{"slug":"khazarzar-athanasius-the-great-of-alexandria-contra-sabellianos","id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-athanasius-the-great-of-alexandria-contra-sabellianos","title":"Contra Sabellianos","title_source":"Contra Sabellianos","author":"Athanasius the Great of Alexandria","genre":"polemic/apologetic","date":"","tradition":"greek","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T07:45:57Z","cost_usd":0.01202},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-athanasius-the-great-of-alexandria-contra-sabellianos","work_id":"khazarzar-athanasius-the-great-of-alexandria-contra-sabellianos","edition":"khazarzar","language":"","license":"Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Athanasius%20the%20Great%20of%20Alexandria_%20PG%2025-28/Contra%20Sabellianos.pdf"},"stats":{"passages":22,"english_words":5940,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":23194,"commentary_units":130,"commentary_kinds":8,"derived_notes":3,"ambiguities":31,"work_notes":4,"external_links":0,"timeline":5},"summary":{"work":"khazarzar-athanasius-the-great-of-alexandria-contra-sabellianos","abstract":"The Contra Sabellianos is a Greek polemical treatise traditionally attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373), but its dating and authenticity are debated, with some scholars placing it in the late 4th or early 5th century. The work argues against Sabellianism, a theological position that conflated the persons of the Trinity, asserting instead the eternal co-existence of the Son and Spirit with God. The title is a later editorial addition, and the surviving text focuses primarily on the Son, raising questions about its completeness. The edition by khazarzar relies on a single manuscript tradition without critical apparatus, limiting access to variant readings. The treatise was not widely cited in later Greek patristic literature and has gained modern attention primarily through editions used in studies of anti-Sabellian polemic.","historical_context":"The Contra Sabellianos is set within the 4th-century Trinitarian controversies that followed the Council of Nicaea (325). Sabellianism, associated with the third-century theologian Sabellius, taught that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were modes or aspects of a single divine being, a view condemned as modalism. Athanasius, a key defender of Nicene orthodoxy, wrote extensively against Arianism, but this work targets Sabellianism, reflecting ongoing debates about the relationship between the divine persons. The treatise likely originated in Alexandria, a major center of Christian theological production, and was composed in Greek, the language of Eastern patristic literature. Its transmission is limited: based on a single manuscript tradition, it was not widely cited in later Greek sources, suggesting a narrow circulation. The work's uncertain dating and disputed authorship complicate its historical placement, but it aligns with late 4th-century efforts to refine Trinitarian doctrine against both Arian and Sabellian extremes.","significance":"The Contra Sabellianos is significant as a witness to the development of anti-Sabellian polemic in the post-Nicene period, illustrating how orthodox theologians distinguished their Trinitarian theology from modalist interpretations. Its focus on the Son's eternal co-existence with God, despite the title's mention of the Spirit, highlights the incomplete state of the transmitted text. The work's limited influence in antiquity contrasts with its modern use in studies of Trinitarian controversies, making it a valuable but cautious source for understanding the diversity of 4th-century theological argumentation.","timeline":[{"date":"c. 296–373","event":"Life of Athanasius of Alexandria, traditional author of Contra Sabellianos."},{"date":"325","event":"Council of Nicaea, defining Trinitarian orthodoxy against Arianism."},{"date":"Late 4th–early 5th c.","event":"Probable composition of Contra Sabellianos if not by Athanasius."},{"date":"4th–5th c.","event":"Transmission of the work in a single manuscript tradition."},{"date":"Modern period","event":"Edition by khazarzar based on the manuscript, used in studies of anti-Sabellian polemic."}],"relations":[{"work":"Against the Arians (Athanasius)","relation":"Another Athanasian polemic against a different Trinitarian heresy, showing his broader theological engagement.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"On the Trinity (Gregory of Nyssa)","relation":"Later Cappadocian work that also refutes Sabellianism, reflecting continued theological development.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Refutation of All Heresies (Hippolytus)","relation":"Earlier anti-heretical work that includes discussion of Sabellius, providing background.","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Ecclesiastical History (Eusebius of Caesarea)","relation":"Source for early Christian heresies, including Sabellianism, contextualizing the treatise.","key":"","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[],"cautions":["The attribution to Athanasius is debated; some scholars assign the work to the late 4th or early 5th century.","The title is a later editorial addition, not original to the work.","The surviving text focuses on the Son, despite the title's mention of the Spirit, raising questions about completeness.","The edition by khazarzar is based on a single manuscript tradition without critical apparatus, so variant readings are not recorded.","The work was not widely cited in later Greek patristic literature, limiting its historical impact."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.00054,"generated":"2026-11-15T07:45:56Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Patrologia Graeca text (khazarzar mirror)","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Athanasius%20the%20Great%20of%20Alexandria_%20PG%2025-28/Contra%20Sabellianos.pdf"}],"checks":{"work":"khazarzar-athanasius-the-great-of-alexandria-contra-sabellianos","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":22,"translated":22,"commentary_passages":22,"commentary_units":130,"english_words":5940,"source_letters":23194,"commentary_kinds":8},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The edition by khazarzar is based on a single manuscript tradition; no critical apparatus is provided, so variant readings from other witnesses are not recorded.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The work is traditionally attributed to Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373), but its dating and authenticity are debated; some scholars assign it to the late 4th or early 5th century.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The treatise was not widely cited in later Greek patristic literature; its influence is primarily modern, through editions used in studies of anti-Sabellian polemic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"This edition does not include a translation or commentary; readers must rely on the Greek text alone, which may obscure theological nuances for non-specialists.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: polemic/apologetic in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 22 narrative."},{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","text":"3 scriptural phrase match(es) noted: John 1:1; John 1:14; Luke 1:28."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: khazarzar — Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":22},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"ΤΟΥ ΕΝ ΑΓΙΟΙΣ ΠΑΤΡΟΣ ΗΜΩΝ ΑΘΑΝΑΣΙΟΥ Περὶ τῆς ἀϊδίου ὑπάρξεως τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος σὺν Θεῷ, καὶ πρὸς τοὺς Σαβελλίζοντας.\n\nἸουδαϊσμὸς ἀντίκειται πρὸς Ἑλληνισμὸν, καὶ οὐδέτερος εὐσεβὴς, ἀλλ' ἀμφότεροι τῆς ἀληθείας ἐκτός. Ἐπεὶ καὶ Βαβυλώνιοι πεπολεμήκασιν Αἰγυπτίους, καὶ ἄλλοι πολλοὶ ἀσεβεῖς ἀσεβέσιν ἠναντιώθησαν. Οὐ τοίνυν ἐξαρκεῖ τὸ πρὸς ἀσέβειαν ἀνθίστασθαι, εἰ μὴ δι' εὐσέβειαν ἡ πρὸς τὴν ἀσέβειαν ἀντίστασις γίγνηται. Πολλὰ καὶ μεγάλα κατὰ τῶν εἰδωλολατρούντων ἔχουσι λέγειν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι, καὶ δίκαια λέγουσι κατηγοροῦντες αὐτῶν τῇ κτίσει λατρευόντων παρὰ τὸν κτίσαντα. Ἀλλ' οὐχ ὅτι δυσσέβειαν ἐλέγχουσι, διὰ τοῦτο εὐσεβεῖν ὁμολογηθήσον ται, τὸν Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα γέγονεν, ἀρνούμενοι, καὶ τοῖς δι' αὐτοῦ τὸν Πατέρα σεβομένοις ἐγκαλοῦντες πολυθεότητα. Διόπερ ἐξεληλύθαμεν ἐξ Ἑλλήνων, καὶ ἀφωρίσμεθα, πρὸς τὸ μὴ ταῖς ἀκα θάρτοις εἰδωλολατρείαις ἀναμίγνυσθαι· ἐξεληλύθα μεν δὲ καὶ ἐκ τῆς τῶν Ἰουδαίων βλασφημίας, τὸν Υἱὸν ὁμολογήσαντες τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ φυγόντες τὴν ὀλέθριον ἄρνησιν τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν, τοῦ λέγοντος· «Ὃς δ' ἂν ἀρνήσηταί με ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀρνήσομαι αὐτὸν ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Πατρός μου τοῦ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.» Ὁμολογοῦμεν δὲ τὸν Υἱὸν ἐκ Πατρὸς, καὶ ἀεὶ μετὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς, πιστεύοντες αὐτῷ λέγοντι καὶ ἐπαγγελλομένῳ·","english":"Of our holy father Athanasius, On the eternal existence of the Son and the Spirit with God, and against the Sabellians.\n\nJudaism is opposed to Hellenism, and neither is pious, but both are outside the truth. For Babylonians have warred against Egyptians, and many other impious men have been set against the impious. It is not sufficient, therefore, to resist impiety, unless the resistance to impiety occurs for the sake of piety. The Jews have many great things to say against the idolaters, and they speak justly in accusing them of worshipping the creation instead of the creator. But because they refute impiety, they will not for that reason be confessed to be pious, denying the Son of God, through whom all things have come to be, and accusing those who through him worship the Father of polytheism. For this reason we have come out from the Greeks, and have been separated, so as not to be mingled with the unclean idolatries; and we have come out also from the blasphemy of the Jews, confessing the Son of God, and fleeing the destructive denial of our Lord, who says: \"Whoever denies me before men, I will deny him before my Father in heaven.\" And we confess the Son from the Father, and always with the Father, believing him who says and promises:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"ΤΟΥ ΕΝ ΑΓΙΟΙΣ ΠΑΤΡΟΣ ΗΜΩΝ ΑΘΑΝΑΣΙΟΥ Περὶ τῆς ἀϊδίου ὑπάρξεως τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος σὺν Θεῷ, καὶ πρὸς τοὺς Σαβελλίζοντας","severity":"info","text":"The title is a later editorial addition, not original to the work; it frames the treatise as anti-Sabellian and asserts the eternal co-existence of Son and Spirit with God.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἰουδαϊσμὸς ἀντίκειται πρὸς Ἑλληνισμὸν","severity":"info","text":"Athanasius sets Judaism and Hellenism as parallel impieties, a rhetorical move to position orthodox Christianity as a third way distinct from both, common in early Christian apologetic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὃς δ' ἂν ἀρνήσηταί με ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀρνήσομαι αὐτὸν ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Πατρός μου τοῦ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς","severity":"info","text":"This saying is not found in the canonical Gospels; it may be an agraphon or a loose citation of a dominical tradition, possibly from the Gospel of the Hebrews or a lost source.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"Σαβελλίζοντας","severity":"info","text":"Sabellianism, associated with Sabellius (3rd c.), taught that Father and Son are modes of a single divine subject; Athanasius opposes this as a form of modalism that collapses Trinitarian distinction.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"ἐξεληλύθαμεν ἐξ Ἑλλήνων, καὶ ἀφωρίσμεθα","severity":"info","text":"The language of separation from both Greeks and Jews echoes the self-definition of early Christian communities as a 'third race' (tertium genus), a theme found in second- and third-century apologetic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Περὶ τῆς ἀϊδίου ὑπάρξεως τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος σὺν Θεῷ","severity":"caution","text":"The title's mention of the Spirit is not developed in the surviving text; the treatise focuses on the Son, raising questions about the integrity or completeness of the transmitted work.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The source of the dominical saying quoted is uncertain; it may be apocryphal or a paraphrase.","The title's reference to the Spirit may reflect a later redactor's theological interest rather than the original scope."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"«Πᾶς ὅστις ὁμολογήσειεν ἐμὲ ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὁμολογήσω κἀγὼ αὐτὸν ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Πατρός μου τοῦ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.» Τοῦτο ὁρῶντες τὸ παράδειγμα, καὶ νῦν ἀπηλλοτριώθημεν τῶν Ἑλληνιζόντων ἐπ' ὀνόματι Χριστιανισμοῦ, τῶν ἔργον Θεοῦ τολμώντων θεολογεῖν τε καὶ προσκυνεῖν. Χωριζόμεθα δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαϊζόντων καὶ τὸν Χριστιανισμὸν ἐν Ἰουδαϊσμῷ παραφθειρόντων· οἳ, τὸν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ Θεὸν ἀρνούμενοι, Θεὸν ἕνα παραπλησίως Ἰουδαίοις λέγουσιν· οὐχ ὅτι μόνος ἀγέννητος· καὶ μόνος πηγὴ θεότητος, διὰ τοῦτο φάσκοντες αὐτὸν εἶναι μόνον Θεόν· ἀλλ' ὡς ἄγονον Υἱοῦ καὶ ἄκαρπον ζῶντος Λόγου καὶ σοφίας ἀληθινῆς. Λόγον γὰρ οἷον τὸν ἐκ καρδίας ἀνθρώπου νομίζουσι τὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ σοφίαν ὁποίαν τὴν ἐν ψυχῇ· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πρόσωπον ἓν τὸν Θεὸν ἅμα τῷ Λόγῳ φασίν· ὥσπερ καὶ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἅμα τῷ ἑαυτοῦ Λόγῳ ἄνθρωπον ἕνα, οὐδὲν πλέον Ἰουδαίων δοξάζοντες, τῶν οὐκ ἀποδεξαμένων τὸν εὐαγγελιστὴν τὸν εὐθὺς ἐξ ἀρχῆς βοῶντα· «Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.» Εἰ γὰρ ἐν καρδίᾳ Λόγον ὁ Θεὸς ἔχει μὴ γεγεννημένον ἐξ αὐτοῦ κατὰ ἀλήθειαν, ὡς Θεὸν ἐκ Θεοῦ, πῶς ἂν εἴη πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν ὁ Λόγος; καὶ πῶς ἂν εἴη Θεός; Οὐ γὰρ ὁ λόγος τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἄνθρωπός ἐστι πρὸς ἄνθρωπον, ἐπεὶ μήτε ζῶν ἐστι, μήτε ὑφεστὼς, ἀλλὰ ζώσης καρδίας καὶ ὑφεστώσης κίνημα μόνον· καὶ λέγεται παραχρῆμα, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι, καὶ πολλάκις λαλούμενος οὐδέποτε δια μένει. Τὸν δὲ τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγον ἄνωθεν ὁ ψαλμῳδὸς ἐκεκράγει λέγων·","english":"Anyone who would confess me before men, I also will confess before my Father in heaven. Seeing this example, we have now been alienated from those who Hellenize under the name of Christianity, who dare to theologize and worship the work of God. We separate also from those who Judaize and corrupt Christianity into Judaism; who, denying the God from God, say there is one God similarly to the Jews—not because he alone is unbegotten and alone the source of divinity, and for this reason they claim he is the only God, but as one barren of a Son and fruitless of a living Word and true wisdom. For they consider the Word of God to be like the word from a man's heart, and wisdom like that in the soul; and therefore they say that God together with the Word is one person, just as a man together with his own word is one man, glorifying nothing more than the Jews, who did not accept the evangelist who cries out from the beginning: \"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.