<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg2022.tlg010.opp-grc1:13</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg2022.tlg010.opp-grc1:13</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text><body><div type="edition" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg2022.tlg010.opp-grc1" xml:lang="grc"><div type="textpart" subtype="chapter" n="13"><p>Ὅγδοόν ἐστιν αὐτοῖς τό· Ἵνα γινώσκωσι σὲ τὸν
μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεόν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν χριστόν·
<lb n="10"/> καὶ τό· Οὐδεὶς ἂγαθός, εἰ μὴ εἷς ὁ θεός. τοῦτο δὲ καὶ
πάντῃ ῥᾴστην ἔχειν τὴν λύσιν μοι φαίνεται. εἰ γὰρ τὸ
μόνον ἀληθινὸν ἐπὶ τοῦ πατρὸς θήσεις, ποῦ θήσεις τὴν
αὐτοαλήθειαν ; καὶ γὰρ εἰ τῷ μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, ἢ τῷ μόνῳ
ἔχοντι ἀθανασίαν, φῶς οἰκοῦντι ἀπρόσιτον, ἢ Βασιλεῖ
<lb n="15"/> τῶν αἰώνων ἀφθάρτῳ, ἀοράτῳ, μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ νοήσεις
οὕτως, οἰχήσεταί σοι θάνατον κατακριθεὶς ὁ υἱός, ἢ σκότος,
ἢ τὸ μὴ σοφὸς εἶναι, μηδὲ βασιλεύς, μηδὲ ἀόρατος, μηδὲ
ὅλως θεός, ὂ τῶν εἰρημένων κεφάλαιον. πῶς δὲ οὐκ
<note type="footnote">1 om τὸ a ΙΙ 5 νοης] διανοῇς cf: νόεις d ΙΙ νογσεις] νόεις d ’Or. 1’
13. 15 ἀοράτῳ] + καὶ f || 18 πὼς δάι d</note>
<note type="footnote">1. τὸν λόγον τὸν ἅκ.] John xiv
24. The ἐπεὶ carries us somewhat
abruptly back to the main thesis of
the section, οὐχ ὡς ὄντος κτλ.</note>
<note type="footnote">6. καὶ παντὸς τοῦ εὐγν] sc. ὁ
λόγος. This is the usual interpretation
of the fathers.</note>
<note type="footnote">13. ’λθ’. 8. — Thee the only true
God and Jesus Christ, and There is
none good but one, that is, God.
There are other instances where
similar language does not exclude
the Son. Here, it is used to exclude
the false gods, and it is the common
Godhead of the Father and of the
which is addressed as the only
true God. The other text is an
answer to one who, thinking Him to
be only a man, called Him ‘good’;
whereas the goodness was that of the
Godhead. If this argument does not
satisfy them., we can find them a
text which, on their principles, would
prove the Son alone to be God.</note>
<note type="footnote">8. ἵνα γινώσκωσι σέ] John xvii 3.</note>
<note type="footnote">10. οὐδεὶς ἀγαθός] Mark x 18.</note>
<note type="footnote">12. τὴν αὐτοαλήθειαν] viz. Christ,
who says, “ I am the Truth."</note>
<note type="footnote">13. τῷ μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῶ Rom. xvi
27.</note>
<note type="footnote">ib. τῷ μόνῳ ἔχ. ἀθ’.] 1 Tim. vi
16. Gr. turns the words into the
ascriptive form.</note>
<note type="footnote">14. βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰ.] 1 Tim. i 17.</note>
<note type="footnote">15. νοήσεις] The foregoing quotations
form the object, or accusative,
to the verb : ‘If you so underSon
stand τῷ μόνῳ σ. θ.‘ Usually in
such cases we have τὸ τῷ μόνῳ κτλ.</note>
<note type="footnote">16. οἰχήσεταί σοι] ‘you condemn
the Son to death, to darkness
and He must go.’</note>
<note type="footnote">18. οὐκ ἀπολεῑ] ‘How can He
help losing?’</note>

<pb n="129"/>
ἀπολεῖ μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων καὶ τὴν ἀγαθότητα, ἢ μάλιστα
μόνου θεοῦ ; ἀλλ’ οἶμαι τὸ μέν· Ἵνα γινώσκωσι σὲ τὸν
μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεόν, ἐπ’ ἀναιρέσει λέγεσθαι τῶν οὐκ ὄντων
μὲν θεῶν, λεγομένων δέ. οὐ γὰρ ἂν προσέκειτο· Καὶ ὃν
ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν χριστόν, εἰ πρὸς ἐκεῖνον ἀντιδιῄρητο <lb n="5"/>
τὸ μόνον ἀληθινόν, ἁλλὰ μὴ κατὰ κοινοῦ τῆς θεότητος ἦν
ὁ λόγος. τὸ δέ, Οὐδεὶς ἀγαθός, ἀπάντησιν ἔχει πρὸς τὸν
πειράζοντα νομικόν, ὡς ἀνθρώπῳ τὴν ἀγαθότητα μαρτυρήσαντα.
