
Because of this, it is appropriate that he brings forward 'who is the icon of the invisible God.' When did he become an icon, or how long did he take 'according to icon and according to likeness' as a form? For previously, as I have often said, he was nothing other than the Word. Is it not therefore evident that before the assumption of our body, the Word in himself was not an icon of the invisible God? For it is fitting to see an icon, so that through the icon the entirely unseen might be able to be seen. How then has Asterius written that the Word of God is an icon of the invisible God? For icons of those things which are icons are also indicative of the absent, so that even the absent seems to appear through them. But if it happens that the Word is invisible while the invisible God exists, how can the Word be an icon of the invisible God, being himself invisible? For it is impossible for the unseen to be seen through the...
Greek · §11
καὶ πικρὰν ὠδῖνα, ὅτι ἠπίστατο Γαλάτας περὶ θεοσεβείας μὴ ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνος δοξάζοντας, μηδὲ δύο οὐσίας τε καὶ πράγματα καὶ δυνάμεις καὶ θεοὺς λέγοντας. 84 οὕτω δὲ καὶ Εὐσέβιος ὁ τῆς Καισαρείας γέγραφεν καὶ αὐτὸς τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχων Παυλίνῳ τε καὶ τοῖς ἔξωθεν περὶ θεῶν δόξαν. γέγραφεν γὰρ οὐχ ὡς ὄντος μόνου θεοῦ, ἀλλ' ἑνὸς ὄντος τοῦ μόνου ἀληθινοῦ θεοῦ. ὅθεν τοίνυν μαθὼν καὶ ὁ Ἀστερίου πατὴρ Παυλῖνος νεωτέρους θεοὺς εἶναι ᾤετο. 85 πῶς οὖν οὐ τὴν αὐτὴν οὗτοι τοῖς ἔξωθεν κακίστην ὁδὸν τραπέντες τὰ αὐτὰ διδάξαι τε καὶ γράψαι προὔθεντο, τοῦ μὲν Εὐσεβίου Οὐαλεντίνῳ τε καὶ Ἑρμῇ ὁμοίως εἰρηκότος, τοῦ δὲ Ναρκίσσου Μαρκίωνί τε καὶ Πλάτωνι; 86 ἀλλ' ἀφέμενος τῆς ἀληθοῦς γνώσεως τὴν ἔντεχνον ἡμῖν καὶ νῦν ἐπεδείξατο θεωρίαν. οὐκ ἔχων γὰρ ἐκ τῶν θείων γραφῶν τὸ ἑαυτοῦ κατασκευάσαι βούλημα, ἐπὶ τοὺς σοφωτάτους, ὡς οἴεται, ἀνατρέχει πατέρας φάσκων· ὅπερ οἱ σοφώτατοι τῶν πατέρων ἐν τοῖς οἰκείοις συντάγμασιν ἀπεφήναντο. ἀπόφασιν ἀποπεφάσθαι τοὺς ἑαυτοῦ πατέρας Ἀστέριός φησιν καὶ δόγμα περὶ θεοῦ γεγραφέναι ἀπὸ τῆς οἰκείας ἑαυτῶν προαιρέσεως. τὸ γὰρ τοῦ δόγματος ὄνομα τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης ἔχεται βουλῆς τε καὶ γνώμης. ὅτι δὲ τοῦθ' οὕτως ἔχει μαρτυρεῖ μὲν ἡμῖν ἱκανῶς ἡ δογματικὴ τῶν ἰατρῶν τέχνη, μαρτυρεῖ δὲ καὶ τὰ τῶν φιλοσόφων καλούμενα δόγματα· ὅτι δὲ καὶ τὰ συγκλήτῳ δόξαντα ἔτι καὶ νῦν δόγματα συγκλήτου λέγεται, οὐδένα ἀγνοεῖν οἶμαι. 87 συνηγορῆσαι γὰρ βουληθεὶς τῷ τὴν ἐπιστολὴν κακῶς γράψαντι Εὐσεβίῳ, πρῶτον μὲν οὐ διδασκαλικῶς ἀναπτύξας, ἔφη, τὸ δόγμα τὴν ἐπιστολὴν συνέταξεν, οὐ γὰρ πρὸς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν οὐδὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἀγνοοῦντας ἐγίγνετο τὸ γράμμα ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸν μακάριον Παυλῖνον, μακάριον αὐτὸν διὰ τοῦτο εἰπών, ὅτι τὴν αὐτὴν εἶχεν Ἀστερίῳ δόξαν. οὐκοῦν ἐπειδήπερ τοὺς σοφωτάτους πατέρας Ἀστερίου μεμαθήκαμεν, ἀκόλουθον ἡγοῦμαι λέγειν καὶ τὸν Παυλίνου τε καὶ τῶν ἄλλων γενόμενον διδάσκαλον. ἀπὸ γὰρ τῆς Παυλίνου ἐπιστολῆς ὁ κἀκείνου διδάσκαλος γεγονὼς εὔδηλος γένοιτ' ἂν ἡμῖν. 88 καίτοι εἰ δεῖ τἀληθὲς περὶ Ὠριγένους εἰπεῖν, τοῦτο προσήκει λέγειν, ὅτι ἄρτι τῶν κατὰ φιλοσοφίαν ἀποστὰς μαθημάτων, καὶ τοῖς θείοις ὁμιλῆσαι προελόμενος λόγοις πρὸ τῆς ἀκριβοῦς τῶν γραφῶν καταλήψεως, διὰ τὸ πολὺ καὶ φιλότιμον τῆς ἔξωθεν παιδεύσεως θᾶττον τοῦ δέοντος ἀρξάμενος [ὑπο]γράφειν ὑπὸ τῶν τῆς φιλοσοφίας παρήχθη λόγων, καί τινα δι' αὐτοὺς οὐ καλῶς γέγραφεν. δῆλον δέ· ἔτι γὰρ τῶν Πλάτωνος μεμνημένος δογμάτων, καὶ τῆς τῶν ἀρχῶν παρ' αὐτῷ διαφορᾶς, ΠΕΡΙ ΑΡΧΩΝ γέγραφεν βιβλίον, καὶ ταύτην τῷ συγγράμματι τὴν ἐπιγραφὴν ἔθετο. δεῖγμα δὲ τούτου μέγιστον τὸ μηδὲ ἄλλοθέν ποθεν τὴν ἀρχὴν τῶν λέξεων αὐτὸν ἢ τὴν ἐπιγραφὴν τοῦ βιβλίου ποιήσασθαι, ἀλλ' ἀπὸ τῶν Πλάτωνι λεχθέντων ῥημάτων· γέγραφεν γὰρ ἀρχόμενος οὕτως· οἱ πεπιστευκότες καὶ πεπεισμένοι. τοῦτο τὸ ῥητὸν οὕτως εἰρημένον εὕροις ἂν ἐν τῷ Γοργίᾳ Πλάτωνος. 89 ἀξιῶ δὲ τοὺς ἐντυγχάνοντας τῶν ἁγίων, ὡσπερεὶ σπέρματα καὶ ἀρχὰς τῆσδε τῆς ἐξηγήσεως ἀληθῶς εἰληφότας, πλείονας ἀποδείξεις προσθεῖναι τοῖς εἰρημένοις, ὥστε ἔτι μᾶλλον τὰς τῶν [περὶ] τὴν πίστιν διαστρεφόντων ἐλέγχεσθαι προαιρέσεις. ὄντως γὰρ θεὸν τὸν γεννήσαντα αὐτοὺς "ἐγκατέλιπον, καὶ ὤρυξαν ἑαυτοῖς λάκκους συντετριμμένους". 90 ἀκόλουθον ἡγοῦμαι βραχέα καὶ περὶ τῆς εἰκόνος εἰπεῖν. γέγραφεν γάρ· ἄλλος δέ ἐστιν ὁ ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεννηθείς, "ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου". εἰκόνος διὰ τοῦτο μέμνηται θεοῦ ἀοράτου Ἀστέριος, ἵνα τοσοῦτον τὸν θεὸν τοῦ λόγου διαφέρειν διδάξῃ, ὅσον καὶ ἄνθρωπος τῆς ἑαυτοῦ εἰκόνος διαφέρειν δοκεῖ. 91 διὰ τοῦτο εἰκότως ἐπιφέρει "ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου". πότε γενόμενος εἰκὼν ἢ ὁπηνίκα τὸ "κατ' εἰκόνα καὶ καθ' ὁμοίωσιν" ἀνείληφεν πλάσμα; πρότερον γάρ, ὥσπερ πολλάκις ἔφην, οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν ἢ λόγος. 92 οὐκοῦν πρόδηλον, ὅτι πρὸ τῆς τοῦ ἡμετέρου σώματος ἀναλήψεως ὁ λόγος καθ' ἑαυτὸν οὐκ ἦν εἰκὼν τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ. τὴν γὰρ εἰκόνα ὁρᾶσθαι προσήκει, ἵνα διὰ τῆς εἰκόνος τὸ τέως μὴ ὁρώμενον ὁρᾶσθαι δύνηται. 93 πῶς οὖν εἰκόνα τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον Ἀστέριος εἶναι γέγραφεν; αἱ γὰρ εἰκόνες τούτων ὧν εἰσιν εἰκόνες καὶ ἀπόντων δεικτικαί εἰσιν, ὥστε καὶ τὸν ἀπόντα δι' αὐτῶν φαίνεσθαι δοκεῖν. εἰ δὲ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀοράτου ὄντος ἀόρατον εἶναι καὶ τὸν λόγον συμβαίνει, πῶς εἰκὼν τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ ὁ λόγος καθ' ἑαυτὸν εἶναι δύναται, καὶ αὐτὸς ἀόρατος ὤν; ἀδύνατον γὰρ τὸ μὴ ὁρατὸν διὰ τοῦ
The Icon of the Invisible God§12
12The invisible is sometimes shown. Therefore, it is clear from everywhere that the icon of the invisible God was spoken by the Apostle as that which became flesh through the Word, so that through the visible the invisible might be shown. For the Apostle says, 'the icon is of the invisible God.' Now, clearly, having become according to the icon of God, the one who took up the form was received as flesh, and has become a true icon of the invisible God.
For if through this icon we were worthy to know the Word of God, we ought to believe Him, the Word, through the icon, saying, 'I and the Father are one' (John 10:30). For neither the Word nor the Father of the Word can be known in any way without this icon. Thus also the Apostle says, as we said a little earlier, 'he emptied himself, having taken the form of a servant' (Phil 2:7), signifying to us the human flesh through the form of a servant, which our Lord God, by His own spreading wisdom, said, 'let us make man in our icon and likeness' (Gen 1:26), rightly naming the human flesh an icon. For He knew precisely that an icon would be a little later than His own Word.
