Ὁ Ἀδὰμ τί ποτε ἦν ; πλάσμα θεοῦ. τί δὲ ἡ
Εὖα; τμῆμα τοῦ πλάσματος. τί δὲ ὁ Σήθ;
γέννημα. ἆρ’ οὖν ταὐτόν σοι φαίνεται πλάσμα, καὶ τμῆμα,
 καὶ γέννημα; πῶς οὔ; ὁμοούσια δὲ ταῦτα, ἢ τί; πῶς δ’ οὔ;
ὡμολόγηται οὖν καὶ τὰ διαφόρως ὑποστάντα τῆς αὐτῆς
εἶναι οὐσίας ἐνδέχεσθαι. λέγω δὲ ταῦτα, οὐκ ἐπὶ τὴν
θεότητα φέρων τὴν πλάσιν, ἢ τὴν τομήν, ἤ τι τῶν ὅσα
σώματος, μή μοί τις ἐπιφυέσθω πάλιν τῶν λογομάχων,
 ἐπὶ δὲ τούτων θεωρῶν, ὡς ἐπὶ σκηνῆς, τὰ νοούμενα. οὐδὲ
γὰρ οἷόν τε τῶν εἰκαζομένων οὐδὲν πρὸς πᾶσαν ἐξικνεῖσθαι
καθαρῶς τὴν ἀλήθειαν. καὶ τί ταῦτά, φασιν; οὐ γὰρ τοῦ
ἑνὸς τὸ μὲν γέννημα, τὸ δὲ ἄλλο τι. τί οὖν; ἡ Eὖα καὶ
Σήθ, οὐχὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ τοῦ Ἀδάμ; τίνος γὰρ ἄλλου; ἢ καὶ
 11. 9 ταὐτὸν] ταύτα acg || ΙΙ τὰ] τὸ e || 1 7 φασιν] φησιν c 
 1. εἰς ἄλλα μεθιστάμενα] Elias
very properly instances gnats, as
out of larvae. It was
prob. not known that such larvae
invariably developed into gnats, or
that all gnats had been such larvae. 
 2. φιλοτιμίᾳ φ] ‘in nature's
eagerness to excel’; cp. ἢ φ. ἐφιλοτεχνήσατο
above. 
 ib. ἤδη δὲ καὶ τοῦ αὖ] The same
creature produces offspring in more
than one way, by generation and
otherwise; and both kinds of off-
spring have the same nature as the
parent. Gr. is prob. thinking of
the way in which some low forms of
animal life appear (like plants) to
be propagated by ‘cuttings’ as well
as by ‘seed.’ 
 4. τῷ παρόντι] ‘the case in point,’
i.e. of the Holy Spirit. 
 11. Human history, however,
presents a better, if still an incomplete,
illustration. Adam, Eve, and
Seth came into being in very different
ways; yet they are consubstantial. 
 9. ταὐτόν σοι φ.] ‘to have the
same nature.’ 
 14. ἐπιφυέσθω] Cp. i 4. 
 15. θεωρῶν ὡς ἐπὶ σκ] These
earthly illustrations form a kind of
stage upon which the higher things
are represented for our study. 
 17. οὐ γὰρ τοῦ ἑνός] This is part
of the objection, not of Gr.’s reply.
From the one person of the Father,
they say, there cannot issue two
others, one by generation, the other
in some other way. 

