Archelaus (Cont.)The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes. (Cont.)

36. None of your party277 O Manes, will you make a Galatian; neither will you in this fashion divert us278 from the faith of Christ. Yea, even although you were to work signs and wonders, although you were to raise the dead, although you were to present to us the very image of Paul himself, you would remain accursed still.279 For we have been instructed beforehand with regard to you: we have been both warned and armed against you by the Holy Scriptures. You are a vessel of Antichrist; and no vessel of honour, in sooth, but a mean and base one, used by him as any barbarian or tyrant may do, who, in attempting to make an inroad on a people living under the righteousness of the laws,280 sends some select vessel on beforehand, as it were destined to death, with the view of finding out the exact magnitude and character of the strength possessed by the legitimate king and his nation: for the man is too much afraid to make the inroad himself wholly at unawares, and he also lacks the daring to despatch any person belonging to his own immediate circle on such a task, through fear that he may sustain some harm. And so it is that your king, Antichrist, has despatched you in a similar character, and as it were destined to death, to us who are a people placed under the administration of the good and holy King. And this I do not say inconsiderately or without due inquiry; but from the fact that I see you perform no miracle, I hold myself entitled to entertain such sentiments concerning you. For we are given to understand beforehand that the devil himself is to be transformed into an angel of light, and that his servants are to make their appearance in similar guise, and that they are to work signs and wonders, insomuch that, if it were possible, the very elect should be deceived. (Mat_24:24) But who, pray, are you then, to whose lot no such position of kinship has been assigned by your father Satan?281 For whom have you raised from the dead? What issue of blood do you ever staunch? What282 eyes of the blind do you ever anoint with clay, and thus cause them to have vision? When do you ever refresh a hungering multitude with a few loaves? Where do you ever walk upon the water, or who of those who dwell in Jerusalem has ever seen you? O Persian barbarian, you have never been able to have a knowledge of the language of the Greeks, or of the Egyptians, or of the Romans, or of any other nation; but the Chaldean tongue alone has been known to you, which verily is not a language prevalent among any great number of people,283 and you are not capable of understanding any one of another nationality when he speaks. Not thus is it with the Holy Spirit: God forbid; but He divides to all, and knows all kinds of tongues, and has understanding of all things, and is made all things to all men, so that the very thoughts of the heart cannot escape His cognizance. For what says the Scripture? “That every man heard the apostles speak in his own language through the Spirit, the Paraclete.” (Act_2:6) But why should I say more on this subject?284 Barbarian285 priest and crafty coadjutor of Mithras, you will only be a worshipper of the sun-god Mithras, who is the illuminator of places of mystic import, as you opine, and the self-conscious deity;”286 that is, you will sport as his worshippers do, and you will celebrate, though with less elegance as it were, his mysteries.287 But why should I take all this so indignantly? Is it not accordant with all that is fitting, that you should multiply yourself like the tares, until that same mighty father of yours comes, raising the dead, as he will profess to do, and persecuting almost to hell itself all those who refuse to yield to his bidding, keeping multitudes in check by that terror of arrogance in which he entrenches himself, and employing threatenings against others, and making sport of them by the changing of his countenance and his deceitful dealing?288 And yet beyond that he shall proceed no further; for his folly shall be made manifest to all men, as was the case with Jannes and Mambres. (2Ti_3:8, 2Ti_3:9) The judges said: As we have heard now from you, as Paul himself also seems to tell us, and, further, as we have learned likewise from the earlier account given in the Gospel, an introduction to preaching, or teaching, or evangelizing, or prophesying, is not, in this life at least, held out on the same terms to any person in times subsequent to the apostle’s:289 and if the opposite appears ever to be the case, the person can only be held to be a false prophet or a false Christ. Now, since yon have alleged that the Paraclete was in Paul, and that He attested all things in him, how is it that Paul himself said, “We know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away?” (1Co_13:9, 1Co_13:10) What other one did he look for, when he uttered these words? For if he professes himself to be looking for some perfect one, and if some one must needs come, show us who it is of whom he speaks; lest that word of his perchance appear to carry us back to this man, Manes, or to him who has sent him, that is to say, Satan, according to your affirmation. But if you admit that that which is perfect is yet to come, then this excludes Satan; and if you look for the coming of Satan, then that excludes the perfect.

37. Archelaus said: Those sayings which are put forth by the blessed Paul were not uttered without the direction of God, and therefore it is certain that what he has declared to us is that we are to look for our Lord Jesus Christ as the perfect one, who290 is the only one that knows the Father, with the sole exception of him to whom He has chosen also to reveal Him, (Mat_11:27) as I am able to demonstrate from His own words. But let it be observed, that it is said that when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. Now this man (Manes) asserts that he is the perfect one. Let him show us, then, what he has done away with; for what is to be done away with is the ignorance which is in us. Let him therefore tell us what he has done away with, and what he has brought into the sphere of our knowledge. If he is able to do anything of this nature, let him do it now, in order that he may be believed. These very words of Paul’s, if one can but understand them in the full power of their meaning, will only secure entire credit to the statements made by me. For in that first Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul speaks in the following terms of the perfection that is to come: “Whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall be destroyed: for we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” (1Co_13:8-10) Observe now what virtue that which is perfect possesses in itself, and of what order that perfection is. And let this man, then, tell us what prophecy of the Jews or Hebrews he has done away with; or what tongues he has caused to cease, whether of the Greeks or of others who worship idols; or what alien dogmas he has destroyed, whether of a Valentinian, or a Marcion, or a Tatian, or a Sabellius, or any others of those who have constructed for themselves their peculiar systems of knowledge. Let him tell us which of all these he has already done away with, or when he is yet to do away with any one of them, in this character of the perfect one. Perchance he seeks some sort of truce – does he?291 But not thus inconsiderable, not thus obscure292 and ignoble, will be the manner of the advent of Him who is the truly perfect one, that is to say, our Lord Jesus Christ. Nay, but as a king, when he draws near to his city, does first of all send on before him his life-guardsmen,293 his ensigns and standards and banners,294 his generals and chiefs and prefects, and then forthwith all objects are roused and excited in different fashions, while some become inspired with terror and others with exultation at the prospect of the king’s advent; so also my Lord Jesus Christ, who is the truly perfect one, at His coming will first send on before Him His glory, and the consecrated heralds of an unstained and untainted kingdom: and then the universal creation will be moved and perturbed, uttering prayers and supplications, until He delivers it from its bondage. (Rom_8:21, Rom_8:22) And it must needs be that the race of man shall then be in fear and in vehement agitation on account of the many offences it has committed. Then the righteous alone will rejoice, as they look for the things which have been promised them; and the subsistence of the affairs of this world will no longer be maintained, but all things shall be destroyed: and whether they be prophecies or the books of prophets, they shall fail; whether they be the tongues of the whole race, they shall cease; for men will no longer need to feel anxiety or to think solicitously about those things which are necessary for life; whether it be knowledge, by what teachers soever it be possessed, it shall also be destroyed: for none of all these things will be able to endure the advent of that mighty King. For just as a little spark, if295 taken and put up against the splendour of the sun, at once perishes from the view, so the whole creation, all prophecy, all knowledge, all tongues, as we haw said above, shall be destroyed. But since the capacities of common human nature are all insufficient to set forth in a few words, and these so weak and so extremely poor, the coming of this heavenly King, – so much so, indeed, that perchance it should be the privilege only of the saintly and the highly worthy to attempt any statement on such a subject, – it may yet be enough for me to be able to say that I have advanced what I have now advanced on that theme on the ground of simple necessity, – compelled, as I have been, to do thus much by this person’s importunity, and simply with the view of showing you what kind of character he is.

