Four discourses against the arians

Chapters XXIII-XXV
By Athanasius




JOHN xiv. 10.

Introduction. The doctrine of the coinherence. The Father and the Son Each
whole and perfect God. They are in Each Other, because their Essence is One
and the Same. They are Each Perfect and have One Essence, because the Second
Person is the Son of the First. Asterius's evasive explanation of the text
under review; refuted. Since the Son has all that the Father has, He is His
Image; and the Father is the One God, because the Son is in the Father.

1. THE Ario-maniacs, as it appears, having once made up their minds to
transgress and revolt from the Truth, are strenuous in appropriating the words
of Scripture, 'When the impious cometh into a depth of evils, he
despiseth(1);' for refutation does not stop them, nor perplexity abash them;
but, as having 'a whore's forehead,' they 'refuse to be ashamed(2)' before all
men in their irreligion. For whereas the passages which they alleged, 'The
Lord created me(3),' and 'Made better than the Angels(4),' and
'First-born(5),' and 'Faithful to Him that made Him(6)' have a right sense(7),
and inculcate religiousness towards Christ, so it is that these men still, as
if bedewed with the serpent's poison, not seeing what they ought to see, nor
understanding what they read, as if in vomit from the depth of their
irreligious heart, have next proceeded to disparage our Lord's words, 'I in
the Father and the Father in Me(8);' saying, 'How can the One be contained in
the Other and the Other in the One?' or 'How at all can the Father who is the
greater be contained in the Son who is the less?' or 'What wonder, if the Son
is in the Father, considering it is written even of us, 'In Him we live and
move and have our being(9)?' And this state of mind is consistent with their
perverseness, who think God to be material, and understand not what


is 'True Father' and 'True Son,' nor 'Light Invisible' and 'Eternal,' and Its
'Radiance Invisible,' nor 'Invisible Subsistence,' and 'Immaterial Expression'
and 'Immaterial Image.' For did they know, they would not dishonour and
ridicule the Lord of glory, nor interpreting things immaterial after a
material manner, pervert good words. It were sufficient indeed, on hearing
only words which are the Lord's, at once to believe, since the faith of
simplicity is better than an elaborate process of persuasion; but since they
have endeavoured to profane even this passage to their own heresy, it becomes
necessary to expose their perverseness and to shew the mind of the truth, at
least for the security of the faithful. For when it is said, 'I in the Father
and the Father in Me,' They are not therefore, as these suppose, discharged
into Each Other, filling the One the Other, as in the case of empty vessels,
so that the Son fills the emptiness of the Father and the Father that of the
Son(10), and Each of Them by Himself is not complete and perfect (for this is
proper to bodies, and therefore the mere assertion of it is full of
irreligion), for the Father is full and perfect, and the Son is the Fulness of
Godhead. Nor again, as God, by coming into the Saints, strengthens them, thus
is He also in the Son. For He is Himself the Father's Power and Wisdom, and by
partaking of Him things originate are sanctified in the Spirit; but the Son
Himself is not Son by participation, but is the Father's own Offspring(11).
Nor again is the Son in the Father, in the sense of the passage, 'In Him we
live and move and have our being;' for, He as being from the Fount(12) of the
Father is the Life, in which all things are both quickened and consist; for
the Life does not live in life(13), else it would not be Life, but rather He
gives life to all things.

2. But now let us see what Asterius the Sophist says, the retained
pleader(1) for the heresy. In imitation then of the Jews so far, he writes as
follows; 'It is very plain that He has said, that He is in the Father and the
Father again in Him, for this reason, that neither the word on which He was
discoursing is, as He says, His own, but the Father's, nor the works belong to
Him, but to the Father who gave Him the power.' Now this, if uttered at random
by a little child, had been excused from his age; but when one who bears the
title of Sophist, and professes universal knowledge(2), is the writer, what a
serious condemnation does he deserve! And does he not shew himself a stranger
to the Apostle(3), as being puffed up with persuasive words of wisdom, and
thinking thereby to succeed in deceiving, not understanding himself what he
says nor whereof he affirms(4)? For what the Son has said as proper and
suitable to a Son only, who is Word and Wisdom and Image of the Father's
Essence, that he levels to all the creatures, and makes common to the Son and
to them; and he says, lawless(5) man, that the Power of the Father receives
power, that from this his irreligion it may follow to say that in a son(6) the
Son was made a son, and the Word received a word's authority; and, far from
granting that He spoke this as a Son, He ranks Him with all things made as
having learned it as they have. For if the Son said, I am in the Father and
the Father in Me,' because His discourses were not His own words but the
Father's, and so of His works, then,--since David says, 'I will hear what the
Lord God shall say in me(7),' and again Solomon(8), 'My words are spoken by
God,' and since Moses was minister of words which were from God, and each of
the Prophets spoke not what was his own but what was from God, 'Thus saith the
Lord,' and since the works of the Saints, as they professed, were not their
own but God's who gave the power, Elijah for instance and Elisha invoking God
that He Himself would raise the dead, and Elisha saying to Naaman, on
cleansing him from the


leprosy, 'that thou mayest know that there is a God in Israel(9),' and Samuel
too in the days of the harvest praying to God to grant rain, and the Apostles
saying that not in their own power they did miracles but in the Lord's
grace--it is plain that, according to Asterius such a statement must be common
to all, so that each of them is able to say, 'I in the Father and the Father
in me;' and as a consequence that He is no longer one Son of God and Word and
Wisdom, but, as others, is only one out of many.