\" For if God has a Word in his heart not truly begotten from him as God from God, how could the Word be with God? And how could it be God? For the word of a man is not a man with respect to man, since it is neither living nor subsistent, but only a movement of a living and subsistent heart; and it is spoken immediately, and it is not, and often spoken it never endures. But the psalmist cried out from above concerning the Word of God, saying:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"«Πᾶς ὅστις ὁμολογήσειεν ἐμὲ ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ὁμολογήσω κἀγὼ αὐτὸν ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ Πατρός μου τοῦ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.»","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of Matthew 10:32-33, where Jesus promises to acknowledge his confessors before the Father. Athanasius uses it as a model for his own confession of faith.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"Ἑλληνιζόντων","severity":"info","text":"The term 'Hellenizing' here refers to Christians who adopt Greek philosophical concepts, likely those who subordinate the Son to the Father (Arians). Athanasius contrasts them with 'Judaizing' Christians.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"Ἰουδαϊζόντων","severity":"info","text":"'Judaizing' describes Christians who deny the full divinity of the Son, reducing God to a single person without a begotten Word. This echoes anti-Sabellian polemic, as Sabellius was accused of modalism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"«Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.»","severity":"info","text":"A direct quotation of John 1:1-2, used to argue that the Word is both distinct from God ('with God') and divine ('was God'). This counters the Judaizing view that the Word is merely an internal thought.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Λόγον γὰρ οἷον τὸν ἐκ καρδίας ἀνθρώπου νομίζουσι","severity":"info","text":"Athanasius refutes the analogy that God's Word is like human internal speech (logos endiathetos). This was a common Stoic and Middle Platonic concept, which he rejects as inadequate for Trinitarian theology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Χωριζόμεθα δὲ καὶ τῶν Ἰουδαϊζόντων","severity":"info","text":"This passage forms a double rejection: first of Hellenizers (Arians), then of Judaizers (Sabellians). The structure mirrors the opening contrast between Judaism and Hellenism, establishing Athanasius' via media.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text is clear; no significant ambiguities."],"confidence":"high","notes":[{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","ref":"John 1:1","text":"The English carries the scriptural phrase “in the beginning was the word”, which matches John 1:1. The match is on the English draft; check the Coptic before quoting the verse."}]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"«Εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, Κύριε, ὁ Λόγος σου διαμένει ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ·» καὶ σύμφωνος αὐτῷ ὁ Θεὸν εἶναι τὸν Λόγον ὁμολογῶν εὐαγγελιστὴς, φανερωθέντα τε αὐτὸν εὐαγγελίζεται, καὶ παρα γενόμενον μηνύει, καὶ σαρκωθέντα κηρύττει, οὐ συμπεριλαμβάνων τῇ τοῦ Λόγου σαρκώσει τὸν Πατέρα· «Ὁ Λόγος, γάρ φησι, σὰρξ ἐγένετο, καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν, καὶ ἐθεασάμεθα τὴν δόξαν αὐτοῦ, δόξαν ὡς Μονογενοῦς παρὰ Πατρὸς, πλήρης χάριτος καὶ ἀληθείας.» Μονογενῆ τὸν Λόγον ὄντα ὁρᾷς ἐν κόσμῳ φανερούμενον, ἐν ἀνθρώποις σκη νοῦντα, δόξαν αὐτῷ\n\nκηρυσσομένην, ὡς Μονογενοῦς παρὰ Πατρός· οὐχ ὡς Πατρὸς αὐτοῦ ὄντος, οὐδ' ὡς τοῦ Πατρὸς ἅμα τῷ Λόγῳ πεφηνότος, ὥσπερ ὁ ἄν θρωπος ἅμα τῷ ἑαυτοῦ φαίνεται λόγῳ, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι φανῆναι τὸν λόγον, εἰ μὴ καὶ ὁ λαλῶν αὐτὸν παρείη καὶ φθέγγοιτο. Τίσιν οὖν πιστεύομεν; Πότερον τοῖς εὐαγγελιζομένοις ἡμῖν Υἱὸν παρὰ Πατρὸς ἐπι δεδημηκότα, ἢ τοῖς ἓν πρόσωπον ἅμα τῷ Λόγῳ τὸν Πατέρα φάσκουσιν εἶναι; Εἰ γὰρ ἓν πρόσωπον, πῶς τὸ μὲν ἀποστέλλει, τὸ δὲ ἀποστέλλεται, καὶ θεωρεῖται διὰ σαρκός; «Θεὸν» γὰρ «οὐδεὶς ἑώρακε πώποτε· ὁ μονογενὴς Υἱὸς, ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ Πατρὸς, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο,» καὶ παραγεγονὼς αὐτὸς φθέγ γεται τῇ ἁγίᾳ φωνῇ, παρέχων τὴν ἑαυτοῦ θεωρίαν, καὶ διὰ ταύτης τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐπίγνωσιν ὑποτιθέμενος· «Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ, ἑώρακε τὸν Πατέρα,» οὐχ ἑαυτὸν εἶναι τὸν Πατέρα φάσκων, πῶς γὰρ, τὸν ἀόρατον; ἀλλὰ τοιοῦτον οἷον τὸν Πατέρα· προειρήκει γάρ· «Εἰ ἐγνώκειτέ με, καὶ τὸν Πατέρα μου ἂν ᾔδειτε,» τὴν δυάδα τῶν προσώπων ἄντικρυς ἡμῖν ἐξηγούμενος, ἀπαραλλάκτῳ γνωριζομένην θεό τητι.","english":"Your Word, O Lord, abides in heaven forever.” And in agreement with him is the evangelist who confesses the Word to be God, proclaims that he was manifested, indicates that he arrived, and preaches that he became flesh, not including the Father in the Word’s incarnation: “The Word,” he says, “became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an Only-begotten from a Father, full of grace and truth.” You see the Word, being Only-begotten, manifested in the world, dwelling among men, glory proclaimed for him as of an Only-begotten from a Father, not as though he were his own Father, nor as though the Father appeared together with the Word, as a man appears together with his own word, and it is not possible for the word to appear unless the speaker who utters it is also present and speaks. Whom then do we believe? Those who proclaim to us a Son who has come from a Father, or those who assert that the Father is one person together with the Word? For if they are one person, how is it that one sends and the other is sent, and he is seen through flesh? “For no one has ever seen God; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he explained,” and having arrived, he himself speaks with his holy voice, providing his own contemplation, and through this setting forth the knowledge of the Father: “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” not claiming that he himself is the Father—for how could he, the invisible one?—but such as the Father; for he had said earlier, “If you had known me, you would also know my Father,” explaining to us directly the duality of persons, recognized by an unalterable divinity.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, Κύριε, ὁ Λόγος σου διαμένει ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ","severity":"info","text":"This is a citation of Psalm 119:89 (LXX 118:89), adapted to a Trinitarian context, asserting the eternal abiding of the Word in heaven.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὁ Λόγος, γάρ φησι, σὰρξ ἐγένετο, καὶ ἐσκήνωσεν ἐν ἡμῖν","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of John 1:14, emphasizing the incarnation of the Word without the Father, a key point in anti-Sabellian polemic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ, ἑώρακε τὸν Πατέρα","severity":"info","text":"This is a citation of John 14:9, used to argue for a duality of persons (Father and Son) while maintaining unity of divinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἰ ἐγνώκειτέ με, καὶ τὸν Πατέρα μου ἂν ᾔδειτε","severity":"info","text":"This is a citation of John 8:19, interpreted as evidence for two distinct persons (Father and Son) known through the Son.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"Μονογενής","severity":"info","text":"The term 'Only-begotten' is used to distinguish the Son from the Father, emphasizing his unique generation and not co-identity, central to anti-Sabellian argument.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"external","lemma":"Σαβέλλιος","severity":"info","text":"The work refutes Sabellianism, which held Father and Son as one person (modalistic monarchianism), a heresy condemned in the 3rd century.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text has minor textual variants in the scriptural citations (e.g., John 1:14 vs. 1:14a), but the sense is clear. The identity of the 'evangelist' is ambiguous but likely John."],"confidence":"high","notes":[{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","ref":"Luke 1:28","text":"The English carries the scriptural phrase “full of grace”, which matches Luke 1:28. The match is on the English draft; check the Coptic before quoting the verse."}]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"Διόπερ ὁ τῆς τοῦ Υἱοῦ καταξιούμενος θεωρίας οὐκ ἀπεστέρηται τῆς τοῦ Πατρός. Οὐ γὰρ ἀλλοῖον ὁ γεννήτωρ ἐγέννα, ἀλλὰ τοιοῦτον οἷος αὐτός. Εἰ γοῦν ἕν τι μόνον εἶναι πρᾶγμα νομίζεις, δύο δὲ ὄντα κατὰ ἀλήθειαν, ἀγνοεῖς τὸν Πατέρα καὶ τὸν Υἱόν. Τίς οὖν σοι πρὸς τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν διδασκαλίαν ἐστὶ κοι νωνία; Πῶς δὲ τὰς τοῦ δεσπότου δέξῃ φωνὰς, «Ἐγὼ, φησὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν;» Καὶ πάλιν περὶ τοῦ Πατρὸς διαλεγόμενος, «Παρ' αὐτοῦ εἰμι,» φησὶ, «κἀκεῖνος ἐμὲ ἀπέστειλε·» προστίθησι δὲ καὶ τὸ τρίτον· «Ἐγὼ,» φησὶ, «παρακαλέσω τὸν Πατέρα μου, καὶ ἄλλον Παράκλητον δώσει ὑμῖν.» Ὅταν οὖν περὶ μὲν ἑαυτοῦ λέγῃ τὸ, «Ἐγώ,» περὶ δὲ τοῦ Πατρὸς, «Ἐκεῖνος,» περὶ δὲ τοῦ Πνεύματος, «ἄλλος·» πῶς οὐκ ἀποστασία σαφὴς ἀρνεῖσθαι τὰ τρία, καὶ μόνον εἶναι λέγειν τὸν φάσκοντα· «Οὐκ εἰμὶ μόνος, ὅτι ὁ πέμψας με Πατὴρ μετ' ἐμοῦ ἐστι.» Χρῆται δὲ καὶ νομικῇ φωνῇ, καὶ διὰ ταύτης δύο παρίστησιν ὄντας αὐτόν τε καὶ τὸν Πατέρα· «Ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, γάρ φησι, τῷ ὑμετέρῳ γέγραπται, ὅτι δύο ἀνθρώπων ἡ μαρτυρία ἀληθής ἐστιν· Ἐγὼ,» φησὶν, «εἰμὶ ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, καὶ μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ ὁ πέμψας με Πατήρ.» Ἰδοὺ γὰρ δύο πρόσωπα, καὶ εἰ μὴ λέγεις δύο εἶναι κατὰ ἀλήθειαν, τοῦτο λέγων οὐδὲ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἐᾷς συνίστασθαι οὖσαν ἀληθινήν. Τοῦτο γὰρ πιστοῦται τὴν μαρτυρίαν, τὸ μὴ ὑφ' ἑνὸς γίνεσθαι μόνου, ἀλλ' ὑπὸ δύο. Καὶ γὰρ μεμαρτύρηκεν ὁ Πατὴρ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ λέγων· «Οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Υἱός μου ὁ ἀγαπητός·» καὶ Υἱὸς Θεοῦ εἶναι ὁ μονογενὴς Υἱὸς μαρτυρεῖ, καὶ τῷ Πατρὶ διείλεκται σαφῶς ἐν ἀκοαῖς ἀνθρώπων λέγων·","english":"Therefore, the one who is deemed worthy of the contemplation of the Son is not deprived of the Father. For the begetter did not beget something different, but such as he himself is. If, then, you think that there is only one thing, while in truth there are two, you are ignorant of the Father and the Son. What communion, then, do you have with the ecclesiastical teaching? And how will you receive the words of the Lord, who says, \"I and the Father are one\"? And again, speaking about the Father, he says, \"I am from him, and he sent me\"; and he adds a third: \"I,\" he says, \"will call upon my Father, and he will give you another Paraclete.\" When, therefore, he says concerning himself, \"I,\" and concerning the Father, \"He,\" and concerning the Spirit, \"another,\" how is it not a clear apostasy to deny the three and to say that only one exists, when he who says, \"I am not alone, because the Father who sent me is with me\"? He also uses a legal expression, and through this he presents both himself and the Father as two: \"For in your law,\" he says, \"it is written that the testimony of two men is true; I,\" he says, \"am the one testifying about myself, and the Father who sent me testifies about me.\" For behold, there are two persons, and if you do not say that they are two in truth, by saying this you do not allow the testimony, which is true, to stand. For this confirms the testimony, that it is not made by one alone, but by two. For the Father has testified from heaven, saying, \"This is my beloved Son\"; and the Son of God, the only-begotten Son, testifies, and he has clearly conversed with the Father in the hearing of men, saying:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Διόπερ","severity":"info","text":"The connective 'Διόπερ' ('Therefore') links this passage to the preceding argument that the Son is not separate from the Father in essence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"θεωρίας","severity":"info","text":"'θεωρίας' ('contemplation') here denotes spiritual insight into the divine nature, a key concept in Athanasius' theology of the Son.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐγὼ, φησὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν","severity":"info","text":"This citation conflates John 10:30 ('I and the Father are one') with the broader Johannine discourse on unity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Παρ' αὐτοῦ εἰμι, κἀκεῖνος ἐμὲ ἀπέστειλε","severity":"info","text":"Echoes John 8:42 and 17:18, where Jesus speaks of being sent by the Father, emphasizing distinction of persons.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐγὼ παρακαλέσω τὸν Πατέρα μου, καὶ ἄλλον Παράκλητον δώσει ὑμῖν","severity":"info","text":"Likely a paraphrase of John 14:16, where Jesus promises another Paraclete (the Holy Spirit), reinforcing the triad.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"νομικῇ φωνῇ","severity":"info","text":"The 'legal expression' refers to the Jewish law requiring two witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15), used here to argue for two distinct persons.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'δύο πρόσωπα' ('two persons') may be read as either two distinct individuals or two hypostases; Athanasius intends the latter.","The source of the legal citation is not explicitly given; it may be a loose reference to Deuteronomy."