Preparation for the Gospel 14.16.1–14.18.32

Eusebius of Caesarea · Preparation for the Gospel · ca. 313–324 · Caesarea · 55 passages

Greek text: Dindorf, Eusebii Opera 1 (Greek text: W. Dindorf, Eusebii Caesariensis Opera 1–2 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1867), digitized by the First Thousand Years of Greek project (Open Greek and Latin), CC BY-SA 4.0).English: Claude (claude-opus-5-5), public domain (CC0). Compare: E. H. Gifford, Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Praeparationis libri XV (Oxford, 1903), vol. 3 (English).

Preparation 14, chapter 16

14.16.1Dindorf 2:295

“Ἔνιοι τῶν φιλοσόφων, καθάπερ Διαγόρας ὁ Μήλιος καὶ Θεόδωρος ὁ Κυρηναῖος καὶ Εὐήμερος ὁ Τεγεάτης, καθόλου φασὶ μὴ εἶναι θεούς· τὸν δὲ Εὐήμερον καὶ Καλλίμαχος ὁ Κυρηναῖος αἰνίττεται ἐν τοῖς ἰάμβοις. καὶ Εὐριπίδης ὁ τραγῳδοποιὸς ἄποκαλύψασθαι μὲν οὐκ ἠθέλησε, δεδοικὼς τὸν Ἄρειον πάγον, ἐνέφηνε δὲ τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον· τὸν γὰρ Σίσυφον εἰσήγαγε προστάτην ταύτης τῆς δόξης, καὶ συνηγόρησεν αὐτοῦ τῇ γνώμῃ. ”

“Enioi tōn philosophōn, kathaper Diagoras ho Mēlios kai Theodōros ho Kyrēnaios kai Euēmeros ho Tegeatēs, katholou phasi mē einai theous; ton de Euēmeron kai Kallimachos ho Kyrēnaios ainittetai en tois iambois. kai Euripidēs ho tragǭdopoios apokalypsasthai men ouk ēthelēse, dedoikōs ton Areion pagon, enephēne de touton ton tropon; ton gar Sisyphon eisēgage prostatēn tautēs tēs doxēs, kai synēgorēsen autou tę̄ gnōmę̄. ”

“Some of the philosophers, such as Diagoras of Melos and Theodorus of Cyrene and Euhemerus of Tegea, say outright that there are no gods. Callimachus of Cyrene hints at Euhemerus in his Iambi. And Euripides the tragedian did not wish to unveil himself, fearing the Areopagus, but showed it in this way: he brought in Sisyphus as champion of this opinion and pleaded for his view.”

Notes and citation

Summary: Plutarch: some philosophers denied the gods altogether; Euripides hinted at it through Sisyphus.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.1–2; Callimachus, Iambi (fragment 191); the Sisyphus is now usually ascribed to Critias.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.1–2 (Plutarch; quotation); Callimachus, Iambi (Callimachus (hymns and fragments); allusion)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.1 (Dindorf 2:295; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-1) · Report an error

Translation: Translated by Claude from the Greek of Dindorf's Teubner text (1867; digital text First1KGreek, CC BY-SA 4.0), then compared section by section with the public-domain English of E. H. Gifford (1903); differences checked against the Greek.

14.16.2Dindorf 2:295

Ἐπὶ τούτοις πάλιν τὸν Ἀναξαγόραν εἰσάγει, πρῶτον φάσκων αὐτὸν ὀρθῶς φρονῆσαι περὶ θεοῦ. λέγει δὲ οὕτως “Ὁ δὲ Ἀναξαγόρας φησὶν ὡς εἱστήκει κατʼ ἀρχὰς τὰ σώματα, νοῦς δὲ αὐτὰ διεκόσμησε θεοῦ καὶ τὰς γενέσεις τῶν ὅλων ἐποίησεν. ὁ δὲ Πλάτων οὐχ ἑστηκότα ὑπέθετο τὰ πρῶτα σώματα, ἀτάκτως δὲ κινούμενα· διὸ, φησὶν, ὁ θεὸς ἐπιστήσας ὡς τάξις ἀταξίας ἐστὶ βελτίων, διεκόσμησεν αὐτά.”

Epi toutois palin ton Anaxagoran eisagei, prōton phaskōn auton orthōs phronēsai peri theou. legei de houtōs “Ho de Anaxagoras phēsin hōs heistēkei katʼ archas ta sōmata, nous de auta diekosmēse theou kai tas geneseis tōn holōn epoiēsen. ho de Platōn ouch hestēkota hypetheto ta prōta sōmata, ataktōs de kinoumena; dio, phēsin, ho theos epistēsas hōs taxis ataxias esti beltiōn, diekosmēsen auta.”

After these he brings in Anaxagoras again, saying that he was the first to think rightly about God. He speaks thus: “Anaxagoras says that in the beginning the bodies stood still, but the mind of God ordered them and made the generations of the universe. Plato supposed that the first bodies did not stand still but moved in disorder; therefore, he says, God, judging that order is better than disorder, ordered them.”

Notes and citation

Summary: Plutarch: Anaxagoras and Plato both made God the orderer of matter.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.4–5.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (stray mark in the digital text): Πλάτωνʼ → Πλάτων.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.4–5 (Plutarch; quotation); Anaxagoras (Anaxagoras; allusion)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.2 (Dindorf 2:295; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-2) · Report an error

14.16.3Dindorf 2:295–296

Οἷς ἐπιλέγει “Ἁμαρτάνουσιν δὲ ἀμφότεροι, ὅτι τὸν θεὸν ἐποίησαν ἐπιστρεφόμενον τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων, καὶ τούτου χάριν τὸν κόσμον κατασκευάζοντα· τὸ γὰρ μακάριον καὶ ἄφθαρτον ζῷον, πεπληρωμένον τε πᾶσι τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς καὶ κακοῦ παντὸς ἄδεκτον, ὅλον ὄν περὶ τὴν συνοχὴν τῆς ἰδίας εὐδαιμονίας τε καὶ ἀφθαρσίας, ἀνεπιστρεφές ἐστι τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων πραγμάτων. κακοδαίμων δʼ ἂν εἴη, ἐργάτου δίκην καὶ τέκτονος ἀχθοφορῶν καὶ μεριμνῶν εἰς τὴν τοῦ κόσμου κατασκευήν.

Hois epilegei “Hamartanousin de amphoteroi, hoti ton theon epoiēsan epistrephomenon tōn anthrōpinōn, kai toutou charin ton kosmon kataskeuazonta; to gar makarion kai aphtharton zǭon, peplērōmenon te pasi tois agathois kai kakou pantos adekton, holon on peri tēn synochēn tēs idias eudaimonias te kai aphtharsias, anepistrephes esti tōn anthrōpinōn pragmatōn. kakodaimōn dʼ an eiē, ergatou dikēn kai tektonos achthophorōn kai merimnōn eis tēn tou kosmou kataskeuēn.

To which he adds: “Both err, because they made God attentive to human affairs and making the world for this reason. For the blessed and imperishable living being, filled with all good things and receptive of no evil, being wholly occupied with the maintenance of its own happiness and imperishability, is unconcerned with human affairs. He would be wretched if, like a laborer and carpenter, he bore burdens and took anxious thought for the making of the world.

Notes and citation

Summary: Plutarch’s source (Epicurean) objects that a blessed God would not care for human affairs.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.6–7. The objection is Epicurean, reported in the Placita.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.6–7 (Plutarch; quotation); Epicurus (Epicurus (sayings and fragments); allusion)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.3 (Dindorf 2:295–296; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-3) · Report an error

14.16.4Dindorf 2:296

καὶ πάλιν, ὁ θεὸς ὃν λέγουσιν, ἤτοι τὸν ἔμπροσθεν αἰῶνα οὐκ ἦν, ὅτε ἦν ἀκίνητα τὰ σώματα, ἢ ὅτε ἀτάκτως ἐκινεῖτο, ἢ ἐκοιμᾶτο, ἢ ἐγρηγόρει, ἢ οὐδέτερον τούτων. ἢ οὔτε τὸ πρῶτον ἔστι δέξασθαι· πᾶς γὰρ θεὸς αἰώνιος· οὔτε τὸ δεύτερον· εἰ γὰρ ἐκοιμᾶτο ἐξ αἰῶνος ὁ θεὸς, ἐτεθνήκει· αἰώνιος γὰρ ὕπνος θάνατός ἐστιν. ἀλλά γε ἄδεκτος ὕπνου ὁ θεός· τὸ γὰρ ἀθάνατον καὶ τοῦ θεοῦ ἐγγὺς ὕπνου κεχώρισται.

kai palin, ho theos hon legousin, ētoi ton emprosthen aiōna ouk ēn, hote ēn akinēta ta sōmata, ē hote ataktōs ekineito, ē ekoimato, ē egrēgorei, ē oudeteron toutōn. ē oute to prōton esti dexasthai; pas gar theos aiōnios; oute to deuteron; ei gar ekoimato ex aiōnos ho theos, etethnēkei; aiōnios gar hypnos thanatos estin. alla ge adektos hypnou ho theos; to gar athanaton kai tou theou engys hypnou kechōristai.

And again, the God they speak of either did not exist in the former age, when the bodies were unmoved, or when they moved in disorder; or he slept, or was awake, or neither of these. The first cannot be accepted, for every god is eternal; nor the second, for if God slept from eternity he was dead, for eternal sleep is death. But God is incapable of sleep; for the immortal and what is near to death are separated.

Notes and citation

Summary: The argument: God could not have existed idle or asleep before ordering the world.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.8. The digital text reads “what is near God” (τοῦ θεοῦ ἐγγύς) where the sense requires “near death” (θανάτου ἐγγύς); translated by sense.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.8 (Plutarch; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.4 (Dindorf 2:296; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-4) · Report an error

14.16.5Dindorf 2:296

εἰ δὲ ἦν ὁ θεὸς ἐγρηγορὼς, ἤτοι ἐνέλιπεν εἰς εὐδαιμονίαν, ἢ πεπλήρωτο ἐν μακαριότητι. καὶ οὔτε κατὰ τὸ πρῶτόν ἐστι μακάριος ὁ θεός· τὸ γὰρ ἐλλεῖπον εἰς εὐδαιμονίαν οὐ μακάριον· οὔτε κατὰ τὸ δεύτερον· μηδὲν γὰρ ἐλλείπων κεναῖς ἔμελλεν ἐπιχειρεῖν πράξεσι. πῶς δὲ, εἴπερ ὁ θεός ἐστι καὶ τῇ τούτου φροντίδι τὰ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον οἰκονομεῖται, τὸ μὲν κίβδηλον εὐτυχεῖ, τὸ δὲ ἀστεῖον τὸ ἐναντίον πάσχει; Ἀγαμέμνων τε γὰρ ἀμφότερον, βασιλεύς τʼ ἀγαθὸς κρατερός τʼ αἰχμητής, ὑπὸ μοιχοῦ καὶ μοιχαλίδος ἡττηθεὶς ἐδολοφονήθη· καὶ ὁ τούτου δὲ συγγενὴς Ἡρακλῆς, πολλὰ τῶν ἐπιλυμαινομένων τὸν ἀνθρώπινον βίον καθαρὰς, ὑπὸ Δηϊανείρας φαρμακευθεὶς ἐδολοφονήθη.”

ei de ēn ho theos egrēgorōs, ētoi enelipen eis eudaimonian, ē peplērōto en makariotēti. kai oute kata to prōton esti makarios ho theos; to gar elleipon eis eudaimonian ou makarion; oute kata to deuteron; mēden gar elleipōn kenais emellen epicheirein praxesi. pōs de, eiper ho theos esti kai tę̄ toutou phrontidi ta kata anthrōpon oikonomeitai, to men kibdēlon eutychei, to de asteion to enantion paschei? Agamemnōn te gar amphoteron, basileus tʼ agathos krateros tʼ aichmētēs, hypo moichou kai moichalidos hēttētheis edolophonēthē; kai ho toutou de syngenēs Hēraklēs, polla tōn epilymainomenōn ton anthrōpinon bion katharas, hypo Dēïaneiras pharmakeutheis edolophonēthē.”

But if God was awake, either he fell short of happiness, or he was filled with blessedness. And neither on the first is God blessed, for what falls short of happiness is not blessed; nor on the second, for, lacking nothing, he would have undertaken empty actions. And how, if there is a God and human affairs are managed by his care, does the counterfeit prosper while the good suffers the opposite? For Agamemnon, ‘both a good king and a mighty spearman,’ was overcome by an adulterer and an adulteress and treacherously murdered; and his kinsman Heracles, having cleansed away many of the things that ravage human life, was poisoned by Deianeira and treacherously murdered.”

Notes and citation

Summary: The Epicurean argument concludes with the suffering of the good, as Agamemnon and Heracles.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.9–10; Homer, Iliad 3.179.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.9–10 (Plutarch; quotation); Homer, Il. 3.179 (Homer, Iliad; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.5 (Dindorf 2:296; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-5) · Report an error

14.16.6Dindorf 2:296–297

“Θαλῆς τὸν κόσμον εἶναι τὸν θεόν. Ἀναξίμανδρος τοὺς ἀστέρας οὐρανίους θεούς. Δημόκριτος θεὸν ἐν πυρὶ σφαιροειδῆ τὴν τοῦ κόσμου ψυχήν. Πυθαγόρας τῶν ἀρχῶν τὴν μὲν μονάδα θεόν· καὶ τὸ ἀγαθὸν, ἥτις ἐστὶν ἡ τοῦ ἑνὸς φύσις, αὐτὸς ὁ νοῦς τὴν δʼ ἀόριστον δυάδα καὶ δαίμονα καὶ τὸ κακὸν, περὶ ἥν ἐστι τὸ ὑλικὸν πλῆθος, [ἐστὶ καὶ ὁρατὸς ὁ κόσμος.]”

“Thalēs ton kosmon einai ton theon. Anaximandros tous asteras ouranious theous. Dēmokritos theon en pyri sphairoeidē tēn tou kosmou psychēn. Pythagoras tōn archōn tēn men monada theon; kai to agathon, hētis estin hē tou henos physis, autos ho nous tēn dʼ aoriston dyada kai daimona kai to kakon, peri hēn esti to hylikon plēthos, [esti kai horatos ho kosmos.]”

“Thales held that God is the world. Anaximander, that the stars are heavenly gods. Democritus, that God is the spherical soul of the world in fire. Pythagoras, that of the principles the monad is God, and the good, which is the nature of the One, is mind itself; and the indefinite dyad is a daimon and evil, around which is the material multitude.”