38. And, in good truth, I hold Marcion, and Valentinian, and Basilides, and other heretics, to be sainted men when compared296 with this person. For they did display a certain kind of intellect, and they did, indeed, think themselves capable of understanding all Scripture, and did thus constitute themselves leaders297 for those who were willing to listen to them. But notwithstanding this, not one of these dared to proclaim himself to be either God, or Christ, or the Paraclete, as this fellow has done, who is ever disputing, on some occasions about the ages,298 and on others about the sun, and how these objects were made, as though he were superior to them himself; for every person who offers an exposition of the method in which any object has been made, puts himself forward as superior to and older than the subject of his discussion. But who may venture to speak of the substance of God, unless, it may be, our Lord Jesus Christ alone? And, indeed, I do not make this statement on the bare authority of my own words, but I confirm it by the authority of that Scripture which has been our instructor. For the apostle addresses the following words to us: “That ye may be lights in this world, holding299 the word of life for my glory against the day of Christ, seeing that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.” (Phi_2:13) We ought to understand what is the force and meaning of this saying; for the word may suit the leader, but the effectual work suits the king.300 And accordingly, as one who looks; for the arrival of his king, strives to be able to present all who are under his charge as obedient, and ready, and estimable, and lovely, and faithful, and not less also as blameless, and abounding in all that is good, so that he may himself get commendation from the king, and be deemed by him to be worthy of greater honours, as having rightly governed the province which was entrusted to his administration; so also does the blessed Paul give us to understand our position when he uses these words: “That ye may be as lights in this world, holding the word of life for my glory against the day of Christ.” For the meaning of this saying is, that our Lord Jesus Christ, when He comes, will see that his doctrine has proved profitable in us, and that, finding that he, the apostle, has not run in vain, neither laboured in vain, He will bestow on him the crown of recompense. And again, in the same epistle, he also warns us not to mind earthly things, and tells us that we ought to have our conversation in heaven; from which also we look for the Saviour, our Lord Jesus Christ. (Phi_3:19) And as the knowledge of the date of the last day is no secure position for us, he has given us, to that effect, a declaration on the subject in the epistle which he wrote to the Thessalonians, thus: “But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you; for yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.” (1Th_5:1, 1Th_5:2) How, then, does this man stand up and try, to persuade us to emigrate his opinions, importuning every individual whom he meets to become a Manichaean, and going about and creeping into houses, and endeavouring to deceive minds laden with sins?301 But we do not hold such sentiments. Nay, rather, we should be disposed to present the things themselves before you all, and bring them into comparison, if it please you, with what we know of the perfect Paraclete. For you observe that302 sometimes he uses the interrogative style, and sometimes the deprecatory. But in the Gospel of our Saviour it is written that those who stand on the left hand of the King will say: “Lord, when saw we Thee an hungered, or athirst, or naked, or a stranger, or in prison, and did not minister unto Thee?” (Mat_25:44) Thus they will implore Him to be indulgent with them. But what reply is that righteous Judge and King represented as making to them? “Depart from me into everlasting fire, ye workers of iniquity.” (Mat_25:46; Luk_13:27) He casts them into everlasting fire, although they cease not to direct their entreaties to Him. Do you see, then, O Manes, what manager of event that advent of the perfect King is destined to be? Do you not perceive that it will not be such a perfection, or consummation, as you allege? But if the great day of judgment is to be looked for after that King surely this man is greatly inferior to Him. But if he is inferior, he cannot be perfect. And if he is not to be perfect, it is not of him that the apostle speaks. But if it is not of him that the apostle speaks, while he still makes the mendacious statement that it is of himself that the said word of the apostle was spoken, then surely he is to be judged a false prophet. Much more, too, might be said to the same effect. But if we were to think of going over in detail all that might thus be adduced, time would fail us for the accomplishment of so large a task. Hence I have deemed it abundantly sufficient thus to have brought under your notice only a few things out of many, leaving the yet remaining portions of such a discussion to those who have the inclination to go through with them.

39. On hearing these matters, those who were present gave great glory to God, and ascribed to Him such praise as it is meet for Him to receive. And on Archelaus himself they bestowed many tokens of honour. Then Marcellus rose up; and casting off his cloak.303 he threw his arms round Archelaus, and kissed him, and embraced him, and clung to him. Then, too, the children who had chanced to gather about the place began and set the example of pelting Manes and driving him off;304 and the rest of the crowd followed them, and moved excitedly about, with the intention of compelling Manes to take to flight. But when Archelaus observed this, he raised his voice like a trumpet above the din, in his anxiety to restrain the multitude, and addressed them thus: “Stop, my beloved brethren, lest mayhap we be found to have the guilt of blood on us at the day of judgment; for it is written of men like this, that ‘there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.’” (1Co_11:19) And when he had uttered these words, the crowds of people were quieted again.305 – Now, because it was the pleasure of Marcellus that this disputation should have a place given it,306 and that it should also be described, I could not gainsay his wish, but trusted to the kind consideration of the readers, believing that they would pardon me if my discourse should sound somewhat inartistic or boorish: for the great thing which we have had in view has been, that the means of knowing what took place on this occasion should not fail to be brought within the reach of all who desired to understand the subject. Thereafter, it must be added, when Manes had once taken to flight, he made his appearance nowhere there again. His attendant Turbo, however, was handed over by Marcellus to Archelaus; and on Archelaus ordaining him as a deacon, he remained in the suite of Marcellus. But Manes in his flight came to a certain village which was at a considerable distance from the city, and bore the name of Diodorus. Now in that place there was also a presbyter whose name likewise was Diodorus,307 a man of quiet and gentle disposition, and well reputed both for his faith and for the excellence of his general character. Now when, on a certain day, Manes had gathered a crowd of auditors around him, and was haranguing308 them, and putting before the people who were present certain outlandish assertions altogether foreign to the tradition of the fathers, and in no way apprehending any opposition that might be made to him on the part of any of these, Diodorus perceived that he was producing some effect by his wickedness, and resolved then to send to Archelaus a letter couched in the following terms: – 

