Fourth Century Christianity

Reference:	CPG 5217
Incipit:	Μέγα μὲν ὁμολογουμένως ἐστὶ τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον
Date:	Spring 430
Greek Text:	ACO 1.1.6:53-75
English Translations:	P.E. Pusey, pp. 81-124, adapted by R. Read; see also the translation of Russell pp. 160- 167 for par. 15-23.

Cyril refers to Nestorius sometimes in second person, sometimes in third person. Usually the referent is clear from context, but clarification has been added in some cases when a sudden change in person is unclear. Any direct quotes from Nestorius’ works are in italics.

Theotokos and related words are transliterated and italicized. This title of Mary is a main point of contention for Nestorius and is addressed mainly in Tome 1. The main topic of the Tomes is the union of natures in Christ, which Cyril defines as a union κατὰ ὑπόστασις and accuses Nestorius of thinking of it as a συνάφεια. Ὑπόστασις has been translated as ‘subsistence,’ by which Cyril means a being which subsists in itself. He uses ὑπόστασις interchangeably with πρόσωπον (person). Cyril writes that the union results in one ὑπόστασις in Christ. He accuses Nestorius of teaching a συνάφεια, which has been translated ‘connection.’ This word implies two different beings side-by-side, moving in synchrony but nevertheless distinct. This is Cyril’s main argument against Nestorius, that he teaches not one but two Christs, one man and one divine.

For more information on the Five Tomes, click here.

Contents:

1. Introduction – The Mysteries of Scripture Are Attained by Faith (1)

2. The Incarnation Is Proved by Scripture (2–4)

3. First Argument – Nestorius Denies Christ’s Offices (5–9)

4. Second Argument – Nestorius Calls Christ the “Possessor of Deity” (10–14)

5. Third Argument – Nestorius Denies Christ’s Brotherhood with Humanity (15–19)

6. Fourth Argument – Nestorius Denies That God Became Human (20–23)

7. Fifth Argument – Nestorius Divides Christ in Two (24–31)

8. Cyril’s Allegory of Jacob Wrestling with God (32–33)

9. Sixth Argument – Nestorius Contorts God’s Actions Concerning Christ (34–35)

10. Seventh Argument – Nestorius Maintains that God Cannot Be High Priest (36–43)

11. Eighth Argument – Even Nestorius Cannot Deny the Necessity of the Union (44–48)

12. Ninth Argument – Nestorius Attributes Sin to Christ (49–53)

13. Conclusion and Summary (54)

BOOK 3

1. Introduction – The Mysteries of Scripture Are Attained by Faith

Μέγα μὲν ὁμολογουμένως ἐστὶ τὸ τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον, τεθαύμασται δὲ καὶ παρ’ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἁγίοις ἀγγέλοις καὶ πρός γε τοῦτο ἡμᾶς ἐμπεδοῖ λέγων ὁ σοφώτατος Παῦλος· “Ἵνα γνωρισθῇ νῦν ταῖς ἀρχαῖς καὶ ταῖς ἐξουσίαις ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις διὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἡ πολυποίκιλος σοφία τοῦ θεοῦ κατὰ πρόθεσιν τῶν αἰώνων, ἣν ἐποίησεν ἐν τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ, ἐν ᾧ ἔχομεν τὴν παρρησίαν καὶ προσαγωγὴν ἐν πεποιθήσει διὰ τῆς πίστεως.” σοφία γὰρ ἀληθῶς καὶ οὐκ ἀνθρωπίνη, πόθεν; θεία δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ ἐν ἀπορρήτοις τισὶ βάθεσί τε καὶ ἀκαταληψίαις κειμένη τὸ Χριστοῦ μυστήριον. ψάλλει γοῦν ὁ μακάριος Δαυίδ· “Καὶ ἔθετο σκότος ἀποκρυφὴν αὐτοῦ κύκλῳ αὐτοῦ ἡ σκηνὴ αὐτοῦ, σκοτεινὸν ὕδωρ ἐν νεφέλαις ἀέρων,” σκότον οἶμαι λέγων οὐδὲν ἕτερον πλὴν ὅτι που πάντως τὴν τῶν ἐννοιῶν δυσκάτοπτον εὕρεσιν τοῖς τῆς διανοίας ὀφθαλμοῖς ἀχλύος δίκην ἐμπίπτουσαν.

1. The mystery of godliness, we confess, is great; it causes even the holy angels themselves to marvel. Wise Paul affirms us in this, saying, “His intent was that now the manifold wisdom of God would be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavens through the church according to his eternal purpose, which he carried out in our Lord Jesus Christ. In him we may freely approach God with confidence through faith” [Eph. 3:10–12]. For the mystery of Christ is indeed wisdom—not human wisdom (how could it be?) but rather divine wisdom, which lies in certain ineffable depths and enigmas. Blessed David therefore sings, “He placed darkness in a circle around him to conceal him; his tent is dark water in clouds of the sky” [Ps. 18:11], using ‘darkness,’ I suppose, to mean nothing other than the altogether difficult understanding of ideas which falls like mist over the eyes of the mind.

2. The Incarnation Is Proved by Scripture

ταύτῃ τοι φαμὲν ζητημάτων ἰσχνῶν καὶ περιεργίας τῆς ἐπέκεινα νοῦ δεδεῆσθαι μὲν οὐδαμῶς τὸ Χριστοῦ μυστήριον, πίστεως δὲ μᾶλλον ἁπλῆν καὶ ἀκάκουργον ἐχούσης τὴν παράδοσιν. οὕτω καὶ ἡμεῖς αὐτοὶ φρονεῖν δεδιδάγμεθα καὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν ὅτι θεὸν ὄντα κατὰ φύσιν τὸν ἴδιον υἱὸν ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ ἄνθρωπον γεγονότα καὶ ἐκ γυναικὸς κατὰ σάρκα γεγεννημένον, ἵνα δικαιώσῃ τοὺς εἰς αὐτὸν πιστεύοντας καὶ τῶν ἐν ἀγνοίᾳ πταισμάτων χρηστοῖς καὶ ἡμερωτάτοις ἀπαλλάξας νεύμασι καθαροὺς καὶ ἀμώμους προσκομίσειε δι’ αὐτοῦ τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ καὶ τῆς θείας ἑαυτοῦ φύσεως ἐργάσηται κοινωνοὺς τοὺς ὑπὸ θάνατον καὶ φθοράν, κηρύξῃ δὲ καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν καὶ τὰς τῶν πεπλανημένων ἀγέλας εἰς τὸ τῆς ἀληθοῦς θεογνωσίας μετακομίσῃ φῶς διδάξῃ τε λοιπὸν τίς ὁ φύσει τε καὶ ἀληθῶς ἐστι θεὸς καὶ τῶν ὅλων δημιουργός. γέγονε γὰρ ὀσμὴ τῆς γνώσεως τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ τεθεάμεθα τὸν ἐξ οὗ γεγέννηται κατὰ φύσιν, ἐγνώκαμέν τε σαφῶς τὴν εἰς ζωὴν ἡμᾶς τὴν ἀίδιον ἀποφέρουσαν ὁδόν. οὕτω καὶ ταῖς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἀγέλαις ἐπιλάμψειν τὸν υἱὸν ὁ μακάριος προφήτης Ἡσαίας προανεκεκράγει λέγων· “Οὕτω λέγει κύριος· ἐκοπίασεν Αἴγυπτος καὶ ἐμπορίαι Αἰθιόπων καὶ οἱ Σαβαὶμ ἄνδρες ὑψηλοὶ ἐπὶ σὲ διαβήσονται καί σοι ἔσονται δοῦλοι καὶ ὀπίσω σοῦ ἀκολουθήσουσι δεδεμένοι χειροπέδαις καὶ προσκυνήσουσί σοι καὶ ἐν σοὶ προσεύξονται, ὅτι ἐν σοὶ ὁ θεός ἐστι καὶ οὐκ ἔστι θεὸς πλὴν σοῦ. σὺ γὰρ εἶ θεὸς καὶ οὐκ ᾔδειμεν, ὁ θεὸς τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ σωτήρ.” εἴρηται δέ που πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν ὡς ἐκ προσώπου πάλιν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρός· “Ἰδοὺ τέθεικά σε εἰς διαθήκην γένους, εἰς φῶς ἐθνῶν τοῦ εἶναί σε εἰς σωτηρίαν ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς.” νενομοθέτηκε μὲν γὰρ τὸν ἐξ αἵματός τε καὶ γένους Ἰσραὴλ τὴν καινὴν διαθήκην, παλαιωθείσης τῆς πρώτης, ἐπέφανε δὲ καὶ μέχρι τερμάτων τῆς ὑπ’ οὐρανὸν τοῖς ἀνὰ πᾶσαν χώραν τε καὶ πόλιν ἔθνεσί τε καὶ λαοῖς. προσκεκυνήκασι γὰρ αὐτῷ καὶ μὴν καὶ ἕπονται νοητῶς, ἀρρήκτοις ἀγάπης δεσμοῖς καθάπερ τισὶ χειροπέδαις ἐνισχημένα καὶ μόνον οὐχὶ λέγοντα τὸ διὰ φωνῆς Ἱερεμίου· “Ἰδοὺ οἵδε ἡμεῖς ἐσόμεθά σοι, ὅτι σὺ κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν εἶ.”	2. Therefore we say that the mystery of Christ by no means needed careful investigations and curiosity beyond the reach of mind, but rather faith which clings to the simple and innocent tradition. Thus we ourselves also have been taught and have believed that God the Father sent his own Son who is by nature God. He became human and was born of woman according to the flesh to justify those who believe in him. He delivered them from stumbling due to ignorance by his kind and most gentle authority, in order that he might present them clean and undefiled through him to God the Father, might make those who are subject to death and decay participants in his own divine nature, might also preach recovery of sight to the blind, might bring the flocks that have strayed back to the light of the true knowledge of God, and finally might teach about the one who is by nature truly God, the creator of all. He has become the fragrance of the knowledge of God the Father; in him we have seen the one of whom he was begotten by nature and clearly know the way that leads us to everlasting life. Thus the blessed prophet Isaiah had also shouted beforehand that the Son should shine on the crowds of Gentiles, saying, “Thus says the Lord: ‘Egypt has toiled; the goods of the Ethiopians and Sabeans, those tall men, will pass over to you; they will be your servants; they will follow you, bound in fetters; they will worship you, and by you will they pray. For in you is God, and there is no God except you. You are God, and we knew it not, God the Savior of Israel’” [Is. 45:14–15]. Somewhere the person of God the Father again says to the Son, “Behold, I have made you to be a covenant for a nation, a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth” [Is. 49:6]. For he has laid down a new covenant for those of the blood and race of Israel, having abrogated the first. He showed himself to the nations and people in every place and city even as far as the boundaries of the earth beneath the sky. For they have indeed worshiped him, and they spiritually follow him, bound by the unbreakable bonds of love as in fetters, and practically say what was said through Jeremiah, “Behold, we will be yours, for you are the Lord our God” [Jer. 3:22].
ὅρα δέ μοι τῶν προφητικῶν ἐννοιῶν τὴν ἐγρήγορσιν· “Προσκυνήσουσί σοι,” φησί, “καὶ ἐν σοὶ προσεύξονται, ὅτι ἐν σοὶ θεός ἐστι καὶ οὐκ ἔστι θεὸς πλὴν σοῦ.” ᾔδει μὲν οὖν ὁμολογουμένως ὡς πνευματοφόρος τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον ἐν ἡμῖν σκηνώσοντα, καθά φησιν ὁ μακάριος εὐαγγελιστὴς Ἰωάννης (ταύτῃ τοί φησιν ὅτι ἐν σοὶ θεός ἐστι)· πλὴν οὐκ εἰς δύο τέμνεσθαι θεοὺς συγκεχώρηκε τὸν Ἐμμανουήλ, ἀλλ’ εἰ καὶ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος ὁ μονογενής, ἕνα καὶ οὕτως ὡμολόγει πάλιν αὐτόν. καὶ γοῦν εὐθὺς προσεπήνεγκεν ὅτι “οὐκ ἔστι θεὸς πλὴν σοῦ.” ἐπιτήρει γὰρ ἀκριβῶς τὴν τοῦ προφήτου φωνήν. προηγορευκὼς γάρ, ὡς ἔφην, ὅτι “ἐν σοὶ ὁ θεός ἐστιν,” οὐ προστέθεικεν ὅτι καὶ οὐκ ἔστι θεὸς πλὴν τοῦ ἐν σοί, ἀλλ’ εἰς ἑνότητα συνενεγκὼν οἰκονομικήν, “οὐκ ἔστι,” φησί, “θεὸς πλὴν σοῦ.”	3. Observe the alertness of the prophet’s thoughts: “They will worship you,” he says, “and by you will they pray. For in you is God, and there is no God except you” [Is. 45:14]. As an inspired prophet he admittedly knew the Word of God the Father, who would dwell among us [John 1:14], as the blessed evangelist John says; for this reason he says, “In you is God.” Yet he has not allowed Emmanuel to be divided into two gods; rather, although the Only-Begotten became human, even so he confessed him as one. Immediately he added, “There is no God except you.” Carefully consider the prophet’s utterance. Having first declared (as I said), “In you is God,” he has not added, “And there is no God except the one who is in you.” Instead he brought things together into the unity of the incarnation and said, “There is no God except you.”
ὅτι δὲ ἄνθρωπος γεγονὼς ὁ μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος διὰ πάσης τῆς θεοπνεύστου γραφῆς ὡς ἔπος εἰπεῖν καταγγέλλεται, διὰ πλείστων μὲν ὅσων ἀκονιτὶ καταδεῖξαι ῥᾷον, ἀπόχρη δέ, οἶμαι, πρὸς τὸ παρὸν ἐκεῖνο εἰπεῖν. ἔφη γάρ που θεὸς πρὸς τὸν μακάριον Δαυίδ· “Καὶ ἀναστήσω ἐκ τοῦ σπέρματός σου μετὰ σὲ ὃς ἔσται ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας σου, καὶ ἑτοιμάσω τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ· αὐτὸς οἰκοδομήσει οἶκον τῷ ὀνόματί μου. καὶ ἀνορθώσω τὸν θρόνον αὐτοῦ ἕως εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα καὶ ἐγὼ ἔσομαι αὐτῷ εἰς πατέρα καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι εἰς υἱόν.” ἀλλ’, οἶμαι, φαίη τις ἄν, οὐκ ἐπί γε τῷ Ἐμμανουήλ, εἰρῆσθαι δὲ μᾶλλον ἐπὶ Σολομῶντι ταυτί· Παῦλός γε μὴν ὁ σοφώτατος τοῖς οὕτως ἐθέλουσι νοεῖν ἀντιτάξεται γεννικῶς. δέχεται γὰρ ἐπὶ Χριστῷ τὰς φωνὰς καὶ αὐτὸν εἶναί φησι πρὸς ὃν εἴρηται παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ὅτι “Ἔσομαι αὐτῷ εἰς πατέρα καὶ αὐτὸς ἔσται μοι εἰς υἱόν.” ὅτι δὲ καθ’ ἡμᾶς γεγονώς, τουτέστιν ἄνθρωπος ἱερουργήσειν ἔμελλε τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ διὰ τῆς εἰς αὐτὸν πίστεως σεσωσμένην τὴν ὑπ’ οὐρανόν, διεσάφει λέγων ἐν ἑτέροις· “Καὶ ἀναστήσω ἐμαυτῷ ἱερέα πιστὸν ὃς πάντα τὰ ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ μου καὶ ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ μου ποιήσει, καὶ οἰκοδομήσω αὐτῷ οἶκον πιστὸν καὶ διελεύσεται ἐνώπιόν μου πάσας τὰς ἡμέρας.” ἄθρει δή μοι πάλιν ὡς ἐν ἑτέροις εἰπὼν “Οὗτος οἰκοδομήσει οἶκον τῷ ὀνόματί μου,” τῷ υἱῷ τὸν οἶκον ἐγείρειν ὁ πατὴρ ἐπαγγέλλεται. καὶ τοῦτο συνεὶς ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος Μωσέα μὲν ἔφη πιστὸν ἐν ὅλῳ γενέσθαι τῷ οἴκῳ μου, τὸ οἰκετικὸν ἔχοντα μέτρον, “Χριστόν” γε μὴν “ὡς υἱὸν ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ, οὗ οἶκος ἐσμὲν ἡμεῖς.”	4. It is effortlessly easy to show by very many proofs that all God-breathed scripture, so to speak,¹ declares to us that the only-begotten Word of God has become human. But for the present I think it is enough to say this: God said somewhere to blessed David, “I will set up one of your offspring after you who will be from your belly, and I will prepare his kingdom. He will build a house for my name. I will establish his throne forever. I will be his father; he will be my son” [2 Sam. 7:12–14]. I suppose someone will say that these things were said not of Emmanuel, but rather of Solomon. Yet wise Paul strenuously opposes those who want to understand it this way, for he applies the words to Christ and says it is he to whom God the Father said, “I will be his father; he will be my son” [Heb. 1:5]. He made clear that he would consecrate to God the Father all beneath the sky saved through faith in him when he became like us, that is, human, saying elsewhere, “I will raise up for myself a faithful priest who will do all which is in my heart and in my soul. I will build him a trustworthy house, and he will walk before me all his days” [1 Sam. 2:35]. Observe that having said elsewhere, “He will build a house for my name,” the Father here promises to raise up a house for the Son. Paul understood this when he said under inspiration that Moses was faithful in all the house, meeting the requirements of a servant, but “Christ is faithful as a Son over his own house—and we are his house” [Heb. 3:6].
τρόπος δὲ τῆς ἱερουργίας αὐτῷ τὰ καθ’ ἡμᾶς, οὐχ αἷμα ταύρων καὶ μόσχων, ἀλλ’ ἡ τῆς ἁπάντων πίστεως ὁμολογία. καὶ πιστώσεται πάλιν ὡδὶ γεγραφὼς ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος· “Ὅθεν, ἀδελφοὶ ἅγιοι, κλήσεως ἐπουρανίου μέτοχοι, κατανοήσατε τὸν ἀπόστολον καὶ ἀρχιερέα τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν, πιστὸν ὄντα τῷ ποιήσαντι αὐτόν.” αὐτὸν οὖν ἄρα φαμὲν τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον, ὅτε δι’ ἡμᾶς κεκενῶσθαι λέγεται “μορφὴν δούλου λαβών,” τότε καὶ ἐν τοῖς τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος μέτροις ἑαυτὸν καθεῖναι, οἷς ἂν πρέποι, καὶ μάλα εἰκότως, καὶ τὸ ἀπεστάλθαι δοκεῖν καὶ τῆς ἀνωτάτω τιμῆς ἡγεῖσθαι πρόξενον τὴν ἱερουργίαν. εἰ γὰρ ἐπείπερ γέγονε καθ’ ἡμᾶς, προσκεκύνηκε μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὡς ἄνθρωπος, καίτοι προσκυνούσης αὐτὸν τῆς ἄνω πληθύος καὶ τῶν ἁγίων πνευμάτων λέγοντός τε Μωυσέος περὶ αὐτοῦ· “Εὐφράνθητε, οὐρανοί, ἅμα αὐτῷ καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες υἱοὶ θεοῦ,” τί τὸ ξένον ἢ τῆς οἰκονομίας λόγοις ἀνάρμοστον, εἰ κεχρημάτικεν ἀρχιερεὺς ὡς εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας ἑαυτόν τε ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν καὶ ἡμᾶς ἀνατιθεὶς δι’ ἑαυτοῦ τε καὶ ἐν ἑαυτῷ τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί; “Χριστοῦ” γὰρ “ἐσμὲν εὐωδία” κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον.	As for the manner of his holy work, it involves things that pertain to us—not the blood of bulls and calves, but the confession of faith of us all. Blessed Paul will again certify it, writing, “For this reason, holy brothers who share in the heavenly calling, consider the apostle and high priest we confess, Jesus, who was faithful to the one who appointed him” [Heb. 3:1–2]. We therefore say that the Word of God the Father, when it says he emptied himself for our sake, “taking the form of a servant” [Phil. 2:7], then also lowered himself with the limitations of the human nature, among which (very reasonably) both the appearance of being sent and the evaluation of his holy work as securing the very highest honor are included. For if, when he became like us, he worshiped with us as a human, even though the host above and the holy spirits worship him, and Moses says of him, “Rejoice with him, O heavens; let all the sons of God worship him” [Deut. 32:43], what is foreign or incongruous to the teachings regarding the incarnation if he has been called high priest because he offers himself on our behalf as a sweet-smelling aroma and offers us through and in himself to God the Father? For “we are a sweet savor of Christ” [2 Cor. 2:15], as it is written.

