# Against Arius - Author: [Marius Victorinus](https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/authors/marius-victorinus/) - Latin title: *Adversus Arium* - Date: ca. 357–362 (approximate) - Source: J.-P. Migne, ed., Patrologiae cursus completus, series Latina, vol. 8 (Paris, 1844), from the editions of A. Mai (Rome, 1828) and the Benedictine Mabillon (Analecta) (Latin text: Migne PL 8, digitized by Open Greek and Latin (patrologia_latina-dev, University of Leipzig), CC BY-SA 4.0) - Translation: Claude, from the original text, unless a passage says otherwise; each passage below gives the translator - Work page: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/ - Passages: 127 ## Against Arius 1.1 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-1 - Source: PL 8:1040c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus begins his reply by comparing the letters of Arius and Eusebius of Nicomedia with the Nicene faith, accepting their denials but rejecting the claim that the Son was made from nothing. ### Latin text in primo sermone hujus operis, et multa et fortiora quaedam etiam horum, o amice Candide, proposita atque tractata abs te sunt; quae quanquam ut oportuit dissoluta sunt, tamen idcirco ista ex eorum epistolis audire voluimus; ut dum haec omni refutatione convincimus. Illa quoque ex istorum refutatione vincamus. Et primum definiendas sunt Arii Eusebiique sententias, in quo nobis consentiant, in quibus discrepent, in quibus ipsi sibi videantur adversi. Arius ait, quoniam filius non est ingenitus. Item Eusebius, hoc idem quod duo non sint ingenita. Nobis quoque ista sententia est. Arius, filius, inquit, pars ingeniti non est, neque est ex aliquo subjecto: haec duo et Eusebius. Et adjicit: neque unum in duo divisum; id est autem, filium partem ingeniti non esse. Sed Eusebius: Neque pars, neque effluentia, inquit, est. Hoc nos consimiliter negamus: nam neque pars patris filius, neque effluentia quae manando inde, minus fecerit unde manando. Jam vero ex non subjecto esse ferre non possumus: non quod nos ex aliquo subjecto esse dicamus, sed quod a patre ut filium. Arius, voluntate, inquit. Dei subsistit filius ante tempora et aeones. Idem et Eusebius: Nos ante omnes aeones, et ante omnia tempora; sed genitum dicimus, non factum, non creatum, non fundatum. Arius dicit: Filium factum, scilicet plenum Deum, unigenitum, immutabilem, qui antequam crearetur non fuerit, propterea quod non sit ingenitus. Haec eadem Eusebius, adjiciens, quod filius omnia facienti sit similis: nos contra, non enim similem, sed eumdem dicimus, quippe ex eadem substantia. Praeterea addit Eusebius, principium filii sciri nec ab homine posse, neque ab aliqua superiore vel potentia, vel excogitatione, et audet tamen dicere, figmentum esse filium, voluntate et sententia patris subsistere, non ex aliquo existenti. Istud non est principium filii dicere: si enim dicit hoc, ex non existentibus est, non est patris neque pars, neque effluentia. Non solum principia novit, sed et τούς λόγους principiorum. Si autem non, quae audacia est dicere: Hoc Deus, hoc Christus est: hoc pater, hoc filius? Nos autem dicimus, patrem ut patrem, filium ut filium. ### English translation (Claude) In the first discourse of this work, my friend Candidus, you set out and treated many arguments, and some even stronger than these; and although they have been refuted as they ought to be, we nonetheless wished to hear these from the letters of those men, so that, while we overcome these with every refutation, we may overcome those also by refuting these. And first we must define the opinions of Arius and Eusebius: in what they agree with us, in what they differ, and in what they seem to contradict themselves. Arius says that the Son is not unbegotten. Eusebius likewise says the same, that there are not two unbegottens. This is our view too. Arius says that the Son is not a part of the unbegotten, nor is he from any substrate; Eusebius says these two things also. And he adds: “nor one divided into two”, that is, that the Son is not a part of the unbegotten. But Eusebius says: “He is neither a part nor an outflow.” This we likewise deny: for the Son is neither a part of the Father nor an outflow which, by flowing out from him, would have made less that from which it flowed. But that he is from no substrate we cannot bear: not that we say he is from some substrate, but that he is from the Father as Son. Arius says: “By the will of God the Son subsists before times and ages.” Eusebius says the same. We say: before all ages and before all times; but we say begotten, not made, not created, not founded. Arius says: “The Son was made, namely full God, only-begotten, unchangeable, who before he was created was not, because he is not unbegotten.” Eusebius says the same, adding that the Son is like his maker in all things. We, on the contrary, say not “like” but “the same”, since he is from the same substance. Eusebius further adds that the Son's beginning cannot be known by man, nor by any higher power or thought; and yet he dares to say that the Son is a thing fashioned, subsisting by the Father's will and decision, not from anything existing. That is to state the Son's beginning. For if he says this, that he is from non-existents, not of the Father, neither a part nor an outflow, he knows not only the beginnings but also the reasons of the beginnings. But if he does not, what daring is it to say: “This is God, this is Christ; this is Father, this is Son”? We, however, say the Father as Father, the Son as Son. ### Extrabiblical texts - Eusebius of Nicomedia, Ep. Paul. (Letter to Paulinus of Tyre): allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - The work (Against Arius, ca. 358–359) answers the letters appended by Candidus (Candidus, Letter to Marius Victorinus 1–2). “Reasons” renders τοὺς λόγους. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.1 (PL 8:1040c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1). ## Against Arius 1.2 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-2 - Source: PL 8:1040c–1041b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from Ephesians 3, John 1:18 and John 8:19 that God can be known through the Son, who reveals the Father because he is of the same substance. ### Latin text Et primum ut ille versiculis quinque quod asserebat, docuisse se credidit, filium factum esse, non natum; sic nos filium natum primum sacra omni lectione docebimus. Deinde id ipsum, hoc est, substantialiter filium, permittente Dei spiritu, ut possumus asseremus. Atque ex hoc primum sumatur exordium. Paulus ad Ephesios: Hujus rei gratia flecto genua mea ad patrem Domini nostri Jesu Christi, ex quo omnis paternitas in caelis et in terra nominatur, ut det vobis secundum divitias gloriae suae, virtute confortari per spiritum suum in interiore homine, habitare Christum per fidem in cordibus vestris, in charitate radicati et fundati, ut possitis comprehendere cum omnibus sanctis, quae sit latitudo et longitudo, et altitudo et profundum: scire etiam supereminentem scientiae charitatem Christi, ut impleamini in omnem plenitudinem Dei. Ei autem qui potest super omnia facere abundantius quam petimus aut intelligimus, secundum virtutem quae operatur in nobis, ipsi gloria in Christo Jesu, et βχχλίϊσία, in omnes generationes saeculorum. Quid ex his apparet possibile esse cognoscere Deum et Dei filium: et quomodo pater, quomodo filius? Est autem et illud in Evangelio secundum Joannem: Deum nullus vidit unquam: unigenitus filius qui est in gremio patris, ille exposuit. Possibile igitur dicere de Deo, et idcirco et de filio. Quis enim de patre exposuit? filius. Quis iste? qui est in gremio. Non solum igitur processit, sed et in gremio semper est filius, sufficiens doctor de patre. Quid enarravit? quomodo Deus. Et Judaei ante et ethnici enarraverunt: quid ergo enarravit? patrem Deum, se autem filium, et quod ex eadem substantia, et quod a patre exierit. Dicit enim: Neque me nostis, neque patrem meum. Si enim me nossetis, nossetis et patrem meum. Hoc nunquam diceret, nossetis, nisi filius, et filius substantialiter: Si me nossetis, nossetis et patrem. Figmentum enim si esset, non ex ipso pater nosceretur, sed potentia Dei et divinitas, ut Paulus dixit: Mirabilia enim ejus a creatura mundi per ea quae facta sunt, intellecta noscuntur: aeterna quoque ejus virtus ac divinitas. Et Spiritus sanctus exposuit de Christo, sicuti dicit Salvator in Evangelio secundum Joannem: Spiritus sanctus quem mittet Pater in meo nomine, ipse vos docebit omnia. Si igitur sic sunt ista, didicimus et patrem et filium et in sanctis scripturis, et a spiritu quem doctorem habet fide sanctus vir. ### English translation (Claude) And first, as he believed he had taught by five short verses what he asserted, that the Son was made, not born, so we shall first teach from the whole of sacred reading that the Son was born. Then we shall assert, as far as we can, God's Spirit permitting, that very point, namely that he is Son substantially. Let us take our first starting point from this. Paul to the Ephesians: “For this reason I bend my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named, that he may grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell through faith in your hearts, rooted and founded in love, so that you may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know also the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled into all the fullness of God. Now to him who is able to do all things more abundantly than we ask or understand, according to the power that works in us, to him be glory in Christ Jesus and in the church, to all generations of the ages.” What appears from this, if not that it is possible to know God and the Son of God, and how he is Father, how Son? There is also this in the Gospel according to John: “No one has ever seen God; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.” It is possible, then, to speak of God, and so also of the Son. For who made known the Father? The Son. Who is he? He who is in the bosom. The Son, then, not only came forth but is also always in the bosom, a sufficient teacher about the Father. What did he make known? How God is. Both Jews and gentiles had spoken of God before; what, then, did he make known? God as Father and himself as Son, and that he is of the same substance, and that he came forth from the Father. For he says: “You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” He would never say “you would know” unless he were Son, and Son substantially: “If you knew me, you would know the Father also.” For if he were a thing fashioned, the Father would not be known from him, but only God's power and divinity, as Paul said: “For his wonders from the creation of the world are understood and known through the things that are made: his eternal power also and divinity.” And the Holy Spirit made known Christ, as the Saviour says in the Gospel according to John: “The Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things.” If these things are so, we have learned both the Father and the Son, both in the holy Scriptures and from the Spirit, whom a holy man has as teacher by faith. ### Scripture references - Eph 3:14: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:15: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:16: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:17: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:18: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:19: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:20: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:21: quotation, high confidence - John 1:18: quotation, high confidence - John 8:19: quotation, high confidence - Rom 1:20: quotation, high confidence - John 14:26: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The “five short verses” are Candidus's proof texts for the Son's being made. “Church” renders the garbled Greek ἐκκλησίᾳ. Rom 1:20 is quoted in Victorinus's own Latin form. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.2 (PL 8:1040c–1041b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-2). ## Against Arius 1.3 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-3 - Source: PL 8:1041b–1042a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from John 1:1–3 that the Word, who was in the beginning and made all things, cannot be from nothing and is equal to the Father, though he differs as the one who acts outwardly. ### Latin text Dicamus igitur scripturas, et primum secundum Joannem: dicit enim, quomodo λόγος et in principio erat, et circa Deum erat, et quomodo Deus erat λόγος. Numquid de alio dicit λόγου; omnino de filio. Quid ergo λόγος, si ex nullo est subjecto? quomodo λόγος potentiam habet, ut per ipsum creentur omnia, ipse qui sit ex nullo subjecto? Impossibile enim, semen esse omnium quae sunt, quod ex nihilo factum est. Deinde si in principio erat, quomodo principium: secundum quod principium est, sine principio est: qui erat in principio, erat semper. Quae igitur audacia? quae blasphemia? Non erat aliquando, dicere, toties Joanne dicente: Erat λόγος in principio, erat ad Deum, erat Deus λόγος ipse? Erat hic in principio ad Deum. Licet enim erat praeteriti temporis significationem habeat, frequenter non sine principio; sed hic sine principio accipiendum, quoniam dixit: In principio erat. Quod et vos significatis ante tempora, ante aeonas dicentes: Omnia, dicit, per ipsum facta sunt, et sine illo effectum est nihil. Etenim sine λόγω quid est, quod non ut sit accipiat? Solus enim λόγος, secundum quod λόγος, est et sibi et aliis ipsum quod est, ipse praestet omnibus quae sunt. Et idcirco aequalis quidem patri. Causa enim principalis et sibi et aliis causa est, potentia, et substantia. Causa exsistens. Prae causa autem pater. Unde filius distabit hoc, quod movetur et operatur in manifestationem, propter magnam divinitatem nobis incognosibiliter operante patre. Supra enim beatitudinem est pater et idcirco ipsum requiescere. Operari enim etiam, si imperfectionem operatur, in molestia motus: ista beatitudo est, secundum quod est operari perfecta. ### English translation (Claude) Let us speak, then, of the Scriptures, and first according to John. For he says how the Word was in the beginning, and was with God, and how the Word was God. Does he speak of another Word? Entirely of the Son. What, then, is the Word, if he is from no substrate? How does the Word have the power that all things are created through him, if he himself is from no substrate? For it is impossible that what was made from nothing should be the seed of all things that are. Next, if he was in the beginning, how is he not the beginning? Insofar as he is the beginning, he is without beginning; he who was in the beginning always was. What daring, then, what blasphemy, to say “he once was not”, when John says so many times: “The Word was in the beginning, he was with God, the Word himself was God”? “He was in the beginning with God.” For although “was” signifies past time, and frequently not without a beginning, here it must be taken as without beginning, since he said: “In the beginning was.” You too signify this when you say “before times, before ages”. “All things,” he says, “were made through him, and without him nothing was made.” For without the Word what is there that receives its being? For the Word alone, insofar as he is Word, is to himself and to others that which he is; he himself provides it to all things that are. And therefore he is equal to the Father. For the principal cause is cause both to itself and to others, being power and substance. He is the existing cause, but the Father is the pre-cause. The Son, then, will differ in this, that he is moved and operates into manifestation, while the Father, because of his great divinity, operates in a way unknowable to us. For the Father is above blessedness, and therefore it belongs to him to rest. For to operate, if one operates imperfectly, involves the trouble of motion; but this is blessedness, to operate perfectly. ### Scripture references - John 1:1: quotation, high confidence - John 1:2: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The last sentence is obscure in the Latin and is translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.3 (PL 8:1041b–1042a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-3). ## Against Arius 1.4 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-4 - Source: PL 8:1042a–1042c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Father is being at rest and the Word is the same being in outward operation, and applies this to the true light of John 1. ### Latin text Audi igitur et aliud. Quod est esse, pater est: quod est operari, λόγος: et prius est quod est esse; secundum, quod est operari. Habet quidem ipsum quod est esse, intus insitam operationem: si enim motu, hoc est, operatione, quae vita aut qui intellectus est: ergo non est solum esse, sed ipsum quod primum est esse, propter quod est ei quiescere solum ipsum esse: est isto modo et quod est operari, quod est secundum, quoniam non intus, sed cum foris operatur, operari dicitur. Apparente enim operatione, et est et nominatur operatio, et ut generatio sui ipsius et aestimatur et est: sic igitur id ipsum quod est operari, et ipsum esse habet, magis autem non habet: ipsum enim operari esse est; simul enim et simplex, et esse et operari, eorum quae supra sunt natura est declarans et sortita: secundum quod est requiescere, ipsum esse et substantiam; secundum autem quod est in motu esse, actionem, operationem: hoc autem quod est in motu esse, declaratio est ejus quod est esse secundum actionem. Et idcirco erat lumen quod est verum, quod illuminat omnem hominem venientem in mundum. Λόγος ergo lumen est quod est verum; et idcirco quod est factum, in ipso vita est, et vita lumen hominum: et ipse λόγος, lumen verum in mundo erat, et mundus per ipsum factus est; qui filius est Dei, de quo dicit: Deum nemo vidit unquam: unigenitus filius qui est in gremio patris, ipse enarravit de λόγω. ### English translation (Claude) Hear, then, something else. What is being is the Father; what is operating is the Word; and that which is being is prior, that which is operating second. That which is being does have operation implanted within it; for without motion, that is, without operation, what life or what intellect is there? So it is not only being; but it is that very thing which is first being, and for this reason it belongs to it to rest, to be being alone. In this way there is also that which is operating, which is second, since it is called operating not when it operates within but when it operates outwardly. For when the operation appears, it both is and is named operation, and it is both regarded as and is a generation of itself. So that very thing which is operating also has being itself, or rather does not “have” it, for operating itself is being. For at once and simply, both being and operating are the nature of the things above, which declares itself and has been allotted: according to rest, being itself and substance; according to being in motion, action and operation; and this being in motion is the declaration, according to action, of that which is being. And therefore there was the light which is true, which enlightens every man coming into the world. The Word, then, is the light which is true; and therefore what was made, in him is life, and the life is the light of men; and the Word himself, the true light, was in the world, and the world was made through him; and he is the Son of God, of whom he says: “No one has ever seen God; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known”, speaking of the Word. ### Scripture references - John 1:9: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: quotation, high confidence - John 1:4: quotation, high confidence - John 1:10: quotation, high confidence - John 1:18: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “For without motion … what life or what intellect is there?” translates the corrupt “si enim motu, hoc est, operatione, quae vita aut qui intellectus est” by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.4 (PL 8:1042a–1042c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-4). ## Against Arius 1.5 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-5 - Source: PL 8:1042c–1043b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus gathers texts from John 1–5 showing that the Son is God, life, light, Christ and Saviour, and true Son of the Father. ### Latin text Omnia supra dixit et conjunxit de filio, nullum alium filium declarans, quam τον λόγον. Erat igitur filius ad Deum, et in principio erat, et ipse Deus erat, et per ipsum omnia facta sunt, et ipse est unigenitus: et veluti prodiens quidem a patre, ad patrem erat propter hoc quod est operari; propter vero quod est esse in gremio patris existens, enarravit de patre, declaratio patris effectus secundum quod est operari. Quod maxime λόγος est ipse filius, ipse lumen, ipse vita. Quod Deus est filius, sic dicit Joannes: Et Deus erat λόγος. Et rursus: Nullus ascendit in coelum, nisi qui de coelo descendit. Quod vita est filius: Ut qui credit in ipsum non pereat. Et rursus: Sed habeat spem, vitam aeternam. Quod filius: Unde filium suum unigenitum tradidit. Filium dixit, et suum, et unigenitum. Quid amplius ad verum filium? Quod ipse vita: ut omnis qui credit in ipsum, non pereat, sed habeat vitam aeternam. Quod ipse filius Christus est: Non enim misit Deus filium, ut judicet mundum, sed ut salvet mundum. Quod lumen, de ipso dicit: Quoniam lumen venit in mundum. Joannes non erat verum lumen, et idcirco dicit: Num sum Christus, sed quod missus sum. Missus est ergo Joannes. Christus autem filius, qui desuper venit, supra omnes est. Et rursus: De coelo veniens. Dicitur quidem quod sit missus a Deo; ut filium enim misit Deus. Sed ista duo, et veniens, et misit, et filium in patre, et patrem in filio esse significant; quoniam Christus vita Samaritidi dicit: Tu ab eo peteres, et tibi daret aquam viventem. Et rursus: Omnis qui biberit ex aqua ista, iterum sitiet: qui autem bibent ex ista aqua quam ego dabo ipsi, non sitiet in omni saeculo: sed aqua quam ipsi dabo, efficietur in ipso fons atque scatentis in vitam aeternam. Quod Christus Salvator: Et scimus, quoniam iste est Salvator mundi. Quod filius Dei est: Pater meus usque nunc operatur. Quis hoc dicit? Christus. Quae blasphemia ipsius, patrem dicere qui non sit pater? quae ira Judaeorum audientium patrem Deum, et irascentium in eum, qui dixit, quod filius esset Dei, cum non esset filius Dei: si enim non fuisset, non diceret. Sed dixit, et Dei cultor dixit; veritate igitur dixit, et idcirco incredulitas Judaeorum punitur. ### English translation (Claude) All the things above he said and joined together concerning the Son, declaring no other Son than the Word. The Son, then, was with God, and was in the beginning, and he himself was God, and through him all things were made, and he himself is the only-begotten. And as proceeding from the Father, he was with the Father because of operating; but because of being, existing in the bosom of the Father, he made the Father known, having become the declaration of the Father in respect of operating. That the Son himself is most of all the Word, himself the light, himself the life. That the Son is God, John says thus: “And the Word was God.” And again: “No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven.” That the Son is life: “That whoever believes in him may not perish”; and again: “but may have hope, eternal life.” That he is Son: “Hence he gave his only-begotten Son.” He said “Son”, and “his own”, and “only-begotten”. What more could be said of a true son? That he is life: “that everyone who believes in him may not perish but have eternal life.” That the Son himself is the Christ: “For God did not send his Son to judge the world, but to save the world.” That he is light, he says of him: “For the light has come into the world.” John was not the true light, and therefore he says: “I am not the Christ, but I have been sent.” John, then, was sent; but Christ the Son, who came from above, is above all. And again: “Coming from heaven.” It is indeed said that he was sent by God; for God sent him as Son. But these two, “coming” and “sent”, signify both that the Son is in the Father and that the Father is in the Son; since Christ, the life, says to the Samaritan woman: “You would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” And again: “Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again; but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will not thirst for ever; but the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain springing up into eternal life.” That Christ is the Saviour: “And we know that this is the Saviour of the world.” That he is the Son of God: “My Father is working until now.” Who says this? Christ. What blasphemy it would be of him to call Father one who is not Father! What was the anger of the Jews when they heard God called Father, angry at him who said that he was the Son of God, if he was not the Son of God? For if he had not been, he would not have said it. But he said it, and a worshipper of God said it: he said it, then, in truth; and therefore the unbelief of the Jews is punished. ### Scripture references - John 1:1: quotation, high confidence - John 3:13: quotation, high confidence - John 3:15: quotation, high confidence - John 3:16: quotation, high confidence - John 3:17: quotation, high confidence - John 3:19: quotation, high confidence - John 1:8: allusion, medium confidence - John 3:28: quotation, high confidence - John 3:31: quotation, high confidence - John 4:10: quotation, high confidence - John 4:13: quotation, high confidence - John 4:14: quotation, high confidence - John 4:42: quotation, high confidence - John 5:17: quotation, high confidence - John 5:18: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - The judgment on the unbelief of the Jews is Victorinus's own. Editorial references printed in the text, “(Ibid. I)” and “(Ibid.)”, are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.5 (PL 8:1042c–1043b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-5). ## Against Arius 1.6 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-6 - Source: PL 8:1043b–1043d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus cites John 5–6 to show that the Son, the bread from heaven, is life from the living Father, so that each is in the other. ### Latin text Post ista, omnis responsio ad Judaeos, et filium Christum, et patrem Deum declarat: Quae facit pater, et ego facio: non facit filius a semetipso, nisi viderit patrem facientem: pater enim amat filium: suscitat pater a mortuis, suscitat et filius.: Habet pater vitam in semetipso, habet et filius. Et omni deinde. Quod λόγος filius, et filius Christus: Et λόγον ejus non habebitis in vobis manentem, quoniam quem misit ille, ipsi vos non creditis. Quod filius: Pater meus dat vobis panem de coelo verum. Quod Christus non ab homine homo: Panis enim ex Deo est, qui descendit de coelo. Quod vita: Et vitam dans mundo. Et postea dicit: Ego sum panis vitae. Quod ex Deo: Non vidit patrem aliquis, nisi qui est a patre. Quod pater et filius alius in alio: Sicuti misit me vivens pater. Si vita filius, vivens pater, filius in patre: sicuti enim quale prius est, deinde qualitas; sic vivens primus Deus, sic vita. Qui enim genuit vitam, vivens est: vivit vita a vivente patre. Non enim ante vita, et sic Deus vivens, sed Deus vivens prior. Sic vita, et sic vivens vita. Et idcirco deinde dicit: Et ego vivo propter patrem. Ergo et pater in ipso. Quod et panis est, et vita: Et qui accipit me, ille vivet propter me. Hic est panis de coelo descendens: Non sicuti patres vestri manducaverunt, et mortui sunt, manducans istum panem vivet in omne soeculum. ### English translation (Claude) After this, every answer to the Jews declares both Christ as Son and God as Father: “What the Father does, I also do; the Son does nothing of himself unless he sees the Father doing it; for the Father loves the Son; the Father raises from the dead, the Son also raises; the Father has life in himself, the Son also has it”; and so on through all the rest. That the Son is the Word, and the Son is Christ: “And you will not have his word abiding in you, since you do not believe him whom he sent.” That he is Son: “My Father gives you the true bread from heaven.” That Christ is not a man from a man: “For the bread is from God, which came down from heaven.” That he is life: “and gives life to the world.” And afterwards he says: “I am the bread of life.” That he is from God: “No one has seen the Father except him who is from the Father.” That Father and Son are each in the other: “As the living Father sent me.” If the Son is life and the Father living, the Son is in the Father. For as the qualified comes first and then the quality, so the living God is first, then life. For he who begot life is living: life lives from the living Father. It is not that life was first and so God living; the living God is prior. So there is life, and so living life. And therefore he says next: “And I live because of the Father.” So the Father too is in him. That he is both bread and life: “And he who receives me, he shall live because of me. This is the bread that comes down from heaven: not as your fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.” ### Scripture references - John 5:19: quotation, high confidence - John 5:20: quotation, high confidence - John 5:21: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence - John 5:38: quotation, high confidence - John 6:32: quotation, high confidence - John 6:33: quotation, high confidence - John 6:35: quotation, high confidence - John 6:46: quotation, high confidence - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 6:58: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Editorial references printed in the text, “(Ibid.)”, are removed. “The Word” renders the garbled Greek λόγος. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.6 (PL 8:1043b–1043d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-6). ## Against Arius 1.7 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-7 - Source: PL 8:1043d–1044b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that Christ's sayings in John would be blasphemy from a mere man, and that “I am in the Father” means unity of substance, not of dignity alone. ### Latin text Numquid homo ista dicit de semetipso, qui sit solum homo? si enim homo ista dicit, blasphemat, et peccantes Deus non audit. Sedenim dicit Christus quod audiit illum Deus: Non ergo peccator, neque homo. Et dictum est: Vana spes in hominem. Et dicitur: Nos vero in Deum nostrum speramus. Christus ergo Deus, non ab alia substantia: Vivens pater, et ego vivo propter patrem. Et: Panis vitae sum ego: qui istum manducat, vivet in saeculum. Cuncta ista unam substantiam significant: Et idcirco dicit Jesus quod desuper est, qui dicit ista: Si igitur videritis filium hominis ascendentem ubi fuit prius? Quod spiritus Deus est, dictum est: Spiritus Deus est. Et quod filius spiritus est vivificans, quod ista fides sit perfecta in Christum, dicit Petrus: Verbum vitae aeternae habes: et nos credimus in te, Domine, quoniam tu es Christus filius Dei. Quid est verbum vitae aeternae? quoniam si quis te audit, vivet in aeternum. Quod a Deo: Ego scio ipsum, quod ab ipso sum. Quod substantia patris Christus: Ego in patre, et pater in me. Hoc non per dignitatem solum, sed per substantiam. Si enim per dignitatem solum, quomodo ipse dicit: Pater meus major me est; et pater mittat, mittatur filius? Rursus autem datur filio a patre dignitas: Secundum hoc igitur pater in filio. Numquid et filius dat dignitatem patri, non habenti substantiam? Igitur et pater in filio, et filius in patre. ### English translation (Claude) Does a man who is only a man say these things of himself? For if a man says these things, he blasphemes, and God does not hear sinners. But Christ says that God heard him: he is not, then, a sinner, nor a man. And it is said: “Vain is hope in man”; and it is said: “But we hope in our God.” Christ, then, is God, not from another substance: “The living Father, and I live because of the Father”; and: “I am the bread of life: he who eats this will live for ever.” All these signify one substance. And therefore Jesus, who says these things, says that he is from above: “What, then, if you see the Son of Man ascending where he was before?” That God is spirit, it is said: “God is spirit.” And that the Son is the life-giving spirit, and that this faith in Christ is perfect, Peter says: “You have the word of eternal life; and we believe in you, Lord, that you are the Christ, the Son of God.” What is “the word of eternal life”? That if anyone hears you, he will live for ever. That he is from God: “I know him, because I am from him.” That Christ is of the Father's substance: “I am in the Father, and the Father in me.” This is not by dignity only, but by substance. For if it were by dignity only, how does he himself say, “My Father is greater than I”, and how does the Father send and the Son is sent? Again, dignity is given to the Son by the Father; in this respect, then, the Father is in the Son. Does the Son also give dignity to the Father, as to one without substance? So both the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father. ### Scripture references - John 9:31: allusion, high confidence - John 11:42: allusion, medium confidence - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 6:48: quotation, high confidence - John 6:51: quotation, high confidence - John 6:62: quotation, high confidence - John 4:24: quotation, high confidence - John 6:63: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 15:45: allusion, medium confidence - John 6:68: quotation, high confidence - John 6:69: quotation, high confidence - John 7:29: quotation, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence - John 14:28: quotation, high confidence - Ps 60:11 (59:13 LXX): quotation, medium confidence - Ps 20:7 (19:8 LXX): quotation, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Vain is hope in man” is a form of Ps 60:11 (Septuagint 59:13, “vain is the help of man”); “But we hope in our God” is a form of Ps 20:7 (Septuagint 19:8). The last two sentences are compressed in the Latin; translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.7 (PL 8:1043d–1044b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-7). ## Against Arius 1.8 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-8 - Source: PL 8:1044b–1045a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus reads John 7:37–39 to show the Spirit flowing from the Son as the Son from the Father's bosom, so that the three are homoousios, and adds further texts from John 8–10. ### Latin text Sed ista. Et iterum quod ipse Christus, qui filius patris, et ipse est Spiritus sanctus: Jesus stabat, et clamabat: Si quis est qui sitit, veniat et bibat. Qui credit in me, quemadmodum dixit scriptura, flumina ex ventre ipsius manant aquae viventis. Est illud quidem dictum de illo qui accipit spiritum; qui accipiens spiritum efficitur venter, effundens flumina aquae viventis. Dat autem hunc spiritum Christus; dat et aquam viventem, ut ipse dicit, scriptura de spiritu dixit istud. Venter igitur qui accipit spiritum, et ipse spiritus venter, a quo manant flumina aquae viventis: sicut scriptura dicit: Hoc autem dixit de spiritu quem futuri erant accipere credentes in ipsum: nondum enim spiritus erat datus, quia Jesus nondum erat glorificatus. Sed rursum iterum flumina spiritus, venter autem ex quo flumina Jesus; Jesus enim est spiritus. Jam ergo Jesus venter de quo flumina spiritus. Sicuti enim a gremio patris, et in gremio filius; sic a ventre filii spiritus; ομοούσιον ergo tres; et idcirco in omnibus unus Deus. Quod non sit ex mundo: Ego sum lumen mundi; propter ipsum enim vixit mundus, ac vivet quamdiu obedierit ei. Quod omnes tres spiritus, jam dixit: Deus spiritus est. Et dicentibus quibusdam: Ubi est pater tuus? dixit: Neque me nostis, neque patrem meum: Si me sciretis, scire possetis et patrem meum. Spiritus autem sanctus Spiritus manifeste; ista autem omnia et pater, et ex patre: ergo. Non enim spiritus ut alii: illi enim a Deo, non ex Deo: ομοούσιον igitur ista tria. Quod filius verus: Ego enim ex Deo exivi, ut ex gremio patris, et advenio in mundum. Quod antequam in carne esset, erat Christus: Abraham, pater vester, laetabatur ut videret diem meum: et vidit et gavisus est. Et rursus: Ante Abraham ego sum. Quod non homo: Cum sum in mundo, lumen sum mundi. Quis autem dedit caeco visum? homo? impossibile: et ego, quod filius Dei: Tu credis in filium Dei? Respondit ille: Quis est. Domine, ut credam in eum? Dixit ipsi Jesus: Et vidisti eum, et qui loquitur tecum, ipse est. Quod ex eadem substantia et potentia: Ego et pater unum sumus. Et rursus: Pater in me, et ego in ipso. ### English translation (Claude) But enough of this. And again, that Christ himself, who is the Son of the Father, is himself also the Holy Spirit: “Jesus stood and cried out: If anyone thirsts, let him come and drink. He who believes in me, as the Scripture said, rivers of living water flow from his belly.” That indeed is said of the one who receives the Spirit: receiving the Spirit, he becomes a belly pouring out rivers of living water. But Christ gives this Spirit; he also gives living water, as he himself says; Scripture said this of the Spirit. The belly, then, is the one who receives the Spirit, and the Spirit himself is the belly from which flow rivers of living water, as Scripture says: “This he said of the Spirit whom those who believed in him were to receive; for the Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” But again, the rivers are the Spirit, and the belly from which the rivers flow is Jesus; for Jesus is spirit. So Jesus is the belly from which the rivers of the Spirit flow. For as the Son is from the bosom of the Father and in the bosom, so the Spirit is from the belly of the Son. The three, then, are homoousios, and therefore in all there is one God. That he is not from the world: “I am the light of the world”; for because of him the world lived, and will live as long as it obeys him. That all three are spirit, he has already said: “God is spirit.” And when some said, “Where is your Father?”, he said: “You know neither me nor my Father; if you knew me, you could know my Father also.” And the Holy Spirit is manifestly Spirit; and all these are both the Father and from the Father: therefore homoousios. For they are not spirit as others are, for those are from God, not out of God: these three, then, are homoousios. That he is the true Son: “For I came forth from God”, as from the bosom of the Father, “and I come into the world.” That Christ was before he was in the flesh: “Abraham your father rejoiced to see my day; he saw it and was glad.” And again: “Before Abraham, I am.” That he is not a man: “While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” Who gave sight to the blind man? A man? Impossible. And that he is the Son of God: “Do you believe in the Son of God?” He answered: “Who is he, Lord, that I may believe in him?” Jesus said to him: “You have seen him, and he who speaks with you is he.” That he is of the same substance and power: “I and the Father are one.” And again: “The Father is in me, and I in him.” ### Scripture references - John 7:37: quotation, high confidence - John 7:38: quotation, high confidence - John 7:39: quotation, high confidence - John 8:12: quotation, high confidence - John 4:24: quotation, high confidence - John 8:19: quotation, high confidence - John 8:42: quotation, high confidence - John 8:56: quotation, high confidence - John 8:58: quotation, high confidence - John 9:5: quotation, high confidence - John 9:35: quotation, high confidence - John 9:36: quotation, high confidence - John 9:37: quotation, high confidence - John 10:30: quotation, high confidence - John 10:38: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Victorinus's statement that Christ “is himself also the Holy Spirit” is translated as written; in the same section he distinguishes the Spirit as flowing from the Son. The distinction between “from God” (a Deo, of creatures) and “out of God” (ex Deo, of the three) is his. “Homoousios” renders ὁμοούσιον (once garbled in the digital text). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.8 (PL 8:1044b–1045a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-8). ## Against Arius 1.9 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-9 - Source: PL 8:1045a–1045c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from Philippians 2:6 that the Son is equal to the Father in power and therefore in substance, against Arius. ### Latin text Unde dictum in Paulo: Qui in forma Dei existens, non rapinam arbitratus est, esse se aequalem Deo. Ista igitur significant et unam esse substantiam, et unam potentiam. Quomodo enim, Ego et pater unum sumus? et quomodo, Pater in me, et ego in patre, si non a patre substantiam habuisset et potentiam, genitus de toto totus? et quomodo, Non rapinam arbitratus est, aequalem esse patri? Non enim dixit: Non arbitratus est aequalem esse, sed, Non arbitratus esse rapinam. Vult ergo inferior esse, non volens rapinam arbitrari aequalem esse. In istis enim arbitrari est, aut non arbitrari rapinam esse aequalem, quae sunt aequalia. Sed putavimus aequalem, secundum potentiam dictum esse. Primum non est illud Arii dogma, quod major est pater dignitate, potentia, claritate, divinitate, actione: aequalia enim dixit: et si secundum istud aequalia, impossibile secundum istud aequalia esse, si non et substantia eadem, Dei enim eadem ipsa est et potentia, et substantia, et divinitas, et actio: Omnia enim unum, et unum simplex. Huc accedit, si ab alia substantia erat filius, et si maxime ex nihilo; quae illa substantia recipere valens istas divinitates et potentias? aequalitas aequali connectitur, et simile simili. AEqualis igitur filius et pater, et propterea et filius in patre, et pater in filio, et ambo unum. ### English translation (Claude) Hence it is said in Paul: “Who, existing in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” These words, then, signify that there is both one substance and one power. For how is it “I and the Father are one”, and how “The Father is in me, and I in the Father”, if he had not had substance and power from the Father, begotten whole from the whole? And how “he did not consider it robbery to be equal with the Father”? For he did not say, “He did not consider himself to be equal”, but “did not consider it robbery”. He wills, then, to be lower, not wishing to consider it robbery to be equal. For to consider it robbery, or not to consider it robbery, to be equal belongs to things that are equal. But we have supposed that “equal” is said in respect of power. First, then, that doctrine of Arius fails, that the Father is greater in dignity, power, glory, divinity and action; for Paul said “equal”. And if they are equal in this respect, it is impossible that they be equal in it unless the substance is also the same; for in God power, substance, divinity and action are one and the same: for all are one, and the one is simple. Add to this: if the Son was from another substance, and above all if from nothing, what substance would be able to receive these divinities and powers? Equality is joined to the equal, and like to like. The Son and the Father, then, are equal, and therefore the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son, and both are one. ### Scripture references - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence - John 10:30: quotation, high confidence - John 10:38: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.9 (PL 8:1045a–1045c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-9). ## Against Arius 1.10 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-10 - Source: PL 8:1045c–1046a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus distinguishes Christ's natural sonship from our adoption, against Photinus, and explains his prayers and fear as part of the mystery of the incarnation. ### Latin text Sed ista nunc. At vero illa Joannis videamus. Ipse Salvator dicit: Ego sum resurrectio, quoniam ipse vita: Quis autem iste? Martha dicit: Quoniam tu es Christus filius Dei, qui in mundum venisti. Quod non sic filius, quemadmodum nos: Nos enim adoptione filii, ille natura. Etiam quadam adoptione filius et Christus, sed secundum carnem: Ego hodie genui te. Si enim istud, solum hominem filium habet: sed Ante Abraham ego sum, dicens quod natura filius erat primum, declaravit. Non igitur Photinianum dogma verum. Deinde nos non gentes solum, sed et qui dispersi sunt filii. Dei igitur filius Christus; filii et nos: sed nos per adoptionem, nos per Jesum Christum, nos ut filii dispersi: num et Christus sic filius? Natura igitur Jesus filius, nos adoptione filii. Quod natura filius, et ipse dicit saepe: Pater gratias tibi ago quod me audisti. Et: Pater, salva me ex ista hora. Et rursus: Ego ex ore patris processi. Ista non, ut nos dicimus, secundum patrem Deum dicta sunt: Non enim mendax Deus, nec impius, filium se dicens, et patrem Deum qui omnino non esset: sed propter corpus passionem induxit, ut implerentur omnia in mysterio. Quod et antequam in corpore, fuit Christus: Et glorificavi, et rursum glorifico: in mysterio enim in carne humiliavit semetipsum. Ergo ante istud et post istud glorificatus est Jesus. Quod propter mysterium et timens inducitur, et postulans aliqua: Non propter me venit haec vox, sed propter vos. Eadem similiter ista facio, non propter me, sed propter vos. ### English translation (Claude) But enough of this for now. Let us look at those words of John. The Saviour himself says: “I am the resurrection”, since he is life. And who is he? Martha says: “That you are the Christ, the Son of God, who have come into the world.” That he is not Son in the way we are: for we are sons by adoption, he by nature. Christ too is Son by a kind of adoption, but according to the flesh: “Today I have begotten you.” For if this alone were so, God would have his Son only as a man; but in saying “Before Abraham, I am”, he declared that he was first Son by nature. The Photinian doctrine, then, is not true. Next, Scripture speaks not only of the nations but also of the sons who are scattered. Christ, then, is Son of God; we too are sons, but we by adoption, we through Jesus Christ, we as scattered sons: is Christ a son in this way? Jesus, then, is Son by nature, we are sons by adoption. That he is Son by nature he himself often says: “Father, I thank you that you have heard me”; and: “Father, save me from this hour”; and again: “I came forth from the mouth of the Father.” These things are not said in the way we say them of God as Father. For God is not a liar, nor impious, calling himself Son and God Father, when God was not his Father at all. But because of the body he took on suffering, that all things might be fulfilled in the mystery. That Christ existed even before he was in the body: “I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again”; for in the mystery he humbled himself in the flesh. Before this and after it, then, Jesus was glorified. That because of the mystery he is presented as fearing and asking for things: “This voice came not for my sake but for yours.” In the same way: “These things I do not for my sake but for yours.” ### Scripture references - John 11:25: quotation, high confidence - John 11:27: quotation, high confidence - Ps 2:7: quotation, high confidence - John 8:58: quotation, high confidence - John 11:52: allusion, high confidence - John 11:41: quotation, high confidence - John 12:27: quotation, high confidence - John 12:28: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:8: allusion, medium confidence - John 12:30: quotation, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Sir 24:3 (Sirach): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Photinus of Sirmium (d. 376) taught that the Son did not exist before his birth from Mary. “I came forth from the mouth of the Father” resembles Sir 24:3 (“I came forth from the mouth of the Most High”). The last quotation (“These things I do not for my sake”) is unidentified; it may paraphrase John 11:42 or 12:30. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.10 (PL 8:1045c–1046a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-10). ## Against Arius 1.11 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-11 - Source: PL 8:1046a–1046d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus cites John 12 and 14 to show that Father and Son are two from one substance, and that the Spirit, “another Paraclete”, is the power of Christ. ### Latin text Quod filius hominis ipse Christus, lumen in mundo filius Dei est: Nos audivimus a lege, quoniam Christus manet in aeternum: et quomodo dicis tu, quod filium hominis oportet altificari? Quis est filius hominis. Dixit ipsis Jesus: Adhuc paululum tempus lumen in vobis est. Et deinde: Quamdiu lumen habetis, credetis in lumen, ut filii luminis efficiamini. Quod ψοαΰσιος Deo: Ego sum via, et veritas et vita. Nullus venit ad patrem, si non per me· Si cognovistis me, et patrem meum cognoscetis: et amodo cognoscitis ipsum, et vidistis ipsum. Et rursum ad Philippum; Qui vidit me, vidit et patrem. Non credis quod ego in patre, et pater in me est? Et rursus ista et talia, in quibus manifestum est, quod et pater est juxta quod est, et filius est juxta quod est, et idcirco duo sunt. Sed quoniam et pater in filio, et filius in patre, (ψοονσιοί. Non oportet igitur dicere duae personae, una substantia; sed duo pater et filius, ex una substantia; dante patre a sua substantia filio substantiam in hoc in quo genuit filium et ex όμςβύσιοι ambo. Quod ipse facit, et faciet omnia, quoniam ego a patre: Et quod resurgitis in nomine meo, hoc faciam, ut glorificetur pater in me. Quod paracletus et Christus: Si me dilexeritis, et mandata mea custodieritis: et ego rogabo patrem, et alium paracletum dabit vobis, ut vobiscum sit in aeternum. Quis autem est alius paracletus: Spiritus veritatis, quem mundus videre non potest: quod eum non videt. Alium autem paracletum, id est, Christum viderunt; quod in carne, non crediderunt in ipsum. Quod potentia Christi sit paracletus: Vos autem cognoscitis ipsum, quoniam apud vos manet. Ergo dedit ipsum ipsis Christus, dixit enim: Manet in vobis, et in vobis est. ### English translation (Claude) That the Son of Man himself is the Christ, the light in the world, the Son of God: “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains for ever; how, then, do you say that the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?” Jesus said to them: “For a little while yet the light is among you.” And then: “While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” That he is homoousios with God: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you had known me, you would know my Father also; and from now on you know him and have seen him.” And again to Philip: “He who has seen me has seen the Father also. Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me?” And again these and similar texts, in which it is plain that the Father is according to what he is and the Son according to what he is, and that therefore they are two. But since the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, they are homoousioi. One must not say, then, “two persons, one substance”, but two, Father and Son, from one substance, the Father giving the Son substance from his own substance in this, that he begot the Son; and both are homoousioi. That he himself does and will do all things, since “I am from the Father”: “And whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in me.” That the Paraclete is also Christ: “If you love me and keep my commandments, I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, to be with you for ever.” Who is the other Paraclete? “The Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot see, because it does not see him.” But the other Paraclete, that is, Christ, they did see; because he was in the flesh, they did not believe in him. That the Paraclete is the power of Christ: “But you know him, since he abides with you.” Christ, then, gave him to them; for he said: “He abides in you and is in you.” ### Scripture references - John 12:34: quotation, high confidence - John 12:35: quotation, high confidence - John 12:36: quotation, high confidence - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 14:7: quotation, high confidence - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence - John 14:12: allusion, medium confidence - John 14:13: quotation, high confidence - John 14:15: quotation, high confidence - John 14:16: quotation, high confidence - John 14:17: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Homoousios” renders ὁμοούσιος, garbled several times in the digital text. Victorinus objects here to the formula “two persons, one substance” and prefers “two from one substance”; translated as written. “Ask” renders the corrupt “resurgitis” by the sense of John 14:13. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.11 (PL 8:1046a–1046d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-11). ## Against Arius 1.12 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-12 - Source: PL 8:1046d–1047c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from John 14 that the Spirit comes from Christ as Christ from God, speaking openly what Christ spoke in figures, so that the three are one and homoousion. ### Latin text Ex his quid apparet? Si Deus spiritus, et Jesus spiritus, et sanctus Spiritus, spiritus, ex una substantia tria; ομοούνι* ergo tria. Quod a Christo Spiritus sanctus, sicut Christus a Deo, et idcirco unum tria: Non vos relinquam orphanos, veniam ad vos. Et rursus dicit: Illa die cognoscetis, quoniam ego in patre meo, et vos in me, et ego in vobis: Secundum spiritum ista: Quod a filio paracletus: Paracletus autem sanctus Spiritus, quem pater mittet in nomine meo, ille vos docebit omnia quae ego dixero. Manifestum ex his, quod in Christo Deus, et in sancto Spiritu Christus, primum paracletus Christus, paracletus sanctus Spiritus. Deinde misit Christus Deus: quae locutus est Christus, ipsa loquitur sanctus Spiritus. Sed Christus locutus est in parabolis, et fecit signa: ergo in occulto omnis, quod ipse in carne erat; sicut ipse intus, sic et verum intus in parabolis et signis. Spiritus autem docet omnia: et enim Spiritus sanctus loquitur spiritui hominum; ipsum quod est loquitur, et quod est loquitur in nulla figura: Et ideo ipse docebit vos. Et quae loquitur? Quaecumque dixero, dixit Christus. Dixero, de futuro est. De quo futuro? Non eo quod nunc, sed eo quod est post ascendere ad patrem. Et si iste paracletus veniens a Deo in nomine Christi, illa docet quae dicit Jesus: ipse ergo Jesus, an ipse alter Jesus? an ipso altero paracleto, hoc est, Spiritu sancto inest Jesus, sicut in ipso Deus? Ista hac serie tribus existentibus, et unum sunt tria, et ομοούσιον: quippe dicente Christo: Eo et venio ad vos: a Deo alius dabitur vobis paracletus, qui quaecumque habet, a me habet, et quaecumque habet pater, tradidit mihi omnia. Etenim omne mysterium hoc est, pater inoperans operatio, filius operans operatio, id est quod est regenerare: sanctus autem Spiritus operans operatio in quod est regenerare. ### English translation (Claude) What appears from these texts? If God is spirit, and Jesus is spirit, and the Holy Spirit is spirit, the three are from one substance; the three, then, are homoousia. That the Holy Spirit is from Christ, as Christ is from God, and that therefore the three are one: “I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.” And again he says: “On that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.” These things are said according to the Spirit. That the Paraclete is from the Son: “But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things that I shall say.” It is plain from these texts that God is in Christ and Christ in the Holy Spirit: first, Christ is a Paraclete, the Holy Spirit is a Paraclete. Then God sent Christ; what Christ spoke, the same the Holy Spirit speaks. But Christ spoke in parables and did signs: everything, then, was hidden, because he himself was in the flesh; as he himself was within, so the truth too was within, in parables and signs. But the Spirit teaches all things: for the Holy Spirit speaks to the spirit of men; he speaks what is, and speaks it in no figure: “And therefore he will teach you.” And what does he speak? “Whatever I shall say,” Christ said. “I shall say” refers to the future. To what future? Not to the present, but to the time after he ascends to the Father. And if this Paraclete, coming from God in Christ's name, teaches the things that Jesus says, is he then Jesus himself, or another Jesus? Or is Jesus in that other Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, as God is in Jesus? The three existing in this order, the three are both one and homoousion, since Christ says: “I go and I come to you”; from God another Paraclete will be given you, who has from me whatever he has; and whatever the Father has, he has handed all to me. For this is the whole mystery: the Father is the operation that does not operate, the Son the operation that operates toward generating, and the Holy Spirit the operation that operates toward what is to regenerate. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - John 14:18: quotation, high confidence - John 14:20: quotation, high confidence - John 14:26: quotation, high confidence - John 16:25: allusion, low confidence - John 14:28: quotation, high confidence - John 16:14: allusion, high confidence - John 16:15: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - In the last sentence the digital text reads “regenerare” (“to regenerate”) for the Son as well as for the Spirit; the sense requires “generare” (“to generate”) for the Son, and it is translated so. “I go and I come to you” is John 14:28; the clauses that follow paraphrase John 16:14–15. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.12 (PL 8:1046d–1047c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-12). ## Against Arius 1.13 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-1/#p-1-13 - Source: PL 8:1047c–1048b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains how the Son is both equal to the Father and lower, and how the Spirit, the hidden power of the Word, receives from Christ as Christ from the Father. ### Latin text Sed ista quidem et in aliis dicta. Quod λόγος, hoc est, Jesus vel Christus, aequalis est patris, et inferior: Eo ad patrem, quoniam pater major est me. Item dicit Paulus: Non rapinam arbitratus est se aequalem esse Deo. Et id quod dictum est: Ego et pater unum sumus. Et quod operatio et pater, et filius: et quod non diceret, me major est pater, nisi fuisset aequalis: accedit etiam, si totus ex toto, et lumen ex lumine, et si omnia quae habet pater dedit filio: omnia autem sunt et substantia, et potestas, et dignitas, aequalis patri, sed major pater: quod ipse dedit ipsi omnia, et causa est ipsi filio ut sit, ut isto modo sit. Ad hoc autem major, quod actio inactuosa: beatior enim quo sine molestia, et impassibilis, et fons omnium quae sunt, requiescens, a se perfecta; et nullius egens: filius autem ut esset, accepit, et in id quod est agere, ab actione procedens, in perfectionem veniens, motu efficitur plenitudo. Sed quoniam in ipso, et in ipsum, et per ipsum gignuntur omnia; semper plenitudo, et semper receptaculum est, qua ratione et impassibilis et passibilis. Ergo aequalis et inaequalis: Major igitur pater. Quod paracletus a Deo, et a Christo: Cum venerit paracletus, quem ego mittam vobis a patre, Spiritum veritatis, qui a patre adveniet. Quod duplex potentia του λόγου ad Deum: una in manifesto, Christus in carne: alia in occulto, Spiritus sanctus. In praesentia ergo cum erat λόγος, hoc est Christus, non poterat venire λόγος in occulto, hoc est, Spiritus sanctus: Etenim si non discedo, paracletus non veniet ad vos. Duo ergo et isti, ex alio alius, ex filio Spiritus sanctus, sicuti ex Deo filius conrationaliter, et Spiritus sanctus ex patre. Quod omnia tria unum, pater non silens silentium, sed vox in silentio, filius jam vox; paracletus vox vocis: Cum venerit Spiritus veritatis, praeibit vobis in veritate omni: non autem verum dicit a semet: Christus enim veritas: sed quaecumque audiet, loquetur, et ventura dicet vobis: Ille me honorabit, quoniam ex meo accipiet, et nuntiabit vobis. Deinde adjungit: Omnia quae habet pater, mea sunt. Dicit ergo: ex meo accipiet, quod una motio, hoc est, actio agens Christus est, et Spiritus sanctus: et primum est vivere, et ab ipso quod est vivere, intelligere: vivere quidem Christus, intelligere Spiritus: ergo Spiritus a Christo accipit, ipse Christus a patre, et idcirco et Spiritus a patre. ### English translation (Claude) But these things have been said elsewhere too. That the Word, that is, Jesus or Christ, is equal to the Father, and lower: “I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.” Likewise Paul says: “He did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” And there is what was said: “I and the Father are one”; and that both the Father and the Son are operation; and that he would not say “the Father is greater than I” unless he had been equal. Add also: if he is whole from the whole and light from light, and if the Father gave the Son all that he has, and “all” is substance, power and dignity, then he is equal to the Father. But the Father is greater, because he gave him all things and is the cause for the Son that he is, and that he is in this way. And he is greater in this, that he is action without activity: for he is more blessed in that he is without trouble, and impassible, and the fountain of all that are, resting, perfect from himself and needing nothing; whereas the Son received in order to be, and, proceeding from action into what is acting and coming into perfection, becomes fullness by motion. But since in him, into him and through him all things are begotten, he is always fullness and always receptacle; and for this reason he is both impassible and passible. He is, then, equal and unequal. The Father, then, is greater. That the Paraclete is from God and from Christ: “When the Paraclete comes, whom I shall send you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who will come from the Father.” That the power of the Word toward God is twofold: one manifest, Christ in the flesh; the other hidden, the Holy Spirit. While the Word, that is, Christ, was present, the Word in hiddenness, that is, the Holy Spirit, could not come: “For if I do not go away, the Paraclete will not come to you.” These two also, then, are one from the other, the Holy Spirit from the Son, as the Son is from God, in the same rational order; and the Holy Spirit from the Father. That all three are one: the Father a silence that is not silent, but a voice in silence; the Son, now a voice; the Paraclete, the voice of the voice: “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will go before you into all truth; he does not speak the truth from himself” (for Christ is the truth), “but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will tell you things to come. He will honour me, because he will receive from what is mine and announce it to you.” Then he adds: “All that the Father has is mine.” He says, then, “he will receive from what is mine”, because there is one motion: that is, the acting action is Christ and the Holy Spirit. First is living, and from what is living, understanding: Christ is living, the Spirit understanding. So the Spirit receives from Christ, Christ himself from the Father, and therefore the Spirit too from the Father. ### Scripture references - John 14:28: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence - John 10:30: quotation, high confidence - John 16:15: quotation, high confidence - John 15:26: quotation, high confidence - John 16:7: quotation, high confidence - John 16:13: quotation, high confidence - John 16:14: quotation, high confidence - John 14:6: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - An editorial reference printed in the text, “(Ibid.)”, is removed. The image of the Father as silence, the Son as voice, and the Spirit as “voice of the voice” is Victorinus's own. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.13 (PL 8:1047c–1048b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-13). ## Against Arius 1.14 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-14 - Source: PL 8:1048b–1049a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains the order of Christ's sayings about coming from the Father in John 16–17, and shows from them that Christ existed before the world and is God in a man. ### Latin text Omnia igitur unum, sed a patre. Quod Christus et a patre processit, hoc est, quod Deus ipsum misit, hoc est, a Deo processit, dicit enim: Quoniam ego a Deo processi: processi a patre: Cognoscendum quod et dixit: et exivi. Sed quod a Deo praeposuit, a Deo processi: quod significat, quod Deus ipsum misit. Credite igitur hoc primum, quoniam ego a Deo exivi. Quod autem a Deo, et ut quis? Ab illo Deo qui pater meus est: Exivi igitur a patre, et veni in mundum. Hujus orationis naturalis ordo iste est: Processi a patre, exivi a Deo, veni in mundum. Sed effectus et locutionis ordo ab hominibus: quoniam vos dilexistis me et credidistis, quod a Deo exivi; hoc enim primum in fidem. Deinde autem processi de patre, exponens a superioribus cujus erat dixit, unde et ipsi dicunt: Credimus quod a patre existi. Quid autem supra dimisit Deum et patrem? non dicit enim, non sum solus: quoniam pater mecum est; et non est intelligere quod pater passus est; neque enim ipse, sed homo ejus. Quod in resurrectionem carnis venit? Glorifica filium, ut filius glorificet te sicut ei dedisti potestatem universa carnis, ut omne quod dedisti ipsi, det ipsi vitam aeternam. Ergo non solum homo Christus, sed Deus in homine. Quod hoc sit vitam habere, credere in Dominum et in filium ejus: Est autem aeterna vita, ut cognoscant te unum et verum Deum, et quem praemisisti Jesum Christum. Quod fuit ante mundum: Et nunc glorifica me, pater, apud te ipsum gloria, quam habui antequam mundus esset. Quod homines a Deo, non tamen ex Deo: Manifestavi tui nomen hominibus quos dedisti mihi. Ex isto manifestum quod non omnes tui erant, et mihi eos dedisti, et verbum tuum custodierunt: Nunc cognoverunt, quoniam omnia quae mihi dedisti, a te sunt. Et quid mirabile, si homines a Deo, si et caro, quod ipse eam formavit? Quid igitur? numquid sic et Christus? Absit. Totus hic locus hoc struit, quod homines a Deo sunt, sed non omnes. Rursus et istud, quod Christus erat ante constitutionem mundi, quod omnia tradidit pater filio, si et nomen dedit, dicit enim: Custodivi eos in nomine tuo, quos mihi dedisti. ### English translation (Claude) All things, then, are one, but from the Father. That Christ proceeded from the Father, that is, that God sent him, that is, that he proceeded from God; for he says: “Because I proceeded from God”; “I proceeded from the Father”. It should be noted that he also said: “and I came out”. But he put “from God” first: “I proceeded from God”, which signifies that God sent him. “Believe, then, this first, that I came out from God.” But from God, and as whom? From that God who is my Father: “I came out, then, from the Father and came into the world.” The natural order of this speech is this: I proceeded from the Father, I came out from God, I came into the world. But the order of effect and of speaking comes from men: “since you have loved me and have believed that I came out from God”; for this comes first for faith. Then, “I proceeded from the Father”, explaining from higher things whose he was; hence they too say: “We believe that you came out from the Father.” But did he leave God and the Father behind on high? No; for he says: “I am not alone, because the Father is with me.” And this is not to be understood as meaning that the Father suffered; nor did the Son himself suffer, but the man that was his. That he came for the resurrection of the flesh: “Glorify the Son, that the Son may glorify you, as you have given him power over all flesh, that to all that you have given him he may give eternal life.” Christ, then, is not only a man, but God in a man. That to have life is this, to believe in the Lord and in his Son: “And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the one true God, and Jesus Christ whom you sent.” That he was before the world: “And now glorify me, Father, with yourself, with the glory that I had before the world was.” That men are from God, yet not out of God: “I have made known your name to the men whom you gave me.” From this it is plain that not all were yours: “and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word. Now they know that everything you gave me is from you.” And what wonder if men are from God, if the flesh too is, since he formed it? What then? Is Christ so too? Far from it. This whole passage builds up this point: that men are from God, but not all. And again this: that Christ was before the founding of the world, that the Father handed all things to the Son, since he also gave him the name; for he says: “I kept in your name those whom you gave me.” ### Scripture references - John 8:42: quotation, high confidence - John 16:28: quotation, high confidence - John 16:27: quotation, high confidence - John 16:30: quotation, high confidence - John 8:16: quotation, high confidence - John 17:1: quotation, high confidence - John 17:2: quotation, high confidence - John 17:3: quotation, high confidence - John 17:5: quotation, high confidence - John 17:6: quotation, high confidence - John 17:7: quotation, high confidence - John 17:12: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The sentence about the Father not suffering answers the Patripassian view (see 1.18). An editor's reference, “(Joan. viii. 16)”, printed in the text is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.14 (PL 8:1048b–1049a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14). ## Against Arius 1.15 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-15 - Source: PL 8:1049a–1050a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus adds texts from John and Matthew, including the confessions of Satan and the demons, and argues from Matthew 11:27 that only one who shares God's substance can know him. ### Latin text Habemus ergo quod Christus habet nomen patris, et quod vita est, et habet potestatem dare vivere. Quod ipse vita est, et pater vita, dictum est: Misit me pater vivens. Et haec est substantia Dei et Christi, ομοούσιοι ergo. Deinde dictum est, lumen Christus, et Deus verum lumen: ista enim ad intelligentiam: num aliud est Spiritus sanctus? Nihil. Quod deinde lumen, non substantia: sic ergo ομοούσια. Et omnia quae habet Deus, habet filius, ομοούσια ergo. Sed de isto posterius. Quod natus est: In istud natus sum, et in istud veni in mundum, ut regnem. Quod a Christo Spiritus sanctus: Insufflavit Christus et dixit: Accipite Spiritum sanctum. Ista omnia secundum Evangelium Joannis. Videamus etiam et secundum Matthaeum pauca; similia enim praetereo. Quod et satanas fatetur Christum Dei esse filium, dicit enim: Si tu es Filius Dei. Et istud ter dicit: Sed in secundo confitens de filio Dei tentavit, si ipse esset Christus, dicit enim: Filius es tu Dei, mitte te deorsum· Scriptum est enim: quod Angelis suis praecipiet de te. Confitetur; qui dicit, de te, Dei filium confitetur, et hunc confitetur· Deinde confitentur rursus daemones. Exibant etiam daemonia a multis, exclamantia et dicentia: Tu es filius Dei Audi, Ari, audi, Eusebi, et omnes audite, Ariani, et maxime qui dicitis ab eo quo est esse Christum: sed secundum serpentis intellectum: quoniam pater ov est, qui fecit Christum: Ideo ex eo quod est esse filium dicentes. Audite ergo, filium dicit Dei satanas, cui promisit regnum mundi, scit omnia quae in supernis: inde enim est. Quid enim post tertiam tentationem, quod diabolus abscessit, confessus est filium esse Dei? Quod et daemones dixerunt filium esse Dei: Quid nobis et tibi, fili Dei, venisti? Quod non oportet dubitare de Christo: Beatus est qui non scandalizatur in me. Quod omnia patris filius habet: Omnia mihi tradita sunt a patre, nullus cognoscit filium nisi pater, nec patrem nisi filius cognoscit, et cui vult filius revelare. Quae causa, solum filium scire patrem, aut patrem ut cognoscat filium? nisi quod nullus habet substantiam ejus. Omnia enim quae in claritudine, et in divinitate, in potentia, in ipsa actione et cognoscunt patrem, et colunt. Sed quoniam cognoscere, hoc est, scire ipsius Dei, ipsum quod est ei esse, hoc est, substantiam ejus: idcirco nullus cognoscit Deum, nisi substantiam eamdem habens filius, et habens ab ipso. Alio enim modo nullus potuit videre, sicuti dictum est: Unigenitus, qui est in gremio patris, ille enarravit. Quod est esse Deum? in gremio enim, et in μήτρα substantiae, ομοούσιον, uterque, et substantia et divinitate consistens, uterque in utroque, et cognoscit uterque utrumque. ### English translation (Claude) We have, then, that Christ has the Father's name, and that he is life and has power to give life. That he himself is life and the Father life, it was said: “The living Father sent me.” And this is the substance of God and of Christ: they are homoousioi, then. Next, it was said that Christ is light, and God the true light; these are for understanding. Is the Holy Spirit anything else? Not at all. Is light, then, not substance? So they are homoousia. And all that God has, the Son has: homoousia, then. But of this later. That he was born: “For this I was born, and for this I came into the world, that I might reign.” That the Holy Spirit is from Christ: “Christ breathed and said: Receive the Holy Spirit.” All these are from the Gospel of John. Let us look also at a few texts from Matthew, for I pass over similar ones. That even Satan admits that Christ is the Son of God; for he says: “If you are the Son of God.” And he says this three times. But in the second, confessing the Son of God, he tested whether he was the Christ; for he says: “You are the Son of God: throw yourself down; for it is written that he will command his angels concerning you.” He confesses: he who says “concerning you” confesses the Son of God, and confesses him. Then the demons confess it again: “Demons also came out of many, crying out and saying: You are the Son of God.” Hear, Arius; hear, Eusebius; hear, all you Arians, and above all you who say that Christ is from that which is being, but with the serpent's understanding, namely that the Father is the existent who made Christ, and so you say that the Son is from that which is being. Hear, then: Satan calls him the Son of God, Satan who promised him the kingdom of the world, who knows all the things above, for he is from there. What then? After the third temptation, when the devil went away, he had confessed that he was the Son of God. That the demons too said he is the Son of God: “What have we to do with you, Son of God? Have you come …?” That one must not doubt about Christ: “Blessed is he who is not scandalized in me.” That the Son has all things of the Father: “All things have been handed over to me by the Father; no one knows the Son except the Father, nor does anyone know the Father except the Son and he to whom the Son wills to reveal him.” What is the reason that only the Son knows the Father, or that only the Father knows the Son? Only that no one else has his substance. For all things in glory, in divinity, in power, in action itself, know the Father and worship him. But since to know, that is, to know God himself, is to know that very thing which is his being, that is, his substance, therefore no one knows God except the Son, who has the same substance and has it from him. In no other way could anyone see him, as it is said: “The only-begotten, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.” What is God's being? In the bosom, and in the womb of substance, both are homoousion, both consisting in substance and divinity, each in each; and each knows the other. ### Scripture references - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 1:9: allusion, medium confidence - John 18:37: quotation, high confidence - John 20:22: quotation, high confidence - Matt 4:3: quotation, high confidence - Matt 4:6: quotation, high confidence - Matt 4:9: allusion, medium confidence - Luke 4:41: quotation, high confidence - Matt 8:29: quotation, high confidence - Matt 11:6: quotation, high confidence - Matt 11:27: quotation, high confidence - John 1:18: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - John 18:37 is quoted with “that I might reign” instead of the usual “that I might bear witness”. “Womb” renders μήτρα. The Arians addressed as speaking “with the serpent's understanding” are not identified with certainty. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.15 (PL 8:1049a–1050a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-15). ## Against Arius 1.16 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-16 - Source: PL 8:1050a–1050c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus answers Valentinus from John 1:18 and argues from the sin against the Holy Spirit that the Spirit is God's, so that the three are of one substance with distinct subsistence by action. ### Latin text Quid igitur, et tu Valentine, dicis? Processit primus αίών, et volens videre patrem non potuit. In gremio patris esse filium, et semper esse Joannes dicit. Non solum ergo patrem videt, sed etiam in patre semper est. Quod est magnum peccatum adversum sanctum Spiritum dicere: Omnis blasphemia et peccatum remittetur hominibus. Et si quis dixerit sermonem adversum filium hominis, remittetur ei: Qui autem dixerit adversum sanctum Spiritum, non remittetur ei neque in isto saeculo, neque in futuro. Primum respiciendum, quod Spiritus sanctus Dei est. Dixit enim: In spiritu Dei ego ejicio daemonia. Deinde de blasphemia et peccato quod peccarunt Judaei, sicuti dixit, quale esse in sanctum Spiritum. Primum, quod blasphemia et peccatum in Spiritum sanctum non remittetur alicui. Peccatum est, blasphemiter cum voluntate dicere. Sed istud non sufficit. Dixit secundum: etiamsi invitus aliquis dicit qualemcumque sermonem, quod non est peccatum, non relinquetur illi in omni saeculo. Si igitur sanctus Spiritus; Dei Spiritus est, et sanctus Spiritus a Dei filio omnia habet; una substantia tribus a substantia patris, ομοούσια: ergo tria, hoc est, simul ουσία. Si enim patris substantia Spiritus; et filius, Spiritus, sanctus autem Spiritus, patris est Spiritus? In quo ordine ponitur sanctus Spiritus? et praecedit enim, si patris est Spiritus; et sequitur, si a filio habet quod est. Et rursus filius, secundum quod Spiritus, unus est et pater, et est in filio pater, et omnes in alternis existentes: ergo ομοούσιοι sunt, unam et eamdem substantiam habentes, et semper simul ομοούσιοι divina affectione secundum actionem subsistentiam propriam habentes. ### English translation (Claude) What, then, do you too say, Valentinus? “The first aeon came forth, and wishing to see the Father, it could not.” John says that the Son is in the bosom of the Father, and always is. So he not only sees the Father but is always in the Father. That it is a great sin to speak against the Holy Spirit: “Every blasphemy and sin will be forgiven men. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither in this age nor in the age to come.” First, it must be observed that the Holy Spirit is God's; for he said: “By the Spirit of God I cast out demons.” Next, concerning the blasphemy and sin that the Jews committed, as he said, what it is to be against the Holy Spirit. First, that blasphemy and sin against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven anyone. It is a sin to speak blasphemously with the will. But this is not enough. He said second: even if someone speaks any word against him unwillingly, which is not a sin, it will not be forgiven him in any age. If, then, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God, and the Holy Spirit has all things from the Son of God, there is one substance for the three, from the substance of the Father: they are homoousia; the three, then, are together one substance. For if the substance of the Father is spirit, and the Son is spirit, is the Holy Spirit the Spirit of the Father? In what order is the Holy Spirit placed? He both precedes, if he is the Spirit of the Father, and follows, if he has what he is from the Son. And again, the Son, as spirit, is one with the Father, and the Father is in the Son, and all exist in one another: so they are homoousioi, having one and the same substance, and always together homoousioi, while having by divine disposition, according to action, their own subsistence. ### Scripture references - John 1:18: allusion, high confidence - Matt 12:31: quotation, high confidence - Matt 12:32: quotation, high confidence - Matt 12:28: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The Valentinian teaching cited is the myth, reported by Irenaeus (Against Heresies 1.2.1), of an aeon who longed to see the Father; Victorinus calls it the first aeon. “Together one substance” renders ὁμοῦ οὐσία (“simul ουσία”). The reasoning about unwilling words against the Spirit is compressed in the Latin; translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.16 (PL 8:1050a–1050c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-16). ## Against Arius 1.17 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-17 - Source: PL 8:1050c–1051a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus cites Matthew 22 and Romans 2, 4 and 8 to show that Christ is God and that the Spirit of God, the Spirit of Christ and Christ are one substance in three. ### Latin text Sed ista rursus sufficiunt nobis quae dicta sunt in Evangeliis. Quod Christus Dei filius ipse Salvator dicit: Quomodo dicunt Christum filium David esse, et ipse David dicit in libro Psalmorum: Dixit Dominus Domino meo, sede a dextris meis? David ergo Dominum vocat, et quomodo filius ejus? In isto Christum et antequam esset in carne mea, et spiritum Dei esse, et Deum esse ipse haec demonstrat. Videamus igitur et Apostolum, dicit enim de Christo ad Romanos: Quoniam Deus est Christus in diem irae et revelationis justi judicii Dei. Sine dubio hoc de Christo: ipse enim judicabit: quoniam apud Deum τό μη ov nihil est. Exemplum de Genesi inducit Paulus: Quia patrem multarum gentium posui te ante eum cui credidisti Deo, qui vivificat mortuos, et vocat ea quae non sunt tanquam sint. Quoniam Spiritus Dei Spiritus Christi, et idem Spiritus sanctus: Vos vero non estis in carne, sed in spiritu: si tamen spiritus Dei habitat in vobis: si quis autem spiritum Christi non habet, hic non est ipsius. Totius mysterii virtus in baptismo est, ejus potentia in accipiendo spiritu. Hoc si ita est, dictum est: vos in spiritu estis: quem sanctus Spiritus dedit vobis. Qui iste est Spiritus, adjunxit: Si tamen Spiritus Dei habitat in vobis. Quis est iste? Si quis autem spiritum Christi non habet. Idem ergo Dei spiritus et Christi spiritus. In quo et illud perspiciendum, quod idem est spiritus Christi, quod ipse Christus. Sequitur enim: Si autem Christus in vobis. Unde et spiritus Dei, Deus. Una igitur substantia, quia idem spiritus: sed in tribus, ό/χοουσιον igitur. Unde non similis substantia, quia idem spiritus: nec tamen idcirco passiones eaedem et in patre, quia unus spiritus: in duobus enim tantum velut passiones, quia jam progressi spiritus sunt. ### English translation (Claude) But again, what has been said in the Gospels suffices us. That Christ is the Son of God, the Saviour himself says: “How do they say that the Christ is the son of David, when David himself says in the book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand? David, then, calls him Lord; how then is he his son?” By this he himself shows that Christ existed even before he was in the flesh, and was the Spirit of God, and was God. Let us look, then, at the Apostle too; for he says of Christ to the Romans: “Since Christ is God, in the day of wrath and of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God.” Without doubt this is of Christ, for he himself will judge. That with God non-being is nothing, Paul brings an example from Genesis: “For I have made you the father of many nations, before God, in whom you believed, who gives life to the dead and calls the things that are not as though they were.” That the Spirit of God is the Spirit of Christ, and the same is the Holy Spirit: “But you are not in the flesh but in the spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you; but if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not his.” The power of the whole mystery is in baptism, and its power lies in receiving the Spirit. If this is so, it is said: you are in the spirit, which the Holy Spirit gave you. Who this Spirit is, he added: “If indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you.” Who is he? “But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ.” The Spirit of God, then, and the Spirit of Christ are the same. Here this too must be observed: that the Spirit of Christ is the same as Christ himself. For there follows: “But if Christ is in you.” Hence the Spirit of God too is God. There is one substance, then, because it is the same Spirit, but in three: homoousion, then. Hence it is not a like substance, because it is the same Spirit; yet not therefore are the same passions in the Father too, because there is one Spirit; for passions, as it were, are only in the two, because they are spirits that have already gone forth. ### Scripture references - Matt 22:42: quotation, high confidence - Matt 22:43: quotation, high confidence - Matt 22:45: quotation, high confidence - Ps 110:1 (109:1 LXX): quotation, high confidence - Rom 2:5: quotation, high confidence - Rom 2:16: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 4:17: quotation, high confidence - Gen 17:5: allusion, high confidence - Rom 8:9: quotation, high confidence - Rom 8:10: quotation, high confidence - Luke 20:41: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Since Christ is God” is Victorinus's reading of Rom 2:5 and 2:16. Ps 110:1 is Septuagint and Vulgate 109:1. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.17 (PL 8:1050c–1051a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-17). ## Against Arius 1.18 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-18 - Source: PL 8:1051b–1052b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus reads Romans 11:36 of Father, Son and Spirit, admits that the generation is beyond understanding, and argues from 1 Corinthians 2 and 12 that the one Spirit is God, Christ and the Holy Spirit. ### Latin text Sed ista plenius postea: Quoniam ex ipso; et per ipsum, et in ipso omnia. Ex ipso: dicitur, ut de patre: Per ipsum: ut de Christo: In ipso, ut de Spiritu sancto. Alibi autem sic dicit: In ipso, per ipsum, ad ipsum. Quod Deus Christus: Ex quibus Christus secundum carnem, qui est super omnes Deus benedictus per omnia saecula saeculorum. Ad Corinth. prima: Si enim cognovissent, nunquam Dominum majestatis crucifixissent. Quod Christus, sicuti Deus; incomprehensibilis, aut vix comprehensibilis est, sed et quemadmodum dictum est: Quae oculus non vidit, quae auris non audivit, et in cor hominis non ascenderunt, quae praeparavit Deus diligentibus se. Deinde dicit, quod intelligit ista: Sicut spiritus hominis ea quae in homine, sic et ea quae Dei, spiritus Dei. Si de Christo ista dicit, his apparet, quod non est facile scire generationem filii. Nam neque νοΰς percipit Dei filium, nec modum generationis scire potest. Si autem de praesentia ejus, et istud supra oculum, supra auditum, supra νοΰν est. Si autem, ut quidam intelligunt, dicit ista de his quae praeparavit Deus diligentibus ipsum: multo magis mirabilis est generatio, et vix comprehensibilis. Si ista sic sine intellectu sunt, quid ex his queas dicere, ab his quae non sunt, esse Christum aut, aut similis substantia est Christus? Comprehensibilia et definita. At vero esse ό/χοούσιον non solum incomprehensibile, et habet contradictiones multas. Si enim ό/χοούσιος et ipse ingenitus: si ομοούσιος quomodo alter, quomodo alius pater, alius filius? Si ομοονσιος, quomodo alius passus est, alius non? Ex isto enim Patripassiani. Sed quoniam Dei voluntate inquirit omnia, et ea quae Dei, Spiritus qui in nobis inhabitat, invenietur modus divinae generationis, juxta quem et όμοονσως manifestabitur, et illa exterminabuntur: Nos enim accepimus non mundi spiritum, sed Dei. Quod idem spiritus Deus et Christus est, et sanctus Spiritus, et idem unus spiritus: Propter quod notum vobis facio, quod nullus in spiritu Dei dicit, anathema Jesu. Et nullus potest dicere Dominum Jesum, nisi in Spiritu sancto. Divisiones autem gratiarum sunt, idem autem spiritus: et divisiones ministeriorum sunt, sed idem Dominus, et divisiones operationum sunt, idem autem Deus, qui omnia in omnibus operatur. Si igitur in spiritu nullus dicit Anathema Jesu, ipse est spiritus et Dei, et sancti Spiritus, De quo idem istud dicit: Et nullus potest dicere Dominum Jesum, nisi in Spiritu sancto. Praeterea amplius istud dicit quod divisiones gratiarum a spiritu sunt, a Deo quidem gratiae, divisiones autem a spiritu; in actionem enim alia existentia Spiritus sanctus, in substantia ό/χοουσίον, quoniam Spiritus sanctus sicut et ministerium Domini: ipse etenim dividit ministeria in operatione vitae operans, et ipse In substantia sua secundum operationem vitae. In substantia autem ομοουσιος. Quod spiritus et operationes a Deo. Operationes autem multae, sed in omnibus idem Deus. Differt autem Deus, quod ipse facit divisiones operationum, ipse tamen in omnibus omnia operans; ipsum enim esse operationis causa cum sit, operationum divisiones facit, et ipse Deus juxta substantiam spiritus cum sit ομοούσιον actioni, omnia ergo tria actione ό{χ«ουσι« et substantia όμοούσια. Quod omnia tria spiritus, et quod a patre Spiritus: a patre substantia. ### English translation (Claude) But these things more fully later. “For from him and through him and in him are all things.” “From him” is said as of the Father; “through him” as of Christ; “in him” as of the Holy Spirit. Elsewhere he speaks thus: “in him, through him, to him”. That Christ is God: “From whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all, blessed for all ages of ages.” In First Corinthians: “For if they had known, they would never have crucified the Lord of majesty.” That Christ, like God, is incomprehensible, or scarcely comprehensible, as it is also said: “What eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, what God has prepared for those who love him.” Then he says who understands these things: “As the spirit of a man knows the things in a man, so too the Spirit of God knows the things of God.” If he says these things of Christ, it appears from them that it is not easy to know the generation of the Son. For neither does the intellect grasp the Son of God, nor can it know the mode of his generation. And if he says them of his presence, that too is beyond the eye, beyond hearing, beyond the intellect. And if, as some understand, he says these things of what God has prepared for those who love him, much more wonderful and scarcely comprehensible is the generation. If these things are thus beyond understanding, what can you say from them: that Christ is from the things that are not, or that Christ is of like substance? These are comprehensible and defined. But to be homoousios is not only incomprehensible; it also has many contradictions. For if he is homoousios, then he too is unbegotten; if homoousios, how is one other than the other, how is one the Father, another the Son? If homoousios, how did one suffer and the other not? For from this come the Patripassians. But since by God's will the Spirit who dwells in us searches all things, even the things of God, the mode of the divine generation will be found, by which the homoousios will be made manifest and those objections will be banished: “For we have received not the spirit of the world but the Spirit of God.” That the same Spirit is God and Christ and the Holy Spirit, one and the same Spirit: “Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking in the Spirit of God says ‘Anathema to Jesus’, and no one can say ‘Lord Jesus’ except in the Holy Spirit. Now there are divisions of graces, but the same Spirit; and divisions of ministries, but the same Lord; and divisions of operations, but the same God, who works all things in all.” If, then, no one in the spirit says “Anathema to Jesus”, the spirit is both God's and the Holy Spirit's, of whom he says the same: “And no one can say ‘Lord Jesus’ except in the Holy Spirit.” Further, he says this as well: that the divisions of graces are from the Spirit; the graces indeed are from God, but the divisions from the Spirit. For in action the Holy Spirit is another existence, in substance homoousion, since the Holy Spirit is, like the Lord, a ministry: he divides the ministries, working in the operation of life, and he is himself in his own substance according to the operation of life; but in substance he is homoousios. That the spirit and the operations are from God: the operations are many, but in all is the same God. God differs in this, that he makes the divisions of operations, yet he works all things in all; for since being itself is the cause of operation, he makes the divisions of operations; and God himself, since by substance he is spirit, is homoousion with action. All three, then, are homoousia in action and homoousia in substance. That all three are spirit, and that the Spirit is from the Father: from the Father is the substance. ### Scripture references - Rom 11:36: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:16: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 9:5: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 2:8: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 2:9: quotation, high confidence - Isa 64:4: allusion, low confidence - 1 Cor 2:11: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 2:10: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 2:12: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 12:3: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 12:4: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 12:5: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 12:6: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Intellect” renders νοῦς. Victorinus states the objections to homoousios (that it would make the Son unbegotten, or lead to Patripassianism, the view that the Father suffered) in order to answer them later. “Homoousios” is garbled several times in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.18 (PL 8:1051b–1052b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-18). ## Against Arius 1.19 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-19 - Source: PL 8:1052b–1053c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains in what sense Christ is the image of God: not a shadow but the living, self-subsisting form and action of the Father's being, homoousios with him. ### Latin text Quod Christus vita est, et quod spiritus, dictum est: Spiritus autem vivificat. Et ibi rursum dicit: Dominus autem spiritus est. Quod Christus de Deo, non ex his quae non sunt: Ut non splenderet illis illuminatio Evangelii gloriae Christi, qui est imago Dei. Si imago Dei Christus de Deo Christus. Imago enim imaginalis imago. Imaginalis autem Deus; imago ergo Christus. Sed imago imaginalis imago est, et quod imaginale est principale. Imago autem secunda, et aliud secundum substantium ab eo quod imaginale. Sed non intelligimus ibi imaginem sicuti in sensibilibus. Hic enim nec substantiam intelligimus imaginem: umbra enim quaedam est in aere, aut in aqua per quoddam corporale lumen corporalis effluentiae per reflexionem figura, ipsa per semet nihil, nec proprii motus, imaginalis solum substantia, neque corpus, neque sensum, neque intelligentiam habens, et ablato aut turbato in quo figuratum est, omnino nihil et nusquam est. Alio igitur modo dicimus Christum imaginem Dei esse, primum esse, et per semet esse; et quae sit intelligens esse; et viventem dicimus imaginem, et vivefacientem, et semen omnium quae sunt: λόγος enim per quem omnia, et sine isto nihil. Sed ista omnia etiam Deo attributa sunt: ergo ό/χοούσιοι Deus et λόγος. Et quare imago Dei λόγος? Quoniam Deus in occulto, in potentia enim; λόγος autem in manifesto: actio enim; quae actio habens omnia quae sunt in potentia, vita, et cognoscentia secundum motum producit et manifestat omnia: propter quod omnia quae sunt in potentia imago est actio, unicuique eorum quae in potentia sunt speciem perficiens, et existens per semet, a nihilo enim nulla substantia. Omne enim esse inseparabilem speciem habet; magis autem ipsa species, ipsa substantia est: non quod prius sit ab eo quod est esse species, sed quod definitum facit species illud, quod est esse species. Etenim quod est esse, causa est speciei esse in eo, quod esse est. Et ideo quod est esse, pater est. Quod species, filius. Rursus quod ipsum quod est esse, praestat speciei ipsum quod est esse: esse autem speciei, imago est ejus quod est esse. Quod est juxta causam: Primum quod est esse ομοούσιον, ergo esse ipsis duobus, et secundum esse imago est primi esse sine tempore: primum et secundum dico juxta causam. Aliud alio ad ipsum quod est esse pater et filius. Quod autem non retrorsum causa, idcirco pater pater, et filius filius. In eo autem quod esse est, ambo simul sunt, et semper ambo, όμοοόσων juxta quod est esse, secundum autem quod est potentia et actione, potentia pater, actione filius. Natus igitur filius, habens in actione et potentialiter esse, sicuti potentialiter esse habet ipsum actionem esse in semetipso. quod est potentialiter esse. Ipsum autem habet, secundum intellectum accipite, non enim habet, sed ipsum est. Simplicia enim ibi omnia. Sed dixi secundum Evangelium: quaecumque habet pater, eadem habet filius. Secundum istam rationem et pater in filio est, et filius in patre, et ομοούσκ» ambo, et imago filius patris; ipsum enim esse duorum όμοούσιον. Quod autem alterum ab altero, imaginale et imago. Et rursus, quod alter ab altero, unum ingenitum, aliud genitum; sine tempore autem ista, quod in principio ista, et ab aeterno in aeternum. Neque igitur qui hominem dicunt Christum, neque qui ex nihilo, neque qui ex aliquo tempore nec alii hujusmodi in ista perspectione locum habent. ### English translation (Claude) That Christ is life and that he is spirit, it was said: “But the Spirit gives life.” And there again he says: “Now the Lord is the Spirit.” That Christ is from God, not from the things that are not: “That the illumination of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine on them.” If Christ is the image of God, Christ is from God. For an image is the image of what is imaged. God is what is imaged; Christ, then, is the image. But an image is the image of what is imaged, and what is imaged is primary; the image is second and other in substance than what is imaged. But we do not understand “image” there as among sensible things. For here we do not even understand an image as a substance: it is a kind of shadow in the air, or a figure in water, produced by reflection through some bodily light of a bodily outflow; it is nothing by itself and has no motion of its own; it has only the substance of what is imaged, and has neither body nor sense nor understanding; and when that in which it was figured is removed or disturbed, it is wholly nothing and nowhere. In another way, then, we say that Christ is the image of God: that he is first being, and being by himself, and being that understands; and we call him a living image, and life-giving, and the seed of all things that are; for he is the Word, through whom are all things, and without whom nothing. But all these are also attributed to God: God and the Word, then, are homoousioi. And why is the Word the image of God? Because God is hidden, for he is in power; but the Word is manifest, for he is action. And this action, having all things that are in power, produces and manifests all things by life and knowledge according to motion. For this reason action is the image of all things that are in power, perfecting the form of each of the things in power, and existing by itself; for from nothing there is no substance. For all being has an inseparable form; or rather the form itself is the substance itself: not that form is prior to that which is being, but that the form makes that which is being definite. For that which is being is the cause of the form's being in that which is being. And therefore that which is being is the Father; that which is form, the Son. Again, that very thing which is being provides to the form that very being; and the being of the form is the image of that which is being. As to cause: first, that which is being is homoousion; being, then, belongs to these two, and the second being is the image of the first being, without time; I say first and second as to cause. Father and Son are related one to the other in respect of that which is being. But because the cause is not reversed, the Father is Father and the Son is Son. In respect of that which is being, both are together, and always both, homoousioi as to being; but in respect of power and action, the Father is power, the Son action. The Son, then, was born, having in action also potential being, just as potential being has action itself in itself, which is potential being. “Has” must be taken according to the intellect: he does not “have”, he “is”; for there all things are simple. But I said, according to the Gospel: whatever the Father has, the Son has the same. By this reasoning the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, and both are homoousioi, and the Son is the image of the Father; for the very being of the two is homoousion. But in that one is from the other, they are what is imaged and image. And again, in that one is from the other, one is unbegotten, the other begotten; but these are without time, since they are in the beginning, and from eternity to eternity. So neither those who say Christ is a man, nor those who say he is from nothing, nor those who say he is from some point in time, nor others of this kind, have any place in this view. ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 3:6: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:17: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 4:4: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - John 16:15: allusion, high confidence - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Homoousios” is garbled in the digital text in places. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.19 (PL 8:1052b–1053c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-19). ## Against Arius 1.20 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-20 - Source: PL 8:1053c–1054d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus reads Genesis 1:26 to show that Christ is the image of God and one image with the Father, while man's rational soul is made according to the image and is to reach the likeness through faith. ### Latin text Videamus autem et istud. Dicit Moyses dictum Dei: Faciamus hominem secundum imaginem nostram et secundum similitudinem. Deus dicit ista, faciamus: cooperatori dicit, necessario Christo, et secundum imaginem dicit; ergo homo non imago Dei, sed secundum imaginem: solus enim Jesus imago Dei, homo autem secundum imaginem, hoc est, imago imaginis. Sed dicit secundum imaginem nostram. Ergo et pater et filius imago una. Si imago patris filius est, et ipsa imago pater, imagine ergo όμοονσιοι. Ipsa enim imago substantia est: unum enim est et simplex et ibi esse et operari: ita autem sunt et substantia et species. Substantia autem cum sit imago, όμοονσκχ pater et filius, patre existente secundum quod est esse, etiam quod est agere: filio autem existente secundum quod est agere, etiam quod est esse, unoquoque habente id quod sit, juxta quod maxime est, antiquius existente quod est esse, ab eo quod est agere. Pater autem quod est esse, et maxime pater ipsum quod est esse, cui inest et actio potentialiter. Et rursus ut juniore existente quod est agere filius, ut junior ab eo quod est esse, habens filium in eo quod est agere a primo quod est esse. Propter quod unus pater juxta quod est esse, unus filius juxta quod agere, uterque simul existens in utroque, sicut demonstratum est: όρρούσιο* ergo. Dicamus ergo: Faciamus hominem, et ad imaginem quid est? et quid est ad nostrum? Deinde hoc quid est; et juxta similitudinem: sic enim dictum, differentiam significat et imaginis et similitudinis. Multa cum sit quaestio de quo dixerit: Faciamus hominem juxta imaginem nostram, concedendum nunc quod de anima hominis, sive de ambobus, sive enim de sola anima, nihil aliud intelligitur, nisi de anima: ipsa enim sola est juxta imaginem Dei, et juxta similitudinem. Imaginem dicimus esse Dei Christum, ipsum autem ioysv. Juxta imaginem ergo Dei animum dicimus, rationalem dicentes. Non enim anima, sed rationalis: et quod totum vita Christus: anima autem vivit, quod vita substantiam habet. Juxta imaginem ergo Dei anima: Christus autem Dei. Quid autem intelligimus hoc, juxta similitudinem? Quemadmodum Xoyo? substantia est, sicuti declaratum est: quoniam et oyov esse ipsum est, et ipsum quod esse; "kbyog autem est agere, et est motum esse, et quoniam simplex est ibi omne istud ipsum esse et agere, hoc est quod est esse, quod est ibi substantia; sic et anima quo anima est, hoc est quod est esse, et substantiam esse; quod autem est a se se movens, imago est substantiae: magis autem ipsa substantia juxta speciem substantiae, et ideo in definitione animae cum dicimus, quid est anima? proprie dicimus et substantialiter, quod a se movetur. Manifestum et ex isto, quod substantialis imago, magis autem substantia est animae, quod a se movetur. Hoc autem est rationale juxta imaginem τού λοyou rationalem esse. Aliud igitur est juxta imaginem esse, quod quidem substantia est; aliud autem juxta similitudinem esse, quod non est substantia, sed in substantia nomen qualitatis declarativum. Sed sicuti Deum, sic et imaginem, hoc est, Christum substantiam accepimus: perfectionem autem juxta quale significativum intelligimus. Et si simile quale significat necessario, quomodo dicimus animam rationalem esse, et perfecte rationalem juxta similitudinem perfectionis in Deo? perfectam esse dicimus animam, juxta imaginem, ergo nunc et in mundo; juxta similitudinem autem postea fide in Deum et in Jesum Christum, qualis esset futura si Adam non peccasset. In quo igitur rationalis est, ad rationem juxta imaginem est; in quo futura perfecta est, secundum similitudinem. Aliud igitur est, imaginem esse, et aliud juxta imaginem, et magis aliud juxta similitudinem. Quae igitur blasphemia, όμοούσιον dici Patrem et Filium: cum imago sit Filius juxta substantiam, non juxta similitudinem? Sed nunc sic. ### English translation (Claude) Let us look at this too. Moses gives God's saying: “Let us make man according to our image and according to likeness.” God says “let us make”: he says it to a co-worker, necessarily Christ; and he says “according to the image”. Man, then, is not the image of God but according to the image; for Jesus alone is the image of God, and man is according to the image, that is, an image of the image. But he says “according to our image”. The Father and the Son, then, are one image. If the Son is the image of the Father, and the Father is that image, they are homoousioi in image. For the image itself is substance; for there being and operating are one and simple, and so too are substance and form. And since substance is image, the Father and the Son are homoousioi: the Father existing as that which is being, also having that which is acting; the Son existing as that which is acting, also having that which is being; each having what he is according to what he most is, that which is being existing as older than that which is acting. The Father is that which is being, and the Father is most of all that very thing which is being, in which action too is present potentially. And again, the Son, as that which is acting, is younger, as younger than that which is being, having his sonship in that which is acting from the first, that which is being. For this reason the Father is one in respect of being, the Son one in respect of acting, each existing at once in the other, as has been shown: homoousioi, then. Let us ask, then: “Let us make man”; and what is “to the image”? And what is “to our”? Then what is this, “and according to likeness”? Said in this way, it signifies a difference between image and likeness. Since there is much question about what he meant by “Let us make man according to our image”, it must be granted for now that it refers to the soul of man, or to both soul and body; for even if to both, nothing else is understood than the soul: for it alone is according to the image and according to the likeness of God. We say that Christ is the image of God, and he is the Word. We say, then, that the soul is according to the image of God, calling it rational. For the soul is not the Word, but it is rational; and because Christ is wholly life, and the soul lives, since life has substance. The soul, then, is according to the image of God, but Christ is the image of God. And what do we understand by “according to likeness”? As the Word is substance, as has been shown (since the Word is being itself and that very thing which is being; and the Word is acting, and being in motion; and since there all this, being itself and acting, is simple, that is, what being is, which there is substance), so the soul too, insofar as it is soul, is what being is, and is substance; and that it moves itself by itself is the image of substance, or rather the substance itself according to the form of substance. And therefore, when we say in the definition of the soul what the soul is, we say properly and substantially that it is moved by itself. It is plain from this too that the substantial image, or rather the substance of the soul, is that it is moved by itself. And this is to be rational, according to the image of the Word. It is one thing, then, to be according to the image, which is substance; another to be according to the likeness, which is not substance but, in substance, a name that declares quality. But as we have taken God as substance, so we have taken the image, that is, Christ, as substance; perfection we understand as signifying quality. And if “like” necessarily signifies quality, how do we say that the soul is rational, and perfectly rational according to the likeness of perfection in God? We say the soul is perfect: according to the image now, in the world; according to the likeness later, by faith in God and in Jesus Christ, such as it would have been in the future if Adam had not sinned. In that it is rational, it is according to the image in respect of reason; in that it is to be perfect, it is according to the likeness. It is one thing, then, to be the image, another to be according to the image, and yet another to be according to the likeness. What blasphemy, then, to call the Father and the Son homoiousion, when the Son is image according to substance, not according to likeness! But enough for now. ### Scripture references - Gen 1:26: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 4:4: allusion, medium confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato, Phaedr. 245c–e (Plato (works)): allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - “The Word” renders λόγον and λόγος (garbled several times in the digital text); in the last sentence the garbled form is read as ὁμοιούσιον (“of like substance”) by the argument. The definition of the soul as self-moving is Platonic (Plato, Phaedrus 245c–e). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.20 (PL 8:1053c–1054d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-20). ## Against Arius 1.21 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-21 - Source: PL 8:1054d–1055c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus gathers texts from 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians and Philippians to show that Christ existed before the incarnation and, being “equal with God” (Phil 2:6), shares God's substance. ### Latin text Eamus vero ad alia. Quod in Christo creatura, sed non una. Sunt enim creaturae tres: una quidem cum creata sunt omnia per Christum; secunda creatura nostra in Christo secundum baptismum, sed in Christo, et alia in Christo commutatio fit. Unde si qua in Christo nova creatura, dictum est: Quod antequam esset Christus in carne: Qui peccatum non noverat, pro nobis peccatum fecit. Quod fuit tempus in quo peccatum non noverat? Antequam esset in carne, ad Ephesios. Quod antequam esset Christus in carne: Benedictus Pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui benedixit nos in omni benedictione spiritali in caelestibus, in Christo Jesu, secundum quod praelegit nos ante constitutionem mundi. Quod fuit Christus antequam esset in carne: Quoniam fueratis illo tempore sine Christo, abalienati a conversatione Israel. Quod Deus Christus: Spem non habentes, et sine Deo. Hoc est, sine Christo. Quod spiritus est qui omnia colligat: Cupientes custodire unitatem spiritus in colligatione pacis. Unum corpus, et unus spiritus. Unus Dominus, una fides, unum baptisma. Unus Deus, et pater omnium, qui in omnibus, et per omnia, et in omnibus. Ad Galatas quod Christus Deus: Paulus Apostolus, non ab hominibus, neque per hominem, sed per Jesum Christum, et Deum patrem. Et rursus: Evangelium quod evangelizatum est a me, non est juxta hominem; non enim ego ab homine accepi ipsum, sed per revelationem Jesu Christi. Ad Philippenses, quod Christus Spiritus: Et in subministratione Spiritus Jesu Christi. Quod όροούσως, et simul patri filius: Istud enim sapite in his quod et in Christo, qui in forma Dei existens, non rapinam arbitratus est esse aequalem Deo, sed semetipsum exinanivit, formam servi accipiens, in similitudinem hominis effectus, et figura inventus sicuti homo. Primum Photini, et ab isto, et ante istum, qui hominem dicunt Jesum et solum ab homine factum, cognoscant impiam blasphemiam in Christo, qui in forma Dei existens. Quando existens? Antequam veniret in corpus: dixit enim, quod exinaniverit se ipsum et acceperit formam servi: erat igitur et antequam homo fieret. Et qualis erat? λόγος Dei, forma Dei. Quid est istud, aequalis existens Deo? quod est ejus ipsius et potentiae substantiae: dixit enim aequalem esse. Etenim aequale et magnitudinis, et quantitatis est declarativum: magnitudo autem substantiae molis magnitudo est, qualitas enim non habet magnitudinem, neque a substantia quod est esse habet. Solum autem quantum substantiae, magnitudine quantum est. Et idcirco declarans beatus Paulus Dei substantiam, omnia quanta dicit: Ut Dei cognoscatis altitudinem, longitudinem, latitudinem, profundum. ### English translation (Claude) Let us go on to other things. That there is creation in Christ, but not just one. For there are three creations: one when all things were created through Christ; a second, our creation in Christ by baptism, but in Christ; and another change comes about in Christ. Hence it is said: “If anyone is in Christ, a new creation.” That Christ existed before he was in the flesh: “He who knew no sin was made sin for us.” What time was there in which he knew no sin? Before he was in the flesh. To the Ephesians, that Christ existed before he was in the flesh: “Blessed be the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, even as he chose us before the founding of the world.” That Christ existed before he was in the flesh: “For at that time you were without Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel.” That Christ is God: “having no hope, and without God”, that is, without Christ. That it is the Spirit who binds all together: “eager to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace: one body and one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is in all, and through all, and in all.” To the Galatians, that Christ is God: “Paul, an apostle, not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father.” And again: “The gospel preached by me is not according to man; for I did not receive it from man, but through the revelation of Jesus Christ.” To the Philippians, that Christ is Spirit: “and through the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ.” That the Son is homoousios and together with the Father: “Have this mind among yourselves which was also in Christ, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of man, and found in figure as a man.” First let the followers of Photinus, and those after him and before him who say that Jesus is a man and made only from a man, recognize their impious blasphemy against Christ, “who, existing in the form of God”. When was he existing? Before he came into a body; for Paul said that he emptied himself and took the form of a servant: he was, then, even before he became man. And what was he? The Word of God, the form of God. What is this, “existing equal with God”? That it is of his very self and of the substance of his power; for he said “equal”. For “equal” declares magnitude and quantity; and the magnitude of substance is the magnitude of bulk, for quality has no magnitude, nor does it have its being from substance. Only the quantity of substance is quantity by magnitude. And therefore blessed Paul, declaring the substance of God, speaks of all its quantities: “that you may know the height, length, breadth and depth of God.” ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 5:17: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 5:21: quotation, high confidence - Eph 1:3: quotation, high confidence - Eph 1:4: quotation, high confidence - Eph 2:12: quotation, high confidence - Eph 4:3: quotation, high confidence - Eph 4:4: quotation, high confidence - Eph 4:5: quotation, high confidence - Eph 4:6: quotation, high confidence - Gal 1:1: quotation, high confidence - Gal 1:11: quotation, high confidence - Gal 1:12: quotation, high confidence - Phil 1:19: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:5: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:18: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Homoousios” renders a garbled form of ὁμοούσιος. An editorial reference, “(Ibid.)”, printed in the text is removed. Eph 4:6 is quoted with “in all” in place of “above all”. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.21 (PL 8:1054d–1055c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-21). ## Against Arius 1.22 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-14/#p-1-22 - Source: PL 8:1055d–1056d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from Philippians 2 that Christ is the form of God, homoousios with him, who emptied himself and became man rather than taking up a man, as Marcellus and Photinus held. ### Latin text Secundum ista ergo aequalis Deo existit Christus. Non enim dixit similis Deo, quod non significat substantiam, sed in substantia alterum quid, ad similitudinem juxta accidens, sicuti secundum similitudinem homo ad Deum, alia cum sit Dei, alia hominis substantia. Ex hoc nefas est dicere hominem aequalem esse Deo. Si igitur Christus forma est Dei, forma autem substantia est, id ipsum enim forma et imago: est autem forma et imago Dei λόγος, et semper λόγος ad Deum, όροονσιος λόγος Deo, ad quem et in principio, et semper est λόγος. Esse autem imaginem et substantiam, et simul cum substantia, quod όμοοόσιον dicitur, ex hoc manifestum. Dixit enim Apostolus: Semetipsum exinanivit, formam servi accipiens. Numquid enim formam solum accepit hominis, non et substantiam hominis? Induit enim et carnem, et in carne fuit, et passus est in carne, et hoc est mysterium, et hoc quod salutare sit nobis. Si igitur exinanivit se ipsum, et Christus exinanivit se ipsum et antequam in carne esset, fuit Christus. Et si fuit ante istud, quoniam te ipsum exinanivit, ipse induit carnem. Quare enim se exinanivit, si, ut dicis, o Marcelle, aut Photine, assumpsit hominem quasi quartum esset? Oportebat enim λόγον qui esset manere, assumere hominem, et modo quodam inspirare spiritum ad actiones. Sed dixit, exinanivit se ipsum. Recte: qui habebat induere hominem. Quid igitur est, exinanivit se? universalem λόγον non esse universalem in eo quod est esse λόγος, carnis, et fieret caro. Non igitur assumpsit hominem, sed factus est homo. Est igitur forma substantia, cum substantia, in qua est forma, όμοούσιος igitur formae substantiae principali, et potentialiter priori, quod ista praestat formae esse, et in substantium esse, et semper simul esse: sine enim altero alterum non est. Secundum igitur quod forma a substantia, substantia est forma quae sit substantiae, istud Dei filius est. Quod forma substantia, quod autem semper substantia cum forma, semper pater, semper filius ad patrem, hoc est, λόγος ad Deum, hoc autem semper. Sed quoniam ista forma substantia est, quae imago est, et λόγος est, quem filium Dei esse dicimus, secundum quod λόγος est omnium quae sunt, λόγος est. Universalis enim λόγος filius Dei est cujus potentia proveniunt, et procedunt in generationem omnia, et consistunt. Ipsius ergo potentia, procedens et simul existens cum patre, facit omnia et generat, et ipsa haec potentia in eo quod est ei praecedere, quae quidem actio dicitur, ipsa patitur si quid patitur, juxta materias et substantias, quibus praestat proprium ad id, quod est illis esse, inversabili et impassibili existente universali λόγω qui semper est ad patrem, et όμοονσως. Et idcirco de filio dicitur, quod est impassibilis et passibilis, sed in progressu passio, maxime autem in extremo progressionis, hoc est, cum fuit in carne: illae enim passiones non dicuntur, generatio a patre, motus primus, et creatorem esse omnium: ista enim substantialia cum sint, magis autem substantiae: λόγοι enim existentium juxta potentiam substantiae sunt ipsorum: non igitur passiones. ### English translation (Claude) According to these texts, then, Christ exists equal with God. For Paul did not say “like God”, which does not signify substance but something else in the substance, a likeness by accident, as man is like God by likeness, the substance of God being one thing and that of man another. Hence it is impious to say that man is equal to God. If, then, Christ is the form of God, and form is substance (for form and image are the same thing), and the Word is the form and image of God, and the Word is always with God, then the Word is homoousios with God, with whom the Word is both in the beginning and always. That to be the image is also substance, and together with substance, which is called homoousion, is plain from this. For the Apostle said: “He emptied himself, taking the form of a servant.” Did he take only the form of man, and not also the substance of man? For he put on flesh, and was in the flesh, and suffered in the flesh; and this is the mystery, and this is what saves us. If, then, he emptied himself, Christ emptied himself, and Christ existed before he was in the flesh. And if he existed before this, since he emptied himself, he himself put on flesh. For why did he empty himself, if, as you say, Marcellus or Photinus, he took up a man as if the man were a fourth? For then the Word who was had to remain, take up a man, and in some way breathe the Spirit into him for his actions. But Paul said: “He emptied himself.” Rightly: he who was to put on man. What, then, is “he emptied himself”? That the universal Word, in being the Word of flesh, was not universal, and became flesh. He did not, then, take up a man, but became man. Form, then, is substance with substance, the substance in which the form is; it is homoousios, then, with the principal substance of the form, which is potentially prior, since it provides the form with being, and with being in substance, and with being always together; for neither is without the other. Insofar, then, as the form is from the substance, the substance is the form that belongs to the substance: this is the Son of God. That form is substance, and that substance is always with form: always Father, always Son with the Father, that is, the Word with God, and this always. But since this form is substance, which is image and is the Word, whom we call the Son of God, he is the Word inasmuch as he is the Word of all things that are. For the universal Word is the Son of God, by whose power all things come forth and proceed into generation and subsist. His power, then, proceeding and existing together with the Father, makes and begets all things; and this power, in that it belongs to it to proceed (which is called action), itself suffers, if it suffers anything, in respect of the matters and substances to which it provides what is proper for their being, while the universal Word, who is always with the Father and homoousios, remains unalterable and impassible. And therefore it is said of the Son that he is impassible and passible; but passion lies in the procession, and most of all at the far end of the procession, that is, when he was in the flesh. For these are not called passions: generation from the Father, the first motion, and being creator of all things; for these are substantial, or rather substances. For the reasons of the existents are, by power, their substances: they are not, then, passions. ### Scripture references - Phil 2:6: allusion, high confidence - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, high confidence - John 1:14: allusion, medium confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “A fourth” probably means that a man taken up by the Word would be a fourth alongside the Trinity. “Reasons” renders λόγοι. “Homoousios” is garbled several times in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.22 (PL 8:1055d–1056d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-22). ## Against Arius 1.23 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-23 - Source: PL 8:1056d–1057c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus rejects the Photinian, Arian and homoiousian positions, arguing that substance as such cannot be “like” another substance, so that the Son must be homoousios, not homoiousios. ### Latin text Sed ista. Et rursus, quid igitur dicunt Photiniani? si όαοούσιος Filius Patri, quomodo Deus ex Maria hominem natum filium habuit? Quid autem et Ariani dicunt? si ομοούσιος et λόγος, et substantia simul est filius cum patre? Nefas enim dicere istud: Erat quando non erat. Et istud nefas: de iis quae non sunt esse. Impii et illi rursus, qui dicunt ό/χοουσιον esse filium patri. Substantia enim secundum quod substantia est, non est alia, ut sit similis ad aliam: eadem enim est in duobus, et non est similis, sed ipsa. Sed alia cum sit, non quo substantia est similis dicitur, sed secundum quamdam qualitatem. Impossibile ergo et incongruum ό*.ο*ύσιον esse aliquid. Praeterea simile quod in alteritate est, aut in eadem est, divisa in duas partes substantia, aut in alia: quo enim receptibile est dissimile esse, hoc receptibile est similem esse: substantia autem secundum quod substantia est, non recipit similem esse, aut dissimilem: juxta quod autem receptibilis est, qualitatis similis aut dissimilis dicitur, in potentia sua vel existentia manente substantia, vel eadem vel diversa. Quid autem vero illa substantia vel Dei, vel τοϋ λόγου numquid receptibilis est dissimilitudinis, ut dicatur similis esse? Sed impossibile, nec similis ergo, non igitur ό/χοουσιον. Videamus igitur et istud: si simile aut in eodem genere substantia est, ut hominis aut animalis: similis enim est et homo homini, et animal animali: aut in alio genere, velut homini lapis, aut statua equo. Quomodo igitur dicunt ista duo ό/χοου- σια esse? si in eodem genere, ut in animali, magis procedit substantia: si autem in ipsa substantia, aut divisa aut alia superiore substantia nata; sed utrumque aut subalternum est, et alterum subjectum, sed divisa, neque in aequalia, neque in inaequalia, habet alterum perfectum, sed duo perfecta, et a perfecto perfectum. Non igitur in ipsa similitudine, quippe et similitudo: si istud, sic necesse est in alio genere. Unde igitur, an alterum quid? Ex nihilo igitur: aut duo principia, sed nihil horum: quoniam et unum principium, et eorum quae sunt omnia causa. Pater secundum τον λόγον, qui in principio erat, et idcirco semper erat; non ergo ex nihilo erat. Si vero et istud, neque et in eo quod alterum genus et similitudo. Quomodo autem dicit non quod Jesus arbitratus est semetipsum aequalem esse Deo, sed quod non rapinam arbitratus est aequalem esse. Ea enim quae natura sunt aequalia, non per divinitatem propriam, sed quae juxta fortunam facta sunt aequalia, quasi rapina aequalia sunt. Magna igitur confidentia, et vere naturalis divinitas ad id quod est aequalem esse, non arbitrari rapinam Deo aequalem esse. ### English translation (Claude) But enough. And again, what, then, do the Photinians say? If the Son is homoousios with the Father, how did God have as his Son a man born of Mary? And what do the Arians say? That the Son is homoousios, and the Word, and substance together with the Father? For it is impious to say: “There was when he was not”; and it is impious to say that he is from the things that are not. Impious again are those who say that the Son is homoiousios with the Father. For substance, insofar as it is substance, is not something other, so as to be like another: it is the same in the two, and is not like but itself. But when it is other, it is called like, not insofar as it is substance, but according to some quality. It is impossible and unfitting, then, that anything should be homoiousion. Further, what is like in otherness is either in the same substance divided into two parts or in another substance; for what can admit being unlike can admit being like. But substance, insofar as it is substance, does not admit being like or unlike; but insofar as it is receptive of quality, it is called like or unlike, the substance remaining, in its power or existence, either the same or different. But is that substance, whether of God or of the Word, receptive of unlikeness, so that it may be called like? Impossible. Not like, then; not homoiousion, then. Let us look at this too: whether the like is a substance in the same genus, as of man or animal (for man is like man and animal like animal), or in another genus, as a stone to a man or a statue to a horse. How, then, do they say these two are homoiousia? If in the same genus, as in animal, a prior substance must come first; if in the substance itself, it is either divided or born of another, higher substance; and both of these are subordinate, the one being subject to the other; and a divided substance, whether into equal or unequal parts, does not have the other perfect; but these are two perfects, perfect from perfect. Not, then, in likeness itself, since likeness too [is excluded]; if so, then necessarily in another genus. From where, then? Is it something else? From nothing, then, or there are two principles. But neither of these, since there is one principle and cause of all things that are: the Father, in relation to the Word who was in the beginning and therefore always was; so he was not from nothing. And if this is so, neither is it in another genus and by likeness. And how does Paul say, not that Jesus considered himself equal to God, but that he did not consider it robbery to be equal? For things that are equal not by nature, through their own divinity, but made equal by fortune, are equal as if by robbery. Great confidence, then, and truly natural divinity in respect of being equal: not to consider it robbery to be equal with God. ### Scripture references - Phil 2:6: allusion, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The digital text writes ὁμοούσιος (“of the same substance”) and ὁμοιούσιος (“of like substance”) in similar garbled forms; which is meant is decided by the argument. The middle of the section (on genus and divided substance) is obscure in the Latin and is translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.23 (PL 8:1056d–1057c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23). ## Against Arius 1.24 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-24 - Source: PL 8:1057c–1058c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus expounds Colossians 1:13–20 to show that Christ, the image of the invisible God and firstborn before all creation, is begotten, not created, and is the cause and fullness of all things. ### Latin text Sed ista. Et rursus ad Colossenses quid dicit: quod ante omnia primus Jesus. Duplex enim generatio ejus: una quidem in divinitatem et filiationem, occulta, divina, et quae, fide intelligatur: alia autem in carnem venire, et ferre carnem. Illa quidem sola generatio a Deo potentiae manifestatio: ista autem acceptio magis carnis non generatio. Si igitur est prior, non ab homine est Salvator: si generatio est, non est figmentum: si autem a Deo generatio, non de nihilo: si imago Dei Jesus, ό/χοουσιος est: imago enim, substantia cum substantia, cujus et in qua est imago. Et quod imago substantia, a substantia ejus in qua est vel subsistit genita, in declarationem intus potentiae: hinc pater qui intus, hinc filius qui foris. Rursus quod filius λόγος, est in actionem festinans substantia, vita enim λόγος, et intelligentia λό>ος, processit in substantiam eorum quae sunt intellectibilium, et hylicorum, et idcirco actio ipsius τοΟλογου, propter imbecillitatem percipientium ipsum, et passibilis est, vel potius passibilis dicitur: dicit enim beatus Paulus de Christo: Qui eripuit nos de potestate tenebrarum, et transtulit in regnum filii dilectionis suae; in quo habemus redemptionem et remissionem peccatorum: qui est imago Dei invisibilis, primogenitus ante omnem creaturam. Quoniam in ipso creata omnia, quae in coelis et quae in terris, visibilia, et invisibilia, sive sedes, sive dominationes, sive principatus, sive potestates: omnia per ipsum, et in ipso constituta sunt, et ipse est ante omnia, et omnia in ipso consistunt: ipse est caput corporis Ecclesiae quae est principium, primogenitus a mortuis, ut fieret in omnibus ipse primarius: quoniam in ipso complacuit omnem plenitudinem inhabitare et per ipsum reconciliare, et reconvertere omnia in ipsum, pacificans per sanguinem crucis ejus sive ea qua in terris, sive ea qua in coelis. Totum mysterium in ista expositione dictum est, quod ομοούσκ», dicit ex isto qui est imago invisibilis Dei, quod filius primogenitus, quod non creatus ante omnem creaturam dixit; si enim et Ipse creatus esset, non diceret, ante omnem creaturam: et proprie dixit primogenitus quod est de filio. Jungamus ergo sensum: primogenitus ante omnem creaturam. Ergo hic genitus ut filius; illa creatura, ut quae creata sit: non autem quod et alium postea genuit, sed quod ante omnem creaturam primogenitus. Est autem omnis creatura et eorum quae in coelis, et eorum quae in terris, visibilium et invisibilium. Sine creatura ergo filius; natura igitur et generatione filius. Quod Christus λόγος est, et quod λόγος omnium quae sunt, ad id ut sint, causa; et idcirco dictum est, quod in ipso condita sunt omnia et per ipsum condita: λόγος enim et causa est ad id quod est esse, iis quae sunt, et est receptaculum eorum quae in ipso sunt. Quod autem omnia in ipso, ipsum receptaculum completur omnibus quae sunt, et ipsum est et plenitudo: et idcirco, omnia per ipsum, et omnia in ipsum, et omnia in ipso. ### English translation (Claude) But enough. And again, what does he say to the Colossians? That Jesus is first, before all things. For his generation is twofold: one into divinity and sonship, hidden, divine, understood by faith; the other his coming into flesh and bearing flesh. The former alone is generation from God, the manifestation of power; the latter is rather a taking of flesh, not a generation. If, then, he is prior, the Saviour is not from man; if it is generation, he is not a thing fashioned; if generation from God, not from nothing; if Jesus is the image of God, he is homoousios: for an image is substance with substance, the substance of which and in which it is the image. And that the image is substance, begotten from the substance in which it is or subsists, to declare the power within: hence the Father, who is within; hence the Son, who is without. Again, that the Son, the Word, is substance hastening into action; for the Word is life and the Word is understanding; he proceeded into the substance of the things that are intelligible and material; and therefore the action of the Word himself, because of the weakness of those who perceive him, is passible, or rather is called passible. For blessed Paul says of Christ: “Who rescued us from the power of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of the Son of his love, in whom we have redemption and the forgiveness of sins; who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn before all creation. For in him were created all things in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things were established through him and in him; and he is before all things, and all things hold together in him. He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he might be the first. For in him it pleased all the fullness to dwell, and through him to reconcile and turn back all things to himself, making peace by the blood of his cross, whether things on earth or things in heaven.” The whole mystery is stated in this exposition: that he is homoousios, he says from this, “who is the image of the invisible God”; that he is the firstborn Son; that he was not created, he said by “before all creation”. For if he too were created, he would not say “before all creation”; and he properly said “firstborn”, which belongs to a son. Let us join the sense, then: “firstborn before all creation”. So he is begotten as Son, and creation is as that which was created; not that God afterwards begot another, but that he is firstborn before all creation. And all creation is of the things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible. The Son, then, is apart from creation: Son, then, by nature and generation. That Christ is the Word, and that the Word of all things that are is the cause of their being; and therefore it is said that in him all things were founded and through him founded: for the Word is both the cause of being for the things that are and the receptacle of the things that are in him. And since all things are in him, the receptacle itself is filled with all things that are, and is itself also the fullness; and therefore all things are through him, and all things to him, and all things in him. ### Scripture references - Col 1:13: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:14: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:15: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:16: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:17: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:18: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:19: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:20: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Homoousios” is garbled in the digital text in places. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.24 (PL 8:1057c–1058c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-24). ## Against Arius 1.25 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-25 - Source: PL 8:1058c–1059b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Son, the fountain of life and the fullness in whom the Godhead dwells bodily, must be homoousios with the Father, through whom all things are gathered into one like a chain. ### Latin text Si igitur ex nihilo erat filius, quomodo ista? Sine fide igitur et impossibile sic ista talia esse. Et rursus, si non όμοούσιον, quomodo et pater plenitudo et filius? simul enim omnia plenitudo; et an ομοον- σιον plenitudo velut animae, et alia quae creata sunt? Omnino impossibile. Etenim όμοούσιον, sicuti dictum in alteritate est: alter enim similis substantia non potest dici, nisi in ipsa non sit, illius autem potentiae si altera substantia est, et ab ipsa quod est illis esse habent omnia quae sunt, impossibile est unum esse omne: nunc vero Deo patre et filio λόγω όμοουσίω existente, quoniam per λόγον omnia in unum vocantur, et sunt a Deo omnia, et Deus omnia in omnibus, sine passione patre existente, sicut idem monstratum est. Quod autem Jesus λόγος, qui et omnium quae sunt spiritus est vivificans, fons vitae aeternae, secundum mysterium veniens in carnem, et in morte peccatorum vicit mortem, et in aeternam vitam mortua suscitavit. Quod autem Deus potentia est ipsius fontanae aeternae vitae, et propterea filius est λόγος, fons vitae aeternae, existens potentia patria, primogenitus a mortuis, et idcirco omnia in ipsum conversa unum fient, hoc est spiritalia: ergo ό,αοούσιος Dei filius, quod aeternae vitae fons est, sicuti pater potentia ipsius, et quod per ipsum filium unum fient omnia, quoniam per ipsum omnia. Quod Jesus, hoc est λόγο? et semen est, et velut demeritum omnium quae sunt, maxime autem jam in hnpyiq et manifestatione eorum qua; sunt, quod in eo inhabitat omnis plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter, hoc est in operatione substantialiter: in patre enim potentialiter omnia inhabitant. Et idcirco Jesus λόγο? imago est patris Dei, hoc ipsum quod est, potentia est, jam hoc quod est actionem esse: omne enim quod in actionem exit, et imago est ejus quod est potentialiter, et ejus quod est potentialiter filius est quod in actione est, ex iis filius et pater. Quod ex Jesu omnia, et ideo ex Deo omnia, omnia dico quaecumque sunt, et non tenens caput Christi, ex quo omne corpus per actus et conjunctiones subministratum et productum, crescit in incrementum Dei; unum enim omnia, etiamsi differentia sint, quae sunt; non enim corpus totius universi velut acervus est, qui acervus tactu inter se solo granorum corpus efficitur, sed maxime quo alternatis in se invicem partibus, ut catena continens corpus est: catena enim Deus, Jesus Spiritus, voO? anima angeli et deinde corporalia omnia subministrata. Igitur plenitudo quippe producta est. ### English translation (Claude) If, then, the Son were from nothing, how could these things be? It would be without faith, then, and impossible for such things to be so. And again, if he is not homoousion, how are both the Father and the Son the fullness? For all things together are the fullness. And is the fullness homoiousion in the way souls are, and the other things that were created? Wholly impossible. For homoiousion, as was said, lies in otherness: for another substance cannot be called like unless it is not in that substance; and if the substance of that power were another, and all things that are had their being from it, it would be impossible for all to be one. But now, since God the Father and the Son, the Word, are homoousioi, all things are called into one through the Word, and all things are from God, and God is all in all, the Father existing without passion, as has also been shown. That Jesus is the Word, who is also the life-giving spirit of all things that are, the fountain of eternal life, who came into flesh according to the mystery, and in the death of sinners conquered death and raised the dead into eternal life. That God is the power of that fountain of eternal life, and therefore the Son is the Word, the fountain of eternal life, existing as the Father's power, the firstborn from the dead; and therefore all things turned toward him will become one, that is, spiritual. The Son of God, then, is homoousios, because he is the fountain of eternal life, as the Father is its power, and because through the Son himself all things will become one, since all things are through him. That Jesus, that is, the Word, is both the seed and, as it were, the element of all things that are, but most of all now in the activity and manifestation of the things that are; for in him dwells all the fullness of divinity bodily, that is, substantially in operation, whereas in the Father all things dwell potentially. And therefore Jesus, the Word, is the image of God the Father: that very thing which is power is now action; for everything that goes out into action is both the image of what is potentially, and what is in action is the son of what is potentially; from these, Son and Father are homoousion. That all things are from Jesus, and therefore all from God, all, I say, that are; and “not holding the head, Christ, from whom the whole body, supplied and brought forth through joints and ligaments, grows with the growth of God.” For all things are one, even though the things that are differ. For the body of the whole universe is not like a heap, which is made a body of grains only by their touching one another; it is a body above all because its parts are linked with one another, as a chain holds a body together. For the chain is God, Jesus, the Spirit, intellect, soul, angels, and then all bodily things supplied in order. The fullness, then, was brought forth. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 15:28: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:45: allusion, medium confidence - John 4:14: allusion, medium confidence - Col 1:18: allusion, high confidence - Col 2:9: quotation, high confidence - Col 2:19: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Element” renders the obscure “demeritum” (perhaps for “elementum”); uncertain. “Homoousion” after “Son and Father” renders a garbled “OOO”, removed from the Latin as unreadable. “Activity” renders a garbled ἐνεργείᾳ, “intellect” νοῦς. A stray “OOO” in the digital text is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.25 (PL 8:1058c–1059b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-25). ## Against Arius 1.26 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-26 - Source: PL 8:1059b–1060b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus applies 1 Timothy 3:16 to the incarnation of the pre-existent Word, who gives life to all things, and reads Isaiah 45:14–15 as a prophecy that God is in Christ. ### Latin text Si igitur omnia unum, quippe in substantia, multo magis Deus et filius, non solum insubstantiatum, sed consubstantialem. Insubstantiata enim sunt omnia δντα in Jesu, hoc est, h τω λόγω sicuti dictum est: Omnia in hio sunt condita: όαοού* σικ autem ista non sunt. Non enim quasi ουσία est illud primum esse quod est Deus, neque autem ut substantia imago, quod est filius, sed simul solum istorum, quod est esse divinitatis ad causam, est esse iis quae sunt: sola igitur ό/χοούσια Deus λόγο?, ad Timotheum prima: Etenim confidenter magnum quoddam est pietatis mysterium, quod manifestatum est in carne, justificatum in spiritu, apparuit Angelis, praedicatum est gentibus creditum in mundo, receptum in gloria. Hoc non est de prima generatione sed de secunda: hoc enim est magnum mysterium, quod Deus exinanivit semetipsum cum esset in Dei forma; deinde quod passus est, primum in carne se esse, et humanae generationis fatum habere, et in crucem tolli. Non autem fierent ista mirabilia, si fuissent illae aut ex homine solum, aut ex nihilo, aut ex Deo secundum facturam. Quid enim exinanivit, si non erat antequam esset in carne? Et quid erat, quod dixit aequalis Deo? AEqualis autem quomodo, qui ex nihilo factura esset? Idcirco ergo magnum mysterium, quod manifestatum est in carne. Fuit ergo antequam esset in carne, sed manifestatum dixit in carne: intelligibiliter enim erat et intellectualiter; sensibiliter autem et incarnaliter tunc manifestatus est. Potentia enim τοΰ λόγου juxta suam substantiam vitae est, semper substantia, secundum quod vita, et vivefacit, et revivefacit, et non permittit esse in morte quacumque vivefacit. In prima igitur motione omnia in vitam adduxit, et ista est descensio του λόγου, quod quoniam a patre exiens, iis qui in coelis sunt, et Angelis, ani thronis, vel gloriis, et hujusmodi quae sunt, dedit suam propriam vitam potentia patria: λόγο? enim omnium est, per quem facta sunt omnia. Et rursus, quod non esset vitefacere, nisi esset materia ad potentiam vivefaciendi, effecta est materia mortua naturae, quae vivefacta suas militias emisit vivificatione divina, et corrupit hominem, sed λόγο?, vita perfecta complevit mysterium, et apparuit in materia, hoc est in carne et in tenebris. Quomodo enim erat possibile apparere quod fuisset, nisi in carne, hoc est, in sensu appareret? Omnia ergo effectus λόγο?, et in omnibus, et genuit omnia, salvavit, et regnavit, vita aeterna existens in spiritu: Ergo justificatus est, apparuit Angelis, veniens ergo praedicatus est gentibus. Fuit igitur antequam veniret: Creditus est in mundo, sic enim et Isaias fatetur prophetans: Laboravit AEgyptus, et mercimonia AEthiopiam et Sabaim: Viri altissimi in te ambulabunt, et tibi erunt servi, et retro te sequentur ligati manicis, et te venerabuntur et te precabuntur, quod in te Deus est, et non est Deus extra te: tu es enim Deus, et non sciebamus, Deus Israel. Praedicatus ergo in mundo, receptus in gloria divinitatis et ab initio, et initio, et postea, et semper ab aeternis, et in saecula saeculorum. Amen. ### English translation (Claude) If, then, all things are one, namely in substance, much more are God and the Son, not only en-substanced but consubstantial. For all existents are en-substanced in Jesus, that is, in the Word, as it is said: “All things were founded in him”; but these are not homoousia. For the first being, which is God, is not as substance, nor is the Son as substance and image; but only these together, which is the being of the divinity as cause, is being for the things that are. God and the Word alone, then, are homoousia. In First Timothy: “For confessedly great is the mystery of piety, which was manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, appeared to angels, was preached to the nations, believed in the world, received up in glory.” This is not about the first generation but about the second. For this is the great mystery: that God emptied himself when he was in the form of God; then that he suffered, first being in the flesh and having the lot of human birth, and being lifted onto the cross. These wonders would not have happened if he had been either from man only, or from nothing, or from God by way of making. For what did he empty, if he did not exist before he was in the flesh? And what was it that Paul said, “equal with God”? And how equal, if he was a thing made from nothing? Therefore, then, it is a great mystery, which was manifested in the flesh. He existed, then, before he was in the flesh, but Paul said “manifested in the flesh”: for he existed intelligibly and intellectually, but then he was manifested sensibly and in the flesh. For the power of the Word, according to its substance, is of life; it is always substance insofar as it is life, and it gives life, and gives life again, and does not allow whatever it gives life to remain in death. In the first motion, then, he brought all things into life; and this is the descent of the Word, that, going out from the Father, he gave his own proper life by the Father's power to those in the heavens, and to angels, thrones or glories, and such beings as there are; for he is the Word of all things, through whom all things were made. And again, since there could be no giving of life unless there were matter for the power of giving life, matter was made dead by nature; and this, when given life, sent forth its hosts by the divine giving of life, and corrupted man. But the Word, perfect life, completed the mystery and appeared in matter, that is, in flesh and in darkness. For how was it possible for what had existed to appear, except in flesh, that is, to the senses? Having become all things, then, and being in all things, the Word begot all things, saved, and reigned, being eternal life in the spirit. So he was justified; he appeared to angels; coming, then, he was preached to the nations. He existed, then, before he came. “He was believed in the world”; for so Isaiah too confesses in prophecy: “Egypt has laboured, and the merchandise of Ethiopia and of the Sabaeans; men of lofty stature shall walk with you, and shall be your servants, and shall follow behind you bound in fetters, and shall worship you and pray to you, because God is in you, and there is no God besides you; for you are God, and we did not know it, the God of Israel.” Preached, then, in the world, received in the glory of divinity, both from the beginning and in the beginning and afterwards, and always from eternity, and for ages of ages. Amen. ### Scripture references - Col 1:16: quotation, high confidence - 1 Tim 3:16: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: allusion, high confidence - Phil 2:7: allusion, high confidence - John 1:3: allusion, medium confidence - Isa 45:14: quotation, high confidence - Isa 45:15: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Isa 45:14–15 is quoted in a Septuagint-based form. The sentence about matter “made dead by nature” that “corrupted man” is obscure in the Latin and is translated as written. “En-substanced” renders insubstantiatum. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.26 (PL 8:1059b–1060b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-26). ## Against Arius 1.27 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-27 - Source: PL 8:1060b–1060d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus reads Isaiah 45:14 against Jews, Photinians and Arians, and explains that the Word, God's power and wisdom, always proceeds from the Father as action from being. ### Latin text Vide autem et istud ad ό/ιοούσιον quomodo Spiritus dicit Isaiae: In te Deus, et non est Deus extra te: quod filio dicit Domino nostro, manifestum in te Deus, hoc est, quod dictum est: Pater in me. Aliud autem, et non est Deus extra te: in isto verbo Omnes haereses praedicit. Ad istud quid dicunt omnes Judaei? et qui dicunt hominem esse Jesum? Et qui dicunt ex nihilo? et fuit quando non fuit? erat enim Deus et semper unus Deus. Si enim Jesus λόγο? et λόγο? semper ad Deum; et βιλόγο? unus Deus; et non est alius, όμοούσιον ergo Deus. Et λόγο? rursus si Deus est quod est esse, hujus autem Dei, et ejus quod est esse, virtus et sapientia Jesus, hoc est λόγο?, unus Deus, et non est alter. Unalitas ergo λόγο? et Deus, et ipsum quod est esse, et λόγο? esse, idem simul in eo quod est esse subsistens, et idcirco όροού- σίσν. Quod autem λόγον esse est, hoc est, vitam et νοΰν esse; ista enim sunt virtus et sapientia Dei, quod est Salvator Jesus, progressio est et generatio, et in substantiam filietas processio, et in actionem effulgentia et refulgentia. Hoc autem non fuit quando non fuit, sed semper fuit: semper ergo pater, semper filius. Et pater tantum pater, et filius tantum filius: ad patrem autem, quoniam id quod est esse, quod est Deus et pater, causa est τω λόγω ad id quod est ei esse, nec reversum autem: et est proprium ejus, quod primum est esse, quiescere; τοΰ λόγου autem proprium movere et agere, et non localiter moveri, neque in locum translatione, sed motione quae animae est meliore et diviniore, quae propria motione et vitam dat, et intelligentias parit subsistens in se ipsa, et non discissa a propria potentia in operationem. ### English translation (Claude) See this too, for the homoousion: how the Spirit says in Isaiah, “God is in you, and there is no God besides you.” Since he says it to the Son, our Lord, it is plain: “God is in you”, that is, what is said: “The Father is in me.” The other phrase, “and there is no God besides you”: in this word he foretells all heresies. What do all the Jews say to this? And those who say that Jesus is a man? And those who say he is from nothing, and that “there was when he was not”? For God was, and always one God. For if Jesus is the Word, and the Word is always with God, and the Word with God is one God, and there is no other, God is homoousion. And again the Word: if God is that which is being, and Jesus, that is, the Word, is the power and wisdom of this God and of that which is being, then there is one God and not another. There is, then, a oneness of the Word and God; and that very thing which is being, and being the Word, is the same, together subsisting in that which is being; and therefore homoousion. And what being the Word is, that is, being life and intellect (for these are the power and wisdom of God, which is the Saviour Jesus), is procession and generation, a procession into substance as sonship, and into action as effulgence and refulgence. This was not “when it was not”; it always was: always, then, Father, always Son. And the Father is only Father, and the Son only Son, in relation to the Father; since that which is being, which is God and Father, is the cause for the Word of his being, and not the reverse. And it is proper to that which is first being to rest; but proper to the Word to move and to act, not moving locally nor by transfer from place to place, but by a motion better and more divine than that of the soul, a motion which by its own movement gives life and brings forth understandings, subsisting in itself and not torn away from its own power into operation. ### Scripture references - Isa 45:14: quotation, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Intellect” renders νοῦς. The phrase about the Jews is Victorinus's own. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.27 (PL 8:1060b–1060d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-27). ## Against Arius 1.28 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-28 - Source: PL 8:1060d–1061c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus attacks the new “homoiousion” party, arguing that its claim to antiquity is empty since Nicaea confirmed the homoousion, and that heretics were condemned for their own errors, not for saying homoousion. ### Latin text Sed ista. Et rursus: Sunt enim et alia in sacra Scriptura, quod Deus Jesus, quod ante aeones: quod filius, et natura filius, et in carne filius, et maxime in carne filius vocatus, quod tunc salvavit omnia ovr«, et tunc vicit inimicitias divinitatis, et omnem mortem, et quod ipse passus sit secundum motionem; pater autem non secundum cessationem. Si ista sic sunt, hoc deest solum quomodo intelligendum ομοονσιον, aut ομοονσιον esse filium patri: hoc enim dogma nunc ex pergefactum est, et quidem olim rumoribus jactatum, quod non oporteat dici ομοούσιον, sed magis ομοούσιον: nunc inventum hoc dogma. Audent autem et hoc dicere, quod olim, non dico quando olim: sufficit enim quod mihi non ab aeone, neque a praesentia Jesus, sed olim datum sit ante annos centum, concedo, et plures. Ubi latuit? ubi dormiit ante undecim annos? cum in Nicaena civitate fide confirmata per 300 plures Episcopos, Arionitas excludentes, in qua synodo istorum virorum Ecclesiae totius orbis lumina fuerunt. Vetus igitur dogma quod fugerat: si non fuit, convictum est, et nunc coepit: si fuit, aut contentione siluit, aut cognitionis et veritatis sententia fugatum est: forte tunc tu patrone dogmatis non solum in vita, sed episcopus fuisti: tacuisti et tu, et socii et discipuli, et condoctores, et toto tempore postea, usquequo imperator Romae fuit, praesens audisti multa contraria, conviva existens istorum hominum quos nunc anathematizas: iratus vel quod sine te fidem scripserunt. An coactus a magistris legatus venisti in defensionem proditionis? Sed quid differt, sive triginta, sive septuaginta. sive amplius, et sive saepius eadem fides in destructionem aliarum αιρέσεων effecta est? una cum sit, et ab uno incipiens, et operata usque nunc. Tu autem scribis ista et dicis: quae Samosatenus Paulos, et Marcellus, et Photinus, et nunc Valens et Ursacius, et alii istius modi in haeresi religiosi inventi destructi sunt. Numquid omoov dicentes? Non. Quomodo autem blasphemantes? Samosatenus sicuti Arius: ex nihilo, et quod fuit quando non fuit, quod factura filius, et omnino omnimodis dissimilis patri. Quid Marcellus et Photinus? Tantum hominem ex homine Jesum, et esse Triadem extra Jesum. Et nunc Valens et Ursacius reliquiae Arii. Propria ergo blasphemia, propter quam ejecti sunt. Tum autem idcirco vicisti eos, quod ομοονσιον dicis, non enim dixerunt ομοούσιον, et sic victi sunt. ### English translation (Claude) But enough. And again: there are other things in sacred Scripture: that Jesus is God, that he is before the ages; that he is Son, Son by nature and Son in the flesh, and called Son most of all in the flesh; that he then saved all existents and conquered the enmities against the divinity and all death; and that he suffered by way of motion, while the Father did not, by way of rest. If these things are so, only this is lacking: how homoousion is to be understood, or that the Son is homoousion with the Father. For this doctrine has now been stirred up, though once noised abroad by rumours: that one ought not to say homoousion, but rather homoiousion. This doctrine has been invented now. And they dare to say this too, that it was taught long ago. I do not ask when “long ago” was; it is enough for me that it was given neither from eternity nor from the presence of Jesus, but long ago: a hundred years ago, I grant, and more. Where was it hidden? Where was it sleeping eleven years ago, when in the city of Nicaea the faith was confirmed by more than three hundred bishops, who excluded the Arians, in which synod these men were the lights of the church of the whole world? An old doctrine, then, which had fled! If it did not exist, it is refuted and has only now begun; if it did exist, either it fell silent through contention or it was put to flight by the judgment of knowledge and truth. Perhaps you, patron of the doctrine, were then not only alive but a bishop: you too were silent, and your fellows and disciples and fellow teachers; and through all the time afterwards, until the emperor was at Rome, you were present and heard many contrary things, being a table companion of those men whom you now anathematize; angry, perhaps, because they wrote a creed without you. Or did you come, compelled by your masters, as an envoy in defence of a betrayal? But what difference does it make whether thirty or seventy or more bishops, and whether the same faith was produced more often for the destruction of other heresies? It is one, beginning from one, and at work until now. But you write and say this: that Paul of Samosata, and Marcellus, and Photinus, and now Valens and Ursacius, and others of this kind, found to be devout in heresy, were destroyed. Was it by saying homoousion? No. How, then, by blaspheming? The Samosatene, like Arius: “from nothing”, “there was when he was not”, that the Son is a thing made and wholly unlike the Father in every way. What of Marcellus and Photinus? That Jesus is only a man from a man, and that the Triad is outside Jesus. And now Valens and Ursacius, the remnants of Arius. Each had his own blasphemy, then, for which they were cast out. Do you think, then, that you conquered them because you say homoiousion? They did not say homoousion, and so they were conquered. ### Translation notes - The opponent addressed is probably Basil of Ancyra, leader of the homoiousian (“like in substance”) party at the Synod of Ancyra (358), whose synodal letter Victorinus answers here and in 1.29; identification uncertain. The digital text writes ὁμοούσιον and ὁμοιούσιον in similar garbled forms; which is meant is decided by the argument. “Eleven years ago” is as printed; other editions read “forty years ago”, which fits Nicaea (325). Valens of Mursa and Ursacius of Singidunum were leading anti-Nicene bishops. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.28 (PL 8:1060d–1061c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-28). ## Against Arius 1.29 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-29 - Source: PL 8:1061d–1062c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus answers the homoiousian objection that homoousion implies a substance prior to Father and Son, turning it back on “like substance”, and appeals to Isaiah's “none like me”. ### Latin text Videamus ergo etiam et hoc quod dicis, et quomodo dicis: sic sapiunt et Afri, et Orientales omnes; quare igitur scribis ad illos, ut ejiciant a sancta Ecclesia ομοούσιον? Dicunt ergo istud: Non oportuit ad eos scribi; si oportuit scribi, oportuit et persuadere illis, non solum jussione, Sed rationibus et sacris scripturis: debeas enim non solum ομοού&κη destruere, sed et ομοουσκη adstruere. Nunc autem supra infra in 6μοου~ σιου perversionem nihil aliud dicis, quam quod istud dicentes necesse sit confiteri substantiam prae existere, et sic explosum patrem et filium esse. Primum non est necesse. Deus enim et substantia, et substantiae causa est, et omnibus quae sunt praeexistit, et universae existentialitati, et universae essentiali: ab ipso enim omnia et ea quae sunt, et nomina. Ex isto igitur Deo substantiae principium qui est, et ideo qui sit substantia ομοουσιος filius in ipso et cum ipso. Quippe forma ejus qui sit et imago et character, sine quibus Deus non intelligitur nec intelligentiam ascendit: non tamen quod non sit, quod est simplex Deus: et non quod ista quasi aliud, quod in se ipso sint, aut ut accidentia, sed istud ipsum Deum esse: et sic esse όμοούσιον est quod est esse, et pater quod est esse. Quod autem sic esse filius est, Deus enim quod est esse, sic autem esse ϊόγος, et hoc significat semper quod dicit: Ego et pater unum sumus. Et: Pater in me, et ego in patre. Et: si quis me vidit, vidit et patrem, ομοονσια enim. Quid ergo dicit, dicens: praeexistit substantia, όροού<πον est? Quid vero si ψοουσιον est, non necesse est sic intelligere quod praeexistat substantia, a quo duo ista substantia similia facta sint? et secundum tuam rationem, et tu in idipsum incurris. quod metuis in ορσούσιον. An tibi soli licet intelligere ομοουσεον, patre dante substantiam filio; nobis autem non est ista excogitatio ψοούσιον esse, patre causa existente ad hoc ut sit filius, substantiam Deum esse, et tu fateris ομοούσιον: esse enim dicis et patrem et filium. Quis, cui similis? secundum dignitatem, et dignitatem minum filius patri? sed tamen et pater filio: sic enim sunt omnia ad aliquid, si istud est similitudo, et dicimus ίμοουσιον, similem esse dicimus filium patri; et quomodo accipiemus Isaiae dictum: dicit enim: Ante me non fuit alius Deus, et post me non erit similis. ### English translation (Claude) Let us look, then, at this too that you say, and how you say it: “So think the Africans too, and all the Orientals.” Why, then, do you write to them to cast the homoousion out of the holy church? If they say this, it was not necessary to write to them; if it was necessary to write, it was necessary also to persuade them, not by command only but by reasons and the sacred Scriptures; for you ought not only to destroy the homoousion but also to build up the homoiousion. But now, up and down, against the homoousion you say nothing other than that those who say it must confess that a substance pre-exists, and so that the Father and the Son are from it. First, that is not necessary. For God is both substance and the cause of substance, and pre-exists all things that are, all existentiality and all essentiality; for from him are all things, both the things that are and their names. From this God, then, who is the principle of substance, and so is substance, the Son is homoousios, in him and with him. For he is the form of him who is, and his image and imprint, without which God is not understood, nor does he rise into understanding; not, however, as if he were not what the simple God is; and not as though these were something else that is in God himself, or as accidents, but this very thing, God's being. And so being homoousion is what being is, and the Father is what being is. That the Son is being in this way: for God is what is being, but being in this way is the Word; and this he always signifies when he says: “I and the Father are one”; and: “The Father is in me, and I in the Father”; and: “If anyone has seen me, he has seen the Father also”; for they are homoousia. What, then, are you saying when you say: “Substance pre-exists, it is homoousion”? But if it is homoiousion, is it not necessary to understand that substance pre-exists, from which these two like substances were made? By your own reasoning you too run into what you fear in the homoousion. Or is it permitted to you alone to understand homoiousion, the Father giving substance to the Son, while we may not think it homoousion, the Father being the cause that the Son is, God being substance? You too confess homoiousion, for you say that both Father and Son exist. Who is like whom? In dignity, and is the Son like the Father with less dignity? Yet the Father is also like the Son; for in this way all such things are relative. If this is likeness, and we say homoiousion, we say that the Son is like the Father; and how shall we take Isaiah's saying? For he says: “Before me there was no other God, and after me there will be none like me.” ### Scripture references - John 10:30: quotation, high confidence - John 10:38: quotation, high confidence - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - Isa 43:10: quotation, high confidence - Heb 1:3: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - The opening quotation is the opponent's claim, as Victorinus reports it. “That the Father and the Son are from it” renders the corrupt “explosum patrem et filium esse” by sense. Isa 43:10 is quoted in a Septuagint-based form. The digital text writes ὁμοούσιον and ὁμοιούσιον in similar garbled forms; translated by the argument. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.29 (PL 8:1061d–1062c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-29). ## Against Arius 1.30 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-30 - Source: PL 8:1062c–1063c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Word is God's image, not a likeness, defines substance, and answers the objection that “substance” is unscriptural by appealing to epiousios (Matt 6:11), periousios (Titus 2:14) and Jeremiah 23. ### Latin text Quid ergo voyos? ante Deum, an post Deum, an cum Deo? si ante Deum, non ingenitus Deus nec pater Deus, nec principium principiorum: si autem post Deum ούκ ομοιος, sed similis alius Deus. Sed si istud nefas dicis, non solum potentia, dignitate, deitate, sed et substantia:quid est esse substantia simile? Ex ipsa ista substantia, secundum quod ista ipsa substantia est. idem est, non simile: simile enim qualitate efficitur, quae similitudo colore, habitu, affectione, virtute, forma similitudo est. Jesus autem, hoc est, Μηος, imago est Dei non similitudo. Imago Dei dicitur, non enim Deus imago, sed Deus imagine et substantia Deus, non ut duo, una enim substantia, et una imago, unde unus Deus, et unus ϊήος, et unum pater, unus filius, et ista unum: unum enim et istud unum, non duo: et ideo simul, et substantia ipsum quod est alterum unum, et ideo istud non alterum unum, sed magis et solum unum. Sed ista. Et rursus, quid dicimus esse substantiam, sicuti sapientes et antiqui definierunt? quod subjectum, quod est aliquid, quod est in alio non esse; et dant differentiam existentiae et substantiae, et existentiam quidem et existentialitatem praeexistentem subsistentiam sine accidentibus, puris et solis ipsis quae sunt in eo, quod est solam esse quod subsistat; substantiam autem subjectum cum iis omnibus quae sunt accidentia, in ipsa separabiliter existentia, in usu autem accipientia et existentiam, et substantiam, ubicumque eodem modo esse aliquid significantes utimur istis nominibus. Sit igitur sic, sive in aeternis sive in mundanis; licet enim dici sive existentiam, sive substantiam, sive quod est esse vere substantiam: ibi motio est, et non simpliciter motio, sed prima motio, quae genus sit et ipsa status, et idcirco ipsa substantia. Sed ista et longioris, et alterius quaestionis. Nunc autem fatemur quod sit ibi substantia, quae habet secundum proprium significatum hoc: aliquid £v esse; adversus autem eos qui dicunt nomen substantiae non esse positum in sanctis scripturis. Non quidem substantiae forte non est, denominata a substantia sunt, unde enim deductum imovaiov quam a substantia: Da panem nobis έπιούσιον, hodiernum? Quoniam Jesus vita est, et corpus ipsius vita est, corpus autem panis, sicuti dictum est: Da nobis panem de coelo. Significat έπιούσιον ex ipsa, aut in ipsa substantia, hoc est vitae panem. Sic rursus et Paulus in Epistola ad Titum: Populum πλούσιον, circa substantiam, hoc est circa vitam consistentem populum, sicuti et in oblatione dicitur: Munda tibi populum circum vitatem aemulatorem bonorum operum circa tuam substantiam venientem. Videtur mihi idem significari in Jeremia propheta, ubi dicit: Quia quis stetit in substantia Domini, et vidit verbum ejus? quis praebuit aurem et audivit? Et post modicum dicit: Et si stetissent in substantia, sed in substantia substantia scribunt, non insubstantia. Sed si quis intellectum certe intelligit, nihil aliud invenit, nisi istud: Si quis in eo quod Dei est esse steterit, hoc est in substantia, quod in ipsa όμοουσιος filius, statim λόγον ejus videt; debemus enim quod ulterius non est, interius aliquid stare facere, τον νουν insubstantia, substantia Dei, hoc est in substantia, et statim comprehendimus et Deum, et λόγον, όμοουσιον enim, et simul ambo unum. ### English translation (Claude) What, then, is the Word? Before God, or after God, or with God? If before God, God is not unbegotten, nor is God the Father, nor the principle of principles; if after God, then Isaiah says “none like”, yet he would be another God, like him. But if you call this impious, saying he is like not only in power, dignity and deity but also in substance: what is it to be like in substance? From that very substance, insofar as it is that very substance, it is the same, not like; for the like comes about by quality, and such likeness is likeness of colour, habit, disposition, virtue, form. But Jesus, that is, the Word, is the image of God, not a likeness. He is called the image of God: God is not the image, but God by image and by substance is God; not as two, for there is one substance and one image; hence one God and one Word, one Father, one Son, and these are one. For this one and that one are one, not two; and therefore they are together, and the substance itself is the other one, and therefore this is not another one, but rather the only one. But enough. And again, what do we say substance is, as the wise and the ancients have defined it? That which is subject; that which is something; that which is not to be in another. And they distinguish existence and substance: existence and existentiality as pre-existing subsistence without accidents, pure and alone in the things that are in it, in that it is only to be what subsists; substance as the subject together with all the accidents, which exist in it separably. But in use we take both existence and substance, and we use these names wherever we signify being something in the same way. Let it be so, then, whether in the eternal things or in the things of the world; for one may say existence, or substance, or that which is being truly, substance: there there is motion, and not simply motion but first motion, which is a genus and is itself rest, and therefore itself substance. But these belong to a longer and different inquiry. For now we confess that there is substance there, which has this according to its proper meaning: to be some one thing. And we speak against those who say that the name substance is not found in the holy Scriptures. Perhaps the name substance is not, but there are words named from substance. For from what is epiousion derived, if not from substance: “Give us today our epiousion bread”? Since Jesus is life, and his body is life, and his body is bread, as it is said: “Give us bread from heaven.” Epiousion signifies “from” or “in” the substance itself, that is, the bread of life. So again Paul in the letter to Titus: “a people periousion”, around substance, that is, a people that stands around life; as is also said in the offering: “Cleanse for yourself a people around life, zealous for good works, coming around your substance.” The same seems to me to be signified in the prophet Jeremiah, where he says: “For who has stood in the substance of the Lord and seen his word? Who has given ear and heard?” And a little after he says: “And if they had stood in the substance”; but some write it otherwise. But if anyone understands the sense truly, he finds nothing other than this: if anyone has stood in that which is God's being, that is, in the substance, in which the Son is homoousios, he at once sees his Word. For we ought to make the intellect stand within, in the substance, the substance of God; and at once we grasp both God and the Word, for they are homoousion, and both together are one. ### Scripture references - Isa 43:10: allusion, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 6:11: quotation, high confidence - John 6:32: allusion, medium confidence - John 6:33: allusion, medium confidence - Titus 2:14: quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:18: quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:22: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Greek words discussed: ἐπιούσιον (Matt 6:11, “daily” or “for the coming day”), περιούσιον (Titus 2:14, “special”, garbled as πλούσιον), and the Septuagint ὑπόστημα in Jer 23:18, 22, rendered “substance” in Victorinus's Latin. The prayer “in the offering” is from the liturgy and is unidentified. The sentence on variant readings in Jeremiah (“sed in substantia substantia scribunt, non insubstantia”) is corrupt and is summarized. “Intellect” renders τὸν νοῦν. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.30 (PL 8:1062c–1063c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-30). ## Against Arius 1.31 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-23/#p-1-31 - Source: PL 8:1063c–1064c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that God, called light and spirit in Scripture, is substance, and that the Son is his image, form, will and Word, light from light, always with him. ### Latin text Sed videris. Supponamus dicere substantiam Dei id illud quod est esse, et του ΙησοΟ quod est esse, esse Deum, et pietas, et confessio: quae igitur substantia Dei? Si substantia dicitur in mundanis, ut animal, ut homo, necesse est dicere in aeternis substantiam esse Deum, sed vides ipsum Deum juxta illud esse, quod dicimus, aut lumen, aut spiritum, aut ipsum esse, aut potentiam ejus quod est esse, aut intelligentiam universalem, aut potentiam universalis intelligentiae, aut universalis vitae vel actionis, aut aliorum istiusmodi in quo sit, fontem esse omnium eorum quae vere sunt, aut quae sunt. Sed dicunt scripturae lumen esse Deum, spiritum esse: haec autem substantiam significant, non enim accidens; cui primo quod est esse accidit, si istud accidens? Sed nulli: impossibile enim ultra esse aliquid supra quod est esse. Ergo substantia, juxta quod est esse lumen, et spiritus, quod est simplex et incompositum, quae ibi et idem lumen et spiritus: est autem lumini et spiritui imago, non a necessitate naturae, sed voluntate magnitudinis patris: ipso enim se ipsum circumterminavit. Et idcirco dicitur, tu te ipsum intelligis, sed et filio intelligibilis, filius ergo in patre imago, et forma, et λόγος, et voluntas patris, juxta quod voluntas patris, alteri juxta quod voluntas patris filius. Omnis enim voluntas progenies est, juxta quod universalis voluntas, unigenitus, semel enim totius plenitudinis λόγος prosiliit e potentia Dei: ista potentia λόγος existens genuit λόγον, hoc est, in manifestationem et operationem adduxit. Sic igitur voluntate patris, voluntas apparuit ipse λόγος filius: est igitur Dei voluntas λόγος cum ipso qui semper est, et ad ipsum ipsa voluntas filiatio est: pater ergo, cujus est voluntas, filius autem voluntas est, et voluntas ipse est λόγος: λόγος ergo filius. Non enim λόγος locutio quaedam est, sed potentia ad creandum aliquid, confabulans iis quibus futurum est esse secundum οντότητα virtutem unicuique propriam substantiam, et ipse λόγος forma, quae cognoscentia est Dei: per λόγον enim solum cognoscentia efficitur. Propter quod dictum est λόγον esse ad Deum, et est λόγος verbum, lumen a lumine, aut spiritus a spiritu, et substantia a substantia, non prima et secunda secundum tempus, sed secundum quod causa est alii, ut sit potentia: semper simul, non enim abscissa est effulgentia luminis, sed semper in lumine est, et ipse lumen existens operatur omnia λόγος existens, a se movens, et quae semper movens, copiam habens: illud patris omnipotentem esse. ### English translation (Claude) But you will see. Let us suppose that it is piety and right confession to say that God's substance is that which is being, and that what is the being of Jesus is to be God. What, then, is God's substance? If substance is spoken of among things of the world, as an animal or a man is, then it is necessary to say that among the eternal things God is substance. But you see God himself according to that being of which we speak: either light, or spirit, or being itself, or the power of that which is being, or universal understanding, or the power of universal understanding, or of universal life or action, or any other such thing in which he is, as the fountain of all the things that truly are or that are. But the Scriptures say that God is light, that he is spirit: and these signify substance, not accident. For to what would that which is first being belong as an accident, if this were an accident? To nothing: for it is impossible that anything should be beyond, above that which is being. It is substance, then, in respect of that being which is light and spirit, which is simple and uncompounded, in which light and spirit are one and the same. And there is an image of this light and spirit, not from necessity of nature but by the will of the Father's greatness; for he bounded himself by himself. And therefore it is said: you understand yourself, but you are intelligible also to the Son. The Son, then, is in the Father as image and form and Word and will of the Father: other, inasmuch as the Son is the Father's will. For every will is offspring; and inasmuch as it is universal will, it is only-begotten: for once, the Word of the whole fullness leapt forth from the power of God; this power, being Word, begot the Word, that is, brought him into manifestation and operation. Thus by the will of the Father the will appeared, the Word himself, the Son. The Word, then, is the will of God, with him who always is; and in relation to him the will itself is sonship. The Father, then, is he whose will it is; the Son is the will, and the will is the Word himself: the Word, then, is the Son. For the Word is not a kind of speech, but a power for creating something, speaking with the things that are to be and giving to each its proper substance according to the power of entity; and the Word himself is form, which is the knowledge of God, for knowledge comes about only through the Word. For this reason it is said that the Word is with God; and the Word is word, light from light, or spirit from spirit, and substance from substance; not first and second in time, but in that one is the cause of the other's being, by power. They are always together; for the effulgence of light is not cut off, but is always in the light. And being himself light, the Word works all things, moving himself and always moving, having abundance: that is the Father's, to be almighty. ### Scripture references - 1 John 1:5: allusion, high confidence - John 4:24: allusion, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Entity” renders ὀντότης. