The Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus (as recorded by Epictetus)

In the Discourse by Epictetus:

The Master Argument seems to have been developed on the basis of the following sort of premisses. These three premisses form an incosistent triad: (1) Every past truth is necessary, and (2) The impossible does not follow from the possible, and (3) Something is possible which neither is true nor will be true. Diodorus, aware of this inconsistency, relied on the plausibility of the first two premisses in order to establish the conclusion that nothing is possible which neither is true nor will be true. But some maintain these two premisses: (3) Something is possible, which neither is nor will be true and (2) The impossible does not follow from the possible, but not (1) Every past truth is necessary. The supporters of Cleanthes seem to have taken this line, and they are mostly followed by Antipater. Others maintain the other two premisses, (3) Something is possible, which neither is nor will be true, and (1) Every past truth is necessary, and assert that the impossible does follow from the possible. It is impossible to maintain all three premisses owing to their mutual inconsistency. (Diss 2.19.1-4=fr.131 Döring=LS 38A).