Part, Question
1 1, 32 | Trismegistus says: "The monad begot a ~monad, and reflected
2 1, 32 | Trismegistus says, "Monad begot monad," ~etc., this does
3 1, 33 | father of the rain? or who begot the drops of dew?" Of some,
4 1, 39 | that we can truly say "God begot God." For, as the ~logicians
5 1, 39 | essence. So when we say "God begot," this term "God" cannot
6 1, 39 | Further, if this be true, "God begot," because the Father ~generates;
7 1, 39 | OBJ 4: Further, if "God begot God," He begot either God,
8 1, 39 | if "God begot God," He begot either God, that is ~Himself,
9 1, 39 | it is false to ~say, "God begot God."~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[39]
10 1, 39 | OBJ 5: Further, if "God begot God," He begot either God
11 1, 39 | if "God begot God," He begot either God who is the ~Father,
12 1, 39 | cannot be ~said that "God begot God."~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[39]
13 1, 39 | This is false, "the Father begot God, that is Himself," ~
14 1, 39 | Maxim.) that "God the Father begot another self [alterum se],"
15 1, 39 | and then it means "He ~begot another from Himself," or
16 1, 39 | it would really mean, "He begot another ~most like to Himself."
17 1, 39 | it is false to say, "He begot ~another God," because although
18 1, 39 | Yet this proposition "He begot another God" ~is tolerated
19 1, 39 | Reply OBJ 5: To say, "God begot God Who is God the Father,"
20 1, 39 | that it would ~mean, "He begot God, Who is Himself the
21 1, 39 | proposition is true, "He begot God Who is not God the Father."
22 1, 39 | the meaning would be, "He ~begot God Who is God Who is the
23 1, 39 | that as we can say "God begot God," so we can say "Essence
24 1, 39 | so we can say "Essence begot ~essence": considering that,
25 1, 41 | Therefore if the ~Father begot the Son, not by the will,
26 1, 41 | seems to follow that He begot ~Him by necessity; and this
27 1, 41 | book, that, "the Father ~begot the Son neither by will,
28 1, 41 | be said that ~the Father begot the Son by will; as also
29 1, 41 | said the God the Father begot the Son, not ~by His will;
30 1, 41 | creature, said that ~the Father begot the Son by will, taking
31 1, 41 | must assert that the Father begot the Son, not ~by will, but
32 1, 41 | they said that the Father begot the Son in such a manner
33 1, 41 | nature, without beginning, begot the Son equal to ~Himself."~
34 1, 39 | that we can truly say "God begot God." For, as the ~logicians
35 1, 39 | essence. So when we say "God begot," this term "God" cannot
36 1, 39 | Further, if this be true, "God begot," because the Father ~generates;
37 1, 39 | OBJ 4: Further, if "God begot God," He begot either God,
38 1, 39 | if "God begot God," He begot either God, that is ~Himself,
39 1, 39 | it is false to ~say, "God begot God."~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[39]
40 1, 39 | OBJ 5: Further, if "God begot God," He begot either God
41 1, 39 | if "God begot God," He begot either God who is the ~Father,
42 1, 39 | cannot be ~said that "God begot God."~Aquin.: SMT FP Q[39]
43 1, 39 | This is false, "the Father begot God, that is Himself," ~
44 1, 39 | Maxim.) that "God the Father begot another self [alterum se],"
45 1, 39 | and then it means "He ~begot another from Himself," or
46 1, 39 | it would really mean, "He begot another ~most like to Himself."
47 1, 39 | it is false to say, "He begot ~another God," because although
48 1, 39 | Yet this proposition "He begot another God" ~is tolerated
49 1, 39 | Reply OBJ 5: To say, "God begot God Who is God the Father,"
50 1, 39 | that it would ~mean, "He begot God, Who is Himself the
51 1, 39 | proposition is true, "He begot God Who is not God the Father."
52 1, 39 | the meaning would be, "He ~begot God Who is God Who is the
53 1, 39 | that as we can say "God begot God," so we can say "Essence
54 1, 39 | so we can say "Essence begot ~essence": considering that,
55 1, 41 | Therefore if the ~Father begot the Son, not by the will,
56 1, 41 | seems to follow that He begot ~Him by necessity; and this
57 1, 41 | book, that, "the Father ~begot the Son neither by will,
58 1, 41 | be said that ~the Father begot the Son by will; as also
59 1, 41 | said the God the Father begot the Son, not ~by His will;
60 1, 41 | creature, said that ~the Father begot the Son by will, taking
61 1, 41 | must assert that the Father begot the Son, not ~by will, but
62 1, 41 | they said that the Father begot the Son in such a manner
63 1, 41 | nature, without beginning, begot the Son equal to ~Himself."~
64 1, 99 | parents, as long as they begot ~children, would not have
65 1, 100| human race. Therefore he begot children like ~himself,
66 2, 40 | commenting on Mt. 1:2, "Abraham begot Isaac, ~and Isaac begot
67 2, 40 | begot Isaac, ~and Isaac begot Jacob," says, i.e. "faith
68 2, 73 | for he outrages one who begot him, ~who fed him, who educated
69 2, 16 | written (Mt. 1:2): "Abraham begot Isaac," i.e. ~"Faith begot
70 2, 16 | begot Isaac," i.e. ~"Faith begot hope," according to a gloss.~
71 2, 150| unmarried and Abraham who begot ~children." Now a greater
72 3, 7 | this text: "As the Father ~begot a full and perfect Word,
73 3, 23 | father of the rain? Or who ~begot the drops of dew?" Therefore
74 3, 29 | Further, on Mt. 1:16: "Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary," ~
75 3, 31 | Matthew ~says that "Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary":
76 3, 31 | 4 Kgs. 8:24) that Joram begot Ochozias, who was ~succeeded
77 3, 31 | Matthew says that Joram begot Ozias. Therefore it seems
78 3, 31 | at different times, each begot a son of one and the ~same
79 3, 31 | Wherefore Matthew ~says "Jacob begot Joseph": whereas Luke, who
80 3, 32 | seed, but like the man who ~begot him. And if the likeness
81 3, 35 | Mother of God, since she begot of her flesh the Word of
82 3, 75 | It is clear that a Virgin begot beyond the order of nature:
|