The first is that of Tertullian, Ex Conscientia scimus, &c. Of Conscience we know, that the Name of God, and Fa∣ther, and Son, and Spirit do agree, so as the Connexion of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, makes Three cohering, alterum ex altero, which Three are One; Ʋnum non unus, as it is said, I and my Father are One for Unity of Substance, not for Singularity of Number, De anima, c. 14.
The other is St. Cyprian, De Ʋnitate, &c. The Lord said, I and my Father are One. And again; Of God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, it's written, And these Three are One; Hanc unitatem, Those that hold not this Unity, hold not the Truth to Salvation.
These I have noted to shame the Scoffer, that shall say, We had but two Gods before the Council of Nice; as well as to shew, that wise and good men, of old, under∣stood the Object and Rule of our Christian Faith in this great Article, and what was then thought of the Op∣pugners of it.
Obj. So much for the Trinity; but the Eternity of the Son of God, and his Co-essentiality with the Father, they say, is unintelligible.
But, can they conceive how God should be a Father from Eternity without a Son? Can they not conceive that which their Brethren the Arrians believed, according to abundance of Scriptures, that our Saviour did exist be∣fore his Incarnation? And then, that being supposed, their own Reason assures them, that He must, from Eternity; as before was observed. Can they not conceive, that if all things were made by him, and without him nothing was made, that was made, that he existed before any thing was made, and therefore was a God born, and not made? Can they not apprehend, that seeing whatsoever is in God is God, and therefore the Wisdom and Power in God is the