3. But if the Lord said this, His words would not rightly have been, 'I in
the Father and the Father in Me,' but rather, 'I too am in the Father, and the
Father is in Me too,' that He may have nothing of His own and by
prerogative(1), relatively to the Father, as a Son, but the same grace in
common with all. But it is not so, as they think; for not understanding that
He is genuine Son from the Father, they belie Him who is such, whom alone it
befits to say, 'I in the Father and the Father in Me.' For the Son is in the
Father, as it is allowed us to know, because the whole Being of the Son is
proper to the Father's essence(2), as radiance from light, and stream from
fountain; so that whoso sees the Son, sees what is proper to the Father, and
knows that the Son's Being, because from the Father, is therefore in the
Father. For the Father is in the Son, since the Son is what is from the Father
and proper to Him, as in the radiance the sun, and in the word the thought,
and in the stream the fountain: for whoso thus contemplates the Son,
contemplates what is proper to the Father's Essence, and knows that the Father
is in the Son. For whereas the Form(3) and Godhead of the Father is the Being
of the Son, it follows that the Son is in the Father and the Father in the

4. On this account and reasonably, having said before, 'I and the Father
are One,' He added, 'I in the Father and the Father in Me,(5)' by way of
shewing the identity(6) of Godhead and the unity of Essence. For they are one,
not(7) as one thing divided into two parts, and these nothing but one, nor as
one thing twice named, so that the Same becomes at one time Father, at another
His own Son, for this Sabellius holding was judged an heretic. But They are
two, because the Father is Father and is not also Son, and the Son is Son and
not also Father(8); but the nature is one; (for the offspring is not unlike(9)
its parent, for it is his image), and all that is the Father's, is the
Son's(10). Wherefore neither is the Son another God, for He was not procured
from without, else were there many, if a godhead be procured foreign from the
Father's(1); for if the Son be other, as an Offspring, still He is the Same as
God; and He and the Father are one in propriety and peculiarity of nature, and
in the identity of the one Godhead, as has been said. For the radiance also is
light, not second to the sun, nor a different light, nor from participation of
it, but a whole and proper offspring of it. And such an offspring is
necessarily one light; and no one would say that they are two lights(2), but
sun and radiance two, yet one the light from the sun enlightening in its
radiance all things. So also the Godhead of the Son is the Father's; whence
also it is indivisible; and thus there is one God and none other but He. And
so, since they are one, and the Godhead itself one, the same things are said
of the Son, which are said of the Father, except His being said to be
Father(3):--for instance(4), that He is God, 'And the Word was God(5);'
Almighty, 'Thus saith He which was and is and is to come, the Almighty(6);'
Lord, 'One Lord Jesus Christ(7);' that He is Light, 'I am the Light(8);' that
He wipes out sins, 'that ye may know,' He says, 'that the Son of man hath
power upon earth to forgive sins(9);' and so with other attributes. For 'all
things,' says the Son Himself, 'whatsoever the Father hath, are Mine(10);' and
again, 'And Mine are Thine.'

5. And on hearing the attributes of the Father spoken of a Son, we shall
thereby see the Father in the Son; and we shall contemplate the Son in the
Father, when what is said of the Son is said of the Father also.


And why are the attributes of the Father ascribed to the Son, except that the
Son is an Offspring from Him? and why are the Son's attributes proper to the
Father, except again because the Son is the proper Offspring of His Essence?
And the Son, being the proper Offspring of the Father's Essence, reasonably
says that the Father's attributes are His own also; whence suitably and
consistently with saying, 'I and the Father are One,' He adds, 'that ye may
know that I am in the Father and the Father in Me(1).' Moreover, He has added
this again, 'He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father(2);' and there is one
and the same sense in these three(3) passages. For he who in this sense
understands that the Son and the Father are one, knows that He is in the
Father and the Father in the Son; for the Godhead of the Son is the Father's,
and it is in the Son; and whoso enters into this, is convinced that 'He that
hath seen the Son, hath seen the Father;' for in the Son is contemplated the
Father's Godhead. And we may perceive this at once from the illustration of
the Emperor's image. For in the image is the shape and form of the Emperor,
and in the Emperor is that shape which is in the image. For the likeness of
the Emperor in the image is exact(4); so that a person who looks at the image,
sees in it the Emperor; and he again who sees the Emperor, recognises that it
is he who is in the image(5). And from the likeness not differing, to one who
after the image wished to view the Emperor, the image might say, 'I and the
Emperor are one; for I am in him, and he in me; and what thou seest in me,
that thou beholdest in him, and what thou hast seen in him, that thou holdest
in me(6).' Accordingly he who worships the image, in it worships the Emperor
also; for the image is his forth and appearance. Since then the Son too is the
Father's Image, it must necessarily be understood that the Godhead and
propriety of the Father is the Being of the Son.

6. And this is what is said, 'Who being in the form of God(1),' and 'the
Father in Me.' Nor is this Form(2) of the Godhead partial merely, but the
fulness of the Father's Godhead is the Being of the Son, and the Son is whole
God. Therefore also, being equal to God, He 'thought it not a prize to be
equal to God;' and again since the Godhead and the Form of the Son is none
other's than the Father's(3), this is what He says, 'I in the Father.' Thus
'God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself(4);' for the propriety
of the Father's Essence is that Son, in whom the creation was then reconciled
with God. Thus what things the Son then wrought are the Father's works, for
the Son is the Form of that Godhead of the Father, which wrought the works.
And thus he who looks at the Son, sees the Father; for in the Father's Godhead
is and is contemplated the Son; and the Father's Form which is in Him shews in
Him the Father; and thus the Father is in the Son. And that propriety and
Godhead which is from the Father in the Son, shews the Son in the Father, and
His inseparability from Him; and whoso hears and beholds that what is said of
the Father is also said of the Son, not as accruing to His Essence by grace or
participation, but because the very Being of the Son is the proper Offspring
of the Father's Essence, will fitly understand the words, as I said before, 'I
in the Father, and the Father in Me;' and 'I and the Father are One(5).' For
the Son is such as the Father is, because He has all that is the Father's.
Wherefore also is He implied together with the Father. For, a son not being,
one cannot say father; whereas when we call God a Maker, we do not of
necessity intimate the things which have come to be; for a maker is before his