3. First Argument – Nestorius Denies Christ’s Offices

ἀλλ’ ἥκιστα μὲν ἐν κόσμῳ τῷ δέοντι πεπρᾶχθαι ταυτὶ διισχυρίζεται πάλιν ὁ γεννάδας οὑτοσί, μόνον δὲ οὐχὶ καταμειδιᾷ τῶν οὕτω ταῦτ’ ἔχειν ὑπειληφότων καὶ τοῖς θείοις σκέμμασιν ἀνοσίως ἐπιτιμῶν οὕτω πού φησιν· “Ἀποστόλου γὰρ ἀκούοντες ὄνομα, τὸν θεὸν λόγον νοοῦσιν ἀπόστολον· ἀρχιερέως ἀναγινώσκοντες κλῆσιν, θεότητα τὸν ἀρχιερέα φαντάζονται παραδόξου φρενοβλαβείας ἰδέᾳ. τίς γὰρ ἀποστόλου λειτουργίαν μαθών, οὐκ εὐθὺς ἄνθρωπον μηνυόμενον ἔγνω; τίς ἀρχιερέως ὀνομασίαν ἀκούων, θεότητος <ἂν> οὐσίαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα νομίσειεν; εἰ γὰρ ἀρχιερεὺς ἡ θεότης, τίς ὁ τῇ παρὰ τῆς ἀρχιερωσύνης λειτουργίᾳ θεραπευόμενος; εἰ θεὸς ὁ προσφέρων, οὐδεὶς ᾧ προσφέρεται. τί γὰρ θεότητος ἄξιον, ἵν’ ὡς ἐλάττων προσφέρῃ τῷ μείζονι;” Προσεπάγει δὲ τούτοις· “Πόθεν οὖν αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς κεκλῆσθαι νῦν ἀρχιερεὺς ἐνομίσθη ὁ θυσίας εἰς προκοπὴν ἰδίαν κατὰ τοὺς ἀρχιερέας μὴ χρῄζων; ὁ θεότητος κτήτωρ ‘ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ληφθεὶς ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπων καθίσταται τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν.’”	5. But this noble person [Nestorius] asserts that these things have been done with improper form, all but derides those who understand that they are so, and, impiously finding fault with God’s purposes, somewhere says, “They hear the word ‘apostle’ and think God the Word is an apostle; they read the title ‘high priest’ and imagine that the deity is high priest by a form of paradoxical folly. For who, learning of the ministryof an apostle, would not immediately understand that it indicates a human? Who, on hearing the designation of high priest, would think that the divine essence is high priest? If the deity is high priest, whom does the high priest’s ministry serve? If God offers sacrifice, there is no one to whom the sacrifice is offered. For what is there that deserves God’s offering, so that as the lesser God should offer to the greater?” Then he adds, “For what reason, then, do they suppose God has now been called high priest—he who has no need to make sacrifices for his own advancement like the high priests? Is the possessor of deity ‘taken from among humans and ordained for humans in matters pertaining to God’?” [Heb. 5:1].
Οὐκοῦν οὐδὲ ἀπεστάλθαι φὴς εἰς τόνδε τὸν κόσμον τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον; πεφενάκικεν οὖν ἄρα κατὰ τὸ εἰκὸς τοὺς δι’ αὐτοῦ κεκλημένους ὁ σοφώτατος Παῦλος· ἔφη γὰρ ὅτι “Ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ γενόμενον ἐκ γυναικός, γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον,” ἁλοίη δ’ ἂν κατὰ σὲ καὶ ὁ μακάριος Δαυὶδ ἐρραψῳδηκὼς εἰκῇ καὶ τὰ ἀνέφικτα ζητῶν· ἔφη γάρ που πρὸς τὸν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς πατέρα καὶ θεόν· “Ἐξαπόστειλον τὸ φῶς σου καὶ τὴν ἀλήθειάν σου.” τί δέ; εἰπέ μοι, οὐχὶ καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ υἱὸς ψευδοεπήσει τάχα που λέγων “Οὐ γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ἵνα κρίνῃ τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ’ ἵνα σωθῇ ὁ κόσμος δι’ αὐτοῦ,” καὶ πάλιν “Ἐγὼ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐξῆλθον καὶ ἥκω”; γράφει δέ που καὶ ὁ σοφὸς Ἰωάννης περὶ αὐτοῦ “Ὁ λαμβάνων αὐτοῦ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἐσφράγισεν ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἀληθής ἐστιν· ὃν γὰρ ἀπέστειλεν ὁ θεός, τὰ ῥήματα τοῦ θεοῦ λαλεῖ.” ἀπεστάλθαι δὲ φαμὲν τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον τὸ τῆς ἀποστολῆς ὄνομά τε καὶ χρῆμα μετὰ τῶν τῆς κενώσεως ἔχοντα μέτρων, σὺ δὲ δὴ δέδιας ἀμαθῶς καὶ αὐτῷ προσνέμειν ἐρυθριᾷς ἀνθ’ ὅτου τό τε τῆς ἀποστολῆς καὶ τῆς ἀρχιερωσύνης ὄνομά τε καὶ χρῆμα; ἆρα γὰρ ἁρμόσειν ὑπείληφας ὡς ἑτέρῳ παρ’ αὐτὸν ἀνθρώπῳ τῷ ἐκ γυναικός, ψιλὴν ἔχοντι τὴν συνάφειαν κατὰ σὲ καὶ ὡς ἐν ἰσότητι μόνης τῆς ἀξίας; πῶς οὖν ἔτι τὰ καθ’ ἡμᾶς ὀνήσας ὁρᾶται θεὸς ὢν ὁ λόγος, εἰ καὶ προσκεκομίσμεθα δι’ ἑτέρου τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί; οὐκέτι γὰρ δι’ αὐτοῦ τὴν προσαγωγὴν ἐσχήκαμεν, ἀλλὰ γέγονεν ἡμῶν μεσίτης ἄνθρωπος καθ’ ἡμᾶς, τὸ τῆς θεότητος ὄνομα κατάπλαστον ἔχων.	6. Surely, then, you say that the Word of God has not even been sent into the world? Then, it seems, wise Paul has tricked those who were called through him, for he said, “God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law” [Gal. 4:4]. You would also catch blessed David idly declaiming and seeking what is unattainable, for he said somewhere to God the Father in heaven, “Send out your light and your truth” [Ps. 43:3]. And what? Tell me, will not the Son himself also lie in saying, “God did not send his Son into the world to judge the world but to save the world through him” [John 3:17], and again, “I came from the Father, and here I am”? [John 8:42]. The wise John somewhere also writes of him, “He who receives his testimony confirmed that God is truthful, for he whom God sent speaks God’s words” [John 3:33–34]. We say that the Word of God has been sent because he possesses both the designation and reality of being sent by virtue of the emptying. But as for you, why are you, in ignorant fear, ashamed to attribute to him both the designation and reality of his being sent and his high priesthood? Do you suppose they would suit the human born of woman as one other than he, having (according to you) a mere conjunction, and that only in equality of rank? How then would the Word being God help our condition any longer if we have been presented to God the Father through one other than him? We would no longer have access through him, but a man like us would have become our mediator, having plastered on the name of deity.
ἀλλὰ ναί, φησί, σμικρὸν ἂν εἴη τῷ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς φύντι λόγῳ τὸ ἱερουργεῖν. σμικρὸν ὁμολογουμένως, συνερῶ γάρ σοι πρεσβεύοντι τἀληθές· ἀλλ’ οὐ γυμνῇ τῇ θεότητι κεχρημένος ἐπέφανε τοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, γεγονὼς δὲ μᾶλλον ἄνθρωπος καθ’ ἡμᾶς, ᾧ μέγα τι χρῆμα καὶ ἐξαίρετον ἡ ἱερουργία. εἰ δὲ δὴ παραιτεῖτο τὸ ἱερουργεῖν ὡς ἀνθρώπῳ πρέπον ἢ γοῦν ἑτέρῳ τῷ τῆς δουλείας ἔχοντι μέτρον, πῶς οὐκ ἄμεινον παρὰ πολὺ καὶ πρό γε τούτου παραιτεῖσθαι τὴν ἐνανθρώπησιν;	7. But he says the priest’s office indeed is petty for the Word begotten of God the Father. I confess it is petty, for I agree when you speak the truth. But not as bare deity did he appear to those upon the earth; instead he became human like us, to whom the priesthood is something great and a special honor. But if he would refuse the priest’s office because it is proper for men—or at least to another in a position of servitude—how would it not be far better even before this to refuse the incarnation?
ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἀπόβλητον ἐποιήσατο δι’ ἡμᾶς τὴν γέννησιν, οὑτοσὶ δέ, ὡς ἔφην, αἰσχύνεται τἀληθές, ἄσοφόν τε καὶ ἀνεπιστήμονα καταδεικνὺς ἑαυτόν, καίτοι τοῦ μακαρίου Παύλου λέγοντος· “Οὐ γὰρ ἐπαισχύνομαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, δύναμις γὰρ θεοῦ ἐστιν εἰς σωτηρίαν παντὶ τῷ πιστεύοντι.” θαυμάσειε δ’ ἄν τις τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον τῆς ἁπάντων ἕνεκα σωτηρίας καὶ ζωῆς τοσαύτην ἀνασχόμενον παθεῖν τὴν ταπείνωσιν, ἣν οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅπως ὁ τῶν εἰκαίων ἡμῖν διδαγμάτων εὑρετὴς καὶ μόνον ὁμολογεῖν αἰσχύνεται, καίτοι δέον ἄγασθαι μὲν ἐπὶ τούτοις αὐτόν, ἀνακραγεῖν δὲ ὁμοῦ τῷ μακαρίῳ προφήτῃ· “Κύριε, εἰσακήκοα τὴν ἀκοήν σου καὶ ἐφοβήθην· κατενόησα τὰ ἔργα σου καὶ ἐξέστην.” ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἁπάσης αὐτῷ τῆς θεοπνεύστου γραφῆς ἀντεγειρομένης τρόπον τινὰ καὶ ἀντανιστώσης τὴν ἀλήθειαν ψυχρόν τε καὶ ἄυλον καὶ οὐδαμόθεν ἐπικουρούμενον ἀποφαινούσης αὐτῷ τὸν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἰδίοις εὑρήμασι λόγον, διηπόρηκεν οὐ μετρίως τῶν εἰς ὀρθότητά τε καὶ ἀλήθειαν ἐννοιῶν τε καὶ διασκέψεων, ταύτῃ τοι καὶ ἃ μηδεὶς πώποτε τῶν εἰς ὀρθότητα τὴν δογματικὴν μεμαρτυρημένων ἢ πεφρονηκὼς ἢ λέγων ἁλίσκεται, ταύτας ποιεῖται τοῦ λόγου τὰς ἀφορμὰς σκιαμαχεῖ τε καὶ διατείνεται μάτην, ἀντεξάγοντος οὐδενὸς ἢ φιλονεικεῖν ἐθέλοντος περὶ τούτων αὐτῷ, καὶ τοῦτο οἶμαί ἐστι τὸ εἰς ἀέρα δέρειν. ἔφη γάρ “Τίς ἀποστόλου λειτουργίαν μαθών, οὐκ εὐθὺς ἄνθρωπον μηνυόμενον ἔγνω; τίς ἀρχιερέως ὀνομασίαν ἀκούων, θεότητος <ἂν> οὐσίαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα νομίσειεν;”	8. Yet for our sakes he did not reject being born. But this man, as I said, is ashamed of the truth, showing himself unwise and ignorant, even though blessed Paul says, “I am not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God for salvation for everyone who believes” [Rom. 1:16]. One might marvel that the Word of God, for the salvation and life of all, was content to suffer such great abasement. And I know not how he who invents purposeless teachings for us is ashamed merely to acknowledge it, though he ought to admire it and to cry with the blessed prophet, “Lord, I heard news of you and was afraid; I considered your works and was amazed” [Hab. 3:2]. But because all divinely inspired scripture, in a way,² rises up against him and sets up the truth, it shows that his discourse in favor of his own inventions is vain, immaterial, and completely unfounded. It lacks in no small degree the thoughts and ideas that aim at uprightness and truth. So the occasions of his discourse are things which no one with the reputation of correct doctrine ever thought or said, and he fights with shadows and strains himself in vain, with no one opposing him or wishing to contend about these matters. And this, I think, is to beat the air. For he said, “Who, learning of the ministryof an apostle, would not immediately understand that it indicates a human? Who, on hearing the designation of high priest, would think that the divine essence is high priest?”
Ὅτε τοίνυν οὐδεὶς ὁ τοῦτο λέγων ἐστί, τίσιν, εἰπέ μοι, φιλονεικεῖς καὶ τὸ ταῖς ἁπάντων ψήφοις κατεγνωσμένον ὡς μόνος αὐτὸς ἀνατρέπων οἴει τάχα που καὶ γερῶν ἀξίαν ποιεῖσθαι τὴν ἔνστασιν; καίτοι πῶς οὐκ ἀληθὲς ὡς τοῦτο λέγοντος οὐδενὸς εἰς μέσον ἄγεις αὐτὸς ὃ σιωπᾶν ἄμεινον καὶ μὴ ταῖς τῶν ἁπλουστέρων ἐνίεσθαι ψυχαῖς; τίς γὰρ οὕτως ἐμβρόντητος, ὡς θεότητος οὐσίαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα νομίζειν; ἄνθρωπος ἦν Ἀαρών, καίτοι τὸ προύχειν τῶν ἄλλων ἐν ἱερωσύνῃ τῇ θείᾳ λαχών. πῶς οὖν ἄν τις οὐσίαν θεότητος τὸν ἀρχιερέα νομίσειεν; ἢ πῶς ἂν οὐχὶ πάντῃ τε καὶ πάντως ὁμολογήσειεν ἀνθρώπου γενέσθαι μνήμην, ὅταν ἡμῖν ὁ Μωυσέος ἀδελφὸς ὡς ἀρχιερεὺς ὀνομάζηται; ἀλλὰ γὰρ κοινόν τινα καὶ κατὰ παντὸς ἀρχιερέως τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς ἰόντα τε καὶ πρέποντα προτιθεὶς τὸν λόγον, τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ νοουμένης οἰκονομίας τὸ παράδοξον παραλύειν ἐπιχειρεῖ καὶ οἷον ἐκ βάθρων αὐτῶν κατασείειν ἀποτολμᾷ τὸ θεῖον ἡμῶν μυστήριον, οὐκ ἐννοῶν ὅτι τεθεμελίωκεν ὁ Χριστὸς ἐπὶ πέτραν τὴν ἐκκλησίαν “καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς.” ἥκιστα μὲν γὰρ ἀξιοῖ τῇ κοινῇ καὶ ἁπάντων τῶν ὀρθὰ φρονεῖν εἰωθότων ἕπεσθαι δόξῃ, καινοτομεῖ […] καὶ μόνος ἀβασανίστως τὸ δοκοῦν.	9. Therefore, since no one says this, with whom, pray tell, are you striving? Do you perhaps even think that your opposition is worthy of honor, as though you alone were refuting what is condemned by unanimous decree? Yet since no one says this, is it not true that you yourself are bringing forward what ought not be spoken lest you instill it into the souls of the simple? Who is so crazed as to think the divine essence is high priest? Aaron was human, but he surpassed others in divine priesthood. How then could anyone suppose that the divine essence is high priest? Or how could one not wholly and surely confess that it mentions a human when it names for us the brother of Moses as high priest? Yet he, putting forth some language that commonly belongs to and befits every high priest among us, tries to undo the paradox of the incarnation understood in Christ and dares to shake our divine mystery from its very foundations, not considering that Christ has founded the church upon a rock, “and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it” [Matt. 16:18]. For he does not at all deign to follow the common doctrine of all who are inclined to think rightly, but he alone invents any untested idea which seems good to him.
ἡμεῖς μὲν γάρ, καθάπερ ἤδη προεῖπον, τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον ἄνθρωπον γεγονότα καὶ ἱερουργῆσαι φαμὲν ἑαυτῷ καὶ τῷ πατρὶ τῆς πίστεως ἡμῶν τὴν ὁμολογίαν πρέπουσάν τε καὶ κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον ἀνάρμοστον τοῖς τῆς κενώσεως μέτροις ποιήσασθαι τὴν οἰκονομίαν, ἀλλ’ οὐχ ὧδε ταῦτ’ ἔχειν ἐκείνῳ δοκεῖ, ἰδίᾳ δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος ἀπολαβὼν ὡς ἕτερον ὄντα Χριστὸν τὸν ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου παρά γε τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον, αὐτὸν γενέσθαι φησὶν ἀπόστολον καὶ ἀρχιερέα τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν, οἴεται δὲ καί <τι> τῶν εἰς εὐσέβειαν ἡκόντων ἐννοεῖν, ἐκεῖνο λέγων “Εἰ θεὸς ὁ προσφέρων, οὐδεὶς ᾧ προσφέρεται. τί γὰρ θεότητος ἄξιον, ἵν’ ὡς ἐλάττων προσφέρῃ τῷ μείζονι;” Ἀλλ’ εἰ μέν τις ἦν ὁ διατεινόμενός τε καὶ λέγων αὐτὸν ἀληθῶς τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως τετάχθαι πρὸς ἱερουργίαν καὶ ἐν μέτροις εἶναι τοῖς λειτουργικοῖς ταύτης τε ἕνεκα τῆς αἰτίας ὀνομάζεσθαι δεῖν ἀρχιερέα καὶ ἀπόστολον, σοφὴν ἂν ἐποιήσατο τὴν ἐπίπληξιν, πεποιῆσθαι δὲ καὶ ἐν κόσμῳ φαίη τις ἂν αὐτῷ τὸν ἐπὶ τούτῳ συλλογισμόν, οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἐν σπάνει τῶν ἱερουργῶν ἡ τῶν ὅλων κατάρχουσα φύσις, ἵν’ ἑαυτῇ λειτουργήσειεν· ἐπειδὴ δὲ φύσει θεὸς ὑπάρχων ὁ μονογενὴς καὶ τὰς παρὰ τῶν ἱερατευόντων λειτουργίας δεχόμενος εἰς τὸ τῶν τεταγμένων εἰς ἱερουργίαν καταπεφοίτηκε μέτρον ἄνθρωπος γεγονώς, ὡς ἔφην, γένοιτο ἂν τῶν ἀτόπων οὐδέν, εἰ καλοῖτο πρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ ἀρχιερεύς. ἢ οὐ καταβέβηκεν ἐν τῇ τοῦ δούλου μορφῇ, μορφὴν δηλονότι δούλου λαβών, καίτοι χαρακτὴρ ὑπάρχων καὶ ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης τοῦ πατρός; ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἂν ἐνδοιάσειέ τις. ὅτε τοίνυν ὁ κατὰ φύσιν ἰδίαν ἐλεύθερος ὡς θεός, ὁ ἐν μορφῇ καὶ ἰσότητι τοῦ γεγεννηκότος, κεχρημάτικε δοῦλος, τῶν ὑπὸ ζυγὰ δουλείας τὸ μέτρον οὐ διωθούμενος οἰκονομικῶς, ἀνθ’ ὅτου δέδιας αὐτὸν καὶ ἀρχιερέα καλεῖν διὰ τὸ ἀνθρώπινον; καθιεροῖ γὰρ ἡμᾶς εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἑαυτόν τε ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ὡς εὐοσμώτατον θύμα προσκεκόμικεν τῷ πατρί.	For, as I said before, we say that the Word of God the Father became human, offered to himself and the Father the confession of our faith, and was incarnate in a manner proper to—and by no means incongruous with—the limitations of the emptying. But to him this does not seem to be true; rather, he considers the one born of the holy virgin separately and individually as another Christ, in addition to the Word of God the Father. He says that he became the apostle and high priest of our confession and supposes that he is thinking piously when he says, “If God offers sacrifice, there is no one to whom the sacrifice is offered. For what is there that deserves God’s offering, so that as the lesser God should offer to the greater?” Now, if there were any who contended and said that the true Word of God the Father had been appointed to the office of priesthood even before the incarnation and was in the position of priest, and for this reason he was to be called high priest and apostle, he would have given a wise rebuke, and one would grant that his argument on this point had been duly made. For the divine nature, which rules all, is not in need of priests, that he should minister to himself. The Only-Begotten is God by nature and receives service from the hands of the priests. But because he has descended to the position of one appointed to the priesthood by becoming man, as I said, there would be nothing strange about our calling him high priest. Or has he not come down in the form of a servant, that is, having taken the form of a servant, although he is the representation and radiance of the Father’s glory? No one would doubt it. Therefore when he who, as God, is free in his own nature, who is in the form of and equal to the Father, has been called servant, according to the incarnation not refusing to enter the position of those under the yoke of slavery, why are you afraid to call him high priest too, in view of his humanity? For he dedicates us as a sweet-smelling aroma through faith and has offered himself for us as a fragrant sacrifice to the Father.

4. Second Argument – Nestorius Calls Christ the “Possessor of Deity”

ὃ δὲ οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅ τι λέγων προσεπάγει τούτοις εὐθύς “Πόθεν οὖν ὁ θεὸς αὐτοῖς κεκλῆσθαι νῦν ἀρχιερεὺς ἐνομίσθη ὁ θυσίας εἰς προκοπὴν ἰδίαν μὴ χρῄζων; ὁ θεότητος κτήτωρ ‘ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ληφθεὶς ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπων καθίσταται τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν.’” Πόθεν μὲν οὖν ἦν ἢ διὰ ποίαν αἰτίαν ὠνόμασται Χριστός, τουτέστιν ἄνθρωπος γεγονὼς ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ λόγος, ἀπόστολος καὶ ἀρχιερεύς, διαρκῶς ἡμῖν ὁ λόγος ἀποδέδειχεν ἀρτίως· οἶμαι δὲ δεῖν οὐκ ἀβασάνιστον ἐᾶν τὴν ἀσυνήθη τε καὶ ξένην αὐτοῦ φωνήν. ἆρα γὰρ θεότητος κτήτορα τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ φησι λόγον, κἂν εἰ ἀνὰ μέρος βούλοιτό τις νοεῖν αὐτὸν καὶ δίχα σαρκός; ἆρ’ ὡς παρ’ αὐτὸν ἑτέραν τὴν θεότητα αὐτοῦ διορίζεται, ἧς οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅπως, καθά φησιν αὐτός, γέγονε κτήτωρ ὡς προσειλημμένης ἔξωθεν καὶ ἐπισυμβάσης [αὐτῷ], καίτοι θεῷ κατὰ φύσιν [οὐκ] ὄντι, αὐτῷ ποτε, ὁποῖόν ἐστι τὸ παρὰ τῆς ἀρχαίας ἐκείνης γυναικός, φημὶ δὴ τῆς Εὔας, τεκούσης τὸν Σὴθ “Ἐκτησάμην ἄνθρωπον διὰ τοῦ θεοῦ”; ἀλλ’ οἶμαι τοῦτό ἐστιν ἀπόβλητον παντελῶς αὐτῷ τε καὶ πᾶσι. τί οὖν ἀκυρολογεῖ καὶ παραρριπτεῖ φωνὰς ἀσυνέτους ἐπ’ ἀναγκαίοις οὕτω πράγμασιν; ἢ οὐκ ἂν ὄφλοι γέλωτα καὶ φρενοβλαβείας γραφήν, εἰ δὴ βούλοιτό τις ἕνα τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς ἀνθρωπότητος κτήτορα λέγειν ἢ γοῦν τὸν ἵππον ἱππότητος; τίς ἆρα λοιπὸν ὁ τῆς θεότητος κτήτωρ, ὃς “ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ληφθεὶς τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν καθίσταται”; ἐρεῖ τάχα που διελὼν εἰς δύο τὸν ἕνα Χριστὸν […] τὸν ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου· τέτραπται γάρ πως εἰς τοῦτο καὶ νῦν ὁ σκοπὸς αὐτῷ.	10. But he, saying I know not what, immediately adds, “For what reason, then, do they suppose God has now been called high priest—he who has no need to make sacrifices for his own advancement? Is the possessor of deity ‘taken from among humans and ordained for humans in matters pertaining to God’?” [Heb. 5:1]. For what reason or cause Christ, that is, the Word of God become human, was apostle and high priest or was called such, our discourse has already clearly shown. But I think I must not leave his unfamiliar and strange message unexamined. Does he say that the Word of God is possessor of deity, even if one might wish to conceive of him separately and apart from flesh? Does he distinguish his deity as other than himself? I know not how, as he says, he has become possessor of deity, as if at some time it was gained and came to him externally as though he was not God by nature, like what that ancient woman (I mean Eve) said when she bore Seth, “I have borne a man through God” [Gen. 4:1]. But I think he and all should utterly reject this. Why then does he speak incorrectly and throw out unintelligible words in matters so important? Or would one not deserve laughter and the accusation of insanity if he chose to call one of us the possessor of human nature, or a horse the possessor of horse-nature? Who then is the possessor of deity, who is “taken from among humans and ordained in matters pertaining to God”? [Heb. 5:1]. Probably he will speak in a way that divides the one Christ, born of the holy virgin, into two. For somehow even now he makes this his goal.
κτῆσις οὖν ἀνθρώπου γέγονεν ἡ θεότης, εἰπέ μοι, καὶ συνέβη τινὶ τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς τὸ φύσει τε καὶ ἀληθείᾳ γενέσθαι θεὸν καὶ τῆς ἀνωτάτω πασῶν καὶ ὑπερτάτης οὐσίας καταπλουτῆσαι τὴν ὑπεροχήν; ἄπαγε τῆς δυσβουλίας, ἄνθρωπε· κεκτήσεται γὰρ οὐδεὶς καὶ ὡς ἰδίαν ἂν ἔχοι τὴν τῆς θεότητος φύσιν τῶν τελούντων ἐν γενητοῖς. ἴδιον ἦν τὸ σῶμα τοῦ λόγου καὶ ὡς ἕνα θεὸν καὶ Χριστὸν καὶ υἱὸν καὶ κύριον σὺν αὐτῷ προσκεκύνηκεν ἡ κτίσις καὶ δοξολογοῦσιν οἱ οὐρανοὶ καὶ σὺν αὐτοῖς ἡμεῖς. ὡς γὰρ ὁ προφήτης φησίν, “Ἐκάλυψεν οὐρανοὺς ἡ ἀρετὴ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς αἰνέσεως αὐτοῦ πλήρης ἡ γῆ,” οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώπου θεότητα κτησαμένου· πῶς γὰρ ἢ πόθεν; ἀλλ’ ὡς ἐν προσλήψει σαρκὸς ἀνθρώπου γεγονότος τοῦ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγου. ἀλλ’ ἔστω τυχὸν ὁ ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ληφθεὶς θεότητος κτήτωρ κατά γε τὸ αὐτῷ σοι δοκοῦν· πῶς καθίσταται τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν, ὡς ἀρχιερεὺς δηλονότι; πότερα οὖν γυμνὸς ἧς ἐκτήσατο θεότητος, ἱερατεύσει τῷ θεῷ ἢ ταύτην ἤδη πως ἰδίαν ἔχων; τουτὶ γὰρ οἶμαι καὶ ἕτερον οὐδὲν κατασημάνειεν ἂν τὸ κτήσασθαι λέγειν αὐτόν. ἀλλ’ εἰ μὲν γυμνός, οὐκ ἐκτήσατο· εἰ δὲ ὡς ἰδίαν ἔχων αὐτήν, θεότης που πάντως ἱερατεύσει θεῷ. τί οὖν ἀλύεις ἄνω τε καὶ κάτω διακυκᾷς καὶ παρασημαίνων οὐκ ἐρυθριᾷς τῆς πίστεως τὴν παράδοσιν;	11. Tell me, has the deity become the possession of a human? Could any one of us become God in nature and truth so that he would be rich in the excellence of the supreme essence that is above all? Away with your folly, sir,³ for nothing in the category of created things may acquire and have as its own the divine nature. The body of the Word was his own, and the creation has worshiped God, Christ, Son, and Lord as one with it. The heavens offer praise, and we with them. For as the prophet says, “His goodness covered the heavens, and the earth is full of his praise” [Hab. 3:3], not as though a human acquired deity (for how or from where could he?), but that the Word of God the Father assumed human flesh. But even supposing that he who was taken from among humans was possessor of deity, as seems good to you, how is he ordained in matters pertaining to God, namely, as high priest? Will he serve God as priest without the deity he acquired, or somehow already having it as his own? For it would signify this and nothing else to say he acquired it, I think. But if without it, he had not acquired it; if having it as his own, I suppose deity will surely serve God as priest. Why then do you wander about, throw things into confusion everywhere, and falsely mark the tradition of the faith without blushing?
ἔχει πρόφασιν ἀναγκαίαν ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος κἂν <εἰ> ἱερατεῦσαι λέγοιτο τῷ πατρί· κεχρημάτικε γὰρ ἱερεὺς οὐ δίχα σαρκός, καθ’ ἡμᾶς δὲ γεγονώς, ὡς ἔφην, οἷς καὶ ἐν εὐκλείας τάξει λελόγισται τῆς ἱερωσύνης τὰ αὐχήματα.	12. We have sufficient reason to say the Word of God the Father serves as priest before the Father. For he has been called priest not apart from flesh, but, as I said, has become like us to whom the glory of the priesthood is accounted an honor.
καὶ καθ’ ἕτερον δὲ τρόπον ἀταλαίπωρον ἰδεῖν ὥς ἐστι τῶν ἄγαν ἐκτοπωτάτων καὶ πολλῆς ἐπίμεστον εὐηθείας κτήτορα θεότητος τὸν ἐξ ἀνθρώπων ληφθέντα λέγειν καθιστάμενόν τε πρὸς τὸν θεόν. εἰ γὰρ ἐλήφθη παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, τίνα τρόπον τὴν λαβοῦσαν αὐτὸν κατεκτήσατο φύσιν; τὸ γάρτοι ληφθὲν ἔσται που μᾶλλον τοῦ λαβόντος ὡς κτῆσις καὶ οὐκ αὐτὸ κεκτήσεται τὸ προσειληφός, οἷον [δὲ] δή τι φημί· πλούτου τις γέγονε κτήτωρ ἢ γοῦν ἐπιστήμης τῆς ἐφ’ ὁτῳοῦν νοουμένης· ἆρ’ οὐχ ἅπασιν ἐναργὲς ὡς οὐκ αὐτὸς ἔσται τοῦ πλούτου κτῆσις ἢ γοῦν τῆς προσγενομένης αὐτῷ ἐπιστήμης, κατακτήσεται δὲ μᾶλλον τὸ προσειλημμένον; ἀλλ’, οἶμαι, τοῦτό ἐστι κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον ἀμφίλογον.	13. Also, in another way it is trivial to see that it is very absurd and completely foolish to say that he who was taken from among humans and ordained in matters pertaining to God is possessor of deity. If God took him, how did he possess the nature which took him? For what is taken belongs, rather, to the one who took it as a possession. That which is taken does not possess that which took it. Let me give an example: A man has become the possessor of wealth, or again of any skill. Surely it is clear to all that he himself is not the possession of wealth or again of the skill he acquired, but rather he possesses what he has gotten? This, I think, is in no way doubtful.
οὐκοῦν εἰ τὸν τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως τοῦ μονογενοῦς πολυπραγμονοῦντες τρόπον ἄνθρωπον εὑρίσκομεν ὡς ἐν προσλήψει θεότητος γεγονότα θεόν, λεγέσθω κατὰ σὲ θεότητος κτήτωρ αὐτοῦ γὰρ γέγονεν ἡ θεότης. εἰ δὲ θεὸς ὢν ὁ λόγος ἐπελάβετο σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ καὶ ὑπάρχων ἐν μορφῇ τοῦ πατρὸς γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος μορφὴν δούλου λαβών, πῶς οὐκ ἐμβρόντητος εἴη ἄν, εἴ τις ἕλοιτο λέγειν ὅτι τὸ ληφθὲν τὴν λαβοῦσαν αὐτὸ κατεκτήσατο φύσιν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον γέγονεν ἴδιον τῆς λαβούσης αὐτό;	14. So if we inquire into the mode of the Only-Begotten’s incarnation and find that a human became God as if acquiring deity, let him be called possessor of deity, as you say, for deity has become his. But if the Word, as God, took possession of the seed of Abraham; being in the form of the Father, became human; and took the form of a servant, how would one not be insane if he chose to say that what was taken possessed the nature that took it and has not rather become the proper possession of him who took it?

