Appearance      Marker   

 

<<

Contents

>>

Anti-Marcion

Footnotes

Introduction, by the American Editor.

^[1846] “From Marlboro’s eyes the tears of dotage flow,

And Swift expires a driveller and a show.”

^[1847] See the story of the Abbé Paris, Guettée, Histoire de L’Eglise de France, Tom. xii. p. 12. Also, Parton, Voltaire, Vol. I. pp. 236, 261, etc.

^[1848] See opp. Tom. viii. p. 46, Ed. Migne.

^[1849] Take e.g. the heading to chapter xxiv. of the De Præscriptione. It reads thus: “St. Peter’s further vindication. St. Paul was not at all superior to St. Peter in teaching. Nothing was imparted to the former, in the “third heaven,” to enable him to add to the faith—however foolishly the heretics may boast of him as if they had, forsooth, been favoured with some of the secrets so imparted to him in paradise.” If the reader will turn to the chapter referred to, he will observe an instance of condensation by which nothing is forfeited that is requisite to a heading, though redundancies are dropped.

I. The Prescription Against Heretics.

^[1850] Of the various forms of the title of this treatise, de Præscriptione Hæreticorum, de Præscriptionibus Hæreticorum, de Præscriptionibus adversus Hæreticos, the first is adopted by Oehler after the oldest authorities, such as the Liber Argobardinus and the Codex Paterniacensis (or Seletstadiensis), and the Editio Princeps of Rhenanus. The term præscriptio is a legal one, meaning a demurrer, or formal objection. The genitive hæreticorum is used in an objective sense, as if adversus hæreticos. Tertullian himself, in de Carne Christi, ii. says, “Sed plenius ejusmodi præscriptionibus adversus omnes hæreses alibi jam usi sumus.” The title therefore means, “On the Church’s Prescriptive Rule against Heresies of all kinds.” [Elucidation I.]

Chapter I.—Introductory. Heresies Must Exist, and Even Abound; They are a Probation to Faith.

^[1851] Istas.

^[1852] Matt. vii. 15; xxiv. 4, 11, 24; 1 Tim. iv. 1-3; 2 Pet. ii. 1.

^[1853] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

^[1854] Plerique, “the majority.”

^[1855] The Holy Ghost having foretold that they should exist. (Rigalt.)

Chapter II.—Analogy Between Fevers and Heresies. Heresies Not to Be Wondered At: Their Strength Derived from Weakness of Men’s Faith. They Have Not the Truth. Simile of Pugilists and Gladiators in Illustration.

^[1856] Denique has in Tertullian sometimes the meaning of proinde.

^[1857] Causam “purpose,” “final cause.”

Chapter III.—Weak People Fall an Easy Prey to Heresy, Which Derives Strength from the General Frailty of Mankind. Eminent Men Have Fallen from Faith; Saul, David, Solomon. The Constancy of Christ.

^[1858] Usitatissimi, “most experienced.”

^[1859] Demutare.

^[1860] 1 Sam. xviii. 8, 9.

^[1861] 1 Sam. xiii. 14.

^[1862] 2 Sam. xi.

^[1863] 1 Kings xi. 4.

^[1864] Heb. iv. 15. [See p. 221, supra.]

^[1865] [Here the word martyr means no more than a witness or confessor, and may account for what are called exaggerated statements as to the number of primitive martyrs. See Kaye p. 128.]

^[1866] Obtinere.

^[1867] Fidem, “The Creed.”

^[1868] Major.

^[1869] Matt. x. 22.

^[1870] Jer. xxxii. 19.

^[1871] 1 Sam. xvi. 7.

^[1872] 2 Tim. ii. 19.

^[1873] Matt. xv. 13.

^[1874] Matt. xx. 16.

^[1875] Matt. iii. 12.

^[1876] John vi. 66.

^[1877] A vestigiis ejus.

^[1878] John 1.1; 6.68; 16.30.

^[1879] John vi. 67.

^[1880] Minus.

^[1881] 2 Tim. i. 15; ii. 17; 1 Tim. i. 20.

^[1882] 1 John ii. 19. [i.e., with the Apostolic Churches. See Cap. xx, infra.]

Chapter IV.—Warnings Against Heresy Given Us in the New Testament. Sundry Passages Adduced. These Imply the Possibility of Falling into Heresy.

^[1883] Matt. vii. 15.

^[1884] Adulteri evangelizatores, the spurious preachers of the gospel. [Galat. i. 8, 9, an example of Apostolic præscription.]

^[1885] Hoc scil. “tempore.”

^[1886] Oehler’s “persecutionem” ought of course to be “persecutionum.”

^[1887] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

^[1888] Exorbitaverint.

^[1889] Juvat.

^[1890] 1 Thess. v. 21. [But Truth is to be demonstrated as a theorem, not treated as a problem of which we must seek the solution.]

Chapter V.—Heresy, as Well as Schism and Dissension, Disapproved by St. Paul, Who Speaks of the Necessity of Heresies, Not as a Good, But, by the Will of God, Salutary Trials for Training and Approving the Faith of Christians.

^[1891] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

^[1892] 1 Cor. xi. 18.

^[1893] Depravare.

^[1894] Capitulum.

^[1895] Objurget.

^[1896] 1 Cor. i. 10.

Chapter VI.—Heretics are Self-Condemned. Heresy is Self-Will, Whilst Faith is Submission of Our Will to the Divine Authority. The Heresy of Apelles.

^[1897] Gal. v. 20.

^[1898] Tit. iii. 10, 11.

^[1899] Taxat.

^[1900] Opera.

^[1901] Αἱρέσεις.

^[1902] Instituendas.

^[1903] Suscipiendas.

^[1904] [A remarkable word is subjoined by the Apostle (ἐξέστραπται) which signifies turned inside out, and so self-condemned, as exhibiting his inward contentiousness and pravity.

^[1905] Nihil, any doctrine.

^[1906] Disciplinam, including both the principles and practice of the Christian religion.

^[1907] Anathema. See Gal. i. 8.

^[1908] Concerning Philumene, see below, chap. xxv.; Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. v. 13; Augustine, de Hæres, chap. xlii. ; Jerome, Epist. adv. Ctesiph. (Works, ed. Ben.) iv. 477, and in his Commentary on Galatians, ii. See also Tertullian, Against Marcion, p. 139, Edinb. Edition.

^[1909] 2 Cor. xi. 14.

^[1910] Præstigiis.

Chapter VII.—Pagan Philosophy the Parent of Heresies. The Connection Between Deflections from Christian Faith and the Old Systems of Pagan Philosophy.

^[1911] 1 Tim. iv. 1.

^[1912] 1 Cor. 3.18, 25.

^[1913] Denique.

^[1914] Subornantur.

^[1915] Formeæ, “Ideæ” (Oehler).

^[1916] See Tertullian’s treatises, adversus Valentinum, xxv., and de Anima, xxi.; also Epiphanius, Hær. xxxi . 23.

^[1917] Volutatur.

^[1918] Retractatus.

^[1919] “De enthymesi;” for this word Tertullian gives animationem (in his tract against Valentinus, ix.), which seems to mean, “the mind in operation.” (See the same treatise, x. xi.) With regard to the other word, Jerome (on Amos. iii.) adduces Valentinus as calling Christ ἔκτρωμα, that is, abortion.

^[1920] Sententiis.

^[1921] Molestam.

^[1922] Tractaverit, in the sense of conclusively settling.

^[1923] 1 Tim. i. 4.

^[1924] Tit. iii. 9.

^[1925] 2 Tim. ii. 17.

^[1926] Col. ii. 8. The last clause, “præter providentiam Spiritus Sancti,” is either Tertullian’s reading, or his gloss of the apostle’s οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν—“not after Christ.”

^[1927] Because in the beginning of the church the apostles taught in Solomon’s porch,Acts iii. 5.

^[1928] Wisd. 1.1.

^[1929] Viderint.

Chapter VIII.—Christ’s Word, Seek, and Ye Shall Find, No Warrant for Heretical Deviations from the Faith. All Christ’s Words to the Jews are for Us, Not Indeed as Specific Commands, But as Principles to Be Applied.

^[1930] Curiositatem.

^[1931] Scrupulositatem, “hair-splitting.”

^[1932] Matt. vii. 7.

^[1933] See our translation of the Anti-Marcion, iv. 18 (infra), and Tertullian’s treatise, de Bapt. x.

^[1934] Sermo.

^[1935] Suggillationis.

^[1936] Luke xvi. 29.

^[1937] John v. 39.

^[1938] Matt. vii. 7.

^[1939] Penes.

^[1940] Or, “were for the first time.”

^[1941] Isa. xl. 15.

^[1942] Matt. vii. 7.

^[1943] Competit.

^[1944] Matt. xv. 24.

^[1945] Matt. 15.26.

^[1946] Matt. x. 5.

^[1947] Matt. xxviii. 19.

^[1948] John xvi. 13.

^[1949] Destinati.

^[1950] Multo magis vacabat.

^[1951] Ultro.

^[1952] Doctrina.

^[1953] In personas, i.e., Judæorum (Oehler).

^[1954] Proprietatem admonitionis.

^[1955] “That is, not a specific command” primarily meant for us, but a principle “to be applied by us” (Dodgson).

Chapter IX.—The Research After Definite Truth Enjoined on Us. When We Have Discovered This, We Should Be Content.

^[1956] Sponte.

^[1957] Expetit.

^[1958] Certare.

^[1959] Sensus.

^[1960] Cum.

^[1961] See Oehler’s note.

^[1962] Gubernaculo. See Irenæus, ii. 46, for a similar view (Rigalt.). Surely Dodgson’s version, if intelligible in itself even, incorrectly represents Tertullian’s sense.

^[1963] Dissoluta.

^[1964] Porro.

^[1965] [Not to be contented with Truth, once known, is a sin preceding that against the Holy Spirit, and this state of mind explains the judicial blindness inflicted on Lapsers, as asserted by St. Paul, 2 Thess. ii. 10, 13, where note—“they received not the love of the truth.” They had it and were not content with it.]

^[1966] Constabit.

^[1967] Penes nos.

^[1968] Ne.

Chapter X.—One Has Succeeded in Finding Definite Truth, When He Believes. Heretical Wits are Always Offering Many Things for Vain Discussion, But We are Not to Be Always Seeking.

^[1969] In modo.

^[1970] This is, “the matter.”

^[1971] “The time.”

^[1972] “The limit.”

^[1973] Invenisti.

^[1974] Fixisti, “determined.”

^[1975] Fossam.

^[1976] Statio, “resting-place.”

^[1977] Dum convenero.

^[1978] This is the rendering of Oehler’s text, “et velut si nusquam. There are other readings of this obscure passage, of which as we add the two most intelligible. The Codex Agobardinus has, “et velim si nunquam;” that is, “and I would that I were nowhere,” with no fixed belief—in such wise as never to have had the truth; not, as must now be, to have forfeited it. (Dodgson). This seems far-fetched, and inferior to the reading of Pamelius and his mss.: “et velint me sic esse nusquam;”—or (as Semler puts it) “velint sic nusquam;” i.e., “and they (the heretics) would wish me to be nowhere”—without the fixed faith of the Catholic. This makes good sense. [Semler is here mentioned, and if anybody wishes to understand what sort of editor he was, he may be greatly amused by Kaye’s examination of some of his positions, pp. 64–84. Elucidation II.]

^[1979] Oportet.

^[1980] Necesse est. Observe these degrees of obligation.

Chapter XI.—After We Have Believed, Search Should Cease; Otherwise It Must End in a Denial of What We Have Believed. No Other Object Proposed for Our Faith.

^[1981] Quamvis et errare delinquere est.

^[1982] Vagatur.

^[1983] Anus illa.

^[1984] Luke xv. 8.

^[1985] Luke xi. 5.

^[1986] Luke xviii. 2, 3.

^[1987] Luke xi. 9.

^[1988] Viderit.

Chapter XII.—A Proper Seeking After Divine Knowledge, Which Will Never Be Out of Place or Excessive, is Always Within the Rule of Faith.

^[1989] Extranea.

^[1990] Although Tertullian calls her “anus,” St. Luke’s word is γυνή not γραῦς.

^[1991] Instrui potest.

^[1992] Unde destruitur.

^[1993] Idque dumtaxat.

Chapter XIII.—Summary of the Creed, or Rule of Faith. No Questions Ever Raised About It by Believers. Heretics Encourage and Perpetuate Thought Independent of Christ’s Teaching.

^[1994] Jam hinc.

^[1995] Primo omnium demissum. Literally, “sent down.” See on this procession of the Son of God to create the world, Bishop Bull’s Defence of the Nicene Creed, etc., by the translator of this work, pp. 445 and following.

^[1996] Ereptum, having been taken away.

^[1997] Vicariam. [Scott’s Christian Life, Vol. III. p. 64.]

^[1998] [See Bunsen (Hippol. III. Notes, etc., p. 129.) for a castigated form of the Latin Creed, as used in Rome. Observe it lacks the word Catholic. But a much better study of these formulas may be found in Dupin’s comparative Table. First Cent. pp. 9–12.]

Chapter XIV.—Curiosity Ought Not Range Beyond the Rule of Faith. Restless Curiosity, the Feature of Heresy.

^[1999] Omnem libidinem effundas, “pour out the whole desire for.”

^[2000] Doctor, literally, “teacher.” See Eph. iv. 11; also above; chap. iii. p. 244.

^[2001] This seems to be the more probable meaning of novissime in this rather obscure sentence. Oehler treats it adverbially as “postremo,” and refers to a similar use of the word below in chap. xxx. Dr. Routh (and, after him, the translator in The Library of the Fathers, Tertullian, p. 448) makes the word a noun, “thou newest of novices,” and refers to Tertullian’s work, against Praxeas, chap. xxvii., for a like use. This seems to us too harsh for the present context.

^[2002] Sciet.

^[2003] See 1 Cor. xii. 8.

^[2004] Luke xviii. 42.

^[2005] Exercitatio.

^[2006] Exercitatio.

^[2007] De peritiæ studio.

^[2008] Non obstrepant.

^[2009] Interim.

^[2010] Dubitationem.

^[2011] Matt. xv. 14.

^[2012] Insinuent.

^[2013] Tractatus.

^[2014] Or, “by instilling an anxiety into us” (Dodgson).

^[2015] Jam debemus.

^[2016] Refutare.

^[2017] Nondum tenent.

^[2018] Ut defendant.

^[2019] Nec sibi sunt.

^[2020] Patrocinantur.

^[2021] Ipsi.

^[2022] Scilicet.

Chapter XV.—Heretics Not to Be Allowed to Argue Out of the Scriptures. The Scriptures, in Fact, Do Not Belong to Them.

^[2023] [See Marcion, B. I. Cap. xxii. infra, note.]

^[2024] Obtendunt.

^[2025] Audacia.

^[2026] De Scripturis. But as this preposition is often the sign of the instrument in Tertullian, this phrase may mean “out of,” or “by means of the Scriptures.” See the last chapter.

^[2027] De consilio diffidentiæ.

^[2028] Constitutionis, “prima causarum conflictio,”—a term of the law courts.

^[2029] Obsequium.

^[2030] 1 Tim. vi. 3, 4.

^[2031] Tit. iii. 10.

^[2032] Matt. xviii. 16.

^[2033] Plane, ironical.

Chapter XVII.—Heretics, in Fact, Do Not Use, But Only Abuse, Scripture. No Common Ground Between Them and You.

^[2034] Ista hæresis.

^[2035] Aliquatenus.

^[2036] Stilus.

^[2037] “De” has often the sense of “propter” in our author.

^[2038] Literally, “O most skilled.”

^[2039] Quid promovebis.

Chapter XVIII.—Great Evil Ensues to the Weak in Faith, from Any Discussion Out of the Scriptures. Conviction Never Comes to the Heretic from Such a Process.

^[2040] Or, “from the Scriptures.”

^[2041] Æquo gradu.

^[2042] Statu certe pari.

^[2043] Incertior.

^[2044] Habent.

^[2045] Proinde.

Chapter XIX.—Appeal, in Discussion of Heresy, Lies Not to the Scriptures. The Scriptures Belong Only to Those Who Have the Rule of Faith.

^[2046] Nulla.

^[2047] Parum certa.

^[2048] Conlatio scripturarum, or, “a polemical comparison of the Scriptures.”

^[2049] Quibus competat fides ipsa cujus sint Scripturæ.

^[2050] Disciplina [or, where was the guide-post set?]

Chapter XX.—Christ First Delivered the Faith. The Apostles Spread It; They Founded Churches as the Depositories Thereof. That Faith, Therefore, is Apostolic, Which Descended from the Apostles, Through Apostolic Churches.

^[2051] Mark iv. 34.

^[2052] Matt. xxviii. 19.

^[2053] Ps. cix. 8; comp. with Acts i. 15-20.

^[2054] Traducem fidei.

^[2055] Mutuantur “borrowing.”

^[2056] Omne genus.

^[2057] Censeatur or, “for its origin.”

^[2058] Communicatio pacis.

^[2059] Contesseratio. [3 John 8.]

^[2060] Jura, “rights.”

^[2061] That is, of the faith, or Christian creed.

Chapter XXI.—All Doctrine True Which Comes Through the Church from the Apostles, Who Were Taught by God Through Christ. All Opinion Which Has No Such Divine Origin and Apostolic Tradition to Show, is Ipso Facto False.

^[2062] Matt. xi. 27.

^[2063] Perinde.

^[2064] Matricibus.

^[2065] Præjudicandam. [This then is Præscription.]

^[2066] De mendacio.

^[2067] Censeatur.

^[2068] Ex hoc ipso, “from this very circumstance.”

Chapter XXII.—Attempt to Invalidate This Rule of Faith Rebutted. The Apostles Safe Transmitters of the Truth. Sufficiently Taught at First, and Faithful in the Transmission.

^[2069] Expedita.

^[2070] Susam rursus convertun.

^[2071] Magistros.

^[2072] Mark iv. 34.

^[2073] Matt. xiii. 11.

^[2074] Matt. xvi. 18. [See Kaye p. 222, also Elucidation II.]

^[2075] Matt. 16.19.

^[2076] Matt. 16.19.

^[2077] John xxi. 20.

^[2078] John xiii. 25. [N.B. loco suo.]

^[2079] John xix. 26.

^[2080] Matt. xvii. 1-8.

^[2081] Reprobans.

^[2082] Deut. 19.15; 2 Cor. 13.1.

^[2083] Itaque, ironical.

^[2084] Luke xxiv. 27.

^[2085] Plane.

^[2086] John xvi. 12, 13.

^[2087] See Tertullian’s Anti-Marcion, iv. 5, and v. 2 (Trans. pp. 187 and 377).

^[2088] Nec ecclesiam se dicant defendere.

^[2089] Incunabulis, infant nursing.

^[2090] Traductiones.

Chapter XXIII.—The Apostles Not Ignorant. The Heretical Pretence of St. Peter’s Imperfection Because He Was Rebuked by St. Paul. St. Peter Not Rebuked for Error in Teaching.

^[2091] Suggillandam.

^[2092] Gal. i. 13.

^[2093] John v. 31.

^[2094] Ut credunt contra Scripturas.

^[2095] Atquin.

^[2096] Gal. i. 18.

^[2097] Scilicet.

^[2098] Gal. i. 24.

^[2099] Gal. ii. 9.

^[2100] The same verse. [Note Peter’s restriction to Jews.]

^[2101] Gal. 2.12,13. See also Anti-Marcion, iv. 3 (Trans. p. 182).

Chapter XXIV.—St. Peter’s Further Vindication. St. Paul Not Superior to St. Peter in Teaching. Nothing Imparted to the Former in the Third Heaven Enabled Him to Add to the Faith. Heretics Boast as If Favoured with Some of the Secrets Imparted to Him.

^[2102] Non mihi tam bene est.

^[2103] Immo.

^[2104] Non mihi tam male est.

^[2105] Ut committam.

^[2106] Superiorem, “that which Peter had preached.”

^[2107] 1 Cor. ix. 20, 22.

^[2108] Viderint.

^[2109] Et in martyrio.

^[2110] 2 Cor. xii. 4.

^[2111] Nulli hominum.

^[2112] Nescio quid illud.

^[2113] Emanavit.

^[2114] Et.

Chapter XXV.—The Apostles Did Not Keep Back Any of the Deposit of Doctrine Which Christ Had Entrusted to Them. St. Paul Openly Committed His Whole Doctrine to Timothy.

^[2115] Above, in chap. xxii. [Note the Gnostic madness of such a plea. Kaye, p. 235 and Elucidation IV.]

^[2116] 1 Tim. vi. 20.

^[2117] 2 Tim. i. 14.

^[2118] Ut alterius doctrinæ deputetur.

^[2119] 1 Tim. i. 18.

^[2120] 1 Tim. vi. 13.

^[2121] Nescis quid.

^[2122] Remotiore.

^[2123] 2 Tim. ii. 2.

^[2124] 2 Tim. ii. 2.

^[2125] Apud conscientiam. [Clement of Alexandria is to be interpreted by Tertullian, with whom he does not essentially differ. For Clement’s Esoteric Doctrine (See Vol. II. pp. 302, 313, etc.) is defined as perfecting the type of the Christian by the strong meat of Truth, of which the entire deposit is presupposed as common to all Christians. We must not blame Clement for the abuse of his teaching by perverters of Truth itself.]

Chapter XXVI.—The Apostles Did in All Cases Teach the Whole Truth to the Whole Church. No Reservation, Nor Partial Communication to Favourite Friends.

^[2126] Passim.

^[2127] Inconsiderate.

^[2128] Matt. vii. 6.

^[2129] John xviii. 20.

^[2130] Matt. x. 27.

^[2131] Luke xix. 20-24.

^[2132] Matt. v. 15.

^[2133] Literally, “the violence of neither Jew nor Gentile.”

^[2134] Luke i. 1.

^[2135] Domesticos. [All this interprets Clement and utterly deprives the Trent System of its appeal to a secret doctrine, against our Præscription.]

^[2136] Catholice, or, “which they were bringing before the public in catholic way.”

^[2137] 1 Cor. i. 10.

^[2138] Matt. v. 37.

Chapter XXVII.—Granted that the Apostles Transmitted the Whole Doctrine of Truth, May Not the Churches Have Been Unfaithful in Handing It On? Inconceivable that This Can Have Been the Case.

^[2139] Plenitudinem prædicationis.

^[2140] Scrupulositatis.

^[2141] Gal. iii. 1.

^[2142] Gal. v. 7.

^[2143] Gal. i. 6.

^[2144] 1 Cor. iii. 1, and following verses.

^[2145] 1 Cor. viii. 2.

Chapter XXVIII.—The One Tradition of the Faith, Which is Substantially Alike in the Churches Everywhere, a Good Proof that the Transmission Has Been True and Honest in the Main.

^[2146] John xiv. 26.

^[2147] John xv. 26.

^[2148] [Tertullian knows no other Vicar of Christ than the Holy Spirit. They who attribute infallibility to any mortal man become Montanists; they attribute the Paraclete’s voice to their oracle.]

^[2149] Audeat.

Chapter XXIX.—The Truth Not Indebted to the Care of the Heretics; It Had Free Course Before They Appeared. Priority of the Church’s Doctrine a Mark of Its Truth.

^[2150] Utique, ironical.

^[2151] Perperam.

^[2152] Virtutes, “potestatem edendi miracula” (Oehler).

^[2153] Charismata.

^[2154] Ministeria. Another reading has mysteria, “mysteries” or “sacraments.”

^[2155] Gal. i. 8. [In this chapter (xxix.) the principle of Prescription is condensed and brought to the needle-point—Quod semper. If you can’t show that your doctrine was always taught, it is false: and this is “Prescription.”]

Chapter XXX.—Comparative Lateness of Heresies. Marcion’s Heresy. Some Personal Facts About Him. The Heresy of Apelles. Character of This Man; Philumene; Valentinus; Nigidius, and Hermogenes.

^[2156] Fere.

^[2157] [Kaye, p. 226.]

^[2158] See adv. Marcion, iv. 4. infra.

^[2159] Enim, profecto (Oehler).

^[2160] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

^[2161] Mark. xiv. 21.

^[2162] Stemma. The reading of the Cod. Agobard. is “stigma,” which gives very good sense.

^[2163] Vetus.

^[2164] Sanctissimi. This may be an ironical allusion to Marcion’s repudiation of marriage.

^[2165] Impegit.

^[2166] In chap. vi. p. 246 above.

^[2167] Energemate. Oehler defines this word, “vis et efficacia dæmonum, quibus agebatur.” [But see Lardner, Credib. viii. p. 540.]

^[2168] Matt. vii. 16.

^[2169] Sine dubio.

^[2170] Alterius fuisse. One reading is anterius; i.e., “demonstrates the priority” of the book he alters.

^[2171] Frequentiores.

^[2172] Nescio qui.

^[2173] Ambulant.

^[2174] Compare de Carne Christi, chap. ii. [Elucidation IV.]

^[2175] Christ; so Routh.

^[2176] We add Oehler’s reading of this obscure passage: “Sic enim apostolus descripsit, sic enim apostolos solet facere, dare præterea illis virtutem eadem signa edendi quæ et ipse.” [“It is worthy of remark” (says Kaye, p. 95), “that he does not appeal to any instance of the exercise of miraculous powers in his own day.”]

Chapter XXXI.—Truth First, Falsehood Afterwards, as Its Perversion. Christ’s Parable Puts the Sowing of the Good Seed Before the Useless Tares.

^[2177] Ab excessu.

^[2178] Disputandam. Another reading has deputandam, i.e., “to attribute.”

^[2179] Posteritatem.

^[2180] Nulla constantia de conscientia, “no conscientious ground of confidence” (Dodgson).

Chapter XXXII.—None of the Heretics Claim Succession from the Apostles. New Churches Still Apostolic, Because Their Faith is that Which the Apostles Taught and Handed Down. The Heretics Challenged to Show Any Apostolic Credentials.

^[2181] Origines, “the originals” (Dodgson).

^[2182] Ille. A touch of irony occurs in the phrase “primus ille episcopus.”

^[2183] Deferunt.

^[2184] Fastos.

^[2185] [Linus and Cletus must have died or been martyred, therefore, almost as soon as appointed. Our author had seen these registers, no doubt.]

^[2186] Confingant.

^[2187] Probabuntur. Another reading is provocabuntur, “will be challenged.” [Not to one particular See, but to all the Apostolic churches: Quod ubique.]

^[2188] Pro consanguinitate doctrinæ.

^[2189] That is, the succession of bishops from the apostles, and the identity of doctrine with the apostolic.

^[2190] Sacramenti.

Chapter XXXIII.—Present Heresies (Seedlings of the Tares Noted by the Sacred Writers) Already Condemned in Scripture. This Descent of Later Heresy from the Earlier Traced in Several Instances.

^[2191] Traducentur.

^[2192] Semina sumpsisse.

^[2193] 1 Cor. xv. 12.

^[2194] Comp. Tertull. De Resur. Carnis, xxxvi.

^[2195] Gal. v. 2.

^[2196] 1 Tim. iv. 3.

^[2197] Æque tangit.

^[2198] 2 Tim. ii. 3.

^[2199] 1 Tim. i. 4.

^[2200] Nescio qui.

^[2201] Charite.

^[2202] Sermonem.

^[2203] De qua prima ogdoade. [See Irenæus, Vol. I. p. 316, etc. this Series.]

^[2204] Gal. iv. 9.

^[2205] Non natam, literally, “as being unbegotten.”

^[2206] Deo non nato.

^[2207] Comparat.

^[2208] Rev. ii. 14.

^[2209] Gaiana. So Oehler; the common reading being “Caiana.”

^[2210] 1 John iv. 3.

^[2211] Comp. Epiphanius, i. 30.

^[2212] Referred to perhaps in Col. ii. 18.

Chapter XXXIV.—No Early Controversy Respecting the Divine Creator; No Second God Introduced at First. Heresies Condemned Alike by the Sentence and the Silence of Holy Scripture.

^[2213] Institutionem.

^[2214] Nescio quem.

^[2215] Igneum, “consisted of fire.”

^[2216] “The ectroma, or fall of Sophia from the Pleroma, from whom the Creator was fabled to be descended” (Dodgson).

^[2217] Scilicet.

^[2218] Luke vi. 40.

^[2219] Universæ.

^[2220] Utique.

^[2221] Nominarentur et ipsæ.

^[2222] Nominatione, i.e. by the apostles.

^[2223] Prædicationis.

^[2224] Fine.

^[2225] Præcedente.

^[2226] Præjudicarentur. [i.e. by Præscription.]

^[2227] i.e., in the days of the apostles, and by their mouth.

Chapter XXXV.—Let Heretics Maintain Their Claims by a Definite and Intelligible Evidence. This the Only Method of Solving Their Questions. Catholics Appeal Always to Evidence Traceable to Apostolic Sources.

^[2228] Res.

^[2229] Indicium proprietatis, a proof of its being their own.

Chapter XXXVI.—The Apostolic Churches the Voice of the Apostles. Let the Heretics Examine Their Apostolic Claims, in Each Case, Indisputable. The Church of Rome Doubly Apostolic; Its Early Eminence and Excellence. Heresy, as Perverting the Truth, is Connected Therewith.

^[2230] Cathedræ.

^[2231] Suis locis præsident.

^[2232] Authenticæ. This much disputed phrase may refer to the autographs or the Greek originals (rather than the Latin translations), or full unmutilated copies as opposed to the garbled ones of the heretics. The second sense is probably the correct one.

^[2233] [Note, those near by may resort to this ancient and glorious church; not as any better than Corinth, or Philippi, or having any higher Apostolic throne. See Irenæus, Vol. I. p. 415, (note) and Elucid. p. 460.]

^[2234] Compare our Anti-Marcion, iv. 5, p. 186.

^[2235] The Baptist’s.

^[2236] [Observe—“even with us in Africa.” If this implies noteworthy love, it proves that there was no organic relation requiring such particular fellowship, even in the West.]

^[2237] Miscet.

^[2238] We have taken Oehler’s hint in favour of “martyrio.” The usual reading “martyrium” (meaning “she exhorts to martyrdom”) is stiff, and unsuited to the context.

^[2239] De.

^[2240] Or, “they were not of it, because they were opposed to it,” i.e., the discipline or teaching.

^[2241] Nucleo.

^[2242] Necessariæ.

^[2243] Papavere. “Ego cum aliis papaver ficus interpretor de seminalibus ficus, non de ipso fructu” (Oehler).

^[2244] Frutice.

^[2245] We again follow Oehler’s hint, who would like to read “de grano veritatis.” The texts are obscure, and vary much here.

^[2246] Silvestres.

Chapter XXXVII.—Heretics Not Being Christians, But Rather Perverters of Christ’s Teaching, May Not Claim the Christian Scriptures. These are a Deposit, Committed to and Carefully Kept by the Church.

^[2247] “That is, in following out their own choice (αἳρεσις) of opinions, they both receive and admit the name of heretics,” αἱρετικοί, “self-choosers” (Dodgson). [In Theology, technically, one must be a baptized Christian in order to be a heretic. The Mohammedans, e.g., are not heretics but pagans. But, our author speaks rhetorically.]

^[2248] Capiunt.

^[2249] Compare 1 Tim. 5.21; 6.13; 2 Tim. 2.14; 4.1-4.

Chapter XXXVIII.—Harmony of the Church and the Scriptures. Heretics Have Tampered with the Scriptures, and Mutilated, and Altered Them. Catholics Never Change the Scriptures, Which Always Testify for Them.

^[2250] By the instrumenta doctrinæ he here means the writings of the New Testament.

^[2251] [Our author insists on the precise agreement of Catholic Tradition with Holy Scripture. See valuable remarks on Schleiermacher, in Kaye, pp. 279–284.]

^[2252] We add the original of this sentence, which is obscured by its terseness: “Quid de proprio intulimus, ut aliquid contrarium ei et in Scripturis deprehensum detractione vel adjectione vel transmutatione remediaremus?”

^[2253] That is, teaching the same faith and conversation (De la Cerda).

^[2254] Domestica.

^[2255] Integro instrumento.

^[2256] Callidiore ingenio.

^[2257] That is, cutting out whatever did not fall in with it (Dodgson).

^[2258] Non comparentium rerum. [Note, he says above “of them, the Scriptures, we, Catholics, have our being.” Præscription does not undervalue Scripture as the food and life of the Church, but supplies a short and decisive method with innovaters.]

Chapter XXXIX.—What St. Paul Calls Spiritual Wickednesses Displayed by Pagan Authors, and by Heretics, in No Dissimilar Manner. Holy Scripture Especially Liable to Heretical Manipulation. Affords Material for Heresies, Just as Virgil Has Been the Groundwork of Literary Plagiarisms, Different in Purport from the Original.

^[2259] See Eph. 6.12; 1 Cor. 11.18.

^[2260] Instruendis.

^[2261] Oehler reads “ex Vergilio,” although the Codex Agobard. as “ex Virgilio.”

^[2262] Denique. [“Getica lyra.”]

^[2263] Otis.

^[2264] Nec periclitor dicere. [Truly, a Tertullianic paradox; but compare 2 Pet. iii. 16. N.B. Scripture the test of heresy.]

^[2265] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

Chapter XL.—No Difference in the Spirit of Idolatry and of Heresy. In the Rites of Idolatry, Satan Imitated and Distorted the Divine Institutions of the Older Scriptures. The Christian Scriptures Corrupted by Him in the Perversions of the Various Heretics.

^[2266] “Interpretur” is here a passive verb.

^[2267] Res.

^[2268] Sacramentorum divinorum. The form, however, of this phrase seems to point not only to the specific sacraments of the gospel, but to the general mysteries of our religion.

^[2269] Compare Tertullian’s treatises, de Bapt. v. and de Corona, last chapter.

^[2270] Expositionem.

^[2271] “Et sub gladio redimit coronam” is the text of this obscure sentence, which seems to allude to a pretended martyrdom. Compare Tertullian’s tract, de Corona, last chapter.

^[2272] The Flamen Dialis. See Tertullian’s tract, ad Uxorem, i. 7.

^[2273] [Corruptio optimi pessima. Compare the surprising parallels of M. Huc between debased Christianity and the paganism of Thibet, etc. Souvenirs d’un voyage, etc. Hazlitt’s translation, 1867.]

^[2274] Morositatem Illam. [He refers to the minute and vexatious ordinances complained of by St. Peter (Acts xiv. 10,) which Latin Christianity has ten-folded, in his name.]

^[2275] Gestiit.

^[2276] Attemperare.

^[2277] i.e., the Scriptures of the New Testament.

Chapter XLI.—The Conduct of Heretics: Its Frivolity, Worldliness, and Irregularity. The Notorious Wantonness of Their Women.

^[2278] Conversationis.

^[2279] See Matt. vii. 6.

^[2280] Lenocinium. “Pandering” is Archdeacon Dodgson’s word.

^[2281] Miscent.

^[2282] Edocti.

^[2283] Repromittere.

^[2284] Compare Tertullian’s tract, de Bapt. I. and de Veland. Virg. viii. [Also, Epiphan. iv. p. 453, Ed. Oehler.]

^[2285] Temerariæ.

^[2286] They were constantly changing their ministers. It was a saying of the heretics, “Alius hodie episcopus, cras alius” (Rigalt.).

^[2287] Sæculo obstrictos.

^[2288] Promereri est.

Chapter XLII.—Heretics Work to Pull Down and to Destroy, Not to Edify and Elevate. Heretics Do Not Adhere Even to Their Own Traditions, But Harbour Dissent Even from Their Own Founders.

^[2289] Non parent.

^[2290] Enim. [e.g. The Trent system of Unity, alas! is of this sort.]

^[2291] Hence the saying, “Wasps make combs, so Marcionites make churches” (see our Anti-Marcion, p. 187); describing the strangeness and uselessness of the societies, not (as Gibbon said) their number (Dodgson).

^[2292] Sua in vilitate. Another reading, pronounced corrupt by Oehler, has “quasi sibi latæ vagantur,” q.d. “All for themselves, as it were, they wander” etc. (Dodgson).

Chapter XLIII.—Loose Company Preferred by Heretics. Ungodliness the Effect of Their Teaching the Very Opposite of Catholic Truth, Which Promotes the Fear of God, Both in Religious Ordinances and Practical Life.

^[2293] Scilicet.

^[2294] Ps. cxi. 10; Prov. i. 7.

^[2295] Attonita, as if in fear that it might go wrong (Rigalt.).

^[2296] In contrast to the opposite fault of the heresies exposed above.

^[2297] Deliberata, where the character was well weighed previous to admission to the eucharist.

^[2298] Apparitio, the duty and office of an apparitor, or attendant on men of higher rank, whether in church or state.

Chapter XLIV.—Heresy Lowers Respect for Christ, and Destroys All Fear of His Great Judgment. The Tendency of Heretical Teaching on This Solemn Article of the Faith. The Present Treatise an Introduction to Certain Other Anti-Heretical Works of Our Author.

^[2299] 2 Cor. v. 10.

^[2300] Scævis.

^[2301] Futuris.

^[2302] It seems to us, that this is the force of the strong irony, indicated by the “credo,” which pervades this otherwise unintelligible passage. Dodgson’s version seems untenable: “Let them (the heretics) acknowledge that the fault is with themselves rather than with those who prepared us so long beforehand.”

^[2303] Christ and His apostles, as before, in continuation of the strong irony.

^[2304] This must be the force of a sentence which is steeped in irony: “Scilicet cum vos non crederetis.” We are indebted to Oehler for restoring the sentence thus.

^[2305] Recogitavi.

^[2306] Turpe.

^[2307] Capit.

^[2308] Exorbitant.

^[2309] Cavent.

^[2310] This sense comes from the “repellendas” and the “a collatione Scripturarum.”

^[2311] Specialiter. He did this, indeed, in his treatises against Marcion, Hermogenes, the Valentinians, Praxeas, and others. [These are to follow in this Series. Kaye (p. 47) justly considered this sentence as proving the De Præscript, a preface to all his treatises against particular heresies.]

^[2312] Elucidation V.

V.

^[2313] It must be remembered that an appeal to Scripture lies behind Tertullian’s Præscription: only he will not discuss Holy Scripture with heretics.

Introductory Notes.

^[2314] [The name of Bishop Jacobson was often introduced in our first volume, in notes to the Apostolic Fathers. He has recently “fallen asleep,” after a life of exemplary labour “with good report of all men and of the Truth itself.” His learning and piety were adorned by a profound humility, which gave a primitive cast to his character. At the Lambeth Conference, having the honour to sit at his side, I observed his extreme modesty. He rarely rose to speak, though he sometimes honoured me with words in a whisper, which the whole assembly would have rejoiced to hear. Like his great predecessor, Pearson, in many respects, the mere filings and clippings of his thoughts were gold-dust.]

^[2315] [Dr. Holmes is described, in the Edinburgh Edition, as “Domestic Chaplain to the Rt. Hon. the Countess of Rothes.” He was B.A. (Oxon.) in 1840, and took orders that year. Was Head-Master of Plymouth Grammar School at one time, and among his very valuable and learned works should be mentioned, as very useful to the reader of this series, his Translation of Bull’s Defensio Fidei Nicænæ (two vols. 8vo. Oxford, 1851), and of the same great author’s Judicium Ecclesiæ Catholicæ, 8vo. Oxford, 1855.]

^[2316] [This preface and the frequent annotations of our author relieve the American editor, save very sparingly, from adding notes of his own.]

^[2317] Two works are worth mentioning in connection with this topic for their succinct and handy form, as well as satisfactory treatment of their argument: Mr. Perowne’s Norrisian prize essay, entitled The Essential Coherence of the Old and New Testaments (1858), and Sir William Page Wood’s recent work, The Continuity of Scripture, as declared by the Testimony of our Lord, and of the evangelists and apostles.

^[2318] Bishop Kaye says of Tertullian (page 62): “He is indeed the harshest and most obscure of writers, and the least capable of being accurately represented in a translation;” and he quotes the learned Ruhnken’s sentence of our author: “Latinitatis certè pessimum auctorem esse aio et confirmo.” This is surely much too sweeping. To the careful student Tertullian’s style commends itself, by and by, as suited exactly to his subject—as the terse and vigorous expression of terse and vigorous thought. Bishop Butler has been often censured for an awkward style; whereas it is a fairer criticism to say, that the arguments of the Analogy and the Sermons of Human Nature have been delivered in the language best suited to their character. This adaptation of style to matter is probably in all great authors a real characteristic of genius. A more just and favourable view is taken of Tertullian’s Latin by Niebuhr, Hist. Rom. (Schmitz), vol. v. p. 271, and his Lectures on Ancient Hist. (Schmitz), vol. ii. p. 54.

^[2319] He has also, as the reader will observe, endeavoured to distinguish, by the help of type, between the true God and Marcion’s god, printing the initials of the former, and of the pronouns referring to Him, in capitals, and those of the latter in small letters. To do this was not always an easy matter, for in many passages the argument amalgamates the two. Moreover, in the earlier portion of the work the translator fears that he may have occasionally neglected to make the distinction.

Book I. Wherein is described the god of Marcion. He is shown to be utterly wanting in all the attributes of the true God.

^[2320] [Written A.D. 207. See Chapter xv. infra. In cap. xxix. is the token of Montanism which denotes his impending lapse.]

Chapter I.—Preface. Reason for a New Work. Pontus Lends Its Rough Character to the Heretic Marcion, a Native. His Heresy Characterized in a Brief Invective.

^[2321] Retro.

^[2322] Jam hinc viderit.

^[2323] Ex vetere.

^[2324] Fratris.

^[2325] Stilus.

^[2326] De.

^[2327] [Euxine=hospitable. One recalls Shakespeare:

—“Like to the Pontick Sea

Whose icy current and compulsive force

Ne’er feels retiring ebb.”—Othel.]

^[2328] Cruda.

^[2329] De jugo. See Strabo (Bohn’s trans.), vol. ii. p. 247.

^[2330] Duritia.

^[2331] Libens.

^[2332] Exaggerantur.

^[2333] Calet.

^[2334] [Iphigenia of Euripides.]

^[2335] [See the Medea of Euripides.]

^[2336] [Prometheus of Æschylus.]

^[2337] Hamaxobio. This Sarmatian clan received its name ῾Αμαξόβιοι from its gypsy kind of life.

^[2338] [I fancy there is point in this singular, the sky of Pontus being always overcast. Cowper says:

“There is but one cloud in the sky,

But that doth the welkin invest,” etc.

^[2339] Quidni.

^[2340] Lancinatur.

^[2341] Castrator carnis. See Pliny, N. H. viii. 47 (Bohn’s trans. vol. ii. p. 297).

^[2342] Ipsius litteris.

^[2343] Jam.

^[2344] Hinc.

^[2345] Retro.

^[2346] He alludes to his book De Præscriptione Hæreticorum. [Was this work then already written? Dr. Allix thinks not. But see Kaye, p. 47.]

^[2347] Interdum. [Can it be that when all this was written (speaking of ourselves) our author had fully lapsed from Communion with the Catholic Church?]

Chapter II.—Marcion, Aided by Cerdon, Teaches a Duality of Gods; How He Constructed This Heresy of an Evil and a Good God.

^[2348] Passus.

^[2349] Instinctum.

^[2350] St. Luke vi. 43 sq.

^[2351] Languens.

^[2352] Isa. xlv. 7.

^[2353] Mala.

^[2354] [This purely good or goodish divinity is an idea of the Stoics. De Præscript. chap. 7.]

^[2355] Hospitam.

^[2356] Quendam. [See Irenæus, Vol. I. p. 352, this Series.]

^[2357] Integre.

^[2358] Præstruendo.

^[2359] Or sections.

Chapter III.—The Unity of God. He is the Supreme Being, and There Cannot Be a Second Supreme.

^[2360] Et exinde.

^[2361] Si Forte.

^[2362] Jam.

^[2363] Of eternity.

^[2364] We subjoin the original of this difficult passage: Hunc enim statum æternitati censendum, quæ summum magnum deum efficiat, dum hoc est in deo ipsa, atque ita et cetera, ut sit deus summum magnum et forma et ratione et vi et potestate.

^[2365] Quid.

^[2366] Unicus. [Alone of his kind.]

^[2367] As its first principle.

^[2368] Porro.

^[2369] Forma.

Chapter IV.—Defence of the Divine Unity Against Objection. No Analogy Between Human Powers and God’s Sovereignty. The Objection Otherwise Untenable, for Why Stop at Two Gods?

^[2370] Isa. xl. 18, 25.

^[2371] Denique.

^[2372] Excidet.

^[2373] Amittitur. “Tertullian” (who thinks lightly of the analogy of earthly monarchs) “ought rather to have contended that the illustration strengthened his argument. In each kingdom there is only one supreme power; but the universe is God’s kingdom: there is therefore only one supreme power in the universe.”— Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, Third edition, p. 453, note 2.

^[2374] Scilicet.

^[2375] Graduum.

^[2376] Culmen.

^[2377] Minutalibus regnis.

^[2378] Undique.

^[2379] Substantiis.

^[2380] Eliquetur.

Chapter V.—The Dual Principle Falls to the Ground; Plurality of Gods, of Whatever Number, More Consistent. Absurdity and Injury to Piety Resulting from Marcion’s Duality.

^[2381] Depth and silence.

^[2382] See Virgil, Æneid, viii. 43, etc.

^[2383] Ipso termino.

^[2384] Paria.

^[2385] Jam.

^[2386] Numeri sui.

^[2387] Ecce.

Chapter VI.—Marcion Untrue to His Theory. He Pretends that His Gods are Equal, But He Really Makes Them Diverse. Then, Allowing Their Divinity, Denies This Diversity.

^[2388] Parilitatem.

^[2389] Formam.

^[2390] Alioquin.

^[2391] Certi (sumus).

^[2392] Tantummodo.

^[2393] Vindicet.

^[2394] Injecta manu detinens.

^[2395] Præscribo.

^[2396] Ex æquo deos confessus.

^[2397] De statu suo.

^[2398] Nega.

^[2399] Nega.

Chapter VII.—Other Beings Besides God are in Scripture Called God. This Objection Frivolous, for It is Not a Question of Names. The Divine Essence is the Thing at Issue. Heresy, in Its General Terms, Thus Far Treated.

^[2400] Passivo.

^[2401] כְּעַרִַח־אֵל. Tertullian’s version is: In ecclesia deorum. The Vulgate: In synagoga deorum.

^[2402] Ps. lxxxii. 1, 6.

^[2403] The now less obvious nicknames of “Alex. Darius and Olofernes,” are in the text.

^[2404] Substantiæ.

^[2405] Vocari obtinuit.

^[2406] Statum.

^[2407] Ex pari.

^[2408] Integritas.

^[2409] Hæsisti.

Chapter VIII.—Specific Points. The Novelty of Marcion’s God Fatal to His Pretensions. God is from Everlasting, He Cannot Be in Any Wise New.

^[2410] Stuporem suum.

^[2411] [Cap. xix. infra.]

^[2412] The original of this obscure passage is: “Novum igitur audiens deum, in vetere mundo et in vetere ævo et sub vetere deo inauditum quem tantis retro seculis neminem, et ipsa ignorantia antiquum, quidam Jesus Christus, et ille in veteribus nominibus novus, revelaverit, nec alius antehac.” The harsh expression, “quidam Jesus Christus,” bears, of course, a sarcastic reference to the capricious and inconsistent novelty which Marcion broached in his heresy about Christ. [By some slight chance in punctuation and arrangement, I have endeavoured to make it a little clearer.]

^[2413] Gloriæ. [Qu. boast?]

^[2414] Hæc erit novitas quæ.

^[2415] Novo semper ac novo titulo.

^[2416] Consecravit.

^[2417] Germana.

^[2418] Censetur. A frequent meaning in Tertullian. See Apol. 7 and 12.

^[2419] We cannot preserve the terseness of the Latin: Deus, si est vetus, non erit; si est novus, non fuit.

Chapter IX.—Marcion’s Gnostic Pretensions Vain, for the True God is Neither Unknown Nor Uncertain. The Creator, Whom He Owns to Be God, Alone Supplies an Induction, by Which to Judge of the True God.

^[2420] Agnitione. The distinctive term of the Gnostic pretension was the Greek equivalent Γνῶσις.

^[2421] Agnitione.

^[2422] Plane.

^[2423] Non evagabor, ut dicam.

^[2424] Provocari.

^[2425] Debebo.

^[2426] Ratione.

^[2427] Constantius.

^[2428] Quale est ut.

^[2429] Agnoscis.

^[2430] Vacat.

^[2431] Argumenta ="proofs.”

^[2432] Sin.

^[2433] Plane.

^[2434] Regulæ partibus.

^[2435] Fortasse an.

^[2436] Status principalis.

^[2437] Viderit.

^[2438] In diversitate.

^[2439] Nec admittentur.

^[2440] Sub eo.

^[2441] Formam.

^[2442] Dirigam.

Chapter X.—The Creator Was Known as the True God from the First by His Creation. Acknowledged by the Soul and Conscience of Man Before He Was Revealed by Moses.

^[2443] Dedicasse.

^[2444] Instituat.

^[2445] Denique.

^[2446] See also De test, anim. 2, and De anima, 41. [Bp. Kaye refers (p. 166) to Profr. Andrews Norton of Harvard, with great respect: specially to a Note on this usage of the Heathen, in his Evidences, etc. Vol. III.]

^[2447] Prophetia, inspired Scripture.

Chapter XI.—The Evidence for God External to Him; But the External Creation Which Yields This Evidence is Really Not Extraneous, for All Things are God’s. Marcion’s God, Having Nothing to Show for Himself, No God at All. Marcion’s Scheme Absurdly Defective, Not Furnishing Evidence for His New God’s Existence, Which Should at Least Be Able to Compete with the Full Evidence of the Creator.

^[2448] Extraneous.

^[2449] Extraneum.

^[2450] Alius.

^[2451] Plane falsæ vacabit.

^[2452] Forma.

^[2453] Proprii sui mundi, et hominis et sæculi.

^[2454] [Kaye, p. 206.]

^[2455] Cicerculam.

^[2456] [—“uncique puer monstrator aratri,” Virg. Georg. i. 19, and see Heyne’s note.]

^[2457] Præscriptio.

^[2458] Tertium cessat.

^[2459] Falsæ. An allusion to the Docetism of Marcion.

^[2460] Apud quem.

Chapter XII.—Impossibility of Acknowledging God Without This External Evidence Of His Existence. Marcion’s Rejection of Such Evidence for His God Savours of Impudence and Malignity.

^[2461] The word cause throughout this chapter is used in the popular, inaccurate sense, which almost confounds it with effect, the “causa cognoscendi,” as distinguished from the “causa essendi,” the strict cause.

^[2462] The word cause throughout this chapter is used in the popular, inaccurate sense, which almost confounds it with effect, the “causa cognoscendi,” as distinguished from the “causa essendi,” the strict cause.

^[2463] The word “res” is throughout this argument used strictly by Tertullian; it refers to “the thing” made by God—that product of His creative energy which affords to us evidence of His existence. We have translated it “proof” for want of a better word.

^[2464] The “tanquam sit,” in its subjunctive form, seems to refer to the concession indicated at the outset of the chapter.

^[2465] Omnino sine causa.

^[2466] Illum, i.e., Marcion’s god.

^[2467] Captare.

^[2468] Deum ex operum auctoritate formatum.

^[2469] Non statim ratione, on a priori grounds.

^[2470] i.e., Marcion’s god.

^[2471] Compare Rom. i. 20, a passage which is quite subversive of Marcion’s theory.

Chapter XIII.—The Marcionites Depreciate the Creation, Which, However, is a Worthy Witness of God. This Worthiness Illustrated by References to the Heathen Philosophers, Who Were Apt to Invest the Several Parts of Creation with Divine Attributes.

^[2472] This is an ironical concession from the Marcionite side.

^[2473] Another concession.

^[2474] Tertullian’s rejoinder.

^[2475] De isto.

^[2476] They called it κόσμος.

^[2477] By sapientiæ professores he means the heathen philosophers; see De Præscript. Hæret. c. 7.

^[2478] In his book adv. Hermogenem, c. 8, Tertullian calls the philosophers “hæreticorum patriarchæ.”

^[2479] Formidaverint.

^[2480] Substantiæ.

^[2481] Dei.

^[2482] The Greek name of Jupiter, Ζεύς, is here derived from ζέω, ferveo, I glow. Juno’s name, ῞Ηρα, Tertullian connects with ἀήρ, the air; παρὰ τὸ ἀὴρ καθ᾽ ὑπέρθεσιν ῞Ηρα. These names of the two great deities suggest a connection with fire and air.

^[2483] i.e., Cybele.

^[2484] The earth’s irrigations, and the washings of the image of Cybele every year in the river Almo by her priests, are here confusedly alluded to. For references to the pagan custom, see White and Riddle’s large Lat. Dict. s. v. Almo.

^[2485] Mithras, the Persian sun-god, was symbolized by the image of a lion. The sun entering the zodiacal sign Leo amidst summer heat may be glanced at.

^[2486] Deficiam ad.

^[2487] Sordidum. [Well and nobly said.]

Chapter XIV.—All Portions of Creation Attest the Excellence of the Creator, Whom Marcion Vilifies. His Inconsistency Herein Exposed. Marcion’s Own God Did Not Hesitate to Use the Creator’s Works in Instituting His Own Religion.

^[2488] De industria ingeniis aut viribus ampliavit.

^[2489] 2 Cor. xii. 5.

^[2490] Tertullian, it should be remembered, lived in Africa.

^[2491] Cantharidis.

^[2492] Adamavit.

^[2493] Laboravit.

^[2494] Paupertina. This and all such passages are, of course, in imitation of Marcion’s contemptuous view of the Creator’s work.

^[2495] Cellula.

^[2496] Infantat.

^[2497] Mendicitatibus.

^[2498] Matricem.

^[2499] Medullas.

^[2500] [The use of fish for fasting-days has no better warrant than Marcion’s example.]

^[2501] Uteris.

Chapter XV.—The Lateness of the Revelation of Marcion’s God. The Question of the Place Occupied by the Rival Deities. Instead of Two Gods, Marcion Really (Although, as It Would Seem, Unconsciously) Had Nine Gods in His System.

^[2502] Vel.

^[2503] Conditionem.

^[2504] Adv. Marcionem, v. 12.

^[2505] For Marcion’s exclusive use, and consequent abuse, of St. Paul, see Neander’s Antignostikus (Bohn), vol. ii. pp. 491, 505, 506.

^[2506] [This date not merely settles the time of our author’s work against Marcion, but supplies us with evidence that his total lapse must have been very late in life. For the five books, written at intervals and marked by progressive tokens of his spiritual decline, are as a whole, only slightly offensive to Orthodoxy. This should be borne in mind.]

^[2507] Frivolis. Again in reference to Marcion undervaluing the creation as the work of the Demiurge.

^[2508] Et ideo.

^[2509] In this and the following sentences, the reader will observe the distinction which is drawn between the Supreme and good God of Marcion and his “Creator,” or Demiurge.

^[2510] Subsiciva.

^[2511] Stipare se.

^[2512] Molitus est.

^[2513] Sentire.

^[2514] Subicit.

^[2515] The Supreme and good God. Tertullian here gives it as one of Marcion’s tenets, that the Demiurge created the World out of pre-existent matter.

^[2516] Interim.

^[2517] Proinde et.

^[2518] Assignet.

^[2519] Namely, (1) the supreme and good God; (2) His Christ; (3) the space in which He dwells; (4) the matter of His creation; (5) the Demiurge (or Marcion’s “Creator”); (6) his promised Christ; (7) the space which contains him; (8) this world, his creation; (9) evil, inherent in it.

Chapter XVI.—Marcion Assumes the Existence of Two Gods from the Antithesis Between Things Visible and Things Invisible. This Antithetical Principle in Fact Characteristic of the Works of the Creator, the One God—Maker of All Things Visible and Invisible.

^[2520] Consequens est ut.

^[2521] Defendant.

^[2522] Col. i. 16.

^[2523] Nunc enim. The elliptical νῦν γάρ of Greek argumentation.

^[2524] Modulata.

^[2525] “I make peace, and create evil,” Isa. xlv. 7.

Chapter XVII.—Not Enough, as the Marcionites Pretend, that the Supreme God Should Rescue Man; He Must Also Have Created Him. The Existence of God Proved by His Creation, a Prior Consideration to His Character.

^[2526] To depreciate the Creator’s work the more, Marcion (and Valentinus too) used to attribute to Him the formation of all the lower creatures—worms, locusts, etc.—reserving the mightier things to the good and supreme God. See St. Jerome’s Proem. in Epist. ad Philem. [See, Stier, Words of Jesus, Vol. vi. p. 81.]

^[2527] Dinoscetur.

^[2528] Quo necessarior.

^[2529] Locum.

^[2530] In chap. xxii.

Chapter XVIII.—Notwithstanding Their Conceits, the God of the Marcionites Fails in the Vouchers Both of Created Evidence and of Adequate Revelation.

^[2531] Age.

^[2532] Anabibazon. The ἀναβιβάζων was the most critical point in the ecliptic, in the old astrology, for the calculation of stellar influences.

^[2533] Quadratus.

^[2534] Trigonus. Saturn and Mars were supposed to be malignant planets. See Smith, Greek and Rom. Ant. p. 144, c. 2.

^[2535] Qualitate.

^[2536] Definimus.

^[2537] Cognoscendum.

^[2538] Recognoscendum.

^[2539] Doctrina.

^[2540] Ex prædicationibus.

^[2541] Operari.

^[2542] Vix impleverat.

^[2543] Alioquin.

^[2544] He means the Emperor Hadrian; comp. Apolog. c. 13.

Chapter XIX.—Jesus Christ, the Revealer of the Creator, Could Not Be the Same as Marcion’s God, Who Was Only Made Known by the Heretic Some CXV. Years After Christ, and That, Too, on a Principle Utterly Unsuited to the Teaching of Jesus Christ, I.e., the Opposition Between the Law and the Gospels.

^[2545] The third of these books against Marcion.

^[2546] Circumlatorem.

^[2547] The author says this, not as his own, but as Marcion’s opinion; as is clear from his own words in his fourth book against Marcion, c. 7, (Pamelius).

^[2548] Spiritus salutaris.

^[2549] Aura canicularis.

^[2550] Primum processit.

^[2551] Utriusque instrumenti.

^[2552] Innotuit.

Chapter XX.—Marcion, Justifying His Antithesis Between the Law and the Gospel by the Contention of St. Paul with St. Peter, Shown to Have Mistaken St. Paul’s Position and Argument. Marcion’s Doctrine Confuted Out of St. Paul’s Teaching, Which Agrees Wholly with the Creator’s Decrees.

^[2553] Tertullian’s indignant reply.

^[2554] Passivum scilicet convictum.

^[2555] Prædicationis. [Largely ad hominem, this argument.]

^[2556] Et alibi.