 
ἀμφότεροι γεννήματα ; οὐδαμῶς. ἀλλὰ τί; τὸ μὲν τμῆμα,
τὸ δὲ γέννημα. καἰ μὴν ἀμφότεροι ταὐτὸν ἀλλήλοις·
ἄνθρωποι γάρ· οὐδεὶς ἀντερεῖ. παύσῃ οὖν ἀπομαχόμενος
πρὸς τὸ πνεῦμα, ὡς ἢ γέννημα πάντως, ἢ μὴ ὁμοούσιον,
μηδὲ θεόν, καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων τὸ δυνατὸν λαβὼν τῆς 
ἡμετέρας ὑπολήψεως; ἐγὼ μὲν οἶ μαί σοι καλῶς ἔχειν, εἰ
μὴ λίαν ἔγνωκας φιλονεικεῖν, καὶ πρὸς τὰ δῆλα μάχεσθαι. Ἀλλὰ τίς προσεκύνησε τῷ πνεύματί, φησιν ; τίς
ἢ τῶν παλαιῶν, ἢ τῶν νέων ; τίς δὲ προσηύξατο ; ποῦ δὲ
τὸ χρῆναι προσκυνεῖν ἢ προσεύχεσθαι γέγραπται ; καὶ 
πόθεν τοῦτο ἔχεις λαβών ; τὴν μὲν τελεωτέραν αἰτίαν
ἀποδώσομεν ὕστερον, ἡνίκα ἂν περὶ τοῦ ἀγράφου διαλεγώμεθα.
νῦν δὲ τοσοῦτον εἰπεῖν ἐξαρκέσει· τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν,
ἐν ᾧ προσκυνοῦμεν, καὶ δι’ οὗ προσευχόμεθα. Πνεῦμα
γάρ, φησιν, ὁ θεός, καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας αὐτὸν ἐν 
πνεύματι καἰ ἀληθείᾳ προσκυνεῖν δεῖ. καὶ πάλιν· Τὸ γὰρ
τί προσευξώμεθα, καθ’ ὃ δεῖ, οὐκ οἴδαμεν, ἁλλ’ αὐτὸ τὸ
πνεῦμα ὑπερεντυγχάνει ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν στεναγμοῖς ἀλαλήτοις.
καί, Προσεύξομαι τῷ πνεύματι, προσεύξομαι δὲ καὶ τῷ νοί,
 3 παύση] παύσαι b ‘Or. I’ || 6 σοι] σε ace ‘quinque Reg.’ || 7 τὰ δηλα]
ἄδηλα e1. 12. II λαβὼν ἔχεις df || 16 ’δει προσκυνεῖν bdf || 17 προσευξόμεθα
acdefg || 18 υπερεντυγχανει] εντυγχ. c || 19 προσεύξομαι primo loco] + δε b:
-ξωμαι (et in secundo) a 
 5. καἰ ἐκ τῶν ἄνθρωπ’] ‘even
human experience has shewn you the
possibility of what we hold.’ 
 6. καλώς ἔχειν] ‘that that you had
better,’ i.e. leave off contending. 
 7. ἔγνωκας] ‘have made up your
mind.’ 
 12. You say that the Spirit is
not, in Scripture, an object of
worship. It is at least ‘in in the
spirit’ that we worship, and that
which we worship ‘is Spirit.’ He
is so entirely one with the object of
worship, that worship addressed to
the Father is equally addressed to the
Holy Ghost. Again, you object that
‘all things were made through the
Son,’ and therefore the Holy Ghost
among them. No more, I answer,
than the Father was. He was
made at all. Accept humbly the docmind.’
trine of the unity of the Divine persons. 
 12. ἀποδώσομεν ὕστερον] in the
whole argument, beginning with
§ 21 and culminating in § 28. 
 14. πνεῦμα γάρ, φησιν] John iv 24. 
 16. τὸ γὰρ τί προσευξ.] Kom. viii
26. 
 19. προσεύξ. τῷ πν.] I Cor. xiv 15. 

 
τοῦτ’ ἐστίν, ἐν νοὶ καὶ πνεύματι. τὸ οὖν προσκυνεῖν τῷ
πνεύματι, ἢ προσεύχεσθαι, οὐδὲν ἄλλο εἶναί μοι φαίνεται,
ἢ αὐτὸ ἑαυτῷ τὴν εὐχὴν προσάγειν καὶ τὴν προσκύνησιν.
