Essays on the work entitled "Supernatural Religion" Part 23

[96:1] _Phil._ -- 8.

[97:1] [Greek: ton autopton tes zoes tou Logou.] I would gladly translate this 'the eye-witnesses of the Word of Life' (comp. 1 John i.

1), as it is commonly taken; but I cannot get this out of the Greek order. Possibly there is an accidental transposition in the common text.

The Syriac translator has 'those who saw with their eyes the living Word.'

[97:2] Euseb. _H.E._ v. 20.

[98:1] Dodwell and Grabe explain the reference by a visit of Hadrian to Asia, which the former places A.D. 122, and the latter A.D. 129 (Grabe _Proleg._ sect. 1); but both these dates seem too early, even if there were no other objections. Ma.s.suet (_Diss. in Iren._ ii. sect. 2) considers that the expression does not imply the presence of the imperial court in Asia, but signifies merely that Florinus was a courtier in high favour with the Emperor. But Irenaeus could hardly have expressed himself so, if he had meant nothing more than this. The succeeding Emperor, Antoninus Pius (A.D. 138-161), spent his time almost entirely in Italy. Capitolinus says of him: 'Nec ullas expeditiones obiit, nisi quod ad agros suos profectus et ad Campaniam,' _Vit. Anton._ 7. He appears however to have gone to Egypt and Syria in the later years of his reign (Aristid. _Op._ i. p. 453, ed. Dind.), and the account of John Malalas would seem to imply that he visited Asia Minor on his return (p. 280, ed. Bonn.). But M. Waddington (_Vie du Rheteur aelius Aristide_ p. 259 sq) shows that he was still at Antioch in the early part of the year 155; so that this visit, if it really took place, is too late for our purpose.

As no known visit of a reigning Emperor will suit, I venture to offer a conjecture. About the year 136, T. Aurelius Fulvus was proconsul of Asia (Waddington _Fastes des provinces Asiatiques_ p. 724). Within two or three years from his proconsulate he was raised to the imperial throne, and is known as Antoninus Pius. Florinus may have belonged to his suite, and Irenaeus in after years might well call the proconsul's retinue, in a loose way, the 'royal court' by antic.i.p.ation. This explanation gives a visit of sufficient length, and otherwise fits in with the circ.u.mstances.

[98:2] Euseb. _H.E._ v. 15, 20.

[100:1] This at least seems to be the most probable meaning of [Greek: parech.o.r.ese ten eucharistian.]

[100:2] _H.E._ v. 24.

[101:1] Iren. iii. 3. 4.

[102:1] Quoted anonymously in Euseb. _H.E._ v. 28.

[103:1] Lipsius _Chronologie der Romischen Bischofe_ p. 263.

[103:2] See Jacobson's _Patres Apostolici_ ii. p. 604.

[103:3] See his _Memoire sur la Chronologie de la Vie du Rheteur aelius Aristide_ in the _Memoires de l'Academie des Inscriptions_ xxvi. p. 202 sq; and his _Fastes des provinces Asiatiques_ in Le Bas and Waddington's _Voyage Archeologique en Grece et en Asie Mineure_.

[104:1] _L'Antechrist_ p. 566.

[104:2] Lipsius in the _Zeitsch. f. Wissensch. Theol._ xvii. p. 188 (1874); Hilgenfeld _ib._ p. 325 sq.

[105:1] _S.R._ I. p. 276.

[105:2] It should be mentioned also that we have another exceptional guarantee in the fact that Polycarp's Epistle was read in the Church of Asia; Jerome _Vir. Ill._ 17, 'Usque hodie in Asiae conventu legitur.'

[108:1] _Phil._ -- 5.

[108:2] I believe that the facts stated in the text are strictly correct; but I may have overlooked some pa.s.sages. At all events a careful reader will, if I mistake not, observe a marked difference in the ordinary theological language of the two writers.

[109:1] [See above, p. 49 sq.]

[109:2] Ign. _Magn._ 13 is given by Lardner (p. 88) as a coincidence with 1 Pet. v. 5. But the expression in question, 'to be subject one to another,' occurs also in Ephes. v. 21, even if any stress could be laid on the occurrence of these few obvious words.