What then will he say regarding these things? For I do not think he has anything to say about this. Nor do I think he can clearly and persuasively confess to others that which he himself hides in his own mind, as being clearly to be learned from that which he has written. For another, he says, is the Father, who begat from himself the only-begotten Word and firstborn of all creation, alone alone, perfect of the perfect, king of kings, Lord of lords, God of God, an unchangeable icon of essence and will and power and glory.
These words clearly expose his faulty glory concerning divinity. For how can the Lord, having been begotten and being God, as He Himself previously said, be able to be an icon of God? For one thing is an icon of God, and another is God. So if He is an icon, He is neither Lord nor God, but an icon of Lord and God; but if He is truly Lord and God, then the Lord and God can no longer be an icon of Lord and God. Therefore, he does not intend for any of those things he has spoken to be true; for he says that he is an icon of all these things.
If, then, an image is of substance, it can no longer be the substance itself; and if it is an image of will, it can no longer be the will itself; and if it is an image of power, it is no longer power; and if it is an image of glory, it is no longer glory. For an image is an image not of itself, but of another.
Indeed, the matter concerning Asterius does not grieve us so much because such things were written, but because certain ones, appearing to be leaders of the church, neglecting the apostolic tradition and preferring external things, dared to write and teach such things, which possess no less error than those previously mentioned. It is necessary, then, to cry out to the Lord with tears and grief, saying, 'We have sinned, we have been impious, we have transgressed,' and 'we have done evil before you,' and now, having recognized this, we deem ourselves worthy to receive philanthropy from you. This was fitting for him, and it was appropriate to say these things because of the immeasurable goodness and philanthropy of God.
Even so, it was following to oppose a God who is cared for with philanthropy and justice, saying, 'If an enemy reproaches me, I would have been crushed if he had magnified himself against me. But you, O man, equal-souled, my leader and my knower, who sweetened my meals at the same time, we walked in the house of God in concord.' For we know from his own words that it was understood by his ministers: 'Behold,' for he said, 'I will be with you all the days of your life, even unto the end of the age.' Then, following this, he would have naturally added even the things that follow those that lead, 'Let death come upon them, and let them descend into Hades while living; for wickedness is in their hearts.' For the Scripture says that those who are in ignorance of impiety are being swallowed by Hades as dead; for they were dead, even though they seemed to live.
For they want the Savior to be a man; and it is evident from those things that Eusebius, through craftiness, turned the words of the apostle toward his own will. As one desiring to bring forth from some ancient great pain a most wicked slander, he 'poured out from his own treasure' the evil, according to the saying of the Savior. Desiring to show the Savior as a man only, thus uncovering for us the greatest secret mystery of the apostle, he said: therefore, the divine apostle most clearly cries out and has cried out the secret and mystical theology which he delivers to us, 'One is God,' and then, after the one God, he says...
Greek · §12
ἀοράτου φανῆναί ποτε. 94 διὸ πανταχόθεν δῆλον εἰκόνα τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἱεροῦ εἰρῆσθαι ἀποστόλου τὴν προσγενομένην τῷ λόγῳ σάρκα, ἵνα διὰ τοῦ ὁρατοῦ καὶ τὸ ἀόρατον φαίνηται. "εἰκὼν" δὲ "ἐστὶν" φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος "τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ". νῦν δηλονότι, ὁπηνίκα τὴν κατ' εἰκόνα τοῦ θεοῦ γενομένην ἀνείληφεν σάρκα, εἰκὼν ἀληθὴς τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ γέγονεν. εἰ γὰρ διὰ τῆς εἰκόνος ταύτης τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον ἠξιώθημεν γνῶναι, πιστεύειν ὀφείλομεν αὐτῷ τῷ λόγῳ διὰ τῆς εἰκόνος λέγοντι "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν". οὔτε γὰρ τὸν λόγον οὔτε τὸν πατέρα τοῦ λόγου χωρὶς τῆς εἰκόνος ταύτης γνῶναί τινα δυνατόν. 95 οὕτω γοῦν καὶ ὁ ἀπόστολός φησιν, ὥσπερ μικρῷ πρόσθεν ἔφαμεν "ἐκένωσεν ἑαυτὸν μορφὴν δούλου λαβών", διὰ τῆς μορφῆς τοῦ δούλου τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἡμῖν σημαίνων σάρκα, ἣν ὁ δεσπότης ἡμῶν θεὸς τῇ ἑαυτοῦ διαπλάττων σοφίᾳ "ποιήσωμεν ἄνθρωπον" ἔφη "κατ' εἰκόνα ἡμετέραν καὶ ὁμοίωσιν", καλῶς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σάρκα ὀνομάζων εἰκόνα. ᾔδει γὰρ ἀκριβῶς ὅτι εἰκὼν ἔσται μικρὸν ὕστερον τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ λόγου. 96 τί οὖν πρὸς ταῦτα λέξει; οὐ γὰρ οἶμαι αὐτὸν ἔχειν τι περὶ τούτου λέγειν. οὐδὲ γὰρ σαφῶς αὐτὸν καὶ ἀπαρακαλύπτως ἡγοῦμαι καὶ πρὸς ἑτέρους ὁμολογῆσαι ἄν, ὅπερ αὐτὸς ἐν τῇ ἑαυτοῦ κρύπτει διανοίᾳ, ὡς ἔστιν σαφῶς ἀφ' ὧν γέγραφεν μανθάνειν. ἄλλος μὲν γάρ, φησίν, ἐστὶν ὁ πατὴρ ὁ γεννήσας ἐξ αὑτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ λόγον καὶ πρωτότοκον ἁπάσης κτίσεως, μόνος μόνον, τέλειος τέλειον, βασιλεὺς βασιλέα, κύριος κύριον, θεὸς θεόν, οὐσίας τε καὶ βουλῆς καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ δόξης ἀπαράλλακτον εἰκόνα. ταῦτα τὰ ῥητὰ σαφῶς τὴν φαύλην αὐτοῦ περὶ θεότητος ἐλέγχει δόξαν. πῶς γὰρ ὁ κύριος γεννηθεὶς καὶ θεός, ὡς αὐτὸς προλαβὼν ἔφη, δύναται εἰκὼν θεοῦ εἶναι; ἕτερον γὰρ εἰκὼν θεοῦ, καὶ ἕτερον θεός. ὥστε εἰ μὲν εἰκών, οὐ κύριος οὐδὲ θεός, ἀλλ' εἰκὼν κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ· εἰ δὲ κύριος ὄντως καὶ θεός, οὐκέτι ὁ κύριος καὶ θεὸς εἰκὼν κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ εἶναι δύναται. 97 οὐδὲν οὖν αὐτὸν ὧν προεῖπεν εἶναι βούλεται· πάντων γὰρ τούτων εἰκόνα αὐτὸν εἶναι λέγει. οὐκοῦν εἰ οὐσίας ἐστὶν εἰκών, οὐκέτι αὐτοουσία δύναται εἶναι· καὶ εἰ βουλῆς ἐστιν εἰκών, οὐκέτι αὐτοβουλὴ εἶναι δύναται· καὶ εἰ δυνάμεως εἰκών, οὐκέτι δύναμις· καὶ εἰ δόξης εἰκών, οὐκέτι δόξα. ἡ γὰρ εἰκὼν οὐχ ἑαυτῆς ἀλλ' ἑτέρου τινὸς εἰκών ἐστιν. 98 ἰδοὺ γὰρ τὸ κατὰ Ἀστέριον ἡμᾶς οὐ τοσοῦτον λυπεῖ, εἰ τοιαῦτα προήχθη γράφειν, ἀλλ' ὅτι καί τινες τῶν προεστάναι δοκούντων τῆς ἐκκλησίας, τῆς μὲν ἀποστολικῆς ἐπιλαθόμενοι παραδόσεως, τὰ δὲ ἔξωθεν τῶν θείων προτιμήσαντες τοιαῦτά τινα γράψαι τε καὶ διδάξαι ἐτόλμησαν, ἃ οὐδὲν ἔλαττον τῆς τῶν προειρημένων ἔχεται πλάνης. 99 δέον τἀναντία μετὰ δακρύων τε καὶ πένθους πρὸς κύριον βοᾶν "ἡμάρτομεν, ἠσεβήσαμεν, ἠνομήσαμεν", καὶ τὸ πονηρὸν ἐνώπιόν σου ἐποιήσαμεν, καὶ νῦν μεταγνόντες τῆς παρά σου τυχεῖν ἀξιοῦμεν φιλανθρωπίας. ταῦθ' ἥρμοττεν αὐτῷ, ταῦτα συνέφερεν λέγειν διὰ τὴν ἄμετρον τοῦ θεοῦ χρηστότητα καὶ φιλανθρωπίαν. καίτοι ἀκόλουθον ἦν τὸν μετὰ φιλανθρωπίας καὶ δικαιοσύνης ἐπιμελούμενον θεὸν ἀντειπεῖν λέγοντα "εἰ ἐχθρὸς ὠνείδισέν με, ὑπήνεγκα ἄν, καὶ εἰ ὁ μισῶν με ἐπ' ἐμὲ ἐμεγαλορημόνησεν, ἐκρύβην ἂν ἀπ' αὐτοῦ. σὺ δέ, ἄνθρωπε ἰσόψυχε, ἡγεμών μου καὶ γνῶστά μου· ὃς ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ἐγλύκανάς μοι ἐδέσματα, ἐν τῷ οἴκῳ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐπορεύθημεν ἐν ὁμονοίᾳ". ὅτι γὰρ σύνεστιν ἡμῖν τοῖς αὐτοῦ λειτουργοῖς ἴσμεν ἀπὸ τῆς αὐτοῦ ῥήσεως, "ἰδοὺ" γὰρ "ἔσομαι μεθ' ὑμῶν" ἔφη "πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας" τῆς ζωῆς ὑμῶν "ἕως τῆς συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος". εἶτα ἀκολούθως πάντως που καὶ τὰ ἑπόμενα τοῖς προάγουσιν ἐπήγαγεν ἂν ῥητά, "ἐλθέτω θάνατος ἐπ' αὐτούς, καὶ καταβήτωσαν εἰς ᾅδου ζῶντες· ὅτι πονηρία ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις αὐτῶν". τοὺς γὰρ ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ τῆς ἀσεβείας ὄντας νεκροὺς ὑπὸ τοῦ ᾅδου καταπίνεσθαί φησιν ἡ γραφή· νεκροὶ γάρ, καὶ ζῆν δοκοῦντες, ἐτύγχανον ὄντες. 100 ἄνθρωπον γὰρ τὸν σωτῆρα εἶναι βούλονται· δῆλον δὲ ἀφ' ὧν πανούργως τὰ τοῦ ἀποστόλου ῥητὰ Εὐσέβιος πρὸς τὸ ἑαυτοῦ μετήνεγκεν βούλημα. ὡς γὰρ ἐκ παλαιᾶς τινος ὠδῖνος μεγίστην ἀποκυῆσαι βουλόμενος βλα σφημίαν, "ἐξέχεεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ἰδίου θησαυροῦ" κατὰ τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος ῥῆσιν "τὸ πονηρόν". ἄνθρωπον γὰρ μόνον τὸν σωτῆρα δεῖξαι βουλόμενος, ὡς μέγιστον ἡμῖν ἀπόρρητον τοῦ ἀποστόλου ἀνακαλύπτων μυστήριον, οὕτως ἔφη· διὸ σαφέστατα καὶ ὁ θεῖος ἀπόστολος τὴν ἀπόρρητον ἡμῖν καὶ μυστικὴν παραδιδοὺς θεολογίαν βοᾷ καὶ κέκραγεν "εἷς ὁ θεός", εἶτα μετὰ τὸν ἕνα θεόν φησιν
The Divinity of Christ vs Eusebius§13
13"One mediator of God and men, a man, Christ Jesus." If therefore he says that he is a man, attending only to his administration according to the flesh, he certainly also confesses that thing, that there is no hope in him. For the prophet Jeremiah said, "Cursed is the man who has hope in man" (Jeremiah 17:5). But the one previously mentioned, having cared for the brevity of the holy prophets, as if explaining a certain secret and hidden theology of the apostle, said, "One God," he said, "one and mediator of God and men, a man, Christ Jesus." And he, having written these things and being very great regarding the remembering of the Scriptures, did not perceive that the most holy apostle, having written this, had written that: "Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider being equal to God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, having taken the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of man and found in the appearance of a man" (Philippians 2:6-8).