5. Third Argument – Nestorius Denies Christ’s Brotherhood with Humanity

Ὅτι δὲ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ λόγων τε καὶ εὑρημάτων τὴν δύναμιν καὶ μὴν καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ τῆς ἀρχιερωσύνης ὄνομα περιίστησιν ἀμαθῶς εἰς ἄνθρωπον ἁπλῶς τὸν ἐκ γυναικός, ἀποφέρων αὐτὸ τοῦ μονογενοῦς καὶ ἐκ πατρὸς ὄντος λόγου, καὶ διὰ τῶν ἑξῆς προσαποφανεῖ· γέγραφε γὰρ ὡδὶ δὴ πάλιν· “‘Οὐκ ἀγγέλων ἐπιλαμβάνεται, ἀλλὰ σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ ἐπιλαμβάνεται.’	15. But he ignorantly attributes the force of his own words and inventions and even the very name of high priesthood to a mere human born of woman, taking it away from the only-begotten Word of the Father. This he also makes manifest by what follows. For he has written again as follows: “‘He does not take hold of angels, but Abraham’s seed’ [Heb. 2:16].
μὴ σπέρμα τοῦ Ἁβραὰμ ἡ θεότης;” ἄκουσον καὶ τὴν ἑπομένην φωνήν· “‘Ὅθεν ὤφειλε,’ φησί, ‘κατὰ πάντα τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς ὁμοιωθῆναι.’ μὴ τῇ θεότητί τινας ὁ θεὸς λόγος ἔσχεν ἀδελφοὺς ἐοικότας; σκόπει καὶ τὸ τούτοις εὐθὺς συναπτόμενον· ‘ἵνα ἐλεήμων γένηται καὶ πιστὸς ἀρχιερεὺς τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν. ἐν ᾧ γὰρ πέπονθεν αὐτὸς πειρασθείς, δύναται τοῖς πειραζομένοις βοηθῆσαι.’ οὐκοῦν ὁ παθὼν ἀρχιερεὺς ἐλεήμων· παθητὸς δὲ ὁ ναός, οὐχ ὁ ζωοποιὸς τοῦ πεπονθότος θεός· σπέρμα Ἁβραὰμ ὁ χθὲς καὶ σήμερον κατὰ τὴν τοῦ Παύλου φωνήν, οὐχ ὁ λέγων· ‘Πρὶν Ἁβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί·’ ὅμοιος τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς κατὰ πάντα ὁ ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναλαβὼν ἀδελφότητα, [καὶ] οὐχ ὁ λέγων· ‘Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα.’”	16. The Deity is not Abraham’s seed, is it?” Hear the following message also: “‘For this reason,’ it says, ‘he had to be made like his brothers in all things’ [Heb. 2:17]. God the Word had no brothers like his deity, did he? See what is immediately connected to this thought: ‘that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in matters pertaining to God. Because he himself suffered when tempted, he can help those who are tempted’ [Heb. 2:17–18]. Therefore he who suffered is merciful high priest. The temple is capable of suffering, not the life-giving God of him who suffered. The seed of Abraham is he who is yesterday and today [Heb. 13:8], as Paul says, not he who says, ‘Before Abraham was, I am’ [John 8:58]. He who assumed brotherhood of human soul and flesh is like his brothers in all things, not he who says, ‘He who has seen me has seen the Father’” [John 14:9].
Οὐκοῦν ἐπελάβετο, καθὰ καὶ αὐτὸς ὡμολόγηκεν ἀρτίως, σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ θεὸς ὢν ὁ λόγος· πῶς οὖν ἔτι θεότητος κτήτωρ ὁ ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραάμ, εἰ προσελήφθη παρὰ θεοῦ καὶ οὐχὶ προσλαβὼν ὁρᾶται τὴν θεότητα αὐτός; καὶ θεότητος οὖν φύσις ἥκιστα ἂν εἴη τὸ σπέρμα τοῦ Ἁβραάμ, σῶμα δὲ μᾶλλον τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου γέγονε κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς καὶ ἴδιον αὐτοῦ. καὶ ὁ τῇ κτίσει κατὰ φύσιν ἰδίαν ἀσύντακτος ὡς θεός, ὅτε γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, ὅς ἐστι κτίσεως μέρος, τότε δὴ τότε, καὶ μάλα εἰκότως, καὶ ἀδελφοὺς ἡμᾶς ὀνομάζειν ἀξιοῖ, λέγων· “Ἀπαγγελῶ τὸ ὄνομά σου τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς μου.” ὅτι δὲ διὰ τὸ τῆς κενώσεως μέτρον καταπεφοίτηκεν ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος καὶ εἴς γε τὸ δεῖν κατονομάζειν ἀδελφοὺς ἑαυτῷ τοὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, σαφηνιεῖ γεγραφὼς ὁ σοφώτατος Παῦλος περί τε αὐτοῦ καὶ ἡμῶν· “Ὅ τε γὰρ ἁγιάζων καὶ οἱ ἁγιαζόμενοι ἐξ ἑνὸς πάντες, δι’ ἣν αἰτίαν οὐκ ἐπαισχύνεται ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοὺς καλεῖν, λέγων· ἀπαγγελῶ τὸ ὄνομά σου τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς μου.” πρὸ μὲν γὰρ τῆς ἐνανθρωπήσεως σμικρὸν κομιδῇ τῷ ἐκ θεοῦ φύντι λόγῳ τὸ τῆς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀδελφότητος ὄνομα, καθιγμένῳ γε μὴν εἰς ἑκούσιον κένωσιν σμικρὸν μὲν καὶ οὕτω, πλὴν εὐαφόρμως εἰσβεβηκός· μετέσχηκε γὰρ αἵματος καὶ σαρκὸς καὶ τοῖς ἐν σαρκὶ καὶ αἵματι κεχρημάτικεν ἀδελφός. εἰ γὰρ ἁγιάζεται μεθ’ ἡμῶν καθὸ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, καίτοι θεὸς ὢν φύσει καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα διδοὺς αὐτός, πῶς εἰ λέγοιτο καὶ ἀδελφός, οὐκ ἐν κόσμῳ λοιπὸν εἰρήσεται; ταύτης γὰρ ἕνεκα τῆς αἰτίας γέγονε καθ’ ἡμᾶς, ἵνα ἡμᾶς ἀδελφοὺς ἀποφήνηται καὶ ἐλευθέρους. “Ὅσοι γὰρ ἔλαβον αὐτόν,” φησίν, “ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν τέκνα θεοῦ γενέσθαι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ, οἳ οὐκ ἐξ αἱμάτων οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκὸς οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρός, ἀλλ’ ἐκ θεοῦ ἐγεννήθησαν.” γεγέννηται γὰρ ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος μεθ’ ἡμῶν κατὰ σάρκα, ἵνα καὶ ἡμεῖς τὴν ἐκ θεοῦ καταπλουτήσωμεν διὰ πνεύματος γέννησιν, οὐκέτι σαρκὸς χρηματίζοντες τέκνα, μεταστοιχειούμενοι δὲ μᾶλλον εἰς τὰ ὑπὲρ φύσιν καὶ υἱοὶ θεοῦ χρηματίζοντες κατὰ χάριν. γέγονε γὰρ ὡς εἷς ἐξ ἡμῶν ὁ κατὰ φύσιν καὶ ἀληθῶς υἱὸς μονογενὴς	17. So the Word, as God, took hold of Abraham’s seed, as he too has just now agreed. How then is he who is of the seed of Abraham possessor of deity, if God took him and he himself did not take deity, as we see? So the seed of Abraham is by no means the divine nature, but rather has become the body of God the Word, according to scripture, and his proper possession. He who as God in his proper nature is not in the same category as creation, when he became human, part of the creation, then, indeed, at that time and with reason deigns to call us brothers, saying, “I will declare your name to my brothers” [Ps. 22:22]. But by reason of the emptying the Word of God the Father has descended so that he has to call those upon the earth his brothers. Wise Paul will clearly show this, writing of him and us, “He who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one. So he is not ashamed to call them brothers, saying, ‘I will declare your name to my brothers’” [Heb. 2:11–12]. For before the incarnation, the status of brotherhood with us was quite low for the Word begotten of God. Now that he has descended to voluntary emptiness, it is still low, yet it has entered with good reason, for he has shared blood and flesh and has been called brother of those with flesh and blood. For if he is sanctified with us in that he has become human, even though he is God by nature and himself gives the Spirit, how would one speak improperly if he should call him brother? This is the reason he has become like us—to declare us free brothers, “For to those who received him,” it says, “he gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in his name, who were born not of blood nor of the will of flesh nor of the will of a husband, but were born of God” [John 1:12–13]. For the Word of God the Father has been born in flesh together with us that we too might be enriched with birth from God through the Spirit. He did this that we would no longer be called children of flesh but rather, transformed beyond nature, would be called sons of God by grace. For he who is by nature truly only-begotten Son has become like one of us.
καὶ ἀψευδὴς ὁ λόγος, πιστώσεται δὲ πρὸς τοῦτο ἡμᾶς ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος, ὡδί που λέγων· “Ὅτι δὲ ἐστὲ υἱοί, ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ εἰς τὰς καρδίας ὑμῶν κράζον, ἀββᾶ ὁ πατήρ.” τί τοίνυν ἀποβιάζῃ τῆς οἰκονομίας τὸ σοφὸν εἰς τὸ μὴ ἐν κόσμῳ τῷ δέοντι πεποιῆσθαι δοκεῖν διά γε τοῦ λέγειν “Μὴ σπέρμα τοῦ Ἁβραὰμ ἡ θεότης; μὴ τῇ θεότητί τινας ἔσχεν ἀδελφοὺς ἐοικότας;” ἆρ’ οὐκ ἐναργὴς ἀποπληξία τοῦτό γε; τὸ γὰρ ἐκτόπως ἀναπυνθάνεσθαι καὶ ἀποκομίζειν εἰς δυσφημίας τὰ οὕτως ὀρθὰ καὶ ἀμωμήτως ἔχοντα κατά γε τὸν τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ νοουμένης οἰκονομίας λόγον τί ἕτερόν ἐστιν ἢ τῆς ἁπασῶν ἐσχάτης ἐμβροντησίας ἀπόδειξις; ὁμολογουμένως μὲν γὰρ κατὰ τὴν τοῦ σώματος φύσιν ἤτοι τὸν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος λόγον τελείως ἐχούσης ἐφ’ ἑαυτῇ γέγονεν ἡμῖν παραπλήσιος καὶ κατὰ πᾶν ὁτιοῦν ἐοικὼς δίχα μόνης ἁμαρτίας ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος. ἐρήσομαι δὲ τὸν λέγοντα “Μὴ τῇ θεότητί τινας ὁ θεὸς λόγος ἔσχεν ἀδελφοὺς ἐοικότας” τί δὴ ἄρα καθ’ ἑαυτὸν ἐννενοηκὼς ὁ ἱερώτατος Παῦλος γέγραφέ τισι· “τεκνία, οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω ἄχρις οὗ μορφωθῇ Χριστὸς ἐν ὑμῖν·” καὶ μὴν καὶ ἑτέρωθι τοῖς διὰ πίστεως τετελειωμένοις ἐν πνεύματι· “Ἡμεῖς δὲ πάντες ἀνακεκαλυμμένῳ προσώπῳ τὴν δόξαν κυρίου κατοπτριζόμενοι, τὴν αὐτὴν εἰκόνα μεταμορφούμεθα ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν καθάπερ ἀπὸ κυρίου πνεύματος, ὁ δὲ κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστιν· οὗ δὲ τὸ πνεῦμα κυρίου, ἐκεῖ ἐλευθερία.” ἆρ’ οὖν ὡς οὐκ ἔχουσι Γαλάταις τῆς σωματικῆς ἐλευθερίας τοὺς τύπους πρὸς τὸ ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ κατὰ σάρκα τὰ τοιάδε φησίν, ἀνωδίνει δὲ αὐτούς, ἵν’ ἐγχαράττοιτό πως αὐτοῖς καὶ διαμορφοῖτο κατὰ σάρκα Χριστός; καίτοι πῶς οὐχ ἅπας τις οἶμαι καὶ ἀναμφιλόγως ἐρεῖ συμμόρφους ἀλλήλοις ἅπαντας εἶναι τοὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, καὶ αὐτῷ δὲ τῷ Χριστῷ καθὸ νοεῖται καθ’ ἡμᾶς ἄνθρωπός τε καὶ μεθ’ ἡμῶν; ποία δὴ οὖν ἐν ἐκείνοις ἐξῃτεῖτο μόρφωσις ἡ πρός γε Χριστόν; ἢ τίνα τρόπον ἡμεῖς ἀπὸ δόξης εἰς δόξαν μεταμορφούμεθα; ποίαν ἀφέντες μορφὴν εἰς τίνα μεταστοιχειούμεθα;	18. The Word is trustworthy. Divine Paul assures us on this point, saying somewhere under inspiration, “Because you are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, ‘Abba, Father’” [Gal. 4:6]. Why then do you do violence to the wise incarnation as if you think it has been done improperly? Thus you say, “The deity is not Abraham’s seed, is it? He had no brothers like his deity, did he?” Is this not clear madness? For when you excessively inquire and take captive to blasphemy things which are so upright and faultless regarding the incarnation perceived in Christ, what is it other than proof of the greatest possible insanity? For we confess concerning the nature of the body or concerning the analogy of humanity, complete in itself, that the Word of God the Father has become equal to us and like us in everything whatsoever except sin alone. But you who say, “God the Word had no brothers like his deity, did he?”—I will ask you: What idea did holy Paul have in his mind when he wrote to some, “Children, for whom I am again in birth pains until Christ is formed in you” [Gal. 4:19], and elsewhere to those who through faith have been perfected in spirit, “We all with unveiled face, reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his image from glory to glory as by the Lord, the Spirit; now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom”? [2 Cor. 3:18, 17]. Does Paul therefore say this to the Galatians as though they do not have the marks of bodily freedom with that which is of the seed of David according to the flesh? Is he again in birth pains for them that Christ according to the flesh might somehow be engraved on them and formed in them? How could some, as I suspect, refuse to say that all who are on the earth possess the same form as each other and as Christ himself, insofar as he is conceived of as human who is both like us and with us? What shaping to Christ, then, was Paul seeking in them? Or how are we changed from glory to glory? What form do we leave, and to what are we changed?
οὐκοῦν διδασκέτω παρελθὼν ὁ θεῖος ἡμᾶς μυσταγωγός, ὁ τῶν θείων μυστηρίων ἱερουργός, “ὁ διδάσκαλος τῶν ἐθνῶν ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀληθείᾳ·” “Οὓς προέγνω,” φησί, “καὶ προώρισε συμμόρφους τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, τούτους καὶ ἐκάλεσεν.” οὐκοῦν, ὡς ἔφην ἀρτίως, καθὸ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος καὶ ἦν ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραάμ, σύμμορφοι πάντες ἐσμὲν αὐτῷ· πάντας δὴ οὖν <οὓς> καὶ προέγνω τοὺς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ προώρισεν ὁ πατήρ, τούτους κεκληκὼς ἡγίασε καὶ ἐδόξασεν. ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐχ ἅπαντες προωρίσθησαν· οὐχ ἅπαντες ἡγιάσθησαν ἢ ἐδοξάσθησαν· οὐκ ἄρα τῆς πρὸς υἱὸν συμμορφίας τὸ χρῆμα κατὰ μόνην ἂν νοοῖτο τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς φύσιν ἢ γοῦν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, ἀλλὰ καὶ καθ’ ἕτερον τρόπον. καὶ τοῦτο ἡμῖν παρίστησι λέγων ὁ μακάριος Παῦλος· “Καὶ καθὼς ἐφορέσαμεν τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ χοϊκοῦ, φορέσωμεν καὶ τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ ἐπουρανίου,” χοϊκοῦ μὲν λέγων εἰκόνα τὴν τοῦ προπάτορος Ἀδάμ, ἐπουρανίου γε μὴν τὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ. τίς οὖν <ἡ> πρώτη τοῦ προπάτορος εἰκών; τὸ εὐπόριστον εἰς ἁμαρτίαν, τὸ ὑπὸ θάνατον γενέσθαι καὶ φθοράν. ποία δὲ πάλιν ἡ τοῦ ἐπουρανίου; τὸ κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον ἡττᾶσθαι παθῶν, τὸ μὴ εἰδέναι πλημμελεῖν, τὸ μὴ ὑποκεῖσθαι θανάτῳ καὶ φθορᾷ, ὁ ἁγιασμὸς ἡ δικαιοσύνη καὶ ὅσα τούτοις ἀδελφά τε καὶ παραπλήσια. ἀλλ’ οἶμαι, ταυτὶ πρέποι ἂν τῇ θείᾳ τε καὶ ἀκηράτῳ διακεκτῆσθαι φύσει. κρεῖττον γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἁμαρτίας καὶ φθορᾶς ἁγιασμὸς καὶ δικαιοσύνη. ἀναφέρει δὲ καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐν τούτοις ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος, τῆς θείας ἑαυτοῦ φύσεως κοινωνοὺς ἀποφαίνων διὰ τοῦ πνεύματος.	Therefore let the divine guide come forward and teach us—the priest of the divine mysteries, the “teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” [1 Tim. 2:7]. He says: “Those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son. He also called them” [Rom. 8:29–30]. Therefore, as I said just now, we all are conformed to him in that he became human and was of the seed of Abraham. Therefore all on earth the Father foreknew, he also predestined; these he called, sanctified, and glorified. Yet not all were predestined; not all were sanctified or glorified. So we should not think of the matter of shaping to the Son as existing in only the fleshly or human nature, but also in another way. Blessed Paul sets this before us, saying, “Just as we bore the image of the earthly, we will also bear the image of the heavenly” [1 Cor. 15:49]. He calls the image of our forefather Adam “earthly” and that of Christ “heavenly.” In the first place, then, what is the image of our forefather? It is a predisposition to sin, a subjection to death and decay. What is the image of the heavenly? It is in no way being overcome by sinful passions, being unable to err, not being subject to death and decay, being holy, righteous, and whatever is akin to these things and like them. These, I think, are proper to the undefiled divine nature to possess. For holiness and righteousness are superior to sin and decay. In these things the Word of God the Father restores us too, rendering us partakers of his own divine nature through the Spirit.
ἔχει τοίνυν ἀδελφοὺς ἐοικότας αὐτῷ καὶ τῆς θείας αὐτοῦ φύσεως φοροῦντας εἰκόνα κατά γε τὸν τοῦ ἡγιάσθαι τρόπον· οὕτω γὰρ ἐν ἡμῖν μορφοῦται Χριστός, μεταστοιχειοῦντος ὥσπερ ἡμᾶς τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ἐκ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων εἰς τὰ αὐτοῦ. ταύτῃ τοι καὶ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὁ μακάριος ἔφη Παῦλος· “Ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ ἐστὲ ἐν σαρκί, ἀλλ’ ἐν πνεύματι.” οὐκοῦν μεθίστησι μὲν ὁ υἱὸς οὐδὲν τὸ παράπαν τῶν πεποιημένων εἰς τὴν τῆς ἰδίας θεότητος φύσιν (ἀμήχανον γάρ), ἐνσημαίνεται δέ πως τοῖς τῆς θείας φύσεως αὐτοῦ γεγονόσι κοινωνοῖς διὰ τοῦ μετασχεῖν ἁγίου πνεύματος ἡ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐμφέρεια νοητὴ καὶ τὸ τῆς ἀρρήτου θεότητος κάλλος ταῖς τῶν ἁγίων ἐναστράπτει ψυχαῖς. τί τοίνυν ἡμῖν γυμνήν τε καὶ μόνην τῆς σαρκὸς τὴν ἐμφέρειαν ἀπονέμων οὐκ ἐρυθριᾷς, τῆς θείας τε καὶ νοητῆς μορφώσεως κατημεληκώς, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ εἰς ἅπαν αὐτὴν ἀναιρῶν; ἀλλ’ ὁ μὲν τῶν ὅλων κύριος καὶ θεὸς μονογενὴς καθῆκεν ἑαυτὸν εἰς κένωσιν δι’ ἡμᾶς, ἵνα ἡμῖν χαρίσηται τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀδελφότητος τὸ ἀξίωμα καὶ τῆς ἐνούσης αὐτῷ εὐγενείας τὸ ἀξιέραστον κάλλος· ὁ δὲ ἁπάντων ἡμᾶς τῶν καλλίστων ἀποστερῶν ἄνθρωπον ἡμῖν ἁπλῶς ἀδελφὸν γεγενῆσθαί φησι καὶ πιστόν, ὡς οἴεται, τὸν ἔν γε τούτοις ἡμῖν ἀποφαίνει λόγον προστιθείς “Σκόπει καὶ τὸ τούτοις εὐθὺς συναπτόμενον· ‘ἵνα ἐλεήμων γένηται καὶ πιστὸς ἀρχιερεὺς τὰ πρὸς τὸν θεόν. ἐν ᾧ γὰρ πέπονθεν αὐτὸς πειρασθείς, δύναται τοῖς πειραζομένοις βοηθῆσαι.’ οὐκοῦν ὁ παθὼν ἀρχιερεὺς ἐλεήμων· παθητὸς δὲ ὁ ναός, οὐχ ὁ ζωοποιὸς τοῦ πεπονθότος θεός.” Ὅτι μὲν οὖν ὧδέ τε φρονεῖν ᾑρημένος καὶ μὴν καὶ λέγειν ἀποτολμῶν ἀποδιίστησιν πάλιν εἴς τε ὑποστάσεις ἰδικὰς καὶ μὴν καὶ πρόσωπα δύο τόν τε ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον καὶ ὃν αὐτὸς ἡμῖν ἀρτίως ὡς θεοφόρον εἰσκεκόμικεν ἄνθρωπον, εἴπερ ἐστὶν ἕτερός τε καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος ὁ παθὼν καὶ ἕτερος ὁ ζωοποιός, ἐνδοιάσειν οἶμαι παντελῶς οὐδένα·	19. Therefore he has brothers like him who bear the image of his divine nature by virtue of their being sanctified. For in this way Christ is formed in us: The Holy Spirit, as it were, changes us from things human to those that are his own. Therefore blessed Paul said to us, “You are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit” [Rom. 8:9]. So the Son introduces into his own divine nature nothing at all that belongs to the category of created things (for that would be impossible), but spiritual likeness with him is somehow imprinted on those who have become partakers of his divine nature through their partaking of the Holy Spirit. The beauty of the inexpressible deity shines in the souls of the saints. Why, then, are you unashamed to assign to us only the bare likeness of flesh and to disregard the divine, spiritual formation, indeed, even to take it away completely? The Lord of all, God only-begotten, lowered himself to emptiness for our sake in order to bestow on us the dignity of brotherhood with him and the beauty worthy of all love, namely, his innate nobility. But this man, robbing us of everything noble, says a mere human has become our brother. He thinks that he presents a persuasive argument on this point, adding, “See what is immediately connected to this thought: ‘that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in matters pertaining to God. Because he himself suffered when tempted, he can help those who are tempted’ [Heb. 2:17–18]. Therefore he who suffered is merciful high priest. The temple is capable of suffering, not the life-giving God of him who suffered.” Therefore, I think no one whatsoever will doubt that by choosing to think thus and also daring to say it, he divides Christ into two distinct subsistences and persons—the Word of God the Father and the one whom he himself has just introduced to us as God-bearing human, if there is on the one hand, separately, he who suffered, and on the other, he who makes alive.