ὃ τίς οὐκ ἂν ἐπαινέσειε τῶν ἐνθέων, καὶ τῶν εὖ εἰδότων
 ὅτι καὶ ἡ τοῦ ἑνὸς προσκύνησις τῶν τριῶν ἐστὶ προσκύνησις,
διὰ τὸ ἐν τοῖς τρισὶν ὁμότιμον τῆς ἀξίας καὶ τῆς θεότητος ;
καὶ μὴν οὐδὲ ἐκεῖνο φοβηθήσομαι τὸ πάντα διὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ
γεγονέναι λέγεσθαι, ὡς ἑνὸς τῶν πάντων ὄντος καὶ τοῦ
ἁγίου πνεύματος. πάντα γὰρ ὅσα γέγονεν, εἴρηται, οὐχ
 ἁπλῶς ἅπαντα· οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ πατήρ, οὐδ’ ὅσα μὴ γέγονεν.
δείξας οὖν ὅτι γέγονε, τότε τῷ υἱῷ δός, καὶ τοῖς κτίσμασι
συναρίθμησον. ἕως δ’ ἂν μὴ τοῦτο δεικνύῃς, οὐδὲν τῷ
περιληπτικῷ βοηθῇ πρὸς ἀσέβειαν. εἰ μὲν γὰρ γέγονε,
διὰ χριστοῦ πάντως· οὐδὲ αὐτὸς ἀρνήσομαι. εἰ δὲ οὐ
 γέγονε, πῶς ἢ τῶν πάντων ἕν, ἢ διὰ χριστοῦ ; παῦσαι οὖν
καὶ τὸν πατέρα κακῶς τιμῶν κατὰ τοῦ μονογενοῦς, — κακὴ δὲ
τιμὴ κτίσμα διδόντα τὸ τιμιώτερον υἱὸν ἀποστερεῖν, — καὶ
τὸν υἱὸν κατὰ τοῦ πνεύματος. οὐ γὰρ ὁμοδούλου δημιουργός,
ἀλλ’ ὁμοτίμῳ συνδοξαζόμενος. μηδὲν μετὰ σεαυτοῦ
 θῇς τῆς τριάδος, μὴ τῆς τριάδος ἐκπέσῃς. μηδενὶ περικόψῃς
τὴν μίαν φύσιν καὶ ὁμοίως σεβάσμιον, ὡς ὅ τι ἂν
 6 om τοῖς c || 7 φοβήσομαι a || II δείξας] δεῖξον df || τότε] καὶ τότε
cdf || 14 ἀρνήσωμαι d || 17 ἀποστερεῖν υἱὸν de2f 
 1. τὸ προσκ. τῷ πν] Gr. thinks
that ‘worshipping or praying in or
by the Spirit,’ which are clearly
commanded, are in fact the bringing
of prayer and worship by the Spirit
to Himself. This is based upon the
text first quoted, in which the object
of the worship πνεῦμά ἐστιν. Not
that Gr. definitely takes the first
πνεῦμα in that text to be the Holy
Ghost ; but on the principle that
worship offered to one person of the
Trinity is offered to all, his reasoning
is correct, if his premisses are
accepted. It must be owned, however,
that he somewhat begs the
question. 
 7. πάντα διὰ τοῦ υἱ.] John i 3. 
 11. τῳ υἱῷ δός] ‘assign assign Him to the
Son’ as one of the things which were
made through Him. 
 12. τῷ περιληπτικῷ] ‘your comprehensive
phrase will not help you.’ 
 16. κακῶς τιμῶν κατὰ] ‘wrongly
honouring the Father at the expense
of the Only-begotten.’ 
 18. οὐ γὰρ ὁμ. δῆμ’.] sc. τοῦ
πνεύματος ὁ υἱός. 
 19. μετὰ σεαυτοῦ] Cp. § 4 μετ’
ἐμοῦ. 