Diodorus sends greeting to Bishop Archelaus,309

40. I wish you to know, most pious father, that in these days there has arrived in our parts a certain person named Manes, who gives out that he is to complete the doctrine of the New Testament. And in the statements which he has made there have been some things, indeed, which may harmonize with our faith; but there have been also certain affirmations of his which seem very far removed from what has come down to us by the tradition of our fathers. For he has interpreted some doctrines in a strange fashion, imposing on them certain notions of his own, which have appeared to me to be altogether foreign and opposed to the faith. On the ground of these facts I have now been induced to write this letter to you, knowing the completeness and fulness of your intelligence in doctrine, and being assured that none of these things can escape your cognizance. Accordingly, I have also indulged the confident hope that you cannot be kept back by any grudge310 from explaining these matters to us. As to myself, indeed, it is not possible that I shall be drawn away into any novel doctrine; nevertheless, in behalf of all the less instructed, I have been led to ask a word with your authority. For, in truth, the man shows himself to be a person of extraordinary force of character, both in speech and in action; and indeed his very aspect and attire also bear that out. But I shall here write down for your information some few points which I have been able to retain in my memory out of all the topics which have been expounded by him: for I know that even by these few you will have an idea of the rest. You well understand, no doubt, that those who seek to set up any new dogma have the habit of very readily perverting into a conformity with their own notions any proofs they desire to take from the Scriptures.311 In anticipation, however, of this, the apostolic word marks out the case thus: “If any one preach any other gospel unto you than that which you have received, let him be accursed.” (Gal_1:8) And consequently, in addition to what has been once committed to us by the apostles, a disciple of Christ ought to receive nothing new as doctrine.312 But not to make what I have got to say too long, I return to the subject directly in view. This man then maintained that the law of Moses, to speak shortly, does not proceed from the good God, but from the prince of evil; and that it has no kinship with the new law of Christ, but is contrary and hostile to it, the one being the direct antagonist of the other. When I heard such a sentiment propounded, I repeated to the people that sentence of the Gospel in which our Lord Jesus Christ said of Himself: “I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil it.” (Mat_5:17) The man, however, averred that He did not utter this saying at all; for he held that when we find that He did abrogate313 that same law, we are bound to give heed, above all other considerations, to the thing which He actually did. Then he began to cite a great variety of passages from the law, and also many from the Gospel and from the Apostle Paul, which have the appearance of contradicting each other. All this he gave forth at the same time with perfect confidence, and without any hesitation or fear; so that I verily believe he has that serpent as his helper, who is ever our adversary. Well, he declared that there in the law God said, “I make the rich man and the poor man;” (Pro_22:2) while here in the Gospel Jesus called the poor blessed, (Mat_5:3) and added, that no man could be His disciple unless he gave up all that he had. (Luk_14:33) Again, he maintained that there Moses took silver and gold from the Egyptians when the people314 fled out of Egypt; (Exo_12:35) whereas Jesus delivered the precept that we should lust after nothing belonging to our neighbour. Then he affirmed that Moses had provided in the law, that an eye should be given in penalty for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; (Exo_21:24) but that our Lord bade us offer the other cheek also to him who smote the one. (Luk_6:29) He told us, too, that there Moses commanded the man to be punished and stoned who did any work on the Sabbath, and who failed to continue in all things that were written in the law, (Num_15:32) as in fact was done to that person who, yet being ignorant, had gathered a bundle of sticks on the Sabbath-day; whereas Jesus cured a cripple on the Sabbath, and ordered him then also to take up his bed. (Mar_2:11) And further, He did not restrain His disciples from plucking the ears of corn and rubbing them with their hands on the Sabbath-day, (Luk_6:1) which yet was a thing which it was unlawful to do on the Sabbaths. And why should I mention other instances? For with many different assertions of a similar nature these dogmas of his were propounded with the utmost energy and the most fervid zeal. Thus, too, on the authority of an apostle, he endeavoured to establish the position that the law of Moses is the law of death, and that the law of Jesus, on the contrary, is the law of life. For he based that assertion on the passage which runs thus: “In which also may God make us315 able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the ministration of death, engraven in letters on the stones,316 was made in glory, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away; how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be rather glorious? For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. For if that which shall be done away is glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.” (2Co_3:6-11) And this passage, as you are also well aware, occurs in the second Epistle to the Corinthians. Besides, he added to this another passage out of the first epistle, on which he based his affirmation that the disciples of the Old Testament were earthly and natural; and in accordance with this, that flesh and blood could not possess the kingdom of God. (1Co_15:46-50) He also maintained that Paul himself spoke in his own proper person when he said: “If I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.” (Gal_2:18) Further, he averred that the same apostle made this statement most obviously on the subject of the resurrection of the flesh when he also said that “he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh,” (Rom_2:28) and that according to the letter the law has in it no advantage. (Rom_4:1) And again he adduced the statement, that “Abraham has glory, but not before God;” (Rom_4:2) and that “by the law there comes only the knowledge of sin.” (Rom_3:20) And many other things did he introduce, with the view of detracting from the honour of the law, on the ground that the law itself is sin; by which statements the simpler people were somewhat influenced, as he continued to bring them forward; and in accordance with all this, he also made use of the affirmation, that “the law and the prophets were until John.” (Luk_16:16) He declared, however, that John preached the true kingdom of heaven; for verily he held, that by the cutting off of his head it was signified that all who went before him, and who had precedence over him, were to be cut off, and that what was to come after him was alone to be maintained. With reference to all these things, therefore, O most pious Archelaus, send us back a short reply in writing: for I have heard that you have studied such matters in no ordinary degree; and that capacity which you possess is God’s gift, inasmuch as God bestows these gifts upon those who are worthy of them, and who are His friends, and who show themselves allied to Him in community of purpose and life. For it is our part to prepare ourselves, and to approach the gracious and liberal mind,317 and forthwith we receive from it the most bountiful gifts. Accordingly, since the learning which I possess for the discussion of themes like these does not meet the requirements of my desire and purpose, for I confess myself to he an unlearned man, I have sent to you, as I have already said more than once, in the hope of obtaining from your hand the amplest solution to this question. May it be well with you, incomparable and honourable father!