6. Fourth Argument – Nestorius Denies That God Became Human

παραπαίει δὲ καὶ ἑτέρως, τὸν ἐξ ἀμπέλου Σοδόμων οἶνον ἐκπεπωκὼς καὶ καταμεθύων τῇ πλάνῃ καὶ τάχα που μηδὲ εἰδὼς ὃ λέγει. ποῦ γὰρ ὠνόμασται θεὸς τοῦ Χριστοῦ (καταπέφρικα δὲ λέγων) ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος; εἷς γὰρ κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς καὶ μία πίστις ἡ εἰς αὐτόν, οὐχ ὡς εἰς δύο καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος, ἀλλ’ ὡς δι’ ἑνὸς βαπτίσματος εἰς υἱὸν ἕνα καὶ θεὸν καὶ κύριον τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον καὶ ὅτε γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος. οὐ γὰρ ὅτι γέγονε καθ’ ἡμᾶς, τὸ εἶναι θεὸς ἀπολέσει, πόθεν; οὔτε μὴν ὅτι θεὸς κατὰ φύσιν ἐστίν, τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὁμοίωσιν ἀπαράδεκτον ἔχει καὶ τὸ ἄνθρωπος εἶναι παραιτήσεται, μεμένηκε δὲ ὥσπερ ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι θεός, οὕτω καὶ ἐν φύσει τε καὶ ὑπεροχῇ θεότητος ὤν, ἄνθρωπος οὐδὲν ἧττόν ἐστιν. ἄμφω δὴ οὖν ἐν ταὐτῷ καὶ εἷς θεός τε ὁμοῦ καὶ ἄνθρωπος ὁ Ἐμμανουήλ.	20. And in another way he errs, having guzzled wine of the vine of Sodom, intoxicated with error, and perhaps not even knowing what he says. For where has the Word of God the Father been called (I shudder to say it) the God of Christ? There is one Lord Jesus Christ and one faith in him, not in two distinct persons, but through one baptism, into one Son and God and Lord, the Word of God the Father, even when he became human. For he will not cease being God because he became like us (impossible!), nor yet does he consider likeness to us intolerable because he is God by nature, nor will he reject being human. But just as he has remained God in human nature, so also, having both divine nature and divine supremacy, he is no less human. Both, therefore, are in the same person, and one Emmanuel is both God and human.
ἀλλ’ ὁ χρηστὸς οὑτοσὶ τῆς οἰκονομίας τὸν τρόπον ὡς ἀκαλλῆ παραιτούμενος, ἀποφέρει τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου τὰ ἀνθρώπινα, ἵν’ ὁρῷτο λοιπὸν κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον ὀνήσας τὰ καθ’ ἡμᾶς. οὐ γάρτοι φησὶν αὐτὸν ἐλεήμονά τε καὶ πιστὸν ἀρχιερέα γενέσθαι, προσνέμει δὲ μᾶλλον ὡς ἑτέρῳ παρ’ αὐτὸν τὸ χρῆμα τῷ πεπονθότι. καίτοι πῶς οὐκ ἔδει μυσταγωγὸν εἶναι θέλοντα σοφὸν τῶν ἐν τῇ θεοπνεύστῳ γραφῇ φωνῶν τε καὶ ἐννοιῶν ἀκριβῆ ποιεῖσθαι τὴν ἄθροισιν ἐννοεῖν τε ὅτι καὶ θεοπρεπὲς ἀληθῶς τὸ χρῆμά ἐστι καὶ οὐκ ἔξω λόγου τοῦ τῇ κενώσει πρέποντός τε καὶ ἐοικότος; καὶ τίνα τρόπον; ἐροῦμεν βραχυλογοῦντες ὡς ἔνι.	21. But this good man rejects the manner of the incarnation as unseemly and takes what is human away from God the Word, so that one may at last see the Word has in no way helped our condition. For he says he did not become a merciful and faithful high priest but instead attributes that to the one who suffered as if other than he. Yet, if he wishes to be a wise teacher, how could he not carefully gather the sayings and ideas of divinely inspired scripture and consider that this matter both truly befits God and does not depart from language that befits and beseems the emptying? In what way? We will say, as briefly as we can.
κατεχρησμῴδησε μὲν γὰρ ὁ τῶν ὅλων θεὸς τοῖς ἀρχαιοτέροις τὸν νόμον μεσολαβοῦντος Μωσέως, ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἦν ἐν νόμῳ τὸ δύνασθαι κατορθοῦν τοῖς ἐθέλουσιν ἀμωμήτως τὸ ἀγαθόν. τετελείωκε γὰρ οὐδέν, ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ ἄμεμπτος ἦν ἡ πρώτη διαθήκη, κατάκριμα δὲ διακονίας ὠνόμαζεν αὐτὴν ὁ πάνσοφος Παῦλος, ἀκούω δὲ λέγοντος· “Οἴδαμεν ὅτι ὅσα ὁ νόμος λέγει, τοῖς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ λέγει, ἵνα πᾶν στόμα φραγῇ καὶ ὑπόδικος γένηται πᾶς ὁ κόσμος τῷ θεῷ, διότι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου οὐ δικαιωθήσεται πᾶσα σὰρξ ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ.” κατεργάζεται γὰρ ὁ νόμος [εἰς] ὀργὴν καὶ τὸ γράμμα ἀποκτέννει καὶ ὥς πού φησιν αὐτός, “Ἀθετήσας τις νόμον Μωσέως χωρὶς οἰκτιρμῶν ἐπὶ δυσὶν ἢ τρισὶ μάρτυσιν ἀποθνῄσκει.” κατακρίνοντος τοίνυν τοῦ νόμου τοὺς ἁμαρτάνοντας καὶ τὴν ἐσχάτην ἔσθ’ ὅτε ποινὴν καθορίζοντος τῶν ἠμεληκότων καὶ κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον οἰκτείραντος,	22. The God of all delivered the law to the ancients through the mediation of Moses. But the law did not give those who wanted to blamelessly accomplish good the ability to do so, for it has perfected nothing. Nor was the first covenant faultless, but wise Paul called it a condemning ministry. I hear him say, “We know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped and all the world be accountable to God, because by works of the law no one will be justified in his sight” [Rom. 3:19–20]. For the law works wrath, and the letter kills, as he himself somewhere says: “Anyone who despised Moses’s law died without mercy with the testimony of two or three witnesses” [Heb. 10:28]. Therefore, the law condemns sinners and sometimes without pity decrees the extreme penalty for those who disregard it.
πῶς οὐκ ἀναγκαία τοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἡ τοῦ φιλοικτίρμονος καὶ ἐλεήμονος ἀληθῶς ἀρχιερέως ἀνάδειξις ἦν, παύοντος μὲν τὴν ἀράν, ἀνακόπτοντος δὲ τὴν δίκην καὶ ἀπαλλάττοντος τοὺς ἡμαρτηκότας ἀμνησικάκῳ χάριτι καὶ τοῖς ἐξ ἡμερότητος νεύμασιν; “Ἐγὼ” γάρ φησιν, “εἰμὶ ὁ ἐξαλείφων τὰς ἀνομίας σου καὶ οὐ μὴ μνησθήσομαι.” δεδικαιώμεθα γὰρ ἐν πίστει “καὶ οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων νόμου” κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον. εἰς τίνα δὴ οὖν πιστεύοντες δικαιούμεθα; οὐκ εἰς τὸν παθόντα δι’ ἡμᾶς τὸν κατὰ σάρκα θάνατον; οὐκ εἰς ἕνα κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν; οὐ τὸν θάνατον αὐτοῦ καταγγέλλοντες καὶ ὁμολογοῦντες τὴν ἀνάστασιν λελυτρώμεθα; εἰ μὲν οὖν εἰς ἄνθρωπον τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς ἕνα πεπιστεύκαμεν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον εἰς θεόν, ἀνθρωπολατρία τὸ χρῆμα καὶ ἕτερον οὐδὲν ὁμολογουμένως· εἰ δὲ θεὸν εἶναι τὸν πεπονθότα σαρκὶ πιστεύομεν, ὃς καὶ γέγονεν ἡμῶν ἀρχιερεύς, πεπλανήμεθα μὲν κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον, ἄνθρωπον δὲ γεγονότα τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον ἐπιγινώσκομεν, πράττεται δὲ οὕτω πρὸς ἡμῶν ἡ πίστις εἰς θεὸν τὸν ἔξω τιθέντα δίκης καὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἀπαλλάττοντα τοὺς ἐναλόντας αὐταῖς. “Ἔχει” γὰρ “ἐξουσίαν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου” καὶ “ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἀφιέναι ἁμαρτίας,” ὥς που καὶ αὐτός φησιν. ἀντιπαραθέντες τοίνυν τῇ διὰ Χριστοῦ σωτηρίᾳ καὶ χάριτι τῆς νομικῆς ἀποτομίας, ἵν’ οὕτως εἴπω, τὸ ἀπηνές, ἐλεήμονα φαμὲν ἀρχιερέα γενέσθαι Χριστόν. ἦν μὲν γὰρ καὶ ἔστι θεὸς ἀγαθὸς τῇ φύσει φιλοικτίρμων τε καὶ ἐλεήμων ἀεί, καὶ οὐκ ἐν χρόνῳ τοῦτο γέγονεν, ἀλλ’ […] εἰς ἡμᾶς ἐδείχθη τοιοῦτος. κατωνόμασται δὲ πιστὸς ὡς μένων ὅ ἐστιν, ἀεὶ κατά γε τὸ εἰρημένον καὶ ἐπ’ αὐτοῦ τοῦ πατρός· “Πιστὸς δὲ ὁ θεός, ὃς οὐκ ἐάσει ἡμᾶς πειρασθῆναι ὑπὲρ ὃ δυνάμεθα.”	How, then, was the manifestation of a compassionate and truly merciful high priest to people on earth not necessary? One who would end the curse, stop condemnation, and free sinners with forgiving grace and kind commands? For he says, “I am the one who blots out your transgressions; I will not remember” [Is. 43:25]. For we have been justified by faith, “not by works of the law” [Gal. 2:16], as it is written. With faith in whom, then, are we justified? Is it not in the one who suffered death according to the flesh for us? Is it not in the one Lord Jesus Christ? Have we not been redeemed as we declare his death and confess his resurrection? If we have believed in a man like us rather than in God, we would confess it is nothing other than worship of a human. But if we believe that the one who suffered in the flesh is God, who also became our high priest, we have not erred in any way, but we acknowledge the Word of God become human. This is required of our faith in God, who removes condemnation and frees from sin those entangled therein. For “the Son of Man has authority on the earth” even “to forgive sins” [Matt. 9:6], as he himself says somewhere. We therefore contrast the law’s cruel severity, so to speak, with salvation and grace through Christ, and we say that Christ was made a merciful high priest. For he was and is God, who is good by nature, compassionate, and always merciful; he did not gain these qualities in time, but had them when he appeared to us. He has been called faithful because he always remains the same, as it also says of the Father himself, “God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability” [1 Cor. 10:13].
οὐκοῦν ἐλεήμων ἅμα καὶ πιστὸς ἀρχιερεὺς εἰς ἡμᾶς γέγονεν ὁ Ἐμμανουήλ. ὡς γὰρ ὁ Παῦλός φησιν, “Οἱ μὲν πλείονές εἰσιν ἀρχιερεῖς γεγονότες διὰ τὸ θανάτῳ κωλύεσθαι παραμένειν, ὃ δὲ διὰ τὸ μένειν αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα ἀπαράβατον ἔχει τὴν ἱερωσύνην, ὅθεν καὶ σῴζειν εἰς τὸ παντελὲς δύναται τοὺς προσερχομένους δι’ αὐτοῦ τῷ θεῷ πάντοτε ζῶν εἰς τὸ ἐντυγχάνειν ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν.” ὅτι δὲ μεμένηκε θεὸς ὁ ἐκ πατρὸς λόγος, καίτοι γεγονὼς ἱερεὺς κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον διὰ τὸ πρέπον τῇ μετὰ σαρκὸς οἰκονομίᾳ σχῆμά τε καὶ μέτρον, ἀποχρῶν ἡμῖν εἰς πληροφορίαν ὁ τοῦ μακαρίου Παύλου γεγένηται λόγος. ἔφη γὰρ πάλιν· “Κεφάλαιον δὲ ἐπὶ τοῖς εἰρημένοις, τοιοῦτον ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα ὃς ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ θρόνου τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς τῶν ἁγίων λειτουργὸς καὶ τῆς σκηνῆς τῆς ἀληθινῆς, ἣν ἔπηξεν ὁ κύριος καὶ οὐκ ἄνθρωπος.” ἄθρει δὴ οὖν ἄθρει τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ φύντα λόγον διαπρέποντα μὲν ὡς θεὸν ταῖς ὑπερτάταις εὐκλείαις καὶ ἐν τοῖς θεότητος θώκοις, ἱερουργοῦντα δὲ τὸν αὐτὸν ὡς ἄνθρωπον καὶ οὐκ ἐπίγειον τινὰ θυσίαν προσκομίζοντα τῷ πατρί, θείαν δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ νοητὴν καὶ σκηνὴν ὥσπερ ἁγίαν ἔχοντα τὸν οὐρανόν. “Οὐ” γὰρ “κατὰ νόμον ἐντολῆς σαρκίνης γέγονεν” ἀρχιερεύς, “ἀλλὰ κατὰ δύναμιν ζωῆς ἀκαταλύτου,” καθὰ γέγραπται. πιστὸς οὖν ἄρα καὶ κατὰ τοῦτο καὶ τοῖς προσιοῦσιν ἐχέγγυος εἴς γε τὸ δύνασθαι καὶ μάλα ῥᾳδίως διασῴζειν αὐτούς· αἵματι γὰρ τῷ ἰδίῳ καὶ μιᾷ προσφορᾷ τετελείωκεν εἰς τὸ διηνεκὲς τοὺς ἁγιαζομένους. τουτὶ γὰρ οἶμαι δηλοῦν τὸν ἱερὸν ἡμῖν λέγοντα Παῦλον· “Ἐν ᾧ γὰρ πέπονθεν αὐτὸς πειρασθείς, δύναται τοῖς πειραζομένοις βοηθῆσαι.” τί τοίνυν ἡμῖν τῶν εἰς εὐσέβειαν ἀφειδήσας ἐννοιῶν καὶ τῶν εἰς ὀρθότητα καὶ ἀλήθειαν ἀποφοιτήσας λόγων, “Ὁ παθών,” φησίν, “ἀρχιερεὺς ἐλεήμων· παθητὸς δὲ ὁ ναός, οὐχ ὁ ζωοποιὸς τοῦ πεπονθότος θεός”;	23. Therefore Emmanuel has become a merciful and faithful high priest for us. For, as Paul says, “There have been many high priests because death kept them from remaining, but he, because he remains forever, has a permanent priesthood. For this reason he is also able to completely save those that come to God through him, ever living to intercede for them” [Heb. 7:23–25]. The Word of the Father remains God, even though he became priest, as it is written, on account of the fashion and mode that befits the fleshly incarnation. The word of blessed Paul is enough to fully assure us of this, for he said again, “Now this is the main point of what has been said: We have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of majesty in heaven, a minister of the sanctuary, the true tabernacle which the Lord pitched and not man” [Heb. 8:1–2]. Therefore perceive that the Word which sprang from God appears prominent, as God, in supreme excellencies and in the seat of deity, that the same carries out the priest’s office as a human and offers to the Father not an earthly but rather a divine and spiritual sacrifice, and that he has heaven as his holy tabernacle. For “he has not become” high priest “by a law regulating ancestry, but by the power of an indestructible life” [Heb. 7:16], as it is written. Therefore he is faithful and trustworthy to those who come to him in this too: that he is able to save them very easily, for with his own blood and with one offering he has forever perfected those who are sanctified. I think holy Paul shows us this when he says, “Because he himself suffered when tempted, he can help those who are tempted” [Heb. 2:18]. Why, then, does he neglect pious thoughts, abandon upright and true words, and say, “He who suffered is merciful high priest. The temple is capable of suffering, not the life-giving God of him who suffered”?

7. Fifth Argument – Nestorius Divides Christ in Two

Ὅτι μὲν οὖν σαρκὶ πέπονθεν ἑκὼν δι’ ἡμᾶς ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος, ἐν ἰδίῳ καιρῷ δειχθήσεται· ὅτι δὲ μερίζει τὸν ἀμέριστον καὶ δύο πρεσβεύει Χριστοὺς τῇ τῶν ἰδίων ἐννοιῶν δυνάμει, κἂν εἰ φαίνοιτό που Χριστὸν ἕνα λέγων, οὐδὲν ἧττον ἐλεγχθήσεται καὶ διὰ τῶν εὐθὺς ἐπενηνεγμένων· ἔφη γὰρ πάλιν “Σπέρμα Ἁβραὰμ ὁ χθὲς καὶ σήμερον κατὰ τὴν τοῦ Παύλου φωνήν, οὐχ ὁ λέγων· ‘Πρὶν Ἁβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί·’ ὅμοιος τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς κατὰ πάντα ὁ ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναλαβὼν ἀδελφότητα, οὐχ ὁ λέγων· ‘Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα.’ ἀπεστάλη <δὲ> ὁ ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιος καὶ κέχρισται κηρύττων ‘αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν· πνεῦμα γὰρ κυρίου ἐπ’ ἐμέ, οὗ εἵνεκεν ἔχρισέ με.’”	24. Therefore, it shall be shown in its own time that the Word of God has willingly suffered in the flesh for our sake. But he is dividing him who is indivisible and setting forth two Christs by the effect of his ideas. So, even though he may clearly say one Christ, my next proof shall be no less convicting, for he further said, “The seed of Abraham is he who is yesterday and today, as Paul says, not he who says, ‘Before Abraham was, I am’ [John 8:58]. He who assumed brotherhood of human soul and flesh is like his brothers in all things, not he who says, ‘He who has seen me has seen the Father’ [John 14:9]. He who is of the same substance as us was sent and has been anointed to proclaim ‘release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, for the Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he anointed me’” [Luke 4:18].
Διορίζεις οὖν εἰς δύο δὴ πάλιν καὶ μάλα σαφῶς· εἶτα πῶς οὐκ ἐλήλεγξαι “ψυχικὸς” καὶ “πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχων,” καθά φησι τοῦ σωτῆρος ὁ μαθητής; ἀλλ’ ἥ γε τῆς ἀληθείας δύναμις τοῖς σοῖς, ὦ οὗτος, ἀντιτετάξεται λόγοις. διισχυριζόμεθα γὰρ αὐτὸν τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον ἐπιλαβέσθαι σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ καὶ ἴδιον ποιήσασθαι σῶμα ψυχὴν ἔχον τὴν λογικὴν τὸ ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου ληφθέν. καὶ δὴ καθ’ ἕνωσιν ἀληθῆ <Χριστὸν> ἕνα τε καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι φαμὲν τὸν χθὲς καὶ σήμερον καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας ὄντα τε πρὸ Ἁβραὰμ θεϊκῶς, γεγονότα δὲ καὶ μετὰ τοῦτο ἄνθρωπον καὶ γέννησιν ὑπομεῖναι τὴν ἐκ γυναικός. οὐκοῦν οὐ ψευδοεπήσει λέγων· “Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἁβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί.”	25. Therefore you very clearly separate Christ into two. How, then, are you not convicted as “worldly” and “not having the Spirit” [Jude 19], as the Savior’s disciple says? But the might of the truth, O man, will oppose your words. For we affirm that the very Word of God the Father took hold of Abraham’s seed and made that which was from the holy virgin his own body with a rational soul. Indeed, by true union we say that he who is yesterday and today and forever, he who was before Abraham as God, is one and the same as he who later became human and was born of woman. Therefore, he will not lie in saying, “Truly I say to you, before Abraham was, I am” [John 8:58].
ἀλλ’ οὐ συνίησιν ὅλως ὅ τι ποτέ ἐστι τὸ χθὲς καὶ σήμερον καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἵνα γὰρ ἀίδιον ὄντα καὶ ὡσαύτως ἔχοντα κατὰ φύσιν καὶ τροπῆς ἀμείνω καὶ μεταβολῆς τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καταδείξῃ λόγον, κἂν εἰ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, εἰς καιροὺς μὲν διέστησε τρεῖς τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον, τίθησι δὲ τὸ μὲν χθές ἐπὶ τοῦ παρῳχηκότος, ἐπὶ δέ γε τοῦ ἐνεστηκότος τὸ σήμερον καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος τὸ εἰς αἰῶνας· ὁ δὲ ἄγροικος οὑτοσὶ τὸ χθὲς καὶ σήμερον ὡς ἐπ’ ἀνθρώπου δέχεται παρ’ αὐτὸν κοινοῦ παραλόγως, οὐκ ἐννοῶν ὅτι πρεσβύτερόν τε καὶ προϋπάρχοντα τῆς ἑαυτοῦ γεννήσεως ἀποφανεῖ πάντῃ τε καὶ πάντως, εἴπερ ἦν ὅλως καὶ κατὰ τὴν χθές, ὅπερ ἐστὶ τοῦ παρῳχηκότος καιροῦ σημαντικόν. ὅτι μὲν <οὖν> οὐχ ἕτερος ὁ χθὲς καὶ σήμερον Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ λέγων “Πρὶν Ἁβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί,” ἀλλ’ εἷς τε καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς καθ’ ἕνωσιν ἀληθῆ, ἀνθρώπου καθ’ ἡμᾶς γεγονότος τοῦ λόγου καὶ τῇ ἰδίᾳ φύσει τετηρηκότος, καὶ ὅτε γέγονε σάρξ, τὸ ἄναρχον ἐν χρόνῳ, καταθρήσαι τις ἂν καὶ ἀταλαιπώρως κομιδῇ διά γε τῆς θεοπνεύστου γραφῆς. [ὃ] φησὶ μὲν γὰρ ὁ μακάριος εὐαγγελιστὴς Ἰωάννης περὶ τοῦ πάντων ἡμῶν σωτῆρος Χριστοῦ· “Ἰωάννης μαρτυρεῖ περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ κέκραγε λέγων· ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν, ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν,” καὶ πάλιν· “Τῇ ἐπαύριον βλέπει τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐρχόμενον πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ λέγει· ἴδε ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ αἴρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου· οὗτός ἐστι περὶ οὗ ἐγὼ εἶπον· ὀπίσω μου ἔρχεται ἀνὴρ ὃς ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν, ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν.”	26. But he does not at all understand what “yesterday and today and forever” is. In order to show that the Word of God is eternal by nature and superior to change and alteration, even though he became human, he divided all time into three periods; he uses ‘yesterday’ of past time, ‘today’ of the present, and ‘forever’ of the future. But this rude man, against reason, says that ‘yesterday and today’ are spoken by him of a common human, not considering that it most surely shows that he is older than and existed before his own birth if in fact he existed yesterday, which signifies past time. There is not one Jesus Christ who is yesterday and today and another who says, “Before Abraham was, I am” [John 8:58], but he is one and the same by a true union. The Word became human like us but remained without temporal beginning in his own nature, even when he became flesh. One can see this without trouble in God-breathed scripture. For as the blessed evangelist John says of Christ, the Savior of us all, “John bears witness concerning him and has cried out, saying, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me’” [John 1:15], and again, “The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, ‘Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! This is he of whom I said, “After me a man is coming who has surpassed me because he was before me”’” [John 1:29–30].
ὁρᾷς οὖν ἄρα καὶ μάλα σαφῶς τὸν θεσπέσιον βαπτιστὴν ἄνδρα λέγοντα τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ ὀπίσω μὲν ἐρχόμενον ὡς ὀψιγενῆ τε καὶ μετ’ αὐτόν, προϋπάρχοντά γε μὴν αὐτοῦ καὶ προϋφεστηκότα· δηλοῖ γὰρ οἶμαι τουτὶ τὸ ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν, καὶ ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν. εἶτα πῶς εἴπερ ἐστὶν ἀνήρ, προϋφεστηκὼς νοεῖται καὶ προϋπάρχειν λέγεται τοῦ προειληφότος κατὰ τὸν χρόνον καὶ πρεσβυτέραν ἔχοντος τὴν κατὰ σάρκα αὐτοῦ γέννησιν; εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἐπί τινος τῶν καθ’ ἡμᾶς ταυτὶ λέγοιτο τυχόν, ἀπορήσειεν ἂν οἶμαί που καὶ ἁπαστισοῦν [εἰς] ἀπολογίας· ἐπὶ δέ γε τοῦ πάντων ἡμῶν σωτῆρος Χριστοῦ τὸ ἐμποδὼν οὐδέν. οἰκειοῦται μὲν γὰρ ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ <καὶ πατρὸς λόγος> τῆς ἰδίας σαρκὸς τὴν γέννησιν, πλὴν οὐκ ἠγνόηκεν ὅτι τῶν αἰώνων ἐστὶ ποιητὴς καὶ προϋφέστηκεν ὡς θεὸς καὶ τῷ ἰδίῳ πατρὶ συναΐδιος. οὐ γάρτοι φαμὲν ὅτι τῇ γεννήσει τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος σύγχρονον ἔχει τὴν ὕπαρξιν, ἀλλ’ ἦν, ὡς ἔφην, ἐκ τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς οὐσίας ἀπορρήτως γεγεννημένος. οὐκοῦν ἔχων τὸ εἶναι πρὸ Ἁβραὰμ ὡς θεός, κἂν εἰ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, οὐκ ἂν διαψεύσαιτο λέγων ὡς εἷς ἀληθῶς καὶ υἱὸς καὶ κύριος· “Πρὶν Ἁβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί.”	Therefore, you see very clearly that the baptizer under inspiration calls Jesus a man and one who comes after, being late-born and after him, yet preceding him and existing before him. For this, I think, is the meaning of the words “because he was before me” and “he has surpassed me.” How, then, if he is a man, is he considered to exist beforehand, and how is he said to be before the one who was far ahead of him in time and was born in the flesh before him? For if this were said of one like us, I think everybody would be at a loss to defend it, but in regard to Christ, the Savior of us all, there is no difficulty. For the Word of God the Father appropriates the birth of his own flesh, but he is well aware that he is maker of the ages, exists beforehand as God, and is coeternal with his Father. For we do not say his existence began at the same time as the birth of his own body, but, as I said, he was ineffably begotten of the essence of God the Father. Therefore, existing before Abraham as God even though he became human, he does not speak falsely in saying, as one who is truly both Son and Lord, “Before Abraham was, I am” [John 8:58].
καὶ μήτοι θαυμάσῃς εἰ τῇ ἰδίᾳ νενέμηκε φύσει τὸ εἶναι πρὸ Ἁβραάμ, διαλογίζου δὲ μᾶλλον ὅτι καίτοι τὸ σῶμα λαβὼν ἐκ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου ἔφη πρὸς τὸν Νικόδημον “Εἰ τὰ ἐπίγεια εἶπον ὑμῖν καὶ οὐ πιστεύετε, πῶς ἐὰν εἴπω ὑμῖν τὰ ἐπουράνια, πιστεύσετε; καὶ οὐδεὶς ἀναβέβηκεν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν εἰ μὴ ὁ ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καταβάς, ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου,” καίτοι κεχρημάτικε καὶ υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου, γεννηθεὶς ἐκ γυναικὸς κατὰ σάρκα. ψευδοεπήσει δὴ οὖν καταβεβηκέναι λέγων ἐξ οὐρανοῦ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, τουτέστιν ἑαυτόν; μὴ γένοιτο· καὶ γάρ ἐστιν αὐτὸς ἡ ἀλήθεια. πῶς οὖν ἄνωθεν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου νοοῖτ’ ἂν εἰκότως; ὅτι θεὸς ὢν ὁ λόγος καὶ ἐκ τῆς ἀνωτάτω πασῶν οὐσίας καταβεβηκέναι λέγεται καὶ δούλου μορφὴν ἀναλαβεῖν, εἶτα διαλέγεται πρὸς ἡμᾶς, οὐχ ὡς γυμνὸς ἔτι λόγος, ἀλλ’ ὡς ἄνθρωπος καθ’ ἡμᾶς καὶ ὡς εἷς ἤδη νοούμενος μετὰ τῆς ἑνωθείσης αὐτῷ σαρκός. ὥσπερ δὲ διὰ τὸ τῇ κενώσει πρέπον οἰκειοῦται πάντα τὰ τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος, καίτοι τὴν φύσιν ἀσώματος ὤν, οὕτω καὶ ἄνωθεν ὢν αὐτὸς καὶ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ τὸ ἄνωθεν ἥκειν ἀπονέμει πάλιν ἑαυτῷ, καὶ ὅτε γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, κἂν εἰ γεγέννηται κατὰ σάρκα μεθ’ ἡμῶν ἐκ γυναικός. γέγονε τοίνυν ἴδια μὲν τοῦ λόγου τὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, ἴδια δὲ πάλιν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος τὰ αὐτοῦ τοῦ λόγου. εἷς γὰρ οὕτω νοεῖται Χριστὸς καὶ υἱὸς καὶ κύριος.	27. Do not marvel that he has allotted being before Abraham to his own nature, but rather consider that though he had taken a body of the holy virgin, he said to Nicodemus, “If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except the one who came down from heaven, the Son of Man” [John 3:12–13]. Indeed, he was even called Son of Man, born of woman according to the flesh. Does he, then, speak falsely in saying that the Son of Man, namely, he himself, has come down from heaven? Not so—he himself is the truth. How, then, do we rightly think of the Son of Man as from above? We say that God the Word, being of the essence that is above all, came down and took servant’s form. Therefore he deals with us not as unclothed Word still, but as a human like us and already to be considered one with the flesh united to him. And just as he appropriates all that belongs to his own flesh by virtue of the emptying, although he is by nature incorporeal, so also, being from above and out of heaven, he allots coming from above to himself even when he has become human and been born of a woman according to the flesh like us. So the properties of the human nature have become the Word’s own properties, and those of the Word himself have become the human nature’s own properties. In this way we think of one Christ and Son and Lord.
ἐπειδὴ δὲ προστέθεικεν ὁ καινοτόμος οὑτοσὶ ὅτι “Ὅμοιος τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς κατὰ πάντα ὁ ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναλαβὼν ἀδελφότητα, οὐχ ὁ λέγων ‘Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα.’” Φέρε δὴ πάλιν ὅ τι ποτέ ἐστιν ὅ φησιν ἐν τούτοις, ὡς ἔνι, περιαθρήσομεν. ὅτι μὲν γὰρ εἰκών ἐστι καὶ χαρακτὴρ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς ὁ υἱός, διωμολόγηκε καὶ αὐτός· τίς δ’ ἂν εἴη λοιπὸν “ὁ ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σώματος ἀναλαβὼν ἀδελφότητα,” δῆλον δὲ ὅτι τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς, διδασκέτω παρελθών. οὐ γάρ που φαίη τις ἂν ὡς ὁ καθ’ ἡμᾶς φαινόμενος ἄνθρωπος οἷον Βαρνάβας τυχὸν ἢ Παῦλος ἢ γοῦν ἕτερός τις τῶν τελούντων ἐν ἀνθρώποις ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σώματος ἀδελφότητα λαβεῖν λέγοιτο ἂν ὡς ἕτερόν τι παρὰ τοῦτο ὑπάρχων, εἶθ’ οὕτω λαβών· ἔστι δὲ μᾶλλον ἔν γε τῷ εἶναι τοῦθ’ ὅπερ ἐστίν. οὐκοῦν οὐκ ἄνθρωπός τις ὑπάρχων, ὡς ἕτερόν τι παρ’ ἑαυτόν, λαβεῖν ἂν νοοῖτο τὸ εἶναι ὅ ἐστι, πρέποι δ’ ἂν μᾶλλον τῷ ἐκ θεοῦ φύντι λόγῳ τὸ ἀσύντακτον ἔχοντι πρὸς ἡμᾶς κατά γε τοὺς τῆς ἰδίας φύσεως λόγους “ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σώματος” τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς “ἀδελφότητα” λαβεῖν. καὶ πρός γε τοῦτο ἡμῖν ὁ τῆς ἀληθείας ἐπαγωνιεῖται λόγος καὶ τῆς ἀμωμήτου πίστεως ἡ παράδοσις. ἄραρεν οὖν ὅτι ἐν μορφῇ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς θεὸς λόγος ἀδελφὸς ἡμῖν κατὰ πάντα γέγονε, “ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σώματος ἀδελφότητα” λαβών, καὶ οὐκ ἂν διαψεύσαιτο λέγων· “Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα.” εἰ μὲν γάρ τις τῶν ἐν ἡμῖν ἀμαθίας εἰς τοῦτο κατώλισθεν ἐννοιῶν, ὡς οἴεσθαι καὶ αὐτὸν τὸν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς πατέρα καὶ θεὸν κατακομίζεσθαι δεῖν, εἴς γε τὸ χρῆναι φημὶ τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὁμοίωσιν ἔχειν, δῆλον δὲ ὅτι τὴν σωματικήν, ὀρθῶς ἐδεδίει μὴ ἄρα που λέγοντος τοῦ Χριστοῦ “Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα” καὶ αὐτὸν ὑποτοπήσειε τὸν ἐξ οὗπέρ ἐστιν, ἐν εἴδει τε εἶναι τῷ καθ’ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐν τοῖς κατὰ σῶμα σχηματισμοῖς· ἐπειδὴ δὲ καὶ υἱὸς ἀνθρώπου γεγονὼς τὸ εἶναι θεὸς διεσώσατο καὶ τὸ τῆς ἰδίας φύσεως κάλλος ἀπαραποίητον ἔχει, κατοκνήσαιμ’ ἂν οὐδαμῶς εἰπεῖν ὅτι καὶ τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὁμοίωσιν ἔχει κατά γε τὸ εἶναι καθ’ ἡμᾶς ἄνθρωπος ὁ ἐκ ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος, καίτοι θεὸς ὢν φύσει καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως τοῦ γεγεννηκότος. εἷς οὖν ἄρα καὶ ὁ αὐτός, παραπλήσιος μὲν τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς κατὰ σάρκα, δεικνύων δὲ καὶ αὐτὸν ἐν ἰδίᾳ φύσει τὸν γεννήτορα, κατά γε φημὶ τὸ εἶναι θεός.	28. But since this innovator continued, “He who assumed brotherhood of human soul and flesh is like his brothers in all things, not he who says, ‘He who has seen me has seen the Father’” [John 14:9], let us again consider, as we are able, what exactly he says here. For he himself has confessed that the Son is the image and representation of God the Father. Now let him come forward and teach who it is “who assumed brotherhood of human soul and body,” meaning brotherhood with us. For surely no one would say that a human like us, such as Barnabas or Paul or anyone else who belongs among humans, could assume brotherhood of human soul and body as if he were something else than human and so would assume brotherhood; brotherhood is rather in his being what he is. Therefore we cannot think that a human assumed being what he is, as if it were something other than himself. Rather, it suits the Word begotten of God, who is not in the same class as us in regard to his proper nature, to assume “brotherhood of human soul and body” with us. The word of truth and the tradition of the undefiled faith contend on our side. They hold that God the Word, in the form of God the Father, became our brother in all things, assuming “brotherhood of human soul and body.” Thus he does not speak falsely in saying, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” [John 14:9]. For if any of us had slipped into such stupid ideas as to think that God the Father in heaven needed to bring him down so that he would have likeness with us—that is, bodily likeness, he might have rightly feared that when Christ says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” [John 14:9], Christ thought that even the Father, of whom he is, was like us in form and in bodily shape. But when he became the Son of Man, he remained God and preserves the unadulterated beauty of his proper nature. Therefore I would not at all shrink from saying that he possesses likeness with us in view of his being human like us, consisting of soul and body, although he is God by nature and the personal representation of him who has begotten him. Therefore he is one and the same, like his brothers according to the flesh, yet representing his begetter in his proper nature—I mean in regard to the fact that he is God.
ὁ δὲ τοῦτο μὲν οὐ συνίησι, πόθεν; παρασημαίνων δὲ ὥσπερ τὸν ὀρθῶς τε καὶ ἀκιβδήλως ἔχοντα τοῦ μυστηρίου λόγον, ἕτερον ἡμῖν καὶ ἕτερον εἰσκομίζει Χριστὸν καὶ τοῖς Ἰουδαϊκοῖς ἐγκλήμασιν ἐναλοὺς οὐδὲ ὅποιπέρ ἐστι καὶ ἵν’ ἥκει κακῶν, αἰσθάνεται. ἤκουον μὲν γὰρ οἱ ἐξ αἵματος Ἰσραὴλ θεοῦ διακεκραγότος δι’ ἑνὸς τῶν ἁγίων προφητῶν περὶ τοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ· “Καὶ σύ, Βηθλεέμ, οἶκος τοῦ Ἐφραθᾶ, ὀλιγοστὸς εἶ τοῦ εἶναι ἐν χιλιάσιν Ἰούδα· ἐκ σοῦ μοι ἐξελεύσεται τοῦ εἶναι εἰς ἄρχοντα ἐν τῷ Ἰσραὴλ καὶ αἱ ἔξοδοι αὐτοῦ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς ἐξ ἡμερῶν αἰῶνος.” καὶ πάλιν· “Τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται; ὅτι αἴρεται ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς ἡ ζωὴ αὐτοῦ.” εἶτα συνιέντες οὐδαμῶς τὸ μυστήριον οὔτε μὴν εἰδότες ὅτι καίτοι θεὸς ὢν φύσει καὶ τῆς ὑπάρξεως τὴν ἀρχὴν ἄποπτόν τε καὶ ἀκατάληπτον ἔχων κεχρημάτικε Βηθλεεμίτης ὡς ἐκ ῥίζης Ἰεσσαὶ καὶ Δαυίδ, ἐκεῖ γεννηθεὶς κατὰ σάρκα, πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἔφασκον· “Οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὃν ζητοῦσιν ἀποκτεῖναι; ἴδε παρρησίᾳ λαλεῖ καὶ οὐδὲν αὐτῷ λέγουσι· μήποτε ἔγνωσαν οἱ ἄρχοντες ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός; ἀλλὰ τοῦτον οἴδαμεν πόθεν ἐστίν, ὁ δὲ Χριστὸς ὅταν ἔρχηται, οὐδεὶς γινώσκει πόθεν ἐστίν.” ἤκουον γάρ, ὡς ἔφην, τοῦ προφήτου λέγοντος ἐναργῶς “Τὴν γενεὰν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται;” καὶ ὅτι τὰς ἐξόδους ἤτοι τὴν ὕπαρξιν πρὸ παντὸς αἰῶνος ἔχει. ἄθρει δή μοι πάλιν τῆς Ἰουδαίων ἐμβροντησίας τὸ μέγεθος. φάσκοντες γὰρ ὅτι “Ὁ Χριστὸς ὅταν ἔρχηται, οὐδεὶς γινώσκει πόθεν ἐστί,” πάλιν πρὸς ἀλλήλους ἔλεγον· “Οὗτός ἐστιν ἀληθῶς ὁ προφήτης· ἄλλοι δὲ ἔλεγον,” φησίν, “ὅτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ Χριστός· οἳ δὲ ἔλεγον· μὴ γὰρ ἐκ τῆς Γαλιλαίας ὁ Χριστὸς ἔρχεται; οὐχὶ ἡ γραφὴ εἶπεν ὅτι ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ καὶ ἀπὸ Βηθλεὲμ τῆς κώμης, ὅπου ἦν Δαυίδ, ὁ Χριστὸς ἔρχεται;” ὁρᾷς οὖν ὅπως καὶ καταμεθύουσι, καὶ τὸ ἄναρχον θεϊκῶς καὶ τὴν ἐν χρόνῳ γέννησιν σαρκικὴν ὁμολογοῦντες αὐτοῦ; ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἂν εἰς οὕτως ἐκτόπους ἀπεκομίζοντο δυσβουλίας, εἴπερ ᾔδεσαν ἀληθῶς ὅτι θεὸς ὢν ὁ λόγος ἐκ ῥίζης τῆς Ἰεσσαὶ καὶ Δαυὶδ καὶ τῆς ἁγίας παρθένου προῆλθεν ἄνθρωπος, ὠνόμασται δὲ καὶ Βηθλεεμίτης ὁ γῆς τε καὶ οὐρανοῦ καὶ τῶν ὅλων δεσπότης· συνεπτώχευσε γὰρ ἡμῖν πλούσιος ὢν κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον.	29. But he does not understand this (how could he?); instead, he perverts, so to speak, the upright and genuine plan of the mystery, sets up for us two different Christs, and does not perceive where he is nor what evils he has drawn towards, caught in Jewish accusations. For those of the blood of Israel heard that God shouted concerning Emmanuel through one of the holy prophets, “You, Bethlehem, house of Ephrathah, are very small to be among the thousands of Judah; out of you will come for me one to be ruler in Israel, and his paths are from the beginning, from the days of old” [Mic. 5:2]. And again, “Who can describe his birth? For his life is taken away from the earth” [Is. 53:8]. Not at all understanding the mystery and indeed not knowing that he was called a Bethlehemite because he was born there according to the flesh of the root of Jesse and David, though he is God by nature and though the origin of his being is invisible and incomprehensible, they said one to another, “Isn’t this the one they’re trying to kill? Look, he speaks openly, and they say nothing to him. Do the rulers really think this man is the Christ? Yet we know where this man is from, but when Christ comes, no one will know where he is from” [John 7:25–27]. For, as I said, they heard the prophet saying clearly, “Who can describe his birth?” [Is. 53:8], and that his paths or his existence are before every age. Now observe the sheer stupidity of the Jews. Just having said, “When Christ comes, no one will know where he is from” [John 7:27], they said again to each other, “‘Truly this is the prophet,’ and others said, ‘He is the Christ.’ But still others said, ‘Does the Christ really come from Galilee? Doesn’t scripture say the Christ comes from the seed of David and from Bethlehem, the town where David was?’” [John 7:40–42]. Do you see how they act drunk, agreeing both that he has no beginning as God and that his flesh is born in time? But such poor counsel would not have taken them captive if they had truly known that the Word, although he is God, came forth as a human from the root of Jesse and David and from the holy virgin, and that the Lord of earth, of heaven, and of all was called a Bethlehemite because, though he was rich, he became poor with us [2 Cor. 8:9], as it is written.
τί τοιγαροῦν ταῖς τῶν Ἰουδαίων τερθρείαις σαυτὸν ἐνιεὶς πεφρόνηκάς τε καὶ λέγεις ἃ μήτε θέμις εἰπεῖν μήτε μὴν ἐννοεῖν ἀζήμιον; ἕνα μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὁμολόγει Χριστὸν καὶ μὴ διατέμνων εἰς δύο δὴ πάλιν ἐκεῖνο λέγε “Ἀπεστάλη ὁ ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιος καὶ κέχρισται κηρύττων ‘αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν.’” Εἶτα ὅποι ποτὲ βαδιεῖται τῶν θεηγόρων ὁ λόγος, οἳ μυσταγωγοὶ γεγόνασι τῆς ὑπ’ οὐρανόν; αὐτὸν γὰρ διακεκράγασι τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον σωτῆρα τῶν ὅλων γενέσθαι καὶ λυτρωτήν, οὐχ ὡς ἀνθρώπου μεσιτεύοντος παρ’ αὐτὸν ἑτέρου καθάπερ ἀμέλει καὶ ὁ Μωσῆς, ἐν εἴδει δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ ἐν ὁμοιώματι σωματικῷ πρὸς ἡμᾶς καθιγμένον. κέχρισται γὰρ οὗτος εἰς ἀρχιερέα καὶ ἀπόστολον. καὶ γοῦν Ἰουδαίοις ἐπετίμα λέγων· “Οὔκ ἐστι γεγραμμένον ἐν τῷ νόμῳ ὑμῶν· ἐγὼ εἶπα· θεοὶ ἐστέ; εἰ ἐκείνους εἶπε θεοὺς πρὸς οὓς ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ οὐ δύναται λυθῆναι ἡ γραφή, ὃν ὁ πατὴρ ἡγίασε καὶ ἀπέστειλεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ὑμεῖς λέγετε ὅτι βλασφημεῖς, ὅτι εἶπον· υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ εἰμί;” ἀνθ’ ὅτου δὲ δὴ τὸν ἑαυτὸν καθέντα πρὸς κένωσιν, ἵνα σώσῃ τὴν ὑπ’ οὐρανόν, τῶν εἰς ἡμᾶς γεγονότων θεοπρεπεστάτων καὶ ἀξιαγάστων ἀληθῶς κατορθωμάτων ἐκπέμψομεν, ἀπεστάλθαι λέγοντες ὡς ἕτερόν τινα παρ’ αὐτὸν ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιον; καίτοι πῶς οὐκ ἄμεινον εἰπεῖν καὶ μὴν καὶ ἑλέσθαι φρονεῖν ὡς ἀπέσταλταί τε καὶ γέγονεν ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιος, τουτέστιν ἄνθρωπος, ὁμοούσιος δὲ μεμενηκὼς καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ καθὸ καὶ νοεῖται καὶ ἦν τε καὶ ἔστι θεός;	30. Why, therefore, do you plunge yourself into Jewish pedantry so that you think and say that which is unlawful to say and harmful to think? Confess one Christ with us and stop dividing him into two by saying, “He who is of the same substance as us was sent and has been anointed to proclaim ‘release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind’” [Luke 4:18]. What, then, shall we do with the word of the theologians⁴ who have initiated all people under heaven? For they have cried out that the very Word of God the Father became Savior and Redeemer of all, not as if a human other than him were mediating, like Moses did; rather, he came down to us in bodily likeness and form. For he has been anointed as high priest and apostle. And he rebuked the Jews, saying, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”’? If those to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’—and Scripture cannot be broken—what of the one whom the Father set apart and sent into the world? Do you say, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?” [John 10:34–36]. He brought himself down to emptiness in order to save all under heaven. Why, then, should we remove from him the marvelous and truly admirable triumphs he accomplished for us by saying that someone other than him of the same substance as us has been sent? How, indeed, would it not be better to say and choose to think that he has both been sent and has become of the same substance as us—namely, human—while remaining of the same substance as God the Father himself, just as he is considered and was and is God?
ἔστι γὰρ ἔστιν ὃ ἦν, καὶ προσλαβὼν τὸ ἀνθρώπινον, ἔχων δὲ τὴν ταὐτότητα τῆς οὐσίας πρὸς τὸν ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς πατέρα καὶ θεὸν ἐπελάβετο σοφῶς καὶ τῆς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὁμοιότητος, τέθειται δὲ καὶ μεσίτης, συνδέων δι’ ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς ἑνότητα σχετικὴν τὰ τοῖς τῆς φύσεως λόγοις ὁλοτρόπως ἀλλήλων διῃρημένα. γέγονε γάρ, θεὸς ὢν φύσει, κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ἄνθρωπος, ἵνα καὶ ἡμεῖς χρηματίσωμεν γένος οὐκέτι τοῦ πρώτου, τουτέστι τοῦ χοϊκοῦ, πρὸς ὃν εἴρηται παρὰ θεοῦ “Γῆ εἶ καὶ εἰς γῆν ἀπελεύσῃ,” τοῦ καὶ εἰς θάνατον παραπέμποντος, ἀλλὰ τοῦ δευτέρου, τοῦ ἄνωθεν καὶ ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, φημὶ δὴ Χριστοῦ, τοῦ πρὸς ζωὴν ἡμᾶς τὴν ἀκήρατον ἀναφέροντος καὶ ἄφθαρτον ἀποφαίνοντος τὸ θανάτῳ κάτοχον καὶ ἀπαλλάττοντος ἁμαρτιῶν τὸ τοῖς ἁμαρτίας βρόχοις ἐνειλημμένον. οὕτω που πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτός φησιν ὁ πατήρ· “Ἰδοὺ δέδωκά σε εἰς διαθήκην γένους, εἰς φῶς ἐθνῶν, ἀνοῖξαι ὀφθαλμοὺς τυφλῶν, ἐξαγαγεῖν ἐκ δεσμῶν δεδεμένους καὶ ἐξ οἴκου φυλακῆς καθημένους ἐν σκότει.” καὶ πάλιν διὰ φωνῆς Ἡσαίου· “Εὐλογήσει με τὰ θηρία τοῦ ἀγροῦ, σειρῆνες καὶ θυγατέρες στρουθῶν, ὅτι ἔδωκα ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ ὕδωρ καὶ ποταμοὺς ἐν γῇ ἀνύδρῳ ποτίσαι τὸ γένος μου τὸ ἐκλεκτόν, λαόν μου ὃν περιεποιησάμην τὰς ἀρετάς μου διηγεῖσθαι.” ὃ δὴ καὶ συνιεὶς εὖ μάλα τοῖς ἐξ ἐθνῶν διὰ πίστεως κεκλημένοις εἰς θεογνωσίαν ἀληθῆ γράφει καί φησιν ὁ θεσπέσιος Πέτρος· “Ὑμεῖς δὲ γένος ἐκλεκτόν, βασίλειον ἱεράτευμα, ἔθνος ἅγιον, λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν, ἵνα τὰς ἀρετὰς ἐξαγγείλητε τοῦ ἐκ σκότους ὑμᾶς καλοῦντος ἐπὶ τὸ θαυμαστὸν αὐτοῦ φῶς, οἵ ποτε οὐ λαός, νῦν δὲ λαὸς <θεοῦ>.”	For he is what he was, even after assuming humanity. He has the same essence as God the Father in heaven. In wisdom he also took up our likeness. He has set himself to be mediator, permanently uniting through himself those things which are completely distinguished from each other by their nature. For although he is God by nature, he truly became man so that we too might no longer be called offspring of the first human—namely, the one made of dust, to whom God said, “Earth you are, and to earth you will return” [Gen. 3:19], who also surrenders to death—but of the second, the one from above, out of heaven—Christ, I mean—who brings us up to pure life, makes immortal what is subject to death, and frees from sins what was held by sin’s snares. Thus the Father himself says somewhere to the Son, “Look, I have made you a covenant for the nation, a light for the peoples, to open blind eyes, to release the bound from chains and those who sat in darkness from prison” [Is. 42:6–7]. Again he says through Isaiah, “The beasts of the field will bless me—jackals and daughters of sparrows—because I put water in the desert and rivers in the arid land to give drink to my chosen nation, my people whom I kept for myself to declare my virtue” [Is. 43:20–21]. Peter understood this very well for those of the nations called through faith to true knowledge of God. He wrote under inspiration, “You are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may proclaim the virtues of him who calls you out of darkness into his wondrous light. Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God” [1 Pet. 2:9–10].
εἰ δὲ καθάπερ αὐτῷ σοι δοκεῖ καὶ φρονεῖν καὶ λέγειν, “Ἀπεστάλη ὁ ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιος,” οὐκέτι δὲ καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ πατρί, κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον ἡμεῖς θείας φύσεως γεγόναμεν κοινωνοί, μεμενήκαμεν <δέ,> ὡς ἔφην, καὶ ἐσμὲν ἔτι γένος τοῦ πρώτου τοῦ παραπέμποντος εἰς ἀρὰν καὶ θάνατον καὶ ὑπὸ ποινὴν ἁμαρτίας. μεματαιώμεθα δὴ οὖν καὶ ἐσμὲν οὐδὲν ἧττον καὶ νῦν ἐν οἷς ἦμεν πάλαι καὶ πρὸ τῆς ἐπιδημίας. πῶς οὖν ἔτι “Τὰ ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθε καὶ ἰδοὺ γέγονε καινά”; ποῦ δὲ <τὸ> “Εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις”;	31. But if, as you are pleased to think and say, “He who is of the same substance as us was sent,” and not he who is of the same substance as the Father, in no way have we become partners of the divine nature. Instead, as I said, we remain and still are offspring of the first human, who surrenders to curse and death under the penalty of sin. We have therefore been fooled; we are no better off now than we were long ago before his coming. How, then, is this still true: “The old has gone; the new is here”? Where has the saying, “If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation” [2 Cor. 5:17], gone?