^[2557] 1 Cor. xv. 11.

^[2558] See Gal. 1.6-7; 2.4.

^[2559] Isa. xliii. 19.

^[2560] This quotation, however, is from Jer. xxxi. 32.

^[2561] Jer. iv. 4.

^[2562] Hos. ii. 11.

^[2563] Slightly altered from Isa. i. 13, 14.

Chapter XXI.—St. Paul Preached No New God, When He Announced the Repeal of Some of God’s Ancient Ordinances. Never Any Hesitation About Belief in the Creator, as the God Whom Christ Revealed, Until Marcion’s Heresy.

^[2564] Nihil præscribit de.

^[2565] i.e., “the old God,” as he has just called Him.

^[2566] Concessare debebat.

^[2567] Ps. ii. 3, 1, 2.

^[2568] Æmulum.

^[2569] Derogaretur.

^[2570] Nutabat.

^[2571] Census.

^[2572] In Creatore christianizet.

^[2573] Obduxeris. For this sense of the word, see Apol. 1. sub init. “sed obducimur,” etc.

^[2574] Sacramenti.

^[2575] Definito.

^[2576] That is, “inspired.”

^[2577] Nihil retractare oportebat.

^[2578] [Kaye, p. 274.]

Chapter XXII.—God’s Attribute of Goodness Considered as Natural; The God of Marcion Found Wanting Herein. It Came Not to Man’s Rescue When First Wanted.

^[2579] In his book, De Præscrip. Hæret., [cap. xv.] Tertullian had enjoined that heretics ought not to be argued with, but to be met with the authoritative rule of the faith. He here proposes to forego that course.

^[2580] Marcion’s Docetic doctrine of Christ as having only appeared in human shape, without an actual incarnation, is indignantly confuted by Tertullian in his De Carne Christi, c.v.

^[2581] That is, the principle in question—the bonitas Dei.

^[2582] Exinde agens.

^[2583] Obvenientia.

^[2584] Jugis.

^[2585] Susciperet.

^[2586] Despiceret.

^[2587] Destitueret.

^[2588] That is, Marcion’s god’s.

^[2589] Censetur.

^[2590] Quandoque.

^[2591] Aliquando.

^[2592] Cruciare.

^[2593] Rescribetur.

^[2594] Sævitias.

^[2595] Arbusculæ.

^[2596] Si ut?

^[2597] Accessione.

^[2598] Ingenio.

^[2599] Nunc. [Comp. chapter xv. supra, p. 282.]

Chapter XXIII.—God’s Attribute of Goodness Considered as Rational. Marcion’s God Defective Here Also; His Goodness Irrational and Misapplied.

^[2600] Atquin.

^[2601] Familiaritatis.

^[2602] This is the sense of the passage as read by Oehler: “Antecedit autem debita indebitam, ut principalis, ut dignior ministra et comite sua, id est indebita.” Fr. Junius, however, added the word “prior” which begins the next sentence to these words, making the last clause run thus: “ut dignior ministra, et comite sua, id est indebita, prior”—“as being more worthy of an attendant, and as being prior to its companion, that is, the undue benevolence.” It is difficult to find any good use of the “prior” in the next sentence, “Prior igitur cum prima bonitatis ratio sit,” etc., as Oehler and others point it.

^[2603] In rem suam.

^[2604] Redundavit.

^[2605] Ratio ipsa, i.e., rationality, or the character of reasonableness, which he is now vindicating.

^[2606] Alio modo destructus.

^[2607] Cujus est res.

^[2608] Justitia, right as opposed to the wrong (injuria) of the preceding sentence.

^[2609] Pro domestico, opposed to the pro extraneo, the alien or stranger of the preceding and succeeding context.

^[2610] Assertor.

^[2611] Nedum.

^[2612] Plagiator.

^[2613] i.e., the Creator.

^[2614] Oro te.

^[2615] Alii Deo. The strength of this phrase is remarkable by the side of the oft-repeated aliena.

^[2616] Therefore Christians used to lift their hands and arms towards heaven in prayer. Compare The Apology, chap. 30, (where the manibus expansis betokens the open hand, not merely as the heathen tendens ad sidera palmas). See also De Orat. c. 13, and other passages from different writers referred to in the “Tertullian” of the Oxford Library of the Fathers, p. 70. [See the figures in the Catacombs as represented by Parker, Marriott and others.]

^[2617] To the same effect Irenæus had said: “How will it be consistent in them to hold that the bread on which thanks are given is the body of their Lord, and that the cup is His blood, if they do not acknowledge that He is the Son of the Creator of the world, that is, the Word of God?” (Rigalt.) [The consecrated bread is still bread, in Patristic theology.]

^[2618] Operatur, a not unfrequent use of the word. Thus Prudentius (Psychom. 572) opposes operatio to avaritia.

Chapter XXIV.—The Goodness of Marcion’s God Only Imperfectly Manifested; It Saves But Few, and the Souls Merely of These. Marcion’s Contempt of the Body Absurd.

^[2619] Matt. v. 48.

^[2620] Traducetur.

^[2621] Nec jam.

^[2622] Immo.

^[2623] Minor numero.

^[2624] Non fiunt salvi. [Kaye, p. 347.]

^[2625] Pauciores.

^[2626] Partiaria exitii.

^[2627] Non facit salvos.

^[2628] Si forte (i.e., εἰ τύχοι εἴπερ ἄρα, with a touch of irony,— a frequent phrase in Tertullian.

^[2629] Anima tenus. Comp.De Præscr. Hær. 33, where Marcion, as well as Apelles, Valentinus, and others, are charged with the Sadducean denial of the resurrection of the flesh, which is censured by St. Paul,1 Cor. xv. 12.

^[2630] Compare De Præscr. Hær. 33, where Marcion and Apelles are brought under St. Paul’s reproach in 1 Tim. iv. 3.

^[2631] Hactenus. [Kaye, p. 260.]

^[2632] Animalis (from anima, the vital principle, “the breath of life”) is here opposed to corporalis.

^[2633] הָאָרָם, homo, from הָאֲרַמָה, humus, the ground; see the Hebrew of Gen. ii. 7.

^[2634] Febricitas.

^[2635] Offensum, probably in respect of the Marcionite treatment of His attributes.

Chapter XXV.—God is Not a Being of Simple Goodness; Other Attributes Belong to Him. Marcion Shows Inconsistency in the Portraiture of His Simply Good and Emotionless God.

^[2636] Ingenitam. In chap. xxii. this word seems to be synonymous with naturalem. Comp. book ii. 3, where it has this sense in the phrase “Deo ingenita.”

^[2637] Improbam.

^[2638] Appendicibus.

^[2639] Affectavit.

^[2640] Ruminans.

^[2641] Judiciarias vires.

^[2642] De ceteris motibus.

^[2643] Nec necessario.

^[2644] Retro.

^[2645] Concussibilis.

^[2646] Concupiscentiæ.

^[2647] (i.e., Marcion’s god.)

^[2648] Porro.

^[2649] Æmulatione.

^[2650] Denique.

^[2651] Scilicet.

^[2652] Officiales suæ.

^[2653] Suis dotibus.

^[2654] Administratur.

^[2655] Præscribatur.

^[2656] Defendemus.

Chapter XXVI.—In the Attribute of Justice, Marcion’s God is Hopelessly Weak and Ungodlike. He Dislikes Evil, But Does Not Punish Its Perpetration.

^[2657] Ut non defensurus. Defendo = vindico. See Oehler’s note for other instances.

^[2658] Secundum.

^[2659] Pronunciavit.

Chapter XXVII.—Dangerous Effects to Religion and Morality of the Doctrine of So Weak a God.

^[2660] Obsequium subsignare.

^[2661] Legitimus.

^[2662] Propter disciplinam.

^[2663] Plagiarii. The Plagiarius is the ἀνδραποδιστής or the ψυχαγωγός of Alex. Greek. This “man-stealing” profession was often accompanied with agreeable external accomplishments. Nempe ψυχαγωγοί, quia blandis et mellitis verbis servos alienos sollicitant, et ad se alliciunt. Clemens Alex. Strom. i. λύκοι ἅρπαγες προβάτων κωδίοις ἐγκεκρυμμένοι, ἀνδραποδιστοί τε καὶ ψυχαγωγοὶ εὐγλῶσσοι, κλέπτοντες μὲν ἀφανῶς, κ.τ.λ.—Desid. Herald. Animad. ad Arnobium, p. 101.

^[2664] Comp. Apology, 38.

^[2665] Absit, inquis, absit. [i.e., the throwing of a grain of incense into the censer, before the Emperor’s image or that of a heathen god.]

Chapter XXVIII.—This Perverse Doctrine Deprives Baptism of All Its Grace. If Marcion Be Right, the Sacrament Would Confer No Remission of Sins, No Regeneration, No Gift of the Spirit.

^[2666] Sulphuratiorem gehennam.

^[2667] Ita neminem.

^[2668] Suffectura. A something whereon the Spirit may operate; so that the Spirit has a præfectura over the anima. [Kaye, p. 179.]

^[2669] Resignatum. Tertullian here yields to his love of antithesis, and makes almost nonsense of signo and resigno. The latter verb has the meaning violate (in opposition to signo, in the phrase virgo signata, a pure unviolated virgin).

^[2670] Apud se.

^[2671] Apud se.

^[2672] Exsortem salutis.

Chapter XXIX.—Marcion Forbids Marriage. Tertullian Eloquently Defends It as Holy, and Carefully Discriminates Between Marcion’s Doctrine and His Own Montanism.

^[2673] Free from all matrimonial impurity.

^[2674] Spadonibus. This word is more general in sense than eunuch, embracing such as are impotent both by nature and by castration, White and Riddle’s Lat. Dict. s.v.

^[2675] Tertullian’s Montanism appears here.

^[2676] i.e., abstinence from marriage.

^[2677] Sectando. [This, indeed, seems to be a fair statement of Patristic doctrine concerning marriage. As to our author’s variations see Kaye, p. 378.]

^[2678] Universum conditionis.

^[2679] Causa in its proper sense is, “that through which anything takes place;” its just and normal state, therefore. Culpa is the derangement of the cause; some flaw in it.

^[2680] Gen. i. 28.

^[2681] Ex. xx. 14, 17.

^[2682] Lev. xx. 10, 13, 15.

^[2683] Ratio.

^[2684] In fide. Tertullian uses (De Pud. 18) “ante fidem” as synonymous with ante baptismum; similarly “post fidem.”

^[2685] [Bad as this is, does it argue the lapse of our author as at this time complete?]

^[2686] 1 Cor. vii. 29.

^[2687] 2 Cor. xii. 9.

^[2688] This is the force of the erit instead of the past tense.

^[2689] Isses in, i.e., obstitisses, check or resist, for then Marcion would, of course, not have been born: the common text has esses in.

^[2690] Tertullian has discussed these “definitions” in chap. ii. vii., and the “conditions” from chap. viii. onward. He will “examine the Scripture” passages in books iv. and v. Fr. Junius.

^[2691] Statuum.

Book II. Wherein Tertullian shows that the creator, or demiurge, whom Marcion calumniated, is the true and good God.

^[2692] [Contains no marks of Montanism of a decisive nature. Kaye, p. 54.]

Chapter I.—The Methods of Marcion’s Argument Incorrect and Absurd. The Proper Course of the Argument.

^[2693] Digne.

^[2694] From the dignity of the supreme Godhead.

^[2695] Snbruere.

^[2696] Propria paratura.

^[2697] With the tanto (answering to the previous quanto) should be understood magis, a frequent omission in our author.

^[2698] Cura in.

^[2699] Inciderat.

Chapter II.—The True Doctrine of God the Creator. The Heretics Pretended to a Knowledge of the Divine Being, Opposed to and Subversive of Revelation. God’s Nature and Ways Past Human Discovery. Adam’s Heresy.

^[2700] Fluitantibus oculis.

^[2701] Quem videat non videt.

^[2702] Temperat.

^[2703] Cæcutis.

^[2704] Quin potius parcis.

^[2705] In periculum extenderis.

^[2706] Ut sciens.

^[2707] Ut nesciens.

^[2708] Quasi sciens.

^[2709] Retractares.

^[2710] Omnifariam.

^[2711] Comp. Isa. 40.13-14; Rom. 11.34.

^[2712] Rom. xi. 33.

^[2713] Sic non debuit Deus. This perhaps may mean, God ought not to have done this, etc.

^[2714] 1 Cor. ii. 11.

^[2715] 1 Cor. i. 21.

^[2716] Consultiores.

^[2717] 1 Cor. i. 25.

^[2718] Pusillus.

^[2719] 1 Cor. ii. 14.

^[2720] Luke 8.18; Matt. 13.12.

^[2721] That is, the natural man, the ψυχικός.

^[2722] Animali = ψυχικῷ.

^[2723] Electionem. By this word our author translates the Greek αἵρεσις. Comp. De Præscr. Her. 6, p. 245, supra.

^[2724] Si forte.

Chapter III.—God Known by His Works. His Goodness Shown in His Creative Energy; But Everlasting in Its Nature; Inherent in God, Previous to All Exhibition of It. The First Stage of This Goodness Prior to Man.

^[2725] That is, “the goodness” of God.

^[2726] Agnitionis, their Gnostic scheme.

^[2727] Denique. This particle refers back to the argument previous to its interruption by the allusion to Marcion and his followers.

^[2728] Fructus, the enjoyment of God’s works.

^[2729] Apparebat. [Was not manifest.]

^[2730] Commisit in.

^[2731] Obventiciæ bonitatis.

^[2732] Provocaticiæ animationis.

^[2733] Gen. i. 14.

^[2734] Immensa.

^[2735] Interminabili.

^[2736] Deo ingenita “Natural to,” or “inherent in.”

^[2737] Perpetua. [Truly, a sublime Theodicy.]

^[2738] Suffundens jam hinc.

Chapter IV.—The Next Stage Occurs in the Creation of Man by the Eternal Word. Spiritual as Well as Physical Gifts to Man. The Blessings of Man’s Free-Will.

^[2739] Præconio suo.

^[2740] Postmodum…postmodum.

^[2741] See Bp. Bull on The State of Man before the Fall, Works, ii. 73–81.

^[2742] Habitaculum majus.

^[2743] “Eructavit cor. meum Sermonem optimum” is Tertullian’s reading of Ps. xlv. 1, “My heart is inditing a good matter,” A.V., which the Vulgate, Ps. xliv. 1, renders by “Eructavit cor meum verbum bonum,” and the Septuagint by ᾽Εξηρεύξατο ἡ καρδία μου λόγον ἀγαθόν. This is a tolerably literal rendering of the original words, רָהַשׂ לִֹגִּי רָכָר טוֹב. In these words the Fathers used to descry an adumbration of the mystery of the Son’s eternal generation from the Father, and His coming forth in time to create the world. See Bellarmine, On the Psalms (Paris ed. 1861), vol. i. 292. The Psalm is no doubt eminently Messianic, as both Jewish and Christian writers have ever held. See Perowne, The Psalms, vol. i. p. 216. Bishop Bull reviews at length the theological opinions of Tertullian, and shows that he held the eternity of the Son of God, whom he calls “Sermo” or “Verbum Dei.” See Defensio Fidei Nicænæ (translation in the “Oxford Library of the Fathers,” by the translator of this work) vol. ii. 509–545. In the same volume, p. 482, the passage from the Psalm before us is similarly applied by Novatian: “Sic Dei Verbum processit, de quo dictum est, Eructavit cor meum Verbum bonum.” [See vol. ii. p. 98, this series: and Kaye, p. 515.]

^[2744] Gen. i.

^[2745] Dispungens, i.e., examinans et probans et ita quasi consummans (Oehler).

^[2746] This twofold virtue is very tersely expressed: “Sic et benedicebat quæ benefaciebat.”

^[2747] This, the translator fears, is only a clumsy way of representing the terseness of our author’s “maledicere” and “malefacere.”

^[2748] Bonitas et quidem operantior.

^[2749] Blandiente.

^[2750] Gen. i. 26.

^[2751] Præfecit.

^[2752] Delicias.

^[2753] Totius orbis possidens.

^[2754] There is a profound thought here; in his tract, De Pœnit. 10, he says, “Where one or two are, is the church, and the church is Christ.” Hence what he here calls Adam’s “higher delights,” even spiritual blessings in Christ with Eve. [Important note in Kaye, p. 304.]

^[2755] See Gen. ii. 18.

^[2756] Sexum Mariæ. For the Virgin Mary gave birth to Christ, the Saviour of men; and the virgin mother the Church, the spouse of Christ, gives birth to Christians (Rigalt.).

^[2757] Arguis.

^[2758] Ex fastidio liberis.

^[2759] Gen. ii. 17.

^[2760] Porro si.

Chapter V.—Marcion’s Cavils Considered. His Objection Refuted, I.e., Man’s Fall Showed Failure in God. The Perfection of Man’s Being Lay in His Liberty, Which God Purposely Bestowed on Him. The Fall Imputable to Man’s Own Choice.

^[2761] Rev. xxii. 15.

^[2762] Articulo.

^[2763] John x. 25.

^[2764] He refers to Hermogenes; see Adv. Hermog. chap. xxxii.

^[2765] Vel…vel.

^[2766] Quanquam.

^[2767] As the Marcionites alleged.

^[2768] Signatus est.

^[2769] Animæ.

^[2770] Nec alias nisi.

Chapter VI.—This Liberty Vindicated in Respect of Its Original Creation; Suitable Also for Exhibiting the Goodness and the Purpose of God. Reward and Punishment Impossible If Man Were Good or Evil Through Necessity and Not Choice.

^[2771] Ratio, or, “His reason.” We have used both words, which are equally suitable to the Divine Being, as seemed most convenient.

^[2772] Irrationaliter, or, “irrationally.”

^[2773] See above, book i. chap. xxiii. p. 288.

^[2774] Utique.

^[2775] Rationale, or, “consistent with His purpose.”

^[2776] Suæ potestatis.

^[2777] Substantia.

^[2778] Accommodata.

^[2779] Status.

^[2780] Suæ potestatis.

^[2781] Sed et alias.

^[2782] Quale erat.

^[2783] Animi sui possessione.

^[2784] Dignatione.

^[2785] Ex dispositione. The same as the “universa disponendo” above.

^[2786] Institutione.

^[2787] Bonum jam suum, not bonitatem.

^[2788] Emancipatum.

^[2789] Libripens. The language here is full of legal technicalities, derived from the Roman usage in conveyance of property. “Libripens quasi arbiter mancipationis” (Rigalt.).

^[2790] Quoniam (with a subj.) et hoc.

^[2791] Bonus consisteret.

^[2792] Ita demum.

^[2793] Proinde.

^[2794] Fortior.

^[2795] Meritis.

^[2796] Constituta est.

^[2797] Our author’s word invenitur (in the singular) combines the bonitas and ratio in one view.

^[2798] The verb is subj., “deceret.”

^[2799] Sed, with oportet understood.

^[2800] Recogitata. [Again, a noble Theodicy.]

Chapter VII.—If God Had Anyhow Checked Man’s Liberty, Marcion Would Have Been Ready with Another and Opposite Cavil. Man’s Fall Foreseen by God. Provision Made for It Remedially and Consistently with His Truth and Goodness.

^[2801] Salva.

^[2802] Gravitatem.

^[2803] Sed, for scilicet, not unfrequent with our author.

^[2804] That is, from the Marcionite position referred to in the second sentence of this chapter, in opposition to that of Tertullian which follows.

^[2805] Si non bene dispunxisset.

^[2806] Peroraturus.

^[2807] Tibi insusurra pro Creatore.

^[2808] Functo.

Chapter VIII.—Man, Endued with Liberty, Superior to the Angels, Overcomes Even the Angel Which Lured Him to His Fall, When Repentant and Resuming Obedience to God.

^[2809] Ut non, “as if he were not,” etc.

^[2810] Ezek. xviii. 23.

^[2811] Ps. civ. 4.

^[2812] [On capp. viii. and ix. See Kaye’s references in notes p. 178 et seqq.]

Chapter IX.—Another Cavil Answered, I.e., the Fall Imputable to God, Because Man’s Soul is a Portion of the Spiritual Essence of the Creator. The Divine Afflatus Not in Fault in the Sin of Man, But the Human Will Which Was Additional to It.

^[2813] Anima, for animus. This meaning seems required throughout this passage, where afterwards occurs the phrase immortalis anima.

^[2814] Qualitas.

^[2815] Πνοήν, not πνεῦμα; so the Vulgate has spiraculum, not spiritum. [Kaye (p. 247) again refers to Profr. Andrews Norton of Harvard for valuable remarks concerning the use of the word spiritus by the ancients. Evidences, Vol. III. p. 160, note 7.]

^[2816] Infuscandi.

^[2817] Aurulam.

^[2818] Veritati.

^[2819] Plerumque.

^[2820] Non deliquendi felicitatem.

^[2821] Ceterum.

^[2822] Et alias autem.

^[2823] Denique.

^[2824] Gen. ii. 7.

^[2825] Heb. i. 14.

^[2826] 1 Cor. vi. 3.

^[2827] Hoc ipsum, referring to the noluit of the preceding clause.

^[2828] Agitatum.

^[2829] Dispositio.

^[2830] Utique.

Chapter X.—Another Cavil Met, I.e., the Devil Who Instigated Man to Sin Himself the Creature of God. Nay, the Primeval Cherub Only Was God’s Work. The Devilish Nature Superadded by Wilfulness. In Man’s Recovery the Devil is Vanquished in a Conflict on His Own Ground.

^[2831] Elogium.

^[2832] Ergo.

^[2833] Delator.

^[2834] Deferendo, in reference to the word delator, our author’s synonyme for διάβολος.

^[2835] Nisi.

^[2836] Nisi.

^[2837] Ezek. xxviii. 11-16 (Sept.).

^[2838] Luke x. 18.

^[2839] Læsuræ ="injuries.” ᾽Αδικήματα ἔν σοι—Iniquitates in te.”—Hieron.

^[2840] Censum.

^[2841] Forma.

^[2842] Sustinens.

^[2843] [Kaye. p. 313.]

Chapter XI.—If, After Man’s Sin, God Exercised His Attribute of Justice and Judgment, This Was Compatible with His Goodness, and Enhances the True Idea of the Perfection of God’s Character.

^[2844] Gen. iii. 16.

^[2845] Gen. iii. 18.

^[2846] Secura.

^[2847] Secundum.

^[2848] Secundum.

^[2849] Accommodata.

^[2850] Rei.

^[2851] Æmulum.

^[2852] Tutela.

Chapter XII.—The Attributes of Goodness and Justice Should Not Be Separated. They are Compatible in the True God. The Function of Justice in the Divine Being Described.

^[2853] Cavere. This is Oehler’s reading, and best suits the sense of the passage and the style of our author.

^[2854] Habitus.

^[2855] Auctrice.

^[2856] Obventiciam.

Chapter XIII.—Further Description of the Divine Justice; Since the Fall of Man It Has Regulated the Divine Goodness. God’s Claims on Our Love and Our Fear Reconciled.

^[2857] Secundum adversionem.

^[2858] Procuratio.

^[2859] Sævit.

^[2860] Commendari.

^[2861] Matt. vii. 13.

^[2862] Prospicit.

^[2863] De ejusmodi.

^[2864] Hos. vi. 6.

^[2865] Ezek. xxxiii. 11.

^[2866] Matt. xxii. 37 f.

Chapter XIV.—Evil of Two Kinds, Penal and Criminal. It is Not of the Latter Sort that God is the Author, But Only of the Former, Which are Penal, and Included in His Justice.

^[2867] Condens.

^[2868] See Isa. xlv. 7.

^[2869] Hospitis populi conflictatricem.

^[2870] Subministrari. In Apol. ii., the verb ministrare is used to indicate Satan’s power in influencing men. [The translator here corrects his own word seduced and I have substituted his better word influenced. The Lord gave him over to Satan’s influence.]

^[2871] Num. 11; 21.

^[2872] 2 Kings ii. 23, 24. [See notes 4, 5, 9, following.]

Chapter XV.—The Severity of God Compatible with Reason and Justice. When Inflicted, Not Meant to Be Arbitrary, But Remedial.

^[2873] Dispice.

^[2874] Ratio.

^[2875] Nam et si.

^[2876] Compulerat.

^[2877] Sine adhuc.

^[2878] Jer. xxxi. 29.

^[2879] Edomita, cf. chap. xix. sub init. and xxix.

^[2880] Matt. xxvii. 25.

^[2881] Omnis providentia.

Chapter XVI.—To the Severity of God There Belong Accessory Qualities, Compatible with Justice. If Human Passions are Predicated of God, They Must Not Be Measured on the Scale of Human Imperfection.

^[2882] Æmulatio.

^[2883] Sævitia.

^[2884] Debita.

^[2885] Exprobrari.

^[2886] Proinde est enim.

^[2887] Erudimur.

^[2888] Habitus.

^[2889] Curare.

^[2890] [See Vol. II. p. 71 (this series), for an early example of this Communicatio idiomatum.]

^[2891] Status.

^[2892] Pariter.

^[2893] Præsumitis. [So of generation, Sonship, etc.]

^[2894] Periclitabitur.

^[2895] Evertetur.

^[2896] Præstantiam, “Qua scilicet præstat præmia vel supplicia” (Rigalt.).

^[2897] Condecet.

Chapter XVII.—Trace God’s Government in History and in His Precepts, and You Will Find It Full of His Goodness.

^[2898] Catholic, because diffused throughout creation (Pamelius).

^[2899] Matt. v. 45. T. predicts this (by the word pluentem) strictly of the “goodness” of God, the quam.

^[2900] Hos. vi. 6.

^[2901] Jonah iii. 10.

^[2902] 2 Kings xx. i.

^[2903] Dan. iv. 33.

^[2904] 1 Sam. xiv. 45.

^[2905] 2 Sam. xii. 13.

^[2906] Optimi.

^[2907] Indulget.

^[2908] Posteritas.

^[2909] Lev. xxv. 4, etc.

^[2910] Erudiretur.

^[2911] Refrigeria. [1 Cor. ix. 10.]

Chapter XVIII.—Some of God’s Laws Defended as Good, Which the Marcionites Impeached, Such as the Lex Talionis. Useful Purposes in a Social and Moral Point of View of This, and Sundry Other Enactments.

^[2912] Ex. xxi. 24.

^[2913] Deut. xxxii. 35; Rom. xii. 19.

^[2914] Repastinaretur.

^[2915] Æstuata.

^[2916] Qua et alias.

^[2917] Ventris.

^[2918] Ex. xxxii. 6.

^[2919] Operationes.

^[2920] Isa. i. 11, 12.

^[2921] Industriam.

Chapter XIX.—The Minute Prescriptions of the Law Meant to Keep the People Dependent on God. The Prophets Sent by God in Pursuance of His Goodness. Many Beautiful Passages from Them Quoted in Illustration of This Attribute.

^[2922] Ps. i. 2.

^[2923] Edomantis, cf. chap. xv. sub fin. and xxix.

^[2924] Pupillo.

^[2925] Isa. i. 16, 17.

^[2926] Quæstiones, alluding to Isa. i. 18: δεῦτε καὶ διαλεχθῶμεν, λέγει Κύριος.

^[2927] Alluding to Isa. lviii. 6: “Loose the bands of wickedness.”

^[2928] Isa. lviii. 6.

^[2929] A lax quotation, perhaps, of the next clause in the same verse: “Break every yoke.”

^[2930] Isa. lviii. 7, slightly changed from the second to the third person.

^[2931] Ps. xxxiv. 13, 14.

^[2932] Comp. Ps. iv. 4.

^[2933] Ps. i. 1.

^[2934] Ps. cxxxiii. 1.

^[2935] Ps. cxviii. 4.

^[2936] Ps. i. 3.

^[2937] Ps. xxiv. 4, 5. He has slightly misquoted the passage.

^[2938] Ps. xxxiii. 18, 19, slightly altered.

^[2939] Ps. xxxiv. 19.

^[2940] Ps. cxvi. 15.

^[2941] Ps. xxxiv. 20, modified.

^[2942] Ps. xxxiv. 22.

^[2943] Præmissa.

Chapter XX.—The Marcionites Charged God with Having Instigated the Hebrews to Spoil the Egyptians. Defence of the Divine Dispensation in that Matter.

^[2944] Sepiæ isti. Pliny, in his Nat. Hist. ix. 29, says: “The males of the cuttles kind are spotted with sundry colours more dark and blackish, yes, and more firme and steady, than the female. If the female be smitted with the trout-speare, they will come to succour her; but she again is not so kind to them: for if the male be stricken, she will not stand to it, but runs away. But both of them, if they perceive that they be taken in such streights that they cannot escape, shed from them a certain black humor like to ink; and when the water therewith is troubled and made duskish, therein they hide themselves, and are no more seen” (Holland’s Translation, p. 250). Our epithet “saucy cuttle” comes from Shakespeare, 2 Henry iv 2, 4, where, however, the word seems employed in a different sense.

^[2945] Deut. xiv.

^[2946] Relucentem, “rekindled” by the confutation.

^[2947] Vasa = the jewels and the raiment mentioned in Ex. iii. 22.

^[2948] Nomine. [Here our author exhibits his tact as a jurisconsult.]

^[2949] Villis.

^[2950] Elector.

^[2951] For a discussion of the spoiling of the Egyptians by the Israelites, the reader is referred to Calmet’s Commentary, on Ex. iii. 22, where he adduces, besides this passage of Tertullian, the opinions of Irenæus, adv. Hæres. iv. 49; Augustine, contra Faust. ii. 71; Theodoret, Quæst. in Exod. xxiii.; Clement of Alex. Stromat. i. 1; of Philo, De Vita Moysis, i.; Josephus, Antiqq. ii. 8, who says that “the Egyptians freely gave all to the Israelites;” of Melchior Canus, Loc. Theoll. i. 4. He also refers to the book of Wisdom, x. 17–20. These all substantially agree with our author. See also a full discussion in Selden, De Jure Nat. et Gentium, vii. 8, who quotes from the Gemara, Sanhedrin, c. ii. f. 91a; and Bereshith Rabba, par. 61 f., 68, col. 2, where such a tribunal as Tertullian refers to is mentioned as convened by Alexander the Great, who, after hearing the pleadings, gave his assent to the claims of the advocates of Israel.

^[2952] Tamen.

^[2953] Amplius.

^[2954] Singulis nummis. [Clem. Alex. Strom. i. 23. Vol. II., p. 336, supra.]

^[2955] Gratia Hebræorum, either a reference to Ex. iii. 21, or meaning, perhaps, “the unpaid services of the Hebrews.”

^[2956] Popularium omnium.

^[2957] Expunxit.

^[2958] Ex. i. 18, 22. [An ingenious and eloquent defence.]

Chapter XXI.—The Law of the Sabbath-Day Explained. The Eight Days’ Procession Around Jericho. The Gathering of Sticks a Violation.

^[2959] Ex. xx. 9, 10.

^[2960] Figuras.

^[2961] De absolutis.

^[2962] [He was not punished for gathering sticks, but for setting an example of contempt of the Divine Law.]

Chapter XXII.—The Brazen Serpent and the Golden Cherubim Were Not Violations of the Second Commandment. Their Meaning.

^[2963] Substantiam.

^[2964] Cæcæ.

^[2965] Titulum. [See Vol. II. p. 477, this series.]

^[2966] Num. xxi. 8, 9.

^[2967] See John iii. 14.

^[2968] Exemplum.

^[2969] Refragari.

^[2970] Statu.

^[2971] In chap. xviii. towards the end. [p. 311, supra.]

^[2972] Isa. i. 11.

^[2973] Ps. l. 13.

^[2974] An inexact quotation of Isa. xl .28.

^[2975] Honorem.

^[2976] Infuscabit.

^[2977] Titulus.

^[2978] See Isa. i. 11-14.

^[2979] Fecerat seems the better reading: q.d. “which he had performed,” etc. Oehler reads fecerant.

Chapter XXIII.—God’s Purposes in Election and Rejection of the Same Men, Such as King Saul, Explained, in Answer to the Marcionite Cavil.

^[2980] Levem.

^[2981] Damnet.

^[2982] Atquin.

^[2983] Or, “for one who is a good man and a judge.”

^[2984] 1 Sam. ix.

^[2985] 1 Sam. xiii.

^[2986] Dispungetur.

^[2987] Censura.

Chapter XXIV.—Instances of God’s Repentance, and Notably in the Case of the Ninevites, Accounted for and Vindicated.

^[2988] Apud illum.

^[2989] 1 Sam. xv. 11.

^[2990] Porro.

^[2991] 1 Sam. ix. 2.

^[2992] Onerabat.

^[2993] Invidiosam.

^[2994] Criminosam.

^[2995] Jonah iii. 10.

^[2996] Jonah iv. 2.

^[2997] Titulum.

^[2998] Malitiæ concursum.

^[2999] Non capit.

^[3000] Nunc.

^[3001] Isa. xlv. 7.

^[3002] Jer. xviii. 11.

^[3003] Infamiam.

^[3004] See above, chap. xiv. [p. 308, supra.]

^[3005] Malitia, i.e., “the evil” mentioned in the cited Jonah iii. 10.

^[3006] Thus, according to St. Jerome, in Matt. vi. 34, κακία means κάκωσις. “Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof”—the occurent adversities.

^[3007] In isto articulo.

^[3008] Atqui hic.

^[3009] Or, “in his capacity as Judge,” ex justitia.

^[3010] Immo.

^[3011] Ingratia.

^[3012] 1 Sam. xv. 28.

^[3013] 1 Sam. 15.29, but inexactly quoted.

^[3014] Relucet.

^[3015] Nedum.

Chapter XXV.—God’s Dealings with Adam at the Fall, and with Cain After His Crime, Admirably Explained and Defended.

^[3016] Ut omnia expediam.

^[3017] Purgandas.

^[3018] Pusillitates.

^[3019] Gen. iii. 9, 11.

^[3020] Immo.

^[3021] Sugillatione.

^[3022] Dolendi.

^[3023] Oculatiorem.

^[3024] Præterire.

^[3025] Naso.

^[3026] Hoc nomine.

^[3027] Relevandi.

^[3028] Ex ore tuo, “out of thine own mouth.”

^[3029] Matt. xii. 37.

^[3030] Propter statum legis.

^[3031] Gen. 3.22; 2 Pet. 1.4.]

^[3032] Ipsum. [Comp.Heb. 9.8; Rev. 22.14.]

^[3033] Relevatos.

^[3034] Gen. xviii. 21. [Marcion’s god also “comes down.” p. 284, supra.]

Chapter XXVI.—The Oath of God: Its Meaning. Moses, When Deprecating God’s Wrath Against Israel, a Type of Christ.

^[3035] See Jer. xxii. 5.

^[3036] Isa. xliv. 8.

^[3037] Deprehendis.

^[3038] Extorquens.

^[3039] Pusillus.

^[3040] Ex. xxxii. 10.

^[3041] An allusion to, rather than a quotation of, Ex. xxxii. 32.

^[3042] Non sineret.

^[3043] Quantum liceat.

Chapter XXVII.—Other Objections Considered. God’s Condescension in the Incarnation. Nothing Derogatory to the Divine Being in This Economy. The Divine Majesty Worthily Sustained by the Almighty Father, Never Visible to Man. Perverseness of the Marcionite Cavils.

^[3044] Absolvam.

^[3045] Ad destructionem.

^[3046] Ratione.

^[3047] Indigna.

^[3048] Diversatum.

^[3049] Conditionis.

^[3050] Pusillitates.

^[3051] Patibulis.

^[3052] i.e., the sensations of our emotional nature.

^[3053] Ejus Dei.

^[3054] Ipsum.

^[3055] Ipsum.

^[3056] Congressum.

^[3057] On this mode of the eternal generation of the Son from the Father, as the Λόγος προφορικός, the reader is referred for much patristic information to Bp. Bull’s Defensio Fid. Nic. (trans. in Anglo-Cath. Library by the translator of this work).

^[3058] Proferendo ex semet ipso.

^[3059] Voluntati.

^[3060] Ps. viii. 6.

^[3061] Ediscens, “practising” or “rehearsing.”

^[3062] This doctrine of theology is more fully expressed by our author in a fine passage in his Treatise against Praxeas, xvi. (Oehler, vol. ii. p. 674), of which the translator gave this version in Bp. Bull’s Def. Nic. Creed, vol. i. p. 18: “The Son hath executed judgment from the beginning, throwing down the haughty tower, and dividing the tongues, punishing the whole world by the violence of waters, raining upon Sodom and Gomorrha fire and brimstone ‘the Lord from the Lord.’ For he it was who at all times came down to hold converse with men, from Adam on to the patriarchs and the prophets, in vision, in dream, in mirror, in dark saying; ever from the beginning laying the foundation of the course (of His dispensations), which He meant to follow out unto the end. Thus was He ever learning (practising or rehearsing); and the God who conversed with men upon earth could be no other than the Word, which was to be made flesh. But He was thus learning (or rehearsing, ediscebat) in order to level for us the way of faith, that we might the more readily believe that the Son of God had come down into the world, if we knew that in times past also something similar had been done.” The original thus opens: “Filius itaque est qui ab initio judicavit.” This the author connects with John iii. 35, Matt. xxviii. 18, John v. 22. The “judgment” is dispensational from the first to the last. Every judicial function of God’s providence from Eden to the judgment day is administered by the Son of God. This office of judge has been largely dealt with in its general view by Tertullian, in this book ii. against Marcion (see chap. xi.–xvii.).

^[3063] Matt. xi. 27.

^[3064] Ex. xxxiii. 20.

^[3065] Penes nos. Christians, not Marcionites. [Could our author have regarded himself as formally at war with the church, at this time?]

^[3066] Ex æquo agebat.

^[3067] In the 1st book, 25th and following chapters.

^[3068] Sævum.

Chapter XXVIII.—The Tables Turned Upon Marcion, by Contrasts, in Favour of the True God.

^[3069] Tenebrosus. Cicero, De finibus, ii. says: “Heraclitus qui cognomento Σκοτεινὸς perhibetur, quia de natura nimis obscure memoravit.”

^[3070] Sursam et deorsum. An allusion to Heraclitus’ doctrine of constant change, flux and reflux, out of which all things came. Καὶ τὴν μεταβολὴν ὁδὸν ἄνω κάτω, τόν τε κόσμον γίνεσθαι κατὰ ταύτην, κ.τ.λ. “Change is the way up and down; the world comes into being thus,” etc. (Diogenes Laertius, ix. 8).

^[3071] Sententias.

^[3072] Dissimulationes.

^[3073] Non nisi emendata.

^[3074] Non repercussus.

^[3075] Mentitum.

^[3076] Non verum. An allusion to the Docetism of Marcion.

^[3077] Nihil deliquit in Christum, that is, Marcion’s Christ.

^[3078] Paucis amat.

Chapter XXIX.—Marcion’s Own Antitheses, If Only the Title and Object of the Work Be Excepted, Afford Proofs of the Consistent Attributes of the True God.

^[3079] Secundum.

^[3080] Ingeniorum.

^[3081] Enim.

^[3082] i.e., Marcion’s Antitheses.

^[3083] Antitheses so called because Marcion in it had set passages out of the O.T. and the N.T. in opposition to each other, intending his readers to infer from the apparent disagreement that the law and the gospel were not from the same author (Bp. Kaye on Tertullian, p. 468).

^[3084] Pro rebus edomitis. See chap. xv. and xix., where he refers to the law as the subduing instrument.

^[3085] Repercussus: perhaps “refuted.”

^[3086] Exclusus.

^[3087] Ab omni motu amariore.

^[3088] Singulas species, a law term.

^[3089] Arbustiores. A figurative word, taken from vines more firmly supported on trees instead of on frames. He has used the word indomitis above to express his meaning.

^[3090] Rationali. Compare chap. vi. of this book, where the “ratio,” or purpose of God, is shown to be consistent with His goodness in providing for its highest development in man’s interest.

^[3091] Ratione: in reference to God’s ratio or purpose in creation. See chap. vi. note 10. [p. 301, supra.]

Chapter I.—Introductory; A Brief Statement of the Preceding Argument in Connection with the Subject of This Book.

^[3092] Perseveramus.

^[3093] Ex abundanti.

^[3094] i.e., “as the Son of, or sent by, no other God.”

^[3095] i.e., “was the Son of, or sent by, no other God.”

^[3096] Recensu.

^[3097] [Surely Tertullian, when he wrote this, imagined himself not separated formally from the Apostolic churches. Of which see De Præscriptione, (p. 258) supra.]

^[3098] Ubi posteritas invenitur. Compare De Præscript. Hæret. 34, where Tertullian refers to “that definite rule, before laid down, touching ‘the later date’ (illo fine supra dicto posteritatis), whereby they (i.e., certain novel opinions) would at once be condemned on the ground of their age alone.” In 31 of the same work he contrasts “posteritatem mendacitatis” with “principalitatem veritatis”—“the latter date of falsehood” with “the primary date of truth.” [pp. 258, 260, supra.]

^[3099] See book i. chap. 1.

^[3100] Non ut laborantem. “Qui enim laborant non totis sed fractis utuntur viribus.” Πανστρατιᾷ πανσυδίῃ; Anglice, “with all her might.”

^[3101] In præscript. compendiis vincit.

^[3102] Ut gestientem.

Chapter II.—Why Christ’s Coming Should Be Previously Announced.

^[3103] Hinc denique.

^[3104] As Marcion makes Him.

^[3105] Profiteretur.

^[3106] Patrocinium.

^[3107] Defendit, “insist on it.”

^[3108] Suggestu.

^[3109] Mandator.

^[3110] Dispositione, “its being ordered or arranged.”

^[3111] Parabatur.

^[3112] Per fidem profuturum.

^[3113] Indiceretur.

^[3114] Agnitione.

^[3115] Prædicatione, “prophecy.”

Chapter III.—Miracles Alone, Without Prophecy, an Insufficient Evidence of Christ’s Mission.

^[3116] Ordo.

^[3117] Virtutum, “miracles.”

^[3118] Exauctoravit.

^[3119] Matt. xxiv. 24. [See Kaye, p. 125.]

^[3120] Auctore.

^[3121] Proinde.

^[3122] Cludet, quasi claudet.

^[3123] Repromissis in.

^[3124] Tantummodo nova.

^[3125] Egentia experimentis fidei victricis vetustatis.

^[3126] i.e., through God’s announcement by prophecy.

Chapter IV.—Marcion’s Christ Not the Subject of Prophecy. The Absurd Consequences of This Theory of the Heretic.

^[3127] Your God.

^[3128] Ipse.

^[3129] Ejus (i.e. Marcionis) Dominum, meaning Marcion’s God, who had not yet been revealed.

^[3130] The Creator and His Christ, as rivals of Marcion’s.

^[3131] He twits Marcion with introducing his Christ on the scene too soon. He ought to have waited until the Creator’s Christ (prophesied of through the Old Testament) had come. Why allow him to be predicted, and then forbid His actual coming, by his own arrival on the scene first? Of course, M. must be understood to deny that the Christ of the New Testament is the subject of the Old Testament prophecies at all. Hence T.’s anxiety to adduce prophecy as the main evidence of our Lord as being really the Creator’s Christ.

^[3132] Atquin.

^[3133] Vanus.

^[3134] The reader will remember that Tertullian is here arguing on Marcion’s ground, according to whom the Creator’s Christ, the Christ predicted through the O.T., was yet to come. Marcion’s Christ, however, had proved himself so weak to stem the Creator’s course, that he had no means really of checking the Creator’s Christ from coming. It had been better, adds Tertullian, if Marcion’s Christ had waited for the Creator’s Christ to have first appeared.

^[3135] Marcion’s Christ.

^[3136] Emendare.

^[3137] Revocare.

^[3138] Aut si.

^[3139] Posterior emendator futurus: an instance of Tertullian’s style in paradox.

^[3140] Vero.

^[3141] Redarguens.

^[3142] Si forte.

Chapter V.—Sundry Features of the Prophetic Style: Principles of Its Interpretation.

^[3143] Proluserim.

^[3144] [An important principle, see Kaye, p. 325.]

^[3145] Familiare.

^[3146] Expunctum.

^[3147] Isa. 50.6, slightly altered.

^[3148] Joel iii. 18.

^[3149] Ex. iii. 8, 17; Deut. xxvi. 9, 15.

^[3150] Isa. xli. 18, 19, inexactly quoted.

^[3151] Relaturus.

^[3152] Hæreticorum apostolus. We have already referred to Marcion’s acceptance of St. Paul’s epistles. It has been suggested that Tertullian in the text uses hæreticorum apostolus as synonymous with ethnicorum apostolus="apostle of the Gentiles,” in which case allusion to St. Paul would of course be equally clear. But this interpretation is unnecessary.

^[3153] 1 Cor. ix. 9.

^[3154] 1 Cor. x. 4; compare below, book v., chap. vii.

^[3155] Gal. iv. 22, 24.

^[3156] Eph. v. 31, 32.

Chapter VI.—Community in Certain Points of Marcionite and Jewish Error. Prophecies of Christ’s Rejection Examined.

^[3157] “Remember, O reader.”

^[3158] Constitisse.

^[3159] Sociari cum.

^[3160] Marcion.

^[3161] The model of wise naval legislation, much of which found its way into the Roman pandects.

^[3162] Symbol of barbarism and ignorance—a heavy joke against the once seafaring heretic.

^[3163] Ignoratus, “rejected of men.”

^[3164] Isa. xxix. 14.

^[3165] Isa. vi. 9, 10. Quoted with some verbal differences.

^[3166] A supposed quotation of Amos iv. 13. See Oehler’s marginal reference. If so, the reference to Joel is either a slip of Tertullian or a corruption of his text; more likely the former, for the best mss. insert Joel’s name.Amos iv. 13, according to the LXX., runs, ᾽Απαγγέλλων εἰς ἀνθρώπους τὸν Χριστὸν αὐτοῦ, which exactly suits Tertullian’s quotation. Junius supports the reference to Joel, supposing that Tertullian has his ch. ii. 31 in view, as compared with Acts ii. 16-33. This is too harsh an interpretation. It is simpler and better to suppose that Tertullian really meant to quote the LXX. of the passage in Amos, but in mistake named Joel as his prophet.

^[3167] Isa. xlii. 19, altered.

^[3168] Isa. i. 2, 3.

^[3169] This seems to be a translation with a slight alteration of the LXX. version of Lam. iv. 20, πνεῦμα προσώπου ἡμῶν Χριστὸς Κύριος .

^[3170] Isa. i. 4.

^[3171] Retro.

^[3172] Per ejusdem substantiæ conditionem.

^[3173] He seems here to allude to such statements of God’s being as Col. ii. 9.

^[3174] Substantiam prædictationis.

^[3175] Materiam.

^[3176] Alterius, “the other,” i.e., Marcion’s rival God.

^[3177] Planum in signis, cf. the Magnum in potestate of Apolog. 21.

^[3178] Æmulum, “a rival,” i.e., to Moses.

^[3179] Nec hominem ejus ut alienum judicaverunt, “His manhood they judged not to be different.”

Chapter VII.—Prophecy Sets Forth Two Different Conditions of Christ, One Lowly, the Other Majestic. This Fact Points to Two Advents of Christ.

^[3180] Rationem.

^[3181] Humilitate.

^[3182] A reference to, rather than quotation from, Isa. liii. 7.

^[3183] Sicut puerulus, “like a little boy,” or, “a sorry slave.”

^[3184] Isa. liii. 2, 3, according to the Septuagint.

^[3185] See Isa. lii. 14; liii. 3-4.

^[3186] Isa. viii. 14.

^[3187] Ps. viii. 6.

^[3188] Ps. xxii. 7.

^[3189] Consummationem: an allusion to Zech. iv. 7.

^[3190] See Dan. ii. 34.

^[3191] Dan. vii. 13, 14.

^[3192] Ps. xlv. 2, 3.

^[3193] Ps. viii. 5, 6.

^[3194] Zech. xii. 10, 12.

^[3195] Isa. liii. 8.

^[3196] Joshua, i.e., Jesus.

^[3197] Podere.

^[3198] Cidari munda.

^[3199] See Zech. iii.

^[3200] Jejunio, see Lev. xvi. 5, 7, etc.

^[3201] Circumdatus.

^[3202] Perhaps in reference to Heb. ix. 19.

^[3203] Civitatem, “city.”

^[3204] In perditionem.

^[3205] This treatment of the scape-goat was partly ceremonial, partly disorderly. The Mischna (Yoma vi. 4–6) mentions the scarlet ribbon which was bound round the animal’s head between the horns, and the “pulling” (rather plucking out of its hair); but this latter was an indignity practised by scoffers and guarded against by Jews. Tertullian repeats the whole of this passage, Adv. Jud. xiv. Similar use is made of the type of the scape-goat by other fathers, as Justin Martyr (Dial. cum Tryph.) and Cyril of Alex. (Epist. ad Acacium). In this book ix. Against Julian, he expressly says: “Christ was described by the two goats,—as dying for us in the flesh, and then (as shown by the scape-goat) overcoming death in His divine nature.” See Tertullian’s passages illustrated fully in Rabbi Chiga, Addit. ad Cod. de die Expiat. (in Ugolini, Thes. i. 88).

^[3206] Quasi visceratione. [See Kaye’s important comment, p. 426.]

^[3207] Jejunantibus.

Chapter VIII.—Absurdity of Marcion’s Docetic Opinions; Reality of Christ’s Incarnation.

^[3208] So Epiphanius, adv. Hæres. l. 23. 7, quotes the same proverb, ὡς ἀσπὶς παρ᾽ ἐχίδνης ἰὸν δανιζομένη. [Tom. II. p. 144. Ed. Oehler.]

^[3209] As in his Docetic views of the body of Christ.

^[3210] 2 Cor. vi. 14.

^[3211] Mendacio.

^[3212] Congressus.

^[3213] Convictus.

^[3214] Demandat.

^[3215] Tam impresse, “so strongly.”

^[3216] 1 Cor. xv. 3-4, 14, 17, 18.

^[3217] Valebit.

^[3218] Aufertur.

^[3219] 1 Cor. xv. 13-18.

^[3220] Sane.

^[3221] Phantasmate forsitan.

Chapter IX.—Refutation of Marcion’s Objections Derived from the Cases of the Angels, and the Pre-Incarnate Manifestations of the Son of God.

^[3222] Ista. [See Kaye, p. 205.]

^[3223] [Pamelius attributes this doctrine to Appelles a disciple of Marcion, of whom see Kaye, pp. 479, 480.]

^[3224] Luke xx. 36.

^[3225] Mentiri.

^[3226] i.e., among the angels.

^[3227] Reformaret.

^[3228] Commeatum.

Chapter X.—The Truly Incarnate State More Worthy of God Than Marcion’s Fantastic Flesh.

^[3229] Stercoribus infersam.

^[3230] A Marcionite argument.

^[3231] Stropham, a player’s trick; so in Spectac. 29.

^[3232] Alienis.

^[3233] Globum.

^[3234] Mendacio.

Chapter XI.—Christ Was Truly Born; Marcion’s Absurd Cavil in Defence of a Putative Nativity.

^[3235] Corpulentiæ.

^[3236] This woman is called in De Præscr. Hæret. 6, “an angel of deceit,” and (in 30) “a virgin, but afterwards a monstrous prostitute.” Our author adds: “Induced by her tricks and miracles, Apelles introduced a new heresy.” See also Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. v. 13; Augustin, De Hæres. 42; Hieronymus, Epist. adv. Ctesiph. p. 477, tom. iv. ed. Benedictin.

^[3237] Luke xi. 27.

^[3238] Luke viii. 20.

^[3239] Below, iv. 26; also in De carne Christi, cap. vii.

^[3240] Expungendam, “consummated,” a frequent use of the word in our author.

^[3241] Viderit opinio humana.

^[3242] Inflatæ.

^[3243] Sanguinis tributo.

^[3244] Plane, ironically said.

^[3245] Turpissimum.

^[3246] Perora.

^[3247] Mendacio.

^[3248] Habitus.

^[3249] Carneus.

^[3250] Ex nativitate.

Chapter XII.—Isaiah’s Prophecy of Emmanuel. Christ Entitled to that Name.

^[3251] Isa. vii. 14.

^[3252] Isa. viii. 4. Compare adv. Judæos, 9.

^[3253] Cohærentia.

^[3254] Agitetur in Christo.

^[3255] Gal. iii. 27.

Chapter XIII.—Isaiah’s Prophecies Considered. The Virginity of Christ’s Mother a Sign. Other Prophecies Also Signs. Metaphorical Sense of Proper Names in Sundry Passages of the Prophets.

^[3256] Compare with this chapter, T.’s adv. Judæos, 9.

^[3257] Isa. viii. 4.

^[3258] Jam hominem, jam virum in Adv. Judæos, “at man’s estate.”

^[3259] Lanceare ante quam lancinare. This play on words points to the very early training of the barbarian boys to war. Lancinare perhaps means, “to nibble the nipple with the gum.”

^[3260] He alludes to the suppling of their young joints with oil, and then drying them in the sun.

^[3261] Pannis.

^[3262] Butyro.

^[3263] Isa. vii. 14.

^[3264] The tam dignum of this place is “jam signum” in adv. Judæos.

^[3265] Contineat.

^[3266] This opinion of Jews and Judaizing heretics is mentioned by Irenæus, Adv. Hæret. iii. 21 (Stieren’s ed. i. 532); Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. v. 8; Jerome, Adv. Helvid. (ed. Benedict), p. 132. Nor has the cavil ceased to be held, as is well known, to the present day. The הָעַלְֹמָה of Isa. vii. 4 is supposed by the Jewish Fuerst to be Isaiah’s wife, and he quotes Kimchi’s authority; while the neologian Gesenius interprets the word, a bride, and rejects the Catholic notion of an unspotted virgin. To make way, however, for their view, both Fuerst and Gesenius have to reject the LXX. rendering, παρθένος.

^[3267] Disposita.

^[3268] Et hic.

^[3269] Alius ordo jam infantis.

^[3270] Infantia est. Better in adv. Judæos, “est infantiæ.”

^[3271] The italicised words we have added from adv. Judæos, “hoc est mirabile signum.”

^[3272] Posterior. Posteritas is an attribute of heresy in T.’s view.

^[3273] Ceterarum, other than the Jews, i.e., Gentiles.

^[3274] Zech. xiv. 14.

^[3275] Ps. lxxii. 15.

^[3276] Ps. lxxii. 10.

^[3277] See Otto’s Justin Martyr, ii. 273, n. 23. [See Vol. I. p. 238, supra.]

^[3278] Videlicet.

^[3279] The Creatori here answers to the Scripturis divinis of the parallel passage in adv. Judæos. Of course there is a special force in this use of the Creator’s name here against Marcion.

^[3280] Isa. i. 10.

^[3281] Ezek. xvi. 3.

^[3282] To the sins of these nations.

^[3283] Isa. i. 2.

^[3284] Apud illum, i.e., Creatorem.

^[3285] Maledictionis.

Chapter XIV.—Figurative Style of Certain Messianic Prophecies in the Psalms. Military Metaphors Applied to Christ.

^[3286] Ps. xlv. 3.

^[3287] Ps. xlv. 2.

^[3288] Literally, “Advance, and prosper, and reign.”

^[3289] Ps. xlv. 4.

^[3290] Rev. i. 16.

^[3291] Eph. vi. 14-17.

^[3292] Matt. x. 34.

^[3293] “Advance, and prosper, and reign.”

^[3294] Exinde qua.

^[3295] Ps. xlv. 4, but changed.

^[3296] Ps. xlv. 5.

^[3297] Traductiones.

^[3298] Ps. xlv. 5.

^[3299] Ejusmodi.

^[3300] Exempla.

Chapter XV.—The Title Christ Suitable as a Name of the Creator’s Son, But Unsuited to Marcion’s Christ.

^[3301] Interim.

^[3302] 1 Cor. viii. 5.

^[3303] Ex dispositione. This word seems to mean what is implied in the phrases, “Christian dispensation,” “Mosaic dispensation,” etc.

^[3304] Consignatur.

^[3305] Proprietatibus.

^[3306] Quintilian, Inst. viii. 6, defines this as a figure “which lends a name to things which have it not.”

^[3307] De alieno abutendo.

^[3308] Matt. ix. 16, 17.

^[3309] Senio.

^[3310] Passio.

^[3311] Adversus Creatorem, in sui Dei nomine venientes.

^[3312] i.e., to the Marcionite position.

Chapter XVI.—The Sacred Name Jesus Most Suited to the Christ of the Creator. Joshua a Type of Him.

^[3313] That is, Christ.

^[3314] Surely it is Duo, not Deo.

^[3315] Constare.

^[3316] Incipit vocari.

^[3317] Secundum populum.

^[3318] Vir.

^[3319] Non celavit te, “not concealed Himself from you.”

^[3320] Ex. xxiii. 20, 21.

^[3321] Officium prophetæ.

^[3322] Sacramentum.

^[3323] Identidem.

^[3324] Reliquus ordo.

^[3325] Obduximus.

Chapter XVII.—Prophecies in Isaiah and the Psalms Respecting Christ’s Humiliation.

^[3326] Corpusculum illud.

^[3327] Habitum.

^[3328] Conspectum.

^[3329] Puerulus, “little child,” perhaps.

^[3330] Sentences out of Isa. 52.14; 53.2, etc.

^[3331] Isa. lii. 14.

^[3332] Ps. xlv. 2.

^[3333] Ps. xxii. 6.

^[3334] Isa. xi. 1, 2.

^[3335] Intentionem.

^[3336] Isa. liii. 3, 7.

^[3337] Momentaneum.

^[3338] Actum.

^[3339] Prædicationis.

^[3340] Interim.

^[3341] Isa. l. 10.

^[3342] Isa. liii. 4.

Chapter XVIII.—Types of the Death of Christ. Isaac; Joseph; Jacob Against Simeon and Levi; Moses Praying Against Amalek; The Brazen Serpent.

^[3343] Compare adv. Judæos, chap. 10. [pp. 165, 166, supra.]

^[3344] De exitu.

^[3345] Compare Deut. 21.23; Gal. 3.13.

^[3346] The words “quiaet aliasantecedit rerum probatio rationem,” seem to refer to the parallel passage in adv. Judæos, where he has described the Jewish law of capital punishment, and argued for the exemption of Christ from its terms. He begins that paragraph with saying, “Sed hujus maledictionis sensum antecedit rerum ratio.” [See, p. 164, supra.]

^[3347] Perhaps rationale or procedure.

^[3348] Edocebo.

^[3349] Magis obumbrandum.

^[3350] But he may mean, by “ne demorer cursum,” “that I may not obstruct the course of the type,” by taking off attention from its true force. In the parallel place, however, another turn is given to the sense; Joseph is a type, “even on this ground—that I may but briefly allude to it—that he suffered,” etc.

^[3351] Deut. xxxiii. 17.

^[3352] Census.

