| << | Contents | >> |
Anti-Marcion
Show All Footnotes & Jump to 1968
Introduction, by the American Editor.
[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.
[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.]
Search Comments
This page has been visited 0697 times.
| << | Contents | >> |
10 per page