8. Cyril’s Allegory of Jacob Wrestling with God

ἀλλ’ αἰσχύνῃ θεὸν ὁμολογεῖν καθ’ ἡμᾶς γενόμενον ἄνθρωπον τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον; ἐπιπλήττεις οὖν αὐτῷ καὶ οὐ σοφὰ βεβουλεῦσθαι φὴς ὅτι κεκένωκεν ἑαυτὸν δι’ ἡμᾶς. οὐκοῦν ἀκούσῃ λέγοντος· “Ὕπαγε ὀπίσω μου, σατανᾶ, σκάνδαλόν μου εἶ, ὅτι οὐ φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἀλλὰ τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων.” ἐρεύνησον μεθ’ ἡμῶν τὴν θεόπνευστον γραφήν. ὤφθη ποτὲ καὶ τῷ πατριάρχῃ Ἰακὼβ τῆς μὲν τοῦ Λάβαν ἑστίας ἀπαίροντι, πρὸς αὐταῖς δὲ γεγονότι ταῖς διαβάσεσι τοῦ Ἰαβὼκ καθὰ γέγραπται. “Ὑπελείφθη γὰρ Ἰακὼβ μόνος καὶ ἐπάλαιεν ἄνθρωπος μετ’ αὐτοῦ ἕως πρωΐ. εἶδε δὲ ὅτι οὐ δύναται πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ ἥψατο τοῦ πλάτους τοῦ μηροῦ αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐνάρκησε τὸ πλάτος τοῦ μηροῦ Ἰακὼβ ἐν τῷ παλαίειν αὐτὸν μετ’ αὐτοῦ. εἶπε δὲ αὐτῷ· ἀπόστειλόν με· ἀνέβη γὰρ ὁ ὄρθρος. ὃ δὲ εἶπεν· οὐ μή σε ἀποστείλω, ἐὰν μή με εὐλογήσῃς.” καὶ μεθ’ ἕτερα πάλιν· “Καὶ ἐκάλεσεν Ἰακὼβ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ τόπου ἐκείνου Εἶδος θεοῦ· εἶδον γὰρ θεὸν πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον, καὶ ἐσώθη μου ἡ ψυχή. ἀνέτειλε δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ ἥλιος, ἡνίκα παρῆλθε τὸ εἶδος τοῦ θεοῦ.” σύνες οὖν ὅπως οὐχ ὡς ἀσώματός τε καὶ ἀναφὴς λόγος ἠξίου φαίνεσθαι τῷ πατριάρχῃ τὸ τηνικάδε τὸν τοῦ μυστηρίου τύπον προαναφαίνων αὐτῷ, ἀλλ’ ἦν ἄνθρωπος ὁ παλαίων καὶ ὅλην εἰς τοῦτο δαπανήσας τὴν νύκτα· πλὴν διαυγαζούσης ἡμέρας ὄρθρου τε γεγενημένου τὸ “Ἀπόστειλόν μέ” φησιν, ὅπερ ἦν ἐναργῶς καταλύοντος τὴν πάλην.

32. But are you ashamed to confess like us that the Word of God is God made human? You rebuke him and say that his plan to empty himself for our sake is not wise. Therefore you will hear him say, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a snare to me, for you are not thinking of the things of God but those of men” [Matt. 16:23]. Search God-breathed scripture with us. He once appeared to the patriarch Jacob when he was departing from Laban’s household and was at the very fords of the Jabbok, as it is written: “Jacob was left alone, and a person was wrestling with him until morning. He saw that he could not prevail against him and touched the wide part of his thigh; the wide part of Jacob’s thigh grew numb while he wrestled with him. He said to him, ‘Let me go, for daybreak is near.’ But he said, ‘I will not let you go unless you bless me’” [Gen. 32:24–26]. Later it continues, “Jacob named that place Form of God, saying, ‘It is because I saw God face to face, and my life was spared.’ The sun rose above him when he passed by Form of God” [Gen. 32:30–31]. Understand, then, that he did not at that time resolve to show himself to the patriarch as the incorporeal and impalpable Word. He rather showed to him the pattern of the mystery in advance; the one who wrestled— and spent the whole night doing so—was human. But when the day was dawning and it was daybreak, he said, “Let me go,” which was clearly the word of one who was bringing the wrestling to an end.

καὶ τίς ὁ τοῦ μυστηρίου λόγος, εἰπεῖν ἀναγκαῖον. τοῖς μὲν γὰρ ὡς ἐν νυκτὶ καὶ σκότῳ διατελοῦσι καὶ ἀχλὺν ἔχουσι τὴν νοητὴν εἰς νοῦν καὶ καρδίαν οὔπω τε νοεῖν ἰσχύουσι τὸ ἐπ’ αὐτῷ μυστήριον παλαίειν τε καὶ μάχεσθαι καὶ νικᾶν ἔθος αὐτῷ· τοῖς γε μὴν ἐν φωτὶ γεγονόσι καὶ ὡς ἐν ὄρθρῳ τῷ νοητῷ καὶ νενοηκόσιν εὖ μάλα τὸ μυστήριον οὐκέτι παλαίειν ἀξιοῖ, διανέμει δὲ μᾶλλον εὐλογίας πνευματικάς. οὐκοῦν κἂν ὀψὲ καὶ μόλις εἰ γένοιο καὶ αὐτὸς μεθ’ ἡμῶν ἐν φωτὶ καὶ οἷον ἐν ὄρθρῳ, πεπαύσεταί σοι μαχόμενος ὁ πάντας νικῶν. θέα δὲ ὅπως ἀνθρώπου παλαίοντος ὁ θεσπέσιος Ἰακὼβ ἑωρακέναι φησὶ τὸν θεὸν πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον, προστέθεικε δὲ τὸ γράμμα τὸ ἱερὸν ὅτι “Ἀνέτειλεν αὐτῷ ὁ ἥλιος, ἡνίκα παρῆλθε τὸ εἶδος τοῦ θεοῦ.” ἀνθ’ ὅτου δὴ οὖν ἐπερυθριᾷς τοῖς τῆς κενώσεως μέτροις, καίτοι τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον σαρκωθῆναί τε καὶ ἐνανθρωπῆσαι παντὸς οἶμαι λέγοντος τοῦ καὶ ὀρθὴν ἔχοντος πίστιν καὶ βασανίζοντος ἀκριβῶς τῆς θεοπνεύστου γραφῆς τὸν σκοπόν; ὁ τοίνυν ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιος καθὸ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, καὶ αὐτῷ δὲ τῷ πατρὶ καθὰ μεμένηκε καὶ <ἐν> ἀνθρωπότητι θεός, ἀπεστάλη κηρύσσειν “αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν ἰάσασθαί τε τοὺς συντετριμμένους τὴν καρδίαν, καλέσαι” δὲ καὶ “ἐνιαυτὸν κυρίου δεκτόν.” αὐτοῦ γὰρ μόνου καὶ οὐχ ἑτέρου τινὸς τὰ τοιάδε γέγονεν εἰς ἡμᾶς κατορθώματα καὶ πιστώσεταί τις τῶν ἁγίων προφητῶν, οὕτω λέγων· “Οὐ πρέσβυς, οὐκ ἄγγελος, ἀλλ’ αὐτὸς ὁ κύριος ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς,” ὁ καὶ ἐναργέστατα λέγων· “Διὰ τοῦτο γνώσεται ὁ λαός μου τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ· αὐτὸς ὁ λαλῶν πάρειμι.” καίτοι πῶς εἴπερ ἦν τις ἄνθρωπος ἁπλῶς ὁ ἀπεσταλμένος, αὐτὸς ἂν νοοῖτο καὶ τὸν πάλαι τοῖς ἀρχαιοτέροις κεχρησμῳδημένον λαλήσας νόμον; οὐ γάρτοι προὼν ὡς ἄνθρωπος ἄνθρωπος γεγενῆσθαι λέγοιτ’ ἄν, ἵνα μὴ τῆς εἰς τὸ εἶναι παρόδου πρεσβυτέραν ἔχων ὁρῷτο τὴν ὕπαρξιν· ἀλλ’ ὡς θεὸς προυπάρχων λελάληκε μὲν τὸν νόμον, παρεῖναι δέ φησι ξένως τε καὶ ἀσυνήθως, ὅτε γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος.

33. Now I must explain the subject matter of the mystery. With those who live in night and darkness, as it were, who have a spiritual mist over mind and heart, and who cannot yet understand the mystery in him, he customarily wrestles, fights, and overcomes. As for those who are now in light and spiritual dawn, so to speak, who have good understanding of the mystery, he does not wish to wrestle; instead he distributes spiritual blessings. So if you yourself would enter with us into the light and the dawn, so to speak, after a long time and with difficulty, he who conquers all will stop fighting with you. See how a human wrestled, but Jacob under inspiration said he had seen God face to face. Holy Scripture added, “The sun rose above him when he passed by Form of God.” So why do you blush at the limits of the emptiness when, it seems, everyone who both holds the true faith and precisely examines the aim of God-breathed scripture says that the Word of God the Father was incarnate and became human? Thus he who is of the same substance as us in that he became human, and of the same substance as the Father himself in that he remained God even in human nature, was sent to proclaim “release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to heal those crushed in heart,” and “to proclaim the favorable year of the Lord” [Is. 61:1-2]. The deeds he did for us belong to him alone, not to any other. One of the holy prophets will assure us, saying, “Not an ambassador, not an angel, but the Lord himself saved us” [Is. 63:9], He also transparently says to us, “Therefore my people will know my name in that day; I who speak am present” [Is. 52:6]. But if he who was sent were merely human, how could one think of him speaking the law, long ago given to the ancients? Because he did not exist beforehand as a human, one would say he became human, lest we regard him as existing before he came into being. But because he exists beforehand as God, he has indeed spoken the law and says he is present in a strange and uncustomary way when he has become human.