But when we call God Father, at once with the Father we signify the Son's
existence. Therefore also he who believes in the Son, believes also in the
Father: for he believes in what is proper to the Father's Essence; and thus
the faith is one in one God. And he who worships and honours the Son, in the
Son worships and honours the Father; for one is the Godhead; and therefore
one(7) the honour and one the worship which is paid to the Father in and
through the Son. And he who thus worships, worships one God; for there is one
God and none other than He. Accordingly when the Father is called the only
God, and we read that there is one God(8), and 'I am,' and 'beside Me there is
no God,' and 'I the first and I the last(9),' this has a fit meaning. For God
is One and Only and First; but this is not said to the denial of the Son(10),
perish the thought; for He is in that One, and First and Only, as being of
that One and Only and First the Only Word and Wisdom and Radiance. And He too
is the First, as the Fulness of the Godhead of the First and Only, being whole
and full God(11). This then is not said on His account, but to deny that there
is other such as the Father and His Word.




Our Lord's divinity cannot interfere with His Father's prerogatives, as the
One God, which were so earnestly upheld by the Son. 'One' is used in contrast
to false gods and idols, not to the Son, through whom the Father spoke. Our
Lord adds His Name to the Father's, as included in Him. The Father the First,
not as if the Son were not First too, but as Origin.

7. Now that this is the sense of the Prophet is clear and manifest to all;
but since the irreligious men, alleging such passages also, dishonour the Lord
and reproach us, saying, 'Behold God is said to be One and Only and First; how
say ye that the Son is God? for if He were God, He had not said, "I Alone,"
nor "God is One(1);"' it is necessary to declare the sense of these phrases in
addition, as far as we can, that all may know from this also that the Arians
are really contending with God(2). If there then is rivalry of the Son towards
the Father, then be such words uttered against Him; and if according to what
is said to David concerning Adonijah and Absalom(3), so also the Father looks
upon the Son, then let Him utter and urge such words against Himself, lest He
the Son, calling Himself God, make any to revolt from the Father. But if he
who knows the Son, on the contrary, knows the Father, the Son Himself
revealing Him to him, and in the Word he shall rather see the Father, as has
been said, and if the Son on coming, glorified not Himself but the Father,
saying to one who came to Him, 'Why callest thou Me good? none is good save
One, that is, God(4);' and to one who asked, what was the great commandment in
the Law, answering, 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is One Lords(5);' and
saying to the multitudes, 'I came down from heaven, not to do My own will, but
the will of Him that sent Me(6);' and teaching the disciples, 'My Father is
greater than I,' and 'He that honoureth Me, honoureth Him that sent Me(7);' if
the Son is such towards His own Father, what is the difficulty(8), that one
must need take such a view of such passages? and on the other hand, if the Son
is the Father's Word, who is so wild, besides these Christ-opposers, as to
think that God has thus spoken, as traducing and denying His own Word? This is
not the mind of Christians; perish the thought; for not with reference to the
Son is it thus written, but for the denial of those falsely called gods,
invented by men.

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 clay, 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(9) 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(10). 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(11) 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(12), 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(13), 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 Truths(1),' 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(2).' 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(3), 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(4).' And when the Prophet says
concerning the creation, 'That stretcheth forth the heavens alone(5),' 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(6); 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 lie 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(7)
through the Son. For as the Father is First, so also is He both First(8), 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.



xvii. II, &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(1). 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(2) 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(3). 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(4)
that the Angels(5) 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(6)?' 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(7),' and observing the exhortation, 'Be ye
therefore followers of God as dear children, and walk in love, as Christ also
hath loved us(8);' many too have become followers of Paul as he also of
Christ(8a). 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(9);' 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(10)?' 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(11), 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

11. This their notion then being evidently unseemly and irrational as well
as the rest, the likeness and the oneness must be referred to the very Essence
of the Son; for unless it be so taken, He will not be shown to have anything
beyond things originate, as has been said, nor will He be like the Father, but
He will be like the Father's doctrines; and He differs from the Father, in
that the Father is Father(1), but the


doctrines and teaching are the Father's. If then in respect to the doctrines
and the teaching the Son is like the Father, then the Father according to them
will be Father in name only, and the Son will not be an exact Image, or rather
will be seen to have no propriety at all or likeness of the Father; for what
likeness or propriety has he who is so utterly different from the Father? for
Paul taught like the Saviour, yet was not like Him in essence(2).' Having then
such notions, they speak falsely; whereas the Son and the Father are one in
such wise as has been said, and in such wise is the Son like the Father
Himself and from Him, as we may see and understand son to be towards father,
and as we may see the radiance towards the sun. Such then being the Son,
therefore when the Son works, the Father is the Worker(3), and the Son coming
to the Saints, the Father is He who cometh in the Son(4), as He promised when
He said, 'I and My Father will come, and will make Our abode with hire(5);'
for in the Image is contemplated the Father, and in the Radiance is the Light.
Therefore also, as we said just now, when the Father gives grace and peace,
the Son also gives it, as Paul signifies in every Epistle, writing, 'Grace to
you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.' For one and the
same grace is from the Father in the Son, as the light of the sun and of the
radiance is one, and as the sun's illumination is effected through the
radiance; and so too when he prays for the Thessalonians, in saying,' Now God
Himself even our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, may He direct our way unto
you(6),' he has guarded the unity of the Father and of the Son. For he has not
said, 'May they direct,' as if a double grace were given from two Sources,
This and That, but 'May He direct,' to shew that the Father gives it through
the Son;--at which these irreligious ones will not blush, though they well

