162 cenizei, intrans. N.T. Polyb. Lucian.
163 eqeloqrhskeiaj, "will worship."
164 conjunctive particles, sundesmoi. In Aristotle's Poetics (xx. 6), these are reckoned as one of the 8 `parts of speech. 0' The term sundesmoj is illustrated by the examples men, htoi, dh, which leaves no doubt that it includes at all events conjunctions and particles. Its general character is defined in his Rhetoric iii. 12, 4: "It makes many (sentences) one." Harris (Hermes ii. c. 2), thus defines a conjunction, "A part of speech devoid of signification itself, but so formed as to help signification by making two or more significant sentences to be one significant sentence," a definition which manifestly comes from Aristotle.
The comparison here seems to be between these constantly recurring particles, themselves `devoid of significant, 0' in an `elegant 0' discourse, and the perpetually used epithets, "fools," &c., which, though utterly meaningless, serve to connect his dislocated paragraphs. The `assembly 0' (sunacij, always of the synagogue or the Communion. See Suicer) of his words is brought, it is ironically implied, into some sort of harmony by these means.
165 A hit at the Anomooeans. `Your subtle distinctions, in the invinsible world of your own mind, between the meanings of "following" are like the unlikenesses which you see between the Three Persons. 0'
166 wj einai men ton Qeon kata tauton wj einai pote (infinitive by attraction to preceding) kai einai pepisteutai.
167 euariqmhtwn rhmatwn. But it is possible that the true reading may be eurufmwn, alluding to the `rhythm 0' in the form of abuse with which Eunomius connected his arguments (preceding section).
168 ouk eij to einai suairountej.
169 He gives to it the whole contents of godhead. It was the central point in Eunomius' system that by the 'Agennhsia we can comprehend the Divine Nature; he trusts entirely to the Aristotelian divisions (logical) and sub-divisions. A mere word (gennhtoj) was thus allowed to destroy the equality of the Son. It was almost inevitable, therefore, that his opponent, as a defender of the Homoousion, should occasionally fall back so far upon Plato, as to maintain that opposites are joined and are identical with each other, i.e. that gennhsij and agennhsia are not truly opposes to each other. Another method of combating this excessive insistence on the physical and logical was, to bring forward the ethical realities; and this Gregory does constantly throughout this treatise. We are to know God by Wisdom, and Truth, and Righteousness. Only occasionally (as in the next section) does he speak of the `eternity 0' of God: and here only because Eunomius has obliged him, and in order to show that the idea is made up of two negations, and nothing more.
170 from prophecy. Psalm x. 16. Basileusei Kurioj eij ton aiwna, kai eij ton aiwna tou aiwnoj: Psalm xxix. 10. kaqieitai Kurioj Basileuj eij ton aiwna: Psalm lxxiv. 12. 'O de qeoj basileuj hmwn pro aiwnoj.
173 ou peri to aidion qewreisqai.
174 Cf. Heb. xi. 1, of faith, elpizomenwn upostasisj pragmatwn.
176 kata diametron allhloij antikeimenwn, i.e. Contradictories in Logic.
177 As in A or E, both of which have the Particular below them (I or O) as a half-way to the contrary Universal. Thus-
A
All men are mortal.
E
I
Some men are mortal.
O
E
No men are mortal.
A
No men are mortal. Some men are not mortal. All men are mortal. But between A and O, E and I, there is no half-way.
178 Beginning (Contraries) Beginningless.
Endless (Contraries) Ending.
179 upenantiwj diakeimenwn. The same term has been used to express the opposition between Ungenerate and Generated: so that it means both Oppositions, i.e. Contraries and Contradictories.
180 Philip. ii. 9. onoma to uper pan onoma.
182 Adopting o logoj from the Venice Cod. (e/i pantwj o logoj sunenexqhsetai). The verb cannot be impersonal: and tij above, the only available nominative, does not suit the sense very well.
Gregory constructs this scheme of Opposition after the analogy of Logical Opposition. Beginning is not so opposed to Beginning-less, as it is to Ending, because with the latter there is no half-way, i.e. no word of definition in common.
184 ton thj aitiaj logon. This is much more probably the meaning, because of before above, than "on the score of the different kind of causation" (Non omne quod procedat nascitur, quamvis omne procedat quod nascitur. S. August.). It is a direct testimony to the `Filioque 0' belief. "The Spirit comes forth with the Word, not begotten with Him, but being with and accompanying and proceeding from Him." Theodoret. Serra. II.
4 This is perhaps the force of twn olwn: "the Lord of the Old Covenant as well as of the New." But twn olwn may mean simply "the Universe."
8 Or, somewhat more literally, "He admits of distinction into belie, in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, being divided," &c.
10 That nature which transcends our conceptions (uperkeiment).
11 Or "be conjoined with such attribute:" autw probably refers, like peri auton kai en autw just above, to Qeoj or to Qeion, but it may conceivably refer to ei ti makarion, k.t.l.
12 hgemonikon. Cf. Ps. li. 12 in [LXX]. (Spiritus principalis in Vulg., "free spirit" in the "Authorised" Version, and in the Prayer-book Version).
21 Or, "in which we were held by sin, being sold." The reference is to Rom. vii. 7 and Rom. vii. 14, but with the variation of upo thj amartiaj, for upo thn amartian, and a change in the order of the words.
22 A similar phrase is to be found in Book V. With both may be compared the language of the Eucharistic Prayer in the Liturgy of S. Basil (where the context corresponds to some extent with that of either passage in S. Gregory):-kai anastaj th trith hmera, kai odopoihsaj pash sarki thn ek nekrwn anastasin k.t.l.
26 Or, possibly, "and the contrast he makes between the one and the many, &c. is irrelevant" (allwj antidiairei): the quotation is from Ps. xcvi. 6 [LXX.].
27 Cf. S. John i. 18, reading (as S. Gregory seems to have done) qeoj for uioj.
28 kai en proj ton patera ontoj. It may be questioned whether the text is sound: the phrase seems unusual; perhaps en has been inserted in error from the preceding clause kai en tw patri ontoj, and we should read "is in the Father and is with the Father" (cf. the 2nd verse of the 1st Epistle, and verses 1 and 2 of the Gospel of S. John).
34 parallagh (Cf. S. James i. 17).
35 Or "I am He that is," Ex. iii. 14.
36 The reference seems to be to Gal. iv. 8.