| << | Contents | >> |
Archelaus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 1935
Introductory Notice to Archelaus.
[1926] The text gives sed abuti, and the Codex Bobiensis has sed et abuti. But the reading ought probably to be sed et uti, or sed etiam uti. Routh, however, notices that abutor is found with the sense of utor.
[1927] Plane.
[1929] Mark ii. 19. [I have slightly accommodated the translation to this text.]
[1930] In semetipsum causam circumcisionis excepit.
[1931] [From Job 2.10; Heb. 4.15; 6.1-8 Scripture abounds in this teaching. Comp. Lam. iii. 33.]
[1932] The Codex Bobiensis gives, “viæ compendiosum nobis tramitem demonstrare.” We adopt the reading, “viæ spatia compendioso nobis tramite demonstrare.”
[1936] Compendia viæ.
[1940] Reading “prævaricator” instead of “prædicator.” The sense would seem strictly to require, a debtor to the law.
[1941] Atramentum.
[1943] The Codex Bobiensis gives, “figuli opus aufers aut fictilium.” The Codex Casinensis has, “figuli opus et ars aut fictilium.” We adopt “figuli opus aut ars fictilium.”
[1944] Adopting “nequaquam” for “nec quemquam.”
[1945] By this he means the Epistle to the Romans, to which the first place among the epistles of Paul was assigned from the most ancient times. In Epiphanius, under heresy 42, it is alleged as an offence against Marcion, that he put the Epistle to the Romans in the fourth place among Paul’s epistles. See a note in Migne. [Again, this expression is a note of genuine antiquity.]
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0166 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page