Textual problem in this passage: see the notes.

Notes and citation

Summary: Plutarch summarizes the views of Thales, Anaximander, Democritus, and Pythagoras about God.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.11–18. The editor deletes “and the visible world is” at the end.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.11–18 (Plutarch; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.6 (Dindorf 2:296–297; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-6) · Report an error

14.16.7Dindorf 2:297

Μετὰ δὲ τούτους οἱ νέοι τῷ χρόνῳ πῶς ἐδόξαζον ἄκουε “ Σωκράτης καὶ Πλάτων ἓν τὸ μονοφυὲς καὶ αὐτοφυὲς, τὸ μοναδικὸν, τὸ ὄντως ὄν ἀγαθόν. πάντα δὲ ταῦτα τῶν ὀνομάτων εἰς τὸν νοῦν σπεύδει. νοῦς οὖν ὁ θεὸς χωριστὸν εἶδος, τοῦτʼ ἔστι τὸ ἀμιγὲς πάσης ὕλης καὶ μηδενὶ παθητῷ συμπεπλεγμένον.

Meta de toutous hoi neoi tǭ chronǭ pōs edoxazon akoue “ Sōkratēs kai Platōn hen to monophyes kai autophyes, to monadikon, to ontōs on agathon. panta de tauta tōn onomatōn eis ton noun speudei. nous oun ho theos chōriston eidos, toutʼ esti to amiges pasēs hylēs kai mēdeni pathētǭ sympeplegmenon.

After these, hear how those younger in time thought: “Socrates and Plato: the One, the single-natured and self-existent, the monadic, the truly existing good. All these names hasten to mind. God, then, is mind, a separate form, that is, what is unmixed with all matter and entangled with nothing passible.

Notes and citation

Summary: Socrates and Plato: God is the One and the Good, pure mind.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.31.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (breathing slip in the digital text): Πλάτων ἕν τὸ μονοφυὲς → Πλάτων ἓν τὸ μονοφυὲς.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.31 (Plutarch; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.7 (Dindorf 2:297; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-7) · Report an error

14.16.8Dindorf 2:297

Ἀριστοτέλης τὸν μὲν ἀνωτάτω θεὸν εἶδος χωριστὸν, ἐπιβεβηκότα τῇ σφαίρᾳ τοῦ παντὸς, ἥτις ἐστὶν αἰθέριον σῶμα, τὸ πέμπτον ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ καλούμενον· διῃρημένου δὲ τούτου κατὰ σφαίρας τῇ μὲν φύσει συναφεῖς, τῷ λόγῳ δὲ κεχωρισμένας, ἑκάστην οἴεται τῶν σφαιρῶν ζῷον εἶναι σύνθετον ἐκ σώματος καὶ ψυχῆς, ὧν τὸ μὲν σῶμά ἐστιν αἰθέριον, κινούμενον κυκλοφορικῶς, ἡ ψυχὴ δὲ λόγος ἀκίνητος, αἴτιος τῆς κινήσεως κατʼ ἐνέργειαν.

Aristotelēs ton men anōtatō theon eidos chōriston, epibebēkota tę̄ sphairą tou pantos, hētis estin aitherion sōma, to pempton hypʼ autou kaloumenon; dię̄rēmenou de toutou kata sphairas tę̄ men physei synapheis, tǭ logǭ de kechōrismenas, hekastēn oietai tōn sphairōn zǭon einai syntheton ek sōmatos kai psychēs, hōn to men sōma estin aitherion, kinoumenon kyklophorikōs, hē psychē de logos akinētos, aitios tēs kinēseōs katʼ energeian.

Aristotle: the highest God is a separate form, mounted upon the sphere of the universe, which is an ethereal body, the fifth so called by him; and this being divided into spheres connected in nature but separated in reason, he thinks each of the spheres a living being composed of body and soul, of which the body is ethereal, moving in a circle, and the soul is unmoved reason, the cause of the motion in act.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristotle: the highest God is a separate form above the ethereal spheres.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.32.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.32 (Plutarch; quotation); Aristotle (Aristotle (works); allusion)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.8 (Dindorf 2:297; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-8) · Report an error

14.16.9Dindorf 2:297

Οἱ Στωϊκοὶ νοερὸν θεὸν ἀποφαίνονται, πῦρ τεχνικὸν, ὁδῷ βαδίζον ἐπὶ γένεσιν κόσμου, περιειληφότος πάντας τοὺς σπερματικοὺς λόγους, καθʼ οὓς ἕκαστα καθʼ εἱμαρμένην γίνεται. καὶ πνεῦμα μὲν διῆκον διʼ ὅλου τοῦ κόσμου, τὰς δὲ προσηγορίας μεταλαμβάνον διʼ ὅλης τῆς ὕλης, διʼ ἧς κεχώρηκε. θεὸν δὲ καὶ τὸν κόσμον καὶ τοὺς ἀστέρας καὶ τὴν γῆν, τὸν δʼ ἀνωτάτω πάντων νοῦν ἐν αἰθέρι.

Hoi Stōïkoi noeron theon apophainontai, pyr technikon, hodǭ badizon epi genesin kosmou, perieilēphotos pantas tous spermatikous logous, kathʼ hous hekasta kathʼ heimarmenēn ginetai. kai pneuma men diēkon diʼ holou tou kosmou, tas de prosēgorias metalambanon diʼ holēs tēs hylēs, diʼ hēs kechōrēke. theon de kai ton kosmon kai tous asteras kai tēn gēn, ton dʼ anōtatō pantōn noun en aitheri.

The Stoics declare God to be intelligent, a craftsmanlike fire proceeding methodically to the generation of the world, comprising all the seminal principles according to which each thing comes to be by fate; and a spirit pervading the whole world, taking different names according to the matter through which it has passed. And they call God the world and the stars and the earth, and the highest mind of all in the ether.

Notes and citation

Summary: The Stoics: God is craftsmanlike fire and spirit pervading the world.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.33.

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.33 (Plutarch; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.9 (Dindorf 2:297; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-9) · Report an error

14.16.10Dindorf 2:297–298

Ἐπίκουρος ἀνθρωποειδεῖς μὲν [πάντας] τοὺς θεοὺς, λόγῳ δὲ πάντας θεωρητοὺς διὰ τὴν λεπτομέρειαν τῆς τῶν εἰδώλων φύσεως. ὁ δʼ αὐτὸς ἄλλας τέσσαρας φύσεις κατὰ γένος ἀφθάρτους τάσδε, τὰ ἄτομα, τὸ κενὸν, τὸ ἄπειρον, τὰς ὁμοιότητας, αὗται δὲ λέγονται ὁμοιομέρειαι, καὶ τὰ στοιχεῖα.”

Epikouros anthrōpoeideis men [pantas] tous theous, logǭ de pantas theōrētous dia tēn leptomereian tēs tōn eidōlōn physeōs. ho dʼ autos allas tessaras physeis kata genos aphthartous tasde, ta atoma, to kenon, to apeiron, tas homoiotētas, hautai de legontai homoiomereiai, kai ta stoicheia.”

Epicurus: the gods are human in form, all to be contemplated by reason because of the fineness of the nature of their images. The same posits four other natures imperishable in kind: the atoms, the void, the infinite, the likenesses; and these are called homoeomeries, and the elements.”

Textual problem in this passage: see the notes.

Notes and citation

Summary: Epicurus: the gods are human in form and made of fine particles.

[Plutarch], Placita 1.7.34. The editor deletes “all” (πάντας) before “the gods.”

Extrabiblical texts: Plutarch, Plac. 1.7.34 (Plutarch; quotation); Epicurus (Epicurus (sayings and fragments); allusion)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.10 (Dindorf 2:297–298; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-10). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-10) · Report an error

14.16.11Dindorf 2:298

Τοιαῦται μὲν δὴ τῶν φυσικῶν φιλοσόφων καὶ αἱ περὶ θεοῦ διαστάσεις τε καὶ δυσφημίαι, ὧν πρώτους ὁ λόγος συνίστησι τοὺς ἀμφὶ τὸν Πυθαγόραν τε καὶ Ἀναξαγόραν Πλάτωνά τε καὶ Σωκράτην νοῦν καὶ θεὸν ἐπιστῆσαι τῷ κόσμῳ. οὗτοι δὴ κομιδῇ παῖδες τοῖς χρόνοις ἀποδείκνυνται καθʼ οὓς χρόνους τὰ ὕστατα ἱστορεῖται τῆς Ἑβραίων ἀρχαιολογίας.

Toiautai men dē tōn physikōn philosophōn kai hai peri theou diastaseis te kai dysphēmiai, hōn prōtous ho logos synistēsi tous amphi ton Pythagoran te kai Anaxagoran Platōna te kai Sōkratēn noun kai theon epistēsai tǭ kosmǭ. houtoi dē komidę̄ paides tois chronois apodeiknyntai kathʼ hous chronous ta hystata historeitai tēs Hebraiōn archaiologias.

Such, then, are the disagreements and blasphemies of the natural philosophers about God, of whom the account shows Pythagoras and Anaxagoras, Plato and Socrates and their followers to have been the first to set mind and God over the world. These are shown to be mere children in time, compared with the times in which the latest events of the Hebrews’ antiquity are recorded.

Notes and citation

Summary: The first Greeks to set mind over the world were late compared with the Hebrew history.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (stray mark in the digital text): ἀρχαιολογίας·. → ἀρχαιολογίας..

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.11 (Dindorf 2:298; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-11). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-11) · Report an error

14.16.12Dindorf 2:298

οὐκ ἦν ἄρα παλαιτάτη παρὰ πᾶσιν Ἕλλησι καὶ τοῖς πρόπαλαι τὴν πολύθεον δεισιδαιμονίαν παρά τε Φοίνιξι καὶ Αἰγυπτίοις εἰσηγησαμένοις ἡ τοῦ τῶν ὅλων θεοῦ γνῶσις, ἣν πρῶτος Ἑλλήνων Ἀναξαγόρας καὶ οἱ ἀμφʼ αὐτὸν ἐξήνεγκαν. καὶ μὴν τὰ τῆς πολυθέου δεισιδαιμονίας πάντων ἐθνῶν ἐκράτει· ἀλλʼ ἦν, ὡς ἔοικεν, οὐ τὴν ἀληθῆ περιέχοντα θεολογίαν, ἀλλʼ ἣν Αἰγύπτιοι καὶ Φοίνικες πρῶτοι πάντων συστήσασθαι ἐμαρτυρήθησαν.

ouk ēn ara palaitatē para pasin Hellēsi kai tois propalai tēn polytheon deisidaimonian para te Phoinixi kai Aigyptiois eisēgēsamenois hē tou tōn holōn theou gnōsis, hēn prōtos Hellēnōn Anaxagoras kai hoi amphʼ auton exēnenkan. kai mēn ta tēs polytheou deisidaimonias pantōn ethnōn ekratei; allʼ ēn, hōs eoiken, ou tēn alēthē periechonta theologian, allʼ hēn Aigyptioi kai Phoinikes prōtoi pantōn systēsasthai emartyrēthēsan.

The knowledge of the God of the universe, then, was not most ancient among all the Greeks and those who long ago introduced polytheistic superstition among the Phoenicians and Egyptians; the first of the Greeks to bring it out were Anaxagoras and his followers. Yet the teachings of polytheistic superstition prevailed over all nations; but they did not, as it seems, contain the true theology, but that which the Egyptians and Phoenicians are attested to have first of all established.

Notes and citation

Summary: The knowledge of the one God came late to the Greeks; polytheism was the older Egyptian and Phoenician error.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (repeated syllables in the digital text): εἰσηγησαμένοις μένοις ἡ → εἰσηγησαμένοις ἡ; Ἑλλήνων ληνῶν Ἀναξαγόρας → Ἑλλήνων Ἀναξαγόρας.

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.12 (Dindorf 2:298; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-12). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-12) · Report an error

14.16.13Dindorf 2:298

αὕτη δὲ ἣν θεοὺς μὲν οὐδαμῶς, οὐδέ τινας θείας δυνάμεις, ἄνδρας δὲ ἤδη πάλαι ἐν νεκροῖς κειμένους θεολογοῦσα, ὡς ὁ τῆς ἀληθείας πάλαι ἀπέδειξε λόγος. φέρʼ οὖν πάλιν ἀναλάβωμεν τὸν λόγον. ἐπειδὴ τῶν φυσικῶν φιλοσόφων οἱ μὲν πάντα κατέβαλλον ἐπὶ τὰς αἰσθήσεις, οἱ δʼ αὖ πάλιν τούτοις ἀνθεῖλκον, ὡς οἶ περὶ τὸν Ξενοφάνην τὸν Κολοφώνιον καὶ Παρμενίδην Ἐλεάτην, οἱ δὴ τὰς αἰσθήσεις ἀνῄρουν, μηδὲν εἶναι φάσκοντες καταληπτὸν τῶν ἐν αἰσθήσει, διὸ μόνῳ δεῖν πιστεύειν τῷ λόγῳ, τὰ πρὸς αὐτοὺς ἀντειρημένα διασκεψώμεθα.

hautē de hēn theous men oudamōs, oude tinas theias dynameis, andras de ēdē palai en nekrois keimenous theologousa, hōs ho tēs alētheias palai apedeixe logos. pherʼ oun palin analabōmen ton logon. epeidē tōn physikōn philosophōn hoi men panta kateballon epi tas aisthēseis, hoi dʼ au palin toutois antheilkon, hōs oi peri ton Xenophanēn ton Kolophōnion kai Parmenidēn Eleatēn, hoi dē tas aisthēseis anę̄roun, mēden einai phaskontes katalēpton tōn en aisthēsei, dio monǭ dein pisteuein tǭ logǭ, ta pros autous anteirēmena diaskepsōmetha.

And this was a theology that deified not gods at all, nor any divine powers, but men long since lying among the dead, as the account of the truth has shown before. Come, then, let us take up the argument again. Since of the natural philosophers some reduced everything to the senses, while others pulled the opposite way, like Xenophanes of Colophon and Parmenides of Elea and their followers, who did away with the senses, saying that nothing perceived by the senses can be apprehended, and therefore that reason alone is to be trusted, let us examine what has been said against them.

Notes and citation

Summary: Polytheism deified dead men; Eusebius now turns to those who rejected the senses.

Compare Books 1–3 of the Preparation.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): Παρ- μενίδην → Παρμενίδην.

