OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume V/Novatian/A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity/Part 7

Chapter VII.  Argument.—Moreover, that When God is Called a Spirit, Brightness, and Light, God is Not Sufficiently Expressed by Those Appellations.
But when the Lord says that God is a Spirit, I think that Christ spoke thus of the Father, as wishing that something still more should be understood than merely that God is a Spirit.  For although, in His Gospel, He is reasoning for the purpose of giving to men an increase of intelligence, nevertheless He Himself speaks to men concerning God, in such a way as they can as yet hear and receive; although, as we have said, He is now endeavouring to give to His hearers religious additions to their knowledge of God. For we find it to be written that God is called Love, and yet from this the substance of God is not declared to be Love; and that He is called Light, while in this is not the substance of God.  But the whole that is thus said of God is as much as can be said, so that reasonably also, when He is called a Spirit, it is not all that He is which is so called; but so that, while men’s mind by understanding makes progress even to the Spirit itself, being already changed in spirit, it may conjecture God to be something even greater through the Spirit. For that which is, according to what it is, can neither be declared by human discourse, nor received by human ears, nor gathered by human perceptions. For if “the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him, neither eye hath seen, nor ear hath heard, nor the heart of man, nor even his mind has perceived;” what and how great is He Himself who promises these things, in understanding which both the mind and nature of man have failed! Finally, if you receive the Spirit as the substance of God, you will make God a creature. For every spirit is a creature. And therefore, then, God will be made. In which manner also, if, according to Moses, you should receive God to be fire, in saying that He is a creature, you will have declared what is ordained, you will not have taught who is its ordainer. But these things are rather used as figures than as being so in fact. For as, in the Old Testament, God is for this reason called Fire, that fear may be struck into the hearts of a sinful people, by suggesting to them a Judge; so in the New Testament He is announced as Spirit, that, as the Renewer and Creator of those who are dead in their sins, He may be attested by this goodness of mercy granted to those that believe.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 1 Cor. ii. 9.
* ↑ [Ex. iii. 2. Not consuming. Heb. xii. 29, “consuming.”]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Various Sections of the Works/Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome/Part 10

And Again:
For on this account after the Unity there is also the most divine Trinity.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ibid. cap. penult., p. 61.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Various Sections of the Works/Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome/Part 11

The Conclusion of the Entire Treatise.
16. In accordance with all these things, the form, moreover, and rule being received from the elders who have lived before us, we also, with a voice in accordance with them, will both acquit ourselves of thanks to you, and of the letter which we are now writing. And to God the Father, and His Son our Lord Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit, be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Of the work itself Athanasius thus speaks: Finally, Dionysius complains that his accusers do not quote his opinions in their integrity, but mutilated, and that they do not speak out of a good conscience, but for evil inclination; and he says that they are like those who cavilled at the epistles of the blessed apostle. Certainly he meets the individual words of his accusers, and gives a solution to all their arguments; and as in those earlier writings of his he confuted Sabellius most evidently, so in these later ones he entirely declares his own pious faith. [Conf. Hermas, vol. iii. p. 15, note 7, with note 2, supra.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Epistles, or Fragments of Epistles/To Sixtus II

Epistle IX.—To Sixtus II.
For truly, brother, I have need of advice, and I crave your judgment, lest perchance I should be mistaken upon the matters which in such wise happen to me. One of the brethren who come together to the church, who for some time has been esteemed as a believer, and who before my ordination, and, if I am not deceived, before even the episcopate of Heraclas himself, had been a partaker of the assembly of the faithful, when he had been concerned in the baptism of those who were lately baptized, and had heard the interrogatories and their answers, came to me in tears, and bewailing his lot. And throwing himself at my feet, he began to confess and to protest that this baptism by which he had been initiated among heretics was not of this kind, nor had it anything whatever in common with this of ours, because that it was full of blasphemy and impiety. And he said that his soul was pierced with a very bitter sense of sorrow, and that he did not dare even to lift up his eyes to God, because he had been initiated by those wicked words and things. Wherefore he besought that, by this purest laver, he might be endowed with adoption and grace. And I, indeed, have not dared to do this; but I have said that the long course of communion had been sufficient for this. For I should not dare to renew afresh, after all, one who had heard the giving of thanks, and who had answered with others Amen; who had stood at the holy table, and had stretched forth his hands to receive the blessed food, and had received it, and for a very long time had been a partaker of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Henceforth I bade him be of good courage, and approach to the sacred elements with a firm faith and a good conscience, and become a partaker of them. But he makes no end of his wailing, and shrinks from approaching to the table; and scarcely, when entreated, can he bear to be present at the prayers.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Of a man who sought to be introduced to the Church by baptism, although he said that he had received baptism, with other words and matters among the heretics.
* ↑ [Vol. v. See a reference to Cyril’s Catechetical Lectures.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Epistles, or Fragments of Epistles/To Sixtus, Bishop

