8. And this account of the meaning of such passages is satisfactory; for since those who are devoted to gods falsely so called, revolt from the True God, therefore God, being good and careful for mankind, recalling the wanderers, says, I am Only God,' and I Am,' and Besides Me there is no God,' and the like; that He may condemn things which are not, and may convert all men to Himself. And as, supposing in the daytime when the sun was shining, a man were rudely to paint a piece of wood, which had not even the appearance of light, and call that image the cause of light, and if the sun with regard to it were to say, I alone am the light of the day, and there is no other light of the day but I,' he would say this, with regard, not to his own radiance, but to the error arising from the wooden image and the dissimilitude of that vain representation; so it is with I am,' and I am Only God,' and There is none other besides Me,' viz. that He may make men renounce falsely called gods, and that they may recognise Him the true God instead. Indeed when God said this, He said it through His own Word, unless forsooth the modern [2853] Jews add this too, that He has not said this through His Word; but so hath He spoken, though they rave, these followers of the devil [2854] . For the Word of the Lord came to the Prophet, and this was what was heard; nor is there a thing which God says or does, but He says and does it in the Word. Not then with reference to Him is this said, O Christ's enemies, but to things foreign to Him and not from [2855] Him. For according to the aforesaid illustration, if the sun had spoken those words, he would have been setting right the error and have so spoken, not as having his radiance without him, but in the radiance shewing his own light. Therefore not for the denial of the Son, nor with reference to Him, are such passages, but to the overthrow of falsehood. Accordingly God spoke not such words to Adam at the beginning, though His Word was with Him, by whom all things came to be; for there was no need, before idols came in; but when men made insurrection against the truth and named for themselves gods such as they would [2856] , then it was that need arose of such words, for the denial of gods that were not. Nay I would add, that they were said even in anticipation of the folly of these Christ-opposers [2857] , that they might know, that whatsoever god they devise external to the Father's Essence, he is not True God, nor Image and Son of the Only and First.
9. If then the Father be called the only true God, this is said not to the denial of Him who said, I am the Truth [2858] ,' but of those on the other hand who by nature are not true, as the Father and His Word are. And hence the Lord Himself added at once, And Jesus Christ whom Thou didst send [2859] .' Now had He been a creature, He would not have added this, and ranked Himself with His Creator (for what fellowship is there between the True and the not true?); but as it is, by adding Himself to the Father, He has shewn that He is of the Father's nature; and He has given us to know that of the True Father He is True Offspring. And John too, as he had learned [2860] , so he teaches this, writing in his Epistle, And we are in the True, even in His Son Jesus Christ; This is the True God and eternal life [2861] .' And when the Prophet says concerning the creation, That stretcheth forth the heavens alone [2862] ,' and when God says, I only stretch out the heavens,' it is made plain to every one, that in the Only is signified also the Word of the Only, in whom all things were made,' and without whom was made not one thing.' Therefore, if they were made through the Word, and yet He says, I Only,' and together with that Only is understood the Son, through whom the heavens were made, so also then, if it be said, One God,' and I Only,' and I the First,' in that One and Only and First is understood the Word coexisting, as in the Light the Radiance. And this can be understood of no other than the Word alone. For all other things subsisted out of nothing through the Son, and are greatly different in nature; but the Son Himself is natural and true Offspring from the Father; and thus the very passage which these insensates have thought fit to adduce, I the First,' in defence of their heresy, doth rather expose their perverse spirit. For God says, I the First and I the Last;' if then, as though ranked with the things after Him, He is said to be first of them, so that they come next to Him, then certainly you will have shewn that He Himself precedes the works in time only [2863] ; which, to go no further, is extreme irreligion; but if it is in order to prove that He is not from any, nor any before Him, but that He is Origin and Cause of all things, and to destroy the Gentile fables, that He has said I the First,' it is plain also, that when the Son is called First-born, this is done not for the sake of ranking Him with the creation, but to prove the framing and adoption of all things [2864] through the Son. For as the Father is First, so also is He both First [2865] , as Image of the First, and because the First is in Him, and also Offspring from the Father, in whom the whole creation is created and adopted into sonship.
[2845] Deut. xxxii. 39; vi. 4, &c.
[2846] theomachoi. vid. Acts v. 39.
[2847] 2 Sam. xv. 13; 1 Kings i. 11.
[2848] Luke xviii. 19, and vid. Basil. Ep. 236, 1.
[2849] Mark xii. 29.
[2850] John vi. 38; xiv. 28.
[2851] John v. 23, cf. xiii. 20.
[2852] §58, note.
[2853] hoi nun, cf. Or. ii. 1, note 6, and Hist. Ar. 61, fin.
[2854] diabolikoi. vid. supr. p. 187, and de Decr. 5, note 2. vid. also Orat. ii. 38, a. 73, a. 74 init. Ep. Æg. 4 and 6. In the passage before us there seems an allusion to false accusation or lying, which is the proper meaning of the word; diaballon occurs shortly before. And so in Apol. ad Const. when he calls Magnentius diabolos, it is as being a traitor, 7. and soon after he says that his accuser was ton diabolou propon analabon, where the word has no article, and diabeblemai and dieblethen have preceded. vid. also Hist. Ar. 52 fin. And so in Sent. D. his speaking of the Arians' father the devil,' 3, c. is explained 4, b. by tous pateras diaballonton and tes eis ton episkopon diaboles.