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.16.13 (Dindorf 2:298; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-16-13). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-16-13) · Report an error

Preparation 14, chapter 17

14.17.1Dindorf 2:298–299

“Ἄλλοι δʼ ἐγένοντο τούτοις τὴν φωνὴν ἀφιέντες. οἴονται γὰρ δεῖν τὰς μὲν αἰσθήσεις καὶ τἀς φαντασίας καταβάλλειν, αὐτῷ δὲ μόνον τῷ λόγῳ πιστεύειν. τοιαῦτα γάρ τινα πρότερον μὲν Ξενοφάνης καὶ Παρμενίδης καὶ Ζήνων καὶ Μέλισσος ἔλεγον, ὕστερον δʼ οἱ περὶ Στίλπωνα καὶ τοὺς Μεγαρικούς. ὅθεν ἠξίουν οὗτοί γε τὸ ὂν ἕν εἶναι, καὶ τὸ ἕτερον μὴ εἶναι, μηδὲ γεννᾶσθαί τι μηδὲ φθείρεσθαι μηδὲ κινεῖσθαι τὸ παράπαν.

“Alloi dʼ egenonto toutois tēn phōnēn aphientes. oiontai gar dein tas men aisthēseis kai tas phantasias kataballein, autǭ de monon tǭ logǭ pisteuein. toiauta gar tina proteron men Xenophanēs kai Parmenidēs kai Zēnōn kai Melissos elegon, hysteron dʼ hoi peri Stilpōna kai tous Megarikous. hothen ēxioun houtoi ge to on hen einai, kai to heteron mē einai, mēde gennasthai ti mēde phtheiresthai mēde kineisthai to parapan.

“There were others who uttered the opposite view to these. For they think one must reject the senses and impressions and trust only reason itself. Such things were said earlier by Xenophanes and Parmenides and Zeno and Melissus, and later by Stilpo and the Megarians. Hence these held that being is one, and the other is not, and that nothing comes to be or perishes or moves at all.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristocles: the Eleatics and Megarians rejected the senses and held that being is one and unmoved.

Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy, book 8 (fragment).

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (OCR slip; line-end hyphen left in the digital text): τὸ ἴτερον μὴ εἶναι → τὸ ἕτερον μὴ εἶναι; Με- γαρικούς → Μεγαρικούς.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.1 (Dindorf 2:298–299; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-1) · Report an error

14.17.2Dindorf 2:299

τὸν μὲν οὖν πλείω πρὸς τούτους λόγον εἰσόμεθα φιλοσοφοῦντες· νυνὶ μέντοι τοσοῦτον λεκτέον εἴποιμεν γὰρ ἂν ὡς ὁ μὲν λόγος ἡμῶν εἴη τὸ θειότατον· οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ δεῖ γε καὶ τῆς αἰσθήσεως, ὥσπερ γε δὴ καὶ σώματος. ὅτι δὲ καὶ ἡ αἴσθησις ἀληθεύειν πέφυκε δῆλον· οὐ γὰρ οἷόν τε τὸν αἰσθανόμενον μὴ οὐχὶ πάσχειν τι· πάσχων δὲ τὸ πάθος ἂν εἰδείη· γνῶσις οὖν τίς ἐστι καὶ ἡ αἴσθησις.

ton men oun pleiō pros toutous logon eisometha philosophountes; nyni mentoi tosouton lekteon eipoimen gar an hōs ho men logos hēmōn eiē to theiotaton; ou mēn alla dei ge kai tēs aisthēseōs, hōsper ge dē kai sōmatos. hoti de kai hē aisthēsis alētheuein pephyke dēlon; ou gar hoion te ton aisthanomenon mē ouchi paschein ti; paschōn de to pathos an eideiē; gnōsis oun tis esti kai hē aisthēsis.

The fuller argument against them we shall know when we philosophize; but for now this much must be said: we would say that reason is the most divine thing in us; nevertheless we need sense too, as indeed we need a body. That sense is by nature truthful is clear; for one who perceives cannot fail to undergo something, and undergoing it, he would know the experience; so sense is a kind of knowledge.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristocles: reason is most divine, but sense is also a kind of knowledge.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.2 (Dindorf 2:299; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-2) · Report an error

14.17.3Dindorf 2:299

ἀλλὰ μὴν εἰ τὸ αἰσθάνεσθαι πάσχειν τί ἐστιν, ἅπαν δὲ τὸ πάσχον ὑπό του πάσχει, πάντως ἕτερον ἂν εἴη τὸ ποιοῦν καὶ τὸ πάσχον. ὥστε πρῶτον μὲν εἴη ἂν τὸ λεγόμενον ἕτερον· οἷον τὸ χρῶμα καὶ ὁ ψόφος· ἔπειτα δὲ ἓν τὸ ὄν οὐκ ἔσται· καὶ μὴν οὐδὲ ἀκίνητον· ἡ γὰρ αἴσθησίς ἐστι κίνησις.

alla mēn ei to aisthanesthai paschein ti estin, hapan de to paschon hypo tou paschei, pantōs heteron an eiē to poioun kai to paschon. hōste prōton men eiē an to legomenon heteron; hoion to chrōma kai ho psophos; epeita de hen to on ouk estai; kai mēn oude akinēton; hē gar aisthēsis esti kinēsis.

But if perceiving is undergoing something, and everything that undergoes undergoes it from something, then what acts and what undergoes would be different. So first, what is spoken of would be other, such as color and sound; and then being will not be one; nor indeed unmoved, for perception is a motion.

Notes and citation

Summary: Perception implies a difference between agent and patient, so being is not one and unmoved.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.3 (Dindorf 2:299; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-3) · Report an error

14.17.4Dindorf 2:299

ταύτῃ δὲ βούλεται πᾶς τις κατὰ φύσιν ἔχειν τἀς αἰσθήσεις, ἅτε δὴ πιστεύων, οἶμαι, ταῖς ὑγιαινούσαις μᾶλλον ἢ ταῖς νοσούσαις. εἰκότως ἄρα καὶ δεινός τις ἔρως αὐτῶν ἡμῖν ἐντέτηκεν. οὐδείς γέ τοι μὴ μεμηνὼς ἕλοιτʼ ἄν ποτε μίαν αἴσθησιν ἀποβάλλειν, ὅπως αὐτῷ πάντα τὰ ἄλλα ἀγαθὰ γένοιτο.

tautę̄ de bouletai pas tis kata physin echein tas aisthēseis, hate dē pisteuōn, oimai, tais hygiainousais mallon ē tais nosousais. eikotōs ara kai deinos tis erōs autōn hēmin entetēken. oudeis ge toi mē memēnōs heloitʼ an pote mian aisthēsin apoballein, hopōs autǭ panta ta alla agatha genoito.

For this reason everyone wishes to have his senses in their natural state, trusting, I think, healthy ones rather than diseased. Fittingly, then, a fierce love of them is ingrained in us. No one, at least, unless mad, would ever choose to lose one sense so that all other goods might be his.

Notes and citation

Summary: Everyone values healthy senses and would not give one up.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.4 (Dindorf 2:299; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-4) · Report an error

14.17.5Dindorf 2:299–300

τοὺς δὴ διαβάλλοντας αὐτὰς ἐχρῆν, πεπεισμένους γε διότι μάτην ἔχοιεν αὐτὰς, εἰπόντας ἅπερ ὁ Πάνδαρος λέγει παρὰ τῷ Ὁμήρῳ περὶ τῶν ἑαυτοῦ τόξων, αὐτίκʼ ἔπειτʼ ἀπʼ ἐμεῖο κάρη τάμοι ἀλλότριος φὼς, εἰ μὴ ἐγὼ τάδε τόξα φαεινῷ ἐν πυρὶ θείην, χερσὶ διακλάσσας, ἀνεμώλια γάρ μοι ὀπηδεῖ, τὸ μετὰ τοῦτο διαλυμήνασθαι πάσας τὰς αἰσθήσεις ἑαυτῶν· οὕτω γὰρ ἄν τις ἐπίστευεν αὐτοῖς ἔργῳ διδάσκουσιν ὡς εἰς οὐδὲν αὐτῶν δέοιντο.

tous dē diaballontas autas echrēn, pepeismenous ge dioti matēn echoien autas, eipontas haper ho Pandaros legei para tǭ Homērǭ peri tōn heautou toxōn, autikʼ epeitʼ apʼ emeio karē tamoi allotrios phōs, ei mē egō tade toxa phaeinǭ en pyri theiēn, chersi diaklassas, anemōlia gar moi opēdei, to meta touto dialymēnasthai pasas tas aisthēseis heautōn; houtō gar an tis episteuen autois ergǭ didaskousin hōs eis ouden autōn deointo.

Those who disparage them, then, being persuaded that they had them in vain, ought to have said what Pandarus says in Homer about his own bow, “May some stranger cut off my head straightway, if I do not put this bow into the shining fire, breaking it with my hands; for it goes with me as useless as wind,” and then to have destroyed all their own senses; for so one would have believed them, teaching by deed that they needed none of them.

Notes and citation

Summary: Those who despise the senses should destroy them, as Pandarus vowed to burn his bow.

Aristocles, On Philosophy; Homer, Iliad 5.214–216.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): πεπεισμέ- νους → πεπεισμένους; δι- δάσκουσιν → διδάσκουσιν.

Extrabiblical texts: Homer, Il. 5.214–216 (Homer, Iliad; quotation); Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.5 (Dindorf 2:299–300; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-5) · Report an error

14.17.6Dindorf 2:300

νυνὶ δὲ τοῦτο καὶ τὸ ἀτοπώτατόν ἐστι· ἀχρήστους γὰρ ἀποφαίνοντες αὐτὰς τῷ λόγῳ τοῖς ἔργοις τὰ μάλιστα χρώμενοι διατελοῦσιν αὐταῖς.

nyni de touto kai to atopōtaton esti; achrēstous gar apophainontes autas tǭ logǭ tois ergois ta malista chrōmenoi diatelousin autais.

But as it is, this is the most absurd thing of all: declaring them useless in argument, they go on using them above all in their actions.

Notes and citation

Summary: The deniers of the senses use them constantly.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.6 (Dindorf 2:300; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-6) · Report an error

14.17.7Dindorf 2:300

ὅ γέ τοι Μέλισσος ἐθέλων ἐπιδεικνύναι διότι τῶν φαινομένων καὶ ἐν ὄψει τούτων οὐδὲν εἴη τῷ ὄντι, διὰ τῶν φαινομένων ἀποδείκνυσιν αὐτῶν· φησὶ γοῦν, εἰ γάρ ἐστι καὶ ὕδωρ καὶ ἀὴρ καὶ πῦρ καὶ σίδηρος καὶ χρυσὸς, καὶ τὸ μὲν ζῶν, τὸ δὲ τεθνηκὸς, καὶ μέλαν καὶ λευκὸν καὶ τὰ ἄλλα πάντα, ὅσα φασὶν ἄνθρωποι εἶναι ἀληθῆ, καὶ ἡμεῖς ὀρθῶς ὁρῶμεν καὶ ἀκούομεν, εἶναι ἐχρῆν καὶ τὸ ὂν τοιοῦτον οἶον πρῶτον ἔδοξεν ἡμῖν εἶναι, καὶ μὴ μεταπίπτειν, μηδὲ γίνεσθαι ἕτερον, ἀλλʼ εἶναι ὅμοιον οἷόν περ ἐστὶν ἕκαστον. νῦν δὲ φαμὲν ὀρθῶς ὁρᾶν καὶ ἀκούειν καὶ συνιέναι· δοκεῖ δὲ ἡμῖν τὸ θερμὸν καὶ ψυχρὸν γίνεσθαι, καὶ τὸ ψυχρὸν θερμὸν, καὶ τὸ σκληρὸν μαλακὸν, καὶ τὸ μαλακὸν σκληρόν.

ho ge toi Melissos ethelōn epideiknynai dioti tōn phainomenōn kai en opsei toutōn ouden eiē tǭ onti, dia tōn phainomenōn apodeiknysin autōn; phēsi goun, ei gar esti kai hydōr kai aēr kai pyr kai sidēros kai chrysos, kai to men zōn, to de tethnēkos, kai melan kai leukon kai ta alla panta, hosa phasin anthrōpoi einai alēthē, kai hēmeis orthōs horōmen kai akouomen, einai echrēn kai to on toiouton oion prōton edoxen hēmin einai, kai mē metapiptein, mēde ginesthai heteron, allʼ einai homoion hoion per estin hekaston. nyn de phamen orthōs horan kai akouein kai synienai; dokei de hēmin to thermon kai psychron ginesthai, kai to psychron thermon, kai to sklēron malakon, kai to malakon sklēron.

Melissus, at least, wishing to show that none of the things that appear and are in sight really exists, proves it through the very things that appear. He says, at least: “If there are water and air and fire and iron and gold, and one thing living and another dead, and black and white and all the other things that men say are true, and if we see and hear correctly, then being ought to be such as it first seemed to us, and not change nor become other, but each should be like what it is. But now we say that we see and hear and understand correctly; yet it seems to us that the hot becomes cold and the cold hot, and the hard soft and the soft hard.”

Notes and citation

Summary: Melissus argues from appearances that appearances are not real.

Aristocles, On Philosophy; Melissus, fragment B 8 (Diels–Kranz).

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.7 (Dindorf 2:300; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-7) · Report an error

14.17.8Dindorf 2:300

ταῦτα δὲ καὶ ἄλλα πολλὰ τοιαῦτα λέγοντος αὐτοῦ καὶ μάλα εἰκότως ἐπύθετό τις ἂν, ἆρʼ οὖν ὅτι [ὃ νῦν] θερμόν ἐστι κἄπειτα τοῦτο γίνεται ψυχρὸν οὐκ αἰσθόμενος ἔγνως; ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων. ὅπερ γὰρ ἔφην, εὑρεθείη ἂν οὐδὲν ἀλλʼ ἢ τὰς αἰσθήσεις ἀναιρῶν καὶ ἐλέγχων διὰ τὸ μάλιστα πιστεύειν αὐταῖς.

tauta de kai alla polla toiauta legontos autou kai mala eikotōs epytheto tis an, arʼ oun hoti [ho nyn] thermon esti kapeita touto ginetai psychron ouk aisthomenos egnōs? homoiōs de kai peri tōn allōn. hoper gar ephēn, heuretheiē an ouden allʼ ē tas aisthēseis anairōn kai elenchōn dia to malista pisteuein autais.

When he says these and many other such things, one might very reasonably ask him: “Did you not know by perceiving that what is hot then becomes cold?” And likewise about the others. For, as I said, he would be found doing nothing but doing away with and refuting the senses by trusting them most of all.

Textual problem in this passage: see the notes.

