Work overview
Author

Homily XVI.

[1] [Homilies XVI.–XIX., giving the details of a second discussion with Simon at Laodicea, are peculiar to this narrative. Much of the matter finds a parallel in the longer account of the previous discussion at Cæsarea in Recognitions, ii. iii. (comp. Homily III.), but all the circumstances are different. Uhlhorn formerly regarded this portion of the Homilies as the nucleus of the entire literature. He has modified his view. An analysis of the discussion cannot be attempted; but in the footnote to Recognitions, ii. 19, a general comparison is given of the three accounts of discussions with Simon Magus.—R.]

[2] The word properly signifies the “sole government or monarchy of God.” It means that God alone is ruler.

[3] ἰδιώτης.

[4] τῶν παρὰ ᾽Ιουδαίοις δημοσίᾳ πεπιστευμένων βίβλων. The literal translation, given in the text, means that the Jews as a community believed in these books as speaking the truth. Cotelerius translates: “the books which were publically entrusted to the Jews.” One ms. reads, πεπιστωμενων, which might mean, “deemed trustworthy among the Jews.”

[5] δόγμα.

[6] One ms. and an Epitome have: “And you must address your arguments to another who acts as judge.”

[7] The words translated “error,” ψεῦσμα, and “to be in the right,” ἀληθεύειν, are, properly rendered, “falsehood,” and “to speak the truth.”

[8] The mss. read: “not otherwise.” The reading of the text is found in an Epitome.

[9] παραδείσῳ, “paradise.” Gen. ii. 16, 17.

[10] ἀναβλέψαι. It signifies either to look up, or to recover one’s sight. Possibly the second meaning is the one intended here, corresponding to the words of our version: “Then your eyes shall be opened.”

[17] Josh. xxiii. 7, LXX.

[18] Deut. x. 17.

[19] Ps. xxxv. 10, lxxxvi. 8.

[20] Ps. l. 1.

[21] Ps. lxxxii. 1.

[22] [Comp. Recognitions, ii. 39.—R.]

[23] Deut. x. 14.

[24] Deut. iv. 39.

[25] Deut. x. 17.

[26] Isa. xlix. 18, xlv. 21, xliv. 6.

[27] Deut. vi. 13.

[28] Deut. vi. 4.

[29] Josh. xxiii. 7, LXX.

[30] Namely, the gods.

[31] Ex. xxii. 28. The mss. omit θεούς, though they insert it in the passage as quoted a little before this. One ms. reads “the ruler” with our version.

[32] Jer. x. 11.

[33] Gen. i. 1.

[34] Ps. xix. 1.

[35] Ps. cii. 26, 27.

[36] [This statement of the subjective method of interpretation is in curious harmony with the prevalent theory of this work respecting the mixture of error and truth in the Scriptures.—R.]

[37] ἰδέας.

[38] μορφῆς.

[39] Probably τολμήματι should be changed into ὁρμήματι, or some such word: making known that an act of injustice has been committed by taking its departure.

[40] This might possibly be translated, “let him leave him who exists to him who exists;” i.e., let him leave the real God to man, who really exists.

[41] Wieseler proposes, “for he exists to no one.”

[42] Gen. i. 26.

[43] This is the only passage in the Homilies relating to the σοφία. The text is in some parts corrupt. It is critically discussed by Uhlhorn, some of whose emendations are adopted by Dressel and translated here.

[44] Prov. viii. 30.

[45] [On the theory of the Scriptures which is here set forth, compare ii. 38, etc., iii. 42, etc.—R.]

[46] Deut. xiii. 1 ff.

[47] The change from the singular to the plural is in the Greek.

[48] Lit., “But it had been said that he who tried, tried.” The idea seems to be, Before the removal to Babylon true prophets tested the people by urging them to worship these gods; but after that event false prophets arose who really wished to seduce the Jews from the worship of the true God.

[49] Lit., “nor can we be made to stumble from the Scriptures nor by any one or anything else.”

[50] Isa. ix. 6.

[51] Lit., “whom obeying:” the “whom” might refer to God.

[52] [Here we encounter marked evidence of Ebionism. Compare with these chapters the letter of Rufinus prefixed to the Recognitions.—R.]

[53] The word γένεσις, “arising, coming into being,” is here used, not γέννησις, “begetting.” The idea fully expressed is: “Is not that which is begotten identical in essence with that which begets it?”

[54] We have inserted εἰ. The passage is amended in various ways; this seems to be the simplest.

[55] [The very ancient variant in John i. 18, “God only begotten,” indicates the distinction between the Unbegotten God and the Son. Even the Arians use the phrase, “Only-begotten God.”—R.]

[56] Lit., “thus it is nature.”

[57] We have adopted an emendation here. The text has: “Even thus the incomparable is one.”

[58] Wieseler proposes to join this clause with the following: “And in point of choice the name which.”

[59] Lit., “of that one, of Him.” [The chapter is peculiar to the Homilies; comp. xvii. 7, 8.—R.]

[60] One ms. reads, “was not restrained.”

[61] We have inserted ἄν, and suppose the sentence to be ironical. The meaning might be the same without ἄν. The text of Dressel is as follows: “For is not He who then punished the sins God, Creator of heaven and earth; since even now, being blasphemed in the highest degree, He punished it in the highest degree?”

[62] Cotelerius translates: “to His enemies.”

[63] i.e., the Scriptures.

[64] A distinction has to be made between the Creator, or maker out of nothing, and the framer, or fashioner, or Demiurge, who puts the matter into shape.

[65] Lit., “the word against God for the trial of men.”

[66] Comp. Matt. xxiv. 24.

Connections

Select a sentence to see related works.

Previous Chapter XI.—Exposition of the True Religion Promised Next Chapter I.—Simon Wishes to Discuss With Peter the Unity of God

Royal Archives Beta

A modern reader for Scripture and the Patristic Corpus

Library Encyclopedia Graph My notes Progress About