41. On receiving this epistle, Archelaus was astonished at the man’s boldness. But in the meantime, as the case called for the transmission of a speedy reply, he immediately sent off a letter with reference to the statements made by Diodorus. That epistle ran in the following terms:318 – 

Archelaus sends greeting to the presbyter Diodorus, his honourable son.

The receipt of your letter has rejoiced me exceedingly, my dearly beloved friend. I have been given to understand, moreover, that this man, who made his way to me before these days, and sought to introduce a novel kind of knowledge here, different from what is apostolic and ecclesiastical, has also come to you. To that person, indeed, I gave no place: for presently, when we held a disputation together, he was confuted. And I could wish now to transcribe for your behoof all the arguments of which I made use on that occasion, so that by means of these you might get an idea of what that man’s faith is. But as that could be done only with leisure at my disposal, I have deemed it requisite, in view of the immediate exigency, to write a short reply to you with reference to what you have written me on the subject of the statements advanced by him. I understand, then, that his chief319 effort was directed to prove that the law of Moses is not consonant with the law of Christ; and this position he attempted to found on the authority of our Scriptures. Well, on the other hand, not only did we establish the law of Moses, and all things which are written in it, by the same Scripture; but we also proved that the whole Old Testament agrees with the New Testament, and is in perfect harmony with the same, and that they form really one texture, just as a person may see one and the same robe made up of weft and warp together.320 For the truth is simply this, that just as we trace the purple in a robe, so, if we may thus express it, we can discern the New Testament in the texture of the Old Testament; for we see the glory of the Lord mirrored in the same.321 We are not therefore to cast aside the mirror,322 seeing that it shows us the genuine image of the things themselves, faithfully and truly; but, on the contrary, we ought to honour it all the more. Think you, indeed, that the boy who is brought by his paedagogue to the teachers of learning323 when he is yet a very little fellow, ought to hold that paedagogue in no honour324 after he has grown up to manhood, simply because he needs his services325 no longer, but can make his course without any assistance from that attendant to the schools, and quickly find his way to the lecture-rooms? Or, to take another instance, would it be right for the child who has been nourished on milk at first, after he has grown to be capable of receiving stronger meats, then injuriously to spurn the breasts of his nurse, and conceive a horror of them? Nay, rather he should honour and cherish them, and confess himself a debtor to their good services. We may also make use, if it please you, of another illustration. A certain man on one occasion having noticed an infant exposed on the ground and already suffering excessively, picked it up, and undertook to rear it in his own house until it should reach the age of youth, and sustained all the toils and anxieties which are wont to fall to the lot of those who have to bring up children. After a time, however, it happened that he who was the child’s natural father came seeking the boy, and found him with this person who had brought him up.326 What ought this boy to do on learning that this is his real father? For I speak, of course, of a boy of the right type. Would he not see to it, that he who had brought him up should be recompensed with liberal gifts; and would he not then follow his natural father, having his proper inheritance in view?327 Even so, then, I think we must suppose that that distinguished servant of God, Moses, in a manner something like this, found328 a people afflicted by the Egyptians; and he took this people to himself, and nurtured them in the desert like a father, and instructed them like a teacher, and ruled them as a magistrate. This people he also preserved against the coming of him whose people they were. And after a considerable period the father329 did come, and did receive, his sheep. Now will not that guardian be honoured in all things by him to whom he delivered that flock; and will he not be glorified by those who have been preserved by him? Who, then, can be so senseless, my dearly beloved Diodorus, as to say that those are aliens to each other who have been allied with each other, who have prophesied in turn for each other, and who have shown signs and wonders which are equal and similar, the one to the other, and of like nature with each other;330 or rather, to speak in truth, which belong wholly to the same stock the one with the other? For, indeed, Moses first said to the people: “A Prophet will the Lord our God raise up unto you, like unto me.” (Deu_18:18) And Jesus afterwards said: “For Moses spake of me.” (Joh_5:46) You see331 how these twain give the right hand to each other, although332 the one was the prophet and the other was the beloved Son, (See Heb_3:5, Heb_3:6) and although in the one we are to recognise the faithful servant, but in the other the Lord Himself. Now, on the other hand, I might refer to the fact, that one who of old was minded to make his way to the schools without the paedagogue was not taken in by the master. For the master said: “I will not receive him unless he accepts the paedagogue.” And who the person is, who is spoken of under that figure, I shall briefly explain. There was a certain rich man, (Luk_16:19, etc.) who lived after the manner of the Gentiles, and passed his time in great luxury every day; and there was also another man, a poor man, who was his neighbour, and who was unable to procure even his daily bread. It happened that both these men departed this life, that they both descended into the grave,333 and that the poor man was conveyed into the place of rest, and so forth, as is known to you. But, furthermore, that rich man had also five brothers, living as he too had lived, and disturbed by no doubt as to lessons which they had learned at home from such a master. The rich man then entreated that these should be instructed in the superior doctrine together and at once.334 But Abraham, knowing that they still stood in need of the paedagogue, said to him: “They have Moses and the prophets.” For if they received not these, so as to have their course directed by him, i.e., Moses, as by a paedagogue, they would not be capable of accepting the doctrine of the superior master.