^[3353] Gen. xlix. 6. The last clause is, “ceciderunt nervos tauro.”

^[3354] Vanum.

^[3355] Spectaculum salutare.

Chapter XIX.—Prophecies of the Death of Christ.

^[3356] Ps. xcvi. 10, with a ligno added.

^[3357] Lignarium aliquem regem.

^[3358] Isa. ix. 6.

^[3359] Isa. ix. 6.

^[3360] Jer. xi. 19.

^[3361] The twenty-second Psalm. A.V.

^[3362] Canentis.

^[3363] Ps. xxii. 16.

^[3364] Hæretica duritia.

^[3365] Passionum, literally sufferings, which would hardly give the sense.

^[3366] Nisi.

^[3367] Quo magis erubescat.

^[3368] Et—et—et.

^[3369] Isa. liii. 12.

^[3370] Both His own and His people’s.

Chapter XX.—The Subsequent Influence of Christ’s Death in the World Predicted. The Sure Mercies of David. What These are.

^[3371] Comp. adv. Judæos, 11 and 12.

^[3372] Ea paria.

^[3373] Evenire.

^[3374] Ps. ii. 7.

^[3375] Isa. xlii. 6, 7.

^[3376] Isa. lv. 4, 5.

^[3377] Isa. lv. 3.

^[3378] Censum. [Kaye, p. 149.]

^[3379] Ventris, “womb.”

^[3380] Ps. cxxxii. 11.

^[3381] He treats “body” as here meaning womb.

^[3382] Ipsius.

^[3383] Floruit ex.

^[3384] Viro deputare.

^[3385] The four books of the Kings were sometimes regarded as two, “the first” of which contained 1 and 2 Samuel, “the second” 1 and 2 Kings. The reference in this place is to 2 Samuel vii. 12.

^[3386] He here again makes bowels synonymous with womb.

^[3387] Magis.

^[3388] Habendus in.

^[3389] In 1 Kings xi. 14, “the Lord” is said to have done this. Comp. 2 Sam. 24.1; 1 Chron. 21.1

Chapter XXI.—The Call of the Gentiles Under the Influence of the Gospel Foretold.

^[3390] i.e., the Jews.

^[3391] Or perhaps, “are found to belong to the Creator’s Christ, not to Marcion’s.”

^[3392] Marcion denied that there was any prophecy of national or Gentile conversion; it was only the conversion of individual proselytes that he held.

^[3393] Allectio.

^[3394] Exorta est.

^[3395] Isa. ii. 2, 3.

^[3396] Sibynas, Σιβύνη· ὅπλον δόρατι παραπλήσιον. Hesychius, “Sibynam appellant Illyrii telum venabuli simile.” Paulus, ex Festo, p. 336, Müll. (Oehler.)

^[3397] Isa. ii. 4.

^[3398] Allectio.

^[3399] Junius explains the author’s induxerunt by deleverunt; i.e., “they annulled your opinion about proselytes being the sole called, by their promulgation of the gospel.”

Chapter XXII.—The Success of the Apostles, and Their Sufferings in the Cause of the Gospel, Foretold.

^[3400] Isa. 52.7; Rom. 10.15.

^[3401] Ps. xix. 5.

^[3402] Pamelius regards this as a quotation from Isa. xlvi. 12, 13, only put narratively, in order to indicate briefly its realization.

^[3403] Atquin.

^[3404] Isa. lii. 11.

^[3405] Universæ.

^[3406] Comp. Psa. 2.2-3; Acts 4.25-30.

^[3407] Exprobrat.

^[3408] Isa. lvii. 1.

^[3409] Wisd. of Sol. ii. 12.

^[3410] Ezek. ix. 4. The ms. which T. used seems to have agreed with the versions of Theodotion and Aquila mentioned thus by Origen (Selecta in Ezek.): ὁ δὲ ᾽Ακύλας καὶ Θεοδοτίων φασι. Σημείωσις τοῦ Θαῦ ἐπὶ τὰ μέτωπα, κ.τ.λ. Origen, in his own remarks, refers to the sign of the cross, as indicated by this letter. Ed. Bened. (by Migne), iii. 802.

^[3411] [Ambiguous, according to Kaye, p. 304, may mean a transition from Paganism to true Christianity.]

^[3412] Ps. xxii. 22, 25.

^[3413] Ps. lxviii. 26.

^[3414] Mal. i. 10, 11.

^[3415] [Kaye remarks that traditions of practice, unlike the traditions of doctrine, may be varied according to times and circumstances. See p. 286.]

Chapter XXIII.—The Dispersion of the Jews, and Their Desolate Condition for Rejecting Christ, Foretold.

^[3416] Isa. ii. 20.

^[3417] Architectum,Isa. iii. 1-3, abridged.

^[3418] Isa. v. 6, 7.

^[3419] Isa. lii. 5.

^[3420] Compare Adv. Judæos, 13, p. 171, for a like statement.

^[3421] Isa. i. 7, 8.

^[3422] Isa. i. 3, 4.

^[3423] Isa. i. 20.

^[3424] Ps. lix. 11.

^[3425] Exustionem.

^[3426] Isa. l. 11.

^[3427] Defensus, perhaps “claimed.”

^[3428] See Isa. liii. 9.

^[3429] Certe.

^[3430] Compare a passage in the Apology, chap. xxi. p. 34, supra.

^[3431] Jam vero.

^[3432] Admiserit per.

^[3433] Hoc affectavit.

^[3434] Plane.

Chapter XXIV.—Christ’s Millennial and Heavenly Glory in Company with His Saints.

^[3435] Immo.

^[3436] Apud inferos.

^[3437] Placatus.

^[3438] See below, in book iv. chap. iv.

^[3439] Ita ut describitur, i.e., in the literal sense.

^[3440] Persequi.

^[3441] Allegorica.

^[3442] Digestum.

^[3443] On the Hope of the Faithful. This work, which is not extant (although its title appears in one of the oldest mss. of Tertullian, the Codex Agobardinus), is mentioned by St. Jerome in his Commentary on Ezekiel, chap. xxxvi.; in the preface to his Comment. on Isaiah, chap. xviii.; and in his notice of Papias of Hierapolis (Oehler).

^[3444] Otiosum.

^[3445] [See Kaye’s important Comment. p. 345.]

^[3446] Rev. xxi. 2.

^[3447] Gal. iv. 26.

^[3448] Phil. iii. 20, “our conversation,” A.V.

^[3449] Deputat.

^[3450] Ezek. xlviii. 30-35.

^[3451] Rev. xxi. 10-23.

^[3452] That is, the Montanist. [Regarded as conclusive; but not conclusive evidence of an accomplished lapse from Catholic Communion.]

^[3453] He means that of Severus against the Parthians. Tertullian is the only author who mentions this prodigy.

^[3454] Evanescente.

^[3455] Et alias de proximo nullam: or “de proximo” may mean, “on a near approach.”

^[3456] Ratio.

^[3457] Apud: or, “in the dispensation of the Creator.”

^[3458] Dispositionis.

^[3459] Gen. xxvii. 28.

^[3460] Nostri, i.e., Christians. [Not Montanist, but Catholic.]

^[3461] Luke xii. 31.

^[3462] Gen. xxvii. 39.

^[3463] Judæorum enim dispositio in Esau priorum natu et posteriorum affectu filiorum. This is the original of a difficult passage, in which Tertullian, who has taken Jacob as a type of the later, the Christian church, seems to make Esau the symbol of the former, the Jewish church, which, although prior in time, was later in allegiance to the full truth of God.

^[3464] Temere, si forte, interpretabimur.

^[3465] Gen. xxviii. 12-17.

^[3466] Apud.

^[3467] Amos ix. 6.

^[3468] Isa. xlix. 18.

^[3469] Isa. lx. 8.

^[3470] In allusion to the dove as the symbol of the Spirit, see Matt. iii. 16.

^[3471] Dan. vii. 13.

^[3472] 1 Thess. iv. 17.

^[3473] Isa. i. 2.

^[3474] Præjudicium.

^[3475] Præconium.

^[3476] Si forte.

^[3477] Indulgentiæ.

^[3478] Regiam: perhaps “capital” or “palace.”

^[3479] Omne.

Book IV. In Which Tertullian Pursues His Argument. Jesus is the Christ of the Creator. He Derives His Proofs from St. Luke’s Gospel; That Being the Only Historical Portion of the New Testament Partially Accepted by Marcion. This Book May Also Be Regarded as a Commentary on St. Luke. It Gives Remarkable Proof of Tertullian’s Grasp of Scripture, and Proves that “The Old Testament is Not Contrary to the New.” It Also Abounds in Striking Expositions of Scriptural Passages, Embracing Profound Views of Revelation, in Connection with the Nature of Man.

^[3480] [The remarks of Bishop Kaye on our author’s Marcion are simply invaluable, and the student cannot dispense with what is said more particularly of this Book. See Kaye, pp. 450–480.]

Chapter I.—Examination of the Antitheses of Marcion, Bringing Them to the Test of Marcion’s Own Gospel. Certain True Antitheses in the Dispensations of the Old and the New Testaments. These Variations Quite Compatible with One and the Same God, Who Ordered Them.

^[3481] Paraturam.

^[3482] Provocamus ad. [Kaye, p. 469, refers to Schleiermacher’s Critical Essay on St. Luke and to a learned note of Mr. Andrews Norton of Harvard (vol. iii. Appendix C.) for valuable remarks on Marcion’s Gospel.]

^[3483] Et, emphatic.

^[3484] Dotem quandam.

^[3485] [See cap. 2, infra.]

^[3486] Patrocinaretur.

^[3487] Præscriptive occurere. This law term (the Greek παραγραφή) seems to refer to the Church’s “rule of faith” (præscriptio), which he might at once put in against Marcion’s heresy; only he prefers to refute him on his own ground.

^[3488] Atque adeo.

^[3489] Apud Creatorem.

^[3490] Olim.

^[3491] Isa. ii. 3.

^[3492] Isa. ii. 4.

^[3493] Isa. ii. 4.

^[3494] Isa. ii. 4, according to the Sept.

^[3495] Ps. xix. 7.

^[3496] T.’s version of Isa. x. 23. “Decisus Sermo” ="determined” of A.V.

^[3497] Compendiatum.

^[3498] Laciniosis.

^[3499] Isa. xliii. 18, 19.

^[3500] Novate novamen novum. Agricultural words.

^[3501] Altered version of Jer. iv. 3, 4.

^[3502] Jer. xxxi. 31, 32, with slight change.

^[3503] Isa. lv. 3.

^[3504] Secundum Mariæ censum. See Kitto’s Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature (third edition), in the article “Genealogy of Jesus Christ,” where the translator of this work has largely given reasons for believing that St. Luke in his genealogy, (chap. iii.) has traced the descent of the Virgin Mary. To the authorities there given may be added this passage of Tertullian, and a fuller one, Adversus Judæos, ix., towards the end. [p. 164, supra.]

^[3505] Isa. xi. 1.

^[3506] Mal. i. 10, 11.

^[3507] To its former self.

^[3508] Deut. xxxii. 39.

^[3509] Isa. xlv. 7.

^[3510] Recogitare.

^[3511] Saltim.

^[3512] Æmularum invicem.

^[3513] Præjudicatum est.

^[3514] In the external world.

^[3515] Sacramenta.

Chapter II.—St. Luke’s Gospel, Selected by Marcion as His Authority, and Mutilated by Him. The Other Gospels Equally Authoritative. Marcion’s Terms of Discussion, However, Accepted, and Grappled with on the Footing of St. Luke’s Gospel Alone.

^[3516] Expeditam a nobis.

^[3517] [The term εὐαγγέλιον was often employed for a written book, says Kaye (p. 298), who refers to Book i. cap. 1. supra, etc.]

^[3518] Interim, perhaps “occasionally.”

^[3519] Præstructuram.

^[3520] Instrumentum. [See cap. 1, supra. And, above, note 9. Also in cap. iii. and the Apology, (cap. xlvii.) he calls the Testaments, Digests, or Sancta Digesta.]

^[3521] By this canon of his, that the true Gospels must have for their authors either apostles or companions and disciples of apostles, he shuts out the false Gospels of the heretics, such as the Ebionites, Encratites, Nazarenes, and Marcionites (Le Prieur).

^[3522] Apostolicos, companions of the apostles associated in the authorship.

^[3523] He means, of course, St. Mark and St. Luke.

^[3524] Adsistat illi.

^[3525] Immo Christi.

^[3526] Insinuant.

^[3527] Instaurant.

^[3528] Isdem regulis.

^[3529] Supplementum.

^[3530] Viderit.

^[3531] De capite.

^[3532] Scilicet.

^[3533] Evertere.

^[3534] Congredi.

^[3535] Dissimulamus.

^[3536] Ex nostro.

^[3537] Compare Irenæus, Adversus Hæreses (Harvey), i. 25 and iii. 11; also Epiphanius, Hær. xlii. See also the editor’s notes on the passages in Irenæus, who quotes other authorities also, and shows the particulars of Marcion’s mutilations. [Vol. I. 429.]

^[3538] Quem cæderet.

^[3539] Posterior.

^[3540] See Hieronymi, Catal. Scriptt. Eccles. 7, and Fabricius’ notes.

^[3541] Instrumenti.

^[3542] Gal. ii. 2.

^[3543] [Dr. Holmes not uniformly, yet constantly inserts the prefix St. before the name of Paul, and brackets it, greatly disfiguring the page. It is not in our author’s text, but I venture to dispense with the ever-recurring brackets.]

Chapter III.—Marcion Insinuated the Untrustworthiness of Certain Apostles Whom St. Paul Rebuked. The Rebuke Shows that It Cannot Be Regarded as Derogating from Their Authority. The Apostolic Gospels Perfectly Authentic.

^[3544] This is Oehler’s arrangement of the chapter, for the sake of the sense. The former editions begin this third chapter with “Sed enim Marcion nactus.”

^[3545] Aliud est si.

^[3546] Sacramentum.

^[3547] Habuit utique.

^[3548] Paraturam.

^[3549] Sed enim.

^[3550] See Gal. ii. 13, 14.

^[3551] Compare what has been already said in book i. chap. 20, and below in book v. chap. 3. See also Tertullian’s treatise, De Præscript. Hæret. chap. 23. [Kaye, p. 275.]

^[3552] Statum.

^[3553] Propria.

^[3554] Variare convictum.

^[3555] 1 Cor. ix. 22.

^[3556] Integrum.

^[3557] Inde nostra digesta.

^[3558] Germanum instrumentum.

^[3559] That is, according to the Marcionite cavil.

^[3560] De titulo quoque.

Chapter IV.—Each Side Claims to Possess the True Gospel. Antiquity the Criterion of Truth in Such a Matter. Marcion’s Pretensions as an Amender of the Gospel.

^[3561] Funis ducendus est.

^[3562] Ratio.

^[3563] Præjudicans.

^[3564] Posterius revincetur. See De Præscriptione Hæret., which goes on this principle of time. Compare especially chapters xxix. and xxx. [p. 256, supra.]

^[3565] Falsum.

^[3566] Passione.

^[3567] Materia.

^[3568] De veritate materiam.

^[3569] Sæculo post.

^[3570] Interim.

^[3571] Communio ejus.

^[3572] De veritate disceptat.

^[3573] Quod est secundum nos. [A note of T.’s position.]

^[3574] Projectam. [Catholic = Primitive.]

^[3575] Præferunt.

^[3576] Penes nos.

^[3577] Post futura.

^[3578] Sane.

^[3579] Eversi.

^[3580] Nisi quod.

^[3581] Matt. x. 24.

^[3582] 1 Cor. xv. 11.

^[3583] 1 Cor. xiv. 32.

^[3584] Gal. i. 8.

Chapter V.—By the Rule of Antiquity, the Catholic Gospels are Found to Be True, Including the Real St. Luke’s. Marcion’s Only a Mutilated Edition. The Heretic’s Weakness and Inconsistency in Ignoring the Other Gospels.

^[3585] [On this whole chapter and subject, consult Kaye, pp. 278–289.]

^[3586] Sacrosanctum. Inviolate. Westcott, On the Canon, p. 384. Compare De Præscript. Hæret. c. 36, supra.

^[3587] De proximo. Westcott renders this, “who are nearest to us.” See in loco.

^[3588] et…et. [N.B. Not Peter’s See, then.]

^[3589] Alumnas ecclesias. He seems to allude to the seven churches of the Apocalypse.

^[3590] [Not the Order of bishops (as we now speak) but of their succession from St. John. Kaye, p. 219.]

^[3591] Generositas.

^[3592] De societate sacramenti. [i.e. Catholic Unity.]

^[3593] Eadem.

^[3594] Plane.

^[3595] Censum.

^[3596] Examine.

^[3597] Favos. See Pliny, Nat. Hist. xi. 21.

^[3598] Patrocinabitur. [Jones on the Canon, Vol. I. p. 66.]

^[3599] Proinde per illas.

^[3600] See Hieronymus, Catal. Scriptt. Eccles. c. 8.

^[3601] Digestum.

^[3602] See above, chap. 2, p. 347.

^[3603] Capit videri.

^[3604] Flagitandus.

^[3605] Potius institerit.

^[3606] The Gospels of the apostles John and Matthew, and perhaps Mark’s also, as being St. Peter’s.

^[3607] Dedicata cum.

^[3608] Competit.

^[3609] Confirmavit.

^[3610] Denique.

^[3611] Apostolica, i.e., evangelia.

^[3612] That is, the canonical Gospel of St. Luke, as distinct from Marcion’s corruption of it. [N.B. “Us” = Catholics.]

^[3613] Traducto.

^[3614] Nunc—nunc.

^[3615] Nunc—nunc.

^[3616] Expedimur.

^[3617] Fide, integrity.

^[3618] Posteritati falsariorum præscribentem.

^[3619] [Mark the authority of churches. He uses the plural—quod ab omnibus.]

Chapter VI.—Marcion’s Object in Adulterating the Gospel. No Difference Between the Christ of the Creator and the Christ of the Gospel. No Rival Christ Admissible. The Connection of the True Christ with the Dispensation of the Old Testament Asserted.

^[3620] Certe, for certo.

^[3621] Propterea.

^[3622] Conveniemus.

^[3623] Sic habebit.

^[3624] This seems to be the sense of the words, “sub illa utique conditione quæ ex utraque parte condicta sit.”

^[3625] Scindit.

^[3626] That is, between what is severe and judicial and punitive on one side, that is, the Creator’s; and what is mild, merciful, and forgiving, on the other, that is, the Redeemer’s side (Rigalt.).

^[3627] Præscriptio.

^[3628] Defigimus.

^[3629] Creatoris pronunciandum.

^[3630] Adjuverit.

^[3631] Repræsentaverit.

^[3632] Restauraverit virtutes ejus.

^[3633] Sententias reformaverit.

Chapter VII.—Marcion Rejected the Preceding Portion of St. Luke’s Gospel. Therefore This Review Opens with an Examination of the Case of the Evil Spirit in the Synagogue of Capernaum. He Whom the Demon Acknowledged Was the Creator’s Christ.

^[3634] Luke 3.1; 4.31.

^[3635] Utique.

^[3636] Ecquid ordinis.

^[3637] See above, book i. chap. xxiii. [Comp. i. cap. xix.]

^[3638] This is here the force of viderit, our author’s very favourite idiom.

^[3639] Apparere.

^[3640] Sapit.

^[3641] Impegerit.

^[3642] Descendisse autem, dum fit, videtur et subit oculos. Probably this bit of characteristic Latinity had better be rendered thus: “The accomplishment of a descent, however, is, whilst happening, a visible process, and one that meets the eye.” Of the various readings, “dum sit,” “dum it,” “dum fit,” we take the last with Oehler, only understanding the clause as a parenthesis.

^[3643] Suggestu.

^[3644] Indignum.

^[3645] Cui.

^[3646] Ingressuro prædicationem.

^[3647] This is the literal rendering of Tertullian’s version of the prophet’s words, which occur chap. ix. 1, 2. The first clause closely follows the LXX. (ed. Tisch.): Τοῦτο πρῶτον πίε, ταχύ ποίει. This curious passage is explained by Grotius (on Matt. iv. 14) as a mistake of ancient copyists; as if what the Seventy had originally rendered ταχὺ ποίει, from the hiphil of קלל, had been faultily written ταχὺ πίε, and the latter had crept into the text with the marginal note πρῶτον, instead of a repetition of ταχὺ. However this be, Tertullian’s old Latin Bible had the passage thus: “Hoc primum bibito, cito facito, regio Zabulon,” etc.

^[3648] Si utique.

^[3649] Agnoscere.

^[3650] Matt. v. 17.

^[3651] Additum.

^[3652] Matt. xv. 24.

^[3653] Matt. xv. 26.

^[3654] Præfert.

^[3655] Tam repentinus.

^[3656] Etsi passim adiretur.

^[3657] Luke iv. 32.

^[3658] Eloquium.

^[3659] Facilius.

^[3660] That is, the Creator.

^[3661] Luke iv. 33, 34.

^[3662] Si non Creatoris.

^[3663] See above, in book iii. chap. xii., on the name Emmanuel; in chap. xv., on the name Christ; and in chap. xvi., on the name Jesus.

^[3664] Quid tale ediderit.

^[3665] Psa. 16.10; Dan. 9.24.

^[3666] Compare what was said above in book iii., chap. xvi. p. 335.

^[3667] Exceperat.

^[3668] Such is our author’s reading of Luke i. 35.

^[3669] Matt. i. 21.

^[3670] Sævi.

^[3671] Optimi.

^[3672] Præmisimus.

^[3673] De candida salutis: see Luke x. 20.

^[3674] Aut cur.

^[3675] Quidem.

^[3676] Verisimiliorem statum.

Chapter VIII.—Other Proofs from the Same Chapter, that Jesus, Who Preached at Nazareth, and Was Acknowledged by Certain Demons as Christ the Son of God, Was the Creator’s Christ. As Occasion Offers, the Docetic Errors of Marcion are Exposed.

^[3677] Habebat.

^[3678] Ipso nomine, or by His very name.

^[3679] Nazaræos; or, Nazarites. [Christians were still so called by the Jews in the Third Century. Kaye, 446.]

^[3680] Lam. iv. 7.

^[3681] Descendit apud, see Luke iv. 16-30.

^[3682] Emancipata.

^[3683] Luke iv. 23.

^[3684] Luke iv. 29.

^[3685] Luke iv. 24.

^[3686] A rebuke of Marcion’s Docetic views of Christ.

^[3687] Scilicet.

^[3688] Per caliginem.

^[3689] “For nothing can touch and be touched but a bodily substance.” This line from Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, i. 305, is again quoted by Tertullian in his De Anima, chap. v. (Oehler).

^[3690] Luke iv. 40.

^[3691] See Isa. liii. 4.

^[3692] Interim.

^[3693] Luke iv. 41.

^[3694] Proinde enim.

^[3695] Illius erat.

^[3696] Porro.

^[3697] Propriæ non habebat.

^[3698] Præ timore.

^[3699] See above, book i. chap. vii. xxvi. and xxvii.

^[3700] Materiæ.

^[3701] Cedebant.

^[3702] Aut nunquid.

^[3703] Necessitatem.

^[3704] In aliam notam.

^[3705] Luke iv. 42.

^[3706] Sermonem. [Nota Bene, Acts vii. 38.]

^[3707] Habitus loci.

^[3708] The law was given in the wilderness of Sinai; see Ex. xix. 1.

^[3709] Isa. xxxv. 1.

^[3710] Luke iv. 42, 43.

Chapter IX.—Out of St. Luke’s Fifth Chapter are Found Proofs of Christ’s Belonging to the Creator, E.g. In the Call of Fishermen to the Apostolic Office, and in the Cleansing of the Leper. Christ Compared with the Prophet Elisha.

^[3711] Argumentum processurum erat.

^[3712] See Luke v. 1-11.

^[3713] Jer. xvi. 16.

^[3714] Attentius argumentatur.

^[3715] Apud illum, i.e., the Creator.

^[3716] Luke v. 12-14.

^[3717] 1 Cor. v. 11.

^[3718] Per carnalia, by material things.

^[3719] Hoc nomine.

^[3720] Æmulus.

^[3721] Another allusion to Marcion’s Docetic doctrine.

^[3722] Materiam.

^[3723] Unicum.

^[3724] Ex., literally, “alone of.” So Luke iv. 27.

^[3725] Compare 2 Kings 5.9-14; Luke 4.27.

^[3726] Facilius—rather than of Israelites.

^[3727] Per Nationes. [Bishop Andrewes thus classifies the “Sins of the Nations,” as Tertullian’s idea seems to have suggested: (1) Pride, Amorite; (2) Envy, Hittite; (3) Wrath, Perizzite; (4) Gluttony, Girgashite; (5) Lechery, Hivite; (6) Covetousness, Canaanite; (7) Sloth, Jebusite.]

^[3728] Compare, in Simeon’s song, Luke ii. 32, the designation, “A light to lighten the Gentiles.”

^[3729] [See Elucidation I.]

^[3730] Such seems to be the meaning of the obscure passage in the original, “Syro facilius emundato significato per nationes emundationis in Christo lumine earum quæ septem maculis, capitalium delictorum inhorrerent, idoatria,” etc. We have treated significato as one member of an ablative absolute clause, from significatum, a noun occuring in Gloss. Lat. Gr. synonymous with δήλωσις. Rigault, in a note on the passage, imputes the obscurity to Tertullian’s arguing on the Marcionite hypothesis. “Marcion,” says he, “held that the prophets, like Elisha, belonged to the Creator, and Christ to the good God. To magnify Christ’s beneficence, he prominently dwells on the alleged fact, that Christ, although a stranger to the Creator’s world, yet vouchsafed to do good in it. This vain conceit Tertullian refutes from the Marcionite hypothesis itself. God the Creator, said they, had found Himself incapable of cleansing this Israelite; but He had more easily cleansed the Syrian. Christ, however, cleansed the Israelite, and so showed himself the superior power. Tertullian denies both positions.”

^[3731] Quasi per singulos titulos.

^[3732] There was a mystic completeness in the number seven.

^[3733] Dicabatur.

^[3734] Sicut sermonem compendiatum, ita et lavacrum. In chap. i. of this book, the N.T. is called the compendiatum. This illustrates the present phrase.

^[3735] Et hoc opponit.

^[3736] Repræsentavit.

^[3737] Quasi non audeam.

^[3738] Vindicare in.

^[3739] Plane. An ironical cavil from the Marcionite view.

^[3740] Si tamen major.

^[3741] Luke v. 14.

^[3742] Utpote prophetatæ.

^[3743] Emaculatum.

^[3744] [i.e., the Great High Priest whose sacrifice is accepted of the Father, for the sins of the whole world.]

^[3745] Suscepturus: to carry or take away.

^[3746] Legis indultor.

^[3747] Advenit.

^[3748] Atquin.

^[3749] Formam.

^[3750] Ab ea avertendos.

^[3751] Aliquatenus.

^[3752] Jam.

^[3753] Supervacuus.

^[3754] Gradu.

^[3755] Ecce.

^[3756] Sententiam.

^[3757] Matt. v. 17.

^[3758] Quod salvum est.

^[3759] That is, you retain the passage in St. Luke, which relates the act of honouring the law; but you reject that in St. Matthew, which contains Christ’s profession of honouring the law.

^[3760] Nostros: or, perhaps, “our people,”—that is, the Catholics.

Chapter X.—Further Proofs of the Same Truth in the Same Chapter, from the Healing of the Paralytic, and from the Designation Son of Man Which Jesus Gives Himself. Tertullian Sustains His Argument by Several Quotations from the Prophets.

^[3761] Luke v. 16-26.

^[3762] Isa. xxxv. 2.

^[3763] Isa. xxxv. 3 in an altered form.

^[3764] Isa. xxxv. 4.

^[3765] Animi vigorem.

^[3766] This seems to be Isa. liii. 12, last clause.

^[3767] Isa. i. 18.

^[3768] Mic. vii. 18, 19.

^[3769] Jonah iii. 10.

^[3770] Circumduxit.

^[3771] 2 Sam. xii. 13.

^[3772] 1 Kings xxi. 29.

^[3773] Resignati jejunii. See 1 Sam. xiv. 43-45.

^[3774] Ezek. xxxiii. 11.

^[3775] Consequens est ut ostendas.

^[3776] Istam.

^[3777] Parem.

^[3778] See book i. chap. xxvi.–xxviii.

^[3779] Admonere.

^[3780] Retractare: give a set treatise about them.

^[3781] Præscriptio.

^[3782] To secure terseness in the premisses, we are obliged to lengthen out the brief terms of the conclusion, virgo est.

^[3783] Si forte.

^[3784] Isa. vii. 14.

^[3785] Si et Dei.

^[3786] Si neque patris.

^[3787] On Marcion’s principles, it must be remembered.

^[3788] Compare T.’s treatise, Adversus Valentinianos, chap. xii.

^[3789] Censentur.

^[3790] Si forte.

^[3791] Nominum communio simplex.

^[3792] Defendimus. See above, book iii. chap. xv. xvi.

^[3793] Ex accidenti obvenit.

^[3794] Super.

^[3795] Proprio.

^[3796] Non convenit.

^[3797] Causam.

^[3798] The context explains the difference between nomen and appellatio. The former refers to the name Jesus or Christ, the latter to the designation Son of man.

^[3799] Dan. iii. 25.

^[3800] Dan. vii. 13.

^[3801] Secundum intentionem eorum.

^[3802] Eum: that is, man.

^[3803] Repercutere.

^[3804] Scandalo isto.

^[3805] Denique.

^[3806] Dispice.

^[3807] Interpellandi.

^[3808] Corpus ex corpore.

^[3809] Plane: introducing the sharp irony.

^[3810] This is perhaps the best sense of T.’s sarcasm: “Atque adeo (thus far) inspice cor Pontici aut (or else) cerebrum.”

Chapter XI.—The Call of Levi the Publican. Christ in Relation to the Baptist. Christ as the Bridegroom. The Parable of the Old Wine and the New. Arguments Connecting Christ with the Creator.

^[3811] He means Levi or St. Matthew; see Luke v. 27-39.

^[3812] Profanum.

^[3813] Matt. xvi. 17.

^[3814] Luke v. 31.

^[3815] Male descendit.

^[3816] Homo a deo Marcionis.

^[3817] See chap. vii. of this book, and chap. ii. of book. iii.

^[3818] Plenum ordinem.

^[3819] See below, chap. xviii.

^[3820] Tuebor.

^[3821] Ipsum.

^[3822] Marcion’s diversitas implied an utter incompatibility between John and Christ; for it assigned John to the Creator, from whom it took Christ away.

^[3823] De disciplinis: or, “about discipleships.”

^[3824] De auctoritatibus; or, “about the authors thereof.”

^[3825] Humiliter.

^[3826] Luke v. 34, 35.

^[3827] Concessit.

^[3828] Rejecturus alioquin.

^[3829] Ps. xix. 5, 6.

^[3830] Isa. lxi. 10.

^[3831] Deputat.

^[3832] The same, which spake again by Isaiah.

^[3833] Isa. xlix. 18.

^[3834] Song of Sol. iv. 8.

^[3835] There is also in Hebrew an affinity between לֹבנה, “frankincense,” and לֹבִבוז, “Lebanon.” [Note this strange but reiterated and emphatic identification of incense with idolatry. In the Gentile church it was thoroughly identified with Paganism.]

^[3836] See also book i. chap. xxix. [On this reservation of Baptism see Elucidation II.]

^[3837] Alter.

^[3838] Jer. iv. 3.

^[3839] His reading of (probably) Isa. 43.19; 2 Cor. 5.17.

^[3840] Olim statuimus.

^[3841] Ille.

^[3842] Novitas.

^[3843] Vetustas.

^[3844] That is, “the oldness of the law.”

^[3845] That is, “the newness of the gospel.”

^[3846] Notandam.

^[3847] Separatione. The more general reading is separationem.

^[3848] Alienis: i.e., “things not his own.”

^[3849] Amplitudinem.

^[3850] Provehitur, “is developed.”

^[3851] Aliud.

^[3852] See Ps. lxxviii. 2.

Chapter XII.—Christ’s Authority Over the Sabbath. As Its Lord He Recalled It from Pharisaic Neglect to the Original Purpose of Its Institution by the Creator the Case of the Disciples Who Plucked the Ears of Corn on the Sabbath. The Withered Hand Healed on the Sabbath.

^[3853] Circumferret.

^[3854] Cur destrueret.

^[3855] Deberet.

^[3856] Institutione: or, teaching, perhaps.

^[3857] Alium.

^[3858] Intervertit.

^[3859] Operatione.

^[3860] Concussum est sabbatum.

^[3861] Per Jesum.

^[3862] Professus…sequebatur.

^[3863] Isa. i. 14.

^[3864] This obscure passage runs thus in the original: “Marcion captat status controversiæ (ut aliquid ludam cum mei Domini veritate), scripti et voluntatis.” Status is a technical word in rhetoric. “Est quæstio quæ ex prima causarum conflictione nascitur.” See Cicero, Topic. c. 25, Part. c. 29; and Quinctilian, Instit. Rhetor. iii. 6. (Oehler).

^[3865] Sumitur color.

^[3866] Luke vi. 1-4; 1 Sam. xxi. 2-6.

^[3867] Affectum.

^[3868] Tunc demum.

^[3869] Statum.

^[3870] Non constanter tuebatur.

^[3871] Non contristandi quam vacandi.

^[3872] [This adoption of an Americanism is worthy of passing notice.]

^[3873] Placet illi quia Creator indulsit.

^[3874] Luke vi. 7.

^[3875] That is, the Christ of another God.

^[3876] Ex. xx. 16.

^[3877] It is impossible to say where Tertullian got this reading. Perhaps his LXX. copy might have had (in Ex. xx. 10): Οὐ ποιήσεις ἐν αὐτῇ πᾶν ἔργον σου, instead of συ; every clause ending in σου, which follows in that verse. No critical authority, however, now known warrants such a reading. [It is probably based inferentially on Ex. 20.9, “all thy work.”]

^[3878] Ex. xii. 16.

^[3879] The LXX. of the latter clause of Ex. xii. 16 thus runs: πλὴν ὅσα ποιηθήσεται πάσῃ ψυχῇ. Tertullian probably got this reading from this clause, although the Hebrew is to this effect: “Save that which every man (or, every soul) must eat,” which the Vulgate renders: “Exceptis his, quæ ad vescendum pertinent.”

^[3880] Liberandæ animæ: perhaps saving life.

^[3881] In salutem animæ: or, for saving life.

^[3882] Luke vi. 9.

^[3883] Pro anima: or, for a life.

^[3884] Animæ omni: or, any life.

^[3885] Luke vi. 5.

^[3886] Tuebatur.

^[3887] Merito.

^[3888] Destructum. We have, as has been most convenient, rendered this word by annul, destroy, break.

^[3889] Et.

^[3890] Isa. i. 13, 14.

^[3891] Isa. xxix. 13.

^[3892] Isa. 58.13; 56.2.

^[3893] Matt. v. 17.

^[3894] Obstruxit.

^[3895] “Destroy”…It was hardly necessary for Oehler to paraphrase our author’s characteristically strong sentence by, “since Marcion thought that he had gagged,” etc.

^[3896] In other words, “permits to be done on the Sabbath.”

^[3897] Præsidia.

^[3898] Quod, not quæ, as if in apposition with præsidia.

^[3899] See 2 Kings iv. 23.

^[3900] Olim.

^[3901] Forma.

^[3902] Repræsentat.

^[3903] Isa. xxxv. 3.

Chapter XIII.—Christ’s Connection with the Creator Shown. Many Quotations Out of the Old Testament Prophetically Bear on Certain Events of the Life of Jesus—Such as His Ascent to Praying on the Mountain; His Selection of Twelve Apostles; His Changing Simon’s Name to Peter, and Gentiles from Tyre and Sidon Resorting to Him.

^[3904] Luke vi. 12.

^[3905] Ordinem.

^[3906] Isa. xl. 9.

^[3907] In vigore. Or this phrase may qualify the noun thus: “They were astonished at His doctrine, in its might.”

^[3908] Luke iv. 32.

^[3909] Isa. lii. 6.

^[3910] Our author’s reading of Isa. lii. 7.

^[3911] Nahum i. 15.

^[3912] Ps. xxii. 2.

^[3913] Ps. iii. 4.

^[3914] Luke vi. 13-19.

^[3915] Næ.

^[3916] Interpretari.

^[3917] Apud creatorem.

^[3918] Num. xxxiii. 9.

^[3919] Ex. xxviii. 13-21.

^[3920] Isa. xliii. 20.

^[3921] Simpliciter: i.e., simply or without relation to any types or prophecies.

^[3922] Non simpliciter.

^[3923] Res.

^[3924] Rei præparatura.

^[3925] Luke vi. 14. [Elucidation III.]

^[3926] Isa. viii. 14; Rom. ix. 33; 1 Pet. ii. 8.

^[3927] Cætera.

^[3928] Affectavit.

^[3929] De non suis; opposed to the de figuris suis peculiariter. [St. Peter was not the dearest of the Apostles though he was the foremost.]

^[3930] Ps. lxxxvii. 4, 5, according to the Septuagint.

^[3931] Mari.

^[3932] Isa. xlix. 12.

^[3933] Isa. xlix. 18.

^[3934] Isa. xlix. 21.

Chapter XIV.—Christ’s Sermon on the Mount. In Manner and Contents It So Resembles the Creator’s Dispensational Words and Deeds. It Suggests Therefore the Conclusion that Jesus is the Creator’s Christ. The Beatitudes.

^[3935] Proprietatem.

^[3936] The original runs thus: “Venio nunc ad ordinarias sententias ejus, per quas proprietatem doctrinæ suæ inducit ad edictum, ut ita dixerim, Christi.” There is here an allusion to the edict of the Roman prætor, that is, his public announcement, in which he states (when entering on his office) the rules by which he will be guided in the administration of the same (see White and Riddle, Latin Dict. s. v. Edictum).

^[3937] οί πτωχοι, not πένητες

^[3938] Luke vi. 20.

^[3939] Ps. xlv. 1. [And see Vol. I. p. 213, supra.]

^[3940] Affectibus.

^[3941] Prout incidit.

^[3942] Ps. lxxxii. 3, 4.

^[3943] Ps. lxxii. 4.

^[3944] Ps. lxxii. 11.

^[3945] Ps. lxxii. 12, 13, 14.

^[3946] Ps. ix. 17, 18.

^[3947] Ps. cxiii. 5-8.

^[3948] The books of “Samuel” were also called the books of “Kings.”

^[3949] 1 Sam. ii. 8.

^[3950] Isa. iii. 14, 15.

^[3951] Isa. x. 1, 2.

^[3952] Solatii.

^[3953] Tertullian seems to have read διαλλαχθῶμεν instead of διαλεχθῶμεν, let us reason together, in his LXX.

^[3954] Isa. i. 17, 18.

^[3955] Jamdudum pertinent.

^[3956] Luke vi. 21.

^[3957] In evangelii scilicet sui præstructionem.

^[3958] Isa. v. 26.

^[3959] Isa. lxv. 13.

^[3960] An Christo præministrentur.

^[3961] Luke vi. 21.

^[3962] Isa. lxv. 13, 14.

^[3963] Ps. cxxvi. 5.

^[3964] Gestivit.

^[3965] Isa. lxi. 1.

^[3966] Luke vi. 20.

^[3967] Isa. lxi. 1.

^[3968] Luke vi. 21.

^[3969] Isa. lxi. 2.

^[3970] Luke vi. 21.

^[3971] Isa. lxi. 3.

^[3972] Statim admissus.

^[3973] Said in irony, as if Marcion’s Christ deserved the rejection.

^[3974] Luke vi. 22.

^[3975] His reading of Isa. li. 7.

^[3976] Isa. lii. 5.

^[3977] Sancite.

^[3978] Circumscribit.

^[3979] Famulis et magistratibus. It is uncertain what passage this quotation represents. It sounds like some of the clauses of Isa. liii.

^[3980] Personam nominis.

^[3981] Sancitur.

Chapter XV.—Sermon on the Mount Continued. Its Woes in Strict Agreement with the Creator’s Disposition. Many Quotations Out of the Old Testament in Proof of This.

^[3982] Luke vi. 26.

^[3983] Versipellem. An indignant exclamation on Marcion’s Christ.

^[3984] Suggillans.

^[3985] Porro.

^[3986] Hic.

^[3987] Suggillaverunt. This is Oehler’s emendation; the common reading is figuraverunt.

^[3988] Motus est.

^[3989] Deus optimus.

^[3990] That is, apathetic, inert, and careless about human affairs.

^[3991] Demutat.

^[3992] Ejus erunt.

^[3993] Sufferentiam.

^[3994] Benignitatem.

^[3995] Ad maledictionem præcavendam.

^[3996] Deut. xxx. 19.

^[3997] Portendebat in.

^[3998] Opposuit.

^[3999] Timendum.

^[4000] Creatori docere.

^[4001] Ratas habet.

^[4002] Divitum causas.

^[4003] Gloriam.

^[4004] Erit par creatoris.

^[4005] Austerioris.

^[4006] Aspernatorem.

^[4007] Advocatorem.

^[4008] 1 Kings iii. 5-13.

^[4009] Vitia.

^[4010] Luke vi. 24. [See Southey’s Wesley, on “Riches,” vol. ii. p. 310.]

^[4011] Deut. viii. 12-14.

^[4012] Tertullian says, ex Perside.

^[4013] Insilit.

^[4014] Isa. xxxix. 6.

^[4015] Jer. ix. 23, 24.

^[4016] Isa. iii. 16-24.

^[4017] Homo: “the mean man,” A.V.

^[4018] Vir.

^[4019] Isa. v. 14.

^[4020] Isa. x. 33.

^[4021] Ps. xlix. 16, 17.

^[4022] Relucent.

^[4023] Ps. lxii. 11.

^[4024] Amos vi. 1-6.

^[4025] Luke vi. 25.

^[4026] Isa. lxv. 13.

^[4027] Ps. cxxvi. 5.

^[4028] Distinguendo.

^[4029] Luke vi. 26.

^[4030] Isa. iii. 12.

^[4031] Jer. xvii. 5.

^[4032] Ps. cxviii. 8, 9.

^[4033] Nedum benedictionem.

^[4034] Non pertinuissent ad.

Chapter XVI.—The Precept of Loving One’s Enemies. It is as Much Taught in the Creator’s Scriptures of the Old Testament as in Christ’s Sermon. The Lex Talionis of Moses Admirably Explained in Consistency with the Kindness and Love Which Jesus Christ Came to Proclaim and Enforce in Behalf of the Creator. Sundry Precepts of Charity Explained.

^[4035] 2 Esdras xv. 1 and comp. Luke vi. 27, 28.

^[4036] Benedicite. St. Luke’s word, however, is καλῶς ποιεῖτε, “do good.”

^[4037] Calumniantur. St. Luke’s word applies to injury of speech as well as of act.

^[4038] Isa. lxvi. 5.

^[4039] “We have here the sense of Marcion’s objection. I do not suppose Tertullian quotes his very words.”—Le Prieur.

^[4040] Le Prieur refers to a similar passage in Tertullian’s De Patientia, chap. vi. Oehler quotes an eloquent passage in illustration from Valerianus Episc. Hom. xiii.

^[4041] Ex. xxi. 24.

^[4042] Luke vi. 29.

^[4043] Renuntiandum est.

^[4044] Penes.

^[4045] Zech. vii. 10.

^[4046] Zech. viii. 17.

^[4047] Deut. 32.35; Rom. 12.19; Heb. 10.30.

^[4048] Fidem non capit.

^[4049] Talione, opposito.

^[4050] Leges talionis. [Judicial, not personal, reprisals.]

^[4051] Voluntatem.

^[4052] Compotem facit. That is, says Oehler, intellectus sui.

^[4053] Prophetia.

^[4054] Disciplinas: or, “lessons.”

^[4055] Denique.

^[4056] Considerem, or, as some of the editions have it, consideremus.

^[4057] Alioquin.

^[4058] In vacuum.

^[4059] Præstare, i.e., debuerat præstare.

^[4060] Passim.

^[4061] Excitatura.

^[4062] Luke vi. 30.

^[4063] Datori.

^[4064] The author’s reading of Deut. xv. 4.

^[4065] Cura ultro ne sit.

^[4066] Præjudicat.

^[4067] Deut. xv. 7, 8.

^[4068] De fenore.

^[4069] Below, in the next chapter.

^[4070] This obscure passage runs thus: “Immo unum erit ex his per quæ lex Creatoris erit in Christo.”

^[4071] Prior ea.

^[4072] This is the idea, apparently, of Tertullian’s question: “Quis enim poterit diligere extraneos?” But a different turn is given to the sense in the older reading of the passage: Quis enim non diligens proximos poterit diligere extraneos? “For who that loveth not his neighbours will be able to love strangers?” The inserted words, however, were inserted conjecturally by Fulvius Ursinus without ms. authority.

^[4073] Gradus.

^[4074] Cujus non extitit primus.

^[4075] In proximos.

^[4076] Sacramentum.

^[4077] The sense rather than the words of Hos. i. 6, 9.

^[4078] Luke vi. 31.

^[4079] Passivitatem sententiæ meæ.

^[4080] Parem factum.

^[4081] Possim.

^[4082] Præstare.

^[4083] Hac inconvenientia voluntatis et facti. Will and action.

^[4084] Non agitur.

^[4085] Strictum.

^[4086] Pro meo arbitrio.

^[4087] At enim. The Greek ἀλλὰ γάρ.

^[4088] Isa. lviii. 7.

^[4089] Ezek. xviii. 7.

^[4090] Ex. xx. 13-16.

^[4091] Merito.

^[4092] “Recisum sermonem facturus in terris Dominus.” This reading of Isa. x. 23 is very unlike the original, but (as frequently happens in Tertullian) is close upon the Septuagint version: ῞Οτι λόγον συντετμημένον Κύριος ποιήσει ἐν τῇ οἰκουμένῃ ὅλῃ. [Rom. ix. 28.]

Chapter XVII.—Concerning Loans. Prohibition of Usury and the Usurious Spirit. The Law Preparatory to the Gospel in Its Provisions; So in the Present Instance. On Reprisals. Christ’s Teaching Throughout Proves Him to Be Sent by the Creator.

^[4093] Luke vi. 34. [Bossuet, Traité de l’usure, Opp. ix. 48.]

^[4094] Ezek. xviii. 8. [Huet, Règne Social, etc., p. 334. Paris, 1858.]

^[4095] Literally, what redounds to the loan.

^[4096] Fructum fenoris: the interest.

^[4097] Quorundam tunc fidem.

^[4098] Primis quibusque præceptis.

^[4099] Balbutientis adhuc benignitatis. [Elucidation IV.]

^[4100] Pignus reddes dati (i.e., fenoris) is his reading of a clause in Ezek. xviii. 16.

^[4101] Deut. xxiv. 12, 13.

^[4102] Deut. xv. 2.

^[4103] Luke vi. 35. In the original the phrase is, υἱοὶ τοῦ ύψίστου.

^[4104] One of the flagrant errors of Marcion’s belief of God. See above, chap. xi.

^[4105] Quam spado.

^[4106] Hoc eram ejus.

^[4107] Ante duos unum. Before God made Adam and Eve one flesh, “I was created Adam, not became so by birth.”—Fr. Junius.

^[4108] Denuo.

^[4109] Me enixus est.

^[4110] Non in animam sed in spiritum.

^[4111] Luke vi. 35.

^[4112] Euge.

^[4113] Suavis.

^[4114] Eloquia.

^[4115] Ps. xix. 11.

^[4116] Suggillavit.

^[4117] Reading of Luke vi. 36.

^[4118] Isa. lviii. 7.

^[4119] Isa. i. 17.

^[4120] Hos. vi. 6.

^[4121] Luke vi. 37, 38.

^[4122] Apud quem.

^[4123] Mensus fuerit.

^[4124] Luke vi. 39.

^[4125] Luke vi. 40.

^[4126] De discipulo.

^[4127] Revincat.

^[4128] Luke vi. 41-45. Cerdon is here referred to as Marcion’s master, and Apelles as Marcion’s pupil.

^[4129] Scandalum. See above, book i. chap. ii., for Marcion’s perverse application of the figure of the good and the corrupt tree.

^[4130] In hoc solo adulterium Marcionis manus stupuisse miror. He means that this passage has been left uncorrupted by M. (as if his hand failed in the pruning process), foolishly for him.

^[4131] Videbitur.

^[4132] Luke vi. 46.

^[4133] Editus.

^[4134] Temptabat. Perhaps, “was tampering with them.”

^[4135] Eloquia.

^[4136] Isa. xxix. 13.

Chapter XVIII.—Concerning the Centurion’s Faith. The Raising of the Widow’s Son. John Baptist, and His Message to Christ; And the Woman Who Was a Sinner. Proofs Extracted from All of the Relation of Christ to the Creator.

^[4137] Luke vii. 1-10.

^[4138] Comp. Epiphanius, Hæres. xlii., Refut. 7, for the same argument: Εἰ οὐδὲ ἐν τῷ ᾽Ισραὴλ τοιαύτην πίστιν εὖρεν, κ.τ.λ. “If He found not so great faith, even in Israel, as He discovered in this Gentile centurion, He does not therefore condemn the faith of Israel. For if He were alien from Israel’s God, and did not pertain to Him, even as His father, He would certainly not have inferentially praised Israel’s faith” (Oehler).

^[4139] Nec exinde. This points to Christ’s words, “I have not found such faith in Israel.”—Oehler.

^[4140] Alienæ fidei.

^[4141] Ceterum.

^[4142] Suggillasset.

^[4143] Æmulus.

^[4144] Eam talem, that is, the faith of Israel.

^[4145] Luke vii. 11-17.

^[4146] Documentum.

^[4147] Luke vii. 16.

^[4148] Et quidem adhuc orantes.

^[4149] Comp. Epiphanius, Hæres. xlii., Schol. 8, cum Refut.; Tertullian, De Præscript Hæret. 8; and De Bapt. 10.

^[4150] Ut ulterius. This is the absurd allegation of Marcion. So Epiphanius (Le Prieur).

^[4151] Ego.

^[4152] Scandalum. Playing on the word “scandalum” in its application to the Baptist and to Marcion.

^[4153] “It is most certain that the Son of God, the second Person of the Godhead, is in the writings of the fathers throughout called by the title of Spirit, Spirit of God, etc.; with which usage agree the Holy Scriptures. See Mark ii. 8; Rom. i. 3-4; 1 Tim. iii. 16; Heb. ix. 14; 1 Pet. iii. 18-20; also John 6.63;56.”—Bp. Bull, Def. Nic. Creed (translated by the translator of this work), vol. i. p. 48 and note X. [The whole passage should be consulted.]

^[4154] Ex forma prophetici moduli.

^[4155] Tertullian stands alone in the notion that St. John’s inquiry was owing to any withdrawal of the Spirit, so soon before his martyrdom, or any diminution of his faith. The contrary is expressed by Origen, Homil. xxvii., on Luke vii.; Chrysostom on Matt. xi.; Augustine, Sermon. 66, de Verbo; Hilary on Matthew; Jerome on Matthew, and Epist. 121, ad Algas.; Ambrose on Luke, book v. § 93. They say mostly that the inquiry was for the sake of his disciples. (Oxford Library of the Fathers, vol. x. p. 267, note e). [Elucidation V.]

^[4156] Ut in massalem suam summam.

^[4157] Unus jam de turba.

^[4158] Eundem.

^[4159] Etiam prophetes.

^[4160] Facilius.

^[4161] Jesus.

^[4162] Luke vii. 20.

^[4163] Sperabat.

^[4164] Documentorum.

^[4165] Major.

^[4166] Scandalum.

^[4167] Luke vii. 21, 22.

^[4168] That is, not the Creator’s Christ—whose prophet John was—therefore a different Christ from Him whom John announced. This is said, of course, on the Marcionite hypothesis (Oehler).

^[4169] Angelum.

^[4170] Luke 7.26-27; Mal. 3.1-3.

^[4171] Eleganter.

^[4172] Scrupulum.

^[4173] Luke vii. 28.

^[4174] That is, Christ, according to Epiphanius. See next note.

^[4175] Comp. the Refutation of Epiphanius (Hæres. xlii. Refut. 8): “Whether with reference to John or to the Saviour, He pronounces a blessing on such as should not be offended in Himself or in John. Nor should they devise for themselves whatsoever things they heard not from him. He also has a greater object in view, on account of which the Saviour said this; even that no one should think that John (who was pronounced to be greater than any born of women) was greater than the Saviour Himself, because even He was born of a woman. He guards against this mistake, and says, ‘Blessed is he who shall not be offended in me.’ He then adds, ‘He that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.’ Now, in respect of His birth in the flesh, the Saviour was less than he by the space of six months. But in the kingdom He was greater, being even his God. For the Only-begotten came not to say aught in secret, or to utter a falsehood in His preaching, as He says Himself, ‘In secret have I said nothing, but in public,’ etc. (Κἄν τε πρὸς ᾽Ιωάννην ἔχοι…ἀλλὰ μετὰ παῤῥησίας).”—Oehler.

^[4176] Luke vii. 25.

^[4177] Tantundem competit creatori.

^[4178] Major tanto propheta.

^[4179] De remissa.

^[4180] Luke vii. 36-50.

^[4181] Comp. Epiphanius, Hæres. xlii., Refut. 10, 11.

^[4182] Hos. vi. 6.

^[4183] Hab. ii. 4.

Chapter XIX.—The Rich Women of Piety Who Followed Jesus Christ’s Teaching by Parables. The Marcionite Cavil Derived from Christ’s Remark, When Told of His Mother and His Brethren. Explanation of Christ’s Apparent Rejection Them.

^[4184] Isa. xxxii. 9, 10. Quoted as usual, from the LXX.: Γυναῖκες πλούσιαι ἀνάστητε, καὶ ἀκούσατε τῆς φωνῆς μου· θυγατέρες ἐν ἐλπίδι εἰσακούσατε λόγους μου. ῾Ημέρας ἐνιαυτοῦ μνείαν ποιήσασθε ἐν ὀδύνῃ μετ᾽ ἐλπίδος.

^[4185] Ostenderet.

^[4186] Eloquii.

^[4187] Pronunciatio.

^[4188] Isa. vi. 9.

^[4189] Luke viii. 8.

^[4190] Luke viii. 18.

^[4191] Pronuntiationi.

^[4192] Sane: with a touch of irony.

^[4193] Luke viii. 18.

^[4194] Luke viii. 16.

^[4195] Luke viii. 17.

^[4196] Matt. xii. 48.

^[4197] Rationales. “Quæ voces adhibita ratione sunt interpretandæ.”—Oehler.

^[4198] Luke x. 25.

^[4199] Luke xx. 20.

^[4200] Singular in the original, but (to avoid confusion) here made plural.

^[4201] In allusion to Luke vii. 16. See above, chap. xviii.

^[4202] Advivit.

^[4203] Adgenerantur.

^[4204] Constat. [Jarvis, Introd. p. 204 and p. 536.]

^[4205] Nunc: i.e., when Christ was told of His mother and brethren.

^[4206] “C. Sentius Saturninus, a consular, held this census of the whole empire as principal augur, because Augustus determined to impart the sanction of religion to his institution. The agent through whom Saturninus carried out the census in Judæa was the governor Cyrenius, according to Luke, chap. ii.”—Fr. Junius. Tertullian mentions Sentius Saturninus again in De Pallio, i. Tertullian’s statement in the text has weighed with Sanclemente and others, who suppose that Saturninus was governor of Judæa at the time of our Lord’s birth, which they place in 747 a.u.c. “It is evident, however,” says Wieseler, “that this argument is far from decisive; for the New Testament itself supplies far better aids for determining this question than the discordant ecclesiastical traditions—different fathers giving different dates, which might be appealed to with equal justice; while Tertullian is even inconsistent with himself, since in his treatise Adv. Jud. viii., he gives 751 a.u.c. as the year of our Lord’s birth” (Wieseler’s Chronological Synopsis by Venables, p. 99, note 2). This Sentius Saturninus filled the office of governor of Syria, 744–748. For the elaborate argument of Aug. W. Zumpt, by which he defends St. Luke’s chronology, and goes far to prove that Publius Sulpicius Quirinus (or “Cyrenius”) was actually the governor of Syria at the time of the Lord’s birth, the reader may be referred to a careful abridgment by the translator of Wieseler’s work, pp. 129–135.

^[4207] Non simpliciter. St. Mark rather than St. Luke is quoted in this interrogative sentence.

^[4208] Ex condicione rationali. See Oehler’s note, just above, on the word “rationales.”

^[4209] Abdicavit: Rigalt thinks this is harsh, and reminds us that at the cross the Lord had not cast away his Mother. [Elucidation VI.]

^[4210] This is literally from Matt. 12.48.

^[4211] In semetipso.

^[4212] Matt. x. 37.

^[4213] Ceterum.

^[4214] i.e., the kindred. [N.B. He includes the Mother!]

^[4215] We have translated Oehler’s text of this passage: “Denique nihil magnum, si fidem sanguini, quam non habebat.” For once we venture to differ from that admirable editor (and that although he is supported in his view by Fr. Junius), and prefer the reading of the mss. and the other editions: “Denique nihil magnum, si fidem sanguini, quem non habebat.” To which we would give an ironical turn, usual to Tertullian, “After all, it is not to be wondered at if He preferred faith to flesh and blood, which he did not himself possess!”—in allusion to Marcion’s Docetic opinion of Christ.

Chapter XX.—Comparison of Christ’s Power Over Winds and Waves with Moses’ Command of the Waters of the Red Sea and the Jordan. Christ’s Power Over Unclean Spirits. The Case of the Legion. The Cure of the Issue of Blood. The Mosaic Uncleanness on This Point Explained.

^[4216] Luke viii. 25.

^[4217] Agnorant.

^[4218] Et pari utrinque stupore discriminis fixum.

^[4219] Josh. iii. 9-17.

^[4220] This obscure passage is thus read by Oehler, from whom we have translated: “Lege extorri familiæ dirimendæ in transitu ejus Jordanis machæram fuisse, cujus impetum atque decursum plane et Jesus docuerat prophetis transmeantibus stare.” The machæram (“sword”) is a metaphor for the river. Rigaltius refers to Virgil’s figure, Æneid, viii. 62, 64, for a justification of the simile. Oehler has altered the reading from the “ex sortefamilæ,” etc., of the mss. to “extorrifamiliæ,” etc. The former reading would mean probably: “Read out of the story of the nation how that Jordan was as a sword to hinder their passage across its stream.” The sorte (or, as yet another variation has it, “et sortes,” “the accounts”) meant the national record, as we have it in the beginning of the book of Joshua. But the passage is almost hopelessly obscure.

^[4221] Solis.

^[4222] Istius.

^[4223] Ps. xxix. 3.