12. For if there were no unity, nor the Word the own Offspring of the
Father's Essence, as the radiance of the light, but the Son were divided in
nature from the Father, it were sufficient that the Father alone should give,
since none of originate things is a partner with his Maker in His givings;
but, as it is, such a mode of giving shews the oneness of the Father and the
Son. No one, for instance, would pray to receive from God and the Angels(1),
or from any other creature, nor would any one say,

'May God and the Angel give thee; 'but from Father and the Son, because of
Their oneness and the oneness of Their giving. For through the Son is given
what is given; and there is nothing but the Father operates it through the
Son; for thus is grace secure to him who receives it. And if the Patriarch
Jacob, blessing his grandchildren Ephraim and Manasses, said, 'God which fed
me all my life long unto this day, the Angel which delivered me from all evil,
bless the lads(2),' yet none of created and natural Angels did he join to God
their Creator, nor rejecting God that fed him, did he from Angel ask the
blessing on his grandsons; but in saying, Who delivered me from all evil,' he
shewed that it was no created Angel, but the Word of God, whom he joined to
the Father in his prayer, through whom, whomsoever He will, God doth deliver.
For knowing that He is also called the Father's 'Angel of great Counsel(3),'
he said that none other than He was the Giver of blessing, and Deliverer from
evil Nor was it that he desired a blessing for himself from God but for his
grandchildren from the Angel, but whom He Himself had besought saying, 'I will
not let Thee go except Thou bless me(4)' (for that was God, as he says
himself, 'I have seen God face to face'), Him he prayed to bless also the sons
of Joseph. It is proper then to an Angel to minister at the command of God,
and often does he go forth to cast out the Amorite, and is sent to guard the
people in the way; but these are not his doings, but of God who commanded and
sent him, whose also it is to deliver, whom He will deliver. There-


fore it was no other than the Lord God Himself whom he had seen, who said to
him, 'And behold I am with thee, to guard thee in all the way whither thou[5]
goest;' and it was no other than God whom lie had seen, who kept Laban from
his treachery, ordering him not to speak evil words to Jacob; and none other
than God did he himself beseech, saying, 'Rescue me from the hand of my
brother Esau, for I fear him[6];' for in conversation too with his wives he
said, 'God hath not suffered Laban to injure me.'

13. Therefore it was none other than God Himself that David too besought
concerning his deliverance, 'When I was in trouble, I called upon the Lord,
and He heard me; deliver my soul, 0 Lord, from lying lips and from a deceitful
tongue[1].' To Him also giving thanks he spoke the words of the Song in the
seventeenth Psalm, in the day in which the Lord delivered him from the hand of
all his enemies and from the hand of Saul, saying, 'I will love Thee, O Lord
my strength; the Lord is my strong rock and my defence and deliverer[2].' And
Paul, after enduring many persecutions, to none other than God gave thanks,
saying, 'Out of them all the Lord delivered me; and He will deliver in Whom we
trust[3].' And none other than God blessed Abraham and Isaac; and Isaac
praying for Jacob, said, 'May God bless thee and increase thee and multiply
thee, and thou shall be for many companies of nations, and may He give thee
the blessing of Abraham my father[4].' But if it belong to none other than God
to bless and to deliver, and none other was the deliverer of Jacob than the
Lord Himself and Him that delivered him the Patriarch besought for his
grandsons, evidently none other did he join to God in his prayer, than God's
Word, whom therefore he called Angel, because it is He alone who reveals the
Father. Which the Apostle also did when he said, 'Grace unto you and peace
from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ[4a].' For thus the blessing was
secure, because of the Son's indivisibility from the Father, and for that the
grace given by Them is one and the same. For though the Father gives it,
through the Son is the gift; and though the Son be said to vouchsafe it, it is
the Father who supplies it through and in the Son; for 'I thank my God,' says
the Apostle writing to the Corinthians, 'always on your behalf, for the grace
of God which is given yon in Christ Jesus[5].' And this one may see in the
instance of light and radiance; for what the light enlightens, that the
radiance irradiates; and what the radiance irradiates, from the light is its
enlightenment. So also when the Son is beheld, so is the Father, for lie is
the Father's radiance; and thus the Father and the Son are one.

14. But this is not so with things originate and creatures; for when the
Father works, it is not that any Angel works, or any other creature; for none
of these is an efficient cause[1], but they are of things which come to be;
and moreover being separate and divided from the only God, and other in
nature, and being works, they can neither work what God works, nor, as I said
before, when God gives grace, can they give grace with Him. Nor, on seeing an
Angel would a man say that he had seen the Father; for Angels, as it is
written, are 'ministering spirits sent forth to minister[2],' and are heralds
of gifts given by Him through the Word to those who receive them. And the
Angel on his appearance, himself confesses that he has been sent by his Lord;
as Gabriel confessed in the case of Zacharias, and also in the case of Mary,
bearer of God[3]. And he who beholds a vision of Angels, knows that he has
seen the Angel and not God. For Zacharias saw an Angel; and Isaiah saw the
Lord. Manoah, the father of Samson, saw an Angel; but Moses beheld God. Gideon
saw an Angel, but to Abraham appeared God. And neither he who saw God, beheld
an Angel, nor he who saw an Angel, considered that he saw God; for greatly, or
rather wholly, do things by nature originate differ from God the Creator. But
if at any time, when the Angel was seen, he who saw it heard God's voice, as
took place at the bush; for 'the Angel of the Lord was seen in a flame of fire
out of the bush, and the Lord called Moses out of the bush, saying, I am the
God of thy father, the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of
Jacob[4],' yet was not


