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;