Do you see how (as foretelling by the Spirit the malice of these) the holy apostle thus in another part wrote "as a man" and "becoming in the likeness of man," in order that he might stop their such great blasphemy. How then, not adhering to these things, does Eusebius alone intend for the Savior to be only a man? He is not daring to say this openly, but he is convicted by his expressions of wanting this.
For before the creation of all, there was a certain silence, as it were, existing in the God of the Word. For if Asterius believed the God to be the maker of all, it is evident that he himself will also confess to us that He is always existing, never having taken the beginning of being, and that the things that have come to be were made by Him and out of non-being. For I do not think he believes this too, that there is something and ungenerated, but rather is precisely convinced that both heaven and earth and all things existing in the heavens and upon the earth were brought into being by God.
If therefore this is believed, it is necessary for him to confess also that, besides God, there was nothing else. The Word possessed his own glory, being in the Father.
Asterius names the authority given to him as glory, and not glory only but also a glory pertaining to the world, not understanding that, lest anything else existed besides God alone, it was not from the world's becoming. For man has received not only authority over things on earth, but also of those in the heavens, appropriately; for if, when he became both 'man' and 'mediator of God and men' (1 Timothy 2:5), then 'all things were created' into him, as the apostle said, 'the things in heaven and those on earth' (Colossians 1:16), it is strictly following to know that authority is given to him not only of those on earth, but also of those in the heavens.
For if the holy Gospel says regarding a certain glory given to him by the Father, the man appears to have received this through the Word. For having become 'mediator of God and men' (1 Timothy 2:5) according to the holy apostle, he glorified God-fearing men by the glory given to him by the Father. And he enabled the fallen man, through disobedience, to be joined to himself through the Virgin by the Word. For what other greater glory could come among men than this glory? And having said 'I have glorified you' (John 17:22), he brings forth by saying 'and I will glorify again' (John 17:24), so that through an excess of philanthropy, by a second glory after the resurrection of the flesh, he might accomplish making the formerly mortal man immortal, and by such a glory glorifying him, so that not only might he be freed from the former slavery, but also might be worthy of a glory above man.
So that, as I said, having been previously deceived by the devil, he might prepare the man himself to conquer the devil again. Because of this, he took up the man, so that he might prepare him to receive following this an earnest of the authority. For this is the beloved, the man united to the Word, concerning whom the evangelist said, 'This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased' (Matthew 3:17). Because the Word of the invisible God through [...]
Greek · §13
"εἷς μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς". εἰ τοίνυν ἄνθρωπον αὐτὸν εἶναί φησιν τῇ κατὰ σάρκα αὐτοῦ μόνῃ προσέχων οἰκονομίᾳ, πάντως κἀκεῖνο συνομολογεῖ, τὸ μηδὲ ἔχειν ἐλπίδα ἐπ' αὐτόν. "ἐπικατάρατος" γὰρ "ἄνθρωπος" ὁ προφήτης Ἱερεμίας ἔφη "ὃς τὴν ἐλπίδα ἔχει ἐπ' ἄνθρωπον". 101 ἀλλ' ὁ προειρημένος, βραχέα τῶν ἁγίων προφητῶν φροντίσας, ὡς ἀπόρρητόν τινα καὶ λανθάνουσαν τοῦ ἀποστόλου θεολογίαν ἐξηγούμενος, "εἷς θεὸς" ἔφη "εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς". καὶ ὁ ταῦτα γράψας καὶ σφόδρα ἐπὶ τῷ μεμνῆσθαι τῶν γραφῶν μεγαλαυχῶν οὐκ ἐνενόησεν ὅτι ὁ τοῦτο γράψας ἁγιώτατος ἀπόστολος κἀκεῖνο γέγραφεν "ὃς ἐν μορφῇ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα θεῷ, ἀλλ' ἐκένωσεν ἑαυτόν, μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπου γενόμενος καὶ σχήματι εὑρεθεὶς ὡς ἄνθρωπος". ὁρᾷς ὅπως (ὥσπερ προϊδὼν τῷ πνεύματι τὴν τούτων κακουργίαν) ὁ ἱερὸς ἀπόστολος οὕτως ἐν ἑτέρῳ μέρει τὸ "ὡς ἄνθρωπος" ἔγραψεν καὶ "ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπου γενόμενος", ἵνα παύσῃ αὐτῶν τὴν τοσαύτην βλασφημίαν. 102 πῶς οὖν τούτοις μὴ προσσχὼν Εὐσέβιος μόνον ἄνθρωπον τὸν σωτῆρα εἶναι βούλεται; οὐ φανερῶς μὲν τοῦτο λέγειν τολμῶν, τοῦτο δὲ βουλόμενος ὑπὸ τῶν ἰδίων ἐλέγχεται ῥήσεων. 103 πρὸ γὰρ τῆς δημιουργίας ἁπάσης ἡσυχία τις ἦν, ὡς εἰκός, ὄντος ἐν τῷ θεῷ τοῦ λόγου. εἰ γὰρ ποιητὴν ἁπάντων τὸν θεὸν ὁ Ἀστέριος πεπίστευκεν εἶναι, δῆλον ὅτι συνομολογήσει ἡμῖν καὶ αὐτὸς τὸν μὲν ἀεὶ ὑπάρχειν, μηδεπώποτε τοῦ εἶναι ἀρχὴν λαβόντα, τὰ δὲ γεγενῆσθαί τε ὑπ' αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων γεγενῆσθαι. οὐ γὰρ οἶμαι καὶ τοῦτο πιστεύειν αὐτὸν τῷ λέγοντι εἶναί τινα καὶ ἀγένητα, ἀλλὰ ἀκριβῶς πεπεῖσθαι ὅτι οὐρανός τε καὶ γῆ καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐν οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς ὄντα ὑπὸ θεοῦ γεγένηται. εἰ τοίνυν τοῦτο πιστεύοι, ἀνάγκη αὐτὸν κἀκεῖνο συνομολογεῖν ὅτι πλὴν θεοῦ οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν. εἶχεν οὖν τὴν οἰκείαν δόξαν ὁ λόγος, ὢν ἐν τῷ πατρί. 104 τὴν δοθεῖσαν αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν Ἀστέριος δόξαν ὀνομάζει, καὶ οὐ δόξαν μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ προκόσμιον δόξαν, οὐκ ἐννοῶν ὅτι μήπω τοῦ κόσμου γεγονότος οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν πλὴν θεοῦ μόνου. 105 εἴληφεν γὰρ ὁ ἄνθρωπος οὐ μόνον τὴν ἐπὶ γῆς τῶν πραγμάτων ἐξουσίαν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἐν οὐρανοῖς, εἰκότως· εἰ γὰρ ὅτε καὶ "ἄνθρωπος" ἐγένετο καὶ "μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων" τότε εἰς αὐτὸν "ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα", ὡς ἔφη ὁ ἀπόστολος, "τά τε ἐν οὐρανοῖς καὶ τὰ ἐπὶ γῆς", ἀκόλουθόν ἐστιν ἀκριβῶς γινώσκειν ὅτι ἐξουσία οὐ μόνον τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἐν οὐρανοῖς δέδοται. 106 εἰ γὰρ περί τινος δόξης δοθείσης αὐτῷ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς τὸ ἱερὸν Εὐαγγέλιον λέγει, ταύτην ὁ ἄνθρωπος διὰ τοῦ λόγου εἰληφὼς φαίνεται. "μεσίτης" γὰρ γενόμενος κατὰ τὸν ἱερὸν ἀπόστολον "θεοῦ τε καὶ ἀνθρώπων" τῇ δοθείσῃ αὐτῷ παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς δόξῃ τοὺς θεοσεβεῖς ἐδόξασεν ἀνθρώπους. 107 καὶ ἠξίωσεν τὸν πεσόντα διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς ἄνθρωπον τῷ ἑαυτοῦ διὰ τῆς παρθένου συναφθῆναι λόγῳ. ποία γὰρ ἐν ἀνθρώποις ἑτέρα μείζων δόξα γένοιτ' ἂν τῆς δόξης ταύτης; εἰπὼν δὲ ὅτι "ἐδόξασά σε", ἐπιφέρει λέγων "καὶ πάλιν δοξάσω", ἵνα δι' ὑπερβολὴν φιλανθρωπίας ἐν τῇ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν τῆς σαρκὸς δευτέρᾳ δόξῃ τὸν πρότερον θνητὸν ἄνθρωπον ἀθάνατον ἀπεργάσηται καὶ τοσαύτῃ αὐτὸν δοξάσῃ δόξῃ, ὥστε μὴ μόνον αὐτὸν τῆς προτέρας ἀπαλλαγῆναι δουλείας, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῆς ὑπὲρ ἄνθρωπον ἀξιωθῆναι δόξης. 108 ἵνα, ὡς ἔφην, ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου ἀπατηθέντα πρότερον τὸν ἄνθρωπον αὐτὸν αὖθις νικῆσαι τὸν διάβολον παρασκευάσῃ. διὰ τοῦτο ἀνείληφεν τὸν ἄνθρωπον, ἵνα ἀκολούθως τοῦτον ἀπαρχὴν τῆς ἐξουσίας παραλαβεῖν παρασκευάσῃ. 109 οὗτος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ ἀγαπητός, ὁ τῷ λόγῳ ἑνωθεὶς ἄνθρωπος, περὶ οὗ ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς ἔφη "οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός, ἐν ᾧ εὐδόκησα". 110 ὅτι ὁ λόγος τοῦ ἀοράτου θεοῦ διὰ
The Kingship of Christ through the Incarnation§14
14It was destined that a virgin should give birth and that the human flesh should be taken up, so that through it, having overcome the devil who previously dominated man, He would not only make him incorruptible and immortal, but also a co-regent in the heavens with God. Indeed, having come down and having taken flesh through the virgin, He was established as king over the church, clearly so that through the Word, the man who had previously fallen from the kingship of the heavens might be able to attain kingship.