Notes and citation

Summary: Melissus refutes the senses by relying on them.

Aristocles, On Philosophy. The editor deletes “what is now.”

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.8 (Dindorf 2:300; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-8) · Report an error

14.17.9Dindorf 2:300

ἀλλὰ γὰρ οἱ μὲν τοιοῦτοι λόγοι σχεδὸν ἱκανὰς ἤδη δεδώκασιν εὐθύνας· ἐξίτηλοί γε τοι γεγόνασιν, ὡς εἰ μηδὲ ἐλέχθησαν τὸ παράπαν. ἤδη μέντοι θαρροῦντες λέγωμεν ὀρθῶς φιλοσοφεῖν τοὺς καὶ τὰς αἰσθήσεις καὶ τὸν λόγον ἐπὶ τὴν γνῶσιν τὴν τῶν πραγμάτων παραλαμβάνοντας.”

alla gar hoi men toioutoi logoi schedon hikanas ēdē dedōkasin euthynas; exitēloi ge toi gegonasin, hōs ei mēde elechthēsan to parapan. ēdē mentoi tharrountes legōmen orthōs philosophein tous kai tas aisthēseis kai ton logon epi tēn gnōsin tēn tōn pragmatōn paralambanontas.”

But such arguments have given sufficient account of themselves already; they have faded away as if they had never been spoken at all. Let us now say with confidence that those philosophize rightly who take both the senses and reason for the knowledge of things.”

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristocles: right philosophy uses both the senses and reason.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.9 (Dindorf 2:300; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-9) · Report an error

14.17.10Dindorf 2:300–301

Τοιοίδε μὲν οὖν οἱ ἀμφὶ τὸν Ξενοφάνην, ὃς δὴ λέγεται συνακμάσαι τοῖς ἀμφὶ Πυθαγόραν καὶ Ἀναξαγόραν. Ξενοφάνους δὲ ἀκουστὴς γέγονε Παρμενίδης· τούτου Μέλισσος, οὗ Ζήνων, οὗ Λεύκιππος, οὗ Δημόκριτος, οὗ Πρωταγόρας καὶ Νεσσᾶς· δὲ Νεσσᾶ Μητρόδωρος, οὗ Διογένης, οὗ Ἀνάξαρχος. Ἀναξάρχου δὲ γνώριμος γέγονε Πυρρῶν, ἀφʼ οὗ ἡ τῶν Σκεπτικῶν ἐπικληθέντων διατριβὴ συνέστη· οὓς καὶ αὐτοὺς μηδὲν εἶναι τὸ παράπαν μήτʼ ἐν αἰσθήσει μήτʼ ἐν λόγῳ καταληπτὸν ὁριζομένους, ἐπέχοντας δʼ ἐν πᾶσιν, ὅπως ἀπήλεγχον οἶ ἀντιδοξάζοντες μαθεῖν πάρεστιν ἀπὸ τοῦ δηλωθέντος συγγράμματος ὧδέ πη πρὸς λέξιν ἔχοντος

Toioide men oun hoi amphi ton Xenophanēn, hos dē legetai synakmasai tois amphi Pythagoran kai Anaxagoran. Xenophanous de akoustēs gegone Parmenidēs; toutou Melissos, hou Zēnōn, hou Leukippos, hou Dēmokritos, hou Prōtagoras kai Nessas; de Nessa Mētrodōros, hou Diogenēs, hou Anaxarchos. Anaxarchou de gnōrimos gegone Pyrrōn, aphʼ hou hē tōn Skeptikōn epiklēthentōn diatribē synestē; hous kai autous mēden einai to parapan mētʼ en aisthēsei mētʼ en logǭ katalēpton horizomenous, epechontas dʼ en pasin, hopōs apēlenchon oi antidoxazontes mathein parestin apo tou dēlōthentos syngrammatos hōde pē pros lexin echontos

Such, then, were the followers of Xenophanes, who is said to have flourished at the same time as Pythagoras and Anaxagoras and their followers. Parmenides was a hearer of Xenophanes; Melissus of him; Zeno of Melissus; Leucippus of Zeno; Democritus of Leucippus; Protagoras and Nessas of Democritus; Metrodorus of Nessas; Diogenes of Metrodorus; Anaxarchus of Diogenes. Pyrrho was a pupil of Anaxarchus, from whom the school of those called Skeptics arose; how those of the opposite opinion refuted them, who define that nothing at all is apprehensible either in sense or in reason, and suspend judgment in everything, may be learned from the work mentioned, which runs thus word for word:

Notes and citation

Summary: The succession from Xenophanes to Pyrrho; Eusebius introduces Aristocles against the Skeptics.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text; line-end hyphen left in the digital text): Διογενὴς → Διογένης; Παρ- μενίδης → Παρμενίδης; μα- θεῖν → μαθεῖν.

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.17.10 (Dindorf 2:300–301; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-17-10). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-17-10) · Report an error

Preparation 14, chapter 18

14.18.1Dindorf 2:301

“ Ἀναγκαίως δʼ ἔχει πρὸ παντὸς διασκέψασθαι περὶ τῆς ἡμῶν αὐτῶν γνώσεως· εἰ γὰρ αὖ μηδὲν πεφύκαμεν γνωρίζειν, οὐδὲν ἔτι δεῖ περὶ τῶν ἄλλων σκοπεῖν.

“ Anankaiōs dʼ echei pro pantos diaskepsasthai peri tēs hēmōn autōn gnōseōs; ei gar au mēden pephykamen gnōrizein, ouden eti dei peri tōn allōn skopein.

“Before everything it is necessary to examine our own knowledge; for if we are by nature able to know nothing, there is no further need to inquire about other things.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristocles: we must first examine whether we can know anything.

Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy, book 8 (fragment).

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): διασκέ- ψασθαι → διασκέψασθαι.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.1 (Dindorf 2:301; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-1). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-1) · Report an error

14.18.2Dindorf 2:301

ἐγένοντο μὲν οὑν καὶ τῶν πάλαι τινὲς οἶ ἀφέντες τήνδε τὴν φωνὴν, οἷς ἀντείρηκεν Ἀριστοτέλης. ἴσχυσε μέντοι τοιαῦτα λέγων καὶ Πυρρῶν ὁ Ἠλεῖος· ἀλλʼ αὐτὸς μὲν οὐδὲν ἐν γραφῇ καταλέλοιπεν, ὁ δὲ μαθητὴς αὐτοῦ Τίμων φησὶ δεῖν τὸν μέλλοντα εὐδαιμονήσειν εἰς τρία ταῦτα βλέπειν· πρῶτον μὲν ὁποῖα πέφυκε τὰ πράγματα· δεύτερον δὲ, τίνα χρὴ τρόπον ἡμᾶς πρὸς αὐτὰ διακεῖσθαι· τελευταῖον δὲ, τί περιέσται τοῖς οὕτως ἔχουσι.

egenonto men houn kai tōn palai tines oi aphentes tēnde tēn phōnēn, hois anteirēken Aristotelēs. ischyse mentoi toiauta legōn kai Pyrrōn ho Ēleios; allʼ autos men ouden en graphę̄ kataleloipen, ho de mathētēs autou Timōn phēsi dein ton mellonta eudaimonēsein eis tria tauta blepein; prōton men hopoia pephyke ta pragmata; deuteron de, tina chrē tropon hēmas pros auta diakeisthai; teleutaion de, ti periestai tois houtōs echousi.

There were also some of the ancients who uttered this view, whom Aristotle answered. Pyrrho of Elis was also strong in saying such things; but he himself left nothing in writing, while his pupil Timon says that one who is to be happy must look to these three things: first, what things are like by nature; second, in what way we must be disposed toward them; and last, what will result for those so disposed.

Notes and citation

Summary: Timon gives Pyrrho’s three questions for happiness.

Aristocles, On Philosophy; Timon of Phlius, testimonium.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line number leaked into the digital text): πρῶτον μὲν 5 ὁποῖα → πρῶτον μὲν ὁποῖα.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation); Timon of Phlius, Timon (Timon of Phlius, Silloi; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.2 (Dindorf 2:301; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-2). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-2) · Report an error

14.18.3Dindorf 2:301

τὰ μὲν οὖν πράγματά φησιν αὐτὸν ἀποφαίνειν ἐπʼ ἴσης ἀδιάφορα καὶ ἀστάθμητα καὶ ἀνεπίκριτα, διὰ τοῦτο μήτε τὰς αἰσθήσεις ἡμῶν μήτε τὰς δόξας ἀληθεύειν ἢ ψεύδεσθαι. διὰ τοῦτο οὖν μηδὲ πιστεύειν αὐταῖς δεῖν, ἀλλʼ ἀδοξάστους καὶ ἀκλινεῖς καὶ ἀκραδάντους εἶναι, περὶ ἑνὸς ἑκάστου λέγοντας ὅτι οὐ μᾶλλόν ἐστιν ἢ οὐκ ἔστιν, ἢ καὶ ἔστι καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν, ἢ οὔτε ἔστιν οὔτʼ οὐκ ἔστιν.

ta men oun pragmata phēsin auton apophainein epʼ isēs adiaphora kai astathmēta kai anepikrita, dia touto mēte tas aisthēseis hēmōn mēte tas doxas alētheuein ē pseudesthai. dia touto oun mēde pisteuein autais dein, allʼ adoxastous kai aklineis kai akradantous einai, peri henos hekastou legontas hoti ou mallon estin ē ouk estin, ē kai esti kai ouk estin, ē oute estin outʼ ouk estin.

Things, he says, Pyrrho declares to be equally indifferent and unstable and undecidable; for this reason neither our perceptions nor our opinions are true or false. For this reason, then, we must not trust them, but be without opinions, without inclination, and unshaken, saying about each single thing that it no more is than is not, or both is and is not, or neither is nor is not.

Notes and citation

Summary: Pyrrho: things are indifferent and undecidable, so we must hold no opinions.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.3 (Dindorf 2:301; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-3). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-3) · Report an error

14.18.4Dindorf 2:301–302

τοῖς μέντοι διακειμένοις οὕτω περιέσεσθαι Τίμων φησὶ πρῶτον μὲν ἀφασίαν, ἔπειτα δʼ ἀταραξίαν, Αἰνησίδημος δὲ ἡδονήν.”

tois mentoi diakeimenois houtō periesesthai Timōn phēsi prōton men aphasian, epeita dʼ ataraxian, Ainēsidēmos de hēdonēn.”

For those so disposed, Timon says, the result will be first speechlessness, then freedom from disturbance; and Aenesidemus says pleasure.”

Notes and citation

Summary: The result of suspending judgment: speechlessness and tranquillity.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.4 (Dindorf 2:301–302; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-4). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-4) · Report an error

14.18.5Dindorf 2:302

“Τὰ μὲν οὖν κεφάλαια τῶν λεγομένων ἐστὶ ταῦτα· σκεψώμεθα δʼ εἰ ὀρθῶς λέγουσιν. ἐπεὶ τοίνυν ἐπʼ ἴσης ἀδιάφορα πάντα φασὶν εἶναι, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο κελεύουσι μηδενὶ προστίθεσθαι, μηδὲ δοξάζειν, εἰκότως ἂν, οἶμαι, πύθοιτό τις αὐτῶν, ἆρά γε διαμαρτάνουσιν οἱ διαφέρειν αὐτὰ νομίζοντες ἢ οὔ; πάντως γὰρ, εἰ μὲν ἁμαρτάνουσιν, οὐκ ὀρθῶς ὑπολαμβάνοιεν ἄν. ὥστε ἀνάγκη λέγειν αὐτοῖς εἶναί τινας τοὺς τὰ ψευδῆ περὶ τῶν ὄντων δοξάζοντας· αὐτοὶ τοίνυν εἶεν ἂν οἱ τἀληθῆ λέγοντες· οὕτω δὲ εἴη ἂν ἀληθές τι καὶ ψεῦδος. εἰ δʼ οὐχ ἀμαρτάνομεν οἱ πολλοὶ τὰ ὄντα διαφέρειν οἰόμενοι, τί παθόντες ἐπιπλήττουσιν ἡμῖν; αὐτοὶ γὰρ ἁμαρτάνοιεν ἂν ἀξιοῦντες μὴ διαφέρειν αὐτά.

“Ta men oun kephalaia tōn legomenōn esti tauta; skepsōmetha dʼ ei orthōs legousin. epei toinyn epʼ isēs adiaphora panta phasin einai, kai dia touto keleuousi mēdeni prostithesthai, mēde doxazein, eikotōs an, oimai, pythoito tis autōn, ara ge diamartanousin hoi diapherein auta nomizontes ē ou? pantōs gar, ei men hamartanousin, ouk orthōs hypolambanoien an. hōste anankē legein autois einai tinas tous ta pseudē peri tōn ontōn doxazontas; autoi toinyn eien an hoi talēthē legontes; houtō de eiē an alēthes ti kai pseudos. ei dʼ ouch amartanomen hoi polloi ta onta diapherein oiomenoi, ti pathontes epiplēttousin hēmin? autoi gar hamartanoien an axiountes mē diapherein auta.

“These, then, are the heads of what they say; let us consider whether they speak rightly. Since, then, they say that all things are equally indifferent, and for this reason bid us assent to nothing nor form opinions, one might reasonably, I think, ask them whether those who think things differ are mistaken or not. For if they are mistaken, they would not suppose rightly; so they must say that there are some who hold false opinions about things; they themselves, then, would be those who speak the truth; and so there would be something true and false. But if we, the many, are not mistaken in thinking things differ, what ails them that they rebuke us? For they themselves would be mistaken in holding that they do not differ.

Notes and citation

Summary: If others are wrong, there is truth and falsehood; if not, the skeptics are wrong.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; page subdivision letter leaked into the digital text): οὕτω δὲ b εἴη → οὕτω δὲ εἴη; δια- μαρτάνουσιν → διαμαρτάνουσιν.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.5 (Dindorf 2:302; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-5). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-5) · Report an error

14.18.6Dindorf 2:302

καὶ μὴν εἰ καὶ δοίημεν αὐτοῖς ἐπʼ ἴσης ἀδιάφορα πάντα εἶναι, δῆλον ὡς οὐκ ἂν διαφέροιεν οὐδʼ αὐτοὶ τῶν πολλῶν. τίς οὖν εἴη ἂν αὐτῶν ἡ σοφία; καὶ διὰ τί Τίμων τοῖς μὲν ἄλλοις λοιδορεῖται πᾶσι, Πύρρωνα δʼ ὑμνεῖ μόνον;

kai mēn ei kai doiēmen autois epʼ isēs adiaphora panta einai, dēlon hōs ouk an diapheroien oudʼ autoi tōn pollōn. tis oun eiē an autōn hē sophia? kai dia ti Timōn tois men allois loidoreitai pasi, Pyrrōna dʼ hymnei monon?

