|Table of Contents | Words: Alphabetical - Frequency - Inverse - Length - Statistics | Help | IntraText Library|
|Eunomius of Cyzicus|
The First Apology
IntraText CT - Text
XIX. But now perhaps somebody that is heated in this matter may argue thus, in way of contradiction to our Reasoning: that if we must thus strictly adhere to the words made use of, and thence be led into the meaning of the things, as we pretend that Unbegotten and Begotten are so intirely different from one another; yet is it plain, that the names Light and Light, Life and Life, Power and Power, which are ascrib'd to both, are alike. To such an one's Question, we shall reply, not with the Argument of the Staff, instead of an Answer, according to the Saying of Diogenes: For the Philosophy of a Cynick is vastly remote from Christianity; but in imitation of the blessed  Apostle Paul, who says, that we ought to instruct those that oppose themselves with great Longsuffering.6 We answer then, that Light is either Unbegotten or Begotten; and we ask whether when. Light is spoken of an Unbegotten Being, and of a Being Begotten, it signifies differently, or has the very same signification? If the very same, 'tis plain, that that must be a compounded thing which consists of different things. Now what is compounded, is not Unbegotten : But if it has a different signification, then as much difference as there is between an Unbegotten and a Begotten Being, so much difference ought there to be suppos'd between Light and Light, Life and Life, Power and Power. For there is but one Rule and Method for the Resolution of all such Difficulties.
If therefore every Character of the Father, which concerns his Substance, be equivalent to that of Unbegotten, as to its proper signification, on account of his being free from Parts, and not compounded; and if the Case be the same as to the Only-begotten, that every Character must be equivalent to that of a Begotten Being, and yet they will still say these Characters may be convertible; who can further endure that they should use the word Likeness of Substance? or that they should determine one to have a Supereminence above the other as to Greatness, even tho all Consideration of Quantity, and, of Time, and the like Circumstances are set aside? and tho the Substance be, and is own'd to be simple and one?