| << | Contents | >> |
Hippolytus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 314
Introductory Notice to Hippolytus.
[304] Or, “for creation is the Logos” (see Arat., Phænom., v. 332 et seq.).
[305] Arat., Phænom., v. 179.
Chapter XLIX.—Symbol of the Creature; And of Spirit; And of the Different Orders of Animals.
[306] i.e., literally a sea-monster (Cicero’s Pistrix); Arat., Phænom., v. 353 et seq.
[307] πρὸς αὐτοῖς ἤδη τοῖς τέρμασι γενόμενον τοῦ βίου. Some read τοῖς σπέρμασι, which yields no intelligible meaning.
[308] Sextus Empiricus, adv. Geom., 29 et seq. (See book vi. chap. xviii. of The Refutation.)
[309] The observations following have already been made in book i. of The Refutation.
[310] Some read ἄρσις.
[311] The Abbe Cruice refers to Censorinus (De Die Natali, cap. vii. et xiv.), who mentions that two numbers were held in veneration, the seventh (hebdomad) and ninth (ennead). The former was of use in curing corporeal disease, and ascribed to Apollo; the latter healed the diseases of the mind, and was attributed to the Muses.
[312] At foot of ms. occur the words, “Fourth Book of Philosophumena.”
[313] [Consult Bunsen, vol. i. p. 35, always interesting and ingeniously critical; nobody should neglect his work. But for a judicial mind, compare Dr. Wordsworth, p. 182.]
[314] The ms. employs the form Sithians, which is obviously not the correct one.
[315] This term κλεψίλογος is frequently applied by Hippolytus to the heretics.
[316] Miller has ἀποκαλύψας for παραλείψας. This, however, can bear no intelligible meaning, except we add some other word, as thus: “not even have I failed to disclose.” Schneidewin’s correction of ἀποκαλύψας into παραλείψας is obviously an improvement.
[317] Μεταλαβόντες; some read μετασχόντες, which it is presumed might be rendered, “sharing in the opinions which gave occasion to these heterodox doctrines.”
[318] i.e., ὄφις. This term has created the title “Ophites,” which may be regarded as the generic denomination for all the advocates of this phase of Gnosticism.
[319] The heresy of the Naasseni is adverted to by the other leading writers on heresy in the early age of the Church. See St. Irenæus, i. 34; Origen, Contr. Cels., vi. 28 (p. 291 et seq. ed. Spenc.); Tertullian, Præscr., c. 47; Theodoret, Hæretic. Fabul., i. 14; Epiphanius, Advers. Hæreses., xxv. and xxxvii.; St. Augustine, De Hæres., xvii.; Jerome, Comment. Epist. ad Galat., lib. ii. The Abbe Cruice reminds his readers that the Naasseni carried their doctrines into India, and refers to the Asiatic Researches (vol. x. p. 39).
[320] The Hebrew word is נָחָשׁ (nachash).
[321] παρὰ τὸν αὐτῶν λόγον. Bernaysius suggests for these words, πατέρα τῷ αὐτῷ λόγῳ. Schneidewin regards the emendation as an error, and Bunsen partly so. The latter would read, πατέρα τὸν αὐτῶν Λόγον, i.e., “The Naasseni honour the Father of all existent things, the Logos, as man and the Son of Man.”
[322] See Irenæus, Hær., i. 1.
[323] Geryon (see note, chap. iii.) is afterwards mentioned as a synonyme with Jordan, i.e., “flowing from earth” (γῆ ῥύων).
[324] γνῶσις,—a term often alluded to by St. John, and which gives its name “Gnosticism” to the various forms of the Ophitic heresy. The aphorism in the text is one that embodies a grand principle which lies at the root of all correct philosophy. In this and other instances it will be found that the system, however wild and incoherent in its theology, of the Naaseni and of some of the other Gnostic sects, was one which was constructed by a subtle analysis of thought, and by observation of nature.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0196 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page