Thank you, Pilgrim. The link you provided conforms, as I expected, very carefully to the language and thought of the Athanasian creed. But rather than clearing up the matter, I am left wondering how the same man could have penned the sentences I quoted. The Systematic rightly calls necessity and immutability to bear on the Father's generation of the Son (just to deal with that relation) while the Summary statement leaves me with a time when the Father was alone, followed--when?????--by the Son (second in "order of existence") , which destroys both the necessity of the Son's generation and the immutability of the Godhead.

I repeat, what's going on here? Even the language in the 2 articles--technically precise vs. carelessly vernacular--seems vastly different.

In Christ,
Paul S