Epistle VI.—To Sixtus, Bishop.
1. Previously, indeed, (Stephen) had written letters about Helanus and Firmilianus, and about all who were established throughout Cilicia and Cappadocia, and all the neighbouring provinces, giving them to understand that for that same reason he would depart from their communion, because they rebaptized heretics. And consider the seriousness of the matter. For, indeed, in the most considerable councils of the bishops, as I hear, it has been decreed that they who come from heresy should first be trained in Catholic doctrine, and then should be cleansed by baptism from the filth of the old and impure leaven. Asking and calling him to witness on all these matters, I sent letters.
And a little after Dionysius proceeds:—
2. And, moreover, to our beloved co-presbyters Dionysius and Philemon, who before agreed with Stephen, and had written to me about the same matters, I wrote previously in few words, but now I have written again more at length.
In the same letter, says Eusebius, he informs Xystus of the Sabellian heretics, that they were gaining ground at that time, in these words:—
3. For since of the doctrine, which lately has been set on foot at Ptolemais, a city of Pentapolis, impious and full of blasphemy against Almighty God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; full of unbelief and perfidy towards His only begotten Son and the first-born of every creature, the Word made man, and which takes away the perception of the Holy Spirit,—on either side both letters were brought to me, and brethren had come to discuss it, setting forth more plainly as much as by God’s gift I was able,—I wrote certain letters, copies of which I have sent to thee.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Dionysius mentions letters that had been written by him as well to the Presbyters Dionysius and Philemon as to Stephen, on the baptism of heretics and on the Sabellian heresy.
* ↑ Lib. vii. ch. 6.
* ↑ [i.e., Sixtus II.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Various Sections of the Works
## Contents

* From the Two Books on the Promises
* From the Books on Nature
* From the Books Against Sabellius
* Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome
* The Epistle to Bishop Basilides
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Various Sections of the Works/Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome
## Contents

* Part 1
* Part 2
* Part 3
* Part 4
* Part 5
* Part 6
* Part 7
* Part 8
* Part 9
* Part 10
* Part 11
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Various Sections of the Works/Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome/Part 1

IV.—Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome.
From the First Book.
1. There certainly was not a time when God was not the Father.
2. Neither, indeed, as though He had not brought forth these things, did God afterwards beget the Son, but because the Son has existence not from Himself, but from the Father.
And after a few words he says of the Son Himself:—
3. Being the brightness of the eternal Light, He Himself also is absolutely eternal. For since light is always in existence, it is manifest that its brightness also exists, because light is perceived to exist from the fact that it shines, and it is impossible that light should not shine. And let us once more come to illustrations. If the sun exists, there is also day; if nothing of this be manifest, it is impossible that the sun should be there. If then the sun were eternal, the day would never end; but now, for such is not really the state of the case, the day begins with the beginning of the sun, and ends with its ending. But God is the eternal Light, which has neither had a beginning, nor shall ever fail. Therefore the eternal brightness shines forth before Him, and co-exists with Him, in that, existing without a beginning, and always begotten, He always shines before Him; and He is that Wisdom which says, “I was that wherein He delighted, and I was daily His delight before His face at all times.”
And a little after he thus pursues his discourse from the same point:—
4. Since, therefore, the Father is eternal, the Son also is eternal, Light of Light. For where there is the begetter, there is also the offspring. And if there is no offspring, how and of what can He be the begetter? But both are, and always are. Since, then, God is the Light, Christ is the Brightness. And since He is a Spirit—for says He, “God is a Spirit”—fittingly again is Christ called Breath; for “He,” saith He, “is the breath of God’s power.”
And again he says:—
5. Moreover, the Son alone, always co-existing with the Father, and filled with Him who is, Himself also is, since He is of the Father.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Fragments of a second epistle of Dionysius, Bishop of Alexandria, or of the treatise which was inscribed the “Elenchus et Apologia.” [A former epistle was written when Dionysius (of Rome) was a presbyter.]
* ↑ And in what follows (says Athanasius) he professes that Christ is always, as being the Word, and the Wisdom, and the Power.
* ↑ Prov. viii. 30.
* ↑ John iv. 24.
* ↑ Scil. Wisdom.
* ↑ Wisd. vii. 25.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Dionysius/Extant Fragments/Containing Various Sections of the Works/Epistle to Dionysius Bishop of Rome/Part 2