^[4224] Hab. iii. 10, according to the Septuagint.

^[4225] Nah. i. 4.

^[4226] See above, book iii. chap. xiii.

^[4227] Luke viii. 30.

^[4228] Atque ita ipsum esse.

^[4229] Ps. xxiv. 8.

^[4230] Luke viii. 28.

^[4231] Agentem.

^[4232] Conversaretur.

^[4233] Substantiæ: including these demons.

^[4234] Sed enim: the ἀλλὰ γὰρ of the Greek.

^[4235] Aliquid.

^[4236] Pusillitatibus.

^[4237] Ego.

^[4238] Luke viii. 43-46.

^[4239] See above, book iii. chap. xxv.

^[4240] Adæquatum: on a par with.

^[4241] Lev. xv. 19.

^[4242] A Marcionite hypothesis.

^[4243] Luke viii. 48.

^[4244] Ecquomodo legem ejus irrupit.

^[4245] Primo.

^[4246] Spurcitia.

^[4247] Non temere.

^[4248] In lege taxari.

^[4249] Illa autem redundavit.

^[4250] Distinxisse.

^[4251] Isa. vii. 9.

^[4252] Luke viii. 48.

^[4253] Utique.

^[4254] Epiphanius, in Hæres. xlii. Refut. 14, has the same remark.

^[4255] Qua res vacua.

^[4256] In allusion to the Marcionite hypothesis mentioned above.

Chapter XXI.—Christ’s Connection with the Creator Shown from Several Incidents in the Old Testament, Compared with St. Luke’s Narrative of the Mission of the Disciples. The Feeding of the Multitude. The Confession of St. Peter. Being Ashamed of Christ. This Shame is Only Possible of the True Christ. Marcionite Pretensions Absurd.

^[4257] Luke ix. 1-6.

^[4258] Vestit.

^[4259] Libertatem oris.

^[4260] Deut. xxv. 4.

^[4261] In testationem redigi.

^[4262] Probatum.

^[4263] Luke ix. 7, 8.

^[4264] Luke ix. 10-17.

^[4265] Scilicet.

^[4266] De pristino more.

^[4267] Aut.

^[4268] Protelavit.

^[4269] Exuberare.

^[4270] Redundaverant.

^[4271] 1 Kings xvii. 7-16.

^[4272] Ordinem.

^[4273] I have no doubt that ten was the word written by our author; for some Greek copies read δέκα, and Ambrose in his Hexaëmeron, book vi. chap. ii., mentions the same number (Fr. Junius).

^[4274] 2 Kings iv. 42-44.

^[4275] Luke ix. 20.

^[4276] Recensebat.

^[4277] Luke ix. 21.

^[4278] Utique.

^[4279] Immo.

^[4280] Luke ix. 22.

^[4281] See below, chaps. xl.–xliii.

^[4282] Sic quoque.

^[4283] Luke ix. 24.

^[4284] Certe.

^[4285] Compare above, chap. x., towards the end.

^[4286] Jam tunc.

^[4287] Dan. iii. 25, 26.

^[4288] Ista.

^[4289] Decucurrerunt.

^[4290] Isa. lvii. i.

^[4291] We have, by understanding res, treated these adjectives as nouns. Rigalt. applies them to the doctrina of the sentence just previous. Perhaps, however, “persecutione” is the noun.

^[4292] Luke ix. 26.

^[4293] Materia conveniat.

^[4294] Ordo.

^[4295] Perorantibus.

^[4296] Fœditatem.

^[4297] Ipsius etiam carnis indignitatem; because His flesh, being capable of suffering and subject to death, seemed to them unworthy of God. So Adv. Judæos, chap. xiv., he says: “Primo sordidis indutus est, id est carnis passibilis et mortalis indignitate.” Or His “indignity” may have been εἶδος οὐκ ἄξιον τυραννίδος, His “unkingly aspect” (as Origen expresses it, Contra Celsum, 6); His “form of a servant,” or slave, as St. Paul says. See also Tertullian’s De Patientia, iii. (Rigalt.)

^[4298] Coagulatur. [Job x. 10.]

^[4299] Ex feminæ humore.

^[4300] Pecus. Julius Firmicus, iii. 1, uses the word in the same way: “Pecus intra viscera matris artuatim concisum a medicis proferetur.” [Jul. Firmicus Maternus, floruit circa, a.d. 340.]

^[4301] Such is probably the meaning of “non decem mensium cruciatu deliberatus.” For such is the situation of the infant in the womb, that it seems to writhe (cruciari) all curved and contracted (Rigalt.). Latinius read delibratus instead of deliberatus, which means, “suspended or poised in the womb as in a scale.” This has my approbation. I would compare De Carne Christi, chap. iv. (Fr. Junius). Oehler reads deliberatus in the sense of liberatus.

^[4302] Statim lucem lacrimis auspicatus.

^[4303] Primo retinaculi sui vulnere: the cutting of the umbilical nerve. [Contrast Jer. Taylor, on the Nativity, Opp. I. p. 34.]

^[4304] Nec sale ac melle medicatus. Of this application in the case of a recent childbirth we know nothing; it seems to have been meant for the skin. See Pliny, in his Hist. Nat. xxii. 25.

^[4305] Nec pannis jam sepulturæ involucrum initiatus.

^[4306] Volutatus per immunditias.

^[4307] Vix.

^[4308] Tarde.

^[4309] Expositus.

^[4310] i.e., he never passed through stages like these.

^[4311] Veritate.

^[4312] Debuit pronuntiasse.

^[4313] Ps. viii. 6.

^[4314] Ps. xxii. 6.

^[4315] Isa. liii. 5.

^[4316] Se deposuit.

^[4317] Ad meritum confusionis.

^[4318] Quod illum finxisti.

Chapter XXII.—The Same Conclusion Supported by the Transfiguration. Marcion Inconsistent in Associating with Christ in Glory Two Such Eminent Servants of the Creator as Moses and Elijah. St. Peter’s Ignorance Accounted for on Montanist Principle.

^[4319] Luke ix. 28-36.

^[4320] Scilicet, in ironical allusion to a Marcionite opinion.

^[4321] Luke ix. 35.

^[4322] Quoscunque.

^[4323] In sordibus aliquibus.

^[4324] Sic.

^[4325] To belong to another god.

^[4326] Secundum perversitatem.

^[4327] Prædicatores.

^[4328] Informator, Moses, as having organized the nation.

^[4329] Reformator, Elias, the great prophet.

^[4330] It was a primitive opinion in the Church that Elijah was to come, with Enoch, at the end of the world. See De Anima, chap. xxxv. and l.; also Irenæus, De Hæres. v. 5. [Vol. I. 530.]

^[4331] Luke ix. 33.

^[4332] This Tertullian seems to have done in his treatise De Ecstasi, which is mentioned by St. Jerome—see his Catalogus Scriptt. Eccles. (in Tertulliano); and by Nicephorus, Hist. Eccles. iv. 22, 34. On this subject of ecstasy, Tertullian has some observations in De Anima, chap. xxi. and xlv. (Rigalt. and Oehler.)

^[4333] [Elucidation VII.]

^[4334] Amentiam.

^[4335] Excidat sensu.

^[4336] He calls those the carnally-minded (“psychicos”) who thought that ecstatic raptures and revelations had ceased in the church. The term arises from a perverse application of 1 Cor. ii. 14: ψυχικὸς δὲ ἄνθρωπος οὐ δέχεται τὰ τοῦ Πνεύματος τοῦ Θεοῦ. In opposition to the wild fanaticism of Montanus, into which Tertullian strangely fell, the Catholics believed that the true prophets, who were filled with the Spirit of God, discharged their prophetic functions with a quiet and tranquil mind. See the anonymous author, Contra Cataphrygas, in Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. v. 17; Epiphanius, Hæres. 48. See also Routh, Rell. Sacræ, i. p. 100; and Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, edit. 3, pp. 27–36. (Munter’s Primord. Eccles. Afric. p. 138, quoted by Oehler.)

^[4337] Amentiam.

^[4338] Ceterum.

^[4339] According to the hypothesis.

^[4340] Totum ordinem, in the three periods represented by Moses, and Elijah, and Christ.

^[4341] Compare Deut. 19.15; Luke 9.28.

^[4342] Consignari.

^[4343] In eo suggestu.

^[4344] Conscriptum fuerat.

^[4345] Marcion’s god.

^[4346] Compare above, book i. chap. 15, and book iv. chap. 7.

^[4347] Precario. This word is used in book v. chap. xii. to describe the transitoriness of the Creator’s paradise and world.

^[4348] Nec nunc.

^[4349] Ps. ii. 7.

^[4350] Isa. l. 10, according to the Septuagint.

^[4351] Ejus est exhibentis.

^[4352] Non præmisisti. Oehler suggests promisisti, “have given us no promise.”

^[4353] Censum: Some read sensum, “sense.”

^[4354] Deut. xviii. 15.

^[4355] Anima: life.

^[4356] Deut. xviii. 19.

^[4357] Isa. l. 10.

^[4358] Tertullian, by introducing this statement with an “inquit,” seems to make a quotation of it; but it is only a comment on the actual quotations. Tertullian’s invariable object in this argument is to match some event or word pertaining to the Christ of the New Testament with some declaration of the Old Testament. In this instance the approving words of God upon the mount are in Heb. i. 5 applied to the Son, while in Ps. ii. 7 the Son applies them to Himself. Compare the Adversus Praxean, chap. xix. (Fr. Junius and Oehler). It is, however, more likely that Tertullian really means to quote Isa. xliv. 26, “that confirmeth the word of His servant,” which Tertullian reads, “Sistens verba filii sui,” the Septuagint being, Καὶ ἰστῶν ῥῆμα παιδὸς αὐτοῦ.

^[4359] In Christo. In with an ablative is often used by our author for in with an accusative.

^[4360] Or perhaps “by the Creator.”

^[4361] Isa. lxiii. 9, according to the Septuagint; only he reads faciet for aorist ἔσωσεν.

^[4362] A Marcionite position.

^[4363] Habitum.

^[4364] Interdum.

^[4365] Hab. iii. 2, according to the Septuagint. St. Augustine similarly applied this passage, De Civit. Dei, xviii. 32.

^[4366] Zech. iv. 3, 14.

^[4367] Commemoremur: be reminded, or call to mind.

^[4368] Cognoscenter: γνωστῶς, “so as to know Thee.”

^[4369] See Ex. xxxiii. 13-23.

^[4370] Posterioribus temporibus. [The awful ribaldry of Voltaire upon this glorious revelation is based upon the Vulgate reading of Exod. xxxiii. 23, needlessly transferred to our Version, but corrected by the late Revisers.]

^[4371] Num. xii. 6-8.

^[4372] Noluit.

^[4373] It is difficult to see what this inquit means.

^[4374] Nedum.

Chapter XXIII.—Impossible that Marcion’s Christ Should Reprove the Faithless Generation. Such Loving Consideration for Infants as the True Christ Was Apt to Shew, Also Impossible for the Other. On the Three Different Characters Confronted and Instructed by Christ in Samaria.

^[4375] Personam: “I personate Israel.”

^[4376] Genitura.

^[4377] Luke ix. 41.

^[4378] ἐπερχόμενε. The true Christ is ὁ ἐρχόμενος.

^[4379] Totum apud te.

^[4380] De tuo commisisti.

^[4381] Quam olim.

^[4382] Imputes.

^[4383] This fable is not extant (Oehler).

^[4384] Adhuc.

^[4385] Insiliit.

^[4386] Nisi quod nec ille. This ille, of course, means the Creator’s Christ.

^[4387] Diligit: or, loves.

^[4388] Luke ix. 47, 48.

^[4389] Autem.

^[4390] 2 Kings ii. 23, 24.

^[4391] Committit.

^[4392] Parvulos.

^[4393] Pueros: [young lads].

^[4394] Partus Hebræos.

^[4395] Ex. ii. 15-21.

^[4396] See a like comparison in book i. chap. xxix. p. 294.

^[4397] Qui de infantia primus est: i.e., cujus qui de infantia, etc. [Elucidation VIII.]

^[4398] Repræsentat plagam.

^[4399] 2 Kings i. 9-12.

^[4400] I translate after Oehler’s text, which is supported by the oldest authorities. Pamelius and Rigaltius, however, read “Christi lenitatem increpantis eandem animadversionem,” etc. (“On the contrary, I recognize the gentleness of Christ, who rebuked His disciples when they,” etc.) This reading is only conjectural, suggested by the “Christi lenitatem” of the context.

^[4401] Destinantes.

^[4402] Luke ix. 51-56.

^[4403] Isa. xlii. 2, 3.

^[4404] Compare De Patientia, chap. xv.

^[4405] 1 Kings xix. 12.

^[4406] Luke ix. 57, 58.

^[4407] Salutem: i.e., “Christ, who is our salvation” (Fr. Junius).

^[4408] Luke ix. 59, 60.

^[4409] Animam defunctam.

^[4410] Lev. xxi. 1, according to our author’s reading.

^[4411] Num. vi. 6, 7.

^[4412] Imbuerat.

^[4413] Sectam.

^[4414] Gen. xix. 17.

Chapter XXIV.—On the Mission of the Seventy Disciples, and Christ’s Charge to Them. Precedents Drawn from the Old Testament. Absurdity of Supposing that Marcion’s Christ Could Have Given the Power of Treading on Serpents and Scorpions.

^[4415] Apostolos: Luke x. i.

^[4416] Compare above, book iv. chap. xiii. p. 364.

^[4417] Exod. 15.27; Num. 33.9.

^[4418] Causarum: “occasions” or circumstances.

^[4419] Potestatum. In Marcionite terms, “The Gods of the Old and the New Testaments.”

^[4420] Consparsionum. [Punic Latin.] Ex. xii. 34, 35.

^[4421] Virgam, Luke 10.4; Matt. 10.10.

^[4422] Causarum offerentiam.

^[4423] Expeditionem, with the sense also of “supplies” in the next clause.

^[4424] Circumcidens.

^[4425] Struxerat.

^[4426] Deut. xxix. 5.

^[4427] Luke x. 4.

^[4428] See 2 Kings iv. 29.

^[4429] Literally, “bless him not, i.e., salute him not.”

^[4430] Literally, “answer him not, i.e., return not his salvation.”

^[4431] Luke x. 5.

^[4432] 2 Kings iv. 26. He reads the optative instead of the indicative.

^[4433] Luke x. 7.

^[4434] Deut. xxv. 4.

^[4435] Compare above, book ii. chap. 17, p. 311.

^[4436] See this argued at length above, in book ii. chap. 20, p. 313.

^[4437] Dominatoribus.

^[4438] Luke x. 9.

^[4439] Subitum.

^[4440] Accipit tempus.

^[4441] Inducens speciem.

^[4442] Tardasse.

^[4443] The announcement (according to the definition) defining the beginning of its existence in time.

^[4444] Appropinquasse.

^[4445] Luke x. 11.

^[4446] Et judicem in utroque.

^[4447] Hærentia.

^[4448] Nedum.

^[4449] Luke x. 11.

^[4450] Inhumanitas.

^[4451] Ecclesiam. There is force in thus using Christian terms for Jewish ordinances, full as he is of the identity of the God of the old with Him of the new covenant.

^[4452] Deut. xxiii. 3.

^[4453] Luke x. 16.

^[4454] Num. xiv. 27.

^[4455] Luke x. 19.

^[4456] Isa. xi. 8, 9.

^[4457] Deputetur.

^[4458] Penes Creatorem.

^[4459] Ps. xci. 13.

^[4460] Isa. xxvii. 1, Sept.

^[4461] Isa. xxxv. 8, 9, Sept.

^[4462] Evacuationem.

^[4463] Isa. xxxv. 3, 5, 6, Sept.

^[4464] Secundum ordinem prædicationis.

Chapter XXV.—Christ Thanks the Father for Revealing to Babes What He Had Concealed from the Wise. This Concealment Judiciously Effected by the Creator. Other Points in St. Luke’s Chap. X. Shown to Be Only Possible to the Creator’s Christ.

^[4465] Ostenditur.

^[4466] Luke x. 21.

^[4467] Satis inique.

^[4468] Præmiserat.

^[4469] Argumenta.

^[4470] Deliquerant.

^[4471] On the Marcionite hypothesis.

^[4472] Deducerentur.

^[4473] In quem competunt omnia.

^[4474] Isa. vii. 9.

^[4475] Rom. i. 20-23.

^[4476] Ingenia.

^[4477] Denique.

^[4478] Olim.

^[4479] Isa. xxix. 14, Sept.

^[4480] Isa. xlv. 3, Sept.

^[4481] Ventriloquorum, Greek ἐγγαστριμύθων.

^[4482] Isa. xliv. 25, Sept.

^[4483] Isa. 42.6; 49.6.

^[4484] Luke x. 21.

^[4485] Ergo.

^[4486] Res ejus edisserens.

^[4487] Uti traduceret eas.

^[4488] Constructionem.

^[4489] Destructionem.

^[4490] Luke x. 22.

^[4491] Per.

^[4492] ἐπερχόμενος ille; on which see above, chap. xxiii. p. 385.

^[4493] Marcion’s god.

^[4494] Alieno abstinere.

^[4495] Aut si.

^[4496] Ecquomodo.

^[4497] Creatoris est.

^[4498] Ps. ii. 8.

^[4499] Luke x. 22.

^[4500] Isa. i. 3.

^[4501] This passage it is not easy to identify. [See Is. lxiii. 3.] The books point to Isa. lxv. 5, but there is there no trace of it.

^[4502] Isa. xl. 15. [Compare Is. lxiii. 3. Sept.]

^[4503] Speculam.

^[4504] When the vintage was gathered, Isa. i. 8.

^[4505] Quæ competere possunt.

^[4506] Luke x. 23, 24.

^[4507] Ut decuit.

^[4508] Merito.

^[4509] Repræsentationem.

^[4510] Æque.

^[4511] Tamen.

^[4512] Exod. 20.12; Deut. 6.2.

^[4513] Luke x. 27.

^[4514] Legalem.

^[4515] Recidivæ.

^[4516] This is perhaps the meaning of “ne plus aliquid observationis exigeret sublimior spe.”

^[4517] Nec alius.

^[4518] Principaliter.

^[4519] Et utramque vitam.

^[4520] Ei opponit.

^[4521] Caput.

^[4522] Dei tui…Marcionites.

^[4523] Captanda.

^[4524] Præstet.

^[4525] i.e., he must needs have it taught and recommended by Christ.

^[4526] Viderit.

^[4527] As Marcion pretended.

Chapter XXVI.—From St. Luke’s Eleventh Chapter Other Evidence that Christ Comes from the Creator. The Lord’s Prayer and Other Words of Christ. The Dumb Spirit and Christ’s Discourse on Occasion of the Expulsion. The Exclamation of the Woman in the Crowd.

^[4528] Luke xi. 1.

^[4529] Suffigi.

^[4530] Scito.

^[4531] Proinde.

^[4532] Sensum.

^[4533] Luke xi. 2.

^[4534] Generavit.

^[4535] Mundialis spiritus: perhaps “the breath of life.”

^[4536] Gen. i. 2.

^[4537] Luke xi. 3.

^[4538] Milium.

^[4539] Ps. lxviii. 25.

^[4540] Luke xi. 4.

^[4541] Prædamnavit.

^[4542] Hoc ordine.

^[4543] Infamat.

^[4544] Luke xi. 9.

^[4545] Salutem: perhaps salvation.

^[4546] Unde sum functus. This obscure clause may mean “the right of praying,” or “the right of access, and boldness to knock.”

^[4547] Ad præstandum non suo homini.

^[4548] Autem.

^[4549] See Luke xi. 5-8.

^[4550] A sarcastic allusion to the ante-nuptial error of Marcion, which he has exposed more than once (see book i. chap. xxix. and book iv. chap. xxiii. p. 386.).

^[4551] Sæculum.

^[4552] Tantum quod = vixdum (Oehler).

^[4553] Luke xi. 8.

^[4554] Tam cito.

^[4555] Luke xi. 11-13.

^[4556] Apud quem.

^[4557] Luke xi. 14.

^[4558] Isa. xxix. 18.

^[4559] Luke xi. 19.

^[4560] Luke xi. 18.

^[4561] Luke xi. 20.

^[4562] Ex. viii. 19.

^[4563] Significaret.

^[4564] Vetustatum scilicet suarum.

^[4565] Apud.

^[4566] Applicuit.

^[4567] Luke xi. 21, 22.

^[4568] Ceterum.

^[4569] Defluendo.

^[4570] The scorpion here represents any class of the lowest animals, especially such as stung. The Marcionites impiously made it a reproach to the Creator, that He had formed such worthless and offensive creatures. Compare book i. chap. 17, note 5. p. 283.

^[4571] Luke xi. 27, 28.

^[4572] See above, on Luke viii. 21.

^[4573] Natura.

^[4574] Proinde.

Chapter XXVII.—Christ’s Reprehension of the Pharisees Seeking a Sign. His Censure of Their Love of Outward Show Rather Than Inward Holiness. Scripture Abounds with Admonitions of a Similar Purport. Proofs of His Mission from the Creator.

^[4575] Purgare.

^[4576] From the Marcionite point of view.

^[4577] Luke xi. 29.

^[4578] Luke xi. 33.

^[4579] Luke 6.28; 11.37-52.

^[4580] Fiximus.

^[4581] Denotari.

^[4582] Tunc.

^[4583] Retractabat.

^[4584] Circumferret.

^[4585] Luke xi. 39.

^[4586] Lavacro.

^[4587] Matt. 9.13; 12.7; Hos. 8.6.

^[4588] Luke xi. 41.

^[4589] The Pharisees and lawyers.

^[4590] Holuscula.

^[4591] Marcion’s gospel had κλῆσιν (vocationem, perhaps a general word for hospitality) instead of κρίσιν, judgment,—a quality which M. did not allow in his god. See Epiphanius, Hæres. xlii., Schol. 26 (Oehler and Fr. Junius).

^[4592] Luke xi. 42.

^[4593] Deut. vi. 5.

^[4594] Amaxam.

^[4595] Nondum palam facto.

^[4596] Sectam administrat.

^[4597] Isa. i. 10.

^[4598] Ps. cxviii. 9.

^[4599] Quodsiquis.

^[4600] Officiis.

^[4601] Idem.

^[4602] Luke xi. 46.

^[4603] Suggillans.

^[4604] Vocationem: Marcion’s κλῆσιν.

^[4605] Nedum.

^[4606] Taxat.

^[4607] Clamantes.

^[4608] See Isa. 5.5,23; 10.2.

^[4609] Isa. xxviii. 14.

^[4610] The books point to Isa. iii. 3, 4 for this; but there is only a slight similarity in the latter clause, even in the Septuagint.

^[4611] Legis doctores: the νομικοί of the Gospels.

^[4612] Luke xi. 47.

^[4613] Zelotes.

^[4614] Arguunt.

^[4615] Luke xi. 52.

^[4616] As Marcion held Him to be.

^[4617] A Marcionite position.

^[4618] Sævum.

^[4619] Deficiendo.

Chapter XXVIII.—Examples from the Old Testament, Balaam, Moses, and Hezekiah, to Show How Completely the Instruction and Conduct of Christ Are in Keeping with the Will and Purpose of the Creator.

^[4620] As narrated by St.Luke xii. 1-21.

^[4621] Contumaces.

^[4622] Luke xii. 2.

^[4623] Luke xii. 4.

^[4624] Isa. lvii. 1.

^[4625] Luke xii. 5.

^[4626] Demereri.

^[4627] Luke xii. 8.

^[4628] Occidi habebunt.

^[4629] Luke xii. 9.

^[4630] Post occisionem.

^[4631] Luke xii. 10.

^[4632] So full of blasphemy, as he is, against the Creator.

^[4633] Infuscat.

^[4634] Luke xii. 11, 12.

^[4635] Documentum.

^[4636] Simul.

^[4637] Num. xxii.-xxiv.

^[4638] A Marcionite objection.

^[4639] “Two men of the Hebrews.”—A.V.

^[4640] Ex. ii. 13, 14.

^[4641] Luke xii. 13, 14.

^[4642] Ne uteretur.

^[4643] Excusserat. Oehler interprets the word by temptaverat.

^[4644] Nunquid indigne tulerit.

^[4645] This is an instance of the title “Spirit” being applied to the divine nature of the Son. See Bp. Bull’s Def. Nic. Fid. (by the translator). [See note 13, p. 375, supra.]

^[4646] Above, chap. xv. of this book, p. 369, supra.

^[4647] Comp. 1 Sam. 2.8; Psa. 113.7; Luke 1.52.

^[4648] Luke xii. 16-20.

^[4649] Apud Persas.

^[4650] Isa. xxxix.

Chapter XXIX.—Parallels from the Prophets to Illustrate Christ’s Teaching in the Rest of This Chapter of St. Luke. The Sterner Attributes of Christ, in His Judicial Capacity, Show Him to Have Come from the Creator. Incidental Rebukes of Marcion’s Doctrine of Celibacy, and of His Altering of the Text of the Gospel.

^[4651] Agere curam: take thought.—A.V.

^[4652] Luke xii. 22-28.

^[4653] Æmulam.

^[4654] Flosculo: see Luke xii. 24-27.

^[4655] Ultro subjectis.

^[4656] Pro sua vilitate.

^[4657] Luke xii. 28.

^[4658] Tantum quod revelato.

^[4659] Luke xii. 30.

^[4660] Luke xii. 30.

^[4661] Expunxerim.

^[4662] Luke xii. 31.

^[4663] De alieno bonus.

^[4664] Qualis.

^[4665] Secundo gradu.

^[4666] Status.

^[4667] Peræquatio.

^[4668] Cui per omnia pariaverint.

^[4669] Luke xii. 35.

^[4670] Luke xii. 35.

^[4671] Luke xii. 36.

^[4672] Luke xii. 39.

^[4673] Sed ille potius.

^[4674] A censure on Marcion’s Christ.

^[4675] Suffossus.

^[4676] Luke xi. 40.

^[4677] Defendo.

^[4678] Portendat.

^[4679] Salvo.

^[4680] Luke xii. 41.

^[4681] Actorum.

^[4682] Luke xii. 41-46.

^[4683] Illi catechizat.

^[4684] Decet.

^[4685] Luke xii. 49.

^[4686] Ille: Marcion’s Christ.

^[4687] Iste: the Creator.

^[4688] Ps. xcvii. 3.

^[4689] Hos. viii. 14.

^[4690] Vel: or, “if you please;” indicating some uncertainty in the quotation. The passage is more like Jer. xv. 14 than anything in Isaiah (see, however, Isa. xxx. 27, 30).

^[4691] Viderit.

^[4692] Luke xii. 51.

^[4693] Pamelius supposes that Tertullian here refers to St. Matthew’s account, where the word is μάχαιραν, on the ground that the mss. and versions of St. Luke’s Gospel invariably read διαμερισμόν. According to Rigaltius, however, Tertullian means that sword is written in Marcion’s Gospel of Luke, as if the heretic had adulterated the passage. Tertullian no doubt professes to quote all along from the Gospel of Luke, according to Marcion’s reading.

^[4694] St. Luke’s word being διαμερισμόν (division), not μάχαιραν (sword).

^[4695] Luke xii. 53.

^[4696] Parentes.

^[4697] Mic. vii. 6.

^[4698] Luke xii. 56.

^[4699] Luke xii. 57.

^[4700] Zech. viii. 16.

^[4701] Jer. xxii. 3.

^[4702] Isa. i. 17.

^[4703] Tertullian calls by a proper name the vineyard which Isaiah (in his Isa. 5.) designates “the vineyard of the Lord of hosts,” and interprets to be “the house of Israel” (Isa. 5.7). The designation comes from Isa. 5.2, where the original clause וַיִטַעַהז שׂר־ is translated in the Septuagint, Καὶ ἐφύτευσα ἄμπελον Σωρήκ. Tertullian is most frequently in close agreement with the LXX.

^[4704] Isa. v. 7.

^[4705] Ex præcepto.

^[4706] Ex arbitrio.

^[4707] Luke xii. 58, 59.

^[4708] Eodem gradu.

Chapter XXX.—Parables of the Mustard-Seed, and of the Leaven. Transition to the Solemn Exclusion Which Will Ensue When the Master of the House Has Shut the Door. This Judicial Exclusion Will Be Administered by Christ, Who is Shown Thereby to Possess the Attribute of the Creator.

^[4709] Luke xiii. 15.

^[4710] Omni animæ.

^[4711] Recognoscor.

^[4712] Utique.

^[4713] Puta.

^[4714] Laqueum.

^[4715] Materia.

^[4716] Lacrimosa austeritate, see Luke xiii. 28.

^[4717] Forte.

^[4718] Luke xiii. 20, 21.

^[4719] Vanitatem vanitate.

^[4720] Vel.

^[4721] Luke xiii. 25.

^[4722] Isa. ii. 19.

^[4723] Luke xiii. 25-28.

^[4724] Quid ergo illuc Creatori.

^[4725] Si stique.

Chapter XXXI.—Christ’s Advice to Invite the Poor in Accordance with Isaiah. The Parable of the Great Supper a Pictorial Sketch of the Creator’s Own Dispensations of Mercy and Grace. The Rejections of the Invitation Paralleled by Quotations from the Old Testament. Marcion’s Christ Could Not Fulfil the Conditions Indicated in This Parable. The Absurdity of the Marcionite Interpretation.

^[4726] Luke xiv. 12-14.

^[4727] Isa. lviii. 7.

^[4728] Forma.

^[4729] Cui parti.

^[4730] Luke xiv. 16.

^[4731] Saturitatem.

^[4732] Dehinc.

^[4733] Tantum quod…jam.

^[4734] Tantum quod…jam.

^[4735] Luke xiv. 18.

^[4736] Ex. xxxii. 1.

^[4737] Isa. vi. 10.

^[4738] Pertinentissime.

^[4739] Jer. vii. 23.

^[4740] Jer. vii. 24.

^[4741] Jer. xi. 8.

^[4742] Luke xiv. 18-20.

^[4743] Jer. 7.25; 25.4; 26.5; 35.15; 44.4.

^[4744] Jer. vii. 26.

^[4745] Luke xiv. 21.

^[4746] Jer. ii. 31.

^[4747] Jer. ii. 31.

^[4748] Luke xiv. 23.

^[4749] Dehinc.

^[4750] ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάτων ἡμερῶν, Septuagint.

^[4751] Deut. xxxii. 20, 21.

^[4752] Gerunt: although vainly at present (“jam vana in Judæis”—Oehler); Semler conjectures “gemunt, bewail.”

^[4753] Gustaturos.

^[4754] Specula, “a look-out;” σκηνή is the word in LXX.

^[4755] Isa. i. 8.

^[4756] Semel.

^[4757] This is probably the meaning of a very involved sentence: “Quid ex hoc ordine secundum dispensationem et prædicationes Creatoris recensendo competit illi, cujus (“Creatoris”—Oehler) nec ordinem habet nec dispositionem ad parabolæ conspirationem qui totum opus semel facit?”

^[4758] “By the fathers.” See above.

^[4759] “By the prophets.” See also above.

^[4760] An obscure sentence, which thus runs in the original: “Ante debent alii excusare, postea alii convenisse.”

^[4761] The Jews.

^[4762] The Gentiles.

^[4763] Speculum.

^[4764] Fastidiosos.

^[4765] Portendit.

^[4766] Plane: This is a Marcionite position (Oehler).

Chapter XXXII.—A Sort of Sorites, as the Logicians Call It, to Show that the Parables of the Lost Sheep and the Lost Drachma Have No Suitable Application to the Christ of Marcion.

^[4767] Luke xv. 1-10.

^[4768] Habuit.

^[4769] Cujus fuit: i.e., each of the things respectively.

^[4770] Argumentum.

^[4771] Vacat circa eum.

Chapter XXXIII.—The Marcionite Interpretation of God and Mammon Refuted. The Prophets Justify Christ’s Admonition Against Covetousness and Pride. John Baptist the Link Between the Old and the New Dispensations of the Creator. So Said Christ—But So Also Had Isaiah Said Long Before. One Only God, the Creator, by His Own Will Changed the Dispensations. No New God Had a Hand in the Change.

^[4772] Luke xvi. 13.

^[4773] Defendi.

^[4774] Offendi.

^[4775] What in the Punic language is called Mammon, says Rigaltius, the Latins call lucrum, “gain or lucre.” See Augustine, Serm. xxxv. de Verbo domini. I would add Jerome, On the VI. of Matthew where he says: “In the Syriac tongue, riches are called mammon.” And Augustine, in another passage, book ii., On the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount, says: “Riches in Hebrew are said to be called mammon. This is evidently a Punic word, for in that language the synonyme for gain (lucrum) is mammon.” Compare the same author on Ps. ciii. (Oehler).

^[4776] Ab actu.

^[4777] Auctorem.

^[4778] Famulatam.

^[4779] Ammentavit.

^[4780] Luke xvi. 13.

^[4781] Magis destinabantur: middle voice.

^[4782] Utique.

^[4783] Nominaturus.

^[4784] Alius.

^[4785] Quem non posuit.

^[4786] Luke xvi. 11.

^[4787] Meum: Luke xvi. 12, where, however, the word is τὸ ὑμέτερον, that which is your own.”

^[4788] Notando.

^[4789] Ad hoc ut seperatur.

^[4790] Luke xvi. 15.

^[4791] Jer. xvii. 5.

^[4792] Jer. xvii. 10, in sense but not in letter.

^[4793] Jer. xx. 12.

^[4794] Luke xvi. 15.

^[4795] Isa. ii. 12 (Sept).

^[4796] Luke xvi. 16.

^[4797] Sedatio: literally, “a setting to rest,” ἠρέμησις.

^[4798] Ut undeunde magis probetur…regnum Dei.

^[4799] Luke 16.17; 21.23.

^[4800] Isa. xl. 8.

^[4801] See above, note on chap. xxviii., towards the end, on this designation of Christ’s divine nature.

^[4802] Isa. xl. 3.

Chapter XXXIV.—Moses, Allowing Divorce, and Christ Prohibiting It, Explained. John Baptist and Herod. Marcion’s Attempt to Discover an Antithesis in the Parable of the Rich Man and the Poor Man in Hades Confuted. The Creator’s Appointment Manifested in Both States.

^[4803] Luke xvi. 18.

^[4804] Deut. xxiv. 1.

^[4805] A Marcionite challenge.

^[4806] Plane.

^[4807] St. Matthew’s Gospel.

^[4808] Matt. xix. 8.

^[4809] Matt. xix. 4, 6.

^[4810] Direxit.

^[4811] Gestans.

^[4812] Excusaverit.

^[4813] Ideo ut.

^[4814] Luke xvi. 18.

^[4815] Nubere. This verb is here used of both sexes, in a general sense.

^[4816] Alias.

^[4817] Etiam: first word of the sentence.

^[4818] Alicubi.

^[4819] Nondum.

^[4820] Tu.

^[4821] Alibi: i.e., than in the Marcionite connection.

^[4822] Apud te.

^[4823] Scilicet.

^[4824] 1 Cor. vi. 15.

^[4825] Justitia divortii.

^[4826] Matt. v. 32.

^[4827] Deut. xxii. 28, 29.

^[4828] Mal. ii. 15.

^[4829] Debeo.

^[4830] Sententiam.

^[4831] Literally, “Moses.”

^[4832] Illiberis. [N.B. He supposes Philip to have been dead.]

^[4833] Costa: literally, “rib” or “side.”

^[4834] Deut. xxv. 5, 6.

^[4835] Jaculatus est.

^[4836] The condition being that the deceased brother should have left “no child” see (Deut. xxv. 5).

^[4837] Ad subsequens argumentum divitis.

^[4838] Luke xvi. 19-31.

^[4839] Ipsum.

^[4840] Suggillati Herodis male maritati.

^[4841] Deformans.

^[4842] Luke xvi. 29.

^[4843] Apud inferos. [Note the origin of this doctrine.]

^[4844] Revincente: perhaps “reproves his eyesight,” in the sense of refutation.

^[4845] Luke xvi. 23.

^[4846] Sublimiorem inferis. [Elucidation VIII.]

^[4847] Compare Heb. 2.2; 10.35; 11.26.

^[4848] Ascensum in cœlum: Sept. ἀνάβασιν εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν, Amos ix. 6. See on this passage the article Heaven in Kitto’s Cyclopædia (3d edit.), vol. ii. p. 245, where the present writer has discussed the probable meaning of the verse.

^[4849] Isa. xxxiii. 14-16, according to the Septuagint, which has but slight resemblance to the Hebrew.

^[4850] Cur non capiat.

^[4851] Candida quædam prospiciatur: where candida is a noun substantive (see above, chap. vii. p. 353).

^[4852] There seems to be here an allusion to Luke ix. 35.

^[4853] Nec accepisset.

^[4854] Luke ix. 20.

^[4855] See Isa. 52.7; 33.14; Amos 9.6.

^[4856] Omnino.

^[4857] See 1 Sam. 2.6-8; Psa. 113.7; Luke 1.52.

^[4858] Divinitatum; “divine powers.”

^[4859] Ipsarum materiarum.

Chapter XXXV.—The Judicial Severity of Christ and the Tenderness of the Creator, Asserted in Contradiction to Marcion. The Cure of the Ten Lepers. Old Testament Analogies. The Kingdom of God Within You; This Teaching Similar to that of Moses. Christ, the Stone Rejected by the Builders. Indications of Severity in the Coming of Christ. Proofs that He is Not the Impassible Being Marcion Imagined.

^[4860] Luke xvii. 1, 2.

^[4861] Zech. ii. 8.

^[4862] Luke xvii. 3.

^[4863] Ex acceptione personæ. The Greek προσωποληψία, “respect of persons.”

^[4864] Lev. xix. 17. The last clause in A.V. runs, “And not suffer sin upon him;” but the Sept gives this reading, καὶ οὐ λήψῃ δι᾽ αὐτὸν ἁμαρτίαν; nor need the Hebrew mean other than this. The prenominal particle עיֹיו may be well rendered δι᾽ αὐτόι on his account.

^[4865] Luke xvii. 4.

^[4866] Lev. xix. 18.

^[4867] Dones.

^[4868] Erga: i.q. circa.

^[4869] See Lev. 13; 14.

^[4870] Morositatem.

^[4871] Prævenientem.

^[4872] Luke xvii. 11-19.

^[4873] Or, perhaps, “had proved the prophecy true by His accomplishment of it.”

^[4874] Retractari.

^[4875] See above in chap. ix.

^[4876] Præfatus est: see Luke iv. 27.

^[4877] Destructionem.

^[4878] Authenticus. “He was the true, the original Priest, of whom the priests under the Mosaic law were only copies” (Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, pp. 293, 294, and note 8).

^[4879] Luke xvii. 14.

^[4880] Et utique viderit.

^[4881] Tam opiniosus.

^[4882] Qua: “I should prefer quia” (Oehler).

^[4883] Pristino leproso: but doubtful.

^[4884] Causas.

^[4885] Luke xvii. 17.

^[4886] Schisma illud ex novem tribubus. There is another reading which substitutes the word decem. “It is, however, immaterial; either number will do roundly. If ‘ten’ be the number, it must be understood that the tenth is divided, accurately making nine and a half tribes. If ‘nine’ be read, the same amount is still made up, for Simeon was reckoned with Judah, and half of the tribe of Benjamin remained loyal” (Fr. Junius).

^[4887] Avulsas.

^[4888] 1 Kings 11.29-39; 12.15.

^[4889] Næ.

^[4890] John iv. 12, 20.

^[4891] Amos vi. 1.

^[4892] Subiciens: or “subjecting.”

^[4893] John iv. 22.

^[4894] Tota promissio Christus.

^[4895] Matricem.

^[4896] Fontem non puteum salutis.

^[4897] Agnovisse.

^[4898] Justificandos.

^[4899] Luke xvii. 19.

^[4900] Luke xvii. 15.

^[4901] Luke xvii. 19.

^[4902] Luke xvii. 20, 21.

^[4903] Una sententia.

^[4904] Excelsum: Sept. ὑπέρογχος.

^[4905] Deut. xxx. 11-13.

^[4906] Luke xvii. 21.

^[4907] Luke xvii. 25.

^[4908] Substantialiter.

^[4909] Assumi.

^[4910] Ps. cxviii. 21.

^[4911] See Isa. 8.14; 1 Cor. 10.4.

^[4912] Luke xvii. 26-30.

^[4913] Luke xvii. 32.

^[4914] Ut ille.

^[4915] Ille: emphatic.

^[4916] That is, the Creator’s Christ from the Marcionite point of view.

Chapter XXXVI.—The Parables of the Importunate Widow, and of the Pharisee and the Publican. Christ’s Answer to the Rich Ruler, the Cure of the Blind Man. His Salutation—Son of David. All Proofs of Christ’s Relation to the Creator, Marcion’s Antithesis Between David and Christ Confuted.

^[4917] Luke xviii. 1-8.

^[4918] Luke xviii. 7, 8.

^[4919] Meliorem Deum.

^[4920] Reprobatum.

^[4921] Luke xviii. 10-14.

^[4922] Sive reprobatricem superbiæ, sive justificatricem humilitatis.

^[4923] Destructorem.

^[4924] See above, chap. xxvi. p. 392.

^[4925] Luke xviii. 19.

^[4926] Utique.

^[4927] Matt. v. 45.

^[4928] Ad contestandum.

^[4929] Luke xviii. 18-20.

^[4930] Luke xviii. 21, 22.

^[4931] See above, chap. ix., near the beginning.

^[4932] Adjecit quod deerat.

^[4933] Ubique.

^[4934] Traduceretur.

^[4935] Matt. v. 17.

^[4936] Mic. vi. 8. The last clause agrees with the Septuagint: καὶ ἕτοιμον εἶναι τοῦ πορεύεσθαι μετὰ Κυρίου Θεοῦ σου.

^[4937] The clauses of Christ’s words, which are here adapted to Micah’s, are in every case broken with an inquit.

^[4938] Tunc pendentibus: i.e., at the time mentioned in the story of the blind man.

^[4939] Notitiam.

^[4940] Luke xviii. 38.

^[4941] Non temere.

^[4942] Luke xviii. 39.

^[4943] Luke xviii. 40.

^[4944] Atquin.

^[4945] Infameretis.

^[4946] Luke xviii. 42.

^[4947] Remunerator.

^[4948] That is, in the sound only, and phantom of the word; an allusion to the Docetic absurdity of Marcion.

^[4949] That is, that He was “Son of David,” etc.

^[4950] Censum: that is, must believe Him born of her.

^[4951] This, perhaps, is the meaning in a clause which is itself more antithetical than clear: “Ruens in antithesim, ruentem et ipsam antithesim.”

^[4952] In book iii. chap. vii. (at the beginning), occurs the same proverb of Marcion and the Jews. See p. 327.

^[4953] See 2 Sam. v. 6-8.

^[4954] The Marcionites.

^[4955] See 2 Sam. v. 8.

^[4956] Fidei equidem pravæ: see preceding page, note 3.

^[4957] Atquin.

^[4958] Et hoc filius David: i.e., præstitit, “showed Himself good,” perhaps.

^[4959] De suo retundendam. Instead of contrast, he shows the similarity of the cases.

^[4960] Ejusdem carnis: i.e., infirmæ (Oehler).

^[4961] Exorandum sibi.

Chapter XXXVII.—Christ and Zacchæus. The Salvation of the Body as Denied by Marcion. The Parable of the Ten Servants Entrusted with Ten Pounds. Christ a Judge, Who is to Administer the Will of the Austere Man, I.e. The Creator.

^[4962] Luke xix. 9.

^[4963] The older reading, which we here follow, is: “Enimvero Zacchæus etsi allophylus fortasse,” etc. Oehler, however, points the passage thus: “Enimvero Zacchæus etsi allophylus, fortasse,” etc., removing the doubt, and making Zacchæus “of another race” than the Jewish, for certain. This is probably more than Tertullian meant to say.

^[4964] Aliqua notitia afflatus.

^[4965] Isa. lviii. 7.

^[4966] In the same passage.

^[4967] For the history of Zacchæus, see Luke xix. 1-10.

^[4968] Isa. lviii. 6.

^[4969] Luke xix. 8.

^[4970] Luke xix. 9.

^[4971] Salutaria esse.

^[4972] Luke xix. 10.

^[4973] Substantiis.

^[4974] Caro: “the flesh,” here a synonym with the corpus of the previous clauses.

^[4975] Elisa est.

^[4976] Secundum rationem feneratæ.

^[4977] Ex parte severitatis.

^[4978] This phrase comes not from the present passage, but from Luke viii. 18, where the words are ὅ δοκεῖ ἔχειν; here the expression is ὅ ἔχει only.

^[4979] Luke xix. 22.

^[4980] The original of this obscure sentence is as follows: “Aut si et hic Creatorem finxerit austerum…..hic quoque me ille instruit eujus pecuniam ut fenerem edocet.

Chapter XXXVIII.—Christ’s Refutations of the Pharisees. Rendering Dues to Cæsar and to God. Next of the Sadducees, Respecting Marriage in the Resurrection. These Prove Him Not to Be Marcion’s But the Creator’s Christ. Marcion’s Tamperings in Order to Make Room for His Second God, Exposed and Confuted.

^[4981] Luke xx. 4.

^[4982] Luke xx. 6.

^[4983] Existeret.

^[4984] Ipse.

^[4985] “Of knowledge of good and evil.” The “law” thereof occurs in Gen. iii. 3.

^[4986] Luke xx. 5.

^[4987] Increpaturus.

^[4988] Certe. [The word sacrament not technical here.]

^[4989] Luke xx. 8.

^[4990] Luke xx. 25.

^[4991] Materia.

^[4992] Monetam.

^[4993] Non alieno.

^[4994] Quo magis absit a Christo.

^[4995] Luke xx. 27-33.

^[4996] Ut videatur.

^[4997] Subostendisse.

^[4998] Luke xx. 34.

^[4999] Luke xx. 35, 36.

^[5000] Surely Oehler’s responsio ought to be responsionis, as the older books have it.

^[5001] Absolvitur.

^[5002] Ex abundanti.

^[5003] We have translated here, post præscriptionem, according to the more frequent sense of the word, præscriptio. But there is another meaning of the word, which is not unknown to our author, equivalent to our objection or demurrer, or (to quote Oehler’s definition) “clausula qua reus adversarii intentionem oppugnat—the form by which the defendant rebuts the plaintiff’s charge.” According to this sense, we read: “I shall now proceed…and after putting in a demurrer (or taking exception) against the tactics of my opponent.”

^[5004] Cohærentes.

^[5005] Decucurrerunt in legendo: or, “they ran through it, by thus reading.”

^[5006] We have adapted, rather than translated, Tertullian’s words in this parenthesis. His words of course suit the order of the Latin, which differs from the English. The sentence in Latin is, “Quos autem dignatus est Deus illius ævi possessione et resurrectione a mortuis.” The phrase in question is illius ævi. Where shall it stand? The Marcionites placed it after “Deus” in government, but Tertullian (following the undoubted meaning of the sentence) says it depends on “possessione et resurrectione,” i.e., “worthy of the possession, etc., of that world.” To effect this construction, he says, “Ut facta hic distinctione post deum ad sequentia pertineat illius ævi;” i.e., he requests that a stop be placed after the word “deus,” whereby the phrase “illius ævi” will belong to the words which follow—“possessione et resurrectione a mortuis.”

^[5007] Luke xx. 33.

^[5008] Luke xx. 39.

^[5009] Formam: “its conditions” or “process.”

^[5010] Luke xx. 41-44.

^[5011] Non obtundebat.

^[5012] Luke xviii. 38.

^[5013] Luke xx. 41.

^[5014] Tueretur.

Chapter XXXIX.—Concerning Those Who Come in the Name of Christ. The Terrible Signs of His Coming. He Whose Coming is So Grandly Described Both in the Old Testament and the New Testament, is None Other Than the Christ of the Creator. This Proof Enhanced by the Parable of the Fig-Tree and All the Trees. Parallel Passages of Prophecy.

^[5015] See above: book iii. chap. xv. and xvi. pp. 333, 334.

^[5016] The illam here refers to the nominum proprietas, i.e., His title Christ and His name Jesus.

^[5017] Transnominaret.

^[5018] Proinde.

^[5019] Luke xxi. 8.

^[5020] Consimilem: of course Marcion’s Christ; the Marcionite being challenged in the “you.”

^[5021] Luke xxi. 9-11.

^[5022] Compare, in Luke 21.9,22,28,31-33,35-36.

^[5023] Luke 21.12,13.

^[5024] Omnipotens: παντοκράτωρ (Sept.); of hosts—A.V.

^[5025] Zech. ix. 15, 16 (Septuagint).

^[5026] Allophylis.

^[5027] Eph. ii. 20.

^[5028] Luke xxi. 12-14.

^[5029] Num. xxii.-xxiv.

^[5030] Ex. iv. 10-12.

^[5031] Isa. xliv. 5.

^[5032] Exserta.

^[5033] See Gen. xxxii. 28.

^[5034] Isa. l. 4.

^[5035] Luke xxi. 16, 17.

^[5036] Per tolerantiam: “endurance.”

^[5037] Comp. Luke 21.19; Matt. 24.13.

^[5038] Ps. ix. 18.

^[5039] After the Septuagint he makes a plural appellative (“eis qui toleraverint,” LXX. τοῖς ὑπομένονσι) of the Hebrew לְחֵלֶמ, which in A.V. and the Vulgate (and also Gesenius and Fuerst) is the dative of a proper name.

^[5040] Luke xxi. 20.

^[5041] Luke xxi. 25, 26.

^[5042] Luke xxi. 26.

^[5043] Joel iii. 30, 31.

^[5044] Elata: “fear was raised to its very highest.”

^[5045] Hab. iii. 9-12 (Septuagint).

^[5046] Luke xxi. 27, 28.

^[5047] Luke xxi. 31.

^[5048] Dan. vii. 13.

^[5049] Dan. vii. 14.

^[5050] Luke xix. 12, 13, etc.

^[5051] Ps. ii. 8.

^[5052] Dan. vii. 14.

^[5053] Luke xx. 35, 36.

^[5054] Hab. iii. 13.

^[5055] In Luke xxi. 7.

^[5056] Luke xxi. 33.

^[5057] Luke xxi. 29-31.

^[5058] Arbuscularum.

^[5059] Luke xxi. 33.

^[5060] Nescio an.

^[5061] Isa. xl. 8.

^[5062] Luke xxi. 34, 35. [Here follows a rich selection of parallels to Luke xxi. 34-38.]

^[5063] Comp. Deut. viii. 12-14.

^[5064] Luke xxi. 37.

^[5065] Hosea xii. 4. One reading of the LXX. is, ἐν τῳ οἴκῳ μου εὕρεσάν με.

^[5066] Zech. xiv. 4.

^[5067] Luke xxi. 38.

^[5068] Isa. l. 4.

^[5069] Literally, “the prophecies.”

^[5070] Luke xxii. i.

^[5071] Sacramentum.

^[5072] Lev. xxiii. 5.

^[5073] Luke xxii. 15.

^[5074] Vervecina Judaica. In this rough sarcasm we have of course our author’s contempt of Marcionism.

^[5075] Isa. liii. 7.

^[5076] Levabit: literally, “shall lift up,” etc.

^[5077] Ps. xli. 9.

^[5078] Amos ii. 6.

^[5079] Exitum.

^[5080] Revocati.

^[5081] This passage more nearly resembles Zech. 11.12,13 than anything in Jeremiah, although the transaction in Jer. xxxii. 7-15 is noted by the commentators, as referred to. Tertullian had good reason for mentioning Jeremiah and not Zechariah, because the apostle whom he refers to (Matt. xxvii. 3-10) had distinctly attributed the prophecy to Jeremiah (“Jeremy the prophet,” Matt. 27.9). This is not the place to do more than merely refer to the voluminous controversy which has arisen from the apostle’s mention of Jeremiah instead of Zechariah. It is enough to remark that Tertullian’s argument is unaffected by the discrepancy in the name of the particular prophet. On all hands the prophecy is admitted, and this at once satisfies our author’s argument. For the ms. evidence in favour of the unquestionably correct reading, τότε ἐπληρώθη τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ ῾Ιερεμίου τοῦ προφήτου, κ.τ.λ., the reader is referred to Dr. Tregelles’ Critical Greek Testament, in loc.; only to the convincing amount of evidence collected by the very learned editor must now be added the subsequently obtained authority of Tischendorf’s Codex Sinaiticus.

^[5082] Appretiati vel honorati. There is nothing in the original or the Septuagint to meet the second word honorati, which may refer to the “honorarium,” or “fee paid on admission to a post of honour,”—a term of Roman law, and referred to by Tertullian himself.

^[5083] Luke xxii. 19. [See Jewell’s Challenge, p. 266, supra.]

^[5084] Corpus veritatis: meant as a thrust against Marcion’s Docetism.

^[5085] Ad vanitatem Marcionis. [Note 9, p. 289.]

^[5086] Peponem. In his De Anima, c. xxxii., he uses this word in strong irony: “Cur non magis et pepo, tam insulsus.”

^[5087] [This text, imperfectly quoted in the original, is filled out by Dr. Holmes.]

^[5088] So the Septuagint in Jer. xi. 19, Ξύλον εἰς τὸν ἄρτον αὐτοῦ (A.V. “Let us destroy the tree with the fruit”). See above, book iii. chap. xix. p. 337.

^[5089] Illuminator antiquitatum. This general phrase includes typical ordinances under the law, as well as the sayings of the prophets.

^[5090] Luke xxii. 20.

^[5091] Isa. lxiii. 1 (Sept. slightly altered).

^[5092] In Juda.

^[5093] Gen. xlix. 11.

Chapter XLI.—The Woe Pronounced on the Traitor a Judicial Act, Which Disproves Christ to Be Such as Marcion Would Have Him to Be. Christ’s Conduct Before the Council Explained. Christ Even Then Directs the Minds of His Judges to the Prophetic Evidences of His Own Mission. The Moral Responsibility of These Men Asserted.

^[5094] Luke xxii. 22.

^[5095] Ipse.

^[5096] This is an argumentum ad hominem against Marcion for his cavil, which was considered above in book ii. chap. v.–viii. p. 300.

^[5097] Obstitit peccaturo.

^[5098] Si ignorabat. One would have expected “si non ignorabat,” like the “si sciebat” of the next step in the argument.

^[5099] The original of this not very clear sentence is: “Nam et Petrum præsumptorie aliquid elocutum negationi potius destinando zeloten deum tibi ostendit.”

^[5100] Luke 22.34, 54-62.

^[5101] Luke xxii. 47-49.

^[5102] Isa. xxix. 13.

^[5103] Luke xxii. 66, 67.

^[5104] Oehler’s admirable edition is also carefully printed for the most part, but surely his quæsisset must here be quæsissent.

^[5105] Luke xxii. 67.

^[5106] Supersedit ostendere.

^[5107] i.e., not to answer that question of theirs. This seems to be the force of the perfect tense, “occultasse se.”

^[5108] He makes Jesus stretch forth His hand, porrigens manum inquit.

^[5109] Luke xxii. 69.

^[5110] Dan. vii. 13.

^[5111] Ps. cx. 1.

^[5112] Luke xxii. 70.

^[5113] Luke xxii. 70.

^[5114] Or does he suppose that they repeated this same question twice? His words are, “dum rursus interrogant.”

^[5115] Either, “Art thou,” or, “Thou art, then, the Son of God.”

^[5116] Oblique.

^[5117] Ut, quia…sic senserunt.

^[5118] Aperte.

^[5119] Æque ita et ille confirmative respondit.

^[5120] Ut perseveraverint in eo quod pronuntiatio sapiebat.…See Luke xxii. 71.

Chapter XLII.—Other Incidents of the Passion Minutely Compared with Prophecy. Pilate and Herod. Barabbas Preferred to Jesus. Details of the Crucifixion. The Earthquake and the Mid-Day Darkness. All Wonderfully Foretold in the Scriptures of the Creator. Christ’s Giving Up the Ghost No Evidence of Marcion’s Docetic Opinions. In His Sepulture There is a Refutation Thereof.

^[5121] Onerare cœperunt.

^[5122] “King Messiah;” λέγοντα ἑαυτὸν Χριστὸν βασιλέα εἶναι, Luke xxiii. 1, 2.

^[5123] Gravassent.

^[5124] Proinde.

^[5125] Luke xxiii. 3.

^[5126] Constitutus est in judicio. The Septuagint is καταστήσεται εἰς κρίσιν, “shall stand on His trial.”

^[5127] Isa. iii. 13, 14 (Septuagint).

^[5128] Ps. ii. 1, 2.

^[5129] Velut munus. This is a definition, in fact, of the xenium in the verse from Hosea. This ξένιον was the Roman lautia, “a state entertainment to distinguished foreigners in the city.”

^[5130] Luke xxiii. 7.

^[5131] Hos. x. 6 (Sept. ξένια τῷ βασιλεῖ).

^[5132] Luke xxiii. 8, 9.

^[5133] Isa. liii. 7.

^[5134] Isa. l. 4 (Sept.).

^[5135] Ps. xxii. 15.

^[5136] Luke xxiii. 25.

^[5137] Comp. Luke 23.33; Isa. 53.12.

^[5138] This remarkable suppression was made to escape the wonderful minuteness of the prophetic evidence to the details of Christ’s death.

^[5139] Ps. xxii. 18.

^[5140] Ps. xxii. 16.

^[5141] Ps. xxii. 16, 7, 8.

^[5142] We append the original of these obscure sentences: “Quo jam testimonium vestimentorum? Habe falsi tui prædam; totus psalmus vestimenta sunt Christi.” The general sense is apparent. If Marcion does suppress the details about Christ’s garments at the cross, to escape the inconvenient proof they afford that Christ is the object of prophecies, yet there are so many other points of agreement between this wonderful Psalm and St. Luke’s history of the crucifixion (not expunged, as it would seem, by the heretic), that they quite compensate for the loss of this passage about the garments (Oehler).

^[5143] Comp. Josh. x. 13.

^[5144] Argumenta.

^[5145] Isa. l. 3.

^[5146] Amos viii. 9.

^[5147] Here you have the meaning of the sixth hour.

^[5148] Luke xxiii. 45.

^[5149] Ezek. xi. 22, 23.

^[5150] Isa. i. 8.

^[5151] Comp. Luke 23.46; Psa. 31.5.

^[5152] Luke xxiii. 46.

^[5153] Spiritus: or “breath.”

^[5154] Expirasse: considered actively, “breathed out,” in reference to the “expiravit” of the Luke 23.46 above.

^[5155] A sharp rebuke of Marcion’s Docetism here follows.

^[5156] Autem.

^[5157] Autem.

^[5158] Nusquam comparuit phantasma cum spiritu.

^[5159] Post expirationem.

^[5160] See these stages in Luke xxiii. 47-55.

