Ἀλλ’ ἐμοί, φησιν, ἐκεῖνα συναριθμούμενα λέγεται, καὶ τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας, οἷς συνεκφωνεῖται καταλλήλως καὶ 3 γραμματι] πράγματι b || 5 λέων και] om καὶ g || 6 ενδημηγορων e || 7 τῆ ’δε φύσει bdf 3. περιέχῃ τοῦ γρ.] ‘you are so attached to the letter of Scripture.’ The emendation τῷ πράγματι in the next clause is ingenious and tempting; but τῷ γράμματι will mean that in this instance they have the very letter of Scripture against them, — as he proceeds to shew. 4. λάβε] seems to be an ironical invitation to prove the point, not= δέξαι i.e. ‘listen to my proofs.’ 5. εὐόδως πορεύεται] Pro v. xxx 29. 8. δύο Χερουβὶμ] Ex. xxv 18, 19. If τῷ M. = ‘ by Moses,’ perh. the ref. is rather to Ex. xxxvii 7 ; but it may be the strict dat., ‘reckoned up singly to Moses.’ 10. ἀπερρηγμένα] ’so completely severed.’ 14. καἰ μᾶλλον γελ.] The same irony continued ; ‘I should be still more laughed at for my mode of numbering things together. ’ Matt. vi 24. Gr. does not observe that God and Mammon are not actually described as two masters, and that if they were, it would be ἃς masters that they would be numbered together, in which respect they are alike. 19. If you tell me that numbers denote things of one nature and those only, then I will deny that you can say ‘three men,’ unless each three is an exact repetition of the others. St John was certainly not bound by your rule when he spoke of the three witnesses nor will it when you come to speak of things of different natures but bearing the same name. 16. οἷς συνεκφ. καταλλ. κ. τ. ὀ.] The opponent explains that things ranged under a number, because they are of the same nature. he means cases where the noun is expressed and the numeral agrees with it (oἷς i.e. συναριθμουμένοις practically = ‘ the numeral’), like ‘three men,’ ‘three God.’ He does not mean that you can never lump together under a neuter numeral heterogeneous objects as so many ‘things.’ This, he says, is not a connumeration. τὰ ὀνόματα· οἷον, ἄνθρωποι τρεῖς, καὶ θεοὶ τρεῖς, οὐχὶ τρία τάδε καὶ τάδε. τίς γὰρ ἢ ἀντίδοσις ; τοῦτο νομοθετοῦντός ἐστι τοῖς ὀνόμασιν, οὐκ ἀληθεύοντος. ἐπεὶ κἀμοὶ Πέτρος, καὶ Παῦλος, καὶ Ἰωάννης, οὐ τρεῖς, οὐδὲ ὁμοούσιοι, ἕως ἂν μὴ τρεῖς Παῦλοι, καὶ τρεῖς Πέτροι, καὶ Ἰωάνναι τοσοῦτοι λέγωνται. ὃ γὰρ σὺ τετήρηκας ἐπὶ τῶν γενικωτέρων ὀνομάτων, τοῦτο καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀπαιτήσομεν ἐπὶ τῶν εἰδικωτέρων κατὰ τὴν σὴν ἀνάπλασιν. ἢ ἀδικήσεις, μὴ διδοὺς ὅπερ εἴληφας ; τί δὲ ὁ Ἰωάννης, τρεῖς εἶναι τοὺς μαρτυροῦντας λέγων ἐν ταῖς καθολικαῖς, τὸ πνεῦμα, τὸ ὕδωρ, τὸ αἷμα ; ἆρά σοι ληρεῖν φαίνεται, πρῶτον μὲν ὅτι τὰ μὴ ὁμοούσια συναριθμῆσαι τετόλμηκεν, ὃ τοῖς ὁμοουσίοις σὺ δίδως, — τίς γὰρ ἂν εἴποι ταῦτα μιᾶς οὐσίασ ; — δεύτερον δὲ ὅτι μὴ καταλλήλως ἔχων ἀπήντησεν, ἀλλὰ τὸ τρεῖς ἀρρενικῶς προθείς, τὰ τρία οὐδετέρως ἐπήνεγκε, παρὰ τοὺς σοὺς καὶ τῆς σῆς γραμματικῆς ὅρους καὶ νόμους ; καίτοι τί διαφέρει, ἢ τρεῖς προθέντα ἓν καὶ ἓν καὶ ἓν ἐπενεγκεῖν, ἢ ἕνα καὶ 19. 1 καὶ θεοι] om καὶ b || 5 παυλοι... πέτροι transp. def || 6 λέγονται ace || 7 ἀπαιτήσωμεν a || 10 ἐν] ἔπι f || πνεῦμα] + καὶ b || ὕδωρ] + καὶ b || 15 προθεις] προσθεὶς e || 16 om σὴς aeg 2. τίς γὰρ ἢ ἀντίδοσις;] This is explained by the words below, ἀδικήσεις, μὴ διδοὺς ὅπερ εἴληφας; It is Gr.’s reply to the objector. ‘What,’ he asks, ‘shall I make you give me in return?’ The γὰρ implies a suppressed ‘Take care!’ ib. τοῦτο νομοθ. ἐστι] ‘This,’ Gr. retorts, ‘is to legislate for Ian- guage, not to state the facts with regard to it.’ At that rate, he can refuse to admit that Peter and Paul and John are three beings of the same nature ; he may say that unless all the peculiarities of are exactly reproduced, so that there are three Peters, there is not sufficient correspondence between Peter and the others to warrant their being brought under a single number as three men. 6. γενικωτέρων] ‘generic’ as opexplanied posed to εἰδικός ‘specific.’ Gr. puts both words in the comp., because he does not use them in a strict sense. 9. τρεῖς εἶναι τοὺς μ.] I John v 8. 13. μὴ καταλλ. ἔχων ἀπ’. ] he coines forward without putting his words in grammatical agreement.’ ᾿Αρρενικῶς, ‘in the ’; οὐδετέρως, ‘in the meut.’ ἕνα καὶ ἕνα λέγοντα μὴ τρεῖς ἀλλὰ τρία προσαγορεύειν ; ὅπερ αὐτὸς ἀπαξιοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς θεότητος. τί δέ σοι ὁ καρκίνος τό τε ζῶον, τό τε ὄργανον, ὅ τε ἀστήρ ; τί δὲ ὁ κύων, ὅ τε χερσαῖος, καὶ ὁ ἔνυδρος, καὶ ὁ οὐράνιος ; οὐ τρεῖς λέγεσθαί σοι δοκοῦσι καρκίνοι καὶ κύνες ; πάντως γε. ἆρα οὖν παρὰ τοῦτο καὶ ὁμοούσιοι ; τίς φήσει τῶν νοῦν ἐχόντων ; ὁρᾷς ὅπως σοι διαπέπτωκεν ὁ περὶ τῆς συναριθμήσεως λόγος, τοσούτοις ἐληλεγμένος ; εἰ γὰρ μήτε τὰ ὁμοούσια πάντως συναριθμεῖται, καὶ συναριθμεῖται τὰ μὴ ὁμοούσια, ἥ τε τῶν ὀνομάτων συνεκφώνησις ἐπ’ ἀμφοῖν, τί σοι πλέον ὧν ἐδογμάτισας ;

