Acts of Disputation
Archelaus
Chapter 42
About this work
- Author
- Archelaus
Section 42
42. But I shall also offer, to the best of
Opening the library…
Opening the library…
Acts of Disputation
Archelaus
42. But I shall also offer, to the best of
Matt. v. 32.
Matt. x. 10.
The Codex Casinensis gives, “exige ab eo illa quæ fraudem interceperat;” the other codex gives, “et exigi ab eo illa quæ fraude interceperat.” The correct reading probably would be, “exigi ab eo illa quæ per fraudem interceperat.”
We adopt the conjecture of Valesius, viz., abstinentia. The Codex Bobiensis gives absentia.
Prov. xxii. 2.
Matt. v. 3.
Reading inflammantur. It may perhaps be inflantur = puffed up.
Rom. xii. 3.
Mark xii. 41.
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.
The Codex Bobiensis reads inferuntur; the other codex gives offeruntur, offered.
Luke xiv. 33.
Matt. viii. 10.
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.
Plane.
Matt. xii. 8.
Mark ii. 19. [I have slightly accommodated the translation to this text.]
In semetipsum causam circumcisionis excepit.
[From Job (ii. 10) to St. Paul (Heb. iv. 15 and vi. to 8) Scripture abounds in this teaching. Comp. Lam. iii. 33.]
The Codex Bobiensis gives, “viæ compendiosum nobis tramitem demonstrare.” We adopt the reading, “viæ spatia compendioso nobis tramite demonstrare.”
Matt. vii. 15.
Matt. xxiii. 27.
Matt. v. 8.
Compendia viæ.
Matt. vii. 12.
2 Cor. xiii. 3.
1 Cor. vii. 18, 19.
Reading “prævaricator” instead of “prædicator.” The sense would seem strictly to require, a debtor to the law.
Atramentum.
Rom. ii. 29.
The Codex Bobiensis gives, “figuli opus aufers aut fictilium.” The Codex Casinensis has, “figuli opus et ars aut fictilium.” We adopt “figuli opus aut ars fictilium.”
Adopting “nequaquam” for “nec quemquam.”
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.]