[82]. Heb. iv: 2.
[83]. John i:3. [See note 6, end of section].
[84]. Some authorities say seven pairs were introduced in this manner.
[85]. The statement is condensed from Mosheim; Dr. Benton, for years professor of divinity at Oxford, in his Brampton lectures states that the matter was "inert and powerless though co-eternal with the supreme God, and, like Him, without beginning."
[86]. The Gnostics desired to avoid making God the author of evil, hence it is a leading principle in their philosophy that all evil has its origin in matter, and as matter was created by one of the Aeons, not by God, the Lord in the Gnostic system is relieved from the responsibility of being the author of evil.
[87]. The statement of the Gnostic philosophy I have condensed from Mosheim and Dr. Benton, than whom there can be no higher authority on this subject.
[88]. Gibbon's Decline and Fall, vol. ii, ch. xxii.
[89]. The subject is difficult of illustration; but the following will perhaps aid the student to grasp the Sabellian doctrine. We see the ocean is a liquid; let us next imagine it frozen into solid ice; next as entirely dissolved into vapor. Here we have the same substance in three different aspects, but whether we speak of it as the liquid ocean, the frozen ocean or the ocean dissolved into vapor, it is always the same ocean, the same substance, but under different aspects. Whether he appeared as the Father, the Son or the Holy Ghost, he was always the same God. Such was the Sabellian theory in respect to Deity. Mosheim represents Sabellius as teaching that the divine nature was divided into portions, that one portion became separate, was called the Son, and was joined to the man Jesus. The Holy Ghost was a similar portion or part of the Eternal Father. The weight of authority is against the learned Doctor in this matter, however, and in favor of the statement of Sabellius' views in the text of this work.
[90]. This is the Nicene Creed as it was formulated by that celebrated council. The so-called Nicene Creed used in the Catholic, Lutheran and English Churches is this creed as modified by the Council of Constantinople, A. D., 381. There is no material difference in them.
[91]. Mosheim, Gibbon, Montfaucon and others insist that Athanasius is not the author of this creed, and this may be true, but I have not yet heard of its being rejected as an explanation of the Nicene Creed. Indeed, notwithstanding its authenticity has long been suspected, it still stands in the English prayer book and is recited in the church of England service upon the most notable feasts, Christmas, Epiphany etc.