[2855] para, vid. §24 end, and John xv. 26
[2856] ohus ethelon, infr. §10, n. 1.
[2857] Who worship one whom they themselves call a creature, vid. supr. Or. i. 8, n. 8, ii. 14, n. 7, 21, n. 2, and below, §16 notes.
[2858] John xiv. 6.
[2859] Ib. xvii. 3.
[2860] mathon edidaxe, de Decr. 7, n. 8; Or. ii. 1, note 6^a.
[2861] 1 John v. 20.
[2862] Isai. xliv. 24.
[2863] He says that in I the first' the question of time does not come in, else creatures would come second' to the Creator, as if His and their duration admitted of a common measure. First' then does not imply succession, but is equivalent to arche; a word which, as Father,' does not imply that the Son is not from eternity.
[2864] ii. 62, n. 2.
[2865] It is no inconsistency to say that the Father is first, and the Son first also, for comparison or number does not enter into mystery. Since Each is holos theos, Each, as contemplated by our finite reason, at the moment of contemplation excludes the Other. Though we say' Three Persons, Person hardly denotes one abstract idea,' certainly not as containing under it three individual subjects, but it is a term' applied to the One God in three ways. It is the doctrine of the Fathers, that, though we use words expressive of a Trinity, yet that God is beyond number, and that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, though eternally distinct from each other, can scarcely be viewed together in common, except as One' substance, as if they could not be generalized into Three Any whatever; and as if it were, strictly speaking, incorrect to speak of a' Person, or otherwise than of the' Person, whether of Father, or of Son, or of Spirit. The question has almost been admitted by S. Austin, whether it is not possible to say that God is One' Person (Trin. vii. 8), for He is wholly and entirely Father, and at the same time wholly and entirely Son, and wholly and entirely Holy Ghost. Some references to the Fathers shall be given on that subject, infr. 36 fin. vid. also supr. §6, n. 11. Meanwhile the doctrine here stated will account for such expressions as God from God,' i.e. the One God (who is the Son) from the One God (who is the Father); vid. supr. de Syn. 52, note 8. Again, he ousia haute tes ousias tes patrikes esti gennema. de Syn. 48, b. Vid. also infr. Orat. iv. 1 and 2.
Chapter XXV.--Texts Explained; Ninthly, John x. 30; xvii. 11, &c. Arian explanation, that the Son is one with the Father in will and judgment; but so are all good men, nay things inanimate; contrast of the Son. Oneness between Them is in nature, because oneness in operation. Angels not objects of prayer, because they do not work together with God, but the Son; texts quoted. Seeing an Angel, is not seeing God. Arians in fact hold two Gods, and tend to Gentile polytheism. Arian explanation that the Father and Son are one as we are one with Christ, is put aside by the Regula Fidei, and shewn invalid by the usage of Scripture in illustrations; the true force of the comparison; force of the terms used. Force of in us;' force of as;' confirmed by S. John. In what sense we are in God' and His sons.'
10. However here too they introduce their private fictions, and contend that the Son and the Father are not in such wise one,' or like,' as the Church preaches, but, as they themselves would have it [2866] . For they say, since what the Father wills, the Son wills also, and is not contrary either in what He thinks or in what He judges, but is in all respects concordant [2867] with Him, declaring doctrines which are the same, and a word consistent and united with the Father's teaching, therefore it is that He and the Father are One; and some of them have dared to write as well as say this [2868] . Now what can be more unseemly or irrational than this? for if therefore the Son and the Father are One and if in this way the Word is like the Father, it follows forthwith [2869] that the Angels [2870] too, and the other beings above us, Powers and Authorities, and Thrones and Dominions, and what we see, Sun and Moon, and the Stars, should be sons also, as the Son; and that it should be said of them too, that they and the Father are one, and that each is God's Image and Word. For what God wills, that will they; and neither in judging nor in doctrine are they discordant, but in all things are obedient to their Maker. For they would not have remained in their own glory, unless, what the Father willed, that they had willed also. He, for instance, who did not remain, but went astray, heard the words, How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning [2871] ?' But if this be so, how is only He Only-begotten Son and Word and Wisdom? or how, whereas so many are like the Father, is He only an Image? for among men too will be found many like the Father, numbers, for instance, of martyrs, and before them the Apostles and Prophets, and again before them the Patriarchs. And many now too keep the Saviour's command, being merciful as their Father which is in heaven [2872] ,' and observing the exhortation, Be ye therefore followers of God as dear children, and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us [2873] ;' many too have become followers of Paul as he also of Christ [2874] . And yet no one of these is Word or Wisdom or Only-begotten Son or Image; nor did any one of them make bold to say, I and the Father are One,' or, I in the Father, and the Father in Me [2875] ;' but it is said of all of them, Who is like unto Thee among the gods, O Lord? and who shall be likened to the Lord among the sons of Gods [2876] ?' and of Him on the contrary that He only is Image true and natural of the Father. For though we have been made after the Image [2877] , and called both image and glory of God, yet not on our own account still, but for that Image and true Glory of God inhabiting us, which is His Word, who was for us afterwards made flesh, have we this grace of our designation.