| << | Contents | >> |
Hippolytus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 1606
Introductory Notice to Hippolytus.
[1596] [The text Eccles. xi. 3 may be accommodated to this truth, but seems to have no force as proof.]
[1597] The second fragment extant in the Parallela begins here.
[1599] [It is not the unrighteous, be it remembered, who go to “purgatory,” according to the Trent theology, but only true Christians, dying in full communion with the Church. Hippolytus is here speaking of the ultimate doom of the wicked, but bears in mind the imagery of Luke xvi. 24 and the appeal to Abraham.]
[1600] The second fragment in the Parallela ends here.
[1601] ἐκβρασσομένη.
Against the Heresy of One Noetus.
[1603] Gallandi, p. 454.
[1604] That Noetus was a native of Smyrna is mentioned also by Theodoret, book iii. Hæret Fab., c. iii., and Damascenus, sec. lvii. (who is accustomed to follow Epiphanius); and yet in Epiphanius, Hæres., 57, we read that Noetus was an Asian of the city of Ephesus (᾽Ασιανον τῆς ᾽Εφέσου πόλεως). (Fabricius.)
[1605] Epiphanius says that Noetus made his heresy public about 130 years before his time (οὐ πρὸ ἐτῶν πλειόνων ἀλλ᾽ ὡς πρὸ χρόνου τῶν τουτων ἑκατὸν τριάκοντα, πλείω ἢ ἐλάσσω); and as Epiphanius wrote in the year 375, that would make the date of Noetus about 245. He says also that Noetus died soon after (ἔναγχος), along with his brother. (Fabricius.)
[1606] So also Epiphanius and Damascenus. But Philastrius, Heresy, 53, puts Elijah for Aaron: hic etiam dicebat se Moysem esse, et fratrem suum Eliam prophetam.
[1607] Epiphanius remarks that they were but ten in number.
[1608] The following words are the words of the Symbolum, as it is extant in Irenæus, i. 10, etc., and iii. 4; and in Tertullian, Contra Praxeam, ch. ii., and De Præscript., ch. xiii., and De virginibus velandis, ch. i. [See vol. iii., this series.]
[1609] Ex. iii. 6 and xx. 3.
[1611] Baruch iii. 35-38. [Based on Prov. viii., but so remarkable that Grotius presumptuously declared it an interpolation. It reflects canonical Scripture, but has no canonical value otherwise.]
[1614] καὶ αὐτοις μονοκῶλα χρώμενοι, etc. The word μονοκῶλα appears to be used adverbially, instead of μονοκώλως and μονοτύπως, which are the terms employed by Epiphanius (p. 481). The meaning is, that the Noetians, in explaining the words of Scripture concerning Christ, looked only to one side of the question—namely, to the divine nature; just as Theodotus, on his part going to the opposite extreme, kept by the human nature exclusively, and held that Christ was a mere man. Besides others, the presbyter Timotheus, in Cotelerii Monument., vol. iii. p. 389, mentions Theodotus in these terms: “They say that this Theodotus was the leader and father of the heresy of the Samosatan, having first alleged that Christ was a mere man.” [See vol. iii, p. 654, this series.]
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0196 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page