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":5,"ref":"p5","source":"«Ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, Πάτερ, Κύριε τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἀπέκρυψας ταῦτα ἀπὸ σοφῶν καὶ συνετῶν, καὶ ἀπεκάλυψας αὐτὰ νηπίοις. Ναὶ ὁ Πατήρ· ὅτι οὕτως εὐδοκία ἐγένετο ἔμπροσθέν σου. Πάντα μοι παρεδόθη ὑπὸ τοῦ Πατρός μου.» Ἀλλὰ τί πρὸς ταῦτα ἀπολογοῦνται οἱ τῆς Ἰουδαίων ἀρνήσεως ὑπηρέται, ὑπὲρ τοῦ μὴ σαφῶς ἐλέγχεσθαι τοῖς Εὐαγγελίοις ἀντιπράττοντες τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ· καὶ οὕτως δύο ὑποστάσεις φαίνεσθαι, ἕνα τὸν Πατέρα Θεὸν, ἕτερον δὲ τὸν Υἱὸν ἄνθρωπον; Φεῦ τῆς ἀσεβείας! Καὶ τί τοῦτο διαφέρει τῆς Σαμοσατέως ἀπο λογίας; εἰπάτωσαν δὲ πῶς ἄνθρωπος περὶ ἑαυτοῦ ταῦτα φθέγγεσθαι τολμᾷ. «Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ, ἑώρακε τὸν Πατέρα;» Πῶς δὲ ὁ εὐαγγελιστὴς περὶ αὐτοῦ ταῦτα φθεγγομένου μαρτυρεῖ, ὅτι Πατέρα ἴδιον ἔλεγε τὸν Θεὸν ἴσον ἑαυτὸν ποιῶν τῷ Θεῷ; Οὐκ ἄνθρωπος ἴσος τῷ Θεῷ, ἀλλ' ὁ ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ Θεὸς ἴσα ἕξει τῷ γεγεννηκότι κατὰ τὴν φύσιν, ὡς καὶ Παῦλος μαρ τυρεῖ, οὐ περὶ τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως, ἀλλὰ τὰ πρὸ τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως ἐξηγούμενος· «Ὃς, ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ.» Ἴσμεν καὶ ἀνθρωπίνως πολλάκις τὸν Σωτῆρα φθεγ γόμενον· ἀλλ' οὐχ ὅτε φησίν· «Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, καὶ μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ ὁ πέμψας με Πατήρ.» Οὐ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος ὁ πεμφθεὶς εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ὁ λέγων·","english":"I confess to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent, and revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for such was the good pleasure before you. All things were delivered to me by my Father. But what do the servants of the Jewish denial say in defense of this, so as not to be clearly refuted as acting contrary to the Gospels of our Lord Jesus Christ, and so that two hypostases appear, one the Father God, and the other the Son a man? Shame on such impiety! And how does this differ from the argument of Samosatenus? Let them say how a man dares to utter these things about himself: \"He who has seen me has seen the Father\"? And how does the evangelist testify, when he speaks these things, that he called God his own Father, making himself equal to God? Not a man is equal to God, but the God from God will be equal to the begetter according to nature, as Paul also testifies, not concerning the incarnation, but explaining the things before the incarnation: \"Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider it a usurpation to be equal to God.\" We know that the Savior often speaks in a human manner; but not when he says: \"I am the one who bears witness concerning myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness concerning me.\" For it is not a man who was sent into the world, who says:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ὑποστάσεις","severity":"info","text":"The plural of ὑπόστασις (hypostasis) here denotes distinct individual realities. The author insists that Father and Son are two hypostases, countering a modalist conflation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ, ἑώρακε τὸν Πατέρα","severity":"info","text":"A clear echo of John 14:9, where Jesus says, 'He who has seen me has seen the Father.' The author uses it to argue for the Son's divinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ μαρτυρῶν περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, καὶ μαρτυρεῖ περὶ ἐμοῦ ὁ πέμψας με Πατήρ","severity":"info","text":"This conflates Johannine themes (John 8:18, 14:16) to stress the Son's self-witness and the Father's sending, underscoring their distinct yet equal status.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Σαμοσατέως","severity":"info","text":"Refers to Paul of Samosata, a third-century bishop condemned for adoptionist Christology. The author likens his opponents' view to that heresy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὃς, ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ","severity":"info","text":"A paraphrase of Philippians 2:6, where Paul says Christ, 'existing in the form of God,' did not consider equality with God a usurpation. The author applies it to the pre-incarnate Son.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἰουδαίων ἀρνήσεως ὑπηρέται","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'servants of the Jewish denial' is a polemical slur, not a historical reference. It likely targets Christians who deny the Son's full divinity, not Jews.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text has a lacuna after 'ὁ λέγων·' at the end; the English draft supplies no completion. The reading assumes the sentence continues with a scriptural quotation."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":6,"ref":"p6","source":"«Ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἥκω·» ὁ λέγων· «Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν Υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν, ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται, ἀλλ' ἔχῃ ζωὴν αἰώνιον·» ὁ λέγων· «Καταβέβηκα ἐκ τοῦ οὐ ρανοῦ, οὐχ ἵνα ποιῶ τὸ θέλημα τὸ ἐμὸν, ἀλλὰ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός με.» Ἀλλ' εἰ θέλεις αὐτῷ ἀνθρωπίνως ἀκοῦσαι, ἁρμοζόντως τῇ ὁρωμένῃ κατὰ σάρκα μορφῇ, καὶ τῇ νομιζομένῃ ψιλῇ παρὰ τοῖς ἀκούσασιν ἀνθρωπότητι, ἄκουε λέγοντος αὐτοῦ· «Εἰ ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, ἡ μαρτυρία μου ἀληθὴς οὐκ ἔστι·» κατὰ τὸ μὴ ἀξιόπιστον εἶναι, μηδὲ νομίζεσθαι ἄνθρωπον ἑαυτῷ μαρτυροῦντα· ὅτε δέ φησι· «Κἂν ἐγὼ μαρτυρῶ περὶ ἐμαυτοῦ, ἡ μαρ τυρία μου ἀληθής ἐστιν, ὅτι οἶδα πόθεν ἔρχομαι, καὶ ποῦ ὑπάγω.» Ὅτε, ἀριθμῶν τὸν Πατέρα καὶ αὑτὸν, δύο φησὶν εἶναι τοὺς περὶ τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ μάρτυρας, οὐκ ἀνθρώπινα φθέγγεται, ἀλλ' ὑπὲρ πᾶσαν ἀνθρωπί νην ἀξίαν· καὶ τί λέγω ἀνθρωπίνην; ὑπὲρ ἀγγελικὴν, ὑπὲρ ἀρχὰς, ὑπὲρ δυνάμεις, ὑπὲρ κυριότητας. Ποία γὰρ ἀνθρώπου καὶ Θεοῦ συναρίθμησις; τίς ἐγγύτης, ἢ τίς κοινωνία; ἀλλὰ λέγων· «Ἐξομολογοῦμαί σοι, Πάτερ, Κύριε τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῆς γῆς,» ἄνθρωπος εἶναί σοι δοκεῖ, καλῶς· καὶ γὰρ ἔχει τὸ ἀνθρώπινον ἀνα μεμιγμένον ἡ παραγενομένη θεότης εἰς τὸν κόσμον. Ἀλλὰ μὴ διὰ τὸ κάλυμμα τῆς σαρκὸς ἀγνόει τὸν Θεὸν, τὸν εὐθὺς ἐπάγοντα περὶ ἑαυτοῦ, καὶ φάσκοντα· «Οὐδεὶς ἐπιγινώσκει τὸν Υἱὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ Πατὴρ, οὐδὲ τὸν Πατέρα τις ἐπιγινώσκει εἰ μὴ ὁ Υἱὸς, καὶ ᾧ ἂν βούληται ὁ Υἱὸς ἀποκαλύψαι. Δεῦτε πρὸς μὲ, πάντες οἱ κοπιῶντες καὶ πεφορτισμένοι, κἀγὼ ἀναπαύσω ὑμᾶς.","english":"I came forth from the Father and I am here,\" he says. \"For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish, but have eternal life,\" he says. \"I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of the one who sent me.\" But if you wish to hear him in a human way, fittingly to the visible form in the flesh and to the mere humanity supposed by those who hear, listen to him saying, \"If I testify about myself, my testimony is not true,\" according to the fact that a man testifying about himself is not credible nor considered trustworthy. But when he says, \"Even if I testify about myself, my testimony is true, because I know whence I come and whither I go.\" Then, numbering the Father and himself, he says there are two witnesses concerning his glory; he does not speak in human terms, but beyond all human worth—and what am I saying, human?—beyond angelic, beyond principalities, beyond powers, beyond lordships. For what is the enumeration together of a man and God? What closeness or what communion? But saying, \"I confess to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth,\" he seems to you to be a man, rightly; for the divinity that has come into the world has the human element mixed in. But do not, because of the veil of the flesh, be ignorant of God, who immediately adds concerning himself and declares, \"No one knows the Son except the Father, nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and to whomever the Son wishes to reveal. Come to me, all who labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐκ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἥκω","severity":"info","text":"The opening phrase echoes John 16:28 ('I came out from the Father') and possibly John 8:42, framing Christ's speech as a direct claim of divine origin.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν Υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν","severity":"info","text":"A close paraphrase of John 3:16, with 'only-begotten Son' (μονογενῆ) emphasizing the unique divine filiation against Sabellian modalism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Καταβέβηκα ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, οὐχ ἵνα ποιῶ τὸ θέλημα τὸ ἐμὸν, ἀλλὰ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ πέμψαντός με","severity":"info","text":"Likely a composite of John 6:38 and Matthew 15:24, stressing Christ's subordination to the Father's will, a key anti-Sabellian point.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὐδεὶς ἐπιγινώσκει τὸν Υἱὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ Πατὴρ, οὐδὲ τὸν Πατέρα τις ἐπιγινώσκει εἰ μὴ ὁ Υἱὸς","severity":"info","text":"A free adaptation of Matthew 11:27, asserting mutual exclusive knowledge between Father and Son, reinforcing distinct hypostases.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"συναρίθμησις","severity":"info","text":"The term 'enumeration together' (συναρίθμησις) is rare; Athanasius uses it to argue that Christ's pairing of himself with the Father as two witnesses (cf. John 8:17-18) proves their distinctness, contra Sabellian fusion.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The passage alternates between Christ's lowly human speech and exalted divine claims, a rhetorical pattern that underscores the paradox of the incarnation—a central polemic against Sabellian denial of real distinction.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text has minor orthographic variation (e.g., 'οὐ ρανοῦ' for 'οὐρανοῦ'), but the sense is clear. The source of the final exhortation 'Come to me...' is uncertain; it may be a free composition by Athanasius rather than a direct scriptural quote."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":7,"ref":"p7","source":"Ἄρατε τὸν ζυγόν μου ἐφ' ὑμᾶς, καὶ μάθετε ἀπ' ἐμοῦ, ὅτι πρᾶός εἰμι, καὶ ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ· καὶ εὑρή σετε ἀνάπαυσιν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ὑμῶν· ὁ γὰρ ζυγός μου χρηστὸς, καὶ τὸ φορτίον μου ἐλαφρόν ἐστιν.» Ἀπέκλεισέ σοι τὴν συκοφαντίαν ὁ Κύριος· Θεὸν παραστήσας ἑαυτὸν καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης μορφῆς ὑπὸ τοῦ Πατρὸς γινωσκόμενον μόνον, καὶ γινώσκοντα τὸν Πατέρα, καὶ τοῖς καταξιουμένοις ἀποκαλύπτοντα τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γνῶσιν καὶ τὴν τοῦ Πατρὸς, προσκαλεῖται ἡμᾶς πρὸς ἑαυτὸν, ἀνάπαυσιν ἐπαγγελλόμενος παρὰ ἑαυτῷ, καὶ ζυγὸν ἑαυτοῦ βαστάσαι παρακελευόμενος. Ταῦτα λέγων ἀπαμφιέννυσι τὴν θεότητα, ἑρμηνεύει τὸ κεκαλυμμένον διὰ τῆς μικρᾶς μορφῆς ὑπερβάλλον μέγεθος, τὴν ὑπερουράνιον ἐξουσίαν ἐπιδείκνυσι γηΐνῳ παραπεπετασμένην σώματι. Καὶ τί με δεῖ καταλέγειν μυρίας οὔσας θεϊκὰς φωνὰς τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; δι' ὧν ἐκβάλλεται μὲν εἰκότως ἡ τοῦ Σαμοσατέως καινοτομία περὶ τοῦ Σω τῆρος, ὡς ὄντος ἀνθρώπου ψιλοῦ, συνεκβάλλεται δὲ καὶ ἡ τῶν μιμουμένων ἐκεῖνον ἀλόγιστος φλυαρία. Φέρε γὰρ, ἵν' ὀλίγων ἐπιμνησθῶμεν μαρτυριῶν, τίς ὁ τὰ τοιαῦτα λέγων· «Οὐ πᾶς ὁ λέγων μοι, Κύριε, Κύριε, εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν;» Οὐκ ἀνθρώπου τὸ ῥῆμα, ἀλλὰ Θεοῦ δεικνύντος τὴν γνησίαν ἀπὸ Πατρὸς γέννησιν, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τὴν κυριολογίαν οὐκ ἀρνουμένου τὴν περὶ ἑαυτοῦ. Κύριος γὰρ ὁ ἐκ τοῦ μόνου γεγεννημένος Κυρίου, ὡς καὶ παρὰ Μωϋσῇ λέλεκται τό· «Ἔβρεξε Κύριος θεῖον, καὶ πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου.» Καὶ ἄλλοτε πρὸς τοὺς ἀποστόλους φησὶν ὁ Σωτήρ· «Φωνεῖτέ με ὁ Διδάσκαλος καὶ ὁ Κύριος, καὶ καλῶς λέγετε·","english":"Take up my yoke upon yourselves, and learn from me that I am gentle and humble in heart; and you will find rest for your souls, for my yoke is kind and my burden is light.\" The Lord has shut off your slander for you, presenting himself as God and, even in human form, known only by the Father and knowing the Father, and revealing his own knowledge and that of the Father to those deemed worthy; he calls us to himself, promising rest with himself, and urging us to bear his yoke. In saying these things, he lays aside the divinity, interprets the hidden transcendent greatness through the small form, and displays the supercelestial authority veiled by an earthly body. And why need I enumerate the countless divine utterances of our Lord Jesus Christ? Through them the innovation of the Samosatene concerning the Savior, as if he were a mere man, is rightly cast out, and the irrational nonsense of those who imitate him is also cast out. For come, let us recall a few testimonies: who is it that says, \"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven?\" It is not a human utterance, but that of God, showing his genuine generation from the Father, and therefore not denying the lordship concerning himself. For the Lord is the one born of the only Lord, as it is also said by Moses: \"The Lord rained down sulfur and fire from the Lord.\" And at another time the Savior says to the apostles: \"Call me the Teacher and the Lord, and you speak rightly.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἄρατε τὸν ζυγόν μου ἐφ' ὑμᾶς","severity":"info","text":"The opening phrase echoes a logion of Jesus not found in the canonical Gospels; it may derive from an apocryphal source or oral tradition, used here to emphasize Christ's humility.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Σαμοσατέως","severity":"info","text":"Samosatene refers to Paul of Samosata, a third-century bishop condemned for adoptionist Christology, which held Jesus was a mere man. Athanasius uses him as a foil for orthodox doctrine.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἔβρεξε Κύριος θεῖον, καὶ πῦρ παρὰ Κυρίου","severity":"info","text":"This citation is a paraphrase of Genesis 19:24 (LXX), where the Lord rains sulfur and fire from the Lord, used to illustrate the distinction of persons within the Godhead.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Σαμοσατέως καινοτομία","severity":"info","text":"Paul of Samosata's 'innovation' (καινοτομία) was his rejection of the Logos theology and insistence on Christ's mere humanity, a view Athanasius combats by citing Christ's divine utterances.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Ταῦτα λέγων ἀπαμφιέννυσι τὴν θεότητα","severity":"info","text":"This phrase marks a rhetorical shift: Athanasius moves from quoting Christ's words to interpreting them as a deliberate veiling and unveiling of divinity, a key argument against Sabellianism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Φωνεῖτέ με ὁ Διδάσκαλος καὶ ὁ Κύριος","severity":"caution","text":"The exact source of this saying is uncertain; it may be a loose citation of John 13:13 or a non-canonical tradition, and its use here is to reinforce Christ's authority as both teacher and Lord.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The source of the opening logion ('Take up my yoke...') is unclear; it may be apocryphal or a free composition by Athanasius. The phrase 'Φωνεῖτέ με ὁ Διδάσκαλος καὶ ὁ Κύριος' is not a direct Gospel quotation; its origin is ambiguous."