Acts of Disputation
Archelaus
Chapter 27
About this work
- Author
- Archelaus
Section 27
27. We may give yet another illustration, if it seems
Opening the library…
Acts of Disputation
Archelaus
27. We may give yet another illustration, if it seems
The text has, “sedens ipse per se,” etc.; for which we adopt “sed et ipse,” etc.
The Codex Casinensis gives, “deinde die moriturus,” which may be either a mistake for “deinde moriturus,” or a contraction for “deinde die qua moriturus”—then on the day that he was about to die, etc.
The codex has, “Sin autem conderem se dicens, exposceret, devitarent persequi,” etc.; which is corrected to, “Sin autem cohæredem se dicens exposceret, devitarent atque,” etc., which emendation is followed in the translation.
Opus autem magis facere debere.
The same sort of argument is employed against the Montanists by Theodorus of Heracleia on John’s Gospel, ch. xiv. 17.
It is remarked in Migne, that it is only in the heat of his contention that this statement is made by Archelaus as to the date of the appearance of Manes; for from the death of Christ on to the time of this discussion there are only some 249 years. [Is it not probable that here is a token of the spurious character of not a little of this work?]
John xvi. 8.
John xiv. 18.
Reading “sed absit hoc a Domino nostro Jesu Christo Salvatore omnis animæ,” instead of the codex’s “sed absit hanc a Domino Jesu Christo Salvatore omne animæ.”
If the reference, however, is to 2 Pet. iii. 9, as Routh suggests, it may rather be = He was not slack concerning His promises. The text is, “non enim moratus est in promissionibus suis.” [A noteworthy reference to the second Epistle of St. Peter. For, if this work be a mere romance, yet its undoubted antiquity makes it useful, not only in this, but in many other critical matters.]
John xiv. 12; xvi. 28.
Reading “abundantius vero conferens Paulo,” instead of the corrupt text in the Codex Casinensis, “abundantibus vero confitens Paulo.”