the Angel the God of Abraham, but in the Angel God spoke. And what was seen
was an Angel; but God spoke in him[5]. For as He spoke to Moses in the pillar
of a cloud in the tabernacle, so also God appears and speaks in Angels. So
again to the son of Nun He spake by an Angel. But what God speaks, it is very
plain He speaks through the Word, and not through another. And the Word, as
being not separate from the Father, nor unlike and foreign to the Father's
Essence, what He works, those are the Father's works, and His framing of all
things is one with His; and what the Son gives, that is the Father's gift. And
he who hath seen the Son, knows that, in seeing Him, he has seen, not Angel,
nor one merely greater than Angels, nor in short any creature, but the Father
Himself. And he who hears the Word, knows that he hears the Father; as he who
is irradiated by the radiance, knows that he is enlightened by the sun.

15. For divine Scripture wishing us thus to understand the matter, has
given such illustrations, as we have said above, from which we are able both
to press the traitorous Jews, and to refute the allegation of Gentiles who
maintain and think, on account of the Trinity, that we profess many gods[6].
For, as the illustration shows, we do not introduce three Origins or three
Fathers, as the followers of Marcion and Manich'us; since we have not
suggested the image of three suns, but sun and radiance. And one is the light
from the sun in the radiance; and so we know of but one origin; and the
All-framing Word we profess to have no other manner of godhead, than that of
the Only God, because He is born from Him. Rather then will the Ario-maniacs
with reason incur the charge of polytheism or else of atheism[7], because they
idly talk of the Son as external and a creature, and again the Spirit as from
nothing. For either they will say that the Word is not God; or saying that He
is God[8], because it is so written, but not proper to the Father's Essence,
they will introduce many because of their difference of kind (unless forsooth
they shall dare to say that by participation only, He, as all things else, is
called God; though, if this be their sentiment, their irreligion is the same,
since they consider the Word as one among all things). But let this never
even come into our mind. For there is but one form[9] of Godhead, which is
also in the Word; and one God, the Father, existing by Himself according as
He is above all, and appearing in the Son according as He pervades all things,
and in the Spirit according as in Him He acts in all things through the
Word[10]. For thus we confess God to be one through the Triad, and we say that
it is much more religious than the godhead of the heretics with its many
kinds[11],, and many parts, to entertain a belief of the One Godhead in a

16. For if it be not so, but the Word is a creature and a work out of
nothing, either He is not True God because He is Himself one of the creatures,
or if they name Him God from regard for the Scriptures, they must of necessity
say that there are two Gods[1], one Creator, the other creature, and must
serve two Lords, one Unoriginate, and the other originate and a creature; and
must have two faiths, one in the True God, and the other in one who is made
and fashioned by themselves and called God. And it follows of necessity in so
great blindness, that, when they worship the Unoriginate, they renounce the
originate, and when they come to the creature, they turn from the Creator. For
they cannot see the One in the Other, because their natures and operations are
foreign and distinct[2]. And with such sentiments, they will certainly be
going on to more gods, for this will be the essay[3] of those who revolt from
the One God. Wherefore then, when the Arians have these speculations and
views, do they not rank themselves with the Gentiles? for they too, as these,
worship the creature rather than God the Creator of all[4], and though they
shrink from the Gentile name, in order to deceive the unskilful, yet they
secretly hold a like sentiment with them. For their subtle saying which they
are accustomed to urge, We say not two Unoriginates[5],' they plainly say to
deceive the simple; for in their very professing 'We say not two
Unoriginates,' they imply two Gods, and these with different natures, one
originate and one Unoriginate. And though the Greeks worship one Unoriginate
and many originate, but these one Unoriginate and one originate, this is no


ence from them; for the God whom they call originate is one out of many, and
again the many gods of the Greeks have the same nature with this one, for both
he and they are creatures. Unhappy are they, and the more for that their hurt
is from thinking against Christ; for they have fallen from the truth, and are
greater traitors than the Jews in denying the Christ, and they wallow[6] with
the Gentiles, hateful[7] as they are to God, worshipping the creature and many
deities. For there is One God, and not many, and One is His Word, and not
many; for the Word is God, and He alone has the Form[8] of the Father. Being
then such, the Saviour Himself troubled the Jews with these words, 'The Father
Himself which hath sent Me, hath borne witness of Me; ye have neither heard
His voice at any time nor seen His Form; and ye have not His Word abiding in
you; for whom He hath sent, Him ye believe not[9].' Suitably has He joined the
'Word' to the 'Form,' to shew that the Word of God is Himself Image and
Expression and Form of His Father; and that the Jews who did not receive Him
who spoke to them, thereby did not receive the Word, which is the Form of God.
This too it was that the Patriarch Jacob having seen, received a blessing from
Him and the name of Israel instead of Jacob, as divine Scripture witnesses,
saying, 'And as he passed by the Form of God, the Sun rose upon him[10].' And
This it was who said, 'He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father,' and, 'I in
the Father and the Father in Me,' and, 'I and the Father are one[11];' for
thus God is One, and one the faith in the Father and Son; for, though the Word
be God, the Lord our God is one Lord; for the Son is proper to that One, and
inseparable according to the propriety and peculiarity of His Essence.

