Historical region of Country
God’s ouvsi,a, which is accessible to our knowledge only through God’s evne,rgeiai, is common to all three Persons of the Trinity, according to Gregory. Indeed, he also considers the du,namij to be one and the same for all three Persons of the Trinity, and identifies this du,namij with the divine will qe,lhma, bou,lhsij, which is also regarded by him as common to the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This is also why Christ’s epinoiai such as Physician, Rock, Spring, Way, Life, Resurrection and so on are ascribed by Gregory to the whole Trinity, Tel Aviv Metro Map which, per se, transcends every name, but quoad nos “becomes poluw,numoj thanks to the variety of its beneficial operations” Ad Abl. GNO III1, 56. From the fact that the ouvsi,a is one and the same for the whole Trinity also derives the unicity of the du,namij and of the evne,rgeia, but this on the ontological plane. On the gnoseological one, according to the order of our knowledge, which starts from what we can realize, Tel Aviv Metro Map if the three Persons have one and the same activity evne,rgeia, then they must have also one and the same power du,namij; now, if they have the same activity and the same power, they will necessarily have also the same nature and substance fu,sij, Tel Aviv Metro Map ouvsi,a; De orat. dom. GNO VII2,41,6-10. This idea was already present in Irenaeus, A.H. IV 20, in a great admirer of Origen such as Athanasius Ep. ad Serap. 28 and in Didymus the Blind, Origen’s faithful follower Spir.
Sanct. 17,32,36; among the Cappadocians, it also appears in Basil De Spir. Sanct. 16,38. On the Neoplatonic side, the necessity of considering ouvsi,a, du,namij and evne,rgeia in a unitary way is also found in Iamblichus Myst. I 5,18. Athanasius, Didymus, Basil and Gregory of Nyssa probably depended on Origen, who insisted on the supreme unity of God, described by him as monad and henad and absolutely simple in Princ. I 1,6. In this passage, Rufinus’s mens obviously corresponds to Greek nouj, which Origen here identifies with God, even though in C. Cels. VII 38 he affirms that God is either Nouj or even beyond Nouj and ouvsi,a. In Protr. ad mart.