9. Sixth Argument – Nestorius Contorts God’s Actions Concerning Christ

“Ἀλλὰ ναί,” φησί, “τὰ πάντα πληροῖ θεὸς ὢν ὁ λόγος· πῶς οὖν ἄρα καὶ ἀπεστάλη; ποῦ γὰρ οὐκ ἦν ὁ πάντα πληρῶν;” τί δέ, εἰπέ μοι, τὴν θείαν καὶ ὁμοούσιον τριάδα συνεστάλθαι δώσομεν ἢ κατευρύνεσθαί τε τῶν ὅλων καὶ πάντα πληροῦν; εἶτα πῶς ὁ μέγας ἡμῖν Μωσῆς, ὅτε τὸν οὐρανομήκη πύργον ἀνεδείμαντο τινὲς τῶν ἀρχαιοτέρων, εἰσκεκόμικε λέγοντα τὸν θεὸν “Δεῦτε καὶ καταβάντες συγχέωμεν ἐκεῖ τὰς γλώσσας αὐτῶν”; ποίας ἐδεῖτο καταβάσεως ἡ οὐρανόν τε καὶ γῆν ἀναπιμπλᾶσα φύσις; γέγραπται δὲ καὶ περὶ τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος ὅτι “Πνεῦμα κυρίου πεπλήρωκε τὴν οἰκουμένην.” ψάλλει καί φησιν ὁ μακάριος Δαυὶδ περὶ τῶν ἐν γῇ κειμένων πρὸς τὸν ζωοποιεῖν ἰσχύοντα θεόν· “Ἐξαποστελεῖς τὸ πνεῦμά σου καὶ κτισθήσονται, καὶ ἀνακαινιεῖς τὸ πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς.” πῶς ἐξαποστέλλεται τὸ πάντα πληροῦν; μὴ τοίνυν ὡς σοφόν τι καὶ δυσανά<λυτον> προτιθεὶς τὸ πάντα πληροῦν ἰσχύοντα τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον ἀνέφικτον ἔχειν τὴν ἀποστολήν, παραλύειν ἐπείγου τὸ ἀληθὲς καὶ τὴν τοῦ μυστηρίου δύναμιν ἀνατρέπειν, ἐννόει δὲ μᾶλλον ὅτι λέγεται μὲν ἀνθρωπίνως τὰ περὶ θεοῦ, νοεῖται δὲ οὕτω […] πρὸς ἡμᾶς ὡς ἂν αὐτός τε εἰδείη καὶ δρᾶν ἔθος αὐτῷ.

34. “Indeed,” he says, “the Word, as God, fills all things. How then was he sent? Where was he who fills all things not present?” What, then? Will we grant that the Holy Trinity, of one substance, is restricted rather than spread over all and filling all things? Then how has great Moses, when some of the ancients were building the tower to reach heaven, introduced God as saying, “Come, let us go down there to confuse their languages”? [Gen. 11:7]. Why did the being who fills heaven and earth need to descend? It is also written of the Holy Spirit, “The Spirit of the Lord has filled the world.”⁵ Of those who lie in the earth blessed David sings to God, who can make alive, saying, “You will send forth your Spirit, and they will be created; you will renew the face of the earth” [Ps. 104:30]. How can he send forth one who fills all things? Therefore stop setting out the idea, as something clever and hard to analyze, that he who can fill all things, the Word of God the Father, cannot be sent. Stop hurrying to put an end to the truth and to overturn the power of the mystery. Consider rather that he speaks humanly of things concerning God. They are to be considered by us in this way, as he himself knows, and as he is accustomed to act.

Ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὡς βραχὺ καὶ ἀνθρώπινον καὶ τῆς τοῦ μονογενοῦς ἀξίας ἡττώμενον ἀμέτρως δέχεται τὴν χρίσιν, φέρε τὰ εἰκότα καὶ εἰς τοῦτο λέγωμεν, τὰς τοῦ σκανδάλου λύοντες ἀφορμάς. εἰ μὲν οὖν οὐ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, ἀποσειέσθω τὰ ἀνθρώπινα, παραιτείσθω τὴν οἰκονομίαν ὡς ἐν μείοσι τιθεῖσαν αὐτὸν καὶ τῆς ἀνωτάτω δόξης καὶ θεοπρεποῦς ὑπεροχῆς κατόπιν ἱεῖσαν, σμικρὰ γὰρ τῷ λόγῳ τὰ καθ’ ἡμᾶς· ἐπειδὴ δὲ σοφὸν ἀληθῶς τὸ μυστήριον καὶ οὐκ ἀπόβλητον αὐτῷ τὸ τῆς κενώσεως χρῆμα, τί τοῖς ὀρθῶς ἔχουσι ῥιψοκινδύνως ἐπιτιμᾷς καὶ τὸ ταῖς αὐτοῦ ψήφοις στεφανούμενον ὡς ἀκαλλὲς ἀποτρέπῃ; εἶδες χριόμενον ἀνθρωπίνως· ὅρα τὸν αὐτὸν καὶ χρίοντα θεικῶς. γέγραπται γὰρ ὅτι “Καὶ ἐμαρτύρησεν Ἰωάννης λέγων ὅτι τεθέαμαι τὸ πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον ὡσεὶ περιστερὰν καὶ μένον ἐπ’ αὐτὸν κἀγὼ οὐκ ᾔδειν αὐτόν, ἀλλ’ ὁ πέμψας με βαπτίζειν ἐν ὕδατι, ἐκεῖνός μοι εἶπεν· ἐφ’ ὃν ἂν ἴδῃς τὸ πνεῦμα καταβαῖνον καὶ μένον ἐπ’ αὐτόν, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ βαπτίζων ἐν τῷ πνεύματι τῷ ἁγίῳ. καὶ ἑώρακα καὶ μεμαρτύρηκα ὅτι οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ.” ἆρα γὰρ ἀνθρωπότητος ἔργον εἶναι φὴς τὸ βαπτίζειν δύνασθαι τοὺς πιστεύοντας ἐν ἁγίῳ πνεύματι; καίτοι πῶς οὐκ εὔηθες τὸ οὕτως ἔχειν οἴεσθαι ταυτί; πῶς γὰρ τὸ μεῖον τὴν τοῦ προὔχοντος ἀσυγκρίτως χαριεῖται μέθεξιν; ἄθρει δὲ ὅτι αὐτὸς ἐκεῖνος ἐφ’ ὃν καταπτῆναι τὸ πνεῦμα λέγεται μεῖναί τε ἐπ’ αὐτόν, ἐν ἁγίῳ βαπτίζει πνεύματι, καταχρίων δὲ δηλονότι τοὺς πιστεύοντας ὡς θεὸς τῷ ἰδίῳ πνεύματι. καὶ γοῦν ἀνεβίω μὲν ἐκ νεκρῶν, ἐνεφύσησε δὲ τοῖς μαθηταῖς, λέγων· “Λάβετε πνεῦμα ἅγιον·” οἳ δὲ λαβόντες φασίν· “Ἡμεῖς δὲ οὐ τὸ πνεῦμα τοῦ κόσμου ἐλάβομεν, ἀλλὰ τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἐκ τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα εἰδῶμεν τὰ ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ χαρισθέντα ἡμῖν.” γράφει δὲ καὶ ὁ σοφώτατος Παῦλος· “Οἱ δὲ ἐν σαρκὶ ὄντες θεῷ ἀρέσαι οὐ δύνανται. ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ ἐστὲ ἐν σαρκί, ἀλλ’ ἐν πνεύματι, εἴπερ πνεῦμα θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν. εἰ δέ τις πνεῦμα Χριστοῦ οὐκ ἔχει, οὗτος οὔκ ἐστιν αὐτοῦ.” καὶ μὴν καὶ ἑτέρωθι· “Ὅσοι γὰρ πνεύματι θεοῦ ἄγονται, οὗτοί εἰσιν υἱοὶ θεοῦ.” οὐκοῦν ὅταν ἴδῃς αὐτὸν τῷ ἰδίῳ χριόμενον πνεύματι, διαμέμνησο τῆς μετὰ σαρκὸς οἰκονομίας καὶ καταλογίζου τὸ ἀνθρώπινον· ὅταν ἴδῃς τὸ πνεῦμα διδόντα, θαύμαζε μετὰ τούτου τὸν καὶ ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι θεόν.

35. But since he takes anointing as something trifling, human, and infinitely below the rank of the Only-Begotten, let us also here say what is reasonable, removing causes of offense. If he has not indeed become human, let him throw what is human from himself and refuse the incarnation as putting him in a lesser position and lowering him from supreme glory and truly divine excellence. For what is ours is too trivial for the Word. But since the mystery is truly wise, and he does not reject the matter of emptying, why do you recklessly find fault with things that are correct and turn away as unseemly what is crowned with his approval? You saw him anointed as a human. See him also anointing as God! For it is written, “John testified, ‘I saw the Spirit descend like a dove and remain on him. I did not recognize him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, “The one on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain on him is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.” And I have seen and have testified that he is the Son of God’” [John 1:32–34]. Do you say it is a work of the human nature to baptize those who believe with the Holy Spirit? How is it not folly to think this way? How would what is lesser give participation in what is immeasurably superior? Observe that this very person on whom it says the Spirit soars down and remains on him baptizes with the Holy Spirit, clearly anointing those who believe with his own Spirit as God. He indeed rose from the dead and breathed on his disciples, saying, “Receive the Holy Spirit” [John 20:22]. Those who received said, “We did not receive the spirit of the world, but the Spirit of God, so that we may know what God has freely given us” [1 Cor. 2:12]. Wise Paul also writes, “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh; instead, you are in the Spirit—if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to him” [Rom 8:8–9]. Elsewhere he writes, “Those who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God” [Rom 8:14]. Therefore, when you see him anointed with his own Spirit, keep the fleshly incarnation in mind and take the human nature into account. When you see him give the Spirit, then marvel at God in human nature.

10. Seventh Argument – Nestorius Maintains that God Cannot Be High Priest

ἀλλ’ οὐδὲν τῶν τοιούτων ὑπολογιζόμενος ὁ δύσερις οὑτοσὶ πάλιν ὧδέ φησιν “Οὗτος ὁ πιστὸς τῷ θεῷ γεγενημένος ἀρχιερεύς (ἐγένετο γάρ, οὐκ ἀιδίως ἦν)· οὗτος ὁ κατὰ μικρὸν εἰς ἀρχιερέως, αἱρετικέ, προκόψας ἀξίωμα. ἄκουε σαφεστέρας σοι διαβοώσης φωνῆς· ‘Ὃς ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις,’ φησί, ‘τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ δεήσεις τε καὶ ἱκετηρίας πρὸς τὸν δυνάμενον σῴζειν αὐτὸν ἐκ θανάτου μετὰ κραυγῆς ἰσχυρᾶς καὶ δακρύων προσενέγκας καὶ εἰσακουσθεὶς ἀπὸ τῆς εὐλαβείας, καίπερ ὢν υἱός, ἔμαθεν ἀφ’ ὧν ἔπαθε, τὴν ὑπακοὴν καὶ τελειωθεὶς ἐγένετο τοῖς ὑπακούουσιν αὐτῷ αἴτιος σωτηρίας ἀκαταλύτου.’ τελειοῦται δὲ τὸ κατὰ μικρὸν προκόπτον, αἱρετικέ, περὶ οὗ καὶ Ἰωάννης ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις βοᾷ· ‘Ἰησοῦς προέκοπτεν ἡλικίᾳ καὶ σοφίᾳ καὶ χάριτι,’ οἷς σύμφωνα καὶ Παῦλος φθεγγόμενος ‘Τελειωθείς,’ φησίν, ‘ἐγένετο τοῖς ὑπακούουσιν αὐτῷ πᾶσιν αἴτιος σωτηρίας αἰωνίου, προσαγορευθεὶς ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀρχιερεὺς κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδέκ.’ οὗτος ὁ Μωσεῖ κατὰ τὸν τῆς στρατηγίας συγκρινόμενος τύπον, ὁ σπέρμα τοῦ Ἁβραὰμ κεκλημένος, ὁ κατὰ πάντα τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς παραπλήσιος, ὁ χρόνῳ γενόμενος ἀρχιερεύς, ὁ διὰ παθημάτων τελειωθείς, ὁ ‘ἐν ᾧ πέπονθεν αὐτὸς πειρασθείς, δυνάμενος τοῖς πειραζομένοις βοηθῆσαι,’ ὁ κατὰ τὴν τάξιν Μελχισεδὲκ ἀρχιερεὺς κεκλημένος. τί οὖν ἀνθερμηνεύεις τῷ Παύλῳ, τὸν ἀπαθῆ θεὸν λόγον ἐπιγείῳ καταμιγνὺς σώματι καὶ παθητὸν ἀρχιερέα ποιῶν;”	36. But this contentious man does not take such things into account and says, “This is he who became God’s faithful high priest (for he became high priest; he was not high priest from eternity). This, heretic, is he who little by little advanced to the dignity of the high priesthood. Hear a clearer voice calling out to you: ‘In the days of his flesh, he offered up prayers and supplications to him who was able to save him from death with a mighty cry and tears. He was heard because of his piety, and even though he was Son, he learned obedience by the things he suffered. Having reached perfection, he became the cause of everlasting salvation for those who obey him’ [Heb. 5:7–9]. Something which advances little by little reaches perfection, heretic. Concerning him John also cries out in the Gospels, ‘Jesus was advancing in stature, wisdom, and favor’ [Luke 2:52]. In agreement with these things, Paul also says, ‘Having reached perfection, he became the cause of everlasting salvation for all those who obey him, designated by God as high priest in the order of Melchizedek’ [Heb. 5:9–10]. He is the one who is compared to Moses in regard to military command, who is called seed of Abraham, who is like his brothers in all things, who became high priest in time, who reached perfection through sufferings, who ‘can help those who are tempted because he himself suffered when tempted’ [Heb. 2:18], who is called a high priest in the order of Melchizedek. So why do you give an interpretation contrary to Paul, mingling God the Word, not capable of suffering, with the earthly body, making him a high priest subject to suffering?”
Ὡς ἀκμαιοτάτην, ὦ τᾶν, καὶ μάλα νεανικὴν τῶν τῆς εὐσεβείας δογμάτων ἐποιήσω τὴν καταδρομήν. καὶ ὁ μὲν θεσπέσιος Βαροὺχ τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον, ἐνηνθρωπηκότα δὲ ἤδη καὶ ἐν ὁμοιώσει τῇ καθ’ ἡμᾶς πεφηνότα καταδεικνὺς “οὗτος,” φησίν, “ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν· οὐ λογισθήσεται ἕτερος πρὸς αὐτόν. ἐξεῦρε πᾶσαν ὁδὸν ἐπιστήμης καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτὴν Ἰακὼβ τῷ παιδὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ Ἰσραὴλ τῷ ἠγαπημένῳ ὑπ’ αὐτοῦ καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὤφθη καὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις συνανεστράφη.” σὺ δὲ τὸ οὗτος καὶ μάλα πλειστάκις ἀναφωνῶν μόνον οὐχὶ καὶ χεῖρα προτείνων τίνα τοῖς πεπιστευκόσι καθίστης ἐναργῆ καὶ μὴν καὶ ὁρᾶσθαι ποιεῖς καὶ δὴ καὶ προκόψαι φὴς εἰς ἀρχιερέα κατὰ βραχύ; ἀλλ’ οἶμαί που πάντως ἐκεῖνον ὃν καὶ ἔναγχος παραδειγματίζων ἔφασκες “Οὐκοῦν ὁ παθὼν ἀρχιερεὺς ἐλεήμων, οὐχ ὁ ζωοποιὸς τοῦ πεπονθότος θεός. σπέρμα Ἁβραὰμ ὁ χθὲς καὶ σήμερον κατὰ τὴν τοῦ Παύλου φωνήν, οὐχ ὁ λέγων· ‘Πρὶν Ἁβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί·’ ὅμοιος τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς κατὰ πάντα ὁ ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναλαβὼν ἀδελφότητα, οὐχ ὁ λέγων· ‘Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα.’” Καὶ ὅτι μὲν τοῦ πεπονθότος θεὸν τὸν ζωοποιὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον ὑπάρχειν διαβεβαιούμενος τοῖς τῆς ἀφύκτου δυσφημίας ἐγκλήμασι σεαυτὸν ἐνιεὶς ἠδίκηκας οὐ μετρίως, ἀποχρῶν ἡμῖν διέδειξε λόγος· θαυμάζω δὲ ὅτι τῶν ἰδίων αὐτὸς ἀμνημονήσας φωνῶν κατὰ βραχὺ προελθεῖν εἰς ἀρχιερέως ἀξίωμα φάναι τε ὁμοῦ καὶ μὴν καὶ φρονεῖν ἀξιοῖς, ὃν καὶ θεὸν εἶναι φὴς παντοκράτορα. προκειμένης γάρ σοι τῆς Ἑβραίοις γραφείσης ἐπιστολῆς ἁλίσκῃ λέγων “Ἀλλ’ οὗτος ὁ κατὰ σάρκα τοῦ Ἰσραὴλ συγγενής, ὁ κατὰ τὸ φαινόμενον ἄνθρωπος, ὁ κατὰ τὴν Παύλου φωνὴν ἐκ σπέρματος γεγεννημένος Δαυὶδ παντοκράτωρ τῇ συναφείᾳ θεός.” Πῶς ἔτι προέκοψε κατὰ τὴν <σὴν> εἰκαιομυθίαν εἰς ἀρχιερέως ἀξίωμα, καίτοι θεὸς παντοκράτωρ καὶ διὰ τῆς σῆς φωνῆς μαρτυρούμενος;	37. You, sir, have made a vigorous, vehement attack against pious doctrine. Baruch points out the already incarnate Word of God, seen in likeness to us, saying under inspiration, “This is our God; no other can be compared to him. He discovered every way of knowledge and gave it to Jacob, his servant, and to Israel, his beloved. Then he appeared on earth and lived among people.”⁶ But you, shouting this quite often, all but holding out your hand—whom do you bring before believers in clear view to make them observe him, saying he advanced little by little to high priesthood? I think it is surely he whom you just now made an example, saying, “Therefore he who suffered is merciful high priest, not the life-giving God of him who suffered. The seed of Abraham is he who is yesterday and today [Heb. 13:8], as Paul says, not he who says, ‘Before Abraham was, I am’ [John 8:58]. He who assumed brotherhood of human soul and flesh is like his brothers in all things, not he who says, ‘He who has seen me has seen the Father’” [John 14:9]. We clearly have sufficient reason to conclude that you plunge yourself into inescapable accusations of blasphemy by maintaining that the life-giving Word of God is God of the one who suffered. Thus you have done more than a little harm. But I am amazed that you yourself, unaware of your own words, consider it right both to say and think that he advanced little by little to the rank of the high priest—he whom you say is also God Almighty. For with the epistle to the Hebrews before you, you are convicted when you say, “Yet this man who, according to the flesh, is a kinsman to Israel, who, according to appearance, is human, who, according to the voice of Paul, was born of the seed of David, is God Almighty by connection.” How could he still advance to the rank of high priest, according to your foolish talk, even though you testified that he is God Almighty?
κἂν τὴν ἀκλεᾶ καὶ τὴν οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅπως ἐξευρημένην αὐτῷ σοι καὶ μόνῳ συνάφειαν ὀνομάζῃς, παρήσω νυνί, πλὴν ἐρήσομαι κατὰ ῥοῦν ἰέναι τὸν αὐτῷ πρέποντά τε καὶ προκείμενον τῷ λόγῳ σκοπὸν ἐφιείς· ἆρ’ οὐχὶ τὸ προκόπτον εἰς ἱερωσύνην καὶ δόξαν τὴν εἰς τὰ ἀμείνω καὶ προὔχοντα ποιεῖται βάδισιν ἢ γοῦν ἐπίδοσιν; καίτοι πῶς οὐχ ἁπαστισοῦν ἐπιψηφιεῖται τῷ λόγῳ τὸ ἀληθές; μεῖζον οὖν ἄρα τοῦ εἶναι θεὸν παντοκράτορα τῆς ἱερωσύνης τὸ χρῆμα. εἶτα πῶς ὁ μὲν ἱερᾶσθαι λαχὼν λειτουργεῖ καὶ παρέστηκεν ὡς λάτρις θεῷ καὶ ὡς οἰκέτης δεσπότῃ, προσκομίζων τὰ νενομισμένα καὶ θυσίας ἀνατιθείς, ὁ δὲ ὡς δόξῃ τῇ ὑπερτάτῃ κατεστεμμένος προσδέχεται τὰς θυσίας καὶ τιμᾶται θεραπευόμενος;	38. Although you speak the ignominious word, ‘connection,’ which all by yourself you discovered (I know not how), I will disregard it for now. Instead, to allow the argument to go with the current on a course that is fitting and proper for it, I ask: Does not that which advances to priesthood and glory make progress or advancement towards what is better and more excellent? Ηow could anyone at all fail to accept the truth of this? Then the high priesthood would be greater than it is to be God Almighty. How then can he who obtained priesthood attend to and stand by God as a servant, like a slave by his master, bringing the customary gifts and offering sacrifices, and how can he who is crowned with supreme glory receive sacrifices and be honored by service?
ἀλλ’ ἐκεῖνο, οἶμαι, φὴς ὅτι θεὸς παντοκράτωρ ὑπάρχων ὁ αὐτὸς γέγονεν ἀρχιερεύς. κεκένωται δὴ οὖν καὶ τεταπείνωκεν ἑαυτὸν καθεὶς ἐν μείοσι. πῶς οὖν ἔτι προέκοψεν εἰς ἀξίωμα γεγονὼς ἱερεύς; διαμέμνησο δὴ πάλιν τῶν σαυτοῦ λόγων· ἔφης γὰρ οὕτως ἐν τοῖς ἀνωτέρω βραχύ “Εἰ δὲ ἀρχιερεὺς ἡ θεότης, τίς ὁ τῇ παρὰ τῆς ἀρχιερωσύνης λειτουργίαι θεραπευόμενος; εἰ θεὸς ὁ προσφέρων, οὐδεὶς ᾧ προσφέρεται. τί γὰρ θεότητος ἄξιον, ἵν’ ὡς ἐλάττων προσφέρῃ τῷ μείζονι;” Στῆθι καὶ νῦν γοῦν ἐν ταῖς σεαυτοῦ φωναῖς· ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν οὐχ οἷός τε ἔσῃ δρᾶν, περιφέρῃ δὲ ὥσπερ ἀνέμῳ παντὶ καὶ διαρριπτούμενος οὐκ αἰσθάνῃ, ποτὲ μὲν ἐξ ἐκείνων εἰς ταῦτα, ποτὲ δὲ πάλιν ἐκ τούτων εἰς ἐκεῖνα μεταπηδῶν, δέδιας δὲ κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον τὸ διὰ τῆς τοῦ Παύλου φωνῆς· “Εἰ γὰρ ἃ κατέλυσα, ταῦτα πάλιν οἰκοδομήσω, παραβάτην ἐμαυτὸν συνιστάνω.”	39. But I suppose you say that he is God Almighty, and the same one has become high priest. He has been emptied and has humbled himself by descending into the inferior. How, then, did he still advance in rank when he became high priest? Remember your own words, for you said a little earlier, “If the deity is high priest, whom does the high priest’s ministry serve? If God offers sacrifice, there is no one to whom the sacrifice is offered. For what is there that deserves God’s offering, so that as the lesser God should offer to the greater?” Now, stand by your own words. But you cannot, for you are carried around, as if by every wind. You do not perceive that you are being driven about, sometimes jumping from this idea to that one, other times from that one to this one. You are in no way alarmed at what Paul says: “If I rebuild what I destroyed, I show that I am a transgressor” [Gal. 2:18].
ἐρεῖς δὲ ἴσως ἐκεῖνο· “Χριστὸν ἕνα καὶ υἱὸν καὶ κύριον διισχυριζόμενος εἶναι πανταχοῦ τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον μετὰ τῆς ἰδίας σαρκός, πῶς δὴ φὴς εἰς ἀρχιερέα τεθεῖσθαι καὶ ἀπόστολον; εἶτα τοῦτο λέγων οὐχ ὑβριεῖς τῆς θείας αὐτοῦ δόξης τὸ ὑπερφερὲς ἀξίωμα;”	40. Perhaps you will say, “How can you say that he has been set up as high priest and apostle if you affirm that the Word of God the Father is altogether one Christ, Son, and Lord, with his own flesh? Do you not insult the supreme dignity of his divine glory in saying that?”
ὅτι, ὦ βέλτιστε, φαίην ἄν, γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος ὁ μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος καὶ τοῖς τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος μέτροις οὐκ ἀνάρμοστον ἂν εἴη τὸ χρῆμα τῆς ἱερωσύνης καὶ μὴν καὶ τὸ ἀπεστάλθαι λέγειν αὐτόν. κατεφρόνησε γὰρ αἰσχύνης, ὡς ὁ θεσπέσιος γράφει Παῦλος, καὶ τὰ ἔτι μείω τε καὶ ἀπηχέστερα δι’ ἡμᾶς ὑπομείνας. δέδωκε γὰρ τὸν νῶτον εἰς μάστιγας, τὸ δὲ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ οὐκ ἀπεστράφη ἀπὸ αἰσχύνης ἐμπτυσμάτων καὶ τῆς Ἰουδαίων παροινίας τληπαθῶς ἠνέσχετο. ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἀξιοῖς ἱερέα λέγειν ὡς ὑπάρχοντα θεόν; δέχου τῆς οἰκονομίας τοὺς λόγους, διαλογίζου τὴν κένωσιν, τὴν εἰς τὴν τοῦ δούλου μορφὴν καταφοίτησιν. οὐ δὴ προκόψαι φαμὲν καὶ εἰς ἀξίωμα δραμεῖν τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον, εἰ κεχρημάτικεν ἡμῶν ἀρχιερεύς, καθικέσθαι δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ διὰ τούτου πρὸς κένωσιν. ἐπεὶ πῶς κεκένωται καὶ τεταπεινῶσθαι λέγεται, καίτοι τὸ ἄτρεπτον ἔχων καὶ ὑπάρχων ἐν μορφῇ καὶ ἰσότητι κατὰ πᾶν ὁτιοῦν πρὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ γεννήτορα, πῶς δὲ καὶ προέκοψε κατὰ βραχύ, καὶ τοῦτο, καθὰ φὴς αὐτός, εἰς τὸ τῆς ἀρχιερωσύνης ἀξίωμα; ποίαν εἰς τοῦτο δεχόμενος τὴν ἐπίδοσιν; εἰ μὲν οὖν τὴν σώματος, ἐρήσομαι πάλιν· ἆρα γὰρ ἡ σώματος αὔξησις πρὸς τὴν τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἀνακομίζει δόξαν; οὐκοῦν ἔστω τὸ χρῆμα κοινὸν καὶ ὁ σὸς οὑτοσὶ κατὰ παντὸς ἴτω λόγος τοῦ προκόπτοντος σωματικῶς· ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐχ ἅπασι τοῖς εἰς αὔξησιν τὴν σωματικὴν ἀναφοιτᾶν εἰωθόσι τὸ ἱερᾶσθαι πρέπει. πῶς οὖν ἡμῖν εἰς ἀπόδειξιν ὧν ἔφης, παρατιθεὶς οὐκ ἐρυθριᾷς τὸ διὰ φωνῆς εἰρημένον τοῦ θεσπεσίου Λουκᾶ· “Ἰησοῦς δὲ προέκοπτεν ἡλικίᾳ καὶ σοφίᾳ καὶ χάριτι”;	41. I would say, dear friend, that the only-begotten Word of God became human; in view of the human nature, his priesthood is not incongruous, nor is saying he has been sent. For he disregarded the shame, as Paul writes under inspiration, and endured yet lower, more unpleasant things for our sake. He gave his back to scourges, did not turn his face away from shameful spit, and patiently bore the insults of the Jews. But you think it wrong to call him priest because he is God? Listen to the words regarding the incarnation; consider the emptying, his descent to servant’s form. We do not say the Word of God advanced and moved towards dignity if he has been called our high priest; rather, we say he descended to emptiness also by being called our high priest. For how has he been emptied, and how can it say he humbled himself, when he is immutable and is equal in form with his Father in everything? And how did he advance little by little, even, as you yourself say, to the rank of high priest? What sort of increase did he receive to this end? If it was bodily growth, I ask again: Does bodily growth raise someone to the glory of priesthood? Then let the priesthood be common to all, and let this reasoning of yours oppose everyone who grows in body. But in fact the priesthood does not properly belong to all who usually attain bodily growth. So how are you not ashamed to set up for us what was spoken by divine Luke, “Jesus was advancing in stature, wisdom, and favor” [Luke 2:52], as proof of what you said?
ἀλλ’ εἰς σοφίαν φὴς γενέσθαι τὴν ἐπίδοσιν· καίτοι πῶς τοῦτο οὐκ ἀμαθές; πεπιστεύκαμεν γὰρ ἐκ νηδύος αὐτῆς καὶ μήτρας τῆς παρθενικῆς θεὸν ὄντα τὸν Ἐμμανουὴλ ἄνθρωπον προελθεῖν, πλήρη που πάντως σοφίας καὶ χάριτος τῆς ἐνούσης αὐτῷ φυσικῶς. ποίαν οὖν <ἂν> ἐπιδέξαιτο τὴν ἐπίδοσιν ὁ “ἐν ᾧ πάντες εἰσὶν οἱ θησαυροὶ τῆς σοφίας,” ὁ τῆς ἄνωθεν χάριτος συνδοτὴρ τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί; πῶς οὖν ἄρα προκόπτειν εἴρηται; συμμετροῦντος, ὥς γε οἶμαι, τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου τῇ τοῦ ἰδίου σώματος αὔξῃ τε καὶ ἡλικίᾳ τῶν ἐνόντων αὐτῷ θεοπρεπεστάτων ἀγαθῶν τὴν ἔκφανσιν. ἐννοῶμεν γὰρ ὅτι καίτοι καθ’ ἡμᾶς γεγονὼς ἄνθρωπος, λανθάνειν ἐσπούδαζεν ἐν ἀρχαῖς καὶ οἷον ἀψοφητὶ καὶ σεσιγημένως τὴν τοῦ μυστηρίου δύναμιν κατὰ βραχὺ διοικούμενος. καὶ πρός γε τοῦτο ἡμᾶς αὐτὸς ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατὴρ πιστώσεται λέγων· “Ἰακὼβ ὁ παῖς μου, ἀντιλήψομαι αὐτοῦ· Ἰσραὴλ ὁ ἐκλεκτός μου, προσεδέξατο αὐτὸν ἡ ψυχή μου. ἔδωκα τὸ πνεῦμά μου ἐπ’ αὐτόν, κρίσιν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν ἐξοίσει. οὐ κεκράξεται οὐδὲ ἀνήσει οὐδὲ ἀκουσθήσεται ἡ φωνὴ αὐτοῦ ἔξω. κάλαμον συντεθλασμένον οὐ συντρίψει καὶ λίνον τυφόμενον οὐ σβέσει.” ἐπετίμα δέ που καὶ αὐτοῖς τοῖς ἁγίοις ἀποστόλοις, “ἵνα μὴ φανερὸν αὐτὸν ποιῶσιν.” οὐκοῦν ἐδείχθη ἂν ἅπασιν ἄηθές τι χρῆμα καὶ ξένον καὶ περιεργίας ἄξιον, εἰ βρέφος ὢν ἔτι θεοπρεπῆ τῆς σοφίας ἐποιεῖτο τὴν ἔνδειξιν· κατὰ βραχὺ δὲ καὶ ἀναλόγως τῇ τοῦ σώματος ἡλικίᾳ κατευρύνων αὐτὴν ἐμφανῆ τε ἅπασι καθιστάς, προκόπτειν ἂν λέγοιτο καὶ μάλα εἰκότως. πῶς οὖν ἄρα κατὰ μικρὸν προέκοψεν εἰς ἱερωσύνην; κατὰ ἀρετήν, εἰπέ μοι, τελειούμενος; εἶτα πῶς ἂν ἢ πόθεν ἐνδοιάσειέ τις ὅτι τὸ ἡμαρτηκὸς τοῦ τελείως ἔχοντος κατὰ ἀρετὴν ὑπὸ μῶμον ἔσται καὶ οὐκ εἰς ἅπαν τεθαυμασμένον, μᾶλλον δὲ τάχα που καὶ ὑπὸ γραφὴν ἁμαρτίας; ἀλλὰ μὴν ἀληθὲς ὡς “οὐ πεποίηκεν ἁμαρτίαν οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ,” καθὰ γέγραπται. παντέλειος οὖν ὁ τοιόσδε πρὸς πᾶν ὁτιοῦν καὶ κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον ἂν ἔχοι τὸ ἐνδεὲς τοῦ ἀρτίως ἔχοντος εἰς κατόρθωσιν ἀρετῆς. πότε δὲ ἦν οὐ τέλειος εἰς τὸ ἀγαθὸν ὁ καὶ ἐν μήτρᾳ θεός; περὶ οὗ καὶ ὁ προφήτης φησὶν Ἡσαίας· “Βούτυρον καὶ μέλι φάγεται· πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι αὐτὸν ἢ προελέσθαι πονηρά, ἐκλέξεται τὸ ἀγαθόν· διότι πρὶν ἢ γνῶναι τὸ παιδίον ἀγαθὸν ἢ κακόν, ἀπειθεῖ πονηρίᾳ τοῦ ἐκλέξασθαι τὸ ἀγαθόν.” ποῦ τοίνυν ἂν ἔχοις ἐπιδεῖξαι Χριστοῦ τὸ ἀτελὲς ἔτι πρὸς τὸ ἀγαθόν; ἢ ποίας ἂν δέοιτο προκοπῆς ὁ οὕτως ἀρτίως ἔχων, ὡς ἁπάσῃ μὲν ἀπειθεῖν πονηρίᾳ, προτάττειν δὲ αὐτῆς καὶ μὴν καὶ μόνον αἱρεῖσθαι τὸ ἀγαθόν;	42. You say the increase was to wisdom, but how is this explanation not ignorant? We believe that Emmanuel, although he is God, came forth from the very womb of the virgin as a human, by all means full of the wisdom and grace that are inherent in his nature. So what sort of increase could he receive—he “in whom are all the treasures of wisdom” [Col. 2:3], who is, with God the Father, giver of grace from above? How, then, can he advance? I think it is because God the Word includes the exhibition of his inherent good qualities proper to God with the growth and stature of his own body. For we may consider that although he became human like us, he was eager to pass unseen at first, administering the power of the mystery little by little, without sound and in silence, as it were. God the Father himself assures us of this, saying, “Jacob is my servant; I will defend him. Israel is my chosen one; my soul received him. I put my Spirit on him; he will deliver judgment to the nations. He will not cry out nor lift up his voice, nor will his voice be heard outside. A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not extinguish” [Is. 42:1–3]. Somewhere he warned even the holy apostles themselves “not to make him visible” [Matt. 12:16]. So he would have shown to everyone something strange, unusual, and deserving curiosity if he had demonstrated his truly divine wisdom while still a baby. But because little by little, in proportion to his bodily stature, he extended it and made it clear to all, we can say he advanced, with good reason. So how did he advance little by little to the priesthood? Tell me, was it by reaching perfection in virtue? Then how can anyone doubt that missing the mark of perfection in virtue will incur blame, will not at all be admirable, and will instead quickly incur the charge of sin? But it is rather true that “he did not commit sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth” [1 Pet. 2:23], as it is written. Such a person is completely perfect in every way; in no way would he lack complete achievement of virtue. When was he not perfectly good—he who was God even in the womb? Of him the prophet Isaiah says, “He will eat butter and honey; before he either has knowledge or prefers evil, he will choose what is good, because before the child knows good or evil, he will reject evil to choose what is good” [Is. 7:15–16]. Therefore, how could you show that Christ is still imperfect with regard to goodness? Or what sort of advance could he need—he who is so perfect that he rejects all evil, prefers good to evil, and indeed only chooses what is good?
ἀλλ’ οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅπως ὁ διαβεβαιούμενός τε καὶ λέγων “Οὗτος ὁ κατὰ μικρὸν προκόψας εἰς ἀρχιερέως ἀξίωμα” καὶ παρενεγκὼν εἰς ἀπόδειξιν τῶν ἑαυτοῦ λόγων τὸ “Ἰησοῦς δὲ προέκοπτεν ἡλικίᾳ καὶ σοφίᾳ καὶ χάριτι,” μόνον οὐχὶ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ λόγων καθορίζων τὸ ἀτερπὲς καὶ ὧν εὖ ἔχειν ὑπείληφεν, εἰς λήθην ὑπενεχθείς, τὸν τῆς τελειώσεως τρόπον ἑτέρως ἡμῖν πεπρᾶχθαι διισχυρίζεται λέγων “Οὗτος ὁ χρόνῳ γεγενημένος ἀρχιερεύς, ὁ διὰ παθημάτων τελειωθείς.” Ἆρ’ οὐκ ἐναργὴς ἀποπληξία τοῦτό γε, μᾶλλον δὲ οὐχ ἁπάσης ῥᾳδιουργίας ἔλεγχος; τετελείωται μὲν γὰρ διὰ παθημάτων ὁ κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς ὁ Χριστός, ὁ δέ, καίτοι τοῦ τετελειῶσθαι τὸν τρόπον οὐκ ἠγνοηκώς, τὸν τῶν ἁπλουστέρων ἀποκομίζει νοῦν εἰς ἐκτόπους τινὰς ἐννοιῶν περιαγωγὰς καὶ προκόψαι φησὶν εἰς ἀρχιερέα καὶ τετελειῶσθαι πρὸς τοῦτο τόν, ὅτι τοῦτο γέγονε, κεκενῶσθαι λεγόμενον. ὥσπερ δὲ διαρκῶς ἀποφήνας ὅτι μηδὲ γέγονε σὰρξ ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος μήτε μὴν προῆλθεν ἄνθρωπος ἐκ γυναικός, τοῖς τὰ τοιάδε φρονεῖν ᾑρημένοις ἐπιτιμᾷ καί φησι “Τί οὖν ἀνθερμηνεύεις τῷ Παύλῳ, τὸν ἀπαθῆ θεὸν λόγον ἐπιγείῳ καταμιγνὺς σώματι καὶ παθητὸν ἀρχιερέα ποιῶν;” Οὐκοῦν ἄκουε καὶ πρὸς ἡμῶν, οἷς δὴ καὶ μᾶλλον ἡ ἀλήθεια φίλη· “Τί παρερμηνεύεις τὸν Παῦλον, μᾶλλον δὲ ἅπασαν συκοφαντεῖς τὴν θεόπνευστον γραφήν, ὑπεξάγων τῆς μετὰ σαρκὸς οἰκονομίας τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἡμῖν συναφείᾳ ψιλῇ τιμώμενον ἐφιστᾷς ἱερέα, καίτοι τὸν αὐτὸν ἀκούων ἀρχιερέα τε ὁμοῦ καὶ σύνθρονον ὄντα τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί, καθάπερ ἤδη φθάσαντες εἴπομεν;” ἔφη γὰρ ὁ Παῦλος ὅτι “Τοιοῦτον ἔχομεν ἀρχιερέα, ὃς ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ θρόνου τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς.”	43. Yet I know not how he confidently says, “This is the one who advanced little by little to the rank of high priest,” and cited as proof of his words, “Jesus was advancing in stature, wisdom, and favor” [Luke 2:52], thus all but admitting the unpleasantness of his words and of the things he assumed were true. He has been subjected to forgetfulness and affirms to us that the perfect character was achieved differently, saying, “He is the one who became high priest in time, who reached perfection through sufferings.” Is this not clear madness; rather, is it not proof of utter deceit? For our Lord Jesus Christ reached perfection through sufferings, but this one—well aware of the mode of reaching perfection—nevertheless carries away simple minds to strange, distorted ideas and says that he advanced to high priesthood and thus reached perfection, and we say he has been emptied because this took place. As if he had quite clearly shown that the Word of God has not become flesh nor come from woman as a human, he rebukes those who have chosen to hold such thoughts and says, “So why do you give an interpretation contrary to Paul, mingling God the Word, not capable of suffering, with the earthly body, making him a high priest subject to suffering?” Then hear also from us, to whom the truth is dearer, “Why do you misinterpret Paul, or rather criticize all God-inspired scripture, carry the Word of God away from the incarnation with flesh, and put a mere human honored with connection over us as priest, though you hear that he is both high priest and enthroned with God the Father, as we have already said?” For Paul said, “We have such a high priest, who sat on the right hand of the throne of majesty in heaven” [Heb. 8:1].
ὅτι μὲν γὰρ ἀπαθὴς ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος, παντί που δῆλον ἂν εἴη δήπουθεν· ὅτι δὲ πέπονθεν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν σαρκί, κατασφραγιεῖ πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἡ τῶν θεηγόρων φωνή. εἰ δὲ ἀποφέρεις αὐτὸς ἐπιγείου σώματος τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον, οἰχήσεταί σοι τὸ σύμπαν εἰς τὸ μηδέν. εἰ γὰρ μὴ γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, οὐδὲ ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, καὶ εἰ μὴ δέδωκε τῷ θανάτῳ τὸ ἴδιον σῶμα, πῶς εἶναι λέγεται πρωτότοκος ἐκ νεκρῶν; οὐκοῦν οὔτε ἀπέθανεν οὔτε ἀνεβίω Χριστός. ἴτω δὴ οὖν εἰς μέσον ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος, ἀνακεκραγέτω λέγων· “Εἰ νεκροὶ οὐκ ἐγείρονται, οὐδὲ Χριστὸς ἐγήγερται· εἰ δὲ Χριστὸς οὐκ ἐγήγερται, ματαία ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν, ἔτι ἐστὲ ἐν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ὑμῶν. ἄρα καὶ οἱ κοιμηθέντες ἐν Χριστῷ ἀπώλοντο.” ἀλλ’ ἐγήγερται Χριστὸς ἐκ νεκρῶν· γέγονε γὰρ ἄνθρωπος ὁ μονογενὴς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος καὶ γήινον σῶμα λαβὼν ἑνώσας τε καθ’ ὑπόστασιν ἑαυτῷ “Χάριτι θεοῦ” κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον “ὑπὲρ παντὸς ἐγεύσατο θανάτου,” κεχρημάτικε δὲ καὶ “ἀπαρχὴ τῶν κεκοιμημένων,” ἐγηγερμένος ἐκ νεκρῶν. ἀσφαλὴς οὖν ἄρα καὶ οὐ ματαία λοιπὸν ἡ πίστις ἡμῶν, “ἣν ὡς ἄγκυραν ἔχομεν τῆς ψυχῆς ἀσφαλῆ τε καὶ βεβαίαν” κατὰ τὸ γεγραμμένον.	For it is, without a doubt, clear to everyone that the Word of God the Father is not subject to suffering, but the word of inspired men will testify to the truth that he suffered for us in the flesh. But if you take the Word of God away from his earthly body, you will make the whole come to nothing. For if he has not become human, he also has not died for us, and if he has not given his own body to death, how can he be called the firstborn from the dead? By this logic Christ neither died nor rose. Now let Paul come forward and cry out under inspiration, “If the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is useless; you are still in your sins. Then those who have fallen asleep in Christ are also lost” [1 Cor. 15:16–18]. But Christ has been raised from the dead, for the only-begotten Word of God became human, took an earthly body, personally united it to himself, and, as it is written, “tasted death for everyone by God’s grace” [Heb. 2:9]. He was also called “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” [1 Cor. 15:20], because he has been raised from the dead. So our faith is secure and not useless—faith “which we have as a secure and steadfast anchor of the soul” [Heb. 6:19], as it is written.