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.31 (PL 8:1063c–1064c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-31). ## Against Arius 1.32 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-32 - Source: PL 8:1064c–1065d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus illustrates the homoousion by the soul, whose life and understanding are one motion and one substance with it, as the Son, the Father's will and motion, is one substance with the Father. ### Latin text Quae igitur hic similitudo, quae consilio ut efficiatur et generetur, ut dicis, ad generationem filii? A se movens pater, a se se generans filius; sed potentia patris se se generans filius: voluntas enim illius, unde enim si ipsa voluntas non est a se se generans, nec voluntas est: sed quoniam Dei est voluntas, equidem ipsa quae sit generans, generatur in Deo. Et ideo Deus pater, voluntas filius, unum utrumque, magis autem et unum, et solum unum non counitione, sed simplicitate: progressa quidem voluntate in potentiam actuosam, non abscedente tamen a substantia propria et eadem motione? ista enim tria ibi unum sunt, substantia, motio, voluntas. Substantia pater, juxta id ipsum motio et voluntas: rursus filius motio et voluntas, et juxta id ipsum et substantia, et hoc est ομοούσων. Habeamus exempli gratia istud quod ego nunc dico: sic enim nunc oportet dicere, quoniam multi in anima corpus esse dicunt, sed nunc secundum dicendi usum anima sit in corpore. Anima in humano corpore est, in eo quod anima est, substantia est, sicuti vel hyle, vel corpus. Istae enim mundanis duae substantiae. Et sicuti hyle formam habet, hoc est speciem, ut est corpus, aut aliud aliquid; unum quidem ύλοώς est in molem concretum. Necesse est enim aliquid quamdam quantitatem esse: quantumcumque igitur est quod est hylicum: Sic enim quantitate definitur hyle, ut subsistat, et substantia fiat, jam aliquid existens. Isto modo et anima, substantia incorporalis quae sit, definitionem et imaginem habet: vitalem potentiam et intelligentialem, bipotens enim, et gemini luminis: etenim et vivificat vitam dans animalibus, et habet coinquinatum τόν νουν, et όμοούσιον, et idcirco ομοουσιΛ omnia: simul enim substantia et motus id ipsum cum sit, secundum subjectum anima, juxta quod vivit et vivificat; et juxta quod intelligit, et intelligentia est una motione, ut una ipsa cum sit, quae species est ipsius, definitur enim motione, et existit unum ov, duplici potentia in uno motu existente: vitae et intelligentiae: impassionabiliter quidem ista, in actione duo, in una motione, id est, quod generatur, et Filius unigenitus animae ipse vita, ipse νους existens, et prima potentia cum eo quod ei esse vita est: quo enim est, hoc est quod est vita: illud enim esse isti ipsi quod substantia est, et vita est, et supra vitam est; non enim aliud vivificat, neque semetipsum: non enim ab alio quasi aliud accipit, hoc enim ipsius quod est esse, ipsi est moveri, et motionem esse; et quod est motio, hoc vita est; et quod vita est, hoc est intelligentia. Ista enim substantialia dico, motiones, vitam, intelligentiam, nullam dicens, sensibilium motionum nec in locum transitum; duo ergo haec, vita et intelligentia, όμοούσια sunt ei quod est esse, hoc est, animae. Quae duo uno est motio, quae quidem prima potentia vitae est, forma enim eo quod est esse, vita est. Definit enim infinitum esse, quod est prima potentia motionis, secunda autem potentia ipsa motio; quoniam quod definitur, et intelligentia comprehenditur a vita, innata intelligentia substantiaque sit, juxta quod est intelligentia et subsistens, et per semetipsam deducta a substantia vitae. Unum haec duo, et unum juxta motum filius est, unigenitus animae, nihil passionis patientis juxta quod animae est: hoc autem est vel mater, vel pater unigeniti filii, motione in duplicem potentiam procedente, quae sola patitur: motio enim passio, et motione passio, in motione enim motio et status: statum autem esse in motione passio est, et in motione esse a statu est passio, ergo et motio: motione igitur omnis passio, haec autem duplex, secundum vitam et intelligentiam: secundum vitam quidem passio, quod adhuc indiget alterius quod vult vivefacere, et ideo juxta quod ejus est particeps, et alias patitur passiones usque in mortem. Secundum autem intelligentiam, quoniam et ista indigens est ejus quod intelligibile est, ut intelligentia subsistat; magis passiones et infirmitates incurrit, et volvitur insensibilibus, et per phantasiam in falsam subsistentiam circumducitur. Istis igitur exigentibus, ista patientibus, manet anima juxta substantiam, custodiens in semine motionis potentiam vitae et intelligentiae, qua semper manente vita et intelligentia accenditur, magis autem erigit, si in fontanam vitam, hoc est, in Christum, et fontanam intelligentiam, hoc est, in sanctum Spiritum resurgit resuscitata anima. ### English translation (Claude) What likeness, then, is there here, made and begotten by counsel, as you say, for the generation of the Son? The Father moves himself; the Son begets himself; but the Son begets himself by the power of the Father, for he is his will. For if the will itself does not beget itself, it is not will; but since it is the will of God, it, being the begetting, is itself begotten in God. And therefore God is Father, the will is Son, each is one, or rather they are one, and only one, not by co-union but by simplicity: the will having proceeded into active power, yet not departing from its own substance and the same motion; for these three are one there: substance, motion, will. The Father is substance, and by that very fact motion and will; again the Son is motion and will, and by that very fact substance as well; and this is homoousion. Let us take as an example what I now say (for so it must be said now, since many say that the body is in the soul; but now, according to common usage, let the soul be in the body). The soul is in the human body; insofar as it is soul, it is substance, as matter or body is; for these are the two substances among the things of the world. And as matter has form, that is, species, as a body or something else has, so one thing, in a material way, is concreted into bulk. For something must be some quantity: whatever is material, then, is of some size. For matter is defined by quantity so as to subsist and become substance, existing now as something. In this way the soul too, being incorporeal substance, has a definition and an image: a vital power and an intellectual power; for it is two-powered and of a twin light: it gives life, giving life to living beings, and it has the intellect joined with it, and homoousion with it, and therefore all are homoousia. For since substance and motion are one and the same, the soul is so as subject, inasmuch as it lives and gives life; and inasmuch as it understands, it is also understanding, by one motion, since it is itself one, which is its form. For it is defined by motion, and exists as one existent, with a twofold power existing in one motion, of life and of understanding: these impassibly, two in action, in one motion, that is, in what is begotten. And the only-begotten son of the soul is itself life, itself intellect, and the first power with that whose being is life: for that by which it is, is what life is; for that being, to this very thing which is substance, is life, and is above life. For it does not give life to another, nor to itself: for it does not receive from another as another; for this belongs to its being: for it to be moved and to be motion; and what is motion, this is life; and what is life, this is understanding. I call these substantial: motions, life, understanding, meaning none of the sensible motions nor passage from place to place. These two, then, life and understanding, are homoousia with that which is being, that is, with the soul. These two are one motion, which is the first power of life; for life is the form of that which is being. For it defines the infinite to be, which is the first power of motion; the second power is motion itself; since what is defined and understood is grasped by life, understanding is innate and is substance, inasmuch as it is understanding and subsisting, and is drawn out by itself from the substance of life. These two are one, and one according to motion is the son, the only-begotten of the soul, suffering no passion insofar as it belongs to the soul. And the soul is, as it were, mother or father of the only-begotten son, the motion proceeding into a twofold power, which alone suffers. For motion is passion, and passion comes by motion; for in motion there are motion and rest; but for rest to be in motion is passion, and to be in motion from rest is passion; so too is motion. All passion, then, is by motion; and this is twofold, according to life and according to understanding. According to life there is passion because it still needs another thing to which it wishes to give life; and therefore, insofar as it shares in it, it suffers other passions even unto death. According to understanding, since this too needs what is intelligible in order that understanding may subsist, it incurs still more passions and weaknesses, and is rolled about among senseless things, and by imagination is led round into a false subsistence. While these things make their demands and these suffer, the soul remains according to substance, guarding in the seed of motion the power of life and understanding; and as that always remains, life and understanding are kindled, or rather the soul raises itself up, if the awakened soul rises again into the fountain of life, that is, into Christ, and into the fountain of understanding, that is, into the Holy Spirit. ### Translation notes - “Intellect” renders τὸν νοῦν; “joined with it” renders the obscure “coinquinatum”. Victorinus presents the soul only as an analogy (see 1.33). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.32 (PL 8:1064c–1065d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32). ## Against Arius 1.33 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-33 - Source: PL 8:1066a–1066c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus rejects the view that God's being is a power at rest prior to God, insisting that God is both being and action, so that the Father and the Word are one and homoousion. ### Latin text Sed ista sicut in similitudine. De Deo enim, et de λόγω, hoc est, Filio Jesu Christo, et Spiritu sancto diviniore intelligentia utentes, suscipiamus istorum όιχοούσιον unitatem. Primum inquirendum. si idem est Deus, et Deo esse, an aliud aliquid? Si idem, jam et esse est, et agere; si autem aliud Deo esse, aliud Deum esse, praeexistentiale est Deo esse, quippe in potentia existens ad id quod est esse, quod vere magis id est quod est esse: potentia enim omnia praeexistens et principium, et ante est quam vere ov. Sed istud beate, in quiete esse aestimant omnino omnimodis: in motu solum quod causa sit omnibus in qualicumque motione exigentibus. Et dicunt istud praenoscentia concipi, cum ipsa per semet nihil est, sed conceptione quod praexistit suscipitur. Sed scriptura, et omnis intelligentia istum Deum et esse dicit, et ante ipsum nihil esse, qui et id est quod est esse, et id quod operari. Istum Deum confitemur et colimus, principium omnium quae sunt; actione enim sunt, quae sunt: ante enim actionem nondum sunt; actuosum enim Deum accipimus, sicut in principio fecit Deus coelum et terram, et fecit Angelos, hominem, et omnia in coelis et in terra. Iste igitur verus Deus et solus Deus, quia et potentia et actione Deus, sed in aeterna: ut Christus et potentia et actione, sed jam foris et aperta. Pater igitur Deus prima actio, et prima existentia et substantia, et principale τό ov, actione a se sua esse qui generet sine principio, semper existens a se, existens infinitus, omnimodis perfectus, omnipotens, immutabilis, semper sic et eodem modo existens, substantialis in semetipso: λόγος existens ad id ut sint omnia, non ut aliud aliquid, aut ut alterum, sed simul simplicitate coexistens, et unitione unum est; hoc enim quod λόγος est, id ipsum est quod est esse, et ipso quod est esse, λόγος est: ipse enim λόγος Deus est, unum ergo et omoov: non enim sine actione Deus, sed operatur Deus, sicuti dictum. ### English translation (Claude) But these things are by way of likeness. Using a more divine understanding of God, and of the Word, that is, the Son Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, let us take up their homoousion unity. First it must be asked whether God and God's being are the same, or something else. If the same, then it is both being and acting. But if God's being is one thing and God another, then God's being is pre-existential, existing in power toward that which is being, which truly is more that which is being; for power, pre-existing all things, is the principle and is before what is truly existent. But this they think is blessedly at rest, wholly and in every way; in motion only in that it is the cause for all things that require motion of any kind. And they say that this is conceived by a fore-knowing, since by itself it is nothing, but what pre-exists is grasped by conception. But Scripture and all understanding say that this God both is and that nothing is before him, he who is both that which is being and that which is operating. This God we confess and worship, the principle of all things that are; for the things that are exist by action; before action they are not yet. For we take God as active, as “in the beginning God made heaven and earth”, and made angels, man, and all things in the heavens and on earth. This, then, is the true God and the only God, because he is God both in power and in action, but in eternal things; as Christ is both in power and in action, but now outwardly and openly. God the Father, then, is the first action, the first existence and substance, and the principal existent, who begets his own being from himself by his action without beginning, always existing from himself, existing infinite, perfect in every way, almighty, unchangeable, existing always thus and in the same way, substantial in himself; the Word existing so that all things may be, not as something else or as another, but coexisting together in simplicity, and one by union. For what the Word is, that very thing is what being is, and by that very being he is the Word; for the Word himself is God: one, then, and homoousion. For God is not without action; God works, as has been said. ### Scripture references - Gen 1:1: quotation, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, high confidence - John 5:17: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The view rejected (“they think”) seems to be a Platonist doctrine of a first principle prior to activity; not identified. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.33 (PL 8:1066a–1066c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-33). ## Against Arius 1.34 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-34 - Source: PL 8:1066c–1067c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus describes the Son as the image and effulgence of the Father, eternally begotten, the universal being that proceeds from the Father above the universal yet remains in him. ### Latin text Substantia autem Dei imago est, actio, filiusque est, per quam intelligitur, et quod sit declaratur: Qui me vidit, vidit et Patrem. Et ipsa substantia existens, habens esse, et a se. Quoniam autem causa ipsi est id in quo est, imago ipsa filius est ejus, in quo est ineffabili generatione, et maxime ingenerabili generatione, aut magis semper generante generatione: quod et Alexander dixit. Et dicitur semper pater, semper filius simul existens. Ergo et semper consubstantialis coexistens, unum existens, in patre filius est; cum autem operatur, procedit: cum procedit, in filio est pater. Quomodo autem istud dicimus? Deus et >670? unum est et unitum, et idcirco ό/χοούσιον, sed quod Deus, juxta quod Deus est, ejus quod et esse potentia est, et omnium quae sunt, ad id quod est esse, causa est λόγος juxta quod est: λόγος paterna est potentia, ad subsistere facere ipsum quod est principale esse ipsum quod est esse, et principium, et perfectio. Ab eo enim quod est esse universale, et supra universale omne universale esse, et juxta genera, et juxta species esse, et individua, quod est esse illis habet. Si igitur λόγος habet esse. est enim λόγος id ipsum quod est esse ipsi et λόγος, ergo ex illo quod est supra universale esse, esse est: sed universale quod est esse λόγος est: Deus autem id quod est supra universale esse, filius autem quod est universale esse: pater ergo supra universale quod est esse, ό/χοούσιον ergo in eo quod est esse, ad id quod est esse, et quod supra universale ad universale: hoc autem et progressio est; ab eo enim quod est supra universale, universale egreditur, et magis certe intelligenti et egreditur, et manet, non enim derelinquitur universale. Ergo et subsistit per semetipsum quod est universale et intus est in eo quod est supra universale: connexum ergo est, et inseparatum est; et istud luminis refulgentia dicitur, omnia luminis habens, sed non accipiens, neque enata, sed connaturalis, ομοούσιος semper existens. Non igitur motu locali, neque immutatione: immutabilis enim pater, et immutabilis filius, et semper pater, semper filius, etiamsi filius credatur in patre imago existens, et ejus quod esse forma, sicut dictum est, sive juxta progressum refulgentia luminis filius est. His sic existentibus, et magis unum existentibus, refulgentia enim splendor luminis, et ipsa in se lumen habet a patre et in lumine est et foris: ergo et in patre filius, et quod annexus est splendor luminis, magis ad lumen esse splendor dicitur, non in lumine; etiamsi a lumine resplendeat in lumine est, et hoc significat: In principio erat Λόγος, et Λόγος erat ad Deum: ό/χοουσιον ergo et filius et pater, et semper ista, et ex aeterno, et in aeternum. ### English translation (Claude) The substance of God is image, action, and is the Son, through whom God is understood and his being declared: “He who has seen me has seen the Father also.” And he is himself substance existing, having being, and from himself. But since that in which he is, is his cause, the Son himself is the image of him in whom he is, by an ineffable generation, and above all by an ungenerable generation, or rather by an ever-begetting generation, as Alexander also said. And it is said: always Father, always Son, existing together. So also, always consubstantial and coexisting, being one, the Son is in the Father; but when he operates, he proceeds; when he proceeds, the Father is in the Son. How do we say this? God and the Word are one and united, and therefore homoousion. But God, insofar as he is God, is the cause of that which is power for being, and of all things that are, for their being; the Word according to what he is. The Word is the Father's power to make subsist that very thing which is principal being, that which is being, both principle and perfection. For from that which is universal being, and above the universal, all universal being, and being according to genera and species, and individuals, have their being. If, then, the Word has being (for the Word is that very thing which is being to him, and is Word), then from that which is above universal being, it is being. But universal being is the Word; God is what is above universal being, the Son what is universal being; the Father, then, is above what is universal being. Homoousion, then, in that which is being, in relation to that which is being, and what is above the universal in relation to the universal. And this is also procession: for from what is above the universal the universal goes forth, and, to one who understands rightly, it both goes forth and remains; for the universal is not abandoned. So the universal subsists by itself and is within, in what is above the universal: it is connected, then, and unseparated. And this is called the effulgence of light, having all that belongs to the light, but not receiving it, nor born afterwards, but connatural, homoousios, always existing. Not, then, by local motion, nor by change: for the Father is unchangeable and the Son unchangeable, and always Father, always Son, whether the Son is believed to be in the Father as image and form of what being is, as has been said, or whether, in respect of procession, the Son is the effulgence of light. These things being so, and rather being one (for the effulgence is the splendour of the light, and has in itself the light from the Father, and is both in the light and outside), the Son, then, is in the Father; and because the splendour is joined to the light, the splendour is said rather to be toward the light, not in the light; even if it shines from the light, it is in the light; and this is what is signified by: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward God.” Homoousion, then, are both Son and Father, and always these, from eternity and to eternity. ### Scripture references - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - Heb 1:3: allusion, high confidence - John 1:1: quotation, high confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Alexander of Alexandria, Ep. (Letters on the Arian Controversy): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “As Alexander also said”: Alexander of Alexandria called the Son “ever-begotten” (ἀειγενής) in his letter to Alexander of Thessalonica (Theodoret, Church History 1.4). “The Word” renders λόγος, once garbled in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.34 (PL 8:1066c–1067c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-34). ## Against Arius 1.35 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-35 - Source: PL 8:1067c–1068b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from Colossians 1:13–15 and John 1 that the Son born of Mary, who redeemed us, is the same as the eternal image and Word, the firstborn before all creation. ### Latin text Dicimus et alia. Λόγος est ad Deum, in confesso est. Quid est λόγος? per quem omnia, et in quo omnia, et in quem omnia; istum esse et Jesum in confesso est. Quod λόγος est filius Dei, filius autem Jesus de quo dicit Paulus: Qui nos eruit de potestate tenebrarum, et transtulit in regnum Filii charitatis suae. Quis igitur iste filius? ipse, inquit, in quo habemus redemptionem, per sanguinem ipsius, remissionem peccatorum nostrorum. Iste quis est? qui natus est ex Maria. Quid deinde? istud solum? numquid maxime quod in eo, qui ex Maria erat? Erat et ante quam ex Maria. Quid autem inducit, qui est imago Dei? numquid hoc solum, de Maria? non: imago enim Dei ab aeterno imago. Si igitur in filio habemus spem, et ipse per sanguinem suum redemit nos; ipse autem imago est Dei; imago ergo filius est Dei. An ego dico istud? Non solus, sed et Paulus; quomodo enim dicit? Primogenitus omnis creaturae. Quis primogenitus? Filius. Quis filius? Filius qui ex Maria. Quis filius ex Maria? primogenitus totius creaturae. Quis totius creatura primogenitus? qui imago Dei est. Necesse est enim primogenitum esse ante omnem creaturam imaginem Dei. Quis autem est imago? λογος. Quis λόγος? qui erat in principio: Sine enim imagine Deus quomodo? Et quis λόγος?; qui ad Deum erat, et per quem effecta sunt omnia, et sine quo effectum est nihil. Quomodo imago λόγος est? et λόγος filius? et ipse qui de Maria? magis autem qui in eo qui de Maria. Ex iis manifestum, si filius Dei redemit nos per sanguinem suum, qui de Maria filius est, et ipse imago est Dei; Dei est filius: si enim totius creaturae primogenitus, necessario filius, numquid alius? Absit: unigenitus enim Dei est filius. Necesse est ergo eumdem ipsum esse filium, et imaginem, et eum qui de Maria. Quomodo enim imago Dei filius, si non primogenitus totius creaturae? Et quomodo imago Dei, qui Filius de Maria post omnia facta natus est? Manifestum ergo, quod ipse primogenitus. Quid vero quod natum est de Maria? non creatura est: sed si filius Dei, imago Dei ante omnem creaturam natus est, ipse est in eo, qui de Maria natus est. Manifestum igitur quod ipse unigenitus. ### English translation (Claude) We say other things too. The Word is with God: that is agreed. What is the Word? Through whom are all things, and in whom are all things, and into whom are all things; and it is agreed that he is also Jesus. That the Word is the Son of God; and Jesus is the Son, of whom Paul says: “Who rescued us from the power of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of the Son of his love.” Who, then, is this Son? He, it says, “in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our sins.” Who is he? He who was born of Mary. What next? Only this? Is it not rather that he is in the one who was from Mary? He existed even before he was from Mary. And what does Paul add? “Who is the image of God.” Is this said only of the one from Mary? No: for the image of God is image from eternity. If, then, we have hope in the Son, and he redeemed us by his blood, and he is the image of God, then the image is the Son of God. Do I say this? Not I alone, but Paul too; for how does he put it? “The firstborn of all creation.” Who is the firstborn? The Son. Which Son? The Son who is from Mary. Who is the Son from Mary? The firstborn of all creation. Who is the firstborn of all creation? He who is the image of God. For the firstborn, the image of God, must be before all creation. And who is the image? The Word. Which Word? He who was in the beginning; for how could God be without his image? And which Word? He who was with God, and through whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. How is the image the Word, and the Word the Son, and the same the one from Mary? Or rather, the one who is in him who was from Mary. From these things it is plain: if the Son of God, who is the Son from Mary, redeemed us by his blood, and he is the image of God, he is the Son of God. For if he is the firstborn of all creation, he is necessarily Son; is he some other? Far from it: for he is the only-begotten Son of God. It is necessary, then, that the same one is the Son, and the image, and the one from Mary. For how is the Son the image of God, if he is not the firstborn of all creation? And how is he the image of God, if as Son from Mary he was born after all things were made? It is plain, then, that he himself is the firstborn. But what of that which was born of Mary? Is it not a creature? But if the Son of God, the image of God, was born before all creation, he himself is in the one who was born of Mary. It is plain, then, that he himself is the only-begotten. ### Scripture references - Col 1:13: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:14: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:15: quotation, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, high confidence - John 1:3: quotation, high confidence - John 1:14: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 11:36: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - An editorial reference, “(Ibid.)”, printed in the text is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.35 (PL 8:1067c–1068b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-35). ## Against Arius 1.36 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-36 - Source: PL 8:1068b–1068d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Son of Colossians 1, through whom all things were created, is the Word of John 1, since both texts ascribe creation “through him”. ### Latin text Post illud perspiciendum, quomodo idem ipse et imago, et filius λόγος est. In confesso est quod imago filius est. Dixit enim Paulus; filius Dei imago est Dei. Dico ipsum esse λόγον, de quo dictum est: In principio erat λόγος. Dicit enim Paulus quomodo filius primogenitus totius creaturae, quod in ipso creata sint omnia, quae in coelis et quae in terra, quae visibilia et quae invisibilia, sive Throni, sive Dominationes, sive Principatus, sive Potestates, Omnia per ipsum, et in ipso creata sunt; et ipse est ante omnia, et omnia in ipso consistunt. Vides quae dixerit de filio, quod ideo primogenitus. quia omnia creata sunt ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso. Tria ergo dicit ex quibus, quod dictum est, omnia per ipsum, cui datum est semper, quod confessione est τώ λόγω. Si igitur Paulus filio dedit per ipsum; ipsum autem quod est per ipsum, dedit Joannes τω Λόγω primus Apostolus et Evangelistes: ante omnes consonant dicta. Quid erit dubitandum, ut non sit filius λόγος? Quid vero alia duo quae dedit filio, cujus magis propria? necessario τού λόγου; potentia enim ejus, omnium quae sunt subsistentia est. Sed si et istud, in ipso sunt omnia, ut dictum est, quod in ipso creata sunt omnia, et ideo in ipso omnia, quoniam efficientur omnia spiritualia, quod et Paulus significat, in consummatione mundi: Nam cum omnia illi subjecta fuerint, tunc ipse subjicietur ei, qui subjecit ei omnia, ut sit Deus omnia in omnibus. Quid istud, et quomodo posterius? Nunc quomodo spiritualia. Verum igitur quod de Maria filius est Dei, et ipse imago et ipse λόγος, et ipse ante saecula et omnem creaturam, et quod omnis creatura per ipsum creata est, et in ipso, ex ipso, et consequenter quae dicta sunt. ### English translation (Claude) After that, we must see how the same one is image, Son and Word. It is agreed that the image is the Son; for Paul said that the Son of God is the image of God. I say that he is the Word, of whom it was said: “In the beginning was the Word.” For Paul says how the Son is the firstborn of all creation: because in him were created all things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things were created through him and in him; and he is before all things, and all things hold together in him. You see what he said of the Son: that he is firstborn because all things were created from him, and through him, and in him. He says, then, three things, of which, as has been said, “all things through him” is always given by confession to the Word. If, then, Paul gave “through him” to the Son, and John, the first apostle and evangelist, gave that very “through him” to the Word, the sayings agree above all. What doubt will there be, then, so that the Son should not be the Word? And the other two that Paul gave to the Son: to whom do they more properly belong? Necessarily to the Word; for his power is the subsistence of all things that are. But if this too, “in him are all things”, as it was said that in him all things were created, and therefore all things are in him, since all things will become spiritual; and Paul signifies this too at the consummation of the world: “For when all things have been subjected to him, then he himself will be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.” What this is, and how, will be discussed later; for now, only how they become spiritual. It is true, then, that the Son of God is the one from Mary, and that he himself is the image and the Word, and that he himself is before the ages and all creation, and that all creation was created through him, and in him, and from him, and what follows from what has been said. ### Scripture references - Col 1:15: allusion, high confidence - Col 1:16: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:17: quotation, high confidence - John 1:1: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:28: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.36 (PL 8:1068b–1068d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-36). ## Against Arius 1.37 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-37 - Source: PL 8:1068d–1069c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus compares Colossians 1:16 with Romans 11:36 and 1 Corinthians 8:6 to show that Paul gives the same prepositions, and so the same power and substance, to the Father and the Son. ### Latin text Quis ergo sine sensu, quis sacrilegus Arius? quis sine Deo non videt quis Jesus? et unde Filius unigenitus? Esse autem et Deum λόγον ό/χοου- σιον, hoc est, et patrem et filium, ex istis manifestum: quae dedit filio Paulus, eadem dedit et patri, tria ista cum dignitate paterna in uno, ut appareret et divinitas una, et substantia, et potentia paterna. Ad Colossenses istud dixit de filio. Ad Romanos autem de patre eadem: Quis enim cognovit mentem Domini? aut quis consiliarius fuit ejus? aut quis prius dedit, et reddetur ei? Quoniam ex ipso, et per ipsum, et in ipso omnia. Vides quemadmodum eadem, et sic eadem dedit, et patri et filio, in ομοονσιον: primum tria et tria, deinde eadem et patri, et filio: hoc autem per quem omnia et patri et filio datum est: quoniam filius λo7ος, qui est omnium quae sunt potentia actuosa, in ea quae sunt, et quod in filio pater est, in ipso et pater actuosa potentia existit: simul enim et filius in patre, et pater in filio: una ergo potentia, hoc est, una substantia existit: ibi enim potentia, substantia: non enim aliud potentia, aliud substantia. Idem ergo ipsum est et patri et filio. Hoc autem ex quo omnia, et ipse filius: hoc igitur patri ut proprium: in quo omnia, quod λόγος et locus est: factorum enim et operum per semetipsum ipse est receptaculum. Ibi autem existentibus omnibus quae sunt efficitur plenitudo: etenim et Jesus pater est omnium operum, eorum quae per semetipsum. Unum ergo pater et filius. Sed quod non extrinsecus ingrediuntur opera: unde enim? nihil enim extra; in se ipso ergo omnia: ipse ergo et receptaculum et habitator. Et quoniam in filio pater, et pater habitator: proprium igitur filio in quo omnia, reliquum ergo hoc, et in ipso, hoc dico esse commune: in consummatione enim unum omnia et ideo Paulus ad Corinthios dicit: Unus Deus pater ex quo omnia, et nos in ipso; et unus est Dominus Jesus, per quem omnia, et nos per ipsum. Aut quomodo alius in ipso? quoniam et in aliis locis sic positum est de patre, ex quo omnia, per quem omnia, in ipso omnia. De filio autem, in quo omnia, per quem omnia, in quem omnia: aequalia igitur omnia et filio et patri dedit Paulus: recte. Quod ομοούσιος pater et filius, et idcirco dictum est: Tunc ipse subjicietur ei, qui subjecit ipsi omnia, ut sit Deus omnia in omnibus. ### English translation (Claude) Who, then, is so senseless, who so sacrilegious as Arius? Who is so godless as not to see who Jesus is, and from where the only-begotten Son comes? That God and the Word are homoousion, that is, Father and Son, is plain from these texts: what Paul gave to the Son, he gave the same to the Father, these three, with the Father's dignity, in one, so that one divinity, substance and paternal power should appear. He said this of the Son to the Colossians; to the Romans he said the same of the Father: “For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counsellor? Or who has first given to him, that it should be repaid him? For from him and through him and in him are all things.” You see how he gave the same things, and gave them in the same way, to the Father and to the Son, toward the homoousion: first three and three; then the same both to the Father and to the Son. And “through whom are all things” is given to both Father and Son, since the Son is the Word, who is the active power of all things that are, in the things that are; and since the Father is in the Son, the Father too exists in him as active power; for at once the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son. There is one power, then, that is, one substance; for there power is substance, and power is not one thing and substance another. The same, then, belongs to both Father and Son. And “from whom are all things” is the Son himself too; this, then, is given to the Father as proper to him. “In whom are all things”, because the Word is also place: for he is, through himself, the receptacle of the things made and of the works. And since all things that are exist there, the fullness comes about; for Jesus too is father of all the works, of those made through himself. Father and Son, then, are one. But the works do not enter from outside: from where would they come? For there is nothing outside; in himself, then, are all things: he himself, then, is both receptacle and inhabitant. And since the Father is in the Son, the Father too is inhabitant. “In whom are all things”, then, is proper to the Son; the rest, and “in him”, I say is common: for at the consummation all things will be one. And therefore Paul says to the Corinthians: “One God the Father, from whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus, through whom are all things, and we through him.” Or, as others read, “into him”: Since in other places too it is put thus of the Father: from whom are all things, through whom are all things, in him are all things; and of the Son: in whom are all things, through whom are all things, into whom are all things. Paul, then, gave all things equally to the Son and to the Father; rightly. That the Father and the Son are homoousios, and therefore it is said: “Then he himself will be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.” ### Scripture references - Col 1:16: allusion, high confidence - Rom 11:34: quotation, high confidence - Rom 11:35: quotation, high confidence - Rom 11:36: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 8:6: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:28: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “The Word” renders λόγος, garbled in the digital text. Victorinus's Latin of 1 Cor 8:6 reads “we in him” where the Greek has “we for him”; he notes that others read “into him”. “As others read” renders the uncertain “quomodo alius”. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.37 (PL 8:1068d–1069c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-37). ## Against Arius 1.38 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-38 - Source: PL 8:1069c–1070b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus expounds 1 Corinthians 15:24–28, arguing that the Son subjects all things by the Father's power and the Father subjects them to the Son, which shows that both are one action and one substance. ### Latin text Vide virtutem dicentis; conducit enim όκοουσιον: filius subjicit patri omnia virtute sua, ut videtur, sed ut est paterna: dicit enim: Subjicietur ei qui subjecit ipsi omnia. Cui subjicietur? Deo. Quis subjicietur? filius, cui subjicit omnia Deus. Actio igitur et pater et filius. Substantia igitur ubi? In qua actio ipsa, magisque sit actio, quae est substantia, οαοούσίο» ergo. Dicit Paulus et hoc, cum tradiderit regnum Deo et Patri. Ipse igitur nunc regnat, et secundum propriam actionem Christus subjicit omnia, et inimicitia, et ipsam mortem exterminat: ipse igitur subjicit, sicuti dicit Paulus, cum evacuaverit omnem potentiam. Sic dicit quod filius propria virtute facit ista. Adjicit et istud; Oportet enim illum regnare. Deus quidem rex omnium: sed quoniam ομοουσιοζ et filius, et magis >o7ος, hoc est, potentia et sapientia Dei; necesse est regnare primum sapientiam, per quam subjicientur omnia: λόγοι enim et subsistunt, et subjicientur omnia: quoniam et dicitur, et dictum est, quod λόγος hoc est filius, subjicit omnia, et idcirco adjecit Paulus: Quousque ponat inimicos omnes ejus sub pedibus ipsius. Quis? Cujus? manifeste, quia filius patris. Sed quoniam in filio pater, idcirco pater filio subjecit omnia, et ideo maxime filius inimicos habet, non pater: et quoniam ambo, id est, bona ambiguitas intellectus, et idcirco ομοούσιοι, postremus inimicus evacuabitur mors: si enim Jesus vita est et aeterna vita, evacuabitur a vita mors: omnia igitur Jesus, id est, filius subjicit patri. Sed quoniam ομοουσιος patri et ipsa substantia, et ipsa potentia, secundum quod primum est esse patrem, et quod esse primum est, secundum autem operari, vivere, intelligere, quoniam duobus causa est quod primum; necesse est dicere patrem subjicere filio. Dicit ergo, cum tradiderit regnum Deo et patri, necessario filius; et cum evacuaverit omnem principatum et potentiam, necessario filius. Dicit rursus: Cum autem omnia subjecta sunt, manifestum quod extra ipsum qui subjicit ipsi omnia: non parva intelligentia ### English translation (Claude) See the force of the speaker: for he leads to the homoousion. The Son subjects all things to the Father by his own power, as it seems, but as it is the Father's power; for he says: “He will be subjected to him who subjected all things to him.” To whom will he be subjected? To God. Who will be subjected? The Son, to whom God subjects all things. Both the Father and the Son, then, are action. Where, then, is substance? That in which action itself is, or rather action that is substance: homoousioi, then. Paul says this too: “when he has handed over the kingdom to God and the Father.” He himself, then, now reigns, and according to his own action Christ subjects all things and destroys the enmities and death itself; he himself, then, subjects them, as Paul says, “when he has abolished every power”. So he says that the Son does these things by his own power. He adds this too: “For he must reign.” God indeed is king of all; but since the Son too is homoousios, and moreover is the Word, that is, the power and wisdom of God, it is necessary that wisdom reign first, through which all things will be subjected. For by reasons all things both subsist and will be subjected, since it is said, and has been said, that the Word, that is, the Son, subjects all things. And therefore Paul added: “until he puts all his enemies under his feet.” Who? Whose? Plainly, because he is the Son of the Father. But since the Father is in the Son, the Father therefore subjected all things to the Son; and therefore it is above all the Son who has enemies, not the Father. And since it is both, that is, a good ambiguity of meaning, they are therefore homoousioi. “The last enemy to be abolished is death”: for if Jesus is life and eternal life, death will be abolished by life. Jesus, then, that is, the Son, subjects all things to the Father. But since he is homoousios with the Father, both the substance itself and the power itself (the Father being first being, and what is first being; and second, operating, living, understanding; since what is first is the cause for the two), it is necessary to say also that the Father subjects all things to the Son. He says, then, “when he has handed over the kingdom to God and the Father”: necessarily the Son; and “when he has abolished every principality and power”: necessarily the Son. He says again: “But when all things are subjected, it is plain that he is excepted who subjected all things to him.” This needs no small understanding. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 15:28: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:24: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:25: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:26: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:27: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - An editor's conjecture printed in the text, “(forte concludit)”, is removed. “Reasons” renders λόγοι. “Homoousios” is garbled in places in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.38 (PL 8:1069c–1070b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-38). ## Against Arius 1.39 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-39 - Source: PL 8:1070b–1070d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Word, acting by the Father's power, made and governs all things from creation to the final abolition of death, after which his activity rests and God is all in all. ### Latin text Sed nunc dimittamus. Quid vult nos intelligere, quod Deus causa qui sit, et praepotens, et praeprincipium potentiae, ipse fecit omnia, cum filius facit? et si pater in filio, et filius in patre, ipse in facit, quae filius fecit; et quae pater facit, filius facit indifferenter: igitur aut patri, aut filio dantur omnia, sive operationes, sive requies: in altero enim ad alterutrum, et nihil alterum, quod in uno alterum. Et idcirco unum solum, et nihil alterum, sed subsistentia propria et pater et filius est, ab una ex patre substantia. Filius autem, hoc est, λ©7ος, activa potentia est, et quae faciat, et quae vivificet, et sit intelligentialis: omnia igitur justa et generat, et facit secundum vitam, et regenerat secundum intelligentiam veritatis et Dei, quam dat Jesus omnibus >070; cum sit, omnium et intellectuum, et universaliter omnium quae sunt. Si igitur iste generat, et iste regenerat omnia, iste subjicit omnia, non solum homines, sed et ut dicit Paulus, omnem principatum et omnem potentiam; numquid ista ut homo, an ut \όγοςl Etenim ipsum subjicere non temporis solum ejus ex quo de Maria filius, sed et ante, et postea. Si enim diluvium factum est, si Sodoma et Gomorrha incensa, si haec et talia multa facta sunt, si in praesentia prima triumphat inimicos in semetipso, si in secunda praesentia novissimus inimicus evacuabitur mors; filius >o7ος facit ista, sed potentia paterna. Facit igitur omnia spiritus spiritualia, tunc et ipse subjicietur Deo, subjicienti ei omnia: evacuatis enim omnibus, requiescit activa potentia, et erit in ipso Deus secundum quod est esse, et secundum quod est quiescere: in aliis autem omnibus spiritualiter, secundum suam et potentiam et substantiam. Et hoc est, ut sit in Deus omnia in omnibus: non enim omnia in unoquoque, sed Deo existente in omnibus, et ideo omnia erit Deus, quod omnia erunt Deo plena. ### English translation (Claude) But let us leave this now. What does he want us to understand: that God, who is the cause and all-powerful and the pre-principle of power, himself made all things, when the Son makes them? And if the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, he himself makes what the Son made, and what the Father makes the Son makes, without difference. So all things are ascribed either to the Father or to the Son, whether operations or rest: for in the one there is relation to the other, and there is nothing other, since in the one is the other. And therefore there is one only and nothing other; but both Father and Son are each their own subsistence, from one substance from the Father. And the Son, that is, the Word, is active power, which makes, which gives life, and which is intellectual. All things, then, he begets and makes justly according to life, and regenerates according to the knowledge of the truth and of God, which Jesus gives to all, since he is the Word of all things, both of intellectual beings and, universally, of all things that are. If, then, he begets, and he regenerates all things, he subjects all things, not only men but, as Paul says, every principality and every power. Does he do these things as man, or as the Word? For to subject belongs not only to the time from which he was the Son from Mary, but to the time before and after. For if the flood was made, if Sodom and Gomorrah were burned, if these and many such things were done, if at the first coming he triumphs over the enemies in himself, if at the second coming the last enemy, death, will be abolished, it is the Son, the Word, who does these things, but by the Father's power. When, then, the Spirit makes all things spiritual, then he himself also will be subjected to God, who subjects all things to him. For when all things have been abolished, the active power rests, and God will be in him according to being and according to rest, and in all others spiritually, according to his power and substance. And this is so that God may be all in all: not all things in each one, but God existing in all; and therefore God will be all, because all things will be full of God. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 15:24: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:26: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:28: quotation, high confidence - Col 2:15: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 7:17: allusion, low confidence - Gen 19:24: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “The Word” renders λόγος, garbled several times in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.39 (PL 8:1070b–1070d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-39). ## Against Arius 1.40 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-40 - Source: PL 8:1071a–1071c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from 1 Corinthians 1:24 that Christ, God's power and wisdom, is one substance with God, as sight is one with the power of sight. ### Latin text Dicamus et alia: Non enim erubesco Evangelium Dei. Virtutem et potentiam Paulus dicit Christum Jesum, hoc enim Evangelium dicit et de isto: Christus ergo Dei et sapientia et virtus. Quid deinde sapientia et virtus Dei? non ipse Deus? Non enim ut in corporibus, aut in corporalibus, aliud est oculus, aliud visio. Aut in igne, aliud ignis, aliud lumen ejus: eget enim oculus et ignis alterius alicujus, et oculus alterius luminis, ut sit ex ipso et in ipso; visio ignis et aeris, ut sit ex ipso lumen. Sed sicuti visionis potentia in se habet visionem tunc foris existentem, cum operatur potentia visionis, et generatur a potentia visionis visio, unigenita ea ipsa: nihil enim aliud ab ea gignitur, et ad potentiam visionis visio est, non intus solum, sed et intus in potentia, in actione magis foris, et ideo ad potentiam, quippe visio cum sit, έμοουσιον ergo visionis potentiae visio, et unum totum. Et potentia quidem quiescit, visio autem in motu est: et per visionem omnia visibilia fiunt, et passiones circa visionem sunt, visionis potentia impassibili existente, et sine passione visionem generante. Sic igitur et virtus et sapientia Dei ipse Deus, est totum, quod simplex, et quod unum, et unius et ejusdem substantiae, et simul ex aeterno, et semper, et a patre, qui sui generator est existens. Sapientiae igitur et virtus operationis, hanc enim virtutem nunc significat: conjunxit enim sapientiam et virtutem. Ergo horum potentia est Deus, et ideo pater, quod ab ipso ista: gignit enim ista in actionem et impassibiliter, quod ομοούσια sunt potentia et actio et Deus, et Dei virtus, et sapientia: quae cum activa sunt, juxta ea quae foris sunt curam habentia, ad Deum sunt, semper sapientiam dantia, semper vivificantia, non Deum, sed a Deo factam per semetipsa omnem creaturam: et si qua passio, in actione passio est. Isto modo sive λόγος est Jesus, sive lumen, sive refulgentia, sive forma, sive imago, sive virtus et sapientia, sive character, sive vita όμοοΰσκη apparebit λόγος et Deus Pater, et Filius, Spiritus et Christus ### English translation (Claude) Let us say other things too: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of God.” Paul calls Christ Jesus power and might, for the gospel says this of him too: Christ, then, is the wisdom and power of God. What, then, are the wisdom and power of God? Are they not God himself? For it is not as in bodies or bodily things, where the eye is one thing and sight another; or as in fire, where the fire is one thing and its light another. For the eye and the fire need something else: the eye needs another light, that sight may be from it and in it; and fire needs air, that light may come from it. But the power of sight has in itself sight, which exists outwardly when the power of sight operates; and sight is begotten from the power of sight, and is itself only-begotten, for nothing else is begotten from it; and sight is toward the power of sight, not only within, though within in power, and more outwardly in action, and therefore toward the power, being sight. Sight, then, is homoousion with the power of sight, and they are one whole. And the power rests, but sight is in motion; through sight all visible things come to be, and passions concern sight, while the power of sight is impassible and begets sight without passion. So, then, the power and wisdom of God are God himself, the whole, because it is simple and one, and of one and the same substance, and together from eternity and always, and from the Father, who is their begetter. Wisdom, then, and the power of operation; for it is this power he now means, since he joined wisdom and power. Of these, then, God is the potency, and therefore the Father, because they are from him; for he begets them into action, and impassibly, because power and action and God, and God's power and wisdom, are homoousia. And these, being active and caring for the things outside, are toward God, always giving wisdom, always giving life, not to God, but to all creation made through them by God; and if there is any passion, the passion is in the action. In this way, whether Jesus is Word, or light, or refulgence, or form, or image, or power and wisdom, or imprint, or life, the Word and God the Father, the Son, the Spirit and Christ will appear homoousia. ### Scripture references - Rom 1:16: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence - Heb 1:3: allusion, medium confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The phrase “the gospel of God” is Victorinus's form of Rom 1:16. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.40 (PL 8:1071a–1071c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-40). ## Against Arius 1.41 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-32/#p-1-41 - Source: PL 8:1071c–1072c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from John 1:4 and 5:26 that Father and Son both have life in themselves, rejecting “like substance” and explaining that their substance is in a certain way both “itself” and “the same”. ### Latin text Adhuc inducamus eadem ipsa. Vitam dicentes Christum, quomodo όμοονσιος est Deo? Dicit Joannes: Quod factum est, in ipso vita erat. Et iterum: Sicuti enim pater habet vitam in semetipso, sic et filio dedit vitam habere in semetipso: Quid tam simul? Quid tam idem? Habet pater in se vitam: habet et filius in semet vitam. Quid est habere vitam in seipso? Ipsum sibi vitam esse, non ab alio accipere vitam, sed a seipso et aliis dare. Dicit aliquis similis substantiae esse, non tamen ομοούσιον esse. Illud jam dictum, quoniam, simile substantia non dicitur: neque enim est juxta quod substantia est, magis autem si ejusdem substantiae est, idem substantia dicitur, non simile, simile enim juxta qualitates, ut ignis substantia est, et aer secundum substantiam idem, vXtj enim ambo: qualitatibus autem simile, aut dissimile, notione virtutum, et aliis simile. Dic et terra, et aqua gravitate et densitate, aut aliis talibus, in quibus et istud accidit, quaecumque sint similia, eadem esse dissimilia, alia et alia qualitate. Simile enim non idem, neque idem unum, sed idem geminum: unum et ista non substantia, sed numero unum. Nos nunc de substantia perquirimus, quae in Deo, aut filio, aut ipsa est, aut eadem: aut modo quodam et ipsa et eadem. Quomodo ergo ipsa est adventante filio, et tanta faciente et in coelo et in terra, et intrante in carnem? Quomodo Jesus filius, quod significat patrem, quomodo et tres sunt substantiae, Deus, Αόγος, Spiritus sanctus: non enim oportet dicere, nec fas est dicere, unam esse substantiam, tres esse personas. Si enim ista ipsa substantia et egit omnia, et passa est, Patripassiani ergo et nos: absit. Quid igitur? eadem est, non ipsa: sed si istud, aut praeexistente substantia duo, aut ab eadem scissione, aut amissione partis ejusdem ipsa facta est eadem: neque dimissione, neque diminutione filius natus est, sed perfectus pater, et semper perfectus, et semper pater: perfectus filius, et semper perfectus, et ex aeterno et in aeternum filius. Quomodo igitur eadem, in duobus enim quae eadem? sed pater et filius unum, et qui pater, pater: et qui filius, filius. Et non idem pater et filius, nec idem filius pater ejus cujus filius est. Non ergo unum sunt: neque ipsa, neque eadem est substantia. Relinquitur ergo modo quodam esse et ipsam et eamdem. Non enim fas est dicere alterius esse substantiae patrem et filium: quoniam quod sit ipsa dicemus, sive Deum et Aoyov dicemus, sive Deum et Dei virtutem et sapientiam. Sive quod est esse et vitam, sive quod est esse intelligere, aut intelligentiam, sive esse et vitam intelligere, sive patrem et filium, sive lumen et effulgentiam, sive Deum et characterem, sive Deum et formam et imaginem, sive substantiam et speciem, sicut ibi, non ut heic, sive substantiam et motionem, sive potentiam et actionem, sive silentium et effatum ipsum substantiam esse confitendum. Deum enim quod est esse dicentes filium vitam; quomodo separamus vitam ab eo quod est esse, sive in patre, sive in filio? Etenim pater in seipso habet vitam, et filius, excepto quod filius a patre accepit quod habet. Pater ergo et Filius a se orti, a se potentes ad vitam, sic mihi intellige habere dicere, quomodo Evangelium, et pater enim habet in se vitam. Habere ergo non quasi aliud sed ipsum est, sed in intellectu. ### English translation (Claude) Let us bring in the same points once more. If we call Christ life, how is he homoousios with God? John says: “What was made, in him was life.” And again: “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has given to the Son to have life in himself.” What could be so together? What so much the same? The Father has life in himself; the Son too has life in himself. What is it to have life in oneself? To be life to oneself, not to receive life from another but from oneself, and to give it to others. Someone says that he is of like substance, yet not homoousion. That has already been answered: “like” is not said of substance; for it does not hold of a thing insofar as it is substance. Rather, if it is of the same substance, it is called the same in substance, not like; for “like” goes by qualities. Fire is a substance, and air is the same in substance, for both are matter; but in qualities they are like or unlike, by the notion of their powers, and like in other respects. Say the same of earth and water, in weight and density or other such things; in these it also happens that whatever things are like are the same things that are unlike, by one quality and another. For the like is not the same, nor is the same one; the same is twin, and these are one not in substance but in number. We are now inquiring about substance, which in God or in the Son is either itself, or the same, or in a certain way both itself and the same. How, then, is it “itself”, when the Son comes and does such great things in heaven and on earth and enters into flesh? How is Jesus the Son, which implies the Father; how are there three substances, God, the Word, the Holy Spirit? For one ought not to say, nor is it right to say, that there is one substance and three persons. For if this very substance both did all things and suffered, then we too are Patripassians: far from it. What then? It is the same, not itself. But if so, either there were two with a substance pre-existing, or the one became the same by a division from it or by the loss of a part of it. But the Son was born neither by a sending off nor by diminution; the Father is perfect, always perfect and always Father; the Son is perfect, always perfect, and Son from eternity and to eternity. How, then, is it the same? For in two, what things are the same? But Father and Son are one; and he who is Father is Father, and he who is Son is Son; and Father and Son are not the same, nor is the Son the same as the Father whose Son he is. So they are not one in that sense: the substance is neither simply itself nor simply the same. It remains, then, that in a certain way it is both itself and the same. For it is not right to say that the Father and the Son are of different substance, since we shall say that it is itself, whether we say God and the Word; or God and the power and wisdom of God; or being and life; or being and understanding, or intelligence; or being, life and understanding; or Father and Son; or light and effulgence; or God and imprint; or God and form and image; or substance and species (as there, not as here); or substance and motion; or power and action; or silence and utterance: it must be confessed to be substance itself. For when we call God being and the Son life, how do we separate life from that which is being, whether in the Father or in the Son? For the Father has life in himself, and so does the Son, except that the Son received from the Father what he has. Father and Son, then, have arisen from themselves, powerful from themselves for life. Understand that I use “have” in this way, as the Gospel does: “for the Father has life in himself”. To “have”, then, is not as something else; it is the thing itself, though in our understanding. ### Scripture references - John 1:3: quotation, high confidence - John 1:4: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, medium confidence - Heb 1:3: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Here Victorinus speaks of “three substances” and rejects the formula “one substance, three persons”, because it seemed to him to imply that the one substance suffered (Patripassianism); translated as written. “Itself” renders ipsa (numerically one), “the same” eadem. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.41 (PL 8:1071c–1072c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-41). ## Against Arius 1.42 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-42 - Source: PL 8:1072d–1073c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Father is life at rest within and the Son is the same life as motion made manifest, so that the two are homoousion, each in the other. ### Latin text Ista diximus. Si igitur pater in semetipso habet vitam, vita est, et substantia ejus vita est, et sic filius. Dicit enim: Ego sum vita: pater ergo vita est, et filius vita. Omnis vita juxta quod vita est, motus est, vivificans quibus posse est vivificari. Et idcirco definitio animae et vitae ista est: quod a se movetur esse. Et ut substantia ejus istud dicitur, multo magis ergo ista in Deo et Αό?ω. Quid ergo diximus? vita pater et substantia est, et se movens substantia, et nihil aliud se movens motio nisi vita ipsa, igitur et substantia, et vita. Sed quoniam in motu intelligentia quasi aliud adintelligitur, et non perfecte aliud. Ipsum autem vivere ad aliud veluti mixtione in utroque alterius, juxta quod vita est, et motus est, unum est. Rursus juxta quod vita est, in ipsum aliud unum, et idcirco eadem substantia. Sed sive ipsa, sive eadem όμοούσιον necessario et simul est: quoniam duo simul sunt; etenim sine altero nunquam fuit alterum. Unum ergo et unum sunt ista. Hoc igitur quod est esse vitam, et per semet esse motionem, pater est: Hoc autem quod est motum esse, et per semet esse vitam, filius est. Causa enim motionis vita. Pater ergo et magis principalis vita, motionem requiescentem habens in abscondito, et intus se moventem; Filius autem in manifesto motio, et ideo filius, quoniam ab eo quod est intus processit. Magis autem motio existens, quod in manifesto. Isto modo et vita filius a patre vita, qui sic accipit vitam esse a praeprincipali principio. Natum universale ab universali, tota ex tota, et idcirco dicit: Vivens pater misit me, et ego vivo propter ipsum. Si igitur generans in vita, et filius secundum motionem filium, secundum autem motum vitam esse, vitam filio dante patre in motionem, generationem et simul vitam, ipse autem in semetipso όμοούσιον; ergo pater et filius et unum est semper, et ex aeterno natus est, et alter in altero, et inseparabilis separatio, et in patre filius, et in filio pater, et maxime filius actio, quoniam filius cum actione vita: Pater autem secundum id quod est esse, vita; et secundum quod est vitam esse, actio. Manet igitur pater, et impassibilis manet. Operatur filius, et in manifestationem ducit. Et Deus intus operatur, existente actione juxta potentiam. Et in patre, et in filio juxta actionem actio est. ### English translation (Claude) We have said these things. If, then, the Father has life in himself, he is life, and his substance is life; and so too the Son. For he says: “I am the life.” The Father, then, is life, and the Son is life. All life, insofar as it is life, is motion, giving life to those that can receive life. And therefore this is the definition of soul and of life: to be that which is moved by itself. And if this is said to be its substance, much more is it so in God and the Word. What, then, have we said? The Father is life and substance, and self-moving substance, and the self-moving motion is nothing other than life itself: so he is both substance and life. But in motion understanding is understood in addition, as if it were something else, and yet not perfectly something else. And living itself, related to the other as by a mixture of each in the other, inasmuch as it is life and is motion, is one. Again, inasmuch as it is life, the other is one in it, and therefore it is the same substance. But whether “itself” or “the same”, it is necessarily homoousion and together, since the two are together; for neither ever was without the other. These, then, are one and one. That, then, which is to be life, and through itself to be motion, is the Father; and that which is to be moved, and through itself to be life, is the Son. For life is the cause of motion. The Father, then, is rather the principal life, having motion at rest in hiddenness and moving itself within; the Son is motion in manifestation, and therefore Son, because he proceeded from what is within; or rather, existing as motion, because he is in manifestation. In this way the Son is also life from the Father who is life, and so receives being life from the pre-principal principle: universal born from universal, whole from whole. And therefore he says: “The living Father sent me, and I live because of him.” If, then, the Father begets in life, and the Son is Son according to motion and is life according to motion, the Father giving life to the Son into motion, generation and life at once, and he himself is homoousion in himself; then Father and Son are always one, and the Son was born from eternity, and each is in the other, an inseparable separation, the Son in the Father and the Father in the Son. And above all the Son is action, since the Son is life with action; the Father, according to that which is being, is life, and according to being life, is action. The Father, then, remains, and remains impassible; the Son operates and leads into manifestation. And God operates within, action existing according to power; and both in the Father and in the Son, according to action, there is action. ### Scripture references - John 5:26: allusion, high confidence - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.42 (PL 8:1072d–1073c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42). ## Against Arius 1.43 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-43 - Source: PL 8:1073c–1074b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that only homoousion preserves one God, and that if the Son is the truth, the Father too is truth and of the same substance, not merely like. ### Latin text Ista hujusmodi oportet revocare ad illa omnia quae praeposuimus: sive Deus est λόγο?, sive lumen et effulgentia, sive silentium et effatum, sive alia quibus unum et simul ea ό4αοούσ«ον apparet, et ingenita generatio. Ubi igitur habet locum quod simile est όμοούσιον, dicere? qua causa dicitur? Semper et mysterium totum hoc est: Unus Deus, et Pater, et Filius et Spiritus sanctus unus Deus. Simile ergo quomodo unus Deus? At όμοουσιον necessario unus Deus. Si enim velut non simul, necessario duo; si autem simile illud alterum, necessario alterum όμοούσιον; ergo necessario alterius substantiae. Isti Ariani, isti Lucianistae, isti Eusebiani, isti Illyriciani, sed abjicientes aliqua, auferentes aliqua et mutantes, omnes diversae opinionis haeretici. Huc accedit, si όμοούσιον pater et filius, quomodo dicit Salvator: Ego sum veritas? Si id quod dictum est verum est, filius cum sit veritas: minor pater, similis quibit veritati, non veritas. Quanta blasphemia ista? Si autem veritas Deus, veritas filius, sicuti ipsi filius dicit, et vere dicit, όμοούσιον Deus est filius: non ergo duplex, sed una semper veritas, et valde foris, et deorsum valde, quod est simile veritati, quod forte in mundo existat similitudo veritatis, ubi et error, et corruptio, et omnis passio. Ipsum ergo veritatem esse, substantia est; non enim aliud substantia, aliud veritas: quod enim simplex, hoc veritas, simplex Deus, simplex filius, veritas Deus, veritas filius, et Deus et filius una veritas. Veritas enim in semetipsa veritas. Item si similis veritati est filius, id est, quod simile est ducit, quae ducit? si autem veritas, in veritatem ducit. Sed enim Deum ducit, et Deus veritas, in veritatem ducit ergo. Sed impossibile, cum ipse veritas non sit, in veritatem ducere: veritas ergo et pater, et filius, sicuti et dicitur: Quem mittit ad me Pater, iste ad me veniet. Ex istis omnibus non solum concluditur, sed manifesta efficitur confessio, extra mutationem esse motum in Deo. Non enim localis neque cum passione generatio, aut corruptione, aut augmento, vel minutione, neque aliqua immutatione; est enim movere ibi, et moveri ipsum quod est esse simul et ipsum, et simplex, et intellectu, unum in uno, sicut in potentia, et actione. Semper quidem, όμοούσιον in eo quod est esse, secundum autem agere ab eo quod est esse, filius, et pater. Sed sicuti dictum est, et in filio pater, et in patre filius. ### English translation (Claude) Points of this kind must be referred back to all that we set out before: whether God and the Word, or light and effulgence, or silence and utterance, or other pairs by which these appear one and together homoousion, and an unbegotten generation. Where, then, is there room to say that the like is homoiousion? For what reason is it said? Always, and this is the whole mystery: one God, and Father and Son and Holy Spirit are one God. How, then, is the like one God? But the homoousion is necessarily one God. For if they are not together, they are necessarily two; and if the other is like, it is necessarily homoiousion, and so necessarily of another substance. These Arians, these Lucianists, these Eusebians, these Illyrians, rejecting some things, taking away some and changing some, are all heretics of differing opinion. Add to this: if Father and Son are homoiousion, how does the Saviour say: “I am the truth”? If what he said is true, then, since the Son is truth, the Father is lesser, like the truth, not the truth. How great a blasphemy that is! But if God is truth and the Son is truth, as the Son himself says, and says truly, then God is homoousion with the Son: not twofold, then, but always one truth. And far outside and far below is what is like the truth, since the likeness of truth may exist in the world, where there is also error and corruption and every passion. To be truth itself, then, is substance; for substance is not one thing and truth another. For what is simple, that is truth: God is simple, the Son simple; God is truth, the Son truth; and God and the Son are one truth. For truth is truth in itself. Likewise, if the Son is like the truth, then he leads to what is like it: to what does he lead? But if he is truth, he leads into truth. But he leads to God, and God is truth: he leads, then, into truth. But it is impossible for him to lead into truth if he himself is not truth. Both Father and Son, then, are truth, as is also said: “Whom the Father sends to me, he will come to me.” From all these things it is not only concluded, but a plain confession is made, that motion in God is without change. For generation there is not local, nor with passion or corruption or increase or diminution, nor with any change; for there, to move and to be moved are that very thing which being is, together and itself, simple, and in understanding one in one, as in power and action. Always, indeed, homoousion in that which is being; but according to acting from that which is being, Son and Father. But, as has been said, the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father. ### Scripture references - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 6:37: allusion, medium confidence - John 6:44: allusion, medium confidence - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The digital text writes ὁμοούσιον and ὁμοιούσιον in similar garbled forms; translated by the argument. The “Illyrians” are probably the bishops of Illyricum, Valens, Ursacius and Germinius. “Whom the Father sends to me” is a free form of John 6:37 or 6:44. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.43 (PL 8:1073c–1074b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-43). ## Against Arius 1.44 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-44 - Source: PL 8:1074b–1075a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus distinguishes his teaching from Patripassianism: the Father is impassible, and the Son suffered only according to the flesh, while divine “emotions” are not passions but nature. ### Latin text Num timor ex isto nascitur, esse nos ista dicentes quasi Patripassianos? Multum differt serpentinum dogma a veritate. Illi enim Deum solum esse dicunt, quem nos patrem dicimus, ipsum solum existentem et effectorem omnium, et venisse non solum in mundum, sed et in carnem, et alia omnia, quae nos filium fecisse dicimus. Si enim dicimus patrem, patrem: et filium, filium, unum et dicentes, et ideo λόγο?, id quod unum, non solum unum dicentes, sed unum et unum. Aliud autem impassibile, unum aliud passum, quomodo ergo Patripassiani sumus? Deus enim nec procedit a semetipso, neque in manifesto actio est, neque velut in motione: quod intus motio veluti non est motio; λόγο? autem qui sit in motionis potentia, magis motio et actio est, fertur potentia sua in effectionem eorum quae sunt? quo enim λόγο?, hoc causa est eorum quae sunt: quo autem causa, hoc non in se manet semper, qui sit in eo quod est λόγο?. Et secundum hoc est iste inversibilis et immutabilis, sed in iis quae sunt juxta genera eorum: quae sunt alius et alius, ipso quo universalis λόγο? est, in patre manens idem ipse. Passiones igitur ubi? neque in patre, neque in filio, sed juxta quae sunt genere suo non recipienda, virtutem totam τού λόγου, quodlibet universalis: unoquoque existente, et illo distribuente suum proprium, ut Angelorum, Potentiarum, Thronorum, Dominationum, Potestatum, animarum, et sensibilium, et ipsius carnis. Passio igitur in istis, et juxta haec non του λόγου, hoc est, filii. Secundum carnem ergo Salvator passus est, secundum spiritum autem quod erat, sine passione. Unde differt nostrum dogma a Patripassianis. Non enim filium esse passio est, sicuti dictum, nec facere aliquid nec loqui: divina enim potentia sine passione fiunt omnia, et ista magis sua, et substantialis, et divina motio est, non passio. Deinde de isto non fuerunt Patripassiani, sed de cruce: quod Pater crucifixus est dicentes sacrilegi: impassibili passionis implicantes, et non intelligentes, necessario aliquid impassibile esse, si est aliud quod patiatur. Nos tamen impassibilem et filium dicimus, juxta autem quod Λόγος caro factus est, passibilem. At vero miseratio, et ira, et gaudium. et tristitia, et alia hujusmodi ibi non sunt passiones, sed natura, et substantia. Si igitur spiritus benevolentia, ipse per se optimus, quibusdam in vitam, quibusdam in mortem est; non sua natura mutatus, sed patientium materia et voluntate, signaturam immutabilem divinitas pro accipientibus aut ut oportet, aut aliter affici dicitur, vel pati; quoniam a nostris sensibus quae divina sunt aestimamus. In sensibilibus enim juxta quod animal est animal, hoc est, anima utens corpore, vel corpus animatum, juxta sensum pati dicitur: vere autem neque per semet solius animae sunt passiones, multo magis spiritus Λόγου et Dei. Impassibilis enim divina natura est. ### English translation (Claude) Does fear arise from this, that in saying these things we are, as it were, Patripassians? The serpent's doctrine differs greatly from the truth. For they say that God alone exists, whom we call Father, he alone existing and the maker of all things, and that he came not only into the world but also into flesh, and did all the other things that we say the Son did. But we say that the Father is Father and the Son Son, while saying that they are one; and therefore the Word, that which is one, saying not only “one” but “one and one”. One is impassible, the other suffered: how, then, are we Patripassians? For God neither proceeds from himself, nor is he action in manifestation, nor as it were in motion; for inward motion is, as it were, not motion. But the Word, who is in the power of motion, is rather motion and action; and is he not carried by his power into the making of the things that are? For insofar as he is Word, he is the cause of the things that are; and insofar as he is cause, he does not always remain in himself, he who is in that which is Word. And in this respect he is unalterable and unchangeable, but in the things that are, according to their kinds, which are one and another, by that very fact by which he is the universal Word, remaining the same in the Father. Where, then, are the passions? Neither in the Father nor in the Son, but in the things that, by their kind, cannot receive the whole power of the Word, which is universal, each existing and he distributing to each its own: to angels, powers, thrones, dominions, authorities, souls, sensible things, and the flesh itself. Passion, then, is in these, and in respect of these, not of the Word, that is, of the Son. According to the flesh, then, the Saviour suffered; but according to the spirit that he was, he was without passion. Hence our doctrine differs from that of the Patripassians. For to be Son is not passion, as has been said, nor is it passion to make anything or to speak; for all things are done by the divine power without passion, and these are rather its own, a substantial and divine motion, not passion. Next, the Patripassians were not so named for this, but for the cross: sacrilegious men saying that the Father was crucified, entangling the impassible in passion, and not understanding that there must necessarily be something impassible if there is something else that suffers. We, however, say that the Son too is impassible, but passible inasmuch as the Word became flesh. But mercy, anger, joy, sadness and other such things are not passions there, but nature and substance. If, then, the Spirit, benevolence itself, best in itself, is to some unto life and to others unto death, not changed in its own nature but by the matter and will of those who undergo it, the divinity, an unchangeable seal, is said to be affected or to suffer, as it ought or otherwise, according to those who receive it, since we judge divine things from our senses. For among sensible things, an animal, insofar as it is an animal, that is, a soul using a body or an animated body, is said to suffer according to sense; but in truth passions do not belong even to the soul alone by itself, much less to the spirit of the Word and of God. For the divine nature is impassible. ### Scripture references - John 1:14: allusion, high confidence - 2 Cor 2:16: allusion, low confidence - Col 1:16: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The Patripassians (followers of Noetus and Praxeas) held that the Father himself was born and suffered. “To some unto life and to others unto death” echoes 2 Cor 2:16. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.44 (PL 8:1074b–1075a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-44). ## Against Arius 1.45 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-45 - Source: PL 8:1075b–1076a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus dismisses the Patripassians, Arians, Marcellians and Photinians, and the homoiousian followers of Basil, whose image of a spark struck from stone and iron he calls hidden Arianism. ### Latin text Discedant ergo Patripassiani, quoniam nos et patrem dicimus et filium, ipsum solum passibilem juxta motum in hyle. Discedant Ariani, quoniam nos naturae filium dicimus, ante omnem creaturam genitum. Discedant et από τού δντος dicentes Christum esse, quod a Deo factus sit, qui Deus ov est: nos enim filium dicimus naturam, et a patre ipsum esse, et in patre. Discedant Marcelli et Photini discipuli, ipsum enim Verbum dicimus in carne fuisse, non aliud Verbum esse, et aliud hominem, in quo Christum dicunt esse, sed ipsum Λόγον carnem induisse. Illi enim dicunt esse et Deum, et Λόγον, et Spiritum. Quartum autem filium, id est hominem, qui ex Maria, quem assumpsit Λόγος, et ut ministrum rexit cui homini dicunt, et sedem paratam esse. Exciderunt ergo a Trinitate. Si autem manet Trinitas sola, ipse homo et λόγος; quem λόγον, nos supra filium demonstravimus. Non autem hoc significat: et λόγος, caro factus est, corruptus λόγος in carnem conversus est, sed λόγος, per quem effecta sunt omnia, et omnia effectus, et caro factus est, ut in carne cum esset, totum hominem sua passione et morte juxta passiones corporis mercaretur. Si enim non erat ipse homo de Maria, quare exinanivit semetipsum? Et quid est formam servi accipiens? et quid rursus est, et Λόγος caro factus est? Discedant et Basilii, όμοούσωι. Nos enim ομοούσιον dicimus, et veritate, et juxta Synodum in Nicaeapoli. Sic enim et pater, et filius unum ambo, et semper, et simul ambo, et quoniam όμοούσιον. Quod autem όμοούσων dicunt, et si confitentur filium a patre habere substantiam, sed aliud quidem dicunt, dicentes neque generatione filium, neque faciendo esse a Deo, sed compulsu istorum duorum, et generationis et faciendi, veluti lapidis et ferri, atque inde emitti flammam. Ista dicentes occulti Ariani sunt. Primum non generatione dicentes Dei filium esse, sed factura, quod dogma est Arii; factura enim est, quod a compulsu exilit, et ex nihilo est. Non enim a ferro aut lapide flamma, quod maxime Arius insanus sapit. Etsi collisio facta est, fuit quando non fuit; et si compulsum faciendi et generatione factus est filius, praeexstitit factio et generatio antequam fuisset filius. Posteriora autem ista. Quomodo ergo compulsio? Et hoc Arii: deinde quomodo ista collisio? et quorum et in quo? Numquid voluntatum in Deo concursio? Numquid passionum aut differentiarum, maxime contrariarum motionum? Et si istud passus est pater, qui est sine passione, et non ex sua substantia apparuit ei filius: collisione enim duarum aut voluntatum, aut passionum, nec voluntas facta est, nec passio, multo magis nec substantia a substantia paterna, sed extra quaedam substantia, quae ex nihilo existeret de λόγω ad patrem. Suspicari ista, impia blasphemia. ### English translation (Claude) Let the Patripassians depart, then, since we speak of both Father and Son, and of the Son alone as passible, according to motion in matter. Let the Arians depart, since we say that the Son is Son by nature, begotten before all creation. Let those also depart who say that Christ is “from that which is”, because he was made by God, who is God existent: for we say that the Son is by nature, and that he is from the Father and in the Father. Let the disciples of Marcellus and Photinus depart; for we say that the Word himself was in the flesh, not that the Word is one thing and the man, in whom they say the Christ is, another, but that the Word himself put on flesh. For they say that there is God, and the Word, and the Spirit; and a fourth, the Son, that is, the man from Mary, whom the Word took up and governed as a minister, and for which man, they say, a throne was prepared. They have fallen away, then, from the Trinity. But if the Trinity alone remains, the man himself is the Word; and we have shown above that this Word is the Son. And “the Word became flesh” does not mean that the Word was corrupted and turned into flesh, but that the Word, through whom all things were made and who became all things, also became flesh, so that, being in the flesh, he might purchase the whole man by his passion and death, according to the passions of the body. For if the man from Mary was not himself the Word, why did he empty himself? And what is “taking the form of a servant”? And what, again, is “and the Word became flesh”? Let the Basilians depart too, the homoiousians. For we say homoousion, both in truth and according to the Synod at Nicaea. For thus Father and Son are both one, and always, and both together, and because they are homoousion. But those who say homoiousion, even if they confess that the Son has his substance from the Father, still say something else: that the Son is from God neither by generation nor by making, but by a striking together of these two, generation and making, as of a stone and iron, from which a flame is struck out. Those who say this are hidden Arians. First, they say that the Son of God is not by generation but by making, which is the doctrine of Arius; for what leaps out from a striking is a thing made, and is from nothing. For the flame is not from the iron or the stone, which is above all what mad Arius thinks. Even if a collision took place, there was when he was not; and if the Son was made by the striking together of making and generation, making and generation existed before the Son was; these come later. How, then, a striking? This too is Arius's. Then, how this collision? Of what things, and in what? Is there a clash of wills in God? Of passions or of differences, above all of contrary motions? And if the Father, who is without passion, underwent this, and the Son appeared to him not from his own substance (for from the collision of two wills or passions neither a will nor a passion came about, much less a substance from the Father's substance, but some substance outside, existing from nothing, of the Word in relation to the Father): to suspect such things is impious blasphemy. ### Scripture references - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:14: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The “Basilians” are the followers of Basil of Ancyra, the homoiousian leader. The image of flint and steel is attributed to them here; its source is not identified. The digital text writes ὁμοούσιον and ὁμοιούσιον in similar garbled forms; translated by the argument. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.45 (PL 8:1075b–1076a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-45). ## Against Arius 1.46 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-46 - Source: PL 8:1076a–1076c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus closes his treatment of the homoousion by listing questions still to be answered and stressing that the Scriptures speak above all of the incarnate Word crucified and risen. ### Latin text Diximus de όροβύσων, et sufficienter diximus: hoc enim nobis propositum. Quomodo autem si δμοοΰσιον, filius, et semper cum patre est, et procedit, et descendit, et ascendit, et mittitur, et facit quae voluntatis sunt patris, et quomodo imago cum sit Dei, in dextera sedeat Dei, et quid sit dextera, et quid sedere, et quid est per quem facta sunt omnia, et quomodo omnia, et quid est quod nihil factum est sine ipso, et quomodo et ipse voluntatem habet, et quae facit, voluntate patris facit, et quomodo perfectus, et a perfecto patre ut imperfectus et corpus accepit, et nunc corpus fert, et si sanctum spiritale, et simile eorum hominum, qui post sancti erunt, et quomodo semperque qui moveatur, et a se genitus potentia quidem patris: ista enim omnia ομοούσιον, definiunt. Si quis dignus sit intelligere, et in isto libro inveniet Fidem sic esse, et permittente Deo, et Jesu Christo Domino nostro, et Spiritu sancto dicimus, ne quis blasphemiter intelligens meum dogma dixerit, omnia enim a sancta scriptura et dicuntur, et sunt. Dicemus maxime illud, e quo gignuntur multae haereses, quod Evangelia, et Apostolus, et omnis vetus Scriptura de Deo quidem dicit omnia, et de Jesu Christo, hoc est de λόγω incarnato, hic enim mysterium salutis nostrae egit, hic nos liberos fecit, redemit: in istum credimus secundum crucem, et juxta resurrectionem a mortuis Salvatorem nostrum, idcirco Paulus dicit: Non enim judicavi quidquam scire in vobis nisi Jesum Christum, et hunc crucifixum. ### English translation (Claude) We have spoken of the homoousion, and spoken sufficiently, for this was our purpose. But how, if he is homoousion, the Son is always with the Father and yet proceeds, descends, ascends, and is sent, and does what belongs to the Father's will; and how, being the image of God, he sits at God's right hand, and what the right hand is, and what sitting is; and what it means that all things were made through him, and how all things; and what it means that nothing was made without him; and how he too has a will, and does what he does by the Father's will; and how he is perfect, and from the perfect Father, yet as one imperfect also took a body, and now bears a body, and whether it is holy and spiritual, and like that of the men who will afterwards be saints; and how he is always one who is moved, and self-begotten, yet by the Father's power: all these define the homoousion. If anyone is worthy to understand, he will find in this book too that the faith is so; and with the permission of God and of Jesus Christ our Lord and of the Holy Spirit we say it, lest anyone, understanding blasphemously, call it my own doctrine; for all these things are both said in holy Scripture and are from it. We shall say above all this, from which many heresies are born: that the Gospels and the Apostle and the whole Old Scripture say everything about God, and about Jesus Christ, that is, about the Word incarnate; for he wrought the mystery of our salvation, he made us free, he redeemed us. In him we believe as our Saviour, according to the cross and the resurrection from the dead; and therefore Paul says: “For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” ### Scripture references - Mark 16:19: allusion, medium confidence - Col 3:1: allusion, low confidence - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 2:2: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.46 (PL 8:1076a–1076c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-46). ## Against Arius 1.47 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-47 - Source: PL 8:1076c–1077c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus sets out his creed: the Father almighty, the only-begotten Son homoousios with him, the Word incarnate, crucified and risen, and the Holy Spirit, three who are one God. ### Latin text Confitemur igitur Deum patrem omnipotentem, confitemur filium unigenitum Jesum Christum, Deum de Deo lumen verum de vero lumine, formam Dei, qui habet substantiam de Dei substantia, naturam, generationem, filium simul cum patre consubstantiatum quod Graeci όμοοΰσων appellant, primogenitum ante constitutionem mundi, et primogenitum ante omnem creaturam, hoc est, et ante substantiam veniendi, et generationis, et revivendi, primogenitum a mortuis λόγον, qui sit omnium universalis λόγος, λόγον autem ad Deum, λόγον in postremis temporibus incarnatum, et cruce vincentem mortem et omne peccatum, Salvatorem nostrum, judicem omnium, semper cum patre substantialem et όμοούσιον, potentiam activam a patria potentia, et generantem, et facientem omnia, et substantiam existendi omnium, et generationem, et reviviscentiam: quoniam vita est aeterna, et Dei virtus, et sapientia: ipsum inversibilem, immutabilem juxta quod λόγο; est, et quod semper λόγο; est: juxta autem quod est creare omnia, et maxime juxta in hyle actionem impassibiliter patientem. Ut fons aquarum immutabilis, impassibilis, extra omnem motionem, cum fluit, et in flumen advenit, juxta alveum et genera et qualitates terrae creditur pati, semper servans potentiam aquae suam, et sicuti flumen irrigat terram, nullam diminutionem sentiens, ad hoc quod est esse aquam; sic Christus ille est fluvius, de quo Propheta dicit: Qui irrigat, et infundit totam terram: sed Christus totus omne irrigat, et visibilia et invisibilia, flumine vitae omnium eorum quae sunt substantia irrigat. In quo autem vita, est Christus: in quo rigat Spiritus sanctus, in quo potentia est vitalitatis, Pater et Deus: totum autem unus Deus. Confitemur ergo et Spiritum sanctum ex Deo Patre omnia habentem, τώΑόγω, hoc est, Jesu Christo tradente illi omnia, quae Christus habet a Patre. Et isto hujusmodi modo simul confitemur esse haec tria, ex isto quod unum, et unum Deum, δμοουσια ista, et semper simul et patrem, et filium, et Spiritum sanctum ineffabili potentia, et ineloquibili generatione filium Dei, Jesum Christum, Λόγο; qui sit, et Deum, et imaginem, et formam, et characterem, et refulgentiam patris, et virtutem, et sapientiam Dei, per quae appareat et declaratur Deus in potentia omnium, et existens, et manens, et agens omnia secundum actionem filii, id est, Jesu Christi, quem incarnatum, et crucifixum, et resurgentem a mortuis et ascendentem in coelos, et sedentem ad dexteram Patris, et judicem futurum venire viventium et mortuorum, Patrem omnis creaturae et Salvatorem, et voce, et toto corde confitemur semper, aurjv. Gratia et pax a Deo patre, et filio ejus Jesu Christo Domino nostro, sic ista confitenti in omnia saecula saeculorum. ### English translation (Claude) We confess, then, God the Father almighty. We confess the only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, God from God, true light from true light, the form of God, who has substance from God's substance, nature and generation; the Son consubstantial together with the Father, which the Greeks call homoousion; firstborn before the founding of the world, and firstborn before all creation, that is, before the substance of coming to be, of generation and of living again; the firstborn from the dead; the Word who is the universal Word of all things; the Word with God; the Word incarnate in the last times, conquering death and all sin by the cross; our Saviour, the judge of all; always substantial with the Father and homoousion; active power from the Father's power, both begetting and making all things, the substance of existence of all things, and their generation and revival; since he is eternal life and the power and wisdom of God; himself unalterable and unchangeable insofar as he is Word, and because he is always Word; but in creating all things, and above all in his action in matter, suffering impassibly. As a fountain of waters, unchangeable, impassible, beyond all motion, when it flows and comes into a river, is thought to suffer according to the channel and the kinds and qualities of the earth, while always keeping its power as water; and as a river waters the earth, feeling no diminution with respect to being water: so Christ is that river of which the prophet says, “Who waters and floods the whole earth.” But Christ, being whole, waters everything, visible and invisible; with the river of life he waters the substance of all things that are. In that he is life, he is Christ; in that he waters, the Holy Spirit; in that there is the power of vitality, the Father and God; but the whole is one God. We confess, then, also the Holy Spirit, who has all things from God the Father, the Word, that is, Jesus Christ, handing over to him all that Christ has from the Father. And in this manner we confess that these three are together, because they are one and one God, these homoousia, and always together, Father and Son and Holy Spirit; and that by an ineffable power and an unspeakable generation the Son of God is Jesus Christ, who is the Word and God, and image and form and imprint and refulgence of the Father, and the power and wisdom of God, through whom God appears and is declared in the power of all things, existing, remaining and doing all things according to the action of the Son, that is, Jesus Christ; whom, incarnate, crucified, risen from the dead, ascended into heaven, seated at the right hand of the Father, and to come as judge of the living and the dead, Father of all creation and Saviour, we always confess with voice and with all our heart. Amen. Grace and peace from God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ our Lord to him who confesses these things so, for all ages of ages. ### Scripture references - Phil 2:6: allusion, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, high confidence - Col 1:18: allusion, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence - Heb 1:3: allusion, high confidence - Gen 2:6: allusion, low confidence - John 16:15: allusion, medium confidence - Mark 16:19: allusion, medium confidence - 2 Tim 4:1: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 1:7: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The prophetic text “Who waters and floods the whole earth” is unidentified (compare Gen 2:6; Sir 24:25–27). An editor's variant printed in the text, “(al. mutabilem)”, is removed. “Amen” renders a garbled ἀμήν. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.47 (PL 8:1076c–1077c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-47). ## Against Arius 1.48 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-48 - Source: PL 8:1077c–1078a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus asks whether spirit, Word, intellect, wisdom and substance are the same or different, and argues that all existents share a communion, so that they may be “other in identity” or “the same in otherness”. ### Latin text Spiritus, λόγο;, νους, sapientia, substantia, utrum idem omnia, an altera a se invicem? Et si idem, communione quadam, an universitate? Si communione quadam, quid primum, quid ex alio, et qua communione? si universitate et ista, et quae differentia, et quae communio? si a se invicem altera omnimodo, altera in alia ut subjectum, alia ut accidens: an juxta alium alterum modum? Si igitur omnimodis altera, et ίτερόνυμ*, et alterius substantiae. Sed nihil omnimodis alterius substantiae: eorum enim quae sunt δν genus, et magis genus in eo quod est esse. Sed quoniam esse dupliciter, et ipsum τό δν dupliciter, est enim vere esse, est et solum esse. Si igitur το δν, vere δν et solum δν ad omnia δντα, et solum δν ad solum δντα, sive συνωνύμω;, sive δ/χω- νύμως dicuntur, non omnimodis altera sunt: participatione igitur cujusdam communionis omnia quae sunt, ad altera sunt. Etenim quod t« ovtc est, hoc quod non δν est, opponitur, quasi contrarium secundum privationem nulla participatione ad se invicem; ergo nec alterum. Si igitur quae sunt, etiam differentia sint et altera, quadam tamen communione eadem sunt, et secundum istum modum et eadem altera sunt; et istud duobus modis sive altera in identitate, sive eadem in alteritate; sed si eadem in alteritate, magis in alteritatem vergunt: si autem altera in identitate, maxime identitas apparet. Quid igitur istis concinat hinc perspiciendum. ### English translation (Claude) Spirit, Word, intellect, wisdom, substance: are these all the same, or other than one another? And if the same, by some communion or by totality? If by some communion, what is first, what comes from another, and by what communion? If by totality, what then is the difference and what the communion? If they are wholly other than one another, is one in another as subject, another as accident, or in some other way? If, then, they are wholly other, they are both differently named and of another substance. But nothing is wholly of another substance; for the existent is the genus of the things that are, and is genus above all in that which is being. But since being is twofold, the existent itself is twofold: there is true being, and there is mere being. If, then, the existent, the truly existent and the merely existent, relate to all existents, and the merely existent to the merely existents, whether they are named synonymously or homonymously, they are not wholly other: by participation, then, in some communion all things that are relate to one another. For what is existent is opposed to what is not existent as a contrary by privation, with no participation in each other; and so it is not even “other”. If, then, the things that are, though different and other, are yet the same by some communion, then in this way they are both the same and other; and this in two ways: either other in identity, or the same in otherness. If the same in otherness, they tend more toward otherness; if other in identity, identity appears most. What agrees with these things must be considered from here. ### Translation notes - Greek terms: λόγος (Word), νοῦς (intellect), ὄν (existent), ἑτερώνυμα (differently named), συνωνύμως and ὁμωνύμως (synonymously and homonymously), several garbled in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.48 (PL 8:1077c–1078a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-48). ## Against Arius 1.49 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-49 - Source: PL 8:1078a–1078d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus describes the Father as the One before all being, beyond existence, substance and understanding, known only to himself, the first cause and power of all things. ### Latin text De Deo et λόγω, hoc est, de patre et filio Dei permissu sufficienter dictum, quoniam unum quae duo. Dictum et de λόγω, hoc est de filio et de Spiritu sancto, quod in uno. Si igitur quae duo, unum, et in uno duo; illud unum in quo sunt duo, quoniam cum illo est, et ex aeterno cum ipso semper; quae simul sunt sibi invicem eadem, duo unum sunt; necesse est igitur ista idem esse. Quomodo istud sit: Audi, ut dico. Ante omnia quae vere sunt, unum fuit sive ipsum unum, antequam sit ei esse unum. Illud enim unum oportet dicere et intelligere, quod unam imaginationem alteritatis habet, unum solum, unum simplex; unum per concessionem, unum ante omnem existentiam, ante omnem existentialitatem, et maxime ante omnia inferiora, ante ipsum δν, hoc enim unum ante δν. Ante omnem igitur essentitatem, substantiam, subsistentiam, et adhuc omnia quae potentiora unum, sine existentia, sine substantia, sine intelligentia. Supra enim haec, immensum, invisibile, indiscernibile universaliter, et his quae in ipso, et his quae post ipsum, etiam quae ex ipso. Soli autem sibi et discernibile, et definitum ipsa sua existentia, non actum, ut non quiddam alterum sit ab ipso consistentia, et cognoscentia sui impartile undique, sine figura, sine qualitate, neque inqualitate; sine qualitate quale, sine colore, sine specie, sine forma, omnibus formis carens. Neque quod sit ipsa forma qua formantur omnia, et universalium et partilium omnium quae sunt. Prima causa omnium principiorum, principium omnium intelligentiarum, praeintelligentia omnium potentiarum, fortitudo ipsa motione celebrior, ipso statu stabilior. Motione enim ineloquibili status est, statu autem ineffabili superelativa motio est. Continuatione omni densior, distantia universa altior, definitior universo corpore, et major omni magnitudine, omni incorporali purior, omni intelligentia et corpore penetrabilior, omnium potentissimus, potentia potentiarum, omni genere, omni potentia, omni specie majus, totum vero quae sunt omnia ipsum existens omni toto majus, corporali, et incorporali, omni parte magis pars inenarrabili potentia, pura, existens prae omnibus, quae vere sunt. ### English translation (Claude) Concerning God and the Word, that is, the Father and the Son, it has been said sufficiently, by God's permission, that the two are one. It has been said also of the Word, that is, of the Son and the Holy Spirit, that they are in one. If, then, the two are one, and the two are in one, that one in which the two are (since it is with that one, and from eternity always with him), and things that are together are the same with each other, then the two are one; these, then, must be the same. How this is, hear as I say it. Before all the things that truly are there was the One, or the One itself, before being one belonged to it. For that One must be spoken of and understood as having no image of otherness: one alone, one simple, one only by concession, one before all existence, before all existentiality, and above all before all lower things, before the existent itself; for this One is before the existent. Before all entity, then, substance and subsistence, and before all things more powerful still, is the One, without existence, without substance, without understanding. For it is above these: immense, invisible, wholly indiscernible, both to the things in it and to those after it, even to those from it; but discernible to itself alone, and defined by its own existence, not by act, so that it is not something other than itself by its consistence and by its knowledge of itself; impartible on every side, without figure, without quality and yet not lacking quality; a quality without quality, without colour, without species, without form, lacking all forms; nor is it the form itself by which all things are formed, both universal and particular, all things that are. First cause of all principles, principle of all understandings, pre-understanding of all powers, strength itself, swifter than motion, more stable than rest itself; for by an unspeakable motion it is rest, and by an ineffable rest it is supereminent motion. Denser than all continuity, loftier than all distance, more definite than every body and greater than every magnitude, purer than every incorporeal thing, more penetrating than all understanding and body, the most powerful of all, the power of powers, greater than every genus, every power, every species; existing as the whole of all things that are, greater than every whole, bodily and bodiless; more a part than every part by its unspeakable power; pure, existing before all the things that truly are. ### Extrabiblical texts - Plotinus, Enn. 6.9 (Plotinus, Enneads): echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - This negative description of the One closely resembles Neoplatonic texts, such as Plotinus, Enneads 6.9, and the anonymous Commentary on the Parmenides. “The existent” renders ὄν. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.49 (PL 8:1078a–1078d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-49). ## Against Arius 1.50 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-50 - Source: PL 8:1078d–1079b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus describes the Father as triple-powered spirit, uniting existence, life and blessedness in simple oneness, from whom the Son leaps forth as the one existing in substance and motion. ### Latin text Hic est Deus, hic Pater, praeintelligentia, praeexistens et praeexistentia, beatitudinem suam et immobili motione semetipsum custodiens, et propter istud non indigens aliorum, perfectus super perfectos, tripotens in unalitate, spiritus perfectus et supra spiritum. Non enim spirat, sed tantum spiritus est in eo, quod est ei esse, spiritus spirans in semetipsum, ut sit spiritus; quoniam est spiritus inseparabilis a semetipso, ipse sibi et locus, et habitator in semetipso manens, solus in solo, ubique existens, et nusquam simplicitate, unus qui sit, tres potentias couniens existentiam omnem, vitam omnem et beatitudinem. Sed ista omnia et unum, et simplex unum, et maxime in potentia ejus quod est esse, hoc est existentiae potentia, vitae et beatitudinis quod enim est et existit potentia, quae sit existentiae, ac potentia est vitae et beatitudinis ipsa per semetipsam, et ideo et λόγος sui ipsius, et vivere, et agens, habens secundum ipsam suimetipsius inexistentem existentiam, indiscernibilis spiritus counitio, divinitas, substantialitas, beatitudo, intelligentialitas, vitalitas, optimitas, et universaliter omnimodis omnia, pure ingenitum π/>οόν, unalitas counitionis nulla counitioni. Isto igitur uno existente, unum proinde exiliit unum, in substantia unum, in motu unum, et motus enim existentia, quoniam existentia motus. Istud igitur unum existentialiter unum, sed non ut Pater inexistentialiter unum, qui est secundum potentiam existentialiter unum. Habet enim potentiam, et magis habet quod ei futurum est secundum operationem esse, et secundum veritatem non habet, sed est; quoniam potentia, coactio actuosa sit omnia, est sine molestia, et vere omnimodis non egens, quae sit ab hoc ut sit omnia potentia: etenim qua potens nata actio eget, agens ipsa unalitas. ### English translation (Claude) This is God, this the Father: pre-understanding, pre-existing and pre-existence, guarding his blessedness and himself by an unmoved motion, and therefore needing no others; perfect above the perfect, triple-powered in oneness, perfect spirit and above spirit. For he does not breathe out, but is only spirit in that which is his being, spirit breathing into himself so as to be spirit; since he is spirit inseparable from himself, his own place and its inhabitant, remaining in himself, alone in the alone, existing everywhere and nowhere by his simplicity; being one, uniting three powers: all existence, all life, and blessedness. But all these are also one, and a simple one, and above all in the power of that which is being, that is, the power of existence, of life and of blessedness. For what is and exists is power, which is the power of existence, and is the power of life and blessedness itself through itself; and therefore it is also the Word of itself, and living and acting, having according to itself its own existence that is not yet existent, an indiscernible co-union of spirit: divinity, substantiality, blessedness, intellectuality, vitality, goodness, and universally all things in every way, the purely unbegotten pre-existent, a oneness of co-union that is no co-union. This One, then, existing, one One accordingly leapt forth: one in substance, one in motion; for motion is existence, since existence is motion. This One, then, is existentially one, but not as the Father is non-existentially one, who is existentially one only in power. For he has power, and rather has what is to be his in operation; and in truth he does not “have” it but is it; since power, an active co-acting, is all things without trouble, and truly in every way lacks nothing, being from this, that it is all things in power. For inasmuch as it is power, the action that is born has need, the oneness itself acting. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - “Pre-existent” renders a garbled προόν. The triad existence, life, blessedness and the term “triple-powered” resemble Neoplatonic usage. The last sentences are obscure in the Latin and are translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.50 (PL 8:1078d–1079b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-50). ## Against Arius 1.51 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-51 - Source: PL 8:1079b–1080b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus describes the Son as infinite life going forth from the Father and returning as wisdom, and reads the incarnation from the virgin as the earthly type of this descent and return. ### Latin text Igitur ista secundum istud quod esse dicimus unum, unum vita est, quae sit motio infinita, effectrix aliorum, vel eorum quae vere sunt, vel eorum quae sunt, existens λόγος, ad id quod est esse quae sunt, omnia a sesemet movens semper in motu, in semetipsa habens motum, magis autem ipsa motus est: sic enim Scriptura divina dicit: Quod dedit ipse pater Deus in ipso esse vitam esse. Iste filius est λόγος, qui est ad Deum, iste per quem facta sunt omnia, iste filius et filietas tota paternitatis totius semper qui sit et filius, et ex aeterno: filius autem et semet mota motione, potentia enim progrediente, et veluti immobili praeexistentia, et non mota juxta quod potentia fuit. Ista motio nusquam requiescit et a semet ipsa exurgens, et in omne genus motus festinans: quippe vita quae sit infinita, et ipsa in vivificatione veluti foris apparuit. Necessario igitur vita nata est, vita autem filius, vita motio, a vitali praeexistentia vita, existentia in constitutione, et apparentia omnium totorum, quae juxta potentiam pater est, ut ab eorum quae vere sunt intelligentia praeintelligentia apparet. Ista igitur existentia est totius existentiae vita, et juxta quod vita motus quasi foemineam sortita est potentiam, hoc quod concupivit vivificare. Sed quoniam sicut demonstratum, ista motio una cum sit, et vita est sapientia, tota conversa in sapientiam, et magis in existentiam patriam, magis aut retro motae motionis in patriam potentiam, et ab ipso vivificata vita recurrens in patrem, vir effecta, descensio enim vita, ascensio sapientia. Spiritus autem et ista. Spiritus igitur utraque: in uno duo, et sicut existente vita prima existentia, necessitas fuit in virginalem potentiam subintrare, et masculari virginis partu virum generari filiam Dei. In prima enim motione, primam dico in apparentiam venientem, veluti defecit a potentia patris, et in cupiditate insita vivefaciendi, intus quidem existens vita, motione autem foris existens in semetipsam recurrit: rursus in semetipsam conversa venit in suam patriam existentiam, virtute effecta et perfecta in omnipotentem virtutem effectus est perfectus spiritus, nutu in superiora converso, hoc est intro. Sic secundum typum oportuit ordinem esse, et cum est in corpore spiritus, hoc est, filio Christo, et quasi diminutionem pati, et a Virgine nasci, et ipsa veluti diminutione sua patria virtute, hoc est, existentia diviniore et prima resurgere et renovari, et reverti in patrem, hoc est, in existentiam et potentiam patriam. ### English translation (Claude) In respect, then, of that which we call being one, the One is life, which is infinite motion, the maker of other things, whether of those that truly are or of those that are, existing as the Word for the being of the things that are, moving all things from itself, always in motion, having motion in itself, or rather being motion itself. For so the divine Scripture says: “That the Father, God himself, gave it to be life in him.” This is the Son, the Word, who is with God, through whom all things were made; this is the Son and the whole sonship of the whole fatherhood, who always is Son, and from eternity: Son by a self-moved motion, power going forth as from an unmoved pre-existence, and not moved inasmuch as it was power. This motion never rests, rising from itself and hastening into every kind of motion, since it is infinite life; and in giving life it appeared as if outside. Necessarily, then, life was born; and life is the Son; life is motion, life from the living pre-existence, existence in constitution and the appearing of all wholes, which according to power is the Father, as a pre-understanding appears from the understanding of the things that truly are. This existence, then, is the life of all existence; and inasmuch as it is life, the motion received, as it were, a feminine power: this, that it desired to give life. But since, as has been shown, this motion, being one, is both life and wisdom, it was wholly turned into wisdom, and rather into the Father's existence, or rather was moved back into the Father's power; and life, given life by him, running back to the Father, was made male. For life is descent, wisdom ascent. And this too is Spirit. Both, then, are Spirit: two in one. And as life is the first existence, there was a necessity for it to enter into virginal power and to be made male, so that by the virgin's birth a man, the Son of God, should be begotten. For in the first motion (I mean the first coming into appearance) it fell away, as it were, from the power of the Father; and in its innate desire to give life, existing as life within but outside by motion, it ran back into itself; again turned into itself, it came into its Father's existence, made power and perfect into almighty power; it became perfect Spirit, its inclination turned toward higher things, that is, inward. So, according to the type, the order had to be this: when the Spirit is in the body, that is, in the Son, Christ, it should suffer, as it were, a diminution and be born of a virgin, and, by that very diminution, through its Father's power, that is, through a more divine and first existence, rise again and be renewed and return to the Father, that is, into the Father's existence and power. ### Scripture references - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence - John 1:1: allusion, high confidence - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - Luke 1:35: echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - Victorinus's imagery of life as a “feminine” power made “male” on its return to the Father is translated as written. The text prints “filiam Dei” (“daughter of God”), translated by sense as “the Son of God”. An editor's variant inserted in the text, “(al. per facta”, is removed. “The Word” renders λόγος. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.51 (PL 8:1079b–1080b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-51). ## Against Arius 1.52 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-42/#p-1-52 - Source: PL 8:1080b–1081b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains God as the power of existence, life and understanding, and the Son as life, the Father's will and motion going forth, both within and without, so that each is in the other. ### Latin text Quomodo istud est, adhuc audeo dicere, ut nostra incidentia plurima expositione manifesta sit. Ponamus intelligentiam: secundum istum modum Deus potentia est istarum trium potentiarum existentiae, vitae beatitudinis, hoc est, ejus quod est esse, quod vivere, quod intelligere. Quod autem in unoquoque istorum tria, manifestum et quod est esse primum, et secundum quod est esse secundum ipsum vivere et intelligere, sine ulla unitione, sed simpliciter simplicitas et istud manifestum sicuti demonstratum, illud et tale quod est esse, Deum esse manifeste, sicuti demonstratum; potentia potens praestandi quod esse omnibus, non ab eo quod esse ut partem dans et paternam et effectricem potentiae unicuique quod est esse ei proprium consistens: hoc autem per ministrantem λόγον, hoc est per vitam quae omnibus praestat vivere, et tunc subsistit, aliquis accipiens quod est esse secundum quod est vitam accipere. Si igitur esse Dei, non ab eo quod sibi esse omnibus praestat, sed ministrante hoc quod est vitam esse; ipsum autem vitam esse in eo est quod est Dei, esse unum et idem est quiescenti, quod est esse patri, cum eo quod est esse vitae secundum identitatem, motus est ex sua potentia a patria potentia dependens. Et quoniam omnis potentia naturalis est voluntas, voluit vitam movere semetipsam, insita juxta substantiam motione impassibiliter, erecte in id quod est. Naturalis enim voluntas, non passio. Secundum igitur quod est esse Dei, in quo potentia existentiae est, substantialitas patria, secundum potentiam, secundum istud esse ipsum et vita est. Si ergo movit vita semetipsam, motio autem voluntas, patria ergo motio, et patria voluntas, quoniam patria potentia vita. Sed si secundum quod est esse vita, motio est, propria ergo motio vitae est. Sed quoniam motio aliunde ad aliud fertur, veluti ab eo quod est intus foras, quod vita et potentia est, et natura, et voluntas: et maxime istud existentia ipsius, ideo effulgentia dicitur esse vel progressio, aut elevati spiritus manifestatio, operatrix in vivefaciendo id quod omne totum est essentitatis. Intus igitur existentis vitae, juxta quod est motionem esse ipsam vitam, proles ejus quod est patrem esse vita est: secundum quod motio est. Sed quoniam motio juxta quod motio est, nullam elationem habens, ab eo quod est intus progressa foras est, sicut sensus ab eo qui νοΰ; est, potentiam fontanam et universalem accipiens, juxta motionem et intus et foris est: motio enim νους est, sic et vita juxta quod motio est, filius est factus manifesta motio a motione patria, quae in occulto est, quae secundum primam potentiam existentia est. Rursus vita secundum quod motio est, procedens a patria motione, et intus et foris est: sed enim vita motio est: vita igitur et intus et foris est, vivit igitur Deus, vivit ipsa vita, ergo et Deus et vita unum. Igitur ista duo et in unoquoque, et alterum et idem: in filio igitur pater, et in patre filius. ### English translation (Claude) How this is, I dare to say further, so that our subject may be made clear by a fuller exposition. Let us posit understanding. In this way God is the power of these three powers, existence, life, blessedness, that is, of being, living and understanding. That in each of these there are three is plain: that being is first, and that, in respect of being, second come living and understanding, without any union but simply as simplicity. And this is plain, as has been shown: that such being is manifestly God, as has been shown; a power able to provide being to all, not by giving a part of his own being, but providing to each the Father's effective power, so that its own being stands. And this he does through the ministering Word, that is, through the life that provides living to all; and then a thing subsists, receiving being in receiving life. If, then, God's being provides being to all, not from his own being, but through the ministry of what is being life, and being life itself is in what is God's, then being is one and the same for the one at rest, what is being for the Father, with what is being for life, by identity; it is motion from its own power, depending on the Father's power. And since every natural power is will, life willed to move itself, the motion being implanted by substance impassibly, upright toward what is. For natural will is not passion. In respect, then, of God's being, in which is the power of existence, the Father's substantiality according to power, by this very being he is also life. If, then, life moved itself, and motion is will, it is the Father's motion and the Father's will, since life is the Father's power. But if, in respect of being, life is motion, motion is proper to life. But since motion is carried from one thing to another, as from what is within to what is without, which is life, power, nature and will, and above all his existence, therefore it is called effulgence, or procession, or the manifestation of the uplifted spirit, working in giving life to the whole of entity. Of the life that exists within, then, inasmuch as motion is life itself, the offspring of what is the Father's being is life, inasmuch as it is motion. But since motion, inasmuch as it is motion, having no elevation of itself, proceeded from what is within to without, as sense from that which is intellect, receiving fountain-like and universal power, it is, according to motion, both within and without; for intellect is motion. So too life, inasmuch as it is motion: the Son became manifest motion from the Father's motion, which is hidden and which, according to the first power, is existence. Again, life, inasmuch as it is motion, proceeding from the Father's motion, is both within and without; for life is motion. Life, then, is both within and without: God lives, life itself lives; so God and life are one. These two, then, are in each, both other and the same: the Son in the Father and the Father in the Son. ### Scripture references - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Intellect” renders νοῦς. Some clauses are obscure in the Latin and are translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.52 (PL 8:1080b–1081b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-52). ## Against Arius 1.53 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-53 - Source: PL 8:1081b–1081d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Son is the form in which the hidden Father is seen, life in which being appears, and calls for faith in the incarnate Christ as the way to eternal life. ### Latin text Exclamat igitur veritas, quod ομοοΰσια ista secundum identitatem counita alteritate. Rursus si pater vita, et filius vita, quoniam filius vita cum sit secundum quod motus est, et intus et foris est, vivit Deus, vivit illius, et foris vivunt omnia ubique filio existente. Et quoniam in filio pater, ubique et pater. Rursus item quoniam in filio pater: cum videritis filium, et intellexeritis, videbitis et intelligetis patrem. Si quis me videt, videt et patrem: propter hoc enim dictum est. Quoniam filius forma est patris: non autem nunc forma esse foris extra substantiam intelligitur, neque ut in nobis adjacens substantiae facies; sed substantia quaedam subsistens, in qua apparet et demonstratur quod occultum et velatum est in alio. Deus autem ut velatum quiddam est: nemo enim videt Deum: forma igitur filius, in quo videtur Deus. Si enim existentia Deus, potentia, substantia, motus, et vita in occulto Deus velut sine forma. Ergo si manifesta vita, et manifesta juxta motus potentiam, vita juxta motum in occulto, in apparentia, in existente motione intelligitur, pronuntiatur, videtur. Adhuc sic quod est esse, pater: quod autem vita, filius, cum sit impossibile id quod est esse comprehendere: in occulto enim illud est, vita autem juxta quod vita est, jam et illud est esse: in vita igitur apparet quod est esse, igitur vita ejus quod est esse. Sed enim pater Deus quod est esse, filius autem vita, filius ergo vita patris Dei forma est, in qua speculatur potentia patria. Credendum igitur in filium Dei, ut vita in nobis fiat, quae est et vera, et aeterna vita. Si enim habebimus fidem in Christum Nazarenum, incarnatum de Maria, in filium Dei idem habebimus, qui fuit et effectus est Spiritus incarnatus. Quomodo istud audivi, dico. ### English translation (Claude) Truth cries out, then, that these are homoousia, co-united in identity with otherness. Again, if the Father is life and the Son is life (since the Son, being life inasmuch as he is motion, is both within and without), God lives, the Son lives, and outside all things live, the Son existing everywhere. And since the Father is in the Son, the Father too is everywhere. Again, likewise, since the Father is in the Son: when you see the Son and understand him, you will see and understand the Father. For this reason it was said: “If anyone sees me, he sees the Father also.” For the Son is the form of the Father: not that “form” is now understood as something outside, apart from substance, nor, as in us, a face lying upon a substance; but a certain subsisting substance in which what is hidden and veiled in another appears and is shown. God is something veiled, for no one sees God: the Son, then, is the form in which God is seen. For if God is existence, power, substance, motion and life, God in hiddenness is, as it were, without form. If, then, life is manifest, and manifest according to the power of motion, the life that is hidden is understood, spoken and seen according to motion, in appearance, in existing motion. Further: being is the Father, life the Son; for it is impossible to grasp being, since it is hidden; but life, inasmuch as it is life, is already that being too. Being, then, appears in life; so life belongs to being. But God the Father is being, the Son life; the Son, then, the life of God the Father, is the form in which the Father's power is contemplated. We must believe, then, in the Son of God, so that life may come to be in us, which is true and eternal life. For if we have faith in Christ the Nazarene, incarnate from Mary, we shall have the same faith in the Son of God, who was and became the Spirit incarnate. How I have understood this, I shall say. ### Scripture references - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:18: allusion, high confidence - John 17:3: allusion, medium confidence - John 3:16: allusion, medium confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.53 (PL 8:1081b–1081d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53). ## Against Arius 1.54 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-54 - Source: PL 8:1081d–1082a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the names spirit, Word, intellect and the rest belong to Father, Son and Spirit as synonyms, the three being the same yet distinguished as hidden and manifest. ### Latin text Sed oportet prius videre, quomodo alia cui attribuentur patri, an filio? Dico autem Spiritum, λόγον, νοϋν, sanctum Spiritum, sapientiam, substantiam, primum pater et filius idem, filius autem et sanctus Spiritus idem: existentia igitur et vita idem; ergo existentia et beatitudo idem: rursus esse et vita idem, et vita et intelligere idem. Dictum de istis est in libro qui ante istum, et in aliis, quoniam in uno tria, et idcirco eadem tria: συνώνυμα apa τα xpiaf secundum nomen quod obtinet unumquidque istorum potentiam suam. Etenim quod est esse, et vita et intelligentia: sic et aliud ad alia; eadem igitur et συνώνυμα, eadem congenerata, igitur et consubstantialia ista. Sed quasi apparet alteritas quaedam in istis, et maxime, idcirco eadem non ipsa; quaedam enim sua potentia in occulto, et manifesta alia et sunt et intelliguntur, existentia autem in eadem potentia simul potentia et consubstantialia sunt, et in istis solis inest unum esse eadem, aliis vero ab istis in identitate altera esse et eadem. ### English translation (Claude) But first we must see how the other names are to be attributed: to the Father or to the Son? I mean spirit, Word, intellect, Holy Spirit, wisdom, substance. First, the Father and the Son are the same, and the Son and the Holy Spirit are the same: existence, then, and life are the same; so existence and blessedness are the same; again, being and life are the same, and life and understanding are the same. It has been said of these, in the book before this one and in others, that the three are in one, and that therefore the three are the same: the three, then, are synonymous, according to the name by which each of them holds its own power. For being is also life and understanding, and so with each in relation to the others: they are the same, then, and synonymous, the same and co-generated, and so these are consubstantial. But since a certain otherness appears, as it were, in them, it is above all for this reason that they are “the same” and not “itself”. For some things in their own power are hidden, and others both are and are understood as manifest; but existing in the same power, they are at once power and consubstantial; and to these alone it belongs to be one and the same, whereas for others than these it belongs to be other and the same in identity. ### Translation notes - “The book before this one” refers to the first part of Book 1 (1.1–47); modern editions divide the book into 1A and 1B. “The three, then, are synonymous” renders garbled Greek (συνώνυμα ἄρα τὰ τρία). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.54 (PL 8:1081d–1082a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-54). ## Against Arius 1.55 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-55 - Source: PL 8:1082b–1082d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that “spirit” names the one substance of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and that the Spirit speaks from the Son as the Son from the Father: silence, voice and spiritual utterance. ### Latin text Nunc autem perspiciendum quid significent alia nomina in primis posita. Dico autem spiritus, λόγο;, vov;, sanctus Spiritus, sapientia, substantia. Spiritus substantiae nomen est vel existentiae, quod quidem esse significat, et in eo quod quid est et appellatur et intelligitur. Si voles nosse quid est Deus, Spiritus ejus quod sit esse significat: ergo Deus et Spiritus quod est esse significat. Rursus quid est vita? quod Spiritus. Spiritus ergo et vita quod est esse significat: sic et Spiritus sanctus quod est esse secundum istud ipsum nomen significat, cum differentia duorum primorum uno nomine nominatorum. Quae differentia substantialis cum sit, quod est significat. Ex iis jam apparet, quoniam substantia unoquoque existente quod est esse significat. In istis tribus igitur Spiritus substantia, ομοούσια ergo. Quoniam Spiritus non diviso Spiritu: quippe unus cum sit in tribus, sed naturae, potentiae et actionis una cum sit existentia patria, et ipsi quod est esse habenti tria sese generantia substantia sunt omnipotentia: neque igitur praeextitit existentia. Pater enim suae ipsius substantiae generator, et aliorum secundum verticem fontana est existentia: neque scissa est ipsa existentia: et existentia, et potentia in eo quod est esse, in unoquoque istorum trium juxta majestatem omnem et omnipotentiam, et omnibus modis perfectionem, quae semel generat, ipsam se substituentem a sese moventem, se semper moventem, consubstantialem, simul potentem ipsum hoc quod sic est esse, et ipsum quod est esse patre dante. Dicit Salvator: Omnia quae habet pater mea sunt, et idcirco dixi: ex meo accipiet; non enim loquetur a semetipso, sed quaecumque audit, loquetur. Sanctus igitur Spiritus si loquitur, a filio loquitur; ipse autem a patre. Vox igitur, et λόγο;, et Verbum, isti tres, propter quod unum tres. Sed pater quidem in silentio loquitur, filius in manifesto, et in locutione sanctus Spiritus non in manifesto loquitur, sed quae loquitur spiritualiter loquitur. ### English translation (Claude) Now we must consider what the other names first set out signify. I mean spirit, Word, intellect, Holy Spirit, wisdom, substance. Spirit is a name of substance or existence, which signifies being, both in what it is called and in what it is understood to be. If you wish to know what God is, spirit signifies what being is: God and spirit, then, signify what being is. Again, what is life? What spirit is. Spirit and life, then, signify what being is. So too the Holy Spirit signifies by this very name what being is, with the difference of the two first named by one name; and this difference, being substantial, signifies what is. From this it now appears that substance, in each existing one, signifies being. In these three, then, spirit is substance: homoousia, then. For spirit is undivided with spirit, being one in three. But since there is one Father's existence of nature, power and action, and for that which has being the three, begetting one another, are almighty substance, existence did not exist beforehand. For the Father is the begetter of his own substance, and at the summit he is the fountain existence of the others; nor is existence itself split. Both existence and power are in being, in each of these three, according to all majesty, omnipotence and perfection in every way, which once begets, establishing itself, moving itself from itself, always moving itself, consubstantial, at once powerful in this very being so, and in being itself, the Father giving it. The Saviour says: “All that the Father has is mine; and therefore I said: he will receive from what is mine. For he will not speak from himself, but whatever he hears he will speak.” If, then, the Holy Spirit speaks, he speaks from the Son, and the Son from the Father. Voice, then, and Word and utterance: these three, because the three are one. But the Father speaks in silence, the Son openly; and in speaking, the Holy Spirit does not speak openly, but what he speaks, he speaks spiritually. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:15: quotation, high confidence - John 16:14: quotation, high confidence - John 16:13: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.55 (PL 8:1082b–1082d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-55). ## Against Arius 1.56 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-56 - Source: PL 8:1082d–1083c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus calls the three one light, Word, voice and utterance; the soul is only an echo, like John the Baptist, while the Son is the life that became flesh by the Spirit and the power of the Most High. ### Latin text Ista igitur tria vera lumina, magis autem unum lumen, verum unus λόγο;, una vox, unum Verbum, hoc est, una potentia activa, consonat, antequam faciet esse quiddam. Animae autem quod alia substantia sit, manifestum: Facta enim a tripotenti Spiritu, neque pure vox, neque verbum, sed sicut ηχώ audit ut loquatur, imago magis vocis quam vox. Et hoc est Joannis vox exclamantis in deserto: Dirigite viam Domini: anima enim in deserto, hoc est in mundo exclamat, quoniam sit Dominum Deum et vult mundari, ut Domino fruatur Deo; et ista dicit testimonium de Deo, et praemissa est in mundum ad testimonium testimonii: testimonium enim Dei Jesus Christus, Filius ergo Dei, filius Joannes Domini. Etenim Joannes non erat lumen, sed venit ut testimonium diceret de lumine. Verbum igitur, et vox filius est, ipse vita, ipse λόγο;, ipse motus, ipse νοΰ;, ipse sapientia, ipse existentia, et substantia prima, ipse actio potentialis, ipse ov, primum vero, ov ex quo omnia δντα, et per quem et in quo: qui est medius in Angelo Trinitatis, patrem declarat praeexistentem, et complet sanctum Spiritum in perfectionem: ut enim dicit Paulus beatus: Evangelium virtus est Dei et sapientia: per virtutem Filium significans, quod omnia per ipsum; verbo enim virtutis fient omnia, et sancti Spiritus sapientia perfecta fiunt omnia. Si igitur Deus ista, simul ista tria. Quoniam autem unum duo, omnia simul existunt in cognitione simul existente vita in patre, in qua est sanctus et Spiritus secundum existentiam, quoniam tria unum erant, et semper sunt. Si igitur aeterna vita filius elucescentia est prae aeternae vitae, ipse autem vita cognoscentia perfecta et aeterna vita: tunc enim perfecta cum cognoverit et quae, et cujus sit, quoniam et semetipsa et jussione patris: tunc enim in semet existens, non fit infinita, salvans et salvata a semetipsa, necesse est intelligere et dicere: quod potentia Dei in ipsa est, hoc est pater in filio, ipsa autem per semetipsam infinita fuit. Et hoc significat: et λόγο; caro factus est. Infinito enim motu in inferiora vita descendit, et vivefecit corruptionem, cujus causa universalis λόγο; et potentia vitae caro factus est, ut dixit angelus: Spiritus sanctus adveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi. Natus est igitur Jesus Christus secundum carnem de Maria, et ex sancto Spiritu, virtute Altissimi. ### English translation (Claude) These three, then, are true lights, or rather one light, truly one Word, one voice, one utterance, that is, one active power, sounding together before it makes anything to be. That the soul is another substance is plain: for it was made by the triple-powered Spirit; it is neither purely voice nor utterance, but like an echo it hears in order to speak, more an image of a voice than a voice. And this is the voice of John crying in the wilderness: “Make straight the way of the Lord.” For the soul cries out in the wilderness, that is, in the world, since it knows the Lord God and wishes to be cleansed, so as to enjoy the Lord God; and it bears witness about God, and is sent ahead into the world to bear witness to the witness. For Jesus Christ is the witness of God, the Son, then, of God; John is the son of the Lord. For John was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. The utterance and the voice, then, is the Son: he is life, he the Word, he motion, he intellect, he wisdom, he existence and first substance, he potential action, he the existent, the truly first existent from whom are all existents, and through whom and in whom. He, who is the middle angle of the Trinity, declares the Father as pre-existent and completes the Holy Spirit into perfection. For, as blessed Paul says, “the gospel is the power of God”, and wisdom: by “power” he signifies the Son, because all things are through him; for by the word of power all things will be made, and by the wisdom of the Holy Spirit all things are made perfect. If, then, God is these, these three are together. And since the two are one, all exist together in knowledge, life existing together in the Father, in which the Holy Spirit too is, according to existence, since the three were one and always are. If, then, the Son, eternal life, is the shining forth of the life that is before eternity, and he is life, perfect knowledge and eternal life (for life is perfect when it has known what it is and whose it is, since it is itself and by the Father's command; for then, existing in itself, it does not become unbounded, saving and saved by itself), then it is necessary to understand and say that the power of God is in it, that is, the Father in the Son, whereas by itself it was unbounded. And this is what is signified by: “And the Word became flesh.” For by an unbounded motion life descended into lower things and gave life to corruption, for whose sake the universal Word and power of life became flesh, as the angel said: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.” Jesus Christ, then, was born according to the flesh from Mary, and from the Holy Spirit, by the power of the Most High. ### Scripture references - John 1:23: quotation, high confidence - Isa 40:3: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:8: quotation, high confidence - Rom 1:16: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence - Heb 1:3: allusion, medium confidence - John 17:3: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:14: quotation, high confidence - Luke 1:35: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “The middle angle of the Trinity” reads “Angelo” as “angulo” (the Trinity pictured as a triangle). “The gospel is the power of God” joins Rom 1:16 with 1 Cor 1:24. “The word of power” recalls Heb 1:3. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.56 (PL 8:1082d–1083c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-56). ## Against Arius 1.57 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-57 - Source: PL 8:1083c–1084b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus says Christ is at once flesh, Spirit, power and Word, and describes the eternal generation as the divine life going out to know itself and at once returning into identity, like faces looking at each other. ### Latin text Omnia igitur Christus Dominus noster, caro sanctus Spiritus, Altissimi virtus, λόγος. Ipse implevit mysterium, ut omnis vita cum carne adimpleta lumine aeterno recurrat ab omni corruptione in coelos. Neque igitur solum caro, neque solum sanctus Spiritus, neque solum Spiritus, nec λόγο; solum, sed simul omnia Dominus noster Jesus. Sanctus ergo Spiritus omnis beatitudo in prima ingenita generatione, quae sola generatio est et dicitur, ipse pater, ipse filius fuit. Spiritu enim moto a semetipso, hoc est vitae perfectae in motione existentis, volentis videre semetipsam, hoc est potentiam suam, patrem scilicet, facta est ipsa manifestatio sui, quae generatio est et dicitur, et juxta hoc foris existens. Omnis enim cognoscentia, secundum quod cognoscentia est. foris est ab illo quod cupit cognoscere. Foris autem dico, sicut in inspectione secundum quod est videre semetipsam: quod est scire vel videre potentiam illam praeexistentem in patriam. In isto igitur sine intellectu temporis tempore, ab eo quod erat esse veluti egrediens in inspiciendum ipsum quod erat quoniam ibi omnis motus substantia est alteritas nata, cito in identitatem revenit. Non enim secundum dorsum effulgentia, sed sicuti lumina, aut vultus se intuentes visione in se invicem, id ipsum unum eodem modo et perfectum substitit. Lumina autem undique ut vultus se aspicientes sunt, et dorsum non habent, et mystice dicitur Deus, secundum dorsum videtur: nulla igitur diminutione totum semper unum mansit, maxime potentificata counitione potentia patria. Sanctus igitur Spiritus motus primus intus, quae sit excogitatio patria, hoc est sui ipsius cognoscentia; praecognoscentiam enim cognoscentia praecedit. Juxta istum ergo cognoscentis modum naturalem foris effectam intelligentiam natus est filius, vita factus: non quod, non fuerit vita, sed quoniam foris vita magis vita, in motu enim vita. Hic est λόγο; qui vocatur Jesus Christus, per quem effecta sunt omnia, semen omnium ad id ut sint, quippe vita qua sine, impossibile est esse aliquid in iis quae sunt, et in iis quae non sunt, quae consecutiones sunt. ### English translation (Claude) Christ our Lord, then, is all things: flesh, Holy Spirit, power of the Most High, Word. He fulfilled the mystery, so that all life with flesh, filled with eternal light, might run back from all corruption into the heavens. Our Lord Jesus, then, is neither flesh only, nor Holy Spirit only, nor spirit only, nor Word only, but all together. The Holy Spirit, then, all blessedness, in the first unbegotten generation, which alone is and is called generation, was himself the Father, himself the Son. For when the Spirit was moved from itself, that is, when the perfect life existing in motion wished to see itself, that is, its power, namely the Father, there came about the manifestation of itself, which is and is called generation, and in this respect existing outside. For all knowledge, inasmuch as it is knowledge, is outside that which it desires to know. I say “outside” as in a beholding, in respect of seeing itself, which is to know or see that power which pre-exists in the Father's existence. In this, then, in a time without any thought of time, going out, as it were, from that which was being in order to behold that very thing which it was (since there every motion is substance), the otherness that was born quickly returned into identity. For it is not an effulgence that turns its back, but like lights, or faces looking at one another by sight into each other, that very one thing subsisted in the same way as perfect. For lights are like faces looking at each other on every side, and they have no back; and mystically it is said that God is seen from behind. With no diminution, then, the whole always remained one, the Father's power above all made powerful by co-union. The Holy Spirit, then, is the first motion within, which is the Father's thought, that is, knowledge of himself; for knowledge precedes fore-knowledge. According to this natural mode of knowing, then, understanding having come about outside, the Son was born, having become life: not that he was not life, but since life outside is more truly life, for life is in motion. This is the Word who is called Jesus Christ, through whom all things were made, the seed of all things for their being; for without life it is impossible for anything to be, among the things that are and among the things that are not, which follow from them. ### Scripture references - Luke 1:35: allusion, medium confidence - Exod 33:23: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - The statements that the Holy Spirit “was himself the Father, himself the Son” in the first generation are translated as written; Victorinus distinguishes the three by their motion and manifestation. “God is seen from behind” alludes to Exod 33:23. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.57 (PL 8:1083c–1084b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-57). ## Against Arius 1.58 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-58 - Source: PL 8:1084b–1085a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus calls the Holy Spirit the “mother” of Jesus above and below, and reads Luke 1:35 as the Spirit and the Word together bringing about the incarnation for the liberation of soul and flesh. ### Latin text Quoniam autem diximus unam motionem et eamdem, et λόγον et sanctum Spiritum, λόγον in eo quod vita est: sanctum Spiritum quod est esse cognoscentiam, et intelligentiam esse: Quoniam quae diximus id ipsum esse vitam et cognoscentiam: et quoniam diximus motam in prima motione intelligentiam: Iste enim ordo naturalis et divinus potentia cum sit, necesse fuit intelligentiam ad suimet ipsius cognoscendam moveri. Natus est filius, λόγο; qui sit, hoc est vita virtute patria, generante intelligentia, hoc est quod esse omnium quae sunt, veluti aeternum fontem. Non falletur ergo, si quis subintellexerit sanctum Spiritum matrem esse Jesu, et supra et deorsum, supra quidem ut dictum, deorsum autem isto modo: necesse fuit liberationis gratia omne divinum, hoc est seminarium spirituum omnium universaliter existentium, et id quod est esse primum, hoc est universalem λόγον, ab inferiore hyle et corruptione omni incarnari, in mortificationem omnis corruptionis et peccati: tenebrae enim et ignoratio animae direptae ab hylicis potentiis eguerunt lumine aeterno in auxilium ut λόγο; animae, et λόγο;, carnis mysterio mortis detrusa corruptione in reviviscentiam, et animas, et carnes per sanctum Spiritum administratorem ad divinas et vivefacientes intelligentias erigerent cognoscentia, fide, amore. Respondit igitur angelus Mariae et dixit illi: Spiritus sanctus adveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi inumbrabit tibi. Haec duo in motu, quae sunt λογο; et sanctus Spiritus, ad id ut gravida esset Maria, ut aedificaretur caro a carne, Dei templum et domicilium advenerunt: sanctus quidem Spiritus potentia in motu, generationis enim principium motus; virtus autem altissimi ipse λόγο; est: Virtus enim et sapientia Dei λόγο; Jesus. Sed de λόγω, hoc est de filio, obumbrabit tibi, dixit. Perfectum enim, divinum et splendide ut est clarum non capit humana natura. Et hoc significat: Et λόγος caro factus est. Magis autem obumbrationem significat, quod dictum est: Exinanivit semetipsum. ### English translation (Claude) But since we said that the Word and the Holy Spirit are one and the same motion, the Word inasmuch as it is life, the Holy Spirit inasmuch as it is to be knowledge and to be understanding; and since what we spoke of is that very thing, life and knowledge; and since we said that understanding was moved in the first motion (for since this is the natural and divine order in power, it was necessary for understanding to be moved to know itself): the Son was born, who is the Word, that is, life by the Father's power, understanding begetting him, that is, the being of all things that are, as an eternal fountain. He will not be deceived, then, who has understood that the Holy Spirit is the mother of Jesus, both above and below: above, as has been said; below, in this way. For the sake of liberation it was necessary that the whole divine, that is, the seed-bed of all spirits existing universally, and that which is first being, that is, the universal Word, should be incarnate from the lower matter and from all corruption, for the putting to death of all corruption and sin. For the darkness and ignorance of the soul, torn away by the powers of matter, needed eternal light to help them, so that the Word of the soul and the Word of the flesh, corruption having been thrust down by the mystery of death into revival, might raise both souls and bodies, through the Holy Spirit as minister, to divine and life-giving understanding, by knowledge, faith and love. The angel, then, answered Mary and said to her: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you.” These two in motion, the Word and the Holy Spirit, came so that Mary might conceive, so that flesh might be built from flesh, the temple and dwelling of God: the Holy Spirit as power in motion, for motion is the principle of generation; and the power of the Most High is the Word himself, for Jesus, the Word, is the power and wisdom of God. But of the Word, that is, of the Son, he said “will overshadow you”. For human nature cannot receive what is perfect and divine, splendid and bright as it is. And this is what is signified by: “And the Word became flesh.” Or rather, the overshadowing is signified by what is said: “He emptied himself.” ### Scripture references - Luke 1:35: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence - John 1:14: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Victorinus's description of the Holy Spirit as the mother of Jesus is translated as written. An editor's reference, “(Philipp. II, 7)”, printed in the text is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.58 (PL 8:1084b–1085a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-58). ## Against Arius 1.59 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-59 - Source: PL 8:1085a–1085c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus concludes that Father, Son and Spirit are one God, differing only in power and action, and lists biblical uses of “substance” against those who deny that the word is scriptural. ### Latin text Habemus ergo secundum ordinem praemissa Dei et Patrem, et Filium όμοούσιονl et όμοουσια secundum identitatem in substantia. Una enim substantia Spiritus, is ipsum esse est. Ipsum esse autem et vita et intelligere est. Ista tria, in singulis quibusque, et ideo una divinitas, et unum; quod omne unus Deus, quia unum Pater, Filius sanctus Spiritus: secundum potentiam et actionem solum apparente alteritate. Quod Deus in potentia, et in occulto motu movet et imperat omnia, ut in silentio; λόγος autem Filius, qui est Spiritus sanctus, et voce confabulatur ad generanda omnia secundum vitam, et secundum intelligentiam substituentia, ad id quod est esse omnibus. Ex iis apparet, λογος ipse et Spiritus sanctus νους et sapientia: id ipsum etenim et Paulus dixit divine: Quis cognovit νοΰν Domini? Et rursus de ipso: Virtus et sapientia Dei. Salomon etiam sapientiam de ipso dicit, et multa nomina in Filium revocantur, et ipsum et substantiam dicit Paulus ad Hebraeos: imago substantiae ejus. Et item consubstantialem populum dixit et Jeremias: quia quis stetit in substantia mea, et vidit Verbum meum. Et rursus: Si stetissent in substantia mea, et audissem verba mea. Et Evangelium secundum Matthaeum: Panem nostrum consubstantialem da nobis hodie. In parabola Lucas: Dixit junior de filiis patri: Da mihi congruam partem substantiae Et rursus: Ibi dissipavit substantiam suam Quod enim inde descendit, potentias suas non tenuit. Ista animae sunt, sed dixi istud adversum negantes ούσέας nomen positum esse in sacris Scripturis. Accedit autem, quod animam, hoc est hominem Deus fecit ad imaginem et similitudinem suam. ### English translation (Claude) We have, then, in due order, set out God the Father and the Son as homoousion, and as homoousia by identity in substance. For the substance of the Spirit is one; it is being itself. And being itself is both life and understanding. These are three in each, and therefore there is one divinity and one God; for the whole is one God, because Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one, otherness appearing only in power and action. For God moves and commands all things in power and in hidden motion, as in silence; but the Word, the Son, who is the Holy Spirit, speaks also by voice, to beget all things according to life and to establish them according to understanding, for the being of all. From this it appears that the Word himself and the Holy Spirit are intellect and wisdom. For Paul too said this divinely: “Who has known the mind of the Lord?” And again of him: “the power and wisdom of God”. Solomon too speaks of wisdom concerning him, and many names are referred to the Son; and Paul calls him substance, to the Hebrews: “the image of his substance”. And likewise he spoke of a consubstantial people. And Jeremiah: “For who has stood in my substance and seen my word?” And again: “If they had stood in my substance and heard my words.” And the Gospel according to Matthew: “Give us today our consubstantial bread.” In a parable Luke says: “The younger of the sons said to his father: Give me the portion of substance that falls to me.” And again: “There he squandered his substance.” For what descends from there did not keep its powers. These refer to the soul; but I said this against those who deny that the name ousia is found in the sacred Scriptures. Further, God made the soul, that is, man, according to his image and likeness. ### Scripture references - Rom 11:34: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 2:16: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: quotation, high confidence - Prov 8:22: allusion, low confidence - Heb 1:3: quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:18: quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:22: quotation, high confidence - Matt 6:11: quotation, high confidence - Luke 15:12: quotation, high confidence - Luke 15:13: quotation, high confidence - Gen 1:26: allusion, high confidence - Titus 2:14: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “The Word, the Son, who is the Holy Spirit” is translated as written. “Mind” renders νοῦν, “ousia” οὐσίας. “Consubstantial bread” is Victorinus's rendering of ἐπιούσιον (Matt 6:11); Jeremiah is quoted from the Septuagint (ὑπόστημα). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.59 (PL 8:1085a–1085c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-59). ## Against Arius 1.60 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-60 - Source: PL 8:1085c–1086a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus pictures the Word as a circular motion going out from the Father and returning to him, and the triad of being, life and understanding as a perfect sphere whose centre is God. ### Latin text Quid vero ista significent, audi ut dico; Summus voOv, et sapientia perfecta, hoc est λόγος universalis, idem ipsum enim in aeterno motu, circularis motus erat a σημείω primo et in summo vertice circularis existens juxta ipsum σημεΐον, cyclica causa inseparabiliter conversa, ut a Patre, et in Patrem, cum Patre existens, incedens, simul existens, et in Patre erat Filius, et in Filio Pater. Prima substantia, et in substantia jam substantia, spiritalis substantia secundum voOv, generatrix et effectrix substantia, praeprincipium universae intelligibilis, et intellectualis et animae, et hylicae universae substantiae in hyle. Si igitur prima motio, vita, inquam, et intelligentia: ista enim illud perfectum unum et solum. Non solum circularis motio ista, sed sphaerica, et magis sphaera, et vere omnimodis perfecta sphaera. Si enim esse et vivere et intelligere, et si vita ipsum esse est et intelligentia, et summitates, et medium est in unoquoque, sic et intelligentia: unum igitur istorum tria sunt in se circulata et participantia invicem sibi. Magis autem simul existentia sine aliquo intervallo, sphaera est et prima, et perfecta, et ipsa sola sphaera: at vero alia juxta similitudinem sphaericam magis. Ex ista ratione necessario, et σηιχδϊον, potentia est, et γραμμή et γραμμήν operans ση/mov est: et a semetipso exiens, et exiens non semper, in mansione, et in motu simul, semper simul, κύκλω semet circulans undique sphaeram esse Deo ubique existente. Quippe cum sit σπμεΐον a quo, et in quod omnis motio conversione reducitur, hic est Deus λόγος totus, νους totus, totus sapientia, omnipotens substantia, substantia quem veremur, quem colimus, solo Spiritu videntes, ipsius nutu et voluntate in ipsum erecti gratia crucis miserante nos Domino nostro Jesu Christo: αμήν. ### English translation (Claude) What these things signify, hear as I say it. The supreme intellect and perfect wisdom, that is, the universal Word (for it is the same thing in eternal motion), was a circular motion from the first point, existing at the highest summit of the circle at that very point, a cyclic cause turned back inseparably, as from the Father and into the Father, existing with the Father, going forth, existing together; and the Son was in the Father and the Father in the Son. First substance, and already substance in substance, spiritual substance according to intellect, begetting and effecting substance, the pre-principle of all intelligible and intellectual and soul substance, and of all material substance in matter. If, then, the first motion is life, I say, and understanding (for these are that perfect one and only one), this motion is not only circular but spherical, or rather it is a sphere, and truly a sphere perfect in every way. For if there are being, living and understanding, and if life is being itself and understanding, and there are extremities and a middle in each, so too with understanding: three in one, then, circled in themselves and sharing in one another. Or rather, existing together without any interval, it is the sphere, first and perfect, the only sphere itself; while other things are more like a sphere by likeness. By this reasoning, necessarily, the point is power, and it is the line, and working the line it is the point; going out from itself and yet not always going out, at rest and in motion at once, always together, circling itself in a circle on every side, so that God, existing everywhere, is a sphere. Since he is the point from which and into which all motion is brought back by turning, this is God: the whole Word, the whole intellect, the whole wisdom, almighty substance, the substance we revere and worship, seeing by the Spirit alone, raised up to him by his nod and will, by the grace of the cross, our Lord Jesus Christ having mercy on us. Amen. ### Scripture references - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Greek in this section: νοῦς (intellect), σημεῖον (point), γραμμή (line), κύκλῳ (in a circle), ἀμήν (amen), several garbled in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.60 (PL 8:1085c–1086a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-60). ## Against Arius 1.61 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-61 - Source: PL 8:1086b–1086d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus describes the soul as an image of the Son, who is life, able to turn upward to intellect and become divine or downward toward matter and become embodied. ### Latin text Erecta motione cyclica rectam dico, quod a tnoasTov in ση/χβΓον, hoc est a Patre in Patrem in apparentia istius motionis et divinitatis universae, et τον λόγον, et Filii existit jussione Dei imago juxta imaginem et similitudinem Dei imago imaginis, hoc est Filii; imago enim Patris Filius, ut demonstratum est: hoc autem est, quoniam Filius vita est, imago igitur vitae anima effecta est, anima autem cum suo νω, ab eo qui νούς est, potentia vitae intellectualis est, non νους est, ad v&Ov quidem respiciens quasi νους est: visio enim ibi unitio est, vergens autem deorsum, et aversa a νω, et se et suum νοΰν trahit deorsum. Intelligens tantum effecta, non jam ut intelligibile, sed si sic perseveraverit, eorum quae super coelum sunt mater est, lumen, non verum lumen, et quidem cum suo proprio νω lumen. Si vero in inferiora respicit, cum faciet petulans, potentia vivificandi fit, vivere quae faciet in mundum, et ea quae in mundo usque ad lapidem lapidum more, ipsa etiam cum νω facta. Etenim cum quidem, >070; sit anima, non λόγος: cumque in medium spirituum, et intelligibilium, et της ύλης proprio νω ad utraque conversa, aut divina fit, aut incorporatur: ad intelligentium etenim suae licentiae est, et privatione veri luminis propter scintillam tenuem proprii τουνοΰ rursum vocatur; quoniam quidem solum est, tenebrata autem deorsum dicitur. Etenim summitates της ύλης puriores animandi vim habentes, causa sunt lumini velut in sua descenderet. Quare enim dictum est: et ista discernit, dicit aliquis, si talis est anima. Quomodo dictum est: Faciamus hominem juxta imaginem et similitudinem nostram? ### English translation (Claude) By the upright cyclic motion I mean the straight one, because from the point to the point, that is, from the Father to the Father, in the appearing of this motion and of the whole divinity, the Word and the Son, there exists by God's command an image according to the image and likeness of God, an image of the image, that is, of the Son; for the Son is the image of the Father, as has been shown. And this is so because the Son is life, so the soul was made the image of life. The soul with its own intellect, from him who is intellect, is the power of intellectual life; it is not intellect, but when it looks toward intellect it is, as it were, intellect, for there sight is union. But turning downward, and turned away from intellect, it draws itself and its intellect down. Become merely understanding, no longer as intelligible, yet if it perseveres so, it is the mother of the things above heaven, a light, though not the true light, light indeed with its own intellect. But if it looks toward lower things, when it acts wantonly, it becomes a power of giving life, making to live the things in the world, and things in the world down to the stone in the manner of stones, itself also having been made with intellect. For the soul is a word, not the Word; and when it is in the middle between spirits and intelligibles and matter, turned with its own intellect to both, it either becomes divine or is embodied. For it is free in its turning toward the intelligent; and when deprived of the true light it is called back again by the faint spark of its own intellect; since it is alone, it is said to be darkened below. For the purer summits of matter, having the power of animating, are a cause for the light, as if it were descending into what is its own. “Why, then, is it said, and he distinguishes these,” someone says, “if the soul is such? How is it said: Let us make man according to our image and likeness?” ### Scripture references - Gen 1:26: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - This section is obscure and partly corrupt in the digital text, and is translated by sense. “Intellect” renders νοῦς throughout; “a word, not the Word” renders λόγος. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.61 (PL 8:1086b–1086d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-61). ## Against Arius 1.62 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-62 - Source: PL 8:1086d–1087c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus surveys views of human nature and, from Gen 2:7 and the sayings about one taken and one left, distinguishes a heavenly soul and intellect from a material soul, both to be purified by faith in Christ. ### Latin text Inspiciendum prius quid est homo, denique quid imago, et quid differt imago a similitudine, et quomodo homo juxta imaginem et similitudinem, non imago ac similitudo effectus sit: et quid est, ad nostram? Dualiter enim homo, quod est in consuetudine, ex corpore et anima intelligitur. Quidam putant ex corpore et anima triplici: quidam autem ex corpore et anima tres potentias habente. Quidam rursus dicunt ex corpore et νω partili, et anima et spiritu, quo consistit fluens corpus. Adhuc quidam de corpore quadripotenti quatuor elementorum et anima duplici, et duplici τω νω. Mea intelligentia haec: Corpus enim, sicut demonstratum: accepit enim pulverem Deus et plasmavit Adam, hoc est, fabricata jam terra, summitates terrae et florem habemus principia corporis. Geminum enim νοΰν, geminam animam declarat Evangelium κατά Ματθαίον et Λουχάν: sic enim dicunt: Sic erit et praesentia filii hominis. Tunc duo erunt in agro: unus accipietur, et unus relinquetur; duae molentes in pistrino, una accipietur, et una relinquetur. Lucas autem adjecit de corpore duo, ipsa nocte erunt duo in uno lectulo, unus accipietur, et alter relinquetur. Alia autem similiter. Ergo quia in agro, λόγος duo sunt, vel νοΰς et λόγος coelestis, et alius hylicus. Et molentes duae animae, coelestis et hylica: et accipietur igitur coelestis νοΰς vel λόγος coelestis anima, hylicus autem λόγος, et anima relinquetur. Quomodo istud, audi. Homo ex anima et corpore confitendus. Ex corpore, quod a terra compositum, habet ergo animam terra hylicam, et factus est Adam, juxta corpus animal, sicuti est animal de aqua et terra. Alia animalia in animam vivam, sed Adam non sic, insufflavit enim Deus in faciem ejus ibi omnem potentiam sensibilem, cui adest νους in discretionem sensus. Alia igitur anima divinior cum suo νώ: sensibili enim potentiae hylicus νους est insitus, et consubstantialis hylicae. Si igitur istud est, Λόγος coelestis, hoc est νους vel Spiritus divinus est in anima divina. Ipsa autem divina anima in hylico spiritu, hylicus autem spiritus in hylica anima, hylica autem anima in carnali corpore, quod oportet purgari cum tribus omnibus, ut accipiat lumen selenium, et aeternam vitam: hoc autem perficit fides in Christo. ### English translation (Claude) We must first examine what man is, then what the image is, how the image differs from the likeness, and how man was made according to image and likeness and not as image and likeness; and what “our” means. Man, as is customary, is understood in two ways, as made of body and soul. Some think he is of body and a threefold soul; some of body and a soul having three powers. Others again say he is of body and a partial intellect, and soul and spirit, by which the flowing body holds together. Still others say he is of a four-powered body of four elements, a twofold soul and a twofold intellect. My understanding is this. The body is as has been shown: for God took dust and formed Adam; that is, the earth having already been fashioned, we have the summits and flower of the earth as the principles of the body. The Gospel according to Matthew and Luke declares a twin intellect and a twin soul. For they say this: “So will be the coming of the Son of Man. Then two will be in the field: one will be taken and one left; two women grinding at the mill: one will be taken and one left.” And Luke added two concerning the body: “On that night there will be two in one bed: one will be taken and the other left.” The others similarly. Since they are in the field, then, there are two words: intellect and a heavenly word, and another that is material. And the two women grinding are two souls, heavenly and material. The heavenly intellect or heavenly word, the soul, will be taken; the material word and soul will be left. How this is, hear. Man must be confessed to be of soul and body. He is of body, which is composed from earth; so he has from the earth a material soul, and Adam was made, according to the body, a living creature, as a living creature comes from water and earth. The other creatures were made into a living soul, but Adam not so: for God breathed into his face, and there placed all the sensory power, with which intellect is present to discern what the senses perceive. There is, then, another, more divine soul with its own intellect; for in the sensory power a material intellect is implanted, consubstantial with the material soul. If this is so, the heavenly Word, that is, the divine intellect or spirit, is in the divine soul; the divine soul itself in the material spirit; the material spirit in the material soul; and the material soul in the fleshly body. This must be purified together with all three, so that it may receive the eternal light and eternal life; and faith in Christ accomplishes this. ### Scripture references - Gen 2:7: allusion, high confidence - Matt 24:39: quotation, high confidence - Matt 24:40: quotation, high confidence - Matt 24:41: quotation, high confidence - Luke 17:34: quotation, high confidence - Luke 17:35: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 1:20: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - “The eternal light” renders “lumen selenium”, probably a slip for “lumen sempiternum”. Victorinus's reading of Matt 24:40–41 and Luke 17:34–35 as referring to two souls is his own. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.62 (PL 8:1086d–1087c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-62). ## Against Arius 1.63 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-63 - Source: PL 8:1087c–1088a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the soul is made in the image of the Trinity, its being, living and understanding being three in one, as an image of the Son, who is the image of the Father. ### Latin text Dicamus igitur quomodo talis anima juxta imaginem Dei, et juxta similitudinem effecta sit, et si sola anima homo, ut dicit Paulus, alius terrenus, alius animalis, alius spiritalis, et ista omnia in uno homine, sed maxime hominem interiorem frequenter dicit, sic enim est anima: colligit enim voOv, et divinam animam; et dicit coelestem hominem, reliquum autem terrenum hominem. Si istud est, anima nostra juxta imaginem est Dei, et Domini Jesu Christi. Si enim Christus vita, et Λόγο? est, imago est Dei, in qua imagine perspicitur Pater Deus, hoc est quod Deus est esse in vita: hoc est enim imago ut dictum est: et si est Christus vita, quod est autem vivere, hoc est Λόγος ipsa autem vita, hoc est quod est esse, hoc autem quod est esse, Pater est. Et si rursus ipsa vita hoc est quod intelligere: id autem est sanctus Spiritus, et tria ista sunt omnia; et in unoquoque tria, et unum tria et omnino όμοούσια. Si igitur anima, secundum quod anima est, et animae esse est, et vivere et intelligere est: tria ergo superioris Triados anima est, ut imago imaginis. Est enim juxta quod anima est in eo quod est esse, et vitam dans, et intelligentiam, ante intelligere simul habens, ομοονσια in uno, et sunt singula ut sua substantia, non scissione, non divisione, non effusione, nec protensione, neque partu praecisa, sed sempiterna tria: aliud existens in alio existente, et ista substantialiter; juxta imaginem ergo. Et sicut Pater esse est, Filius autem duo, sed in motu et in actu; sic anima in eo quod anima, ut potentia patria: vivificatio autem et intelligentia in motu. Ista ergo esse animae juxta imaginem Patris et Filii: sic autem esse juxta similitudinem, όμοούσιον ergo etiam ipsa in sua unalitate, et simili substantia: in triplici potentia, ipsa generans, ergo ipsa se movens, et semper in motu in mundo motionum, fons et principium, sicuti pater et filius ipsius animae, motionis et creator, et praecausa et praeprincipium. ### English translation (Claude) Let us say, then, how such a soul was made according to the image of God and according to the likeness; and whether the soul alone is the man, since Paul speaks of one man earthly, another psychic, another spiritual, and all these in one man. But above all he often speaks of the inner man, for such is the soul, since it gathers the intellect and the divine soul; and he speaks of the heavenly man, and calls the rest the earthly man. If this is so, our soul is according to the image of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ. For if Christ is life and is the Word, he is the image of God, in which image God the Father is beheld, that is, God's being in life; for this is the image, as has been said. And if Christ is life, and what living is, that is the Word; and life itself is being, and this being is the Father. And if again life itself is understanding, and this is the Holy Spirit, then these three are all, and in each are three, and the three are one and wholly homoousia. If, then, the soul, insofar as it is soul, is the soul's being and living and understanding, the soul is three of the higher Triad, as an image of the image. For insofar as it is soul, it is in being, giving life and understanding, having them together before understanding, homoousia in one; and they are each as its substance, not by splitting, not by division, not by outpouring, nor by extension, nor cut off by birth, but everlasting three: one existing in another that exists, and these substantially. It is according to the image, then. And as the Father is being, and the Son the other two, but in motion and act, so the soul, insofar as it is soul, is like the Father's power, while giving life and understanding are in motion. These, then, are the soul's being according to the image of the Father and the Son; and so to be according to the likeness. Homoousion, then, is the soul too in its oneness, and of like substance, in triple power: itself generating, therefore itself moving itself, and always in motion in the world of motions, a fountain and principle, as the Father and the Son are of the soul itself, of its motion, both its creator and its pre-cause and pre-principle. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 15:47: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:48: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 2:14: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 7:22: allusion, medium confidence - Eph 3:16: allusion, low confidence - Gen 1:26: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Psychic” renders animalis (ψυχικός, 1 Cor 15:44–46). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.63 (PL 8:1087c–1088a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-63). ## Against Arius 1.64 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-1-64 - Source: PL 8:1088a–1088c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus ends Book 1 by suggesting that man was made in the image of God even in the body, since the Word was to take flesh, rise and ascend, and our bodies will become spiritual. ### Latin text Adhuc dico in occulto mysterium magnum; sicuti divinior Trinitas unali, secundum quod per se effulgenter fecit animam in mundo intellectibili in substantiam et propriam substantiam, quam proprie dicimus substantiam: sic animae trinitas unalis secunda explicavit imaginationem in sensibili mundo, ipsa anima semper quae sursum sit mundanas animas gignens, et istud ergo juxta imaginem et similitudinem. Videamus ergo si et juxta carnem quidem, et juxta carnem dicunt prae divinatione, quoniam futurum erat ut Jesus indueret carnem. Ego autem dico forte si et in isto quod Λόγος, et carnis est Λόγος, et Deus et corporalis, et super omne corpus dicitur: potentia enim universorum et omnium Deus, non frustra secundum imaginem corporis. Si enim futurum est nostrum corpus et carnem resurgere, et induere incorruptionem, et fieri spiritualis caro, sicuti et Salvator noster juxta omnia et fuit, et resurrexit, et ascendit, et futurum est ut veniat: et si post resurrectionem immutabitur, accipientes spiritale indumentum, nihil impedit juxta imaginem carnis superioris τον λόγου hominem factum esse. Ad istud enim testimonium dicit Propheta, dicens: Et fecit Deus hominem juxta imaginem Dei. Si fecit Deus secundum imaginem, pater juxta filii imaginem: si autem istud dicit, fecit ipsum masculum et feminam, ut praedictum est, fecit hominem juxta imaginem Dei; manifestum quoniam et juxta corpus et carnem valde et mystice, τω λόγω in mare et femina existente: quoniam ipse sibimet filius erat, in primo et secundo partu spiritaliter et carnaliter. Gratia Deo Patri, et Filio ejus, Domino nostro Jesu Christo, ex aeterno in omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen. ### English translation (Claude) I speak further of a great mystery in secret. As the more divine Trinity, with its oneness, made the soul by itself, radiantly, in the intelligible world, into substance and its own substance, which we properly call substance, so the second trinity with oneness, that of the soul, unfolded an image in the sensible world, the soul itself, which is always above, begetting the souls of the world; and this, then, is according to the image and likeness. Let us see, then, whether man is made according to the flesh as well. Some say “according to the flesh” by foresight, since Jesus was going to put on flesh. But I say: perhaps also in this, that he is the Word, and the Word of flesh, and God who is both bodily and said to be above every body; for God is the power of the universe and of all things; not without reason is man according to the image of the body. For if our body and flesh are to rise and put on incorruption and become spiritual flesh, as our Saviour was in all things, and rose, and ascended, and is to come; and if after the resurrection we shall be changed, receiving a spiritual garment, nothing prevents man from having been made according to the image of the higher flesh of the Word. For the prophet bears witness to this, saying: “And God made man according to the image of God.” If God made him according to the image, the Father made him according to the image of the Son. And if he says this, “he made him male and female”, as was said before, “he made man according to the image of God”, it is plain that he made him also according to the body and the flesh, greatly and mystically, the Word existing as male and female, since he was a son to himself in the first and second birth, spiritually and in the flesh. Thanks be to God the Father and to his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, from eternity to all ages of ages. Amen. ### Scripture references - Gen 1:27: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:53: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:44: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:51: allusion, medium confidence - Acts 1:11: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The closing statements about the Word as “male and female” and “a son to himself” are obscure and are translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 1.64 (PL 8:1088a–1088c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-64). ## Against Arius 2.1 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/1-53/#p-2-1 - Source: PL 8:1088c–1089c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus opens Book 2 by arguing that God is not without substance but above it, and that Christ, the Only-begotten, is from the Father's substance, not from nothing. ### Latin text Deum omnipotentem omnes fatemur Christum Jesum nos nunc; mox tamen fatebuntur omnes, quibus fides in Christum filium. De utroque quod sint ambo, et singuli: quippe ut pater Deus, filius Jesus Christus, tota nobis religio est, et spes tota, et in isto fides. Sed cum fatemur singulos duos, unum tamen Deum dicimus, et ambos unum Deum, quod et pater sit in filio, et filius in patre. Alii unum Deum dicunt patrem solum, filium vero hominem, sed hos nunc omittamus: etenim Jesum filium cum dicimus et antequam de Maria nasceretur, fuisse filium confitemur. Nam si in principio fuit >070?, et λόγο; fuit ad Deum, et Deus fuit ipse λόγος, et hoc fuit in principio, qui cum postea λόγος caro factus est, idem est Λόγον esse et Jesum. Si enim in principio erat λόγος, in principio filius, qui postea in carne Jesus, propter mysterium, quod mandato patris implevit. Fatendum est igitur a principio fuisse filium. De patris substantia, an extra dicimus? Sed istud quaerendum. Num Deum non fatemur esse? Fatemur. Qui igitur esse istud ανούσιον dicimus, an ένούσιον? id est, sine substantia, an substantiom? Ανούσιον, inquiunt. Accipio, sed quaero ανούσιον, quomodo, qui substantia non sit omnino? an qui supra substantiam sit, id est ύπερούσιον? Sine substantia quis dicat, Deum qui esse fateatur? esse enim illi substantia sua, non illa nobis nota, sed ipse quod est ipsum esse, est ipse non ex substantia, sed ipsa substantia, parens omnium, a se sibi esse tribuens, prima substantia, universalis substantia, ante substantiam substantia. Per id igitur quod υπερούσιος est, ανούσιος a quibusdam dicitur, non quod sit sine substantia, quippe cum sit: veneremur ergo Deum, et esse dicamus, id est ένούσιον, qui constituit omnia, coelum et terram, mundum, spiritus, angelos, animas, animalia, et hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem imaginis eorum. Quid igitur cum sit ένούσιος? Deus pater utique dicitur, sic fatemur, et pater Unigeniti: omnium fides ista. Num igitur fallit intelligentiam Verbum, ambiguo suo? Genuit enim vos, et de hominibus dixit Deus: si igitur significat genui et creavi, ut creaturam, et naturaliter de mea substantia genui. Quid magis unigenito? quid ei qui filius est quid ei qui unus et solus? quid ei in quo pater est? quid ei qui in patre est? quid ei qui λόγος est, qui in principio erat, et erat apud Deum, et Deus est, et per quem facta sunt omnia, et sine quo factum est nihil. Quid autem hoc significat, quod Christus unigenitus? Si enim Deus omnium pater est secundum creaturam, quomodo hujus unigeniti pater, si non alio modo et ex substantia, non ex nihilo? Erat autem non alia substantia ante omnia quam patris: de patris ergo substantia Christus. ### English translation (Claude) We all confess God almighty; we now confess Christ Jesus; but soon all will confess him who have faith in Christ the Son. Concerning both, that they are both two and each one: since God as Father and Jesus Christ as Son are our whole religion and our whole hope, and our faith is in this. But while we confess two, each in himself, we still say one God, and both one God, because the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father. Others say that God is one, the Father alone, and that the Son is a man; but let us leave them aside for now. For when we say that Jesus is the Son, we confess that he was the Son even before he was born of Mary. For if in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word himself was God, and this one was in the beginning, who afterwards became flesh, then to be the Word and to be Jesus are the same. For if in the beginning was the Word, in the beginning was the Son, who afterwards in the flesh was Jesus, because of the mystery which he fulfilled at the Father's command. It must be confessed, then, that the Son was from the beginning. Do we say that he is from the Father's substance, or outside it? This must be inquired into. Do we not confess that God is? We do. Do we, then, say that this being is anousion or enousion, that is, without substance or with substance? “Anousion,” they say. I accept it; but I ask: anousion in what way? As one who is not substance at all, or as one who is above substance, that is, hyperousion? Who, confessing that God is, would say that he is without substance? For his being is his substance, not the substance known to us; but he himself, that which being is, is not from substance but is substance itself, the parent of all, giving himself being from himself, the first substance, the universal substance, the substance before substance. Because he is hyperousios, then, he is called anousios by some, not because he is without substance, since he is. Let us venerate God, then, and say that he is, that is, that he is enousios, he who established all things, heaven and earth, the world, spirits, angels, souls, living creatures, and man according to the image and likeness of their image. What, then, since he is enousios? He is certainly called God the Father: so we confess, and Father of the Only-begotten; this is the faith of all. Does the word, then, deceive our understanding by its ambiguity? For God also said of men, “He begot you.” If, then, “I begot” can signify “I created”, as of a creature, it also signifies “I begot by nature, from my own substance.” What belongs more to the Only-begotten? What more to him who is the Son, to him who is one and alone, to him in whom the Father is, to him who is in the Father, to him who is the Word, who was in the beginning and was with God and is God, through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made? And what does it signify that Christ is only-begotten? For if God is the Father of all by creation, how is he the Father of this Only-begotten, if not in another way, from substance, not from nothing? And there was no other substance before all things than the Father's: Christ, then, is from the Father's substance. ### Scripture references - Phil 2:11: allusion, low confidence - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:1: quotation, high confidence - John 1:2: allusion, high confidence - John 1:3: quotation, high confidence - John 1:14: allusion, high confidence - Gen 1:26: allusion, medium confidence - Deut 32:18: allusion, medium confidence - Isa 1:2: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms: ἀνούσιος (without substance), ἐνούσιος (with substance), ὑπερούσιος (above substance). “Others say … that the Son is a man” refers to the followers of Photinus. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.1 (PL 8:1088c–1089c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-1). ## Against Arius 2.2 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-2 - Source: PL 8:1089c–1090c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus rejects the claim that the Son came from nothing, distinguishes Marcellus and Photinus, and argues against those who say “like substance” that substance in two is the same, not like, so that Father and Son are homoousion. ### Latin text Age: nunc esse in Christum fatemur. Quaeramus eodem modo hoc, esse ένούσιον est, an ανούσιον? Jam supra dictum ανούσιον esse non posse cui sit esse. Quid igitur? istud esse, unde est; εκτού ανουσίου, an έχτοΟ ένουσίου, id est, ab eo quod est esse, an ab eo quod est non esse? Deus, ut inquiunt, esse est: Christus item esse, sed coepit tamen. Verum hoc est. Sed istud esse quod coepit, ab eo coepit, quod fuit aliquo modo fuisse, ut omnia divina, et a divinis orta, potentia semper sunt ac fuerunt: processus autem eorum actus est, et ex motu manifestatio, et quidem natalis: quid enim Dei nascitur, cum Deus sit ingenitus? an illud credibile est, aut fas est dicere, ex nihilo vel natum esse Christum, quem dicimus Dei filium? qui est Dominus majestatis; et caetera quae supra diximus et in aliis libris. Hoc vero postremo haeresis dicit cui similes et illa est vel quae a Maria dicit coepisse Christum, vel quae non ipsum Αόγον induisse carnem, sed assumpsisse hominem, ut cum ipse Αόγος regeret, atque hoc Marcellus: quod superius autem, Photinus. Excludamus igitur omnes qui haec atque hujusmodi de Christo sentiunt: loquamur cum his, qui Christum Dei filium dicunt, et filium natum, quippe cum fateantur unigenitum, genitum utique, non factum. Parum istud est, adjiciunt, de patre filium, de Deo Deum, de vero lumine lumen verum, utique et consequentia de Spiritu, Spiritum, et in patre filium, et in filio patrem; haec cum fateantur consilio nullo, ratione timoris potius quam veritatis. Alii substantiam heic nominandam negant, alii nominant, sed similem volunt, non eamdem dicere. Quibus illud primum perspiciendum est, quod propheta Isaias dixit: Nullus fuit ante me Deus, et post me nullus erit similis Deus. Si filius Christus, utique post Deum, Christus; nullus autem similis post Deum Christus ergo non similis Deo, aut si non post Deum, certe cum Deo, nam ante Deum nullo modo όροούσιον. Et David sic nullus similis tibi. Deinde, quod multis docuimus, substantia in eo quod substantia est, maxime si sit ejusdem generis, et haec in duobus pluribusve sit, haec eadem non similis dicitur esse substantia; ut anima substantia est, sunt licet multae animae, in eo quod animae sunt, una est illis eademque substantia. Non quod praecesserit illa substantia et praeexstiterit, sed simul semper exstiterit, ita et in caeteris. Quanto magis in Deo? cum ipse sit origo substantiae, cum quo divino quodam ortu filius a patre accepta substantia, semper cum eo, et in eo, ut alter atque idem ejusdem substantiae, nulla vel illius diminutione, vel hujus acceptione consubstantiali completiva unalitate Deus atque virtus ejus semper qui fuerit, et semper exstiterit, hoc est Deus et Αόγος, Deus et forma ejus, pater et filius, Deus et Jesus Christus, Deus et virtus et sapientia, όροούσιον: ergo hoc si dictum όροούσιον ut όροούσιον, cum in eadem sunt specie simul existentes, όροειδεϊς ejusdem temporis et aetatis. Heic vero όροηλιχιός significat consubstantiale simul et substantiam sine composito vel discretione, sed simul semper quod sit rerum virtutibus actionibusque discretum. ### English translation (Claude) Come, then: we now confess that there is being in Christ. Let us ask in the same way whether this being is enousion or anousion. It has already been said above that what has being cannot be anousion. What, then? From where is this being: from the anousion or from the enousion, that is, from that which is being or from that which is non-being? God, as they say, is being; Christ likewise is being, but he began. This is true. But this being that began began from what in some way had been, as all divine things, and those arising from divine things, always are and have been in power; their procession is act, a manifestation from motion, and indeed a birth. For what of God is born, since God is unbegotten? Or is it credible, or right to say, that Christ, whom we call the Son of God, was born from nothing, he who is the Lord of majesty, and the rest that we have said above and in other books? This is what the most recent heresy says; and like it is the heresy that says either that Christ began from Mary, or that the Word did not himself put on flesh but took up a man so that the Word himself might govern him; and this is Marcellus, while the former is Photinus. Let us exclude, then, all who think these and similar things of Christ, and speak with those who say that Christ is the Son of God, and a Son born, since they confess him as only-begotten, that is, begotten, not made. That is too little, they add: the Son from the Father, God from God, true light from true light, and by consequence Spirit from Spirit, the Son in the Father and the Father in the Son. Yet they confess these things with no clear purpose, out of fear rather than for the truth. Some deny that substance should be named here; others name it, but want to call it like, not the same. They must first consider what the prophet Isaiah said: “There was no God before me, and after me there will be no God like me.” If Christ is the Son, Christ is certainly after God; and no one after God is like him: Christ, then, is not like God. Or, if he is not after God, he is certainly with God, for before God he is in no way: homoousion, then. And David says thus: “There is none like you.” Next, as we have taught by many arguments, substance insofar as it is substance, especially if it is of the same kind, when it is in two or more, is called the same substance, not a like substance. So the soul is substance; though there are many souls, insofar as they are souls they have one and the same substance; not that this substance went before and pre-existed, but that it always existed together with them; and so in other cases. How much more in God, since he himself is the origin of substance; with whom the Son, having received substance from the Father by a certain divine origin, is always with him and in him, as other and the same, of the same substance, with no diminution of the one or acquisition by the other, by a consubstantial, completing oneness: God and his power, who always was and always existed, that is, God and the Word, God and his form, Father and Son, God and Jesus Christ, God and his power and wisdom, homoousion. So homoousion is said as homoeides is said of things existing together in the same species, of the same time and age; but here, as “of the same age”, it signifies at once consubstantial and substance without composition or separation, always together, yet distinguished by powers and actions. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 2:8: allusion, high confidence - Isa 43:10: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, medium confidence - Ps 35:10 (34:10 LXX): quotation, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The last sentence plays on Greek compounds such as ὁμοειδεῖς (“of the same form”) and ὁμῆλιξ (“of the same age”), garbled in the digital text; translated by sense. Isa 43:10 is quoted in a Septuagint-based form; “There is none like you” is Ps 35:10 (Septuagint 34:10). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.2 (PL 8:1089c–1090c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2). ## Against Arius 2.3 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-3 - Source: PL 8:1090c–1091d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus answers the objection that “substance” is not in Scripture by arguing that God, though above substance, may be called substance, and by citing Jeremiah 23, Psalm 139 and Hebrews 1:3. ### Latin text Heic oriuntur quaestiones: Prima, quod in sacris Scripturis substantiae mentio facta non sit, et magis non όροούσιον non sit lectum. Alia quod si hoc ita est, compassus est filio pater. Tertia, quod si hoc ita sit, neque pater major, neque minor filius, neque alius mittens, alius missus. Et haec et hujuscemodi talia. Primum igitur illud de substantia videamus: non est in Deo substantia, neque in Christo: An non est lectum? si non est, ut supra diximus: quia omnino non est, sic accipimus; an quia omnino supra substantiam est, Deum non esse nobis nefas dicere: substantia est enim quod Deus est, quod spiritus, quod lumen est. Cur enim addimus et verum lumen? Etenim in divinis, et in Deo sic accipiemus substantiam, ut in hylicis corpora, et in corporalibus animum. Haec enim est ibi substantia, esse supra substantiam: Deum esse omnes fatentur cum sit potentia substantiae, et ideo supra substantiam atque ex hoc substantia: etenim potentiae inest esse. Certe Deus omnipotens est, et quorum origo vel causa est, ipse ille omnia est virtute scilicet et modo quodam, unde dictum a Paulo: Ut sit Deus omnia in omnibus: ergo et ov est, et existens, et substantia, quae omnia cum sit: quia parens omnium est, potentia igitur omnia est. Non dubitandum ergo dicere substantiam Dei: quia cum nos circa prima vel summa proprie verba deficiunt, non congrue demum apud nos quod convenire possit intelligentiae aptamus, ut heic quod est, Deo esse, Substantiam jure dicamus. Eodem modo accipiamus Christum et esse substantiam, et de patre ejus esse substantiam, quippe cum sit et ipse lumen de lumine, Deus de Deo, Spiritus, Λόγο; per quem facta sunt omnia. Et cum sit ita, ut usque ad mysterium corporale substantia sua venire voluerit, de quo dictum ab Apostolo: Et non secundum Christum: quia in illo habitat omnis plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter quod est ούσιακώ;; Deus enim potentia, et Λόγο; actio, in utroque utrumque: nam et potentia quod potest esse est, et quod est, potest esse. Ipsa igitur potentia actio est, et ipsa actio potentia. Actio est ergo et pater, agit et filius, agit et pater: ideo pater, quia potentia gignit actionem: et ideo filius actio; quia actio ex potentia: ergo et pater in filio, et filius in patre, sed utrumque in singulis, et idcirco unum. Duo autem, quia quo magis est, id alterum apparet: magis autem pater potentia, et actio filius; et idcirco quia magis actio, magis autem actio, quia foris actio. Hoc si ita est, et substantia pater et filius, et una substantia, et de patre substantia, et simul substantia, et semper et ex aeterno simul pater et filius, eadem simulque substantia, hoc est, ομοούσιον. An non est lectum in Scripturis divinis? Primum qui hoc negat, rem fatetur, sed Scripturae quaerit auctoritatem. Quomodo autem non iniquum est, ideo rem non admittere, quia majores omiserint, aliquo fortasse casu, vel causa, cum ratione vincaris? verum quid lectum negant substantiam? an de Deo et Christo substantiam? an ipsum? De Deo et Christo substantia lecta est. De Deo lecta in propheta Hieremia: Quis stetit in substantia Domini, et vidit verbum ejus? quis praebuit aurem, et audivit? Item paulo post: Et si stetissent in substantia, et audissent verba mea. Item lecta substantia apud prophetam David: Et substantia mea in inferioribus terrae. Lectum apud Paulum ad Hebraeos de Christo: Qui est character substantiae ejus. Sunt et alia exempla, verum haec sufficere arbitror. ### English translation (Claude) Here questions arise. First, that no mention of substance is made in the sacred Scriptures, and still less is homoousion read there. Second, that if this is so, the Father suffered with the Son. Third, that if this is so, the Father is not greater nor the Son less, nor is one sending and another sent. These, and others of this kind. First, then, let us look at the question of substance. Is there no substance in God or in Christ? Or is it only not read? If there is none, as we said above, either because he is not at all, or because he is wholly above substance, it is impious for us to say that God is not. For substance is what God is, what spirit is, what light is. For why do we add “and true light”? For in divine things and in God we shall take substance as we take bodies among material things, and the soul in bodily things. For substance there is this: to be above substance. All confess that God is, since he is the power of substance, and therefore above substance, and from this also substance; for being belongs to power. Certainly God is almighty, and he is all the things of which he is the origin or cause, that is, by power and in a certain way; hence it was said by Paul: “That God may be all in all.” He is, then, the existent and existing and substance, since he is all these; because he is the parent of all, he is all things in power. We need not hesitate, then, to speak of God's substance; for when proper words for the first or highest things fail us, we fit, though not fittingly, what among us can suit the understanding, so that here we rightly call that which is God's being “substance”. In the same way let us take Christ both to be substance and to be substance from his Father, since he himself is light from light, God from God, Spirit, the Word, through whom all things were made. And since he is so, he willed his substance to come even into the bodily mystery, of which the Apostle said: “And not according to Christ; for in him dwells all the fullness of divinity bodily,” that is, substantially. For God is power and the Word action, each in each: for power is what can be, and what is can be. Power itself, then, is action, and action itself is power. The Father, then, is action; the Son acts, and the Father acts. He is Father because power begets action, and the Son is action because action is from power. So the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, but both are in each, and therefore they are one. Yet they are two, because what each is more, that appears as other: the Father is more power, the Son action; and he is more action because action is outward. If this is so, both Father and Son are substance, and one substance, and substance from the Father, and substance together, and always and from eternity together, Father and Son, the same and together substance, that is, homoousion. Is it not read in the divine Scriptures? First, whoever denies this admits the thing but asks for the authority of Scripture. And how is it not unjust to refuse to admit a thing because our forebears left it out, by some chance perhaps or for some reason, when you are overcome by reason? But what do they deny is read: substance? Or the substance of God and of Christ? Or the word itself? The substance of God and of Christ has been read. Of God it is read in the prophet Jeremiah: “Who has stood in the substance of the Lord and seen his word? Who has given ear and heard?” And a little after: “And if they had stood in the substance and heard my words.” Substance is also read in the prophet David: “And my substance in the lower parts of the earth.” It is read in Paul to the Hebrews, of Christ: “Who is the imprint of his substance.” There are other examples too, but I think these are enough. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 15:28: quotation, high confidence - Col 2:8: quotation, high confidence - Col 2:9: quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:18: quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:22: quotation, high confidence - Ps 139:15 (138:15 LXX): quotation, high confidence - Heb 1:3: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Substantially” renders a garbled οὐσιωδῶς. Jeremiah and Ps 139:15 (Septuagint 138:15) are quoted from the Septuagint, which uses ὑπόστασις/ὑπόστημα (“substance”). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.3 (PL 8:1090c–1091d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-3). ## Against Arius 2.4 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-4 - Source: PL 8:1091d–1092d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains the Greek terms on, hyparxis and hypostasis, arguing that being belongs to the Father and form to the Son, that there are three subsistences of one substance, and that hypostasis in Scripture means ousia. ### Latin text At enim apud Graecos posita est ύπόστασι;, non ουσία. Videamus quid intersit. Οντα nominant Graeci tam ea quae sunt in aeternis, quam ea quae in mundo atque terrenis: in aeternis igitur Deus est omnipotens, causa omnium; et fons et origo omnium quae sunt, id est τών οντων πάντων. Quid igitur damus Deo? hoc quod est esse, an omnibus damus esse, do, non damus? Equidem ratio sic se habet, ut primum esse sit Deus. Verum quia potest accipi esse non aperte quid sit illud esse, si jam comprehensibile erit, ov dicitur, id est, forma quaedam in notitiam veniens, quod tale esse jam ov et ΰηοφξις dicitur, omnis ύποφξι; habet quod est esse; quod autem est esse, non continuo xfd υπαρξις est, neque ov, nisi potentialiter, non in manifesto ut ov dicatur; est enim ov figura quaedam formatum illud quod est esse, quod tamen purum tunc purum intelligitur cum intelligitur jam formatum: forma enim intellectum ingenerat, manifeste pronuntiat aliud esse formam, aliud quod formatum est. Quod autem formatum est, hoc est esse: forma vero est, quae intelligi facit illud quod est esse. Hoc ergo quod est esse, Deo damus, formam autem Christo, quia per filium cognoscitur pater, id est, per formam, quod est esse; et heic dictum est: Qui me vidit, vidit et patrem. Est ergo et Deus υπαρξις%, et Christus υπ«ρ· ξις; υπκρξις enim cum forma quod est esse, et quia semper simul sunt, et forma esse est, et ipsum esse forma, unde pater in filio, et filius in patre: est enim esse et in patre, quod est potentia, quod prius est ab eo quod est forma. Est item rursus et in filio esse; sed istud, quod est esse proprium a patre habet, ut sit illi formam esse; alter ergo in altero, et ambo unum. Ergo ov Deus, ov filius, id est enim r«£v esse cum forma: omne enim quod esse, est cum forma: hoc et existentia dicitur et substantia et subsistentia, quod enim ov est, et existit et subjectum est. Hoc autem est quod est esse sine connexo ullo, quod simplex est, quod unum; manifestior igitur subsistentia est, et existentia est, et substantia dicitur. Si ergo dicitur de Deo subsistentia, magis de Deo dicitur substantia, et magis ista, quoniam subjectum significat, et principale quod convenit Deo. Non sit autem subjectum sicut in mundo substantia, sed quod honoratius et antiquius et secundum fontem universitatis. Verum quod est esse, quod praestat Deus his quae sunt, ut unumquodque sit ομοούσιο;: ergo esse formam habens, et primum solum verum: quoniam quod est illud esse purum est, hoc magis substantia est. Quoniam autem rursus et forma est esse, et ipsa substantia est, sed hoc ύπόστασι; dicitur: jam enim formatum esse substantia est, formatum autem esse est Deus, quod Deus est, et pater, sic et filius, quod λόγο; et filius. Subsistentia ergo proprie dicitur de ambobus, quod est substantia: quoniam quod est esse principale, cum forma substantia dicitur. Haec autem et substantia dicitur, et ideo dictum est, de una substantia tres subsistentias esse, ut ipsum quod est esse subsistat tripliciter, ipse Deus, et Christus, id est Λόγο; et Spiritus sanctus. Ergo ύητόστασι; jure Deo datur jure Λόγω, id est, patri et filio. Id autem Latini substantiam dicunt, quia diximus et substantiam dici posse, scilicet id quod esse est, magis formatum esse. Quae cum ita sint, lecta est ύπόστασι;, haec autem est ουσία, sicut probavimus. ### English translation (Claude) But among the Greeks the word used is hypostasis, not ousia. Let us see what the difference is. The Greeks call onta both the things in the eternal realm and those in the world and on earth. In the eternal realm, then, is God almighty, the cause of all, the fountain and origin of all things that are, that is, of all existents. What, then, do we ascribe to God? Being; or do we ascribe being to all things, or do we not? The reasoning is this: God is first being. But since being can be taken without its being plain what that being is, when it becomes comprehensible it is called on, that is, a certain form coming into knowledge; such being is now called on and hyparxis. Every hyparxis has being, but being is not at once hyparxis, nor on, except potentially, not manifestly, so as to be called on. For on is that being formed by a certain figure; pure being is understood as pure only when it is understood as already formed. For form gives rise to understanding, and plainly declares that form is one thing and what is formed another. What is formed is being; form is what makes being understood. Being, then, we ascribe to God, and form to Christ, because the Father is known through the Son, that is, through the form, the being; and this is what is said here: “He who has seen me has seen the Father also.” God, then, is hyparxis, and Christ is hyparxis; for hyparxis is being with form. And because they are always together, form is being and being itself is form; hence the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father. For there is being in the Father, which is power, which is prior to what is form; and again there is being in the Son, but this, his own being, he has from the Father, so that it is his to be form. One, then, is in the other, and both are one. God, then, is on, the Son is on; for that is being with form, since everything that is, is with form. This is called existence, substance and subsistence; for what is on both exists and is subject. And that being without any connection, which is simple and one: subsistence, then, is more manifest, and it is existence, and it is called substance. If, then, subsistence is said of God, substance is said of God all the more, because it signifies subject and the principal, which befits God. Yet let it not be subject as substance is in the world, but something more honoured and more ancient, as the fountain of the universe. But that which being is, which God provides to the things that are so that each one may be: being that has form, and the first being, alone true, are named homonymously; since that first being is pure, it is substance all the more. But since form too is being, and is itself substance, this is called hypostasis: for being already formed is substance, and being formed is God, what God is, and the Father; so too the Son, what the Word and the Son is. Subsistence, then, is properly said of both, and it is substance, since principal being with form is called substance. And this is also called substance; and therefore it is said that from one substance there are three subsistences, so that being itself subsists threefold: God himself, and Christ, that is, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. Hypostasis, then, is rightly ascribed to God, rightly to the Word, that is, to the Father and the Son. This the Latins call substance, because we said that it too can be called substance, namely that which being is, or more precisely formed being. Since these things are so, hypostasis is read, and this is ousia, as we have shown. ### Scripture references - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms: ὄντα (existents), ὄν (existent), ὕπαρξις (existence), ὑπόστασις (hypostasis, subsistence), οὐσία (substance), several garbled in the digital text; “named homonymously” renders a garbled word (ομοούσιο;), read by the sense as ὁμωνύμως. The formula “from one substance three subsistences” is Victorinus's own; the Greek would be one ousia, three hypostases. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.4 (PL 8:1091d–1092d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-4). ## Against Arius 2.5 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-5 - Source: PL 8:1092d–1093b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that hypostasis in Jeremiah 23 and Psalm 139 means God's very substance, not wealth, and that to stand in it is to see the Word. ### Latin text Nunc videamus utrum ibi, ubi legimus, aliud significet, ύπόστασι; quam ουσία. Multi enim aestimant copias atque fortunas significari hoc verbo, ύπόστασι? scilicet; sed si dixit: Si stetissent in ύποστάσιι Domini, vidissent Verbum ejus. Quod heic intelligimus ύπόστασιν Domini, nisi id quod est Deus? Est autem Deus spiritus, lumen, potentia, omnipotens, et hujusmodi talia. Hic qui stat et intelligit, non autem errat qui intelligit, stat ergo: intelligens autem Deum intelligit et videt Λόγον Dei filium; manifestum ergo hanc Dei esse ύπόστασιν, quia intellecta et Verbum intelligitur, simul enim sunt, et hoc est ομοούσιον. Hoc et iterum dicit: Quia si stetissent in mea ύποστάσει, et verbum meum audissent. Supra videre; heic autem posuit utrumque, hoc est quo intelligere. Is enim rem intelligit, qui in rei substantia stat, id est, in primo fonte rei, ut omnia quae sunt ejus intelligat. Quid deinde? cum alibi vel In Davide, vel in Evangelio posita est et lecta ύπόστασι?, numquid aliud quam ουσία intelligitur? ‘ϊπόστασι? mea, inquid David: de Deo utique, ‘Τπόστασι? mea in inferioribus terrae. Dicit enim: occultum se nemo credat, quia utique sum et omne quod sum et substantia mea, et in inferioribus terrae: ubique est enim Deus, vel spiritus Dei, quae Dei substantia est. ### English translation (Claude) Now let us see whether, where we read it, hypostasis signifies something other than ousia. For many think that wealth and fortunes are signified by this word, hypostasis. But the prophet said: “If they had stood in the hypostasis of the Lord, they would have seen his Word.” What do we understand here by the hypostasis of the Lord but that which God is? And God is spirit, light, power, almighty, and the like. He who stands also understands; and he who understands does not go astray; so he stands. Understanding God, he understands and sees the Word, the Son of God. It is plain, then, that this is God's hypostasis, because when it is understood the Word too is understood; for they are together, and this is homoousion. And again he says: “For if they had stood in my hypostasis and heard my word.” Above he says “see”; here he has used the other, “hear”; both mean to understand. For he understands a thing who stands in the thing's substance, that is, in the thing's first fountain, so that he understands all that belongs to it. What next? When elsewhere, in David or in the Gospel, hypostasis is placed and read, is anything other than ousia understood? “My hypostasis,” says David, certainly of God, “my hypostasis in the lower parts of the earth.” For he says: let no one think that I am hidden; for I certainly am, and all that I am, my substance, is even in the lower parts of the earth; for God is everywhere, or the Spirit of God, which is God's substance. ### Scripture references - Jer 23:18: quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:22: quotation, high confidence - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - Ps 139:15 (138:15 LXX): quotation, high confidence - Ps 139:7 (138:7 LXX): allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - Victorinus reads Ps 139:15 (Septuagint 138:15) as spoken of God's own substance; in the psalm the speaker is the psalmist. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.5 (PL 8:1092d–1093b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-5). ## Against Arius 2.6 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-6 - Source: PL 8:1093b–1093d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus interprets the father's dividing of his “substance” in the parable of the two sons as God's riches, which are Christ, the power and wisdom of God, and concludes that Father and Son share one hypostasis. ### Latin text Volo nunc et illud videre in Evangelio per parabolam et exemplum positum. Dixit enim pater familias quidam duobus filiis, υπόσταση/ suam divisit; utique fortunas et patrimonium intelligimus. Sed si hoc referri ad Deum oportet, erit υπόστασή et heic potentia omnis et virtus. Hanc consumit unus filius qui a Deo recedit: etenim qui peregrinatur a Deo, nec spiritum Dei habet, nec lumen, nec Christum, hic apud se consumit substantiam Dei. Haec est enim Dei ύπόστασις, ut diximus; sive nunc heic divitias dicamus, vel patrimonium, nihil differt: sic enim dictum est ab apostolo Paulo: O altitudo divitiarum sapientiae et scientiae Dei!. Si igitur divitiae Dei, sapientia et scientia sunt: et si sapientia et scientia ipsa virtus Dei est, virtus autem Dei Christus est, Christus autem Aoyo? est; Αογος et vere filius, filius autem in patre ipse est: ipse ergo, divitiae patris; ipse υπόστασή est. Jam igitur nihil interest, utrum ύπόστασιν divitias intelligamus, an ουσίαν, dummodo id significetur quo ipse Deus est. Ergo lectum est de Deo vel ύπόστασις vel ουσία: hoc autem et de Christo intelligitur. Dictum est: Ego in patre, et pater in me. Quod quidem ideo bis dictum, quia in patre esse potuit filius, non tamen et in filio pater, sed ut plenitudo atque idem unum in singulis esset. Si autem eadem ύπόστασις, ομοούσιον ergo. Eadem autem: nam Christus Deus de Deo, et lumen de lumine. Ergo ομοούσιον. Id autem si ex aeterno et semper necessario simul, ergo vere ομοούσιον. ### English translation (Claude) I want now to look also at what is set out in the Gospel by parable and example. For a certain father of a family, speaking to his two sons, divided his hypostasis among them; here we certainly understand fortunes and patrimony. But if this must be referred to God, hypostasis here too will be all his power and might. One son consumes this, the one who departs from God: for he who goes abroad from God has neither the Spirit of God, nor light, nor Christ; he consumes the substance of God in himself. For this is God's hypostasis, as we said; and whether we call it riches here or patrimony makes no difference. For so it is said by the apostle Paul: “O the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!” If, then, God's riches are wisdom and knowledge, and if wisdom and knowledge are God's power itself, and the power of God is Christ, and Christ is the Word, and the Word is truly Son, and the Son is in the Father: he himself, then, is the Father's riches; he himself is the hypostasis. It now makes no difference, then, whether we understand hypostasis as riches or as ousia, provided that what is signified is that by which God himself is. Hypostasis or ousia, then, is read of God; and this is understood of Christ also. It is said: “I am in the Father, and the Father in me.” This is said twice because the Son could be in the Father without the Father also being in the Son; it is said so that the fullness, the same one, might be in each. If the hypostasis is the same, then, they are homoousion. And it is the same, for Christ is God from God and light from light: homoousion, then. And if this is from eternity and always, necessarily together, then truly homoousion. ### Scripture references - Luke 15:12: allusion, high confidence - Luke 15:13: allusion, high confidence - Rom 11:33: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Victorinus's text of Luke 15:12 has ὑπόστασις; the standard Greek has βίος and οὐσία. An editor's reference, “LuC. xv, 12)”, printed in the text is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.6 (PL 8:1093b–1093d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-6). ## Against Arius 2.7 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-7 - Source: PL 8:1093d–1094b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that his opponents themselves use the unscriptural phrase “light from light”, so they cannot reject homoousion, which follows from texts showing that the same life is in Father and Son. ### Latin text At enim hoc ipsum ομοούσιον lectum est. Omnia enim quae diximus lecta sunt: vobis dico, qui jam fatemini de Deo, vel quod lumen sit, vel quod spiritus. Dicitis ergo de Deo Deum, de invisibili Spiritu Spiritum, et verum lumen de vero lumine, quae sunt ύποστάσβι? Dei. Verum cum dicitis Christum, Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine, et talia: ubi sic legistis? an vobis licet sic dicere, unde magis ομοούσιον probatur, nobis discere ομοούσιον non licebit? Verum si ideo dicitis lumen de lumine, quia et Deus lumen dictus, et Christus lumen, et item et Pater Deus, et Christus Deus dictus; id quidem manifestum, verum de Deo non lectum, lumen de lumine; at licuit sumere. Liceat ergo de lectis non lecta componere. *Ομοούσιον lectum negatis; sed si aliqua similia, vel similiter denominata lecta sunt, jure pari et istud denominatum accipere debemus. Dei ουσία lumen est, hoc lumen vita est, et ista vita, ista intelligentia, hoc esse Deum, hoc esse Christum satis declaratum est. Vivit pater, et ego vivo. Pater habet in se vitam, et filio dedit habere apud se vitam. Quae habet pater, ea mihi dedit omnia. His et aliis saepe probamus, eadem in patre esse et in filio, et quod semper et ex aeterno: et ideo ομοούσιον appellatum est. ### English translation (Claude) But this very homoousion is read. For all that we have said is read: I say this to you who already confess of God that he is light or spirit. You say, then, God from God, Spirit from invisible Spirit, and true light from true light, which are the hypostases of God. But when you call Christ God from God, light from light, and the like, where have you read this? Or are you permitted to speak so, from which homoousion is all the more proved, while we shall not be permitted to learn homoousion? But if you say “light from light” because God is called light and Christ is called light, and likewise the Father is called God and Christ is called God, that is indeed plain; yet “light from light” is not read of God; and still it was permitted to adopt it. Let it be permitted, then, to compose what is not read from what is read. You deny that homoousion is read; but if some things like it, or similarly named, are read, by the same right we ought to accept this term too. The ousia of God is light; this light is life; and that this life, this understanding, this being, is God and is Christ has been sufficiently shown: “The Father lives, and I live”; “The Father has life in himself, and has given to the Son to have life in himself”; “All that the Father has he has given to me.” By these and other texts we often prove that the same things are in the Father and in the Son, always and from eternity; and therefore it is called homoousion. ### Scripture references - 1 John 1:5: allusion, medium confidence - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence - John 16:15: quotation, medium confidence - John 17:10: allusion, low confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.7 (PL 8:1093d–1094b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-7). ## Against Arius 2.8 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-8 - Source: PL 8:1094b–1095a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus traces the scriptural roots of ousia in epiousios bread (Matt 6:11) and the people periousios (Titus 2:14), arguing that homoousion is formed in the same way and rightly excludes heretics. ### Latin text Sed unde hoc verbum, audi Evangelium, audi Paulum apostolum, audi orationem oblationis, quoniam vita est Deus; et aeterna vita. Nos Christiani, id est, qui in Christum credimus, docemur in Evangelio quomodo Deum patrem rogare debeamus, in qua oratione cum multa petimus, tum petimus panem, qui panis vita est (sic enim dictum est: Hic enim est panis, qui de coelo descendit). Hanc vitam et Christi et Dei, id est, aeternam quod nomine ipse dicit, επιούσιον άρτον, ex eadem ουσία panem, id est, de vita Dei: consubstantialem vitam. Unde enim filii Dei erimus, nisi participatione vitae aeternae? quam nobis Christus a patre afferens dedit. Hoc ergo est, όό? ύμΐν επιούσιον άρτον. id est, vitam ex eadem substantia, etenim si quod accipimus, corpus Christi est, ipse autem Christus vita est, quaerimus άρτον επιούσιον, divitiae enim in Christo corporaliter habitant; Graecum igitur Evangelium habet έπιούσιον, quod denominatum est a substantia, et utique Dei substantia: hoc Latini vel non intelligentes vel non valentes exprimere non potuerunt dicere, et tantummodo quotidianum posuerunt, non επιούσιον. Est ergo et nomen lectum, et in Deo substantia, et dici potest graece etiam latine non exprimitur; dicitur tamen graece quia intelligitur. Ergo nos qui Christum credimus, quia ab eo vitam aeternam speramus, quia ipse vita est, cum ipsum sequimur, et cum eo, et circa ipsum, et circa vitam aeternam sumus, et appellamur λαό? περιούσιος. Hinc sanctus Apostolus ad Titum Epistola sic dixit Graece; Ιναΐυτρωσηταιύμας από πάσας Μομίας, και χαΒαρίστρ εαυτώ λαόν περιούσιον ζηλοτην καλών έργων. Latinus cum non intelligeret περιούσιον όχλον, περιούσιον, τον περιοντα, id est, circa vitam quam Christus et habet et dat, posuit populum abundantem. Quid meriti est ut salvetur populus quo abundat? Hoc autem rursus magna causa et veluti necessitas, quo περιούσιος. Hinc oratio oblationis intellectu eodem precatur eum: σώσον περιούσιον λαόν, ζηίωτιην καλών έργων, Ergo lecta sunt omnia, denominata ab ουσία? hinc itaque compositum ομοούσιον de Deo et Christo, quod et ab ratione non est alienum: habet enim ewiov, quam habent superiora nomina, et eodem modo denominatum est: et hoc nomen omnes excludit haereticos; necessario ergo positum a majoribus. Dicendum ergo et semper tractandum est. ### English translation (Claude) But where does this word come from? Hear the Gospel, hear Paul the apostle, hear the prayer of the offering: since God is life, and eternal life. We Christians, that is, we who believe in Christ, are taught in the Gospel how we ought to ask God the Father; and in that prayer, among many things we ask, we ask for bread, the bread that is life (for so it is said: “For this is the bread that came down from heaven”). This life of Christ and of God, that is, eternal life, he himself names epiousios bread: bread from the same ousia, that is, from the life of God, a consubstantial life. For how shall we be sons of God except by sharing in eternal life, which Christ brought from the Father and gave to us? This, then, is “Give us the epiousios bread”, that is, life from the same substance. For if what we receive is the body of Christ, and Christ himself is life, we ask for epiousios bread; for the riches dwell in Christ bodily. The Greek Gospel, then, has epiousios, which is named from substance, and certainly God's substance. The Latins, either not understanding or unable to express this, could not say it, and put only “daily”, not epiousios. So the word too is read, and substance in God; and it can be said in Greek, though in Latin it is not expressed; it is said in Greek because it is understood. So we who believe in Christ, because we hope for eternal life from him, because he himself is life, when we follow him and are with him and around him and around eternal life, are called a laos periousios. Hence the holy Apostle said in Greek in the letter to Titus: “that he might redeem us from all lawlessness and purify for himself a people periousios, zealous for good works.” The Latin translator, not understanding periousios (that is, “around” the one who is, around the life that Christ both has and gives), put “an abounding people”. What merit is there in a people being saved because it abounds? But this, again, is a great reason and as it were a necessity, that it is periousios. Hence the prayer of the offering, with the same understanding, beseeches him: “Save a people periousios, zealous for good works.” All these, then, are read, named from ousia; hence homoousion was composed of God and Christ, which is not foreign to reason, for it has the same root as the names above and is named in the same way. And this name excludes all heretics; it was therefore necessarily adopted by our forebears. It must be said, then, and always treated. ### Scripture references - Matt 6:11: quotation, high confidence - John 6:50: quotation, high confidence - John 6:41: allusion, medium confidence - John 14:6: allusion, medium confidence - Col 2:9: allusion, high confidence - Titus 2:14: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms: ἐπιούσιον ἄρτον (Matt 6:11; Latin “daily bread”), λαὸς περιούσιος (Titus 2:14; Latin “abounding people”), the latter also quoted from the liturgical “prayer of the offering” (unidentified). The Greek quotation of Titus 2:14 is garbled in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.8 (PL 8:1094b–1095a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-8). ## Against Arius 2.9 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-9 - Source: PL 8:1095a–1096a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus answers the objections that homoousion is obscure, scandalous or new, arguing that Scripture itself keeps foreign words, that the term excludes heretics, and that it was adopted at Nicaea and approved by Constantine. ### Latin text At enim quia non intelligitur, et scandalum facit tollendum et de fide et tractatu, aut certe latine ponendum: non intelligitur, dicunt. Ergo nec latine potest dici. Non intelligitur, quare vos timetis istud? qui enim oppugnant, timent tamen: si timetis; haeretici estis, hoc excluso subintrare cupitis. Num si ούσίαν in Deo negatis, όμοούσιον ideo tolli vultis, quia ουσίαν fatentur? Ergo intelligitis et timetis. Si autem et Basilius όμοούσιον dicit, et hoc quoque nomen adversum vobis est, et ideo et hoc repudiatis, quia semel ούσίαν negatis in Deo. Si autem ideo repudiatis, quia intelligitis; et ipse Basilius intelligit qui όμοούσιον dici vult, de quo post loquemur. Non est όμοούσιον nomen, quod non intelligitur. Latine, inquiunt, dicatur. Quia difficile dicitur, ideo expetitis; et si dicatur, sequimini. Magnum miraculum! verbum vos haereticos facit, vel potius sonus verbi, quod graece dicitur. Deinde si latine dixero, quia Ecclesia habet Graecos, et quia omnis scriptura vel Veteris Testamenti et Novi, et graece et latine scripta est, si non ponimus graece, interrogati a Graecis, quid respondebimus? Necessario dicendum est όμοούσιον: ergo ponendum. Quid autem? In Scripturis non multa sunt nomina, vel graeca, vel hebraica, aut interpretata, aut non interpretata? ut, Ηλει, Ηλεί, λαμά σαβανθανεί. Item Golgotha, et Emmanuel. Item, Si quis non amat Dominum nostrum Christum filium, ανάθεμα. Sexcenta alia aut interpretata, posita tamen: aut non interpretata, et sola posita; aut anathema, quod non exprimitur, nec latine nec graece, et tamen positum est, et quotidie, usurpatur, sicut et Alleluia, et Amen, quae in omni lingua incommutabiliter dicuntur. Licet igitur ponere eodem modo όμοούσιον. Certe verbum cum tollendum est, aut quia obscurum est tollitur, aut quia contrarium, aut quia minus vel plus exprimit, aut quia supervacuum est. Hoc non obscurum est; nam et nos diximus quod significet; et vos quia intelligitis, timetis: et Basilius, quia intelligit mutat. Contrarium autem non est, nam cum de substantia jam omnes fateamur: substantia est enim Deus, Spiritus, lumen; quae de Deo patre et Christo dicuntur. Hoc verbum όμοουσιον, cum de substantia dicatur, non potest esse contrarium. Sed minus aut amplius exprimitur. Corrigendum potius quam auferendum. Jam vero supervacuum quomodo? quia jam dictum, ubi dictum: an quia non utile, quod excludit haereticos maxime Arianos? Quod majoribus positum ut murus et propugnaculum. Sed nuper est positum. Quia nuper erupit venenata cohors haereticorum, quo tamen conditum juxta veterem fidem, nam et ante tractatum, multi orbis episcopi trecenti quindecim in civitate Nicaea quam per totum orbem decretam fidem mittentes, episcoporum millia in eadem habuerunt, vel illius temporis, vel sequentium annorum. Probatum autem ab imperatore imperatoris nostri patre. ### English translation (Claude) “But because it is not understood and causes scandal, it should be removed from the faith and from discussion, or at least put in Latin”: “it is not understood,” they say. Then it cannot be said in Latin either. If it is not understood, why do you fear it? For those who attack it nonetheless fear it. If you fear it, you are heretics: you wish to creep in once it is shut out. If you deny ousia in God, do you want homoousion removed for this reason, because it confesses ousia? Then you understand it, and fear it. But if Basil too says homoiousion, this name too is against you, and so you reject it as well, because once for all you deny ousia in God. And if you reject it because you understand it, Basil himself also understands, who wants homoiousion to be said, of whom we shall speak later. Homoousion is not a name that is not understood. “Let it be said in Latin,” they say. Because it is hard to say, you demand it; and if it is said, you will follow? A great wonder: a word makes you heretics, or rather the sound of a word, because it is said in Greek! Next, if I say it in Latin, since the church has Greeks, and since the whole Scripture of the Old and New Testaments is written in Greek and in Latin, what shall we answer when the Greeks ask us, if we do not set it down in Greek? Homoousion must necessarily be said; it must be set down, then. And what? Are there not in the Scriptures many names, Greek or Hebrew, either translated or untranslated? Such as “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani”; likewise “Golgotha” and “Emmanuel”; likewise “If anyone does not love our Lord Christ the Son, anathema.” There are six hundred others, either translated and yet set down, or untranslated and set down alone; or “anathema”, which is expressed neither in Latin nor in Greek, and yet is set down and used daily, as are “Alleluia” and “Amen”, which are said unchanged in every language. It is permitted, then, to set down homoousion in the same way. Certainly, when a word is to be removed, it is removed because it is obscure, or because it is contrary, or because it expresses less or more than it should, or because it is superfluous. This one is not obscure: for we have said what it signifies, and you fear it because you understand it, and Basil, because he understands it, changes it. Nor is it contrary: for we all now confess about substance (for God is substance, spirit, light, things said of God the Father and of Christ); this word homoousion, since it is said of substance, cannot be contrary. Suppose it expresses less or more: then it should be corrected rather than removed. And how is it superfluous? Because it has already been said? Where has it been said? Or because it is not useful, when it excludes heretics, above all the Arians? It was set by our forebears as a wall and bulwark. “But it was set down recently.” Because a poisoned band of heretics broke out recently; yet it was established according to the ancient faith. For even before this discussion, many bishops of the world, three hundred and fifteen, in the city of Nicaea, sending the faith they had decreed throughout the whole world, had thousands of bishops in agreement, of that time or of the following years. And it was approved by the emperor, the father of our emperor. ### Scripture references - Matt 27:46: quotation, high confidence - Mark 15:34: allusion, medium confidence - John 19:17: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 1:23: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 16:22: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The opponents addressed are those who denied ousia in God (probably the Anomoeans and the authors of the Sirmian creed of 357) and Basil of Ancyra's homoiousians; identification uncertain. “The emperor, the father of our emperor” is Constantine, father of Constantius II. The digital text writes ὁμοούσιον and ὁμοιούσιον in similar garbled forms; translated by the argument. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.9 (PL 8:1095a–1096a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-9). ## Against Arius 2.10 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-10 - Source: PL 8:1096a–1096d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that both the deniers of substance and Basil's party in fact confess substance by calling God light and spirit, and explains that homoousion means “of the same substance” and “together”, excluding Arius's “once he was not”. ### Latin text Sed latine hoc nos dici volumus: nec hoc vobis negabitur, vos qui substantiam negatis in Deo quamque a Basilio vincamini, et tu, Basili, qui substantiam confiteris, utrique vestris vocibus όμοούσιον confitemini. Nempe dicitis Deum, et eumdem dicitis lumen, eumdem spiritum. Qui dicit ista, substantiam dicit Dei. Nam qui dicit patrem vel omnipotentem, vel bonum, vel infinitum et talia, non substantiam, sed qualitatem dicit. Item filium dicitis Αόγον, lumen, spiritum; et ista substantiam significant. Rursus cum dicitis Deum, dicitis Deum de Deo, verum lumen de vero lumine: argumentum timoris Basilii tollitis, ne sit superior substantia, ex qua duo sunt. Si enim de Deo Deus, et lumen de lumine, utique patris substantia filii est: quia ipse Deus pater, ipse substantia est, de qua substantia filius Λόγος, lumen, spiritus: etenim cum dicitur filius, item Salvator, item Jesus Christus, secundum qualitatem, non secundum substantiam dicitur. Sic reliqua vel patri dantur vel filio, ergo substantiam fatemini. Vos autem certe Basilio credite, qui eadem de Deo, et de Christo dicit; lumen Deum: spiritum, λόγον, et substantiam confitetur. At enim in istis όμοούσιον non est: ita est, si non in όμοουσίω eamdem substantiam intelligas. Sin autem cum componitur verbum, idem in duobus vel pluribus significatur όμοειόός, quod eadem sit specie: et όμοολιξ quod eadem aetate, et quod ομώνυμος eodem nomine, concordia όμονοία, eodem corde, eadem έννοια: ergo consubstantiale quod sit eadem substantia est. Sin autem όμού intelligitur, erit όμοούσιον, latine simul consubstantiale, non ab aliquo alio, sed Dei potentia ex aeterno. Etenim si In principio erat λόγος, et λόγος erat ad Deum, quoniam principium ante nihil habet: si enim habuerit, desinit esse principium: ex aeterno Deus, et ex aeterno λόγος. Simul ergo ambo, et semper simul, nec aliquando alter sine altero, nec filius ex eo quod non est aliquando. Heic ergo exclusus Arius, qui protulit ένιότβ ούχ ί: sententia ejus fuit et illa, εξ ούκ όντων esse filium, id est de nihilo. Significat όμοούσιον simul esse, et substantiam: Adversus utrumque sacrilegium verbi hujus potentia repugnat, quo όμοούσιον dicitur: sive enim ita est, ut όμοούσιον, sit ejusdem substantiae, ut όμοαδός sicuti supra docuimus, excluditur quod dictum est, esse Christum ex nihilo: si enim Deus et λόγος eadem substantia sunt, Deus et λόγος non solum non ex nihilo, sed ne ex simili quidem substantia. Si vero όμοουσιον ex eo quod est, simul esse substantia intelligitur, hoc est simul esse substantiarum, simul Deus et λόγος, et ex aeterno semper simul pater et filius. ### English translation (Claude) “But we want this to be said in Latin.” Nor will this be denied you: you who deny substance in God, though you have been defeated by Basil; and you, Basil, who confess substance. Both of you, in your own words, confess homoousion. For you call God, and the same God light, and the same spirit. Whoever says these things speaks of God's substance. For whoever says Father, or almighty, or good, or infinite and the like, speaks not of substance but of quality. Likewise you call the Son Word, light, spirit; and these signify substance. Again, when you say God, you say God from God, true light from true light: you remove the argument of Basil's fear, that there might be a higher substance from which the two come. For if he is God from God and light from light, the Father's substance is certainly the Son's: because God the Father is himself substance, and from this substance the Son is Word, light, spirit. For when he is called Son, likewise Saviour, likewise Jesus Christ, it is said according to quality, not according to substance. So the rest are given to the Father or to the Son: you confess substance, then. And you others, believe Basil at least, who says the same things of God and of Christ: he confesses God as light, spirit, Word and substance. “But homoousion is not in these.” That is so, if you do not understand “the same substance” in homoousion. But if, when a word is compounded, sameness in two or more is signified (homoeides, of the same species; homēlix, of the same age; homōnymos, of the same name; concord, homonoia, of the same heart, the same thought), then consubstantial means what is of the same substance. But if homou, “together”, is understood, homoousion will be in Latin “consubstantial together”, not from anything else, but by God's power from eternity. For if “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God”, since a beginning has nothing before it (for if it had, it would cease to be a beginning), God is from eternity and the Word from eternity. Both, then, are together, and always together; nor was one ever without the other, nor was the Son ever from what is not. Here, then, Arius is excluded, who put forth “once he was not”; and his opinion was also that the Son is “from things that are not”, that is, from nothing. Homoousion signifies being together and substance; against both sacrileges the force of this word, homoousion, stands. For if homoousion means “of the same substance”, like homoeides, as we taught above, what was said, that Christ is from nothing, is excluded; for if God and the Word are the same substance, God and the Word are not only not from nothing, but not even from a like substance. But if homoousion is understood from this, that it is substance together, that is, the being together of substances, then God and the Word are together, and from eternity always together, Father and Son. ### Scripture references - John 1:1: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms (partly garbled): ὁμοειδής, ὁμῆλιξ, ὁμώνυμος, ὁμόνοια, ἔννοια, ὁμοῦ (“together”); Arius's phrases ἦν ποτε ὅτε οὐκ ἦν (“once he was not”) and ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων (“from things that are not”). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.10 (PL 8:1096a–1096d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-10). ## Against Arius 2.11 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-2/#p-2-11 - Source: PL 8:1096d–1097c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus praises the Nicene term homoousion as the death of Arianism and argues that, since Father and Son are in each other, one may say “God in God, light in light” as well as “God from God”. ### Latin text Ex hoc excluditur quod dictum est: fuit quando non fuit. Hoc si ita est, hoc uno, id est, ομοούσεο;, omne venenum Ariani dogmatis internecatur. O docti episcopi! o sancti! o fidem spiritu confirmantes! o verbum, vere verbum Dei! quod Deus et λόγο* ostenditur, simul ex aeterno, et semper eademque substantia. Dictum igitur latine est ομοούσιον: unde necessario etiam graece ponendum atque tractandum. Sed adjiciamus etiam nunc aliquid, quo per confessionem vestram et per lectionem deificam latine expressum ομοούσιον approbetur. Lectio divina dicit: pater in filio, et filius in patre. Et ne parum sit ad fidem ipse Dominus noster Jesus Christus dicit: Ego in Patre et Pater in me. Quid ergo? Haec nomina insunt sibi invicem? an virtutes, an substantiae, an sapientiae et potestates? pater quo pater est, in filio esse non potest. Item filius in patre esse non potest, sed quo virtutis substantiae sibi est, hoc est, in altero. Inde alterum in altero: unum redditur etiam subsistentibus singulis; unum tamen, quia idem in utroque intelligitur et nominatur. Ergo et pater in filio, et filius in patre. Sed isto modo. Hoc si ita est, videamus caetera. Dicitis, et recte dicitis: Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum, Deum de Deo, et lumen de lumine. Vicinum est, similiter dicere et istud. Dicamus ergo, vereque dicamus in Deo, lumen in lumine. Quod quidem ideo non et reversim dicitur, quia unum verbum est in duobus. Nam pater et filius duo sunt vocabula, et idcirco verti invicem possunt, ut et pater in filio dicatur, et filius in patre. At vero cum unum nomen in duobus dicitur, Deus in Deo, eodem modo dicetur et cum de altero dicitur, eadem ratio et cum dicitur lumen in lumine. Necessitate igitur nominis unius semel quidem dicitur, sed propter duo patrem et filium bis et intelligitur et auditur. Dicamus igitur Jesum Dei filium, Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine. Dicamus et illud, Deum in Deo, lumen in lumine. Si enim, ut fatemur omnes, et filius in patre est, et pater in filio, est autem pater et Deus, et lumen, ita tamen ut de patre filius hic sit, unde necessario et vere est dicere: et Deus in Deo, et lumen in lumine. An durum illud est? sed necessario fatendum est et sic esse et sic se habere. ### English translation (Claude) From this is excluded what was said: “There was when he was not.” If this is so, by this one word, homoousios, all the poison of the Arian doctrine is killed. O learned bishops! O holy men! O you who confirmed the faith by the Spirit! O word, truly a word of God, by which God and the Word are shown to be together from eternity, always and the same substance! Homoousion, then, has been said in Latin; hence it must necessarily be set down and treated in Greek too. But let us now add something more, by which homoousion expressed in Latin may be approved through your own confession and through divine reading. Divine reading says: the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father. And lest that be too little for faith, our Lord Jesus Christ himself says: “I am in the Father and the Father in me.” What, then? Are these names in each other? Or powers, or substances, or wisdoms and powers? The Father, insofar as he is Father, cannot be in the Son; likewise the Son cannot be in the Father; but that by which each has the power of substance, this is in the other. Hence the one is in the other: one is rendered even while each subsists; yet one, because the same thing is understood and named in both. So the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, but in this way. If this is so, let us look at the rest. You say, and rightly say: Jesus Christ our Lord, God from God and light from light. It is close to this to say likewise: let us say, then, and truly say, God in God, light in light. This is not said in reverse, because it is one word for two. For Father and Son are two words, and therefore they can be turned about, so that the Father is said to be in the Son and the Son in the Father. But when one name is said of two, God in God, it is said in the same way when said of the other; the same reasoning holds when light in light is said. By the necessity of the one name, then, it is said once; but because of the two, Father and Son, it is understood and heard twice. Let us say, then: Jesus the Son of God, God from God, light from light. Let us say also: God in God, light in light. For if, as we all confess, the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son, and the Father is God and light, yet so that the Son is from the Father, then it is necessary and true to say: God in God and light in light. Is that hard? But it must necessarily be confessed that it is so, and stands so. ### Scripture references - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.11 (PL 8:1096d–1097c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-11). ## Against Arius 2.12 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-2-12 - Source: PL 8:1097c–1098b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus ends Book 2 by finding “light in light” in Psalm 36:9 and “God in God” in Isaiah 45:14, and urges that homoousion, the faith of Nicaea and of the apostles, be preached in all the churches. ### Latin text Quid si etiam lectum est, et ex duobus istis unum apertissime sic positum, ut a me non inventum, sed sacra lectione sit jam probatum? Hymnicus David in libro Psalmorum, qui clavis mysteriorum omnium dicitur, sic Deo psallit: Quoniam apud te est fons vitae, et in lumine tuo videbimus lumen: Deo dictam aestimamus, an Christo? an utrique? Quia cuicumque recte: in patre enim filius, et in filio pater. Sed si patri Deo, hoc erit illud: Si in substantia mea stetissent, et verbum meum audissent. Si autem filio, hoc erit illud: Qui me videt videt et Patrem. Ergo in lumine tuo videbimus lumen. Est igitur lumen, in lumine tuo videbimus lumen. Neque enim dubitandum est quando et hoc sequatur, cum illud quod eodem modo est, et re sit, et lectione probatum. Quod si ita est, colligamus omnia: jam ομοούσιον apparebit et graece intellectum, et latine pronuntiaturo. Credimus in Deum patrem omnipotentem, et in filium ejus unigenitum. Verum fiat: Satis est jam de hoc. Isaias sic ita: Laboravit AEgyptus, et mercimonia AEthiopum et Sabaim. Viri altissimi in te ambulabunt, et tibi erunt servi, et retro ligati manicis te venerabuntur, et te precabuntur, quod in te Deus est, et non est Deus extra te. Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum, Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine: consubstantialem, simul substantialem: sic reliqua ad symbolorum quae junguntur, et ad fidem explicitum est, et absolutum ipoo plenum est, et de eadem substantia, et in eadem substantia, et semper simul, si placet, latine sic habeatur. Si autem unum verbum graecum., quod magna expressione. magnaque brevitate utrumque concludit, placet manere, de Deo et Domino nostro perseveret; ίμοούσιο-j vero magis ac magis teneatur, scribatur, dicatur, tractetur, in Ecclesiis omnibus praedicetur. Haec enim fides apud Nicaeam, haec fides apostolorum, haec fides catholica. Hinc Ariani, hinc haeretici vincuntur universi. Pax cum his qui ita sentiunt, a Deo patre et a Jesu Christo Domino nostro. Amen. ### English translation (Claude) What if it is even read, and one of these two is set down most openly, so that it was not invented by me but has already been proved by sacred reading? The hymnist David, in the book of Psalms, which is called the key of all mysteries, sings thus to God: “For with you is the fountain of life, and in your light we shall see light.” Do we think it is said to God, or to Christ, or to both? It is rightly said to either, for the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son. But if it is said to God the Father, it will be like this: “If they had stood in my substance and heard my word”; and if to the Son, like this: “He who sees me sees the Father also.” So, “in your light we shall see light”. There is light, then: in your light we shall see light. Nor must one doubt that the other formula follows too, since what is of the same kind is both real and proved by reading. If this is so, let us gather everything together: homoousion will now appear both understood in Greek and pronounced in Latin. We believe in God the Father almighty, and in his only-begotten Son. Let it be so; enough of this now. Isaiah says: “Egypt has laboured, and the merchandise of the Ethiopians and the Sabaeans; men of lofty stature will walk in you and will be your servants, and, bound in fetters, they will follow behind and worship you and pray to you, because God is in you, and there is no God besides you.” Jesus Christ our Lord, God from God, light from light, consubstantial, substantial together; and so with the rest that are joined to the creeds. Thus the faith is unfolded and complete, full, both from the same substance and in the same substance and always together; if it pleases, let it be held so in Latin. But if it pleases that the one Greek word remain, which with great expressiveness and great brevity includes both, let it stand concerning God and our Lord; and let homoousion be held more and more, written, spoken, treated, and preached in all the churches. For this is the faith of Nicaea, this the faith of the apostles, this the catholic faith. By it the Arians, by it all heretics are overcome. Peace to those who think so, from God the Father and from Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. ### Scripture references - Ps 36:9 (35:10 LXX): quotation, high confidence - Jer 23:22: quotation, high confidence - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - Isa 45:14: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Ps 36:9 is Septuagint and Vulgate 35:10; Isa 45:14 is quoted in a Septuagint-based form. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 2.12 (PL 8:1097c–1098b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12). ## Against Arius 3.1 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-1 - Source: PL 8:1098b–1099a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Word is the image of God, light from light and of the same substance, and that to see the hidden Father one must die to outward life and understanding. ### Latin text ΑΟΓΟΣ vel voOf divinus ut sede utitur, atque ut corpore, anima coelesti; ea vero sensuali voO, vel Aoyof insensuali anima, ut ipse sensualis in corpore est. et ideo in qualicumque corpore. Omne autem sed ut imago, ut id in aliis et assertum est et probatum: quippe cum in ipsis divinis Ai?,, Dei imago Sit, sic Igitur caetera; ergo omnium divinorum. Ut enim. Dei Aiyof imago est, ita TO5 >iyou anima quaeque hoc genus ibi. caetera imagines sunt. At in natura sensuali non imagines, sed magis simulacra ac simulamenta dicenda. Ita enim rerum progressio est, ut effulgentia luminis, imago sit luminis; unde substantia eadem est in summis et aeternis, quia imago luminis, lumen est. Ut enim de Spiritu, non nisi Spiritus, et de vero, verum, et de Deo, Deus: sic et de substantia, substantia: Spiritus enim et verus, et Deus substantia est. Omne autem quod est unicuique suum esse, substantia est. Sed hoc esse quod dicimus, aliud intelligi debet in eo quod est esse: aliud vero in eo quod est ita esse, ut unum sit substantiae, aliud qualitatis. Sed ista sic in sensibilibus et in mundo. At in divinis et aeternis ista duo unum: omne enim quod ibi simplex, et hoc Deus quod lumen, quod optimum, quod existentia, quod vita, quod intelligentia: at de hoc et in aliis diximus. Omnia ergo ibi substantialiter simplicia, inconnexa, cum numero unum, nec numero unum, sed ante numerum unum, id est, ante unum quod est in numero, hoc est, plane simplex, solum sine phantasia, quod alterum. Unde quod inde nascitur imago, non scissio, nec effusio, sed effulsio: nec protensio, sed apparentia, nec germinatio potentiae, quam potentiae actio: ubi enim actio, aut unde, nisi in potentia atque ex potentia? Et quando aut ubi potentia, nisi cum actione et in actione? Non ergo alterum in altero, nec aliquando simile, quia idem semper. Et quia effulgentia declaratur lumen, vel actio declaratur potentia; idcirco: Qui me videt, videt et Patrem. Et quia potentiam ipsam solam nemo videt: Deum nemo vidit unquam. Et quoniam potentia cessans vita est, et cessans intelligentia, haec autem vita et intelligentia actio est; si quis Deum viderit, moriatur necesse est: quia Dei vita et intelligentia in semetipsa est, non in actu: omnis autem actus foris est, hoc vero est nostrum vivere, quod foris est vivere: ergo est mors Deum videre: Nemo, inquit, unquam vidit et vixit; simili enim simile videtur. Omittenda igitur vita foris, omittenda intelligentia, si Deum videre volumus, et hoc nobis mors est. ### English translation (Claude) The divine Word, or Intellect, uses the heavenly soul as a seat and as a body; and the sensory Intellect, or Word, uses the sensory soul, as it is itself sensory in a body, and so in any kind of body. But all this is as image, as has been asserted and proved elsewhere: since among the divine things themselves the Word is the image of God, so then with the rest; so with all the divine things. For as the Word of God is image, so the soul is the image of the Word, and everything of this kind there; the rest are images. But in the sensory nature they should be called not images but rather likenesses and semblances. For such is the progression of things that the effulgence of light is the image of light; hence the substance is the same in the highest and eternal things, because the image of light is light. For as from Spirit there is only Spirit, and from the true, the true, and from God, God, so too from substance, substance: for Spirit and the true and God are substance. And everything that is, for each thing, its own being is substance. But this being of which we speak must be understood one way in that which is being, and another in that which is being so, so that the one belongs to substance, the other to quality. But this is so in sensible things and in the world. In divine and eternal things these two are one: for everything there is simple, and God is this: what light is, what the best is, what existence is, what life is, what understanding is; but of this we have spoken elsewhere. All things there, then, are substantially simple, not compounded, one together with number; or rather not one in number, but one before number, that is, before the one that is in number, that is, plainly simple, alone, without the imagination of any other. Hence what is born from there is an image, not a splitting nor an outpouring, but a shining forth; not an extension but an appearing; not a sprouting of power, but rather the action of power. For where is action, or from where, but in power and from power? And when or where is power, but with action and in action? So neither is one in the other, nor at any time like it, because always the same. And because light is declared by its effulgence, or power by its action, therefore: “He who sees me sees the Father also.” And because no one sees power itself alone: “No one has ever seen God.” And since power is life at rest and understanding at rest, while this life and understanding in act is action, whoever sees God must die: because God's life and understanding are in himself, not in act; and all act is outward, and this is our living, to live outwardly. To see God, then, is death: “No one,” it says, “has ever seen and lived”; for like is seen by like. We must leave behind, then, the outward life, leave behind understanding, if we wish to see God; and this, for us, is death. ### Scripture references - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - John 1:18: quotation, high confidence - Exod 33:20: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence - Heb 1:3: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The opening of Book 3 is badly garbled in the digital text, especially the Greek words λόγος and νοῦς; translated by sense. “No one has ever seen and lived” recalls Exod 33:20. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.1 (PL 8:1098b–1099a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-1). ## Against Arius 3.2 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-2 - Source: PL 8:1099a–1100b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains the generation as God's inner motion looking outward to see and know himself, so that the Son, the one motion and act, is only-begotten and consubstantial with the Father. ### Latin text Quoniam autem haec vita et intelligentia λόγος est, qui Christus est: per Christum et nos omnia: per ipsum est ergo Λόγος, et vita, et intelligentia. Quare? quia ista omnia motus, et adjectio est: nos ergo, si sumus in Christo Domino, per Christum videmus, id est, vitam veram, hoc est, per imaginem veram. Et quia veram, ergo ejusdem substantia, quia et in actione potentia est: ibi ergo Deum videmus, et hinc illud: Qui me videt, videt Deum. Quod vero de potentia actio, ideo de Patre Filius, ac de Spiritu Λόγος:et quia de Spiritu Spiritus, ideo de Deo Deus: ergo de substantia eadem substantia, ut supra docuimus. Potentia Deus est, id est, quod primum existentiae universale est esse, quod secum, id est, in se vitam et intelligentiam habet: magis autem ipsum quod est esse, hoc est. quod vita atque intelligentia motu interiore et in se converso; est ergo motus in Deo, et ex hoc et actio, unde dictum: Amen, amen dico vobis, non potest Filius a semetipso facere aliquid, si non viderit Patrem facientem: quae enim ille facit, eadem et Filius facit. Similiter ergo et Pater et facit et agit, sed intus, unde cum nullo eget extrinsecus, semper plenum, semper totum, semper beatum est. Verum quoniam vita atque intelligentia motus sunt, omnis autem vita vivificat, omne vero quod vivificatur foris est; itemque intelligentia quod intelligit foris est, et id quod intelligit intus, tracta et vita ex intelligentia, vel effulgente vel illuminante intelligit. Unde de Deo atque ex eadem substantia est, et substantia, et vita, et intelligentia, itemque motus cum intus in se est, idem est quod substantia: qui cum inde spectat, et ut foras emineat, id est, ut operetur atque agat, hic partus est, hic natalis. Et quia motus unus est, unigenitus filius, motus autem unus sive illa vita, sive intelligentia: etenim vitam motum esse necesse est. Vivefacit enim omnis vita, unde motus est vita, qui sive in se existens, atque in se conversus substantia ipse sibi est; sive foras spectat, unde magis dicitur motus: nam intus motus cessatio est, vel mota cessatio, cessansque motus: debet enim Deus utriusque, cessationis dico et motus, et parens esse, et ipsa substantia, quod societate et quadam forma ad utrumque fons est, est simplex ipse et unus, semperque unus ac solus, et, ut supra diximus, totus. Qui cum in cessante motu accipitur atque intelligitur, hoc est Deus, atque ipse pater est, semper atque ex aeterno pater: quia semper motus et substantia, et in substantia, vel potius ipsa substantia, qui cum foras spectat, hoc est autem foras spectare, motum vel motionem esse: quod Ipsum hoc illud est se videre, se intelligere, ac nosse velle: cum autem se videt, geminus existit et intelligitur videns, et quod videtur: Ipse qui videt, ipsam quod videtur, quia se videt: hoc est igitur foras spectans, foris genitus vel existens, ut quid sit intelligat. Ergo si foris est, et si genitus, filius: et si filius, unigenitus, quia solus, qui est omnis actus, atque omnis et universalis, et unus est motus, idem autem motusque substantia: ergo et pater, et filius una eademque substantia: consubstantiale igitur, id est, ό^οοάηον. ### English translation (Claude) Since this life and understanding is the Word, who is Christ, through Christ we too are: “all things are through him.” The Word, then, is both life and understanding. Why? Because all these are motion and addition. We, then, if we are in Christ the Lord, see through Christ, that is, through the true life, that is, through the true image. And because it is true, it is of the same substance, because power is also in action: there, then, we see God; hence the saying: “He who sees me sees God.” Because action is from power, the Son is from the Father, and the Word from the Spirit; and because Spirit is from Spirit, God is from God: from substance, then, the same substance, as we taught above. God is power, that is, the first universal being of existence, which has with itself, that is, in itself, life and understanding; or rather it is being itself, which life and understanding are by an inner motion turned into itself. There is, then, motion in God, and from this also action; hence it is said: “Amen, amen, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of himself unless he sees the Father doing it; for whatever he does, the Son does likewise.” Similarly, then, the Father too makes and acts, but within; so that, needing nothing from outside, he is always full, always whole, always blessed. But since life and understanding are motions, and all life gives life, and all that is given life is outside, and likewise what understanding understands is outside while that which understands is inside, life too, drawn from understanding, understands either by shining or by illuminating. Hence from God and from the same substance there is substance and life and understanding; and likewise motion, when it is within, in itself, is the same as substance; when it looks out from there so as to stand forth outwardly, that is, to operate and act, this is the birth, this the nativity. And because the motion is one, the Son is only-begotten; and the motion is one, whether it is called life or understanding, for life must be motion. For all life gives life; hence life is motion, which, whether existing in itself and turned in on itself, is itself substance to itself, or looks outward, when it is more properly called motion. For inner motion is rest, or moved rest, and resting motion. For God must be the parent of both, I mean of rest and of motion, and substance itself, because by union and a certain form he is the fountain of both; he is himself simple and one, always one and alone, and, as we said above, whole. When he is taken and understood as resting motion, this is God, and he is the Father, always and from eternity Father, because he is always motion and substance, and in substance, or rather substance itself. And when he looks outward (and to look outward is to be motion or movement, which is the very same as to see himself, to understand himself, and to will to know himself), when he sees himself, he becomes twofold and is understood as seer and seen: he himself who sees, he himself what is seen, because he sees himself. This, then, is looking outward, begotten or existing outside, so as to understand what he is. If, then, he is outside, and if he is begotten, he is Son; and if Son, only-begotten, because he alone is all act, all and universal, and is one motion; and motion is the same as substance. Father and Son, then, are one and the same substance: consubstantial, that is, homoousion. ### Scripture references - John 14:9: quotation, medium confidence - John 5:19: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: quotation, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “He who sees me sees God” is a free form of John 14:9. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.2 (PL 8:1099a–1100b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-2). ## Against Arius 3.3 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-3 - Source: PL 8:1100b–1101b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Son is life from himself, in whom all things were made, and that in the incarnation the Word took the universal principle of flesh and of soul, so that the whole man was assumed and freed. ### Latin text Omnia ergo filius, ut omnia pater. Sed quia potentialiter prior est substantia quam actus ac motus, prius autem ad vim dixi et ad causam, quia motui causa substantia: omnis enim motus in substantia, ergo necessario generator est pater, et item necessario omnia quae pater habet, habet et filius: Omnia, inquit, quae habet Pater mihi dedit. Et item: Pater ut ipse habet ex se vitam, ita dedit Filio ex se habere vitam: ergo ut pater, ita filius vita est, et ex se vita. Ipsa est enim vita, quae sibi et aliis est vis vivendi, non aliunde vita. Igitur motus, et principalis motus, et unus motus, et a se motus, et unigenitus motus: hic est Awoc: etenim vita est, per quem Vivunt omnia. Et quia vita est, ipse est per quem sunt facta omnia, et in quem facta sunt omnia: quia purgata omnia in vitam aeternam redeunt. Et omnia in ipso facta sunt, quia quae facta sunt in ipso vita sunt: nihil enim quod sit, cui sit esse suum, ex quo ipsi vita sit esse quod sit. Ergo in Christo facta sunt omnia, quia Christus Αογος est. Vita autem nec coepit, quia a se sibi semper est, unde nunquam desinit, et infinita semper est, et per omnia, et in omnibus usque a divinis et a supracoelestibus ad usque coelestia, coelosque omnes, aethera, aera, humida atque terrena, omniaque quae oriuntur e terra, omniaque caetera. Ergo et corpus caroque nostra habet aliquid vitale, omnisque materia animata est, ut mundus existeret, unde eruperunt jussu Dei animatiae. In carne ergo inest vita, id est, Λόγος: vitae autem inest Christus: quare Λόγος caro factus est. Unde non mirum quod mysterio sumpsit carnem, ut et carni et homini subveniret, sed cum carnem sumpsit, universalem Λόγον carnis sumpsit: nam idcirco omnis carnis potestas in carne triumphavit, et idcirco omni subvenit carni, ut dictum est in Isaia: Videbit te omnis caro salutare Dei. Et in libro Psalmorum: Ad te omnis caro veniet. Item et universalem λόγον animae: nam et animam habuisse manifestum, cum idem Salvator dixit: Tristis est anima usque ad mortem. Et item in Psalmo: Non derelinques animam meam in inferno. Quod autem sumpserit universalem λόγον animae, his manifestum in Ezechiele; Omnes animae sunt meae, ut anima patris, sic et anima filii. Item universalis animae λόγος et ex hoc ostenditur, quod et irascitur, cum maledicit et arbori fici, et dicit: Sodomis et Gomorrhis in illa die commodius erit quam vobis. Sic etiam multis in locis, Item et cupit, cum dicit: Pater, si fieri potest, transferatur a me hic calix. Ibi etiam ratiocinatur: sed fiat potius voluntas tua. Haec et alia multa sunt quibus ostenditur animae λόγος universalis: assumptus ergo homo totus, et assumptus, et liberatus est: in isto enim omnia universalia fuerunt, universalis caro, anima universalis, et in crucem sublata atque purgata sunt per salutem Deum λόγον, universalium omnium universalem: per ipsum enim omnia facta sunt, qui est Jesus Christus Deus et Salvator, et Dominus noster. Amen. ### English translation (Claude) The Son, then, is all things, as the Father is all things. But because substance is potentially prior to act and motion (I said “prior” with respect to force and cause, because substance is the cause of motion, for all motion is in substance), necessarily the Father is the begetter; and likewise necessarily all that the Father has, the Son also has: “All that the Father has,” he says, “he has given me.” And likewise: “As the Father has life from himself, so he has given to the Son to have life from himself.” As the Father, then, so the Son is life, and life from himself. For he is life itself, which is to itself and to others the power of living, not life from elsewhere. He is, then, motion, and principal motion, and one motion, and self-moved motion, and only-begotten motion: this is the Word; for he is life, through whom all things live. And because he is life, he is the one through whom all things were made, and into whom all things were made, because all things, purified, return into eternal life. And all things were made in him, because the things that were made are life in him: for there is nothing that is, to which its own being belongs, except from that by which it is given life to be what it is. In Christ, then, all things were made, because Christ is the Word. And life did not begin, because it is always from itself to itself; hence it never ceases, and is always infinite, and through all and in all, from the divine and supercelestial things down to the celestial things and all the heavens, the ether, the air, moist and earthly things, and all that springs from the earth, and all the rest. So our body and flesh too have something living, and all matter is animated, so that the world might exist, from which living things burst forth at God's command. In flesh, then, there is life, that is, the Word, and Christ is in life: therefore the Word became flesh. Hence it is no wonder that in the mystery he took flesh, to help both flesh and man; but when he took flesh, he took the universal logos of flesh. For this reason the power over all flesh triumphed in the flesh, and for this reason he helped all flesh, as it is said in Isaiah: “All flesh will see the salvation of God”; and in the book of Psalms: “To you all flesh will come.” Likewise he took the universal logos of the soul: for it is plain that he had a soul, since the same Saviour said: “My soul is sorrowful unto death”; and likewise in the Psalm: “You will not leave my soul in hell.” That he took the universal logos of the soul is plain from Ezekiel: “All souls are mine: as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son.” The universal logos of the soul is also shown from this, that he is angry, when he curses the fig tree, and says: “It will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah on that day than for you”; and so in many places. Likewise he desires, when he says: “Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me”; and there too he reasons: “but rather let your will be done.” These and many others show the universal logos of the soul. The whole man, then, was assumed, assumed and set free: for in him were all universals, universal flesh, universal soul; and they were lifted onto the cross and purified through the saving God, the Word, the universal of all universals; for through him all things were made, who is Jesus Christ, God and Saviour and our Lord. Amen. ### Scripture references - John 16:15: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - John 1:4: allusion, high confidence - Col 1:16: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:14: quotation, high confidence - Luke 3:6: quotation, high confidence - Isa 40:5: quotation, high confidence - Ps 65:2 (64:3 LXX): quotation, high confidence - Matt 26:38: quotation, high confidence - Ps 16:10 (15:10 LXX): quotation, high confidence - Ezek 18:4: quotation, high confidence - Matt 21:19: allusion, high confidence - Matt 10:15: quotation, high confidence - Matt 26:39: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Universal logos” (λόγος, rational principle) expresses Victorinus's view that the Word assumed humanity as a whole, not only one individual. Ps 65:2 is Septuagint 64:3; Ps 16:10 is Septuagint 15:10. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.3 (PL 8:1100b–1101b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-3). ## Against Arius 3.4 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-4 - Source: PL 8:1101b–1102a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that in God being, living and understanding are one in substance and three in subsistence, which the Greeks express as one ousia and three hypostases. ### Latin text Λόγον igitur quae sunt, quaeque esse possunt, quaere esse potuerunt, veluti semen ac potentia existendi, sapientia ac virtus omnium substantiarum de Deo ad actiones omnes, Deus potentia patris actuque, quo filius ipse cum patre unus Deus est. Etenim cum sint istae existentiae viventes intelligentesque, animadvertamus haec tria, esse, vivere, intelligere, ita tria esse, ut unum semper sint, atque in eo quod est esse. Sed in eo quod est esse dico, quod ibi est esse: in hoc igitur esse, hoc est vivere, hoc intelligere omnia substantialiter, et unum subsistentia; vivere enim ipsum id est quod esse; neque enim ita in Deo, ut in nobis aliud est quod vivit, aliud vita quae efficit vivere. Etenim si ponamus accipiamusque ipsum vitam esse atque existere, quodque ei potentia; ait, id ipsum sit ei esse, clarum fiet unum atque idem nos accipere debere esse et vivere: haec ratio est, visque eadem intelligentia est utique illi. Hoc ipsum ergo intelligere, hoc est quod est ei esse, idque esse quod est intelligere: ipsum hoc intelligere intelligentia est; esse ergo, esse et vitae et intelligentiae est, id est, quod vita et intelligentia: unum igitur quod vita, et idem esse quod est intelligentia. Quod si haec in singulis atque in binis unum, sequitur ut ipsum vivere hoc sit, quod intelligere: nam si esse hoc est vivere, atque esse id quod Intelligere; fit unum vivere atque intelligere, cum sit illis unum quod est esse. Huc accedit quod ipsum esse nihil est aliud quam vivere: quod enim non vivit, ipsum esse ei deperit, ut quamdiu quidque sit, hoc sit et suum vivere, unde commoritur esse cum vita. Sed nos cum de aeternis loquimur, aliud vivere accipimus: sed hoc ipsum scire quod vivas, scire porro hoc est quod intelligere: Ergo scire intelligere est, et scire quod vivas, hoc est vivere: id ergo erit intelligere quod vivere. Quod si ita est, ut unum sit vivere et intelligere, et cum unum sit esse quod est vivere atque intelligere; substantia unum, subsistentia tria sunt ista: cum enim vim ac significantiam suam habeant, atque ut dicuntur et sunt; necessario et sunt tria, et tamen unum, cum omne quod singulum est unum, tria sint, idque Graecis ita dicitur: tx μιΰς ούσίβς xpsig slwi τάς υποστάσεις. Hoc cum ita sit, esse ut fundamentum est reliquis: vivere enim et intelligere ut secunda et posteriora, ut natura quadam in eo quod est esse, velut inesse videantur, vel ex eo quod esse quodammodo ut extiterint, atque in eo quod est suum esse, illud primum ac fontanum esse servaverint: nunquam enim esse sine vivere atque intelligere; neque vivere atque intelligere sine eo quod est esse jam probatum est. ### English translation (Claude) The Word, then, of the things that are, and can be, and could have been, is as it were the seed and power of existing, the wisdom and power of all substances from God for all actions; God by the power and act of the Father, by which the Son himself is one God with the Father. For since these existences are living and understanding, let us notice these three, to be, to live, to understand: that they are three in such a way that they are always one, and in that which is being. But by “that which is being” I mean what being is there. In this being, then, living and understanding are all substantially, and one in subsistence. For living itself is what being is; nor is it in God as in us, where what lives is one thing and the life that makes it live another. For if we posit and accept that he himself is life and exists, and that what is power to him is his being, it will become clear that we must take being and living as one and the same; and this reasoning and force is the same as understanding for him. This very understanding, then, is what his being is, and that being is what understanding is: this understanding itself is intelligence. Being, then, is the being of life and of understanding, that is, what life and understanding are: one, then, is what life is, and the same being is what understanding is. And if these are one singly and in pairs, it follows that living itself is what understanding is: for if being is living, and being is understanding, living and understanding become one, since being is one for them. Add to this that being itself is nothing other than living: for what does not live loses its being, so that as long as anything is, this is also its living; hence being dies together with life. But when we speak of eternal things, we take living otherwise: as this very knowing that you live; and knowing is understanding. Knowing, then, is understanding, and knowing that you live is living: understanding, then, will be the same as living. And if it is so, that living and understanding are one, and since what is living and understanding is one being, these are one in substance and three in subsistence. For since they have their own force and meaning, and are as they are said to be, they are necessarily three, and yet one, since everything that is singly one is three; and this the Greeks say thus: “from one ousia there are three hypostases”. This being so, being is as a foundation for the rest: for living and understanding, as second and later, seem as it were to be in that which is being by a certain nature, or to have come forth in some way from that which is being, and in that which is their own being they have kept that first and fountain-like being. For it has been proved that being is never without living and understanding, nor are living and understanding without that which is being. ### Translation notes - The Greek formula ἐκ μιᾶς οὐσίας τρεῖς εἶναι τὰς ὑποστάσεις (“from one ousia there are three hypostases”) is garbled in the digital text and is translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.4 (PL 8:1101b–1102a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-4). ## Against Arius 3.5 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-5 - Source: PL 8:1102a–1102c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus illustrates the unity of being, living and understanding by sight, whose power, act of seeing and judging are one. ### Latin text Hujus rei ad intelligentiam hoc sit exemplum. Ponamus visum vel visionem per se vi sua atque natura potentialiter existentem, hoc est ejus esse, potentiam habentem visivam ad videndum, quod erit ejus videre: et item potentiam habentem videndo visa quaeque discernere, quod est conira intelligere: haec potentia sunt, nihil aliud quam esse dicitur et manent, et ut quieta sunt, atque in se conversa tantum ut sint, operantur solum visio, vel visus existentia, et idcirco solum esse numeranda. At cum eadem visio operatione videndi uti coeperit, quasi progressione sui visio, quasi, inquam, non enim progreditur, nec a se exit, sed intentione ac vigore propriae potestatis, quod est et vivere omnia quae sunt ei obvia, vel quibus incurrendo obvia conspexerit cum officio vivendi fungitur, vita ipsius visionis est, quae motu operante vivere indicat visionem, tantum in eo quod videt puro videndi sensu non discriminante, nec dijudicante quod videt. Quod quidem nos accipimus aestimatione, ut opinemur videre solum sine intelligentia: cum autem videre, quod est vivere visioni, videre non sit, nisi capiat comprehendatque quod viderit, simul ergo est et judicare quod viderit: ergo in eo quod est videre, inest dijudicare; neque enim si viderit, quomodocumque viderit non dijudicavit illud ipsum, vel quod viderit. Ergo, ut dicimus, in eo quod est videre est dijudicare: in eo autem quod est esse visionem inest videre: inconnexa igitur ac magis simplicia in eo quod sunt, non aliud quam unum, visio, videre, discernere; quo pacto et in eo quod est discernere, inest videre, et in eo quod est videre, inest esse visione, atque, ut vere dicam, non inest, sed eo quod est visio, in eo est videre atque discernere: ita in singulis omnia, vel unumquidque omnia unum. ### English translation (Claude) Let this be an example for understanding the matter. Let us posit sight, or vision, existing potentially by itself, by its own force and nature, that is, its being, having the power of sight for seeing, which will be its seeing; and likewise having the power, in seeing, to distinguish each of the things seen, which is its understanding. These are in power; they are said to be, and remain, nothing other than being; and as they are at rest and turned into themselves only so as to be, only the vision operates, or the existence of sight, and so they are to be counted only as being. But when the same vision begins to use the operation of seeing, as it were by a progression of itself (I say “as it were”, for it does not progress nor go out from itself, but acts by the intention and vigour of its own power, which is also to live), then, as it performs the office of living toward all the things that are in its way, or that it has seen in its way by meeting them, this is the life of vision itself, which by its operating motion shows that vision lives, only in that it sees with the pure sense of seeing, not distinguishing or judging what it sees. We take this by estimation, so as to suppose seeing alone without understanding. But since seeing, which is living for vision, is not seeing unless it grasps and comprehends what it has seen, it is at once also judging what it has seen. In seeing, then, there is judging; for if it has seen, however it has seen, it has not failed to judge that very thing, or that it has seen. So, as we say, in seeing there is judging, and in being vision there is seeing. Not compounded, then, and rather simple in what they are, they are nothing but one: vision, seeing, discerning; and in this way in discerning there is seeing, and in seeing there is being vision; and, to speak truly, it is not “in”, but by that which vision is, seeing and discerning are in it. So in each are all, or each one is all, one. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.5 (PL 8:1102a–1102c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-5). ## Against Arius 3.6 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-6 - Source: PL 8:1102d–1103b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus urges his own spirit to seek God, who is known through the Son and the Spirit, and argues that Father, Son and Spirit, each spirit and life, are one substance. ### Latin text Extolle te igitur atque erige, spiritus meus, et virtute qua a Deo mihi es inspiratus, agnosce, Deum intelligere difficile, non tamen desperatum: nam ideo nosse se voluit, ideo mundum et opera sua divina constituit, ut eum per ista omnia cerneremus; Λόγος certe, qui ejus filius, qui imago, qui forma est, a se ad patrem intelligendi transitum dedit. Deum igitur in qua natura, in quo genere, in qua vi, in qua potentia ponimus, intelligimus, aestimamus? vel qua phantasia intelligentiae attingimus atque in eum provehimur? Et cum intelligibilem esse dicimus, certe insufflatione Dei anima nobis atque ex eo pars in nobis est, quae in nobis est maxima: attingimus igitur cum eo, quo inde sumus atque pendemus. Certe post Salvatoris adventum, cum in Salvatore ipsum Deum vidimus, cum ab eo docti atque instructi sumus, cum ab eo sanctum Spiritum intelligentiae magistrum accepimus, quid aliud tantus intelligentiae magister dabit, nisi Deum nosse, Deum cognoscere, Deum fateri? Et majores nostri quaesierunt quid esset, aut quis esset Deus; et his ab eo qui in ejus gremio semper est responsum est ita: Me videtis et Patrem meum quaeritis, olim vobiscum sum: qui me vidit, vidit et Patrem, ego in Patre, et Pater in me. Ergo quid dicimus? Deum nempe Spiritum, et Spiritum vitae: dictum enim est, vita pater est, et item Christus Spiritus est. Et ipse rursus de se dixit: Ego sum vita. Et: Ut Pater habet in se vitam, ita et Filio dedit habere ex se vitam. Eodem modo Spiritus sanctus Spiritus est, utique et ipse vita. Nam omnia Christus accepit a patre: Et omnia, inquit, ei dedi. Et item: Quae habet mea sunt. Ergo habet vitam, et vitam a se esse. Quare istud? quia ubi vita est, ibi est, a se esse vitam: et si istud ita est, ibi est intelligere se vitam esse, et quid esse sit vivere: et quid esse quod vita est: conjuncta igitur omnia, et unum omnia et una substantia, et vere όμοούσια, vel simul, quod est 6μοΰ, vel eademque substantia. ### English translation (Claude) Lift yourself up, then, and rise, my spirit, and by the power with which you have been breathed into me by God, recognize that to understand God is difficult, yet not hopeless. For this is why he willed to be known, this is why he established the world and his divine works: so that we might discern him through all these. The Word, certainly, who is his Son, who is image, who is form, has given through himself a passage for understanding the Father. In what nature, then, in what genus, in what force, in what power do we place God, understand him, judge of him? Or by what image in the understanding do we reach him and are carried toward him? And when we say that he is intelligible, it is certainly by God's breathing that there is soul in us, and from him a part is in us, which is the greatest in us: we reach him, then, by that by which we come from there and depend on him. Certainly after the Saviour's coming, when we saw God himself in the Saviour, when we were taught and instructed by him, when we received from him the Holy Spirit, the teacher of understanding, what else will so great a teacher of understanding give us than to know God, to recognize God, to confess God? Our forebears too asked what God was, or who God was; and they were answered by him who is always in his bosom: “You see me and you seek my Father? I have been with you so long: he who has seen me has seen the Father also; I am in the Father and the Father in me.” What, then, do we say? That God is Spirit, and the Spirit of life: for it is said that the Father is life, and likewise that Christ is Spirit. And he again said of himself: “I am the life”; and: “As the Father has life in himself, so he has given to the Son to have life from himself.” In the same way the Holy Spirit is Spirit, and certainly he too is life. For Christ received all things from the Father: “And all things,” he says, “I have given him”; and likewise: “What he has is mine.” He has life, then, and life from himself. Why so? Because where there is life, there is life that is from itself; and if this is so, there is understanding that it is life, and what it is to live, and what that being is which life is. All, then, are joined, and all are one and one substance, and truly homoousia, either “together”, which is homou, or the same substance. ### Scripture references - Gen 2:7: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 1:20: allusion, low confidence - John 1:18: allusion, high confidence - John 14:8: allusion, high confidence - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence - John 4:24: allusion, high confidence - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence - Matt 11:27: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:15: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Together, which is homou” renders ὁμοῦ, garbled in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.6 (PL 8:1102d–1103b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-6). ## Against Arius 3.7 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-7 - Source: PL 8:1103b–1104b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus calls the Father being, silence and rest, and the Son life, Word and motion born from that silence, warning against separating the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son. ### Latin text Pater igitur esse est; hoc enim caeteris principium et primum ad phantasiam secundorum: hic Deus, is cum duobus caeteris Deus, hic unus Deus, quia quod est vivere et intelligere, hoc ipsum est quod est esse; et duobus istis quod vivere atque intelligere, ab eo provenit quod est esse. Nemo igitur separet Spiritum sanctum, et profana blasphemia esse nescio quid suspicetur, quia et ipse de patre est, quia ipse est et filius, qui de patre est: namque post id quod est esse, id est existentia vel substantia, vel in altius metu quodam propter nota nomina conscendas, dicasque vel existentialitatem, vel substantialitatem, est id ύτταρχστητα, ούσιότητα,οντότητα, omnibus his esse quod dico manens in se, suo a se motu vivificans potentia sua, qua cuncta vivificentur, et potentificantur, plena, absoluta, super omnes perfectiones omnimodis est divina perfectio. Hic est Deus supra νουν, supra veritatem, omnipotens potentia, et idcirco non forma; voO? autem, et veritas, forma, sed non ut inhaerens alteri inseparabilis forma, sed ut inseparabiliter annexa ad declarationem potentiae Dei patris eadem substantia vel imago vel forma. Illud igitur primum quod esse diximus, quod Deus est, et silentium dictum, et quies atque cessatio. Quod si ita est, potentiae progressio, quae non quidem progressio, sed apparentia est; et si progressio non dimittens unde progreditur, sed cum connexione progressio, magis autem apparentia: non enim fuit aliquid extra quod progressio fieret. Ubique enim Deus, et omnia Deus: ergo potentiae progressio actus exstitit: actus, si silentium Deus est, Verbum dicitur: sed cessatio, motus:si essentia, vita. Quod, ut docuimus, in eo quod est esse et vivere, in eo quod est silentium est tacens Verbum, et in eo quod est quies vel cessatio inest vel occultus motus, vel occulta actio. Necessario itaque ex hac cessatione natus motus, et nata actio est, vel a silentio Verbum, vel ab essentia vita. Ergo ista essentia, silentium, cessatio, Pater, hoc est, Deus pater. At vero vita, Verbum, motus aut actio, filius et unicus filius; quia nihil aliud quam unum, vel vita, vel verbum, vel motus aut actio, magisque omnia ista motus aut actio: etenim omnia illa activa sunt, vita et Verbum, motu vigent et motu operantur; universalis autem motus, qui principalis est motus, a se oritur: quid enim est motus, nisi a se sibi motus sit? Nam si ab alio movetur, est quidam aliud quam motus, quod ab alio movetur: et si illud quod hoc nescio quid movet, motus non est, movere non potest: unde enim moveat non habebit. Sin motus a motu nascitur, motus ergo a se nascitur. Sed hoc est: Dedit ei pater vitam, ut et vita esset. ### English translation (Claude) The Father, then, is being; for this is the principle for the others, and first for the imagining of the second. This is God; he, with the two others, is God; he is one God, because what living and understanding are is the very thing that being is; and to these two, what living and understanding are comes from that which is being. Let no one, then, separate the Holy Spirit, nor suspect by profane blasphemy that he is some sort of thing, since he too is from the Father, since he too is the Son, who is from the Father. For after that which is being, that is, existence or substance (or, if you climb higher out of a certain fear because the names are familiar, and say existentiality or substantiality, that is, hyparxotēs, ousiotēs, ontotēs), that which I call being for all these, remaining in itself, giving life by its own motion from itself, by its power by which all things are given life and made powerful, full, absolute, above all perfections, is divine perfection in every way. This is God above intellect, above truth, almighty power, and therefore not form; but intellect and truth are form, yet not as a form inhering inseparably in another, but as joined inseparably to declare the power of God the Father, the same substance, or image, or form. That first thing, then, which we called being, which God is, is also called silence, and rest and cessation. If this is so, there is a progression of power, which is not indeed a progression but an appearing; and if it is a progression, it is one that does not leave behind that from which it progresses, but a progression with connection, or rather an appearing: for there was nothing outside into which a progression could be made. For God is everywhere, and all things are God. The progression of power, then, came forth as act: act, if God is silence, is called Word; if cessation, motion; if essence, life. As we taught, in that which is being and living, in that which is silence there is a silent Word, and in that which is rest or cessation there is a hidden motion or a hidden action. Necessarily, then, from this cessation motion was born and action was born, or the Word from silence, or life from essence. So this essence, silence, cessation is the Father, that is, God the Father. But life, Word, motion or action is the Son, the only Son, because it is nothing other than one, whether life or Word or motion or action; and rather all these are motion or action. For all those are active: life and Word thrive by motion and operate by motion; and universal motion, which is the principal motion, arises from itself. For what is motion, unless it is motion from itself to itself? For if it is moved by another, what is moved by another is something other than motion; and if that which moves this something is not motion, it cannot move, for it will have nothing from which to move. But if motion is born from motion, then motion is born from itself. And this is what is meant by: “The Father gave him life, that he too might be life.” ### Scripture references - John 5:26: allusion, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:28: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - “Since he too is the Son” is translated as written; Victorinus means that the Spirit, like the Son, is the one motion from the Father (see 3.8). Greek terms: ὑπαρξότης, οὐσιότης, ὀντότης (existentiality, substantiality, entity), νοῦς (intellect). “All things are God” is Victorinus's own phrase, as in 1 Cor 15:28 “God all in all”. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.7 (PL 8:1103b–1104b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-7). ## Against Arius 3.8 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-8 - Source: PL 8:1104b–1105b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Son is the one motion from the Father, life and knowledge, and that the Spirit exists as the knowledge within that one motion, receiving all from the Son as the Son from the Father. ### Latin text Ergo motus, et unus est motus, et a se motus. Et cum in parte occultus sit, atque inde hic motus apparens a patre motus. Et quia a motu motus, ideo a se motus, et unus motus, unde unicus filius. Hic λόγος universalis in omnibus per quem facta sunt omnia. Hic vita omnibus, quia quae facta sunt vivunt omnia. Hic etiam Jesus Christus est, quia ad vitam salvabit omnia. Unus ergo motus, et unus filius et unicus, quia unica vita, et una vita, solaque aeterna. Ergo ομοοΰσιος filius patri: vita enim pater, et vita filius, qua: ουσία est: item motus pater, et motus filius quae ουσία est, neque enim ibi aliquid accidens; ergo et Verbum pater, licet tacens Verbum, Verbum tamen, et Verbum filius, et hoc ουσία. Quidquid enim vel est, vel agit atque operatur ουσία, et ubi magis ουσία, Verbum. Non enim ut hic aer sonans, Verbum, sed ut hic aliquid agens. Verbum. Unus ergo filius, quia unus motus: una vita, quia una sola vita quae aeterna. Nec enim vita, quae aliquando moritur. Nunquam autem moritur, si se sciat. Scire autem se non poterit, nisi Deum sciat, et Deum qui vita est, et vera vita est, ac fons vitae. Hoc si ita est, Deo cognito cognoscet omnia: quia a Deo omnia, et in omnibus Deus, et Deus omnia. Hoc Joannes clamat: Haec est autem vita aeterna, ut cognoscant te solum et verum Deum, et quem misisti Jesum Christum. Cognitio est vita. Porro autem sive vita, sive cognitio motus est unus, et idem motus agens vitam, et per vitam cognitionem, et per cognitionem vitam; idem ergo motus, duo officia complens, vitam et cognoscentiam. Aoyo? autem motus est, et Aoyor filius. Filius igitur unicus in eo quod filius; in eo autem quod Aoyo?, geminus. Ipse enim vita, ipse cognoscentia, utroque operatus ad animarum salutem mysterio crucis:et vita, quia de morte liberandi fueramus: mysterio autem cognoscentiae per Spiritum sanctum: quia is magis est datus et ipse omnes docuit, et testimonium de Christo dixit. Quod est cognitionem vitam agere, et ex hoc Deum cognoscere, quod est vitam veram fieri, et hoc est testimonium de Christo dicere. Ita Dei filius Christus, id est, Λόγος, et filius vita; et quia id est motus etiam et cognoscentia, filius est opere quo vita est Jesus existens. Opere autem quo cognoscentia est, Spiritus sanctus et ipse existens, ut sint existentiae duae, Christi et Spiritus sancti, in uno motu, qui filius est. Et hinc et a patre Jesus: Ex ore Altissimi processi: et Spiritus sanctus etiam ipse a patre, quia unus motus utrumque in existentiam protulit. Et quia quae habet pater filio dedit omnia: ideo et filius, qui motus est, dedit omnia Spiritui sancto: omnia enim quae habet de me habet, inquit; etenim quia et ipse motus est, de motu habet: non enim filius illi dedit, sed ille, inquit, de meo habet. Principaliter enim motus vita est, et ipsa vita scientia est et cognoscentia: ergo quidquid habet cognoscentia, de vita habet. Haec summa Trinitas, haec summa Unalitas: Omnia quaecumque habet Pater mea sunt; propterea dixi quia de meo accipiet et annuntiabit vobis. ### English translation (Claude) It is motion, then, and one motion, and motion from itself. And since in part it is hidden, from there this appearing motion is motion from the Father. And because it is motion from motion, it is motion from itself, and one motion; hence the only Son. This is the universal Word in all things, through whom all things were made. This is life for all, because all the things that were made live. This is also Jesus Christ, because he will save all things to life. One motion, then, and one Son, the only Son, because there is one life, a single life, and alone eternal. The Son, then, is homoousios with the Father: for the Father is life and the Son is life, which is ousia; likewise the Father is motion and the Son is motion, which is ousia, for there is nothing accidental there. So the Father too is Word, though a silent Word, yet Word, and the Son is Word, and this is ousia. For whatever either is or acts and operates is ousia, and where there is more ousia, there is the Word. For the Word is not, as here, air that sounds, but, as here, something that acts. One Son, then, because one motion; one life, because there is one sole life, which is eternal. For it is not a life that at some time dies. And it never dies if it knows itself. But it cannot know itself unless it knows God, God who is life and true life and the fountain of life. If this is so, when God is known it will know all things, because all things are from God, and God is in all, and God is all. John cries out: “And this is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.” Knowledge is life. Further, whether life or knowledge, it is one motion, the same motion bringing about life, and through life knowledge, and through knowledge life: the same motion, then, fulfilling two offices, life and knowledge. The Word is motion, and the Word is Son. The Son, then, is one inasmuch as he is Son, but twofold inasmuch as he is Word. For he himself is life, he himself knowledge, working by both for the salvation of souls through the mystery of the cross: by life, because we had to be freed from death; and by the mystery of knowledge through the Holy Spirit, because it was he above all who was given, and who taught all, and bore witness about Christ. And this is to bring about knowledge as life, and from this to know God, which is to become true life; and this is to bear witness about Christ. So Christ is the Son of God, that is, the Word, and the Son is life; and because this is also motion and knowledge, he is Son by the work by which he is life, existing as Jesus; but by the work by which he is knowledge, the Holy Spirit too exists, so that there are two existences, of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, in one motion, which is the Son. Hence Jesus is from the Father: “I came forth from the mouth of the Most High”; and the Holy Spirit too is from the Father, because one motion brought both forth into existence. And because the Father gave the Son all that he has, therefore the Son too, who is motion, gave all things to the Holy Spirit: “for all that he has he has from me,” he says. For because he too is motion, he has from motion; for it is not that the Son gave to him, but “he has from what is mine,” he says. For in the first place motion is life, and life itself is knowledge and understanding: so whatever knowledge has, it has from life. This is the supreme Trinity, this the supreme Oneness: “All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will receive from what is mine and declare it to you.” ### Scripture references - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - John 17:3: quotation, high confidence - John 15:26: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:14: quotation, high confidence - John 16:15: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: allusion, medium confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Sir 24:3 (Sirach): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “I came forth from the mouth of the Most High” is Sir 24:3, applied to Christ. An editor's reference, “(Ibid.)”, printed in the text is removed. Victorinus's statement that Christ and the Spirit are “two existences … in one motion, which is the Son” is translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.8 (PL 8:1104b–1105b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-8). ## Against Arius 3.9 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/2-12/#p-3-9 - Source: PL 8:1105b–1106a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus concludes that Father, Son and Spirit are being, life and knowledge, one substance in three subsistences, and supports the Spirit's role as knowledge from Romans 8–9 and 1 Corinthians 2. ### Latin text Hoc igitur satis clarum faciet, esse quod pater est, et vitam quod est filius, et cognoscentiam quod est Spiritus sanctus, unum esse, et unam esse substantiam, subsistentias tres, qui ab eo quod est esse, quae substantia est motus, quia et ipse, ut docuimus, ipsa substantia est, geminans potentia valet, et vitalitatis, et sapientiae, atque intelligentiae, ita scilicet, ut in omnibus singulis tria sint: ergo Spiritus sanctus scientia est et sapientia. Hoc ita esse probant sacrae lectiones: Quis Dei mentem cognovit, nisi solus Spiritus?: Ipse Spiritus testimonium reddit spiritui nostro. Quis testis sine scientia? Et scientia ipsa, quia sapientia est, docet nos esse filios Dei. Item: Quis autem scrutatur corda? quis scit cogitationes spiritus? Item quomodo ad scientiam junguntur ambo?: Veritatem dico in Christo. Ubi veritas, ibi scientia, quia veritas Christus; ideo et scientia, quod est Spiritus sanctus. Et item: Non mentior, testimonium mihi perhibente conscientia mea in Spiritu sancto. Quid est enim aliud conscientia, quam cum altero scientia? Nunc nostra cum Spiritu, ergo Spiritus scientia: et Christus est scientia, quia veritas; ergo et Christus et Spiritus scientia. At enim Christus vita: Quid si Spiritus vita: unus enim, ut dixi, motus est, et eadem vita quae scientia: quid enim in Christo doctus, id est, a Deo; et cum dico doctus, a scientia dico, quod sive a Christo, sive a Spiritu, unum atque idem est; quid enim dicit Paulus, cum utrumque idipsum esse declaret? Prudentia vero spiritus, vita est. AEstuat enim et rebellat, ac repugnat secum error, imprudentia, inscientia; et hoc prudentia carnis, quae imprudentia, et quia Deum nescit, mors est: ergo prudentia spiritus, vita atque pax est: quo modo jam juncti isti sunt, et unum sunt. ### English translation (Claude) This, then, will make it sufficiently clear that being, which is the Father, and life, which is the Son, and knowledge, which is the Holy Spirit, are one, and are one substance and three subsistences; for from that which is being (which substance is motion, because motion too, as we taught, is substance itself) it is strong with a twofold power, of vitality and of wisdom and understanding, in such a way that in all and in each there are three. The Holy Spirit, then, is knowledge and wisdom. That this is so the sacred readings prove: “Who has known the mind of God, except the Spirit alone?” “The Spirit himself bears witness to our spirit.” Who is a witness without knowledge? And knowledge itself, because it is wisdom, teaches us that we are sons of God. Likewise: “Who searches the hearts? Who knows the mind of the Spirit?” Likewise, how are both joined in knowledge? “I speak the truth in Christ.” Where there is truth, there is knowledge, because Christ is truth; and so there is also knowledge, which is the Holy Spirit. And likewise: “I do not lie, my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit.” For what else is conscience but knowledge with another? Here it is ours with the Spirit; so the Spirit is knowledge. And Christ is knowledge, because he is truth; so both Christ and the Spirit are knowledge. But Christ is life. What if the Spirit is life? For it is one motion, as I said, and the same life that is knowledge. For what is taught in Christ is taught by God; and when I say “taught”, I mean by knowledge, which, whether from Christ or from the Spirit, is one and the same. For what does Paul say, when he declares both to be the same? “But the mind of the Spirit is life.” For error, folly and ignorance seethe and rebel and fight within themselves; and this is the mind of the flesh, which is folly, and because it does not know God, it is death. The mind of the Spirit, then, is life and peace: so these are now joined and are one. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 2:11: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 2:16: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 8:16: quotation, high confidence - Rom 8:27: quotation, high confidence - Rom 9:1: quotation, high confidence - John 14:6: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 8:6: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Editorial references printed in the text, “(i Cor. ii. 16)” and “(Ibid.)”, are removed. “Conscience” (conscientia) is explained as “knowledge with another” (con-scientia). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.9 (PL 8:1105b–1106a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-9). ## Against Arius 3.10 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-10 - Source: PL 8:1106a–1107a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus shows from Romans, Ephesians and John that Father, Son and Spirit are knowledge and life, one substance and one will, and that to believe in Christ, the Word of life, is to know God and have the Spirit. ### Latin text Doceamus quod Deus et scientia sit et vita, quamquam ab ipso ista Paulus: O, inquit, altitudo divitiarum sapientiae et scientiae Dei! Sic dictum ab eodem: Multiformis sapientia Dei. Hinc et secretum Dei, hinc et Christus dictus sapientia, hinc et illud: Ut possitis comprehendere cum omnibus sanctis, quae sit latitudo, longitudo, altitudo, profundum, scire etiam supereminentem scientiae charitatem Christi. Ita et scientia Deus est, et nos scientia liberat, sed per Christum tamen, quia ipse est et scientia, et janua, et vita, et λόγος, et omnium per quem facta sunt omnia. Ergo et scire ista, et etiam charitatem in Christum habere debemus. Haec atque alia plurima, et Deum scientiam esse, et Christum, et Spiritum sanctum satis clarum etiam vitam esse uno licet satis probatur exemplo; nam in aliis libris uberius approbavimus: Sicuti enim Pater vitam habet in semetipso, sic dedit et Filio vitam habere in semetipso. Item dicit: Sicut me misit vivus Pater, ita et ego vivo propter Patrem. Sunt igitur ista sic singula, ut omnia tria ista sunt singula, una omni ergo substantia est pater, ergo filius, Spiritus sanctus, Deus, λόγος παράάητος, unum sunt, quod substantialitas, vitalitas, beatitudo, silentium, sed apud se loquens silentium, Verbum, Verbi Verbum: quid etiam est voluntas patris, nisi silens Verbum? Hoc ergo modo cum Verbum pater sit, et filius Verbum, id est, sonans Verbum atque operans: ergo, inquam, si et pater, et filius Verbum est, una substantia est. Deinde: Justum, inquit, meum judicium est, quia non quaero facere voluntatem meam, sed ejus qui me misit. Ergo una voluntas, unde una substantia: quia et ipsa voluntas substantia est. Verbum autem ipsum vitam esse sic ostenditur: Non vultis ad me venire, ut vitam habeatis. Deinde et de hoc totum mysterium est, quod expono: Omne quod mihi datum est a Patre apud me habeo. Quia vero idem motus est quod esse, et quod est esse motus est, et quia quadam intelligentia prius esse, ab eo quod moveri, sed prius χατό το αίτιον, id est, secundum causam: ideo dedit pater filio et motum, qui et quod est esse habet. Ergo motum esse est λόγος: igitur qui motus est habet et esse: esse autem vita est et scientia: habet igitur omnia, quia patris habet esse: ergo voluntatem patris implet illius. Quae autem voluntas, nisi quia cum pater vita sit, motus est vita ejus? haec voluntas est, vivere facere alia. Haec ergo et τού λόγου, id est, Christi. Quae est, inquit, voluntas Patris qui me misit? ut ex eo quod mihi dedit nihil perdam, sed resurgere faciam id ipsum postrema die. Haec enim voluntas est Patris mei, ut omnis qui videt Filium et in ipsum credit, habeat vitam aeternam, et in die novissima resurgat. Videre autem est Christum scire Deum Dei filium, vitam, et vitae Deum; et hoc est accepisse Spiritum sanctum Verbum, id esse quod vita. Hinc probatum est: Post quem ibimus? verbum vitae habes, et nos credimus et cognovimus quod tu es Christus Filius Dei. Totum mysterium Christus Dei filius, Christus Verbum, et ipsum Verbum, vitae aeternae Verbum. Ergo hoc Verbum quod vita, et hoc qui audit et credit, utique cognoscit Deum: ergo et Spiritum sanctum habet. ### English translation (Claude) Let us show that God is both knowledge and life; though Paul says these come from him: “O the depth,” he says, “of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!” So it is said by the same apostle: “the manifold wisdom of God”. Hence also the secret of God; hence Christ is called wisdom; hence also this: “that you may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth, length, height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge.” So God too is knowledge, and knowledge frees us, yet through Christ, because he is knowledge, and the door, and life, and the Word, the Word of all, through whom all things were made. We ought, then, both to know these things and to have love toward Christ. These and very many other texts show that God is knowledge, and Christ, and the Holy Spirit; and that they are also life is sufficiently proved even by one example, for in other books we have proved it more fully: “For as the Father has life in himself, so he has given also to the Son to have life in himself.” Likewise he says: “As the living Father sent me, so I too live because of the Father.” These are each such, then, that all three are each. There is one substance, then: the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit; God, Word, Paraclete are one, as substantiality, vitality, blessedness; silence, but silence speaking with itself; Word; Word of the Word. For what is the Father's will but a silent Word? In this way, then, since the Father is Word and the Son Word, that is, the sounding and operating Word: if, I say, both Father and Son are Word, there is one substance. Next: “My judgment,” he says, “is just, because I do not seek to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me.” There is one will, then, and hence one substance, because the will too is substance. That the Word itself is life is shown thus: “You do not want to come to me that you may have life.” Next, the whole mystery concerns this, which I explain: “All that has been given me by the Father I have with me.” Since motion is the same as being, and being is motion, and since by a certain understanding being is prior to being moved, but prior according to cause, therefore the Father gave the Son motion as well, which also has being. To be motion, then, is the Word; so he who is motion also has being; and being is life and knowledge. He has all things, then, because he has the Father's being; and so he fulfils the Father's will. And what will is this, if not that, since the Father is life, his life is motion? This is the will: to make other things live. This, then, is also the will of the Word, that is, of Christ. “What is,” he says, “the will of the Father who sent me? That of what he has given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life and rise on the last day.” To see Christ is to know God, the Son of God, life, and the God of life; and this is to have received the Holy Spirit. That the Word is what life is, is proved from this: “To whom shall we go? You have the word of life, and we believe and have known that you are the Christ, the Son of God.” The whole mystery is this: Christ the Son of God, Christ the Word, and the Word itself, the Word of eternal life. This Word, then, is life; and whoever hears and believes this certainly knows God, and so also has the Holy Spirit. ### Scripture references - Rom 11:33: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:10: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, medium confidence - Eph 3:18: quotation, high confidence - Eph 3:19: quotation, high confidence - John 10:9: allusion, medium confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 5:30: quotation, high confidence - John 5:40: quotation, high confidence - John 6:39: quotation, high confidence - John 6:40: quotation, high confidence - John 6:68: quotation, high confidence - John 6:69: quotation, high confidence - John 6:37: quotation, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “According to cause” renders κατὰ τὸ αἴτιον. The saying “All that has been given me by the Father I have with me” is a free form of John 6:37. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.10 (PL 8:1106a–1107a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10). ## Against Arius 3.11 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-11 - Source: PL 8:1107a–1107d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from John 8 and 10 that the Father is known in the Son as substance in life, and that the Word and Spirit, which lay down and take up the soul, are of a higher substance than the soul. ### Latin text Pronuntiata heic plena fides est, quippe a discipulis. Item ad Judaeos dicit: Me si sciretis, sciretis Patrem meum. Neque me scitis, neque patrem meum. Et recte. Quamquam enim et in patre filius, et in filio pater, existentia vel substantia in vita, et vita in substantia; invisibilis tamen cum sit substantia, non intelligitur nisi in vita. Magis autem vita Christus, quamquam et substantia: ergo pater in filio cognoscitur Unde? Quia non scitis me, nec Patrem; si sciretis me, sciretis et Patrem. Ipsum hoc quid est? Sciretis ame esse, quia ipse et scientia, quod est Spiritus sanctus. Item ad illos quia Verbum est, et Verbum pater: ergo una substantia: Item qui me misit verus est, et ego quae audivi ab ipso ea loquor. Pater filio loquitur, filius mundo: quia pater per filium, et filius virtute Verbi patris facit omnia, id est, secum loquens Verbum per Verbum in manifesto loquens facit omnia. Secum autem loquens Verbum Deus est cum filio, quia pater et filius unus Deus. Ipse praeterea dicit: Amen, amen dico vobis: si quis verbum meum custodierit, mortem non videbit. Et ipse rursum: Novi enim Patrem, et verbum ejus custodio. Uterque Verbum, Sed Ut dixi. Illud quantum aut quale est in Joanne? Propterea me Pater amat et ego pono animam meam, ut iterum sumam eam. Nemo illum a me tollit, sed ego eam pono a me ipso: licentiam habeo ponere eam, et licentiam habeo sumere eam. Christum nunquam dictum esse animam satis manifestum est; sed nec Deum dictum animam. Etenim Pater Deus dictus, Spiritus dictus. Item filius λόγος dictus, spiritus dictus, et sine dubio Deus: quippe cum ambo unus Deus. Ergo haec, λόγος, πνίύμβ supra animam sunt, sua superiore substantia, longe alia substantia animae et inferiore, quippe a Deo insufflata et genita, et sola vere substantia dicta, quod subesset suis in se speciebus, et eodem pacto ut hyle. ### English translation (Claude) Here the full faith is pronounced, and by the disciples. Likewise he says to the Jews: “If you knew me, you would know my Father. You know neither me nor my Father.” And rightly. For although the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son, existence or substance in life and life in substance, yet since substance is invisible, it is not understood except in life. And Christ is rather life, though also substance: the Father, then, is known in the Son. From where? “Because you know neither me nor the Father; if you knew me, you would know the Father also.” What is this? You would know through me that he is; because I am also knowledge, which is the Holy Spirit. Likewise, to them, that he is Word and the Father is Word, and so one substance: “Likewise, he who sent me is true, and what I heard from him I speak.” The Father speaks to the Son, the Son to the world: because the Father acts through the Son, and the Son by the power of the Father's Word does all things; that is, the Word speaking with itself does all things through the Word speaking openly. And the Word speaking with itself is God with the Son, because the Father and the Son are one God. He also says: “Amen, amen, I say to you: if anyone keeps my word, he will not see death.” And again he himself: “For I know the Father and keep his word.” Each is Word, but as I have said. What and how great is that saying in John? “For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my soul that I may take it again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.” It is plain enough that Christ was never called a soul; nor was God called a soul. For God the Father is called Spirit; likewise the Son is called Word, called spirit, and without doubt God, since both are one God. These, then, Word and Spirit, are above the soul by their higher substance; the substance of the soul is far other and lower, since it was breathed in and begotten by God, and alone is truly called substance, because it stands under its own forms within it, in the same way as matter. ### Scripture references - John 8:19: quotation, high confidence - John 8:26: quotation, high confidence - John 8:51: quotation, high confidence - John 8:55: quotation, high confidence - John 10:17: quotation, high confidence - John 10:18: quotation, high confidence - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 2:7: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “My soul” renders animam meam (John 10:17–18, often translated “my life”). “Stands under” plays on sub-stantia. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.11 (PL 8:1107a–1107d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-11). ## Against Arius 3.12 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-12 - Source: PL 8:1107d–1108c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the soul is the image of the Word, of like substance, which the Word, as life, takes up in the incarnation and lays down in death, and identifies the Spirit who came after Christ's departure as the one motion of the Word. ### Latin text Huc accedit quod vita Deus, vita Christus, et ex se vita utique, sed ut patre dante Christus habeat ex se vitam: ergo vita superior ab anima. Priora enim ζωη et ζωηρίς, id est, vita, vitalitas quam anima: ergo illa όμοονσια Deus et λόγος, pater et filius. Quippe ut ille Spiritus, et hic Spiritus, et hic vita, et ille vita. Item Verbum et Verbum, et caetera. Spiritus igitur habet potestatem animam sumendi, ponendi et resumendi. Etenim vita, et a se vita potestatem habet sumendi, ponendi illud, quod sua potentia, sui participatione facit vivere; etenim anima ad imaginem imaginis Dei facta: Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram. Ergo inferior, et a Deo atque λόγω magis orta vel facta. Nunquam ipse Deus aut λόγος, sed quidem λόγος, non ille qui filius generalis vel universalis, atque omnium quae per ipsum facta sunt, semen, origo, fons. Illius vero λόγος anima: quomodo, aut qui, et dixisse memini, et suo loco esse dicturum. Ergo universalis, quia spiritus et vita, non anima, habet potestatem a semetipso animam ponere, et rursum animam sumere. Deus igitur et λόγος, vel quia vita sunt, vel quia Spiritus, vivunt et semper vivunt. Quippe qui a se vivunt. Ergo illa ίμοοόσΜ. Anima vero όμοοάπος, haec cum assumitur a divinis, id est, a λόγω; neque enim a Deo: Λόγος, enim motus est, et motus anima, et motus a semetipso motus, unde imago et similitudo anima του λόγον est. Ergo cum assumitur, nihil adjicitur vitae: quippe cum ex vita, id est, ex vivendi potentia animae vita sit. Animam igitur cum assumit Spiritus, veluti ad inferiora trajicit potentiam atque actiones, cum mundum et mundana complet: ergo Spiritum, et maxime λόγος spiritus, qui vita est, in potestate habet et sumere animam, et ponere: cum autem sumit, mundo veluti nascitur, et potentia ejus cum mundo colloquitur: cum vero ponit, a mundo recedit, et non operatur in mundo carnaliter, nec tamen spiritaliter. Hoc nos mortem ejus nominamus, et tunc esse dicitur in inferno, non utique sine anima. Hinc petit ne Deus animam suam relinquat in inferno. Ergo eam, quia rediturus ad mundum est, et ad ejus actum secum ad inferis ducit, quasi resumit ergo animam, id est, actus, mundum iterum accipit, et quia actus in mundo plenos ac totos Λόγος agit, et qui Spiritus est, et animam, et corpus, rursus ergo sanctificandum fuit, quia rursus ista susceperat. Ivit igitur ad Spiritum, et sanctificatus redit, cum apostolis egit, post sanctum Spiritum egit. Quis igitur est Spiritus sanctus? id est, λόγος*, unus enim motus, et ideo dictum: et si discedo et praeparo vobis, rursus venio. Quis enim venit post abitum Christi, nisi Spiritus S. Paracletus? ### English translation (Claude) Add to this that God is life and Christ is life, and certainly life from himself, but in such a way that Christ has life from himself by the Father's gift: life, then, is higher than the soul. For life and vitality (zōē and zōotēs) are prior to the soul. These, then, God and the Word, Father and Son, are homoousia, since the one is Spirit and the other Spirit, the one life and the other life; likewise Word and Word, and the rest. The Spirit, then, has the power to take up a soul, to lay it down and to take it again. For life, life from itself, has the power to take up and to lay down that which it makes to live by its power and by participation in itself. For the soul was made according to the image of the image of God: “Let us make man according to our image and likeness.” It is lower, then, and arose or was made from God, and rather from the Word. It is never itself God or the Word, but it is indeed a word: not that Word who is the general or universal Son, the seed, origin and fountain of all things made through him. The soul is a word of that Word: how, or which, I remember having said, and shall say in its place. The universal, then, because it is spirit and life, not soul, has power from itself to lay down the soul and to take the soul again. God and the Word, then, either because they are life or because they are Spirit, live and always live, since they live from themselves. These, then, are homoousia. But the soul is homoiousios. When it is assumed by the divine, that is, by the Word (for not by God: for the Word is motion, and the soul is motion, and motion moved from itself; hence the soul is the image and likeness of the Word), when it is assumed, then, nothing is added to life, since the life of the soul is from life, that is, from the power of living. When the Spirit takes up a soul, then, it carries over, as it were, its power and actions into lower things, when it fills the world and the things of the world. So the Spirit, and above all the Word, the spirit that is life, has in its power both to take up the soul and to lay it down. When it takes it up, it is as it were born to the world, and its power converses with the world; when it lays it down, it withdraws from the world and does not operate in the world in the flesh, nor yet spiritually. This we call his death, and then he is said to be in hell, certainly not without a soul. Hence he asks that God not leave his soul in hell. So he leads it with himself from the underworld, because he was to return to the world and to his work in it; he takes back the soul, then, that is, his acts; he receives the world again. And because the Word, who is Spirit, performs full and whole acts in the world, with both soul and body, it had to be sanctified again, because it had taken these up again. He went, then, to the Spirit, and returned sanctified; he acted with the apostles; he acted after the Holy Spirit. Who, then, is the Holy Spirit? That is, the Word: for it is one motion; and therefore it is said: “And if I go away and prepare a place for you, I will come again.” For who came after Christ's departure but the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete? ### Scripture references - John 5:26: allusion, high confidence - Gen 1:26: quotation, high confidence - John 10:17: allusion, high confidence - John 10:18: allusion, high confidence - Ps 16:10 (15:10 LXX): allusion, high confidence - Acts 2:27: allusion, medium confidence - John 14:3: quotation, high confidence - John 14:16: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Homoiousios” renders a garbled form, probably ὁμοιούσιος (“of like substance”), applied to the soul in contrast to the homoousion of Father and Son. Victorinus's identification of the Holy Spirit with the Word (“for it is one motion”) is translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.12 (PL 8:1107d–1108c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-12). ## Against Arius 3.13 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-13 - Source: PL 8:1108c–1109a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus reads John 14:6–14 to show that Father, Son and Spirit are one, and that to ask in Christ's name is to ask for eternal life and spiritual things, not worldly goods. ### Latin text Id ita esse quod dico: ut pater et filius unum sint: item quod Jesus et Spiritus sanctus unum sint: ac propterea omnes unum sint, juncta lectione Joannes declaravit; coepit namque a Λόγου: Ego sum, inquit, via, et veritas, et vita. Nemo venit ad Patrem nisi per me. Quis enim ad id quod est esse, et verum esse pervenit, quod pater est, nisi per vitam: vita enim quae vera vita est, quia aeterna est, hoc est vere esse, nihil enim mutatur, nihil corrumpitur, quae genera mortis sunt, vita esse, verum vita est: Vivit, inquit, Deus. Ergo vitam esse, Deus est. Et: Ego, inquit, vivo. Quicumque ad Christum venit, ad vitam venit, et sic per vitam ad Deum: ergo juncti sunt Deus et >070;. Et hinc illud est: Qui me cognovit cognovit et Patrem. Et: Qui me vidit vidit et Patrem. Hinc et illud: Non credis, quod ego in Patre, et Pater in me? Hinc et illud mystice: Et si quid aliquando petieritis in nomine meo, istud faciam. Quid est petere in Christi nomine? animam aeternam fieri, lucem Dei videre, ad ipsum videndum venire, aeternam vitam habere, non divitias, non filios, non honores, nihilque mundanum; sed spiritale omne, atque omne quo uniti Deo Christo jungamur: hoc enim est, ut glorificetur in Filio, id est, vita aeterna, quam petentibus dabo. ### English translation (Claude) That what I say is so (that the Father and the Son are one; likewise that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one; and therefore that all are one), John declared in a connected reading; for he began from the Word: “I am,” he says, “the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” For who arrives at that which is being, and true being, which the Father is, except through life? For life which is true life, because it is eternal, is true being; for nothing changes and nothing is corrupted (these are the kinds of death); to be life is true life. “God lives,” it says. To be life, then, is God. And: “I live,” he says. Whoever comes to Christ comes to life, and so through life to God: God and the Word, then, are joined. Hence this: “He who has known me has known the Father also”; and: “He who has seen me has seen the Father also.” Hence also this: “Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?” Hence also this, said mystically: “And if you ask anything in my name, this I will do.” What is it to ask in Christ's name? For the soul to become eternal, to see the light of God, to come to see him, to have eternal life; not riches, not children, not honours, nothing of the world, but everything spiritual, and everything by which, united, we are joined to God and Christ. For this is that he may be glorified in the Son, that is, eternal life, which I will give to those who ask. ### Scripture references - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 6:57: allusion, medium confidence - John 14:19: allusion, medium confidence - John 14:7: quotation, high confidence - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence - John 14:13: quotation, high confidence - John 14:14: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.13 (PL 8:1108c–1109a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-13). ## Against Arius 3.14 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-14 - Source: PL 8:1109a–1110a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus reads John 14:15–26 to show that Christ and the Holy Spirit are two Paracletes but one motion, Christ the Spirit made open in the flesh and the Holy Spirit the same Spirit hidden. ### Latin text Subjungitur deinde plenissime de Spiritu sancto, quid sit, unde sit, quod ipse sit: Si enim, inquit, me amatis, mandata mea custodite. Et ego rogabo Patrem meum, et alium Paracletum dabit vobis, Ut vobiscum sit in omne tempus. Quid est Paracletus, qui asserat adstruatque apud Patrem homines omnes fideles atque credentes? Quis est iste? unus ne solus Spiritus sanctus? an idem et Christus? Etenim ipse dixit; alium Paracletum dabit vobis Deus. Dum dixit alium, se dixit alium; dum dixit Paracletum, operam similem declaravit, et eamdem quodammodo actionem. Ergo et Spiritus Paracletus, et Spiritus sanctus, alius Paracletus, et ipse a patre mittitur. Jesus ergo Spiritus sanctus: motus enim Spiritus, unde et Spiritus motus, eo quod Spiritus: Spirat enim ubi vult. Et ipse nunc dicit: Spiritus veritatis, et ita ei nomen est Spiritus sanctus, Spiritus etiam Christus, Spiritus et Deus, Omnes ergo Spiritus. Verum Deus substantialiter Spiritus: inest enim In eo quod est substantia et motus: vel potius substantia ipsa, qui est motus, sed in se manens, ut saepe jam diximus, et retinendi causa saepe repetemus. At vero Jesus et Spiritus sanctus motio vere mota motio; unde foris operans, sed Jesus spiritus apertus; quippe et in carne: Spiritus autem sanctus occultus; Jesus quippe qui intelligentias infundat, non jam qui signa faciat, aut per parabolas loquatur ipsum se esse, ipse sic docet; Non vos dimittam orphanos, veniam ad vos. Ipse autem in Spiritu sancto esse occultum sic docet: Mundus me jam non videbit, vos autem videbitis me, quoniam vivo ego et vos vivetis. Hoc etiam sancto Spiritui datum: ut penes vos sit in aeternum Spiritus veritatis. Et de se dixit: Ego sum veritas. Deinde adjecit: Quem mundus non potest videre. Et de se dixit: Jam me mundus non videbit. Deinde adjecit: Quoniam ipsum non videt, neque cognoscit ipsum. Sed et Christum nemo cognovit: In sua venit et mundus eum non cognovit. Adjecit: Vos cognoscetis ipsum, quoniam manet in vobis, et in vobis est. Et ipse de se ita: Vos videbitis me. Et quoniam Christus vita est, de se adjunxit: Quoniam ego vivo, et vos vivetis. Et quia Spiritus sanctus intelligentia est, Utroque autem mundus ipse caret, ideo adjecit: Quoniam apud vos manet, et in vobis est. Unde autem aut est in illis, aut jam manet Spiritus sanctus, si adhuc postea venturus est, et non jam per Christum apud illos esse coepit? Ergo juncti atque ex uno sunt, qui motus est. Id apertius in sequentibus declaratur, ait enim: Haec vobis dixi apud vos manens. Paracletus autem Spiritus sanctus, quem mittet Pater in nomine meo, vos docebit omnia quaecumque dico. Ego, inquit, in vobis maneo. Data est enim vita, nec ab illis jam Christus abscedit: Sunt igitur et spiritali motu, quod est Christum In illis manere: ipsi autem animae, in quibus spiritus manet, nec aliquando discedit, dictum tamen; Nunc ibo ad Patrem. ### English translation (Claude) Then he adds, most fully, about the Holy Spirit: what he is, from where he is, and that he is himself: “For if,” he says, “you love me, keep my commandments. And I will ask my Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, to be with you for all time.” What is a Paraclete, who supports and pleads for all the faithful and believing before the Father? Who is he? The Holy Spirit alone? Or is he also the same as Christ? For he himself said: God will give you another Paraclete. When he said “another”, he called himself another; when he said “Paraclete”, he declared a similar work, and in a way the same action. So the Spirit is Paraclete, and the Holy Spirit is another Paraclete, and he too is sent by the Father. Jesus, then, is the Holy Spirit: for Spirit is motion, and so motion is Spirit, because it is Spirit; for “it breathes where it wills.” And he himself now says, “the Spirit of truth”; and so his name is Holy Spirit. Christ too is Spirit, and God is Spirit: all, then, are Spirit. But God is Spirit substantially: for in him, in that which is substance, there is also motion; or rather he is substance itself, which is motion, but remaining in itself, as we have often said and shall often repeat so that it may be retained. But Jesus and the Holy Spirit are motion, truly moved motion; hence they work outwardly; but Jesus is the open Spirit, since he was also in the flesh, while the Holy Spirit is the hidden Jesus, Jesus pouring in understanding, no longer working signs or speaking in parables. That he himself is that Spirit, he teaches thus: “I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.” And that he himself is hidden in the Holy Spirit he teaches thus: “The world will no longer see me, but you will see me, because I live and you will live.” This is also given to the Holy Spirit: “that the Spirit of truth may be with you for ever.” And of himself he said: “I am the truth.” Then he added: “whom the world cannot see.” And of himself he said: “The world will no longer see me.” Then he added: “because it neither sees him nor knows him.” But no one knew Christ either: “He came to his own, and the world did not know him.” He added: “You will know him, because he abides in you and is in you.” And he says of himself: “You will see me.” And since Christ is life, he added of himself: “Because I live, and you will live.” And since the Holy Spirit is understanding, and the world lacks both, he therefore added: “because he abides with you and is in you.” But how is the Holy Spirit either in them or already abiding, if he is still to come later, and had not already begun to be with them through Christ? They are joined, then, and from one, which is motion. This is declared more openly in what follows; for he says: “These things I have said to you while abiding with you. But the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all that I say.” “I,” he says, “abide in you.” For life has been given, and Christ no longer departs from them. They are, then, also by spiritual motion, which is Christ abiding in them; and the souls themselves in which the spirit abides and never departs. And yet it is said: “Now I go to the Father.” ### Scripture references - John 14:15: quotation, high confidence - John 14:16: quotation, high confidence - John 3:8: quotation, high confidence - John 14:17: quotation, high confidence - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - John 14:18: quotation, high confidence - John 14:19: quotation, high confidence - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 1:11: quotation, high confidence - John 1:10: allusion, high confidence - John 14:25: quotation, high confidence - John 14:26: quotation, high confidence - John 14:20: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:5: quotation, medium confidence - John 14:28: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Victorinus's statement “Jesus, then, is the Holy Spirit” is translated as written; in the same section he distinguishes Christ as the open and the Spirit as the hidden motion. Editorial references printed in the text, “(Ibid.)” and “(Ibid. 17)”, are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.14 (PL 8:1109a–1110a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-14). ## Against Arius 3.15 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-15 - Source: PL 8:1110a–1111b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains Christ's “going to the Father” as the sanctifying of the risen humanity, and reads John 15:26 and 16:8–11 to show the Father, Son and Spirit joined in sending and in convicting the world. ### Latin text Quid istud sit facile intelligi potest, si accipiatur ex mysterio dictum, et corporali mysterio: nam spiritaliter cum et ipse in Patre sit, et pater in Ipso, quo, aut quare Ibit. Ex eodem mysterio est, quod ad Christum Spiritus columbae similis venit, et quod nunc Spiritus mittetur a patre, et mittetur ad patrem, Christo eunte et petente ut mittatur: a morte enim vita revocata, et vita non ipsa vita, quia Aoyo? est: haec enim mortem nescit, magis haec ipsa interficit mortem; sed vita quae in hominibus resurrexit a morte. Quam utique induit simul cum corpore, et eam ab inferno resumpsit. Propter hanc igitur sanctificandam, eundum fuit ad patrem, Sed corporaliter atque animaliter, id est, in id quod in se pater fuerat penetrandum potentialiter atque existentialiter: hoc igitur modo ivit ad patrem. Denique nec absentiae tempus edictum, sed contra dictum, quod nocte quae sabbatum sequitur apparuerit Mariae, tangi noluerit priusquam iret ad patrem: nuntiavit Maria discipulis: eadem nocte ad ipsos venit ostendens manus et intus, utique tangi jam non prohibens. Post Thomas palpavit, tetigit, Ipso quidem hortante, quia ille desperabat, quod significat sanctificatum jam fuisse. Quam ergo breve hoc tempus est, sed propter mysterium dictum; ibo ad Patrem: nam cum ipse In patre, et in ipso pater sit, quo ibit? Eodem ergo mysterio: quem vobis mittit Pater, quia pater mittit, eum Christus mittit. Denique Sic ait: Mittit Pater in nomine meo, id est, pro me: aut in nomine meo, quoniam spiritus Christus, et ipse Spiritus sanctus; aut in nomine meo, quia Spiritus sanctus ipse de Christo testimonium feret, sic enim dictum: Ille testimonium dicit de me. Quis ille? quem vobis ego mitto a Patre: juncti ergo omnes: ego mitto, a patre mitto, Spiritum veritatis mitto: medius ergo Atyoc, id est, Jesus ipse mittit; motus enim principalis universalisque qui vitalis ac vita est, mittit intelligentiae motum, qui sicuti docuit, ex vita atque ipsa vita est; scire enim quid sit, hoc est vivere, hoc est esse. Hoc autem esse quid est, quam ex Dei substantia esse, quod est Spiritum esse? unde nos spiritales efficimur, accepto Spiritu a Christo, et hinc aeterna vita: Spiritus ergo appellata est ista Trinitas. Nam dictum; Deus spiritus est. Item dictum a Paulo ad Corinthios secunda: Dominus autem Spiritus est: ubi autem Spiritus Domini, ibi libertas. Utique ista de Christo, ipse vero Spiritus sanctus dictus, quos sanciat Sanctos, id est, Sanctos facit; et certe ipse est Spiritus Dei: dictus est enim prudentia, sapientia, omniumque rerum scientia, ita enim de eo subjungit: Ille convincet mundum de peccato, et de justitia, et de judicio. De peccato, inquit, quoniam in me non credunt, vel quod vita sit Christus, vel quod Dei filius et a Deo missus, et qui peccata dimittat. De justitia autem, quoniam ad Patrem pergo: tot enim in mysterio passionis, quia fidem mandatorum servavit et implevit: quippe cum dixerit, cum aliud vellet: Fiat voluntas tua. Itemque quia monitos derelinquens, jam non ita videndus relinquebat, justitiae fuit, iis actis omnibus ire ad patrem, nec ire ad patrem tantum, sed cum illo jam esse: Nam idcirco dicitur: Sedet ad dexteram Patris. De judicio: quoniam princeps hujus mundi judicatus est: mysterio enim crucis omnes adversae Christo ab eodem Christo triumphatae sunt potestates. Haec, inquit, docebit Spiritus sanctus. Quid eligitur? De salute mysterium Paracletus complet, et non completa Christus abscidit: An quia idem ipse Christus est et Spiritus sanctus, vel quia ipse eum mittit, vel quia Spiritus habet omnia Christi? Habet omnia, per Christum celebratur. ### English translation (Claude) What this is can easily be understood if it is taken as said of the mystery, the bodily mystery. For spiritually, since he is in the Father and the Father in him, where, or why, will he go? It is from the same mystery that the Spirit came to Christ like a dove, and that now the Spirit will be sent by the Father, and will be sent to the Father, Christ going and asking that he be sent. For life was called back from death: not life itself, which is the Word (for this life does not know death; rather it kills death), but the life that rose from death in men, which he certainly put on together with the body and took back from hell. For the sake of sanctifying this life, then, he had to go to the Father, but bodily and as soul, that is, to penetrate potentially and existentially into what the Father had been in himself: in this way, then, he went to the Father. Finally, no period of absence was announced; on the contrary, it is said that on the night following the Sabbath he appeared to Mary and would not be touched before he went to the Father; Mary told the disciples; and that same night he came to them showing his hands and side, certainly no longer forbidding them to touch him. Afterwards Thomas handled him and touched him, at his own urging, because Thomas despaired; which signifies that he had already been sanctified. How short, then, this time is! But “I go to the Father” is said because of the mystery: for since he is in the Father and the Father in him, where will he go? By the same mystery, then: “whom the Father sends you”; because the Father sends, Christ sends him. Finally he says thus: “The Father sends in my name”, that is, for me; or “in my name”, since Christ is spirit and is himself the Holy Spirit; or “in my name”, because the Holy Spirit himself will bear witness about Christ, for so it is said: “He bears witness about me.” Who is he? “He whom I send you from the Father.” All are joined, then: I send; I send from the Father; I send the Spirit of truth. The Word, then, that is, Jesus himself, is the middle who sends; for the principal and universal motion, which is living and is life, sends the motion of understanding, which, as he taught, is from life and is life itself; for to know what one is, this is to live, this is to be. And what is this being but to be from God's substance, which is to be Spirit? Hence we are made spiritual, having received the Spirit from Christ, and hence eternal life. This Trinity, then, is called Spirit. For it is said: “God is spirit.” Likewise it is said by Paul in Second Corinthians: “Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” Certainly these words are of Christ; but he himself is called the Holy Spirit, because he hallows the holy, that is, makes them holy; and certainly he is the Spirit of God. For he is called prudence, wisdom and knowledge of all things; for so it adds of him: “He will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment. Concerning sin,” he says, “because they do not believe in me”: either that Christ is life, or that he is the Son of God, sent by God, who forgives sins. “Concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father”: for so much was done in the mystery of the passion, because he kept and fulfilled faithfully the commandments, since he said, when he wished otherwise, “Your will be done.” And likewise because, leaving those whom he had instructed, he would no longer be seen as before, it belonged to righteousness, all these things having been done, to go to the Father, and not only to go to the Father but to be already with him; for this is why it is said, “He sits at the right hand of the Father.” “Concerning judgment, because the prince of this world has been judged”: for by the mystery of the cross all the powers opposed to Christ were triumphed over by Christ himself. “These things,” he says, “the Holy Spirit will teach.” Which is to be chosen? Does the Paraclete complete the mystery of salvation, and did Christ leave it uncompleted? Or is it because Christ himself is the same as the Holy Spirit, or because he himself sends him, or because the Spirit has all things of Christ? He has all things, and it is celebrated through Christ. ### Scripture references - Matt 3:16: allusion, high confidence - John 20:1: allusion, medium confidence - John 20:17: allusion, high confidence - John 20:18: allusion, high confidence - John 20:19: allusion, high confidence - John 20:20: allusion, high confidence - John 20:27: allusion, high confidence - John 14:26: quotation, high confidence - John 15:26: quotation, high confidence - John 4:24: quotation, high confidence - 2 Cor 3:17: quotation, high confidence - John 16:8: quotation, high confidence - John 16:9: quotation, high confidence - John 16:10: quotation, high confidence - John 16:11: quotation, high confidence - Matt 26:42: quotation, high confidence - Mark 16:19: quotation, medium confidence - Col 2:15: allusion, medium confidence - Isa 11:2: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - “His hands and side” renders by sense the corrupt “manus et intus”. “Hallows the holy” plays on sanciat sanctos. Victorinus's “he is himself the Holy Spirit” is translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.15 (PL 8:1110a–1111b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-15). ## Against Arius 3.16 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-16 - Source: PL 8:1111b–1112d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains the Spirit's work as giving knowledge and testimony, distinguishes baptismal sanctification from the gift of the Spirit for knowledge in Acts, and traces the apostles' witness to Christ's resurrection and ascension. ### Latin text Et tamen videamus quid acturus est, Spiritus scientiam daturus gestorum, et insinuationem scientiae, quasi vim testimonii, ac magis judicii habiturus, vel ad poenitentiam vel ad poenam; de peccato, inquit, quod in me non crediderunt. Ergo ut sciat mundus jam poenam suam. De justitia autem, quod ad Patrem vado. Et hoc potest esse de peccato quod injuste fecerunt qui eum in crucem sustulerunt, quia se filium Dei dicebat. Et nunc pergit ad patrem, quod item erit omnium, si in Deum credant, et faciant Dei jussa: ut et ipsi ad patrem pergant; justificantur enim, nam: Abraham credidit, et reputatum est et ad justitiam. Deinde de judicio, inquit, quod princeps mundi judicatus sit. Haec, ut cernitur, non ad salutem, quae jam a Christo completa est, sed pertinent ad scientiam rerum gestarum. Est enim pater loquens silentium, Christus vox, Paracletus vox vocis. Ergo Spiritus sanctus in isto actu alter Paracletus, in salutis mysterio cooperator ut Christus, in Spiritu vero sanctificationis quod Deus. Si igitur et hoc modo Christus quod spiritus, sed Deus in mysterio aeternae vitae Christus, in sanctificatione Spiritus sanctus, sanctificat autem Deus, ut dictum: Sanctifica eos in veritate, patri filius dicit, ergo sanctificat pater, item Christus sanctificat, ut dictum; Et pro iis sanctifico me ipsum, ut sint ipsi sanctificati in veritate. Item sanctificat Spiritus sanctus, nam et baptizare ad sanctificationem pertinet: dictum ergo in Actis Apostolorum: Joannes baptizavit aqua, vos autem Spiritu sancto tingemini. Quod superfudit se illis ad scientiam: nam jam sanctificati fuerunt baptismo, invocato Deo Christo; Spiritui sancto etenim sic dictum est: Sanctifica eos in veritate. Et veritas Christus est; Paracletus etiam Spiritus est veritatis: ergo omnis qui baptizatur, et credere se dicit, et fidem accipit veritatis, id est, Spiritum sanctum, fitque sanctior a Spiritu sancto, et ideo dictum in Actis Apostolorum: Sed accipietis virtutem, adveniente in vos Spiritu sancto. Non ad sanctificationem, sed scientiam, et ad ea quae promisit in Evangelio Christus de Spiritu sancto, id est, de Paracleto. Primum ut testimonium de Christo dicat, sic enim ait: Accipietis virtutem, adveniente in vos Spiritu sancto, et eritis mihi testes in Jerusalem. Sed et Lucas dicit: Nondum quidem misso Spiritu. Jam tamen testimonium dicit. Paulus tamen in omnibus epistolis suis quid aliud agit, nisi de Christo testimonium dicit? et post abscessum Christi, solus Christum vidit et soli apparuit. Spiritus ergo per Christum, et Christus per Spiritum sanctum adfuit. Item dicit testimonium Joannes et Petrus: Quod audivimus, quod vidimus, quod palpavimus. Et in Actis Apostolorum et ipse, et Lucas qui scripsit de iis, de David ita dicit: Propheta cum esset, et sciens quia jurejurando jurasset illi Deus; ex fructu ventris ejus sedere super thronum illius, providens locutus est de resurrectione Christi: quia neque relictus est in inferno, neque caro ejus vidit corruptionem. Hunc ergo Jesum resuscitavit Deus, cujus nos omnes testes sumus. Quando ista dicunt: Cum jam factus esset de coelo sonus, et tanquam vi magna, Spiritus ferretur, qui replevit totam domum, et repleti sunt Spiritu sancto, et coeperunt loqui variis linguis. Deinde dicunt Apostoli de peccato mundi, quod non credidit Christo, in Actis ita: Sicut vos scitis, hunc decreto consilio et praescientia Dei traditum per manus scelestas, et suffixistis eum cruci, et occidistis quem Deus suscitavit. Item in Actis Apostolorum, referente Petro: David non ascendisse in coelum, sed dixisse ita: Dixit Dominus Domino meo, sede ad dexteram. Hoc etiam Paulus dixit: Qui resurrexit, qui est in dextera Dei. Ergo docuerunt quod post resurrectionem ad Patrem ivit. Idem mox adjecit: Qui et interpellat Patrem. Ergo si Christus interpellat, Paracletus etiam ipse. Item in Actis, quod ad patrem ierit, testimonium est: Videntibus illis elevatus est: et nubes suscepit eum ab oculis ipsorum; cumque intuerentur euntem illum in coelum, et reliqua. ### English translation (Claude) And yet let us see what the Spirit is to do. He is to give knowledge of the things that were done, and to instil knowledge, having as it were the force of testimony, and rather of judgment, either to repentance or to punishment. “Concerning sin,” he says, “that they did not believe in me”: so that the world may now know its punishment. “Concerning righteousness, that I go to the Father.” And this can concern the sin that those committed unjustly who lifted him onto the cross because he said he was the Son of God. And now he goes to the Father, which will likewise be the lot of all, if they believe in God and do God's commands, that they too may go to the Father; for they are justified, since “Abraham believed, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.” Next, “concerning judgment,” he says, “that the prince of the world has been judged.” These things, as is seen, pertain not to salvation, which has already been completed by Christ, but to the knowledge of the things that were done. For the Father is speaking silence, Christ the voice, the Paraclete the voice of the voice. The Holy Spirit, then, in this act is another Paraclete; in the mystery of salvation he is a co-worker, like Christ; in the Spirit of sanctification he is what God is. If, then, in this way too Christ is what Spirit is, God is, in the mystery of eternal life, Christ, and in sanctification, the Holy Spirit. And God sanctifies, as it is said: “Sanctify them in the truth”, the Son says to the Father; so the Father sanctifies. Likewise Christ sanctifies, as it is said: “And for them I sanctify myself, that they too may be sanctified in the truth.” Likewise the Holy Spirit sanctifies, for baptizing too belongs to sanctification. It is said, then, in the Acts of the Apostles: “John baptized with water, but you will be baptized in the Holy Spirit”: because he poured himself over them for knowledge. For they had already been sanctified by baptism, God and Christ having been invoked; for to the Holy Spirit it is said thus: “Sanctify them in the truth.” And Christ is the truth; the Paraclete too is the Spirit of truth. So everyone who is baptized both declares that he believes and receives the faith of the truth, that is, the Holy Spirit, and becomes holier by the Holy Spirit. And therefore it is said in the Acts of the Apostles: “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you”: not for sanctification but for knowledge, and for the things that Christ promised in the Gospel about the Holy Spirit, that is, the Paraclete. First, that he should bear witness about Christ; for so he says: “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem.” Luke too speaks of this: the Spirit had not yet been sent, and yet he already speaks of witness. And Paul, in all his letters, what else does he do but bear witness about Christ? And after Christ's departure he alone saw Christ, and to him alone Christ appeared. So the Spirit was present through Christ, and Christ through the Holy Spirit. Likewise John and Peter bear witness: “What we heard, what we saw, what we touched.” And in the Acts of the Apostles both Peter himself and Luke, who wrote of them, say this of David: “Being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn to him with an oath that one from the fruit of his loins would sit on his throne, he foresaw and spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that he was not left in hell, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of this we are all witnesses.” When do they say these things? “When a sound had come from heaven, and the Spirit was borne as with a mighty force, and it filled the whole house, and they were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in various tongues.” Then the apostles speak of the sin of the world, that it did not believe in Christ, in Acts thus: “As you know, this man, delivered up by the decreed counsel and foreknowledge of God, you fixed to the cross by wicked hands and killed; and God raised him up.” Likewise in the Acts of the Apostles, Peter relates that David did not ascend into heaven, but said: “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand.” Paul too said this: “Who rose, who is at the right hand of God.” They taught, then, that after the resurrection he went to the Father. And the same apostle soon added: “Who also intercedes with the Father.” If, then, Christ intercedes, he too is a Paraclete. Likewise in Acts there is testimony that he went to the Father: “While they watched, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him from their eyes; and as they gazed at him going into heaven,” and the rest. ### Scripture references - John 16:9: quotation, high confidence - John 16:10: quotation, high confidence - John 16:11: quotation, high confidence - Rom 4:3: quotation, high confidence - Gen 15:6: quotation, high confidence - John 17:17: quotation, high confidence - John 17:19: quotation, high confidence - Acts 1:5: quotation, high confidence - Acts 1:8: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 15:8: allusion, medium confidence - 1 John 1:1: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:30: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:31: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:32: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:2: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:4: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:23: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:24: quotation, high confidence - Acts 2:34: quotation, high confidence - Ps 110:1 (109:1 LXX): quotation, high confidence - Rom 8:34: quotation, high confidence - Acts 1:9: quotation, high confidence - Acts 1:10: quotation, high confidence - Luke 24:48: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The reference to Luke is probably Luke 24:48 (“you are witnesses”). An editorial reference printed in the text, “(Ibid.)”, is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.16 (PL 8:1111b–1112d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-16). ## Against Arius 3.17 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-17 - Source: PL 8:1112d–1113b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus cites texts on the judging of Satan and explains that the three powers are one deity, referred to Father and Son because both are self-begotten motion of one substance. ### Latin text Dicta sunt jam tria de testimonio in Christum, de peccato, de justitia, nunc de judicio. Sic per Spiritum sanctum locutus Paulus ad Romanos: Deus autem pacis conteret Satanam sub pedibus vestris velociter. Item ipse ad Ephesios: Qui ascendit in altitudine captivam duxit captivitatem. Item in Apocalypsi ipse dixit: Et habeo claves mortis et inferi. Item ibi: Et factum est proelium in coelo, Michael et angeli ejus bellarunt adversus draconem. Et totus locus demonstrat diabolum judicatum. Cum igitur approbatum sit, tres istas potentias, et communi, et proprio actu et substantia eadem, unitatem deitatemque conficere; non sine ratione rerum in duo ista revocantur, in Filium ac Patrem: etenim cum quasi geminus ipse Pater sit, existentia et actio, id est, substantia et motus, sed intus motus, αύτογονο? motus, et hoc quod substantia est motus, necessario et Filius, cum sit motus, et «ντόγονος motus, eadem substantia est: eadem enim haec inter se sine conjunctione unum sunt, et sine geminatione simplex, suo ut proprio existendi versum, vi autem potentiaque: quia nunquam sine altero alterum, unum atque idem tantum actu; sed qui foris est, in passiones incidente, alio autem interiore semper manente atque aeterno, quippe originali et substantiali, et idcirco semper patre, qua ratiocinatione et semper filio. Paulus in omnibus epistolis: Gratia vobis et pax a Deo Patre nostro et Domino nostro Jesu Christo. item: Non ab hominibus, neque per hominem, sed per Jesum Christum et per Deum Patrem. Item in Evangelio: Ego et Pater unum sumus: ego in Patre, et Pater in me. ### English translation (Claude) Three things have now been spoken of: the testimony to Christ, sin, and righteousness; now judgment. So Paul spoke through the Holy Spirit to the Romans: “And the God of peace will swiftly crush Satan under your feet.” Likewise to the Ephesians: “He who ascended on high led captivity captive.” Likewise in the Apocalypse he himself said: “And I have the keys of death and of hell.” Likewise there: “And war arose in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon.” And the whole passage shows the devil judged. Since, then, it has been shown that these three powers, by common and proper act and by the same substance, make up a unity and a deity, it is not without reason that they are referred back to these two, to the Son and the Father. For since the Father is himself, as it were, twofold, existence and action, that is, substance and motion, but inward motion, self-begotten motion, and this substance is motion, necessarily the Son too, since he is motion, self-begotten motion, is the same substance. For these are one with each other without conjunction, and simple without doubling, each by its own proper turning of existence, but by force and power; because neither is ever without the other, they are one and the same, different only in act: the one outside falls into passions, while the other, inward, always remains and is eternal, as original and substantial, and therefore is always Father; and by the same reasoning there is always the Son. Paul, in all his letters: “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and our Lord Jesus Christ.” Likewise: “Not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and through God the Father.” Likewise in the Gospel: “I and the Father are one; I am in the Father and the Father in me.” ### Scripture references - Rom 16:20: quotation, high confidence - Eph 4:8: quotation, high confidence - Rev 1:18: quotation, high confidence - Rev 12:7: quotation, high confidence - Rom 1:7: quotation, high confidence - Gal 1:1: quotation, high confidence - John 10:30: quotation, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Self-begotten” renders αὐτογόνος, garbled in the digital text. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.17 (PL 8:1112d–1113b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-17). ## Against Arius 3.18 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-3-18 - Source: PL 8:1113b–1113d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus ends Book 3 by explaining how Father and Son are two as one, Christ and Spirit two in one motion, and the Trinity one God, recalling the Spirit's role in Christ's conception and baptism. ### Latin text Nos quoque patrem et filium religiose semper usurpamus, et recte secundum rationem supradictam: etenim motus, ut supra docuimus, filius, atque ipse motus vita et scientia, vel sapientia. Certe Paulus plenissime expressit quod intelligi voluimus: Gratias ago, inquit, Deo meo semper pro vobis in Christo Jesu, quod omnes locupletati estis in illo, in omni verbo et in omni scientia. Verbum Christum diximus, id est, vitam, scientiam Spiritum sanctum, ergo unum: In Christo enim, ait, locupletati estis. Quod cum ita sit, si Deus et Christus unum, cum Christus et Spiritus unum, jure tria unum, vi et substantia: prima tamen duo unum diverse, hoc ut sit pater, actualis existentia, id est, substantialitas; filius vero actus existentialis: duo autem reliqua ita duo, ut Christus et Spiritus sanctus in uno duo sint, id est, in motu, atque ita duo, ut unum duo: prima autem duo, ut duo unum, sic cum in uno duo, et cum duo unum, Trinitas existit unum. Nam quid ego de Spiritu sancto, de quo tractatum est pluribus, multa commemorem? Ex ipso concipitur Christus in carne; ex ipso sanctificatur in baptismo, Christus in carne; ipse est in Christo qui in carne, ipse datur Apostolis a Christo qui in carne est, ut baptizent in Deo, et in Christo, et Spiritu sancto: ipse quem Christus in carne promittit esse venturum, quadam agendi distantia; idem ipse et Christus, et Spiritus sanctus; et quia Spiritus, idcirco et Deus: quia Christus quod Spiritus, ideo Deus: unde pater, et filius, et Spiritus, non solum unum, sed et unus Deus. ### English translation (Claude) We too always use “Father and Son” reverently, and rightly, according to the reasoning above; for the Son is motion, as we taught above, and this motion is life and knowledge, or wisdom. Certainly Paul expressed most fully what we wanted to be understood: “I give thanks,” he says, “to my God always for you in Christ Jesus, that you have been enriched in him in every word and in all knowledge.” We have said that Christ is the Word, that is, life, and the Holy Spirit knowledge; so they are one: “For in Christ,” he says, “you have been enriched.” This being so, if God and Christ are one, and Christ and the Spirit are one, the three are rightly one, by power and substance. Yet the first two are one in a different way: so that the Father is actual existence, that is, substantiality, and the Son existential act; while the other two are two in such a way that Christ and the Holy Spirit are two in one, that is, in motion, and so two that the two are one; but the first two are two as one. So, when there are two in one, and when two are one, the Trinity exists as one. For why should I recount many things about the Holy Spirit, who has been treated at length? From him Christ is conceived in the flesh; by him Christ in the flesh is sanctified in baptism; he is in Christ, who is in the flesh; he is given to the apostles by Christ in the flesh, that they may baptize in God and in Christ and in the Holy Spirit; he is the one whom Christ in the flesh promises will come, with a certain distinction in acting. The same is both Christ and the Holy Spirit; and because he is Spirit, he is also God; because Christ is what Spirit is, he is therefore God. Hence Father and Son and Spirit are not only one but also one God. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 1:4: quotation, high confidence - 1 Cor 1:5: quotation, high confidence - Luke 1:35: allusion, high confidence - Matt 3:16: allusion, high confidence - John 20:22: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 28:19: allusion, high confidence - John 14:16: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “The same is both Christ and the Holy Spirit” is translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 3.18 (PL 8:1113b–1113d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-18). ## Against Arius 4.1 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/3-10/#p-4-1 - Source: PL 8:1113d–1114b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus opens Book 4 by asking whether “he lives” and “life” are one or two, and concludes that each is in the other, so that they are one, differing only as cause. ### Latin text Vivit ac vita unum ne, an idem, an alterum? Unum. Et cur duo nomina idem, et quomodo? cum sit aliud in actu esse, aliud ipsam actionem esse, ergo alterum. Sed quomodo alterum? cum in eo quod vivit, vita sit, et in eo quod vita est, vivat necesse est: non enim caret vita quod vivit, aut cum sit vita non vivit: alterum igitur in altero, et ex hoc in quolibet altero duo: et si ut duo, non ut pure duo, quippe cum alterum in altero, et id in utroque, idem ergo. Sed idem in duobus est, et a se alter: is ergo et idem est, et alterum in quolibet horum aliquo. At si idem est, et ad se utrumque idem et unum est; quodlibet enim altero existente quod alterum est, neutrum ut geminum; ergo si utrumque hoc ipso quod est, et alterum est, erit apud se utrumque unum; at cum utrumque apud se unum est, in altero idem unum est: at cum idem unum est, vere unum est utrumque: nullo enim utrumque distat, nec existendi virtute, nec tempore, fortasse causa, et hoc altero prius est. ### English translation (Claude) Are “he lives” and “life” one, or the same, or other? One. And why are there two names for the same thing, and how? Since it is one thing to be in act and another to be action itself, they are other. But how other? Since in what lives there is life, and what is life must live: for what lives does not lack life, nor, being life, does it fail to live. Each, then, is in the other, and from this there are two in either one; and if they are two, they are not purely two, since each is in the other, and the same in both: the same, then. But the same is in two, and is other than itself: it is, then, both the same and other in either of these. But if it is the same, each is the same and one with itself; for whichever exists as other with the other, neither is a twin. If, then, each, by the very fact that it is, is also the other, each will be one with itself; and when each is one with itself, it is the same one in the other; and when it is the same one, each is truly one. For they differ in nothing, neither in the power of existing nor in time; perhaps in cause, and in this one is prior to the other. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.1 (PL 8:1113d–1114b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-1). ## Against Arius 4.2 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-2 - Source: PL 8:1114b–1114c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that living and life are not two things coupled but one substance, since in eternal realities there is no accident and being, living and understanding coincide. ### Latin text Hoc quo facilius judicetur, sic ista melius retractabimus. Vivere ac vita ita sunt, ut et hoc quod est vivere, vita sit: et hoc quod est vita, sit vivere; non ut duplicatum alterum in altero sit, neque alterum cum altero est: haec enim est copulatio: num et ex hoc etiamsi inseparabiliter junctum sit, unitum est, non unum? nunc vero cum ipso eodem opere vitam esse sit vivere, et eodem modo vitam esse sit. De iis enim loquimur duobus, de vivere et vita; non de eo quod ad effectum vitam habet et vivere. Quamquam et ipsum tertium, et in eo quod vitam habet, et ut alterum ex altero, sed ut unum utrumque. Ex quo apparet, quid ipsa per se existentia in suis rebus valeant, cum substantia una atque eadem manente, esse suum nulla sui innovatione custodiant: namque vitae esse suum, est moveri: ipsum autem moveri, hoc est vivere. Esse igitur et vivere est, et esse vitam: una ergo eademque substantia: namque unicuique in eo quod sit suum esse, substantia est. Etenim in supernis aeternisque, id est, in intellectibilibus atque intellectualibus, nihil accidens, nihil qualitas, nihil geminum, vel cum altero, sed omnia viventes sunt, intelligentesque substantiae, purae, simplices, uniusmodi, hoc ipso quo sunt et vivunt, et intelligunt; conversumque quo intelligunt, hoc ipso etiam sunt. Vivit igitur ac vita una substantia est. ### English translation (Claude) So that this may be judged more easily, we shall treat it better as follows. Living and life are such that what living is, is life, and what life is, is living; not so that one is doubled in the other, nor that one is with the other, for that is a coupling: from this, even if inseparably joined, is it not united rather than one? But now, by the very same work, to be life is to live, and in the same way to live is to be life. For we are speaking of these two, of living and life, not of that which has life and living as an effect. And yet that too is a third, both in that which has life and as one from the other, but both as one. From this it appears what existences can do by themselves in their own spheres, since, the substance remaining one and the same, they keep their being with no innovation of themselves. For the being of life is to be moved, and to be moved is to live. To be, then, is both to live and to be life: one and the same substance, then; for for each thing, what is its being is substance. For in the higher and eternal things, that is, in the intelligible and intellectual things, there is nothing accidental, nothing that is quality, nothing twin or joined with another; all are living and understanding substances, pure, simple, uniform, which by the very fact that they are, both live and understand, and conversely, by that by which they understand, by this very fact they also are. “He lives” and “life”, then, are one substance. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.2 (PL 8:1114b–1114c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2). ## Against Arius 4.3 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-3 - Source: PL 8:1114c–1115b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that in God living and life are distinguished only as cause and effect, living being first and life its offspring, though they are always together. ### Latin text Sed quoniam intellectus ita se pandit, atque ita sermo processit, ut et in eo quod est vivere vita sit; et in eo quod vita sit, ideo sit vita, quia vivit: videndum, et intenta ratione quaerendum, utrum naturalis ista complexio, et bigemina existentiae modo pura simplicitas unave sit, an duae. Si nihil interest, vivere, et vita sit; et vitam esse, vi insit et vivere; jure ac merito unam istorum, non geminam copulam ad existentiam sui esse dicemus. Sin autem primum, aliud est vivere, aliud vitam esse. Et item si distantia est, ut nunc vita causa sit ad vivendum, nunc ipsum vivere causa sit, ut vita sit: duo sunt ista, sed gemina inter se, atque apud se simpliciter unita: potentia enim Λόγω suo atque divino refert ista geminari, ut ejusdem naturae ac potentiae, alterum cujus sit id, a quo hoc alterum. Atqui est nonnulla distantia, parva illa sit licet, unde non est frustra geminatio. Etenim non idem actio et agere, nec potentia et operatio, nec, ut verius dicam, Idem causa est, quod effectus: illa enim origo, hic partus est. Unde cum duo ista, vivit ac vita, sit actio atque agere, quamquam in se simulque sint, tamen et alia Vi atque natura existimanda sunt, ut alterum alterius causa sit, alterum existat effectum. Sed ut mihi intelligentia est, ac probata sententia, cum in principali naturalique primae divinitatis exordio, primum sit quod est vivere, secundum vero quod vita; ita enim ratio docebit, et ipsa veritas approbabit; fit ut vivere causa sit, effectusque vivendi vita sit, quod tamen ipsum vivere et vita sit: simul enim ista, et simul semper, quod cognoscitur, erant. Aliud vita ad secunda tertiaque, vel deinceps quae vivunt ordinata causa atque principium, ita scilicet ut idem sit simulque vita quod Vivere; sed hoc vivere, secundum de vita, cum vita est: Illud primum ac principale vivere, simul et vita causa est vitae, et fons, et origo viventium. Scio hoc obscurum videri posse, non tam rerum, quam eorumdem repetitionem sermonum, quod duo ista tali copulatione nectuntur, ut cum sit vivere Vita sit, et cum sit vita, sit vivere; unde constituto quolibet uno, frustra alterius videbitur facta geminatio. ### English translation (Claude) But since the understanding unfolds itself thus, and the discourse has so proceeded that in what is living there is life, and in what is life, it is life because it lives, we must see and inquire with close reasoning whether this natural combination, this twin mode of existence, is one pure simplicity or two. If it makes no difference whether living is life, and if in being life living is present by force, we shall rightly and justly say that there is one of these for the existence of its being, not a twin coupling. But if, first, living is one thing and being life another; and likewise if there is a difference, so that now life is the cause of living, and now living itself is the cause of there being life, then these are two, but twin with each other and simply united in themselves; for it matters to the power, by its divine Word, that these be twinned, as of the same nature and power, the one belonging to that from which the other comes. And there is some difference, small though it be, so that the twinning is not in vain. For action and acting are not the same, nor power and operation; nor, to speak more truly, is cause the same as effect; for the one is origin, the other offspring. Hence, since these two, “he lives” and “life”, are action and acting, although they are in each other and together, they must still be judged of different force and nature, so that one is the cause of the other and the other exists as effect. But in my understanding and considered opinion, since in the principal and natural beginning of the first divinity living is first and life second (so reason will teach and truth itself approve), it comes about that living is the cause and life the effect of living; and yet living itself is also life, for these were together, and always together, as is known. Life is something else for the second and third things, and those after them, that live, ordered as cause and principle; so that for them life is the same and at once the same as living, but this living is second, from life, when it is life; whereas that first and principal living is at the same time life, the cause of life, and the fountain and origin of living things. I know this may seem obscure, not so much because of the things as because of the repetition of the same words, since these two are joined by such a coupling that when there is living there is life, and when there is life there is living; so that, once either one is established, the twinning of the other will seem to have been made in vain. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.3 (PL 8:1114c–1115b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-3). ## Against Arius 4.4 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-4 - Source: PL 8:1115b–1116a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from John 4:24, John 6:63, Jeremiah 23 and Romans 8 that God is spirit, that spirit is substance, and that this substance is living and life. ### Latin text Audi, lector, audi quod miraberis, lector: ista tam dura, tam tortuosa, tam clausa tractatu de Deo et de divinis, simplici disputatione pandemus. Deum certe fatemur omnes, Deum omnipotentem, Deum supra omnia, Deum ante omnia, Deum a quo omnia. Hunc cum fatemur, etiam esse sine dubio confitemur. Esse huic quid credimus? quid putamus?: Spiritus, inquit, Deus est, lumen; et verum lumen Deus est. Quid hoc esse creditur, quod spiritus dicitur? nempe spiritum intelligere cogimur quamdam existentem, viventem, intelligentemque substantiam: in supernis quidem, et circa Deum maxime quasi humilem et alienum; et in posterioribus nomen non credunt convenire substantiam. Sed cur a nobis fugiatur hoc verbum? cum esse, cuique hoc et sit esse substantiam. Et in Jeremia Deus loquens ita dicit: Quod si in mea substantia staretis, videretis Verbum meum. Sic etiam ibi non multo post, et aliis in locis multis. Est igitur spiritus substantia, id est, esse ejus: colligamus igitur χ«τά Ιωάνναν dictum: Spiritus Deus est; et adorantes eum, in spiritu et veritate adorare oportet. Deus, inquit, spiritus est, hoc est Dei, quod est esse: ergo substantia Dei spiritus est, eadem substantia, hoc est quod vivens: non ut aliud sit substantia aliud vivens, sed ipsum vivens ut sit ipsa substantia. Si enim dictum est ab eodem: Spiritus est qui vivificat, utique is qui vivificat, qui vivit, et vitae potentia est: ergo vivit spiritus, vivit Deus. Porro autem quia vivit, ut supra diximus, et vita est, Spiritus ergo et vita est, ut idem Joannes ait: Spiritus vita est; ergo Deus, cum est Spiritus, et vivit et vita est. Paulus etiam ad Romanos: Nulla ergo damnatio iis qui sunt in Christo Jesu, et non juxta corpus ambulant: lex enim spiritus vitae in Christo Jesu liberavit me a lege peccati et mortis. Spiritus vitae, inquit, tria enim ista spiritus sunt, Deus, Jesus. Spiritus sanctus. ### English translation (Claude) Hear, reader, hear what will make you wonder: these matters, so hard, so tortuous, so closed in treating of God and divine things, we shall open by a simple discussion. We all certainly confess God: God almighty, God above all, God before all, God from whom are all things. When we confess him, we also confess without doubt that he is. What do we believe his being to be? What do we think? “God,” it says, “is spirit”; he is light, and God is true light. What is this that is called spirit believed to be? We are compelled to understand spirit as a certain existing, living and understanding substance. Some think the word substance low and foreign when used of the things above, and above all of God, and do not believe that the name substance fits even the lower things. But why should we shun this word, since for each thing its being is its substance? And in Jeremiah God, speaking, says thus: “But if you had stood in my substance, you would see my Word”; and so too there not much later, and in many other places. Spirit, then, is substance, that is, its being. Let us gather, then, what is said according to John: “God is spirit; and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” God, it says, is spirit, that is, the being of God: so the substance of God is spirit, the same substance, that is, what is living; not that substance is one thing and the living another, but that the living itself is substance itself. For if it is said by the same evangelist, “It is the Spirit who gives life”, then certainly he who gives life lives and is the power of life. The Spirit lives, then; God lives. Further, because he lives, as we said above, he is also life; the Spirit, then, is also life, as the same John says: “The Spirit is life.” So God, since he is Spirit, both lives and is life. Paul too says to the Romans: “There is therefore no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus and do not walk according to the body; for the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death.” “The Spirit of life,” he says; for these three are spirit: God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: quotation, high confidence - 1 John 1:5: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:9: allusion, medium confidence - Jer 23:22: quotation, high confidence - John 6:63: quotation, high confidence - Rom 8:1: quotation, high confidence - Rom 8:2: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The sentence about those who think the word substance unsuitable is compressed in the Latin and is translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.4 (PL 8:1115b–1116a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-4). ## Against Arius 4.5 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-5 - Source: PL 8:1116a–1116d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus distinguishes God's living from all created life and describes God as first begetting the universal Ideas of entity, vitality and intellectuality, each of which contains the others. ### Latin text Ac de Deo probatum puto et spiritum esse: spiritum autem et vivere, et vivere facere; et vitam esse substantialiter, ut ista intellecta sint, et simplex et una substantia, ut hoc sit spiritum esse, quod vivere, et vitam esse, Sed non istud quod nostrum est vivere, quod animalium, quod elementorum, quod creatorum ex elementis, quod mundi, quod omnium in mundo, quod Angelorum, daemonum, vel etiam eorum quos in mundo de mundo deos nominant: non, inquam, Illud vivere in Deo est. Hoc Deus est, quod est vivere animae, aut uniuscujusque, aut illius universalis atque fontaneae; non ut ibi Angelorum, non ut ibi thronorum, gloriarum vel caeterorum in aeternis existentium, vel in intellectualibus, vel intellectibus: sed illud vivere, unde haec pro suo existendi genere vitam recipiunt et vivunt; illo quodammodo progrediente, et ista prout capere possunt potentiam viventis vigoris afflante, a se sibi, per se, in se solo simplex, purum sine existendi principio a quo fusum magis, vel progressum, vel natum principium est, per quod crearetur vivere exterorum. Etenim vivere vitam parit; nam vi naturali prior actor, quam actio: agens enim actionem genuit, et quasi ex ipsa vocabulum et rem cum ipse tribuerit, ipse suscepit. Hoc cum rectum; etiam ratione admodum verum est: certe Deus, cui ad omnipotentiam principalemque summitatem hoc nomen convenit Deus: Deus, inquam, primum, si in Dei operibus dicendum aliquid primum: sed intelligentia humani ingenii, ut se excrat et res capiat, rebus vel simul existentibus, vel simul fusis; et ortus, et diversos ortus,et quasi tempus attribuit. Deus, inquam, primo universalium existentias substantiasque progenuit: has Plato ideas Vocat; cunctarum inexistentibus specierum species principales; quod genus in exemplo est όντότuc, ζωότης, vbijotc: Et item τουτότης et τϊρότης, atque hoc genus caetera: genera igitur generum profunduntur, adeo omnium potentiarum potentias universaliter principales. Ergo fivrnijr, id est; existentialitas, vel essentialitas: sive ζωότη?, id est, Vitalitas, id est, prima universalis vitae potentia, hoc est, prima vita fonsque omnium vivendi. Item vono-cc, intelligendi vis, virtus, potentia, vel substantia, vel natura: haec tria accipienda ut singula, sed ita, ut qua suo plurimo sunt, hoc nominentur et esse dicantur: nam nihil horum est, quod non tria sit: esse enim, hoc esse si vivat, hoc est in Vita sit. Ipsum vero vivere, non est vivere quod vivat intelligentiam non habere: quasi mixta igitur et ut res est, triplici simplicitate simplicia. Quidquid enim hoc ipso quo est, et alterum est, non aliquando dicendum geminum, sed semper unum. ### English translation (Claude) I think it has been proved of God that he is spirit, and that spirit both lives and makes live, and is life substantially, so that these are understood as simple and one substance, so that to be spirit is to live and to be life. But it is not that living which is ours, or that of animals, of the elements, of the things created from the elements, of the world and of all in the world, of angels and demons, or even of those whom people in the world call gods from the world: not that living, I say, is in God. God is not this, what the living of the soul is, either of each soul or of that universal and fountain soul; nor as the living of the angels there, nor of the thrones, glories and the rest that exist in eternal things, whether intellectual or intelligible; but he is that living from which these receive life and live according to their kind of existence; that living which in a certain way goes forth and breathes into them, as far as they can receive it, the power of living vigour; from itself to itself, through itself, simple in itself alone, pure, without any principle of existence; from which rather the principle was poured forth, or proceeded, or was born, through which the living of the others was created. For living begets life; for by natural force the agent is prior to the action: the agent begot the action, and though he himself gave it both its name and its reality, he took his own name, as it were, from it. This being right, it is also quite true by reason. Certainly God (to whom this name, God, fits because of his omnipotence and principal summit), God, I say, is first, if anything in God's works is to be called first; but the understanding of the human mind, in order to exercise itself and grasp things, attributes to things existing together or poured forth together both an origin and diverse origins, and as it were time. God, I say, first begot the existences and substances of the universals: these Plato calls Ideas, the principal species of all the species existing in them; of this kind are, for example, entity, vitality and intellectuality; and likewise identity and otherness, and the rest of this kind. So genera of genera are poured forth, indeed the universally principal powers of all powers. Entity, then, that is, existentiality or essentiality; vitality, that is, the first power of universal life, the first life and fountain of all living; likewise intellectuality, the force, virtue, power, substance or nature of understanding. These three are to be taken each by itself, but so that they are named and said to be by what they chiefly are; for none of them is not three. For to be is to be if it lives, that is, if it is in life; and living itself is not living if what lives does not have understanding. They are, then, as it were mixed, and, as the thing is, simple with a threefold simplicity. For whatever, by the very fact that it is, is also the other, must never be called twin, but always one. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - John 6:63: allusion, medium confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato (Plato (works)): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms (garbled in the digital text): ὀντότης (entity), ζωότης (vitality), νοότης (intellectuality), ταὐτότης (identity), ἑτερότης (otherness). The reference to Plato's Ideas is Victorinus's own. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.5 (PL 8:1116a–1116d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-5). ## Against Arius 4.6 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-6 - Source: PL 8:1117a–1117d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Father is living itself and the Son is life begotten from that living, citing John 1:4, 14:6, 7:37–38 and the Samaritan woman to show that Christ is life and eternal life. ### Latin text Verum de iis pluribus alibi. Deus igitur est vivere, quod summum, primum, fontaneum, principaliter principale, tria ista genuit, id est, suo vivendi opere, ut existerent procreavit. Ista igitur opere provenerunt, et haec proles, ista generatio est, ut ab agente actus, ab eo quod est essentitas vel essentia, a vivente vitalitas vel vita, ab intelligente νοησις, Intelligentium universalium universalis intelligentia nasceretur. Prius est igitur vivere, quam vita: quamquam in eo quod est vivere, vita sit: sed vivere ut parens vitae est, vita et proles, et quod gignitur, quippe a vivente generata. Deus igitur est vivere illud primum vivere a semetipso, vivere ante omnium vivere, et ante ipsius vitae vivere: agens enim et semper agens, et nullo principio agens, non ab actione agens est, ne actio vel phantasia principii sit ad agentem, sed ut actio agentis opere, vel progenita sit vel exstiterit, vel effusa sit. Hoc utique agere In eo ponimus, quod est vivere: Deus ergo vivere est, et principale vivere: vita autem ut genitum. Vivere ergo pater est, vita filius: namque quod in eo factum est, vita est, et ipse filius dicit: Ego sum via, ego veritas, ego vita. Haec vita est, quae orta est ab eo quod pater vivit, et hoc illud est: Ego enim de Deo exivi. Item ipse de se ita dicit: Qui sitit, veniat ad me, et bibat; qui credit in me, sicut dixit Scriptura, flumina de ventre ejus fluent aquae vivae. Hinc et illud est quod Samaritanae respondit: Si scires donum Dei, et quis est qui dicit tibi: Da mihi bibere, tu magis petisses eum, et dedisset tibi aquam vivam. Item postea; Omnis qui biberit ex hac aqua sitiet iterum. Samaritana aqua mundana est anima: Qui autem biberit de aqua quam ego dedero ei non sitiet in sempiternum, sed aqua quam dabo ei fiet in eo fons aquae salientis in vitam aeternam. His atque hujusmodi innumerabilibus exemplis satis clarum fit Christum Dei filium vitam esse, et aeternam vitam: quippe qui et ipse ut pater Spiritus sit; De Spiritu enim quod nascitur spiritus est: Spiritus vero spirat, et a se spirat: spirare autem vivere est. Porro quod a se spirat, a se vivit: quod a se vivit, ex aeterno et in aeternum vivit: nunquam enim se deserit, quod sibi causa est, ut hoc Ipsum sit quod existit. Cum igitur pater sit quod est vivere, ut supra docuimus, vivere autem sit vitam esse, itemque quod vita id sit quod gignitur ab eo quod est vivere, necessario id est vita, quod vivere: vivit enim et vita hoc Ipso quia vita est, atque ex se vita est: ex se enim ei est vivere: verumtamen ex illo primo, quod est principaliter vivere, quod est pater, ubi et unde existit vita, cui inest et vivere, et ex se vivere, quod esse filium Jesum Christum probamus, intelligimus et fatemur. ### English translation (Claude) But of these things more elsewhere. God, then, is living, which, being highest, first, fountain-like, principally principal, begot these three, that is, by his work of living procreated them so that they might exist. These came forth, then, by a work; and this is offspring, this is generation: that from the agent the act, from what is entity or essence, from the living vitality or life, from the understanding the act of understanding, the universal understanding of universal understandings, should be born. Living, then, is prior to life, although in what is living there is life; but living is as the parent of life, and life is the offspring and what is begotten, since it is begotten by the living. God, then, is living, that first living from himself, living before the living of all things and living before life itself. For he is acting, always acting, and acting without beginning; he is not acting from an action, lest action, or the imagination of a beginning, should be prior to the agent; rather the action is begotten or comes to exist or is poured forth by the work of the agent. This acting we place in what is living. God, then, is living, and principal living; life is as what is begotten. Living, then, is the Father, life the Son: for what was made in him is life, and the Son himself says: “I am the way, I the truth, I the life.” This is the life that arose from the Father's living, and this is that saying: “For I came forth from God.” Likewise he says of himself: “Whoever thirsts, let him come to me and drink; whoever believes in me, as the Scripture said, rivers of living water will flow from his belly.” Hence too what he answered the Samaritan woman: “If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, Give me a drink, you would rather have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” And afterwards: “Everyone who drinks of this water will thirst again.” The Samaritan water is the worldly soul. “But whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will not thirst for ever; but the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into eternal life.” By these and countless examples of this kind it becomes sufficiently clear that Christ, the Son of God, is life, and eternal life; since he too, like the Father, is Spirit. “For what is born of the Spirit is spirit”; and the Spirit breathes, and breathes from himself; and to breathe is to live. Further, what breathes from itself lives from itself; what lives from itself lives from eternity and to eternity; for it never deserts itself, being the cause to itself that it is this very thing which exists. Since, then, the Father is what living is, as we taught above, and living is to be life, and likewise life is what is begotten from what is living, life is necessarily what living is. For life too lives by the very fact that it is life, and is life from itself, since living belongs to it from itself; yet from that first which is principally living, which is the Father, where and from which life exists, in which there is also living, and living from itself: and this we prove, understand and confess to be the Son, Jesus Christ. ### Scripture references - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - John 1:4: allusion, high confidence - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 8:42: quotation, high confidence - John 7:37: quotation, high confidence - John 7:38: quotation, high confidence - John 4:10: quotation, high confidence - John 4:13: quotation, high confidence - John 4:14: quotation, high confidence - John 3:6: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “The act of understanding” renders νόησις. An editor's reference printed in the text, “(Ibid. et 14)”, is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.6 (PL 8:1117a–1117d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-6). ## Against Arius 4.7 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-7 - Source: PL 8:1117d–1118c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus reads John 6:53–62 to show that the whole Christ, spirit, soul and flesh, is eternal life, and that Father and Son are consubstantial, distinguished only as cause and caused. ### Latin text Ista omnia quae a me dicta sunt, quemadmodum in Evangelio x*r« iwowuv significata atque asserta per ipsa Salvatoris verba videamus: Misit me vivus Pater, et ego vivo propter Patrem. Ac ne qui istum in carne Christum dixisse istud crederet, subjunxit statim; Hic est panis qui de coelo descendit. Deinde vitam esse, et aeternam vitam sic testatur, sic docet: Nisi acceperitis corpus Filii hominis, sicut panem vitae, et biberitis sanguinem ejus, non habebitis vitam in vobis: qui autem edet carnem ejus, et bibet ejus sanguinem, habet vitam aeternam. Omne ergo quod Christus est, vita aeterna est, vel spiritus, vel anima, vel caro: horum enim omnium ipse Khyoq est. Atr/ος autem principalis vita est: ergo etiam ea quae induit vita sunt; unde ista et in nobis vitam aeternam merebuntur per Spiritum quem Christus nobis dat, facta et ista spiritalia. Ac ne qui crederet de Christo carnali Christum ista dicere, et non de toto se, qui est Spiritus, anima, caro, quid ait?: Quid si videritis Filium hominis ascendentem? Quis est filius hominis? Spiritus, anima, caro: haec enim habuit cum ascendit, et cum quibus ascendit. Quid ergo est quod adjicit? ut spiritus intelligatur: Ubi primum fuit: hoc est, spiritus: atque vita, quod Pater, quod Deus, unde haec όμοοΰοχκ, id est, consubstantialia sunt, nullo tempore extra se existentia, principaliter principalia, una eademque substantia, vi pari, eadem potentia, majestate, virtute; nullum altero prius, nisi quod causa est alterum alterius, et idcirco alterum; Sed idem alterum verum quia idem unus Deus; quia vero alterum, idcirco primum et secundum; et quia causa alterum alterius, Idcirco pater, quod causa est; id vero quod ab altero, filius: in substantia vero nulla distantia, nulla temporis discretio, nulla significatio; unus motus, una voluntas, et aliquando phantasia alterius voluntatis, sed semper eadem. ### English translation (Claude) Let us see how all that I have said is signified and asserted in the Gospel according to John through the Saviour's own words: “The living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father.” And lest anyone think that Christ said this of himself in the flesh, he added at once: “This is the bread that came down from heaven.” Then he testifies and teaches that he is life, and eternal life: “Unless you receive the body of the Son of Man, as the bread of life, and drink his blood, you will not have life in you; but he who eats his flesh and drinks his blood has eternal life.” All, then, that Christ is, is eternal life, whether spirit or soul or flesh; for he is the Word of all these. And the Word is principal life; so the things he put on are also life. Hence these in us too will merit eternal life through the Spirit whom Christ gives us, these too being made spiritual. And lest anyone think that Christ said these things of the Christ in the flesh, and not of his whole self, which is spirit, soul and flesh, what does he say? “What if you see the Son of Man ascending?” Who is the Son of Man? Spirit, soul, flesh: for he had these when he ascended, and with them he ascended. What, then, does he add, so that spirit may be understood? “Where he was before”: that is, spirit, and life, which the Father is, which God is. Hence these are homoousia, that is, consubstantial, at no time existing outside each other, principally principal, one and the same substance, of equal force, of the same power, majesty and virtue; neither prior to the other, except that one is the cause of the other, and therefore other. But the other is truly the same, because the same is one God; and because it is other, therefore there are first and second; and because one is the cause of the other, therefore he is Father, because he is cause; and that which is from the other is Son. But in substance there is no distance, no distinction of time, no sign of difference; one motion, one will, and at times the appearance of another will, yet always the same. ### Scripture references - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 6:58: quotation, high confidence - John 6:53: quotation, high confidence - John 6:54: quotation, high confidence - John 6:62: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Never even the appearance of another will” renders by sense “et aliquando phantasia alterius voluntatis”. “Homoousia” renders a garbled ὁμοούσια. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.7 (PL 8:1117d–1118c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-7). ## Against Arius 4.8 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-8 - Source: PL 8:1118c–1119c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains the Son as life, the form in which the Father's hidden living is seen, citing John 1:18, 14:9, Philippians 2:6, Colossians 1:15 and Exodus 33. ### Latin text Haec ita esse sacra primum lectione doceamus, deinde, ut ordo poscit, ut rerum necessitas flagitat, et perspiciamus in iis quibus est una eademque substantia, cur alter mittentis, alter missi potestatem gerant: imperantis alter, alter ministri: alter motu agendi a passionibus libero, alter per infinitos actus in creandis saeculis infinitus, et iis quae sunt in saeculis; subjecit usque ad mortem innumeras passiones. Vivit quod primum est, vivit ex sese, vivit aeternum, et hoc Deus est. Quod Ipsum vivit, ut docui, existentiae, vel substantiae vim habet, et naturam vitae et intelligentiae: immo ipse in eo quod est ei esse, hoc est illud quod dicimus vivere, et hoc quod Intelligere, et hoc Deus est: ergo quod est Deo esse, existentiae causa et pater est. Et quoniam in ipso suo esse Vita et est; et in eo etiam nosse qui sit, et vitae universalis, et Intelligentiae fons est. De tribus enim istis quae simplici existentia in Deo sunt, vel quae Deus sunt, magis esse Deus est: quod ex se habet vivere, et vitam esse, vel intelligere, et intelligentiam esse, ut supra docuimus, et in pluribus. Ut jam reliqua duo, vitam dico et intelligentiam accipiamus, ut genita ab eo quod est esse, suum esse habentia ab eo quod est primum esse motum, pro priore existendi vim ac nomen vitae intelligentiamve sortita. Omnia enim in tribus terna sunt quodammodo et ordine nominata: non quod non in singulis tribus trina sunt, sed quod motu id operantur quod esse dicuntur: esse enim primus motus est, qui cessans dicitur motus, idem intus motus: cum enim se ut existat operatur, recte et intus motus, et cessans motus est nominatus. Hinc nos motum esse dicimus, quod est vivit ac vivere: jam vero cum ex eo quod est vivit ac vivere confecta quodam modo et genita in habitus speciem ipsius quod est vivit ac vivere forma formata sit, haec vita, haec filius nominatur. Ut enim forma quaelibet, vel ibi posita ubi est, vel alibi ducit nos ad cognoscendum eum cujus est; sic vita facit nos nosse quid sit vivere: actus enim est vivere, et in actu momentis omnibus cursus, et ideo dictum: Deum nemo vidit unquam. Quis enim videat vivere, quod Deus est, sine vita quae lineamentis agendis in quadam specie coit et existit, ut sit forma viventis? Ergo ejus quod est vivere, forma est vita, per quam, vel in qua quod est, vivit ac vivere videtur, accipitur et agnoscitur, quod a patre significat dictum Salvatoris: Qui me videt videt et Patrem: Filius enim Dei forma Dei est, id est, vita, quae est forma viventis. Dictum enim a Paulo ad Philippenses: Qui cum in forma Dei constitutus esset, non rapinam arbitratus est ut esset aequalis Deo. Item ad Colossenses: Qui est imago invisibilis Dei. Ergo Jesus Christus et imago, et forma Dei. Diximus autem quod in forma videtur, id cujus forma: et eodem pacto et in imagine videtur is, cujus imago est, maxime si is cujus imago, est invisibilis, sicut heic dictum: Imago Dei invisibilis. Eodem modo dictum in Evangelio κατά ΐωάννην: Deum nemo unquam vidit, nisi Unigenitus Filius, qui de sinu ejus exivit. Et item sic Moysi dictum: Faciem meam non videbis; quis enim faciem meam vidit et vixit? Permisit tamen posterganea sua videri, id est, deorsum, caeteraque praeter faciem. ### English translation (Claude) Let us first teach from sacred reading that these things are so; then, as order demands and the necessity of the matter requires, let us consider why, among those who have one and the same substance, one bears the power of sender and the other of the one sent, one of commander and the other of minister; one with a motion of acting free from passions, the other boundless through boundless acts in creating the ages and the things in the ages, and subjected even to death, to countless passions. What is first lives, lives from itself, lives eternally; and this is God. What lives in itself, as I have taught, has the force of existence or substance, and the nature of life and understanding; or rather, in what is his being, he is himself that which we call living and understanding; and this is God. What is God's being, then, is the cause and Father of existence. And since in his very being he is also life, and in it also knows who he is, he is the fountain of universal life and understanding. For of these three, which are in God by simple existence, or which God is, God is rather being, which has from itself living and being life, or understanding and being understanding, as we taught above and in many places. So that we may now take the other two, I mean life and understanding, as begotten from what is being, having their being from that which is the first being, and having received, by the motion proper to their existing, the force and the name of life or of understanding. For all things in the three are threefold, and are named in a certain way and order: not that they are not threefold in each of the three, but because by motion they operate what they are said to be. For being is the first motion, which is called resting motion, the same as inner motion; for when it operates itself so as to exist, it is rightly named both inner motion and resting motion. Hence we call motion that which is “he lives” and living. But when, from what is “he lives” and living, completed and begotten in a certain way, the form of “he lives” and living has been formed into the shape of a state, this is called life, this is called the Son. For as any form, whether placed where it is or elsewhere, leads us to know him whose form it is, so life makes us know what living is. For living is act, and in act a course at every moment; and therefore it is said: “No one has ever seen God.” For who could see living, which God is, without the life that comes together and exists in a certain shape, with the lineaments of acting, so as to be the form of the living one? Life, then, is the form of that which is living, through which, or in which, what “lives” and living is, is seen, received and recognized. This is what the Saviour's saying signifies, as from the Father: “He who sees me sees the Father also.” For the Son of God is the form of God, that is, life, which is the form of the living one. For Paul says to the Philippians: “Who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” Likewise to the Colossians: “Who is the image of the invisible God.” So Jesus Christ is both image and form of God. And we have said that in the form is seen that whose form it is; and in the same way he whose image it is, is seen in the image, especially if he whose image it is is invisible, as is said here: “the image of the invisible God”. In the same way it is said in the Gospel according to John: “No one has ever seen God, except the only-begotten Son, who came forth from his bosom.” And likewise it was said to Moses: “You shall not see my face; for who has seen my face and lived?” Yet he allowed his back parts to be seen, that is, what is below, the rest apart from the face. ### Scripture references - John 1:18: quotation, high confidence - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:15: quotation, high confidence - Exod 33:20: quotation, high confidence - Exod 33:23: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - Migne prints “primum esse motum, pro priore existendi vim”, which hardly construes; it is translated as “primum esse, motu proprio existendi vim” (“by the motion proper to their existing”), the reading the sense requires. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.8 (PL 8:1118c–1119c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-8). ## Against Arius 4.9 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-9 - Source: PL 8:1119c–1120a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus restates that God, the Son and the Holy Spirit are spirit, and that spirit, living from itself without beginning, is the eternal substance of life. ### Latin text Quot heic mysteria? quot genera quaestionum? quot signa ad declarandum et Deum, et Jesum Christum, et substantiam esse, et unum ambo esse substantiam, et simul utrumque unam esse substantiam, et a patre filio esse substantiam? Quae cuncta, atque hujusmodi alia, nullo modo explicari, intelligi atque approbari possunt, nisi superior tractatus manifestis perceptionibus illucescat. Sit igitur nobis fixa sententia, quod Deus spiritus sit, et spiritus de quo et filius spiritus, et spiritus Spiritus sanctus: De spiritu enim quod nascitur spiritus est: Spiritus autem vivificat. Quod vivificat, utique ipsum vivit: quod vivit, quia spiritus est, a se vivit: et quod a se vivit, hoc ipsum est quod vivit: et quia quod a se vivit, cum ipsum sit quod est vivit, nec aliud habet quod vivere dicatur: non enim vivificatum est, sed vivit ipsum, vivit vel vivere existens: et quia vivit, ac vivere agere est, in eo quod a se vivit, nunquam coepit; non enim expectavit alterum, ut nunquam se deseruit, aut deseret: ex aeterno igitur atque in aeternum vivit principalis et universalis substantia vivendi, non ut substantia sit, et sic vivens; sed ipsum quod est vivens, hoc ipsum substantia est: neque enim cum ipsum vivens, ac vivit, et vivere esse, et quodammodo esse intelligatur, non suum sibi esse quod sit, substantia est, hoc et lectione omni sacra, et rerum ipsarum vocibus spiritus nominatur. ### English translation (Claude) How many mysteries are here! How many kinds of questions! How many signs declaring that both God and Jesus Christ are substance, that both are one substance, that both together are one substance, and that the Son has his substance from the Father! None of these, or of others like them, can in any way be explained, understood and approved unless the preceding discussion shines out with clear perceptions. Let this, then, be our fixed opinion: that God is spirit, and the spirit from which the Son too is spirit, and that the Holy Spirit is spirit. “For what is born of spirit is spirit”; and “The Spirit gives life.” What gives life certainly itself lives; what lives, because it is spirit, lives from itself; and what lives from itself is this very thing that lives. And because what lives from itself is itself what “lives” is, and has nothing else that could be called its living (for it was not given life, but itself lives, existing as “lives” or living), and because it lives, and living is acting, then, in that it lives from itself, it never began; for it did not wait for another, as it never deserted itself nor will desert itself. From eternity, then, and to eternity lives the principal and universal substance of living: not that it is substance and so living, but that the very thing that is living is substance itself. For when the living itself, the “lives” and the to-live, and in a way the being, is understood, its own being, which it is, is substance; and this, both in all sacred reading and by the very voices of things, is named spirit. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: allusion, high confidence - John 3:6: quotation, high confidence - John 6:63: quotation, high confidence ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.9 (PL 8:1119c–1120a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-9). ## Against Arius 4.10 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-10 - Source: PL 8:1120a–1121a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Father is living and the Son life, begotten from living, so that they are two only as begetter and begotten, one substance and one God, homoousion. ### Latin text Spirat autem spiritus, et a se spirat, et Deus spiritus est: spirat vero, hoc est, quod vivit: vivit ergo a se et semper spiritus, qui Deus est: vivit, inquam, atque in actu vivendi, et ipso opere vita cum vivit, opere vitam cum vivit, operatur. Nata ergo est vivente Deo vita aeterna, generata est, et quia vivit, ipsum substantia est: et quod est ab eo quod vivit, et vita ipsa substantia est, per eadem aequalis ac simul, quia ipsum vivit vita est, atque ipsa vita vivendo existit ut vita sit. Spiritus ergo est vivere, et vita spiritus est: complectitur se utrumque, et in utrumque est, et alterum non ut geminum et adjectum, sed simplicitate ex se atque in se existentis, quasi alterius substantis duplicatum, nunquam a se discretum, quia in singulis geminum. Etenim vivere cum vita est, et vita rursus cum eo est quod est vivere: vivere autem, ut docuimus, Deus est, vita Christus: et quia vivere ut generator est vitae: actu enim, quod est vivere, ut quaedam prolis vita generatur, fit vivere pater, filius vita, ista ipsa quidem, qui alterum altero, idcirco duo. Unde enim duo, nisi alterum ab altero? et semper quod ab altero est filius est, illud autem unde alterum, pater. Sed nunc non ita alterum ut discretum atque diversum, sed tantum alterum ab altero, ut conficiens atque confectum, et generans atque generatum, conjunctione substantiae utrumque unum, cum et vivere vita sit et vita ipsa vivere: hinc pater et filius, unus Deus. Et quia conversio naturalis existentiae non nisi una est: ut enim in eo quod est vivere inest vita, et item in eo quod est vita, inest vivere; una sola et conversio est. Unde cum in eo quod vita est, insit et vivere; idcirco unigenitus filius consubstantialis patri, unus et ipse filius, pater unus. Unde una eademque substantia, et simul ac semper: Hoc est enim όροούσιον, ομοϋ ουσίαν βχων, simul substantiam habens, paremque existendi vim atque virtutem, eamdemque substantiae naturam, nullo tempore praecunte; quod nos consubstantiale dicimus, causativo priore quod est vivere, ad id quod vita est, ut illud generans ac pater, hoc genitum ac filius, et sit, et esse dicatur. Ergo quia insunt sibi, et licet pater cum sit, filius non sit: rursusque cum filius, qui est ejus cujus est filius, pater non sit; tamen vi rerum et substantis parilitate, cum vivere vita sit et una sit vivere, merito divina Salvatoris voce pronuntiatum est: Et ego in Patre, et Pater in me. Hinc et illud est: Ego et Pater unum sumus: etenim cum rerum vi et natura ipsa duce nihil sint omnia, si non vivant, et motu vitali vacua, nec molem hylicum aut existentiae vel imaginem, vel speciem habere credantur: fluendi enim ac refluendi natura incondite subsistendi, non recipit vis lubrica inconstans, nec formam recipit, ut aliquid esse dicatur. ### English translation (Claude) The spirit breathes, and breathes from itself, and God is spirit; and to breathe is to live. The spirit, then, which is God, lives from itself and always: lives, I say, and in the act of living, and by the very work, when he lives he is life; when he lives he works life. Eternal life, then, was born of the living God, was begotten; and because “he lives” is itself substance, what is from that which lives, life itself, is also substance, equal by the same reasoning and together with it, because “he lives” is itself life, and life itself exists by living so as to be life. Spirit, then, is living, and life is spirit: each embraces the other and is in both, and the one is not a twin added to the other, but, by the simplicity of what exists from itself and in itself, it is as it were a doubling of the other's substance, never separated from itself, because it is twin in each. For living is with life, and life again with what is living. And living, as we taught, is God, life is Christ; and because living is as the begetter of life (for by the act which is living, life is begotten as a kind of offspring), living becomes Father and life Son; these very two, because one is from the other, are therefore two. For how are there two, unless one is from the other? And always what is from another is son, and that from which the other is, is father. But here the other is not separated and diverse, but only other from other, as maker and made, begetter and begotten; by conjunction of substance both are one, since living is life and life itself is living: hence Father and Son are one God. And because the natural turning of existence is only one (for as in living there is life, so in life there is living, and there is one sole turning), therefore, since in what is life there is also living, the only-begotten Son is consubstantial with the Father; the Son himself is one, the Father one. Hence there is one and the same substance, together and always. For this is homoousion, having substance together, and an equal force and power of existing, and the same nature of substance, with no time going before: what we call consubstantial, what is living being causally prior to what is life, so that the one is begetter and Father, the other begotten and Son, both in being and in name. Since, then, they are in each other, and although when there is the Father he is not the Son, and again the Son, who is the Son of him whose Son he is, is not the Father, yet by the force of things and the equality of substance, since living is life and life living, it was rightly pronounced by the divine voice of the Saviour: “And I am in the Father, and the Father in me”; hence also: “I and the Father are one.” For by the force of things and with nature itself as guide, all things are nothing if they do not live; empty of living motion, they are not believed to have material bulk or any image or form of existence. For the slippery, inconstant force of a nature that flows and ebbs, subsisting without order, does not receive form so as to be said to be something. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: allusion, high confidence - John 14:10: quotation, high confidence - John 10:30: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Having substance together” renders the Greek ὁμοῦ οὐσίαν ἔχων. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.10 (PL 8:1120a–1121a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-10). ## Against Arius 4.11 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-11 - Source: PL 8:1121a–1121d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus describes the life-giving power flowing from the Word through the heavenly orders into soul and matter, so that all things live in their degree, while Christ and the Spirit are life itself from God. ### Latin text Unde carens eo quod est aliquid esse, etiam esse suum tenet, ut recte nullo modo esse dicitur. At nunc comprehensa et tota, atque in partibus circumsistens, et formata, atque hoc corporata, et ad aliquid esse specie aliqua capta et esse creditur: quia motu vitali, et ab infinito certis lineamentis septa, in sensus certissimos promovetur. Ergo hylica quae sunt, ut esse videantur, facit vis potentiaque vitalis, quae defluens a λόγω illo qui vita est, quem dicimus filium, per Archangelos, Angelos, Thronos, Glorias, caeteraque quae supra mundum sunt, primo incorporea, atque αυλα, naturali sua substantia munda atque puriora cum currit ac labitur, lucem suam majore sui communione patitur, mox in animam fontemque animae gradatim veniens. Quia anima imago τού λόγον est, quasi quadam cognitione majorem defluendi accipit cursum. Et quia in animanda anima properat, fit et in animanda ejus petulantior appetitus. Hinc in hylen mersa, et mundanis elementis, et postremo carnalibus vinculis implicata, corruptioni atque ipsi morti sese miscens, vivendi idolum materiae faecibus praestat. Vivunt ergo cuncta terrena, humida, aerea, ignea, aetherea, coelestia, non λόγω illo priore, nec vitae integro lumine, sed propter copulationem hylicam saucia luce vitali, vivunt supra caelestia, et magis vivunt, quae ab hyle et a corporeis nexibus recesserunt, ut puriores animae, et Throni, et Gloriae; item Angeli atque ipsi Spiritus, alii ut in alio, id est, in sua substantia vitam habentes: alii ipsa vita sunt: Jesus autem Christus, et sanctus Spiritus: nam et de hoc mox docebimus: simul cum Deo, sed a Deo tamen vita sunt, sed universali vita vivunt, et a se vivunt, et non in altero habentes quod vivunt, sed ut hoc ipsum illis esse sit vivere et vitam esse, et scientiam esse patre tradente, hoc est, principaliter existente eo quod est vivere. Ergo haec omnia enumerata vivant, et nihil sit vel in aeternis, vel in mundanis aut hylicis, quod non pro natura sua vivat: utique confitendum est esse vim quandam vel potentiam qua cuncta vivefiant, et quasi vivendi fonte in vitales spiritus erigantur, ut ex hoc et vivant, et quia vivunt, esse sortita sint. ### English translation (Claude) Hence, lacking being something, matter so holds its being that it is rightly said not to be at all. But now, grasped and whole, standing round in its parts, formed and so embodied, and caught in some form so as to be something, it is also believed to be: because by living motion it is enclosed from the boundless by fixed lineaments and is brought forward to the surest senses. So the living force and power makes material things seem to be. This power flows down from that Word who is life, whom we call the Son, through Archangels, Angels, Thrones, Glories, and the rest that are above the world; first into incorporeal and immaterial things, clean and purer by their natural substance; as it runs and glides it bears its light with a greater sharing of itself; then it comes by degrees into soul and the fountain of soul. Because the soul is the image of the Word, by a certain kinship it receives a greater course of flowing down. And because in giving life it hastens to give life, its appetite in giving life becomes more wanton. Hence, plunged into matter and into the elements of the world, and at last entangled in the bonds of flesh, mixing itself with corruption and with death itself, it provides a mere image of living to the dregs of matter. All earthly, moist, airy, fiery, ethereal and heavenly things live, then, not by that prior Word, nor by the whole light of life, but by a wounded living light, because of their coupling with matter. Above the heavenly things live, and live more, those that have withdrawn from matter and bodily bonds, such as purer souls, Thrones and Glories; likewise the Angels and the Spirits themselves, some as in another, that is, having life in their substance; others are life itself: Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit (for of him too we shall soon teach). They are together with God, but from God; they are life, but they live a universal life, and live from themselves, not having in another that by which they live, but so that this very thing is their being: to live and to be life, and to be knowledge, the Father handing it to them, that is, that which is living existing in the first place. Since, then, all these that have been listed live, and there is nothing, whether in eternal things or in the things of the world or of matter, that does not live according to its nature, it must certainly be confessed that there is a certain force or power by which all things are given life, and are raised as from a fountain of living into living spirits, so that from this they live, and because they live have received being. ### Scripture references - Col 1:16: allusion, medium confidence - John 1:4: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Immaterial things” renders ἄϋλα. Victorinus's picture of the soul plunging into matter is Neoplatonic and is translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.11 (PL 8:1121a–1121d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-11). ## Against Arius 4.12 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-2/#p-4-12 - Source: PL 8:1121d–1122b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus identifies God as the fountain of all life and being, always perfect and needing no added act, while all else consists of powers and actions that proceed from him. ### Latin text Quis est iste, unde in aeterna atque in mortalia vitalis spiritus spirat, quo vigent cuncta, quo subsistunt, quo actus proprios sumunt, quo et generata sunt, et generatura proveniunt? Deus, sine dubio Deus, et quod menti nostra venerationi est vivendi pater, numenque vivendi. Hunc vel potentiam vitae, ut in aliis diximus, vel vitam summam principemque, et generaliter generalem, atque omnium viventium originem, causam, caput, fontemque dicemus:Principium existentium, substantiarum patrem, qui ab eo quod ipse est, esse caeteris praestat, secundum vim ac naturam percipientium vivendi potentiam, substantiamque moderatus. Quid ipse, aut in quo? Quippe vivus verusque: Unus, ut nos de se loqui sinit: vivit, et ex aeterno et in aeternum vivit, ex se habens illud ipsum, quod ei substantia est: vivit; non enim ei accedere actus aut debuit aut potuit, ne aliquando a se minus: sed semper perfectus, plenus ac totus, in eo quod est ei esse, inest etiam sic esse: caeteraque post Deum sunt, et potentiae sunt, et actiones potentiae, quae vi sua jam esse creduntur, ut omnia et esse, et habere videantur, quae maturis processionis actibus existentia in suo opere heic habere provenit: actiones autem dicuntur, cum existendis processibus gignunt, ac foras promunt quod esse possunt. Ut semen jam potentia est, et culmus, et folia; vel mas aut femina venereae cupiditatis effusio; sed haec in mundo atque sub luna: supra vero in aethere atque coelo actiones sunt, atque actionibus vivunt, sed genita etiam quod futurum fuerant facta: ex ortu enim suo in operationes proprias suasque dimissa, suos actus naturae continentis contagione discurrunt. ### English translation (Claude) Who is this, from whom the living spirit breathes into eternal and mortal things, by whom all things thrive, by whom they subsist, by whom they take up their own acts, by whom they have been begotten and come forth to beget? God, without doubt God, whom our mind venerates as the Father of living and the divinity of living. Him we shall call either the power of life, as we said elsewhere, or the supreme and princely life, general in the most general way, and the origin, cause, head and fountain of all living things; the principle of existents, the Father of substances, who from what he himself is provides being to the rest, governing the power of living and substance according to the force and nature of those who receive it. What is he himself, or in what is he? He is living and true; one, as he allows us to speak of him; he lives, and lives from eternity and to eternity, having from himself that very thing which is his substance. He lives; for act neither ought nor could accrue to him, lest at some time he be less than himself; but he is always perfect, full and whole, and in what is his being there is also his being thus. The rest come after God: they are powers, and actions of a power, which are believed to be by their own force, so that they all seem both to be and to have what existence, through the mature acts of procession, comes to have here in its work. They are called actions when, by the processes of existence, they beget and bring forth outwardly what they can be. So a seed is already in power both the stalk and the leaves; or the outpouring of desire in male or female. But these are in the world and under the moon; above, in the ether and the heavens, there are actions, and they live by actions, but having been begotten they were made what they were to be; for, sent forth from their origin into their own proper operations, they run through their acts by contact with the nature that holds them together. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.12 (PL 8:1121d–1122b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-12). ## Against Arius 4.13 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-13 - Source: PL 8:1122b–1123a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus contrasts the soul, a made substance with self-originated motion, with the Son, life eternally made by the Father's living without beginning, so that maker and made are in each other and of one substance. ### Latin text Quod si haec quae in mundo sunt actus sunt, quanto magis illa quae in aeternis ac supra coelestia sunt, actus sunt et actiones sunt, quae mundana ista genuerunt? Item et anima et Angeli ex animis, et supra animas. Nam et anima αύτογόνω, id est, suo et a se sibi orto motu fertur, αυτοκίνητο? dicitur, unde oxiwro?: ergo semper in motu est, quod est semper agere, et esse ipsam cvipyscov, ut sit ei substantia, ille motus. Dictum est enim: Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram. Habet ergo «ύτόγονον χίνησιν, id est, motum a se ortum, ut Deo est, ut Christo. Sed quia non est ille prior spiritus, idcirco alia substantia, et facta, non a se existens, sed facta ut a se haberet motum: quippe anima aliud, aliud vita: vita enim vivendi habitus est, et quasi quaedam forma, vel status vivendo progenitus, in se continens ipsum vivere, atque id esse quod vita est, utrumque sit una substantia: non enim vere alterum in altero, sed unum simplici suo geminum; et idcirco in se, quia ex se; et ideo ex se, quia aliud operatur in septima simplicitas: quies enim nihil gignit; motus vero et agendi operatio format sibi ex se quod sit, vel potius quonammodo sit: namque esse, vivere est: vitam autem esse, motus quidam est, id est, forma viventis, confecta ipso illo cui forma est: illud autem quod est conficiens, id est vivere: quia nunquam coepit: a se enim quod vivit, non incipit, quia semper vivit, unde nec vita incipit: cum enim conficiens sine exordio, et id quod conficitur caret exordio. Simul ergo ut utrumque et consubstantiale. Vivere autem Deus est, vita Christus: et in eo quod est vivere, vita est, et in eo quod est vita, vivere. Hoc quidem modo alterum in altero, quia confectum et conficiens alterum in altero. Ut enim conficiens in confecto, ita confectum in conficiente, maxime si semper ista: ergo et pater in filio, et filius in patre: etenim conficiens et Confectum conficiens, et confectum conficiente confectum; ergo una substantia, non una duobus, et In una duo; sed quia in qua Deus, in eadem filius, id est ejusmodi: ut enim vivit Deus, ita vivit et filius: In quali substantia pater, in tali filius. ### English translation (Claude) And if these things in the world are acts, how much more are those in the eternal realm and above the heavens acts and actions, which begot these things of the world? Likewise the soul, and the Angels who are from souls and above souls. For the soul too is carried by a self-begotten motion, that is, a motion of its own, arising from itself to itself; it is called self-moving, and hence ever-moving. It is always in motion, then, which is always to act, and to be itself activity, so that that motion is its substance. For it is said: “Let us make man according to our image and likeness.” It has, then, a self-begotten motion, that is, a motion arising from itself, as God has, as Christ has. But because it is not that prior Spirit, it is therefore another substance, and made, not existing from itself, but made so as to have motion from itself. For soul is one thing, life another. For life is the state of living, and as it were a certain form or condition begotten by living, containing in itself living itself and being what life is, both being one substance. For truly the one is not in the other, but is one twinned in its own simplicity; and therefore it is in itself because it is from itself, and from itself because simplicity operates something else within itself. For rest begets nothing; but motion and the operation of acting form for themselves, from themselves, what they are, or rather in what way they are. For to be is to live; and to be life is a certain motion, that is, the form of the living one, made by that very thing whose form it is. That which makes is living, because it never began; for what lives from itself does not begin, because it always lives; hence life does not begin either. For when the maker is without beginning, what is made also lacks beginning. Both, then, are together and consubstantial. Living is God, life is Christ; and in what is living there is life, and in what is life there is living. In this way, indeed, each is in the other, because made and maker are each in the other. For as the maker is in the made, so the made is in the maker, especially if they are always so. So the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father: for the maker is maker of the made, and the made is made by the maker. There is one substance, then: not one shared by two, nor two in one, but because in the substance in which God is, in the same is the Son, that is, of the same kind: for as God lives, so the Son lives; of such substance as the Father is, of such is the Son. ### Scripture references - Gen 1:26: quotation, high confidence - John 10:38: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Migne reads motus (“a certain motion”) where other editions read modus (“a certain mode”); Migne's reading is translated. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.13 (PL 8:1122b–1123a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13). ## Against Arius 4.14 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-14 - Source: PL 8:1123a–1123d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus answers the objection that two living ones would both be unbegotten: the Son lives “because of the Father”, receiving the same substance from him, and so is homoousios in both senses, the same and together. ### Latin text Sed si vivit, inquiunt, pater, vivit et filius, et Idcirco eadem talique substantia ambo. Substantia autem istius vivit, cum utrumque sit, vivit utrumque, sine ortu est utrumque sempiternum. Sed hoc excluditur Evangelistae sacratis verbis, loquente ipso filio Domino nostro Jesu Christo: Vivit Pater. Hic fons sine ortu est. At ubi aliunde principium? Et ego, inquit, vivo propter Patrem. Si ergo propter patrem, a patre accepit: et si accepit, genitus ab ingenito: et si vivit, existentia certa est, visque Substantiae in utroque cum isto uniusmodi vivit, eadem patri et filio, sed filio a patre substantia est. Quod enim de spiritu nascitur, spiritus est: ergo de tali patris substantia, talis filii Substantia. Atque ut obtendatur magis a patre data et Substantia, et eadem unaque substantia, dictum quod vivit, ac vita substantia est: ergo eadem Deo, et a Deo Christo filio substantia; hoc dicente Evangelista: Ut enim Deus habet ex se vitam, ita et Filio dedit ex se habere vitam: ομοουσιϋς ergo Christus cum Deo: id est, consubstantialis, quod est ejusdem substantiae, id est, primae, principalis, universalis, unde omnia quae sunt, et vivunt vitam habentia επακτόν, id est, illatam, non a se genitam, neque quo sit ipsorum Vivere, quod est Dei et filii. Tantum quippe omnibus est caeteris ex vita, quantum largiatur Christus. In Deo vivere ut principale conficiens est vitam, uno atque eodem existentia fonte, nullo priore vel tempore vel potestate, dumtaxat circa substantiam. Unde sive hoc accipiamus esse 6/χοού- σιον, quod eadem sit substantia, nulla dubitatio est eamdem esse, quia et qui vivit, jam vita est, quod est Deus: et qui vita est, vivit, quod est Christus: et utrisque a se vita est, sicuti dictum est: Ut habet ex se vitam Pater, ita et filio dedit ex se habere vitam. Si autem hoc accipimus ομοοΰήον esse, quod est ίμοούatov είναι, simul eamdem esse substantiam, facilius id et manifestius approbatur quo patrem dixi esse vel filium. Vivere enim et vita ita simul sunt, et semper simul, ut et in eo quod est Vivere, vita sit: et rursus id sit vita, quod vivere. ### English translation (Claude) “But if the Father lives,” they say, “the Son lives too, and therefore both are of the same and such a substance. And the substance of this ‘he lives’, since it belongs to both, both live; both are without origin, everlasting.” But this is excluded by the sacred words of the evangelist, the Son himself, our Lord Jesus Christ, speaking: “The Father lives.” This is the fountain without origin. But where is the beginning from another? “And I,” he says, “live because of the Father.” If, then, he lives because of the Father, he received from the Father; and if he received, he was begotten from the unbegotten; and if he lives, his existence is certain, and the force of substance in both is of one kind with this “he lives”, the same for Father and Son, but the Son's substance is from the Father. For what is born of spirit is spirit: from such a substance of the Father, then, such is the substance of the Son. And so that it might be shown more clearly that the substance was given by the Father, and that it is one and the same substance, it was said that “he lives” and life are substance. The substance of God, then, and of Christ the Son from God, is the same, as the evangelist says: “For as God has life from himself, so he has given to the Son to have life from himself.” Christ, then, is homoousios with God, that is, consubstantial, which means of the same substance, the first, principal and universal substance, from which come all things that are and live, having life brought in from outside, not begotten from itself, nor such that their living is that which belongs to God and the Son. For all others have as much of life as Christ bestows. In God, living is the principal maker of life, the two existing from one and the same fountain, with nothing prior in time or in power, at least as regards substance. Hence, if we take homoousion to mean that the substance is the same, there is no doubt that it is the same, because he who lives is already life, which is God, and he who is life lives, which is Christ; and both have life from themselves, as it is said: “As the Father has life from himself, so he has given to the Son to have life from himself.” But if we take homoousion to mean being of the same substance together, this is proved more easily and plainly by what I have said the Father and the Son are. For living and life are together, and always together, so that in what is living there is life, and again life is what living is. ### Scripture references - John 6:57: quotation, high confidence - John 3:6: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Brought in from outside” renders ἐπακτόν; “being of the same substance together” renders ὁμοῦ οὐσίαν εἶναι (garbled in the digital text). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.14 (PL 8:1123a–1123d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-14). ## Against Arius 4.15 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-15 - Source: PL 8:1123d–1124b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus compares the generation of life from living with eternity made by an ever-present act, of which our present time is an image, and concludes that the Son is homoousios with the Father. ### Latin text Etenim capiamus exemplum: quamquam quod dico res ipsa est potius, non exemplum. Deum nihil aliud esse diximus quam vivere, sed illud principale, illud unde omne vivere omnium, caeterorum actio ipsa in agendo existens, atque in hujusmodi motu esse suum habens, quod est vel existentiam, vel substantiam suam habens: quanquam ne habens quidem, sed existens ipsum, quod sit principaliter et universaliter vivere. Id autem quod conficitur ex isto actu, et quasi forma ejus est, vita. Ut enim αιών conficitur praesenti semper rerum omnium actu, ita vivendo et ipso vivendi semper praesenti opere vita conficitur. Et ut ita fingamus, vitalitas hoc est, ut vitae forma ad potentiam suam substantiamque generatur. Sed et nostrum vivere constat ex praesenti semper tempore. Non enim vivimus praeteritum, aut vivimus futurum, sed semper praesenti utimur. Hoc enim solum tempus est, quod ipsum solum, quia solum tempus est, imago esse dicitur τον αίωνος, id est, aeternitatis. Quomodo enim αιών semper per praesentia habet omnia, et haec semper. Nos quoque, quia per praesens tempus habemus omnia quae habere possumus, idcirco hoc tempus nostrum τού «ΐώνος imago est, quia nostrum praesens non iisdem, neque idem semper est praesens: conficitur ergo vivendo vita, ac simul existendo formatur: ac formatio apparentia est; apparentia vero ab occultis ortus est, et ab occultis ortus et natalis est, et ejus natalis, qui et antequam sic oriretur exstiterit; hinc et in vivendo vita, antequam vita; et posterior tamen vita, quia vivendo vita, et semper atque ex aeterno vita: quia in eo quod est, vivit, et ex aeterno vivit, est vita. Cum igitur vivat Deus, sit vita Christus, quia vita oritur existens ab eo quod et vivit; necessario vivit pater, est vita filius, ita ut supra docuimus, ut et in eo quod est vivit, vita sit: et in vita insit et vivere. Ergo filius «μοβύσικ patri, ut supra docuimus cum exemplis. ### English translation (Claude) Let us take an example, though what I am saying is rather the thing itself than an example. We have said that God is nothing other than living: but that principal living, that from which comes all the living of all things; the very action of the others, existing in acting, and having its being in such motion, that is, having its existence or substance; though not even “having”, but existing itself as that which is living principally and universally. And what is made from this act, and is as it were its form, is life. For as eternity is made by the ever-present act of all things, so by living, and by the ever-present work of living, life is made. And, to put it so, this is vitality: that the form of life is begotten according to its power and substance. But our living too consists of an ever-present time. For we do not live the past, nor do we live the future, but always use the present. For this alone is time, and because it alone is time, it is said to be the image of aion, that is, of eternity. For as eternity always has all things through presents, and has them always, so we too, because we have through present time all that we can have, this time of ours is the image of eternity, though our present is not the same, nor always the same present. Life, then, is made by living, and at the same time is formed by existing; and formation is appearance; and appearance is a rising from hidden things; and from hidden things it is a rising and a birth, the birth of one who existed even before he so arose. Hence in living there is life before it is life; and yet life is later, because it is life by living; and it is always and from eternity life, because in that it is, it lives, and from eternity it lives, it is life. Since, then, God lives and Christ is life, because life arises, existing, from that which also lives, necessarily the Father lives and the Son is life, as we taught above, so that in what is “he lives” there is life, and in life there is also living. The Son, then, is homoousios with the Father, as we taught above with examples. ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato, Tim. 37d (Plato (works)): allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “Aion” renders αἰών (eternity). The description of time as the image of eternity recalls Plato, Timaeus 37d. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.15 (PL 8:1123d–1124b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-15). ## Against Arius 4.16 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-16 - Source: PL 8:1124b–1125a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that God is being, spirit and light, and that living and understanding are one motion from that being, so that Christ is life and the Holy Spirit knowledge, receiving from Christ as Christ from the Father. ### Latin text Nunc illud sequitur quid sit cum his sanctus Spiritus explicatus. De Deo ista et dicta sunt, et probata: Deum esse quod esse, Spiritum esse quod est vivere. Item lumen esse quod est intelligentiam esse, et scientiam. Etenim lumen nihil occultum, nihil obscurum esse permittit, aperit, illustrat, illuminat. Est igitur Deus hoc ipsum quod Deus, est esse, est esse primum et principale omnibus quae sunt, pro modo percipientium esse praestans, ut ante docuimus, hoc, id est, vivere, hoc intelligere, id est, hoc quod est esse, hoc est spiritus, hoc lumen. Ista enim in uno ac simplici, immo unum ac simplex, Hoc sunt quod est esse, hoc vel existentiam, vel substantiam jure dicimus. Verum cum principale istorum sit illud, quod est esse; duo autem alia vivere et intelligere motus esse intelligantur, cum omnis motus a quiete nascatur. Quies autem est id quod est esse; ab eo vero quod esse, nascitur motio, exin actio: motio autem primi illius quod est esse, vivere et intelligere. Utrumque enim motus est, et unus motus, duas virtutes praestans officio gemino, una eademque substantia. Nam substantia iis motus est: non enim in iis aliud est esse, aliud moveri. Sic item non aliud est vivere, aliud intelligere, quantum ad substantiam pertinet. Etenim viventis est intelligere, et intelligentis vivere, per actus se vertente uno motu: ita tamen, ut manente opera actuque vivendi intelligentiae actus agitetur: unde cum Christus vita sit, Spiritus autem sanctus scientia et intelligentia: omnia tamen Spiritus sanctus quae habet a Christo accepit, Christus a patre, id est, ab eo quod est esse; exstiterit vita, et vivere exstiterit scientia et intelligere: nec tum, cum illud esse primum ita sit, ut cum esse sit, sit et moveri. ### English translation (Claude) Now follows the explanation of what the Holy Spirit is, together with these. Of God these things have been said and proved: that God is what being is, and that Spirit is what living is; likewise, that light is what being understanding is, and knowledge. For light allows nothing to be hidden, nothing obscure; it opens, illumines, enlightens. God, then, is this very thing which God is: he is being, he is the first and principal being for all things that are, providing being according to the measure of those who receive it, as we taught before; he is this, that is, living; he is this, understanding; that is, this which is being, this is spirit, this is light. For these are in one and simple, or rather are one and simple. These are what being is; this we rightly call either existence or substance. But the principal of these is that which is being, while the other two, living and understanding, are understood to be motions, since every motion is born from rest. Rest is that which is being; from that which is being, motion is born, and from it action; and the motion of that first, which is being, is living and understanding. For both are motion, and one motion, providing two powers by a twin office, one and the same substance. For motion is substance for these; in them being is not one thing and being moved another. So likewise living is not one thing and understanding another, as far as substance is concerned. For understanding belongs to the living and living to the understanding, turning through their acts by one motion; yet so that, while the work and act of living remain, the act of understanding is set in motion. Hence, since Christ is life and the Holy Spirit knowledge and understanding, the Holy Spirit nonetheless received from Christ all that he has, and Christ from the Father, that is, from that which is being; life came to exist, and from living came knowledge and understanding; and this was so even then, since that first being is such that, when it is being, it is also being moved. ### Scripture references - John 4:24: allusion, medium confidence - 1 John 1:5: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:14: allusion, high confidence - John 16:15: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - The last clause is obscure in the Latin and is translated by sense. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.16 (PL 8:1124b–1125a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-16). ## Against Arius 4.17 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-17 - Source: PL 8:1125a–1125d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that life and understanding go forth from God's inner motion as Christ and the Spirit, and that Christ gives life through faith while the Spirit adds the knowledge that completes salvation. ### Latin text Quanquam dicatur quies, movetur autem intus motu unde vivit sibi, et intelligit semetipsum. Ergo a motu interno, extra et quod est foris natus est motus, ab eo quod est intus esse, et ab eo quod est intus vivere, foris vivere, ab eo quod est intus intelligere; foris intelligere, movente se vita et intelligentia. Sunt enim motus eodem modo existente simul, eo quod est esse, ut et intus esset et foris, ista Trinitas intus, cum Deus unus et solus foris, cum Jesus Christus intus et foris, cum ambo Deus unus, atque ex iis cum Deus όμοούοτιον Christo, necessario et Christus όμοοΰσιον Spiritu sancto, ac per hoc et per Christum Deo: ipse etiam de Deo egressus est. Si enim omnis motus qui foris est, a Dei motu qui intus motus est, ergo et iste a Deo. Etenim scientia et intelligentia, existentia est utriusque ac potentia cognoscentiae; idque hoc ipsum motus est, hoc ipso quod motus substantia: necessario igitur in Christo, vel Christus est, et ab ipso habet omnia, quia a vita quod Christus est, substitit intelligentia, et ideo alter. Hoc enim dictum: Et a me habet omnia. Habet autem et a me, duo sunt: ergo alter et alter: Sed quia motus et ipse Spiritus sanctus, motus et Christus, et quia vita vera Christus est, et credentibus in se dat vitam veram, hoc est aeternum, et adest apud Deum credentibus in se, quod Dei sit filios, id que per fidem: idcirco per Christum reconciliamur Deo; propter vero hominum obrutam sui et Dei memoriam, opus est Spiritu sancto, si accesserit scientia: Et intelligere quae sit latitudo Dei, quae longitudo, quae profunditas et altitudo; et confirmata fuerit charitas, et fides in Christum per Spiritum sanctum, quia scientia est, fiet salvus; plene namque ipse dicit testimonium de Christo, et docet omnia, et est interior Christi virtus, scientiam tribuens, et ad salvationem proficiens, unde alter Paracletus. Etenim mortuis per peccata hominibus vita prius danda fuerat, ut erigerentur in Deum per fidem, quod erat jam vivere ex Dei vita quam attulit Christus in carne, ut carni etiam subveniret. Quare confirmatis hominibus per fidem in Christum filium Dei, etiam scientia danda videatur, et de Christo, et perinde de Deo: item de mundo, ut eum argueret. Quae cum intellexissent, facilius ad Dei lucem hominis sui divinorumque intelligentia liberarentur terrenorum mundanorumque contemptu, et desiderio quod excitat scientia divinorum. ### English translation (Claude) Although it is called rest, it moves within by an inner motion by which it lives to itself and understands itself. From the inner motion, then, motion was born outwardly, to what is outside: from that which is being within, and from that which is living within, living outside; from that which is understanding within, understanding outside, life and understanding moving themselves. For the motions exist in the same way together with that which is being, so that it is both within and without: this Trinity is within, when God is one and alone; outside, when it is Jesus Christ; within and without, when both are one God. And from these, since God is homoousion with Christ, Christ is necessarily homoousion with the Holy Spirit, and through this and through Christ with God; for he too came forth from God. For if every motion that is outside is from God's motion, which is inner motion, then this one too is from God. For knowledge and understanding are the existence and the power of knowing of both; and this is itself motion, by the very fact that motion is substance. Necessarily, then, he is in Christ, or is Christ, and has all things from him, because understanding came to subsist from life, which Christ is, and therefore he is another. For it is said: “And he has all things from me.” “He has” and “from me” are two: so one and another. But because the Holy Spirit too is motion, and Christ is motion, and because Christ is true life and gives true, that is, eternal, life to those who believe in him, and is present with God for those who believe in him, so that they are sons of God, and this through faith, we are therefore reconciled to God through Christ. But because men's memory of themselves and of God had been buried, there is need of the Holy Spirit, if knowledge is to be added: to understand what is the breadth of God, what the length, what the depth and height. And when love and faith in Christ have been confirmed through the Holy Spirit, because he is knowledge, a man will be saved. For he bears full witness about Christ, teaches all things, and is the inner power of Christ, granting knowledge and advancing toward salvation; hence he is another Paraclete. For to men dead through sins life had first to be given, so that they might be raised to God through faith, which was already to live from God's life, which Christ brought in the flesh, to help the flesh too. Therefore, once men had been confirmed through faith in Christ the Son of God, it seemed that knowledge too should be given, about Christ, and likewise about God, and about the world, to convict it. When they had understood these things, they would more easily be set free toward God's light by understanding their own inner man and divine things, by contempt for earthly and worldly things, and by the desire that knowledge of divine things arouses. ### Scripture references - John 16:14: quotation, high confidence - John 16:15: allusion, high confidence - John 1:12: allusion, medium confidence - Rom 5:10: allusion, medium confidence - Eph 3:18: quotation, high confidence - John 15:26: allusion, high confidence - John 14:26: allusion, high confidence - John 14:16: allusion, medium confidence - Eph 2:1: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:8: allusion, high confidence ### Translation notes - An editor's reference printed in the text, “(Joan. xvi, 14, 15)”, is removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.17 (PL 8:1125a–1125d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-17). ## Against Arius 4.18 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-18 - Source: PL 8:1125d–1127a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from John 16, Matthew 28 and Sirach 1 that the Spirit, the wisdom and knowledge of God, completes the faith Christ sowed, and that Father, Son and Spirit are homoousia; he then raises the question of how inner life and understanding appear outwardly. ### Latin text Venit ergo posterior, id est, fides posterior operari: recedente enim Christo, qui per miracula et per praecepta seminaverat fidem, quod ipse Dei filius esset, et vitam in se credentibus daret, completa sunt spiritu omnia, et fides cognitione in Christum adulta succrevit, et ipso in Christo semper praesente sic enim dixit: Non enim loquetur a semetipso, sed quaecumque audierit loquetur, et futura annuntiabit vobis: ille me honorificabit, quoniam de mea accipiet. Ergo de vita intelligentia; et ipsa vita de vivendo, id est, de Patre Filius, de Filio Spiritus sanctus; sic enim subjunxit: Omnia quaecumque habet Pater mea sunt: propterea dixit, mea sunt, quia quae pater habet filii sunt, esse, vivere, intelligere: haec eadem habet Spiritus, omnia ergo όμοουσια. Idem tamen ut ostenderet suam praesentiam semper χατά Ματθαίον sic loquitur: Euntes nunc docete omnes gentes, baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii, et Spiritus sancti, docentes eos servare omnia quaecumque mandavi vobis, et ecce ego vobiscum sum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saeculi. Ex hoc ostenditur quodammodo idem Jesus, idem Spiritus sanctus, actu scilicet agendi diversi, quod ille docet intelligentiam, iste dat vitam. Etenim idem ipse et unus motus et primus motus: quo contingit, ut qui vivit, et vere vivat, et intelligat, et vere intelligat, qui vere intelligit, vere vivat. Atque ut idem manifestetur Jesus et Spiritus sanctus, attendamus istud: nempe Spiritus sanctus doctrina est, intelligentia, ipsaque sapientia et Christo et Deo sapientia datur: atque hoc Christus nomine nuncupatur, quod est (Evangelium) Christum esse Dei filium, quod (Evangelium) definitur Dei virtus atque sapientia, ut Paulus ad Romanos. Item Salomon: Omnis sapientia a Deo est et cum eo fuit semper ante aevum. EcCe Ιμοοΰσκη apparet cum sapientia et de Deo datur, et a Deo datur, utique Christo et Spiritui sancto. Et cum dictum est, quod cum Deo semper fuerit, quod o/iOouccov est, ostenditur simul cum patre. Deinde cum dictum, ante oevum, non ergo cum in carne, tunc Christus. Item prior omnium creata est sapientia, si primogenitus Christus, sapientia Christus. Deinde quod sequitur. Spiritus sanctus: et intellectus prudentiae ab aevo. Si Spiritus sanctus prudentia est, et Intellectus; si scientia, et doctrina. Christus est sine dubio, quia ipse est ab aevo, id est, ex aeterno, et primogenitus, et quod est amplius, unigenitus. Haec et alia in multis tractata libris a me, ομοούσιάν probant non solum Deum et Christum, sed etiam Spiritum sanctum. Demus igitur vel accipiamus Deum id esse, quod est primum et principale vivere, quod est verum et principale esse: non enim est, quod non vivit: hoc ipsum vivere operatione ipsa conficere, et generare vitam, apertum fecimus. In eo vero quod vita est, scientia et intelligentia inest. Vivit ergo Deus, et vivendo vita est Deus, et cum vita est, intelligentia est. Sed haec tria ut unum ac simplex, et in eo ut principale sit, id est, hoc sit quod esse magis existentia principali est Deus vivens, necessario et semetipsum intelligens. Hinc enim omnia intelligens, quia semetipsum intelligit. Omnium existentiarum causa est, et ideo omnia: ergo vita et intelligentia in id accepta, quod est esse intus, semper operantur, quod est vivere. Vivere autem Deo hoc est quod est esse. Esse igitur cuncta, unus et omnipotens Deus est. Quid igitur? si intus in se operatur, vel se potius operatur vita et intelligentia? Quomodo ista veluti foris apparere potuerunt? et quid est foris aut intus ον λόγον? Quaesierunt philosophi et docti ad legem viri, quid sint et ubi sint. Quid sint, substantiam eorum vel existentiam, ut explicemus: ubi sint, utrum inde an extra, et in omnibus reliquis, an in utroque et ubique. ### English translation (Claude) He came later, then; that is, faith came later to operate. For when Christ withdrew, who by miracles and precepts had sown the faith that he was the Son of God and gave life to those who believed in him, all things were completed by the Spirit, and faith, grown to maturity by knowledge of Christ, increased, Christ himself being always present. For so he said: “For he will not speak from himself, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will announce to you the things to come. He will honour me, because he will receive from what is mine.” Understanding, then, comes from life, and life itself from living: that is, the Son from the Father, the Holy Spirit from the Son. For so he added: “All that the Father has is mine.” He said “is mine” because what the Father has belongs to the Son: being, living, understanding. These same the Spirit has: all, then, are homoousia. Yet, to show his constant presence, the same Lord speaks thus according to Matthew: “Go now and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to keep all that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with you all days until the consummation of the age.” From this it is shown in a certain way that Jesus is the same and the Holy Spirit the same, though with a different act of acting, because the one teaches understanding and the other gives life. For the same is both one motion and first motion; and so it happens that he who lives truly lives and understands, and truly understands, and he who truly understands truly lives. And so that Jesus and the Holy Spirit may be shown to be the same, let us attend to this: the Holy Spirit is teaching, understanding and wisdom itself; and wisdom is ascribed both to Christ and to God; and Christ is called by this name, since the Gospel is that Christ is the Son of God, and the Gospel is defined as the power and wisdom of God, as Paul says to the Romans. Likewise Solomon: “All wisdom is from God, and has been with him always, before the age.” See how homoousia appears, when wisdom is said to be both of God and given by God, certainly to Christ and to the Holy Spirit. And when it is said that it was always with God, which is homoousion, it is shown to be together with the Father. Then, when it is said “before the age”, Christ did not begin when he was in the flesh. Likewise, “wisdom was created before all things”: if Christ is the firstborn, Christ is wisdom. Then what follows refers to the Holy Spirit: “and the understanding of prudence from eternity”. If the Holy Spirit is prudence and understanding, if he is knowledge and teaching, he is without doubt Christ, because he is from the age, that is, from eternity, and firstborn, and, what is more, only-begotten. These and other things, treated by me in many books, prove that not only God and Christ but also the Holy Spirit are homoousia. Let us grant, then, or accept, that God is what is first and principal living, which is true and principal being; for what does not live is not. We have made it clear that this very living by its operation makes and begets life. And in what is life, knowledge and understanding are present. God, then, lives, and by living God is life, and when he is life he is understanding. But these three are as one and simple, and in it as principal, that is, this is what being is: by his principal existence God is above all living, and necessarily also understanding himself. Hence he understands all things, because he understands himself. He is the cause of all existences, and therefore he is all things. Life and understanding, then, taken into that which is being within, always operate, and this is living; and for God living is what being is. The one almighty God, then, is the being of all things. What, then? If he operates within himself, or rather if life and understanding operate him, how could these appear as if outside? And what is outside or inside of the Word? Philosophers and men learned in the law have asked what they are and where they are: what they are, so that we may explain their substance or existence; where they are, whether there or outside, and in all the rest, or in both and everywhere. ### Scripture references - John 16:13: quotation, high confidence - John 16:14: quotation, high confidence - John 16:15: quotation, high confidence - Matt 28:19: quotation, high confidence - Matt 28:20: quotation, high confidence - Rom 1:16: allusion, medium confidence - 1 Cor 1:24: allusion, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Sir 1:1 (Sirach): quotation, high confidence - Sir 1:4 (Sirach): quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Sir 1:1 and 1:4 are quoted as “Solomon”. A sentence repeated in the digital text is removed. Victorinus's statements that “Jesus is the same and the Holy Spirit the same” and that the Spirit “is without doubt Christ” are translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.18 (PL 8:1125d–1127a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-18). ## Against Arius 4.19 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-19 - Source: PL 8:1127a–1127d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus distinguishes the first, unparticipated being of God, infinite and beyond even the existent, from the Logos, which defines and forms each thing so that it becomes an existent. ### Latin text Haec quidem nos in aliis libris exsequenter pleneque tradidimus. Verum nunc ista summatim breviterque dicemus. Ante ov et ante λόγον, vis et potentia existendi illa est, quae significatur hoc verbo quod est esse, Graece quod est τό είναι. Hoc ipsum esse duobus accipiendum modis: unum, ut universale sit, et principaliter principale: unde in caeteris esse sit, alioque esse est caeteris quod est, omnium post vel generum vel specierum, atque hujusmodi caeterorum. Verum esse primum ita imparticipatum est, ut nec unum dici possit, nec solum, sed per praelationem ante unum, et ante solum, ultra simplicitatem, praeexistentiam potius quam existentiam, universalium omnium universale, infinitum, interminatum, sed aliis omnibus, non sibi: et idcirco sine forma intellectu quodam auditur, et praeintelligentia potius quam intelligentia accipitur, cognoscitur, creditur. Hoc illud est quod diximus vivere vel vivit, illud infinitum, illud quod supra universalium omnium vivere est ipsum esse, ipsum vivere, non aut aliquid esse, aut aliquid vivere, unde nec ov. Certum enim etiam quiddam est ov, intelligibile, cognoscibile. Ergo si non Sv, nec λόγος, λόγος enim definitus est, et definitor: sive enim est ratio, sive existentiae ipsius potentia, sive res illae quas intelligentia accipit, ut uniuscujusque fit et esse: cognoscat quod non cognoscit, nisi animadvertat et capiat quae sint illa, quae praestant unicuique substantiam: et hic λόγος rerum per quem creata sunt omnia, universalis potentia, continens universaliter omnium res, praestans ad existentiam unicuique sua et propria. Ergo quia sua unicuique et propria praestat, defluit et determinat, etiam illud 0v facit. Imponendo enim infinito terminum rebus ad existentiam sui unicuique format rem, et intelligentiam infinitate sublata subjicit. Est ergo in eo quod rerum est potentia ad pariendas efficiendasque existentias λόγος: ex eo autem quod definit, atque concludit unumquodque formam tribuens, Sv, est jam existens, cum fuerit ejus quod est esse certa forma. ### English translation (Claude) These things we have set out thoroughly and fully in other books; but now we shall state them summarily and briefly. Before the existent and before the Logos there is that force and power of existing which is signified by the word “to be”, in Greek to einai. This being is to be taken in two ways. In one, it is universal and principally principal, from which being comes to be in the other things; in the other, being is, for the other things, that which is, for all that come after, whether genera or species, and others of this kind. But the first being is so unparticipated that it cannot be called one or alone, but, by pre-eminence, it is before the one and before the alone, beyond simplicity, pre-existence rather than existence, the universal of all universals, infinite and unbounded, but for all others, not for itself. And therefore it is heard without form by a certain understanding, and is received, known and believed by pre-understanding rather than by understanding. This is what we have called living, or “lives”: that infinite one, which above the living of all universals is being itself, living itself; not being something or living something; and so not even the existent. For the existent is something definite, intelligible and knowable. If, then, it is not the existent, neither is it the Logos; for the Logos is defined and defining: whether it is reason, or the power of existence itself, or those things which understanding grasps so that it becomes the being of each; for it knows what it does not know only when it notices and grasps what those things are which provide substance to each. And this is the Logos of things through which all things were created, the universal power, containing universally the things of all, providing to each its own and proper existence. Because it provides to each what is its own and proper, it flows down and determines, and makes that existent too. For by imposing a limit on the infinite, it forms each thing for its existence, and, when infinity has been removed, places it under understanding. In that it is the power of things for bringing forth and effecting existences, then, it is the Logos; and in that it defines and encloses each thing, giving it form, it is the existent, now existing, since it has become the definite form of that which is being. ### Scripture references - John 1:3: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms: τὸ εἶναι (to be), ὄν (the existent), λόγος (Logos, here kept as a technical term). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.19 (PL 8:1127a–1127d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-19). ## Against Arius 4.20 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-20 - Source: PL 8:1127d–1128b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that God's first being has its own hidden Logos, identical with being itself, and asks how this inner form came to appear outwardly as the image of God without becoming something other. ### Latin text Hoc cum ita sit, videamus an nullius primi, quod est esse, sit λόγος. Si dicimus infinitum, si dicimus immensum, indiscretum, res quibus esse consistit non capimus, non tenemus: ergo λόγος ejus nullus est. Sed quoniam fieri non potest, ut sit quoquo modo et sine λόγω suo sit hoc ipsum existens quod est, infinitus est, sine dubio ei λόγος suus est, sed latitans, et occultus, ut sit in eo quod est esse ipsum λόγον esse; vel potius ipsum λόγος nihil aliud est, quam ipsum esse: hoc autem est quod dixi vere primum, illud et universaliter universale vivere, quamquam, ut docuimus, sit ipsum vivere, et vita, et intelligentia definita: nam potentiae τού λόγου; etenim definitum quidnam atque formatum est: intelligentia vero et definiens: tamen quia ista intus sunt, et in se conversa sunt, omnia αγνωοτα, o&tocxptret, incognita et indiscreta sunt: ita et Deus quod est esse, id est, vivere, incognitus et indiscretus est; et ejus forma, id est, vitae intelligentia, incognita et indiscreta est: sunt enim ista nihil aliud quam esse, quod est vivere. Quod cum infinitum, et forma ejus infinita est, ibi manens, et nihil aliud quam esse existens. Cum autem foris esse coeperit, tunc forma apparens imago Dei est, Deum per semel ostendens; et est λόγος, non jam inde προς τόνθ«όν λόγος, in qua vita et intelligentia, jam ov: quia certa cognitio et existentia, quae intellectu et cognitione capitur: sed quemadmodum foris exstiterunt ista, et utrum ipsa forma, quae intus est emissa, foras est, an se ipsum ejecit? sed cum illa intus forma indiscreta et infinita sit, quomodo et in ea quae foris est, illa cognoscitur, an alia est haec? sed si alia, non ergo ab illa nata vel emissione, vel sua motione: et si ita ut alia non pars, nec eadem nec omnino ομοούσιος, et deinde unde haec apparuit? ### English translation (Claude) This being so, let us see whether there is no Logos of the first, which is being. If we call it infinite, immense, indistinct, we do not grasp or hold the things in which its being consists: so it has no Logos. But since it cannot be that this very existent, which is, should be in any way without its Logos (though it is infinite), it certainly has its own Logos, but lying hidden and secret, so that in that which is being the Logos itself is; or rather the Logos itself is nothing other than being itself. And this is what I called truly first, that universally universal living; although, as we taught, living itself, life and understanding are defined, for they are powers of the Logos, and the Logos is something defined and formed, and understanding is also defining. Yet because these are within and turned in upon themselves, all are unknown and indistinct. So God too, what being is, that is, living, is unknown and indistinct; and his form, that is, life and understanding, is unknown and indistinct; for these are nothing other than being, which is living. And since this is infinite, its form too is infinite, remaining there and existing as nothing other than being. But when it began to be outside, then the form that appears is the image of God, showing God through itself; and it is the Logos, no longer the Logos “toward God” there within, in which life and understanding are now the existent, because it is definite knowledge and existence, grasped by understanding and knowledge. But how did these come to exist outside? Was the form that is within sent out, or did it cast itself out? And since the inner form is indistinct and infinite, how is it known also in the form that is outside? Or is this another? But if it is another, then it was not born from that one, either by emission or by its own motion; and if it is so other, it is not a part, nor the same, nor homoousios at all; and then from where did it appear? ### Scripture references - John 1:1: allusion, medium confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms (garbled in the digital text): ἄγνωστα, ἀδιάκριτα (unknown, indistinct), πρὸς τὸν θεόν (toward God, John 1:1). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.20 (PL 8:1127d–1128b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-20). ## Against Arius 4.21 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-21 - Source: PL 8:1128b–1128d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus rejects the alternatives that the Son's form came from another, from nothing, or from itself, and prepares to explain, outside time, how God as triple power of being, living and understanding begets without change. ### Latin text De altero ergo duo principia, an de nihilo? nihilum non est sub Deo τών όντων. Deinde si Dei potentia vel voluntate exstitit, non est nihilum Dei potentia vel voluntas. Etenim si omnipotens Deus, omnipotentia ejus et causa omnibus, et ipsa existentia est. Num ergo quod reliquum est dicere audemus, a se orta haec forma est? et quomodo cum esset in patre, inscio patre, an jubente? si jubente, non ergo a se: an insciente? est ergo aliquid quod non potentia Dei fuit, aut est quod sine illo fuit, cum de λόγω qui ejus dicitur forma, ita dictum sit: Per quem facta sunt omnia et sine quo factum est nihil. Quid istud est? tantarum confusionum quae separatio? quae si non veritas vel vita est veritatis. Adsit Spiritus sanctus: quid inspiratum nobis sit, modo auditor attendat, pura exponentes simplicitate pandemus. Interea unum moneo, sine tempore haec accipi convenire, ex aeterno semper nullo temporis principio, sed ut sit unum utrumque principium et generator et genitum. Primum in rebus aeternis, divinis maximeque primis manentia quieta, et in eo quo sunt existentia, nulla sui per motum mutatione generarunt. Primus Deus, deinde λόγος, vel νους, vel quidquid alter est, vel uterque, ut spiritus, ut vivere, vel vita, ut intelligentia, vel cognoscentia: anima vero sola mota generationes habet. Haec omnia sic damus: τρώύναμος est Deus, id est, tres potentias habens, esse, vivere, intelligere: ita ut in singulis tria sint, sitque ipse unum quodlibet trium nomen quo se praestat accipiens, ut supra docui, et iis multis: nihil enim esse dicendum, nisi quod intelligit. Triplex igitur in singulis singularitas, et unalitas in Trinitate: ista vero tria progressu suo exponemus. ### English translation (Claude) From another, then, so that there are two principles? Or from nothing? But nothing is not among the existents under God. Next, if it came to exist by God's power or will, God's power or will is not nothing. For if God is almighty, his omnipotence is both the cause of all things and existence itself. Do we dare, then, to say what remains: that this form arose from itself? And how, since it was in the Father? Without the Father's knowledge, or at his command? If at his command, then not from itself. Or without his knowledge? Then there is something that was not by God's power, or something that was without him; yet of the Word, who is called his form, it is said: “Through whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made.” What is this? What separating of such great confusions? Which, if not the truth, or the life of truth? May the Holy Spirit be present: what has been breathed into us, if only the hearer attends, we shall lay open, expounding it with pure simplicity. Meanwhile I give one warning: these things must be taken without time, always, from eternity, with no beginning in time, but so that both, the begetter and the begotten, are one principle. First, in eternal and divine things, and above all in the first things, remaining at rest and existing in what they are, they begot with no change of themselves through motion: first God, then the Word or Intellect, or whatever the other is, or both, as spirit, as living or life, as understanding or knowledge; only the soul, being moved, has generations. All these I set out thus. God is triple-powered, that is, having three powers: being, living, understanding; so that in each there are three, and he himself is any one of the three, taking the name of the one in which he stands out, as I taught above and in many places; for nothing is to be said to be except what understands. There is, then, a threefold singularity in each and a oneness in the Trinity; and these three we shall set out in their progression. ### Scripture references - John 1:3: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - “Triple-powered” renders τριδύναμος, garbled in the digital text; “Intellect” renders νοῦς. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.21 (PL 8:1128b–1128d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-21). ## Against Arius 4.22 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-22 - Source: PL 8:1128d–1129b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that all creatures share in being, living and understanding as images of the higher three, and that God, “one all and not one”, is the principle from whom all powers and acts arise. ### Latin text Omnium quae sunt, quaeque esse possunt, aut esse potuerunt, existentiam, vitam, intelligen– tiamque pro rerum ac substantiarum captu, et participationes praestant, sortita sunt: est enim in omnibus esse suum, vivere suum, intelligere suum, suumque sentire, ut sint ista umbra vel imago trium omnium superiorum; ergo Deus cum sit, ut ab omnibus dicitur, unum, et solum unum. Nonnulli autem dixerunt Deum esse unum omnia, et nec unum; omnium enim principium, unde non omnia sed illo modo omnia. Istud autem hac de causa et primum quidem Deum esse unum et solum. illa tria, quia non copulatione consistunt, sed existendo quod sum ipso, et quod alterum credimus sunt, necessario unum, nec ullo modo alterum. Sed de hoc saepe dictum. Quod vero dictum unum omnia, et nec unum, omnium enim principium, satis aperte dilucideque declarat, patrem rerum omnium et principium Deum: qui cum unum non est, magis omnia est: quia et omnium caussa est atque principium, et in omnibus omnia. Quae cum ita sint, et it Deus omnia, existens, omnivivens, omnividens, et omniintelligens. Et quoniam diximus, confici ab actu potentiam; sic enim se prima habent, ut cum sint omnia a divina energia, id est actus, et operationes; necessarium est, ut a Deo principio omnium potentiarum, universaliter universalium fons et origo nascatur. Iste namque rerum progressus est, ut cum omnia a Deo, potentiae et actus a Deo, qui supra potentias et actus accipitur, orta haec esse credantur. ### English translation (Claude) All things that are, and that can be or could have been, have received existence, life and understanding according to the capacity of things and substances and the sharing that these three provide. For in all there is their own being, their own living, their own understanding and their own sensing, so that these are a shadow or image of the three higher ones. God, then, is, as all say, one, and only one. But some have said that God is one all and not one; for he is the principle of all, and so not all things, but all things in that way. This is so for this reason; and first, that God is one and alone. Those three, because they do not consist by coupling but by existing as what he himself is, and as what we believe to be other, are necessarily one and in no way other. But of this much has been said. And what was said, “one all and not one, for he is the principle of all”, declares clearly and plainly that God is the Father and principle of all things; who, since he is not one, is rather all, because he is the cause and principle of all, and all in all. Since these things are so, God is also all things: existing, all-living, all-seeing and all-understanding. And since we said that power is completed by act (for so the first things are, since all things are from divine energy, that is, from acts and operations), it is necessary that from God, the principle of all powers, the fountain and origin of the universally universal things should be born. For this is the progression of things: since all things are from God, powers and acts from God, who is understood to be above powers and acts, these are believed to have arisen from him. ### Scripture references - 1 Cor 15:28: allusion, low confidence ### Extrabiblical texts - Plotinus, Enn. 5.2.1 (Plotinus, Enneads): echo, low confidence ### Translation notes - The saying that God is “one all and not one” resembles Plotinus, Enneads 5.2.1 (“the One is all things and not one of them”). “Energy” renders ἐνέργεια. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.22 (PL 8:1128d–1129b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-22). ## Against Arius 4.23 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-13/#p-4-23 - Source: PL 8:1129b–1130a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that God is called without existence, substance, intellect and life not by privation but by supereminence, being the pre-existent, unknowable until knowledge, the Son, appeared. ### Latin text Verum cum a nobis dictum sit Deum actum quemdam esse, quod est vivere, sed hoc vivere quod supra omne est vivere, et ex aeterno, atque in aeternum, vivere simul intellectu acceptis, et eo quod est esse, et eo quod intelligere, sed sic simul, ut ne phantasia quidem copulationis sit: necessario autem vivendi actu, uti docui, confitetur atque exsistit forma quam universalem potentiam nominamus, per singula illa formata, quam ex omni exsistentia, ex omniviventi omniviventia, ex omnividenti omnividentia. Haec singula potentiae ut nota et determinata: Sed cum in uno omnia, vel unum omnia, aut cum unum omnia, vel nec unum, nec omnia, fit infinitum, fit incognitum, indiscernibile, incognoscibile, et quod vere dicitur άοριστία, id est, infinitas, et indeterminatio. Etenim omnium esse sit, et omnium vivere et omnium intelligere, et id unum, et sine phantasia alterius unum: unde nec unum, quia omnium principium: unde et ipsius unius. Ex hoc cogimur jam necessario et illa de Deo dicere, ut ejus incomprehensibile sit et esse, et vivere, et intelligere, nec solum ut incomprehensibile ejus sit esse, vivere et intelligere; ut nec esse quidem ista videantur quod ille supra omnia sit: quare et άνύπαρζτο;, et ανούσιο;, et «vou;, et ίξων, sine existentia, sine substantia, sine intelligentia, sine vita dicitur: non quidem per στ«ρησιν, id est, non per privationem, sed per supralationem; omnia enim quae voces nominant, post ipsum sunt: unde nec ov, sed magis προο'ν. Eodem modo prae existentia, praevidentia, praecognoscentia horum quae conficiuntur: Ipse autem praeexsistens, praevidens, praecognoscens: sed haec omnia apparentibus secundis et intellecta sunt, et nominata. Postquam enim apparuit cognoscentia, et intellecta et appellata est praecognoscentia; eodem modo et praexistentia, et praeviventia. Erant quidem haec, sed nondum animadversa, nondum nominata. Unde et incognoscibile omne quod Deus est. Sed quoniam tunc cognoscibile et habetur et dicitur, cum est cognoscentia: relativa sunt enim et se invicem tenent et pariunt, aut invicem interimunt, nondum cognoscibile illud non fuit, quia non fuit cognoscentia. Non quo non fuit illud, quod cognoscibile sibi fecit cognoscentia; sed quia erat quidem quod cognoscibile esse posset, non quo cognoscibile esset: quod tunc fit et accipitur, cum adintelligitur quod et intelligentia esse possit. Hoc modo igitur et in Deo, et esse poterat, et erat ex hoc cognoscibile; quia et esse poterat, ex hoc erat cognoscentia. ### English translation (Claude) But since we have said that God is a certain act, which is living, but that living which is above all living, from eternity and to eternity, living being taken together with that which is being and that which is understanding, but together in such a way that there is not even the imagination of a coupling: necessarily, by the act of living, as I taught, there is completed and comes to exist the form which we call the universal power, formed through those single ones: from the all-existing, all-existence; from the all-living, all-livingness; from the all-seeing, all-seeingness. These single powers are as known and determined. But when all are in one, or one is all, or when one is all, or neither one nor all, it becomes infinite, unknown, indiscernible, unknowable, and what is truly called aoristia, that is, infinity and indetermination. For it is the being of all, the living of all and the understanding of all, and it is one, and one without the imagination of another; hence not even one, because it is the principle of all, and so also of the one itself. From this we are now necessarily compelled to say these things also of God: that his being, living and understanding are incomprehensible; and not only that they are incomprehensible, but that they do not even seem to be what he is, who is above all. Therefore he is called without existence, without substance, without intellect, without life: not by privation, but by supereminence; for all things that words name come after him. Hence he is not the existent, but rather the pre-existent. In the same way there is a pre-existence, a pre-vision and a pre-knowledge of the things that are made; he himself is pre-existing, pre-seeing, pre-knowing. But all these were understood and named only when the second things appeared. For after knowledge appeared, pre-knowledge was understood and named; in the same way pre-existence and pre-living. These indeed existed, but were not yet noticed, not yet named. Hence all that God is, is unknowable. But since the knowable is had and spoken of when there is knowledge (for they are relative, and hold and beget each other, or destroy each other), that knowable was not yet knowable, because there was no knowledge. Not that what knowledge made knowable to itself did not exist; but it was indeed what could be knowable, not yet such as to be known; and that happens and is received when it is further understood that there can also be understanding. In this way, then, in God too, it both could be and was, and from this it was knowable; because it could also be, from this there was knowledge. ### Translation notes - Greek terms (garbled in the digital text): ἀοριστία (indetermination), ἀνύπαρκτος, ἀνούσιος, ἄνους, ἄζων (without existence, substance, intellect, life), στέρησις (privation), προόν (pre-existent). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.23 (PL 8:1129b–1130a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-23). ## Against Arius 4.24 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-24 - Source: PL 8:1130b–1131a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that in God knowledge and the knowable are one, knowledge becoming knowable by turning upon itself, and describes God as resting at the centre of all things, seeing all at once; he then states that contraries arise from contraries. ### Latin text Quid ergo ex his? Quoniam si haec postea nata sunt, fuerunt in Deo; et si fuerunt, quia Deus unum, et ista unum, et id quod Deus, et ista unum quia Deus. Ista idem ergo cognoscibile et cognoscentia; sed ita ut cognoscibile quod sit, hoc sit cognoscentia. Etenim cum virtus istorum trium una sit: esse enim nihil aliud est quam vivere, atque ipsum vivere intelligere, cum sit et intellectum esse; tota vis singulorum in eo est quod est cognoscere, vel esse cognoscentiam. Sed esse cognoscentia non potest, nisi sit cognoscibile: in his autem primis ubi quod est esse, id est quod vivere, et quod intelligere esse cognoscibile non potest, nisi ipsa cognoscentia nondum apparens, sed se intus tenens, manensque quieta cessans, atque in se versa sibi se cognoscibilem praebens. Cum enim ipsa cognoscentia lateat, atque apud se sit, forinsecus in se intrans, sed naturaliter mersa in eo, in quo et esse est manens; ejus formae est, ut cognoscibile esse possit cum excita cognoscentia velut egressa se circumspiciens, cognoscentium se fecerit. cognoscendo se fit cognoscibile suum facta. Hoc igitur, si fas est dicere, hoc inquam, modo illud primum, unum illud solum, illud Deus, vel spiritus, vel spirans, vel lumen, vel luminans, vel existens, vel omniexistens, vel existentia, vel omniexistentia, vel vivens, vel omnivivens, vel vita, vel viventia, vel omniviventia, vel intelligens atque cognoscens, vel omniintelligens, omnicognoscens, vel omniintelligentia, omnicognoscentia, omnipotens, omnimodis perfectus, interminatus, immensus, sed exteris, sibi terminatus et mensus, super omnia, et idcirco nullum de omnibus, ac magis ex quo omnia. ergo unum et solum unum: principium enim omnium. Unde non unum omnia manens in se, neque in se, ne duo, auditor, accipias, sed ipsum manens vel mansio, quies quietus, quiescens magis, quia a quiescente quies, ut supra docuimus. Unde dictus est et sedere quasi in centro τών πάντων όντων, id est, omnium quae sunt unde universali oculo id est, lumine substantiae suae, qua vel esse est, vel vivere, vel intelligere, in eas τών όντων, non versabili aspectu videt, quia et quies est, a centro simul in omnia unus est visus. Haec Deus, sed quomodo Deus pater, et quis filius, aut quomodo filius, et postea quomodo Jesus filius omnium esse principium, ante omnia esse, est omnium esse, principium non tam quietem esse est, quam ipsam quietem esse. Omnia enim quae genita factave sunt ex motu genita factave sunt. Motus autem ipse, quo motus est, antequam movetur quies est; contrarius enim Ortus contrariorum fiunt, ita ut contrario ortu contrarium unde hoc ortum est pereat non esse, ut ex vita mors, et ex morte vita. Item ex eo quod est esse: et ex eo quod non esse, esset. Et item ex quiete motus, et ex motu quies. ### English translation (Claude) What follows from this? That if these were born afterwards, they were in God; and if they were, because God is one, they too are one; and what God is, they are, one, because they are God. These same, then, are the knowable and knowledge, but in such a way that what is knowable is knowledge. For since the power of these three is one (for being is nothing other than living, and living itself is understanding, since it is also being understood), the whole force of each lies in knowing, or in being knowledge. But there cannot be knowledge unless there is something knowable; and in these first things, where being is what living and understanding are, the knowable can only be knowledge itself, not yet appearing, but holding itself within, remaining at rest, ceasing, turned toward itself and presenting itself to itself as knowable. For when knowledge itself lies hidden and is with itself, entering into itself from outside, yet naturally immersed in that in which being too remains, it belongs to its form that it can be knowable; when knowledge is roused and, as it were going out, looks round upon itself and makes itself knowing, by knowing itself it becomes knowable, made its own. In this way, then, if it is right to say so, in this way, I say, is that first, that one alone, that God, or spirit, or breathing, or light, or illumining, or existing, or all-existing, or existence, or all-existence, or living, or all-living, or life, or livingness, or all-livingness, or understanding and knowing, or all-understanding, all-knowing, or all-understanding, all-knowledge, almighty, perfect in every way, unbounded, immense, but for others; to himself bounded and measured; above all, and therefore none of all things, but rather he from whom all things are. He is, then, one and only one, for he is the principle of all. Hence he is not one-all, remaining in himself, nor in himself (lest, hearer, you take it as two), but he is himself remaining, or abiding, rest at rest, or rather resting, because rest comes from the one resting, as we taught above. Hence he is said also to sit as in the centre of all things that are, from where, with a universal eye, that is, with the light of his substance, by which he is, or lives, or understands, he sees into the things that are with no turning gaze, because he is rest; from the centre there is one sight into all things at once. These things God is. But how God is Father, and who the Son is, or how he is Son, and afterwards how Jesus is the Son: to be the principle of all, to be before all, is to be all; and the principle is not so much to be at rest as to be rest itself. For all things that were begotten or made were begotten or made from motion. And motion itself, by which it is motion, before it is moved is rest; for contraries arise from contraries, so that by the arising of the contrary, the contrary from which it arose perishes into non-being, as death from life and life from death; likewise from that which is being, and from that which is non-being there would be being; and likewise motion from rest, and rest from motion. ### Extrabiblical texts - Plato, Phaed. 70d–71e (Plato (works)): allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - The principle that contraries arise from contraries recalls Plato, Phaedo 70d–71e. “All things that are” renders τῶν πάντων ὄντων. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.24 (PL 8:1130b–1131a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24). ## Against Arius 4.25 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-25 - Source: PL 8:1131a–1132a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that contraries do not truly perish: death in the world dissolves only the form of composite bodies, whose elements remain, while in divine things there is no death and procession is manifestation, not birth. ### Latin text Sed advertamus acrius, atque audaci intelligentia rerum vim, altitudinemque videamus, ut proposita ista sunt, si diligens circumspector advertat, reperiet esse existentiam quamdam et in his, quorum phantasia quadam est interire: namque cum vita sit cui adest esse, ex qua mors nascitur; est etiam morti esse, si ex morte nascitur vita. Itemque si ex eo quod est esse, efficitur non esse; necessario erit etiam ipsum non esse, si ex eo nascitur quod est esse: itemque si cessatio est, motus esse cessationem necesse est, si motus nascatur. Quid igitur? nonne ortu contrariorum contraria, aut mori, aut non esse creduntur? Videtur ita, sed contra est: nam utraque manent, nec intereunt ab aeterna substantiali sua qualitate. Quomodo istud sit, dicam, adsit Deus, fiet facilior explicatio. Esse in aeternis hoc est esse, quod vivere, quod intelligere. Saepius haec et diximus, et probavimus. Id autem esse ita est, ut sint ibi viventes, intelligentesque substantiae: has accipiamus pro modo existentium res tres praestare, et participatione sui cuncta retinere, et in noctis vigere, sola esse simplicia, divina, aeterna: in mundanis vero et hylicis inesse quidem, sed carnalibus variis ac mortalibus sustineri. Heic ergo mors si est, corporum mors est; et si plenior adhibeatur intentio, nec corporum, id est, in eo quod hyle sunt; sed horum corporum, in ea specie quae nunc est, effecta quodam interitu dissolutio: sola igitur corporis species dissoluta cum in elementa dispergitur, manent ac sunt unde victura reparantur. Etenim cum In mundo et hyle sit, quae elementis certis semper existit, et cum imagines illorum trium, heic quoque, id est, in mundo se praebeant, quid mors agit illa cum et in suis imaginibus aeterna sint? Imagines dico potentias per omnia a lineis animae defluentes. Cum igitur aeterna sint ista, aeterna et in hyle elementa: mors si sola composita solvit funditus interit. Unde recte dicitur, quod ex vita mors efficiatur, quod ex vigore vivendi compositi cujuslibet corporis fiat usque ad certa resolutio, et rursus in aliam compositionem iisdem cunctis fiat ex morte reparatio. Hoc modo et esse in mundo accipiendum, hoc modo heic et quies, et motus: at in divinis, quia nulla sunt corpora, mors nulla: sed et vita alio modo, quippe illa principalis et vera; et idcirco ibi progressio non natalis, aut si placet, natalis magis apparentia et manifestatio. Item illa alio modo esse et non esse, et alio motus atque cessatio: etenim Deus vivit; id autem est esse et intelligere, quae ista unum tria conficiunt, potentias tres, existentiam, vitam, intelligentiam. ### English translation (Claude) But let us attend more keenly, and with bold understanding see the force and height of things. As these things have been set out, a careful observer will find that there is a certain existence even in those things that appear to perish. For since life is that to which being belongs, and from it death is born, death too has being, if life is born from death. Likewise, if non-being is made from that which is being, necessarily non-being too will be, if what being is is born from it. Likewise, if there is cessation, the cessation of motion must exist, if motion is born from it. What, then? Are contraries not believed, through the arising of their contraries, either to die or not to be? It seems so, but the opposite is true: for both remain, and do not perish from their eternal substantial quality. How this is I shall say; with God's help the explanation will be easier. In eternal things to be is this: what living and understanding are. We have said this often, and proved it. And this being is such that there are living and understanding substances there. Let us take these as providing three things according to the mode of the existents, and holding all things together by sharing in themselves; they thrive in the things known; they alone are simple, divine, eternal. In the things of the world and of matter they are present, but are sustained by various fleshly and mortal things. Here, then, if there is death, it is the death of bodies; and if closer attention is paid, not even of bodies, insofar as they are matter, but the dissolution of these bodies in the form they now have, brought about by a certain perishing. Only the form of the body, then, is dissolved when it is scattered into the elements; the things from which what is to live is restored remain and are. For since in the world there is matter, which always exists in certain elements, and since images of those three present themselves here too, that is, in the world, what does death do, since they are eternal even in their images? By images I mean the powers flowing down through all things from the lines of the soul. Since, then, these are eternal, and the elements in matter are eternal, death, if it dissolves only composite things, itself perishes utterly. Hence it is rightly said that death is made from life, because from the vigour of living of any composite body there comes a dissolution up to a certain point; and again from death there comes a restoration of all the same things into another composition. In this way being too is to be understood in the world, and in this way here both rest and motion. But in divine things, since there are no bodies, there is no death; and life too is of another kind, since it is principal and true. Therefore procession there is not birth, or, if you like, birth there is rather appearance and manifestation. Likewise being and non-being are of another kind there, and motion and cessation of another kind. For God lives; and this is being and understanding, which make these three one: three powers, existence, life and understanding. ### Translation notes - “They thrive in the things known” renders the uncertain “in noctis vigere” by sense. The clause “death … itself perishes utterly” is ambiguous in the Latin. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.25 (PL 8:1131a–1132a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-25). ## Against Arius 4.26 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-26 - Source: PL 8:1132a–1132c - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Son is the Father's inherent, consubstantial form, so that form and substance coincide and the Son is the same as the Father, God above being, living and understanding. ### Latin text Sed quia illa tria unum quomodo sint, docui: unum quodlibet tria sit, sic et ista tria unum sunt: sed in Deo haec tria esse sunt, in filio vivere, in Spiritu sancto intelligere: ergo esse, vivere, Intelligere, in Deo esse sunt: existentia autem, vita, intelligentia, forma sunt: actu enim interiore et occulto ejus, quod est esse, vivere, intelligere: intus enim ita sunt et occulta, magisque supra esse, et supra vivere, et supra intelligere Deus est. Unde et ανούσιος, vel ανύπαρκτος et item άζων, avoof dicitur, praeintelligentia quadam inventus, et magis per formam suam cognitus, sed inhaerentem et consubstantialem sibi. Et hoc est, quod in patre est filius: quod cum ita sit, idem filius quod pater, unde et filius Deus, quia hoc est forma, quia id quod est iis cujus forma. Etenim cum esse, vivere, intelligere Deus sit, forma autem sit existentia, vita, intelligentia: ista me dicere sic accipias velim, ut supra ista sit Deus. Quod si ita est, fit idem forma quod substantia: Eodem enim modo valeat et sunt ista habentia vel existentia, esse, vivere, intelligere: ita cum duo λόγοι sint, unus per quem unumquidque sit: alius per quem quomodo sit: tamen quia eadem vi habet, quomodo et quidque sit, necessario fit unus λόγος, idem valente forma quod substantia. Ergo si idem valet, et idem est forma, istius tamen substantiae quod ipsa substantia, substantialis enim forma est. idem erit filius quod pater, aut neque pater, neque filius ante egressum foras, sed unum ipsum solum. ### English translation (Claude) How those three are one, I have taught: any one of them is three; and so these three are one. But in God these three are being; in the Son, living; in the Holy Spirit, understanding. So being, living and understanding are, in God, being; and existence, life and understanding are form, by the inner and hidden act of that which is being, living and understanding. For within they are so, and hidden; and God is rather above being, above living, above understanding. Hence he is called without substance, or without existence, and likewise without life and without intellect, found by a certain pre-understanding, and known rather through his form, but a form inherent in him and consubstantial with him. And this is what it means that the Son is in the Father. Since this is so, the Son is the same as the Father; hence the Son too is God, because this is the form, and because the form is the same as that whose form it is. For since God is being, living and understanding, and the form is existence, life and understanding, I would have you take my words so that God is above these. If this is so, form becomes the same as substance; for these hold and are in the same way: having, or existence, being, living, understanding. So, though there are two logoi, one through which each thing is, the other through which it is in the way it is, yet because by the same force it has both how and what each thing is, necessarily there is one Logos, the form being of the same force as the substance. If, then, it has the same force, and the form is the same, yet the form of this substance being the substance itself (for it is a substantial form), the Son will be the same as the Father; or else, before the going forth, there is neither Father nor Son, but the one itself alone. ### Scripture references - John 14:10: allusion, medium confidence - Phil 2:6: allusion, low confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms (garbled): ἀνούσιος, ἀνύπαρκτος, ἄζων, ἄνους; λόγοι (logoi, principles). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.26 (PL 8:1132a–1132c; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-26). ## Against Arius 4.27 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-27 - Source: PL 8:1132c–1132d - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that God is intelligence understanding itself, and that by this self-understanding, without motion, he exists and lives, unbegotten and one. ### Latin text Hoc cum ita sit; cum sit et intelligere et intelligentia, sit idem intelligentia quod vita et quod est esse: cum autem magis agendi virtus sit intelligere, quam esse, quam vivere; et cum hoc esse sit intelligere quod sit, et cum hoc sit vivere, intelligere quod vivat: necessario sit intelligere, vel intelligentia Deus est, cum intelligit Deus, se ipsum intelligit, cum autem se ipsum intelligit, non ut alter alterum, fit ut intelligentia ipsa se intelligat. Quod cum est, se esse efficit, atque in existentiam provenit, fitque sibi quod est esse: atque eodem modo intelligendo existit et suum vivere, quibus cunctis a se natis, vel magis a se existentibus, ingenitus Deus est, existens ex ingenitis: quae unum cum sint, unum et simplex, unus Deus est, et haec est ut intus intelligentia, quae sine aliquo motu se intelligit, quippe quae cum intelligit, existit, et cum existit, intelligit. Et hoc est Deus. et utique hoc ex aeterno atque in aeternum. ### English translation (Claude) This being so, since there is both understanding and intelligence, intelligence is the same as life and as that which is being. But since understanding is more the power of acting than being or living, and since being is understanding that one is, and living is understanding that one lives, necessarily understanding, or intelligence, is God. When God understands, he understands himself; and when he understands himself, not as one understanding another, it comes about that intelligence itself understands itself. When this is so, it makes itself to be, comes forth into existence, and becomes for itself what being is; and in the same way, by understanding, its living also exists. Since all these are born from itself, or rather exist from itself, God is unbegotten, existing from things unbegotten; and since these are one, one and simple, he is one God. And this is as it were the inner intelligence, which understands itself without any motion, since when it understands it exists, and when it exists it understands. And this is God, and this certainly from eternity and to eternity. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.27 (PL 8:1132c–1132d; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-27). ## Against Arius 4.28 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-28 - Source: PL 8:1132d–1133b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Son is the form and image through which God is known, the intelligence that, understanding itself, came forth outward from the inner intelligence which is the Father. ### Latin text Verum quoniam imaginem Dei filium dicimus Dei, genita est enim forma, ut ab eo quod est esse, vivere, intelligere, gigneretur existentia, vita, intelligentia. Quaedam enim in his forma est, per quam ut per imaginem intelligitur quid sit esse, vivere et intelligere; necessario per formam intelligitur Deus, nam ipsum nemo vidit unquam. Ergo forma Dei cum accipitur in Deo Deus est cum autem intelligit se Deus, per formam se intelligit; sed et ipsa forma intelligat necesse est. Etenim intelligens ac vivens existentia, cum nihil aliud intelligat quam quod ista Deus sunt. Et haec saepe jam docui. Cum autem ipsa intelligentia intelligit quod sit intelligentia (necessario enim sequitur, ut et se intelligat intelligentia), veluti existens a semetipsa se intellexit, fecitque se extra: quod foris est intelligendo, se, id est, motu suo. Unde est haec foris intelligentia, et hic est filius, hic est >070;, natus filius, quia alius a Deo, de Deo tamen, id est, de eo quod est existens: et vivens, intelligentia, quae Deus est, atque intus Intelligendo se Intelligentia foras se protulit, atque exstitit patri, in quo et ipsa fuit, atque est semper imago existens per intelligentiam internam, quae esse est atque existere, ac propterea imago imaginis genita. ### English translation (Claude) But we call the Son the image of God; for the form was begotten, so that from that which is being, living and understanding there should be begotten existence, life and understanding. For there is in these a certain form through which, as through an image, it is understood what being, living and understanding are; necessarily, then, God is understood through the form, for no one has ever seen him. The form of God, then, when it is taken in God, is God; but when God understands himself, he understands himself through the form; and the form itself must also understand. For it is understanding and living existence, since it understands nothing other than that these are God. And this I have often taught. But when intelligence itself understands that it is intelligence (for it necessarily follows that intelligence understands itself), as existing from itself it understood itself and made itself outside: what is outside, by understanding itself, that is, by its own motion. Hence this is the outer intelligence, and this is the Son, this is the Word, the Son born, because he is other than God, yet from God, that is, from that which is existing and living intelligence, which is God. Understanding itself within, intelligence brought itself forth outside and stood forth before the Father, in whom it too was; and it is always the image existing through the inner intelligence, which is being and existing; and therefore it was begotten as the image of the image. ### Scripture references - John 1:18: allusion, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - “The image of the image” is as printed; the sense is that the Son is the outward image of the Father's inner self-understanding. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.28 (PL 8:1132d–1133b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-28). ## Against Arius 4.29 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-29 - Source: PL 8:1133b–1134a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues that the Son, the outer intelligence understanding the Father's inner intelligence, received the Father's whole fullness and is homoousion with him in every respect, equal with God. ### Latin text Duae igitur intelligentiae, una Intus existens quod est illi esse: alia existens, quod est illi intelligendo esse. Haec foris, haec filius. Quoniam vero intelligendo Se intelligentia Deum intellexit, utique intelligentiam internam, illa autem Deus est; intellexit et verum esse, et verum vivere, et verum intelligendo exstitit et ipsa verum esse, verum vivere, verum intelligere. Etenim qui unum intelligit, et habet unum, et est unum: secundum ejus apud se intelligentiam: sic ergo filius, id est, intelligentia, intelligendo se genita, intelligentia intellexit Deum, et omnia illa quae ingenita Deus sunt, et intelligendo πλήρωμα quaerendo, et πλήρωμα intelligendo, unde idem extitit quod pater. Etenim cum πλήρωμα pater sit necessario, χόφημα suum habet infinitum, licet et sibi finitum: ubi πλήρωμα suum tenet et capit, eodemque modo filius recipiendo et quaerendo: hoc est enim recipere χωρημα, existere, intelligendo autem totum quod pater πλήρωμα, exstitit genitus, et ipse totus ex toto: et quia intelligentia est intelligens intelligentiam, cum lumen rerum sit intelligentia, existit lumen ex lumine: et quia intelligentia utraque, verum lumen ex vero lumine. Itemque Cum Deus sit intus intelligentia, ista intelligendo se intelligentia Deus ex Deo est: Ιμοοΰσαν ergo in omnibus, in eo quod esse, et vivere, et intelligere. Item in eo quod uterque χωρημα et πλήρωμά est: item in eo quod imago et imago; dictum est enim ad imaginem nostram. Et in eo quod lumen et lumen, et in eo quod verum lumen et verum lumen, et in eo quod Spiritus et Spiritus: et in eo quod motus et motus, sed pater motus quiescens, id est, interior, et nihil aliud quam motus, non motione motus, filius autem motione motus est, uterque tamen motus, Item uterque actio et opera, uterque vita, et uterque a se habens vitam voluntas et voluntas, eadem virtus, sapientia, verbum Deus, Deus et Deus vivus et Deus vivus, ex aeterno et ex aeterno invisibilis et invisibilis: nam dictum a Matthaeo: Nemo novit filium nisi pater, neque patrem nisi filius, Simul ambo: hoc enim significat 6μοου<τιον, praeter eamdem ουσίαν. Haec cuncta illo pleno intelligi possunt: Omnia quae habet pater, mihi dedit. Et, Omnia quae habet pater, et ego habeo. Omnia, inquit: si omnia οαοοούσιον filius patri; Idem ergo: et si idem, par; et si par, recte Paulus de filio Dei Jesu Christo dixit: Qui cum esset in Dei forma, non rapinam arbitratus est ut esset aequalis Deo. ### English translation (Claude) There are, then, two intelligences: one existing within, which is its being; the other existing, which is its being by understanding. This one is outside; this one is the Son. But since intelligence, by understanding itself, understood God, that is, the inner intelligence, which is God, it understood true being and true living, and by understanding truly it came to exist itself as true being, true living, true understanding. For he who understands one both has one and is one, according to his understanding of it within himself. So, then, the Son, that is, intelligence, begotten by understanding itself, as intelligence understood God and all those things which God, unbegotten, is; and by understanding, seeking the fullness, and by understanding the fullness, he came to exist as the same as the Father. For since the Father is necessarily the fullness, he has his capacity infinite, though finite to himself, where he holds and grasps his fullness; and in the same way the Son, by receiving and seeking: for this is to receive the capacity, to exist; and by understanding the whole fullness that the Father is, he came to exist as begotten, he too whole from the whole. And because he is intelligence understanding intelligence, and intelligence is the light of things, he exists as light from light; and because both are intelligence, true light from true light. Likewise, since God is inner intelligence, this intelligence understanding itself is God from God. Homoousion, then, in all things: in being, living and understanding. Likewise in that each is capacity and fullness; likewise in that each is image, for it is said, “to our image”; and in that each is light, and true light, and Spirit; and in that each is motion, but the Father resting motion, that is, inner, nothing other than motion, not motion by movement, while the Son is moved by movement; yet each is motion. Likewise each is action and work, each is life, and each has life from himself; will and will, the same power, wisdom, Word; God and God, living God and living God, from eternity and from eternity, invisible and invisible. For it is said by Matthew: “No one knows the Son except the Father, nor the Father except the Son.” Both together: for this is what homoousion signifies, besides the same ousia. All these can be understood from that full saying: “All that the Father has he has given me”; and: “All that the Father has, I too have.” “All,” he says. If all, the Son is homoousion with the Father; the same, then; and if the same, equal; and if equal, Paul rightly said of the Son of God, Jesus Christ: “Who, when he was in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” ### Scripture references - John 1:9: allusion, low confidence - Gen 1:26: quotation, high confidence - John 5:26: allusion, medium confidence - Matt 11:27: quotation, high confidence - John 3:35: allusion, medium confidence - John 16:15: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms (garbled in the digital text): πλήρωμα (fullness), χώρημα (capacity, room), ὁμοούσιον, οὐσία. The two sayings “All that the Father has” combine John 3:35 and John 16:15. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.29 (PL 8:1133b–1134a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-29). ## Against Arius 4.30 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-30 - Source: PL 8:1134a–1135a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus argues from Philippians 2 and the resurrection that the Son, the form of God, is other than the Father though having all that the Father has by the Father's gift: God's hidden being made manifest. ### Latin text Multa heic divina et magnifica mysteria continentur. Primum quod Christus forma Dei est, in quo ostenditur omnia habere quae Deus habet: hoc enim est quod et imago dicitur, sicuti de ipso dictum; Qui est imago Dei. Habet igitur et Deus imaginem suam: et filius imago Dei est, etenim si dictum: Faciem Dei nemo unquam vidit. Et dictum: Posterganea mea videbis. Est sine dubio facies Deo, est filio, vel potius est et filius Imago Dei, ut dictum est: Qui cum in forma Dei fuisset. Unde jure dictum: Faciamus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem nostram. Est ergo Filius, et si alter, est: non enim idem pater, idem filius: illis rebus omnibus supra a me positis idem, idem autem, hoc est, eadem habens existentia sua propria. Unde et idem, et alter: etenim cum heic dictum: cum fuisset in forma Dei, utique aliud accipiendum quod forma est, aliud Deus. Sed videris, sit calumniae locus, ut forma Dei sit in ipso Deo forma, ut sit una et indiscreta substantia. Quid sequentia quemadmodum intelligemus? Non est arbitratus rapinam se aequalem Deo. In sua existentia positi est, se cum altero credere, vel dicere aequalem. Quid vero illud se exinanivit, et formam servi suscipiens? De Christo accepimus, quod mortuus est, an de Deo? At nullus dixit unquam. Deinde cum dicitur de patre, qui filium suum excitavit a mortuis, nonne satis clarum est, alium esse patrem, alium filium, alium esse suscitantem, alium suscitatum? Ergo forma Dei. Aliud forma, aliud Deus est; et est quidem Deo forma, sed filius Dei forma in manifesto, Dei vero in occulto: sic enim omnia et existentia, et vita, et cognoscentia Dei intus in occulto, filio in manifesto: sic caetera χωργιμα, πλήρωμα, imago, lumen verum, veritas, spiritus, motus, actio, operatio, vita, et a semetipso vita, voluntas, virtus, sapientia, Verbum Deus, Deus vivus, et caetera alia omnia. Sed haec veluti foras, et in manifesto; illa in se atque circa existentiam, vel ipsa potius quod est existentia: haec autem in actu agente quod est in manifesto. Postremo haec omnia filius habet, sed patre dante quod vehementer expressum in eo, quod cum filius habet a se, inquit, sed adjunxit Pater ei dedit ut haberet a se vitam. Vera Igitur imago, atque existentia in omnibus eadem, sed patre dante: ergo et pater et filius, sed patre dante. De eo enim quod diximus patrem esse, vivere, intelligere; existentia genita est, ut vita, intelligentia: et haec est Dei forma, haec est filius: sed filius cum in patre est, unum totum intus, Deus agens, operans, se utens, se fruens, fons atque in se plenitudo omnium. ### English translation (Claude) Many divine and magnificent mysteries are contained here. First, that Christ is the form of God, in whom it is shown that he has all that God has; for this is what is also called image, as is said of him: “Who is the image of God.” God, then, has his image, and the Son is the image of God. For it is said, “No one has ever seen the face of God”, and it is said, “You will see my back.” Without doubt God has a face, and it is the Son; or rather the Son is the image of God, as it is said: “Who, when he was in the form of God.” Hence it is rightly said: “Let us make man to our image and likeness.” The Son, then, exists, even if he is other; for the Father is not the same as the Son. He is the same in all the things I have set out above; the same, that is, having the same things, each with his own existence. Hence he is both the same and other. For since it is said here, “when he was in the form of God”, the form must certainly be taken as one thing and God as another. But you will say (let there be room for cavil) that the form of God is the form in God himself, so that there is one undivided substance. How, then, shall we understand what follows? “He did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” It belongs to one set in his own existence to think or say that he is equal with another. And what of that, “he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant”? Have we been taught that Christ died, or that God died? No one ever said the latter. Then, when it is said of the Father that he “raised his Son from the dead”, is it not clear enough that the Father is one and the Son another, one raising and the other raised? So, the form of God: the form is one thing, God another. God has a form; but the Son is the form of God in manifestation, God's form in hiddenness. For so all things, existence, life and knowledge, belong to God within, in hiddenness, and to the Son in manifestation; and so with the rest: capacity, fullness, image, true light, truth, spirit, motion, action, operation, life and life from itself, will, power, wisdom, the Word God, the living God, and all the others. But these belong to the Son as outward and in manifestation; those to the Father in himself and about his existence, or rather they are that very thing which existence is; these belong to the acting act, which is in manifestation. Finally, the Son has all these, but by the Father's gift; and this is strongly expressed when, after saying that the Son has life from himself, he added: “The Father gave him to have life from himself.” A true image, then, and the same existence in all things, but by the Father's gift: both Father and Son, then, but by the Father's gift. For from what we have said the Father is, being, living and understanding, existence was begotten, as also life and understanding; and this is the form of God, this is the Son. But the Son, when he is in the Father, is one whole within: God acting, operating, using himself, enjoying himself, the fountain, and in himself the fullness of all things. ### Scripture references - 2 Cor 4:4: quotation, high confidence - Col 1:15: allusion, high confidence - John 1:18: allusion, medium confidence - Exod 33:20: allusion, high confidence - Exod 33:23: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence - Gen 1:26: quotation, high confidence - Gal 1:1: allusion, medium confidence - John 5:26: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - Greek terms: χώρημα (capacity), πλήρωμα (fullness). ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.30 (PL 8:1134a–1135a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-30). ## Against Arius 4.31 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-31 - Source: PL 8:1135a–1136a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus explains that the Son, the Father's image and the Logos through which all things are made, acts both by the Father's power and by his own will, and, like a river from a fountain, suffers only in act and operation, not in substance. ### Latin text Sed quoniam, uti docuimus, intelligentia vi potentiae suae, necessario dum in semet sese vertit, intellexit semetipsam, hoc quodammodo gemina facta, velut intus et foris filius est, genitus ab existentia patris: nam existentia est intelligentia, quae et vita est: apparens ergo et existens est Deus de Deo. Et quoniam in quolibet uno de tribus cuncta sunt, esse, vivere, intelligere; cum intelligentia intelligentiam genuerit, genitus est filius, et omnia habet filius quae pater, et habet a patre. Item quoniam haec omnia sunt per qua: creantur omnia: quaecumque enim sunt, accipiunt suum esse, suum vivere. suum intelligere; filius cum haec omnia sit, quippe imago patris, et actu actuoso sit, id est, ut hoc praestet caeteris pro natura existentium, est necessario universis totisque cunctis λο7οί, id est, vis et potentia, per quam, quae sunt ut sint esse provenit, per quem Deus fecit et facit omnia, et sine quo nihil fit. Hoc appellant alii motum activum, verbum, rationem operantem. Quoniam tamen cum operatur, inest in illo vis patria. in se operatur, unde multa ita dicuntur. ut cum ipsius sit quod faciat tamen ipse in patrem refert omnia, ut: pater me misit. Et: Non meam sed patris facio voluntatem: Et mille talia. Attendamus tamen istum locum: inveniemus quasi ipsum per se facere, ut sua sponte: Non est arbitratus rapinam se aequalem Deo. Et item: Se exinanivit, et formam servi sumens, qui habebat dominium. Ista omnia sunt sua voluntate facientis. Sed potest credi ipse facere, cum in ipso pater sit, ex quibus sunt et illa: Ego do vitam in aeternum. Et; Ego sum janua, ego vita, ego veritas. Item: Sicut enim pater suscitat mortuos et vivificat, sic et filius quos vult vivificat. Haec vera, haec varia, et in omnibus magis vera intelligentia facit et filium in patre esse, et in filio patrem, et tamen ut pater, ut alter sint et unum, tamen duo sint, quoniam autem alter pater, alter filius: quippe cum pater filii fons, filius ut flumen. quod excurrit ex fonte: in fonte autem ut manens aqua, et quieta est, pura, immaculata, sine scatendi specie, sibi occulto motu apertiore per diversa discurrens, terrarum quas sulcat qualitatibus et afficitur, et quodam modo patitur; sic et filius aqua sua, suaque substantia, quae patris est, semper purus, immaculatus, impassibilis, regionibus per quas discurrit. locisque. vel supracoelestibus, vel coelestibus, vel intracoelestibus, nunc spumat, ut occurentibus saxis, quae sunt ex generibus animarum campus quietus excurrit. Recipit igitur passiones, non in eo quod substantia est, sed in actu atque operatione. Nam cum mysterium adventus sui compleret, tum jam passionem sustinuit, ut se exinaniret, ut personam servi susciperet. Sic et reliqua, in quibus omnibus actus est et operatio. Quamquam et in primo existentiae suae actu, sicuti in multis libris docuimus, passio exstiterit recessionis a patre, unde tenebrae, id est, hyle consecuta est, non creata. Sed haec plenius alibi. ### English translation (Claude) But since, as we taught, intelligence, by the force of its power, necessarily understood itself while turning upon itself, becoming in this way twofold, as it were within and without, the Son is begotten from the Father's existence; for existence is intelligence, which is also life. Appearing, then, and existing, he is God from God. And since in any one of the three are all things, being, living and understanding, when intelligence begot intelligence the Son was begotten, and the Son has all that the Father has, and has it from the Father. Likewise, since these are all the things through which all things are created (for whatever things are receive their own being, their own living, their own understanding), and since the Son is all these, as the image of the Father, and is in active act, that is, so as to provide this to the others according to the nature of the existents, he is necessarily the Logos for all things and all wholes, that is, the force and power through which it comes about that the things that are, are; through whom God made and makes all things, and without whom nothing is made. Others call this active motion, word, operating reason. But since, when he operates, the Father's power is in him, he operates in himself; and so many things are said in such a way that, although what he does is his own, he refers all things to the Father: “The Father sent me”; and, “I do not my own will, but the Father's”; and a thousand such. Yet let us attend to that passage: we shall find him acting, as it were, through himself, of his own accord: “He did not consider it robbery to be equal with God”; and likewise, “He emptied himself and took the form of a servant”, he who had lordship. All these belong to one acting by his own will. But he can be believed to act himself because the Father is in him; among these sayings are also: “I give life for ever”; and, “I am the door, I the life, I the truth”; and, “For as the Father raises the dead and gives life, so the Son too gives life to whom he wills.” These are true and varied; and in all of them a truer understanding makes the Son to be in the Father and the Father in the Son, and yet so that, as Father and as other, they are one and yet two, since one is the Father and the other the Son. For the Father is the fountain of the Son, and the Son is like the river that runs out from the fountain. In the fountain the water remains, quiet, pure, unstained, without the appearance of gushing; but the river, running through various places by a motion more open than the hidden one, is affected by the qualities of the lands it furrows, and in a way suffers. So too the Son, with his water and his substance, which is the Father's, is always pure, unstained, impassible; yet in the regions and places through which he runs, whether above the heavens, in the heavens, or within the heavens, he now foams, as against rocks in his way, which are the kinds of souls, and now runs out as across a quiet plain. He receives passions, then, not in that he is substance, but in act and operation. For when he fulfilled the mystery of his coming, he then endured passion, so as to empty himself, so as to take on the role of a servant; and so with the rest, in all of which there is act and operation. And yet even in the first act of his existence, as we have taught in many books, there was a passion of withdrawal from the Father, from which darkness, that is, matter, followed, not created. But of this more fully elsewhere. ### Scripture references - John 1:3: allusion, high confidence - John 8:42: allusion, medium confidence - John 20:21: allusion, medium confidence - John 6:38: allusion, high confidence - John 5:30: allusion, medium confidence - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence - John 10:28: quotation, high confidence - John 10:9: quotation, high confidence - John 14:6: quotation, high confidence - John 5:21: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The statement that a “passion of withdrawal from the Father” in the Son's first act was followed by matter, “not created”, is Victorinus's own speculation, translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.31 (PL 8:1135a–1136a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-31). ## Against Arius 4.32 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-32 - Source: PL 8:1136a–1137a - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus sums up: Father and Son are homoousion; the Son, the Logos of all things, became incarnate from the Virgin, and Philippians 2:5–8 shows that he who existed in the form of God emptied himself even to the cross. ### Latin text Nunc quid assertum est, quid probatum? Deum patrem, filium Deum ό/ιοούσιον esse, esse tamen et patrem in substantia, et filium in ea quidem substantia, sed sibi existentem actum agente in actu passione exstitisse, numquam separatum a patre, ex aeterno et esse, et fuisse, et futurum esse. Actu, quia intra naturam agendi est, et cum patre, vel in patre esse; et extra hoc dici, et intus et foris cum ipse agat, quia de patre ei actus est, patre agente agere dicitur, et tamen omnia patrem per illum agere dicitur; hunc esse λόγον omnium, et universaliter universalium, et generum, et specialium, et partialium λόγον. Et quia omnium et incorporalium, ergo et corporalium pro sua vi ad id quod esse possunt, ut sint λόγος: unde et mysterii ordinatione novissimis seculis λόγος, quia omnium existentium adumbrata per Spiritum sanctum Maria Virgine incarnatus est ipse ille, quem supra demonstravimus, filius, eodem modo ut esset in corpore, quo Spiritus sanctus in nobis, non totus: nam ut Deus ubique est, sed ut pars ejus: omnium enim divinorum pars hoc semper est, quod est totum, ut est anima in corporibus, ut virtus ac disciplina in animis, vel sol aut ejus lux in oculis. Ipsum autem λόγον, ipsumque illum quem demonstravimus filium, fuisse in corpore, omnia Evangelia declarant, Apostolus omnis, omnes Prophetae. Cum enim praedixerunt futurum Christum, in carne futurum praedixerunt, quippe cum ante in carnem dicant et visum, et apparuisse, ut Abrahae, ut Jacob. Et ipse in carne dixerit: Abraham vidit diem meum, et gavisus est. Et Apostolus, in sacro isto ac mysteriis pleno loco, declarat maxime filium Dei ante carnem, et ipsum postea sumpsisse carnem: Hoc enim sentite in vobis, quod et in Christo Jesu, qui cum in forma Dei constitutus fuisset. Utique hoc quando ante carnem fuit, ergo et ante carnem et fuit qualis et quantus. Forma, inquit, Dei. Quid istud est, forma idem quod pater. Quid est forma? in qua pater cernitur: Qui me videt, videt et patrem. Utique non in eo quod videbatur, sed in eo quod ipse Deus divina substantia, λόγος, vita. Hoc igitur fuit ante carnem: namque quid adjungit? Non arbitratus est rapinam ut esset aequalis Deo. De se ergo cogitat, et de Deo: facit igitur ut non sit aequalis, sed fuit. Quid deinde adjicit? Sed se exinanivit. Quid exinanivit? aut unde, si non fuit? Adjicit adhuc: Et servi sumpsit formam in similitudinem hominum factus, et habitu inventus tanquam homo. Humiliavit semetipsum, subditus factus usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis. Quid hic non ex omni parte declarat Jesum Christum et filium Dei? Nam sic dictum: Deus misit filium suum et missum suae potentiae, ac suae etiam voluntatis arbitio cuncta facientem, ut se nollet aequalem, ut se exinaniat, ut induat servi formam: fuit ergo qui fuit Dei forma, fuit qui se exinanivit: is autem ipse est Jesus, qui sumpsit imaginem servi, et inventus homo est, qui se subdidit usque ad mortem, ut designetur plenius Jesus Christus, usque ad mortem crucis. ### English translation (Claude) Now, what has been asserted, what proved? That God the Father and God the Son are homoousion; yet that the Father is in substance, and the Son in that same substance, but existing for himself as act; that by the acting act he came to be in passion, never separated from the Father, from eternity being, having been and to be. He is act, because he is within the nature of acting, and is with the Father or in the Father; and beyond this he is said to be both within and without, since he himself acts, because his act is from the Father; when the Father acts he is said to act, and yet the Father is said to do all things through him. He is the Logos of all things, the Logos of the universally universal, of genera, of species and of particulars; and because he is the Logos of all things and of incorporeal things, he is also the Logos of bodily things, according to their capacity for what they can be, so that they may be. Hence too, by the ordering of the mystery in the last ages, because he is the Logos of all existents, he himself, whom we have shown above to be the Son, overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, was incarnate from the Virgin Mary; in the same way, so as to be in the body, as the Holy Spirit is in us, not whole; for as God he is everywhere, but as a part of him; for of all divine things the part is always what the whole is, as the soul is in bodies, as virtue and discipline are in souls, or the sun or its light in the eyes. That the Word himself, the very one whom we have shown to be the Son, was in the body, all the Gospels declare, the whole Apostle, all the Prophets. For when they foretold that the Christ would come, they foretold that he would come in the flesh; and they say that before the flesh he was seen and appeared, as to Abraham and to Jacob. And he himself said in the flesh: “Abraham saw my day and was glad.” And the Apostle, in that sacred passage full of mysteries, declares above all that the Son of God existed before the flesh and that he himself afterwards took flesh: “For have this mind among yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, when he had been in the form of God.” This was certainly when he existed before the flesh: he existed, then, before the flesh, and what kind of being and how great he was: “the form,” he says, “of God”. What is this? The form, the same as the Father. What is form? That in which the Father is seen: “He who sees me sees the Father also”; certainly not in what was seen, but in that he himself is God, divine substance, Word, life. This, then, he was before the flesh. For what does Paul add? “He did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” He thinks, then, of himself and of God; he acts so as not to be equal, but he was equal. What does he add next? “But he emptied himself.” What did he empty, or from what, if he did not exist? He adds further: “And took the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and found in appearance as a man. He humbled himself, becoming subject unto death, even the death of the cross.” What here does not declare from every side Jesus Christ and the Son of God? For so it is said: God sent his Son; and the one sent acts by his power, doing all things also by the choice of his own will, so that he willed not to be equal, to empty himself, to put on the form of a servant. He existed, then, who was the form of God; he existed who emptied himself; and he is that very Jesus who took the image of a servant and was found a man, who subjected himself unto death, and, so that Jesus Christ might be designated more fully, unto the death of the cross. ### Scripture references - Luke 1:35: allusion, high confidence - Gen 18:1: allusion, medium confidence - Gen 32:30: allusion, medium confidence - John 8:56: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:5: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:6: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:7: quotation, high confidence - Phil 2:8: quotation, high confidence - John 14:9: quotation, high confidence - Gal 4:4: allusion, medium confidence ### Translation notes - The appearances to Abraham and Jacob are Gen 18 and 32. Editorial references printed in the text, “(Philipp. ii, 5, 6)” and “(Philipp. ii, 7, 8)”, are removed. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.32 (PL 8:1136a–1137a; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-32). ## Against Arius 4.33 - URL: https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-24/#p-4-33 - Source: PL 8:1137a–1138b - Translation: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), 2026-09-27 Summary: Victorinus ends the work by restating that the pre-existent Word became flesh, that the Holy Spirit is the hidden, inward Christ, and that Father, Son and Spirit, each with his own existence, are one substance, a faith on which salvation rests. ### Latin text Haec viris fidelibus satis probata sunt, et ante carnem fuisse, et in carne eumdem filium fuisse, illum qui ante saecula est genitus, illum qui ascendit in coelum, et inde descendit, illum qui nobis de coelo panis est: illum qui in carne dicit: Redde mihi, pater, honorem meum, quem habui apud te: utique supra coelos, et ante carnem, illum: λόγος est, et in principio λόγος, et juxta Deum λόγος, et qui λόγος Deus est, et per quem λόγον facta sunt omnia, et sine quo factum est nihil; illum qui illuminat hominem in hunc mundum venientem; illum qui λόγος caro factus est. Audisti in principio, λόγος, audisti quod λόγος ipse caro factus est: audi quod ipse Dei filius sit, et de patre genitus, sit illa quam diximus supra generatio. Dicit evangelista: Deum nemo vidit unquam, nisi unigenitus solus filius, qui est in sinu patris. Melius autem dicemus gremio. Graeci εν κόλπω, id est in gremio. Sed vel hoc verbum, vel illud significat et genitum filium, quod est foris esse, tamen cum patre esse, cum dictum est: Qui est in sinu patris. Omnibus lectionibus ita esse diligens et fidelis quaesitor intelliget. Jam vero Spiritum sanctum alio quodam modo ipsum esse Jesum Christum occultum, interiorem, cum animis fabulantem, docentem ista, intelligentiasque tribuentem, et a patre per Christum genitum, et in Christo: quippe cum unigenitus filius Christus sit, multis nos libris exposuimus; et quod exemplis plurimis approbavimus, satis clarum est. Hoc modo atque hac intelligentia ut pater et Deus cum filio ό4αοούσιον, et filius quod ipse vita est cum eo. Quia autem ipse intelligentia est Christus, et Spiritus sanctus όμοούσιον intelligitur: unde juncto patri filioque accepto, quod sit idem quod Spiritus sanctus, eo quidem modo, quo filius idem est quod pater; ita tamen, ut quomodo pater et filius unum cum sint, sic tamen Pater sit etiam filius, existentia unusquisque sua, sed ambo una eademque substantia: sic Christus et Spiritus sanctus cum ambo unum sint, existit tamen Christus sua existentia, et Spiritus sanctus sua: sed ambo una substantia, ex quo omnes, id est, tota Trinitas una, atque eodem modo juncto patre cum filio, filioque cum Spiritu sancto. Atque ista ratione patre cum Spiritu sancto per Christum juncto, singulis quidem existentibus unum, omnis Trinitas sit, atque existet illud, cum sit omnibus una eademque simul ex aeternitate substantia. Haec nobis salus est, haec liberatio, haec totius hominis plena salvatio, sic patrem omnipotentem Deum credere, sic Jesum Christum filium, sic Spiritum sanctum. Amen. ### English translation (Claude) These things have been sufficiently proved to the faithful: that the same Son existed both before the flesh and in the flesh; he who was begotten before the ages; he who ascended into heaven and descended from there; he who is bread for us from heaven; he who says in the flesh: “Give me, Father, my glory, which I had with you”, certainly above the heavens and before the flesh. He is the Word, and in the beginning the Word, and the Word with God, and the Word who is God, through which Word all things were made, and without whom nothing was made; he who enlightens every man coming into this world; he, the Word, who became flesh. You have heard “in the beginning, the Word”; you have heard that the Word himself became flesh: hear that he himself is the Son of God, begotten of the Father, and that this is the generation of which we spoke above. The evangelist says: “No one has ever seen God, except the only-begotten Son alone, who is in the bosom (sinus) of the Father.” But we shall better say gremium; the Greeks say en kolpō, that is, “in the bosom”. But either word signifies the begotten Son, which is to be outside, yet to be with the Father, since it is said: “Who is in the bosom of the Father.” A diligent and faithful inquirer will understand from all the readings that it is so. Now, that the Holy Spirit is in another way Jesus Christ himself, hidden, inward, conversing with souls, teaching these things and bestowing understanding, begotten from the Father through Christ and in Christ, since Christ is the only-begotten Son, we have set out in many books; and what we have proved by very many examples is clear enough. In this way and with this understanding, as the Father and God is homoousion with the Son, and the Son, because he is life, with him, so, because Christ himself is understanding, the Holy Spirit too is understood as homoousion. Hence, the Son being joined to the Father and taken to be the same as the Holy Spirit, in the same way as the Son is the same as the Father; yet so that, as the Father and the Son, though one, are each Father and Son by their own existence, but both are one and the same substance, so Christ and the Holy Spirit, though both are one, Christ nonetheless exists by his own existence and the Holy Spirit by his, but both are one substance. Hence all, that is, the whole Trinity, are one, the Father being joined with the Son and the Son with the Holy Spirit in the same way. And by this reasoning, the Father being joined with the Holy Spirit through Christ, each existing singly, the whole Trinity is one, and exists so, since there is for all one and the same substance, together from eternity. This is our salvation, this our liberation, this the full salvation of the whole man: so to believe in God the Father almighty, so in Jesus Christ the Son, so in the Holy Spirit. Amen. ### Scripture references - John 3:13: allusion, high confidence - John 6:33: allusion, high confidence - John 17:5: quotation, high confidence - John 1:1: quotation, high confidence - John 1:3: quotation, high confidence - John 1:9: quotation, high confidence - John 1:14: quotation, high confidence - John 1:18: quotation, high confidence ### Translation notes - The clause “so that the Father is also the Son” in the digital text (“sic tamen Pater sit etiam filius”) is corrupt and is translated by the sense of the parallel that follows. Victorinus's statement that the Holy Spirit is “in another way Jesus Christ himself” is translated as written. ### Citation (SBL) Marius Victorinus, Adv. Ar. 4.33 (PL 8:1137a–1138b; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/victorinus-adversus-arium/4-33).