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":8,"ref":"p8","source":"εἰμὶ γάρ·» καὶ πάλιν, Δεσπότην τῆς πατρῴας οἰκίας ἑαυ τὸν ἀποφαίνων, ὡς ἂν μονογενὴς Υἱός· «Εἰ τὸν οἰκοδεσπότην Βεελζεβοὺλ ἐπεκάλεσαν, πόσῳ μᾶλλον τοὺς οἰκιακοὺς αὐτοῦ.» Οὐκοῦν ὅτι μὲν Θεὸς ὁ Κύριος τῶν ὅλων Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, ὡς ὢν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ γεγεννημένος, δῆλον ἅπαντι· εἰπὼν δὲ, «Οὐ πᾶς ὁ λέγων μοι, Κύριε, Κύριε, εἰσελεύσεται εἰς τὴν βασι λείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν,» ἐπιφέρει καὶ τὸν Πατέρα σαφῶς ἡμῖν ἑρμηνεύων· «Ἀλλ' ὁ ποιῶν τὸ θέλημα τοῦ Πατρός μου, τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς.» Ἔχεις οὖν Υἱὸν, ἔχεις Πατέρα· μὴ φοβοῦ τὴν δυάδα· τῇ φύσει γὰρ οὐ διώρισται, οὐδ' ὁ τὰ δύο λέγων ἀπηλλοτρίωσε τοῦ γεννήσαντος τὸ γέννημα· οὐδὲ διὰ τὴν ἑτέραν μανίαν τῶν ἀρνησαμένων μίαν εἶναι τὴν τῶν δύο θεότητα, διὰ τοῦτο καὶ δύο λέγειν φευκτέον. Εἷς Θεὸς, ὅτι καὶ Πατὴρ\n\nεἷς· Θεὸς δὲ καὶ Υἱὸς, ταὐτότητα ἔχων, ὡς Υἱὸς πρὸς Πατέρα· οὐκ αὐτὸς ὢν ὁ Πατὴρ, ἀλλ' ἡνωμένος πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα τῇ φύσει· δύο μὲν ἀριθμῷ, μία δὲ οὖσα οὐσία τελεία· δύο, οὐκ ἐκ δύο μερῶν. Τέλειος ὁ Υἱὸς ἥκει παρὰ τελείου Πατρὸς, ὢν ἐξ ὄντος, χαρακτὴρ τῆς πα τρικῆς ὑποστάσεως, οὐ ῥῆμα ἀνυπόστατον, ἀλλὰ ζῶσα δύναμις, καὶ τοῦ ζῇν αἰτία τοῖς πᾶσιν, οὐχ οἵα ἀν θρώπου δύναμις, δι' ἣν ἄνθρωπός ἐστι δυνατός· οὐ γὰρ γέννημα ἀνθρώπου ἢ υἱὸς, ἢ δύναμις αὐτοῦ· Θεοῦ δὲ Υἱὸς ἢ δύναμις, ὥστε δυνατὸς μὲν ὁ Πατὴρ τελείως, ὅτι Πατὴρ δυνάμεως, δύναμις δὲ ὁ Υἱὸς τε λεία, ὅτι γέννημα αὐτοῦ. Καὶ σοφία τοῦ Πατρὸς ὁ Υἱὸς, ἀλλ' οὐχ ὡς ἡ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, δι' ἧς ὁ ἄνθρωπος σοφὸς, ἀλλ' ἀπὸ σοφοῦ σοφία· περὶ οὗ λέγεται·","english":"I am. And again, making himself master of the paternal household, as a only-begotten Son: \"If they called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more his household servants.\" Therefore, that the Lord of all, Jesus Christ, is God, as being born from God, is clear to everyone. And having said, \"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven,\" he adds, clearly interpreting the Father for us: \"But the one who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven.\" So you have the Son, you have the Father; do not fear the duality. For they are not separated in nature, nor does the one who speaks of the two alienate the offspring from the begetter. Nor, because of the other madness of those who denied that the divinity of the two is one, must one avoid speaking of two for that reason. There is one God, because there is one Father. And the Son is God, having identity as Son in relation to Father; not being himself the Father, but united with the Father in nature. Two in number, but being one perfect substance; two, not from two parts. The Son is perfect, having come from a perfect Father, being from being, a character of the paternal hypostasis, not a word without substance, but a living power, and the cause of life for all, not like the power of a man, through which a man is powerful; for he is not a product of a man, or a son, or his power. But the Son of God is power, so that the Father is perfectly powerful, because he is Father of power, and the Son is perfect power, because he is his offspring. And the Son is wisdom of the Father, but not as that of a man, through which a man is wise, but wisdom from a wise one; concerning which it is said:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"δυάδα","severity":"info","text":"The term 'duality' (δυάδα) is used polemically to counter Sabellian accusations that distinguishing Father and Son implies two gods. Athanasius insists the duality is not a division of nature.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ὑποστάσεως","severity":"info","text":"'Hypostasis' (ὑποστάσεως) here denotes the individual reality of the Father, of which the Son is the 'character' (χαρακτὴρ). This anticipates later Nicene usage distinguishing ousia and hypostasis.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἰ τὸν οἰκοδεσπότην Βεελζεβοὺλ ἐπεκάλεσαν","severity":"info","text":"The reference to Beelzebul and household servants is likely an allusion to Matthew 10:25, where Jesus warns of persecution. Athanasius adapts it to argue for Christ's divine authority.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὐ πᾶς ὁ λέγων μοι, Κύριε, Κύριε, εἰσελεύσεται","severity":"info","text":"This saying is not a direct biblical quotation but a paraphrase of Matthew 7:21, emphasizing that true discipleship requires doing the Father's will, not merely acclamation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"Σαβελλιανούς","severity":"info","text":"The work is directed against Sabellianism, a modalist heresy that conflated Father and Son. Athanasius defends the distinct hypostases while maintaining their unity of nature.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὐκοῦν ... δῆλον ἅπαντι","severity":"info","text":"This passage forms a logical conclusion (οὐκοῦν) from the preceding scriptural arguments, asserting Christ's divinity as self-evident, then pivoting to clarify the relationship between Father and Son.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text has minor orthographic variations (e.g., ἑαυ τὸν for ἑαυτόν) that do not affect meaning. The phrase 'character of the paternal hypostasis' is ambiguous: it could imply the Son is an image or imprint of the Father's being, a key point in later Arian debates."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":9,"ref":"p9","source":"«Μόνῳ σοφῷ Θεῷ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας, ἀμήν.» Ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐγέννησεν ὁ Πατήρ. Πῶς οὖν Πατὴρ, καὶ τίνος; Εἰ δὲ ἐγέννησεν, ὁ ὤν ἐστιν ὁ γεγεννημένος. Κἀγὼ, φησὶν, ὁμολογῶ γέννη σιν· γεννᾶται γὰρ ὁ λόγος, ὅτε καὶ λαλεῖται καὶ γινώσκεται. Καὶ ποσάκις ὁ αὐτὸς, εἰπέ μοι, γεννηθήσεται; ἢ πολλοὺς ἐρεῖς τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγους ἑκάστοτε γεννωμένους; καὶ ποτὲ μὲν σιωπῶντα φαντασθήσῃ τὸν Θεὸν, ποτὲ δὲ λαλοῦντα, καὶ μεταβαλλόμενον ἀπὸ σιω πήσεως εἰς λαλιὰν, καὶ χείλεσιν ἀνοιγομένοις, ἢ καρδίᾳ κινουμένῃ; Οὐκ ἄνθρωπος ὁ Θεός· ὑπέλαβες, ἄνομε, ὅτι ἔσται σοι ὅμοιος ὁ Θεός; Ὦ ἄνθρωπε, κἂν ὀφθαλμοὺς ἀκούσῃς Θεοῦ, κἂν τὰ ἄλλα μέλη τὰ σωματικὰ, μὴ σαρκικῶς νόει· ἀλλὰ δι' ὁμοιότητος τῶν σωματικῶν ἐννόει τὸ ἀσώματον. Καὶ γὰρ εἴρη ταί σοι· Πνεῦμα ὁ Θεός· οὕτω καὶ ὁ Λόγος οὐκ ἀνθρώπινος, οὐδὲ οἷος ὁ σός· Θεὸς γάρ ἐστι, κἂν μή σοι δοκῇ, καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶ δύο Θεοὶ, ὅτι μηδὲ δύο Πατέρες, μηδὲ ἑτερούσιος τοῦ γεννήσαντος ὁ γεγεννημένος. Ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἀρχὰς εἰσάγων δύο, δύο κηρύττει Θεούς. Αὕτη Μαρκίωνος ἡ δυσσέβεια, Θεὸν λέγοντος δίκαιον ἰδίου Χριστοῦ Πατέρα, καὶ Θεὸν ἕτερον ἀγαθὸν ἰδίου Χριστοῦ Πατέρα. Πάλιν ὁ Θεὸν ἀγένητον εἶναι λέγων, ἄλλον δὲ Θεὸν γενητὸν, δύο καὶ αὐτὸς λέγει Θεοὺς, διὰ τὴν τῆς οὐσίας διαφορὰν, ἣν βλασφήμως εἰσ άγει. Ὅπου δὲ μία μὲν ἡ ἀρχὴ, ἓν δὲ τὸ ἐξ αὐτῆς γέννημα, εἰκὼν ἀκριβεστάτη καὶ φυσική· διότι καὶ γεννητὴ ἐξ αὐτοῦ· εἷς Θεὸς, τελείας μὲν ἐν Πατρὶ τῆς θεότητος νοουμένης, τελείας δὲ καὶ ἐν Υἱῷ τῆς πατρι κῆς θεότητος ὑπαρχούσης.","english":"To the only wise God through Jesus Christ, to whom is glory forever, amen.\" But the Father did not beget. How then is He Father, and of whom? But if He did beget, the one who is is the one who was begotten. And I, he says, confess a begetting; for the Word is begotten when it is spoken and known. And how many times, tell me, will the same one be begotten? Or will you say that there are many Words of God begotten each time? And will you sometimes imagine God silent, sometimes speaking, and changing from silence to speech, with lips opening or heart stirring? God is not a man. You supposed, lawless one, that God would be like you? O man, even if you hear of God's eyes, or of other bodily members, do not think carnally; but through the likeness of bodily things conceive of the incorporeal. For it has been said to you: God is Spirit. So also the Word is not human, nor like yours; for He is God, even if it does not seem so to you, and there are not two Gods, because there are not two Fathers, nor is the begotten one of a different essence from the one who begot. For he who introduces two principles proclaims two Gods. This is the impiety of Marcion, who says that the just God is the Father of his own Christ, and that another good God is the Father of his own Christ. Again, he who says that God is unbegotten, and that another God is begotten, also speaks of two Gods, because of the difference of essence which he blasphemously introduces. But where the principle is one, and the offspring from it is one, a most exact and natural image—because it is also begotten from it—there is one God, the divinity being understood as complete in the Father, and the Father's divinity also existing complete in the Son.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"γέννησις","severity":"info","text":"The term γέννησις (begetting) is central to the anti-Sabellian argument. Athanasius distinguishes between divine generation (eternal, non-corporeal) and human procreation, countering the Sabellian charge that generation implies change or multiplicity in God.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Πνεῦμα ὁ Θεός","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'God is Spirit' echoes John 4:24, where Jesus says 'God is Spirit' in the context of worship. Athanasius uses it to argue that divine attributes (e.g., eyes, members) are not to be understood carnally, reinforcing the incorporeal nature of God.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Μαρκίων","severity":"info","text":"Marcion (c. 85–160) taught two gods: a just creator God (Demiurge) and a good God (the Father of Jesus). Athanasius here equates any distinction of essence or principle with Marcion's heresy, arguing that such dualism leads to polytheism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The passage moves from a hypothetical Sabellian objection ('the Father did not beget') to a reductio ad absurdum (multiple begettings), then to a positive statement of unity: one principle, one offspring, one God. The Marcionite and 'unbegotten/begotten' contrasts serve as negative foils.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'εἰκὼν ἀκριβεστάτη καὶ φυσική' (most exact and natural image) anticipates the Nicene language of 'homoousios' (same essence). Athanasius insists that the Son is not of a different essence (ἑτερούσιος) from the Father, a key point in the Arian controversy.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"γεννᾶται γὰρ ὁ λόγος","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'the Word is begotten when it is spoken and known' could be misread as implying a temporal or human-like generation. Athanasius immediately corrects this by stressing God's non-human nature and the incorporeal understanding of divine attributes.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of the interlocutor ('he says') is ambiguous; it may be a Sabellian opponent or a hypothetical objector. The text does not specify whether the 'lawless one' is a specific historical figure or a generic heretic."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":10,"ref":"p10","source":"Ἐπεὶ καὶ διὰ τοῦ μικροῦ τούτου παραδείγματος, ὅπερ ἡ θεία Γραφὴ δεδήλω κεν εἰκόνα τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου τὸν Χριστὸν ὀνομάσασα, δύνασαι καταλαβεῖν τὸ λεγόμενον· φύγωμεν πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα τὸ ἀνόμοιον τὸ ἐν τῷ παραδείγματι, τὸ τεχνίτην καὶ ἑτερούσιον εἶναι τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ εἰκόνα, γεννητὴν δὲ καὶ ὁμοούσιον ὁμολογῶμεν. Ὅμως δὴ οὖν ὁ τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ βασιλέως ὁρῶν τὸν βασιλέα ὁρᾷ, καί φησιν· Ἰδοὺ, οὗτος ὁ βασιλεὺς, καὶ οὐ δύο πεποίηκε βασιλεῖς, οὐδὲ μέρος τοῦ βασι λέως τὴν εἰκόνα, ἢ τῆς εἰκόνος τὸν βασιλέα. Οὕτω τοίνυν εἷς Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ, καὶ μία θεότης Πατρὸς καὶ Υἱοῦ. Ὡς δὲ σὺ λέγεις, εἷς ἔσται σύνθετος ἐκ δύο μερῶν ἀτελῶν. Πρὸς δὲ ταύτην τὴν ἀσέβειαν ἀπο κλεῖσαι καλὸν τὰς ἀκοὰς, καὶ ἀπονίψασθαι τὴν ψυχήν· οὔτε γὰρ Υἱὸν οὔτε Πατέρα ὁ τοῦτο φαντα ζόμενος ὁμολογεῖ· ἐπεὶ μήτε Πατέρα, μήτε Υἱὸν ἀτελῆ νοεῖν ἐγχωρεῖ. Ἀλλ' εἴρηται, φησίν· «Ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί·» οὐκ ἔστι δὲ Λόγος ἐν καρδίᾳ τοῦ Υἱοῦ ὁ Πατήρ· οὐ τοίνυν οὐδὲ ὁ Υἱὸς Λόγος ἐν καρδίᾳ τοῦ Πατρὸς, ἀλλὰ Λόγος ζῶν ἀπὸ ζῶντος Πατρὸς Θεοῦ, ἀϊδίῳ γεννήσει πεφηνὼς, ἀνάρχως τῷ Πατρὶ συνών· ὡς μηδέποτε μόνον ἐπινοεῖσθαι τὸν Πατέρα. Ἀεὶ γὰρ Τριὰς ἡ Τριὰς, καὶ προσθήκην θεότητος οὐ λαμβάνει. Οὐδ' ὁ μὴ πρότερον ὢν σὺν τῷ Πατρὶ προστίθεται ὕστερον ὁ Υἱὸς, οὐδὲ τῷ Υἱῷ τὸ Πνεῦμα ἐπιγίνεται. Τὰ γὰρ ἀπό τινος ἀρχῆς γεγε νημένα καὶ ποιήματά ἐστι καὶ δοῦλα, καὶ τῇ Τριάδι συναριθμεῖται οὐδαμῶς·","english":"Since even through this small example, which divine Scripture has set forth, naming Christ the image of the invisible God, you can understand what is being said. Let us again flee here the dissimilarity in the example—that the image of God is a craftsman and of a different substance—but let us confess it to be begotten and consubstantial. Nevertheless, then, he who sees the image of the king sees the king, and says, \"Behold, this is the king,\" and he does not make two kings, nor does he make the image a part of the king, or the king a part of the image. Thus, then, one God is the Father, and one divinity of Father and Son. But as you say, there will be one composite from two incomplete parts. Against this impiety it is good to close the ears and wash the soul; for he who imagines this confesses neither Son nor Father, since it is not possible to conceive of either Father or Son as incomplete. But it is said, he says, \"That I am in the Father, and the Father is in me.\" Yet the Father is not a Word in the heart of the Son; therefore neither is the Son a Word in the heart of the Father, but a living Word from a living Father God, manifested by eternal generation, co-existing without beginning with the Father, so that the Father is never conceived alone. For the Trinity is always the Trinity, and it receives no addition of divinity. Nor is the Son, who was not previously with the Father, added later, nor does the Spirit come upon the Son subsequently. For things generated from some beginning are also works and slaves, and are in no way numbered with the Trinity.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"εἰκόνα τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου τὸν Χριστὸν","severity":"info","text":"The author interprets the scriptural phrase 'image of the invisible God' (Col 1:15) as a typological example, not a literal depiction, to argue for the Son's consubstantiality.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ὁμοούσιον","severity":"info","text":"The term 'homoousion' (consubstantial) is central to the anti-Sabellian argument, asserting that the Son shares the same substance as the Father, against the 'heteroousion' (different substance) of the opponents.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί","severity":"info","text":"This citation (John 14:10-11) is used by the opponent to argue for mutual immanence, but the author reinterprets it to deny that the Father is a 'word in the heart' of the Son, preserving distinct hypostases.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"external","lemma":"Σαβέλλιος","severity":"info","text":"Sabellius (early 3rd c.) taught that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are modes of a single divine subject, a view Athanasius combats by insisting on eternal, distinct hypostases without temporal succession.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"φύγωμεν πάλιν καὶ ἐνταῦθα τὸ ἀνόμοιον","severity":"info","text":"The passage shifts from a positive analogy (king's image) to a polemical rejection of the opponent's composite model, then to a scriptural rebuttal, forming a three-part argument: analogy, warning, exegesis.