Therefore, God, desiring that this man—who previously fell from lordship due to disobedience—become Lord and God, worked out this economy. The most holy prophet David says prophetically, 'The Lord has reigned, let the earth rejoice' (Ps 96:1). For which reason, as if having received the beginning of kingship from a certain time of our Lord Christ, the prophecy says, 'But I have been made king by him' (Ps 2:6).
For this reason also, having become and reigning in human flesh, having established through the Word the man who was previously deceived as king, He 'will abolish all principality' (Col 2:15) of the devil 'and power and authority.' For it is said, 'it is necessary for him to reign' 'until he has placed the enemies under his feet' (1 Cor 15:25). This is the end of the kingship of our Lord Christ, says the holy apostle, to subject all things to his feet (1 Cor 15:28).
There, the apostle reveals a greatest mystery to us: that there would be an end, claiming it of Christ's kingship; but an end then, when he subjects all things under his feet. We have said in the discourses proceeding before us that our Lord Christ has had the beginning of kingship, using proofs from the divine writings. One says, 'But I have been made king by him upon Zion, his holy mountain' (Ps 2:6); another, 'The Lord has reigned, let the peoples be moved to wrath' (Ps 97:4); and again, 'The Lord has reigned, let the earth rejoice' (Ps 96:1). And it is possible to show with abundance myriads of words for testimony, that the man has received the beginning of kingship through the Word.
If, then, the kingdom began not more than four hundred years ago, it is nothing paradoxical, if the apostle says that he will deliver the kingdom which occurred so recently, meaning that he is a king whom God established, as the Scripture says. It seems that he is separated from the Father by energy alone because of the outward show of the flesh, until such time as the one approaching the judgment reveals the appointed time, so that the remaining part may follow, consequently, the pattern of those who were cast out after having seen the one who was cast out, as the prophecy says. For all are destined to be made subject to Christ in the time of the end, as the apostle said, just as 'he himself shall subject all things to him who subjected all things to him.'
What then do we learn concerning the human flesh, which the Word took not all years ago, but four hundred? Will the Word have this flesh also in the coming ages, or only until the time of the judgment? For what the prophet said must be confirmed in deed. For he says, 'they shall see him whom they cast out'; and they cast out, clearly, the flesh. For the Word did not take flesh so as to benefit our own self, but so that the flesh might attain immortality through communion with the Word, which is evident even from the Savior's own decision. Regarding the flesh, while possessing it and conversing with the disciples, he says thus: 'Does this scandalize you? If, then, you see the Son of Man departing from where he was previously; the Spirit gives life, the flesh profits nothing.'
If he confesses that the flesh profits him nothing, how can he allow the one existing from the earth, which profits nothing, to remain in the coming ages as being useful to the Word? For this is why it seems to me that even the Almighty God, the Lord, says to him, 'Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.' He seems to be separated by energy alone because of the human flesh, and as if defining a specific time for him of the seated position at the right hand, he says to him, 'until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.'
This prophecy of David is made clearer to us by the holy apostle, who thus said: 'for he must reign until he makes his enemies a footstool of his feet.' Thus, both his human administration and his kingdom seem to have a limit. For he wills nothing other than what was said by the apostle: 'until he makes his enemies a footstool of his feet.'
Greek · §14
παρθένου τεχθήσεσθαι ἔμελλεν καὶ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀναλήψεσθαι σάρκα, καὶ ἵνα δι' αὐτῆς τὸν πρότερον κατισχύσαντα τοῦ ἀνθρώπου διάβολον καταγωνισάμενος μὴ μόνον ἄφθαρτον αὐτὸν καὶ ἀθάνατον γενέσθαι παρασκευάσῃ, ἀλλὰ καὶ σύνθρονον ἐν οὐρανοῖς τῷ θεῷ. 111 ὁ γοῦν καταβὰς καὶ τὴν σάρκα διὰ τῆς παρθένου προσλαβὼν 111 κατεστάθη βασιλεὺς ἐπὶ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, δηλονότι ἵνα διὰ τοῦ λόγου ὁ τῆς βασιλείας τῶν οὐρανῶν πρότερον ἐκπεπτωκὼς ἄνθρωπος βασιλείας τυχεῖν δυνηθῇ. τοῦτον οὖν τὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν πρότερον διὰ τὴν παρακοὴν τῆς βασιλείας ἐκπεπτωκότα κύριον καὶ θεὸν γενέσθαι βουλόμενος ὁ θεὸς ταύτην τὴν οἰκονομίαν εἰργάσατο. ὁ οὖν ἁγιώτατος προφήτης ∆αυὶδ προφητικῶς λέγει "ὁ κύριος ἐβασίλευσεν, ἀγαλλιάσθω ἡ γῆ". 112 δι' ἣν αἰτίαν, ὥσπερ ἀρχὴν βασιλείας ἀπό τινος λαβόντος χρόνου τοῦ δεσπότου ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ, ἡ προφητεία φησὶν "ἐγὼ δὲ κατεστάθην βασιλεὺς ὑπ' αὐτοῦ". 113 διὰ τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ βασιλεύσει ἐν τῇ ἀνθρωπίνῃ σαρκὶ γενόμενος, βασιλεύς τε καταστὰς διὰ τοῦ λόγου ὁ ἀπατηθεὶς πρότερον ἄνθρωπος "πᾶσαν ἀρχὴν" τοῦ διαβόλου "καὶ δύναμιν καὶ ἐξουσίαν καταργήσει". "δεῖ γὰρ αὐτὸν βασιλεύειν" φησὶν "ἄχρι οὗ ἂν θῇ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑπὸ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ". τῆς τοίνυν τοῦ δεσπότου ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ βασιλείας τοῦτο τέλος εἶναί φησιν ὁ ἱερὸς ἀπόστολος, τὸ πάντα ὑποταγῆναι τοῖς ποσὶν αὐτοῦ. 114 μέγιστον ἡμῖν μυστήριον ἐνταῦθα ὁ ἀπόστολος ἀνακαλύπτει, τέλος μὲν ἔσεσθαι φάσκων τῆς Χριστοῦ βασιλείας· τέλος δὲ τότε, ὅταν πάντα ὑποταγῇ ὑπὸ τοὺς πόδας αὐτοῦ. 115 ἔφαμεν ἐν τοῖς προάγουσιν ἡμῶν ῥητοῖς τὸν δεσπότην ἡμῶν τὸν Χριστὸν ἀρχὴν ἐσχηκέναι βασιλείας, ἐκ τῶν θείων γραφῶν ἀποδείξεσιν χρώμενοι. ἔστιν μὲν μία ἡ λέγουσα "ἐγὼ δὲ κατεστάθην βασιλεὺς ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ Σιὼν ὄρος τὸ ἅγιον αὐτοῦ", ἑτέρα δὲ "ὁ κύριος ἐβασίλευσεν, ὀργιζέσθωσαν λαοί", καὶ αὖθις "ὁ κύριος ἐβασίλευσεν, ἀγαλλιάσθω ἡ γῆ". καὶ ὅλως μυρίων ῥητῶν πρὸς μαρτυρίαν ἔστιν εὐπορήσαντα δεῖξαι, ὅτι ἀρχὴν βασιλείας εἴληφεν ὁ ἄνθρωπος διὰ τοῦ λόγου. εἰ οὖν εἴληφεν ἀρχὴν βασιλείας πρὸ ἐτῶν ὅλων οὐ πλειόνων ἢ τετρακοσίων, οὐδὲν παράδοξον, εἰ τὸν πρὸ οὕτως ὀλίγου χρόνου τῆς βασιλείας ταύτης τυχόντα ὁ ἀπόστολός φησιν παραδώσειν τὴν βασιλείαν, δηλονότι τῷ θεῷ τῷ καταστήσαντι αὐτόν, ὡς ἡ γραφή φησιν, βασιλέα. 116 οὐκοῦν ἐνεργείᾳ μόνῃ διὰ τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς πρόφασιν ἄχρι τοσούτου κεχωρίσθαι τοῦ πατρὸς φαίνεται, ἄχρι οὗ ἂν ὁ προσιὼν τῆς κρίσεως ἀναφανῇ καιρός, ἵνα τῶν τηνικαῦτα ἐκκεντησάντων κατὰ τὴν προφητείαν ἑωρακότων τὸν ἐκκεντηθέντα, οὕτω καὶ τὸ λειπόμενον ἀκολούθως γένηται. πάντων γὰρ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τοῦ τέλους ὑποτάσσεσθαι μελλόντων τῷ Χριστῷ, ὡς ὁ ἀπόστολος ἔφη, τηνικαῦτα "αὐτὸς ὑποταγήσεται τῷ ὑποτάξαντι αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα". τί τοίνυν μανθάνομεν περὶ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης σαρκός, ἣν δι' ἡμᾶς ἀνείληφεν ὁ λόγος πρὸ τετρακοσίων οὐχ ὅλων ἐτῶν; πότερόν ποτε ταύτην καὶ ἐν τοῖς μέλλουσιν αἰῶσιν ὁ λόγος ἕξει ἢ ἄχρι μόνου τοῦ τῆς κρίσεως καιροῦ; ἀνάγκη γὰρ τὸ ὑπὸ τοῦ προφήτου λεχθὲν ἔργῳ βεβαιωθῆναι. "ὄψονται γὰρ" φησὶν "εἰς ὃν ἐξεκέντησαν"· ἐξεκέντησαν δὲ δηλονότι τὴν σάρκα. 