And indeed, if we granted them that all things are equally indifferent, clearly they themselves would not differ from the many. What, then, would their wisdom be? And why does Timon revile all others and praise Pyrrho alone?

Notes and citation

Summary: If all is indifferent, the skeptics are no wiser than anyone else.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.6 (Dindorf 2:302; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-6). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-6) · Report an error

14.18.7Dindorf 2:302

ἔτι γε μὴν εἰ ἐπʼ ἴσης ἐστὶν ἀδιάφορα πάντα καὶ διὰ τοῦτο χρὴ μηδὲν δοξάζειν, οὐκ ἂν οὐδὲ ταῦτα διαφέροι· λέγω δὲ τὸ διαφέρειν ἢ μὴ διαφέρειν, καὶ τὸ δοξάζειν ἢ μὴ δοξάζειν. τί γὰρ μᾶλλον τοιαῦτά ἐστιν ἢ οὐκ ἔστιν; ἢ, ὡς φησι Τίμων, διὰ τί ναί καὶ διὰ τί οὔ, καὶ αὐτὸ τὸ διὰ τί; φανερὸν οὖν ὡς ἀναιρεῖται τὸ ζητεῖν· ὥστε παυσάσθωσαν ἐνοχλοῦντες. ἐπεὶ νῦν γε μεμήνασι πόρρω τέχνης ἅμα μὲν ἡμῖν διακελευόμενοι μὴ δοξάζειν, ἅμα δὲ κελεύοντες αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιεῖν, καὶ λέγοντες ὡς περὶ οὐδενὸς ἀποφαίνεσθαι δέοι, κἄπειτα ἀποφαινόμενοι· καὶ ἀξιοῦσι μὲν μηδενὶ συγκατατίθεσθαι, πείθεσθαι δʼ αὐτοῖς κελεύουσιν· εἶτα λέγοντες μηδὲν εἰδέναι πάντας ἐλέγχουσιν ὡς εὖ εἰδότες.

eti ge mēn ei epʼ isēs estin adiaphora panta kai dia touto chrē mēden doxazein, ouk an oude tauta diapheroi; legō de to diapherein ē mē diapherein, kai to doxazein ē mē doxazein. ti gar mallon toiauta estin ē ouk estin? ē, hōs phēsi Timōn, dia ti nai kai dia ti ou, kai auto to dia ti? phaneron oun hōs anaireitai to zētein; hōste pausasthōsan enochlountes. epei nyn ge memēnasi porrō technēs hama men hēmin diakeleuomenoi mē doxazein, hama de keleuontes auto touto poiein, kai legontes hōs peri oudenos apophainesthai deoi, kapeita apophainomenoi; kai axiousi men mēdeni synkatatithesthai, peithesthai dʼ autois keleuousin; eita legontes mēden eidenai pantas elenchousin hōs eu eidotes.

Further, if all things are equally indifferent and for this reason one must form no opinion, these things too would not differ: I mean differing and not differing, and opining and not opining. For why are they such rather than not? Or, as Timon says, why yes and why no, and why the very “why”? Clearly, then, inquiry is done away with; so let them stop troubling us. For now they are raving beyond all art, at once bidding us not to opine and telling us to do this very thing, saying that one must declare oneself about nothing and then declaring themselves; and they think it right to assent to nothing, yet bid us be persuaded by them; then, saying they know nothing, they refute everyone as if they knew well.

Notes and citation

Summary: The skeptics contradict themselves in teaching and refuting.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): ἀποφαί- νεσθαι → ἀποφαίνεσθαι.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.7 (Dindorf 2:302; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-7). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-7) · Report an error

14.18.8Dindorf 2:302–303

ἀνάγκη τε τοὺς φάσκοντας ὡς ἄδηλα πάντα εἴη δυοῖν θάτερον, ἢ σιωπᾶν ἢ ἀποφαίνεσθαί τι καὶ λέγειν. εἰ μὲν οὖν ἡσυχίαν ἄγοιεν, δῆλον ὅτι πρός γε τοὺς τοιούτους οὐδεὶς ἂν εἴη λόγος· εἰ δʼ ἀποφαίνοιντο, πάντη τε καὶ πάντως ἢ εἶναί τι φαῖεν ἂν ἢ μὴ εἶναι, καθάπερ ἀμέλει νυνί φασιν ὡς εἴη πάντα ἄγνωστα καὶ νομιστὰ πᾶσι.

anankē te tous phaskontas hōs adēla panta eiē dyoin thateron, ē siōpan ē apophainesthai ti kai legein. ei men oun hēsychian agoien, dēlon hoti pros ge tous toioutous oudeis an eiē logos; ei dʼ apophainointo, pantē te kai pantōs ē einai ti phaien an ē mē einai, kathaper amelei nyni phasin hōs eiē panta agnōsta kai nomista pasi.

And those who say that all things are unclear must do one of two things: either keep silent, or declare and say something. If they keep quiet, clearly there would be no argument with such people; but if they declare themselves, they would in every way and altogether say either that something is or that it is not, just as indeed they now say that all things are unknowable and matters of opinion to all.

Notes and citation

Summary: The skeptic must either be silent or assert something.

Aristocles, On Philosophy. “Matters of opinion” renders the digital text’s νομιστά, probably for “matters of convention.”

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text; stray word in the digital text): πάντως τὼς ἢ εἶναί → πάντως ἢ εἶναί; φά- σκοντας → φάσκοντας.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.8 (Dindorf 2:302–303; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-8). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-8) · Report an error

14.18.9Dindorf 2:303

ὡς δʼ οὐδὲν τοῦτο τοίνυν ὁ ἀξιῶν ἤτοι δηλοῖ τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ ἔνεστιν αὐτὸ συνεῖναι λεγόμενον, ἢ οὐκ ἔνεστιν. ἀλλʼ εἰ μὲν οὐ δηλοῖ, καθάπαξ οὐδεὶς οὐδʼ οὕτω πρὸς τὸν τοιοῦτον ἂν εἴη λόγος. εἰ δὲ σημαίνοι, πάντως ἢ ἄπειρα λέγοι ἂν ἢ πεπερασμένα· καὶ εἰ μὲν ἄπειρα, οὐδʼ οὕτως ἂν εἴη λόγος πρὸς αὐτὸν, ἀπείρου γὰρ γνῶσις οὐκ ἔστι· πεπερασμένων δὲ ὄντων τῶν δηλουμένων ἢ ἑνὸς ὁτουοῦν ὁ τοῦτο λέγων ὁρίζει τι καὶ κρίνει. πῶς οὖν ἄγνωστα καὶ ἀνεπίκριτα πάντα εἴη ἄν; εἰ δὲ φαίη ταὐτὸ καὶ εἶναι καὶ μὴ εἶναι, πρῶτον μὲν ἔσται ταὐτὸ καὶ ἀληθὲς καὶ ψεῦδος, ἔπειτα δὲ ἐρεῖ τι καὶ οὐκ ἐρεῖ, καὶ λόγῳ χρώμενος ἀναιρήσει λόγον, ἔτι δὲ ὁμολογῶν ψεύδεσθαι πιστεύειν ἑαυτῷ φησι δεῖν.

hōs dʼ ouden touto toinyn ho axiōn ētoi dēloi to pragma kai enestin auto syneinai legomenon, ē ouk enestin. allʼ ei men ou dēloi, kathapax oudeis oudʼ houtō pros ton toiouton an eiē logos. ei de sēmainoi, pantōs ē apeira legoi an ē peperasmena; kai ei men apeira, oudʼ houtōs an eiē logos pros auton, apeirou gar gnōsis ouk esti; peperasmenōn de ontōn tōn dēloumenōn ē henos hotououn ho touto legōn horizei ti kai krinei. pōs oun agnōsta kai anepikrita panta eiē an? ei de phaiē tauto kai einai kai mē einai, prōton men estai tauto kai alēthes kai pseudos, epeita de erei ti kai ouk erei, kai logǭ chrōmenos anairēsei logon, eti de homologōn pseudesthai pisteuein heautǭ phēsi dein.

Then he who maintains this either makes the matter clear, and it is possible to understand what is said, or it is not. If he does not make it clear, in that case too there could be no argument with such a man. But if he signifies something, he would say either infinite things or limited ones; and if infinite, in that case too there could be no argument with him, for there is no knowledge of the infinite; but if the things made clear are limited, or any one thing, the one who says this defines and judges something. How then could all things be unknowable and undecidable? And if he says that the same thing both is and is not, first the same thing will be both true and false; then he will both say something and not say it, and using speech he will do away with speech; and further, admitting that he lies, he says one should trust him.

Notes and citation

Summary: Any meaningful statement by the skeptic defines and judges something.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): ἂν ἣ πεπερασμένα → ἂν ἢ πεπερασμένα.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.9 (Dindorf 2:303; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-9). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-9) · Report an error

14.18.10Dindorf 2:303

ἄξιον δὲ ζητῆσαι πόθεν καὶ μαθόντες ἄδηλα πάντα φασὶν εἶναι. δεῖ γὰρ εἰδέναι πρότερον αὐτοὺς τί δή ποτʼ ἐστὶ τὸ δῆλον· οὕτω γοῦν ἂν ἔχοιεν λέγειν ὡς οὐκ εἴη τὰ πράγματα τοιαῦτα. πρῶτον γὰρ εἰδέναι χρὴ τὴν κατάφασιν, εἶτα τὴν ἀπόφασιν. εἰ δὲ ἀγνοοῦσιν ὁποῖόν ἐστι τὸ δῆλον, οὐκ ἂν εἰδεῖεν οὐδὲ τί τὸ ἄδηλον.

axion de zētēsai pothen kai mathontes adēla panta phasin einai. dei gar eidenai proteron autous ti dē potʼ esti to dēlon; houtō goun an echoien legein hōs ouk eiē ta pragmata toiauta. prōton gar eidenai chrē tēn kataphasin, eita tēn apophasin. ei de agnoousin hopoion esti to dēlon, ouk an eideien oude ti to adēlon.

It is worth asking from where they learned to say that all things are unclear. For they must first know what the clear is; for so they could say that things are not such. For one must first know the affirmation, then the negation. But if they do not know what the clear is like, they would not know what the unclear is either.

Notes and citation

Summary: To call all things unclear, one must know what “clear” is.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.10 (Dindorf 2:303; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-10). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-10) · Report an error

14.18.11Dindorf 2:303–304

ὁπόταν γε μὴν Αἰνησίδημος ἐν τῇ ὑποτυπώσει τοὺς ἐννέα διεξίῃ τρόπους (κατὰ τοσούτους γὰρ ἀποφαίνειν ἄδηλα τὰ πράγματα πεπείραται) πότερον αὐτὸν φῶμεν εἰδότα λέγειν αὐτοὺς ἢ ἀγνοοῦντα; φησὶ γὰρ ὅτι τὰ ζῷα διαφέρει, καὶ ἡμεῖς αὐτοὶ, καὶ αἶ πόλεις, καὶ οἶ βίοι, καὶ τὰ ἔθη, καὶ οἷ νόμοι· καὶ τὰς αἰσθήσεις δέ φησιν ἡμῶν ἀσθενεῖς εἷναι, καὶ πολλὰ τὰ ἔξωθεν λυμαινόμενα τὴν γνῶσιν, ἀποστήματα, καὶ μεγέθη καὶ κινήσεις· ἔτι δὲ τὸ μὴ ὁμοίως διακεῖσθαι νέους καὶ πρεσβυτέρους, καὶ ἐγρηγορότας καὶ κοιμωμένους, καὶ ὑγιαίνοντας καὶ νοσοῦντας· οὐδενός τε ἡμᾶς ἁπλοῦ καὶ ἀκραιφνοῦς ἀντιλαμβάνεσθαι.

hopotan ge mēn Ainēsidēmos en tę̄ hypotypōsei tous ennea diexię̄ tropous (kata tosoutous gar apophainein adēla ta pragmata pepeiratai) poteron auton phōmen eidota legein autous ē agnoounta? phēsi gar hoti ta zǭa diapherei, kai hēmeis autoi, kai ai poleis, kai oi bioi, kai ta ethē, kai hoi nomoi; kai tas aisthēseis de phēsin hēmōn astheneis heinai, kai polla ta exōthen lymainomena tēn gnōsin, apostēmata, kai megethē kai kinēseis; eti de to mē homoiōs diakeisthai neous kai presbyterous, kai egrēgorotas kai koimōmenous, kai hygiainontas kai nosountas; oudenos te hēmas haplou kai akraiphnous antilambanesthai.

Again, when Aenesidemus in his Outline goes through the nine modes (for in so many he has tried to show that things are unclear), shall we say that he speaks of them knowing or not knowing? For he says that living beings differ, and we ourselves, and cities, and ways of life, and customs, and laws; and he says that our senses are weak, and that many things from outside spoil knowledge: distances, sizes, and motions; and further that the young and the older are not similarly disposed, nor the waking and sleeping, nor the healthy and sick; and that we grasp nothing simple and pure.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aenesidemus’ modes of skepticism.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.11 (Dindorf 2:303–304; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-11). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-11) · Report an error

14.18.12Dindorf 2:304

πάντα γὰρ εἶναι συγκεχυμένα καὶ πρός τι λεγόμενα. ταῦτα δὲ, φημὶ, καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα κομψολογοῦντα αὐτὸν ἡδέως ἄν τις ἤρετο, πότερον εὖ εἰδὼς λέγοι διότι τὰ πράγματα τοῦτον ἔχει τὸν τρόπον ἢ ἀγνοῶν· εἰ μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ᾔδει, πῶς ἂν ἡμεῖς αὐτῷ πιστεύοιμεν; εἰ δʼ ἐγίνωσκε, κομιδῇ τις ἦν ἠλίθιος ἅμα μὲν ἄδηλα πάντα ἀποφαινόμενος, ἅμα δὲ τοσαῦτα λέγων εἰδέναι.

panta gar einai synkechymena kai pros ti legomena. tauta de, phēmi, kai ta toiauta kompsologounta auton hēdeōs an tis ēreto, poteron eu eidōs legoi dioti ta pragmata touton echei ton tropon ē agnoōn; ei men gar ouk ę̄dei, pōs an hēmeis autǭ pisteuoimen? ei dʼ eginōske, komidę̄ tis ēn ēlithios hama men adēla panta apophainomenos, hama de tosauta legōn eidenai.