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀϊδίῳ γεννήσει πεφηνὼς","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'manifested by eternal generation' is ambiguous: it could imply a temporal beginning (Arian) or an eternal procession (orthodox). The context supports the latter, but the wording is imprecise.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'ἀϊδίῳ γεννήσει πεφηνὼς' could be read as implying a beginning in time, but the context of 'ἀνάρχως τῷ Πατρὶ συνών' clarifies that the generation is eternal and without temporal origin."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":11,"ref":"p11","source":"«Πορευθέντες γὰρ,» φησὶ, «μαθητεύσατε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, βαπτίζοντες αὐ τοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Πατρὸς, καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος.» Ἀρχὴν δὲ οὔτε μίαν, οὔτε ἐξου σίαν, οὔτε δύναμιν συνηρίθμησεν· ἀϊδίῳ γὰρ τὰ μὴ ἀΐδια συναριθμεῖσθαι ἀδύνατον, καὶ τῇ\n\nθεότητι τὰ μὴ μετέχοντα τῆς θεότητος οὐ συντάττεται. Πῶς οὖν ἐν τῷ γεγεννηκότι ὁ γεγεννημένος; καὶ πάλιν ὁ γεννήτωρ ἐν τῷ γεννήματι; πῶς οὗτος ἐν ἐκείνῳ, κἀκεῖνος ἐν τούτῳ; Ὅτι καὶ αὐτὸς τοιοῦτός ἐστιν οἷος κἀκεῖνος, κἀκεῖνος οἷος οὗτος. Οὕτω καὶ ἓν τὰ δύο, τῷ μὴ διαλλάττειν, μηδὲ ἀπεσχοινίσθαι, μηδὲ καθ' ἕτερον εἶδος καὶ ξένον χαρακτῆρα νοεῖσθαι τὸν Υἱὸν, ἀλλ' εἶναι Θεὸν, ὥσπερ καὶ ὁ Πατήρ. Ἐπεὶ καὶ εἰπόντος αὐτοῦ· «Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν,» ἠγανάκτουν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι λέγοντες, «Ὅτι σὺ, ἄνθρωπος ὢν, ποιεῖς σεαυτὸν Θεόν.» Καὶ ὁ Σωτὴρ ἀπε κρίνατο βεβαιῶν τὸ εἰρημένον ὑπ' αὐτῶν, ὡς οὐδὲν ἄλλο ἢ τοῦτο δεδηλωκὼς ἐν τῷ φάσκειν· «Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν,» τὸ εἶναι καὶ αὐτὸν Θεὸν Υἱὸν ὄντα Θεοῦ· «Εἰ ἐκείνους θεοὺς εἶπε, πρὸς οὓς ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ οὐ δύναται λυθῆ ναι ἡ Γραφή· ὃν ὁ Πατὴρ ἡγίασε, καὶ ἀπέστειλεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ὑμεῖς λέγετε, Ὅτι βλασφημεῖς· ὅτι εἶπον, ὅτι Υἱὸς Θεοῦ εἰμι; εἰ οὐ ποιῶ τὰ ἔργα τοῦ Πατρός μου, μὴ πιστεύετέ μοι· εἰ δὲ ποιῶ, κἂν ἐμοὶ μὴ θέ λητε πιστεύειν, τοῖς ἔργοις πιστεύετε·","english":"For,\" he says, \"go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.\" He did not count together either one beginning, or authority, or power; for it is impossible for things that are not eternal to be numbered with the eternal, and things that do not partake of divinity are not ranked with the divinity. How then is the begotten in the one who begot? and again, the begetter in the offspring? How is this one in that one, and that one in this one? Because this one is such as that one is, and that one is such as this one is. Thus the two are one, in that the Son does not differ, is not separated, nor is conceived according to a different form and foreign character, but is God, just as the Father is. Since even when he said, \"I and the Father are one,\" the Jews were indignant, saying, \"That you, being a man, make yourself God.\" And the Savior answered, confirming what they had said, as having indicated nothing other than this in declaring, \"I and the Father are one,\" that he himself is also God, being Son of God: \"If he called those gods to whom the Word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be undone; whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, you say, 'That you blaspheme; because I said that I am the Son of God; if I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me; but if I do, even if you do not wish to believe me, believe the works.'","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Πορευθέντες γὰρ ... βαπτίζοντες αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ Πατρὸς, καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of Matthew 28:19, the Great Commission, which Athanasius uses to argue for the co-equal naming of the Trinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ἀϊδίῳ","severity":"info","text":"ἀΐδιος (eternal) is a key term in the anti-Sabellian argument: the Father, Son, and Spirit are co-eternal, and non-eternal things cannot be counted with them.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν","severity":"info","text":"This is John 10:30, cited to show that Christ’s unity with the Father implies his own divinity, not a modalist identity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ἠγανάκτουν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι","severity":"info","text":"The Jewish reaction (accusing Jesus of making himself God) is a rhetorical device common in patristic polemic, here used to reinforce the orthodox reading of John 10:30.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Πῶς οὖν ... πῶς οὗτος ... Ὅτι","severity":"info","text":"The passage moves from a rhetorical question about the interrelation of Father and Son to an answer based on likeness of essence, a typical Athanasian argumentative pattern.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἰ ἐκείνους θεοὺς εἶπε ...","severity":"caution","text":"The long quotation attributed to the Savior is not a direct biblical verse but a composite or paraphrase; its exact source is uncertain, and the syntax is broken in the Greek.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Εἰ ἐκείνους θεοὺς εἶπε' is ambiguous: it may be a continuation of Christ’s speech or an authorial comment; the English draft treats it as part of the quotation.","The clause 'ὃν ὁ Πατὴρ ἡγίασε, καὶ ἀπέστειλεν' lacks a clear antecedent, possibly referring to the Son or to a generic believer."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":12,"ref":"p12","source":"ἵν' εἰδῆτε, καὶ γινώσκητε, ὅτι ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ, καὶ ὁ Πατὴρ ἐν ἐμοί.» Οὐκοῦν ἐν τῷ Πατρὶ τὸν Υἱὸν εἶναι, καὶ τὸν Πατέρα ἐν τῷ Υἱῷ, τοῦτό ἐστι καὶ οὐδὲν ἕτερον, τὸν Υἱὸν εἶναι Θεοῦ τὸν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ γεγεννημένον, Θεὸν ὄντα κατὰ τὴν φύσιν, ὅπερ ὁ Πατὴρ, καὶ δεικνύντα τὸ πατρῷον εἶδος ἐν ἑαυτῷ, καὶ δεικνύμενον ἐπὶ τῆς πατρικῆς ὑποστάσεως. Εἷς οὖν, καὶ εἷς, καὶ ἡ δυὰς οὐ μεμέρισται τῇ φύσει, ἀνενδεὴς οὖσα τῇ τελειότητι, ὅλον μὲν τὸ πλή ρωμα τῆς θεότητος ὁ Πατὴρ, ὡς Πατὴρ, ὅλον δὲ τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος ὁ Υἱὸς, ὡς Υἱός. Ἐπειδὴ δι' ἀμφοτέρων ἓν εἶδος νοεῖται, ὁλοκλήρως ἐν ἀμφο τέροις δεικνύμενον. Μηδεὶς ἀρνείσθω τὴν φανερω θεῖσαν ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ ζωήν· «Ἥτις ἦν,» φησὶ, «πρὸς τὸν Πατέρα, καὶ ἐφανερώθη ἡμῖν.» Καὶ πρὸ τῆς φανερώσεως τοῦτο ἔδοξεν εἶναι, ἡνίκα πεφανέρωται. Γεγέννηται γὰρ ἀϊδίως, καὶ ὑπάρχει μετὰ τοῦ ἰδίου Πατρός. Μηδεὶς ἀρνούμενος τὰ τρία τὴν μονάδα εὑρίσκειν νομιζέτω· ἀλλ' ἐν τῇ Τριάδι νοείτω τὸ ἓν, ἔχων τὸ κεφάλαιον τῆς πίστεως ἐν τῷ βαπτίσματι, καὶ ἐν ταῖς τρισὶν ἁγίαις σφραγῖσι, δι' ὧν εἰς σωτηρίαν ἀναγεγέννηται, μεμνημένος τοῦ Ἀποστό λου λέγοντος· «Εἷς Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ, ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ εἷς Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα·» μεμνημένος τοῦ λέγοντος Πατρός· «Ἐκ γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε,» τοῦ τε Υἱοῦ μαρτυροῦντος, ὅτι ἦν πρὸ τοῦ κόσμου παρὰ τῷ Πατρὶ, τὴν δόξαν ἔχων τὴν τῆς θεότητος· «Δόξασόν με γὰρ,» φησὶ, «Πάτερ, παρὰ σεαυτῷ τῇ δόξῃ ᾗ εἶχον, πρὸ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι, παρὰ σοί·» τὴν μὲν κατὰ ἄνθρωπον δόξαν αἰτῶν, τὴν δὲ κατὰ Θεὸν ἔχων πρὸ τοῦ κόσμου μαρτυρῶν.","english":"so that you may know and understand that \"I am in the Father, and the Father is in me.\" Therefore, for the Son to be in the Father and the Father in the Son is nothing other than this: the Son is of God, born from God, being God by nature, which the Father is, and displaying the paternal form in himself, and being displayed upon the paternal hypostasis. Thus, one and one, and the dyad is not divided in nature, being without need in perfection: the Father is the whole fullness of divinity as Father, and the Son is the whole fullness of divinity as Son. Since through both one form is conceived, shown completely in both. Let no one deny the life manifested in the world: \"Which was,\" he says, \"with the Father, and was manifested to us.\" And before the manifestation, it was deemed to be this, when it has been manifested. For it was born eternally, and exists with its own Father. Let no one, by denying the three, think to find the monad; but in the Trinity let him conceive the one, holding the summary of the faith in baptism, and in the three holy seals, through which he has been reborn to salvation, remembering the Apostle saying: \"One God the Father, from whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things;\" remembering the Father saying: \"From the womb before the morning star I begot you,\" and the Son testifying that he was before the world with the Father, having the glory of divinity: \"Glorify me,\" he says, \"Father, with yourself in the glory which I had, before the world existed, with you;\" asking for glory according to man, while testifying that he had it according to God before the world.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ὑποστάσεως","severity":"info","text":"The term 'hypostasis' here denotes the individual reality or subsistence of the Father, upon which the Son is displayed, reflecting the pro-Nicene distinction between ousia and hypostasis.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐκ γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε","severity":"info","text":"This phrase is not a direct biblical quotation but echoes Psalm 109:3 LXX (110:3 MT), where God speaks of begetting the king, here applied to the Son's eternal generation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἷς Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ, ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ εἷς Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα","severity":"info","text":"This citation adapts 1 Corinthians 8:6 and Ephesians 4:6, conflating Pauline phrases to assert the Father as source and the Son as mediator of all things.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"τρισὶν ἁγίαις σφραγῖσι","severity":"info","text":"The 'three holy seals' refer to the triple immersion or trinitarian formula in baptism, a standard catechetical symbol in fourth-century anti-Sabellian polemic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὐκοῦν","severity":"info","text":"The inferential particle 'Οὐκοῦν' marks a logical conclusion from the preceding scriptural citation (John 14:10-11), structuring the argument as exegetical deduction.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐκ γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε","severity":"caution","text":"The source of this saying is uncertain; it may be a lost apocryphon or a liturgical adaptation, and its attribution to 'the Father saying' is not scripturally attested.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Ἐκ γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε' has no clear biblical source; it may be a paraphrase or from a non-canonical text.","The identity of the 'Apostle' cited for the conflated Pauline formula is ambiguous, as the wording combines elements from different epistles."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":13,"ref":"p13","source":"Εἶχε δὲ τὴν δόξαν ὢν καὶ ὑπάρ χων· οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ μὴ ὢν δεδόξασται. Εἰ δὲ ἦν, καὶ γεγέννητο· οὐ γάρ ἐστιν υἱὸς μὴ γεγεννημένος· ἀλλ' εἰ γεγέννηται, φησὶν, ἐκτός ἐστι τοῦ γεννήσαντος, καὶ διῄρηται· ἀδιαίρετον δὲ χρὴ εἶναι Λόγον ὄντα ἐν Θεῷ, καὶ μὴ φαινόμενον ἔξω τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ποῦ γὰρ ἂν καὶ φανείη ἐκτὸς, πάντα τοῦ Θεοῦ πεπληρω κότος, κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον· «Τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν ἐγὼ πληρῶ, λέγει Κύριος;» Τοιαύταις φαντασίαις ἀναιρεῖν ἐπιχειροῦσι τὴν γέννησιν τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ τὴν ἀπὸ τοῦ Πατρὸς ἀΐδιον πρόοδον, καὶ τὴν μετὰ τοῦ Πατρὸς ὕπαρξιν, καὶ τὸ τελείως μὲν ὑφεστάναι Πατέρα καθ' ἑαυτὸν, τελείως καὶ τὸν Υἱὸν καθ' ἑαυτὸν ὑφεστάναι. Μαθέτωσαν οὖν, ὅτι μὴ νοοῦσι, «μήτε ἃ λέγουσι, μήτε περὶ ὧν διαβεβαιοῦνται,» τόπῳ Θεὸν περιγράφοντες, καὶ τὸν Υἱὸν αὖ πάλιν ἐν ἑτέρῳ φανταζόμενοι τόπῳ, καὶ μεμε ρίσθαι, τὸν μὲν ἐκεῖ, τὸν δὲ ἐνθάδε νομίζοντες, ἐὰν γεγεννημένος καὶ πεφηνὼς καθ' ἑαυτὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ Πατρὸς ὁ Υἱὸς ὁμολογῆται. «Τίς τόπος τῆς καταπαύσεώς μου;» φησὶν ὁ Θεὸς διὰ τοῦ προφήτου. «Ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ὁ οὐρανὸς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ οὐκ ἀρκέσουσί σοι,» Σολομὼν λέγει πρὸς τὸν Θεόν· τεκμηρίῳ μεγίστῳ πείθων τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ὁ Θεὸς, ὅτι μηδεὶς αὐτοῦ τόπος δεκτικός. «Ἡ γὰρ χείρ μου,» φησὶν, «ἐποίησε ταῦτα πάντα.» Οὐ τοίνυν περιέχει τὰ ποιήματα τὸν πεποιηκότα, ὃς καὶ πρὸ","english":"He had glory, being and existing; for that which does not exist has not been glorified. But if He was, He was also begotten; for there is no Son who is not begotten. But if He is begotten, they say, He is outside the one who begot Him, and is separated; but the Word, being in God, must be indivisible, and not appear outside God. For where could He appear outside, when all things are filled by God, according to the Scripture: \"I fill the heaven and the earth, says the Lord?\" With such fancies they attempt to do away with the generation of the Son, and the eternal procession from the Father, and His existence with the Father, and the fact that the Father subsists perfectly in Himself, and the Son also subsists perfectly in Himself. Let them learn, then, that they understand \"neither what they say, nor what they affirm,\" circumscribing God by place, and again imagining the Son in another place, and thinking them divided, one there and the other here, if the Son is confessed to be begotten and to have appeared in Himself from the Father. \"What is the place of my rest?\" says God through the prophet. \"The heaven and the heaven of heaven will not suffice for you,\" Solomon says to God, with the greatest proof persuading men that no place is receptive of Him. \"For my hand,\" He says, \"made all these things.\" Therefore the things made do not contain the maker, who is also before","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἶχε δὲ τὴν δόξαν ὢν καὶ ὑπάρχων","severity":"info","text":"The phrase asserts that the Son had glory because he existed; the argument is that non-existence cannot be glorified, linking ontology to doxology.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"γέννησιν","severity":"info","text":"γέννησιν (generation) is a key term in the Arian controversy, denoting the Son's eternal begetting from the Father, not a temporal event.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὴν γῆν ἐγὼ πληρῶ, λέγει Κύριος","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of Jeremiah 23:24, where God declares his omnipresence; Athanasius uses it to argue that the Son cannot be spatially separate from the Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Τίς τόπος τῆς καταπαύσεώς μου","severity":"info","text":"A reference to Psalm 132:14 (LXX), where God asks about a place of rest, used here to deny that God can be contained in any location.