117 ὅτι γὰρ οὐχ ἵν' ὁ λόγος ὠφεληθῇ τὴν ἡμετέραν ἀνείληφεν σάρκα, ἀλλ' ἵνα ἡ σὰρξ διὰ τὴν πρὸς τὸν λόγον κοινωνίαν ἀθανασίας τύχῃ, δῆλόν ἐστιν καὶ ἀπ' αὐτῆς τῆς τοῦ σωτῆρος ἀποφάσεως. περὶ γὰρ τῆς σαρκός, ἣν ἔχων ὡμίλει τοῖς μαθηταῖς, οὕτω λέγει "τοῦτο ὑμᾶς σκανδαλίζει; ἐὰν οὖν ἴδητε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀπιόντα ὅπου ἦν τὸ πρότερον; τὸ πνεῦμα ζωοποιεῖ, ἡ σὰρξ οὐδὲν ὠφελεῖ". εἰ οὖν ὁμολογεῖ τὴν σάρκα μηδὲν ὠφελεῖν αὐτόν, πῶς ἐγχωρεῖ τὴν ἐκ γῆς τε οὖσαν καὶ μηδὲν ὠφελοῦσαν καὶ ἐν τοῖς μέλλουσιν αἰῶσιν ὡς αὐτῷ λυσιτελοῦσαν συνεῖναι τῷ λόγῳ; διὰ τοῦτο γάρ μοι δοκεῖ καὶ ὁ παντοκράτωρ θεός, ὁ δεσπότης, πρὸς αὐτὸν λέγειν "κάθου ἐκ δεξιῶν μου ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου". ἐνεργείᾳ μόνῃ διὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σάρκα χωρίζειν αὐτὸν δοκῶν καὶ ὥσπερ ῥητόν τινα χρόνον ὁρίζων αὐτῷ τῆς ἐν δεξιᾷ καθέδρας οὕτω φησὶν πρὸς αὐτὸν "ἕως ἂν θῶ τοὺς ἐχθρούς σου ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν σου". τοῦτο δὲ τὸ προφητικὸν τοῦ ∆αυὶδ ῥητὸν σαφέστερον ἡμῖν ἑρμηνεύων ὁ ἱερὸς ἀπόστολος οὕτω πως ἔφη "δεῖ γὰρ αὐτὸν βασιλεύειν, ἕως ἂν θῇ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αὐτοῦ ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ". οὐκοῦν ὅρον τινὰ ἔχειν δοκεῖ ἡ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον αὐτοῦ οἰκονομία τε καὶ βασιλεία. οὐδὲν γὰρ ἕτερον βούλεται ἢ τοῦτο τὸ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀποστόλου ῥηθὲν "ἕως ἂν θῇ τοὺς ἐχθροὺς αὐτοῦ ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ".
The Economy of the Word and Restoration§15
15So indeed, when the enemies have no longer a footstool under their feet in this part of the kingdom, he becomes king over all in general; for he co-reigns with 'God and Father', of whom the Word was and is. For the Word himself by himself has not taken the beginning of the kingdom, but the man deceived by the devil through the power of the Word has become king, so that having become king he might conquer the devil who previously deceived.
For this reason also the Acts of the Apostles concerning this man, whom the Word of God took and having taken sits at the right hand of the Father, teach in this way, saying, 'whom it is necessary to receive into heaven until the times of restoration' (Acts 1:11). And these, as if defining a certain boundary and a deadline in which it is fitting the economy according to man to be joined to the Word, say so. For what else does 'until the times of restoration' mean, except to signify to us an age to come, in which it is necessary for all things to attain the perfection of restoration?
If therefore in the time of the restoration of all things even the creation itself will be changed from slavery into freedom, as Paul said (for he says, 'because even the creation itself will be freed from the slavery of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God' Romans 8:21), how could it still be possible for the Word to possess the form of a slave, which the Word took, as a form being a slave? Therefore, clearly and emphatically, in a brief time of both the past and the coming ages, the economy of the Word according to the flesh has happened for us, and Paul the lawgiver has declared that this shall have as both a beginning and an end, having said in this way, 'then the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God and Father' (1 Corinthians 15:24), referring to having grasped the human body and showing it to those seeing, 'does this scandalize you?'. He said, 'if therefore you see the Son of Man ascending, where was the former one? The spirit gives life, the flesh profits nothing' (John 6:63).
So indeed, not for himself, but for us the Word took human flesh. And if, having taken it, it appears through us, and all things concerning us will attain an end by his providence and energy at the time of judgment, there will no longer be a need even for this part of the kingdom.
But if anyone says that because of this the human flesh is worthy of the Word, because through the resurrection He fashioned it immortal, let him know that not everything that is immortal is worthy of God. For God is greater even than immortality itself, being able by His own will to make non-existent things immortal. It is clear that not all that is immortal is worthy of union with God, and it does not differ from this in the case of the beginning, the authorities, and the immortal angels. If anyone should inquire about this flesh, which has become immortal in the Word, what shall we say to him? We consider it not safe to dogmatize about those things of which we have not learned accurately from the divine Scriptures. For how is it possible for those to do this who overturn the doctrines of others? But to those who wish to learn the accurate word from us, we shall say, being persuaded by the holy Apostle, that we know it is proper for us to see the hidden mysteries in this way, just as he himself said: 'For now we see in a mirror, in a riddle; then face to face. Now we know in part; then I shall know just as I also am known' (1 Cor 13:12).
So do not inquire of me about things of which I have not learned clearly from the divine Scripture. Therefore, indeed, I will not be able to speak clearly even about that divine flesh which partook of the divine Word. But now I believe the divine Scriptures: that there is one God, and this one God's Word proceeded from the Father, so that 'all things might be through Him' (John 1:10), and after the time of judgment, and the correction of all things, and the destruction of every opposing energy, 'then He himself shall submit to Him who subjected all things to Him' (1 Cor 15:28), 'to God and Father,' so that the Word might be in God, just as He also was before the world existed. For nothing existed before except God alone, and since all things were to come into being through the Word, the Word proceeded with an active energy, the Word being of the Father.
This is he about whom Paul said, 'the predestined Son of God' (Rom 8:29). For this reason the most holy prophet Solomon said, 'to receive turns of speech,' and again, 'utterances of the wise and riddles.' Therefore, it seems to me that this most wise prophet has spoken the first words of prophecy proverbially. For nothing is incongruous, I think, in the present little of the...
Greek · §15
οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὰν τοὺς ἐχθροὺς σχῇ ὑποπόδιον τῶν ποδῶν οὐκέτι χρῄζει τῆς ἐν μέρει ταύτης βασιλείας, πάντων καθόλου βασιλεὺς ὑπάρχων· συμβασιλεύει γὰρ "τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί", οὗ ὁ λόγος ἦν τε καὶ ἐστίν. οὐδὲ γὰρ αὐτὸς καθ' ἑαυτὸν ὁ λόγος ἀρχὴν βασιλείας εἴληφεν, ἀλλ' ὁ ἀπατηθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ διαβόλου ἄνθρωπος διὰ τῆς τοῦ λόγου δυνάμεως βασιλεὺς γέγονεν, ἵνα βασιλεὺς γενόμενος τὸν πρότερον ἀπατήσαντα νικήσῃ διάβολον. διὰ τοῦτο καὶ αἱ Πράξεις τῶν ἀποστόλων περὶ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τούτου, ὃν ἀνείληφεν ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος καὶ ἀνειληφὼς ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς καθέζεται, οὕτως διδάσκουσιν λέγουσαι "ὃν δεῖ οὐρανὸν μὲν δέξασθαι ἄχρι χρόνων ἀποκαταστάσεως". καὶ αὗται ὥσπερ ὅρον τινὰ καὶ προθεσμίαν ὁρίζουσαι ἐν ᾧπερ προσήκει τὴν κατὰ ἄνθρωπον οἰκονομίαν ἡνῶσθαι τῷ λόγῳ οὕτω λέγουσιν. τί γὰρ ἕτερον βούλεται τὸ "ἄχρι χρόνων ἀποκαταστάσεως", ἢ αἰῶνα μέλλοντα ἡμῖν σημαίνειν, ἐν ᾧ δεῖ πάντα τῆς τελείας τυχεῖν ἀποκαταστάσεως; εἰ τοίνυν ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς ἀποκαταστάσεως ἁπάντων καὶ αὐτὴν τὴν κτίσιν ἐκ τῆς δουλείας εἰς τὴν ἐλευθερίαν μεταβληθήσεσθαι ὁ Παῦλος ἔφη (λέγει γὰρ "ὅτι καὶ αὐτὴ ἡ κτίσις ἐλευθερωθήσεται ἀπὸ τῆς δουλείας τῆς φθορᾶς εἰς τὴν ἐλευθερίαν τῆς δόξης τῶν τέκνων τοῦ θεοῦ"), πῶς ἔτι τὴν τοῦ δούλου μορφήν, ἣν ἀνείληφεν ὁ λόγος, μορφὴν οὖσαν δούλου, συνεῖναι τῷ λόγῳ δυνατὸν γένοιτ' ἄν; σαφῶς δ' οὖν καὶ διαρρήδην ἐν βραχεῖ τινι χρόνῳ τῶν τε παρεληλυθότων καὶ τῶν μελλόντων αἰώνων τὴν κατὰ σάρκα οἰκονομίαν τοῦ λόγου δι' ἡμᾶς γεγενῆσθαι συμβεβηκέναι καὶ ταύτην ὥσπερ ἀρχὴν οὕτως καὶ τέλος ἕξειν ὁ θεσπέσιος εἴρηκεν Παῦλος, οὕτω πως εἰπὼν "εἶτα τὸ τέλος, ὅταν παραδιδῷ τὴν βασιλείαν τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί". 