Appearance      Marker   

 

<<  Contents  >>

Irenæus

Footnotes

Show All Footnotes

Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3038

Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies

[3028] See chap xxiii. etc.

[3029] Viz., the Valentinians.

[3030] Rom. i. 25.

[3031] Gal. iv. 8.

[3032] Isa. xlvi. 9.

Chapter X.—Perverse interpretations of Scripture by the heretics: God created all things out of nothing, and not from pre-existent matter.

[3033] This clause is unintelligible in the Latin text: by a conjectural restoration of the Greek we have given the above translation.

[3034] Luke xviii. 27.

Chapter XI.—The heretics, from their disbelief of the truth, have fallen into an abyss of error: reasons for investigating their systems.

[3035] Playing upon the doctrines of the heretics with respect to vacuity and shade.

Chapter XII.—The Triacontad of the heretics errs both by defect and excess: Sophia could never have produced anything apart from her consort; Logos and Sige could not have been contemporaries.

[3036] The text vacillates between “dicemus” and “dicamus.”

[3037] This sentence is confused in the Latin text, but the meaning is evidently that given above.

[3038] It is difficult to see the meaning of “iterum” here. Harvey begins a new paragraph with this sentence.

[3039] ἐνδιάθετος —simply conceived in the mind—used in opposition to προφορικός, expressed.

[3040] Harvey remarks that “the author perhaps wrote Ορον (Horos), which was read by the translator ῞Ολον (totum).”

[3041] Since Soter does not occur among the various appellations of Horos mentioned by Irenæus (i. 11, 4), Grabe proposes to read Stauros, and Massuet Lytrotes; but Harvey conceives that the difficulty is explained by the fact that Horos was a power of Soter (i. 3, 3).

[3042] Irenæus here, after his custom, plays upon the word Bythus (profundity), which, in the phraseology of the Valentinians, was a name of the Propator, but is in this passage used to denote an unfathomable abyss.

Chapter XIII.—The first order of production maintained by the heretics is altogether indefensible.

[3043] This sentence appears to us, after long study, totally untranslateable. The general meaning seems to be, that whatever name is given to mental acts, whether they are called Ennœa, Enthymesis, or by whatever other appellation, they are all but exercises of the same fundamental power, styled Nous. Compare the following section.

[3044] “The following,” says Harvey, “may be considered to be consecutive steps in the evolution of λόγος as a psychological entity. Ennœa, conception; Enthymesis, intention; Sensation, thought; Consilium, reasoning; Cogitationis Examinatio, judgment; in Mente Perseverans, Λόγος ἐνδιάθετος; Emissibile Verbum, Λόγος προφοικός.”

[3045] That is, lest He should be thought destitute of power, as having been unable to prevent evil from having a place in creation.

[3046] Isa. lv. 8.

[3047] The Latin expression is “similimembrius,” which some regard as the translation of ὁμοιόκωλος, and others of ὁμοιομερής; but in either case the meaning will be as given above.

[3048] That is, His Nous, Ennœa, etc., can have no independent existence. The text fluctuates between “emittitur” and “emittetur.”

 

 

 

10 per page

 

 

 Search Comments 

 

This page has been visited 0428 times.

 

<<  Contents  >>