Testimonia

Publiek archief van verzamelde en verwerkte bronrecords.
Overzicht / Records / versie

Versie

version_key: d7179cb9cb4193a1db77eed3dfb17c6242a950fe6e937b51487dac39d34676f0
record: e1d1cc46fc6dfca89798ed211a790050649dde1714a470b9db058576cbed90e8 · work_id: ws-npnf2-5-wilson-selection-1294eebed82fdacfe755 · origin: existing-publication-record

Metadata

{"author":"Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)","date_end":1893,"date_label":"1893 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain)","date_start":1893,"edition_year":1893,"edition_year_basis":"Original NPNF Series II Volume V title and copyright, 1893; transcription physical printing year unknown","id":"ws-library-full-note:1294eebed82fdacfe755:cite_note-14","is_genuine_commentary_verified":false,"license_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Reusing_Wikisource_content","public_import_allowed":true,"publication_location":"source-library","record_type":"editorial-footnote","references":[],"rights_approved":true,"section":"Chapter uncertain; original source section: On 'Not Three Gods.', editorial note cite_note-14","semantic_kind_reviewed":false,"source_context":["But some one will say that the proof of our argument does not yet regard the question. For even if it were granted that the name of “Godhead” is a common name of the nature, it would not be established that we should not speak of “Gods”: but by these arguments, on the contrary, we are compelled to speak of “Gods”: for we find in the custom of mankind that not only those who are partakers in the same nature, but even any who may be of the same business, are not, when they are many, spoken of in the singular; as we speak of “many orators,” or “surveyors,” or “farmers,” or “shoemakers,” and so in all other cases. If, indeed, Godhead were an appellation of nature, it would be more proper, according to the argument laid down, to include the Three Persons in the singular number, and to speak of “One God,” by reason of the inseparability and indivisibility of the nature: but since it has been established by what has been said, that the term “Godhead” is significant of operation, and not of nature, the argument from what has been advanced seems to turn to the contrary conclusion, that we ought therefore all the more to call those “three Gods” who are contemplated in the same operation, as they say that one would speak of “three philosophers” or “orators,” or any other name derived from a business when those who take part in the same business are more than one."],"source_library_url":"/library/1294eebed82fdacfe755/#ws-library-full-note:1294eebed82fdacfe755:cite_note-14","source_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nicene_and_Post-Nicene_Fathers:_Series_II/Volume_V/Dogmatic_Treatises/On_'Not_Three_Gods.'#cite_note-14","translator":"Henry Austin Wilson (translator and notes), Joseph Hirst Lupton (editorial revision assistance), Henry Wace (editor)","verification":{"proof_file":"raw/review/source-library-note-batch-0062/proof-records.jsonl","proof_file_sha256":"87ac19c66dcf691b7d925a42029bc37a8a4357e5c005fab9223fd715854f7606","proof_record_id":"ws-library-full-note:1294eebed82fdacfe755:cite_note-14"},"verified":true,"work":"On 'Not Three Gods.'","work_id":"ws-npnf2-5-wilson-selection-1294eebed82fdacfe755"}

Referentiemetadata

[]

source: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nicene_and_Post-Nicene_Fathers:_Series_II/Volume_V/Dogmatic_Treatises/On_'Not_Three_Gods.'#cite_note-14

Plaatsingen (1)

InputOrdinalRecordPayload
13$.records[578]e1d1cc46fc6dfca89798ed211a790050649dde1714a470b9db058576cbed90e8faf0dac2a27234ed991f066bfcac895241d5a4ea3934c5d9b8f61f95db640d6f

Terug naar record