Σκοπῶ δὲ κἀκεῖνο, καὶ ἴσως οὐκ ἔξω λόγου. τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ ἓν οὐκ εἰς δύο συντίθεται ; τὰ δύο δὲ οὐκ εἰς ἓν καὶ ἓν ἀναλύεται ; δῆλον ὅτι. εἰ οὖν ὁμοούσια μὲν τὰ συντιθέμενα κατὰ τὸν σὸν λόγον, ἑτεροούσια δὲ τὰ τεμνόμενα, τί συμβαίνει ; τὰ αὐτὰ ὁμοούσιά τε εἶναι καὶ ἑτεροούσια. γελῶ σου καὶ τὰς προαριθμήσεις, καὶ τὰς ὑπαριθμήσεις, 20. 16 om τε f 3. τό τε ὄργανον] a pair of tongs. 8. ἐληλεγμένος] from ἐλέγχω. 10. ἢ τε τῶν ὁ. συνεκφ.] ‘and the nouns are expressed in both cases, along with the numeral,’ i.e. not merely ‘understood.’ Or. means both in the case of ὁμοούσια which are not numbered together, and in that of οὐχ ὁμοούσια which are. 20. It will not bear the simplest test of addition or division. Your rules about the order of enumeration, and about the use of prepositions, are just as ridiculous. We will now proceed to give you the coup de grace. 13. οὐκ εἰς δύο συντ.] ‘one and one make two,’ although ace. to the heretic’s logic ‘one and one’ would only be said of things of different nature, such as could never be united under a common numeral. Conversely ‘two is divided into one and οne,’ although ‘two’ can only be said of things of the same nature, which it would be unnatural to describe in that single fashion. The upshot is that the same things proved to be of the same nature and of different natures. Of course the argument is more or less of a piece of banter. 17. προαριθμ. κ. ὑπαριθμ.] Elias says, probably without historical grounds, that this system of numbering (δεύτερος θεός, τρίτος θεός) was derived from the way in which the Neoplatonic writers arranged existences according to a scale, from the First Cause to the lowest. The phraseology is fully discussed by Basil l. c. (de Sp. S. 17.)῾Υπαριθμεῖν’, as distinguished from συναριθμ., is to reckon in a secondary position. αἷς σὺ μέγα φρονεῖς, ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ τάξει τῶν ὀνομάτων κειμένων τῶν πραγμάτων. εἰ γὰρ τοῦτο, τί κωλύει κατὰ τὸν αὐτὸν λόγον, ἐπειδὴ τὰ αὐτὰ καὶ προαριθμεῖται καὶ ὑπαριθμεῖται παρὰ τῇ γραφῇ διὰ τὴν ἰσοτιμίαν τῆς φύσεως, αὐτὰ ἑαυτῶν εἶναι τιμιώτερά τε καὶ ἀτιμότερα ; ὁ δὲ αὐτός μοι καὶ περὶ τῆς Θεὸς φωνῆς καὶ Κύριος λόγος· ἔτι δὲ τῶν προθέσεων, τῆς ἐξ οὗ, καὶ δι’ οὗ, καὶ ἐν ᾧ, αἷς σὺ κατατεχνολογεῖς ἡμῖν τὸ θεῖον, τὴν μὲν τῷ πατρὶ διδούς, τὴν δὲ τῷ υἱῷ, τὴν δὲ τῷ ἁγίῳ πνεύματι. τί γὰρ ἂν ἐποίησας, παγίως ἑκάστου τούτων ἑκάστῳ νενεμημένου· ὁπότε πάντων πᾶσι συντεταγμένων, ὡς δῆλον τοῖς φιλοπόνοις, τοσαύτην σὺ διὰ τούτων εἰσάγεις καὶ τῆς ἀξίας καὶ τῆς φύσεως ἀνισότητα; ἀπόχρη καὶ ταῦτα τοῖς μὴ λίαν ἀγνώμοσιν. ἐπεὶ δέ σε τῶν χαλεπῶν ἐστίν, ἅπαξ ἐπιπηδήσαντα τῷ πνεύματι, τῆς φορᾶς σχεθῆναι, ἁλλὰ μή, καθάπερ τῶν συῶν τοὺς θρασυτέρους, εἰς τέλος φιλονεικεῖν, καὶ πρὸς τὸ ξίφος ὠθίζεσθαι, μέχρις ἂν πᾶσαν εἴσω τὴν πληγὴν ὑπολάβῃς , φέρε, σκεψώμεθα τίς ἔτι σοι λείπεται λόγος.