11. Eighth Argument – Even Nestorius Cannot Deny the Necessity of the Union

ὥσπερ δὲ κατ’ οὐδένα τρόπον ἠδικηκὼς τῆς μετὰ σαρκὸς οἰκονομίας τοὺς λόγους διά γε τοῦ φάναι ταυτὶ καὶ τῶν τῆς ἀληθείας δογμάτων ἀκρατῆ τε καὶ βδελυρώτατον καταχέαι τὸν ἔμετον, ἐφ’ ἑτέραν ἔρχεται δυσβουλίαν, μᾶλλον δὲ δυσσέβειαν ἐναργῆ καί φησιν “Ὄντος οὖν ἡμῖν τούτου μόνου ἀρχιερέως συμπαθοῦς καὶ συγγενοῦς καὶ βεβαίου, τῆς εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ παρατρέπεσθε πίστεως. αὐτὸς γὰρ ἡμῖν τῆς ἐπηγγελμένης εὐλογίας ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ ἀπεστάλη ὡς ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τοῦ γένους τὴν τοῦ σώματος θυσίαν συνεπαγόμενος.”	44. But as if he has in no way harmed the matter of the incarnation with flesh by saying such things and pouring out uncontrolled, disgusting vomit on true doctrine, he proceeds to another poor counsel, or rather clear blasphemy, and says, “This one alone is therefore our high priest—compassionate, of our kin, and steadfast, so do not turn away from faith in him. For because a blessing was promised from the seed of Abraham, he was sent to us to offer the sacrifice of his body for himself and his race.”
Ἀρχιερέα τοίνυν ἡμῖν συγγενῆ τε καὶ συμπαθῆ καὶ βέβαιον καὶ προσέτι μόνον ἐκεῖνον εἶναι φὴς ὃν ἀρτίως ἡμῖν ὁ σὸς ἐναργῶς διέδειξε λόγος· ἔφης γάρ “Σπέρμα Ἁβραὰμ ὁ χθὲς καὶ σήμερον κατὰ τὴν τοῦ Παύλου φωνήν, οὐχ ὁ λέγων· ‘Πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί·’ ὅμοιος τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς κατὰ πάντα ὁ ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναλαβὼν ἀδελφότητα, οὐχ ὁ λέγων ‘Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα.’ ἀπεστάλη ὁ ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιος καὶ κέχρισται κηρύττων ‘αἰχμαλώτοις ἄφεσιν καὶ τυφλοῖς ἀνάβλεψιν.’” Οὗτος οὖν ἄρα καὶ συγγενὴς ἂν νοοῖτο τοῖς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ οὐχ, ὡς σὺ φής, “ὁ λέγων ‘Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα.’” […] εἰ μὲν γὰρ εἰς ἓν ἄμφω συλλέγων καθ’ ἕνωσιν ἀληθῆ ἕνα μεθ’ ἡμῶν ὁμολογεῖς υἱόν, πεποίηκας μάτην ἰδίᾳ τε καὶ ἀνὰ μέρος ἑκάτερον ἀποφέρων ὑποστάσεσί τε καὶ προσώποις διιστὰς ὁλοτρόπως, οὐχὶ τῷ εἰδέναι μόνον ὅτι σαρκὸς μὲν φύσις ἑτέρα παρὰ τὴν θείαν, συνόδῳ γε μὴν τῇ καθ’ ἕνωσιν ἀληθῆ ἰδία γέγονεν αὐτῆς· εἰ δὲ ἀσύμβατος ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν δόξαν ὁρᾶσθαι θέλων καὶ παραιτούμενος πανταχῇ τὴν ἕνωσιν ἕτερον εἶναι φὴς καὶ ἕτερον καὶ τὸν μὲν ἐκ θεοῦ γεγεννῆσθαι πατρός, τὸν δὲ συγγενῆ τε ὑπάρχειν ἡμῖν καὶ ὁμοούσιον, πῶς δὴ χρῆναι φὴς τῆς εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ παρατρέπεσθαι πίστεως, εἰπέ μοι, καὶ συγγενῆ πιστεύσομεν, ἀφέντες τὸν λέγοντα “Πρὶν Ἁβραὰμ γενέσθαι, ἐγὼ εἰμί,” <ἢ> ἐπιγραψόμεθα θεὸν τὸν ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σαρκὸς ἀναλαβόντα πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀδελφότητα, παρέντες τὸν λέγοντα “Ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακε τὸν πατέρα”;	45. Therefore, you say that he whom your discourse just now clearly showed to us is a high priest who is of our kin, compassionate, and steadfast (and nothing more). For you said, “The seed of Abraham is he who is yesterday and today, as Paul says, not he who says, ‘Before Abraham was, I am’ [John 8:58]. He who assumed brotherhood of human soul and flesh is like his brothers in all things, not he who says, ‘He who has seen me has seen the Father’ [John 14:9]. He who is of the same substance as us was sent and has been anointed to proclaim ‘release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind’” [Luke 4:18]. Then this one would be thought of also as kin to those on earth rather than, as you say, “he who says, ‘He who has seen me has seen the Father’” [John 14:9]. For if you bring both together into one by a true union and confess one Son with us, you worked in vain to take each apart from the other, completely severing them into separate subsistences and persons, as if you didn’t know that the fleshly nature is different than the divine, yet it has become his own by coming together in true union. But if you wish to show yourself at odds with us in opinion, utterly deny the union, and say there is this one and that one—one begotten of God the Father and one of our kin, of the same substance as us, how on earth do you say we ought not turn away from faith in him? Will we believe he is of our kin while forsaking him who says, “Before Abraham was, I am”? [John 8:58]. Or will we take as our God him who assumed brotherhood of human soul and flesh with us, neglecting him who says, “He who has seen me has seen the Father”? [John 14:9].
καίτοι φησὶν αὐτός· “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,” καὶ πάλιν· “Ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν οὐ κρίνεται· ὁ δὲ μὴ πιστεύων ἤδη κέκριται ὅτι μὴ πεπίστευκεν εἰς τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ.” ἆρ’ οὖν ὑπάρχειν νοεῖται μονογενὴς ἰδίᾳ τε καὶ μόνος ὁ ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραάμ, καίτοι γεγραφότος Ἰωάννου σαφῶς· “Ὁ μονογενὴς υἱὸς ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρός, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο,” καὶ μὴν καὶ ἑτέρου γράμματος ἱεροῦ· “Ὅταν δὲ εἰσαγάγῃ τὸν πρωτότοκον εἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην, λέγει· καὶ προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ.” πρωτότοκος δὲ πάντῃ τε καὶ πάντως εἴη ἂν ὁ ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς, οὐχ ὁ μόνος ἐκ μόνου γεγεννημένος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρός. ἑψόμεθα γὰρ τέως ταῖς σαῖς, ὦ οὗτος, διαστολαῖς, καραδοκοῦντες οἰκονομικῶς ὅποι ποτὲ ἡμῖν διεκπαίουσιν οἱ λόγοι. οὐκοῦν (ἀνακομίσω γὰρ τὸν λόγον εἰς τὸ ἀπ’ ἀρχῆς) “ὁ ψυχῆς ἀνθρωπίνης καὶ σαρκὸς πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀναλαβὼν ἀδελφότητα,” γεγονὼς δὲ ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ πρωτότοκος εἴη ἂν ὡς ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς, ὅ γε μὴν ἐν κόλπῳ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς μονογενὴς θεὸς λόγος. εἶτα τῆς θεοπνεύστου γραφῆς εἰς τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ χρῆναι λεγούσης ποιεῖσθαι τὴν πίστιν, τὸν συγγενῆ τε καὶ ἡμῖν ὁμοούσιον ἀνθ’ ὅτου παρατιθεὶς μὴ δὴ χρῆναι φὴς τῆς εἰς αὐτὸν παρατρέπεσθαι πίστεως; οὐκοῦν ἀνάγκη συνδεῖν εἰς ἕνα κύριον καὶ Χριστόν, καθ’ ἕνωσιν δὲ δηλονότι τὴν καθ’ ὑπόστασιν, ἵν’ ἐν ταὐτῷ νοοῖτο μονογενὴς καὶ πρωτότοκος ὁ αὐτὸς καθὸ φύσει θεὸς ὑπάρχων ὁ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγος γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος καθ’ ἡμᾶς καὶ ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραάμ.	But he says, “God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” [John 3:16], and again, “He who believes in him is not condemned, but he who does not believe is condemned already because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God” [John 3:18]. Then he who is of the seed of Abraham is properly considered only-begotten on his own, even though John clearly wrote, “The only-begotten Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known” [John 1:18]. Yet another Holy Scripture says, “When he brings his firstborn into the world, he says, ‘Let all God’s angels worship him’” [Heb. 1:6]. Now, the firstborn would certainly be one among many brothers, not the only one begotten of God the Father alone. To this point, sir, we follow your distinctions, voluntarily waiting until our words burst through. So (I will bring the argument back to its beginning) “he who assumed brotherhood of human soul and flesh with us” and became of the seed of Abraham would be the firstborn among many brothers, but he who is at God the Father’s side is God the Word, the Only-Begotten. Therefore, when God-inspired scripture says we must have faith in the Only-Begotten Son of God, why do you put forward one of our kin, of the same substance as us, and say we ought not turn away from faith in him? Therefore, it is necessary to unite him into one Lord and Christ according to a unity of subsistence so that the same one is considered both only-begotten and firstborn in one and the same person, insofar as the Word of God the Father, although God by nature, has become human like us, of the seed of Abraham.
ἀλλὰ γὰρ ἐξηύρηταί τι σοφὸν αὐτῷ, καθάπερ οὖν οἴεται, καί φησιν οὕτω πάλιν “Μέμνησθε δέ που πάντως καὶ τὰ πολλάκις μοι πρὸς ὑμᾶς εἰρημένα τὰς διπλᾶς πρὸς τὸν δεσπότην Χριστὸν διακρίνοντι φύσεις. διπλαῖ μὲν γὰρ τῇ φύσει, τῇ δὲ ἀξίᾳ μοναδικαί· ἡ γὰρ τῶν φύσεων αὐθεντία διὰ τὴν συνάφειαν μία, τῶν μὲν φύσεων ἐν τῇ οἰκείᾳ τάξει διὰ παντὸς μενουσῶν, τῆς δὲ ἀξίας συνημμένης, ὡς προεῖπον, εἰς αὐθεντίαν μοναδικήν.”	46. But now he thinks he has discovered something clever and so says again, “Be sure to remember what I have often said to you to distinguish the two natures in our Lord Christ. They are two with respect to nature but one in rank. The authority of the natures is one on account of the connection. While the natures always remain in their own position, the rank, as I said before, is joined to a single authority.”
Ἀλλ’ ἦσθ’ <ἄν> που πάντως εὐμαθής, τῇ θεοπνεύστῳ γραφῇ κατακολουθεῖν ᾑρημένος ἕνα λεγούσῃ κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν καὶ οὐκ ἀνὰ μέρος τιθείσῃ τὸν ἐκ σπέρματος Ἀβραὰμ καὶ τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον. καὶ πρός γε δὴ τούτῳ κἀκεῖνο διανοεῖσθαι χρῆν· ἕτερον μὲν γάρ τι χρῆμα θεότης, ἕτερον δὲ καὶ ἡ καθ’ ἡμᾶς ἀνθρωπότης κατά γε τὸν ἐνόντα ταῖς φύσεσι λόγον, συμβάσει δὲ τῇ καθ’ ἕνωσιν ἀληθῆ εἷς ἐξ ἀμφοῖν ὁ Χριστός, καθὰ πλειστάκις εἰρήκαμεν. τῶν γε μὴν ὑποστάσεων, ὡς σὺ φής, διῃρημένων εἰς δύο καὶ νοουμένων ὑπάρχειν ἀνὰ μέρος τε καὶ ἰδικῶς, πῶς ἂν γένοιτο σύμβασις εἰς πρόσωπον ἕν, εἰ μὴ ἄρα πως ἴδιον ἓν ἑνὸς λέγοιτο, καθάπερ ἀμέλει τῆς ἀνθρώπου ψυχῆς ἴδιον ἂν νοοῖτο τὸ σῶμα αὐτῆς, καίτοι πρὸς αὐτὴν ὑπάρχον ἑτεροφυές; οὐ γάρ που ταὐτὸν ἂν εἴη ψυχή τε καὶ σῶμα.	47. Now, you would have been quite educated had you chosen to follow God-inspired scripture, which names one Lord Jesus Christ and does not separate him who is of the seed of Abraham from the Word of God the Father. In addition, one must consider this: The divine nature is one thing, and the human nature like ours is another, according to the inherent relation of the natures, but there is one Christ of both by their coming together to true union, as we have often said. But when the subsistences, as you say, have been severed into two and are considered to exist separately and individually, how could there be a communion in one person unless one would somehow be called the possession of the other, just as the body is considered the possession of the human soul, although the soul is of a different nature than it? For soul and body surely could not be the same.
ἀλλ’ ἴσως ἐρεῖ τις· “Πῶς ἡ ἁγία καὶ προσκυνουμένη τριὰς διορίζεται μὲν εἰς τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις, μίαν δὲ θεότητος ἀποτελεῖ φύσιν;” ὅτι, φαίην ἄν, τῇ τῶν ὑποστάσεων διαφορᾷ τὸ ταὐτὸν εἰς οὐσίαν ἀναγκαίως ἑπόμενον εἰς μίαν θεότητος ἀνακομίζει φύσιν τῶν πιστευόντων τὸν νοῦν· ἐπὶ δέ γε τοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, ἐπειδὴ θεότης ἕτερόν τι παρὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητά ἐστιν, εἰ μὴ φαμὲν ἴδιον γενέσθαι τὸ σῶμα τοῦ λόγου καθ’ ἕνωσιν ἀληθῆ, πῶς ἂν ἓν ἀποτελοῖτο πρόσωπον [τὸ] ἀμφοῖν, ἑκατέρας ἡμῖν ὑποστάσεως φερούσης ἴδιον, ὡς ἀνὰ μέρος κειμένης; καὶ εἰ μὴ γέγονεν ἴδιον τὸ ληφθὲν τοῦ προσειληφότος, οὐκ ἀρκέσει συνάφεια κατὰ σύνοδον ἁπλῶς τὴν ὡς ἐν ἀξίᾳ τε μόνῃ καὶ αὐθεντίᾳ τὸν ἕνα καὶ μόνον ἡμῖν ἀποτελέσαι Χριστὸν τὸν αὐτὸν ὄντα θεὸν ὁμοῦ τε καὶ ἄνθρωπον. τότε γὰρ τότε καὶ μάλα […] τῆς εἰς αὐτὸν παρατρέπεσθαι πίστεως, κἂν εἰ ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ νοοῖτο κατὰ τὴν σάρκα. ἕτερον δὲ καὶ ἕτερον εἶναι λέγων, εἶτα τῷ ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ προσκομίζεσθαι δεῖν τὴν πίστιν διαβεβαιούμενος, ἴσθι τοι καὶ μάλα σαφῶς τῆς ἑαυτοῦ κεφαλῆς τὰ τῆς ἀνθρωπολατρίας καταχέων ἐγκλήματα, καίτοι παραιτούμενος, καὶ λίαν ὀρθῶς, τὸ ἀνθρωπολάτρης εἶναι δοκεῖν.	48. But someone might say, “How is it that the Holy Trinity, worthy of honor, is distinguished as three subsistences, but constitutes one divine nature?” I would respond that the identical essence necessarily agrees with the distinction between the subsistences and carries up the mind of believers to one divine nature. But as regards Emmanuel, because the divine nature is different than the human, unless we say the Word’s body became his own by a true union, how could one person of both natures be produced when each subsistence on its own brings before us what is proper to it? And unless what is assumed has become proper to the one who has assumed it, connection by merely coming together only in rank and authority does not suffice to produce only one Christ who is both God and human. For then, in fact, we rightly say not to turn from faith in him, even though we consider him to be of the seed of Abraham according to the flesh. But if you say there is this one and that one and then maintain that we must put our faith in him who is of the seed of Abraham, know well that you bring on yourself the charge of worshiping a human (though you rightly loathe the reputation of worshiping a human).

