Now if any one should ask for some interpretation, description and explanation of the divine essence, we are not going to deny that we are unlearned in this kind of wisdom, acknowledging only so much as this, that it is not possible that which is by nature infinite should be comprehended in any conception expressed by words. The fact that the divine greatness has no limit is proclaimed by prophecy, which declares expressly that of his splendor, his glory and his holiness, "there is no end." If his surroundings have no limit, much more is he himself in his essence, whatever it may be, comprehended by no limitation in any way. If then interpretation by way of words and names implies by its meaning some sort of comprehension of the subject, and if, on the other hand, that which is unlimited cannot be comprehended, no one could reasonably blame us for ignorance, if we are not bold in respect of what none should venture on. For by what name can I describe the incomprehensible? By what speech can I declare the unspeakable? Accordingly, since the Deity is too excellent and lofty to be expressed in words, we have learned to honor in silence what transcends speech and thought. If he who "thinks more highly than he ought to think" tramples on this cautious speech of ours making a jest of our ignorance of things incomprehensible, and recognizes a difference of unlikeness in that which is without figure, or limit, or size or quantity (I mean in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit) and brings forward to reproach our ignorance that phrase that is continually alleged by the disciples of deceit, " 'You worship you know not what,' if you know not the essence of that which you worship," we shall follow the advice of the prophet. We shall not fear the reproach of fools or be led by their reviling to talk boldly of things unspeakable. That unpracticed speaker Paul we make our teacher in the mysteries that transcend knowledge. He is so far from thinking that the divine nature is within the reach of human perception that he calls even the judgments of God "unsearchable" and his ways "past finding out." He affirms that the things promised to them that love him, for their good deeds done in this life, are above comprehension so that it is not possible to behold them with the eye, or to receive them by hearing or to contain them in the heart.

Instead of speaking of him [God the Father] as "ungenerated," it is permissible to call him the "First Cause" or "Father of the Only-Begotten," or to speak of him as "existing without cause," and many such expressions that lead to the same thought. In that case Eunomius confirms our doctrines by the very arguments in which he brings charges that we do not know any name indicative of the divine nature. We are taught the fact of its existence, while we assert that a name of such breath as to include the unspeakable and infinite nature either does not exist at all or at any rate is unknown to us. Let him then abandon his usual fictive language, and show us the names that signify the real meanings and then proceed further to divide the subject by the divergence of their names. But as long as the statement of the Scripture is correct that Abraham and Moses were not capable of the knowledge of the name, and that "no one has seen God at any time," and that "no one has seen him, nor can see," and that the light around him is unapproachable and "there is no end of his greatness," so long can we say and believe these things. This is similar to an argument that promises any comprehension and expression of the infinite nature by means of the meaning of names to one who thinks that he can enclose the whole sea in his own hand! Just as the hollow of one's hand is comparable to the entire depth of the sea, so is all the power of language comparable to that nature that is unspeakable and incomprehensible.