^[5161] Non nihil: “a something.”

^[5162] This argument is also used by Epiphanius to prove the reality of Christ’s body, Hæres. xl. Confut. 74. The same writer also employs for the same purpose the incident of the women returning from the sepulchre, which Tertullian is going to adduce in his next chapter, Confut. 75 (Oehler).

^[5163] Luke xxiii. 51.

^[5164] Ps. i. 1.

Chapter XLIII.—Conclusions. Jesus as the Christ of the Creator Proved from the Events of the Last Chapter of St. Luke. The Pious Women at the Sepulchre. The Angels at the Resurrection. The Manifold Appearances of Christ After the Resurrection. His Mission of the Apostles Amongst All Nations. All Shown to Be in Accordance with the Wisdom of the Almighty Father, as Indicated in Prophecy. The Body of Christ After Death No Mere Phantom. Marcion’s Manipulation of the Gospel on This Point.

^[5165] The first word of the passage just applied to Joseph.

^[5166] Luke xxiv. 1.

^[5167] Hos. 5.15; 6.1-2.

^[5168] Volutata.

^[5169] Luke xxiv. 3.

^[5170] Isa. lvii. 2, according to the Septuagint, ἡ ταφὴ αὐτοῦ ἠρται ἐκ τοῦ μέσου.

^[5171] Luke xxiv. 4.

^[5172] Tot fere laterensibus.

^[5173] Deut. 17.6; 19.15; Matt. 18.16; 2 Cor. 13.1.

^[5174] Isa. xxvii. 11, according to the Septuagint, γυναῖκες ἐρχόμεναι ἀπὸ θέας, δεῦτε.

^[5175] Luke xxiv. 13-19.

^[5176] Luke xxiv. 21.

^[5177] Plane.

^[5178] Luke xxiv. 25.

^[5179] Luke xxiv. 6, 7.

^[5180] Videte. The original is much stronger ψηλαφήσατέ με καὶ ἴδετε, “handle me, and see.” Two sentences thrown into one.

^[5181] Luke xxiv. 37-39.

^[5182] Luke xxiv. 39.

^[5183] Luke xxiv. 41.

^[5184] An additional proof that He was no phantom.

^[5185] Ut opinor.

^[5186] Sententiis.

^[5187] Prophetarum.

^[5188] Luke 24.47; Matt. 28.19.

^[5189] Ps. xix. 4.

I.

^[5190] Opp. Tom. vi. p. 228. Ed. Migne.

IV.

^[5191] Calmet. Opp. i. 483 and Tom. x., p. 525.

Chapter I.—Introductory. The Apostle Paul Himself Not the Preacher of a New God. Called by Jesus Christ, Although After the Other Apostles, His Mission Was from the Creator. States How. The Argument, as in the Case of the Gospel, Confining Proofs to Such Portions of St. Paul’s Writings as Marcion Allowed.

^[5192] Cum cognoveris unde sit.

^[5193] Materiam.

^[5194] We have already more than once referred to Marcion’s preference for St. Paul. “The reason of the preference thus given to that apostle was his constant and strenuous opposition to the Judaizing Christians, who wished to reimpose the yoke of the Jewish ceremonies on the necks of their brethren. This opposition the Marcionites wished to construe into a direct denial of the authority of the Mosaic law. They contended also from St. Paul’s assertion, that he received his appointment to the apostolic office not from man, but from Christ, that he alone delivered the genuine doctrines of the gospel. This deference for St. Paul accounts also for Marcion’s accepting St. Luke’s Gospel as the only authentic one, as we saw in the last book of this treatise; it was because that evangelist had been the companion of St. Paul” (Bp. Kaye, On the Writings of Tertullian, 3d edition, pp. 474–475).

^[5195] Novus aliqui discipulus.

^[5196] Interim.

^[5197] Temere.

^[5198] Agnitione.

^[5199] Ad sollicitudinem.

^[5200] In albo.

^[5201] Ex incursu: in allusion to St. Paul’s sudden conversion, Acts ix. 3-8. [On St. Paul’s Epistles, see p. 324, supra.]

^[5202] Marcion is frequently called “Ponticus Nauclerus,” probably less on account of his own connection with a seafaring life, than that of his countrymen, who were great sailors. Comp. book. i. 18. (sub fin.) and book iii. 6. [pp. 284, 325.]

^[5203] In acatos tuas.

^[5204] Quo symbolo.

^[5205] Quis illum tituli charactere percusserit.

^[5206] Quis transmiserit tibi.

^[5207] Quis imposuerit.

^[5208] Constanter.

^[5209] Ne illius probetur, i.e., to the Catholic, for Marcion did not admit all St. Paul’s epistles (Semler).

^[5210] Omnia apostolatus ejus instrumenta.

^[5211] Gal. i. 1.

^[5212] Subscribit.

^[5213] Actis refert.

^[5214] Luke xxi. 8.

^[5215] Conversor.

^[5216] Jam hinc.

^[5217] Gen. xlix. 27, Septuagint, the latter clause being καὶ εἰς τὸ ἑσπέρας δίδωσι τροφήν.

^[5218] Satisfactio.

^[5219] Non aliud portendebat quam.

^[5220] Secundum Virginis censum.

^[5221] Figurarum sacramenta.

^[5222] Although St. Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles, Marcion does not seem to have admitted this book into his New Testament. “It is clearly excluded from his catalogue, as given by Epiphanius. The same thing appears from the more ancient authority of Tertullian, who begins his Book v. against Marcion with showing the absurdity of his conduct in rejecting the history and acts of the apostles, and yet receiving St. Paul as the chief of the apostles, whose name is never mentioned in the Gospel with the other apostles, especially since the account given by Paul himself in Gal. i.-ii. confirms the account which we have in the Acts. But the reason why he rejected this book is (as Tertullian says) very evident, since from it we can plainly show that the God of the Christians and the God of the Jews, or the Creator, was the same being and that Christ was sent by Him, and by no other” (Lardner’s Works, Hist. of Heretics, chap. x. sec. 41).

^[5223] Gal. i. 1.

^[5224] Inde te a defensione ejus expello.

^[5225] An insinuation that Marcion’s defence of Paul was, in fact, a calumny of the apostle.

^[5226] Præstruant eam.

^[5227] Qualis es.

^[5228] Habe nunc de meo.

^[5229] In ipso gradu præscriptionis.

^[5230] Oportere docere…sapere…velle.

^[5231] Edicere.

^[5232] Ne non haberetur.

^[5233] Nullum alium deum circumlatum.

^[5234] Præjudicasse debebit.

^[5235] Marcion only received ten of St. Paul’s epistles, and these altered by himself.

Chapter II.—On the Epistle to the Galatians. The Abolition of the Ordinances of the Mosaic Law No Proof of Another God. The Divine Lawgiver, the Creator Himself, Was the Abrogator. The Apostle’s Doctrine in the First Chapter Shown to Accord with the Teaching of the Old Testament. The Acts of the Apostles Shown to Be Genuine Against Marcion. This Book Agrees with the Pauline Epistles.

^[5236] Principalem.

^[5237] See above, in book i. chap. xx., also in book iv. chap. i.

^[5238] Comp. Isa. 43.18-19; 65.17; 2 Cor. 5.17.

^[5239] Luke xvi. 16.

^[5240] Apud quem.

^[5241] Porro.

^[5242] Immo quia.

^[5243] Disciplina.

^[5244] Ultro.

^[5245] Discessionem.

^[5246] Ut adhuc suggeremus.

^[5247] Gal. i. 6, 7.

^[5248] Deberet.

^[5249] Moverat illos a.

^[5250] Gal. i. 7.

^[5251] Isa. xl. 9 (Septuagint).

^[5252] Isa. lii. 7.

^[5253] We have here an instance of the high authority of the Septuagint version. It comes from the Seventy: Καὶ ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνοματι αὐτοῦ ἔθνη ἐλπιοῦσιν (Isa. xlii. 4.) From this Tertullian, as usual, quoted it. But what is much more important, St. Matthew has adopted it; see Matt. 12.21. This beautiful promise of the Creator does not occur in its well-known form in the Hebrew original.

^[5254] Isa. xlii. 6.

^[5255] Apud: “administered by.”

^[5256] Gal. i. 7.

^[5257] Cum sit.

^[5258] Gal. i. 8.

^[5259] Gal. i. 8.

^[5260] Referret.

^[5261] A similar remark occurs in Præscript. Hæretic. c. xxiii. p. 253.

^[5262] Ipsa materia.

^[5263] See Gal. 1.11-24; Acts 15.5-29.

^[5264] “The Acts of the Apostles” is always a plural phrase in Tertullian.

^[5265] Ut non secutus sit.

^[5266] Formam.

^[5267] Dedocendæ legis; i.e., of Moses.

Chapter III.—St. Paul Quite in Accordance with St. Peter and Other Apostles of the Circumcision. His Censure of St. Peter Explained, and Rescued from Marcion’s Misapplication. The Strong Protests of This Epistle Against Judaizers. Yet Its Teaching is Shown to Be in Keeping with the Law and the Prophets. Marcion’s Tampering with St. Paul’s Writings Censured.

^[5268] Ad patrocinium.

^[5269] Scribit often takes the place of inquit; naturally enough as referring to the epistles.

^[5270] Gal. ii. 1, 2.

^[5271] Formam.

^[5272] Si quando.

^[5273] Gal. ii. 3.

^[5274] Ex defensione.

^[5275] Gal. ii. 4.

^[5276] Interpolatione Scripturæ.

^[5277] Qua effingerent.

^[5278] Gal. ii. 4, 5.

^[5279] Ipsi.

^[5280] Gal. ii. 3, 4.

^[5281] Incipit reddere rationem.

^[5282] Contrarii utique facti. [Farrar, St. Paul, pp. 232 and 261.]

^[5283] Denique.

^[5284] See Conybeare and Howson, in loc.

^[5285] Fuerunt propter quos crederetur.

^[5286] The following statement will throw light upon the character of the two classes of Jewish professors of Christianity referred to by Tertullian: “A pharisaic section was sheltered in its bosom (of the church at Jerusalem), which continually strove to turn Christianity into a sect of Judaism. These men were restless agitators, animated by the bitterest sectarian spirit; and although they were numerically a small party, yet we know the power of the turbulent minority. But besides these Judaizing zealots, there was a large proportion of the Christians at Jerusalem, whose Christianity, though more sincere than that of those just mentioned, was yet very weak and imperfect…Many of them still only knew of a Christ after the flesh—a Saviour of Israel—a Jewish Messiah. Their minds were in a state of transition between the law and the gospel; and it was of great consequence not to shock their prejudices too rudely; lest they should be tempted to make shipwreck of their faith and renounce their Christianity altogether.” These were they whose prejudices required to be wisely consulted in things which did not touch the foundation of the gospel. (Conybeare and Howson’s St. Paul, People’s Edition, vol. ii. pp. 259, 260.)

^[5287] Gal. ii. 2.

^[5288] Ex censu eorum: see Gal. ii. 9, 10.

^[5289] Acts xvi. 3.

^[5290] Acts xxi. 23-26.

^[5291] 1 Cor. ix. 20, 22.

^[5292] Gal. ii. 9.

^[5293] Gal. ii. 10.

^[5294] See above, book iv. chap. xiv. p. 365.

^[5295] Victus: see Gal. 2.12,14.

^[5296] Gal. ii. 12.

^[5297] Gal. ii. 16.

^[5298] Gal. ii. 18 (see Conybeare and Howson).

^[5299] Rivi: the wadys of the East.

^[5300] Luke iii. 4, 5.

^[5301] Ps. ii. 3.

^[5302] Ps. ii. 1, 2.

^[5303] Gal. 2.16; 3.11.

^[5304] Hab. ii. 4.

^[5305] Apud.

^[5306] Deut. xi. 26.

^[5307] Gal. iii. 13.

^[5308] The LXX. version of Deut. xxi. 23 is quoted by St. Paul in Gal. iii. 13.

^[5309] Apud te.

^[5310] According to the promise of a prophet of the Creator. See Hab. ii. 4.

^[5311] Gal. iii. 26.

^[5312] Gal. iii. 7, 9, 29.

^[5313] Gal. iii. 6.

^[5314] Magis proinde: as sharing in the faith he had, “being yet uncircumcised.” See Rom. iv. 11.

^[5315] Patris fidei.

^[5316] In integritate carnis.

^[5317] Denique.

^[5318] Formam: “plan” or “arrangement.”

^[5319] Alterius dei…dei alterius.

^[5320] Revincatur.

^[5321] Ipso sensu.

Chapter IV.—Another Instance of Marcion’s Tampering with St. Paul’s Text. The Fulness of Time, Announced by the Apostle, Foretold by the Prophets. Mosaic Rites Abrogated by the Creator Himself. Marcion’s Tricks About Abraham’s Name. The Creator, by His Christ, the Fountain of the Grace and the Liberty Which St. Paul Announced. Marcion’s Docetism Refuted.

^[5322] This apparent quotation is in fact a patching together of two sentences from Gal. 3.15; 4.3 (Fr. Junius). “If I may be allowed to guess from the manner in which Tertullian expresseth himself, I should imagine that Marcion erased the whole of chap. iii. after the word λέγω in Gal. 3.15-4.3. Then the words will be connected thus: ‘Brethren, I speak after the manner of men…when we were children we were in bondage under the elements of the world; but when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth His Son.’ This is precisely what the argument of Tertullian requires, and they are the very words which he connects together” (Lardner, Hist. of Heretics, x. 43). Dr. Lardner, touching Marcion’s omissions in this chap. iii. of the Epistle to the Galatians, says: “He omitted Gal. 3.6-8, in order to get rid of the mention of Abraham, and of the gospel having been preached to him.” This he said after St. Jerome, and then adds: “He ought also to have omitted part of Gal. 3.9, σὺν τῷ πιστῷ ᾽Αβραάμ, which seems to have been the case, according to T.’s manner of stating the argument against him” (Works, History of Heretics, x. 43).

^[5323] Exemplum.

^[5324] Suspicit.

^[5325] Gal. iii. 15. This, of course, is consistent in St. Paul’s argument. Marcion, however, by erasing all the intervening verses, and affixing the phrase “after the manner of men” to the plain assertion of Gal. iv. 3, reduces the whole statement to an absurdity.

^[5326] Gal. iii. 16.

^[5327] Erubescat.

^[5328] So, instead of pursuing the contents of Gal. 3., he proceeds to such of Gal. 4. as Marcion reserved.

^[5329] Gal. iv. 4.

^[5330] In extremitatem temporum.

^[5331] Isa. ii. 2 (Sept).

^[5332] Joel iii. 28, as quoted by St. Peter, Acts ii. 17.

^[5333] Ipsius.

^[5334] Gal. iv. 5.

^[5335] Isa. xl. 4.

^[5336] Isa. ii. 3.

^[5337] Gal. iv. 5.

^[5338] Isa. xlii. 4, 6.

^[5339] Gal. iv. 6.

^[5340] Joel iii. 28, as given in Acts ii. 17.

^[5341] Gal. iv. 9.

^[5342] Gal. iv. 8.

^[5343] Nec sic taxans.

^[5344] Gal. iv. 10.

^[5345] Cœnas puras: probably the παρασκευαί mentioned in John xix. 31.

^[5346] See also John xix. 31.

^[5347] Isa. i. 13, 14.

^[5348] Amos v. 21.

^[5349] Hos. ii. 11.

^[5350] In other words, Marcion has indeed tampered with the passage, omitting some things; but (strange to say) he has left untouched the statement which, from his point of view, most required suppression.

^[5351] Allegorica: on the importance of rendering ἀλληγορούμενα by this participle rather than by the noun “an allegory,” as in A.V., see Bp. Marsh’s Lectures on the Interpretation of the Bible, pp. 351–354.

^[5352] Ostensiones: revelationes perhaps.

^[5353] Gal. iv. 21-26, 31.

^[5354] Apud quem.

^[5355] Gal. v. 1.

^[5356] Tertullian, in his terse style, takes the case of the emperor, as the highest potentate, who, if any, might make free with his power. He seizes the moment when Galba was saluted emperor on Nero’s death, and was the means of delivering so many out of the hands of the tyrant, in order to sharpen the point of his illustration.

^[5357] Gal. v. 1.

^[5358] Ps. ii. 3, 2.

^[5359] Jer. iv. 4.

^[5360] Deut. x. 16.

^[5361] Gal. v. 6.

^[5362] Utraque vacabat.

^[5363] Isa. xlii. 4.

^[5364] Gal. v. 6.

^[5365] Deut. vi. 5.

^[5366] Lev. xix. 18.

^[5367] Gal. v. 10.

^[5368] Gal. v. 14.

^[5369] Dispendium.

^[5370] Compendium: the terseness of the original cannot be preserved in the translation.

^[5371] Gal. vi. 2.

^[5372] Erratis: literally, “ye are deceived.”

^[5373] Gal. vi. 7.

^[5374] Gal. vi. 7.

^[5375] Intentat.

^[5376] Gal. vi. 9.

^[5377] Gal. vi. 10.

^[5378] Corruptionis.

^[5379] Gal. vi. 9.

^[5380] Eccles. iii. 17.

^[5381] Gal. vi. 14.

^[5382] See Gal. vi. 17, κόπους μοι μηδεὶς παρεχέτω, “let no one harass me.”

^[5383] Stigmata: the scars not of circumcision, but of wounds suffered for His sake (Conybeare and Howson).

^[5384] Corporalia.

^[5385] Solidam.

Chapter V.—The First Epistle to the Corinthians. The Pauline Salutation of Grace and Peace Shown to Be Anti-Marcionite. The Cross of Christ Purposed by the Creator. Marcion Only Perpetuates the Offence and Foolishness of Christ’s Cross by His Impious Severance of the Gospel from the Creator. Analogies Between the Law and the Gospel in the Matter of Weak Things, and Foolish Things and Base Things.

^[5386] Præstructio.

^[5387] Titulo.

^[5388] 1 Cor. i. 3.

^[5389] Appellant.

^[5390] Officio.

^[5391] Isa. lii. 7.

^[5392] Pacem quam præferendam.

^[5393] 1 Cor. i. 3.

^[5394] Competentibus nostro quoque sacramento.

^[5395] Nisi ex accedentibus cui magis competant.

^[5396] Disciplinæ.

^[5397] Per naturæ dissimulationem. This Fr. Junius explains by τὴν φύσεως ἀφοσίωσιν, in the sense of “original sin” (ἀφοσιοῦσθαι seems to point to sin requiring expiation).

^[5398] 1 Cor. i. 18.

^[5399] 1 Cor. 1.19; Isa. 29.14.

^[5400] Causam.

^[5401] Aut si: introducing a Marcionite cavil.

^[5402] Apud dominum.

^[5403] 1 Cor. i. 20.

^[5404] Boni duxit Deus, εὐδόκησεν ὁ Θεός.

^[5405] 1 Cor. i. 21.

^[5406] Hic vel maxime.

^[5407] That is, “man who lives in the world, not God who made the world.”

^[5408] 1 Cor. i. 22.

^[5409] Æmula.

^[5410] Causæ: the reasons of His retributive providence.

^[5411] 1 Cor. i. 23.

^[5412] Consignat.

^[5413] Isa. viii. 14.

^[5414] Isa. xxviii. 16.

^[5415] “Etiam Marcion servat.” These words cannot mean, as they have been translated, that “Marcion even retains these words” of prophecy; for whenever Marcion fell in with any traces of this prophecy of Christ, he seems to have expunged them. In Luke ii. 34 holy Simeon referred to it, but Marcion rejected this chapter of the evangelist; and although he admitted much of chap. xx., it is remarkable that he erased the ten verses thereof from the end of the eighth to the end of the eighteenth. Now in vers. 17, 18, Marcion found the prophecy again referred to. See Epiphanius, Adv. Hæres. xlii. Schol. 55.

^[5416] 1 Cor. i. 25.

^[5417] Caro.

^[5418] Vere.

^[5419] 1 Cor. i. 27.

^[5420] Apud Creatorem etiam vetera: (vetera, i.e.) “veteris testamenti institutiones” (Oehler).

^[5421] Lev. xv. passim.

^[5422] Lev. xiii. 2-6.

^[5423] Æmulatur.

^[5424] 1 Cor. i. 29, 31.

^[5425] By Jer. 9.23,24.

Chapter VI.—The Divine Way of Wisdom, and Greatness, and Might. God’s Hiding of Himself, and Subsequent Revelation. To Marcion’s God Such a Concealment and Manifestation Impossible. God’s Predestination. No Such Prior System of Intention Possible to a God Previously Unknown as Was Marcion’s. The Powers of the World Which Crucified Christ. St. Paul, as a Wise Master-Builder, Associated with Prophecy. Sundry Injunctions of the Apostle Parallel with the Teaching of the Old Testament.

^[5426] 1 Cor. ii. 6, 7.

^[5427] Infatuavit.

^[5428] Isa. xlii. 6.

^[5429] Isa. xlv. 3 (Septuagint).

^[5430] Nedum.

^[5431] Sacramenta.

^[5432] Palam decurrentia.

^[5433] Delitescebat.

^[5434] 1 Cor. ii. 7.

^[5435] Gen. i. 14, inexactly quoted.

^[5436] Quodammodo.

^[5437] Introductione sæculi.

^[5438] Pæne jam totis sæculis prodactis.

^[5439] 1 Cor. ii. 8.

^[5440] Ut et hoc recidat.

^[5441] Virtutibus.

^[5442] Sed jam nec mihi competit.

^[5443] Matt. iv. 1-11.

^[5444] Luke iv. 34.

^[5445] In Creatoris accipitur apud Marcionem.

^[5446] Considered, in the hypothesis, as Marcion’s god.

^[5447] Apud me.

^[5448] Luke xxii. 3.

^[5449] 1 Cor. ii. 8.

^[5450] Videtur.

^[5451] Et quo.

^[5452] Instrumento.

^[5453] Isa. xl. 13.

^[5454] 1 Cor. iii. 10.

^[5455] Depalatorem.

^[5456] So the A.V. of Isa. iii. 3; but the Septuagint and St. Paul use the self-same term, σοφὸς ἀρχιτέκτων.

^[5457] 1 Cor. iii. 11.

^[5458] Isa. xxviii. 16.

^[5459] We add the original of this sentence: “Nisi si structorem se terreni operis Deus profitebatur, ut non de suo Christo significaret, qui futurus esset fundamentum credentium in eum, super quod prout quisque superstruxerit, dignam scilicet vel indignam doctrinam si opus ejus per ignem probabitur, si merces illi per ignem rependetur, creatoris est, quia per ignem judicatur vestra superædificatio, utique sui fundamenti, id est sui Christi.” Tertullian is arguing upon an hypothesis suggested by Marcion’s withdrawal of his Christ from everything “terrene.” Such a process as is described by St. Paul in this passage, 1 Cor. i. 12-15, must be left to the Creator and His Christ.

^[5460] 1 Cor. iii. 16.

^[5461] The text has vitiabitur, “shall be defiled.”

^[5462] 1 Cor. iii. 17.

^[5463] 1 Cor. iii. 18.

^[5464] 1 Cor. iii. 19.

^[5465] The older reading, “adhuc sensum pristina præjudicaverunt,” we have preferred to Oehler’s “ad hunc sensum,” etc.

^[5466] 1 Cor. iii. 19-20; Job v. 13; Ps. xciv. 11.

^[5467] Si non illi doceret.

^[5468] 1 Cor. iii. 21.

^[5469] Jer. xvii. 5.

^[5470] Ps. cxviii. 8.

^[5471] Ps. cxviii. 9.

Chapter VII.—St. Paul’s Phraseology Often Suggested by the Jewish Scriptures. Christ Our Passover—A Phrase Which Introduces Us to the Very Heart of the Ancient Dispensation. Christ’s True Corporeity. Married and Unmarried States. Meaning of the Time is Short. In His Exhortations and Doctrine, the Apostle Wholly Teaches According to the Mind and Purposes of the God of the Old Testament. Prohibition of Meats and Drinks Withdrawn by the Creator.

^[5472] 1 Cor. iv. 5.

^[5473] Isa. xlii. 6.

^[5474] Ps. vii. 9.

^[5475] 1 Cor. iv. 5.

^[5476] 1 Cor. iv. 9.

^[5477] Our author’s version is no doubt right. The Greek does not admit the co-ordinate, triple conjunction of the A.V.: Θέατρον ἐγενήθημεν τῷ κόσμῳ—καὶ ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἀνθρώποις.

^[5478] Nimirum: introducing a strong ironical sentence against Marcion’s conceit.

^[5479] Nisi exserte.

^[5480] Lev. xviii. 8.

^[5481] 1 Cor. v. 1.

^[5482] Secutus sit.

^[5483] 1 Cor. v. 5.

^[5484] Viderit.

^[5485] 1 Cor. v. 5.

^[5486] 1 Cor. v. 13.

^[5487] 1 Cor. v. 7.

^[5488] 1 Cor. v. 7.

^[5489] Ex. xii.

^[5490] 1 Cor. vi. 13.

^[5491] Peribit.

^[5492] 1 Cor. vi. 14.

^[5493] 1 Cor. vi. 15.

^[5494] 1 Cor. vi. 20.

^[5495] 1 Cor. vi. 20.

^[5496] Constantior: ironically predicated.

^[5497] 1 Cor. vii. 7, 8.

^[5498] 1 Cor. vii. 9, 13, 14.

^[5499] 1 Cor. vii. 27.

^[5500] One of Marcion’s Antitheses.

^[5501] Viderint.

^[5502] Et Christus: Pamelius and Rigaltius here read “Christi apostolus.” Oehler defends the text as the author’s phrase suggested (as Fr. Junius says) by the preceding words, “Moses or Christ.” To which we may add, that in this particular place St. Paul mentions his injunction as Christ’s especially, οὐκ ἐγὼ, αλλ᾽ ὁ Κύριος, 1 Cor. vii. 10.

^[5503] 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11.

^[5504] 1 Cor. vii. 29.

^[5505] 1 Cor. vii. 39.

^[5506] 1 Cor. viii. 5.

^[5507] 1 Cor. viii. 4.

^[5508] 1 Cor. viii. 6.

^[5509] 1 Cor. iii. 21, 22.

^[5510] 1 Cor. iii. 23.

^[5511] 1 Cor. ix. 13.

^[5512] 1 Cor. ix. 7.

^[5513] He turns to Marcion’s god.

^[5514] 1 Cor. 9.9; Deut 25.4.

^[5515] 1 Cor. xi. 10.

^[5516] Comp. 1 Cor. 9.13-14; Deut. 18.1-2.

^[5517] Gratis.

^[5518] 1 Cor. ix. 15.

^[5519] 1 Cor. x. 4.

^[5520] Figuram extranei sacramenti.

^[5521] Recensendum.

^[5522] 1 Cor. x. 6.

^[5523] Me terret sibi.

^[5524] 1 Cor. x. 7-10.

^[5525] Magis quam foveat.

^[5526] 1 Cor. x. 11.

^[5527] 1 Cor. x. 25-27.

^[5528] Novationem.

Chapter VIII.—Man the Image of the Creator, and Christ the Head of the Man. Spiritual Gifts. The Sevenfold Spirit Described by Isaiah. The Apostle and the Prophet Compared. Marcion Challenged to Produce Anything Like These Gifts of the Spirit Foretold in Prophecy in His God.

^[5529] 1 Cor. xi. 3.

^[5530] 1 Cor. xi. 7.

^[5531] Gen. i. 26.

^[5532] 1 Cor. xi. 10.

^[5533] 1 Cor. xi. 9.

^[5534] 1 Cor. xi. 10.

^[5535] See more concerning these in chap. xviii. of this book. Comp. Gen. vi. 1-4.

^[5536] 1 Cor. xi. 18, 19.

^[5537] Probabiles: “approved.”

^[5538] See above, in book iv. chap. xl.

^[5539] Luke 22.15-20; 1 Cor. 11.23-29.

^[5540] 1 Cor. xii. 1.

^[5541] Flos: Sept. ἂνθος.

^[5542] Religionis: Sept. εὐσεβείας.

^[5543] Timor Dei: Sept. φόβος Θεοῦ.

^[5544] Isa. xi. 1-3.

^[5545] We have more than once shown that by Tertullian and other ancient fathers, the divine nature of Christ was frequently designated “Spirit.”

^[5546] Floruisset in carne.

^[5547] See Isa. iii. 2, 3.

^[5548] Luke xvi. 16.

^[5549] 1 Cor. 12.4-11; Eph. 4.8; Psa. 68.18.

^[5550] He argues from his own reading, filiis hominum.

^[5551] 1 Cor. iv. 15.

^[5552] Gal. iv. 19.

^[5553] Joel ii. 28, 29, applied by St. Peter, Acts ii. 17, 18.

^[5554] Gal. iv. 4.

^[5555] 1 Cor. vii. 29. [The verse filled out by the translator.]

^[5556] Comp. 1 Cor. 12.8-11; Isa. 11.1-3.

^[5557] 1 Cor. 12.12-30; Eph. 4.16.

^[5558] This seems to be the force of the subjunctive verb noluerit.

^[5559] Noluerit.

^[5560] Meritum.

^[5561] They are spiritual gifts, not endowments of body.

^[5562] De dilectione præferenda.

^[5563] Compare 1 Cor. xii. 31; xiii. 1, 13.

^[5564] Totis præcordiis.

^[5565] Luke x. 27.

^[5566] “Here, as in John x. 34; xii. 34; xv. 25, ‘the law’ is used for the Old Testament generally, instead of being, as usual, confined to the Pentateuch. The passage is from Isa. xxviii. 11.” (Dean Stanley, On the Corinthians, in loc.).

^[5567] 1 Cor. xiv. 21.

^[5568] Æque.

^[5569] Duntaxat gratia.

^[5570] 1 Cor. xiv. 34, 35.

^[5571] 1 Cor. xi. 5, 6. [See Kaye, p. 228.]

^[5572] 1 Cor. 14.34; Gen. 3.16 is referred to.

^[5573] Et si: These words introduce the Marcionite theory.

^[5574] Traduxerint.

^[5575] 1 Cor. xiv. 25.

^[5576] 1 Cor. xiv. 26.

^[5577] Duntaxat spiritalem: These words refer to the previous ones, “not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God.” [Of course here is a touch of his fanaticism; but, he bases it on (1 Cor. xiv.) a mere question of fact: had these charismata ceased?]

^[5578] Amentia.

^[5579] Magnidicam.

^[5580] Erit.

Chapter IX.—The Doctrine of the Resurrection. The Body Will Rise Again. Christ’s Judicial Character. Jewish Perversions of Prophecy Exposed and Confuted. Messianic Psalms Vindicated. Jewish and Rationalistic Interpretations on This Point Similar. Jesus—Not Hezekiah or Solomon—The Subject of These Prophecies in the Psalms. None But He is the Christ of the Old and the New Testaments.

^[5581] He here argues, as it will be readily observed, from the Marcionite theory alluded to, near the end of the last chapter.

^[5582] 1 Cor. xv. 12.

^[5583] See his treatise, De Resur. Carnis, chap. i. (Oehler).

^[5584] An allusion to the deaths of martyrs.

^[5585] Compendio.

^[5586] Defendi.

^[5587] Animam.

^[5588] The reader will readily see how the English fails to complete the illustration with the ease of the Latin, “surgere,” “iterum surgere,” “resurgere.”

^[5589] Gen. iii. 19. [“Was not said unto the Soul”—says our own Longfellow, in corresponding words.]

^[5590] 1 Cor. xv. 21.

^[5591] Vivificatio.

^[5592] Mortificatio.

^[5593] Adhuc.

^[5594] Interposuit aliquid.

^[5595] 1 Cor. xv. 25, 27.

^[5596] Jam quidem.

^[5597] Psa. 110.1-2; 8.6.

^[5598] Ps. cx.

^[5599] In Ezechiam cecinisse.

^[5600] 2 Kings xix. 14; but the words are, “quia is sederit ad dexteram templi,” a sentence which occurs neither in the LXX. nor the original.

^[5601] Tertullian, as usual, argues from the Septuagint, which in the latter clause of Ps. cx. 3 has ἐκ γαστρὸς πρὸ ἑωσφόρου ἐγέννησά σε; and so the Vulgate version has it. This Psalm has been variously applied by the Jews. Raschi (or Rabbi Sol. Jarchi) thinks it is most suitable to Abraham, and possibly to David, in which latter view D. Kimchi agrees with him. Others find in Solomon the best application; but more frequently is Hezekiah thought to be the subject of the Psalm, as Tertullian observes. Justin Martyr (in Dial. cum Tryph.) also notices this application of the Psalm. But Tertullian in the next sentence appears to recognize the sounder opinion of the older Jews, who saw in this Ps. cx. a prediction of Messiah. This opinion occurs in the Jerusalem Talmud, in the tract Berachoth, 5. Amongst the more recent Jews who also hold the sounder view, may be mentioned Rabbi Saadias Gaon, on Dan. vii. 13, and R. Moses Hadarsan [singularly enough quoted by Raschi in another part of his commentary (Gen. xxxv. 8)], with others who are mentioned by Wetstein, On the New Testament, Matt. xxii. 44. Modern Jews, such as Moses Mendelsohn, reject the Messianic sense; and they are followed by the commentators of the Rationalist school amongst ourselves and in Germany. J. Olshausen, after Hitzig, comes down in his interpretation of the Psalm as late as the Maccabees, and sees a suitable accomplishment of its words in the honours heaped upon Jonathan by Alexander son of Antiochus Epiphanes (see 1 Macc. x. 20). For the refutation of so inadequate a commentary, the reader is referred to Delitzch on Ps. cx. The variations of opinion, however, in this school, are as remarkable as the fluctuations of the Jewish writers. The latest work on the Psalms which has appeared amongst us (Psalms, chronologically arranged, by four Friends), after Ewald, places the accomplishment of Ps. cx. in what may be allowed to have been its occasion—David’s victories over the neighboring heathen.

^[5602] Nos.

^[5603] Debemus.

^[5604] Istos: that is, the Jews (Rigalt.).

^[5605] Utique jam in tanto opere.

^[5606] Natum esse quum maxime.

^[5607] Generavi: Sept. ἐγέννησα.

^[5608] Isa. i. 2.

^[5609] Curiosius.

^[5610] Deputans carni: a note against Docetism.

^[5611] Ps. cx. 4.

^[5612] Ps. lxxii. 1.

^[5613] Super vellus: so Sept. ἐπὶ πόκον.

^[5614] Ps. lxxii. 6.

^[5615] Similarly the Rabbis Saadias Gaon and Hadarsan, above mentioned in our note, beautifully applied to Messiah’s placid birth, “without a human father,” the figures of Ps. cx. 3, “womb of the morning,” “dew of thy birth.”

^[5616] Simpliciora.

^[5617] Ps. lxx. 8.

^[5618] Ps. lxx. 11.

^[5619] Ps. lxx. 17.

^[5620] Ps. lxx. 17.

^[5621] Ps. lxx. 18.

^[5622] Ps. lxx. 19.

^[5623] Ps. lxx. 9.

^[5624] 1 Cor. xv. 25, 27.

^[5625] Consecuturus.

Chapter X.—Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body, Continued. How are the Dead Raised? and with What Body Do They Come? These Questions Answered in Such a Sense as to Maintain the Truth of the Raised Body, Against Marcion. Christ as the Second Adam Connected with the Creator of the First Man. Let Us Bear the Image of the Heavenly. The Triumph Over Death in Accordance with the Prophets. Hosea and St. Paul Compared.

^[5626] He refers to his De Resurrect. Carnis. See chap. xlviii.

^[5627] 1 Cor. xv. 29.

^[5628] Viderit.

^[5629] Kalendæ Februariæ. The great expiation or lustration, celebrated at Rome in the month which received its name from the festival, is described by Ovid, Fasti, book ii., lines 19–28, and 267–452, in which latter passage the same feast is called Lupercalia. Of course as the rites were held on the 15th of the month, the word kalendæ here has not its more usual meaning (Paley’s edition of the Fasti, pp. 52–76). Oehler refers also to Macrobius, Saturn. i. 13; Cicero, De Legibus, ii. 21; Plutarch, Numa, p. 132. He well remarks (note in loc.), that Tertullian, by intimating that the heathen rites of the Februa will afford quite as satisfactory an answer to the apostle’s question, as the Christian superstition alluded to, not only means no authorization of the said superstition for himself, but expresses his belief that St. Paul’s only object was to gather some evidence for the great doctrine of the resurrection from the faith which underlay the practice alluded to. In this respect, however, the heathen festival would afford a much less pointed illustration; for though it was indeed a lustration for the dead, περὶ νεκρῶν, and had for its object their happiness and welfare, it went no further than a vague notion of an indefinite immortality, and it touched not the recovery of the body. There is therefore force in Tertullian’s si forte.

^[5630] Si forte.

^[5631] τῷ εὔχεσθαι ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν (Rigalt.).

^[5632] Eph. iv. 5.

^[5633] Pro corporibus.

^[5634] Eph. iv. 5.

^[5635] Corpora.

^[5636] Ut, with the subjunctive verb induxerit.

^[5637] 1 Cor. xv. 35.

^[5638] Consequens erat.

^[5639] Porro.

^[5640] 1 Cor. xv. 37, 38.

^[5641] 1 Cor. xv. 38.

^[5642] Ut.

^[5643] 1 Cor. xv. 39-41.

^[5644] Portendit.

^[5645] 1 Cor. xv. 42.

^[5646] 1 Cor. xv. 42, 43.

^[5647] 1 Cor. xv. 44.

^[5648] Anima: we will call it soul in the context.

^[5649] Possit videri.

^[5650] Animam.

^[5651] Non ideo.

^[5652] Animam.

^[5653] Animale. The terseness of his argument, by his use of the same radical terms Anima and Animale, is lost in the English. [See Cap. 15 infra. Also, Kaye p. 180. St. Augustine seems to tolerate our author’s views of a corporal spirit in his treatise de Hæresibus.]

^[5654] 1 Cor. xv. 46.

^[5655] 1 Cor. xv. 45.

^[5656] ὁ ἔσχατος ᾽Αδάμ into ὁ ἔσχατος Κύριος.

^[5657] Vel auctoris.

^[5658] Par.

^[5659] 1 Cor. xv. 47.

^[5660] Marcion seems to have changed man into Lord, or rather to have omitted the ἄνθρωπος of the second clause, letting the verse run thus: ὁ πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος ἐκ γῆς χοϊκὁς, ὁ δεύτερος Κύριος ἐξ οὐρανοῦ. Anything to cut off all connection with the Creator.

^[5661] The οἱ ἐπουράνιοι, the “de cœlo homines,” of this 1 Cor. 15.48 are Christ’s risen people; comp. Phil. iii. 20, 21 (Alford).

^[5662] Secundum exitum.

^[5663] 1 Cor. xv. 49. T. argues from the reading φορέσωμεν (instead of φορέσομεν), which indeed was read by many of the fathers, and (what is still more important) is found in the Codex Sinaiticus. We add the critical note of Dean Alford on this reading: “ACDFKL rel latt copt goth, Theodotus, Basil, Cæsarius, Cyril, Macarius, Methodius (who prefixes ἕνα), Chrysostom, Epiphanius, Ps. Athanasius, Damascene, Irenæus (int), Tertullian, Cyprian, Hilary, Jerome.” Alford retains the usual φορέσομεν, on the strength chiefly of the Codex Vaticanus.

^[5664] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[5665] Gal. v. 19-21.

^[5666] Rom. viii. 8.

^[5667] Merebitur.

^[5668] 1 Cor. xv. 52.

^[5669] 1 Cor. xv. 53.

^[5670] Matt. 22.30; Luke 20.36.

^[5671] Sed resuscitatæ.

^[5672] Aut si.

^[5673] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[5674] Demutationi.

^[5675] Suggested by the ἰσχυσας of Sept. in Isa. xxv. 8.

^[5676] 1 Cor. xv. 55.

^[5677] Isa. 25.8; Hos. 13.14.

^[5678] The Septuagint version of the passage in Hosea is, ποῦ ἡ δίκη σου, θάνατε; ποῦ τὸ κέντνον σου, ᾅδη, which is very like the form of the apostrophe in 1 Cor. xv. 55.

Chapter XI.—The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. The Creator the Father of Mercies. Shown to Be Such in the Old Testament, and Also in Christ. The Newness of the New Testament. The Veil of Obdurate Blindness Upon Israel, Not Reprehensible on Marcion’s Principles. The Jews Guilty in Rejecting the Christ of the Creator. Satan, the God of This World. The Treasure in Earthen Vessels Explained Against Marcion. The Creator’s Relation to These Vessels, I.e. Our Bodies.

^[5679] 1 Cor. viii. 5.

^[5680] 2 Cor. i. 3.

^[5681] Gen. i. 22.

^[5682] Dan. ii. 19-20; iii. 28-29; iv. 34, 37.

^[5683] 2 Cor. i. 3.

^[5684] Ps. lxxxvi. 15; cxii. 4; cxlv. 8; Jonah iv. 2.

^[5685] Jonah iii. 8.

^[5686] 2 Kings xx. 3, 5.

^[5687] 1 Kings xxi. 27, 29.

^[5688] 2 Sam. xii. 13.

^[5689] Ezek. xxxiii. 11.

^[5690] Atquin et nos.

^[5691] The Contingent qualities in logic.

^[5692] 2 Cor. iii. 6.

^[5693] Joel ii. 28.

^[5694] 2 Cor. iii. 6.

^[5695] Deut. xxxii. 39.

^[5696] See above in book ii. [cap. xi. p. 306.]

^[5697] Apud unum recenseri prævenerunt.

^[5698] 2 Cor. iii. 7, 13.

^[5699] 2 Cor. iii. 7, 8.

^[5700] Obtunsi: “blunted,” 2 Cor. iii. 14.

^[5701] He seems to have read the clause as applying to the world, but St. Paul certainly refers only to the obdurate Jews. The text is: “Sed obtunsi sunt sensus mundi.

^[5702] 2 Cor. iii. 15.

^[5703] 2 Cor. iii. 16.

^[5704] 2 Cor. iii. 18.

^[5705] 2 Cor. iii. 18, but T.’s reading is “tanquam a domino spirituum” (“even as by the Lord of the Spirits,” probably the sevenfold Spirit.). The original is, καθάπερ ἀπὸ Κυρίου Πνεύματος, “by the Lord the Spirit.”

^[5706] Moysi ordinem totum.

^[5707] 2 Cor. iv. 4.

^[5708] He would stop off the phrase τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου from ὁ Θεὸς, and remove it to the end of the sentence as a qualification of τῶν ἀπίστων. He adds another interpretation just afterwards, which, we need not say, is both more consistent with the sense of the passage and with the consensus of Christian writers of all ages, although “it is historically curious” (as Dean Alford has remarked) “that Irenæus [Hæres. iv. 48, Origen, Tertullian (v. 11, contra Marcion)], Chrysostom, Œcumenius, Theodoret, Theophylact, all repudiate, in their zeal against the Manichæans, the grammatical rendering, and take τῶν ἀπίστων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου together” (Greek Testament, in loc.). [I have corrected Alford’s reference to Tertullian which he makes B. iv. 11.]

^[5709] Isa. xxix. 13.

^[5710] Isa. vi. 10 (only adapted).

^[5711] Isa. vii. 9, Sept.

^[5712] Sept. κρὐψω, “will hide.”

^[5713] Said concessively, in reference to M.’s position above mentioned.

^[5714] Marcion’s “God of this world” being the God of the Old Testament.

^[5715] Hactenus: pro non amplius (Oehler) tractasse.

^[5716] “A fuller criticism on this slight matter might give his opponent the advantage, as apparently betraying a penury of weightier and more certain arguments” (Oehler).

^[5717] Isa. xiv. 14.

^[5718] Mancipata est illi.

^[5719] 2 Cor. iv. 6.

^[5720] Gen. i. 3.

^[5721] Isa. xlix. 6 (Sept. quoted in Acts xiii. 47).

^[5722] Isa. 9.2; Matt. 4.16.

^[5723] Ps. iv. 7 (Sept.).

^[5724] Persona: the πρόσωπον of the Septuagint.

^[5725] 2 Cor. iv. 4.

^[5726] Ait.

^[5727] Eph. ii. 12.

^[5728] 2 Cor. iv. 7.

^[5729] 2 Cor. iv. 8-12.

^[5730] Oehler, after Fr. Junius, defends the reading “mortificationem dei,” instead of Domini, in reference to Marcion, who seems to have so corrupted the reading.

^[5731] 2 Cor. iv. 10.

^[5732] 2 Cor. iv. 10.

^[5733] 2 Cor. iv. 16-18.

^[5734] 2 Cor. iv. 11.

^[5735] 2 Cor. iv. 14.

^[5736] 2 Cor. iv. 16.

^[5737] 2 Cor. iv. 16.

^[5738] Vexatione.

^[5739] Animi.

Chapter XII.—The Eternal Home in Heaven. Beautiful Exposition by Tertullian of the Apostle’s Consolatory Teaching Against the Fear of Death, So Apt to Arise Under Anti-Christian Oppression. The Judgment-Seat of Christ—The Idea, Anti-Marcionite. Paradise. Judicial Characteristics of Christ Which are Inconsistent with the Heretical Views About Him; The Apostle’s Sharpness, or Severity, Shows Him to Be a Fit Preacher of the Creator’s Christ.

^[5740] 2 Cor. v. 1.

^[5741] As Marcion would have men believe.

^[5742] 2 Cor. v. 2, 3.

^[5743] Despoliati.

^[5744] Gravemur.

^[5745] 2 Cor. v. 4.

^[5746] Strinxit.

^[5747] 1 Cor. xv. 52.

^[5748] Superinduti magis quod de cœlo quam exuti corpus.

^[5749] Utique et mortui.

^[5750] De cœlo.

^[5751] 1 Cor. xv. 53.

^[5752] Induunt.

^[5753] Superinduunt.

^[5754] 2 Cor. v. 4.

^[5755] Vita præveniri.

^[5756] 2 Cor. v. 4; and see his treatise, De Resurrect. Carnis, cap. xlii.

^[5757] 2 Cor. v. 5.

^[5758] 2 Cor. v. 6.

^[5759] Boni ducere.

^[5760] 2 Cor. v. 8.

^[5761] 2 Cor. v. 10.

^[5762] Deputari cum.

^[5763] 2 Cor. v. 10.

^[5764] Per id, per quod, i.e., corpus.

^[5765] 2 Cor. v. 17.

^[5766] Isa. xliii. 19.

^[5767] His reading of 2 Cor. vii. 1.

^[5768] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[5769] 2 Cor. xi. 2.

^[5770] Utique ut sponsam sponso.

^[5771] 2 Cor. xi. 13.

^[5772] Prædicationis adulteratæ.

^[5773] A reference to Marcion’s other god of the New Testament, of which he tortured the epistles (and this passage among them) to produce the evidence.

^[5774] 2 Cor. xi. 14.

^[5775] Patitur. The work here referred to is not extant; it is, however, referred to in the De Anima, c. lv.

^[5776] Precario; “that which one must beg for.” See, however, above, book iv. chap. xxii. p. 384, note 8, for a different turn to this word.

^[5777] 2 Kings ii. 11.

^[5778] 2 Cor. xii. 7, 8.

^[5779] 1 Sam. ii. 7-8; Ps. cxlvii. 6; Luke i. 52.

^[5780] Job. 1.12; 2 Cor. 12.9.

^[5781] Gal. i. 6-9.

^[5782] 2 Cor. xiii. 1.

^[5783] 2 Cor. xiii. 2.

^[5784] 2 Cor. xiii. 10.

Chapter XIII.—The Epistle to the Romans. St. Paul Cannot Help Using Phrases Which Bespeak the Justice of God, Even When He is Eulogizing the Mercies of the Gospel. Marcion Particularly Hard in Mutilation of This Epistle. Yet Our Author Argues on Common Ground. The Judgment at Last Will Be in Accordance with the Gospel. The Justified by Faith Exhorted to Have Peace with God. The Administration of the Old and the New Dispensations in One and the Same Hand.

^[5785] Profligatur.

^[5786] Concessionem.

^[5787] Apud Creatorem.

^[5788] Excludere.

^[5789] Rom. i. 16, 17.

^[5790] Utique.

^[5791] Rom. i. 18.

^[5792] Rom. ii. 2.

^[5793] Aliud est si.

^[5794] Nostri instrumenti.

^[5795] Rom. ii. 12-16.

^[5796] Instar legis: “which is as good as a law to them,” etc.

^[5797] Rom. ii. 16.

^[5798] Rom. ii. 2.

^[5799] Rom. i. 18.

^[5800] See the remarks on Rom. 1.16,17 above.

^[5801] Rom. ii. 21.

^[5802] Ut homo.

^[5803] Ex. iii. 22.

^[5804] Ex. xx. 15; see above, book iv. chap. xxiv. p. 387.

^[5805] Scilicet verebatur.

^[5806] Rom. ii. 24.

^[5807] Rom. ii. 29.

^[5808] Jer. iv. 4.

^[5809] Deut. x. 16 (Sept.).

^[5810] Metens.

^[5811] Rom. ii. 28.

^[5812] Tunc.

^[5813] Rom. iii. 21, 22.

^[5814] Tertullian, by the word “enjoins” (monet), seems to have read the passage in Rom. v. 1 in the hortatory sense with ἔχωμεν, “let us have peace with God.” If so, his authority must be added to that exceedingly strong ms. authority which Dean Alford (Greek Test. in loc.) regrets to find overpowering the received reading of ἔχομεν, “we have,” etc. We subjoin Alford’s critical note in support of the ἔχωμεν, which (with Lachmann) he yet admits into his more recent text: “AB (originally) CDKLfh (originally) m 17 latt (including F-lat); of the versions the older Syriac (Peschito) (and Copt;of the fathers, Chrysostom, Cyril, Theodoret, Damascene, Thephylact, Œcumenius, Rufinus, Pelagius, Orosius, Augustine, Cassiodorus,” before whom I would insert Tertullian, and the Codex Sinaiticus, in its original state; although, like its great rival in authority, the Codex Vaticanus, it afterwards received the reading ἔχομεν. These second readings of these mss., and the later Syriac (Philoxenian), with Epiphanius, Didymus, and Sedulius, are the almost only authorities quoted for the received text. [Dr. H. over-estimates the “rival” Codices.]

^[5815] Nusquam.

^[5816] Ejus.

^[5817] Rom. v. 20.

^[5818] Rom. v. 20.

^[5819] Nisi si: an ironical particle.

^[5820] Ideo ut.

^[5821] Apud ipsum.

^[5822] Rom. v. 21.

^[5823] Gal. iii. 22.

^[5824] Rom. iii. 19.

^[5825] Rom. 7.4; Gal. 2.19. This (although a quotation) is here a Marcionite argument; but there is no need to suppose, with Pamelius, that Marcion tampers with Rom. vi. 2. Oehler also supposes that this is the passage quoted. But no doubt it is a correct quotation from the seventh chapter, as we have indicated.

^[5826] Statim (or, perhaps, in respect of the derivation), “firmly” or “stedfastly.”

^[5827] Ejus.

^[5828] Rom. vii. 4.

^[5829] In this argument Tertullian applies with good effect the terms “flesh” and “body,” making the first [which he elsewhere calls the “terrena materia” of our nature (ad Uxor. i. 4)] the proof of the reality of the second, in opposition to Marcion’s Docetic error. “Σὰρξ is not = σῶμα, but as in John i. 14, the material of which man is in the body compounded” (Alford).

^[5830] Compare the Rom. 7.4-6; 8.2-3.

^[5831] Rom. vii. 7.

^[5832] This, which is really the second clause of Rom. vii. 7, seems to be here put as a Marcionite argument of disparagement to the law.

^[5833] Per quam liquuit delictum latere: a playful paradox, in the manner of our author, between liquere and latere.

^[5834] Rom. vii. 8.

^[5835] Rom. vii. 13.

^[5836] Rom. vii. 14.

Chapter XIV.—The Divine Power Shown in Christ’s Incarnation. Meaning of St. Paul’s Phrase. Likeness of Sinful Flesh. No Docetism in It. Resurrection of Our Real Bodies. A Wide Chasm Made in the Epistle by Marcion’s Erasure. When the Jews are Upbraided by the Apostle for Their Misconduct to God; Inasmuch as that God Was the Creator, a Proof is in Fact Given that St. Paul’s God Was the Creator. The Precepts at the End of the Epistle, Which Marcion Allowed, Shown to Be in Exact Accordance with the Creator’s Scriptures.

^[5837] Rom. viii. 3.

^[5838] Sensus νοός in Rom. vii. 23.

^[5839] Pari.

^[5840] Consimilis.

^[5841] Titulum.

^[5842] Mendacium.

^[5843] This vindication of these terms of the apostle from Docetism is important. The word which our A.V. has translated sinful is a stronger term in the original. It is not the adjective ἁμαρτωλοῦ, but the substantive ἁμαρτίας, amounting to “flesh of sin,” i.e. (as Dean Alford interprets it) “the flesh whose attribute and character is sin.” “The words ἐν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς ἁμαρτίας, De Wette observes, appear almost to border on Docetism, but in reality contain a perfectly true and consistent sentiment; σὰρξ ἁμαρτίας; is flesh, or human nature, possessed with sin.…The likeness, predicated in Rom. viii. 3, must be referred not only to σάρξ, but also to the epithet τῆς ἁμαρτίας” (Greek Testament, in loc.).

^[5844] Carnis peccati.

^[5845] Puta nunc.

^[5846] Statu.

^[5847] Censu: perhaps “birth.” This word, which originally means the censor’s registration, is by our author often used for origo and natura, because in the registers were inserted the birthdays and the parents’ names (Oehler).

^[5848] It is better that we should give the original of this sentence. Its structure is characteristically difficult, although the general sense, as Oehler suggests, is clear enough: “Quia vera quidem, sed non ex semine de statu simili (similis, Latinius and Junius and Semler), sed vera de censu non vero dissimili (dissimilis, the older reading and Semler’s).” We add the note of Fr. Junius: “The meaning is, that Christ’s flesh is true indeed, in what they call the identity of its substance, although not of its origin (ortus) and qualities—not of its original, because not of a (father’s) seed, as in the case of ourselves; not of qualities, because these have not in Him the like condition which they have in us.”

^[5849] Dum alterius par est.

^[5850] Qua hoc tantum est.

^[5851] See Rom. viii. 5-13.

^[5852] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[5853] Non ad reatum substantiæ sed ad conversationis pertinebunt.

^[5854] Rom. viii. 10.

^[5855] Understand “corpus” (Oehler).

^[5856] Rom. viii. 11.

^[5857] Dici capit: capit, like the Greek ἐνδέχεται, means, “is capable or susceptible;” often so in Tertullian.

^[5858] We do not know from either Tertullian or Epiphanius what mutilations Marcion made in this epistle. This particular gap did not extend further than from Rom. 8.11-10.2. “However, we are informed by Origen (or rather Rufinus in his edition of Origen’s commentary on this epistle, on Rom. 14.23) that Marcion omitted the last two chapters as spurious, ending this epistle of his Apostolicon with the Rom. 14.23. It is also observable that Tertullian quotes no passage from Rom. 15; 16. in his confutation of Marcion from this epistle” (Lardner).

^[5859] Rom. x. 2-4.

^[5860] The god of the New Testament, according to Marcion.

^[5861] Isa. i. 3.

^[5862] Isa. xxix. 13 (Sept.)

^[5863] Ps. ii. 2.

^[5864] Rom. xi. 33.

^[5865] In fidem Christi ex lege venientem. By “the law” he means the Old Testament in general, and probably refers to Rom. x. 17.

^[5866] Rigaltius (after Fulvius Ursinus) read “non erasit,” but with insufficient authority; besides, the context shows that he was referring to the large erasure which he had already mentioned, so that the non is inadmissible. Marcion must, of course, be understood to have retained Rom. xi. 33; hence the argument in this sentence.

^[5867] Isa. xlv. 3.

^[5868] Isa. xl. 13, quoted (according to the Sept.) by the apostle in Rom. xi. 34, 35.

^[5869] Plane: ironically.

^[5870] Rom. xii. 9.

^[5871] Ps. xxxiv. 14.

^[5872] Rom. xii. 10.

^[5873] Lev. xix. 18.

^[5874] Rom. xii. 12.

^[5875] Ps. cxviii. 9.

^[5876] Rom. xii. 12.

^[5877] Ps. xx. 1.

^[5878] Rom. xii. 12.

^[5879] Rom. xii. 16.

^[5880] Isa. v. 21.

^[5881] Rom. xii. 17.

^[5882] Lev. xix. 17, 18.

^[5883] Rom. xii. 19.

^[5884] Rom. 12.19; Deut. 32.25.

^[5885] Rom. xii. 18.

^[5886] Rom. xiii. 9.

^[5887] Ironically said. He has been quoting all along from Marcion’s text of St. Paul, turning its testimony against Marcion.

^[5888] Matt. v. 17.

^[5889] For although he rejected St. Matthew’s Gospel, which contains the statement, he retained St. Paul’s epistle, from which the statement is clearly proved.

^[5890] Ecce.

^[5891] Promerendum.

Chapter XV.—The First Epistle to the Thessalonians. The Shorter Epistles Pungent in Sense and Very Valuable. St. Paul Upbraids the Jews for the Death First of Their Prophets and Then of Christ. This a Presumption that Both Christ and the Prophets Pertained to the Same God. The Law of Nature, Which is in Fact the Creator’s Discipline, and the Gospel of Christ Both Enjoin Chastity. The Resurrection Provided for in the Old Testament by Christ. Man’s Compound Nature.

^[5892] Sapor. We have here a characteristic touch of his diligent and also intrepid spirit. Epiphanius says this short epistle “was so entirely corrupted by Marcion, that he had himself selected nothing from it whereon to found any refutations of him or of his doctrine.” Tertullian, however, was of a different mind; for he has made it evident, that though there were alterations made by Marcion, yet sufficient was left untouched by him to show the absurdity of his opinions. Epiphanius and Tertullian entertained, respectively, similar opinions of Marcion’s treatment of the second epistle, which the latter discusses in the next chapter (Larder).

^[5893] 1 Thess. ii. 15.

^[5894] All the best mss., including the Codices Alex., Vat., and Sinait., omit the ἰδίους, as do Tertullian and Origen. Marcion has Chrysostom and the received text, followed by our A.V., with him.

^[5895] Amarum.

^[5896] Status exaggerationis.

^[5897] Ergo exaggerari non potuit nisi.

^[5898] Ex utroque titulo.

^[5899] 1 Thess. iv. 3, 4.

^[5900] 1 Thess. iv. 5.

^[5901] Portentuosis.

^[5902] The rule of Gentile life.

^[5903] We have here followed Oehler’s reading, which is more intelligible than the four or five others given by him.

^[5904] Tractet.

^[5905] Retundo.