From the Same First Book.
6. But when I spoke of things created, and certain works to be considered, I hastily put forward illustrations of such things, as it were little appropriate, when I said neither is the plant the same as the husbandman, nor the boat the same as the boatbuilder. But then I lingered rather upon things suitable and more adapted to the nature of the thing, and I unfolded in many words, by various carefully considered arguments, what things were more true; which things, moreover, I have set forth to you in another letter. And in these things I have also proved the falsehood of the charge which they bring against me—to wit, that I do not maintain that Christ is consubstantial with God. For although I say that I have never either found or read this word in the sacred Scriptures, yet other reasonings, which I immediately subjoined, are in no wise discrepant from this view, because I brought forward as an illustration human offspring, which assuredly is of the same kind as the begetter; and I said that parents are absolutely distinguished from their children by the fact alone that they themselves are not their children, or that it would assuredly be a matter of necessity that there would neither be parents nor children. But, as I said before, I have not the letter in my possession, on account of the present condition of affairs; otherwise I would have sent you the very words that I then wrote, yea, and a copy of the whole letter, and I will send it if at any time I shall have the opportunity. I remember, further, that I added many similitudes from things kindred to one another. For I said that the plant, whether it grows up from seed or from a root, is different from that whence it sprouted, although it is absolutely of the same nature; and similarly, that a river flowing from a spring takes another form and name: for that neither is the spring called the river, nor the river the spring, but that these are two things, and that the spring indeed is, as it were, the father, while the river is the water from the spring. But they feign that they do not see these things and the like to them which are written, as if they were blind; but they endeavour to assail me from a distance with expressions too carelessly used, as if they were stones, not observing that on things of which they are ignorant, and which require interpretation to be understood, illustrations that are not only remote, but even contrary, will often throw light.

## Footnotes

* ↑ From Athan., Ep. de decret. Nic. Syn., 4. 18. [See remarks on inevitable discrepancies of language and figurative illustrations at this formative period, vol. iv. p. 223.]
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII/Chapter 21

21. The “Woe” Does Not Apply to the Disciples of Jesus.
But if there is woe unto men everywhere on the earth, because of occasions of stumbling to those who are laid hold of by them; but the disciples are not of the world, as they do not look at things seen, like as the Master is not of this world; to no one of the disciples of Jesus does the “woe because of occasions of stumbling” apply, since “great peace have they who love the law of God, and there is to them no occasion of stumbling.” But if any one seems to be called a disciple, but yet is of the world, because of his loving the world, and the things therein,—I mean, the life in the place round about the earth, and the property in it, or the possessions, or any form of wealth whatsoever,—so that the saying, “they are not of the world,” does not fit him; to him, as being really of the world, shall come that which happens to the world, the “woe, because of occasions of stumbling.” But let him who wishes to avoid this woe not be a lover of life, but let him say with Paul,” “The world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” For the saints while “in the tabernacle, do groan being burdened” with “the body of humiliation,” and do all things that they may become worthy to be found in the mystery of the resurrection, when God shall fashion anew the body of humiliation not of all, but of those who have been truly made disciples to Christ, so that it may be conformed to the body of the glory of Christ. For as none of the “woes” happen to any of the disciples of Christ, so does not this “woe, because of occasions of stumbling;” for, supposing that thousands of occasions should arise, they shall not touch those who are no longer of the world. But if any one, because of his faith wanting ballast, and the instability of his submission in regard to the Word of God, is capable of being caused to stumble, let him know that he is not called by Jesus His disciple. Now we must suppose that so many stumbling-blocks come, that, as a result, the woes extend not to some parts of the earth, but to the whole “world” which is in it.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Ps. cxix. 165.
* ↑ John xvii. 16.
* ↑ Gal. vi. 14.
* ↑ 2 Cor. v. 4.
* ↑ Phil. iii. 21.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII/Chapter 14

