The argument, when drawn out, is virtually this: if, because two subjects are coessential, a third is pre-supposed of which they partake, then, since either of these two is coessential with that of which both partake, a new third must be supposed in which it and the pre-existing substance partake and thus an infinite series of things coessential must be supposed. Vid. Basil. Ep. 52. n. 2. [Cf. Aristot. Frag. 183, p. 1509 b 23.]
{"context":{"$text_sha256":"667eb0301fd933bea9e1ed1236ad5fa795918035baf83476d70d4136ce603741"},"context_xpath":"/ThML/ThML.body/div1[22]/div2[2]/div3[3]/p[21]","kind":"whole-historical-note","source_family":"athanasius-bounded-remainder","title":"On the Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia. (De Synodis.)","work":"xxii.ii","xpath":"/ThML/ThML.body/div1[22]/div2[2]/div3[3]/p[21]/note[5]"}