To Florus 2.48

In fact, you tried to infer by argument what the words themselves had not indicated. You add that, if he had been speaking about imitation, he ought to have mentioned the devil; but because he meant generation, he preferred to say ‘a human being’ rather than ‘a demon.’ I therefore ask what gave you occasion for this opinion. What? Do you deny that people sin by imitating human beings? Although so plain a matter needs no scriptural testimony, listen to David: ‘Do not compete with evildoers or envy those who practice injustice’ (Psalm 37:1; LXX/Vulgate 36:1); ‘Do not envy the one who prospers in his way’ (Psalm 37:7; LXX/Vulgate 36:7). Moreover, all the Old Testament Scriptures warn Israel not to imitate the practices of an impious nation (compare Leviticus 18:3; Deuteronomy 18:9). What necessity, then, required the apostle, if he meant imitation, to name the devil rather than a human being, when he knew that people sin by imitating both human beings and the devil? Either prove that no one can sin by imitating human beings and that this is found nowhere in the law, and then maintain that room has been made for your conjecture; or else, since it is evident that nothing has strengthened sins more than the imitation of vices, acknowledge that you inferred with great ignorance that the apostle would certainly have spoken of the devil if he had meant imitation.