14. Concerning Those Who Said, Who is the Greatest? and Concerning the Child that Was Called by Jesus.
“In that day came the disciples unto Jesus saying, Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” In order that we might be taught what it was that the disciples came to Jesus and asked to learn of Him, and how He answered to their inquiry, Matthew, though he might have given an account of this very thing only, has added, according to some manuscripts, “In that hour the disciples came unto Jesus,” but, according to others, “In that day;” and it is necessary that we should not leave the meaning of the evangelist without examination. Wherefore giving attention to the words preceding “in that day,” or “hour,” let us see if it is possible from them to find a way to understand, as being necessary, the addition, “in that day,” or “hour.” Jesus then had come to Capernaum along with His disciples, where “they that received the half-shekel came to Peter,” and asked and said, “Doth not your Master pay the half-shekel?” Then, when Peter answered and said to them, Yea, Jesus giving further a defence with reference to the giving of the half-shekel, sends Peter to drag up the fish into the net, in the mouth of which He said that a stater would be found which was to be given for Himself and Peter. It seems to me, then, that thinking that this was a very great honour which had been bestowed on Peter by Jesus, who judged that he was greater than the rest of His friends, they wished to learn accurately the truth of their suspicion, by making inquiry of Jesus and hearing from Him, whether, as they supposed, He had judged that Peter was greater than they; and at the same time also they hoped to learn the ground on which Peter had been preferred to the rest of the disciples. Matthew then, I think, wishing to make this plain, has subjoined to the words “that take”—the stater, to-wit—“and give unto them for thee and me,” the words, “In that day came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who then is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” And, perhaps, they were also in doubt because of the preference which had been given to the three at the transfiguration, and they were in doubt about this—which of the three was judged by the Lord to be greatest. For John reclined on His breast through love, and we may conclude that before the Supper they had seen many tokens of special honour given by Jesus to John; but Peter on his confession was called blessed in their hearing, because of his saying, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;” but again because of the saying, “Get thee behind Me, Satan; thou art a stumbling-block unto Me, for thou mindest not the things of God but the things of men,” they were distracted in mind as to whether it was not he but one of the sons of Zebedee, that was the greatest. So much for the words “in that day” or “hour,” on which took place the matters relating to the stater.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xviii. 1.
* ↑ Matt. xvii. 27; xviii. 1.
* ↑ Matt. xvi. 16, 17.
* ↑ Matt. xvi. 23.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume IX/Origen on Matthew/Origen's Commentary on Matthew/Book XIII/Chapter 22

22. What the “Occasions of Stumbling” Are.
“And it must needs be that occasions of stumbling come,” which I take to be different from the men by whom they come. The occasions then which come are an army of the devil, his angels, and a wicked band of impure spirits, which, seeking out instruments through whom they will work, often find men altogether strangers to piety, and sometimes even some of those who are thought to believe the Word of God, for whom exists a worse woe than that which comes to him who is caused to stumble, just as also it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment, than for the places where Jesus did signs and wonders, and yet was not believed. But as one might undertake to make a collection from the Scriptures of those who are pronounced blessed, and of the things in respect of which they are so called, so also he might undertake to do with the woes which are written, and those in whose case the woes are spoken.  But that the woe is worse in the case of him who causes to stumble, than in him who is made to stumble, you may prove by the passage, “Whoso shall cause to stumble one of these little ones which believe in Me, it is profitable for him,” etc.; for, while the little one who is made to stumble receives retribution from him who caused him to stumble, it is expedient that the severe and intolerable punishment which is written should befall the man who has caused the stumbling. But if we were to give more careful consideration to these things, we should be on our guard against sinning against the brethren, and wounding their conscience when it is weak, lest we sin against Christ; as often our brethren about us, “for whom Christ died,” perish, not only through our knowledge, but also through some other causes connected with us; in the case of whom, we, sinning against Christ, shall pay the penalty, the soul of them who perish through us being required of us.

## Footnotes

* ↑ Matt. xviii. 7.
* ↑ Matt. xi. 22.
* ↑ Matt. xviii. 6.
* ↑ 1 Cor. viii. 11, 12.
# Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VII/Lactantius/The Divine Institutes/Book VI/Chap. XXII

Chap. XXII.—Of the Pleasures of Taste and Smell.
But with regard to the pleasures of taste and smell, which two senses relate only to the body, there is nothing to be discussed by us; unless by chance any one requires us to say that it is disgraceful to a wise and good man if he is the slave of his appetite, if he walks along besmeared with unguents and crowned with flowers: and he who does these things is plainly foolish and senseless, and is worthless, and one whom not even a notion of virtue has reached. Perhaps some one will say, Why, then, have these things been made, except that we may enjoy them? However, it has often been said that there would have been no virtue unless it had things which it might overpower. Therefore God made all things to supply a contest between two things. Those enticements of pleasures, then, are the instruments of that whose only business it is to subdue virtue, and to shut out justice from men. With these soothing influences and enjoyments it captivates their souls; for it knows that pleasure is the contriver of death. For as God calls man to life only through virtue and labour, so the other calls us to death by delights and pleasures; and as men arrive at real good through deceitful evils, so they arrive at real evil through deceitful goods. Therefore those enjoyments are to be guarded against, as snares or nets, lest, captivated by the softness of enjoyments, we should be brought under the dominion of death with the body itself, to which we have enslaved ourselves.