^[5906] 1 Thess. iv. 15-17.

^[5907] Gal. iv. 26.

^[5908] Isa. lx. 8.

^[5909] Oehler and Fr. Junius here read Amos, but all the other readings give Hosea; but see above, book iii. chap. xxiv., where Amos was read by all.

^[5910] Amos ix. 6.

^[5911] 1 Thess. v. 19, 20.

^[5912] Nihil fecit. This is precisely St. Paul’s ἐξουθενεῖν, “to annihilate” (A.V. “despise”), in 1 Thess. v. 20.

^[5913] Formam.

^[5914] Celebratur.

^[5915] Si quando corpus in hujus modi prænominatur.

^[5916] 1 Thess. v. 23. For a like application of this passage, see also our author’s treatise, De Resurrect. Carnis, cap. xlvii. [Elucidation I.]

^[5917] It is remarkable that our author quotes this text of the three principles, in defence only of two of them. But he was strongly opposed to the idea of any absolute division between the soul and the spirit. A distinction between these united parts, he might, under limitations, have admitted; but all idea of an actual separation and division he opposed and denied. See his De Anima, cap. x. St. Augustine more fully still maintained a similar opinion. See also his De Anima, iv. 32. Bp. Ellicott, in his interesting sermon On the Threefold Nature of Man, has given these references, and also a sketch of patristic opinion of this subject. The early fathers, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alex., Origen, as well as Didymus of Alex., Gregory Nyssen., and Basil, held distinctly the threefold nature. Our own divines, as is natural, are also divided in views. Bp. Bull, Hammond, and Jackson hold the trichotomy, as a triple nature is called; others, like Bp. Butler, deny the possibility of dividing our immaterial nature into two parts. This variation of opinion seems to have still representatives among our most recent commentators: while Dean Alford holds the triplicity of our nature literally with St. Paul, Archdeacon Wordsworth seems to agree with Bp. Butler in regarding soul and spirit as component parts of one principle. See also Bp. Ellicott’s Destiny of the Creature, sermon v. and notes.

^[5918] On this paradox, that souls are corporeal, see his treatise De Anima, v., and following chapters (Oehler). [See also cap. x. supra.]

^[5919] Quæ = caro.

Chapter XVI.—The Second Epistle to the Thessalonians. An Absurd Erasure of Marcion; Its Object Transparent. The Final Judgment on the Heathen as Well as the Jews Could Not Be Administered by Marcion’s Christ. The Man of Sin—What? Inconsistency of Marcion’s View. The Antichrist. The Great Events of the Last Apostasy Within the Providence and Intention of the Creator, Whose are All Things from the Beginning. Similarity of the Pauline Precepts with Those of the Creator.

^[5920] Circumferri.

^[5921] Utriusque meriti: “of both the eternal sentences.”

^[5922] 2 Thess. i. 6-8.

^[5923] 2 Thess. i. 8, 9.

^[5924] Crematoris Dei.

^[5925] 2 Thess. i. 8.

^[5926] Non omnibus scibilis.

^[5927] 2 Thess. i. 9.

^[5928] Isa. ii. 19. The whole verse is to the point.

^[5929] 2 Thess. ii. 3, 4.

^[5930] The prophets of the Old and the New Testament.

^[5931] 1 John iv. 1-3.

^[5932] Solventes Jesum. This expression receives some explanation from the Vulgate version of 1 John iv. 3: “Et omnis spiritus qui solvit Jesum Christum ex Deo non est.” From Irenæus, Vol. I., 443 (Harvey, ii. 89), we learn that the Gnostics divided Jesus from Christ: “Alterum quidem Jesum intelligunt, alterum autem Christum,”—an error which was met in the clause of the creed expressing faith in “One Lord Jesus Christ.” Grabe, after Socrates, Hist. Eccles. vii. 32, says that the oldest mss. of St. John’s epistle read πᾶν πνεῦμα ὅ λύει τὸν ᾽Ιησοῦν. If so, Tertullian must be regarded as combining the two readings, viz., that which we find in the received text and this just quoted. Thus Grabe. It would be better to say that T. read John 4.2 as we have it, only omitting ᾽Ιησοῦν; and in John 4.3 read the old lection to which Socrates refers instead of πᾶν πνεῦμα ὅ μὴ ὁμολογεὶ.

^[5933] 2 Thess. ii. 9.

^[5934] Instinctum fallaciæ.

^[5935] 2 Thess. ii. 10-12.

^[5936] Summissu erroris.

^[5937] Marcion, or rather his Christ, who on the hypothesis absurdly employs the Creator’s Christ on the flagrantly inconsistent mission of avenging his truth, i.e. Marcionism.

^[5938] Habens fungi…Creatori.

^[5939] Angelum: the Antichrist sent by the Creator.

^[5940] Æmulatio.

^[5941] 2 Thess. ii. 11.

^[5942] Plagis: “heavy strokes,” in opposition to the previous “beneficiis.”

^[5943] Prædicationibus: see Rom. i. 20.

^[5944] Productus est.

^[5945] Materia.

^[5946] 2 Thess. iii. 10.

^[5947] Deut. xxv. 4.

Chapter XVII.—The Epistle to the Laodiceans. The Proper Designation is to the Ephesians. Recapitulation of All Things in Christ from the Beginning of the Creation. No Room for Marcion’s Christ Here. Numerous Parallels Between This Epistle and Passages in the Old Testament. The Prince of the Power of the Air, and the God of This World—Who? Creation and Regeneration the Work of One God. How Christ Has Made the Law Obsolete. A Vain Erasure of Marcion’s. The Apostles as Well as the Prophets from the Creator.

^[5948] Veritati.

^[5949] Titulum interpolare gestiit: or, “of corrupting its title.”

^[5950] Certe tamen.

^[5951] For a discussion on the title of this epistle in a succinct shape, the reader is referred to Dean Alford’s Gr. Test. vol. iii. Prolegomena, chap. ii. sec. 2.

^[5952] ἀνακεφαλαιώσασθαι, “to sum up into a head.”

^[5953] Eph. i. 9, 10.

^[5954] Eph. i. 12.

^[5955] He explains “præsperasse by ante sperasse.”

^[5956] Eph. i. 13.

^[5957] Joel ii. 28.

^[5958] Eph. ii. 17.

^[5959] Ps. xxiv. 10.

^[5960] Eph. i. 17.

^[5961] Isa. xi. 2.

^[5962] Eph. i. 18.

^[5963] Isa. xlii. 19 (Sept.).

^[5964] Eph. i. 18.

^[5965] Ps. ii. 8.

^[5966] Eph. i. 19-22.

^[5967] Ps. cx. 1.

^[5968] Ps. viii. 7.

^[5969] Infertur.

^[5970] Plane.

^[5971] Eph. ii. 1, 2.

^[5972] Deo mundi: i.e. the God who made the world.

^[5973] Operator: in reference to the expression in Eph. 2.2, “who now worketh,” etc.

^[5974] Sufficit igitur si.

^[5975] Isa. xiv. 13, 14. An inexact quotation from the Septuagint.

^[5976] On this and another meaning given to the phrase in 2 Cor. iv. 4, see above, chap. xi.

^[5977] Plane: an ironical particle here.

^[5978] Eph. ii. 3.

^[5979] Eph. ii. 3.

^[5980] In Marcion’s sense.

^[5981] Eph. ii. 3.

^[5982] Captante.

^[5983] Eph. ii. 10.

^[5984] Literally, “the covenants and their promise.”

^[5985] Eph. ii. 11, 12.

^[5986] Conversatio: rather, “intercourse with Israel.”

^[5987] Eph. ii. 13.

^[5988] This is rather an allusion to, than a quotation of, Isa. xlvi. 12, 13.

^[5989] Eph. ii. 14.

^[5990] Eph. ii. 15.

^[5991] “The law of commandments contained in ordinances.”

^[5992] He expresses the proverbial adage very tersely, “non Marrucine, sed Pontice.”

^[5993] Vacuam fecit.

^[5994] Ex adjutore.

^[5995] Conderet: “create,” to keep up the distinction between this and facere, “to make.”

^[5996] Eph. ii. 10.

^[5997] Eph. ii. 15-16.

^[5998] Eph. ii. 16.

^[5999] Eph. ii. 17-20.

^[6000] “Because, if our building as Christians rested in part upon that foundation, our God, and the God of the Jews must be the same, which Marcion denied” (Lardner).

^[6001] Eph. ii. 20.

^[6002] Ps. cxviii. 22.

Chapter XVIII.—Another Foolish Erasure of Marcion’s Exposed. Certain Figurative Expressions of the Apostle, Suggested by the Language of the Old Testament. Collation of Many Passages of This Epistle, with Precepts and Statements in the Pentateuch, the Psalms, and the Prophets. All Alike Teach Us the Will and Purpose of the Creator.

^[6003] Eph. iii. 8, 9.

^[6004] The passage of St. Paul, as Tertullian expresses it, “Quæ dispensatio sacramenti occulti ab ævis in Deo, qui omnia condidit.” According to Marcion’s alteration, the latter part runs, “Occulti ab ævis Deo, qui omnia condidit.” The original is, Τίς ἡ οἰκονομία τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ ἀποκεκρυμμένου ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐν τῷ Θεῷ (compare Col. iii. 3) τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσαντι. Marcion’s removal of the ἐν has no warrant of ms. authority; it upsets St. Paul’s doctrine, as attested in other passages, and destroys the grammatical structure.

^[6005] Emicat.

^[6006] Eph. iii. 10.

^[6007] Debebat.

^[6008] Isa. xl. 13.

^[6009] Marcion’s god, of course.

^[6010] Eph. 4.8; Psa. 68.19.

^[6011] Ps. xlv. 3.

^[6012] Isa. viii. 4.

^[6013] Extundis.

^[6014] See above, book iii. chap. xiii. and xiv. p. 332.

^[6015] Eph. iv. 25.

^[6016] Ps. iv. 4.

^[6017] Eph. iv. 26.

^[6018] Eph. iv. 26.

^[6019] Eph. v. 11.

^[6020] Ps. xviii. 26.

^[6021] Deut. 21.21; 1 Cor. 5.13.

^[6022] Isa. 52.11; 2 Cor. 6.17.

^[6023] Eph. v. 18.

^[6024] Amos ii. 12.

^[6025] Lev. x. 9.

^[6026] Eph. v. 19.

^[6027] Isa. v. 11, 12.

^[6028] Eph. v. 22, 24.

^[6029] Eph. v. 23.

^[6030] Eph. v. 23.

^[6031] Eph. v. 25, 28.

^[6032] Eph. v. 29.

^[6033] Proinde.

^[6034] Ego.

^[6035] Masculi.

^[6036] Eph. v. 31, 32.

^[6037] Inter ista.

^[6038] Magna sacramenta.

^[6039] Eph. v. 32.

^[6040] Eph. vi. 1.

^[6041] Eph. vi. 2. “He did this (says Lardner) in order that the Mosaic law might not be thought to be thus established.”

^[6042] Ex. xx. 12.

^[6043] Eph. vi. 4.

^[6044] Ex. x. 2.

^[6045] Eph. vi. 12.

^[6046] An ironical allusion to Marcion’s interpretation, which he has considered in a former chapter, of the title God of this world.

^[6047] Eph. vi. 11.

^[6048] Eph. vi. 12.

^[6049] Apud Creatorem.

^[6050] Ex qua delatura.

^[6051] Illius arbusculæ.

^[6052] Spiritalia nequitiæ: “wicked spirits.”

^[6053] Eph. vi. 12.

^[6054] Gen. vi. 1-4. See also Tertullian, De Idol. 9; De Habit. Mul. 2; De Cultu Femin. 10; De Vel. Virg. 7; Apolog. 22. See also Augustin, De Civit. Dei. xv. 23.

^[6055] Ut taxaret. Of course he alludes to Marcion’s absurd exposition of the Eph. 6.12, in applying St. Paul’s description of wicked spirits to the Creator.

^[6056] Eph. vi. 19, 20.

Chapter XIX.—The Epistle to the Colossians. Time the Criterion of Truth and Heresy. Application of the Canon. The Image of the Invisible God Explained. Pre-Existence of Our Christ in the Creator’s Ancient Dispensations. What is Included in the Fulness of Christ. The Epicurean Character of Marcion’s God. The Catholic Truth in Opposition Thereto. The Law is to Christ What the Shadow is to the Substance.

^[6057] Compendium figere.

^[6058] Col. i. 5, 6.

^[6059] Antoniniani Marcionis: see above in book i. chap. xix.

^[6060] Ps. xix. 4.

^[6061] Col. i. 15.

^[6062] Ex. xxxiii. 20.

^[6063] Col. i. 15. Our author’s “primogenitus conditionis” is St. Paul’s πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως, for the meaning of which see Bp. Ellicott, in loc.

^[6064] John i. 3.

^[6065] Ante omnes.

^[6066] Ante amina.

^[6067] Creatoris is our author’s word.

^[6068] Col. i. 19.

^[6069] Aut si.

^[6070] Evangelizatores.

^[6071] Ceterum quale.

^[6072] Col. i. 20.

^[6073] “Una ipsa” is Oehler’s reading instead of universa.

^[6074] Cujus novissime fuerant.

^[6075] Col. i. 21.

^[6076] Eph. i. 23.

^[6077] Col. i. 24.

^[6078] Col. i. 22.

^[6079] As if only in a metaphorical body, in which sense the Church is “His body.”

^[6080] Col. ii. 8.

^[6081] “Dominum inferens hebetem;” with which may be compared Cicero (De Divin. ii. 50, 103): “Videsne Epicurum quem hebetem et rudem dicere solent Stoici…qui negat, quidquam deos nec alieni curare, nec sui.” The otiose and inert character of the god of Epicurus is referred to by Tertullian not unfrequently; see above, in book iv. chap. xv.; Apolog. 47, and Ad Nationes, ii. 2; whilst in De Anima, 3, he characterizes the philosophy of Epicurus by a similar term: “Prout aut Platonis honor, aut Zenonis vigor, aut Aristotelis tenor, aut Epicuri stupor, aut Heracliti mæror, aut Empedoclis furor persuaserunt.”

^[6082] The Stoical dogma of the eternity of matter and its equality with God was also held by Hermogenes; see his Adv. Hermogenem, c. 4, “Materiam parem Deo infert.”

^[6083] Pliny, Nat. Hist. vii. 55, refers to the peculiar opinion of Democritus on this subject (Fr. Junius).

^[6084] 1 Cor. i. 27.

^[6085] Isa. 29.14; 1 Cor. 1.19; Jer. 8.9; Job 5.12-13.

^[6086] Col. ii. 13.

^[6087] Col. ii. 16, 17.

^[6088] Col. ii. 18-19, 21.

^[6089] Col. ii. 22.

^[6090] Recensentur: Eph. i. 10.

^[6091] Initium.

^[6092] Contained in Vol. iii. and iv.

^[6093] In the Epistle to the Laodiceans or Ephesians; see his remarks in the preceding chapter of this book v.

^[6094] Isa. 43.18-19; 65.17; 2 Cor. 5.17.

^[6095] Jer. iv. 3. This and the passage of Isaiah just quoted are also cited together above, book iv. chap. i. and ii. p. 345.

Chapter XX.—The Epistle to the Philippians. The Variances Amongst the Preachers of Christ No Argument that There Was More Than One Only Christ. St. Paul’s Phrases—Form of a Servant, Likeness, and Fashion of a Man—No Sanction of Docetism. No Antithesis (Such as Marcion Alleged) in the God of Judaism and the God of the Gospel Deducible from Certain Contrasts Mentioned in This Epistle. A Parallel with a Passage in Genesis. The Resurrection of the Body, and the Change Thereof.

^[6096] Phil. i. 14-17.

^[6097] Utique.

^[6098] Regulas sacramentorum.

^[6099] Phil. i. 18.

^[6100] Nihilominus.

^[6101] Plane.

^[6102] Compare the treatise, De Resur. Carnis, c. vi. (Oehler).

^[6103] Exhausit ἐκένωσε.

^[6104] Phil. ii. 6, 7.

^[6105] Col. i. 15.

^[6106] Posuit.

^[6107] Inventum ratione.

^[6108] Phil. ii. 8.

^[6109] Phil. ii. 8.

^[6110] Non enim exaggeraret.

^[6111] Virtutem: perhaps the power.

^[6112] See the preceding note.

^[6113] Candidæ pharisaeæ: see Phil. iii. 4-6.

^[6114] Phil. iii. 7.

^[6115] Phil. iii. 8.

^[6116] Phil. iii. 9.

^[6117] Phil. iii. 20.

^[6118] Gen. xxii. 17.

^[6119] 1 Cor. xv. 41.

^[6120] Phil. iii. 21. [I have adhered to the original Greek, by a trifling verbal change, because Tertullian’s argument requires it.]

^[6121] 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52.

^[6122] Deputari, which is an old reading, should certainly be demutari, and so say the best authorities. Oehler reads the former, but contends for the latter.

^[6123] 1 Thess. iv. 16, 17.

Chapter XXI.—The Epistle to Philemon. This Epistle Not Mutilated. Marcion’s Inconsistency in Accepting This, and Rejecting Three Other Epistles Addressed to Individuals. Conclusions. Tertullian Vindicates the Symmetry and Deliberate Purpose of His Work Against Marcion.

^[6124] Inspector: perhaps critic.

^[6125] Retro: in the former portions of this treatise.

^[6126] Expunxerimus.

^[6127] Qua eruimus ipsa ista.

^[6128] [Elucidation II.]

Chapter I.—The Opinions of Hermogenes, by the Prescriptive Rule of Antiquity Shown to Be Heretical. Not Derived from Christianity, But from Heathen Philosophy. Some of the Tenets Mentioned.

^[6129] Compendii gratia. [The reference here to the De Præscript. forbids us to date this tract earlier than 207 a.d. Of this Hermogenes, we only know that he was probably a Carthaginian, a painter, and of a versatile and clever mind.]

^[6130] This is the criterion prescribed in the Præscript. Hæret.xxxi. xxxiv., and often applied by Tertullian. See our Anti-Marcion, pp. 272, 345, 470, and passim.

^[6131] The tam novella is a relative phrase, referring to the fore-mentioned rule.

^[6132] Denique.

^[6133] Maldicere singuiis.

^[6134] Probably by painting idols (Rigalt.; and so Neander).

^[6135] It is uncertain whether Tertullian means to charge Hermogenes with defending polygamy, or only second marriages, in the phrase nubit assidue. Probably the latter, which was offensive to the rigorous Tertullian; and so Neander puts it.

^[6136] Quoting Gen. i. 28, “Be fruitful and multiply” (Rigalt.).

^[6137] Disregarding the law when it forbids the representation of idols. (Rigalt.).

^[6138] Et cauterio et stilo. The former instrument was used by the encaustic painters for burning in the wax colours into the ground of their pictures (Westropp’s Handbook of Archæology, p. 219). Tertullian charges Hermogenes with using his encaustic art to the injury of the scriptures, by practically violating their precepts in his artistic works; and with using his pen (stilus) in corrupting the doctrine thereof by his heresy.

^[6139] By the nubentium contagium, Tertullian, in his Montanist rigour, censures those who married more than once.

^[6140] 2 Tim. i. 15.

^[6141] Thus differing from Marcion.

^[6142] The force of the subjunctive, ex qua fecerit.

Chapter II.—Hermogenes, After a Perverse Induction from Mere Heretical Assumptions, Concludes that God Created All Things Out of Pre-Existing Matter.

^[6143] Præstruens.

^[6144] Porro.

^[6145] In partes non devenire.

^[6146] Ut faceret semetipsum.

^[6147] Ut fieret de semetipso.

^[6148] Non fieri.

^[6149] Non ejus fieret conditionis.

^[6150] Inveniri.

Chapter III.—An Argument of Hermogenes. The Answer: While God is a Title Eternally Applicable to the Divine Being, Lord and Father are Only Relative Appellations, Not Eternally Applicable. An Inconsistency in the Argument of Hermogenes Pointed Out.

^[6151] Porro.

^[6152] Retro.

^[6153] Itaque.

^[6154] Conjecturam.

^[6155] Tam…quam.

^[6156] Scilicet.

^[6157] Argumentari: in the sense of argutari.

^[6158] Naviter nobis patrocinatur.

^[6159] Gen. i. 1.

^[6160] Gen. i. 3, etc.

^[6161] Cognominatur: as if by way of surname, Deus Dominus.

^[6162] Gen. ii. 15.

^[6163] Gen. ii. 16.

^[6164] Et ego.

^[6165] Extrema linea. Rhenanus sees in this phrase a slur against Hermogenes, who was an artist. Tertullian, I suppose, meant that Hermogenes was extremely ignorant.

^[6166] Experimenta.

^[6167] Libera: and so not a possible subject for the Lordship of God.

^[6168] Matter having, by the hypothesis, been independent of God, and so incapable of giving Him any title to Lordship.

^[6169] Fuit hoc utique. In Hermogenes’ own opinion, which is thus shown to have been contradictory to itself, and so absurd.

Chapter IV.—Hermogenes Gives Divine Attributes to Matter, and So Makes Two Gods.

^[6170] Quod, with the subjunctive comparet.

^[6171] Census.

^[6172] Scilicet.

^[6173] 1 Cor. viii. 5.

^[6174] Apud nos.

^[6175] The property of being eternal.

^[6176] Unicum sit necesse est.

^[6177] Censetur.

Chapter V.—Hermogenes Coquets with His Own Argument, as If Rather Afraid of It. After Investing Matter with Divine Qualities, He Tries to Make It Somehow Inferior to God.

^[6178] Comparationi.

^[6179] Ratio.

^[6180] Auctrix.

^[6181] Statim si.

^[6182] Totum Dei.

^[6183] Ps. lxxxii. 6.

^[6184] Psa. 82.1.

^[6185] Hermogenes.

^[6186] Ordinem: or course.

^[6187] Quale autem est: “how comes it to pass that.”

Chapter VI.—The Shifts to Which Hermogenes is Reduced, Who Deifies Matter, and Yet is Unwilling to Hold Him Equal with the Divine Creator.

^[6188] Isa. xlv. 23.

^[6189] Isa. xli. 4; xliv. 6; xlviii. 12.

^[6190] Ordo.

^[6191] Isa. xliv. 24.

^[6192] Salvum ergo erit.

^[6193] Recensentur.

Chapter VII.—Hermogenes Held to His Theory in Order that Its Absurdity May Be Exposed on His Own Principles.

^[6194] Nec natus omnino.

^[6195] Of course, according to Hermogenes, whom Tertullian refutes with an argumentum ad hominem.

^[6196] Aderit utrobique.

^[6197] That is, having no God superior to themselves.

^[6198] Hermogenes.

Chapter VIII.—On His Own Principles, Hermogenes Makes Matter, on the Whole, Superior to God.

^[6199] Atquin etiam.

^[6200] Ex illa usus est.

^[6201] De cujus utitur.

^[6202] Præstat.

^[6203] Itaque.

^[6204] Quidem.

^[6205] Revera.

^[6206] Sane.

^[6207] They are so deemed in the de Præscript. Hæret. c. vii.

Chapter IX.—Sundry Inevitable But Intolerable Conclusions from the Principles of Hermogenes.

^[6208] We have rather paraphrased the word “precario”—“obtained by prayer.” [See p. 456.]

^[6209] Domino: opposed to “precario.”

^[6210] Ideo…ut.

^[6211] Mediocritatis.

^[6212] Tali: i.e. potestate.

^[6213] Jam ergo: introducing an argumentum ad hominem against Hermogenes.

^[6214] Quia dominator.

^[6215] Ergo.

^[6216] Aut precario: “as having begged for it.”

^[6217] Precario: See above, note 2, p. 482.

^[6218] De is often in Tertullian the sign of an instrumental noun.

Chapter X.—To What Straits Hermogenes Absurdly Reduces the Divine Being. He Does Nothing Short of Making Him the Author of Evil.

^[6219] Optima.

^[6220] Bona fide.

^[6221] Audiat.

^[6222] De mali ratione.

^[6223] Hac sua injectione. See our Anti-Marcion, iv. i., for this word, p. 345.

^[6224] Assentator. Fr. Junius suggests “adsectator” of the stronger meaning “promoter;” nor does Oehler object.

^[6225] Adversum semetipsum.

^[6226] Male: in reference to His alleged complicity with evil.

Chapter XI.—Hermogenes Makes Great Efforts to Remove Evil from God to Matter. How He Fails to Do This Consistently with His Own Argument.

^[6227] Et tamen.

^[6228] Definimus.

^[6229] Competere illi.

^[6230] Alias.

^[6231] Et in Deum credi.

^[6232] Gestivit.

^[6233] Jam vero.

^[6234] Tum.

^[6235] 1 Cor. v. 13.

^[6236] Utique: with a touch of irony, in the argumentum ad hominem.

^[6237] Matt. xxv. 41.

^[6238] Rev. xx. 3.

^[6239] Rom. viii. 19.

^[6240] Rom. viii. 21.

^[6241] Rom. viii. 20.

^[6242] Conditionis: “creation.”

^[6243] Condixerint.

^[6244] Isa. xi. 6.

^[6245] Ps. cx. 1.

^[6246] Male deputantur.

Chapter XII.—The Mode of Controversy Changed. The Premisses of Hermogenes Accepted, in Order to Show into What Confusion They Lead Him.

^[6247] Scilicet.

^[6248] Matt. iii. 9.

^[6249] Matt. 3.7,8.

^[6250] O homo.

^[6251] Temere.

^[6252] Tene.

^[6253] Scilicet.

^[6254] Gen. i. 21, 22.

^[6255] Denique.

^[6256] That is, of course, by its own natural law.

Chapter XIII.—Another Ground of Hermogenes that Matter Has Some Good in It. Its Absurdity.

^[6257] Matter.

^[6258] i.e. in their nature, Matter being evil, and they good, on the hypothesis.

^[6259] Matt. vii. 18.

^[6260] Concurrisse.

^[6261] Ipsa.

^[6262] Invidiam.

^[6263] Ingenio.

Chapter XIV.—Tertullian Pushes His Opponent into a Dilemma.

^[6264] Nactus.

^[6265] Turpe.

^[6266] Utique.

^[6267] Ex malo.

^[6268] Proinde quatenus.

^[6269] We subjoin the original of this sentence: “Plane sic interest unde fecerit ac si de nihilo fecisset, nec interest uned fecerit, ut inde fecerit unde eum magis decuit.”

^[6270] Pusillitas.

^[6271] Secundum Hermogenis dispositionem.

Chapter XV.—The Truth, that God Made All Things from Nothing, Rescued from the Opponent’s Flounderings.

^[6272] Contra denegatam æterni conversationem. Literally, “Contrary to that convertibility of an eternal nature which has been denied (by Hermogenes) to be possible.” It will be obvious why we have, in connection with the preceding clause preferred the equivalent rendering of our text. For the denial of Hermogenes, which Tertullian refers to, see above, chap. xii. p. 484.

^[6273] Debuisset protulisse.

^[6274] This clumsy expedient to save the character of both God and Matter was one of the weaknesses of Hermogenes’ system.

^[6275] Cur non et ex nihilo potuerit induci?

^[6276] Ubique et undique.

^[6277] Destructionibus. “Ruin of character” is the true idea of this strong term.

Chapter XVI.—A Series of Dilemmas. They Show that Hermogenes Cannot Escape from the Orthodox Conclusion.

^[6278] Præstructione. The notion is of the foundation of an edifice: here ="preliminary remarks” (see our Anti-Marcion, v. 5, p. 438).

^[6279] Articuli.

^[6280] Utrumque utrique.

^[6281] Alterum alteri.

^[6282] Boni matrix.

^[6283] The usual reading is “Hermogenes.” Rigaltius, however, reads “Hermogenis,” of which Oehler approves; so as to make Tertullian say, “I cannot tell how I can avoid the opinion of Hermogenes, who,” etc. etc.

^[6284] Per substantiæ suggestum.

^[6285] Excusas jam causam. Hermogenes held that Matter was eternal, to exclude God from the authorship of evil. This causa of Matter he was now illogically evading. Excusare = ex, causa, “to cancel the cause.”

^[6286] De præjudicio alieno.

Chapter XVII.—The Truth of God’s Work in Creation. You Cannot Depart in the Least from It, Without Landing Yourself in an Absurdity.

^[6287] Unici Dei.

^[6288] Rom. 11.34-35; Isa. 40.14.

^[6289] De aliquo.

^[6290] Adeo ut fecerit.

Chapter XVIII.—An Eulogy on the Wisdom and Word of God, by Which God Made All Things of Nothing.

^[6291] Sophiam suam scilicet.

^[6292] Apud.

^[6293] 1 Cor. ii. 11.

^[6294] Isa. xl. 14.

^[6295] Or the “inquit” may indicate the very words of “Wisdom.”

^[6296] Fontes. Although Oehler prefers Junius’ reading “montes,” he yet retains “fontes,” because Tertullian (in ch. xxxii. below) has the unmistakable reading “fontes” in a like connection.

^[6297] Compingens.

^[6298] Ad quem: the expression is masculine.

^[6299] Prov. viii. 27-31.

^[6300] Commendet.

^[6301] “Non fini subditam” is Oehler’s better reading than the old “sibi subditam.”

^[6302] Condidit: created.

^[6303] See Prov. viii.

^[6304] Intra Dominum.

^[6305] Scilicet.

^[6306] Cœpti agitari.

^[6307] Multo magis non capit.

^[6308] Extra Dominum.

^[6309] Sensu.

^[6310] Nedum.

^[6311] Proinde.

^[6312] On this version of Ps. xlv. 1., and its application by Tertullian, see our Anti-Marcion (p. 299, note 5).

^[6313] John i. 1.

^[6314] John x. 30.

^[6315] Nisi quod.

Chapter XIX.—An Appeal to the History of Creation. True Meaning of the Term Beginning, Which the Heretic Curiously Wrests to an Absurd Sense.

^[6316] Originale instrumentum: which may mean “the document which treats of the origin of all things.”

^[6317] Principium.

^[6318] Corpulentum.

^[6319] Gen. i. 1.

^[6320] Substantivum aliquid.

^[6321] De cetero.

^[6322] Non ab re tamen.

Chapter XX.—Meaning of the Phrase—In the Beginning. Tertullian Connects It with the Wisdom of God, and Elicits from It the Truth that the Creation Was Not Out of Pre-Existent Matter.

^[6323] Illam…quæ.

^[6324] Condidit: “created.”

^[6325] Prov. viii. 22.

^[6326] In qua: in Wisdom.

^[6327] Wisdom.

^[6328] De cogitatu.

^[6329] Species facti.

^[6330] Proinde.

^[6331] John i. 1.

^[6332] Gen. i. 1.

^[6333] John i. 1-3.

Chapter XXI.—A Retort of Heresy Answered. That Scripture Should in So Many Words Tell Us that the World Was Made of Nothing is Superfluous.

^[6334] Plane.

^[6335] Dum ostenditur: which Oehler and Rigalt. construe as “donec ostendatur.” One reading has “dum non ostenditur,” “so long as it is not shown.”

^[6336] Ea conditione.

^[6337] In totum habebat intelligi.

Chapter XXII.—This Conclusion Confirmed by the Usage of Holy Scripture in Its History of the Creation. Hermogenes in Danger of the Woe Pronounced Against Adding to Scripture.

^[6338] Gen. i. 11, 12.

^[6339] Gen. i. 20, 21.

^[6340] Gen. 1.24.

^[6341] Quid unde protulerit: properly a double question ="what was produced, and whence?”

^[6342] Unde unde…dumne.

^[6343] Quid unde processerit: properly a double question ="what was produced, and whence?”

^[6344] Gen. i. 1.

^[6345] Adoro: reverently admire.

^[6346] John i. 3.

^[6347] Officina.

^[6348] Rev. xxii. 18, 19.

Chapter XXIII.—Hermogenes Pursued to Another Passage of Scripture. The Absurdity of His Interpretation Exposed.

^[6349] Gen. i. 2.

^[6350] Redigit in.

^[6351] Inconditam: we have combined the two senses of the word.

^[6352] Tale aliquid.

^[6353] Plane: ironical.

Chapter XXIV.—Earth Does Not Mean Matter as Hermogenes Would Have It.

^[6354] Articulos.

^[6355] Nec utique.

^[6356] Communicare.

^[6357] We have construed Oehler’s reading: “Quanto non comparet” (i.e., by a frequent ellipse of Tertullian, “quanto magis non comparet”). Fr. Junius, however, suspects that instead of “quanto” we should read “quando”: this would produce the sense, “since it is not apparent to what object it may be ascribed,” etc.

^[6358] Nominatam.

^[6359] Cognominatam.

Chapter XXV.—The Assumption that There are Two Earths Mentioned in the History of the Creation, Refuted.

^[6360] Gen. i. 2.

^[6361] Quæ cui nomen terræ accommodare debeat. This is literally a double question, asking about the fitness of the name, and to which earth it is best adapted.

^[6362] He means those who have gone wrong on the eternity of matter.

^[6363] Proinde.

^[6364] A mixed metal, of the colour of amber.

^[6365] Gen. i. 31.

Chapter XXVI.—The Method Observed in the History of the Creation, in Reply to the Perverse Interpretation of Hermogenes.

^[6366] Gen. i. 1.

^[6367] Qualitatem ejus: unless this means “how He made it,” like the “qualiter fecerit” below.

^[6368] Gen. i. 1.

^[6369] Gen. i. 7.

^[6370] Gen. 1.8.

^[6371] Gen. i. 27.

^[6372] Gen. ii. 7.

^[6373] Utique.

^[6374] Prosequi.

^[6375] Primo præfari, postea prosequi; nominare, deinde describere. This properly is an abstract statement, given with Tertullian’s usual terseness: “First you should (‘decet’) give your preface, then follow up with details: first name your subject, then describe it.”

^[6376] Alioquin.

^[6377] Hermogenes, whose view of the narrative is criticised.

^[6378] Integer.

^[6379] Autem.

^[6380] Gen. i. 1, 2.

^[6381] Cum maxime edixerat.

^[6382] The “autem” of the note just before this.

^[6383] Fibula.

^[6384] Alligat sensum.

Chapter XXVII.—Some Hair-Splitting Use of Words in Which His Opponent Had Indulged.

^[6385] Implied in the emphatic tu.

^[6386] Sine u lo lenocinio pronunciationis.

^[6387] Prima positio: the first inflection perhaps, i.e. the present tense.

^[6388] Declinatio: the past tense.

^[6389] Caput.

^[6390] Scilicet.

^[6391] This seems to be the meaning of the obscure passage, “Ut ejusdem sit Erat cujus et quod erat.”

Chapter XXVIII.—A Curious Inconsistency in Hermogenes Exposed. Certain Expressions in The History of Creation Vindicated in The True Sense.

^[6392] Habitum.

^[6393] Deo subjacebat.

^[6394] See below, ch. xxx. p. 494.

^[6395] Matter.

^[6396] “Compertus est” is here a deponent verb.

^[6397] Minus factum.

^[6398] Rudimento. Tertullian uses the word “rudis” (unformed) for the scriptural term (“void”); of this word “rudimentum” is the abstract.

Chapter XXIX.—The Gradual Development of Cosmical Order Out of Chaos in the Creation, Beautifully Stated.

^[6399] Depalans.

^[6400] Dedicans: “disposed” them.

^[6401] Solatio lunæ: a beautiful expression!

^[6402] Significavit.

^[6403] Belluis.

^[6404] In vacuum: void.

^[6405] Isa. xlv. 18.

^[6406] Futura etiam perfecta.

^[6407] De reliquo nondum instructa.

^[6408] Genitalis humoris.

^[6409] Canit: “sing,” as the Psalmist.

^[6410] Ps. xxiv. 1.

^[6411] Emicantior.

^[6412] “Visibilis” is here the opposite of the term “invisibilis,” which Tertullian uses for the Scripture phrase “without form.”

^[6413] In congregatione una.

^[6414] Gen. i. 9.

^[6415] Sustinebat: i.e. expectabat (Oehler).

^[6416] Gen. i. 10.

^[6417] Gen. 1.11.

^[6418] Gen. 1.24.

^[6419] Volo.

^[6420] He means, of course, the theoretic “Matter” of Hermogenes.

^[6421] Isa. xlv. 18.

^[6422] Demonstravit: “make it visible.” Tertullian here all along makes form and visibility synonymous.

^[6423] Gen. i. 9.

^[6424] Ostensam: “manifested” (see note 10, p. 96.)

^[6425] Cum cælo separavit: Gen. i. 1.

Chapter XXX.—Another Passage in the Sacred History of the Creation, Released from the Mishandling of Hermogenes.

^[6426] Gen. i. 2.

^[6427] Confusæ.

^[6428] Massalis illius molis.

^[6429] Situs.

^[6430] Dispositionem.

^[6431] Tot formarum vocabulis.

^[6432] Corpus confusionis.

^[6433] Unicum.

^[6434] Informe.

^[6435] Autem.

^[6436] Confusum.

^[6437] Ex varietate.

^[6438] Unam speciem.

^[6439] Unam ex multis speciem.

^[6440] Istas species.

^[6441] Non habens formas.

^[6442] Agnoscitur.

Chapter XXXI.—A Further Vindication of the Scripture Narrative of the Creation, Against a Futile View of Hermogenes.

^[6443] Ista: the earth, which has been the subject of contention.

^[6444] Speciebus.

^[6445] Scrupulo: doubt or difficulty.

^[6446] Suggestus: “Hoc est, apparatus, ornatus” (Oehler).

^[6447] It will be observed that Tertullian applies the spiritus to the wind as a creature.

^[6448] Qua summale.

^[6449] Qua portionale.

^[6450] Scena.

^[6451] Has species.

^[6452] Gen. ii. 7.

^[6453] Both in the quotation and here, Tertullian read “faciem” where we read “nostrils.”

^[6454] Cutem: another reading has “costam,” rib.

^[6455] See Gen. ii. 21, 23; iii. 5, 19; iv. 10.

Chapter XXXII.—The Account of the Creation in Genesis a General One, Corroborated, However, by Many Other Passages of the Old Testament, Which Give Account of Specific Creations. Further Cavillings Confuted.

^[6456] Quatenus hic commendare videtur.

^[6457] Dissimulato tacito intellectu.

^[6458] Prov. viii. 24.

^[6459] Subjecta.

^[6460] Isa. xlv. 7.

^[6461] De spiritu. This shows that Tertullian took the spirit of Gen. i. 2 in the inferior sense.

^[6462] So also the Septuagint.

^[6463] So also the Septuagint.

^[6464] Amos iv. 13.

^[6465] The “wind.”

^[6466] John iv. 24.

^[6467] Flatum: “breath;” so LXX. of Isa. lvii. 16.

^[6468] Fontes, quæ.

^[6469] Modulans.

^[6470] Prov. viii. 28.

^[6471] Plane.

^[6472] Gen. i. 2.

^[6473] In disperso.

^[6474] Ergo: Tertullian’s answer.

^[6475] Ch. xxx., towards the end.

^[6476] Ut et aliæ.

^[6477] Jam.

^[6478] Otiosa.

^[6479] Generatio: creation in the highest sense of matter issuing from the maker. Another reading has “generosiora essent,” for our “generatio sola esset,” meaning that, “those things would be nobler which had not been made,” which is obviously quite opposed to Tertullian’s argument.

^[6480] Æque.

^[6481] Præmiserat.

Chapter XXXIII.—Statement of the True Doctrine Concerning Matter. Its Relation to God’s Creation of the World.

^[6482] Colores. See our “Anti-Marcion,” p. 217, Edin., where the word pretension should stand instead of precedent.

^[6483] Præscribentes.

^[6484] Innatum: see above, note 12.

^[6485] Donec ad Scripturas provocata deficiat exibitio materiæ.

^[6486] Etiamsi quid.

^[6487] Origines.

^[6488] Materias. There is a point in this use of the plural of the controverted term materia.

Chapter XXXIV.—A Presumption that All Things Were Created by God Out of Nothing Afforded by the Ultimate Reduction of All Things to Nothing. Scriptures Proving This Reduction Vindicated from Hermogenes’ Charge of Being Merely Figurative.

^[6489] Ceterum.

^[6490] Isa. xxxiv. 4; Matt. xxiv. 29; 2 Pet. iii. 10; Rev. vi. 14.

^[6491] Matt. xxiv. 35.

^[6492] Rev. xxi. 1.

^[6493] Rev. xx. 11.

^[6494] Ps. cii. 25, 26.

^[6495] Acerba sua “grossos suos” (Rigalt.). So our marginal reading.

^[6496] Rev. vi. 13.

^[6497] Ps. xcvii. 5.

^[6498] Isa. ii. 19.

^[6499] Isa. xlii. 15.

^[6500] Isa. xli. 17.

^[6501] Etiam mare hactenus,Rev. xxi. 1.

^[6502] Causam.

^[6503] Etiam.

^[6504] Emortuam.

^[6505] In hoc, ut esset. Contrasted with the “non erat” of the previous sentence, this must be the meaning, as if it were “ut fieret.”

Chapter XXXV.—Contradictory Propositions Advanced by Hermogenes Respecting Matter and Its Qualities.

^[6506] Ista.

^[6507] Interim.

^[6508] De substantiis duntaxat.

^[6509] Age nunc sit: “But grant that there is this third state.”

Chapter XXXVI.—Other Absurd Theories Respecting Matter and Its Incidents Exposed in an Ironical Strain. Motion in Matter. Hermogenes’ Conceits Respecting It.

^[6510] Subicit.

^[6511] Other than “the right reason” above named.

^[6512] Adversus.

^[6513] The original, “Adversus renuntiationem reciprocationis illius,” is an obscure expression. Oehler, who gives this reading in his edition, after the editio princeps, renders the term “reciprocationis” by the phrase “negative conversion” of the proposition that Matter is corporeal and incorporeal (q.d. “Matter is neither corporeal nor incorporeal”). Instead, however, of the reading “reciprocationis,” Oehler would gladly read “rectæ rationis,” after most of the editions. He thinks that this allusion to “the right reason,” of which Hermogenes boasted, and of which the absurd conclusion is exposed in the context, very well suits the sarcastic style of Tertullian. If this, the general reading, be adopted, we must render the whole clause this: “For it will be corporeal and incorporeal, in spite of the declaration of that right reason (of Hermogenes), which is plainly enough above giving any reason,” etc. etc.

^[6514] Inconditum. See above ch. xviii., in the middle. Notwithstanding the absurdity of Hermogenes idea, it is impossible to translate this word irregular as it has been proposed to do by Genoude.

^[6515] Rectior.

^[6516] Bardior.

^[6517] Actus: being driven.

^[6518] Actus ejus est motus.

^[6519] Sicut tu.

^[6520] Denique.

^[6521] Solius.

^[6522] Res.

^[6523] Officia.

^[6524] Habitum.

^[6525] Quid enim?

^[6526] Si placuisset tibi.

^[6527] See below, ch. xli., p. 500.

Chapter XXXVII.—Ironical Dilemmas Respecting Matter, and Sundry Moral Qualities Fancifully Attributed to It.

^[6528] Compositionem Dei.

^[6529] Non accepisset translationem.

^[6530] Subostendis.

^[6531] Affinem.

^[6532] Matt. iii. 9.

^[6533] Subicis.

^[6534] This is the force of the subjunctive verb.

^[6535] Te confessum.

Chapter XXXIII.—Other Speculations of Hermogenes, About Matter and Some of Its Adjuncts, Shown to Be Absurd. For Instance, Its Alleged Infinity.

^[6536] De situ.

^[6537] Oehler here restores the reading “quod et de modo,” instead of “de motu,” for which Pamelius contends. Oehler has the mss. on his side, and Fr. Junius, who interprets “modo” here to mean “mass or quantity.” Pamelius wishes to suit the passage to the preceding context (see ch. xxxvi.); Junius thinks it is meant rather to refer to what follows, by which it is confirmed.

^[6538] In loco.

^[6539] Determinatur.

^[6540] Lineam extremam.

^[6541] Modo corporis: or “bulk.”

^[6542] Nec tota fabricatur, sed partes ejus. This perhaps means: “It is not its entirety, but its parts, which are used in creation.”

^[6543] Obduceris: here a verb of the middle voice.

^[6544] In reference to the opinion above mentioned, “Matter is not fabricated as whole, but in parts.”

^[6545] Ut exemplarium antiquitatis.

Chapter XXXIX.—These Latter Speculations Shown to Be Contradictory to the First Principles Respecting Matter, Formerly Laid Down by Hermogenes.

^[6546] Rectius.

^[6547] Definitiva.

^[6548] Ut quæ fabricatur, inquis, a Deo.

^[6549] Lineis. Tertullian often refers to Hermogenes’ profession of painting.

^[6550] In partes venire.

^[6551] Omnia ex omnibus.

^[6552] i.e. of Matter.

^[6553] Dinoscatur ex.

^[6554] Utique ex pristinis.

^[6555] Aliter habeant.

Chapter XL.—Shapeless Matter an Incongruous Origin for God’s Beautiful Cosmos. Hermogenes Does Not Mend His Argument by Supposing that Only a Portion of Matter Was Used in the Creation.

^[6556] In melius reformatam.

^[6557] Speculum.

^[6558] Mulus.

^[6559] Speciatum: εἰδοποιηθέν, “arranged in specific forms.”

^[6560] Κόσμος.

^[6561] Inornatæ: unfurnished with forms of beauty.

^[6562] Non totam eam fabricatam.

^[6563] Recesserunt a forma ejus.

Chapter XLI.—Sundry Quotations from Hermogenes. Now Uncertain and Vague are His Speculations Respecting Motion in Matter, and the Material Qualities of Good and Evil.

^[6564] From which he has digressed since ch. xxxvi., p. 497.

^[6565] Subjacens materia.

^[6566] Æqualis momenti motum.

^[6567] Passivitas.

^[6568] Determinabilem.

^[6569] In loco facis: “you localise.”

^[6570] In loco.

^[6571] Denique.

^[6572] Cum corpori accedunt: or, “when they are added to a body.”

^[6573] Loca: “places;” one to each.

^[6574] Cum ab utraque regione suspendis: equally far from good and evil.

Chapter XLII.—Further Exposure of Inconsistencies in the Opinions of Hermogenes Respecting the Divine Qualities of Matter.

^[6575] Dispersisti omnia.

^[6576] Inconditum.

^[6577] “Communionem.”

^[6578] Ornari: “to be adorned.”

^[6579] Ornari: “to be adorned.”

^[6580] Composite.

^[6581] Incondite.

Chapter XLIII.—Other Discrepancies Exposed and Refuted Respecting the Evil in Matter Being Changed to Good.

^[6582] Concretus.

^[6583] Certaminis.

^[6584] Compositionem: “arrangement.”

^[6585] See above, ch. xxxvii. p. 498.

^[6586] Ornata.

^[6587] Cessavit a.

^[6588] Cessavit.

Chapter XLIV.—Curious Views Respecting God’s Method of Working with Matter Exposed. Discrepancies in the Heretic’s Opinion About God’s Local Relation to Matter.

^[6589] Facit quid decor.

^[6590] Certe.

^[6591] Retro.

^[6592] Dan. iii. 21.

Chapter XLV.—Conclusion. Contrast Between the Statements of Hermogenes and the Testimony of Holy Scripture Respecting the Creation. Creation Out of Nothing, Not Out of Matter.

^[6593] Prov. viii. 22, 23.

^[6594] John i. 3.

^[6595] Spiritu Ipsius: “by His Spirit.” See Ps. xxxiii. 6.

^[6596] Isa. xlviii. 13.

^[6597] Ps. cii. 25.

^[6598] Isa. 40.12; 48.13.

^[6599] Jer. li. 15.

^[6600] Ps. lxiv. 7.

^[6601] Aut si.

^[6602] Atquin.

^[6603] Ubique conveniri.

^[6604] Rom. i. 20.

^[6605] Nescio quæ.

^[6606] Sensualia.

^[6607] Rom. xi. 34.

^[6608] Rom. 11.33.

^[6609] Nec competat.

^[6610] Nisi quod.

Chapter I.—Introductory. Tertullian Compares the Heresy to the Old Eleusinian Mysteries. Both Systems Alike in Preferring Concealment of Error and Sin to Proclamation of Truth and Virtue.

^[6611] Occultant. [This tract may be assigned to any date not earlier than a.d. 207. Of this Valentinus, see cap. iv. infra, and de Præscript. capp. 29, 30, supra.]

^[6612] We are far from certain whether we have caught the sense of the original, which we add, that the reader may judge for himself, and at the same time observe the terseness of our author: “Custodiæ officium conscientiæ officium est, confusio prædicatur, dum religio asseveratur.”

^[6613] Et aditum prius cruciant.

^[6614] Antequam consignant.

^[6615] Epoptas: see Suidas, s.v. ᾽Επόπται.

^[6616] Ædificent.

^[6617] Adytis.

^[6618] Epoptarum.

^[6619] Dispositio.

^[6620] Patrocinio coactæ figuræ.

^[6621] Excusat.

^[6622] “Quid enim aliud est simulachrum nisi falsum?” (Rigalt.)

^[6623] Quos nunc destinamus.

^[6624] Lenocinia.

^[6625] Taciturnitate.

^[6626] Facili caritati. Oehler, after Fr. Junius, gives, however, this phrase a subjective turn thus: “by affecting a charity which is easy to them, costing nothing.”

^[6627] Concreto.

^[6628] Sua cæde.

Chapter II.—These Heretics Brand the Christians as Simple Persons. The Charge Accepted, and Simplicity Eulogized Out of the Scriptures.

^[6629] Notamur.

^[6630] Matt. x. 16.

^[6631] In the original the phrase is put passively: “malim eam partem meliori sumi vitio.”

^[6632] How terse is the original! minus sapere quam pejus.

^[6633] Facies Dei.

^[6634] Wisd. of Sol. i. 1.

^[6635] Litaverunt: “consecrated.”

^[6636] Tertullian’s words are rather suggestive of sense than of syntax: “Pueros vocem qui crucem clamant?”

^[6637] Secundum Deum: “according to God’s will.”

^[6638] 1 Cor. xiv. 20, where Tertullian renders the ταῖς φρεσί (A.V. “understanding”) by “sensibus.”

^[6639] Dedi.

^[6640] i.e., without wisdom.

^[6641] Concutere.

Chapter III.—The Folly of This Heresy. It Dissects and Mutilates the Deity. Contrasted with the Simple Wisdom of True Religion. To Expose the Absurdities of the Valentinian System is to Destroy It.

^[6642] Torqueat.

^[6643] Per anfractus.

^[6644] Nec semel totus.

^[6645] By this remark it would seem that Tertullian read sundry passages in his Latin Bible similarly to the subsequent Vulgate version. For instance, in Zech. vi. 12, the prophet’s words הִנֵּה־אִישׁ צֵמַ שְׁמןֹ (“Behold the Man, whose name is the Branch”), are rendered in the Vulgate, “Ecce Vir Oriens nomen ejus.” Similarly in Zech. iii. 8, “Servum meum adducam Orientem.” (Compare Luke i. 78, where the ᾽Ανατολὴ ἐξ ὕψ·ους (“the day-spring from on high”) is in the same version “Oriens ex alto.”)

^[6646] Or, perhaps, “whom it (nature) feels in all its works.”

^[6647] Alioquin.

^[6648] Alloquin a turba eorum et aliam frequentiam suadere: which perhaps is best rendered, “But from one rabble of gods to frame and teach men to believe in another set,” etc.

^[6649] A nutricula.

^[6650] Inter somni difficultates.

^[6651] These were child’s stories at Carthage in Tertullian’s days.

^[6652] Apostoli spiritus: see 1 Tim. i. 4.

^[6653] Detectorem.

^[6654] Designatorem.

^[6655] Totius conscientiæ illorum.

^[6656] Tanto impendio.

Chapter IV.—The Heresy Traceable to Valentinus, an Able But Restless Man. Many Schismatical Leaders of the School Mentioned. Only One of Them Shows Respect to the Man Whose Name Designates the Entire School.

^[6657] Enim.

^[6658] Martyrii.

^[6659] Conversus.

^[6660] Semitam.

^[6661] Consolatur.

^[6662] Regularum: the particulars of his system. [Here comes in the word, borrowed from heresy, which shaped Monasticism in after times and created the regular orders.]

^[6663] Nec unitatem, sed diversitatem: scil. appellant.

^[6664] Colores ignorantiarum.

Chapter V.—Many Eminent Christian Writers Have Carefully and Fully Refuted the Heresy. These the Author Makes His Own Guides.

^[6665] Archetypis.

^[6666] Passivorum.

^[6667] [See Vol. I. pp. 171, 182, this series].

^[6668] In a good sense, from the elegance of his style.

^[6669] [See Vol. I. p. 326, of this series. Tertullian appropriates the work of Irenæus, (B. i.) against the Gnostics without further ceremony: translation excepted.]

^[6670] Dignitas. [Of this Proculus see Kaye, p. 55.]

^[6671] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

^[6672] Otiosus.

Chapter VI.—Although Writing in Latin He Proposes to Retain the Greek Names of the Valentinian Emanations of Deity. Not to Discuss the Heresy But Only to Expose It. This with the Raillery Which Its Absurdity Merits.

^[6673] Tam peregrinis.

^[6674] Compactis.

^[6675] Ut signum hoc sit.

^[6676] Or stormed perhaps; expugnatio is the word.

^[6677] Delibatione transfunctoria.

^[6678] Ostendam vulnera.

^[6679] Secura.

Chapter VII.—The First Eight Emanations, or Æons, Called the Ogdoad, are the Fountain of All the Others. Their Names and Descent Recorded.

^[6680] Primus omnium.

^[6681] Cœnacula: dining halls.

^[6682] Supernitates supernitatum.

^[6683] Ædicularum.

^[6684] Meritorium.

^[6685] This is perhaps a fair rendering of “Insulam Feliculam credas tanta tabulata cœlorum, nescio ubi.” “Insula” is sometimes “a detached house.” It is difficult to say what “Felicula” is; it seems to be a diminutive of Felix. It occurs in Arrian’s Epictetica as the name of a slave.

^[6686] We follow Tertullian’s mode of designation all through. He, for the most part, gives the Greek names in Roman letters, but not quite always.

^[6687] Expostulo: “I postulate as a first principle.”

^[6688] Tertullian is responsible for this Latin word amongst the Greek names. The strange mixture occurs often.

^[6689] Quadriga.

^[6690] Factionis.

^[6691] Ibidem simul.

^[6692] Cellas.

^[6693] Census.

^[6694] Turbam.

^[6695] Criminum.

^[6696] Numinum.

Chapter VIII.—The Names and Descent of Other Æons; First Half a Score, Then Two More, and Ultimately a Dozen Besides. These Thirty Constitute the Pleroma. But Why Be So Capricious as to Stop at Thirty?

^[6697] We everywhere give Tertullian’s own names, whether of Greek form or Latin. On their first occurrence we also give their English sense.

^[6698] Ebulliunt.

^[6699] Proinde conjugales.

^[6700] Of this name there are two forms—Αἶνος (Praise) and ᾽Αεινοῦς (Eternal Mind).

^[6701] Or Τελετός (Teletus). Another form of this Æon’s name is Φιλητός (Philetus = Beloved). Oehler always reads Theletus.

^[6702] Cogor.

^[6703] Frigidissimus.

^[6704] Cum virum fortem peroraret…inquit.

^[6705] Tertullian’s joke lies in the equivocal sense of this cry, which may mean either admiration and joy, or grief and rage.

^[6706] Audisti: interrogatively.

^[6707] See above, chap. iv. p. 505.

^[6708] Privilegia.

^[6709] Castrata.

^[6710] Tanta numerorum coagula.

^[6711] The pædagogium was either the place where boys were trained as pages (often for lewd purposes), or else the boy himself of such a character.

^[6712] Oehler reads, “hetæri (ἑταῖροι) et syntrophi.” Another reading, supported by Rigaltius, is “sterceiæ,” instead of the former word, which gives a very contemptuous sense, suitable to Tertullian’s irony.

Chapter IX.—Other Capricious Features in the System. The Æons Unequal in Attributes. The Superiority of Nus; The Vagaries of Sophia Restrained by Horos. Grand Titles Borne by This Last Power.

^[6713] Exceptio.

^[6714] Tertullian has, above, remarked on the silent and secret practices of the Valentinians: see chap. i. p. 503.

^[6715] In hunc derivaret.

^[6716] Sed enim.

^[6717] De Patre.

^[6718] Præ vi dulcedinis et laboris.

^[6719] It is not easy to say what is the meaning of the words, “Et in reliquam substantiam dissolvi.” Rigaltius renders them: “So that whatever substance was left to her was being dissolved.” This seems to be forcing the sentence unnaturally. Irenæus (according to the Latin translator) says: “Resolutum in universam substantiam,” “Resolved into his (the Father’s) general substance,” i. 2, 2. [Vol. I. p. 317.]

^[6720] Illius.

^[6721] So Grabe; but Reaper, according to Neander.

^[6722] Animationem.

Chapter X.—Another Account of the Strange Aberrations of Sophia, and the Restraining Services of Horus. Sophia Was Not Herself, After All, Ejected from the Pleroma, But Only Her Enthymesis.

^[6723] Exitum.

^[6724] Uti quæ.

^[6725] Comp. Aristotle, Hist. Anim. vi. 2; Pliny, H. N. x. 58, 60.

^[6726] Ratione.

^[6727] Exitus.

^[6728] In hæc: in relation to the case of Sophia.

^[6729] Above, in chap. viii. we were told that Nus, who was so much like the Father, was himself called “Father.”

^[6730] In censu.

^[6731] Appendicem.

^[6732] Literally, “infirm fruit and a female,” i.e. “had not shared in any male influence, but was a purely female production.” See our Irenæus, i. 4. [Vol. I. p. 321.]

Chapter XI.—The Profane Account Given of the Origin of Christ and the Holy Ghost Sternly Rebuked. An Absurdity Respecting the Attainment of the Knowledge of God Ably Exposed.

^[6733] Ille nus.

^[6734] Iterum: above.

^[6735] Copulationem: The profane reference is to Christ and the Spirit.

^[6736] [A shocking reference to the Spirit which I modify to one of the Divine Persons.]

^[6737] Vulneratur.

^[6738] Cathedræ.

^[6739] Quædam.

^[6740] Conjugiorum.

^[6741] Innati conjectationem.

^[6742] Perpetuitatis: i.e. “what was unchangeable in their condition and nature.”

^[6743] Rationem: perhaps “the means.”

^[6744] Hac dispositione.

Chapter XII.—The Strange Jumble of the Pleroma. The Frantic Delight of the Members Thereof. Their Joint Contribution of Parts Set Forth with Humorous Irony.

^[6745] Nemo aliud quia alteri omnes.

^[6746] Refunduntur.

^[6747] The reader will, of course, see that we give a familiar English plural to these names, as better expressing Tertullian’s irony.