[110:1] _Altkatholische Kirche_ p. 584 sq (ed. 2).

[111:1] [See above, p. 63 sq.]

[111:2] [See above, p. 11.]

[112:1] Ritschl (_l.c._ p. 586), though himself condemning the thirteenth chapter as an interpolation, treats this objection as worthless, and says very decidedly that the corresponding Greek must have been [Greek: ton met' autou].

[112:1] _Fortnightly Review_, January, 1875, p. 14.

[114:1] I have collected several instances in _Philippians_ p. 138 sq.

[See also below, p. 189.]

[114:2] Polyc. _Phil._ -- 3.

[115:1] [See above, pp. 98, 103 sq.]

[115:2] The words of Irenaeus are, [Greek: kai autos de ho Polukarpos Markioni pote eis opsin auto elthonti k.t.l.] Zahn (_Ignatius_ p. 496) remarks on this that the [Greek: pote] refers us to another point of time than the sojourn of Polycarp in Rome mentioned in the preceding sentence. I could not feel sure of this; but it separates this incident from the others, and leaves the time indeterminate.

[116:1] In the _Letter to Florinus_, quoted above, p. 96 sq.

[116:2] Polyc. _Phil._ -- 7.

[117:1] _e.g._ Iren. i. 27. 2, 3; iii. 12. 12.

[118:1] Iren. i. 26. 1.

[118:2] This seems to be the form of heresy attacked in the Ignatian letters: _Magn._ 11; _Trall._ 9; _Smyrn._ 1.

[118:3] 1 John iv. 2, 3, 'Every spirit that confesseth Jesus Christ come ([Greek: eleluthota]) in the flesh is of G.o.d; and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of G.o.d.' I cannot refrain from expressing the suspicion that the correct reading in this second clause may be [Greek: luei], 'divideth' or 'dissolveth,' instead of [Greek: me h.o.m.ologei], 'confesseth not.' It is the reading of the Old Latin, of Irenaeus, of Tertullian, and of Origen; and Socrates (_H.E._ vii. 32) says that it was found 'in the old copies.' Though the pa.s.sages of Irenaeus and Origen are only extant in Latin versions, yet the contexts clearly show that the authors themselves so read it. It is difficult to conceive that the very simple [Greek: me h.o.m.ologei] would be altered into [Greek: luei], whereas the converse change would be easy. At all events [Greek: luei] must represent a very early gloss, dating probably from a time when the original reference of St John was obvious; and it well describes the Christology of Cerinthus. See the application in Irenaeus, iii. 16, 8 'Sententia eorum homicidialis... _Comminuens et per multa dividens_ Filium Dei; quos... Ioannes in praedicta epistola fugere eos praecepit dicens' etc.

[119:1] Die altesten Zeugnisse p. 41.

[119:2] _e.g._ 1 Cor. vi. 12-18, viii. 1 sq, etc.

[119:3] Rev. ii. 6, 14, 15, 20, 24.

[120:1] 1 Cor. xv. 12.

[120:2] 2 Tim. ii. 18.

[120:3] Iren. ii. 31. 2; Tertull. _de Resurr. Carn._ 19.

[120:4] Iren. i. 27. 3, Tertull. _adv. Marc._ v. 10, _de Praescr. Haer._ 33.

[120:5] See Neander _Church History_ ii. p. 147; and to the references there given add Iren. iii. 25. 2 'Alterum quidem _judicare_ et alterum quidem salvare dixerunt,' and sect. 3, 'Marcion igitur ipse dividens Deum in duo, alterum quidem bonum et alterum _judicialem_ dicens,' with the context.

[121:1] I might add also that it is directly stated in the account of his martyrdom (-- 13), that he was treated with every honour, [Greek: kai pro tes polias], 'even before his grey hairs,' as the words ran in Eusebius, _H.E._ iv. 15. The common texts subst.i.tute [Greek: kai pro tes marturias].

[122:1] Hilgenfeld (_Apost. Vater_ p. 273) evidently feels this difficulty, and apologises for it.

[123:1] This reference to 1 Tim. ii. 2 is pointed out in Jacobson's note.

[123:2] See above, p. 15 sq.