118 τοῦ ἀνθρωπίνου ἁψάμενος σώματος καὶ δείξας αὐτὸ τοῖς ὁρῶσιν "τοῦτο ὑμᾶς σκανδαλίζει;" ἔφη "ἐὰν οὖν ἴδητε τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἀνιόντα, ὅπου ἦν τὸ πρότερον; τὸ πνεῦμα ζωοποιεῖ, ἡ σὰρξ οὐδὲν ὠφελεῖ". 119 οὐκοῦν οὐ δι' ἑαυτόν, ἀλλὰ δι' ἡμᾶς τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην ἀνείληφεν σάρκα. εἰ δὲ δι' ἡμᾶς ἀνειληφὼς φαίνεται, πάντα δὲ τὰ καθ' ἡμᾶς τῇ αὐτοῦ προνοίᾳ καὶ ἐνεργείᾳ ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τῆς κρίσεως τέλους τεύξεται, οὐκέτι οὐδὲ ταύτης τῆς ἐν μέρει βασιλείας ἔσται χρεία. 1 εἰ δέ τις λέγοι, διὰ τοῦτο τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σάρκα ἀξίαν εἶναι τοῦ λόγου, ὅτι διὰ τῆς ἀναστάσεως ἀθάνατον αὐτὴν ἀπειργάσατο, γνώτω ὅτι οὐ πᾶν, ὅπερ ἀθάνατον, τοῦτο ἄξιον θεοῦ. μείζων γὰρ καὶ αὐτῆς τῆς ἀθανασίας ὁ θεός, ὁ τῇ ἑαυτοῦ βουλήσει καὶ τὰ μὴ ὄντα ἀθάνατα ποιεῖν δυνάμενος. ὅτι δὲ οὐ πᾶν τὸ ἀθάνατον ἡνῶσθαι θεῷ ἄξιον δῆλόν ἐστι καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀρχὰς καὶ ἐξουσίας καὶ ἀγγέλους ἀθανάτους ὄντας μηδὲν διαφέρειν τῇ ἑνότητι τοῦ θεοῦ. 121 εἰ δέ τις περὶ τῆς σαρκὸς ταύτης τῆς ἐν τῷ λόγῳ ἀθανάτου γεγονυίας πυνθάνοιτο, τί φαμεν πρὸς αὐτόν; ὅτι δογματίζειν μὲν ἡμεῖς περὶ ὧν μὴ ἀκριβῶς παρὰ τῶν θείων μεμαθήκαμεν γραφῶν οὐκ ἀσφαλὲς εἶναι νομίζομεν. πῶς γὰρ τοῦτο πράττειν δυνατὸν τοῖς καὶ τὰ ἑτέρων ἀνατρέπουσιν δόγματα; ἀλλ' ἐροῦμεν πρὸς τοὺς τὸν ἀκριβῆ περὶ τούτου μαθεῖν παρ' ἡμῶν βουλομένους λόγον, ὅτι πειθόμενοι τῷ ἱερῷ ἀποστόλῳ ἴσμεν ὅτι οὕτως ἡμᾶς ὁρᾶν τὰ ἀποκεκρυμμένα μυστήρια προσήκει, ὡς αὐτὸς ἔφη· "βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι" φησὶν "δι' ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον· ἄρτι γινώσκομεν ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνωσόμεθα καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθημεν". ὥστε μή μου πυνθάνου περὶ ὧν σαφῶς παρὰ τῆς θείας γραφῆς μὴ μεμάθηκα. διὰ τοῦτο τοίνυν οὐδὲ περὶ τῆς θείας ἐκείνης τῆς τῷ θείῳ λόγῳ κοινωνησάσης σαρκὸς σαφῶς εἰπεῖν δυνήσομαι. νυνὶ δὲ πιστεύω ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς, ὅτι εἷς θεός, καὶ ὁ τούτου λόγος προῆλθεν μὲν τοῦ πατρός, ἵνα "πάντα δι' αὐτοῦ" γένηται μετὰ δὲ τὸν καιρὸν τῆς κρίσεως καὶ τὴν τῶν ἁπάντων διόρθωσιν καὶ τὸν ἀφανισμὸν τῆς ἀντικειμένης ἁπάσης ἐνεργείας "τότε αὐτὸς ὑποταγήσεται τῷ ὑποτάξαντι αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα" "θεῷ καὶ πατρί", ἵν' οὕτως ᾖ ἐν τῷ θεῷ ὁ λόγος, ὥσπερ καὶ πρότερον ἦν πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι. οὐδενὸς γὰρ ὄντος πρότερον ἢ θεοῦ μόνου, πάντων δὲ διὰ τοῦ λόγου γίγνεσθαι μελλόντων, προῆλθεν ὁ λόγος δραστικῇ ἐνεργείᾳ, ὁ λόγος οὗτος τοῦ πατρὸς ὤν. 122 οὗτός ἐστιν περὶ οὗ ὁ Παῦλος ἔφη "τοῦ προορισθέντος υἱοῦ θεοῦ". 123 τούτου γὰρ χάριν ὁ ἁγιώτατος προφήτης Σολομὼν "δέξασθαί τε στροφὰς λόγων" ἔφη, καὶ πάλιν "ῥήσεις τε σοφῶν καὶ αἰνίγματα". 124 διό μοι δοκεῖ ὁ σοφώτατος οὗτος προφήτης καὶ τὰ πρῶτα ῥήματα τῆς προφητείας παροιμιωδῶς εἰρηκέναι. 125 οὐδὲν γὰρ ἄτοπον, οἶμαι, ἐν τῷ παρόντι ὀλίγον τῶν
The Proverb of Letters and the Goat§16
16One might recall you through proverbs. But either it is dead or it teaches letters. Someone might take this proverb to refer to the appearance of the letter, saying that those teaching according to the letters are doing so; for another also said among them, 'You were teaching letters, but I was plundering.'
But those who wrote the commentaries said it was not so; rather, because Sicilians, having won the war against the Athenians, they say, were saving only those carrying the educational staff, leading their teachers to the children while plundering all the others, they said that some of them, having fled and returned, were asked by the Athenians about certain things differing from them, and they said, 'But either it is dead or it teaches letters.'
And what about 'The goat has the knife'? Someone might think it was said so that he might first say the things said about it, in order to somehow divert the proverb because of the goat being sacrificed to the knife. But the ancients did not say this; for the said thing would not have been a proverb, if it had been like this (for this would have been easy to perceive from the appearances), but they say it was said regarding those bringing evils upon themselves. For they say that Medea, having killed the children in Corinth, hid the knife on the spot; and the Corinthians, while sacrificing a black goat given to them by lot, were at a loss for knives, and the goat, scratching with its foot, found the knife of Medea and was sacrificed by it.
And what does 'The sow is an oak' mean? Someone says: for it is not possible to recognize the proverb from what is at hand. The ancients, as they said, while eating acorns before the agriculture of wheat, because they thought this fruit would be found later, paying attention to it and rejoicing in the change, said 'The sow is an oak'; and they said this was the proverb.
Again, there is another proverb mentioned by many of the wise among them in many and diverse books; what some have written about it, those who set themselves to interpret proverbs, it is necessary in the present to mention [...], but in order that we may expose Asterius, and that he, being a man knowing the sciences of the external sources exactly, the excellence of the proverb, but in the present having feigned ignorance, might seem to be skillfully constructing his own will through the use of the proverbial phrase.
And there is 'The Art of Glaucus'. This, the external wise men, having remembered the proverb, explained it diversely. For one of them said that a certain Glaucus, having become a master of a certain art, the being very wonderful of many, perished at once in the sea, with no one at all proclaiming it. Another, testifying to the experience in music at the highest, says that four bronze discs constructed by him were for the purpose of making the harmony of the sounds somewhat pleasant; from this the proverb is said to be. Another indeed says that a wonderful crater and an under-crater of Alyattic votive offerings are standing, the work of Glaucus of Chios. Another, to place Glaucus himself as a bronze tripod in Delphi, having thus created it, to make the thick-sounding legs upon which he stands, and the upper surrounding part and the crown upon the basin and the rods arranged through the middle, to speak with the voice of a lyre. And again another, from a certain Glaucus having thought to have done more, says the proverb.
You see how the difficulty of the proverb is shown, through the fact that those wishing to explain this proverb do not even stand upon the same interpretation. Thus something difficult the matter of the proverb seems to be even among the external ones. Therefore also someone, having collected the proverbs said by many and diversely among the wise with them, has written six books about them, two of the metrical and four of the unmetered. And these proverbs the external ones named 'Proverbs' for no other reason, it seems to me, but because having encountered the Proverbs of the wisest Solomon and having known through them that there is nothing to learn clearly from what is said in them by what is at hand, and themselves having wished to emulate the prophetic style, they wrote the letters in the same manner as he. Then, as being unable to devise any other name more important than that, they named these 'Proverbs'.
So surely this is 'The Lord has created me for the beginning of his ways toward his works' (Proverbs 8:22). (He says) that the Word of God prepared the human flesh to become immortal through the resurrection and just as a crown of victory...