17. The Arians, however, not even thus abashed, reply, 'Not as you say,
but as we will[1];' for, whereas you have overthrown our former expedients, we
have invented a new one, and it is this:--So are the Son and the Father One,
and so is the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father, as we too may
become one in Him. For this is written in the Gospel according to John, and
Christ desired it for us in these words, 'Holy Father, keep through Thine own
Name, those whom Thou hast given Me, that they may be one, as We are[2].' And
shortly after; 'Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall
believe on Me through their Word; that they all may be one, as Thou, Father,
art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us, that the world may
believe that Thou hast sent Me. And the glory which Thou gavest Me I have
given them, that they may be one, even as We are one; I in them, and Thou in
Me, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that
Thou didst send Me[3].' Then, as having found an evasion, these men of
craft[4] add, 'If, as we become one in the Father, so also He and the Father
are one, and thus He too is in the Father, how pretend you from His saying, "I
and the Father are One," and "I in the Father and the Father in Me," that He
is proper and like[5] the Father's Essence? for it follows either that we too
are proper to the Father's Essence, or He foreign to it, as we are foreign.'
Thus they idly babble; but in this their perverseness I see nothing but
unreasoning audacity and recklessness from the devil[6], since it is saying
after his pattern, 'We will ascend to heaven, we will be like the Most High.'
For what is given to man by grace, this they would make equal to the Godhead
of the Giver. Thus hearing that men are called sons, they thought themselves
equal to the True Son by nature such[7]. And now again bearing from the
Saviour, 'that they may be one as We are[8],' they deceive themselves, and are
arrogant enough to think that they may be such as the Son is in the Father and
the Father in the Son; not considering the fall of their 'father the
devil[9],' which happened upon such an imagination.

18. If then, as we have many times said, the Word of God is the same with
us, and nothing differs from us except in time, let Him be like us, and have
the same place with the


Father as we have; nor let Him be called Only-begotten, nor Only Word or
Wisdom of the Father; but let the same name be of common application to all us
who are like Him. For it is right, that they who have one nature, should have
their name in common, though they differ from each other in point of time. For
Adam was a man, and Paul a man, and he who is now born is a man, and time is
not that which alters the nature of the race[1]. If then the Word also differs
from us only in time, then we must be as He. But in truth neither we are Word
or Wisdom, nor is He creature or work; else why are we all sprung from one,
and He the Only Word? but though it be suitable in them thus to speak, in us
at least it is unsuitable to entertain their blasphemies. And yet, needless[2]
though it be to refine upon[3] these passages, considering their so clear and
religious sense, and our own orthodox belief, yet that their irreligion may be
shewn here also, come let us shortly, as we have received from the fathers,
expose their heterodoxy from the passage. It is a custom[4] with divine
Scripture to take the things of nature as images and illustrations for
mankind; and this it does, that from these physical objects the moral impulses
of man may be explained; and thus their conduct shewn to be either bad or
righteous. For instance, in the case of the bad, as when it charges, 'Be ye
not like to horse and mule which have no understanding[5].' Or as when it
says, complaining of those who have become such, 'Man, being in honour, hath
no understanding, but is compared unto the beasts that perish.' And again,
'They were as wanton horses[6].' And the Saviour to expose Herod said, 'Tell
that fox[7];' but, on the other hand, charged His disciples, 'Behold I send
you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves; be ye therefore wise as serpents
and harmless as doves[8].' And He said this, not that we may become in nature
beasts of burden, or become serpents and doves; for He hath not so made us
Himself, and therefore nature does not allow of it; but that we might eschew
the irrational motions of the one, and being aware of the wisdom of that other
animal, might not be deceived by it, and might take on us the meekness of the

19. Again, taking patterns for man from divine subjects, the Saviour says;
'Be ye merciful, as your Father which is in heaven is merciful[1];' and, 'Be
ye perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect[2].' And He said this too, not
that we might become such as the Father; for to become as the Father, is
impossible for us creatures, who have been brought to be out of nothing; but
as He charged us, 'Be ye not like to horse,' not lest we should become as
draught animals, but that we should not imitate their want of reason, so, not
that we might become as God, did He say, 'Be ye merciful as your Father,' but
that looking at His beneficent acts, what we do well, we might do, not for
men's sake, but for His sake, so that from Him and not from men we may have
the reward. For as, although there be one Son by nature, True and
Only-begotten, we too become sons, not as He in nature and truth, but
according to the grace of Him that calleth, and though we are men from the
earth, are yet called gods[3], not as the True God or His Word, but as has
pleased God who has given us that grace; so also, as God do we become
merciful, not by being made equal to God, nor becoming in nature and truth
benefactors (for it is not our gift to benefit but belongs to God), but in
order that what has accrued to us from God Himself by grace, these things we
may impart to others, without making distinctions, but largely towards all
extending our kind service. For only in this way can we anyhow become
imitators, and in no other, when we minister to others what comes from Him.
And as we put a fair and right[4] sense upon these texts, such again is the
sense of the lection in John. For he does not say, that, as the Son is in the
Father, such we must become:--whence could it be? when He is God's Word and
Wisdom, and we were fashioned out of the earth, and He is by nature and
essence Word and true God (for thus speaks John, 'We know that the Son of God
is come, and He hath given us an understanding to know Him that is true, and
we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ; this is the true God
and eternal life[5]), and we are made sons through Him by adoption and grace,
as partaking of His Spirit (for 'as many as received Him,' he says, 'to them
gave He power to become children of God, even to them that believe on His
Name[6]), and therefore also He is the Truth (saying, 'I am the Truth,' and in
His address to His Father, He said, 'Sanctify them through Thy Truth, Thy Word
is Truth[7]'); but we by imitation[8] become virtuous[9] and sons:--therefore


not that we might become such as He, did He say 'that they may be one as We
are;' but that as He, being the Word, is in His own Father, so that we too,
taking an examplar and looking at Him, might become one towards each other in
concord and oneness of spirit, nor be at variance as the Corinthians, but mind
the same thing, as those five thousand in the Acts[10], who were as one.