42. But I shall also offer, to the best of my ability, some expositions of the other words referred to; that is to say, I shall show that Jesus neither said nor did aught that was contrary to Moses. And first, as to the word, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,” (Mat_5:32) – that is the expression of justice. And as to His injunction, that a man, when struck on the one cheek, should offer the other also, that is the expression of goodness. Well, then, are justice and goodness opposed to each other? Far from it! There has only been an advance from simple justice to positive goodness. And again, we have the saying, “The workman is worthy of his hire.” (Mat_10:10) But if a person seeks to practise any fraud therein, it is surely most just335 that what he has got possession of by fraud should be required of him, most especially when the hire is large. Now this I say, that when the Egyptians afflicted the children of Israel by the taskmasters who were set over them in the process of making bricks, Moses required and exacted the whole at once, with penalties, within one moment of time. But is this, then, to be called iniquity? Far from it! Surely it is the abstinence336 of goodness, indeed, when one makes but a moderate use of what is really necessary, and gives up all that goes beyond that. Let us look, again, at the fact that in the Old Testament we find the words, “I make the rich man and the poor man,” (Pro_22:2) whereas Jesus calls the poor blessed. (Mat_5:3) Well, in that saying Jesus did; not refer to those who are poor simply in worldly substance, but to those who are poor in spirit, that is to say, who are not inflamed337 with pride, but have the gentle and lowly dispositions of humility, not thinking of themselves more than they ought to think. (Rom_12:3) This question, however, is one which our adversary has not propounded correctly. For here I perceive that Jesus also looks on willingly at the gifts of the rich men, when they are put into the treasury. (Mar_12:41) All too little, at the same time, is it338 if gifts are cast into339 the treasury by the rich alone; and so there are the two mites of the poor widow which are also received with gladness; and in that offering verily something is exhibited that goes beyond what Moses prescribed on the subject of the receipt of moneys. For he received gifts from those who had; but Jesus receives them even from those who have not. But this man says, further, that it is written, that “except a man shall forsake all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luk_14:33) Well, I observe again, that the centurion, a man exceedingly wealthy and well dowered with worldly influence, possessed a faith surpassing that of all Israel; (Mat_8:10) so that, even if there was any one who had forsaken all, that man was surpassed in faith by this centurion. But some one may now reason with us thus: It is not a good thing, consequently, to give up riches. Well, I reply that it is a good thing for those who are capable of it; but, at the, same time, to employ340 riches for the work of righteousness and mercy, is a thing as acceptable as though one were to give up the whole at once. Again, as to the assertion that the Sabbath has been abolished, we deny that He has abolished it plainly;341 for He was Himself also Lord of the Sabbath. (Mat_12:8) And this, the law’s relation to the Sabbath, was like the servant who has charge of the bridegroom’s chamber, and who prepares the same with all carefulness, and does not suffer it to be disturbed or touched by any stranger, but keeps it intact against the time of the bridegroom’s arrival; so that when he is come, the same may be used as it pleases himself, or as it is granted to those to use it whom he has bidden enter along with him. And the Lord Jesus Christ Himself gave His testimony to what we affirm, when He said with His heavenly voice, “Can ye make the children of the bride-chamber fast so long as the bridegroom is with them?”342 And again, He did not actually reject circumcision; but we should rather say that He received in Himself and in our stead the cause of circumcision,343 relieving us by what He Himself endured, and not permitting us to have to suffer any pain to no purpose.344 For what, indeed, can it profit a man to circumcise himself, if nevertheless he cherishes the worst of thoughts against his neighbour? He desired, accordingly, rather to open up to us the ways of the fullest life by a brief path,345 lest perchance, after we had traversed lengthened courses of our own, we should find our day prematurely closing upon us in night, and lest, while outwardly indeed we might appear splendid to men’s view, we should inwardly be comparable only to ravening wolves, (Mat_7:15) or be likened to whited sepulchres. (Mat_23:27) For far above any person of that type of character is to be placed the man who, although clad only in squalid and threadbare attire, keeps no evil hidden in his heart against his neighbour. For it is only the circumcision of the heart that brings salvation; and that merely carnal circumcision can be of no advantage to men, unless they happen also to he fortified with the spiritual circumcision. Listen also to what Scripture has to say on this subject: “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God?” (Mat_5:8) What need, therefore, is there for me to labour and suffer, seeing that I have been made acquainted with the compendious way of life,346 and know that it shall he mine if only I can be pure in heart? And that is quite in accordance with the truth which we have learned now, to wit, that if one prevails in the keeping of the two commandments, he fulfils the whole law and the prophets. (Mat_7:12) Moreover Paul, the chief of the apostles, after all these sayings, gives us yet clearer instruction on the subject, when be says, “Or seek yea proof of that Christ who speaketh in me?” (2Co_13:3) What have I then to do with circumcision, seeing that I may be justified in uncircumcision? For it is written: “Is any man circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Or is any in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised. For neither of these is anything, but only the keeping of the commandments of God.” (1Co_7:18, 1Co_7:19) Consequently, as circumcision is incompetent to save any, it is not greatly to be required, especially when we see that if a man has been called in uncircumcision, and wishes then to be circumcised, he is made forthwith a transgressor347 of the law. For if I am circumcised, I also fulfil the commandments of the law with the view of being in a position to be saved; but if I am uncircumcised, and remain in uncircumcision, much more in keeping the commandments shall I have life. For I have received the circumcision of the heart, in the spirit, and not that of the letter in the mere ink,348 in which former there is praise, not of men, but of God. (Rom_2:29) Wherefore let no charge of this kind be brought against me. For just as the man of wealth, who possesses great treasures of gold and silver, so that he gets everything which is necessary for the uses of his house made of these precious metals, has no need to display any vessel of earthen-ware in anything belonging to his family and yet it does follow from this circumstance that the productions of the potter, or the art of making vessels of pottery,349 are to be held in abhor-fence by him; so also I, who have been made rich by the grace of God, and who have obtained the circumcision of the heart, cannot by any means350 stand in need of that most profitless fleshly circumcision, and yet, for all that, it does not follow that I should call it evil. Far be it from me to do so! If, however, any one desires to receive still more exact instruction on these matters, he will find them discussed with the greatest fulness in the apostle’s first epistle.351

