| << | Contents | >> |
Hippolytus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 1285
Introductory Notice to Hippolytus.
[1275] In Gallandi, from a codex of the Coislin Library, Num. 193, fol. 36.
I. Hippolytus, (Bishop) of Rome on Hezekiah.
[1276] [Here we have the blunder (noted supra, p. 175) repeated as to Rome, which must be here taken as meaning the Roman Province, not the See. The word “Bishop,” which avoids the ambiguity above noted, I have therefore put into parenthesis.]
[1277] Isa. xxxviii. 5, 7, 8.
II. From the Discourse of St. Hippolytus on the beginning of Isaiah.
[1279] [Theodoret, in his First Dialogue.]
[1280] The text is evidently corrupt: Κύριον δὲ τὸν Λόγον, νεφέλην δὲ κούφην τὸ καθαρώτατον σκῆνος, etc. The reference must be to Isa. 19.1.
[1281] Hippolytus wrote on Isaiah with the view of making the most of the favourable disposition entertained by the Emperor Alexander Severus towards the Christians, and particularly on that part where the retrogression of the sun is recorded as a sign of an extension of life to Hezekiah.
[1282] That Hippolytus wrote on Jeremiah is recorded, so far as I know, by none of the ancients; for the quotation given in the Catena of Greek fathers on Jer. xvii. 11 is taken from his book On Antichrist, chap. lv. Rufinus mentions that Hippolytus wrote on a certain part of the prophet Ezekiel, viz., on those chapters which contain the description of the temple of Jerusalem; and of that commentary the following fragments are preserved.—De Magistris.
[1283] διόροφον.
[1284] 2 Chron. iii. 1, 3, 4.
I. Preface by the most holy Hippolytus, (Bishop) of Rome.
[1285] Simon de Magistris, Daniel secundum Septuaginta, from the Codex Chisianus, Rome, 1772; and Mai, Script. vet. collectio nova, i. iii. ed. 1831, pp. 29–56.
[1286] Shallum. See 1 Chron. iii. 15.
[1288] 2 Kings xxv. 27. Note the confusion between Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin in what follows.
[1289] i.e., Jehoiachin.
[1290] Others τριμήνιον = three months.
[1291] ἀρχιμάγειρος, “chief cook.”
[1292] Jer. xxii. 24, etc.
[1294] The same method of explaining the two visions is also adopted by Jacobus Nisibenus, serm. v., and by his illustrious disciple Ephraem Syrus on Dan. vii. 4. [Let me again refer to Dr. Pusey’s work on Daniel, as invaluable in this connection. The comments of our author on this book and on “the Antichrist,” infra, deserve special attention, as from a disciple of the disciples of St. John himself.]
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0196 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page