| << | Contents | >> |
Irenæus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3291
Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies
[3281] Harvey thinks that this parenthesis has fallen out of its proper place, and would insert it immediately after the opening period of the chapter.
[3282] It is a mistake of Irenæus to say that the doctrine of metempsychosis originated with Plato: it was first publicly taught by Pythagoras, who learned it from the Egyptians. Comp. Clem. Alex., Strom., i. 15: Herodot., ii. 123.
[3283] “In hominem conversi,” literally, “returning into man.”
[3284] “Possidet.” Massuet supposes this word to represent κυριεύει, “rules over” and Stieren κρατύνει, governs; while Harvey thinks the whole clause corresponds to κρατεῖ καὶ κυριεύει τοῦ σώματος, which we have rendered above.
[3285] Literally, none of things past.
[3286] The Latin text is here very confused, but the Greek original of the greater part of this section has happily been preserved. [This Father here anticipates in outline many ideas which St. Augustine afterwards corrected and elaborated.]
[3287] Grabe refers to Tertullian, De Anima, ch. vii., as making a similar statement. Massuet, on the other hand, denies that Irenæus here expresses an opinion like that of Tertullian in the passage referred to, and thinks that the special form (character) mentioned is to be understood as simply denoting individual spiritual properties. But his remarks are not satisfactory.
[3288] Luke xvi. 19, etc.
[3289] With Massuet and Stieren, we here supply esse.
[3290] Some read resurgeret, and others resurrexerit; we deem the former reading preferable.
[3293] As Massuet observes, this statement is to be understood in harmony with the repeated assertion of Irenæus that the wicked will exist in misery for ever. It refers not annihilation, but to deprivation of happiness.
[3294] Luke xvi. 11, quoted loosely from memory. Grabe, however, thinks they are cited from the apocryphal Gospel according to the Egyptians.
[3295] Comp. Justin Martyr, Dial. c. Tryph., ch. vi.
[3297] Ex defluxu, corresponding to ἐξ ἀποῤῥοίας in the Greek.
[3298] Eloæ here occurs in the Latin text, but Harvey supposes that the Greek had been ᾽Ελωείμ. He also remarks that Eloeuth (אֱלָהוּת) is the rabbinical abstract term, Godhead.
[3299] All that can be remarked on this is, that the Jews substituted the term Adonai (אֲדֹנַי) for the name Jehovah, as often as the latter occurred in the sacred text. The former might therefore be styled nameable.
[3300] The Latin text is, “aliquando autem duplicata litera delta cum aspiratione,” and Harvey supposes that the doubling of the Daleth would give “to the scarcely articulate א a more decidedly guttural character;” but the sense is extremely doubtful.
[3301] Instead of “nec posteaquam insurgere,” Feuardent and Massuet read “ne possit insurgere,” and include the clause in the definition of Addonai.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0428 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page