Psalms 96:5

True, Scripture says, "Make no mention of the name other gods, neither let it be heard out of your mouth." What it stipulates is that we should not call them gods. For in the first part of the law it says, "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain," that is, apply it to an idol. So anyone who honors an idol with the name of God falls into idolatry. If I am compelled to mention gods, I must add something to show that I do not call them gods. Scripture uses the name "gods" but adds "their" or "of the pagans," as when David, having used the name "gods," says "but the gods of the pagans are demons."

But that God, whom the Hebrew sages worshipped, forbids sacrifice to be offered even to the holy angels of heaven and divine powers, whom we, in this our pilgrimage, venerate and love as our most blessed fellow-citizens. For in the law which God gave to his Hebrew people he utters this menace, as in a voice of thunder: "he that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed." And that no one might suppose that this prohibition extends only to the very wicked demons and earthly spirits, whom this philosopher calls very small and inferior,—for even these are in the Scripture called gods, not of the Hebrews, but of the nations, as the Septuagint translators have shown in the psalm where it is said, "For all the gods of the nations are demons,"—that no one might suppose, I say, that sacrifice to these demons was prohibited, but that sacrifice might be offered to all or some of the celestials, it was immediately added, "save unto the Lord alone."

But, if he is of too little importance, according to their reasoning, to be capable of the partnership of the term "Godhead" with the Father and the Son, he is not worthy of sharing any other of the terms proper to God. For, if the terms are considered and compared with each other according to the significance observed in each, none will be found to be inferior to the title of "God." And a proof of this is that many inferior things also are called by this name. Moreover, the divine Scripture does not refrain from using this equivocal term, not even in inconsistent matters, as when it calls images by the name of "God." "For," it says, "let the gods who did not make the heaven and the earth be destroyed and be cast under the earth." It also says, "All the gods of the Gentiles are devils." And the witch with her magic arts summoning up the souls sought by Saul said that she saw gods. Furthermore, even Balaam, a certain diviner and soothsayer, who bore his oracles in his hand, as the Scripture says, and who successfully procured for himself instruction from the demons through his divining trickery, is related by the Scripture to have taken counsel with God. And, it is possible, collecting many such passages from the divine Scriptures, to allege that this name has no precedence above the other appellations proper to God, since, as it has been said, we even find it used equivocally in incongruous matters. But the name of holiness, and of eternity, and of righteousness and of goodness, we are taught by the Scriptures, is nowhere communicated to things that are unfit. Therefore, if they do not deny that the Holy Spirit shares with the Son and the Father in the names piously used exclusively in the case of the divine nature alone, what reason is there to try to make out that he has no partnership in this one alone that both evil spirits and idols have been shown to share through a certain equivocal use?