The Unbegotten Nature of Good vs Evil

No opposition of opposites can be absolute in every respect, because there must exist something common to the opposites. For example, white, though being the opposite of black, has its opposition only in the differences, since they share color and quality; and nothing of this kind has its opposition prior to these shared things, for all opposition is after the commonalities, and in the commonalities there is no opposition. For it is necessary that there be a common color and quality, so that white and black may be such; likewise, virtue and vice are opposites after the quality and disposition.

If, therefore, two ungenerated principles are themselves opposites, they either have opposition in every respect, or there exists something common to them. But they do not accept opposition in every respect; therefore, they too have commonalities: to be, to be in essence, and if anything else is found common to them. What, then, makes them such, the one being good and the other evil; and the one light and the other darkness? But it is pre-conceived that they are essences, or that good and evil exist. Thus, opposition is not according to the commonalities, but according to the particularity.

They are set down as being ungenerated; but nothing is prior to the ungenerated. What is prior to these? That which I said exists commonly to them; therefore, the principles are not ungenerated. For these opposites are ungenerated, but that which exists commonly to them is prior to them. Therefore, the principles are not ungenerated, for nothing is prior to the ungenerated. If they were to say that their opposition does not follow from the ungenerated, this too would be found common to them. But since the evil is ungenerated evil, and the good is ungenerated good, the ungenerated evil will be found common to both, and the ungenerated good to both. For if good cannot be found without the ungenerated, and the ungenerated is common, then that which follows by necessity from the ungenerated is also common; and this is the good. If they were to say that their ungenerated nature is not common, then as it exists in the one, it does not exist in the other; it will be...

Therefore, the unbegotten is either the good or the evil; it is not both good and evil. If the good were found to be unbegotten, the evil would be begotten.

Furthermore, every evil is to be punished; nothing to be punished is incorruptible; therefore nothing evil is incorruptible, because to exist without being incorruptible is to be corruptible. Nothing unbegotten is corruptible; but the evil is corruptible; so the evil is not unbegotten. Nothing is evil in essence, because the evil is a kind of thing; but nothing is a kind without essence; therefore the evil is not essence. All opposites are corruptible of one another; but the unbegotten things are incorruptible; therefore they are not opposites; for opposites are not incorruptible. Nothing unbegotten is changeable; but the good is changed when held by the evil; so the good is not unbegotten. The unbegotten is not desirous of any corruption, nor is it corrupting; but the evil is desirous of corruption; so the evil is not unbegotten.

The Divine Scriptures are said to be handed over for punishment, not only bad men, but also the devil himself, they say. And everything handed over for punishment is changeable; but nothing changeable is unbegotten; therefore nothing of the evils is unbegotten. Of those opposing through all things, nothing is common. So it is a necessity that what exists in the one, does not exist in the other; and to the good belongs being unbegotten; so to the evil neither of these belongs. Therefore the evil is not being.

Everyone who is reasonably desirous of something has a directed desire, if he desires reasonably. But God desires to destroy the evil; therefore of the corruptible is either evil or the desire for it. And since it exists among the corruptible, it shall be destroyed; and being destroyed, it is not unbegotten. If the evil were unbegotten, it would naturally belong to it to be evil. But no one sins by doing what is according to nature. Therefore the evil does not sin; and the one not sinning is not to blame. But Satan is to blame; therefore he is not unbegotten, for the Divine Scripture of the deeds and the habits which men perform, says they are sons and offspring. Those having anger and the other sin, as because of this...