20. For it is as 'sons,' not as the Son; as 'gods,' not as He Himself; and
not as the Father, but 'merciful as the Father.' And, as has been said, by so
becoming one, as the Father and the Son, we shall be such, not as the Father
is by nature in the Son and the Son in the Father, but according to our own
nature, and as it is possible for us thence to be moulded and to learn how we
ought to be one, just as we learned also to be merciful. For like things are
naturally one with like; thus all flesh is ranked together in kind[1]; but the
Word is unlike us and like the Father. And therefore, while He is in nature
and truth one with His own Father, we, as being of one kind with each other
(for from one were all made, and one is the nature of all men), become one
with each other in good disposition[2], having as our copy the Son's natural
unity with the Father. For as He taught us meekness from Himself, saying,
'Learn of Me for I am meek and lowly in heart[3],' not that we may become
equal to Him, which is impossible, but that looking towards Him, we may remain
meek continually, so also here wishing that our good disposition towards each
other should be true and firm and indissoluble, from Himself taking the
pattern, He says, 'that they may be one as We are,' whose oneness is
indivisible; that is, that they learning from us of that indivisible Nature,
may preserve in like manner agreement one with another. And this imitation of
natural conditions is especially safe for man, as has been said; for, since
they remain and never change, whereas the conduct of men is very changeable,
one may look to what is unchangeable by nature, and avoid what is bad and
remodel himself on what is best.

21. And for this reason also the words, 'that they may be one in Us,' have
a right sense. If, for instance, it were possible for us to become as the Son
in the Father, the words ought to run, 'that they may be one in Thee,' as the
Son is in the Father; but, as it is, He has not said this; but by saying 'in
Us' He has pointed out the distance and difference; that He indeed is alone in
the Father alone, as Only Word and Wisdom; but we in the Son, and through Him
in the Father. And thus speaking, He meant this only, 'By Our unity may they
also be so one with each other, as We are one in nature and truth; for
otherwise they could not be one, except by learning unity in Us.' And that 'in
Us' has this signification, we may learn from Paul, who says, 'These things I
have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos, that ye may learn in us
not to be puffed up above that is written[1].' The words 'in Us' then, are not
'in the Father,' as the Son is in Him; but imply an example and image, instead
of saying, 'Let them learn of Us.' For as Paul to the Corinthians, so is the
oneness of the Son and the Father a pattern and lesson to all, by which they
may learn, looking to that natural unity of the Father and the Son, how they
themselves ought to be one in spirit towards each other. Or if it needs to
account for the phrase otherwise, the words 'in Us' may mean the same as
saying, that in the power of the Father and the Son they may be one, speaking
the same things[2]; for without God this is impossible. And this mode of
speech also we may find in the divine writings, as 'In God will we do great
acts;' and 'In God I shall leap over the walls;' and 'In Thee will we tread
down our enemies[4].' Therefore it is plain, that in the Name of Father and
Son we shall be able, becoming one, to hold firm the bond of charity. For,
dwelling still on the same thought, the Lord says, 'And the glory which Thou
gavest Me, I have given to them, that they may be one as We are one.' Suitably
has He here too said, not, 'that they may be in Thee as I am,' but 'as We
are;' now he who says 'as'[5], signifies not identity, but an image and
example of the matter in hand.

22. The Word then has the real and true identity of nature with the
Father; but to us it is given to imitate it, as has been said; for He
immediately adds,' I in them and Thou in Me; that they may be made perfect in
one.' Here at length the Lord asks something greater and more perfect for us;
for it is plain that the Word has come to be in us[6], for He has put on our
body. 'And Thou Father in Me;' 'for I am Thy Word, and since Thou art in Me,
because I am Thy Word, and I in them because of the body, and because of Thee
the salvation of men is perfected in Me, therefore I ask that they also may
become one, according to the body that is in Me and according to its
perfection; that they too may


become perfect, having oneness with It, and having become one in It; that, as
if all were carried by Me, all may be one body and one spirit, and may grow up
unto a perfect man[7].' For we all, partaking of the Same, become one body,
having the one Lord in ourselves. The passage then having this meaning, still
more plainly is refuted the heterodoxy of Christ's enemies. I repeat it; if He
had said simply and absolutely[8] 'that they may be one in Thee,' or 'that
they and I may be one in Thee,' God's enemies had had some plea, though a
shameless one; but in fact He has not spoken simply, but, 'As Thou, Father, in
Me, and I in Thee, that they may be all one.' Moreover, using the word 'as,'
He signifies those who become distantly as He is in the Father; distantly not
in place but in nature; for in place nothing is far from God[9], but in nature
only all things are far from Him. And, as I said before, whose uses the
particle 'as' implies, not identity, nor equality, but a pattern of the matter
in question, viewed in a certain respect[10].