Greek · §16
ἔξωθεν ὑπομνῆσαί σε παροιμιῶν. ΑΛΛ' Η ΤΕΘΝΗΚΕΝ Η ∆Ι∆ΑΣΚΕΙ ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΑ. ταύτην τὴν παροιμίαν πρὸς μὲν τὸ φαινόμενον τοῦ γράμματος ὑπολάβοι ἄν τις κατὰ τῶν γράμματα διδασκόντων εἰρῆσθαι· ἐπεὶ καὶ ἕτερός τις τῶν παρ' αὐτοῖς "ἐδίδασκες γράμματα, ἐγὼ δ' ἐφοίτων" ἔφη. τὸ δ' οὐχ οὕτως ἔχειν οἱ τὰ ὑπομνήματα γράψαντες ἔφασαν· ἀλλ' ἐπειδὴ Ἀθηναίους Σικελιῶται, φασίν, πολέμῳ νικήσαντες μόνους ἔσῳζον τοὺς παιδείαν σκηπτομένους, διδασκάλους αὐτοὺς τοῖς παισὶν ἄγοντες, τοὺς δὲ ἄλλους πάντας ἐφόνευον, ἐξ αὐτῶν δή τινας φυγόντας καὶ ἐπανελθόντας ἐρωτωμένους τε ὑπὸ Ἀθηναίων περί τινων διαφερόντων αὐτοῖς ἔφασαν εἰρηκέναι ΑΛΛ' Η ΤΕΘΝΗΚΕΝ Η ∆Ι∆ΑΣΚΕΙ ΓΡΑΜΜΑΤΑ. τί δὲ καὶ τὸ ΑΙΞ ΤΗΝ ΜΑΧΑΙΡΑΝ; νομίσειεν ἄν τις [εἰρῆσθαι], ἵνα θῶ πρότερον τὰ περὶ αὐτῆς λεγόμενα, πάντως που διὰ τὸ τὴν θυομένην αἶγα εἰς τὴν μάχαιραν ἀφορᾶν εἰρῆσθαι τὴν παροιμίαν. ἀλλ' οὔτι γε τοῦτ' ἔφασαν οἱ παλαιοί· οὐδὲ γὰρ παροιμία ἦν ἂν ἡ λεχθεῖσα, εἴγε τοῦθ' οὕτως εἶχεν (τοῦτο γὰρ ἀκόλουθον ἦν ἐκ τῶν φαινομένων ἐννοεῖν), ἀλλ' ἐπὶ τῶν ἑαυτοῖς κακὰ προξενούντων εἰρῆσθαι τοῦτό φασιν. φασὶν γὰρ Μήδειαν ἐν Κορίνθῳ τὰ τέκνα ἀποκτείνασαν κατακρύψαι τὴν μάχαιραν αὐτόθι· τοὺς δὲ Κορινθίους κατὰ χρησμὸν αὐτοῖς δοθέντα αἶγα μέλαιναν ἐναγίζοντας ἀπορεῖν μαχαίρας, τὴν δὲ αἶγα σκάλλουσαν τῷ ποδὶ τὴν Μηδείας ἀνευρεῖν μάχαιραν καὶ αὐτῇ τυθῆναι. τί δὲ τὸ ΑΛΙΣ ∆ΡΥΟΣ σημαίνει; φησί τις· οὐ γὰρ δυνατὸν ἐκ τοῦ προχείρου γιγνώσκειν τὴν παροιμίαν. οἱ παλαιοί, ὡς ἔφασαν, πρὸ τῆς τοῦ σίτου γεωργίας βαλανηφαγοῦντες, ἐπειδὴ ὡς ᾤοντο ὁ καρπὸς οὗτος ὕστερον εὑρέθη, ἐκείνῳ προσέχοντες τὸν νοῦν καὶ τῇ μεταβολῇ προσχαίροντες ΑΛΙΣ ∆ΡΥΟΣ ἔλεγον· καὶ τοῦτο τὴν παροιμίαν ἔφασαν εἶναι. αὖθίς τε ἑτέρας παροιμίας ὑπὸ πλείστων τῶν παρ' αὐτοῖς σοφῶν ἐν πλείστοις καὶ διαφόροις βιβλίοις εἰρημένης, τίνα περὶ αὐτῆς γεγράφασιν οἱ τὰς παροιμίας ἑρμηνεῦσαι προελόμενοι ἀναγκαῖον ἐν τῷ παρόντι μνημονεῦσαι, * * * ἀλλ' ἵν' ἐλέγξωμεν Ἀστέριον, καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν ἔξωθεν αὐτὸν μαθημάτων εἰδότα μὲν ἀκριβῶς τὸ τῆς παροιμίας ἐξαίρετον, ἐν δὲ τῷ παρόντι ἄγνοιαν προσποιηθέντα, ἵνα τὸ ἑαυτοῦ βούλημα διὰ τῆς τοῦ παροιμιώδους ῥητοῦ χρήσεως πιθανῶς κατασκευάζειν δόξῃ. ἔστιν δὲ ΓΛΑΥΚΟΥ ΤΕΧΝΗ. ταύτης οἱ ἔξωθεν σοφοὶ τῆς παροιμίας μνημονεύσαντες διαφόρως αὐτὴν ἐξηγήσαντο. ὁ μὲν γὰρ αὐτῶν τις ἔφη, Γλαῦκόν τινα ἐπιστήμονα τέχνης τινὸς γεγονότα † πολλῶν οὖσαν θαυμασιωτάτην, ἀπολέσθαι ἅμα ἐκείνῳ κατὰ θάλατταν, μηδενός πω διακηκοότος αὐτῆς. ἕτερος δέ, τὴν ἐπ' ἄκρον μουσικῆς ἐμπειρίαν μαρτυρήσας τῷ Γλαύκῳ, τοὺς κατασκευασθέντας ὑπ' αὐτοῦ δίσκους χαλκοῦς φησιν τέσσαρας, πρὸς τὸ ἐμμελῆ τινα τῆς κρούσεως τὴν συμφωνίαν τῶν φθόγγων ἀποτελεῖν· ἔνθεν τε εἰρῆσθαι τὴν παροιμίαν. ἄλλος δέ τις Ἀλυαττικῶν ἀναθημάτων φησὶν ἀνακεῖσθαι κρατῆρα καὶ ὑποκρατήριον θαυμάσιον, Γλαύκου Χίου ποίημα. ἕτερος δέ, Γλαῦκον αὐτὸν ἀναθεῖναι εἰς ∆ελφοὺς τρίποδα χαλκοῦν, οὕτω δημιουργήσαντα τοῖς † παχέως τε κρουομένου, τούς τε πόδας, ἐφ' ὧν βέβηκεν, καὶ τὸ ἄνω περικείμενον καὶ τὴν στεφάνην τὴν ἐπὶ τοῦ λέβητος καὶ τὰς ῥάβδους διὰ μέσου τεταγμένας φθέγγεσθαι λύρας φωνῇ. καὶ αὖθις ἕτερος, ἀπὸ Γλαύκου τινὸς δόξαντός τι πλέον πεποιηκέναι εἰρῆσθαι τὴν παροιμίαν. ὁρᾷς, ὅπως τὸ δυσχερὲς τῆς παροιμίας καὶ διὰ τούτου δείκνυται, διὰ τοῦ μηδὲ ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς ἑρμηνείας στῆναι τοὺς τὴν παροιμίαν ταύτην ἐξηγήσασθαι βουληθέντας. οὕτως δυσεύρετόν τι πρᾶγμα τὸ τῆς παροιμίας καὶ παρὰ τοῖς ἔξωθεν εἶναι δοκεῖ. διὸ καί τις τῶν παρ' αὐτοῖς σοφῶν συναγαγὼν τὰς ὑπὸ πολλῶν καὶ διαφόρως λεχθείσας παροιμίας, εἰς αὐτὰς γέγραφεν ἓξ βιβλία, δύο μὲν τῶν ἐμμέτρων, τῶν δὲ ἀμέτρων τέσσαρα. ταύτας δὲ παροιμίας ὠνόμασαν οἱ ἔξωθεν δι' οὐδὲν ἕτερον, ἐμοὶ δοκεῖν, ἀλλ' ἐπειδὴ ταῖς τοῦ σοφωτάτου Σολομῶνος Παροιμίαις ἐντυχόντες καὶ γνόντες δι' αὐτῶν ὅτι οὐδέν ἐστιν ἐκ τοῦ προχείρου σαφῶς τῶν ἐν αὐταῖς εἰρημένων μαθεῖν, καὶ αὐτοὶ ζηλῶσαι τὸ προφητικὸν βουληθέντες γράμμα τὸν αὐτὸν ἐκείνῳ γεγράφασι τρόπον. εἶτα ὡς μηδὲν ἕτερον ὄνομα κυριώτερον ἐκείνου ἐπινοῆσαι δυνηθέντες καὶ ταύτας παροιμίας ὠνόμασαν. 126 οὐκοῦν τοῦτ' ἐστιν τὸ "κύριος ἔκτισέν με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ". 127 (ἔφη) τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σάρκα διὰ τῆς ἀναστάσεως ἀθάνατον γενέσθαι παρεσκευακέναι καὶ ὥσπερ τινὰ νίκης στέφανον
Letter to Julius regarding false accusations§17
17He is having sat down at the right hand of the Father. He says that he has made this by composing one single treatise for the purpose of knowing God. Greetings to the most blessed co-celebrant Julius from Marcellus in Christ.
Because certain ones, having been previously convicted of not believing correctly—whom I refuted at the Council of Nicaea—dared to write to your piety against me, striving to transfer their own guilt onto me as if I were not thinking correctly even ecclesiastically, I deemed it necessary to respond by reminding you, so that you might send those who wrote against me to be refuted by me on both sides, since also what they have written against me turns out to be false, and that even now they persist in their former plan and have dared to be terrible both against the churches of God and against us who preside over them.
Since, therefore, they were not willing to respond, having sent your presbyters to them, and since I have completed this in Rome for a total of three years and one month, I deemed it necessary, as I am about to depart from here, to write my faith to you with all truth, having written it with my own hand, to hand it over to you, which I learned both from the divine Scriptures and from the bad things said by them, and to remind you, so that you may know those who wish to use the truth to hide it for the purpose of deceiving those who listen to the words.
For they say that the word of the Pantokrator God is not one's own and true...
