Selected quad for the lemma: diversity_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
diversity_n	father_n	son_n	substance_n	392	5	9.2521	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38749	The history of the church from our Lords incarnation, to the twelth year of the Emperour Maricius Tiberius, or the Year of Christ 594 / as it was written in Greek, by Eusebius Pamphilius ..., Socrates Scholasticus, and Evagrius Scholasticus ... ; made English from that edition of these historians, which Valesius published at Paris in the years 1659, 1668, and 1673 ; also, The life of Constantine in four books, written by Eusibius Pamphilus, with Constantine's Oration to the convention of the saints, and Eusebius's Speech in praise of Constantine, spoken at his tricennalia ; Valesius's annotations on these authors, are done into English, and set at their proper places in the margin, as likewise a translation of his account of their lives and writings ; with two index's, the one, of the principal matters that occur in the text, the other, of those contained in the notes.; Ecclesiastical history. English	Eusebius, of Caesarea, Bishop of Caesarea, ca. 260-ca. 340.; Socrates, Scholasticus, ca. 379-ca. 440. Ecclesiastical history. English.; Evagrius, Scholasticus, b. 536? Ecclesiastical history. English.; Eusebius, of Caesarea, Bishop of Caesarea, ca. 260-ca. 340. Life of Constantine. English.	1683 (1683)	Wing E3423; ESTC R6591	2,940,401	764

as well those out of the Western as the Eastern parts were no more than 170. His words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. There met therefore both from the East and from the West at the City of Serdica 170 Bishops neither more nor less In the Mogunt Edit after the Canons of the Synod of Serdica there is this note subscripserunt c. i. e. and all the Bishops of divers Provinces and Cities subscribed being in number 121. Vales. e In this place Socrates seems to have been mistaken in referring those things to the Council of Serdica which belong to the Roman Synod For when Julius had invited the Eastern Bishops to a Syond at Rome that Athanasius's case might there be inquired into the Eastern Bishops refused to come thither pretending amongst other reasons the narrowness of the time set as Julius informs us in his Epistle to the said Eastern Bishops recorded by Athanasius pag. 744. Indeed Socrates's following words to wit although there had passed a year and six months after such time as the Synod had been summoned and during which space Athanasius made his abode at Rome c. doe manifestly confirm what I have said For Athanasius invited by Julius's Letters came to Rome where he abode a whole year and six months expecting his adversaries and the Synod which had been summoned at Rome Julius attests this in his forequoted Epistle pag. 748. Vales. f Paulus Bishop of Constantinople was not present at the Synod of Serdica as Theodoret attests book 2 chap. 5. Eccles. Histor. which is also confirmed by the Synodick Epistle of the Eastern Bishops at Serdica which occurs in Hilarius's Fragments at pag. 434. Edit Paris 1631. Vales. g Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having written Letters the reading in the Allat M. S. is truer which is thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having inserted in their Letters But what Socrates here says to wit that the Eastern Bishops at Serdica established the opinion of the Anomoiani see the following note in this chapter in their Synodick Epistle is altogether false Their Synodick Epistle is extant in Hilarius's Fragments at pag. 434. Edit Paris 1631 and at the end of it there is a confession of faith added In which confession there is nothing which in the least savours of the Anomians opinion The said Hilarius relating in his book de Synodis the same draught of the Creed published by the Eastern Bishops at Serdica owns it as Catholick and explaines it And Hilarius is so far from believing that they disseminated the Anomians opinion that he affirms them to have obstructed that opinion on every side His words are these Ex omni autem parte c. But on all sides whithersoever sollicitude could turn it self the passage is stopt up by the wit of the Hereticks lest it should be Preacht that there is any diversity or unlikeliness in the Son from the Father Vales. h The Anomoians were such as asserted that the Son had a substance or essence different from or unlike to the Father * That is different or unlike † Co-essential or consubstantial * The Western Bishops † The Eastern Bishops i In the Synodick Epistle of the Council of S●rdica which occurs in Theodoret B. 2. c. 8. Eccles. Hist. there is not the least mention of Paulus Vales. ‖ See Socrates book 1. chap. 36 Eccles. Hist. † 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to renew the combat with the sentence which c. k These three books the Title whereof is De Ecclesiastica Theologia ad versus Marcellum of Eusebius's are at this day extant There are prefixt before them two books entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Against Marcellus wherein he reproves his designe malice and envy Eusebius attests in the close of his second book against Marcellus that he wrote these books by the order of those Bishops who had condemned Marcellus in the Constantinopolitan Synod Further it is uncertain whether or no Socrates had ever seen those two former books against Marcellus in regard he has made no mention of them Vales. * See Euseb concerning the Life of Constantine book 3. chap. 13 14 Edit Vales. † That is to assert Arius's opinion a Socrates means those Doxologies that occur at the end of Eusebius's Sermons which Eusebius doth always put into this form Glory be to the unborn Father by his only begotten Son c. This may plainly be seen in those Tracts of Eusebius's which Jacobus Sirmondus hath published For example in the end of his first book against Sabellius these are his words Gloria uni non nato Deo c. i. e. Glory be to the one unborn God by the one only begotten God the Son of God in one holy Spirit both now and always and throughout all ages of ages Amen And so concerning the rest Also in the Oration Eusebius made at the Consecration of the Church at Tyre which occurs at the Tenth book of his Eccles. Histor. chap. 4. we meet with the same clause at the close of that Speech 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. by whom be Glory to him For so we have worded that place agreeable to three of our M. SS Further 't is manifestly known that the Arians attributed this preposition per quem by whom to the Son upon this design that they might make him subject to the Father See Theodoret upon the first chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians Vales. b Before these words there is a whole line wanting which from the First Book of Eusebius de Ecclesiastica Theologia Chap. 9. is thus to be made up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. For by this means he would be their brother rather than the Son of God and would be one of those common Creatures c. Vales. c Instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reading should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 produced as Eusebius words it at the place before cited It should also be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For these two words although they are distinguished but by one Letter yet do very much differ in their significations For the term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies that which is born but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 imports that which is made Vales. * See Prov. 8. 22. and what was remarkt concerning that Text in chap. 19. of this book note ‖ * 1 Pet. 2. 13 14. Where the expression in the original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which may be rendred thus to every humane Creature † Amos 4. 12. 13. Euseb. quotes this Text in the words of the Septuagint but omits the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I we have rendred them according to his quotation which is very different from the Hebrew and from our English Version ‖ Eccles. 1. 9. * Acts 2. 2 4. † Amos 4. 13. ‖ Psal. 51. 10. * Ephes. 2. 15. † Ephes. 4. 24. ‖ 2 Cor. 5. 17. * Prov. 8. 22.