Dionysius of Alexandria — Fragments II

1. In Opposition to Those of the School of Epicurus Who Deny the Existence of a Providence, and Refer the Constitution of the Universe to Atomic Bodies. Is the universe one coherent whole, as it seems to be in our own judgment, as well as in that of the wisest of the Greek philosophers , such as Plato and Pythagoras, and the Stoics and Heraclitus? Or is it a duality, as some may possibly have conjectured? Or is it indeed something manifold and infinite , as has been the opinion of certain others who, with a variety of mad speculations and fanciful usages of terms, have sought to divide and resolve the essential matter of the universe , and lay down the position that it is infinite and unoriginated, and without the sway of Providence? For there are those who, giving the name of atoms to certain imperishable and most minute bodies which are supposed to be infinite in number, and positing also the existence of a certain vacant space of an unlimited vastness, allege that these atoms, as they are borne along casually in the void, and clash all fortuitously against each other in an unregulated whirl, and become commingled one with another in a multitude of forms, enter into combination with each other, and thus gradually form this world and all objects in it; yea, more, that they construct infinite worlds. This was the opinion of Epicurus and Democritus; only they differed in one point, in so far as the former supposed these atoms to be all most minute and consequently…

2. A Refutation of This Dogma on the Ground of Familiar Human Analogies. How, shall we bear with these men who assert that all those wise, and consequently also noble, constructions (in the universe ) are only the works of common chance? Those objects, I mean, of which each taken by itself as it is made, and the whole system collectively, were seen to be good by Him by whose command they came into existence . For, as it is said, God saw everything that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. Genesis 1:31 But truly these men do not reflect on the analogies even of small familiar things which might come under their observation at any time, and from which they might learn that no object of any utility, and fitted to be serviceable, is made without design or by mere chance, but is wrought by skill of hand, and is contrived so as to meet its proper use. And when the object falls out of service and becomes useless, then it also begins to break up indeterminately, and to decompose and dissipate its materials in every casual and unregulated way, just as the wisdom by which it was skilfully constructed at first no longer controls and maintains it. For a cloak, for example, cannot be made without the weaver, as if the warp could be set aright and the woof could be entwined with it by their own spontaneous action; while, on the other hand, if it is once worn out, its tattered rags are flung aside. Again, when a house or a city is built, it does not take on its stones, as if some of…

3. A Refutation on the Ground of the Constitution of the Universe. Or who can bear to hear it maintained, that this mighty habitation, which is constituted of heaven and earth, and which is called Cosmos on account of the magnitude and the plenitude of the wisdom which has been brought to bear upon it, has been established in all its order and beauty by those atoms which hold their course devoid of order and beauty, and that that same state of disorder has grown into this true Cosmos, Order? Or who can believe that those regular movements and courses are the products of a certain unregulated impetus? Or who can allow that the perfect concord subsisting among the celestial bodies derives its harmony from instruments destitute both of concord and harmony? Or, again, if there is but one and the same substance in all things, and if there is the same incorruptible nature in all — the only elements of difference being, as they aver, size and figure — how comes it that there are some bodies divine and perfect, and eternal , as they would phrase it, or lasting, as some one may prefer to express it; and among these some that are visible and others that are invisible — the visible including such as sun, and moon, and stars, and earth, and water; and the invisible including gods, and demons , and spirits? For the existence of such they cannot possibly deny however desirous to do so. And again, there are other objects that are long-lived, both animals and plants. As to animals, there…

4. A Refutation of the Same on the Grounds of the Human Constitution. Further, those men understand neither themselves nor what is proper to themselves. For if any of the leaders in this impious doctrine only considered what manner of person he is himself, and whence he comes, he would surely be led to a wise decision, like one who has obtained understanding of himself, and would say, not to these atoms, but to his Father and Maker, Your hands have made me and fashioned me. And he would take up, too, this wonderful account of his formation as it has been given by one of old: Have You not poured me out as milk, and curdled me as choose? You have clothed me with skin and flesh, and hast fenced me with bones and sinews. You have granted me life and favour, and Your visitation has preserved my spirit. For of what quantity and of what origin were the atoms which the father of Epicurus gave forth from himself when he begot Epicurus ? And how, when they were received within his mother's womb, did they coalesce, and take form and figure? And how were they put in motion and made to increase? And how did that little seed of generation draw together the many atoms that were to constitute Epicurus , and change some of them into skin and flesh for a covering, and make bone of others for erectness and strength, and form sinews of others for compact contexture? And how did it frame and adapt the many other members and parts — heart and bowels, and organs of sense, some within and some…