12. Ninth Argument – Nestorius Attributes Sin to Christ

ἀλλ’ ὀλίγα κομιδῇ τοῦ χρῆναι φρονεῖν τὰ εἰκότα πεφροντικώς, συκοφαντεῖ καὶ ἑτέρως τὸ μέγα τῆς εὐσεβείας μυστήριον. ἐπιφέρει γὰρ εὐθύς “Αὐτὸς γὰρ ἡμῖν τῆς ἐπηγγελμένης εὐλογίας ἐκ σπέρματος Ἁβραὰμ ἀπεστάλη ὡς ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τοῦ γένους τὴν τοῦ σώματος θυσίαν συνεπαγόμενος.”	49. But he is hardly concerned about the need to think what is fitting and slanders the great mystery of godliness in yet another way. For he immediately adds, “As the promised blessing of the seed of Abraham, he was sent to us to offer the sacrifice of his body for himself and his race.”
Ὑφ’ ἁμαρτίαν οὖν ἄρα καὶ αὐτὸς γέγονεν ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ δι’ οὗ τὸ καθ’ ἡμῶν τῆς ἁμαρτίας ἐμφράττεται στόμα κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ψάλλοντος φωνήν; ἆρα καὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ φωτὸς τοῦ ἀληθινοῦ τὸ τῆς ἐπαράτου φαυλότητος ἥψατο σκότος; ἆρα μεθ’ ἡμῶν ἐδεήθη τοῦ λυτρουμένου καὶ σῴζοντος ὁ δι’ οὗ πᾶσα λύτρωσις καὶ σωτηρίας ἐλπίς; πρέποι δ’ ἂν αὐτῷ κατά γε τὸ εἰκὸς μεθ’ ἡμῶν ἀναφέρειν τὰ χαριστήρια, θεοῦ λέγοντος ἀμνησικάκως· “Ἐγὼ εἰμὶ ὁ ἐξαλείφων τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου καὶ οὐ μὴ μνησθήσομαι,” καταγορεύσει δὲ καὶ αὐτοῦ, καθὰ καὶ ἡμῶν, ὁ τῆς ἁμαρτίας πατήρ. εἶτα πῶς οὐ ψευδοεπήσει λέγων “Ἔρχεται ὁ ἄρχων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου καὶ ἐν ἐμοὶ εὑρήσει οὐδέν”; δεδυσφημήκασί ποτε κατ’ αὐτοῦ καὶ τῆς Ἰουδαίων συναγωγῆς οἱ προεστηκότες· ἐπειδὴ γὰρ τοῖς τοῦ φθόνου βέλεσι κατετρύχοντο, τεθεραπευμένον ἀδοκήτως ὁρῶντες τὸν ἐκ γενετῆς τυφλόν, ἀνοσίως ἔφασκον· “Δὸς δόξαν τῷ θεῷ· ἡμεῖς οἴδαμεν ὅτι οὗτος ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἁμαρτωλός ἐστιν.” ὁ δέ γε κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς ἀθυροστομοῦντας ἐλέγχων διαρρήδην ἔφασκε· “Τίς ἐξ ὑμῶν ἐλέγχει με περὶ ἁμαρτίας; εἰ δὲ ἀλήθειαν λέγω, διὰ τί ὑμεῖς οὐ πιστεύετέ μοι;” οὐκοῦν εἰ προσκεκόμικε τὴν θυσίαν ὑπέρ τε ἡμῶν αὐτῶν καὶ προσέτι καὶ ἑαυτοῦ, δεδέηταί που πάντως ἀναγκαίως αὐτῆς, καθὰ καὶ ἡμεῖς οἱ ὑπὸ ζυγὸν ἁμαρτίας.	50. Then did Christ himself also come under sin—he through whom sin’s mouth against us is shut [Ps. 107:42], according to the psalmist’s voice? Did the darkness of accursed wickedness touch the true light himself? Did he then need, along with us, a Redeemer and Savior—he through whom all redemption and hope of salvation exists? It would seem he must bring thank-offerings along with us when God in his forgiveness says, “I am the one who blots out your transgressions; I will not remember” [Is. 43:25]; the father of sin will accuse even him just as he accuses us. How then does he not lie in saying, “The prince of this age is coming, and he will find nothing against me”? [John 14:30]. The leaders of the Jewish synagogue also blasphemed against him once. Because envious arrows afflicted them when they saw a man born blind unexpectedly healed, they profanely said, “Give glory to God! We know this man is a sinner” [John 9:24]. But our Lord Jesus Christ, to convict them of speaking nonsense, said plainly, “Who of you can prove me guilty of sin? If I speak the truth, why do you not believe me?” [John 8:46]. Now, if he offered sacrifice for us as well as for himself, he surely had need of it, just as we who are under the yoke of sin did.
ἔλεγξον τοίνυν αὐτὸν περὶ ἁμαρτίας· εἰ τέθυκε δὲ μεθ’ ἡμῶν, δεῖξον ἡμῖν συνημαρτηκότα. ποιμὴν ὑπάρχων ἀγαθὸς ὑπὲρ τίνος τέθεικε τὴν ἰδίαν ψυχήν; ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ μᾶλλον ἢ ὑπὲρ τῶν προβάτων; ἀκούω λέγοντος περὶ ἡμῶν· “Ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν ἐγὼ ἁγιάζω ἐμαυτόν,” καὶ καθά φησιν ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος, “Χάριτι θεοῦ ὑπὲρ παντὸς ἐγεύσατο θανάτου,” καὶ πάλιν “Παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν καὶ ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν,” καὶ καθά φησιν ὁ προφήτης Ἡσαίας, “Παιδεία εἰρήνης ἡμῶν ἐπ’ αὐτόν, τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς ἰάθημεν,” οὐκ αὐτὸς τῷ τῆς ἰδίας σαρκὸς τεθεράπευται πάθει. παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν, οὐ διά γε τὰ ἑαυτοῦ· πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ. κατενήνεκται μὲν γὰρ ὁμολογουμένως ἡ ἀνθρώπου φύσις ἐκ τῆς ἐν Ἀδὰμ παραβάσεως εἰς ἀρὰν καὶ θάνατον, κατηρρώστησε δὲ πρὸς τούτοις καὶ τὸ εὔκολον εἰς ἁμαρτίαν ἐν τῇ σαρκί, “ἵνα τὸ δικαίωμα τοῦ νόμου πληρωθῇ ἐν ἡμῖν τοῖς μὴ κατὰ σάρκα περιπατοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ κατὰ πνεῦμα.” κεχρημάτικε γὰρ διὰ τοῦτο καὶ ἔσχατος Ἀδάμ, οὐ τὰ τοῦ πρώτου νοσεῖν ἀνεχόμενος, ἀπαλλάττων δὲ μᾶλλον ὡς ἐν ἑαυτῷ τε καὶ πρώτῳ τὴν ἀνθρώπου φύσιν τῶν ἐκ παραβάσεως τῆς ἀρχαίας ἐκείνης αἰτιαμάτων. κατεγνώσθη μὲν γὰρ ἐν Ἀδάμ, ἀλλ’ ὤφθη δοκιμωτάτη καὶ ἀξιάγαστος ἐν Χριστῷ. χοϊκὸς οὖν ἐκεῖνος, ἐπουράνιος δὲ ὁ Χριστός.	So prove him guilty of sin! If he has offered sacrifice with us, show that he sinned with us. If he is the Good Shepherd, for whom did he lay down his life? Was it for himself or for the sheep? I hear him saying about us, “For them I sanctify myself” [John 17:19], and as Paul says under inspiration, “He tasted death for everyone by God’s grace” [Heb. 2:9], and again, “He was delivered to death because of our transgressions and was raised to life because of our justification” [Rom. 4:25], and, as the prophet Isaiah says, “The chastisement that brought us peace was on him; by his wound we were healed” [Is. 53:5]. He himself has not been healed by the suffering of his own flesh. He was delivered to death because of our transgressions, not because of his own—far from it. For we confess that human nature has been brought down to curse and death by Adam’s transgression, and in the flesh it was further afflicted with the readiness to sin, “in order that the requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who walk not in line with the flesh but in line with the Spirit” [Rom. 8:4]. This is why he was also called the last Adam—not because he bore the same sickness as the first, but rather because in both himself and the first he removed the blame of that ancient transgression from human nature. For human nature was condemned in Adam, but in Christ it appeared precious and admirable. So Adam is earthly, but Christ is heavenly.
καὶ ἐνετράπη μὲν ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ, κατακομισθεῖσα πρὸς παρακοήν, ὅπερ ἐστὶν ἁμαρτία· τετήρηκε δὲ τὸ ἀπαράβατον ἐν Χριστῷ καὶ ὡς ἐν ἀπαρχῇ δευτέρᾳ τοῦ γένους, ὤφθη τε ἄτρωτος ἁμαρτίαις καὶ κρείττων ἀρᾶς καὶ δίκης καὶ θανάτου καὶ φθορᾶς. προσεμπεδοῖ δὲ ἡμᾶς ὁ σοφώτατος Παῦλος, ὡδὶ γεγραφώς· “Ὥσπερ γὰρ διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἁμαρτωλοὶ κατεστάθησαν οἱ πολλοί, οὕτω καὶ διὰ τῆς ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί.” δεῖται δὴ οὖν θυσίας τῆς ὑπέρ γε τῶν ἰδίων πλημμελημάτων πᾶς εἴ τις γέγονεν ἁμαρτίαις ἔνοχος, καὶ προσκεκόμικε μὲν ὁ Χριστὸς ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ τοῦ κατὰ σάρκα γένους, τουτέστιν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ δὲ οὐκέτι, κρείττων ἁμαρτίας ὑπάρχων ὡς θεός. εἰ γὰρ τέθυται δι’ ἑαυτόν, οὐχ ἡμεῖς ἠγοράσμεθα μόνοι τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, ἀλλ’ εἴη [δ’] ἂν καὶ αὐτὸς ἡμῖν συνηγορασμένος, οὐκέτι κατὰ τὴν τοῦ Ἡσαίου φωνὴν “Κύριος παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις ἡμῶν,” δέδοται δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων. οὗ γὰρ ὅλως θυσία καὶ προσαγωγή, ἐκεῖ που πάντως καὶ ἄφεσις ἁμαρτίας. πεφενάκικεν οὖν ἄρα τοὺς ἀνὰ πᾶσαν τὴν ὑπ’ οὐρανὸν ὁ θεσπέσιος Παῦλος, περὶ αὐτοῦ γεγραφώς· “Τοιοῦτος γὰρ ἡμῖν ἔπρεπεν ἀρχιερεύς, ὅσιος ἄκακος ἀμίαντος, κεχωρισμένος ἀπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν καὶ ὑψηλότερος τῶν οὐρανῶν γενόμενος, ὃς οὐκ ἔχει καθ’ ἡμέραν ἀνάγκην, ὥσπερ οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς, πρότερον ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων ἁμαρτιῶν θυσίας ἀναφέρειν, ἔπειτα τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ· τοῦτο γὰρ ἐποίησεν ἐφ’ ἅπαξ ἑαυτὸν προσενέγκας. ὁ νόμος γὰρ ἀνθρώπους καθίστησιν ἀρχιερεῖς ἔχοντας ἀσθένειαν, ὁ λόγος δὲ τῆς ὁρκωμοσίας τῆς μετὰ τὸν νόμον υἱὸν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τετελειωμένον.”	51. And it suffered shame in the first, dragged down to disobedience, which is sin. But in Christ it remained without transgression and, as in a second firstfruits of the race, appeared both unwounded by sins and superior to curse, penalty, death, and decay. Wise Paul affirms us in this, writing, “Just as through one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so also through one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous” [Rom. 5:19]. Now, everyone guilty of sin needs sacrifice for his own offences. Christ has offered himself for his kin according to the flesh, that is, for us. But he did not at all offer sacrifice for himself because he is superior to sin as God. For if he was sacrificed for himself, it is not the case that we alone have been bought by his blood, as the scriptures say, but he himself would have also been bought along with us; no longer, according to Isaiah’s voice, “did the Lord deliver him to death for our sins” [Is. 53:6], but he has been given instead for his own sins. For in fact where there is sacrifice and offering, there surely the remission of sins is also. So Paul has tricked those everywhere under heaven when he wrote under inspiration regarding him, “Such a high priest was suitable for us—one who is holy, innocent, pure, set apart from sinners, and exalted above the heavens. He does not need to offer sacrifices day after day like the other high priests, first for his own sins then for the sins of the people. He offered sacrifice once for all when he offered himself. For the law appoints high priests who have weakness, but the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son, who has been perfected for eternity” [Heb. 7:26–28].
πῶς οὖν ὅσιος ἀρχιερεὺς ὁ Χριστὸς ἢ κατὰ τίνα τρόπον ἄκακος καὶ ἀμίαντος, εἰ δεδέηται μεθ’ ἡμῶν τῆς θυσίας προσκεκομισμένης εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν πλημμελημάτων καὶ εἰς δικαίωσιν τῶν ἡμαρτηκότων; πῶς κεχώρισται τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν, εἰ δικαιοῦται σὺν αὐτοῖς, οὐχ ἑτέρου του χάριν τῆς θυσίας προσκεκομισμένης ἢ τούτων αὐτῶν; θαυμάζω δὲ ὅτι διακεκραγότος τοῦ Παύλου καὶ μάλα σαφῶς οὐκ εἶναι παραπλήσιον τοῖς ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων πλημμελημάτων προσκομίζειν κεκελευσμένοις, ἔπειτα τῶν τοῦ λαοῦ, πρεσβεύειν οὐ δέδιας, οἷς ἔφη, τἀναντία φάναι τε τολμᾷς καθ’ ὁμοιότητα τὴν ἐκείνων οἳ κατὰ νόμον γεγόνασιν ἱερεῖς, καὶ αὐτὸν ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ προσάγειν θυσίαν. καὶ εἴπερ ἐστὶν ἀληθὲς ὡς ὁ νόμος μὲν καθίστησιν ἀρχιερεῖς ἔχοντας ἀσθένειαν, ὁ λόγος δὲ τῆς ὁρκωμοσίας τῆς μετὰ τὸν νόμον υἱὸν εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα τετελειωμένον, τί τοῖς ἀσθενεῖν εἰωθόσι ποιεῖς συναρίθμιον τὸν τῆς ἐκείνων πληθύος ἐξῃρημένον καὶ τὴν ὑπὲρ νόμον ἔχοντα τελείωσιν οἴκοθέν τε καὶ κατὰ φύσιν, εἴπερ ἐστὶν υἱὸς ἀληθῶς καὶ διὰ τοῦτο θεός;	How, then, is Christ a holy high priest, or how is he innocent and pure, if he needed sacrifice like us, although he offered himself for forgiveness of offences and for justification of those who have sinned? How has he been set apart from sinners if he must be justified along with them—the sacrifice having been offered for none other than these? But I marvel that, although Paul has proclaimed quite clearly that he is not like those who have been ordered to offer sacrifice for their own offences and then for those of the people, you are not afraid to maintain the opposite of what he said. You dare to say that, like those who were made priests by the law, he too offered sacrifice for himself. And if it is true that the law appoints high priests who have weakness, but the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son, who has been perfected for eternity, why do you count among those accustomed to weakness him who has been removed from their number and possesses perfection which surpasses the law, properly and by nature, since he is truly Son and therefore God?
ἴδωμεν δὲ καὶ ἐκ τοῦ νομικοῦ καὶ ἀρχαιοτέρου γράμματος τίνα δὴ τρόπον καὶ ὑπὲρ τίνων εἰσκεκόμικεν ἑαυτὸν ὁ Ἐμμανουὴλ εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρί. σκιὰ μὲν γὰρ ὁμολογουμένως ὁ νόμος ἦν, πλὴν ὑποτύπωσιν ἔχει μυστηρίου τοῦ κατὰ Χριστὸν καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας ὠδίνει τὴν μόρφωσιν. καὶ γοῦν ἔφη που Χριστὸς τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις προσλαλῶν· “Εἰ ἐπιστεύετε Μωυσῇ, ἐπιστεύετε ἂν ἐμοί· περὶ γὰρ ἐμοῦ ἐκεῖνος ἔγραψε.” πῶς οὖν ἄρα τεθύκασι τὸν ἀμνὸν μέλλοντες τῆς Αἰγυπτίων ἀπαίρειν οἱ ἐξ αἵματος Ἰσραήλ; ὑπὲρ ἑαυτῶν ἄρα καὶ μόνων ἢ καὶ ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἀμνοῦ; τίνας ἐλυτροῦτο διὰ τοῦ αἵματος; ἆρα τοὺς ὑπὸ ζυγὸν δουλείας καὶ δύσοιστον ἀνατλάντας τὴν ἐκ τῶν Αἰγυπτίων πλεονεξίαν ἢ καὶ ἑαυτόν; τίνος ἀπεσόβει τὸν ὀλοθρευτήν; τίσιν ἔφασκεν ὁ τῶν ὅλων θεός· “Καὶ ὄψομαι τὸ αἷμα καὶ σκεπάσω ὑμᾶς”; ἆρα τοῖς δεδεημένοις τῆς παρ’ αὐτοῦ σκέπης ἢ γοῦν καὶ αὐτῷ τῷ ἀμνῷ;	52. But let us also see from the Law, the more ancient scripture, in what manner and for whom Emmanuel offered himself as a sweet-smelling odor to God the Father. For the law, we confess, was a shadow, yet it has an outline of the mystery in Christ and brings forth the form of the truth. Indeed, Christ said somewhere when talking to the Jews, “If you had believed Moses, you would have believed me. For he wrote about me” [John 5:46]. How, then, did those of the blood of Israel sacrifice the lamb when they were going to leave the land of the Egyptians? Was it for themselves alone, or for the lamb’s sake too? Whom did it redeem by its blood? Was it those who were under the yoke of slavery and enduring unbearable oppression from the Egyptians, or itself also? Whose destroyer did it keep away? To whom did the God of all say, “I will see the blood, and I will protect you”? [Exod. 12:13]. Was it to those who needed his protection, or also to the lamb itself?
διετύπου μὲν γὰρ τὰς ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιεῖσθαι θυσίας, καθάπερ ἐν πίνακι, τῷ νόμῳ σκιαγραφῶν ἔτι τὸ Χριστοῦ μυστήριον ὁ θεὸς καὶ πατήρ, ἔφη δὲ οὕτως πρὸς τὸν ἱεροφάντην Μωσέα· “Ἐὰν δὲ πᾶσα συναγωγὴ υἱῶν Ἰσραὴλ ἀγνοήσῃ ἀκουσίως καὶ λάθῃ ῥῆμα ἐξ ὀφθαλμῶν τῆς συναγωγῆς καὶ ποιήσωσι μίαν ἀπὸ πασῶν τῶν ἐντολῶν κυρίου, ἣ οὐ ποιηθήσεται, καὶ πλημμελήσωσι καὶ γνωσθῇ αὐτοῖς ἡ ἁμαρτία ἣν ἥμαρτον αὐτῇ, καὶ προσάξει ἡ συναγωγὴ μόσχον ἐκ βοῶν ἄμωμον περὶ ἁμαρτίας.” τίνα δὲ τρόπον τὰ τῆς θυσίας ἐπιτελεῖσθαι χρή, διειπὼν εὖ μάλα, προσεπάγει καί φησι· “Καὶ ἐξιλάσεται περὶ αὐτῶν ὁ ἱερεὺς καὶ ἀφεθήσεται αὐτοῖς ἡ ἁμαρτία.” ἄθρει δὴ οὖν ὅτι προσεκομίζετο μὲν ὁ μόσχος ἐν τύπῳ Χριστοῦ τοῦ πανάγνου καὶ μῶμον <τοῦ> μὴ ἔχοντος, ἀπηλλάττοντο δὲ τῶν ἰδίων αἰτιαμάτων οἱ προσκομίζοντες καὶ οὔτι που μᾶλλον ὁ μόσχος. τέθυται γὰρ οὐχ ὑπέρ γε μᾶλλον ἑαυτοῦ, καθὰ σὺ φής, ἀλλ’ ὑπέρ γε τῶν ἠσθενηκότων, ὑπὲρ ὧν ἐποιεῖτο τὰς λιτὰς ὁ κατὰ νόμους ἀρχιερεύς, ἵνα πάλιν ἐννοῇς τὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν γεγονότα παράκλητον ἄμωμόν τε καὶ ὅσιον ἀρχιερέα κεχωρισμένον τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν.	53. God the Father was prescribing the sacrifices that were to be made for sins in the law as on a tablet, still outlining the mystery of Christ. Thus he said to Moses, the teacher of sacred truths, “Should the whole assembly of the Israelites sin unintentionally, and should the matter escape the notice of the eyes of the assembly, and should they transgress one of the commands of the Lord and should err, when their sin becomes known to them, the assembly shall offer a young bull without blemish from the cattle for the sin” [Lev. 4:13–14]. Having fully stated the details of how the sacrifice should be done, he adds, “The priest will atone for them, and their sin will be forgiven” [Lev. 4:20]. Observe, then, that the young bull was offered as a type of the entirely pure Christ, who has no blemish. Also observe that those who bring the offering were set free from their guilt, not the young bull. For he was not sacrificed for himself, as you say, but for the infirm, for whom the high priest used to pray, according to the law, that you may understand him who became our intercessor, an undefiled and holy high priest, set apart from sinners.

13. Conclusion and Summary

πανταχόθεν τοιγαροῦν ἠρρωστηκότι τοῦ λόγου τὸ ἀκαλλὲς τῷ δι’ ἐναντίας ἀρχιερέα καὶ ἀπόστολον τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν γενέσθαι φαμὲν αὐτὸν τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον, ὅτε γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, καθεὶς ἑαυτὸν εἰς κένωσιν καὶ ἐν τοῖς καθ’ ἡμᾶς, ἵνα καὶ ὑπὲρ πάντων εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας ἑαυτὸν ἀναθεὶς τῷ πατρὶ κατακτήσηται τὴν ὑπ’ οὐρανόν, ἐξέληται τῶν ἀρχαίων αἰτιαμάτων, δικαιώσῃ τῇ χάριτι διὰ πίστεως, θανάτου καὶ φθορᾶς ἀποφήνῃ κρείττοντας ἱερούς τε καὶ ἡγιασμένους καὶ πᾶν εἶδος ἀρετῆς εὖ μάλα κατωρθωκότας <τοὺς> σωτῆρα καὶ λυτρωτὴν ὁμολογοῦντας αὐτόν· δι’ οὗ καὶ μεθ’ οὗ τῷ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ ἡ δόξα σὺν ἁγίῳ πνεύματι εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν.

54. Therefore, to our opponent whose argumentation is unsound in every way, we say that the Word of God the Father became the high priest and apostle of our confession of faith when he became human, lowering himself to emptiness to be in our condition. He did this so that, having offered himself to the Father as a sweet-smelling odor on behalf of everyone, he might gain all under heaven, remove their ancient guilt, justify them by grace through faith, and declare them superior to death and decay, holy and sanctified, well-versed in every kind of virtue, confessing him as Savior and Redeemer. Through him and with him be glory to God the Father, with the Holy Spirit, forever. Amen.

Back to Documents from the Escalating Controversy

Edited 9/14/2026 by JSW

Cyril includes this qualification because, strictly speaking, not all scripture directly declares this.
Cf. footnote 1 above.
When this Greek noun is used to address someone, it frequently has a contemptuous sense.
This Greek noun is used especially of the NT authors.
Wisd. 1:7.
Bar. 3:36-38.

No Responses yet

"What did the Fathers do except seek and present the clear and open testimonies of Scripture?" — Martin Luther, Against Latomus (1521)

Tome 3 Against Nestorius (CPG 5217)

Search

What's New

Tools

Primary Texts

Website Related

Meta