4 τῆ] + θεια bdf || 14 ἔπει] ἐπειδὴ dt || 18 ὑπολάβοις c1. ὥσπερ...πραγμάτων] ‘as as if the realities themselves (i.e. the Persons of the Trinity) depended upon the order in which they are named.’3. καὶ προαριθμ. καὶ ὑπαριθμ.] ‘are sometimes enumerated in one order and sometimes in another’; e.g. 2 Cor. xiii 14.6. π. τῆς θεὸς φ. καὶ κύριος] ‘The same observation holds good’ of these, not in regard to the order in which they are placed, but to the way in which they are applied to the Divine Persons as it were indiscriminately.7. τῶν προθέσεων] ‘the prepositions.’8. κατατεχνολογεῖς ἤμ’. τὸ θ.] ‘tie down the Godhead with your canons.’ Basil de Sp. S. 2 ascribes the canon to Aetius.9. τί γὰρ ἂγ ἐποίησας] Α very ironical argument. If, when these prepositions are used interchangeably, you contrive to get such inequality out of them, what would you not have done if the use of them had been constant and able? Ὁπότε is used here like ὅστις with an inferential shade of meaning.13. καὶ ταῦτα] ‘even even these things,’ i.e. without going further.14. τῶν χαλεπῶν ἐστίν] ‘is a difficulty.’15. τῆς φορᾶς σχεθῆναι] ‘to stop short in your impetus.’21. You speak of the silence of Scripture on the Godhead of the Ghost. Scholars have often shown hoto false this is; but I too will do my best to help you out of your difficulty.

Πάλιν καὶ πολλάκις ἀνακυκλεῖς ἡμῖν τὸ ἄγραφον. ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐ ξένον τοῦτο, οὐδὲ παρείσακτον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς πάλαι καὶ τοῖς νῦν γνωριζόμενον καὶ παραγυμνούμενον, δέδεικται μὲν ἤδη πολλοῖς τῶν περὶ τούτου διειληφότων, ὅσοι μὴ ῥᾳθύμως μηδὲ παρέργως ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς ἐντυχόντες, ἀλλὰ διασχόντες τὸ γράμμα καὶ εἴσω παρακύψαντες, τὸ ἀπόθετον κάλλος ἰδεῖν ἠξιώθησαν, καὶ τῷ φωτισμῷ τῆς γνώσεως κατηυγάσθησαν. δηλώσομεν δὲ καἰ ἡμεῖς ἐξ ἐπιδρομῆς, ὅσον ἐνδέχεται, τοῦ μὴ δοκεῖν εἶναι περιττοί τινες, μηδὲ φιλοτιμότεροι τοῦ δέοντος, ἐποικοδομοῦντες ἐπὶ θεμέλιον ἀλλότριον. εἰ δὲ τὸ μὴ λίαν σαφῶς γεγράφθαι θεὸν μηδὲ πολλάκις ὀνομαστί, ὥσπερ τὸν πατέρα πρότερον καὶ τὸν υἱὸν ὕστερον, αἴτιόν σοι γίνεται βλασφημίας, καὶ τῆς περιττῆς ταύτης γλωσσαλγίας καὶ ἀσεβείας, ἡμεῖς σοι λύσομεν ταύτην τὴν βλάβην, μικρὰ περὶ πραγμάτων καὶ ὀνομάτων καὶ μάλιστα παρὰ τῆ τῆς γραφῆς συνηθείᾳ φιλοσοφήσαντες.

21. 1 ανακυκλοις b ‘Reg. b’ || 5 εντυχοντες] ἐντυγχάνοντες b ‘Colb. 3’ || 8 δηλώσωμεν aef || 10 εποικοδομουντες] οἰκοδομοῦντες acg1. τὸ ἄγραφον] Cp. § 1.2. οὐ ξένον τοῦτο] τοῦτο seems by comparison with § 1 to mean the Holy Spirit Himself, not the doctrine of His Godhead. So also περὶ τού. του below.3. τοῖς πάλαι] the O.T. writers; τοῖς νῦν, the Christian Church.ib. παραγυμνούμενον] ‘revealed,’ ‘disclosed.’4. διειληφότων] ‘have discussed.’ Cp. iv 16, v 5.5. ἐντυχόντες] to ‘meet with,’ ‘come across’; so to ‘read.’ The word does not necessarily imply a casual, hasty perusal; cp. § 26.6. διασχόντες] Cp. ii 3, 31, ‘have penetrated beyond the letter.’7. ἀπόθετον] ‘put away,’ so ‘hidden’ like a treasure, = ἀπόκρυφον. See Thompson’s note on Plat. Phaedr. 252 B.9. ἐξ ἐπιδρομῆς] lit. ‘at a rush,’ i.e. ‘hastily.’ib. τοῦ μὴ δοκεῖν] explains why Gr. will not attempt to go into the question at greater length.11. ἐπὶ θέμ’. ἀλλ’] Rom. xv 20. Because Basil and others had gone over the ground before.12. ὀνομαστί] The word appears to belong to both σαφῶς and πολλά. κὶς, and to qualify the word not τὸ ἄγ. πνεῦμα understood; ‘the fact that He is not very clearly, often, described in Scripture by title of “God”.’ But the expression is somewhat redundant.13. πρότερρον] under the earlier dispensation; ὕστ., under the later.15. λύσομεν…βλάβην] ‘will remove this disadvantage’; said a kind of irony, as if the opponent would recognise that it was a βλάβη.