23. Indeed we may learn also from the Saviour Himself, when He says, 'For
as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the
Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth[1].' For
Jonah was not as the Saviour, nor did Jonah go down to hades; nor was the
whale hades; nor did Jonah, when swallowed up, bring up those who had before
been swallowed by the whale, but he alone came forth, when the whale was
bidden. Therefore there is no identity nor equality signified in the term
'as,' but one thing and another; and it shews a certain kind[2] of parallel in
the case of Jonah, on account of the three days. In like manner then we too,
when the Lord says 'as,' neither become as the Son in the Father, nor as the
Father is in the Son. For we become one as the Father and the Son in mind and
agreement[3] of spirit, and the Saviour will be as Jonah in the earth; but as
the Saviour is not Jonah, nor, as he was swallowed up, so did the Saviour
descend into hades, but it is but a parallel, in like manner, if we too become
one, as the Son in the Father, we shall not be as the Son, nor equal to Him;
for He and we are but parallel. For on this account is the word 'as' applied
to us; since things differing from others in nature, become as they, when
viewed in a certain relation[5]. Wherefore the Son Himself, simply and without
any condition is in the Father; for this attribute He has by nature; but for
us, to whom it is not natural, there is needed an image and example, that He
may say of us, ' As Thou in Me, and I in Thee.' 'And when they shall be so
perfected,' He says, 'then the world knows that Thou hast sent Me, for
unless I had come and borne this their body, no one of them had been
perfected, but one and all had remained corruptible[6] Work Thou then in them,
0 Father, and as Thou hast given to Me to bear this, grant to them Thy Spirit,
that they too in It may become one, and may be perfected in Me. For their
perfecting shews that Thy Word has sojourned among them; and the world seeing
them perfect and full of God[7], will believe altogether that Thou hast sent
Me, and I have sojourned here. For whence is this their perfecting, but that
I, Thy Word, having borne their body, and become man, have perfected the work,
which Thou gavest Me, O Father? And the work is perfected, because men,
redeemed from sin, no longer remain dead; but being deified[8], have in each
other, by looking at Me, the bond of charity[9].'

24. We then, by way of giving a rude view of the expressions in this
passage, have been led into many words, but blessed John will shew from his
Epistle the sense of the words, concisely and much more perfectly than we can.
And he will both disprove the interpretation of these irreligious men, and
will teach how we become in God and God in us; and bow again we become One in
Him, and how far the Son differs in nature from us, and will stop the Arians
from any longer thinking that they shall be as the Son, lest they hear it said
to them, 'Thou art a man and not God,' and Stretch not thyself, being poor,
beside a rich man[1].' John then thus writes; 'Hereby know we that we dwell in
Him and He in us, because He hath given us of His Spirit[2].' Therefore
because of the grace of the Spirit which has been given to us, in Him we come
to be, and He in us[3]; and since it is the Spirit of God, therefore through
His becoming in us, reasonably are we, as having the Spirit, considered to be
in God, and thus is God in us. Not then as the Son in the Father, so


also we become in the Father; for the Son does not merely partake the Spirit,
that therefore He too may be in the Father; nor does He receive the Spirit,
but rather He supplies It Himself to all; and the Spirit does not unite the
Word to the Father[4], but rather the Spirit receives from the Word. And the
Son is in the Father, as His own Word and Radiance; but we, apart from the
Spirit, are strange and distant from God, and by the participation of the
Spirit we are knit into the Godhead; so that our being in the Father is not
ours, but is the Spirit's which is in us and abides in us, while by the true
confession we preserve it in us, John again saying, 'Whosoever shall confess
that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him and he in Gods[5].' What
then is our likeness and equality), to the Son? rather, are not the Arians
confuted on every side? and especially by John, that the Son is in the Father
in one way, and we become in Him in another, and that neither we shall ever be
as He, nor is the Word as we; except they shall dare, as commonly, so now to
say, that the Son also by participation of the Spirit and by improvement of
conduct[6] came to be Himself also in the Father. But here again is an excess
of irreligion, even in admitting the thought. For He, as has been said, gives
to the Spirit, and whatever the Spirit hath, He hath from[7] the Word.

25. The Saviour, then, saying of us, 'As Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in
Thee, that they too may be one in Us,' does not signify that we were to have
identity with Him; for this was shewn from the instance of Jonah; but it is a
request to the Father, as John has written, that the Spirit should be
vouchsafed through Him to those who believe, through whom we are found to be
in God, and in this respect to be conjoined in Him. For since the Word is in
the Father, and the Spirit is given from[1] the Word, He wills that we should
receive the Spirit, that, when we receive It, thus having the Spirit of the
Word which is in the Father, we too may be found on account of the Spirit to
become One in the Word, and through Him in the Father. And if He say, 'as we,'
this again is only a request that such grace of the Spirit as is given to the
disciples may be without failure or revocation[2]. For what the Word has by
nature[3], as I said, in the Father, that He wishes to be given to us through
the Spirit irrevocably; which the Apostle knowing, said, 'Who shall separate
us from the love of Christ?' for 'the gifts of God' and 'grace of His calling
are without repentance[4].' It is the Spirit then which is in God, and not we
viewed in our own selves; and as we are sons and gods[5] because of the Word
in us[6], so we shall be in the Son and in the Father, and we shall be
accounted to have become one in Son and in Father, because that that Spirit is
in us, which is in the Word which is in the Father. When then a man falls from
the Spirit for any wickedness, if he repent upon his fall, the grace remains
irrevocably to such as are willing[7]; otherwise he who has fallen is no
longer in God (because that Holy Spirit and Paraclete which is in God has
deserted him), but the sinner shall be in him to whom he has subjected
himself, as took place in Saul's instance; for the Spirit of God departed from
him and an evil spirit was afflicting him[8]. God's enemies hearing this ought
to be henceforth abashed, and no longer to feign themselves equal to God. But
they neither understand (for 'the irreligious,' he saith, 'does not understand
knowledge'[9]) nor endure religious words, but find them heavy even to hear.