Irenæus

Footnotes

Introductory Note to Irenæus Against Heresies

Chapter XIII—Refutation of the opinion, that Paul was the only apostle who had knowledge of the truth.

^[3529] All the previous editors accept the reading Deum without remark, but Harvey argues that it must be regarded as a mistake for Dominum. He scarcely seems, however, to give sufficient weight to the quotation which immediately follows.

^[3530] 1 Cor. xv. 11.

^[3531] See note 9, p. 436.

^[3532] John xiv. 7, 9, 10.

^[3533] Matt. x. 6.

^[3534] Matt. xvi. 17.

^[3535] Gal. i. 1.

^[3536] Some such supplement seems necessary, as Grabe suggests, though Harvey contends that no apodosis is requisite.

^[3537] Gal. ii. 1, 2.

^[3538] Latin, “Ad horam cessimus subjectioni” (Gal. ii. 5). Irenæus gives it an altogether different meaning from that which it has in the received text. Jerome says that there was as much variation in the copies of Scripture in his day with regard to the passage,—some retaining, others rejecting the negative (Adv. Marc. v. 3).

Chapter XIV.—If Paul had known any mysteries unrevealed to the other apostles, Luke, his constant companion and fellow-traveller, could not have been ignorant of them; neither could the truth have possibly lain hid from him, through whom alone we learn many and most important particulars of the Gospel history.

^[3539] Acts xvi. 8, etc.

^[3540] Acts xvi. 13.

^[3541] Acts xx. 5, 6.

^[3542] Acts xxi.

^[3543] Acts xxvii.

^[3544] Acts xxviii. 11.

^[3545] 2 Tim. iv. 10, 11.

^[3546] Col. iv. 14.

10 per page

Search Comments

This page has been visited 0428 times.

Contents