| << | Contents | >> |
Irenæus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3059
Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies
[3049] That is, in human beings no doubt, thought (Nous) precedes speech (Logos).
[3051] Nothing is known of this writer. Several of the same name are mentioned by the ancients, but to none of them is a work named Theogonia ascribed. He is supposed to be the same poet as is cited by Athenæus, but that writer quotes from a work styled ᾽Αφροδίτης γοναι.
[3052] The Latin is “Cupidinem;” and Harvey here refers to Aristotle, who “quotes the authority of Hesiod and Parmenides as saying that Love is the eternal intellect, reducing Chaos into order.”
[3053] Compare, on the opinions of the philosophers referred to in this chapter, Hippolytus, Philosoph., book i.
[3054] Iliad, xiv. 201; vii. 99.
[3055] The Latin has here exemplum, corresponding doubtless to παράδειγμα, and referring to those ἰδέαι of all things which Plato supposed to have existed for ever in the divine mind.
[3056] [Our author’s demonstration of the essential harmony of Gnosticism with the old mythologies, and the philosophies of the heathen, explains the hold it seems to have gained among nominal converts to Christianity, and also the necessity for a painstaking refutation of what seem to us mere absurdities. The great merit of Irenæus is thus illustrated: he gave the death-blow to heathenism in extirpating heresy.]
[3057] The Latin text reads “sensibilia et insensata;” but these words, as Harvey observes, must be the translation of αἰσθητὰ καὶ ἀναίσθητα, —“the former referring to material objects of sense, the latter to the immaterial world of intellect.”
[3058] This clause is very obscure, and we are not sure if the above rendering brings out the real meaning of the author. Harvey takes a different view of it, and supposes the original Greek to have been, καὶ ἄλλας μὲν τῆς ὑποστάσεως ἀρχὰς εἶναι ἄλλας δὲ τῆς αἰσθήσεως καὶ τῆς οὐσίας. He then remarks: “The reader will observe that the word ὑπόστασις here means intellectual substance, οὐσία material; as in V. c. ult. The meaning therefore of the sentence will be, And they affirmed that the first principles of intellectual substance and of sensible and material existence were diverse, viz., unity was the exponent of the first, duality of the second.”
[3059] All the editors confess the above sentence hopelessly obscure. We have given Harvey’s conjectural translation.
[3060] Literally, “antiphrasis.”
[3061] 1 Tim. vi. 20. The text is, “Vocum novitates falsæ agnitionis,” καινοφωνίας having apparently been read in the Greek instead of κενοφωνίας as in Text. Rec.
[3062] Grabe and others insert “vel” between these words.
[3063] It seems necessary to regard these words as parenthetical, though the point is overlooked by all the editors.
[3065] “Decem” is of doubtful authority.
[3066] The text has “qui in labe facti sunt;” but, according to Harvey, “the sense requires πληρώματι instead of ἐκτρώματι in the original.”
[3067] Viz., the “Dii majorum gentium” of the Gentiles.
Chapter XV.—No account can be given of these productions.
[3068] Referring to numbers like 4, 5, 6, which do not correspond to any important fact in creation, as 7 e.g., does to the number of the planets.
[3069] The Latin text is here scarcely intelligible, and is variously pointed by the editors.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0428 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page