43. I shall speak now with the utmost brevity of the veil of Moses and the ministration of death. For I do not think that these things at least can introduce very much to the disparagement of the law. The text in question,352 then, proceeds thus: “But if the ministration of death, engraven353 in letters on the stones, was made in glory, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away;” (2Co_3:7) and so on. Well, this passage at any rate acknowledges the existence of a glory on the countenance of Moses, and that surely is a fact favourable to our position. And even although it is to be done away. and although there is a veil in the reading of the same, that does not annoy me or disturb me, provided there be glory in it still. Neither is it the case, that whatever is to be done away is reduced thereby under all manner of circumstances to a condition of dishonour.354 For when the Scripture speaks of glory, it shows us also that it had cognizance355 of differences in glory. Thus it says: “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.” (1Co_15:21) Although, then, the sun has a greater glory than the moon, it does not follow that the moon is thereby reduced to a condition of dishonour. And even thus, too, although my Lord Jesus Christ excelleth Moses in glory, as the lord excelleth the servant, it does not follow from this that the glory of Moses is to be scorned. For in this way, too, we are able to satisfy our hearers, as the nature of the word itself carries the conviction356 with it in that we affirm what we allege on the authority of the Scriptures themselves, or verily make the proof of our statements all the clearer also by illustrations taken from them. Thus, although a person kindles a lamp in the night-time, after the sun has once risen he has no further need of the paltry light of his lamp, on account of that effulgence of the sun which sends forth its rays all the world over; and yet, for all that, the man does not throw his lamp contemptuously away, as if it were something absolutely antagonistic to the sun; but rather, when he has once found out its use, he will keep it with all the greater carefulness. Precisely in this way, then, the law of Moses served as a sort of guardian to the people, like the tamp, until the true Sun, who is our Saviour, should arise, even as the apostle also says to us: “And Christ shall give thee light.” (Eph_5:14) We must look, however, to what is said further on: “Their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil in the reading of the Old Testament; it is untaken away, because it is done away in Christ.357 For even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away. Now the Lord is that Spirit.” (2Co_3:14-17) What, then, is meant by this? Is Moses present with us even unto this day? Is it the case that he has never slept, that he has never gone to his rest, that he has never departed this life? How is it that this phrase “unto this day” is used here? Well, only mark the veil, which is placed, where he says it is placed, on their hearts in their reading. This, therefore, is the word of censure upon the children of Israel, because they read Moses and yet do not understand him, and refuse to turn to the Lord; for it is He that was prophesied of by Moses as about to come. This, then, is the veil which was placed upon the face of Moses, (Exo_34:33; 2Co_3:13) and this also is his testament;358 for he says in the law: (Gen_49:10-12) “A prince shall not be wanting from Judah, nor a leader from his thighs,359 until He come whose he is;360 and He will be the expectation of the nations: who shall bind361 His foal unto the vine, and His ass’s colt unto the choice vine; He shall wash His garments in wine, and His clothes in the blood of grapes; His eyes shall be suffused362 with wine, and His teeth white with milk;” and so on. Moreover, he indicated who He was, and whence He was to come. For he said: “The Lord God will raise up unto you, a Prophet from among your brethren, like unto me: unto Him hearken ye.” (Deu_18:15) Now it is plain that this cannot be understood to have been said of Jesus the son of Nun.363 For there is nothing of this circumcision364 found in him. After him, too, there have still been kings from Judah; and consequently this prophecy is far from being applicable to him. And this is the veil which is on Moses; for it was not, as some among the unlearned perhaps fancy, any piece of linen cloth, or any skin that covered his face. But the apostle also takes care to make this plain to us, when he tells us that the veil is put on in the reading of the Old Testament, inasmuch as they who are called Israel from olden time still look for the coming of Christ, and perceive not that the princes have been wanting from Judah, and the leaders from his thighs; as even at present we see them in subjection to kings and princes, and paying tribute to these, without having any power left to them either of judgment or of punishment, such as Judah certainly had, for after he had condemned Thamar, he was able also to justify her.365 “But you will also see your life hang (in doubt) before your eyes.”366

44. Now this word also has the veil. For up to the time of Herod they did appear to retain a kingdom in some sort; and it was by Augustus that the first enrolment took place among them, and that they began to pay tribute, and to be rated.367 Now it was also from the time when our Lord Jesus Christ began to be prophesied of and looked for that there began to be princes from Judah and leaders of the people; and these, again, failed just at the approach of His advent. If, then, the veil is taken away which is put on in that reading of theirs, they will understand the true virtue of the circumcision; and they will also discover that the generation of Him whom we preach, and His cross, and all the things that have happened in the history of our Lord, are those very matters which had been predicted of that Prophet. And I could wish, indeed, to examine every such passage of Scripture by itself, and to point out its import, as it is meet that it should be understood.368 But as it is another subject that is now urgent, these passages shall be discussed by us at some season of leisure. For at present, what I have already said may be sufficient for the purpose of showing, that it is not without reason that the veil is (said to be) put upon the heart of certain persons in the reading of the Old Testament. But those who turn to the Lord shall have the veil taken away from them. What precise force all these things, however, may possess, I leave to the apprehension of those who have sound intelligence. Let us come now again to that word of Moses, in which he says: “The Lord your God shall raise up a Prophet unto you, of your brethren, like unto me.” In this saying I perceive a great prophecy delivered by the servant Moses, as by one cognizant369 that He who is to come is indeed to be possessed of greater authority than himself, and nevertheless is to suffer like things with him, and to show like signs and wonders. For there, Moses after his birth was placed by his mother in an ark, and exposed beside the banks of the river; (Exo_2:1-25) here, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His birth by Mary His mother, was sent off in flight into Egypt through the instrumentality of an angel. (Mat_2:13) There, Moses led forth his people from the midst of the Egyptians, and saved them; (Exo_14:1-31) and here, Jesus, leading forth His people from the midst of the Pharisees, transferred them to an eternal salvation. (Mar_8:15) There, Moses sought bread by prayer, and received it from heaven, in order that he might feed the people with it in the wilderness; (Exo_16:1-36) here, my Lord Jesus by His own power satisfied370 with five loaves five thousand men in the wilderness. (Mat_14:1-36) There, Moses when he was tried was set upon the mountain and fasted forty days; (Exo_34:1-35) and here, my Lord Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness when He was tempted of the devil, and fasted in like manner forty days. (Mat_4:2) There, before the sight of Moses, all the first-born of the Egyptians perished on account of the treachery of Pharaoh; (Exo_12:1-51) and here, at the time of the birth of Jesus, every male among the Jews suddenly perished by reason of the treachery of Herod. (Mat_2:16) There, Moses prayed that Pharaoh and his people might be spared the plagues; (Exo_8:1-32) and here, our Lord Jesus prayed that the Pharisees might be pardoned, when He said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” (Luk_23:34) There, the countenance of Moses shone with the glory of the Lord, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look upon his face, on account of the glory of his countenance; (Exo_34:35) and here, the Lord Jesus Christ shone like the sun, (Mat_17:2) and His disciples were not able to look upon His face by reason of the glory of His countenance and the intense splendour of the light. There, Moses smote down with the sword those who had set up the calf; (Exo_32:1-35) and here, the Lord Jesus said, “I came to send a sword upon the earth, and to set a man at variance with his neighbour,” (Mat_10:34) and so on. There, Moses went without fear into the darkness of the clouds that carry water; (Exo_24:18) and here, the Lord Jesus walked with all power upon the waters. (Mat_14:25) There, Moses gave his commands to the sea; (Exo_14:1-31) and here, the Lord Jesus, when he was on the sea,371 rose and gave His commands to the winds and the sea. (Mat_8:26) There, Moses, when he was assailed, stretched forth his hands and fought against Amalek; (Exo_17:1-16) and here, the Lord Jesus, when we were assailed and were perishing by the violence of that erring spirit who works now hi the just,372 stretched forth His hands upon the cross, and gave us salvation. But there are indeed many other matters of this kind which I must pass by, my dearly beloved Diodorus, as I am in haste to send veil this little book with all convenient speed; and these omissions of mine you will be able yourself to supply very easily by your own intelligence. Write me, however, an account of all that this servant of the adversary’s cause may do hereafter. May the Omnipotent373 God preserve you whole in soul and in spirit!





