| << | Contents | >> |
Irenæus
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 3298
Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies
[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.
[3302] The author is here utterly mistaken, and, notwithstanding Harvey’s earnest claim for him of a knowledge of Hebrew, seems clearly to betray his ignorance of that language. The term Sabaoth is never written with an Omicron, either in the LXX. or by the Greek Fathers, but always with an Omega (Σαβαώθ). Although Harvey remarks in his preface, that “It is hoped the Hebrew attainments of Irenæus will no longer be denied,” there appears enough, in the etymologies and explanations of Hebrew terms given in this chapter by the venerable Father, to prevent such a conclusion; and Massuet’s observation on the passage seems not improbable, when he says, “Sciolus quispiam Irenæo nostro, in Hebraicis haud satis perito, hic fucum ecisse videtur.”
[3303] Probably corresponding to the Hebrew term Jehovah (יְהֹוָה)
[3304] Literally, “belong to one and the same name.”
[3305] “Secundum Latinitatem” in the text.
[3306] The words are “apostolorum dictatio,” probably referring to the letters of the apostles, as distinguished from their preaching already mentioned.
[3307] This last sentence is very confused and ambiguous, and the editors throw but little light upon it. We have endeavoured to translate it according to the ordinary text and punctuation, but strongly suspect interpolation and corruption. If we might venture to strike out “has Scripturas,” and connect “his tamen” with “prædicantibus,” a better sense would be yielded, as follows: “But that I may not be thought to avoid that series of proofs which may be derived from the Scriptures of the Lord (since, indeed, these Scriptures to much more evidently and clearly set forth this very point, to those at least who do not bring a depraved mind to their consideration), I shall devote the particular book which follows to them, and shall,” etc.
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0428 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page