From Reformation to Reformation

THESIS XXVII: Hitherto the commanding principium: the executing principium follows, which is the power of God, whereby God is able to...

THESIS XIX: In the Scripture there are various names for the divine will, which nevertheless indicate concepts, diverse to us, of...

THESIS XVIII: The principium commanding action is the will, whereby God wills Himself of Himself, and beyond Himself all things because...

THESIS XIV: Hitherto the divine properties of the first class: Of the second class are those that are applicable to God in such a way...

THESIS XI: Immutability is a property of God, which excludes from God all possibility of mutation: 1. with respect to existence; 2. ...

THESIS VI: The Properties of the divine nature, or essence, are GOD’S essential attributes, whereby the truth and majesty of the divine...

THESIS I: Hitherto the προλεγόμενα/Prolegomena of Christian Theology: now follows the explication of the body of Theology itself by...

Thesis I: The knowledge of God is defined. Thesis II: God is described. Explanation: 1. The description of God is confirmed. 2. The...

By today’s Socinians; who, as they speak of Christ as a Metaphoric God, so also as the Metaphoric Son of God, for four reasons enumerated by our AUTHOR, which have regard to Him as Man and Mediator in time; and they do not admit Eternal Generation except in designation: see HOORNBEECK’S Socinianismum confutatum, tome 2, book I, chapter I, section I, pages 6, 7; Socinus’ Explicationem initii of John 1, opera, tome I, page 80a; Przipcovius’[1] Cogitationes ad initium Euangelii

Council of Nicea (Arius underfoot) But that Generation is overturned in the worst way: 1. by the ancient Arians, having their name from Arius, a heretic of the Fourth Century, a Presbyter of Alexandria, ejected from the Church in the year 322, whose followers were in turn divided into various names and sects, and some receded farther than others and erred more grossly, as Ecclesiastical History abundantly shows. They maintained that the Son of God was created, ἐκ μὴ ὄντων, ou

Neither is it to be set in opposition, that the Giving of Life to be had in Himself is not able to be explained of the divine Generation of the Son, since from the divine Life given it would follow that the Son does not have it in the same mode as the Father; 1. Because the Giving of Life implies the dependence of the one that receives life from the one that gave it. 2. Life was given, either to the Son already existing; but thus it was not necessary for him to receive life:

Therefore, from this interpretation of the divine Generation of the Son, given by the Lord Himself, the same is best described by our AUTHOR as the Eternal and Incomprehensible of the Numerically Same Divine Essence, from the Father to the Son.How familiar among the Orthodox in this matter is the expression of the Communication of the Divine Essence, sought both from the proper concept of Generation, and from this passage of John, the Reverend WILHELMIUS[1] teaches, with a gr

Frederic Adolphus Lampe Not without advantage does our AUTHOR refer the text of John 5:26 to this. Of course, the Socinians, because they deny the true Deity of Christ, expound this passage very feebly, of the power given to Christ to announce the way of Life through the Gospel; of the immortal Life bestowed upon Him for an example to others after His suffering and death; and also of the power of conferring eternal Life in the name of the Father to those persevering in faith

3.Nevertheless, it is Proper, and not Metaphorical; seeing that, α.the Filiation hence flowing is true and proper, Romans 8:32.β.That which constitutes an essential of Generation and its definition is applicable to the Son of God; together with natural consequences, which are wont to be proper to true Filiation through Generation.For, as Generation is the Communication of the Life of one subsisting to another, through which these obtain a mutual relation to each other, the fo

Eusebius It is, 2.Hyperphysical, not Physical, which sort belongs to corporeal and material substance, which begets of itself by means of seed, and bring forth the thing begotten outside of itself:while Metaphysical Generation, whereby the mind begets λόγον/reason/word, hence also called mental, is only an improper generation, whereby an accidental property is begotten, which is in the one begetting as subject.But the Generation of the Son of God is with good reason called Hy

But this Generation is, 1.Eternal and perpetual, without beginning, end, or succession, which our AUTHOR rightly observes to be set forth in the present on account of the thing itself, in the past on account of our mode of understanding.Of course, the internal Works of the Persons ad intra, which sort are to beget, to be begotten, are eternal, perpetual, always continuing, as the very Deity is always like unto itself, whence it is able rightly to be said in the present, that

β. This Generation is the sole foundation as to why He is called the Son of God, Matthew 16:16, and indeed Beloved, etc. Indeed, the second Person of the Trinity is the Son of God according to the Divine Nature alone, not according to the human nature also, Romans 1:4; and when the foundation of proper Filiation is in divine Generation, a metaphorical and improper divine Filiation is not able to agree in the same Person, which will be proven at length against the Remonstrants

As there is an explicit treatment of Generation in the cited passage of the Psalm, so also under the more common name of Going Forth mention is made of the same in Micah 5:2: for, 1. most aptly is the divine Generation here compared with the temporal Generation of the Messiah and set in opposition to it. 2. Nothing was able to make more for signifying and commending the excellency of the מוֹשֵׁ֖ל בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל, Ruler of Israel. 3. Neither is it able here to be considered of

It is treated, α.of that Generation explicitly in Psalm 2:7. In which Psalm, in favor of the incarnate Son of God is decided the suit brought against Him, both in His person in the time of His earthly life, and then in the ministers preaching Him, according to those things that are found in Acts 4:23-29.Controversy was primarily moved, both concerning His divine Filiation, and concerning His true Messiahship. From the testimony of the Father, the Messiah confirms that both ar

Gisbertus Voetius Like the Production of the Spirit together with the Father, Generation by the Father applies to the Son as His characteristic Property. The Generation of the Son by the Father, I say; for Essence does not beget Essence: for, as one is begetting, another is begotten, so, if Essence beget Essence, in this very thing the divine Essence would be multiplied and a plurality of Gods introduced; neither the Unity of Essence, nor the Incommunicability of the characte