τῶν πραγμάτων τὰ μὲν οὐκ ἔστι, λέγεται δέ· τὰ δὲ ὄντα οὐ λέγεται· τὰ δὲ οὔτε ἔστιν, οὔτε λέγεται· τὰ δὲ ἄμφω, καὶ ἔστι, καὶ λέγεται. τούτων ἀπαιτεῖς με τὰς ἀποδείξεις ; παρασχεῖν ἕτοιμος. ὑπνοῖ τῆ γραφῇ θεός, καὶ γρηγορεῖ, καὶ ὀργίζεται, καὶ βαδίζει, καὶ θρόνον ἔχει τὰ χερουβίμ· καίτοι πότε γέγονεν ἐμπαθής ; πότε δὲ σῶμα θεὸν ἀκήκοας ; τοῦτο οὐκ ὂν ἀνεπλάσθη. ὠνομάσαμεν γάρ, ὡς ἡμῖν ἐφικτόν, ἐκ τῶν ἡμετέρων τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ. τὸ μὲν ἠρεμεῖν αὐτὸν ἀφ’ ἡμῶν, καὶ οἷον ἀμελεῖν, δι’ ἃς αὐτὸς οἶδεν αἰτίας, ὑπνοῦν. τὸ γὰρ ἡμέτερον ὑπνοῦν τοιοῦτον, ἀνενέργητόν τε καὶ ἄπρακτον. τὸ δὲ ἀθρόως εὖ ποιεῖν ἐκ μεταβολῆς, γρηγορεῖν. ὕπνου γὰρ λύσις ἐγρήγορσις, ὥσπερ ἀποστροφῆς ἐπίσκεψις. τὸ δὲ κολάζειν ὀργίζεσθαι πεποιήκαμεν· οὕτω γὰρ ἡμῖν ἐξ ὀργῆς ἡ κόλασις. τὸ δὲ νῦν μὲν τῇδε, νῦν δὲ τῇδε ἐνεργεῖν, βαδίζειν. ἡ γὰρ ἀπ’ ἄλλου πρὸς ἄλλο μετάβασις, βαδισμός. τὸ δὲ ἐναναπαύεσθαι ταῖς ἁγίαις δυνάμεσι, καὶ οἷον ἐμφιλοχωρεῖν, καθέζεσθαι καὶ θρονίζεσθαι. καὶ τοῦτο ἡμέτερον. οὐδενὶ γὰρ οὕτως ὡς τοῖς ἁγίοις τὸ θεῖον ἐναναπαύεται. τὸ δὲ 22. 9 αὐτὸς αἰτίας οἶδεν c: οἶδεν αὐτὸς αἰτίας e ΙΙ 10 om ὕπνουν secundo loco b || 16 εναναπαυεσθαι] εναπαυεσθαι (sic) c: ἀναπαύεσθαι df ΙΙ 19 εναναπαυεται] ἐπαναπαύεται be2 ‘Or. 1’ 22. There are four heads under which we may arrange the phenomena of Scripture language, (I) There are things said which are not literally true. Of this kind are all the anthropomorphic expressions concerning God. 1. λέγεται δέ] sc. in Scripture. 4. ὑπνοῖ] Ps. xliii 24 (xliv 23). 5. γρηγορεῖ] Jer. xxxi 28. id. ὀργίζεται] e.g. Ps. lxxviii (lxxix) 5. ib. βαδίζει] The word does not seem to be used of God in LXX. The ref. is doubtless to passages like Gen. iii 8. ib. θρόνον ἔχει] Ps. lxxix 2 (lxxx 1); Ezek. i 26. 6. ἐμπαθής] in ref. to ὑπνοῖ, γρηγορεῖ, ὀργίζεται; σῶμα, to βαδίζει, θρόνον. 9. ἠρεμεῖν … ἀφ’ ἠμ’.] ‘letting alone’ (lit. ‘keeping quiet from us’). 11. ἀθρόως] ‘suddenly; cp. ii 2. 15. τῇδε. … τῇδε] ‘in this direction and in that.’ 17. ταῖς ἃγ. δυνάμεσι] sc. τοῖς χερουβίμ. ‘Resting in those holy Powers and, as it were, being fond of the place, is “sitting” and “being enthroned”.’ 18. οὐδενὶ γάρ] The γάρ explains, not the καὶ τοῦτο ἠμ’., but the choice of the expression ‘resting’ etc. God is in everything; but there is nothing in which He ‘rests’ as He does in the saints (and angelic beings). 19. τὸ δέ ὀξυκ.] more instances of metaphorical language. God ‘flies,’ Ps. xvii li (xviii 10); we speak of His ‘face,’ e.g. Ps. iv 7 (6); His ‘hand,’ e.g. Ps. cxliv (cxlv) 16. ὀξυκίνητον, πτῆσιν· τὴν δὲ ἐπισκοπήν, πρόσωπον· τὸ διδόναι δὲ καὶ προσίεσθαι, χεῖρα· καὶ ἄλλη τις ὅλως τῶν τοῦ θεοῦ δυνάμεων ἢ ἐνεργειῶν ἄλλο τι τῶν σωματικῶν ἡμῖν ἀνεζωγράφησεν.

