| << | Contents | >> |
Archelaus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 2052
Introductory Notice to Archelaus.
[2042] Matt. xvi. 23. [Satan seems to have rebelled against man’s creation.]
[2043] Luke iv. 34, reading sanctus Deus. [i.e., not the received text.]
[2044] Reading silere. The Codex Casinensis gives sinire, which may be meant for sinere = give over.
[2045] Pro accidentium salute.
[2046] We have adopted Migne’s arrangement of these clauses. Routh, however, puts them thus: And that it may be made more intelligible to you, etc.,… (for in forgetfulness, etc., you have turned off, etc.), listen to me now for a brief space.
[2047] Reading “pondus belli toleraverant,” instead of the “pondus bellico tolerarant” of the Codex Casinensis.
[2049] Salva.
[2050] Gal. iv. 4. The reading is, “cum autem fuit Dei voluntas in nobis.” The Vulgate, following the ordinary Greek text, gives, “at ubi venit plenitudo temporis.” And so Irenæus, Tertullian, Cyprian, etc. [This should have been in the margin of the Revised Version.]
[2052] 1 Cor. vi. 14. The text here inserts the words cum illo, which are found neither in the Greek, nor in the Vulgate, nor in Irenæus, Adv. Hæres., v. 6, 7 [vol. i. pp. 530, 532, this series], nor in Tertullian, Adv. Marc., v. 7, etc. [vol. iii. p. 443, this series]. According to Sabatier, however, they are found in Jerome, Ep. ad Amand.
[2053] Reading in vobis. But the Codex Casinensis seems to give in nobis, amongst us.
[2054] But the Codex Casinensis seems to make it fides nostra, our faith.
[2055] Initium.
[2057] Distinctio.
[2058] Gal. iii. 1. The word in the text is rescriptus est. The Vulgate gives præscriptus est. The Vetus Itala proscriptus est.
[2059] Minor.
[2061] It would seem that Archelaus read the passage in Matthew as meaning, notwithstanding, he that is less, is, in the kingdom of heaven, greater than he. Thus, he that is less is understood to be Jesus in His natural relations. [A very lean and hungry proculdubio of the author.]
[2062] Routh appends a note here which may be given. It is to this effect: I am afraid that Archelaus has not expressed with sufficient correctness the mystery of the Divine Incarnation, in this passage as well as in what follows; although elsewhere he has taught that the Lord Jesus was conceived by divine power, and in ch. xxxiv. has called the Virgin Mary Dei genetrix, Θεοτόκος. For at the time of the Saviour’s baptism the Holy Spirit was not given in His first communication with the Word of God (which Word, indeed, had been united with the human nature from the time of the conception itself), but was only received by the Christ ἀνΘρωπίνως and οἰκονομικῶς, and for the sake of men. See Cyril of Alexandria, De Rectâ Fide, xxxiv. vol. v. 2, p. 153, editio Auberti.[Routh, R.S., vol. v. p. 178.]
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0166 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page