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὁ οὐρανὸς καὶ ὁ οὐρανὸς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ οὐκ ἀρκέσουσί σοι","severity":"info","text":"A paraphrase of 2 Chronicles 6:18 (LXX) or similar wisdom tradition, attributed to Solomon, emphasizing God's transcendence beyond all created space.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀΐδιον πρόοδον","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'eternal procession' reflects Athanasius's anti-Arian stance, asserting that the Son's generation is timeless and not a later emanation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text has a lacuna or uncertain reading at the end ('ὃς καὶ πρὸ'), where the English draft breaks off; the sense is that the maker precedes his creations."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":14,"ref":"p14","source":"τούτων ἦν, καὶ τούτοις παρέχει τὸ εἶναι, καὶ αὐτῇ τῇ δυνάμει τοῦ πε ποιηκότος ἐπιστηρίζεται. Διό φησι Παῦλος· «Ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ εἰς ὃν τὰ πάντα·» καὶ πάλιν· «Ἐν αὐτῷ γὰρ ζῶμεν, καὶ κι νούμεθα, καὶ ἐσμέν.» Ἄνελε δή μοι τὸν ἐν τόπῳ ἐστηριγμένον, ὅτε διανοῇ περὶ Θεοῦ, καὶ τοῦ Λόγου, καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος· ἄνελε τοπικοὺς χωρισμοὺς, καὶ μὴ ἀλλαχοῦ τὸν Πα τέρα ὄντα, ἀλλαχοῦ δὲ τὸν Υἱὸν ἐκπέμπειν ἐκ τοῦ γεννᾷν ὑποπτεύσῃς. Οὗτοι γὰρ οἱ ψευδεῖς, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ ἄθεοι λογισμοὶ, περὶ τὴν ὕπαρξιν τοῦ Υἱοῦ σε σκανδαλίζουσι. Συνεξήρνηται δέ σοι μετὰ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, διὰ τοῦ ὑφ' ἑνὸς προ κατέχεσθαι πάντα τοῦ Πατρός. Μὴ ζητεῖτε μέγεθος τόπου τοσοῦτον, ὃς δυνήσεται χωρῆσαι μέγεθος Θεοῦ· οὐ γάρ ἐστι τὸ ἀμέτρητον ἐπὶ τῷ μεμετρημένῳ, ἀλλὰ σπιθαμῇ μὲν αὐτοῦ μετρεῖ τὸν οὐρανὸν, ὡς ὁ προφήτης παραβολικῶς ἑρμηνεύει· μεμέτρηκε δὲ καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ τῇ χειρὶ, καὶ τὴν γῆν πᾶσαν δρακί. Ὧ δ' οὕτως ἐλάχιστα πάντα, ὡς ἡ προφητικὴ παρα βολὴ μετρίως ὑποδείκνυσι, πῶς ἂν τῇ μικρᾷ καὶ ἐλαχίστῃ κτίσει συμπαρεκτείνεσθαι δόξειεν; Οὐ συμπαρεκτεινόμενος τοῖς πᾶσι πεπλήρωκε τὰ πάντα ὁ Θεός· σωματικὸν γὰρ τοῦτο, ὥσπερ εἰ τὸν ἀέρα φαίη πεπληρωκέναι τις τὸν μεταξὺ γῆς καὶ οὐρανοῦ· ἀλλ' ὡς δύναμις συνέχει τὰ πάντα· δύναμις γὰρ ἀσώμα τος, ἀόρατος, οὐ κυκλοῦσα, οὐ κυκλουμένη. Τὸ αὐτὸ δὲ καὶ περὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ περὶ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος· διὰ γὰρ Υἱοῦ καὶ ἐν Πνεύματι τὰ πάντα ὁ Θεὸς καὶ συνεστήσατο, καὶ συνέχων διαφυλάττει.","english":"of these, and provides them with being, and is supported by the very power of the one who made it. Therefore Paul says: \"From whom are all things, and through whom are all things, and into whom are all things;\" and again: \"For in him we live, and move, and have our being.\" Remove for me, then, the one fixed in place when you think about God, and the Word, and the Spirit; remove local separations, and do not suspect that the Father is elsewhere, but that the Son is sent forth elsewhere from begetting. For these false, or rather even godless, reasonings cause you to stumble concerning the existence of the Son. And with the Son, the Holy Spirit is also denied by you, because all things are held beforehand by the one Father. Do not seek such a magnitude of place as will be able to contain the magnitude of God; for the immeasurable is not in the measured, but with his span he measures the heaven, as the prophet interprets figuratively; and he has measured the water with his hand, and the whole earth with his fist. For one to whom all things are so small, as the prophetic figure moderately indicates, how would he seem to be co-extended with the small and least creation? God has filled all things not by being co-extended with them; for that is corporeal, as if one were to say that the air between earth and heaven has been filled; but as a power he holds all things together; for power is incorporeal, invisible, not encircling, not encircled. The same is true also concerning the Son, and concerning the Holy Spirit; for through the Son and in the Spirit, God has both constituted all things, and, holding them together, preserves them.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐξ οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ δι' οὗ τὰ πάντα, καὶ εἰς ὃν τὰ πάντα","severity":"info","text":"This is a composite Pauline citation, likely from Romans 11:36 and Ephesians 4:6, adapted to a Trinitarian formula.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐν αὐτῷ γὰρ ζῶμεν, καὶ κινούμεθα, καὶ ἐσμέν","severity":"info","text":"A paraphrase of Romans 11:36, emphasizing God as the source of life and movement.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"σπιθαμῇ ... μετρεῖ τὸν οὐρανόν","severity":"info","text":"Alludes to Isaiah 40:12 (LXX), where God's hand measures the heavens, used here to argue divine immeasurability.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"δύναμις ἀσώματος","severity":"info","text":"Incorporeal power: a key term in Athanasius' anti-Sabellian argument, distinguishing divine presence from spatial extension.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Τὸ αὐτὸ δὲ καὶ περὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ περὶ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος","severity":"info","text":"This sentence marks a structural parallel, extending the argument about God's incorporeal power to the Son and Holy Spirit.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"συμπαρεκτείνεσθαι","severity":"caution","text":"The verb 'co-extended' is contested: it implies spatial extension, which Athanasius denies of God, but some readers may misinterpret as denying divine immanence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'Ἐξ οὗ ... εἰς ὃν' is not a direct biblical quotation but a conflation; the exact source is uncertain.","The term 'συμπαρεκτείνεσθαι' may be read as either 'co-extended' or 'co-expanded', affecting the spatial metaphor."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":15,"ref":"p15","source":"Ἀσεβὲς τοίνυν καὶ ζητεῖν καὶ ἐννοεῖν τὸ ποῦ πο τέ ἐστιν ὁ Θεὸς, ἢ ὁ Λόγος τίνα τόπον εἴληχεν, ἢ τὸ Πνεῦμα τίνα οἴκησιν ἐκληρώσατο. Εἰ δὲ διὰ τοῦτο τὸν Υἱὸν οὐκ εἶναί τις οὐδὲ γεγεννῆσθαι λέγοι, ὅτι τόπος αὐτοῦ τῆς οὐσίας ἀνεπινόητος καὶ ἀνεύρητος, ὁ τοιοῦτος οὐδὲ τὸν Πατέρα φαίη εἶναι καθάπαξ, οὐδ' ὑπάρχειν Θεόν· ἐπεὶ μηδὲ τόπος τις εὑρίσκεται Θεοῦ. «Εἶπεν ἄφρων ἐν καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ· Οὐκ ἔστι Θεός.» Ἄφρονες ὡς ἀληθῶς οἱ τοιοῦτοι, κεναῖς φαντασίαις ἑαυτοὺς παραλογιζόμενοι· νηπίων καὶ παντάπασιν ἀνοήτων τὰ ῥήματα, ὀφθαλμῷ λαμβάνεσθαι τὸ ἀσώματον καὶ τόπῳ περιλαμβάνεσθαι βουλομένων. Δῶμεν δὲ αὐτοῖς βραχείας τινὰς εἰκόνας ἐκ τῶν ἐνδεχομένων ἀσωμάτων, τινῶν ἐπιμνησθέντες πραγμάτων, ἃ δὴ καθ' ἡμᾶς ὄντα, καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς κτί σεως φαίνεται, εἴ πως δυνηθεῖεν διὰ τούτων ἀναβαίνοντες ἐννοῆσαί πως τὸ ἀσώματον τοῦ Πατρὸς, καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος· καὶ μηκέτι φαντάζεσθαι τόπους αὐτῶν, μηδὲ τοπικὰς διαιρέσεις τῆς Τριάδος ἐπινοεῖν. Ἀσώματος καὶ πνευματικὸς ὢν ὁ νόμος, ἔστιν ἐν τῇ τοῦ νομομαθοῦς διανοίᾳ· ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ δὲ καὶ οἱ προφῆται, Εὐαγγέλια καὶ ἀπόστολοι· καὶ εἴρηται περὶ τῶν νομικῶν καὶ προφητικῶν λόγων «Ἔχουσι Μωϋσέα καὶ τοὺς προφήτας·» καὶ ὁ Σωτὴρ τὸν ἔχοντα παλαιὰ καὶ καινὰ ῥήματα ἐπὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ διανοίας ἐοικέναι φησὶν ἀν θρώπῳ οἰκοδεσπότῃ, ὅστις προφέρει ἐκ τοῦ θησαυροῦ αὐτοῦ καινὰ καὶ παλαιά. Ἐδέχετο δὲ ὁ Μωϋσέως νοῦς σοφίαν τε πᾶσαν Αἰγυπτιακὴν, καὶ τὴν ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ δοθεῖσαν αὐτῷ.","english":"It is impious, therefore, both to ask and to conceive where God is, or what place the Word has obtained, or what dwelling the Spirit has been allotted. But if someone should say that the Son does not exist and has not been generated because the place of his essence is inconceivable and undiscoverable, such a person would also deny that the Father exists at all, or that God subsists, since no place of God is found either. \"The fool said in his heart, 'There is no God.'\" Truly foolish are such people, deceiving themselves with empty fantasies; their words are those of infants and utterly senseless persons who wish to grasp the incorporeal with the eye and to encompass it with place. Let us grant them some brief images from among possible incorporeal things, recalling certain matters which exist among us and are evident in creation, so that perhaps through these they might ascend and somehow conceive the incorporeality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and no longer imagine places for them, nor devise local divisions of the Trinity. The law, being incorporeal and spiritual, exists in the mind of the one learned in the law; and in the same mind also are the prophets, Gospels, and apostles; and it is said concerning the legal and prophetic words, \"They have Moses and the prophets.\" And the Savior says that the one who has both old and new words in his own mind is like a householder who brings forth new and old from his treasury. The mind of Moses received all Egyptian wisdom as well as that given to him by God.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἀσεβὲς τοίνυν καὶ ζητεῖν καὶ ἐννοεῖν τὸ ποῦ ποτέ ἐστιν ὁ Θεός","severity":"info","text":"The author declares it impious to ask or conceive of a spatial location for God, the Word, or the Spirit, rejecting any localizing of the Trinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἶπεν ἄφρων ἐν καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ· Οὐκ ἔστι Θεός","severity":"info","text":"This is a citation of Psalm 52:1 (LXX 53:1), 'The fool said in his heart, There is no God,' used to liken opponents to atheists.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀσώματος","severity":"info","text":"The argument that the incorporeal cannot be grasped by the eye or contained in place reflects a standard anti-Sabellian and anti-Arian polemic, drawing on Platonic and Christian notions of incorporeality.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἔχουσι Μωϋσέα καὶ τοὺς προφήτας","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'They have Moses and the prophets' echoes a common patristic trope (cf. Origen, John Chrysostom) for the internalization of Scripture, here used to illustrate incorporeal presence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Δῶμεν δὲ αὐτοῖς βραχείας τινὰς εἰκόνας","severity":"info","text":"This passage transitions from refutation to a concessive pedagogical move, offering analogies from incorporeal realities (e.g., law in the mind) to help opponents conceive of the Trinity without spatial categories.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐδέχετο δὲ ὁ Μωϋσέως νοῦς σοφίαν τε πᾶσαν Αἰγυπτιακὴν","severity":"caution","text":"The claim that Moses' mind received 'all Egyptian wisdom' is a traditional Hellenistic-Jewish and patristic topos (cf. Philo, Clement), but its historical basis is uncertain and may reflect apologetic rather than fact.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text at the end is slightly garbled in the source edition (e.g., 'κτί σεως' for 'κτίσεως'), but the sense is clear. The reference to 'Egyptian wisdom' is ambiguous: it may be a positive appropriation or a polemical contrast."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":16,"ref":"p16","source":"Καὶ Δανιὴλ, σύνεσιν πᾶσαν τὴν Χαλδαίων ὑποδεξάμενος, ἐχώρει καὶ τὰ ποικίλα τῆς θείας σοφίας νοήματα, ὅπερ σημαίνει δι' Ἰεζεχιὴλ ὁ Θεός· «Μὴ σὺ σοφώτερος εἶ τοῦ Δανιήλ; πᾶν κρύφιον οὐχ ὑπεδείχθη σοι.» Ἀναρίθμητος δὲ ἡ τοῦ Σολο μῶνος φρόνησις, καὶ τὸ χύμα τῆς καρδίας αὐτοῦ, ὡς ἄμμος, ἡ παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν. Τὸ δὲ τοσοῦτον πλῆθος τῶν σοφιῶν περὶ μίαν ὁρῶντες διάνοιαν, ἐνθυμείσθωσαν αὐτὰς οὐκ οὔσας ἐν τόπῳ. Πόσος γὰρ ἂν τῷ μεγέθει γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος, ἐξήρκεσεν εἰς τὴν τοσούτων ὑποδοχὴν, εἰ τόποις μεμερισμένοις τῶν θεωρημάτων ἕκαστα εἶχεν; Ὅταν οὖν τὰ ἐνταῦθα πνευματικὰ μὴ δέηται πλειόνων τόπων πλείονα ὄντα, ἀλλὰ περὶ τὸν ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν στρέφηται νοῦν, ἐννοήσωμεν καὶ τὰ ὑπὲρ ἡμᾶς, καὶ καθ' ἑαυτὰ ὄντα ἀσώματα, τὸν Πατέρα καὶ τὸν Υἱὸν καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα μὴ τόπων δεόμενα, μηδὲ τόποις διαιρούμενα· καὶ μὴ διὰ τοῦτο ἀνύπαρκτον ἢ τὸν Πατέρα τις, ἢ τὸν Υἱὸν, ἢ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ὑποτίθεσθαι τολμάτω· ὅτι μηδὲ ἔστι τόπον ἀφορίζειν καὶ","english":"And Daniel, having received all the wisdom of the Chaldeans, also contained the varied conceptions of divine wisdom, which God signifies through Ezekiel: \"Are you not wiser than Daniel? Was not every hidden thing revealed to you?\" The wisdom of Solomon is also countless, and the outpouring of his heart like the sand by the sea. Seeing such a multitude of wisdoms around a single mind, let them consider that these are not in a place. For how great a man in size would suffice to receive so many, if he held each of his thoughts in separate places? Therefore, since these spiritual things here do not require many places, being many, but revolve around one and the same mind, let us conceive also of things above us, and being in themselves incorporeal—the Father, the Son, and the Spirit—as not needing places, nor being divided by places; and let no one dare to suppose, because of this, that either the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit is non-existent; for it is not possible to assign a place and","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Δι' Ἰεζεχιὴλ ὁ Θεός· «Μὴ σὺ σοφώτερος εἶ τοῦ Δανιήλ; πᾶν κρύφιον οὐχ ὑπεδείχθη σοι.»","severity":"info","text":"The quotation is not from Ezekiel but appears to be a free adaptation or apocryphal saying; no exact parallel exists in the canonical book of Ezekiel.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Δανιὴλ, σύνεσιν πᾶσαν τὴν Χαλδαίων","severity":"info","text":"Daniel is portrayed as surpassing Chaldean wisdom, a common trope in early Christian apologetic that contrasts pagan learning with divine revelation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"τὸ χύμα τῆς καρδίας αὐτοῦ, ὡς ἄμμος, ἡ παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν","severity":"info","text":"The image of Solomon's wisdom as sand by the sea echoes 1 Kings 4:29-30 (LXX) and is used to illustrate the non-spatial nature of intellectual capacity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἀναρίθμητος δὲ ἡ τοῦ Σολομῶνος φρόνησις","severity":"info","text":"This passage forms a rhetorical climax in the narrative, moving from Daniel and Solomon to the incorporeal Trinity, reinforcing the argument against spatial conceptions of God.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"μὴ τόπων δεόμενα, μηδὲ τόποις διαιρούμενα","severity":"info","text":"The argument that spiritual realities do not require or are divided by places is central to Athanasius's anti-Sabellian polemic, denying that the Trinity is spatially limited.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Καὶ Δανιὴλ, σύνεσιν πᾶσαν τὴν Χαλδαίων ὑποδεξάμενος","severity":"caution","text":"The Greek text is ambiguous: 'σύνεσιν πᾶσαν' could mean 'all understanding' or 'all intelligence'; the translation 'wisdom' is interpretive.