Chapter XXVIII.—A Curious Inconsistency in Hermogenes Exposed.  CertainExpressions in The History of Creation Vindicated in The True Sense.

But we shall show not only that this condition264    Habitum. agreed with this earth of ours, but that it did not agree with that other (insisted on by Hermogenes). For, inasmuch as pure Matter was thus subsistent with God,265    Deo subjacebat. without the interposition indeed of any element at all (because as yet there existed nothing but itself and God), it could not of course have been invisible. Because, although Hermogenes contends that darkness was inherent in the substance of Matter, a position which we shall have to meet in its proper place,266    See below, ch. xxx. p. 494. yet darkness is visible even to a human being (for the very fact that there is the darkness is an evident one), much more is it so to God. If indeed it267    Matter. had been invisible, its quality would not have been by any means discoverable. How, then, did Hermogenes find out268    “Compertus est” is here a deponent verb. that that substance was “without form,” and confused and disordered, which, as being invisible, was not palpable to his senses? If this mystery was revealed to him by God, he ought to give us his proof. I want to know also, whether (the substance in question) could have been described as “void.” That certainly is “void” which is imperfect. Equally certain is it, that nothing can be imperfect but that which is made; it is imperfect when it is not fully made.269    Minus factum. Certainly, you admit. Matter, therefore, which was not made at all, could not have been imperfect; and what was not imperfect was not “void.” Having no beginning, because it was not made, it was also unsusceptible of any void-condition.270    Rudimento. Tertullian uses the word “rudis” (unformed) for the scriptural term (“void”); of this word “rudimentum” is the abstract. For this void-condition is an accident of beginning. The earth, on the contrary, which was made, was deservedly called “void.”  For as soon as it was made, it had the condition of being imperfect, previous to its completion.

CAPUT XXVIII.

Atquin non tantum probabimus istum habitum huic terrae competisse, sed et illi alii non competisse. Nam si nuda materia Deo subjacebat, nullo scilicet elemento obstruente, si quidem nondum quicquam 0222B erat praeter ipsam et Deum; utique invisibilis esse non poterat. Quia etsi tenebras volet in substantia fuisse materiae (cui articulo respondere debebimus suo ordine), etiam homini tenebrae visibiles sunt. Hoc enim ipsum quod sunt tenebrae, videtur, nedum Deo. Et utique si invisibilis esset, nullo modo cognosceretur qualitas ejus. Unde ergo compertus est Hermogenes informem et confusam et inconditam illam fuisse, quae ut invisibilis latebat: aut si hoc a Deo revelatum est, probare debet. Sic et an rudis dici potuerit, expostulo. Certe enim rude illud est quod imperfectum est. Certe imperfectum non potest esse, nisi quod factum est. Quod enim minus factum est, imperfectum est. Certe, inquis. Ergo materia quae facta non erat in totum imperfecta esse 0222C non potuit. Quae imperfecta non fuit, etiam rudis non fuit. Initium non habens quia facta non fuit, carnit et rudimento. Initii enim accidens est rudimentum. Terra vero quae facta est, meruit et rudis dici. Statim enim ut facta est, habuit imperfectae locum, ante perfectionem.