Πάλιν σὺ πόθεν τὸ ἀγέννητον λαβὼν ἔχεις, ἢ τὸ ἄναρχον, τὰς σὰς ἀκροπόλεις, ἢ καὶ ἡμεῖς τὸ ἀθάνατον ; δεῖξον ταῦτα ὀνομαστί, ἢ διαγράψομεν, καὶ τέθνηκας ἐκ τῶν σῶν ὑποθέσεων, καθαιρεθέντων σοι τῶν ὀνομάτων, καὶ τοῦ τείχους τῆς καταφυγῆς ἐφ’ ᾧ ἐπεποίθεις. 23. 6 om η e2 || 7 ὀνομαστὶ] + καὶ η ἀθετήσομεν ἐπειδὴ οὐ γέγραπται bed, nisi quod om καὶ cd || 9 ἐφ’ ω] ἐφ’ ο ac2 2. προσίεσθαι] ‘to welcome’; ii 119. ib. ὅλως] ‘in short.’ 4. ἀνεζωγράφησεν] ‘has depicted,’ i.e. ‘has suggested the form of.’ should almost have expected the inversion of the sentence, — that bodily things depict the powers and operations of God; but either way is intelligible. 23. (2) There are th ings not said which are nevertheless true, — among them facts of which you make a deal. (3) Things neither said nor true. (4) Things both true and said. 5. πάλιν] Instances of true things not found in Scripture. 6. τὰς σὰς ἀκροπ.] ‘those fortresses of yours’; cp. below τοῦ τῆς καταφυγῆς. 7. ἢ διαγράψομεν] Cp. iii 8. The words ἢ ἀθετήσομεν, ἐπειδὴ οὐ γέγραπται seem to be an ancient gloss to explain ἢ διαγράψομεν. They offer no real alternative to it ; and the variation of the mss. which contain them between ἢ and καὶ ἢ indicates the uncertainty of their footing. If they are to be retained, the only sense that can be got out of them would be this: — Shew us the words ἀγέννητον, ἄναρχον in the Bible, and we will either reject the Holy Ghost’s Divinity for not being found there, or (if we can prove that it is there) we will erase both it and your two words together. But this would be very cumbrous. Omitting the words, the sense is plain. Gr. retaliates ; — Shew us ἀγένν., ἄναρχ. in the Bible, or we will discard them, and you will die by your own rules. The perf. τέθνηκας gives vividness to the argument. Probably the gloss was introduced because Gr. ’s word διαγράψομεν seemed itself to imply that the words ἀγέννητον etc. were to be found written in Scripture. How can that be erased which was never written? The scribe wished to substitute for διαγρ. the more general word ἀθετήσομεν, ‘because the expressions in question are not written.’ It may be that the correction might be due to Gr. himself; but (1) its place in the MSS. is against it; it ought to have followed διαγρ.; (2) by διαγρ. Gr. intended no reference to being found in Scripture ; he meant, if conscious of the metaphor at all, an erasure from the theological writings in which the expressions occurred. 8. τῶν ὀνομάτων] sc. ἀγέννητον, ἄναρχον. ἢ δῆλον ὅτι ἐκ τῶν ταῦτα συναγόντων, κἂν μὴ ταῦτα λέγηται ; τίνων τούτων ; Ἐγώ εἰ μί’ πρῶτος, καὶ ἐγὼ μετὰ ταῦτα. καί, Πρὸ ἐμοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος θεός, καὶ μετ’ ἐμὲ οὐκ ἔσται. ὅλον γὰρ τὸ ἔστιν ἐμόν· οὔτε ἠργμένον, οὔτε παυσόμενον. ταῦτα λαβών, τὸ μὲν μὴ εἶναί τι πρὸ αὐτοῦ, μηδὲ πρεσβυτέραν αἰτίαν ἔχειν, ἄναρχον προσηγόρευσας, καὶ ἀγέννητον· τὸ δὲ μὴ στήσεσθαι τοῦ εἶναι, ἀθάνατον καὶ ἀνώλεθρον. αἱ μὲν δὴ πρῶται συζυγίαι τοιαῦται, καὶ οὕτως ἔχουσαι. τίνα δὲ οὔτε ἔστιν, οὔτε λέγεται; πονηρὸν τὸ θεῖον, ἡ σφαῖρα τετράγωνος, τὸ παρελθὸν ἐνέστηκεν, οὐ σύνθετον ὁ ἄνθρωπος. τίνα γὰρ εἰς τοσοῦτόν ποτε ἐμπληξίας ἀφικόμενον ἔγνως, ὥστε τι τοιοῦτον ἢ ἐννοῆσαι τολμῆσαι, ἢ ἀποφήνασθαι ; λείπεται δεῖξαι τίνα καὶ ἔστι καὶ λέγεται· θεός, ἄνθρωπος, ἄγγελος, κρίσις· ματαιότης οἱ τοιοῦτοι συλλογισμοί, καὶ τῆς πίστεως ἀνατροπή, καὶ τοῦ μυστηρίου κένωσις.

3 μετ’ ἐμὲ] μετ’ ἐμοῦ a || ΙΙ σύνθετον] σύνθετος b || 12 ἐμπληξίας ποτε df || 15 ματαιότης] ἀνταπόδοσις ‘Reg. Cypr.’1. ἢ δῆλον] The ellipsis is, (Have you any other interpretation) or is it evident?ib. ἐκ τῶν τ. σύναγ’.] Supply ἐστίν, or λαμβάνεται : ‘that they are deduced from passages which imply them.’2. ἐγώ εἰμι πρῶτος] Is. xliv 6.3. πρὸ ἐμοῦ] Is. xliii 10.4. ὅλον γὰρ τὸ ἐστιν ἐμόν] God is represented as still speaking ; ‘all that is included in the word Is is Mine, without beginning and without end.’5. ταῦτα λαβών] You have taken these facts, and have (rightly) deduced from them the appellations which you give to God, of ἀγέννητον, ἀθάνατον, and the rest.8. αἱ…πρῶται σῦς.] viz. things that are said and are not, and things that are and are not said.10. τὸ παρελθὸν ἔνεστ’.] ‘past is present.’12 ἐμπληξίας] ‘so daft.’13. ἀποφήνασθαι] ‘to declare his opinion that it is so.’ The ἢ mean ‘or at any rate.’14. θεός, ἄνθρ., κτλ.] Gr. first names four substantives, and then certain propositions ; ‘such syllo- gisms are vanity, and a of faith, and an emptying of the mystery? See 1 Cor. i 17 foll.24. This being so, we must not make too much of the reticence Scripture. When you hear of twice five, you are justified in saying ten ; so whatever is clearly implied in Scripture may rightly be affirmed, even if it is not explicitly stated there. I will give you the reason for the reticence of Scripture.