^[6748] Concinunt.

^[6749] Diffundebatur.

^[6750] Nauclerus: “pilot.”

^[6751] Tertullian lived in a seaport at Carthage.

^[6752] Nedum.

^[6753] Christ and the Holy Spirit, [i.e. blasphemously.]

^[6754] Symbolæ ratio.

^[6755] Ratio.

^[6756] Ex ære collaticio. In reference to the common symbola, Tertullian adds the proverbial formula, “quod aiunt” (as they say).

^[6757] Compingunt.

^[6758] Cognominant.

^[6759] De patritus. Irenæus’ word here is πατρωνυμικῶς (“patronymice”).

^[6760] Ex omnium defloratione.

^[6761] Patina.

^[6762] Alluding to the olive-branch, ornamented with all sorts of fruits (compare our “Christmas tree”), which was carried about by boys in Athens on a certain festival (White and Riddle).

Chapter XIII.—First Part of the Subject, Touching the Constitution of the Pleroma, Briefly Recapitulated. Transition to the Other Part, Which is Like a Play Outside the Curtain.

^[6763] Comparaticium antistatum. The latter word Oehler explains, “ante ipsum stantes;” the former, “quia genus eorum comparari poterat substantiæ Soteris” (so Rigaltus).

^[6764] The reader will see how obviously this is meant in Tertullian’s “Quod superest, inquis, vos valete et plaudite.” This is the well-known allusion to the end of the play in the old Roman theatre. See Quintilian, vi. 1, 52; comp. Horace, A. P. 155. Tertullian’s own parody to this formula, immediately after, is: “Immo quod superest, inquam, vos audite et proficite.

^[6765] In libero: which may be, however, “beyond the control of Horos.”

Chapter XIV.—The Adventures of Achamoth Outside the Pleroma. The Mission of Christ in Pursuit of Her. Her Longing for Christ. Horos’ Hostility to Her. Her Continued Suffering.

^[6766] Ininterpretabili.

^[6767] Tertullian’s “Dum ita rerum habet” is a copy of the Greek οὕτω τῶν πραγμάτων ἔχουσο.

^[6768] Deflectitur a.

^[6769] Casus sui.

^[6770] Rerum ex liberalitatibus.

^[6771] De actia fuit. [See Vol. I. pp. 320, 321.]

^[6772] It is not necessary, with Rigaltius, to make a difficulty about this, when we remember that Tertullian only refers to a silly conceit of the Valentinians touching the origin of the sacred name.

^[6773] Or does “nec habens supervolare crucem” mean “being unable to elude the cross?” As if Tertullian meant, in his raillery, to say, that Achamoth had not the skill of the player who played the part of Laureolus. Although so often suspended on the gibbet, he had of course as often escaped the real penalty.

^[6774] A notorious robber, the hero of a play by Lutatius Catullus, who is said to have been crucified.

^[6775] Temperata.

Chapter XV.—Strange Account of the Origin of Matter, from the Various Affections of Achamoth. The Waters from Her Tears; Light from Her Smile.

^[6776] Ille.

^[6777] Recogitavit.

^[6778] “Omnis anima hujus mundi” may, however, mean “every living soul.” So Bp. Kaye, On Tertullian, p. 487.

^[6779] Cetera.

^[6780] Achamoth’s.

^[6781] Exitum.

^[6782] Utique.

^[6783] These two rivers, with their peculiar qualities, are mentioned by Pliny, H. N. ii. 103; [and the latter by Milton against Salmasius.]

^[6784] Ovid. Metam. iv. 286.

^[6785] Pipiavit.

^[6786] Qui.

^[6787] As light.

^[6788] Instrumentum: water is meant.

^[6789] Christ and the Holy Spirit. Oehler.

Chapter XVI.—Achamoth Purified from All Impurities of Her Passion by the Paraclete, Acting Through Soter, Who Out of the Above-Mentioned Impurities Arranges Matter, Separating Its Evil from the Better Qualities.

^[6790] Saviour: another title of their Paraclete.

^[6791] Col. i. 16.

^[6792] Fructiferumque suggestum.

^[6793] Expumicat.

^[6794] Habilitatem atque naturam. We have treated this as a “hendiadys.”

^[6795] Æquiparantias corpulentiarum.

Chapter XVII.—Achamoth in Love with the Angels. A Protest Against the Lascivious Features of Valentinianism. Achamoth Becomes the Mother of Three Natures.

^[6796] Ecce.

^[6797] Subavit et ipsa.

^[6798] Trinitas generum.

Chapter XVIII.—Blasphemous Opinion Concerning the Origin of the Demiurge, Supposed to Be the Creator of the Universe.

^[6799] Exercitior.

^[6800] Scilicet.

^[6801] Fere.

^[6802] Eo animo.

^[6803] See above, chap. xvi. p. 512.

^[6804] Demiurgum.

^[6805] Et velut sigillario. “Sigillarium est νευρόσπαστον,” Oehler.

^[6806] The Father acting through and proceeding from his Mother.

^[6807] Commendant.

^[6808] Delegant.

^[6809] Communiter in universitatem.

Chapter XIX.—Palpable Absurdities and Contradictions in the System Respecting Achamoth and the Demiurge.

^[6810] Jam.

^[6811] Rursus.

^[6812] This is the force of the “qui” with the subjunctive verb.

^[6813] Soter.

^[6814] Effingeret.

^[6815] There seems to be a relative gradation meant among these extra-Pleroma beings, as there was among the Æons of the Pleroma; and, further, a relation between the two sets of beings—Achamoth bearing a relation to Propator, the Demiurge to Nus, etc.

Chapter XX—The Demiurge Works Away at Creation, as the Drudge of His Mother Achamoth, in Ignorance All the While of the Nature of His Occupation.

^[6816] Duplicis substantiæ illius disclusæ.

^[6817] Sublimantia.

^[6818] Ogdoadis primogenitalis: what Irenæus calls “the first-begotten and primary Ogdoad of the Pleroma” (See our Irenæus, Vol. I.; also above, chap. vii. p. 506.)

^[6819] Noëros.

^[6820] Nubeculas.

^[6821] Arbusculas.

^[6822] Puerilium dicibulorum.

^[6823] Sibi here must refer to the secondary agent of the sentence.

Chapter XXI.—The Vanity as Well as Ignorance of the Demiurge. Absurd Results from So Imperfect a Condition.

^[6824] Tenendum.

^[6825] Alioquin.

^[6826] Adeo rerum non erat compos.

^[6827] Censu.

^[6828] Scilicet.

^[6829] Isa. xlv. 5; xlvi. 9.

Chapter XXII.—Origin of the Devil, in the Criminal Excess of the Sorrow of Achamoth. The Devil, Called Also Munditenens, Actually Wiser Than the Demiurge, Although His Work.

^[6830] Infamia apud illos.

^[6831] Tolerabilior.

^[6832] Capit: “capax est,” nimirum “infamiæ” (Fr. Junius).

^[6833] Ex nequitia.

^[6834] Achamoth’s.

^[6835] Irenæus’ word is Κοσμοκράτωρ; see also Eph. vi. 12.

Chapter XXIII.—The Relative Positions of the Pleroma. The Region of Achamoth, and the Creation of the Demiurge. The Addition of Fire to the Various Elements and Bodies of Nature.

^[6836] Above, in chap. viii., he has mentioned the Pleroma as “the fulness of the thirtyfold divinity.”

^[6837] Metatur.

^[6838] Reciprocandi.

^[6839] Fire.

^[6840] Ego.

^[6841] Motiunculis.

^[6842] Febricitasse.

Chapter XXIV.—The Formation of Man by the Demiurge. Human Flesh Not Made of the Ground, But of a Nondescript Philosophic Substance.

^[6843] Vel.

^[6844] Ex pituitis et gramis.

^[6845] Choicus.

Chapter XXV.—An Extravagant Way of Accounting for the Communication of the Spiritual Nature to Man. It Was Furtively Managed by Achamoth, Through the Unconscious Agency of Her Son.

^[6846] Accipe.

^[6847] Anima derivaret.

^[6848] Sermoni perfecto.

^[6849] Traducem animæ suæ.

^[6850] Censum.

^[6851] Or, the substance of ᾽Αρχή.

Chapter XXVI.—The Three Several Natures—The Material, the Animal, and the Spiritual, and Their Several Destinations. The Strange Valentinian Opinion About the Structure of Soter’s Nature.

^[6852] Exitum.

^[6853] Monstruosum illum.

^[6854] Prosicias induisse. Irenæus says, “Assumed the first-fruits,” τὰς ἀπαρχάς.

^[6855] Ingratis.

Chapter XXVII.—The Christ of the Demiurge, Sent into the World by the Virgin. Not of Her. He Found in Her, Not a Mother, But Only a Passage or Channel. Jesus Descended Upon Christ, at His Baptism, Like a Dove; But, Being Incapable of Suffering, He Left Christ to Die on the Cross Alone.

^[6856] Reddo.

^[6857] Nescio quæ.

^[6858] Fartilia.

^[6859] Farsura.

^[6860] That which descended like a dove.

^[6861] Æque insubditivam.

^[6862] In delineationem.

^[6863] Agnitionali.

Chapter XXVIII.—The Demiurge Cured of His Ignorance by the Saviour’s Advent, from Whom He Hears of the Great Future in Store for Himself.

^[6864] Prophetiale patrocinium.

^[6865] Matt. viii. 5, 6.

Chapter XXIX.—The Three Natures Again Adverted to. They are All Exemplified Amongst Men. For Instance, by Cain, and Abel, and Seth.

^[6866] De dispositione.

^[6867] Inunitam.

^[6868] Argumenta.

^[6869] Essentiæ.

^[6870] Choicum: “the clayey.” Having the doubtful issues, which arise from freedom of the will (Oehler).

^[6871] Recondunt: or, “discover.”

^[6872] Recondunt: or, “discover.”

^[6873] Superducunt.

^[6874] De obvenientia.

^[6875] Indulgentiam.

^[6876] The “quos” here relates to “spiritalem statum,” but expressing the sense rather than the grammatical propriety, refers to the plural idea of “good souls” (Oehler).

^[6877] Depluat.

^[6878] Salutaria.

^[6879] We have tried to retain the emphatic repetition, “inreformabilem naturæ naturam.”

^[6880] Eruditu hujus.

^[6881] Above, in ch. xxv. p. 515.

^[6882] Istarum næniarum.

Chapter XXX.—The Lax and Dangerous Views of This Sect Respecting Good Works. That These are Unnecessary to the Spiritual Man.

^[6883] Operationes: the doing of (good) works.”

^[6884] As, forsooth, we should in the spiritual state.

^[6885] Suffragio.

^[6886] Being animal, not spiritual.

^[6887] See above. ch. ix. x. p. 508.

^[6888] See Scorpiace, ch. x. infra.

^[6889] Passivitate.

^[6890] “Diligentia” may mean “proclivity” (Rigalt.).

^[6891] Of the Æons.

^[6892] Nec legitimum: “not a lawful son.”

Chapter XXXI.—At the Last Day Great Changes Take Place Amongst the Æons as Well as Among Men. How Achamoth and the Demiurge are Affected Then. Irony on the Subject.

^[6893] De consummatione.

^[6894] Urgebit.

^[6895] See above, ch. xxiii. p. 514.

^[6896] Compacticius ille.

^[6897] Fient.

^[6898] Query, the Holy Scriptures, or the writings of the Valentinians?

^[6899] Very severe against adultery, and even against celibacy.

^[6900] In ch. xx. this “scenam de Hebdomade cælesti” is called “cælorum septemplicem scenam” ="the sevenfold stage of heaven.”

^[6901] Cœnaculum. See above, ch. vii. p. 506.

Chapter XXXII.—Indignant Irony Exposing the Valentinian Fable About the Judicial Treatment of Mankind at the Last Judgment. The Immorality of the Doctrine.

^[6902] Choicæ: “clayey.”

^[6903] Isa. xl. 6.

^[6904] See above, in ch. xxiv. p. 515.

^[6905] Interiores.

^[6906] Averterant.

^[6907] Neque detentui obnoxii.

^[6908] Neque conspectui obnoxii.

^[6909] Si ita est: or, “since such is the fact.”

^[6910] Claudent.

^[6911] But slaves, in fact.

^[6912] This parenthetic clause, “tacendo jam dixi,” perhaps means, “I say this with shame,” “I would rather not have to say it.”

^[6913] The common reading is, “Onesimum Æonem,” an Æon called Onesimus, in supposed allusion to Philemon’s Onesimus. But this is too far-fetched. Oehler discovers in “Onesimum” the corruption of some higher number ending in “esimum.”

^[6914] This is Oehler’s idea of “et nulla jam fabula.” Rigaltius, however, gives a good sense to this clause: “All will come true at last; there will be no fable.”

^[6915] The same as Macariotes, in ch. viii. above, p. 507.

Chapter XXXIII.—These Remaining Chapters an Appendix to the Main Work. In This Chapter Tertullian Notices a Difference Among Sundry Followers of Ptolemy, a Disciple of Valentinus.

^[6916] Velut epicitharisma.

^[6917] Emendatoribus.

^[6918] Censum.

Chapter XXXV.—Yet More Discrepancies. Just Now the Sex of Bythus Was an Object of Dispute; Now His Rank Comes in Question. Absurd Substitutes for Bythus Criticised by Tertullian.

^[6919] Tertullian, however, here gives the Latin synonyme, Invisibilis.

Chapter XXXVI.—Less Reprehensible Theories in the Heresy. Bad is the Best of Valentinianism.

^[6920] The “Gemonian steps” on the Aventine led to the Tiber, to which the bodies of executed criminals were dragged by hooks, to be cast into the river.

^[6921] Mappa, quod aiunt, missa: a proverbial expression.

^[6922] Istam.

^[6923] See above, ch. vii. p. 506.

Chapter XXXVII.—Other Turgid and Ridiculous Theories About the Origin of the Æons and Creation, Stated and Condemned.

^[6924] Oehler gives good reasons for the reading “ingenia circulatoria,” instead of the various readings of other editors.

^[6925] Insignioris apud eos magistri.

^[6926] Non proferentes. Another reading is “non proserentes” (not generating).

^[6927] Sermo.

^[6928] Or, solitariness.

^[6929] Or, Union.

^[6930] Compare our Irenæus, I. 2, 3. [Vol. I. p. 316.]

Chapter XXXVIII.—Diversity in the Opinions of Secundus, as Compared with the General Doctrine of Valentinus.

^[6931] Achamoth.

Chapter XXXIX.—Their Diversity of Sentiment Affects the Very Central Doctrine of Christianity, Even the Person and Character of the Lord Jesus. This Diversity Vitiates Every Gnostic School.

^[6932] See above, ch. xii. p. 510.

^[6933] The Æons Sermo and Vita.

^[6934] See above, ch. vii. p. 506.

^[6935] See above, ch. viii. p. 507.

^[6936] See above, ch. xiv. p. 511.

^[6937] Superfruticant.

^[6938] Archamoth is referred to.

V. On the Flesh of Christ.

^[6939] In his work On the Resurrection of the Flesh (chap. ii.), Tertullian refers to this tract, and calls it “De Carne Domini adversus quatuor hæreses”: the four heresies being those of Marcion, Apelles, Basilides, and Valentinus. Pamelius, indeed, designates the tract by this fuller title instead of the usual one, “De Carne Christi.” [This tract contains references to works written while our author was Montanistic, but it contains no positive Montanism. It should not be dated earlier than a.d. 207.]

Chapter I.—The General Purport of This Work. The Heretics, Marcion, Apelles, and Valentinus, Wishing to Impugn the Doctrine of the Resurrection, Deprive Christ of All Capacity for Such a Change by Denying His Flesh.

^[6940] Moratam.

^[6941] The allusion is to Matt. xxii. 23; comp. De Præscr. Hæret. 33 (Fr. Junius).

^[6942] Tertullian’s phrase is “carnis vota”—the future prospects of the flesh.

^[6943] Certum est.

^[6944] Ordo.

^[6945] Τῷ δοκεῖν haberentur. This term gave name to the Docetic errors.

^[6946] Opinio.

Chapter II.—Marcion, Who Would Blot Out the Record of Christ’s Nativity, is Rebuked for So Startling a Heresy.

^[6947] Luke i. 26-38.

^[6948] This is said in opposition to Marcion, who held the Creator’s angel, and everything else pertaining to him, to be evil.

^[6949] A reference to Isa. vii. 14.

^[6950] Marcion.

^[6951] See also our Anti-Marcion, iv. 7.

^[6952] Luke ii. 1-7.

^[6953] Viderit.

^[6954] Luke ii. 13.

^[6955] Luke ii. 8.

^[6956] Matt. ii. 1.

^[6957] Matt. ii. 11.

^[6958] Matt. 2.16-18; Jer. 31.15.

^[6959] Luke ii. 22-24.

^[6960] Luke ii. 25-35.

^[6961] Luke ii. 36-38.

^[6962] Apostolicus.

^[6963] Morere.

^[6964] Rescindendo.

^[6965] Compare our Anti-Marcion, i. 1, iv. 4 and de Præscr. Hær. c. xxx.

^[6966] Atquin.

^[6967] Aliter fuisse.

^[6968] Porro.

^[6969] Ex abundanti. [Dr. Holmes, in this sentence actually uses the word lengthy, for which I have said large.]

Chapter III.—Christ’s Nativity Both Possible and Becoming. The Heretical Opinion of Christ’s Apparent Flesh Deceptive and Dishonourable to God, Even on Marcion’s Principles.

^[6970] Quatenus.

^[6971] Nativitatem.

^[6972] Opinio.

^[6973] If Christ’s flesh was not real, the pretence of it was wholly wrong.

^[6974] Viderint homines.

^[6975] It did not much matter (according to the view which Tertullian attributes to Marcion) if God did practise deception in affecting the assumption of a humanity which He knew to be unreal. Men took it to be real, and that answered every purpose. God knew better: and He was moreover, strong enough to obviate all inconveniences of the deception by His unfaltering fortitude, etc. All this, however, seemed to Tertullian to be simply damaging and perilous to the character of God, even from Marcion’s own point of view.

^[6976] Edoce.

^[6977] Non potes dicere ne, etc.

^[6978] Distat.

^[6979] In exitu conversionis.

^[6980] Gen. xviii.

^[6981] Gen. xix.

^[6982] Gen. xxxii.

^[6983] See below in chap. vi. and in the Anti-Marcion, iii. 9.

^[6984] Corpore.

^[6985] Matt. iii. 16.

Chapter IV.—God’s Honour in the Incarnation of His Son Vindicated. Marcion’s Disparagement of Human Flesh Inconsistent as Well as Impious. Christ Has Cleansed the Flesh. The Foolishness of God is Most Wise.

^[6986] Corporationem.

^[6987] Compare similar passages in the Anti-Marcion, iii. 1 and iv. 21.

^[6988] Insolescentem.

^[6989] Enitentis.

^[6990] Religiosum.

^[6991] Cum suis impedimentis profusum.

^[6992] Unctionibus formatur.

^[6993] Hanc venerationem naturæ. Compare Tertullian’s phrase, “Illa sanctissima et reverenda opera naturæ,” in the Anti-Marcion, iii. 11.

^[6994] Videris.

^[6995] Per ludibria nutritum. Compare the phrase just before, “smiled on with nurse’s fawns”—“blanditiis deridetur.” Oehler, however, compares the phrase with Tertullian’s expression (“puerperii spurcos, anxios, ludicros exitus,”) in the Anti-Marcion, iv. 21.

^[6996] Phil. ii. 8.

^[6997] Hæc: i.e. man’s nativity and his flesh.

^[6998] Literally, “by a heavenly regeneration.”

^[6999] Revera. [I cannot let the words which follow, stand in the text; they are sufficiently rendered.]

^[7000] 1 Cor. i. 27.

Chapter V.—Christ Truly Lived and Died in Human Flesh. Incidents of His Human Life on Earth, and Refutation of Marcion’s Docetic Parody of the Same.

^[7001] Aufer, Marcion. Literally, “Destroy this also, O Marcion.”

^[7002] Educari an sepeliri.

^[7003] Recidisti.

^[7004] Vacua ludibria.

^[7005] Paul was of great authority in Marcion’s school.

^[7006] 1 Cor. ii. 2.

^[7007] Excusas.

^[7008] The humiliation which God endured, so indispensable a part of the Christian faith.

^[7009] Matt. 10.33; Mark 8.38; Luke 9.26.

^[7010] Ineptum.

^[7011] That is, imaginary and unreal.

^[7012] Census: “the origin.”

^[7013] Dispuncta est.

^[7014] This term is almost a technical designation of the divine nature of Christ in Tertullian. (See our translation of the Anti-Marcion, p. 247, note 7, Edin.)

^[7015] This term is almost a technical designation of the divine nature of Christ in Tertullian. (See our translation of the Anti-Marcion, p. 247, note 7, Edin.)

^[7016] This term is almost a technical designation of the divine nature of Christ in Tertullian. (See our translation of the Anti-Marcion, p. 247, note 7, Edin.)

^[7017] Dimidias.

^[7018] See his Adv. Valentin, chap. 25.

^[7019] Luke xxiv. 39.

^[7020] Avocatorem.

Chapter VI.—The Doctrine of Apelles Refuted, that Christ’s Body Was of Sidereal Substance, Not Born. Nativity and Mortality are Correlative Circumstances, and in Christ’s Case His Death Proves His Birth.

^[7021] He has Appelles mainly in view.

^[7022] Sine præjudicio tamen. “Without prejudice to their denial, etc.”

^[7023] The Roman version of the proverb is “out of the lime-kiln into the coal-furnace.”

^[7024] See Tertullian, de Præscr. Hæret. c. xxx.

^[7025] Ab eo: or, “from that event of the carnal contact.” A good reading, found in most of the old books, is ab ea, that is, Philumene.

^[7026] Gal. i. 8.

^[7027] Ex ea qualitate in qua.

^[7028] Ipsius: the Creator.

^[7029] Forma.

^[7030] Æque.

^[7031] Quod, quia nascitur, moritur.

^[7032] Pro.

^[7033] Ediscebat. Compare a fine passage of Tertullian on this subject in our Anti-Marcion, note 10, p. 112, Edin.

^[7034] Ceterum.

^[7035] The angels’.

^[7036] Sidera. Drawn, as they thought, from the stars.

^[7037] Ps. lxxviii. 24.

Chapter VII.—Explanation of the Lord’s Question About His Mother and His Brethren. Answer to the Cavils of Apelles and Marcion, Who Support Their Denial of Christ’s Nativity by It.

^[7038] Matt. xii. 48; Luke viii. 20-21.

^[7039] See our Anti-Marcion, iv. 19.

^[7040] Literally, “heresies.”

^[7041] Luke x. 25.

^[7042] Literally, “nobody prevented its being, etc.”

^[7043] Subesse.

^[7044] Materia.

^[7045] Eo adicimus etiam.

^[7046] Supervenissent.

^[7047] John vii. 5.

^[7048] Non computantes scilicet.

^[7049] Nec sustinent saltem.

^[7050] Contendens: “videlicet sponsionibus” (Oehler)

^[7051] Literally, “Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?”—Christ’s own words.

^[7052] The alius is a genitive, and must be taken with sermonis.

^[7053] Abnegavit: “repudiated.”

^[7054] Force of the indicative quale erat.

^[7055] Luke xi. 27, 28. See also our Anti-Marcion, p. 292, Edin.

Chapter VIII.—Apelles and His Followers, Displeased with Our Earthly Bodies, Attributed to Christ a Body of a Purer Sort. How Christ Was Heavenly Even in His Earthly Flesh.

^[7056] Isti Apelleiaci.

^[7057] Ignominiam.

^[7058] Ab igneo illo præside mali: see Tertullian’s de Anima. xxiii.; de Resur. Carn. v.; Adv. Omnes Hæres. vi.

^[7059] Peccatum.

^[7060] Mundus is here the universe or entire creation.

^[7061] Matt. vii. 17.

^[7062] Censu.

^[7063] Plane.

^[7064] 1 Cor. xv. 47.

^[7065] Retro.

^[7066] Secundum carnem.

^[7067] Ei adæquantur.

Chapter IX.—Christ’s Flesh Perfectly Natural, Like Our Own. None of the Supernatural Features Which the Heretics Ascribed to It Discoverable, on a Careful View.

^[7068] Fit.

^[7069] Sua.

^[7070] Metalla.

^[7071] Christum hominem obstupescebant.

^[7072] Notaretur.

^[7073] Non mira.

^[7074] Matt. xiii. 54.

^[7075] Compare Isa. liii. 2. See also our Anti-Marcion, p. 153, Edin.

^[7076] Novum: made of the stars.

^[7077] Merentem.

^[7078] Literally, “why do you suppose it to be celestial.”

^[7079] Matt. xxvi. 41.

Chapter X.—Another Class of Heretics Refuted. They Alleged that Christ’s Flesh Was of a Finer Texture, Animalis, Composed of Soul.

^[7080] Animalem: “etherialized; of a finer form, differing from gross, earthy matter” (Neander).

^[7081] Animalem.

^[7082] Non carneas.

^[7083] Præsumant.

^[7084] Scilicet.

Chapter XI.—The Opposite Extravagance Exposed. That is Christ with a Soul Composed of Flesh—Corporeal, Though Invisible. Christ’s Soul, Like Ours, Distinct from Flesh, Though Clothed in It.

^[7085] Demonstraretur: or, “should become apparent.”

^[7086] Cui latebat.

^[7087] Denique.

^[7088] Isto modo.

^[7089] An retro allegent.

^[7090] Per quod sit.

^[7091] Eam: the soul.

^[7092] Dignius: i.e., “in a manner more worthy of Himself.”

^[7093] Demonstrare.

^[7094] Cassidem.

^[7095] Deputetur.

^[7096] Aliqua vi rationis: or, “by some power of its own condition.”

^[7097] Demonstrare.

^[7098] Notitiæ.

^[7099] Ne.

^[7100] Gestisset.

^[7101] Ex.

^[7102] Istis.

^[7103] In illam: perhaps “in it,” as if an ablative case, not an unusual construction in Tertullian.

Chapter XII.—The True Functions of the Soul. Christ Assumed It in His Perfect Human Nature, Not to Reveal and Explain It, But to Save It. Its Resurrection with the Body Assured by Christ.

^[7104] Ostensa sit.

^[7105] Si constiterit.

^[7106] Denique.

^[7107] Quoquo modo.

^[7108] Opinor.

^[7109] Sensualis: endowed with sense.

^[7110] Nihil animale sine sensu.

^[7111] Nihil sensuale sine anima.

^[7112] We should have been glad of a shorter phrase for sentire (“to use sense”), had the whole course of the passage permitted it.

^[7113] Se ministrare.

^[7114] See especially chap. iv. supra.

^[7115] Debuerat.

^[7116] Nisi qualis esset.

^[7117] 1 John i. 2.

^[7118] Ostendere; see Luke ix. 56.

^[7119] Nimirum.

^[7120] Animalis.

^[7121] Carnalis.

^[7122] Dispositione.

Chapter XIII.—Christ’s Human Nature. The Flesh and the Soul Both Fully and Unconfusedly Contained in It.

^[7123] Ostenderetur: or, “that it might prove itself soul.”

^[7124] Or, “that it might show itself flesh.”

^[7125] Alterutrum: “no matter which.”

^[7126] Testæ: a pitcher, perhaps.

^[7127] Generis.

^[7128] Tertullian quotes his opponent’s opinion here.

^[7129] Silicet: in reference to the alleged doctrine.

^[7130] Non adhæret.

^[7131] Singularitas tota.

^[7132] Nudis.

^[7133] Matt. xxvi. 38. Tertullian’s quotation is put interrogatively.

^[7134] “The salvation” (salute) is Tertullian’s word.

^[7135] John vi. 51.

^[7136] Above, beginning of chap. x.

^[7137] Salvus.

Chapter XIV.—Christ Took Not on Him an Angelic Nature, But the Human. It Was Men, Not Angels, Whom He Came to Save.

^[7138] Gestavit.

^[7139] Matt. xxv. 41.

^[7140] Satellitem.

^[7141] Si forte.

^[7142] Ps. viii. 5.

^[7143] For this designation of the divine nature in Christ, see our Anti-Marcion, p. 247, note 7, Edin.

^[7144] Luke i. 35.

^[7145] Hebioni.

^[7146] Plane.

^[7147] Zech. i. 14.

^[7148] Isa. lxiii. 9.

Chapter XV.—The Valentinian Figment of Christ’s Flesh Being of a Spiritual Nature, Examined and Refuted Out of Scripture.

^[7149] John viii. 40.

^[7150] Matt. xii. 8.

^[7151] Isa. liii. 3, Sept.

^[7152] Jer. xvii. 9, Sept.

^[7153] Dan. vii. 13.

^[7154] 1 Tim. ii. 5.

^[7155] Acts ii. 22.

^[7156] Vice præscriptionis.

^[7157] Animalis.

^[7158] Factiuncula.

^[7159] Informatam.

^[7160] Volutabant: see Lactantius, iv. 22.

^[7161] De nobis probatum est: or, perhaps, “has been proved to have happened in our own case.”

^[7162] Ps. viii. 6, Sept.

^[7163] Ps. xxii. 6.

^[7164] Isa. liii. 3, Sept.

^[7165] Ex incorruptela.

^[7166] Corruptela.

Chapter XVI.—Christ’s Flesh in Nature, the Same as Ours, Only Sinless. The Difference Between Carnem Peccati and Peccatum Carnis: It is the Latter Which Christ Abolished. The Flesh of the First Adam, No Less Than that of the Second Adam, Not Received from Human Seed, Although as Entirely Human as Our Own, Which is Derived from It.

^[7167] Although Tertullian dignifies him with an ille, we have no particulars of this man. [It may be that this is an epithet, rather than a name, given to some enemy of truth like Alexander the “Coppersmith” (2 Tim. iv. 14) or like that (1 Tim. i. 20), blasphemer, whose character suits the case.]

^[7168] Census.

^[7169] So Bp. Kaye renders “carnem peccati.” [See his valuable note, p. 253.]

^[7170] We take the meminerimus to refer “to the Creed.”

^[7171] Suggestu.

^[7172] Naturam.

^[7173] Culpam.

^[7174] “Tertullian, referring to St. Paul, says of Christ: ‘Evacuavit peccatum in carne;’ alluding, as I suppose, to Romans viii. 3. But the corresponding Greek in the printed editions is κατέκρινε τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐν τῇ σαρκί (‘He condemned sin in the flesh’). Had Tertullian a different reading in his Greek mss., or did he confound Rom. 8.3; 6.6, ἵνα καταργηθῇ τὸ σῶμα τὴς ἁμαρτίας (‘that the body of sin might be destroyed’)? Jerome translates the Greek καταργέω by ‘evacuo,’ c. xvi. See Adv. Marcionem, ver. 14. Dr. Neander has pointed out two passages in which Tertullian has ‘damnavit or damnaverit delinquentiam in carne.’ See de Res. Carnis. 46; de Pudicitiâ. 17.”—Bp. Kaye.

^[7175] Also in Rom. viii. 3.

^[7176] Peccatricis carnis.

^[7177] Viri.

^[7178] Transire in: “to pass into.”

^[7179] Sine coagulo.

Chapter XVII.—The Similarity of Circumstances Between the First and the Second Adam, as to the Derivation of Their Flesh. An Analogy Also Pleasantly Traced Between Eve and the Virgin Mary.

^[7180] Idonei.

^[7181] Isa. vii. 14.

^[7182] Matt. i. 23.

^[7183] Gen. ii. 7.

^[7184] Æmula.

^[7185] Literally, “Gabriel.”

Chapter XVIII.—The Mystery of the Assumption of Our Perfect Human Nature by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. He is Here Called, as Often Elsewhere, the Spirit.

^[7186] Matt. xii. 41, 42.

^[7187] De Hebionis opinione.

^[7188] Hominis.

^[7189] Viri.

^[7190] Vacabat.

^[7191] As we have often observed, the term Spiritus is used by Tertullian to express the Divine Nature in Christ. Anti-Marcion, p. 375, note 13.

^[7192] Dispositio rationis.

^[7193] Proferendum.

^[7194] John i. 14.

^[7195] Nec periclitatus quasi.

^[7196] Literally, “in which it became flesh.”

^[7197] John iii. 6.

^[7198] John iii. 6.

^[7199] [A very perspicuous statement of the Incarnation is set forth in this chapter.]

Chapter XIX.—Christ, as to His Divine Nature, as the Word of God, Became Flesh, Not by Carnal Conception, Nor by the Will of the Flesh and of Man, But by the Will of God. Christ’s Divine Nature, of Its Own Accord, Descended into the Virgin’s Womb.

^[7200] Tertullian reads this in the singular number, “natus est.”

^[7201] John i. 13.

^[7202] We need not say that the mass of critical authority is against Tertullian, and with his opponents, in their reading of this passage.

^[7203] He refers to the Valentinians. See our translation of this tract against them, chap. xxv., etc., p. 515, supra.

^[7204] Formalis nostræ nativitatis.

^[7205] Despumatione.

^[7206] Vis.

^[7207] Medicando. [This is based on Job x. 10, a favourite passage with the Fathers in expounding the generative process.]

^[7208] i.e., The Son of God.

^[7209] Which is all that the heretics assign to Him.

^[7210] Such as Valentinus ascribed to Him. See above, c. xv. p. 511.

Chapter XX.—Christ Born of a Virgin, of Her Substance. The Physiological Facts of His Real and Exact Birth of a Human Mother, as Suggested by Certain Passages of Scripture.

^[7211] Indicating the material or ingredient, “out of.”

^[7212] Per.

^[7213] Ex.

^[7214] Matt. i. 20.

^[7215] Matt. i. 16.

^[7216] Grammaticis.

^[7217] Gal. iv. 4.

^[7218] John i. 14.

^[7219] Avulsisti.

^[7220] Ps. xxii. 9.

^[7221] Psa. 22.9,10.

^[7222] Psa. 22.10.

^[7223] i.e. of His flesh.

^[7224] Concarnatus et convisceratus: “united in flesh and internal structure.”

^[7225] Sentinam illam inferni sanguinis.

^[7226] Lactiorem.

^[7227] Avulsionem.

Chapter XXI.—The Word of God Did Not Become Flesh Except in the Virgin’s Womb and of Her Substance. Through His Mother He is Descended from Her Great Ancestor David. He is Described Both in the Old and in the New Testament as “The Fruit of David’s Loins.”

^[7228] Isa. vii. 14; Matt. i. 23.

^[7229] See the same passages.

^[7230] Ipsius.

^[7231] Quod concepit: or, “what she conceived.”

^[7232] Evacuabitur.

^[7233] Luke i. 31.

^[7234] An objection.

^[7235] The rejoinder.

^[7236] Luke i. 41.

^[7237] Luke 1.43.

^[7238] Luke 1.42.

^[7239] Eruditur.

^[7240] Quominus vindicet.

^[7241] Adhærere.

^[7242] Psa. 132.11; Acts 2.30.

Chapter XXII.—Holy Scripture in the New Testament, Even in Its Very First Verse, Testifies to Christ’s True Flesh. In Virtue of Which He is Incorporated in the Human Stock of David, and Abraham, and Adam.

^[7243] Commentator.

^[7244] Originis carnalis: i.e. “origin of the flesh of.”

^[7245] Matt. i. 1.

^[7246] Rom. i. 3; 2 Tim. ii. 8.

^[7247] In nomine: or, “for the sake of.”

^[7248] Gal. iii. 8, 16.

^[7249] Censetur.

Chapter XXIII.—Simeon’s “Sign that Should Be Contradicted,” Applied to the Heretical Gainsaying of the True Birth of Christ. One of the Heretics’ Paradoxes Turned in Support of Catholic Truth.

^[7250] Literally, “Lord.”

^[7251] Luke ii. 34.

^[7252] Isa. vii. 14.

^[7253] Academici isti: “this school of theirs.”

^[7254] i.e. “Because she produced not her son from her husband’s seed.”

^[7255] Defensionem.

^[7256] Matt. v. 37.

^[7257] Nupsit.

^[7258] Nupsit ipsa patefacti corporis lege.

^[7259] De vi masculi admissi an emissi.

^[7260] i.e. “The male.”

^[7261] Ex. xiii. 2; Luke ii. 23.

^[7262] Clausam: i.e. a virgin’s.

^[7263] Magis.

^[7264] Utique.

^[7265] Nuptialem passionem.

^[7266] Epiphanius (Hær. xxx. 30) quotes from the apocryphal Ezekiel this passage: Τέξεται ἡ δάμαλις, καὶ ἐροῦσιν—οὐ τέτοκεν. So Clem. Alex. Stromata, vii. Oehler.

^[7267] Ceterum.

^[7268] Isa. vii. 14.

Chapter XXIV.—Divine Strictures on Various Heretics Descried in Various Passages of Prophetical Scripture. Those Who Assail the True Doctrine of the One Lord Jesus Christ, Both God and Man, Thus Condemned.

^[7269] Isa. v. 20.

^[7270] Istos.

^[7271] Prædicatur.

^[7272] Isa. xlv. 5.

^[7273] Isa. xlvi. 9.

^[7274] John i. 13. Tertullian’s quotation is, as usual, in the singular, “natus.”

^[7275] Gal. i. 8.

^[7276] Comp. de Præscr. Hæret. c. xxx. p. 257, supra.

^[7277] 1 John iv. 3.

^[7278] Disceptatores ejus.

^[7279] Ceteris passivum.

^[7280] Acts i. 11.

^[7281] Tantundem.

^[7282] Tantummodo.

I.

^[7283] I quote the Ed. London, 1739, Vol. V., p. 249.

VI. On the Resurrection of the Flesh.

^[7284] See Bp. Kaye, On Tertullian, p. 256. A full examination of the tenets of these Gnostic heretics occurs in our author’s Treatise against Marcion. An able review of Tertullian’s line of thought in this work on the resurrection occurs in Neander’s Antignostikus, Bohn’s translation, ii. 478–486. [There is a decisive ebullition of Montanistic fanaticism in cap. xi., and in the second chapter there is a reference to the De Carne Christi. Date this treatise circa a.d. 208.]

Chapter I.—The Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body Brought to Light by the Gospel. The Faintest Glimpses of Something Like It Occasionally Met with in Heathenism. Inconsistencies of Pagan Teaching.

^[7285] Fiducia.

^[7286] Parentant.

^[7287] Pro temporibus esculentorum.

^[7288] Etiam desiderar.

^[7289] Cum crematis cremat.

^[7290] Adhuc proxime: “Christianæ scilicet doctrinæ.” Oehler.

^[7291] Recidivatum.

^[7292] Corporalem.

Chapter II.—The Jewish Sadducees a Link Between the Pagan Philosophers and the Heretics on This Doctrine. Its Fundamental Importance Asserted. The Soul Fares Better Than the Body, in Heretical Estimation, as to Its Future State. Its Extinction, However, Was Held by One Lucan.

^[7293] Apud Deum.

^[7294] Sciemus.

^[7295] Salutem.

^[7296] Eam solidam.

^[7297] In sacramentis.

^[7298] In prædicationibus: “in the declarations of the prophets.”

^[7299] Scrupulis.

^[7300] See books ii. and iii. of our Anti-Marcion.

^[7301] He means the De Carne Christi.

^[7302] Tanquam penes nos quoque incerta, id est penes Creatorem. This obscure clause is very variously read. One reading, approved by Fr. Junius, has: “Tanquam penes nos incertum, dum sit quoque certum penes Creatorem,” q.d., “As a subject full of uncertainty as respects ourselves, although of an opposite character in relation to the Creator;” whatever that may mean.

^[7303] Hoc latere.

^[7304] Compare Adv. Omnes Hæreses, c. vi.

^[7305] Varro’s words help us to understand this rough joke: “Ursi Lucana origo,” etc. (De Ling. Lat. v. 100.)

^[7306] Iste: rather his subject than his person.

^[7307] i.e. the De Anima.

Chapter III.—Some Truths Held Even by the Heathen. They Were, However, More Often Wrong Both in Religious Opinions and in Moral Practice. The Heathen Not to Be Followed in Their Ignorance of the Christian Mystery. The Heretics Perversely Prone to Follow Them.

^[7308] Compare the De Test. Anim. ii., and De Anim. xlii.

^[7309] Isa. xliv. 20.

^[7310] 1 Cor. i. 20, iii. 19.

Chapter IV.—Heathens and Heretics Alike in Their Vilification of the Flesh and Its Functions, the Ordinary Cavils Against the Final Restitution of So Weak and Ignoble a Substance.

^[7311] Of the resurrection of the body.

^[7312] Frivolæ.

^[7313] Isto.

^[7314] Gula.

^[7315] Natandum pulmonibus.

Chapter V.—Some Considerations in Reply Eulogistic of the Flesh. It Was Created by God. The Body of Man Was, in Fact, Previous to His Soul.

^[7316] 1 Cor. vii. 31.

^[7317] John i. 3.

^[7318] Formam.

^[7319] Gen. i. 26.

^[7320] Universitati.

^[7321] Gen. i. 27.

^[7322] Limum de terra: Gen. ii. 7.

^[7323] Gen. ii. 7, 8.

^[7324] It having just been said that flesh was man’s prior designation.

Chapter VI.—Not the Lowliness of the Material, But the Dignity and Skill of the Maker, Must Be Remembered, in Gauging the Excellence of the Flesh. Christ Partook of Our Flesh.

^[7325] Quid enim si.

^[7326] Adeo.

^[7327] Ista.

^[7328] Gen. i. 26.

^[7329] Constitutus.

^[7330] Phil. ii. 6.

^[7331] Gen. iii. 19. [“Earth thou art, etc.” in text.]

Chapter VII.—The Earthy Material of Which Flesh is Created Wonderfully Improved by God’s Manipulation. By the Addition of the Soul in Man’s Constitution It Became the Chief Work in the Creation.

^[7332] Gen. iii. 31.

^[7333] A Valentinian notion.

^[7334] Gen. ii. 23.

^[7335] Rom. ix. 20.

^[7336] 2 Cor. vi. 7.

^[7337] Col. ii. 11.

^[7338] Invehi.

^[7339] Dominari.

^[7340] John iv. 24.

Chapter VIII.—Christianity, by Its Provision for the Flesh, Has Put on It the Greatest Honour. The Privileges of Our Religion in Closest Connection with Our Flesh. Which Also Bears a Large Share in the Duties and Sacrifices of Religion.

^[7341] Instaurat.

^[7342] Una notitia ejus = monogamia.

Chapter IX.—God’s Love for the Flesh of Man, as Developed in the Grace of Christ Towards It. The Flesh the Best Means of Displaying the Bounty and Power of God.

^[7343] Afflatus.

^[7344] Matt. xxii. 37-40.

^[7345] 2 Cor. xii. 9.

^[7346] Luke v. 31.

^[7347] 1 Cor. xii. 23.

^[7348] Luke xix. 10.

^[7349] Ezek. xviii. 23.

^[7350] Deut. xxxii. 39.

^[7351] Vacuisset.

Chapter X.—Holy Scripture Magnifies the Flesh, as to Its Nature and Its Prospects.

^[7352] Isa. xl. 7.

^[7353] Isa. xl. 5.

^[7354] Gen. vi. 3, Sept.

^[7355] Joel iii. 1.

^[7356] Rom. viii. 18.

^[7357] Rom. viii. 8.

^[7358] Gal. v. 17.

^[7359] Below, in ch. xvi.

^[7360] Gal. vi. 17.

^[7361] 1 Cor. iii. 16.

^[7362] 1 Cor. vi. 15.

^[7363] 1 Cor. 6.20.

Chapter XI.—The Power of God Fully Competent to Effect the Resurrection of the Flesh.

^[7364] Carnes. [To explain the state of mind in which this sentence is written, let the reader kindly turn back to Vol. II. p. 4, the paragraph, “As Eusebius informs us, etc.”]

^[7365] Licentiam.

^[7366] Oehler explains “devoratum” by “interceptum.”

Chapter XIII.—From Our Author’s View of a Verse in the Ninety-Second Psalm, the Phœnix is Made a Symbol of the Resurrection of Our Bodies.

^[7367] Δίκαιος ὡς φοίνιξ ἀνθήσει, Sept. Ps. xcii. 12.—“like a palm tree” (A.V.). We have here a characteristic way of Tertullian’s quoting a scripture which has even the least bearing on his subject. [See Vol. I. (this series) p. 12, and same volume, p. viii.]

^[7368] Matt. x. 33.

Chapter XIV.—A Sufficient Cause for the Resurrection of the Flesh Occurs in the Future Judgment of Man. It Will Take Cognisance of the Works of the Body No Less Than of the Soul.

^[7369] He refers to Marcion.

^[7370] He here refers his reader to what he has written against Marcion, especially in his books i. and ii.

Chapter XV.—As the Flesh is a Partaker with the Soul in All Human Conduct, So Will It Be in the Recompense of Eternity.

^[7371] Matt. ix. 4.

^[7372] Matt. v. 28.

^[7373] The leading power.

Chapter XVI.—The Heretics Called the Flesh “The Vessel of the Soul,” In Order to Destroy the Responsibility of the Body. Their Cavil Turns Upon Themselves and Shows the Flesh to Be a Sharer in Human Actions.

^[7374] “Frictricis” is Oehler’s reading.

^[7375] 1 Thess. iv. 4.

^[7376] 2 Cor. iv. 16.

^[7377] Rom. viii. 3.

^[7378] 1 Cor. vi. 20.

Chapter XVII.—The Flesh Will Be Associated with the Soul in Enduring the Penal Sentences of the Final Judgment.

^[7379] Simplicior.

^[7380] Interim.

Chapter XVIII.—Scripture Phrases and Passages Clearly Assert “The Resurrection of the Dead.” The Force of This Very Phrase Explained as Indicating the Prominent Place of the Flesh in the General Resurrection.

^[7381] As stated in ch. v.–ix.

^[7382] See ch. xi.

^[7383] As stated in ch. xii. and xiii.

^[7384] See ch. xiv.–xvii.

^[7385] Divinitus.

^[7386] Proscripta.

^[7387] Resurrectio Mortuorum.

^[7388] Gen. iii. 19.

^[7389] John ii. 19.

^[7390] Matt. xxvi. 38.

^[7391] John ii. 21.

^[7392] “Corpse from falling.” This, of course, does not show the connection of the words, like the Latin. [Elucidation I.]

^[7393] Gen. xxiii. 4.

Chapter XIX.—The Sophistical Sense Put by Heretics on the Phrase “Resurrection of the Dead,” As If It Meant the Moral Change of a New Life.

^[7394] Matt. xxiii. 27.

Chapter XX.—Figurative Senses Have Their Foundation in Literal Fact. Besides, the Allegorical Style is by No Means the Only One Found in the Prophetic Scriptures, as Alleged by the Heretics.

^[7395] Isa. vii. 14; Matt. i. 23.

^[7396] Isa. viii. 4.

^[7397] Isa. iii. 13.

^[7398] Ps. ii. 1, 2.

^[7399] Isa. liii. 7.

^[7400] Isa. l. 6, Sept.

^[7401] Isa. liii. 12.

^[7402] Ps. xxii. 17.

^[7403] Psa. 22.18.

^[7404] Ps. lxix. 22. Tertullian only briefly gives the sense in two words: et potus amaros.

^[7405] Ps. xxii. 8.

^[7406] Zech. xi. 12.

^[7407] Isa. xxxv. 5.

^[7408] Isa. 35.3.

^[7409] Isa. 35.6.

Chapter XXI.—No Mere Metaphor in the Phrase Resurrection of the Dead. In Proportion to the Importance of Eternal Truths, is the Clearness of Their Scriptural Enunciation.

^[7410] Resurrectio Mortuorum, of which we have been speaking.

^[7411] See ch. xix.

Chapter XXII.—The Scriptures Forbid Our Supposing Either that the Resurrection is Already Past, or that It Takes Place Immediately at Death. Our Hopes and Prayers Point to the Last Great Day as the Period of Its Accomplishment.

^[7412] For the opinions of those Valentinians who held that Christ’s flesh was composed of soul or of spirit—a refined, ethereal substance—see Tertullian’s De Carne Christi, cc. x.–xv.

^[7413] Suspirant in.

^[7414] Luke xxi. 24.

^[7415] Joel iii. 9-15; Dan. vii. 13-14.

^[7416] Luke xxi. 25, 26.

^[7417] Luke 21.26-28.

^[7418] Luke xxi. 29-30; Matt. xxiv. 32.

^[7419] Luke xxi. 31; Matt. xxiv. 33.

^[7420] Luke xxi. 36.

^[7421] Isa. ii. 19.

^[7422] Ps. cx. 1.

^[7423] Compare The Apology, xl.; De Spect. xxvii.; De Exhort. Cast. xii.

^[7424] Acts i. 11.

^[7425] Zech. 12.10; John 19.37.

^[7426] Mal. iv. 5.

^[7427] 1 John iv. 3.

^[7428] Rev. xviii. 2.

^[7429] Matt. xxii. 21.

Chapter XXIII.—Sundry Passages of St. Paul, Which Speak of a Spiritual Resurrection, Compatible with the Future Resurrection of the Body, Which is Even Assumed in Them.

^[7430] Col. i. 21.

^[7431] Col. ii. 12.

^[7432] Col. 2.13.

^[7433] Col. 2.20. The last clause in Tertullian is, “Quomodo sententiam fertis?”

^[7434] Denique.

^[7435] Col. iii. 1, 2.

^[7436] Col. 3.3.

^[7437] 1 John iii. 2.

^[7438] Gal. v. 5.

^[7439] Phil. iii. 11, 12.

^[7440] Phil. 3.12.

^[7441] Vers. 13, 14. In the last clause Tertullian reads τῆς ἀνεγκλήσεως = blamelessness, or purity, instead of τῆς ἄνω κλήσεως ="our high calling.”

^[7442] Gal. vi. 9.

^[7443] 2 Tim. i. 18.

^[7444] 1 Tim. vi. 14-15, 20.

^[7445] Acts iii. 19-21.

Chapter XXIV.—Other Passages Quoted from St. Paul, Which Categorically Assert the Resurrection of the Flesh at the Final Judgment.

^[7446] 1 Thess. i. 9, 10.

^[7447] 1 Thess. ii. 19. Some mss. omit “God.”

^[7448] 1 Thess. iii. 13.

^[7449] 1 Thess. iv. 13-17.

^[7450] 1 Cor. xv. 19.

^[7451] 2 Tim. i. 15.

^[7452] 1 Thess. v. 1-3.

^[7453] 2 Thess. ii. 1-7.

^[7454] 2 Thess. ii. 8-10.

Chapter XXV.—St. John, in the Apocalypse, Equally Explicit in Asserting the Same Great Doctrine.

^[7455] Rev. vi. 9, 10.

^[7456] Rev. xvi.

^[7457] Rev. xviii.

^[7458] Rev. xx. 2.

^[7459] Rev. 20.4-6.

^[7460] Rev. 20.12-14.

Chapter XXVI.—Even the Metaphorical Descriptions of This Subject in the Scriptures Point to the Bodily Resurrection, the Only Sense Which Secures Their Consistency and Dignity.

^[7461] Gen. iii. 19.

^[7462] See above, ch. v.

^[7463] Gen. iv. 11.

^[7464] Ps. xcvii. 1.

^[7465] Zech. xii. 10.

^[7466] Isa. i. 19.

^[7467] 1 Cor. ii. 9.

^[7468] Matt. v. 45.

^[7469] Rom. i. 25.

^[7470] Matt. iv. 4.

^[7471] Rom. ii. 28, 29.

^[7472] Isa. li. 9, Sept.

Chapter XXVII.—Certain Metaphorical Terms Explained of the Resurrection of the Flesh.

^[7473] Rev. 3.4; 14.4.

^[7474] Matt. xix. 12.

^[7475] Rev. iii. 5.

^[7476] Matt. xxii. 11, 12.

^[7477] There is a curious change of the word here made by Tertullian, who reads ἱμάτια instead of ἰάματα, “thy health,” or “healings,” which is the word in the Sept.

^[7478] Isa. lviii. 8.

^[7479] Isa. xxvi. 20.

^[7480] Isa. xxvi. 20.

Chapter XXVIII.—Prophetic Things and Actions, as Well as Words, Attest This Great Doctrine.

^[7481] Ex. iv. 6, 7.

^[7482] Ex. iv. 2-9.

^[7483] Comp. Ex. 4.3,4.

^[7484] Comp. Ex. 4.6,7.

^[7485] Comp. Ex. 4.9.

^[7486] Gen. ix. 5.

^[7487] Sitiant.

^[7488] Isa. xxxviii. 12-13, 16. The very words, however, occur not in Isaiah, but in 1 Sam. ii. 6, Deut. xxxii. 39.

Chapter XXIX.—Ezekiel’s Vision of the Dry Bones Quoted.

^[7489] Ezek. xxxvii. 1-14.

Chapter XXXI.—Other Passages Out of the Prophets Applied to the Resurrection of the Flesh.

^[7490] Mal. iv. 2, 3.

^[7491] Isa. lxvi. 14.

^[7492] Isa. xxvi. 19.

^[7493] Isa. lxvi. 23.

^[7494] Isa. 66.22.

^[7495] Isa. lxvi. 24.

Chapter XXXIII.—So Much for the Prophetic Scriptures. In the Gospels, Christ’s Parables, as Explained by Himself, Have a Clear Reference to the Resurrection of the Flesh.

^[7496] Matt. xiii. 34.

^[7497] Matt. 13.10.

^[7498] Matt. 13.13; Isa. 6.9.

^[7499] See Luke 6.39, 20, and other places, especially in this Gospel.

^[7500] See Luke viii. 11.

^[7501] See Luke xviii. 1.

^[7502] Such cases of obvious meaning, which required no explanation, are referred to in Matt. 21.45; Luke 20.19.

^[7503] Matt. xi. 22.

^[7504] Matt. x. 7.

^[7505] Luke xiv. 14.

Chapter XXXIV.—Christ Plainly Testifies to the Resurrection of the Entire Man. Not in His Soul Only, Without the Body.

^[7506] Luke xix. 10.

^[7507] Rom. v. 20.

^[7508] John vi. 38.

^[7509] John 6.39.

^[7510] John 6.40.

^[7511] John xx. 29.

Chapter XXXV.—Explanation of What is Meant by the Body, Which is to Be Raised Again. Not the Corporeality of the Soul.

^[7512] Matt. x. 28.

^[7513] Tertullian supposed that even the soul was in a certain sense of a corporeal essence. [Compare the speculations of Crusius in Auberlen, Divine Revelation, (Translation of A.B. Paton, Edinburgh, Clarks, 1867).]

^[7514] Scilicet.

^[7515] Matt. x. 29.

^[7516] Matt. 10.31.

^[7517] Matt. x. 30.

^[7518] John vi. 39.

^[7519] Matt. viii. 12; xiii. 42; xxii. 13; xxv. 30.

Chapter XXXVI.—Christ’s Refutation of the Sadducees, and Affirmation of Catholic Doctrine.

^[7520] Compare Tertullian’s De Præscript. Hæret. c. xxxiii.

^[7521] Matt. xxii. 23-32; Mark xii. 18-27; Luke xx. 27-38.

^[7522] Luke xx. 37.

^[7523] Luke 20.36.

^[7524] Luke 20.36.

Chapter XXXVII.—Christ’s Assertion About the Unprofitableness of the Flesh Explained Consistently with Our Doctrine.

^[7525] John vi. 63.

^[7526] John v. 24.

^[7527] John i. 14.

^[7528] John vi. 51.

^[7529] John vi. 31, 49, 58.

^[7530] John v. 25.

^[7531] The divine nature of the Son. See our Anti-Marcion, pp. 129, 247, note 7, Edin.

^[7532] John v. 28, 29.

^[7533] Compare c. xix. above.

Chapter XXXVIII.—Christ, by Raising the Dead, Attested in a Practical Way the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Flesh.

^[7534] Rev. vi. 9-11.

Chapter XXXIX.—Additional Evidence Afforded to Us in the Acts of the Apostles.

^[7535] Tertullian always refers to this book by a plural phrase.

^[7536] Resignandi.

^[7537] Consignandi.

^[7538] Sub tribuno.

^[7539] Acts xxiii. 6.

^[7540] Acts xxvi. 22.

^[7541] Gen. ix. 5, 6.

^[7542] Acts xvii. 32.

Chapter XL.—Sundry Passages of St. Paul Which Attest Our Doctrine Rescued from the Perversions of Heresy.

^[7543] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

^[7544] 2 Cor. iv. 16.

^[7545] Animum.

^[7546] Animam.

^[7547] Eph. iii. 17.

^[7548] 2 Cor. iv. 17, 18.

^[7549] Rom. viii. 17, 18.

^[7550] 2 Cor. vii. 5.

^[7551] 2 Cor. 7.5.

Chapter XLI.—The Dissolution of Our Tabernacle Consistent with the Resurrection of Our Bodies.

^[7552] 2 Cor. v. 1.

^[7553] Matt. v. 10.

^[7554] John xiv. 2.

^[7555] 2 Cor. v. 2, 3.

^[7556] Compendio mortis. Compare our Anti-Marcion for the same thoughts and words, v. 12. [p. 455, supra.]

^[7557] 1 Thess. iv. 15-17.

Chapter XLII.—Death Changes, Without Destroying, Our Mortal Bodies. Remains of the Giants.

^[7558] 1 Cor. xv. 51-53.

^[7559] Comp. Matt. v. 26, and see Tertullian’s De Anima, xxxv. [and see cap. xliii., infra, p. 576.]

^[7560] De Anim. c. li.

^[7561] Sed: for “scilicet.”

^[7562] Carthage.

^[7563] 2 Cor. v. 4. [Against Marcion, p. 455, note 24.]

^[7564] Exuti. He must have read ἐκδυσάμενοι, instead of the reading of nearly all the ms. authorities, ἐνδυσάμενοι.

^[7565] 2 Cor. v. 3.

Chapter XLIII.—No Disparagement of Our Doctrine in St. Paul’s Phrase, Which Calls Our Residence in the Flesh Absence from the Lord.

^[7566] 2 Cor. v. 6, 7.

^[7567] 2 Cor. 5.8.

^[7568] Comp. his De Anima, c. lv. [Elucidation III.]

^[7569] 2 Cor. v. 9, 10.

^[7570] 2 Cor. v. 10.

^[7571] Per hyperbaton.

Chapter XLIV.—Sundry Other Passages of St. Paul Explained in a Sentence Confirmatory of Our Doctrine.

^[7572] 2 Cor. iv. 6.

^[7573] 2 Cor. 4.7.

^[7574] 2 Cor. iv. 10.

^[7575] 2 Cor. 4.10.

^[7576] 2 Cor. 4.10.

^[7577] Ps. cvii. 16.

^[7578] 2 Cor. iv. 11.

