τοῦ μὲν γὰρ εἶναι θεόν, καὶ τὴν πάντων ποιητικήν τε καὶ συνεκτικὴν αἰτίαν, καὶ ὄψις διδάσκαλος, καὶ ὁ φυσικὸς νόμος· ἡ μὲν τοῖς ὁρωμένοις προσβάλλουσα, καὶ πεπηγόσι καλῶς καὶ ὁδεύουσι, καὶ ἀκινήτως, ἵνα οὕτως εἴπω, κινουμένοις καὶ φερομένοις· ὁ δὲ διὰ τῶν ὁρωμένων καὶ τεταγμένων τὸν ἀρχηγὸν τούτων συλλογιζόμενος. πῶς γὰρ ἂν καὶ ὑπέστη τόδε τὸ πᾶν, ἢ συνέστη, μὴ θεοῦ τὰ πάντα καὶ οὐσιώσαντος καὶ συνέχοντος; οὐδὲ γὰρ κιθάραν τις ὁρῶν κάλλιστα ἠσκημένην καὶ τὴν ταύτης εὐαρμοστίαν καὶ εὐταξίαν, ἢ τῆς κιθαρῳδίας αὐτῆς ἀκούων, ἄλλο τι ἢ τὸν τῆς κιθάρας δημιουργὸν καὶ τὸν κιθαρῳδὸν ἐννοήσει, καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀναδραμεῖται τῆ διανοίᾳ, κἂν ἀγνοῶν τύχη ταῖς ὄψεσιν. οὕτω καὶ ἡμῖν τὸ ποιητικὸν 6. 4 αἰτίαν] οὐσίαν f ǁ 6 ὁδεύουσι] -σα c 6. Of His existence the order of nature assures us. We are forced to think of a Creator when we look upon Creation, as the sight of a lyre makes us think of the lyre-maker. But beyond that, we have no certainty. 4. συνεκτικήν] from συνέχειν, Δ’ maintain in harmony’: cp. Col. i τὰ πάντα ἐν αὐτῷ συνέστηκεν. So Xen. Cyrop. 8 p. 140 οἱ θεοὶ] τὴν τῶν ὅλων τήνδε τάξιν συνέχουσιν ἀτριβῆ. For the construction, τὴν π. π. αἰτίαν is strictly (with θεόν) the subject of εἶναι. The def. art. is used in the same way as in participial sentences like εἰσὶν...οἱ τ. ἀκ. προσκνώμενοι (above, p. 1); where our idiom rather puts ’a’ than ‘the’; ‘that there is a God and a creative cause.’ 5. ὁ φυσικὸς νόμος] Gr. does not here mean ‘natural law’ in modern sense, although such an use might readily be paralleled. The explanatory clause below shews that he does not mean ‘the law which we observe in the natural order around us,’ but the natural upon ourselves of the observations which we make. Cp. below ταῖς φυσικαῖς ἀποδείξεσιν. ib. προσβάλλουσα] ‘lighting upon.’ 6. κ. πεπηγόσι] πέπηγα (from πήγνυμι) has the intrans. sense, ‘to be fixed.’ K. πεπ. κ. ὁδ’. κ. κιν. κ. are predicates of τοῖς ὁρ.; ‘seeing them fixed’ ect. 8. συλλογιζόμενος] When we see the order in nature the natural result upon ourselves is to infer the existence of an ἀρχηγός i.e. ‘author.’ 10. οὐσιώσαντος] οὐσιόω=‘to give οὐσία,’ ‘bring into being.’ 11. κιθάραν...κάιλιστα ἠσκημένην] Cp. Paley's famous argument about the watch. Ἀσκεῖν like ἐξασκεῖν, = exornare; see Horn. Od. i 439: ‘beautifully and elaborately made.’ 15. ταῖς ὄψεσιν] contrasted with τῆ διανοίᾳ: ‘he will pass ἀναδ. because higher up, further back, in the order of thought or causation) to him in thought, although he may not be acquainted with him by sight.’ The unusual pl. ταῖς ὄψ. might mean either ‘by his (the player's) looks,’ or ‘by his (the hearer's) sight.’ latter makes the best parallel to διαν.; it is also used in this sense by Herodian 6 (9, 10) ὡς ἐν ὄψεσιν ἢν ’when he came in sight.’ δῆλον, καὶ τὸ κινοῦν καὶ τηροῦν τὰ πεποιημένα, κἂν μὴ διανοίᾳ περιλαμβάνηται· καὶ λίαν ἀγνώμων ὁ μὴ μέχρι τούτων προιὼν ἑκουσίως καὶ ταῖς φυσικαῖς ἑπόμενος ἀποδείξεσιν. ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ τοῦτο εἶναι θεόν, ὅπερ ἐφαντάσθημεν, ἢ ἀνετυπωσάμεθα, ἢ λόγος ὑπέγραψεν. εἰ δέ τις ἐν περινοίᾳ τούτου ποτὲ κἂν ἐπὶ ποσὸν ἐγένετο, τίς ἡ ἀπόδειξις; τίς οὕτως εἰς ἔσχατον σοφίας ἀφίκετο; τίς τοσούτου χαρίσματος ἠξιώθη ποτέ; τίς οὕτω τὸ στόμα τῆς διανοίας 6 om ποτε ‘Or. 1’ 1. τὸ ποιητ δῆλον] ‘the creating power is plain.’ 2. ἀγνώμων] here ‘unreasonable,’ ‘deficient in sense.’ 3. κ. ταῖς φ. ἐπ’. ἀποδ.] The καὶ joins ἑπόμενος to ἑκουσίως, not to προίων. 4. ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ τοῦτο] a very difficult passage. The usual interpretation makes ἀλλὰ answer to the μὴ in μὴ προιών, ‘who will not go as far as this, but (says) that not even this, which we have imagined, is God.’ But it is harsh to supply the necessary φάσκων or ὁμολογῶν in order to make the clause grammatical; and a comparison with the sentence in § 12 where Gr. resumes his thread after a long digression, seems to shew that we must assign an entirely different meaning to the present sentence,—and which will accord better with grammatical requirements. In ἑ 12 Gr. says that the proposition from which he had started was τὸ μὴ ληπτὸν εἶναι ἀνθρωπίνη διανοίᾳ τὸ θεῖον, μηδὲ ὅλον ὅσον ἐστὶ φαντάζεσθαι. Here, accordingly, we must suppose, that it is Gr. himself, and not the λίαν ἀγνώμων, who denies εἶναι θεὸν ὅπερ ἔφαντ’. It is, he says, very unreasonable not to accept the natural proofs of God's existence, and in following them we are compelled to form certain great outlines of a conception of God (e.g. creative power, rational method, etc.), which we cannot doubt to be correct. But even this is not the same thing as to identify εἶναι ὅπερ) God with what we have imagined, or figured to ourselves, or what our reason has delineated. τοῦτο is the subject of ἐστὶν understood, of which εἶναι θ. κτλ. is the predicate. While we have ἀποδείξεις for the one belief, we have none for the other. 5. ὑπέγραψεν] Cp. I Pet. ii 21 ὑπογραμμόν ‘a sketch.’ 6. ἐν περινοίᾳ τ....ἐγένετο] Gr. uses the same expression in Or. xlv § 11: οὐ γὰρ οἶόν τε ἄλλως ἐν περινοίᾳ θεοῦ γενέσθαι σώματος ὑλικοῦ καὶ δεσμίου νοῦ πάχος μὴ βοηθούμενον. The rare word περίνοια appears to denote an embracing in thought, a mental taking in of the subject. Τούτου sc. θεοῦ ‘If ever anyone in any degree has attained to an understanding of Him, what proof is there of the fact?’ 8. τὸ στόμα...πνεῦμα] Ps. cxviii (cxix) 131. The ἵνα ὥστε, following as it does upon the οὕτως and the τοσούτου. ἤνοιξε καὶ εἵλκυσε πνεῦμα, ἵνα τῷ τὰ πάντα ἐρευνῶντι καὶ γινώσκοντι καὶ τὰ βάθη τοῦ θεοῦ πνεύματι θεὸν καταλάβῃ, καὶ μηκέτι τοῦ πρόσω δέηται, τὸ ἔσχατον ὀρεκτὸν ἔχων ἤδη, καὶ εἰς ὃ πᾶσα σπεύδει καὶ πολιτεία τοῦ ὑψηλοῦ καὶ διάνοια;