277 The text gives “ex vobis.” But perhaps we should read “ex nobis” = none of us.

278 The Codex Casinensis has “Galatam facies vicit, o nostras feras,” for which we adopt the correction, “Galatam facies, nec ita nos.”

279 O Satan! The Codex Casinensis gives “anathema esse ana,” which may be an error, either for “anathema es, Satana,” or for “anathema es et maranatha.” [“O Satan” is less probable.]

280 The text is legum; for which regum, kings, is also suggested.

281 The text gives, “qui neque necessarium aliquem locum sortitus es,” etc. Routh proposes “necessarii.” The sense seems to be that Manes had nothing to prove any connection between him and Christ.

282 Reading “quos luto,” etc., for the “quod luto” of the codex.

283 [Note, against Canon Farrar and moderns, the persuasion of antiquity as to the miraculous gift of tongues; the charismata of others, also, besides the Apostles.] The text is, “quae ne in numerum quidem aliquem ducitur.”

284 The text gives “Quid dicabo,” which may stand for “quid dicam;” or perhaps the translator intends to use “dicare” in the sense of urge.

285 Reading barbare, for which the text offers barba.

286 Conscium. [For Mithras, see vol. 3, p. 475.]

287 In this sentence the sense is somewhat obscure, in consequence of the corruptions of the text in the codex. We adopt the emendations “locorum mysticorum” for mysteriorum, and “apud eos ludes” for ludis. In the end of the clause Migne gives, as in the translation, “et tanquam minus elegans,” etc. But Routh reads mimus = and like an elegant pantomimist, etc.

288 The Codex Casinensis gives the sentence thus: “…adveniat? suscitans mortuos? pene usque ad gehennam omnes persequens, qui si ut obtemperare noluerit, plurimos deterrens arrogantiae metu, Quod est ipse circumdatus, aliis adhibet minas vultus sui conversione circumdatio ludificat.” The emendations adopted by Migne and Routh consist in removing these two interrogative marks, and in reading qui sibi for qui si ut, noluerint for noluerit, quo est for Quod est, adhibens for adhibet, and et circumductione ludificans for the last two words.

289 The sense is again obscure throughout this sentence, owing to the state of the text. The codex gives us this clause, “nulli alio atque posterum,” etc., for which “nulli alii aeque in posterum” is proposed.

290 Reading “qui solus,” for the sed, etc., of the codex. See also Luk_10:22.

291 Inducias fortassis aliquas quaerit.

292 Reading “non plane, non tam obscure,” etc., instead of the “non plane nota,” etc., of the Codex Casinensis.

293 “Protectores,” on which term consult Ducangius in his Glossary.

294 Signa, dracones, labaros.

295 The text gives simply, sicut enim parva. We may adopt, with Routh, “sicut enim cum parva,” etc.

296 Reading “sic ut istius comparatione,” for the “sicut istius paratione” of the codex.

297 Reading se ductores, for the seductores, etc., of the codex.

298 Seculis.

299 Continentes.

300 The precise meaning and connection are somewhat obscure here. The text gives, “verbum enim ducis obtinet locum, opera vero regis.” And the idea is taken to be, that the actual work of thoroughly doing away with the ignorance of men was something that suited only the perfect King who was expected, and that had not been accomplished by Manes.

301 Alluding to 2Ti_3:6.

302 Routh inserts interdum poenitet = sometimes he uses the penitential style, which Migne omits.

303 The text gives the plural form stolas, perhaps for stolam.

304 The text gives fugere, apparently in the sense of fugare.

305 [Note the testimony against the persecution of heretics, – a characteristic of early Christians which too soon began to disappear, notably in Alexandria under Cyril.]

306 Excipi.

307 This Diodorus appears to be called Trypho by Epiphanius, on this Manichaean heresy, n. 11.

308 Reading concionaretur for continuaretur.

309 This epistle is also mentioned, and its argument noticed, by Epiphanius, Haeres., 11.

310 Invidia.

311 [Tertullian, vol. 3. p. 251, this series.]

312 [Against Scripture and the torrent of patristic testimony, the men of this generation have seen new dogmas imposed upon a great portion of Christendom by the voice of a single bishop, and without synodical deliberation or consent. The whole claim to “Catholicity” perishes wherever such dogmas are accepted.]

313 Resolvisse.

314 Reading cum populus for the cum populo of the text.

315 Faciat Deus.

316 In litteris formatum in lapidibus.

317 Reading “praeparare et proximos fieri benignae ac diviti menti” for “praeparet proximus fieri benigne hac,” etc., as it stands in the Codex Casinensis. Routh suggests “praeparare proximos fieri benignae ac diviti menti et continuo … consequemur” = to take care to draw near to the gracious and liberal mind, and then we shall forthwith receive steadily from it, etc.

318 This epistle is edited not only from the Codex Casinensis, but also by Valesius from the Codex Bobiensis. The most important varieties of reading shall therefore be noted.

319 Summum studium. But the Codex Bobiensis reads suum studium.

320 Reading “ex subtegmine atque stamine,” etc., with the Codex Bobiensis, instead of “subtemine et, quae stamine,” etc., as it is given in the Codex Casinensis. [A beautiful anticipation of Augustine’s dictum, “The New is veiled in the Old, the Old unveiled in the New.”

321 We read here “gloriam enim Domini in eodem speculamur.” The Codex Bobiensis is vitiated here, giving gloriam um Domini, which was changed by Valesius into gloriam Jesu, etc.

322 Reading, with the Codex Bobiensis, “speculum, cum nobis ipsam imaginem,” etc., instead of “speculum nobis per ipsam imaginem,” etc.