For all things are confused and spoken of in relation to something. One would gladly ask him, as he says these and such things so cleverly, whether he says them knowing well that things are so, or not knowing. For if he did not know, how should we believe him? But if he knew, he was utterly foolish, at once declaring all things unclear and saying that he knew so many things.

Notes and citation

Summary: If Aenesidemus knew his modes were true, he contradicted himself.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): λεγό- μενα → λεγόμενα.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.12 (Dindorf 2:304; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-12). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-12) · Report an error

14.18.13Dindorf 2:304

καὶ μὴν ὁπότε γε τοιαῦτα διεξίοιεν, οὐδὲν ἀλλʼ ἢ ἐπαγωγήν τινα λέγουσι, δεικνύντες ὁποῖʼ ἄττα εἴη τὰ φαινόμενα καὶ τὰ καθʼ ἕκαστα· τὸ δὲ τοιοῦτο καὶ ἔστι καὶ λέγεται πίστις. εἰ μὲν οὑν αὐτῇ συγκατατίθενται, δῆλον ὅτι δοξάζουσιν· εἰ δʼ οὐ πιστεύουσιν, οὐδʼ ἂν ἡμεῖς προσέχειν αὐτοῖς βουληθείημεν.

kai mēn hopote ge toiauta diexioien, ouden allʼ ē epagōgēn tina legousi, deiknyntes hopoiʼ atta eiē ta phainomena kai ta kathʼ hekasta; to de toiouto kai esti kai legetai pistis. ei men houn autę̄ synkatatithentai, dēlon hoti doxazousin; ei dʼ ou pisteuousin, oudʼ an hēmeis prosechein autois boulētheiēmen.

And indeed, when they go through such things, they are stating nothing but an induction, showing what the appearances and particulars are like; and such a thing both is and is called a proof. If, then, they assent to it, clearly they hold opinions; but if they do not believe it, neither would we wish to pay attention to them.

Notes and citation

Summary: The skeptics’ arguments are inductions; if they believe them, they hold opinions.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.13 (Dindorf 2:304; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-13). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-13) · Report an error

14.18.14Dindorf 2:304

ὅ γε μὴν Τίμων ἐν τῷ Πύθωνι διηγεῖται, μακρόν τινα κατατείνας λόγον, ὡς ἐντύχοι τῷ Πύρρωνι βαδίζοντι Πυθοῖδε παρὰ τὸ ἱερὸν τὸ τοῦ Ἀμφιαράου, καὶ τίνα διαλεχθεῖεν ἀλλήλοις. ἆρʼ οὖν οὐκ εὐλόγως ἄν τις αὐτῷ ταῦτα συγγράφοντι παραστὰς εἴποι, τί, ὦ πονηρὲ, ἐνοχλεῖς σεαυτῷ ταῦτα συγγράφων καὶ ἃ μὴ οἶσθα διηγούμενος; τί γὰρ μᾶλλον ἐνέτυχες αὐτῷ ἢ οὐκ ἐνέτυχες, καὶ διελέχθης ἢ οὐ διελέχθης;

ho ge mēn Timōn en tǭ Pythōni diēgeitai, makron tina katateinas logon, hōs entychoi tǭ Pyrrōni badizonti Pythoide para to hieron to tou Amphiaraou, kai tina dialechtheien allēlois. arʼ oun ouk eulogōs an tis autǭ tauta syngraphonti parastas eipoi, ti, ō ponēre, enochleis seautǭ tauta syngraphōn kai ha mē oistha diēgoumenos? ti gar mallon enetyches autǭ ē ouk enetyches, kai dielechthēs ē ou dielechthēs?

Timon, at least, in his Python relates at great length how he met Pyrrho walking to Pytho by the temple of Amphiaraus, and what they said to one another. Would not someone reasonably stand by him as he wrote this and say: “Why, you wretch, do you trouble yourself writing this and relating what you do not know? For why did you meet him rather than not meet him, and converse rather than not converse?”

Notes and citation

Summary: Timon’s narrative of meeting Pyrrho contradicts his own skepticism.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (breathing lost in the digital text; line-end hyphen left in the digital text): τοῦ Αμφιαράου → τοῦ Ἀμφιαράου; διη- γεῖται → διηγεῖται.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.14 (Dindorf 2:304; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-14). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-14) · Report an error

14.18.15Dindorf 2:304–305

αὐτός τε ἐκεῖνος ὁ θαυμαστὸς Πυρρῶν ἆρά γε ᾔδει τὸ διὰ τί βαδίζοι Πύθια θεασόμενος; ἢ καθάπερ οἶ μεμηνότες ἐπλανᾶτο κατὰ τὴν ὁδόν; ἡνίκα δὲ ἤρξατο κατηγορεῖν τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ τῆς ἀγνοίας αὐτῶν, ἆρά γε φῶμεν αὐτὸν ἀληθῆ λέγειν ἢ μὴ, καὶ τὸν Τίμωνα παθεῖν τι καὶ συγκαταθέσθαι τοῖς λόγοις ἢ μὴ προσέχειν; εἰ μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἐπείσθη, πῶς ἀντὶ χορευτοῦ φιλόσοφος ἐγένετο καὶ τὸν Πύρρωνα διετέλεσε θαυμάζων; εἰ δὲ συγκατέθετο τοῖς λεγομένοις, ἄτοπος ἂν εἴη τις, αὐτὸς μὲν φιλοσοφῶν, ἡμᾶς δὲ κωλύων.

autos te ekeinos ho thaumastos Pyrrōn ara ge ę̄dei to dia ti badizoi Pythia theasomenos? ē kathaper oi memēnotes eplanato kata tēn hodon? hēnika de ērxato katēgorein tōn anthrōpōn kai tēs agnoias autōn, ara ge phōmen auton alēthē legein ē mē, kai ton Timōna pathein ti kai synkatathesthai tois logois ē mē prosechein? ei men gar ouk epeisthē, pōs anti choreutou philosophos egeneto kai ton Pyrrōna dietelese thaumazōn? ei de synkatetheto tois legomenois, atopos an eiē tis, autos men philosophōn, hēmas de kōlyōn.

And that wonderful Pyrrho himself, did he know why he was walking to see the Pythian games? Or did he wander along the road like madmen? And when he began to accuse men and their ignorance, shall we say that he spoke the truth or not, and that Timon was moved and assented to his words or paid no attention? For if he was not persuaded, how did he become a philosopher instead of a chorus dancer and go on admiring Pyrrho? But if he assented to what was said, he would be absurd, philosophizing himself but preventing us.

Notes and citation

Summary: Pyrrho and Timon acted as if they knew and believed.

Aristocles, On Philosophy. Timon had been a chorus dancer before turning to philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (OCR slip): θαμαστὸς → θαυμαστὸς; συγκατλέθετο → συγκατέθετο.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.15 (Dindorf 2:304–305; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-15). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-15) · Report an error

14.18.16Dindorf 2:305

ἁπλῶς δὲ θαυμάσαι τις ἂν οἱ Τίμωνος σίλλοι καὶ αἷ κατὰ πάντων ἀνθρώπων βλασφημίαι, καὶ αἱ μακραὶ στοιχειώσεις εἰς Αἰνησιδήμου, καὶ πᾶς ὁ τοιοῦτος ὄχλος τῶν λόγων τί δήποτε βούλεται αὐτοῖς. εἰ μὲν γὰρ οἰόμενοι κρείττους ἡμᾶς ἀπεργάσεσθαι ταῦτα γεγράφασι, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πάντας οἴονται δεῖν ἐλέγχειν ὅπως παυσώμεθα φλυαροῦντες, βούλονται δηλονότι τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἡμὰς εἰδέναι καὶ ὑπολαβεῖν ὅτι τοιαῦτα εἴη τὰ πράγματα καθάπερ ἀξιοῖ Πυρρῶν. ὥστε εἰ πεισθείημεν αὐτοῖς, ἐκ χειρόνων βελτίους ἂν γενοίμεθα, κρίναντες τὰ συμφορώτερα καὶ τοὺς ἄμεινον λέγοντας ἀποδεξάμενοι.

haplōs de thaumasai tis an hoi Timōnos silloi kai hai kata pantōn anthrōpōn blasphēmiai, kai hai makrai stoicheiōseis eis Ainēsidēmou, kai pas ho toioutos ochlos tōn logōn ti dēpote bouletai autois. ei men gar oiomenoi kreittous hēmas apergasesthai tauta gegraphasi, kai dia touto pantas oiontai dein elenchein hopōs pausōmetha phlyarountes, boulontai dēlonoti tēn alētheian hēmas eidenai kai hypolabein hoti toiauta eiē ta pragmata kathaper axioi Pyrrōn. hōste ei peistheiēmen autois, ek cheironōn beltious an genoimetha, krinantes ta symphorōtera kai tous ameinon legontas apodexamenoi.

In short, one might wonder what Timon’s Silloi and his blasphemies against all men, and the long elementary treatises addressed to Aenesidemus, and the whole crowd of such writings mean for them. For if they have written these thinking to make us better, and for this reason think they must refute everyone so that we may stop talking nonsense, they clearly want us to know the truth and to suppose that things are such as Pyrrho holds. So if we were persuaded by them, we would become better from worse, having judged what is more profitable and accepted those who speak better.

Notes and citation

Summary: The skeptics write to improve us, which assumes that truth can be known.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.16 (Dindorf 2:305; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-16). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-16) · Report an error

14.18.17Dindorf 2:305

πῶς οὖν ἐπʼ ἴσης ἀδιάφορα τὰ πράγματα καὶ ἀνεπίκριτα δύναιτʼ ἂν εἶναι; καὶ πῶς ἀσυγκατάθετοι καὶ ἀδόξαστοι γενοίμεθʼ ἄν; εἰ δʼ οὐδὲν ὄφελός ἐστι τῶν λόγων, τί ἡμῖν ἐνοχλοῦσιν; ἢ διὰ τί Τίμων φησὶν οὐκ ἂν δὴ Πύρρωνί γʼ ἐρίσσειεν βροτὸς ἄλλος; οὐ γὰρ μᾶλλον Πύρρωνα θαυμάσαι τις ἂν ἢ τὸν Κόροιβον ἐκεῖνον ἢ τὸν Μελητίδην, οἳ δὴ δοκοῦσι μωρίᾳ διενεγκεῖν.

pōs oun epʼ isēs adiaphora ta pragmata kai anepikrita dynaitʼ an einai? kai pōs asynkatathetoi kai adoxastoi genoimethʼ an? ei dʼ ouden ophelos esti tōn logōn, ti hēmin enochlousin? ē dia ti Timōn phēsin ouk an dē Pyrrōni gʼ erisseien brotos allos? ou gar mallon Pyrrōna thaumasai tis an ē ton Koroibon ekeinon ē ton Melētidēn, hoi dē dokousi mōrią dienenkein.

How then could things be equally indifferent and undecidable? And how could we be without assent and without opinion? But if the arguments are of no use, why do they trouble us? Or why does Timon say, “No other mortal could contend with Pyrrho”? For one would no more admire Pyrrho than that famous Coroebus or Meletides, who are thought to have excelled in folly.

Notes and citation

Summary: If nothing is decidable, Pyrrho is no more admirable than a fool.

Aristocles, On Philosophy; Timon, fragment.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (OCR slip): ἀσυγκατάθετιο → ἀσυγκατάθετοι.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.17 (Dindorf 2:305; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-17). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-17) · Report an error

14.18.18Dindorf 2:305–306

ἐνθυμεῖσθαι μέντοι χρὴ καὶ ταῦτα. ποῖος γὰρ ἂν γένοιτο πολίτης, ἢ δικαστὴς, ἢ σύμβουλος, ἢ φίλος, ἢ ἀπλῶς εἰπεῖν ἄνθρωπος, ὅ γε τοιοῦτος; ἢ τί τῶν κακῶν οὐ τολμήσειεν ἂν ὁ μηδὲν ὡς ἀληθῶς οἰόμενος εἶναι κακὸν, ἢ αἰσχρὸν, ἢ δίκαιον, ἢ ἄδικον; οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐκεῖνο φαίη τις ἂν, ὅτι τοὺς νόμους δεδοίκασι καὶ τὰς τιμωρίας οἶ τοιοῦτοι· πῶς γὰρ οἴ γε ἀπαθεῖς καὶ ἀτάραχοι, καθάπερ αὐτοί φασιν, ὄντες;

enthymeisthai mentoi chrē kai tauta. poios gar an genoito politēs, ē dikastēs, ē symboulos, ē philos, ē aplōs eipein anthrōpos, ho ge toioutos? ē ti tōn kakōn ou tolmēseien an ho mēden hōs alēthōs oiomenos einai kakon, ē aischron, ē dikaion, ē adikon? oude gar ekeino phaiē tis an, hoti tous nomous dedoikasi kai tas timōrias oi toioutoi; pōs gar oi ge apatheis kai atarachoi, kathaper autoi phasin, ontes?

One must also consider this. What kind of citizen, or judge, or counselor, or friend, or, in a word, human being would such a man be? Or what evil would he not dare, who thinks that nothing is truly evil or shameful or just or unjust? Nor could one say that such men fear the laws and punishments; for how could they, being without passion and undisturbed, as they themselves say?

Notes and citation

Summary: A skeptic who recognizes no good or evil would be a dangerous member of society.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Topics: Ethics

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.18 (Dindorf 2:305–306; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-18). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-18) · Report an error

14.18.19Dindorf 2:306

ὅ γέ τοι Τίμων ταῦτα καὶ λέγει περὶ τοῦ Πύρρωνος ἀλλʼ οἶον τὸν ἄτυφον ἐγὼ ἴδον ἠδʼ ἀδάμαστον πᾶσιν ὅσοι δαμνᾶτε βροτῶν ἄφατοί τε φατοί τε λαῶν ἔθνεα κοῦφα, βαρυνόμενʼ ἔνθα καὶ ἔνθα ἐκ παθέων, δόξης τε καὶ εἰκαίης νομοθήκης.

ho ge toi Timōn tauta kai legei peri tou Pyrrōnos allʼ oion ton atyphon egō idon ēdʼ adamaston pasin hosoi damnate brotōn aphatoi te phatoi te laōn ethnea koupha, barynomenʼ entha kai entha ek patheōn, doxēs te kai eikaiēs nomothēkēs.

Timon, at least, says this too about Pyrrho: “But such a man, free from vanity, I saw, and unsubdued by all that subdue the speechless and the speaking tribes of mortals, light peoples, weighed down here and there by passions, opinion, and random lawmaking.”

