| << | Contents | >> |
Hippolytus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 939
Introductory Notice to Hippolytus.
[929] Iliad, xiv. 201, 246.
[930] Or, “kinglessly,” which has no meaning here. Miller therefore alters ἀβασιλεύτως into ἀβουλήτως.
[931] An allusion is evidently made to the opening chapter of St. John’s Gospel. Monoïmus, like Basilides, seems to have formed his system from the prologue to the fourth Gospel.
Chapter VI.—Monoïmus’ “Iota;” His Notion of the “Son of Man.”
[932] The iota with a little mark placed above, signifies ten; thus, ι = 10.
Chapter VII.—Monoïmus on the Sabbath; Allegorizes the Rod of Moses; Notion Concerning the Decalogue.
[935] The plagues, being transformations, were no doubt considered symbols of creation, in accordance with the view of the ancient philosophers, that creation itself brought nothing into existence, but simply altered the disposition of already existing elements. [Gen. i. 2. See Dr. Chalmers’ Astronomical Discourses.]
[936] It is very much after this allegorical mode that Philo Judæus interprets the Mosaic law and history.
[937] [Exod. 12.17; 1 Cor. 5. 7,8.]
[939] Literally, “nobly born.”
[940] See [vol. i. pp. 353, 457. But see his works, vol. ii. p. 61, this series]; Irenæus, i. 28; Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., iv. 16, v. 13; Epiphanius, Hær., xlvi.; Jerome, Vir. Illustr., c. xxix.; and Theodoret, Hær. Fab., i. 20.
[941] See [vol. iii. p. 257, also p. 477] Tertullian, Præscript., c. xxx.; [vol. iv. p. 245, this series] Origen, Περὶ ἀρχ., i. 2; Eusebius, De Præp., vii. 8, 9; St. Augustine, Hær., lix.; Theodoret, Hær. Fab., i. 19; and Philastrius, Hær., lv.
[942] Literally, “unadorned.”
Chapter XI.—The Quartodecimans.
[944] They were therefore called “Quartodecimans.” (See Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., v. c. xxii. xxv.; Epiphanius, Hær., l.; and Theodoret, Hær. Fab., iii. 4.)
[945] [Bunsen, i. p. 105.] The chapter on the Quartodecimans agrees with the arguments which, we are informed in an extract from Hippolytus’ Chronicon Paschale, as preserved in a quotation by Bishop Peter of Alexandria, were employed in his Treatise against all Heresies. This would seem irrefragable proof of the authorship of the Refutation of all Heresies.
[947] [He regards the Christian Paschal as authorized. 1 Cor. v. 7, 8.]
Chapter XII.—The Montanists; Priscilla and Maximilla Their Prophetesses; Some of Them Noetians.
[948] These heretics had several denominations: (1) Phrygians and Cataphrygians, from Phrygia; (2) Pepuzians, from a village in Phrygia of this name; (3) Priscillianists; (4) Quintillists. See Eusebius, Hist. Ecclesiast., iv. 27, v. 16, 18; Epiphanius, Hær., xlviii.; Theodoret, Hær. Fab., iii. 2; Philastrius, xlix.; and St. Augustine, Hær., xxvi. [The “Tertullianists” were a class by themselves, which is a fact going far to encourage the idea that they did not share the worst of these delusions.]
[949] Bunsen thinks that Hippolytus is rather meagre in his details of the heresy of the Phrygians or Montanists, but considers this, with other instances, a proof that parts of The Refutation are only abstracts of more extended accounts.
Chapter XIII.—The Doctrines of the Encratites.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0196 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page