 
τῶν τριῶν καθέλῃς, τὸ πᾶν ἔσῃ καθῃρηκώς, μᾶλλον δὲ τοῦ
παντὸς ἐκπεπτωκώς. βέλτιον μικρὰν τῆς ἑνώσεως φαντασίαν
λαβεῖν, ἢ παντελῆ τολμῆσαι δυσσέβειαν. Ἥκει δὲ ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος ἐπ’ αὐτὸ τὸ κεφάλαιον· καὶ
στένω μέν, ὅτι πάλαι τεθνηκὸς ζήτημα, καὶ τῆ πίστει 
παραχωρῆσαν, νῦν ἀνακαινίζεται· στῆναι δὲ ὅμως ἀναγκαῖον
πρὸς τοὺς λογολέσχας, καὶ μὴ ἐρήμην ἁλῶναι, λόγον
ἔχοντας, καὶ συνηγοροῦντας πνεύματι. εἰ θεός, φησι, καὶ
θεός, καὶ θεός, πῶς οὐχὶ τρεῖς θεοί; ἢ πῶς οὐ πολυαρχία
τὸ δοξαζόμενον ; ταῦτα τίνες; οἱ τελεώτεροι τὴν ἀσέβειαν, 
ἢ καὶ οἱ τῆς δευτέρας μερίδος, λέγω δὲ τοὺς περὶ τὸν υἱόν
πὼς εὐγνώμονας ; ὁ μὲν γὰρ κοινός μοι πρὸς ἀμφοτέρους
λόγος, ὁ δὲ πρὸς τούτους ἴδιος. ὁ μὲν οὖν πρὸς τούτους
τοιοῦτος. τί φατε τοῖς τριθείταις ἡμῖν οἱ τὸν υἱὸν σέβοντες,
 13, 8 φησι] φασι cdf 
 1. τὸ πᾶν ἔσῃ καθ’.] Cp. § 4. 
 2. βέλτιον μικράν] ‘Better to
have a notion of the union,
incomplete, than to venture upon
such thorough-going ungodliness.’ 
 13. It is painful to revive a
long-dead controversy; but I must
defend myself against the charge of
Tritheism. It is brought against us
both by those who go all lengths in
unbelief, and by some who are fairly
orthodox with regard to the Son. To
the latter I would say that they are
equally open to the charge of
Ditheism. 
 4. ἐπ’ αὐτὸ κεφ.] ‘to the fundamental
question itself,’ viz. how
reconcile the Godhead of the Three
Persons with the unity of God. 
 5. τῆ πίστει παραχ.] ‘that had
yielded to faith.’ 
 7. λογολέσχας] like ἀδολέσχας,
‘praters.’ 
 ib. μὴ ἐρ. ἁλῶναι] a law term,
freq. in Demosth., ‘to have judgment
given against us by default.’
agrees with δίκην understood, which
is a kind of cognate ace. alter
ἁλῶναι. 
 ib. λόγον ἔχ.] used m a kind of
double sense, which after all is but
one; ‘to have the Word,’ and
have reason.’ 
 9. πολυαρχία τὸ δ.] ‘how can the
object which you glorify not be polytheistic?’
Cp. iii 2. 
 10. ταῦτα τίνες·] ‘who is it that
says this? Is it those who go the
whole length of ungodliness?’ i.e.
Arians and the Eunomians? ‘or is
it, as may well be the case (καί),
who belong to the second division,
and are more or less right-minded
with regard to the Son?’ Cp. § 1
περὶ τὸν υἱὸν μετριάζοντες. Gr. asks,
because part of his argument will
apply to both sections, and part —
that which comes next — only to the
latter. 
 14. τί φατε] ‘What do you say
to us Tritheists?’ i.e. What argument
can you urge against us, whom
you call Tritheists, which will not
equally apply to yourselves, who
worship the Son, even if you have
departed from the Spirit? 

 
εἰ καὶ τοῦ πνεύματος ἀφεστήκατε ; ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐ διθεῖται ;
εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἀρνεῖσθε καὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς τὴν προσκύνησιν,
σαφῶς τέταχθε μετὰ τῶν ἐναντίων· καὶ τί φιλανθρωπευόμεθα
πρὸς ὑμᾶς ὡς οὐ πάντῃ νενεκρωμένους ; εἰ δὲ σέβεσθε,
 καὶ μέχρι τούτου διάκεισθε σωτηρίως, ὑμᾶς ἐρωτήσομεν·
τίς ὁ λόγος τῆς διθείασ ὑμῖν, ἂν τοῦτο ἐγκαλῆσθε ; εἰ ἔστι
λόγος συνέσεως, ἀποκρίθητε, δότε καὶ ἡμῖν ὁδὸν ἀποκρίσεως.