^[7579] 2 Cor. 4.14.

Chapter XLV.—The Old Man and the New Man of St. Paul Explained.

^[7580] Eph. iv. 22-24.

^[7581] The flesh.

^[7582] Gen. i. 28.

^[7583] See ch. xxvii.

^[7584] We treat “homines” as a nominative, after Oehler.

^[7585] Eph. iv. 22.

^[7586] Gal. v. 19.

^[7587] Eph. iv. 25-32.

^[7588] Eph. iv. 22.

Chapter XLVI.—It is the Works of the Flesh, Not the Substance of the Flesh, Which St. Paul Always Condemns.

^[7589] Rom. viii. 8, 9.

^[7590] Rom. 8.10.

^[7591] Nodosius.

^[7592] Rom. viii. 11.

^[7593] Rom. 8.12,13.

^[7594] Rom. 8.2.

^[7595] Rom. vii. 17, 20, 23.

^[7596] Per delinquentiam: see the De Carne Christi, xvi.

^[7597] Rom. viii. 3.

^[7598] Rom. vii. 20.

^[7599] Rom. viii. 6.

^[7600] Rom. 8.7.

^[7601] Col. ii. 20.

Chapter XLVII.—St. Paul, All Through, Promises Eternal Life to the Body.

^[7602] Rom. vi. 6.

^[7603] Evacuetur: καταργηθῃ. A.V. destroyed, i.e. deprived of all activity,Rom. vi. 6.

^[7604] Rom. vi. 6. Tertullian’s reading literally is, “that thus far (and no further) we should be servants of sin.”

^[7605] Rom. 6.8.

^[7606] Rom. 6.11.

^[7607] Rom. 6.11.

^[7608] Rom. 6.11.

^[7609] Rom. 6.12,13.

^[7610] Rom. 6.19-23.

^[7611] Rom. vi. 3, 4.

^[7612] Rom. 6.5.

^[7613] Rom. v. 21.

^[7614] 1 Cor. xv. 55.

^[7615] Rom. v. 20.

^[7616] 2 Cor. xii. 9.

^[7617] Municipatum.

^[7618] Phil. iii. 20, 21.

^[7619] Rom. xii. 1.

^[7620] 1 Thess. v. 23.

^[7621] [Note Tertullian’s summary of the text, in harmony with the Tripartite philosophy of humanity.]

Chapter XLVIII.—Sundry Passages in the Great Chapter of the Resurrection of the Dead Explained in Defence of Our Doctrine.

^[7622] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[7623] 1 Cor. xv. 12-18.

^[7624] 1 Cor. 15.3.

^[7625] 1 Cor. 15.4.

^[7626] 1 Cor. 15.21.

^[7627] 1 Cor. xv. 22.

^[7628] 1 Cor. 15.23.

^[7629] 1 Cor. 15.29.

^[7630] 1 Cor. 15.29.

^[7631] Lavatione.

^[7632] Comp. 1 Pet. iii. 21.

^[7633] 1 Cor. xv. 30.

^[7634] 1 Cor. 15.31.

^[7635] 1 Cor. 15.32.

^[7636] 2 Cor. i. 8.

^[7637] 1 Cor. xv. 35.

Chapter XLIX.—The Same Subject Continued. What Does the Apostle Exclude from the Dead? Certainly Not the Substance of the Flesh.

^[7638] Ad carnem et sanguinem revera.

^[7639] 1 Cor. xv. 47.

^[7640] 1 Cor. 15.45.

^[7641] See De Carne Christi. ch. xvi.

^[7642] 1 Cor. xv. 48.

^[7643] 1 Cor. xv. 40.

^[7644] 1 Cor. 15.41.

^[7645] Ver. 49.

^[7646] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[7647] See Eph. iv. 22.

^[7648] Rom. viii. 9.

^[7649] Gal. v. 21.

^[7650] 1 Cor. xv. 32.

Chapter L.—In What Sense Flesh and Blood are Excluded from the Kingdom of God.

^[7651] Obvenit.

^[7652] A.V. damnation, John v. 29.

^[7653] Forma.

^[7654] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[7655] This must be the meaning of the dative illi.

^[7656] John vi. 63.

^[7657] 1 Cor. xv. 53.

^[7658] We have kept this word to suit the last Scripture quotation; but Tertullian’s word, both here and in the quotation, is “devorata,” swallowed up.

^[7659] See Gal. 1.15,16.

Chapter LI.—The Session of Jesus in His Incarnate Nature at the Right Hand of God a Guarantee of the Resurrection of Our Flesh.

^[7660] Mark xvi. 19.

^[7661] 1 Cor. xv. 45.

^[7662] Acts i. 9.

^[7663] Acts 1.10.

^[7664] Zech. xii. 10; John xix. 37; Rev. i. 7.

^[7665] 1 Tim. ii. 5. Tertullian’s word is “sequester,” the guardian of a deposit.

^[7666] 2 Cor. v. 5.

^[7667] 1 Cor. xv. 50.

^[7668] 1 Cor. xv. 54-56.

^[7669] Rom. vii. 23.

^[7670] 1 Cor. xv. 26.

^[7671] 1 Cor. 15.52.

^[7672] 1 Cor. 15.53.

^[7673] Cutem ipsam. Rufinus says that in the church of Aquileia they touched their bodies when they recited the clause of the creed which they rendered “the resurrection of this body.”

Chapter LII.—From St. Paul’s Analogy of the Seed We Learn that the Body Which Died Will Rise Again, Garnished with the Appliances of Eternal Life.

^[7674] 1 Cor. xv. 36.

^[7675] 1 Cor. 15.37.

^[7676] An objection of the opponent.

^[7677] 1 Cor. 15.37,38.

^[7678] 1 Cor. xv. 38.

^[7679] 1 Cor. 15.39.

^[7680] Ps. xlix. 20, Sept.

^[7681] 1 Cor. xv. 39.

^[7682] 1 Cor. xv. 41.

^[7683] 1 Cor. 15.42.

^[7684] 1 Cor. 15.42-44.

^[7685] Gen. iii. 19.

^[7686] 1 Cor. xv. 45.

Chapter LIII.—Not the Soul, But the Natural Body Which Died, is that Which is to Rise Again. The Resurrection of Lazarus Commented on. Christ’s Resurrection, as the Second Adam, Guarantees Our Own.

^[7687] What in our version is rendered “a natural body,” is St. Paul’s σῶμα ψυχικόν, which the heretics held to be merely a periphrasis for ψυχή. We have rendered Tertullian’s phrase corpus animale by “animate body,” the better to suit the argument.

^[7688] 1 Cor. xv. 42, 43.

^[7689] Compare 1 Cor. 15.45; Gen. 2.7.

^[7690] See this put more fully above, c. v., near the end.

^[7691] Animata.

^[7692] See the De Anima, v.–ix., for a full statement of Tertullian’s view of the soul’s corporeality.

^[7693] 1 Cor. xv. 45.

^[7694] 1 Cor. xv. 46.

^[7695] 1 Cor. 15.47.

^[7696] 1 Cor. 15.45.

^[7697] 1 Cor. 15.46.

^[7698] 1 Cor. xv. 44, 45.

^[7699] 2 Cor. 1.22; 5.5; Eph. 1.14.

Chapter LIV.—Death Swallowed Up of Life. Meaning of This Phrase in Relation to the Resurrection of the Body.

^[7700] 2 Cor. v. 4.

^[7701] 1 Cor. xv. 53.

^[7702] 1 Cor. xv. 53.

^[7703] 1 Cor. 15.54.

^[7704] 1 Cor. 15.55.

Chapter LV.—The Change of a Thing’s Condition is Not the Destruction of Its Substance. The Application of This Principle to Our Subject.

^[7705] Subducitur.

^[7706] Ex. iv. 6, 7.

^[7707] Ex. xxxiv. 29, 35.

^[7708] Acts vi. 15.

^[7709] Acts vii. 59, 60.

^[7710] Matt. xvii. 2-4.

^[7711] Matt. 17.3.

^[7712] Phil. iii. 21.

^[7713] 1 Sam. x. 6.

^[7714] 2 Cor. xi. 14.

Chapter LVI.—The Procedure of the Last Judgment, and Its Awards, Only Possible on the Identity of the Risen Body with Our Present Flesh.

^[7715] With Marcion.

^[7716] With Valentinus.

^[7717] Statu.

^[7718] Utrobique.

^[7719] Rev. v. 9; xiv. 3.

Chapter LVII.—Our Bodies, However Mutilated Before or After Death, Shall Recover Their Perfect Integrity in the Resurrection. Illustration of the Enfranchised Slave.

^[7720] Qualiscunque.

^[7721] Or the recovery of our entire person.

^[7722] Genus.

^[7723] 1 Cor. xv. 52.

^[7724] 1 Cor. xv. 53.

^[7725] 1 Thess. 4.13-17;5.23.

^[7726] Matt. xix. 26.

^[7727] 1 Cor. i. 27.

Chapter LVIII.—From This Perfection of Our Restored Bodies Will Flow the Consciousness of Undisturbed Joy and Peace.

^[7728] Isa. xxxv. 10.

^[7729] Isa. 35.10.

^[7730] Rev. vii. 17.

^[7731] Rev. xxi. 4.

^[7732] Rev. xx. 10, 13-15.

^[7733] Deut. xxix. 5.

^[7734] Justitia.

^[7735] Dan. iii. 27.

^[7736] Jonah i. 17; ii. 10.

^[7737] Gen. v. 24; 2 Kings ii. 11.

^[7738] 1 Cor. x. 6.

Chapter LIX.—Our Flesh in the Resurrection Capable, Without Losing Its Essential Identity, of Bearing the Changed Conditions of Eternal Life, or of Death Eternal.

^[7739] 1 Cor. iii. 22.

^[7740] Isa. xl. 7.

^[7741] Isa. 40.5.

^[7742] Demetere.

^[7743] Isa. xl. 15.

^[7744] Isa. 40.17. The word is spittle, which the LXX. uses in the fifteenth verse for the “dust” of the Hebrew Bible.

^[7745] Isa. xlii. 4, Sept; quoted from the LXX. by Christ in Matt. xii. 21, and by St. Paul in Rom. xv. 12.

^[7746] An allusion to some conceits of the Valentinians, who put men of truest nature and fit for Christ’s grace outside of the ocean-bounded earth, etc.

Chapter LX.—All the Characteristics of Our Bodies—Sex, Various Limbs, Etc.—Will Be Retained, Whatever Change of Functions These May Have, of Which Point, However, We are No Judges. Analogy of the Repaired Ship.

^[7747] 1 Cor. xv. 53.

^[7748] 2 Cor. v. 10.

Chapter LXI.—The Details of Our Bodily Sex, and of the Functions of Our Various Members. Apology for the Necessity Which Heresy Imposes of Hunting Up All Its Unblushing Cavils.

^[7749] Ex. xxiv. 8.

^[7750] 1 Kings xix. 8.

^[7751] Deut. viii. 3; Matt. iv. 4.

Chapter LXII.—Our Destined Likeness to the Angels in the Glorious Life of the Resurrection.

^[7752] Luke xx. 36; Matt. xxii. 30.

^[7753] ἰσάγγελοι.

^[7754] Cui.

Chapter LXIII.—Conclusion. The Resurrection of the Flesh in Its Absolute Identity and Perfection. Belief of This Had Become Weak. Hopes for Its Refreshing Restoration Under the Influences of the Paraclete.

^[7755] 1 Tim. ii. 5.

^[7756] Gen. iii. 22.

^[7757] In this apostrophe to the soul, he censures Marcion’s heresy.

^[7758] Compare the De Carne Christi.

^[7759] See the De Præscript. Hæret. ch. xxxviii. supra, for instances of these diverse methods of heresy. Marcion is mentioned as the mutilator of Scripture, by cutting away from it whatever opposed his views; Valentinus as the corrupter thereof, by his manifold and fantastic interpretations.

^[7760] See the Adv. Valentinianos, supra.

^[7761] Joel ii. 28-29; Acts ii. 17-18. [See last sentence. He improves upon St. Peter’s interpretation of this text (as see below) by attributing his own clear views to the charismata, which he regards as still vouchsafed to the more spiritual.]

^[7762] We follow Oehler’s view here, by all means.

^[7763] 1 Cor. xi. 19.

I.

^[7764] Œuvres, Tom. v. p. 111.

II.

^{[7765] 2} See Soames’ Anglo Saxon Church, cap. xii. p. 465, and cap. xi. pp. 423–430. See also the valuable annotations of Dr. Routh’s Opuscula, Vol. II. pp. 167–186.

VII. Against Praxeas;

^[7766] The error of Praxeas appears to have originated in anxiety to maintain the unity of God; which, he thought, could only be done by saying that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost were one and the same. He contended, therefore, according to Tertullian, that the Father himself descended into the virgin, was born of her, suffered, and was in a word Jesus Christ. From the most startling of the deductions from Praxeas’ general theory, his opponents gave him and his followers the name of Patripassians; from another point in his teaching they were called Monarchians. [Probable date not earlier than a.d. 208].

^[7767] [Elucidation I.]

Chapter I.—Satan’s Wiles Against the Truth. How They Take the Form of the Praxean Heresy. Account of the Publication of This Heresy.

^[7768] Matt. iv. 3.

^[7769] Matt. 4.6.

^[7770] Ps. xci. 11.

^[7771] John viii. 44.

^[7772] 1 Cor. xiii. 3.

^[7773] Probably Victor. [Elucidation II.]

^[7774] Had admitted them to communion.

^[7775] “The connection renders it very probable that the hic quoque of this sentence forms an antithesis to Rome, mentioned before, and that Tertullian expresses himself as if he had written from the very spot where these things had transpired. Hence we are led to conclude that it was Carthage.”—Neander, Antignostikus, ii. 519, note 2, Bohn.

^[7776] On the designation Psychici, see our Anti-Marcion, p. 263, note 5, Edin.

^[7777] [This statement may only denote a withdrawal from the communion of the Bishop of Rome, like that of Cyprian afterwards. That prelate had stultified himself and broken faith with Tertullian; but, it does not, necessarily, as Bp. Bull too easily concludes, define his ultimate separation from his own bishop and the North-African church.]

^[7778] Matt. xiii. 30.

Chapter II.—The Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity and Unity, Sometimes Called the Divine Economy, or Dispensation of the Personal Relations of the Godhead.

^[7779] The Church afterwards applied this term exclusively to the Holy Ghost. [That is, the Nicene Creed made it technically applicable to the Spirit, making the distinction marked between the generation of the Word and the procession of the Holy Ghost.]

^[7780] The “Comforter.”

^[7781] See our Anti-Marcion, p. 119, n. 1. Edin.

^[7782] See his De Præscript. xxix.

^[7783] Tertullian uses similar precaution in his argument elsewhere. See our Anti-Marcion, pp. 3 and 119. Edin.

^[7784] οἰκονομία.

^[7785] Dirigens.

^[7786] Statu.

^[7787] See The Apology, ch. xxi.

^[7788] Specie.

^[7789] See Bull’s Def. Fid. Nic., and the translation (by the translator of this work), in the Oxford Series, p. 202.

Chapter III.—Sundry Popular Fears and Prejudices. The Doctrine of the Trinity in Unity Rescued from These Misapprehensions.

^[7790] οἰκονυμία.

^[7791] So Bp. Kaye, On Tertullian, p. 499.

^[7792] Unicum.

^[7793] This was a notion of Praxeas. See ch. x.

^[7794] Tam unicis.

^[7795] Dan. vii. 10.

^[7796] “Pignora” is often used of children and dearest relations.

^[7797] [The first sentence of this chapter is famous for a controversy between Priestly and Bp. Horsley, the latter having translated idiotæ by the word idiots. See Kaye, p. 498.]

Chapter IV.—The Unity of the Godhead and the Supremacy and Sole Government of the Divine Being. The Monarchy Not at All Impaired by the Catholic Doctrine.

^[7798] [Compare Cap. viii. infra.]

^[7799] 1 Cor. xv. 24, 25.

^[7800] Ps. cx. 1.

^[7801] 1 Cor. xv. 27, 28.

^[7802] Apud.

Chapter V.—The Evolution of the Son or Word of God from the Father by a Divine Procession. Illustrated by the Operation of the Human Thought and Consciousness.

^[7803] Res ipsa.

^[7804] Formam, or shape.

^[7805] Patrocinantibus.

^[7806] See St. Jerome’s Quæstt. Hebr. in Genesim, ii. 507.

^[7807] “Dispositio” means “mutual relations in the Godhead.” See Bp. Bull’s Def. Fid. Nicen., Oxford translation, p. 516.

^[7808] Sensus ipsius.

^[7809] Sermonem. [He always calls the Logos not Verbum, but Sermo, in this treatise. A masculine word was better to exhibit our author’s thought. So Erasmus translates Logos in his N. Testament, on which see Kaye, p. 516.]

^[7810] Sermonen.

^[7811] Sermonalis.

^[7812] Rationalis.

^[7813] i.e., “Reason is manifestly prior to the Word, which it dictates” (Bp. Kaye, p. 501).

^[7814] Sermonem.

^[7815] Dicturus. Another reading is “daturus,” about to give.

^[7816] Sermone.

^[7817] Gen. i. 26.

Chapter VI.—The Word of God is Also the Wisdom of God. The Going Forth of Wisdom to Create the Universe, According to the Divine Plan.

^[7818] “Mutual relations in the Godhead.”

^[7819] Sensus.

^[7820] Sapientius.

^[7821] Prov. viii. 22-25.

^[7822] Prov. viii. 27-30.

Chapter VII.—The Son by Being Designated Word and Wisdom, (According to the Imperfection of Human Thought and Language) Liable to Be Deemed a Mere Attribute. He is Shown to Be a Personal Being.

^[7823] Ornatum.

^[7824] Gen. i. 3.

^[7825] Conditus. [See Theophilus To Autolycus, cap. x. note 1, p. 98, Vol. II. of this series. Also Ibid. p. 103, note 5. On the whole subject, Bp. Bull, Defensio Fid. Nicænæ. Vol. V. pp. 585–592.]

^[7826] Condidit.

^[7827] Prov. viii. 22.

^[7828] Prov. 8.27.

^[7829] Col. i. 15.

^[7830] Ps. xlv. 1. See this reading, and its application, fully discussed in our note 5, p. 66, of the Anti-Marcion, Edin.

^[7831] Ps. ii. 7.

^[7832] Prov. viii. 22, 25.

^[7833] John i. 3.

^[7834] Ps. xxxiii. 6.

^[7835] Prov. viii. 22.

^[7836] Prov. 8.28.

^[7837] John i. 3.

^[7838] John i. 3.

^[7839] Offensus.

^[7840] John i. 1.

^[7841] Ex. xx. 7.

^[7842] Phil. ii. 6.

^[7843] John iv. 24.

^[7844] This doctrine of the soul’s corporeality in a certain sense is treated by Tertullian in his De Resurr. Carn. xvii., and De Anima v. By Tertullian, spirit and soul were considered identical. See our Anti-Marcion, p. 451, note 4, Edin.

^[7845] [On Tertullian’s orthodoxy, here, see Kaye, p. 502.]

Chapter VIII.—Though the Son or Word of God Emanates from the Father, He is Not, Like the Emanations of Valentinus, Separable from the Father. Nor is the Holy Ghost Separable from Either. Illustrations from Nature.

^[7846] “The word προβολή properly means anything which proceeds or is sent forth from the substance of another, as the fruit of a tree or the rays of the sun. In Latin, it is translated by prolatio, emissio, or editio, or what we now express by the word development. In Tertullian’s time, Valentinus had given the term a material signification. Tertullian, therefore, has to apologize for using it, when writing against Praxeas, the forerunner of the Sabellians” (Newman’s Arians, ii. 4; reprint, p. 101).

^[7847] προβολή.

^[7848] See Adv. Valentin. cc. xiv. xv.

^[7849] Matt. xi. 27.

^[7850] John i. 18.

^[7851] John viii. 26.

^[7852] John vi. 38.

^[7853] 1 Cor. ii. 11.

^[7854] John xiv. 11.

^[7855] John i. 1.

^[7856] John x. 30.

^[7857] Literally, the προβολή, “of the truth.”

^[7858] [Compare cap. iv. supra.]

^[7859] Or oneness of the divine empire.

^[7860] Or dispensation of the divine tripersonality. See above ch. ii.

Chapter IX.—The Catholic Rule of Faith Expounded in Some of Its Points. Especially in the Unconfused Distinction of the Several Persons of the Blessed Trinity.

^[7861] “Modulo,” in the sense of dispensation or economy. See Oehler and Rigault. on The Apology, c. xxi.

^[7862] “In his representation of the distinction (of the Persons of the Blessed Trinity), Tertullian sometimes uses expressions which in aftertimes, when controversy had introduced greater precision of language, were studiously avoided by the orthodox. Thus he calls the Father the whole substance, the Son a derivation from or portion of the whole.” (Bp. Kaye, On Tertullian, p. 505). After Arius, the language of theology received greater precision; but as it is, there is no doubt of the orthodoxy of Tertullian’s doctrine, since he so firmly and ably teaches the Son’s consubstantiality with the Father—equal to Him and inseparable from him. [In other words, Tertullian could not employ a technical phraseology afterwards adopted to give precision to the same orthodox ideas.]

^[7863] John xiv. 28.

^[7864] Ps. viii. 5.

^[7865] John xiv. 16.

^[7866] Aliud ab alio.

^[7867] Matt. v. 37.

Chapter X.—The Very Names of Father and Son Prove the Personal Distinction of the Two. They Cannot Possibly Be Identical, Nor is Their Identity Necessary to Preserve the Divine Monarchy.

^[7868] [Kaye, p. 507, note 3.]

^[7869] As correlatives, one implying the existence of the other.

^[7870] Matt. xix. 26.

^[7871] Luke xviii. 27.

^[7872] 1 Cor. i. 27.

^[7873] Gen. xviii. 14.

^[7874] An ironical reference to a great paradox in the Praxean heresy.

Chapter XI.—The Identity of the Father and the Son, as Praxeas Held It, Shown to Be Full of Perplexity and Absurdity. Many Scriptures Quoted in Proof of the Distinction of the Divine Persons of the Trinity.

^[7875] Distincte, non divise.

^[7876] For this version of Ps. xlv. 1, see our Anti-Marcion, p. 66, note 5, Edin.

^[7877] Ecce.

^[7878] Ps. ii. 7.

^[7879] In allusion to Ps. cx. 3 (Sept.)

^[7880] In allusion to Prov. viii. 22.

^[7881] Isa. xlii. 1.

^[7882] Isa. xlix. 6.

^[7883] Isa. 61.1; Luke 4.18.

^[7884] Ps. lxxi. 18.

^[7885] Ps. iii. 1.

^[7886] Sustinent.

^[7887] Ex.

^[7888] Ps. cx. 1.

^[7889] Tertullian reads Κυρίῳ instead of Κύρῳ, “Cyrus.”

^[7890] Isa. xlv. 1.

^[7891] Isa. liii. 1, 2.

^[7892] [See Elucidation III., and also cap. xxv. infra.]

^[7893] [See De Baptismo, cap. v. p. 344, Ed. Oehler, and note how often our author cites an important text, by half quotation, leaving the residue to the reader’s memory, owing to the impetuosity of his genius and his style: “Monte decurrens velut amnis, imbres quem super notas aluere ripas fervet, etc.”]

Chapter XII.—Other Quotations from Holy Scripture Adduced in Proof of the Plurality of Persons in the Godhead.

^[7894] Gen. i. 26.

^[7895] Gen. iii. 22.

^[7896] Gen. i. 27.

^[7897] Gen. i. 3.

^[7898] John i. 9.

^[7899] Mundialis lux.

^[7900] Gen. i. 6, 7.

^[7901] Gen. i. 14, 16.

^[7902] John i. 3.

^[7903] John i. 1.

^[7904] [Kaye thinks the Athanasian hymn (so called) was composed by one who had this treatise always in mind. See p. 526.]

^[7905] Per eum.

Chapter XIII.—The Force of Sundry Passages of Scripture Illustrated in Relation to the Plurality of Persons and Unity of Substance. There is No Polytheism Here, Since the Unity is Insisted on as a Remedy Against Polytheism.

^[7906] Ps. xlv. 6, 7.

^[7907] Isa. xlv. 14, 15 (Sept.).

^[7908] John i. 1.

^[7909] Ps. cx. 1.

^[7910] Isa. liii. 1.

^[7911] Gen. xix. 24.

^[7912] Ps. lxxxii. 6.

^[7913] Psa. 82.1.

^[7914] Retro.

^[7915] Numerum.

^[7916] Conscientia.

^[7917] Rom. i. 7.

^[7918] Rom. ix. 5.

^[7919] Species.

Chapter XIV.—The Natural Invisibility of the Father, and the Visibility of the Son Witnessed in Many Passages of the Old Testament. Arguments of Their Distinctness, Thus Supplied.

^[7920] Ex. xxxiii. 13.

^[7921] Ex. 33.20.

^[7922] Pro modulo derivationis.

^[7923] Spiritus here is the divine nature of Christ.

^[7924] Ex. xxxiii. 11.

^[7925] Gen. xxxii. 30.

^[7926] Num. xii. 6-8.

^[7927] 1 Cor. xiii. 12.

^[7928] Mark ix. 4; Matt. xvii. 3.

^[7929] Si forte.

^[7930] Cominus sciret.

^[7931] Comp. Ex. 33.13,11.

^[7932] Gen. xxii. 30.

^[7933] Involved in the nunquid.

^[7934] John xiv. 28.

^[7935] Lam. iv. 20. Tertullian reads, “Spiritus personæ ejus Christus Dominus.” This varies only in the pronoun from the Septuagint, which runs, Πνεῦμα προσώπου ἡμῶν Χριστὸς Κύριος. According to our A.V., “the breath of our nostrils, the anointed of the Lord” (or, “our anointed Lord”), allusion is made, in the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, to the capture of the king—the last of David’s line, “as an anointed prince.” Comp.Jer. lii. 9.

^[7936] 1 Cor. xi. 3.

Chapter XV.—New Testament Passages Quoted. They Attest the Same Truth of the Son’s Visibility Contrasted with the Father’s Invisibility.

^[7937] Quæstionibus.

^[7938] John i. 18.

^[7939] 1 Tim. vi. 16.

^[7940] Ex. xxxiii. 20; Deut. v. 26; Judg. xiii. 22.

^[7941] 1 John i. 1.

^[7942] 1 John i. 1.

^[7943] John i. 1, 2.

^[7944] Quia cum Patre apud Patrem.

^[7945] John i. 14.

^[7946] 1 John iv. 12.

^[7947] John i. 18.

^[7948] 1 Cor. ix. 1.

^[7949] Rom. ix. 5.

^[7950] 1 Tim. vi. 16.

^[7951] 1 Tim. i. 17.

^[7952] 1 Cor. xv. 3.

^[7953] 1 Cor. 15.8.

^[7954] Acts xxii. 11.

^[7955] Matt. xvii. 6; Mark ix. 6.

^[7956] Ex. xxxiii. 20.

^[7957] John v. 19.

^[7958] In sensu.

^[7959] The reading is, “in Patris sensu;” another reading substitutes “sinu” for “sensu;” q.d. “the Father’s bosom.”

^[7960] John i. 3.

Chapter XVI.—Early Manifestations of the Son of God, as Recorded in the Old Testament; Rehearsals of His Subsequent Incarnation.

^[7961] John iii. 35. Tertullian reads the last clause (according to Oehler), “in sinu ejus,” q.d. “to Him who is in His bosom.”

^[7962] John i. 1.

^[7963] Matt. xxviii. 18.

^[7964] John v. 22.

^[7965] See our Anti-Marcion, p. 112, note 10. Edin.

^[7966] Comp. 1 Cor. x. 11.

^[7967] See the treatise, Against Marcion. ii. 25, supra.

^[7968] Gen. iii. 9.

^[7969] Gen. vi. 6.

^[7970] Ps. viii. 6.

^[7971] Quasi.

^[7972] Ps. viii. 6.

^[7973] 1 Tim. vi. 16.

^[7974] Acts xvii. 24.

^[7975] Joel ii. 10; Ps. xcvii. 5.

^[7976] Isa. x. 14.

^[7977] Isa. lxvi. 1.

^[7978] Isa. xl. 28.

Chapter XVII.—Sundry August Titles, Descriptive of Deity, Applied to the Son, Not, as Praxeas Would Have It, Only to the Father.

^[7979] John v. 43.

^[7980] John xvii. 6.

^[7981] Ps. cxviii. 26.

^[7982] John xvi. 15.

^[7983] Acts ii. 22.

^[7984] Rev. i. 8.

Chapter XVIII.—The Designation of the One God in the Prophetic Scriptures. Intended as a Protest Against Heathen Idolatry, It Does Not Preclude the Correlative Idea of the Son of God. The Son is in the Father.

^[7985] See above ch. xiii. p. 607.

^[7986] Isa. xlv. 5.

^[7987] Isa. xlv. 5, 18; xliv. 6.

^[7988] Isa. xliv. 24.

Chapter XIX.—The Son in Union with the Father in the Creation of All Things. This Union of the Two in Co-Operation is Not Opposed to the True Unity of God. It is Opposed Only to Praxeas’ Identification Theory.

^[7989] Prov. viii. 27.

^[7990] Rom. xi. 34.

^[7991] Prov. viii. 30.

^[7992] 1 Cor. i. 24.

^[7993] 1 Cor ii. 11.

^[7994] John i. 3.

^[7995] Ps. xxxiii. 6.

^[7996] Isa. xliv. 25.

^[7997] On this reading, see our Anti-Marcion, p. 207, note 9. Edin.

^[7998] Matt. iii. 17.

^[7999] Isa. xliv. 24.

^[8000] Ps. xxxiii. 6.

^[8001] Isa. xli. 4 (Sept.).

^[8002] John i. 1.

^[8003] Prolatus.

^[8004] See ch. xiii. p. 107.

Chapter XX.—The Scriptures Relied on by Praxeas to Support His Heresy But Few. They are Mentioned by Tertullian.

^[8005] Sonitu.

^[8006] Isa. xlv. 5.

^[8007] John x. 30.

^[8008] John xiv. 9, 10.

Chapter XXI.—In This and the Four Following Chapters It is Shewn, by a Minute Analysis of St. John’s Gospel, that the Father and Son are Constantly Spoken of as Distinct Persons.

^[8009] John i. 1-3.

^[8010] John i. 14.

^[8011] Unius sinum Patris. Another reading makes: “He alone (unus) declared,” etc. See John i. 18.

^[8012] John i. 18, first clause.

^[8013] John i. 29.

^[8014] John i. 49.

^[8015] Matt. xvi. 16.

^[8016] John i. 50.

^[8017] Matt. xvi. 17.

^[8018] John ii. 16.

^[8019] John iii. 16.

^[8020] John iii. 17, 18.

^[8021] John iii. 35, 36.

^[8022] John iv. 25.

^[8023] John xx. 31.

^[8024] John iv. 34.

^[8025] John v. 17.

^[8026] John v. 19-27.

^[8027] i.e. His divine nature.

^[8028] John v. 36, 37.

^[8029] John 5.37.

^[8030] John 5.43.

^[8031] John vi. 29.

^[8032] John 6.30.

^[8033] John 6.32.

^[8034] The expression is in the neuter collective form in the original.

^[8035] John vi. 37-45.

^[8036] John 6.46.

^[8037] John 6.66.

^[8038] John 6.67.

^[8039] John 6.68.

Chapter XXII.—Sundry Passages of St. John Quoted, to Show the Distinction Between the Father and the Son. Even Praxeas’ Classic Text—I and My Father are One—Shown to Be Against Him.

^[8040] See John vii. passim.

^[8041] John 7.28,29.

^[8042] John 7.33.

^[8043] John viii. 16.

^[8044] John 8.17.

^[8045] John 8.18.

^[8046] John 8.19.

^[8047] John 8.19.

^[8048] John viii. 26.

^[8049] John 8.27.

^[8050] Jer. i. 9.

^[8051] Isa. l. 4.

^[8052] John viii. 28, 29.

^[8053] John 8.38.

^[8054] John 8.40.

^[8055] John 8.42.

^[8056] John 8.49.

^[8057] John viii. 54, 55.

^[8058] John 8.56.

^[8059] John ix. 4.

^[8060] John 9.35-38.

^[8061] John x. 15.

^[8062] John 10.15,17,18.

^[8063] John 10.24.

^[8064] John 10.25.

^[8065] John 10.26-28.

^[8066] John 10.29.

^[8067] John 10.30.

^[8068] John x. 32.

^[8069] John 10.34-38.

Chapter XXIII.—More Passages from the Same Gospel in Proof of the Same Portion of the Catholic Faith. Praxeas’ Taunt of Worshipping Two Gods Repudiated.

^[8070] John xi. 27.

^[8071] Matt. xvi. 16.

^[8072] John i. 49.

^[8073] John xi. 41, 42.

^[8074] John xii. 27, 28.

^[8075] John v. 43.

^[8076] Or, “by way of excess.”

^[8077] Matt. xvii. 5.

^[8078] John xii. 28.

^[8079] Or, held (haberi).

^[8080] Matt. vi. 9.

^[8081] Ps. viii. 5.

^[8082] Psa. 8.5.

^[8083] John xii. 30.

^[8084] John xii. 44.

^[8085] John 12.45.

^[8086] John xii. 49.

^[8087] Isa. l. 4.

^[8088] John xii. 50.

^[8089] John xiii. 1, 3.

^[8090] John 13.31.

^[8091] John 13.32.

Chapter XXIV.—On St. Philip’s Conversation with Christ. He that Hath Seen Me, Hath Seen the Father. This Text Explained in an Anti-Praxean Sense.

^[8092] John xiv. 5-7.

^[8093] John 14.8.

^[8094] John 14.9.

^[8095] John xiv. 9.

^[8096] John x. 30.

^[8097] John xvi. 28.

^[8098] John xiv. 6.

^[8099] John vi. 44.

^[8100] Matt. xi. 27.

^[8101] John v. 21.

^[8102] John xiv. 7.

^[8103] Vicarium.

^[8104] Ex. xxxiii. 20.

^[8105] John xiv. 10.

^[8106] John xiv. 11.

^[8107] John xiv. 10.

^[8108] John 14.10.

^[8109] John 14.10.

^[8110] John 14.11.

Chapter XXV.—The Paraclete, or Holy Ghost. He is Distinct from the Father and the Son as to Their Personal Existence. One and Inseparable from Them as to Their Divine Nature. Other Quotations Out of St. John’s Gospel.

^[8111] John xiv. 16.

^[8112] See above ch. xiii.

^[8113] John xvi. 14.

^[8114] Unum. [On this famous passage see Elucidation III.]

^[8115] Unus.

^[8116] John x. 30.

^[8117] John xv. 1.

^[8118] John xvii. 1.

^[8119] John xvii. 11.

^[8120] Matt. xxvii. 46.

^[8121] Luke xxiii. 46.

^[8122] John xx. 17.

^[8123] John xx. 31.

^[8124] [A curious anecdote is given by Carlyle in his Life of Frederick (Book xx. cap. 6), touching the text of “the Three Witnesses.” Gottsched satisfied the king that it was not in the Vienna ms. save in an interpolation of the margin “in Melanchthon’s hand.” Luther’s Version lacks this text.]

Chapter XXVI.—A Brief Reference to the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke. Their Agreement with St. John, in Respect to the Distinct Personality of the Father and the Son.

^[8125] Luke i. 35.

^[8126] Inicere.

^[8127] i.e., the angel of the Annunciation.

^[8128] On this not strictly defensible term of Tertullian, see Bp. Bull’s Defence of the Nicene Creed, book ii. ch. vii. sec. 5, Translation, pp. 199, 200.

^[8129] John i. 14.

^[8130] “The selfsame Person is understood under the appellation both of Spirit and Word, with this difference only, that He is called ‘the Spirit of God,’ so far as He is a Divine Person,…and ‘the Word,’ so far as He is the Spirit in operation, proceeding with sound and vocal utterance from God to set the universe in order.”—Bp. Bull, Def. Nic. Creed, p. 535, Translation.

^[8131] Ex ipso.

^[8132] Substantiva res.

^[8133] Ipse Deus: i.e., God so wholly as to exclude by identity every other person.

^[8134] Luke ii. 49.

^[8135] Matt. iv. 3, 6.

^[8136] Mark i. 24; Matt. viii. 29.

^[8137] Matt. xi. 25-26; Luke x. 21; John xi. 41.

^[8138] Matt. xvi. 17.

^[8139] Matt. xi. 25.

^[8140] Matt. xi. 27; Luke x. 22.

^[8141] Matt. x. 32, 33.

^[8142] Matt. xxi. 33-41.

^[8143] Matt. xxiv. 36.

^[8144] Luke xxii. 29.

^[8145] Matt. xxvi. 53.

^[8146] Matt. xxvii. 46.

^[8147] Luke xxiii. 46.

^[8148] Luke xxiv. 49.

^[8149] Non in unum.

Chapter XXVII.—The Distinction of the Father and the Son, Thus Established, He Now Proves the Distinction of the Two Natures, Which Were, Without Confusion, United in the Person of the Son. The Subterfuges of Praxeas Thus Exposed.

^[8150] Ipsæ.

^[8151] Luke i. 35.

^[8152] Matt. i. 23.

^[8153] His version of Ps. lxxxvii. 5.

^[8154] Ex.

^[8155] Rom. i. 3.

^[8156] Rom. 1.4.

^[8157] See next chapter.

^[8158] i.e., Christ’s divine nature.

^[8159] John iii. 6.

^[8160] Luke i. 35.

^[8161] 1 Tim. ii. 5.

Chapter XXVIII.—Christ Not the Father, as Praxeas Said. The Inconsistency of This Opinion, No Less Than Its Absurdity, Exposed. The True Doctrine of Jesus Christ According to St. Paul, Who Agrees with Other Sacred Writers.

^[8162] Acts iv. 27.

^[8163] Acts ii. 36.

^[8164] See 1 John 2.22; 4.2-3; 5.1.

^[8165] 1 John i. 3.

^[8166] Rom. i. 8.

^[8167] Gal. i. 1.

^[8168] John xx. 17.

^[8169] Amos iv. 13, Sept.

^[8170] Ps. ii. 2.

^[8171] Here Tertullian reads τῷ Χριστῷ μου Κυρίῳ, instead of Κύρῳ, “to Cyrus,” in Isa. xlv. 1.

^[8172] Eph. i. 17.

^[8173] Rom. viii. 11.

^[8174] From this deduction of the doctrine of Praxeas, that the Father must have suffered on the cross, his opponents called him and his followers Patripassians.

Chapter XXIX.—It Was Christ that Died. The Father is Incapable of Suffering Either Solely or with Another. Blasphemous Conclusions Spring from Praxeas’ Premises.

^[8175] 1 Cor. xv. 3.

^[8176] Gal. iii. 13.

^[8177] Same ver.

^[8178] Referimus: or, “Recite and record.”

^[8179] Deut. xxi. 23.

^[8180] Gal. iii. 13.

^[8181] [This passage convinces Lardner that Praxeas was not a Patripassian. Credib. Vol. VIII. p. 607.]

^[8182] That is, the divine nature in general in this place.

^[8183] That which was open to it to suffer in the Son.

^[8184] Suo nomine.

^[8185] De nobis.

Chapter XXX.—How the Son Was Forsaken by the Father Upon the Cross. The True Meaning Thereof Fatal to Praxeas. So Too, the Resurrection of Christ, His Ascension, Session at the Father’s Right Hand, and Mission of the Holy Ghost.

^[8186] Matt. xxvii. 46.

^[8187] Rom. viii. 32.

^[8188] This is the sense rather than the words of Isa. liii. 5, 6.

^[8189] Luke xxiii. 46.

^[8190] i.e., the divine nature.

^[8191] 1 Cor. xv. 3, 4.

^[8192] John iii. 13.

^[8193] Eph. iv. 9.

^[8194] Mark xvi. 19; Rev. iii. 21.

^[8195] Acts vii. 55.

^[8196] Ps. cx. 1.

^[8197] Acts i. 11; Luke xxi. 37.

^[8198] Tertullian was now a [pronounced] Montanist.

^[8199] John xvi. 13.

Chapter XXXI.—Retrograde Character of the Heresy of Praxeas. The Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity Constitutes the Great Difference Between Judaism and Christianity.

^[8200] Coram.

^[8201] Viderint.

^[8202] 1 John iv. 15.

^[8203] 1 John v. 12.

I.

^[8204] Kaye, pp. 504–596.

^[8205] Ch. iii. compared with ch. xviii.

II.

^[8206] Vol. i. p. 416, this Series.

^[8207] Vol. I. p. 569, this Series.

^[8208] Eusebius, B.V. cap. 24. Refer also to preceding note, and to Vol. I. p. 310, this Series.

^[8209] Vol. II. pp. 3 and 4, this Series, also, Eusebius, B.V. Cap. iii.

III.

^[8210] p. 516.

^[8211] “A New Plea for the Authenticity of the text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses: or, Porson’s Letters to Travis eclectically examined, etc. etc. By the Rev. Charles Forster, etc.” Cambridge, Deighton, Bell & Co., and London, Bell & Daldy, 1867.

^[8212] See Milman, Hist. Lat. Christ., i. p. 29.

^[8213] See Bull’s Works, Vol. V., p. 381.

^[8214] Where it is Psalm XIV.

VIII. Scorpiace.

^[8215] [Written about a.d. 205.]

Chapter I.

^[8216] Of the cross over the wounded part. [This translation is frequently weakened by useless interpolations; some of these destroying the author’s style, for nothing, I have put into footnotes or dropped.]

^[8217] I.e. adjuring the part, in the name of Jesus, and besmearing the poisoned heel with the gore of the beast, when it has been crushed to death. [So the translator; but the terse rhetoric of the original is not so circumstantial, and refers, undoubtedly, to the lingering influence of miracles, according to St. Mark xvi. 18.]

^[8218] Acts xxviii. 3.

^[8219] Ex. iii. 2.

^[8220] The opponents of martyrdoms are meant.—Tr.

^[8221] Ps. l. 13.

^[8222] Ezek. xxxiii. 11.

^[8223] i.e. the devil.—Tr.

^[8224] An instrument of torture, so called.—Tr.

^[8225] Ps. xix. 10.

^[8226] Ex. iii. 17.

^[8227] Isa. v. 20.

Chapter II.

^[8228] By those in favour of its having been divinely enjoined.

^[8229] By argument, of course.—Tr.

^[8230] Ex. xx. 2.

^[8231] Ex. xx. 22, 23.

^[8232] Deut. vi. 4.

^[8233] Deut. vi. 12.

^[8234] Deut. xi. 27.

^[8235] Deut. xii. 2, 3.

^[8236] Deut. xii. 30.

^[8237] Deut. xiii. 1.

^[8238] Of course our division of the Scripture by chapter and verse did not exist in the days of Tertullian.—Tr.

^[8239] Deut. xiii. 6.

^[8240] Deut. xiii. 16.

^[8241] Deut. xxvii. 15.

^[8242] Rev. xix. 4.

^[8243] The words in the Septuagint are: ὃτι ἐμοὶ οἱ υἱοὶτ ᾽Ισραὴλ οἰκέται εἰσίν, παῖδές μου οὗτοί εἰσιν οὕς ἐξήγαγον ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου.

^[8244] Lev. xxv. 55; xxvi. 1.

^[8245] Ps. cxxxv. 15; cxv. 4.

Chapter III.

^[8246] Ex. xxxii.

^[8247] Num. xxv. 1.

^[8248] Judg. ii. 8-13.

^[8249] Judg. ii. 20, 21.

Chapter IV.

^[8250] An allusion to what occurred in the games, there being lines to mark the space within which the contests were to be waged.—Tr.

Chapter V.

^[8251] Literally, “disperse in vapour.”—Tr.

Chapter VI.

^[8252] Literally, “age.”—Tr.

^[8253] 1 Cor. xv. 41.

^[8254] Ps. xxxii. 1; Rom. iv. 7, etc.

^[8255] 1 Pet. iv. 8.

^[8256] Matt. xxii. 37.

Chapter VII.

^[8257] Prov. ix. 2: “She hath killed her beasts.” The corresponding words in the Septuagint are ἔσφαξε τα εαυτῆς θύματα. Augustine, in his De Civ. Dei, xvi. 20, explains the victims (θύματα) to be Martyrum victimas.—Tr.

^[8258] Prov. i. 20, 21; see the Septuagint version.

^[8259] Isa. xliv. 5.

^[8260] Zech. xiii. 9.

^[8261] Rom. viii. 32.

^[8262] Rom. iv. 25.

^[8263] Rom. xi. 34.

Chapter VIII.

^[8264] Ps. cxvi. 15.

^[8265] Isa. lvii. 1.

^[8266] Matt. xiv. 3.

^[8267] Dan. iii. 12.

^[8268] Baruch vi. 3.

^[8269] Dan. iii. 16.

Chapter IX.

^[8270] Tertullian means martyrdom.—Tr.

^[8271] Matt. v. 10; Luke vi. 23.

^[8272] Matt. x. 16.

^[8273] The words in the Greek, though correctly rendered in our authorized version, are, when translated literally, what Tertullian represents them to be.—Tr.

Chapter X.

^[8274] The perfect.

^[8275] The spell-resisting.

^[8276] The steadfast.

^[8277] Isa. xl. 15.

^[8278] Matt. xvi. 13.

^[8279] Matt. 7.12; Luke 6.31.

^[8280] Ps. xxiv. 7.

^[8281] Amos ix. 6.

^[8282] In support of my cause.

^[8283] More literally, “How long shall we suffer the third race!” The Christians are meant; the first race being the heathen, and the second the Jews.—Tr.

^[8284] Matt. x. 34.

^[8285] Matt. x. 21.

Chapter XI.

^[8286] Luke xiv. 26.

^[8287] Matt. x. 39.

^[8288] Matt. x. 19.

^[8289] Matt. xxv. 36.

^[8290] Luke xviii. 7.

^[8291] Matt. xiii. 3.

^[8292] See note 1, cap. iv. p. 637, supra.

Chapter XII.

^[8293] 1 Pet. ii. 20.

^[8294] 1 Pet. iv. 12.

^[8295] 1 John iii. 16.

^[8296] 1 John iv. 18.

^[8297] Rev. ii. 10.

^[8298] Rev. ii. 13.

^[8299] Rev. iii. 10.

^[8300] Matt. xx. 20-23.

^[8301] Rev. vi. 9.

^[8302] Rev. vii. 14.

^[8303] Isa. i. 18.

^[8304] Rev. xvii. 6.

^[8305] Rev. xxi. 8.

Chapter XIII.

^[8306] Gen. xxv. 34; xxvii. 25.

^[8307] 2 Thess. i. 4.

^[8308] Rom. v. 3.

^[8309] Rom. viii. 17.

^[8310] Rom. viii. 35.

^[8311] 2 Cor. xi. 23.

^[8312] 2 Cor. xii. 10.

^[8313] 2 Cor. iv. 8.

^[8314] Should be Philippians: i.e. Phil. i. 29, 30.

^[8315] Phil. ii. 17.

^[8316] 2 Tim. iv. 6.

^[8317] 2 Tim ii. 11.

^[8318] 2 Tim. i. 8.

^[8319] 2 Tim. i. 7.

Chapter XIV.

^[8320] Rom. xiii. 1.

^[8321] Rom. xiii. 6.

^[8322] Matt. xxii. 21.

^[8323] 1 Pet. ii. 13.

Chapter XV.

^[8324] It has been thought that the allusion is to the breaking of the legs of the crucified to hasten their death, not to the beating to which the apostles were subjected by the Jewish council: Acts v. 40.—Tr.

^[8325] Acts vii. 59.

^[8326] James the brother of our Lord, not the James mentioned Acts xii. 2.

^[8327] John xxi. 18.

^[8328] Acts xxi. 11.

^[8329] Matt. 16.23; 4.10,—a mixing up of two passages of Scripture.

IX. Appendix.

^[8330] [On p. 14, this volume, see nearly all that need be said, of this spurious treatise. I add a few references to Routh, Opuscula, Vol. 1. p. 160 etc. His honouring it with a place in his work must be my apology for not relegating it to the collection of spurious Tertulliana, sub fine.]

Chapter I.—Earliest Heretics: Simon Magus, Menander, Saturninus, Basilides, Nicolaus. [The Work Begins as a Fragment.]

^[8331] [Routh says he inadvertently changed his title to read Advs. Hæreticos, but that it is better after all, in view of the opening sentence.]

^[8332] See Acts xxiii. 8, and the references there.

^[8333] Pharisees = Separatists.

^[8334] See Acts viii. 9-24.

^[8335] I use Virtue in this and similar cases in its Miltonic sense.

^[8336] Mundum.

^[8337] Or, “intelligence.”

^[8338] Or, “but had undergone a quasi-passion.”

^[8339] Magus.

^[8340] Innascibilem;” but Fr. Junius’ conjecture, “innoscibilem,” is agreeable to the Greek “ἄγνωστος.”

^[8341] Mundum.

^[8342] The text here is partially conjectural, and if correct, clumsy. For the sense, see de Anima, c. xxiii. ad init.

^[8343] Or, Abraxes, or Abrasax.

^[8344] Or, Power.

^[8345] Potestates.

^[8346] Mundum.

^[8347] Mundum.

^[8348] Mundum.

^[8349] i.e. probably “Simon the Cyrenian.” See Matt. xxvii. 32; Mark xv. 21; Luke xxiii. 26.

^[8350] Alter hæreticus. But Fr. Junius suggests “aliter.”

^[8351] See Acts vi. 1-6. [But the identity is doubtful.]

^[8352] So Oehler gives in his text. But his suggestion, given in a note, is perhaps preferable: “and of execrable embraces and permixtures, and obscene conjunctions.”

^[8353] See Rev. ii. 6.

Chapter II.—Ophites, Cainites, Sethites.

^[8354] Or, “Serpentarians,” from ὄφις, a serpent.

^[8355] See Gen. iii. 1-7.

^[8356] See Num. xxi. 4-9.

^[8357] John iii. 14.

^[8358] Eucharistia (neut. pl.) = εὐχαριστεῖα (Fr. Junius in Oehler): perhaps “the place in which they celebrate the eucharist.”

^[8359] These words are intended to give the force of the “illo” of the original.

^[8360] Roberston (Ch. Hist. i. p. 39, note 2, ed. 2. 1858) seems to take this word to mean “Son of Darkness or Chaos.”

^[8361] “Seque” Oehler reads here, which appears bad enough Latin, unless his “se” after “extendisse” is an error.

^[8362] Or, “heaven.”

^[8363] Or, “what the upper regions were.”

^[8364] Filio Deo.

^[8365] Or, “she;” but perhaps the text is preferable.

^[8366] See Gen. iii. 1-7.

^[8367] See de Bapt. c. i.

^[8368] Mundi.

^[8369] Or, Sethoites.

^[8370] “Dicerent;” but Routh (I think) has conjectured “disceret” “when she learned,” etc., which is very simple and apt.

^[8371] See 1 Pet. iii. 20.

^[8372] Cf. Gen. ix. 1-2, 7, 19.

Chapter III.—Carpocrates, Cerinthus, Ebion.

^[8373] Mundum.

^[8374] Mundum.

^[8375] “Ab illis” is perhaps an error for “ab angelis,” by absorption of the first syllable. So Routh has conjectured before me.

^[8376] “Ab angelis:” an erroneous notion, which professed probably to derive support from John i. 17, Acts vii. 53, Gal. iii. 19, where, however, the Greek prepositions should be carefully noted, and ought in no case to be rendered by “ab.”

^[8377] Al. Hebion.

^[8378] Al. Hebion.

^[8379] See Matt. x. 24; Luke iv. 40; John xiii. 16.

^[8380] i.e., as Rig.’s quotation from Jerome’s Indiculus (in Oehler) shows, “because in so far as, Christ observed it.”

Chapter IV.—Valentinus, Ptolemy and Secundus, Heracleon.

^[8381] Conjugationes. Cowper uses our word “conjugation” in this sense in one of his humorous pieces. [“Pairing-time.”] The “syzygies” consisted of one male and one female Æon each.

^[8382] Oehler separates “in primis;” but perhaps they ought to be united—“inprimis,” or “imprimis”—and taken as ="primo ab initio.”

^[8383] Bythus.

^[8384] Hominem.

^[8385] “Sermone:” he said “Verbum” before.

^[8386] In defectione fuisse.

^[8387] Cf. adv. Valent. cc. x. xiv. [Routh says that this IAO (see note 8) is wanting in the older editions. It was borrowed from the Adv. Valentin. to eke out a defect.]

^[8388] Such appears to be the meaning of this sentence as Oehler gives it. But the text is here corrupt; and it seems plain there must either be something lost relating to this “Achamoth,” or else some capital error in the reading, or, thirdly, some gross and unaccountable confusion in the writer: for the sentence as it stands is wholly irreconcilable with what follows. It evidently makes “Achamoth” identical with “the thirtieth Æon” above-named; and yet, without introducing any fresh subject, the writer goes on to state that this despondent Œon, who “conceived and bare,” was itself the offspring of despondency, and made an infirm world out of the infirm materials which “Achamoth” supposed it with. Now it is apparent from other sources—as, for instance, from Tert. adv. Valentin, above referred to—that the “thirtieth Æon” was supposed to be female, Sophia (Wisdom) by name, and that she was said to be the parent of “Achamoth,” or “Enthymesis” (see adv. Valentin. cc. ix. x. xi. xiv. xxv.), while “Achamoth” herself appears by some accounts to be also called κάτω Σοφία. The name “Achamoth” itself, which Tertullian (adv. Valentin. c. xiv. ad init.) calls an “uninterpretable name,” is believed to be a representation of a Hebrew word meaning “wisdom;” and hence, possibly, some of the confusion may have arisen,—from a promiscuous use, namely, of the titles “Achamoth” and “Sophia.” Moreover, it would appear that some words lower down as to the production by “Achamoth” of “Demiurgus,” must have dropped out. Unless these two omissions be supplied, the passage is wholly unintelligible. Can the fact that the Hebrew word which “Achamoth” represents is a fem. pl. in any way explain this confused medley, or help to reconcile conflicting accounts? The ἄνω and κάτω Σοφία seem to point in some degree to some such solution of some of the existing difficulties. “Iao,” again, is a word which has cause much perplexity. Can it possibly be connected with ἰάομαι, “to heal?” [See note 8.]

^[8389] Mundum.

^[8390] Oehler’s suggestion is to vary the pointing so as to give this sense: “The resurrection of this flesh he denies. But of a sister-Law and prophets,” etc. But this seems even more harsh than the other.

^[8391] “Alter,” i.e., perhaps another of the same class.

^[8392] It seems almost necessary to supply some word here; and as “Monade” follows, it seemed simple to supply “Monada.”

Chapter V.—Marcus and Colarbasus.

^[8393] See Rev. i. 7; xxi. 6; xxii. 13.

^[8394] Denique Jesum Christum descendisse. So Oehler, who does not notice any conjectural emendation, or various reading, of the words. If correct, his reading would refer to the views of a twofold Jesus Christ—a real and a phantasmal one—held by docetic Gnostics, or to such views as Valentine’s, in whose system, so far as it is ascertainable from the confused and discrepant account of it, there would appear to have been one Æon called Christ, another called Jesus, and a human person called Jesus and Christ, with whom the true Jesus associated Himself. Some such jumble of ideas the two heretics now under review would seem to have held, if Oehler’s be the true reading. But the difficulties are somewhat lessened if we accept the very simple emendation which naturally suggests itself, and which, I see, Semler has proposed and Routh inclines to receive, “in Jesum Christum descendisse,” i.e. “that Christ descended on Jesus.”

^[8395] See Matt. iii. 13-17; Mark i. 9-11; Luke iii. 21-22; John i. 29-34.

^[8396] Habere secum numerum DCCCI. So Oehler, after Jos. Scaliger, who, however, seems to have read “secum hunc numerum,” for the ordinary reading, “habere secundum numerum,” which would mean, “represents, in the way of numerical value, DCCCI.”

Chapter VI.—Cerdo, Marcion, Lucan, Apelles.

^[8397] Initia duo.

^[8398] Sævum.

^[8399] Mundi.

^[8400] “Ponticus genere,” lit. “a Pontic by race,” which of course may not necessarily, like our native, imply actual birth in Pontus. [Note—“son of a bishop:” an index of early date, though not necessarily Ante-Nicene. A mere forgery of later origin would have omitted it.]

^[8401] Rig., with whom Oehler agrees, reminds us that neither in the de Præscr. nor in the adv. Marc., nor, apparently, in Irenæus, is any such statement brought forward.

^[8402] See Matt. vii. 17.

^[8403] See de Præscr. c. xxx., and comp. with it what is said of Marcion above.

^[8404] Mundum.

^[8405] Mundi.

^[8406] “Aëream,” i.e., composed of the air, the lower air, or atmosphere; not “aetheream,” of the upper air, or ether.

^[8407] Phaneroseis. Oehler refers to de Præscr. c. xxx. q. v.

^[8408] φιλουμένη, “loved one.”

Chapter VII.—Tatian, Cataphrygians, Cataproclans, Catæschinetans.

^[8409] Salvi. Perhaps if it be questionable whether this word may be so rendered in a correct Latinist, it may be lawful to render it so in so incorrect a one as our present author.

^[8410] i.e. followers of Proclus.

^[8411] i.e. followers of Æschines. So this writer takes “Cataphryges” to mean followers of the Phrygians.”

Chapter VIII.—Blastus, Two Theodoti, Praxeas.

^[8412] Negavit. See de Idol. c. xxiii. note 1.

^[8413] Hominem solitarium atque nudum. The words seems to mean, destitute of anything superhuman.

^[8414] Et ipsum hominem Christum tantummodo. I rather incline to read, as in the preceding sentence, “et ipse”: “and himself affirms Christ to have been merely human, conceived alike,” etc.

^[8415] See Ps. cx. 4, and the references there.

^[8416] The Latin here is very careless, unless, with Routh, we suggest “et” for “eo,” and render: “and that what Christ does,” etc., “Melchizedek does,” etc.

^[8417] See Heb. vii. 1-3.

^[8418] Who he is, no one knows. Oehler (following the lead of Fabricius on Philaster, cap. 49, p. 102) believes the name to be a mistake for Victor, a bishop of Rome, who (see Adv. Prax. c. i.) had held the episcopate when Praxeas was there. His successor was Zephyrinus; and it is an ingenious conjecture of Oehler, that these two names, the one written as a correction of the other, may have been confused: thus, Victor/Zephrynus; and thus of the two may have been made Victorinus.

^[8419] The form and order of the words here used are certainly remarkably similar to the expressions and order of the “Apostles’ Creed.”

 

 

 Search Comments 

 

This page has been visited 0697 times.

 

<<

Contents

>>