τὸ γὰρ ἄκρως ἀγαθόν, φησι, μόνου θεοῦ, κἂν τοῦτο
καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὀνομάζηται, ὡς τό· Ὁ ἀγαθὸς ἄνθρωπος ἐκ <lb n="10"/>
τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ θησαυροῦ προβάλλει τὸ ἀγαθόν· καί, δώσω
τὴν βασιλείαν τῷ ἀγαθῷ ὑπὲρ σέ, τοῦ θεοῦ πρὸς τὸν
Σαοὺλ περὶ τοῦ Δαβὶδ λέγοντος· καὶ τό· Ἀγάθυνον,
κύριε, τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς· καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα τοιαῦτα λέγεται περὶ
τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν ἐπαινουμένων, ἐφ’ οὓς ἡ ἀπόρροια τοῦ πρώτου <lb n="15"/>
καλοῦ καὶ κατὰ δεύτερον λόγον ἔφθασεν. εἰ μὲν οὖν
πείθομεν τοῦτο, ἄριστον· εἰ δὲ μή, τί φήσεις πρὸς τοὺς
λέγοντας ἑτέρωθι, τὸν υἱὸν μόνον εἰρῆσθαι θεὸν κατὰ τὰς
σὰς ὑποθέσεις ; ἐν τίσι τοῖς ῥήμασιν ; ἐν ἐκείνοις· Οὗτός
σου θεός, οὐ λογισθήσεται ἕτερος πρὸς αὐτόν· καὶ μετ’ <lb n="20"/>
ὀλίγα· Μετὰ τοῦτο ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὤφθη, καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις
<note type="footnote">5 εκεινον] τοῦτον b || 6 om τὸ g ΙΙ 12 θεοῦ] + λογος df || 17 πείθοιμεν a ||
19 οὕτος ο θεὸς bcf2 ’duo Reg.' ΙΙ 20 θεος] + καὶ cdf</note>
<note type="footnote">5. εἰ πρὸς ἐκ. ἀντιδιῄρητο] ‘If
the words " only true" were used to
distinguish God from Him,’ ‘to 
exclude Him.' Cp. § 4.</note>
<note type="footnote">6. κατὰ κοίνου] Something like
ἀπὸ κοινοῦ in § 12, ‘ in general.' Of
course τῆς θεότ. depends upon ἢν,
not upon κατὰ κ. Gr. does not perceive
what difficulties he is landed
in, if he makes ’Jesus Christ' address
the Godhead in general as
His sender. Both Nestorianism and
Sabellianism are near at hand.
ἀπάντησιν ἔχει πρός] ‘is intended
ἃς an answer to? Gr. has
confused the Rich Young Ruler
with the Lawyer who tempted
Christ.</note>
<note type="footnote">9. καλ’ τοῦτο] sc. ἀγαθός.</note>
<note type="footnote">10. ὁ ἂγ. ἄνθρωπος] Matt, xii 35.</note>
<note type="footnote">11. δώσω τὴν β.] 1 Sam. xv 28.</note>
<note type="footnote">13. ἀγάθυνον] Ps. exxiv (exxv) 4.</note>
<note type="footnote">15. ἐφ’ οὒς ἡ ἀπόρρ. ] ‘upon whom
the outflotv of the First Fair has
come, even in a secondary sense.’</note>
<note type="footnote">17. πείθομεν τοῦτο] ’persuade you
of this.’</note>
<note type="footnote">19. οὗτός σου θεός] Baruch iii
35 foll.</note>

<pb n="130"/>
συνανεστράφη. ὅτι μὲν γὰρ οὐ περὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ἀλλὰ
τοῦ υἱοῦ τὸ λεγόμενον, ἡ προσθήκη σαφῶς παρίστησιν.
οὗτος γάρ ἐστιν ὁ σωματικῶς ὁμιλήσας ἡμῖν, καὶ μετὰ τῶν
κάτω γενόμενος. εἰ δὲ νικήσειε κατὰ τοῦ πατρὸς λέγεσθαι
<lb n="5"/> τοῦτο, μὴ τῶν νομιζομένων θεῶν, ἡττήμεθα τὸν πατέρα,
δι’ ὧν τοῦ υἱοῦ κατεσπουδάσαμεν. τί ἃν τῆς νίκης ταύτης
γένοιτο ἀθλιώτερον ἢ ζημιωδέστερον ;</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>