# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Page: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/727097563:0154
# Permalink to this reading: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/727097563:0154?run=74
# Title: A Discourse In Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity (shelfmarks ZEN Leibn. Marg. 40; Leibn. Marg. 40)
# Folio 82, page id 727097563:0154
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=727097563&page=154
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/727097563/jpgs/default/00000154.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
# Lines: 39 recognised, mean confidence 0.88
# Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German.
# Licence: CC BY 4.0, Leibniz Legible. Machine output: do not ingest it as verified text; keep this provenance with the text.
# Wording rule: say "the machine reads it as …", never "Leibniz wrote".
# After the first blank line: the recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

2.9.9.
CurcelI.
28. 64.
Mtaam.
384
C HrCeH.
dect. 73.
A Vindication of
ture, not taken from what we sec amonq men.
And ic is observable, that wrhen Paulus
Samosatenus had uroed ehis as the Best Ar-
sument asainst the term Ouosor , That
it made such a difference of Substances as is
amone men: for that Realon Caith Athana-
sius, his fudces vere content to let it alone, for
the Son of God is not in such a sense Con-sub-
stantial; but afterwards. theWicene Fathers
findine out tbe Art of Paulus, and the sienisi-
cancy of theWVord ro discriminate the AriaNS,
made use of it, and ouly thoueht it necessary
to declare, that when it is applied to God,
Et is not to be understood, as amone indivi-
duat Men.
A5 to the Dialogues under Athanasius
his Name, on Which Curcellaeus insills (0
much; it is now verr well knoon chat
ther belons noctohim, bueco Maximus;
andby comparins ehem withi otler places
in him, iE may appear, thar he intended
no specisick Nature in 60d.
Buc laich Curcellaeus, Is the Fathers in
tended any more than a Specifick Nature,
Why did they not use WVords Which vould ex-
press it more fullr, ASMoroSO O and -
205 lor that very Realon, Which he
iventions trom Spiphanius, because they
vould seem to approach t00 near to Sabellia-
nism.
3. Ba)1