Greek · §17
ἀναδησάμενον ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρὸς καθέζεσθαι. 128 (ἕν τι ... σύγγραμμα συντάξας τοῦτό φησιν πεποιηκέναι) διὰ τὸ ἕνα γνωρίζειν θεόν. 129 Τῷ μακαριωτάτῳ συλλειτουργῷ Ἰουλίῳ Μάρκελλος ἐν Χριστῷ χαίρειν. Ἐπειδή τινες τῶν καταγνωσθέντων πρότερον ἐπὶ τῷ μὴ ὀρθῶς πιστεύειν, οὓς ἐγὼ ἐν τῇ κατὰ Νίκαιαν συνόδῳ διήλεγξα, κατ' ἐμοῦ γράψαι τῇ θεοσεβείᾳ σου ἐτόλμησαν ὡς ἂν ἐμοῦ μὴ ὀρθῶς μηδὲ ἐκκλησιαστικῶς φρονοῦντος, τὸ ἑαυτῶν ἔγκλημα εἰς ἐμὲ μετατεθῆναι σπουδάζοντες, τούτου ἕνεκεν ἀναγκαῖον ἡγησάμην ἀπαντήσας εἰς τὴν Ῥώμην ὑπομνῆσαί σε, ἵνα τοὺς κατ' ἐμοῦ γράψαντας μεταστείλῃ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀπαντήσαντας αὐτοὺς ἐπ' ἀμφοτέροις ἐλεγχθῆναι ὑπ' ἐμοῦ, ὅτι τε καὶ ἃ γεγράφασι κατ' ἐμοῦ ψευδῆ ὄντα τυγχάνει, καὶ ὅτι ἔτι καὶ νῦν ἐπιμένουσι τῇ ἑαυτῶν προτέρᾳ πλάνῃ καὶ δεινὰ κατά τε τῶν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκκλησιῶν καὶ ἡμῶν τῶν προεστώτων αὐτῶν τετολμήκασιν. ἐπεὶ τοίνυν ἀπαντῆσαι οὐκ ἠβουλήθησαν ἀποστείλαντός σου πρεσβυτέρους πρὸς αὐτούς, καὶ ταῦτα ἐμοῦ ἐνιαυτὸν καὶ τρεῖς ὅλους μῆνας ἐν τῇ Ῥώμῃ πεποιηκότος, ἀναγκαῖον ἡγησάμην, μέλλων ἐντεῦθεν ἐξιέναι, ἔγγραφόν σοι τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ πίστιν μετὰ πάσης ἀληθείας τῇ ἐμαυτοῦ χειρὶ γράψας ἐπιδοῦναι ἣν ἔμαθον ἔκ τε τῶν θείων γραφῶν ἐδιδάχθην, καὶ τῶν κακῶς ὑπ' αὐτῶν λεγομένων ὑπομνῆσαί σε, ἵνα γνῷς οἷς χρώμενοι πρὸς ἀπάτην τῶν ἀκουόντων λόγοις τὴν ἀλήθειαν κρύπτειν βούλονται. φασὶ γὰρ μὴ ἴδιον καὶ ἀληθινὸν λόγον εἶναι τοῦ παντοκράτορος θεοῦ
The Son vs. a different Logos§18
18They say that it is not the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, but a different word of him and a different wisdom and power. Because he was named word and wisdom and power by him, they claim that a different substance standing apart from the Father exists, because they think in this way.
Furthermore, they also claim that the Father pre-existed the Son, through which they venture to argue, and that he is not truly the Son of God; but even if they say 'of God', they say it in the same way as they say 'all things'. Moreover, they even dare to say that there was once a time when he was not, and that he is a creature and a work, distinguishing him from the Father.
Therefore, I believe those saying these things to be strangers to the Catholic Church. But I believe, following the divine Scriptures, that there is one God and his only-begotten Son, the Word, who is always co-existing with the Father and has never possessed a beginning of being, truly existing from God, not having been created, not having been made, but always being, always reigning with 'God and Father', whose 'kingdom', according to the testimony of the apostle, 'will have no end' (Rev 11:15).
This is the Son, this is the power, this is the wisdom. This is the same and true Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, the undivided power of [...]
Greek · §18
τὸν υἱόν, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν, ἀλλ' ἕτερον αὐτοῦ λόγον εἶναι καὶ ἑτέραν σοφίαν καὶ δύναμιν. τοῦτον γενόμενον ὑπ' αὐτοῦ ὠνομάσθαι λόγον καὶ σοφίαν καὶ δύναμιν, καὶ διὰ τὸ οὕτως αὐτοὺς φρονεῖν ἄλλην ὑπόστασιν διεστῶσαν τοῦ πατρὸς εἶναί φασιν. ἔτι μέντοι καὶ προϋπάρχειν τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸν πατέρα δι' ὧν γράφουσιν ἀποφαίνονται καὶ μὴ εἶναι αὐτὸν ἀληθῶς υἱὸν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ· ἀλλὰ κἂν λέγωσιν ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ οὕτως λέγουσιν ὡς καὶ τὰ πάντα. ἔτι μὴν καὶ ὅτι ἦν ποτε ὅτε οὐκ ἦν λέγειν τολμῶσι καὶ κτίσμα αὐτὸν καὶ ποίημα εἶναι, διορίζοντες αὐτὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ πατρός. τοὺς οὖν ταῦτα λέγοντας ἀλλοτρίους τῆς καθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας εἶναι πεπίστευμαι. πιστεύω δὲ ἑπόμενος ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς ὅτι εἷς θεὸς καὶ ὁ τούτου μονογενὴς υἱὸς λόγος, ὁ ἀεὶ συνυπάρχων τῷ πατρὶ καὶ μηδεπώποτε ἀρχὴν τοῦ εἶναι ἐσχηκώς, ἀληθῶς ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, οὐ κτισθείς, οὐ ποιηθείς, ἀλλὰ ἀεὶ ὤν, ἀεὶ συμβασιλεύων "τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί", οὗ "τῆς βασιλείας" κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ἀποστόλου μαρτυρίαν "οὐκ ἔσται τέλος". οὗτος υἱός, οὗτος δύναμις, οὗτος σοφία. οὗτος ἴδιος καὶ ἀληθὴς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος, ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, ἀδιαίρετος δύναμις τοῦ
The Logos and the Creed§19
19Of God, through whom all things that came into being came to be, just as the Gospel testifies saying, 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things through him came to be, and without him nothing came into being' (John 1:1-3). This is the Word about whom also Luke the evangelist testifies saying, 'just as we were handed down by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the Word' (Luke 1:2). Concerning this also David said, 'My heart has searched out a good word' (Psalm 40:8). So also our Lord Jesus Christ teaches us through the Gospel saying, 'I went out from the Father and I have come' (John 16:28).
This one, having descended 'in the last days' (Matthew 28:20) for our salvation and having been born of the virgin Mary, took upon himself the man.
I believe therefore in God the almighty; and in Christ Jesus his son, the only-begotten, our Lord, born of the Holy Spirit and Mary the virgin, having been crucified under Pontius Pilate and having been buried and on the third day having risen from the dead, having ascended into the heavens and sitting at the right hand of the Father, from where he comes to judge the living and the dead; and in the Holy Spirit, the holy church, the forgiveness of sins, the flesh...
Greek · §19
θεοῦ, δι' οὗ [τὰ] πάντα τὰ γενόμενα γέγονε καθὼς τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον μαρτυρεῖ λέγον "ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. πάντα δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν". οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ λόγος περὶ οὗ καὶ Λουκᾶς ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς μαρτυρεῖ λέγων "καθὼς παρέδωκαν ἡμῖν οἱ ἀπ' ἀρχῆς αὐτόπται καὶ ὑπηρέται γενόμενοι τοῦ λόγου". περὶ τούτου καὶ ∆αυὶδ ἔφη "ἐξηρεύξατο ἡ καρδία μου λόγον ἀγαθόν". οὕτω καὶ ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ἡμᾶς διδάσκει διὰ τοῦ Εὐαγγελίου λέγων "ἐγὼ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἥκω". οὗτος "ἐπ' ἐσχάτων τῶν ἡμερῶν" κατελθὼν διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν καὶ ἐκ τῆς παρθένου Μαρίας γεννηθεὶς τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἔλαβε. πιστεύω οὖν εἰς θεὸν παντοκράτορα· καὶ εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν, τὸν γεννηθέντα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου, τὸν ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου σταυρωθέντα καὶ ταφέντα καὶ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἀναστάντα ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, ἀναβάντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανοὺς καὶ καθήμενον ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ πατρός, ὅθεν ἔρχεται κρίνειν ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς· καὶ εἰς τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα, ἁγίαν ἐκκλησίαν, ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν, σαρκὸς
The Indivisibility of the Godhead§20
20the resurrection, eternal life. We have learned from the divine writings that the divinity of the Father and of the Son is to be indivisible.
For if anyone separates the Son, that is, the Word of the Pantokrator God, it is necessary for him either to think them to be two gods (which has been considered alien to the divine teaching) or to confess that the Word is not God (which also appears to be alien to the right faith, the Evangelist saying, "and the Word was God" John 1:1). But I have learned precisely that the Son of the Father is indivisible and inseparable in power.
For the Savior himself, the Lord our Jesus Christ, says, "the Father is in me, and I in the Father" John 14:10, and "I and the Father are one" John 10:30, and "he who has seen me has seen the Father" John 14:9. This faith I have received from the divine writings and have been taught by the ancestors according to God, and in the church of God I preach and to you now I have written, possessing the counterpart of this with myself.
And I permit the antitype of this to be inscribed in the letter to the bishops, so that some of those not knowing precisely might be deceived by paying attention to those writing under them. Farewell.
Greek · §20
ἀνάστασιν, ζωὴν αἰώνιον. ἀδιαίρετον εἶναι τὴν θεότητα τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ παρὰ τῶν θείων μεμαθήκαμεν γραφῶν. εἰ γάρ τις χωρίζει τὸν υἱόν, τουτέστι τὸν λόγον, τοῦ παντοκράτορος θεοῦ, ἀνάγκη αὐτὸν ἢ δύο θεοὺς εἶναι νομίζειν (ὅπερ ἀλλότριον τῆς θείας διδασκαλίας εἶναι νενόμισται) ἢ τὸν λόγον μὴ εἶναι θεὸν ὁμολογεῖν (ὅπερ καὶ αὐτὸ ἀλλότριον τῆς ὀρθῆς πίστεως εἶναι φαίνεται, τοῦ εὐαγγελιστοῦ λέγοντος "καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος"). ἐγὼ δὲ ἀκριβῶς μεμάθηκα ὅτι ἀδιαίρετος καὶ ἀχώριστός ἐστιν, ᾗ δύναμις, τοῦ πατρὸς ὁ υἱός. αὐτὸς γὰρ ὁ σωτήρ, ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, φησὶν "ἐν ἐμοὶ ὁ πατήρ, κἀγὼ ἐν τῷ πατρί" καὶ "ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν" καὶ "ὁ ἐμὲ ἑωρακὼς ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα". ταύτην καὶ παρὰ τῶν θείων γραφῶν εἰληφὼς τὴν πίστιν καὶ παρὰ τῶν κατὰ θεὸν προγόνων διδαχθεὶς ἔν τε τῇ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκκλησίᾳ κηρύττω καὶ πρὸς σὲ νῦν γέγραφα, τὸ ἀντίγραφον τούτου παρ' ἐμαυτῷ κατασχών. καὶ ἀξιῶ τὸ ἀντίτυπόν σε τούτου τῇ πρὸς τοὺς ἐπισκόπους ἐπιστολῇ ἐγγράψαι, ἵνα μή τινες τῶν ἀκριβῶς μὴ εἰδότων ἡμᾶς κἀκείνοις τοῖς ὑπ' αὐτῶν γραφεῖσι προσέχοντες ἀπατηθῶσιν. Ἔρρωσθε.