οἷς γὰρ ἂν ὑμεῖς τὴν διθείαν ἀποκρούσησθε λόγοις, οὗτοι
καὶ ἡμῖν κατὰ τῆς τριθείασ ἀρκέσουσι. καὶ οὕτω νικῶμεν,
 ὑμῖν τοῖς κατηγόροις συνηγόροις χρώμενοι· οὗ τί
γενναιοτερον ; Ὁ δὲ κοινὸς ἡμῖν πρὸς ἀμφοτέρους τίς ἀγών τε
καὶ λόγος; ἡμῖν εἷς θεός, ὅτι μία θεότης· καὶ πρὸς ἓν τὰ
ἐξ αὐτοῦ τὴν ἀναφορὰν ἔχει, κἂν τρία πιστεύηται. οὐ γὰρ
 τὸ μὲν μᾶλλον, τὸ δὲ ἦττον θεός· οὐδὲ τὸ μὲν πρότερον, τὸ
δὲ ὕστερον· οὐδὲ βουλήσει τέμνεται, οὐδὲ δυνάμει μερίζεται,,
 4 νενεκρωμένων b || 5 ἐρωτήσωμεν ab 14. 13 λόγος] + ἐστιν b ||
14 πιστεύητε a 
 3. φιλάνθρωπ’.] ‘deal tenderly
with you.’ 
 6. ὁ λόγος τῆς διθ. ὑμῖν] ‘what
defence do you offer for your ditheism,
if you are charged with it?’ 
 7. λόγος συνέσεως] an expression
formed on the model of λόγος σοφίας,
γνώσεως, 1 Cor. xii 8. 
 10. ὑμῖν τοῖς κ. σ. χρ.] ‘by the
of you our accusers.’ 
 14. To both parties I answer
thus. There is but one God, and
one Godhead; and though there are
three Persons, there is but one Source
from which all that belongs to the
Godhead issues. Between these three
Persons there is no kind οἱ division
or inequality, as there is between the
specimens of a limited class. 
 13. εἷς θεός, ὅτι μ. θ.] ‘There is
but one God, because there is only
one thing that can be called Godhead.’
If there could be different
kinds of Godhead, we might imagine
many Gods; but as the thing
is necessarily unique, we cannot
conceive of it as the possession of
several personages independent
each other. This argument, of
course, is based on philosophical
grounds, not on divine revelation ;
but it bears witness to the reasonadvocacy
ableness of that revelation. 
 ib. πρὸς ἐν τὰ ἐξ αὐτοῦ] Cp. iii
2 πρὸς τὸ ἐν τῶν ἐξ αὐτοῦ σύννευσις.
The personalities issuing from a
single source are referred back to
that source so as to be but one
with it, although we recognise that
they are three. The αὐτοῦ is neuter.
It refers to ἔν. 
 15. τὸ μὲν μᾶλλον] The Benedictine
editors compare Leo Serm. viii
in Nat. Chr. ‘gradus in uera diuinitate
esse non possunt. quidquid
deo minus est, deus non est. 

 
οὐδέ τι τῶν ὅσα τοῖς μεριστοῖς ὑπάρχει, κἀνταῦθα λαβεῖν
ἐστίν· ἀλλὰ ἀμέριστος ἐν μεμερισμένοις, εἰ δεῖ συντόμως
εἰπεῖν, ἡ θεότης· καὶ οἷον ἐν ἡλίοις τρισὶν ἐχομένοις
ἀλλήλων, μία τοῦ φωτὸς σύγκρασις. ὅταν μὲν οὖν πρὸς
τὴν θεότητα βλέψωμεν, καὶ τὴν πρώτην αἰτίαν, καὶ τὴν 
μοναρχίαν, ἓν ἡμῖν τὸ φανταζόμενον· ὅταν δὲ πρὸς τὰ ἐν
οἷς ἡ θεότης, καὶ τὰ ἐκ τῆς πρώτης αἰτίας ἀχρόνως ἐκεῖθεν
ὄντα καὶ ὁμοδόξως, τρία τὰ προσκυνούμενα. Τί δέ, οὐχὶ καὶ παρ’ Ἕλλησι, φαῖεν ἄν, μία
θεότης, ὡς οἱ τὰ τελεώτερα παρ’ ἐκείνοις φιλοσοφοῦντες, 
καὶ παρ’ ἡμῖν ἀνθρωπότης μία, τὸ γένος ἅπαν ; ἀλλ’ ὅμως
πολλοὶ θεοί, καὶ οὐχ εἷς, ὡς δὲ καὶ ἄνθρωποι; ἀλλ’ ἐκεῖ
μὲν ἡ κοινότης τὸ ἓν ἔχει μόνον ἐπινοίᾳ θεωρητόν· τὰ δὲ
 I μεριστοις] μερισταῖς b 15. 12 θέοι πολλοὶ df || δε] δὴ df 
 1. οὐδέ τι τῶν ὅσα] ‘nor are any of
the distinguishing marks of separate
individualities to be found there,’
in the Godhead. 
