| << | Contents | >> |
Arnobius
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3357
Introductory Notice to Arnobius.
[3347] So the edd., reading in rebus eximiis for the ms. exi-gu-is, which would, of course, give an opposite and wholly unsuitable meaning.
[3348] So generally, Heraldus having restored delitu-it in Christo from the ms., which had omitted -it, for the reading of Gelenius, Canterus, and Ursinus, delicti—“no deceit, no sin was,” etc.
[3349] So emended by Salmasius, followed by most later edd. In the earlier edd. the reading is et merito exutus a corpore (Salm. reading at instead of a, and inserting a period after mer.)—“and when rightly freed from the body,” etc.
[3350] It may be instructive to notice how the simpler narrative of the Gospels is amplified. Matthew (Matt. 27.51) says that the earth trembled, and Luke (Luke 23.45) that the sun was darkened; but they go no further. [See p. 301, note 4, supra.]
[3351] Or, “which if…itself, would never,” etc. [Note the confidence of this appeal to general assent.]
[3352] That is, by the climate and the inclination of the earth’s surface.
[3353] So the 1st ed., Ursinus, Elmenhorst, Orelli, and Hildebrand, reading munerandis, which is found in the ms. in a later handwriting, for the original reading of the ms. munera dis.
[3354] According to Rigaltius the ms. reads ista promiserunt in immensum—“have put forth (i.e., exaggerated) these things to an immense degree falsely, small matters and trivial affairs have magnified,” etc.; while by a later hand has been superscribed over in immensum, in ink of a different colour, extulere—“have extolled.”
[3355] So the ms., 1st ed., and Hildebrand, while all others read atqu-i—“but.”
[3356] So LB., reading quo for the ms. quod.
[3357] So most edd., reading intercip-erefor the ms. intercipi—“it is that the progress be obstructed,” etc.
[3358] So Orelli and Hildebrand, reading glabre from a conjecture of Grotius, for the ms. grave.
[3359] i.e., that the one should be masculine, the other feminine.
[3360] i.e., does not one of you make the plural of uter masc., another neut.? [Note the opponent’s witness to the text of the Gospels.]
[3361] So the ms., followed by Hildebrand and Oehler, reads and punctuates quis mortuus? homo, for which all edd. read mortuus est? “Who died?”
[3362] Here, as in the whole discussion in the second book on the origin and nature of the soul, the opinions expressed are Gnostic, Cerinthus saying more precisely that Christ having descended from heaven in the form of a dove, dwelt in the body of Jesus during His life, but removed from it before the crucifixion.
[3363] So the ms. by changing a single letter, with LB. and others, similitudine proxim-a (ms. o) constitutum; while the first ed., Gelenius, Canterus, Ursinus, Orelli, and others, read -dini proxime—“settled very closely to analogy.”
[3364] In the original latronibus; here, as in the next chapter, used loosely to denote lawless men.
[3365] So emended by Mercerus for the ms. vatis.
[3366] So read in the ms.—not -tius, as in LB. and Orelli.
[3367] Lit., “the ways of things”—vias rerum.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0321 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page