| << | Contents | >> |
Irenæus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3015
Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies
[3005] The Latin is fieri eos: Massuet conjectures that the Greek had been ποιεῖσθαι αὐτούς, and that the translator rendered ποιεῖσθαι as a passive instead of a middle verb, fieri for facere.
[3006] See above, chap. i.
[3007] The Latin text here is, “et concludentur tales cum patre suo ab eo qui est extra Pleroma, in quo etiam et desinere eos necesse est.” None of the editors notice the difficulty or obscurity of the clause, but it appears to us absolutely untranslateable. We have rendered it as if the reading were “ab eo quod,” though, if the strict grammatical construction be followed, the translation must be, “from Him who.” But then to what does “in quo,” which follows, refer? It may be ascribed either to the immediate antecedent Pleroma, or to Him who is described as being beyond it.
[3008] Chap. ii., iii., iv.
[3009] This is an extremely difficult passage. We follow the reading æternochoica adopted by Massuet, but Harvey reads æterna choica, and renders, “They charge all other substance (i.e., spiritual) with the imperfections of the material creation, as though Æon substance were equally ephemeral and choic.”
[3010] The common reading is “aut;” we adopt Harvey’s conjectural emendation of “at.”
[3011] The above clause is very obscure; Massuet reads it interrogatively.
[3012] The text has “antiquius,” literally “more ancient,” but it may here be rendered as above.
Chapter VI.—The angels and the Creator of the world could not have been ignorant of the Supreme God.
[3014] Massuet refers this to the Roman emperor.
Chapter VII.—Created things are not the images of those Æons who are within the Pleroma.
[3015] Harvey supposes that the translator here read ἤ quam instead of ᾗ quâ (gloria); but Grabe, Massuet, and Stieren prefer to delete erit.
[3016] Reference is here made to the supposed wretched state of Achamoth as lying in the region of shadow, vacuity, and, in fact, non-existence, until compassionated by the Christ above, who gave her form as respected substance.
[3017] We have literally translated the above very obscure sentence. According to Massuet, the sense is: “There will some time be, or perhaps even now there is, some Æon utterly destitute of such honour, inasmuch as those things which the Saviour, for the sake of honouring it, had formed after its image, have been destroyed; and then those things which are above will remain without honour,” etc.
[3018] The Saviour is here referred to, as having formed all things through means of Achamoth and the Demiurge.
[3019] Massuet deletes quem, and reads nūn as a genitive.
[3021] Dan. vii. 10, agreeing neither with the Greek nor Hebrew text.
[3022] This clause is exceedingly obscure. Harvey remarks upon it as follows: “The reasoning of Irenæus seems to be this: According to the Gnostic theory, the Æons and angels of the Pleroma were homogeneous. They were also the archetypes of things created. But things created are heterogeneous: therefore either these Æons are heterogeneous, which is contrary to theory; or things created are homogeneous, which is contrary to fact.”
[3023] Literally, “from Himself.”
Chapter VIII.—Created things are not a shadow of the Pleroma.
[3024] See above, chap. ii. and v.
[3025] The text has fabricâsse, for which, says Massuet, should be read fabricatam esse; or fabricâsse itself must be taken in a passive signification. It is possible, however, to translate, as Harvey indicates, “that He (Bythus) formed so great a creation by angels,” etc., though this seems harsh and unsuitable.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0428 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page