323 [Here is the liberal use of the word “paedagogue,” with which Clement took liberties. Vol. 2. p. 209, note 2, this series.] Adopting “qui ad doctores a paedagogo,” instead of “qui a doctore iis a paedagogo.”

324 “Dehonorare,” or, as in the Codex Bobiensis, “dehonestare.”

325 Reading “opera ejus non indiget.” But the Codex Casinensis gives “ore ejus,” etc.

326 The Codex Bobiensis reads here, “accidit vero post tempus ut is qui … requireret,” etc. The other codex has, “accedit vero post tempus is qui … requirere.”

327 Reading pro respectu with Codex Bobiensis. The other codex gives prospectu.

328 Reading invenisse. The Codex Casinensis gives venisse.

329 Routh suggests pastor, the shepherd, for pater.

330 Reading cognata, with Codex Bobiensis, instead of cognita.

331 We adopt the reading vides, instead of the faulty unde of the Codex Casinensis.

332 Reading quamvis for quum.

333 Infernum. [Sheol, rather, or Hades.]

334 The reading of the Codex Casinensis is, “rogavit dives simul uno tempore ut edisceret majorem doctrinam.” But the other codex gives, “uno tempore discere majorem doctrinam ab Abraham.” = entreated that he might learn the superior doctrine of Abraham. For edisceret we may read with Routh ediscerent.

335 The Codex Casinensis gives, “exige ab eo illa quae fraudem interceperat;” the other codex gives, “et exigi ab eo illa quae fraude interceperat.” The correct reading probably would be, “exigi ab eo illa quae per fraudem interceperat.”

336 We adopt the conjecture of Valesius, viz., abstinentia. The Codex Bobiensis gives absentia.

337 Reading inflammantur. It may perhaps be inflantur = puffed up.

338 Reading et parum hoc est, with Codex Bobiensis, instead of the et pauperum hoc est of Codex Casinensis. We may also render it as = “but it is far from being the case that gifts are cast,” etc.

339 The Codex Bobiensis reads inferuntur; the other codex gives offeruntur, offered.

340 The text gives sed abuti, and the Codex Bobiensis has sed et abuti. But the reading ought probably to be sed et uti, or sed etiam uti. Routh, however, notices that abutor is found with the sense of utor.

341 Plane.

342 Mar_2:19. [I have slightly accommodated the translation to this text.]

343 In semetipsum causam circumcisionis excepit.

344 [From Job (Job_2:10) to St. Paul (Heb_4:15 and 6-8) Scripture abounds in this teaching. Comp. Lam_3:33.]

345 The Codex Bobiensis gives, “viae compendiosum nobis tramitem demonstrare.” We adopt the reading, “viae spatia compendioso nobis tramite demonstrare.”

346 Compendia viae.

347 Reading “praevaricator” instead of “praedicator.” The sense would seem strictly to require, a debtor to the law.

348 Atramentum.

349 The Codex Bobiensis gives, “figuli opus afers aut fictilium.” The Codex Casinensis has, “figuli opus et ars aut fictilium.” We adopt “figuli opus aut ars fictilium.”

350 Adopting “nequaquam” for “nec quemquam.”

351 By this he means the Epistle to the Romans, to which the first place among the epistles of Paul was assigned from the most ancient times. In Epiphanius, under heresy 42, it is alleged as an offence against Marcion, that he put the Epistle to the Romans in the fourth place among Paul’s epistles. See a note in Migne. [Again, this expression is a note of genuine antiquity.]

352 Reading “propositus” for “propheticus.”

353 The Codex Casinensis has formatum; the other codex gives firmatum.

354 The text gives, “neque vero omingene in ignobilitatem redigitur,” etc. The Codex Bobiensis has, “neque vero omni genere in nobilitate.”

355 Reading “scisse se differentias gloriae,” etc. Codex Bobiensis gives scis esse, etc. = you know that there are differences.

356 Sicut et verbi ipsius natura persuadet. Reading “natura persuadet.” But the Codex Bobiensis gives demonstrat, demonstrates.

357 Non revelatur quia in Christo destruitur.

358 The text is, “hoc est velamen, quod erat positum super faciem Moysi, quod est testamentum ejus,” etc.

359 The reading in the text is, “non deficiet princeps ex Juda, neque jux de femoribus ejus usquequo veniat,” etc. Codex Bobiensis coincides, only giving “de femore ejus.” On the whole quotation, which is given in forms so diverse among the old versions and fathers, see Novatian, De Trin., ch. 9, and Cyprian, Adv. Judaeos, i. 21.

360 The text gives, “veniat, cujus est,” etc. Prudentius Maranus on Justin’s Apology, i. § 32, thinks this was originally an error of transcription for cui jus est, which reading would correspond very much with the ᾦ ἀπόκειται of some of the most ancient authorities. See Cotelerius on the Constitut. Apostol., i. 1, and the note in Migne.

361 Qui alligabit. But Codex Casinensis has “quia alligabit,” and Codex Bobiensis “qui alligavit.”

362 Suffusi oculi. Codex Bobiensis gives “effusi oculi.” See, on the whole, Grabe’s Dissert. De variis vitiis LXX. interpret., 19, p. 36.

363 We adopt the reading “Jesu Nave.” But the Codex Bobiensis gives “Jesu Mane.” See a discussion on this name by Cotelerius on the Epistle of Barnabas, ch. 12.

364 For circumcisionis Routh suggests circumstationis, which might perhaps be taken as = these surroundings do not suit him.

365 Gen_38:26. We read “justificare.” But the Codex Casinensis gives “justificari” = he (or she) could be justified.

366 The text is, “sed et videbitis vitam vestram pendentem ante oculos vestros.” The reference is apparently to Deu_28:66.

367 Censum dare.

368 Reading “sermonem, et ostendere ut intelligi dignum est.” The Codex Bobiensis gives a mutilated version: “sermonem, ut intelligi, dignum est.”

369 Reading “Moysi scientis,” which is the emendation of Valesius. But Codex Casinensis gives “scientibus,” and Codex Bobiensis has “scientes.”

370 Adopting “satiavit.” The Codex Bobiensis gives “saturavit.”

371 Reading “in mari.” But the Codex Bobiensis has in navi = or a ship.

372 The text gives in justis. But the Codex Bobiensis has in istis = in those men. The true reading may be in injustis = in the unrighteous. See Eph_2:2.

373 But the Codex Casinensis gives “Deus omnium” = the God of all.

6.05.05 Archelaus – Acts of Disputation 36-44