Notes and citation

Summary: Timon praises Pyrrho as unconquered by passion and opinion.

Aristocles, On Philosophy; Timon, fragment 9 (Diels).

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): ἄφατοι τε φατοί τε → ἄφατοί τε φατοί τε.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.19 (Dindorf 2:306; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-19). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-19) · Report an error

14.18.20Dindorf 2:306

ὁπόταν μέντοι φῶσι τὸ σοφὸν δὴ τοῦτο, ὅτι δέοι κατακολουθοῦντα τῇ φύσει ζῆν καὶ τοῖς ἔθεσι, μηδενὶ μέντοι συγκατατίθεσθαι, πάνυ τινές εἰσιν εὐήθεις. εἰ γὰρ μηδενὶ ἄλλῳ, τούτῳ γοῦν αὐτῷ δεῖ συγκαταθέσθαι καὶ ὑπολαβεῖν οὕτως ἔχειν αὐτό. τί δὲ μᾶλλον τῇ φύσει καὶ τοῖς ἔθεσι δεῖ κατακολουθεῖν ἢ οὐ δεῖ, μὴ εἰδότας γε δὴ μηδὲν, μηδὲ ἔχοντάς τι ὅτῳ κρινοῦμεν;

hopotan mentoi phōsi to sophon dē touto, hoti deoi katakolouthounta tę̄ physei zēn kai tois ethesi, mēdeni mentoi synkatatithesthai, pany tines eisin euētheis. ei gar mēdeni allǭ, toutǭ goun autǭ dei synkatathesthai kai hypolabein houtōs echein auto. ti de mallon tę̄ physei kai tois ethesi dei katakolouthein ē ou dei, mē eidotas ge dē mēden, mēde echontas ti hotǭ krinoumen?

When, however, they say that this wise thing, that one must live following nature and customs but assent to nothing, they are very simple-minded. For if to nothing else, at least to this very thing one must assent and suppose that it is so. And why must one follow nature and customs rather than not, if we know nothing and have nothing by which we shall judge?

Notes and citation

Summary: Following nature and custom without assent is self-contradictory.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.20 (Dindorf 2:306; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-20). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-20) · Report an error

14.18.21Dindorf 2:306

ἐκεῖνο μὲν γὰρ καὶ παντάπασίν ἐστιν ἠλίθιον, ἐπειδὰν λέγωσιν ὅτι καθάπερ τὰ καθαρτικὰ φάρμακα συνεκκρίνει μετὰ τῶν περιττωμάτων καὶ ἑαυτὰ, τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον καὶ ὁ πάντα ἀξιῶν εἶναι λόγος ἄδηλα μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἀναιρεῖ καὶ ἑαυτόν. εἰ γὰρ αὐτὸς αὑτὸν ἐλέγχοι, ληροῖεν ἂν οἶ χρώμενοι τούτῳ. βέλτιον οὖν ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν αὐτοὺς καὶ μηδὲ τὸ στόμα διαίρειν.

ekeino men gar kai pantapasin estin ēlithion, epeidan legōsin hoti kathaper ta kathartika pharmaka synekkrinei meta tōn perittōmatōn kai heauta, ton auton tropon kai ho panta axiōn einai logos adēla meta tōn allōn anairei kai heauton. ei gar autos hauton elenchoi, lēroien an oi chrōmenoi toutǭ. beltion oun hēsychian agein autous kai mēde to stoma diairein.

That is altogether foolish, when they say that, just as purgative drugs expel themselves along with the waste, in the same way the argument that holds all things to be unclear does away with itself along with the others. For if it refutes itself, those who use it would be talking nonsense. Better, then, for them to keep quiet and not even open their mouths.

Notes and citation

Summary: The skeptics’ purgative analogy only shows their argument is nonsense.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): παντά- πασίν → παντάπασίν.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.21 (Dindorf 2:306; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-21). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-21) · Report an error

14.18.22Dindorf 2:306

ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδʼ ὅμοιον ἔχει τι τὸ καθαρτικὸν φάρμακον καὶ ὁ τούτων λόγος. τὸ μὲν γὰρ φάρμακον ἐκκρίνεται κἀν τοῖς σώμασιν οὐχ ὑπομένει, τὸν μέντοι λόγον ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ὑπάρχειν δεῖ τὸν αὐτὸν ὄντα καὶ πιστευόμενον ἀεί· μόνος γὰρ οὗτος εἴη ἂν ὁ ποιῶν ἀσυγκαταθέτους.

alla mēn oudʼ homoion echei ti to kathartikon pharmakon kai ho toutōn logos. to men gar pharmakon ekkrinetai kan tois sōmasin ouch hypomenei, ton mentoi logon en tais psychais hyparchein dei ton auton onta kai pisteuomenon aei; monos gar houtos eiē an ho poiōn asynkatathetous.

But the purgative drug and their argument have nothing alike. For the drug is expelled and does not remain in the body, whereas the argument must remain in souls the same and always believed; for this alone would make them without assent.

Notes and citation

Summary: The skeptical argument must remain believed, unlike a purgative.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (line-end hyphen left in the digital text): ἀσυγκατα- θέτους → ἀσυγκαταθέτους.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.22 (Dindorf 2:306; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-22). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-22) · Report an error

14.18.23Dindorf 2:306–307

ὅτι δʼ οὐκ οἴονται τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἀδόξαστον εἶναι καὶ ὡδὶ καταμάθοι τις ἄν. ἀδύνατον γὰρ τὸν αἰσθανόμενον μὴ αἰσθάνεσθαι. τὸ δʼ αἰσθάνεσθαι γνωρίζειν τι ἢν. ὅτι δὲ καὶ πιστεύει τῇ αἰσθήσει πᾶσι φανερόν· ἀκριβέστερον γὰρ θέλων ἰδεῖν ἀπέψησε τὼ ὀφθαλμὼ καὶ προσῆλθεν ἐγγύτερον καὶ ἐπηλυγάσατο.

hoti dʼ ouk oiontai ton anthrōpon adoxaston einai kai hōdi katamathoi tis an. adynaton gar ton aisthanomenon mē aisthanesthai. to dʼ aisthanesthai gnōrizein ti ēn. hoti de kai pisteuei tę̄ aisthēsei pasi phaneron; akribesteron gar thelōn idein apepsēse tō ophthalmō kai prosēlthen engyteron kai epēlygasato.

That they do not think man is without opinion one might learn in this way too. For it is impossible for one who perceives not to perceive; and perceiving was knowing something. And that he trusts perception is plain to all; for wishing to see more accurately he wiped his eyes, came nearer, and shaded them.

Notes and citation

Summary: Even skeptics trust their senses in practice.

Aristocles, On Philosophy. The subject of the last sentence is perhaps Pyrrho, or anyone.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.23 (Dindorf 2:306–307; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-23). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-23) · Report an error

14.18.24Dindorf 2:307

καὶ μὴν ἡδόμενοί γε καὶ πονοῦντες ἴσμεν· οὐ γὰρ οἷόν τε τὸν καιόμενον ἢ τεμνόμενον ἀγνοεῖν. τὰς δὲ δὴ μνήμας καὶ τὰς ἀναμνήσεις τίς οὐκ ἂν φαίη μεθʼ ὑπολήψεως γίγνεσθαι; περὶ μὲν γὰρ τῶν κοινῶν ἐννοιῶν, ὅτι τὸ τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν, ἔτι δὲ περὶ τῶν ἐπιστημῶν καὶ τεχνῶν, τί λέγοι τις ἄν; οὐδὲν γὰρ ἦν τούτων, εἰ μὴ ἐπεφύκειμεν ὑπολαμβάνειν. ἀλλʼ ἔγωγε ἐῶ τἄλλα τοῖς μέντοι λεγομένοις ὑπὸ τούτων ἐάν τε πιστεύωμεν, ἐάν τε ἀπιστῶμεν, ἀναγκαίως ἔχει δοξάζειν πάντη τε καὶ πάντως.”

kai mēn hēdomenoi ge kai ponountes ismen; ou gar hoion te ton kaiomenon ē temnomenon agnoein. tas de dē mnēmas kai tas anamnēseis tis ouk an phaiē methʼ hypolēpseōs gignesthai? peri men gar tōn koinōn ennoiōn, hoti to toiouton anthrōpos estin, eti de peri tōn epistēmōn kai technōn, ti legoi tis an? ouden gar ēn toutōn, ei mē epephykeimen hypolambanein. allʼ egōge eō talla tois mentoi legomenois hypo toutōn ean te pisteuōmen, ean te apistōmen, anankaiōs echei doxazein pantē te kai pantōs.”

And indeed we know when we feel pleasure and pain; for it is impossible for one being burned or cut not to know it. And who would not say that memories and recollections occur with some supposition? And about the common notions, that such a thing is a man, and further about the sciences and arts, what could one say? For none of these would exist if we were not by nature able to suppose. But I let the rest go: whether we believe what is said by these men or disbelieve it, we must necessarily form opinions in every way and altogether.”

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristocles: pleasure, pain, memory, and the arts all require opinion.

Aristocles, On Philosophy, book 8 (fragment).

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.24 (Dindorf 2:307; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-24). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-24) · Report an error

14.18.25Dindorf 2:307

“Ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἀμήχανόν ἐστι φιλοσοφεῖν τρόπον τοῦτον φανερόν· ὅτι δὲ καὶ παρὰ φύσιν καὶ παρὰ τοὺς νόμους ὡδὶ κατίδοιμεν ἄν. εἰ γὰρ αὖ τῷ ὄντι τὰ πράγματα τοιαῦτα εἴη, τί λοιπὸν ἀλλʼ ἢ καθάπερ ἐν ὕπνῳ ζῆν ἡμὰς εἰκῆ καὶ ἐμπλήκτως; ὥστε φλυαροῖεν ἂν οἱ νομοθέται καὶ στρατηγοὶ καὶ οἱ παιδεύοντες. ἀλλʼ ἔμοιγε δοκοῦσιν οἶ μὲν ἄλλοι πάντες ἄνθρωποι ζῆν κατὰ φύσιν, μόνοι μέντοι τετυφῶσθαι, μᾶλλον δὲ μεμηνέναι μανίαν ἐρρωμένην οἶ ταῦτα ληροῦντες.

“Hoti men oun amēchanon esti philosophein tropon touton phaneron; hoti de kai para physin kai para tous nomous hōdi katidoimen an. ei gar au tǭ onti ta pragmata toiauta eiē, ti loipon allʼ ē kathaper en hypnǭ zēn hēmas eikē kai emplēktōs? hōste phlyaroien an hoi nomothetai kai stratēgoi kai hoi paideuontes. allʼ emoige dokousin oi men alloi pantes anthrōpoi zēn kata physin, monoi mentoi tetyphōsthai, mallon de memēnenai manian errōmenēn oi tauta lērountes.

“That it is impossible to philosophize in this way is plain; and that it is also against nature and against the laws we might see thus. For if things really were such, what would remain but for us to live as in sleep, at random and senselessly? So lawgivers and generals and educators would be talking nonsense. But it seems to me that all other men live according to nature, and only those who talk this nonsense are deluded, or rather mad with a violent madness.

Notes and citation

Summary: Skepticism would make life a random sleep; only the skeptics are mad.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (OCR slips): οἶ παισεύοντες → οἱ παιδεύοντες.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.25 (Dindorf 2:307; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-25). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-25) · Report an error

14.18.26Dindorf 2:307–308

οὐχ ἥκιστα μέντοι τοῦτο καταμάθοι τις ἂν κἀκεῖθεν. Ἀντίγονος γοῦν ὁ Καρύστιος κατὰ τοὺς αὐτοὺς γενόμενος χρόνους καὶ ἀναγράψας αὐτῶν τὸν βίον φησὶ τὸν Πύρρωνα διωκόμενον ὑπὸ κυνὸς ἀναφυγεῖν ἐπί τι δένδρον, σκωπτόμενον δʼ ὑπὸ τῶν παρόντων εἰπεῖν ὡς χαλεπὸν εἴη ἄνθρωπον ἐκδῦναι. Φιλίστης δὲ τῆς ἀδελφῆς αὐτοῦ θυούσης, ἔπειτα τῶν φίλων τινὸς ὑποσχομένου τὰ πρὸς τὴν θυσίαν καὶ μὴ παρασχομένου, τοῦ μέντοι Πύρρωνος πριαμένου καὶ ἀγανακτοῦντος, ἐπειδήπερ ὁ φίλος ἔλεγεν ὡς οὐ ποιήσαιτο σύμφωνα τοῖς λόγοις οὐδʼ ἄξια τῆς ἀπαθείας, εἰπεῖν αὐτὸν, ἐν γοῦν γυναικὶ οὐ δεῖ τὴν ἀπόδειξιν αὐτῆς ποιεῖσθαι. καίτοι δικαίως ἂν εἶπεν ὁ φίλος ὅτι, ὦ μάταιε, καὶ ἐν γυναικὶ καὶ κυνὶ καὶ πᾶσιν, εἴ τι δή σοι τῶν λόγων τούτων ἐστὶν ὄφελος.”

ouch hēkista mentoi touto katamathoi tis an kakeithen. Antigonos goun ho Karystios kata tous autous genomenos chronous kai anagrapsas autōn ton bion phēsi ton Pyrrōna diōkomenon hypo kynos anaphygein epi ti dendron, skōptomenon dʼ hypo tōn parontōn eipein hōs chalepon eiē anthrōpon ekdynai. Philistēs de tēs adelphēs autou thyousēs, epeita tōn philōn tinos hyposchomenou ta pros tēn thysian kai mē paraschomenou, tou mentoi Pyrrōnos priamenou kai aganaktountos, epeidēper ho philos elegen hōs ou poiēsaito symphōna tois logois oudʼ axia tēs apatheias, eipein auton, en goun gynaiki ou dei tēn apodeixin autēs poieisthai. kaitoi dikaiōs an eipen ho philos hoti, ō mataie, kai en gynaiki kai kyni kai pasin, ei ti dē soi tōn logōn toutōn estin ophelos.”

Not least might one learn this from the following. Antigonus of Carystus, at least, who lived in the same times and wrote their lives, says that Pyrrho, chased by a dog, fled up a tree, and when mocked by those present said that it was hard to strip off the man. And when his sister Philista was sacrificing, and one of their friends promised the things for the sacrifice and did not provide them, Pyrrho bought them and was angry; and when the friend said that he had not acted in agreement with his words nor worthily of his impassivity, he said, ‘In the case of a woman, at least, one should not make a display of it.’ Yet the friend might justly have said: ‘You fool, both in the case of a woman and a dog and in all things, if your arguments are of any use.’”

