| << | Contents | >> |
Hippolytus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 864
Introductory Notice to Hippolytus.
[854] See [vol. i. p. 348, this series, where it is Saturninus]; Irenæus, i. 24; [vol. iii., this series, p. 649]; Tertullian, Præscript. xlvi.; Epiphanius, Hær., xxiii.; Theodoret, Hær. Fab., i. 3; St. Augustine, Hær., iii. Eusebius styles this heretic Saturninus.
[855] Epiphanius makes Basilides and Saturnilus belong to the same school.
[856] φαεινῆς: Miller reads φωνῆς.
[858] Miller reads “the Father.”
[859] Or, “world-making.”
[860] See [vol. i. p. 352, this series]; Irenæus i. 27; [vol. iii., this series especially p. 257], Tertullian, Adv. Marc., and Præscript., xxx.; Epiphanius, Hær., xlii.; Theodoret, Hær. Fab., i. 24; Eusebius., Hist. Ecclesiast., v. 13, 16; and St. Augustine, Hær., xxii.
[861] Or, “quarrelsome,” or, “frantic.”
[862] Hippolytus’ discussion respecting the heresy of Marcion is chiefly interesting from the light which it throws on the philosophy of Empedocles.
[863] These are lines 55–57 in Karsten’s edition of a collection of the Empedoclean verses.
[864] These are lines 110, 111, in Stein’s edition of Empedocles.
[865] Lines 360–362 (ed. Karst.).
[866] Line 7 (Karsten), 381 (Stein).
[867] Line 4 (Karsten), 372, 373 (Stein).
[868] Line 5 (Karsten), 374 (Stein).
[869] Line 6 (Karsten), 375, 376 (Stein).
[870] Lines 16–19 (Karsten), 377–380(Stein).
[871] Lines 1, 2 (Karsten), 369, 370 (Stein).
[872] The text of these verses, as given by Hippolytus, is obviously corrupt, and therefore obscure. Schneidewin has furnished an emended copy of them (Philol., vi. 166), which the translator has mostly adopted. (See Stein’s edition of the Empedoclean Verses, line 222 et seq.)
Chapter XVIII.—Source of Marcionism; Empedocles Reasserted as the Suggester of the Heresy.
[873] ὁ κολοβοδάκτυλος. Bunsen [more suo, vol. i., p. 89] considers this a corrupt reading, and suggests καλῶν λόγων διδάσκαλος, i.e., “a teacher of good words,” i.e., an evangelist, which word, as just used, he does not wish to repeat. The Abbe Cruice denies the necessity for any such emendation, and refers us to an article in the Journal of Classical and Sacred Philology (Cambridge, March, 1855), the writer of which maintains, on the authority of St. Jerome, that St. Mark had amputated his thumb, in order that he might be considered disqualified for the priesthood.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0196 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page