'«  They  that  admit  tv/o  Hypojtafes,  one  unhego^rcn,  nnd  the
*'  other  created  rrorn  nothing,  do  indeed  make  0  eGodi  .m'rin  rh-.'ir
"  Scheme,  TheSon  Vv-iilbe  noi'^w,  nor  O'./y  begotten,  no  nr>r  LuY'I,
"  nor  Cod,  having  no  communion  of  rbc^  Farhc'sGodliead  bat  U*-
"  ing  bken'd  to  the  rci't  of  liie  Creatures,  as  having  cxifted  jVt///>
■    no:  h  ing,

X  frc-u


162  ^  Second  Defense  Qu.lL

from  mn-exiftence  to  exificnce :    For  Enfcbms  plainly  de-
nits  tlie  Son  to  be  ex.  t»  i^id  ovro^^  in  the  fame  Senfc
that  he  aflftrms   it  of  Creatures  ;    and  therefore  muft
deny  his  paOfing  out  of  mn-exiftcme  to  exiflence^  un-
lefs  He   were  the   greatefl   Prevaricator  and    Shuffler
imaginable.      If  it   be  faid ,    that    He    intended    that
Creatures  were  not  made  out  of  any  thing  pre-exiflmg,
he  mull:  tlien  affirm  that  the  Son  was  oftt  of  fomething
■pre-exifting:    And  then  let  any  Man  tell  me,  what  he
could  mean  by  it;    except  it  were  that  He  exift:ed  he^
fore  his  Generations  having  been  eternally  in,  and  with
the   Father ,    of  the  fame  Homogeneous   divine    Sub-
ftance  that  the  Father  is.     But  my  Perfuafion  is,  that
Ei'ifebit'is  believed  cternd  Generation  ;    and  if  fo,  it  is
plain  enough  what  He  meant  by  denying  the  Son  to
be  ex.  y)^  oir©^.      It  does  not  appear  tome,  that  £«-
fcbiits  denied  the  Son   to  be  k'\^%'j    tho*    I    know
Montfmcon  charges  Him  with  it ;   and  there  are  more
Pailages  than   one*  that  fay  fomething  very  like  it.