 2. ἀμέριστος ἐν μεμ.] ‘ but
as the Persons are, the entire and
undivided Godhead is in each. ’ The
passage is incorporated without comment
by Jo. Damasc. de Fide Orth.
viii. 
 3. ἐν ἡλίοις τρίσιν] The illustration
tration only shews the impossibility
of illustration. ‘There suns joined
to each other’ might appear to us
one, but their relation to each other
would be very different from that
of the Three Divine Persons. 
 6. τὸ φανταζόμενον] The word
does not imply that our observation
is untrue, but only that it is (necessarily)
inadequate. Cp. e.g. ii 6
18, 19. 
 ib. πρὸς τὰ ἐν οἷς ἢ θ.] ‘ at the
Persons in which the Divine nature
resides, and which issue from the
First Cause, deriving from it Their
existence above all time and with
an equality of glory, there are
Three objects for our adoration.’
avoids saying τρεῖς οἱ προσκ., not
only, as so freq., for the sake of
reverence, but because it sounds at
first as if the three were ‘separate
individualities’ like ourselves.
also has its dangers, as possibly suggesting
differences of nature ; but in
the context this danger is removed.
It is possible that Gr. here means
to speak of the Father Himself as ἐκ
τῆς πρώτης αἰτίας; but. if so, that
πρώτη αἰτία is within Himself. He
is the source of His own being. 
 15. The Greeks, it is true, spoke
of α single Divine nature, compatible
with plurality ; ἃς is the case
also with human nature. But in
these cases, each individual has but
a fragment of the whole nature,
varies, not only from all other partakers
of it, but from himself also, by
change. This holds true even of
angels. 
 13. μόνον ἐπινοίᾳ θ.] In the case
of the heathen polytheism, the common
Godhead exists only as a conception
or generalisation of the
philosopher; it has no existence in
fact. Each individual deity differs
greatly from the other in history,
and character, and capacities. The
same holds true of the specimen
man in relation to the human genus. 

 
καθ’ ἕκαστον πλεῖστον ἀλλήλων καὶ τῷ χρόνῳ καὶ τοῖς
πάθεσι καὶ τῇ δυνάμει μεμερισμένα. ἡμεῖς τε γὰρ οὐ
σύνθετοι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀντίθετοι καὶ ἀλλήλοις καὶ ἡμῖν
αὐτοῖς, οὐδὲ ἐπὶ μιᾶς ἡμέρας οἱ αὐτοὶ καθαρῶς μένοντες,
 μὴ ὅτι τὸν ἅπαντα βίον, ἀλλὰ καὶ σώμασι καὶ ψυχαῖς ἀεὶ
ῥέοντές τε καὶ μεταπίπτοντες. οὐκ οἶδα δέ, εἰ μὴ καὶ
ἄγγελοι καὶ πᾶσα φύσις ἡ ἄνω μετὰ τὴν τριάδα, κἂν
ἁπλοῖ τινὲς ὦσι, καὶ πρὸς τὸ καλὸν παγιώτεροι τῆ πρὸς
τὸ ἄκρον καλὸν ἐγγύτητι.