Anti-Marcion

Footnotes

^[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.

10 per page

Search Comments

This page has been visited 0697 times.

Contents