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The source of the Ezekiel quotation is uncertain; it may be a loose citation or a lost apocryphon.","The phrase 'σύνεσιν πᾶσαν' could be read as 'all understanding' rather than 'all wisdom'."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":17,"ref":"p17","source":"κατανέμειν ἑκάστῳ. Ἀλλ' ἔστι μὲν ὁ Πατὴρ τέλειον ἔχων τὸ εἶναι καὶ ἀνελλιπὲς, ῥίζα καὶ πηγὴ τοῦ Υἱοῦ καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος· ἔστι δὲ ὁ Υἱὸς ἐν πλήρει τῇ θεότητι, ζῶν Λόγος, καὶ γέννημα τοῦ Πατρὸς ἀνενδεές· πλῆρες δὲ καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τοῦ Υἱοῦ, οὐ μέρος ἑτέρου, ἀλλ' ὁλόκληρον ἐφ' ἑαυτοῦ. Καὶ οὕτως ἡ Τριὰς, ἀληθινῶς οὖσα, συνῆπται μὲν ἀδιαστάτως. Τὸ γὰρ διορίζον οὐδὲν, σύνεστι δὲ ἀϊδίως· αἰὼν γὰρ οὐδεὶς μεταξὺ παρεμπίπτει. Μορφὴν δὲ προφαίνει μίαν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν, Πατρὸς μὲν ἐν Υἱῷ θεωρουμένου, Υἱοῦ δὲ ἐν Πνεύματι καὶ νοουμένου καὶ μετεχομένου ὑπὸ ἀνθρώπου. «Ἡμεῖς γὰρ,» φησὶ, «πάντες ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπῳ τὴν δόξαν Κυρίου κατοπτριζόμενοι, τὴν αὐτὴν εἰκόνα μεταμορφούμεθα ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν, καθάπερ ἀπὸ Κυρίου πνεύματος.» Μὴ τοίνυν ὡς ἐνσώματα ἀδιαίρετα μέρη φανταζώμεθα τρία. Δυσσεβὴς γὰρ ὁ λογισμὸς, ἀλλότριος ἀσωμάτων τελείων. Ἀδιαίρετον δεχώμεθα συνουσίαν συνόντων ἀλλήλοις ἀδιαστάτως, καὶ τριῶν γε κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ὑφεστώτων, ἓν τὸ εἶδος ἐννοῶμεν, ἀρχόμενον μὲν ἐκ Πατρὸς, λάμψαν δὲ ἐν Υἱῷ, καὶ φανερούμενον διὰ Πνεύματος. Διὰ τοῦτο καὶ οἱ τὸ Πνεῦμα φοροῦντες φοροῦσι Χριστόν· «Εἰ γάρ τις,» φησὶ, «Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἔχει, οὗτος οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτοῦ. Εἰ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν, τὸ μὲν σῶμα νεκρὸν διὰ ἁμαρτίαν,» καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς. Καὶ ὁ Ἰωάννης· «Ἐκ τούτου γινώσκομεν, ὅτι ἐν ἡμῖν ἔστιν, ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματος, οὗ ἔδωκεν ἡμῖν.» Καὶ ναὸν μὲν ἁγίου Πνεύματος τὰ σώματα ἡμῶν ὁ Παῦλος ὀνομάζει, Χριστὸν δὲ ἐν ἡμῖν εἶναι λέγει. Χριστοῦ δὲ οἰκοῦντος εἰς τὸν ἔσω ἡμῶν ἄνθρωπον, κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον, Θεός ἐστιν ἐν ἡμῖν κατοικῶν·","english":"to assign to each. But the Father exists, having his being perfect and without deficiency, root and source of the Son and the Spirit; and the Son exists in full divinity, living Word, and offspring of the Father, lacking nothing; and the Spirit too is full from the Son, not a part of another, but complete in itself. And thus the Trinity, truly existing, is conjoined without separation. For nothing divides it, and it coexists eternally; for no age intervenes between. And it displays one and the same form, the Father being seen in the Son, and the Son being both understood and participated in through the Spirit by man. \"For we,\" he says, \"all reflecting the glory of the Lord with unveiled face, are transformed from glory to glory into the same image, just as from the Lord's spirit.\" Let us not, therefore, imagine three as if they were indivisible parts of a body. For that thought is impious, alien to perfect incorporeal beings. Let us accept an indivisible communion of those that coexist without separation, and, with three truly subsisting, let us conceive one form, beginning from the Father, shining in the Son, and manifested through the Spirit. For this reason, those who bear the Spirit also bear Christ: \"For if anyone,\" he says, \"does not have the Spirit of Christ, that one is not his. If Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin,\" and so on. And John says: \"From this we know that he is in us, from the Spirit which he gave us.\" And Paul calls our bodies a temple of the Holy Spirit, and says that Christ is in us. And with Christ dwelling in our inner man, according to what is written, God dwells in us.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ἀδιαστάτως","severity":"info","text":"The adverb ἀδιαστάτως (without separation) is a key term in anti-Sabellian polemic, asserting that the divine persons are distinct yet inseparable, countering the Sabellian charge that Nicene theology implies division.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἡμεῖς γὰρ... κατοπτριζόμενοι","severity":"info","text":"The quotation beginning Ἡμεῖς γὰρ (For we) is not a direct biblical citation but likely a paraphrase or allusion to 2 Corinthians 3:18 or a liturgical source, reflecting the theme of transformation from glory to glory.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἰ γάρ τις... Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἔχει","severity":"info","text":"The phrase Εἰ γάρ τις Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἔχει echoes 1 Corinthians 12:3 or a similar Pauline passage, linking possession of the Spirit to belonging to Christ.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐκ τούτου γινώσκομεν... ἐκ τοῦ Πνεύματος","severity":"info","text":"The Johannine citation Ἐκ τούτου γινώσκομεν (From this we know) is not a direct verse but a summary of 1 John 3:24 or 4:13, emphasizing the Spirit as the means of knowing Christ's presence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"ναὸν μὲν ἁγίου Πνεύματος","severity":"info","text":"Paul's description of bodies as a temple of the Holy Spirit (ναὸν ἁγίου Πνεύματος) is a common Pauline metaphor (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:16-17), used here to argue for the Spirit's immanence without subordination.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Καὶ οὕτως ἡ Τριὰς... συνῆπται μὲν ἀδιαστάτως","severity":"info","text":"This sentence marks a structural pivot: after describing each person's fullness, the text asserts the Trinity's unity without separation, then moves to participatory language (μετεχομένου) and scriptural proofs.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The source of the first quotation (Ἡμεῖς γὰρ...) is uncertain; it may be a free adaptation of 2 Corinthians 3:18 or a lost liturgical text.","The phrase 'Εἰ γάρ τις... Πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἔχει' is not a verbatim biblical citation; its exact referent is unclear.","The Johannine citation (Ἐκ τούτου γινώσκομεν) is a paraphrase; the specific verse is not identified."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":18,"ref":"p18","source":"«Οὐκ οἴδατε, γὰρ, φησὶν, ὅτι ναὸς Θεοῦ ἐστε, καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τοῦ Θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν.» Οὕτως μοι τὸ τῆς θεότητος ἀδιαίρετον εὐσεβῶς ἐκ τῶν θείων λόγων καταμάνθανε, ἐν τρισὶν ἓν εἶδος κατανοῶν, οὐχ ἓν ἐκ τριῶν πρᾶγμα συντιθείς. Ἀχώριστα δὲ καὶ εἰς τὰ τῆς ἐνεργείας θεωρούμενα, ἀκούοντες τοῦ Ἀποστόλου μυσταγω γοῦντος καὶ φάσκοντος· «Διαιρέσεις δὲ χαρισμάτων εἰσὶ, τὸ δὴ αὐτὸ Πνεῦμα· καὶ διαιρέσεις διακονιῶν εἰσὶ, καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς Κύριος· καὶ διαιρέσεις ἐνεργημάτων εἰσὶν, ὁ δὲ αὐτὸς Θεὸς ὁ ἐνεργῶν τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσι.» Καὶ καταλέξας τὰ χαρίσματα ἐπιφέρει· «Πάντα δὲ ταῦτα ἐνεργεῖ τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ αὐτὸ Πνεῦμα, διαιροῦν ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστῳ, καθὼς βούλεται.» Ὅταν δὲ τὰ πάντα ἐνεργῆται ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ Χριστοῦ ἐν ἁγίῳ Πνεύματι, ἀχώριστον ὁρῶ ἐνέργειαν τοῦ Πατρὸς, καὶ τοῦ Υἱοῦ, καὶ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος. Ἀλλ' οὐ διὰ τοῦτο συμπλέξας τὸ ἐξ οὗ, καὶ δι' οὗ, καὶ ἐν ᾧ, βιάζομαι τὴν Τριάδα μονάδα ποιεῖν· οὐδὲ ἄνθρωπον ἐκ τριῶν ὑπονοῶν σύνθετον, πνεύματος, ψυχῆς, σώματος, οὕτω καὶ Θεὸν, καθάπερ κἀκεῖνοι τολμῶσιν, οὐδὲ ἐπὶ τῆς τοιαύτης ἀσεβοῦς ὑπονοίας προΐεμαι τὸ ἀχώριστον. Οὐδὲ εἰ λέγοι τις ὡς τὸν ἐνδιάθετον λόγον, ἢ τὸν ἐν φωνῇ τοῦ νοοῦντος καὶ λαλοῦντος ἀχώριστον, οὕτω τοῦ Πατρὸς τὸν Υἱὸν καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα. Τὰ γὰρ τοῦ συνθέτου μέρη, καὶ τὰ τοῦ κινουμένου κινήματα, πρὸς τὴν ἀσύνθετον καὶ ἀναλλοίωτον φύσιν οὐδεμίαν ἔχει κοινωνίαν. Ἐπεὶ καὶ πῶς ἀποστέλλει τὸ μέρος ἢ τὸ κίνημα αὐ τοῦ ὁ Πατὴρ, ἀποστέλλων τὸν Υἱόν; ἣ τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον ὁ Υἱὸς ἐκπέμπων εἰς τὸν κόσμον; Ἢ οὐκ ἀπεστάλη μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Πατρὸς ὁ Υἱός;","english":"Do you not know,\" he says, \"that you are a temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in you?\" Thus learn from the divine words the pious understanding of the indivisibility of the Godhead, perceiving one form in three, not composing one thing from three. And these are inseparable also in the things observed in activity, hearing the Apostle initiating and declaring: \"There are divisions of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are divisions of ministries, and the same Lord; and there are divisions of operations, but the same God who works all things in all.\" And after listing the gifts he adds: \"All these things the one and the same Spirit works, distributing to each individually as it wills.\" But when all things are worked by God through Christ in the Holy Spirit, I see an inseparable activity of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. But I do not, by intertwining the from which, and through which, and in which, force the Trinity to become a monad; nor do I, suspecting a composite human being from three—spirit, soul, body—likewise think of God, as those men dare, nor do I put forward the inseparable on such an impious suspicion. Nor if one were to speak of the internal word, or the word in voice of the one thinking and speaking as inseparable, do I so speak of the Son and the Spirit in relation to the Father. For the parts of a composite, and the movements of a moved thing, have no communion with the uncompounded and unchangeable nature. For how then does the Father send the part or the movement of himself, when sending the Son? Or the Son send out the Holy Spirit into the world? Or was the Son not sent by the Father?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὐκ οἴδατε, γὰρ, φησὶν, ὅτι ναὸς Θεοῦ ἐστε, καὶ τὸ Πνεῦμα τοῦ Θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, where Paul says the body is a temple of the Holy Spirit. Athanasius adapts it to argue for the indwelling of the Spirit in believers.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Διαιρέσεις δὲ χαρισμάτων εἰσὶ, τὸ δὴ αὐτὸ Πνεῦμα· καὶ διαιρέσεις διακονιῶν εἰσὶ, καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς Κύριος· καὶ διαιρέσεις ἐνεργημάτων εἰσὶν, ὁ δὲ αὐτὸς Θεὸς ὁ ἐνεργῶν","severity":"info","text":"This is a composite citation from 1 Corinthians 12:4-6, where Paul discusses the unity of the Spirit amid diverse gifts. Athanasius uses it to support the inseparable activity of the Trinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ἀχώριστον","severity":"info","text":"The term 'inseparable' (ἀχώριστον) is central to Athanasius' argument against Sabellianism: he insists on the distinctness of Father, Son, and Spirit while affirming their indivisible unity in activity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"ἐνδιάθετον λόγον","severity":"info","text":"The distinction between 'internal word' (ἐνδιάθετος λόγος) and 'uttered word' (προφορικὸς λόγος) was used by Stoics and later by some Christian theologians to illustrate the relation of Son to Father. Athanasius rejects this analogy as implying composition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἢ οὐκ ἀπεστάλη μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Πατρὸς ὁ Υἱός","severity":"caution","text":"The Greek text ends with a rhetorical question that is syntactically incomplete in the manuscript tradition; the English draft supplies a full question. The sense is clear, but the exact punctuation is uncertain.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Οὕτως μοι ... καταμάνθανε","severity":"info","text":"This passage is a narrative unit that moves from scriptural citation to theological argument, using a series of negations ('οὐ ... οὐδὲ ... οὐδὲ') to reject false analogies (composition, movement, human tripartite soul) for the Trinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text of the final rhetorical question is fragmentary; the English draft supplies a full question, but the original may be an aposiopesis."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":19,"ref":"p19","source":"Διαμαρτύρεται πανταχοῦ, καὶ ἀποστέλλειν τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ παρά κλητον ἐπαγγέλλεται, καὶ δὴ καὶ ἀποστέλλει κατὰ τὴν ὑπόσχεσιν. Ἀλλ' οἱ τὴν Τριάδα μονάδα ποιοῦντες νοθεύειν καὶ τὴν ἀποστολὴν, ὥσπερ τὴν γέννησιν, ἐπιχειροῦσιν. Εἴσω γὰρ ὄντα φασὶ τοῦ Πατρὸς τὸν Υἱὸν ἁγιασμὸν ἀνθρώπου ἐργάζεσθαι, τουτέστιν, αὐτὸν τὸν ἕνα καὶ μόνον Θεὸν, οὕτως ἀπεστάλθαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον, οὐ Θεὸν παρὰ Θεοῦ. Πῶς γὰρ καὶ ἀπέσταλται, φασὶν, ὁ Λόγος, μὴ διαιρούμενος, μηδὲ χωριζόμενος, οὗ Λόγος ἐστίν; Ὅτι μὲν οὖν σάρκωσις τοῦ Λόγου κεκήρυκται, τίς ἀντείποι; τοῦ εὐαγγελιστοῦ βοῶντος· «Ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο,» καὶ ὅτι καταβέβηκεν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ κεκραγότος αὐτοῦ τοῦ Σωτῆρος, οὐχ ἅπαξ, ἀλλὰ καὶ πολλάκις; Καὶ μὴν ὅτι οὐκ ἄνθρωπος ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς, ὁ ἀπόστολος\n\nΠαῦλος πρὸς Γαλάτας διισχυρίζεται. Ἀλλ' εἰ καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὁμώνυμος ἡμῖν, δεύτερος ἄνθρωπος, καὶ οὐχ οἷος ὁ πρότερος γηγενὴς, καὶ ὁ μὲν ψυχὴ ζῶσα, ὁ δὲ Πνεῦμα ζωοποιοῦν.","english":"He protests everywhere, and promises to send the Paraclete Spirit, and indeed sends it according to the promise. But those who make the Trinity a unity attempt to adulterate the sending, just as they do the generation. For they say that the Son, being within the Father, works the sanctification of man, that is, that the one and only God himself was sent as man, not God from God. For how, they say, was the Word sent, being neither divided nor separated from that whose Word he is? That the incarnation of the Word has been proclaimed, who would deny? For the Evangelist cries out, \"The Word became flesh,\" and that he came down from heaven, the Savior himself has cried out, not once but many times. And indeed, that our Lord Jesus Christ is not a man, the Apostle Paul insists to the Galatians. But even if he is a man homonymous with us, a second man, and not like the first earth-born, and the one is a living soul, the other a life-giving Spirit.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"Παράκλητον","severity":"info","text":"The term 'Paraclete' (Παράκλητον) here refers to the Holy Spirit as advocate or comforter, a key Johannine title (John 14:16, 26) used in anti-Sabellian polemic to stress the Spirit's distinct personhood.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὁ Λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο","severity":"info","text":"The quotation 'The Word became flesh' is from John 1:14, a foundational text for the incarnation, here deployed to counter Sabellian denial of a real sending of the Son.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"πρὸς Γαλάτας","severity":"info","text":"The reference to Paul's Epistle to the Galatians likely alludes to Gal 2:20 or 4:6, where Paul distinguishes Christ's nature from ordinary humanity, supporting Athanasius' anti-Sabellian argument.