Notes and citation

Summary: Anecdotes from Antigonus of Carystus show Pyrrho could not live his skepticism.

Aristocles, On Philosophy, citing Antigonus of Carystus, Lives.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): οὐ δεῖ τὴς ἀπόδειξιν → οὐ δεῖ τὴν ἀπόδειξιν.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.26 (Dindorf 2:307–308; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-26). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-26) · Report an error

14.18.27Dindorf 2:308

“Ὀρθῶς δʼ ἔχει μαθεῖν καὶ τίνες οἱ ζηλώσαντες αὐτὸν ἐγένοντο καὶ τίνας ἐξήλωσεν αὐτός. ὁ μὲν οὖν Πύρρων Ἀναξάρχου τινὸς ἐγένετο μαθητὴς, ὃς τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἦν ζωγράφος, οὐδʼ οὕτως εὐτυχὴς, ἔπειτα τοῖς Δημοκρίτου βιβλίοις ἐντυχὼν χρηστὸν μὲν οὐδὲν οὔτε εὗρεν οὔτε συνεγράψατο, κακῶς δὲ πάντας εἶπε καὶ θεοὺς καὶ ἀνθρώπους· αὐτὸς δʼ ὕστερον τοῦτον τὸν τῦφον περιβαλλόμενος καὶ καλῶν ἄτυφον ἑαυτὸν οὐδὲν ἐν γραφῇ κατέλιπεν.

“Orthōs dʼ echei mathein kai tines hoi zēlōsantes auton egenonto kai tinas exēlōsen autos. ho men oun Pyrrōn Anaxarchou tinos egeneto mathētēs, hos to men prōton ēn zōgraphos, oudʼ houtōs eutychēs, epeita tois Dēmokritou bibliois entychōn chrēston men ouden oute heuren oute synegrapsato, kakōs de pantas eipe kai theous kai anthrōpous; autos dʼ hysteron touton ton typhon periballomenos kai kalōn atyphon heauton ouden en graphę̄ katelipen.

“It is right to learn also who they were who admired him and whom he himself admired. Pyrrho, then, was a pupil of one Anaxarchus, and was at first a painter, and not a very successful one; then, coming upon the books of Democritus, he neither found nor wrote anything useful, but spoke ill of all, both gods and men. Later, wrapping himself in this vanity and calling himself free from vanity, he left nothing in writing.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristocles: Pyrrho, a failed painter, became a vain critic of all.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.27 (Dindorf 2:308; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-27). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-27) · Report an error

14.18.28Dindorf 2:308

ἐγένετο δὲ μαθητὴς αὐτοῦ Τίμων Φλιάσιος, ὃς τὸ μὲν πρῶτον ἐχόρευεν ἐν τοῖς θεάτροις, ἔπειτα δʼ ἐντυχὼν αὐτῷ συνέγραψεν ἀργαλέας παρῳδίας καὶ βωμολόχους, ἐν αἶς βεβλασφήμηκε πάντας τοὺς πώποτε φιλοσοφήσαντας. οὗτος γὰρ ἦν ὁ τοὺς σίλλους γράψας καὶ λέγων σχέτλιοι ἄνθρωποι, κάκʼ ἐλέγχεα, γαστέρες οἶον, τοίων ἔκ τʼ ἐρίδων ἔκ τε στοναχῶν πέπλασθε, καὶ ἄνθρωποι κενεῆς οἰήσιος ἔμπλεοι ἀσκοί.

egeneto de mathētēs autou Timōn Phliasios, hos to men prōton echoreuen en tois theatrois, epeita dʼ entychōn autǭ synegrapsen argaleas parǭdias kai bōmolochous, en ais beblasphēmēke pantas tous pōpote philosophēsantas. houtos gar ēn ho tous sillous grapsas kai legōn schetlioi anthrōpoi, kakʼ elenchea, gasteres oion, toiōn ek tʼ eridōn ek te stonachōn peplasthe, kai anthrōpoi keneēs oiēsios empleoi askoi.

His pupil was Timon of Phlius, who at first danced in the theaters, then, meeting him, wrote troublesome and buffoonish parodies, in which he has blasphemed all who ever philosophized. For he it was who wrote the Silloi and said: ‘Wretched men, base reproaches, mere bellies, from such strifes and groans are you formed,’ and, ‘Men, wineskins full of empty conceit.’

Notes and citation

Summary: Timon, Pyrrho’s pupil, mocked all philosophers in his Silloi.

Aristocles, On Philosophy; Timon, fragments.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (OCR slip; repeated word in the digital text): παρῳδίας παρῳδίας καὶ → παρῳδίας καὶ; ιὗτος γὰρ → οὗτος γὰρ; ἄνθρψποι → ἄνθρωποι.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.28 (Dindorf 2:308; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-28). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-28) · Report an error

14.18.29Dindorf 2:308

μηδενὸς δʼ ἐπιστραφέντος αὐτῶν, ὡς εἰ μηδὲ ἐγένοντο τὸ παράπαν, ἐχθὲς καὶ πρώην ἐν Ἀλεξανδρείᾳ τῇ κατʼ Αἴγυπτον Αἰνησίδημός τις ἀναζωπυρεῖν ἤρξατο τὸν ὕθλον τοῦτον. καὶ σχεδὸν οἱ μὲν κράτιστοι δοκοῦντες εἶναι τῶν τὴν ὁδὸν βεβαδικότων ταύτην εἰσὶν οὗτοι.

mēdenos dʼ epistraphentos autōn, hōs ei mēde egenonto to parapan, echthes kai prōēn en Alexandreią tę̄ katʼ Aigypton Ainēsidēmos tis anazōpyrein ērxato ton hythlon touton. kai schedon hoi men kratistoi dokountes einai tōn tēn hodon bebadikotōn tautēn eisin houtoi.

When none paid any attention to them, as if they had never existed at all, yesterday or the day before in Alexandria in Egypt a certain Aenesidemus began to rekindle this nonsense. And these, more or less, are those who seem the strongest of those who have walked this road.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aenesidemus revived skepticism in Alexandria.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (OCR slips and repeated syllables in the digital text): Αἰνγςίσημός τις ἀναζωπυρεῖν ρεῖν → Αἰνησίδημός τις ἀναζωπυρεῖν.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.29 (Dindorf 2:308; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-29). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-29) · Report an error

14.18.30Dindorf 2:308–309

ὅτι μὲν οὖν τὴν τοιαύτην εἴτε αἵρεσιν εἴτε ἀγωγὴν λόγων εἴτε ὅπη καὶ ὅπως ἐθέλει τις καλεῖν αὐτὴν οὐδεὶς ἂν εὖ φρονῶν ὀρθὴν εἶναι φαίη δῆλον. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὐδὲ φιλοσοφίαν οἴομαι δεῖν ὀνομάζειν αὐτὴν, ἀναιροῦσάν γε δὴ τὰς τοῦ φιλοσοφεῖν ἀρχάς.”

hoti men oun tēn toiautēn eite hairesin eite agōgēn logōn eite hopē kai hopōs ethelei tis kalein autēn oudeis an eu phronōn orthēn einai phaiē dēlon. egō men gar oude philosophian oiomai dein onomazein autēn, anairousan ge dē tas tou philosophein archas.”

That no one in his right mind would say that such a school, or method of argument, or whatever and however one wishes to call it, is right, is clear. For my part I do not think it should even be called philosophy, since it does away with the very principles of philosophizing.”

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristocles: skepticism is not even philosophy.

Aristocles, On Philosophy.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (wrong quotation mark in the digital text): ἀρχάς." → ἀρχάς.”.

Extrabiblical texts: Aristocles (Aristocles of Messene, On Philosophy; quotation)

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.30 (Dindorf 2:308–309; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-30). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-30) · Report an error

14.18.31Dindorf 2:309

Ταῦτα μὲν οὖν πρὸς τοὺς κατὰ Πύρρωνα φιλοσοφεῖν νομιζομένους. συγγενῆ δʼ αὐτοῖς εἴη ἂν καὶ τὰ ἀντιλεγόμενα πρὸς τοὺς κατὰ Ἀρίστιππον τὸν Κυρηναῖον, μόνα λέγοντας εἶναι τὰ πάθη καταληπτά. Σωκράτους δʼ ἑταῖρος ὁ Ἀρίστιππος ἦν, ὁ τὴν καλουμένην Κυρηναϊκὴν συστησάμενος αἵρεσιν, ἀφʼ ἧς τὰς ἀφορμὰς Ἐπίκουρος πρὸς τὴν τοῦ τέλους ἔκθεσιν εἴληφεν. ἦν δʼ ὁ Ἀρίστιππος ὑγρὸς πάνυ τὸν βίον καὶ φιλήδονος· ἀλλʼ οὐδὲν μὲν οὗτος ἐν τῷ φανερῷ περὶ τέλους διελέξατο, δυνάμει δὲ τῆς εὐδαιμονίας τὴν ὑπόστασιν ἔλεγεν ἐν ἡδοναῖς κεῖσθαι. ἀεὶ γὰρ λόγους περὶ ἡδονῆς ποιούμενος εἰς ὑποψίαν ἦγε τοὺς προσιόντας αὐτῷ τοῦ λέγειν τέλος εἶναι τὸ ἡδέως ζῆν.

Tauta men oun pros tous kata Pyrrōna philosophein nomizomenous. syngenē dʼ autois eiē an kai ta antilegomena pros tous kata Aristippon ton Kyrēnaion, mona legontas einai ta pathē katalēpta. Sōkratous dʼ hetairos ho Aristippos ēn, ho tēn kaloumenēn Kyrēnaïkēn systēsamenos hairesin, aphʼ hēs tas aphormas Epikouros pros tēn tou telous ekthesin eilēphen. ēn dʼ ho Aristippos hygros pany ton bion kai philēdonos; allʼ ouden men houtos en tǭ phanerǭ peri telous dielexato, dynamei de tēs eudaimonias tēn hypostasin elegen en hēdonais keisthai. aei gar logous peri hēdonēs poioumenos eis hypopsian ēge tous prosiontas autǭ tou legein telos einai to hēdeōs zēn.

So much, then, against those thought to philosophize according to Pyrrho. Akin to them would be the arguments against the followers of Aristippus of Cyrene, who say that only feelings can be apprehended. Aristippus was a companion of Socrates, who founded the so-called Cyrenaic school, from which Epicurus took his starting points for his account of the end. Aristippus was very soft in his life and fond of pleasure; he said nothing openly about the end, but in effect said that the substance of happiness lies in pleasures. For by always talking about pleasure he led those who came to him to suspect that he said the end is to live pleasantly.

Notes and citation

Summary: Aristippus of Cyrene, founder of the Cyrenaics, implied that pleasure is the end.

Notes on the original text

Digital text corrected (accent slip in the digital text): τοὐ λέγειν → τοῦ λέγειν.

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.31 (Dindorf 2:309; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-31). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-31) · Report an error

14.18.32Dindorf 2:309–310

τούτου γέγονεν ἀκουστὴς σὺν ἄλλοις καὶ ἡ θυγάτηρ αὐτοῦ Ἀρήτη· ἥτις γεννήσασα παῖδα ὠνόμασεν Ἀρίστιππον, ὃς εἰσαχθεὶς ὑπʼ αὐτῆς εἰς λόγους φιλοσοφίας μητροδίδακτος ἐκλήθη· ὃς καὶ σαφῶς ὡρίσατο τέλος εἶναι τὸ ἡδέως ζῆν, ἡδονὴν ἐντάττων τὴν κατὰ κίνησιν. τρεῖς γὰρ ἔφη καταστάσεις εἶναι περὶ τὴν ἡμετέραν σύγκρασιν· μίαν μὲν καθʼ ἣν ἀλγοῦμεν, ἐοικυῖαν τῷ κατὰ θάλασσαν χειμῶνι· ἑτέραν δὲ καθʼ ἣν ἡδόμεθα, τῷ λείῳ κύματι ἀφομοιουμένην· εἶναι γὰρ λείαν κίνησιν τὴν ἡδονὴν, οὐρίῳ παραβαλλομένην ἀνέμῳ· τὴν δὲ τρίτην μέσην εἶναι κατάστασιν, καθʼ ἣν οὔτε ἀλγοῦμεν οὔτε ἡδόμεθα, γαλήνῃ παραπλησίαν οὖσαν. τούτων δʼ οὖν καὶ ἔφασκε τῶν παθῶν μόνων ἡμᾶς τὴν αἴσθησιν ἔχειν, πρὸς οὓς ἀντιλέλεκται ταῦτα.

toutou gegonen akoustēs syn allois kai hē thygatēr autou Arētē; hētis gennēsasa paida ōnomasen Aristippon, hos eisachtheis hypʼ autēs eis logous philosophias mētrodidaktos eklēthē; hos kai saphōs hōrisato telos einai to hēdeōs zēn, hēdonēn entattōn tēn kata kinēsin. treis gar ephē katastaseis einai peri tēn hēmeteran synkrasin; mian men kathʼ hēn algoumen, eoikuian tǭ kata thalassan cheimōni; heteran de kathʼ hēn hēdometha, tǭ leiǭ kymati aphomoioumenēn; einai gar leian kinēsin tēn hēdonēn, ouriǭ paraballomenēn anemǭ; tēn de tritēn mesēn einai katastasin, kathʼ hēn oute algoumen oute hēdometha, galēnę̄ paraplēsian ousan. toutōn dʼ oun kai ephaske tōn pathōn monōn hēmas tēn aisthēsin echein, pros hous antilelektai tauta.

Among others, his daughter Arete was his hearer; she bore a son and named him Aristippus, who, introduced by her to the study of philosophy, was called “mother-taught”; he plainly defined the end as living pleasantly, ranking pleasure as a matter of motion. For he said there are three states concerning our constitution: one in which we feel pain, like a storm at sea; another in which we feel pleasure, likened to a smooth wave, for pleasure is a smooth motion, compared to a favorable wind; and the third a middle state, in which we feel neither pain nor pleasure, like a calm. And of these feelings alone, he said, we have perception; against whom this has been said:

Notes and citation

Summary: The younger Aristippus defined the end as pleasure and taught three states of feeling.

Cite (SBL): Eusebius, Praep. ev. 14.18.32 (Dindorf 2:309–310; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/fathers/eusebius-praeparatio/14-16-1/#p-14-18-32). (abbreviation not yet checked)

BibTeX · RIS (whole work; this passage's key: sophiascriptura-eusebius-praeparatio-14-18-32) · Report an error