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This passage forms a narrative unit within the polemic, moving from a reported Sabellian objection (the Son as internal to the Father) to a series of scriptural counter-arguments (incarnation, descent, Pauline testimony).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"δεύτερος ἄνθρωπος","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'second man' (δεύτερος ἄνθρωπος) is ambiguous: it may echo Paul's 'second Adam' (1 Cor 15:45) or a Sabellian claim that Christ is merely a second human, not divine. The text argues against the latter.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'δεύτερος ἄνθρωπος' could be read as a Pauline echo or as a Sabellian position; the text takes it as the latter.","The reference to 'the Apostle Paul insists to the Galatians' is not precise; the exact verse is not given."],"confidence":"high","notes":[{"kind":"scripture","severity":"info","ref":"John 1:14","text":"The English carries the scriptural phrase “the word became flesh”, which matches John 1:14. The match is on the English draft; check the Coptic before quoting the verse."}]},{"i":20,"ref":"p20","source":"Ταῦτα γὰρ θεῖά τε καὶ ἀποστολικὰ ῥήματά τε καὶ δόγματα, καὶ τὰ ἔργα τῇ θεότητι μαρτυρεῖ μετ' ἐξουσίας οὐρανίου πραττόμενα, ὅτε κελεύει μὲν στοιχείοις, ἐπιτιμᾷ δὲ πνεύμασι, δυνάμει δὲ πηρώσεις ἀποκαθίστησι, καὶ θελήματι νόσους ἰᾶται, καὶ λέγει τὴν ἐξουσίαν, καὶ οὐκ ἀποκρύπτεται, καὶ καταργεῖται δι' αὐτοῦ θάνατος, φωτίζεται δὲ ζωὴ καὶ ἀφθαρσία, καὶ δημιουργεῖται δεύτερον ἡ φθαρεῖσα τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσις, καὶ κόσμος ἀνακαινοῦται διὰ τῆς παρουσίας αὐτοῦ, καὶ κτίσις ἀναφαίνεται καινὴ διὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, μεταμορφουμένου μὲν τοῦ σώματος τῆς ταπεινώσεως ἡμῶν εἰς συμμορφίαν τοῦ σώματος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ· τῆς δὲ κτίσεως ὅλης ἐλευθερουμένης ἀπὸ τῆς δουλείας τῆς φθορᾶς εἰς τὴν ἐλευθερίαν τῆς δόξης τῶν τέκνων τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ὅτι δὲ ὁ σαρκωθεὶς Κύριος καὶ Θεὸς ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ὁ Πατὴρ οὐκ ἔστιν, οὐδ', ὡς ἐκεῖνοι φαῖεν, ὁ μόνος Θεὸς, ἅπασαι μαρτυροῦσιν αἱ θεῖαι Γραφαὶ, Υἱὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ τὸν παραγεγονότα κηρύττουσαι, καὶ περὶ Πατρὸς ἀεὶ διαλεγόμενον ἐπιδεικνύουσαι, παρὰ Πατρὸς ἐληλυθέναι φάσκοντα, καὶ πρὸς Πατέρα ἀπιέναι. Καὶ οὐδὲν δεῖ μηκύνειν παρατιθέμενον μαρτυρίας· πάντα γὰρ, ὡς εἰπεῖν, τὰ Εὐαγγέλια, καὶ αἱ τῶν ἀποστόλων γραφαὶ εἰς τοῦτο συντείνουσιν. Ἄλλας τε Ἑλληνικὰς ἡμῖν ἀντιλογίας κινοῦσι, καὶ τὰς ἐξ Ἰουδαίων βλασφημίας ἐπιφέρουσι, χλευάζοντες τὸ μυστήριον τῆς ἀποστολῆς τοῦ Λόγου καὶ σαρκώσεως. Εἰ γὰρ ἀποστέλλεται, καὶ καταβαίνει, φασὶν, οὐκ ἔσται μετὰ τοῦ ἀποστέλλοντος, οὐδὲ τῷ ἄνω μένοντι σύνεστι.","english":"These are divine and apostolic words and doctrines, and the deeds performed with heavenly authority bear witness to the divinity, when he commands the elements, rebukes spirits, restores impairments by his power, heals diseases by his will, declares his authority, and does not conceal it; through him death is abolished, life and incorruption are illuminated, the ruined nature of humanity is created anew, the world is renewed through his presence, and a new creation appears through the resurrection of Christ, as the body of our humiliation is transformed into conformity with the body of his glory, and the whole creation is freed from the slavery of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God. That the incarnate Lord and our God Jesus Christ is not the Father, nor, as they would say, the only God, all the divine Scriptures bear witness, proclaiming that the one who has come is the Son of God, and showing him always speaking about the Father, claiming to have come from the Father, and to return to the Father. And there is no need to lengthen the discourse by citing testimonies; for all the Gospels, so to speak, and the writings of the apostles tend toward this. They also raise other Greek objections against us and bring forward blasphemies from the Jews, mocking the mystery of the sending of the Word and the incarnation. For if he is sent and descends, they say, he will not be with the one who sends him, nor will he be present with the one remaining above.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Ταῦτα γὰρ θεῖά τε καὶ ἀποστολικὰ ῥήματά τε καὶ δόγματα","severity":"info","text":"This sentence opens a long catalogue of Christ's divine acts, building a cumulative argument that the Son is distinct from the Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"τῆς κτίσεως ὅλης ἐλευθερουμένης ἀπὸ τῆς δουλείας τῆς φθορᾶς","severity":"info","text":"Echoes Romans 8:21 and the Pauline theme of liberation from corruption through Christ's resurrection.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"συμμορφίαν τοῦ σώματος τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'conformity to the body of his glory' alludes to Philippians 3:21, where Christ's glorified body is the pattern for the resurrected.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἄλλας τε Ἑλληνικὰς ἡμῖν ἀντιλογίας κινοῦσι, καὶ τὰς ἐξ Ἰουδαίων βλασφημίας ἐπιφέρουσι","severity":"info","text":"Athanasius accuses Sabellians of borrowing objections from Greek philosophy and Jewish polemic, a common rhetorical strategy to discredit opponents as foreign to Christian tradition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἰ γὰρ ἀποστέλλεται, καὶ καταβαίνει, φασὶν, οὐκ ἔσται μετὰ τοῦ ἀποστέλλοντος","severity":"info","text":"The Sabellian objection: if the Son is sent and descends, he cannot be simultaneously with the sender above, a spatial argument Athanasius refutes by distinguishing divine presence from local movement.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"πάντα γὰρ, ὡς εἰπεῖν, τὰ Εὐαγγέλια, καὶ αἱ τῶν ἀποστόλων γραφαὶ","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'all the Gospels, so to speak' is a rhetorical hyperbole; Athanasius does not cite specific verses, so the argument relies on general scriptural consensus rather than precise proof.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text is clear; no textual ambiguities in this passage."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":21,"ref":"p21","source":"Μαθέτωσαν δὴ τὸ ἄνω καὶ τὸ ἐν ὕψει μὴ σωματικῶς ἀκούειν μόνον, ἀλλὰ δή τι καινότερον ἐνθυμείσθωσαν. Τὸ γὰρ, «Ὑψηλὸς ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ὁ Κύριος,» καὶ τὸ, «Ὑψώσω σε, Κύριε,» καὶ τὸ, «Αἰνετὸς καὶ ὑπερυψούμενος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας,» οὐκ ἐν τόπῳ τινὶ καὶ μετεώρῳ τὸν Κύριον ὄντα παρίστησιν, οὐδ' ὑπὸ ἀνθρώπων μετεωριζόμενον ὑπογράφει τὸν Θεὸν, οὐδ' ὑπὸ τῶν· ἄλλων τῶν ὑμνούντων αὐτὸν, ἀλλὰ τὸ μεγαλοπρεπὲς τῆς ἀοράτου θεότητος ὕψος καλεῖ. Καὶ ὁ λέγων· «Ὁ οὐρανὸς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τῷ Κυρίῳ, τὴν δὲ γῆν ἔδωκε τοῖς υἱοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων,» οὐ τόπον οἰκήσεως ἀποκληροῖ τῷ Κυρίῳ τὸν οὐρανὸν, ἀνθρώποις δὲ τὴν γῆν· ἀλλὰ τὴν ὑπεροχὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ μεγαλοπρέπειαν ἐπιδείκνυσιν. Ὅταν οὖν τὸ μὲν σεμνὸν καὶ μεγαλοπρεπὲς ἐπουράνιον εἶναι λέγηται, τούτῳ δὲ ἀντικειμένως τὸ ταπεινὸν γηΐνως τε καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς εἶναι λέγηται, κατάβασις εὑρίσκεται τοῦ Λόγου ἡ ἐκ τῆς ἀσωμάτου μεγαλοπρεπείας εἰς τὸ τοῦ σώματος εὐτελὲς ἐπίδοσις, ἐπιδεδωκότος ἑαυτὸν εἰς σωματικὴν μόρφωσιν διὰ φιλανθρωπίαν καὶ τὴν τοῦ παντὸς σωτήριον πρόνοιαν. Ἀπεσταλμένος τε κατὰ τοῦτο νοηθήσεται, ὅτι ἀῤῥήτῳ βουλήσει τοῦ ἀσωμάτου Πατρὸς σώματι δέδω κεν ἑαυτόν. Μὴ τοίνυν αἱ σωματικαὶ φωναὶ, τουτέστιν ἡ κατάβασίς τε καὶ ἀποστολὴ πρὸς ἄρνησιν τῆς σαρκώσεως αὐτοῦ προσαγέσθωσαν, ὅτι μὴ καταβαίνει τοπικῶς μηδὲ ἀποστέλλεται Θεός· ἀλλ' ἀκουέτωσαν τοῦ Ἀποστόλου φράζοντος τὸ πρᾶγμα, καὶ ἅμα τῶν τοιούτων ὁμοιώσεων, ὅτε φησίν·","english":"Let them learn, then, not to hear \"above\" and \"in the height\" only in a bodily sense, but to conceive something more profound. For the phrases, \"The Lord is high above all nations,\" and \"I will exalt You, Lord,\" and \"Praiseworthy and supremely exalted for ever,\" do not represent the Lord as being in some place or in the air, nor do they depict God as being lifted up by men, nor by others who hymn Him, but they call the majesty of the invisible divinity \"height.\" And the one who says, \"The heaven of heaven belongs to the Lord, but the earth He gave to the sons of men,\" does not assign heaven as a dwelling place to the Lord and earth to men, but displays the superiority and majesty of God. Therefore, when the august and majestic is said to be heavenly, and in contrast the lowly is said to be earthly and upon the earth, the descent of the Word is found to be the giving over of Himself from incorporeal majesty to the cheapness of the body, He having given Himself over to bodily form out of love for humanity and for the providential salvation of the whole. And He will be understood as having been sent in this sense, that by the ineffable will of the incorporeal Father He gave Himself to a body. Let not, then, the bodily terms—that is, the descent and the sending—be brought forward to deny His incarnation, on the ground that God does not descend locally nor is He sent; but let them hear the Apostle expressing the matter, and at the same time such analogies, when he says:","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"κατάβασις","severity":"info","text":"The term 'descent' (κατάβασις) is central to Athanasius' argument: it denotes the Word's voluntary transition from incorporeal majesty to bodily form, not a local movement.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὑψηλὸς ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ὁ Κύριος","severity":"info","text":"This phrase echoes Psalm 113:4 LXX (ὑψηλὸς ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ ἔθνη κύριος), used to illustrate that divine 'height' is not spatial but a metaphor for majesty.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὁ οὐρανὸς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τῷ Κυρίῳ","severity":"info","text":"This citation from Psalm 115:16 LXX (ὁ οὐρανὸς τοῦ οὐρανοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ) is interpreted by Athanasius as indicating God's superiority, not a physical dwelling.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Σαβελλιανοί","severity":"info","text":"The Sabellians, against whom this work is directed, denied the distinct hypostases of Father and Son, often interpreting scriptural language of divine action in purely modal terms.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Μαθέτωσαν δὴ","severity":"info","text":"This passage forms a rhetorical climax: after listing divine acts, Athanasius now instructs opponents on proper exegesis of spatial language, leading to the Apostle's testimony.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀῤῥήτῳ βουλήσει","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'ineffable will' (ἀῤῥήτῳ βουλήσει) is textually uncertain; some manuscripts read ἀῤῥήτῳ βουλῇ. The sense of divine mystery remains, but the exact wording is not fully secure.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text has a minor textual variant in the phrase 'ἀῤῥήτῳ βουλήσει' (ineffable will), where some witnesses read 'βουλῇ' (counsel). The reading adopted follows the source edition."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":22,"ref":"p22","source":"«Ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ, ἀλλ' ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσε, μορφὴν δούλου λαβὼν, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος.» Τοῦτο ἦν τὸ καταβῆναι, τοῦτο τὸ ἀποσταλῆναι εἰς ἔνδυμα ταπεινότερον τῆς ἀξίας αὐτοῦ, ὑπόβασις ἡ τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης μορφῆς ἐπαμφίασις, κατὰ τὸ βούλημα τοῦ Πατρὸς ἐπιτελουμένη. Εἰ δὲ τόπῳ καὶ σώματι ὁ Λόγος μὴ περιγράφεται, οὐκ ἀποσπασθήσεται τοῦ ἀσωμάτου Πατρὸς διὰ τὴν πρὸς σῶμα ἀνάκρασιν· δέδεκται γὰρ αὐτὸν τὸ σῶμα βουληθέντα, ὡς πεφύκει ἡ σαρκίνη φύσις Θεὸν ὑποδέξασθαι. Μένει δὲ οὐδὲν ἔλαττον ἐπὶ τῆς ἑαυτοῦ φύσεως, ἢ καὶ πρὸ τῆς σαρκώσεως. Ὥστε ἡ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ κατάβασις οὐκ ἦν μετάβασις ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, οὐδὲ ἡ ἀποστολὴ χωρισμὸς ἀπὸ τοῦ πέμποντος Πατρός.","english":"Who, being in the form of God, did not consider it a usurpation to be equal to God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men.\" This was the descent, this the being sent into a garment more humble than his dignity, a descent the putting on of human form, accomplished according to the will of the Father. But if the Word is not circumscribed by place and body, he will not be separated from the bodiless Father because of his mixture with a body; for the body received him when he willed, as the fleshly nature is capable of receiving God. He remains no less in his own nature, even as before the incarnation. Thus the descent from heaven was not a change of place from heaven, nor was the sending a separation from the Father who sent him.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ὃς ἐν μορφῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχων, οὐχ ἁρπαγμὸν ἡγήσατο τὸ εἶναι ἴσα Θεῷ, ἀλλ' ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσε, μορφὴν δούλου λαβὼν, ἐν ὁμοιώματι ἀνθρώπων γενόμενος","severity":"info","text":"This is a paraphrase of Philippians 2:6-7, which Athanasius adapts to emphasize Christ's voluntary self-emptying and equality with God, a key proof-text in anti-Sabellian polemic.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"glossary","lemma":"ἁρπαγμόν","severity":"info","text":"The term ἁρπαγμόν (usurpation) is rare in patristic Greek; Athanasius uses it to counter the Sabellian charge that the Son's equality with the Father is a seizure of divine prerogative.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"ὑπόβασις","severity":"info","text":"The term ὑπόβασις (descent) here is not spatial but ontological, denoting the Son's voluntary assumption of human form. This reflects Athanasius's anti-Arian insistence that the incarnation does not diminish the Word's divine nature.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Εἰ δὲ τόπῳ καὶ σώματι ὁ Λόγος μὴ περιγράφεται","severity":"info","text":"This conditional clause introduces a logical argument: because the Word is not circumscribed by place or body, his incarnation does not entail separation from the Father. It forms the rhetorical climax of the passage.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"ἀνάκρασιν","severity":"caution","text":"The term ἀνάκρασιν (mixture) could be misread as implying a blending of divine and human natures. Athanasius carefully qualifies it: the body receives the Word only when he wills, preserving the distinction of natures.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The phrase 'ἐξ οὐρανοῦ κατάβασις' might be read spatially, but Athanasius explicitly denies a local descent, insisting it is a metaphor for the incarnation. The reading taken is non-spatial."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}